Відео

there is no difference between the behavior of someone who falls into the world to run away from himself (escapism) and Zizek's ideal form of selfless ego-less being. Zizek is talking about brainwashing yourself for a greater cause (love, philosophy.... ) It's not peace. He doesn't understand

One thing is certain…you are not enlightened!!!

I enjoy Zizek, certainly not because I agree with him. His take on Buddhism is based on associations and incidentals in which he can cite facts - but this has little or nothing to do with the essence from which Buddhism emanates.

Zizek, is he on coke, nose itching.

What about trying to improve your English first? Then trying to relax. Would do you good. Poskusi, saj ni težko. And then improving your knowledge of Buddhism wouldn't be asking too much, would it?!

As a relatively disinterested nonbeliever I am still curious why his opinions are apparently found to be so offensive (presumably by Buddhists?!) merely from some his observations (?) The excuse that Buddhism cannot be nor should it be expected to be explainable with mere words is laughable. It would seem to be much like a complex scientific theory- if you can explain it in simple and easy to understood terms, you don't understand it yourself!?

We first need to suffer then secondly we will then look for a problem to solve suffering. Is this not how the Buddha found out the truth. He suffered at both edges of the scale. First he suffered from ignorance in having excess materialism being a prince then he suffered from letting it all go in extreme like the yogis sitting in silence and prolonged meditation. So he then realised there was a vast space between these two states of mind which he called the Middle Way. His teachings then allow the inner body to heal and the chakras to be flowing once again. Karma is released and the mind is free of suffering ✨🫶🏻✨🙏🏻✨

Peasants in the Great Leap Forward want to suffer? Communism creates suffering not emancipation. Communism creates slavery; just look at the lower classes in China today.

Life is suffering. Its not Life has suffering

Is Zizek a covert Mahayana Buddhist?

this guy is full of beans.

Buddhism even after 2600 years is still kicking but communism is on it s deathbed just after a century😢😢😢

This guy doesn't know what Buddhism is.... First and for all, he should know what is Buddhism. He's totally off the point. 😅😅

Buddhism does not address people's greatest fear: DEATH.

Super🎉

Shit, trying to spell misunderstanding of Buddhism with out prior understanding is worst

There are a lot better AI voices available today, even for free.

Hegel is like my least fav Philosopher besides Marx... Ive just simply never understood him except for the thesis antithesis synthesis which Ive heard came before him. Also his Dialectic and he was an Idealist a christian who made the 3 parts of his dialectic into corresponding parts that represented the Christian Trinity. Idk seems insane but other ppl call him quite the philosopher so I have a baseline respect for him. I DONT have that for Marx at all

For a man as allegedly smart Zizek, he is woefully underread about eastern philosophies. His bashing of the Bhagawad Gita as 'Evil' , without any actual contextual rationale is shocking.

You have touched your nose, hair, beared 1000 times...please don't go for lunch without washing your hands 😅

No zizek.. you should have stopped the moment you began. Buddhist are not asking for you to give them certificates. Nor are Hindus.

What a joke this guy is. May be he should read up more than fiddling with his nose. Everything he said is incorrect. Nobody is escaping from suffering. They are trying to accept it and then detach from it. Even pleasure is a kind of suffering. Who is asking this guy to give pectures on things he doesn't know anything about!?

I personally find Buddhism and Communism go hand in hand. Communism seems to be the exoteric model of Buddhism, which is an esoteric practice itself.

if there's authority, there are classes

I would ask him if he knows he is terminally ill.

He acts as though he knows what enlightenment is. Does he think enlightenment is possible? Is it possible that the grip of the world can be loosened? Is he ready to let go of his grip of the world? That is the paradox of Buddhism. Its not something intellectually grasped. But it's where one starts. The fundamental reality of the world cannot be changed.

A bit of meditation wouldn't harm your tics and involuntary moves

This version of buddhism where you can take a pill to reach Nirvana makes me laugh but it's really sad the same time. No pill can't do the job for changing the data of ignorance, greed and hate which mostly forms all kinds of human desires of our human realm into friendliness, compassion, joy for achievements of others and the same evenly perception of good and bad as you see the emptiness which lays behind of all things. Without this day-by-day training of ethical things you can't enter Djana. Let alone you need a great amount of energy for that and if you do any 'killing' of any sentinent beings this will throw you back to zero and even further, no matter you feel 'piece' inside or not haha! It's not about your perception of the killing and torture. Its just a pure mechanism which will leave this data of suffering of other being in your 'Formless Realm' (causal realm as we westerners say) and you won't be able to go any further in your meditation and can't enter other realms. Just not possible. Ethics means energy in this Universe. That's why it's the key. Buddhism should be studied like a real sceince before talking very superficially about it.

Bro seems suspiciously like criticizing Theravada to then advocate for Mahayana lol

the leaps being-made-here, and across vast area's of thought-forms, janism/buddhism etc etc perpetuate the continuing thought errancy across vast area's of thought-forms, and dare I say, and so on ... desire, eh and how to tame such ...

all the problem you said is not a problem at all. simple

Boycott and strike is violence?

Did the Haitian revolution succeed ? It is to early to say, one might feel tempted to state. Just look what they have now in 2024 and then maybe one might find the courage to offer a Y/N to that question.

Buddhism doesn’t start with the problem of suffering, but with the problem of appearance and reality. Happiness, however you can conceive of it, is very much within a fictionality.

""What I find attractive in Western tradition - it's terribly politically incorrect what I'm saying now - in contrast to this [Buddhist[ idea: don't get involved, maintain an inner distance.... isn't the entire western ethics - starting with Plato - entirely an ethics of falling into? Opening yourself to an encounter. Our western love is not this peaceful Buddhist smile - it's out there. It's something, and you fall fully into it." I want to put this quote over a picture of Jordan Peterson, and see if anyone will notice that something is amiss.

You know you can’t read thousand book and know about something you know only if you feel it To feel it you need to go inside. The outer world is shallow all answers is within yourself, Zizek is great guy, Very smart indeed but I don’t want to listen to him about things he don’t know about. Just say you don’t know there is no compulsion of knowing every damn thing in the world

Whats this mouth breather babbling about complex philosophies like Buddhism and Hinduism ?

We had a horrible experience with a "Buddhist" neighbour. The worst thing I ever did was talk to the woman..... I honestly thought she was a nice person. Couldn't have been more wrong. FIRST RED FLAG: She said I got cancer because I was evil in a past life or was being punished for something. Honestly what kind of rubbish is that ?? I suppose the children in hospital are being punished too...??? 🤨 SECOND RED FLAG: Soon after learning I was going through treatment she began to do strange things like every time we were in our yard or had people over she would get out the sage and gong her bowl whilst walking around chanting some buddhist nonsense (very loudly) THIRD RED FLAG: She set off our smoke alarms when we weren't home (actually out getting treatment) With sage over our fence...... lots of it. Massive amounts. It was all caught on our security cameras & our home absolutely stunk like crap, yet she denied it 😂 FOURTH RED FLAG: She salted our front yard on the property line to the point nothing would grow. This went on every day & night for just over a year then...... The hilarious outcome of all of this.......😂😂...... she got divorced & moved away because her husband cheated on her 😂 😂😂😂 I know I shouldn't laugh but I guess I wasn't the evil one after all

Zizek is as right as he's wrong ~ no problem; his confusion between the dialogical and dialectical is though apparent, no?

Authentic

Buddhism is a Godless religion one of the core beliefs being reincarnation who/what entity decides which form reincarnation should take ie when I die who decides if I should return as a rabbit or in another human incarnation?

Describe a telephone to someone who's never encountered one without becoming bogged down in minutea....this is where Zizek appears to be longwinded but in reality is giving us a thorough explanation so we can fully understand the subject, he cannot be faulted for his explanations & sharing of views as he sees it. But in the end it's only his analysis of the subject. As with all questions involving religious beliefs there inevitably comes a point when we now know that we ( at least in this life) that we will never know.

Approaching what quantum physics is and describes in auch a crudeness is not a good basis to philosophize on... At least in my mind... If I what to discuss Hegels philosophy I'd also have to read many books first. Same for Quantum Physics. I don't judge Zizek for not goin into depth since it's not his ficus of expertise, but it feels a bit Danning Krüger Syndrome like how he utilizes it. Talking about incompleteness here is misleading in my opinion... At least one has to be clear where incompleteness comes into play. The theory is consistent, yet it is an approach to describing nature. It is incomplete in the sense that we cannot describe all of nature with it. Quantum Physics could so far only be brought together with Special Relativity, forming Quantum Field theory which is the basis of the Standard Model (which can describe Quarks Gluons etc.)... however, it could not be brought together with General Relativity so far... Could we go beyond the atom? Yes Zizek, that is what experiments like CERN dive into together with the standard model... String Theory as other theories under development are trying to tackle the problem of getting General relativity together with Quantum Field theory. Yet, to my understanding such theories haven't made any experimentally provable predictions so far... Now arguably, quantum physics always contains probability that we cannot turn into any process that we can fully describe in a way that allows us to determine what a quantum state will result in ... and I can see how this brings in the idea of incompleteness. But we dive deeper and deeper everyday with our understanding and find ever more creative and extravagant ways to get deeper information. I don't believe we are capable of having a model that describes everything... but I do believe the approach towards it can be endless. In a sense there is such incompleteness, but I have the feeling Zizek thinks there is a sharp border "until here and not beyond" (not quoting Zizek btw). I don't think so, but only science can give an answer when it comes to the workings of nature... I see science as the philosophy that listens to the arguments of nature and takes them seriously ... Other philosophies do so as well, but are more flexible, since they don't work in the purest form of logic - mathematics. Whatever you think Quantum Physics is... after all it is a mathematical model - the interpretations around it are not pure logic and should not be treated as such.

"Promo sm" 🔥

On the first point, I agree but for a different reason. The lack of morals and ethics in Buddhism, IMO, comes from the Buddhist meditation practice out of the Mahayana tradition. This teaching appeals to Westerners in particular because of its elite snobbery entitlement. Mahayana Buddhism calls itself the higher vehicle and Hinayana Buddhism the lower vehicle. Hinayana Buddhism, btw, does not recognize Mahayana Buddhism. Westerners secretly like practicing something that is considered "higher" by persons in positions of authority but they also want a payout for their efforts. They put in 10,000 hours of Buddhist meditation so they deserve [fill in the blank]. On his second point, I get what he's saying about falling into society as a Bodhisattva. However, the Bodhisattva is slave work. The notion is that as an enlightened Bodhisattva, after you die you must come back here to preach the Dharma to maintain your Bodhisattva status. If you decide to retreat you relinquish that status. Whether or not he is aware of it, Zizek is promoting slavery. Getting everyone to be a Bodhisattva is not going to change the world to make it a better place because from the start the tradition looks down on a segment of Buddhists as inferior, which extends out to other identity politics. It solidifies the first point that Mahayana Buddhism lacks morals and ethics. If taken from a historical perspective, Buddhism was a reaction to the caste system of Hinduism.

I'm happy that this man is thinking for himself, but my suggestion is that he should do more reading on the subject. And, of course, take an interest in the practice of mindfulness.

Where did he learned about Buddhism anyway? It is all wrong.

Wonderful how Zizek cuts to the quick: Do we want to stop suffering? "I don't think so". Probably not for ourselves, definitely not for the wider community - there are many who dedicate their lives to causing suffering in others. Zizek is quite correct "we as humans" have no wish to stop suffering. Pol Pot as Bodhisattva - amazing thought.

Is he on cocaine?

Amazing stuff..