Help Needed to Talk to a Buddhist or Non-Catholic

[InJesusItrust]

And you know someone who has been there?

The Virgin May, the saints, the mystics. Many have been shown heaven. Christianity is based primarily on what people have witnessed and experienced in Christ. It is founded on those who have seen the risen Christ. It is not only a religion shown to be true by logic but by miracles throughout time. When it claims to be supernatural it is backed up by evidence.

Jesus did not just say that He would rise from the dead, but He showed His disciples.

I myself had had an experience of the light of God, but have not died. There is no sorrow in the presence of God, but bliss and love. Someone could shoot you and you would still feel no sorrow or anger. But you would still be living in the presence of God.

How much do you know about the life of the Buddha? He attained nirvana at age 35. He died at age 80. For 45 years he was in nirvana and talking to people as he lived out his last life.

Nirvana is not a heaven that you can only get to after you die. Nirvana is something you can attain here and now. Thousands of people talked to the Buddha after he entered nirvana. There are a few people in the world today who have entered nirvana. If you search hard enough you might be able to find one and talk to him or her.

rossum

So nirvana is a state of mind where you convince yourself that you don’t care what happens Didn’t Buddha still age, get sick and die, all have which you claimed are suffering? How then could he have been in nirvana without suffering? Nirvana just sounds like a state of mind where you care for nothing anymore so you don’t feel like you are suffering. If you care for nothing or have no desires to be met, how will you find joy? All you have done is escaped suffering, at the expense of making yourself a shell of a human.

 

[rossum]

The Virgin May, the saints, the mystics.

Not all mystical experiences are true.

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.

• Zen is Boring.

Many have been shown heaven.

And many more only think they have been shown heaven. Buddhists have plenty of heavens; the Christian version is just another one to add to the list.

So nirvana is a state of mind where you convince yourself that you don’t care what happens

No. If the Buddha didn’t care what happened he wouldn’t have spent 45 years hard work preaching round North India.

Didn’t Buddha still age, get sick and die, all have which you claimed are suffering?

Yes. However, he was detached from them. Suffering is in the mind; it is only yours if you attach yourself to it. If you detach yourself from it, then it is no longer your suffering.

My general point here is still the same. Buddhism is not Christianity, and it is necessary to understand some of Buddhism if you are to effectively explain Christianity to a Buddhist. Assuming that Buddhism is just Christianity manqué is a recipe for a failed discussion.

rossum

 

[cheese_sdc]

Don’t try to argue. Just discuss. Listen to what they have to say, and they will listen to what you have to say.

If you try to argue, both of you will lose. If you discuss, both of you will win.

 

[InJesusItrust]

Christianity is logical, and many people do not see the logic. If I wanted to prove it to any unbeliever I would try to discuss the logic, like Jesus being as real person whose followers more than likely saw all that He is reported to have done and believed His exclusive claims because He both raised and rose from the dead. How do Buddhists try to help people get free from Samsara? In the Christian worldview without Christ there is no salvation, so it is important. There is no second chance and invincible ignorance should not be assumed.

God is not the Hindu God that Buddha was disputing so the difference between resurrection and reincarnation is vital. If the ressurection really happened Hinduism and Buddhism are false. People actually saw the risen Christ. Buddha claimed to have found nirvana but could he show anyone? Even the Sai Baba guy in India claimed many things but he remains dead and had no power to heal himself.

If mystical experiences are not to be trusted, how are we supposed to trust that people have entered nirvana?

I am assuming that all people know logic.

 

[robwar]

Don’t try to argue. Just discuss. Listen to what they have to say, and they will listen to what you have to say.

If you try to argue, both of you will lose. If you discuss, both of you will win.

I agree very much!

 

[Marybeloved]

Before discussing things with a Buddhist, you need to learn about Buddhism. Buddhism believes in reincarnation, so everybody rises from the dead, again and again and again. The point of Buddhism is not to rise from the dead. The Buddha was not reborn because he attained nirvana. Promising a Buddhist endless life is promising him or her endless suffering:

Clearly the eternal life they mean has no relationship whatever to the Catholic Beatific Vision- It’s impossible to suffer when fully possessed of Bliss himself, love himself, beauty itself, and goodness itself. It’s also impossible to love anything else for its own sake before God- all is seen and known and loved in him, and it’s impossible to want anything except what he wants.

[The Buddha said:] “This is the noble truth of suffering (dukkha): birth is suffering, ageing is suffering, illness is suffering, death is suffering; sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair are suffering; union with what is displeasing is suffering; separation from what is pleasing is suffering; not to get what one wants is suffering”

That is all true-Christians call them the fallen state of man or the consequences of the fall. Christianity teaches that it will all be restored, to its original perfection (no suffering) and glorified even more to the life of God himself.

The Buddha was not a god, instead the Buddha preached to the gods. It is the gods who need the Buddha, not the other way round.

There are no gods, and Christ was no god- He’s the ultimate reality beyond all reality.

Buddhism is not Christianity, and you cannot assume that a Buddhist will share the automatic presumptions of a Christian.

That’s true.

 

[shando]

Thank you for all the replies given…i really appreciate it

Convincing a Buddhist is not easy. But what i hate about them is when they try to ARGUE and not DISCUSS or LISTEN to what is being said by the other person.

They always think they are right. That’s the hardest part of it…

 

[notself]

Thank you for all the replies given…i really appreciate it

Convincing a Buddhist is not easy. But what i hate about them is when they try to ARGUE and not DISCUSS or LISTEN to what is being said by the other person.

They always think they are right. That’s the hardest part of it…

This differs from Christians in what way? Read the posts on this thread. Christians believe they are right and are arguing the points made by Buddhists.

Why do you want to convince anyone of anything? Why not lead by action, example, kindness, compassion? Why not spend your energy teaching Catholics more about Catholicism?

The Pew Forum recently did a survey on religious knowledge. When asked if the host was changed into the body and blood of Christ, 45% of Catholics surveyed got the answer WRONG. Here is the link. pewforum.org/U-S-Religious-Knowledge-Survey-Who-Knows-What-About-Religion.aspx#Christianity

Here is a link to the quiz. Taking the quiz will not effect the survey results.
features.pewforum.org/quiz/us-religious-knowledge/?q=1

 

[Vouthon]

This differs from Christians in what way? Read the posts on this thread. Christians believe they are right and are arguing the points made by Buddhists.

Why do you want to convince anyone of anything? Why not lead by action, example, kindness, compassion? Why not spend your energy teaching Catholics more about Catholicism?

The Pew Forum recently did a survey on religious knowledge. When asked if the host was changed into the body and blood of Christ, 45% of Catholics surveyed got the answer WRONG. Here is the link. pewforum.org/U-S-Religious-Knowledge-Survey-Who-Knows-What-About-Religion.aspx#Christianity

Here is a link to the quiz. Taking the quiz will not effect the survey results.
features.pewforum.org/quiz/us-religious-knowledge/?q=1

:tiphat:

 

[sinscriven]

Thank you for all the replies given…i really appreciate it

Convincing a Buddhist is not easy. But what i hate about them is when they try to ARGUE and not DISCUSS or LISTEN to what is being said by the other person.

They always think they are right. That’s the hardest part of it…

Your frustration indicates you were attached to your point of view. You are just as obstinate as the guy you were arguing with and you wanted to be right too.

All of this has more to do with being a human being and being convinced of your own ego more than it has to do with what faith a person is. This is the kind of stuff the Shakyamuni Buddha was talking about when talking about the suffering that comes from attachment.

When you’re not attached to outcome, you can come out saying “I had a lively discussion with a buddhist today” and not “Grrr… I’m mad cause I didn’t get my point across and the other guy was being stubborn.” and filling yourself with negativity and separation.

 

[TimeEntrance]

Before discussing things with a Buddhist, you need to learn about Buddhism. Buddhism believes in reincarnation, so everybody rises from the dead, again and again and again. The point of Buddhism is not to rise from the dead. The Buddha was not reborn because he attained nirvana. Promising a Buddhist endless life is promising him or her endless suffering:

[The Buddha said:] “This is the noble truth of suffering (dukkha): birth is suffering, ageing is suffering, illness is suffering, death is suffering; sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair are suffering; union with what is displeasing is suffering; separation from what is pleasing is suffering; not to get what one wants is suffering”

The Buddha was not a god, instead the Buddha preached to the gods. It is the gods who need the Buddha, not the other way round. Buddhism is not Christianity, and you cannot assume that a Buddhist will share the automatic presumptions of a Christian.

rossum

As stated by Rossum Buddhism does teach that suffering is a part of life.

However, there are different branches of Buddhism with different beliefs. There are indeed “gods” in Buddhism but they are more akin to the Catholic concept of the community of saints in heaven. Not quite but similar.

In Buddhism a person can become a god and live in one of the many realms of heaven. A person can also enter one of the many realms of hell.

Buddhism believes in karma and cycles of rebirth. Your karma follows with you into your rebirth. So, in Thailand for example, the male-to-female transsexuals are believed by Buddhist to have some negative karma from a past life and have to suffer and endure the dishonor of being shemales.

The Thai movie Beautiful Boxer based on a true story touches upon this. beautifulboxer-movie.com/flash/eng/index.html

You’re probably better off just answering questions that you might know about Catholicism rather than engaging in a religious debate with a Buddhist. I’m not sure much fruit will result from that.

 

[TimeEntrance]

You are again approaching things from the Christian perspective, not the Buddhist perspective. “Separation from what is pleasing is suffering.” Those in heaven are separated from those in hell. Those in heaven love those in hell: “Love others as you love yourself” - BMKV 91. Separation from those you love is suffering. Could a mother be happy in heaven, knowing that her child was suffering the agonies of Hell for eternity?

Obviously you aren’t familiar with some of the mothers on earth (e.g., abused children, intentionally drowning their children etc.)

Again, you are looking at things from the wrong perspective. If rebirth is the case, then resurrection is pointless. The story of the resurrection does however confirm the Buddhist perspective on gods; gods are mortal and can die and be reborn, just like other living beings.

rossum

The resurrection of Jesus was not a rebirth resulting in the corruption of His body. And his ascension in heaven and judgment over man - not to mention His Eucharistic blood and flesh eaten by men - is not a mere “confirmation” of Buddhism.

 

[rossum]

The resurrection of Jesus was not a rebirth resulting in the corruption of His body. And his ascension in heaven and judgment over man - not to mention His Eucharistic blood and flesh eaten by men - is not a mere “confirmation” of Buddhism.

The story of Jesus confirms that gods can die. If Jesus didn’t die then the story of the resurrection is false. If Jesus did die then gods can die. In Buddhism all the gods die eventually and are reborn, unless they have attained nirvana.

rossum

 

[TimeEntrance]

The story of Jesus confirms that gods can die. If Jesus didn’t die then the story of the resurrection is false. If Jesus did die then gods can die. In Buddhism all the gods die eventually and are reborn, unless they have attained nirvana.

rossum

It does not confirm gods can die. That was not the narrative of the Gospels but your Buddhist spin on it which hypocritically ignores the culture and religion the Gospels and New Testament grew out of.

Jesus in Christianity is not a god or a saint but God Himself the Second Person of the Trinity - First Cause. Furthermore, as I stated, the story of the resurrection of Jesus is that His body did not corrupt. That is much different than dieing and then finding life as an ant, cow, god, or person in a different body with a different genotype and ancestry.

What one might consider pertaining to the question of rebirth is why humanity has had an exponential population growth rate since the Industrial Revolution? I’m sure Buddhism has worked this question out in its own metaphysical tradition. But that is the thing about Christian theology or Buddhist metaphysics, those that subscribe to it will always find away to explain a problem that might challenge some of its basic beliefs, making the religion unfalsifiable.

For example:

I notice every time I sneeze it rains but I did not see it rain this day I sneezed. So, I look to see if it rained anywhere on earth that day. And I find out it rained in a city half way across the other side of the earth on that day. I then reason that yes… when I sneeze it always rains and my sneezing causes the rain. I explain away what I want to confirm what I want.

My point is Buddhism supposedly does not subscribes to the monotheistic concept of a First Cause (God) and certainly does not subscribe to the concept of the Holy Trinity, so, claiming the Christian story of Jesus confirms the Buddhist concept of gods (which are akin to the Catholic concept of saints in heaven that are super human or what one might regard as “mini gods”) is disingenuous.

The Buddhist Boddhistavas - or Dali Lamas - most closely resemble the concept of the Christian Jesus because they are thought by Buddhist to be reincarnated gods that chose to return to human life on earth to help ease human suffering in this world through their teachings and examples. But for reasons I stated earlier even these Lamas are not entirely symmetrical to the Christian Christ.

(I said you were being hypocritical because you admonished a different person in this thread for viewing Buddhism and its beliefs through Christian lenses, and then you go right ahead and start viewing the Christian concept of the Christ through Buddhist lenses)

 

[rossum]

It does not confirm gods can die.

Did Jesus die on the cross or not? Did He remain dead for three days or not? Did He rise from the dead on the third day or not?

Am I saying anything that Christians themselves have not been saying about Jesus for 2,000 years?

rossum

 

[Michael_Mayo]

Did Jesus die on the cross or not? Did He remain dead for three days or not? Did He rise from the dead on the third day or not?

Am I saying anything that Christians themselves have not been saying about Jesus for 2,000 years?

rossum

Jesus had two natures, human and divine. His human nature, his body, died. Yet, it was then also resurrected by his divine nature which never dies.

 

[notself]

What is the reason the Church gives for Jesus descending into hell?

 

[InJesusItrust]

What is the reason the Church gives for Jesus descending into hell?

To rescue souls in Sheol. Heaven was closed to humans until the crucifixion, and God opened heaven to the righteous dead.