Buddhism is compatible with any other religious belief

[Ozzie]

Why or why not?

[Engyo]

On the surface, yes; obviously some will disagree, and then we need to define exactly how we are using both "compatible" and "Buddhism" in the statement.

Now if one delves deeply enough into Buddhist doctrine, there are things which are contrary to core principles in the Abrahamic faiths, for instance. The Buddhist seals of impermanence and no(t)-self contradict Abrahamic principles to varying degrees.

Buddhism generally (not in all cases of course) takes a soft line about such things, letting people make up their own minds and come to their own understandings about these issues. The general attitude seems to be that if you don't get it in this lifetime, there's always the next one.

[Ozzie]

On the surface, yes; obviously some will disagree, and then we need to define exactly how we are using both "compatible" and "Buddhism" in the statement.

Now if one delves deeply enough into Buddhist doctrine, there are things which are contrary to core principles in the Abrahamic faiths, for instance. The Buddhist seals of impermanence and no(t)-self contradict Abrahamic principles to varying degrees

Could you expand on this?

Buddhism generally (not in all cases of course) takes a soft line about such things, letting people make up their own minds and come to their own understandings about these issues. The general attitude seems to be that if you don't get it in this lifetime, there's always the next one.

Let's define "compatible" as may exist alongside, and "Buddhism" as how respondents choose to define it.

[Anti-religion]

After life beliefs differentiates between "dharmic" from "abrahamic".It is "Reincarnation/rebirth" and "Eternal heaven(hell)".In that way it is incompatible.

On the concepts of God or self ,Dharmic religions are vary of expressing it any ontological theories.Abrahamic religons are hard on theories relating to God.That makes it incompatible with all dharmic religions and not the other way around.Moreover *experience* and *practice* is more in Dharmic religions and are emphasized.Dharmic religions are similar to heretic and unorthodox kabbala,sufism or gnosticism of abrahamic religions.
Proselytism is not encouraged and support for other possible aspects of truth (and atheism) in explicit theories ,makes it different from orthodox abrahamic ones which say or used to say otherwise.
Buddhism can exist alongside other religions ,but can * orthodox *abrahamic ones exist along side each other has to be the question.

[Ozzie]

[quote]

Originally Posted by Anti-religion

After life beliefs differentiates between "dharmic" from "abrahamic".It is "Reincarnation/rebirth" and "Eternal heaven(hell)".In that way it is incompatible.

Once occupants of heaven have descended to hell in abrahamic after-life beliefs. Similarly celestial beings in Buddhism may be reborn in state of woe. What is the difference?

On the concepts of God or self ,Dharmic religions are vary of expressing it any ontological theories.Abrahamic religons are hard on theories relating to God.That makes it incompatible with all dharmic religions and not the other way around.Moreover *experience* and *practice* is more in Dharmic religions and are emphasized.Dharmic religions are similar to heretic and unorthodox kabbala,sufism or gnosticism of abrahamic religions.

Can you expand on this?

[Anti-religion]

Once occupants of heaven have descended to hell in abrahamic after-life beliefs. Similarly celestial beings in Buddhism may be reborn in state of woe. What is the difference?

I think Heaven or Hell is gained by one time effort on earth and is an eternal place.Variations of this concept exists in abrahamic faiths.check them out .I am not an authority in this.There is no reincarnation as far i know.

Celestial beings or any other being is taken to heavenly or lower planets through his karma and this process continues until liberation in Buddhism.

Can you expand on this?

God is beyond mind or any philosophical theory.So while expressing the in expressible multiple theories and contradictions are accepted(they occur at mental level ) in dharmic ones.Moreover none of the theories can express truth completely .This is emphasized in Buddhism .Usually Abrahamic specially the orthodox ones are hard on their stance ,given in their holy books.

[ChristineES]

Parts of it can be compatible with Christianity. In fact, there are aspects of Buddhism that are the same as Christianity.

[Anti-religion]

Christianity practiced today is very tolerant,almost all Christian majority countries are secular.Moreover,i see christians to be very open-minded,as they like to question their beliefs.

There was a time during medieval period when it very intolerant.I feel ,it is the people who have to be tolerant and more than the religions as such.

[Smoke]

In many expressions of Buddhism, one can be a Buddhist and be a Christian, but in most expressions of Christianity one cannot be both a Christian and a Buddhist.

Christianity and Islam are dogmatic in ways that are alien to Buddhism, and they are dogmatic about things Buddhism cannot be dogmatic about. I've said before that Buddhism can tolerate its adherents being Christian, but Christianity cannot tolerate its adherents being Buddhist -- however, that's not exactly true. The whole worldview, the whole approach of Christianity, and especially Western Christianity, is incompatible with Buddhism. The devil is not just in the details; the ways of being religious don't mesh. Most Christianities are too relentlessly cataphatic and too arrogantly dogmatic to find much common ground with Buddhism.

I have said, when I was Orthodox, that Eastern Orthodoxy was closer to Buddhism than to Western Christianity, and I rarely met with any contradiction from other Orthodox. But I still heard Buddhists characterized as idolators, as worshipers of demons, and so on. Eastern Christianity is more apophatic and less self-assuredly dogmatic than Western Christianity, but it is still dogmatic. When a Christian movement lets go of dogma, and starts defining itself in terms of way of life rather than in terms of belief, it becomes a post-Christian movement.

[Anti-religion]

Originally Posted by Smoke

In many expressions of Buddhism, one can be a Buddhist and be a Christian, but in most expressions of Christianity one cannot be both a Christian and a Buddhist.

Christianity and Islam are dogmatic in ways that are alien to Buddhism, and they are dogmatic about things Buddhism cannot be dogmatic about. I've said before that Buddhism can tolerate its adherents being Christian, but Christianity cannot tolerate its adherents being Buddhist -- however, that's not exactly true. The whole worldview, the whole approach of Christianity, and especially Western Christianity, is incompatible with Buddhism. The devil is not just in the details; the ways of being religious don't mesh. Most Christianities are too relentlessly cataphatic and too arrogantly dogmatic to find much common ground with Buddhism.

I have said, when I was Orthodox, that Eastern Orthodoxy was closer to Buddhism than to Western Christianity, and I rarely met with any contradiction from other Orthodox. But I still heard Buddhists characterized as idolators, as worshipers of demons, and so on. Eastern Christianity is more apophatic and less self-assuredly dogmatic than Western Christianity, but it is still dogmatic. When a Christian movement lets go of dogma, and starts defining itself in terms of way of life rather than in terms of belief, it becomes a post-Christian movement.

Rightly stated!!Probably gnosticism or christian kabbala would be closer i think.

I am yet to hear a christian say something like this.
"To find out where the truth lies, you should not depend on certain things: the first is tradition. Also do not depend on hearsay, on the scriptures, on rumours. Do not decide on the good and bad only on the good reputation of a teacher, or on the appearances of things. Remember also that you do not have the means to know all the facts of truth; therefore, you should not come to the conclusion, 'My conclusion is the only true one, everything else is false'. You would become dogmatic."As the wise test gold by burning, cutting and rubbing it (on a piece of touchstone), so are you to accept my words only after examining them and not merely out of regard for me"--Buddha.