[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 797 KB, 1746x2894, buddha.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17143114 No.17143114 [Reply] [Original]

>The unbroken progression of closer connected events gives the appearance of
continuity, of identity, but this is only an apparent reality, not ultimate truth.

>We may give a river a name but actually it is a flow of water ever pausing in its course. We may think of the light of a candle as something constant, but if we look closely, we see that it is really a flame arising from a wick which burns for a moment, to be replaced at once by a new flame, moment after moment. We talk of the light of an electric lamp, never pausing to think that in reality it is, like the river, a constant flow, in this case a flow of energy caused by very high frequency oscillations taking place within the filament. Every moment something new arises as a product of the past, to be replaced by something new in the following moment. The succession of events is so rapid and continuous that it is difficult to
discern. At a particular point in the process one cannot say that what occurs now is the same as what preceded it, nor can one say that it is not the same. Nevertheless, the process occurs.

>In the same way, the Buddha realized, a person is not a finished, unchanging entity but a process flowing from moment to moment-
There is no real “being," merely an ongoing flow, a continuous process of becoming. Of course in daily life we must deal with each
other as persons of more or less defined, unchanging nature; we must accept external, apparent reality, or else we could not function
at all. External reality is a reality, but only a superficial one. At a deeper level the reality is that the entire universe, animate and
inanimate, is in a constant state of becoming—of arising and passing away. Each of us is in fact & stream of constantly changing
subatomic particles, along with which the processes of consciousness, perception, sensation, reaction change even more
rapidly than the physical process.

Damn

>> No.17143141

>>17143114
>people see things and understand them as they are
>give simpler names and terms for ease of communication, abstract a bit
>GUY SO UHH IF I GO BEYOND IMPERFECTIONS OF LANGUAGE IT'S LITERALLY -- GET THIS -- NOT THAT SIMPLE!!!
Wow.

>> No.17143202

>>17143114
good blog nigga
nigga nigga nigga nigaa

>a person is always changing
goddamn it just past the whole scripture here if you can't sum it up for a downie to understand

>> No.17143244

>>17143141
are you simplifying his philosophy for ''ease of communication'' here, or...?

>> No.17143275

>>17143244
His observations are primitive. They don't mean anything.
>sky is blue
Okay.

>> No.17143397

>>17143275
Are you one of those Zoomers I've been hearing about?

>> No.17143437

>>17143114
what zero grace does to a mf

>> No.17143444

>>17143141
>people see things and understand them as they are
most people won't get to that unless it's forced down their repeating lives

>> No.17143459

>>17143275
Yet many people are blinded to reality by linguistic convention. Just because something is simple when you understand it doesn't make it trivial.

>> No.17143464

>>17143444
>repeating lives
Literally never happened lol

>> No.17143594
File: 159 KB, 871x792, 1604209077346.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17143594

>>17143464
how long have you been on 4chan, waiting for the same "BASED" over and over again?
unless you aren't clinically autistic like the rest of us I don't get you

>> No.17143604

>>17143594
Cope buddha tranny

>> No.17144191

>>17143604
b-buh me es cafolic!!

>> No.17145057

>>17143114
Alright. What is the trendiest form of Buddhism?

Soto b/c of black robes and near nihilism?

Thai forest tradition? I feel Tibetan is kinda for boomers. Zen might be too gen x

>> No.17145078

>>17145057
Zoomers like to larp so any secular buddhism or any guruism like mahayana will do. The least trendy is theravada.

>> No.17145365

How does the Blessed One manage to make crosscucks seethe so hard?

>> No.17145406

>>17145365
Are you asking why christians hate Buddhism?

>> No.17145474

>>17143114
>along with which the processes of consciousness, perception, sensation, reaction change even more rapidly than the physical process.
Wrong

Consciousness is one and unchanging; it is only when the objects get associated with it that they appear in consciousness and as identical with it in such a way that the flashing of an object in consciousness appears as the flashing of the consciousness itself. It is through an illusion that the object of consciousness and consciousness appear to be welded together into such an integrated whole, that their mutual difference escapes our notice, and that the object of consciousness, which is only like an extraneous colour applied to consciousness, does not appear different or extraneous to it, but as a specific mode of the consciousness itself. Thus what appear as but different awarenesses, as book-cognition, table-cognition, are not in reality different awarenesses, but one unchangeable consciousness successively associated with ever-changing objects which falsely appear to be integrated with it and give rise to the appearance that qualitatively different kinds of consciousness are flashing forth from moment to moment. Consciousness cannot be regarded as momentary.

For, had it been so, it would have appeared different at every different moment. If it is urged that, though different consciousnesses are arising at each different moment, yet on account of extreme similarity this is not noticed; then it may be replied that, if there is difference between the two consciousnesses of two successive moments, then such difference must be grasped either by a different consciousness or by the same consciousness. In the first alternative the third awareness, which grasps the first two awarenesses and their difference, must either be identical with them, and in that case the difference between the three awarenesses would vanish; or it may be different from them, and in that case, if another awareness be required to comprehend their difference and that requires another and so on, there would be a vicious infinite

>> No.17145479

>>17145474

If the difference be itself said to be identical with the nature of the consciousness, and if there is nothing to apprehend this difference, then the nonappearance of the difference implies the non-appearance of the consciousness itself; for by hypothesis the difference has been held to be identical with the consciousness itself. The non-appearance of difference, implying the non-appearance of consciousness, would mean utter blindness. The difference between the awareness of one moment and another cannot thus either be logically proved, or realized in experience, which always testifies to the unity of awareness through all moments of its appearance.

It may be held that the appearance of unity is erroneous, and that, as such, it presumes that the awarenesses are similar; for without such a similarity there could not have been the erroneous appearance of unity. But, unless the difference of the awarenesses and their similarity be previously proved, there is nothing which can even suggest that the appearance of unity is erroneous. It cannot be urged that, if the existence of difference and similarity between the awarenesses of two different moments can be proved to be false, then only can the appearance of unity be proved to be true; for the appearance of unity is primary and directly proved by experience. Its evidence can be challenged only if the existence of difference between the awarenesses and their similarity be otherwise proved. The unity of awareness is a recognition of the identity of the awarenesses, which is self-evident.

>> No.17145492

>>17143114
Damn right, ur girlfriend is not who u think she is she is a million onion skins of cliches under which all lies a simple symbiosis of gut flora hiding and thriving in that warm wet hairless ape skin suit

>> No.17146585

>>17145078
Vipassana movement is trendy and meditation only cults have formed all around the society.

>> No.17146649

>>17143114
I cant still wrap my head around the idols. Aren't they against the Buddha's teachings?

>> No.17146709

>>17146649
That depends on what you mean. It's a supremely compassionate act, and indeed, an offensive action against Mara, delusion, to venerate the Buddha and to make Buddhist iconography. The very presence of it reminds people to act properly. By making an icon of the Buddha, or a Bodhisatta, you are combating wickedness and evil. You are reducing suffering.

Is thinking that a stone statue will actually get up and move around dumb? Yes, and literally no one on earth except Abrahamics thinks that this is how statues actually work.

Early Buddhism was aniconic because Monks lacked the capacity to make icons. In some cases, icons are useful. In some, they are not. Use them when they are useful, ditch them when they are not. The Buddha's of Banyan were a constant reminder to the villages around them to act admirably, virtuously, and to live will. When the Taliban destroyed them, they revealed caves filled with ancient texts and beautiful displays of craftsmanship. When the statues were there, there was goodness. When the statues weren't there, there was goodness.

>> No.17146721

>>17145078
If these threads are any indication, Theravada is the trendiest because you can apply a basic-bitch Protestant hermeneutics to it ("it's the ORIGINAL Buddhism because the Pali Canon is just the BUDDHIST BIBLE, and the yucky MAHAYANA is BUDDHIST CATHOLICISM because they REJECT THE BIBLE!"). This is, of course, not what the Theravada actually is, but then the retarded bot just posted the same three posts of meaningless word salad that it does in every thread, so the bar is really fucking low.

>> No.17147518

>>17146709
very interesting, much like Buddha's teaching itself use it for convenience and when it hampers you you must abandon it

>> No.17147594

>>17145406
please explain, yes

>> No.17147865

Why does /lit/ suddenly hate Buddhism. It's been a few months since I visited/lit/, I don't remember this amount of hatred here. Seems unusual and new.

>> No.17148058

>>17146721
Theravada is definetely closer to Buddha's actual practice, but it's way different from the secular cognitive therapy buddhism that western zoomers love.