I just came to this realization today, when looking-up impermanence and the fear of success. Which had no real results when searched on the internet. So interestingly I found out about Heraclitus (in which I just pasted his name here) I'd only heard a little about him. So.....both guys were smart, fantastic. Most smart people understand Buddhism which is purely science. Anything beyond science, like gods, the before, and after life is not Buddhism. Just my thoughts as a Zen Buddhist
How can someone who loves philosophy degenerate to childish name-calling and what amounts to an e-hissy fit. I think you need to revisit Aristotle's ethics Greek philosophy lover.
@bretbret99 What could you possibly mean? Where does Mr. Bakken call names? I do not recall...please be specific. His aim is to compare the impermanence views of two world-renowned philosophers.
I don't think you understood a lot of what I have said...
Heraclitus had some very good points, but for me to argue with you about how "interesting" each one of these people are is about as pointless as your own existence ^_^
You'll get there however you get there, and when you get there, you'll find yourself not agreeing or disagreeing, not resisting the constant flow that is life...
Hmmm....I wonder if they were so much greater than Buddha why no one one streets will likely have heard of any of those Greeks or Romans? Ask them about the Buddha. Sorry friend, Jesus' tradition overwhelmed your Greek and Roman friends' traditions. Philosopher Buddha won the day, and sorry, Heraclitus is a dabbler in the time/space debate. This kind of thing is the Buddhists "bread and butter."
How can you say Heraclitus was only a "dabbler in the time/space debate" when the vast majority of his writings were lost over time, as you've already admitted in the video. Fuck off, Heraclitus is bad-ass.
Very interesting, I think if one starts looking for enlightenment, you'll see that there are almost no differences between the many masters... But if you look only philosophically at things, you'll miss everything
I think you are in a cloud, Cloud. Just writing those words you are a philosopher. Did you miss everything? The problem with the "many paths to the mountaintop" view is that we are not there, just on one of the paths. Until we get there, it doesn't look to me like Muhammad and Laozi are on the same path, does it to you? In that case we need philosophy. Buddha himself said not all high meditation states are the same, and was a philosopher even about that. kind of thing.
Enlightenment involves losing everything you have known and stepping into the unknown, and this is what I meant that if you only look philosophically, you'll miss everything
Greco-Buddhism, sometimes spelt Graeco-Buddhism, refers to the cultural syncretism between Hellenistic culture and Buddhism, which developed between the 4th century BCE and the 5th century CE
One of the successor states of Alexander the Great's Empire was The Indo-Greek Kingdom .
And i think we can draw paralells with the forming of Christianity (wich is a revamping of the ancient Greek religion) and the forming of Buddism both had ancient Greek sources !
Buddism was the official Religion of the Indo-Greek State and there was a merging of Ideas .
Google for Greco-Buddhism
Odysseus name itself means Man of Pain
They main source of Greek Thinking is Homers Illiad and Odyssey
Heraclitus and The Buddha were also contemporaries with Confucius. They represent the discovery of the individual soul -- a process which culminated with the religion of Christ.
The self for Heraclitus and much of the Pre-socratics were not as fixed as it is in the christian faith. Even the idea of fire as the sole basis of everything suggests a world were flux is the norm and not being.
Especially their god Dionysus reveals this unity of all beings, through intoxication and tragedy.
Again, I understand that Heraclitus viewed things cosmologically, lacking the metaphysics necessary to account for an immortal soul. But I don't think you are considering the connection between an acknowledged impermanence in the cosmos and the search for meaning.
Still Heraclitus didn't think of the soul as being eternal or immortal in anyway, just as much as the Buddha rejects the notion of atman in Hinduism. There is no fixed or immortal self. And still Heraclitus despised logical thinking and instead used intuition, which is very far from being metaphysical in the Christian sense of the word.
Thanks for sharing that!
opensourcebuddhism 1 year ago
Brilliant lecture, and much appreciated. (Archbishop Lazar.)
allsaintsmonastery 1 year ago
@allsaintsmonastery thanks for sharing that Archbiship Lazar!
opensourcebuddhism 1 year ago
Wow! great
I just came to this realization today, when looking-up impermanence and the fear of success. Which had no real results when searched on the internet. So interestingly I found out about Heraclitus (in which I just pasted his name here) I'd only heard a little about him. So.....both guys were smart, fantastic. Most smart people understand Buddhism which is purely science. Anything beyond science, like gods, the before, and after life is not Buddhism. Just my thoughts as a Zen Buddhist
dvsthientai 1 year ago
@opensourcebuddhism - I think bretbret99 is referring to the comments made by CaronteEmpire 3 months ago, not Mr. Bakken's work!
MsRedjay 1 year ago
@MsRedjay Thanks Ms Redjay,
for clarifying that for me!
opensourcebuddhism 1 year ago
Heraclitus ftw.
invanorm 1 year ago
great video, thank you : )
islandzebra 1 year ago
How can someone who loves philosophy degenerate to childish name-calling and what amounts to an e-hissy fit. I think you need to revisit Aristotle's ethics Greek philosophy lover.
bretbret99 1 year ago
@bretbret99 What could you possibly mean? Where does Mr. Bakken call names? I do not recall...please be specific. His aim is to compare the impermanence views of two world-renowned philosophers.
opensourcebuddhism 1 year ago
Comment removed
MsRedjay 1 year ago
Comment removed
MsRedjay 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@opensourcebuddhism - I think bretbret99 is referring to the comments made by CaronteEmpire 3 months ago, not Mr. Bakken's work!
MsRedjay 1 year ago
It'd be hilarious to find out that you're a zen master hahahaha ^_^
cloud1232006 2 years ago
lmao...
"true interesting phylosophers"
I don't think you understood a lot of what I have said...
Heraclitus had some very good points, but for me to argue with you about how "interesting" each one of these people are is about as pointless as your own existence ^_^
You'll get there however you get there, and when you get there, you'll find yourself not agreeing or disagreeing, not resisting the constant flow that is life...
cloud1232006 2 years ago
Hmmm....I wonder if they were so much greater than Buddha why no one one streets will likely have heard of any of those Greeks or Romans? Ask them about the Buddha. Sorry friend, Jesus' tradition overwhelmed your Greek and Roman friends' traditions. Philosopher Buddha won the day, and sorry, Heraclitus is a dabbler in the time/space debate. This kind of thing is the Buddhists "bread and butter."
opensourcebuddhism 2 years ago
How can you say Heraclitus was only a "dabbler in the time/space debate" when the vast majority of his writings were lost over time, as you've already admitted in the video. Fuck off, Heraclitus is bad-ass.
mussman717word 1 year ago
Very interesting, I think if one starts looking for enlightenment, you'll see that there are almost no differences between the many masters... But if you look only philosophically at things, you'll miss everything
cloud1232006 2 years ago
I think you are in a cloud, Cloud. Just writing those words you are a philosopher. Did you miss everything? The problem with the "many paths to the mountaintop" view is that we are not there, just on one of the paths. Until we get there, it doesn't look to me like Muhammad and Laozi are on the same path, does it to you? In that case we need philosophy. Buddha himself said not all high meditation states are the same, and was a philosopher even about that. kind of thing.
opensourcebuddhism 2 years ago
Philosophy = the love of knowledge
Enlightenment involves losing everything you have known and stepping into the unknown, and this is what I meant that if you only look philosophically, you'll miss everything
cloud1232006 2 years ago
Greco-Buddhism, sometimes spelt Graeco-Buddhism, refers to the cultural syncretism between Hellenistic culture and Buddhism, which developed between the 4th century BCE and the 5th century CE
qaplatlhinganmaH 2 years ago
One of the successor states of Alexander the Great's Empire was The Indo-Greek Kingdom .
And i think we can draw paralells with the forming of Christianity (wich is a revamping of the ancient Greek religion) and the forming of Buddism both had ancient Greek sources !
Buddism was the official Religion of the Indo-Greek State and there was a merging of Ideas .
Google for Greco-Buddhism
Odysseus name itself means Man of Pain
They main source of Greek Thinking is Homers Illiad and Odyssey
zigsauer 2 years ago
There was interaction between India and Greece before Alexanders campaign .
Alexander himself said the he was walking in the footsteps of Dionysus and Hercules .
Nonnus Dionysiaca is an epic in forty-eight books, the main subject of which is the expedition of Dionysus to India and his return .
zigsauer 2 years ago
Heraclitus and The Buddha were also contemporaries with Confucius. They represent the discovery of the individual soul -- a process which culminated with the religion of Christ.
neothomist1275 3 years ago
No!
Christ and the christian faith is concerned with individuality free from all restrictions.
Heraclitus is concerned with eternal change, which doesn't go well with a notion of a soul that's fixed.
Mig440 2 years ago
Ontologically they are very different, yes.
But they both represent the move away from the compactness of pagan experience.
neothomist1275 2 years ago
The self for Heraclitus and much of the Pre-socratics were not as fixed as it is in the christian faith. Even the idea of fire as the sole basis of everything suggests a world were flux is the norm and not being.
Especially their god Dionysus reveals this unity of all beings, through intoxication and tragedy.
Mig440 2 years ago
Again, I understand that Heraclitus viewed things cosmologically, lacking the metaphysics necessary to account for an immortal soul. But I don't think you are considering the connection between an acknowledged impermanence in the cosmos and the search for meaning.
neothomist1275 2 years ago
Still Heraclitus didn't think of the soul as being eternal or immortal in anyway, just as much as the Buddha rejects the notion of atman in Hinduism. There is no fixed or immortal self. And still Heraclitus despised logical thinking and instead used intuition, which is very far from being metaphysical in the Christian sense of the word.
Mig440 2 years ago
Very interesting, thanks.
x00p3 3 years ago
Indeed !
NeoBarockLoki 3 years ago
Good video!!
sebastiaosalgado1979 3 years ago