Why do you hate buddhism?

[Anonymous No.15115407]

I suppose it can lead to a stagnant life-style, but that's the point. I don't really understand how stoicism is any better.

[Anonymous No.15115420]

because it's pagan, nihilistic, and solipsistic

[Anonymous No.15115422]

>>15115407
I don't hate it. I wouldn't call myself a Buddhist but it improved my life more than therapy or antidepressants.

[Anonymous No.15115476]

Pretty sure people here take buddhism more seriously than stoicism.

[Anonymous No.15115515]

>>15115420
I don't believe it's solipsistic entirely. I think it's more so a way to control the mind, rather than let the world control you.

[Anonymous No.15116239]

>>15115407
Because it is basically the noble lie for everyone except the monks.

[Anonymous No.15116268]

>>15115407
Every single person I met who liked buddhism was a shallow atheist trying to cope with an exotic larp with the tiresome "spiritual not religious" maxim.

[Anonymous No.15116281]

>>15116239
Elaborate

[Anonymous No.15116282]

>>15115407
world-denying nihilistic bugmen religion is incompatible with freedom and life-affirming capitalism

[Anonymous No.15116289]

>>15116282
You still have to come to terms with the inescapable fact of death, and impermanence of all things

[Anonymous No.15116308]

>>15116282
But capitalism spawns nihilistic bugmen.

[Anonymous No.15116316]

>>15116282
>capitalist
>dares to call others "bugmen"
kek you can't make this up

[Anonymous No.15116362]

>>15116282
>capitalism
>life-affirming
Get a load of this retard.

[Anonymous No.15116492]

>>15115407
>Why do you hate buddhism?

"From whatever new points of view the Buddha's system is tested with reference to its probability, it gives way on all sides, like the walls of a well, dug in sandy soil. It has, in fact, no foundation whatever to rest upon and hence the attempts to use it as a guide in the practical concerns of life are mere folly. Moreover Buddha, by propounding the three mutually contradicting systems, teaching respectively the reality of the external world, the reality of ideas only and general nothingness, has himself made it clear that he was a man given to make incoherent assertions or else that hatred of all beings induced him to propound absurd doctrines by accepting which they would become thoroughly confused…Buddha’s doctrine has to be entirely disregarded by all those who have a regard for their own happiness."

- Adi Shankara - Brahma Sutra Bhasya 2.2.32.

[Anonymous No.15116510]

>>15116281
Ask any lay Buddhist in Asia and they will tell you that they believe that if they do good things then they will have a good rebirth and that they will take part in that good rebirth. But then ask any monk and they'll tell you that rebirth is a lower teaching and really there is no such thing and at most rebirth is akin to a tree bearing a fruit that will create a new tree and morality determines the qualities of the fruit and later the tree. Clearly though the former tree does not partake in any way in the life of the new tree. When you think about it, the moral person will be the most unhappiest person because someone else will bear the fruits of his actions whereas the immoral person will be the happiest person because someone else will bear the fruits of his actions.

It's world denying moralism and the noble lie for laymen.

[Anonymous No.15116518]

>>15115420
Idk that sounds based to me. Might try it out.

[Anonymous No.15116669]

>>15116268
Basing your opinion on white people with an asian fetish is a horrible way to judge Buddhism. Despite what they (white yuppies/hippies/stoners) say, Buddhism is a religion complete with rituals/texts/etc and the spiritual/not religious take on it is wrong.

[Anonymous No.15116694]

>>15116268
I actually checked a buddhist temple in my city, it's just an ethic club

[Anonymous No.15117391]

>>15115420
>pagan
It's not religious, it doesn't deny the existence of divine beings but it claims that things like gods aren't important for finding happiness or ending suffering, which in itself is a rejection of the importance all religions inherently claim.
>nihilistic
Not at all, it claims that you can practice a method of suffering less in your lifetime. Needless suffering doesn't add meaning to your life.
>solipistic
It teaches to help others as much as possible, to look beyond yourself and to help them suffer less. In fact, it's not just part of its creed, but a natural consequence of its insights: if you understand suffering in yourself, you understand it in others, since no person's reasons to suffer are truly unique. If it was worth helping yourself, then you natually sympathize with the suffering of others.

[Anonymous No.15117408]

>>15116492
Opinion piece by a corrupt theocratic class system beneficiary who was shaking in his boots since Buddhism was denying his supposedly cosmos-given right to stand above all other classes.

[Anonymous No.15117410]

>>15115407
because its an elaborate form of cope

[Anonymous No.15117424]

>>15117391
>le buddhism isn't religious face

[Anonymous No.15117448]

>>15117424
Buddhist practice is often religious as a result of merging with local religions and superstitions for thousands of years, but there are plenty of suttras that deny the importance of divine beings, and call them mere distractions and causes of suffering.

[Anonymous No.15117464]

>>15117448
That doesn't make it not religious.

[Anonymous No.15117486]

>>15117408
>corrupt theocratic class system beneficiary
Wrong dumbass, unlike Buddha who sat on his ass living a hedonist lifestyle in a palace until his 30's Adi Shankara left his family and become an ascetic at 8 years old and remained one his whole life

[Anonymous No.15117520]

>>15117464
Is it atheist? No. It's a 2,500 year old teaching from a deeply religious culture. It states quite clearly that the point is to suffer less in the present moment, through contemplation and meditation, while religion, any religion, is just another cause of suffering. It doesn't rely on any religious teachings, it just doesn't deny the existence of supernatural things.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15117572]

I don’t hate Buddhism, I quite like some aspects but disagree on very core elements.

Example the dhamma theories of Theravada are very high quality, but its doctrine of reincarnation cannot reconcile with its doctrine of no-self which cannot reconcile with its general nondual view.

By this I mean to say that the view of reincarnation as normally taught in Theravada is a skillful means/a lie which even Theravada admits and the true reincarnation is simply the totality manifesting as any singular individual flow via the nonduality of cause and effect. So now we have via their own ideas disproven reincarnation, which renders their entire existential crisis no longer a problem, only a perception problem.

So we now turn to the doctrine of no-self, and this is a fine doctrine unless you agree with the Taoists that the void is non-empty, that the No-self is simply the purity of the true self(and Mahāyāna admits this and even in certain schools says they are the very same thing) and finally the question of arhantship and nonduality which Mahāyāna itself answers is that since there is no separation between self and other because of cause and effect, one cannot truly free himself ‘least he free all. And since the principle of sorrow is eternal, we now have a double contradiction, the Theravada no longer can claim arhantship and the bodhisattva can never succeed since suffering never ceases in maya, which again, certain monks and sects agree with themselves and thus say the bodhicitta aspiration is a skill means itself and the entire key is to realize this world is the pure land, this world, samsara and nirvana are one thing. Which leads us into Vajrayana like sects and stuff like pure land Buddhism, and by majority even something like zen is almost always historically practiced WITH pure land, but even ignoring this, in zen it all becomes a skillful means to knowing the inherent nature of Unborn mind, so what are we left with? We’re left with a model in vajrayana, shingon and so forth which more or less agrees with Tantra and other Hindu formations, or in the case of Zen we induce models that are basically just lowkey Taoism. Whether Rinzai zen or even soto zen in which the kirikami were given as their esoteric teachings which were literally teachings based on I-Ching diagrams and so forth, and the Taoist philosophy basically contains the zen at that point and goes further.

So we’re left with Vajryana which is basically just a fusion of Hindu tantra, Buddhist aesthetics and Dhamma theory and Bon shamanism, Mahāyāna sects which amount to high quality teachings that are fundamentally in line with Hindu modes, and zen which is fully present in Taoism but more elaborate upon IMO. So while I enjoy and appreciate Buddhism, I recognize how much of it is skillful means/lying to get the point across which even the monks and scriptures will tell you.

So I’m basically not a Buddhist because I know what the higher teachings amount to.

[Anonymous No.15117598]

>>15117520
>four noble truths
>three jewels
>eight fold path
>samsara
>nirvana
>not religious teachings
It's entirely ordered towards a salvific end, Buddhism is religious through and through.

[Anonymous No.15117874]

>>15117598
Fuck mate, I'm trying to write something coherent but I have a headache and can't concentrate on shit, sorry. I gotta duck out and get some sleep.

[Anonymous No.15117916]

>>15117391
wrong

[Anonymous No.15117977]

Its a string of random thoughts. There is no basic tenets of Buddhism that applies to every version of Buddhism.

[Anonymous No.15117990]

>>15115420
fpbp, stoicism is dull and uninspiring as well.

The Bible and Hinduism have given me the most so far. Boggles my mind that people will skip these and go straight to Redditism

[Anonymous No.15117993]

Imho buddhism provides a more comprehensive solution to the issue of human suffering. It has a history, sacred texts, several minor "prophets" or people who have otherwise contributed by writing books, mental exercises invluding meditation, organizations of followers as well as different kinds of buddhism-- many varieties to choose from.

[Anonymous No.15118000]

>>15117993
you haven’t studied in any other religions in depth, please don’t pretend you have hylic

[Anonymous No.15118075]

>>15115420
This.
Also Godless, nominalist, relativist, teaches man to seek a spiritual experience instead of Truth, teaches man he can transcend the world through his own effort/practice, which contradicts itself and reality.

[Anonymous No.15118077]

>>15117572
I like your posts, thanks for contributing, I agree with what you wrote as well.

[Anonymous No.15118153]

>>15117448
>We wuz buddhists and shiet too bad those yellow barbarians bastardized the only good philosophy.

[Anonymous No.15118158]

>>15116492
cringe...

[Anonymous No.15118160]

>>15117391
>It's not religious
This is what people online always say but I've asked every Asian, Indian and Sri Lankan person I know and they all say that every Buddhist they know does ancestor worship and believes in gods, etc. The 'godless' Buddhism is a chimera, it doesn't actually exist.

[Anonymous No.15118172]

>>15117572
>void is non-empty
this leads to internal contradiction as Nagarjuna pointed out

[Anonymous No.15118180]

>>15118158
Advaita Vedanta produced Ashtavakra Gita. Buddhism produced... ?

[Anonymous No.15118188]

>>15118180
>Buddhism produced...
Advaita Vedanta

[Anonymous No.15118195]

>>15118188
based and checked

[Anonymous No.15118205]

>>15116308
not capitalism, consumerism

[Anonymous No.15118220]

>>15117464
its not a religion, its a dharma. there is no higher power being worshiped. only teachings.

[Anonymous No.15118231]

>>15117598
except its not

[Anonymous No.15118235]

>>15118188
So Buddhism is the beta version of Advaita Vedanta?

[Anonymous No.15118244]

>>15118172

Its pristine purity is still full of awareness/consciousness and is non-separate to consciousness, cause and effect are non separate to the void, the Dhammas and the nature of the Void are non-separate, the affirmation of Dharmas being illusionary yer existent demonstrates, the experience of all characteristics as the lack of characteristics is itself, just a modification of characteristic experience. Nirguna/emptiness is itself non separate to the nature of Dharma, the property which they call the lack of properties is itself a property. As such the Void is ever full and ever reproductive whilst being completely void, just as consciousness is ever pure yet the wheel turns perpetually also.

[Anonymous No.15118246]

>>15118235
it's an alpha version of Advaita Vedanta

[Frater asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15118263]

Sorry last post was mine also.

>>15118172

Also contradiction isn’t a problem with superior forms of logic, such as para-consistent Logic, look into meinong’s work. At the level we’re speaking of there’s no specific reason why the properties of non being or being would produce any stains on Dharma, fullness or emptiness being just modifications themselves.

[Anonymous No.15118270]

>>15118000
I'm not considering other religions, in fact I believe that almost any religion would have some form of the things that I brought up (some people to consider as minor prophets, etc etc etc). But that doesn't really matter bc the OP was concerning a comparison of Buddhism and Stoicism.

[Anonymous No.15118299]

>>15115407
Because, much like stoicism, it's bullshit. It's for people who are already well to start off with. It's pure hypocrisy.
Also it doesn't help that most of the practicing followers seem to be hedonistic 20~30 somethings doing self improvement and looking for an easy excuse to just do whatever the fuck with no consequences.
"Yeah no bro I need to fuck 30 women cause getting attached to 1 is bad bro you gotta let go you know things are impernanent".

I was never able to get a Buddhist to answer this to me:
Should a slave owner teach buddhism to his slaves, so that they don't revolt?

[Anonymous No.15118309]

>>15115407
Buddhism is life-denying, nihilistic, passive and breeds weakness. Still not as bad as Christianity

[Anonymous No.15118324]

>>15115407
new age man self help

[Anonymous No.15118325]

>>15118299
The slave owner should become buddhist and free the slaves. He will be happier that way.

[Anonymous No.15118334]

>>15118309
Following your desires is not living. Such people are rightly called "samsara's bewildered beasts of burden".

[Anonymous No.15118336]

[Anonymous No.15118342]

>>15118246
Then show me the alpha version of Ashtavakra Gita.

[Anonymous No.15118352]

>>15118334
>implying one can’t control themselves
Follow le middle path, bro.

[Anonymous No.15118414]

>>15118352
the middle whey is a path to many abilities some consider to be unnatural

[Anonymous No.15118419]

>>15118160
Actual East Asian living in Asia. The misunderstanding comes from how gods are treated in East Asia. They are not monotheistic or all powerful, they are demigods personifying aspects of the universe. Worshipping is a shitty way to say it, a more accurate way to say it is paying respects. And ancestor worship has nothing to do with Buddhism.

Godless Buddhism does exist, it depends on your interpretation. There are some who live by the ethical codes of the Buddha without paying respects. But by and large the Buddha is treated as a demigod, doing inhuman feats and a pathway to enlightenment, but never doing anything like creating the sky or unleashing divine retribution on the wicked.

[Anonymous No.15118427]

>>15118414
>when you want to larp as hindu but was born as sudra and not brahmin
yep i guess buddhism is whats left

[Anonymous No.15118429]

>>15118414
is it possible to learn this power?

[Anonymous No.15118439]

[Anonymous No.15118442]

>>15118429
not from a Hindu

[Anonymous No.15118445]

>>15118439

[Anonymous No.15118448]

>>15118419
>But by and large the Buddha is treated as a demigod, doing inhuman feats and a pathway to enlightenment

Isn't that treatment sort of the antithesis of what the Buddha taught? i.e. he didn't want to be worshiped or thought of as a deity.

[Anonymous No.15118452]

>>15118439

[Anonymous No.15118456]

>>15118427
there are many Hindu and Hindu-Tantric sects which reject caste and are open to people of any background

[Anonymous No.15118460]

>>15118419
i was under no illusions that buddhism has deities like those in monotheistic systems, but they are gods nonetheless, they are still reverenced as gods

[Anonymous No.15118461]

>>15118448
No actually in the Pali Canon Buddha acts like a pseudospritual charlatan and claims to have all sorts of magic powers and says he speaks to gods and visits supernatural realms

[Anonymous No.15118462]

[Anonymous No.15118464]

>>15115407
Western people don't even know what buddhism is. They turned into a diluted pseudo-philosophical feelgood bullshit while completely ignoring its most outrageous characteristics as if they don't exist. Reincarnation? Gods? Demons? Different dimensions? Nah dude, just live and let live...

[Anonymous No.15118476]

>>15115407
>buddhists and hindus will unironically defend this https://youtu.be/yWW_je6djqQ?t=106

[Anonymous No.15118479]

>>15118464
isnt there also hell in buddhism

[Anonymous No.15118483]

>>15118414
you think he can take on an Advaitin monk like Swami Kashi?

[Anonymous No.15118487]

>>15118476
Hindus are fucked up lol.....

[Anonymous No.15118490]

>>15118172
>this leads to internal contradiction as Nagarjuna pointed out
such as? every example I have ever seen of Nagarjunas thought was laughably stupid

[Anonymous No.15118496]

>>15118483
He'll pulverize that hindu s󠀀oyboy lol

[Anonymous No.15118498]

>>15118483
you can see in his eyes he isnt a real chad, theyre filled with fear

[Anonymous No.15118507]

>>15118490
cringe...

[Anonymous No.15118524]

>>15118490
what do you mean by 'example', it was a point of principle. Does Nagarjuna bother you that much that every time his name is mentioned you devolve into childish rants 'hahah hes stupid lol'.

[Anonymous No.15118542]

>>15118524
Based

>>15118483
He's probably the only swami I've seen that is barely buff. The rest of em are either thin or flabby.

[Anonymous No.15118552]

>>15118448
Yes and no. The Buddha never wanted to be worshipped - near his death when his followers asked him how they should worship him he folded his outer robe and put his begging bowl upside down on it.

But he was quite clear that he was enlightened and highest being in the world, in the context of Buddhism this means he was perfectly enlightened. He asked his follows to chant the Triratna Vandana, the salutation or worship of the 3 jewels of Buddhism. They are the Buddha, the Dharma (his teachings) and the Sangha, the order of Buddhist monks.

There is a large ideological difference between Abrahamic and Buddhist salvation/enlightenment. Salvation through Jesus for example, is worshipping Jesus the Son of God, and gaining entry into heaven by accepting him. BUT Buddha was explicitly stated to be a mortal and achieved enlightenment. The implication is that anyone can reach the Buddha's level, as opposed to no one can reach Jesus' level.

[Anonymous No.15118573]

>>15118476
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vO7Hf1rQWzM

can we post more Hindu schizophrenia?

[Anonymous No.15118585]

>>15118524
I asked for the contradiction that someone else claimed Nagarjuna showed in an idea, when reading about his attempts to find contradictions in other ideas I have personally found his attempts to be unconvincing to say the least, can you quit trying to pathologize me because I don't like him and just answer the question?

[Anonymous No.15118586]

>>15118442
That's a Berserk character.

[Anonymous No.15118592]

>>15118552
I understand Buddha being the pathway to enlightenment, just that deification of him was something I thought he taught against -- which you explained is the case.

[Anonymous No.15118595]

>>15118476
That's spirituality in the Kali Yuga for you

[Anonymous No.15118597]

>>15118595
upanishads and all hindu texts were written in it though

[Anonymous No.15118600]

>>15118220
>semantics
Dharma is a religious concept.

>>15118231
>no u

[Anonymous No.15118611]

>>15115407
Buddhism is just mentally paralyzing. What's so significant about impermanence and non-being that I should shake up my whole life for it? The answer is that it's truly irrelevant nihilism dressed up as serious philosophy. It's an idea that should have lost relevance within a generation of being committed to paper, and it would have, had the Buddhists not gotten smart and took their boring philosophy and combined it with whatever gods the locals worshiped.

Literally the only thing they have to teach is meditation, but even that's a stretch. I don't need any education from a Buddhist to empty my mind.

In short, there are serious philosophies that have galvanized human achievement and they are all western; Platonism, Christianity, Liberalism, and Rationalism to name a few. The east has nothing to offer in terms of thought but a few meme-tier scratchings on a cave-wall.

[Anonymous No.15118617]

>>15118597
The Upanishads are held to be revealed texts which come from Brahman so it's not as though they would necessarily be degraded by some other aspect of the cyclic creation which Brahman also created

[Anonymous No.15118618]

>>15118573
this raises many questions about aryan hinduism...

[Anonymous No.15118627]

>>15115407
Because it's like the eastern philosophy equivalent of the Frankfurt School

[Anonymous No.15118658]

>>15118585
You're question made to sense. I'll rephrase it for you since you're ESL: How does non-emptiness of emptiness lead contradiction? If emptiness we're non-empty, it would render itself as substantial (ie something in itself), however by definition emptiness means that which is nothing in itself, leading to a 'liars paradox'. Therefore the only possible conclusion is that emptiness is itself empty.

20th century Philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein called this dialectic that 'Wittgenstein ladder' where he said that his own work was to refute all works including his own, which would defeat that purpose of his own work if not for the hidden proposition that his own work was meant to refute itself and thereby serve simply as a ladder outside of the logico-philosophical hole he saw in the west.

[Anonymous No.15118661]

>>15118658
your*

oh my it seems im the ESL person after all

[Anonymous No.15118668]

>>15118618
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b0uDojBBi4

[Anonymous No.15118688]

>>15118597
The Kali Yuga has a golden age at the start. Said to last 10,000 years, but still.

[Anonymous No.15118693]

>>15118611
> t. bewildered beast of burden

[Anonymous No.15118696]

>>15118668
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3zAAEjvj5g

[Anonymous No.15118705]

>>15118696
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UkI-8WCKWk

[Anonymous No.15118718]

>>15118705
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yhSBWg0ql8

[Anonymous No.15118726]

>>15118658
Okay, thank you for answering, I have a question in response however, I have seen many Buddhists strenuously deny that the emptiness of the void is "nothingness" or "non-existence", so what exactly would distinguish this void from nothingness or non-existence, and by virtue of there being that X which distinguishs the void from nothingness, does that X not in itself become something which means that the void isn't completely empty of everything? I don't see how you can have it both ways

[Anonymous No.15118731]

>>15116492
Filter him

[Anonymous No.15118750]

>>15118718
>>15118705
>>15118696
>>15118668
>>15118573
>>15118476
and people doubt Paul's words that the other 'gods' are demons

[Anonymous No.15118767]

who needs walking lol

this Hindu gangsta just rolls his way to the path

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QaCItcf2iSA

[Anonymous No.15118770]

>>15117572
>so we’re left with Vajrayana which is a fusion of Hindu Tantra, Buddhist aesthetics, Dhamma, and bon shamanism

That doesn’t sound too bad, what’s wrong with getting into esoteric Buddhism if it’s not self contradictory? Unless I missed you point out Vajrayana was somewhere else

[Anonymous No.15118833]

>>15118693
I'm happy that you have no arguments other than memes. I should have been sorry if my brief insults did not convey my reasoning.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15118838]

>>15118726

A superior question to ask of Nagarjuna, is from a position of pure logic how can you argue that the Knowledge is purely non-conceptual and yet you have the conception of all lacking essence/being empty, which is a positive conceptual knowledge statement, there’s also many books which basically demonstrate a lot of Nagarjuna is full of fallacious and sophist arguments that break in on themselves, not to say I don’t respect his work but there’s plenty you can break.

>>15118770

Because at that point all of the things which make Buddhism distinct from Hinduism really disappear and now your Buddhism is just Hindu tantra with some different aesthetics, a bit different ethics and some different folk religious aspects. Like at this point you may as well just go ahead and be a tantrik. There’s nothing about Tantrik Buddhism that is exceptionally different to tantric Hinduism. The practices are much the same, the sadhana much the same, the deities much the same, the theory and goals much the same.

Now I could go on a rant about how various Buddhist tantric lineages are basically just shamanistic and sorcerous, especially the vajrakila and kurukulla specialized practitioners, but I think you get my point.

[Anonymous No.15118860]

>>15118838
>there’s also many books which basically demonstrate a lot of Nagarjuna is full of fallacious and sophist arguments that break in on themselves, not to say I don’t respect his work but there’s plenty you can break.
such as?

[Anonymous No.15118877]

>>15118838
Is the only reasoning Hindu Tantra is “better” is due to its earlier start? If they’re the same , what is the advantage of being a hindu tantrik over a Buddhist tantrik?

I literally know nothing about either so be kind if I’m missing something obvious.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15118918]

>>15118860

Here have an entire book on it.

https://libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=3B751B8571C51AEEDCAFFDC61D4BA251

He demonstrates how the logical constructs nagarjuna creates are often false dichotomies and common sophist tactics, how multiple interpretations of nagarjuna all still more or less break his own model and how they more or less amount to nihilism. The author is a Buddhist by the way.

>>15118877

Buddhist and Hindu tantra are both heavily initiation based but Buddhist tantra is even harder within the idea of the requirement of initiation. Hindu tantra has more literature and you’re fine to read both Hindu and Buddhist sources if you take the Hindu approach without having to pretend that the Hindu texts were secretly Buddhist all along (which certain Buddhist tantric texts claim justifies the study of Hindu tantra) they basically amount to very much the same ends, goals and even practices but with Hindu tantra imo you’re getting the philosophy and mysticism in a far more complete fashion.

[Anonymous No.15119035]

>>15118918
>with Hindu Tantra you’re getting the philosophy and mysticism in a more complete fashion

Thanks for the info. I’ve recently had the interest to study the subjects but wasn’t sure the difference between the two conception of the tantric literature/ practices, and information online is not as forthcoming as I’d like on the differences between the two. Once I have a relatively good base on the sutras, Gita, etc I think I’ll tear into the tantras.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15119081]

Here’s a crash course on Hindu tantra/shivaism. From easiest to hardest

Shiva Sutras
Shiva Samhita
Kali Kaula (the secret supreme is also a good book here, as is the bhairava tantra)
Tantra Illuminated
Kaulajnananirnaya
Kularnava Tantra
Anandalahare
Matrikabheda Tantra
Spandakarikas
Paratrisikavivirana
Tantraloka

Note, Buddhist tantra would basically be okay with all this literature as certain very old Buddhist tantric texts say all literature revealed by Shiva were truly revealed by manjuhsri and so forth.

[Anonymous No.15119092]

>>15119081
Good shit, thanks m8

[Anonymous No.15119097]

>>15118918
>He demonstrates how the logical constructs nagarjuna creates are often false dichotomies and common sophist tactics, how multiple interpretations of nagarjuna all still more or less break his own model and how they more or less amount to nihilism. The author is a Buddhist by the way.
Burton has a very poor understanding of Nagajuna's view. In many instances he wrongly interprets Nagajuna's position, then criticises Nagajuna for the ensuing problems his own incorrect interpretation produces. An almost comical approach to highlighting how failing to understand the subtle nuances of this profound philosophy only promotes ongoing ignorance and doesn't over come it.

His book often seems to be a work of Anglo-American analytic philosophy that happens to be treating issues raised by Nagarjuna's epistemology and ontology. He repeatedly demonstrates philosophical reasoning and patience in following his arguments. But his interpretation occasionally suffers from the limitations of his particular philosophical framework. For example, Burton's rejection of the possibility of non conceptual discrimination is significant for his argument, yet he disregards the many persuasive phenomenological accounts of non conceptual discrimination. His realist critique of the notion that conceptually constructed entities do not require further entities from which they are constructed ("it is implausible and unintelligible") seems philosophically unimaginative. The history of philosophy in the East and the West has plenty of subtle arguments for one variety or another of this position.

>The author is a Buddhist by the way.
Some have said this but I couldn't find any information on it, however I wouldn't be surprised if he was since most critics of Madhyamaka are Buddhists themselves.

[Anonymous No.15119103]

>>15118573
>>15118476
muh superior indian metaphysics

[Anonymous No.15119116]

>>15115407
Because when you leave Samsara you would cease to exist and literally kill your soul
and if it was ever possible we would already cease to exist at any point in the infinite past

[Anonymous No.15119188]

>>15119097
>Burton has a very poor understanding of Nagajuna's view
Most western authors look at the east with their own Aristotelian lens and fail to grasp its way of thinking. Nagarjuna is probably the biggest target in this regard since his method of elucidation borders on absurdity (which is ironically designed to reveal absurdity in other systems). I'm actually surprised that Shaivanon subscribes to this sort of 'pure logic' criticism since he on the other hand seems to promote a sort of dialetheist mysticism that is apparent in Kashmir Shaivism.

[Anonymous No.15119225]

>>15119097
If you are so sure that Nagarjuna's thought is contradiction-free would you please oblige me by providing an answer to the question here >>15118726 I'm genuinely curious how Madhyamaka adherents would try to square that circle

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15119238]

>>15119097

Even in these non-conceptual views, my own experience/gnosis would show that what’s occurring is awareness is still occurring and experience and even subtle forms of conception, they’re just radically outside our normal structures of logic and categorization, the Revelatory nondual experience in its subtly is still being perceived. Awareness and conception are non separate in this regard, the question is rather the characteristics of the conception to me.

When I analyze consciousness, Just as much as I can reduce all to there being no essence I can equally state all is essence, as much as I can state Void I can state self nature, in this way I do not find it personally convincing from my own personal analysis and meditation.

>>15119188

I’m demonstrating that there’s a lot of people who have tackled nagarjuna to the point that he’s not that rock solid, even you anon agee that his system borders on absurdity at certain points. And I personally believe that graham priest style logic which roots in the work of meinong which allows such paraconsistent and contradictory experiences and logic structures, increases the amount of logic and critique and analysis we can do, not reduce. My actual critique of Sunyata being the end would require my full phenomenological analysis which you lads might not enjoy me spamming.

[Anonymous No.15119268]

>>15119238
Since you seem knowledgeable on Shaivism I wanted to ask, are you familiar with Veerashaivism/Lingyatism (also known as Shaktivishishtadvaita) and do you have any thoughts on it? They claim to be the final philosophical development of non-dual Shaivism and they offer initations to westerners who agree to follow all their precepts but there is very little of their writings which have been translated from what I gather.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15119296]

>>15119268

Honestly from what I understand their model resembles more closely vedanta and Vedic material than agamas and tantras, for me its the synthesis of Krama kaula and trika which is pretty much dead today. But my opinions are heavily influenced specifically by Vamachara sensibilities. What I’m saying is, they’re probably fine but from what I know they’re not really gonna give you the same value as studying abhinavagupta.

[Anonymous No.15119419]

>>15119296
>they’re probably fine but from what I know they’re not really gonna give you the same value as studying abhinavagupta.
Yes, unfortunately though (correct me if I'm wrong) it appears that the Trika lineage no longer exists, one can find various teachers online but I've read that Lakshmanjoo never formally initiated anyone to the extent of them being fully qualified of passing it down, there are only some people who studied with him for a while etc but they dont fully posses the lineage and are sorta 'winging it' as the saying goes. There remains some enduring appeal about being initiated into a still thriving school that goes back almost a millenium that makes me find Veerashaivism appealing, although one could always be initiated into it while continuing to study various other schools of Hindu philosophy. Nisargadatta Maharaj was initiated into both the Naths and the Veerashaivas also which adds to my interest as I appreciate his talks.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15119451]

>>15119419

Nah you’re pretty much correct then there’s a few odd groups related to the Uttarakaula Lineage which have odd claims and so forth. I’d say look into the study of any of these since you personally believe they have value. Me personally I had a teacher and going by what he said and what the tantraloka teaches one can initiate himself fully. Abhinavagupta makes this clear in the tantraloka.

Tantraloka 16:195 is a self initiation via an ordeal of consciousness.
Tantraloka 4:62:
>The purpose of self initiation is to mobilize the essense of the mantra which is being practiced. Mobilization of the essence of the mantra results in activation of self knowledge. It has been observed that if one is unable to get a teacher capable of activating the mantra, by praying to Candika Devi (Raktadevi) regularly, one becomes an Acarya within a month, a Sadhaka in a fortnight. A Putraka in a week, and within four days less by quarter of a day, Samayi. In this process of initiation, Raktadevi is supposed to perform the ceremony Herself as the provision of the Shastras. This method is to be adopted in case of unavailibility of a Guru. Abhinavagupta comments that you can brute force your way in by constructing your own mantras in accordance with lineal doctrines. Moreover, there's enough interspersed between Tantraloka and Paratrishikavivirana to do the exoteric form of worship and get a sense of mantra installation.

Abhinavagupta seems to state pretty clearly in Ch. 16 that a properly initiated guru can fuck with the system as much as he likes as long as it's in-line with the teachings and praxes.More interestingly, he appears to invite people to practice these rites without initiation to attempt jivanmukti, with the caveat that they recognize they aren't lineal representatives.

Btw

The Dhyana Mantra of Raktadevi:

महाविनोदार्पितमातृचक्र-
वीरेन्द्रकासृग्रसपानसक्ताम् |
रक्तीकृतां च प्रलयात्यये तां
नमामि विश्वाकृतिरक्तकालीम् ||

न चैषा चक्षुषा ग्राह्या न च सर्वेन्द्रियस्थिता |
निर्गुणा निरहङ्कारा रञ्जयेद्विश्वमण्डलम् |
सा कला तु यदुत्पन्ना सा ज्ञेया रक्तकलिका ||

mahāvinodārpitamātṛcakra-
vīrendrakāsṛgrasapānasaktām |
raktīkṛtāṃ ca pralayātyaye tāṃ
namāmi viśvākṛtiraktakālīm ||

na caiṣā cakṣuṣā grāhyā na ca sarvendriyasthitā |
nirguṇā nirahaṅkārā ranjayedviśvamaṇḍalam |
sā kalā tu yadutpannā sā jneyā raktakalikā ||

[Anonymous No.15119516]

>>15119451
Interesting, I didn't know that, thanks. I'm not done with my studies of Vedanta yet but when I am I plan to study Trika in depth as well.

[Anonymous No.15119586]

ITT:
>NOOOO YOU HAVE TO BE LIVE-AFFIRMING! YOU CANT JUST ASCEND BEYOND PLEASURE AND PAIN! YOU HAVE TO COOM AND EAT AND ALSO SUFFER LIKE ME!!! YOU CAN'T JUST STRIVE FOR NIRVANA YOU HAVE TO COOM AND CHASE MONEY FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE!!!!

[Anonymous No.15119591]

>>15119586
Anyone who truly believes life is bad is free to commit suicide.

[Anonymous No.15119618]

>>15119591
Buddhism isn't death-affirming either though. It focuses on nirvana, which is beyond life and death.

[Anonymous No.15119662]

>>15118750
>>15118476
>>15118573
>>15118718
>>15118696
>>15118705
All religions lead to the same path! these are totally not demons bro, trust me. just pay tribute to this statue and we will give you advaitist non-dual enligthenment!

[Anonymous No.15119676]

>>15118611
>Christianity
>western
lol

[Anonymous No.15119685]

>>15119662
>most of humanity will burn in hell for all eternity! this is totally not just desert fairytales bro, trust me. just pray to this piece of carved wood and donate to the church and you will be transported to an alternate dimension with winged flying people!

[Anonymous No.15119692]

>>15118611
>Liberalism, and Rationalism
Who are you, fucking Sargon of Akkad? Can we just ban liberals already?

[Anonymous No.15119694]

>>15118573
>The purpose of embracing pollution and degradation through various customs is the realization of non-duality (advaita) through transcending social taboos, attaining what is essentially an altered state of consciousness and perceiving the illusory nature of all conventional categories.

jesus, india is just full of psychos

[Anonymous No.15119701]

>>15118767
they see me rollin

[Anonymous No.15119757]

>>15119685
>>most of humanity will burn in hell for all eternity! this is totally not just desert fairytales bro, trust me. just pray to this piece of carved wood and donate to the church and you will be transported to an alternate dimension with winged flying people!

[Anonymous No.15119770]

>>15118476
>>15118573
>>15118718
>>15118705
>>15118696
>>15118668
>>15118573
>>15119662
>>15119685

Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness? And what accord has Christ with Belial? Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever? And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God. As God has said:

“I will dwell in them
And walk among them.
I will be their God,
And they shall be My people.”

Therefore

“Come out from among them
And be separate, says the Lord.
Do not touch what is unclean,
And I will receive you.”
“I will be a Father to you,
And you shall be My sons and daughters,
Says the LORD Almighty.”

[Anonymous No.15119781]

>>15118476
>>15118573
>>15118718
>>15118705
>>15118696
>>15118668
>>15118573

[Anonymous No.15119790]

Hipster version of Hinduism.

[Anonymous No.15119803]

>here's your jivanmukti bro

[Anonymous No.15119810]

brothers.....I have ascended (pbum)........tat tvam asi tat tvam asi tat tvam asi tat tvam asi tat tvam asi tat tvam asi tat tvam asi tat tvam asi tat tvam asi tat tvam asi tat tvam asi tat tvam asi tat tvam asi

[Anonymous No.15119817]

Abrahamics can't compete this much AUSPICIOUSNESS

[Anonymous No.15119822]

>fountain of youth in Hinduism

[Anonymous No.15119826]

holyl.... shit.... this is so LIBERATING!!!!
now i see how Christ and his message were just meant for the local people and werent a universal call to remove oneself from idolatry............

[Anonymous No.15119832]

what is it with hinduism and poop? whats the secret?

[Anonymous No.15119836]

>>15119832
poop is but a process in the cycle of reincarnation......

we foolish westerners have much too learn from these noblemen

[Anonymous No.15119837]

>>15119810
>>15119822
>>15119817
>>15119803
>>15119810
Woah... I wonder what the deep theology and metaphysic makes them do these beautiful rituals...

[Anonymous No.15119842]

>>15119803
truly the east has much to teach us metaphysically-deficient westerners in the reign of quantity.

[Anonymous No.15119856]

>>15119822
Based.... This is like a Caduceus in Western Esoteric symbolism... The Snake of the World manifesting itself in the lower realm...

https://youtu.be/WJZU-48dR9Q

[Anonymous No.15119865]

I still don't get it, where in their scripture does it say you have to cover yourself in cow shit?

[Anonymous No.15119875]

>>15118419
So the classic 'religions', by your standards, were godless?

[Anonymous No.15119891]

>>15119790
Buddhism came before hinduism.
Also, the Buddha was a literal Aryan in every sense of the word

[Anonymous No.15119895]

>Indian Villagers Worshiping Newly Built Toilets Instead of Using Them
so this is what traditional orthodox Advaitin Hinduism temples are like...

[Anonymous No.15119896]

>>15119891
>the Buddha was a literal Aryan
hmm, you're gonna pull the "scythian" argument? you fucking pooniggers

[Anonymous No.15119901]

>>15119676
and what is it you fucking retard?

[Anonymous No.15119902]

Based. Where can I get a based Trad hindu wife to meditate with upon Shankara (pbuh) and Guenon (pbuh) and ascend towards the Trad stages of life?

[Anonymous No.15119908]

>>15119901
First Hebraic and then universal. Look up a map of the world.

[Anonymous No.15119912]

>>15119901
middle eastern. most of the events occur in the middle east and Jesus and the apostles are middle eastern.

[Anonymous No.15119943]

>>15119895

[Anonymous No.15119948]

[Anonymous No.15119949]

>>15119908
>>15119912
ancient Judea was a part of the West at the time, just like Ionia, which is Turkey now. remember, all of that happened in Roman Empire, and in even in preroman times, the judeans were in close contact with the West, the main text of Christianity - The New Testament, is written in greek. it was developed in Roman Empire, it was influenced by Greek beliefs, and it took over the world after it was adopted and by Continental Europe

[Anonymous No.15119951]

[Anonymous No.15119952]

[Anonymous No.15119956]

[Anonymous No.15119959]

[Anonymous No.15119960]

[Anonymous No.15119963]

[Anonymous No.15119964]

[Anonymous No.15119967]

[Anonymous No.15119968]

>>15119949
no nigger, geophraphy doesn't change over time, israel and judea wasn't part of wester or northern Europe back then, geographically it was part of the middle east. and they were UNDER roman occupation. if a bunch of arabs occupy norway through military force does it all of a sudden becomes a part of the middle east?

[Anonymous No.15119969]

[Anonymous No.15119971]

[Anonymous No.15119974]

[Anonymous No.15119975]

[Anonymous No.15119977]

[Anonymous No.15119981]

[Anonymous No.15119982]

[Anonymous No.15119986]

[Anonymous No.15119989]

[Anonymous No.15119991]

[Anonymous No.15119996]

[Anonymous No.15119998]

[Anonymous No.15120027]

>>15119896
No, he wasn't even indian. I never said he was scythian.
The region from where he comes from wasn't part of India at the time.
He was a Kshatriya, i.e. a member of the warrior class, which could be composed only by aryans at the time (aryans as the population who invaded India).
He's described as tall, handsome and with blue eyes. Before he took the ascetic path he spent his life military training and greco-buddhist artwork show him as muscular.
Hinduism didn't even exist until almost a millennium afterwards. At the time there was the Vedic religion, which degenerated a lot in Buddha's time.
His "revolt" against the degenerated brahmins was an attempt to enstablish the vedic principles of the first Aryan conquest.

[Anonymous No.15120037]

>>15116510
that's still your stream even if it's a different person

[Anonymous No.15120048]

>>15120037
Buddhism is about understanding it's not your stream

[Anonymous No.15120305]

>>15116268
Same here and I'm from an eastern eu country lmao.

[Anonymous No.15120714]

>>15115420
this. based and checked.

[Anonymous No.15120976]

>>15118833
> assuming 'galvanizing human achievement' is any more meaningful than min-maxing videogame

Keep chasing happiness out in the world, I'm sure you will catch it someday. Just try not to kill too many people while you're at it, Faust.

[Anonymous No.15121109]

>>15115407

Buddhism is shitty Phenomenology.

[Anonymous No.15121116]

>>15121109
Husserl seemed to have praised it immensely

[Anonymous No.15121365]

>>15120027
The earliest Upanishads date from several hundreds years before Buddhism, all the key tenets of Buddhism actually appear in them first, Buddhism was just a spinoff version of them that degenerated info a bunch of confused schools who didnt even understand what he taught anymore

[Anonymous No.15121730]

>>15117391
>It's not religious
>now please read muh 20000 treaties on backwards metaphysics why you should just kill yourself

[Anonymous No.15121970]

>>15121365
Only 1~4 out of 108 upanishads (less than half of all upanishads) can be said to predate the Buddha based purely on crude linguistic analysis. The Buddha wasn't aware of the existence of these Upanishads as a separate entity and outright rejected the Vedas in its entirety. The ideas contained in these upanishads were floating in wider Indian culture which the Buddha was part of, after all he was educated by a Samkhya master so naturally he was familiar with the ideas without ever engaging in the upanishads themselves. The upanishads were really a response to a proto-sramana movement that attacked the authority of the Brahmins and peeled away followers from the rigid Vedic system. This is why yajna and deva lauding that characterized the elder Vedic period were relegated and priority was given to metaphysical knowledge of an Absolutist principle that is centered on the self (atman-brahman). This is evidenced by the fact that these austere ideas are found in the latest book of the Vedas, the same time that references to sramanas (muni) appears. There is really no explanation on the part of the Hindus as to why the IE-centric framework of the Vedas was miraculously transformed into a neo-contemplativist framework without external forces, all there is about it amounts to apologetics. Therefore it is false to suggest that Buddhism is a spinoff of Hinduism, it would be like saying Christianity is a spin off of Zoroastrianism because they share similar concepts.

[Anonymous No.15121980]

>>15121970
half of all principle upanishads*

[Anonymous No.15122962]

>>15120976
Horse shit, Buddhism first has to explain why impermanence and non-existence creates any kind of moral imperative to do anything or refrain from doing anything. It matters little to me that the world is a burning building, it is burning so slowly that I'd have to be psychologically unstable for decay to injure my enjoyment of it.

If anything, death, impermanence and non-being give me an imperative to have a party. Not an immoral party where I do everything contrary to society's morals just for the sake of it, that doesn't seem justified. But I should -- knowing I will grow old and die -- enjoy a degree of licentiousness, drunkenness, and gluttony, to the extent that I enjoy it, and while I can enjoy it. Soon I will be old, and too much food and drink will make me sick, and sex will throw out my back and be gross in the old-age home.

I don't mean of course to always chase external happiness, but I reject the dichotomy between internal and external happiness which technically isn't Buddhism, but is nevertheless ascetic. If I had no internal consolation at all, no relationship with God, then I'd be miserable, but if I had no external pleasures, I'd be less miserable than a person without God, but miserable nonetheless. Therefore I reject the dichotomy; between chasing pleasure in the world and chasing the pleasures of asceticism. Abnegation and indulgence are both pleasurable, or asceticism would not have any popularity at all. This fact that pleasure can be found in refusing pleasure so obvious that there are sexual practices wherein mixing pain and pleasure denied with the actual external pleasure itself is the whole point, and is said to make the pleasure greater by lengthening it with obstacles. Could there be a better metaphor for everything that happens in life as a whole?

[Anonymous No.15123043]

>>15121970
>The Buddha wasn't aware of the existence of these Upanishads as a separate entity
The main claim of your post relies on this unverifiable assumption. To be fair my claim is unverifable as well, but presenting one unverifiable claim is not a refutation of another

>Hindus as to why the IE-centric framework of the Vedas was miraculously transformed into a neo-contemplativist framework
Even in the mantras of the Rig-Veda, there are verses saying that all the Gods are really one God and also mantras saying that there is really one Self or Soul in all beings, you are seeming to imply that it's somehow unatural for people to continue to develop and elaborate on these ideas over the course of time, and that the only thing that explains why they didn't statically keep the exact same ideas for thousands of years is outside influence, which is a silly hypothesis as it denies any autonomy to them and denies that they were capable of gradually developing over time ideas already contained in the earliest texts (similar to how a lot of liberalism implicitly denies autonomy to black person by blaming external influences for all their problems)

[Anonymous No.15123164]

>>15121970
>>15123043
Also, I would add that there is absolutely no evidence for there being any independent source of those pan-Indian/dharma ideas other than the Vedas and early Upanishads. Countless people have tried to theorize about certain ideas coming from Dravidians or mysterious anonymous sramanics but there are no indications that there were any texts or scriptures at all talking about them before the Vedas and Upanishads. Samkhya is derived from the latter, Jainism is pre-Buddhist but aside from their unverified self-aggrandizing about its mythical founders there is no evidence of earlier Jainist texts predating the Hindu scriptures. The Vedas and early Upanishads were the only early texts talking about these concepts that experts are aware of, the Hindu texts were first then sprang up Jainism and Samkhya in the wake of those texts, then Buddhism. They might as well all be derived directly or indirectly from the Vedas and Upanishads given the remarkable absence of any other text from that early period which talks about those ideas.