Jump to content
BANGKOK
Sign in to follow this  
Maxi101

Buddha And Jesus, Your Opinion On An Article

Recommended Posts

on a side note to turn this around. does anybody believe that stuff where jesus was supposed to be influenced by buddhist teachings? is this just a wild idea off the internet, akin with the OP, or is there any substance to this claim?

I don't think so. I just think there so many similarities in the teachings on our behaviour. Doing good and trying to live a good life etc.

i looked into this a bit further today, while there no archeological evidence linking jesus with buddhism, there were denfitely buddhist missionaries sent west towards greece and egypt from about 250BC by asoka, an indian monarch.

there seem to be alot of books and articles that make the case for this idea, but there does not seem to be any archealogical evidence. however it is certainly very interesting, and i think agreat deal more plausible than the article in the OP.

Even before Ashoka, Alexander encountered the gymnosophists (naked philosophers) in India. There is also some strong analysis now linking Pythagoras with hinduism. This is wholly textual rather than having any artefacts but many of the pythagorean rules of their brotherhood just seem very atypical of Greek thought but are astonishingly close to hinduism. Pythagoras was a contemporary of Buddha - maybe I can unearth a document saying they had lunch one day in Babylon.

I best keep quiet about Jesus :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is to some, the "deep end" of religion. (Did the Buddha influence Jesus ?)

I follow the teachings of Baha'u'llah, prophet-founder of renewed religion known as the Baha'i Faith.

For those who are unaware, and with absolutely no intention of entering into dispute with anyone, allow me to tell you that Baha'is hold the Lord Buddha in the very highest reverence possible.

They also have a very clear understanding of the intimate relationship between the Lord Buddha and Jesus the Christ as well as a firm understanding of the nature of Maitrya Buddha.

If you would like an explanation, may I respectfully suggest that you check out "The Oneness of the Prophets", a principal tenent of the Baha'i Faith.

As I have been respectful to the forum readers, I ask that you kindly return similar respect to my posting by avoiding contest and contention.

Check it out. You might find answers to the question .

Chock dee !

Why would you expect us to be anything else but respectful?

What I'd be interested to know is how important is this "intimate relationship between the Lord Buddha and Jesus the Christ as well as a firm understanding of the nature of Maitrya Buddha" in the Baha'i faith.

Not so much from the point of view of what is believed but whether holding fast to such a belief is important in Baha'i. Is faith based belief important in Baha'i or are such ideas presented in way that gives you freedom to accept, investigate, or reject as you progress along in your spiritual development?

Does it really matter whether this teacher influenced that teacher as an historical fact? does it matter whether you believe it or not? with evidence or not?

Surely with whatever path you follow the proof of the pudding is in the eating.

Thanks for the questions Brucenkhamen,

First thing is to know that, like yourself, I am only able to share my personal thoughts - although I think you may take them as being reflective of most Baha'is understandings of the teachings of Baha'u'llah.

*I would say that from postings found on this and other TV forums, it is evident, that respectfulness can and does sometimes fly out of the window. I am happy to say that this has not been the case in this circumstance.

* the importance of understanding the relationship between the Lord Buddha and Jesus the Christ and the Maitreya Buddha - pivotal, central. critical.

*holding fast on to this understanding goes beyond "belief" and "faith". Its explanation by Baha'u'llah is for so many, an intelligent approach that immediately removes the morass of continuing mis-understandings and separations of the various religious pathways. Once understood, easily, in it's simplicity, this concept is readly accepted by Bahais as common-sense fact, not mere "belief".

*Is there freedom to investigate , accept or reject ? Again, an absolutely central tenent of the Baha'i Faith is independent investigation. Society has reached a stage where we have sufficient skills and understanding to enable us to do so. Baha'is do not have a clergy to instruct them in the meanings of any scipture. Baha'u'llah's writings are considered so broad as to provide adequate assistance with the smooth passage of a continally evolving society. I should add here, that the writings and sayings of the Lord Buddha, have in their spiritual context, relevance and acceptance by Baha'is as well.

Specifically, on your reference to rejection- one is either a follower of Baha'u'llah or one is not. It's as clear cut as that. This is the same in any religion. If you wish to call yourself a follower, then you "buy the package" and do your best to be a follower of all the teachings, not some. You will not succeed in all, but then you have two clear choices. Firstly, consider yourself an adherent and continually strive to do your best , or, secondly, reject parts that you consider not worth pursuing and, if this is your choice , and if honesty means much to you, opt out and cease calling yourself a follower.

* As is the case with followers of all religion, and this is certainly also the case with the reading of Baha'i sciptures, each reading of the same writing yields different degrees of understanding as our spiritual development progresses and occasionally regresses .

* The relationship between the different "teachers" of each of the world's great faiths is not understood to be the influence that one exerts upon the other as has been suggested by posters on this thread - I understand that they ARE, in essence, one another !

I understand that this is immediately, a most challenging, statement and I would suggest that only an honest and open and independent, full investigation of the writings of Baha'u'llah on this point will bring answers to you - which you either accept or reject.

* The proof of the pudding, the adage tells us, is in the eating. I absolutely agree with you. As I grow older I am, regrettably, seeing more and more of the proof of the pudding being sought in the pudding !

Hope I have responded sufficiently to have at least focused direction in these matters. Thank you for posing these interesting questions.

Chock dee !

Edited by SwaziBird

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
* the importance of understanding the relationship between the Lord Buddha and Jesus the Christ and the Maitreya Buddha - pivotal, central. critical.

I have to confess I know little about your faith, so it's been interesting to learn. In the past I had formed the impression the Baha'i was quite a open minded religion so I was surprised that parts of your post came across as dogmatic and belief based as I'd expect from fundamentalists of other religions. The main point of my questions was to try and clarify whether I had misinterpreted that or not.

For example, do you see the contradiction between these two passages?…

*holding fast on to this understanding goes beyond "belief" and "faith". Its explanation by Baha'u'llah is for so many, an intelligent approach that immediately removes the morass of continuing mis-understandings and separations of the various religious pathways. Once understood, easily, in it's simplicity, this concept is readly accepted by Bahais as common-sense fact, not mere "belief".
*Is there freedom to investigate , accept or reject ? Again, an absolutely central tenent of the Baha'i Faith is independent investigation. Society has reached a stage where we have sufficient skills and understanding to enable us to do so. Baha'is do not have a clergy to instruct them in the meanings of any scipture. Baha'u'llah's writings are considered so broad as to provide adequate assistance with the smooth passage of a continally evolving society.

Now somebody might think that it's a common sense fact that there is life on other planets, they might be right but until there is proof it's just a belief.

Somebody else might think it's a common sense fact that if you martyr yourself by flying a plane into the World Trade centre you'll go to paradise,. I'd beg to differ as I'm sure would you, but again until there is proof it's just a belief.

I don't have a problem with anything that you believe, I do have a problem with your presenting it as if it was a fact, because unless you have proof it's still just a belief. We all know the excesses to which blind faith can push it's believers.

I should add here, that the writings and sayings of the Lord Buddha, have in their spiritual context, relevance and acceptance by Baha'is as well.

If that's the case you'd be aware of the importance in the sayings of the Buddha placed on not accepting the Buddhas teaching blindly, but continually experimenting with it and testing it and only accepting the truth of it when you see it or experience it as a reality.

The kind of belief the Buddhas teaching requires is that because I saw that last time I did something unwholesome it resulted in suffering for me and those around me and created a tendency to do it again. Therefore I "believe" if I do it again I'll have similar results, and I "believe" if I don't do it things may get better

Specifically, on your reference to rejection- one is either a follower of Baha'u'llah or one is not. It's as clear cut as that. This is the same in any religion. If you wish to call yourself a follower, then you "buy the package" and do your best to be a follower of all the teachings, not some. You will not succeed in all, but then you have two clear choices. Firstly, consider yourself an adherent and continually strive to do your best , or, secondly, reject parts that you consider not worth pursuing and, if this is your choice , and if honesty means much to you, opt out and cease calling yourself a follower.

It may be the same in most religions but it's not the same in Buddhism, the Buddha's teaching never forces anyone to choose between buying the whole package or opting out. In some respects this is a weakness as Buddhism has become mixed with lots of different local indigenous religions, but then that's another story.

Your statement above sounds no different from the "if you don't accept the Lord Jesus you belong to the devil and are going hel_l" type of attitude. I don't object so much to what is believed as to the attitude that you must believe it or not. It paints a very black and white world when in fact the world has many shades of grey.

* The relationship between the different "teachers" of each of the world's great faiths is not understood to be the influence that one exerts upon the other as has been suggested by posters on this thread - I understand that they ARE, in essence, one another !

It may be true, it may not be true, my only concern is I see no value in believing it blindly with no evidence.

The Buddha may have taught X,Y, and Z, and Jesus may have taught V,W and X. X is the obvious overlap, and we can speculate until the cows come home on how that overlap came about. Surely it's more important that you follow X,Y,Z or V,W,X as the case may be and see the reality and effectiveness of the teaching as you go on.

I understand that this is immediately, a most challenging, statement and I would suggest that only an honest and open and independent, full investigation of the writings of Baha'u'llah on this point will bring answers to you - which you either accept or reject.

Certainly that's true, and I'm trying not to be critical of things I don't know much about, as all I've got to go on is what I've learned from you and it doesn't really inspire me to spend time digging deeper into it.

* The proof of the pudding, the adage tells us, is in the eating. I absolutely agree with you. As I grow older I am, regrettably, seeing more and more of the proof of the pudding being sought in the pudding !

Yes, if you understand what I meant by that then you'll understand I'm not really interested in what you believe rather how following the teachings of your teacher has facilitated your spiritual development and how that compares with what you know of the Buddhas path, as that is after all the subject of this forum.

That's about it. I hope you don't think I've just been too critical, I'm just trying to evaluate what your are saying in terms of what I think is important from the Buddhist perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They never get tired of trying do they!!??

Ajaydee,

If I read you correctly, you are suggesting that they're trying something. I am me . I'm not a they.

Let me hasten to assure you that I am trying nothing. What you have read in my last post was simply an attempt to answer questions put to me by Bruce...

I was invited to express opinions.

My earlier post was made in the earnest hope that I might be able to assist by throwing some new approach on the quite clearly confused and confusing suggestions of searching for historical and archeological proofs of the co-existence of the Lord Buddha and Jesus the Christ and their influences upon each other expressed on a Buddhist forum.

So please, Ayjaydee, if this is what you meant about them trying, be a good fellow and show some good manners.

Bruce, if you are reading this, perhaps this supports my answer to the very first question that you put to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They never get tired of trying do they!!??

Ajaydee,

If I read you correctly, you are suggesting that they're trying something. I am me . I'm not a they.

Let me hasten to assure you that I am trying nothing. What you have read in my last post was simply an attempt to answer questions put to me by Bruce...

I was invited to express opinions.

My earlier post was made in the earnest hope that I might be able to assist by throwing some new approach on the quite clearly confused and confusing suggestions of searching for historical and archeological proofs of the co-existence of the Lord Buddha and Jesus the Christ and their influences upon each other expressed on a Buddhist forum.

So please, Ayjaydee, if this is what you meant about them trying, be a good fellow and show some good manners.

Bruce, if you are reading this, perhaps this supports my answer to the very first question that you put to me.

i'm not sure how you arrived at the conclusion that you were the they i referred to, but you are mistaken. so relax ,pal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They never get tired of trying do they!!??

Ajaydee,

If I read you correctly, you are suggesting that they're trying something. I am me . I'm not a they.

Let me hasten to assure you that I am trying nothing. What you have read in my last post was simply an attempt to answer questions put to me by Bruce...

I was invited to express opinions.

My earlier post was made in the earnest hope that I might be able to assist by throwing some new approach on the quite clearly confused and confusing suggestions of searching for historical and archeological proofs of the co-existence of the Lord Buddha and Jesus the Christ and their influences upon each other expressed on a Buddhist forum.

So please, Ayjaydee, if this is what you meant about them trying, be a good fellow and show some good manners.

Bruce, if you are reading this, perhaps this supports my answer to the very first question that you put to me.

i'm not sure how you arrived at the conclusion that you were the they i referred to, but you are mistaken. so relax ,pal

Ajaydee

Could you please elaborate who you mean by they then?

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read this excerpt  a couple of years ago and though I do my best to follow Christ, not being much of a Bible thumper or evangelist, I was suspicious, thinking this might be Christian propaganda, which, by the way, is an oxymoron, as the word “Christian” actually means “Christ-like” (and, well, that’s a whole other conversation.) After asking people I knew in Cambodia, some from Vietnam and others (some Buddhist, some Christian) from Thailand (who all confirmed knowing of this scripture as authentic) and since I lived in Chiang Mai, I visited Wat Phra Singh, (“The Temple of the Lion”), where I asked an elder monk if the scripture quoted above was actually housed at his temple. He said yes and pointed to a small building that he said contained this scripture and also told me that it is sealed for 10 years. He also told me Chiang Mai University had taken pictures of it and put it on microfiche. I visited the Library, where the Monk thought it might be located. They told me they no longer store microfiche at the library but it is in a database in their arts and cultural center. (More research to do). This was in the third week of July, 2018 (just two days ago, as I write this). I guess we have to wait 10 years to lay our eyes on the actual manuscript, but it does cause me to ponder and pray. It is for those who have eyes to see and those who have ears to hear. As far as I know only those who have not investigated this, dispute it. (This is a common practice called “contempt prior to investigation”), a sure way to remain ignorant. The rest of those I have discussed this with, either honestly say they do not know about it (This includes a Catholic Priest, other Christians, Buddhists and laymen alike) or when asked, they confirm it’s authenticity based on their first hand knowledge. You do the math...or the research, as you like. Either way ignorance is a dull path trudged by those who seem happy flailing and faltering in light of the truth, usually from a bar stool or some other ridiculous pulpit. I do find it interesting that western sources now say there is evidence to support that during Yeshua’s missing years (age 13-33) he was reported to be a Buddhist monk by some and a wandering prophet (all over Asia) by others. In any event it would be remarkable and even amazing to discover that Yeshua followed Buddha to some extent, only to later be reavealed that Christ was followed by Buddha...Seems reasonable and fitting in a circular more universal view. Krishna was confirmed to be Christ by an actual Hindu Priest, so why would this be so surprising? Probably TMI for most, but I hope it helps. ((((LOVE))))

Edited by LoveisTruth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...