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.
How do Buddhists view Christians/Christianity?
Hi Buddhist friends,
I am new to this forum and am looking for some random answers to the question, "How do Buddhists view Christians and/or Christianity?"
If I were to describe Buddhism/Buddhists, I would have some general comments to make, yet at the same time realizing that there are many exceptions.
I'm looking for 1-5 sentence replies. It doesn't matter to me whether you include exception clauses, or whether you just state generalities.
Looking forward to your response!
I am new to this forum and am looking for some random answers to the question, "How do Buddhists view Christians and/or Christianity?"
If I were to describe Buddhism/Buddhists, I would have some general comments to make, yet at the same time realizing that there are many exceptions.
I'm looking for 1-5 sentence replies. It doesn't matter to me whether you include exception clauses, or whether you just state generalities.
Looking forward to your response!
0
Comments
Please tell us precisely why you're asking?
PM me to re-open your thread.
I don't hold this view because I am Buddhist either...so pretty much my post isn't helping you much so far.
I personally do not believe the bible contains exclusively historical truth, and of course the concept of Jesus as Son of God sort of has no real meaning in Buddhism, but otherwise I have nothing against Jesus, as portrayed in the Bible. I suspect he was a very good person.
For those who do believe in the Bible, if that brings them peace, and they dont run around telling everyone with a different belief they are wrong, I'm quite OK with it. I think it can be a perfectly valid "Dharma door" as it were.
My only concern is for those who are not open to truth from any other source, or if science should contradict the Bible, but even then, it is their choice and ultimately none of my business.
Two of my best friends are very devout Christians, and more genuine, kind and compassionate people you would have a tough time finding.
My only real beef with Christianity is the tendency of the religious right to want to legislate based on conservative Christian ideals.
However, most Christians I have known live by their church's teachings, which absolve the individual of any responsibility as long as they believe in Jesus. Their mind is usually somewhere else during their waking hours.
I think the two teachings (Christ vs. church) are quite different, and suspect much has been lost from the original teachings, turning them into a no-effort/all-gain sort of bargain that appeals to the spiritually lazy.
Christianity sometimes doesn't have some things I like in buddhism. For example christianity says that beer is ok enjoyment but bad when to excess (a couple bible versus imply this), but I don't get a powerful teaching about how to overcome addictions just from christianity. On the other hand christians themselves do have access to such technologies such as the 12 step program but its not in the scripture.
I wish there was more in the scripture of christianity about how to be happy, though I think there is a lot.
There is not one single Christianity, any more than there is a single Buddhism.
Despite what many commentators maintain, and the attitude of some contributors here, Christian doctrine, dogma, beliefs and rituals present us with an extraordinary variety.
It has always astonished me how often a particular Christian belief such as, say "substitutionary theology", is presented as the belief of all Christians. It is even more strange that when some of us use scriptures such as the Gospel of Thomas, these are dismissed as not being "canonical" or as "heretical". By whose authority? If these deniers reject the authority of councils of a particular church, how can they then appeal to it to validate authentic scripture?
All believers, Christian or Buddhist, are selective about their guiding beliefs. As a group exploring Buddhism, we are all too aware of our diversity, but fail, very often, to understand the extraordinary range of Christian beliefs on all subjects.
Even 'basic' tenets are open to a variety of interpretations, despite the efforts of church leaders to impose single understandings. In reflecting on writing this post, I reviewed a few that came immediately to mind:
* "Extra Ecclesia, nulla salus": the old warcry of the Catholic Church, abandoned by John XXIII and Vatican II but rearing its ugly head again.
* "Once Saved, Always Saved": a belief held by some Christians that, once a person has been 'saved', they cannot then be 'lost'. 'Saved', in this context, can either mean being 'born again' (usually by experiencing an ecstatic state) or by 'election' by God (either before or after the Fall). See what I mean about a variety of beliefs?
* And what about the nature of Jesus? God? Man? God/Man? Vast tomes written and gallons of blood spilled over a definition which, today, is as unclear as 2000 years ago.
We must, I think, be very careful when we consider world-wide belief systems, be they religions or politics and economics. If we are to live by principles of respect and dialogue, we need to recognise that they are rarely monolithic, despite their own pretensions. The Catholic Church is in a state of ferment, not just over its dreadful record of abuse but also anent fundamental doctrines such as the humanity of Jesus (vide Liberation Theology). The liberal democracies cannot agree on the best way to run election. The economists cannot agree on how to run an economy.
We must learn to dialogue with uncertainties, our own as much as those of others.
@Jeffrey:
We seem to be reading different writings. May I urge you to break out from the straitjacket of the Nicene canon: there's lots of other 'scripture' - it doesn't stop - and you will find that joy is at the heart of many a Christian writer.
And, just as the Buddha offers a way out of dukkha, Jesus says that he offers rest for those heavy burdened, which is all of us.
I'm glad to see that you don't lump all of us together in the same boat. My goal is to respect you as an individual as well.
I find that it is difficult for other religions to dialogue with Christians because of atrocities that have been committed in the name of Christ, and because of Christians' bad social/political behavior. I started this thread with the goal of learning first hand, what it is that buddhists and others struggle with the most about Christians/Christianity. (Christian magazines/articles sometimes attempt to address this issue, but their perspective is typically formed by their own conclusions, not by what other people actually think.)
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/NWENhzLLtJs&hl=en_US&fs=1?rel=0&color1=0x402061&color2=0x9461ca"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/NWENhzLLtJs&hl=en_US&fs=1?rel=0&color1=0x402061&color2=0x9461ca" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
Well, ultimately, everything is the same. It is all process that arises and ceases.
But from a logical philosophical point of view, I don't understand how xtianity can be the same as Buddhism. They both have different goals, different means/practices, different cosmological and philosophical (metaphysical? - I don't like that term) concepts.
metta to all
I like this story.
There were once 3 blind men and an elephant. One man touched the elephants leg and said "It's like a tree trunk!" Another man touched it's trunk and said "No! It's like a snake!" The last man touched it's tail and said "No! You're both wrong! It's like a twig!" Then they all started arguing with each other about who was right and ended up killing each other. Failing to see, because they were blind, that they were all correct.
You are your own higher authority; at the risk of sounding like a horribly overused SciFi cliche, I think, 'When the time comes, you will know,' is a perfectly apt explanation to any of these 'What do Buddhists think about X' threads.
BB
Nice story, one of my favourites too... The Buddha, however, debated many ascetics from different orders. He showed them how their views were "wrong view" and showed them how to think of things rightly - ie "right view". Many of those ascetics renounced their order and followed the Buddha.
Two disparate concepts cannot be the same. If one is "right view", the other must necessarily be "wrong view". One leads to a dead end, the other leads to cessation.
Vangelis,
I think you misunderstand the meaning of "right" or, as I prefer, "beneficial". Above it all it is not an invitation back into dualism of right vs. wrong.
Thich Nhat Hanh and others point out that samyag drishti (Beneficial View) is "first of all, a deep understanding of the Four Noble Truths.... The Buddha said that Right View is to have faith and confidence that there are people who have been able to transform their suffering." (The Heart of the Buddha's Teaching chap 9 - my emphasis) Nothing in this excludes a Christian, Muslim, Parsee, Jewish, or secular context .
This is true. Having said that if the label 'Christian' is to have any useful meaning there has to be a core set of beliefs and/or practices that make those who self identify as Christian distinct from those who do not.
Christians as well as Muslims, Jews etc. all believe in the existence of an entity called 'God'. Their notion of God isn't an impersonal force like energy, but a personal being/force that has some pretty plain and direct things to say to humans. They may debate amongst themselves on all sorts of points, but they all agree in the existence of a God who is a personal entity.
Thus it is fair to say that all Christians, on some level, regard blind faith as an acceptable means of knowing truth. It's not a means of knowing that invites scrutiny or examination. It's also a means of knowing that has historically and in the present day led people to disbelieve truth well supported by evidence in favor of truth not supported by evidence.
As such I would say that Christians have set themselves up for suffering and the only way to end that suffering is to cease craving to know the unknowable. To cease craving certainty where there is none.
Of course this craving is not purely the domain of Christians or even theists, but it is a common denominator.
I will exempt from this label 'Christian' those who are Christian via osmosis. They were born into a culture where it is the predominant belief system and they really haven't bothered to examine it much, if at all. They sort of half heartedly self identify as Christian not knowing what else to identify as
Don't quote me on this but I'm pretty sure the bible says something about becoming happy if you follow Gods laws. Or that could be the Book of Mormon which I've been reading casually lately.
The Law (Torah) of the Old Testament (Tanakh) is aimed at social stability and community rather than at individual happiness. What Jesus put into the mix was the possibility of the individual finding liberation, peace and joy by abandoning the notion of 'self' and following a path of service and prayer in an impermanent and deceptive world. Is it any wonder that some of us find coherence between the Christian and the Buddhist messages?
It's really fascinating that such similar doctrines (existence of an all-powerful god aside) have developed into such different social interpretations. For whatever reason, Christianity became extremely bureaucratic and Buddhism did not, which eventually led to the various wars and power struggles that are so contradictory to the Christian belief (the story of the Tower of Babel comes to mind).
Jesus and the disciples probably would have scoffed at the idea of the Pope, the Vatican and the centralization of Christianity altogether. The closest thing to centralization in Buddhism is the existence of monasteries, but even that's not an accurate portrayal; monasteries are not a form of hierarchy, rather a collection of people coming together in search of liberation.
Whilst what you say is true to some extent, we should not forget that many of the Buddhisms use a vertical, hierarchical structure and that doctrinal differences have led, even in the current age, to anger and violence. The scandal of NKT and HHDL is a case in point.
Take any practitioner of any religion, and instead know how selfish or selfless that person is at heart, and a much truer gauge of their compassion would be known. Failing that... for we can not know a person's heart, we must rely on their speech and actions alone. This may be why the morality precepts of right speech and right action are so important as building blocks to the higher purification of mind that is the Buddhist goal.
I agree there could be more. There is this:
“The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.” (Galatians 5:22)
I lived there. It's true, unfortunately, but there aren't many outbursts. It mostly involves evangelical Christian fundies, convinced that Buddhism must be from the "evil one", trying to close down temples. Some Korean Christians can be very aggressive proselytizers. I've had Korean men kindly introduce themselves, shake my hand, and then hold me prisoner while they tell me about Jesus. I've actually had to wrestle my hand free!
St. Seraphim of Sarov greeted all with the words: "My joy!" To many he advised: "Acquire a peaceful spirit, and around you thousands will be saved." No matter who came to him, the starets bowed to the ground before all, and, in blessing, kissed their hands. He did not need the visitors to tell about themselves, as he could see what each had on their soul. He also said, "Cheerfulness is not a sin. It drives away weariness, for from weariness there is sometimes dejection, and there is nothing worse than that."
http://orthodoxwiki.org/Seraphim_of_Sarov
http://www.the-new-way.org/testimonies/ris_02_buddhist_monk_raised_from_the_dead.html
Upon reading this story I felt compelled to sign up and say something. I would just like to say that all Christians are not like this. As a Christian myself, this sort of propaganda saddens me to no end. To lie and to make up false stories in order to proselytize and convert others is sinful and ignorant. Nothing good can come from this sort of behavior.
Please understand that this posted story is nothing but extreme right-wing fundamentalist evangelical propaganda. True Christianity is based on Love, not on fear. Unfortunately, these days many so-called Christians do what Christ Himself would be incapable of doing.
Peace to you.
I heard read that article about 2 months ago and found it quite disturbing.
May a Christian gentleman assure you, Shanyin, that you are not.
Poor lady.
<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/PTCogarppGs?version=3"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PTCogarppGs?version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></object>
God?
|-Yes.
|-No.
The Complete View encompasses this entire tree, especially when no logical or empirical claims are being made. (when they are, the deeper ramifications of each choice must also be investigated and included)
You have to have long and stretchy legs to be on two branches. I imagine you have to grow them. Or perhaps you can leap back and forth like a bat or flying squirrel???
sincerely john