Does buddhism really say that no self does not mean no soul.
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
Does buddhism really say that no self does not mean no soul.
Does buddhism really say that no self does not mean no soul.
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
There is no such thing as “buddhism.” “Buddhism” does not say anything, hundreds of different people writing different books and saying different things across century do. If you ask me, it is unlikely the original Buddha if he ever existed believed in any of the subtle body shit. Religions always pick up more and more baggage as they evolve.
>There is no such thing as “buddhism.” “Buddhism” does not say anything, hundreds of different people writing different books and saying different things across century do.
And yet... Buddhism remains consistent in all lineages, regardless of how we name the phenomena. Everyone says, "The Buddha was right.
Buddhism does not say anything because it is a pervert's ideology par excellence, only matched today by the Continentals (the Saul of Tarsus-Hegel-Zizek lineage). Case and point: . All they do is lie, the Buddhist-Continental discourse is a Metaphysical (Archonic) Ted Bundy yapping to stay his execution. FRY HIM!
bhudda probably eats food
In the Pali canon the self is an impermanent, dependently arisen process -- not a substance at all.
There is no "S"elf with a capital S. There is no eternal unchanging Self such as in Hinduism.
In the Pali canon, the Buddha said the summit of perception is both one and many, which can be taken to refer to nonduality, so while the Buddha did not argue for an eternal Self, he did seem to hint at a nondual experience.
i don't understand why some people can't just do this
no, no-self means no-soul, this idea taht there can still be a self in the no self doctrine was pretty much invented by the first budologist, since all of them were christians and the idea of a religion that negates the soul was to much for them
some buddhist point out that the no-soul doctrine has it's basis in the negative impact of reifying experience, which creates the idea of a self and that creates suffering, but if you reify the no-soul doctrine you end up the fake substance of the "self"with a new fake substance of the "no-self", so now suffering arise not from ethe idea of a self but from the idea of a no-self, and you go back right where you started, so the no-self doctrine should be practiced with precaution and skillfulnes
No self doesn’t mean that you don’t have the experience of existing, it just means that upon investigating this experience you will find no part of it that has an unchanging essence. For example there is no fundamental thing you can say is the same today as yesterday. Taken to extreme of emptiness it implies that all phenomena and the categories of those phenomena also have no unchanging essence
this is fake, it absolutely has to be, it is above me
Can you elaborate on your astonishment?
No, but the soul is not self, its not absolute and is impermanent.
Buddhism was a psyop by the Indian and Chinese elites to trick rice farmers that not owning shit is somehow "enlightened," while they hoarded resources and fricked big tit belly dancers in their harems. Only idiots fall for this scam. Which was probably why they were rice farmers to begin with.
You want to read an actual enlightened philosophy of ascetism free of any kind of religious dogma or biases, read the Enneads.
Can you stay on r/atheism at least until you're 16? It's only polite, really. Thanks.
Sorry your shitty peasant """"religion"""" is so easy to dab on. I know your type though. Claim to be above lowly western religions to rebel against daddy, but think that eastern religions somehow aren't equally as cringe. Westerners who fall for the "eastern spirituality" meme are far more hypocritical than any atheist could dream to be.
Ngl even as a western Buddhist I kinda agree. It is cringe and it's just running away from the spiritual problems of westerners. As westerners we need to come up with our own spirituality rather than constantly trying to fit into someone else's
That said, Buddhism is still way better than Christianity
>As westerners
this is a shallow concept taht means very little, not only that, the western tradition started with the indoeuropeans, which not only created the greek and roman tradition that foudned the west but also the basis for the buddhist tradition, that's why the weapon called vajra(thunderbol) that the buiddhas use to erase ignorance, has the same symbolic origin that the thunder of zeus or the mijolnir of thor, not onlythat india and greece had a ton of cultural exanges, specially when alexande rthe great conquered the region, just study the relation between, the greek hercules, the buddhist varapani and the japanese fudo-myo, an in a more deep level, the greek sceptics where heavely influenced by buddhist, particulary the madhyamaka school, those same sceptics would in turn infleunce David Hume which in turn influenced Emmanuel Kant, the most influential philosopher of modernity, Hegel too was influenced by the sceptics, and you can see on his system the traces of the anti substantialist madhyamaka doctrine
buddhism at teh aend of teh day is another expression of the indoeuropean culture, the same culture that created "the west"(note taht the two most important aspect of the west greek culture and jesus christ were located actually on the east, so the term means almost nothing when you really think about it)
Your narrative isn't factual, it only seems so because you mix real history with things you've taken out of your head.
>narratives
>stucture
Even the french commies in 68 realized that shit was a bourgeios spook.
The suffering of westerners, indians, and asians is exactly the same and has the exact same causes
No it isn't, and no it doesn't.
What's the cause of suffering for westerners? What's the cause of suffering for indians? What's the cause of suffering for asians?
Suffering is not our problem. Westerners do not "suffer" and we have spiritual problems defined in totally different terms
>Westerners do not "suffer"
How can you say that? Then what is our problem?
Well, that's a big question, but why presume it's the very same problem that Indians had?
This is really the dogmatic point of Buddhism. Buddhism asserts that really the ultimate problem is suffering and that if we just remove the causes of suffering we'll be fine, but in the west we do not have this understanding. For example, we often see suffering as a very important part of life, as a constructive element that we may even enjoy, that enriches life. In that sense we do not even have a theology around suffering, it's just another emotion among others. We are concerned with very different questions. Buddhists may assert it's ultimately about suffering anyway but really that's just blind dogmatism
Dukkha is less a matter of pain and suffering and more that the elements (dharma) of experience as grasped are in a state of commotion or unrest... one suffers in the sense that this can be experienced as pain if his mind is weak or clouded and sees lasting substance in any of this momentariness to cling to.
>Well, that's a big question, but why presume it's the very same problem that Indians had?
Suffering is suffering, the form may change, but the roots are the same: attachment, aversion, delusion.
>This is really the dogmatic point of Buddhism. Buddhism asserts that really the ultimate problem is suffering.
No, Buddhism doesn't say that. Buddhism states that everything that comes to an end ends in: physical pain, the pain of loss, the pain of change.
>and that if we just remove the causes of suffering we'll be fine,
More than fine
> but in the west we do not have this understanding. For example, we often see suffering as a very important part of life,
No, you just learn to give the experience a non-inherent meaning to serve as a "lesson.
When does the lesson end? Why did it begin? What is the goal? What can be experienced that hasn't already been experienced? And the same goes for what can be said.
>as a constructive element that we may even enjoy,
Distortion of understanding: what is bad is good, what is good is bad.
>that enriches life.
I wish you much suffering.
In that sense we do not even have a theology around suffering,
That is a big problem.
>it's just another emotion among others. We are concerned with very different questions. Buddhists may assert it's ultimately about suffering anyway but really that's just blind dogmatism
If you're saying...
>Suffering is suffering, the form may change
Pure dogmatism
We suffer when we don't have what we want and when we have what we don't want, what other cause of suffering is there? It's the same for anyone anywhere in the world. This suffering is eliminated by uprooting the three poisons of attachment, aversion, and ignorance. What other means of ending suffering could there be?
>What other means of ending suffering could there be?
endless procedurally generated hentai wired directly to your brain through an advanced man-machine interface... this is what the enemies of the dharma offer
No one enjoys suffering when they are suffering, suffering is by definition unenjoyable. Any attempt to understand suffering as positive is just a means to cope with it. Buddhism faces suffering directly.
> Buddhism faces suffering directly.
This but unironically
The fact that this board says "cope" how it does like a snide little jab remark goes to show the 3 poisons that insult the noble ones and the Dhamma
1 Loba: greedy attachment
2 Dosa: hateful aversion
3 Moha: ignorant delusion
You should distrust any ideology that is universally confirmed by all examples
Westerns are incredibly unhappy. They are not lacking for anything material—which kills off the appeal of religions like Christianity which promise paradise after death—but burdened by stewardship of the hoard. Our goods, services, homes, and relationships all become increasingly disposable, everything costs more tomorrow than it did today, the environment is starting to try to kill us, the entire poor population of every non-Western country wants to live in our sheds and basements, the elites of every Western country treat governance as a means of acquiring private wealth... it's a very ugly culture and society. There are Buddhist sutras which describe the human body as filthy and rotten and worthy of renunciation but even that pales in comparison to the poor self-image our anti-depressant abusing, instagram following, tattoo collecting, funko popping, pornography hoarding peers have. Every westerner is a degenerate prince yet to experience the revelation a thousand births have prepared for him
Okay, and? You guys clearly either are not westerners or have just bought into the Buddhist kool aid entirely
>clings to strawmanned hostile take anyway
may these posts benefit lurkers
>that
Sigmund Freud(neurosis), Soren Kierkeggard(existential dreed), WHilhem Frederich Hegel(the path of despair), Martin Heidegger(inauthenticity), and more all of them pose the main point of affliciton of the wetsern individual to be suffering/alienation just like the buddhist did, the whole western agenda is to free humankind from it's state of alienation just like the buddhist
Ask IQfy
Answer: birth
But better with picrel
>your type
Do you really think that here on IQfy anons who grew up in a Christian culture, and who go through different visions in life, are going to come here and act like a spiritual TikToker?
Yes. Same reason troonys try to raid blue boards harder than a Mormon whos salvation is on the line.
I don't know if you're joking. But a Buddhist thread of mine was deleted for my autism. So no.
chinese know frick all about buddhism, same for brahmins and they didn't do what you claim.
Contrary to the homosexuals you try to push. Ups.
What, you think they're going to write down in the historical record "Holy shit we are scamming the peasants. I can't believe they are buying this shit. What a bunch of dumbasses! LMAO!" Of course they aren't going to broadcast it.
Basic logic suggests however that that is indeed the actual historic origins of Buddhism, as well as most other non-pagan non-animistic religions. Most have an inorganic unnatural birth, usually some kind of government propaganda program that ends up working far better than they thought it would.
If what Anon said about you is true, my answer is simple. Just look at what science is becoming today. A real failure to understand the mind and its factors. Science has no answer to human dilemmas. Psychology today is nothing but a copy of the Noble Eightfold Path.
Do you really have to create such a complex system to enslave people? Look at the modern capitalist world, they sacrifice themselves for empty materialistic illusions, and by the time they realize it, it's too late.
>he says posting on a israeli imageboard on his slave labor electronics that only has connectivity to the world at large thanks to corpo telecoms
You are a clown ass homie
His argument is strengthened by the strength of knowing what is best in life: titty fricking. One who tittyfricks ceases to care what other people think. One who constructs a mental yoke for others which financially and SMV status elevates him to the surplus of tittyfricking is truly top dog on top who knows what's best.
Unironically great post.
Leadership.
Pass it on.
Btw Sri Lanka's best kept secret is their busty 10/10 most wedding worthy women
Om I want a Sri Lankan gf sirs ommm
Om cinnamon is the winner, mon ommmm
Omm i will only stop smoking weed when I get a good grades south asian gf omm
and how did Sri Lanka acquire this?
through brahmacarya!
probably through geographically distant supply chains altered by hindu cow puja and agrarian health in the age of microplastics none of which is a proposition ever conceived by normies in the environment itself only science nerds like me.
B-b-but my b-borders and national identity!
Zoomers confirmed better bodies than Boomers despite the plastics
But yes the good focus of those exact lion king noises are pretty good for the ecosystem too
indeed it is only by roaring the lion 's roar that a wheel turning kang may acquire the booba treasure
threads about the answer are weird, because asking for the answer is the it.
The term soul is not commonly used in the scriptures. The term soul is associated with something eternal and imperishable, unchanging, that carries life experiences.
In this case, the answer is yes. There is no soul.
The real problem is not with the concept of soul, but with the concept of "I".
This concept seems to be a step beyond the common understanding of experience from the point of view of an individual.
This is the problematic question that causes so much debate among Buddhists.
There is no eternal soul in Buddhism. There is absolutely nothing persistent which can be defined as a self. The self is merely an imputation on the five aggregates.
>arrive at vihara
>only white man there
>2 THICC sri lankan women enter and give food to the monks
>literally the most beautiful women I have ever seen
>they do not look at me, they are focused
>hear them talk
>they are sisters, they look like twins
>one is married the other is not
>tomorrow is Vesak, the Buddha's birthday
>invited for the ceremony
>go to ceremony
>parking lot is full
>readjusting my parking space
>almost run over a Ceylon type Pajeet behind my parking space
>"sorry sir!"
>shake hands
>smiles and leads me to the dining hall
>i dressed in white today just cuz
>everyone is dressed in all white
>enter the temple
>suddenly a thin brown little arm wraps around my big man arm
>look down and long black silky hair drapes my shoulder
>meet eyes
>feel like a Conquistador arrived at Yucatan after months of being boat bound arriving at a waterfall siren
>she has heterochromia like Kajol
>she starts smooth talking me asking me questions and suddenly Im in a job interview for bf/husband
>"this is my mom!"
>look around
>see monks glaring at me
>see THICC Sri Lankan babeasuarus rex flock walk by giggling laughing looking at me
>my long hair lion's mane long horns waft in the wind as I am gazed in shining sun making my mixed blond hair golden rays in everyone's periphery
>my arm is tugged down to this skinny jungle girl
>she wants me and has captured me
>old man walks up to me and asks me about money
>all the 'mirin stops
>sober eyes everywhere
Papa protecc
Why am i poor
the most chaste monks are the most seductive... bataille said that somewhere
Buddhism is just a cope that lets westerners think that they've understood the secret that solves the human condition
>exists thousands of years before the english language preserved in pristine Pali scholarship
>yeah bro this gift shop spans the ends of the earth and my karen soccer mom knows all just ask her about politics you will become a Buddha
The Buddha didn't even speak Pali lol it was just a random language used to write the discourses down. It has no special relevance
Also, the Theravada is lesser (literally Hinayana)
> It's the same for anyone anywhere in the world.
Wrong
>Wrong
Can you explain how?
I'm sorry but if you're brown you just won't get it
The tradition openly exists in continuity of its historical heritage. There is a wink and nod to other cohorts that neighbored it like Patanjali. Persia and Pajapati are mentioned often. Bimbisara is mentioned often. It is a monastic path but not a cult of capture that demands you cut off other sects as total heathens until a serious disagreement is met that hinders the path and distracts the training. The story of King Bimbisara going to visit the Buddha but having to ask the monks "which one is he" goes to show that this bald monastic did not emphasize branding himself keeping an official name. Buddhi itself means intelligence. बूढ़ा means old man yet how is it pronounced?
"Historical heritage" is a western invention made by the British in order to justify their "Pali Buddhist Bible" which was deemed to be safely non-contradictory with Christianity
Using thought, language, and reason? Existence is already predicated on language. There is no being without language
>There is no being without language
So you agree with Nagarjuna?
Language is the development of all things. There is literally no reason to stay at the state before language. We should develop our consciousness through language. Buddhism is a death cult
I have no idea what you think Nagarjuna is saying, but emptiness has nothing to do with "development." Emptiness just means that everything is entirely dependent on other things for its existence.
Okay, and? Developing prajnaparamita leads to letting go of all the constructions that we have made to organise the totally blank, fully interconnected unity that exists before any dialectic is performed. I.e., it is the pure unity. This is the most basic starting point of western thought, yet Buddhists seem to think that we should instead retvrn to it and abide in it.
I have lost friends to the allure of this unity. They stay there, cling to it, and go mad. It's pure childishness, literally, they want to return to the state as a baby before things started "going wrong". It's all just unresolved trauma.
Have you ever asked yourself why most people are happy in their lives without any need for "the Dharma"? It's because they have dealt with their issues and are happy to continue and develop their lives and their thought from the unity.
Summary: Buddhists are just humans with unresolved mommy and daddy issues.
Realizing the ultimate truth does not prevent you from functioning in the conventional truth
Yet, this so-called "ultimate truth" is so immediately obvious to the western mind that it's where Hegel intuitively decided to START his philosophy
You don't realize the ultimate truth through intellectual understanding, it is realized through experience
There is no experience outside of intellectual understanding
Wrong
How so? Do you think that water existed before humans named it?
You're talking about the Phenomenology but I'm talking about his Logic. In the Logic he does indeed start with the undivided unity.
I wasn't talking about phenomenology at all. This has nothing to do with that
I have practised Buddhism extensively with an ordained teacher. I'm not just some random person who has constructed an idea of it.
>Do you think that water existed before humans named it?
Show me me, you and the external world.
>You're talking about the Phenomenology but I'm talking about his Logic. In the Logic he does indeed start with the undivided unity.
yeah but you start with the phenomenology and then go to the logic, the phenomenology is a prologue to the science of logic
>I wasn't talking about phenomenology at all
phenomenology is the study of the developement of the spirit, so saying that emptiness is the earliest stage in it's development is wrong even on Hegelian standards
> yeah but you start with the phenomenology and then go to the logic, the phenomenology is a prologue to the science of logic
How so? Most people suggest reading the logic before the phenomenology. Why would I read phenomenology first?
>I have practised Buddhism extensively with an ordained teacher
In what tradition?
Boy, that's pure scientism.
Oh, I knew you were a Kantian.
position on epistemology in plain text:
- Emphasizes direct experience as a primary source of knowledge.
- Views the mind as crucial for understanding reality.
- Acknowledges impermanence and interdependence in reality.
- Focuses on practical knowledge for personal growth.
- Believes in evolving understanding through questioning.
- Highlights compassion and interconnectedness in spiritual pursuit.
Disproven with a sleeping fart
Hegel didn't started his philosophy with ultimate truth, his system starts with sense certainty. or what buddhist would call sensuality, the epistemology of the senses
it's weird that you cling to your strawman of buddhism
Learning the language will help me escape Boomerville which has worsened under its Britishisms. Brits hate proper pronunciation. Brits violate all colloquial language with their supreme HR closed circuit dictionary. Brits impose fertility faux pas with their enforced state gayness that sneaks on the captured population by shoving us into compulsory institution on top of compulsory institution.
You literally have Shakespeare available to you who had a deeper insight into the human condition than the Buddha and yet you instead choose to learn the language of a tradition which is now primarily composed of cigarette smoking monks who accept money bribes and make a living by extorting the superstitions of desperate poor people?
If you speak what you know of the human condition you scare the hoes. One with knowledge does not seek more knoweldge like a striving faustian student but the means of conveyance that are kind and effective. People are always learning and cooperation is far smarter than the studious sleepless inquiry. Shakespeare remains in parts of the Anglosphere that are decaying. Chuckspeare and Nogspeare are next.
Shakespeare needs a translator into English in order to be spoke to and around the English people. Shakespeare was a blockbuster movie to get b***hes and bar bawds back in his life and times. (at the Thames too!) Only now is he the GOD of Academia. John Donne > Shakespeare. Thomas Hobbes understands what I need for me and myself but not for friends. Buddha is the barney the blackpill dinosaur I need.
What I lack the Jeets have. What the Jeets have, I lack. My transaction will be great once I master the Jeet IQfy and language.
This is too schizo for me, I can't follow
Ah yes the friendly British intellect how kind and empathetic.
What I speak of as a language learner is any and all value financial and spiritual I can acquire with this noble aim and noble path and noble figurehead.
The triple gem is free (and open source)
Dhammam saranam gachami
Dhammam tatiyampi saranam gachami
Lmao at a drug addict trying to queer up the boofha.
>drug addict
Your brain is a part for which there is no whole. No whole remains. Through understanding mental processes and the materials of the brain you come to the understanding that frogs and plants and bees share this consciousness. Acetylcholine supplements and L Theanine and CBD and DMT and opiate and amphetamine cabinets are marks for places held in the brain. Modern people are obliged to understand these objects before they are harnessed to tailor your understanding from the outside in.
>queer
Software development has acquiesced to the political environment of our financial world that is GAE gayMAN. However the philosophy of FOSS is above the world of gay gay bugman devs.
Devjeet you are my champion. You are the beta tester of betas. Look at my works ye mighty and shit the street! In London! In France! In Canada's underpants!
>ah truth is too spicy!
>please dilute your words with dead books and israeli lies!
Good impression of the average Buddhist
>It has no special relevance
Ah yes Eastern humble bragging
I bow deeper than you I speak Spanish which is commercial mutt Latin which itself was the language of Roman homosexuals but is regarded as Holy Catholic magic monk music.
I am even MORE austere than you
It has defacto special significance its simplicity as does the Buddha's dharma in being a distillate of Dharmic thought portable for China to Japan. Kukai created Hiragana out of his Sutra Sastra translating.
Any convention we adopt becomes significant as it stands the test of time and becomes the grandparent to the literate future.
Imagine looking at the Buddhadharma and thinking the language it was written in is the important thing
Yes. I am an HSL
Hindi as a third language. I am trying to talk to Pajeets to make friends and do internet business and wife up a brown beauty.
As soon as the Bodhisatta was born, he stood firmly with his feet on the ground; then he took seven steps to the north, and, with a white sunshade held over him, he surveyed each quarter. He uttered the words of the Leader of the Herd: ‘I am the Highest in the World, I am the Best in the World, I am the Foremost in the world; this is the last birth; now there is no more renewal of being in future lives.’” – The Buddha
Also western philosophy literally proved that Buddhists were wrong about enlightenment
All of western philosophy was refuted by Nagarjuna
Emptiness is literally the earliest stage of the development of the spirit. Buddhists want to return to being little babies. It's purely Freudian. The real evolution is further development, not a retreat back to some kind of undetermined unity
How do you develop past the absence of inherent existence? You develop an inherently existent self through causes and conditions?
>Emptiness is literally the earliest stage of the development of the spirit
not at all, emptiness is the anti subtantialist interdepence the spirit discover after being the dialectical articulation of force and understanding, the whole notion of self awareness developed in the second part of the phenomenology of sipirt starts with spirit discovering all phenomena is empty of substance, or what is teh same taht subject and substance are the same, and since the subject is negation the substance is just the negation of itself and it's nature is dialectical and interdependent
the material utopia prophesized by marxist intellectuals has never happened
It's scientifically guaranteed to do so, but cope away
2 more weeks
> Just stop thinking bro, just let go of discursive thoughts bro, then you will attain the true death bro
The fruits of the continuation of the Pali language tradition
http://www.buddhistische-gesellschaft-berlin.de/downloads/brokenbuddhanew.pdf
When the lion, the king of beasts, roars, whatever animals hear the sound are for the most part filled with fear, a sense of urgency, and terror. Those who live in holes enter their holes; those who live in the water enter the water; those who live in the woods enter the woods; and the birds fly up into the air. Even those royal bull elephants, bound by strong thongs in the villages, towns, and capital cities, burst and break their bonds asunder; frightened, they urinate and defecate and flee here and there. So powerful, bhikkhus, is the lion, the king of beasts, among the animals, so majestic and mighty.
Remember, Anons, that Christians and atheists do not have the same framework as the rest of us for dealing with the idea that suffering, once known, has no value, because that leads them to nihilism.
Guess I'll post it again, link has talks of an authentic Theravadan monk reciting & explaining the earliest recorded teachings of the Buddha. Anyone who's truly interested in what the Buddha taught, this is the best resource you'll get short of downloading PDFs of the 4 nikayas and studying them yourself.
https://mega.nz/folder/o10V1YTA#t05Ijm2VHPuW0fzp39CxPw
Link to the original talks:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1SR3MO-cLmaPaAB7KGgGqfg-k7NHy2RI3
As this thread is 80% chatGPT spam and random trolls I'm not going to bother replying to anyone. Enjoy the lectures, they're great.
Fricking pussy
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skandha
They believe in five impermanent aggregates which combine to create your being. This is different from a soul as it is impermanent and it is not a whole. The soul is not impermanent and divisible into parts.
http://tibetanbuddhistencyclopedia.com/en/index.php/Anatta,_Anatman,_No-Self,_Soulessness_and_other_Nihilistic_bullshit_your_local_moronic_''buddhist''_will_tell_you_about.