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.
Did Jesus know buddhism?
i have recently read info that jesus was taken to india as a kid and learned buddhism , they say the '3 wise men' were buddhist who have been known to seek out the incarnations of previous great buddhists [ a modern ex. is the dali llama ] and it is said they took him to india and taught him the way of buddhism and after his 'death' jesus returned there and he is burried there , there is even a tomb in an indian city where a jew with crucifixion scars who lived in the time of jesus is burried , i think it explains the many similaritys in buddha and jesus's teachings [which were unheard of in the west]
i found this info to be breath taking and am interested in what people think
i found this info to be breath taking and am interested in what people think
0
Comments
im just wondering what you and others think of this piticular theroy
wisdom is something that has evolved
in the buddha's time, the liberation of mind via loving-kindness was well known
the buddha discovered something else
the buddha's claim to fame was not the teachings on love (although he perfected them)
the buddha discovered emptiness
jesus did not teach emptiness
in israel, the law of love was not known until jesus
the old testament has many 'wise men' but none taught the liberation of mind via loving-kindness
it is natural, jesus learned this in india
by the time of jesus, buddhism had flourished greatly in the world
jesus changed the focus from judaism a religion for society to a doctrine of personal liberation
this is why he gave many teachings about the mind
:smilec:
he states: not necessarily because although Jesus would have been exposed to Buddhism, it does not mean he would have chosen to teach its supramundane teachings
even the buddha did not teach supramundane teachings (such as the 4NTs) to ordinary people
jesus simply chose those aspects suitable for his purpose
his teachings on non-violent resistance only have their pier (during that period in history) in buddhism
his use of the words 'heaven', 'hell', 'fire', etc, are the same as the buddha
his emphasis upon 'not knowing' (avicca) in his forgiveness teachings is the same as buddha
jesus emphasised the 'holy spirit' (the holy breath) as supreme
jesus said one can blasphem against the father & son but not against the 'spirit'
this takes spirituality internally rather than externally
after jesus, alot of christian meditation and monasticism arose
but yes...jesus was not interested in nature but god...
to me, his teachings are more like buddhist influenced brahminism
The Jesus texts certainly show Greek philosophical influence as well as Judaic and the link with Egypt is there in the stories so that there would be no surprise if he had encountered other schools and theories.
@DD: Despite the fact that you have a pretty thorough knowledge of the Hebrew and Christian writings, I cannot agree with what you say about the "law of love". Its most pithy expression ("Love the Lord your God and your neighbour as yourself") is a direct quotation from Deuteronomy, the compilation of which precedes even the Buddha's time. Of all the books of the Tanakh, it is the one which is best known, even today, and learned by every Jewish child.
In my view, I must disagree here.
The phrase, actually from Leviticus, is merely a teaching about how to treat aliens in Israel.
To me, it is not a salient spiritual teaching.
Also, it does not carry thoughout most of the OT.
Kind regards
The problem with the OT and NT is that they were "edited" by men. The Council of Trent and all of the others only chose 66 books for the Protestant Bible...I wonder how many books didn't fit their mold and were cast aside. How many perhaps taught other views, i.e. Buddhist teachings?
And the Buddhist scriptures were not edited by men? Are we to imagine that they are similar to Joseph Smith's 'golden plates', handed down by angels?
The books of the Tanakh were agree long before Nicaea (not Trent, which comes much later) and you will know that different schools of Buddhism accept - and reject - different sets of texts and translations. This is the nature and problem of all belief systems which use non-contemporaneous texts composed after a period of oral transmission.
Our US friends may well have had to learn the Gettysburg Address at school and been led to believe that it is as spoken, whereas we now know that it was 'tidied up' for publication. Just another example of a text that has been edited.
"Early Christian records are known to exist in Tibet, and the monks of a Buddhist monastery in Ceylon still preserve a record which indicates that Jesus sojourned with them and became conversant with their philosophy.
Although early Christianity shows every evidence of Oriental influence, this is a subject the modern church declines to discuss. If it is ever established beyond question that Jesus was an initiate of the pagan Greek or Asiatic Mysteries, the effect upon the more conservative members of the Christian faith is likely to be cataclysmic."
-- Manly P. Hall (Founder of the Philosophical Research Society, 33rd Degree Freemason)
[1] The Secret Teachings of All Ages, pg. 582; Manly P. Hall
.
Thynk you for the correction, DD. Please excuse an old man whose memory continues to deteriorate. I recall looking it up many years ago after a talk by an Oxford theologian on the text about "denying self". He was challenged by one questioner with the "love your neighbour as yourself" text and replied: "I'm sorry. I can't help you with an OT text. I am a simple NT scholar" (Canon John Fenton) It struck me then that there was a creative dissonance between what I understand to be the authentic Jesus message, which approaches the non-self concept, and his new spin on the Leviticus text.
Thank you, also, for the words "to me". Our conversations are certainly facilitated by our taking responsibility for our own beliefs and, thereby, acknowledging the possibility of change, rather than asserting some sort of absolute truth/error dialectic. I freely admit that my understanding of 'salvation history' as capable of dynamic and unfolding interpretation is heterodox. My hermeneutic is based on the concept of universal liberation and the possibility of metanoia, as, according to Paul, we are all reconciled. I am continually grateful that I was not born in Spain under the Inquisition LOL/
Jesus said he was the son of god; as are we all if things are seen as they are. But unfortunately people used conditioned 'knowledge' and interpreted what he said literally which lead massive delusion. All religions really if interpreted clearly are pointers towards a simple truth; just more eightfold paths..
I just really wish people could see clearly that all religions (well the main stream ones) lead back to the same basic message if interpreted correctly.....self....
Perfect example of how I get annoyed with religious discussions...
Talking to a christian and he was going on about how he speaks with God and God has spoken to him etc.etc..and was talking about the rapture.
So I asked...what about the Jewish and the Muslims, etc....what about them?
His reply..."It's easy...they all have it wrong....they will pay in the end"
Now tell me....how can someone answer a question like that KNOWING the history of these religions?? Hundreds and hundreds of years...he is telling me "they" have it wrong?
Anyways..sorry for the jump in...religion tends to be a sore spot for me and I do not get to vent about it that often.
I have a hard time seeing this. It seems to me that, while there are some similarities, they are quite different and have very different aims. I think Stephen Prothero illustrates this well in his new book, God Is Not One.
I disagree there. The Abrahamic religions certainly have a competely different philosophy than the Eastern religions. Abrahamic religions are concerned about who you accept as a Savior, if you accept the resurrection, who you accept as a prophet, which Gods you do and don't worship, etc. And if you aren't in line with any of that, you get sent to Hell (except Judaism)
However, I think the true underlying teachings such as Gnostic Christianity, Sufi Islam, and Qabbalah Judaism, have much more sound teachings, and closer to the true and original teachings before being tampered with.
But even still, the philosophies are still different, that should be clear.
I think I might disagree with that, in Judaism, it's said the world stands on 3 blocks - study, acts of loving kindness and worship of God, and also Rabbi Hillel was/is a famous Sage/Rabbi, who said to a gentile who asked to convert to Judaism, if Hillel would teach him the Torah:
So, I think the law of love, kindness and compassion was known to the ancient Jews.
Personally, I like the idea that maybe Jesus trained with Buddhists, and, I've heard there were Buddhists in Alexandria, Egypt, but, then, I also think Jesus may have trained with the Essenes, a mystical Jewish group.
Mtns
Sorry, but even though Manly Hall was a nice guy, like most theosophists fidelity to the historical records was not one of his strong points. There was no Buddhism in Tibet while Jesus was alive. It was introduced centuries later. He could not have met with Tibetan teachers or had his visits recorded in Tibetan texts.
How good to be reminded of a book that meant so much too me when it came out. Do you know Schonfield's translation of the N.T.? It was acclaimed as superb and ground-breaking when it came out in 1958 but The Passover Plot (1965) upset a lot of people. I could never understand the problem but then I've always had a 'detached' approach to the "Is Scripture.history?" debate.
Do you know Vermes work Jesus The Jew?
Sci-Fi where a man, from the Upper Paleolithic survived until the present day.
"i knew a man called buddha, like what he say, later try to teach a little about it in the roman empire..." good story
@ newtech - Yes, I have that. A fascinating film, but I'm sure only to certain few. I found it wonderful.
Then again maybe the spirit of Nietzsche, who professed the virtue in lying, is still faking the whole thing.
That being said, it at least makes sense. Take one very compassionate man who thought his religion was harsh, his God wrathful, and let him see other religions of the world and come up with his own solution to create a more compassionate and just future for his people. I'd go with that, but it would still just be my belief.
You could also look at it another way. They say Jesus was the son of God, but more than that was God himself; a part of the Trinity. If you believe in literal rebirth, perhaps Jesus was a deva known as Yahweh/Jehovah, who was reborn in human form, only to be reborn yet again who knows where. This would leave room for, and expectation of, a "second coming" in human form sometime in the future from his death. Jesus may in fact be born again, find Buddhism and turn out to be Maitreya; bringing the power of both Christianity's influence and Buddhism's truths to the entire world. Again still speculation, depending on you and your beliefs. Interesting ideas though.
If based on my understanding of the universe you would ask me who Jesus was, I would only be able to say that he was a saint that spoke more to the true nature of mankind than the religion he was raised in. His was extremely powerful karma, influencing billions since his time; that can't be denied. We can only ask whether it was skillful or unskillful karma, and to this I would say it was mostly skillful.
Respectfully, Manly P. Hall was a kook.
http://www.movies-links.tv/movies/jesus_in_india/
Warmly,
In the Dhamma,
Matthew
Or, for just as much historical veracity (LOL) and political statement:
<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/jw_GqL3pW84&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" height="385" width="480"><object height="385" width="480">
<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/jw_GqL3pW84&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" height="385" width="480"></object>