Hi, and thanks for responding. Please explain how our understanding of Christ is not Christ.
And which problematic understandings are you talking about? Please explain.
An idea of some person, even Jesus Christ, held in the mind of a flawed human being, might bear little or no relationship to Christ in reality.
Well, we could look at Charlemagne, who cut off the heads of Saxons who refused to embrace Christianity. Or the burning of witches in Salem, Massachusetts. Just for two examples of the difference between what people thought they understood about Christ, and the reality of Christ.
The Emperor’s New Clothes
Hi. I am delighted you know so many kindly Buddhist who do charity work. And please feel free to bring up any damage done by Christians if you like.
It’s helpful in these discussions to argue in specifics rather than labels. “Pantheism” can mean a lot of things. The quote clearly distinguishes between the born and the unborn, etc. In other words, it isn’t saying that the world we experience is unborn, unoriginated, etc. Quite the reverse. So perhaps you need to explain what kind of “pantheism” you have in mind and how it “rejects the true God.”
It is rather annoying to respond to specific arguments in this patronizing, general way, without making any actual counter-argument.
And how do you define the one true God? Was Aquinas, for instance, correct in saying that there is a source to the universe “which all call God”? Was Aquinas talking about the true God when he said that, or was he not?
Actually, I think it’s your contrast that is superficial, and your description isn’t even coherent. You can’t simultaneously “extinguish thought” and “dwell on the mutability and nothingness of existence.” Buddhism seeks to quiet the “monkey mind” which leaps from one thing to another and fastens on the impermanent as if it were permanent. Nothing there incompatible with Christianity.
Hi Matthew. Wow, this is a fascinating question. First, I would say that Catholicism should be judged by those who most live out the beliefs of Catholicism, and therefore most resemble Christ. Those would be the saints. I imagine you have no problem with St Francis of Assisi. Catholic beliefs about Jesus Christ can hardly be judged by the lives of those who refuse to listen and live by those beliefs.
Have you never suffered for love? Besides, the Buddha said, “Love others as you love yourself.” (Bhadramayakara vyakarana sutra, 91)
The Four Truths are framed as a medical diagnosis:
It is a common error to see nirvana as extinction. That is not the case. What nirvana extinguishes is mistaken notions about ourselves. It is like removing the ‘water’ from a mirage. We are no longer fooled by the mirage, but see it for what it is. All we have lost is the ‘water’ in the mirage.
No. The Buddha lived for many years after attaining nirvana. Thomas Merton also lived after, very probably, becoming enlightened. No doubt there are others as well.
Death is easy. Everyone who is born will die. The difficult trick is not to be born again after you die.
Do angels exist? We can be reborn as angels, devils, in a (temporary) heaven, in a (temporary) hell. The Hindu/Buddhist universe goes in cycles. Part of the cycle only has the non-material elements. The rest of the cycle has both the material and non-material elements. Reincarnations are not “endless”; nirvana ends them.
If you throw a rock directly up in the air, you will in future be hit on the head by a descending rock. If you do not want to be hit on the head by a rock, then don’t throw rocks in the air.
Here is an extract from Chapter One of the Lotus sutra, the Saddharmapundarika:
There is no “entity”. Karma is not an entity, any more than there was an “entity” throwing that rock back down onto your head. If you do require an entity, then that entity is yourself. You threw the rock in the air; you suffer the consequences. Actions have consequences. If you don’t want the consequences, then don’t do the actions. It really is that simple.
And if the universe is being run by a omnipotent Abrahamic entity, why is it so cruel? Thousands and thousands of centuries of plagues and wars and starvation and murders. Please explain.
Exactly, we’ll make a Buddhist of you yet.
You just need to realise that the hells are not permanent, more like purgatory.It has, but that effect was mostly in Asia, not in Europe. Christianity has had more effect in Europe.
The one thing The Buddha couldn’t give…Eternal Life in paradise.Have you never suffered for love? Besides, the Buddha said, “Love others as you love yourself.” (Bhadramayakara vyakarana sutra, 91)
The Four Truths are framed as a medical diagnosis:
This is a medical diagnosis, focused on curing the problem. It is not a philosophical description of the world. By and large the Buddha avoided such things, though his later followers did not do as well.
- Diagnose the problem: Suffering.
- The cause of the problem: Selfish desire.
- Is the problem curable: Stop the selfish desire.
- The prescription: The eight-fold path.
It is a common error to see nirvana as extinction. That is not the case. What nirvana extinguishes is mistaken notions about ourselves. It is like removing the ‘water’ from a mirage. We are no longer fooled by the mirage, but see it for what it is. All we have lost is the ‘water’ in the mirage.
No. The Buddha lived for many years after attaining nirvana. Thomas Merton also lived after, very probably, becoming enlightened. No doubt there are others as well.
Death is easy. Everyone who is born will die. The difficult trick is not to be born again after you die.
Do angels exist? We can be reborn as angels, devils, in a (temporary) heaven, in a (temporary) hell. The Hindu/Buddhist universe goes in cycles. Part of the cycle only has the non-material elements. The rest of the cycle has both the material and non-material elements. Reincarnations are not “endless”; nirvana ends them.
If you throw a rock directly up in the air, you will in future be hit on the head by a descending rock. If you do not want to be hit on the head by a rock, then don’t throw rocks in the air.
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
Here is an extract from Chapter One of the Lotus sutra, the Saddharmapundarika:
Sakra, the ruler of the celestials, with twenty thousand gods, his followers, such as the god Chandra (the Moon), the god Surya (the Sun), the god Samantagandha (the Wind), the god Ratnaprabha, the god Avabhasaprabha, and others; further, the four great rulers of the cardinal points with thirty thousand gods in their train, viz. the great ruler Virudhaka, the great ruler Virupaksha, the great ruler Dhritarashtra, and the great ruler Vaisravana; the god Ishvara and the god Maheshvara, each followed by thirty thousand gods; further, Brahma Sahdmpati and his twelve thousand followers, the Brahmakayika gods, amongst whom Brahma Sikhin and Brahma Gyotishprabha, with the other twelve thousand Brahmakayika gods.
We have tens of thousands of gods.
There is no “entity”. Karma is not an entity, any more than there was an “entity” throwing that rock back down onto your head. If you do require an entity, then that entity is yourself. You threw the rock in the air; you suffer the consequences. Actions have consequences. If you don’t want the consequences, then don’t do the actions. It really is that simple.
And if the universe is being run by a omnipotent Abrahamic entity, why is it so cruel? Thousands and thousands of centuries of plagues and wars and starvation and murders. Please explain.
Exactly, we’ll make a Buddhist of you yet.
It has, but that effect was mostly in Asia, not in Europe. Christianity has had more effect in Europe.
A word of advice. I have probably spent more time arguing these things with Christians than you have arguing with Buddhists. You might want to bear that in mind.
rossum
Hi Rossum, However, surely, if you asked vast numbers of people, they would all agree that the Buddha was wrong. The problem with this life isn’t suffering. That’s a side issue. Why are you convinced that suffering is the major problem with this life, since, after all, the sole problem for every human being is death? That’s the problem. Suffering? Come on.
Being alive after you have extinguished all desire and all that is your personality and all that is preference is pointless. it’s just another kind of death. Absorbing the belief that you self is no different from the person next to you is merely a denial of reality, not to mention again, pointless. Prove otherwise.
Once again, a Buddhist insisting that death is a good idea. You try to kill your self, the idea that you exist as separate from others, your desires, etc., and most of all, you want to really die??
But who made them? Where did they come from? What proof do you have of their existence? How do these ‘gods’ chose who gets what life? And why?
So you have no answer to how reincarnation is accomplished, how lives are chosen, why death or evil is chosen, why good or harm is chosen, why life exists, etc.? In fact, no answers at all? Just that its a reaction of some kind? This simply does not sound very convincing.
Then why can’t you explain to me how reincarnation is accomplished? Who decides what? How can reincarnation be explained with the facts of the big bang?
Life is suffering. Eternal life is eternal suffering. Do not assume that Buddhism is like Christianity, you will make errors.
How do you propose to avoid death? Where are all the 2,000 year old Christians who have avoided death? Show me some and I might follow your path. For the moment I prefer to concentrate my efforts on the possible. Buddhism provides a number of techniques that reduce suffering. I have tried them. They work. Show me that Christian techniques work to avoid death, your “sole problem”.
Death is indeed a reality. We can either embrace reality or try to ignore it. Reality always wins in the end. I find that the Buddhist approach works better.
Not a good idea, but an inevitable future. The bad idea is to ignore that inevitability. The Buddha was shaken out of his cocooned environment by the sights of an old man, a sick man and a corpse. “Death comes to all men.”
The gods, like ourselves and all living things are effectively self-made. A failure to attain enlightenment before death results in a new life. They exist because of that previous failure.
Scripture, the same as for your proof of the existence of YHWH.
Buddhism has methods that work. Answers to irrelevant questions are not particularly important.
We each choose our own life by our actions in our previous lives. That was the point of those two verses from the Dhammapada that I quoted above. Actions have consequences, either in this current life or in a future life. Or to put it another way, “You will reap what you sow.”
There is no “who” to decide, except for each individual. It was you who decided to throw the rock in the air; it is you who gets hit on the head as a result.
You are making a materialistic assumption here. There are immaterial living things, the equivalent of angels, devils, gods and so forth. They do not need a material universe to exist.
Hi Rossum. I am enjoying this discussion. However, your statement is wrong. Jesus Christ conquered death and the good news is that we will all live forever. It’s just that some of us will be alive in heaven and some alive in hell. So in answer to your “Where are all the 2,000 year old Christians who have avoided death”? I can assure you, every single one of them is alive. Every. Single. One. …somewhere.
Life is not all suffering! Actually, I’m having a simply terrific time, but I am sorry to hear about your problems… And as for your depressed, decidedly melancholic belief that eternal life would be eternal suffering, pull yourself together. Think the problem through. Wouldn’t the God who created sex, laughter, and love will be able to figure out a way to make you happy? Even someone so gloomy and unhappy he believes “life is suffering”.
The Buddha, should he have existed, appears to have been a person crying out for antidepressants. We can only pray that he made it to heaven, where he could learn to a smile. Of course he did abandon his wife and child…
Perhaps I do not understand you here. Living things create themselves? Cockroaches and Milly Cyrus are self creations? What a ghastly thought. No wonder you are so depressed and half in love with easeful death.
This makes no sense to me. How do the gods create themselves? Nothing creates itself.
This is the sort of thing Buddhists repeat all the time, and I find it disturbingly anti rational. This is why China and India never developed science, but the west did. Buddhism and Hinduism believed in cycles, that the golden age was followed by the age of dust and ashes and then back to the golden age. This is why the concept of progress didn’t take hold in China and India. I find it very disturbing that anyone today would chose to reject logic and reality and I also find it very, very disturbing that you desire your own death. Please rethink.
So, you are not actually promising an eternal life, but an eternal afterlife. That is not so special, since there are a great many different religions, each promising some sort of eternal afterlife.
So, your claim has as much evidence as the Buddhist claim for reincarnation. At least I have evidence of the claims of the effectiveness of meditation.
No, but all pleasures, and all pains, are temporary. Everything changes, the good as well as the bad.
He gave them the greatest gift he could. His son was ordained as a monk, and his wife as a nun. What greater gift than enlightenment?
Your birth was caused by your actions in previous lives. That is what I mean.
Actions have consequences. If the consequences do not appear in this life, then they will appear in a subsequent life. The bundle of currently unresolved consequences, both good and bad, passes from one life to the next life.
Very simply:
By their actions in their previous lives. All gods are mortal, though they can be very long lived.
Why? Science deliberately limits itself to finding natural answers to natural questions. Science does not attempt to answer purely religious questions. If I want answers to religious questions, then I do not look to science. The Buddha was concentrating on important religious questions, not on scientific questions not relevant to enlightenment.
That isn’t true. Abraham and Moses went down to the grave, like everyone else. In traditional Christian thought, they did have a kind of shadowy, ghostlike existence in the world of the dead, and they were at rest rather than being tormented like the wicked spirits, but they did not enjoy eternal life until Jesus rose from the dead and “harrowed hell.”
That doesn’t really sound much like good news, does it? As Rossum says, the way you put it makes it sound as if eternal life is just something we all have and isn’t a gift of Jesus–and if it is, it’s a curse for many people. Scripture does not speak of those in hell as having eternal life.
You aren’t doing a good job of representing Christianity in this discussion. Psychoanalyzing people you don’t know on the Internet just because they have different ideas from yours is a real no-no.
As I understand it, it’s supposed to be an impersonal cause-and-effect process. I do have questions about the apparent Buddhist belief that this process just exists in its own right in the absence of an eternal Reason. But the basic idea is that your consciousness, which is simply a process of cause-and-effect rather than a thing, creates a new body around itself out of the cravings that are left over from previous lives.
No, it’s just a statement of the limits of Buddhism. Buddhism isn’t about everything, necessarily, though Buddhist cultures have certainly developed metaphysics based on Buddhism. It’s about a specific problem and its solution.
Actually, what’s anti-rational is stating big explanations of complex historical processes with great confidence without sufficient evidence.
So why aren’t you a Buddhist ?
Plenty of reasons.
You are right, I didn’t see that you have issues with Buddhism,but your post sounded like your championed Buddhism over Christianity, and caused me to be confused, thank you for your response.
Yes, this is something of a mystery. I know that in the Suttas, the Buddha is asked this very question. His advice is to steer well clear of trying to understand it - it is far too complicated for we mere mortals to understand. So I suppose that , in a sense, it could well be that there is an explanation for its purpose but we are unable to understand it. I suppose it is akin to trying to understand infinity.
Correct. The simile in in the Assu sutta, Samyutta Nikaya 15.3