Buddhism: A Dangerous Wave From the East?

[kell0618]

With the arrival of the Dalai Lama to the United States, April 24 - May 9, 2007, Christians must learn more about this visit and its purpose. “What does this have to do with us?” you may ask. One needs to understand buddhism first in order to clearly see how it contrasts with Catholicism specifically and Christianity in general.

Important basics about buddhism first:

• Buddhists believe that we have many lives but a soul that will end.
• Life is suffering and the way to get rid of suffering is to get rid of the desire and to eventually achieve ‘nirvana’ which means extinction.
• Some buddhists believe in no god, others believe in one God or many.
• In buddhism, there is no permanence of truth.
• The idea of sin is a stranger to buddhists.
• Buddha is considered a savior, but emphasis is placed solely on an individual’s journey and not a larger community.
• Buddhists evangelize by example only, tempting others with their peaceful demeanors which appear to be very attractive to people in these difficult times.
• Buddhists attempt to deconstruct logic and therefore logic does not exist.
  Please note that the likelihood of demonstrations and protests against the dalai lama’s visit is nil. This is quite a contrast to what happens whenever the Pope visits the U.S. Remember, just as papal visits can evangelize non-Catholics, the visit of the dalai lama can serve as evangelization among non-buddhists. It is the peaceful means by which the dalai lama is received that should sound an alarm in the heart of all Christians.

Catholics and many other Christians believe in the following and when contrasting the points above with these present below, you will see where there is a great danger for those weak in their faith:

• As Christians, we have one life on earth and one soul. Salvation is perceived as living in God’s presence forever in Heaven.
• Christians embrace suffering as seeing that it brings us closer to Christ.
• Catholics believe in particular and unchangeable truths.
• Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior.
• Our doctrines and beliefs are in the foreground
  The appearance of peace and tranquility, immersed in the love for nature and beauty, buddhism can be alluring to the lambs of Christ who have become wayward. For those questioning what the secular media presents to us on a daily platter, the idea of peace and tranquility would certainly be well received.

Brothers and sisters in Christ, we are called to respect the dalai lama, but must keep in the forefront of our minds and hearts that there is a marked difference and to allow ourselves to be seduced by this non-salvific religion would be deadly. Peace is wonderful indeed, however we need to pursue the peace of the Lord Jesus Christ as He asks of us.

Be cautious especially in regard to our impressionable youth. Buddhism has found an ‘in’ among increasing numbers.

With prayer,

Kelly

For more information on Catholicism and Buddhism

 

[CCM08]

It’s important to keep in mind that the pop fad of Buddhism which we see in the west has very little to do with the practice of actual Buddhism. It’s a water down version heavily laced with new age ideology. If you think you’re going to study the religion of Buddhism and come away with an understanding of what people who call themsevels Buddhists in the US believe you’ll be sorely mistaken.

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

A slight quibble, if I may.

Buddha is NOT considered a saviour. The whole notion of a saviour is foreign to Buddhism. Buddha is, at most, a wayshower.

This can be an important point in countering the allure of Buddhism. Sure, one can do pretty much whatever one wants when all is illusion, but in Buddhism one is very much on one’s own at those times when the reality of what is supposed to be illusion is all too clear.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[Contarini]

• Buddhists believe that we have many lives but a soul that will end.

Well, in a sense they don’t believe we have a soul at all. We have consciousness, which flickers from one life to another like a candle flame. Mahayana Buddhists think that everyone and everything has a “Buddha nature,” but this is a very paradoxical concept and I don’t think I understand it yet.

• Life is suffering and the way to get rid of suffering is to get rid of the desire and to eventually achieve ‘nirvana’ which means extinction.

Extinction of selfish craving, yes. Whether it means extinction in the sense of no longer existing in any sense is a very complex question, and different forms of Buddhism have different ways of talking about it.

• Some buddhists believe in no god, others believe in one God or many.

Buddhists traditionally believe in many gods who are simply superhuman beings, part of the world of birth and death as we are. The Mahayana also believe in Buddhas and Bodhisattvas who are “gods” in a more permanent sense. The only sense in which they believe in one God is the Mahayana belief that Buddha pervades the universe and everything has a Buddha nature.

• In buddhism, there is no permanence of truth.

I’m not sure what you mean by that. Some things are always true–that craving brings misery, for instance.

• The idea of sin is a stranger to buddhists.

Not true. Read Buddhist monastic rules sometime. They are full of lists of sins. The “Eightfold Path” describes certain actions as incompatible with the pursuit of enlightenment.

If by “sin” you mean an offense against a personal God, then you’re right, though Pure Land Buddhists might be an exception.

• Buddha is considered a savior, but emphasis is placed solely on an individual’s journey and not a larger community.

Then why is one of the “Three Jewels” of Buddhism the “sangha”–the monastic community? And why is the goal for Mahayana Buddhists to become a Bodhisattva–someone who postpones full enjoyment of nirvana in order to save others?

• Buddhists attempt to deconstruct logic and therefore logic does not exist.

They certainly deal in paradoxes–the Mahayana especially–but Buddhist philosophy has a pretty rigorous logic, it seems to me.

I think these characterizations are half-true at best. You are taking altogether the wrong approach. You say rightly that the peaceful attitude of Buddhists is appealing to people and you see this as a threat, but you don’t seem to realize that your paranoid and hostile approach is the sort of thing that makes people find Buddhism appealing by contrast!

Your post certainly makes me more sympathetic to Buddhism rather than less! Your approach will backfire disastrously.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

A slight quibble, if I may.

Buddha is NOT considered a saviour. The whole notion of a saviour is foreign to Buddhism. Buddha is, at most, a wayshower.

That’s true of Theravada (though even there I’d say that Buddha is a savior precisely as a “wayshower”) which teaches that we must save ourselves by our own efforts. But it’s certainly not true of Mahayana Buddhism, which is numerically much larger.

Edwin

 

[Ahimsa]

That’s true of Theravada (though even there I’d say that Buddha is a savior precisely as a “wayshower”) which teaches that we must save ourselves by our own efforts. But it’s certainly not true of Mahayana Buddhism, which is numerically much larger.

Edwin

And even in the Theravada, we find this interesting exchange, which demonstrates the irreplaceable importance of friendship and community in Buddhist (as opposed to ‘new-age buddhist’) practice:

I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One * was living among the Sakyans *. Now there is a Sakyan town named Sakkara. There Ven. Ananda [one of the Buddha’s disciples] went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to the Blessed One, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, Ven. Ananda said to the Blessed One, “This is half of the holy life, Lord: admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie.”

[The Blessed One replied] “Don’t say that, Ananda. Don’t say that. Admirable friendship, admirable companionship, admirable camaraderie is actually the whole of the holy life. When a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, and comrades, he can be expected to develop and pursue the noble eightfold path.”**

 

[Ahimsa]

• Life is suffering

This is probably the most misunderstood aspect of Buddhism, particularly for Westerners. If you read the actual, original texts, what you’ll find (and I’m summarizing, of course) is that the First Noble Truth states that “dukkha” characterizes everything that we can experience – whether matter or mental states. And dukkha means essentially this: the ultimate inability of anything that we experience, to satisfy us totally. That is, nothing that we can sense with the five senses (smell, taste, touch, hear, see) or experience via our minds (ideas, feelings, attitudes) can make us happy, ultimately or finally.

(And insofar as Christian definitions of God exclude God from being solely identified with anything that we can sense or mentally experience, the First Noble Truth can make sense from a Christian perspective.)

 

[kell0618]

For those of you who subscribe to National Catholic Register, dig out your April 22, 2007 copy from your recycling bin. The story “Buddhism Boom” begins on the front page.

All are interesting comments thus far within this thread and it seems we have some among us who are very well educated in the subject matter.

In regard to sin, I must clarify what I meant. Certainly sin is known to buddhists, what I meant is that they do not particularly focus on personal sin in a way that Catholics do.

About Buddha being a savior, I must only reply that he is the next closest thing to being a savior. He shows ‘the way’, yet we see Christ as THE WAY.

About the soul, the article here clearly refers to a soul. Whether it is illustrated as a beautiful flame flickering or a cloud of smoke doesn’t matter, though the imagery is lovely!

The purpose of my OP was to grab the attention of those of us who do not understand the buddhist beliefs. I am not pulling the usual ‘sky is falling’ routine that is found within the Seventh Day Adventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses, to name only two. Bottom line, educate yourselves so that you know beforehand the basic tenets of the ‘faith’ when your kid comes home from college sporting some fancy new Buddhist wares.

As a Christian, I am required to help evangelize. While doing so, I am open to (name removed by moderator)ut from other Christians that can better help to explain our faith. I am also not supposed to sit by when someone is in a burning building and quietly watch them expire through the window. Christianity is about search and rescue. Finding those wandering sheep and getting them on the path to Christ.

 

[Vaclav]

Edwin does a very good job in discussing Buddhism. There are differences in beliefs in the different schools of Buddhism and many are dependent on national boundaries as well (though not entirely by any means).

It’s important to keep in mind that the pop fad of Buddhism which we see in the west has very little to do with the practice of actual Buddhism. It’s a water down version heavily laced with new age ideology. If you think you’re going to study the religion of Buddhism and come away with an understanding of what people who call themsevels Buddhists in the US believe you’ll be sorely mistaken.

This tends to be very true as well and in fact some Asian Buddhists have been quite hostile to the “American-ised” version of their faith. This is especially true of the stricter schools of Buddhism as those practiced in Thailand and Burma (I think) which as was mentioned by someone else have very strict codes of conduct for monks.

Buddhism is sometimes very difficult for Westerners to grasp precisely because it does not use the Jewish and Greek philosophical foundations that we are accustomed to. It is truly impossible to project Judaic, Christian, or Islamic structures onto Buddhism. They simply do not fit.

 

[Valke2]

Buddhism is sometimes very difficult for Westerners to grasp precisely because it does not use the Jewish and Greek philosophical foundations that we are accustomed to. It is truly impossible to project Judaic, Christian, or Islamic structures onto Buddhism. They simply do not fit.

I don’t know if I’d agree. many Jews have found spiritual similarities between Judaism and Buddahism. Rabbi Aaron Lew describes these quite well, I think.

 

[Ahimsa]

It should also be recognized that the concept of “soul” is very much debated within Buddhism – because the idea of “soul”, like the idea of “God”, has no one definition, and each person has his or her own particular idea of what the “soul” is. When Buddhism refutes the “soul”, one has to ask, “How are you defining ‘soul’?” And then that question leads us down the rabbit hole.

What all Buddhists do agree to, is that the Buddha was not a nihilist – that is, the Buddha did not teach that the after-death state was the state of sheer nothingness assumed by materialists. Moreover, the Buddha rejected the concept of any material or mental state as being absolutely permanent and non-changing.

So, if I happen to define the ‘soul’ as that part of my body-mind that somehow continues after death – that mere definition in and of itself would not contradict Buddhism. The contradiction would come in only if I made the further statement that this part of my body-mind is absolutely permanent and non-changing.

Thus, Buddhism often likens the soul to a flame: the flame has continuity over time, but if you look closely, you’ll see that the flame changes constantly, every second. Our body-minds are just like the flame, only that our body-minds do not appear to change as quickly. (But if you look closely at our atoms, you’ll find that they are in constant motion.) From the Buddhist perspective, at each miniscule moment in time, our body and mind is ‘reborn’ again and again and again, but (unlike in the case of the flame) the change is too quick for the human eye to see, thus producing the appearance of absolute continuity and the appearance of changing slowly.

That’s why Buddhists speak of rebirth, rather than reincarnation. Each moment in time, our body and mind appears, exists, and then disappears; and this process is repeated moment after moment after moment, giving the appearance of solidity and permanence.

Now, the debate within Buddhism centers on: is there *any *thing that is not body nor mind, something that is perhaps non-changing and eternal? And the simple answer is “yes”: that’s nirvana, or nibbana.

The complex answer is: “no”, because nirvana is not a “thing”.

 

[Ahimsa]

I don’t know if I’d agree. many Jews have found spiritual similarities between Judaism and Buddahism. Rabbi Aaron Lew describes these quite well, I think.

Don’t forget the JUBUs (Jewish-Buddhists). There are also HINJUs, but they aren’t as organized as the JUBUs.

 

[kell0618]

Thank you, Ahimsa. Good information.

 

[August]

It’s important to keep in mind that the pop fad of Buddhism which we see in the west has very little to do with the practice of actual Buddhism. It’s a water down version heavily laced with new age ideology. If you think you’re going to study the religion of Buddhism and come away with an understanding of what people who call themsevels Buddhists in the US believe you’ll be sorely mistaken.

Exactly. I have a friend who went buddhist. I asked him what he had to do to be buddhist, he said, “nothing.” Typical of many college age buddhists I know, it’s just a cool non-western thing to do, but it isn’t any deeper than that.

 

[Urf]

Joke topic.

…right?

 

[Greg27]

Buddhism is an interesting and fast growing religion in the West, particularly in ‘Post-Christian’ countries such as Australia and Europe.

I myself got involved with Buddhism and Buddhist meditation for a few months, but I found spiritually it was not what I was looking for; rather, it made me realise what I had been missing in my evangelical faith, and that was a deep Christian spirituality. I turned back to the contemplative roots of Christianity and found what I was looking for there.

Christianity and Buddhism are in my view, totally different religions, for many reasons, but mainly because everything in Christianity is focused around Christ. There are many other points of divergence, on issues such as reincarnation, meditation, salvation, the nature of the Absolute, and so on, but that is the main difference.

Neverthless great beauty and holiness does exist in some branches of Buddhism, as does great depth in terms of philosophical reflection on man, the universe, and the Absolute.

As a Catholic and a Philosopher, I find East Asian religions and philosophies interesting and worthwhile studying, though a Catholic is not bound to believe that Buddhism as either a Philosophy or a Religion is free of error. I felt myself one thing missing in Buddhism is an encounter with the living God, as Nirvana is a deeply impersonal reality, and another is that in some forms it denigrates the material world too much in favour of the ineffable.

Nevertheless, Buddhism rightly focuses on the need for compassion in religious belief and practice, as well as concern for taking care of creation properly.

Christianity and Buddhism in my experience converge most closely in their rich monastic and mystical traditions. This is probably where the two different religions can best share insights.

 

[Eireann]

For me any religion not founded by Christ is a false religion, with a false hope after death, and I want nothing and never will want anything to do with them.

 

[CherryBomb]

It’s sad how much ignorance there is regarding Buddhism. Pretty much everything you’ve stated is false. Spreading lies does nothing to bring people to the Truth of God.

First of all, there are many branches of Buddhism, just like Christianity. The only one I know much about is Tibetan Gelugpa Buddhism, which is a branch that is in the lineage of the Dalai Lama. My brother belongs to this school of Buddhism, and before I converted to Catholicism I received teachings with him.

Buddhists believe that we have many lives but a soul that will end

False. Buddhists don’t believe in a soul. They believe in the continuation of the consciousness, which is similar, but not a soul. They don’t believe there is any end to it.

Life is suffering and the way to get rid of suffering is to get rid of the desire and to eventually achieve ‘nirvana’ which means extinction.

False. Do you deny there is suffering in life? Of course there is. That doesn’t mean life is all suffering. Nirvana is not extinction. It’s a supreme state in which there is no suffering. Buddhists desire for all beings to reach that state. It’s no more extinction than going to Heaven is extinction. They do believe in ridding themselves of negative desires. I fail to see the problem with that.

Some Buddhists believe in no god, others believe in one God or many.

This might be the only truthful thing you wrote. Buddhism is inherently agnostic.

In buddhism, there is no permanence of truth

This makes no sense. If there were no permanence of truth, there would be no Buddhism, now would there? This is a twisted misunderstanding of the concept of permanence.

The idea of sin is a stranger to buddhists.

False. Buddhists very much believe in sin. And they spend every moment attempting to avoid sin and abolish their desire to sin. The school of Buddhism my brother follows even has a concept of confession similar in some ways to the Catholic sacrament.

Buddha is considered a savior, but emphasis is placed solely on an individual’s journey and not a larger community.

Buddha was not a savior, at least not in the Christian sense. He was a man who reached the ultimate state of enlightenment. The second sentence is also completely false. Yes, emphasis is placed on the personal journey, but only because they believe that journey will allow them to help all living beings reach enlightenment. The larger community is vitally important to Buddhists, so much so that it’s considered one of the “three jewels” that Buddhists take refuge in. The Buddha is the first, the dharma (the teachings of the Buddha) are the second, and the Sangha (the community) is the third.

Buddhists attempt to deconstruct logic and therefore logic does not exist.

False. Buddhism deals with abstract concepts, yes. But they very much believe logic exists and value it highly.

There is nothing about the Dalai Lama’s visit that should alarm Christians. He has been VERY clear that he does NOT think that westerners should convert from Christianity to Buddhism. I can’t think of any Buddhist that thinks that.

I also find your insinuation that the peaceful nature of Buddhists is some kind of sinister front to be downright disgusting. Buddhists are peaceful because their religion teaches peace. It is NOT a front. They very earnestly desire nothing but the happiness and liberation for all beings from suffering. I disagree with them in principle on how to achieve that, yes. I believe in LIVING Christ’s words and LIVING the faith and being a LIVING testament to God. You’ll convert ZERO Buddhists if you try to tell them they’re wrong when you don’t even have a CLUE as to what they actually believe (how well do Protestants convert Catholics when it’s obvious they’re totally wrong about what we believe?) And if you’re desire is to keep Christians from Buddhism, you’re doing a poor job, because your ignorance means you lack any credibility. My faith is not so weak that I can’t understand another belief system without falling out of the Church.

I don’t believe Buddhism is the Truth. I pray that everyone will come to Christ, Buddhists included. Understanding the religion doesn’t preclude me from either of those facts. Truth will get you farther than misconceptions ever will.

This also reminded me that my brother went out to Wisconsin to see the Dalai Lama. I’ll have to call him and see how it went, I think he gets back today.

 

[CherryBomb]

And that article is SO off the mark it’s driving me nuts. I really hope these are all unintentional falsities, because otherwise I’m insulted that people think the Truth of Christ is so weak we have to lie about Buddhism to make the LORD look better.

 

[CherryBomb]

And just to make it clear, as I stated, those are all perspectives specific to Tibetan Gelugpa Buddhists in the lineage of the 13th dalai lama. Some sects, like Zen, are very different. I just didn’t feel like typing that out over and over so I used Buddhist