Buddhism

[Pope_Noah_I]

I went to see the Dalai Lama lecture on Buddhism at Stabler Arena Friday, and I came away from the teaching very disturbed. I went to see the Dalai Lama because I wanted to hear about Buddhism from it’s most famous practitioner, and because I admire the Dalai Lama as a monk. In accordance with my expectations, His Holiness opened the talk with the statement that Buddhism is not a religion, but rather a “science of the mind”. The entire lecture followed suite, and in the entire two hours I sat there I heard almost nothing on spirituality or metaphysics. Instead I heard about the mind, the root of suffering, and other things that made it sound more like science than spirituality. Then it struck me, very deeply, about half-way through the lecture; “What if they’re right?” For the first time in a long time, my faith in Christianity was tested, indeed, my theism was cast in doubt. With all the hooplah about Buddhism, it’s collaboration with science, it’s emphasis on empirical examination rather than on faith, and it’s total denial of a judgmental, personal God, it seemed for a second that they were right. It appeared that they know something that we don’t, attained with their not-so-mystical practice of analytical meditation. I was downright horrified. When I left, I became convinced that if Christianity was to effectively combat Buddhism, we need to attack it with logic, with reason. We need to take away it’s sense of logical superiority and show the West that it’s concepts of inter-dependence and liberation are delusions. I did a search on the internet, and there are no real, thorough, logical criticisms of Buddhism and it’s fundamental tenets. So, in conclusion, I ask others here, those of you who are so knowledgable of our venerable and ancient Faith, how do we do this? How do we combat Buddhism with reason?

(I apologize if this text seems like rambling, I have trouble organizing my thoughts in a coherent manner sometimes…)

 

[vee8]

I suggest you to go to the ewtn audio library and search for Paul Williams and listen to his interview on the Journey Home. The interview is almost one hour long so set some time aside for yourself but it is well worth it. It is an interview I often recommend on Buddhism threads here because well the man knows what he is talking about.

http://www.ewtn.com/vondemand/audio/searchprog.asp

 

[redhen]

We need to take away it’s sense of logical superiority and show the West that it’s concepts of inter-dependence and liberation are delusions.

Good luck with that. Interdependence or “dependent origination” is just plain old cause and effect.

How do we combat Buddhism with reason?

I didn’t think Catholics were into proselyting. If you were to go to one of the Buddhist forums you would never read a thread on how to “combat Christianity” or any other religion.

However, I will give you some ammunition. Buddhism, in all its forms require faith. Faith in karma and rebirth. These are the core beliefs, without them you can’t call yourself a Buddhist. Even the most westernized form of Zen requires this faith.

Karma is just cause and effect, so that doesn’t take much faith.

Now Buddhists may reply that you can see evidence for rebirth, by reaching the fourth level of dhyana (meditation) you can see your past lives like the Buddha did. However, I don’t know anyone who has done this. This again takes faith.

If you want to get a Buddhist all tongue tied, just ask him/her “If there is no self, what is it that is reborn?”

In fact, on one Buddhist forum someone posted this question and received about 100 replies, each of them different.

 

[Boxerdog]

Here is a great lecture on the comparison between Buddhism and the Catholic Church.

catholic.com/radio/calendar_search.php

 

[Boxerdog]

the link didnt work, type in Clark under guest in the radio search or my link and you will find it. let me know what you think.

 

[SedesDomi]

I went to see the Dalai Lama lecture on Buddhism at Stabler Arena Friday, and I came away from the teaching very disturbed. I went to see the Dalai Lama because I wanted to hear about Buddhism from it’s most famous practitioner, and because I admire the Dalai Lama as a monk. In accordance with my expectations, His Holiness opened the talk with the statement that Buddhism is not a religion, but rather a “science of the mind”. The entire lecture followed suite, and in the entire two hours I sat there I heard almost nothing on spirituality or metaphysics. Instead I heard about the mind, the root of suffering, and other things that made it sound more like science than spirituality. Then it struck me, very deeply, about half-way through the lecture; “What if they’re right?” For the first time in a long time, my faith in Christianity was tested, indeed, my theism was cast in doubt.

You need to start meditating, dude. And since you’re Catholic, there are many Catholic forms of meditation.

The reason Buddhists are so “laid-back” and not into proselytizing, is because Buddhists meditate, and meditation allows them to actually experience what some have called “the light within”, or “buddha-nature”, or “nirvana”. If you have encountered the experience of the “divine” (however you want to call it) within oneself, then if someone else comes along saying “You’re wrong!” or “I have a better religion”, or “My religion is more scientific”, your own direct experience of the “divine” would allow you to withstand most any doubts or challenges to faith.

However, if you want to fight the Buddhists on the level of logic, then I say “Good luck!”

The only fight I would suggest you do, is the “fight” of meditation, contemplation, or prayer.

 

[JesuXPIPassio]

I went to see the Dalai Lama lecture on Buddhism at Stabler Arena Friday, and I came away from the teaching very disturbed. I went to see the Dalai Lama because I wanted to hear about Buddhism from it’s most famous practitioner, and because I admire the Dalai Lama as a monk. In accordance with my expectations, His Holiness opened the talk with the statement that Buddhism is not a religion, but rather a “science of the mind”. The entire lecture followed suite, and in the entire two hours I sat there I heard almost nothing on spirituality or metaphysics. Instead I heard about the mind, the root of suffering, and other things that made it sound more like science than spirituality. Then it struck me, very deeply, about half-way through the lecture; “What if they’re right?” For the first time in a long time, my faith in Christianity was tested, indeed, my theism was cast in doubt. With all the hooplah about Buddhism, it’s collaboration with science, it’s emphasis on empirical examination rather than on faith, and it’s total denial of a judgmental, personal God, it seemed for a second that they were right. It appeared that they know something that we don’t, attained with their not-so-mystical practice of analytical meditation. I was downright horrified. When I left, I became convinced that if Christianity was to effectively combat Buddhism, we need to attack it with logic, with reason. We need to take away it’s sense of logical superiority and show the West that it’s concepts of inter-dependence and liberation are delusions. I did a search on the internet, and there are no real, thorough, logical criticisms of Buddhism and it’s fundamental tenets. So, in conclusion, I ask others here, those of you who are so knowledgable of our venerable and ancient Faith, how do we do this? How do we combat Buddhism with reason?

(I apologize if this text seems like rambling, I have trouble organizing my thoughts in a coherent manner sometimes…)

It’s good that you try to work through these moral questions using logic. God gave us brains; some people don’t use them. It’s great that you’re not stuck in that rut.

Anyway, if I can make a suggestion, how about if you typed up, point-by-point, the issues regarding Buddhism that you’d like to tackle. It’s a little hard to prepare a good Catholic response without knowing exactly what the issue is. Be as specific as you can so that we can understand from where you’re coming.

 

[rossum]

If you will allow some comments from a Buddhist on this thread.

However, I will give you some ammunition. Buddhism, in all its forms require faith. Faith in karma and rebirth. These are the core beliefs, without them you can’t call yourself a Buddhist. Even the most westernized form of Zen requires this faith.

At the start Buddhism requires faith. You need faith that the Path you are about to follow leads to the destination stated. As you progress along the path you need less and less faith because you have reached and passed the various markers you were told would be on the path. Eventually you will, hopefully, attain nirvana and no more faith is needed, just as no more Christian faith is needed after you get to Heaven. The difference being that it is possible to get to nirvana before you die; difficult, but possible. The claim is that all of Buddhism can be verified for yourself and so faith is not absolutely required in the final analysis.

Karma is just cause and effect, so that doesn’t take much faith.

Correct. It makes Buddhists very careful about how we act. There is neither sin, not forgiveness of sin, in Buddhism. There are no “Get out of Hell Free” cards.

Now Buddhists may reply that you can see evidence for rebirth, by reaching the fourth level of dhyana (meditation) you can see your past lives like the Buddha did. However, I don’t know anyone who has done this. This again takes faith.

That is the standard interpretation and the standard method as in the Visuddhimagga Chapter 13, and in other places as well. Another interpretation of rebirth is that we change throughout our lives and each different version of ourselves is a rebirth from our previous version. We are different now from what we were ten years ago.

If you want to get a Buddhist all tongue tied, just ask him/her “If there is no self, what is it that is reborn?”

I light a candle. I use that candle to light a second candle. I blow out the flame on the first candle. Is the flame on the second candle the same as the flame on the first candle? Is it different? Is it both? Is it neither? Are you the same as you were ten years ago? Are you different? Are you both? Are you neither? Following Heraclitus, you cannot step in the same river twice: it is not the same river and it is not the same you.

In fact, on one Buddhist forum someone posted this question and received about 100 replies, each of them different.

That I can well believe. Herding cats comes very strongly to mind.

rossum

 

[PoliSciProf]

A dialogue with Buddhism must begin as a lived experience if a logical refutation is to be possible. I recommend a very important book: The Monk and the Philosopher by Jean-Francoise Revel. Revel is a very famous atheist, an anti-Marxist and a philosopher whose son Mathieu (who holds a prestigious doctorate in micro-biology) has renounced things of the modern West (materialism, the pursuit of the soul-less self, etc.) to become a Buddhist monk. It is a far-reaching philosophical dialogue between two first class minds covering man’s search for meaning, science and morality. I recommend reading it and imagining what a first class Catholic theologian (I nominate Ratzinger) would contribute to this intellectual and deeply personal exchange. Go to it, Pope Noah I!

 

[mfbukowski]

I am not Catholic, nor a protestant, but I am Christian, (Mormon) and after studying Buddhism, I have come to the conclusion that there really is almost no conflict with Christianity except for re-incarnation. Kharma is really just the acknowledgement that what we do often has consequences, either good or bad, and that concept certainly doesn’t conflict with Christianity. The main thing as Christians we can learn from Buddhism in my opinion, is how to quiet the mind and open oneself up to mystical direct communication. In the West, I think we have neglected mysticism. Meditation is very useful, in my opinion, in attaining personal revelation. I think St. Theresa would agree.

Anyway, you cannot argue logically with a mystic. What they have experienced they have experienced. I think it is correct to say that Buddhism is not really a religion at all, so to believe it is in conflict with any religion (except again, taking reincarnation as a dogma) would be a misunderstanding of Buddhism. It is nothing to be feared!

 

[rwoehmke]

I guess I wouldn’t get all in a sweat. I just don’t see mobs of people all lined up and jamming to get into any particular form of religion. Seems like the trend is in the opposite direction.

 

[thistle]

I am not Catholic, nor a protestant, but I am Christian, (Mormon) and after studying Buddhism, I have come to the conclusion that there really is almost no conflict with Christianity except for re-incarnation. Kharma is really just the acknowledgement that what we do often has consequences, either good or bad, and that concept certainly doesn’t conflict with Christianity. The main thing as Christians we can learn from Buddhism in my opinion, is how to quiet the mind and open oneself up to mystical direct communication. In the West, I think we have neglected mysticism. Meditation is very useful, in my opinion, in attaining personal revelation. I think St. Theresa would agree.

Anyway, you cannot argue logically with a mystic. What they have experienced they have experienced. I think it is correct to say that Buddhism is not really a religion at all, so to believe it is in conflict with any religion (except again, taking reincarnation as a dogma) would be a misunderstanding of Buddhism. It is nothing to be feared!

Actually if you are Mormon then you are not Christian!

 

[mfbukowski]

Actually if you are Mormon then you are not Christian!

Ok. I believe Jesus is God, He is the Son of God, He came to earth and became man, was crucified died and buried and by doing so atoned for your sins and my sins and is the only way we can return to God and be saved in heaven.

If that is not Christian, the so be it! How do you define “Christian”?

 

[csr]

A family member has recently married a Buddhist, and is drifting toward Buddhism. I don’t find much of any way to answer him, because he just wants to do something (a) easy-seeming, and (b) that goes with the flow. He wants validation for modern views of morality, and to believe that there is no one standard of thinking that needs to be actively applied. People like this are coasting on their natural virtues, which in some cases may be quite high. They may have such natural virtues that they appear to outshine some of us who embrace Christ as best as we know how.

They may think that their approach is more scientific, but, they are ignoring facts which the reasoning mind can discern, e.g., the existence of God. I find that the Buddhist wife tends to say things that are reasonably plausible, i.e. that sound nice and friendly and reasonably acceptable, things like, ‘I try to do good and good will be done by me’ etc. It’s a nice easy religion. No requirements, and you get to feel spiritual.

Part of the problem is that people don’t realize what Christianity really involves. The mystical dimensions are profound.

Perhaps Buddhism is culture + spiritualized psychology, whereas Christianity is what God Himself has indicated to us as the way to recognize Him and organize ourselves.

 

[csr]

links here on www.catholic.com (not including links on forums.catholic-questions.org)

 

[csr]

Another big problem with these discussions is that the Buddhist is unlikely to clearly agree with the details of Buddhist philosophy. When you mention that in Buddhism the nature of truth is slippery and vague, they just smile and talk about doing good. The details don’t matter. It’s as if the standard of reason or thinking is much lower. This ties in with the basic motive of conversion to Buddhism, which is laxity, and feeling personally ‘okay’.

 

[packermann]

Then it struck me, very deeply, about half-way through the lecture; “What if they’re right?” For the first time in a long time, my faith in Christianity was tested, indeed, my theism was cast in doubt. With all the hooplah about Buddhism, it’s collaboration with science, it’s emphasis on empirical examination rather than on faith, and it’s total denial of a judgmental, personal God, it seemed for a second that they were right.

Buddhism is probably the most unscientific religion in the world. First of all, Budhism teaches that suffering is an illusion, that it does not exist. How scientific is it to tell a cancer patient that his “disease” is a illusion? Or worst yet, why should a scientist even bother to find a cure for cancer, or heart disease, or even the common cold, since these are all nothing but illusions?

I would recommend the book Victory of Reason by Rodney Stark. In this book, the author shows that science flourished in the Middle Ages under Christendom, and not under other cultures, because of the Christian view of the world. According to the Christian view, God created a physical world with order. Since the world has order, we are able to investigate it.

Rodney Stark contrasted this view with over views, including the Budhist view. According to Budhism, the physical world is an illusion (which is why physical suffering is an illusion). Under this view, why bother studying the physical world, since the physical world does not actually exist?

That is not to say there are now no Budhist scientists in the modern times. The people in the East saw the progress the West was having with science, so the East started the adopt Westerm science, even though it conflicts with their Budhist beliefs about reality.

But science would never have gotten off the ground in a Budhist culture.

So I find it laughable when I read that Budhism is somehow scientific.

 

[csr]

Thank you for the book recommendation. I will locate that book promptly.

Another problem with Buddhists will be that they say their lives have improved since commencing a program of regular meditation. But, these are natural results of a natural stilling of the mind, perhaps more noticeable in this noisy age. This is not the same as the supernatural results of prayer in union with Christ.

 

[thistle]

Ok. I believe Jesus is God, He is the Son of God, He came to earth and became man, was crucified died and buried and by doing so atoned for your sins and my sins and is the only way we can return to God and be saved in heaven.

If that is not Christian, the so be it! How do you define “Christian”?

This is what you believe:

The Mormon church views Jesus and Satan as spirit brothers and sons of God. God put forth His plan of salvation for the world, and Satan proposed his own plan. Jesus accepted the Father’s plan and offered to implement it as the Savior. The Father chose Jesus, and the spirit of Jesus was given a body through the virgin Mary. He was crucified on a Roman cross, and rose from the dead three days later to establish His deity. The character and life of Jesus is attainable by anyone who performs at such a righteous level.

You not not believe in the Holy Trinity or that Jesus is God and has existed eternally.

 

[rossum]

Another big problem with these discussions is that the Buddhist is unlikely to clearly agree with the details of Buddhist philosophy.

Buddhism covers as wide a range as Christianity. Just as there is no single “Christian” philosophy so there is no single “Buddhist” philosophy. There are many different schools of philosophy within each religion.

When you mention that in Buddhism the nature of truth is slippery and vague, they just smile and talk about doing good. The details don’t matter. It’s as if the standard of reason or thinking is much lower.

Read some Nagarjuna first. Or alternatively a good explanation of Nagarjuna, such as Nagarjuna and the Limits of Thought.

This ties in with the basic motive of conversion to Buddhism, which is laxity, and feeling personally ‘okay’.

That may apply to some people, it certainly did not apply to me. A Buddhist cannot be lax, ever. Karma does not include the concept of “forgiveness of sin” so Buddhists always have to be very of careful what they do as there is no avoiding the consequences of their actions:Mind precedes all conditions,
mind is their chief, they are mind-made.
If you speak or act with an evil mind then suffering will follow you,
as the wheel follows the draught ox.

Mind precedes all conditions,
mind is their chief, they are mind-made.
If you speak or act with a pure mind then happiness will follow you,
as a shadow that never leaves.

Dhammapada 1:1-2
rossum