Buddha > Stirner

How do you know?

Wow pretty normie tier religious philosophy

Max Stirner and Karl Marx are necessary reads.

But for true communist enlightenment, as well as generally great religious philosophy, you better read you some Joseph Smith comrade.

I think Max sent a lot of misinterpreted messages by exaggerating to make a point. Perhaps not the most well articulated statements to get his ideas across.
Regardless, I agree that if it could be implemented universally, a loss of ego would solve a lot of problems. In the world we live in, however, a degree of
to others (and exaltation of the self) has a role as an important element of survival and growth. That's what I got from Stirner.

This is my first time replying with this app. The missing word is indifference

This post is bait

Stirner: all but self is an illusion
Buddha: even the self is an illusion

I know, but he was definitely spooky.

What does this have to so with leftism?

You can't have leftism without philosophy.

Is that why he thought anything was OK as long as it made you happy? That's not moral relativism, that's moral nihilism. Big diff, regardless of how often they're confused.

I've read all three, funnily enough.

But Buddha already went over that too, he said one shouldn't abandon their material needs, just not overindulge them. A lot of people see Chinese and Indian "deference to famiry" culture and assume Buddhism has something to do with it. It has nothing to do with it, that's Hinduism and Confucianism. In an unwanted arranged marriage, for example, Buddha would tell you to evaluate your options and if reluctantly accepting was your best option then do it and don't hold any resentment toward anyone about it. Buddha was not about the "bring grory to famiry and country" life.

Basically.

Nah.

A lot.

I'm sure you're aware of the phrase "nothing new under the sun" OP.

Of course. However, I feel that Stirner doesn't bring anything new to the table that Buddha doesn't. He barely repackages anything, he adds some of his own crummy ideas- honestly he comes off like someone with a very poor understanding of Buddhism.

Maybe he just reinvented the ideas

Was knowledge of buddhism common at that time in Europe

Yes, but Stirner never mentioned Buddhism as an influence, which is usually what you do as a philosopher.

The fact you're still trying to judge thinks as "ok" or "not okay" shows you have literally no idea what you are talking about.

confirmed for not having read Stirner.

Lol ok

Try actually reading the book next time, kiddo.

The main impediments in discussing Buddhism, one that can be encountered in the face of any theology, religion, philosophy or ideology, of course, is the common Westerner's lack of exposure to Buddhist thought, especially through the works of bhikku scholars (more particularly from the Theravada tradition). Unfortunately, the West's illusory picture of this religion is derived from the ignorant, feel-good stereotypes depicted in films and similar media along with the added false Buddhist quotes one can encounter online at ease. Therefore, one feels that they can say that Buddhism is highly misunderstood for something of a New Age sentiment which it is certainly not. Finally, one makes the claim that it has been cheapened of its content and religious nature with added alien psychologization through the appropriating of it from Western atheists who feel the urge to redress it as something the traditions collectively would not hold. Secular "Buddhism", is being referred to here.

You're referring to the Middle Way: The path of modesty set in-between the road of extreme self-indulgence and the road of extreme asceticism. It is true that Buddhism, unlike many other religions, cannot be characterized as being pro-family in a defining way.

Give works on buddhism

agreed

...

I'd be very careful with comparing Stirner to Buddha. In fact, I would like to point you toward this dude instead, who was far more similar:

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adi_Shankara

And here's a better primer on Advaita Vedanta:

>iep.utm.edu/adv-veda/

Fuck off David Hume

Here, I'll give you some cliff notes that might help break it down for you.

Gee, I wonder who that sounds like.

plato.stanford.edu/entries/max-stirner/#2

I know it's hard to read, but you should try it someday when you're done being spooked by "muh middle way".

Good post.