Stoicism and Buddhism

>>9210469

Meditations by Marcus Aurelius and Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu have more "self help" knowledge between the two books than the rest of the books in the world combined. Letters From a Stoic by Seneca is god-tier as well.

The two are related because they are about emotional intelligence and not really giving a fuck about things that don't matter. They're very chill philosophies, but many Western academics write them off because they are surprisingly practical and simple and are above the circle jerk of academia, they pretty much make the rest of philosophy irrelevant when you really absorb the two books/philosophies.

>>9210506
This. *dons cape and vanishes*

>>9210506
>Tao Te Ching
that isn't buddhist, but either way, you might have not meant to express that it was.

>>9210526
what does that mean?

File: 1486566134653.jpg (7KB, 249x249px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 249x249px

>>9210469
Who is the closest thinker to be the exact opposite of Stoicism?
Someone who promotes pain, entitlement and hystericism

>>9210658
Any modern Marxist/feminist

How much did Greek stoicism influence Buddhism?

File: o-JUDITH-BUTLER-MCGILL-facebook.jpg (257KB, 1536x1107px) Image search: [Google]

257KB, 1536x1107px

>>9210667
I don't know about that, Judith Butler is pretty chill

>>9210469
Buddhism is a bit more developed than stoicism imo
The stoics were cut short by Christianity and their ideas were largely abandoned in favour of more extreme asceticism of the desert fathers.

Buddhism is also a lot more than "just chill dude" that's more Daoism. It is very anarchic however much unlike any abrahamic faith

>>9210668
We don't know
Or how much did Buddhism influence Hellenic thought?

We know there was lots of contact and spread of ideas.
A number of modern Buddhist ideas only really developed after Alexander

>>9210668
buddhism predates stoicism and as I've said, stoic and epicurea terms like "ataraxia" came from the east.

That doesn't necessarily mean the influence came from buddhism though

File: foucault56.jpg (83KB, 338x450px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 338x450px

>>9210658
Thinking about it, Foucault may be the closest to it

Roman sources spoke of buddhists within the empire and mentioned the Buddha by name
There have also been found Buddhist graves in Roman Egypt and Greece

In the east there are mentions of Greek legends, and a massive artistic shift after the conquest

>>9210658
Nietzsche

So, can you dudes answer my questions?

>>9210790
This isn't your thread anymore bud

>>9210798
b-b-but why?

>>9210735
any good books/sources on this?

>>9210779
Not even in the slightest
Nietzsche would be a Buddhist if he knew more about it at the time

>>9210810
he did admire it more, but did misunderstand some of its very fundamental parts.

I really doubt he would have been one though.

>>9210807
This thread mentions several
http://history.stackexchange.com/questions/20889/buddhists-in-ancient-alexandria-and-rome

Even Greek Buddhist missionaries visiting India

>>9210812
Maybe not become one but definitely appreciated it.
The warrior he describes is very similar to the warrior traditions within Buddhist nations

File: 1479963309375.jpg (102KB, 940x658px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 940x658px

>>9210810
>>9210819
The biggest contradiction is that Nietzsche was vehemently opposed to the proposition that the aim of life should be the end of suffering. Their ontologies are in synch otherwise however

Nietzsche was familiar enough with Buddhism through Schopenhauer

>>9210814
ta m8

>>9210658
feminists

>>9210824
Buddhism doesn't say that suffering should be avoided but rather that it is an important tool to help you attain enlightenment by overcoming it
Which is what Nietzsche thought as well

Honestly before the 1960s western knowledge of Buddhism was fairly limited and mostly second hand

>>9210837
>Which is what Nietzsche thought as well

Literally no it isn't. Whether its total reduction or an arbitrary "moderate reduction" the very fact of a libidinal imposition in the noble truths is already fundamentally oppositional to Nietzsches framework

>>9210779
No

>>9210837
Nietzsche was mostly interested in what would be next after overcoming it, though. Buddhism treats the overcoming of suffering as the goal, but for Nietzsche it is just another step towards advancing yourself and human progress.

there are similarities between buddhism and stoicisim but there are generally lots of similarities between buddhism and the three main hellenistic schools that came after aristotle. for example, there is a lot of scholarly work (like the book 'Greek Buddha') exploring similarities between buddhism and pyrrhonian skepticism, and there are also clear similarities between epicurean views on atomism and its implications, on the one hand, and the views of various buddhist schools on composite objects

>>9210668
Buddists can't speak Greek idiot, how would they communicate?

>>9210779
>>9210824
>>9210854

you might find this book revealing:

http://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/philosophy/nineteenth-century-philosophy/nietzsche-and-buddhist-philosophy?format=HB&isbn=9781107031623

>>9210658
Kierkegaard

>>9211005
But for the Buddhist overcoming suffering is not the end (unless you chose to end it there and float aimlessly in between being and non-being)

I think the main difference is Nietzsche disdains what he sees as "pity" and seeks individual attainment while the Buddhist feels individual attainment is impossible so long as suffering continues around you and therefore it is the duty of the enlightened to help overcome suffering beyond themselves as bodhisattvas

Basically the difference between the Buddha who retreats into nirvana in order to reach higher heights of enlightenment vs the Buddha who returns to samsara and the karmic cycle is one turns the wheel on its side highlighting the individual and One while the other keeps it flat highlighting the spokes and ever turning nature

>>9210506
I've been really drawn towards Buddhist philosophy (not so much stoicism) since college and the ideology of it all has definitely made life so much simpler, better, more meaningful.

I've also found that I absolutely fucking hate talking about philosophy now because the academics have their heads so far up their own ass with convoluted bullshit that they mistake for complex wisdoms. The beauty of Buddhism to me has always been the simple answers it provides.

Somewhere along the line people start confusing philosophy with politics or science, and boy are they fucking wet blankets

>>9211562
What the fuck are you on about, please go back to /x/

>>9211614
>philosophy is like too hard dude, just nerds overthinking lol
>I like Buddhism because I can pretend I know everything and I don't have to think much

You sound like a highschooler, consider suicide

>>9211623
You really missed the point friend. There's nothing difficult about understanding complex philosophies, but being long winded and edgy doesn't make you sound smart, it just makes you come off like an asshole.

Or you could pursue a philosophy that focuses on being a generous person and not overanalyzing things that have no deeper meaning.

You let us know how the asshole thing works out.

>>9211623
>>Pretending to know everything.
>>Actually thinking you know everything.

Which one do you think is worse anon?

>>9210824
>Nietzsche was familiar enough with Buddhism through Schopenhauer

which is why his conception of Buddhism was facile - Schopenhauer's was. You can't really evaluate Buddhist teachings just by reading the texts, the teachings something you have to *do*. For example re: the Jhanas, what the hell is anyone supposed to say about the Jhanas who has not put in hundreds of hours of meditation practice in order to experience them? "Jhana" is not an abstract concept open to dialogue or disputation the way the Western tradition likes.

Buddhism is not a philosophical system (system of thought) the way that Stoicism and other western philosophical movements are. It's something more like a set of instruction manuals for re-engineering your mental states.

In the Pali Canon the Buddha comes out hard against even engaging in what we would call philosophical discussion or speculation at all, e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Poisoned_Arrow

You could say that the teachings or Dharma are philosophical in certain ways, and sure, but its all in the context of *intense* meditation practice which has nothing to do with philosophy.

>>9211653
>generous person

Literally a meaningless spook. The point of complex philosophy is become some people have a commitment towards being rationally accountable for their notions and not just believing in arbitrary bullshit like this because it sounds nice

Again suicide

>>9211669
>the teachings something you have to *do*.

Lmao kindly fuck off

>>9211687
>Lmao kindly fuck off

you aren't even trying

>>9211695
I don't need to try in the face of such horseshit. Its a joke that someone on a board interested in literature takes on pure faith alone that you'll necessarily come to some prescribed set of notions from nothing but ritualized ideological reinforcement.
Buddhism attracts the worst kind of pseuds who pretend they have intellectual credibility then shirk back in esoteric mysticism the moment you need to justify your propositions

>>9211724
>takes on pure faith alone
no
>prescribed set of notions
no
>ritualized ideological reinforcement
nope

>esoteric mysticism
eh

I'll put it to you this way. If you haven't been to the grand canyon, and if you don't have access to any pictures of it (or even any pictures of any canyons), there's no amount of circuitous explaining I can do that can give you an authentic portrait of what being at the grand canyon is like. You just have to go there. You can claim that you understand by reading or hearing about the Grand Canyon, but you don't. But my saying so is not "esoteric mysticism" or obscurantism or snake oil or whatever; its totally ordinary. Just go to the Canyon and experience it like you would anything else. Or if you don't like that example, substitute in sex or psychedelic drugs or something else that alters your mental state in a substantial way. There are plenty of things in this world that you can't really know anything about until you do them: meditation is one of them. Why is that so hard to believe? Did you understand what being drunk was like before you had your first drink?

>>9211053
lel

File: 532626727.jpg (16KB, 468x326px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 468x326px

>>9211685
>speaks of spooks
>proceeds to defend philosophy and encourages suicide

>>9210469 (OP)
>seem to be very similar
They agree on the four elements. Stoics claiming that the goal is to live according to Nature will remind you of Buddhists following the Dharma (the word Buddhism is a Western invention). Both philosophies tell desire to fuck off. Interest in both philosophies is growing in the West.
>where do they differ?
Ishvara: Stoics believe in an Ishvara called either God, Zeus or Nature which is coincident with the material universe (pantheism), Theravada Buddhists reject the Ishvara, Buddhist views on matter and phenomena exclude pantheism - if you're thinking of immanent views in Mahayana, where the Buddha is everywhere, I'll remind you of the Heart Sutra: the Dharmas, the laws of this universe are, in fact, empty. The Stoic thinks God is before him because God is the sensible universe, no enlightenment or skepsis is required to discover this, you just need reason and some consensus (see epistemology below).
Free will: Stoics are uncompromising determinists, Theravada Buddhists point out that the Devadahasutta teaches that the present experience of pleasure and pain is a combined result of both past and present actions, it's a weak compatibilism that I believe is stronger in Mahayana.
Afterlife: Stoics believe the soul to be extinguished first and then transforming into the matter-logos spermatikos of the universe (because they're pantheists), Buddhists believe in a cycle of death and rebirth first with extinction at the final goal (which excludes pantheism, your psyche can GTFO the universe).
Epistemology: while Stoics begin with sense information, which leave an impression upon the psyche, reason is the final ultimate judge of these representations of reality, episteme can be achieved with consensus between people. The Buddha of the sabbasutta is an empiricist, all that can be known comes from the 6 senses. Early Buddhism is said to be pragmatist and to teach a correspondence theory, later Buddhists develop a Two Truths doctrine with a provisional pragmatism in daily life and skepsis as the final truth. Chan Buddhism and Western "Buddhism" are often skeptic and tell the phenomena to go fuck themselves.
Ethics: Stoics see the solution to sexual behavior as to simply practice temperance and never over-indulge, they see no merit in saving animals, and have no next life to look for. They want apatheia, peace of mind, here and now, not collecting afterlife points until you can blow out this candle.

Don't ask for book recommendations because I'm ESL.

>>9211745
>There are plenty of things in this world that you can't really know anything about until you do them

I dont think that's true whatsoever and I see no justification for presuming so. The human imagination is perfectly capable of picturing what a fucking canyon looks like.
What you're speaking of in your misconstrued logic is the ability to come to certainty in predicting a specific experience. Which is entirely irrelevant when dealing with abstract matters which are by definition transcendental.
In these matters there is absolutely nothing in experience that is relevant outside the very existence of experience itself.

>>9211780
Oh, I forgot an immensely important difference:

Stoics believe your soul begins as a tabula rasa, Buddhist doctrines of previous lives and karma make this impossible.

>>9210469

They're very similar because this is how people approach life in the context of a late civilizational phase.

>>9211750
Neither philosophy or suicide are spooks you fucking troglodyte
Philosophy especially is a fundamental pre-requisite for becoming unspooked
Git gud

>>9211796
The bottom line is that Stoicism is a philosophy and Buddhism is a religion, the moment you completely make a secular, humanist, if not naturalized, protestant Buddhism that looks only at the Pali Canon and ignores the Mahayana and Vajrayana scriptures, many of the differences disappear.

But then this neo-Buddhism, or non-Buddhism as some call it, will lose many of the distinguishing features that make it an attractive mystical set of doctrines to the Westerner.

Whats a spook

>>9211815
Its when your mind gets cucked

>>9211824
How does a mind get cucked?

File: dj1qrsgrr0ky.gif (1MB, 320x146px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 320x146px

How does a stoic learn to resist the desire to have a daughter after watching Logan? Srs please help

>>9211745

talking about jhanas without experiencing them is like talking about trips without taking acid

you'll sound like a major faggot who doesn't know a damn thing

>>9210469
anyone i've known that has read books on either tend to be detached from reality.
the ability to stay composed isn't that complicated of an idea and something you gain by practice, reading about it only makes you some weird detached neurotic.
save reading for interesting/informative shit.

>>9211854
t. shallow stemfag

Go build a rocket or something.

>>9211864
i'm a bartender.
maybe stop being a little bitch and try being in the real world then you won't have to read a book on how to be in it.

>>9211849
A CUTE

>>9211854
Yes normie hedonists cannot stand that what they experience through the 5 senses and their little ideas are worthless compared to the jhanas.

>>9211877
>i'm just a bartender
>y-yea i know it's pathetic, b-but.. IM IN THE REAL WORLD!!!

holy fucking shitballs, friend. you win!

>>9211883
you're a detached weirdo and you think you're better for it.
it's funny when western buddhists talk about staying calm when they really just learn detachment techniques because they can't handle reality.
>>9211906
being a bartender is fucking great but nice projection.
this is what i'm talking about. i have nothing against buddhists who grew up that way but the entire lot of western buddhists are largely made up of autistic eunuchs who need some religious element to live by. have fun never getting laid then moving to SEA and fucking tranny hookers with other losers when you realize how much of a retard you were.

>>9211930
>being this MAD

>being a bartender is fucking great
sure is, friendo.
>the entire lot of western buddhists are autistic
if you really believe that, I feel obligued to point out the irony of the fact that you called me a
>retard
also:
>have fun never getting laid
wow. you went full neanderthal there. getting your dick wet on a regular basis to forget the fact that you're an idiot?
At first I was having fun trolling you, but now I feel bad for you, mate. I feel genuine pity for you. Have fun bartending and fucking!

>>9210655
It means you're a turbosperg getting into philosophy for all the wrong reasons. And you probably smell too

>>9212034
you sound butthurt maybe step up on your meditation game bud

>>9210469
I can see where teaching of Equanimity might apply to Stoicisim.

Don't know much about stoicism that sticking to what you can control (your mind) which Buddhism also claims to teach you but with an actual pragmatic framework.

File: 1451398566579.jpg (278KB, 500x395px) Image search: [Google]

278KB, 500x395px

>>9212055
THERE'S A FLY IN MY DRINK

>>9212107
is that your mantra?

>>9210658
My diary desu

>>9210701
read his later works, Foucault ended with the Stoics

>>9211669
this guy gets it.

File: adsfjañnñadsfn.jpg (114KB, 384x384px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 384x384px

>>9212123

File: 1488868883797.png (801KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

801KB, 1000x1000px

>>9212049
You sound like the sperg anon. Getting your jimmies all rustled because someone stepped on your high brow philosophy which you probably wasted your major on.

>>9212156
Poor fool.

>>9212172
Not the same guy autist

>>9212229
But you are a different guy autist. Autist.

buddhists belive in gohsts

stoicis are too rationaal for this.

>>9212350
>When you're a beta permavirgin NEET, never neglect the Nietzsche
*tips fedora*

>>9212371

No they don't have to. I mean the Buddha did but he also spoke to devas. Belief in ghosts is extraneous and not required for liberation.

>>9210469
I lived in Asia for a while and the first thing you notice about Buddhism is that it's very irrational, a lot more than christianity. You have belief in the supernatural, lots of requests and praying to gods, heaven and hell, ghosts, dragons, lucky charms, etc.
Because of that, I can't learn anything from my buddhist gf, everything is drowned in bullshit.

So, what kind of Buddhism, are you talking about? Westerners-ready Buddhism ?

>>9211792
I think you're wilfully going a bit too far in your refutation of this

>>9212497
Buddhism in Asia is largely ritualistic and theocratic, largely against the Buddha's ideals. People don't even meditate. Most of them only give alms to monks in hopes that that is enough to gain karmic merit.

Usually it's not enough , one has to live by the Precepts and have a concentration practice.

>>9211614
This; make sure you actually sit down and read the sutras though (Diamond is best to start, then Lanka for a big systematic awesome one) usually intro classes give you only summaries or other peoples' commentary.

I really like the way Heidegger subtly brings existentialism (a rare practical modern philosophy) and Buddhist concepts of being together in a way that still keeps them practical, so I found and joined a fb group, thinking it would be full of interesting practical advice or interpretations of his principal works. Instead, it was just /b/-tier shit posting masked in academic jargon.

>>9212515
I was invited to some Rinpoche cult meeting while there and it was the same shit.

I learned that smoking weed obstructs an area of the cranium and it prevents your soul from leaving your body properly when you die (alcohol is totally fine though).
It's also possible to see dragons (which are all around us) with the right training.
The leader shat on people like Alan Watts for corrupting real Buddhism.

The friend who invited me is completely submitted to the cult, she has to work for free for them and do mindless exercices like doing prostrations for one hour.

Westernized Buddhism is interesting because it makes most of the bullshit disappear, but does similar things really exists in Asia?

>>9212639
Yes. Well I like the Theravada school so it's pretty grounded in what the Buddha actually taught. In particular, Forest Thai cuts out the mystical nonsense. Pure Land and Tibetan can be seen as cultish but I have no beef with them as we are both ultimately dependent on The Eightfold Path. They tend to have Buddha's like Maitreya and others whereas Theravada only studies Gautma Siddhartha. Again, there is no beef because we are both for the cessation of suffering and liberation , they tend to add a lot of extraneous commentary. But I learned something from them too, in particular LamRim meditation and such tantric techniques.

>>9212639
>>9212679
buddhism is just fucking detachment techniques. just as christianity is just a fucking guilt trip cult just as islam is non-racial fascism.

>>9210658
Rand

>>9212696
> buddhism is just fucking detachment techniques.

What makes you say this?

>>9212719
because it is?
there's probably more socio-cultural aspects in the east but the west doesn't give a fuck about that they just want the techniques to help them detach under the guise of spiritual enrichment. it's a commodity, a drug in the west, nothing more. you can't be a real buddhist unless you plan to live in a monastery.

>>9211804
spooks are a spook, you cock munching faggot.

>>9212679
>Forest Thai cuts out the mystical nonsense
That's because the Forest Thai is inspired by Christian modernism which was imported and very influence in Thailand around the same time it was founded.

>largely against the Buddha's ideals
>what the Buddha actually taught
You need to actually read the Pali canon if you think Buddhism wasn't full of mystical nonsense, the buddha condemned actors to hell and instructed multiple Kings and warmongers without condemning either.

File: 1487677474975.jpg (121KB, 753x724px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 753x724px

>>9212696
>angry autistic barman keeps doling out edgy wisdom

>>9212639
>I learned that smoking weed obstructs an area of the cranium and it prevents your soul from leaving your body properly when you die (alcohol is totally fine though).

That's consistent with what the Buddha taught, or are you forgetting that Buddhism originally started off as a straight edge Hindu sect?

He also permitted grape wine which is often assuming to mean low alcohol percentage beverages.

>>9212856
>That's consistent with what the Buddha taught, or are you forgetting that Buddhism originally started off as a straight edge Hindu sect?


That's total bs. Firs your use of the word "hindu" was anachronistic.

Second, the buddha pertained to the sramana traditions of ascetics who rejected the Vedic teachings. His refutations and rebukes are all over the pali canon. Blasphemy in that time was very common and most of the religious/philosophical thinkers who were not the Brahmins engaged in it.

the buddha was closer to jainism

>>9212874
>As the story goes, a yakṣa offered grapes to the bhikṣus on the outskirts of a monastery. The bhikṣus did not recognize what they grapes were, so they asked the Buddha. He explains that grapes are a fruit of the north and are to be “made pure” through fire

> At that time, the grapes had been consumed and because there were still many leftover the Buddha said, “The grape juice is to be pressed out of them. Heat the juice but not thoroughly cooking it, and then strain it.” The Buddha said, “It is to be heated and stored away, to be offered to the sangha as a beverage when it is untimely [past noon].”

A similar story is found in the Sarvastivada Vinaya, but doesn't mention heating the juice.

Several hundred years later when chinese monks went to India mentioned that the Buddhist monks there still consumed wine and rum.

https://www.academia.edu/5363000/Making_wine_in_Gandhara_under_Buddhist_monastic_supervision

>>9212892
I was talking about your point about him being a part of a "hindu sect"

>>9212739
> because it is?
False.
> there's probably more socio-cultural aspects in the east but the west doesn't give a fuck about that they just want the techniques to help them detach under the guise of spiritual enrichment. it's a commodity, a drug in the west, nothing more.

You don't need the 'socio-cultural' aspects. They are largely rituals based on theocratic traditions which the Buddha was largely against. It's just that in the East the predominant culture was headed by the Monks who preached his teachings, along with tacked on rituals and commentary and thus influenced the culture and attitudes of the locals. However it also serves as a reinforcement or motivation to ones practice. To take refuge in the image of Buddha, to chant as to remind us of our condition. It isn't at all required for the cessation of suffering (which is the goal) which is outlined in the Eightfold Path which is summarised as living ethically, living with wisdom, and undergoing a concentration practice.

> you can't be a real buddhist unless you plan to live in a monastery.

False. Anyone can train to have attainments, even laymen, anywhere at anytime.

>>9212831
Anyway, you don't need the mystical aspects of it. Maybe reincarnation is the hardest pill to swallow and perhaps required in that you realize that your actions will have consequences and they will ripen and affect your future states.

Don't know much about the latter part about warlords, do post some the relevant texts.

>In that case, brahman, throw the milk-rice away in a place without vegetation, or dump it in water with no living beings."
>So Kasi Bharadvaja dumped the milk-rice in water with no living beings. And the milk-rice, when dropped in the water, hissed & sizzled, seethed & steamed. Just as an iron ball heated all day, when tossed in the water, hisses & sizzles, seethes & steams, in the same way the milk-rice, when dropped in the water, hissed & sizzled, seethed & steamed.
>Then Kasi Bharadvaja — in awe, his hair standing on end — went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, throwing himself down with his head at the Blessed One's feet, said to him, "Magnificent, Master Gotama! Magnificent!

T-Tacked on mystical nonsense.

File: sophies-world-25-728.jpg (135KB, 728x546px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 728x546px

>>9210658
Not so much the opposite, but Stoics v Epicureans was the East Coast/West Coast of its day. IMHO the Epicureans usually win until you fuck something up and then run back to the Stoa with your tail between your legs.

>and then you do it all over again like a monkey

also Diogenes a shit

http://academyofideas.com/2014/03/stoicism-vs-epicureanism/

http://izhaarbir.com/phil/university-of-houston-undergraduate-–-senior/epicureanism-vs-stoicism/

>>9212906
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.26.0.than.html

Buddhism advocates for Chakravartinism, something similar to the Philosopher-King of Plato.

He also wasn't opposed to self-defence and violence for protection of a Monarchs country and the Dharma in the cakkavatti sihanada sutra.

>>9212838
how's it edgy though? and why can't you argue without projecting your butthurt onto others?
try meditating buddy i heard it provides a calming effect.
>>9212898
>You don't need the 'socio-cultural' aspects.
you're proving my point? hiding behind the vanity/preachy aspect it's just detachment techniques and nothing more.
> It isn't at all required for the cessation of suffering (which is the goal) which is outlined in the Eightfold Path which is summarised as living ethically, living with wisdom, and undergoing a concentration practice.
this is impractical in many settings. be honest with yourself, western buddhism is nothing more than detachment techniques to get through life. unless you're some special snowflake, trying to practice eastern buddhism in a western setting is setting yourself up for a mindfuck. unless you're just doing detachment techniques in whch case that's my entire point about western buddhism. even the dalai lama said buddhism for the average westerner is generally impractical and can cause confusion.
>False. Anyone can train to have attainments, even laymen, anywhere at anytime.
keep telling yourself that.

>>9212965
Oops wrong link, here: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.32.0.piya.html

Basically a magic spell invoking war deities and also mentions the monks, nuns and temples should be guarded.

>>9212898
>False. Anyone can train to have attainments, even laymen, anywhere at anytime.
Vaccha, there is no householder who, without abandoning the fetter of householdership, on the dissolution of the body has made an end of suffering.

>>9212639
I know people shit on Alan Watta and "western" Buddhism, but really there is nothing inherent to it that is anti-Buddhist or against what the Buddha taught. It's just decidedly non-Asian

Also it's influenced more by Japanese Zen Buddhism (and Tibetan to a lesser extent) than Mahayana or Theravada

>>9212639
>The friend who invited me is completely submitted to the cult, she has to work for free for them and do mindless exercices like doing prostrations for one hour.
how old is she and what is her social background?

>>9213115
Alan Watts teaching directly contradicted the Buddha's teaching; he is not Buddhist, he denied being a Buddhist.

Monism is explicitly rejected by the Buddha yet its the core philosophy of Watts, he told people to commit suicide abet jokingly etc.

The guy was a drunken womanizer and worst of all a hypocrite.

>>9213158
>being against suicide

What a weak shit faggot

>>9212977
> you're proving my point? hiding behind the vanity/preachy aspect it's just detachment techniques and nothing more.

What sociocultural aspects, say Tibetan Buddhism, do you believe are required for attainments?

What vanity/preachy aspects are you speaking of?

You seem to say these things without pointing to actual dharma or instructions.

> this is impractical in many settings. be honest with yourself, western buddhism is nothing more than detachment techniques to get through life. unless you're some special snowflake, trying to practice eastern buddhism in a western setting is setting yourself up for a mindfuck. unless you're just doing detachment techniques in whch case that's my entire point about western buddhism. even the dalai lama said buddhism for the average westerner is generally impractical and can cause confusion.

Living ethically, living wise and practicing meditation is impractical? That is the core of the teachings and it's very much practical.

Dhamma knows no direction. It speaks to the common conditions of all beings. There is now east or Western Buddhism. There isn't even a proper definition for a Buddhist.

What do you perceive to be the difference in terms of Dhamma(Teachings) between Eastern or Western Buddhism?

Dalai Lama is right. The West wil have many misconceptions about Buddhism and is generally a different way of life compared to Western lifestyles.

>Detachment techniques

Where do hear about detachment techniques? I don't know where you are getting your terminology from.


> >False. Anyone can train to have attainments, even laymen, anywhere at anytime.
> keep telling yourself that.

I have attained practical benefits of which is purely from the result of discipline, being aware of choices, and other techniques for calming the mind.

I can't convince you through text and so perhaps this is something you need to experience for yourself.

>>9213163
>Wanting to suffer from the negative karmic consciences of commit suicide

>>9213174
>consciences

>>9213047
Anyone can have the dedication to be attained. Yes it will be harder to become an arahant living as a householde or something with ends in society.

The primary goal is to end suffering through the cessation of craving. That is applicable to anyone of any caste.

>>9212980
Okay what does do for me in practice?

Does it lead to the end of suffering?

Does it perpetuate craving?

Those are the primary concerns of someone practicing to attain liberation.

Not every text I have to automatically agree to. I am the final judge of what I read and hear and this is in line with the Buddha's way.

>>9213172
>so perhaps this is something you need to experience for yourself.

There he goes hiding into bullshit again

>>9213183
You can't become an arhat as a householder.

This is a concrete rule set down by the Buddha himself.

>>9213202
Okay I can give you some superficial words to grasp

Calm mind, non craving mind, content mind, proclivity to spiritual seclusion, serving others, generating loving kindness for all beings, mindful of thoughts and actions, harmless and blameless bliss, one pointedness

>>9213219
>itinerary of a self help workshop

>>9213204
Yes but you can still apply the teaching and gain some attainments.

I'm still yet to hear one reason why suffering should be reduced.

>>9213224

Buddhism is a from of self help , there's no facades in that.

>>9213242
Oh it shows

>>9213246

Anyway I'm interested to hear how you manage stress

File: disdain.jpg (26KB, 400x462px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 400x462px

>>9213251
By not being an emotionally unhinged numale.

>>9213241
what suffering are you talking about?

>>9213262

You've never experienced stress?

>>9213269
Everyone experiences stress, I just don't let it affect my decisions. Much like your mother's lips on my cock.

>>9213251
>>9213269
There's no such thing as "stress". There is only particular multifaceted emotional relationships to particular states of affairs at any one time. To ask my universal response to an abstracted framing when I am always temporally and situationally present is an absurdity

>>9213280

I highly doubt it but okay. Considering the effects of performance is directly affected by the concentration of acetylcholine (stress). Much less self made and self perpetuating mental stress . Anyway I see you're being intentionally facetious. Good day anon.

>>9213285
>the concentration of acetylcholine (stress)
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
Fuck off

, >>9213281

It all boils down to stress and ending of stress.

If you don't feel stress in your life then I don't see how Buddhism can help you. Just maintain it and live happy.

>>9213303
>stress
>happy

You keep using these words and I don't know what the fuck you're talking about

>>9213285
This post should be saved in International Bureau of Weights in Measures as an ideal prototype of 1 Fedora.

>>9213310
kek

>>9213307
Stress - a form psychosomatic suffering caused h physical or mental factors.

Happy - lack of stress and presence of blameless goodwill

File: 8.jpg (137KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 800x800px

>>9213325
Please, stop shitposting and consume more literature on topic. The sheer comical stupidity of your statements is astounding.

>>9213325
Very poor arbitrary definitions, a papercut or boredom could be called stress there.
Likewise presuming goodwill as intrinsic to feeling happy is retarded. I could be said to feel pretty happy calling you out as a pseud right now.

>>9213325
>Stress - a form psychosomatic suffering caused h physical or mental factors.
this is how liberals define stress

>>9213241
it is only once you see that you suffer that you want to reduce suffering
the easiest way to see that you suffer is that sometimes what is experienced sucks and whatever is done before , during and after this does not prevent another sucking experienced to appear

>>9213158
Zen Buddhism embraces monism

>>9213398
Haven't answered the question, what if I want to suffer? What if it gets me hard

>>9213241
>being a masochist and forcing yourself to suffer more
Causing undue harm to the body or mind really achieves nothing, it just distracts you from samsara and true suffering rather than directly addressing it.

>>9213438
>Causing undue harm to the body or mind really achieves nothing

And, what's the problem with achieving nothing?
That other shit just sounds like a drag, much rather choke myself to get off

>>9213450
There's nothing wrong with nothing unless you want to achieve something

>>9213463
>achieve something

Sounds spooky, how is that other garbage achieving anything, what will I own or fuck?

>>9213469
It's obviously not something you're interested in achieving so doing nothing is fine

>>9213493
You've still yet to even justify calling it achievement. Probably because its just a meaningless game like anything else

>>9213536
Not him but
Justification is being free from mental.hindrances like fear, greed, anxiety.

If you don't see the value in that I don't know what to say.

>>9213172
>What sociocultural aspects, say Tibetan Buddhism, do you believe are required for attainments?
i don't think you understand what i'm saying. i'm saying you DON'T NEED the socio-cultural aspects.
>What vanity/preachy aspects are you speaking of?
the prose. you don't need any of it to have the experience. i'm talking about western buddhists who do it as a lifestyle choice like how they could drop that pursue hedonism when they get bored of it.
>Living ethically, living wise and practicing meditation is impractical? That is the core of the teachings and it's very much practical.
minus the meditation that's pretty general and is the basis of pretty much every religion so idk what you're trying to get at. either way, most eastern buddhists generally don't even meditate, it's generally considered something the more hardcore ones do.

>Living ethically, living wise and practicing meditation is impractical? That is the core of the teachings and it's very much practical.
what i'm calling impractical is pretending that the core of western buddhism isn't meditation and the detached calm it provides.
the difference between eastern buddhism and western buddhism is that eastern buddhism is impractical if you're not living in a monastery, it's the truth, practicing buddhists in the east just follow a vague guideline much like how someone in the west might call themselves christian but not attend church except on special occasions.

western buddhism is a romanticization of buddhism and a great deal of focus is put upon trite sentimental prose ala alan watts and meditation. it's just something to make people feel good, i suppose you could say it's some evangelical breed of buddhism.

>Dalai Lama is right. The West wil have many misconceptions about Buddhism and is generally a different way of life compared to Western lifestyles.
it's straight up incompatible with the western way of life. not just western, if you live in a city it's pretty much completely incompatible. sure you could meditate and feel less anxiety or whatever but you're not really a buddhist you're just using their detachment techniques.
>Where do hear about detachment techniques? I don't know where you are getting your terminology from.
i'm referring to meditation and the various other mind practices. you're lying to yourself if you think the "exercises" aren't meant to detach ones self from reality.
sure what is reality right? but i'm talking about the most colloquially understood definition of it. if you don't wish to take part in it then go ahead it's your mind but to think you can have your cake and eat it too is foolish which is my entire point about how it's generally dumb and borderline dangerous if you're living in specific types of environments.

>>9213536
Think of it as a long term investment
Drugs and so on basic pleasures, as well as masochistic suffering only serve as short term abaitments of suffering, they are escapism and only hurt you in the long term making that "escape" harder and harder
The alternative is that same "detachment" in order to directly address suffering without the fetters that would normally stop you from doing so and overcome it to become a far stronger person, the Over Man

>>9213600
>>9213614
So basically its just your subjective proposal that this is superior enjoyment and nothing more?
I'm going to suffer instead, its more literary to be miserable

>>9213172
>I have attained practical benefits of which is purely from the result of discipline, being aware of choices, and other techniques for calming the mind.
sure i'm not saying it doesn't make you feel better and calmer. i'm saying that there are other more practical less dangerous ways of navigating through life than detachment.
>I can't convince you through text and so perhaps this is something you need to experience for yourself.
i did it for a bit. i felt calm, too calm for my liking. i don't know i guess if you're in an environment where people are really relaxed all the time then it could be done. if you're in more loud chaotic environments it's just impractical and detrimental to your well-being.

as i said, do what you want. i just think people need to not romanticize the entire thing and not abuse the detachment techniques which are pretty much drugs and be wary of the backfiring that may occur.

>>9213635
Not him but I'm not sure I understand your point about cities and the west, are you saying practicing Buddhism here is impossible because at chaotic and noisy? That seems a bit trite honestly, if anything wouldn't being able to push that unnecessary stimulation ou Of your mind be extremely valuable in order to focus on what is really important to you?

And you're confusing "detachment" with utter lack of care or some ultra scoticism. You shouldn't become a stone Buddha, and detachment only allows you to move beyond the petty trivial concerns which in reality don't mean all that much.

>>9213698
not exactly the chaos and noise. but if you want to be able to deal with all kinds of people via toughening up buddhism isn't the road to go down. to be blunt, it makes you weak and unaware.

your second sentence is a mess but if you're talking about the ability to focus, i don't see how you need buddhist practices to sharpen that up.

>You shouldn't become a stone Buddha, and detachment only allows you to move beyond the petty trivial concerns which in reality don't mean all that much.
it kills your instinct. petty trivial concerns might not appear to be of importance in the moment but not taking part in that game will not allow you to learn how to play it. and if you plan on staying in that environment this will leave you at a disadvantage and probably leave you bitter and angry.
i'm not saying become a total asshole, but the ability to deal with difficult people is a valuable one that is essential for well-being.

buimp

>>9210469

They look very similar on the surface, and their overlap lies in how one conducts their way of life. But the reasons for doing so in either philosophy are very different from each other. Both have different views on the soul, truth, knowledge, the universe, etc.

>>9213774
It doesn't make you weak. It makes you mentally smart knowing when to fight or fall for bait.

The Buddha explored the Path of Awareness by Shiva. So I don't know how you are even drawing your conclusions. Are you educated or do you just have your misconceptions, and what you read on Wikipedia? Buddhism is NOTHINg without practice. Reading teaching is not gonna do jack shit.

>>9215445
> Buddhism is NOTHINg without practice.

Buddhism is nothing but theory. "Practice" is a retroactively constituted imaginary narrative and nothing more

>>9215458
>"Practice" is a retroactively constituted imaginary narrative and nothing more

For something imaginary, there's quite a ton of benefits. Jhanic attainments are worth the practice.

>>9215500
>there's quite a ton of benefits

If you say so, now after the fact

>>9215506
Hey it works for me, I can only recommend it

>>9215513
>Hey it works for me

Again what are you basing this on? For someone coming from a sect that priviledges the present you sure are accepting your imagination of the past at face value

>>9215526
>you sure are accepting your imagination of the past at face value

Wut?

> sect that priviledges the present

Another western misconception. You can be in the present moment but it won't do much for you. It's what you do in the present moment that matters. We also look at the past to see where we can improve. We also look towards the future when our merit and the fruits of practice blossoms.

>>9215634
>Hahah thats a misconception!
>Goes on to restate my proposition but simply elaborate on it

Ok dude.
Anyway again, its a simple problem; How do you know you're actually any "happier" or "improved" now than you were in the past and not simply telling yourself and others an illegitimate narrative that you are?

>>9215661
>>>Hahah thats a misconception!

It is. The West thinks that being present moment will magically correct everything just by being in it.

>How do you know you're actually any "happier" or "improved" now than you were in the past

I've only been meditating for about 4 years, it hasn't been a daily practice but I do it more often nowadays.

One tangible benefit is my powers of self-analysis has improved. I can definitely say I am more aware of my actions especially when I'm about to or am fucking up. I can dismiss thoughts that stir anxiety much more easily. I am also more aware of my body; what I eat, when I eat, how much I eat; aware of what I mentally consume. Also, being content with just being with the breath is probably the biggest thing. Such a blameless activity, its free, and very energizing.

But I am not fully attained of course. I am just more aware when Im fucking up, and I try to stop an action/thought that is unskilfull and will lead to bad results.

>>9215736
>The West thinks that being present moment will magically correct everything just by being in it.

Which I never said or believed you presumptious prick.
Anyway again all you're doing is restating your narrative without providing any substance to back it up. Nobody ever thinks their self-analysis has diminished, its part of the ego to assume self understanding regardless of how deluded it is or has become. How do you know that you are not just ideologically invested in reporting and telling yourself that your anxiety has decreased while being the same wreck you always were?

>>9215779

>Anyway again all you're doing is restating your narrative without providing any substance to back it up.

How do you want me to provide evidence?

I compared myself from how I used to be to my current self. Anxiety used to grip me like mad, now it barely does. These are things that I've observed as a result of my meditation practice. I wish I could just tell myself I am liberated from all hindrances, but that is clearly not the case, there's still a lot of work to be done.

>>9215805
>I wish I could just tell myself I am liberated from all hindrances

Except you very well can, and many people do. I could go talk to a born again Christian and he might tell me how much happier and relieved he is not that he found Jesus even though he's still gripped by some problems which will go away through stronger faith in God.
Here's the thing, I think that "excess" is the same suffering you've always had, that you're simply reconstituting into a narrative in which it is exterior to your official narrative of the world.
Your very assumption that liberation is down the road has absolutely no justification behind it, you just take that on faith because its the key to sustaining the fiction.

>>9215840
I admit there is some faith involved since I have not attained Liberation.

But the jhanic attainments, man if I could tell myself to simply have those every second, I would be doing so. It's pure bliss just from focusing on the breath.

>>9210469
No. Buddism ultimately leads to the discovery that we are all one, you and me and everything is "god". It's the ultimate selflessness through selfishness. Stoicism is a way of life for those who cannot let go.

File: 1480840384175.jpg (182KB, 1440x1080px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 1440x1080px

>>9215871
Sure thing bro, I think I'll stick to crystal therapy though

>>9215892
Literally the other way around, holyshit read the thread

>>9215899

Whatever works for you mate

File: you.jpg (71KB, 1024x512px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 1024x512px

>>9210678
>The stoics were cut short by

This thread is full of dipshits talking out of their ass, sorry I had to single you out.

>>9215913
Its not

>>9215779
Normies go first by faith, typically because they are bored from being normies.
The first step is precisely to lose faith/doubt by seeing the dhamma.

Rationalists cling so much to their imagination, and think linearly when it suits them, that the traditional question that these normies ask is ''can I know something before experiencing it''. You can when it comes to the dhamma, you dont when it comes to the senses or imagination.
Also, only rationalists use the word proof. And you did not even define this...because twenty year-old undergrad is not even able to.
You really feel smart, but people even more rationalist than you have tried to talk about knowledge and they always failed to go beyond sophistry, precisely because they cling to their faith that inferences are useful to achieving something (they cannot even say what).

4/10 for trying

>>9216312
Can you please translate your fucking Sanskrit jargon before pretending you're interested in convincing anyone but yourself here

>>9216326
I do not give a shit about what you think, so no chance I attempt to feel your fantasy that I try to convince you. Also, time for you crack some book on philosophy of science and epistemology.

>>9216340
>I do not give a shit about what you think

Yeah and clearly no one else here if you won't even expose your propositions in English. Make like the great one and fuck off to meditate in the woods if you're not interested in being accountable for your beliefs

>>9216353
you are already buthurt
2/10

Buddhist or zen meditation consists completely of awareness of thought and returning to a physical focus in order to have more control of your overall concentration of the present moment

I find that stoicism is more about being focused in an examination form, realising what is within your control and what is outside of your control, being conscious of what the right/wrong notion may be

The two philosophies are alike in the way that they are about not letting your emotions dominate you, but different in their overall consensus