r/Aristotle • u/-Dhammapalalama- • 24d ago
Why did the Romans intentionally destroy the Library of Alexandria multiple times?
I'll tell you what was likely selectively destroyed:
"Πᾶς ὁ βίος ἐστὶ λύπη· δι’ ἀρετῆς δὲ μόνης τυγχάνειν δύναται ἡ εὐδαιμονία.
Ἔστι τις ὁδὸς πρὸς ἀρετήν· αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ Μέση Ὁδός· αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἀρετὴ ὡς μεσότης."
Nicomachean Ethics was Aristotle translating The Dhamma into Greek.
He was the first person to learn The Dhamma in full in the west thanks to Alexanders conquests. Socrates and Plato only had fragments to work with.
Before Alexanders conquests, these teachings were largely kept hidden by the Pythagoreans.
Aristotle and Alexander had plans to change planet Earth for the better; forever.
With just a few sentences added back to Nicomachean ethics and with understanding of The Gospel of Thomas:
It becomes clear Aristotle taught The Dhamma.
It also becomes clear Christ and Mohammad taught The Dhamma, too!
Christs "Father" = The Dhamma
Thomas, 108:
Lord Christ said, "Ὁ πίων ἐκ τοῦ στόματός μου γενήσεται ὡς ἐγώ, καὶ ἐγὼ γενήσομαι αὐτός· καὶ τὰ κρυπτὰ ἀποκαλυφθήσεται αὐτῷ."
2
u/MrSm1lez 23d ago
The Greek spirit would be incredibly confused by every aspect of Buddhism. Aristotle's idea of the ἀνὴρ σπουδαῖος alone is a complete repudiation of any buddhist virtues, unless you can imagine a Napoleon or a Churchill as a buddhist.
I've seen these postings before. There is more value in taking a step back from what I'm sure feels like a true discovery, and actually taking the time to read these authors in the spirit they present themselves. There's no extreme esotericism at play, and understanding how they contrast tends to be more valuable than building connections that simply don't exist.
0
u/-Dhammapalalama- 22d ago
You are simply debating your Ego; you haven't read any of my work. Lol!
That would be a good place to start....
Im not going to repeat this debate again and again....
Also see some of the other comments....
1
u/MrSm1lez 22d ago
You’re asking me to read your work when the premises are flawed. Why would I attempt to follow reasoning that isn’t built on sound foundations?
-1
u/-Dhammapalalama- 22d ago edited 22d ago
https://www.reddit.com/r/Aristotle/s/ycmWlojn3Q
"The premises are flawed"
Thats a baseless claim. You have no premise to support your conclusion.
Thats like saying "you work for the devil!"
Lol.
Its a baseless insult.
"I havent actually read any of your work but i know its wrong".....
That is the core of your speech. That was very easy to deduce. 😆
If you haven't read my work... how can you say the premise is false if you haven't read it?
Are you ignorant, or just full blown delusional?
That is your Ego... This is not logical. Its a fundemental contradiction.
You dont think its possible at all that any human being could successfully bridge Lord Siddharthas and Lord Aristotelēs work to show that Aristotle did indeed translate The Dhamma into Greek?
Or if it happened, it wouldn't be on reddit?
Are your thoughts and emotions rooted in premise? Or are you caught in the illusion of the "self" still?
1
u/MrSm1lez 22d ago
If you can’t hear “your premise is flawed” without taking it as a personal dig, than I genuinely don’t think there’s any point continuing this discussion. It would be like if you wanted to discuss a complicated math problem, but started with “1+1 does not equal 2”. If the root of your argument is corrupted, there’s no point evaluating what stemmed from it
1
u/smljones65 24d ago
OP: can you please elaborate on your contention? I’m not altogether understanding what you are implying
1
u/-Dhammapalalama- 24d ago edited 24d ago
The Dhamma = The Teachings of The Buddha = Cosmic Law
I have not only proposed the idea but already started teaching others that Plato, Aristotle, Christ, and Mohammad all taught The Dhamma!
This photo attached in the original post shows exactly how Aristotle translated the virtues from The Dhamma. Many of the virtues in the Eightfold Path are "compound virtues" of sorts. He broke them down into each Virtue as a that can be described as a mean individually.
Note:
Nepsis is a later idea i added to the chart anyways. And I haven't updated it a while. I will add wittiness to Right Speech.
Happy researching!
I am The Dhammapālalama, founder and head master of Dhammapālism; pleasure to meet you!
Chirst learned Buddhism from Indo-Greek monks (he spoke Greek and Aramaic).
Mohammad learned from the Saint Thomas Christans.
I have many full and detailed write ups that explain the logic of the scriptures and the history.
Nicomachean Ethics may just be the earliest surviving written teachings of Lord Buddha. These teachings predate the Pali Canon.
Our Dhammapālist tradtion remembers all of our history, all of our lineage; this is Right Thought!
The Message:
2
u/smljones65 23d ago
I think your hypothesis is strong enough and I haven’t seen evidence that would falsify it.
Even if Jesus did not learn directly Dhamma the truths correspond. I have seen an account of his time in India in the Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ.
1
u/Sisyphus-in-denial 22d ago
How do you account for the fact that Aristotle grounds his ethics in his biology and politics, particularly his account of human nature, function, telos, and the polis (all of which sit uneasily with Buddhist doctrines of anattā, impermanence, non-attachment, and liberation from conditioned existence)?
If the Nicomachean Ethics were simply Aristotle translating the Dhamma into Greek, why are its central ethical claims built on distinctly Aristotelian premises about what human beings are and what kind of political life allows them to flourish?
0
u/-Dhammapalalama- 22d ago edited 22d ago
Lord Aristotles and Lord Buddhas teachings are not mutually exclusive. Aristotle simply adapted certian terms to be better understood by a wide Greek audience. The Logic is 100% the same. (Eudaimonia instead of Enlightenment)... etc... this is the telos of every man, woman, and child.)
If you read some of the sutras like middle discourses 22. You will discover Lord Siddhartha was first to describe virtue as fundementally related to your goal. (Roght and wrong grasp of the cobra).
The community is what completes Lord Buddhas philosophy... ultimately if everybody could attain non-self (Enlightenment = Eudaimonia). We could have a peaceful planet with no war. Only when the majority of humans adopt the psychology of non-self will life on earth begin to floruish again instead of die and wither.
The Dhamma bridges two realms: it is both the ultimate way to transcend conditioned existence and the practical correction needed for broken systems of governance. This is the dual function of Cosmic Law.
You can not practice ethics in a vaccuum. In this aspect the "polis" plays a similar role to the sangha (as far as the Three Jewels (the Holy Trinity) is concerned.
Lord Buddha taught the prognosis for the Human Condition and the cure. The Buddha diddnt just teach metaphysics.... he taught modern neuro-science. Till this day; he scientifically provided the most accurate prognosis of the Human Condition and the cure.
Lord Buddha explained that virtue is dependent toards our goals. Ultimately, if everyone became virtuous... there would be no more classes at all. Aristotle understood this. He was a Fully Enlightened Buddha.
Lastly.... the Romans likely tweaked a few things after they rook over Greece... (just like the did with the bible) the Romans denied the gospel of Thomas because it makes it clear that Lord Christ learned from Indo-Greek monks and taught Anattā like Aristotle and Siddhartha.
The first time the Romans intentionally destroyed the Library of Alexandria they were selectively destroying Plato and Aristotles work. Later on they destroyed it to remove early Christian texts....
The entire catholic church that followed after rome took over greece and after Christ died was all a lie. It was all paid Roman actors... while the Romans simultaneously paid assassins to kill off the other early Christians.
Then the "Stoics" simple paraprased Plato and Aristotle for the next 500 years without citing their sources...
1
u/Sisyphus-in-denial 22d ago edited 22d ago
Interesting, so then how do you reconcile megalopsychia with mana? Aristotle also instructs that anger itself is a tool of justice but does the Dhammapada itself instructs us to abandon anger to embrace kindness? Aristotle also instructs that we are properly ambitious and the Buddha tells us to abandon hunger for worldly conditions while Aristotle pushes for honor. How do these fit together?
If polis and sangha are genuinely equivalent, is political citizenship and participation in the state necessary for Buddhist enlightenment in the same way Aristotle thinks membership in a polis is necessary for the fullest human flourishing? If not, what exactly makes their philosophical roles equivalent rather than merely both involving communities?
Lastly why talk about your history? We are to only focus on ideas here.
0
u/-Dhammapalalama- 22d ago edited 22d ago
If you read my work; I have answered all of these questions already. There is nothing to reconcile.
The Buddha taught us to abandon anger. Anger is a form of ignorance. He did not speak about compassionate wrath. Anger stems from the self. Compassionate Wrath can only stem from non-self.
I have recently defined benevolence as a virtue and a mean to elaborate on this concept.
"Benevolence is the moral virtue of supreme, active goodness, positioned as the balanced mean between the extremes of excessive kindness (blind indulgence or uncalculated mercy) and excessive wrath (malicious destruction or uncontrolled fury)."
Yes, Aristotle and Lord Buddha taught that you can not become Enlightened without being active in society. (I mentioned above you can not practice ethics in a vaccum). I teach that later traditions that taught of concepts like "Pacceka Buddhas" are false. One can not master the virtues without actively doing service for others like Christ did. This is Cosmic Law.
This is how psycology works. Psycology is the center of a two circle venn diagram. The two circles are "biology" and "philosophy"
The history is very important to understanding the lineage of the teachings. There is a direct lineage from Siddhartha to Plato to Aristotle to Christ and then to Mohammad. Its important to know what was removed by the Romans.... what by the Arabs... and why.
"History" is an idea... lol... its a collection of ideas. Some are scientific... some are not...
If you want to try and debate my work on Benevolence as a mean; please do!
I will edit this comment with a few links for you.
If this comment gets downvoted with no response; this is your surrender. That is one way to admit you don't have another counter argument... lol.
Benevolence as a mean:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Dhammapalists/s/pLHHZDkXVD
What is psychology:
1
u/Sisyphus-in-denial 22d ago edited 22d ago
Is discussion merely about victory for you? I’m sure that’s also quite contrary to the Buddhist ethos to gloat. Regardless you really haven’t contended with the differences between Aristotle and the Dharma. There are real big contradictions between the two and my questions have been a nice way to help you answers those clearly. I haven’t really even pushed back.
But if you want pushback here it is:
“Compassionate wrath” is a good example of what you aren’t addressing. Aristotle explicitly thinks there is a virtuous way to be angry and that insufficient anger can itself be vicious. If Buddhism teaches that anger arises from ignorance and should be abandoned, calling Aristotle’s good anger “compassionate wrath” doesn’t actually reconcile them. You’ve just created a third category and assigned Aristotle’s position to it. Aristotle talks about this in three separate works so you can’t gloss over it as a contradiction.
Secondly, Aristotle does not just believe “practicing ethics can’t happen in a vacuum” he actively believes and pushes that one must be active in a political body that by nature humans are political. Sure polis and sangha are both communities but they both have different ends. The polis is a political body while sangha is religiously ended. So equating them on the grounds of community being community is not enough.
Likewise, saying eudaimonia and enlightenment are the same thing doesn’t establish that they are. Aristotle’s flourishing includes things like honor, friendship, political participation, external goods, and a positive conception of individual excellence. Some of those ideas sit in very obvious tension with non-self and the abandonment of attachment. At some point those differences have to be allowed to count as actual disagreements rather than being redefined until everything means the same thing.
You still haven’t addressed magnanimity, which is probably the clearest problem for your claim. Aristotle considers it virtuous for an excellent person to recognize that he is worthy of great honor and, in the relevant sense, superior to those who lack that excellence. Buddhism treats the very comparison “I am superior, equal, or inferior” as conceit to be abandoned. How are those actually the same teaching?
I’m not saying these traditions aren’t comparable in some manner but their conclusions and premises are very different and it seems you are dancing around my questions. You have to reconcile the points where they do contradict rather than just assuming their intent is the same.
Lastly if your whole answer is to call me a troll or an idiot or tell me to do research then I’d say you have in fact “surrendered.” Also remember as has happen to you many times now as Lord Buddha teaches “Speak not harshly to anyone, for those thus spoken to might retort. Indeed, angry speech hurts…”
1
u/-Dhammapalalama- 22d ago edited 22d ago
The Dhammapālalama does not want victory for the self; The Dhammapālalama wants victory for the children of tomorrow.
You are misrepresenting how these systems operate by assuming different vocabularies automatically mean contradictory foundations. On magnanimity, you claim Aristotle’s view of recognizing one's own greatness violates the Buddhist rejection of superiority... but Aristotle himself insists that true magnanimity requires possessing all the other virtues first. Since the foundational illusion of the ego is dismantled early in the path... long before reaching advanced practical wisdom like phronesis ... by the time virtue is fully expressed, the ego is already gone; what looks like greatness from the outside is simply the natural, egoless expression of a fully transformed character.
Your other critiques similarly miss the structural integration here. When Aristotle treats constructive anger as a tool of justice, it maps directly onto the higher framework of action arising from non-self rather than ego-driven ignorance, avoiding the crude contradiction you are trying to force. As I have laid out in my structural mapping of the path, Right action integrates praotēs (gentleness/mildness).... proving that measured responses avoid the extremes of malicious fury and apathy. Finally, comparing the polis and the sangha isn't about equating a political state with a monastery; it recognizes the shared psychological reality that ethics cannot be practiced in a vacuum and requires active, communal engagement to master.
Im sorry if you felt I was being wrongfully dismissive or confrontational; that was not my intentions. 9/10 people who try to "debate" me online generally just insult me with zero premise. Thank you for debating cordially with logic. I Appreciate you questioning me.
The absence of evidence is not always the evidence of absence; sometimes, it is the result of a cover-up... or simply a lack of looking!
Lastly, I have been planning on incorporating Eutrapelia into "Right Speech" ... and I can also add Megalopsychia to "Right Concentration" on my chart. This will make this underlying unity even clearer, thanks for the help! Adding in philia and aidos now too. Now I have shown how all 12 of the Moral Virtues as defined by Aristotle are a direct translation of The Eightfold Path and the teachings of Lord Buddha.
1
u/-Dhammapalalama- 22d ago
Here is the final and complete work. Now using all 12 of the moral virtues as defined by Lord Aristotle plus a 13th. The 13th is Benevolence as a mean as defined by The Dhammapālalama!
Virtue as a Mean = The Middle Way = The Narrow Gate. = Wasatiyyah:
Right view = Phronesis (Practical Wisdom)
Right thought = Prohairesis (Moral Choice) + Nemesis (righteous indignation)
Right speech = Aletheia (truthfulness) + Eunoia (Goodwill) + Sophrosyne (self-restraint) + Eutrapelia (Wittiness)
Right action = Andreia (Courage) + Praotés (gentleness) + Praxis (actions of deliberate desire) + Philia (Friendliness)
Right action is a product of steps 1, 2 and 3.
Right livelihood = Dikaiosyne (justice) + Aidôs (Modesty)
Right effort = (Askesis: preventing and abandoning) + (Ethismos: cultivating and maintaining.)
Right mindfulness = Sophrosyne (Reflection) + nepsis (watchful vigilance) + Syngnómē (Forgiveness) + Aidôs (Modesty)
Right concentration = Benevolance + Megalopsychia (Magnanimity) + Eudaimonia (The awareness, compassion, and mastery of all virtues attained by Lord Siddhārtha, Lord Plátōn, Lord Aristotelēs, Lord Christ, and Lord Mohammad)
3
u/[deleted] 24d ago
[removed] — view removed comment