• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Jesus a Buddha?

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
I mean, Jesus taught ideas that doesn't sync with traditional Judaism, that do sync with Zoroastrianism. For example, Jews believe Satan is an angel who obeys God, Jesus taught that Satan was a devil who fell from heaven like Ahriman in the Zoroastrian scriptures. He also put a heavy emphasis on light/darkness duality, something else Zoroastrianism does, and Judaism not so much. He also taught that God was entirely good and there was no evil in him, something that Zoroaster taught about Ahura Mazda, but Judaism does teach that God is both good and evil.
I agree. In the first century though, there were varieties of Judaism which, some of them, were very different from modern/traditional Judaism.

Some of these ancient forms of Judaism, or sect of Judaism, had been influenced by teachings of Zoroastrianism. There were still other forms that ignored those teachings, but not all of them.
 

Rainbow Mage

Lib Democrat/Agnostic/Epicurean-ish/Buddhist-ish
Did any of the ancient sects of Judaism teach that Satan was a fallen angel though? The Essenes seem to have been heavily influenced by Zoroastrianism. Did they teach that?
 

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
Some sects did, or at least had the foundation for that belief to be built on. Some of the Hebrew Apocrypha even have stories of a character that would later be associated with Satan. I think it was found in that Maccabees, but I can't remember off hand.
 

Rainbow Mage

Lib Democrat/Agnostic/Epicurean-ish/Buddhist-ish
You mean Samael? Samael is sometimes described as an advesary, like in the Apocalypse of Abraham, where he is shown to be tempting Abraham to worship him. Samael is traditionally the angel of death in Jewish and Muslim lore. You know Jews don't have the same ideas about advesary as Christians do with their devil, so can we be sure?
 

LoTrobador

Active Member
as such Indian Christianity is Thomasine as opposed to Peterian (Is that a word???) or Markian or Paulian.....

I think it would be Petrine, Markian and Pauline. :)

Indian Christians use the acts of thomas as a part of their bible....

I thought the New Testament canon was the same among all post-Nicene Churches, could you provide links referring to this inclusion of the Acts of Thomas into Thomasine Christians' canon?
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Most days, I think of Jesus as someone who had one or more poorly digested mystical experiences. Also, I believe he was born into a mystically impoverished culture that did little or nothing to help him understand his mystical experience(s). I don't think he was even close to being a Buddha.
 

Rainbow Mage

Lib Democrat/Agnostic/Epicurean-ish/Buddhist-ish
I certainly don't think Jesus was fully enlightened. He may have attained a certain level of enlightenment. Anyone can attain a certain level. Very few attain full enlightenment.
 

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
There is a theory that Jesus, during the so called lost years (the years preceding his ministry), he traveled to India and learned from the teachers there. So it would be theoretically possible that he did become a Buddha.

However, even though the idea the Jesus traveled to India in his early years can not be fully refuted, it is probably unlikely.
A slightly more modest theory proposes that Jesus may have been exposed to some of Buddhism’s teachings during his childhood in Egypt.

However these theories are not only unsubstantiated but if you believe there is some truth to the teachings of Jesus or the Buddha then these theories are unnecessary. If these ideas that we are referring to are true then it is possible and reasonable that they were discovered independently. (and not only by these two we are discussing)
 

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
Most days, I think of Jesus as someone who had one or more poorly digested mystical experiences. Also, I believe he was born into a mystically impoverished culture that did little or nothing to help him understand his mystical experience(s). I don't think he was even close to being a Buddha.
And what do you think on the other days?
 

Rainbow Mage

Lib Democrat/Agnostic/Epicurean-ish/Buddhist-ish
I think anyone can discover some level of the truth independentally. Yes it's possible Jesus discovered what he did without being aware of the Buddha's teachings. The Buddha never knew of Lao Tzu or Confucius either, and their teachings are all similar enough. Even Muhammad, to a certain degree, had some level of the truth, for he said that Allah (god) is nearer to a person then their own jugular vein.
 

footprints

Well-Known Member
What do you guys think? Was Jesus a Buddha, that is to say, was he an enlightened one who tried to guide others to the way? I don't rule out that Jesus could have been. The way he taught can easily be explained by his difference in culture and local religion to that of Gautama Buddha. I wonder if he could be called a Buddha?

Had Jesus been born in Asia Minor, he would have indeed been referred to as a Buddha. Even without this, both Buddhism and Hinduism will still refer to Jesus in this way.

Both Jesus and Buddha attained enlightenment, both spoke with the same voice and seen with the same eyes. Both were one, with the universe around them.

Unlike modern day christian religions, where enlightenment is supposed to come down and drop on a person like some form of miracle, based on devotion and faith of belief. The path of enlightenment as left by Lord Jesus, has pretty much, remained untouched, since Jesus himself, walked the face of the earth. It is there, Jesus used it, but for some reason Christian based groups don't use it, and use devotion and faith instead.

By my reasoning, I reckon that the Christian based religions would get more benefit from using the path of enlightenment Jesus left, and at the same time give the people of the congregation more than faith to rely on, then their current method of relying on devotion and blind faith. Each to their own I suppose, they would have their own reasoning for doing the way that they are.
 

Rainbow Mage

Lib Democrat/Agnostic/Epicurean-ish/Buddhist-ish
Well footprints even in Buddhism, Mahayana anyway, devotion and faith can get you to a certain level of enlightenment, but it cannot show you the entire picture. The gods cannot win your enlightenment for you, they can only help you on the path.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
What do you guys think? Was Jesus a Buddha, that is to say, was he an enlightened one who tried to guide others to the way? I don't rule out that Jesus could have been. The way he taught can easily be explained by his difference in culture and local religion to that of Gautama Buddha. I wonder if he could be called a Buddha?

Jesus indeed was a Buddha for whom Buddha prophesied:
The Buddha, in his prophecy, named his 'Bagwa Metteyya' because 'Bagwa' in Sanskrit means 'white', and Jesus being an inhabitant of the Syrian territory, was fair of skin.
Jesus in India
Regards
 

psychoslice

Veteran Member
Yes I think the man called Jesus was a man who was enlightened just as there are many today, and when one is enlightened, they take whatever from whatever has truth within it, be that Buddhism, Hinduism or whatever religion was around at the time of Jesus the man.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
What do you guys think? Was Jesus a Buddha, that is to say, was he an enlightened one who tried to guide others to the way? I don't rule out that Jesus could have been. The way he taught can easily be explained by his difference in culture and local religion to that of Gautama Buddha. I wonder if he could be called a Buddha?

Yes. He is a Buddha. We are all Buddhas. He just realized it through His Faith in God. That was His enlightenment.
 
Last edited:

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
I see Jesus as more of a bodhisattva than a Buddha who has reached paranibbana.
He couldnt be a Boddhisttava. Boddhisatvas helped people help themselves out of suffering. They mirror The Buddha in how, throuh meditation, charity, and vocation. Jesus took suffering on Himself. He didnt help people from sufferring Himself but through His God.

Buddha is internal salvation (inward out), Jesus used external salvation (outside in).

He was enlightened as we all, but not a Boddhattava or follower of The Buddha.
 
Last edited:

arthra

Baha'i
For Baha'is Jesus and Buddha were Manifestations of God... We doubt Jesus made it to India however.
 
Top