Buddhism says that desire causes suffering and thus to end one's suffering is to get rid of all desires.

Buddhism says that desire causes suffering and thus to end one's suffering is to get rid of all desires.
How does one do that without become completely apathetic to everything? Or is that the whole point?

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

Yakub: World's Greatest Dad Shirt $21.68

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The rock does not suffer because it does not have any desire. It just is.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      This.

      https://i.imgur.com/EipnDdh.jpg

      Buddhism says that desire causes suffering and thus to end one's suffering is to get rid of all desires.
      How does one do that without become completely apathetic to everything? Or is that the whole point?

      Desire can cause suffering. Even a Buddhist has the desire not to desire. So the answer to your question is that you will learn many many things which will satiate your desire instead. Eventually you will burn out from that, and realize you could have chosen to chill out at any time. Why you did or did not, before, is your business. Buddhism isn't about pushing the truth on you. The Buddha Amitabha, is, even now, sitting and meditating in his Pure Land. You can go there to chill out if you want. There are many houses in the mansion.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Dwayne Johnson?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Wisdom can be found in a sink.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Great, humans are not stones though.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Who knows ? , in a not gendered world.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You gotta remind yourself you are dealing with morons with a bit of psuedowisdom. Monkey see Monkey do, they just saw a monkey do something they found interesting and want to repeat it. Best not to let anything bother you too much though

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          > Monkey see Monkey do
          ear
          smell
          taste
          touch
          but not understand what they copy

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Being apathetic means that you are immovable to events as they happen. For instance, you don't enjoy when something nice happens.

      It is not about desires. It is moreso about expectations.

      Desires regard expectations of the future. If you have no expectation and just take things as they are, you need not be apathetic.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    desire is a mistranslation
    more authentically, desire to change things
    when one defines everything as perfect and not needing to be changed, one cannot experience suffering

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      well everything inevitably change, so there goes your suffering

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        the only thing that changes is your point of view of everything, but every possible point of view already exists

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          implying nothing changes outside of one's perceptions sounds like disingenuous gaslighting to me

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            But your perceptions are the only thing that really matters, so you might as well say nothing else changes. Because it's more helpful to do so. It certainly is more helpful to say so to others, even if you know it's a lie.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            nah, i'm not interested in spreading your solipsistic lie, thanks though

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Quick question; what is "truth", to you?
            Is it that we're all just space dust on a spinning rock floating through space and life is meaningless? Is that: the truth? Or?
            For me, truth just means that which proves most useful. That seems most reasonable to me.
            I'm not a nihilist!

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Most useful defined as that which evolves consciousness?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I guess so. I mostly care about fulfillment, and I'm pretty Nietzschean
            For example; in my eyes, living in nature brings a more fulfilling life than living in a concrete jungle, so ideally I want to move towards that, but I'm not solipsistic, and I'm dogmatic, so I push others towards that too

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            The goal is not to control things but to align oneself with nature/divine will. You have to surrender to change.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        it's about desire for change, enlightment is being content with any current state
        e.g. your leg has a nail in it, you want pain to end, nirvana is simply accepting it, does not suffer because of pain

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >desire causes suffering and thus to end one's suffering is to get rid of all desires.
      what causes suffering is people not having agency over their path of suffering. If you have to suffer and you know it will be for a good cause, who would dodge that? If you could hang on a cross to get 200 people to safety: who wouldn't do it? If someone arbitrarily decides to enslave you and your people, it's a very different story. Or if they put you in conundrums that could be preventable if you had acted and grown to a place where you could make a difference.

      >when one defines everything as perfect and not needing to be changed, one cannot experience suffering
      in some people's pov this would be the same as defeatism or arbitrarily changing the goalposts.

      But why does it suck?
      What's the most important thing to you?
      To feel pleasure, instead of suffering?

      >To feel pleasure, instead of suffering?
      nta but to be immersed in pleasure with no useful stuff to do would be suffering too. Suffering is personal. Usually you suffer when you have difficulty manifesting your authentic self in whatever reality high or low you are in.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      thats the wqrong way to be i hate buddhists,. buddha was mistaken

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Initially it might seem so, because we are leaning way too much into sensual pleasures. In practical terms it's about giving things up and learning the be ok despite the lack of XYZ. You learn how to be at ease, despite having slept bad for example. You practice honesty and calling yourself out, when you catch yourself doing something that's clearly not beneficial for you or others. You learn how to be patient with your current experienced discomfort. This is called the "gradual training" and taking the preceipts (5-8) creates the training ground for you to find comfort within the discomfort. Being at ease is neither exciting nor boring, it's peaceful and the most pleasant mode of being. So most of the work is about enduring our burdensome attitude and not acting out of it.

      If you accept everything as perfect as it can be, and live in harmony with that philosophy, how do you circumvent not becoming completely passive of your surrounding world?
      What does Buddhism say about fighting evil in the world, or simply wishing for a better world? If what you say is true, why would an enlightened person even want to make a change in the world, despite learning to be okay with a lack of perfection?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Well it doesn't matter if you accept/deny everything or not, your body/mind will react to the world. The arahant also experiences pain but it doesn't bother him that much and is not forced to scratch the itch. In a certain way an arahant has moved on from the world, but he still shares his fruits of wisdom out of compassion, the body is still here. I think the idea of a saint doesn't fit with theravada buddhism, if you are more interested in that direction it's in mahayana. I still think the buddha himself makes more sense, how can you help others when you are still struggling yourself. The buddha gave the simile about a man that is shot with an arrow, refusing the help of a doctor because he doesn't know who or why he was shot.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Fighting with evil means getting engaged and having attachment to the illusion - taking maya seriously is what gives it it's power

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I read some Tara Brach, a Buddhist psychologist. She writes about learning to accept things the way they are SO THAT you can change them if needed. It's about cultivating peace in the moment, not saying everything's perfect. I don't know what she would say about the eliminating desire thing, though.

      No, being apathetic is not the goal. Apathy is a sign of poor development of the correct understanding of what is really to be done.
      >Buddhism says that desire causes suffering and thus to end one's suffering is to get rid of all desires.
      The more correct term would be "to stop being a slave to desire" or detachment, abandonment.
      We are contaminated by three poisons: attachment, aversion, delusion.
      The Buddha had a tamed mind, when desire arose on its own or at someone else's suggestion he always gave the final word, I know that sounds a bit contradictory but you'll understand with time.
      I recommend that you study a little more to correct this wrong understanding.

      This take appeals to me.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >accept everything is perfect
      This Is cognitive restructuring and doesn't change the fabric of the collective consensus independently

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Initially it might seem so, because we are leaning way too much into sensual pleasures. In practical terms it's about giving things up and learning the be ok despite the lack of XYZ. You learn how to be at ease, despite having slept bad for example. You practice honesty and calling yourself out, when you catch yourself doing something that's clearly not beneficial for you or others. You learn how to be patient with your current experienced discomfort. This is called the "gradual training" and taking the preceipts (5-8) creates the training ground for you to find comfort within the discomfort. Being at ease is neither exciting nor boring, it's peaceful and the most pleasant mode of being. So most of the work is about enduring our burdensome attitude and not acting out of it.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Very interesting.
      I want to practice this. Should I join Buddhism? Which are the core dogmas of this religion?
      I was raised catholic, but I can't connect myself to that religion and it's dogmas anymore. There are too many contradictions.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I don't think you should join anything just read the suttas and compare it to your own experience or be lazy like myself and listen to some bhikkus. It needs to be personal and has to apply to you. So don't join any religion or tunnel vision on any teaching, work on your understanding and how to see flaws within yourself. Personally I can recomend these 2 channels, but that's up to you:
        https://www.youtube.com/@HillsideHermitage
        https://www.youtube.com/@candanabhikkhu

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I like Hillside Monastery, currently getting to know them.
          I'd recommend:

          (Tallahassee Zen Center)

          (Samaneri Jayasara's dharma audiobooks)

          (Kwan Yin Chan Li Zen Meditation Center Singapore)

          (Yongey Mingyur Rinpoche)

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I like Hillside Monastery, currently getting to know them.
          I'd recommend:

          (Tallahassee Zen Center)

          (Samaneri Jayasara's dharma audiobooks)

          (Kwan Yin Chan Li Zen Meditation Center Singapore)

          (Yongey Mingyur Rinpoche)

          these are all frauds and morons
          >inb4
          ea whatever go frick yourself

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Do you have any videorecorded dharma talks that you can recommend?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            frick off

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Consciousness circle has a realized sage.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >I was raised catholic, but I can't connect myself to that religion and it's dogmas anymore. There are too many contradictions
        What are you talking about? There are 0 contradictions in the bible. Repent now to our lord Jesus or else face your fate in eternal suffering in hell.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >God loves and forgives everyone
          >Now get on your knees and start praying OR BURN IN HELL.

          see?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            would you let yourself in heaven?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Can you stop talking about christcuckery in my thread? It's about buddhism, not your homosexual israeliteworship, frick off back to your containment threads.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            you mad bro?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Trust no faith that makes proselytization and propagation of itself a central goal

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            how about asking questions that make you seethe?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            A philosophy with any truth to it is self-evident enough to others that it wouldn't need to spread by force or coercion of any kind. You only reveal your own insecurity in the strength of your superstitions by attempting to force belief into others

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >ask a question
            >get this level of seethe as reaction
            seems like a pretty powerful idea set to me.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            But enough about catholicism..

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            What's wrong with having self-propagation as a central goal? Imagine you're a prophet, and you have some kind of really positive life-philosophy you want to share with the world, wouldn't you want it to spread more?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Heaven realm is part of the 6 realms bro, not same anon but u just assumed it was Christianity. (Nirvana is not heaven for newbies, it's still samsara and even has death and rebirth)

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            You have completely and utterly misunderstood Christianity.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Help me understand. I am genuinely asking.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >There are 0 contradictions in the bible
          xdddd good1 bruh

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >I was raised catholic

        Catholic and Orthodox are memes, they go against Jesus teachings and create religions and institutions which add a bunch of extraneous rules. If you actually read the bible the path to salvation is clear in John 3:16. Believe Jesus is God, accept the free gift of eternal life, and you are saved.

        ?si=3R7Vxn5ykh2rMZ_E

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Frick off already man, could you fricking christcucks stop making EVERY THREAD about yourself?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >create religions and institutions which add a bunch of extraneous rules
          Islam and the hadiths tbh

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >You learn how to be at ease, despite having slept bad for example.

      This sounds too good to be true. I haven't had a good sleep in over 15 years, so I can't even imagine what it's like to wake up refreshed and ready to take on the day.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >I haven't had a good sleep in over 15 years, so I can't even imagine what it's like to wake up refreshed and ready to take on the day.

        You should de-cultivate goals and outcomes as a way of life. Instead, you should cultivate something like good habits which, when you are awake, naturally lead you to what is good and away from what is bad.

        Read a book like atomic habits by James Clear and start cultivating good habits so you can have the experience of waking up and, before you even realize it or register things like "I'm awake so I have to..." you are doing the things that are good for you and conducive to good things.

        I can probably count on 1 hand the amount of times I've had bad sleep. Because I have very very few goals in life, even when I'm sleep deprived I just do my best. I am constantly content like this.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You have Apnea.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Nope. I lost control over my life.

    • 1 month ago
      RON_MEXICO_BWC

      This is how I am naturally. I have a life path number 33. I pretty much never get bothered about things, only slightly perturbed. No matter how big the frick up is. So how does someone like me reach nirvana? Currently my meditation looks like where I can be at inner silence for 2 hours at a time. I honestly think I could meditate for 24 hours straight. Should I try something radical like that?

      • 1 month ago
        RON_MEXICO_BWC

        Oh and I am a leader devout Catholic if that makes a difference.

        • 1 month ago
          RON_MEXICO_BWC

          Pretty devout**** not “leader”

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Nirvana is reached when one no longer desires anything, including nirvana.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Why would you even desire to end suffering?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Can someone answer this?
      What's important in life isn't to not suffer, it's for it to be fulfilling, for you to lay on your death bed, look back, and think: "That was a great time.". What does suffering have to do with that?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        if you dont mind suffering (not desiring an alternative) its all a great time no matter what happens
        you people are a special kind of stupid arent ya

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          If you don't mind it to begin with, what's the point of trying to find a way to not mind it?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            if you didnt mind it what were you looking for

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I think pain/bliss is the duality we need to live life properly.
        Imagine you love someone profoundly and that person dies. Unless you didn't really loved, you will suffer.
        Ying/yang, you can't have one without the other.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      ...to not suffer?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You'll never know the true value of pleasure if you never suffer.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          That's wrong.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Wrong. Trauma degrades the soul which is the purpose of the parasitic zodiac wheel we live within. I had one of the most fortunate childhoods in that I hardly suffered at all. It wasn't until hardship that my soul shattered. And no, I didn't cave. I've risen above my trauma but it still remains unhealable in the recesses of my psyche.

          Stop with these elementary takes.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    No, being apathetic is not the goal. Apathy is a sign of poor development of the correct understanding of what is really to be done.
    >Buddhism says that desire causes suffering and thus to end one's suffering is to get rid of all desires.
    The more correct term would be "to stop being a slave to desire" or detachment, abandonment.
    We are contaminated by three poisons: attachment, aversion, delusion.
    The Buddha had a tamed mind, when desire arose on its own or at someone else's suggestion he always gave the final word, I know that sounds a bit contradictory but you'll understand with time.
    I recommend that you study a little more to correct this wrong understanding.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >The more correct term would be "to stop being a slave to desire" or detachment, abandonment.
      Sadhu

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It's tempting to join it but there are too many oddities you got to accept. >trust me the oddities make sense if you read 500 obscure texts/ do 500 mental gymnastics over those / just turn brain off only then you know what "REAL buddhism" is
    mm yeah sure
    >even if you don't, see, read this weird breathing technique they don't know want you to know about!
    completely useless. I can just breath normally like anyone always does? way better than that. some homosexual still said "bet you haven't tried it lololol" out of nowhere.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Less than 20 texts are needed to understand Buddhism.
      There are no mental gymnastics. When you put Buddhism forward as a provider of knowledge, you will have to make an effort towards the proposed understanding.
      If you think that the liberating vision should be something simple and obvious, why even start?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Just be content and be aware.
      >I can just breath normally like anyone always does?
      Observe your breath, that's all.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Observe the observer of the observer of the breath. Ask who is observing this whole thing? Sit in the answer.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Observe your breath, that's all.

        Okay, then what?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Take a fat dump and call it a day

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Maybe the masons were right, maybe divinity really is achieved through the anus...

  7. 1 month ago
    Seanonymous

    Perhaps desire and the ability to enjoy are not mutually exclusive

    • 1 month ago
      Seanonymous

      I'll also had that they don't really destroy suffering. They simply realize the axis of their identity is flexible, and when one state is suffering they simply inhabit another psychological plane of existence. Eventually one way or another their dukkha will end and they will enter a phase sukha as is the law of impermanence, and then they might occupy that psychological plane again if they are not enjoying the sukha of one of the other planes already and wish to. Thank you for coming to my /x/ talk. Okay, I'll just stop writing now.

      • 1 month ago
        Seanonymous

        I'll also add*
        frick sorry

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Pathos is just the Greek translation of dukkha, so yes, liberation from suffering—apatheia—is the goal. Today apathy has an unfortunate connotation, but if it helps, remember that the ideal is a mind of perfect self-sufficiency. A man with such a constitution is only apathetic to just that extent, but is otherwise happy, kind, compassionate, and wise. It's not the apathy of a misanthrope or a depression patient. "Equanimity" is a more favorable term

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    How can I reconcile passion and inner peace? It seems like those two are mutually exclusive. Please answer, I've been struggling with this a lot. I understand Buddhism, the thing is, I don't *want* to stop suffering, suffering means being alive. I want to feel things and do stuff in the world. I want to be egoistic, feel regret when I fail and gloat when I win. I don't want to commit spiritual suicide and be content with sitting on a mountain somewhere for the rest of my life, even though I acknowledge that that's a misrepresentation and that someone who's enlightened can probably work even harder than someone who's driven by emotions, because the ego-dead person can control his body like a puppet. But the thing is, would he even *want* to? If you don't have ego & passion, how do you even make decisions on what to do? ... It's really hard to figure this out.. I hope you guys get what I'm saying, please help me out.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >some moronic buddhist is gonna respond thinking this is sincere

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I'm being for real though. I intuitively feel right about it based on my experience, but I can't find a way to reason about it logically before committing fully.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Boddhicitta? Masters don't cease to have faults, make mistakes or have negative character traits. That's a demoralizing myth.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I think it's inspiring. Is it wrong to be idealistic?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          It's simply not true, and it demoralizes people once they realize their progress does not measure up to their (impossible) ideal despite their best efforts.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >just stop trying bro
            >enlightenment isnt real bro

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            That's the kind of demoralizing thoughts people experience when they realize they are not becoming perfect and without any faults and negative feelings from their practice, in contradistinction to their ideals on the basis of which they were generating false hopes.
            Yes, their idea of Nirvana was false, and simetimes they erroneously conclude from that that there is no Nirvana of any kind. The idea of "perfect Masters" is what sets them up for this.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            [...]
            >having no confidence in an entrance to awakening, they consider awakening a deception; they consider awakening "starting second" at a game of chess; they consider awakening as upāya-speech (expedient); they consider awakening a term to lure people along. People like this cheat others and cheat themselves, mislead others and mislead themselves. You must be careful!
            the irony here is ofc that this in fact demoralizes people
            because they were told there is no enlightenment
            so why make an effort right
            or alternatively; then i already am so dont have to make an effort and all my actions are expression of enlightenment
            [...]
            no youre wrong
            some people cant even fathom going for a walk because theyre so fricking fat
            thats not the fault of someone that works out

            So do you think it's possible for me to decrease my 'non-player-character' score to 0%? Does this define what it means to be human? I think it's what separates us from animals. So that means more spiritually progressed people, or anyone who's in control of their emotions, is more human. I view real life npcs as sub-human. It's my goal to achieve that level of freedom, because I've been feeling trapped in my mind since forever. Being able to freely choose which thoughts I discard and accept seems like a big deal.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            frick off

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Sorry for not aligning with whatever you've got going there. Your lore doesn't really matter to me, I'm just describing things in a practical way

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            youre not doing anything

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            No, I'm seeking out advice. Yes, I'm ignorant

            https://i.imgur.com/O0sZU60.gif

            How can I reconcile passion and inner peace? It seems like those two are mutually exclusive. Please answer, I've been struggling with this a lot. I understand Buddhism, the thing is, I don't *want* to stop suffering, suffering means being alive. I want to feel things and do stuff in the world. I want to be egoistic, feel regret when I fail and gloat when I win. I don't want to commit spiritual suicide and be content with sitting on a mountain somewhere for the rest of my life, even though I acknowledge that that's a misrepresentation and that someone who's enlightened can probably work even harder than someone who's driven by emotions, because the ego-dead person can control his body like a puppet. But the thing is, would he even *want* to? If you don't have ego & passion, how do you even make decisions on what to do? ... It's really hard to figure this out.. I hope you guys get what I'm saying, please help me out.

            I'm not trolling, I really want to resolve this

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Being able to freely choose which thoughts I discard and accept seems like a big deal.
            Completely life altering. When not oppressed by thoughts it's easy to be pure enough for causeless joy.

            >So that means more spiritually progressed people, or anyone who's in control of their emotions, is more human.
            A good way to see it. It turns out that emotions are not yours, those only appear. Drop the identification with the emotions to gain freedom.

            Mastering the mind means you also become more intelligent, able to observe and process more than others.
            The stickiness of thoughts and emotions doesn't serve us but makes us blind. Reacting to situations should be left for animals.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            As always the sarcastic jester accidentally reveals the truth :^)

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            At that point they wouldn't have that problem. I doubt that I'd still have those kinds of expectations & do those kinds of comparisons and stuff if I reach that level

            >just stop trying bro
            >enlightenment isnt real bro

            And yeah I still think it's true

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            That's the kind of demoralizing thoughts people experience when they realize they are not becoming perfect and without any faults and negative feelings from their practice, in contradistinction to their ideals on the basis of which they were generating false hopes.
            Yes, their idea of Nirvana was false, and simetimes they erroneously conclude from that that there is no Nirvana of any kind. The idea of "perfect Masters" is what sets them up for this.

            >having no confidence in an entrance to awakening, they consider awakening a deception; they consider awakening "starting second" at a game of chess; they consider awakening as upāya-speech (expedient); they consider awakening a term to lure people along. People like this cheat others and cheat themselves, mislead others and mislead themselves. You must be careful!
            the irony here is ofc that this in fact demoralizes people
            because they were told there is no enlightenment
            so why make an effort right
            or alternatively; then i already am so dont have to make an effort and all my actions are expression of enlightenment

            That's the kind of demoralizing thoughts people experience when they realize they are not becoming perfect and without any faults and negative feelings from their practice, in contradistinction to their ideals on the basis of which they were generating false hopes.
            Yes, their idea of Nirvana was false, and simetimes they erroneously conclude from that that there is no Nirvana of any kind. The idea of "perfect Masters" is what sets them up for this.

            no youre wrong
            some people cant even fathom going for a walk because theyre so fricking fat
            thats not the fault of someone that works out

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >some people cant even fathom going for a walk because theyre so fricking fat
            >thats not the fault of someone that works out
            That's not the same as telling people that hitting the gym will turn them into literal Hercules.
            Even if such perfection of character and action is possible to someone who has completed the entire path of attainment, that's not a necessary part of it. It's not necessary to develop that, even if developing such extreme and para-normal capacities is enabled by it and to some extent occurs naturally along the path.

            [...]
            So do you think it's possible for me to decrease my 'non-player-character' score to 0%? Does this define what it means to be human? I think it's what separates us from animals. So that means more spiritually progressed people, or anyone who's in control of their emotions, is more human. I view real life NPCs as sub-human. It's my goal to achieve that level of freedom, because I've been feeling trapped in my mind since forever. Being able to freely choose which thoughts I discard and accept seems like a big deal.

            Like... becoming 100% human? That's certainly possible. Much more than that is possible. I'm trying to clarify that even when you reach that level and beyond, it's still possible to be a grump, or bad at playing chess, and so on. There's no ceiling to attainment beyond how you conceptualize the path of attainment, and preisely because of this it is helpful to avoid expending effort on attaining things which are extraneous to your immediate and overarching goal, and which may also be much easier to attain at a later stage.
            I would definitely recommend getting rid of the NPC nomenclature and perhaps first looking for something better, because it's not good for you to routinely denigrate people.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            pic

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            youre a moron
            youre also weak af
            >This is a matter for strong people.

            .

            >Don't misunderstand: to bear this thing you have to be totally strong, cast of raw iron - how could it be taken up carelessly by your small faculties and small capacity?
            meanwhile youre sitting here crying because nobody ever made you eat a veggie before

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Thank you.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Like... becoming 100% human? That's certainly possible. Mu..
            Ah, alright.
            >it's not good for you to routinely denigrate people
            I acknowledge that. I've started working on eliminating that, but it's going to be difficult, since a large chunk of my character is founded on setting myself apart from others. It's it's basis. Why? Because they denigrated me, for my character, since childhood. But even if I acknowledge that it's probably not a good thing, I simultaneously disagree, because of that other, bigger part of me. How can I do something to myself I don't want to do? That's the issue.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Bah!
            >Denigrate
            Enlightenment isn't politically correct, nor is offending others relevant to it's attainment.
            If I'm a carpenter, and I am, and I've been building shit for ten years, I'm better at it than most people. Period. That's what I wanted to be, worked for it, and now am. Based on my criteria of"better", based on what I want, I'm better than them. Oooooooo I'm denigrating them! Damn right. That's why they pay me. Wouldn't be a carpenter if I wasn't
            Define what enlightenment is, that is, what you want that you're calling enlightenment.
            And then get that. After doing this, you'll be "more enlightened" according to your criteria of enlightenment, which is what you're trying to do.
            I can make wood do what I want it to. This fulfills me.
            If it fulfills you to be content with your life, and in control of your mind, and the desires it has, based on whatever the frick you want, or don't want, depending on whatever arbitrary goal or lack thereof you have, and thus achieve contentedness and that is what YOU call enlightenment
            Then you'll be more enlightened and less npc than the rest, and better off, according to you.
            You, have the final determination, the authority, to determine what is better, based on whatever goal, or lack of goals.

            And if thereby you can find contentedness in this sufferable life, you're ahead of the game, and doing better than most people with Thier lives of quiet desperation.
            It begins and ends with you. Have some right mind, in the spirit of the noble path, and clearly define what you want and what these words mean, or your playing around with your life in a subjectivist gray area where you at once are enlightened already, but depending on the definition, aren't anywhere close.
            It's not both at the same time. It only quests that way because that word, enlightened, isn't clearly defined.
            You, with your brain, and free will, have been granted the authority by whatever god made this existence, to determine what that definition is.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Well, what you're feeling is normal, it's called obstacles.
      There are many obstacles.
      As for what the mind of an enlightened person is like, the suttas are full of examples of how ideas and desires arose in the Buddha's mind and how he dealt with thoughts

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Thank you, I'll look into that.
        My current view on this is that for an enlightened person, all of those thoughts are still there, it's just that they're all optional, and the person picks whichever he's most curious about, or thinks is the most reasonable, not out of any necessity. That's the most comforting explanation I can think of.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >all of those thoughts are still there, it's just that they're all optional,
          Exactly!
          A simple example: He was alone going to a temple, but it was very early and the place was closed, so the idea of visiting his friend who was a barber arose in his mind, so he agreed positively with the idea as if the mind was only suggesting it, rather than imposing it through desire or obligation or any kind of apprehension.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            That makes sense.
            But that means he's still dependent on whatever thoughts his mind suggests to him, and he isn't his mind.
            To me that means he still doesn't have full freedom, since he's dependent on the options he's given.
            How could he re-adjust his mind to start giving him options it has never given before? ..
            Maybe I'm just looking for something that isn't possible. So mythical.
            I guess I'm not really looking for what's most human, but rather what's most alien, since that has the most potential.
            >How could you fully malue your mind?
            To answer this question I've started looking into Tulpas and committing suicide by permanently switching with them, becoming a new person, with a new personality and everything
            I'm so sorry for being so weird about this..

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Kek, that's an interesting technique.
            There's the subtle mind, it's like thinking "without thinking", it has nothing to do with being an NPC, I'm talking about a way of thinking that's faster, cleaner, crystal clear.
            The serene mind, without a crude form, which would be using sound, (which in the end appears in a vicious emulation of mental dialogue) is something that needs to be cultivated, truly free thinking is like a super power, emphasized that it has nothing to do with being an NPC.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Sometimes a thought pops up into my mind that seems like it came out of nowhere, like some childhood memory, like pure raw passion, or some insight.
            This is just superstition, but I think I noticed it happen more often as I meditated a lot.
            Am I getting at something here?
            Is this that faster, cleaner, crystal clear way of thinking you've described?
            >the serene mind, which would be using sound, mental dialogue
            Do you mean inner monologue / your minds voice, or what?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >

            Kek, that's an interesting technique.


            There's the subtle mind, it's like thinking "without thinking", it has nothing to do with being an NPC, I'm talking about a way of thinking that's faster, cleaner, crystal clear.
            The serene mind, without a crude form, which would be using sound, (which in the end appears in a vicious emulation of mental dialogue) is something that needs to be cultivated, truly free thinking is like a super power, emphasized that it has nothing to do with being an NPC.
            >Sometimes a thought pops up into my mind that seems like it came out of nowhere, like some childhood memory, like pure raw passion, or some insight.
            This is just superstition, but I think I noticed it happen more often as I meditated a lot.
            >Am I getting at something here?
            Yes, what we see as a line of thoughts is just your mind focusing on a certain point in an ocean of thoughts that arise simultaneously, like bubbles.
            The more you meditate, the more your mind lets go of a way of focusing and starts to perceive the surroundings, the periphery of the thoughts, so it perceives more things as if the focal angle were opening up.
            >Is this that faster, cleaner, crystal clear way of thinking you've described?
            Yes, but your mind can develop this skill even further and it can become your natural way of thinking.
            >Do you mean inner monologue / your minds voice, or what?
            More or less, your internal dialog also changes, but it's still there, faster, as if everything you had learned was there at your disposal, flawlessly, in perfect harmony.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Well I've managed to make myself auditorily hallucinate before, while I was internally dialogueing

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Suffering sucks. It's really that simple.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      But why does it suck?
      What's the most important thing to you?
      To feel pleasure, instead of suffering?

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Apathetic towards everything=Suffering

    Buddhism is labeling things as suffering anvoid said suffering until you find enjoyment in most things.

    We see things as suffering and then choose simply not to suffer because we see suffering as the unwholesome vibe.
    It takes time(meditation) to simply stop suffering.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      That image gave me chills, anon

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    everything you hate about the world is exactly what you came to this world to experience. Your thoughts, desires and decisions create your reality. The lesson is what are you learning from your suffering, what is it teaching you about yourself and what are you teaching others with it. This is how the soul grows and becomes more evolved

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The desire to end one's suffering is desire in itself lol. Jesus is the only way

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Christianity and Buddhism are similar in the sense that both encourage slave-mentality. Desire is not the root of suffering, but the craving for meaning (duality) accompanied ignorance.

    Jesus and Buddha are both the demiurges servants.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      That's something I can get behind, that's my main contention with this
      If Buddhism is about escapism how can it be pro-demiurge? I don't understand

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      That's something I can get behind, that's my main contention with this
      If Buddhism is about escapism how can it be pro-demiurge? I don't understand

      Learn how to read.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I can understand Christianity being le slave-morality, being that it's about self-effacement before the israeli god and such. But Buddhism is most certainly not that, it's the warrior-discipline mentality applied to the ontological plane. Even historically, Christianity generally appealed to the underclass wherever it spread: slaves of the Roman Empire, dalits of India, etc. Whereas Buddhism mainly won its converts from the Indian kshatriya, Japanese samurai, etc.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Good point
        It's still appealing to slaves though

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        > it's the warrior-discipline mentality applied to the ontological plane
        Based

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          https://i.imgur.com/3CbrhsB.jpg

          I can understand Christianity being le slave-morality, being that it's about self-effacement before the israeli god and such. But Buddhism is most certainly not that, it's the warrior-discipline mentality applied to the ontological plane. Even historically, Christianity generally appealed to the underclass wherever it spread: slaves of the Roman Empire, dalits of India, etc. Whereas Buddhism mainly won its converts from the Indian kshatriya, Japanese samurai, etc.

          But that's what Christianity is too dumb dumbs. "Spiritual warfare", "put on your armor of God", and fantasizing about becoming some noble angelic aristocrat in a Heavenly Kingdom of Jerusalem feasting on the finest foods and wines while God's enemies are thrown into monarchial prison.

          Claiming that Buddhism applies "master morality" to the spiritual plane is just proving that it's slave morality.

          Meanwhile, the israelites see no division between heaven and earth and wiping out the Europeans means wiping out Satan. And you will cuck out to that mentality and be killed off.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >wiping out the Europeans
            But enough about christcuckery!

            Nietzsche was right, israeliteworshippers are anti-life misanthropes.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Claiming that Buddhism applies "master morality" to the spiritual plane is just proving that it's slave morality.
            That's just moving the goalposts.

            >Meanwhile, the israelites see no division between heaven and earth and wiping out the Europeans means wiping out Satan. And you will cuck out to that mentality and be killed off.
            The israelites aren't a military threat to anyone today except the palestinians. Even so, when it comes to actual enemies of buddhism (or any aryan religion) like christians and muslims, there's no issue with exiling or killing them. The gods Vajirapani and Vessavana enforced the Buddha's will with violence, and the Buddha himself resorted to violent threats for example to get asuras to release the sun and moon. Hence the buddhist nations of of Burma and Thailand can put their foot down on pesky muslims, and even historically the buddhist shogunate did the same to invading christians. All this does not make the Earth an object of worship, it is still only the springboard to higher realms and nibbana. But of course you've already twisted it so that aspiring to godhood and beyond is le slave mentality.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Do you truly believe Buddhism is Master Morality?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Perhaps not in N*tzsche's sense, but in the literal sense, yes. There's a good reason the Buddha often invoked the idea of nobility (ariya, khattiya) in his discourses, because the Eightfold Path requires as much discipline and rigor as in the training of a warrior or aristocrat.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            i guess since Buddha had the option to become a world-conqueror his Morality of Buddhism must be at least equivalent in Masterfulness

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You do not know what Christianity is about.

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Desire causes suffering if it is based on lack. Instead of getting rid of desire, desiring-production should be unleashed.

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Coward's religion. All religions which say that there can be any end or escape from suffering are religions of retreat from the reality.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      There is no retreat in Buddhism. The monk lives in the wilderness unprotected from the elements and fierce animals, contemplating corpses, living on one meal per day. Suffering is faced head-on. Likewise in meditation one pursues deeper and more difficult states of absorption, and in both practices one seeks knowledge of ultimate reality.
      True escapism is what everyone else does, following the path of least resistance. Seeking pleasure and avoiding pain, putting up shelters and walls, covering up and hiding from sickness, old age, and death, and so on.

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    If you're gnostic you're gonna resonate more with this reality being a prison planet.
    If you're buddhist you'll view this experience as an endless wheel of suffering. The abrahamic religions view this reality as a creation meant to worship the creator. The lower dimensions of this universe have qualities that aren't easy to overcome. Our reality is in an endless process of becoming, as well as interference of malevolent forces and addiction to suffering which has created amnesia to our true identity as source consciousness along with the evolution of source consciousness itself, they're all happening at once and are different ways of perceiving the same thing. There are different facets of reality that we awaken into once we start to develop multidimensional awareness. The more conscious a being becomes the more they awaken to their own freewill. Freewill allows us to be responsible for our journey and place salvation in our own hands. There isn't a creator looking over us determining if we'll have another incarnation or if we'll suffer, it's strictly a matter of our vibratory rate. Before we incarnate we plan our lives to the extent we have dominate lessons and overarching themes. These themes then materialize into the perfect conditions to carry out that particular fate.

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The ego is a seperate entity that is using your body to act out sin, and feeds on sorrow. Your natural state is the opposite of the ego.

    • 1 month ago
      no, buddy

      Having an ego is not only natural, it's necessary for continued survival. If you do not have a perceived sense of self then it's a lot hard to preserve yourself. Do not try to release your ego, instead try to expand yourself past it, realize that where it ends is not where you end.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        The ego always uses this argument, you cannot find a less original take. The ego does nothing else but justifies why the virus is a good thing.

        • 1 month ago
          no, buddy

          I didn't say it was good, I said it was necessary for survival. It doesn't just justify itself, it also protects the mind body and spirit the best it knows how. Putting a moral value on it doesn't make sense.

          Keep in mind though, that if you want to expand yourself past the ego you do need to learn to turn it off from time to time. Buddhism has a lot to teach on the subject.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Philosophies and worldly wisdom
            Ramana Maharshi killed his ego. The end.

          • 1 month ago
            no, buddy

            I did too, but it has to come back for you to come back.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I'll take Ramanas words over yours.

          • 1 month ago
            no, buddy

            Please do, but I hope you'll find a better translation.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >but I hope you'll find a better translation
            What do you mean?

          • 1 month ago
            no, buddy

            I mean that he would not disagree with me. Don't take my word for it though, or anyone here's for that matter.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I disagree, un my experience the ego just gets in the way and is not needed. Ramana literally calls it a demon that is trying to deceive.

          • 1 month ago
            no, buddy

            And he's not wrong. The ego is a great source of illusion. It's just that there is some nuance I think you are missing. Seeing past the ego and letting go of the ego are two translations for the same concept, but one is more accurate.

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Don't bother with that. Plus to desire to not have desires you are having a desire. Why would you desire no desires though? What you really desire is to feel a certain way. So go and feel the way you want to feel, you don't need to violate your own natural desires.

  20. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >How does one do that without become completely apathetic to everything?

    https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN36_6.html

    https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN35_88.html

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      /Thread

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I'm intellectually consistent throughout. So the irony of you quoting me with "/thread" and then trying to use my own post to refute what is also my own post isn't lost on me. *pats head like a loving father figure*

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I suffer a lot, Anon. Sometimes I lose faith that this is really the truth.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            You should just be comfortable doing whatever the best thing you can find is and let come what may. I think Buddhism is the best thing. You should read some suttas (maybe use this random sutta button on this website) to shore up any doubts you may have.

            https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/

            I bet there are some things you feel doubtful about only because of a lack of knowledge.

  21. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The point of detachment is to more compassionately and richly interface with existence. So the point is not to become an ascetic, a nihilist, a do-nothing and be-nothing. The point is that to be overly attached to anything in reality is to cause anxiety and fear and panick in your mind, over that which you ultimately cannot control. This limits you actually being able to impact that which you do have influence over, and generally, causes you to interface negatively with the world. You're less loving, less compassionate, less respectful of others agency, less human, really.
    As with all other wisdom, it rests on Paradox. To be less attached is to be more securely attached.

  22. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Also, Buddhism doesn't eschew suffering. It eschews Unecessary Suffering, which is caused by the mind.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Buddhism doesn't eschew suffering.
      > It eschews Unecessary Suffering
      Prove that with words of the Buddha. I bet you can't.

      I'll say it again, prove that with words that came from no one else but Gautama Buddha, the latest Buddha.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It's contained within the third pillar.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          No that isn't.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        NTA.
        LOL
        Look
        Here's the answer

        >How does one do that without become completely apathetic to everything?

        https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN36_6.html

        https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN35_88.html

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I'm both those anons. In reference to the second post, which (again) I myself posted, that only supports your second premise at best. That suttas only shows how one does not suffer.

          Buddhism exhorts one to give up suffering.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Buddhism exhorts one to give up suffering.
            I agree.

  23. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Desire is thinking there is a will other than Gods. That only one out of an infinite paths will occur for you based off decisions you made. But uhhhh it’s not true. Everything is done/complete. The path you are on and moment you are on is optimised perfectly based off what you love. And this includes whatever desires you may have whether they be for nice food or big tittied woman. Desire to get rid of desire, that’s the trap people fall in when they find out about this stuff. But it’s more like, you can’t do anything cause everything has been done. Really think about that. Desire disappears because you realise it doesn’t make sense. The game is on rails. Maybe the game tricks you to believe it’s going one direction and then changes I dunno. Still on rails baby.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Desire to get rid of desire, that’s the trap people fall in when they find out about this stuff.

      Poorly said. Not based and low-IQ/Ignorance-pilled.

      Here's a sutta which says the opposite of what you said: https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN51_15.html

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Cool man and how’s that working out for you?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          It worked out very well.

  24. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    and none of you can think for youreslves. you just want to follow something. and have no mind of your own. can you wake u?

  25. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Desire cause suffering
    Nope, attachment to desire (And identifications) causes suffering. Desire is not bad because it dissolves automatically after some time.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      What if the desire is accompanied with a strong bodily urge (eg: wanting to indulge in gluttony/lust)? What do you do about the bodily urge part? Desire dissipates but the urge sticks around, for much much longer. Will power can postpone the indulgence but eventually you will have to listen to your body.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Years and years of meditation and practice, and lust will disappear.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Lust is still relatively easier to beat because there's creative energy transmutation. Tell me about gluttony.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Same thing. It's still a form of sensual craving. It disappears after years of Samatha and Vipassana together, when you reach the anagamis state.

  26. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    That's the whole point.

  27. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Buddhist anons i'd like to start meditating for medical reasons (I grind my teeth when I sleep and it's causing me health issues)
    What would you say the best meditation method for relaxation is? Is metta good?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You should try yoga. Skillfully done, that's probably healthy for you.

      You should also read this sutta on thoughts and put it into practice: https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/MN/MN20.html

      Metta is definitely a good awareness/practice to cultivate. Here are some suttas for that:
      https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/KN/Khp/khp9.html
      https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn46/sn46.054.than.html

      I recommend the establishings of mindfulness. Here are some suttas on that:
      https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN47_38.html
      https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/MN/MN10.html

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I have no idea where I'd even start with yoga
        Thank you for the resources friend. I've always kind of dabbled in awareness of breath but could never stick to it. But now that I have actual health issues that could potentially be resolved with meditation I'll get more serious with it

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Starting with yoga: learn sun salutation A and B and do them every day, and moon salutation and do it every evening. The Sanskrit names for these two sequences are called Surya Namaskara A and B, and Chandra Namaskara. There are two types of moon salutation floating around, which are quite different from each other, and both are beneficial.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I find just naturally focusing on the breath and maintaining a still body is the best. Don't force the breath but bring attention. If new you can recite the number of breaths (maybe reset at 50). If mind wonders generally and lovingly bringing it back to breath and don't beat urself over it as that's the process

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        counting down like from 40 to 20 works better for me

  28. 1 month ago
    Garrote

    I repeatedly desire to eat and if I don't eat I die.
    The desire reminds me to eat. I'll keep it.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The urge to eat for survival is not the same as the craving for pleasant tastes, the feeling of fullness, etc. You have to piss and shit to survive too, but that's hardly what you'd call a craving.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You could simply eat when feeling hungry.

  29. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    i wrote a poem on buddhism anyone want to tell me if i have a little wisdom? there is no buddhism general so i decided to post it here so as to not make my own thread.

    https://jmp.sh/s/XIxF59JAbLgR81pGOTZm

  30. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Buddhism is bullshit, like any other religion. They tell you that you need to learn to accept everything that happens to you, but you will find masters constantly nagging you because you're wasting your "precious human life" and will threaten you with becoming a ghoul in the underworlds or reeincarnating as a worm. But I thought the point was to just accept whatever happened to me as good?

    In the end, it's just another group of gullible morons following some guys with hats - yellow hats, white hats or red hats, it's all the same stuff. Fantasy stories based on the writings of a million people who all claim that "this was the real thing that the real master wrote!" yet the original thug (aka Budha) did not write anything, so everything you read is just made up by people who claim to really really for real remember what he said and understand his words.

    And one more thing is, they supposedly are devoted to the work of liberating all sentient beings but they have no realistic plan to achieve this, it's just "trust me brah" yet they miss the basic point that people who have no food or no employment will not read a single goddamn sutra. If buddhists are really so compassionate, why don't they get into politics and do something that actually fixes our problems? Do they really expect people to commit to liberating ALL THE FREAKING HUMAN BEINGS (not to mention the rest of sentient beings) just by counting beads and reciting a hundred thousand om mani padme hums? Give me a break

    The only useful part of Buddhism is their mental training, and possibly some of the techniques for visualization and working with your inner energies. The rest is trash

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      one time i described the function of a Bodhisattva to my mother, saying they work to liberate all sentient beings, and she retorted by the holy spirit,
      >Well, how do they do that?
      I am still stumped by this as a Buddhist

      If my brother has a cat, how do i liberate him? By staring into his eyes?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        At some point I considered reading sutras to animals hoping that they would somehow acquire good karma this way but there’s no evidence that this would work so I stopped

        Well I agree the bodhisattva vow is an evidently foolish and impossible one. I think some treat it as a sort of trick, like "liberating all beings" is just code for "seeing samsara as nirvana", but most seem to take it literally. But as far as
        >If buddhists are really so compassionate, why don't they get into politics and do something that actually fixes our problems?
        In orthodox Buddhism compassion is only an inner virtue, it is one of only four skillful dispositions. As for the external world, it is a neverending chain of problems to be solved. If you live in the developed world, everyone has the time and resources for meditation, they just choose to spend it on other things; "getting involved" is a waste on them. If you live in the undeveloped world or are interested in it, then sure, stamping out the local warlords and lifting the people out of poverty as a benevolent ruler is meritorious and praiseworthy. Even so, that new kingdom of yours is not eternal, and undoubtedly few of the new subjects will care to take up meditation, let alone the full-blown holy life. Most of samsara would rather keep samsara-ing. Knowing that, would you waste your time securing that unstable peace to persuade the stubborn masses, or would you make good on this knowledge and lead the holy life yourself? Surely the latter seems a better use of one's time.

        Yes, I honestly believe that is just used as a way to encourage you, but never as a real goal. Kinda like when they tell black kids in school “in America, even a Black person like you can be president!” Of course not all the little Black folk will become president, but if they have that goal in mind, perhaps they will one day leave the ghetto and achieve a certain level of success

        The attainment of Nirvana is the highest possible thing a human can achieve.

        They liberate all sentient beings in a non-physical form, in higher planes

        >The only useful part of Buddhism is their mental training, and possibly some of the techniques for visualization and working with your inner energies. The rest is trash

        Its actually the exact opposite. You're better off looking at western sources for the basics, e.g. visualisation. Then, the final stages is where buddhism comes along. You wont understand any of the sutras with 5 spritual XPs, it only becomes clear after

        Not what I’ve heard. For many of the people i have learned from, compassion is the highest goal, and enlightenment is obtained only so that you can die and go “oh shit I’m dead, nevermind I am still self aware, so let me choose to go back to earth and keep being a Buddhist”

        https://i.imgur.com/JSrTSs5.jpg

        -The Buddha himself praised those who asked almost no questions, but he always answered and encouraged questions, because the Buddha was generous but didn't want to create a bunch of zombies who don't know how to think for themselves or lead them astray with curiosities.
        -In fact, thinking that anything that happens to you is good is one of the obstacles caused by ignorance.
        -All Buddhist scriptures can be criticized. You can and must verify the veracity of the scriptures, it's not a religion that promises rewards to those who blindly believe in it the most.
        -If the world's problem was politics, he would have become a king and not a spiritual leader.

        - “the Buddha wrote” really means “a bunch of people wrote what they heard hundreds of years after the event and each one probably changed the meaning to fit their particular view of things”. So I don’t really care about making up a specific idea of who the Buddha was or what he said, because it’s impossible and a waste of time. We might as well stop using that name at all, because it’s an illusion.
        - yes, my mistake. The idea of “ Everything that happens to you is good” should be more like “everything that happens is just unimportant. Just live through it and we will see you on the other side”.
        - It is a religion that promises rewards to the ones who believe the most. Or have you not heard about the 100,000 prostrations for this Tara, or that Heruka? Sure, maybe these days Buddhists don’t really do all those, but for the longest time they were mandatory if you wanted to get empowerments. And again, most of the claims that Buddhism makes on things like chakras, channels, “winds” etc have not, as far as I know, ever been proven scientifically.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Well I agree the bodhisattva vow is an evidently foolish and impossible one. I think some treat it as a sort of trick, like "liberating all beings" is just code for "seeing samsara as nirvana", but most seem to take it literally. But as far as
      >If buddhists are really so compassionate, why don't they get into politics and do something that actually fixes our problems?
      In orthodox Buddhism compassion is only an inner virtue, it is one of only four skillful dispositions. As for the external world, it is a neverending chain of problems to be solved. If you live in the developed world, everyone has the time and resources for meditation, they just choose to spend it on other things; "getting involved" is a waste on them. If you live in the undeveloped world or are interested in it, then sure, stamping out the local warlords and lifting the people out of poverty as a benevolent ruler is meritorious and praiseworthy. Even so, that new kingdom of yours is not eternal, and undoubtedly few of the new subjects will care to take up meditation, let alone the full-blown holy life. Most of samsara would rather keep samsara-ing. Knowing that, would you waste your time securing that unstable peace to persuade the stubborn masses, or would you make good on this knowledge and lead the holy life yourself? Surely the latter seems a better use of one's time.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The attainment of Nirvana is the highest possible thing a human can achieve.

      They liberate all sentient beings in a non-physical form, in higher planes

      >The only useful part of Buddhism is their mental training, and possibly some of the techniques for visualization and working with your inner energies. The rest is trash

      Its actually the exact opposite. You're better off looking at western sources for the basics, e.g. visualisation. Then, the final stages is where buddhism comes along. You wont understand any of the sutras with 5 spritual XPs, it only becomes clear after

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      -The Buddha himself praised those who asked almost no questions, but he always answered and encouraged questions, because the Buddha was generous but didn't want to create a bunch of zombies who don't know how to think for themselves or lead them astray with curiosities.
      -In fact, thinking that anything that happens to you is good is one of the obstacles caused by ignorance.
      -All Buddhist scriptures can be criticized. You can and must verify the veracity of the scriptures, it's not a religion that promises rewards to those who blindly believe in it the most.
      -If the world's problem was politics, he would have become a king and not a spiritual leader.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Is buddhism inherently antitheism? It seems more like a spriitual philosophy to me, is it possible for one to hold a belief in a god and still practice buddhism

        • 1 month ago
          Seanonymous

          I wanna say it's technically agnostic but that the basedience of Buddha's time and people thought stuff like "fire burns up because it is returning to its source the sun", or that people reincarnate. Maybe we do reincarnate iunno.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            isn't reincarnation a basic tenant of buddhism

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Reincarnation is essentially a failure, at least in Tibetan Buddhism. The Buddhist analogue to "Heaven" is essentially the state of not being reincarnated. Their death ceremonies exist specifically to help guide people away from reincarnation after they die.

          • 1 month ago
            Seanonymous

            I'll look into it more but my current understanding is that it's more about perceiving and reacting to reality appropriately whatever it may be. There are sects that kinda promote the idea but Christians believe in a heaven that like they just sorta made up in arts and clergy and books never mention. I'm looking it up and getting conflicting results to be honest.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Maybe we do reincarnate
            I used to believe we don't until some anon put it this way. If we didn't exist before we were born and cease to exist when we die, what is there to stop us from simply just coming back?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            A reductionist would say we are just the chemicals and electric jolts between our neurons. If you cease to exist, that's it. There's no biological possibility to exist again.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            in that vessel sure

          • 1 month ago
            Seanonymous

            I was maybe the anon who said that to you, but also it's not a garuntee, but yeah makes sense.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Hinduism has lots of gods. Buddhism has none.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Funny how lots of gods and no gods is practically the same thing. 🙂

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I don't get what you're getting at.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Think about it a bit more, I guess.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Isn't Buddha considered a god?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I'm pretty sure a Buddha is not able to be classified, in the way that an Arahant is not able to be classified. One reason that an Arahant and/or Buddha is said to not be able to be classified can be found here: https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN22_36.html

          • 1 month ago
            Seanonymous

            I'm looking it up and tibetan Buhhdism has a pantheon and Mahayana has the Buhhdas and Bodhisattvas but I'll admit that's a weak semantic argument but still insist they're basically mortals that achieved apotheosis.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Buddhism has none.
            No?

            https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn02/sn02.009.piya.html
            https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn02/sn02.010.piya.html
            https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/AN/AN8_71.html
            https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN11_22.html
            https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN6_14.html

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Shiiieeeet, guess I was wrong.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Gayā Sutta
            Man... Buddha was a genius...

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            What?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            At Gayā Sutta is brilliant.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >The Buddha himself praised those who asked almost no questions

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Kek
          I just said "think first, ask questions later."

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            First listen, then think and finally ask.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            If a question arises

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Yes

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Religions last longer than political empires and have longer cultural impact. More people today remember who the Buddha is over Emperor Ashoka or Constantine.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        The trauma of being raped lasts longer than the joy of receiving a good gift. What’s your point

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      That's how I felt about stoicism. It sounds good on paper but I can't see anyo e actually, realistically following it. Plato knew this, which is why he worked so hard on a philosophy to take the human condition into account in all his works.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >why don't they get into politics and do something that actually fixes our problems?

      You think they would stand a chance in politics? They would just get assassinated like any other politician trying to change the global paradigm into a more spiritual one, then get branded as a far right extremist or some other such nonsense.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Yep. Buddhism gives us the instruction to turn inward for answers. Politics is an external sphere, an abomination. It's up to individuals to decide their fate and everyone learns at their own pace. It's not up to Buddhists to wield illusory power in politics in order to convince you to live better. People learn how to on their own at their own pace.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          How the frick is politics “illusory power” when you can literally change the lives of hundreds of thousands, improving their conditions and allowing them to free their time to actually practice to achieve enlightenment? Stop parroting what the boldies are telling you, there would be nothing wrong with a Buddhist political party as long as it maintained a level of self awareness about the world. The current stance of “muh politics are evil cuz the world is not real!” is absolute bullshit and you’d find that most high officials of big monasteries and lamaseries are already being visited by politicians and asked for advice and cooperation.

          I mean, even the smallest Buddhist monasteries need to have policies, who sleeps where, when do you pray, who cooks, who cleans etc. Isn’t that as illusory as the “outside” world? Why don’t Buddhists then just let lay people tell them what to do? The truth is that they are already mixed in samsara (everyone is) but they just have to convince you that they’re not

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >you can literally change the lives of hundreds of thousands

            So you want to live others' lives for them? Then why do they even exist?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I'm picking up what you're putting down. By way of buddhist context/support, there are these words from a sutta (number 6 is what you are referring to, I think: domineering):

            2. "Monks, suppose a cloth were stained and dirty, and a dyer dipped it in some dye or other, whether blue or yellow or red or pink, it would take the dye badly and be impure in color. And why is that? Because the cloth was not clean. So too, monks, when the mind is defiled,[1] an unhappy destination [in a future existence] may be expected.

            "Monks, suppose a cloth were clean and bright, and a dyer dipped it in some dye or other, whether blue or yellow or red or pink, it would take the dye well and be pure in color. And why is that? Because the cloth was clean. So too, monks, when the mind is undefiled, a happy destination [in a future existence] may be expected.

            3. "And what, monks, are the defilements of the mind?[2] (1) Covetousness and unrighteous greed are a defilement of the mind; (2) ill will is a defilement of the mind; (3) anger is a defilement of the mind; (4) hostility...(5) denigration...(6) domineering...(7) envy...(8) jealousy...(9) hypocrisy...(10) fraud...(11) obstinacy...(12) presumption...(13) conceit...(14) arrogance...(15) vanity...(16) negligence is a defilement of the mind.[3]

            Source (Majjhima Nikaya 7): https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.007.nypo.html

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Spirituality isn't even a liberal or conservative political concept, what the hell. It's outside of politics.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          "Politics" doesn't have to exist only under the terms that society tells you that it should. Concepts like liberal or conservative don't matter here.

  31. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It's a trick. They want you to kill your ego. They want you to be a passive slave who has nothing and desires nothing. All religion is a trick to enslave the goyim with moronic ideologies.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      stupid Black person. you're an addict and want to stay in your fantasy world. stupid dumb fricking Black person

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >kill your ego goy. desire nothing goy. LET DOWN YOUR SPIRITUAL SHEILDS GOY. LET US IN. LET US IN. LET US IN.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Your desire for sensual pleasure is a limitation
          >ACKCHYUALLY wanting blowjobs and cheeseburgers is a spiritual shield against muh j00ish conspiracy

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Nta but that's some compassion you have there anon very wise

  32. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    advice : in letting go, in being free, give up your intention to let go, to be free
    to use no effort, give up the intention to be effortless
    to enlighten - drop the mind - the body knows how to take care of itself - the mind knows how to take care of itself

    when I enlightened, this was 6+ years ago, i had dropped my mind numerous times
    i came to everything is on/in my baseline
    i just saw (minds eye/visualization) the sea, a jungle with a longhouse hut, and nature with banana leaf trees

    i just saw. it was a silent recognition that extended past a dream i had once, where i saw writing that said "enlightenment is already within you"

    it was beyond, chop wood carry water, enlighten, then chop wood carry water.

    afterwards i focused on effortlessness. since that time i have been without conscious choice for years. 5+ years. no lie. recently ive upgraded a lot - like my piece of advice now is this

    relationships develop naturally without force control or manipulation

    that means a lot to me. i was in crisis mode for a while before this, and this advice stuck, a couple days ago. anyways. give up the intention to keep quiet, to concentrate in meditation, to live on the positive side of life,

  33. 1 month ago
    Seanonymous

    I think westerners might've misinterpreted what they mean when they say reincarnation the more I'm reading into it. Nothing at all of yours transfers, not even your consciousness, and they prefer the term rebirth. I think this might be some of that communalism v. individualism cultural misunderstanding thing. Iunno.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Now you're extrapolating and making up details to fill in things that you're unsure about instead of simply accepting the teaching for what it is. Knowing what something isn't can be an important part of defining what it is. Consider avoiding making up bits to fill your societal expectation into the box.

      For instance, you may exist without what you call consciousness. Consciousness may have levels that exist outside your current field of perception. Many things could be. Why pretend they can't?

      • 1 month ago
        Seanonymous

        How do you reincarnate when you're not even real? No in Buddhism their is no soul or even a self. The ones that believe in it just adapted their native folk beliefs.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          But also I agree. I am a Nobodyist or whatever it's called. I was just studying Buddhism to answer the question and got kinda hypnotized. It was very calming and nice to be honest.

          Even in Christianity, mind, soul, and body are different things. These terms are likely used to make these concepts more tangible than older religions. You keep conflating the term "you" with "mind", but no existing religion agrees with this interpretation.

          In Buddhism, its more than even that. You definitely have a "self". Have you read the Tibetan Book of the Dead, which details the suggested way for ushering someone away from the failure that result in your "self" reincarnating during the process of physical death?

          You are a spiritual concept, not a physical one. Most people won't ever get this because they want you to prove this with ideas that exist in society on Earth or that they want you to show it in mathematics.

          Unfortunately, the spiritual world isn't understood to that level. The only way that people can really understand it is through experiences. People don't often seek out these experiences, either, so flesh worship itself has become self-fulfilling prophecy.

          • 1 month ago
            Seanonymous

            There's literally a thing in Buddhism called anata or Not-Self. I think I understand it pretty well. I haven't studied Buhhdism in like a decade to be honest tho. I'm more so studied in Theraveda and Mahayana philosophy. I don't know much about Tibetan. I'm guessing it is very influenced by Hinduism given it's geography and my general understanding of the history and transmission of Buhhdism.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Its a bit confusing, but anatta (non-self) is more like an acknowledgement that your "self" is something that will always change. So, its only a non-self in the same way that you aren't who you were five years ago. However, it only exists alongside your Atman, which is your eternal "self" for lack of a better word.

          • 1 month ago
            Seanonymous

            I'm looking it up and it says most Buddhist texts reject the idea of an atman or permanent self

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            That's why I emphasized a certain one specifically. Most other ones are essentially the same as non-theistic Satanism.

          • 1 month ago
            Seanonymous

            That's sorta interesting tho. Gave me some ideas.

      • 1 month ago
        Seanonymous

        But also I agree. I am a Nobodyist or whatever it's called. I was just studying Buddhism to answer the question and got kinda hypnotized. It was very calming and nice to be honest.

  34. 1 month ago
    Seanonymous

    Yeah I guess if there is no you how would you reincarnate. Huh.

  35. 1 month ago
    Seanonymous

    >The Buddha said, “Oh, Bhikshu, every moment you are born, decay, and die.”
    >A Theraveda Scholar in 1959 days "if we can understand that in this life we can continue without a permanent, unchanging substance like Self or Soul, why can't we understand that those forces themselves can continue without a Self or Soul behind them after the non-functioning of the body?"

  36. 1 month ago
    Seanonymous

    Frick I think "I" just became Buddhist again

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >"I"
      Sorta lame to air quote that. Anyway relevant suttas for the lurker(s):

      https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN22_83.html

      https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN1_25.html

      • 1 month ago
        Seanonymous

        Fair. I just like getting worked into religious frenzy and revelation.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I'm not making fun of you or anything. I get it.

  37. 1 month ago
    Seanonymous

    Wait no I'm Somebody dammit. One or some of us will eventually win.

  38. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    You put the cart before the donkey- suffering is caused by attachment and aversion, mitigate/eliminate these and suffering withdraws commensurate.

    One does not 'end suffering to make desire go away'- stop fricking around

    Try to name one type/instance of suffering contingent upon anything other than attachment or aversion- go ahead, I dare you.

  39. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I used to wonder this, but then it kind of clicked for me when I started looking more into the mythological aspects of Buddhism. I think Westerners tend to view Buddhism through a fairly dry philosophical and secular lens, but it's also heavily steeped in mysticism. We tend to think of Nirvana/liberation/whatever name you want to give the ultimate goal in Buddhism as being this vague, abstract state of non-attachment were people are just blissed out, but for many Buddhist traditions that isn't really the case.

    A lot of them view the liberated state where the Buddhas reside in a similar way to how Christians view Heaven (although this is also more vague than we give it credit for. Nobody talks a whole lot about the day to day life in Heaven in the Bible), and more specifically, not unlike some early Christian Gnostics viewed pleroma. It's a place that's kind of like Earth but without suffering.

    Once you realize that, it kind of clicks. At least it did for me. You're not forsaking the concept of pleasure or desire forever and ever and walking around talking like Yoda, you're just placing your attachment elsewhere, which is to say in the imperishable Pure Land.

    Say you really want to know what it's like to be a wealthy famous man on Earth and you die before achieving it. You would reincarnate here to give it another shot, because it's not something that would logically exist in Heaven exactly as it does on Earth. Maybe you have everything you need, but you'd be equal to everyone else and there'd be no rat race or pissing contest and some people really just like the thrill of the chase. If Heaven cannot provide your exact desire, then you will end up somewhere that can.

    If you're the kind of person who wants power and affluence only if it is relative to others who have less that's fine, but you're not going to get that in Pleroma/Heaven/Moksha/Pure Land/Summerland/whatever

  40. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    life is just a series of dukkha and sukkha whether you desire something or be an apathetic frick.you dont need to read buddha to know that.
    where is passion if you detach from something entirely?why would i give a frick about my work after that if i can be sukkha all the time ?

  41. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Samsara really is the perfect metaphor. Its this weird thing humanity is constantly creating every second. It's not real, its just sick, it springs from sickness.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Samsara isn't something you create, it's something you escape.

  42. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    life is like a flowing river, constantly changing and moving, desire is demanding the river to stay stationary. buddhism is recognizing this and accepting the flowing river as reality

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      No it's about the death of the ego that owns the desires and filters reality into a subjective lie.

  43. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    All is one.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      As long as the ego is there, tge truth isnot experienced.

      • 1 month ago
        Seanonymous

        The Machine God, The Complex One, The God at the End rejects this premise.

  44. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Buddha sure lost all desire to exercise that fatty fat frick.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The Buddha starved himself to try and kill the ego.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        bro does he look like he’s starving?

    • 1 month ago
      Seanonymous

      No that's Bodi, he's not the Buddha, he's a Buddha. Simple.

  45. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Or is that the whole point?

    Could be, but that only occurs after much experience. Life is for living. Part of the experience is pain. Part of the experience is pleasure. And it seems that there are those who have experienced much of both and then seek release from it, which is true death. Which will come to all, eventually. "Eternity" notwithstanding.

  46. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    desire = lust.

    whoever says otherwise is of Mara.

  47. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    buddhism was engineered to create npcs. a better slave. while tibet is no longer measured on iq tests, if it were, itd probably be around Nepal's average, which is 52.
    yeah.. i didnt know a score that low was possible either.
    and of course who can forget all the "Indians have smallest brains in the world, reveals IIIT-Hyderabad study after creating brain atlas" memes.
    while most religions are designed to create npcs, buddhism has an edge up on its competition. wanna know how? meditation.
    >meditation is designed to moron your brain. its like underclocking a cpu. instead of being able to use 32 threads on 8 cores, youve disabled your other cores and operate on a single thread, your brain is slowly degenerated and its virtually impossible to notice from the individual's perspective. theyll actually feel better, because they no longer have to focus on bad things when they can divert their sole focus to something else. i wouldnt recommend doing this, because it can break you, but were you to meditate, you literally want to do the exact opposite of what traditional meditation tells you to do. focus on overclocking your brain, more threads, more inquiries, more thoughts, more ideas, you need to go in the complete opposite direction.
    >the best way to do that is to ask some unknowable questions, then imagine your thoughts like a tree style tab, each line of thought as its own branch, subbranches, features, comments, pros/cons, etc, and having a vast array of these branches per every thought constantly through sheer brute force eliminating impossibilities and finding possibilities, until you can conceive of answers.
    meditation effectively creates a type of consciousness that is extremely pathos oriented. it becomes accustomed to processing only a single thought at a time. its like, having a woman's brain.
    whats ironic is buddhism gets more right than many other mainstream religions, but just like those religions, it lacks comprehension to the concepts it purports to answer

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >posts a ranking where half the countries are either christcucks or sandBlack folk

      The golem well poisoner strikes again.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I was only attempting to show Nepal's relative position in the IQ metrics.
        but by all means, enlighten us then anon. show us your iq metrics by country showing Nepal relative to other countries without the dumbest most Black personed up countries who worship a israelite rivaling their position.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >please take my shitpost bait seriously

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            still not seeing your christcuck seethe-free global IQ metrics where Nepal is shown relative to other countries.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Last (you) for you.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Unfair since they had Stoicism which laid a lot of ground work for Catholicism.

            The Greeks and Romans were also fairly Mediterranean... but go off...

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Why do you talk so much?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        my comments are only for between 1%-20% of this board's population. i havent done any npc studies on this board so i cant give you a true figure.
        i like to read and learn and its not like your 144 char twitter posts that are dumbed down npc arguments that a toddler can understand are going to fulfill that. any post under 1000 chars is just nonsensical bot language, argumentation, time wasting npc nonsense. that includes this post which is purely for demonstration purposes, and for all intents and purposes can be skipped as its completely irrelevant to the topic at hand and discussion. generally, its going to be for one anon, you, which if it were shorter an npc might be compelled to read, but since youre asking me a direct question, i will indulge you. any post over 1000 chars should be screened for effort and player input. the vast majority are spambots, but the ones that arent, those are your effortposters, they are, to dumb it down for you, the only people worth reading.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I did not mean to insult you. It was an honest question. I have been a very talkative person in my past. Most of it caused trouble, and set me back a lot. Some consequences of my prior words, I am probably yet to face, and they may bring much difficulty to me some day.
          You did not ask me for advice, so it would be better not to give it. But I can tell you for myself: through the cultivation of silence, I have learned that nearly everything I say, is meaningless, and most of it produces harm.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            ask yourself: why do you think elites dont give their children smart phones?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I dont really worry about what elites do or don't do. I used to worry about it very much. I cannot change anything in my past, nor can you. But in the present moment: you can cultivate silence.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            youre avoiding my question

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I am not avoiding it. It is irrelevant what others do. In focusing upon it, you are avoiding questions which are more significant.
            However, you did not ask for my advice, so I have already said far too much. I wish you the best in life.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >i have learned that nearly everything i say, is meaningless
            might want to ask yourself why that is
            what youre doing wrong
            >it is irrelevant what others do
            great, so youre caught in a vicious cycle of self-miseration, which again, leads me back to my earlier question: why do you think the elites dont give their children smart phones?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >might want to ask yourself why that is
            >what youre doing wrong
            Why do you think I emphasize silence?
            >great, so youre caught in a vicious cycle of self-miseration
            I think you are misunderstanding. I am not miserable in the present moment, far from it. I feel at peace.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            miserating does not mean miserable. it means the act of commiserating, sorrow for the hardships or afflictions of another; pity; compassion
            note i used miseration (future) and not miserating (present) or miserated (past), implying it is not necessarily achieved at present, but suggests that is the trajectory of your present course based on your pattern of behavior.
            nevermind. it doesnt matter.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Why do you think Steve Jobs ignored proven cancer treatments for a juice regimen that very likely exacerbated his condition?
            Rich people can be incredibly stupid and gullible, too.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            why fight fate?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Yet you dont ask that to the people denying their kids smartphones. Your stance is built on sand.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Why are you so concerned about what others are doing?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Why did you ask about what others were doing in the first place?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I didn't.

            miserating does not mean miserable. it means the act of commiserating, sorrow for the hardships or afflictions of another; pity; compassion
            note i used miseration (future) and not miserating (present) or miserated (past), implying it is not necessarily achieved at present, but suggests that is the trajectory of your present course based on your pattern of behavior.
            nevermind. it doesnt matter.

            Again, i am solely focused upon cultivating inner peace through silence for the moment. I don't really worry about much beyond that for now.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            First post responded to:

            ask yourself: why do you think elites dont give their children smart phones?

            >ask yourself: why do you think elites dont give their children smart phones?
            Asking us to wonder about what other people are doing.
            If you - like me - think it was stupid to ask this, then we're all cool.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I didn't ask that question. You may be confusing anons. When that anon asked me why do you think elites don't give their children smart phones, I responded by asking why one worries what others are doing.
            As for the smart phone question: I don't think about it, I do not care or even worry about why they do that.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >I didn't ask that question.
            Dont care, you decided to start responding to me.
            >If you - like me - think it was stupid to ask this, then we're all cool.

            you didnt ask why i did, you asked why i havent, assuming i hadnt, but i have, because i did. youre now implying that, perhaps, you intended to ask me a different question, and i will be happy to answer that, just as soon as the other anon i asked of that question first answers mine. me answering the question for you would defeat the purpose of my question for them. i am not interested in the answer, i already know the answer, i am interested in what that anon thinks is the answer, and if i answered your question i would bias their answer, should he or she choose to answer it.

            >you didnt ask why i did
            Wrong.

            Why did you ask about what others were doing in the first place?

            >Why did you ask about what others were doing in the first place?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            i dont need to ask them, i am them.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I didnt ask if you need to. I asked why you did.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            you didnt ask why i did, you asked why i havent, assuming i hadnt, but i have, because i did. youre now implying that, perhaps, you intended to ask me a different question, and i will be happy to answer that, just as soon as the other anon i asked of that question first answers mine. me answering the question for you would defeat the purpose of my question for them. i am not interested in the answer, i already know the answer, i am interested in what that anon thinks is the answer, and if i answered your question i would bias their answer, should he or she choose to answer it.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I answered you the first time you asked me.
            "Why do elites not give their children smart phones?"
            I told you I do not worry or care about it.

            I dont really worry about what elites do or don't do. I used to worry about it very much. I cannot change anything in my past, nor can you. But in the present moment: you can cultivate silence.

            In this post, the very first time you asked.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            how would you feel if you didnt eat breakfast this morning?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Who cares?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Low effort ChatGPT to sow content and infighting.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I dont know if it's chatgpt, or if the intent is to sew infighting and sow content; but that is the consequence of most of our wasted words.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Meh, ideological 5th generational warfare. It's either JIDF or christcucks trying to keep people from having fruitful conversations that could possibly help them.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            What fruit is borne out of most conversations?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Practical information.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Practical in relation to what purpose?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I'm not saying to literally never speak; hut there's a standard in buddhism that I see as so helpful
            "Speak, only if your words are better than silence."
            Silence should be the standard by which we measure everything we say. This makes sense to me, at least

  48. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I have been coming to some understanding these past few days.
    Yes, the desire is actually to become completely apathetic to everything. It is actually that straightforward.

  49. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >How does one do that without become completely apathetic to everything? Or is that the whole point?

    Probably "desires" is not the best word. I would rather use "attachments" and there is plenty to do. Once free yourself from attachments and stop by being self-focused you start noticing the suffering of other people around you and become empathetic towards it.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Buddha directly states that all evil stems from desire.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Buddha directly states that all evil stems from desire.

        Many concepts are not perfectly translated into western languages.
        Going by the full meaning of desire, if extinguish it you become like a passive rock, with no intention of doing anything good.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Intent to do good is just as easily called an attachment.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I think you are misunderstanding. But, I say this with full humility and acknowledgement that I am learning too.
          I dont think that this is an issue of translation. I think it may be a misattribution of what desire really means. All desires, yes, all of them, lead to evil, because they lead to attachments. As you've rightly identified, this could be thought to lead to total nihilism, or extreme asceticism, where one has become totally devoid of life and existence. This is the same thought I had for many years that kept me from diving into Buddhism.
          However, I believe that this is a simple misunderstanding. Desire and intention simply are not the same thing.
          All desire, is rooted in the self. The self is an illusion which causes us to actually get further away from true being, true love, etc. So, it is not true, that a man who has abandoned all desire, which live as a passive stone. A man with no desire can still act in the world.
          The difference is, he will do this authentically. He will not think about existence, he will exist. He will not think about being compassionate, he will be compassionate. He will not desire anything out of others, and so he will actually see others for what they are, instead of what he wants them to be.
          In this way, the abandonment of desire actually makes us much more capable or "doing good," in that we have a much less predatory and calculating way in our approach toward others. Since we desire nothing, our thoughts and actions are always about something other than our selves.
          Who would you rather be around; a man who sees you as you, or a man who sees you through the eyes of his Self?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *