The impossibility of the Non-Self doctrine

[Anonymous No.14873619]

If there is no self, Buddhism is pointless and no one ever reached Nirvana; ergo Buddhism is a lie.
>Axioms
There is no self
There are only Nirvana and the aggregates
The aggregates are impermanent and illusory
>Prop. 1
If there is no self, only the aggregates can possibly practice the path. But the aggregates are impermanent; every advancement in the path is lost with them and the goal is never achieved.
>Prop. 2
If there is no self, only the aggregates can possibly reach nirvana. But the aggregates are illusory; therefore no one ever achieved Nirvana.
>Corollary:
The Buddha never achieved Nirvana.
>Corollary 2:
Buddhism is a lie.

[Anonymous No.14873628]

>Bonus
If there is not self, there is no rebirth; if there is no rebirth it is indifferent whether you achieve Nirvana or kys. Suicide is easier than practicing. Therefore one should commit suicide.

[Anonymous No.14873642]

The confusion of nirvana with selflessness is the confusion of via negativa with non-being, borne from nobody actually reading wtf the text says.

[Anonymous No.14873663]

>>14873628
don’t forget: if the self/ego is an illusion, who is being deceived?

[Anonymous No.14873760]

>>14873663
Well said

[Anonymous No.14873766]

If there is a universal Self, Advaita is pointless and no one ever reaches Moksha; ergo Advaita is a lie.
>Axioms
There is a Self
There is only Brahman which is the Self
The aggregates are impermanent and illusory
>Prop. 1
If there is a Self which is by its very nature non-dual and therefore without action, only the aggregates can possibly practice the path. But the aggregates are impermanent; every advancement in the path is lost with them and the goal is never achieved.
>Prop. 2
If there is a Self, only the aggregates can possibly reach moksha because change in the Self is nonsensical. But the aggregates are illusory; therefore no one ever achieved moksha.
>Corollary:
The Advaitins never achieves moksha.
>Corollary 2:
Advaita is a lie.

[Anonymous No.14873807]

>>14873766
>he thinks I’m an advaitin
Seems like you accept my argument ano it Buddhism though

[Anonymous No.14873818]

>>14873807
Don't care about you. Just anticipating the Guenonposters.

[Anonymous No.14874518]

>>14873619
It's been explained to you before. The five psycho-physical aggregates create a tenporary self and it is up to you to achieve Nirvana and Shambhala. This has been explained countless times. Are you an actual idiot or are you being obtuse?

[Anonymous No.14874529]

>>14873663
Das rite

[Anonymous No.14874542]

>>14874529
>tfw to smart for science and medicine

[Anonymous No.14874806]

>>14873619
aww OP is stuck on exoteric Buddhism so cute

[Anonymous No.14874970]

>>14873628
>choosing the easy path.

[Anonymous No.14875825]

>>14874970
Yes

[Anonymous No.14875831]

>>14873619
>>14873628
Really makes me think about who is starting all these anti-Buddhism threads...

[Anonymous No.14875838]

>>14873619
If you lose yourself you'll find yourself.

[Anonymous No.14875955]

>>14873619
>If there is no self
The Buddha didn't argue for 'no self', he simply denied self-hood to the the aggregates.

>Buddhism is pointless and no one ever reached Nirvana; ergo Buddhism is a lie.
Nirvana isn't something you 'reach' like a heaven of sorts, it is simply the extinguishing of the 3 fires (or 'poisons') that lead to re-becoming. In some ways, Nirvana is only possible if one sees past the self-hood of the aggregates (part of the 'delusion' fire) which contradicts your statement.

>There is no self. There are only Nirvana and the aggregates
False, Buddha never said there are 'only Nirvana and aggregates.'

>The aggregates are impermanent and illusory
False, Buddha didn't say the aggregates themselves are illusory, the illusion lies in one seeing an essence within or beyond the constituents ('wrong view' in his system).

>If there is no self, only the aggregates can possibly practice the path. But the aggregates are impermanent; every advancement in the path is lost with them and the goal is never achieved.
You are supposing that aggregates are a 'person' to begin with, something which the Buddha denied. Also you'd need to elaborate on what you mean by the latter statement 'advancement in the path is lost'.

>If there is no self, only the aggregates can possibly reach nirvana. But the aggregates are illusory; therefore no one ever achieved Nirvana.
Again like the previous proposition you are supposing the 'aggregates' can do things in their own accord like 'reach nirvana' or 'practice the path'. Your propositions don't have merit.

Your corollary is therefore based on flawed propositions which is also based on false axioms.

>If there is not self, there is no rebirth;
prove this is the case, otherwise its simply a statement.

>if there is no rebirth it is indifferent whether you achieve Nirvana or kys. Suicide is easier than practicing. Therefore one should commit suicide.
Suicide violates the Buddha's precepts (but is permitted in extreme cases).

[Anonymous No.14876550]

>>14873619
this is why educating the plebeans to logic was a mistake

[Anonymous No.14876697]

For someone who cares so much about this, you sure do know little about it.

God you're pathetic.

[Anonymous No.14876755]

>>14873663
>>14873760
>>14873619
>>14873628
God it feels good knowing people as dumb as you exist
I literally get shivers of pleasure knowing how each day I get my bread by scamming retards like you instead of living honestly

[Anonymous No.14876871]

>>14873619
All of the points you raise have been addressed by Buddhist schools over a millennium ago with various sophisticated solutions given.
I guess instead of posting this facile gotcha thread, you should have actually studied Buddhist doctrine and precepts beyond a mere superficial level distorted by these Western preconceptions about selfhood, substance essentialism and discursive thought.

[Anonymous No.14876927]

>>14876755
Teach me oh great one.

[Anonymous No.14876939]

>>14873619
buddhism *is* a lie, go read the diamond sutra and quit making shitty threads like this

[Anonymous No.14877482]

>>14873619
Buddha never actually denied that there was a self and he never taught a doctrine of 'no-self', it's just that most Buddhist schools misunderstood this and thought that he did, a mistake which is also shared by some of the Buddhists on /lit/. It really goes to show how far all the Buddhist schools are removed from his actual teachings that they would get such a basic teaching wrong.

> The Buddhist term Anatman (Sanskrit), or Anatta (Pali) is an adjective in sutra used to refer to the nature of phenomena as being devoid of the Soul, that being the ontological and uncompounded subjective Self (atman) which is the “light (dipam), and only refuge” [DN 2.100]. Of the 662 occurrences of the term Anatta in the Nikayas, its usage is restricted to referring to 22 nouns (forms, feelings, perception, experiences, consciousness, the eye, eye-consciousness, desires, mentation, mental formations, ear, nose, tongue, body, lusts, things unreal, etc.), all phenomenal, as being Selfless (anatta). Contrary to countless many popular (=profane, or = consensus, from which the truth can ‘never be gathered’) books (as Buddhologist C.A.F. Davids has deemed them ‘miserable little books’) written outside the scope of Buddhist doctrine, there is no “Doctrine of anatta/anatman” mentioned anywhere in the sutras, rather anatta is used only to refer to impermanent things/phenomena as other than the Soul, to be anatta, or Self-less (an-atta).


http://www.chinabuddhismencyclopedia.com/en/index.php/Anatta,_Anatman,_No-Self,_Soulessness_and_other_Nihilistic_bullshit_your_local_retarded_''buddhist''_will_tell_you_about.

[Anonymous No.14877497]

>>14873628
>If there is not self, there is no rebirth;

The Aggregates reincarnate. The self is temporary as all things are but it can still reincarnate. The Lama compared it to changing weather. I can get the full quote if you really need. He put it eloquently.

[Anonymous No.14878158]

>>14873619
I don't know what's worse,
A moron
Ar a moron proud to display being a moron
Either way
Take your ignorant 'self' and choke on it