The Buddha dies: NO problem/ Jesus dies: BIG problem

[flipper]

For example, in Chinese Ch'an or Japanese Zen Buddhism, the emphasis is placed on the experiential nature of Buddha's teachings. The intention of Buddhist practice in these traditions is to enlighten its practitioners.

So if they learned that the Buddha himself failed to reach enlightenment through his own teachings, that would not have an effect on them?

Who can say what would happen? On one hand there's the emphasis in Buddhism on personal experience and more than two thousand years of tradition: "Believe only what you yourself test and judge to be true" is attributed to the Buddha. So there's a lot of people who claim to have had a similar experience, plus a goodly amount of scientific evidence to support the claims made in favor of meditation.

On the other hand:

His Holiness the Dalai Lama, who has taking a leading role in dialogues between Buddhism and science, has repeatedly claimed that if compelling scientific evidence refutes any Buddhist assertion, Buddhists should abandon their own discredited assertion. This attitude stems, presumably, from the Buddhist belief that sentient beings are fundamentally subject to suffering due to ignorance and delusion, and the way to freedom is by coming to know reality as it is.

http://www.alanwallace.org/Tricycle%...%20Article.pdf

So I suppose that if science showed that enlightenment was in itself delusion, that might pose a rather tricky conundrum for world Buddhism.

However, science and Buddhism do not appear to be in discord currently.

[Magdalenbrother]

How about this instead Magdalenbrother,

Buddhist: There is no-self, everything is impermanent.
Peter: Jesus rose from the dead and has promised us eternal life.
Buddhist: ...

I don't see how presenting a head-butting of religious belief between the Buddhist and the Christain helps your case. Buddhism and Christianity have different goals. It would be a big problem if Buddha came back from the dead because that would be the return of the illusion of I. I'm not going to repeat Hamster's main point, but I think he's right.

That's exactly what I've been trying to say for the last couple of weeks here!!!

[Piebald]

That's exactly what I've been trying to say for the last couple of weeks here!!

That Hamster is right? Amen!

[Jin-Roh]

MagBro, if the head-butting issue is something you object to, why did you try to use it make your case?

[Duder]

I have always wondered why Jesus had to do all the self-serving apologetic stuff of the resurrection apparitions while the Buddha could simply pass away-after an ordinary indigestion-and quietly disappear in the flames of a cremation pile without any diminution of faith on the part of his disciples.

Any idea?

Could the answer to this question help us to see more clearly the difference between Buddhism and mainstream Christianity?

Is it that in the case of Buddhism it is the teachings that matter, whereas in Christianity it is the bearded individual that matters?

Interestingly enough, Buddhism teaches no-self...

I am not sure whether the respective ministries of Jesus Christ and Gautama Buddha were really all that different. However, it is clear that by the 4th century CE orthodox Christianity had distinguished itself by making Jesus the one and only begotten son of God. They kicked Jesus upstairs to an office that can be occupied by one being and one being only.

It never became an orthodox doctrine in Buddhism that Gautama was the one and only Buddha. Anyone can become a Buddha, and there have been many Buddhas since the time of Gautama. It is true that when you say the Buddha you tend to think of Gautama, since he had a unique and special role in articulating the fundamental insights of what has come to be called Buddhism. But the Buddha Nature is something that all beings share in equally, and that is the essential fact to which Gautama awakened. It is my personal belief that Jesus experinced a similar awakening ("I and the father are one") - but again - that's just me. Orthodoxy sees it differently.

So a Buddhist can easily tolerate the disintegration of the man Guatama, because the Buddha Nature in which he participated goes on eternally. But an orthodox Christian cannot tolerate the disintegration of the man Jesus, because he is seen as the one and only Christ - and if he goes, there goes the Christ.

[flipper]

Yeah, Duder's right. There have been a great number of Buddhas throughout the centuries in all traditions. I believe that the Mahayana traditions acknowledge all beings as Buddhas.

[Magdalenbrother]

What I've been arguing for is that Buddhism and Christianity are two different doctrinal planets. Their practice is also different. But for me that doesn't mean I cannot use Buddhist arguments to demolish Christianity.

[Jin-Roh]

If that's true for MagBro, is the opposite true for Jin-roh and Hamster?

[Vivian]

And if Buddha never achieved enlightenment under that tree, there'd be no reason to believe that his teachings worked (especially since you don't know until after you die).

Again, Buddhism relies on an incident in Buddha's life that verifies his teachings: His Awakening. The Awakening is what is comparable to the Resurrection of Jesus.

A Buddhist's faith would not be shaken if he saw Buddha die because Buddha's point wasn't to conquer death, but to find enlightenment. How would the Buddhist react if he discovered that the Buddha actually failed to achieve enlightenment?

Excellent insight, Hampster!

This point that Buddha's awakening is comparable to the life and ascension of Jesus is a one that has been obscured by the distortion of both teachings through the ages.

Buddha taught us about the Light or enlightenment, while Jesus taught us about the Love of the Father. But both had attained a United Consciousness with the Absolute Intelligence which Jesus taught was God the Father. The Father and I are One.

Such attainment was achieved by Buddha while sitting under the bodhi tree where in meditation he faced maya (the passions of this delusionary world) and ultimately his ego self, which he declared did not exsit.

Jesus also faced the passsions of this world in his encounter with Satan and his own ego self in the Garden of Geshemene where he triumphed in denial of self with his declaration - not my will but Thine be done.

Through his life and ministry, Jesus showed us the way to enlightenment/remembrance/salvation/deliverence through the mediation of Service. His birth through ascension reveal the steps that all men must go through to enter the Kingdom of Heaven - the same steps walked by Buddha - I come to do what all men must do.

If this revelation startles any of you...do not fear, for Grace will greet those who are pure in heart and guide them on the journey Home.


vivian

[Duder]

What I've been arguing for is that Buddhism and Christianity are two different doctrinal planets. Their practice is also different. But for me that doesn't mean I cannot use Buddhist arguments to demolish Christianity.

MagBro -

There are simple, naive Buddhists who "take the finger for the moon" just as much as their Christian counterparts. They see Buddha as a unique and special diety whose main use is for worshipping, and they see his teachings as if they were commandments to be obeyed. I believe the same thing is true in Hinduism, also.

My point is, there is a perspective from which the differences between Christianity and Buddhism are merely stylistic. An othodox Christian and a naive Buddhist will have little to argue about except the proper name of the object of worship. A Christian mystic and a Zen master will have little to argue about except the form in which the teaching is presented.

It doesn't make much sense to me to use Buddhism to demolish Christianity. Do you want to throw Meister Eckhart out with the bathwater? I think it's better to use Buddhism as an aid in finding the riches that lay hidden in Christianity.

[Vivian]

MagBro -

There are simple, naive Buddhists who "take the finger for the moon" just as much as their Christian counterparts. They see Buddha as a unique and special diety whose main use is for worshipping, and they see his teachings as if they were commandments to be obeyed. I believe the same thing is true in Hinduism, also.

My point is, there is a perspective from which the differences between Christianity and Buddhism are merely stylistic. An othodox Christian and a naive Buddhist will have little to argue about except the proper name of the object of worship. A Christian mystic and a Zen master will have little to argue about except the form in which the teaching is presented.

It doesn't make much sense to me to use Buddhism to demolish Christianity. Do you want to throw Meister Eckhart out with the bathwater? I think it's better to use Buddhism as an aid in finding the riches that lay hidden in Christianity.

Yes Duder!

If humanity could put aside it's fears and shame and guilt - that all began when we fell in the Garden, we might be able to recognize the gifts that God has given us at the roots of most religious traditions. But man so loves the darkness that he distorts any Light that comes into this world once the Messenger has died. So the religions that exist today have strayed from the original teachings.

There is a saying that if Jesus and Buddha and Krishna et al met together in one room, they would recognize each other and hug and kiss, but put their followers in the same room and they will try to kill each other.

If you are interested in the parallel truths found in Christianity and Hinduism, the writings of Paramahansa Yogananda are an excellent source.

One parallel teaching between Buddhism and Christianity is found in Buddha's noble eightfold path and Paul's eightfold armor of God.

The Noble Eightfold Path -

1. Right faith
2. Right thought
3. Right speech
4. Right action
5. Right livelihood
6. Right effort
7. Right mindfulness
8. Right concentration


The Eightfold Armor of God -

1. Gird your loins with truth;
2. Put on the breastplate of righteousness;
3. Shoe your feet with the preparedness of the gospel of peace;
4. Take up the shield of faith, with which you will be able to quench all the fiery darts of evil;
5. Put on the helmet of salvation;
6. and the sword of the spirit, which is the word of God;
7. praying always in the spirit, with all prayer and supplication;
8. and taking care to remain praying, with great perseverance, for all the holy ones.


The variance in order is due to the diffferences in the cultures each Messenger was born into.

vivian

[Jin-Roh]

Yes Duder!

If humanity could put aside it's fears and shame and guilt - that all began when we fell in the Garden, we might be able to recognize the gifts that God has given us at the roots of most religious traditions. But man so loves the darkness that he distorts any Light that comes into this world once the Messenger has died. So the religions that exist today have strayed from the original teachings.

"Strayed from the original teachings..." I'm going to hold you to that.

There is a saying that if Jesus and Buddha and Krishna et al met together in one room, they would recognize each other and hug and kiss, but put their followers in the same room and they will try to kill each other.

You know, I don't agree with that statement, but I'll give you an A+ for rhetoric.

If you are interested in the parallel truths found in Christianity and Hinduism, the writings of Paramahansa Yogananda are an excellent source.

I recommond "Water Buffalo Theology" by Kosuke Koyama, but we'll start with your guy's views.

One parallel teaching between Buddhism and Christianity is found in Buddha's noble eightfold path and Paul's eightfold armor of God.

The Noble Eightfold Path -

1. Right faith
2. Right thought
3. Right speech
4. Right action
5. Right livelihood
6. Right effort
7. Right mindfulness
8. Right concentration

Define all these things.

The Eightfold Armor of God -

1. Gird your loins with truth;
2. Put on the breastplate of righteousness;
3. Shoe your feet with the preparedness of the gospel of peace;
4. Take up the shield of faith, with which you will be able to quench all the fiery darts of evil;
5. Put on the helmet of salvation;
6. and the sword of the spirit, which is the word of God;
7. praying always in the spirit, with all prayer and supplication;
8. and taking care to remain praying, with great perseverance, for all the holy ones.

Ditto.

I'll prod a little further and say that "prayer and supplication" is defined in Judeo-Christianity as communication with a personal deity.

The variance in order is due to the diffferences in the cultures each Messenger was born into.

Have you transcended your culture enough that your viewpoints can supercede the culturally biased viewpoints of others?

vivian

[Magdalenbrother]

A very good reply Jin-Roh. Five pearls speeding to your treasure box.

[Jin-Roh]

Thank you MagBro.

[technomage]

Peter: Jesus has resurrected!
Buddhist: So what?
Peter: That means he was really sent by God!
Buddhist: I thought Jesus rebuked people who would not believe unless they were shown some extraordinary sign.
Peter: ...
Buddhist: You should have known that he was God when listening to his inspired words or seeing his healings and other signs. If you had been transformed, you would have known with absolute certainty, through an inner testimony, who both you and he are and that neither you nor he is ever likely to die.
Peter: Jesus is alive...
Buddhist: You believe because you have seen and touched. Even a goy or a publican would believe if he had been in the Cenacle. If you believe now, this means that Jesus was a pretty bad teacher, a teacher incapable of transforming his closest followers through the power of his words and deeds. We Buddhists saw our beloved teacher die of indigestion and then disappear in the flames of a cremation pyre, and our faith was not shaken because we had faith in his teachings.
Peter: But for us Jesus is central!
Buddhist: An individual, no matter how sublime, is just a messenger. What matters is the message and who sends it. You have fallen into the trap of adoring the messenger, immeasurable mischef will result from such foolish idolatry.

:snicker:

While I agree that this is a false dichotomy, I still have to express my appreciation at some of the concepts expressed here.