Post Reply
Page 3 of 3  •  Prev 1 2 3
Switch to Forum Live View An ACTUAL comparative religion thread between Christianity and Buddhism on the Subject of DEATH
3 years ago  ::  Mar 29, 2012 - 10:17AM #21
Aka_me
Posts: 12,638

Mar 20, 2012 -- 2:35AM, Ferretling wrote:

In the elephant story, even according to your own link, the Buddha wasn't referring to view on the afterlife, but those who are ignorant quarrelling about their view and the rightness of it without the capacity to see or understand other points of view.



wasn't intending to apply the elephant story ONLY to the afterlife, but in general to those claiming KNOWING


KNOWING Buddhism is X... and KNOWING Christianity is Y


KNOWING a tusk is X... and KNOWING a tail is Y

the US exports death and corruption globally on a scale undrempt by Iranian authorities. war for corporate profits funded by taxpayers and soldiers' lives plus unofficial war funded by drugs to minorities. wave that flag of corruption in blissful ignorance of the orphans it creates assisting the rich to get richer. it's all good though cause we don't need to do ANYTHING to change... mother nature will create the necessary change.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 29, 2012 - 12:34PM #22
Bob_the_Lunatic
Posts: 3,458

Mar 29, 2012 -- 2:20AM, Aka_me wrote:


Mar 15, 2012 -- 5:15AM, Bob_the_Lunatic wrote:

But it is clear that a "discussion" requires both parties listening.  And it is also clear that claiming everything in 2 faiths is essentially the same with no basis for any arguments made is not only fallacious, but also a waste of time as nobody learns anything, and it is rather boring since essentially discussions with an agenda to NOT discuss push people apart due to frustration with the lack of basic rules and respect.   It's about time we had a REAL comparative religion discussion.



when has anyone claimed EVERYTHING is essentially the same?


The context here is clear and it regards the 2 faiths in the title, and the answer to the question in that context is also obvious:  Dio.  You have also done this with a much more childish and stolen analogy of the elephant.


Mar 15, 2012 -- 5:15AM, Bob_the_Lunatic wrote:

Listen to others, which requires respect for them and some degree of humility (that everyone can teach us something)  and respond fairly to their points-revealing a desire to discuss not convert.



listening involves not HEARING imaginary words, like "everything", which wasn't spoken.


The elephant analogy says exactly that, quibbling over semantics doesn't change an argument.


Mar 15, 2012 -- 5:15AM, Bob_the_Lunatic wrote:

While this humility, or proper motive (discussion/learning not proselytizing) is the main element lacking in many discussions I've seen lately



proper motive?


name misspelling and x-rated references count as proper motive?


This is not the Bahai forum, bahai has nothing to do with Buddhism and teaches the opposite, please stick to the point of this thread:  How Buddhism and Christianity are opposites, specifically on the issue of death-the OP and title are pretty clear, there is no way to interpret this as relevant to bahai, but you made my point here for me by bringing up an irrelevant copycat faith.


Mar 15, 2012 -- 5:15AM, Bob_the_Lunatic wrote:

I am wondering why christians seem to fear death so much and find it ironic considering their beliefs, I also find buddhists do not seem to fear death, yet I see logically reasons they should be more concerned about it than christians; both groups appear to do the opposite of what you'd expect.  I speculate that the answer  is the difference between the two in perception of where control over life (and death) lies:  In the human being, or in a god.



talk of death is theoretical until one fully believes they are about to die. there is no way of guessing percentages of either Buddhists or Christians because no scientific study has been performed, only people pulling numbers out of their.


Mar 15, 2012 -- 5:15AM, Bob_the_Lunatic wrote:

also talk about death beliefs and the different attitude toward dead bodies (and how christians use a substantially higher amount of real estate per capita for their dead and may have to  move them to make space for the living as we face overpopulation).   Buddhists (at least some of us) see the dead body as an empty vessel, not to be held onto (talk about attachment) to wait for a pickup and a second usage later.

And lastly-I speculate on the effects that objects of worship, from Buddhist Mandalas, to the most common christian depiction of their god:  A very gorey and certainly dead object of worship and speculate on their respective affects on respective believers  (and while christians believe jesus is alive, they also believe he died on the cross and thus depict him as dead) ie they actually have DEATH as their focal point, spiritually.  They may not see it this way-but as a Buddhist, the object of worship has a profound impact on the believers



it's extremely complex.


1. Christ's separating from the physical body was a liberating process


would be equivalent to trying to argue the following...


since my desk is wood, and Buddhist gohonzon is made of wood, it would be perfectly acceptable to worship my desk as a gohonzon.



no. a completely invalid statement... just as believing Christians are focused on death is an invalid statement.


2. the cross represents redemption.


3. it's also central to salvation.


4. and very much a part of atonement.


You have not addressed the argument here:  First, that a child does not look at it this way, but again only sees the death.  2nd, these things you describe are still negative:  1/  Shows the human being is FLAWED, that's not good.   2/  Shows the human being cannot save himself, again, a negative thing.   3/  That the human needs to rely on an other worldy creature to fix themself in this life (same as #2).


to a Christian, the word death should cease to exist and be replaced by Next Life.


because there is no such thing as dieing, there is only "awakening to a greater truth".


which sounds vaguely familiar, ring any bells?


Buddhist salvation... sound familiar?



First, it is indeed death-you have only agreed with my point by redefining "death" as "everlasting life" (ie the christian view), but again-this only reveals my point further that they cannot have salvation or happiness in THIS LIFE.  That is the argument, and again you've only reinforced it:  Christianity offers nothing in THIS LIFE, it talks only of what will happen after death, thus a death faith, clearly we agree on this point less your semantics.


And Buddhist salvation is in this moment, so no comparison.  Again, one focuses on life, one on death.  The argument here remains valid until you show christianity is a teaching for THIS WORLD, yet it is not, as it offers salvation AFTER DEATH which means it does indeed focus on death.  Babbling about what the cross means does not attack my argument, but you did solidify my claim that the cross offers negative concepts as I argued to the human psyche.


Buddhist philosophies vary on the subject of the Afterlife, but they tend to emphasize an individual's meditation and appeal to the Buddha, often through an intermediary monk or priest/teacher who is seen as a "saviour" or "helper" in their attaining of nirvana. In Nirvana is the ultimate realization that 'Afterlife' is not important, and because of this all fear ends.



chasing nirvana... as if it's some kind of eldorado, means it most certainly IS important enough to "work" for.


otherwise people would just meditate and get the relaxing focusing benefits and dispose with karma, intent, noble truths, 8 fold paths, etc.


nirvana is the carat equal to heaven, and rebirth is the stick equal to hell.





All quite wrong, and an equivocation fallacy.  First, only the individual can help themself.  Having a teacher is helpful, but they are not an intermediary between the person and a god  (Buddhism has no such god as you continue to forget).  Nor are they an intermediary between the person and the ultimate reality.  They are not necessary, jesus is necessary. 


And ultimately the only rule in christianity IS to have faith in jesus, once you do that, you're done-that's all there is to it.  In Buddhism, the struggle for awakening is never over, and in death the struggle is non-existent, for death is non-existence.  Christianity teaches that upon death you are rewarded with heaven.  Buddhism teaches that heaven is a lowly world based on the environment, and one in the mind, and one in THIS LIFE, they could not really be further opposites.  Buddhism teaches that you don't even experience death (without a body or mind that is obvious to anyone), christianity teaches you get the greatest happiness DURING DEATH.  


The goal of one is in death, the other in life.  So again, one has a savior, one does not.  One empowers the self, one chains the self to believe they need some dead guy to save them.  And one seeks the ultimate truth here and now, and the greatest happiness here and now, and the other teaches it cannot be found here, but only in death.


Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 29, 2012 - 12:44PM #23
Bob_the_Lunatic
Posts: 3,458

Mar 29, 2012 -- 10:17AM, Aka_me wrote:


Mar 20, 2012 -- 2:35AM, Ferretling wrote:

In the elephant story, even according to your own link, the Buddha wasn't referring to view on the afterlife, but those who are ignorant quarrelling about their view and the rightness of it without the capacity to see or understand other points of view.



wasn't intending to apply the elephant story ONLY to the afterlife, but in general to those claiming KNOWING


KNOWING Buddhism is X... and KNOWING Christianity is Y


KNOWING a tusk is X... and KNOWING a tail is Y




Because christianity offers salvation in DEATH (you cannot ignore that this is indeed precisely what the "afterlife" is), it does NOT apply to this world.  So if they were elephants, one still has to be a DEAD elephant-ignoring that they do not lead to the same place at all (thus not really both elephants, just a childish analogy), nor do they offer the same rewards, answers, conclusions, etc..... so the analogy again is one that would be used by someone very ignorant of what these teachings actually say.



So now let's look at life:  One is completely focused on this life and offers answers for THIS LIFE.  One gives some recommendations for this life, but no answers, no explanations, no "becauses" for how to behave etc.  And further, they are again only recommendations, they are NOT REQUIRED for salvation.   Christianity has only ONE requirement, only ONE rule:  Believe in Jesus and you'll be saved.   That's a very childish teaching, any idiot could do that, it's the easiest religious practice in the history of the world.  


Buddhism is beyond difficult, the practice is neverending, and upon taking faith, I get no special status-my life STILL operates on the law of karma.



So we see that NEITHER in life NOR death are they anything alike.  They are opposites.


Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 30, 2012 - 1:23AM #24
Aka_me
Posts: 12,638

Mar 29, 2012 -- 12:34PM, Bob_the_Lunatic wrote:

And ultimately the only rule in christianity IS to have faith in jesus, once you do that, you're done-that's all there is to it.



perhaps to some, but not to all. you're taking a select subset and trying to project conclusions on to the entire group. it doesn't work that way.


if a person did NOT have faith in the Buddha...


there'd be no reason to believe nirvana even exists, no reason to seek refuge in the Buddha.


Mar 29, 2012 -- 12:34PM, Bob_the_Lunatic wrote:

The goal of one is in death, the other in life.  So again, one has a savior, one does not.  One empowers the self, one chains the self to believe they need some dead guy to save them.  And one seeks the ultimate truth here and now, and the greatest happiness here and now, and the other teaches it cannot be found here, but only in death.



I've never stated there are no differences, because there are differences. much of that due to mis-interpretation


the very SAME mis-interpretations giving rise to the various Buddhist denominations.


would you put forth a statement that there are NO similarities?


certainly other people find similarities...


The teachings of the Buddha display certain similarities to Christian moral precepts of more than five centuries later: the sanctity of life, compassion for others, rejection of violence, confession and emphasis on charity and the practice of virtue.



the US exports death and corruption globally on a scale undrempt by Iranian authorities. war for corporate profits funded by taxpayers and soldiers' lives plus unofficial war funded by drugs to minorities. wave that flag of corruption in blissful ignorance of the orphans it creates assisting the rich to get richer. it's all good though cause we don't need to do ANYTHING to change... mother nature will create the necessary change.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 30, 2012 - 2:20AM #25
Bob0
Posts: 485

AKA: "if a person did NOT have faith in the Buddha...


there'd be no reason to believe nirvana even exists, no reason to seek refuge in the Buddha."


That's OK AKA, lots of people make that mistake.



"So, as I said, Kalamas: 'Don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, "This contemplative is our teacher." When you know for yourselves that, "These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering" — then you should abandon them.' Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said.


"Now, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness' — then you should enter & remain in them.


Kalama Sutta AN 3.65


Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 30, 2012 - 1:42PM #26
Bob_the_Lunatic
Posts: 3,458

Mar 30, 2012 -- 1:23AM, Aka_me wrote:


Mar 29, 2012 -- 12:34PM, Bob_the_Lunatic wrote:

And ultimately the only rule in christianity IS to have faith in jesus, once you do that, you're done-that's all there is to it.



perhaps to some, but not to all. you're taking a select subset and trying to project conclusions on to the entire group. it doesn't work that way.


if a person did NOT have faith in the Buddha...


there'd be no reason to believe nirvana even exists, no reason to seek refuge in the Buddha.


Mar 29, 2012 -- 12:34PM, Bob_the_Lunatic wrote:

The goal of one is in death, the other in life.  So again, one has a savior, one does not.  One empowers the self, one chains the self to believe they need some dead guy to save them.  And one seeks the ultimate truth here and now, and the greatest happiness here and now, and the other teaches it cannot be found here, but only in death.



I've never stated there are no differences, because there are differences. much of that due to mis-interpretation


the very SAME mis-interpretations giving rise to the various Buddhist denominations.


would you put forth a statement that there are NO similarities?


certainly other people find similarities...


The teachings of the Buddha display certain similarities to Christian moral precepts of more than five centuries later: the sanctity of life, compassion for others, rejection of violence, confession and emphasis on charity and the practice of virtue.






Not a relevant comparison.  There is ONE book for most christians, and it's the bible.  This is nothing like Buddhism where almost every sect has a different doctrine/s that they believe in.  So your comparison again shows ignorance and wishful thinking.


Further, I took no 'subset' of christians, you made that part up (strawman fallacy).  Rather I rely on what the bible says, very clearly that there is only ONE RULE (The One Commandment), and ultimately that faith is all that's necessary for salvation.  Pay attention and respond relevantly or just go sit down and listen for once, you'd learn something obviously since clearly you know nothing of Buddhism and apparently not even much of the bible!

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 3 of 3  •  Prev 1 2 3
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook