How old were you when you accepted the 4 Nobel truths?

How old were you when you accepted the 4 Nobel truths?

post the rest

That is just a quote not one of the truths.

These?

The truth of suffering (Dukkha)
The truth of the origin of suffering (Samudāya)
The truth of the cessation of suffering (Nirodha)
The truth of the path to the cessation of suffering (Magga)

Whoa that's true. What are the other 3?

Buddhism is just nihilism. Anger and other things exist in order to create better conditions for your descendants. Yeah, you can go be peaceful within nothingness and be nothing. It ignores the fact that nothingness created something necessarily.

The 1 that hit me the most is
> The origin of sorrow is desire.
So true, think about that person you wish you could be with.

>to make your soul you must unmake the world says the East
>to make the world you must unmake your soul says the West
WHERE DO WE GO?!

>So true, think about that person you wish you could be with.
kek
This is how American teenagers become "buddhists"

Alfred?

I was 68 yrs. old, when they handed me that worthless chunk of glass.

What the fuck did I do to deserve a Nobel prize besides test manly pistols and ping things with my favorite Glock.

Cunts.

brainlet

even Buddha would've gotten mad at jews.

People moralize Buddhism into thinking it is anti-anger. It is not against or for anything. Buddha would feel hatred and rage at the Jew but he would only feel it, he would not attach to it. When the anger passsed then Buddha would not feel it. It’s really fucking simple but no one seems to understand it.

congratulations you are the only non-brainlet itt

Not attaching to it means not doing anything about it. Everyone understands it. Its nihilism.

...

Anyone else tale the Mahayana pill?
>tfw everything is empty

if you read Buddhist sutras there's a lot where he gets annoyed. I remember one where he basically threatens to blow someone's head off with a lightning bolt for lying to him

He did. Look at Rohingha. Somehow they managed to piss off the most peace loving religion in the world.

You're missing the point.
Attaching yourself makes you want your enemy to suffer and you become inefficient because making them suffer is more important than killing them.
If you become detached from your anger and not distracted by sadistic desires you exterminate your enemies.

Buddhism being peace-loving is just a western liberal myth. Ashoka, the founder of the first Buddhist state, conquered most of the Indian subcontinent. The philosophy of Buddhism itself is peace-loving, but its rarely practiced except in monasteries. Not different from Christianity.

Fuck off with that eastern shit
Anger clearly makes you stronger.
Eating poison builds your immunity to it.

Stay life's victim pacifist.

Most nihilists today are cringy emotional types. They say nothing matters and meme, but then they get btfo by some tweet. The Buddha would not be nihilistic and say life does have meaning: detaching and attaining enlightenment. People think of Buddhism as monks just meditating in a temple when it's really saying is that life is full of BS, chill out, sort yourself out, and be more spiritual.

Same with cum

Unless you are using some sort of unusual definition of nihilism, Buddhism argues against nihilism. Buddhism is a form of nominalism.

>Anger and other things exist in order to create better conditions for your descendants.

There are three major paths of Buddhism, two of which explicitly say there are implicitly pure natures to phenomena, including generally afflictive emotions like anger/wrathfulness.
This subtle but critical perspective contextualizes the quote you're responding to, which then is referring to the futility of afflictive anger versus the utility of non-afflictive anger.

>Yeah, you can go be peaceful within nothingness and be nothing.

The point is that peace comes from the knowledge that the nature of things are void from the very beginning, and thus pure. This therefore by definition applies to all decisions and motivation forces, and so doesn't negate anything. So one's initial goals, interests, pursuits, and concerns for race and the conditions of one's descendants remain valid and just as morally justified as before.

>It ignores the fact that nothingness created something necessarily.

Buddhism views nothingness and something as ontological extremes, and instead asserts ontological undecidability (voidness is form, form is voidness). In short Buddhism doesn't assert an ontologically extant nothingness.