Christianity Questions

Started by m. sade5 pages
Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Yes, because it asks us to let go of the self, and to resist all urge to do harm to another. That's not something most people are ready to do yet....

"There could be no greater mistake than for a Westerner the direct practice of *[Chinese yoga], for it would be a matter of his will and his consciousness, and would only strengthen the latter, bringing about the very effect to be avoided."
-Jung (1930)
"Secret of the Golden Flower"

Of course, this was written in the 1930s when the divide between the East and West was more distinctly felt, but my impression is that in addition to some people not being ready for it yet, their conscious efforts to do so would have the opposite effect of reinforcing the ego.

Undoubtedly, native practitioners of their respective spiritual traditions faced that same paradox, but seems like a considerably different problem when people of a much different culture attempt to practice that same spiritual tradition. Buddhism was transformed by and adapted to each culture it was introduced to, from India to China to Japan. Each time it was assimilated into a new culture it adapted to the sensibilities and peculiarities of the people. I am skeptical that many people are able to successfully reconcile their identity as a Westerner as well as successfully engage in a foreign spiritual practice as it was originally meant to be practiced verbatim (and hence the need to adapt it to one's own personal needs).

I'm not saying that it's not possible or that it hasn't been done... but I'm skeptical. One good example to the contrary is John Cage. Or the beat poets, who were able to capture the spontaneity and creativity of zen. Many people are also able to successfully integrate various philosiphies originating from different religions, but I don't necessarily see the traditional practices of those religions as appropriate. They're valuable no doubt, but they were developed and suited to an entirely different people. As Jung put it, we have “an entirely different point of departure in these things.”

*sorry, this was meant to be a single post, but I accidentally posted the first part

Originally posted by Alliance
Its a fad.

A bunch of people figured out that Abrhamic gods weren't the only ones around and went slaphappy.

Buddhism is too often viewed as this perfect relgion. People overlook its own flaws because its currently considered popular.

Not so in Buddhism. Its because buddha's teachings are humanistic philosophy that elucidates the truth and the workings of human mind which guides the supreme way of life and the reverence of all living beings.This what makes it popular and appealing to the people.

Any religion will sell itself, and its not that simple.

Besides, there are many other philosophies that teach the same things.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Buddhism is very difficult to practice - properly at least.

Traditional Buddhism, indeed, involved difficult practices and austerities to attain one's goal of supreme enlightenment. However, my Buddhism taught by Nichiren, 13th century buddhist reformist monk, is very practical, and widely accesible to anyone who practice it.

http://www.middlewaypress.com/mirror.html

The Road to Enlightenment

Today there are many schools of Buddhism, perhaps even thousands. The British scholar Christmas Humphreys once wrote: "To describe [Buddhism] is as difficult as describing London. Is it Mayfair, Bloomsbury, or the Old Kent Road? Or is it the lowest common multiple of all these parts, or all of them and something more?"

As the Buddhist philosophy gently flowed from India - north through China and Tibet, south into Thailand and Southeast Asia - it tended to absorb and be influenced by local religious customs and beliefs. The Buddhism that spread to Tibet and China and eventually to Korea and Japan was called Mahayana, meaning "greater vehicle." That which spread southward, to Southeast Asia and Sri Lanka was called Hinayana, for "lesser vehicle," a pejorative term applied to it by the Mahayanists. The Hinayana schools, based on the earlier teachings of Shakyamuni, typically emphasized a strict and highly detailed code of personal conduct geared toward one's personal salvation. The Mahayana schools emphasized the need for Buddhism to be a compassionate means for common people to attain enlightenment - to search for a practical method that could serve as a vehicle for greater numbers (the greater vehicle) to make the journey to Buddhahood. The profusion of different Buddhist sutras and theories came to be a source of great confusion, particularly in China in the first and second centuries. At that time, Chinese scholars were confronted with the random introduction of the various sutras of the many Hinayana schools as well as the Mahayana scriptures. Perplexed by these diverse teachings, Chinese Buddhists attempted to compare and classify the sutras.

By the fifth century A.D., the systematizing of the Buddhist canon had become very advanced. In particular, a priest named Chih-i, later known as the Great Teacher T'ien-t'ai, developed the definitive standard known as "the five periods and eight teachings." Based on his own enlightenment, which may have rivaled Shakyamuni's, T'ien-t'ai's system classified the sutras chronologically as well as from the standpoint of profundity. He determined that the Lotus Sutra, the penultimate teaching of Shakyamuni expounded toward the end of his life, contained the ultimate truth. T'ien-t'ai formulated this truth as the principle of "three thousand realms in a single moment of life." It employs a phenomenological approach, describing all the kaleidoscopic emotions and mental states that human beings are subject to at any given moment. The theory of three thousand realms in a single moment of life holds that all the innumerable phenomena of the universe are encompassed in a single moment of a common mortal's life. Thus the macrocosm is contained within the microcosm.

The vast dimension of life to which Shakyamuni awoke under the Bodhi tree was beyond the reach of ordinary human consciousness. T'ien-t'ai described this ultimate truth as three thousand realms in a single moment of life, recognizing that the Lotus Sutra was the only sutra to assert that all people - men and women, good and evil, intellectuals and common laborers - had the potential to attain Buddhahood within their lifetimes.

A crucial question remained: How could common people apply this to their lives? Toward that end, T'ien-t'ai advocated a rigorous practice of observing the mind through meditation, delving deeper and deeper until the ultimate truth of three thousand realms in a single moment of life was grasped. Unfortunately, this type of practice was feasible only for monks, who could spend indefinite periods of time contemplating the message implicit in the Lotus Sutra. It was almost impossible for people who worked for a living and had other things on their minds. The full flowering of Buddhism was not to be accomplished until it migrated along trading routes to Japan. It would not be widely practiced and revered today without the incredible courage and insight of a thirteenth-century Japanese monk named Nichiren, who brought the Lotus Sutra into sharp focus in a way that had a direct impact on people and their daily lives.

Back to Top

Modern-Day Buddhism
Nichiren, born in Japan in 1222, gave concrete and practical expression to the Buddhist philosophy of life that Shakyamuni taught and T'ien-t'ai illuminated. He expressed the heart of the Lotus Sutra, and therefore the Buddha's enlightenment, in a form that all people could practice. He defined this as the invocation Nam-myoho-renge-kyo, based on the characters of the title of the Lotus Sutra.

His achievement was akin to translating a complex scientific theory into a practical technique. Just as Benjamin Franklin's discovery of electricity was not harnessed for practical use until many years later when Thomas Edison invented the light bulb, Shakyamuni's enlightenment was inaccessible until Nichiren taught the fundamental practice by which all people could call forth the law of life from within themselves. His realization of this principle had the power to directly affect and move the people who encountered it, heralding a new epoch in the history of Buddhism.

He had revealed the ultimate Mahayana teaching - the greater vehicle - by which all people could journey to Buddhahood. In Nichiren's own words, "A blue fly, if it clings to the tail of a thoroughbred horse, can travel ten thousand miles, and the green ivy that twines around the tall pine can grow to a thousand feet." For the first time, ordinary people could take a journey previously possible only for saints and sages.

Nichiren's Buddhism has proved itself to be of profound value to millions of people. It was Nichiren who expressed the essence of the Lotus Sutra in a way that enables all people, regardless of their level of knowledge, to enter the gateway to enlightenment. This was a revolutionary development in the history of religion.

While Buddhism began with the teaching of one human being who awoke to the law of life within himself, it has come to include the interpretations of that teaching by subsequent scholars and prophets. As we have said, the word Buddha originally meant "enlightened one," one who is awakened to the eternal truth or law of life (dharma). This truth is eternal and boundless. It is present always and everywhere. In this sense, the law of life is not the exclusive property of Shakyamuni Buddha or of Buddhist monks.

The truth is open equally to everyone. In the Buddhism described on these pages, there are no priests or gurus, no ultimate authority that decides what is correct or incorrect, what is right or wrong. In this Buddhism, the wall between priesthood and laity has been torn down, leading to a complete democratization of the practice. Because it is essentially nondogmatic, it suits the skeptics among us. The ultimate and all-abiding law that the Buddha perceived may be another name for some people's concept of God. On the other hand, a person who cannot believe in an anthropomorphic God can see an underlying energy to the universe. The breadth of Buddhism encompasses both views and focuses on the individual.

There is no one to blame - and no one to implore for salvation. In Buddhism, no God or supernatural entity plans and shapes our fates. In Western religion, you can bring yourself closer to God through your faith, but you can never become God. In Buddhism, one could never be separate from the wisdom of God, because the ultimate wisdom already exists in the heart of every person. Through Buddhist practice, we seek to call forth that portion of the universal life force existing originally and eternally within - what we call Buddhahood - and manifest it by becoming a Buddha. Buddhists become aware of the existence, in their innermost depths, of the eternal law that permeates both the universe and the individual human being. They aim to live every day in accordance with that law. In so doing, they discover a way of living that redirects all things toward hope, value and harmony. It is the discovery of this objective law itself, as it manifests within the individual, that creates spiritual value, not some exterior power or being. As Nichiren stated in a famous letter titled "On Attaining Buddhahood In This Lifetime":
Your practice of the Buddhist teachings will not relieve you of the sufferings of birth and death in the least unless you perceive the true nature of your life. If you seek enlightenment outside yourself, then your performing even ten thousand practices and ten thousand good deeds will be in vain. It is like the case of a poor man who spends night and day counting his neighbor's wealth but gains not even half a coin.

This idea that the power to achieve happiness lies totally within can be disconcerting. It entails a radical sense of responsibility. As Daisaku Ikeda has written: "Society is complex and harsh, demanding that you struggle hard to survive. No one can make you happy. Everything depends on you as to whether or not you attain happiness·. A human being is destined to a life of great suffering if he is weak and vulnerable to his external surroundings."......................

Originally posted by Alliance
Any religion will sell itself, and its not that simple.

Besides, there are many other philosophies that teach the same things.

Buddhism don't sell by itself. People just love the Buddha Dharma if they could discover it..

😂 Oh I love hearing that. Thats what every religion says.

I find all the exalted sentiment upsets my stomach... sick

If I had to state a preference though, it would definitely be Chinese Buddhism, specically Chan Buddhism.... (Linji was the man chair)

concerning....buddhism?

i was specifically referring to the article above and mahasattva's promotion of nichiren buddhism... but in general i do find enthusiastic zeal.... nauseous

no, i respect buddhism, but i don't feel obligated to like it

Christianity Questions

I have a question, my wife and I were watching Passion of Christ last nigh (I know way late) and we were talking about the difference between the Catholic religion and Christianity. Now from what I have read is that Christianity has been around since 1400 BC and the Old Testament but Christ wasn’t around then? Some things I would like answered…

Where did the word Christianity come from?
What is the difference between Christianity and Catholic religion?
Was it always called Christianity even before Christ?

Just a note, I’m not making fun these are things I couldn’t find clear answers for.

Catholicism is a branch of Christianity, they are not two separate religions.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Catholicism is a branch of Christianity, they are not two separate religions.
Well I know that there are many branches of Christianity and many have different views and beliefs.

Christianity was not around until about 50 years after "Jesus's" death. That is when the first books of the New Testement were first written.

Religions similar to Christianity were around before Christianity.

Catholicism is Christianity, one of its three main branches.

The ironic message that you are indirectyl hitting on is that the Jews, who worship the same god as Christians, supposedly were not saved, according to some versions of Christianity, because they did not accept Christ. So, even though they were following God's will, because he had not sent his "son" yet, they were burned.

Of course, in Christianity there are so many sects and competing ideas that there is no "this is Christian" archtype.

Originally posted by ThePittman
Well I know that there are many branches of Christianity and many have different views and beliefs.

You asked the diffeance between Chistianity and Catholicism, so I assumed you meant that Catholicism is different to Chistianity.

So if I understand right Christianity wasn’t around before Christ? However I have read that Christianity was founded with the first Bible in 1400 BC.

No. You've, frankly, read wrong. The Old Testement was around, but that was co-opted from the Torah. Christianity was not founded as a religion until maybe about 100 CE

Thanks for the answers, that what was bugging me. I found several religion sites that had timelines of religions and many of them had Christianity going back to 1400 BC which didn’t make sense to me from what I had previously learned.

Didn't you mother ever teach you about the quality of websites on the internet? 😛

Any religion will do anyhting to justify its historical existance as THE religoin. Fortunately, most do so against fact, so its easy to spot the liars.

Re: Christianity Questions

Originally posted by ThePittman
I have a question, my wife and I were watching Passion of Christ last nigh (I know way late) and we were talking about the difference between the Catholic religion and Christianity. Now from what I have read is that Christianity has been around since 1400 BC and the Old Testament but Christ wasn’t around then? Some things I would like answered…

Where did the word Christianity come from?

Greek I would assume.
Originally posted by ThePittman
What is the difference between Christianity and Catholic religion?
Catholics are christians, what you're thinking of is called Anglican/Protestant/Church of England where the ruler is The Queen of England, and has been England's Monarch since Henry VIII who invented the religion.
Originally posted by ThePittman
Was it always called Christianity even before Christ?
I don't understand what you mean. Christianity is after christ, before christ they were jews, which is why the old testement is jewish beliefs.

Originally posted by ThePittman
Just a note, I’m not making fun these are things I couldn’t find clear answers for.
Try here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/christianity