Customer Reviews

Buddhists Talk About Jesus, Christians Talk About the Buddha

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Having read several books on the comparison of Buddhism and Christianity, I found myself somewhat dissatisfied with this book. The premise is interesting: Christians and Buddhists reacted to the other's religion with members of the religion reacting in the following pages to their statements. Unfortunately, several points are repeated in several of the essays and the dialogue is far from complete.

What I found to be odd was the venom toward Christianity from some of the Buddhist writers. Particularly in the case of Rita Gross, the goal seemed to be bashing Christianity more than comparing it to Buddhism. In contrast, Terry Muck's essay is among the highlights. I have read some of Muck's previous work and have come to admire it. As Muck points out in the conclusion on page 152, "It is not a matter of simply comparing or leveling all religions. It is a matter of Christians reappropriating, in appropriate ways, lessons learned from these Buddhist appropriations of our most sacred heart."

Based on the balance of the arguments in the book, it seems Buddhism fits better into Christianity than Christianity fits into Buddhism. Christians may not be comfortable with some of the Buddhist critiques of Christianity. Yet the Christian dialogue discussing Buddhism, though simplistic, attempts to accomodate aspects of Buddhism into Christianity. Even if this seems to be the most reasonable deduction to draw from this book, it would not be entirely accurate.

Of course there are great differences that can not be explored in a book that is less than 200 pages. Even unbalanced, the book does show that different faiths can gain from eachother.

Summary:

Composed of a collection of essays from the Buddhist-Christian Studies Journal, this volume forms a lively and engaging dialog between scholars and practitioners of both religions. In the first section, four Buddhists talk about Christianity, after which two Christians respond. The roles are then reversed in the second section, where four Christians talk about Buddhist, to which two Buddhists respond.

While appreciating certain aspects of Christianity, the Buddhists are generally critical of it. On the one hand, for example, Jose Ignacio Cabezon affirms that the "program of social reform" Jesus inaugurated "must be recognized as being the more radical and far-reaching" (20). He also finds many of the virtues Jesus upheld "attractive," such as the love of one's enemies or the dedication to the "pursuit of virtue through humility" (23). On the other hand, along with the rest of the Buddhist contributors, Cabezon repudiates the notion that Jesus could be the almighty God or the "messiah that most Christians believe him to have been" (28). While comfortable with recognizing Jesus as a bodhisattva, they balk at Christian claims of the absolute uniqueness of his revelation. We may discern three main points on which the Buddhists critique Christianity: first, as Rita Gross surmises, the exclusivistic and universal demands of its doctrine, which relegate all other religions to a state of relative falsehood (39); second, the belief that the action of another entity, whether divine or human, "can seal our fate, either as regards salvation or damnation" (28); and third, the sheer existence of an omnipotent creator God (26).

In contrast, the Christians are positive in their overall appraisal of Buddhism. They might, as Terry C. Muck does, express "dislike" at how the Buddha left his wife and son to explore the religious path (102). But for the most part, they regard him as a "religious genius" whose thought "cut to the essence of human psychological experience" (101). Elizabeth J. Harris, for instance, expresses utmost admiration for the Buddha's insights into the personal hells that people inhabit as a "consequence of ignorance and not-knowing" (91), while Bonnie Thurston "stand[s] in awe" to both the Buddha's devotion to truth" as well as his compassion and "loving-kindness" (119, 21). Nevertheless, with the exception of Marcus Borg and perhaps John Dominic Crossan, they seem to maintain their core, orthodox Christian confession by distinguishing it from Buddhism in two essential ways. Firstly, whereas the Buddha was a teacher of the way, they confess Jesus as himself the Way. And secondly, in some way or other they recognize their need for an "other power" beyond themselves - the "grace of God" - to help them in their daily lives (93).

~

Critique:

"Buddhists Talk about Jesus, Christians Talk about the Buddha" has offered me a very constructive framework to go about my comparative study of the two religions. More pointedly, it has also shed considerable light on the underlying, invisible dynamics that might be influencing and directing interreligious dialogue.

In spite of the similarities that practitioners of both religions do observe in the other, one of the first things that struck me was the many fundamental differences that existed between Christianity and Buddhism. Cabezon's systematic enumeration of the radical distinctions between the theologies and soteriologies of the two religious systems was eye-opening; explaining "Jesus as God" and "Jesus as Messiah" in Buddhist terms has now become an infinitely more complex task than I had hitherto imagined! Burford's summation offers a basic but useful delineation. "The difference [it] comes down to," she suggests, is "a Buddhist model of human power to follow a religious path toward wisdom and compassion versus a Christian model of divine intervention through the power of grace for universal salvation" (136). Indeed, it seems that we need not go further than the personal histories of Jesus and Gautama to look for evidences of their mutual incommensurability. For no matter how much Borg may seek to reconcile the two ("I see Jesus as a teacher of an enlightenment way of wisdom similar to that taught by the Buddha"), the fact remains that Jesus was gorily crucified upon the cross for who he claimed to be and the threat he proved to the Roman and Jewish authorities, while the Buddha lived a long life and eventually died of food poisoning at eighty (78).

My second observation about the book concerns the aspects of Buddhism that the Christian essayists focus upon. As Taitetsu Unno perceptively notes, "their views appear to be focused on the human face of the Buddha and scant attention is paid to what might be called the numinous" (138). In other words, with the exception of Donald K. Swearer, they spend the bulk of their time engaging the humanistic, ethical, and contemplative aspects of Buddhism, rather on its theological or cosmological components, as articulated in Cabezon's study. It is not impossible that this imbalance arises from their awareness that the essence of Buddhism is more "experiential" than it is "discursive or conceptual" (140). Then again, through and beyond the creeds and doctrines of the church, ought this not be said of Christianity as well? Regardless, it seems to me that there is much room for fruitful, rigorous theological engagement, particularly of Buddhism by Christian theologians. For instance, I would be quite curious to see what more John Dominic Crossan - with his inventive (if "unorthodox") understanding of the Trinitarian structure of all religions - might have to say in response to this saying of the Buddha: "He who sees the Dhamma sees the Enlightened One. He who sees the Enlightened One sees the Dhamma."

Finally, I find the disparity between the Christians' and Buddhists' appraisal of each other's religion very revealing of certain underlying sociological and cultural forces. On the one hand, as noted above, the Christians are virtually unanimous of singing the praises of Buddhism. "Buddhism excels. The Buddha changed history," Muck avers, concluding that he "couldn't think more highly of anyone else" (101, 106). There is never the slightest hint of discourtesy in the Christian's presentation and assessment of Buddhism; they are always polite, affirming the ways in which their encounter with Buddhism has enriched their spiritual lives. On the other hand, the Buddhists are often unabashed in making known their low esteem for Christianity. At the start of her essay, Burford declares, "I don't care a whit about Jesus," before going on to say, "I honestly do not expect my predominantly Buddhist worldview to be enriched by learning more about Christianity" (131, 132). In a similar vein, Gross proclaims, "I am serious when I say that I can see no basis for venerating Jesus as a human being in a league by himself or unequaled by other humans beings" (43).

Why this grave disparity? Why is it that the Christians here seem so intent on being irenic and conciliatory, while the Buddhists are allowed to give free expression to their scorn for Christianity? In her introduction, Gross offers two helpful explanations. First, responsible Christians tend to "emphasize their appreciation for non-Christian religions" due to Christianity's flawed history of missionary activity. And second, Christians can admire the Buddha as a philosophical "human teacher without in any way compromising their loyalty to the deity of Christ," whereas the reverse simply cannot be said of Buddhists, who must reject the fundamental theological claims of Christianity. In addition to these, a third explanation will be posited: the cultural and religious background of the writers themselves, as suggested by Muck's understanding of socialization. To a large extent, it seems that several of the western Buddhists hold on to their faiths as a reaction against Christianity, rejecting it as either the stifling "institutionalized religion" they had been raised in or as the popular faith of the hoi polloi around them. In fact, Gross openly admits to engaging in Buddhist-Christian dialog as an attempt to heal from "wounds inflicted upon [her] by an exclusivist and doctrinaire version of Christianity" - which is, incidentally, something that this reviewer identifies deeply with (32)! Regardless, it would be fascinating to explore alternative cultural contexts where this egregious disparity might be reversed. For instance, what would Buddhist-Christian dialogue look like in historically or predominantly Buddhist countries like Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Japan, when the Christian voices are converts out of Buddhism? Would they, like their western counterparts represented in this book, be so affirming of the merits of the Buddha?

This collection(very uniquely arranged) is as good as a collection of acedemic theology essays can get. Although similarites between Christianity and Buddhism is one of my favorite subjects..this book didn't exactly blow me away. What it did do was allow me to read some critiques of each religion from practitioners of the other. I disagreed with some of the points made in some of the essays....but that makes me like the book even more. If you are even somewhat interested in comparative religion you should check this book out. I gave 4 stars!