Will awakening ruin your chance at succeeding in life and make you a complete bum because you'll stop caring?

Happy to help
Here's an obligatory plug of the Buddhism chart that's been going around, if you're interested.
I've been reading a lot of Nāgārjuna lately, and it is incredibly profound (I am almost certain, however, that it'd make little to no sense to me if I didn't already have a decent knowledge of dependent origination from reading suttas and Nyanananda).

Attached: 1555255699827.jpg (2712x5224, 3.67M)

/thread

Only it isn't hopeful but a fact that you won't

Here we see a match:
>fully enlightened being can still do work in the world and find success, it is just the case that whatever they do will have to be motivated by compassion
Even if user isn't 'fully enlightened,' his motivations are pure and not rooted in delusion, but compassion instead, so he would still most likely have the same pursuits enlightened or not.

much obliged user. i have a copy of that chart already, i've been working my way through it. as you say, it is some very profound literature, i've been really fascinated by it.

Great to hear! If you have read any of Nyanananda's works from seeingthroughthenet, I'm curious what your thoughts are on those works in particular?

well, i finished the introductory text, In the Buddha's Words, but i wanted to get to know the major Sutras also. that's been a bit of a mixed bag, i guess. i have read the Dhammapada before, but in the context of a more general interest in Eastern philosophy of all kinds: Chinese, Indian, Zen. recently, Nagarjuna's Letter to a Friend on a recommendation from another user here on Yea Forums. also pic related, which i have enjoyed quite a lot for being a kind of overview of major works and other things.

so not a lot of things from that link you referenced, but i tend to kind of jump around a little bit when i am getting to learn a new subject. i tend to be kind of impatient and monkey-minded in this way...

Attached: 81pyewv8Z1L.jpg (1628x2404, 397K)

I think what OP is asking is:

Does our system of society forbid true enlightenment in some/most people, due to the difficulty in attaining means to carve out the path of compassion by one who wishes to walk it.

We do not live in Antique India, where food and society was plentify, and war and conflict was (on the horizon but) not yet to ordained to pass.

Enlightenment as Buddha saw it is a simple thing, a 16 year old could understand it, but enlightenment isn't a benchmark. One must find his own niche, where tranquiliity and utility go hand in hand.

The reason Socrates was concurrent but not akin to Buddha is a simple lesson about western civilisation: Our battles are at the level of community, not self. Siddhartha's community was all of the known world to him. All of civilised India.

In that case, here is IMO the best website for reading suttas:
obo.genaud.net/backmatter/indexes/sutta/sutta_toc.htm
It has the most variety in translations, (my personal go-to is the PTS translations).
I hope you enjoyed In The Buddha's Words and especially Letter to a Friend.
It is always exciting to see people getting into Buddhism on here, particularly because for the longest time on this board people would have no idea what to read when getting into Buddhism, unlike how it would be with Hinduism threads, or Taoism threads where everyonr unanimously recommended their respective primary texts...etc. I think in the last few months the Buddhist threads have really picked up in quality, due to a sudden trend of anons discussing the primary source texts (the suttas and so on).

>We do not live in Antique India

Not exactly the best place to live in for 'enlightenment'.

thank you for the links! since you're quite knowledgeable about this, perhaps you could answer a question: how important are these major sutras, the Heart, Diamond, Platform, Lotus? i have it in my mind that i really need to understand these in particular, perhaps because of my interest in intellectual history and how these things shape and inform the various traditions and vehicles of Buddhism. i guess in my uninformed way i was sort of convinced that the thing to understand were these major sutras, but i can see that there are quite a lot of other discourses also.

as for getting into Buddhism, speaking only for myself it has only come about as a result of a kind of exhaustion with continental philosophy, which i have read a fair bit of, and which led me into reading quite a lot of Eastern religious and philosophical works, as well as the Traditionalists. but i had never really read the Buddhists in depth, and perhaps it is only now that i am really seeing the appeal. even today i was just thinking how much all things postmodern, that can be so frustrating to think about, become a pretty compelling argument for seeking enlightenment elsewhere...even though i'm quite a novice with this material i've had a really wonderful couple of weeks since beginning an exploration of it in earnest, i really feel quite glad to have discovered these materials. there's also a lot of wonderful synergy between Taoist, Hindu, and Buddhist thought as well, this also is something that makes me feel quite at home in it.

Attached: Gu-Wenda-“Liszt-Piano-Concerto-–-Before-the-Arrival-of-Wind-and-Rain”-ink-on-paper-380-x-150-c (999x389, 25K)

'de contemplating' is the essential key here, so all those books are worthless.

>how important are these major sutras, the Heart, Diamond, Platform, Lotus?
In terms of understanding the historical development of Buddhism? Incredibly important. There are entire schools of Buddhism founded around those sutras.
In terms of understanding the Dhamma as it is presented in the earliest texts? Completely unnecessary, sometimes even counterproductive (as with the Lotus Sutra, which completely contradicts the consistent and self-contained teachings found in the earliest texts), but the other 3 can be helpful insofar as they don't contradict the early texts (the Platform and Diamond sutras are good for this). Here's a general guideline to remember:
suttas are the earliest discourses, the words dated back to the time of the Buddha, and the texts being dated to just a few hundred years after the Buddha's death, put to paper as soon as writing was introduced to India, and before then preserved and passed down in an oral tradition (as all the other Indian vedic teachings were preserved). If there's one thing you can be certain of, it is that the suttas are the earliest recorded source of the Buddha's teaching.
The sutras are later works, put to paper hundreds of years after the suttas were (and in some cases 1000+ years after the Buddha's death). I don't think it is any coincidence that these later sutras tend to contradict the teachings of the suttas (which again, are completely consistent with each other and self-contained).

Also, if you're interested in how those texts shaped and informed the different developing schools and traditions of Buddhism throughout history, I highly recommend A History of Buddhist Philosophy: Continuities and Discontinuities by David Kalupahana. That is literally the scope of the book.

blacked lol

IT IS THE NOBLE, SAPIENT, LUCID WHO CARES; IT IS THE IGNOBLE, IGNORANT, OPAQUE, WHO DOES NOT CARE.

yeah

More like blued desu

Its called bodhisattva when the renounce the neverending bliss of nirvana dir teaching human beings, so its a normal move but once your enlightened you can decide if you care or not

awakening is the ultimate success in life you fucking pleb you're still holding on to the definition of success that is used by normalfags lmao "GET PAID GET LAID NIGGA". ur never gonna awaken anyway so why do you even care dummy

correct

Kek

What exactly did you awaken to?