My honest reaction while reading another indifferential 'nothing-ever-happens' emptiness faggotry.

Trumpoids getting played like retards they are once again

We shall not forsake the land of our birth,
Nor let our speech be buried.
We are the Polish nation, Polish kin,
Of royal Piast lineage carried.
We shall not let the foe oppress us.
May God be our aid!

Whoever truly has power and is conscious of being worthy of it, whoever feels himself to be truly superior, also realises that every kind of vanity and of personalism abase him: these are artificial and fictitious forms of having worth before oneself and before others, and he has no need of them. They have nothing to do with an Aryan, Nordic-Aryan and Romano-Aryan style of life. Thus it is that a new anti-intellectualistic ruling group might form up, ascetic and heroic, almost feudal and barbaric in its hardness and insouciance of forms, silent, compact and impersonal as an Order, but precisely for this reason realising a superior form of personality, one that is not improvised but which justifies itself with a ‘tradition’ and with a ‘race’ experienced in their deeper and more transcendent values.

Burn all books ??? and libraries to the ground, Fahrenheit 451 up in this bitch

ノウマク サンマンダ バザラダン センダ マカロシャダ ソワタヤ ウンタラタ カンマン

Nōmaku sanmanda bazaradan senda makaroshada sowataya un tarata kanman

Homage to the all-pervading Vajra! Grant me strength and protection, unshakeable and immovable like Fudō Myōō.

This is a non-dogmatic channel.

Why do I say this? Do I consider myself to be above the Teachings? No. Do I claim some realisation by which I might transcend the instructions of the buddhas? No. Do I believe dogma is an unimportant part of practice? No. Am I courting controversy to get my channel started? ?

Firstly, let me define my terms. Dogma, as I use the word, refers to a set of ideas or beliefs which one considers canonical and therefore beyond questioning or dispute.

The thing is, holding to some sort of dogma can be useful to a buddhist practitioner. It is ill-advised to explore emptiness without any sort of safety harness. One needs a guide, a support of some kind.

We are but maggots, writhing in the filth of our own corruption. We are so lost in our tangle of misconceptions about reality that directly confronting reality without some preparation can have devastating results. As such, we require the guidance of the one who has ascended from the dung of mortality and now walks among the stars.

We call this Refuge, and it is threefold; Buddha is the exemplar, the Thus Gone One who has shown the way; Dharma is the way itself, the actual teachings by which we may liberate ourselves; Sangha is the assembly of noble ones who follow the way with us.

By taking firm Refuge in these Three Jewels, we establish for ourselves a stable footing from which we may safely explore the Void, which often appears terrifying to us at first and which later can prove seductive (and in either aspect, whether as Destroyer or as Lover, it is dangerous). This, then, is the use of dogma.

But dogma also has its limit, and this is true even of dogma designed and delivered by the buddhas. Mahayana buddhists observe different dogma to that which is held by Theravadins, yet both dogmas were given by the historical Buddha.

Even within Mahayana, different schools have different dogmas, and within any given school one can find different lamas emphasising different teachings and delivering different dogmas to their students.

One might conclude that all these dogmas are meaningless and all those who teach or follow them are fools. That’s fine, but (since nearly everyone holds to a dogma of some kind) now you live in a world of meaninglessness and fools. So, for the sake of argument, let’s suppose that you have some faith in the buddhadharma.

Let’s suppose that – for whatever reason – you have chosen to follow the path of awakening taught by the Tathagata. Well now you have a problem, because whatever portion of the teachings you have decided is definitive is going to be just that - a portion. They can’t all be definitive.

No practising buddhist can hold all of the Buddhas’ teachings to be definitive. You can’t follow the word-for-word instructions of every lama. Just try it, I dare you.

So you’ll pick your lama and you’ll pick your dogma, and you’ll have your reasons. And the next guy over will pick his lama and his dogma, and he’ll have his reasons too (we call those reasons karma, btw). He may even have the same lama as you and yet somehow his dogma can still be different – maybe even wildly different – to yours.

So you conclude he must be wrong. He’s misunderstood something along the way (maybe so). He’s injecting his own attachments and aversions into the dharma (maybe so). He’s a heretic who will, wittingly or not, pervert the teachings (maybe so). He’s a fundamentalist who is so hung up on the words of the dharma that he misses the essence of the teaching (maybe so).

To war! We must educate those who have misunderstood. We must expose those who are still labouring under attachment and aversion. We must crusade against the heretic and transgress against the fundamentalist.

In this episode we emphasize the value of the "outer" work in the "inner" liberation.

https://youtu.be/VyaMfOu1MZg

One White Monster for a White Monster, please!