PearlSeeker
Well-Known Member
I agree but sometimes misrepresentations make seem there is less common ground than actually is.
-
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!
The Trinity and the Tibetan Book of the Dead.
- Thread starter an anarchist
- Start date
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
I wasn't raised Christian to know much about it but brief understanding of catholicism, on RF, and reading the bible.
But I have a good understanding of Buddha's teachings and the two don't mesh.
Where in Christianity dos it promote rebirth, mind-focus, concept of Maya, following the Buddha as the person to enlightenment, without a god, no human incarnation, and even polytheism involved in the mix?
Unless there is an odd christian denomination that symbolizes the bible to make both religion match, the main points of both religions just don't mix.
Which theology and biblical concept in Christianity mixes with any eastern tradition?
(Not the result-love, compassion-but the theology.)
PearlSeeker
Well-Known Member
You said Jesus put emphasis on faith (Buddha on action) but he put also emphasis on action. A tree is known by it's fruit...
Now let's see some other common points (correct me if I'm wrong).
1. Human need for salvation. Central in both Christianity and Buddhism is human condition - misery, entrapment in this world, spiritual blindness ... The cause is egoism - in Bible presented as alienation, in Buddhism identification with ego. Suffering comes from a fateful division in man.
2. Role of Christ and Buddha (The Anointed and The Awaken). Both have been over the years to some extent mythologized and turned into a simbol. Both represent a perfect/fulfilled/undivised man (or Man). Buddha doesn't live anymore from his ego but from deeper Reality (nirvana). Christ is a perfect union between man and God. He doesn't live for (and from) himself. He doesn't just talk about God's Kingdom but it is present in him.
3. Way of realizing Christhood/Budahood - transcending ego. Following Jesus is dying to self to give (spiritual) birth to Christ in me. In Christianity this is said to happen by the power of divine grace. Buddhist eightfold path on the other hand seems as self effort (independent of God). But also here enlightment cannot be forced. With eightfold path you only create good conditions. Awakening happens, spontaneously, as a gift (effort would be still in bounds of ego).
God and nirvana
Nirvana is the ultimate/transcendent reality. As I understand it's the same concept as mystery of God in apophatic theology. The difference is that Christianity also believes in God's revelation in history (divine face).
Last edited:
Some of the things Jesus said only make sense when viewed through a Buddhist lens, imo. An example of this is Mark 9:43-50
43 If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out. [44] 45 And if your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell. [46] 47 And if your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, 48 where
“‘the worms that eat them do not die,
and the fire is not quenched.’
49 Everyone will be salted with fire.
50 “Salt is good, but if it loses its saltiness, how can you make it salty again? Have salt among yourselves, and be at peace with each other.”
The Beatitudes is an illustration of the impermanence of suffering if you stop clinging to it.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
The theology is different.
Jesus puts emphasis on faith-faith saves not works. The general christian consensus is that works/actions can't get one to heaven and when ne goes to heaven they aren't reborn into another lifespan.
The Buddha puts emphasis on action. Right action keeps us from rebirth-that's the overall point.
Buddhism doesn't have an idea of salvation-in other words, no one is saving anyone on that person's behalf in the Dharma.
The human condition in christianity is of the soul and heart with most determining the problem with original sin.
The Dharma poses the problem of the mind. The attachments (gods for example of the Hindu tradition) and so forth are keeping the person "stuck" in this life from lifespan to lifespan. Relieving the ego is one way to do it. The theology in doing so differs in both traditions.
Also, the definition of ego is different.
In the Dharma, non-attachment to ego leads to cultivation for self in present state
The bible focuses on non-attachment to ego (though not expressed like that) one day in a future state.
In Buddhism, suffering is of the mind.
In Christianity, suffering is of the heart/soul.
In the Dharma awaken or enlightenment means end of rebirth and the current state is lack of attachment-from anything, gods included.
There is no concept of god in Buddhism like there is in christianity.
There is no union with anything in the Dharma as there is in christianity.
Everything is done by one's self in the Dharma.
Christianity needs god and christ.
There is no "spirit-ual" in the Dharma as described in christianity
There is no divine grace or any divinity in buddhism as defined in christianity
the eightfold path leads to good actions (karma). Those actions leads to good conditions but just not attachment to them.
Heaven and nivanna are two separate concepts.
Heaven is an endstate and nivanna is a present state
God is a being, essence, a noun that one unites when "after" death.
Nivanna is the awaken state/mind (not soul) in that attachments are all gone and there is no rebirth. Nivanna is a present state of mental cultivation not a divine state where one joins with another.
Jesus puts emphasis on faith-faith saves not works. The general christian consensus is that works/actions can't get one to heaven and when ne goes to heaven they aren't reborn into another lifespan.
The Buddha puts emphasis on action. Right action keeps us from rebirth-that's the overall point.
Buddhism doesn't have an idea of salvation-in other words, no one is saving anyone on that person's behalf in the Dharma.
The human condition in christianity is of the soul and heart with most determining the problem with original sin.
The Dharma poses the problem of the mind. The attachments (gods for example of the Hindu tradition) and so forth are keeping the person "stuck" in this life from lifespan to lifespan. Relieving the ego is one way to do it. The theology in doing so differs in both traditions.
Also, the definition of ego is different.
In the Dharma, non-attachment to ego leads to cultivation for self in present state
The bible focuses on non-attachment to ego (though not expressed like that) one day in a future state.
In Buddhism, suffering is of the mind.
In Christianity, suffering is of the heart/soul.
In the Dharma awaken or enlightenment means end of rebirth and the current state is lack of attachment-from anything, gods included.
There is no concept of god in Buddhism like there is in christianity.
There is no union with anything in the Dharma as there is in christianity.
Everything is done by one's self in the Dharma.
Christianity needs god and christ.
There is no "spirit-ual" in the Dharma as described in christianity
There is no divine grace or any divinity in buddhism as defined in christianity
the eightfold path leads to good actions (karma). Those actions leads to good conditions but just not attachment to them.
Heaven and nivanna are two separate concepts.
Heaven is an endstate and nivanna is a present state
God is a being, essence, a noun that one unites when "after" death.
Nivanna is the awaken state/mind (not soul) in that attachments are all gone and there is no rebirth. Nivanna is a present state of mental cultivation not a divine state where one joins with another.
Last edited:
PearlSeeker
Well-Known Member
The general consensus is "justified by faith alone" not "saved by faith alone". Catholic position is we are sanctified and saved by grace, faith and works (not faith alone and not works alone). See James 2:14
The idea of salvation is that current human condition needs (and has) a remedy. Nirvana is salvation from samsara.
Not so.
"If anyone wants to come after Me, he must deny himself, take up his cross, and follow Me."
"Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear."
"Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Today has enough trouble of its own."
etc.
In Buddhism you have nirvana and parinirvana.
Theosis and sainthood is also before death. But yes, heaven is a different concept - there is the heavenly community - individual self or soul is still retained.
There are the 31 planes of existence in Buddhism, which include both happy destinations as well as hellish ones.
The Thirty-one Planes of Existence
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
Buddhism is action alone
No. It means end of rebirth and no attachment.. god included
How do you define ego?
But Christianity doesn't have rebirth.
PearlSeeker
Well-Known Member
Self(awareness). Sense of I.
Sometimes meant as entrapment in a seperated self or identification with false self.
Yes, Christianity doesn't believe in rebirth. Resurrection is a kind of reincarnation. (Catholic) Christianity has purgatory (instead of many reincarnations) to resolve karma.
Biblical word for heaven is in plural (heavens). In Dante's Divine Comedy there are together 30 levels of hell, purgatory and heaven.
Last edited:
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
Where is the "I" located? The heart/soul? The mind?
It isn't.
One because christians don't "return" here from life time to life time
They have a perception of the soul where the Buddha taught there was no such fixed soul
Reincarnation is a Hindu concept; rebirth is a Buddhist one
Purgatory, from what I gather, is not living life time to life time in the present moment. Whereever one is in between life and heaven one's venial and mortal sins are "cleansed" so that person can unite with god. This concept does not exist in Buddhism.
From what I learned, there is no "resolving" karma. How I would see it is everything you do affects everyone and everything else either in big ways or subtle ways. It can't be separated "say getting back what you deserved" type of thing. It's all interconnected if not one.
There is no abrahamic concept of hell, heaven, and purgatory in the Dharmas.
PearlSeeker
Well-Known Member
That's a difficult question. I think mind/body is just a vessel (software and hardware that the real "I" uses). Thus "I" is beyond location.
PearlSeeker
Well-Known Member
Yes, that's what I'm trying to say. Catholic afterlife is closer to Hindu beliefs. At death a person's soul leaves the body and enters purgatory, heaven or hell (similar to Hindu astral worlds). At the last judgment (when there will be new earth) souls will be resurrected (return to body - hence sort of reincarnation).
Last edited:
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
In Buddhism there is nothing in the vessel. The I doesn't exist for there to be anything that "holds" it like a soul or spirit in relation to the body.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
No. From hundreds of posts here from Hindu there is 100% no comparison.
Edit...rebirth
Reincarnation doesn't have purity state. There is a soul that's not different from everything and how I understand it the soul and God are the same and when we our aware of Self, we no longer reincarnate.
Catholicism is more god is spoken of separate from the person. He says and does things and seen as someone he unites with after purgatory and after death.
He doesn't do this on earth since unlike Hindu he isn't God. Reincarnation is realization of god (self awareness) not union with it...no it to unite.
How I understand it some Christian denominations believe people stay on the grave until the resurrection. No reincarnation.
Edit.
Also, Buddha's dharma doesn't have the concept of a soul. I'm honestly not sure what is reborn but the idea is we do live lifespan to lifespan until we realize there is no I. What happens after full awareness I don't know. Hindus feel once self realized they know they are god...not union and not unite, no purgatory, and no God apart from all things.
Last edited:
PearlSeeker
Well-Known Member
I know. But I don't understand what it is that is reborn. There is no consensus about that even in Buddhism.
Buddhism focuses on *processes* as co-dependent arising and abandons all substance-based speculations. This might be likened to "fire" and its clinging to its "fuel" as it burns. Having any views on Self would constitute fuel for the fire to cling to, leading to further rebirth of the pattern of addiction (and suffering) that is fire clinging to its fuel as it burns. Nirvana means "blowing out" this fiery addiction, and hence, the suffering that comes with it.
So, clinging to the notion of "no-self" is just as much an addiction as clinging to the notion of "Self." The only consensus about this in Buddhism is to focus on breaking the processes of addiction and not worry about "Self," as worrying about "Self/No-Self" constitutes a rebirth of the addiction, and hence, more suffering. One might say that it is this addiction, fueled by craving, that gets reborn. We are all junkies subject to relapse.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
True. They all seem to believe we have multiple life spans something Christianity doesn't teach
PearlSeeker
Well-Known Member
There are different schools in Hindu philosophy/religion - monistic, dualistic, theistic, atheistic...
Catholic teaching is in no way 100 % same as some Hindu schools. There are just some common points. Human soul is immortal. Resurrection means that soul re-enters body (reincarnates) at the last judgment but there are no further reincarnations. Between death and resurrection are soul (astral) realms - some nice, some less nice...
"God apart from all things" is a common misconception about Christianity and Abrahamic religions. YHWH means "I am that I am". Paul: "In Him we live and move and have our being."
As I already said mystical "union" (the final stage of inner transformation) is possible before death. Most theologians explain it as human participation in divine life (one but still different).
"In thus allowing God to work in it, the soul ... is at once illumined and transformed in God, and God communicates to it His supernatural Being, in such wise that it appears to be God Himself, and has all that God Himself has. And this union comes to pass when God grants the soul this supernatural favour, that all the things of God and the soul are one in participant transformation; and the soul seems to be God rather than a soul, and is indeed God by participation; although it is true that its natural being, though thus transformed, is as distinct from the Being of God as it was before." (St. John of the Cross)
"They are like the burning coal that no one can put out once it is completely consumed in the furnace, because it has itself been turned into fire. So it is with these souls cast into the furnace of my charity, who keep nothing at all, not a bit of their own will, outside of me but are completely set afire in me. There is no one who can seize them or drag them out of my grace. They have been made one with me and I with them." (St. Catherine from Siena)
(quotes are from Wiki)
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
So I came across this passage today, in the book Helgoland by Carlo Rovelli; it seems apropos to this thread, so I'm just going to leave it here. The subject is particle entanglement, one of the 'spookiest' QM phenomena;
"The joint properties of two objects exist only in relation to a third. To say that two objects are correlated means to articulate something with regard to a third object: the correlation manifests itself when the two correlated objects both interact with this third object, which can check (observe)...
...A correlation between two objects is a property of the two objects - like all properties, it exists only in relation to a further, third object.
Entanglement is not a dance for two partners, it is a dance for three."
"The joint properties of two objects exist only in relation to a third. To say that two objects are correlated means to articulate something with regard to a third object: the correlation manifests itself when the two correlated objects both interact with this third object, which can check (observe)...
...A correlation between two objects is a property of the two objects - like all properties, it exists only in relation to a further, third object.
Entanglement is not a dance for two partners, it is a dance for three."