Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
For those of you who still believe in Jesus Christ..
If you are a Buddhist perhaps you can tell me why you believe in the teachings. Is there some kind of evidence or personal experiences that validate what you believe?
I stumbled on an Alan Watts video and loved it, it just made so much sense to me... It got me into some deep thinking, like I had never done before. I didn't realize at first that much of Watts talks was Buddhism based, or I probably would never have looked into it on purpose... then I found this site, and other things to read, then visited a Sangha... I guess you can say that Buddhism found me because I wasn't looking for it, I stumbled upon it.
I was raised as a Christian, and all those years of preaching had blinders on me, and it wouldn't have felt right to study anything else but the bible... it took a realization that, for me at least, the whole thing was wrong... I felt duped, and am still working on some bitterness that I know resides in me. I like that I am now studying at my own pace and still forming my beliefs as I discover them, and I think the sense of discovery is what excites me the most. There is no preaching involved, and I like that it is not about converting others, but progressing down my own path. It works for me, but I totally understand that it is not for everyone.
@pineblossom I think there is an attachment among many with regards to the word 'believe' in that it is only applicable to other religions other than Buddhism or smacks of Christianity so there are obvious attempts to refute or avoid its usages as evidenced in the many comments posted regarding it.
The fact remains is the word can be applied and used in all religious traditions. Even the Dalai Lama has said that somethings in Buddhism one just accepts as being true.
There is a difference between 'accepting' something as being true and 'belief'. As the Buddha says one needs to work with one's own experience and not rely on what we are told no matter how 'great' is such tradition.
Always thought this was funny, don't know how verified or anything like that it is, but when we're talking about 2000 years ago...who knows really right? I mean who the hell is King James that christianity took him so seriously anyway? lol
A really interesting thread everyone, I think it's important to rejoice in the fact that we are surrounded by the such honest people and supported by an environment which promotes that.
Firstly, my initial thought was that its important to first consider whether one considers oneself a Buddhist or not. If we do, then in no sense can we also consider ourselves Christian too. Neither are "right" or "wrong" in the absolute sense.
Conditioned Co-production is THE fundamental tenant of the Buddhas Dhamma. Without it, no other aspect of Buddhist philosophy make sense. "CCP" (or Dependant Origination) states that all phenomena arise from pre-exiting phenomena being present. All phenomena are born out if the decay of others. God, as a phenomena, could not simply "self create", something or some conditions would have to have created God. Logically, we can therefor say, that God does not exist as an external phenomena within the realm of conditioned existence. The poetic God of imagination is a different matter altogether. I'm not saying that Jesus did not exist, clearly he did, and his teachings have had more positive influence than most other political and religious thinkers. He was indeed a great man. Following the teachings of Jesus can have huge and lasting benefit to many millions, and again, what a wonderful thing! But Buddhist theology does not accept that he was/is the son of god in the sense that God does not exist in the conventional understanding. A belief in a monotheistic, creator god is tantamount to spiritual immaturity, if one also considers oneself a Buddhist. The two are mutually exclusive.
To consider oneself a Buddhist, one believes in enlightenment as the spiritual ideal. The three jewels are dependant on this. One views the Buddha as the embodiment of that idea. The Dharma is the path/truth of that ideal and the Sangha (us lot) as the spiritual community on that path together, supporting each other.
In other words, we understand the centrality of, and place the act of Going for Refuge at the centre if one's personal mandala, and going further, we then start to reorient our lives thus.
I really hope that this doesn't offend anyone, make anyone feel uncomfortable, create doubt/indecision or cause suffering in any way. It's just theologically speaking, a question of whether one considers oneself a Buddhist or not. There is NOTHING wrong with NOT being a Buddhist btw, Buddha himself would be far more concerned about your general state of well being, rather than your internal sense of religious affiliation.
Interestingly, perhaps this suggests an even better preliminary question: am I happy?
One can be a Buddhist, a Christian, a Muslim, Jewish etc. One be none of the above, and one can be a Buddhist and still be influenced by elements of other religions (I personally identify strongly with the sense of fraternity in Islam, and see fellow Buddhist practitioners as Brothers and sisters) but I don't think you can believe in a creator God and be a Buddhist. I think you can believe in God and be influenced positively by the Dharma, but as to calling or seeing oneself as a Buddhist, by definition that would be a contradiction in terms.
I think we need to look at how happy we are as the starting point, then ask whether we see ourselves as spiritually inclined. Then we can worry about affiliation. I love all sentient life, I don't worry about someone's background, religious standing. All are subject to Conditioned Co-Production, thus impermanent, and all are beautiful and transient because of it.
With more love and metta than I could ever hope to express, whatever you choose to believe...
Comments
I was raised as a Christian, and all those years of preaching had blinders on me, and it wouldn't have felt right to study anything else but the bible... it took a realization that, for me at least, the whole thing was wrong... I felt duped, and am still working on some bitterness that I know resides in me. I like that I am now studying at my own pace and still forming my beliefs as I discover them, and I think the sense of discovery is what excites me the most. There is no preaching involved, and I like that it is not about converting others, but progressing down my own path. It works for me, but I totally understand that it is not for everyone.
Thanks for sharing.:-)
I think there is an attachment among many with regards to the word 'believe' in that it is only applicable to other religions other than Buddhism or smacks of Christianity so there are obvious attempts to refute or avoid its usages as evidenced in the many comments posted regarding it.
The fact remains is the word can be applied and used in all religious traditions. Even the Dalai Lama has said that somethings in Buddhism one just accepts as being true.
Always thought this was funny, don't know how verified or anything like that it is, but when we're talking about 2000 years ago...who knows really right? I mean who the hell is King James that christianity took him so seriously anyway? lol
Firstly, my initial thought was that its important to first consider whether one considers oneself a Buddhist or not. If we do, then in no sense can we also consider ourselves Christian too. Neither are "right" or "wrong" in the absolute sense.
Conditioned Co-production is THE fundamental tenant of the Buddhas Dhamma. Without it, no other aspect of Buddhist philosophy make sense. "CCP" (or Dependant Origination) states that all phenomena arise from pre-exiting phenomena being present. All phenomena are born out if the decay of others. God, as a phenomena, could not simply "self create", something or some conditions would have to have created God. Logically, we can therefor say, that God does not exist as an external phenomena within the realm of conditioned existence. The poetic God of imagination is a different matter altogether. I'm not saying that Jesus did not exist, clearly he did, and his teachings have had more positive influence than most other political and religious thinkers. He was indeed a great man. Following the teachings of Jesus can have huge and lasting benefit to many millions, and again, what a wonderful thing! But Buddhist theology does not accept that he was/is the son of god in the sense that God does not exist in the conventional understanding. A belief in a monotheistic, creator god is tantamount to spiritual immaturity, if one also considers oneself a Buddhist. The two are mutually exclusive.
To consider oneself a Buddhist, one believes in enlightenment as the spiritual ideal. The three jewels are dependant on this. One views the Buddha as the embodiment of that idea. The Dharma is the path/truth of that ideal and the Sangha (us lot) as the spiritual community on that path together, supporting each other.
In other words, we understand the centrality of, and place the act of Going for Refuge at the centre if one's personal mandala, and going further, we then start to reorient our lives thus.
I really hope that this doesn't offend anyone, make anyone feel uncomfortable, create doubt/indecision or cause suffering in any way. It's just theologically speaking, a question of whether one considers oneself a Buddhist or not. There is NOTHING wrong with NOT being a Buddhist btw, Buddha himself would be far more concerned about your general state of well being, rather than your internal sense of religious affiliation.
Interestingly, perhaps this suggests an even better preliminary question: am I happy?
One can be a Buddhist, a Christian, a Muslim, Jewish etc. One be none of the above, and one can be a Buddhist and still be influenced by elements of other religions (I personally identify strongly with the sense of fraternity in Islam, and see fellow Buddhist practitioners as Brothers and sisters) but I don't think you can believe in a creator God and be a Buddhist. I think you can believe in God and be influenced positively by the Dharma, but as to calling or seeing oneself as a Buddhist, by definition that would be a contradiction in terms.
I think we need to look at how happy we are as the starting point, then ask whether we see ourselves as spiritually inclined. Then we can worry about affiliation. I love all sentient life, I don't worry about someone's background, religious standing. All are subject to Conditioned Co-Production, thus impermanent, and all are beautiful and transient because of it.
With more love and metta than I could ever hope to express, whatever you choose to believe...
Your Brother in the Dharma, Jay :-)