Have people ever successfully criticized Buddhism as a philosophical system without having to resort to faulty...

Good post, yet there's literally nothing wrong with western prejudices.

I suspect that Guenonposters who fervently argue that Mahayana is 'true Buddhism' are the same ones who also argue that Shankara's refutations of Mahayana and Theravada commentarial teachings prove that Buddhism as a whole is a sham, inferior to Hinduism.

shh let them circle jerk away with their fantasies these threads are always funny if you sit back and watch

I'm peculiarly interested in Taoism as it seems to promote almost the same values, why would there be conflict between the two?

only reason Hinayana gets attention is because western prejudices but yes I do agree with you Buddhism is shit and I'd prefer-if this is what your asking-Hinduism or Buddhism any day of the week, more recently I've been checking out near east metaphysics

I don't know if you realize Mahayana teachings were developed centuries after the Buddha's death, that Mahayana's later texts often contradict the earliest Buddhist texts, and that Western new age hippies are pretty much always drawn to Mahayana, Soto Zen and Vajrayana over other schools.

over* sorry main language is spanish

Where can I read Shankara's specific refutations of Buddhism? All I can find are his commentaries on the Upanishads/Gita/Brahma Sutras etc etc. Are they hidden somewhere in those writings or did he write any direct polemics against the Buddhist? And are there any Buddhist writings that specifically against the Vedanta positions?

Attached: 1553042694127.jpg (960x690, 122K)

no one can trace verbal teachings directly in any accurate way what-so-ever and to compare later TEXTS to original doctrines is a common misconception texts are nothing but place holders for word to word teachings

Shankara's criticisms don't apply to the early texts, only to later revisionist schools. You will find no attacks of the early texts, but of the post-Asoka schools.

The earliest teachings given by the Buddha were preserved and memorized orally, and were for a very long time kept private from the lay community to avoid corruption.

Yeah well, if I was to read arguments against Christianity I would read those that actually argue against Catholicism/Orthodoxy/proddiestantism, not some weird polemic against pre-Pauline Christianity. That would be irrelevant.

So I don't really care about muh true theoretical unspoiled Buddhism. I want to read arguments against/for actual practiced Buddhism/Vedanta in the last 2000 years or whatever.

Reminder that Hindus regularly false-flag as Mahayana Buddhists to make people believe the Mahayana sutras are the "original teachings," only for them to later rip on the Mahayana teachings to prove Hinduism's supposed superiority.

>theoretical unspoiled Buddhism
The suttas are very direct in instructions for practice. There are still Theravadins (though rare) who disregard the commentaries and Abhidhamma, who practice according to the suttas exclusively. That original form of Buddhism is still practiced, though again, not by many.

Hinayana is buddhism for beginners basically. It's fine for novices.

If anyone is interested I watched a video on Buddhism yesterday where 4 buddhist discuss emptiness. They're all from different traditions such as Tibetan, Zen, Theravada etc
>youtube.com/watch?v=rG8_-TdihnM

It's not particularly structured and they probably didn't get very deep on the subject, but I found it pretty interesting and they seem to be doing these on the regular. They're right-wingers though, so if you're left then maybe it won't be for you.

You're a Hindu aren't you

>As a student studying Traditionalism but more so the orientals

Jesus christ I hate every single one of you insufferable white teenage faggots. All of them from discord servers filled with pedophiles obsessed with some white-aryan image of deep mystical hindoo minus all the actual poo.

This is bait, this is bait, this is bait

Attached: tumblr_pptg70Ffeo1qg9aeso1_1280.jpg (1280x913, 233K)

poo

>Hīnayāna which is the shitty retarded version of the original doctrines compared with the Mahāyāna which stays way truer to the doctrines.
you sure you're not getting the terms mixed up?

>ancient indians were horse-riding nazis
is this true?

>Have people ever successfully criticized Buddhism as a philosophical system without having to resort to faulty translations or obvious misconceptions? I knew Nietzsche wasn't too fond of it, but im not sure what criticism he really offered.
preemptive no true scotsman
i like your style op

Absolutely.

Attached: 1556304488796.png (500x725, 709K)

tb-h from indian school of thought perspective a one sided refutation doesn't mean much

The real kicker here is that Nietzsche was pretty positive of Buddhism, but i put that there to bait people who know more about both Buddhism and N to reply.

Normally i just post barely SFW porn to bait people in replying, but that would derail the thread and get me banned here.

obvious false flag bait, made me smile; most of the stuff you say is true though but not for the reasons you think

good bait tho

>but i put that there to bait people who know more about both Buddhism and N to reply.

All you're going to get is guenon-retards and trolls pretending to be guenon-retards

How convenient that the 'true' forms of Buddhism are the exact kind that Hindus are able to refute. Guess everyone in these threads might as well just drop Buddhism altogether and become Traditionalist Hindus after all, aye?

Yes I am aware that most people in India that argue against other positions are usually very good at positing the oppositions position very well.

>heh they may be refuting Buddhism at large but not this one offshoot weird semen eating sect I subscribe to
>we be the true Buddhists and shieeeet

You're not gonna reach nirvana by being fanatically attached to anatman. :^)

You're not gonna reach nirvana by being a little bitch, either

I'd hardly call the revisionist teachings with no basis in the early texts inferred by the Sarvastivada, Vijnanavadi, and Shunyavada schools to be "Buddhism at large."

Get a job, Guenofag.

see link below
You can read some detailed descriptions of Shankara's critiques of Buddhism and its doctrines here in this thread, there are a bunch of posts replying to this one with more from the same book

warosu.org/lit/thread/S12913986#p12915368

it is true that much of it pertains to the ideas of later schools, but he also does make some thoughtful critiques of its core concepts, and points out how some of it is illogical.

>Where can I read Shankara's specific refutations of Buddhism? All I can find are his commentaries on the Upanishads/Gita/Brahma Sutras etc etc. Are they hidden somewhere in those writings or did he write any direct polemics against the Buddhist?
Along with his criticisms of the other schools of thought astika and nastika they are interspersed throughout his works, he brings up the views of opponents when its particularly related to the part of the text he's commenting
>And are there any Buddhist writings that specifically against the Vedanta positions?
No, aside from modern partisans of whom I'm not aware of no classical buddhist thinker ever wrote a detailed refutation of the doctrines of Advaita, and Shankara/Advaita is only given a few brief mentions in some Buddhist texts. The absence is all the more conspicious since Shankara is one of the foremost figures often identified as being responsible for the near-disappearance of Buddhism from India.

Just the first post says
>The famous early Buddhist scholar Rhys T David also agreed that Buddha was continuing the tradition and teachings of the Upanishads.
I'd just like to point out that this is entirely untrue.
Not to say anything of the copy and pasted refutations, but that statement there is false.

Kek, you mad that your cutesy little buddhist religion got thoroughly btfo?

>The absence is all the more conspicious since Shankara is one of the foremost figures often identified as being responsible for the near-disappearance of Buddhism from India.
I doubt that Shankara's debates and doctrinal refutations was much more significant in Buddhism's disappearance from India than the Muslim invasions and the destroying of most of the important Buddhist temples, stupas and monuments.

Other posters in this thread have already established that those are refutations of later teachings with no basis in the early texts. I just wanted to point out that false statement, apart from the refutations which have already been dealt with.

There were still mass conversions of Buddhists communities back into Hindus

chinabuddhismencyclopedia.com/en/index.php/Anatta,_Anatman,_No-Self,_Soulessness_and_other_Nihilistic_bullshit_your_local_retarded_''buddhist''_will_tell_you_about.

>REEEEEEEEE!!!!

Not the religion, but its clergy is corrupt as fuck, image relies on new age tourism both domestic and foreign. Think thai buddhist monks fucking prostitutes and drinking and using donations to live fairly lavish lifestyles. A bit like corruption of christianity by indulgences, but the sects are more distributed. Shave your head, wear a rag, fuck bitches.

Any proof of that? I've more been told that it was probably mostly the fact that Shankara's Hinduism was so close to Buddhism that they just kinda merged over the centuries as most Indians really couldn't see much of a difference.

So really it was less about people being swayed by Shankara's arguments than just Buddhism being merged back into Hinduism through Advaita.

I would also say that during this period, Hinduism and Advaita were merged into Buddhism just as much as Buddhism was merged into Hinduism (hence Buddha-nature, the eventual development of Dzogchen...etc).

lmao buddhist cope

sad, that buddhism albeit refuted is picked up by westerners on a mongolian bakugan trading fourm and they all think anybody in the East even subscribes to such versions.
see here--->and heregood day

>I have no argument

yea a-lot of white washed buddhist cope in this thread

>also "mongolian bakugan trading fourm" thats a good one

Attached: 1553210743890.gif (450x324, 517K)

hindus are only able to refute it because it says within the domains of metaphysics and isent white washed to near religiousness, you do realize the shit your defending prescribes to some semi-metaphysical roots? It's like the religious side of islam, completely incomparable to the metaphysical side of the East how the fuck are you suppose to refute something that is completely foreign to you and your traditions

I'm not a buddhist
I just can't stand whitey larpers who think they're superior to the average hippy orientalist because they splash some elitism into their shtick

The implication is that the Vedantins refuted later schools of Buddhism which maintained doctrines with no basis in the earliest texts, and they did not refute Buddhism's earliest form.

I would say the LARPing white teenage Hindus who fancy themselves Aryan warriors are promoting a more white-washed version of their respective Eastern religion than the Buddhists they're replying to.

hinayana came first you moron

buddhism is mega-gay and for fags
/thread

Early Buddhism was largely lost. Theravada or Hinayana is a school of late early Buddhism. Some Mahayana sects claim to predate Hinayana. Tibet claims to have translations of early lost Indian Buddhist texts. The important part to remember is that advaita is for losers.

see here -->

This user is correct, Theravada has lots of revisions of its own, littered throughout the commentaries and Abhidhamma teachings:
As a tradition, Early Buddhism was largely lost, but the texts remain (the Nikayas, the Sutta Nipata....etc). Theravada is technically the closest to what is described in the earliest texts, but again, it still contains many revisions.

>Tibet claims to have translations of early lost Indian Buddhist texts
yeah the indian mahayana buddhist texts which came after the earlier schools

Where do i start with traditionalism?

Ive never studied philosophy aside from very basic introductory college class

>this but instead of it being refuted, you people think that the dates of certain texts mean that hinayana came before...dating the exact origins of texts is ultimately futile no matter what. Just because a certain text came before does not mean in any which way that the school itself came before, the only way too look at it is through the traditions of the culture itself. I'm no Buddhist nor Hindu, but it should be basic knowledge to everybody that dating the origins of certain traditions never works.

Non canon

That's not really correct. Shankara explicitly criticised Buddhism and his commentaries are on texts the Buddhists explicitly rejected (Veda Upanishads, Bhagavad Gita, Brahma Sutrads). However, he was criticised by other Hindus for being too similar to Buddhists, especially for rejecting the material world as illusion and his focus on knowledge and meditation over ritual. There are still several key differences that make his philosophy incompatible with Buddhism, especially his focus on the Self and Brahman. Shankara's monism is antithetical to Buddhism, his whole worldview is founded on the metaphysical claim of the monist unity of Self-Atman, while Buddhism rejects metaphysical claims about the self, and different Buddhist sects have their own divergent cosmologies. For Shankara, liberation was realisation of the identity of one's true self with the Self (atman) and Brahman. For Buddhists, all identifications and attachments are to be dissolved.

>not only believing a bait post is real but also asking the troll for advice

imagine being this braindead

If all that is real is illusion than reality and illusion are interchangeable thus there exists no illusion, only the fullness of experience.
Suffering isn’t inherently bad.

Life is Good.
There’s no actual way to escape the Wheel nor reason to desire to escape, for the wheel is pure Bliss.

What reincarnates? My inmost unchanging emptiness nature which isn’t even a being? How is that movement of anything? And do you mean this literal body? Because if so this literal body transmutes many times throughout its own life and does not carry even memory of its fast and desires to enjoy life.
People should enjoy life and there is no reason that the sense organs cannot be used for the ultimate goals and aims, there is No reason to believe that desire and grasping are inherently bad things.

>t. brain dead anglo, with retarded prejudices and no understanding of eastern tradition

Attached: AC08D34E-259A-4BDD-80E4-89F4D25A2F5B.jpg (750x664, 317K)

I don't know what you take as successful criticism. But one of the tenets of Buddhism is the non-existence of the self. Some people, not so much historical Buddhists as it is modern Westerners who don't really give a shit about anything but claim to, think meditation gives us proof that the self isn't real. So I'd say, maybe give Jainism a look? Clearly they have a tradition of meditation as old as Buddhism's, with similar aims (moksha or liberation from suffering), but unlike Buddhism, Jainism asserts that the self exists, and is eternal, and separate from its experiences. They seem to have derived a different conclusion from their meditative experiences than Buddhists did.

I know Buddhists and Jains critiqued each other historically. So I'm sure you can look into that interchange.

>frogposter too
Ugly teenagers are such a waste of youth. You should hang yourself.

If we're talking about Advaita-Vedanta, then all that appears to be real isn't real. There is only one true reality: Atman-Brahman. The apparent world isn't totally non-existent as it clearly exists as an illusion, but on a fundamental level, it is not ultimate reality. Identifying the illusion as ultimate reality is ignorance (avidya). In this philosophy, the cause of ignorance is unknowable; because when one is liberated there is no cause nor effects, so ignorance and its cause are seen to not be real in a fundamental sense.

based, this thread is filled with
>iT CAmE BeFoRE
or
>tlIT WaS ReFutED
no shit, hindus or taoist dont even pay attention to hinayana

>woke tantric chad destroys teenage brahmin virgins

its bait retard

woops meant this cunt --->

this thread is filled with morons thinking obvious bait is based and correct, or spending too much energy trying to prove it wrong

You're asking the wrong question. Study more philosophy. Eastern and Western. Metaphysics, epistemology, aesthetics, ethics, etc. All of it. Don't discriminate. Don't even touch Guenon or Evola, at least until you've got the equivalent of a basic philosophy major education, and then proceed with care.

These traditionalists don't really want you to read even Eastern philosophy, not to mention Western. They're hostile to philosophy proper and just want to defend their own prejudices with the work of some dead people that happen to prop their prejudices up. Nobody just stumbles on Evola or Guenon, with the opposite worldview, reads them, and becomes convinced. You have to wonder why the opposite (reading other philosophical work after holding these kinds of views, and repenting of the stupidity) happens over, and over, and over.

I’m talking shivaism, if all is Brahman then Brahman is the substance of all. If Brahman is truth then all that proceeds from Brahman is truth thus all things are truth.
This very experience of relative reality that I experience is nothing but the interplay of shiva and shakti, of my own highest egoism which is shiva interacting with its own awareness. I can indubitably assert that I experience this phenomenal world thus it is impossible to argue that this phenomena is not truly what I am currently experiencing thus this very relative phenomenal reality is True insofar as it relates to my own experience and my own awareness and Ego.

There is no difference between illusion and reality when the substance of all things is absolute truth.

My advice still stands

fucking based

The tough part about proving bait wrong is that many people will think the bait is correct and as a result be misled, so it is compelling to openly correct it.

Attached: 168212DC-6FAA-4E4C-AFA4-14CBB70007AE.jpg (550x550, 38K)

>le

Attached: 182E9DEC-D711-486E-9981-E7B251B47DBC.jpg (601x508, 94K)

Attached: 1556742201073.jpg (1280x853, 258K)

holyshit, ironically enough all the buddhism threads are the most toxic cesspools.

retard keeps responding

Attached: 5936B9EC-213F-4C37-B55C-211930574A69.png (600x580, 360K)

the absolute state of the absolute KEK I'm replying to

Attached: 1556143415376.jpg (431x425, 27K)

Attached: 1CFE1BAF-3999-4CCD-AD28-A8DACA7F5141.jpg (258x245, 12K)

>Prayer beads are made from the seeds of Ficus religiosa, considered sacred because of the closeness to Buddha himself and his enlightenment
trees dude

Attached: 81yDJ4OUYzL._SX425_.jpg (425x287, 30K)

lmao buddhafags didnt even make it to Nietzsche yet
how could someone take your worldview seriously lol

>thinking Yea Forums is the place for serious discussion

It is not just the dating of the texts, there is much more to indicate that the teachings of the Early Buddhist Texts came first:
>The Early Buddhist Texts being preserved orally were likely edited for ease of oral memorization, however, not a single contradiction of doctrine or substance can be found throughout the entire Pali Canon. The differences are only in style, not of substance.
>Early Buddhist Texts (Pali Canon) match the descriptions of India given by the Jain and Brahmanical texts from the same period in which the Buddha was teaching.
>Later texts such as the Mahayana sutras portray the Buddha "predicting" King Asoka, the EBTs never do anything of the sort.
>It is not like the EBTs shied away from talking of politics and leaders: they mention the kings of Magadha regularly, but never even allude to Asoka or even Candagutta.
>The earliest mention of Candagutta is in the Milindapanha.
>Later Buddhist sources mention Asoka loads of times (Dipavamsa, Mahavamsa, Samantapasadika, Asokavadana)
>There is no literary or archaeological evidence that contradicts the picture of India (regarding towns, villages, politics, division) provided in the EBTs. If the texts were composed after the Buddha's time, one would expect errors in the descriptions of the political situation (as is the case regularly in non-EBT Buddhist literature, ex: the depiction of Sakya as a kingdom, and exaggeration of city sizes).
>The socio-economic and political conditions of the EBTs fit well with the expected conditions of the era of Early Buddhism (before Candagutta and Asoka, after the early Upanishads)
>It is universally agreed upon by historians that writing was unknown in India until at least Candagutta's reign, and most likely until Asoka's reign 100+ years after the Buddha's death - the EBTs never mention writing, while the Mahayana sutras frequently mention writing (and some may argue, even owe their existence to writing)
>The EBTs mention no sectarian schisms, sectarianism is only mentioned in post-Asokan literature (ex: the Kattavatthu). This points to the EBTs being largely finalized before Asoka.
>There is a wide variety of ancient Indian Buddhist schools (Mahavihara, Dharmaguptaka, Mahasanghika, Mahisaka, Mulasarvastivada, Sarvastivada) that have SEPARATELY preserved the EBTs - yet all these preserved texts are shown to be completely identical in doctrine irrespective of transmission lineage. - This shows a very stark contrast to non-EBT texts.
>The Sarvastivada and Theravada lineages separated around the time of the Asokan missionary activities - they transmitted the Majjhima Nikaya/the Madhyama Agama separately for almost 2300 years, plus an initial period of oral transmission that lasted several centuries - and the doctrinal content is still identical. - Such incredible correspondence does not exist for non-EBT texts
>Oral transmission was very reliable in India, since for example, the Vedic texts were transmitted orally for over 2000 years.

See:

the absolute state of buddhist copes
look at these fucking mental gymnastics lmao, face it, your "philosophy" is shit

Only when they're filled with Vedantins

That God's serenity is not passivity and that your Ontogenic prerogative is not Ontological insurance is fully explained in Christianity.

Attached: fractal-square-root.jpg (1024x768, 194K)

I know this is bait, but at least write bait that actually pertains to the post you're replying to.
That post was just explaining how it is known that the teachings of the early texts came before those of the later schools.
It had nothing to do with the validity of the contents of the philosophy.

you missed the point completely
Hīnayāna=Not at all prescribing to metaphysical texts aka dogshit not principled buddhism
Mahayana=prescribed to original metaphysical buddhism and relates directly to hinduism principles

do people not understand the basic history of the eastern doctrines?.. history is a iffy word, but you get what i mean. The connection between all the schools rooting from hinduism is not hard to understand.

>i think guenon said something like this in a book of his? not sure.

Hinayana isn't Early Buddhism

its not bait;also more mental gymnastics

also;same fag.

it goes over ur head again.....

it goes over ur head again.....

>i think guenon said something like this in a book of his? not sure.
>Later Buddhist sources mention Asoka loads of times (Dipavamsa, Mahavamsa, Samantap There is only one true reality: Atman-Brahman. The apparent world isn't totally non-existent as it clearly exists as an illusion, but on a fundamental level, it is not ultimate reality. Identifying the illusion as ultimate reality is ignorance (avidya). In this philosophy, the cause of ignorance is unknowable; because when one is liberated there is no cause nor effects, so ignorance and its cause are seen to not be real in a fundamental sense. asadika, Asokavadana)

Attached: s-l300.jpg (296x300, 11K)

What are you even arguing at this point? The Buddhism that you propose to be the "original metaphysical Buddhism" comes from teachings that clearly originated later than those of the early texts.

it goes over ur head again.....

Please just explain what you are arguing. I am clearly missing something.

>It would be illogical to regard space as merely ‘negation of covering' or emptiness (avaranabhava), for space provides room for extension of things
>mfw buddhist arguments are unironic shitposts as per diogenes

Attached: bdc.png (226x274, 82K)

OP here, i read every post in the thread and have not gotten any more knowledge about Buddhism.

>also;same fag.
I think that was obvious to anyone, and user was not trying to conceal it.
Do you have any reference on the ancient Buddhist schools?

Attached: 1543935142895.gif (320x240, 1.54M)

That's because you're asking on Yea Forums. Go email a studied Buddhist, not some dilletante shitposters.

Just read the Buddhist texts if you want to learn about it.

so this is what guenon was talking about when he mentioned western "orientalist"

now i see why he had such a hatred towards them....

it goes over ur head again.....

They usually have no conflict, but for various reasons, mostly political, conflicts flare up from time to time.

it goes over ur head again.....

your suppose to stop taking Kazakhstan bug collecting fourms seriously after reading guenon my friend

[it] goes ov[ertly, and besides/er] your(?) head

Again.

I will repeat.

If all things are illusion then nothing is illusion because reality is itself identical with illusion thus only full experience of the real would exist in your perception.
Suffering isn’t inherently bad because it builds character, perseverance and wisdom.

There is no escape from the wheel because the wheel is pure bliss and all that exists.

If the ultimate nature that is the ground of being is emptiness, nothingness, transience, changing or unchanging then all things arose from this ground, was extracted from this and are of this very same nature.

There is nothing that incarnates, if there is an atman it is entirely unchanged by the external and does not travel or change. If there is a Brahman there is again no difference. If there is no self nature there is again no reincarnation only the spin of the Wheel.

Your very being is this very wheel and all truth and lack thereof exists as pure unity within this wheel.

There’s no reason to believe the sense organs are bad nor is there reason to believe they cannot help one achieve the ultimate goal.

>reddit spacing
just gtfo

I’ve never posted once on reddit and I’ve been here since 2005 through newgrounds

Like anyone would believe an anonymous poster using reddit spacing.

it goes over your head again.....

Question to all the Guenon-posters here:
Why are you not Muslims?

There can’t actually be that many of them, this is a small board. You sure there aren’t just people here who have more study of Hinduism over Buddhism?

>hey guys I'm 19 and don't have a dad
>has anyone ever epically BTFO le asian LSD mysticism?
>150 replies
have sex

it goes over your head again.....

here:

see

>For Shankara the correct way to prove the ultimate unreality of this world of subject-oject duality is not to reject the subject-object duality even empirically, but to show the essentially self-contradictory character of this world as indescribable either as real or as unreal or as both, and thus prove its falsity from the ultimate standpoint, by treating it as a projection of avidyd on the ground reality of pure Consciousness.
>yfw this is analogous to plato's parmenides

Attached: index.jpg (224x224, 6K)

Buddha was really hindu. Jesus was really a jew.

see:

...

see:

Maybe not intentionally and self-consciously but Buddha was very much the continuance of them in spirit and in style, and im pretty sure this is the sense Davids uses it in. There is very little in Buddhas teachings which don't already appear in pre-buddhist Upanishads. The pre-Buddhist upanishads already equate ignorance with suffering, fear etc and describe transmigration, they talk about how all of phenomenal existence is perishable and how ultimate freedom/satisfaction is not to be found in phenomenal existence, they describe the realization of a higher truth pertaining to that which is undecaying, unborn, unconditioned, which is ineffable and beyond all phenomeal existence, from which thought and speech turn back, which upon realization of engenders bliss, freedom from desire, suffering and fear, they enjoin monastic existence, all of this is found in the Upanishads dating from before he lived. There is some influence from early Jainism and Samkhya too but if you take out everything found in the pre-Buddhist upanishads there is barely anything substantial left in the doctrines of the PC. You can already find a fairly complete outline of Advaita in the pre-Buddhist Brihadaranyaka and Chandogya, Advaita as a doctrine long predates Buddhism even though it formalized and become wideapread later on.
The Muslim invasions doesn't explain the quick removal of Buddhism from South India which it took the Muslims a while to reach and which they never fully controlled, the destroying of temples etc does little to effect the beliefs of the masses in the cities, India had fairly latge urban centers at the time. Given that it was majority or a near majority Buddhist at one time there were inevitably large amounts of conversions of Buddhists back into Hinduism, they just didn't die out. Also, the Muslims also repressed Hinduism, they didn't uniquely target Buddhism in a more harsh manner than Buddhism; that really fails as a good explanation for the subcontinent as a whole.
>So really it was less about people being swayed by Shankara's arguments than just Buddhism being merged back into Hinduism through Advaita.
That doesn't make any sense though because Shankara heavily critiqued Buddhism and many of his ideas were very opposed to the Buddhism at the time and his Advaita predates Buddhism, it's not that Advaita is Buddhism but that Buddhism largely stems from the Advaita of the early Upanishads, when you guys come up with these convoluted explanations it makes it seem like the idea of Buddhists becoming Hindu causes too much cognitive dissonance so you have to convince yourself that it was actually all the Muslims fault or that they were secretly still Buddhist all along.

Roberto Unger in The Religion Of The Future. He considers Buddhism, like Stoicism &c to be in a mode of "Overcoming The World" as opposed to "Struggle With The World" and "Humanization Of The World".
It's on Libgen, I can def recommend it.

>The pre-Buddhist upanishads already equate ignorance with suffering, fear etc and describe transmigration, they talk about how all of phenomenal existence is perishable and how ultimate freedom/satisfaction is not to be found in phenomenal existence, they describe the realization of a higher truth pertaining to that which is undecaying, unborn, unconditioned, which is ineffable and beyond all phenomeal existence
An user in the other thread said he was going to compare PC descriptions of Nirvana to descriptions of Brahman from the Upanishads, but he still hasn't done it.

imagine being emotionally tied to the idea of a particular doctrine

The world has changed a lot since Guenon became a Muslim. I’d argue that the religion has fallen towards materialism with more literal and aggressive interpretations of Islam becoming the norm. It seems (at least from the outside) that it a lot less spiritual and politics in the Middle East are having a big impact on it. On the other side, the 60s happened and Indian metaphysics are much more accessible that they were in his time and since it’s mostly an oral tradition, if Guenon wasn’t in with the right people, he could never actually practice the spiritual techniques. Buddhism is a very shallow system however when compared to Vedic/Tantric practices which are my current interest.

it goes over your head again.....

Imagine being a faggot. Oh wait, you dont have to imagine

see

tried replying to everyone in this thread and then adding "it goes over your head again" but the post had too many line and im too lazy to post them over each other...so i guess

>it goes over my head again

You appear at least somewhat read. How do you feel about Taoism if you haven any experience with it?

Word games. Presuppositions. The religious impulse is not evil. But death to the god that is bound by the printed (or spoken) word and is not the living flesh of the word.

---->

>Word games. Presuppositions. The religious impulse is not evil. But death to the god that is bound by the printed (or spoken) word and is not the living flesh of the word.
There is a bird above, it is flying, far across, lateral, anterior, posterior, medial, over your head.

Is it.... Dare I say it.... Christposting time?

lol, its the Buddhists who are eternally butthurt about Vedanta and who feel the need to compulsively attack it in every thread, most people into Vedanta are either indifferent to Buddhism or they appreciate it and see it as a similar body of teachings with a different emphasis, its the Buddhist posters who feel the need to let Vedantins live rent-free in their heads and who cry out as they strike them

>hey guys I'm 19 and don't have a dad
>has anyone ever epically BTFO le asian LSD mysticism?
>160 replies
have sex

John 14:6 KJV
6) Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

John 14:21-23 KJV
21) He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.
22) Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?
23) Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

John 3:16 KJV
16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Attached: the way.jpg (531x710, 290K)

Buddhism is the anglo-american liberal Protestantism of eastern religion

Attached: 49030.jpg (625x625, 21K)

I was very interested in Taoism for a period, read many books and practiced Tai Chi and Taoist meditation for a couple years. I think they have a very good understanding of the physical dimension but they don’t seem to have any interest in the spiritual one (maybe because it requires coming to conclusions/naming the unknown which they are against). It’s great for deconditioning the mind of societal constructs and their views on language still continue to have a big impact on my personal views but accessibility is a huge issue for us in the west. They may have knowledge equal to Tantric practices but you’d never find someone with it outside of China. Even in China its limited after Mao’s war on religion.

No they do it’s just not often translated. Have you read he Hong? The daozang? There’s plenty of hardcore spiritual material it’s modtky just tied up to the ultra religious and ceremonial aspects, which are unattractive to the new agey western Buddhist types which makes them untranslated.

I've heard things about the Dragon Gate school and Quanzhen that I'm interested in.
I'd like to find some secondary overview/history first.

Read Aztec Philosophy by Maffie, it's on libgen.

Attached: aztec_calendar.gif (1150x1150, 252K)

I'm not that guy, it's not in dispute though that the pre-Buddhist upanishads talk about all those things, anyone who's read them could tell you that. Most Buddhists seem to be completely unaware of this though because they make the mistake of thinking that the views of some Hindu priests/brahmins that Buddha argues against in the PC are representative of the Upanishads when in reality they are not at all.

Here I'll just copy and paste the PC lines about Nirvana from the other thread and hopefully someone can point out what here is the same (even though this thread has descended into total chaos):

"By whom was this image wrought,
Who is the maker of this image,
Where has this image arisen,
And where does the image cease?"
"Neither self-wrought is this image,
Nor yet other-wrought is this misery,
By reason of a cause, it came to be,
By breaking up the cause, it ceases to be.
Just as in the case of a certain seed,
Which when sown on the field would feed
On the taste of the earth and moisture,
And by these two would grow.
Even so, all these aggregates
Elements and bases six,
By reason of a cause have come to be,
By breaking up the cause will cease to be."
- Sagātha Vagga

'Whatever past karma there was,
all that is exhausted,
there is no new karma to
bring about any existence,
detached in mind
as regards future existence,
they whose seed (of
consciousness) is destroyed and desire does not
sprout forth,
those wise ones get
extinguished like this lamp.
- Snp 2.1

"That monk who sees no essence in existence,
Like one seeking flowers in Udumbara trees,
Will give up the hither as well as the thither,
Like the snake its slough that doth wither".
- Snp 1.1

Enlightened as he is, the Fortunate One preaches
the Dhamma for enlightenment
Tamed as he is, the Fortunate One preaches
the Dhamma for taming
Calm as he is, the Fortunate One preaches
the Dhamma for calming
Crossed over as he is, the Fortunate One preaches
the Dhamma for crossing over
Perfectly extinguished as he is, the Fortunate One
preaches the Dhamma for perfect extinguishment
- DN 25

“This is peaceful, this is excellent, namely, the stilling
of all preparations, the relinquishment of all assets,
the destruction of craving, detachment, cessation,
extinction.”
- AN 4 34

"Like the flame thrown out by the force of the wind
Reaches its end, it cannot be reckoned."
- Snp 5.6

"This anguished world, fully given to contact,
Speaks of a disease as self.
In whatever terms it conceives of,
Even thereby it turns otherwise.
The world, attached to becoming,Given fully to becoming,
Though becoming otherwise, Yet delights in becoming.
What it delights in is a fear
What it fears from is a suffering.
But then this holy life is lived for the abandoning of that very becoming."
- Ud 3

"This world, Kaccāyana, for the most part,
bases its views on two things: on existence and non-existence. Now,
Kaccāyana, to one who with right wisdom sees the arising of the
world as it is, the view of non-existence regarding the world does not
occur. And to one who with right wisdom sees the cessation of the
world as it really is, the view of existence regarding the world does
not occur."
- Nidāna Vagga

lmao typical buddhist mental gymnastics, we're not going to deal with your cog dis for you

That's the based part of Hinayana/Theravada.

There is no soul or anything like that, no spiritual realm, only the Skandas, the elements in motion, their momentum carrying on from one life to another, just assemblages of forces.
Desire and grasping are what keep that process in motion, detachment and concentration apply inertia and increase inertia into total entropy, and the cycle of birth and death literally and materially stops.

It's antinatal in function.

I'm starting to think the posters in this thread don't really have any spiritual insights at all....

I'm starting to think the posters in this thread don't really have any spiritual insights at all....

it goes over your head
just ask mishima

Attached: 70f630049ffd457fbeba27eedbb573d2.jpg (770x1178, 167K)

before britney there was a rock...
flying over your head....

Attached: britdrivemecrazypremiere1999.jpg (1092x1600, 402K)

autumn ends:
frogs settle down
over your head

Attached: MV5BYzA5ZmEwMDAtZTQyMS00MWVmLTliZGMtNDAyNjVhN2Y2YzkyXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMzM4MjM0Nzg@._V1_.jpg (480x360, 16K)

I wonder if anyone browsing this thread has been convinced by the Traditionalists' arguments that you replied to

Yea Forums only cares about consuming text expounding some elaborate philosophy with hope to achieve some blissful illumination just from that, so it can be shit if you want truth that doesn't require thousands of pages

can you go fucking die

it goes over your head again.....

I don’t deny it but as I said accessibility is a huge issue. Any early Taoist worth his weight would have never considered himself such and I feel that the categorisation has come from the outside for many obscure chinese schools (now very few). This is clear in comparing “religious” Taoist beliefs and Laozi as an example.

I have been lucky to find have a genuine tantric guru so I’d rather focus completely on that as it’s actually achievable with guidance. Trying to learn the depths of Taoist thought is akin to climbing a mountain without a rope or guide. The only way round that is to go to study at a specific school in China for a few years but even then language barriers may preclude you.

There’s no way of verifying the magic, etc without going and seeing yourself. It’s genuinely no different from reading sci-fi at that point. So unless you have 1-3 years minimum to go to the school itself which probably won’t accept you unless you can prove your worth, understand Chinese and have a good basis in Tai Chi then what’s the point? It becomes no different from reading about Jesus’s reserectrion.

The action of difficult reading is a form of intense meditation.
The repetition of eye movement, the absorption in the mental process of comprehension, it is in itself as powerful as complex yantra and Japa, or qigong &c.

Duh

Yeah I know they're different in some ways but i'm saying that for most people they aren't very different at all.
>be dalit muckfarmer
>go ask the local Buddhist if there is such a thing as caste
>monk responds by saying No
>asks if rituals are meaningful
>monk responds by saying No
>asks if there is such a thing as me, be it my body, senses, mind or intellect etc
>monk responds by saying No
>proceeds to local Advaitin
>asks if there is such a thing as caste
>advaitin responds by saying No
>asks if rituals are meaningful
>advaitin responds by saying No
>asks whether there is such a thing as me, be it my body, senses, mind or intellect etc
>advaitin responds by saying No
>starts walking home
>*from the distance a faint noise is heard*
>it's the advaitin shouting after me saying "b-but there is an eternal Subject perceiving all these things!!11"

So anons, what's the conclusion of this thread? That's a lot of posts, surely some conclusion has come out of it, right?

pic related is worth more than any eastern shit

Attached: 1555503022246.jpg (1351x1054, 503K)

traditionalism is just racism toward western "orientals" its only cringe when you know the argument is made by somebody here.

Judging by this thread, life truly is suffering.

What the fuck? I always thought that Theravada was closer to original Buddhism than Mahayana. The former still is literally barefoot monks practised in closer places to India while Mahayana has been mixed in with all sorts of religions like influence from the Daoists and even Shinto in Japan and the like. There are tons of Mahayana philosophers that came thousands of years after the Buddha's death and profoundly influenced and changed our modern notion of Mahayana yet you say these guys are the original deal. What the fuck?

I know that Mahayana is superior to Hinayana, but the latter is more "true" in the sense that it's more primitive than the former.

Attached: 230px-Hotei,_god_of_happiness_at_Jōchi-ji_temple.jpg (230x345, 42K)

what makes mahayana better and how2into it considering it's so vast
I don't care about what's the true path to realisation, I just care about the aesthetics and having a fun time reading
I want buddha to appear in my dreams a la LSD Dream Emulator and The Temptations of St. Anthony
please give me a stepping stone

Attached: 69962483e0d552b87b04b08676be4417.jpg (245x350, 32K)

If you haven't been able to tell already by the incessant shitposts: that user was baiting.

Mahayana is a ton more based. Even using the term "Hinayana" actually implies that it's "the inferior vehicle". If you read the Guide to the Boddhisatva by Shantideva, he will give a pretty convincing reason as to why to adopt the Mahayana instead of the Hinayana. He claims that the former is an advancement on the latter and that it's not enough to just adopt the Hinayana. In order to free all human beings and become a Boddhisatava, one must wish for the liberation of all beings and adopt the Mahayana.

Also, there is a ton more literature and philosophy of Mahayana available to read than Hinayana so there's that too.

Attached: 456px-Dwarf_Japanese_Juniper,_1975-2007.jpg (456x599, 110K)

I must go. Thank you.
Do you know of a general history of Buddhism? I wish to have a bowl of context to place all of these object containing objects in. Else they just float in the waters.
Shantideva here; Tacitus there.

Attached: newimage.png (600x356, 456K)

Attached: cryptobuddhist.png (500x440, 110K)

It's life denying

Just read the main Buddhist works lmao. It's not that hard.

>It's life denying
and that's why it's so based. There's nothing good in this shithole. Schopenhauer was (mostly) right.

Attached: 579px-Atlas_Cedar,_GSBF-CN_120,_September_12,_2008.jpg (578x599, 152K)

This

I'd save this meme if it wasn't against Right Speech.

have a (you).

Tibetan Dream Yoga my fren

Attached: 9781590309575 (1).png (363x550, 98K)

>Just read the main Buddhist works lmao. It's not that hard.
No I want a map, a bedframe, a bowl.
Not the strays of a cat lady.

unironically follow the chart that the Guenon-poster was talking down on
and read A History of Buddhist Philosophy: Continuities and Discontinuities by David Kalupahana

Fucking go visit your nearest Mahayan Buddhist temple you nigger.

Attached: 1557076020649.gif (306x469, 47K)

I said I wanted a general history of buddhism as a whole you depressive rat fucking dog mutt cunt faggot scumbag

...

Walpola Rahula is a good scholar work to discover Buddhism. And it is pretty neutral regarding the various Buddhisms.

I would actually say What The Buddha Taught is a better introductory text than In The Buddha's Words insofar as it handles some of the more complex teachings (such as dukkha) better than Bodhi does.

Buddhism by Richard Gard, part of Great Religions Of Modern Man set.
The whole set is like $6 on Amazon and beyond excellent.

Zizek

Thoughts on this post? Fellow Easterners criticizing Buddhism, isn't that something that you'd find interesting?

Jains also criticize hindus. Tho I have heard some interesting metacritiques of jainism.

There is a bit of truth to the whole aryan thing but you know how Hitler declared allies "honorary Aryans" and enemy nations nonaryans regardless of what the actual genetics were?
I feel like that probably happened a whole lot that there was a whole lot of Game of Thrones shit and political doublecrossing and propaganda.
Even if you're racist as Hitler you probably care more about winning than strict ideological consistency.
Also there was probably just as much larping in the past as there is today.
If you were very, very careful how would anyone know you weren't high-caste?
Just move someplace else and change your name and call yourself a Sayyid or something.
Or it's not like someone is going to argue with the king that he was actually just "adopted" by low-caste parents and was secretly high-caste.
Probably was rare but probably happened.
>namecalling is based
Jainists are historical revisionists.
Ashoka was clearly not a Jain.
Not a fan of Bhuddism either though.