Would they be less retarded if Buddhism replaced post-Vedic Hinduism or if Vedic Hinduism preserved its orthodoxy?

Would they be less moronic if Buddhism replaced post-Vedic Hinduism or if Vedic Hinduism preserved its orthodoxy?

Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68

Ape Out Shirt $21.68

Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68

  1. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    they'd still be smelly brown subhumans so i don't think so, no

  2. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Buddhism and Jainism were BTFO in formal religious debates by Hindus in the early Middle Ages and collapsed without royal support because most non-merchant commoners did not give a shit about monastic autists making up new Buddha power levels while smoking a joint

    Vedic Hinduism is still around today, it's just that Shrauta practice has been shown to be not as effective in prayer and gaining divine knowledge (bhakti) as adding in knowledge from the Puranas (i.e. the Smarta tradition).

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Buddhism and Jainism were BTFO in formal religious debates by Hindus in the early Middle Ages
      how so?

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Buddhism and Jainism were BTFO in formal religious debates by Hindus i
        Pure Hindutva propaganda.

        Anons, we have contemporary accounts and corresponding documents like temple grants demonstrating that Buddhists became far more monastic and less intertwined with the common people beyond being quite harsh tax collectors within their monastery's desmene.
        Also saying that Hinduism is what led to the decline of Buddhism is the opposite of what Hindutva preaches, as I understand it. They claim that all the local religions were living in peace and harmony until the Turks attacked. Obviously Islam was the death knell for South Asian Buddhism but Hinduism had forced it into a downward spiral for a long time before then

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          yeah but, how were they BTFO in formal religious debates? as in, what debates?

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            Well, one clear example off the top of my head is the debate in the Pandya kingdom of Southern India that saw the Hindu ascetic Sambandar face off against the Jains and ended with the conversion of the Pandya monarchs to Hinduism and the impalement of a good part of the local Jain monks to fulfill their end of the wager.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Buddhism and Jainism were BTFO in formal religious debates by Hindus i
      Pure Hindutva propaganda.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      Buddhism would be better because it eliminated caste before mainstream Hinduism did it (partially). Also Buddhism believes that individuals can fix themselves and find knowledge. While, Hinduism says that you should be content in your life. But Buddhism still has the same problems that come from the cultural assumptions of Indian society.
      These assumptions are:
      Believes in Reincarnation or Rebirth
      Believes in a disembodied soul not a embodied soul
      Believes in Absolute truth not contextual truth
      Believes that the material world is bad and we shouldn't fix it
      Is not humanistic and doesn't believe in Human exceptionalism
      These cultural assumptions are unproductive beliefs. As, they don't result in the world getting better.

      >Buddhism and Jainism were BTFO in formal religious debates by Hindus
      Advaita is just less coherent Mahayana. And it still has the problems of the cultural assumptions of Indian society.
      >Shrauta practice has been shown to be not as effective in prayer and gaining divine knowledge (bhakti) as adding in knowledge from the Puranas (i.e. the Smarta tradition)..
      No, psychedelics are better and the Puranas are just retcons to fit in Vedantic philosophy(which is less coherent Mahayana).

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Advaita is just less coherent Mahayana.
        what does it have to do with mahayana?

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          He's a rarted Buddhist who doesn't realize Buddhism's severe flaws and will get buttblasted by Advaita anon if you summon him.

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Buddhism's severe flaws
            which are?

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        What’s the difference between a disembodied soul and a embodied soul?

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        >everything is Mahayana if you squint hard enough
        schizo detected
        Adi Shankaracharya specifically refutes Mahayana Buddhism in his writings.

        >adding in knowledge
        >the Smarta
        Who writes this shit?

        I do. You got a problem with it?

        • 8 months ago
          Anonymous

          >I do. You got a problem with it?
          That was a "lmao book/movie writers" kind of joke

          • 8 months ago
            Anonymous

            oh wait I'm moronic lmao
            I've been pavlov dog conditioned by stormweenies into aggressively responding to all criticism on this board

      • 8 months ago
        Anonymous

        >same problems that come from the cultural assumptions

        I don't think that some of those are cultural assumption. I think they a extent realities described "in this religion" and "in this religion".

        There is an ongoing popular line of reasoning wherein on believes and posits that "because it came after this, it arose in dependence on this." When one describes reality, it's not inherently the case that they do so in dependence on those who described reality in just the same way in the past.

    • 8 months ago
      Anonymous

      >adding in knowledge
      >the Smarta
      Who writes this shit?

  3. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    vedic hinduism did preserve its orthodoxy

  4. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yes. Same if Islam replaced Hinduism

  5. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Hindus parasited some parts of buddhism then crushed the rest that didnt allow them to play around in and worship cow dung.
    Vegetarians are subhuman.

  6. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    Indian civilization were broken down systematically by the British empire such that they lost the ability to poo in the loo.

  7. 8 months ago
    Anonymous

    They would probably be more genteel. But even in Buddhist countries there are people who say they are Buddhist, followers of the Buddha, adherents to the dharma, payers of respect to those worthy of respect, who do things that are harmful.

    I think, and I've not read the vedas so don't correct me if i'm wrong, that the vedas are a doctrine that is too poorly explained for the lazy to NOT live happily and the energetic to NOT live unhappily.

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