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.
4 Nobles Truths for Christians
skullchin
Veteran
Hi, I was wondering, if you are familiar with Christian scripture and you wanted to explain the 4NT (especially the first three) to a group of Christians which scriptures would you choose?
0
Comments
If they are intelligent people, they'll get it. If they're unintelligent (in every sense of the word) no matter what the explanation is, they won't 'get it'.
"Man that is born of woman hath but a short time to live, and is full of misery. He cometh up, and is cut down, like a flower; he fleeth as it were a shadow, and never continueth in one stay."
What comes to mind, right off the top of my head, are - possibly - the entire books of Job and Ecclesiastes.
(Maybe Romans 8:18 and 1 Cr. 12:26, but these would have to be 'worked on' somewhat).
That's a bit of light reading for you!!
The Noble Truths are not a syllogism where one term connected with another leads to a logical conclusion.
The First Truth may easily be taught to anyone of just about any age. The truth of suffering is apparent from the first moment of our awareness. That having been said, it takes reflection and teaching/study to realise the depth of the statement and the all-embracing nature of dukkha. Those of us who care to discuss the Dharma with non-Buddhists will almost inevitably come across resistance to this first step. People do not want to admit the basic unsatisfactoriness of their lives - and who can blame them?
If the First Truth is hard to grasp and integrate into our lives, the Second takes us even further into controversy until the First is fully grasped.
For anyone who is interested, like the OP, in parallels with the Bible, there is an interesting view of the Eden story which enables us to see that craving rooted in ignorance leads to taking and eating unskillfully. The man and the woman are led by their senses to act in such a way that they can no longer live in the garden.
When we come to the Third Truth, we are in an even more problematical area. It is far from obvious that, having recognised that dukkha arises from "craving for sensual pleasures, craving for existence, craving for extermination," and that this underlying craving is integral to living, there is a way out of suffering whilst still alive. As Solon the Lawgiver said to King Croesus, "Call no one happy until they are dead". Indeed, we, here, have been asked about this time and again, in various ways. Whilst the Third Truth is the "good news" of the Dharma, it is far from self-evident and requires the Fourth Truth to show how we can escape from dukkha.
In conversation with Christians, there is really no problem in sharing the Third Truth. Indeed, the idea that our suffering is the result of our own cravings and aversions fits well into the concept of 'falling short' (Rom. 2:23), nor with the idea that there is a way out. It is at this point that the conversation can, if we are not careful, become confrontational. We need, if we want the dialogue to be productive, to understand that Jesus said "I am the Way", whereas Gotama taught eight interdependent elements of the Way - and that these are not contradictory views but may be deemed complementary. I have shared this with many Christians and Buddhists who have understood that the Noble Eightfold Path gives us a way of life which fills in the gaps left by the New Testament: the instruction book, if you will.
Jesus, in such texts as the Sermon on the Mount, takes what we have learned from the Noble truths and adds the 'social' dimension that is so often lost in close focus on our own way out of suffering. It is this that has attracted HHDL, TNH and other Buddhist writers to the Gospels without their having to give up their Buddhist beliefs.
I hope that I have shown here that finding Bible texts that reflect the Truths can empower dialogue and enrich our own practice.
??
What are the Four Noble Truths?
(Not just a quoted or verbatim description. I'd like to understand - from a Buddhist's point of view - what it means to them).
Seph, take a look at the following:
http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/basic-guide.htm
We can read all the sutras and the commentaries but the real understanding comes from reflecting on our own lives and those of all living beings, finding the 'seeds' of our clinging and aversion and engaging in a practice to verify and prove, in our own lives, the reality of the Third Truth. With more informed Christians, I use the format of the Second Week of St Ignatius's Spiritual Exercises with its structured Examen.
Our aim is to realise what suffering is, what its causes are, and prevent suffering from arising.
Be Mindful, and simplify.
The Four Noble Truths - culminating in the Eightfold Path - exhort us to live our lives with Mindfulness, Wisdom and Compassion.
Consider your thoughts, words and deeds, and manifest them skilfully and with kindness.
I was being funny.....:rolleyes:
Kundun: On it's way to my house so I can watch it sometime next week
St Ignatius structured examen: Would you mind saying little more about this?
SOTM - is based upon how happy a person may be in dependence of the path of christianity
FNT - is based on the natural suffering that occurs without a path.
jesus takes a goal as that like Happiness and talks about how we are far off the mark ( sin)
Buddha takes the self evident awareness of FNT as suffering and the possiblity for Happiness through the path.
One is deductive and the other is inductive.
This will help in western terminology , it distills down the mesages in socratic and neo platonic terms and is well known in western philosophical circles.
Start here and with this gross categorization then refine your view through the thesis - antithesis- synthesis method.
Which Stanley jones says and exegites upon very profoundly. Also its said that in jest jesus's doctorine is about self abondonment and it is in direct opposition to the self sufficent or Nietche's "superman".
Buddha talks about this as well in many supporting sutras . he says in effect that a life based upon self reliance and reifying of self creates suffering and that a life of self abandonment or bodhichitta creates the actions of merit that accumulate for causes to enlightenment.
The soiterological meaning of the SOTM and FNT are toward the same goal. Where they differ is the positing of a Creator. But this is mainly doctrinal and excess anyway. Most of the christians i know are looking for experiential not theological answers. So theology is going to bring up eschtological concerns and metaphysical difficulties. But if your point is to see the similarites and the goal of both masters as soiterological then you will have made a unifying presentation. but beware theology will create divisiveness. and most of your listeners won't be able to differentiate the " message from the mess "
I know it is nice to find common ground among philosophies and religions but in the case of Buddhism there is little connection to any religion that is based on a higher power in the universe that controls your destiny and saves you in the end for repentance.
However, practising Buddhism while incorporating much of Catholic doctrine is a far greater challenge, and fraught with obstacles....
I think you have a valid point, Fede, although I am far from clear what conclusion one can draw. There are a fair number of examples of highly-respected Catholics (largely monastics) who inhabit common ground with Buddhists. From the other 'side', I have only come across Masao Abe who practises Buddhism whilst incorporating Christian (rather than specifically Catholic) beliefs.
Perhaps the picture is that a person will emerge from a specific tradition, be it Buddhist or Christian, and is confronted by a panoply of traditions in the other. For someone like myself, coming from a truly secular humanist context, there are many choices and decisions and challenges in both (indeed, all) the bodies of belief.
The more I think about this, the stranger it becomes. You would imagine, surely, that it would be the other way round, The Catholic Church is seen as dogmatic and exclusive, whereas Buddhism is presented as anti-dogmatic and inclusive. Are you sure you're right, Fede. What about HHDL and TNH's admiration for Jesus and for Christian social action?
The Dalai Lama is a devoted and diligent practitioner of Buddhism, but his acceptance and recognition of Christian values, while admirable, does not mean he has adopted them as daily practice.....
Therein lies the difficulty.
Thomas Merton, Jim Pym and Thich Nhat Hahn all proclaim the virtues of the religion they admire, and speak of the similarities between their calling, and the other religion.
But push comes to shove, they can only plant their flags in one camp, at the end of the day.
Where we differ, Fede, is that I do not perceive different camps. They seem to me to be visible only from the inside, hallucinations.
There is a difference, Simon. Melding acceptance of the two is commendable, but practising the two to the same intensity, depth devotion and single-mindedness - is impossible.
Credo quia impossibile.
This is correct HH the DL says many places that you can't practice buddhism to enlightenment or liberation by being christian. Eventually one must choose.