/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17475232]

This is the result of understanding Plotinus' wisdom and being able to translate ancient Pali?

[Anonymous No.17475244]

No. Pic related is the result.
/thread

[Anonymous No.17475260]

>>17475244
plotinus advocated for celibacy, not trying to complete oneself with whores

[Anonymous No.17475268]

>>17475232
ken wheeler is really smart tho

[Anonymous No.17475274]

>>17475232
I really like his book recommendations, not a bad one so far.

[Anonymous No.17475307]

I have seen his videos, did the Buddha actually teach there was a self?

[Anonymous No.17475324]

>>17475307
modern buddhism is a sham

[Anonymous No.17475330]

>>17475307
No.

[Anonymous No.17475413]

>>17475307
No. Time and time again, no.
This is the massive failing of neoplatonic perennialism. All they would have to do is realize that their great wheel is broken, accept the fact, and they would have a satisfying pursuit for followers

[Anonymous No.17475429]

>>17475232
No. He's fat, which makes him categorically wrong.

[Anonymous No.17475470]

>>17475307
>>17475330
>>17475413
>If one understands the term 'soul' as a continuum of individuality from moment to moment, from lifetime to lifetime, then one can say that Buddhism also accepts a concept of soul; there is a kind of continuum of consciousness. From that point of view, the debate on whether or not there is a soul becomes strictly semantic. Buddhism does not deny the continuum of consciousness.
t. Dalai Lama

Quoted from the pure land thread

[Anonymous No.17475487]

>>17475429
What's the tipping point of being fat where it makes your philosophy wrong?

[Anonymous No.17475506]

>>17475470
Now post the Thanissaro quote from the exact same post.
By the way, nowhere in that quote did the Dalai Lama say there is a an eternal, unchanging self.

[Anonymous No.17475515]

>>17475487
When your BMI reaches obesity territory.

[Anonymous No.17475520]

>>17475487
A very very noticeable double chin I guess

[Anonymous No.17475539]

>>17475506
>eternal, unchanging self
Literally noone believes that what the fuck anon?

[Anonymous No.17475548]

>>17475539
Yeah except Plato and the entirety of Abrahamism and Hinduism

[Anonymous No.17475551]

>>17475232
This guy has a massive ego for someone who is supposedly into buddhism

[Anonymous No.17475557]

love da fuji sensors, simple as

[Anonymous No.17475593]

>>17475548
In all of these the self can change. It's in fact quite important.

[Anonymous No.17475604]

>>17475548
Not to mention 95% of shamanic religions, animistic religions, etc...

[Anonymous No.17475609]

>>17475593
I don't think you understand the term "self" as conceived by these philosophies/religions. It isn't the ego, or even the mind.

[Anonymous No.17475687]

>>17475609
>a continuum of individuality from moment to moment, from lifetime to lifetime, a continuum of consciousness
I think you got your malinformed claim refuted and now try to make vague criticism to save face.

[Anonymous No.17475753]

>>17475687
Yeah, that's not a self.
I think you don't know much about buddhism, or metaphysics for that matter, and are arguing about things you don't understand.

[Anonymous No.17476512]

>>17475232
He even looks like the Buddha

[Anonymous No.17476686]

>>17475232
Who the fuck is this guy?

[Anonymous No.17476703]

>>17475232
He can be useful, but take anything he says with a pinch of salt

[Anonymous No.17476780]

>>17475232
I honestly think this guy wills well, and isn't as narcissistic as he seemed in that video.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.17476800]

>>17476780
I mean I don’t think he’s narcissistic, maybe it’s because I’m from Brooklyn but for his age that kind of personality type is incredibly common. That’s probably just what down to earth looks like to him. I honestly felt he was trying to show he’s just one of the guys you’d meet on the street.

[Anonymous No.17476840]

>>17476686
Ken Wheeler, he has a youtube channel

[Anonymous No.17476852]

>>17475268
He has literally got 3 tb of books on hard drive.
You aren't stupid if you can store that much.

[Anonymous No.17476923]

>>17475232
If you really think about it, yeah. It would be so at odds with the modern world that it would pretty much look like this most likely.

[Anonymous No.17476926]

>>17475307
Yes. Buddhistfags on this board deny it for some reason.

[Anonymous No.17476979]

>>17476840
elaborate

[Anonymous No.17477028]

>>17476979
YouTube is a web based video platform where creators upload videos on topics they find interesting or entertaining.
These creators have what is called a channel which collects all of their content.

[Anonymous No.17477100]

>>17476979
Some right wing conspiracy nut who's into Traditionalism, fake physics, and Atta-Buddhism. This dude believes the whole world is fundamentally made of electricity and that there's some secret energy field that he uncovered thanks to magnets. He's basically a delusional schizo pushed on by /lit/ traditionalists.

[Anonymous No.17477106]

>>17477100
You sound jealous.

[Anonymous No.17477119]

>>17477106
You sound like you're hungry.

[Anonymous No.17477153]

>>17476979
pic related is all you need to know

[Anonymous No.17477181]

>>17475548
The unchanging self is simple awareness, with no thoughts, emotions, or sense perceptions attached, or if there are, they are transient, their coming and going met with utter indifference, or rather equanimity.

Can't speak for Plato, but even Christian mystics like Eckhart, Angelus Silesius, and even Brother Lawrence all believed this.

[Anonymous No.17477187]

Wheeler is based.

[Anonymous No.17477191]

>>17477187
based on a mcdonalds diet?

[Anonymous No.17477192]

>>17477100
>This dude believes the whole world is fundamentally made of electricity
its proven by E=mc^2 you dummy, matter is condensed energy

[Anonymous No.17477195]

>>17477100
>>17477153
sounds dangerously based

[Anonymous No.17477201]

Why are they so fat?

[Anonymous No.17477204]

>matter is condensed energy

[Anonymous No.17477206]

>>17475429
It's interesting. On the one hand, being fat suggests untrammeled desire. On the other, obesity is an external, the acts of the body indicating nothing about interior development.

[Anonymous No.17477214]

>>17477187
>>17477195
and there he goes....

[Anonymous No.17477223]

>>17477214
i'm sorry. he seems based. and you seem like you have images of him saved on your computer. the truth hurts.

[Anonymous No.17477230]

>>17477153
>failed photographer who has become a laughing stock on /p/ for gearfagging and shilling as multiple people
lmao my sides! can you link me to any archived /p/ threads where he does this?
>>17477191
kek

[Anonymous No.17477231]

>>17477153
I like how this image retroactively anticipated the poster itt with his 'based' train. Like poetry.

[Anonymous No.17477247]

>>17476926
Because if it were true it would threaten their hopes of an eventual extinction from all traces of existence

[Anonymous No.17477248]

>>17477214
He seems pretty based and knowledgable on a range of topics.
Not many Pali translators out there either.
Based.

[Anonymous No.17477254]

>>17477231
It’s ‘preemptively’ you moron

[Anonymous No.17477271]

There is nothing wrong with Ken or with Guenon.
Both are probably based beyond the comprehension of the absolute morons in this thread.

[Anonymous No.17477323]

I don't care about his level of based or cringe, is he or is not right about Buddhism?

[Anonymous No.17477331]

>>17477323
it depends if you're asking a buddhist or ken wheeler

[Anonymous No.17477351]

>>17477230
I don't have specific threads on me but you can pretty much find his threads on
https://archive.nyafuu.org/p/search/text/ken%20wheeler/page/1/

[Anonymous No.17477358]

>>17477323
Ken is probably right that Buddhism was originally a spinoff of Upanishadic non-dual teachings, the only alternative possibility is that Buddhism actually is nihilistic annihilationism

[Anonymous No.17477360]

Wow he's so based, look at him samefag a tumblr page as a female named 'Kendra Wheelright' to shill his youtube channel. Based as fuck isn't it? Yea I'm thinking based....

[Anonymous No.17477362]

>>17477323
>is he or is not right about Buddhism?
He's probably wrong about Buddhism, just as he's wrong about most things.

[Anonymous No.17477371]

every time i think he's bullshitting me, i take time to research without his input and he is correct. he is extremely repetitive and never changes his script (a good thing for a person making claims like he does)

[Anonymous No.17477384]

>>17477100
So based that he is beyond based

[Anonymous No.17477388]

>>17477323
Lets see
>the entirety of Buddhist tradition from 500 BCE
vs
>1 fat schizo's ramblings

[Anonymous No.17477392]

>>17477153

/p/ is not serious, they're all trust fund kids and dudes that got bored of taking screenshots in skyrim. they would have no way of verifying anything he says

[Anonymous No.17477396]

>Ken Wheeler samefagging ITT
lmao I just knew it was him

[Anonymous No.17477399]

Doesn't this guy own the rights to Guenon's books or something?

[Anonymous No.17477425]

>>17477388
>>1 fat schizo's ramblings
>plus Susan Hookham who agrees
>plus Guenon (pbuh) who agreed
>plus Coomaraswamy who agreed
>plus Caroline Rhys Davids who agreed
>plus Chandradhar Sharma who agreed
>plus Stanislaw Schayer who agreed
>plus the Shentong/Jonang tradition in Tibetan Buddhism, which completed and restored the true meaning of Buddhism after it was lost for over a millennia

[Anonymous No.17477439]

>>17477392
It's even more damning for him that he would go to /p/ and /pol/ to shill his channel. I read somewhere that he distrust modern science because it doesn't allow 'debunking the status quo' and therefore refuses to submit his sekret magnetism theory to their institutions, which is a cope excuse for being rejected on the grounds that he gets basic physics wrong. But yes you're right, there is no way of verifying his assertions, however conducting a shill job in several online forums playing both sides is an indicator that he is not confident in his ideas and neither should we.

[Anonymous No.17477441]

>>17477396
you are impotent and incapable of stopping him

[Anonymous No.17477448]

>>17477441
Why would I? I want him to keep going, its amusing.

[Anonymous No.17477451]

I'm going to show this FREAK WEIRDO to /lit/ and maybe they'll have a laugh!
>actually, he seems based
UH.... they keep repeating that he is based. that must mean they're all one person because nobody could find this FREAK WEIRDO interesting. that means anyone who says ken wheeler is based must be ken wheeler!

[Anonymous No.17477455]

>>17475307
Yes, through an apophatic approach. The Buddha’s disciples were so dumb that they took it literally too. Remember how devas literally had to beg the Buddha to teach the dharma and he initially refused because no one would understand it? Well it turns out that the Buddha was right and the devas were retarded

[Anonymous No.17477461]

>>17477439
>being rejected on the grounds that he gets basic physics wrong
source? Name something he gets wrong

[Anonymous No.17477471]

>>17477425
>w-wait a few people do agree with him
Ok now list the thousands of Buddhist and Hindu scholars that don't.

[Anonymous No.17477472]

>>17477451
I think Ken is based

- F. Gardner

[Anonymous No.17477478]

>>17477451
Haha based post, thanks for putting him in his placed my based bro, Ken is so fucking based!

[Anonymous No.17477479]

>>17477439

he doesn't need to post on 4chan to shill his content - he got posted on /p/ because he is a photography novelty, he got posted on /pol/ because it is the second largest board

[Anonymous No.17477487]

>>17477455
>Well it turns out that the Buddha was right and the devas were retarded
Indra actually attains Self-knowledge in the Chandogya Upanishad, something that eludes Buddhists to this day, so I’d be careful about who you’re calling retarded pal

[Anonymous No.17477496]

>>17475232
How hard is it to learn ancient Pali?

[Anonymous No.17477503]

>>17477472
based f gardner

[Anonymous No.17477521]

>>17475232
I thought this was Andrew Zimmern on first glance.

[Anonymous No.17477523]

I really hope this thread reaches the bump limit, this shit is too funny.

[Anonymous No.17477525]

Ken is here.
AMA.

[Anonymous No.17477527]

>>17477451
This is the correct analysis on the topic.

[Anonymous No.17477533]

>>17477478
if you want to be head of the circus then don't resent the quality of the company you keep.

[Anonymous No.17477537]

>>17477525
Why?

[Anonymous No.17477538]

>>17477451
BASED and correct. The absolute lucidity of this post to discern reality... it just too based. Brothers, Ken Wheeler (pbuh) is far too based for this board. Based Wheeler.

[Anonymous No.17477553]

>>17475232
He reminds me of the Norf lads

[Anonymous No.17477554]

>>17477538
>BASED and correct. The absolute lucidity of this post to discern reality... it just too based. Brothers, Ken Wheeler (pbuh) is far too based for this board. Based Wheeler.

think i'll start doing this unironically

[Anonymous No.17477564]

>>17477537
Why what?
Ask intelligent questions.

[Anonymous No.17477566]

>>17477554
Based (pbuh)

Brotherposting (pbuh) will (pbuh) make (pbuh) a (pbuh) comeback (pbuh) in (pbuh) this (pbuh) board (pbuh)

Brothers (pbuh).....

[Anonymous No.17477581]

>>17477566

Thank you brother (pbuh), I am glad that you are finally willing to acknowledge Ken (pbuh). In time you will come to love the rest of the /lit/ pantheon.

[Anonymous No.17477604]

>>17477525
Why do you claim that Upadesasahsri and Vivekachudamani are Shankara’s only authentic works (which nobody inside the Advaita tradition or scholars who study it claim, I’ve only seen the claim made on theosophist websites), but then in other videos you recommend as wonderful the AJ Alston translations of Shankara’s writings arranged by topic? The Shankara writings in the AJ Alston books are like 95+% drawn from the same prose commentaries that you claim are not authentic, so why do you then recommend them in the form of AJ Alston’s compilations of them? It seems like a contradiction.

[Anonymous No.17477836]

>>17477487
Krishna BTFO Indra and he hasn’t recovered since

[Anonymous No.17478214]

>>17477604
To know a contradiction you have to learn what both contra- and -diction mean and what his implied by their translated forms.

[Anonymous No.17478221]

>>17477455
>>Yes, through an apophatic approach.
>>17475307
the utter state of poos and atheists

[Anonymous No.17478222]

>>17477358
>>Ken is probably right that Buddhism was originally a spinoff of Upanishadic non-dual teachings
>the buddha reacted to ideas made 500 years after him

woah

[Anonymous No.17478228]

>>17477181
simple awareness is conditonned

[Anonymous No.17478232]

>>17476800>>17475232

>>17476780
>I like a white guru

atheism is a huge mistake

>>17475470
>>If one understands the term 'soul' as a continuum of individuality from moment to moment, from lifetime to lifetime, then one can say that Buddhism also accepts a concept of soul; there is a kind of continuum of consciousness
yeah that's not true in buddhism

[Anonymous No.17478305]

He’s based.
Seriously, he’s based.

[Anonymous No.17479750]

>>17478228

How?

[Anonymous No.17479772]

>>17478232
>yeah that's not true in buddhism
>I know more about buddhism than the Dalai Lama
/lit/ pseuds never fail to crack me up

[Anonymous No.17479790]

>>17475232
How the fuck this consoomer gearfaggot sperg is based? I don't know about his lit and phil knowledge but he is the pathetic illiterate scum of photography.
I am from >>>/p/ and his breed ruined the whole fucking board. Just look at the catalog of pee. It is full of gear stock photographs. Imagine some autist you talks about pens and typewriters but don't ever talks about art/literature.

This man is the quintessential soulless bugman consoomer.

[Anonymous No.17479821]

>>17475232

[Anonymous No.17480451]

>>17475753
you're right

[Anonymous No.17480483]

>>17479790
>I don't know about his lit and phil knowledge
he's just as cringe in those areas as he is in photography

[Anonymous No.17480491]

>>17478222
The pre-Buddhist Upanishads speak pretty extensively of non-dualism and say multiple times that the Atman is Brahman, I can quote the passages if you'd like me to. To say that Buddhism was a spinoff of those non-dual Upanishadic teaching existing in 800-700 BC is not the same as saying that Buddha later stole ideas from Shankara. I was only saying the former and not the latter.

[Anonymous No.17480603]

>>17475232
basado

[Anonymous No.17482091]

>>17480483
>he's just as cringe in those areas as he is in photography
lies

[Anonymous No.17482189]

The guy is absolutely clueless about Buddhism and makes beginner level mistakes when translating Pali

[Anonymous No.17483397]

>>17482189

>look everyone, we got a pali translator on /lit/

[Anonymous No.17483678]

>>17483397
why not?

[Anonymous No.17483752]

>>17483678
Since Ken seems to be shitposting in this thread, why don't you put your money where your mouth is and give some examples of his mistaken translations

[Anonymous No.17483786]

>>17483752
I'm not the pali guy

[Anonymous No.17484071]

>>17479821
Fucking based

[Anonymous No.17484086]

>>17478228
>"the Subject is epiphenomenal"
>"...to operant conditioning"
kek this is the power of anglo-analytic "philosophy" let's all laugh at this retard

[Anonymous No.17484100]

>>17483752
>Since Ken seems to be shitposting in this thread
if you're schizoparanoiac, yes, it would seem that's the case.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.17484103]

>>17478232
Eh; I actually don’t like nor do I watch him. I agreed with his takes on Buddhism and Hinduism and Platonism and found him overly fixated on apophatic mysticism while also blurring/smudging the details of western and eastern mysticism to fit his lense.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.17484128]

>>17484103
>I agreed with

Sorry mistyped, talking to friends waiting for the Game, I meant to say, I disagree with his takes on Buddhism. Apologies.

[Anonymous No.17484528]

This whole thread is just one pro-Ken schizo (maybe Ken himself) arguing with one anti-Ken schizo

[Anonymous No.17484551]

>>17475232
This guy cracks me up

[Anonymous No.17484571]

>>17484128
>I disagree with his takes on Buddhism
Don't you agree with him though that it was originally a spinoff of Upanishadic teachings? Where do you differ from him? Is it mainly that you don't seem to write off all of later Buddhism like he does but that you take an interest in Mahayana and Vajrayana?

[Anonymous No.17484573]

This guy reminds me of the Judge in Blood Meridian. There was something about him having a face like a baby.