This doesn’t explain the misery and suffering that we see in the world.
The Buddha rejected the idea of a God with creative powers as untenable, but still gave an explanation.
At the risk of adding to the muddle, I can confirm that Christians at least of the Anglican communion interpret the statement in question as follows:
I am the way, the truth, and the life, ← first clause
No one comes to the Father except through me. ← second clause
-John 14:6
but one cannot read the second clause without the first. No one comes to the Father except through me. Who is ‘me’? ‘The way, the truth, and the life’. Vague, to be sure, but that is the definition given. In light of this, Jesus can be construed to be many things. That is how many Christians interpret the verse at least.
The crux of the matter is you attain Nibbana in this life, not after death.
Even if you are short of Nibbana, you can experience nature of other divine abodes this life itself. There is a clear path. Not just pray for something unknown.
I have said repeatedly that this is not an ‘argument’. I am simply pointing things out. I am not out to convince you or anyone else. The point of my first response to you was that this could not be resolved or proven one way or the other. All of the quotes I have given have been in response to specific points people have made and so from that perspective - yes I have selected quotes that try to show what I am talking about. I would love to have the time to go through his various books and put together an essay on what seems to match up well, what doesn’t and the things that I can’t make any sense out of.
The man wrote for a 13th century Flemish audience. As with the suttas - it would be most helpful to be able to immerse myself in the belief system of his time so I could have a better understanding but that isn’t really possible. A couple of things we can be pretty sure of is that he and his audience looked at the world from a Biblical perspective or mindset and that he must have been aware throughout his writing that the Church Hierarchy had a gun to his head should he stray too far from official doctrine.
So now you bring up something that strikes you as being dualistic and inconsistent with the Suttas. So here are my thoughts on your quote:
I think that statement might be keeping him from getting burned at the stake. Saying ‘I am God’ or ‘I become God’ - doesn’t church doctrine reject that possibility? On the other hand, the Arahant does not become Nibbana but rather touches it with his body etc. But anyway, the first part of the quote: Man proceeds from God and is destined to return. Buddha says that we have been lost in samsara since beginningless time and that if we follow the path then we can break free of the cycle.
Nibbana is the unconditioned element. It neither arises nor passes away yet it is. So going back to beginningless time can you imagine any point where something unconditioned comes into existence? It is a nonsensical statement. Considering that we are talking about 2 people living and teaching in very different cultures and belief systems I don’t see a big difference here. The key is the path. Is this a show stopper? Is it going to prevent someone from entering the path? I don’t see it. I am not and have not been saying the doctrines are the same - I am saying that I see patterns in the nature of their experience that suggests they awakened to essentially the same thing as described in the suttas. As long as the doctrine can propel them along the path - it really doesn’t matter what it is.
He did say ‘One who sees the dhamma sees me, one who sees me sees the dhamma’. Seems pretty similar to me.
Certainly one does. If you read his writing you will immediately see that this is something he is saying happens in this very life. He is not talking about this is what happens to you after you die.
Ruysbroek describes a path which begins with the practice of virtue and generosity and builds step by step toward a series of awakening experiences that ultimately lead to the total enlightenment that he is describing.
“Perhaps the teaching is one, but there are various people who hear it. On account of the inconceivable merit it bestows, it shines forth in various ways”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haribhadra
I can copy what Buddha said and start a new religion without Nibbana.
What matter in Buddhism is the Noble Eightfold Path.
Has Ruysbroek preached Noble Eightfold Path and four noble truths?
If not what is missing?
True. I was providing a number of quotes as to the nature of God that I found in his writings. Similarly, you would not expect to find descriptions of suffering within the nature of nibbana. You do bring up a good point that I haven’t really been looking for so far and that is if there is anything in his writings about suffering and it’s cause. So I will add that to my list - I think it could be another indicator.
I don’t know how his audience understood their life. We have the story of Genesis from the bible and as 13th Century Christians I would imagine this was part of their belief system. It may be that they already got the whole suffering thing and just were looking for some kind of salvation but I don’t know. I stopped going to Church when I was 11. Maybe someone else better informed could comment on that.
Who are those two women?
1 Like
I do not know
The similarities are mostly to be found in the disdain for worldly things and possessions. Renunciation of social attachments and subduing carnal impulses is a common theme in most of the monastic and ascetic traditions. But, once we move past the similarities, I don’t think we can equate the nature of gnosis in various religions as one and the same. The misery that we see in the world is not explained by a Creative God. It’s a paradox that has to be brushed aside by blind faith since God is assumed to be merciful, loving etc.
I think the suffering in this world is the litmus test for evaluating any doctrine.
So its pure speculation? Ok cool, got it.
I think that statement might be keeping him from getting burned at the stake. Saying ‘I am God’ or ‘I become God’ - doesn’t church doctrine reject that possibility? On the other hand, the Arahant does not become Nibbana but rather touches it with his body etc. But anyway, the first part of the quote: Man proceeds from God and is destined to return. Buddha says that we have been lost in samsara since beginningless time and that if we follow the path then we can break free of the cycle.
You are reaching here, so hard. They are clearly different ideas, why is that bad?
I am saying that I see patterns in the nature of their experience that suggests they awakened to essentially the same thing as described in the suttas.
I don’t see any pattern here which indicates the same awakening. One person is describing theophany (in greek it literally means the appearance of a personal deity), the other tradition is describing something completely different.
1 Like
The way I understand, the Christianity accepts suffering. (perhaps not the same way Buddhist understand it) It appears Jesus Christ died on the cross for the original sins of mankind and their suffering. When you pray to Jesus you will be free from suffering. You will be considered favorably when Jesus rises from the dead on the judgment day.
I may be wrong but that is how I understand it.
Second in from the right appears to be Quan Yin Bodhisattva.
1 Like
One’s Kwan Yin and the other looks like one of the female orishas, probably either Yemoja or Oshun.
3 Likes
Something like that. It’s like you come upon something interesting and you want to share it. That’s all.
It’s quite interesting for me that many of the insights pointed out in the EBTs, I have arrived at by following a purely Christian path.
Some of the views on subjects such as “prayer” in this thread seem rather naive and simplistic. It feels like when I talk to Christians about Buddhism and they only have a couple of badly translated Jataka tales to base their views of Buddhism on.
2 Likes
Do you find them in the bible?
A couple of big religions post date the Buddha, so he can’t have been talking about those.
I’m guessing that these religions may have benefited from the Buddha’s insights. The doors to the deathless having been opened
Also, presumably the Buddha didn’t know about all the religions during the time of his last birth, just those in his own “world system”.
Yes you do.