If the Buddha found enlightenment without studying the dharma, why do we study the dharma?

precisely why one should choose Christianity over any of these pretentious philosophies

Gautama has no comeback to "No one is good"

He would ask why you desire to divide people into categories when your own experiences tell you that people defy such things. He would then ask what makes a person bad to enter a discussion into behavior, and what makes those behaviors ‘good’ or ‘bad,’ to enter into a final dialogue about what ‘good’ and ‘bad’ are, as you perceive them and why in order to break you out of thinking in such strict dichotomies that make no sense when applied to actual experience beyond theory and abstraction.

Why? The vast majority of Christians believe in Predestination, hell even the Catholic Church is teaching a doctrine of it that would make Calvin blush. At least in Buddhism you (or rather, some part of you that a future entity will carry on) has to DO something to warrant Nirvana, Predestination means you don't even have to be a Christian to go to heaven.

>He would ask why you desire to divide people into categories
>implying Jesus is a divider, and not a gatherer of people
shepherd bit went over your head eh

based

this is so funny to me. yeah, eventually you'll choose Christ. it might take you several eternities, but eventually you will accept that you are a created being and owe him thanks and praise. and not even for his sake, but for your own. THAT is how benevolent and giving he is.

the buddha was euphoric because he was enlightened by his own intelligence, just like me and all my fellow jordan peterson followers

What do Buddhists strive for in this life? What qualities do they wish to have? What do they want to be? Whatever their desire, they cannot become perfect. So how can they reach perfection in the afterlife?
It's simply a pragmatic reason. If you are a Christian, you will be saved either way. Not the same if you are a Buddhist. Choosing Buddhism is therefore retarded

Dhamma studies in many respects lead to attachment and are absolutely a hindrance. I like that you chose Bodhidharma, as Chan and Zen still retain the core methodological element of radical surrender and self-inquiry, which is absolutely vital for awakening. If you want to get a sense of what it means to be attached to 'spirituality' and its teachings and doctrines, and even to be attached to enlightenment itself, and why this will make impossible what you seek, I recommend U.G. Krishnamurti who radically expresses this. He himself experienced awakening, rejected the term however and preferred to talk of it as his own 'calamity', a natural process which had nothing to do with spiritual striving.

Yes, Buddhism is highly syncretic, but it innovates precisely in the aspect of radically letting go of attachments to completely overcome the self, to the point that even talking of the 'true self' of Mahayana can be considered highly heterodox (with the original position being that one methodologically takes no ontological position on the existence of a self at all, and treads the Middle Path in rejecting both eternalism and annihilationism). Buddhism in its orthodox form is the most radical of all paths, which is why I am still a Buddhist despite my acknowledgement of all paths being suitable for liberation.

This is a Mahayana belief that in my opinion only serves to legitimate the bodhisattva ideal and in the EBTs the Buddha made no indiciation of this, in fact we have reason to believe that the Buddha never took a bodhisattva vow in any previous life. This is not to say that I reject the bodhisattva ideal, I acknowledge it as a useful motivation and path for those who have experienced awakening.

A very unskillful comment radically opposed to Buddhist belief.

Everyone should call me Buddha, because I am also enlightened. I cannot prove it to you, just believe me, i'm really smart

you sound like a charlatan. i'm a certified bodhisattva

>A very unskillful comment radically opposed to Buddhist belief.
how is he wrong? source? explanation?what happens to all souls eventually?

Not to mention that Christianity teaches all one need do when they err is to ask forgiveness from their priest, regardless of the effects their actions have had. Then, because they fail to examine what made them err in the way they do, they continue along the crooked path they’ve laid out for themselves, thinking they walk straight and causing suffering all around them.
Enlightenment, on the other hand, demands thousands of hours of meditation, is achievable within one lifetime, and has scientifically measurable effects.
One is self-satisfied and uncritical of itself, and the other seeks achievement through years of study and meditation.

>If you are a Christian, you will be saved either way
That's held to be the truth by precisely zero Christian denominations, however. If that's your personal belief... Okay, I guess, but you're alone in thinking that.

>Not the same if you are a Buddhist.
Sure it is, eventually all entities will achieve enlightenment. It's a matter of when, not if. Buddhism has a huge body of soteriology.

I will never get used to unironic Christianity on this board. It’s just baffling.

The Buddhist can never stop working. Unless he is constantly purging himself of all desires and bad thoughts, he is not perfect. How, then, can he be content? When he dies, how will he know if he did enough? But the Christian is assured of his salvation

From a Buddhist POV what Jesus practiced was a valid path towards awakening, although not the most effective one. The two are not in conflict I'd say, but I regard the Buddhist path to be more complete overall, with the Christian path being particularly detailed for what it sets out to do. This path is distinguished by 1) choosing the cultivation of virtue as your primary spiritual path (and also 'meditation object' if you practice meditation) and 2) by submission and giving up the self (in the case of Christianity to God——God is rejected in Buddhism only as an idea because of views that are associated with Him that would be hindrances).

For 1) see: accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an11/an11.002.than.html

For 2) I want to share the words of Ramana Maharshi:

There are only two ways to conquer destiny or to be independent of it. One is to inquire whose this destiny is and discover that only the ego is bound by it and not the Self and that the ego is non-existent. The other way is to kill the ego by completely surrendering to the Lord, realizing one’s helplessness and saying all the time: "Not I, but Thou, oh Lord," giving up all sense of "I" and "mine" and leaving it to the Lord to do what He likes with you. Surrender can never be regarded as complete so long as the devotee wants this or that from the Lord. True surrender is the love of God for the sake of love and nothing else, not even for the sake of salvation. In other words, complete effacement of the ego is necessary to conquer destiny, whether you achieve this effacement through Self-inquiry or through bhakti-marga.

I like to think it's just one guy. Probably the same guy spamming guenon. high level shizoposting

Read the dharma to find the answers to your questions.

>hat's held to be the truth by precisely zero Christian denominations, however.
what? If you're Christian, and Buddhism is true, then you will still be saved. But if you're Buddhist, and Christianity is true, you're kinda screwed. Why be a Buddhist?

accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn56/sn56.048.than.html
accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn20/sn20.002.than.html
accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn15/sn15.003.than.html

This chance to practice the dhamma and find awakening is extremely rare, and the dhamma is infinitely valuable, thus all of us have the duty to practice it, lead the contemplative life and strive towards liberation, else we would waste this opportunity and be trapped in samsara, including all of its hells. I do not know whether all souls eventually find salvation or not, but I understand it is both a Christian doctrine and believed by (some) Mahayana Buddhists.

Wrong. Jesus was not an enlightened being according to Buddhism and the Christian path does not lead to awakening. Quite the opposite really.

Jesus is probably a bush or is in hell right now.

Someone that thinks they’re Napoleon will eventually take a plane to Waterloo, that doesn’t mean what he expects to happen, will happen. And yes, you’re correct that Buddhism is a lifetime of hard work, but such is also true of human life a priori.

I'm not sure why you would say that. The dhamma is universal and not limited to Buddhists, many people of different faiths have found it. For another example there would be St. Teresa. If you don't believe me, read The Interior Castle and notice how she describes progressing through the dhyanas until she eventually reached a state of equanimity, resulting in her awakening which she could only describe as "self-forgetfulness".

I really hope so. Anyone claiming to be an actual Christian while on Yea Forums is operating inside of a form of delusion that’s hard to imagine.

All that’s true, but all things have Buddha nature, don’t forget.

There's no use in practicing a philosophy that demands you to be perfect when you cannot actually be perfect. Jesus had it right: no one is good, and no one can come to the Father except through him.

wow, you dont think Jesus at least reincarnated as a human on a good path to enlightenment? We're all screwed then

Buddhism does not teach or demand you to be perfect; only someone that hasn’t studied the dharma at all would suggest as you have. What’s your source for Buddhism demanding, or expecting perfection and not self awareness of oneself and one’s actions?

pretty brainlet to think in terms of "good" and "bad".
Obviously every being is just acting in an attempt to avoid suffering - most often ignorantly.

The Buddhist path asks not of perfection, it asks of complete self-forgetfulness. What the Christians call God the Buddhists call emptiness or Buddha nature. The Buddhists just prefer not to think of God in analogy as a person, which I am sure is in conflict with some dogma, I am not a practicing Christian, but nonetheless makes no difference. The Christian mystics are evidence of that.

How can you escape attachment when you always have thoughts and desires? What exactly is the threshold for your soul to finally escape samsara? I hope this question has a decent answer

He's talking out of his ass. The only things he knows about Buddhism are things he learned in Sunday School.

The Dhamma being universal does not mean everything is Dhamma. Jesus preached the God of the old Testament, he preached attachment to self and even to ones literal body of shit and piss(bodily resurrection), he preached a personal God and maybe most important of all he preached that he himself was a God and that he was gonna be the ultimate judge over beings wrongdoings in heaven.

Stop with this ecumenism nonsense. If you're a Buddhist you have absolutely nothing to gain from it while Christianity have everything to gain.
Jesus wasn't some perfect being or even close to perfect. Don't worry you can do it user.

>Obviously every being is just acting in an attempt to avoid suffering
yes, that would be considered "good" behavior. No one is truly good because no one acts perfectly for himself.
>The Buddhist path asks not of perfection, it asks of complete self-forgetfulness.
Who has been able to do this monumental task? It seems to be demanding perfection to me

>Who has been able to do this monumental task? It seems to be demanding perfection to me
Meister Eckhart, St. Teresa, Jakob Böhme to give you some names I believe you to be familiar with.

Honest, good faith question deserves an honest, good faith answer and it’s this: a lot of our shitty behaviors come from self-talk, the conversations that we have with ourselves to justify or excuse or try to understand our actions. The trick is to kill self-talk entirely, and to rely on your character and your mindfulness and awareness of the reality of other people to lead to good actions. This is achieved through meditation, self-interrogation and self-awareness, with the first leading to the second and third.
I’ve finally gotten serious about my meditation and I can give anecdotal evidence that, within a month, you’ll be more in control of your self-talk and your emotional states. This is after a month of consistent, half an hour every 24 hours, mindfulness meditation. And fortunately, there’s several peer reviewed papers confirming better control over emotional states with consistent mindfulness meditation.
There’s your good faith answer. I recommend Zen Mind, Beginner’s Mind if you have an honest desire to know more. You can finish it in a single afternoon.

Attached: 553C43DC-F6EA-4B75-A256-FB92198F88DB.jpg (1575x2475, 252K)

so they reached permanent self-forgetfulness? I doubt it. How can you even eat or move if you are forgetting that you exist?

You're not supposed to escape thoughts and desires. You're supposed to escape attachments to those thoughts and desires. They're just phenomena that you'll realize will emerge, peak and then disappear.

What exactly is the threshold for escaping samsara?

It’s like if you desire a pint of ice cream, and know you shouldn’t get one. That desire will eventually fade if you ignore it and fail to act on it.

What exactly is the point in non-thirst when drinking water?

eternal recurrence here we go

so you must go without eating, then, since eating would be an attachment to the desire to eat. I can only imagine a Buddhist being saved when he sits perfectly still until he dies, never being aroused by anything. And by the way, if the whole point is to forget the self, then what of the self when you are in Nirvana? You will still have a self, right?

What? Why can;t you just answer the question? How does a Buddhist know he is saved?

This self-forgetfulness is a form of death, but only of the conditioned ego. Enlightened people are still able to manifest a self for those purposes necessary for survival, but it is not an ego born out of delusion, but a mere necessary point of reflexivity. Despite that our God given bodies are quite formidable, miraculous things. They are able to operate almost completely on their own, and have tremendous self-healing abilities, and the closer to God you are, the less disturbed our bodies are, the safer they are from harmful interference. The existence as an awakened being, one that has forgotten the self, is a natural one, in harmony with existence, and of a vitalizing, spontaneous naivety: a state of equanimity.

Which self is that? I can’t conjecture on a state that doesn’t exist yet. The self that exists then has little relation to the self that exists now, just as this self has little relation to the self at birth. It has no permanence, and is only an idea with no actual reality. Holding onto the idea of ‘self’ does no good.

How do you know, when you’re drinking water, when you aren’t thirsty anymore? What’s the precise measurement that you require not to be thirsty anymore? What was the precise measurement that you will require in ten minutes if you don’t drink water now?

>I can’t conjecture on a state that doesn’t exist yet
You're just not enlightened enough, I guess. Gautama somehow figured all this out without God telling him. Makes you wonder how he did that and why we should have faith in Nirvana and reincarnation

An attachment is always an act of craving which is necessitated by consciousness. The feeling of hunger, eating and digestion are natural operation of the bodies, nothing that must be contemplated and can occur without a conditioned self.

>needing someone else to tell you what you do or don’t know according to your own experiences
Are you actually interested in learning?

If you want to find God you must overcome your idea of God as person. This idea only helps laypeople to come closer to God because they can only conceive of him through analogy. Open your heart, completely empty your self, and God's grace will touch you, and it will hopefully become clear to you how the Buddha too was "in communion with God", as the Christians would call it. And yes, you likely must free yourself from essential dogmas of the particular Christian tradition you are part of, but that is the courage which is required in submission to God.

How does one know of Nirvana if it is only experienced after death? How did Gautama know that it existed? Every Buddhist has faith in Gautama, a man

>And yes, you likely must free yourself from essential dogmas of the particular Christian tradition you are part of
What a hypocrite, for you are holding on to dogma right now

Having the desire to eat when you're hungry is a not something "bad". What is "bad" is when you perceive yourself to be a "hungry Self" as opposed to viewing it as a phenomena of hunger having arisen and that this phenomena is itself empty.

Attachment implies a subject and objects of that subject. Without a subject though there can be no "mine" and therefore attachments are dissolved. Doesn't mean you won't stop having "desires" though. It doesn't mean you don't to eat or can perceive the beauty of a sunset.

Nibbana is experienced in the here and now. This is nibbana: sacred-texts.com/chr/tic/tic31.htm

Please read it, it will answer many questions, and I hope you will accept the answers for St. Teresa is an outstanding patron of the Church. With a degree of charity, you will find that the Buddhists express nothing else, they just use language that is foreign to you. In any case, even if you believe Buddhism to be heretical and say something fundamentally different, I would still ask of you to put your faith in St. Teresa and follow her ideal.

Why can't you use this reasoning to justify any behavior? Take a second to read what you're writing. None of it makes sense. What is inherently bad about believing in the self?

Life is action. Unquestioned action is morality. Questioning your actions is destroying the expression of life. A person who lets life act in its own way without the protective movement of thought has no self to defend. What need will he have to lie or cheat or pretend or to commit any other act which his society considers immoral?

How does reaching enlightenment suddenly teleport you out of the wheel of existence?

Buddha read the bible

>Unquestioned action is morality.
No. Morality is doing what ultimately benefits you

Egoists are not allowed in this thread. Nietzscheans are okay but only if they have read Thus Spoke Zarathustra and understood it.

Kinda incorrect. People did think about the implications of that and their are different interpretations in each sect. The one that you are referring to has the ethos that only you can truelly forgive yourself so if you lie about forgiveness or your heart isn’t in it, it isn’t true forgiveness. You may stumble going forward, but that’s all in the fallibility of man.

why would you not want to do what ultimately benefits you the most?

Just "being" a Christian isn't good enough, however. You have to actively engage in specific behavior to be a Christian, just as you have to actively engage in specific behavior to be a Buddhist.

Because you seeking to realize your psychological motivations and conceptual desires only leads to grasping for the permanent in that which is only impermanent by nature, thus leading to an endless cycle of suffering.

Yes, and? It's still the case that choosing Buddhism is the retarded move

Wait, why are you trying to avoid suffering? Aren't you trying to benefit yourself just as I am?

Yes, I am, and the paradoxical nature and ultimately gravest obstacle of the Buddhist path is to overcome the aversion to suffering.

so it seems like you must force yourself to be ignorant of the truth. All we care about is self-benefit, but you don't want to believe it. You have your own attachments, they're just a different type

But everyone is enlightened, people just need to bring forth their Buddha-nature.

Attached: Valaistunut Oululainen.png (485x632, 145K)

No it isn't. You're still making the assumption that the specific branch of Christianity you choose is the correct one (because choosing wrong is sin punishable by hell) AND that you can actually go through with it enough to not go to hell by being a shitty person (because otherwise, hell). You could argue
>well the whole "eternal damnation" thing isn't ACTUALLY eternal because Yahweh forgives everyone eventually
but then the entire debate is moot because it comes down to
>I'll get my paradise eventually.

It is the complete opposite. This truth is acknowledged, but it is a lesser truth, which pales in comparison to the unconditioned. It is expressed in the principle of dukkha, one of the Four Noble Truths of Buddhism.

It doesn't matter whether you long for fame, money, women or enlightenment. They all constitute different attachments of the ego, expressions of craving. That is precisely why spiritual paths ask of you to let go any notion of craving and of self, to overcome both. This sort of enlightenment cannot be wished, cannot be worked for, it is a 'miracle'.

Because i'm not buddha

you're assuming that only one denomination is correct. The Bible is pretty clear on what it takes to be saved. There are Christians across many denominations, though some denominations might be more fit. Just read your Bible.

OR directly take the Holy Spirit into yourself and talk amongst friends as you feel moved to.

So we can shoot the Buddha.

Books about Buddhism I have read say otherwise.

t. virgin mara

What if everyone is saved regardless because God loves them unconditionally? Evil can't sustain itself for eternity.

God loves you unconditionally, but you still must accept God's love in your heart.

>t. woman

God is loving to those who love Him. Deuteronomy 7:9.

imagine being a westerner thinking he can be a buddhist.

Everyone is saved, hell is distancing yourself from god by your own volition.

Imagine being an Easterner and thinking you are a Buddhist.

imagine being and thinking

>This is a Mahayana belief
it is depicted in the Jatakas
the Bodhisatta path is a part of Theravada Buddhism, but it isn't universally prescribed to practitioners because of how intensely difficult it is and how rare it is for someone to even make it to the end without falling off the path, which is why the Theravadins instead opt for Arahantship

Eugh.

Attached: AdmiredMerryGadwall-max-1mb.gif (260x196, 822K)

I am talking specifically about the Buddha having taken a bodhisattva vow in a past life, which I believe to not be an orthodox belief. There's an accesstoinsight article on it. But I might be mistaken.

yea I didn't say he took a vow but he did in fact accumulate merit, perhaps indirectly, in the Jataka tales

also props for actually reading the EBTs and sticking to them above all else, it's rare to find others like that on here or in general

Brainlet here
What even is 'enlightenment' because every person I ask gives a vague as fuck answer because I'm pretty sure even they don't know.

You're right, I read something into your post that wasn't there. My bad.

It's about having a certain kind of clarity to your point of view or thought, you see more things or you see things more clearly because they are "brought into the light" rather than being in darkness.

youtube.com/watch?v=tRtBa4nOO04

in Buddhism it's essentially the total extinction of greed, hatred and delusion in the mind. Greed and hatred are obvious, but delusion is referring to the delusion that there are in fact actually self-existing real entities and things in the world with self-nature, that there is actually a stable self with essence that lives within a world with essence, and that there is anything abiding, stable, self-existent or lasting in experience.

*so total collapse of subject-object duality and absence of objectifying/reifying any experience whatsoever (not that one goes into a vegetable state and cannot operate in the conventional world - they can - but all the while they are aware that convention is not true in an ultimate sense, but is rather an impersonal and essence-less play of appearances)

Enlightenment can only be accurately described in negative terms, because once you attempt a positive description of it, it will lead to confusion for any non-awakened person. This is because enlightenment is the non-conceptual, bare truth of life itself, that thought and language cannot grasp. To attempt a positive description nonetheless, it is complete immanence, a spontaneous natural state of being. If you want descriptions of what the enlightenment experience was like there are a few enlightened people who have written or talked about it. Earlier in this thread I linked St. Teresa for a Christian POV: sacred-texts.com/chr/tic/tic31.htm

U.G. Krishnamurti also talks of enlightenment as a calamity (and explicitly not enlightenment to communicate that it cannot be communicated, and that one cannot reach it by grasping for it) and describes it in materialistic/biological/naturalistic terms.

Chapter 3 of Ajahn Mun's biography (founder of the Thai Forest tradition) contains a vivid description of his attainment of awakening: buddhanet.net/pdf_file/acariya-mun.pdf

Awakening comes in different degrees and intensities. Some are lighter, in need of refinement, some are strong and very pure. Gautama Buddha is believed to have had a perfected enlightenment.

The U.G. Krishnamurti story is here: en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Mystique_of_Enlightenment/Part_One

His experience was very weird, and only God knows how much of it is accurate.

Fuck, man. I could never truly get going with meditation. Life is so fucked, the internet changed things too fast and people feel miserable and anxious, provoked, reactive. depressed and confused, democracies are all fucked up. I've read few buddhist texts like that one, also suttas, nagarjuna, bunch of zen stories, listened to alan watts multiple times. But also I've spent most of my life behind a computer screen, filling my head with stupid shit and lots of neurotic thoughts, intellectual bullshit, social anxiety, no attention span at all. I read one book a year and that's it. I meditate like 10 times a year. I walk fast paced and I'm never comfortable where I am. I'm almost always baked.This year I bought a zafu (meditation cushion), even though I know very well that doesn't matter much, thought that would remind me to meditate and help with my posture. Used it like 5 times and now it's sitting somwhere. I feel like the most undisciplined lazy son of a bitch to ever exist, which is to show my narcisism. I know that this is all some form of quitting, to stop trying and just wait for the weekend and whatever. At the same time I'm ambitious and greedy, I want to do things right, people say I'm kind, so kind, so gentle, too kind, a "good person" in a way and this honestly offends me, I feel like a sheep being taken by a desire to vanish amongst the world and the people, so I attend to others, I flee from conflict and I feed my cowardice. To think there are trillions of galaxies right now and I can't fucking sit for 5 minutes everyday because I understand that would destroy my bullshit excuses. Feels like losing my shit, but also I look at buddhism and think "one day I'll get at ya", but that doesn't even make sense, to postpone work is not to work. But anyway, that's where I am now. I'll try to meditate tonight or perhaps I'll leave it for tomorrow.

Read Nietzsche and Nishitani afterwards. I was in your place and it is what helped me out. You need to get your life in order first before you meditate.

Also, I say Nishitani because if you practice Buddhism, you will need Zen. Something to shut up and sit down, and to stop feeding your neurotic cravings for explanations and analytical thought. The Nietzsche works much in the same way. Clean your room, bucko, part of this is realizing that you yourself are very weak and without power, and much depends on everything around you.

To deal with procrastination all I can recommend is starting very very slowly with meditation, 5 minutes a day. Whatever is comfortable, do that. Do not push yourself to the point where it feels like a chore, or you will be regressing more than progressing. Do your best to make the practice pleasant. As soon as you have stable attention, practice metta asap so you can experience firsthand the pleasant and softening side of meditation. As for the weed, wean yourself off of it as slow as you feel comfortable. Cold turkey will not work IF you've tried it before and it backfires with intense indulgence after a period of struggling to avoid it, as is the case with a lot of people.
Also, I highly recommend building some sense of community. Reach out to some good Buddhist practitioners in your area. Do some volunteer work and get engaged with the world, help the poor....etc. There's also no shame in finding a support group or getting a therapist to help get yourself on track, there are some well-known lay Buddhists who advise doing so in addition to religious practices.
Best of luck friend

Stop reading (((westerners))).

Jesus was a good guy and promoted virtue to countless masses of people. With all that merit he was probably born as a high level deva

Matthew 9:10-17
>10 While Jesus was having dinner at Matthew’s house, many tax collectors and sinners came and ate with him and his disciples. 11 When the Pharisees saw this, they asked his disciples, “Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?”
>12 On hearing this, Jesus said, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. 13 But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice.’[a] For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”

Mark 2:15-22
>15 While Jesus was having dinner at Levi’s house, many tax collectors and sinners were eating with him and his disciples, for there were many who followed him. 16 When the teachers of the law who were Pharisees saw him eating with the sinners and tax collectors, they asked his disciples: “Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?”
>17 On hearing this, Jesus said to them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”

Luke 5:29-39
>29 Then Levi held a great banquet for Jesus at his house, and a large crowd of tax collectors and others were eating with them. 30 But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law who belonged to their sect complained to his disciples, “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?”
>31 Jesus answered them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. 32 I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Works_of_mercy#Spiritual_Works_of_Mercy
>Just as the corporal works of mercy are directed towards relieving corporeal suffering, the aim of the spiritual works of mercy is to relieve spiritual suffering.

Yea Forums represents probably the greatest opportunity to practice the first work of spiritual mercy that has ever existed.

Funny, I was just listening to a lecture on Nietzsche right now. WIll look for Nisihitani, thanks user.

Thanks brother

>Yea Forums represents probably the greatest opportunity to practice the first work of spiritual mercy that has ever existed.
ah yes the 'righteous' Yea Forums christcuck is here to 'heal the sick', not to indulge in sinful activities like shitposting and fapping to anime pictures....

extinction of greed, aversion, delusion (which is what binds a human into samsara ie cyclical rebirth). Once these are extinct from the mind, one is free from samsara. Further inquiry from that point is, according to the Buddha, speculative and tangent.

why not

Bros does Buddhism support an anti-natalist worldview? It seems like you'd want to stop further births so that fewer beings are subjected to samsara, but at the same time you can only find Nirvana in a human form right?

yes human birth is best and provides you the most opportunity therefore to give lower beings a chance towards higher realms one must procreate

>if x and y person realized so and so scientific advancements without having those advancements, why do study those advancements
imagine saying that

this guy is a fucking materialist man pls dont post him here

OP is zen

>Implying afterlife is about perfection

maya is strong with this one

Wasn't a westerner.

because you're a sub-aryan mongrel

also if humans got wiped out, beings would still be trapped in samsara all the same.
Only Nirvana is the end of suffering, not lack of procreation (though monks are expected to give it up for obvious reasons)

> t. Utilitarian

>Not to mention that Christianity teaches all one need do when they err is to ask forgiveness from their priest, regardless of the effects their actions have had.
Not true at all. You have to implement change in your life to prevent further error. You dont just kill and steal and go to the priest and that's that. If you are unrepentant then you dont received mercy.