Buddha and Jesus both born of Virgins

[PJM]

Both untrue statements.

My dear friend,

What your saying is “untrue” is also my understanding.

Would you be so kind as to allow to know what you believe to be trut, and why?

Love and prayers,

 

[Bill_Pick]

Hi

I think one would like to read interesting similarities mentioned between accounts of lives of Buddha and Jesus . One is given as under by Warren :

“Both are said to have been born of a virgin, and through the holy spirit. (Thomas Maurice, History of Hindostan (London 1798), vol. 2, p. 310; Matthew 1:18.)”

geocities.com/Tokyo/Courtyard/1652/BuddhaChrist.html

I love Buddha and Jesus

Thanks

Parr you are getting better you are50% right and that is a fact not any ones opinion

 

[greggy53]

JFK & C.S. Lewis both died on 22 November 1963.​

This surely proves that JFK was a first-rate Christian thinker, & very fine story-teller, even if he was an Anglican

Jesus & Buddha both had mothers, both of whom were female: I’m not sure this proves much…

From what I read Aldous Huxley also died the same day as CS Lewis, and JFK…Some one I can’t recall the authors name wrote a story about the 3 men meeting in Purgatory. Now that would be an interesting encounter. The Christian, the humanist, and athiest.

 

[SedesDomi]

My dear friend,

What your saying is “untrue” is also my understanding.

Would you be so kind as to allow to know what you believe to be trut, and why?

Love and prayers,

Please see my extensive post at 1:55 AM, Thursday, 05 March 2009.

 

[SedesDomi]

You are correct that all conditioned things, anicca, dukkha, anatta are impermanent. This is a description in particular of the aggregates. But please tell me, what in the universe is not conditioned? What in the universe is permanent? What in the universe is not subject to change?

Nibbana is beyond, not capable of being described but here is one attempt from the suttas. It is not described as permanent. Nibbana is neither coming nor going nor stasis.

“There is that dimension where there is neither earth, nor water, nor fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of nothingness, nor dimension of neither perception nor non-perception; neither this world, nor the next world, nor sun, nor moon. And there, I say, there is neither coming, nor going, nor stasis; neither passing away nor arising: without stance, without foundation, without support [mental object]. This, just this, is the end of stress.”
— Ud 8.1

Thus, the “Middle Way”!

Granted, Nibbana is not a “thing”, not “in” the universe. So, from one perspective, “no thing is permanent” is true, in Buddhism. But we live in the West, a culture with a different set of assumptions. To say that “no thing is permanent” in the West is to be leave oneself open to accusations of atheism! of immorality! of ungodliness! God forbid! But we know that in Buddhism, realities, or dhammas, include both “things” (the conditioned phenomena) and the “no-thing that is Nibbana” (the unconditioned); and to say that “no thing is permanent” does not exclude the existence of a “something” that is a “no-thing”.

As for the devas, they are subject to samsara, anicca, dukkha, anatta as any other being. There are 32 planes of existence of which two are visible to us, the human and the animal realms. These two are natural. The other planes are invisible to us but that does not make them supernatural in the Christian sense. It just makes them unseen. Although the word deva is translated as god, it actually means radiant one. According to Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines, by Nyanatiloka:

Yes, the devas are radiant, shining, even “bright”. The Abrahamic definitions of god are so different from the Indic perspective that I prefer to say that Buddhism is not “polytheistic”, but rather “para-devic” – that is, Buddhism goes beyond (“para”) the devas. And, furthermore, I prefer to say that Buddhism rejects “sarva-bala-deva-ism” – that is, Buddhism rejects the idea that any one deva is all- (“sarva”) powerful (“bala”), because such a deva would then be the ultimate source of both all the good and all the evil in the world, and who would want to worship such a deva who is the source of all the evil in the world? (Luckily, Christian and Jewish theology are not absolutely predicated upon an “all-powerful” deity.)

 

[Bill_Pick]

** there is no ignorance. I have seen the photo of the tomb of jesus in sirinagar, kashmir. Do you know that siri means scull? That is the place of the scull as you people had the word golgotha.

Anyhow, jesus went to kashmir. The budhists welcomed him as if their budha had come back. The old budha who lived 500 years before jesus had predicted the coming in the land of a white masiha (bagwa mathea). So the budhists were waiting for the white masiha and he arrived there in the shape of jesus. They believed him and the budhists under the influence of jesus, follwed jesus in large numbers.

Jesus had married there and had children. He died there at the age of 120 years. (more later)**

why do you keep blaspheming Jesus and this froums and the mod do nothing about it ,why you keep posting hoG wash time after time WHY ARE THE MOD BLIND

 

[notself]

SedesDomi;4902741]Thus, the “Middle Way”!

Granted, Nibbana is not a “thing”, not “in” the universe. So, from one perspective, “no thing is permanent” is true, in Buddhism. But we live in the West, a culture with a different set of assumptions. To say that “no thing is permanent” in the West is to be leave oneself open to accusations of atheism! of immorality! of ungodliness! God forbid! But we know that in Buddhism, realities, or dhammas, include both “things” (the conditioned phenomena) and the “no-thing that is Nibbana” (the unconditioned); and to say that “no thing is permanent” does not exclude the existence of a “something” that is a “no-thing”.

Language always gets in the way of reality.

Yes, the devas are radiant, shining, even “bright”. The Abrahamic definitions of god are so different from the Indic perspective that I prefer to say that Buddhism is not “polytheistic”, but rather “para-devic” – that is, Buddhism goes beyond (“para”) the devas. And, furthermore, I prefer to say that Buddhism rejects “sarva-bala-deva-ism” – that is, Buddhism rejects the idea that any one deva is all- (“sarva”) powerful (“bala”), because such a deva would then be the ultimate source of both all the good and all the evil in the world, and who would want to worship such a deva who is the source of all the evil in the world? (Luckily, Christian and Jewish theology are not absolutely predicated upon an “all-powerful” deity.)

The devas are beings in samsara and are not worshipped. They cannot help humans. They are not a source of salvation or intercession. They really aren’t paid attention to by my tradition of Buddhism except as role models for a moral life.

 

[djconklin]

Hi

I think one would like to read interesting similarities mentioned between accounts of lives of Buddha and Jesus . One is given as under by Warren :

“Both are said to have been born of a virgin, and through the holy spirit. (Thomas Maurice, History of Hindostan (London 1798), vol. 2, p. 310; Matthew 1:18.)”

geocities.com/Tokyo/Courtyard/1652/BuddhaChrist.html

I love Buddha and Jesus

Thanks

Buddha was not born of a virgn according to a study done by Boslooper who wrote a book entitled “Virgin Birth” back in 1962.

 

[swariffin]

No, I support American charities. I like to be able to check out the financials of any organizations I donate to in order to be certain that the majority of my money is being spent on charitable work. This is no reflection on the Tzu Chi foundation.

I see. You support charity, then you are a Boddhisatva to other people.