I’m calmer now :)
Anyway, Dark Buddhism is both a book and a philosophy. The philosophy melds Zen Buddhism, Objectivism, and psychology to create an understanding of the world that doesn’t really accurately reflect any of the three. From Buddhism, the author takes meditation and a belief in impermanence, but rejects the doctrine of no-self and the importance of compassion; from Objectivism, the author takes morality, the existence of the self, and A is A, but rejects the static view of the world and the belief that one can control everything that happens to oneself; and from psychology (although I’m a bit hazy on this), the author takes the importance of self-esteem and (again) the idea of self.
Zen and Objectivism are the two most important aspects; psychology serves as a check on both of them, keeping them grounded to empirical evidence.
The meaning/purpose of life in Dark Buddhism is happiness, which is expressed thus:
There are two types of happiness, and each
reflects a respective pillar of Dark Buddhism. First from traditional
Buddhism, happiness comes from within. Happiness is
being completely at peace and in harmony with life, the universe, and
everything. It is very much being part of the “flow” of
the universe without particular attachments, either attachments to the past or present or material attachments. The
second form of happiness is the more material kind of happiness, which
we in the West are more familiar with and which
jibes with Ayn Rand’s Objectivist ideals. This is happiness in one’s
accomplishments, it is happiness in the arms of your lover,
and it is happiness when you get recognition at work for a job well
done. This form of happiness is externally based-even
when the happiness is derived from the self, it is how the self acts and interacts with respect to the external world.