588
Anon studies Buddhism
(sh.itjust.works)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2025
588 points (96.5% liked)
Greentext
6136 readers
1483 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Out of curiosity, which Buddhist tradition was this temple out of? I've had similar experience, but I get the feeling like Buddhist thought might be about as diverse as Christian.
It's much more diverse than Christianity, actually. Buddhism isn't so much a religion in the judeochristian sense as a characteristic that many religions have. There are Buddhist traditions that worship gods, there are godless Buddhist traditions that worship the Buddha,, and ones thay don't even worship the Buddha but just think he was a pretty wise dude. Some require you to meditate daily, others to chant some mantras, and there are Buddhist traditions like Zen that worship nothing and are all about getting your head out of your ass.
Isn't that just like the various branches of Christianity? Unitarianism, Quakers, etc.
Sort of but not really.
All branches of Christianity believe that Jesus was the Messiah and the Son of God and that the Bible was written under divine inspiration and is the literal Word of God, among other dogmas. They only differ in how they interpret the sacred scriptures.
Not only is there no centralized textual source for Buddhist teachings (there are several different sutras and each "kind" of Buddhism gets to pick and choose), and therefore no dogmas universal to Buddhism other than "what the Buddha said was true", but as I said some believe in the Hindu gods, some in other local gods and some in none; some believe in reincarnation and some don't; and some believe that the Buddha himself was born special like Jesus (though not from a virgin) while others believe he was just a regular Joe for his caste but who was brilliant enough to figure out a way to cease suffering.
So you could make a case for there existing Buddhist Hinduism, Buddhist Shintoism and even "atheist" (in the literal sense of not believing in the supernatural, not in the acquired sense of not being a religion) Buddhism. This last kind views the Buddha's teachings as basically brilliant psychology lessons masked in mystical language to be more accessible to the audiences of the time.
Ah I see, thanks for the extra context!
You're welcome! It's always a pleasure to geek out about something I find interesting.
Aye, perhaps not in the "Judeo-Christian" sense, but a religion nonetheless.
But actually it strikes me that "Judeo-Christianity" is more about theme or literature than form. The Christians claim a common God with the Jews, but that's mostly it. In form Christianity seems more Greco-Roman than Judaic to me.
"Greco-Romo-Christan" maybe?
How does a monotheistic religion whose prophet explicitly claimed to be part of the succession of Jewish prophets and to have "come to confirm" their teachings seem more like a polytheistic religion where gods aren't known for using prophets to send messages to the people to you? Serious question. I'm intrigued.
Jesus did not really claim to be part of succession of Jewish prophets based on the text in the New Testament. In the first three Gospels one could certainly describe him as a prophet, though by the fourth he was definitely being described as God. That in itself makes it far more like mithran cults than Judaism.
And while a lot of what he taught was consistent with Jewish thought, a lot of it was contrary to Jewish thought and practice too, even explicitly so. And later writings by Paul, which for better or worse are canonical to the vast majority of Christians, pull the religion further away from Judaism.
Now Greco Roman gods didn't need prophets, because they had more formal roles that played similar functions: priests and oracles. Christianity on the other hand has prophets, saints, martyrs, and priests. Judaism on the other hand had priests, occasional prophets, then later rabbis. Notably Christian prophets prophesy about Jesus's return or his goings on in heaven, while Jewish prophets were mostly telling people to get back into their covenant and stop marrying foreigners, usually promising freedom from whatever country was currently conquering them at the moment as a reward. Notably people claiming to be Jewish prophets do not get a lot of traction in Jewish communities these days, and have not for millennia.
I mean you can't deny that Jesus was Jewish, but he was an eccentric Jew, and the people who became his hangers on created a religion that did not look like the religion he mostly practiced. Certainly not one that looks like Judaism of today.
Christianity says Jesus is god, uses multiple images of their God, but also multiple gods through their Trinity / triune God head work around, centers mostly around devotion and worship through novel praise rather than rule following and study. It often focuses on a personal relationship with the godhead. Judaism doesn't do this stuff, but it's not out of place in pagan traditions.
I mean Jesus was literally conceived by the Holy Spirit entering into Mary, like Zeus going into countless mortal women to make half-God children. I mean I guess it wasn't technically sex because that would be tasteless, but certainly all the Jewish prophets I can think of were conceived through two human people having sex.
None of that's to say there's anything per se "wrong" with Christianity, but there's a reason it exists alongside modern Judaism and not instead of it.
There are definitely elements of Christianity that mimic Greco-Roman (and other, older) mystery religions. Down to celebrating their deity's birth at the same time and commemorating his death and rebirth by having followers share bread and wine.
My favorite theory of the origin of Christianity is that it was a Jewish attempt to mimic the mystery religions that were popular at the beginning of the Common Era.
The central point of mystery religions like the Eleusinian Mysteries is to cultivate the mystical experience. In judeochristian theology, that experience is considered sacrilegious. Some Jews let Jesus have it and became Christians, but nobody else is allowed. And the ones we call Jewish today didn't even let that one guy have it.
The similarities between Christianity and Greco-Roman mysticism are only surface-level and were a marketing ploy to gain followers. In its core, Christianity is still Judaism, just packaged for export. Hence why two thousand years later, Christians are still quoting the Old Testament to justify bigotry, even though they claim to be followers of the guy who said "love each other as I have loved you".
It feels to me like there's an inconsistency between calling Christianity "Judaism for export", and saying that it quotes the Old Testament for the purposes of bigotry. Or maybe it just feels antisemitic, even if not deliberately so. I mean it's not like there isn't bigotry in the New Testament, or radical acceptance in the Old.
But also I don't think you can argue that Christianity is a mere extension of Judaism and at the same time argue that it shouldn't utilize Jewish text.
Plain Buddhism was kind of a downer so they made stuff like pure land buddhism that is more of a fun afterlife version instead of hardcore OG Buddha which is like kill yourself and stop existing forever because the world is just an eternal cycle of pain and reincarnation into more pain forever.
I get it, life sucks. but I ain't giving up. This world is gonna have to stop me.
The Buddha never said to kill yourself, though. Your comment reads like those people who thought Nietzsche was depressed.
Yeah, Zen Buddhism kinda rocks.
Tibetan, it's a mix of Mahayana and Vajrayana
Yeah, the way you said it my first thought was "Tibetan".