There were adherents of Buddhism already visiting Rome when the Empire was in its infancy during the bce era.How would Rome fair if they had adopted Buddhism as their favoured organised religion to support the state? Either during in its infancy or when it adopted another organised religion in the 300s. I’m assuming Persia isn’t an issue with its spread and had already syncretised many of its buddhist practices with Zoroastrianism like in Tibet with BönHow would their form of buddhism be shaped and differ from the ones in South/Central/Southeast/East Asia?
>>18759457Pyrrho travelled with the army of Alexander to India. He studied in India and, after his return to Greece, found a philosophical school somewhat similar to Buddhism. At least his concept of ataraxia is basically nirvana. And his apatheia is basically the cessation of dukkha. Works of Nagarjuna are very similar to Sextus Empiricius'. They are similar to the point that some scholars suggest Nagarjuna actually could read Sextus.So, if you want to know what Roman Buddhism looked like, look into Pyrrhonism and maybe into the skeptical period of Academia. From the philosophical point, it's basically Buddhism, but without Buddha.If you'd like to know what Buddhism specifically would look like in Rome, look into the Greco-Buddhism.Also, there was an actual Buddhist mission in Alexandria. But I'm afraid nothing really is known about what exactly Alexandrian Buddists' faith was.
Does it sound Buddhismish?>The Skeptics were in hopes of gaining tranquility (ataraxia) by means of a decision regarding the disparity of appearances and ideas, and being unable to effect this they suspended judgment; and they found that tranquility followed this suspension of judgment as a shadow follows a body.Sextus Empiricius, Outlines of Pyrrhonism 1.29
>>18759457>We almost had european folk religion + buddhism.I blame Greek's philosophy unwilling to let go of the magical ghost inside the human body. That idea has ruined western thought beyond imagination.
>>18760444No.
>>18760469>That idea has ruined western thought beyond imagination.Care to elaborate?
>>18760469>magical ghost inside the human bodyPlatonism - checkPythagoreanism - checkEpicureanism - not checkSkepticism - not checkCynicism - irrelevantCyrenaicism - not checkStoicism - not check (mostly)Aristotelianism - not check
>>18760493That belief has opened the door to many nasty things.Do you feel like a different person? My soul is different! No, you have dissociative disorder. Your life sucks? Take it easy, your soul will go to a better place when you die! And so on.>>18760504I say that because the main reason buddhism didn't have a strong footing on Europe was primarily because it rejects the belief on a soul, something that was a big no-no in mainstream greek thought.
>>18760547Nah, if you wanna make your religion big, go to the rulers or be one. Zoroaster, Ashoka, Constantine, Muhammad. They should've sent a mission to Rome instead of Alexandria.
>>18760547>That belief has opened the door to many nasty things.Do you feel like a different person? My soul is different! No, you have dissociative disorder. Your life sucks? Take it easy, your soul will go to a better place when you die!These are perfectly fine nonfalsifiable copes, especially in a context where you can't do much about the disorder or the state of your life because they're outside of your control. And, if they're within your control, then the copes don't actually prevent you from getting treatment or fixing your life. You'd have to add something extra to get that outcome, like a belief that tolerating a miserable situation will improve your afterlife state. But you could just as well believe that doing your best to fix your life now is what would improve your afterlife state instead, so believing in a soul isn't the heart of the problem there. And most of Buddhism also believes in an afterlife despite allegedly rejecting the soul according to some interpretations, so either the soul isn't the root cause of afterlife beliefs, or those interpretations of Buddhism are incoherent.
>>18760607Ignore the sage in the name field, I left it by mistake
>>18760607>And most of Buddhism also believes in an afterlife despite allegedly rejecting the soul according to some interpretationsAfaik Buddhist do not believe the soul is something unchanging and eternal. They kinda agree the soul exists, but they think it consists of several parts. Souls are destroyed upon death (its parts lose connections just like your body decomposes), but you're still in Samsara, which is the cycle of causation. So, reincarnation in Buddhism isn't souls travelling from body to body, but rather the chain of causation. I maybe wrong though, hope some Buddhist anon will swim out from nirvana to explain their doctrines.
>>18760607>These are perfectly fine nonfalsifiable copesFrom a logical view, yes, but humans don't work like that. The belief in the soul has caused for many harmful ideas to arise, and it has been also used a cope, like you said, to get negative thigs. You are clever here>so believing in a soul isn't the heart of the problem thereAnd you're right, the problem is human nature. If humans cannot handle a concept without harming themselves in the proccess, then it's better to keep it away from them.
>>18760631What would have been better than Platonism and its Judeized baby? Epicureanism? Well, it's easy if you're rich, but what if you're a poor bitch living in a Roman insula? Your life is shit, you need metaphysical support.
>>18759457If there’s gonna be a Muhammed figure that unites the Arab Peninsula, how would their version of Islam turn out?
>>18760750There was nothing wrong with the old and tested traditions, but at that point decadence was too big to stop.
Could Platonic Buddhism be a thing? The One as it was understood by neo-Platonics is beyond being and not being. And the ultimate goal is to reach the One. Until then, you keep reincarnating. This seems similar to nirvana and samsara.
>>18761043Buddha isn't a god, he's a teacher. And Muhammad's authority is derived from being Allah's messenger. Perhaps, in Islamo-Buddhism, Allah would be a deva who became a Buddha, and now he sends the instructions through Muhammad. People following the instruction would reincarnate in Allah's world, which is full of pleasures but also allows to attain enlightenment. In a way, Allah would be a distant cousin to Buddha Amida. If you don't follow the instructions, your karma worsens and you'll go to hell. He could still be against the pagan gods, if he framed them as demons.
>>18760469Every household has a small shrine to their gods as well as the buddha.Buddhist temples built in the local architecture rather than mass importing what’s from Rome. Temples in Greek and Roman style, German and Norse styles, etcRather than claiming divine rule from god, rulers claim descendancy from multiple gods
>>18762024Also, had the Buddhist Roman Empirestill fallen, the Latin language wouldn't have the status it has in our timeline. But I would expect more Greek, since this is the language through which the Buddhism would come to the empire, and this was the language of Greko-Buddhist kingdoms, with which Romans would likely keep the tighter connection.
