>>25739612 learn breath meditation see that everything fades and the more you cling to it, the more you will cry get dispassionate about uneffective ways to be happy, aka about hedonism [mundane or through jahnas] reach nibbanna
but first, since you admit being an hedonist, go into jhanas.
but you must understand that your fear stem from taking seriously your feelings and desires which itself stems from a lack of proper view on what emotions are. your faith in hedonism is literally what causes your identification with your anxiety and pains
>>25739363 Descartes said the only thing he could know was that he existed. Bundle theory states there is no actual object there, just it's properties. For example, try thinking of an apple. You imagine something small and red with a sweet taste. Now think of an apple without the properties; you can't. Then apply this to the self and what you have is sense data colliding to create the illusion of the self. If you can only know the self, what happens after you refuse it? What happens after as far as what we can know about existence and knowledge?
>>25739373 I have never failed to say I only really post to clarify my opinions to myself. Now I have done that, understood the overarching fallacy of Buddhism, that of '...in moderation' (continuous reliance on drive-degenerative connotations epitomized by 'let go of desire' while superficially conceding importance of 'being ambitious whenever a situation calls for it'), there is really hardly a reason for me to post. Not considering the proportion of people abusing me to people who have understood -- who, again, do exist.
>>25740240 (In short, the only thing one needs to know about Buddhists is that they are not interested in the mind. They don't give the smallest of fucks about the mind. They have absolutely zero interest in relating exposure to their practices and meaningless dogmas to eventual life choices and life outcomes. They just want to spout about self-mastery and understanding reality. They are not interested in understanding it.)
>>25740283 Well, yes. The idea is, it is far, far easier to say 'meditation helps, and if it doesn't help, you just need to alter your practice, or maybe it is not for you, this doesn't mean it's bad, stop being so fucking negative', than to understand the host of principles needed to approach it maturely -- that, for instance, there is no such thing in science as objective helping or harming, that there exists no free will which to appeal to as soon as 'meditation' starts backfiring ('you just need to remember to offset its negative effects!'), that discussion of effects of a practice must not be dismissed using arbitrary addition of disclaimers of harmlessness ('it doesn't mean anything if meditation makes people lazier, because it is just a stage, a phase, that a mature practitioner can overcome'), and so on. It is far, far more convenient just to say 'it makes you aware of your thoughts bro'... without ever defining 'self-awareness', which is about as nebulous as 'soul'.
>>25740369 (In short, Buddhism only still is a thing because of conscious incongruity between their declarations and their goals. Goals: 'I want to make you care less.' Declarations: 'I want to make you care less in moderation.')
>>25740524 If I had a dollar every time a Buddhist declared from his high horse that I will never understand what he/she means, I could afford myself a good library of overpriced textbooks on 'mindfulness meditation'.
>>25739363 My Buddhism is stimulant (adderall or ritalin, i strangely prefer the latter) & valium combo. Damn the serenity and clear-headedness it gives you, bro. I tried Buddhism but failed. I even read this whole book: http://www.amazon.com/The-Middle-Length-Discourses-Buddha/dp/086171072X I can see the potential but it's not for me and too hard.
>>25739363 I was in the airport (of all places) and suddenly started to see, in a really visceral way, the emptiness and transparency of my consicous experience, saw myself as part of that emptiness, etc. This was cool at first but pretty quickly started to get fearful.
With regard to my walking-around experience, I would say this: whereas before I had what I would describe as a strong intellectual understanding/conviction of the ultimate emptiness of self and world, my gut-level instinctual map of things was still for the most part "I am a separate self-particle in a world of separate object-particles," or whatever, though on an intellectual level I knew this was false. Now "emptiness" is much more prominent phenomenologically. Sometimes this feels empowering and sometimes this feels very frightening. I also sometimes reach a point (often after sitting, actually), where I feel OK with the emptiness and almost "normal," though the fear (mostly a fear of sliding back into fear, I think) remains in the background.
>>25740913 Translation: you achieved a big fat fucking nothing.
Where there used to be a meaningless, useless belief that 'everything is empty', now there is a meaningless, useless belief that 'everything is empty' that you feel strongly about.
As always, tip: if a thought cannot be employed by a robot, it is trash. As opposed to math and physics and history, the 'realization' that 'the self is vacuous' is useless for a robot. It cannot be employed by it to become more proficient at finding resources, or communicating knowledge, or interacting with his environment at all. It has no code representation. It can be used in no algorithm. It is just a vapid artifact of your brain to which you became attached. You should discard it, which you never will.
>>25740758 >http://www.amazon.com/The-Middle-Length-Discourses-Buddha/dp/086171072X what do you mean? the book i recommended is not pop buddhism. it's hardcore buddhism. and it works, but you have to put a lot of effort into it. it was nothing for me. i'm too "weak". and i don't want to end up like a plant either.
>>25742324 It means that only people who recommend vices need to use the disclaimer of '...but follow the middle path with respect to it'. If that Siddhartha demagogue knew his claims were harmless, he would never say that.
>many great things can only be achieved through hard work (effort).
For the millionth time, this is literally not even wrong. It makes no scientific sense. A claim is infused with sense no sooner than it contains a predictive relationship, 'thing X tends to happen given the past preconditions A, B, C, ...', where A, B, C, ... are things such as upbringing. 'You can only do it if you give effort' is predicated on nothing, it says 'you can do it if you fulfill all conditions necessary'. Is vacuous, content-less crap. 'You can do it as soon as you persevere in spite of all hardships to the contrary'. This is tautological, it renders the thing achievable by definition: 'you can achieved it as soon as every thing that statistically comes in the way of achieving it is arbitrarily eliminated by your effort'. It's crap.
I have been accused of retardation dozens of times for objecting to those garbage claims.
>>25742477 In other words, 'you can do it as soon as you give effort' should just provoke any person with the modicum of brains to ask 'okay dude, but this is just evasion of the question; now the question is what are the predictors of my giving the necessary effort -- what does that depend on'. Of course, the motivating retard will then evade the question again, saying, 'obviously, effort depends on your individual, personal choices'. At which point attempts to extort some sense from the motivating tard by asking, 'what do my questions depend on' quickly approach futility.
>>25742477 >>25742509 tl;dr 'you can do it, it just takes effort' has been invented by people who just NEED to put 'you can do' and 'it' in one sentence, but can find no plausible premises why the person in question should actually in all likelihood be able to achieve it.
Buddhism only works for stupid people. Europe has a rich and varied philosophical body if you like Buddhism you're either a weeb or a nihilist. If you're a weeb then Shinto is what you want, and if nihilist then read the work of nihilists. There is no excuse for being Buddhist, especially if you are white.
Look at pic related, he even used the s-word Buddholes like so much.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at [email protected] with the post's information.