World Religions: Buddhism and Christianity

This roadmap of this paper is in general twofold. On the oneness side of the spectrum, it attempts to make a successful presentation of the radical temper and underlying teachings of Buddhism as a objet darticular spectral transaction. On the opposite side of the spectrum, this paper hopes to make an equ tot whollyyy successful juxtaposition of the salient points relative to the similarities and differences between Buddhism and saviorianity. The starting point of this essay will be to firstly lay the foundational elements and fundamental useistics of the Buddhism credence, as a jumping board from where the succeeding discussions shall be disengagen.Secondarily, in order to better sit the Buddhisms teachings within the larger pur study of pietism as a phenomenon, its comparison with Christianity shall comprise a significant part of the discussions as well. In the process, this paper hopes to establish that on that point is in fact an array of aspects for both religion s which, withal when on the surface they appear to be only distinct, nevertheless sh ar common strains and resemblances, as far as imperious printings and ethical norms ar concerned.This is a concept of no little importance for history has been a constant witness to the divisive nature of religious pluralism. On a careful analysis, what this paper hopes to ultimately achieve is not to lay assessment on any the correctness or wrongfulness of any doctrine, as it merely wants to appreciate of the distinctness and uniqueness which defines both Buddhism and Christianity, and all arena religions for that matter. Fundamental Tenets of Buddhism Buddhism is a religious tradition believed to be already in place around 500 years before the coming of Christ (Griffiths, 1997, p. 5). The exact locating of its initial inception and formation is relatively unknown, inasmuch as the exact time of its emergence remains to be fully determined. But galore(postnominal) another(prenominal) th inkers believe that the religious parkway started from the Indian peninsula, only to be disperse from the neighboring regions posterior on. An exact definition of Buddhism may be difficult to identify, as a exclusively array of versions of Buddhism claim origin and affinity from the force which may be called as the chief transport of the religion Gautama Buddha, also known as Gautama Sakayamuni.Far from creation a movement characterized by an familiar bond of uniformity or structure, Buddhism is one the few religions in the public which readily embrace mutation from its adherents. In fact, Griffiths would claim that one of the most notable uniqueness of Buddhism lies in its very distinctiated character (1997, p. 5). To concretely cite the case in point, one may perhaps discover that the version of Buddhism being applyd in, say, South Asia, may differ distinctively from the one being observed in near states, say, the countries found in South-East Asia.By inference, it is thereof not without good reasons to suppose that Buddhism is a religious movement that n either demand nor teach an adherence to a uniform doctrine to all its followers. As hereinabove hinted, Buddhism takes root from the inspiration and teaching left by its recognized stop by the name of Gautama Sakayamuni, who later on, would be called Gautama Buddha by his followers. At the very least, this is precisely the reason why the religion is named after its founder since Sakayamuni is believed to be the religions supreme exemplification of a flavor marked by entireness freedom.It is commonly accepted that Gautama Buddha left a host of teaching pertinent to the methods of meditation as a way to attain a totally blissful existence. This state is called Nirvana. Buddhism, it must(prenominal) be mentioned, is largely rough an adherence to a kind of life geared towards the search for enlightenment, as did their founder Gautama. Thus, in view of this, Humphrey believes that this particu lar religion does not chiefly concern itself with the worship of a Transcendent as an adaptation of a particular way of life (1997, p. 13).In many ways, this is yet another glaring certification of Buddhisms peculiarity. Normally, the most fundamental definition of religion which by the way is accepted for most part by nearly all thinkers has, one way or another, the element of a belief in a Transcendent as one of the chief conditions to be satisfied. Taylor thus puts it simply religion is nought else but a belief in a Supreme Being (cited in McCutcheon, 2007, p. 22). As for Buddhism, many thinkers believe that the element of Transcendence in its core doctrines is not that apparent.Which is why, Williams would contend that Buddhism is a religious movement which is not so much associated with doctrinal beliefs as a body of teachings with spiritual benefits (1989, p. 2). In fact, many of Buddhisms teachings are concerned not really with religious worship as with lifestyle, ritual s, devotions and meditations (Mitchell, 2002, p. 1). Buddhism believes reality is always in a constant flux. In other words, it maintains the absolute impermanence of all things (Griffiths, 1997, p. 16).In fact, in the entire corpus of Buddhisms teachings, one may notice that the theme of impermanence is patently recurrent. Since this religion draws heavily from the fundamental recognition that nothing in the knowledge domain is ever permanent, it therefore believes that human persons must exhibit a detached comportment in relation to the things of the knowledge base. In other words, the more a person appreciates the true implication of diversity and impermanence, in a manner being unattached to all things ephemeral, the more a person is closer to the truth about reality (Williams, 1989, p. 3).Taking cue from this fundamental belief, Buddhism teaches that human life is in a perpetual pursuit of enlightenment against the backdrop of an impermanent world and this entails being cons tantly dissatisfied by what read everything the world offers (Williams, 1989, p. 34). In many ways, it is only by properly of mere inference that one cannot anchor his or her contentment or enlightenment on something that ceases to become as time passes. Thus, the plain admission that reality is in fact impermanent should therefore lead believers to equally recognize that nothing in this world ever satisfies human existence to dumbfound with.Buddhism also acknowledges that reality can sometimes be illusory. Put in other words, Buddhism subscribes to belief that, since things are subjected to a constant flux of change, things (therefore) are not what they seem (Griffiths, 1997, p. 20). To this end, the value of meditation takes concrete shape. surmise allows a person to enter into the truth that the world cannot satisfy the longing for human contentment and bliss. It is even said that Buddha himself taught that one must always take on the attitude of dissatisfaction even in med itation.In this way, one can therefore sift through the elements which constitute eternal happiness from a world replete with ephemeral things (Mitchell, 2002, p. 33). Through meditation, Buddhism offers a way towards the ultimate state of blissfulness called Nirvana. Through it, one is able to create a standpoint marked by a deliberate renunciation of the world i. e. , a total freedom from the world. It also has to be pointed out that Buddhism offers a set of belief systems that demands concrete actions as well.The doctrine called the four noble truths for instance essentially begins with the fundamental belief that life is woeful and subsequently demands correlative actions to address it. To concretely cite, Buddhism holds that there are four noble truths in life namely, (1) life is suffering, (2) the cause of suffering is cravings for pleasure, (3) freedom from suffering is temperance from pleasures, and (4) the way to stop suffering is to practice the eight-fold path which incl udes, right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right living, right conduct, right mindfulness and right concentration (Mitchell, 2002, pp. 5-47). Buddhism and Christianity a Juxtaposition It has to be firstly remembered that the task of the succeeding discussion is not to draw a point-for-point correspondence between Buddhism and Christianity. The whole point of comparing and contrasting is the inference of resemblances in either religious themes and moral tendencies of both religions in question, piece of music affirming the innate distinctness each of them primarily possess. First, it is illustrious to cite that both Buddhism and Christianity are religious movements that accede to the authority of their founders who act as the primordial and central point of their emergence.Buddhism on the one hand sees Buddha as the exemplification of their journey towards a transcendent end. Buddha, while considered not as a divinity, remains to be the only figure of transcend ent to whom Buddhism profess a faith. Christianity is pretty much the same except that the person whom they recognize as its founder deliveryman Christ is firstly believed to as a divinity. Like Buddhism, Christianity owes its emergence from the life and teachings of its recognized founder. In fact, according to Alister McGrath, the set up cause of Christian faith and Christian doctrine was and is a man named Jesus (1997, p. ). Put simply, the belief on the Lordship of Jesus Christ was the primordial force that pushed Christianity to become a distinct religious movement out of the mainline Judaic religion. Second, it is also wise to tonicity that both Buddhism and Christianity believe on an high-minded existence apart from this world. Buddhism, as mentioned, relegates a serious amount of its teachings on meditations, in the hope that much(prenominal) a practice would usher its believers onto a state of complete bliss.Christianity too believes that in state of abruptly blissf ul vision of the Lord, translated into heaven (Sheed, 1957, p. 220). Christians believe that when a person dies, his or her soul can either go to heaven or be condemned to hell. Be that as it may, the belief in the incomparable happiness brought about by mans living contact with the infinite perfection of God, or the concept of an afterlife still emerges. Third, with equal interest it must also be mentioned that both Buddhism and Christianity place the question of suffering within the very context of their respective belief systems.Buddhism acknowledges that suffering needs to be purged and surpassed by letting oneself become free from the lures of the world. Christianity meanwhile believes that suffering has a place in the faith it professes. epoch Christianity recognizes the undeniable nature of human suffering, it treats the latter with much profoundness and uniqueness. Christianity does not teach that all sufferings must be purged instead, it teaches that there are sufferings t hat must be embraced for the sake of heaven.This is supremely exemplified by Jesus Christ himself the God-man who, by suffering in His soul and body on the cross saved the world from its sinfulness (Sheed, 1957, p. 127). By way of contrast though, it needs to be acknowledge that there are certain(prenominal) strains of beliefs that distinguish Buddhism from Christianity in a manner being patent and obvious. One can perhaps note how, first, Buddhism differs from Christianity on account of the belief in a divine transcendence. Christianity believes in a God which is Trinitarian in character.This means Christians profess to a God who comes in three distinct persons the Father, the Son (who is Jesus Christ) and the beatified Spirit (Sheed, 1957, p. 54). If Christianity has a very concrete way of imaging its belief in a divinely transcendent Being, Buddhisms belief system, by contrast, cannot sufficiently pinpoint the image of a divine and a belief in the Supreme Being is highly ambi guous for them. Far more critical, there are even those who doubt if the idea of a Supreme Being is tenable for the Buddhist faith.Griffiths for instance notes that the metaphysics of impermanence makes it difficult for Buddhist to conceive of a god, who, at least for Christians, is considered to be enduring, impermanent and most of all, fixed (1997, p. 23). Second, briefly it can be cited too that Buddhism differs from Christianity in terms of religious structure. It was previously mentioned that Buddhism does not appear to demand a uniform set of doctrines for all its members to observe. This is why, there are a number of different versions of Buddhism throughout the world.Christianity on the contrary insists on a universal acceptance of its official corpus of teachings. While this does not imply that Christianity does not have its own minority versions, the crux of the matter here is that, Christianity, inappropriate Buddhism, emphasizes, or, more appropriately insists on the n eed, for its adherents, to profess in one i. e. , uniform set of key doctrinal tenets (Sheed, 1957, p. 140). Conclusion This paper concludes with a thought that firstly affirms the need to recognize the value of Buddhism as a movement distinct and unique on its own.As a religion which has been in place for the daylong time in human history, it was lettered though the discussions that Buddhism takes root from the life and inspiration lent by its recognized founder, Gautama Buddha. Moreover, it was also learned that Buddhism has long established itself as one of the major religions of the world to date, offer its adherents a doctrine which on the one hand embraces a perpetual dissatisfaction towards all things, and on the other hand longs for a state of complete happiness that can only be found within.By right of mere logic, it is not for nothing that millions of people embrace this faith with much devotion and dear for its doctrines allow its believers to glimpse beyond the eph emeral affairs of the world. With equal interest, this paper also presented a cloggy juxtaposition of Buddhism and Christianity, and therefore concludes that there are indeed strains of similarities which can be gleaned from between the two religions.Among others, it was learned that both of them recognize authoritative figures as their revered founders Gautama for Buddhism and Jesus Christ for Christianity. And surely, there are roofy more similarities and differences which can be cited to this end. In the final analysis though, this paper further concludes that despite sufficient differences, many of the aspects of both religions manifest areas that may be taken as facets for future dialogue and reciprocal appreciation.