Jesus and Buddha
- David_clay123
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 1
- Joined: August 19th, 2017, 5:50 am
Jesus and Buddha
I've noticed something on my trip to Asia. People here seems to alter the role of Buddha and Jesus. Instead of looking up the them for guidance, they turn Jesus and Buddha into gods that have some sort of power of giving. That's really weird and derailed. I wonder what had caused that.
-
- Posts: 3601
- Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm
Re: Jesus and Buddha
It should also be kept in mind that the term ‘god’ is used to mean different things, beings, entities, and forces. There is the notion of apotheosis or deification, to become or be made divine. What it means to be or become divine also has various meanings.
-
- Posts: 1366
- Joined: August 18th, 2016, 11:29 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Paul Tillich
Re: Jesus and Buddha
On a deeper level than most people are accustomed, I perceive little difference between Buddhism and Christianity. In his book book Living Buddha, Living Christ, Thich Nhat Hanh writes:David_clay123 wrote:Hi everyone,
I've noticed something on my trip to Asia. People here seems to alter the role of Buddha and Jesus. Instead of looking up the them for guidance, they turn Jesus and Buddha into gods that have some sort of power of giving. That's really weird and derailed. I wonder what had caused that.
God as the ground of being cannot be conceived of. Nirvana also cannot be conceived of. If we are aware when we use the word “nirvana” or the word “God” that we are talking about the ground of being, there is no danger in using these words.
-
- Posts: 3601
- Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm
Re: Jesus and Buddha
This only compounds the problem by claiming that two terms that cannot be conceived of are the same as something else whose meaning is problematic and subject to various interpretations. The only reasonable thing we can say that terms that cannot be conceived of have in common is that we cannot conceive of them. All else is empty talk (pun intended).God as the ground of being cannot be conceived of. Nirvana also cannot be conceived of. If we are aware when we use the word “nirvana” or the word “God” that we are talking about the ground of being, there is no danger in using these words.
- -1-
- Posts: 878
- Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am
Re: Jesus and Buddha
It is derailed in the case of the Buddha,who is not a god. But Jesus is supposed to be omnipotent because he is god, so it makes sense to turn to him to give, just like it makes sense to turn to those who have, and have plenty, to ask them to give.David_clay123 wrote:Hi everyone,
I've noticed something on my trip to Asia. People here seems to alter the role of Buddha and Jesus. Instead of looking up the them for guidance, they turn Jesus and Buddha into gods that have some sort of power of giving. That's really weird and derailed. I wonder what had caused that.
Nobody ever gives, by the way, to those who ask. Not gods, anyway. They give, but randomly, and without merit as to a pious, deserving life of being given.
This is why I am skeptical of the afterlife. It's not the good, the pious or the challenged who get to the kingdom of heaven; it is those who are randomly chosen to go there, is my opinion on Christian dogma.
-
- Posts: 1366
- Joined: August 18th, 2016, 11:29 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Paul Tillich
Re: Jesus and Buddha
Don't bite the finger that's pointing.Fooloso4 wrote:DM:
This only compounds the problem by claiming that two terms that cannot be conceived of are the same as something else whose meaning is problematic and subject to various interpretations. The only reasonable thing we can say that terms that cannot be conceived of have in common is that we cannot conceive of them. All else is empty talk (pun intended).God as the ground of being cannot be conceived of. Nirvana also cannot be conceived of. If we are aware when we use the word “nirvana” or the word “God” that we are talking about the ground of being, there is no danger in using these words.
-
- Posts: 3258
- Joined: December 14th, 2011, 9:42 am
Re: Jesus and Buddha
I don't think that the deification of Jesus is anything new, but the deification of Buddha does also strike me as strange. Historically, Buddha was an enlightened person, but he never (as far as I'm aware) made any claims about his own divinity as Jesus did. However, if his wisdom was such that he seemed to know what was right about every situation and willingly imparted his knowledge (having a giving nature), it is understandable to a degree that he would be canonised by the people, especially if he was also benevolent. It would be interesting to know their reasons for doing so as we are speculating. Catholics pray and ask for the guidance of saints, so perhaps the behaviour you observe could be similar to that? I suspect that the issue has a lot to do with Asian culture, history and folklore.Hi everyone,
I've noticed something on my trip to Asia. People here seems to alter the role of Buddha and Jesus. Instead of looking up the them for guidance, they turn Jesus and Buddha into gods that have some sort of power of giving. That's really weird and derailed. I wonder what had caused that.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14997
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Jesus and Buddha
Religion is just an ideology on which people can base, and thus simplify, their lives. Religion sorts out all the big questions and lets people just get on with life, along with providing reassurance and optimism to the oppressed and impoverished. In context, how false a religious belief is factually seems largely moot (as long as they stay out of science education and practice).
Each census reveals thousands of adherents to "the Jedi religion". Most are obviously a joke, but some are probably serious. I suspect that a person could gather the wisdom of Yoda and live by it as well as one could live by the tenets of any religion. Since humans live in eusocial societies with much specialisation of roles, many people often do well using such "ideological blinders", regardless of the blinder. Rather than being confused by the myriad claims and counter claims around them, they can simply accept their texts, reject everything else and then are free to focus on their specialised areas. Religion would therefore seem to be a perfect vehicle for maintaining order amongst low status intelligent eusocial organisms.
So, in context, believing that possibly mythical characters of the past just gives those who believe implicitly in highly doubtful material anyway a little more certainty. After all, gods can't be wrong so the word of God would be 100% solid to them.
-
- Posts: 3601
- Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm
Re: Jesus and Buddha
You have misunderstood not only me but a basic tenant of Buddhism. His pointing at something that cannot be conceived of does not mean that you can see because he is pointing. Buddhist knowledge is experiential. Your attempt to arrive at a concept of God that is beyond the ordinary criticisms is antithetical to what is being point toward.Don't bite the finger that's pointing.
The observation made by David_clay123 has nothing to do with your concept of God as ground. Certainly very few if any of the people he came in contact with who think of Jesus and Buddha as gods think of this as the ground of being.
-
- Posts: 5161
- Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various
Re: Jesus and Buddha
I am from Asia and I am well aware of the above scenarios.David_clay123 wrote:Hi everyone,
I've noticed something on my trip to Asia. People here seems to alter the role of Buddha and Jesus. Instead of looking up the them for guidance, they turn Jesus and Buddha into gods that have some sort of power of giving. That's really weird and derailed. I wonder what had caused that.
What is happening with Jesus as God is something new [300 years since the missionaries came] and there is nothing new with the Buddha believed as a God in Asia.
[Rule breaking comments deleted]
Since Jesus claimed to a Son of God, this is easily conflated to perceive 'Jesus' as God or as close to a God so as to reinforce the psychological security to stave off the angst. Since this psychological starvation for a God is the most compulsive, the missionaries sold this idea the Jesus as God to the locals and many buy it because it is so easy, believe and viola one is saved by the Son or God or Jesus as God. Another point it easy to relate a person to God than trying the perceive an invisible entity like God.
The basic doctrine of Buddhism is non-theistic. Whilst Buddhism is of high level spirituality it [pure form] is too advance for the Buddha's time and even at the present.
Buddhism recognizes humans come in all sort of varieties in terms of physical, mentally, psychologically and spiritually.
The variety of various spiritual inclinations was already recognized by 'Hinduism' long ago, e.g. the various different Yoga to suit those with different proclivities.
The majority of humans are of the devotional type [Bakti Yoga]. Buddhism being flexible has no problem adjusting the religion's practices and thinking to the majority, thus allowing the majority of Buddhists who are devotional to view the Buddha as godlike. Genuine Buddhism proper do not promote gods, deities, praying to statues, and the likes but nevertheless Buddhist organizations allow for these practices with the hope that some of their followers will advance to Buddhism proper later.
So yes, the majority of lay-Buddhists in Asia has been believing the Buddha is like God.
However, most Buddhists in the West do not accept the Buddha as a God [pseudo theistic] but rather adopted Buddha's philosophy as a practical guide. This is because only the more refined aspects of Buddhism was exported to the West to cater for those in the West who are fed up with theism.
While most Buddhists in the West do not relate to a theistic God, some Buddhist groups promote an ultimate reality such as Buddha Nature.
Why believers in Asia 'turn Jesus and Buddha into gods that have some sort of power of giving' is due to the majority's spiritual and psychological profile where the majority yearn [compelled subliminally] for some super-all-powerful-entity to relieve their terrible existential angst.
-
- Posts: 429
- Joined: July 25th, 2012, 3:42 pm
Re: Jesus and Buddha
It was at the Council of Nicaea that a group of men lead by the Emperor Constantine decided to deify Jesus for very obvious socio-political reasons. The same kind of thing has happened to the Siddhartha Gautama (the Buddha). It's not unlike what happens to celebrities today. These were great philosophers and spiritual teachers whom I think would absolutely abhore being "worshiped" as gods of any kind were they aware that this deification has occurred. I have written several post on why I believe it becomes psychological necessary for many people to deify and worship others who appear to have superior understanding and/or celebrity. I won't repeat that discussion here but it should suffice to say there are several theoretical reasons as to why this has occurred and will continue to occur as new spiritual and intellectual teachers spring up. We may be past the point where anyone new will ever be actually deified by a significant percentage of the modern culture but that is mostly due to the advent of science and modern rationality going mainstream.
-- Updated August 25th, 2017, 1:28 pm to add the following --
If interested see my post on the specific reasoning behind why Jesus is turned into a god and see if it makes sense to you....the post is in this forum and it's title is ..."Why the Catholic Church turned Jesus into the son of "GOD"
- -1-
- Posts: 878
- Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am
Re: Jesus and Buddha
But then The Who came, and they sang:
"Meet the new boss... same as the old boss..." The timing of chiming in by The Who came some 2000 years too late... by that time the regime solidified itself, split up, reformed itself, and waged wars against the infidels.
-
- Posts: 3601
- Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm
Re: Jesus and Buddha
I read your post and agree. I would like to expand upon the following as it relates to the dispute between Athanasius and Arius at the Council of of Nicaea:… see my post on the specific reasoning behind why Jesus is turned into a god and see if it makes sense to you....the post is in this forum and it's title is ..."Why the Catholic Church turned Jesus into the son of "GOD"
Arius saw as one of the strengths of his argument (besides that fact that it had much greater scriptural support) is that it allows for apotheosis, that is, for men to transcend their human limits, to become divine.This cannot be simply another human. I contest that it can be, but …
The early Jesus movement was pluralistic and inspiration (indwelling spirit) was valued, but all this changed with the institution of a universal church with official doctrines, practices, and hierarchic structure.
- -1-
- Posts: 878
- Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am
Re: Jesus and Buddha
Sitting comfortably? Just you listen:
The Sweetest Surprise
I walked in a pasture, on a lawn
In a park in Taipeh, Taiwan.
Sunlight beams played with my glances
Breaking through the leaves of tree branches
Luring my sight up, and making me breathe in
the air of a fresh summer morning.
My face cut into spider webs that glistened with dew
As I meandered in the park to, fro and through.
The hum of the morning was all around
Bees suckling honey, sparrows squirrelling, earthworms toiling underground.
I walked on the lawn, on green pasture
Heels slightly sinking into the soft colour and hue.
After a turn, after a sudden lift in the foliage
I beheld him, as he was sitting on a stone ledge.
He was larger than life, yet he fit in himself perfectly
His robust statue the ledge held up very easily.
I knew from legend, from school, from my masters,
That his wisdom’s weight contradicts the flight of his lightness.
He was glowing, with happiness, with glee
He smiled at me, with joy greeted he me.
Our glances locked, him not moving his eyes,
It was stranger than Strangers In The Night.
His stone belly jiggled, not seen by man,
His stone laughter, not heard, surprised me again.
I felt his warm breath ‘round me, his stroke of goodwill
I felt warmth in my spine, which caused a thrilling chill.
I thought I saw god there and that he saw me
I thought he really said, “I do love thee”.
Whereas the person I saw there
Was Mom, lost long to the reaper.
This person was Winnie-The-Pooh, and Pif le chien
(from the young French peoples’ paper “Valiant”)
And the music of Marriott and Lane
On the LP “Ogden’s Nut Gone Flake”
He was Huck Finn, the friend of Tom Sawyer.
He was my childhood, the latency-bearer.
He was the sweat-beads of childhood,
The tree barks, the sky’s blue
The taste of fallen walnuts,
The tree houses, the mud huts
The smell of rain, my palm’s feel on a rake
The games we’d invent and create
All the solemn, serene solitude that I could take
As has been said well in the books of Istvan Fekete.
What else did I see there?
My growing love for life, for my spirit and for concepts
All appeared together in a certain context.
I saw the growth my love has taken for women
Both in the physical and the emotional realm.
I saw my love for knowledge,
And my sweet addiction to create.
There in front of me was I: relating to my self, and to others.
I saw that my life’s been not just a string of events but a progress.
In that statue of Buddha
A friend, a comrade I saw.
The wealth of the universe he gave to me
And gave me an ability also to give.
In that statue of Buddha
Is a god unlike Jesus and Yahweh and Allah.
Though not less wise or loving or smart,
He is down to earth, not cruel, not part
Of political agendas
Or leading us into bitter wars.
He dares to laugh! He dares to have fun!
He dares to be awfully human.
He’s not rigid in his demands of us
He dictates nothing – no fuss.
So there, when I, the uninitiated,
Into his company unwittingly stepped
I was taken by his immediate closeness,
By the lack of such pretences as “oneness”.
Before I met him there I had known nothing of his teachings
But I knew him then, all of him, with no prior preachings.
To me he’s a life force, a god, a good spirit,
A reflection, a focussed stream of time and space infinite.
He takes my hand and guides it encouraging me
To touch his heart, hold it, and breathe in his spirit.
Finally he lifts me, up, mine level to his eyes.
He whispers my name... then just like me and with me,
He dances, laughs and cries.
2007 March 3.
-
- Posts: 429
- Joined: July 25th, 2012, 3:42 pm
Re: Jesus and Buddha
Fooloso4 wrote:Philosch:
I read your post and agree. I would like to expand upon the following as it relates to the dispute between Athanasius and Arius at the Council of of Nicaea:… see my post on the specific reasoning behind why Jesus is turned into a god and see if it makes sense to you....the post is in this forum and it's title is ..."Why the Catholic Church turned Jesus into the son of "GOD"
Arius saw as one of the strengths of his argument (besides that fact that it had much greater scriptural support) is that it allows for apotheosis, that is, for men to transcend their human limits, to become divine.This cannot be simply another human. I contest that it can be, but …
The early Jesus movement was pluralistic and inspiration (indwelling spirit) was valued, but all this changed with the institution of a universal church with official doctrines, practices, and hierarchic structure.
Yes indeed Fooloso4, and this is no small thing. Imagine how different the world would be if the Catholic Church practiced a religion without worshiping supernatural deities but rather valued the indwelling spirituality based on compassion and unity with all of creation, just imagine if they actually did what their own founding inspirational teacher had asked them, even implored them to do. It's stunning to me that the historical facts of that council are known and yet the Catholic church along with other Christian faiths have the temerity to insist that Jesus is a "GOD" and that he actually claimed to be. So dishonest and it has been the cause of so much misery on this planet it's truly unforgiveable. What's more amusing is that the protestant religions broke off from the Catholic church because of "other" offensive doctrinal differences and yet that particular doctrine was fully accepted. Of course this is because you can't have an authoritarian church of any flavor if you don't have the supernatural backing of a deity and each person is responsible for their own spiritual salvation.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023