Is Buddhism compatible with Christianity?

[Nikia]

I read Siddhartha and found the Buddhist ideas in it very relevent to me. Jesus is still my personal hero though. Can one be Buddhist and Christian? Are any Duers following that path?

[More Than A Feeling]

1. It's definitely compatible with Christian mysticism

Check out The Perennial Philosophy by Aldous Huxley for a look at how mystics across all religions have more in common with each other than with non-mystics of their own faith.

[Tom Joad]

2. I don't. But read Thomas Merton.

Personally secular (thank God!), but Merton is cool.

[Speck Tater]

3. I know some Catholic Nuns who are also Budhists.

As a practising Buddhist myself, Buddhism, in it's pure form, is not really a religion at all, but a philosophy of life, and I don't see any reason why it would be at all in conflict with Christianity. Perhaps you should read "Living Buddha, Living Christ" by Thich Nhat Hanh

[CountAllVotes]

8. right!

I was in Ireland this past summer and the religion now drawing the most recruits is Buddhism. It is considered to be a fair balance/option to many between being choosing between being a Catholic or Protestant and there are temples popping up all over the Emerald Isle these days! :D

[papau]

11. Many Christians are also Buddhists - I see no conflict. n/t

n/t

:-)

[Dorian Gray]

14. The Dalai Lama

has come out and said that, despite early impressions of Buddhism, a practicing Catholic would find it too difficult to stay on the path of Englightenment while holding on to his/her religious faith.

Quote from him:

Q: Do you think it is possible to be both Christian and Buddhist at the same time?
A: I ... replied to this question indirectly when I said that belief in a Creator could be associated with the understanding of emptiness. I believe it is possible to progress along a spiritual path and reconcile Christianity with Buddhism. But once a certain degree of realization has been reached, a choice between the two paths will become necessary. I recently gave a series of teachings in the United States and one of these teachings was about patience and tolerance. At the end there was a ceremony for taking the Bodhisattva Vows. A Christian priest who was in the audience wanted to take these vows. I asked him if he had the right to, and he replied that yes, of course, he could take these vows and still remain a Christian.

GO BACK TO TOP OF PAGE


from this webpage:

http://hhdl.dharmakara.net/hhdlquotes2.html

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

4. Buddhism is compatable with the core teachings of all faiths

which is basically found in the mystical versions of all faiths.

[Warpy]

5. Considering how radically different the teachings of Jesus were

from the garbage the Pharisees were handing down, one might be tempted to think Jesus had heard of Buddha and his teachings, many are similar. He was certainly on the trade route from the far east, and certainly would have had access to stories told by travelers in the wine bars of the day, some of which undoubtedly detailed the "weird" religions that had been encountered by traders on their travels.

His teachings make perfect sense as Buddhism adapted for a strongly theistic culture that was in no way ready to accept any notion of reincarnation.

[Zen Democrat]

10. The question is, who did the adapting? Did Jesus do it, or was that later?

I've always been struck by the question to Jesus from his disciples: "Who sinned Master, the man born blind or his parents?" How could the man have sinned before being born blind unless he had lived before this incarnation?

[Luke21]

6. Sure, it is.

Religion is meant to make the world better. It is the ultimate in personal journey. My people, the Christians, often become their own worst enemies through harshness, aloofness, and demanding that everyone follow their doctrines to the letter. How can something that can't be seen be so formal?

People of faith are often people of peace. Practicing a faith with devoutness should be a sign of a happy, optimistic, welcoming spirit. With my people, and I'm a minister, quite often it isn't.

A great author wrote one time about Christianity, "Why would something practiced by so many miserable people possibly appeal to me?"

The Buddhists I have known are seekers. I enjoy speaking to them and learning of their journey.

[politicaholic]

7. I've heard of catholic monestaries in west Asia which have meshed the two-

A good friend of mine went to one a couple of years ago in northern India for a couple of months. He said it was an amazing experience. Lots of meditating and quiet reflection.

He came back and started a class of what he learned there at his usual church/parish. They ended up asking him to leave. They said he was preaching mysticism when in reality he was just teaching meditation, ancient christian mantras, and breathing classes.

He's since denounced the Catholic church and has been spending most of his time playing the x-box. Those catholics really know how to screw a dude up.

[buddysmellgood]

9. Jesus was Buddhist. That's where he was between his early years and when

he started his preaching. He was out East learning Buddhism.

[saltpoint]

12. To many, yes. Spiritual people whose paths lead them toward

contemplative, inward journeys can find compatibility with both Buddhism and Christianity.

But by 'Christianity' I certainly do not mean Jim Dobson and his pack of hate-mongering jackasses in Colorado Springs.

St. Francis, yes. I think a Buddhist and a contmeplative Franciscan would have much to talk about.

[renter]

13. Nikia, Jesus and Buddha are not really the same...

Let's take a short history course. Gautama Buddha was born into a wealthy family, married and had a son. Buddha was obviously a very observant and mentally brilliant man. He lamented over life's suffering. Buddha left his family to travel, question and think for several years about this. For want of a better term Buddha achieved "enlightenment" observing that life is full of sorrow. Buddha created the four noble truths of 1. life is suffering 2. the cause of this suffering is desire/passion 3. eliminate this desire/passion and you obtain Nirvana--the cessation of desire/passion and the entering of bliss. 4. Finally, Buddha thought of a way to try to remove this suffering/desire/passion by following an eightfold path of doing the right thing. People suffer because they are people. Buddha preached a religion that, from what I can tell, tries to eliminate authority, ritual, tradition, speculation and spirit. Either in the present physical life or another one, somewhat similar to the parent thought of Hinduism, a religion Buddha escaped from. Buddha,in seeking nirvana, sought to eliminate individuality, a person's soul. If I remember right, Buddha died from accidental food poisoning.
Jesus was born poor, never attained wealth or family, and was murdered. Jesus did not invent a recipe of "truths" that must be followed in order to achieve a good life. Jesus IS life. You are able to have a PERSONABLE relationship with God via Jesus. Jesus gave up his physical life for your spiritual life. Even with all of our human frailties, you can talk to God via prayer. You cannot obtain this via Buddha. Jesus acknowledges life's permanent misery and offers permanent salvation. Buddha seeks to disavow misery. Jesus wants us to help our fellow man, to share sorrow. Buddha wishes to "internalize" sorrow and eliminate it. Buddha teaches an internal, secular solution to human problems. Jesus shows us we cannot do this ourselves, we need external hope.
Do a search on charities. See how many have their genesis in God. See how many have their beginning in Buddha. Do a search on the founding of hospitals. See how many were founded by followers of God. Then see how many were founded by the followers of Buddha.
Every religion has a central theme. In Buddhaism, you follow a recipe of thoughts and rules. In Christianity, Jesus IS THE theme, not a set of rules. Follow Jesus.

[NMMNG]

18. Nice try

Do a search on charities. See how many have their genesis in God. See how many have their beginning in Buddha. Do a search on the founding of hospitals. See how many were founded by followers of God. Then see how many were founded by the followers of Buddha.


In the United States, which is predominantly Christian, of course the majority of faith-based charities will be run by Christians. However if you were to research a nation that is predominantly Buddhist you would find that most faith-based charities are run by Buddhists.

Don't look now, but your bias is showing.

[renter]

20. Good morning, Buffy, please...

expand your vision to include not only our country but other countries as well.
Through out the New Testament there are many references on the duty and obligation to helping the poor. You cannot find this same depth and breadth of compassion for your fellow man in Buddhism. If you wish, you can see that wherever there are problems in the world, it is Christianity that is playing a part in trying to solve it. You could, literally, spend days doing web searches on Christian charities worldwide and the problems these fine organizations are trying to resolve. If you would like, I could point some out to you. Below are two items that may interest you.
http://www.rhythmism.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16340
http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/index.php?showtopic=9645
Good luck Buffy in expanding your horizons. I sincerely hope everything goes well in your life.

[NMMNG]

26. Don't play as if I'm ignorant

I am not.

Buddhism teaches its adherents to be generous and charitable just as Christianity. Helping the poor is just one thing Buddhists do as part of Engaged Buddhism, a much broader movement to address the social ills of the world. The biggest difference between Engaged Buddhism and Christian Charity is that Engaged Buddhism does not proselytize or require recipients of their services to convert to their religion to receive services like Christianity often does.


From the 14 Precepts of Engaged Buddhism:

1
Do not be idolatrous about or bound to any doctrine, theory, or ideology, even Buddhist ones. Buddhist systems of thought are guiding means; they are not absolute truth.

snip

3
Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education. However, through compassionate dialogue, help others renounce fanaticism and narrow-mindedness.

snip

5
Do not accumulate wealth while millions are hungry. Do not take as the aim of your life fame, profit, wealth, or sensual pleasure. Live simply and share time, energy, and material resources with those who are in need.

snip

9
Do not say untruthful things for the sake of personal interest or to impress people. Do not utter words that cause division and hatred. Do not spread news that you do not know to be certain. Do not criticize or condemn things of which you are not sure. Always speak truthfully and constructively. Have the courage to speak out about situations of injustice, even when doing so may threaten your own safety.

snip

12
Do not kill. Do not let others kill. Find whatever means possible to protect life and prevent war.

snip
http://buddhism.kalachakranet.org/resources/14_precepts.html

Many Christian charities could learn much from these precepts.




More on engaged Buddhism:

http://www.dharmanet.org/engaged.html

http://www.engagedpage.com/

http://www.peckham.demon.co.uk/neb.htm



And something on Buddhism and Charity/generosity in general:

To be a real Buddhist is just to take the Triple Gem as one's guide, that is to say, if anyone puts his or her faith in the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha, he or she is regarded as a Buddhist. This is according to the answer of the Buddha to Prince Mahanama's question about being a Buddhist.
There is advice for the progress in practice called the Basis of Merit Making as taught by the Buddha as follows:
1. Charity or generosity (Dana)
2. Morality (Sila) and
3. Development of meditation which is of two kinds, namely: tranquility of the mind and spiritual insight (Bhavana).
From the above mentioned principle it is clear that charity and serving society in the way of giving a helping hand and other spiritual practices are regarded as the additional practices of being a Buddhist.
http://mahamakuta.inet.co.th/english/question.htm


And here is something of great interest:

Question
Why is it that you don't often hear of charitable work being done by Buddhists?

Answer
Perhaps it is because Buddhists don't feel the need to advertise about the good they do. Several years ago the Japanese Buddhist leader Nikkho Niwano received the Templeton Prize for his work in promoting inter-religious harmony. Likewise a Thai Buddhist monk was recently awarded the prestigious Magsaysay Prize for his excellent work among drug addicts. In 1987 another Thai monk, Ven. Kantayapiwat was awarded the Norwegian Children's Peace Prize for his many years of work helping homeless children in rural areas. And what about the large scale social work being done among the poor in India by the Western Buddhist Order? They have built schools, child minding centres, dispensaries and small scale industries for self sufficiency. Buddhists see help given to others as an expression of their religious practice just as other religions do but they believe that it should be done quietly and without self-promotion. Thus you don't hear so much about their charitable work.

http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/qanda01.htm

Yeah, that's right. There is no "Buddha 700 Club" where some guy gets on tv and rambles on about all the alleged good work he does while picking the pockets of his viewers dry. When Buddhists do good work they just do it and go on with their lives. As they should. No Pharisees there.









Edit to fix italics

[beam me up scottie]

27. "Yeah, that's right. There is no "Buddha 700 Club""

You go, Buffy.
:woohoo:

[renter]

29. Good Morning Buffy...

It is good to see the charitable works of people who are Bud dist do. The progression of Budd ism to emphasize more charitable works is a worthy and noble goal.There are also many, many charitable Christian organizations that do not receive attention. The opinion piece to the New York Times is but one example mentioning this.
It is unfortunate Buffy that you wish to dwell negatively on Christianity. Perhaps if more progressive individuals followed Christ, more progressive individuals would be in political/public office. Unfortunately this is not the case. From reading and listening it is apparent that the hatred of Christianity in some Democratic Party circles is because the Republicans have captured this crowd. This was not always the case as a history of American politics shows. .
Perhaps those who are, shall we mildly say, di pleased with these Christians, try to be better Christians themselves. Please, reflect on this.
Religion is a purely pro-choice decision. You either believe or not. I choose to believe,to trust my soul, to Jesus. Not Buddha. The Four Gospels is the best reason I can give,perhaps people may care to read them. They can explain it much better than I.
Buffy, and others, may you find peace and harmony in your choice. I do sincerely wish you well. But please, do not let the hatred of Christianity in you heart blind the vision and truth that it brings. Good morning, and I hope you have a good day today.

[NMMNG]

30. If you recall

Our discussion was prompted by your negativity towards Buddhism. Therefore it is impolite for you to chastise me for any negativity towards Christianity.

I choose to believe,to trust my soul, to Jesus. Not Buddha.

This is just as well, as Buddhists do not believe in the soul, and therefore would not be interested in you trusting yours to the Buddha, who has been dead for nearly three millennia.

The Four Gospels is the best reason I can give,perhaps people may care to read them.

I have read them, thank you very much, along with the rest of the Bible. I used to be a very devout Christian. That is how I understand so much of the dark side of the religion, and the Bible. It is often the most significant error that a believer makes is to assume that the atheist has never read the Bible. Often we have read more of it than many Christians.


Cheers

[renter]

31. Good Morning Buffy, again :)

Just out of curiosity, and no malice is intended, would you explain "the dark side...and the Bible?" Buffy, do you feel sorrowed by--if I am reading your post correctly--that you do not believe that you have a soul? I hope everything is going well for you and have a good day Buffy:)

[NMMNG]

32. Oh my goodness, where to begin and end

The Bible.

God says in the Ten Commandments "Thou Shalt Not Kill".

Yet God kills 70,000 innocent people because David ordered a census of the people (1 Chronicles 21). God also orders the destruction of 60 cities so that the Israelites can live there. He orders the killing of all the men, women, and children of each city, and the looting of all of value (Deuteronomy 3). He orders another attack and the killing of “all the living creatures of the city: men and women, young, and old, as well as oxen sheep, and asses” (Joshua 6). In Judges 21, He orders the murder of all the people of Jabesh-gilead, except for the virgin girls who were taken to be forcibly raped and married. When they wanted more virgins, God told them to hide alongside the road and when they saw a girl they liked, kidnap her and forcibly rape her and make her your wife! Just about every other page in the Old Testament has God killing somebody! In 2 Kings 10:18-27, God orders the murder of all the worshipers of a different god in their very own church! In total God kills 371,186 people directly and orders another 1,862,265 people murdered.

So apparently it's "Thou shalt not kill, unless I say so".



Then there's God's treatment of rape victims:

(Deuteronomy 20:10-14)

As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you.

(Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NAB)

If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. {Sure, it's ok to force a rape victim to marry her rapist}



(Deuteronomy 22:23-24 NAB)

If within the city a man comes upon a maiden who is betrothed, and has relations with her, you shall bring them both out of the gate of the city and there stone them to death: the girl because she did not cry out for help though she was in the city, and the man because he violated his neighbors wife. {That's it, stone the victim for being raped.}


(Deuteronomy 21:10-14 NAB)


"When you go out to war against your enemies and the LORD, your God, delivers them into your hand, so that you take captives, if you see a comely woman among the captives and become so enamored of her that you wish to have her as wife, you may take her home to your house. But before she may live there, she must shave her head and pare her nails and lay aside her captive's garb. After she has mourned her father and mother for a full month, you may have relations with her, and you shall be her husband and she shall be your wife. However, if later on you lose your liking for her, you shall give her her freedom, if she wishes it; but you shall not sell her or enslave her, since she was married to you under compulsion." {God approves of forcible rape}


(Zechariah 14:1-2 NAB)


Lo, a day shall come for the Lord when the spoils shall be divided in your midst. And I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem for battle: the city shall be taken, houses plundered, women ravished; half of the city shall go into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be removed from the city. {Again, God approves of forcible rape}


Then there are all of these blatant lies told by Jesus

1) And Jesus answered and said to them, "Truly I say to you, if you have faith and do not doubt, you will not only do what was done to the fig tree, but even if you say to this mountain, `Be taken up and cast into the sea,' it will happen. "And all things you ask in prayer, believing, you will receive." (Matthew 21:21-22 NAS)



2) Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks, receives; and the one who seeks, finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened. (Matthew 7:7-8 NAB)



3) Again I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by My Father who is in heaven. For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst. (Matthew 18:19-20 NAS)



4) Amen, I say to you, whoever says to this mountain, 'Be lifted up and thrown into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it shall be done for him. Therefore I tell you, all that you ask for in prayer, believe that you will receive it and it shall be yours. (Mark 11:24-25 NAB)



5) And I tell you, ask and you will receive; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks, receives; and the one who seeks, finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened. (Luke 11:9-13 NAB)



6) And whatever you ask in my name, I will do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask anything of me in my name, I will do it. (John 14:13-14 NAB)



7) If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask for whatever you want and it will be done for you. (John 15:7 NAB)



8) It was not you who chose me, but I who chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit that will remain, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name he may give you. (John 15:16 NAB)



9) On that day you will not question me about anything. Amen, amen, I say to you, whatever you ask the Father in my name he will give you. Until now you have not asked anything in my name; ask and you will receive, so that your joy may be complete. (John 16:23-24 NAB)


He essentially says that anything you ask of God, you will receive. Yet anybody who has asked anything of God knows that this is not true. Prayers go unanswered all of the time. Therefore every one of these statements is a lie.



I could go on but this post is already long enough, so I'll move on.




Christianity:

There are many who claim that the Bible is inerrant, the breathed word of God and to be followed to a T. Yet it is evident that they are in no way following it with any regularity. E.G., they are "Cafeteria Christians", and therefore hypocrites. While they denounce homosexuals because of the six "clobber verses", people of other faiths/no faith, and others of their choosing, they conveniently ignore many verses, if not whole chapters of the Bible that would make their life inconvenient. Some significant examples:

They get divorces or condone others who do in direct violation of Matthew 5:32.
They eat shellfish, even though Leviticus 11:9-12 says they are an abomination.
They eat pork, despite the fact that Leviticus 9:26 claims this is unclean.
They wear clothing made of two different kinds of fabric, though this is forbidden by Leviticus 19:19.
They wear gold and pearl jewelry, and braid their hair, despite Paul's prohibition of this in 1 Timothy 2:9.



Now of course many Christians claim that they no longer have to follow the "purity codes" of Leviticus because Jesus eradicated them with his coming, etc. However they are very quick to quote the clobber verses of Leviticus when condemning homosexuals, and the Ten Commandments in general. It also doesn't explain their violations of NT prohibitions. Cafeteria plan again. Do as I say, not as I do.


Then, of course, there are the many "Christians" who extoll Christianity while exhibiting none of the virtues of Christ. They are all Leviticus and no Luke. Hellfire and Brimstone, but no Forgiveness or Mercy. Where they get off calling themselves Christians I will never know.



Buffy, do you feel sorrowed by--if I am reading your post correctly--that you do not believe that you have a soul?


Not at all. I feel no distress over the nonexistence of a fictional concept. I am quite at peace with the fact that when I die I will simply cease to exist.

[renter]

33. Buffy, for an early A.M. posting,

Your very coherent and productive. If you would please, give me a few days to respond to each quote that you brought up. I have to work-out now and I have two jobs, so it may take awhile to thoughtfully respond to the quality that your recent post deserves. Hope everything goes well for you.

[NMMNG]

34. I work two jobs myself

So I know what that entails. Take all the time you need. :thumbsup:

[renter]

40. Hi Buffy, I believe we...

can agree that people do cause misery to themselves and others. I also think we can agree that people do create joy and fullfillment to themselves and others. Why is there a preponderance of the former and not the latter? Buddah believes(basically)that this is from individual desire. To repress/eliminate these (can we agree on the term-selfiss wants?), will bring an individual closer to achieving perfection. Jesus, to paraphrase, would say the awnser is due to the internal "sinfull" nature of each of us. For Christians, how do we "achieve perfection?" By believing in God. That God is the standard of perfection and that deviation from this brings consequences. Can we agree on the above statements as being basically true? From my Christian beliefs how do I, and more importantly, why do I believe this. The Bible.
From your prior readings of the Bible I believe you know that it contains some litteral truths and some metaphorical truths about God and people. It can be difficult sometimes to tell one from the other. Way back in Genesis we learn that men and women achieved the ability to choose between the "fruit" of good and evil. Evil scores first. The struggle to live begins with imperfect(sinfull)people and their choices. God is sadden that his standards are not kept and begins again with the family of Noah. Same result. God begins again with the Jews and gives them ten of his laws to live by. Now begins the "fun" we have today of interpreting these words. Many believe that "...shall not kill" is the same as not murder. Not really. It is legal then and now to kill, but not murder. We have the ability to distinquish the two. So does God.
So now we come to the flowers of your question; why did God order the killing of the tribes mentioned in the Old Testament by the Jews, and why all the "stupid" rules(laws) mentioned. Let's start with second one.

[renter]

41. sorry Buffy, hit the wrong button, need more sleep I guess...

God wanted the Jews to be his messenger to the world of his ways. The laws that you mentioned in the Old Testament are a way to set the Jews apart from the rest of the world. Kind of like your avatar sets you apart. The laws that you mentioned are were more "fair" than the laws that the non-Jews had at the time. They also reflect the agrarian nature of the time and what it takes to prosper in it. It is difficult to relate to and to judge people living in this type of environment who did not have the thousands of years of human development we have now. The many types of sacrifices mentioned were a reminder to a forgetful and sinful people to remember God. Kind of like an agricultural passing of the offering plate during that one day a week.
The genocide you mentioned was due to the "guilty" tribes committing some rather tragic sins. The worst are mentioned in Deuteronomy. God was acting as police, jury and judge in this case by giving the Jews the opportunity to remove sin from their surroundings. An example today would be to remove drug use and the murders, prostitution, disease and the degradation that it causes in your neighborhood. Why did God do something we see as horrible? To remove horrible sin, to prevent this sin from infecting the Jews. As further reading of the Old Testament reveals, the Jews failed to do as God wanted. The principle of this is read in Exodus 34:6-7. The Jews became like their sinful neighbors and suffered the consequences of their choice. If you superimpose maps of where these sinfully tribes where to a map of today, you will see that it covers Israel and the area around it. The world would be a much better place if people would be able to do what God wanted.
So we can read throughout the Old Testament that people really don't change. They bring misery and sorrow to themselves and others by individual choice and ignore the rules that God gave to promote the prosperity that is available from him.
It is apparent that there will never be peace on earth as long as people continue their sinful nature. Jesus gave up his physical life carrying the inherent sinful nature of all of us upon his shoulders. A cross God chose to bear. Since we as individuals fail in perfection, there are after all not even perfect progressives, Jesus gives us the ability to tame our sinful nature by believing in him. What I see in Buddhism is this repetition of individual failure, and for me personally, the denial of our spirit, our soul. Our un-physical ability of perfection. We cannot help being who we are and what we are. No set of human instructions can really change this. People cannot achieve physical or intellectual perfection on this earth. The millions of people who have/currently follow(ed) Buddha, Confucius, or Marx and Engels over all of these years would have figured it out by now if it were possible. Since the reoccurring history of people have shown we cannot achieve an "A" on the elementary school level of physical life. Christianity gives us the individual choice of at least a grade of "B" on this physical level and the gift of an "A" in the higher spiritual order of life.
Thank you Buffy for taking time out of your busy life to read this. I hope it makes some sense to you and of the Bible. I hope all goes well with you.

[NMMNG]

43. Dear Renter,

The laws that you mentioned in the Old Testament are a way to set the Jews apart from the rest of the world.

Yes, I'm aware of what the Purity and Holiness Codes were designed for. What I have a huge problem with is the way Christians claim, on the one hand, that they are no longer applicable to today's modern world, yet on the other hand claim that they apply in other circumstances. They select specific verses and apply them to others, claiming that these individuals are sinful because they are in violation of those verses. Some examples:

Leviticus 18
22" 'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.

23 " 'Do not have sexual relations with an animal and defile yourself with it. A woman must not present herself to an animal to have sexual relations with it; that is a perversion.

Leviticus 20
13 " 'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.


So it's the utter hypocrisy that is the problem. The "you must follow the Bible, but I don't have to" that is an issue. And any time you call them on it they have some convenient excuse as to why the verses they aren't following no longer apply, but the ones they demand you follow are set in stone for all eternity, even if those verses are in the exact same chapter. For example:

Leviticus 20
10 " 'If a man commits adultery with another man's wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.

This is only three verses above the admonishment towards homosexuals, yet nobody in this day and age would even suggest putting adulterers to death. Why not? The Bible says it is required!


Then there will be those who will say, "But even if you disregard the verses against homosexuals in the OT, there are some in the NT". Yes, that is true. However they are in the Pauline letters, right along with his warnings to women not to wear gold or pearl jewelry, or to braid their hair. (Not to mention how women are supposed to be quiet in church and never teach men) One man's reply when I asked him why it was ok for women to disobey this but not ok for people to ignore Paul's orders against homosexuality? "Paul's instructions against the jewelry and braids were just suggestions".

As I said, always some convenient excuse.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What I see in Buddhism is this repetition of individual failure

In what way?

[renter]

44. Good morning Buffy, I wish to thank you...

for the opportunity you are giving me to help explain the Bible. Prior to Leviticus, God "gave birth" to the Jewish nation from Egypt to go to back to the area that is now Israel and the area around Israel. Just as parents set household rules(discipline) for their children to follow, so did God set rules for the Jews to follow. The first ten--the most important-- I'm sure your familiar with. The elaboration and other rules are found in Leviticus. You mentioned some that trouble you. Are there not some paths of Buddhism that trouble you? Are there some parts of Buddhism you do not yet understand? Do you not take the bitter with the sweet?
The whole book of Leviticus can summed up in 11:45:"You will be holy because I am holy." To juxtapose this with Buddha I would say follow the rules Buddha has establish and you will reach Nirvana. You quoted some rules you do not like. Most other people who have trouble with Leviticus mention these same rules. I have yet to read where these same individuals mention 11:45 or what I consider the next two most important verses 19:17-45: You will not hate your brother(family,friends and neighbor). You should reason honestly with them, lest you be like them(sinful).
You should not bear a grudge against your neighbor or community, but you should love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord. Discipline is the foundation that love can be built on.
Leviticus sets up the opportunity for the Jews to atone for their sins via the offering of part of their labor. Christians, via Jesus, can atone for their sins due to love and his sacrificial offering. As Hinduism can help explain it's Buddha relative, so can the Old Testament relate to the New.
Paul was chosen directly by Jesus to be a messenger of his word. Perhaps I can help explain Paul's letters to the various churches. I believe the best explanation of the relationship between husband and wife is found in Ephesians 5:17-33:
"Therefore do not be unwise, but understand what the will of the Lord is. And do not be drunk with wine, in which is dissipation; but be filled with the Spirit, speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord, giving thanks always for all things to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, submitting to one another in the fear of God. Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body.
"Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her, that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word, that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish. So husbands ought to love their own wives as their own bodies; he who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as the Lord does the church.
"For we are members of His body, of His flesh and of His bones. "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Nevertheless let each one of you in particular so love his own wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband." (Ephesians 5:17-33)

For leadership qualities there is Matthew 20:25-26
" But Jesus called them to Himself and said, 'You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authority over them. Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant. . . .'" (Matthew 20:25-26)

Timothy 2:11-12 proclaims, “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.” In the church, God assigns different roles to men and women. This is a result of the way mankind was created (1 Timothy 2:13) and the way in which sin entered the world (2 Timothy 2:14). God, through the Apostle Paul’s writing, restricts women from serving in roles of spiritual teaching authority over men.

My looking up references to Buddha and women show similar findings. The best example I found was this one:
WOMEN IN BUDDHISM -- By Rev. Patti Nakai
If anyone wanted to present Buddhism as a viciously sexist religion, they could easily do so by quoting out of context passages from numerous sutras or from more recent texts such as Shinran's wasan (poems) or the by-laws of the Shinshu Otani-ha (Higashi Honganji's denomination) which denies female clergy the same status as male priests. But I believe the essential spirit of Buddhism absolutely includes all beings, male and female, in its vision of enlightenment. If I did not believe in that then I would not want to be a part of this religious tradition. In this intermittent series, I hope to make it clear that women have always been involved in Buddhist history and that their role has been very crucial even if often overlooked. As all scholars of Buddhism are quick to point out, there were many more rules for women than for men; in one version, there are about 250 rules for monks and 348 rules for nuns.
http://www.mkzc.org/sarawebb.html:Traditionally in Buddhism, women have been seen as inferior. When the Buddha was selecting disciples, he turned women away initially, even his own stepmother, and was persuaded only with difficulty to set up spiritual training for women.

Women excel in gifts of hospitality, mercy, teaching and helps. Much of the ministry of the church depends on women. Women in the church are not restricted to public praying or prophesying (1 Corinthians 11:5), only to having spiritual teaching authority over men.
The Bible nowhere restricts women from exercising the gifts of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians chapter 12). Women, just as much as men, are called to minister to others, to demonstrate the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23), and to proclaim the Gospel to the lost (Matthew 28:18-20; Acts 1:8; 1 Peter 3:15).The only activity women are restricted from is teaching or having spiritual authority over men.
The statement regarding women's apparel is true. Paul was complaining of the display of wealth--as seen in the words: rich clothing, copious amounts of jewelry and hair treatments. The poor should not be intimidated by this.
Your question about the stoning to death of an adulteress was awnsered by Jesus when this very same predicament came upon him. Jesus said to the crowd let anyone who is without sin throw the first rock. The crowd dispersed and the woman was rescued. People have never fully followed the laws(rules) set down by God. The awnser was forgiveness of sin if people believe in Jesus. Belief in Jesus is the only way to really reach whatever final stop you wish to believe in: heaven, nirvana, rebirth, etc.
I believe the best way to explain the relationship between the Old and the New Testament is that the old documents people's eternal inclination to sin. Whether on their own from Adam/Eve to the Jews release from Egypt. From disobeying the Ten Commandments to the laws Leviticus. To not eliminating sin where they were and where the Jews were to go, to ignoring God and his prophets. In the New Testament God offers truth and salvation not in people sacrificing to him, but to his sacrifice to his people. I know of no other religion where God becomes physically human to be tortured and finally physically die for the sins of his people. In no other religion does God stoop down to wash feet.
The book "Jesus Before Other Gods"--can't remember the author's name--offers a much better explanation than I can give you.
Buffy, in my prior post I stated:'What I see in Buddhism is this repetition of individual failure.' "In what way?" was your question to this statement. The awnser is in Leviticus and Jesus. People are unable to follow the path (law). In Buddhism, from my understanding, and no malice or disrespect is intended when I say this, you need to endlessly repeat a physical life in order to finally achieve Nirvana. A repetition of failure. In Christianity, Nirvana is given to you when you hear of Jesus, all you need to do is to believe in him. When you honestly believe Jesus died for your sins, the spirit(enlightenment)will present itself to you. To some this comes with a shout, for others a quiet revelation. For me, a quiet, comfortable feeling while sitting on a pew. With a tear running down my left eye, the eye toward the wall. God was not letting me embarrass my introverted self in front of other people. A graciousness I too often not return to my fellow man.
I sincerely hope this conveys on why I love God, and why I believe in him. Good luck Buffy, and others who are reading, I do wish you the best in your lives.

[NMMNG]

45. Dear Renter,

Are there not some paths of Buddhism that trouble you?


I don't like how nuns are treated differently than monks. However, I know this is because the society in which Buddhism was created (as all societies of the time) was incredibly sexist. As with most other religions, Christianity included, women were considered inferior to men and treated as such. So far, however, I've not come across any other negatives (though I am not nearly as well versed in Buddhism as I am in Christianity).

The Bible nowhere restricts women from exercising the gifts of the Holy Spirit

And the Buddha was the first spiritual leader to recognize that women had equal spiritual potential to men:

33. In Buddhism, can women attain enlightenment?
The Buddha was the first religious leader to accept equal spiritual potentiality of men and women. The nature of enlightenment transcends gender difference, which otherwise tends to limit women in their social contexts. For this reason women were accepted into the Order (Sangha), and proved themselves worthy of the Buddha's recognition. Some of them were individually praised by the Buddha, such as Bhikkhuni Patacara who was foremost in Vinaya, and Bhikkhuni Khema who was foremost in wisdom. Among lay women, Visakha was foremost in offering dana and Samavati was foremost in loving-kindness. In brief, women showed equal capability in practicing and propagating Buddhism in early Buddhist history. Even now both men and women who practise the Buddhist teachings can undoubtedly attain enlightenment.

34. Is it true that in some countries women can be ordained?
The Buddha allowed women full ordination in His time. They were called Bhikkhuni (Bhisuni in Sanskrit). The Bhikkhuni lineage in India lasted more than a thousand years and disappeared together with the Bhikkhu Sangha when India was invaded in C.11th.
A group of Bhikkhunis from India led by Sanghamitta Their, King Asoka's daughter, were invited by King Devanampiyatissa of Sri Lanka to establish the Bhikkhuni lineage in B.E. 236. This Bhikkhuni Sangha in Sri Lanka also lasted for more than a thousand years before they were uprooted by foreign invasion.
However, a group of Sri Lanka Bhikkhunis were invited over to China in B.E. 976 where they established a Bhikkhuni lineage there. This lineage has been kept alive until today.
Afterward, they spread to many neighbouring countries, i.e. Japan, Korea, etc. Bhikkhuni strongholds can now be found in Taiwan monastery and Korea. In B.E. 2531 (1988) His Lai Temple, a Chinese monastery in Los Angeles, U.S.A., provided ordination for 200 women from various traditions and countries to strengthen the institution of fully ordained Buddhist women. In the last two decades, Buddhist women have expressed clearly their desire to participate at all levels in Buddhism. Considering that women from half of the world population, this trend should have a positive effect towards the development of Buddhism.
From: http://mahamakuta.inet.co.th/english/question.htm">Buddhist Questions and Answers



One thing intrigues me. When women in the Christian church are expected to "learn quietly with full submission", and to never teach a man (two very restrictive rules IMO), you consider that simply God's way of dividing up gender roles. However you quote a passage from a book on Buddhism that makes the claim that because there are more rules for nuns than monks that it is "a viciously sexist religion". How is telling women to "sit still, shut up, and take orders" not viciously sexist?


Are there some parts of Buddhism you do not yet understand?

Plenty. I am not a Buddhist, but an atheist who studies Buddhism off and on. Therefore I have much to learn.






In Buddhism, from my understanding, and no malice or disrespect is intended when I say this, you need to endlessly repeat a physical life in order to finally achieve Nirvana.


One need not endlessly repeat a physical life to attain Nirvana:

45. Is Nibbana or Nirvana attainable in this lifetime?
Certainly, there are many passages in the Tripitaka, the Buddhist Scripture, some of which mentioning Nibbana in this lifetime that Dhamma which can be seen in this life is timeless, inviting one to come and see, appropriate to be brought into practice and realisable for themselves by the wise. Anyone who can free oneself from clinging to egotism is sure to attain Nibbana or Nirvana here and now.
From Buddhist Questions and Answers

There are even Buddhists who don't believe in reincarnation, so there is no worry of endless repetition of life:

"All Buddhists believe in reincarnation"
This misconception is understandable, given that Tibetan Buddhists (such as the Dalai Lama), who do believe in a form of reincarnation, are perhaps the most "visible" of the many sects of Buddhism. Also, watching recent movies like Little Buddha, Seven Years in Tibet or Kundun, might lead one to believe that Tibetan Buddhism is "representative" of Buddhism in general. However, Shin Buddhists generally treat belief in reincarnation in the same way we treat belief in a god: We don't give it much thought. What's important is not which Buddhists believe in reincarnation and which don't, but that all Buddhists do strive to awaken to one central teaching: The universal truth of the impermanent and interdependent nature of all life. As our awareness of this truth awakens, so does our awareness of compassion.
From:http://www.livingdharma.org/Misconceptions.html">Common Misconceptions About Buddhism

I happen to be someone who does not believe in reincarnation, or any other form of afterlife.

[renter]

46. Good morning Buffy, another one of your...

intelligent and coherent early morning posts. Third shift worker? I will try to awnser your question below.
"One thing intrigues me. When women in the Christian church are expected to "learn quietly with full submission", and to never teach a man (two very restrictive rules IMO), you consider that simply God's way of dividing up gender roles. However you quote a passage from a book on Buddhism that makes the claim that because there are more rules for nuns than monks that it is "a viciously sexist religion". How is telling women to "sit still, shut up, and take orders" not viciously sexist?"

My awnser would be Ephesians 5:17-33. I will capitalize the letters of the sentences I think will help explain your question (I don't mean to be "shouting" when I use caps., I just don't know of any other way to differentiate my awnsers from this verse.)

Ephesians 5:17-33:
"Therefore do not be unwise, but understand what the will of the Lord is. And do not be drunk with wine, in which is dissipation; but be filled with the Spirit, speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord, giving thanks always for all things to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, submitting to one another in the fear of God. Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body.
"Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her, that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word, that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish. So husbands ought to love their own wives as their own bodies; he who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as the Lord does the church.
"For we are members of His body, of His flesh and of His bones. "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Nevertheless let each one of you in particular so love his own wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband." (Ephesians 5:17-33)

'...DO NOT BE DRUNK WITH WINE...BUT BE FILLED WITH THE SPIRIT...'
In other words, don't fill your time at the corner bar, but fill your time with God. Spend time with your wife. Solve the problems that come up with prayer and respect to one another. Be thankful for the gift of Jesus and of your wife.

'Wives, submit to your husbands, AS TO THE LORD. FOR THE HUSBAND IS THE HEAD OF THE WIFE, AS ...CHRIST IS THE HEAD OF THE CHURCH.'
Buffy, what happened to Jesus, the "head" of the church? High leadership brings with it higher responsibility. God would wish us to live our lives not as we may think it should be, but as God knows it should be. What responsibility does the husband acquire as being the leader of the house?
What responsibility does the man accept in the demand that the woman summit to him? The awnser is in the verse below. The verse below is, in my opinion, THE-I am only shouting this time:)-most important aspect of marriage.

'HUSBANDS, LOVE YOUR WIVES, JUST AS CHRIST...LOVED THE CHURCH and GAVE HIMSELF FOR HER.'
The part of LOVE your wife and GIVE HIMSELF FOR HER means this: the responsibility of the husband is to love, give, and protect. To love his wife, to take the personal responsibility of getting a job and supporting his wife, and to give up his life in protecting her. Is there any part of Buddhism that demands this much personal male morality/responsibility regarding husband and wife?

'THAT HE...SANCTIFY... HER WITH THE WASHING WATER OF WATER OF THE WORD' and 'JUST AS THE CHURCH IS SUBJECT TO CHRIST,SO LET THE WIVES BE TO THEIR OWN HUSBANDS IN EVERYTHING.'
The washing water of words are the words of Jesus. The words of Jesus are the detergent in the water that help cleanse us of sin. The summation of the wife to the husband in church is not due to the difference of gender, but to the spiritual responsibility given by God to the husband. In the New Testament, Paul states that it is a responsibility of the wife to ask questions when the couple is not in church of the teachings of the church. In my observations women never forget:0, the words of the church would be present in the home the other six days. It is the duty of the husband to put spiritual words into spiritual action. It is the duty of the wife to support her husband in this, in his decisions.
Buffy, "sit still, shut up and take orders (!)" is not what God intended. A father may have to occasionally tell his young children this; but if husband and wife understand God, a husband would not and should not tell his wife this.
When you hear of people picking one or two sentences of the Bible, ask them to give the whole chapter and verse. And read slowly. Thank you Buffy for your question and I hope this awnsers it for you. Good day.

[InaneAnanity]

15. A Piece of Advice

If you choose to have personal heroes (a choice I don't make), it would be wise to have those heroes part of the modern world, so their words and actions are directly observable and applicable to your everyday life.

[greyl]

16. Of course not, even though they are both salvationist religions.

They both have disparate views on the path to salvation and blissful escape from this faulted world, yet they share the recent idea that humans are born needing to be saved.

They are only imagined to be compatible by those that have a cursory understanding of either religion. Many intelligent, searching people in our culture have found themselves at a locus of confusing paths where they enjoy a sort of "tossed faith salad" diet. Make no mistake, it's an improvement on what they believed when they were young. They want to believe in God, they respect the emotional genesis of all religions, Jesus is awesome yet The Churches are evil etc...

The Dalai Lama said that once one reaches a certain level of realization, the Buddhist path must be chosen over others. For some reason, he doesn't mention the realizations that occur at the end of a Buddhist path.

I think he's a great and beautiful human, though seriously.

edit: left out a word

[supernova]

17. I think they are compatible

I don't see a contradiction between Jesus and the Buddha.

I often think that they must have a lot to talk about. And what I have learned of Buddhism over the years has given me a lot of comfort, as has the Bible. So I enjoy getting to know both areas of spirituality.

[greyl]

19. Jesus tells Siddhartha, "I am THE son of God and my mom is a virgin."

Siddhartha just laughs and laughs.

[supernova]

21. No, he doesn't

That's what xtian orthodoxy has gloamed on to Jesus over the ages.

He's a nice Jewish boy who found the secret to a gratifying life was in helping others in need. Siddartha was a nobleman who found the secret to a satifying life was in taking the journey.

[greyl]

22. No, that's a joke I just made up. :) nt

[supernova]

23. lol!

:silly:

It's hard to tell, most people are so deathly serious in here. :P

[Goldensilence]

24. I don't think so

neither do i think it is possible to be a buddhist and a christian as i pointed out in another thread. You can be a quiet comptemplative chrstian and find peace in mediation. But that doesn't change the underlying precepts of christianity versus buddhist thought.Of course both are going to share some basic universal altrusitic charactaristics that is comparable always in any two relgions(again i hate to classify buddhism as a religion) but to me it ends there.

[TechBear_Seattle]

25. Absolutely not

There are several fundamental differences.

Buddhism: The soul is trapped in a neverending cycle of birth, life, death and rebirth.
Christianity: You have one chance at life and one chance only.

Buddhism: The ultimate goal is annihilation of the self in to nothingness, a state called Nirvana.
Christianity: The ultimate goal is eternal union with God in Heaven. Failure to achieve this union in your one lifetime will result in everlasting torment in Hell.

Buddhism: Salvation comes only by breaking the cycle of rebirth, which might take many lives to get right.
Christianity: Salvation comes only through faith in Jesus Christ.

Buddhism: There are many possible paths towards salvation.
Christianity: There is one and only one possible path towards salvation.

Buddhism: Siddhartha Gautama is the best known Buddha (Enlightened One) and he is the one who began the movement that is known as Buddhism. However, he was not the first, nor was he the last, Buddha. There are "official" counts that list hundreds of Buddhas, many who have entered Nirvana, many who returned a few times to teach, and some who continue to incarnate (including, among others, the Dalai Lama.)
Christianity: There is one Savior, Jesus Christ, who lived on earth, taught absolute truth, died, rose from the dead and ascended bodily in to heaven.

I've studied Buddhism fairly deeply, and I was a Christian minister for many years (I'm better now, thanks for asking.) I just do not see any way to reconcile the foundational principles behind these two belief sets, not without entirely compromising one or the other.

[Maat]

47. Except that, in the current version of many Christian churches,

the adherents do not believe that the only path is through the savior, Jesus Christ. Many pastors with the United Church of Christ, Unitarian-Universalists, and members of Unity and Church of Religious Science honor all spiritual paths to the One, believing that there are as many paths as there are people on this Earth.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

28. Up to a point it's possible

By the standard definitions of Buddhism and Christianity, no, they're no mutually compatible - they require one to believe radically different things about the fundamental nature of the universe and life after death.

One can certainly self-identify as both Buddhist and Christian, and believe some combination of their teachings, but the philosophy thus arrived at certainly wouldn't be regarded as Christian by Christians, and I doubt it would be regarded as Buddhist by Buddhists.

You'd also have to throw away an awful lot of the teachings from each side to reach a philosophy that didn't contain internal contradictions, if self-consistency is something that worries you.

[Goldensilence]

35. please elaborate

You'd also have to throw away an awful lot of the teachings from each side to reach a philosophy that didn't contain internal contradictions, if self-consistency is something that worries you.

???

[greyl]

36. meaning "if self-consistency is a concern" maybe? nt

[Donald Ian Rankin]

37. Elaboration:

There are a lot of things that Christianity says are true that Buddhism says are false, and vice versa - what happens after death, how the universe was created, the spiritual statuses of Jesus and Buddha and the ultimate fate of the universe being obvious areas of disagreement.

To combine the two, either you have to say that on each of these areas one of the two is right and the other is wrong, or both are wrong, or try and believe two mutually-contradictory things simultaneously.

[Goldensilence]

38. thanks

i was thinking the same thing just got confuzzled about the self consistency part.

[NMMNG]

39. Dear Nikia,

Here are some resources that might help you with your question:

Can I Be a Buddhist and a... This offers a variety of opinions on whether or not one can be a Buddhist and of another faith.



You may also want to check out Living Buddha, Living Christ, a book that "draws parallels between {Buddhism and Christianity} that have them walking, hand in hand, down the same path to salvation". It is written by Thich Nhat Hanh, a well-known Buddhist monk who is easy to read and very engaging. It is likely available at your public library, or you can order it online.

[BiggJawn]

42. Nope.

I don't think Buddhism gives a fig if you're a Christian, but Organized Christianity would probably change your staus on the roster to "Back-slid" or "Lost".

Witness the exchange above between Buffy and Renter.