I would like to know from you, which is the only right path, or the best one if you believe in multiple. I'm currently on my own, following whatever comes, inspired by Hinduism and it's beliefs but sort of not really part of the religion really. However I am contemplating whether it's true and have found no answer yet. Mahayana Buddhism fatigues me. I love vegetarianism, but I can't follow Buddhism it's just too much meaningless effort. Spiritual islam is also an option, whenever I read Sufi texts (audio on YouTube) I get high levels of spiritual vibrations from it so there might be something to it. Tell me your thoughts on all that.

>>40553248 (OP)
Truth is the only right path. Functionally this means start telling truth both internally and externally and over time the path will show itself to you more and more.
You'll find out how hard this actually is once you begin to do it. You'll see how many things are designed to make you lie.

>>40553317
The easiest starting point is ridding your self-delusions or at the very least reframing them to take back the control.

>>40553317
Interesting thought. Well, I say whatever spontaneously arises. I don't try to actively speak what is true at all times. Tried it, it's pretty fatiguing. But I believe the closer I come to truth in a spiritual sense, the more my words will have spiritual potency. What is your belief system? Do you believe in god, a soul, which religion describes reality most accurately in your opinion?

>>40553248 (OP)
https://www.youtube.com/@HillsideHermitage

>>40553334
I abandoned Theravada thinking and don't feel desire to go back from Mahayana to Theravada. But thanks.

>>40553341
What I like about those monks is that they teach stuff differently from 'standard' Theravada schools. There's no abhidhamma or meditation techniques. It's directly about how to uproot your mind's liability to create suffering.
If the restraint found in Theravada such as 5 or 8 precepts are what you didn't like, then you'll probably end up disagreeing with these monks.
Ultimately, sense restraint is required to free yourself from suffering, because acting out of desire is how you keep your mind bound up with suffering. Even liberating yourself by Mahayana teachings would require you to take on 5, 8, or more precepts, because otherwise your mind will keep creating suffering.
I've personally found a lot of benefit from this, but it's understandable if you don't see the benefit. It's hard to go against the addiction to existence.

>>40553373
It is indeed. What do you think about spiritual Islam and Hinduism?

Never stop learning new information
Reduce suffering to other creatures
Energy is reciprocal so emanate positive energy
Humanism is a good guide for the modern person and will lead humanity to the stars

>>40553248 (OP)
There are many paths up the mountain.

>>40553377
Those religions are only on the level of managing suffering. Some do it better than others and can lead to better rebirths, but even if you become fully accomplished in those, you'll still he liable to suffering. Your mind will still have the capability of turning against its own best interests and harming itself.
This sutta is quite long, but makes an important point later on.
https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/MN/MN22.html
>“Very good, monks. I, too, do not envision a possession, the possession of which would be constant, permanent, eternal, not subject to change, that would stay just like that for an eternity.
>“Monks, you would do well to cling to that clinging to a doctrine of self, clinging to which there would not arise sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, & despair. But do you see a clinging to a doctrine of self, clinging to which there would not arise sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, & despair?”
>“No, lord.”
>“Very good, monks. I, too, do not envision a clinging to a doctrine of self, clinging to which there would not arise sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, & despair.
>“Monks, you would do well to depend on a view-dependency [diṭṭhi-nissaya], depending on which there would not arise sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, & despair. But do you see a view-dependency, depending on which there would not arise sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, & despair?”
>“No, lord.”
>“Very good, monks. I, too, do not envision a view-dependency, depending on which there would not arise sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, & despair.

>>40553401
I expected this. But this does not suffice. I want to know 'your' path, and what you think about the paths I talked about.

>>40553411
Ok cool. Thanks.

>>40553427
I thought of something else that might interest you. You mentioned Buddhism seeming like a lot of meaningless effort. There are some suttas which talk about the fruits of skillful behavior visible here and now. Here's one that I like, you might find it useful as well. It's a bit too verbose to fit the key points into a post.
https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/AN/AN7_54.html

>>40553518
No, no, I have no interest anymore in reading pali stuff. The lotus sutra is far greater. You should give Mahayana a try man.. you seem pretty obsessive.

>>40553558
I tried Mahayana and Zen stuff for a few years, but it never did anything significant to resolve the problem of suffering for me.
It was only after I started looking into early Pali Canon Buddhism and took it seriously have I started to see some real benefits. This has also resulted in me being a little obsessive about it.

>>40553586
Then try again. Mahayana is the true path. Contemplate non-self of everything, I do that a lot and recently started it and already see immense results. Imagine what happens when I do this for even just the next month. Try this, then come back. I believe this is a teaching from the diamond sutra, which is so called because it cuts through delusion like a diamond. Good luck.

>>40553248 (OP)
>God = totality of existence, not an old man in a chair
>we’re in the densest layer of consciousness
>after death = shared dream realms or personal subconscious paradise
>eventually reincarnate
>astral = collective unconscious
>orgone = free-floating formless consciousness, the fuel of manifestation/alchemy

>>40553611
I contemplate non self often. The difference I've found is that the insistence on sense restraint from Theravada and early Pali Canon Buddhism is what provides a suitable basis for that sort of contemplation to have a great effect.
To give an example from the suttas, Bahiya was an ascetic who had lived for a long time alone in the forest and experienced jhana often due to his lack of sensuality (IIRC). When he met the Buddha, it only took one sentence for Bahiya to be fully enlightened. This wasn't because he was just lucky, but rather that he already did the work of giving up sensuality, and so there was a suitable basis for a contemplation on non-self to fully liberate him.
Buddha said that there's two conditions for the arising of the right view: appropriate attention and the words of another (who knows the Dhamma). Bahiya already fulfilled appropriate attention, he just needed to hear the Dhamma once because of that.

>>40553646
I see. I think I meant emptiness rather than just simple non-self. Did you try that? I must say I personally meditated for years up to this point and also spend almost all my time when I'm alone reading scriptures.

>>40553702
Could you describe specifically what you mean? There's different kinds of contemplation on emptiness. The heart sutra is one I'm familiar with.
How I contemplate emptiness/not-self is primarily by recalling this sutta and attempting to apply it towards my own attachments:
https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN22_59.html
>“Form, monks, is not self. If form were the self, this form would not lend itself to dis-ease. It would be possible (to say) with regard to form, ‘Let my form be thus. Let my form not be thus.’ But precisely because form is not self, this form lends itself to dis-ease. And it is not possible (to say) with regard to form, ‘Let my form be thus. Let my form not be thus.’
>“Feeling is not self.…
>“Perception is not self.…
>“Fabrications are not self.…
>“Consciousness is not self...
>...

>>40553723
Yes. I mean emptiness as things having no substance, being between existence and non-existence. Empty of inherent existence basically. If you for example look at the wall, and think this wall has no existence, it is empty, that is what I mean by that. I think this is the contemplation that leads to the goal much faster than any other contemplation.

>>40553735
Or basically, empty of self.

>>40553248 (OP)
Just, sit down and meditate and observe without judgment.

>>40553248 (OP)
Whatever works best to become Serene.
I don't take Islam seriously and I'm not interested in its good bits either.
Buddhism is the best thing that's advertised widely. I highly doubt the Hindus have anything comparable. The Taoists may come in at a close second.
Loyalty is overrated.

>>40553748
I'm inspired by Hinduism somehow. This idea that there is an ancient primordial ritualistic doctrine of salvation where you bathe in holy rivers or at the meeting places of night and day. It is very very serene and inspiring. But yeah Buddhism kinda has better results from the practices I've done.

>>40553753
Hinduism has a lot more imagery than I need personally. I kinda like Thich Nhat Hanh's plain language writings.

>>40553735
I think that that's a useful contemplation overall because it will start to point you in the right direction.
However, the problem of suffering doesn't come from you thinking that a wall has a permanent existence, it comes from your attachment to the world.
When beings are attached to something, they must also be covering up / ignoring the truth about the emptiness of that thing. So the real ignorance that fetters beings isn't about thinking a wall is permanent (unless you're emotionally attached to it...), it's about refusing to patiently endure the discomfort of the reality that you will grow separate from all you find dear and appealing. Once your mind calms down and can accept the full weight of that without craving against it, you're now free from that ignorance of suffering.
Buddha suggested a contemplation of 'All beings survive on nutriment'. Thinking about how food is required for all beings to live can cut through that emotional view of your attachments being permanent.
People intellectually understand that they will lose everything they hold dear, but they don't emotionally accept it and instead emotionally cover it up because of not knowing any escape from suffering apart from sensuality.
By abstaining from sensuality and contemplating the loss of your attachments, you force your mind to confront the truth about emptiness and suffering on the deepest emotional level, which uproots the core ignorance that keeps you bound to samsara. You see that the cause of suffering is the mind delighting in what is inconstant, and so your mind lets go of passion, delight, craving, birth, aging, death, and suffering.

>>40553782
I agree, it has too much "stuff" I don't want that much stuff. I'm gonna smear my face with ashes now, let's see what Hindu practice will produce in my heart.

>>40553789
I feel like this rings true however! Mahayana offers a clear cut through path through all that by saying nothing exists, and thus you can contemplate the non-self nature of all phenomena, which in my experience just works so much better than what the pali suttas teach: the contemplation of impermanence. I tried both, and the first did far greater work in me than the latter.

>>40553802
Fair enough. If you get better results from Mahayana contemplations, then go ahead and do those.
I would caution against adopting a view that 'nothing exists'. In the Pali suttas at least, Buddha rejects this as a wrong view. It's more accurate to say that nothing has a permanent existence. More accurately, anything that arises can only arise in dependence on something else, therefore it also must cease and cannot have a permanent self existence.

>>40553317

>>40553818
Ok. Nothing exists because everything is neither existent nor non-existent. The truth of impermanence leads to that, it's an extension of the Theravada idea.

>>40553829
This will be my last post tonight, need to go to bed (unfortunately, beings have to work to survive...). It was good talking with you.
I'll leave you with these excerpts, which might help you out.
https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN22_90.html
>“‘“Everything exists”: That is one extreme. “Everything doesn’t exist”: That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathāgata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications.
>From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness.
>From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form.
>From name-&-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media.
>From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact.
>From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling.
>From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving.
>From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance.
>From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming.
>From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth.
>From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering.
https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/MN/MN110.html
>“And how is a person of integrity a person of integrity in the views he holds? There is the case where a person of integrity is one who holds a view like this: ‘There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are contemplatives & brahmans who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.’ This is how a person of integrity is a person of integrity in the views he holds.

>>40553853
Ok, hope you read this when you have time tomorrow, I think I'm out of Buddhism again, I made the thread being inspired by Hinduism without being a Hindu, then I became a Buddhist, now I'm the first thing again.

>>40553248 (OP)
I just conclude that I am God and decide how to write the path.

>>40553875
Ok. What did you write?

>>40553866
Ok. I hope you find what you're looking for.

>>40554875
Thanks. I hope I will.