Is Buddhism the religion of the last man?

This. That is the whole point of the religion. Everything else is ancillary.

everyone else to go to heaven

Glorify God.

Because that is how you get into heaven.

They don't believe in literal reincarnation.

Nah, he liked Buddhism's suggestions on getting rid of anger and resentment towards other people. He saw Christianity (as people practiced/thought of it) as implicitly supporting anger towards those who are "immoral", whereas he liked Buddhism's teachings on not holding any grudges since it doesn't do anything good for you or bad against the other person

Why did the buddha abandon his wife and kids? especially when it was time for him to take on his responsibilities (ie. inherit his role of a leader) In this respect I find Hinduism, for all its flaws, is better because it at least acknowledges that you can live seflessly by still fulfilling your roles. Abandoning your wife and kids and taking on the role of a monk/ascetic while telling yourself that you're being sefless just seems dishonest, not to mention hypocritical.

Why do buddhist monks live off the lay class who provide for them but the lay class can't achieve salvation/nirvana in this life? This isn't selfish?

Is the desire not to desire still a desire?

uhhh

you're joking, right?

well, for disliking anger and grudges, Nietzsche sure held a lot of them

So, Nietzsche didn't really know Buddhism then? wrathful deities feature extensively in Buddhism.

Not necessarily. God is glorified in the punishment of the damned in Hell.

Your last two bullets are really good points I feel tbqhwm

Better than christians and Muslims, but that's all.

Buddhism is nonsense like other religions. Techniques aren't so bad like Christian asceticism, Buddhist meditation et cetera but going full believer in any religion is hopeless.

>Techniques aren't so bad like Christian asceticism
Buddhism and Christian monasticism are extremely similar, what are you referring too?

it's the least trash-worthy religion and neechee is trash.

Be right. The vast majority of (American) Christians are rational materialists who just happen to believe they have access to a certain form of material that others do not.

>Why did the buddha abandon his wife and kids?
Because he was just a man and had all of the flaws of a man and acted out of fear.

>Abandoning your wife and kids and taking on the role of a monk/ascetic while telling yourself that you're being sefless just seems dishonest, not to mention hypocritical.
That's exactly why the Buddha returns to his family after his travels and meditations, claims his son as his own, raises him, and teaches him the Dharma.

>Why do buddhist monks live off the lay class who provide for them but the lay class can't achieve salvation/nirvana in this life? This isn't selfish?
Many sects feel it is selfish, which is why many sects view the asking of alms as a humbling action rather than a way to get money. Or get special dispensations from the government so they don't have to pay taxes and then farm their own food, or use the alms they get to buy food. Others, like the Thai Forest Tradition, eschew city life entirely and live out in the forest and using it as their larder. They don't rely on the laity at all, instead they live semi-nomadic lives in a multitude of abandoned temple complexes. The situation with Gelug in Tibet was a special case that was abhored by many Buddhists and monks. There've been plenty of scandals in Asia of monks being greedy or rapists and what not. It usually ends with the monk being defrocked (Disrobed?) and then either killed or sent to jail.

Many sects believe that you can achieve nirvana in this life (Or rather, they're Mahayana and believe you can achieve enlightenment and Bodhisattvahood in this life). Pure Land gets around that entirely with their whole "DUDE LMAO JUST TAKE REFUGE IN THE BUDDHA OF COMPASSION, ANYONE CAN DO IT" schtick.

Many Buddhist monks, at least historically, acted as academic advisors and repositories of knowledge in parts of Asia. They were chroniclers, translators, diplomats, and teachers. In Post Colonial SEA the Buddhist clergy pretty much started the entirety of academia and education from scratch using both their traditional knowledge and Western learning. It's part of the reason why Chinese emperors kept letting the Buddhist monks back it: They were very useful to society. And they also provide the key service of teaching the means towards happiness and freeing oneself from suffering and acting as repositories of this information in addition to being the forefront of research into the techniques to actually doing this (Most of Buddhism is stuff monks have come up with, following the Buddha's recommendation to try many things and use empiricism to decide what works).

>Is the desire not to desire still a desire?
That's the big meme every monk has to go through. The answer is: Yes. Which is why you stop desiring to stop desiring.

Stoicism is better.

Christianity as understood by Kierkegaard is the most patrician and ultimately the most intense form of religiosity. You live in the revelation. Accept it.

Wise post user.

What do you think of Chogyam Trungpa?