Be industrious?

Buddhism glorifies poverty but at the end of the day working hard and earning money, producing food and being creative are very important to mental health and overall society.

>>16882126
Buddhism is a religion that says being a neet is essential to the soteriological path

Buddhist morals really don't align with an industriousness. Resilience yes, aware/considered action yes - but greed fueled grasping after more, no

>>16882089
>Are lay Buddhist values enough to lead a good life?
yeah the 5 precepts are enough that's the whole advise from the buddha

prosperity of people is done with cultivating metta and the insights
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nyanaponika/wheel006.html
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.08.amar.html
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an11/an11.016.piya.html
"Monks, eleven advantages are to be expected from the release (deliverance) of heart by familiarizing oneself with thoughts of loving-kindness (metta), by the cultivation of loving-kindness, by constantly increasing these thoughts, by regarding loving-kindness as a vehicle (of expression), and also as something to be treasured, by living in conformity with these thoughts, by putting these ideas into practice, and by establishing them. What are the eleven?

1. "He sleeps in comfort. 2. He awakes in comfort. 3. He sees no evil dreams. 4. He is dear to human beings. 5. He is dear to non-human beings. 6. Devas (gods) protect him. 7. Fire, poison, and sword cannot touch him. 8. His mind can concentrate quickly. 9. His countenance is serene. 10. He dies without being confused in mind. 11. If he fails to attain arahantship (the highest sanctity) here and now, he will be reborn in the brahma-world.

>>16882126
>>16882132
Nothing about not being industrous and glorifying poverty for the lay.

I think you're confused. Do you say Christianity glorifies not being industrous and glorifies poverty because Christian monastics do the same thing Buddhist monastics do?

>>16882662
>Christianity glorifies not being industrous and glorifies poverty
Until the Reformation and Counter-Reformation it absolutely did. Business, sex, finance and just about anything that was "worldly" as opposed to monastic was borderline sinful and Christian hagiography was full of Buddhist tier world rejecting shit like saints drinking puss and rolling around in the snow. Modernity tempered a lot of Christianity's more extreme life-denying tendencies but they were pretty central for the majority of Christian history. The idea that Christianity was only ever teaching some apollonian balance of worldly and otherworldly is anachronistic cope.

>>16882821
And reformation and counter-reformation happened in Buddhism too. So now Buddhism isn't just for monks but for everyone as well. Everyone pursues their own amount of Buddhism.

>>16882089
These are literally human values found in basically every society. Buddhist values is more like the Four Noble Truths

>>16883690
Notably they end there though.
Nothing about being gay or charging interest or not eating onion

>>16882089
NEET life

>>16883690
True but the values Buddhism promotes is basically selflessness/harm reduction. In the truest sense/epistemelogically/philosophically/practically aligned. In a robust way. Whereas others are more of a "yeah those are good but thats because God said so" argument.

>>16882089
>Don't kill
What do you mean "don't kill"? What if savage barbarians are invading your country?

>>16882132
> Resilience yes, aware/considered action yes - but greed fueled grasping after more, no
The way Buddhism relies so often on the either-or fallacy is very off-putting.

>>16884445
Greed is a cardinal sin in Christianity as well. Its not a Buddhist thing. Its a universal morality of all the ancient traditions. People again and again ignore it.

>>16883956
This. Most religions are devotional, which means the path to salvation/liberation is one of servitude and developing a relationship with God. In Judaism, this relationship is characterized as a father and his children, in Christianity, the relationship between God and his people is said to be like a husband and wife, and in Islam, the relationship is master and slave. In Hindu traditions there are other relationships, like mother and child, friend, etc., but there is another way, the way of knowledge/contemplation, which is a direct path, unburdened by myth and the excessive crude anthropomorphism that characterizes the devotional traditions. Advaita, Dzogchen, Buddhism, Neoplatonism, etc. fall into this category. Their ethics are grounded in their ontology. You practice non-violence because you know yourself to be the self of all, so why would you do it in the first place? In devotional traditions, you practice non-violence because God says so, and you love God, so you just go along with it even if you don’t understand why because you want to please God. Of course, when you take reason/philosophy out of ethics, this opens the door to all kinds of arbitrary ridiculous things like “eating pork is immoral” or “wearing gold is immoral”. So it is without a doubt an inferior system and philosophically weak, but it has its own consistent internal “logic”.

>>16884496
>You practice non-violence because you know yourself to be the self of all, so why would you do it in the first place?
In Buddhism the arg isn't "you're a self thats why we should stop hurting each other". But rather, "suffering is bad state, universally, therefore reduction is good for all". The appeal to a self existence isn't the driving force

>>16884508
And also, its not necessarily the ontology aspect for Buddhism but more so perceptual aspect. The whole project is a perceptual correction project done through behavioral correction, leading to emotional correction, leading to mental correction, etc.

>>16884467
The former guy merely said
>at the end of the day working hard and earning money, producing food and being creative are very important to mental health and overall society
he immediately called it greed, which is the either-or fallacy I'm talking about.

>>16884765
Right but you excluded it to a Buddhist only thing when its a universal human quality within all societies. Unless your claim is to expand towards a notion that all humans are offputting, thereby either you claim superiority or are a self-loather