Being a cultural Christian I’ve been thinking about a contrast between Christianity and Buddhism that I find interesting
In Christianity, there is often a strong emphasis on the idea that human beings ultimately cannot save themselves and need help from outside grace, forgiveness, and transformation coming from God. This can lead to a strong focus on humility: recognizing one’s limits and dependence.
In Buddhism, especially in early teachings, there seems to be a strong emphasis on effort. The Buddha teaches the path, but each person must walk it themselves. Liberation appears to depend on one’s own insight, discipline, and practice.
This made me wonder if this strong emphasis on self-reliance may carry a risk of reinforcing the sense of “I am the one who achieves awakening”? In other words could the path itself unintentionally strengthen the ego it is supposed to dissolve?
By contrast, Christianity sometimes frames the spiritual path in terms of surrender and humility before something greater than oneself.
So how do Buddhists prevent the path of effort from becoming another project of the ego? How is humility cultivated if liberation depends primarily on one’s own practice and insight?
This might be a bit off your topic.
My observation is that many dhamma practitioners may manage to let go of most material things and/or concepts. Despite that or because of that, their conceit is more pronounced.
Understanding this can help us restrain our mind from getting drowned in conceit.
Sir, the factors of stream-entry are associating with true persons, listening to the true teaching, rational application of mind, and practicing in line with the teaching.”
SN55.5
Without the input of others, and honest reflection into cause and effect it’s not possible to realise stream entry. Cause and effect is counter to that which builds a sense of solid self.
The point is everything can strengthen the ego, even “the turn the other cheek”. But the path doesn’t unintentionally strengthen the ego, since when ego is omnipresent, just cannot help, the practice has to start from ego. Ego desiring dissolution quite likely will not succeed, but if it waits for God who will dissolve it, most certainly waits rather for Godot.
To me Buddhism is a paradox. When confronted by such questions I resort to MN22. Included in this Sutta is this gem:
“In the same way, I have taught a simile of the teaching as a raft: for crossing over, not for holding on.By understanding the simile of the raft, you will even give up the teachings, let alone what is not the teachings.”
This is my go to Sutta! Mettā 
This might be a subtle point but the sutta’s portray a Buddha that learns that the delusion that it is an Ego that lives, feels, sees, hears and knows, must dissolve. This is not the same as the dissolution of a real existing Ego, but the dissolution of being deluded about what sees, hears, feels and knows. Ignorance must be replaced by true knowledge.
Our whole experience might acutely scream that within us there is a subject, an I or Ego, some kind of entity that sees, hears, lives, dies, feels, knows, but is it? Buddha learns that feeling, seeing, hearing and knowing are functions of the mind and not of an existing subject, Ego or entity-I.
So, it believe we can sum it up like this: We have a distorted perception and understanding of the nature of mind, or in other words: of that what sees, hears, feels and knows. Until this distorted perception and understanding is gone, our experience screams of the existence of a subject, an Ego, an I am seeing, I am feeling etc. This also influences what/how we think, speak and do or not do.
Our impression that an Ego or entity-I sees, hears, feel, knows, can be strenghtend in many ways. Also in living a religious life in which one conceives oneself as little compared to God. It is not difficult to see this strenghtens the conceit I am. All ideas about oneself strenghten I am-conceit, even thinking low or little about oneself.
The risk of strenghtening delusion, especially by growing conceit, is adressed in the sutta’s. One might start to feel a special person in living with such high moral standards, having so much wisdom, knowledge and vision not shared by many, abilities to enter jhana at wish etc.
I think the chance is great this happens because not many have a natural feeling for the emptiness of mind (its non-ego nature) and the heart is a wilderness with many longings. Not at least the longing to be a special person, savior, hero, winner, famous, authority, a person with status etc.
But the sutta’s teach that when one remains on track and does not deviate, the eye of wisdom will become so strong that it will also break through and end all conceit. Also the poignent experience that it is an Ego, subject, entity-I that sees, hears, feels, knows, is described to vanish.
In the end Buddha does not treat the Ego-conceit as something immoral or as not Gods will. He teaches:
“Dispassion for the world is happiness for one who has gone beyond sensual pleasures. But dispelling the conceit ‘I am’is truly the ultimate happiness.” (Ud2.1)
Apparantly Buddha saw it from the perspective of suffering and its end. In that sense, i feel, he did not really have a religious approach. A Christian mystic wil probably see it as calling to become God-like. And a Christian will probably see any self-centeredness as not Gods will with humans, or just as not pure? I have certainly also feeling for the impurity of any selfishness, but my impression is that Buddha was not really attuned to that. His concern was apparantly suffering, its cause, its end and the Path to the end.
This thread is closed for moderation.