Where Christianity and Buddhism Agree?

[Shiranui117]

No, Buddhism and Christianity are diametrically opposed.

While Christianity may perceive there is something awry or wrong with human nature, a mistake, or imperfection per se' Buddhism employs engaged practices designed to penetrate opaqueness caused by a strong ego.

A view of imperfection or flawed nature that needs some sort of "fixing" is a very good example of that opaqueness.

Basically Christianity attempts to "fix something" whereas Buddhism simply blows the dust off.......

I would note here in Orthodoxy, we think of all human beings as being made in, and containing, the image of God. A metaphor I've often seen to explain the spiritual life is that we're working with God to uncover that radiant image within us which has been covered up with soot and dirt, which is our sin. Sin is a heavy burden to carry, and one of the goals of the Christian life is to throw that burden off. This is why Christ says His burden is light; following His teachings unburdens us from our selfish desire, narrow-mindedness, hatred, fear, worry and despair. Even in this realm, I think Christianity and Buddhism share a lot in common. As we Orthodox sing every Sunday in the Cherubic Hymn, "let us set aside all earthly cares." This is an invitation which Buddhists have been also giving for millennia.

 

[Phantasman]

I remember when I was watching a documentary on the life of DT Suzuki, who was not only a Buddhist, but an ecumenist.

A Catholic priest who had been a friend of Suzuki's made the statement on camera that Christianity and Buddhism agree on there being something awry in human nature. Obviously, he means original sin, as Christians are concerned.

What he's referring to about Buddhism is our view that ignorance misleads humanity. In Mahayana, this is ignorance to the fact of everything having one essential nature- an ignorance produced by the skandhas and false house of ego. This ignorance in turn produces the defilements of the base nature- like greed, anger, and hatred.

Buddhists practice virtues in order to purify the faculties of these poisons.

I did find it an interesting statement on that priest's part though, and it got me to thinking. Because I think Buddhists and Christians probably also agree that no person is capable of being perfect, because we all have the potential to do bad things. Christians should also ideally agree I think- that no one person or group of people can truly be blamed for evil in the world, which Buddhists tend to emphasize in our view of human nature.

What do you think friends? Is this an area where Christians and Buddhists agree, at least to some degree?

I see a much closer path of the early Gnostics aligning with Buddhism than the orthodox view. Spiritual ignorance is the mother of all sin in gnosis (of Spirit) and not some dude named Satan.

Many early Christian Gnostics influenced and were influential in Eastern religious followings.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

I see a much closer path of the early Gnostics aligning with Budd

I'd certainly agree. Buddhist teaching is often translated Buddha gnosis in English. As I understand it, Buddhism and Christian gnosticism even had a syncretic offshoot in the form of Manichaeism.

 

[Phantasman]

I'd certainly agree. Buddhist teaching is often translated Buddha gnosis in English. As I understand it, Buddhism and Christian gnosticism even had a syncretic offshoot in the form of Manichaeism.

Yes. Mani was a follower of gnosis over the orthodox views.

 

[crossfire]

There are records of King Ashoka sending monks to Alexandria to spread the dharma, which is where Jesus' family spent some time, and where Gnosticism started. (Too bad the library of Alexandria burned down!)

Anyone ever notice how the Tibetans send out the wise men looking for the reborn Lamas? Has anyone noticed the similarity between them and the wise men looking for the young Jesus?

 

[wizanda]

Is this an area where Christians and Buddhists agree, at least to some degree?

Unlike others who have written analysis of comparisons, we should start with dissecting the text, as Christianity stems from Paul, John and Simon the stone's own theologies.

So if we compare Christianity as a whole to Buddhism: they both teach selflessness, following a righteous path of charity and good action, that the world is corrupted, that material desires lead us to lower planes of existence, that there is one ultimate Source of reality, that by giving up earthly desires, to seek a path of saintliness there is the hope of ascending out of this realm, that the followers are to revere their enlightened teacher, to refrain from intoxicants and revelry, to not be sexually promiscuous, no lying, stealing, coveting, adultery, etc.

The difference if we include Yeshua's teachings, is that he also taught reincarnation, Moksha, enlightenment, selflessness to the point of hating self and only loving the Source of reality, meditation, and that we all have to cleanse our own heart (soul) to reach the state of Nirvana to be saved.

In my opinion.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

@crossfire there was an entire Hellenistic school of Buddhism, but it disappeared during the Christian era. King Menander is one of it's better known converts. The Greco-Buddhism is known to have an uncertain degree of influence on Mahayana because the first Buddha images we find came from the Hellenists. Early Buddhists only erected Stupas.

 

[crossfire]

@crossfire there was an entire Hellenistic school of Buddhism, but it disappeared during the Christian era. King Menander is one of it's better known converts. The Greco-Buddhism is known to have an uncertain degree of influence on Mahayana because the first Buddha images we find came from the Hellenists. Early Buddhists only erected Stupas.

Likely from monks sent out by King Ashoka.

 

[crossfire]

Jesus also took up the homeless life like a Buddhist monk.

 

[Shiranui117]

I remember when I was watching a documentary on the life of DT Suzuki, who was not only a Buddhist, but an ecumenist.

A Catholic priest who had been a friend of Suzuki's made the statement on camera that Christianity and Buddhism agree on there being something awry in human nature. Obviously, he means original sin, as Christians are concerned.

What he's referring to about Buddhism is our view that ignorance misleads humanity. In Mahayana, this is ignorance to the fact of everything having one essential nature- an ignorance produced by the skandhas and false house of ego. This ignorance in turn produces the defilements of the base nature- like greed, anger, and hatred.

Buddhists practice virtues in order to purify the faculties of these poisons.

I did find it an interesting statement on that priest's part though, and it got me to thinking. Because I think Buddhists and Christians probably also agree that no person is capable of being perfect, because we all have the potential to do bad things. Christians should also ideally agree I think- that no one person or group of people can truly be blamed for evil in the world, which Buddhists tend to emphasize in our view of human nature.

What do you think friends? Is this an area where Christians and Buddhists agree, at least to some degree?

Yes, I would say so. Within Orthodox monasticism, there is a strong teaching of the necessity of overcoming sinful passions as well. The Ladder of Divine Ascent by St. John Climacus, and the Philokalia (a compilation of ascetic texts written by many Orthodox Saints and monks throughout the centuries) speak often of watchfulness (what Buddhists would call mindfulness), freeing oneself from desires for material possessions or earthly honor, and ridding oneself of all vices that leave one blind to God such as hatred, envy, pride, selfish desire, despondency, sloth and lust. Of course, Orthodox Christians and Buddhists have different end-goals in mind (Heaven vs. Nirvana) and the means differ (the Jesus Prayer, contemplation of the Bible, liturgical prayers and the Sacraments vs. sutras, mantras and other things I'm sure I have no idea about), but a lot of the ideas are the same.

 

[crossfire]

I'm pretty sure that Christians will also agree with Buddhists regarding the four sublime states:
Brahmavihara - Wikipedia

1. loving-kindness or benevolence
2. compassion
3. empathetic joy
4. equanimity

 

[crossfire]

Christianity and Buddhism also endorse monasticism, and have strong traditions of it, while many other religions forbid monasticism.

 

[Srivijaya]

Sometimes I envy (I don't mean in a negative context) those that grew up in a Dharmic culture, because they wouldn't have a lot of the tendencies growing up in a western culture gives one.

There would certainly be some advantages. Many western Buddhists try to shoehorn Buddhist teachings into the gap left by abandoning Christianity and align it with the western philosophical tradition. Karma becomes a God replacement, dishing out punishment or reward. Understanding that Buddhism is not about metaphysics is a huge hurdle to overcome too (was for me at least).

On the other hand, many born into Buddhist cultures never bother to really explore it. Kind of births, marriages and deaths believers, with the odd visit to a temple or shrine for merit etc. Western converts perhaps come across as a bit "intense" to such folks. A UK born Chinese friend of mine only started to take an interest in Buddhism after discussing it several times with me. She just thought it was something odd her granny did.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I remember when I was watching a documentary on the life of DT Suzuki, who was not only a Buddhist, but an ecumenist.

A Catholic priest who had been a friend of Suzuki's made the statement on camera that Christianity and Buddhism agree on there being something awry in human nature. Obviously, he means original sin, as Christians are concerned.

What he's referring to about Buddhism is our view that ignorance misleads humanity. In Mahayana, this is ignorance to the fact of everything having one essential nature- an ignorance produced by the skandhas and false house of ego. This ignorance in turn produces the defilements of the base nature- like greed, anger, and hatred.

Buddhists practice virtues in order to purify the faculties of these poisons.

I did find it an interesting statement on that priest's part though, and it got me to thinking. Because I think Buddhists and Christians probably also agree that no person is capable of being perfect, because we all have the potential to do bad things. Christians should also ideally agree I think- that no one person or group of people can truly be blamed for evil in the world, which Buddhists tend to emphasize in our view of human nature.

What do you think friends? Is this an area where Christians and Buddhists agree, at least to some degree?

I think the only few big things that differientates christianity and buddhism is one, its focus on original sin. Mahayana believe we have a clean nature (mind rather than soul). However, because of our actions past and present, we developed delusions and igorance that blinds us from this. If its inherited, it cannot be cleansed unless as christian believe its done by an outside party. In Mahayana its a "inside" party. Acting in virtues etc cleanses our delusions. Sin of the mind rather than the heart. That and in the suttas it says we can train our minds and liberate ourselves. Christianity doesnt believe that acts lead to self liberation.

Id say they both emphasis the need to end suffering. Both christianity and some Mahayana traditions have mystics say Tantric practices. Christianity sees changing our heart brings virtues and good actions. Buddhism says good actions not just beliefs bring out virtues and the source of them rather than results.

I guess if you generalize it it may sound the same. Nun Thubton Chodron was saying she attended a peace conference with various religions. While they diagreed on the basics, she said that monastics both catholic and buddhist seem to have similar experiences in faith, practice, and being examples to followers and lay practitioners alike. The Dali Lama has a universalist view in that he sees peace in all religions and they overlap.

They all agree that they have big core differences that cant be changed to compromise the other persons definiton of peace. As a result, similarities are highly generalized for the greater humanity but by no means the way to either be enlightened on one side and heaven in the other.

 

[shunyadragon]

A friend posted an interesting excerpt from a discussion between the Dalai Lama and a Catholic priest.

The Dalai Lama Reflects on Faith in Buddhism and Christianity | Wisdom Publications

The two religions seem to have a great deal in common.

My experience with pure land Buddhism (part of the Mahayana tradition) is that its easy for a Westerner such as myself from a Christian background to grasp the more metaphysical teachings.

Pure Land Buddhism - Wikipedia

Good post! I believe that the Baha'i Faith has more in common with both, sort of in the middle. The Source some call God(s) in the Baha'i Faith is unknowable and undefinable, and of course absolutely not known in the negative sense as in atheism, from the human perspective. Also the rejection of an anthropomorphic hands on God of some churches in Christianity, which is close to the Vedic/Buddhist and Taoist perspective, but describes more of a relationship with humanity through Revelation an awareness of the attributes of Creation such as love justice and compassion, which is more in common with Judaism, Islam and Christianity. The ultimate unknowable source Brahman of Vedic traditions is close to the view of God in the Baha'i Faith.

The Baha'i Faith promotes prayer and meditation in one form or another, which is common to both.

I believe the Baha'i Faith is more in common with the original teachings of Buddha and Jewish/Christian teachings of the rejection of all images and statues of the Divine or spiritual entities. Before becoming a Baha'i I considered myself a non-temple Buddhist for this reason, and removing the cultural and ritual nature of contemporary Buddhism.

The Baha'i Faith promotes more a mystical and metaphysical nature than a literal interpretation of ancient scripture, and Baha'i scripture in a more universal gnosticism, which encourages more common ground between the diverse religions in general.

 

[David T]

I remember when I was watching a documentary on the life of DT Suzuki, who was not only a Buddhist, but an ecumenist.

A Catholic priest who had been a friend of Suzuki's made the statement on camera that Christianity and Buddhism agree on there being something awry in human nature. Obviously, he means original sin, as Christians are concerned.

What he's referring to about Buddhism is our view that ignorance misleads humanity. In Mahayana, this is ignorance to the fact of everything having one essential nature- an ignorance produced by the skandhas and false house of ego. This ignorance in turn produces the defilements of the base nature- like greed, anger, and hatred.

Buddhists practice virtues in order to purify the faculties of these poisons.

I did find it an interesting statement on that priest's part though, and it got me to thinking. Because I think Buddhists and Christians probably also agree that no person is capable of being perfect, because we all have the potential to do bad things. Christians should also ideally agree I think- that no one person or group of people can truly be blamed for evil in the world, which Buddhists tend to emphasize in our view of human nature.

What do you think friends? Is this an area where Christians and Buddhists agree, at least to some degree?

They deeply align at the core Buddha and Jesus. They both culturally split out in articulation. But all metaphysics leads to and are rooted in the unconscious regardless. Christianity has been more dominated by an accedemic intellectual approach which makes it highly unstable. In the United States we can see that in evangelicalism/protestantism. Its more scholar theologian based. Theology is a fantastic tool though to see intellectualism development in Western culture and probably has application to Buddhism. . It's worthless in application to the text or uderstanding the text and really it hinders that process.

 

[Nakosis]

I remember when I was watching a documentary on the life of DT Suzuki, who was not only a Buddhist, but an ecumenist.

A Catholic priest who had been a friend of Suzuki's made the statement on camera that Christianity and Buddhism agree on there being something awry in human nature. Obviously, he means original sin, as Christians are concerned.

What he's referring to about Buddhism is our view that ignorance misleads humanity. In Mahayana, this is ignorance to the fact of everything having one essential nature- an ignorance produced by the skandhas and false house of ego. This ignorance in turn produces the defilements of the base nature- like greed, anger, and hatred.

Buddhists practice virtues in order to purify the faculties of these poisons.

I did find it an interesting statement on that priest's part though, and it got me to thinking. Because I think Buddhists and Christians probably also agree that no person is capable of being perfect, because we all have the potential to do bad things. Christians should also ideally agree I think- that no one person or group of people can truly be blamed for evil in the world, which Buddhists tend to emphasize in our view of human nature.

What do you think friends? Is this an area where Christians and Buddhists agree, at least to some degree?

Christianity started out wrong in its understanding about the nature of God and what necessary to achieve "enlightenment".

What was the Buddha wrong about?

Christian thinking has evolved away from its roots. Especially when it comes to universalists. I'm not saying this is wrong, just that it had to or has changed from its origins.

So maybe we see similarities not because of what Christianity was but because of what it has become.

Maybe they both talk about some state of human perfection but how they go about it is completely different.

Christianity is about the appeasement of a God. Buddhism is about letting go of attachment to impermanence.

Folks can try to make Christianity into something it's not out of a desire to hold on to their cultural beliefs but a some point, maybe it's just time to let go.

 

[Srivijaya]

A metaphor I've often seen to explain the spiritual life is that we're working with God to uncover that radiant image within us which has been covered up with soot and dirt, which is our sin.

The closest I've seen is here, though most Christians I've ever met have zero idea about any of this stuff.

Selected quotes from the desert fathers, some of which are truly profound:

 

[shunyadragon]

Christianity started out wrong in its understanding about the nature of God and what necessary to achieve "enlightenment".

This reflects a human view as to what the 'understanding about the nature of God and achieving either enlightenment nor salvation in reality is.

What was the Buddha wrong about?

Like all religions and religious beliefs being right or wrong is not likely the bottom line, Considering the fallible nature of human view it is likely that any one religion or religious belief is limited and in some way flawed as to what the universal reality is beyond individual human beliefs,

Christian thinking has evolved away from its roots. Especially when it comes to universalists. I'm not saying this is wrong, just that it had to or has changed from its origins.

Likely true, but considering the fallible nature of humans Buddhism in its many variations may have evolved away from its roots. In fact in many ways I 'believe, it has. I believe the prevalence of ritual, imagery and statues, and clinging to asceticism and traditions are variations of Buddhism that may be evolved away from its roots.

The attempts of universalists to remove the human shroud chained to the human images of the Divine may be closer to reality than the orthodox view of Christianity, but again all views are likely flawed.

So maybe we see similarities not because of what Christianity was but because of what it has become.

It is possible both may be a limited extent true,

Maybe they both talk about some state of human perfection but how they go about it is completely different.

They being human going about things being different is normal and flawed.

Christianity is about the appeasement of a God.

Possibly not the intent of Christ,

Buddhism is about letting go of attachment to impermanence.

Actually in the rejection of materialism in Christianity also may acknowledge the need to let go and the nature of impermanence of our existence.

Folks can try to make Christianity into something it's not out of a desire to hold on to their cultural beliefs but a some point, maybe it's just time to let go.

I believe it is the nature of fallible humans in history to make religions into something that they are not intended, The apparent cultural burden on both Buddhism and Christianity is a classic example. Also the vain efforts to define or undefine what the Source some call Gods and others nothing is likely human efforts to define what cannot be defined.

 

[shunyadragon]

No, Buddhism and Christianity are diametrically opposed.

While Christianity may perceive there is something awry or wrong with human nature, a mistake, or imperfection per se' Buddhism employs engaged practices designed to penetrate opaqueness caused by a strong ego.

A view of imperfection or flawed nature that needs some sort of "fixing" is a very good example of that opaqueness.

Basically Christianity attempts to "fix something" whereas Buddhism simply blows the dust off.......

Classic extreme view of one religion for another that is some way different from the fallible human perspective.