Buddhism and Nothingness

>>18507993
No, nirvana is oceanic concepts beyond the conditioning of duality. It is nothing relative from our viewpoint because it is beyond the categories of the phenomenal and not a negation.

>>18507993
That's exactly what it is. It's an attempt to escape human negativity and fault.
Not a big fan of it. After 30 years of weird dreams and nightmares I've got a basic idea how nothing could look like. Let's say I know 1% of 1% of what a theologist knows. The Nothing is the most horrifying thing that is possible to experience.

I'd say that the nothing of Buddhism is more like a rejoining with the Tao, the One.

It is 100% incomprehensible from our current point of view, so it might as well be described as "nothing" in the sense that it has nothing similar to the existence we live, or to existence in general, since it exists outside of it.

>>18507993
Technically there are two nibbanas. The first is achieved upon enlightenment, and it is the end of the desire to be reborn, the end of craving, aversion, and delusion.

The second nibbana is what happens after an enlightened beings dies. Without the desire to be reborn, the enlightened being remains in a state without suffering, a sense of self, or any impermanent form of experience. Whether you would call that the absence of consciousness or a purified form of consciousness is up to you.

Not all forms of Buddhism actually seek after or even believe in this type of nibbana however. Mahayana buddhists typically go for the Bodhisattva ideal, becoming enlightened to benefit all sentient beings. Pure land buddhists believe that the buddhas are reborn in an actual world with bodies, but that they are still free from suffering. Other buddhists seem to take a more animistic/taoist stance that enlightenment doesn't actually change much, beyond helping you to live more in the flow of nature or something.

The view I described first best characterizes what I understand about the Theravada branch, which is thought to be the oldest form of buddhism.

I'm just an unenlightened western enthusiast though, so my understanding might be a bit off.

>>18507993
Nothing in your mind is real

Thank you for your answers.

>>18508004
You are saying that "nirvana" or "nothing" is just a higher paradigm? Doesn't that basically represent Samsara also? This would mean that basically most of buddhist cosmology is dead in the water if you are telling that Nirvana is "something".

>>18508032
It's a pretty gruesome thought, sure. Am I'm trying to understand if Buddhists are some sort of undercover gnostics / apocalyptic sect that basically understood some concepts of creation and wish to accelerate the return to nothingness. In a Christian view, you can see them as such as satanic.

>>18508606
I believe that equation between Tao and Buddhism discipline is pretty much an after-thought, created from the syncretism between buddhism and local popular beliefs. A sort of "old-new age".

>>18508828
Ok; so then nothing in the mind of God / Devas is real, so then all Creation is illusory. Right? That does not contradict my thesis, it actually proves it. In this case Buddhism positions itself as a final solution.

>>18510303
>>18508828
Are you teaching this to God or learning it yourself?

Its a cycle. Have no mind, this will help you acheive your enlightenment.

Buddah did these things to reach nirvana.

>>18507993
Absolutely not. And the most appropriate terminology is emptiness rather than nothingness. Emptiness is the most appropriate--while yet incomplete--description of the perspective of enlightenment, in the sense that it tears down the psychic domes around objects and selves. It is the best attempt at an explication of the reality that what we consider interior and exterior occurs continuously over the very same canvas of awareness and that even the categorisation of events into interior and exterior categories is just another content within the very same canvas of awareness.
The substantial constitutes the relative aspect of reality, while the insubstantial emptiness constitutes the absolute. Yet in the end the absolute and the relative realities as wholes, yin and yang, interconnect precisely in the same manner.
>In other words, Buddhism is certainly not about escape