buddha & christ

Upload: kspm007

Post on 10-Apr-2018

235 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    1/101

    The Buddhaand

    The ChrisT

    reCiproCal Views

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    2/101

    F :

    C- B , Kk, J.

    Mj M | D.

    W J C

    Tz Tk | D.

    C 8 E V

    A .

    N k

    z , ,

    , ,

    ,

    .

    ISBN: ---X

    ISBN-: 8

    L C C N: 8

    V .k. .

    The Buddhaand

    The ChrisT

    reCiproCal Views

    Ernest Valea

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    3/101

    For my amily

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    4/101

    Contents

    Introduction ................ ................. ................. ................. ................. .........

    PART ONE THE BACKGROUND ................ ................. ................

    . Hinduism rom the Vedas to the time o the Buddha ..........................The Vedic gods ................. ................. ................. ................. .............

    The origins o Hindu pantheism ................. ................. ................. ....

    The human condition, liberation and eternal destiny

    in the Upanishads ...................................................................

    . Judaism rom the story o creation to the time o the Christ ................

    The creation o man ................ ................. ................. ................. .......

    The remission o sins in Judaism vs. other religious patterns ..............

    A short history o Judaism rom Moses to Jesus .................................

    PART TWO THE LIFE AND TEACHINGS ................ ................. ....

    . Historical settings o the Buddha and the Christ .................................

    Dates and evidences or a historical approach ................ ................. ....

    The Jesus o history ...........................................................................

    A review o the Buddhas lie ................. ................. ................. .......... Similarities and contrasts with the lie o Christ .............................. ..

    . How did the Christ understand himsel and his mission? ....................

    Jesus as a man o miracles .................................................................

    Jesus as a prophet ................ ................. ................. ................. ..........

    Jesus as redeemer rom sin ................................................................

    Jesus divinity ................. ................ ................. ................. ................

    Father, Son and Holy Spirit ................ ................. ................. .............

    . The teaching o the Buddha according to Theravada and

    Mahayana Buddhism ................. ................. ................. ................. ..........

    The First Noble Truth ............... ................. ................. ................. ....

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    5/101

    the buddha and the christ reciprocal views

    The Second Noble Truth ................ ................. ................. .................

    The Third Noble Truth ................. ................. ................. .................

    The Fourth Noble Truth ................ ................. ................. .................

    Doctrinal development in Mahayana Buddhism ............................. ..

    A new wisdom: The doctrine o emptiness ........................................

    A new motivation: Becoming a Buddha or the sake o countless

    beings ................ ................. ................. ................. ................. ....

    The three bodies o the Buddha .......................................................

    Appendix The Buddha o Hinduism and the Christ

    o Gnosticism ................................................................................

    PART THREE RECIPROCAL VIEWS ................ ................. ............

    . On the nature o Ultimate Reality .....................................................

    . On personhood .................................................................................

    Personhood and the Kingdom o God ................ ................. ............

    Personhood and sin ................ ................ ................. ................. ........

    Personhood and no-sel ....................................................................

    . On the Savior about himsel and his way o saving us ........................

    How did they become the savior? ................. ................. ................

    How do they wish to be seen by us? ................ ................. ...............

    What did they do or our salvation/enlightenment? ..........................

    . On what they asked us to do or our salvation/enlightenment ............

    The meaning o aith .......................................................................

    Buddhist compassion and Christian love ..........................................

    . The Parable o the Prodigal Son as told by the Christand by the Buddha ........................................................................

    . The Christ as a bodhisattva................................................................

    CONCLUSION....................................................................................

    Works cited ................ ................. ................ ................. ................. .......

    Index ................ ................. ................. ................. ................. ...............

    Introduction

    You will nd many parables in this book. Let me start with one to introduce

    our topic. There once was a little worm living happily in an apple and eating

    it away slowly, day by day. He didnt lack anything. In act all he needed was

    ood, and ood was all around him. But one day he started to do philosophy, or

    more ormally to investigate the principles o being. He wondered whether

    the apple core was all there was and whether the meaning o lie consisted

    o nothing else but eating it away. He asked his ellow worms about this,

    but they didnt know either and had never asked such questions. They sent

    him to the oldest worm, but neither did he know. Why do you ask such

    questions? he replied. There is nothing more to lie than chewing up this

    tasty apple. I could teach you several ways o chewing it, o shaping beautiulgalleries through it or o digging aster than other worms, but stop asking

    such nonsense. So the little worm gave up his philosophical inquiry and

    dedicated himsel to the routine o a normal worms lie. But one day he took

    a big bite and was suddenly blinded by the light o the sun. He ell out o the

    apple and landed on the ground. The only reality he knew had ended. But it

    was too late or him to learn rom his experience, as the ants rapidly took him

    to their nest and ate him. Ignorance is not bliss.

    This parable illustrates well our world. Some o us are like the little

    worm, wondering i eating, drinking, sex and all other pleasures o lie

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    6/101

    10 the buddha and the christ reciprocal views Introduction 11

    are all there is in store or us. Others dont bother themselves with such

    philosophical questions and just dig urther in the apple. The Buddha and

    the Christ warn us against such a perspective, and both tell us there is more

    to lie than eating up our apple. The Christ let us theParable of the Rich Man

    inLuke 12,1621, saying:

    The ground o a certain rich man produced a good crop. He thought

    to himsel, What shall I do? I have no place to store my crops. Then

    he said, This is what Ill do. I will tear down my barns and build

    bigger ones, and there I will store all my grain and my goods. And

    Ill say to mysel, You have plenty o good things laid up or many

    years. Take lie easy; eat, drink and be merry. But God said to him,

    You ool! This very night your lie will be demanded rom you. Then

    who will get what you have prepared or yoursel? This is how it

    will be with anyone who stores up things or himsel but is not rich

    toward God.

    Similarly, the Buddha let us the parable o the rich herdsman Dhaniya,

    who argued:

    I have boiled (my) rice, I have milked (my cows), I am living together

    with my ellows near the banks o the Mahi (river), (my) house is

    covered, the re is kindled: thereore, i thou like, rain, O sky! []

    I support mysel by my own earnings, and my children are (all) about

    me, healthy; I hear nothing wicked o them: thereore, i thou like,

    rain, O sky! []

    I have cows, I have calves, I have cows in cal and heiers, and I have

    also a bull as lord over the cows: thereore, i thou like, rain, O sky!

    []Then at once a shower poured down, lling both sea and land

    (Nipata , ).

    In other words, ignorance is not bliss. This book is or those who are not

    satised with chewing up their apple and who, like our little riend in the

    parable, also started to investigate the meaning o lie. Most o us look to

    great spiritual teachers or answers. Undoubtedly two o the greatest are the

    Buddha and the Christ, both o whom are ollowed by millions. Not only are

    their teachings o huge interest separately, but there is growing interest in

    how they relate to each other. Their teachings show some common ground, as

    we have seen in their warning against hedonism, and they hold in common

    many other exhortations o an ethical nature. We nd, or example, several

    very similar demands in JesusSermon on the Mount(Matthew 57) and in the

    BuddhasDhammapada:

    T B : T C :

    Let a man overcome anger by

    love, let him overcome evil by

    good; let him overcome the

    greedy by liberality, the liar by

    truth!(Dhammapada )

    Love your enemies and pray or

    those who persecute you

    (Matthew ,).

    Not the perversities o others,

    not their sins o commission

    or omission, but his own mis-

    deeds and negligences should a

    sage take notice o

    (Dhammapada ).

    You hypocrite, rst take the

    plank out o your own eye, and

    then you will see clearly to

    remove the speck rom your

    brothers eye

    (Matthew ,).

    One is the road that leads

    to wealth, another the road

    that leads to Nirvana; i the

    Bhikshu, the disciple o Bud-

    dha, has learnt this, he will not

    yearn or honour, he will striveater separation rom the world

    (Dhammapada ).

    No one can serve two masters.

    Either he will hate the one and

    love the other, or he will be

    devoted to the one and despise

    the other. You cannot serveboth God and Money

    (Matthew ,).

    All men tremble at punish-

    ment, all men ear death; re-

    member that you are like unto

    them, and do not kill, nor

    cause slaughter

    (Dhammapada ).

    So in everything, do to others

    what you would have them do

    to you, or this sums up the

    Law and the Prophets

    (Matthew ,).

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    7/101

    12 the buddha and the christ reciprocal views Introduction 13

    Many other such similarities can be ound in Marcus Borgs book Jesus and

    the Buddha.1 Some authors have gone ar beyond noting such similarities and

    concluded that the Buddha and the Christ are complementary teachers. One

    o these is Thich Nhat Hanh, a best-selling Zen master, who writes in his

    Going Home: Jesus and Buddha as Brothers: Buddha and Jesus are two brothers

    who have to help each other (Nhat Hanh 1999, p. 200). To assess to what

    extent the Buddha and the Christ can help each other is one o the tasks

    o Buddhist-Christian dialogue, to which this book attempts to make some

    contribution.

    This will not be a literature survey on dierent approaches in Buddhist-

    Christian dialogue, although that would be an important area o research.Rather, it will try to establish the proper tools or this dialogue. We cannot

    conclude that the Buddha and the Christ have complementary teachings

    without rst making every eort to understand them as they are, each in his

    original setting. In other words, we must go beyond supercial similarities

    and appearances. Instead o quoting verses careully selected rom Buddhist

    and Christian texts according to a pre-established agenda and putting them

    side by side so that the teachings may seem equivalent or opposite, I propose

    that we engage in a more rigorous analysis o their teachings. We should rst

    study the spiritual background in which they gave their teaching, understand

    how their teaching related to that background, what they took over and what

    they let out, what they modied and why, and only ater understanding each

    ones teaching as a whole to pursue a comparative study.

    This book is addressed to both Buddhists and Christians. I hope to present

    the teachings o the Buddha and o the Christ in such a way that they will not

    look like two separate booklets articially put together under the same cover,

    or like two texts in languages that cannot be reciprocally comprehended. I

    will do my best to present the teaching o the Buddha in a most relevant way

    or Christians, and vice versa, to present the message o Christ in a way that

    would make sense or Buddhists. This doesnt meanadapting the teaching o

    one to the teaching o the other, but to always remain aware o what words

    truly communicate. The same words can yield dierent meanings in dierent

    contexts, and Buddhism and Christianity operate in very dierent conceptual

    contexts.

    This book is divided into three parts. The rst sets the scene or a proper

    understanding o the Buddha and the Christ. The rst chapter introduces

    1 Marcus Borg (ed.),Jesus and Buddha: the parallel sayings, Seastone, Berkeley, CA, 1997.

    Hinduism, the context in which the Buddha delivered his teaching, and thus

    will explain the major themes debated at that time. It will also help us see

    how a transition occurred in Hinduism rom a theistic worldview, dealing

    with gods and sacrices, to a pantheistic one, in which insight plays the

    major role. The second chapter introduces Judaism. It will provide the basic

    understanding o the context and issues addressed by the Christ. The Jews at

    the time o the Christ had very dierent expectations rom the Hindus at the

    time o the Buddha, so we need to be aware o these dierences. Thereore this

    rst part on Hinduism and Judaism is aimed at reconstructing the contexts

    in which the Buddha and the Christ were teaching, as both were addressing

    specic issues in very dierent religious backgrounds.

    Part two is about what the Buddha and the Christ actually said anddid. Chapter 3 presents the lives o the Buddha and the Christ, identiying

    what they had in common and what was dierent. The next two chapters

    analyze their teaching. Chapter 4 is about the teachings o the Christ, aiming

    at understanding the link between what he said and who he was. Chapter 5

    presents the teaching o the Buddha according to the tradition o Theravada

    Buddhism and its most important developments in Mahayana Buddhism.

    Part three is an exercise in comparative religion. We will assess how the

    teachings o the Buddha and the Christ relate to each other. We will try to see

    how the teachings o each would work in the context o the teachings o the

    other. In other words, we will try to understand what a certain doctrine o the

    Buddha would mean in light o the teaching o the Christ and vice versa. What

    would it communicate? For instance, how would the Buddha view the Christs

    teaching on sin? Or how would the Christ interpret the Buddhas teaching on

    compassion? Is there an ultimate common ground between these teachings,

    a meeting point beyond insignicant divergences? Did the Buddha and theChrist use two languages that spoke o the same truth? Do we need only

    minor adjustments in our vocabulary in order to discover an already existing

    common ground between their teachings? Or are there really irreconcilable

    dierences?

    The problem in attempting such a comparative approach is that the same

    observer has to switch sides between the two perspectives and try to remain

    objective and equally detached rom both. But the act is that we all approach

    reality through the lter o own our prejudices, religion included. Although

    I am a Christian and I didnt convert rom Buddhism, I still think that such

    an approach is worth taking, as it can open the way or a better reciprocal

    understanding o the two religious traditions. Others may want to ollow this

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    8/101

    14 the buddha and the christ reciprocal views Introduction 15

    method rom a Buddhist perspective, which I would encourage, as it may well

    provide some good eedback to my present work.

    This book is to be viewed as a personal attempt to bring more light to

    the controversial domain o comparative religion. The story is incomplete or

    obvious reasons. I have just mentioned the bias o my own religious views.

    Another limitation is imposed by my sources. The material I used is inevitably

    selective, as I had to use Buddhist and Christian texts and authors in English

    translations. There is the urther diculty o diering varieties within each

    major tradition, especially in Buddhism. This makes it dicult to nd a

    common Buddhist position on certain issues (like the bodhisattva doctrine,

    or instance), so a urther caution will be to remain aware o the existing

    dierences and note the alternative views.Suggestions, comments and critiques are welcomed rom all readers, with

    the hope that they will improve the next edition. Please make them as specic

    and clear as possible.2 In the end, this book is an invitation or you to continue

    to explore this ascinating domain or yoursel.

    Editorial note

    Following many other authors, I have not inserted the diacritical marks or

    Sanskrit and Pali words. Scholars do not need them to recognize these words

    in their original written orm, and the majority o readers have nothing to

    gain rom them. Thereore Sanskrit and Pali words are in roman type or

    easier reading. For instance, instead o , you will ndshunyata. Since

    the Buddhist canon o scripture was originally written in Pali, I will use Pali

    words or the terms relevant to our discussion. But in cases in which the

    original scriptures were written in Sanskrit (as in Hinduism and some o the

    Mahayana sutras) or in Japanese (in Shin Buddhism), I will use the names as

    they appear in that language.

    However, several terms have already become common in English, so

    I have used the anglicized orm (or example, nirvana instead o the Pali

    nibbana; karma instead okamma). Where necessary, the plural o Sanskrit

    or Pali words has been ormed by adding the s.

    Whenever a scholars name is rst mentioned, whether in the main text or

    in ootnotes, I will add a ew words to introduce him or her.

    2 Please use ma [email protected] as the e-mail address.

    A note on sources of canonical scriptures

    All quotations rom the Bible are taken rom The NIV Study Bible, New

    International Version, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI, 1985.

    All quotations rom Hindu scriptures used in chapter 1, unless otherwise

    indicated, are rom Friedrich Max MllersSacred Books o the East, now in the

    public domain, source: www.sacred-texts.com. The same source applies to the

    BuddhistDhammapada and theSutta Nipata.

    Quotations rom the Buddhist Nikayas are taken rom the translations

    published by Wisdom Publications:

    The Middle Length Discourses o the Buddha: Bhikkhu Nanamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi, 2001. Reprinted rom /The Middle

    Length Discourses o the Buddha: A Translation o the Majjhima Nikaya/,

    with permission rom Wisdom Publications, 199 Elm Street, Somerville, MA

    02144 USA. Wisdompubs.org

    The Long Discourses o the Buddha:

    Maurice Walshe, 1996. Reprinted rom /The Long Discourses o the

    Buddha: A Translation o the Digha Nikaya/, with permission rom Wisdom

    Publications, 199 Elm Street, Somerville, MA 02144 USA. Wisdompubs.org.

    The Connected Discourses o the Buddha:

    Bhikkhu Bodhi, 2000. Reprinted rom /The Connected Discourses o the

    Buddha: A Translation o the Samyutta Nikaya/, with permission rom Wisdom

    Publications, 199 Elm Street, Somerville, MA 02144 USA. Wisdompubs.org.

    Quotations rom theLotus Sutra are taken rom the translation o Bunno Kato,

    Yoshiro Tamura and Kojiro Miyasaka, published by Kosei Publishing, Tokyo,

    1975, The Threeold Lotus Sutra.

    Abbreviations used:

    DN stands or the Digha Nikaya, as above.

    MN stands or the Majjhima Nikaya, as above.

    SN stands or the Samyutta Nikaya, as above.

    LS stands or the Lotus Sutra, as above.

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    9/101

    PART ONE

    THE BACKGROUND

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    10/101

    Chapter 1

    Hinduism from the Vedasto the time of the Buddha

    Hinduism is not a unitary religion, but a multitude o religious and philosophical

    trends. At the time o the Buddha, two main patterns were present. One was

    Brahminism, in which gods ruled the universe and human aairs, and priests

    interceded on behal o humans through the perormance o sacrices. It was

    the religion grounded on the ancient holy scriptures called the Vedas, and the

    closest Indian correspondent to rst-century AD Judaism. The other pattern was

    the Shramana tradition, inaugurated by the wandering ascetics who rejected

    Brahminism. They let the priest-dominated society and withdrew to the

    wilderness to attain deeper spiritual knowledge by practicing asceticism and

    meditative techniques.

    The introduction to Hinduism that ollows will be o help especially to

    those who are not amiliar with its undamental notions, such asatman, karma,

    reincarnation and liberation. In order to understand the Buddhas message

    we must be acquainted with these terms, as they orm the basic religious

    language o his time. It will also help us see how Hinduism underwent a

    transition rom a theistic to a pantheistic worldview. This exegetical exercise

    will then enable us to understand the transition to the system o thought more

    distant rom theism, which is Buddhism.

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    11/101

    20 the buddha and the christ reciprocal views

    The Vedicgods

    The most sacred scriptures o Hinduism are the our Vedas (Rig,Sama, Yajur,

    andAtharva Veda). They are our collections o hymns (samhitas) describing

    deities, their works and the praises addressed to them in religious rituals.

    The oldest o them, the Rig Veda, is dated as early as 1500 BC.1 Each o the

    our collections o Vedic hymns is associated with three other kinds o Vedic

    literature the Brahmanas, theAranyakas and the Upanishads, to which I will

    reer later. Together they represent the most sacred religious literature (Shruti)

    o Hinduism.

    Although the Vedic hymns speak o gods mostly as Ultimate Reality, wecannot dene the Vedic people either as polytheistic or as monotheistic. On

    the one hand, the hymns shit rom the worship o one god to the worship

    o another, as i each in turn would be the most preerred by the worshipper.

    On the other hand, many divine attributes are shared by several gods, as

    or instance by Varuna, Mitra and Agni. They are not individuated as are

    the Greek gods, and hardly have unique attributes. Thereore it is hard to

    establish who the supreme deity at was a given stage o religious development

    in early Hinduism. Instead o calling the Vedic religion polytheistic or

    monotheistic, Max Mller called it henotheistic, which, according to

    Surendranath Dasgupta,2 is a belie in single gods, each in turn standing out

    as the highest.3 Let me mention a ew important Vedic gods and describe how

    they related to humankind.

    According to Mircea Eliade,4 one o the oldest gods in the Hindu pantheon

    must have been Varuna, the sustainer o creation, omnipotent and omniscient,

    1 Max Mller, one o the ounders o the academic study o Eastern religions, argues or 1200 BC

    (in Dasgupta 1975, p. 10), while Hans W. Schumann, lecturer on Buddhism at Bonn University in

    Germany, argues or 1500 BC (Schumann 2004, p. 29).

    2 Dr. Surendranath Dasgupta (18871952) was the Principal at Government Sanskrit College,

    Calcutta, and an important scholar o Indian religions.

    3 Dasgupta 1975, p. 18. According to Macdonell, Proessor o Sanskrit at Oxord in the 19th century,

    henotheism is an appearance rather than a reality, an appearance produced by the indeniteness

    due to undeveloped anthropomorphism, by the lack o any Vedic god occupying the position o

    a Zeus as the constant head o the pantheon, by the natural tendency o the priest or singer in

    extolling a particular god to exaggerate his greatness and to ignore other gods, and by the growing

    belie in the unity o the gods [] each o whom might be regarded as a type o the divine (in

    Dasgupta 1975, p. 19).

    4 Eliade 1978, p. 199. Mircea Eliade (19071986) was Proessor o the History o Religions at the

    University o Chicago.

    guardian o the rita (the universal law o order), guardian o oaths and lord o

    waters. A hymn in theAtharva Veda proclaims:

    Both this earth here belongs to king Varuna, and also yonder broad

    sky whose boundaries are ar away. Moreover these two oceans are the

    loins o Varuna; yea, he is hidden in this small (drop o) water.

    He that should fee beyond the heaven ar away would not be ree

    rom king Varuna. His spies come hither (to the earth) rom heaven,

    with a thousand eyes do they watch over the earth ( Atharva Veda

    ,,).

    Varuna is deeply involved in human aairs, as he punishes sin and inficts

    diseases on those who are guilty o moral transgressions. The odd thingor humans is that they do not know explicitly the nature o their sin, so

    they lament:

    What, Varuna, hath been my chie transgression, that thou wouldst

    slay the riend who sings thy praises?

    Tell me, Unconquerable Lord, and quickly sinless will I approach

    thee with mine homage (Rig Veda ,,).

    The infiction o penalties can be avoided by conessing sins and having them

    orgiven by him:

    I we have sinned against the man who loves us, have ever wronged a

    brother, riend, or comrade,

    The neighbour ever with us, or a stranger, O Varuna, remove rom

    us the trespass.

    I we, as gamesters cheat at play, have cheated, done wrong unwittingly

    or sinned o purpose,Cast all these sins away like loosened etters, and, Varuna let us be

    thine own beloved (Rig Veda ,,).

    Let us summarize two important elements o early Hinduism: people are

    responsible or their behavior beore god, and moral trespasses bring divine

    punishment, unless orgiveness is granted. This perspective has close parallels

    in Judaism and thus will prove helpul in our comparative approach.5

    According to Eliade the most popular god in the Rig Veda is Indra,

    the warrior god who saved mankind rom the infuence o demon Vritra, the

    embodiment o the rough aspects o nature (Eliade 1978, p. 205). Vritra had

    5 For an in-depth discussion o this aspect see Griswold 1971.

    hinduism from the vedas to the time of the buddha 21

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    12/101

    22 the buddha and the christ reciprocal views hinduism from the vedas to the time of the buddha 23

    locked the waters in the sky, which caused a catastrophic drought on earth. At

    human demand, Indra consumed a large quantity o ritual drink (soma), took

    the lightning (vajra) shaped by god Tvashtri and, with the help o other gods,

    killed the demon and brought back the rain on earth (Rig Veda 10,113). That

    is why he is praised and invoked in the hymns:

    Indra, give us security rom that whereo we are araid.

    Help us, O Maghavan, let thy succour grant us this: drive oes and

    enemies aar.

    We call on Indra, on the liberal giver: we will be prosperous in men

    and cattle.

    Let not the hosts o cruel ends approach us. Drive o

    the Druhs to every side, O Indra (Atharva Veda ,,).

    It is important to notice that Indra ullls his role as sovereign god with

    much more eort than Varuna. Indra needs the ritual drinksoma and sacrices

    perormed or him by humans, and he has to ght in order to restore the

    universal order. His sovereignty over the world is not so obvious as that

    portrayed by the hymns addressed to Varuna. However, people love him more

    than they love Varuna. They do not understand Varunas ways, but they can

    infuence Indra through sacrices and thereore can obtain more easily the

    earthly blessings they seek.

    The re god Agni is both god o sacrice or the Brahmin priests and the

    priest o the gods. As he can burn away sins through the re ritual, people

    pray to him or orgiveness and also or material welare:

    Chasing with light our sin away,

    O Agni, shine thou wealth on us.

    May his light chase our sin away.

    For goodly elds, or pleasant homes,

    or wealth we sacrice to thee.

    May his light chase our sin away(Rig Veda ,,).

    According to the hymns o the Rig Veda, humans are at the mercy o their

    gods. They depend completely or their welare on the benevolence o gods

    and need to appease them through sacrices. Death is not the end o ones

    existence; we can nd in the hymns an expressed desire or eternal lie in a

    celestial world. Here is how the worshippers o Indra convey their longing or

    personal immortality:

    Make me immortal in that realm where dwells the King,

    Vivasvans Son,

    Where is the secret shrine o heaven, where are those waters

    young and resh. Flow, Indu, fow or Indras sake.

    Make me immortal in that realm where they move even

    as they list,

    In the third sphere o inmost heaven where lucid worlds are ull

    o light. Flow, Indu, fow or Indras sake(Rig Veda , , ).

    The desire or immortality and preservation o ones identity ater death is

    proved by the way the amily addresses the departed relative in the burial

    ritual: I have recalled thy lie to lie, to being, power, and energy.

    Let thy soul go unto its own: so to the Fathers hasten thou.

    Let not thy soul be let behind: here let not aught

    o thee remain,

    O spirit, body, members, sap. []

    Each parted member, severed rom thy body, thy vital breaths

    that in the wind have vanished,

    With all o these, piece ater piece, shall Fathers who dwell

    together meet and reunite thee (Atharva Veda ,,).

    In a similar way to the ancient Chinese religion, the departed relatives

    constituted a holy hierarchy. The deceased was commemorated individually

    or a year ater his departure and then included in the mortuary oerings o

    the monthlyshraddha ritual (Rig Veda 10,15,111). This ritual was necessary

    because the dead could infuence or good or bad the lie o the living (Rig Veda

    10,15,6). Beginning only with the Brahmana writings,6 which are the rst tomention a primitive idea o karma and reincarnation, did the tendency appear

    to abandon the idea o preservation o personhood ater death. However, this

    was not the spirit o the early Vedic religion.

    Yama, the god o death (who is also mentioned in the Buddhist scriptures),

    is sovereign over the souls o the dead and the one who receives the oerings o

    the amily or the benet o the departed. He casts the wicked into an eternal

    dark prison rom which they can neverescape (Rig Veda 7,104,3 and 17). The

    gods o later theistic Hinduism play an insignicant role in the Vedic hymns.

    6 They were composed rom the 9th century BC (Schumann 2004, p. 29) until about 500 BC

    (Dasgupta 1975, p.14).

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    13/101

    24 the buddha and the christ reciprocal views hinduism from the vedas to the time of the buddha 25

    Vishnu is a riend and ally o Indra (Rig Veda 1,186,10) and Rudra-Shiva is seen

    rather as a demon than as a god (Rig Veda 1,114,1,5) as he inspires ear, is a source

    o diseases and calamities, and is lord o wild animals (Eliade 1978, p. 213).

    Brahma, the Hindu creator god that will oten be reerred to by the

    Buddha, is not mentioned in the Vedas or in the Brahmanas. The Puranas

    and theMahabharata mention him as a creator god belonging to a triad o

    gods Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva (the creator, the preserver and the destroyer

    o the universe). They are said to be maniestations o a supreme abstract spirit,

    to which I will reer next.

    Theoriginsof hindupanTheism

    Doctrinal developments in three major areas set the scene or developing

    a pantheistic worldview: the exegesis o sacrice, the nature o Ultimate

    Reality and the nature o the human being. To begin with the rst, in the

    Brahmana writings the ritual became more and more elaborate, so that minute

    details were considered o undamental importance or its eectiveness. Any

    apparently insignicant error in wording or gesture could not only ruin the

    whole ceremony, but also attract the anger o gods and put in jeopardy the

    well-being o the one beneting rom it, be he king or armer. The meaning

    o sacrice was elevated to such importance that it wasnt limited to the well-

    being o human beings but came to be seen as sustaining the world o gods

    as well. The reason was the belie that a special power called maya was being

    released during the sacrice, a power which was considered to sustain the

    world o humans and gods alike. Dasgupta explains:

    The sacrice is not oered to a god with a view to propitiate him

    or to obtain rom him welare on earth or bliss in Heaven; these

    rewards are directly produced by the sacrice itsel through the

    correct perormance o complicated and interconnected ceremonies

    which constitute the sacrice. Though in each sacrice certain gods

    were invoked and received the oerings, the gods themselves were

    but instruments in bringing about the sacrice or in completing the

    course o mystical ceremonies composing it. Sacrice is thus regarded

    as possessing a mystical potency superior even to the gods, who it is

    sometimes stated attained to their divine rank by means o sacrice

    (Dasgupta , p. ).

    As a result, not only were ertility, wealth, victory over enemies and other

    worldly interests at the mercy o proessional perormers o sacrice (the

    priests), but the universal order as well. As the Brahmanas state, the gods

    themselves depend on the sacriceShatapatha Brahmana 14.6,8,9 (Schumann

    2004, p. 33). The natural result was that, since the whole universe depended

    upon their skills in rightly perorming the sacrices, the priests gained the

    upper position in society. This religious tradition is called Brahminism, the

    established religion o ancient Hindu society, which was known by the Buddha

    and who oten reerred to it.

    The new view o the sacrice weakened considerably the importance o the

    Vedic gods. This is the second element that opened the way to pantheism. Acreation hymn in theRig Veda suggests that there is another kind o Ultimate

    Reality as the source o all existent beings and worlds:

    Then was not non-existent nor existent: there was no realm o

    air, no sky beyond it.

    What covered in, and where? and what gave shelter? Was water

    there, unathomed depth o water?

    Death was not then, nor was there aught immortal: no sign was

    there, the days and nights divider.

    That One Thing, breathless, breathed by its own nature: apart

    rom it was nothing whatsoever.

    Darkness there was: at rst concealed in darkness this All was

    indiscriminated chaos.

    All that existed then was void and ormless: by the great power

    o Warmth [tapas] was born that Unit [the One].

    [] Who verily knows and who can here declare it, whence itwas born and whence comes this creation?

    The Gods are later than this worlds production. Who knows

    then whence it rst came into being? (Rig Veda ,,)

    There are two important aspects to be noticed here: 1) primordial water

    produced the One; and 2) the process was realized by the power o warmth

    (tapas). This impersonal essence (the One), which existed beore the maniested

    world, will eventually develop into a new kind o Ultimate Reality. Both

    gods and humans would nd their origin in it. As or the second aspect, this

    text is oundational or asceticism, which came to be seen as a method o

    producing a kind o creative energy, a power that makes the unmaniested

    become maniested.

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    14/101

    26 the buddha and the christ reciprocal views hinduism from the vedas to the time of the buddha 27

    In the Brahmana texts the One is present as an entity called the golden egg,

    rom which a creator called Prajapati emerged (Shatapatha Br. 11,1,6). While in

    theRig Veda the One appears as a result o asceticism, in the Brahmanas Prajapati

    creates the world by using the power released by his asceticism. His words are

    ullled as a result o asceticism and the material out o which he builds the

    universe is his own body.

    The Brahmana texts link this cosmogony with the nature o Brahminic

    sacrice. Eliade argues that we can nd a close association o the meaning o the

    agnicayana yearly sacrice perormed by the priest with the belie o Prajapati

    creating the world through his own sacrice.7 The universe generated by Prajapatis

    sacrice is ragile, tends to degenerate and thus needs strengthening through

    sacrices. Thereore the ritual perormed by the priest symbolizes three stageso creation: 1) the primordial unity o Prajapati by the animal used as sacrice,

    2) the apparition o an unstable multiplicity which is the maniested universe by

    the parts o the sacriced animal now distributed by the priest to all participants

    in the ritual, and 3) the reconstitution and rearticulation o Prajapatis cosmic

    body8 by the building o the altar by the priest. The whole procedure maniests

    a spiritual power, called maya, which strengthens the universe and the world o

    gods, enabling them to subsist or the coming year.

    A similar view is presented in the Purushasukta hymn ( Rig Veda 10,90).9

    According to this hymn, the product o the golden egg is a being called Purusha.

    By his consuming himsel in the re o creation all o the worlds came into

    existence, including our physical world, the our-caste system, the animals and the

    duality o the sexes. There is no doubt that Purusha and Prajapati are equivalent,

    both being produced out o the impersonal One.

    The process o transition rom a personal Ultimate Reality, represented by the

    Vedic gods, to an impersonal one is an important eature o Hinduism that was

    urther developed by the Upanishads. These writings appeared in the 7th centuryBC,10 so their basic teachings were known at the time o the Buddha. They ignore

    the Vedic gods and instead claim that the origin o any existing thing is Brahman,

    the equivalent o the One:

    As the spider comes out with its thread, or as small sparks come orth

    rom re, thus do all senses, all worlds, all Devas, all beings come

    orth rom that Sel [Brahman](Brihadaranyaka Upanishad,,a).

    7 Eliade 1978, p. 2289.

    8 Ibid., p. 229.

    9 A similar version can be ound in theAtharva Veda (19,6) and in the Taittiriya Aranyaka (3,12).

    10 According to Dasgupta they appeared ater 700 BC (Dasgupta 1975, p. 28).

    According to the Upanishads, the Ultimate Reality is this Brahman (o neuter

    gender). A helpul illustration here would be the Big Bang theory o the

    origin o the universe. The point o innite mass out o which all celestial

    bodies are said to have originated has its ideological correspondence with the

    unmaniested Brahman o the Upanishads. However, in the maniestation o

    Brahman, the products are not only lieless matter, but also all living beings,

    gods, humans, animals and plants. The cause o the maniestation process

    is Brahmans desire to be multiplied: May I be many, may I grow orth

    (Taittiriya Up. 2,6).

    The third element leading to pantheism, closely linked with the previous

    one, is a new perspective on human nature. In the Chandogya Upanishad(5,1,1)it is stated that breath is the oldest and the best principle that sustains all

    psycho-mental capacities (sight, speech, hearing, thought). From the Sanskrit

    an (breathing) derived the notion oatman (refexive pronoun), which came

    to designate the sel, ones spiritual being. This entity is o the same nature

    with Brahman and acts as the uniying principle o all psycho-mental aculties

    while being above their temporal fuctuations.

    In order to avoid conusion we must be aware that thisatman is not the seat

    o consciousness, it does not provide the basis or personhood, and thereore is not

    a soul that can interact with other souls. It is rather an impersonal essence that

    stands at the core o ones being as a witness o all psycho-mental processes, but

    who does not generate them. It is o the same ontological quality with Brahman;

    it does not fuctuate, it is expressionless, irreducible, eternal and pure:

    And he (theAtman in that state) can only be described by No, no! He

    is incomprehensible, or he cannot be comprehended; he is undecaying,

    or he cannot decay; he is not attached, or he does not attach himsel;he is unbound, he does not suer, he does not perish (Brihadaranyaka

    Up. ,,).

    To summarize, we have identied the three major developments in early

    Hinduism that generated the pantheistic worldview o the Upanishads: 1) The

    meaning o sacrice evolved rom a way o appeasing gods to becoming the

    eective way o making the world subsisting; 2) Ultimate Reality was no

    longer seen as a sovereign personal god, but came to represent an impersonal

    being, the One, or Brahman; 3) the essence o human nature is o the same

    quality with Ultimate Reality.

    The next step is to understand the basic philosophy o the Upanishads, as

    they shaped the meaning o several key terms we will nd in the Buddhas

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    15/101

    2 the buddha and the christ reciprocal views hinduism from the vedas to the time of the buddha 29

    teaching, such as the sel, illusion, karma, reincarnation and liberation. Since

    the Buddha was aware o the pantheistic view o the Upanishads11 and oten

    used these terms in his teaching, it will be o great help to understand their

    initial signicance and then why and how he gave them a new meaning.

    ThehumancondiTion, liberaTionandeTernal

    desTinyinThe upanishads

    The nature o Brahman is to endlessly maniest the world and then absorb it

    back into its initial unmaniested orm:

    As rom a blazing re sparks, being like unto re, fy orth a

    thousandold, thus are various beings brought orth rom the

    Imperishable, my riend, and return thither also ( Mundaka Up.

    ,,).

    The transormation o Brahman between the maniested and the unmaniested

    state has no beginning and no end. The best illustration o this process is the

    astronomical theory o the pulsating universe, i.e., a cyclic model according

    to which our universe endlessly expands and contracts, so that time has no

    beginning and no end.

    The human being is an insignicant part in this cosmic play. However,

    one has the capacity to understand the whole process and discern between the

    sel (atman) and the sensory and psycho-mental experience, and consequently

    to realize the ontological identity between atman and Brahman. This is

    possible by introspection: He who thus knows that he is Brahman, becomes

    all this, and even the Devas cannot prevent it, or he himsel is their Sel(Brihadaranyaka Up. 1,4,10). In order to get this intuitive knowledge one has

    to deeat illusion (maya).Maya12 is a orce that deceives humans about their

    true nature, channeling their wishes toward the phenomenal world that is

    ever changing. At the same time, maya hides atman under the cloak o the

    11 It is still a matter o debate whether the Buddha had actually encountered the pantheistic

    philosophy o the Upanishads. An argument against it is that he never reers in scriptures to the

    impersonal neuter Brahman. However, the principalUpanishads existed at his time, and Oldenberg

    gives evidence that he couldnt have missed them (see Oldenberg 1991, p. 185 .).

    12 In the Brahmanasmaya has two opposite meanings. There is a negative maya, as a orce that makes

    the universe created by Prajapatis sacrice disintegrate, and a positive maya, as an energy generated

    during the sacrice which mends the creation and makes it survive or another year.

    physical body and o psycho-mental activity. As a result o illusion, we grant

    true spiritual value to what is unstable and changing instead o knowing the

    eternal and immutable sel. This ignorance (avidya) is the cause oatmans

    captivity in the world o material experience:

    As people who do not know the country, walk again and again over

    a gold treasure that has been hidden somewhere in the earth and do

    not discover it, thus do all these creatures day ater day go into the

    Brahma-world (they are merged in Brahman, while asleep), and yet

    do not discover it, because they are carried away by untruth [illusion]

    (Chandogya Up. ,,).

    As a result o ignorance, a cause and eect process develops similar to thelaw o action and reaction o physics. This is karma, the law o action and

    retribution according to ones deeds. Its origin can be traced to the Brahmana

    writings, the exegetical treatises on the nature o the Vedic sacrice, which

    rst stated that while sacrices bring good results to the one who perorms

    them, there must be a general rule o acting and being rewarded accordingly

    orallones deeds. Some deeds are benecial and bring people to heaven, while

    others prevent humans rom entering the celestial world ater death or limit

    their stay there, orcing them to all back in this world and reap the ruits o

    their deeds. The Upanishads developed and perected this concept by making

    the law o karma a kind o perect accountant or all ones deeds and intentions.

    All produce an eect which is reaped in this lie or in urther lives. This is

    reincarnation (samsara), the eect o karma and the practical way one reaps the

    ruits o his deeds and intentions.

    According to how we act and how reluctant we are to detach rom the

    material world, we live urther lives as humans, animals or even plants. This

    law is rst mentioned in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (3,2,13), by stating

    that a man becomes good by good work, and bad by bad work. We also nd

    out there that the element that initiates the reincarnation chain is desire: And

    here they say that a person consists o desires. And as is his desire, so is his

    will; and as is his will, so is his deed; and whatever deed he does, that he will

    reap (Ibid. 4,4,5). The desire is that o experiencing the physical world, and

    consequently illusion, and what he will reap is the ruit reaped in a urther

    lie, as a result o karmas retribution. Karma is the direct link between desire

    in this lie and reward in a uture lie. It builds an inter-conditioning link

    between the previous, the present and the next lives. As a result o karmas

    retribution, any thought, word or deed o this lie will nd its proper reward

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    16/101

    30 the buddha and the christ reciprocal views hinduism from the vedas to the time of the buddha 31

    in a uture lie. In the Katha Upanishad(5,7) it is stated: Some enter the

    womb in order to have a body, as organic beings, others go into inorganic

    matter, according to their work and according to their knowledge. In act

    what reincarnates is not a personal soul or consciousness, but the impersonal

    atman accompanied by the karmic body.13 Thereore the atman itsel is not

    aected by ones living:

    He is incomprehensible, or he cannot be comprehended; he is

    imperishable, or he cannot perish; he is unattached, or he does not

    attach himsel; unettered, he does not suer, he does not ail. Him

    (who knows), these two do not overcome, whether he says that or

    some reason he has done evil, or or some reason he has done good

    he overcomes both, and neither what he has done, nor what he has omitted

    to do, burns (aects) him (Brihadaranyaka Up. ,,, emphasis mine).

    An important aspect to emphasize here is that reincarnation is not merely

    a perect mechanism or punishing bad deeds. Reincarnation unctions

    independently o the moral content o our actions. It is not only that bad deeds

    are punished, but also the good ones must be rewarded and thus uel karma.

    Good deeds only provide a short reward in heaven, but then the soul has to

    return to earth and continue its struggle. Thereore those who seek liberation

    by good deeds are deluded:

    Considering sacrice and good works as the best, these ools know

    no higher good, and having enjoyed (their reward) on the height o

    heaven, gained by good works, they enter again this world or a lower

    one (Mundaka Upanishad,,).

    Good deeds, then, are not the solution or reincarnation. They merely providea better reincarnation in which the rewards o good deeds are consumed. The

    endless cycle o reincarnation continues until true spiritual knowledge is

    attained. Thereore, the Upanishads mark a transition rom the point where

    the human condition is determined by divine personal agents (such as the

    Vedic gods) to that o being totally controlled by the impersonal law o karma.

    From the Vedic perspective o a universe governed by gods such as Varuna,

    13 The Advaita Vedanta philosophy, which is the ospring o Upanishadic thought, adopted the

    concept o a subtle body (sukshma-sharira) which is attached toatman as long as its bondage lasts.

    This is the actual carrier o karmic debts. The acts recorded by the subtle body are a sum o hidden

    tendencies or impressions (samskara) imprinted by karma as seeds that will generate uture behavior

    and personal character.

    who rules through a law that is subordinated to him (rita), we have arrived at

    the pantheistic view o the Upanishads, in which the impersonal law o karma

    determines the ate o all beings, including the gods. In this situation humans

    are alone acing their destiny, having the duty to nd a way out rom the

    vicious cycleavidya-karma-samsara by their own eorts. As we will see later,

    the Buddha will use much o this philosophy in stating his new perspective.

    According to the Upanishads, the undamental human need is that o

    attaining true spiritual knowledge. The sel is one with Brahman, but illusion

    prevents humans rom knowing it, and karma uels an endless cycle o

    reincarnation. Liberation can be attained only during a human existence, so we

    are in a privileged stage o spiritual evolution. As the Buddha also stated, we

    are in a better position than even gods. They are in a stage o reaping positive

    merits during a lietime, as animals are the opposite, the stage o reaping bad

    merits. That is why devotion to a god is not a valid way toward liberation,

    as it merely perpetuates illusion. Not only are gods o no help in attaining

    liberation in the Upanishads, but they even encourage living in ignorance:

    Now i a man worships another deity, thinking the deity is one and

    he another, he does not know. He is like a beast or the Devas. For

    verily, as many beasts nourish a man, thus does every man nourish the

    Devas. I only one beast is taken away, it is not pleasant; how much

    more when many are taken! Thereore it is not pleasant to the Devas

    that men should know this(Brihadaranyaka Upanishad,,).

    Vedic sacrices (Mundaka Up. 1,2,7) and the knowledge o the Vedas (Chandogya

    Up. 7,1,3) have no value in attaining liberation. As the Buddha will also

    conclude, the cycleavidya-karma-samsara can be broken only by knowing and

    destroying its primary cause, which is desire. According to the Upanishads,liberation o the sel (atman) rom reincarnation is called moksha and represents

    its return into Brahman. It is actually an impersonal usion oatman with

    Brahman, when personhood is annihilated and the process o reincarnation

    ceases. The best illustration is the usion o a drop o rain with the ocean, thus

    becoming one with it:

    As the fowing rivers disappear in the sea, losing their name and their

    orm, thus a wise man, reed rom name and orm, goes to the divine

    Person [Brahman], who is greater than the great. He who knows

    that highest Brahman, becomes even Brahman (Mundaka Upanishad

    ,,).

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    17/101

    32 the buddha and the christ reciprocal views hinduism from the vedas to the time of the buddha 33

    The ollowers o the Upanishadic pantheist philosophy were called eternalists

    by the Buddha, because o their belie in the eternal preservation oatman as

    ultimate ground or human existence. But they were not the only philosophical

    movement at the time o the Buddha.

    The Ajivikas, ounded by Makkhali Gosala, preached a doctrine

    o total atalism. They were skeptical about any human ability to aect

    destiny, considering that ate dictates ones lie completely. There is a xed

    progression o rebirths, so one has to surrender to whatever ate has in store

    or him or her. The closest correspondent to this teaching in Jesus world

    was Stoicism.

    Another group who rejected the Vedic tradition were the materialists

    o Kesakambali. The name o their philosophy Lokayata (directed only

    towards what is visible) expresses their worldview: Nothing that cannot be

    experienced by the senses is true. Thereore they rejected the existence o gods,

    karma and reincarnation, the existence o the sel and o divine revelation

    altogether. Since they considered that human existence is annihilated at

    death they ollowed a lie o simple pleasures. The Buddha called them

    annihilationists.

    Finally, a group that greatly infuenced the Buddhas spiritual quest were

    the ascetics, the ounders o the Shramana tradition in Hinduism, a parallel

    spirituality that emerged as a rejection o the Brahminic order. This trend

    was inaugurated in theAranyaka writings the books o the orest dwellers,

    i.e., o those who withdrew rom social lie and lived either in total isolation

    or in groups under the leadership o a teacher. Following the example o the

    god Indra who gained power (tapas) by perorming austerities in order to

    deeat Vritra, they saw asceticism as the means to attain spiritual power and

    knowledge. They rejected the external rituals o Brahminism, consisting inanimal and vegetal sacrices, and ound that true sacrices were those o an

    inner nature. They thereore sacriced their own physical comort and basic

    human needs, such as ood, clothing, movement and breath, and some even

    adopted the liestyle o animals such as cows or dogs. Practically the new view

    o sacrice meant sacricing ones own breath (by reducing the respiratory

    requency), hygiene (by abstaining rom bathing), and enduring physical

    extremes (heat, cold and inficted pain). Such practices were common among

    the ascetics o the Buddhas day and he was himsel one who engaged this path

    or almost six years in his quest or truth.

    As a result o such incredible practices the ascetics were able to enter altered

    states o consciousness which were then interpreted as revealing the true nature

    o the world. The various Yoga schools that we see today have resulted rom

    systematizing ascetic techniques and the knowledge they attained. A amous

    ascetic group at the time o the Buddha was that o Niganta Nataputta, the

    ounder o Jainism.

    Now let us see how religion developed on the other side o the world,

    in Judea.

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    18/101

    Chapter 2

    Judaism from the story of creationto the time of the Christ

    There are several similarities between rst century AD Judaism and early

    Hinduism. Judaism also speaks about god, sin, sacrices and priests. But

    there are important points o divergence that must be emphasized. Judaism

    is about the one God who is said to have revealed himsel through the story

    o the Jewish people. We nd it in the scriptures called the Torah by Jews

    and the Old Testament by Christians.1 It is the story o the creation, all

    and restoration o mankind. Let me emphasize the most relevant aspects

    or our inquiry.

    1 The Old Testament as a collection o writings is a challenge or scholars to date. Gordon Wenham,

    Proessor o Old Testament at Cheltenham and Gloucester College o Higher Education, dates

    the nal redactation oGenesis in the tenth century BC (Wenham 2000, pp. 4143). The oldest

    existing manuscripts o the Old Testament were ound among the Dead Sea Scrolls, dating rom

    the third century BC to the rst AD. For details see Emanuel Tov,Textual Criticism o the Hebrew Bible,

    Augsburg Fortress, Minneapolis, 2001, pp. 100118 and Ellis R. Brotzman, Old Testament Textual

    Criticism: a practical introduction, Baker Books, Grand Rapids, 1994, pp. 8796.

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    19/101

    36 the buddha and the christ reciprocal views

    ThecreaTionofman

    The Old Testament begins with the story o God creating the universe out o

    nothing (ex nihilo).2 He does not maniest the universe out o his own substance

    as does Brahman, or out o a pre-existent matter as does Indra. This nothing is

    not a primordial substance, because prior to creation nothing existed except God.

    He is independent o his creation and can annihilate it at will without undergoing

    any change in his own nature. ThePsalms state:

    In the beginning you laid the oundations o the earth, and the

    heavens are the work o your hands. They will perish, but you remain;

    they will all wear out like a garment. Like clothing you will changethem and they will be discarded. But you remain the same, and your

    years will never end (Psalms ,).

    The creation presented in the book oGenesis is an act intended and completed

    by a personal God. It is not the result o an inherent necessity o an impersonal

    nature, but the product o the ree choice o God. The Upanishads have a dierent

    teaching on the nature o the world. Following the concept o the undamental

    unity o the world in Brahman, Hindu pantheism considers the physical world

    and humanity as maniestations o Brahman, maniestations o a primordial

    essence to which they are destined to return. The maniestation o Brahman is

    not a choice but a necessity derived rom its very nature. It is a transormation o

    the Ultimate Reality rom one ontological state into another, not a replacement

    o nothingness with something. What once existed in unity and potentiality

    becomes multiplicity and maniestation. In Judaism the nature o Ultimate

    Reality and that o creation are very dierent. Creation subsists through the willo God, not as his own transormation.3

    The creation o human beings ollows the act o creating the physical

    universe. The brie account in Genesis says:

    2 Both options we have or accounting or the existence o the universe that it was created by a

    personal God, or that it has no beginning at all and will endlessly ollow a cycle o maniestation

    and absorbtion are accepted by aith, so none is more scientical or rational than the other. Our

    view on the beginnings o the Universe is an assumption we make by aith alone.

    3 The Judaic mystical discipline known as the Kabbalah developed in Europe during the Middle

    Ages. It has nothing to do with rst-century AD Judaism and thereore is not linked to our topic.

    The Lord God ormed the man rom the dust o the ground and

    breathed into his nostrils the breath o lie, and the man became a

    living being (Genesis ,).

    Again, as with the physical creation, there is no ontological continuity between

    the nature o God and that o humans, as between Brahman and atman, but a

    undamental dierence that excludes any pantheistic resemblance. According to

    the Genesis account, humans were created to have communion with God, to be

    witnesses o his glory and enjoy it, and to rule over all the creatures that move

    along the ground (Genesis 1,27). In other words, God created humans not or his

    own sake, but or theirs.

    Hinduism presented us with a dierent picture. On the one hand, inBrahminism the sacrices perormed by the priests were necessary in order to

    sustain the universe and the gods, which meant that humans were necessary

    or the very sustenance o gods. On the other hand, the Upanishads state the

    atman-Brahman identity, i.e., that humans have an intrinsic divine nature

    waiting to be intuitively discovered. According to the Judaic view, humans do

    not have the nature o God, but only a personal way o existing resembling

    his. Thereore, the breath o lie (Genesis 2,7), which God transmitted to

    human beings at creation, was not a small part o Gods essence (a kind o

    atman), but the act o lie-giving, which marked the beginning o experiencing

    sel-consciousness or personal identity by a creature whose existence is ully

    dependent on the creator.

    The most intriguing aspect o human status is the act that one can choose

    to ollow the order o creation, i.e., to center ones lie upon God and develop a

    personal relationship with him, or to rebel against it and center ones lie upon

    himsel or hersel. This second option is called sin. The open option to disobey

    God is not a proo o his incapacity to create inallible beings, a proo that he

    is not almighty, because reedom o will is the most important element that

    denes personhood and makes humans dierent rom robots. It also makes

    possible real communion among personal beings, including communion

    with God, which was the very purpose o creating humankind. The test o

    obedience came with the rst explicit command:

    You are ree to eat rom any tree in the garden; but you must not eat

    rom the tree o the knowledge o good and evil, or when you eat o

    it you will surely die (Genesis ,).

    Since this passage may cause misunderstandings (Is God against human

    knowledge?), a ew remarks are necessary. The knowledge (dah-ath) o good

    Judaism from the story of creation to the time of the Christ 37

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    20/101

    3 the buddha and the christ reciprocal views Judaism from the story of creation to the time of the Christ 39

    and evil mentioned in this verse does not have the meaning o merely getting

    some new inormation. It is not just a matter o conceptual elaboration, a science

    o good and evil that would explain rationally two opposite concepts without

    judging them morally. In this text and in Genesis 3,5, where the verb to know (yaw-

    dah) is used, knowledge and to know means experiencing and getting mixed

    with another reality.4 It is an ontological process rather than an epistemolo-gical

    one. Rather than to know as acquiring new knowledge, it means to enter into

    communion with something and live according to it. The same way as knowing

    God is not just a mental operation, but participating and subscribing to his will,

    the knowledge o good and evil is an existential experience, an accommodation to

    a state that is harmul to human nature. In this context, Gods command is not ahindrance rom getting necessary knowledge or an annoying limitation o human

    reedom, but a warning concerning the possibility o getting involved with the

    nature o evil, o participating in a reality other than that intended by God. This

    other reality was the world o Satan and the allen angels.

    There are passages in the Old Testament that suggest that God created a

    world o angels beore the creation o our physical world. Evil appeared when

    Lucier, one o Gods most important angels, rebelled against the established

    order. In the book o the prophet Isaiah we can read the ollowing metaphorical

    account o this incident:

    How you have allen rom heaven, O morning star, son o the dawn!

    You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the

    nations! You said in your heart, I will ascend to heaven; I will raise

    my throne above the stars o God; I will sit enthroned on the mount

    o assembly, on the utmost heights o the sacred mountain. I will

    ascend above the tops o the clouds; I will make mysel like the MostHigh. But you are brought down to the grave, to the depths o the

    pit (Isaiah ,).

    Although these verses belong to a prophecy concerning Babylon, they are usually

    interpreted as having a deeper meaning. 5 Evil is not created by God, but is a

    perversion o his creation, a result o using ree will in the world o angels against

    4 In the Septuagint text the Greek translation o the Old Testament, produced in Alexandria

    between the third and the rst centuries BC we nd dah-ath translated as ginoskein, which

    means gaining experiential knowledge, while the knowing o Genesis 3,5 is its gerund orm

    ginoskontes.

    5 A similar allusion to this story is in Ezekiel28,1219.

    the very purpose or which they were created (obedience to God in a communion

    relationship based on love). Evil was not intended to exist in Gods creation and

    is not linked to the essence o God, but is a parasite o good, a personal orm o

    rebellious existence against the creator. This is the world o Satan and the demons.

    Since humankind is created or having communion with God, the meaning

    o human existence cannot be ound in onesel, but only in communion with

    the Creator. Humans are not meant to nd an inner true spiritual nature or a

    higher sel (a kind oatman), but to remain in communion with God. Thereore

    our status in the spiritual world is more like a river bed than a spring. We are

    better dened as a river bed that chooses what spring will fow through it than

    a spring that doesnt depend upon external resources. As a river bed is clean ordirty according to the water that fows through it, human identity (and obviously

    ethical conduct) is ashioned by the spiritual source one chooses to obey God

    or Satan.

    The story in Genesis reveals that Satans temptation has cast doubt on the

    justice o Gods demands, suggesting that God is not just and that rebellion

    against him would bring total reedom and ulllment:

    Did God really say, You must not eat rom any tree in the garden?

    The woman said to the serpent, We may eat ruit rom the trees in

    the garden, but God did say, You must not eat ruit rom the tree

    that is in the middle o the garden, and you must not touch it, or you

    will die. You will not surely die, the serpent said to the woman.

    For God knows that when you eat o it your eyes will be opened, and

    you will be like God, knowing good and evil (Genesis ,).

    The temptation can be summed up as to become like God, that is, to

    ollow the same path o rebellion that Satan had ollowed in order to nd

    sel-determination. The Genesis story tells that Adam and Eve disobeyed

    God and that the rst thing they came to know was not sel-determination,

    but separation rom God and rom the perect environment they were living

    in (Genesis 3,24). Thereore the biblical meaning o sin does not correspond

    to the loss o a secret knowledge (as the perception o the inner sel) and

    the subsequent appearance o duality and illusion. The human all is a

    consequence o a wrong decision toward independence rom God; it is an act

    o perverting the order established by God in his creation.

    The closest equivalent in Hinduism to this understanding o sin is ound

    in the early hymns to the Vedic god Varuna (p. 21) as trespasses against his

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    21/101

    40 the buddha and the christ reciprocal views Judaism from the story of creation to the time of the Christ 41

    moral order, which he punishes by illness and death. A major dierence

    however, is that in the Judaic account humans always know the nature o

    their trespasses. They are only blamed or consciously disobeying God. The

    notion o sin, as stated in the Judaic tradition, has no correspondent in later

    Hindu pantheism. According to the Upanishads, the origin o sinul conduct

    is spiritual ignorance (avidya). Thereore, sinners need only instruction and

    not condemnation. They need help to reason the right way and realize that

    they are responsible or their actions, as they must pay the consequences in

    urther lives. Since the Upanishads state that humans are a maniestation o the

    Ultimate Reality, they must have in themselves the divine nature (atman) and

    all resources to overtake their state o ignorance. But according to the Judaic

    tradition this is impossible, since we do not possess an intrinsic divine nature,and thus we are incapable o saving ourselves rom our allen state.

    In conclusion, rom a Judaic point o view, the central problem o mankind

    is sin, which is not a state o ontological ignorance, but a moral barrier

    between human beings and their creator. The dierence originates in the way

    Hindu pantheism and Judaism have dened Ultimate Reality, impersonal vs.

    personal. As a result, dierent views on human nature and its relationship to

    this Ultimate Reality emerged.

    Theremissionofsinsin JudaismVs. oTher

    religiouspaTTerns

    The Bible is an account o human restoration rom sin to a state o perect

    communion with God. In Genesis, the rst book o the Old Testament, God called

    a man named Abraham to leave his athers household in Mesopotamia and ollowhim to an unknown land, promising that he would become the ancestor o a

    blessed nation. Abraham trusted God against all odds, and this attitude, called

    aith, determined that God would declare him righteous and the beneciary o an

    overwhelming promise:

    He took him outside and said, Look up at the heavens and count the

    stars i indeed you can count them. Then he said to him, So shall

    your ospring be. Abraham believed the Lord, and he credited it to

    him as righteousness (Genesis ,).

    The nation born out o Abraham was Israel. Through this nation God intended to

    make himsel known in the world and correct wrong patterns in addressing him.

    Although all nations had priests, oerings and temples, all ritualism was labeled

    as wrong and in need o correction.

    The book o Exodus (the second book in the Old Testament) tells the

    story o how God redeemed Israel rom Egyptian slavery through his grace

    (chapters 119), presented the law according to which they should live

    (ch. 2024) and then showed the way to solve any trespassing o the law,

    through the oce o the tabernacle (ch. 2540), which was later replaced

    by the temple in Jerusalem. This given order redemption law temple was

    not randomly chosen. God instituted the Mosaic Law as a covenant with his

    peopleaterredeeming the nation rom slavery. The redeemed Israelites had

    to obey God and to live according to the demands o the law in order to

    have a right relationship with him (Exodus 19,5). The tabernacle (and later thetemple) was the place where sacrices were brought in order to atone or the

    trespassings o the law and to remind the people o their total dependence on

    God. Obedience to the law was o rst importance and the sacrices in the

    temple were second, prescribed only as solution or repairing the ailures in

    ullling Gods demands.

    The other ancient nations had a dierent view o worship. They were

    attempting to please their gods and even ulll their needs through the

    religious rituals perormed in temples. We have already seen that in

    Brahminism the priesthood reached the position o actually manipulating

    the gods and considered themselves through the rituals they perormed the

    keepers o universal order, providers o ertility, wealth, victory over enemies,

    etc. Although human sacrices (Purushamedha) were very rare, the priests held

    the ropes o heaven and soon became more important than the gods themselves.

    Ater all, it was their sacrices that kept the universe properly unctioning.

    No wonder that the Shramana tradition appeared as a rejection o thisorder.

    The temple and the sacrices in the Old Testament had a dierent

    meaning rom those o other religions. The condition or maintaining a proper

    relationship with God was to obey and to conorm to his revealed standards,

    not the perormance o religious rituals that would empower him to ulll

    his divine attributes. In Judaism sacrices were not necessary or God, but or

    the sake o sinul people as the solution or their trespassing o the law. I not

    absolved, the sins o the people would bring Gods punishment on the nation.

    Thereore, the sacrice had to perorm its work in man, not in God. This is

    why the tabernacle and the sacricial system was added to the covenant with

    Israel (in Exodus 2024), as a urther grace. Although Israel also had, as the

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    22/101

    42 the buddha and the christ reciprocal views Judaism from the story of creation to the time of the Christ 43

    other nations, a temple, priests and sacrices, their role was dierent and God

    commanded them not to ollow the pagan pattern:

    Be careul not to be ensnared by inquiring about their gods, saying,

    How do these nations serve their gods? We will do the same. You

    must not worship the Lord your God in their way, because in

    worshipping their gods, they do all kinds o detestable things the

    Lord hates. They even burn their sons and daughters in the re as

    sacrices to their gods. See that you do all I command you; do not

    add to it or take away rom it (Deuteronomy ,).

    Out o the many religious easts mentioned in the Old Testament, o greatest

    importance and signicance was the Day o Atonement (Yom Kippur), describedinLeviticus 16. It was perormed once a year, only by the high priest and or the

    benet o all people. Its purpose was to remove all sins committed during the

    year and mark the rededication o the nation to God. Since it is very relevant to

    our comparative study, let me briefy describe the procedure and its meaning.

    First, the high priest had to oer a bull as an atoning sacrice or his own sins.

    Only in this way was he considered cleansed o his sins and thereore capable o

    perorming the atonement ritual or the nation. Then he took two goats, one said

    to be or the Lord and the other considered as scapegoat. The goat or the Lord was

    slaughtered and the blood sprinkled on the atonement cover, located in the Most

    Holy Place o the temple.6 As the high standards o God had been transgressed by

    the people, the act o the priest symbolized the covering o the transgressions with

    blood, as ransom price paid or their remission. Then the high priest had to

    lay both hands on the head o the live goat and coness over it all the

    wickedness and rebellion o the Israelites all their sins and putthem on the goats head. He shall send the goat away into the desert

    in the care o a man appointed or the task (v. ).

    In this ritual the sins accumulated over the year were symbolically transerred

    onto the scapegoat, and then carried away, out o the camp into the desert. This

    was a way o teaching the people that sin is a very serious matter. Sins act as a

    barrier between God and his people, a barrier which cannot simply be ignored.7

    6 Under the atonement cover were kept the Ten Commandments carved in stone, the summary o

    Gods commands given to Israel.

    7 The prophet Isaiah says: Your iniquities have separated you rom your God; your sins have hidden

    his ace rom you, so that he will not hear (Isaiah 59,2).

    Once committed, sins are regarded almost as an indestructible creation. The

    atonement ritual suggests that sins can only be moved rom one carrier to another

    rom the sinner to the High Priest through personal conession over the year, and

    then rom the High Priest to the scapegoat. This was done once a year on the Day

    o Atonement. Only when sins were carried away, out o the land, was the nation

    righteous beore God.8 The working principle the Israelites had to learn was that

    sins have to be borne by an innocent animal as a substitute or the sinner. This

    principle will help us understand the view Jesus had on sin, as he lived and taught

    among Jewish believers who had such specic convictions o the nature o sin.

    In the Eastern religions this way o dealing with sins would be absurd. In

    a context where karma operates, nothing can act as a substitute sacrice. Thesinner must pay or his own sins in this and in urther lives.

    a shorThisToryof Judaismfrom mosesTo Jesus

    As the Old Testament testies, the Israelites transgressed the Mosaic Law very

    oten, especially by worshipping other gods, an act orbidden by the very rst

    command. Long periods o religious syncretism were ollowed by short periods

    o religious restoration. Few were the kings called aithul to God, such as David,

    Hezekiah and Josiah. At the time the prophet Jeremiah lived (627580 BC), the

    unction o the Temple itsel had become perverted, and those who came to

    worship there were condemned or perorming empty rituals according to the

    idolatrous patterns o other religions, without any desire to obey Gods law.9 As a

    result o this constant attitude they were punished by being deported to Babylon

    in three waves between 597 BC and 582 BC. The temple in Jerusalem and thewhole city were destroyed in 586 BC.

    The prophets o the Old Testament had long beore warned against

    this tragedy. But besides warning people against the eventual outcome o

    persisting into sinning, the prophets also oretold the return o the Jews rom

    the Babylonian captivity and the beginning o a new era in their stand beore

    God. Prophets like Isaiah, Jeremiah, Micah and Zechariah, as well as the

    8 This is the context in which to understand properly the Jewish concept o orgiveness. In Hebrew,

    one o the meanings onasa (to lit up) is to carry away an oence, i.e., to orgive it.

    9 SeeJeremiah 7,111; 2223.

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    23/101

    44 the buddha and the christ reciprocal views Judaism from the story of creation to the time of the Christ 45

    Psalms proclaimed the coming o a Messianic gure, as the ideal ruler and

    religious teacher, Gods own representative on earth:

    But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the

    clans o Judah, out o you will come or me one who will be ruler

    over Israel, whose origins are rom o old, rom ancient times (Micah

    ,).

    The Jews nally returned rom captivity in 538 BC as a result o the edict o Cyrus,

    the Persian emperor who conquered Babylon. In 516 the Temple was rededicated

    and Judaism was back in business. But history was not glorious or the new

    Jewish nation. For centuries to come they were under the control o oreign rule.

    The Persian rule lasted until 332 BC, when Alexander the Great conqueredJudea. Ater his death the Greek empire was divided among his generals. The

    Ptolemies o Egypt ruled over Judea until 198 BC, allowing the Jews to carry on

    their religious observances. The next governing empire, that o the Seleucids (the

    other remnant o Alexanders empire) was initially tolerant, until Antiochus IV

    Epiphanes (175164 BC) started a massive campaign o orced Hellenization to the

    point o prohibiting Judaism. This triggered a 24-year war called the Maccabean

    uprising (166142 BC) that led to the independence o Judea. It didnt last long,

    as Judea was conquered by the Roman legions o Pompey in 63 BC. Priests were

    massacred and the temple desecrated. Such a sacrilege was not easy or Jews to

    orget.

    This turbulent history contributed to the rise o Messianic expectations.

    Although the glorious age predicted by the prophets had not yet arrived by the

    rst century AD, speculation about it was at its highest. The Messiah was expected

    to be a charismatic leader who would expel the Romans rom the Holy Land and

    reinstate the ormer glory o Israel under King David. This portrait was seen as

    consistent with prophecies such as:

    The days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will raise up to

    David a righteous Branch, a King who will reign wisely and do what

    is just and right in the land. In his days Judah will be saved and Israel

    will live in saety. This is the name by which he will be called: The

    Lord Our Righteousness (Jeremiah ,).

    There were several religious sects active in Judea during the rst century AD

    which had an important role in shaping Judaism. The Pharisees were a middle-

    10 See also Isaiah 11,15; 42,17; 52,1353,12; Zechariah 9,910,Psalms 45,67; 110,14.

    class movement that stressed individual ulllment o the law in minute detail

    as the proper way o expressing obedience to God. The Sadducees belonged to

    the upper class. They were temple priests and accepted as holy scriptures only

    the ve books o Moses (the rst ve books o the Old Testament). As a result

    they rejected the belie in resurrection, eternal lie, angels and demons, and thus

    were in confict with the Pharisees, who acknowledged them. The Essenes were a

    separatist group that lived in small communities outside Jewish society. They also

    stressed strict legal observances but rejected the temple ritual and its priesthood

    as utterly corrupted. The Zealots were a militant group who argued or an armed

    uprising against Rome as the way o establishing the new order. Such was the

    religious context in Judea at the time o Jesus arrival.

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    24/101

    PART TWO

    THE LIFE AND TEACHINGS

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    25/101

    Chapter 3

    Historical settings of the Buddhaand the Christ

    daTesandeVidencesforahisToricalapproach

    The Buddha must have lived about ve centuries beore the Christ. Most scholars

    believe that he died in 486 BC, based on two historical reerence points. The rst

    takes 268 BC as the year o king Asokas accession to the throne, according to

    reerences made to Greek kings in his rock-edict, and the second is that 218 years

    had elapsed rom the death o the Buddha till then, according to the Singhalese

    chroniclesDipavamsa andMahavamsa. Since he died at the age o 80, he must have

    lived rom 566 to 486 BC. Schumann argues or the 563 to 483 BC period.1 But

    Williams belie is that according to theDipavamsa chronicle (which mentions a

    lineage o teachers starting with the Buddha), it seems that ewer than 218 years

    elapsed rom the Buddha to Asoka, and thereore the lie o the Buddha should

    rather be placed later, about 480 to 400 BC.2

    1Schumann 2004, p. 1011.

    2 Williams 1989, p. 9. Paul Williams is Proessor o Indian and Tibetan Philosophy and

    Co-Director o the Centre or Buddhist Studies at the University o Bristol.

  • 8/8/2019 Buddha & Christ

    26/101

    50 the buddha and the christ reciprocal views

    The earliest Buddhist writings are the sutras o the Pali Canon, which

    contain only secondary inormation about the biography o the Buddha, the

    major interest being his teaching. The Pali Canon was written down in the

    rst century BC in Sri Lanka,3 which means that about 400 years o oral

    transmission had passed. The oldest existing original manuscripts we have

    today have been dated by scholars to the end o the rst century AD. 4

    The earliest Buddhist texts that present a complete biography o the

    Buddha are the Buddhacarita (The Acts o the Buddha), written by Ashvagosha

    in the rst or second century AD, the Nidanakatha o the Theravada school

    (second or third century AD),5 and the Lalitavistara o the Sarvastivada

    school (rst century AD).6 I will not debate here whether these writings are

    biographies or hagiographies. A biography is expected to recount real historicalacts o the Buddhas lie-story, while a hagiography is an idealized lie-story,

    one that combines how it was with how it should have been.7 There are no

    historical criteria or distinguishing between history and myth in the accounts

    o the lie o the Buddha. No historical conrmation is available, except the

    edict o king Asoka issued 218 years ater the Buddhas death which conrms

    the existence o Buddhism at that time.

    I will use as sources o inormation or the lie o the Buddha the Sutras

    o the Pali Canon, the Buddhacarita and the Nidanakatha. It is not relevant

    or our present inquiry to question the historicity o the events in the lie

    o the Buddha, or try to establish which sayings and deeds are genuine and

    which were added later.8 Even i the biographical details o his lie could be

    somehow proved inaccurate it would not have any serious eect upon the

    validity o his teaching. As Williams points out:

    The eectiveness o the Dharma does not in itsel depend on its

    discovery by a Buddha. I the Buddha did not exist then someone

    3Harvey1990,p.3andWilliams2000,p.106.4 These were ound in Pakistan and are written in Gandhari. Fragments o theRhinocerosSutra (Sutta

    Nipata 3474) and o the Dhammapada have been identied so ar. See http://www.washington.edu/

    alumni/columns/march97/scrolls1.html (accessed September 29, 2008).

    5 Schumann dates it in the th century AD (Schumann 2004, p.44).

    6G