God is not a Christian:

Patr

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/07/god-is-not-a-christian-tutu-dalai-lama_n_2421553.html?icid=hp_religion_art_more

Just some light reading.........

BhikkhuJayasara

And Buddha was never a Buddhist.

Deepankar

Both is thusness

Tosh

Jesus wasn't a Christian either.

Silouan

When the Dalai Lama states he doesn't believe in a "Creator God" I must agree with him, because I don't believe the concept or notion he holds either.

However, I do find it a little amusing that those that can perceive the inconceivable mystery of the “Luminous Mind” can’t associate that same mystery with the “Light of the Mind” and vice versa as it is perceived in profound silence and stillness despite the references.

Silouan

Though this source is Christian for those interested in all things mystical here is a link to an online short treatise worth reading:

esotericarchives.com/oracle/dionys1.htm

Vastmind

Thanks for sharing. I enjoyed this read.

It's just labels.
Isn't that why the story played up that
they were intended back and forths/horsing around,
with words. hahaha.
It appears the meet was a positive exchange.
Of thoughts and conversation. A little bit of
visiting too.

This is why I don't take it seriously that
I will one day have to drop or unbecome a
Buddhist. I never picked it up. Hello? It's just
named after the person/entity. Christian or Buddhist.

The teachings and
practice should be preventing the label, not
undoing one. That's touching it twice.
Both religions need to address this....putting
the cart before the horse thing.

David

I don't even think Jesus truely believed in Abrahams idea of God.

Personally I think if there is god, it is waking up one aspect at a time.

It won't be completely awake until all of us are aware of it.

Tosh

Jesus was a Jew. Christianity was formed with Paul.

Dakini

You guys, I came across the most fascinating piece of info in a book on the religious traditions of the Mongols and Tibetans. There's a tradition around Inner Asia and East Asia involving an old man in a white robe, who judges whether people are good or bad, deserving of punishment or reward. In some traditions he's also considered to be a creator of the world. This tradition is said to pre-date Buddhism by a long shot. The author of the book thinks it originated with early Indo-European nomads that migrated into Inner Asia, and he feels that the Santa Claus image comes from this tradition. But I think he missed the rather more obvious parallel...

David

Tosh said:

Jesus was a Jew. Christianity was formed with Paul.

He may have had Jewish blood but his beliefs were far from Judaic as far as I can tell. That would be why the Jews rejected him as the Messiah and still do.

I agree with you about Paul... Jesus warned about guys coming around using his name in regards to "Great signs and wonders" and then came Paul, professing that Jesus performed "great signs and wonders".

He and his deciples preached the good news while Jesus was alive which was different doctrine than one finds in the O/T and different than having to be saved by the blood of Christ.

Dakini

ourself said:

He and his deciples preached the good news while Jesus was alive which was different doctrine than one finds in the O/T and different than having to be saved by the blood of Christ.

Is there a religion based on what Jesus taught, without the extra elements? If not, there should be.

David

Dakini said:

ourself said:

He and his deciples preached the good news while Jesus was alive which was different doctrine than one finds in the O/T and different than having to be saved by the blood of Christ.

Is there a religion based on what Jesus taught, without the extra elements? If not, there should be.

Well, he was pretty much spreading his version of the Golden Rule... "Love God and love thy neighbor as yourself" "What you do to the lowest of you, you do to me".

I don't think he ever said the good news was that he was going to die and suffer in agony so that we didn't have to bear the fruits of our actions or escape from a wrongful deed commited against an all knowing, all powerful being before we had a say in the matter.

David

What I did is read the Gospels and see which ones make sense in light of the Golden Rule and disregarded the rest.

Not just the Biblical ones either but ones that didn't make the cut like the Gospel of Thomas.

That's just me though... I think Jesus was trying to interject Buddhist values into a warlike people and got killed for it.

A young master turned into a martyr that turned into an idol which turned into gold.

vinlyn

Dakini said:

ourself said:

He and his deciples preached the good news while Jesus was alive which was different doctrine than one finds in the O/T and different than having to be saved by the blood of Christ.

Is there a religion based on what Jesus taught, without the extra elements? If not, there should be.

I think that goes back to the "spectrum" concept, and I would point to (as I have before) the "Jefferson Bible". Maybe it would be "secular Christianity" (I know someone is going to think I'm being a smart ass by mentioning that...but think of it...Christian principles while stripping away the magic aspect).

Dakini

vinlyn said:

Dakini said:

ourself said:

He and his deciples preached the good news while Jesus was alive which was different doctrine than one finds in the O/T and different than having to be saved by the blood of Christ.

Is there a religion based on what Jesus taught, without the extra elements? If not, there should be.

I think that goes back to the "spectrum" concept, and I would point to (as I have before) the "Jefferson Bible". Maybe it would be "secular Christianity" (I know someone is going to think I'm being a smart ass by mentioning that...but think of it...Christian principles while stripping away the magic aspect).

Well, this is what I was wondering. If there's a form of Christianity that doesn't celebrate Jesus as the son of God, the resurrected one, and all that. But I guess that's what defines Christianity, so the answer would be "no". Maybe Judaism is the closest thing?? Does it incorporate Jesus' teachings?

vinlyn

^^ Well, I know people who consider Jesus a wise teacher sent by God.

Deepankar

It is not whether is jesus wise or buddha wise, it is whether how wise are you after mastering the wise of inherent. Otherwise, in contempt of great nature teaching, the effect is extremely disasterous to inherent nature because you are in contempt of yourself

Cinorjer

Delightful. What tickled me was that the author of the article just didn't get the jokes, when he talked about the two men making each other laugh. I always read the comments below these types of articles, too, just to see if the usual suspects crop up. Actually, pretty tame this time by internet troll standards.

Cinorjer

Dakini said:

You guys, I came across the most fascinating piece of info in a book on the religious traditions of the Mongols and Tibetans. There's a tradition around Inner Asia and East Asia involving an old man in a white robe, who judges whether people are good or bad, deserving of punishment or reward. In some traditions he's also considered to be a creator of the world. This tradition is said to pre-date Buddhism by a long shot. The author of the book thinks it originated with early Indo-European nomads that migrated into Inner Asia, and he feels that the Santa Claus image comes from this tradition. But I think he missed the rather more obvious parallel...

Who is the author? There was an effort some time ago to place Jesus and early Buddhist missionaries together, but the problem is, all evidence so far is entirely lacking or very suspect. But this you describe seems to be a "Grandpa Creator" archetype similar to the Native Americans.

Silouan

Wisdom and compassion are inclusive, but we want to confine them and make them exclusive.

All our myths and the religions built upon them have the same primordial essence as their source, but we see myths as other people’s religions and our own as truth. Myths are spiritual metaphors and are true on that level. Jesus said let him who has ears hear, but he was referring to our spiritual ears not our physical ears.

The Jataka Tales are adaptations of older Indian folk tales that existed before the incarnation of the Buddha. The miraculous or magic conception of the Buddha from a white elephant entering his mother's side in a dream, and then his being born able to walk with Lotus flowers blossoming at his footsteps is pretty amazing. Is this myth a spiritual metaphor to convey something of great spiritual significance or do we make it a literal historical fact?

The story of the Virgin Mary holds a very important spiritual significance too. What her story does is restore the feminine aspect of creation where before the masculine aspect was held dominant by nomadic warrior tribes who had to scratch and claw for their existence.

However, the primordial essence is androgynous, and God made man in his own image, both male and female. If you recall the Genesis story the earth was without form, and the spirit hovered over the water. The water was already there and not created. The water is God's feminine aspect and what happens when breath or wind blows on water? The stillness is broken in waves so this is symbolic of the rising and falling of thoughts. Then we see in the New Testament the Holy Spirit come upon the Virgin Mary. In the Old Testament the water is a fore shadow of her. Christ becomes the new Adam showing us how to realize our primordial essence, the God or Buddha within.

Is Christianity influenced by Buddhism, and is Buddhism influenced by Christianity. Most likely, but who gives a toss. I think in the end when the mountain falls into the sea, or the mountains are walking it is the same result. It’s all about letting go!

Sorry for the ramble.

Dakini

Cinorjer said:

Who is the author? There was an effort some time ago to place Jesus and early Buddhist missionaries together, but the problem is, all evidence so far is entirely lacking or very suspect. But this you describe seems to be a "Grandpa Creator" archetype similar to the Native Americans.

I did read that early Christian missionaries made it as far as Mongolia, and influenced the Buddhist view of hell there. But belief in a "white old man" dwelling in the sky (and sometimes coming to Earth) would go back to before Buddhism, if it's connected with Indo-Euro nomads in Central Asia. Walther Hessig and Geoffrey Samuel are the authors (Religions of Mongolia). Tucci is the author of Religions of Tibet. They used to be in one volume, now they're two.

David

Cinorjer said:

There was an effort some time ago to place Jesus and early Buddhist missionaries together, but the problem is, all evidence so far is entirely lacking or very suspect. But this you describe seems to be a "Grandpa Creator" archetype similar to the Native Americans.

The problem there actually lies with knowing that Buddhism was around at the time but not being able to prove that Jesus was... Not to mention being the son of an all powerful deity.

The teachings I believe came from Jesus can stand by themselves and don't require Jesus to be anything more than us.

Jesus' views on religion were too forgiving for Judaic law and that we need to be saved by believing he died for our bad karma is too out of touch with what he said while he was alive.

If the sermon on the mount is taken into consideration, I think it's hard to dismiss a Buddhist influence.

David

ourself said:

Cinorjer said:

There was an effort some time ago to place Jesus and early Buddhist missionaries together, but the problem is, all evidence so far is entirely lacking or very suspect. But this you describe seems to be a "Grandpa Creator" archetype similar to the Native Americans.

The problem there actually lies with knowing that Buddhism was around at the time but not being able to prove that Jesus was... Not to mention being the son of an all powerful deity.

The teachings I believe came from Jesus can stand by themselves and don't require Jesus to be anything more than us.

I don't know what's going on with this post, sorry... I hit quote instead of edit and have tried to clear it to no avail.

Florian

ourself said:

Cinorjer said:

There was an effort some time ago to place Jesus and early Buddhist missionaries together, but the problem is, all evidence so far is entirely lacking or very suspect. But this you describe seems to be a "Grandpa Creator" archetype similar to the Native Americans.

The problem there actually lies with knowing that Buddhism was around at the time but not being able to prove that Jesus was... Not to mention being the son of an all powerful deity.

The teachings I believe came from Jesus can stand by themselves and don't require Jesus to be anything more than us.

Jesus' views on religion were too forgiving for Judaic law and that we need to be saved by believing he died for our bad karma is too out of touch with what he said while he was alive.

If the sermon on the mount is taken into consideration, I think it's hard to dismiss a Buddhist influence.

I can agree with all this, ourself, except the final sentence. I agree that Buddhism and Jesus' Christianity may be interpreted as being equivalent, and that's how I interpret them, but this does not require that they influenced each other. To discover that F=MA it is not necessary to be influenced by Newton.

Great point made earlier, that from the records we know that Buddhism was around in Galilee all that time ago, but we don't know that Jesus was. If he was, then It seems to me that things started to go wrong with Paul, then got worse with the Council of Nicea, then the Romans introduced their misogeny, then the original Christian tradtion was wiped out by Iraeneus and his bullies, and then Christianity became the ideal religion of Empire and Commerce. Meanwhile orthodox Christianity looked on in horror.

I suspect some of this would becomes apparent in the Dead Sea Scrolls, which may be why the have been kept secret for so long in what may be the worst academic scandal of all time. Luckily we have the Nag Hammadi library and the Philokalia.

Here's one early Christian monk, making it clear that there is only one mysticism and warning us to beware of divine manifestations and created Gods.

"When the intellect attains prayer that is pure and free from passion, the demons attack no longer with sinister thoughts but with thoughts of what is good. For they suggest to it an illusion of God’s glory in a form pleasing to the senses, so as to make it think it has realised the final aim of prayer. A man who possesses spiritual knowledge has said that this illusion results from the passion of self-esteem and from the demon’s touch of certain areas of the brain.

I think that the demon, by touching this area, changes the light surrounding the intellect as he likes. In this way he uses the passion of self-esteem to stir up in the intellect a thought which fatuously attributes form and location to divine principial knowledge. Not being disturbed by impure and carnal passions, but supposing itself to be in a state of purity, the intellect imagines that there is no longer any adverse energy within it. It then mistakes for a divine manifestation the appearance produced in it by the demon, who cunningly manipulates the brain and converts the light surrounding the intellect into a form, as we have described.

When you are praying. Do not shape within yourself any image of the Deity, and do not let your intellect be stamped with the impress of any form; but approach the Immaterial in an immaterial manner, and then you will understand."

Evagrios the Solitary
On Prayer
One Hundred and Fifty-Three Texts (73-75)
The Philokalia