Ask A Buddhist

[Contarini]

But what could they find helpful that Christ forgot to teach us?

That argument makes no sense. No “forgetting” is involved. Jesus clearly did not intend to give a comprehensive verbal account of all truth in the universe. Jesus did not sit down and dictate an encyclopedia.

Did Jesus “forget” to tell us about the periodic table of the elements, or about the existence of dinosaurs, or about the fact that the world was round and there was a whole continent to the West that nobody knew anything about?

Edwin

 

[rinnie]

Ethics and meditation are separate issues, though I think Christians can use both.

You appear to be confusing TM–which is an allegedly “non-religious” (a dubious, if not ludicrous claim) Westernization of Hindu meditation–with Buddhist meditation. I understand why, since many of the same Westerners are interested in both. But it’s like confusing Sufism with Christian monastic spirituality. Related but clearly distinct things.

Tibetan Buddhists and certain other Mahayana/Vajrayana traditions use mantras and other practices that look fairly close to “idolatry” from a Christian perspective–these are the forms of Buddhism closest to Hinduism.

Other Buddhists don’t do this.

One of the questions that needs raising is whether it is idolatry to pay “dulia” to the historical Buddha, for instance. I don’t see how it can be. Dulia doesn’t become latria just because the object is non-Christian. And as I’ve pointed out on this forum before, the liturgical trappings of patriotism clearly constitute a form of dulia directed toward a non-Christian object.

Precisely. Hence, anything good in Buddhism comes from the Logos, and appropriating it is in no way an act of disloyalty to the Logos! This is the argument Justin Martyr used with regard to classical Greco-Roman philosophy–if he hadn’t, Catholicism would look very different.

Edwin

I am quite confused here Edwin, I was taught the Mantra calls on a Hindu god. Now he said not all use mantra, but ism’t it a practice of Buddhism?

 

[Bakmoon]

Your beliefs are contrary to the Christian faith.

I freely admit this. That’s why I never said that a person could be Catholic and Buddhist at the same time. The whole question is whether or not it is possible for a Catholic to adapt certain parts of Buddhist ethics and meditation without contradicting Catholic Teaching, even though other parts contradict it.

Look at the Catholic Church’s position on Aristotelian philosophy. Aristotle taught a form of ethics that isn’t based on God either, but that hasn’t prevented the many parts of Aristotle which are comparable with Catholic teaching from being used, even in the field of Theology itself.

 

[Contarini]

You act surprised that Buddhism conflicts with Christianity. That’s what we’ve been saying for some pages now.

Yes. But you haven’t been taking the apophatic aspect of Christianity into account, so I don’t think the conflict is as sharp or definite as it appears.

I’m certainly not claiming there is no conflict, just that I question premature statements of conflict, particularly given that both traditions recognize the hopeless insufficiency of verbal formulae to capture the truth.

Edwin

 

[rinnie]

That argument makes no sense. No “forgetting” is involved. Jesus clearly did not intend to give a comprehensive verbal account of all truth in the universe. Jesus did not sit down and dictate an encyclopedia.

Did Jesus “forget” to tell us about the periodic table of the elements, or about the existence of dinosaurs, or about the fact that the world was round and there was a whole continent to the West that nobody knew anything about?

Edwin

No, not at all. All things are revealed to us by the Grace of God. Just like everything else in this world God works in mysterious ways.

Rather it be through the Son Jesus Christ, or through the Church and the Holy Spirit or to use common human beings. God works through all men.

Do you really think that science trumps God?

Science would not be here if not for God. Men could not understand anything without the Grace of God.

That is the problem people feel you have to separate science from God. When that is actually impossible. All things come through God.

 

[Contarini]

No, not at all. All things are revealed to us by the Grace of God. Just like everything else in this world God works in mysterious ways.

Rather it be through the Son Jesus Christ, or through the Church and the Holy Spirit or to use common human beings. God works through all men.

Do you really think that science trumps God?

No. You’re completely missing the point.

My point is that just as God used human beings–not all of them Christians–to bring us scientific truth, so God might use Buddhists to bring us other kinds of truth. Your rhetorical argument about Jesus “forgetting to tell us” certain things is just illegitimate. You can’t maintain it consistently–hence my scientific examples.

Edwin

 

[rinnie]

I freely admit this. That’s why I never said that a person could be Catholic and Buddhist at the same time. The whole question is whether or not it is possible for a Catholic to adapt certain parts of Buddhist ethics and meditation without contradicting Catholic Teaching, even though other parts contradict it.

Look at the Catholic Church’s position on Aristotelian philosophy. Aristotle taught a form of ethics that isn’t based on God either, but that hasn’t prevented the many parts of Aristotle which are comparable with Catholic teaching from being used, even in the field of Theology itself.

My bad there, I though you were trying to unite the two. But now back to the point.

No I know meditation will not work. Meditation is completely on God. You claim no god, Alot of Buddhism is what we call today as new age.

Is not your meditation a way of emptying oneself to find the true self?

 

[Lokabrenna]

I am quite confused here Edwin, I was taught the Mantra calls on a Hindu god. Now he said not all use mantra, but ism’t it a practice of Buddhism?

Both Hindus and some Buddhists use mantras, but a mantra is just a sound, a syllable, or a word or phrase that can be chanted or carved onto surfaces. They’re also used by Sikhs and Jains. It’s like the difference between a Catholic prayer and a Protestant prayer, prayer itself is a general practice, but different Christian denominations have different prayers that they use.

Protestants don’t generally say the Hail Mary and Buddhists wouldn’t use Hindu mantras (if they use mantras at all).

 

[InJesusItrust]

But your recursion analogy commits the fallacy of begging the question because such functions are only defined with a starting point anyways, which is what you are trying to prove to be true (through analogy) of causality. The argument assumes its conclusion as part of its premise.

I use that anologue because events are a chain. Future events follow past events. Are you sayings events don’t have a cause, that any random thing can happen at any random moment? How did the infinite cycle start without an initial state?

 

[Bakmoon]

No, not at all. All things are revealed to us by the Grace of God.

Do you mean to say that natural knowledge is impossible? That for any given truth, it is impossible to know it without divine assistance?

 

[rinnie]

No. You’re completely missing the point.

My point is that just as God used human beings–not all of them Christians–to bring us scientific truth, so God might use Buddhists to bring us other kinds of truth. Your rhetorical argument about Jesus “forgetting to tell us” certain things is just illegitimate. You can’t maintain it consistently–hence my scientific examples.

Edwin

But it still does not change the question I asked before. We are not talking about science. We are talking about Religion.

I am asking you to take this challenge.What is one truth found in Buddhism that was not given in Christianity? Thats my question. And I never got an answer.

I am not saying there is not one, But I don’t know one. Do you?

 

[notself]

I am quite confused here Edwin, I was taught the Mantra calls on a Hindu god. Now he said not all use mantra, but ism’t it a practice of Buddhism?

It is my understanding that in Hinduism a mantra is the name of a god and is contemplated on by the meditator. This is not the case in Theravada.

The only mantra I am familiar with is the word Buddho which is a variation on Buddha. One says the syllable bud, “u” like good, on the intake of breath and dho, like go, on the exhalation of breath. It is no different than counting breaths. It assist the mediator in the stilling of discursive thought.

Tibetan Buddhist may have a whole other take on mantras, but I don’t know a thing about Tibetan Buddhism. Too many rituals and levels of practice for me.

 

[rinnie]

do you mean to say that natural knowledge is impossible? That for any given truth, it is impossible to know it without divine assistance?

bingo!

 

[Contarini]

I am quite confused here Edwin, I was taught the Mantra calls on a Hindu god. Now he said not all use mantra, but ism’t it a practice of Buddhism?

Even Hindu mantras don’t necessarily call in Hindu gods. The most basic mantra is the single syllable “Om,” which isn’t the name of a deity per se, although it’s understood to refer to Brahman, the ultimate Reality behind all the deities.

There are many forms of Buddhism. Tibetan Buddhism uses mantras, many of which call on one of the Bodhisattvas. In Tibetan Buddhism the line between Bodhisattvas and gods is thin or nonexistent. The most famous Tibetan mantra, Om mani padme hum, is usually translated as “The jewel in the lotus,” though in looking stuff up (on Wikipedia) in response to your post I found out that some scholars challenge this and argue that “manipadme” is actually the name of a bodhisattva. (Bodhisattvas, in Mahayana Buddhism, are beings who take a vow to bring enlightenment to all beings rather than seeking it for themselves. As I said, in Tibetan Buddhism in particular they are often indistinguishable from Hindu deities.)

So you’re not entirely wrong–certainly some mantras do call on deities/bodhisattvas/buddhas of various kinds.

But basically a mantra is a sacred chant whose sound is, to use a Catholic term, “sacramental.” The prayers of the Rosary are, effectively, mantras.

The wikipedia article on “mantra” looks pretty good–in fact I confess that I used it in preparing this post!

Edwin

 

[Bakmoon]

The wikipedia article on “mantra” looks pretty good–in fact I confess that I used it in preparing this post!

Edwin

I can vouch for the accuracy of your post, Contarini.

 

[notself]

But it still does not change the question I asked before. We are not talking about science. We are talking about Religion.

I am asking you to take this challenge.What is one truth found in Buddhism that was not given in Christianity? Thats my question. And I never got an answer.

I am not saying there is not one, But I don’t know one. Do you?

Buddhism seeks the unconditioned, Nibbana/Nirvana.
Christianity seeks eternal life.

One is truth, or both are true, or neither is true.

 

[Bakmoon]

Originally Posted by bakmoon View Post
“do you mean to say that natural knowledge is impossible? That for any given truth, it is impossible to know it without divine assistance?”

bingo!

That doesn’t seem to me to be a common view among Catholic thinkers. Even the great Thomas Aquinas held that there are certain truths (Natural Truths he called them if I am not mistaken) that are knowable purely by means of reason and without the need of supernatural assistance. If I am not mistaken, he even held the existence of God to be a natural truth discoverable through reason without supernatural help.

 

[rinnie]

Even Hindu mantras don’t necessarily call in Hindu gods. The most basic mantra is the single syllable “Om,” which isn’t the name of a deity per se, although it’s understood to refer to Brahman, the ultimate Reality behind all the deities.

There are many forms of Buddhism. Tibetan Buddhism uses mantras, many of which call on one of the Bodhisattvas. In Tibetan Buddhism the line between Bodhisattvas and gods is thin or nonexistent. The most famous Tibetan mantra, Om mani padme hum, is usually translated as “The jewel in the lotus,” though in looking stuff up (on Wikipedia) in response to your post I found out that some scholars challenge this and argue that “manipadme” is actually the name of a bodhisattva. (Bodhisattvas, in Mahayana Buddhism, are beings who take a vow to bring enlightenment to all beings rather than seeking it for themselves. As I said, in Tibetan Buddhism in particular they are often indistinguishable from Hindu deities.)

So you’re not entirely wrong–certainly some mantras do call on deities/bodhisattvas/buddhas of various kinds.

But basically a mantra is a sacred chant whose sound is, to use a Catholic term, “sacramental.” The prayers of the Rosary are, effectively, mantras.

The wikipedia article on “mantra” looks pretty good–in fact I confess that I used it in preparing this post!

Edwin

This is another problem. How can we compare them to Christianity when we don’t even know which form.

What is a lay buddhist?

Hey guys I gotta go. A huge lightening storm is hitting and going to be out of elec. soon. Will be back tommorow. Have alot of question to ask. God Bless!

 

[Bakmoon]

This is another problem. How can we compare them to Christianity when we don’t even know which form.

What is a lay buddhist?

Hey guys I gotta go. A huge lightening storm is hitting and going to be out of elec. soon. Will be back tommorow. Have alot of question to ask. God Bless!

I look forward to engaging with you again tomorrow. May you be safe in the storm, and may you be well and happy!

 

[Lokabrenna]

What is a lay buddhist?

A Buddhist who isn’t a monk or a nun. Your average Buddhist, essentially.