Is Buddhism A Viable Solution To Happiness?

[Shin]

14 minutes ago, Barry J said:

Of course, they are all in the dream seeing things through the dream, and expressing their delusions on a forum. 

It may be the least corrupt path, but it's still corrupt, there is way too much dogmas and unneccessary teachings that distract from the core teachings that Buddha taught.

Even if you find a Zen center without bullshit dogmas, they will still cling to their Buddhist ideology and tell you you're crazy to think you will get to the Truth if you don't follow them.

Try talking about psychedelics, Actualized.org, Eckhart Tolle or DNA activation frequency.

I can already predict the answer from 90% of them "You're wasting your time, come to our 4000$ retreat"

?

Edited September 25, 2018 by Shin

[Barry J]

10 minutes ago, Shin said:

 

It may be the least corrupt path, but it's still corrupt, there is way too much dogmas and unneccessary teachings that distract from the core teachings that Buddha taught.

?

@Shin  why would you need to go to a zen centre to practice the “core teachings that the Buddha taught”?

Edited September 25, 2018 by Barry J

[Shin]

10 minutes ago, Barry J said:

@Shin  why would you need to go to a zen centre to practice the “core teachings that the Buddha taught”?

I don't, but that's what anyone will do if he read that thread thinking Buddhism is a corruptless path/religion.

[Shadowraix]

45 minutes ago, Barry J said:

@Leo Gura  I’m responding to you assertion that some teachings are fundamentally corrupt to begin with. The person/idea known as Buddha was not fundamentally corrupt. However, a corrupt person can take a teaching and make it corrupt. 

That Buddha guy said that direct experience is the only source of truth 2500 years before you did

A teaching is only as good as the teacher.

So if a teacher is corrupt, their teaching will ultimately reflect that.

You can give an overarching goal of Buddhism, but the implementation to achieve that goal will be what varies from teacher to teacher. 

[Barry J]

32 minutes ago, Shadowraix said:

A teaching is only as good as the teacher.

So if a teacher is corrupt, their teaching will ultimately reflect that.

You can give an overarching goal of Buddhism, but the implementation to achieve that goal will be what varies from teacher to teacher. 

@Shadowraix  sure, but isn’t that the same for any teaching?

[Shadowraix]

1 minute ago, Barry J said:

@Shadowraix  sure, but isn’t that the same for any teaching?

That is correct, nobody said that wasn't the case. Actually people try to give Buddhism a pass from being corrupt because they are so fed up with abrahamic religions.

[Barry J]

@Shin  People need to make up their own minds through their own experience. Agree?

[Barry J]

11 minutes ago, Shadowraix said:

Actually people try to give Buddhism a pass from being corrupt because they are so fed up with abrahamic religions.

People don’t know what is up and what is down. People are deluded. 99.99% of people are walking zombies. 

So why the fuck does it matter if they pick Buddhism over any other non dual teaching? 

 

Edited September 25, 2018 by Barry J

[Emanyalpsid]

3 hours ago, Barry J said:

People don’t know what is up and what is down. People are deluded. 99.99% of people are walking zombies. 

So why the fuck does it matter if they pick Buddhism over any other non dual teaching? 

 

@Barry J there is almost no point in trying to get through to them, meaning non-duality believers. They strayed to far from reality, dismissing everything that is real. As they fully believe that their subjective world is the real world, that they created everything. Can't come back from believing you are god.

Buddhism is different then non-duality though. In Buddhism they see that the ego creates a duality, but they don't see that it stands on itself. They see, through observations, that it is of dependent origin. 

[Barry J]

8 minutes ago, Emanyalpsid said:

@Barry J there is almost no point in trying to get through to them, meaning non-duality believers. They strayed to far from reality, dismissing everything that is real. As they fully believe that their subjective world is the real world, that they created everything. Can't come back from believing you are god.

Buddhism is different then non-duality though. In Buddhism they see that the ego creates a duality, but they don't see that it stands on itself. They see, through observations, that it is of dependent origin. 

I don’t identify as a Buddhist or a non dualist or anything really

I sometimes post here to challenge people’s beliefs with the aim of increasing clarity for themselves and others who are reading it

I am surprised by the dualistic notions that some people hold onto as truth on this forum. It’s kinda ironically funny 

[Shadowraix]

3 hours ago, Barry J said:

People don’t know what is up and what is down. People are deluded. 99.99% of people are walking zombies. 

So why the fuck does it matter if they pick Buddhism over any other non dual teaching? 

 

Well, I never said it mattered. Leo only argued about the general tendency of Buddhist teachings and notice he promoted more integral teachings. This post is about Buddhism so it makes sense to address about specific cautions and criticisms about Buddhism but you seemed to take that as some exclusion to other teachings.

15 minutes ago, Emanyalpsid said:

@Barry J there is almost no point in trying to get through to them, meaning non-duality believers. They strayed to far from reality, dismissing everything that is real. As they fully believe that their subjective world is the real world, that they created everything. Can't come back from believing you are god.

Buddhism is different then non-duality though. In Buddhism they see that the ego creates a duality, but they don't see that it stands on itself. They see, through observations, that it is of dependent origin. 

You sound like me when I transitioned from Christianity to Atheism. 

Its very simple: Distinction creates dualities and so on. So its as subjective as morality. So really as a whole all you have is just everything as one thing. aka nonduality. Our "creator" is the most fundamental form/substance of everything. That is what those on the nondual path often defines as God which therefore makes you it. Separating you and God is nothing but a distinction you create.

[Joseph Maynor]

Isn’t the whole point of Buddhism not to be so clingy with ideology and attachment?  I’ve never met a Buddhist who feels like they gotta defend their ideology before.  To me that sounds like religion.  Maybe Buddhism is a religion, but I never took it that way.  Not in the sense of clinging hard to beliefs and identification.  Maybe noobs to Buddhism are like that.  Watch some Adyashanti videos perhaps.  He’s one of my favorite teachers and I believe he comes outta the Buddhist tradition.  

Edited September 25, 2018 by Joseph Maynor

[Barry J]

@Joseph Maynor where is the Buddhist? 

[Shadowraix]

9 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

Isn’t the whole point of Buddhism not to be so clingy with ideology and attachment?  I’ve never met a Buddhist who feels like they gotta defend their ideology before.  To me that sounds like religion.  Maybe Buddhism is a religion, but I never took it that way.  Not in the sense of clinging hard to beliefs and identification.  Maybe noobs to Buddhism are like that.  Watch some Adyashanti videos perhaps.  He’s one of my favorite teachers and I believe he comes outta the Buddhist tradition.  

This is tricky because ultimately the amount of people we even meet in our lifetime is a minority of the population and even more so to massive philosophies like Buddhism.

So then it comes down to who you have met which can have drastic differences.

[Barry J]

18 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

Isn’t the whole point of Buddhism not to be so clingy with ideology and attachment?  I’ve never met a Buddhist who feels like they gotta defend their ideology before.  To me that sounds like religion.  Maybe Buddhism is a religion, but I never took it that way.  Not in the sense of clinging hard to beliefs and identification.  Maybe noobs to Buddhism are like that.  Watch some Adyashanti videos perhaps.  He’s one of my favorite teachers and I believe he comes outta the Buddhist tradition.  

@Joseph Maynor do you realise how much you are projecting?  

[Emanyalpsid]

2 hours ago, Shadowraix said:

Its very simple: Distinction creates dualities and so on.

Not true; I can make a distinction between an egg and it's environment, because i see the egg. That doesn't mean the egg is not in the environment or part of the environment, or that I create a duality. As I'm seeing it, not thinking it.

[Shadowraix]

15 minutes ago, Emanyalpsid said:

Not true; I can make a distinction between an egg and it's environment, because i see the egg. That doesn't mean the egg is not in the environment or part of the environment, or that I create a duality. As I'm seeing it, not thinking it.

The brain is what processes sight and thus still creates the duality/distinction. Its like breathing. You can consciously make distinctions but you don't need to be consciously aware of it to do it.

So I don't see where you disproved me. You are creating distinction whether you are aware you are or not. I never said conscious thought was necessary.

[Emanyalpsid]

2 minutes ago, Shadowraix said:

The brain is what processes sight and thus still creates the duality/distinction. Its like breathing. You can consciously make distinctions but you don't need to be consciously aware of it to do it.

So I don't see where you disproved me. You are creating distinction whether you are aware you are or not. I never said conscious thought was necessary.

Okay you don't understand me. Explain to me what a duality is for you and what a distinction is? Why is a duality the same as a distinction for you?

[Shadowraix]

3 minutes ago, Emanyalpsid said:

Okay you don't understand me. Explain to me what a duality is for you and what a distinction is? Why is a duality the same as a distinction for you?

I would say duality comes from distinction.

Duality would be polar opposite sides of something. Good vs evil Hot vs cold etc

Distinction would be some form of fragmentation of things. Seeing an egg and separating it from the environment would be a distinction. The only thing separating an egg and the environment is the arrangement of atoms. The only thing separating you from me are the atoms between us. All these classifications are arbitrary. I had to abstract a bit to try and explain my point (such as using atoms)

Without distinction its just all infinity. No distinction means no atoms, no speakers, no grass etc its all just one big thing.

[Emanyalpsid]

1 minute ago, Shadowraix said:

I would say duality comes from distinction.

Duality would be polar opposite sides of something. Good vs evil Hot vs cold etc

Distinction would be some form of fragmentation of things. Seeing an egg and separating it from the environment would be a distinction. The only thing separating an egg and the environment is the arrangement of atoms. The only thing separating you from me are the atoms between us. All these classifications are arbitrary. I had to abstract a bit to try and explain my point (such as using atoms)

Without distinction its just all infinity. No distinction means no atoms, no speakers, no grass etc its all just one big thing.

I also see it much in this way. But does this mean that if duality comes from distinction that they are the same? Only in thought a duality is made through a concept. The self (subject) defines something (object) through a concept. The eyes through which you see can make a distinction. But your eyes are also atoms, just as the egg.