Wednesday, December 24, 2008

When Jesus Met Buddha

I bring this older post up front here because it is still receiving comments AND because it points to a major need of our times. GB

My view is that we need inter-religious dialogue more than ever these days (and I include a-theism as a religion). I hope you take the time to read, reflect, and comment for how can we have dialogue with no one talking?
--George

When Jesus met Buddha
Something remarkable happened when evangelists for two great religions crossed paths more than 1,000 years ago: they got along
By Philip Jenkins, The Boston Globe, December 14, 2008

WAS THE BUDDHA a demon?

While few mainline Christians would put the matter in such confrontational terms, any religion claiming exclusive access to truth has real difficulties reconciling other great faiths into its cosmic scheme. Most Christian churches hold that Jesus alone is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and many also feel an obligation to carry that message to the world's unbelievers. But this creates a fundamental conflict with the followers of famous spiritual figures like Mohammed or Buddha, who preached radically different messages. Drawing on a strict interpretation of the Bible, some Christians see these rival faiths as not merely false, but as deliberate traps set by the forces of evil.

Being intolerant of other religions - consigning them to hell, in fact - may be bad enough in its own right, but it increasingly has real-world consequences. As trade and technology shrink the globe, so different religions come into ever-closer contact with one another, and the results can be bloody: witness the apocalyptic assaults in Mumbai. In such a world, teaching different faiths to acknowledge one another's claims, to live peaceably together side by side, stops being a matter of good manners and becomes a prerequisite for human survival.

Over the past 30 years, the Roman Catholic Church has faced repeated battles over this question of Christ's uniqueness, and has cracked down on thinkers who have made daring efforts to accommodate other world religions. While the Christian dialogue with Islam has attracted most of the headlines, it is the encounters with Hinduism and especially Buddhism that have stirred the most controversy within the church. Sri Lankan theologians Aloysius Pieris and Tissa Balasuriya have had many run-ins with Vatican critics, and, more recently, the battle has come to American shores. Last year, the Vatican ordered an investigation of Georgetown University's Peter Phan, a Jesuit theologian whose main sin, in official eyes, has been to treat the Buddhism of his Vietnamese homeland as a parallel path to salvation.

Following the ideas of Pope Benedict XVI, though, the church refuses to give up its fundamental belief in the unique role of Christ. In a widely publicized open letter to Italian politician Marcello Pera, Pope Benedict declared that "an inter-religious dialogue in the strict sense of the term is not possible." By all means, he said, we should hold conversations with other cultures, but not in a way that acknowledges other religions as equally valid. While the Vatican does not of course see the Buddha as a demon, it does fear the prospect of syncretism, the dilution of Christian truth in an unholy mixture with other faiths.

Beyond doubt, this view places Benedict in a strong tradition of Christianity as it has developed in Europe since Roman times. But there is another, ancient tradition, which suggests a very different course. Europe's is not the only version of the Christian faith, nor is it necessarily the oldest heir of the ancient church. For more than 1,000 years, other quite separate branches of the church established thriving communities across Asia, and in their sheer numbers, these churches were comparable to anything Europe could muster at the time.These Christian bodies traced their ancestry back not through Rome, but directly to the original Jesus movement of ancient Palestine. They moved across India, Central Asia, and China, showing no hesitation to share - and learn from - the other great religions of the East.

Just how far these Christians were prepared to go is suggested by a startling symbol that appeared on memorials and stone carvings in both southern India and coastal China during the early Middle Ages. We can easily see that the image depicts a cross, but it takes a moment to realize that the base of the picture - the root from which the cross is growing - is a lotus flower, the symbol of Buddhist enlightenment.

In modern times, most mainstream churches would condemn such an amalgam as a betrayal of the Christian faith, an example of multiculturalism run wild. Yet concerns about syncretism did not bother these early Asian Christians, who called themselves Nasraye, Nazarenes, like Jesus's earliest followers. They were comfortable associating themselves with the other great monastic and mystical religion of the time, and moreover, they believed that both lotus and cross carried similar messages about the quest for light and salvation. If these Nazarenes could find meaning in the lotus-cross, then why can't modern Catholics, or other inheritors of the faith Jesus inspired?

Many Christians are coming to terms with just how thoroughly so many of their fundamental assumptions will have to be rethought as their faith today becomes a global religion. Even modern church leaders who know how rapidly the church is expanding in the global South tend to see European values and traditions as the indispensable norm, in matters of liturgy and theology as much as music and architecture.

Yet the reality is that Christianity has from its earliest days been an intercontinental faith, as firmly established in Asia and Africa as in Europe itself. When we broaden our scope to look at the faith that by 800 or so stretched from Ireland to Korea, we see the many different ways in which Christians interacted with other believers, in encounters that reshaped both sides. At their best, these meetings allowed the traditions not just to exchange ideas but to intertwine in productive and enriching ways, in an awe-inspiring chapter of Christian history that the Western churches have all but forgotten.

To understand this story, we need to reconfigure our mental maps. When we think of the growth of Christianity, we think above all of Europe. We visualize a movement growing west from Palestine and Syria and spreading into Greece and Italy, and gradually into northern regions. Europe is still the center of the Catholic Church, of course, but it was also the birthplace of the Protestant denominations that split from it. For most of us, even speaking of the "Eastern Church" refers to another group of Europeans, namely to the Orthodox believers who stem from the eastern parts of the continent. English Catholic thinker Hilaire Belloc once proclaimed that "Europe is the Faith; and the Faith is Europe."

But in the early centuries other Christians expanded east into Asia and south into Africa, and those other churches survived for the first 1,200 years or so of Christian history. Far from being fringe sects, these forgotten churches were firmly rooted in the oldest traditions of the apostolic church. Throughout their history, these Nazarenes used Syriac, which is close to Jesus' own language of Aramaic, and they followed Yeshua, not Jesus. No other church - not Roman Catholics, not Eastern Orthodox - has a stronger claim to a direct inheritance from the earliest Jesus movement.

The most stunningly successful of these eastern Christian bodies was the Church of the East, often called the Nestorian church. While the Western churches were expanding their influence within the framework of the Roman Empire, the Syriac-speaking churches colonized the vast Persian kingdom that ruled from Syria to Pakistan and the borders of China. From their bases in Mesopotamia - modern Iraq - Nestorian Christians carried out their vast missionary efforts along the Silk Route that crossed Central Asia. By the eighth century, the Church of the East had an extensive structure across most of central Asia and China, and in southern India. The church had senior clergy - metropolitans - in Samarkand and Bokhara, in Herat in Afghanistan. A bishop had his seat in Chang'an, the imperial capital of China, which was then the world's greatest superpower.

When Nestorian Christians were pressing across Central Asia during the sixth and seventh centuries, they met the missionaries and saints of an equally confident and expansionist religion: Mahayana Buddhism. Buddhists too wanted to take their saving message to the world, and launched great missions from India's monasteries and temples. In this diverse world, Buddhist and Christian monasteries were likely to stand side by side, as neighbors and even, sometimes, as collaborators. Some historians believe that Nestorian missionaries influenced the religious practices of the Buddhist religion then developing in Tibet. Monks spoke to monks.

In presenting their faith, Christians naturally used the cultural forms that would be familiar to Asians. They told their stories in the forms of sutras, verse patterns already made famous by Buddhist missionaries and teachers. A stunning collection of Jesus Sutras was found in caves at Dunhuang, in northwest China. Some Nestorian writings draw heavily on Buddhist ideas, as they translate prayers and Christian services in ways that would make sense to Asian readers. In some texts, the Christian phrase "angels and archangels and hosts of heaven" is translated into the language of buddhas and devas.

One story in particular suggests an almost shocking degree of collaboration between the faiths. In 782, the Indian Buddhist missionary Prajna arrived in Chang'an, bearing rich treasures of sutras and other scriptures. Unfortunately, these were written in Indian languages. He consulted the local Nestorian bishop, Adam, who had already translated parts of the Bible into Chinese. Together, Buddhist and Christian scholars worked amiably together for some years to translate seven copious volumes of Buddhist wisdom. Probably, Adam did this as much from intellectual curiosity as from ecumenical good will, and we can only guess about the conversations that would have ensued: Do you really care more about relieving suffering than atoning for sin? And your monks meditate like ours do?

These efforts bore fruit far beyond China. Other residents of Chang'an at this very time included Japanese monks, who took these very translations back with them to their homeland. In Japan, these works became the founding texts of the great Buddhist schools of the Middle Ages. All the famous movements of later Japanese history, including Zen, can be traced to one of those ancient schools and, ultimately - incredibly - to the work of a Christian bishop.

By the 12th century, flourishing churches in China and southern India were using the lotus-cross. The lotus is a superbly beautiful flower that grows out of muck and slime. No symbol could better represent the rise of the soul from the material, the victory of enlightenment over ignorance, desire, and attachment. For 2,000 years, Buddhist artists have used the lotus to convey these messages in countless paintings and sculptures. The Christian cross, meanwhile, teaches a comparable lesson, of divine victory over sin and injustice, of the defeat of the world. Somewhere in Asia, Yeshua's forgotten followers made the daring decision to integrate the two emblems, which still today forces us to think about the parallels between the kinds of liberation and redemption offered by each faith.

Christianity, for much of its history, was just as much an Asian religion as Buddhism. Asia's Christian churches survived for more than a millennium, and not until the 10th century, halfway through Christian history, did the number of Christians in Europe exceed that in Asia.

What ultimately obliterated the Asian Christians were the Mongol invasions, which spread across Central Asia and the Middle East from the 1220s onward. From the late 13th century, too, the world entered a terrifying era of climate change, of global cooling, which severely cut food supplies and contributed to mass famine. The collapse of trade and commerce crippled cities, leaving the world much poorer and more vulnerable. Intolerant nationalism wiped out Christian communities in China, while a surging militant Islam destroyed the churches of Central Asia.

But awareness of this deep Christian history contributes powerfully to understanding the future of the religion, as much as its past. For long centuries, Asian Christians kept up neighborly relations with other faiths, which they saw not as deadly rivals but as fellow travelers on the road to enlightenment. Their worldview differed enormously from the norms that developed in Europe.

To take one example, we are used to the idea of Christianity operating as the official religion of powerful states, which were only too willing to impose a particular orthodoxy upon their subjects. Yet when we look at the African and Asian experience, we find millions of Christians whose normal experience was as minorities or even majorities within nations dominated by some other religion. Struggling to win hearts and minds, leading churches had no option but to frame the Christian message in the context of non-European intellectual traditions. Christian thinkers did present their message in the categories of Buddhism - and Taoism, and Confucianism - and there is no reason why they could not do so again. When modern scholars like Peter Phan try to place Christianity in an Asian and Buddhist context, they are resuming a task begun at least 1,500 years ago.

Perhaps, in fact, we are looking at our history upside down. Some day, future historians might look at the last few hundred years of Euro-American dominance within Christianity and regard it as an unnatural interlude in a much longer story of fruitful interchange between the great religions.

Consider the story told by Timothy, a patriarch of the Nestorian church. Around 800, he engaged in a famous debate with the Muslim caliph in Baghdad, a discussion marked by reason and civility on both sides. Imagine, Timothy said, that we are all in a dark house, and someone throws a precious pearl in the midst of a pile of ordinary stones. Everyone scrabbles for the pearl, and some think they've found it, but nobody can be sure until day breaks.

In the same way, he said, the pearl of true faith and wisdom had fallen into the darkness of this transitory world; each faith believed that it alone had found the pearl. Yet all he could claim - and all the caliph could say in response - was that some faiths thought they had enough evidence to prove that they were indeed holding the real pearl, but the final truth would not be known in this world.

Knowing other faiths firsthand grants believers an enviable sophistication, founded on humility. We could do a lot worse than to learn from what we sometimes call the Dark Ages.

Philip Jenkins is Edwin Erle Sparks professor of the humanities at Penn State University. He is author of "The Lost History of Christianity: The Thousand-Year Golden Age of the Church in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia -- and How It Died," published last month.

Agree? Disagree?

Stopped reading after the first two paragraphs?

So what do you think?

20 comments:

  1. Hmmmm... No responses. Okay, I'll start out. As a zenbaptist I welcome the dialogue across religious bounds. As a mystic, I am familiar with many of the mystics of other spiritual paths and know that we see and live in the same reality of love and compassion.

    Seems to me that each of us humans sees ourselves as walking on an exclusive or an inclusive spiritual path.

    I surmise that those on an exclusive path see this article as WRONG in fact, in focus, and in intent, but will not say so because of the flak they might take.

    I surmise that those on an inclusive path are saying yeh, yeh and going on to make dinner or whatever.

    I surmise that those who prefer to not get into such matters had their eyes glaze over at about sentence three.

    But what do I know? I am having an inter-religious dialogue with myself!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hey Bubba -- some of us have these things called jobs that are sometimes followed by these other things called chores and we don't get/take a moment to read/respond until those duties/choices are tended. :)

    Now ... you know I love the histories/loopholes/tangents of religion in the same manner in which I allow myself to become frustrated. My current mind-wrapping-around-ity is with Lao-tzu via Stephen Mitchell. As I was reading your blog, these translated words kept smiling into my mind:

    When people see some things as beautiful, other things become ugly.
    When people see some things as good, other things become bad.

    Being and non-being create each other.
    Difficult and easy support each other.
    Long and short define each other.
    High and low depend on each other.
    Before and after follow each other.


    Cheers! Phil

    ReplyDelete
  3. (laughing) -- i forgot, phil, you got chickens and critters and other things -- thank you for the taoist quotes -- helps keep things in perspective -- cheers received and cheers given!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks for posting the article, George. Definitely interesting to learn more about the early history of Christianity in Asia. Especially like the lotus cross as proof that "transreligious" evolution/incorporation. To mutate Abe Lincoln- a world divided against itself can't stand. Best way forward is to have the type of interfaith conversation that Pope Benedict claims is impossible. Remember the design, WE? I believe it's just the type of transreligious symbol we could sorely use in the new millenium to chart a more harmonious path.
    Thanks again. Happy Festivus!- David Piller

    ReplyDelete
  5. George:
    Interesting article. It is true that some of the oldest X-tian traditions would not likely be recognized by X-tians today: Coptic traditions in Egypt, for instance, blend the traditions of Jesus with old dynastic Egyptian religions and the Hellenistic traditions of Alexander. The Greek Orthodox Church split with Rome over issues like the Divinity of Jesus and the trinity. Christianity today seems to want to be "pure," but its attempts to do so make it sterile and dead. Syncretism has a bad name, but syncretism is what makes a religion (or any belief system) vital. Look how it has survived in the Caribbean and American Gulf Coast regions in forms of Vodun and Santeria; mysticism and Christianity combined are beautifully robust; Islam, Christianity, and mysticism form the basis of B'hai faiths, and on and on. If the Church were really interested in the relief of suffering and not in theological hegemony, it would be finding wonderfully convenient ways of integrating itself with local traditions and beliefs. That is, after all, what made Christianity so successful in the first several hundred years of its existence.
    Best,
    Brad

    ReplyDelete
  6. Here is a translation of a portion of the Jesus Sutras referred to in the article --

    "The Lord of Heaven sent the Cool Wind to a girl named Mo Yen. It entered her womb and at that moment she conceived. The Lord of Heaven did this to show that conception could take place without a husband. He knew there was no man near her and that people who saw it would say, "How great is the power of the Lord of Heaven." Their hearts would become filled with pure faith and they would devote themselves to bettering the karmic condition of all.

    Mo Yen became pregnant and gave birth to a son named Jesus, whose father is the Cool Wind."

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thanks for sharing this brother!

    I watched a program on our local public broadcasting channel this week on Jesus' alleged visit to India. A visitor to a Buddist monastery in India brought back documentation of Jesus' teachings which he supposedly left behind at that monastery. In India he was known as Issa. Reportedly, he visited many Hindu and Buddhist leaders sharing his ideas and being influenced by theirs. While some anthropologists and historians argue that this is highly unlikely, the idea is intriguing.

    We cannot possibly know for sure what these humans, Jesus, Buddha, and other mystics, were like and how open they may have been to other perspectives. At best, these people serve as role models for those of us who seek to understand that which lies beyond the sensory world. To that extent, they share in common an interest in being in the world but not of the world. May they both inspire many to question prevailing dogma and to turn beyond all known limits.

    Peace be with you!
    stan

    ReplyDelete
  8. I like / deeply appreciate the interflow and exchange of understandings within and across cultures that is being pointed to by comments here. A richness occurs.

    I like the zen way too, which is close to the taoist way expressed by Phil. Here is that old zen dude Hui-neng telling it like it is --

    "The person who sees into his True Nature is free when he stands as well as when he does not stand. He is free both in going and in coming. There is nothing which retards him, nothing which hinders him. Responding to the situation, he acts accordingly; responding to the words, he answers accordingly. He expresses himself taking on all forms but he is never removed from his Self-Nature."

    No need for a structured belief system here. It gets in the way. This is more like living the way Jesus and Buddha lived rather than just holding them in adulation.

    ReplyDelete
  9. David, I like that lotus cross too. I appreciate the work you are doing and the prophet that you are. Blessings to you! Let's drink some coffee!

    ReplyDelete
  10. I notice only males have responded here (and free-thinking ones at that!). Do not those of the feminine persuasion have thoughts upon this matter?

    ReplyDelete
  11. WAS THE BUDDHA a demon? no! and even if he was...so what? aren't we all a mix of demon and angel? in the religion i grew up in...they believed "Everything was pagan" LOL if not following Jesus. Well...what about before Jesus? how they worshiped before Jesus was just as important and needed. things change...things will continue to change. change is good. my knowledge is not much George Breed...but i love learning and I'm a bit slow...but i see nothing wrong with pagan...i love Jesus too like you...and the Buddha...is pretty cool too.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I think you have pretty good knowledge, Kathy.

    ReplyDelete
  13. once when i got really mentally ill...(years ago) i was going around saying that the devil and God are one and the same! yeah...i even wrote a letter to my uncle and told him this. i laugh now when i think back on this happening. I don't know what happen to my brain...but all that stuff/readings in the bible and being translated by the Jehovah Witnesses scrambled my brain...and there's no going back...Thank God for that!

    but i still love the quotes in the bible..i have lots of favorite bible quotes. and i really love Jesus Christ and his father. If I'm nuts. well, I'm sorry. Only God can forgive me.

    ReplyDelete
  14. anyway..is spirituality needed in a human soul? Yes. I need it.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Love you George, impatience and all!
    I think this article is interesting on numerous levels. First I am intrigued by the historical perspective he gives regarding branches of Christianity that flowered in the East It makes me wonder if things might have been different with Europe based Christianity if it had experienced a less chaotic time in its early days. What if instead of the hardships of the Dark Ages (as it was experienced in much of Europe), the times had been more amenable to trade, mixing of cultures and philosophical pursuits? Would there have been more openness to religious cross-fertilization in the European strands of Christianity? Would there have been more emphasis on the message of Christianity and less on developing an orthodox faith as a tool to rule others?

    I am also interested in the article as it relates to modern times. Because even though there is a vocal segment of fundamentalist Christians, I sense that there are a large number of Catholics, and other Christians, who are not adverse to the idea that other religions have validity. No matter what the particularly conservative Pope Benedict is saying, many of my catholic friends and family, (of which I have a many being married to a guy from Ireland) clearly don’t agree with the pope on a number of ideas. Even though they remain faithful practicing Catholics, their religion doesn’t always seem to fit a worldview which is increasingly complex and diverse. I find most to be quietly intrigued, and if not accepting, they clearly see the relevance of other religious views. So even though the religious leaders may not be for inter-religious dialogue, I think that is not the case with a lot of ordinary folks. I honor people who are trying to find a way to hold to their religious beliefs in a way that is dynamic enough to fit their experience of the world.

    Finally I cant help but wonder, that as the world seems to be entering a period of heightened fear and potential chaos, will people be more likely to embrace openness and a more ecumenical stance, or retreat into fundamentalism?
    Tania

    ReplyDelete
  16. Tania, I appreciate your thinking. Looking at the two branches of Christianity (western/eastern or european/asian) I see the western christian way as more like the "hard" martial arts in its interaction style and the eastern christian way as more aikido like -- entering and blending.

    I agree with the understanding that people are way ahead of the institutional church -- some have left the organizations and some have stayed "to work within." Still others of course, of all denominations, think their church creed is the Eternal Truth Unchanging.

    It remains to be seen, as you point out, whether we navel tribe members will swear allegiance to the entire tribe (while maintaining our individual uniquenesses) or continue declaring war on all who do not believe as we believe and consign them to the pits of hell while muttering to ourselves that it is their own doing -- our hands are clean -- they had a chance to be like us, the heavenly ones, and blew it.

    Love to you! Warrior Woman!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Brad,
    Your comment --
    "If the Church were really interested in the relief of suffering and not in theological hegemony, it would be finding wonderfully convenient ways of integrating itself with local traditions and beliefs. That is, after all, what made Christianity so successful in the first several hundred years of its existence."
    -- reminds me of the premise "if you want to save your life, then lose it." Christianity could save its life, enliven itself, if it stopped clinging to an armor-ridden outmoded form and gave itself away freely. "It is better to give than receive."

    ReplyDelete
  18. Stan, my take on it is that neither Jesus nor Buddha were too interested in founding an organization. Jesus, especially, was no administrative bureaucrat. They were both teaching a way of life, a stance in the universe. I agree with you about following their example, questioning prevailing dogma, and turning beyond all known limits.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Carolyn Truscott sent me this and said that I could post it. Thanks, Carolyn!

    George,

    My friend Ron King forwarded me the thought-provoking article 'When Buddha Met Jesus'. I felt I had to respond as I feel Christians should be dialoging about this very thing.

    As the article refers, Buddha, Confucius, Ghandi and others were just spiritual figures. As 'spiritual figures', they don't have the spiritual significance of being God's one and only son, that which Jesus claimed. NOT ONE OTHER SPIRITUAL FIGURE CAN CLAIM THOSE CREDENTIALS.

    As for framing the gospel message in Buddhist or Confucist terms, WHY? It's not possible because the messages are DIFFERENT MESSAGES. While Buddhism focuses on purifying the self, Jesus WAS our purification, taking on our sin when we couldn't pay for it.

    The simplicity of the Gospel is legendary. Jesus spoke in parables to make it plain to people that he was offering the unprecedented offer of a lifetime; eternal life for being a pitiful, wretched, sinful human. No other spiritual figure could offer eternal life for DOING NOTHING. Even Buddha with his rigorous rice fasting and enlightenment could not attain eternal life for himself or his followers. The message of the Gospel is simple-there is very little to do; in fact, nothing we can do will give us what Jesus offered. All we have to do is ACCEPT his offer of eternal life.

    All paths do not lead to the same destination. It would be a disorderly and confusing world were that so. Why would God give us a bunch of different paths to eternal life, when he provided the one and only best road of all - His Son. Jesus himself claimed that he was THE WAY, THE TRUTH AND THE LIFE. I rely on this when I read about other roads to eternal life - I know that God would only offer his best and I have taken advantage of that offer. I trust that Jesus was the ONE AND ONLY blood sacrifice and that he laid down his life for all mankind. No other spiritual figure did that for you or me, and all those spiritual figures lie in the grave to this day; useless to you or me as far as atoning for our sins, interceding for our eternal souls, or taking us to live eternally with Father God.

    All the other stuff in the article; very interesting - especially the Nesayrans. This is good stuff; however, I have learned that the best witness to what the Lord did for me is my own life experience. That tells the tale and the truth of what he promised, "Life and abundant life."

    I do appreciate your quest for spiritual truths. Unfortunately, I don't believe this quest has to have as much search as we might think. The Bible and all its promises are forever available and forever true. All the inter-faith dialogue and intellectual articles will go on forever as man is constantly and consciously pushing the Gospel to the back burner-it will be there if all else fails. I hope you can remember that too, when all else fails, there will always be Jesus.

    In steadfast faith,

    Carolyn Truscott

    ReplyDelete
  20. The analogy of the pearl amid stones in a darkened house is a perfect reflection of the interplay of different human faiths and beliefs in what is Divine. People forget that the Divine came before any belief or faith, and that religions evolve and die just as humans and their societies evolve and die, and are replaced by other humans and their civilizations. We humans must learn from one another, or perish from our own ignorance.

    ReplyDelete