steveb1 wrote:
Is it worth a response?
...there is always the consideration of truth.
That is, how do we "stick up for the Dharma" in the face of prejudice, misinformation, and sometimes contempt?
Have any Dharma Wheel posters confronted - or better, solved - this problem? It would be nice to hear different views from Buddhists in confrontation with Christian fundamentalists.
steveb1 wrote:What is your view of engaging Christian fundamentalists?

http://www.leighb.com/dn1.htm
'Monks, if outsiders should speak against me, or against the Dhamma, or against the Sangha, you should not on that account either bear malice, or be upset, or feel ill will. If on that account, you should be angry and hurt, that would stand in the way of your own self-conquest.
If, when others speak against us, you feel angry at that or displeased, would you then be able to judge whether that talk of theirs is well said or not?'
'No, Sir.'
'But when outsiders speak in disparagement of me, or of the Dhamma, or of the Sangha, you should unravel what is false and point it out as wrong, saying:
"For this or that reason this is not the fact, that is not so, such a thing is not found among us, is not in us."
'But also, monks, if outsiders should speak in praise of me, in praise of the Dhamma, in praise of the Sangha, you should not, on that account, be filled with pleasure or gladness or be lifted up in heart. Were you to be so that also would stand in the way of your self-conquest.
When outsiders speak in praise of me, or of the Dhamma, or of the Sangha, you should acknowledge what is factual, saying:
"For this or that reason this is true, that is so, such a thing is found among us, is in us."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .nymo.html
"Bhikkhus, there are these five ways of removing annoyance, by which annoyance can be entirely removed by a Bhikkhu when it arises in him.
What are the five?
"Loving-kindness can be maintained in being toward a person with whom you are annoyed: this is how annoyance with him can be removed.
"Compassion can be maintained in being toward a person with whom you are annoyed; this too is how annoyance with him can be removed.
"Onlooking equanimity can be maintained in being toward a person with whom you are annoyed; this too is how annoyance with him can be removed.
"The forgetting and ignoring of a person with whom you are annoyed can be practiced; this too is how annoyance with him can be removed.
"Ownership of deeds in a person with whom you are annoyed can be concentrated upon thus:
'This good person is owner of his deeds, heir to his deeds, his deeds are the womb from which he is born, his deeds are his kin for whom he is responsible, his deeds are his refuge, he is heir to his deeds, be they good or bad.'
This too is how annoyance with him can be removed.
"These are the five ways of removing annoyance, by which annoyance can be entirely removed in a Bhikkhu when it arises in him."
steveb1 wrote:What is your view of engaging Christian fundamentalists? There does seem to be an array of choices, from ignoring them, to arguing your view against their views, to being assertive enough to (for example) hand out Buddhistic literature to fundamentalists and/or actually inviting them to Buddhist services (that's a stretch, I admit).
For me, it does get tiresome to hear conservative Christians knowingly or unknowingly misrepresent Buddhism. We've all heard the litany: Buddhism is "Satanic"; it is pessimistic; it induces trance and other mind-control techniques; humankind needs God/ Buddhism has no God; Buddha was a damned sinner/Jesus was God and sinless; Buddha died/Jesus is risen, and for that matter is eternal; Jesus saves from sin/Buddha has no such capacity; God set his seal on Jesus via miracles/God did not "vouch" for Buddha; etc., etc.
Obviously, the essential differences make even the most hopeful communication difficult, as Christianity is founded on the notion of a supernatural/personal god's miraculous activity, whereas no such entity exists in Buddhism. But there are other issues that can be addressed, starting with simple corrections of Christian misunderstandings of Buddha and Buddhism.
Is it worth a response? After all, fundamentalists' salvation rests upon their unswerving, total belief in faith-propositions. If they perceive that one is trying to correct views which fundamentalists firmly believe are God-given, then they will not jeopardize their salvation. Hence, any real dialogue is probably impossible. But, beyond considerations of communication and dialogue, there is always the consideration of truth.
That is, how do we "stick up for the Dharma" in the face of prejudice, misinformation, and sometimes contempt? Have any Dharma Wheel posters confronted - or better, solved - this problem? It would be nice to hear different views from Buddhists in confrontation with Christian fundamentalists.

not1not2 wrote:Am sorry you thought you must choose family or Dharma. Did they push you out or did you push them out? We tred the path of Dharma and wish others well. Does there have to be a choice? Metta, Earl
catmoon wrote:If I may repeat, the key is not wanting to win the conversation.
Yes, that.
catmoon wrote: "Stephen Hawking is a flake",
Man, she needs help..............fast.........."I know there is a God" and so on. She likes to throw out challenging questions like "What has Buddha got that Jesus doesn't?", and "Why would anyone choose Buddhism?".
You know, the same questions can be asked of her........The key seems to be not wanting to win the conversation. If I don't have an answer ready, the answer is "I'd have to think about that." If one is very very mindful, very careful not to blurt out the first response, and thoughtful, if one is not attached to one's own "superior" point of view then things can go fairly smoothly. I think of many things to say which, although they would be beneficial, would start a great bloody fight, which would negate the whole point of trying to beneficial.
steveb1 wrote:......Is it worth a response? After all, fundamentalists' salvation rests upon their unswerving, total belief in faith-propositions. If they perceive that one is trying to correct views which fundamentalists firmly believe are God-given, then they will not jeopardize their salvation. Hence, any real dialogue is probably impossible. But, beyond considerations of communication and dialogue, there is always the consideration of truth.
That is, how do we "stick up for the Dharma" in the face of prejudice, misinformation, and sometimes contempt? Have any Dharma Wheel posters confronted - or better, solved - this problem? It would be nice to hear different views from Buddhists in confrontation with Christian fundamentalists.

steveb1 wrote:What is your view of engaging Christian fundamentalists? There does seem to be an array of choices, from ignoring them, to arguing your view against their views, to being assertive enough to (for example) hand out Buddhistic literature to fundamentalists and/or actually inviting them to Buddhist services (that's a stretch, I admit).
For me, it does get tiresome to hear conservative Christians knowingly or unknowingly misrepresent Buddhism. We've all heard the litany: Buddhism is "Satanic"; it is pessimistic; it induces trance and other mind-control techniques; humankind needs God/ Buddhism has no God; Buddha was a damned sinner/Jesus was God and sinless; Buddha died/Jesus is risen, and for that matter is eternal; Jesus saves from sin/Buddha has no such capacity; God set his seal on Jesus via miracles/God did not "vouch" for Buddha; etc., etc.
Obviously, the essential differences make even the most hopeful communication difficult, as Christianity is founded on the notion of a supernatural/personal god's miraculous activity, whereas no such entity exists in Buddhism. But there are other issues that can be addressed, starting with simple corrections of Christian misunderstandings of Buddha and Buddhism.
Is it worth a response? After all, fundamentalists' salvation rests upon their unswerving, total belief in faith-propositions. If they perceive that one is trying to correct views which fundamentalists firmly believe are God-given, then they will not jeopardize their salvation. Hence, any real dialogue is probably impossible. But, beyond considerations of communication and dialogue, there is always the consideration of truth.
That is, how do we "stick up for the Dharma" in the face of prejudice, misinformation, and sometimes contempt? Have any Dharma Wheel posters confronted - or better, solved - this problem? It would be nice to hear different views from Buddhists in confrontation with Christian fundamentalists.
Made from 100% recycled karmaUsers browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests