Basics of Buddhism

Generally Buddhism does not believe in a personal God or a divine being, it does not
have worship, praying to, or praising of a divine being (although some sects do.) It offers
no form of redemption, forgiveness, no heavenly hope, or a final judgment to those
practicing its system. Buddhism is a moral philosophy, an ethical way to live for the here
and now of this world to gain the ultimate state. It has more in common with humanism
and atheism than its original religion Hinduism it separated from. But Buddhism is not
atheism just because they dont believe in a personal God. It is more like pantheism, there
is a impersonal force the void which is the ultimate.
There are 327 million Buddhists worldwide (313,114,000 in Asia) here in Hawaii the
major Japanese, Korean population are Some type of Buddhist. There are numerous
offshoots but their are two major branches. For us to understand and use the gospel to
penetrate this religion we need to know what they teach about the Buddha and use the
stories as possibly bridges to reach them. In my opinion of all religions this is one of the
hardest to reach and understand, since Buddhism can be cultural, it is a lifestyle of many
generations as well as a spiritual practice.
For centuries, Buddhism has been the dominant religion of the Eastern world and still
remains the predominant religion in China, Japan, Korea, as well as southeast Asia. In
Japan alone there are approximately 200 sects. This makes it difficult to address this
religion as a whole since it can be so diversified.
Buddhism has made a tremendous impact in the United States with a growing Asian
population in the U.S, thousands of Americans have been attracted to Buddhism making

it their religion. There are now over one thousand Buddhist temples, monasteries, and
centers in the United States.
Sangha which means the order or brotherhood (community) who are monks. Each
member of the Sangha must wear a yellow robe, shave their head and practice
meditation. They are to affirm the three refuges (triple gems): take refuge in Buddha who
became enlightened when he discovered the true reality. The Dharma which are the laws
the adhere to on the path to eliminate their suffering. These consist of the laws of the
world and the teachings of Buddha. From a Christian point of view the laws of this world
would be subject to the present condition of things which is fallen. And Sangha which is
the community as a whole striving for the qualities of the Buddha. There are to adhere to
over 225 regulations which forbid them to do many things.
There are many noble and humanitarian teachings found in Buddhism that elicit
compassion and understanding for their fellow man. But these cannot be seen as a means
to the end itself. The concern many have is that some Christians seem to think there is
little difference in Buddhism to Christianity. There is a harmonizing of its practices
incorporating its teachings into the Church. Some even have them speak inside their
churches.

Comparing Buddha with Jesus

It is said Siddhartha became the Awakened one, so Jesus became the Anointed one is a
common misconception. Christ was the anointed one from eternity while the Siddhartha
became the Buddha by searching and self discovery became illuminated. Anointing and
enlightenment are two very different concepts.

Buddha came at a time when the people were tired of Hindu sects, castes and teachings.
Buddha discovers a new way and he discards some teachings and upholds others. Christ
came when the people were oppressed by religious leaders also but they did not know the
truth nor were they asking for deliverance spiritually. Jesus only explained what they
already had in the Scriptures giving the correct interpretations and fulfilling the
prophecies.
Buddha died at the old age of 80 years old by eating rotten food, his life was lived
without exaggerations of either luxury or asceticism. Jesus ate fish, meat and did not have
people give up their possessions unless it interfered with their relationship with God. He
died at 33 years old, sentenced to death like a criminal, tortured and executed for
something he did not do. Not much similarity here.
Claims are there are similarities to relics (statues, icons ) in both Buddhism and
Christianity. But this is only found in the Catholic Church side. The Bible specifically
addresses this as wrong and calls the usage of these as idolatrous. Throughout the
Scripture this is specifically addressed as an affront to God.
Isa. 45:20-22: "Assemble yourselves and come; draw near together, you who have
escaped from the nations. They have no knowledge, who carry the wood of their carved
image, and pray to a god that cannot save. Tell and bring forth your case; yes, let them
take counsel together. Who has declared this from ancient time? Who has told it from that
time? Have not I, the LORD? And there is no other God besides Me, a just God and a
Savior; there is none besides Me. "Look to Me, and be saved, all you ends of the earth!
For I am God, and there is no other."

Buddha was passive in his outlook of humanity. He was engaged in self discovery to
change himself. Which can be good if one comes to the conclusion that the answers are
not found within us, and looks toward the creator of all mankind.
Christ did not have to search for wisdom since he was the wisdom and power of God
before and during his coming to earth. He came from heaven as a servant to mankind. He
grew in understanding in his humanity only, but even at an early age he was aware of his
purpose and who he actually was.
Buddha needed to make sense of the world and its suffering for himself. He was in
turmoil in his soul seeing the condition of life being unfavorable for so many. So he
searched for enlightenment to have answers for the dilemma he saw in the world.
Christ exhibited love which is active, it participates in others lives. He did not tolerate
falsehood or have the same reaction for one being sad or happy. He taught objective
truth, the true reality of life is that it is real and there are consequences here and now as
well as afterward.
Thereavada says Buddha did not claim to have a special relationship with God. The fact
that Buddha did not consider the existence of God to be important shows that he is not in
any way related to biblical prophets or Jesus. Buddha said it doesnt matter whether you
believe in him or not. Buddha claimed to point to the right way to escape suffering and
attain enlightenment. Contrary to this, Jesus claimed to be the way. Christianity teaches
there was only one incarnation of God and he came to relieve the source of all suffering
sin.
Although the Buddha did not deny the existence of gods, he taught that the worship of
gods obstructed one'
s quest for nirvana. To him the gods inhabit the cosmos and are

impermanent like all other living beings. There is no God as an eternal deity. Gautama,
the founder of Buddhism, did not claim to be divine. He claimed to be the one to point
the way to Nirvana. an ultimate state in the afterlife, but it was up to each individual to
find his own way there. Each has their own path to walk on to discovery.
Dr. John Noss states, "... there is only the ultimate impersonal unity of being itself, whose
peace enfolds the individual self when it ceases to call itself " I " and dissolves in the
featureless purity of Nirvana, as a drop of spray is merged in its mother sea."( Noss,
p.183.)
They look to this ultimate elimination of self as their identity merges into the great unity.
But the goal on earth is to eliminate whatever is possible now." Regard the world as
void" (Suttanipata, 119). "So one who is convinced of the emptiness of everything has
no likes or dislikes. For he knows that that which he might like is just empty, and sees it
just empty" (Sik-shasamuccaya, 264).
The concept of a personal God does not fit into the Buddhist system of religion. Today
there are many sects of Buddhism. Many differ in their concept of the divine and of
Buddha. In general, if a Buddhist believes in God he holds to a pantheistic view. Many
view God as an impersonal force which is made up of all living things and holds the
universe together. This is the same as the Hindu concept of Pantheism that the force is
united with all living and non living thing in creation.
The late Dr. Suzuki is considered one of the greatest teachers of Zen Buddhism, said
about his concept of God: "If God after making the world puts Himself outside it, He is
no longer God. If He separates Himself from the world or wants to separate Himself, He

is not God. The world is not the world when it is separated from God. God must be in the
world and the world in God." ( D. T. Suzuki, The Field of Zen p. 16.)
Dr. John Noss explains, "there is no sovereign Person in the heavens holding all together
in unity."( Noss, p. 183.)
Since Buddhism generally does not believe in a personal God or a divine being, it does
not have worship, praying, or praising of a divine being. Although these are practiced
without any reference to God. It offers no form of redemption, forgiveness, heavenly
hope, or final judgment. Buddhism is, more of a moral philosophy, an ethical way of life
that can have improvement on ones state.
Professor Kraemer describes the Buddhist system as "a non-theistic ethical discipline, a
system of self training, anthropocentric, stressing ethics and mind-culture to the exclusion
of theology."( Taylor & Offner, p. 177.)
Christianity teaches

Buddhism teaches

Heaven is a reality

Nirvana is the ultimate state = nothingness

personal eternal life

Extinction of the self

Savior is the person of Christ

Savior is ones self and ones works

There is a literal hell of suffering

There is no hell in the biblical sense of

permanency

the one God is tri-une

the triple gem

Father

1)the Buddha = teacher

Son (Jesus)

2) the dharma = truth

and Holy

3) the sangaya = light

Spirit
God is a personal being

Impersonal force, no God

Moral absolutes

No moral absolutes

World is real for us

World is an illusion

Sin is the problem

ignorance is the problem

Desires needs redirection

Desire needs to be eliminated

Jesus = God is salvation

God with us

Emmanuel =

Christ = the anointed one

Siddhartha means" he who has accomplished

his objectives." Buddha = the Enlightened
One

Buddha did not claim to have a special relationship with God in fact Buddha did not
consider the existence of God to be important. Buddha claimed to point to the right way
to escape suffering and attain enlightenment. Contrary Jesus claimed to be the way.
Christianity teaches there was only one incarnation of God. While anyone can make a
belief system, it is another thing to prove it. In this Buddha and those who followed after
failed and Jesus succeeded.
Christ is not a spiritual master as they claim Buddha is, Christ is his creator. If one only
looks at Jesus as a human being he exemplifies the highest ideal in man, he has all the
qualities Buddha taught about and sought after, but Christ is more than just a man he is
our and the Buddhists creator.
Most Buddhists believe their are many ways to God. The emphasis is based on the path
that we must work on by our own effort. That'
s not good news. The difference between
Buddhism and Christianity is that its been done, while in Buddhism they are still trying to
accomplish it. One is by our own efforts the other was obtained by the perfect man.

Christ clearly offers salvation to His followers. Buddhism does not. It is said that
Gautama'
s last words before his death were: "Buddha'
s do but point the way, work out
your salvation with diligence."
Theravada teaches that each man is responsible for their own this is reached by ones selfeffort; "Be lamps unto yourselves. Be a refuge unto yourselves. Do not turn to any
external refuge.... Work out your own salvation with diligence" (Mahaparinibbana-sutta
2.33; 6:10; from the Pali Canon)
The exclusiveness of Christ'
s claims through the concept of reconciliation. Restoring a
relationship that is broken. Lets say you broke your relationship someone you care about,
how many ways are there to restore it, only one. By confessing our fault and asking
forgiveness.

The WAY
It is best to live a moral life. Self discipline has value. Many religions offer this for the
seeker. Meditation and prayer are important, compassion, virtue are all common qualities
we should develop. It is how we achieve it that needs to be understood.
The goal of each Buddhist is the attainment of the state of nirvana. This word means to
extinguish or to blow out of existence. Like a candle in the wind, just like the song. This
is the ultimate state where one enters nirvana with the extinguishing of the ego. Their life
merges in the sea like a drop of water. Nirvana is very different from the Christian
concept of heaven. Christianity teaches that ones personality continues but is perfected by
Gods grace, not by anything we can accomplish. Gautama'
s original teaching was that
nirvana is not union with God or heaven, his system has no place for deity or ones

personal self, but rather is a state of being. What exactly this is, Buddha never really
articulated. Today it is known as nothingness this is not annihilation but means a release
from suffering, desire, and the finite state of self. The Absolute is completely impersonal,
and salvation is attained solely by self-effort.
The Buddha taught, "I had no notion of a self, or of a being, or of a soul, or of a person,
nor had I any notion or non-notion." (Vairacchedika, 14).
Personal peace will be found when we abide in that which is permanent. As christians we
believe to abide in God is the only permanence to be found as he offers eternal life with
him in a place as real as earth, heaven.
Reincarnation is offered as the process to give one enough time to develop the qualities
and practices to enter nirvana. Buddhists hope to enter into the state of Nirvana, but there
is no clear, objective proof or teaching on what occurs beyond the grave. Even Buddha
himself was not certain what lay beyond death. He left no absolute teaching on the
afterlife only philosophical speculations which can still be debated today. The body of
Buddha lies in a grave in at the bottom of the Himalayan Mountains. The facts of life
after death still are an unsolved mystery in Buddhism. Buddhism offers neither assurance
of forgiveness or eternal life. In contrast Christ spoke emphatically and absolutely about
an afterlife, something every religion had sought to have answers for. It would be best to
listen to the one who conquered death and lives eternally than continue to speculate on it.
That is what we hope Buddhists will do.

Background of Gautama and Buddhism

Buddhism began as a reformation movement within Hinduism. Its founder was

Siddhartha Gautama, who was born about 563 B.C. in the ruler warrior caste of
Hinduism. (Died in 483.) His father, Suddhodana, was a Raja a chieftain of the Sakya
clan, a family of the Kshatriya (warrior-nobility) caste of ancient Bharata. His father
reigned over (Kapilavastu), a small district on the slope of the Himalayas on the Indian
that borders between India and Nepal. His mother'
s name was Maya. When Gautama was
16 or 19, he married the princess Yasodharma and later had a son named Rahula.
Gautama grew up surrounded by a life of luxury, but he grew dissatisfied in his 20s.
It is not easy to give an accurate historical account of the life of Gautama, since no
biography was recorded until hundreds of years after his death. Today, much of his life
story is clouded in myths and legends which arose after his death. The best historians of
our day have several different and even contradictory accounts of Gautama'
s life. The
biography of Siddhartha Gautama was not recorded during his lifetime. These teachings
were orally passed down to future generations of Buddhist monks within various
Buddhist communities in India. The earliest available accounts of his life were collected
some three hundred years or more after his death. four centuries later, in about 80 B.C.,
Buddhist scribes finally compiled the teachings of the Buddha on paper, which became
the Pali Canon. Both the historical and legendary descriptions of his life have been
included in the Pali Canon and Sanskrit accounts. It has become indistinguishable to
know where to draw the line between history and legend. Whether the stories about
Siddhartha Gautama are true or myth, his life has been and still is an inspiration and
model for all Buddhists. Buddhist scriptures and sayings attributed to Gautama written
about four centuries after Buddha'
s death. There is no way to be sure these are really

Gautama'
s words. By the time they were written Buddhism was split into opposing sects.
The question of authority is an important issue that needs answering in the Buddhist
system.
At birth Gautama (his family name) received the name of Siddhartha, meaning "he who
has accomplished his objectives." Later in life he became known as the Buddha ("the
Enlightened One" or '
awakened one").
During Siddhartha'
s infancy, the sage Asita visited King Suddhodana'
s court and had
prophesied that Siddhartha would become either a great ruler like his father if he
remained within his father'
s palace or a Buddha if he went out into the world. His father
King Suddhodana believed that if his son observed human misery in the world,
Siddhartha would leave his home of luxury to seek for truth. The king naturally wanted
his son to inherit his throne and kingdom after his death. So he issued strict orders to his
subjects that the young prince was to be kept from seeing any form of evil or suffering.
Gautamas Father sheltered his son from the outside world confining him to the palace. so
he lived his life surrounded with pleasures and wealth. Despite his father'
s efforts,
Gautama one day finally saw the darker side of life by taking a trip outside the palace
walls.
The legend of the Four Passing Sights tells how he became aware of the world'
s suffering
in spite of his parents'efforts to keep him away from seeing the world of evil and
suffering. Siddhartha decided to elude the royal attendants and was able to leave his
father'
s palace where he rode his chariot four times through the city. During his journey
He saw an old man, a person suffering from a disease(a leper), a dead man, and a beggar
(an ascetic) shaven monk ( Other accounts say he merely envisioned these four states of

humanity.) Going outside he saw for the first time that great suffering exists with the
people. He realized from his observations that life was full of sorrows and that happiness
was an illusion. It was from these sights of suffering he became Deeply distressed. He
decided to leave the luxury of palace life and begin a quest to find the answer to the
problem of pain and human suffering. and chose a path of renunciation.
It is said on the same night in which Yashodara gave birth to their son Rahula, Siddhartha
who was 29 at the time abandoned his family and kingdom compelled to seek the truth
that was hidden from him all his life. This was of course not such an easy decision and he
certainly anguished over his decision to leave everything he loved, but now that his son,
whose name means "hindrance," was born and could continue the royal line. He was free
to begin his spiritual quest that was burning inside himself. He took his faithful servant
Channa and his devoted horse Kanthaka to the forest, where he shaved off his hair and
changed his robes in search of wisdom and enlightenment.
His journey began by seeking communion with the supreme cosmic spirit, He first
subjected himself to Hindu masters and began a pilgrimage of inquiry and asceticism as a
poor beggar monk. For six or seven years He studied the Hindu scriptures under Brahmin
hermit priests, and then in the company of five monks. but became disillusioned with the
teachings of Hinduism. He then devoted himself to a life of extreme asceticism in the
jungle such as fasting. . Other physical austerities included sleeping on brambles to
mortify the desires of his body and abstaining from sitting by crouching on his heels to
develop his concentration. Legend has it that he eventually learned to exist on one grain
of rice a day which ended up reducing his body to a skeleton. His practice of selfmortification had brought him closer to the point of death instead of enlightenment. One

day while swimming he almost drowned being so weak. He soon concluded, however,
that asceticism did not lead to peace and self realization but merely weakened the mind
and body.
Despite all these efforts, Siddhartha did not succeed in attaining truth. Finally, in a
moment of profound insight he realized that his life as an ascetic was of no greater value
than his previous life as a prince living in luxury. Self-torture was vain and fruitless;
depriving oneself was no better than pleasure. He understood then the importance of what
he called the Middle Way. Abandoning a life of extreme austerities, Siddhartha began to
eat solid food. This act angered his fellow monks, who felt Siddhartha had weakened and
succumbed to his physical needs. They promptly deserted him, thoroughly disgusted with
his seeming worldliness.
Gautama eventually turned to a life of meditation. On the wide bank at a major city in
northeast India, While deep in meditation under a fig tree known as the Bohdi tree
(meaning, "tree of wisdom"), Gautama experienced the highest degree of Godconsciousness called Nirvana. There Mara, the evil one, tried to thwart Siddhartha from
becoming the Buddha, luring him with worldly temptations during his meditations.
Siddhartha withstood all the challenges presented and experienced the revelation of
liberating awareness. The way that provides escape from the cruel causality of samsara
(the cycle of rebirths). He discovered the Four Noble Truths, which became known as the
wisdom of Realization. Gautama then became known as Buddha, the "enlightened one."
He believed he had found the answers to lifes most puzzling questions the answer of why
there is pain and suffering.

Gautama'
s approach to religion was quite different from the Hinduism out of which he
had come from. Hinduism had degenerated to empty philosophical speculations and
disputes, to polytheism, rituals, magic, and superstition. Authority for truth was the
exclusive ownership of the highest caste. Gautama attacked the caste system and rejected
their forms of speculation, ritual, and occultism. Interesting that Tibetan Buddhism has
become much of what Gautama rejected. Some compare Buddhas break to Martin
Luthers reformation in Christianity. He believed everyone was equally capable of the
highest spiritual development.
The Buddha was 80 when Cunda the blacksmith served him pig'
s flesh or some claim
mushrooms. He became extremely ill and died. Before he passed away, he sent a message
to Cunda saying that he should not feel guilty for being the cause of his death, for it was
destined to be. Just before his death, he exhorted his disciples not to grieve. His last
recorded words were: "Decay is inherent in all omponent things! Work out your own
salvation with diligence." (Christmas Humphreys, Buddhism, p.41.)
By the time of his death at age 80, Buddhism had become a major force in India. Three
centuries later it had spread to all of Asia. Buddha never claimed to be deity but rather
that he was an enlightened human being, a "way- shower." Strangely enough seven
hundred years later, some of the followers of Buddha began to worship him as deity
despite his not teaching this.
Since Gautama'
s death, many sects have developed within Buddhism. These sects can
sometimes be like comparing two different religions. Many have developed their own
unique concept of God. Some are pantheistic in their view of God, others are atheistic.
Still others have developed a polytheistic system of gods (like its originator Hinduism).

Some have combined pantheism and polytheism. Several sects have elevated Gautama
(or Buddha) to the level of a savior or divine being although it is clear he never claimed
to be a deity. Other sects have tried to synchronize together some of the doctrines of God
from other religions with Buddhism . As there are some Churches that adopt some
Buddhist teachings into Christianity. While there are general similarites in some ethics
and moral teachings Buddhism is not condusive to Christianity. The two are mutually
exclusive, they both can'
t be right at the same time, nor can the two be blended together
The two differ in there concept of God. For Buddhists in general, their is no Absolute
which has a purpose in our daily living. Gautama said little about any concept of God.
Buddha was monistic in his view of the Absolute as an impersonal force made up of all
living things but denied the existence of a personal God. The Bible teaches of a God who
rules the universe, is personal and sovereign and wants to have communion with man.
Therein lies a vast difference in these religions teachings.

The Way of Salvation

The world is not made up of mostly atheists but of religions that believe in God. You
have Hindus which are near 950 million. Muslims that are almost a billion and Catholics
which number in the 950 million . These three make up almost half the population of
earth. Of the many different religions there is one that is a major influence that does not
necessarily believe in God. Professor Kraemer describes the Buddhist system as "a nontheistic ethical discipline, a system of self training, anthropocentric, stressing ethics and
mind-culture to the exclusion of theology."(Taylor & Offner p.177.)
The question Gautama sought to answer has been one that has perplexed many a
philosopher as well as those in the different religions who believe in God. Why is there

pain and suffering? He held to the Hindu belief of reincarnation which teaches after death
one returns to earthly life in a higher or lower form of life according to his good or bad
deeds. Gautama carried over the twin Hindu teachings of transmigration (samsara) and
karma into his doctrines. However, he modified the meaning of transmigration by
claiming that men have no souls (anatta). There is no enduring self or substance which
goes through rebirth only a set of feelings, impressions, and present moments. This belief
prompted another question that needed to be answered. How does one break this rebirth
cycle? The basic teachings of Buddhism focus on what Gautama believed to be the
answer to these questions. These basic tenants are found in what is taught as the Four
Noble Truths and the Eight-fold Path. While Buddhism claims that it does not adhere to
dogmas rites or ceremonies it does have a self effort system of activities that one must
practice to acheive their goal for enlightenment.
1) life consist of suffering = (dukkha) pain, misery, and sorrow and unfulfillment is
evident in birth sickness and decay, death, and the presence of hated things, and
separation from loved things . Even the forces which hold life together (skandas) are full
of suffering. These include the body, the senses, thoughts, feelings and consciousness.
From the Pali Canon "This is the noble truth of sorrow. sorrow, disease Birth is sorrow,
age is sorrow, death is sorrow.... in short, of all the five components, individuality is
sorrow" (Samyutta-nikaya 5:4)
The Bible teaches that all humans (believers and non believers) can expect to suffer and
die, no one is exempt. (Job 5:7; 14:1, 10, 22)
Christ did not promise to relieve us from suffering but would strengthen us through it.
Philippians 1:29: " For to you it has been granted on behalf of Christ, not only to believe

in Him, but also to suffer for His sake.

2 Timothy 3:12: "Yes, and all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer
persecution.
Both James and Peter say trials (suffering) can be beneficial to a believer in Christ. James
1:2-4: " My brethren, count it all joy when you fall into various trials, knowing that the
testing of your faith produces patience." 1 Peter 1:6-7: "In this you greatly rejoice, though
now for a little while, if need be, you have been grieved by various trials, that the
genuineness of your faith," While we are not to look for trials they can have a lasting
affect in shaping ones character and relationship with God.
2) Suffering is caused by the desire or thirst for pleasure existence, and prosperity.
Everything is impermanent in life its always changing we suffer because we desire the
things that are not permanent. This ignorance perpetuates our desires.
The bible teaches that denying pleasure can sometimes bring suffering instead of
eliminate it. Hebrews 11:24-26 " By faith Moses, when he became of age, refused to be
called the son of Pharaoh'
s daughter, choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people
of God than to enjoy the passing pleasures of sin, esteeming the reproach of Christ
greater riches than the treasures in Egypt; for he looked to the reward." Moses denied the
position that was his to suffer so that he may have eternal rewards.
The claim is Buddha'
s teaching on human suffering is neither optimistic nor pessimistic.
Rather, it is realistic.
Buddhists view the Buddha as a spiritual physician. He neither ignores the problem and
says all is well, nor exaggerates the problem and gives up hope. Instead, he diagnoses the
problem.

All religions have something to say about human suffering, this issue is also central to all
Buddhist philosophies but is not crucial to the other Far Eastern religions. While they
recognize the truth that there is suffering they do not acknowledge the reason for it, Sin.
The Bible teaches that the origin of human suffering was when the first man and woman
disobeyed God. By not acknowledging God their creator the Buddhist unknowingly
continues the very reason they are in this predicament. Even if one recognizes the
problem it is another thing to have the solution.
3) Suffering can be overcome by eliminating these cravings (desires). Gautama believed
the root cause of suffering is desire. It is the craving for wealth, happiness, and other
forms of selfish enjoyment which cause suffering. These cravings can never be satisfied
for they are rooted in ignorance. True reality needs to be realized for one to be free.
"To one who is thus not wisely reflecting, one of six speculative views may arise as
though it were real and true: '
there is self for me.'... the ordinary uninstructed person is
not freed from birth, from aging and dying or from grief, sorrow, suffering, lamentation
and despair. I say that he is not freed from suffering." (Majjhima-Nikaya 1, 8).
Buddhism'
s cure is to stop thinking your an individual person that you are a real self and
feed the craving of self. The ultimate is to lose your individuality. In contrast Christianity
saves you with your individuality. God made you unique as a person and wants you to
develop your individuality.
Scripture states some desires are unhealthy, but the answer is not to eliminate all of them.
Prov. 18:1 "A man who isolates himself seeks his own desire; he rages against all wise
judgment."

Prov. 13:12 "Hope deferred makes the heart sick, but when the desire comes, it is a tree
of life." It is here where Christianity and Buddhism part. Scripture states some desires are
healthy.
"Buddhism stands unique in the history of human thought in denying the existence of
such a Soul, Self, or Atman. According to the teaching of the Buddha, the idea of self is
an imaginary, false belief which has no corresponding reality, and it produces harmful
thoughts of '
me'and '
mine,'selfish desire, craving, attachment, hatred, ill-will, conceit,
pride, egoism, and other defilements, impurities, and problems" (Walpola Rahula, "What
the Buddha Taught p.51).
There are 3 views in the world that make someone happy. Materialism Buddhism and
Christianity all represent these. Materialism says to make a man happy you add to his
possessions. If you dont have enough money for the things you want, you earn more. If
you have one car and happiness eludes you then get another. If that doesnt make one
happy then get a motorcycle then if that doesnt work get a boat. this is basically the way
we live in America today. It is this aspect of life that Gautama discovered that hindered a
persons happiness instead of achieving it. This was a right observance but I don'
t agree
with his solution ( neither did Jesus)
Buddhism'
s solution- for one to be happy you dont add to his possessions but take away
from his passions. Which means he will not desire all the possessions.
"Persons are a conglomeration of skandhas, elements and sense-fields, anything
belonging devoid of a self or to a self. Consciousness arises from ignorance, karma and
craving, and it keeps going by settling down in the grasping at form" (Lanleavatara
Sutra, 68).

The goal of each Buddhist is the attainment of the state of nirvana. which means to
extinguish or to blow out it--does not imply annihilation but means a release from
suffering, desire, and the finite self. Gautama'
s original teaching was that nirvana is not
God or heaven. The Absolute is completely impersonal and this is what we are to
achieve.
It is through ones own human effort that deliverance from suffering (salvation) is
achieved. Permanence is sought but one needs to disregard the impermanent to achieve
the ultimate truth which is the true and permanent absolute reality.
"While realizing that there is no permanent or immutable entity called the self [the
Buddha] also found the '
self,'that belief in such an entity led to further suffering. Belief
in a permanent entity such as the atman often led to selfishness and egoism. This, for
him, was the root cause of craving and its attendant suffering " (David J. Kalupahana,
Buddhist Philosophy, 38).
The Buddha taught the Middle Way to his followers. Teaching them to abstain from selftorture as well as self-indulgence.
Jesus recognized the fact of possessions not bringing happiness and said a mans life does
not consist in the abundance of things he possesses . Jesus stated "What if a man gains
the whole world and loses his own soul." Jesus dealt with covetousness which one of the
10 commandments. So Christ agreed with the premise of material things and position are
not what we are to desire to achieve. But he never said for everyone to give all this up,
only that we should not love them above God. This was a matter of priorities.
There are definite distinctions from Buddha and Christ in alleviating the problem. Christ
spoke much on suffering and he came into the world with the solution. We can use this

bridge and bring Christ to the Buddhists frame of reference. Christ'

s solution to make one
happy, you redirect ones passions to God who alone can fulfill them. They cant be
fulfilled by anything in this world . Our void for real meaning comes from knowing God
and doing his will.
As in Ecclesiastes Solomon said all the things of the world are vanity, especially when
one is looking for their meaning and fulfillment in them. God has put eternity in our
heart. As Pascual said each person has a God shaped void in their heart. Solomon Said at
the end of the book, fear God and keep his commandments. Finite things cannot fulfill
our infinite thirst for spiritual meaning.
Human Desire cannot be eliminated otherwise ones personality becomes like a rock, it is
something built into our human nature by God. To deny this makes one less than human.
Many good emotions are linked with desire. Take for example seeing one suffer brings
out ones compassion to want to help even if one is unable. When we see someone in
trouble "our desire" is to reach out if possible. The desire for water to preserve life is a
natural instinctive in all creatures. The Dai in southwest China reverence water that a
year after they build their wells they have a celebration where the well is cleaned and its
adorned covering is repainted.
No one lets their house they live in get dirty, they desire it clean. there are numerous
things we do each day that are attached to a healthy desire. For example if you drive a car
your goal is to drive well, not bad. That is a desire. To make yourself into a better person
is a desire as well.
So desire is not the problem of human suffering. Desire can be detrimental if used wrong,
it can be redirected to be beneficial. As Jesus said seek the kingdom of God first and all

these things will be added. Jesus was not an ascetic, he taught that we have a will that can
be used for the highest good. In thy presence is fulness of Joy and at thy right hand there
pleasures forever more Ps.16:10. He promises to give rewards to those who are faithful,
while this isnt a Lexus or a dynamite stereo it is things which are denied in Buddhism.
The Bible regards human suffering as a crucial issue. the Bible devotes an entire book to
the issue of human suffering. In the book of Job, he seeks answers to understand why he
is suffering. God does not answer Job'
s specific question but helps him understand that he
is sovereign and will ultimately bring about good for those who put their trust in him. Job
then becomes an example for all people through time that wrestle with the questions of
suffering in their life.
Christ spoke much on suffering and he came into the world with the solution. The Bible
teaches that the distinct purpose of Christ'
s coming to this world was to suffer on behalf
of humanity'
s sins. Christ in contrast to the Buddha purposely embraced suffering for us
rather than attempting to avoid it. Yet this still does not erase our suffering in the world
but gives it meaning.
The last noble truth 4) Desire can be eliminated, this is done by following the Eightfold
Path: a system of therapy designed to help develop habits which will release people from
the restrictions caused by their own ignorance and cravings. (Cults, World Religions, and
the Occult p.32 Kenneth Boa)
The true and permanent state, the changeless absolute is reality itself.
Simply put Buddhists ultimately seek escape from a world that only brings suffering.
While we all may feel this way hoping for the least possible amount of suffering in life
the Bible tells suffering can be beneficial for our faith in God.

The bible disputes three of the four of Buddha'

s Noble Truths
Our hearts desires can be selfish if one is wicked and ignores the Lord. Psalms 10:3-4:
"For the wicked boasts of his heart'
s desire; he blesses the greedy and renounces the
LORD. The wicked in his proud countenance does not seek God; God is in none of his
thoughts."

God can be our desire. Psalms 73:24-26: "You will guide me with Your counsel, and
afterward receive me to glory. Whom have I in heaven but You? And there is none upon
earth that I desire besides You. My flesh and my heart fail; but God is the strength of my
heart and my portion forever."
Psalms 145:19-20 He will fulfill the desire of those who fear Him; he also will hear their
cry and save them.20 The LORD preserves all who love Him, but all the wicked He will
destroy."
Jesus said to "seek the kingdom of God and all His righteousness." Meaning God and all
that encompasses him.
The Bible does not teach that all desires are evil. In fact there are desires that are good
and even required of us to seek. Prov. 24:1-2: " Do not be envious of evil men, nor desire
to be with them; For their heart devises violence, and their lips talk of
troublemaking."
Proverbs 11:23: "The desire of the righteous is only good, but the expectation of the
wicked is wrath."
We are to desire" to do God'
s will (Ps. 40:8), "desire" God'
s mercy (Matt. 9:13), desire"
spiritual gifts (1 Cor. 12:31; 14:1), and "desire" to live honorably (Heb. 13:18).We are to

desire our mate Song of Solomon 7:10 " I am my beloved'

s, and his desire is toward me."

For even God has desires to man Hosea 6:6 "For I desire mercy and not sacrifice, and the
knowledge of God more than burnt offerings."

Buddha taught to eliminate suffering we must eliminate desire. This goal is difficult to
attain since it requires some type of desiring to eliminate the desire. The logic of the
Buddha'
s teaching goes against the law of contradiction. You cant say I dont exist
without existing otherwise why say it. You cant say that one should stop desires. To
sincerely stop desiring means you are desiring to sincerely to stop desiring. Then you
should discontinue your goal to stop desiring, because the desire to stop desiring is a
desire. So this is impossible with our human nature.
Although several sects have elevated him to a the status of a god, Buddha never claimed
to be one. Only the way-shower to eliminate suffering and bring one to Nirvana. Jesus, on
the other did. He claimed to be God and not simply a way-shower or someone with
enlightenment, but the only way to know God and inherit eternal life. Contrary Jesus
claimed to be the way. Jesus said in John 14:6, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No
one comes to the Father except through me." This is something that Jesus desires: for all
men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth. He asks us to seek Him
Christianity teaches there was only one incarnation of God and while anyone can make a
belief system it is another thing to prove it. In this Buddha failed and Jesus succeeded.

If one only looks at Jesus as a human being he exemplifies the highest ideal in man, he
has all the qualities Buddha taught about and sought, but Christ is more than just a man
he is our creator.
The Fourth Noble Truth of the Buddha contains the Buddhist ethics, which include right
views, right speech, right conduct,
It is a sacred path with eight branches called: right views or understanding, right
aspirations, right speech, right conduct or action, right livelihood, right effort or
endeavor, right mind control or concentration, and right mindfulness. These eight
branches are not stages that can be lived out in succession or isolation from one another.
Rather they are different dimensions of a total way of life.
there is no rightness or wrongness, since rightness and wrongness are, among other
things, statements of value.
The Eightfold path consists of: 3 sections Wisdom
(1) right knowledge
right aspirations (intentions) right thought One must renounce all desires and any
thoughts like lust, bitterness, and cruelty. He must harm no living creature.
Ethical conduct
(3) right speech One must speak only truth. There can be no lying, slander, or vain talk
(overcoming falsehood and promoting the truth)
4) Right conduct, action Right Behavior. One must abstain from sexual immorality,
stealing, and all killing.

Right livlihood One must work in an occupation that benefits others and harms no one
(certain occupations must not be participated in or followed slave trader, tax collector or
butcher.
Mental disciplines
Right effort- One must seek to eliminate any evil qualities within and prevent any new
ones from arising. One should seek to attain good and moral qualities and develop those
already possessed. Seek to grow in maturity and perfection until universal love is
attained.
Right mindfulness (self-analysis), One must be observant, contemplative, and free of
desire and sorrow.
and (meditation such as Raja Yoga). After freeing oneself of all desires and evil, a person
needs to concentrate his efforts in meditation so that he can overcome any sensation of
pleasure or pain and enter a state of transcending consciousness to attain a state of
perfection. Buddhists believe that through self effort and these disciplines one can attain
the state of peace and eternal bliss called Nirvana.
One is to avoid having an occupation that breaks the moral precepts of Buddhism. These
precepts (number 4 of the eightfold) includes the five precepts forbidding killing all
forms of life, stealing, lying, adultery or immoral sexual behavior, and drinking
intoxicants. These are found in the natural moral laws written in mans hearts. But they
have no vertical consequences for a Buddhist. In Christianity a moral God gave the law
and so we break the vertical relationship. So we sin against a personal God. In Buddhism
there is no vertical connection so they have moral laws but no moral law giver. This is
impossible since all have a source.

Five additional precepts are followed during some holy seasons and by some
monasteries: do not eat at forbidden times; do not dance, listen to music, or attend
theatrical plays; do not indulge in personal adornment (use cosmetics or jewelry); do not
use a broad or high bed; do not receive gold or silver.
You suffer because you desire what is passing and because you have the illusion there is
a real you. Christianity says we suffer because of the consequences of our sin and Adam.

Buddhist scriptures and sayings attributed to Gautama were written about four centuries
after Buddha'
s death. Some say there is no way to be sure these are all really Gautama'
s
words. By the time they were written Buddhism was split into opposing sects. (b) What
form of Buddhism does one adhere to? The differences among the sects of Buddhism are
greater than those found among many religions. Although they are trying to rectify that
today. The question of authority is very important here.
If you become nuetral and meditate on nothing you put yourself in a position that is
subject to anything that exerts strength over you.

Meditation
Buddhism is meditation on the void emptiness your mind becomes neutral and let the
force flow. Remember luke skywalker well he was a Buddhist. George Lucas tells us this
in his own biography (written by dale pollack) he was asked where did he get his ideas
from , they come from Buddhism. Rolling stone magazine asked him about the 2nd film
where he got his ideas from, he said Zen Buddhism. The impersonal force was essentially

the void, it showed you cant trust your senses he stopped using them by turning off the
computers closed his eyes stopped thinking and felt the force.
Let me give you an example of this meditation. Would you like driving in a car in a dense
fog and the driver tells you to not worry since hes going to close his eyes stop thinking
and we will turn off the lights to get there safely.Wouldnt this make you feel confident!

a non thinking thought ?

Meditation for Christians is different, it is meditation on the word Ps.1 it is objective, it is
on truth. It expands understanding gives one knowledge that is practical.

Karma, Samsara, and Nirvana

Three important concepts in understanding Buddhism are karma, Samsara, and Nirvana.
Karma refers to the law of cause and effect in a person'
s life, reaping what one has sown.
Buddhists believe that every person must go through a process of birth and rebirth until
he reaches the state of nirvana in which he breaks this cycle. According to the law of
karma, "You are what you are and do what you do, as a result of what you were and did
in a previous incarnation, which in turn was the inevitable outcome of what you were and
did in still earlier incarnations." (Davis Taylor and Clark Offner, The World'
s Religions,
Norman Anderson, ed. (Grand Rapids: InterVarsity, 1975), p. 174)
For a Buddhist, what one will be in the next life depends on one'
s actions in this present
life. Buddha believed, unlike Hinduism, that a person can break the rebirth cycle no
matter what class he is born into.

The second key concept to understand is the law of Samsara or Transmigration. This is
one of the most perplexing and difficult concepts in Buddhism to understand. The law of
Samsara holds that everything is in a birth and rebirth cycle. Buddha taught that people
do not have individual souls. The existence of an individual self or ego is an illusion.
There is no eternal substance of a person which goes through the rebirth cycle. What is it
then that goes through the cycle if not the individual soul? What goes through the rebirth
cycle is only a set of feelings, impressions, present moments, and the karma that is passed
on. "In other words, as one process leads to another, ... so one'
s human personality in one
existence is the direct cause of the type of individuality which appears in the next."( John
Noss, Man'
s Religions (New York: Macmillan Company, 1968), p. 182.) The new
individual in the next life will not be exactly the same person, but there will be several
similarities. Just how close in identity they will be, Buddha did not define.
The third key concept is Nirvana
Nirvana in Hinduism to the Brahmans, nirvana or moksha is attained when the individual
soul becomes one with the Universal Soul, the Buddha held that nirvana is actually the
termination of rebirths that is, the identity of an individual is extinguished.
The term means "the blowing out" of existence. the identity of a person is like a candle
flame in the wind that is blown out.. Nirvana is very different from the Christian concept
of heaven. Nirvana is not a place like heaven but rather a state of being. What exactly it
is, Buddha never really articulated. Today it is known as nothingness
Nirvana can be described as an eternal state of non being. It is the condition in which the
law of karma, and the cycle of rebirth come to an end , then one returns to the source. It is
the end of suffering, a state where there are no desires and the individual consciousness

comes to an end. Although to our Western minds this may sound like annihilation,
Buddhists would object to such a notion. Gautama never gave an exact description of
Nirvana, but his closest reply was this. "There is disciples, a condition, where there is
neither earth nor water, neither air nor light, neither limitless space, nor limitless time,
neither any kind of being, neither ideation nor non-ideation, neither this world nor that
world. There is neither arising nor passing-away, nor dying, neither cause nor effect,
neither change nor standstill."( Taylor & Offner, p. 177) Although no Buddhist really
understands the condition of Nirvana, it is their eternal hope.
Dharma is an Indian term, which can mean either conformity to one'
s duty within society
or the basic principles of one'
s existence within the universe. In its general sense it is
simply understood as the law of life. Within Buddhism, the Dharma took on a more
specific meaning, being understood as the teachings of the Buddha.
These teachings on suffering are the heart of the Dharma and are known as the Four
Noble Truths: (1) suffering is universal (2) the origin of suffering, (3) the overcoming of
suffering (4) the way which leading to suppress ones suffering.
The first Truth defines the nature of being; the second and third Truths develop various
aspects of being; and the fourth Truth indicates a practical way to deliverance from
suffering.
The Dalai lama is the reincarnation of the Buddha. To a Buddhist time is a circle going
around while Christianity teaches it is linear. Time has a beginning and an end. Buddhism
teaches the cycle of birth and death over and over until one escapes the cycle by Yoga

What Would Buddha Do

It has been 10 years have passed since a Michigan church began distributing wristbands
labeled "WWJD" which has become a Christian slogan for "What Would Jesus Do?" The
idea was to remind us of Jesus as our example. Since then books and songs have been
inspired with this slogan.
Now in a sign of the country'
s growing religious diversity, members of another faith also
are thinking about wearing their spirituality on their sleeves.
Now someone has come up with the "WWBD" idea, standing for "What Would Buddha."
California based Ulysses Press will start selling books and wristbands labeled "WWBD."
In the newspaper article they are asked, "Does someone need to be Buddhist to read the
book or wear the band? No." That'
s the key to religious diversity today. Americans feel
free to look for spiritual wisdom in many different traditions. They use different spiritual
practices that they find meaningful. And the Buddhist tradition, has a lot of good advice
for people'
s daily lives."
What would Buddha do? We already know what Buddha did, he ran off leaving his
family to seek enlightenment. He almost died pursuing self enlightenment. Jesus on the
other hand lived with his family despite their rejection of his claims. Before he died made
sure he gave his mother over in Johns hands for her care. Despite all the good things we
hear about Buddha and his ethics, he did not lived up to all of them, he was no better or
worse than anyone of us. He needed salvation and what Jesus did for him like anyone
else.
The examples of being good are certainly in Buddhism but from what motive? It is to
advance self onto the road of enlightenment and freedom. Jesus on the other hand said for
us to lose our life in him so we can find it. We do not do good works to gain our

salvation, but because it was given to us as a free gift.While many work diligently to be
better people morally and ethically and certainly that is to be commended. The
fundamental difference between Christ'
s teachings and the Buddha'
s (as well as others) is
that Christ did all the work and surrender means to have him live his life through us. This
is where all the other religions fail no matter how auspicious they are. They cannot
deliver since their human leaders have died and left their teachings to follow, which the
adherents do in their own strength. Christianity'
s teacher has risen from the dead and
rules in the spirit of all those who have accepted him for whom he is and what he has
done. In this there can be no bridge to fill the gap.

Taking a Second Look at Buddhism

by Scott Noble
January 2, 2003

Last summer I went to Thailand to visit some friends. While there one of my friends had
his college students take me on a tour of the city. This particular city (Ayutthaya) is filled
with Buddhist temples and other sites of historical significance. At one museum the
students showed me a cabinet-like structure, which was said to contain a small piece of
Sakyamuni
Buddha'
s bones (Sakyamuni just means sage of the Sakya clan- a.k.a. Siddhartha
Gautama). They told me that the Buddha had instructed his followers to break his bones
into tiny pieces so that each group could have a piece, and so that they would not fight
over his body. At another site, the students showed me a life-size statue of the Buddha
sitting in meditation position on the coil of a giant cobra, while the cobra (Mucalinda)

held its hood over the Buddha'

s head. This, it was said, was to protect the Buddha from
the rain. Though I lived in Thailand for two years
(from 1997-1999), and have read about the basics of Buddhism, these experiences made
me curious as to the more exact nature, history and differences of the various branches of
Buddhism. Later, when I was in Bangkok, I picked up a copy of Thai Buddhism in the
Buddhist World by P. A. Payutto (2001). Having read this book, two others and many
articles, I'
d like to share some of my findings. I'
m going to skip over the basics. If
you'
re interested in a more basic approach to the subject of Buddhism, J. Isamu
Yamamoto'
s four overview articles provide a good start:
http://www.equip.org/free/DB565-1.htm
http://www.equip.org/free/DB565-2.htm
http://www.equip.org/free/DB565-3.htm
http://www.equip.org/free/DB565-4.htm

I'
ll be doing a lot of jumping around to different topics, reporting and responding to
various items. In this day of being politically correct as opposed to biblically correct,
and having inter-religious dialogues as opposed to debates, taking a critical view of
any religion is taboo, but according to who? This kind of tolerance is not without
inconsistency. For
starters, some people who hold to this kind of tolerance have no qualms about using the
name of Jesus or God as an expression of disgust, anger, or even surprise, in a way they
would not even use the name of their boss.
This kind of tolerance is something we also wouldn'
t hold to when considering a medical

question. If someone with questionable qualifications were giving medicine to our child,
surely we wouldn'
t stand back and ignore it on the basis of tolerance. Why then should
we ignore dangers, inaccuracies, etc. when it comes to the well-being of the soul? Taking
a critical stance is not always wrong. The Bible is not silent when it comes to speaking
out against false teachings. Examples of this would be Elijah on Mount Carmel (I Kings
18), Jeremiah'
s satirical writings on idolatry
(Jeremiah 2), Jesus rebuking those who replaced God'
s Word with man'
s traditions
(Matthew 23), and Paul causing a riot in Ephesus because of his preaching (Acts 19). I'
m
certainly not a prophet, and it'
s not my intention to stir up controversy, but I do feel that
as a Christian I have an obligation to examine truth claims and respond to them in the
light of God'
s Word. Furthermore, false ideas produce devastating effects in people'
s
lives. If in this paper I can show the beauty of God'
s Word as revealed in
Jesus Christ, and the dangers of Buddhism, I will have accomplished my goals. If an idea
has merit and truth to it, it will be able to withstand the heat of examination. Jesus Christ
and the Old and New Testaments have long been targets for critics, but they have been
found to be tried and true. For examples of this reliability, please see the following
websites:
An overview of evidences for the reliability of the Bible:
http://www.gospelcom.net/faithfacts/maps.html
William Lane Craig'
s virtual office:
http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/menus/historical.html
A bibliography of books listed by topic:
http://www.gospelcom.net/rzim/publications/biblio_all.php

The Great Theory Tale

In his book, Payutto, who is speaking from a Theravada Buddhist perspective, repeatedly
makes reference to how scientific Buddhism is. He says, There is no God who created
the world and controls man'
s destiny. Man is his own master. The way is one of selfeffort, free from prayer and superstition (10). Speaking of a Buddhist revival in Japan,
Payutto writes, Buddhism was then revalued as its teachings were found to be
compatible with new
discoveries and theories of modern science, such as Darwin'
s theory of evolution (129).
To say that humans are in the same category as animals (only more developed) is a denial
of God as Creator and a denial of God as
Judge. By saying that Man is his own master an affirmation is made of the Satanic
Bible verse Do what thou wilt. This autonomy from God is rebellion, whether clothed
in black robes and deadly ceremonies or orange robes and good works. My people
have committed two sins: They have forsaken me, the spring of living water, and have
dug their own cisterns, broken cisterns that cannot hold water (Jeremiah 2: 13).

The title of a Calvin and Hobbes comic book reminds me of evolution: Scientific
Progress Goes '
Boink.'
Macro-evolution, in the world of theories is like a dinosaur
which is still on display, but doesn'
t have any life breath left. Here are a few resources
that reveal just how boinky evolution is (without using the word boink):
- Articles by Phillip E. Johnson, a law professor at the University of
California, Berkeley:

<http://www.origins.org/menus/pjohnson.html>
-On-line audio messages by Dr. Ron Carlson:
<http://www.jude3.com/audiolibrary.htm>
-On-line audio messages by Ken Ham of Australia:
<http://www.answersingenesis.org/answersmedia/searchProcess.asp>

A Boat Ride
The second of three books I read on Buddhism is The Lotus and the Cross: Jesus talks
with Buddha, by Ravi Zacharias (a Christian apologist from India). In this book,
Zacharias imagines what would be said if Jesus and Buddha had a chance to talk to one
another. This meeting takes place while on a boat ride. A prostitute dying of AIDS and
the boatman also participate
in this conversation. The book is based on library research as well as conversations with
Buddhist monks and instructors in Malaysia, India, Singapore, and Thailand. In the
introduction, Zacharias gives an appeal: Jesus and Buddha cannot both be right. The lotus
is the symbol of Buddhism; the cross, the symbol of the Christian faith. Behind the two
symbols stand
two diametrically opposed beliefs. I ask you, the reader, to examine the message of each,
using both your heart and your mind. It is worth the exercise because it will determine
your destiny. One day we will all find out that being respectful and sincere does not give
us license to be wrong.
Truth demands investigation and commitment. Our conclusions must be in keeping with
Truth that can be tested. To be handcuffed by a lie is the worst of all imprisonments. (8)

Distance between Jerusalem and Northern India Some have claimed that Christian
teachings were copied from Buddhist teachings. When looking at the teachings of
Christianity it'
s important to note that there were Old Testament prophecies concerning
much of Christ'
s
ministry. These preceded the New Testament by hundreds and even thousands of years.
The virgin birth parallel which is claimed as evidence of a Christian copy of Buddha'
s
birth, was prophesied by Isaiah about 700 years before Christ (Isaiah prophesied from
around 740- 681 B.C.), and 300 years before Buddha (according to recent calculations of
Buddha'
s birth).
Information on Buddha'
s birth can be found on a page of the University of Virginia
website:
Date of Birth: Many Western scholars place the Buddha'
s lifetime from 563-483 BCE,
while the Sri Lankan tradition believes the Buddha to have lived from 624-544 BCE.
More recent date setting suggests that some time around 410 BCE is more accurate
(http://religiousmovements).
lib.virginia.edu/nrms/buddhism. html). The date of 410 BCE is from Damien Keown'
s
1996 book entitled Buddhism: Avery short introduction. Using this date, the prophecy
of Isaiah (Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be
with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.) and the time that
Sidhartha Gautama was searching for answers was separated by approximately 300 years.
Even using the other dates separates the end of Isaiah'
s ministry and the beginning of
Buddha'
s by about 90- 150 years.

How long would it take for a person to travel from Jerusalem to Northern India? Using an
estimate that is on the slow side, if a person travels 4 miles per hour, for 3 hours a day,
resting every seventh day, it would take approximately 285 days (c. 3000 miles as the
crow flies) including Sabbath days. Adding another year for getting lost, crossing
mountains and rivers,
time for settling down before moving again, 10 years for language study, etc. it'
s not
unreasonable to think that these prophecies about Christ could have been passed along
within 15 years.

In 722 B.C., Jews in Northern Israel were removed from their homeland by the
Assyrians, and in 586 B.C. more Jews from Southern Israel were taken away by the
Babylonians. These people would not have had to be religious experts or even have any
manuscripts with them. Even most non-Christians in the west are familiar with some of
the basic teachings of the Bible. In the same way, to hear the prophet Isaiah or another
prophet speak would have been a
memorable event (this was the mass media of the day, in addition to manuscripts). The
ideas could also have been passed along by the grapevine, whether by Jews or outside
merchants, not requiring one individual or group to make the entire journey there.
Buddha'
s virgin birth
is actually one of the least substantiated claims made by those who wish to see parallels
here. Knowing the distances involved and the antiquity of the Old Testament, though, is
important for some of the other claims. According to the Nidanakatha, which Thomas

calls an example of hagiographical industry (xxi), after the Buddha was born there
appeared signs. Among these, in a summary by Thomas, .the blind receive their sight,
the deaf hear, the dumb speak, the cripples become straight-limbed, the lame walk, and
the fire in all the hells is extinguished (32). This is reminiscent of the much older text in
Isaiah 35: 5-6, prophesying about Jesus: Then will the eyes of the blind be opened and
the ears of the deaf unstopped. Then will the lame leap like a deer, and the mute tongue
shout for joy. Water will gush forth in the wilderness and streams in the desert.

Other Parallels
While surfing the web, I came across two lists of parallels between Jesus and Buddha in a
discussion forum, posted by the same individual. The first list has 27 parallels, and the
second list has 13 parallels. These can be found at
http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Courtyard/1652/BuddhaChrist.html.
On an Islamic sponsored website (www.themodernreligion.com/comparative/
http://www.themodernreligion.com/comparative/christ/ bible_buddhism.htm) the first list
mentioned above was given in a streamlined fashion, with 22 parallels. In these parallels,
scripture references from the Bible are given for Jesus, but for Buddha, with theexception
of one Buddhist scripture reference, these were referenced by
giving the name of a scholar. This has made it difficult to track down the scripture
locations for these items about Buddha, especially since the Pali canon alone (not taking
into account all of the scriptures of other schools) is approximately 15 times the size of
the Bible (http://www.akshin.net/literature/budlitsourcespali.htm). Fortunately though, I
did find a good book which did this work for me. This is the third book which I

mentioned: The Life of Buddha as Legend and History by Edward J. Thomas. In this
book there are 16 parallels which Edwards considers noteworthy (these arebased on van
den Bergh'
s work).

Incidentally, the one Buddhist scripture mentioned in the list of 40 parallels, comes from
the 11th century AD! That reference was from the Kathasaritsagara: Although its dates
have not been conclusively established, the Kathasaritsagara is said to have been
compiled by a
Kashmiri Saivite Brahmin called Somadeva in AD 1070. Legend has it that Somadeva
composed the Kathasaritsagara for queen Suryavati, wife of King Anantadeva who ruled
Kashmir in the eleventh century. (amazon.com)

Of the 40 parallels mentioned above, many can be dismissed just by making the same
comparisons with people in general or religious leaders in particular. Items such as *they
both fasted for a long time, *they were about the same age when they began public
ministry (Jesus 30; Buddha 35- though Buddha'
s age is debatable here), *the multitudes
required a sign from
both, *both taught compassion, and *both were of royal descent (in the case of Buddha
this is debatable), could be said of many people, especially a religious leader. Thomas
(1927) summarizes the work of several scholars in this area of study:
Seydel'
s fifty instances are reduced by van den Bergh to nine. In proportion to the
investigator'
s direct knowledge of the Buddhist sources the number seems to decrease. E.
W. Hopkins discusses five '
cogent parallels'
, but does not consider any of them very

probable. Garbe assumes direct borrowing in four cases, Simeon, the Temptation, Peter
walking on the sea, and the Miracle of the loaves and fishes. Charpentier considers
Simeon the only unobjectionable example. Other scholars reject all connexion. In
any case the chief events of the life- birth, renunciation, enlightenment, and the death, the
very items which might give strength to the comparison- disappear from the question.
(247-248)

Rather than going through all of these, I'

ll just address some of the key ones. In the case
of Simeon seeing Jesus at the temple, and Asita going to see the infant Gautama,
regarding the Buddhist scripture (Nalaka-sutta of the Sutta-nipata), Thomas says, It is
clearly late, as is shown by the reference to the thirty-two marks; and as it is in general
agreement with the Sanskrit accounts, there is nothing to prove that it is as early as the
pre-Christian era (39). The thirty-two marks refer to physical characteristics used to
identify a potential Buddha. This is thought to be a later Mahayana development (K.R.
Norman, 1983, Pali Literature: including the canonical literature in Prakrit and Sanskrit
of all the Hinayana schools of Buddhism, 42). James Kennedy (1917), in his article The
Gospels of the Infancy, the Lalita Vistara and the Vishnu Purana, addresses the walking
on water parallel:
The story occurs in the introduction to Jataka No. 190.in this case all we know is that the
story of the monk, and the Jataka which follows it, were considered old enough to be
included among 546 others, when the Jataka book was compiled in the fifth or sixth
century A.D. (528)
Regarding the multiplying of food parallel, Kennedy writes, Like the story of the monk

we have just discussed, it occurs in the introduction to a Jataka [No. 78], and is subject to
the same comment (529).

Another parallel claim made regards the prodigal son stories of Buddha and Jesus. For an
excellent description of the content differences in these stories, please see the following
website: http://www.comparativereligion.
com/prodigal.html. This story in Buddhist scriptures is found in the Saddharmapundarika
sutra. According to the following Buddhist website, the composition date of this volume
is later than the composition of Luke (the gospel in which Jesus tells the story of the
prodigal son). Luke was Luke'
s first volume, the second being the book of Acts (both of
which are dated before 63 AD). Here'
s the dating assigned to the Saddharmapundarika
(also known as the Lotus Sutra): Contains elements of various eras. The final edition is
believed to have taken place around 200 CE, but a lot of later interpolations are found
within it. The Buddha here is not a historical figure, but the manifestation of an eternal,
abstract '
Buddhahood'
. Further, it contains the doctrines of '
Expedient Means'(upaya) and
of the '
One Vehicle'(ekayana).
(http://www.akshin.net/literature/budlitsourcessanskrit.htm)

Shin Buddhism (a form of Pure Land Buddhism developed in Japan)This form of

Buddhism has been thought of by many to be very similar to Christianity, because the
end goal is a pure land, and achieving that goal is not based on self-effort, but through
the merits of Amida Buddha. There are, however some serious differences between
Christianity and Shin Buddhism. When seeking out a doctor, people want to be sure that

the doctor'
s training has taken place at a reputable school, that the doctor is basing the
diagnosis on medical facts rather than just speculation, etc. When it comes to the soul,
how much more important is it to establish the reliability of the source and the content of
claims? Looking at Shin Buddhism in this way, there are some serious insufficiencies:
Dharmakara'
s credibility: Dharmakara is said to have been a king who gave up his throne
to become a monk and later became Amida Buddha. It is claimed he lived approximately
65 billion years ago- using the time unit of a kalpa, which can also be interpreted as being
inconceivably long
(http://www.akshin.net/pureland/pl-purelandbuddhism-partone. htm). If this
is the case, why did he wait until the 2nd century AD (some say the 2nd century B.C.) to
reveal this plan of his pure land? It seems rather suspect that this concept was not
developed until after Siddhartha Gautama made his claims.
Dharmakara'
s limitations: Even if we are to believe this person existed, he was still just a
man, who was preceded by another Buddha, and who spent approximately 22 billion
years (apparently not as a man at this point), studying other Buddha lands, in order to
develop his famed Pure Land.
Already it'
s apparent that he'
s not on the same level as God Almighty as revealed in the
Bible.
No atonement: Shin Buddhists place their faith in Amida Buddha to secure salvation for
them. Unfortunately, this is like trusting a homeless man to pay our million dollar bail to
get out of jail. He barely has the means to sustain himself, let alone get us out of the jail
caused by our sins.
Anyone with their own sins to deal with (which is everyone, including Dharmakara if we

are to suppose he existed), can only take the punishment for their own sins. Even then
though, being imperfect, this bearing of sins can only fulfill justice. It can'
t pay for
salvation. Only Jesus, being God in the flesh, and sinless, could take the punishment for
others.
Shinran'
s choice of patriarchs (focusing on the first patriarch): Shinran is the man who
developed Shin Buddhism into what it is today. He lived in Japan from 1173- 1262 AD.
In an attempt to establish authority for his new interpretation of Pure Land, Shinran chose
seven patriarchs: He acknowledged Sakyamuni Buddha as being the voice of Amida
Buddha, and then named the first patriarch- Nagarjuna, a man in India who lived from c.
150 AD- c. 250 AD (http://www.akshin.net/pureland/pl-purelandbuddhismparttwo.htm). This wide gap from the time of Sakyamuni Buddha, to the time of the first
patriarch (500 years, if not more) shows just how far removed from the original it is.
Also, Nagarjuna is said to have had interactions with giant snakes, just as Sakyamuni
encountered Mucalinda:
Mahayana tradition explains the chronological discrepancy by contending that they were
indeed taught by the Buddha to advanced disciples, but that he ordered that they be
hidden in the underwater realm of nagas (beings with snakelike bodies and human heads)
until the time was right for their
propagation. The legend further reports that the second-century philosopher Nagarjuna
(fl. ca. 150 C.E.) was the person preordained by Buddha to recover and explicate the
Perfection of Wisdom texts. After one of his lectures, some nagas approached him and
told him of the texts hidden in their kingdom, and so Nagarjuna traveled there and
returned with the sutras to India.

(http://www.geocities.com/gileht/chandrakirti/middle_part3.htm)
This is a man who was taught by giant snakes! How can we entrust ourselves to such
teachings? What parents would leave their baby in the care of a cobra? Half of
Nagarjuna'
s name is of Hindu origin, and the other half comes from his interactions with
these nagas:
When he preached the Dharma in the monastery park, the nagas performed acts
of reverence such as six of the serpents forming a parasol to shade him from
the sun. Having thus become the Lord of the Nagas, the Acarya was named The Nga.
Because his skill at spreading the Mahayana Dharma resembled theshooting speed and
mastery of the famed archer Arjuna, he became known as wll as The Arjuna
(http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Ithaca/4886/ naga1.
htm)
Shin Buddhism'
s scriptures: Shin Buddhism is based on the writings of the even
patriarchs, as well as on the three primary texts: Scriptures of this tradition [Pure Land in
general] (which later became known as the Triple Sutras) appeared during the initial
period of the Mahayana movement. Two of them are of Indian origin and date from about
the first century B.C. The third scripture, which dates from about the fourth century,
exists only in a Chinese version.
(http://my.cybersoup.com/hongakujodo/history.html)
Apart from being late in and of themselves, Shinran, and other patriarchs made changes
to the doctrines. Also, Amida Buddha is not even mentioned in the earlier Pali canon. The
Pali canon itself is not exactly a history textbook, but it is closer to the time of the
Sakyamuni Buddha. Pure Land'
s change in status: One example of a changed doctrine is

that originally the Pure Land was thought to be an intermediary place, ideally suited for
obtaining nirvana. Later it was believed that the Pure Land is the end goal itself.
In summary, trusting in Shin Buddhism is like playing soul roulette with every barrel
loaded. The founder (Dharmakara) is probably entirely mythical. Even if we suppose he
existed, he is so human that he could not have even saved himself. And, the record of
Shin Buddhism'
s teachings speaks of relying on snakes and late, revised ideas.

The Uniqueness of Jesus Christ as compared to Sakyamuni Buddha There are over 300
prophesies about Jesus in the Old Testament (the most recent ones are 400 years B.C.;
most are older than that). In Thomas'book which gave a very detailed account, including
perspectives from various schools, I found one prophecy at the time of his birth, when it
was said he would become a great king if he stayed in the palace, but would become a
Buddha if he left. Also, the Buddhavamsa text contains prophecies by the previous 24
Buddhas. Although the Buddhavamsa is part of the Pali canon, Thomas refers to it as
another example of hagiographical industry (xxi), and being in the Pali, it would have
been composed after the death of Sakyamuni. Jesus had a forerunner to announce His
arrival (John the Baptist- who was also prophesied in Isaiah 40:3)
Jesus'mother outlived Him (on earth, that is) [Buddha'
s mother died seven days after
he was born (Thomas, 33)] Jesus, being God in the flesh, created His mother and all
people Jesus was born into a poor family (as opposed to Buddha'
s royal upbringingalthough it is in dispute as to whether Buddha was really of royalty) Jesus didn'
t need
teachers (whereas in the stories of the Buddha, he had several teachers, and words such as
searching and striving are used) Jesus could borrow a tomb (He used it for less

than three days) Jesus'public ministry lasted for 3 years. Buddha'

s lasted for 45 years.
Jesus died at age 33 (by crucifixion). Buddha died at age 80 (by unintentional food
poisoning). This difference also has a bearing on recording the events of their lives. If
two people died today at these ages (33 and 80), in order to find eyewitnesses of these
accounts for the person who was 33, we'
d have to find people who were living around
1969 to the present. For the person who was 80, we'
d have to find people who were alive
(and at least 10 years old, such that they would have a clear memory of the events)
around 1922. It becomes clear that there would have been far more eyewitnesses (both
sympathetic and hostile- which meant the writers had to be accurate in their retelling of
the events) for Jesus.
Jesus is not one in a series of greats- rather He is completely unique- God in the flesh.
Buddha, depending on which text is used was preceded by 6, 24, 54, or more than a
hundred previous Buddhas (Thomas, 27). Jesus, though tempted, such that He could be
understanding and compassionate, was completely sinless. Sakyamuni Buddha had many
sins, as is evidenced by the many lives that are claimed for him (547 previous lives as
recorded in the Jataka tales), in which he had to work off his bad karma.

Syncretism
Buddhism has a history of adopting practices and ideas of its surrounding cultures. If
Buddhism were a business, this would be an admirable quality. Since it is a truth claim
however, this quality undermines its authority. Choosing a religion is not the same thing
as choosing a flavor of ice cream. One is based on preference and the other is based on
truth. Customizing truth to suit people is another form of rebellion against God, who calls

people, not truth to change.

Payutto explains the origination and spread of making Buddha images:Around this time,
through the Greek influence, there appeared for the first time the making of images of the
Buddha. Within a century, this practice became common in northwestern India as a
development of the Gandhara school of art and then spread and was accepted in all
Buddhist lands. (46- 47) Thomas concurs on these points, and provides a date: It is in
sculptures of the Gandhara school in the first century B.C. that the earliest figures of
Buddha are found. A type of the figure of Buddha modeled on that of Apollo was created,
from which the Indian and all others are derived. (221)

Buddhism is incompatible with the attachment displayed in paying homage to ancestors.

In an online article (http://www.aloha.net/~albloom/shin study/unit06.htm), the reason for
this addition (in some countries and sects of Buddhism) is given:
While Buddhism was not initially a religion of funerals and ancestor reverence, it
developed this emphasis in China as a means to disprove the Confucian criticisms that
Buddhism was unfilial in advocating monastic and celibate life which involved the
leaving of home and withdrawing from society.

The Pali Canon

The Pali Canon is held to be the closest to the original teachings of Sakyamuni Buddha.
Of course there are many other Buddhist scriptures besides the Pali Canon (such as
Sanskrit, Tibetan, and Chinese scriptures). Earlier I mentioned that the Pali Canon is

approximately 15 times the size of the Bible. The Chinese Canon is approximately 120
times the size of the
Bible! (http://www.akshin.net/literature/budlitsourceschina.htm) Thomas in his biography
of the Buddha, writes, The earliest period at which we have evidence for the existence
of a body of Scriptures approximating to the present Canon is at the third Council held
B.C. 247. (xix). The reason he says approximating is because within the Pali canon
some parts are considered to be much later than 247 B.C. Thomas goes on to say, We
have nothing, even in the Pali, at all like '
the real facts of the Gospel history'to put in the
place of the Sanskrit legend. We have merely other forms of the same legend, some
earlier and some later (xxiv).

Amazing Grace
Stephen H. Short was a Zen Buddhist for 13 years before turning to Christ. In an online
article (http://www.summit.org/resources/ZenandtheArt.htm) he retraces how he became
involved in Zen and how he decided to leave. Here
are some excerpts:
I considered whether there might be truth beyond Zen that I would never find because
through Zen I had lost all desire to look for it. Watching my desires and attachments
appear and trying not to hold on to them, I also watched my attention becoming more and
more focused on myself. Though we students bowed, chanted, meditated, ate, and slept
together, we might just as well have been alone on a mountain top..The irony of
becoming wrapped up in the self in order to lose the self was not lost on me. We were
told that bringing our attachments to awareness was a prerequisite to letting them go.

Might not increased awareness subtly lead to increased attachment? Were we trading
bondage to desire for bondage to self-absorption?

Jim Stephens was a Nichiren Shoshu Buddhist for 14 years. In his online account
(<http://www.equip.org/free/DB555.htm>) he gives the reasons for his departure from
Buddhism and how he turned to Jesus Christ. Here are three excerpts:
The accident report read, Cause: Act of God. I was in a train station in Japan, making a
pilgrimage to the head Buddhist temple Daisekiji at the foot of Mount Fuji, when a young
man - in perfect English - warned: Beware the winds of Himeiji! Three and one-half
hours later, I was leaning over to put some postcards into my travel bag and heard
someone yell a warning in Japanese. The next thing I knew, a sign weighing nearly 200
pounds came crashing down on my back.I was painfully lost in a spiritual wasteland and
was weighed down with sin. I realized that while Buddhism had benefited me in many
ways, it ultimately led to a spiritual dead end. As a great wiseman, King Solomon, once
said: There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death (Prov.
16:25).That night, my wife- a Nichiren Shoshu Buddhist for 16 years- also believed.
What grace!

Lit-Sen Chang (1904- 1996) was a university professor at age 21, and his thoughts were
influential among Chinese government leaders. In his Christian testimony he writes,
Though after my conversion I also wrote five million words as before my conversion,
the fruits were different (294). He goes on to say how feedback from his readers shows
lives changed for the better. Some of his later books are A Christian Critique of

Humanism, The Spiritual Decline of the West, Transcendental Meditation,

Comprehensive Christian Apologetics (four volumes), and Zen- Existentialism. In
his book Asia'
s Religions: Christianity'
s momentous encounter with paganism, he tells
of how he became a Christian at age 50, after deep involvement with various Asian
religions. Here'
s an excerpt:I was intoxicated with Confucianism, Buddhism and Taoism
as were many other Chinese scholars, and became the founding President of Kiang Nan
University.
The Yung De-sheng family donated five thousand acres of land, beside the most beautiful
lake T'
ai Hu. This was to be the center of a resurgence movement of Asian religions and
culture. My purpose was to revive Asian religions and destroy Christianity. I was fortyfive years old. (290) Through a surprise change of plans he went to Indonesia instead of
India, and was invited to the opening ceremony for a new church. This became the
beginning of his life in Christ.

Kaneki Masuda, of Omuta, Japan, became a Christian four and a half years ago. Here'
s
part of his story:I had been a Buddhist for 40 years. I did all of the many and varied
ascetic practices of that religion, such as: standing under cold water falls, Zen practices,
sitting in Zen meditation in the snow and ice, all-night meditations, fastings, etc.
Furthermore, of the many sects of Buddhism, I chose to believe in the Fudo- the god of
fire. In my own way, I endeavored to serve that sect. And, now, I suddenly realize I am
71 years of age.
According to A Dictionary of Buddhist Terms and Concepts, Fudo is a Buddhist deity
who serves practitioners by defeating the obstacles and devils which hinder Buddhist

practice.He is popularly depicted as an angry figure surrounded by flames, holding a rope

and a sword. Fudo is among the deities called myoo. The Kodansha Encyclopedia
explains further:Myoo were originally non-Buddhist Hindu deities who were adopted into
the pantheon of ESOTERIC BUDDHISM.The deities have been especially popular in
Japan, chiefly since the introduction of esoteric Buddhist traditions in the 9th century.
The most popular of the myoo is Fudo; the temple Shinshoji (Naritasan) in Chiba
Prefecture is the center of the Fudo cult.
When Mr. Masuda went to the hospital for an operation, he took with him a
book his daughter had given him. He explains:I was totally ignorant of Christ, but as I
continued to read, I felt the depth of love and Christ'
s sacrifice of Himself and his family
to help others. I was half believing and half doubting, wondering if these things could
possibly be true. Anyway, I couldn'
t put the book down and read all night long. It was
time for breakfast the next morning when I finished the book. The story goes on, and he
was transformed by the amazing grace of Jesus Christ.

Conclusion
Jesus said, He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me,
scatters (Luke 11:23). Buddha is a false teacher. The teachings of Buddha and Jesus
cannot be mixed without causing a poisoning effect. To say that there are some good
morals in Buddhism is not enough, when the spiritual effect is to poison the soul against
God. If a glass of water is 99 % pure water, and only 1% poison, it'
s still fatal. Buddha is
often thought of as a man who was a spiritual pioneer searching for answers. The picture
is not quite as innocent as that though. He was also a man adrift on the fascination of his

own status. In the Acchariyabbhutadhamma-sutta (of the Pali canon), Buddha and other
bodhissattas are quoted as saying at their birth, I am the chief in the world, I am the best
in the world, I am the first in the world. Also, in the Pali canon (in the Majjhima) he is
quoted as saying, Alone am I the All- enlightened. This puts him beyond being a mere
innocent seeker. And yet, in other places, Buddha takes more of an agnostic view of
things: .the Buddha often declared that he was merely a '
guide'(Dh 276), not an
authority (D 2:100, 154), and that all propositions, including his own should be tested (A
1:188 f) (New Light From An Old Lamp- 5 lectures by Tan Beng Sin, Piyasilo). He
gave people mere speculations which in truth lead people farther from God and reality.

Coming back to my opening remarks about the Buddha sitting on a giant cobra, this story
is from the Udana of the Pali canon. Concerning the breaking of his bones for
distribution, this story seems to be a legend developed later. Working out of the
Mahaparinibbana of the Pali, Thomas writes, But the Mallas of Kusinara in their
assembly refused to make a division, as the Lord had attained Nirvana in their domain.
Then the brahmin Dona counseled concord, and proposed to divide the relics into eight
equal parts for each of the eight claimants (155). These relics are apparently his robe and
bowl and such items, since the Buddha was said to have been cremated: It burned
without leaving behind any of the skin, flesh, sinews, or fluid of the joints, or any ash and
soot (155). There are however two lists which mention five teeth as relics.

By contrast, Jesus Christ is alive and well (http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter

/articles/josh2.html)

, and has the power to transform any repentant sinner. Our problem as humans is not that
we have no SELF, as Buddhism asserts, but that our SELF is in rebellion against God.
But God made us, and He knows what'
s best for us. Our choice here boils down to the
sure Word of God as revealed in the Bible, or the empty speculations of Buddhism. We
are in fact commanded to make the right choice, and we are also shown demonstrable
love in Jesus'crucifixion on our behalf, but we have the ten witnesses (the ten
commandments) testifying to our guilt if we refuse. I want to ask you the reader, please
make the right choice.

The Buddhist Road Map by Scott Noble (waterpark777@yahoo.com)

November 6, 2004
In this paper I'
ll be focusing on Theravada Buddhism, since this form of Buddhism,
found mainly in Sri Lanka, Thailand, Burma, Cambodia and Laos, claims to resemble the
original teachings of Sakyamuni Buddha[i] most closely. Other schools claim this as
well, but historically speaking (not mystically speaking), the Theravada schools claim
seems to be the most substantiated. Much of what has been written on Buddhism
presents an idealized and incomplete portrait of Buddhist teachings. This is difficult to
avoid due to the vastness of the subject, but is enhanced by those who focus mainly on
the positive aspects of Buddhism, omitting the more difficult issues. In this paper I dont
claim to provide a comprehensive portrait, but I will attempt to address some of the more
obscure and lesser known core issues and dilemmas of Buddhism, showing that it is
indeed a fascinating system, but not one which will help a person fulfill their destiny in
life. I will also make some comparisons between Theravada Buddhism and Christianity

based on biblical principles. The paper will be presented under eight subtopics, namely
No soul (anatta[ii]), Rebirth, Nirvana, Karma, Women, Meditation, Science, and God.

No Soul (anatta)
Descartes is known for the phrase, I think- therefore I am. My high school history
teacher punished us with the following phrase: Im pink- therefore Im Spam.
Taking an entirely different approach to these evidences for identity, Buddhism
concludes with the concept I am not. In John Garrett Jones book, Tales and
Teachings of the Buddha: The Jataka Stories in relation to the Pali Canon, Jones takes a
look at how popular representations of the Buddhas teachings, as seen in the Jataka
Stories[iii], compare with the more orthodox Four Nikayas[iv] of the Pali Canon[v]. I.B.
Horner, former president of the Pali Text Society, gives Jones the following
recommendation in the foreword to Jones book: Mr Jones is well versed in both Jataka
and Canon, and is thus able to draw on both not only with apparent ease but also with
aptness and accuracy and dependable documentation. (vii) Jones in his chapter on
rebirth, addresses the doctrine of no soul, pointing out that, according to orthodox
beliefs, souls are not reborn, because Buddhism admits to no such entity:
Consciousness (vinnana) is one of the five khandhas[vi] which are dissolved at death.
Deprived of its physical basis, or, if we prefer it, its physical correlate, how could it
possibly survive death? In MLS I 313, 320f, Gotama does in fact vigorously refute the
heresy of a persisting consciousness (34).
The doctrine of no soul undermines the entire premise of the Jataka Stories, which are
supposed to be rebirth tales of Sakyamuni Buddha. Without a soul, what is the

connecting point from life to life? The answer usually given to that question is that the
karma of a being carries through. But, what does this karma attach itself to, if not to
the one to whom that karma was due? Daniel J. Gogerly in his 1885 edition of The
Evidences and Doctrines of the Christian Religion, (after 44 years of Pali study), wrote
the following:
The Buddhist religion is that which Buddha taught, and which is found in his
Sutras[vii], and not that which persons may hold who are ignorant of these
teachings. We shall in the first instance prove that Buddha teaches, that the person
by whom the actions were performed is not the same with the person who is
rewarded or punished: that the connection is not between the man who performs
the action, and the good or evil resulting from that action, but between the action
performed and its results, whoever may be the recipient of those results. This is
contrary to every known principle of justice, which associates the doer of the good
action with the reward, whereas in Buddhism the reward will follow the good
actions, but the performer of the good action will not be the recipient of the reward.
This results from Buddhas doctrine that there is no soul in man which
transmigrates, but that the whole of a man;- the whole of the panchaskandha[viii]
ceases at death. (54-55)
A belief in anatta would mean, for example, that when Adolf Hitler died, the aggregates
of his being dissolved, and then his enormously bad karma attached itself to someone
or something (maybe a lowly insect), having absolutely no consciousness of the evil
deeds done, or the reason for the suffering. Can this be called justice? WHO is
punished? WHO is rewarded in this system? When the word self is used in Buddhism,

such as self-improvement, be a refuge unto yourself, etc., this word is used for the
sake of convenience, as opposed to describing an absolute self. Walpola Rahula, in
What the Buddha Taught, responds to those who try to point to a self or soul in
Buddhism:
Those who want to find a Self in Buddhism argue as follows: It is true that the
Buddha analyses being into matter, sensation, perception, mental formations, and
consciousness, and says that none of these things is self. But he does not say that
there is no self at all in man or anywhere else, apart from these aggregates. This
position is untenable for two reasons: One is that, according to the Buddhas
teaching, a being is composed only of these Five Aggregates, and nothing more.
Nowhere has he said that there was anything more than these Five Aggregates in a
being. The second reason is that the Buddha denied categorically, in unequivocal
terms, in more than one place, the existence of Atman[ix], Soul, Self, or Ego within
man or without, or anywhere else in the universe. (56-57)
In spite of teaching that there is no soul, but that there is rebirth, Sakyamuni Buddha still
held to a conviction that the universe is not amoral. Concerning Buddhas conviction that
this is a moral universe, Jones concludes: He could not claim that this conviction had a
sound basis in the rational, analytical part of his teaching; indeed, it would seem to me
not too strong to say that there is a hopelessly irreconcilable contradiction between the
two (36). But, if there is no soul, why does a Buddhist go to such great lengths to be
free from rebirth, and why is it said that Sakyamuni proclaimed at the time of his last
birth (Dialogues of the Buddha II, 12), that it was his last birth? WHOSE last birth?

"For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul? Or
what will a man give in exchange for his soul? (Matthew 16:26).

Rebirth
In the popular story of Sakyamunis final birth and renunciation of worldly pleasures,
several questions arise. If Sakyamuni had really passed through virtually countless lives
previous to that one, why did his father need to shelter him from the harsher side of lifewhy was Sakyamuni so startled by the sites of death, poverty, and old age, when he
finally ventured out of the palace to see things for himself? If we are to take the Jataka
re-birth tales at face value, he would have been quite familiar with all of these harsher
realities of life- in fact according to the Jataka tales, he was sometimes a participant in the
cruel side of life. within this group is the one which depicts the bodhisatta[x] himself
as being, in one way or another, involved in killing or injuring. The stories concerned are
JSS 93, 128, 129, 152, 178, 233, 238, 246, 315, 319, 384. (Jones, 61). Among the 547
Jataka stories, he is twice said to have been a robber, once a gambler, and twice a giant
snake (Jones, 18-19). He would also have been familiar with suffering according to
Jataka 538, which states he had to spend eighty thousand years in the Ussada hell[xi]
(Jones, 43). So why was Sakyamuni so struck by the fact of death or suffering, as if he
had never experienced or seen these things? The common answer given to this question
is that previous lives must be remembered in a state of meditation, when the mind is free
from distraction, and more capable of reaching these deep levels of memory. But how
can the mind store such information when the mind and everything of which people are
said to consist (the five aggregates) are said to not survive death? Actually though, this

popular story of the Buddhas renunciation is not found in the Pali Canon.
In the Pali Canon, as a baby, the Buddha was said to have walked uprightly and
proclaimed that it was his last birth: Chief am I in the world, Eldest am I in the world,
Foremost am I in the world! This is the last birth! (D II, 12) How can a baby be so
mature as to speak these lofty words if there is no enduring soul? In the non-canonical
story, the problem of anatta arises because meditation does not explain how the 35 year
old bodhisatta could remember that which according to his own doctrine was not an
enduring soul. In the canonical story, the problem of anatta is still there, because his
doctrine of no enduring soul stands in contrast to a baby speaking from the perspective of
an enduring soul, relieved to see the end in sight.
The doctrinal mismatch between anatta and rebirth leaves the intellect unsatisfied, while
an attempt is made to appease the conscience with an invented morality: When two
propositions conflict, the simplest possible solution is to ignore one of them- which is
precisely what the Jataka does. There is no contradiction in the Jataka between the
doctrine of anatta (no soul) and the doctrine of a series of lives of the same individual
because the doctrine of anatta is simply ignored (Jones, 39). Sakyamuni did not want to
let go of morality, but his system is one which leads people to contradictions, both
intellectually and in merit distribution- both the villainous and the virtuous are said to
have no soul connection from one life to the next- and thus the ones receiving a particular
lot are not the ones who earned it.
But apart from these difficulties with rebirth, what about real life cases of people who
claim to have been reborn? Ernest Valea, in his online article Past-life recall as modern
proof for reincarnation, (www.comparativereligion.com/reincarnation1.html) quotes Ian

Stevenson, who is one of the foremost authorities in the field of re-birth/reincarnation

research:
In my experience, nearly all so-called previous personalities evoked through hypnotism
are entirely imaginary and a result of the patients eagerness to obey the hypnotists
suggestion. It is no secret that we are all highly suggestible under hypnosis. This kind of
investigation can actually be dangerous. Some people have been terribly frightened by
their supposed memories, and in other cases the previous personality evoked has refused
to go away for a long time (Omni Magazine 10 (4): 76 (1988)).
Valea points out that this phenomenon is called false memory syndrome, and that,
Courts of law know these dangers and most do not accept testimonies produced under
hypnosis or from witnesses that have been previously hypnotized. What about other
cases, where the memories are not evoked by hypnotism? Valea brings our attention to
the demographic of people who are usually targeted for this:
Almost all cases of spontaneous past life recall experiences are produced by children
who manifest them between the age of two and five, when their spiritual discernment is
almost nonexistent, especially concerning spirits. This situation makes them easier to be
manipulated by external spirits. As the child grows up, the entities lose their power of
influence upon him, which could explain why the past life memories are lost after the age
of 10.
In one case researched by Stevenson, a person actually had two personalities expressing
themselves at the same time. As in the cases of the children, where manifestations took
place when the individuals were at a vulnerable time in their lives (especially if their
parents were taking them to centers of spiritual activity), spirit possession or the person

acting as a medium is a likelier explanation. This interference by outside spirits shows

the extremely subjective nature of rebirth research. Valea concludes with Stevensons
conclusion:
For this reason Ian Stevenson, the well known researcher of this phenomena, was
forced to admit in his book Twenty Cases Suggestive of Reincarnation that the
cases he studied, as the very title of his book indicates, are only suggesting
reincarnation and cannot be considered proofs for it. Stevenson admitted: All the
cases Ive investigated so far have shortcomings. Even taken together, they do not
offer anything like proof (Omni Magazine 10(4): 76 (1988). If this is the case,
they could also be suggestive of spirit possession.
Seeing the possibility of outside spirits to deceive in this way, how are we to suppose that
a monk or nun who is meditating is immune to this outside influence? Meditation
actually swings the door wide open to such an influence. The monk or nun may
experience many things during their meditations and count them as confirmations of the
Buddhas doctrine. Are they though? Can we really count this as a confirmation when
they were trying to have such memories in the first place, and when the experiences are
largely subjective? Even if a person can reveal information they would not naturally
know, this information is something which outside spirits could know and transmit.
Why does a person need to be under hypnosis, or have the undiscerning mind of a child,
or be in an altered state of consciousness during meditation, in order to have such
memories? If rebirth is for real why isnt it obvious among the billions of people in
the world, regardless of cultural background? Why cant babies speak the language of
their former life or any language (besides gobbly gook) for that matter? This is

probably the reason for inventing the doctrine of anatta (explains the lack of memory).
This places the dilemma in the moral realm though (no real justice without a permanent
soul) and still does not solve the practical problem of having a connecting point from life
to life. it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment (Hebrews
9:27).

Nirvana
Childers in his Pali Dictionary, presents a very definitive answer to what nibbanam
(nirvana) is. He states, But a creed which begins by saying that existence is suffering,
must end by saying that release from existence is the highest good, and accordingly we
find that annihilation is the goal of Buddhism, the supreme reward held out to the faithful
observer of its precepts. (265) Annihilation may not be the best choice of words here,
but for another reason than one might think. Walpola Rahula, points out, Nirvana is
definitely no annihilation of self, because there is no self to annihilate. If at all, it is the
annihilation of the illusion, of the false idea of self. (37)
In explaining why some canonical verses speak of nirvana as bliss and others as
extinction, Childers shows that both are meant, but that the bliss is only a temporary
state before final extinction:
I have shown that the goal of Buddhism is annihilation, and that Nirvana is a brief
period of bliss followed by eternal death. It is of course conceivable that Sakyamuni
should have made Arhatship[xii] the summum bonum held out to his disciples. It may
even appear incredible to some that having imagined a state of blissful purity resulting
from a virtuous life, he should have made it end in annihilation. That he did so is

however certain, and it must be remembered that his denunciations of the evil and
suffering of existence are levelled not merely against transmigration but against all
existence whatever, and that the bliss of the Arhat is chiefly based on the consciousness
that he has rooted out Karma and may any day cease to exist. (268)
Rahula, likewise states that nirvana is ceasing to exist: There is a word parinibbuto used
to denote the death of the Buddha or an Arahant who has realized Nirvana, but it does not
mean entering into Nirvana. Parinibbuto simply means fully passes away, fully
blown out or fully extinct, because the Buddha or an Arahant has no re-existence after
his death. (41)
In Buddhist cosmology there are said to be 31 realms of existence, including various
heavens, hells, the earth, etc. In all 31 of these however, many of which are heavenly
bliss states, none of them are nirvana, because all of these are said to be prone to
impermanence and suffering. When even a heaven cannot be nirvana, we see again that
nirvana is beyond existence. Among the 31 realms of existence, the top 20 of these are
also said to parallel the meditative states. In other words a person who meditates is
supposed to be able to experience what these top 20 realms represent. The highest
meditative state a person can achieve, also represents most closely what nirvana is
supposed to be:
A ninth stage known as the attainment of cessation (nirodha-samapatti) is also
mentioned in some sources. In this stage all mental operations are completely suspended,
and even heartbeat and respiration cease. Life subsists simply in the form of residual
bodily heat. A person can, we are told, remain in this state for several days, eventually
emerging from it spontaneously at a predetermined time. This condition is held to be the

closest anyone can come to experiencing final nirvana while still alive, and is described
as touching nirvana with the body. (Keown, 91-92)
When even mental operations are suspended, we see that its not a far step from there to
complete cessation. And this is consistent with the Pali Canon teaching of a progression
towards more and more detachment, finally culminating in detachment from existence.
In a discussion of whether nirvana is taught as a state of bliss or cessation in the Pali
Canon, Jones comments, If this is the case [nirvana as bliss], I can find no basis for it in
the Four Nikayas. So far as I am aware, there is not one word in the Four Nikayas which
lends support to the idea of nibbana as some positive, transcendent state of bliss. (152)
In a footnote to this discussion, Jones brings to light the most commonly held view
among Theravada scholars: It is interesting to note that, while Jayatilleke, 1963, pp.
475f, does adopt a transcendentalist view of nibbana, his former pupil Kalupahana, 1976,
pp. 87f, rebukes him for this and reasserts the more commonly (in Theravada circles)
held cessationist view. (202)
A.L. Herman in his article Two Dogmas of Buddhism,[xiii] points out other difficulties
with nirvana, relating to both Mahayana[xiv] and Theravada Buddhism. The more recent
Mahayana school of Buddhism tends to hold more to the view of nirvana as bliss,
whereas the more orthodox Theravada school of Buddhism usually holds to nirvana as
cessation. Herman shows that regardless of which interpretation of nirvana is taken, it is
a dogma in dilemma:
The dilemma of nirvana holds that if nirvana is seen negatively as the total absence of
passion and desire and feeling then this is tantamount to being dead, and who wants to
pursue a goal that leads to death? Nirvana is suicide on this first interpretation. On the

other hand, if nirvana is seen positively as the presence of peace and tranquility wherein
all that I desire is fulfilled then desire is not ended or blown out and the whole intent of
nirvana is contradicted: nirvana is inconsistent on this second interpretation. But, the
dilemma of nirvana continues, nirvana must be seen either negatively or positively; there
is no third alternative. The conclusion of the dilemma is then that nirvana is either
suicidal obliteration or inconsistent continuance. (170)
Herman concludes with this somber note: The effect of retaining these ill-founded
dogmas in the face of these philosophic problems would be (has been) to move Buddhism
away from empirical truth and reason and closer to either a questionable pragmatism,
where truth is measured by sheer usefulness, or towards a non-rationalism and
mysticism where truth is abandoned altogether. (174) In the footnote to this conclusion,
Herman further explains, a questionable pragmatism and a non-rationalism and
mysticism, were precisely the routes subsequently taken respectively by Southern or
Theravada Buddhism, on the one hand, and Northern or Mahayana, Buddhism, on the
other. (174)
If we say that the more recent Mahayana view is correct, it flies in the face of the Pali
Canon, it being the nearest in time to what Sakyamuni actually taught. If Mahayanists
wish to assert a different interpretation, on what higher authority is this based? This
would be to negate the authority of the Buddha, and rely on mystical revelations instead.
If on the other hand, we concede that the view in the Pali Canon of cessation is indeed
what the Buddha taught, then speaking plainly, the Buddhist way amounts to if you are
really good, you get to be extinguished. It is no wonder Mahayanists have tried to
change this doctrine, but in vain as there is no authority to back up the claim. The

authority behind the original claim (of cessation) is also quite lacking though. Instead of
desire leading to suffering, and suffering being the chief characteristic of existence, there
is a way of hope and renewal. Instead of exiting from existence, Jesus Christ offers a
way to quench thirst in order to live meaningfully and eternally: Jesus answered and
said to her, "Whoever drinks of this water will thirst again, but whoever drinks of the
water that I shall give him will never thirst. But the water that I shall give him will
become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life."" (John 4: 13-14).

Karma
The system of Karma is one which has an appeal to people at the popular level, making it
seem that everything that happens is based on what is deserved-- if you do good, you
receive good; if you do evil, you receive evil. This seems to explain inequalities in the
world, as well as apparent injustices. But, lets take a closer look at the implications of
this system. Firstly, karma is said to be a natural law just like gravity, only that it
governs morality instead of governing matter, although matter is also said to be affected.
If it is just a natural law, doesnt that mean it could be subject to mutations just as the
laws of genetics are occasionally influenced by an unexpected (and in most cases
harmful) factor? How could we place our trust in such a system? Concerning this
dilemma, John Jones points out that, The morality of karmic consequences seems to call
in question the strictly impersonal nature of karmic processes since, if these are moral
processes, the only type of morality for which we have empirical evidence is that
associated with personality. There is thus a tension between the impersonal and the
moral attributes of karma (37).
The supposed effects of karma are listed clearly in the Pali Canon (Middle Length

Sayings III, p. 248- 253): This course is conducive to shortness of life-span, brahman
youth, that is to say making onslaught on creatures, being cruel, bloody-handed, intent on
injuring and killing, and without mercy to living creatures. The opposite of this is as
follows: This course is conducive to length of life-span, brahman youth, that is to say, if
one, by getting rid of onslaught on creatures [204] abstains from onslaught on creatures,
(and with) the stick laid aside, the sword laid aside, lives scrupulous, merciful, kindly and
compassionate to all living creatures. Since the opposite results are easy to guess, and
for the sake of brevity, Ill list a few more with only the negative consequences. The
ellipses () in these quotes are in the text itself (not something Ive omitted):
This course is conducive to many illnesses, brahman youth, that is to say being by
nature harmful to creatures with his handor with a sword.This course is conducive
to ugliness, brahman youth, that is to say being wrathfuland evincingresentment.
This course is conducive to being of little account, brahman youth, that is to say being
jealous-mindedof respect and reverence paid them. This course is conducive to
poverty, brahman youth, that is to say not being a giverof bed, lodging, light. This
course is conducive to being in a lowly family, brahman youth, that is to say being one
whodoes not honour one who should behonoured. This course is conducive to
being weak in wisdom, brahman youth, that is to saynot being one who asks: Or
what, being done by me, is for long for my welfare and happiness?
Thus the causes of a short life, illnesses, ugliness, being of little account, poverty, being
in a lowly family, and being weak in wisdom, are spelled out for us- these things are due
to bad deeds, words or thoughts done in previous lives. That these are descriptions of
causes from previous lives, can be seen in the first consequence: But if, at the breaking

up of the body after dying he does not arise in the sorrowful ways, the bad bourn, the
Downfall, Niraya Hell[xv], but comes to human status, then wherever he is born (in a
new existence) he is of a short life-span. This is the way karma explains inequalities in
life- according to what people deserve. In this system the poor deserve to be poor, and
the rich deserve to be rich, etc. This type of thinking seems to place the crippled person
in the same category as a criminal in jail, and the person with material possessions, in the
hero category. Are these conclusions really warranted?
All of the complex moral effects in a persons life are supposed to be recorded, not by an
intelligence, but by a mere energy force. Then, to compound the problem, the person
who dies is said to have no soul, raising the question of how this accumulated moral bank
account is reassigned. Karma is the conscience of the Buddhist system, but its practical
operation and existence is left unexplained. Jones writes of the Buddha, He seems to
have been convinced that, however much the rational, analytical part of his teachingespecially the doctrine of anatta- might seem to deny it, the laws governing sentient life
on this planet and beyond are not amoral. (36) The Buddha couldnt deny morality, and
yet he also couldnt synchronize it with his doctrine. Aside from these difficulties
though, we should ask ourselves, do we really want what we deserve, strictly speaking?
The system of karma supposes that a good deed can make up for a bad deed, like a bank
account of merit which could be added to or taken from. This kind of reasoning applied
to morality would not hold up in a court of law (judges dont pardon crimes based on
balancing out the good deeds against the bad deeds in the life of the accused). Biblically
speaking, morality is not like a bank account which can be balanced out subtracting bad
deeds from good deeds, or vice versa. Rather, morality is a set of obligations based on

relationships. Children have certain obligations to respect their parents, as parents have
obligations to care for their children. Husbands and wives, friends, workers and
employees, etc. all have certain obligations to one another. If a husband cheats on his
wife, but then gives his wife a wonderful present, will he then break even? Will he have
amended his violation as if it were a business deal? There is such a thing as forgiveness
in relationships, but morality is not just an impersonal formula that can be treated as a
bank account. Likewise, if a person admitted to murder, but then told the judge that even
though he had committed the murder, he had also given his lifes savings to a widow in
his neighborhood, would that judge cancel the punishment for the murder? He had
violated his obligations to love his neighbor (whom he murdered). The crime of murder
would still be punished, no matter how many good deeds the person had done.
Conversely, if a person lives an upright life and follows all of the laws of the land, does
the government then send this person a reward for their good behavior? That person was
simply fulfilling their obligations, so while the government would be appreciative, they
would simply see the person as behaving as they should. They dont get any bonus
points for that. Violations count against us, but good behavior is simply expected. Even
if a person does one hundred good deeds, but one bad deed, they have fulfilled their duty
one hundred times, but have one violation on their record. What would we think of an
employer who pays their employees 100 times, but the time after that doesnt pay them,
because of their supposed merit in already paying 100 times? Or, what would we think
of a hot-tempered teacher who refrains from temper loss with absent-minded students 100
times, but the time after that lets loose and gives one of them a good kick? Does that
mean the teacher then has 99 points (100 good deeds minus 1 bad deed)? The teacher

has fulfilled an obligation 100 times and has one violation on record.
People are obliged to forgive others for violations done to them, because they themselves
have their own lists of violations, though perhaps in areas differing from those offending
them: For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive
you. But if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your
trespasses. (Matthew 6:14-15). God on the other hand is not obliged to forgive,
because He is without sin. A judge in a courtroom, though not without sin, likewise has
no obligation to pardon a crime.
According to the Bible, not only good deeds are expected of us. Our obligation is to do
our best: "For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the
tax collectors do the same? And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more
than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so? Therefore you shall be perfect, just as
your Father in heaven is perfect. (Matthew 5: 46-48). If a person lives a horrible life,
accumulating a long list of cruel violations, but then reforms and lives the rest of life as
an upstanding citizen, is the past then balanced out? The reformed life lived was already
an obligation, but the former list of offenses is still on record. Likewise, when a criminal
has finished serving time for their crime, it doesnt erase the crime, because their best
was expected all along. Violations continue to accumulate throughout a persons life,
and included in that list is the violation of not forgiving others for violations against us.
The biblical system is an entirely personal one. Positive or negative morals cannot be
separated from relationships as being mere points. To rebel against morality is not just
to make a bad choice or to accumulate negative points. It is all relational. The laws of
the Bible are summed up in two commands love God and love people. To reject

morals is to rebel against a personthe One who created life. To properly acknowledge
obligations is also to change our relational standing: Therefore the law was our tutor to
bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. (Galatians 3: 24). First comes the
law and thus a realization of the extent of violations. With that realization, comes a
realization of the love of Christ, who being innocent died on the cross for our sins. With
that realization comes a yielding to Jesus Christ. Then things that were once
obligations, become things which are welcome: "No longer do I call you servants, for
a servant does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all
things that I heard from My Father I have made known to you. (John 15: 15)
On the other hand, to embrace morality, but to reject the relational aspect of morality is
like refusing a ride from a ship going across the ocean and trying to swim that incredible
distance. The Bible describes such a person as cursed, because they depend on their own
abilities and not on God: For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse;
for it is written, Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written
in the book of the law, to do them." (Galatians 3: 10). When our faith is in Christ the
violations that were against us are nailed to the cross.
It is hopeless for people to climb out of the mire of their misdeeds, by their own abilities.
And yet there is hope for everyone. Gods offer of forgiveness is not something that can
be earned, or demanded, but is a free gift of mercy for all who realize the extent of their
violations and truly repent- putting their trust in God, and not in themselves: For by
grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,
not of works, lest anyone should boast. (Ephesians 2: 8-9).
pt.2

The Buddhist Road Map

Women
According to the Pali Canon, it is said that someone can be born as a woman in one life
and then as a man in the next, etc. But, nowhere in the 500 plus Jataka lives (though not
an exhaustive list of Buddhas lives), nor elsewhere in the Pali Canon, does Sakyamuni
appear as a woman (although it is sometimes inferred that he must have been a woman at
one time or another). Jones writes, The most striking single fact is that, in spite of the
tremendous diversity of forms which the bodhisatta assumes, he never once appears as a
woman or even as a female animal. Even when he appears as a tree-spirit or fairy, he is
always masculine. (20) His close friend Ananda who appears in many of his lives,
appears only once as a woman (Jones, 113). Going further, Jones contrasts the doctrine of
the Jatakas with the Pali Canon in general:
But whereas the corrupting influence of an evil woman is the norm in the Jatakas,
virtuous women being merely exceptions which prove the rule, the possibility of a
friends becoming a corrupting influence is so remote that it is hardly ever mentioned.
This differs from the canonical position. There, unquestionably, sex and marriage are
bad, but so are love and friendship, since these involve one in personal attachments and
painful (or potentially painful) emotions. The only love which the canon can bless is that
which is quite detached and general; a boundless friendly mind for all creatures. (115)
Commenting on one of these virtuous women, Jones writes, That rare thing in the Jataka
stories, a virtuous woman, owes her virtue to merit acquired in a former birth- as a male!
(43) In the Pali Canon itself, the depiction of women is hardly better: yet, women

never tire of sexual intercourse and childbearing (GS I 72) and they never sit in court or
embark on business because they are uncontrolled, envious, greedy and weak in
wisdom (GS II 92f). (Jones, 78). Regarding the establishment of an order for nuns,
Jones writes, When Ananda prevailed upon Gotama to allow a separate Order for
women, he is reported to have been very gloomy about this. It would, he said, halve the
length of time for which the Dhamma[xvi] would be preserved in pure form. (Jones, 77;
GS IV 184f). In the Vinaya Pitaka (Book of Discipline V), a similar prediction is made
by Sakyamuni, when addressing Ananda:
If, Ananda, women had not obtained the going forth from home into homelessness in the
dhamma and discipline proclaimed by the Truth-finder, the Brahma-faring, Ananda,
would have lasted long, true dhamma would have endured for a thousand years. But
since, Ananda, women have gone forthin the dhamma and discipline proclaimed by the
Truth-finder, now, Ananda, the Brahma-faring will not last long, true dhamma will
endure only for five hundred years. (356)
Since women did go forth and five hundred years have already passed, the question
arises, is the above canonical passage false, or is it true in saying that true dhamma will
only endure for five hundred years? If we say it is false, then there is falsity in the Pali
Canon. If we say it is true, then it is still false, since five hundred years have already
passed, and thus true dhamma would no longer be around. In this same text, the
Buddha compares the influence of women to mildew: Even, Ananda, as when the
disease known as mildew attacks a whole field of rice that field of rice does not last long,
even so, Ananda, in whatever dhamma and discipline women obtain the going forththat
Brahma-faring will not last long. (356) Also in the above text (Book of Discipline V),

the eight conditions for allowing the women to join, are spelled out. Among these, here
are two examples, which highlight womens subordinate role to men in Buddhism:
A nun who has been ordained (even) for a century must greet respectfully, rise up from
her seat, salute with joined palms, do proper homage to a monk ordained but that day.
And this rule is to be honoured, respected, revered, venerated, never to be transgressed
during her life. (354); From to-day admonition of monks by nuns is forbidden,
admonition of nuns by monks is not forbidden. This rule too is to be honoured, respected,
revered, venerated, never to be transgressed during her life. (355)
Elaborating on this basic attitude, Tibetan (Tantric) Buddhism has taken it to more
extreme extents. Victor and Victoria Trimondi, in their book The Shadow of the Dalai
Lama: Sexuality, Magic, and Politics in Tibetan Buddhism, devote a large portion of
their 816 page volume (in German) to the topic of misogyny:
In light of the complexity of the topic, we have resolved to proceed deductively and to
preface the entire book with the core statement of our research in the form of a
hypothesis. Our readers will thus be set on their way with a statement whose truth or
falsity only emerges from the investigations which follow. The formulation of this
hypothesis is necessarily very abstract at the outset. Only in the course of our study does
it fill out with blood and life, and unfortunately, with violence and death as well. Our
core statement is as follows:
The mystery of Tantric Buddhism consists in the sacrifice of the feminine principle and
the manipulation of erotic love in order to attain universal androcentric power

(this book is not currently available in hardcopy in English, but the entire English
translation of the German can be found online:
http://www.trimondi.de/SDLE/Contents.htm)
Coming back to Theravada Buddhism, Jones explains the doctrinal gymnastics behind the
scenes of the Jatakas and the Pali Canon proper, related to women:
Why such an onslaught on the fair sex? I am convinced that JS 61 gives us the most
reliable clue to an answer. The stories are designed mainly to discourage young men from
family life and sexual involvement. Now, as we have seen, the canonical reason for
turning away from the entanglements of family life is that these are fetters, nourishing
the illusion of self and of attachment to other selves; only in the detachment of the
realisation of anatta (selflessness) can true peace be found. We have also seen that the
Jatakas studiously avoid the doctrine of anatta, since this would undermine their basic
premise: that the same person moves on from life to life.Thus women pay very dearly
for the Jatakas need to avoid the anatta doctrine. In becoming the scapegoat, they must
have found it very hard to retain any self-respect. A Theravada woman, bred on the
Jatakas, must have felt the dice were very heavily loaded against her- as must a layman
who hoped that his marriage, against all the odds, would turn out well. (99)
Instead of rebelling against Buddhism though, many women in Buddhist societies accept
their lower status as something they deserve based on supposed karma from previous
lives. Cleo Odzer, in the book Buddhism and Abortion, writes, Typically, women in
Thailand are undervalued in respect to men, a situation endorsed by the Buddhist
religion(33), and in surveying women in a Bangkok slum area, it was discovered that

Mostly, the women accepted their lot in the Buddhist belief that they were born as a
woman because of bad karma or a lack of sufficient good merit.(35)
In the Bible women are not seen as mildew, incapable of doing business, of lesser
status than even junior men, the cause of men being defiled, and deserving of any
suffering they may be facing. Women and men do have different roles and
responsibilities in the Bible, but the inheritance for believers in Gods economy is equal:
For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew
nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all
one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christs, then you are Abrahams seed, and heirs
according to the promise. (Galatians 3: 27- 29) In the book of Proverbs chapter 31,
written by King Lemuels mother, the virtuous woman is praised for being wise in
business dealings, being clothed in strength and honor, having words of wisdom on her
lips, and being trusted by her husband.

Meditation
Buddhist meditation is often presented as something neutral-- just meditation, as opposed
to being a religious activity. People from various worldview backgrounds are
encouraged to try it, on the assumption that its just a kind of mind training-- just as
physical exercise is body training. This is an attraction for someone who just wants to
have a unique, peaceful, or meaningful experience without necessarily buying into the
doctrines of the Buddha. But how neutral is meditation really?
In a rarely referred to portion of the Pali canon, a meditation time gone haywire is
reported:

Indeed there was one occasion so damaging to the Buddhas reputation as a peerless
charioteer of men that it is hard to think it would have been invented. I have never seen
it referred to in any of the books on Buddhism I have read. In KS V 284, we read that the
Buddha had commended the unlovely as a subject for meditation before he himself
went off for a fourteen-day retreat. On his return, he found the Order sadly diminished
because so many of the monks, contemplating the unlovely had as to this
bodyworried about it, felt shame and loathing for it, and sought for a weapon to slay
themselves- and had in fact, committed suicide. Ananda suggests that in future it might
be better if the Buddha would teach some other method of meditation. Gotama replies
with this suggestion and advises his monks to base their meditation on their breathing in
future. (Jones, 76)
To this day, the unlovely (such as a human corpse) is still a valid object of Buddhist
meditation, although other types of meditation, such as focusing on breathing, are far
more common. The above canonical passage raises the question of Sakyamunis
omniscience (which is claimed for him in other canonical passages). Did he know the
monks would commit suicide, and gave them this harsher form of meditation anyway, or
did he not know, and thus was not omniscient (this latter view is more commonly held
today).
Even in the more standard types of meditation, such as focusing on ones breathing, or
observing ones thoughts as though they were not ones own thoughts (being detached
from the concept of self and objectively observing the thoughts), there are dangers.
Rahula nonetheless encourages such meditation: Try to examine it as if you are
observing it from the outside, without any subjective reaction, as a scientist observes

some object. Here, too, you should not look at it as my feeling or my sensation
subjectively, but only look at it as a feeling or a sensation objectively. You should
forget again the false idea of I. (73) In his chapter dealing with Meditation on
Breathing, Paravahera Vajiranana relates Vipassana[xvii] meditation to breathing:
At the moment of insight he breathes in, breathes out, setting free the mind from the idea
of permanence by contemplating impermanence, from the idea of happiness by
contemplating painfulness, from the idea of self by contemplating non-ego, from the idea
of delight by contemplating repulsion, from passion by contemplating detachment, from
cause of origination by contemplating cessation, from clinging by contemplating
renunciation. (255)
Also related to a breathing meditation, Vajiranana writes, Thus in these two stages the
bodily element of respiration is said to be completely tranquilized. It is with a view to
attaining this state that he practises mindfulness of breathing in and out (243) In this
instance, the goal of breathing is not breathing! In a footnote, and based on
Visuddhimagga[xviii] 283, Vajiranana points out, There are eight states in which there
is no breathing: within the mothers womb, when one is drowned in water, in
unconscious beings, in the dead, in the fourth Jhana[xix], in the unconscious form-world,
in the formless world, and in Nirodha-samapatti, the attainment of the cessation of all
feelings and perceptions (243). Ernest Valea in his online article points out some further
dangers with Vipassana meditation:
the experiences that accompany Buddhist contemplation on the mental states (citta
samapatti) can be explained as misperceptions of the surrounding reality due to the
imposition of an abnormal way of functioning on the senses and mind:

As meditators passively watch their own mental states come and go without trying to
control them, these begin to fluctuate more and more rapidly and unpredictably. After a
while this chaotic activity creates the strong impression that the mental events are
springing into life on their own, from some separate source, rather than the observers
own mind. As meditators persist with this practice, they also notice that there is a definite
separation between the mental events being observed and the mind that is doing the
observing. As meditation progresses still further, both the mental events and the
observing mind begin to seem alien and impersonal, as if they do not really belong to the
observer. At about this point the meditators sense of self becomes confused and
weakened, and finally it disappears entirely for brief periods of time (E. Hillstrom,
Testing the Spirits, IVP, 1995, p. 114-115)
(www.comparativereligion.com/Buddhism.html)
When a person becomes a third person observer of themselves, and even renounces the
idea of self, it is like relinquishing the steering wheel and sitting in the passenger seat.
This presents the possibility of outside spirits entering in and having a very real and
dangerous influence, even if its only deception. Why does a person have to move into
an altered state of consciousness, in order to accept the higher truths? Would we not be
suspicious if a real estate agent told us we needed to take mind altering drugs before
appreciating the full value of the house being sold?
The ultimate goal of meditation, canonically speaking, is nirvana- freedom from suffering
via the non-existence of the individual. Many meditators who try Buddhist meditation at
the basic levels, do not have this as their goal. Their goal may be inner peace, mental
health, or just to experience something unique. Nonetheless, travelling farther along the

pathway of meditation, when the stated goal is nirvana, meditators become more and
more detached from their feelings, and become spiritually leprous. A person with
physical leprosy is someone who has lost the sense of touch (and thus is in danger when
leaning on a hot stove, not having an impulse to pull away, etc.). A person who becomes
completely detached from emotions becomes spiritually leprous, and may appear to be
quite peaceful, but is also unaware of emotions which give needed warning and provide
other healthy functions.
There are said to be states of bliss and even supernormal abilities attainable along the
pathway of meditation, but according to canonical teachings, these are supposed to be
rejected as distracting from the ultimate purpose- that of complete cessation (nirvana).
Thus the positive experiences of meditation are mere lures leading to the hook of
cessation. Speaking of the highest level of meditation (Nirodha-samapatti), Vajiranana
writes, But that which is experienced in the Nirodha-samapatti is the state of Nirvana,
namely the cessation of all mental activities, which is comparable to that of final Nirvana.
The final Nirvana is called Khandha-pari-nibbana, the complete cessation of the five
aggregates, and is attained by the Arhat at his death (467).
Apart from the dangers of meditation on a personal level, meditation does not deliver the
objective standard it claims. Meditation is sometimes labeled as scientific, because in it,
the claims of the Buddha are said to be experienceable. However, as mentioned before,
the meditators are instructed beforehand in what they can expect to experience. This
expectation removes objectivity since it conditions people to generate what is expected. If
the instructor tells them they can expect to see previous lives, they are already
predisposed towards that. Also, it is not objective, because there are wrong or heretical

views described in the Pali Canon. In other words, if someone meditates and experiences
something heretical- such as I do have an eternal soul, this will be rejected.
Buddhist meditation takes people who are relational by nature, and makes their mind
more like a machine. Even when the meditation is spreading compassion to all beings,
the focus is on ones own ability to direct the mind to this challenge, and the compassion
is meant to be a detached one. When the meditation is a concentration upon one object, to
the exclusion of all other thoughts, this silences the voice of conscience calling us to a
relationship with God, and sets the mind instead on a path toward increased detachment
and isolation. Proverbs chapter 18, verse 1 states, A man who isolates himself seeks his
own desire; He rages against all wise judgment. In isolation ones own desires may be
accomplished, but this situation can be compared to a child who would reject the care of
loving parents who provide good food and friendship, and wants to instead go live in the
forest- rejecting offers of food, rejecting clothing, rejecting offers for education, etc. Such
a child would have difficulty surviving and would eventually lose the ability even to
communicate with the parents. Meditation in the Bible means to consider Gods
principles and character, spending time with God. Its a relational process of God
feeding His children and communicating with them, taking away the burdens in life
and providing wisdom.

Science
This is the topic which brings to light Sakyamunis claims to omniscience (or the Pali
Canons claims on his behalf). How credible is the Pali Canon as a book of facts? If
Sakyamuni Buddha did not inspire these writings either directly or indirectly, where is
the standard by which truth is measured? And, if it is claimed that the Pali Canon was

inspired by the Buddha why does it contain so many factual errors? If the Pali Canon is a
mix of truth and error, entrusting ones destiny to its teachings would be like entrusting
oneself to a doctor who prescribes both good and harmful medicines-- a real gamble. All
of the scriptural quotations in this science section are from the Pali Canon proper, not its
commentary.
In the Digha Nikaya (Dialogues of the Buddha III; 137-139), are listed the 32 marks of
one who is supposed to become either a Buddha or a universal ruler. Among these marks,
it says he must have 40 teeth [as a baby! - the time when such an assessment is made
(Dialogues of the Buddha II; pp. 13-18)]. Ordinarily children have only half that amount20 teeth. A mature adult will have 32 teeth total (assuming they didnt play too much
hockey), or 28 teeth if the four wisdom teeth are removed. Fitting eight extra teeth into
the jaw of an adult would be quite a feat, but fitting 20 extra teeth into a babys jaw
would be a real stretch- both of the jaw and of its credibility!
Among the 32 marks, another one is that the potential universal ruler or Buddha must
have a large tongue. Just how large? In the Majjhima Nikaya (Middle Length Sayings II),
a brahman named Sela came to talk with the Buddha and was looking for the 32 marks on
himThen the Lord, having put out his tongue, stroked it backwards and forwards over
both his ears and he stroked it backwards and forwards over both his nostrils and he
covered the whole dome of his forehead with his tongue. (335). Wow. Although there
are many statues of the Buddha with various expressions, and in various postures, Ive
never seen one highlighting this aspect of his anatomy, and yet this is canonical.
When responding to Anandas question about the cause of an earthquake (Gradual
Sayings IV; pp. 208-210), the Buddha gives eight reasons. The first is a natural

explanation relating to the structure of the earth, while in the next seven reasons the
Buddha says the earth responds with quaking when various enlightened ones make
monumental accomplishments. In the first reason for earthquakes, we see some real
differences between what he says and what modern science knows about the structure of
the earth and the causes of earthquakes: Since, Ananda, this great earth rests on water
and the water rests on wind and the wind subsists in space; what time the great winds
blow, they cause the water to quake, and the quaking of the water causes the earth to
quake. This, Ananda, is the first cause, the first reason, of a great earthquake becoming
manifest.
This example and some of the following examples, demonstrate a lack of correspondence
with the way things are (the kind of insight the Buddha claimed to provide). These are
not just examples of miracles, which would have to be examined on an individual basis
according to the evidence for or against them. Rather, they are examples of reality
claims, which can be tested against modern and non-controversial knowledge of our
world (such as the layout of the continents, the height of the tallest mountain, the size of
the oceans, etc.).
In the Dialogues of the Buddha III, a description is given of human ancestors who lived
to be 80,000 years old, but gradually through various vices, their life-spans were reduced
to only ten years. At that time it is alleged that these humans married at five years of age,
and presumably conceived children at least by the age of nine if not earlier (since at age
nine old age would have already set in). These are clearly referred to as humans in this
text, and not monkeys. Then, with an increase in moral living, the humans are said to
increase their life-spans once again. If this story is only allegorical, why does the text

refer to a well known city as being part of this history/prophecy: Among such humans
the Benares of our day will be named Ketumati (73). Also, if it is allegorical, so is the
prediction of the future Buddha Metteyya, who is supposed to appear when human lifespans are back to 80,000 years.
In another reality claim coming from the mouth of the one who can fall into no error
(Dialogues of the Buddha III, 25), the Buddha says that there are fish in the great ocean,
which are anywhere from 100- 500 yojanas long:
And again, monks, the great ocean is the abode of great beings; these beings are there:
the timis, the timingalas, the timitimingalas, asuras, nagas, gandhabbas. There are in the
great ocean individualities a hundred yojanas (long), individualities two hundredthree
hundredfour hundredfive hundred yojanas (long). (Book of Discipline V, 333)
According to the Pali Text Society Dictionary, one yojana is said to be equal to 7 miles.
That means a fish which is 500 yojanas long would be 3500 miles long. Thats quite a
claim, considering that this distance would be about 700 miles longer than the USA is
wide (west to east)! Also, it would be quite a disproportional fish since the deepest spot
in the worlds oceans is about 7 miles deep, with the average depth being about 3 miles.
For one who claims to omnisciently describe things as they are whether in the spiritual
or the physical realm, it seems not too much to ask that he would be able to diagnose
physical ailments and prescribe suitable cures. In the fourth volume of the Book of
Discipline, there are a number of stories which make it plain that the Buddhas
knowledge does not even match up to modern standards, much less omniscience. In one
such case the Buddha puts his approval on consuming raw flesh and blood from swine:

Now at that time a certain monk had an (sic) non-human affliction. Teachers and
preceptors, although nursing him, were unable to get him well. He, having gone to the
swines slaughter-place, ate raw flesh and drank raw blood, and his non-human affliction
subsided. They told this matter to the Lord. He said: I allow, monks, when one has a
non-human affliction, raw flesh and raw blood. (274)
A non-human affliction here may refer to demon-possession as the footnote for this
passage points out. The cure approved of by the Buddha, is to let the non-human spirit
(a.k.a. demon) indulge itself in raw flesh and blood. Is there any disease for which this
would actually be a wise practice?
Why didnt the Buddha cast out such a foul oppressor as Jesus Christ often did? In
another contrast to the ministry of Jesus Christ, whose healing was often described using
the word immediately, the Buddha gives permission for various remedies, which are
often followed by the words, he got no better (278-279). Following such incidents is
another passage showing the Buddhas lack of appropriate remedies:
I allow, monks, a piece of cloth for tying over the sore. The sore itched. I allow you,
monks, to sprinkle it with mustard-powder. The sore festered. I allow you, monks, to
make a fumigation. The flesh of the sore stood up. I allow you, monks, to cut it off with
a piece of salt-crystal. The sore did not heal. (279)
When someone is so much in the dark regarding physical realities, why should we trust
him concerning much weightier, eternally significant, spiritual realities?
Lastly, because the theory of evolution seems to align itself to Buddhism pretty well (no
need for a Creator), does this mean Buddhism is therefore scientific? Firstly, the Buddha
didnt explain ultimate origins and said that speculating about origins is one of the useless

endeavors in life (since such speculation doesnt lead to Nirvana). But, also if there is no
Creator, how can we expect our world to have any morals (or any karmic justice), or any
beauty if everything came into being through random, mutated, impersonal chance?
Apart from the lack of cohesion between evolution and Buddhism, there is the more
fundamental problem- evolution is still a theory- and after all these years since Darwins
discovery, the evidence for evolution is not increasing, but decreasing. The famous
line-up of monkeys to men, for example, have been shown to be hoaxes, or completely
ape, or completely human. The missing links are still missing. The website
www.answersingenesis.org has articles, audios, and videos, presented by Ph.D. creation
scientists, offering evidence in support of a Creator of this world. To someone raised with
evolutionary thinking, a Creator may sound unscientific, but the evidence is there. To
dismiss this evidence without a fair examination would itself be unscientific. Should we
accept something just because it is the opinion of our age or in agreement with our moral
preferences in life? An objective person would be willing to follow the evidence where it
leads, even if that means to God.

God
In Jataka 543, questions are asked concerning a Creator[xx]: Why are his creatures all
condemned to pain? Why does he not to all give happiness. [sic] (Jones, 144). The
agnosticism/atheism in Buddhism and emphasis on self-effort, claim for humanity a
jurisdiction all their own. Suffering that is so evident in this world is often given as the
reason for rejecting a loving and powerful God. The book of Job in the Bible addresses
the problem of apparent injustices in this world. By making a judgement about their
circumstances, people presume to know all that can be known about the situation. Job had

a similar complaint, because from his perspective, he couldnt see any justice in what he
was facing. In response, God asked Job four chapters worth of questions (Job 38-41),
which made Job realize how limited his knowledge really is. Sitting in judgment on God
is presuming to know what is right based on our finite and limited perspective. What
knowledge does such a person have, that the Creator has not yet considered?
The vanity in this world should turn us towards our Creator for direction and renewal,
rather than supposing we can handle the problems on our own. Jesus taught his disciples
their need to humble themselves before God: Then Jesus called a little child to Him, set
him in the midst of them,
and said, Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children,
you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 18: 2-3). What we see in
this world oftentimes is unjust- the wicked prospering, the innocent facing trouble, etc.,
but we need to know the perspective of eternity, which includes a judgment day in which
God will judge the world in righteousness. In Buddhism, the question of Gods existence
is placed in the category of vain philosophical speculation-- supposing that this question
does not help a person end suffering through Nirvana. Thankfully, knowing God does not
lead us to Nirvana (non-existence). Also, considering Sakyamunis lack of omniscience,
it is hardly advisable to trust in his speculations about what is or is not a worthy pursuit.
If an appliance in our house is not functioning properly, we turn to the owners manual or
maybe call the maker of that appliance. Similarly, God who made us has the answers to
lifes dilemmas.

Conclusion
Looking at Buddhism plainly like this, if Buddhism were a journey, it would be a journey
in which the road map contains known false claims, the discoverer of this journey is no
longer around to offer any help, and ultimately one is extinguished when arriving at the
destination. Although Buddhism is a fascinating system, it leads people along a pathway
away from the God who loves them, away from incorruptible everlasting life, and thus
away from what we were made for- a life washed of our sins and relating to our Makermade possible not by earning it, but through Jesus Christ taking our punishment onto
Himself on the cross. To reject this is to reject a true road map to heaven[xxi], help for
the journey, and a guide who will not fail us. To acknowledge and accept this is to begin
a relationship of trust with our Maker. "For God so loved the world that He gave His only
begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.
For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world
through Him might be saved. He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who
does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the
only begotten Son of God. (John 3: 16-18).
References
Childers, R.C. (1979). A Dictionary of the Pali Language. New Delhi: Cosmo
Publications.
Gogerly, D.J. (1885). The Kristiyani Prajnapti or The Evidences and Doctrines of the
Christian Religion in three parts. Colombo: Christian Vernacular Education Society.

Herman, A.L. (1996). Two Dogmas of Buddhism. In Pali Buddhism Hoffman, F.J.,
Mahinda, D. (Eds.) Surrey: Curzon Press.
Jones, J.G. (1979). Tales and Teachings of the Buddha: The Jataka Stories in relation to
the Pali Canon. London: George Allen & Unwin.
Keown, D. (2000). Buddhism: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Odzer, C. (1998). Abortion and Prostitution in Bangkok. In Buddhism and Abortion.
Keown, D. (Ed.). Great Britain: Macmillan Press Ltd.
Rahula, W. (1999). What the Buddha Taught. Bangkok: Haw Trai Foundation.
Rhys Davids, T.W. & Stede, W. (1966). The Pali Text Societys Pali-English Dictionary.
London: Luzac & Company, Ltd.
The Debate of King Milinda: An Abridgement of The Milinda Panha. (1998) Pesala, B.
(Ed.) Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Pte. Ltd.
The Holy Bible: New King James Version (1991 printing). Nashville: Thomas Nelson
Inc.
The Pali Canon: Pali Text Society Version. Abbreviations of Pali Text Society books,
with Pali titles in parentheses: V = Book of Discipline (Vinaya Pitaka); GS = Gradual
Sayings (Anguttara Nikaya); D = Dialogues of the Buddha (Digha Nikaya); KS =
Kindred Sayings (Samyutta Nikaya); MLS = Middle Length Sayings (Majjhima Nikaya);
JS(S) = Jataka Stories (Jataka).
Trimondi, V. & Trimondi, V. (1999) Der Schatten des Dalai Lama: Sexualitaet, Magie
und Politik im tibetischen Buddhismus. Duesseldorf: Patmos- Verlag.

Vajiranana, P. (1987). Buddhist Meditation in Theory and Practice: A General Exposition

According to the Pali Canon of the Theravada School. Kuala Lumpur: Buddhist
Missionary Society.

[xvi] Dhamma can be translated as the body of teaching or the doctrine.

[xvii] Vipassana meditation is what makes Buddhist meditation unique, focusing on the
transitory (anicca), unsatisfactory (dukkha), and non-self (anatta) nature of existence.
[xviii] This is a non-canonical work, written by Buddhaghosa, but very well respected
among Theravada Buddhists.
[xix] Jhana is also spelled Dhyana. Rahula defines Dhyana as, trance, recueillement, a
state of mind achieved through higher meditation. (143)
[xx] In this case the creator referred to is Brahman, although this is actually an argument
against the existence of such a creator.
[xxi] For some examples of the reliability of the Bible, the following sites present some
evidence from history, archeology, fulfilled prophecies, etc.:
http://www.apologeticsinfo.org/resource.html
http://www.letusreason.org/Apolodir.htm
http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/menus/historical.html
http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/article-index-b_1.html