I agree with this philosophy. I'm here because I believe in Vital Existence and the ego, not self-denial or abstinence. However, the Buddhist meditation techniques continue to benefit me. You are right, though. I am not a Buddhist.

Is that "OM" as in the groan of someone in pain?

Buddhism is supposed to be about ceasing the pain that comes with assuming you are that horrid little sense of having a personal self (that we call ego).

Is that "Mo" in the sense of "More"?

Satanism is certainly in favor of satisfying that horrid sense of having a personal self (called ego) by having more pleasures.

It is really funny. You get hungry. You have MO food. You enjoy eating and then feel satisfied.

Repeat.

That is Satanism.

You get hungry. You think, "If only I didn't have this sense of personal self (called ego) I wouldn't feel this hunger.

You eat something. You chide yourself for still feeling that you "suffer" hunger and all the other things that come up in life. The hunger stops but you still feel cheated because you are unenlightened.

That is Buddhism.

I like the first one better!

Read The Relaxation Response by Herbert Benson, MD, professor of cardiology at the Harvard Medical School.

Correct meditative techniques can have many very real and positive benefits.

They are not owned by any religion.

Welcome to more fun as an illusory self!

That is indeed a positive point about Buddhism, in my opinion. I don't generally believe in violence.

You've missed the point.

Then please, enlighten me.

What you mean to say is that you don't condone violence, yes?

Because certainly you're aware that "violence" is just another form of communication amongst the inhabitants of Earth, no believing is necessary.

Generally it means one of three things.

1) Get away from that, it's mine.
2) Get away from that, I want it.
3) I'm taking this, deal with it.

There are other reasons of course, and the above reasons are deeper than the simplified versions I've provided, but those are the big three, sort of like the automobile industry.

It is a form of communication, but I believe (at least for myself) that most conflicts can be solved without implementing it, and prefer not to revert to barbarism in favor of more intelligent resolutions.

In jest, in jest.

Don't take me too seriously, it's all in good fun.

The problem with being a Buddhist AND a Satanist is that both differ dramatically in terms of their underlying worldviews and assumptions.

Buddhism, like most standard religions, assumes that:

*Humans are inherently fallen and flawed
*This life is not all there is
*This life pales in comparison to the afterlife/the Great Beyond
*Abstinence and temperance are the ways to enlightenment and purification
*The universe is governed/supported by a more-or-less inflexible and straightforward *moral* code. Good is good, and bad is bad, and never the two shall meet or become confused. Those who violate the code are inevitably and predictably punished.*

Of course, to Buddhism's credit, it doesn't necessarily rag on humanity the way, say, Christianity does, and the Eightfold Path can potentially be interpreted rather Satanically. It also isn't as anti-nature as other religions. And, it is often true that we suffer in life because we have desires that aren't met. But, beyond this, Buddhism and Satanism see the world quite differently at core level.

And, I gotta say, I did rather like this guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ch%C3%B6gyam_Trungpa

But, like others here have said, Eastern religions have some wonderful tools that you can use. I recommend you check out Taoism (especially Chuang Tzu), Wang Yang Ming, Hsun Tzu, and Yang Chu. Don't limit yourself to Buddhism; Confucianism has a lot to offer, too (as seen by the aforementioned scholars), as does Hinduism and Taoism. Mo-ism (which is extinct, and was founded by Mo Tzu, not to be confused with Mao Tse Tung) is total shit, however .


*Satanism does maintain that the universe runs on certain laws and rules of thumb, of course, and some of these could be said to be moral. It is also true that those who do not recognize the laws of nature often get bitchslapped. But, where actual morality's concerned, Satanism doesn't take as black-and-white a view as other religions, and instead maintains that morality is contextual and sometimes even irrelevant, and that it is certainly possible for a person or organism to do very naughty or malicious things and totally get away with it.

As for violence, you may not believe in it, but it believes in you .

Seriously, I agree with you that there are lots of situations that could be solved quite nicely without violence, and that we should seek out non-violent solutions when and where they will be most appropriate and most feasible. Violence can cause a lot of stress, use up a lot of resources, and do a lot of needless damage. But, sometimes violence is necessary, and other times, violence is inevitable. So, you should never project your dislike of violence onto the outside world, or expect others to share your enlightened point of view.

I don't take much seriously, that included.

I know close to nothing about buddhism, andit's been years since I read anything about it.

But I seem to remember briefly reading about an alternate form of buddhism inwhich they take the complete opposite approach to "enlightenment", which was said to be more direct but also more "risky". They do it by essentially "drowning their ego's in indulgence", kind of like the "smoke untill your sick as a dog" cure for smoking.... Sounds like a pretty slick excuse to me .

Does anyone think they mite know what I'm talking about? ... It's also possible I just made it up ... and if so, sorry 4 wasteing your precious brainpower.

Thats what I do every morning!
It's basically my brain trying to tell me "Run out of milk.."

Clever!

Now what can you do with this? I wonder.

RUM RUM RUM RUM RUM RUM RUM RUM RUM RUM