Where Christianity and Buddhism Agree?

[Buddha Dharma]

@shunyadragon I'm aware that Baha'is believe Krishna and Buddha were messengers of God, but can I ask you something about that? Do you usually take into account the kind of culture these figures appeared in? They appeared in a Vedic culture. You seem reasonable, so I wonder- do you agree the two couldn't have been radically in opposition to their culture? What Hindus believe about Krishna, and Buddhists believe about Buddha is pretty well perfectly in line with what Indian spirituality has always been.

There'd be no easy way of a person trying to argue India wasn't Vedic, especially in the Buddha's time. We can place him in history. We know that the Buddha grew up in a Vedic framework at a time when Indian philosophy was still somewhat primitive.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

I remember when I was watching a documentary on the life of DT Suzuki, who was not only a Buddhist, but an ecumenist.
A Catholic priest who had been a friend of Suzuki's made the statement on camera that Christianity and Buddhism agree on there being something awry in human nature. Obviously, he means original sin, as Christians are concerned.
What he's referring to about Buddhism is our view that ignorance misleads humanity. In Mahayana, this is ignorance to the fact of everything having one essential nature- an ignorance produced by the skandhas and false house of ego. This ignorance in turn produces the defilements of the base nature- like greed, anger, and hatred.
Buddhists practice virtues in order to purify the faculties of these poisons.
I did find it an interesting statement on that priest's part though, and it got me to thinking. Because I think Buddhists and Christians probably also agree that no person is capable of being perfect, because we all have the potential to do bad things. Christians should also ideally agree I think- that no one person or group of people can truly be blamed for evil in the world, which Buddhists tend to emphasize in our view of human nature.
What do you think friends? Is this an area where Christians and Buddhists agree, at least to some degree?

Agree, No person is capable of being perfect and we lean towards wrongdoing.
In today's world No one person or group can truly be blamed for evil in the world today.
However, in Scripture the fallen angel called as Satan became the first to lie, thus he's called the father of the lie.
That Liar Satan wants humans to worship him, so he invites us to come 'sin' with him ( be a law breaker ).
That one angelic person started the trouble, the evil in the world. By choosing to listen to Satan then Adam and Eve
brought evil into the world which influences our human nature, our imperfect inherited human nature from Adam and Eve.
So, as a Buddhist, what do Buddhist see as a future hope for us ________________

I recall that there is a Buddhist saying something like that there are more tears shed on Earth then water in the oceans.
To me, that shows the magnitude of just how much suffering there is on Earth to deal with.

Christendom (so-called Christian) basically does Not teach about a virtuous time coming when there will be an end to suffering here on Earth. Is that ignorance since they have the Bible, or is it many wilfully choose to ignore what the Bible really teaches about Earth. They often do Not teach that the time is soon coming when there will be Peace on Earth, and moral and peaceful family life will be here on Earth, besides healing for earth's nations as God promised a man named Abraham that ALL families of Earth will be blessed, and ALL nations of Earth will be blessed. Blessed with the benefits of having No more suffering on Earth.
God's promises are found at Genesis 12:3; Genesis 22:18 and Revelation 22:2.
The potential to do bad things will No longer be a problem because righteous mankind will be freed from such human imperfection, and even 'enemy death' will be No more on Earth as brought out at 1 Corinthians 15:24-26; Isaiah 25:8. So, the main theme of Jesus' teaching about the good news of God's kingdom is that good times (free from suffering) are coming to Earth.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Since we are talking about human religious systems, there usually are things in all religions that agree with others........................

Mankind in general can trace its human religious systems back to its base in ancient Babylon.
As the people migrated out of ancient Babylon they took with them their human religious practices and ideas and spread them world wide into a greater religious Babylon or Babylon the Great.
That is why in the religious world we see many similar or overlapping religious ideas agreeing with others.

 

[sealchan]

I remember when I was watching a documentary on the life of DT Suzuki, who was not only a Buddhist, but an ecumenist.

A Catholic priest who had been a friend of Suzuki's made the statement on camera that Christianity and Buddhism agree on there being something awry in human nature. Obviously, he means original sin, as Christians are concerned.

What he's referring to about Buddhism is our view that ignorance misleads humanity. In Mahayana, this is ignorance to the fact of everything having one essential nature- an ignorance produced by the skandhas and false house of ego. This ignorance in turn produces the defilements of the base nature- like greed, anger, and hatred.

Buddhists practice virtues in order to purify the faculties of these poisons.

I did find it an interesting statement on that priest's part though, and it got me to thinking. Because I think Buddhists and Christians probably also agree that no person is capable of being perfect, because we all have the potential to do bad things. Christians should also ideally agree I think- that no one person or group of people can truly be blamed for evil in the world, which Buddhists tend to emphasize in our view of human nature.

What do you think friends? Is this an area where Christians and Buddhists agree, at least to some degree?

Actually, in my close study of the Gospel of Matthew, I have reason to suspect that the author of Matthew may have been influenced by some early Buddhist literature in his formulation of the temptations Jesus faced and Jesus' subsequent teachings at the Sermon on the Mount.

Consider the idea that Jesus temptations in the wilderness are equivalent to the Buddha's experience with Mara. Afterwards Jesus begins his teaching career and Matthew presents the long Sermon on the Mount as, perhaps, his version of the Buddha's life long teaching at Deer Park.

Then are the Beatitudes (which can be counted up as presenting eight teachings) inspired by the Buddha's Eightfold Path?

Now the substance is clearly different but there are thematic overlaps and the narrative is similar as well as I hope to have demonstrated. I recall Joseph Campbell as indicating this as well in The Power of Myth interviews.

 

[shunyadragon]

Actually, in my close study of the Gospel of Matthew, I have reason to suspect that the author of Matthew may have been influenced by some early Buddhist literature in his formulation of the temptations Jesus faced and Jesus' subsequent teachings at the Sermon on the Mount.

Consider the idea that Jesus temptations in the wilderness are equivalent to the Buddha's experience with Mara. Afterwards Jesus begins his teaching career and Matthew presents the long Sermon on the Mount as, perhaps, his version of the Buddha's life long teaching at Deer Park.

Then are the Beatitudes (which can be counted up as presenting eight teachings) inspired by the Buddha's Eightfold Path?

Now the substance is clearly different but there are thematic overlaps and the narrative is similar as well as I hope to have demonstrated. I recall Joseph Campbell as indicating this as well in The Power of Myth interviews.

I do not believe it is necessary, though possible. that Jesus and his apostles be influenced by Buddhist writings to be similar. Yes, the message of each was in the cultural context of their time and place, and their followers understood their message in that context.

If one believes in universal Revelation throughout the history of humanity, as Baha'is do, similarities are universal, but the cultural context of the religion would not be. Over time believers do mold their religion in their own image, What ever one wishes to describe the relationship as enlightenment or Revelation it is ultimately universal with humanity.

 

[sealchan]

I do not believe it is necessary, though possible. that Jesus and his apostles be influenced by Buddhist writings to be similar. Yes, the message of each was in the cultural context of their time and place, and their followers understood their message in that context.

If one believes in universal Revelation throughout the history of humanity, as Baha'is do, similarities are universal, but the cultural context of the religion would not be. Over time believers do mold their religion in their own image, What ever one wishes to describe the relationship as enlightenment or Revelation it is ultimately universal with humanity.

To the extent that spiritual teachings represent an honest, open experience of what we call the spiritual which some may call a special corner of humanities' psychological experience, certainly there are universal themes. What I am indicating is that there may have been direct inspiration in the form of the Buddha's life narrative in the composition of Jesus' narrative. So in this sense early Christian authors borrowed narrative motifs from an existing religion that were concerned with describing a single individual who reflected upon his own culture's spiritual knowledge and provided a new perspective that many chose to follow. Sounds like a good precedent if one is wanting to do the same in one's own culture around an individual that people were beginning to talk about.

I find it fascinating that in the formulation of one budding religion, early writers drew from the structure of narrative, if not directly from the content, of another religion. I think this says volumes about the nature of spiritual teaching...that it has its universal aspects that apply to everyone, but that it also has its local aspects, its manifestation in a form that is suitable to a specific people or culture. It is as if there is a more objective truth behind the forms of truth that religions speak of. We cannot express that other truth directly, but we can receive inspiration from it and produce revelation in tune or not with the culture who the inspired would have be the recipient of that revelation.

It is as if spiritual truth were moonlight which some dismiss as merely reflected sunlight. But understanding that the way that that light is reflected is vitally enmeshed in how we come to make meaning for ourselves. Our psyches are the moon, our souls the reflection of the Universe upon our psyches and it is necessary for our overall satisfaction with life to walk in that light with some sense of direction.

Sometimes the differences are essential, sometimes they merely get in the way.

 

[Grandliseur]

Mankind in general can trace its human religious systems back to its base in ancient Babylon.
As the people migrated out of ancient Babylon they took with them their human religious practices and ideas and spread them world wide into a greater religious Babylon or Babylon the Great.
That is why in the religious world we see many similar or overlapping religious ideas agreeing with others.

Yes, but that also carried with it many kinds of dogma that at times show a clear way back to the teaching we received in through the Bible. Thus you have some Viking beliefs that imo have their origin way back then, we have the Sumerian tales that at some level give a similar tale but with differences, some big, that make some scientists even claim that the Bible is a copycat tale on these issues.

I was simply referring to how our humanity would naturally cause the condemnation of murder, theft, and to value some other human properties.

 

[Twilight Hue]

....Christianity has been more dominated by an accedemic intellectual approach which makes it highly unstable. In the United States we can see that in evangelicalism/protestantism. Its more scholar theologian based. Theology is a fantastic tool though to see intellectualism development in Western culture and probably has application to Buddhism. . It's worthless in application to the text or uderstanding the text and really it hinders that process.

That's an excellent assessment.

If there's anything common between the two, it would be the inmoderate introduction of academia permeating throughout both religions.

 

[ajay0]

The difference if we include Yeshua's teachings, is that he also taught reincarnation, Moksha, enlightenment, selflessness to the point of hating self and only loving the Source of reality, meditation, and that we all have to cleanse our own heart (soul) to reach the state of Nirvana to be saved.

In my opinion.

Imo, earlier Christianity had also the above teachings, though they were edited out later on by the Romans in the Council of Nicea so that it won't offend their sensibilities too much.

I have stated this in the below posts of mine....

1. Editing by the Romans

2. Common philosophical basis of Christianity and the Dharmic faiths

3. Extension

 

[Dawnofhope]

Good post! I believe that the Baha'i Faith has more in common with both, sort of in the middle. The Source some call God(s) in the Baha'i Faith is unknowable and undefinable, and of course absolutely not known in the negative sense as in atheism, from the human perspective. Also the rejection of an anthropomorphic hands on God of some churches in Christianity, which is close to the Vedic/Buddhist and Taoist perspective, but describes more of a relationship with humanity through Revelation an awareness of the attributes of Creation such as love justice and compassion, which is more in common with Judaism, Islam and Christianity. The ultimate unknowable source Brahman of Vedic traditions is close to the view of God in the Baha'i Faith.

The Baha'i Faith promotes prayer and meditation in one form or another, which is common to both.

I believe the Baha'i Faith is more in common with the original teachings of Buddha and Jewish/Christian teachings of the rejection of all images and statues of the Divine or spiritual entities. Before becoming a Baha'i I considered myself a non-temple Buddhist for this reason, and removing the cultural and ritual nature of contemporary Buddhism.

The Baha'i Faith promotes more a mystical and metaphysical nature than a literal interpretation of ancient scripture, and Baha'i scripture in a more universal gnosticism, which encourages more common ground between the diverse religions in general.

Hi Frank,

I've been a Baha'i for nearly 30 years and like many Westerners had a Christian upbringing. As you will know the Baha'i Faith has established itself throughout practically every country in the world including all countries that have sizeable Buddhist populations (with the possible exception of North Korea). Its also established in every Christian country with the exception of the Vatican City which isn't likely to change in a hurry.

The similarities with Christianity are profound for anyone who takes the trouble to compare the two religions. It easy to see the connections as I've been an adherent of both religions. Appreciating those connections between Buddhism and the Baha'i Faith to the same extent are a work in progress for me, as unlike you, I have never practised Buddhism. However my wife is part Japanese so have an evolving connection with Buddhism through that side of her family and having travelled to Japan on several occasions.

Living in Japan where most Japanese are nominal Buddhist (like many Westerners are nominal Christians), its not such a big deal to visit temples and to pray and meditate there. Most Japanese have a butsudan in their home with Buddha like figures that they revere and worship.

I've started to explore pure-land Buddhism which is easy to understand for novices like me. Buddha having grown up with Hinduism rejected excessive reflection on overly metaphysical subjects and instead outlined the practical path.

For example:

In the search for truth there are certain questions that are unimportant. Of what material is
the universe constructed? Is the universe eternal? Are there limits or not to the universe?
In what way is this human society put together?
What is the ideal form of organization for human society?
If a man were to postpone his searching and practicing for Enlightenment until such questions were solved, he would die before he found the path.
Suppose a man were pierced by a poisoned arrow, and his relatives and friends got together to call a surgeon to have the arrow pulled out and the would treated. If the wounded man objects, saying, "Wait a little. Before you pull it out, I want to know who shot this arrow.
Was it a man or a woman? Was it someone of noble birth, or was it a peasant?
What was the bow made of?
Was it a big bow, or a small bow, that shot the arrow?
Was it made of wood or bamboo?
What was the bowstring made of?
Was it made of fiber, or of gut?
Was the arrow mad of rattan, or of reed?
What feathers were used?
Before you extract the arrow, I want to know all about these things."
Then what will happen.
Before all this information can be secured, no doubt, the poison will have time to circulate all
through the system and the man may die.
The first duty is to remove the arrow, and prevent its poison from spreading.
When a fire of passion is endangering the world, the composition of the universe matters little;
what is the ideal form for the human community is not so important to deal with.
The question of whether the universe has limits or is eternal can wait until some way is found
to extinguish the fires of birth, old age, sickness and death; in the presence of mi sery, sorrow,
suffering and agony, one should first search for a way to solve these problems and devote oneself to the practice of that way.
The Buddha's teaching contains what is important to know and not what is unimportant.
That is, it teaches people that they must learn what they should learn, remove what they should remove, train for what they should become enlightened about.
Therefore, people should first discern what is the most important, what problem should be solved first and what is the most pressing issue for them.
To do all this, they must first undertake to train their minds; that is, they must first seek mind control.

http://www.e4thai.com/e4e/images/pdf/theteachingofbuddha.pdf
p 150-152

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I think any perceived compatibility or similarity depends on the Christian you are talking to. If you are swapping notes with a well-read spiritual Christian, then there is space for a meeting of minds. If you are debating with a legalistic Christian, then forget it, there's zilch.

Also, it's surprising how many Christians know nothing at all about Buddhism. Two acquaintances of mine are Church ministers. Both thoroughly nice blokes but clueless about any other religion. Most western Buddhists have grown up in a broadly Christian culture, undergone a spiritual quest, rejected Christianity and found Buddhism.

This automatically makes them more informed than someone who was raised Christian and has never looked elsewhere or questioned it, so it's a lop-sided conversation most times.

This.... all day

But then again this goes for most people of various faiths. I've said this about those who criticize Islam but cannot account for any specificities of the doctrines and laws other than what people read in English. I believe in any positive element of any faith there is always room for discussion and comparative analysis or as you say, a meeting of the minds. But as you've also indicated if you try to discuss or even debate someone even though they aren't as well learned of your faith (or a faith they're arguing against) the discussion is pointless. Most people with concrete bias will not be moved to reason at that point.

 

[David T]

That's an excellent assessment.

If there's anything common between the two, it would be the inmoderate introduction of academia permeating throughout both religions.

Well in person you and I would have a wonderful dialog on this whole topic!! My real concern is our enviromental relationship. Certainly accedemics in western culture has rendered a very dead inert, subjective nature world. That nature-supernatural split is a very serious problem. I don't like the term naturalist even it has all kinds of negative connotations now.

 

[shunyadragon]

Yes, but that also carried with it many kinds of dogma that at times show a clear way back to the teaching we received in through the Bible. Thus you have some Viking beliefs that imo have their origin way back then, we have the Sumerian tales that at some level give a similar tale but with differences, some big, that make some scientists even claim that the Bible is a copycat tale on these issues.

It is not really 'copy cat,' what the evidence indicates is that it is the evolution of theology, myth and stories in ancient cultures, which is found in the history of virtually all cultures throughout the history of humanity. It is continuum and not necessarily one copying another. The ancient Hebrews were pastoral tribes, a part of the Canaanite/Ugarit tribal culture, and language, and the myths on cuneiform tablets are dated before the Hebrew language existed.

 

[pearl]

I recall Joseph Campbell as indicating this as well in The Power of Myth interviews.

I remember these. https://www-tc.pbs.org/moyers/faithandreason/print/pdfs/campbell1.pdf

 

[shunyadragon]

I remember these. https://www-tc.pbs.org/moyers/faithandreason/print/pdfs/campbell1.pdf

I really like Joseph Campbell, and he most definitely wrote extensively concerning the mythology at the root of all religions including Christianity, and links between religions.

 

[shunyadragon]

It is not really 'copy cat,' what the evidence indicates is that it is the evolution of theology, myth and stories in ancient cultures, which is found in the history of virtually all cultures throughout the history of humanity. It is continuum and not necessarily one copying another. The ancient Hebrews were pastoral tribes, a part of the Canaanite/Ugarit tribal culture, and language, and the myths on cuneiform tablets are dated before the Hebrew language existed.

Added note: This evolution of mythology as exists in the Vedic religions from the various belief systems of Hinduism and Buddhism, and the evolution of mythology in China and Japan in Buddhism, Taoism, and Shinto. Mythology is not necessarily inseparable from the religion, but objective detached discernment is essential to help separate myth and culture from the essential spiritual beliefs, which I believe are more universal.

As Joseph Campbell accurately describes the mythology in religions evolved from ancient mythical oral stories to written myths incorporated into religions.

 

[pearl]

I really like Joseph Campbell, and he most definitely wrote extensively concerning the mythology at the root of all religions including Christianity, and links between religions.

According to Campbell, a former priest, it is his " Catholic upbringing had proven a rich resource for his life. "I think anyone who has not been Catholic in that sort of substantial way has no realization of the ambiance of religion within which you live. It’s powerful; it’s portent; it’s life supporting. And it’s beautiful. The Catholic religion is a poetic religion. Every month has its poetic and spiritual value … I’m sure that my interest in mythology comes out of that."

 

[shunyadragon]

According to Campbell, a former priest, it is his " Catholic upbringing had proven a rich resource for his life. "I think anyone who has not been Catholic in that sort of substantial way has no realization of the ambiance of religion within which you live. It’s powerful; it’s portent; it’s life supporting. And it’s beautiful. The Catholic religion is a poetic religion. Every month has its poetic and spiritual value … I’m sure that my interest in mythology comes out of that."

I was raised in the Roman Church like Joseph Campbell., though I do not share Joseph Campbell's totally positive view of the Roman Church as stated in the citation. Nonetheless what I stated before Joseph Campbell's writings concerning the relationship of Christianity and mythology is indeed the case. Despite his roots in the Roman Church and Christianity I do not believe that he was a believer. In his writing he opposed the opposed the historical theology of orthodox Christianity, viewed the stories of Genesis and other beliefs as based on mythology, and considered their only value as metaphorical interpretations.

 

[sealchan]

It is not really 'copy cat,' what the evidence indicates is that it is the evolution of theology, myth and stories in ancient cultures, which is found in the history of virtually all cultures throughout the history of humanity. It is continuum and not necessarily one copying another. The ancient Hebrews were pastoral tribes, a part of the Canaanite/Ugarit tribal culture, and language, and the myths on cuneiform tablets are dated before the Hebrew language existed.

My own take on all of this is that oral culture can spread knowledge far faster than written culture and the various world religions we see today crystallized out of those cultures that produced epic-scale literature at a time when writing was available to them and they sought, in a context of general artistic efforts, to capture their greatest oral stories and weave them into something more lasting in the form of a written document to be preserved for all time.

Now the oral traditions carried with them a vast number of stories which were linked together into epics. There were probably ways in which story-tellers could link stories together in various ways and they probably altered their stories as they travelled to new areas to ply their trade. So we have a series of most popular stories captured in ink and paper now that represent probably a fairly decent reflection of the best work of the oral story-tellers and poets.

Those who composed these epic works of spiritual literature were artists whose work may or may not have been understood to become part of some later canon. Certainly these literary authors knew they were attempting to capture something of divine inspiration. Many worked from existing stories molding them into ones they themselves and their prospective audiences would admire and appreciate. Many freely borrowed from other cultures and in particular, I think, when composing something of epic length, they may have been using a framework that epic story-tellers all shared amongst themselves, knowingly or not.

Now the oral stories themselves are a product of two primary influences: the audience/culture that the story teller told his/her stories to and the human psyche. I have studied dreams extensively and I can see elements of literary and story craft naturally embedded in dream compositions. Having grown up in a literate culture and learned a little about things like foreshadowing and motifs and whatnot, I can see the same in dreams. But dreams preceded literature by a long shot. So we can get a good sense that dreams compose stories with literary qualities and often one's with supernatural elements, that make for good story telling material. I have even seen a few dreams which could easily be analyzed based on Joseph Campbell's Hero's Journey pattern. This shows to me that dreams and oral myths and fairy tales are indeed close cousins.

In my own personal experience in dreams relating to God and the dreams of others in the same context, there is a pattern which can be mapped to that of Abram/Abraham's experience with God as described in Genesis. This has led me to conclude that in the psyche there is an objective dynamic that exists that underlies the experience people have when they dream about God and which underlies some of the content of the story of Abraham in Genesis.

 

[Srivijaya]

There was one similarity which tends to get overlooked. If we look at what Jesus was aiming to achieve, he appears to be trying to form something akin to a monastic order among his disciples. He exhorts them to leave their wealth and possessions, adopt celibacy etc. It really didn't have the feeling of a lay doctrinal religion in the making, more a path to gnosis.