Buddhism And Christianity

[beatty07]

[quote name='Innocent' post='1391935' date='Sep 23 2007, 09:19 PM']I haven't heard of the Sevenfold Path so far. How is it different from the Eightfold Path?[/quote]

The difference is that the Sevenfold Path is a figment of my imagination. oops. well, I might as well finish the job since I've created a new religion. Here it is:

1) lots of coffee
2) compulsive running followed by long periods of couch-potato-ness.
3) surfing
4) listen to 'Freebird' and/or 'Wanted Dead or Alive' every day.
5) talk like a pirate at inappropriate times. Wait, are there any?
6) if you aren't crying, you need more hot sauce.
7) any of the above can be omitted for the holy purpose of going fishing, especially at 4am.

[jeffpugh]

Why 4am?

[Socrates]

I don't claim to be an expert on Buddhism, but Buddhism and Catholicism are too fundamentally different in their basic understanding of reality for there to be any "synthesis."

This is not deny that some good elements can be found in Buddhism (importance of compassion, etc.), but Buddhism's teachings on reality and the individual are too far removed from Christian Truth for there to be a true "fusion" of these beliefs.

[abercius24]

Buddhists generally have beliefs and practices we Catholics believe to be supersticious and sometimes atheistic. Similarities such as monastic life, personal honor and spiritual discipline are not enough to create a synthesis. Christianity is also incompatible with any "open" philosophical framework. We believe in absolute truth, which is only compatible with a "closed" philosophical framework (as the Greeks held). Buddhism does not seek to find an ultimate truth. Instead it seeks to find "paths" that lead to "personal" truth. Christ is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. He alone is our path and goal. As Merton points out, Zen is a way of life that is not necessarily religious and can be compatible with Christianity when one carefully keeps to a Christian focus. Zen is more of an aesthetic discipline presenting concepts to help one balance their priorities in life, which we inherently hold to in most cases.

Edited September 25, 2007 by abercius24

[beatty07]

Do you know much about Zen? Do you find Merton's proposal convincing? So far this thread has everything except anybody who knows anything about Zen!

[abercius24]

[quote name='beatty07' post='1392890' date='Sep 25 2007, 01:05 PM']Do you know much about Zen? Do you find Merton's proposal convincing? So far this thread has everything except anybody who knows anything about Zen![/quote]

Yes, I have read Merton's writings on Zen and did a little study of it on the side. It's mainly geared toward balancing one's life.

[Innocent]

[quote name='abercius24' post='1393109' date='Sep 26 2007, 09:07 AM']Yes, I have read Merton's writings on Zen and did a little study of it on the side. It's mainly geared toward balancing one's life.[/quote]

I'd be grateful if you could share with us what you learned from your study. Thank you.

[Guest Lantsberger]

[quote name='Innocent' post='1389665' date='Sep 21 2007, 12:42 AM']Some time ago I was reading about Buddhist philosophy and it struck me that there had not been any attempts of synthesis comparable to what the Angelic Doctor did with Greek Philosophy.

Would attempts to synthesise Buddhist philosophy be worthwhile for Catholicism?[/quote]

These are the key questions which I dont think are being fully addressed. It is conventionally taught that St. Augustine's vast scholarship wedded and entwined Neo-Platonism with Catholicism and divine revelation, and that this mode of thought was carried through the Middle Ages, and had another champion in St. Anselm. There are certain sticking points in Platonism which were worked through with St. Thomas Aquinas and his fusion of Aristotelianism and revelation.

This explanation might be slightly wrong in detail, but correct enough in sweep to be a starting point. I wouldnt recommend Merton, I think he is solid up to a point, and then falls away, both literally and literarily! One would be better served looking at the Jesuits of the Counterreformation period, Matteo Ricci, St. Francis Xavier and others who encountered these systems. There dont seem to be many works available, and the titles in existence are hard to find, but I think there is much better fruit to be found there.

I understand Classical Chinese thought to a fairly strong degree. Ive done Tai Chi and other Chinese Martial arts for about fifteen years, and Ive delved into that culture, met many natives and formed connections. I think the synthesis you are looking for has been done by some people at different times and in different degrees. There are a couple great websites I found in the past that I will try to post here.

[Innocent]

[quote name='Lantsberger' post='1394584' date='Sep 28 2007, 10:00 AM']One would be better served looking at the Jesuits of the Counterreformation period, Matteo Ricci, St. Francis Xavier and others who encountered these systems. There dont seem to be many works available, and the titles in existence are hard to find, but I think there is much better fruit to be found there.[/quote]


This might be a good thing. Their works are in the public domain, and it might be possible to find them on the internet.

What do you think of that book I mentioned in the first post? Have you encountered it? I am reading another book by the same author, and (until what I have read so far, at least) I see no problems with his orthodoxy.