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.
Comparing the teachings of Jesus and Buddha? Jesus is still the way?
I have listened to this debate for decades and I still have the same questions. My basic question is this: " What 'flipping' difference does it make?" The proof of this pudding is not in the recipe but in the eating!
The 20th Century obsessions with personality and historical 'accuracy' have been wonderful weapons in the hands of those who want to discredit the spiritual.
If we take a few moments to reflect, we can quickly see that each tradition does not begin and end with the founder. Here are a few examples:
* In Christian churches, Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant, we will soon be seen "cribs": representations of the stable in which legend says that Jesus was born. This tradition of representing the Holy Family, etc., began with Saint Francis, in the 13th Century and has been adopted, world-wide, as an integral part of Christmas worship. Some churches have services of blessing the figures, or arrange for the figures to travel around before arriving at church. Not particularly 'scriptural', which is why Cromwell banned it in England.
* Buddhism has adopted many of the local practices where it became installed. New teachers arose: Padmasambhava, Dogen, Nichiren, etc. The movement from Theravada/Hinayana to Mahayana to Tantra took place over centuries.
* In Islam we are currently suffering from the split between Sunni and Shia which is a matter of interpretation of an unchangeable text. Also we cannot ignore the matter of Sufism and its various schools which have arisen across the centuries.
It is a mistake to imagine some sort of monolithic "truth" which was taught by a single Founder which was then preserved intact and unchanged.
As a metaphor, look at our great British temple complex of Stonehenge. It was built, rebuilt and altered over many hundreds of years and may have evolved from an original wood henge. What we see today appears to be a single monument but even superficial examination shows its evolution. Or go into our local cathedral in Gloucester and see how it evolves and changes as fashions (and wealth) ebbs and flows.
If we spend our time worrying about historical accuracy, we miss the importance of contemporary authenticity.
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
Comments
The 20th Century obsessions with personality and historical 'accuracy' have been wonderful weapons in the hands of those who want to discredit the spiritual.
If we take a few moments to reflect, we can quickly see that each tradition does not begin and end with the founder. Here are a few examples:
* In Christian churches, Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant, we will soon be seen "cribs": representations of the stable in which legend says that Jesus was born. This tradition of representing the Holy Family, etc., began with Saint Francis, in the 13th Century and has been adopted, world-wide, as an integral part of Christmas worship. Some churches have services of blessing the figures, or arrange for the figures to travel around before arriving at church. Not particularly 'scriptural', which is why Cromwell banned it in England.
* Buddhism has adopted many of the local practices where it became installed. New teachers arose: Padmasambhava, Dogen, Nichiren, etc. The movement from Theravada/Hinayana to Mahayana to Tantra took place over centuries.
* In Islam we are currently suffering from the split between Sunni and Shia which is a matter of interpretation of an unchangeable text. Also we cannot ignore the matter of Sufism and its various schools which have arisen across the centuries.
It is a mistake to imagine some sort of monolithic "truth" which was taught by a single Founder which was then preserved intact and unchanged.
As a metaphor, look at our great British temple complex of Stonehenge. It was built, rebuilt and altered over many hundreds of years and may have evolved from an original wood henge. What we see today appears to be a single monument but even superficial examination shows its evolution. Or go into our local cathedral in Gloucester and see how it evolves and changes as fashions (and wealth) ebbs and flows.
If we spend our time worrying about historical accuracy, we miss the importance of contemporary authenticity.
I am neither with nor against anybody. This implies choice. I stay in the Middle Way....What is there to explain? And Why?