I read in a book once that some students of the religions have a 'theory' that Christ had Buddhist teachers, though others disagree.

It makes sense to me that, after 500 years, the news that there were people further East who were following Buddhist principles had reached Palestine. And that a young Jew, who was troubled that "an eye for an eye" was a recipe for us to all end up blind, might feel that "Love thine enemy" gave a better chance of the world becoming a better place.

And so he might well have advocated the addition to Judaism of as much of the Buddhist principles as (some) Jews could accept.

But I am an ignoramus about religous matters. I just like a good hymn, sung with a bit of fervour as in Welsh and (some) Yorkshire chapels.

Can anyone point me to where this 'theory' is propounded/discussed?

My B.A. degree was specifically in Biblical Studies and since then I've been primarily a student of Budhism as well as a lecturer in religious studies. This doesn't makeme an authority on anything at all but it does make me a little more aware of the scholarship that's been done than most folks.

And I can say that no 'serious' scholar has ever put forth such a hypothesis, simply because there is no evidence, nice idea though it is. Buddhist missionaries did reach Egypt long before Jesus' time but they made no significant impact. You can read a sensible account of all this in Stephen batchelor's 'The Awakening of the West' - an excellent study of the history of the encounter of Buddhism and the West.

In fact all of Jesus' innovative ideas can be understood within the context of the liberal branches of proto-Judaism in first century Palestine.

To me it makes sense to think that if the most highly realised/wise teachers in any culture at any time understand the deepest implications of compassion and selflessness then it stands to reason that their teachings are going to appear very similar. That is not evidence that they are borrowing/nicking ideas from each other, rather that they are all accessing the one true 'Source'.

There is also a theory that Mahayana Buddhism arose from an interface between the first generatino christians going East and early buddhism, but this is equally devoid of any evidence and betrays ignorance of early Indian Buddhism.

Thanks, andyinkat.

Good luck with the job in Nong Khai. Quite a change from Nepal----even from Thamel!

The survey that showed Nong Khai was the best place in Asia for Americans to retire amazed several of us in and around Khon Kaen and Udon. Nong Khai isn't way, way behind in any rational manner of scoring; but we did reckon there are a fair few places just south of it where we would prefer to be. I tried to find more about the survey, but without much success. I guess (though I may find myself being corrected) that the American association of retirees that did it simply posted a questionnaire to their members who had overseas addresses and scored the replies that they got; and that they got one from Nong Khai and none from elsewhere in Esarn. I remember that 'price of real estate' was a big factor, which didn't impress me!!

Please tell us your experience of ETIHAD. I am giving them a try in the opposite direction in 5 weeks time. Did your GBP277 include tax?

Um, you might have stuck this on the wrong thread Martin!

Actually I've gotten a bit ahead of myself - I don't physically touch down until two weeks; mentally I'm already in LOS!

So you won't be too far away from Nong Khai - cool.

BTW i was in Boudha, the far end of Kathmandu from Thamel - tourist quarter - ugh!

My fare does include tax; one way though. i'll let you know how it goes. My first flight to Nepal was with Syrian Air - 'cos they were dirt cheap. Boy you get what you pay for - utter disasterous but amused me. My only criterion is getting to my destination as cheaply as possible.

So, about Jesus and Buddha.....

There are some books which speculate that Jesus survived the cross and went to India. See Jesus In India Books

From the actual (non-biblical) evidence available, it is *extremely* doubtful that a *historical* Jesus actually existed. Please don't crucify me for writing this (sorry if my choice of words bothers you!) but you MUST read the book "The Jesus Mysteries" (written by scholars) if you want to be "enlightened" about the origins of Christianity.

The Jesus mythological character we read about was a part of a gnostic tradition that pre-dates the Lord Buddha and the "new testament Christians" by hundreds of years.

Please read Chapter 8, "The Missing Man" , before you dismiss the conclusions of the authors. I happen to believe the non-believers. Your milage may vary.

SIGH

[Reminds himself this is a Buddhism Forum and endeavours to maintain his composure and a noble silence]

Well i'm a secular jew living 20 minutes from j-town (jerusalem) and i join andi with the 'silence and ignore'; come travel some with the bibles in and around my area and u will be amazed ... every step u take u trip over some archeological stuff.... walk where king david walked; check out where john the baptist hid (cave in our orchards found by british arch. scholars) near sataf and tzuba.... blah blah blah....

andi your silence shouldnt be 'noble' but just..... non involved silence neither ignoring or not ignoring ....

andi if u ever get to 'palestina' come visit; we have a resident archeoligist on our kibbutz who specializes only in our area: tzuba which goes back to biblical times as a way station for water food 'local pub' and grape growing jesus probably drank wine here

 

 

I've read the deluded rantings of L Ron Hubbard and Joseph Smith and Jim Jones, and I've even read Moorcock's "Behold The Man", so I guess I'm "partially enlightened". Can I have a point for a near miss ?

I have not (and probably will not) read these rantings. But, yes, you can get the point you request. Why not? Although it seems you didn't get the original point at all

Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy (The Jesus Mysteries) are early Christian historians. The word Mysteries in the title is a non-pejorative term that refers to religious traditions and doctrine of the Pagans. An unintended consequence of the title is that would-be readers conclude it is written by *ranters*

What I like about their tome is their focus on the [fascinating] development of history, itself. Although their conclusions are unpopular and provocative, their research seems unassailable.

"Jesus said, 'It is to those who are worthy of my Mysteries that I tell my Mysteries.'"

The Gospel of Thomas

I have only metioned this book because of it's link to the thoughts in the original post. In the modern world I think it makes little difference if there was a historical Jesus or not.

Dammit – lured into breaking his noble silence!

[bina, what you describe is pretty much the Buddha’s ‘noble silence’]

Rod and Bina are correct; no amount of historical or archaeological evidence can ever ascertain that Jesus of Nazareth is/was ‘The Christ’ or ‘The Son of God’ as these are theological not historical concepts, but there is plenty of evidence to be confident that he did walk the land of first century Palestine.

In the modern world I think it makes little difference if there was a historical Jesus or not.

It matters to Christians - of whom there are a few, even in the modern world.

There is indeed far more credible evidence for this than for the historical existence of most characters from the ancient world whom no one doubts. For instance there is far less evidence that Plato or Socrates existed yet no one is writing badly researched books on these lines. Why? Simple – they wouldn’t sell. But there are always millions of mugs who’ll lap up any half-baked ‘Jesus exposed scoop’.

The actual notion that Jesus was merely a mythological figure was first put about by German scholars in the mid-19th century and has long since been discredited. I’m surprised no one has yet referred to the resurrection of the idea by a British scholar in the 1960s who tried to put it about that the gospels were all secret code for which only he had the magic key – ‘Jesus’ was actually a hallucinogenic mushroom. [John Allegro – ‘The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross’]. The disciples were basically stoned hippies. Late 1960s note – see how some ‘scholars’ have a way of giving the buying public what they want to hear?

Jesus in India – this notion actually has its origins in the Qur’an. For Muslims Jesus was the greatest prophet after Muhammad (peace be upon him). The Qur’an teaches that the Christian belief that he was the Son of God is blasphemy however and it rejects the belief that he was crucified as a sacrifice to God. The Qur’an therefore teaches that he was switched at the last minute and a colleague was crucified [note that the Qur’an was revealed six centuries later and note the theological reasons for altering the story]. Muslim legend has it that he slipped away to Kashmir and his grave is supposed to be there.

“

The Jesus mythological character we read about was a part of a gnostic tradition that pre-dates the Lord Buddha and the "new testament Christians" by hundreds of years.

The earliest letters in the New Testament were written about AD 50, i.e. less than 20 years after Jesus’ death – hardly ‘centuries’. The Gnostic writings about Jesus post-date that. The Early Church certainly did suppress the Gnostic movement, and there are interesting areas of contact between Gnostic teachings and Eastern mystical traditions; I find the serious scholarship about this fascinating but it tends to be buried under heaps of badly researched bull.

I've read the deluded rantings of L Ron Hubbard and Joseph Smith and Jim Jones, and I've even read Moorcock's "Behold The Man", so I guess I'm "partially enlightened". Can I have a point for a near miss ?

That’s the point Rod – there’s so much bull written which sells to an incredulous public that life’s too short for serious scholars to waste time debunking it all. I have to say, Moorcock’s ‘Behold the Man’, like ‘The Last Temptation’ is brilliant; genius. The difference is, these are presented as fiction; plausible interpretations, but fiction which is an honest approach in contrast to the pseudo-scholar hacks.

Bina – my own position is this: Jesus was a Jew. He placed himself on the radical wing of what in pre-revolt Palestine was a very diverse religious society, but nothing he ever taught or did was opposed to Judaism. His Lord’s Prayer for instance is a beautiful Jewish prayer. He was quite idiosyncratic – some of his ideas were ultra-conservative, others ultra-liberal; he was his own man and not part of any ‘party’. His actions in the temple set off a panic amongst the Jewish authorities who feared Roman reprisals and they moved to silence him.

Jesus’ teachings were in many ways on a worldly level quite impractical. He was fully compassionate with all the humble folk trying to survive in society, but at the same time he insisted that if you really want to commit yourself to God you have to ‘drop out’ of society – give up all possessions, family, home, security and be a homeless wanderer. The movement which sprang up in his name – the Church had to ‘water down’ these radical teachings; the great majority of people cannot commit themselves this fully.

This is exactly the same as the Buddha’s approach. I repeat, Jesus didn’t nick his ideas from Buddha – both are the logical outcome of fully committing yourself to the ‘Other’. This, for me, is fruitful territory for exploring the interface between Buddha and Jesus; in fact the wonderful Vietnamese Buddhist monk Thich Nhat Hanh has done just that in ‘Buddha and Christ’.

I apologize if I offended anyone with my discussion of the historical Jesus debate. I meant to say that is of interest mostly to academics and literalists (and book publishers!) and should not undermine Christianity in any way. It is slightly off-topic anyway so I would be happy to dismiss the whole thing.

One thing I hope we can all agree on is the immeasurable worth of the popular and prolific Pra Thich Nhat Hanh!

This, for me, is fruitful territory for exploring the interface between Buddha and Jesus; in fact the wonderful Vietnamese Buddhist monk Thich Nhat Hanh has done just that in ‘Buddha and Christ’.

Who else could write so eloquently about mediation while driving in Paris?

http://www.tricycle.com/new.php?p=articles&id=21

One thing I hope we can all agree on is the immeasurable worth of the popular and prolific Pra Thich Nhat Hanh!

Here we can be in complete agreement

In fact let's go completely off topic and linger on this a moment. In another thread asking if anyone had ever met an enlightened person I rwally should have mentioned Thich Nhat Hanh - he really had a presence!

And I can categorically state that IMHO he is the best writer on Dharma in the world today. He has a unique ability to get across the most complex concepts in the simplest, accessible and practical ways.

I would particularly recommend to anyone who hasn't read it, 'Old Path White Clouds'. It is a biography of Lord Buddha; he omits all the miraculous stuff you lot don't like, and he focuses on the most important suttas (teachings) in the Pali Canon - i.e. the scriptures of Thailand's Theravadan Buddhism. You would find yourself extremely well informed and entertained concerning the host nation's religion.

But all his writings have such an endearing charm. and as a peace activist during the War in which he was regarded as an enemy by both sides, and being involved in the subsequent rescue of the boat people he really understands close up what suffering is all about, yet his love and gentleness for all shine through.

I seem to remember reading that there were 2 schools of thought, after Jesus was said to have died on the cross. One was that Jesus was man who became God and second Jesus was God who became man. I thought this was interesting when relating it to Buddhism and the concept of enlightenment. I can see the case for both being correct.

Back in the mid 1950's I was in Sydney and got to spend some time with the top Buddhist Abbot from thailand along with his translator one Phra Sumungalo (Dr. Robert Clifton). They were doing a tour of Australia and were staying with a friend of mine. The Abbot tells me a story about a young woman from the USA. She was doing a tour of the world studying world religons and got to interview this top guy. She asks the question ''can one be a Christian and also a Buddhist too'' The answer given was if you are a Christian and you become a Buddhist then you become a better Christian. I've thought about this over the years and I believe this to be true.

I don't think that Guatama said ''There is no God ''but rather ''It is not important whether there is a God or there is not a God'' Remembering that Guatama was all about ending suffering.

Regards Joe

 

 

Up here in Esarn, I see many, many animistic shrines. Some of them are in the grounds of Buddhist temples. At first I thought that this just showed the tolerance of the local abbots. But having read the above posts about Christians also being Buddhist, I will change to seeing it as the acceptance by the abbots that Buddhists can be Animists too.

I also found it strange that Buddhist monks would tie a string round my wrist, as I understood that this was a symbolic tying of my body spirits into me so that I didn't lose any of them on my travels and come home without them. This seemed to be Animist rather than Buddhist.

Not that I minded. It seemed to me to do no harm to have a reminder, every time I had to dry them after showering, that somebody was hoping I would return no worse than I went, which meant keeping my conscience clear.

Is it OK for me to go on being a methodistic Buddhist when I am at home in Thailand and go to the Wat, and being a buddhist Methodist when I go to Yorkshire as a migrant worker and go to the Chapel that I was christened in?

Somewhere I once saw a map of the world showing the religions of the peoples of the world. I think it was the multi-volume Times Atlas, produced about 1950, after things such as national boundaries settled down after WWII. The things that surprised me were that Christians in Europe were vastly outnumbered by those elsewhere in the world, and that the majority of the world's population followed two religions simultaneously.

I remember thinking that "honour thy father and thy mother" might be the remains of an absorption of ancestor worship, so even for us who were recorded as only following one religion it wasn't clear cut.

Okay, this whole 'can you be a buddhist AND a Christian/member of other religion' debate. The answer is 'yes and no - it depends'. very Buddhist!

His Holiness the Dalai Lama, being a great diplomat and ambassador for Buddhism in the west (amongst many other enlightened qualities) is frequently asked this question. He tells Christians to look into Buddhism to help them become better Christians, not to convert. But to really understand this you need to understand the theological context and the Buddhist beliefs about life after death.

You know how in Christianity it is taught that in this life you get one shot and this determines your eternal destiny, but in Buddhism it is taught that you have an infinite number of lifetimes to achieve the final goal. I've explained on another thread that in most forms of Buddhism it is accepted that the chances of actually attaining the final goal in this lifetime are minimal at best. Therefore realistically a Buddhist can hope fo ra better rebirth back in samsara (that which is not nirvana).

Thus a good Christian, a good animist, a good atheist can achieve a better rebirth. A bad Buddhist on the other hand will have a bad rebirth. However when it comes to attaining the ultimate state of full and perfect enlightenment I don't know of any texts that maintains it is possible for a non-Buddhist. Actually it's not possible for a Buddhist since 'Buddhism' is a raft - a vehicle of ideas and practices which ultimately has to be left behind.

But in order to get to the point where your mind is ready to let go of all relative concepts you have to put in the enormously hard work of following a specific path with full commitment. That means putting your faith in one teacher, one teaching and focussing everything on that until you arrive. You'll probably notice that in Thailand monks are perfectly tolerant of the animist beliefs of lay people, but they don't (or shouldn't) practise them themselves. Similarly jumping about from one practice to another or mixing and matching can be beneficial on a relative level but ultimately it involves diluting wisdom with delusion, or the absolute with the relative.

So to sum up, in Christianity all devotees are hoping to get to heaven in their next life. In Buddhism the vast majority of devotees are hoping for the relative goal of a better rebirth in their next life and for this the means are quite flexible. But for the tiny minority who are pursuing the ultimate goal one's focus has to be very narrow and that means sticking to one (of the many) Buddhist paths.

You'll probably notice that in Thailand monks are perfectly tolerant of the animist beliefs of lay people, but they don't (or shouldn't) practise them themselves.

Yes, they shouldn't, but I have seen "exorcisms" and monks (Thai-Burmese, I think) tattoed with astrological "maps (?)" who provide "consulting services" to villagers.

I rarely hear of Thais talking about rebirth. It seems the ultimate *here-after* goals of Christians and Thai-Buddhist-Animists alike are overshadowed by the more practical tham-boon, make-merit, honor thy mother-father (ancestors) concerns. Perhaps the Christian approach is more "avoid sin", than, "make merit." And maybe I am wrong, but isn't tithing as common in the Thai (wat) world as it is in the Christian (Church) world?

The Jesus Mysteries, a book on early Christians and how their beliefs evolved was a real eye opener for me. I can say that it changed my life and puts many things about religion in perspective. I would recommend it to anybody with an open mind. For those folks that have blind faith this book is not for you.

Monks and animist believes.

I understood that there were 2 main Buddist schools of thought here in Thailand. One is those that teach that what was taught by the Buddha and have to do with the Forest Meditation group and was started by monk who died in 1993. The other group are those that involve animism and a mixture of the Hindu religions.

My time in India I did not meet anyone who believed there was more than one God and all those other gods were in fact different aspects of the one God.

Taking that into consideration along with the different beliefs here in Thailand kind of makes sense to me. Because it gives everyone a place to fit in ,that is in a spiritual sense. I've always thought of India as a spiritual smorgasborg.

I want peace of mind, you want peace of mind, we are all heading in the same direction but walking on different pathways. Of course there seem to be those that don't seem to know that peace of mind exists.

If I want to mix Christianity up with Buddhism or Hinduism and I feel that this is leading me to peace of mind then give me your blessing because I give you mine.

Regards Joe

 

Many believe that Kali is all gods and all gods are Kali ... that she created the world, is the mother of the world, and will eventually destroy the world. Most Hindus seem to either revere her or fear her.

You'll have been in Calcutta (Kalighat) then Rod? I was living there (and around West Bengal) in January and February of this year. I was there for the nine days of Durga Puja, I visited the temple of Kali at Kalighat but skipped the animal sacrifices and was amazed to see that Mother Teresa's hospice is built right into the temple.

She's not so 'big' outside Bengal. The female 'energy' (Shakti) is revered ('revere' and 'fear' - or awe and wonder are inseperable) throughout the Hindu world but in different manifestations. The most popular wrathful form is Durga Ma. What you say if Kali equally applies to Durga, Krishna, Siva, indeed any of the major deities - they are all 'all the gods combined' and which version a Hindu focusses on usually comes down to family/community tradition.

Joe, i think the Thai Achaan you are referrin gto was Achaan Chah. He didn't 'begin' the forest tradition - that goes back to the Buddha, but he reinvigourated it in Thailand and also established a wat for westerners (he was the teacher of my first Buddhist teachers). There were a few other great Achaans doing the same thing. The contrast you refer to is not quite how it is - different achaans in different wats have different standards about how strictly or 'lax' their monks should practise. The forest sanghas do tend to be stricter than the urban ones who are catering to a more cosmopolitan and perhaps materialistically-minded laity.

The Jesus Mysteries, a book on early Christians and how their beliefs evolved was a real eye opener for me.  I can say that it changed my life and puts many things about religion in perspective.  I would recommend it to anybody with an open mind.  For those folks that have blind faith this book is not for you.

Hi threelegcowboy,

So this topic resurfaces

Ironically, I (a Christian-turned-agnostic-turned-Buddhist) am much more at ease with Christianity after reading this book. It is unsettling at first, but then why should we *cling* to the notion of a flesh-and-blood Jesus when it is clear that the early Christians (including Paul) had no inclination to do so? (So, why didn't they?)

The debate about the historacity of Jesus began during the second century CE!

If you are branded anti-Christian for recommending this book, just turn the other cheek. They know not what they do!

This book and the Bible are all any good Christian needs in his/her library.

Peace.

Well i'm a secular jew living 20 minutes from j-town (jerusalem) and i join andi with the 'silence and ignore'; come travel some with the bibles in and around my area and u will be amazed ... every step u take u trip over some archeological stuff.... walk where king david walked; check out where john the baptist hid (cave in our orchards found by british arch. scholars) near sataf and tzuba.... blah blah blah....

andi your silence shouldnt be 'noble' but just..... non involved silence neither ignoring or not ignoring ....

andi if u ever get to 'palestina' come visit; we have a resident archeoligist on our kibbutz who specializes only in our area: tzuba which goes back to biblical times as a way station for water food 'local pub' and grape growing  jesus probably drank wine here

Well I have visited the Church of the Nativity, The Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the Wailing Wall, wandered the streets of Jerusalem, Bethleham etc., and can say with conviction that Budhism don't come remotely close to christianity in terms of putting up a convincing scenario.

If you want to feel something visit any of the above.

If you want to argue that Christ had Buddhist teachers you might as well open it up and ask what Mohammed was doing at the time. (teaching the Buddhists eh?)

There was a guy in New Zealand (Doctor of Divinity) and dean of the Knox (University) College Presbyterian faculty who was charged with heresy for questioning the origins of christianity.

He was acquited without conviction, however I would suggest that he was a bit deeper into and more qualified in the the business than the foregoing posters.

If you want to argue that Christ had Buddhist teachers you might as well open it up and ask what Mohammed was doing at the time. (teaching the Buddhists eh?)

Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) lived a thousand years after Lord Buddha.

 

QUOTE 

I was living there (and around West Bengal) in January and February of this year. I was there for the nine days of Durga Puja,

I think Durga Puja is in late October. Could it have been Saraswati Puja ?

QUOTE 

I visited the temple of Kali at Kalighat but skipped the animal sacrifices

Animal sacrifices aren't restricted to the Puja ... the beheading of a live goat is (or was ... maybe that has changed) a daily ritual at the temple.

QUOTE 

and was amazed to see that Mother Teresa's hospice is built right into the temple.

Worshippers believe that Mother Teresa's Home for The Dying (and the Mother herself, while she lived) were under Kali's protection. I heard or read somewhere that the Mother, although a devout Catholic, paid homage to Kali ... but I feel sure that if this was true then it would have been widely publicized, so it's probably just an urban myth created around the location of her hospice.

*blush* Yes Rod, it was Saraswati Puja. How amiss of me!

About the same time it was Id-ul-Adha, the Muslim festival of sacrifice. I was staying in a Hindu/Muslim village at the time and was amazed not so much at the hundreds of buffalo and goats awaiting slaughter, but all the camels that were making their way right across the huge country for the occasion.

And I meant I timed my visits to Kali Mandir to avoid 'that time of day'.

That's no urban myth about Mother Teresa. Previously I wasn't a huge Mother Teresa fan, but now I'm a convert. I don't want to go into details but I spent the two months in Bengal living as a homeless beggar, mostly on the streets of Calcutta where I got to know the resident beggar community very well. They had so many stories to tell of Mother Teresa's kindness and how it's all changed since her passing. I learnt a lot about her that is not in any biography because nobody has ever talked to these people.

I later found myself in the north of the state at Kalimpong in the foothills of the Himalayas. There I found the most wonderful church I have ever seen in my life. Designed by Mother Teresa it is in the shape of a Tibetan temple and there are murals inside and outside throughout depicting Jesus and his disciples looking like Buddhist monks and Mother Mary floating on a lotus in the posture of a female bodhisattva. Mother Teresa did have a reverence for Hinduism and Buddhism which you just don't hear of - perhaps the Roman Catholic church don't want to publicise it. But I learned so much about her that I never got from biographies and everything I learnt led me to hold her in awe - truly she warrants the epithet Saint Teresa.