Buddhism and Christianity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter YHWH_Christ
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Being agnostic is not anti-Catholic. They’re focusing more on psychological and philosophical aspects of how to live, while setting aside the question of God. Some see Buddhism as compatible with theistic traditions by supporting charitable and peaceful behaviors.

This is certainly different from Catholicism, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t Pro Catholic values there. Charity and peace are Catholic values too. Simply because they are setting aside the question of theistic questions, doesn’t mean that they’re against you. Didn’t someone important say that if they are not against you then they are for you?
 
openmind77 said:
I have lots of respect for Buddhists too (and Christians for that matter) Where did I say otherwise? So sorry, i embarrassed you.
Click to expand...
You said:

“Sure non-intellectuals practice Buddhism, but they don’t understand it very well.”

My personal experience is that ordinary, non-intellectual Buddhists understand Buddhism only too well (Many of them barely know how to read. Many Buddhist monks do not even have a high school education, or equivalence). They not only understand it, but live the tenets of Buddhism. Through their kind and gentle actions, they communicate Buddhism better and more effective than the words of the learned Buddhists.
 
Last edited:
Randolph said:
My personal experience is that ordinary, non-intellectual Buddhists understand Buddhism only too well.
Click to expand...
I am glad to hear it. I personally have difficulty understanding concepts like ‘no-self’, ‘great void - emptiness’, ‘many gods, but atheistic’ etc, but I am sure many people have no such problems.
 
openmind77 said:
I am glad to hear it. I personally have difficulty understanding concepts like ‘no-self’, ‘great void - emptiness’, ‘many gods, but atheistic’ etc, but I am sure many people have no such problems.
Click to expand...
I understand you now. I am sorry for my misunderstanding.

Many Catholic saints are non-intellectuals, but they understood the faith and in their own ways communicated the faith so well—St. Francis of Assisi, St. Teresa de Jesus, Mother St. Theresa, etc… An aside note, in his book “Jesus of Nazareth”, Pope Benedict suggested that the true interpreters of the Gospels are the saints.
 
Last edited:
Peaceable said:
I think you’re misinformed about Buddhism
Click to expand...
You might be right. I know the basics about Buddhism. I know they believe in reincarnation and believe that they are born over and over again in different lives untilo they achieve nirvana. I know they follow something called The Four Noble Truths & The Eightfold Path. I know there are two branches of Buddhism: Theravada Buddhism & Mahayana Buddhism. I know they have a religious leader called The Dalai Lama. The Budda, born Siddhartha Guatama, went under a bodhi tree where he supposedly achieved “enlightenment”

Buddhism is any-Catholic. Think about the concept of reincarnation. They don’t believe in God. They aren’t trying to reach heaven. And, as I said earlier, Catholocism is all I need and I have no need to add another religion onto it. It would be wrong for a Catholic to practice it. 🙂
 
peaceable
“Peaceable said:
You maybe quoting Hanh out of context and misunderstanding Buddhists (and some Hindus) who refer to illusion or “Maya.”
Click to expand...

“In Buddhism, knowledge is regarded as an obstacle to understanding. Like a block of ice that obstructs water from flowing,” (p 48 from Being Place by Hanh).

"Understanding means to throw away your knowledge. You have to be able to transcend your knowledge…The Buddhist way of understanding is always letting go of our views and knowledge in order to transcend. This is the most important teaching, " (p 49).

“In Buddhism, knowledge can be seen as an obstacle” (p 58 from Going Home by Hanh).

“The Buddha warned us several times that we have to be careful about our knowledge,” (p 60).

These are from a few books in my library by Hahn.

For 2,500 years Buddhist literature has emphasized enlightenment, and the renunciation of secular life, including knowledge. Knowledge, science, studying the world, fighting to save others, improving great wrongs in society - any of these, all of these, are regarded as impediments to the path of enlightenment. They are not condemned or forbidden, but they are seen as impediments that will not help the person attain enlightenment.

And yes, a great many scholars have argued that it is this tendency in Buddhism that has hindered society.
 
WHAT DO CHINESE SCIENTISTS SAY CAUSED THE SUCCESS OF THE WEST?

Recently the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences ended a twenty year study of western society in which they tried to account for European success. A direct quote from an official of the the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences put it this way:

‘We studied everything we could from the historical, political, economic, and cultural perspective. At first, we thought it was because you had more powerful guns than we had. Then we thought it was because you had the best political system. Next we focused on your economic system. But …(it is) your religion: Christianity. That is why the West is so powerful…We don’t have any doubt about this.’

Go ahead and look it up.
 
annem said:
For 2,500 years Buddhist literature has emphasized enlightenment, and the renunciation of secular life, including knowledge. Knowledge, science, studying the world, fighting to save others, improving great wrongs in society - any of these, all of these, are regarded as impediments to the path of enlightenment. They are not condemned or forbidden, but they are seen as impediments that will not help the person attain enlightenment.

And yes, a great many scholars have argued that it is this tendency in Buddhism that has hindered society.
Click to expand...
I think again you’re taking the quotes out of contact. He’s referring to what I mentioned earlier- The spiritual context. See my point earlier about the Bible not mentioning science. Doesn’t mean Christians are not scientific.

I’ve seen a great deal of bias in discussions of eastern traditions in the West. I don’t think it’s an intentional, just misguided at times. A huge problem that’s being discussed these days by indigenous folks who practice eastern traditions is the problem of nontranslatable concepts. I’d be curious to see who these authors are.
 
You certainly don’t need to practice Buddhism, no one would be expecting this of you. No one would even expect you to learn about Buddhism. It’s not necessary if you’re happy with your faith tradition. Sounds like your understanding of the faith is not particularly deep, and that’s OK, it doesn’t need to be. My knowledge of many faith traditions isn’t that deep either. And I’m certainly no expert on Buddhism.

Where I get concerned is when you say that people who don’t believe in God are against you. Remember they’re agnostic. They’re not taking a position either way on God. That doesn’t mean they’re against God. I’m not disagreeing that Catholics should not convert to Buddhism or take on all the beliefs. It is after a completely different faith tradition was completely different beliefs.

But they Pope recognizes they also have beliefs that are highly compatible with Catholicism, including beliefs and practices relating to compassion, kindness, and peace. For many years there’s been Interreligious dialogue sponsored by the Vatican involving mutual understanding and positive interactions between Buddhists and Catholics. I would simply say that these discussions have a great deal of value. And as I mentioned, I’ve seen and read of respected Catholic priests and monks who have learned from Buddhist practices. They are still Catholic. Why question their approaches when you’re not certain about what Buddhism is? Why stir up animosity against people who may share some of your same goals? And I get it. It may not be good for you to learn about it because it might cause you to stray from your faith tradition. In this case then don’t do it. But that may not be true for everyone.
 
You’re right in saying my understanding of Buddhism is not very deep. I’m not an expert on Catholicism, but I think it’s wrong for a Catholic to practice Buddhism. I’m glad they emphasize kindness, compassion, etc… But so does Christianity, so if you want to learn how to be kind, why learn that from Buddhism? Christianity is a much better source. 🙂

“Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as Christ God forgave you.”

Ephesians 4:32

As I said earlier, Catholicism is all I need. Why add on to it? There’s no reason and it would probably be sinful. I don’t want to say that I know better than the Catholic priests, monks, & nuns who embrace Buddhism, but I do think it’s wrong to do so and the religious can sin, too. I’d talk to my parish priest if I were you. I’m just an average, ordinary, everyday Catholic, so I could be wrong, but I highly advise against practicing Buddhism. I hope this helps!!! God bless!!! 🙂
 
peaceable
“Peaceable said:
I’ve seen a great deal of bias in discussions of eastern traditions in the West. I
*
Click to expand...
*

WHAT DO CHINESE SCIENTISTS SAY CAUSED THE SUCCESS OF THE WEST?

Recently the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences ended a twenty year study of western society in which they tried to account for European success. A direct quote from an official of the the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences put it this way:

‘We studied everything we could from the historical, political, economic, and cultural perspective. At first, we thought it was because you had more powerful guns than we had. Then we thought it was because you had the best political system. Next we focused on your economic system. But …(it is) your religion: Christianity. That is why the West is so powerful…We don’t have any doubt about this.’
 
The author was actually referring to China post 1700s. In fact he felt that China was more successful than the West (I.e Christian West) before then, when Buddhism had more influence. (Note:I am not agreeing with the author’s analysis, just providing a more fuller account). It seems (in other sources ) he feels Christianity would be a correction to the ills of modern and Communist China, which has largely been atheist and critical of Buddhistic traditions as well.
 
annem said:
“In Buddhism, knowledge can be seen as an obstacle” (p 58 from Going Home by Hanh).
Click to expand...
You play fast and loose with your source material, and seem not to be interested in the truth. You are identical to anti-Catholics who quote mine Catholic works out of context, only you do it to Buddhism. The wiki-article you referred to, says nothing about Dalai Lama, but but a few really bad Lamas. The quotes you have mined from TNH do not saywhat you claim, and in fact have direct parallells in Christianity.

In the Buddhist circle, people speak about letting go of your knowledge. When you know something, you stick to your knowledge. You are not ready to let it go, and this is an obstacle on the path of practice. In Buddhism, knowledge can be seen as an obstacle. Many people try to accumulate knowledge, and one day they may realize that the knowledge they possess has become an obstacle to their understanding. The Sanskrit word for «knowledge as obstacle» is jneyavarana.
To know and to understand are two different things. When you climb a ladder, unless you abandon the lower step, you will not be able to climb to a higher one. Knowledge is like that. If you are not ready to let go of your knowledge, you cannot get a deeper knowledge of the same thing. The history of science proves this. You discover a new thing that helps you to understand better. Yet you are aware that some day you’ll have to let go of that thing in order to discover something deeper and higher. The Buddhist teaching of abandoning your knowledge is very important.
The process of learning and understanding has to do with your faith. As you let go of one notion, one understanding, your faith grows. The kind of Buddhism you learned when you were twenty years old, you have to let go of. The notion of Buddha you had when you were fifteen is quite different from your understanding of Buddha now. Your understanding of the Buddha is deeper and closer to reality now. But you know that you have to let go of your notions in order to have a deep understanding of the Buddha. (TNH, Going Home)

This is no different from what Paul says in Corinthians:

«Love never fails. If there are prophecies, they will be brought to nothing; if tongues, they will cease; if knowledge, it will be brought to nothing. For we know partially and we prophesy partially, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. When I was a child, I used to talk as a child, think as a child, reason as a child; when I became a man, I put aside childish things. (1 Corinthians 13:8-11)
 
Last edited:
YHWH_Christ said:
What are your thoughts on this faith? It came into existence in India/Nepal about 500 years before Christ based on the teachings of Siddhartha Gautama (the Buddha).
Click to expand...
It shares some common ground w/Christianity…
Siddartha Gautama? Is not the actual Messiah of God…
the Church accepts whatever is true in other belief systems
JESUS is the complete embodiment of Truth
 
This whole thread reminds me of a conversation I had with a Jewish woman a few years ago. It was prompted by my asking her about her views about rebirth, but the conversation quickly turned to Jesus and the New Testament since we were part of a multireligious discussion group, and there were Christians present. She seemed to be a very well educated and knowledgeable woman who enjoyed talking about modern historical critical research of the gospels. It was quite apparent that she enjoyed criticizing them, almost to the point of gloating. My view was (and is) that none of that research invalidates Christianity, but it does pose problems for certain forms of fundamentalist belief. At any rate, I wanted to see how open minded she really was, and so I started asking her about modern historical critical research on the Jewish scriptures, particularly Abraham, 12 tribes, and the Exodus.

Now her mode of behavior changed completely. From openly embracing and enjoying modern scholarship, she clung to conservative positions that most modern scholars reject. Views that the same scholars she mentioned when discussing the New Testament would almost certainly reject. Instead, she went into full defense mode. It was apparent to me that her Jewish faith was very important to her, and the she had built an elaborate mental shield to defend it from the same modern scientific studies she quite happily weaponized against other faiths.

It seems to me that a lot people are rarely willing or even able to apply the same standards of evaluation to their own worldview and/or religious belief that they apply to the beliefs and worldviews of others.
 
My son lost his faith at a Benedictine school. He then took an interest in Buddhism and purchased the Penguin Classics book of Buddhist Scriptures. At that time he used very kindly to drive me to work and suggested I read the book to him while we were driving along.

We were both taken aback at the sheer bloodcurdling violence of the descriptions of hell, more graphic than anything comparable in Catholic literature. It completely put him off Buddhism!

Sadly he has not shown any religious curiosity since and if you read this, of your charity please say a prayer for him.
 
Maximian said:
My son lost his faith at a Benedictine school. He then took an interest in Buddhism and purchased the Penguin Classics book of Buddhist Scriptures. At that time he used very kindly to drive me to work and suggested I read the book to him while we were driving along.
Click to expand...
I am so sorry to hear this!!! I will pray for him!!! 🙏
 
I’ve heard Saint Josaphat is likely the western retelling of the story of the buddha.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top