>We are living in God's dream

>We are living in God's dream
Why are so many modern theories of existence so similar to Hindu ones? Did they rip them off?

Terry Davis: They Glow, You Shine Shirt $21.68

It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14

Terry Davis: They Glow, You Shine Shirt $21.68

  1. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Because they aren't?

  2. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    It goes like this
    eastern primary texts > 60’s counterculture crossover with eastern ideas > The Invisibles (Grant Morrison) > The Matrix > ‘simulation theory’ is mainstreamed

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      The Matrix has more to do with Gnosticism than oriental ideas. There's just the spoon thing, everything else is essentially Christo-Gnostic which is fundamentally western.

  3. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Why are so many modern theories of existence
    you mean those papers that were written by students that just want to get PhD as quick as possible?

  4. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    stolen from Augustine (pbuh)

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      Augustine only had a few passages where he briefly writes about this idea, he didn’t go far enough.

  5. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    What does god have to dream about? Why are you self contradicting homosexuals so moronic? You take a human concept and paste it to a ideal being who is supposed to have no flaws. He is god, he doesn't have wishes he can't fulfil.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >You take a human concept and paste it to a ideal being who is supposed to have no flaws

      sigh... The abrahamic god isn't the definition of "god" you fricking moron.

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        Of course it isn't because indian gods are supposed to be less powerful in that regard you inbred sky daddy believing manchild.

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Of course it isn't because indian gods are supposed to be less powerful in that regard
          Well no, you are once again comparing everything to your Abrahamic God lol.

          >you inbred sky daddy believing manchild.
          Said the Christ-tard lol...

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          >because indian gods are supposed to be less powerful in that regard
          Hindu believe in a supreme God that is unique and incomparably raised above the other Hindu Gods, they just disagree about which one is the supreme.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            It's more complicated than that, all recognise the Trimurti as essentially linked. Brahman is a very deep topic.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >It's more complicated than that, all recognise the Trimurti as essentially linked. Brahman is a very deep topic.
            I agree but not every sect accepts the trimurti as its typically presented in introductory material for westerners, the idea of them being representations of the one formless Brahman is basically just the Smarta/Advaita conception but e.g. Sri Vaishnavas will say that it’s actually Narayana (who has form) alone who creates, maintains and dissolves the universe. I was mainly making the point that Shaktists, Vaishnavites, Shaivists and Smartists alike will all say that there is one Supreme Deity, identified with the Para-Brahman of the Upanishads, but then once you get past this point each sect has their own different teachings about how creation occurs, whether other lesser ‘Gods’ are involved such as Shiva’s consort/power of Shakti etc and whether there is a trimurti involved and exactly how or whether its purely symbolic etc.

  6. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Hindus stole anything related to mediation, karma and rebirth.
    For instance, in the Vedas, karma is not karma from jainism or buddhism. Karma in Hinduism is how well a brahmin perform the killing of an animal, in order to please their made up gods. Hindus have no fricking clue what those meditation, karma, rebirth are and especially in the upanishads, because the upanishads are just their first attempt to steal everything from buddhists and jains and converting them into vedism. Ie making rebirth compatible with their caste system and sacrifices.
    This is why the hindu exposition of meditation is very very shallow. The first semi-precise treaty on mediation by the brahmins is patanjali, and guess what he stole everything from buddhism, this time word for word lol. Patanjali is a very late addition to the hindu shit canon.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      Botted post

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Botted post
        Nothing was wrong about it though.

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          if you say so. i see this post spammed in almost every buddhist hindu thread. doesnt reply to anything, doesnt say anything else. Just same thing copy pasted, sometimes revised

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Nothing was wrong about it though.
          Incorrect, the whole post is wrong

          Karma, meditation and rebirth first appears in the early Upanishads which predate the existence of Buddhism and Jainism, these Upanishadic ideas are reused in these two traditions after-the-fact.

          Patanjali isnt the first tract on meditation but the Bhagavad-Gita has large portions of it devoted to discussing meditation as do many of the Upanishads. Patanjali has little to do with Buddhism and it’s rooted in Sankhya-Yoga philosophy and uses Upanishadic philosophical concepts like Purusha and Prakriti. The general idea of using methods to calm and control the mind isn’t particularly Buddhist and it’s already found in the Upanishads.

          The person who posted that is either mentally ill they are a bot. They have been spamming that pasta for years even though its been debunked and refuted many times. Basically almost all the experts in the field of Indology disagree with its claims about chronology. The person posting it is not interesting at all but they literally hold to some hylic extinctionist annihilationist interpretation of Buddhism where you are supposed to make yourself go extinct and he thinks that’s the most profound thing ever and he derides any thinker who doesn’t want to go extinct for being “intellectuals” (means= anybody with a >100 IQ who realizes that annihilationist Buddhism is moronic and crypto-materialism)

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >They have been spamming that pasta for years even though its been debunked and refuted many times
            I saw him spamming this a couple months ago, didnt know it was years.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            This was from September 2021

            https://warosu.org/lit/thread/18973671#p18973744

            This dude has been spamming this garbage and attacking people for not wanting to suicide themselves for at least two years now

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            grim.

            Are you indian?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Are you indian?
            Im a white American, I’ve just been fascinated by Indian philosophy for many years after self-studying it. I have some interest in Buddhism and Sankhya/Yoga but I find Tantric/Shaivist and especially Vedantic philosophy to be more interesting and valuable.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Cool. Hari om tat sat

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >annihilationist Buddhism is moronic and crypto-materialism)
            What percent of Buddhism is annihilationism? What percent of Buddhism is undecided about the nature of soul and a prime creator god?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >What percent of Buddhism is annihilationism?
            Probably less than 10-20%, it seems like a minority viewpoint. It’s not even something that most of Hinayana openly proclaims but as far as I understand in the Abhidharma source texts that the medieval Hinayana and modern Theravada follow it says that Nirvana is an uncaused and eternal reality or asamskrta-dharma. They don’t present any convincing or logical explanation of how one is supposed to attain or experience it if one is comprised entirely of skandhas which dissolve and dont continue into Parinirvana but that’s a separate philosophical issue, I don’t see this as being openly annihilationistic but only as being logically muddled/confused and contradictory since they are still talking about a liberation that consists both of freedom from rebirth and attaining an eternal reality (one can argue it implicitly involves extinction if no soul continues into post-death Nirvana but I digress). It’s when people deny that Nirvana is any sort of ineffable reality beyond all qualifications/predications and insist that it’s just a total and complete extinction that is nothing more than the end of the aggregates/skandhas that I see it as being openly annihilationistic.

            In Mahayana/Vajrayana they usually take 1 of 2 approaches, neither of which are openly annihilationistic
            1) Taking the position that you shouldn’t thing about such things because that’s part of the useless conceptual proliferation that prevents enlightenment… but while still denying that it’s a total extinction but refusing to speak further as to exactly how/why
            2) A kind of non-dualism where one’s true being or essence or one’s true nature is identified as being already identical with the Absolute in some way and where you are just waking up to this eternal truth, and where you abide in this identity after enlightenment, either as a bodhisattva or in a post-rebirth state of some sort.

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