[ 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: 665 KB, 750x537, 1611337308197.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17940471 No.17940471 [Reply] [Original]

Wouldn't it be preferable to just stay in samsara and enjoy the good lives and suffering through the bad?
Like in your individual life you enjoy the good times and suffer through the bad instead of suicide?

>> No.17940486

>>17940471
I think the Buddhists would call that a kind of delusion or false consciousness, based on a misapprehension of the situation
>suffer through 500 lives of abject hell for the sake of 1 coom fest which is not even that satisfying

>> No.17940526

>>17940471
wtf is samsara?

>> No.17940853

>>17940486
If we all gonna get blown up by the sun one day tho who cares

>> No.17940858

>>17940853
What's to say that would stop the cycle of reincarnation? In Buddhist cosmology there are plenty of other worlds and planes.

>> No.17941560

>>17940471
buddhism is retarded
the only good branches actually agree with you (some sects of vajrayana)

>> No.17941706

>>17940471
Well Hinduism suggests that since you're born and now inhabit a physical body, you are bound by the laws of physical existence. As such you should not deny life but rather realise God through living your life.

The life span is divided into 4 parts and only in the last part i.e Sanyasa, should you renounce the physical world and focus solely on God.

>> No.17941712

>>17940471
>enjoy
No such thing you retard.
Existence is suffering and this is an objective fact for them.

>> No.17941999

>>17941712
>Existence is suffering
At least read about buddhism before embarrassing yourself here.

>> No.17942013

>>17941999
He didn’t say anything wrong

>> No.17942028

>>17941999
Kek, Dukkha means suffering you dumb western retard and there is nothing positive about it. We use the word Dukh in our language which means suffering, unhappiness, pain, melancholy etc.

>> No.17942057

>why go to heaven? just ignore the fire of hell and enjoy the good through the bad

>> No.17943704

>>17942057
there is no eternal heaven and hell in buddhism try again

>> No.17944006

>>17943704
it is a comparison

>> No.17944021

test

>> No.17944050

In buddhism enjoyment isn't ultimately satisfying

And the bad lives are truly horrific, like millions of years being burnt alive stabbed by spears

>> No.17944225

All the stuff about life being suffering and extinguishing desires and stuff makes sense, but I don't understand where they come up with all the woo woo cosmological stuff. Seems like they just made it up.

>> No.17945375

>>17944225
yes, most of it is magical and not necessary, but to be fair, back when buddhism was spreading in india there was another kind of thoughts surrounding the current religion. The woo woo things was made up to gather more attention to Buddha as years went on after his death or something along this line.

>> No.17945856
File: 147 KB, 600x600, 2069971i.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17945856

>>17940471
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinegar_tasters

>> No.17946445

>>17944225
People at the time correctly saw the spiritual world unlike today how the world has been ravaged by secularism

>> No.17946460

>>17944225
To be fair, it's mostly what people already believed at the time, but not everyone. Buddha studied with the Jains and pretty much aped their cosmology except he decided there was a level beyond what they regarded as liberation.

>> No.17946481

>>17944225
The cosmology necessarily precedes the practice. If there's no endless reincarnation then Buddhism has no reason to exist and the best option is literally suicide (or murder if you want to be a bodhisattva). Secular Buddhists might ramble about all they want, but all religious authorities of all sects flat out state it.

>> No.17946594

>>17945375
>The woo woo things was made up to gather more attention to Buddha as years went on after his death or something along this line.
major cope

>> No.17946621

I get satisfaction from things

>> No.17946642

is there a buddhism flowchart to make sense of the relevant lit

>> No.17946645

>>17946621
No you don't.
t. The Buddha

>> No.17946682

>>17946645
Yes I do
t. Nietzsche

(that's a joke, I know this is not accurate)

>> No.17946688

>>17946645
buddhism just conflates ontology and morality and claims that because the material world is contingent, everything in it is immoral. obviously retarded, some things are nice, sensual pleasure is okay. no need to inject this pseudo platonism as your base and dance around its obvious faults by changing the game from ontology to morality per the circumstances

>> No.17946730

If you're white you can't be a Buddhist, you have to be a stoic instead.

>> No.17947283 [DELETED] 

>>17940471
>Wouldn't it be preferable to just stay in samsara and enjoy the good lives and suffering through the bad?
No.

Buddhism is a mediocre agnostic doctrine that has its end in the relnquishment of one's martial potential, and in the resignation of oneself in pro of basking in one's own internal spiritual abundance.

Mediocrity entails loss of freedom; knowledge wthout growth is stunted; this is why "Buddhists" will never be able to discern the reality of what is, and experience the serene flame of gnosticism, which is perfected in Christianity.

Better to know than to be ignorant; worse to be idle with knowledge than to excel with it.

>> No.17947370

>>17940471
>Wouldn't it be preferable to just stay in samsara and enjoy the good lives and suffering through the bad?
No.

Buddhism is a mediocre pregnostic doctrine that has its end in the relnquishment of one's martial potential, and in the resignation of oneself in pro of basking in one's own internal spiritual abundance.

Mediocrity entails loss of freedom; knowledge wthout growth is stunted; this is why "Buddhists" will never be able to discern the reality of what is, and experience the serene flame of gnosticism, which is perfected in Christianity.

Better to know than to be ignorant; worse to be idle with knowledge than to excel with it.

>> No.17947751

>>17946642
Sure.
In The Buddha's Words is collection of Theravada sutras that I recommend for general reading.
For Mahayana, I recommend the BDK Tripitaka translations.

If you are interested in the philosophy, then check out Buddhist Philosophy by Jay L. Garfield and Buddhism as Philosophy by Mark Siderits (this is more analytical style)

>> No.17947785

>>17946688
you don't know what you're talking about

>> No.17947813

>>17940471
>LMAO DUDE, JUST SIT DOWN AND ZONE OUT

>> No.17948112

>>17944225
it's a rough map of the psyche since it connects to a greater world outside the physical cosmos

>> No.17948149

>>17947813
>zone out
Literally the fucking opposite

>> No.17948159

>>17948149
Bullshit.

>> No.17948171

>>17948159
I don't even know how to respond to this.
Go read the Wikipedia article on meditation if you're truly this ignorant

>> No.17948303

>>17947813
I don't even agree with Buddhism, but if you had ever tried meditating even once, you would know that it requires active effort and can actually be quite exhausting.

>> No.17949194

>>17946594
literally true, buddhism was woven into the contemporary world view to have it make sense to begin with and then to overcome it entirely, just accept your atheism bro

>> No.17949210

>>17940471
yes, go ahead and enjoy what you can, as humans we are too weak to become perfect and therefore need help, turn your mind to Amida Butsu and he will help you after you are done enjoying the joyful things. Things simply play out naturally, no need to force it.

>> No.17949621

>>17949194
No, even if the story's that were written as "magical" of buddhas life, a lot of his teaching are useful. Everything comes from emptiness and once you start to notice these things in daily life, suffering will fade with time. Ironic this is cause time is manmade and this post is as empty as all of it.

>> No.17949710

>>17949194
who said anything about me being atheist? nice projection

>> No.17950979

>>17942028
>Dukkha means suffering
Kinda sad that westerners know the subtleties of your languace better than you do.

>> No.17951020

>>17950979
not him but its dukhi.

>> No.17951108

>>17950979
>my interpretation is better than yours
Retard, whenever someone mentions "Dukhh" I intuitively feel its meaning according to the situation. And again there is nothing "positive" about this word. A universal definition is the word is useless bullshit that Wittgenstein refuted 100 years ago.

>> No.17951917

>>17946730
>>>/pol/

>> No.17951978
File: 77 KB, 640x708, d4a33ee15cf20a30c803e7e6927d191e93016a71c63ce81e8468c5c4c8b72ac9_1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17951978

>>17946730
>t.

>> No.17952280

What's the difference between mindfulness and repressing your thoughts/emotions?
I'm trying to understand meditation but I'm not 100% on board yet.

>> No.17952484

>>17952280
You don't force your thoughts or emotions away when you meditate, you allow them to arise and then fall away, but you don't get attached to them. For instance, if I'm meditating and a thought appears about how I need to study for a test, I just allow the thought to appear, then disappear, I don't get involved with it.

>> No.17952640

>>17940471
Buddhism is hypergay

>> No.17952646

>>17940471
Theravada buddhists committed genocide in Myanmar. Only mahayana buddhists go to the pure land

>> No.17952651

>>17946730
What s retarded conditional

>> No.17952660

>>17952646
But that's based, you gigantic faggot.
Also mahayana sutras are some of the lamest fanfics ever made.

>> No.17952690

>>17945856
Holy shit thank you I've looked for a photo of this for ages.

>> No.17953099

If Buddhism considers the mind to be a sensory organ, the sixth sense being thought essentially. Where does the conscious reside?

>> No.17953124
File: 309 KB, 1060x1500, 91IG5zl8nyL._SL1500_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17953124

>>17940471
This shit? Fuck yeah

>> No.17953284

>>17940853
Rebirth never ends until you get Nirvana. The sun will be blown up, and you'll be reborn on planet Peepee in the Poopoo dimension.

>>17953099
Nowhere, consciousness isn't "a thing", it's an English word that is occasionally used to translate a variety of concepts. The first is the idea of the mental activity caused by a sensation ("sight consciousness"). The second is as a broader web of mental activity, but each part of the web is just that: a part. There's no single part that "is" the consciousness anymore than there is one drop of water that "is" the ocean. There is no tiny man in your head piloting you.

It should be noted that this "sixth sense" isn't just memory, but mental activity period. You daydream using the sixth sense, you talk to yourself in your head using the sixth sense, you dream using the sixth sense, etc.

>>17952484
At a more simple angle, mindfulness is just looking at what you think/feel, seeing what makes it arise, seeing it fall away, dissecting it, etc. It's being aware of it. Repression, when successful, results in you not being aware of it. I'd personally argue that you can never "repress" a memory in the Freudian sense, just that you can start acting a certain way and not realize why you're acting that way. In that case, ironically, if you don't like acting that way you can un-repress yourself by being mindful.

At the risk of someone thinking this is doctrinal (I don't believe it is) they're two ways of dealing with a phenomena, and one (mindfulness) is far more healthy than the other (repression).

>> No.17953764

>>17940471
>Wouldn't it be preferable to just stay in samsara and enjoy the good lives and suffering through the bad?

First: That's not what the First Noble Truth says. It's not that life is suffering. It's that there is dukkha, which while encompassing "suffering" is much more than just that. "Unsatisfactoriness" is a better general translation. Obviously (human) life is more than just pain and suffering. But if you don't recognize the inherently unsatisfactory nature of all conditioned phenomena - everything you deal with every day - then you'll never even start down the path that can end it.

Even a rebirth in a heavenly realm is dukkha. That's the whole point. You can't escape it through the process of death and rebirth. Even if you somehow manage to spend 10^10^10^10^10^10^10^10^10^10 years in a heavenly realm as a powerful diety you'll still end up disappointed and unsatisfied when that time is up. And the knowledge that that time will come will always weigh on the mind in one way or another, even if it's very subtle. So long as there is continued craving for existence or non-existence there is dukkha.

The whole point of liberation, englightenment, awakening, whatever you want to call it is to completely root out the delusions which lead to that craving thus ending the cycle. There is no other way to find peace because by defintion it cannot be found in samsara.

>Like in your individual life you enjoy the good times and suffer through the bad instead of suicide?

This is the entire point! So long as you cling to existence or non-existence you won't be able to live life without dukkha coloring your view of good times and bad.

>>17942028
Dukkha is bad, yes, but "existence is suffering" is a horrible misread of the First Noble Truth.

>> No.17953793
File: 18 KB, 638x398, tipitaka_chart.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17953793

>>17946642
This chart is just for the Pali Canon.

You may want to check out https://suttacentral.net/ and https://84000.co/..

>> No.17953849

>>17946481
This is correct. Buddhism without the concept of rebirth is nonsense.

Even if the concept of rebirth seems far out you can still learn what the Buddha taught and follow his instructions to the extent they've been preserved. Eventually you'll get to a point where the whole rebirth thing sort of just clicks and you'll have a hard time remembering when you didn't see it as obviously true.

>> No.17954023

>>17953764
I understand rebirth as when this body dies whatever this body is made of will eventually be part of different living beings. In fact, the body is constantly being remade with new material, one could think of myself today as a rebirth of me from 10 years ago, or as a rebirth of the chicken I ate for lunch.
Using that understanding of rebirth, if liberation is achieved in this lifetime, once this body dies, it will no longer matter. Any attainment or understanding will be lost, and there will be new beings with dukkha born from the remains of this body. The cycle of samsara will continue indefinitely, I just happened to be free from the suffering of day to day life for a short time.
Am I missing something here? The cycle of samsara will never end. Maybe one day all sentient beings will be liberated?

>> No.17954118

>>17953849
>Eventually you'll get to a point where the whole rebirth thing sort of just clicks
Factually untrue. Not that you can't believe in it, but it doesn't necessarily follow unless you just go down the "if he's right about this then he's got to be right about everything" avenue.

>> No.17954176

>>17954023
>Am I missing something here?
Yes. Rather than try and poorly summarize it, I recommend just reading this: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/truth_of_rebirth.html..

>Maybe one day all sentient beings will be liberated?
That's the idea!

>>17954118
Kinda like how if there's a stream and once you enter it you get carried away. If only they had a phrase for that.

>> No.17954225

>>17954176
Hello, arahant Dave.

>> No.17955002
File: 311 KB, 650x488, 2_08_58_37_1_1_H@@IGHT_350_W@@IDTH_650.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17955002

>>17953284
>Nowhere, consciousness isn't "a thing",
Yes it is, it refers to the qualitative or experiential aspect of being conscious, i.e. being sentient as opposed to an insentient object. Conscious entities are naturally endowed with consciousness, it is their very being and essence.

>it's an English word that is occasionally used to translate a variety of concepts. The first is the idea of the mental activity caused by a sensation ("sight consciousness"). The second is as a broader web of mental activity, but each part of the web is just that: a part.
This is contradicted by how we experience things, in both of the senses you describe, you are not actually describing consciousness, you are describing things which are appear within or to consciousness, which are observed by the light of one's foundational awareness. Sights, sounds and smells do not observe themselves, they occur to a conscious presence who is different from them, they enter into and leaves its presence. Similarly, the "broader web of mental activity" like thoughts, memory, emotions and so on are all things which occur to an awareness which registers them in turn.

If there was no awareness who was separate from these things there would be no coherent way to explain how they all take place as an integrated whole as the phenomena within one's own smooth continuum of uninterrupted experience that occurs to conscious beings when time progresses. A disparate jumble of scattered thoughts and sensory perceptions cannot logically produce the unity of consciousness/awareness that experiences itself as such like we do from the self-enclosed flashes of awareness which would come and go with them.

This is one of the areas in which the correctness of Hindu schools of philosophy like Advaita Vedānta over Buddhism is demonstrated. Buddha failed to clearly enunciate the nature of consciousness, he instead lists as consciousness a list of things which occur to consciousness.

Some people try to grapple with this by believing that it was all meant to indirectly help people realize this consciousness, but regardless it gives rise to masses of people who are confused about their own consciousness, and they go around trying to fool others into thinking that living beings aren't really conscious and that there is just a bunch of random thoughts and sensations occurring to nobody, that there is no presence to whom they occur, even though to be conscious means to have something that contradicts this.

>There's no single part that "is" the consciousness anymore than there is one drop of water that "is" the ocean. There is no tiny man in your head piloting you.
Consciousness is not any of the parts, they are things which occur within consciousness, consciousness itself is formless, homogenous self-revealing or self-illuminating and it has no parts. Things which can be identified as types of mental sensation like thoughts can only be done so because they occur as objects to consciousness.

>> No.17955033

>>17955002
>Buddha failed to clearly enunciate the nature of consciousness, he instead lists as consciousness a list of things which occur to consciousness.
Philosophers of the Yogacara school came the closest to articulate the nature of consciousness, but were hamstrung by Buddhist orthodoxy.

>> No.17955394

>>17946642
sticky

>> No.17955452

First Truth is not a truth, its not even a half truth. Life comes with suffering, but one cannot say that life itself is suffering without massive delusions, faulty definitions of suffering, or the presupposition that breathing is suffering.
t. Sufferer.

>> No.17955509

>>17953764
Alright this is a slightly more sensible reading of the truth, but much like the Christian idea that life should inherently be lived for what comes after, Buddhism supposes that you have to spend your life trying to be free of your fate. On the other side though, Christianity tells you to live your life while Buddhism teaches to detach yourself from it entirely and thats where I have a large issue with it. It could be called hypocrisy for a Christian to call out the Buddhist way of life, but to detach ones self from life or Samsara, is equitable to not having lived at all and I cannot even begin to understand what might drive one to follow such a path.

>> No.17955631

>>17955509
>Samsara, is equitable to not having lived at all and I cannot even begin to understand what might drive one to follow such a path.

Having lived countless times before.

I think it does a great disservice to the discourse on Buddhism the way we treat it like everyone is meant to become a monk. When we discuss Christianity we don't work with the assumption that everyone is meant to become a priest, a monk, a hermit. Likewise with Hinduism the discussion around these parts is more open to the fact that not everyone is meant to end up in an Ashram, or going back far enough the idea was you did so at the end of your life. But with Buddhism it seems that the laity, which constitutes the vast bulk of Buddhists who live their lives much like everyone else on the planet, is disregarded.

>> No.17955704

>>17955631
Can't say I have time to read into or think about what you wrote, but it was interesting enough to make a footnote, I'll think about it later.

>> No.17956002

>>17940471
Comfy buddhism thread.

>> No.17956022

>>17955631
I wouldn't say the lay community is disregarded. The path is the path. It's for the few. The society that fosters buddhism does make some sacrifice so that the seekers can seek. But the lay community also feels the benefits of wise spiritual leadership, good teaching and counseling from the monks, the blessings that they believe can help them, the offerings they make, the sense of community and tradition they build in each other. Is the laity disregarded by buddhist thought? Hard to say. Nothing stops anyone from forsaking possessions and taking the oaths and wearing the robes.

>> No.17956036

>>17956022
I meant it is disregarded commonly in discussions on this board. Specifically that many critiques work on an erroneous assumption that everyone is meant to join a monastery, when, like you said, the path is for the few.

>> No.17956037

>>17955452
I can hear an abbot somewhere facepalming himself when he reads that.

>> No.17956049

>>17955002
"Self"

>> No.17956129

>>17956036
Most the people here on this board are probably not from a culture where they can see buddhism as a larger societal element. I didn't know how strong the bond between lay person's and monks could be until I began visiting a local thai temple. The festivals, the offerings, the blessings. To me it's impossible to sperate out the religion from the culture of the people where the religion is integrated into every person's life. But I was just a stupid American reading texts and larping in my mind in saffron robes until I became a part, or at least witness of a buddhist culture.

>> No.17956186

>>17952280
>What's the difference between mindfulness and repressing your thoughts/emotions?
kek what

it's just mental training to improve emotional regulation and executive functioning, as well as robustness and adaptability (not stuck in triggers and loops). this is aimed towards awakening. going above and beyond to higher and higher states of consciousness which involves decoupling or controlling the constructs of your mind from dictating you.

>> No.17956220

>>17944225
>woo woo cosmological stuff
Read Nagarjuna.

>> No.17956287

>>17955452
dude stop getting hung up on english words. it's pretty systematic and doesn't mean anything like you said.

>> No.17957245

>>17951108
>And again there is nothing "positive" about this word
I never claimed that it's positive in any way. But suffering is a bad translation in the context of buddhism.

>> No.17957297

>>17940471
Honestly all hedonists should kill themselves.

>> No.17958192

>>17956049
it remains true regardless of what you call it

>> No.17958871

>>17940526
Earthly existence detached from Nirvana (hevan is a bad translation for nirvana, but useful for a shit post explanation)

>> No.17959467

>>17958192
The only thing real about self is your attachment to the concept. As long as you enjoy it, I am sure it will give you some modicum of comfort in this and many lifetimes. But why settle for a dead end of "self"ism when you can be free?

>> No.17959879

>>17959467
What is the "you" that experiences being "free"?

>> No.17960652

>>17959467
>The only thing real about self is your attachment to the concept.
Only a fool would deny the reality of consciousness, whether or not you consider this to be the Self is unimportant, the Buddhist explanation of consciousness remains incoherent either way.
>But why settle for a dead end of "self"ism when you can be free?
You don’t have a single good argument for why the Vedantic doctrine of the Atman is a dead end, you are just stating that it is per your belief in Buddhist dogma. You also don’t have a coherent answer to who exactly is supposed to be free if there is no Atman.

>> No.17961439
File: 193 KB, 1545x869, der coomer.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17961439

>>17940486

>tfw got lucky and rolled for coom fest
well, might as well take advantage of it while I'm here, right?

>> No.17962319

>>17960652
Free to not exist.

But you go ahead and keep on suffering, going into buddhism threads to trash talk others beliefs. It's just the pain making you lash out like that.

>> No.17962328

>>17959879
You don't get to experience it, you get to not exist at all. Did none of you do any studying at any point?

>> No.17962417

>>17962319
>>17962328
>you get to not exist at all.
>Free to not exist.
Annihilation is not freedom, freedom is something that can only be possessed and enjoyed by an existing entity.

>"Lastly, the Buddhistic assumption that the extinction of that consciousness is the highest end of human life, is untenable, for there is no recipient of results. For a person who has got a thorn stuck into him, the relief of the pain caused by it is the result (he seeks); but if he dies, we do not find any recipient of the resulting cessation of pain. Similarly I if consciousness is altogether extinct and there is nobody to reap that benefit, to talk of it as the highest end of human life is meaningless. If that very entity or self, designated by the word 'person' -Consciousness, according to you-whose well-being is meant, is extinct, for whose sake will the highest end be? But those who believe in a self different from consciousness and witnessing many objects, will find it easy to explain all phenomena such as the remembrance of things previously seen and the contact and cessation of pain-the impurity, for instance, being ascribed to contact with extraneous things, and the purification to dissociation from them."

- Śaṅkarācārya

>> No.17962454
File: 78 KB, 630x430, 566022.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17962454

>>17962417
The recipient of the results of the cessation of pain is the viewer, the witness, every individual and the society as a whole. The freedom gained is not for yourself but to shine a light down the path that others might see and follow. A man can easily be enticed to let go of everything in life, his wife, his home, his lands, his fortunes. But ask him to let go of his pain and this existence and the importance of himself and he will endure any hardship and eternal suffering not to loose those most precious burdens.

>> No.17962707

>>17962454
>The recipient of the results of the cessation of pain is the viewer, the witness, every individual and the society as a whole. The freedom gained is not for yourself but to shine a light down the path that others might see and follow.
This means that you are not actually talking about Buddhism leading to us enjoying or possessing freedom in any meaningful sense but are using it in a purely figurative way, applying it to the ripples of cause and effect left in the waters of samsara left in the wake of people being snuffed out of it into complete oblivion. This is not different from how a rich man might like to imagine he will live on in memory after his death through his philanthropy or vanity projects.

You are not talking about the attainment of real freedom or liberation from bondage; the transition from being a bound entity to an unbound one is not the same as being a bound entity who is then completely annihilated from existence.

>A man can easily be enticed to let go of everything in life, his wife, his home, his lands, his fortunes. But ask him to let go of his pain and this existence and the importance of himself and he will endure any hardship and eternal suffering not to loose those most precious burdens.
I find it amusing that people are capable of being inspired by what is essentially working hard to be assured that you'll experience the materialist nihilist conception of death.

>> No.17962910

Most this stuff boils down to
Avoid the illusion
Embrace the illusion
If you want the latter, watch for fraters posts on Tantra

>> No.17963830

>>17962707
>enjoying or possessing freedom
To even type such a phrase. Enjoying? Possessing? Do you try and convince Christians they are wrong and that they should sin MORE to gain salvation? The words you use "possession of freedom." You honestly cannot see the irony? You cannot be free when bound by attachment and possession. You are only dragged into the deep waters of endless suffering. What is so baffling about not wanting to exist? How many lifetimes of broken heartedness and suffering do you really need. And in all you lives how many steps closer to the boundless eternal entity that you believe yourself to be are you?

>> No.17963954

>>17940471
sorry anon but buddhist science is bullshit. take the central idea, reason through and with it, judge the result, continue or not; put it into context, use it, put it up against opposites or try to find opposites yourself: make philosophy, in other words. There is no rebirth, there is no faith, there is just consciousness; and consciousness is just the sum of a working-and-perceptive process we call life-and-living.

>inb4 popsci atheism

no

>> No.17964554

>>17963954
"Faith" the buddha taught to try out his teachings, of they work for you or not then you can judge their truth. There is no faith needed.

>> No.17965027

>>17940471
That's basically the definition of "blue pilled"