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.
I was just having a shave and had a random thought.
Assuming that the majority of the people on this board are westerners, we are surrounded mostly by Christians. Since becoming buddhist I have actually gained respect for every religion as apposed to when I was a bitter atheist.
Anyway, my thought was this. I am not too clued up on the Christian faith as I was never Christened, and I have not really studied it in any degree of detail. BUT, lets say for IF in fact there is a God who judges us when we die, an all knowing creator who pushes us to an eternal hell or heaven, then surely if we have been good little buddhists, we have lead a pure and compassionate life. Just because we have chosen to not believe in him,... or her, then surely we would be granted into heaven?
Obviously being buddhist I believe in the dharma but I am just saying IF for the sake of this thread.
0
Comments
Given that one of the main creeds of Christianity is the Golden Rule, being kind and humble, etc., if one has followed the precepts and practiced compassion, one would qualify, methinks. Most religions have similar values. It's when they urge people to go on jihads or crusades that they go astray.
But yea, at the core most religions have the same goal, to help people deal with life problems and become a decent human being. It is people who taint religions, religion in itself is pure.
But the thought crossed my mind, we cannot prove if there is a god, or if rebirth is a reality etc, so surely if this so called God turns out to be real, surely he/she can't be bitter enough to turn us away just because we chose not to believe in him/her. We are good people
I was born and raised Catholic (orthodox), converted to Judaism, and now I am poking around here. Heaven help me!
(Welcome, sndymorn, and poke around to your heart's content.! )
I apologize if I have made some mistakes in these descriptions, but to the extent that they are accurate, I think it is a good idea to look into the implications of what is credited by the majority of those around us.
My Zen Buddhist teacher once said to me, "For the first four or five years (of practice) belief and hope are necessary. After that, they are not so necessary." It was not a criticism or an accolade. It was just an observation. As a belief or hope, God generally means something "else," some "other" being or situation or entity. Practicing Buddhists are not equally keen on something "else."
Just some thoughts.
so Gandhi and the Dalai Lama would be screwed, but a serial rapist who's also murdered his own parents, done drugs and drunk himself half-blind, gets in - providing he truly accepts Jesus in his heart, on his deathbed.
Apparently.
Palzang
Metta,
Guy
I really don't know a lot about other denominations take on it, but they're bound to be as different as the opinions on "thy neighbor".
Like you Tom, I have gained a more tolerant view of religions after practicing The Way. I have also discovered through my studies, that Catholics made some of the most important legal principles we use in Europe today - the individual responsibility for damages and crimes and the freedom to marry the one you want regardless of your family's opinion (in theory, at least).
To complement the Canonical Law was the Roman Law (corpus iuris civilis) from the 6th century and earlier.
When Luther reformed Christianity in the 16th century, most of that (canonical and roman law) was lost to fundamentalism and laws based on The Old Testament - a 2000-years setback (in the sense that The Old Testamentary rules are based on the way simpler principles of law which existed about 500 years BC).
Where the Catholic church demanded offenders to pay a (somewhat heavy) fine for serious crimes, the new Lutherans demanded death and mutilation for even simple crimes as theft - with Bible in hand, that is!
Several hundreds of years past before proportionality was implemented in the legal systems again and the roman law was rediscovered..
Sorry for the rant, I got carried away
My own interest is in the doctrine of salvation by "grace". Having looked deeply at many of the world faiths ( at least as deeply as my own intellect can take me ) it is the idea of "grace" that is a common factor. This said in total recognition of the vast difference between a "grace" seen as being bestowed by a "being" outside of ourselves, and - at the other end of the spectrum - that of the recognition that "we are empty from the beginning" and therefore need not empty ourselves of anything.
A Theravada Bhikkhu once said that at the moment of realisation/enlightenment/release "effort falls away, having reached the end of its scope". As I see it, and understand it, it is the nature of effort, and its scope, that distinguishes each faith from another. Pure Land Buddhism explores this with great depth. At least, I think so.
Anyway, just to say that reliance upon the "self" and its "works" and hoping such will get us a pass mark from the "judge"..........does not really work in ANY faith.
My Point: "IT" is soooo HUUUGE and soooo complicated and interwoven, there's no such thing as understanding it except as humans do: with extremely dim wits!
Over simplifed conclusion AND the ONLY one that's possible: be nice to people and other animals and you'll be fine.
HAHA! Thanks for the chance to express that again. I feel better. In a good way of course!
I'm wishing y'all well! :thumbsup: