Buddhism saves. Compatible with Christianity. Short read.

Before I found out the Catholic Church gives its priests the power to withhold the help of the Church without telling you and for no reason better than their own discretion, I may have trusted them a bit much.

I went to a Buddhist event a little more than a year ago and bought a few books on the topic.

Mindfulness, Metta, Tonglen, love with equanimity, and Buddhist forgiveness quickly started regaining the soul I had lost.

Now I meditate (not as much as I could-bad habits are hard to overcome so don't be too quick to judge based on one example) and read the Bible in order to not count on a human intercessor.


Buddhism did not exist outside of monasteries until the 18th Century. Maybe some of the practices I mentioned are traditionally oriented around helping others for that reason. Ordinary people can probably stick to using them for their own benefit.

While it may be selfishness talking, it also seems almost immoral and out-of-place to work on other people without their knowledge or consent. Unless of course there is a grave reason, such as if they had been messing with you. Monks were probably asked and paid to work on other people. Furthermore, monks had renounced their part in society so there was less chance they could pray for a person's immoral practices so they could take that person's job.

originally posted by: Solvedit
Before I found out the Catholic Church gives its priests the power to withhold the help of the Church without telling you and for no reason better than their own discretion,...

You'll have to explain yourself on that one. I'm not seeing anything in the Catholic church that says priests can 'withhold the help of the Church without telling you and for no reason better than their own discretion'. Give examples of what help they can withhold 'without telling' and how they can do this own their own without the Church knowing either etc etc.

Buddhism saves.

No it doesn't.

Buddhism doesn't believe in a God that you can sin against and be separated from (lost).

Buddhism believes in devas, which are 'gods', with a small 'g' .. not a creator God with a capital 'G'. There is no answering to them and not sinning against them that people do.

Therefore, Buddhism doesn't have anything to 'save' you from.

a reply to: Solvedit

Buddhism does not save. Buddhist philosophy denies there is even no "self".

Takes a lifetime to understand all you input is for naught unless in journey-within-ones-self...only to discover....there is no....and shouldn't be...any individual "self".

Metaphorically, a shattered glass marble...is still a marble... The marble shattered is still.."self"... and one needs to shed that suit and become the eternal "ALL"...which we already are.

Zen Buddhist monk I know notes it takes a lifetime...to learn to shed....that lifetime.

originally posted by: mysterioustranger
a reply to: Solvedit

Metaphorically, a shattered glass marble...is still a marble... The marble shattered is still.."self"... and one needs to shed that suit and become the eternal "ALL"...which we already are.

Diving into arcana to find stumbling blocks is one way to do things. Trying it is another.

For example, do mindfulness and you will start to see the pieces of the marble.

originally posted by: mysterioustranger

Zen Buddhist monk I know notes it takes a lifetime...to learn to shed....that lifetime.

Are you sure you're grasping the point? Plus, there is more to Buddhism than monastic practices.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

Buddhism saves.

No it doesn't.

Buddhism doesn't believe in a God that you can sin against and be separated from (lost).

Buddhism believes in devas, which are 'gods', with a small 'g' .. not a creator God with a capital 'G'. There is no answering to them and not sinning against them that people do.

Therefore, Buddhism doesn't have anything to 'save' you from.

So read the Bible, pray, do penance, make restitution, and treat people morally.

originally posted by: Solvedit
So read the Bible, pray, do penance, make restitution, and treat people morally.

You didn't address my post so I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.

Buddhism doesn't believe in a creator God to sin against, therefore they do not believe in being 'saved'.

Well it could quite literally save a life ...

If it brings peace of mind to someone.

Someone who might consider death.



Does that fit the bill?


Edit:

Furthermore, if through knowledge of life and self and not-self, their understanding is increased to include what you call God or Father as Self, would they not then be saved from perpetual damnation?

I ask because I don't quite follow Catholicism though I was raised in it.

a reply to: Solvedit

I think if we are going to get into it Jesus and Buddha were a lot like each-other, except for 3 things. Soul, afterlife (beyond Samsara), and loving world.

But basically everything else is similar, moral-wise and you do all the good things BECAUSE the world is cruel and filled with artificial mental contracts that lead to attachment and suffering.

Buddhism saves on from a looping self-destructive mind, albeit on an inverted vector to Christianity.

They even died the most mythological loving deaths.

Common knowledge Jesus socially self-immolated decrying a corrupt Roman system and literally martyred himself to stand up against Rome. And then died for sedition charges he know was going to happen.

Buddha socially self-immolated against an aristocratic class and went and sat under a tree. Self immolation by another name. He then died from food poisoning because he felt it disrespectful to turn down their offering, despite knowing it would kill him.

I'm not sure how much of that narrative on Buddha is true, and could be a christianization of Buddha.

But it always struck me as a 2000 year old "you take the East, I take the west type thing."

ETA: Another really close proxy to Jesus is Lao Tzu, who has amazing wisdom and compassion to share as well.

originally posted by: BrotherKinsMan
Well it could quite literally save a life ...

If it brings peace of mind to someone.

Someone who might consider death.



Does that fit the bill?

Try it and you'll see, or don't try it, as you prefer.

a reply to: Solvedit

That...my friend...is HOW I learned to observe things. Pieces of the whole...are still..the whole.

Coconut Grove, Miami '73.

a reply to: FlyersFan

Buddhism doesn't believe in a God

God is a label that can never be defined (no man shall see my face). So you are only correct in stating Buddhism doesn't attempt to define in the undefinable.

Christianity warns if your hand reaches for the lolly jar. God will burn your hand in fire forever and forever.
Buddhism teaches that embedded in all lollies is the seed of all suffering.

One method uses fear and guilt, the other uses logic, to overcome the insatiable egotistical mind. Christianity may be more effective with some mindsets, Buddhism others.

I grew up as a christen just like many sand people grow up as a Muslim. A product of the society you are raised in mostly.

I have lived in a Buddhist country for over 20 years and out of the three Buddhist seem to be more of live and let live safe society. I like the Buddhist idea of do unto others as you would have then do unto you; many parallels in the belief system.

True Buddhist do not believe in a creator God yet they pray to Buddha all the time especially come lottery time ! Yep if you are mean and cruel then your next life will be one of suffering and cruelty focused upon you. No you do not come back as a Cockroach although throughout history there have probably been many who deserved that fate.

Many religions control by fear and damnation ... I have known people who lived their whole lives thinking the rapture or the return of Jesus was coming anytime now or for sure in their lifetime. Since I am very old all those folks are buried and worm food for many years. If religion brings you peace and happiness then good for you...if you live your life in fear and dread I would suggest finding a new way to make yourself miserable..

Some religions are a destructive force which in the past and even today have been responsible for untold thousands of deaths and wars, all in the name of some silent unseen sky fairy which had mankind write what the god supposedly wanted the people to believe. Key words being "man writes what is to be believed" and then the man claims his hand was guided by some supreme god. Thousands of years of stifled growth and advancement due to some written words supposedly by a god who promises paradise after you are dead yet written by men who seek power or live in a controlled fantasy of their own creation..

Mess up and no virgins for you (a sigh of relief from the corner with the virgins) or spend all eternity in hell fire because he/she/it/ loves you but you messed up ! The religious factions preach and proclaim tolerance while in truth anyone who does not fall within their sects hierarchy are condemned to a fate worse than death.

Lets sacrifice some people to the God of the Aztec; some say they sacrificed 80,000 in one month, or hey burn someone at the stake because they pissed off the Catholic enforcers or someone declared them a witch... Behead or stone her because she was with a man not of her kin. etc etc etc

A society will always invent ways of maintaining order and preventing disruption of their accepted norm; an elite few seem to always want total control of the information the masses receive. Same as yesteryear and same as today.

The fog of every mystery is only blown away by knowledge...If knowledge is lacking then a belief in a godly higher power will suffice for those in fear of the unknown..

a reply to: Solvedit

All religions are compatible, yet not so.

I've never been a fan of organized religion in general....

Until I underwent a transformation.

One could say I fell in face first...

I'm still not a fan of most religions and their leaders.

The practitioners however, I see more in common with.

I share much with the truth seekers.

However, I have seen more than my share, and I no longer seek to know.

I seek to share.

Call me what you will, I don't care.

Your relationship to Source, whatever you call it, should be a personal one.

You don't need a Pope, a priest, an Imam, a whatever to speak for you...

Just seek the Truth.

I advise you do so with an aligned Heart Mind Spirit.

It would be good for you.

Maybe then you'll find answers most find so elusive.

Give it a try maybe?

At some point, all religions meet, as they shed much of their heaviness.

a reply to: Solvedit

Buddhism did not exist outside of monasteries until the 18th Century.

That is not correct. The Buddha himself, under pressure from his followers, created a separate set of rules for lay Buddhists; you’ll find them in the Anguttara Nikaya. It is true that the text exists in different versions; the Buddha himself lived before writing was introduced to India, so his teachings weren’t written down until the second or the first century BC. There may have been earlier writings in Greek following the Alexandrian conquest of the Punjab, but these were lost before Jesus was born.

As with the Bible and other sacred texts, people added to, subtracted from and often substantially altered the Buddha’s teachings and other Buddhist narratives when writing them down or copying them. All the same, the Anguttara Nikaya has existed in written form for over two thousand years.

* * *

Buddhism as practised in Asia comes in two varieties. I don’t mean the sectarian divisions between Mahayana and Theravada but something older and much simpler: a lay version and a monastic version. The lay version is just a set of moral precepts, to which various magical or superstitious rituals were later added, making it exactly like any other popular religion. The monastic version has mystical and (arguably) philosophical components, but is chiefly a set of practices that, if followed daily, is supposed to lead to the extinction of desire and ultimately to the cessation of existence itself. Death, final and total, is the goal of every Buddhist monk. ‘Enlightenment’ is just a service stop along that road.

Needless to say, the practices don’t work. Rather than renouncing the world, monastic communities in Buddhist-majority countries long ago metastasized into rich, powerful, parasitic institutions heavily involved in society, business and politics. And disturbingly, Buddhism is historically associated with authoritarian, highly repressive regimes: see, for example, Burma, Cambodia, Laos, Sri Lanka, Tibet before the Chinese takeover, Vietnam... even Bhutan with its benevolent monarchy.

* * *

What is correct to say is that lay Buddhism is a religion for the rich, for people who can afford to detach themselves from the karma-producing dirty work of earning a living and raising their families, who have plenty of spare time to meditate and lots of money to ‘give dana’ (do charity) with. It has always been most popular as a court religion. Even today, it enjoys state support in most of those countries I mentioned earlier. In Burma, Thailand and Sri Lanka it forms an integral part of state itself. If not for the support it received from royalty (in particular King Bimbisara of Magadha during Gautama’s own lifetime and the Emperor Asoka in the third century BC), Buddhism would not exist today. Its later growth and spread through Asia were likewise made possible entirely by royal sponsorship.

All Buddhism offers the poor is the distressing news that they brought their miseries down on themselves in a previous life, and that the only way to start digging themselves out of the hole they’re in is to make themselves even more miserable by leaving their homes and families and becoming beggars on the streets — or, in practice, joining a wealthy monastery and living a life of luxury for the rest of their days, accumulating more and more karma in the process and chaining themselves ever more firmly to the Wheel of Life.

I found out the Catholic Church gives its priests the power to withhold the help of the Church without telling you and for no reason better than their own discretion

Well, obviously. A priest can’t phone up the Pope every time he is called upon to administer Extreme Unction. Priests have the right, short of excommunication, to withhold sacraments; this was a stratagem used in many parts of the world during the nineteenth century to stop Catholic children being educated at schools run by Protestant missionaries. Catholic parents were threatened by the Church with eternal damnation simply for educating their children. All religion thrives on ignorance.

Now I meditate (not as much as I could

It’s less harmful than smoking weed, but it’s just another way of getting high all the same. Enjoy!

a reply to: FlyersFan

You didn't address my post so I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.

He addressed it perfectly, but you didn’t understand because you don’t know anything about Buddhism. Making restitution, doing penance for your sins, following the Golden Rule and meditation through reading or hearing the scriptures are all important aspects of the lay Buddhist rule. Solvedit’s advice to you was to follow the ‘lay rule’ of your own faith, because this will help reduce your karma and allow you to be born into better circumstances in your next incarnation. That is all any layperson can hope for in Buddhism; enlightenment and nirvana can only be attained by following the monastic rule.

Gautama, Sakyamuni, was hospitable to followers of all faiths, nor did he ever advise anyone to abandon their religion. Perhaps you are unaware that other religions are not like Christianity and Islam; they don’t operate on the my-way-or-the-highway principle.

Buddhism doesn't believe in a creator God to sin against, therefore they do not believe in being 'saved'.

So confident in your ignorance.

Sakyamuni did not disbelieve in the gods. Far from it; he taught that the gods, too, are subject to karma, and that long as a god may live, he or she too, will eventually pass on and be reborn, or else attain nirvana and cease to exist.

The Buddha lived and died in the religion of his people, and as far as I know he never questioned the existence of Brahma, the Divine Creator. He was, however, strongly opposed to the idea of Brahman, the imperishable essence of divinity, which is unchanging. He refuted imperishability; he taught that impermanence is universal; as he put it, ‘everything is on fire.’

And Buddhism is, in fact, all about attaining salvation. Buddhism is the do-it-yourself method.

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: FlyersFan

You didn't address my post so I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.

He addressed it perfectly, but you didn’t understand because you don’t know anything about Buddhism.

That too, but my point was you don't have to not concern yourself with being a good person just because you take advantage of meditative techniques.

a reply to: Solvedit

I should have thought that went without saying. By the way, what Buddhist tradition are you most familiar with? You used a Pali word, metta, and a Tibetan word, tonglen. The latter suggests a Mahayana orientation, but a Mahayana disciple would more probably say maitri instead of metta. What's your flavour?