was jesus an arahant

[Dhammarakkhito]

i used to think jesus was a fully enlightened person, if not self-awakened, but after i watched this video i thought this must not be true https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCJUg52adII
but that leads me to another conclusion, perhaps, that jesus didn't exist. or that jesus did exist but his record has been obscured. bringing others back from the dead must be something figurative. i guess it doesn't matter

[SarathW]

Nice video.

[dylanj]

He would have to have been Buddhist to be an arahant. There are theories he was. I don't know if they are true. I don't feel there's enough information about him since he is so detached from a Buddhist context. But I know very little about Christianity.

[Javi]

He probably believed in the Jewish God which makes him an eternalist.

So probably not

[chownah]

Perhaps off topic: jesus was not a christian and buddha was not a buddhist.
chownah

[chownah]

He would have to have been Buddhist to be an arahant. There are theories he was. I don't know if they are true. I don't feel there's enough information about him since he is so detached from a Buddhist context. But I know very little about Christianity.

I think that maybe jesus was a pachinkobuddha and thus would qualify as an arahant.....I guess.....don't know for sure.....
chownah

[DNS]

Perhaps off topic: jesus was not a christian and buddha was not a buddhist.
chownah

Buddha did not call himself a "Buddhist" because the term "Buddhism" didn't exist yet. He followed the Dhamma-Vinaya which he rediscovered, in a line of past samma-sam-buddhas. "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet" as the saying goes, so it was Buddhism.

If Jesus existed, he was probably a Jewish-reformer which is why he was not accepted by the priestly class and masses. In the Samaritan story, Jesus says something like "salvation is for the Jews" to the Samaritan woman and he held a Passover ceremony in the Last Supper, which suggests still being a Jew.

[Coëmgenu]

Perhaps off topic: jesus was not a christian and buddha was not a buddhist.
chownah

Perhaps not written by chownah?

My bad attempt at a joke.

Jesus is often called the "Buddha of the West" by ecumenically minded Buddhists. I hear this generally a lot more from ecumenically minded Mahāyāna Buddhists, but I imagine the sentiment pervades in ecumenical areas of Theravāda as well. There are similarities between the teachings of Jesus and Buddhadharma (the focus on intention and intentionality being a huge parallel) and there are dissimilarities (often coming from the divergent Indic and [Hellenized?] Jewish cultural-religious backgrounds).

If we want to call Jesus a "Buddha" we then have to argue that either a) Christians do not have the original teachings of Jesus, or have them poorly preserved (Christian textual criticism is a very well-established field, this would not be a fruitful avenue of critique) or b) the Dharma can take on more provisional forms that conventionally thought.

[binocular]

If we want to call Jesus a "Buddha" we then have to argue that either a) Christians do not have the original teachings of Jesus, or have them poorly preserved (Christian textual criticism is a very well-established field, this would not be a fruitful avenue of critique) or b) the Dharma can take on more provisional forms that conventionally thought.

Was Jesus free of greed, anger, and delusion (about the Four Noble Truths)?

From what can be read in the Bible, he maintained self-view and was an eternalist. So, no, he doesn't qualify for a buddha.

b) the Dharma can take on more provisional forms that conventionally thought.

It's possible to be so open-minded that one's brains fall out ...

[Coëmgenu]

If we want to call Jesus a "Buddha" we then have to argue that either a) Christians do not have the original teachings of Jesus, or have them poorly preserved (Christian textual criticism is a very well-established field, this would not be a fruitful avenue of critique) or b) the Dharma can take on more provisional forms that conventionally thought.

Was Jesus free of greed, anger, and delusion (about the Four Noble Truths)?

How would I know? His "suffering" on the cross is very important in Christianity... so...

From what can be read in the Bible, he maintained self-view and was an eternalist. So, no, he doesn't qualify for a buddha.

Well, to be fair, "self-view" is a Indic concept that is completely foreign to non-Indic metaphysics. Non-Indic metaphysics may hold what Indic metaphysics "would call" an ātman, but the discourse of ātman/attā itself is utterly foreign to the West, IMO.

b) the Dharma can take on more provisional forms that conventionally thought.

It's possible to be so open-minded that one's brains fall out ...

Ummm.... who exactly is this "self" you are positing who "owns" brains that can fall out?

Nvm I'm just being a troll. Yeah, indeed.

[lostitude]

If we want to call Jesus a "Buddha" we then have to argue that either a) Christians do not have the original teachings of Jesus, or have them poorly preserved (Christian textual criticism is a very well-established field, this would not be a fruitful avenue of critique)

It reminds me of how Muslims say that Gautama was a Prophet sent by Allah who was misunderstood by the people he preached.

[form]

Absorbing sacred figures from another religion and ranked it at a lower hierarchy of one own belief system is a common strategy to downplay competitors.

[befriend]

I always had a hard time praying to Jesus as I never thought he was pure in conduct i.e. His getting angry at the money changers in the temple.

[mario92]

I read about his hidden life and his years in india, when he was in the cross he attained samadhi to deal with pain, then he appeared to be dead, then the romans took him to his tumb, and his master from india awaken him to go to india by using psychic powers. So he never died in the cross i think, there is a tumb in cachemire where people call the dead person there as isa the name given to him in that place, he had sons, and got married.

[Jetavan]

Perhaps off topic: jesus was not a christian and buddha was not a buddhist.
chownah

Buddha did not call himself a "Buddhist" because the term "Buddhism" didn't exist yet. He followed the Dhamma-Vinaya which he rediscovered, in a line of past samma-sam-buddhas.

Did the Buddha take refuge in any of his past-lives?