Suicide as a method for spiritual enlightenment?

[RedDEE]

Okay, so my thing is - I'm Buddhist. In Buddhism, it's taught that life is suffering and the cessation of consciousness is considered the path to peace and joy. I've tried everything to gain peace in life, meditation, psychedelic drugs, hypnosis, literally everything. The more I go on, I realize that life is just a metaphor, existing to contrast with death, and that death is better. That life is a roller coaster of good and bad, and death is a neutral not consisting of either good or bad, but is better because it's silent and peaceful and you're not like stuck in between a tug of war between good and evil, pain and pleasure.

And for people that say that you get reincarnated when you die - I believe that reincarnation is a metaphor in itself. That every day we die a little death, and every day we are reborn, until our final death and then our life stops completely and there is nothing but peace. My thought process works like this - to achieve enlightenment, you must have a method. Some people choose meditation, and achieve it that way. What's the difference between achieving enlightenment through meditation and achieving it through suicide? If you achieve enlightenment through meditation, your life still stops just as if you have died - because enlightenment entails the end of consciousness.

I've tried everything to achieve peace, and I realize it's not possible to achieve peace within the mind. The end of the mind must be peace. I'm sick of chickening out and not just getting it over with. My life is literally hell and I haven't deserved any of the bad things that have happened to me. I hope the whole world blows up.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

What school of Buddhism do you follow?

 

[Suez]

Isnt it true that most Buddist traditions follow the belief that suffering is the nature of samsara, and until we learn how to relate to it properly, thereby transforming it, we'll never get out of samsara – even if we take our own lives ? So your consciousness will continue even when you suicide because you will take another body that will again be the basis of suffering.

 

[rasputin]

Okay, so my thing is - I'm Buddhist. In Buddhism, it's taught that life is suffering and the cessation of consciousness is considered the path to peace and joy. I've tried everything to gain peace in life, meditation, psychedelic drugs, hypnosis, literally everything. The more I go on, I realize that life is just a metaphor, existing to contrast with death, and that death is better. That life is a roller coaster of good and bad, and death is a neutral not consisting of either good or bad, but is better because it's silent and peaceful and you're not like stuck in between a tug of war between good and evil, pain and pleasure.

And for people that say that you get reincarnated when you die - I believe that reincarnation is a metaphor in itself. That every day we die a little death, and every day we are reborn, until our final death and then our life stops completely and there is nothing but peace. My thought process works like this - to achieve enlightenment, you must have a method. Some people choose meditation, and achieve it that way. What's the difference between achieving enlightenment through meditation and achieving it through suicide? If you achieve enlightenment through meditation, your life still stops just as if you have died - because enlightenment entails the end of consciousness.

I've tried everything to achieve peace, and I realize it's not possible to achieve peace within the mind. The end of the mind must be peace. I'm sick of chickening out and not just getting it over with. My life is literally hell and I haven't deserved any of the bad things that have happened to me. I hope the whole world blows up.

Obviously none of us have the answer but I like your hypothesis. :) It gave me a little bit of peace just reading this. Thanks for sharing.

 

[pete_x]

There is no enlightenment in death. Suffering ; not speaking to degree, is a part of life. I always thought Bhuddha suffered from that ignorance of common reality that seems to walk hand in hand with privelege. Cessation of consciousness sounds more like living death than anything useful. My thinking on that being, you have to be aware in a functional way to recognize peace and appreciate it as thus, right? . Isn't chaos technically bound by definition/order in order for it to be identifiable as chaos ? There's a rabbit hole effect there I think. On the middle path thing, you could be leaning too much in one direction or another ? I guess it comes down to [for whatever reason] do you truly yearn not for peace but for an end. ? If it's the former, get out of the rabbit hole and maybe revise your process/belief system ? Bhuddhism could actually be harming you. That IS entirely possible.

Edit; I'm not selling or shitting on any particular belief system, I do apologize if it comes across that way.

 

[codewarrior]

Okay, so my thing is - I'm Buddhist. In Buddhism, it's taught that life is suffering and the cessation of consciousness is considered the path to peace and joy. I've tried everything to gain peace in life, meditation, psychedelic drugs, hypnosis, literally everything. The more I go on, I realize that life is just a metaphor, existing to contrast with death, and that death is better. That life is a roller coaster of good and bad, and death is a neutral not consisting of either good or bad, but is better because it's silent and peaceful and you're not like stuck in between a tug of war between good and evil, pain and pleasure.

And for people that say that you get reincarnated when you die - I believe that reincarnation is a metaphor in itself. That every day we die a little death, and every day we are reborn, until our final death and then our life stops completely and there is nothing but peace. My thought process works like this - to achieve enlightenment, you must have a method. Some people choose meditation, and achieve it that way. What's the difference between achieving enlightenment through meditation and achieving it through suicide? If you achieve enlightenment through meditation, your life still stops just as if you have died - because enlightenment entails the end of consciousness.

I've tried everything to achieve peace, and I realize it's not possible to achieve peace within the mind. The end of the mind must be peace. I'm sick of chickening out and not just getting it over with. My life is literally hell and I haven't deserved any of the bad things that have happened to me. I hope the whole world blows up.

I disagree with few of your points about enlightenment. Let me explain what I've understood though.

- Enlightenment is a state where nothing affects you, you are fully aware of conscious and your mind is at complete peace. In today's world, living one week without internet and mobile is an achievement itself forgot about enlightenment

- We all are depressed souls here and our minds are heavy most of times, lets admit it. Enlightenment on other side is nothingness in mind. Its not about a moment but continuous. Here one is aware who he is, what actions he has to perform and he does realizes that the almighty is formless and resides within

- It is very difficult to achieve complete peace or nirvana. Thats why saints prefer to live in seclusion rather than getting involved in worldly pleasures trying to control their 5 senses


At end what really matters is the step you taking, are you satisfied. If Almighty exists anywhere, he can be inside you too and is he convinced and your actions are justified? A lot of soldiers preferred to die by suicide rather than being captured, does almighty judge them? No, its about situations.

People would always judge you and your actions though, thats the nature of Human.

 

[woxihuanni]

I have no patience with buddhism, but I like the random note on which you end your line of thought: "I hope the world blows up."

 

[Soul]

@RedDEE, I'm glad @GoodPersonEffed has asked what school of Buddhism you follow, because some of your post - especially your concluding remarks - don't seem very Buddhist.

 

[Notabadguy]

Suicide is not Buddhist. If you suicide, you'll get reincarnated again. Enlightenement is another thing, it consistis in overcome the difficulties, out of wisdom, that brought us to this CTB situation.

I don't know if Buddhists are right or wrong, but suicide is not Buddhist, wisdom is. Only wisdom, from a Buddhist point of view, allows to detach yourself from desire and, therefore, pain. Why do you want to CTB? Because you have no money, no social status, no relatives, no good health. Well, for an enlightened one that doesn't matter because you don't desire them, at least not to the point of getting attached to them.

Wisdom doesn't have anything to do with academic knowledge, but with seeing clearly, once you are free from desire-attachment.

The Indian Jesuit priest Anthony de Mello explains it better than me, he uses the words of Buddha to explain enlightenment, and because of that he was sort of censored for the Chatolic Church:

 

[last_tour]

@RedDEE, I'm glad @GoodPersonEffed has asked what school of Buddhism you follow, because some of your post - especially your concluding remarks - don't seem very Buddhist.

It could be Vajrayana. There are alot of schools in buddhism with conflicting values, buddhism as it traveled across asia gets mixed with ideas and philosophies of the local culture. Its really a free for all if you follow its history, kind of like western philosophy. There was a practice called sokushinbutsu in Japan (self mummification), the practice originated from mahasamadhi from Indian Yoga. It is said yogi's in the himalaya's can stop their heart at will. I did some research and yeah i would think its possible if you were old age, went to the himalayas , ate very little, climbed a mountain, and stayed there for awhile you could induce a sudden death type heart attack which is pretty common with hikers.

On a side note Heaven's Gate had the same idea of leaving the body and it was based on Christianity. They even went out with Nembutal. It must of been much easier to get back then!

 

[codewarrior]

It could be Vajrayana. There are alot of schools in buddhism with conflicting values, buddhism as it traveled across asia gets mixed with ideas and philosophies of the local culture. Its really a free for all if you follow its history, kind of like western philosophy. There was a practice called sokushinbutsu in Japan (self mummification), the practice originated from mahasamadhi from Indian Yoga. It is said yogi's in the himalaya's can stop their heart at will. I did some research and yeah i would think its possible if you were old age, went to the himalayas , ate very little, climbed a mountain, and stayed there for awhile you could induce a sudden death type heart attack which is pretty common with hikers.

On a side note Heaven's Gate had the same idea of leaving the body and it was based on Christianity. They even went out with Nembutal. It must of been much easier to get back then!

The Mahasamadhi is referred can be achieved through Kriya Yoga, very difficult to find a guru with original knowledge though. Based on science of breath control.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

Edited comment.

@Soul and @last_tour, it was actually the OP's first sentence which had me questioning the school of Buddhism.

 

[last_tour]

Edited comment.

@Soul and @last_tour, it was actually the OP's first sentence which had me questioning the school of Buddhism.

I would say thats a pretty common belief in most schools of buddhism. Although the solution to it is not actual suicide (that would make it a death cult) in many schools like Theravada the solution is to commit social suicide (donate away all your belongings, enter a temple, no drinking, smoking, can't have a family etc)

The Mahasamadhi is referred can be achieved through Kriya Yoga, very difficult to find a guru with original knowledge though. Based on science of breath control.

Yes I read about that, although its just a guess I thought maybe they used a breathing technique like Kapalbhati Pranayama which is like hyperventilation and then seize breathing right after to induce unconsciousness. Added to that stress on the heart from climbing the mountain and being in a low oxygen high altitute area, with the addition of cold temperatures could lead to a heart attack.
This video explains the mechanism I was thinking of and why hyperventilation and ceasing to breath right after leads to a state of unconsciousness:


Kapalbhati Pranayama (starting from 1:30):


Guy actually seized doing Wim Hof Breathing method:

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

I would say thats a pretty common belief in most schools of buddhism.

I respectfully disagree. Here's why.

This was the sentence:

In Buddhism, it's taught that life is suffering and the cessation of consciousness is considered the path to peace and joy.

First, the story is that Gautama became aware of suffering and sought the means for the cessation of suffering (the endless cycle of samsara). That is what he pursued via a couple of different schools, and then alone, and his "perfect" (that is, complete) enlightenment focused primarily on the The Four Noble Truths, the Noble Eightfold Path, and the Middle Way. The Four Noble Truths are about the causes, conditions, and cessation of suffering. The Noble Eightfold Path describes one way for an ascetic to reach enlightenment and Nirvana (the escape from the cycle of suffering, from both existence and non-existence, from desire and non-desire, a state that Gautama said is difficult to describe and must be directly experienced. He compared it to the flame of a candle that, once blown out, neither exists nor does not exist). Nirvana is neither condition nor conditionlessness, it exists outside of both and cannot be touched by them.

What I take issue with is the assertion that the cessation of consciousness is the path to peace and joy. It is in fact awareness that Gautama sought and claimed to achieve. Enlightenment relies on awareness. If one is not conscious of peace and joy, one cannot experience them; the path to peace and joy is in knowing what causes suffering, the "taints" (greed, ignorance, etc.) and being freed from them.

There is a story in the Pali Cannon that one of Gautama's closest disciples was praising the miracles of his birth: that his mother was given signs that she would give birth to a Buddha, a perfectly enlightened one, that he was born already able to walk, etc. In the story, Gautama basically says, "Yes, but what's really impressive is that I am aware of my thoughts as they arise and as they pass."

What the OP is describing is a nihilistic perspective that Gautama advised against in the Middle Way, because it is an extreme that does not lead to the cessation of suffering. It is one of his fundamental teachings and one of the main elements of his enlightenment as he struggled between two different schools, one which said enlightenment could only be achieved through nihilism and total denial of comfort to the point of self-abuse, and another which I cannot recall but was considered very soft and at the opposite end of the spectrum, akin to hedonism I believe, but I am not confident in that. The entire foundation of the authority of his claim to have reached Buddhahood, "perfect enlightenment," was in having found the Middle Way between the two, and attachment to neither -- no clinging, no rejecting, because rejecting is a form of clinging to the desire for the opposite of what is being rejected. When he reached enlightenment, that is, when he discovered the Middle Way, the Four Noble Truths, and the Noble Eightfold Path, he went back to those he knew who, before he went his own way, had been on the same paths of extreme austerity and self-abuse (starvation, exposure to elements, lack of sleep, denial of all comfort, self-inflicted pain). They thought he'd gone soft, they thought his claim of perfect enlightenment was BS, and he had to win them over; the Middle Way was a key point in his argument that neither extreme would ever lead to enlightenment or the cessation of suffering, as both were attached to and focused on pain and pleasure, two sides of the same coin -- he removed the coin and shifted the focus. Same as Nirvana, in which condition and conditionlessness are two sides of the same coin, and also were removed from focus and consideration.

My source for what I've written here is the book In the Buddha's Words, taken primarily from the Pali Canon, as well as a select few other sources. I wanted to get as close to what Gautama actually said rather than listening to teachers from various schools. I wanted to get to the source of all of their teachings, which branched out in different ways from the original source, and some rely on different texts, but all of them rely on the Pali Canon. BTW, I am not Buddhist, I studied it to determine if I wanted to follow that path. I learned a lot from it, I think Gautama figured out a lot about cognition, but I don't think he figured out everything he claimed to, and he did some flip-flopping and mental gymnastics to validate his teachings and his claims of Buddhahood. Buddhism has a lot of similarities to Stoicism, which has served me better. I sometimes think Gautama meditated so much that his enlightenment experiences were like being on psychedelics and did not necessarily represent cosmological truth as he claimed.

 

[Soul]

Edited comment.

@Soul and @last_tour, it was actually the OP's first sentence which had me questioning the school of Buddhism.

Ah - you mean "Okay so my thing is - I'm Buddhist". Subtle but astute as always, GPE
... which is meant to gently poke fun at myself. GPE knows I'm a fan 8]

It could be Vajrayana. There are alot of schools in buddhism with conflicting values, buddhism as it traveled across asia gets mixed with ideas and philosophies of the local culture.

Thanks, @last_tour. I spent some time studying the history of Buddhism and the varieties are indeed wide-ranging, but I don't recall wishing the world would explode because I don't deserve this shit as a revered teaching in many of them. Which doesn't mean it isn't one. I hope @RedDEE will let us know.

I have the impression that quick routes to enlightment (psychedelic drugs, suicide, etc.) are given short shrift in "mainstream" Buddhism, but of course that might just be a bunch of grouchy squares defending the status quo.

I feel compelled to add that the Dalai Lama was told by a trusted source that adepts in high mountain monasteries would use the long sleeves of their robes to "hang glide" in the wind currents in the gorges. I love that image.

 

[woxihuanni]

I have the impression that quick routes to enlightment (psychedelic drugs, suicide, etc.) are given short shrift in "mainstream" Buddhism, but of course that might just be a bunch of grouchy squares defending the status quo.

Hehe, I like this.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

@Soul, my fault, I read the first two sentences as one, it was the second one I took issue with. Although, I did consider the claim of being Buddhist since the second sentence didn't seem to align with Buddhist philosophy. But ultimately, it's a label, an identity, much as a Christian can take on that label and then get judged for not knowing the whole Bible or not acting as one thinks a Christian "should" act. I think Gautama would reject the label of being a Buddhist, but that's a whole other disucssion! Apologies for my error that caused misunderstanding, though I can see how it would be a fun one to play with.

 

[last_tour]

I respectfully disagree. Here's why.

This was the sentence:

In Buddhism, it's taught that life is suffering and the cessation of consciousness is considered the path to peace and joy.

First, the story is that Gautama became aware of suffering and sought the means for the cessation of suffering (the endless cycle of samsara). That is what he pursued via a couple of different schools, and then alone, and his "perfect" (that is, complete) enlightenment focused primarily on the The Four Noble Truths, the Noble Eightfold Path, and the Middle Way. The Four Noble Truths are about the causes, conditions, and cessation of suffering. The Noble Eightfold Path describes one way for an ascetic to reach enlightenment and Nirvana (the escape from the cycle of suffering, from both existence and non-existence, from desire and non-desire, a state that Gautama said is difficult to describe and must be directly experienced. He compared it to the flame of a candle that, once blown out, neither exists nor does not exist). Nirvana is neither condition nor conditionlessness, it exists outside of both and cannot be touched by them.

What I take issue with is the assertion that the cessation of consciousness is the path to peace and joy. It is in fact awareness that Gautama sought and claimed to achieve. Enlightenment relies on awareness. If one is not conscious of peace and joy, one cannot experience them; the path to peace and joy is in knowing what causes suffering, the "taints" (greed, ignorance, etc.) and being freed from them.

There is a story in the Pali Cannon that one of Gautama's closest disciples was praising the miracles of his birth: that his mother was given signs that she would give birth to a Buddha, a perfectly enlightened one, that he was born already able to walk, etc. In the story, Gautama basically says, "Yes, but what's really impressive is that I am aware of my thoughts as they arise and as they pass."

What the OP is describing is a nihilistic perspective that Gautama advised against in the Middle Way, because it is an extreme that does not lead to the cessation of suffering. It is one of his fundamental teachings and one of the main elements of his enlightenment as he struggled between two different schools, one which said enlightenment could only be achieved through nihilism and total denial of comfort to the point of self-abuse, and another which I cannot recall but was considered very soft and at the opposite end of the spectrum, akin to hedonism I believe, but I am not confident in that. The entire foundation of the authority of his claim to have reached Buddhahood, "perfect enlightenment," was in having found the Middle Way between the two, and attachment to neither -- no clinging, no rejecting, because rejecting is a form of clinging to the desire for the opposite of what is being rejected. When he reached enlightenment, that is, when he discovered the Middle Way, the Four Noble Truths, and the Noble Eightfold Path, he went back to those he knew who, before he went his own way, had been on the same paths of extreme austerity and self-abuse (starvation, exposure to elements, lack of sleep, denial of all comfort, self-inflicted pain). They thought he'd gone soft, they thought his claim of perfect enlightenment was BS, and he had to win them over; the Middle Way was a key point in his argument that neither extreme would ever lead to enlightenment or the cessation of suffering, as both were attached to and focused on pain and pleasure, two sides of the same coin -- he removed the coin and shifted the focus. Same as Nirvana, in which condition and conditionlessness are two sides of the same coin, and also were removed from focus and consideration.

My source for what I've written here is the book In the Buddha's Words, taken primarily from the Pali Canon, as well as a select few other sources. I wanted to get as close to what Gautama actually said rather than listening to teachers from various schools. I wanted to get to the source of all of their teachings, which branched out in different ways from the original source, and some rely on different texts, but all of them rely on the Pali Canon. BTW, I am not Buddhist, I studied it to determine if I wanted to follow that path. I learned a lot from it, I think Gautama figured out a lot about cognition, but I don't think he figured out everything he claimed to, and he did some flip-flopping and mental gymnastics to validate his teachings and his claims of Buddhahood. Buddhism has a lot of similarities to Stoicism, which has served me better. I sometimes think Gautama meditated so much that his enlightenment experiences were like being on psychedelics and did not necessarily represent cosmological truth as he claimed.

Well from what I heard from many buddhist scholars and monks, its pretty common knowledge that enlightment can't be obtained as we are now. Its not something we can acheive in this life within human bodies. I think in practice though you do have to quit many luxuries and do a lot of cessation measures (read about Tapas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tapas_(Indian_religions)). Since modern life has become so hedonistic I think it would take some effort before we'd ever get to the middle. If you wanted to be a real buddhist in the Theravada school for example you would have to get rid all your family and belonings and commit to living in a temple. They do not permit you to be a layman and a buddhist monk at the same time. I think its an effective measure, i practiced buddhism and experienced that you can easily get side tracked and have the wrong thoughts, and agree temple living is the only true path to enlightenment (but you won't become truly enlightened like you mentioned in this life while there).

Mahayana Buddhism gives you a little more freedom, you can have a family, you can have belongings, you can drink and smoke, but also its not original buddhism because they refuted a lot of Gauntamas original teachings and did a 180 on many ideas. (maybe thats where op came from?) For Mahayana and later buddhism Gauntama's story is just one story of the many buddhas (there are hundreds) and his enlightment is seen as one of the many methods one would obtain it. They believe nirvana can be reached through infinte number of paths. There are even beliefs in later buddhism that we are already enlighted, and don't have to do anything. I would say OP is right though from a Mahayana perspective, its nothing special really to have that idea, there were many others in the past who were not buddhist as well who believed the same.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

Well from what I heard from many buddhist scholars and monks, its pretty common knowledge that enlightment can't be obtained as we are now. Its not something we can acheive in this life within human bodies. I think in practice though you do have to quit many luxuries and do a lot of cessation measures (read about Tapas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tapas_(Indian_religions)). Since modern life has become so hedonistic I think it would take some effort before we'd ever get to the middle. If you wanted to be a real buddhist in the Theravada school for example you would have to get rid all your family and belonings and commit to living in a temple. They do not permit you to be a layman and a buddhist monk at the same time. I think its an effective measure, i practiced buddhism and experienced that you can easily get side tracked and have the wrong thoughts, and agree temple living is the only true path to enlightenment (but you won't become truly enlightened like you mentioned in this life while there).

Mahayana Buddhism gives you a little more freedom, you can have a family, you can have belongings, you can drink and smoke, but also its not original buddhism because they refuted a lot of Gauntamas original teachings and did a 180 on many ideas. For Mahayana and later buddhism Gauntama's story is just one story of the many buddhas (there are hundreds) and his enlightment is seen as one of the many methods one would obtain it. They believe nirvana can be reached through infinte number of paths. There are even beliefs in later buddhism that we are already enlighted, and don't have to do anything. I would say OP is right though from a Mahayana perspective, its nothing special really to have that idea, there were many others in the past who were not buddhist as well who believed the same.

Okay, you've focused on the enlightenment perspective quite thoroughly. However, you quoted me and so I read the comment as a response.

My main point was to take issue with the claim that the cessation of consciousness is the path to peace and joy.

I just want to separate out that your comment does not agree with nor refute my argument, but shifts the focus back to paths to enlightenment. So it's a straw man argument. It appears as if you are knocking down my argument, but I wasn't arguing about enlightenment, so, respectfully, it doesn't seem that you disagreed with me so much as disagreed to have the same conversation with me that I was having.

 

[last_tour]

My main point was to take issue with the claim that the cessation of consciousness is the path to peace and joy.

from a mahayana perspective, its possible. Its pretty simple what op is saying, that you can't find peace and joy in the material world. A lot of schools of religion believe that. Its mentioned in the pali translation multiple times. So far from what I've come across suicide is probably not mentioned anywhere in buddhist texts, but then again i doubt you will find many religious practictioners who affirm suicide because they won't last very long, that would really get them into trouble with the state. But when I look at yogi's meditating in Himalayas to acheive enlightment, they're going into the mountains without equipment and food and many of them do get crushed by boulders and die from hypothermia while meditating, some of them die from heart attack. Does that look like suicide to you? or should we say they were going towards enlightenment?

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

from a mahayana perspective, its possible. Its pretty simple what op is saying, that you can't find peace and joy in the material world. A lot of schools of religion believe that. Its mentioned in the pali translation multiple times.

What the OP said is, "In Buddhism, it's taught that....a cessation of consciousness is the path to peace and joy."

S/he did not say that you can't find peace in the material world. Respectfully, you arguing in support of a statement the OP did not make.

 

[Pan]

Okay, so my thing is - I'm Buddhist. In Buddhism, it's taught that life is suffering and the cessation of consciousness is considered the path to peace and joy. I've tried everything to gain peace in life, meditation, psychedelic drugs, hypnosis, literally everything. The more I go on, I realize that life is just a metaphor, existing to contrast with death, and that death is better. That life is a roller coaster of good and bad, and death is a neutral not consisting of either good or bad, but is better because it's silent and peaceful and you're not like stuck in between a tug of war between good and evil, pain and pleasure.

And for people that say that you get reincarnated when you die - I believe that reincarnation is a metaphor in itself. That every day we die a little death, and every day we are reborn, until our final death and then our life stops completely and there is nothing but peace. My thought process works like this - to achieve enlightenment, you must have a method. Some people choose meditation, and achieve it that way. What's the difference between achieving enlightenment through meditation and achieving it through suicide? If you achieve enlightenment through meditation, your life still stops just as if you have died - because enlightenment entails the end of consciousness.

I've tried everything to achieve peace, and I realize it's not possible to achieve peace within the mind. The end of the mind must be peace. I'm sick of chickening out and not just getting it over with. My life is literally hell and I haven't deserved any of the bad things that have happened to me. I hope the whole world blows up.

A new consciousness begins at death...you will be free, cleansed of bad karma. We pay for our karma now, not later. Get ready for your new adventure; like any infant at birth, you are free, and ready to take on the next life. Know, however, that your pain and hardship will be lessened. On to cruising the multiverse. I wish you luck...

 

[last_tour]

What the OP said is, "In Buddhism, it's taught that....a cessation of consciousness is the path to peace and joy."

S/he did not say that you can't find peace in the material world. Respectfully, you arguing in support of a statement the OP did not make.

I think thats what he's implying though. Here op says :

I've tried everything to gain peace in life, meditation, psychedelic drugs, hypnosis, literally everything. The more I go on, I realize that life is just a metaphor, existing to contrast with death, and that death is better. That life is a roller coaster of good and bad, and death is a neutral not consisting of either good or bad, but is better because it's silent and peaceful and you're not like stuck in between a tug of war between good and evil, pain and pleasure.

He tried everything material, and that death (entering to a non material spiritual state) is better.
Am I mistaken?

 

[Michael1127]

Obviously none of us have the answer but I like your hypothesis. :) It gave me a little bit of peace just reading this. Thanks for sharing.

Whatch videos of Sadghuru - He is enlightened and shares his experience with death - because he can somehow also remember

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

I think thats what he's implying though. Here op says :


He tried everything material, and that death (entering to a non material spiritual state) is better.
Am I mistaken?

You'll have to ask the OP if you are mistaken. I personally don't see any mention of the material world that would logically lead me to the same conclusion you've reached.

I see a declaration of what s/he says is taught in Buddhism, that a cessation of consciousness is the path to peace and joy,

then I see a list of his/her attempts to find peace,

and then I see his/her hypotheses of what are life and death.

 

[Pan]

It could be Vajrayana. There are alot of schools in buddhism with conflicting values, buddhism as it traveled across asia gets mixed with ideas and philosophies of the local culture. Its really a free for all if you follow its history, kind of like western philosophy. There was a practice called sokushinbutsu in Japan (self mummification), the practice originated from mahasamadhi from Indian Yoga. It is said yogi's in the himalaya's can stop their heart at will. I did some research and yeah i would think its possible if you were old age, went to the himalayas , ate very little, climbed a mountain, and stayed there for awhile you could induce a sudden death type heart attack which is pretty common with hikers.

On a side note Heaven's Gate had the same idea of leaving the body and it was based on Christianity. They even went out with Nembutal. It must of been much easier to get back then!

They did not go out with Nembutal; their drug of choice was a barbiturate, leavened with plenty of liquor.

 

[last_tour]

They did not go out with Nembutal; their drug of choice was a barbiturate, leavened with plenty of liquor.

I checked. They used phenobarbital. I remembered it as pentobarbital or mistakenly thought it was pento. Hmm so is this another reliable way to CTB? Wonder why it doesn't get mentioned much.

 

[RedDEE]

Hey guys. Posted this thread when I was drunk and forgot about it. I'm going to go over a few points and say that

1. Yes I believe everlasting peace cannot be found in the material world and you must go beyond it.

2. If you find everlasting peace while still alive it is not discernable from the peace you have after death.

3. I am a Mahayana Buddhist follower of the Lotus Sutra.

4. Literal reincarnation is certainly untrue it's a metaphor. It is unscientific, YOLO people.

5. You don't have to be aware of peace to have peace. The cessation of awareness is peace in itself. Being alive is like being sick, and you throw up (die) and you feel at ease because what was once there (sickness/awareness) is gone. Or its like having a splinter, the absence of it feels good.

Also I consider myself Christian and a Satanist. I think Death is God.