Those buddhist bastards!

I've been listening to the Dalai Lama all day, and while he's clearly making an effort to be understood despite his accent and lack of vocabulary, he keeps talking about thinks I don't get!
These buddhist guys seem to love lists, but lists are fine because that's just simple criteria. It's the outlandish freaky stuff that I don't get, that annoy me. They keep talking about this "enlightenment" thing, which seems really cool to reach, because it is supposed to make me all holy and shit, and hopefully being holy will land me some massive respect and a few groupie chicks, but the bastards don't give me any clear directions on how to get there! Besides the "be nice to everyone" things, there's all these states of mind that I have to get through, and I don't even get what they mean! How am I supposed to know if I passed them or not, if I don't even understand what the fuck they're talking about?! "Impermanence", fine, but what's this shit about closing your eyes and still seeing a fly on someones forehead? What's a "non-elephant in the room", and what's that supposed to mean?

I think there's a severe lack of enlightenment tests on the internet. I mean there's one at HelloQuizzy, and according to that I'm the fucking man, but that test is hardly written by anyone who knows shit about enlightenment! You guys need to write a serious tibetan enlightenment test, so that I can measure the size of my enlightenment-peen.

(I'm writing this on 4chan, because this place is bound to be crawling with tibetan buddhists.)

Dicks on the internet don't qualify as buddhists because of their severe lack of patience as well as overt fondness of throwing tantrums on their keyboard.

So yuh, no buddhists here, pal.

>>2
The Dharma teaches of freedom, Liberation, Enlightenment, eternal life and eternal compassion, such things that SFBE hates.

OP here. I found another test on HelloQuizzy:
http://www.helloquizzy.com/results/the-four-stages-of-enlightenment-test/
This test lies: It only has results for *three* stages of enlightenment, because it leaves out Buddha - the very definition I seek! There needs to be an "Are you a Buddha?" test on the internet! "You may not call yourself a buddha." is bullshit title-hogging!

OP here again.
I finally figured out what a buddha is: It's simply a guy who has no clue.

There's this guy right now, who's famous for just sitting under a tree and not giving a shit, and in India, as soon as you go and sit under a tree, people will come running and start molesting you, thinking they'll get superpowers from your divinity. ...so anyway, this guy has nothing better to do than to sit and meditate, and while the crazy indians claim that he doesn't eat or pee or sleep, they're just covering it up. (I've personally seen videos of him going taking breaks to go behind sheets to do his bodily needs. It's just an act. However, his followers will attack you and steal your camera if you film this. Also any critism on the internet (including entire sites) is censored. Indians are heavy into scams, in case the cold calling wasn't enough of a clue.)
However, it's generally agreed on, that he's not a buddha. All the *actual* buddha did, was to sit under a tree, but this "buddha boy" can't even be like him even after sitting under a tree for over six years "straight".
Shit is whack.

Also, there's anywhere between a handful, to a thousand buddhas, depending on who you ask, because people can't agree on who's what.
...but basically, you just have to be clueless and careless, and wham, you get all the chicks and their daughters to bang all day, and record deals, and private jets, and people will want you to pee on them, and you'll have bling out the ass, ma nigga.

...so yeah.
I'll come right out and say it: I'm the first black buddha.
I'm the blackha. I'm the buddha of big dicks. Ride it for enlightenment. Chicks only, so don't get no funny ideas, okay?

>>1
>>3
>>5
I can't respect traditional Buddhists, the culture and history, the genuine folks in Tibet and Laos who have been raised that way, there is more to it than just superstition.

But modern westernized buddhism is a joke, its just sad. There is no deep philosophy behind it, if you want philosophy go read Descartes.

Unless you were tragically orphaned as a baby and adopted by a devout Buddhist couple you cannot be a white buddhist.

>>1
>>3
>>5
I can respect traditional Buddhists*
fix'd

oops

>>6
>>7

>>there is more to it than just superstition
See, that's how buddhism gets you. That's how every religion gets you in the beginning: "See how sane we are! I know you're critical of us, so just see how much sense we make at first!"

Then before you know it, you'll be sitting there visualizing colors and "buddha medicine" in your "chakras", thinking that people have lived past lives, that life needs escaping from instead of embracing, and trying to achieve states of mind that some elected teacher won't explain to you.

Buddhists will tell you all this nonsense: "Do this! Behave like that! Think like this! Act like that!" ...and that compounds all this stress in you, and self-contempt for yourself, that the secret to Nirvana is just saying "Fuck this shit! It's all good!". They're not the cure. They're the poison. They are creating the very state that they say that they are liberating you from.

Yes, you can (veeery slooowly) learn a few things about your opinions being relative, and cause and effect, but what you're actually doing when you denounce your own opinions as illusions, is denying yourself. Buddhists are damaging the weave of "karma", because they hate karma. They hate life. Buddhists hate life to much that they have turned destroying it into a science. If they "liberate" you, then this will not only kill you, but also damage everyone affected by you. To be blunt: If someone hits you, and you just smile at them in return, they will gain incentive to start hitting people to make them smile.

Buddhism is created out of a mental sickness in India, to think that you can find holy men sitting under trees. The guy was just sitting under a tree, for crying out loud! People who invented banging two rocks together, have achieved more!

Furthermore, this is what happens when you are too vague and obscure about things: You get all these different interpretations, resulting in all these different schools, that all use different meanings for the same terminology. ...and your Buddha mutates into a lion with hands below his kneecaps, and a saliva that you can cook food with, I'm not even kidding. Look at your Buddha! He can't even walk properly!

>>8
>>there is more to it than just superstition
>See, that's how buddhism gets you. That's how every religion gets you in the beginning: "See how sane we are! I know you're critical of us, so just see how much sense we make at first!"

There is more to every religion than just superstition. Generally religion comes along with a set of values which are greatly conducive to living healthily in a functioning (albeit religiously homogenous) society.

That doesn't make the superstition any less ridiculous, nor does it make religion any less hijackable as a vehicle of asbsolute insanity (e.g. radical Islam in the past 60 years).

>>10
...and it's weird that you don't see this in other inventions:

"Oh man, I just invented the wheel. Now I just have to tell people that it has to have exactly six spokes to work, and that it can only be used to transport turnips, and people will believe that for lifetimes. What's this? You invented the wheel too? No way! You claim that it needs to have eight spokes and is to be used to transport rabid bears! That's blasphemy! We must do battle in the name of the wheel!"

Yes, we have all sorts of branding on phones and cars, but you'd think that the branding on "Not Beating Eachother Over The Head" has expired its copyright by now.
...but apparently not. Apparently it's still being sold by "The Nirvana-travelling Sitting Tiger Buddha" and "The Crucified Son of God" and so on.

>>11

It's very obvious why a wheel is good. It makes many jobs much easier. There is practically no situation in which a society or an individual would benefit from rejecting the wheel.

The rules and morals of society aren't quite so universally beneficial. Sometimes you get really angry and want to kill people. Sometimes the world seems really unfair and you lose trust in the value of following those morals. The mysticism of religion helps it keep its value in those situations, and hence helps to keep society as a whole adhering to them.

>>12
If anything rules and morals has *kept* people beating eachother over the head. Now it's just monopolized by state control. There's nothing *morally* wrong with beating up your son and fucking him in the ass. It's just pretty impratical if you want a civilized son after that point. At the heart of both christianity and buddhism, you have the selfish need to reach paradise. You're not even being kind to other people because of genuine kindness, but because you think "you'll get laid in heaven".

The morals and the rules, isn't the sane part. Buddhism (at least japanese zen buddhism) you have the relativism of basically all adjectives and morals, and the understanding that it's pointless to want things you can't have or don't even need. That's just sanity. ...but then slowly insane things like meditation and reincarnation and wanting to break out of "the evil samsara" starts to seep in, but at that point you've already had your critical phase as a believer, so you trust buddhism enough at that point, to trust anything.

...and buddhism has lots of fucked up beliefs, especially if you look at the mahayana side of it where buddhas just glow like fucking 20 foot lightbulbs, but they all share the sane parts. That's where it all comes from. I have no problems believing in there having existed an actual guy named Siddharta Gautama, who claimed he was a buddha, and him being both sane and enlightened in the relativity and futility of it all, but the mistake he made, is that he started talking to *indian* people, and indian people are full of crap, so they just make stuff up as they went along. They played "indian whispers" for a long time before buddhas teachings were actually written down, and at that point shit was whack.

Everything fucking sucks, To prove it, I'm gonna wear all black complete with skull makeup, walk up to every diplomat stupid enough to stand around in the streets and punch them in the face, then PISS ALL OVER THEM!!!!!!

>>14
May m00t be with you, brave warrior, and may you feast upon their skulls.

>>1-15
you guys don't even quote correctly

>>16
I know. It's like they don't even know. I mean WTF? I'd think people would know better. I mean my gawd. Such lameness. I just can't believe it. I'm gonna go lie down for awhile, because that was so lame.

Just listen to this shit:
As he was asked for advice, the Buddha gave advice which basically told people how to live. He made up rules, and said that people should follow the major ones, but could disregard the minor ones. However, he never specified which was which. Then, after he died, his clueless monks couldn't work it out either, so just to make sure, they decided to adopt *ALL* his fucking rules as major. Never mind that the Buddha stressed that it was the underlying *spirit* of the rules that was important, because his monks didn't get what the spirit was. Instead they figured that as long as they abided by any rule that Buddha made up, they'd get the spirit soon enough. These rules were called Vinaya, and were declared officially in The First Council, in 544 B.C., where the retards won their case.

Here are some examples of the most retarded rules adopted as aiding in the path of enlightenment:

"1. Storing salt in a horn.
2. Eating after midday.
3. Eating once and then going again to a village for alms.
4. Holding the Uposatha Ceremony with monks dwelling in the same locality.
5. Carrying out official acts when the assembly was incomplete.
6. Following a certain practice because it was done by one's tutor or teacher.
7. Eating sour milk after one had his midday meal.
8. Consuming strong drink before it had been fermented.
9. Using a rug which was not the proper size.
10. Using gold and silver."

Even to this day, the Dalai Lama thinks that gold is a cursed substance. This links back to The Second Council, where a large group of monks were condemned for begging for gold and silver.

...but it wasn't Buddha, or even his clueless followers, that was going to shape buddhism. It was emperor Emperor Asoka, 280 years after Buddhas death. Emperor Asoka had seized the throne by just blatantly killing all the siblings which stood in his way. In the third council, he appointed himself judge and jury, to discern which buddhists should be expelled from the order - this after wealthy and influential friends of his were trying to take over the order from the actual buddhists. Guess which ones the emperor expelled.

That the court was even held at all, was because previously his minister was sent to deal with the proper monks refusing to hold rituals, and was systematically beheading them all, until he came to the only surviving brother of Emperor Asoka. ...so they couldn't just decapitate all the buddhists - they had to formally expel them instead.

All this happened before Buddhas teachings were even written down on paper. (Before this monks were just told to memorize it all in their heads.) ...so the teachings that current buddhism draws from, is actually written down by clueless, rule-worshipping, class-seeking friends of the emperor, over 500 years after Buddha died. ...so good luck with your buddhism, guys.

Besides the outlandish physical attributes, there also ten characteristics of a Buddha. These characteristics are frequently mentioned in the buddhist bible, and are chanted daily in many Buddhist monasteries, so this is definitely what a buddha is.
...and it's crap.
It's crap because it's vague as shit:

"1. thus gone, thus come"
Nobody even knows what this means. Buddhists can only speculate as to what this was actually meant to mean.

"2. worthy one"
The criteria is that you pass the criteria.

"3. perfectly self-enlightened"
Yes, but that means that you have to know what "enlightenment" means, which you must be a buddha for, so conveniently I can just declare myself a buddha, and unless you're a buddha (which I will deny that you are) you just have to take my word for it.


"4. perfected in knowledge and conduct"

Again, if I write the rulebook on what is knowledge and conduct, I can declare myself perfected in it.


"5. well gone"

Again: Nonsense.


"6. unsurpassed"

Everybody is unsurpassed in being themselves. Once again: If you write the rulebook on what counts as worth, you can easily declare yourself the master of it.


"7. knower of the world"

It's easy for a world traveller to "know the world", but most people know the world better than anyone did at that time. ...unless you are talking deep philosophical subjects that are highly open to interpretation.


"8. leader of persons to be tamed"

This is a "no true scottsman" fallacy.


"9. teacher of the gods and humans"

Apart from the delusions to gods, as long as anybody listenes, you'll be a teacher. ...and if you isolate a Buddha, he will apparently cease to be a Buddha.


"10. the Blessed One or fortunate one"

I think you forgot "the awesome one", "the rocking one" and "the fantastic one".



...so yeah: Anyone can declare themselves a buddha.
Sure, buddhists have people going around testing announced buddhas for "buddha energies", but when the only concrete things they have to go on, it if you look like a shining tiger mutant, they can't possibly know shit.

Buddhisms reputation as a "nontheistic religion" (as quoted by Wikipedia) is ill-deserved. Beside the mention of there being gods (that Buddha apparently pwns), the very first rules of the Vinaya (The conduct for monks and nuns) is to not have any sort of sexual relationships. You're not heading towards enlightenment if you have sex, because apparently this primary biological function, is just wrong.

...and I'll tell you why Buddha thought sex was wrong:
The reason that Buddha left home, was to abandon his son.
This whole thing about samsara (the cycle of death and rebirth) being suffering, comes from Buddha not wanting to raise children. It comes from nothing more than him being a deadbeat dad. That's what all the talk about escaping reincarnation was about: "Don't have kids, people." Nirvana and "final death", is to never have kids, and that's it.

When Buddha heard about his son having been born, he simply said "Fuck this - I'm out!" and left. To be more precise, he said: "Rāhu jāto, bandhanam jātam", meaning "A rāhu (fetter) is born, a fetter has arisen." ...and while the child probably had an actual name, Buddha publicly just referred to it as "Rāhula", meaning "fetter", or "impediment". How is that for being a awesomely "perfect being"?

Also tibetan buddhists actually believe that Buddhas son grew in his mothers womb for six YEARS. Really sane, guys.

According to buddhanet.net ( http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/buddhism/pbs2_unit03.htm )Buddha reached enlightenment through this insight:
"The cause of suffering is greed, selfishness and stupidity. If people get rid of these negative emotions, they will be happy."

You don't need to sit and meditate for years and years like "Buddha boy" does. It only took Buddha a couple of days to come up with that insight, and I don't think you need to starve while you're thinking either.

...and then when you get what Buddha got, you will apparently be a Buddha as well. The first one to reach this insight, will apparently be called Maitreya, because that's what people predict. ...so just change your name to Maitreya. Maybe we can *all* just change our names to Maitreya, to mess with them, and then they have to go around looking for "the real one". :P

...and you don't have to say that chicks should be chaste for you if you don't want to, because as the next buddha, you will teach a more complete teaching than the previous buddha did, so you can demand all the cars and bitches and records deals you want, and they should be fine with that. I don't know how many hot buddhistic nuns there are in the world, but there's bound to be more than you would care to have.

...so good luck, all you Maitreyas out there. All you need to do, is to realize that people would be happier if they wouldn't be so greedy, selfish and stupid all the time, and there you go.

Also post pics.

>>22
yes, clearly we must conduct a genocide against buddhists

>>23
Butthurt buddhist detected.
I'm fairly certain that sarcasm isn't included into Right Speech.

...but what's your problem? I've clearly discerned how to become a buddha in this thread, and so I'm bringing about an age of enlightenment, with thousands of buddhas with a dharma that isn't crap. What more could you buddhists ask for?
You might even be free to have sex again (depending on whoever is decided to be "the real" Maitreya).

Look, it's simple: Either there *is* a way to reach Nirvana and becomae a buddha, or there isn't. It's a matter of simple knowledge, so it's not like it's an exclusive diamond that you have to be a millionaire to buy and share. The Dalai Lama said that it would take "eons and eons" to reach it, but whether you reach it in your lifetime or not, you have to have a set goal in mind before you start walking, or you'll just be wandering in circles for the amusement of self-appointed, self-important spiritual leaders.

You claim to be against stupidity, but all I see is a person worshipping cult, that covers up their stupidity in obscurity and mysticism. People are spending entire lives on what it took Buddha only days to realize, because they don't even know what it is that they're supposed to realize.

Meanwhile you have already self-appointed Maitreyas that preach a distilled form of narcissism as religion. ( http://www.maitreya-teachings.org/your-spiritual-ascension.html ) ...and these rats are gnawing on buddhism, because buddhism is a corpse. It's been a corpse since 0 A.D.. It's an old bald man dressed in a saffron and maroon robe, that people like because he sounds like Yoda - a man kidnapped and brainwashed into buddhism from birth. ...and not even he knows what it's all about.

I'd rather be sucking another mans dick with a purpose, than running around like a headless chicken, so I'm bringing you Maitreya. Maybe he'll declare genocide - you never know. ...but at least he'll make your goals clear for you.

I'll tell you what people want, when it comes to buddhism.
They want to escape everything harsh in life, but they still want ot live forever. They want to go to heaven filled with bliss, where their dead near ones will greet them.
They want to see people that they don't like suffer, and they like to be rewarded for what they think they should be rewarded for.

They want cake. They want cake after cake after cake after cake, and that's why they're into buddhism. That's why they believe that life is suffering, why they believe in reincarnation, why they believe in Nirvana, and why they believe in karma. They believe in all that bullshit, because they want cake.

...but the cake that buddhism dangles the most in front of peoples faces, is the buddhahood cake. They tell people: "You can be just as slim and muscular as this guy, if you just buy buddhism today!" They prop up this idol whose dick is endlessly sucked by gods, and tell you that you can be like that guy too, if you just sit down and breathe.

...so they do it, because they're after that cock-sucking. They'll do anything for it - even give away everything they have to waste away at a temple all day, hoping to live even hundreds of lives after this, continuing to crave that ultimate cock-sucking where they hope to turn into superstars.

...so buddhism is not only fictional. It's also inducing the very craving that they're said to be against.

This is especially sad since there *is* a state of enlightenment. There's something *real* admidst all this idol worship and bullshit surrounding it. I recommend rinzai zen to achieve it. ...and all that nirvana will do, is turn you very sad, because after realizing the ultimate truth, you'll be surrounded by idiots needing help, for the rest of your life. Is that what you want? ...or would you rather just go out and buy yourself a woman to have kids with? It's your choice.

>>24
actually I'm not a buddhist I was serious

>>26
Ah, butthurt *muslim* detected. You're the ones going around just killing everyone else. Nice god. :)

>>27
i am not part of any major religion or ideology, I just see a clear and practical need to genocide buddhists

>>28
I don't believe you, but go ahead and explain if you wish.

Buddhism is a cult worse then scientoligy. Don't by into there karma BS!

>>30
That wasn't much of an explanation leading to "...and therefore all buddhists must die.". I take it you've lost someone close to them.

>>29
First familiarize yourself with some basic philosophy.

Theory and practice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Praxis_%28process%29

Putting theory into practice can be difficult, that is why we need science to improve the accuracy of our theories.

Motives and actions.

We have many biological and emotional needs and a few needs determined intellectually.

http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/whoami.htm

Then there is the manner in which we act on our motives. Different needs come into conflict with each other. "Do the ends justify the means?" is a typical question involving motives (ends) and actions (means), the answer is yes. Yes they do.


What theories, motivations and actions are best?

We are sapient and want good things to happen to us, so logically we ought to want the same for other sapient beings, when pushed to its logical conclusion our motivation should be for all sapient life to live in eternal happiness. In practice there are limitations to this, so we must add to our theory.

Due to economic scarcity we are inclined to favor ourselves over others, however we are humans, weak and feeble, helpless as a baby when asleep, we need to cooperate and trust family, friends, associates and the wider community to keep us safe at night. The motivation for this trust comes partly from emotions and partly from abstract ideas. You can only have a limited number of emotional attachments and people can always find alternate means of satiating their emotional needs that do not require you, hence abstract ideas are crucial. Furthermore such a society must prevent problems that might result in it collapsing and destroying itself.

If someone does not share these abstract ideas and they do not cooperate, then it is very difficult for you to help them achieve happiness and biological immortality. Buddhists are one such group of people. Another group are fedoratheists.

This is the specific type of atheist that I mean, they are typically teenagers or in their early 20s, they are fans of fedoratheists and the culture surrounding it, they are antisocial and they are fans of Richard Dawkins.

http://www.reddit.com/r/atheists

In the future the entire surface of the world will be covered in energy and resource producing facilities, these resources will support sapient beings who will conduct scientific research for the goal of achieving biological immortality among other things. I am pretty tolerant but the sheer impracticality of attempting to enlist the support of fedoratheists or buddhists prevents me from believing there is a future for them.

They will have to go, of course none of them will be actually killed as they will all be convinced of the errors of their ways and there will be a place for them. However if any make themselves a threat then logically they must be eliminated, as you would eliminate any other problem like malaria or air pollution.

this is the subreddit i meant

http://www.reddit.com/r/atheism

>>32
That's quite a philosophy you've got going there: You say that selfishness is a natural state, that everything is based on survival of the fittest, and that the future won't have room for people who don't think like you. ...so why only kill buddhists and a certain kind of atheists? Aren't christians and muslims and hindus and icecream companies and Nintendo employees, pretty impractical in the new world order as well?

>>34
I'm not saying it's right. I'm saying that's the way it is.

It is not nice, but you need to know that there is a problem in order to solve it. It is like a doctor explaining to a patient that they have a melanoma and must undergo chemotherapy. It is like telling people they need to lock their doors. You have to do it, you must obey me.

So you accuse me of wanting to kill off nintendo employees and things. oh hahaha
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClwvBShn9lk
You're just like the good guy in an action movie where the bad guy tries to justify his evil plot and the good guy trips him up!

Except you haven't really said anything about the basic philosophy I outlined earlier though. It's not going anywhere.

Corrections

Selfishness can be limited through a combination of eliminating poverty and education. It is not really selfishness if I intend to use most of my economic surplus on investments, gaining power and scientific research, as opposed to hedonism.

Survival of the fittest can be eliminated by taking control over our environment and evolution through genetic engineering, which I intend to get round to doing.

There is no room for psychopaths and such folks in society, this is not a new idea.

Most of the concepts you think of need not exist, they are arbitrary. Buddhism, fedoratheism, christianity, islam, hinduism and new world orders are just a bunch of ideas some people came up with. I'm not a hater, just laying down some perspective.

>>35
You're pretty incoherent, but the gist seems to be:

>> yes, clearly we must conduct a genocide against buddhists
>> I'm not saying it's right. I'm saying that's the way it is.
>> I'm not a hater, just laying down some perspective.

...so what you're actually trying to say, is that other people will - no, "might" - kill all the buddhists.

...and you're also into genetic engineering, which makes me think you're Friend Computer.

Terrible!

I'm a pacifist ^-^

>>38
Being too weak and afraid to fight, isn't an ideology.
Pacifists actually choose not to fight. You just choose not to make a clown out of yourself.

>>39
yes, you must be careful around Futuristipastica, I hear he has quite the penchant for schlongs

>>38 fixed

I'm a penisfist ^-^