buddhism

[Sixtus]

Originally Posted by notself
Let me say that I practice Theravada Buddhism and am speaking from that tradition.

Buddhists don’t care how the universe came to be or whether existence always existed. The Buddha taught that there is stress and the way to overcome stress.

Evolution makes sense to Buddhists. Buddhists are comfortable with science since we are instructed not to just believe something because we are told, but to think about it and test it for ourselves.

All Buddhists follow 5 Precepts although monks and nuns follow more, these five are the key precepts.

I undertake the precept to refrain from killing living creatures.
I undertake the precept to refrain from taking what is not freely given.
I undertake the precept to refrain from sexual misconduct.
I undertake the precept to refrain from incorrect speech.
I undertake the precept to refrain from intoxicating drinks and drugs which lead to carelessness.

Abortion would fall under the first precept. Buddhists are Pro-Life.

In a recent poll on a Buddhist forum, the precept that people found the most difficult to keep was the precept to refrain from incorrect speech. It certainly is the one I have most difficulty with. The standard is a high one.

These are very good principles by which to live

 

[notself]

Along with the five precepts there are other ethical teachings for both laypeople and for monks and nuns.

The Buddha covered many practical considerations for the everyday life of laypeople. There are suttas on how to treat parents, spouses, children. There are suttas on how to make an ethical living and how to manage wealth.

One of the most interesting teachings was the one that the Buddha gave to his young son, Rahula. I have edited it for the sake of brevity.

“What do you think, Rahula: What is a mirror for?”

“For reflection, sir.”

"In the same way, Rahula, bodily actions, verbal actions, & mental actions are to be done with repeated reflection.

**"Whenever you want to do an action, you should reflect on it: **‘This action I want to do — would it lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both? Would it be an unskillful bodily action, with painful consequences, painful results?’ If, on reflection, you know that it would lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both; it would be an unskillful action with painful consequences, painful results, then any action of that sort is absolutely unfit for you to do. But if on reflection you know that it would not cause affliction… it would be a skillful action with pleasant consequences, pleasant results, then any action of that sort is fit for you to do.

**"While you are doing an action, you should reflect on it: **‘This action I am doing — is it leading to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both? Is it an unskillful action, with painful consequences, painful results?’ If, on reflection, you know that it is leading to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both… you should give it up. But if on reflection you know that it is not… you may continue with it.

"Having done an action, you should reflect on it: ‘This action I have done — did it lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both? Was it an unskillful bodily action, with painful consequences, painful results?’ If, on reflection, you know that it led to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both; it was an unskillful action with painful consequences, painful results, then you should confess it, reveal it, lay it open to the Teacher or to a knowledgeable companion in the holy life. Having confessed it… you should exercise restraint in the future. But if on reflection you know that it did not lead to affliction… it was a skillful action with pleasant consequences, pleasant results, then you should stay mentally refreshed & joyful, training day & night in skillful mental qualities.

“Thus, Rahula, you should train yourself: ‘I will purify my bodily actions through repeated reflection. I will purify my verbal actions through repeated reflection. I will purify my mental actions through repeated reflection.’ That’s how you should train yourself.” - MN61

 

[Contarini]

Reincarnation and Christianity are incompatible, so how does that work??

Buddhists do not, strictly speaking, believe in reincarnation. They believe in rebirth. I don’t know if this can be interpreted so as to avoid conflict with Christian doctrine, but I think it’s less clearly contradictory than the Hindu view. However, you have the additional problem that Buddhists deny a soul at all (which is why they don’t believe that “souls” are reincarnated, since there’s no substantial soul to be reincarnated but only a flicker of consciousness that passes from life to life like a candle from one wick to another).

Perhaps before judging this priest, you should listen to what he or those who think like him can say in his defense. It seems to me that a wholesale adherence to Buddhism is not compatible with Christianity, but that the adoption of Buddhist disciplines is. However, there are clearly some learned (and perhaps holy) persons who disagree with me on both counts! I know we’ve already had a thread on this!

Edwin

 

[richardwy]

Athestic religion like Hinduism.

Nufsed.

It charms so many of my friends to fancy themselves friendly to buddhism. It’s easier for them to swallow and say so rather than telling the truth and saying they are anti-Christian.

 

[Contarini]

Athestic religion like Hinduism.

Nufsed.

Well, since most forms of Hinduism are not atheistic in any sense (none, unless you count the extinct Carvakas, are atheistic in the Western sense, and I believe that even those forms that are “atheistic” in the sense Jainism and Buddhism are atheistic are now extinct, or at least are not practiced as religions, though some secular Indians point to them and to the Carvakas as models), no, it’s not enough said. To say enough you need to say something accurate.

Edwin

 

[Delraek]

Buddhists do not, strictly speaking, believe in reincarnation. They believe in rebirth. I don’t know if this can be interpreted so as to avoid conflict with Christian doctrine, but I think it’s less clearly contradictory than the Hindu view. However, you have the additional problem that Buddhists deny a soul at all (which is why they don’t believe that “souls” are reincarnated, since there’s no substantial soul to be reincarnated but only a flicker of consciousness that passes from life to life like a candle from one wick to another).

Perhaps before judging this priest, you should listen to what he or those who think like him can say in his defense. It seems to me that a wholesale adherence to Buddhism is not compatible with Christianity, but that the adoption of Buddhist disciplines is. However, there are clearly some learned (and perhaps holy) persons who disagree with me on both counts! I know we’ve already had a thread on this!

Edwin

I wasn’t aware I was judging anyone… after having read this thread on the Buddhist beliefs, especially concerning what I thought was reincarnation and, also, no Supreme Diety, I was wondering how the 2 could be compatible. Still am!

Can the Buddhists on this thread comment on this?

 

[Contarini]

I wasn’t aware I was judging anyone

If he’s identifying himself as a Buddhist and a Christian, and Buddhism is so obviously incompatible with Christianity, then isn’t he either a liar or an idiot?

If you are reluctant to assume that he is either of those things, then shouldn’t you be open to the possibility that one can be *in some sense *both a Buddhist and a Christian, and curious as to just how that might work? I know I am. I’m dubious about the idea of being Buddhist and Christian at the same time, so we’re on the same page there. I just don’t want to jump to conclusions.

Edwin

 

[notself]

Athestic religion like Hinduism.

Nufsed.

It charms so many of my friends to fancy themselves friendly to buddhism. It’s easier for them to swallow and say so rather than telling the truth and saying they are anti-Christian.

Why do you think your friends are anti-Christian?

How does “being friendly to buddhism” make them anti-Christian?

Inquiring minds want to know.

 

[notself]

I wasn’t aware I was judging anyone… after having read this thread on the Buddhist beliefs, especially concerning what I thought was reincarnation and, also, no Supreme Diety, I was wondering how the 2 could be compatible. Still am!

Can the Buddhists on this thread comment on this?

Rebirth is a process like gravity or rainfall. It does not require a managing entity.

 

[notself]

If he’s identifying himself as a Buddhist and a Christian, and Buddhism is so obviously incompatible with Christianity, then isn’t he either a liar or an idiot?

If you are reluctant to assume that he is either of those things, then shouldn’t you be open to the possibility that one can be *in some sense *both a Buddhist and a Christian, and curious as to just how that might work? I know I am. I’m dubious about the idea of being Buddhist and Christian at the same time, so we’re on the same page there. I just don’t want to jump to conclusions.

Edwin

Obviously, people can find value in Buddhism. It has loads of practical advice on daily living, elimination of anger, development of Metta (loving kindness) compassion and equanimity. The ethical code is detailed and well developed.

There is a Catholic priest who has been named as a Roshi or teacher in Zen Buddhism. His name is Robert E. Kennedy. It appears that he emphasizes meditation rather than the philosophy of Buddhism. Here is the link. You can decide.

ncrcafe.org/node/1057

 

[rossum]

I wasn’t aware I was judging anyone… after having read this thread on the Buddhist beliefs, especially concerning what I thought was reincarnation and, also, no Supreme Diety, I was wondering how the 2 could be compatible. Still am!

Can the Buddhists on this thread comment on this?

Buddhism is a set of techniques and a theory to back them up. The techniques are, as far as I am aware, compatible with Christianity: the five rules of morality, meditation on breathing, universal loving-kindness and so forth. The theory is incompatible with Christianity: indifference to gods, lack of a soul, impermanent hells and heavens, nirvana and the rest.

It is possible to incorporate Buddhist practices into Christianity without many problems. Buddhist theory would be more difficult to include.

Buddhism has been summed up as “Do good, cease to do evil, meditate.” Christianity generally does the first two well, it can be less good on the third. It is perhaps in the area of meditation where Christians would do well to try some Buddhist techniques. For a good description of Zen Buddhist meditation try Zen is Boring. There is nothing in the Meditation on Breathing - breathing and counting to ten - that is incompatible with Christianity and that is a usual starting point for beginning meditators.

For something more specifically Christian you might want to try Saying the Jesus Prayer.

Whatever form of meditation you might wish to try please do bear in mind Bishop Ware’s warning from the last link:“But those who have no personal contact with [a teacher] may still practice the [Jesus] Prayer without any fear, so long as they do so only for limited periods - initially, for no more than ten or fifteen minutes at a time - and so long as they make no attempt to interfere with the body’s natural rhythms.”
That is good advice and holds for Buddhist meditation as well.

rossum

 

[Contarini]

Obviously, people can find value in Buddhism. It has loads of practical advice on daily living, elimination of anger, development of Metta (loving kindness) compassion and equanimity. The ethical code is detailed and well developed.

There is a Catholic priest who has been named as a Roshi or teacher in Zen Buddhism. His name is Robert E. Kennedy. It appears that he emphasizes meditation rather than the philosophy of Buddhism. Here is the link. You can decide.

ncrcafe.org/node/1057

Yes, I’ve seen that before. I note that he explicitly denies being a Buddhist. What I’m curious about is what the other priest mentioned means by calling himself a Buddhist. Does he simply mean the same thing Fr. Kennedy is talking about? Or is he actually claiming that Buddhist philosophy as a whole is compatible with Christianity?

Edwin

 

[notself]

Buddhism is a set of techniques and a theory to back them up. The techniques are, as far as I am aware, compatible with Christianity: the five rules of morality, meditation on breathing, universal loving-kindness and so forth. The theory is incompatible with Christianity: indifference to gods, lack of a soul, impermanent hells and heavens, nirvana and the rest.

It is possible to incorporate Buddhist practices into Christianity without many problems. Buddhist theory would be more difficult to include.

I agree. The Christian concept of God and soul is in conflict with the Buddhist philosophy.

Whatever form of meditation you might wish to try please do bear in mind Bishop Ware’s warning from the last link:“But those who have no personal contact with [a teacher] may still practice the [Jesus] Prayer without any fear, so long as they do so only for limited periods - initially, for no more than ten or fifteen minutes at a time - and so long as they make no attempt to interfere with the body’s natural rhythms.”
That is good advice and holds for Buddhist meditation as well.

rossum

I don’t understand this warning. Respiration does slow down during meditation, but I don’t see this as interfereing with the body’s natural rhythm. Perhaps he meant something else? I practice alone and meditate for longer periods without ill effect.

Would you please explain a bit more?

 

[Contarini]

I don’t understand this warning. Respiration does slow down during meditation, but I don’t see this as interfereing with the body’s natural rhythm. Perhaps he meant something else? I practice alone and meditate for longer periods without ill effect.

Would you please explain a bit more?

Based on what I’ve read, hesychastic mysticism does involve techniques of breath control. I know that yoga practitioners are warned not to move on to pranayama (breathing exercises) without a teacher, so I would guess that this is what he is talking about.

Edwin

 

[notself]

Based on what I’ve read, hesychastic mysticism does involve techniques of breath control. I know that yoga practitioners are warned not to move on to pranayama (breathing exercises) without a teacher, so I would guess that this is what he is talking about.

Edwin

Well, learn something new every day. The term hesychastic was new to me so I had to look it up. None of my sources described the actual practices, but it does sound as though it is similar to the breath control of Yoga masters. I can see why a teacher would be needed otherwise the meditator could pass out while practicing some of the breath holding techniques.

There is this from New Advent.

Hesychasts (hesychastes – quietist) were people, nearly all monks, who defended the theory that it is possible by an elaborate system of asceticism, detachment from earthly cares, submission to an approved master, prayer, especially perfect repose of body and will, to see a mystic light; which is none other than the uncreated light of God. The contemplation of this light is the highest end of man on earth; in this way is a man most intimately united with God. The light seen by Hesychasts is the same as appeared at Christ’s Transfiguration. This was no mere created phenomenon, but the eternal light of God Himself. It is not the Divine essence; no man can see God face to face in this world (John i, 18), but it is the Divine action or operation. For in God action (energeia, actus, operatio) is really distinct from essence (ousia). There was a regular process for seeing the uncreated light; the body was to be held immovable for a long time, the chin pressed against the breast, the breath held, the eyes turned in, and so on. Then in due time the monk began to see the wonderful light.

In Hindu, Jain and Buddhist meditation practices, the wonderful light is the by product of a well focused mind. I can see how this light could be interpreted as an aspect of God. However in Buddhism this state, called jhana, is considered a tool rather than a goal. (Breath holding is not part of Buddhist meditation.)

This state is so joyous that meditators are warned not to consider this Nibbana/Nirvana. Here is a description of the First Jhana. There are four in the Theravada tradition and jhanas are considered a mark of wisdom.

"There is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities — enters and remains in the first jhana: rapture and pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought and evaluation. He permeates and pervades, suffuses and fills this very body with the rapture and pleasure born from withdrawal. There is nothing of his entire body unpervaded by rapture and pleasure born from withdrawal. SN 45.8

 

[rossum]

Based on what I’ve read, hesychastic mysticism does involve techniques of breath control. I know that yoga practitioners are warned not to move on to pranayama (breathing exercises) without a teacher, so I would guess that this is what he is talking about.

Correct. The meditation should follow the breathing. The potential for danger is when the breathing follows the meditation.

rossum

 

[rossum]

This state is so joyous that meditators are warned not to consider this Nibbana/Nirvana.

People long for big thrills. Peak experiences. Some people come to Zen expecting that Enlightenment will be the Ultimate Peak Experience. The Mother of All Peak Experiences. But real enlightenment is the most ordinary of the ordinary. Once I had an amazing vision. I saw myself transported through time and space. Millions, no, billions, trillions, Godzillions of years passed. Not figuratively, but literally. Whizzed by. I found myself at the very rim of time and space, a vast giant being composed of the living minds and bodies of every thing that ever was. It was an incredibly moving experience. Exhilarating. I was high for weeks. Finally I told Nishijima Sensei about it . He said it was nonsense. Just my imagination. I can’t tell you how that made me feel. Imagination? This was as real an experience as any I’ve ever had. I just about cried. Later on that day I was eating a tangerine. I noticed how incredibly lovely a thing it was. So delicate. So amazingly orange. So very tasty. So I told Nishijima about that. That experience, he said, was enlightenment.

Source: Zen is Boring
Not everything is what it seems.

rossum

 

[Contarini]

Well, learn something new every day. The term hesychastic was new to me so I had to look it up. None of my sources described the actual practices, but it does sound as though it is similar to the breath control of Yoga masters. I can see why a teacher would be needed otherwise the meditator could pass out while practicing some of the breath holding techniques.

The most popular text dealing with hesychasm (or the “Jesus Prayer” which can of course be used without all the hesychastic techniques and theories) is the 19th-century Russian *Way of a Pilgrim. *It’s a quite remarkable story of a Russian layman who became a wandering ascetic praying the Jesus Prayer wherever he went.

The classic exposition and defense of hesychasm is in the work of Gregory Palamas from the 14th century. Palamas’s writings and those of many other hesychasts can be found in the multi-volume collection *Philokalia, *which contains most of the classic texts of Orthodox spirituality.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

People long for big thrills. Peak experiences. Some people come to Zen expecting that Enlightenment will be the Ultimate Peak Experience. The Mother of All Peak Experiences. But real enlightenment is the most ordinary of the ordinary. Once I had an amazing vision. I saw myself transported through time and space. Millions, no, billions, trillions, Godzillions of years passed. Not figuratively, but literally. Whizzed by. I found myself at the very rim of time and space, a vast giant being composed of the living minds and bodies of every thing that ever was. It was an incredibly moving experience. Exhilarating. I was high for weeks. Finally I told Nishijima Sensei about it . He said it was nonsense. Just my imagination. I can’t tell you how that made me feel. Imagination? This was as real an experience as any I’ve ever had. I just about cried. Later on that day I was eating a tangerine. I noticed how incredibly lovely a thing it was. So delicate. So amazingly orange. So very tasty. So I told Nishijima about that. That experience, he said, was enlightenment.

Source: Zen is BoringNot everything is what it seems.

rossum

Great article, although of course I disagree with the last sentence!

Edwin

 

[Sixtus]

t

Buddhism is not compatible with Christianity,
Edwin

A jesuit once told me that the ‘end state’ of the soul when it has done all in the next world that it is to do, ultimately returns to the Spirit which created it and it abides as part of that Supreme Spirit [God] so that God becomes ‘all in all’.

He further stated that this view is not only Christian but is wholly compatible with the Buddhist view