A Buddhist Ontology of Christian Claims Using the Pali Canon

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
Samvega
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 3:24 pm
Location: Tampa, FL USA
Contact:

A Buddhist Ontology of Christian Claims Using the Pali Canon

Post by Samvega »

A friend of mine, and a true scholar of the Pali Canon, has put together an essay of excepts from the Pali Canon which poses an explanation of the fundamental Christian claims from a Buddhist ontology. It's very interesting stuff. He claims that the ontology outlined in the Pali Canon can in fact explain:


[*]How a being such as Jesus can descend and think himself to be the son of God.
[*]Why Christians believe the things they do regarding the path to God (using parallels from ancient indian schools of thought) and why those beliefs are incorrect
[*]The attaining of union with God through selfless love

You can check it out here: http://christianity.nibbanam.com/

I'd like to know what everyone thinks.
User avatar
poto
Posts: 369
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 3:21 am

Re: A Buddhist Ontology of Christian Claims Using the Pali Canon

Post by poto »

Interesting read, and might be of some use the next time I get into a debate with Christians. Although, there were a few things that caught my eye.

For this part of the Tevijja Sutta, I think compassion is being mistranslated as pity.
78. 'And he lets his mind pervade one quarter of the world with thoughts of pity [29], ... sympathy [30], equanimity [31], and so the second, and so the third, and so the fourth. And thus the whole wide world, above, below, around, and everywhere, does he continue to pervade with heart of pity. . . . sympathy, . . . equanimity, far-reaching, grown great, and beyond measure.

79. 'Just, Vasettha, as a mighty trumpeter makes himself heard -- and that without difficulty -- in all the four directions ; even so of all things that have shape or life, there is not one that he passes by or leaves aside, but regards them all with mind set free, and deep-felt pity, ... sympathy, ... equanimity.
After a brief search I found another translation, which looks better to me:
76. He then pervades the first direction with a heart filled with loving-kindness, likewise the second, likewise the third, likewise the fourth; so above, below and all around; he pervades the entire world everywhere and equally with a heart filled with loving-kindness, abundant, expansive, limitless, free from enmity and ill will.

Just as a mighty trumpeter makes himself heard without difficulty in all four directions; even so, of all things that have shape or life, there is not one that he passes by or leaves aside, but regards them all with a heart set free though deep-felt loving-kindness.

77. He then pervades the first direction with a heart filled with compassion, likewise the second, likewise the third, likewise the fourth; so above, below and all around; he pervades the entire world everywhere and equally with a heart filled with compassion, abundant, expansive, limitless, free from enmity and ill will.

Just as a mighty trumpeter makes himself heard without difficulty in all four directions; even so, of all things that have shape or life, there is not one that he passes by or leaves aside, but regards them all with a heart set free though deep-felt compassion.

78. He then pervades the first direction with a heart filled with empathetic joy, likewise the second, likewise the third, likewise the fourth; so above, below and all around; he pervades the entire world everywhere and equally with a heart filled with empathetic joy, abundant, expansive, limitless, free from enmity and ill will.

Just as a mighty trumpeter makes himself heard without difficulty in all four directions; even so, of all things that have shape or life, there is not one that he passes by or leaves aside, but regards them all with a heart set free though deep-felt empathetic joy.

79. He then pervades the first direction with a heart filled with equanimity, likewise the second, likewise the third, likewise the fourth; so above, below and all around; he pervades the entire world everywhere and equally with a heart filled with equanimity, abundant, expansive, limitless, free from enmity and ill will.

Just as a mighty trumpeter makes himself heard without difficulty in all four directions; even so, of all things that have shape or life, there is not one that he passes by or leaves aside, but regards them all with a heart set free though deep-felt equanimity.

source: http://www.leighb.com/dn13_bv.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also, this:
such a condition of things can in no wise be!
Would probably read better as, "such a condition of things can in no way be wise!" or "such a condition of things is not wise!"
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." -- C. S. Lewis
User avatar
Samvega
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 3:24 pm
Location: Tampa, FL USA
Contact:

Re: A Buddhist Ontology of Christian Claims Using the Pali Canon

Post by Samvega »

Yes, my friend is not a native English speaker, and translates the suttas himself, so there are mistakes sometimes.

I love his take on Christianity though, and that's why I shared it. He's know to remark to his Christian friends that he DOES believe in God, and the God himself (Brahma) is a Buddhist. Cracks me up.
User avatar
Kare
Posts: 767
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2009 10:58 am
Location: Norway
Contact:

Re: A Buddhist Ontology of Christian Claims Using the Pali Canon

Post by Kare »

Samvega wrote:A friend of mine, and a true scholar of the Pali Canon, has put together an essay of excepts from the Pali Canon which poses an explanation of the fundamental Christian claims from a Buddhist ontology. It's very interesting stuff. He claims that the ontology outlined in the Pali Canon can in fact explain:


[*]How a being such as Jesus can descend and think himself to be the son of God.
[*]Why Christians believe the things they do regarding the path to God (using parallels from ancient indian schools of thought) and why those beliefs are incorrect
[*]The attaining of union with God through selfless love

You can check it out here: http://christianity.nibbanam.com/

I'd like to know what everyone thinks.
Please give your friends my best wishes for the new year, and my recommendation of two books that he may benefit from reading:

Richard Gombrich, "What the Buddha Thought", http://www.amazon.com/Buddha-Thought-BU ... 172&sr=8-1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Noa Ronkin, "Early Buddhist Metaphysics", http://www.amazon.com/Early-Buddhist-Me ... 230&sr=1-1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Mettāya,
Kåre
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: A Buddhist Ontology of Christian Claims Using the Pali Canon

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
Samvega wrote:He's know to remark to his Christian friends that he DOES believe in God, and the God himself (Brahma) is a Buddhist. Cracks me up.
South Park also claims that God is a Buddhist.

:D

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: A Buddhist Ontology of Christian Claims Using the Pali Canon

Post by Kim OHara »

More seriously, I see gaps, discrepancies or mistranslations between 'God' as understood by Christians and 'God' as expounded by the Buddha. The fact that people use the same word doesn't mean they are talking about the same thing.
Similarly, there are gaps between 'attaining ... union with God', 'going to Heaven' as understood by Christians, and 'attaining Nibbana'.

IMO, Buddhism and Christianity match best where they talk about what it is to be a good person. Beyond that, the differences are real, significant and intractable.

:namaste:
Kim
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: A Buddhist Ontology of Christian Claims Using the Pali Canon

Post by mikenz66 »

Thanks Samvega,

A nice collection, that expands on this, for example:
To the extent that a religion proposes sound ethical principles and can promote to some degree the development of wholesome qualities such as love, generosity, detachment and compassion, it will merit in this respect the approbation of Buddhists. These principles advocated by outside religious systems will also conduce to rebirth in the realms of bliss — the heavens and the divine abodes. Buddhism by no means claims to have unique access to these realms, but holds that the paths that lead to them have been articulated, with varying degrees of clarity, in many of the great spiritual traditions of humanity. While the Buddhist will disagree with the belief structures of other religions to the extent that they deviate from the Buddha's Dhamma, he will respect them to the extent that they enjoin virtues and standards of conduct that promote spiritual development and the harmonious integration of human beings with each other and with the world.

Tolerance and Diversity
Bhikkhu Bodhi
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... ay_24.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Metta
Mike
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: A Buddhist Ontology of Christian Claims Using the Pali Canon

Post by tiltbillings »

Kim O'Hara wrote:More seriously, I see gaps, discrepancies or mistranslations between 'God' as understood by Christians and 'God' as expounded by the Buddha. The fact that people use the same word doesn't mean they are talking about the same thing.
That Worshipful Brahma, the Great God, the Omnipotent, the Omniscient, the Organizer, the Protection, the Creator, the Most Perfect Ruler, the Designer and Orderer, the Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be, He by Whom we were created, He is permanent, Constant, Eternal, Unchanging, and He will remain so for ever and ever." Digha Nikaya 24
Basically, it is the idea of an omniscient, permanent, independent, unique cause of the cosmos that is addressed by the Buddha.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
Jechbi
Posts: 1268
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:38 am
Contact:

Re: A Buddhist Ontology of Christian Claims Using the Pali Canon

Post by Jechbi »

Hi Kim,
Kim O'Hara wrote:The fact that people use the same word doesn't mean they are talking about the same thing.
Excellent point.

I think the "Buddha on Christianity" article referenced in the OP is entertaining, but it doesn't reach across the aisle in a manner that speaks to the Christian faithful, for exactly the reasons you state, Kim. For the superficial, stereotypical Christian, maybe this would be a good poke in the eye, but the exposition fails to address the core Christian orientation, which is the relationship between oneself and what Christians label as God.

All of the cosmology about a theoretical "God" person who is omniscient, omnipresent, benevolent, the first cause, etc., is fodder for a classroom philosophical debate, maybe, but it doesn't have much to do with the relational experience that appears to me to underpin the Christian approach to spirituality. This relationship involves an orientation that steps off from a completely different frame of reference from Theravada Buddhism: grace. These are different traditions, stemming from different cultures, using different labels, applying different concepts.

I am not going to defend the Christian approach to spirituality, but I will say that there's more to it than usually gets acknowledged on non-Christian discussion boards. It's easy to oversimplify what we don't understand.

I think most Christians reading the "Buddha on Christianity" article would dismiss it as completely missing the point.
Rain soddens what is kept wrapped up,
But never soddens what is open;
Uncover, then, what is concealed,
Lest it be soddened by the rain.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: A Buddhist Ontology of Christian Claims Using the Pali Canon

Post by tiltbillings »

Jechbi wrote:
I think most Christians reading the "Buddha on Christianity" article would dismiss it as completely missing the point.
There is more than enough within the Buddha's teachings that can reasonably be used, drawing out the implications and principles from the suttas (and many of those quoted above), that can be used effectively to address and adequately critrique the Christian concept of a god, not just a bearded guy in the sky, but a god that is an omniscient, permanent, independent, unique cause of the cosmos that intervenes in history, that is supposedly love, beyond measure, etc..
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
Jechbi
Posts: 1268
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:38 am
Contact:

Re: A Buddhist Ontology of Christian Claims Using the Pali Canon

Post by Jechbi »

tiltbillings wrote:There is more than enough within the Buddha's teachings ... that can be used effectively to address and adequately critrique the Christian concept of a god, not just a bearded guy in the sky, but a god that is an omniscient, permanent, independent, unique cause of the cosmos that intervenes in history, that is supposedly love, beyond measure, etc..
Yes, I have no doubt that you're correct. The philosophical God concept is easy to criticize (the question of evil, etc.). But these philosophical debates don't touch on the relational experience that seems to underpin Christian spirituality. All that philosophical stuff doesn't seem to make a lick of difference to many Christians. It's not the important part.
Rain soddens what is kept wrapped up,
But never soddens what is open;
Uncover, then, what is concealed,
Lest it be soddened by the rain.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: A Buddhist Ontology of Christian Claims Using the Pali Canon

Post by tiltbillings »

Jechbi wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:There is more than enough within the Buddha's teachings ... that can be used effectively to address and adequately critrique the Christian concept of a god, not just a bearded guy in the sky, but a god that is an omniscient, permanent, independent, unique cause of the cosmos that intervenes in history, that is supposedly love, beyond measure, etc..
Yes, I have no doubt that you're correct. The philosophical God concept is easy to criticize (the question of evil, etc.). But these philosophical debates don't touch on the relational experience that seems to underpin Christian spirituality. All that philosophical stuff doesn't seem to make a lick of difference to many Christians. It's not the important part.
And with what are these Christians having a relationship?

As for addressing Christians, it depends upon what one is trying to do and to whom one is talking. If one is trying to answer a Christian polemical/apologetic critique of Buddhism for having no god, then clearly the "philosophical god concept " is be appropriate. There is no point in going out of one's way to try to convince anyone that their cherished believe is a bit of a problem, but it may be important to know how to address the issue of a supposed omniscient, permanent, independent, unique cause of the cosmos if the situation requires it. Also, it is not a bad thing to get a handle on it for dealing with ideas of god that many of us have had to deal with in our Xtian lives from early childhood onwards before finding the Dhamma, an unhealthy relational experience with an all-knowing loving god who demands our love and fear, that lingers and causes guilt and consternation and false sense of security among other things.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
Jechbi
Posts: 1268
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:38 am
Contact:

Re: A Buddhist Ontology of Christian Claims Using the Pali Canon

Post by Jechbi »

tiltbillings wrote:And with what are these Christians having a relationship?
I'm not going to be able to provide you with an answer.
tiltbillings wrote:As for addressing Christians, it depends upon what one is trying to do and to whom one is talking. If one is trying to answer a Christian polemical/apologetic critique of Buddhism for having no god, then clearly the "philosophical god concept " is be appropriate. There is no point in going out of one's way to try to convince anyone that their cherished believe is a bit of a problem, but it may be important to know how to address the issue of a supposed omniscient, permanent, independent, unique cause of the cosmos if the situation requires it. Also, it is not a bad thing to get a handle on it for dealing with ideas of god that many of us have had to deal with in our Xtian lives from early childhood onwards before finding the Dhamma, an unhealthy relational experience with an all-knowing loving god who demands our love and fear, that lingers and causes guilt and consternation and false sense of security among other things.
Well, sure, it can have its uses. There are lots of different possible scenarios out there.
Rain soddens what is kept wrapped up,
But never soddens what is open;
Uncover, then, what is concealed,
Lest it be soddened by the rain.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: A Buddhist Ontology of Christian Claims Using the Pali Canon

Post by tiltbillings »

Jechbi wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:And with what are these Christians having a relationship?
I'm not going to be able to provide you with an answer.
"The assumption that a God is the cause (of the world, etc.) is based on the false belief in the eternal self (atman); but that belief has to be abandoned, if one has clearly understood that everything is impermanent and subject to suffering." Abhidharmakosha 5, 8 vol IV, p 1
We want - in the most elemental way - to be comforted by our protective parent.
Jechbi wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:As for addressing Christians, it depends upon what one is trying to do and to whom one is talking. If one is trying to answer a Christian polemical/apologetic critique of Buddhism for having no god, then clearly the "philosophical god concept " is be appropriate. There is no point in going out of one's way to try to convince anyone that their cherished believe is a bit of a problem, but it may be important to know how to address the issue of a supposed omniscient, permanent, independent, unique cause of the cosmos if the situation requires it. Also, it is not a bad thing to get a handle on it for dealing with ideas of god that many of us have had to deal with in our Xtian lives from early childhood onwards before finding the Dhamma, an unhealthy relational experience with an all-knowing loving god who demands our love and fear, that lingers and causes guilt and consternation and false sense of security among other things.
Well, sure, it can have its uses. There are lots of different possible scenarios out there.
Also, letting go of a god is letting go of something that blinds us to paticcasamuppada.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
Jechbi
Posts: 1268
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:38 am
Contact:

Re: A Buddhist Ontology of Christian Claims Using the Pali Canon

Post by Jechbi »

Thanks for your thoughts, Tilt. I'm not going to disagree with you.

My post was in resonse to this, from the OP:
Samvega wrote:I'd like to know what everyone thinks.
I understand that you disagree with my perspective, and I respect your point of view.
Rain soddens what is kept wrapped up,
But never soddens what is open;
Uncover, then, what is concealed,
Lest it be soddened by the rain.
Post Reply