Buddah?
Posted on 10/30/2005 11:05:55 PM PST by Coleus
Only in the very loosest sense could one say that if you are a happy Christian, then you are also a Buddhist, and vice versa. It is possible to be both, since Christianity is a revealed religion, and Buddhism is, at its source, a philosophy, not a religion. (When someone asked Gautama Buddha to discuss his view of gods, cosmology, etc., he declined to do so, saying that it did not have anything to do with what he was trying to teach: his philosophy.) Many people now identify as both Christians and Buddhists. They worship Christ and follow the Middle Way as well. But to say that Christianity and Buddhism are the same thing is, in my humble layperson's opinion, rather misleading and not correct.
Here's an excellent little book: "The Lotus and the Cross: Jesus Talks with Buddha" by Ravi Zacharias
No person or thing can be compared to God, and to do so is pure sacrilege. (In Catholic tradition it was St. Michael the Archangel who challenged Lucifer when he compared himself to God, by saying: "Who is like unto God"?)
But these are pagan times we live in, and God and truth are merely what people happen to believe in today, not something that is eternal and unchangeable.
You're right of course. However, think of the books it'll sell!
Buddah?
Next thing you know they will be pushing St Germaine and all the so called Ascended Masters nonsense upon an unsuspecting public!
Buddah?
That is what my old SGT. ROCK comic books say. Pull the trigger on a Thompson and it goes BUDDA-BUDDA-BUDDA!
Nopeski.
Not a lot of family resemblance. I say ixnay on the brother thing.
On coming back and reading this article more closely, and realizing that many people who are not familiar with Buddhism will take it literally word for word, I wanted to correct at least one of the misinterpretations in this article.
One of the principal foundations of Buddhism is indeed the tenet that "Life is suffering" ... except that "suffering" in English and the original word that is being interpreted as "suffering" do not have the same meaning, and it really skews the meaning of the whole concept. I have forgotten the original word (not being a Sanskrit speaker myself) but the word being interpreted in English as "suffering" is a word that means, literally, a wagon wheel that is not working properly, that is a little bumpy and not giving a smooth ride. It should probably be interpreted more closely as "unsatisfactory." And I think that there are few people in this world who would disagree that our life in this world is often unsatisfactory. Whereas to say that life is *suffering* implies a very self-defeating and nihilistic point of view, to say the least.
Also, to say that Buddhists seek "extinction" is really an extreme interpretation. As a matter of fact, in the prayer of the Three Refuges, Buddhists ask to become a Buddha themselves, solely "in order to benefit all sentient beings." This implies continued existence in some form, as well as a selfless wish to be of use to all self-knowing beings.
I just wanted to comment on that a little. Buddhism has a bad rap as a nihilistic religion, and it is neither nihilistic nor, really, a religion.
Sorry, typo. Make that a purpose-driven Buddha.
Ruy - LOL...I remember that well.
Also, I think German schmisers went taka-taka-taka and I think another MG went rata-rata-rata. Maybe that was a Jap subgun...lol
Jesus is the Son of God and Savior of the world by His death on the cross (John 3:16). Buddha isn't.
Well, yes, in the most expansive sense. All human beings are one family by descent, including Jesus Christ as a human person, and the human philosopher called "the Buddha".
What I was thinking before I got to this paragraph. Buddhism is a fine religion as religions go, but it doesn't conatin all the Truth.
Well, that's why he is named Michael.
Or rather: mikha'el (abbreviation of mi khamokha eloheinu). Meaning "who is as G-d?"
Though for the record, I am fairly sure Michael is a seraph, not an archangel.
"1. Life is suffering."
Wrong. The Lord created life and saw that it was good.
2. The cause of suffering is desire.
Wrong. The cause of suffering is rejection of the Lord.
3. To be free from suffering, we must detach from desire.
Wrong. Only through Christ's one oblation on the Cross may we be saved.
4. The "eight-fold path" is the way to alleviate desire.
Wrong. We must take up our cross and follow Christ.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.