Pagan Apologetics

Introduction

This is a reply to an article by Pat Zukeran of Probe Ministries on Buddhism. I must admit that I am not specifically a Buddhist, I do venerate the Buddha's teachings higher than those of Jesus but that is based mostly upon the vast number of his teachings compared to the extremely few of Jesus'. I may also harbor some biases against Christianity because I was brought up in that faith.

The Origin of Buddhism

One might consider Buddhism to have started as an offspring of Hinduism because Hinduism is very old (the oldest living major religion), however Jains are also mentioned in UD XI.2 and AN III.70.

It is true that we do not know much about Gotama (or Gautama), but that is irrelevant. The Dhamma taught by the Buddha is true, you know it to be true when you have practiced it and have known its results. Myths and legends only help to fill in (as with Jesus) the gaps with a bit of color and allegory. We do not know the Buddha's teachings to be true because there was a historical Gotama who taught these things and did these things word-for-word, we know them to be true by our own personal experience.

Historians cannot determine which (if any) events in Gotama's life actually did happen. That is certainly not unique. Need I bring up the problem of historicity with regards to Jesus? Many, many books and reports have been written on the subject. Amazingly, all of the supposed "references to the historicity of Christ" have been shown to have been misinterpretations or deliberate forgeries. Certainly, the founder of a religion does not have to be recorded accurately so to have his teachings be true!

The life of the Buddha is also a spiritual allegory - like the life of Jesus. When we are born, we are naive as to the reality of suffering, pain, and death. However, there is a point where we break through the walls and see life for what it really is. From there, we try to search for the Truth - first going to one extreme and then the other. Finally, we reach a point where we learn to follow the "middle way" and we are enlightened as to the Truth.

Buddhism's spread is a testament to the power of the Dhamma. Christians answer me this: if Satan is in control of all non-Christian religions, then why would people be converting from Satanism (Hinduism) to Satanism (Buddhism)? Certainly the devil could not fear them turning to Christ (who was still 500 years later), nor to Yahweh (who declared the Israelites to be his son and condemned all others; anyway, Yahwehists were several thousand miles away). But that is all irrelevant since I have seen no signs of this supposed "prince of this world".

Zukeran quotes a book entitled "Cults, World Religions, and the Occult" by Kenneth Boa (Wheaton: Victor Books, (1977) p. 35.). Now this wouldn't be slightly biased, now would it? This Evangelical piece of "literature" claims that "seven hundred years later, followers of Buddha began to worship him as deity." I am no expert in world religions but could someone please enlighten me as to what sect worships the Buddha as a deity. Certainly he is venerated by all Buddhists, but worshiped as a deity?

The Way of Salvation

Zukeran purposely labels this section "The Way of Salvation" to make the connection with Christianity. However, Christian salvation and Buddhist enlightenment are far from equivalent - these are the same people who think Nirvana is Buddhists' heaven! (thankfully Zukeran does not make this tragic mistake)

The transmigration of souls (samsara) is sometimes compared to the Hindu belief of reincarnation. However, upon inspection, they are quite different. For example, the Hindus believe in a type of "soul" which travels through different bodies versus the Buddhist rejection of such a "soul".

I will list the Four Noble Truths and the Eight-fold Path here for quick reference. They are described more fully in SN LVI.11 and MN 117 (along with many, many others.)

The Four Noble Truths:

1. Suffering exists.
2. Suffering is caused by desire.
3. Suffering is to be ended.
4. Suffering may be ended by following the path of righteousness.

The Eight-fold Path:

1. Right View
2. Right Resolve
3. Right Speech
4. Right Action
5. Right Livelihood
6. Right Effort
7. Right Mindfulness
8. Right Concentration

Karma, Samsara, and Nirvana

"Intention, I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of body, speech, & intellect." (AN VI.63 - Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu)

Kamma (or Karma) is "intentional action". You cannot break the laws of kamma - they are as permanent and undefiable as gravity (SN XLII.6). Even the Bible says we must reap the actions we have sown and to deny this is to mock God (Gal 6:7).

There are four reasons why we have been wandering (AN IV.1) - not understanding and penetrating noble virtue, concentration, discernment and release.

"... it is by reason of conduct not in accordance with the Dhamma, by reason of unrighteous conduct, that beings here on the dissolution of the body, after death, reappear in states of deprivation, in an unhappy destination, in perdition, even in hell. It is by reason of conduct in accordance with the Dhamma, by reason of righteous conduct, that some beings here on the dissolution of the body, after death, reappear in a happy destination, even in the heavenly world." (MN 41 - Translated from the Pali by ~Nanomoli Thera)

It is important to note that the terms rendered "hell" (niraya) and "heaven" (sagga) are not the same as they are in Christianity. There are two major differences. Firstly, one reappears in different planes because of their past kamma and not because they believed the right things. Secondly, all planes of existence are temporary, not eternal as the Christians believe.

Nibbana (or Nirvana) is the end result of following the path of the Dhamma. In MN 72, Vacchagotta is asking questions of Master Gotama. Vaccha is befuddled because Master Gotama answers the questions about whether a monk who has been freed reappers, does not reappear, both does and does not reappear, and neither does nor does not reappear, he says "doesn't apply."

To explain this concept to Vaccha, Master Gotama uses the simile of a fire. If fire is burning, it is dependent on grass and timber as its sustenance. If it goes out, where has it gone? Has it gone East? West? North? or South? - Such questions don't apply because the fire is out or unbound.

Such is it with Nibbana. One cannot describe Nibbana because it is beyond explanation.

Buddhists do hope that one day they will be able to break the cycle of samsara and do not reappear again. The fact that one cannot describe Nibbana is no proof of its not being factual. Compare this with the Christian heaven (or "new Jerusalem") as it is described in Revelation 21. John believes heaven to be a city that is a cube 12,000 furlongs (KJV), or 1500 miles, on each side and having walls, gates, and streets! The Buddhist state of Nibbana is unbounded and free while the Christian heaven is very much materialistic and is certainly bounded in having a physical form.

God and Buddhism

This may be a point where I will have trouble. Buddhism (in most forms) is classified as a non-theistic religions. Christianity is classified as a monotheistic religion. My religion, Hellenic Paganism, is a polytheistic religion. Therefore, we have three different views in conflict here. However, I will try to keep this from a Buddhist perspective.

As Zukeran says, Gotama "claimed to be the one to point the way to Nirvana, but it was up to each individual to find his own way there." There is no doubt about this. Some religions teach that you can put your sins into somebody or something else. The Jews had scapegoats, the Christians have Jesus, and the Hindus have sacred rivers, but Gotama realized that the only person resposible for your sins is you.

In Matthew 15:11, Jesus says "Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man." In verse 18, he says "But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man." Unfortunately, Jesus does not take the next step and say that it is the heart which cleanses a man.

When, in MN 7, the Buddha is asked whether he bathes in the Bahuka River (a river the Hindus believe will cleanse them of sin) he replies "What good, brahmin, is the Bahuka River? What can the Bahuka River do?... A fool may there forever bathe, Yet will not purify his black deeds." The Buddha knew that which Proverbs 26:7 states, "As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly." The only way to purify yourself is to change your heart and not to do evil deeds in the first place.

Zukeran says that Buddhism "offers no form of redemption, forgiveness, heavenly hope, or final judgment." Aside from the "heavenly hope", this is true. It also offers no form of dogmatic laws, begging forgiveness from an angry god, eternal hell, or an unjust judge. Certainly one does not have to have all these things to be classfied as a religion! AN III.65 makes it clear that even if there is no afterlife, then living the holy life here and now will make this life good. (this is sort of a Buddhist "Pascal' Wager")

Zukeran says that "Other sects [of Buddhism] have combined some of the doctrines of God from other religions with Buddhism." I am not sure what religions contain the "doctrines of God", I believe Christianity (as a whole) rejects all other religions besides itself, so then, how many religions can these "doctrines of God" come from? Buddhism has grown and changed, it merged with various religions of whatever area it came upon. This does not change the basic, fundamental teachings of the Dhamma, they are the same in all sects.

It is amazing that Zukeran actually notes that "Buddhism is left with some [of] life's deepest questions unanswered, questions such as the origin of the universe and the purpose of man's existence." It is amazing that Zukeran says this because the Buddha has already explained these things.

AN IV.77 says that to try and contemplate things about the world (incl. origins) would drive you insane! Reading both about how Christians try to justify their creation myth and how science explains the quantum physics of the Universe, I can see how this drives people insane. Therefore, why should we even worry about how the Universe began? It has no bearing on what we do from here.

The famous "poison arrow" simile in MN 63 relates a story of a man who has been shot by a poison arrow. His friends take him to a surgeon but the man says that he must first know everthing about who shot him and the bow and the arrow which he is pierced by. The man dies before his questions are answered. Why should we contemplate the origins of the Universe? It does not matter how the universe came into existence or why we are here.

All we know is the Four Noble Truths: suffering exists, suffering is caused by desire, suffering must end, suffering may be ended by following the Noble Eight-Fold Path. Nothing else is relavent.

A Comparative Study of Christianity and Buddhism

Christianity and Buddhism are very different from one another. Some syncrenistic religions have tried to include facets from both religions. Although this may be possible, it is certainly difficult and requires a bit of liberality with the two faiths. Looking at Gnostic Christianity versus Buddhism we are much closer together than with Literal (Traditional) Christianity. Here are some comparisons: they both teach that we must die to our lower selves and be resurrected (or reborn) as our higher self, they both teach reincarnation, they both concern themselves with the elimination of our physical bodies and the enhancement of our spiritual ones, etc. I am working on a comparison between Christianity and Buddhism, but is, as of yet, unfinished.

Zukeran again attacks the historicity of Gotama sayings. Again I reply that it does not matter if Gotama actually said or did these things or whether he was a real, historical figure. We know the Dhamma to be true because we experience it every day, that is enough.

As to whether the Gospels were written by "eyewitnesses to Jesus and the events surrounding His life", that is doubtful. There are no contemporary writings about Jesus and we only _assume_ that there were earlier documents from which the documents we do have, which are copies of copies of copies (an unknown number of times over). No contemporary of Jesus wrote about him and the three which might be a mention of Jesus fall down completely under investigation!

Every religion and every sect of every religion has a different concept of the Divine. Some deny its existence, some claim it is one, some two, others many. Buddhism does not specifically teach about God or Gods and the Bible does teach (in most interpretations) about one God.

Like all Literalist Christians, Zukeran misinterprets the Gospels and Jesus. One may argue, as Muslims do, that Jesus never said he was God. There is quite a bit of merit to this. However, seeing as Jesus was a mythological figure, it doesn't really matter if he said he was God, does it?

Jesus is the personification of the Logos. As John 1:1 states, "In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God." Also, John 14:6 says "I [Jesus, the Logos] am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." The concept of the Logos was quite foreign to Judaism but was common among the Pagan Inner Mysteries. The translation of Logos as "Word" is incomplete. The Logos is the very essence of reality, it is the very breath of God, it is the Holy Breath (or Spirit).

Jesus is symbolic of each of our journeys through life. We start from a humble beginning, wander around with "no place to lay our head", have our physical bodies crucified, and are reborn with our spiritual bodies. The Gospels are filled with mythological symbolism, to understand more about this, read the Gnostic (i.e. Apocryphal) Gospels.

Zukeran says that "Buddhism offers neither assurance of forgiveness or eternal life." However, may I ask, who should we beg forgiveness of? We look to none other than ourselves to do what is good and right. Christianity might offer eternal life but it also offers eternal death. Buddhism teaches the truth when it says we should not seek what is harmful and do what is painful but rather that we should release ourselves from this cycle of rebirth and thus end our suffering. Christianity offers slavery, Buddhism offers freedom. Christianity brings "not peace, but a sword", Buddhism brings peace and rejects the sword. Buddhism is much more pure than Christianity as to teaching the Truth.

Of course the Buddha did not leave any "clear, objective proof" of what lies beyond the grave. How can we? As I explained above, if there is a hereafter, then we shall reappear in the heavenly realms by doing what is good, if there is not, then we will reap that which we have sown in the here and now. That much are sure of, for we have experienced the results of our kamma and have seen how the Dhamma helps us.

Zukeran claims that the "Resurrection of Jesus Christ is a proven fact of history". Amazing! How can a mythological figure have his resurrection a "proven fact of history"? There has yet to be any proof for the historical existence of Jesus, let alone for his supposed resurrection. One must believe in Jesus and his resurrection, not because of the evidence, but in spite of it.

If a Christian would sincerely ask what Zukeran says to ask when witnessing to a Buddhist ("Do you have tangible proof of what occurs after death?"), I would certainly put the question back at him: "What tangible proof does the Christian have for life after death?" Certainly all those who have died still have their bodies in the grave where they were buried! How can the resurrection of a mythical figure be applicable to the resurrection of actual people?

Certainity means nothing. For thousands of years, people were certain that the world was flat, that the earth was the center of the universe, and (for Jews and Christians) that the world was made in 4004 BC! Now we know such things not to be true. Truth has been brought forth into the light despite the Christians, not because of them.

``Magnificent, lord! Magnificent! Just as if he were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to show the way to one who was lost, or to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way has the Blessed One - through many lines of reasoning - made the Dhamma clear. We go to the Blessed One for refuge, to the Dhamma, and to the Sangha of monks. May the Blessed One remember us as lay followers who have gone to him for refuge, from this day forward, for life.''

-- Common response to the teachings of the Buddha (this one from the Kalama Sutta - AN III.65, translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikku)