Christian & Buddhist Mysticism: What Are The Differences?

[mercyalways]

No. The goal is to avoid death.

Yet books about Buddhism talk about nirvana as being extinguished. From suffering. From everything, from all suffering, hence death. Enlightenment and death appear indistinguishable.

Moreover, there is the complete inability to explain how it works. I repeat: if there is a non self, then how can a non self be judged and earn some sort of karma? And what on earth is doing the judging and upon what list of rules does the judgment rely on?

Please explain.

 

[Kei]

Christians love Jesus, who is Life (and Truth and the Way), so they love life and embrace suffering, instead of trying to avoid it, which is kind of the whole point of Buddhism, the avoidance of suffering (achieved with asceticism and meditation etc).
The way they go about this may seem kind of odd, like going to a foot doctor about an ingrown toenail and getting the whole toe cut off! But, since they assume that there is reincarnation, then life itself in a sense is considered a cause of suffering, since it leads inevitably to death and suffering and hence more suffering in the next life. So to escape the life cycle they want their life to be extinguished in a sense.
Naturally, obviously a lot of our sensual desire can be put out by mortifying our flesh, and so a deal or even a great deal of success is not surprising, especially considering the merciful manner God releases His graces. Meditation in general can change the way we act and react and think. So, as a Christian, I really don’t see an issue in saying they’re experiencing something rather (more or less) natural, that they interpret in their own worldview.
As Christians, we are open to the Almighty and Supreme God. Our meditations are more focused on Him and we hope to be inflamed by the flare that lights up Christ’s Sacred Heart. We hope to become as a clear window for the light to come through.

 

[rossum]

Enlightenment and death appear indistinguishable.

The Buddha became enlightened at age 35. He died age 80. For 45 years he was living in the world while also living in nirvana. It is an error to think of nirvana as just another heaven. Nirvana is not something that happens after you die; it is something that happens while you are alive, during your current life.

What is extinguished in nirvana are illusions. What you thought was your ‘self’ is not, it is just the illusion of a self, like the water is a mirage is an illusion of water.

if there is a non self, then how can a non self be judged and earn some sort of karma? And what on earth is doing the judging and upon what list of rules does the judgment rely on?

Karma does not “judge”. You are applying an assumption from the Abrahamic religions to Buddhism, and that is usually an error. If I throw a stone straight up in the air and that stone hits me on the head as it comes down, whose fault is it? Was I ‘judged’ by gravity? Actions have consequences. If you don’t want the consequences then don’t do the actions. Think of karma as more like gravity than a court of law.

There is no rule saying “Thou shalt not throw a stone straight up in the air.” Buddhism offers advice: “If you throw a stone straight up in the air, then it will come down and hit you on the head.”

The Buddhist path guides you away from actions with deleterious consequences and towards actions with beneficial consequences. Away from suffering and towards nirvana.

 

[Shakuhachi]

Meditation in general can change the way we act and react and think. So, as a Christian, I really don’t see an issue in saying they’re experiencing something rather (more or less) natural, that they interpret in their own worldview.
As Christians, we are open to the Almighty and Supreme God. Our meditations are more focused on Him and we hope to be inflamed by the flare that lights up Christ’s Sacred Heart. We hope to become as a clear window for the light to come through.

That was worth saying. Thank you.

 

[mercyalways]

I really don’t see an issue in saying they’re experiencing something rather (more or less) natural, that they interpret in their own worldview.

But Buddhists directly reject truth. There is no truth in Buddhism, any more than there can be an ultimate good and evil.

For example, Mao slaughtered/starved to death some fifty million of his people. No Christian would have a problem would calling this evil. Many times I have heard Buddhists insist this was mere ‘ignorance’, as evil does not exist in Buddhism, any more than ultimate good. Any more than there is a me, or a you.

Surely this is more than a mere worldview. It is a belief that denies there is belief. And, wouldn’t you also say that it is a belief that defies reality and logic?

 

[mercyalways]

What is extinguished in nirvana are illusions.

Yes, many books on Buddhism explain that when you finally, finally, after many lives, reach nirvana/death, you stop being reincarnated and truly die, never to be reincarnated again. So it seems unavoidable that Buddhism is truly all about achieving death.

There is no rule saying “Thou shalt not throw a stone straight up in the air.”

Moral judgments aren’t stones falling on your head, however. A staggering lack of stones fell on Mao’s head, for example. Nothing in this life suggests that the wicked are punished.

Buddhists say that there is a mysterious force, karma, which will punish. So the karmic force will see to it that Mao is punished, although no one knows why. Why is the karmic force doing this? What taught the karmic force to do this? Why hasn’t the karmic force given clear explanations as to right and wrong, as did Jesus Christ?

Karma cannot be seen by any scientific method whatsoever. There is not the smallest hint of karma throughout history. So upon what basis do you believe karma exists?

 

[Shakuhachi]

And, wouldn’t you also say that it is a belief that defies reality and logic?

From what little I know I would say yes as it transcends the rational mind.

 

[Shakuhachi]

BTW, when we say “emptiness” there a many things we might mean. I am trying to make it through this article.
FORMS OF EMPTINESS: PSYCHODYNAMIC, MEDITATIVE AND CLINICAL PERSPECTIVES

https://www.atpweb.org/jtparchive/trps-21-89-01-061.pdf

 

[Kei]

Surely this is more than a mere worldview. It is a belief that denies there is belief. And, wouldn’t you also say that it is a belief that defies reality and logic?

Even granting all you say, I fail to see how such a belief system would be outside the realm of worldview, as this belief system informs their understanding of the world. What would you call such a thing if not a worldview? It is precisely a worldview, no? Merriam-Webster defines worldview as follows: “a comprehensive conception or apprehension of the world especially from a specific standpoint.”

 

[Shakuhachi]

The way I meditate for the past 40 or so years is a lot like Buddhist mindfulness except I do it in the context of what I believe is God’s presence. I sometimes use what used to be called an “ejaculation” ( really, look it up in the Enchiridion of Indulgences). “Lord, have mercy!” “Adonia”, “My Lord and My God” for me they are invocations rather than mantra. I use them when I need them. Otherwise I quite easily have inner stillness. There, I am attentive, exercising awareness of the presence of God. I am completely available for whatever God wants to do with me even if it seems like nothing.

“Quietism”? Maybe. I really don’t care. Buddhist? Passive nonjudgmental mindfulness but with a big difference - In God’s presence and still seeking God. It takes a lot of faith in what seems like a void. But I become sensitive to something subtle and deep. that is all I can say about it other than I believe it is a person rather than an impersonal purity of being.

 

[Kei]

“Quietism”? Maybe. I really don’t care.

I think we should care to avoid quietism CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Quietism,

but I don’t think what you’re describing is anything like it. I don’t see the difference in what you describe and normal Christian meditation to be honest, maybe I am not understanding the terminology. We normally get into His presence and try to fully focus on Him/His quality as it relates to us until it stops, no?

 

[CRM_Brother]

I think that some of the disagreement found in this thread is due to a confusion concerning the terms which we are using. I’ve identified three primary terms in the Christian context which may help us sort out the differences between Christian and Buddhist mysticism. They build upon each other within Christianity but they are inherently distinct. For example, a Christian mystic will always practice contemplation and meditation but a contemplative will not always practice mysticism.

1. Meditation - Meditation is the application of the intellect to Revelation (whether primarily laid out in Scripture or secondarily through theology or devotional writings). In meditation, man seeks to expand his understanding of God. It is a receptive prayer form in which the Holy Spirit guides and imparts understanding to the one praying. It is summed up by the famous motto of St. Anselm of Canterbury, ‘Faith Seeking Understanding’ (Fides Quarens Intellectum)
2. Contemplation/Contemplative - Contemplation must be divided into two separate forms of prayer, active contemplation and infused contemplation.

• Active Contemplation - Active contemplation is the most usual form of contemplation. It is also the only one which man can initiate. In active contemplation, the contemplative has received understanding of the Divine Indwelling through meditation and the Holy Spirit. The contemplative looks inward toward the presence of God within their souls. Slowly, they form a relationship with the Divine Indwelling. It ceases to be seen as a presence or power and is revealed to be a person: Jesus Christ, himself. The contemplative then begins the process of kenosis (self-emptying). This differs from quietism in the sense that while quietism seeks to dampen and suppress the individual’s identity, kenosis seeks to strip away anything other than the person’s true identity as they had been created in Christ. The ultimate goal of kenosis is the mystical union.
• Infused Contemplation - Infused contemplation is a special grace given to those in an active contemplative state. The contemplative suddenly experiences the all-engulfing presence of God. Sometimes called ecstasy, infused contemplation has been described as the closes someone can come to the Beatific Vision here on Earth and still live.

(post 1 of 2)

 

[CRM_Brother]

(post 2 of 2)

1. Mysticism/Mystic - Just as active contemplation is derived from the graces of meditation, so too is mysticism derived from graces gifted to them through contemplation. As the contemplative progresses into the mystical union (hence the terms: mystical and mysticism) they come to realize that a great divide lies between them and the Father. God’s self revelation inherently flows through the Son, as it is in his Image that the world was created. So too, the Holy Spirit only flows to us through Christ. In the mystical union, this lack of knowledge of the Father urges the contemplative (now mystic) to attempt to breach that gap in the way which we know how: to follow Christ. In doing so, the mystic “beat evermore on this cloud of unknowing that is betwixt thee and thy God with a sharp dart of longing love, and loath for to think on aught under God, and go not thence for anything that befalleth.” (The Cloud of Unknowing, Ch. 12) Ultimately, mysticism is the inverse of meditation when seeking out the Father. The most appropriate summation of this is ‘Understanding Seeking Faith’ (Intellectus Quarens Fidem), for the mystic finds that their intellect halts at the cloud of unknowing and they are left reaching up to God in acts of pure faith and love.
   

As you can see, Christian and Buddhist mysticism do have similarities. They both come face to face with the cloud of unknowing obscuring man from experiential knowledge of the Father. This, however, is where the difference ends. Buddhist mystics see the cloud of unknowing which obscures their spiritual vision of God as Nirvana, absolute being, (or as St. Thomas Aquinas would describe it, 'Ipsum Esse Subsistens).

The Christian knows that there is a personal nature to God through their meditation and the Holy Spirit. It was the embrace of personhood and individuality found within the approach of the Divine Indwelling in contemplation which allows the Christian to approach the cloud of unknowing. They know that the personal God is not the cloud of unknowing but beyond it. Through the mystical union, the mystic accompanies Christ as he throws up his love to the Father and it is only through faith that the mystic has any reassurance that that love pierces that dense cloud.

Now, don’t worry if you cannot progress to mysticism. Extremely few progress that far on the path of prayer. Those with the capacity for mysticism are not any better in the eyes of God than those who do not. Every person is created with different pathways in prayer to walk. Everyone is called to mediation, only a handful are called to contemplation and an exponentially fewer amount are finally called to mysticism. To attempt to seek a form of prayer which you are not called to can actually be detrimental to our prayer life. Allow God to lead you from one form of prayer to another in his own time.

I hope this was clear. I welcome any feedback on my descriptions of meditation, contemplation and mysticism. I am in the process of writing a book on the forms of prayer and these explanations are some of the condensed material from those chapters.

 

[rossum]

Karma cannot be seen by any scientific method whatsoever.

I would be fascinated to see your references to the scientific papers showing the existence of heaven and hell. You do have those references, don’t you? Oh…

 

[Shakuhachi]

used to be called an “ejaculation”

ok, now they are called, “Pious Invocations” in the appendix.
https://sttheresaij.org/documents/2018/4/Indulgences_v2.pdf

 

[christofirst]

I have read about the stages of prayer you describe, but do you consider it wrong or lazy to deemphasize these definitions and to just practice a simple mantra meditation such as the way taught by the late Benedictine monk John Main? I’m not suggesting there’s anything wrong with the time-honored distinctions, but your fellow Carmelite, the late Ernest Larkin, O. Carm, seems to think it is also not wrong to just practice a simple way of silent prayer, unencumbered with analysis. In his book, “Contemplative Prayer for Today: Christian Meditation,” he wrote:

“According to Quiroga (Jose de Jesus Maria Quiroga), John of the Cross expected his novices to reach at least this state of “acquired” contemplation, by the end of the one-year novitiate, an opinion shared by Thomas of Jesus and others. Christian Meditation is a different kind of meditation and is easily identified with the contemplative acts described by Quiroga. Meditators in this system are not told to expect a long preparatory phase, perhaps a year, before they will be graced with contemplation. The discrete acts of love start immediately and the habit or state of that condition will come later, either “acquired” through regular practice or “infused” by God’s special grace. In John Main’s perspective these distinctions are irrelevant. He leaves precise definitions to others and, as already indicated, he sees, “contemplation, contemplative prayer, and meditative practice” as synonyms for meditation. His meditation, moreover, is precisely the “loving quietude” and “simple attention” that marks the third stage of prayer described by Quiroga and taught by John of the Cross. Today there is less concern about names and degrees of contemplation and more attention to the practice of contemplative disciplines. Thousands of devout Christians are pondering the mystery of God’s presence in various forms of contemplative prayer.”

I’m attracted by the simplicity.

 

[Shakuhachi]

As you can see, Christian and Buddhist mysticism do have similarities. They both come face to face with the cloud of unknowing obscuring man from experiential knowledge of the Father. This, however, is where the difference ends. Buddhist mystics see the cloud of unknowing which obscures their spiritual vision of God as Nirvana, absolute being, (or as St. Thomas Aquinas would describe it, ’ Ipsum Esse Subsistens ).

I think Buddhists would talk about it more as clearly seeing their true nature or Kensho or satori insight. Rather than Cloud of Unknowing and darkness it is a clearing away. But the distinction remains that Christianity retains the personal relationship with another, even in union. Buddhists and yoga Advaita see thing as Non-dual. And that is not really pantheism. It is difficult to talk about at all.

Also I think perfection of detachment is key to liberation, moksha.

 

[CRM_Brother]

It isn’t lazy at all. The effects and processes I described in contemplation are the stages from a rational level, that is, through a meditative analysis of the prayer. Every contemplative will tell you that simplicity and silence is integral to seeking that presence of God in our souls.

I was putting forward these definitions within mainly a theological context to aid in the distinction between Christian and Buddhist mysticism. In practice, it is much different. Knowing specifically what takes place doesn’t necessarily help you to enact it when it comes to contemplation. As we approach God and draw closer to the mystical union, the kenosis of the contemplative inherently draws them into the utter simplicity of the prayer.

P.S. While I’m honored that you would think me a Carmelite, I was actually a brother of the Clerics Regular Minor. I discerned a path away from the Order and am now pursuing diocesan seminary. I’ve tried to get my user name corrected but the Administrator has never gotten back to me.

 

[Shakuhachi]

“When the Buddha awakened and realized emptiness, he understood that his prior
way of seeing the world had been deluded. His own self-constructed ridgepole
of self-deception had been the basic structural problem. This, he
realized, was what had prevented him from truly appreciating the Oneness of
Absolute Ultimate Reality. Indeed, this fresh open perspective of Reality was so
unlimited as to be beyond all concepts either of form or of no form.” p. 383
https://terebess.hu/zen/mesterek/Zen-Brain-Reflections.pdf

Nirvana is the realization of the Oneness of Absolute Reality. Is there any Christian counterpart? Do we have the same experience and interpret it differently, call it something else?

 

[CRM_Brother]

Upon a closer reading of the quote which you provided, I would have to say that I do disagree with one point that Fr. Larkin makes. While yes, within Quiroga’s system of contemplation, ‘meditation’ and ‘contemplation’ are used as synonyms, I argue that they cannot (and should not) be confused. While they may appear similar, the terms are derived from two very different roots. ‘Meditation’ comes from ‘meditatio’, meaning to think upon extensively. It is an active movement of the human intellect which seeks out understanding.

‘Contemplation’, however, comes from ‘con’ + ‘templo’ simply meaning ‘with the temple’. This is where simplicity and stillness come into play. The contemplative is ultimately approaching the Divine Indwelling on an existential level and comes to sit in the temple of his soul with Christ. The third stage of prayer as taught by Fr. Main is more properly contemplation, not meditation as he puts it. Even Thomas Merton, arguably one of the most insightful modern writers on the topic of contemplative prayer, marks the distinction as important.

I recognize that contemplation within the Carmelite tradition sees the path from meditation to mysticism as a single prayerful movement and uses the terms interchangeably as such, but the distinct stages which the tradition identifies are theologically viewed by the Church as a whole as separate forms of prayer with distinct appellations.