/lit/ - Literature

>Q: Do you think it is possible to be both Christian and Buddhist at the same time?

Dalai Lama: : I replied to this question indirectly when I said that belief in a Creator could be associated with the understanding of emptiness. I believe it is possible to progress along a spiritual path and reconcile Christianity with Buddhism. But once a certain degree of realization has been reached, a choice between the two paths will become necessary. I recently gave a series of teachings in the United States and one of these teachings was about patience and tolerance. At the end there was a ceremony for taking the Bodhisattva Vows. A Christian priest who was in the audience wanted to take these vows. I asked him if he had the right to, and he replied that yes, of course, he could take these vows and still remain a Christian.

"emptiness" nullifies a personal conscious God.

>>5059600

No

>>5059600
being christian and Buddhist is basically just a more ascetic version of a christian. You probably can't be both catholic and Buddhist though.

are there christians who believe in Jesus but not "the Father" ?

>Christian
>Buddhist

Buddhism and Christianity are just categories for a broad number of movements and teachings that have within themselves reached diametrically opposed conclusions.

But if you're going to look at them like that, then they most certainly can be reconciled with each other, they are based are the teachings of people who spoke in riddles eons ago, passed down in inevitably faulty translations and originals who's meaning is entirely alien to our modern minds. So, yes, they can absolutely be reconciled with each other, in many, ways, since they can mean effectively whatever you want them to mean.

>>5059600
Can Snow White be reconciled with Rapunzel?

You're asking about whether one type of make believe can be reconciled with another type of make believe.

And, of course, inb4 "edgy", "fedora", and all the other usual knee jerk responses.

>>5060161
>You're asking about whether one type of make believe can be reconciled with another type of make believe.

that is still a valid question, whether or not you think it's make believe.

>>5059600
>Buddhism says not to cling/attach to anything, not even buddhism or its ideas

Including the Buddhist idea you've just described? =^)

>>5059619

"emptiness" is a poor rendering of sunyata.

is this the le terrible pseudo-intellectual comedian may may?

>>5060173
>muh garl sagan

>>5060396
>Including the Buddhist idea you've just described?

of course.
The platform sutra and the heart sutra both highlight this point :^)

but it's easier said than done

>>5060423

It's my observation that virtually 100% of converts to Buddhism are hopelessly "attached" to the idea of being Buddhist. Did the fat guy anticipate this irony as well?

According to Thomas Merton they have a lot in common, and his monastary has been having dialogues with Buddhists for decades now.

They've published work together. Last one was a book on ecology as relates to Buddhism/Christianity. Fascinating stuff.

My opinion:
They can certainly get along. They both prize non-violence and compassion. Theologically they can't be reconciled but in terms of ethics they have a great deal of overlap.

One of my favorite Merton quotes is to the effect of "One should only engage in interfaith dialogue after a long period of silence."

How true, how true, and how applicable to other "dialogue"!

>>5060443

You're not going to undermine a 2000 year old tradition with your shitty 21st century jab.

Hush your mouth, be humble and learn.

Unlike Christianity, Buddhism is compatible with any religion. It is more of a philosophy than religion

>>5060443
>It's my observation that virtually 100% of converts to Buddhism are hopelessly "attached" to the idea of being Buddhist

attachment and verbal self-identification aren't the same thing, but nevertheless

>Did the fat guy anticipate this irony as well?

Yes. He was questioned about it from the very start

>>5059600
gtfo or, if by some miracle, seriously not trollin', >>>>>/lit/

>>5060453
Very reasonable and (I'm assuming) informed post

>>5059619

John Scottus, 8th Century Theologian, posited the idea that God can only be known through negation- what he is not. "We do not know what God is. God Himself does not know what He is because He is not anything. Literally God is not, because He transcends being."

It mightn't be taught by the local priest but there are schools of Christian thought that meld well with Buddhism.
>>5059759

Athiest Christians are a thing.


>>5060423

So why don't you stop trying to forget forgetting? Middle path 101.

>>5060459
>You're not going to undermine a 2000 year old tradition with your shitty 21st century jab.

Not the tradition, Ken-sama. Just some of its latter-day adherents.

>>5059600
Buddhism and Christianity are basically the same thing:
>Abandon false reality of earthly desire
>be content with self
>be selflessly kind to others
>leave the false reality of the material world by being born again and leaving the cycle of reincarnation on material hellworld earth.

Yeah it's all legit.

>inb4 filtered.

>>5061311

but the nuances are very different just like how buddhism and hinduism are different, except on a superficial surface they look very similar

Read Thomas Merton and then you tell me.

http://billmoyers.com/2014/01/17/can-science-and-religion-be-reconciled/

i like bill moyers but i've not read this yet. i know that christians like isaac newton and galileo, copernicus etc thought that science was a way to reveal God. but obviously certain scientific and religious truths clash to i dunno. i don't think the two fundamentally clash though since religion isn't science as it is metaphysical and i think there will always be more questions no matter how many answers we discover so that area of mystery will leave room for religion forever.

>>5061311
Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but doesn't Buddhism ultimately advocate a kind of annihilation of the personal spirit? Isn't that what 'nirvana' is?

>>5061488
some sects, yes.

I was doing some searching on this topic this morning and ran into this: http://www.gotquestions.org/Zen-Christian.html

>>5061488
>Buddhism ultimately advocate a kind of annihilation of the personal spirit? Isn't that what 'nirvana' is?

buddhism hypothesizes that all phenomena are transient, lack a permanent "substance". Things come and go when the conditions are right.

the realization that this transience and impermanence applies to your "self" as well is called nirvana, which is the release from clinging, grasping, delusion and suffering

>>5061501
>>5063443
In that case, of course Buddhism can't be reconciled with Christianity. Christianity asserts that, not only is your 'immortal soul' a really firm, solid thing, but it lives forever. This is the total opposite of nirvana.

>>5063701
>This is the total opposite of nirvana.

the problem is that nirvana is unborn, unconditional, neither transient nor permanent, but supersedes all dualities

what is buddhist
what is christianity? think about it