Thank you for your response. I don’t believe Jesus’ essence comes through complete in the mainstream teachings, especially with their ignorance of reincarnation (which slips in, though, in the NT when there is a discussion on who John the Baptist is/was, for example). Good sources on Jesus include the Urantia Book (free online), with its 500-page section on the life of Jesus; I also like a book called Walking Through Illusion: Jesus Speaks of the People Who Shared His Journey: An Emotional Biography by Betsy Otter Thompson, which is the only book I’ve read 12 times (available online; unfortunately needs a proofreader).
Religion is Bullshit.
Richard Dawkins exploding at bull shit in the Bible.
Very nice post! 
I can identify with and agree with a lot of what you said in it.
Christianity, particularly Catholicism, has taken a huge battering in Ireland (where I live). A lot of that was self-deserved with covering up of abuse scandals etc. From being the de facto state religion a few decades ago, with 90%+ mass attendances, it’s now trendy in the media to be hostile to it. Very few young people attend mass anymore. I suspect that, in a generation or two, attendance will be down to levels more typical of continental European countries (a dedicated core of maybe 10-15%?). Treatment of other religions, e.g. Eastern ones, tends to be favourable and uncritical in a vague and rather uninformed way. Actually having a Thai sister-in-law, I get the general impression the state of Thai Buddhism might actually be in a similar place to Ireland’s Catholic Church a few decades back (though I’m sure other people here have far greater insights and knowledge than me). It seems deeply and unquestioningly embedded in Thai society and politics (rather like the devotion to the Royal family). You’d have to wonder, though, what skeletons are in its closet. As modernity sweeps Thailand, will a similar pattern reoccur there eventually? A more aggressive media, a wave of scandals, less interest in religion and more in consumerism by young people. I’ve a certain intuition that history may repeat itself. Buddhist institutions probably have their dark sides too, e.g. the book “Zen at War”, various scandals concerning Zen and Tibetan masters in the West etc. That’s probably inevitable no matter how great the core message (human fallibility being what it is).
I’ll have to agree with you on Bhante Sujato. He is one of the very best writers I have encountered on Buddhism (very clear reasoning and nice writing style). I’ve found several of his books very helpful: “A History of Mindfulness”, “Sects and Sectarianism”, "“A Swift Pair of Messengers” etc. (he’d even edge out Bhikkhu Analayo whose work on mindfulness and more recent work comparing the Pali canon and Chinese Agamas I’ve also found very illuminating). In general, I’ve found the BSWA talks very helpful also. It was actually via reference to this site via an old Sujato BSWA talk (a farewell talk to the Armadale meditation group I think) that I actually only stumbled across SuttaCentral. This whole translation endeavour seems exceptionally worthy. Textual analysis of the gospels has been taken to the umpteenth degree on unfortunately a very sparse amount of core material. There seems huge scope for similar tools applied to the far greater Buddhist canon. Must be very exciting for people working in the field!
That describes me to a tee also! 
Like most Irish people in the Irish Republic, I got the usual Roman Catholic upbringing. I have always been “spiritually interested” but also was always big in things scientific and technical (acquired a background and training in that too), so have always been rather skeptical and doubting as well.
I had several issues with Catholicism and Christianity in general. Ended up being quite widely read on spiritual/philosophical topics. Only two things ever really impressed and resonated with me.
One was the book: “A Course in Miracles”. That was really the only lens I found through which the Christianity I was raised in made sense to me. One of the people involved with its inception in the 1960s, Bill Thetford, remarked on some striking similarities to the Vivekananda strand of Vedanta (though IMO there are limits to this; it is very Christian in many senses, though tieing in too to the “perennial philosophy” notion mentioned in other threads here recently). I can’t say whether the book is actually genuine (only the late Helen Schucman, it primary originator, knew for certain I guess). However, despite my doubts, I was impressed by the book. I have worked a lot with it over many years (following its spiritual exercises). In practical terms, It has led to much increased peace of mind/happiness. I’m a kinder person for it I feel. To put in Buddhist terms, there’s a heavy emphasis on Brahmavihara (forgiveness, compassion, kind perception of other people) and a rather rigorous daily-life mindfulness regimen (continual short structured meditations during the day at intervals, examining one’s mind and see if lack of forgiveness/hatred etc. is present), plus longer mediation sessions morning and night (though not really meditation in a Buddhist sense, more contemplation and/or “listening” to inner silence). If there is something to Christianity, IMO, it’s something very much along the lines set out in “A Course in Miracles” (ACIM), whether genuine or not (the practical and detailed workbook of practice exercises also sold me).
The Buddhist suttas themselves were the only other thing that really spoke deeply to me. It was through Bhikkhu Bodhi’s book “In the Buddha’s Words” that I really encountered these for the first time. My impression was that this material was written by a real spiritual genius (the impression has never let me). The suttas themselves spoke in a way that books about Buddhism didn’t to any way near the same extent. I read some free sutta anthologies after that, and then onto the Nikayas themselves. Have been making my way through these for several years. The suttas can be a bit vague on the nuts-and-bolts of practice so in relatively recent times I’ve been making my way through books like Analayo’s and Sujato’s and other meditation manuals. My actual practice is still primarily ACIM-based. I’m probably getting to the stage where I’m feeling I’ve derived about as much benefit as I’m going to get from ACIM-based practice for now. My plan is to continue on for about another year at this, and then immerse myself deeply into Buddhist meditation and practice for several years (hence my attempts to get a clear picture of meditation nuts-and-bolts). There are actually some nice Theravada retreat centres of various hues in Southern Ireland also, which should be useful.
So I’ve a lot of practice with an “Eternalist” spiritual system (as Buddhism categorizes these things). As theist systems go, probably given my Catholic background, the “Course in Miracles” interpretation of Christianity was a reasonably natural fit (best one I found anyway).
Atheism/“annihilationism” also remains a viable possibility for me (in the sense of consciousness being simply an ephemeral artifact of material reality). I don’t really tend to believe in annihilation per say, due to Anthropic Principle-type arguments. I’ve heard human existence described by a confirmed atheist as a brief flickering holiday from a long infinity of oblivion. However, it seems extremely unlikely to me that I just happen to be in this tiny particular interval of existence in a much longer infinite interval of non-existence. It seems likelier to me that there is always existence (a vast infinite sea of it, in some vast multiverse in physics term), just maybe not personalized existence as such. Perhaps metaphorically like waves (individuals) rising and falling on this sea, but the sea itself carrying on (even if it’s not really me). Perhaps even some kind of very coarse cause-and-effect, new waves tending to rise in the same area of sea (similar karmic conditions), but no fine-grained cause-and-effect and transfer of memories like in Buddhism (and no escape from all this either).
Buddhism seems like the third real alternative to me; it’s genuine kind of “third way”, carefully threading itself in a “middle way” between eternalism and annihalationism (with its goal being described by the four-fold negation: the so-called Catuṣkoṭi, a kind of philosophical “hedge”/middle-ground). A very practical, logical and self-consistent path (the words of the suttas speak to me as the words of “A Course in Miracles” do too).
These three possibilities all remain viable alternatives to me. My doubt tempers and grounds my practice too. I find myself asking myself: is this practice really helpful to me and others around me, making my life better, even if none of these systems turn out to the way things are? I’ve seen people go off the deep end and end up quite screwed up with spiritual paths of various kinds applied un-gently and too zealously! I’ve seen ACIM itself used by people in both helpful and unhelpful ways (spiritual paths aren’t always good for people in my experience; probably holds for Buddhism too I suspect). At worst, hopefully, I’ll end up a better and happier person with some cool experiences, having met some interesting people, and having spent time being exposed to somewhat obscure but ultimately interesting spiritual thinking (I’m rather a nerd anyway! Could spend my time doing worse things I guess! 
). Some of that is true already anyway (have come across some cool and interesting people via ACIM too).
Up to a point, there’s a lot of overlap between ACIM/Christianity and Buddhism: morality, giving, loving-kindness (Brahmavihara type stuff), even some of the practice. Their end points do differ though (there’s no getting around that I think). I suppose they’d agree on enlightenment/the end-goal being the absence of greed, hatred and delusion. However, they differ on what delusion actually is! I remain open-minded on this point.
You can actually find interesting people in the intersection between Christianity and Buddhism. Bernadette Roberts would be a prime example. Her approach is, no doubt, useful for some. I suspect, though, there’ll eventually be an incompatibility there as my practice deepens. Several years down the road, I’ll probably go one way or the other (hopefully as I become wise enough to tell the difference). Logic or argumentation hasn’t sufficed to shift me one way or the other up to now (hopefully practice and meditation experience eventually will give me the necessary insight).
I don’t believe in being evangelical about ACIM or Buddhism either; it’s hard to be also when I don’t have full confidence in either of them at this point! Given this forum is full of die-hard Buddhists, in the best sense of the word of course! ;), I don’t think there’s any danger of me being that here (would be like selling fridges to Eskimos I think! ).
Anyway, far more information than you probably wanted to know. I suppose this reply was partly in reply to you (many points of your post resonated with me), and partly just some rambling thoughts to no one in particular about the weird Buddhist/Christian/agnostic place I have found myself in my practice for quite a few years. That seemed somewhat appropriate on a thread that is about both Buddhism and Christianity. So, if I make some vaguely non-negative (even positive, God forbid! ) noises about Christianity on this forum in the future, people may understand a little of where I’m coming from (though I’ll try to stick to the core point of this forum: the EBTs).
5 Likes
The idea that “religion is bullshit” must come from India, because there the cow is a sacred animal.
Even its droppings may be regarded as holy?
2 Likes
The cow is the most useful animal to human.
https://www.ecovillage.org.in/ecopedia/land-cow-iii-benefits-of-cow-dung
[quote=“SarathW1, post:49, topic:5950, full:true”]
The cow is the most useful animal to human.
https://www.ecovillage.org.in/ecopedia/land-cow-iii-benefits-of-cow-dung
[/quote]Well… at the same time though, over-reliance on cow (and other animals raised en masses, the norm in our current global food practices) leads to bad environmental practices. Meat should be something special had once in a while (said the fellow who eat far too much meat).
1 Like
A bit late to this topic, but to those interested in movies, I suggest watching The Man From Earth (though I do not suggest reading anything about it to no spoil).
1 Like
What was the name of the Sri Lankan Buddhist Maha-Thera who could remember being Jesus in a past life? Was it Ayya Khema’s teacher in Sri Lanka? Was it the ‘Most Ven. Matara Sri Nanarama Maha Thera’ or, somebody else?
Maybe jesus went to the same place as we buddhists are pointed to, you know that place of not going forward, not moving back and not standing still, and maybe that is why we find similarities in the teachings … !?
1 Like
What really matters here is the teaching of Christianity and the teaching Buddha.
Maybe, but we also talk about where Jesus went, if he went anywhere at all, and do you recognize that Jesus and Buddha pointed to what seems to be the same place?
1 Like
No. That is not how I understand it.
"Conze explicitly compared Mahayana Buddhism with “gnosis,” that is, knowledge or insight, and not with “the Gnostics,” because too little was known about the Gnostics as a social group. Based on Conze’s eight similarities, Hoeller gives the following list of similarities:
Liberation or salvation can be achieved by a liberating insight, namely gnosis or jnana.
Ignorance, or a lack of insight, called agnosis or avidhya, is the root cause of entrapment in this world.
Liberating insight can be achieved by interior revelation, not by external knowledge.
Both systems give a hierarchical ordering of spiritual attainment, from blind materialism to complete spiritual attainment.
Wisdom, as the feminine principle personified in Sophia and prajna, plays an important role in both religions.
Myth is preferred over historical fact; the Christ and the Buddha are not mere historical figures, but archetypal primordial beings.
Both systems have antinomianistic tendencies, that is, a disregard for rules and social conventions in higher spiritual attainments.
Both systems are intended for spiritual elites, not for the masses, and have hidden meanings and teachings.
Both systems are monistic, aiming at a metaphyscial oneness beyond the multiplicity of the phenomenal world.
According to Conze, these commonalities were not by chance, but inherent to the essence of both religions. How these similarities came into existence was unclear for Conze, but according to Verardi they may be related to the sea trade between the Roman Empire and India, which was intense at the time." - Wikipedia
Did he also remember being Mozart? Mozart is a very popular person to remembering being. Very popular. Not as popular as Jesus though.
Sorry! Couldn’t resist! 
1 Like
Out of curiousity, does the female Indian Mahāprajnāpāramitā deity arise around the same time as Jesus was teaching? AFAIK, she is a very late Vajrayāna development.
Sophia, before she was a woman, was a quite often a man in Judaism. It is through Hellenic influence that Sophia becomes a woman all-the-time.
At first glance, they are very different people. Mozart was Austrian, born January 27, 1756 in Salzburg. Jackson was an African American, born August 29, 1958 in Gary, Indiana. Nevertheless, the similarities in their life histories are quite striking:
Both were born the seventh child in a very musical family.
Both were musically talented from a very early age. Mozart had mastered his first keyboard piece just before his fifth birthday; he was the toast of Viennese society by age 7 and soon became a child star all over Europe. By age 8 Jackson had already taken over singing lead vocals in the Jackson 5. He was deemed a prodigy with “overwhelming musical gifts”.
Both missed out on a normal childhood, spending the entire time immersed in a punishing regime of practicing, touring and performing, all imposed by a strict father. Mozart’s father believed that it was his God-given duty to exhibit his talented children throughout Europe, giving at least one performance a day, though this almost cost the boy his life on several occasions. Michael Jackson was physically, verbally and emotionally abused by his father from a young age, enduring beatings and even whippings. However, he also credited his father’s strict discipline as playing a large part in his success.
Both later fell out with their father and went their own way. Mozart’s ambivalent attitude towards his father continued to dominate his private and professional life as an adult.
Despite periods of great financial success, both were prone to extravagant over-spending and later struggled with debt.
Both maintained a child-like personality in adulthood.
Both enjoyed dressing flamboyantly and keeping a variety of pets.
Well, the issue I was implying was that too many people claim to have been the reincarnations of particular famous “great men” of the past, like Mozart, Jesus, etc.
I don’t actually know what the EBT position is on the uniqueness of individual mind-continua, but usually afaik they are distinct. Only one person gets to be reincarnation of X at a time, to use very crude language to express a very refined concept.
Could you please provide a source for this?