/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14633893]

Should I read this first as a premise for Buddhist thought or do I need to know certain things about Buddhism to understand?

[Anonymous No.14633944]

>>14633893
No. Read Sri Sankaracharya (pbuh) instead. Buddhism is a refuted false doctrine.

[Anonymous No.14633973]

>>14633893
An anon recommended to me Bikkhu Bodhi's "In the Buddha's Words" which is a diverse selection of texts from the Pali canon. Though it has a minor Theravada bias, it covers a lot of topics and is all primary sources (the most ancient available if I understand correctly). You won't get a rose tinted or westernized picture of Buddhism. Highly recommend though I'm only about halfway through.

>>14633944
Shut the fuck up

[Anonymous No.14633994]

>>14633944
Based.
>>14633973
Cringe.

[Anonymous No.14634001]

>>14633893
Read this first, it should help you decide.

http://politicallyincorrectdharma.blogspot.com/2017/10/evola-on-buddhism-dharma-for-fascists.html

[Anonymous No.14634014]

>>14633944
based

[Anonymous No.14634258]

>>14633944
>>14633994
Guenon retroactively refuted himself on Buddhism and retracted and redid the chapter where he speaks ill of it after Marco Pallis got Coomaraswamy to talk to him.
Both of them are good authors to read on Buddhism.
I wish Guenonfags would actually read Guenon instead of just LARPing.

This >>14633973 is also a good recommendation.

[Anonymous No.14634316]

>>14634258
this

>Guénon's initial evaluation of Buddhism was plagued by an astonishing lack of understanding. This evaluation was suppressed in the English edition of Orient et Occident(Paris, 1924); Guénon later modified it in part, by making some concessions to a "Brahmanic" version of Buddhism, which is truly a Buddhism evirated of the specific and valid elements it possessed at its inception. These specific elements concerned an autonomous way of realization. In this realization, the action of a qualified individual who strives to attain the Unconditioned, even by means of violent efforts is the necessary counterpart of the descent of a force from above, which does not need "initiatory bureaucracies." What Guénon had to say in an unfortunate essay concerning "The Need for a Traditional Exotericism," must also be rejected, since it offers dangerous incentives and alibis to a reactionary and petty-bourgeois conformism. The pedantic representatives of Guénonian scholasticism should rather strive to reach a deeper understanding of the true meaning of the Way of the Left Hand, which is not any less traditional than the Way of Right Hand, and which has the advantage of emphasizing the transcendent dimension proper of every truly initiatory realization and aspiration.
I know Evola isn't the know-it-all of Buddhist thought he larps as but at least he understood its basic premise.

[Anonymous No.14634354]

>>14634316
>>14634258
>Evola
>Buddhism
>Traditional

[Anonymous No.14634364]

>>14634354
Guenon couldn't answer Buddhism, get over it.

[Anonymous No.14634394]

>>14634364
>Guenon
>couldn't answer

[Anonymous No.14634405]

>>14634354
>>14634394
At least the original Guenonfag used to make quality posts sometimes.

[Anonymous No.14634408]

>>14634394
Yes he couldn't. He literally had to redact his evaluation. Whats so hard to understand?

[Anonymous No.14634450]

>>14634001
And again, the idea that the Buddha was a royal prince before he renounced the world was emphasized by Evola as a kind of symbolic evidence of Buddhism’s spiritual nobility. (Evola points out that, according to Buddhist tradition, although a man of any race or class could join the Sangha, only a man of the highest caste could become a Buddha.)

We should unironically prevent people like these from even reading the scriptures of Buddhism, if monstrosities like this will be the result. A complete falsehood, being used by fascists to tarnish the Buddha's name.

[Anonymous No.14634455]

>>14634408
>Guenon
>couldn't

[Anonymous No.14634457]

>>14634450
>And again, the idea that the Buddha was a royal prince before he renounced the world was emphasized by Evola as a kind of symbolic evidence of Buddhism’s spiritual nobility. (Evola points out that, according to Buddhist tradition, although a man of any race or class could join the Sangha, only a man of the highest caste could become a Buddha.)


We should unironically prevent people like these from even reading the scriptures of Buddhism, if monstrosities like this will be the result. A complete falsehood, being used by fascists to tarnish the Buddha's name.

(Re-posted with proper greentext)

[Anonymous No.14634483]

>>14634455
>>Guenon

[Anonymous No.14634490]

>>14634455
>repeats himself like a parrot after being refuted
Face facts buddy

[Anonymous No.14634511]

How did a noble faith like the Buddha arise from the brown filth of India? The Buddha was Aryan surely. Leave the filthy brown low IQ typed to their monkey and elephant ikons

[Anonymous No.14634589]

>>14634450
The Buddha was pragmatic. He didn't tackle the caste discrimination or monarchic despotism head on, but rather wisely sought to reform society through the cultivation of insight. He did not advocate the inherent superiority of one caste over another, but a universal compassion between them and a mutual responsibility to relieve the suffering of the world. He didn't exalt the divine right of nobility over all those inferior, but rather made rulers see their purpose as enlightened "wheel turning monarch" to rule with peace and compassion, and cultivate wisdom among the ignorant.

Fawning over "strong men", claiming merit by birthright, and advocating eugenics by extermination is as far as you can get from the dharma.

[s10241875 No.14634592]

>>14633893
>Should I read this first as a premise for Buddhist thought
This book is not about "Buddhist thought," but about evolafaggotry.
>or do I need to know certain things about Buddhism to understand?
No, other Julius books may be useful.

This is the only Evola book I have read. And I had a better opinion of him before.

>>14633944
Hi, guenonfag.
Fuck off.

[Anonymous No.14634735]

>>14634511
People with mentalities like yourself will take a hundred lifetimes simply to begin any kind of sincere spiritual practise. "Aryan" doesn't even mean what your fascist friends have made you believe it does. Nor does Buddhism most of the ideals you do, and consider "noble" what you consider the same. See >>14634589

>>14634589
Yes, and why then are supposed "scholars" like Evola permitted to publish nonsense like the above in his works? Taints the Buddha's name, and people who don't read the texts themselves will think that Buddha really said things. Nothing we can do about it I guess, but it's quite disturbing to observe.

[Anonymous No.14634887]

>>14633893
Yes it is as good as any of the Buddhist introduction books. Doctrine of awakening is good start.

[Anonymous No.14635051]

>>14633944
B A S E D

[Anonymous No.14635061]

>>14634316
>concessions to a brahamnical form of Buddhism

Yes it’s common knowledge that any coherent points within Buddhism have been copy pasted from various brahamnical philosophies

[Anonymous No.14635069]

>>14634457
Read the Pali canon anon, it’s faolry clear that the boddhisatava shall only incarnate as a Kshatriya or a Brahmin when in human form

[Anonymous No.14635082]

>>14634511
t. Retard

[Anonymous No.14635092]

>>14635051
kekked hard at image

[Anonymous No.14635114]

>>14635092
Damn straight. All my niggas from East Stockwell street be reading the Brahma Sutra Bhasya. We ride with Adi shankaracharya my nigga

[Anonymous No.14635167]

>>14634457
Care to point out why you believe it’s a falsehood your is your notion of fascism and it’s alleged association with it just cause enough for you to throw it out?

[Anonymous No.14635295]

Secular buddhism is the shit.

[Anonymous No.14635409]

>>14635295
I agree, it is shit.

[Anonymous No.14635505]

>>14635295
How can Buddhist morality be separated from Buddhist cosmology?

[Anonymous No.14635514]

>>14635505
What's the problem?

[Anonymous No.14635572]

>>14635295
Oxymoron

[Anonymous No.14635581]

>>14635514
Seems to me that the majority of the Buddha's teachings are in the context of a greater karmic cycle which is dependent on rebirth. I don't see how one can approach the Dharma without accepting that. Not that someone can't learn from the Buddha because they are secular — many of the practices easily better ones current life — but the Dharma itself and Buddhist morality appear to be predicated on rebirth and karma.

[Anonymous No.14635665]

>>14635295
>>14635572
>teach a Way for the purpose of escaping the saeculum
>Westerners try to make it secular
can't make this shit up

[Anonymous No.14635676]

>>14635295
Nah, Dark Buddhism and a blend of Humanistic Judaism is the objective way forward.

>Dark Buddhism integrates Objectivism with Zen Buddhism because both forms of happiness are integral to the full human experience, and, especially in our modern world, one form of happiness doesn't really exist without the other.

>Buddhism supplied a necessary piece of the puzzle but, as an Objectivist, I simply could not accept the selflessness the Buddha taught. This is selflessness in both senses of the word: first a life of compassion toward others, and second a dissolution of the ego, becoming without self. The latter is the more familiar concept that "we are all one" or "everything in the universe is interconnected." Buddhism is not supposed to have any particular moral codes or ethics, like a religion, yet the teachings regarding compassionate living seemed to be just that.

>In Dark Buddhism these are all personal choices, not morality as dictated by others. It slowly dawned on me that I could take what seemed rational and "right" from Zen Buddhism, excise the parts that were inconsistent with my values, and then do the same with Objectivist epistemology and merge the two together. The psychology of self-esteem is the glue that binds the two together, and the result is Dark Buddhism, a logically consistent whole.

[Anonymous No.14635798]

>>14633944
this but unironically

[Anonymous No.14635807]

>>14635051
based

[Anonymous No.14635924]

>>14635676
>Dark Buddhism integrates Objectivism with Zen Buddhism
M A X I M U M
E D G E

[Anonymous No.14636090]

>>14635676
>Compassion bad