Interfaith Dialogue

[ronnewmexico]

Well serenity.....to my opinion you have presented a very indepth logical discussion on the issue.

I would suggest if you define god as being other power..such may be found.

If you ask any buddhist faith to abscribe to buddhism as theism...you will find none.

I personally attach that to a cultural bias as much as anything else. As theism in its most presently evidenced introductory form in asia was considered a inferior product of inferior spiritual minds such a adherance to theism would be a assumptive stance of a inferiority. The western impact on asian culture was within the context of a inferior peoples, with superior tools, expressing dominance or attempts of dominance, upon a considered superior culture and peoples. So such will not happen in the present climate.....theism will never be abscribed to by any Buddhist school of lineage. Most all deriveing from asian componant, which had aversion to the west and western ways of thinking or religion. If that changes as things change over great amounts of time I would suspect that may change as well.

As a practical manner in the west and perhaps for many lay peoples elsewhere. my personal observation is I would not find a clear line of differentiation betweent the concepts present in a common approach to buddhism and theist religions. IN Sri Lanka for example buddhist and christians both transverse the same mountain top expressing the belief in the finding of very similiar relics of a prior buddha or christian saint.
And if one were to perhaps visit nepal and areas of india closest to nepal one would find I would expect forms of hinduism and buddhism that closely replicate themselves. So much so as to be virtually indistinguishable. If one examines books of buddhist source from years ago one may find reference to many faulted forms of what is described as buddhism, not other religions but other buddhisms. So apparently we can conclude historically much has been called buddhism in the past which is not buddhism in the present. So, what is now, may not be in the future, nor necessarily has been.

On a pure philsophical sense as discussed here...yes, theism appears mostly refuted by buddhist thought. But other power certainly seems present in some forms..some define god as any other powered vehicle.

So formally in a religious context...not one single form of buddhism with lineage claims theism as its own. Research it...you will find none with lineage do.

You can believe whatever you want of course and call it what you will.

As a aside I don't necessarily call myself a buddhist. But firmly find no inherant existant things of other power, and find this to be so in the main from spiritual means derived from buddhism.
Few laypeoples in any form of commonly practiced buddhism will be found openly discussing emptiness or such things which refute god notions to my experience. A theist would be quite indistinguishable, changing perhaps the name of god to buddha is my opinion in most sanghas. Substitute prostrations mala beads for genuflections and rosary beads and we have, I think, very similiar things. I personally find western buddhists abscribing quite often to many concepts seemingly inherited from theism. Most commonly inherantly existant souls, perhaps from montheistic abrahamic beliefs, and often a common godlike theme of primodial existance in all things found in a hindu form of theism you initially describe.

So that to my opinion is how it is. For what it is worth.
I, to repeat, believe in none of the things you describe, and find buddhist thought to often refute those things. But many are the interpretations of Buddhism throughout the world. I personally would like to believe it is as clearly displayed as is mostly expressed here but find it is often not.

I consider it a error of logical basis to believe in such things, but that is indeed a personal issue not blanket religious finding.

So I appreciate your initiated discussion. Part of the condition of human samsaric existance is to my opinion this continual necessity to find for a other, as without a other, it is, for most is, simply unbearable. They get to lonely.
But to my opinion it is connected to being human not being.

[Malcolm]

Serenity is not listening to any of your well intentioned advice and has shown that he has no intention of listening to reason.

Yup.

[Sönam]

Dealing with a french forum, I once more encounter the discussion on Jésus being a bodhisattva. Some "stable" vajra friends, some I know personnaly, pretend that His Holiness has once (Paris 2003) said that Jesus was a bodhisattva, which is for me a total nonsense. Then other members (vajra practionners) generally quite knowledgeable concerning the dharma did pretend the same, pretending that he did adapt his teaching to the peoples in Palestin in that time. Of course I did'nt agree at all, and as too many of them did pretend so, I tell them that I will ask for confirmation to a Rinpoche (Gelug) I'm in contact with. Surprisingly he says the same, that he believes that Jesus was a 8th bhumi bodhisattva, that his "real" teaching was not know, and so on.
Honestly I do not know what to say ... I need some help on that point that I could not accept. I'm lost (like a wall following on me) ?

Sönam (sorry for bad english)

[Enochian]

Jesus may exist, but he would be dependently originated, and thus not really the Creator.

[Enochian]

Which "Holiness" are you referring to?

Dalai Lama?

[Sönam]

Which "Holiness" are you referring to?

Dalai Lama?

Yes

[Malcolm]

Dealing with a french forum, I once more encounter the discussion on Jésus being a bodhisattva. Some "stable" vajra friends, some I know personnaly, pretend that His Holiness has once (Paris 2003) said that Jesus was a bodhisattva, which is for me a total nonsense. Then other members (vajra practionners) generally quite knowledgeable concerning the dharma did pretend the same, pretending that he did adapt his teaching to the peoples in Palestin in that time. Of course I did'nt agree at all, and as too many of them did pretend so, I tell them that I will ask for confirmation to a Rinpoche (Gelug) I'm in contact with. Surprisingly he says the same, that he believes that Jesus was a 8th bhumi bodhisattva, that his "real" teaching was not know, and so on.
Honestly I do not know what to say ... I need some help on that point that I could not accept. I'm lost (like a wall following on me) ?

Sönam (sorry for bad english)

It is just political stuff to make christians happy where it is not new age nonsense.

however, it is possible for a bodhisattva to appear in any form....so

[Sönam]

so what ?

A 8th bhumi bodhisattva could miss the fact that his words and actions will bring so much suffering ... holy wars, Inquisition and even holocaust having his origin in the fact that jews would have killed God (the son)?
Jesus have the compassion dimension, but where is the wisdom dimension?

[Malcolm]

so what ?

A 8th bhumi bodhisattva could miss the fact that his words and actions will bring so much suffering ... holy wars, Inquisition and even holocaust having his origin in the fact that jews would have killed God (the son)?
Jesus have the compassion dimension, but where is the wisdom dimension?

We are not in disagreement. I personally think "Jesus as bodhisattva" is nonsense.

[Sönam]

so what ?

A 8th bhumi bodhisattva could miss the fact that his words and actions will bring so much suffering ... holy wars, Inquisition and even holocaust having his origin in the fact that jews would have killed God (the son)?
Jesus have the compassion dimension, but where is the wisdom dimension?

We are not in disagreement. I personally think "Jesus as bodhisattva" is nonsense.

Thank you, I first misunderstood your answer ... but "they" have arguments like, if Jésus did'nt teach the dharma it's just because those who listen to him were not ready for, not that Jésus was not able to do it. That the capacity of those who were listening have limited the "spontaneous" teaching of Jésus. That the capacity of the teacher, in such a case like Jesus, did depend of those who were listening, and that's the strenght of the dharma ... and of course that christian have understand nothing to the real story (which is a dharma story).

Not bad argument I must say ...

[ronnewmexico]

My experience with the issue of HHDL is that to my opinion he will occasionally speak to the audience as opposed to all audiences.
As per example I think it was nigeria several years back a nation with a very christian bias he stated to them things that really affirm the belief in a god of christian origin,that type of god . But his written books authorized by him say different things.

He has a couple of books on jesus and christianity I have read excerpts but not the whole things and have never seen him to write that. So speak that possibly, probably I'd guess write that, I'd wait to see it.

Other Rinpoche's saying that....they have different opinions on things as we all do. I wouldn't say one speaks for all any more than one speaks for another here. A lama that is not familiar with christianities role in the west(and many might not be) in a historical context may say such things.

I have a quote in another thread which I have from a book I am just reading from the 16th century a Tibetan religious authority. It puts christianity, its leaders, abrahams followers, firmly on the side of the opponants of the devas which makes them...demons.

So if you want to be reassured there is differing opinion on this thing I can produce that quote with no difficulty. I just have to cut copy and paste

This is a political world. Sometimes it is easier to get along is my guess. You have to consider religious persecuton is ongoing in Tibet and thusly anything that differentiates them from another religion or critical of another religion may sew a seed for furthur prosecution. It is first in their mind.
So I would not depend upon Tibetans to source this thing of jesus of bodhisttava.

That quote is handy......

Two ways of looking at that quote...one they didn't know christianity 1600s Tibet.
two they knew exactly christianity but safe in tibet at that time spoke their mind completely about it.

[Sönam]

So if you want to be reassured there is differing opinion on this thing I can produce that quote with no difficulty. I just have to cut copy and paste

Please do it ...

But I must say that the argument consisting to say that Jésus, enlightened and "spontaneous", "driven" by the dharma, could only "produce" what auditors could realize (in fact jewishs with a "killer" God, telling them God is not a killer, but love and so on) is an argument that has a sense ... it could fit with my (poor) understanding of the dharma.

[ronnewmexico]

Well ask and ye shall receive ....

A partial excerpt from the new book...Mahamudra and related instructions..pgs 194, 195

Oral transmission of the Supreme Siddhas..A commentary on Prayer for the definitive meaning, the Mahamudra...Situ Tenpai Nyinje(1700-1777)..


To say"it exists" is the view of eternalism.
To say "it doesn't exist" is the view of nihilism.

Who holds these views? They are primarily found among the tirthikas, but they are also found among Buddhists. Within the tirthikas, Rishi Brhaspatid, in order that the devas would be victorious over the asuras in battle, wrote a text teacheing that there were no past or future lives, and no good or bad karma. Those who followd this, such as Rishi Jayarsibhatta (a contemporary of Dharmakirti) spread {this teaching}. It became known as Lokayata or Carvaka. this is the nihilistic view.
There are what are known as the four eternalist schools:
1. The Simkhya: follwers of the teacher Kapila, who believed in Five principles and proclaimed that knowing them brings liberation.
2. The believers in Isvaara: followere of Rishi Kanada or Rishi Aksapada, who were given the supreme boon by the god Isvara, and who believed in six catagories, and so on that were to be understood.
3. The Vaisnavites: the followers of such teachers as Jayatirtha, who believe Visnu to be God.
4. The Jains (Nirgranthas) the followers of Rishi Jina, who believe in six substances, and so on.

There are also those who are known as Tajiks (Iranians) or Mlecchas ("barbarians") who follow the tradition of the texts composed by the teacher Abraham, who was a follower of the Asuras. In Tibet, there is the Yungdrung Bon tradition, followeres of Miwo Shenrap. In China there are the followers of the tradition of Taoism. These {three} are not actual tirthikas. The first of these the Tajiks, have a conduct that is worse than that of the tirthikas. The latter two are slightly better than tirthikas in terms of not believing in a self and so on, but they are still to be included among the eternalists.

Among the Buddhists, Vaibhasikas and Sautrantikas do not, generallly speaking deny the self of phenomena. They say that there are externally existant indivisible atoms and so on. Cittamatrins state that knowledge of the emptiness of dualism has true existence, and therefore they believe in the perceiver as the self of phenomena." ....end quote.

The second part you just mention....no offense but I say get real..more peoples have died due to consequence of christianity than any other religions near as I can tell.Complicit with colonialism and all that that wrote. Part and parcel of it and all the rest.
If that a very advanced product of bodhisttava corrupted or not by human....I'd stay very far away from those type of bodhisttavas.

Their followers mean well and it has value for them as path. But a really well thought out product....no way. Filled with holes and bound to become corrupted immediately which is what happened.
Why the early death anyway....seems a bit counterproductive if you really want to spread the word, and why only in one place?
Geeze Loouise I could go on and on. Sucky teacher...no offense but he was. Good speech giver but no attention to finer details such as...

staying alive to give the teaching.

[Sönam]

The second part you just mention....no offense but I say get real..more peoples have died due to consequence of christianity than any other religions near as I can tell.Complicit with colonialism and all that that wrote. Part and parcel of it and all the rest.
If that a very advanced product of bodhisttava corrupted or not by human....I'd stay very far away from those type of bodhisttavas.

Their followers mean well and it has value for them as path. But a really well thought out product....no way. Filled with holes and bound to become corrupted immediately which is what happened.
Why the early death anyway....seems a bit counterproductive if you really want to spread the word, and why only in one place?
Geeze Loouise I could go on and on. Sucky teacher...no offense but he was. Good speech giver but no attention to finer details such as...

staying alive to give the teaching.

Thanks for the quote ... regarding "the second part", Rinpoche says that the situation would have been more catastrophic without what remains of his teaching, the god of the old testament being worth, cruel and vengeful that the "new" god, full of love, and so on ...

[ronnewmexico]

I don't know about that....jewish peoples (other than their heious political stances of recent) seem pretty compassionate and caring.

I look at their political thing now being a response of sorts to the mass killings murders of world war2. Excepting that.. they seem I'd say better than most christians, more compassionate and accepting. Their book is the old testament of christianity.

So hate to say it...he appears wrong.

Excepting Israel and all that a very nice intelligent group they generally are. I like to be around them more than around almost any others. Israel removed.

That way of looking at things could actually be lifted straight out of a catholic religious textbook. Jewish peoples would take objection. I wonder what he says to the Jews who are members now of his lineage? Does he say the same to them?

I don't want to put any seeds of doubt in anyones mind about a rinpoche. It is just they are like buddhas in things of their lineage and training. In other things they are like humans and bound to make mistakes in judgement on occasion as we all do being human.
So politically we have to use our own minds. Religiously use theirs.

[Sönam]

I don't know about that....jewish peoples (other than their heious political stances of recent) seem pretty compassionate and caring.

I look at their political thing now being a response of sorts to the mass killings murders of world war2. Excepting that.. they seem I'd say better than most christians, more compassionate and accepting. Their book is the old testament of christianity.

So hate to say it...he appears wrong.

Excepting Israel and all that a very nice intelligent group they generally are. I like to be around them more than around almost any others. Israel removed.

That way of looking at things could actually be lifted straight out of a catholic religious textbook. Jewish peoples would take objection. I wonder what he says to the Jews who are members now of his lineage? Does he say the same to them?

do not know what he says ... and I know about jewish for having had a jewish (central europa) father and having moved in the jewish community when being young.

[PadmaVonSamba]

What we know of Jesus, assuming that he ever existed, is essentially legends, many of which have been changed in the course of translation from Greek to Latin to English.

So whether or not a person ever existed, perhaps named Jeezus or whatever who later became the basis of the legendary person in question here, that person may or may not have been a bodhisattva and we will never know. There may have been a bodhisattva wandering around at that time, maybe his name was Sneezus. Presumably, there are many bodhisattvas wandering around presently, perhaps in relative obscurity.

Has "Jesus" never gained the fame which now bears his name, people wouldn't make a big deal of it, or wonder about it. Maybe his next door neighbor, Larry, was also a Bodhisattva. If so, nobody would care, but we won't ever know, because nobody ever heard of any next door Neighbor of Jesus, named Larry.

So, it is kind of silly to ask whether a legendary person was a bodhisattva. it's like asking whether Robin Hood was a Bodhisattva....not because one must doubt that somebody existed, but that what we are dealing with is a very limited amount of information, most, if not all of it, elaborations.

[Caz]

Ive heard this as well from several teachers within the group I practise, The common thinking is that he was using skilfull means to help others. We had a former quaker live at our centre for a good 20 years she said when she studied Dharma it helped her to reconcile the things she had rejected as a christian but later she came to view such things as skilfull means to aid sentient beings through a myriad of practises suited for their needs.
So perhapes he was a Bodhisattva if this seems to be the common theme amongst several well known teachers it may have some truth behind it.

[Sönam]

...
I wonder what he says to the Jews who are members now of his lineage? Does he say the same to them?

continuing the discussion with him, I could perceive a slightly seed of a feeling (that I know)shared in east Europa (Poland and so on) of a "cultural anti-Semitism" ... curious from a Rinpoché.

Sönam

[Grigoris]

Has "Jesus" never gained the fame which now bears his name, people wouldn't make a big deal of it, or wonder about it. Maybe his next door neighbor, Larry, was also a Bodhisattva. If so, nobody would care, but we won't ever know, because nobody ever heard of any next door Neighbor of Jesus, named Larry.

Brian was his next door neighbour, not Larry! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIjBO26qjYM&feature=fvst" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;