Why is Buddhism such a life denying and pessimistic ideology? It's basic premise is pretty sound...

Why is Buddhism such a life denying and pessimistic ideology? It's basic premise is pretty sound, but instead of actually suggesting how to live a good or moral life is suggests simply giving up on life and detaching from the world. It's like the official religion of bitter quitters.

>but instead of actually suggesting how to live a good or moral life
It does though through rules, ideals and sayings of Buddha.
I will admit that the supernatural Buddhism has a much stronger case than the secular Buddhism that denies rebirth though.

What about the basic premise is sound? What's your solution?

Buddhism is Gnostic BS. I was raised by hippy parents who practiced it, I feel depressed, empty and nihilistic much of the time. Too many contradictions in its dogma too, like "life is suffering, so show compassion for all other living beings" while simultaneously treating all life as worthless because everything dies and reincarnates anyway. Why should i show compassion when all life is worthless? That doesnt make sense and makes me think the contradiction is there on purpose ie its a mind control trick.

Its a great religion for Will-to-Power type people.

What's the point of will to power if your aim is to die, as it is in Buddhism?

Power, the comfortable trappings of a successful life etc.

>life is suffering, so show compassion for all other living beings
The only time I've ever seen Buddhists use 'compassion' with buddhism is compassion for other people stuck in rebirth and is usually reserved for Bodhisattva who have superior merit to those who simply escape from rebirth after achieving enlightenment.
Other things like caring for animals, other people, etc is about cultivating merit and good thinking which Buddhists believe is essential for somebody to achieve enlightenment.
Sure you were raised by 'hippy parents' which somehow ruined your life but you can apply that to all religions, just because one group of people misinterpret Buddha's teachings or choose to radically depart from how its usually practised, does not mean the religion itself is dangerous and harmful.
My family has been Buddhist for centuries and I turned out fine.

Didn't ruin my life, I just have a more pessimitic outlook than I should, the mindset doesn't feel "natural" to me. I sometimes feel that Christianity or another religion of love would have better suited me. To each his own though, I dont think in "one size fits all" categories, people should form their own worldviews.

Christianity as a religion of love sounds awesome until you actually become one and live among them. They're shit. A very few saints, and a whole bunch of goddamn liars and scum. Don't fall for it. Seriously, don't. I tried for most of my childhood and adult life to make it work. It won't.

And as Heidegger once intimated at length, Eastern religious systems shouldn't be taken out of their social and cultural contexts and transplanted into different cultural settings. I cant remember any points of his reasoning. but at the time it resonated with me.

Ok that is disheartening to me, but i will have to find out for myself.

Because Christianity is mostly just escapism to people. Follow rules without thinking, justify your personal opinions, feel like you get to live forever happily.

Same way that Buddhism is escapism. Sit around in a monastery waiting to die, hopefully forever.

You claim that you were raised as a Buddhist but you don't understand the Buddhist view of the compassion of Buddha for staying in samsara because he wanted to end the suffering of beings through Buddhism? Is expecting somebody else to do all of your work as is the case of Christianity natural for you?
And how does your 'one size fits all' critique specifically single out Buddhism and not literally every other religion? Should we ban parents from having a choice in the religion that their children will grow up in? Are you just a crypto christian trying to refute Buddhism from the inside? You know that lying is considered a bad thing in both Buddhism and Christianity right?
Like I said before, there's nothing special about 'religions of love'. Ask victims of Jehovah's witnesses or fundamentalist christians who have repressed who they are their entire life and suffered from it how they feel about this 'religion of love'.

Or will you admit that the teachings of your parents wasn't actually real buddhism? Since you seem to lack any understanding of basic fundamental Buddhist belief.

You misunderstand what Buddhism is. Buddhism is not simply an ideology but dharmic, meaning it is an investigation of reality. Buddhism itself is essentially a science for consciousness in this sense.

>instead of actually suggesting how to live a good or moral life is suggests simply giving up on life and detaching from the world
You need to understand that attachment to the material world is the cause of all sufferings. The more detatched you become, the more virtuous of a person you can be. A man too attached to material wealth thinking it will bring him happiness can never become charitable. A man attached to sex will never become chaste. A man attached to sleep will never become diligent. Having a good character is not something that is developed, but something that is uncovered once you eliminate excess attachments. Being attached to things like a beautiful wife, money, and other forms of sense gratification only cause you to be caught up in the material karmic reactions and cause you to once again enter into the cycle of suffering.

I will speak from a Hindu standpoint here. Life is not a material phenomenon as you perceive it to be. Life does not consist of having lots of wealth, having a good sex life, being famous, etc. All of these things are material and temporary. Life is not material, life is spiritual. So called "life" in the material world is confined to the cycle of birth and death, a hellish and grim system full of suffering and without end. If that is not life-denying then I do not know what is. However, life in the spiritual world, called Nirvana in Buddhism, is blissful, eternal, and free from disease, death, and old age that plagues material life.

That doesn't sound like buddhism, /pol/boy.

>I was raised by hippy parents who practiced it

>hippies
>buddhism

I'm sorry m8, but you got trolled

I was raised a christian and it ruined my life.

The christians who actually live a christian life get used or manipulated, or simply end isolated in a monastery, just like you say about buddhism and mind control. The average (99%) christian, no matter the denomination (in my case catholic and it's shit) is a blatant hypocrite who shits on cucktian beliefs 24/7.

Don't get fooled. All religions are the same garbage in the end

If they're actually Buddhist they'll say Mahayana or Theravada or Chan etc not just Buddhist, there isn't just "Buddhist"

You have to show compassion to avoid creating negative karma for yourself and you're not expected to considered life worthless but be non-attached to it.

I don't know what you're complaining about, there are many people who felt the same thing of the wordly life and turned to religion to find fulfillment.
There are also the Yogic currents.

This is manifestly false. You have fallen for some b/s explanation of Buddhism.
For laypeople, consult the book The Buddha's Teachings on Prosperity (bad title for the reprint, I know), it contains all the ethical and behavioural injunctions for normal people who live a working, married life in society. There's nothing life-denying about that.

>life is spiritual
What does that mean?
And what exactly is this spiritual world?

Because with ego death you realize there's no you, there's only everyone

>life denying
>giving up on life
>detatching from the world

Please give textual evidence to support these claims. Unfortunately, this task will be impossible because buddhism does none of these things. Merely a smear campaign from daoists or people who read nietzsche once.

>muh eastern religion is mystical cultural that westerners will never get

buddhism is literally a faggot giveup religion for indian peasants living in abject poverty born into the belief that all that awaits them after their hellish life is another, and aother, and another, and another, and another, and another

samsara is hell to a man suffering from depression (which the original buddha clearly was)

I wholeheartedly agree with OP. Buddhism is a suicidal death cult.

if the buddha was alive today, born into the cultural atheist belief that nothing is after death, then he would have simply killed himself and achieved his blessed nirvana (which appears no different to me)

the buddha was simply a man of the vedic samsaric beliefs of his time, suffering from depression, trying to ensure he will never have to live and suffer again

>but instead of actually suggesting how to live a good or moral life

to be fair this appears that you are simply assuming that this type of life is inherently more valuable that what the buddha conceived, with no proof to back it up

Dhammapada :

331 "It is sweet to have friends in need; and to share enjoyment is sweet. It is sweet to have done good before death; and to surrender all pain is sweet."

332 "It is sweet in this world to be a mother; and to be a father is sweet. It is sweet in this world to be a monk; and to be a saintly Brahmin is sweet."

>life denying and pessimistic ideology
>even emptiness is itself empty, samsara is the same as nirvana, we are all already buddhas if we only opened our eyes too it

gee sure sounds pessimistic to me

wow a butthurt buddhist.

>Buddhism is what say it is
>no textual, scriptural, doctrinal, or historical evidence to support claims
>strawman

Not an argument

>Please give textual evidence to support these claims

Even if someone did, you would just wave it away just like Muslims and Christians do when you point out stupid shit in their religion.

>i could, but I'll spare you

lol

>no source therefore strawman
Not very good at making your case, are you?

LIfe fucking sucks dude

>What does that mean?
Everything that exists is a product of matter and spirit. Spirit is the basic field of creation, and matter is created by spirit. Spirit is not created at a certain stage of material development. Rather, this material world is manifested only on the basis of spiritual energy. This material body is developed because spirit is present within matter; a child grows gradually to boyhood and then to manhood because of that superior energy, spirit soul, being present. Once the soul has left the body and consciousness is gone, the material body begins to decompose as there is no longer life within the body. That is to say spirit is life and life is spirit. Life cannot come from material.

>And what exactly is this spiritual world?
In this material world we find that everything is temporary. It comes into being, stays for some time, produces some by-products, dwindles and then vanishes. That is the law of the material world, whether we use as an example this body, or a piece of fruit or anything. But beyond this temporary world there is another world of which we have information. That destination is called the sanātana sky, the eternal spiritual sky. There are many planets in this spiritual sky, but chief among them is Krsnaloka, where God himself resides and where the entire universe is manifested out of just as the source of light is the flame of a candle.

Can you prove any of this?

Any layman can understand the difference between a living man and a dead corpse, the existence of spiritual nature is directly perceivable in this way. As far as the information regarding the spiritual sky, it is taken from the Srimad Bhagavad and from the words of A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, a guru in the disciplic succession.

"Just try to learn the truth by approaching a spiritual master. Inquire from him submissively and render service unto him. The self-realized soul can impart knowledge unto you because he has seen the truth." (Bg 4.34)

The path of spiritual realization is undoubtedly difficult. The Lord therefore advises us to approach a bona fide spiritual master in the line of disciplic succession from the Lord Himself. No one can be a bona fide spiritual master without following this principle of disciplic succession. The Lord is the original spiritual master, and a person in the disciplic succession can convey the message of the Lord as it is to his disciple. No one can be spiritually realized by manufacturing his own process, as is the fashion of the foolish pretenders. Therefore, mental speculation or dry arguments cannot help one progress in spiritual life. One has to approach a bona fide spiritual master to receive the knowledge.

In other words, no.
Where would I find a bona fide spiritual master? Why can't I manufacture my own progress?
A living man and a dead corpse does not mean "the existence of spiritual nature is directly perceivable". It certainly isn't perceivable to me. Not when I still don't understand what this spiritual nature is.

Because it's superior

It's not a balanced path like Islam is. The only way to truly practice the religion is to completely abandon a normal life and become a celibate vegan meditating all day.

Compare this excessive asceticism with the perfection of Islam where a man is able to enjoy women in a balanced and healthy way (four wives and women your right hand posses) you can eat meat but it also incorporates ascetic practices into everyday life in a healthy way, like fasting and giving charity, and the prophet (SAW) encouraged working, he went from being a shepherd (as all the prophets were shepherds) to being a successful leader, while still giving charity to the poor.

Buddhism like Christian monasticism goes to far and puts unnecessary hardship on people that have no benefit.

>raised by hippies
You were actually raised protestant with a new coat of paint.

...

What's your refutation to medical knowledge about causes of death and decay?

>Not when I still don't understand what this spiritual nature is.
Sorry I should have elaborated further. Spiritual nature means consciousness. When consciousness leaves the body the body is said then to be dead, as the superior life force is no longer present. Without consciousness, the spiritual energy, the material energy decomposes. So it is from this spiritual nature of consciousness, otherwise known as Brahman, that maintains the body composed of the inferior material energy. Material can only come from the spiritual, and spiritual never comes from material. Trying to combine various material chemicals to produce a body will never yield a living entity, as consciousness was never present beforehand.

>Why can't I manufacture my own progress?
One does manufacture his own progress, as no progress can be made otherwise. However, one needs the knowledge of how to make progress before action can be undertaken. It is necessary then to receive instruction from a spiritual master, as he has seen the truth himself. If you do not know the absolute truth is, then what will you know to look for? What methods will you employ to find it? An authority is required to know these things. A drowning man is unable to lift himself out of the ocean on his own, but requires someone who is already out of the ocean to assist him up. The spiritual master is that which helps us out of the ocean of ignorance.

>Where would I find a bona fide spiritual master?
Visit Vaishnava temples and mathas.

What is there to refute? Death is caused when consciousness has left the body, medical science acknowledges this. Decay is inherit to material nature, as material is temporary and thus is perpetually destroyed by time.

this.

It's the exact opposite. Buddhism is basically the most ancient form of nihilism.

If you were actually a will-to-power type person you would love the opportunity to be reborn again over and over again for eternity and hate the idea of this cycle ending.