Two Realities - Jesus and Buddha as Brothers

[Vmarco]

"Jesus worked for the enslavement of sentient beings by indoctriating them to submit to the God of his religion."

 

What you call enslavement may well be liberation for some people depending on how you understand the teaching and the concept of God.

 

You seem very sure about many concepts historians and theologians have been debating for hundreds of years. But I am perfectly happy with my understanding of what a Bodhisattva is thank you and nothing you have said has changed my opinion that Jesus was a Bodhisattva.

 

1. Enslavement is not liberation. Anything that steps between a sentient being and their direct experience is not ground for liberation. No Christian can ever realize bodhicitta, as long as they are a Christian,...it's impossible.

 

2. If your definition of compassion is contrary to Robert Thurman's, as quoted in post #20, which is also the Dalai Lama's definition, which comes from the Bodhicharyavatara, then your concept is wrong, according to Buddhist views.

 

"If I have any understanding of compassion..., it all comes from studying the Bodhicharyavatara" HH Dalai Lama

[Encephalon]

If you have any interest in an honest dialogue,...I'm always open. Very, very few however, are honest enough for such impersonal reflections.

 

Given that your attitude is so obviously fucked up, it would seem unlikely that sensible people would choose to engage you in this, or any, topic.

 

I'm done.

Edited December 13, 2011 by Encephalon

[Jetsun]

2. If your definition of compassion is contrary to Robert Thurman's, as quoted in post #20, which is also the Dalai Lama's definition, which comes from the Bodhicharyavatara, then your concept is wrong, according to Buddhist views.

 

"If I have any understanding of compassion..., it all comes from studying the Bodhicharyavatara" HH Dalai Lama

 

From my own personal experience compassion isn't that complicated, you just need to get your identity out of your head and reactionary defensive egoic mind and your heart will radiate compassion naturally. But there is small compassion which we all experience every day which discriminates where it shines it's light and there is big compassion which does not discriminate, i'm guessing Robert Thurman is talking about big compassion here, which I see plenty of evidence of Jesus showing in many of the scriptures.

 

But if you read the Dalai Lama's autobiography he says the most important compassion he has received in his whole life came from his mother when he was a child, which strictly according to Buddhist and Thurman's definitions would be classed as small compassion yet it was the most important and it had nothing to do with the Bodhicharyavatara or Buddhism or emptiness, so I wouldn't underestimate small compassion just because it has no grounding in dependent origination.

[C T]

From my own personal experience compassion isn't that complicated, you just need to get your identity out of your head and reactionary defensive egoic mind and your heart will radiate compassion naturally. But there is small compassion which we all experience every day which discriminates where it shines it's light and there is big compassion which does not discriminate, i'm guessing Robert Thurman is talking about big compassion here, which I see plenty of evidence of Jesus showing in many of the scriptures.

 

But if you read the Dalai Lama's autobiography he says the most important compassion he has received in his whole life came from his mother when he was a child, which strictly according to Buddhist and Thurman's definitions would be classed as small compassion yet it was the most important and it had nothing to do with the Bodhicharyavatara or Buddhism or emptiness, so I wouldn't underestimate small compassion just because it has no grounding in dependent origination.

plus plus plus! + + +

 

Not underestimating 'small compassion'.... i like that!

[Vmarco]

[Vmarco]

[Bubbles]

 

On top of that, I pivot from an impersonal position, which personal folks as yourself find irritating.

 

Anyway,...I merely dropped by (Tao Bums)to see if any honest, impersonal folks were around. So far, it seems like not,...so, I'll drop out again, so that the "conspiracy of mediocrity" (run a search) can continue.

 

V

 

No boy, "you don't pivot from an impersonal experience". This is self delusion.

 

Your mental state is obviously altered and you really need to consult a psychiatrist or get some professional advice. You are a sociopath ( see what I mean HERE ) which is very different from being impersonal.

 

Good luck

[Jetsun]

[Encephalon]

Whew! Glad that's over. I just wanted to say that the irony of seeing me admonishing someone else on exercising gentle persuasion instead of belligerent condescencion was not lost on me! In my defense, I've tried to speak competently about the few issues I have some experience with and have tried to see to it that we not presume to have more knowledge than actually do. To the best of my knowledge I hope I've never tried to pummel other people over the head with lessons on the nature of compassion!

[doc benway]

[thelerner]

Anyway,...I merely dropped by (Tao Bums)to see if any honest, impersonal folks were around. So far, it seems like not,...so, I'll drop out again, so that the "conspiracy of mediocrity" (run a search) can continue.

 

V

 

We are not worthy

[Encephalon]

I'll be happy to address your original points Encephalon.

 

I never saw Christianity as pointing toward the truth until studying the works of the Jesuit Anthony DeMello. His presentation of select scriptural elements helped me to begin to see how the mystical Christian tradition helps one to tease the spiritual elements from the religious baggage. I'm not a Christian but I can now see truth in the scriptures (well, some of them anyway). Similarly, there is truth (and waste) to be found in scriptures and sutras of all the well known religions.

 

In my view the religious traditions have developed around core teachings which are all pointing at the same reality. Reality is one, it is not different for us based on our belief systems and our labels (and at the same time it is! but that's for another discussion). That reality is the inspiration for the mystics. Unfortunately, layer upon layer of exploitation and misdirection have been heaped on top of these core principles in ALL of the religious traditions. The core principles are the seat of spirituality and basically refer to the fact that each of us must look deeply at, around, and into ourselves to find who we are and how we are related to everything around us. And they are also telling us that all is well and everything is as it should be. Everything else that has been piled on top of this is politics, intending to control and exploit us.

 

Arguably the chaff is less pronounced in Buddhism and Daoism. In my interpretation, all of the traditions have at their core a basic understanding of the one-ness (or not-two-ness) of Being. Buddhism approaches it in a relatively scientific and psychological fashion, Christianity is more focused on the concept of love, Daoism emphasizes nature and naturalness, and so on. Just like each great guru or mystic colors their expression of the truth through their unique vision and conditioning, so do the traditions and institutions. To see the similarities, it's helpful to focus on the mystical traditions and methods of the Abrahamic religions (Jesuit, sufi, Kabbalistic).

 

To address the idea of horizontal and vertical theology, I agree completely. There is no knowledge of the truth (I prefer that word to the word god) without an understanding of oneself. There is no understanding of oneself without an understanding of others (human or otherwise) and relationship. It is all completely and inextricably inter-related (may I use the word dependently originated? or why not use the term mutually arising?). Unfortunately, so much crap has been added to the core teachings, they are almost unrecognizable and it is all a matter of politics and control. This is what is so appealing to me about studying the works of more contemporary teachers (DeMello and Krishnamurti for example) whose words have not yet had a chance to be buried in politics. But in my opinion it's a mistake to throw out the baby with the bath water. It's simply a matter of studying ourselves and our surroundings with the same (or more, much more!) intensity that we focus on our books and teachings and methods. As we begin to understand who we are, what we are, and how we all relate to one another, the intent of the teachings (whether they be Hindu, Christian, Jewish, Daoist, Buddhist) become obvious and are all variations on the same basic theme.

 

Disclaimer - I'm no scholar and simply offer some opinions for what they're worth...

Like a lawyer friend recently told me when I asked for some casual advice - 'free legal advice is worth exactly what you pay for it...'

 

I too am satisfied that the mystical tradition dissolves the gross differences between the traditions, although it seems fairly well established that the Abrahamic tradition's vertical hierarchy does not incline toward ideas of horizontal interdependency. The Book of Genesis wasn't too keen on the concept of Indra's Web either; the closest it comes to ecological awareness is stewardship, with Man in charge, harvesting that which he needs from those below.

 

I'd also plug in a bit of geographical determinism as well (as any self-respecting geographer would do!). The cosmology created by a culture cannot help but be informed by the state of the natural world in which it evolves. Both Buddhism and Taoism originated in rich, lush environments that were brimming with biodiversity, India in Buddhism's case and China's Yellow River Valley in Taoism's case. The Abrahamic tradition came straight out of the desert... and in my opinion, it shows.

[thelerner]

To some extent comparing Buddhism and Christianity is like comparing apples and oranges. But you know what, they're both fruit. There's good, bad, great and ugly in them. There are definitely places where they have commonality.

 

But I would say there aims are different because they have different targets. Cool thing about Buddhism (in my unstudied eye) is that its not a traditional western religion. Its non theistic explanations of the mans motives and being are hard to equal.

[Aaron]

Vmarco is gone now, I'm assuming, so this may be a little late, but I have to agree with him on some points he made, but I also have to say that he seems to have a very deep resentment towards Christianity and seems to use compassion as an excuse to act out this resentment through the denigration of the religion as a whole.

 

For me compassion has nothing to do with causing another person harm, even if that harm is supposedly in their best interests, it's like telling someone who loves basketball and wants nothing more than to grow up and be a basketball player that they suck and need to quit while they're ahead. Yes, it may be true, but how much more harm does that cause than allowing them to figure that out on their own. In fact this seems more like saying you suck at basketball, basketball sucks, just play the sport I want you to play and everything will be fine.

 

In regards to the horizontal and vertical aspects of Christianity, I fail to see how that is so odd for a Buddhist to understand, in fact the two religions are very similar in that regard. Just look at it from the frame of mind that the eight fold path is the horizontal and that it is only through practicing the eight fold path that one can truly come to an understanding of the nature of the vertical, or the deeper teachings of Buddha.

 

I would also say that both religions seek the same thing, liberation from suffering, and that the agenda is the same, that by doing good works in this life, one develops a deeper understanding of the divine and through this understanding they can develop a meaningful understanding of Jesus/Buddha's teachings, not just the idea of right and wrong, but the greater mysteries. It is through this understanding that one can shake free the bonds of mortality (and suffering) and become "saved". For one it's heaven, for the other it's nirvana or escape from the dharma cycle.

 

I for one see just as much wrong with Buddhism as I do Christianity, but I also understand that pointing out the many things that are wrong, doesn't mean that there aren't good things in those religions either. I've been told that many missionaries aren't hardcore evangelists, that they practice the acts of charity first and evangelize second, understanding that words without actions are meaningless. This is one area many Western Buddhists might learn a thing or two from the Christians.

 

In the end the religions are more similar, in fact most religions are more similar, than they are different. Perhaps the real problem isn't defining the differences, but a failure to recognize the similarities. Most religions are based on the concept of love (or compassion), it's just that the underlying message gets bogged down in dogma and inevitably is seen as less important, so the practice of love takes a back seat to the importance of theology or logical understanding of the religion. In the end the logical understanding isn't even the practice of horizontal devotion, rather it's simply a dot on the horizontal line, it's only when one can practice the religion and see the importance of practicing being superior to that of contemplation, that one begins to truly ascend the vertical and touch God or Buddha and then understand that the teachings aren't important at all, but what's important is the change that takes place within a person on their journey.

 

Actions first, words second, study last, or at least that's how I see it.

 

Be well and peace be with you,

 

Aaron

 

edit- I feel it necessary to make a clarification, I know from personal experience that many Western Buddhists are also willing to show compassion to those suffering, so my comments regarding Buddhists in the West learning a thing or two from Christians, is really a commentary on the predisposition towards philosophy many Western Buddhists seem to have, rather than a rule of thumb. I had hoped my closing comments would clarify that, but I wanted to be sure that it was clearly stated.

Edited December 15, 2011 by Twinner

[9th]

The Gospel According to Thomas, commonly shortened to the Gospel of Thomas, is a well preserved early Christian, non-canonical sayings-gospel discovered near Nag Hammadi, Egypt, in December 1945, in one of a group of books known as the Nag Hammadi library. The Coptic language text, the second of seven contained in what modern-day scholars have designated as Codex II, is composed of 114 sayings attributed to Jesus. The manuscript is dated at around 340 AD.

 

 

(97) Jesus said, "The kingdom of the father is like a certain woman who was carrying a jar full of meal. While she was walking on the road, still some distance from home, the handle of the jar broke and the meal emptied out behind her on the road. She did not realize it; she had noticed no accident. When she reached her house, she set the jar down and found it empty."

 

 

(60) They saw a Samaritan carrying a lamb on his way to Judea. He said to his disciples, "That man is round about the lamb."

They said to him, "So that he may kill it and eat it."

He said to them, "While it is alive, he will not eat it, but only when he has killed it and it has become a corpse."

They said to him, "He cannot do so otherwise."

He said to them, "You too, look for a place for yourself within repose, lest you become a corpse and be eaten."

 

 

(57) Jesus said, "The kingdom of the father is like a man who had good seed. His enemy came by night and sowed weeds among the good seed. The man did not allow them to pull up the weeds; he said to them, 'I am afraid that you will go intending to pull up the weeds and pull up the wheat along with them.' For on the day of the harvest the weeds will be plainly visible, and they will be pulled up and burned."

 

 

(75) Jesus said, "Many are standing at the door, but it is the solitary who will enter the bridal chamber."

 

 

(18) The disciples said to Jesus, "Tell us how our end will be."

Jesus said, "Have you discovered, then, the beginning, that you look for the end? For where the beginning is, there will the end be. Blessed is he who will take his place in the beginning; he will know the end and will not experience death."

 

 

(2) Jesus said, "Let him who seeks continue seeking until he finds. When he finds, he will become troubled. When he becomes troubled, he will be astonished, and he will rule over the All."

 

 

(39) Jesus said, "The pharisees and the scribes have taken the keys of knowledge and hidden them. They themselves have not entered, nor have they allowed to enter those who wish to. You, however, be as wise as serpents and as innocent as doves."

 

 

(3) Jesus said, "If those who lead you say to you, 'See, the kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the kingdom is inside of you, and it is outside of you. When you come to know yourselves, then you will become known, and you will realize that it is you who are the sons of the living father. But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty."

 

 

(50) Jesus said, "If they say to you, 'Where did you come from?', say to them, 'We came from the light, the place where the light came into being on its own accord and established itself and became manifest through their image.' If they say to you, 'Is it you?', say, 'We are its children, we are the elect of the living father.' If they ask you, 'What is the sign of your father in you?', say to them, 'It is movement and repose.'"

 

 

(11) Jesus said, "This heaven will pass away, and the one above it will pass away. The dead are not alive, and the living will not die. In the days when you consumed what is dead, you made it what is alive. When you come to dwell in the light, what will you do? On the day when you were one you became two. But when you become two, what will you do?"

 

 

(113) His disciples said to him, "When will the kingdom come?"

Jesus said, "It will not come by waiting for it. It will not be a matter of saying 'here it is' or 'there it is.' Rather, the kingdom of the father is spread out upon the earth, and men do not see it."