Amida and Jesus

Wow InLove! I love your pluralistic vision! And I think you are brave for following your path where it leads you. No need to apologize for 'clinging' to the name of Jesus! I look forward to hearing more about this enlightenment you've experienced.

But, who is Amida :eek: ? I must not have been paying close enough attention, or the name did not stick for some reason. *luna sneaks off to wiki to try to rectify her ignorance*

lunamoth,

take a look at my avatar........................."Amida Looking back"

She/he has her hands in the mudra of "peace/fearlessness" and of "expressing the teachings", yet she turns to look back, her first concern being for the fallen, the broken, the misfits, those often without the strength - or even the inclination - to come or follow.

Namu-amida-butsu! (simply a cry of gratitude, and loosely translated..........my foolish self is embraced by infinite compassion; embraced never to be abandoned )

:)
 
I recently read an interview with the Bishop (yes, Bishop) of the Buddhist Churches of America, which is the US “branch” of True Pure Land Buddhism. Their website is “under reconstruction” at the moment but I imagine there’s other stuff on the web.

s.
 
ps. Snoop. loved that Pure land stuff you posted.

Yes, it's lovely, isn't it? I found it by accident (as is often the case).

The John Cobb article was interesting too, so thanks for that.:)

s.
 
Hello, Everyone :)

Namaste.

Well, I'm pretty sure I am going to do this at some point, anyway. I thought now might be a good time, and I hope this is a good place to do it.

I mentioned to a friend of mine the other day that I have a vision. (Yes, I have visions.) I see Amida and Jesus walking hand-in-hand. I don't really know what this means, but I think it means just what it suggests. Not that Amida is Jesus or vice-versa, but that they might walk together in some way.

Maybe I see this because I know that as a Christian, I am able to walk hand-in-hand with followers of Amida. (I cling to that label because I love Christ, not necessarily because of any particular religious affiliation, although I do realize that by my claim, I am automatically bound in some way to certain philosophies. But I just can't let go of the Name--it isn't a step I can take for myself. I can be ousted or excommunicated or whatever, but I can't deny Christ, and so rejecting the label of "Christianity" is just too difficult for me to do, so maybe I am not supposed to.) Gee, I am rambling already....nothing like derailing one's own thread on the first post! :D

Anyway, I hope that by attempting to start this conversation, I have not offended. I am just curious as to how some others here might feel about what I have said. Anyone interested?

InPeace,
InLove
How can anyone be offended when Jesus himself said:
John 10:11-17 said:
11 “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep. 12 But a hireling, he who is not the shepherd, one who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf catches the sheep and scatters them. 13 The hireling flees because he is a hireling and does not care about the sheep. 14 I am the good shepherd; and I know My sheep, and am known by My own. 15 As the Father knows Me, even so I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. 16 And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd.
Don't worry about the wolf who wants to scatter the sheep. The Good Shepherd knows his sheep, and His sheep know him, even the ones "from different folds." :)
 
...and as for causing offence, watch this:

The Buddha was a gormless goon.

s.

How come you can talk about Buddha but not jesus? If I said.. jesus was a whiney little punk.... Imagine how many reports that would get.... I am sorry I am derailing this thread too.... Just bothers me how you can call one a name but not another.....

In regards to your "visions" I'd say they are just idle day dreams and dreams when you're asleep... If we go by visions... My latests vision will be me living with a wild pack of grey wolves and becoming their Alpha.... I doubt it is going to happen.... simple day dreaming is all.. Your's being connected to religion because you are more that way inclined, if I bought into this, I guess mine would be religious day dreams also.
 
Yo derailer,

I understand your point. I said what I said because I think this may (possibly!) be InLove’s first thread in this forum and (as ever) she was feeling at pains not to cause offence, because of putting a toe into unknown waters and because of what it’s like on her usual “stomping ground”. So I just wanted to put InLove at ease by being rather over the top to make the point that it’s OK to talk freely here without fear of censure. Maybe someone will come along and say “Hey I’m a Buddhist and you’ve offended me, you ignorant toe-rag”. I doubt it, but if it does happen I think I’ll be able to cope.

Whether or not it’s OK to be so “offensive” about other religious figures such as you cite I would have to leave to others to comment on. I can obviously imagine the kinds of responses you’d get; but if the Buddha does block the road to my liberation I will kill him. (or to put it more gently, when you reach the other shore, you no longer need the boat).

I presume you mean InLove’s visions not mine. Mine are usually more mundane.

s.

PS Of course the CoC is an entirely different matter!
 
Namaste all,

on a working level, i wouldn't imagine that there would be any issues with using visualization of Jesus in ones meditational practice.. what value there would be, however, is not clear to me. how did your vision arise, through meditation?

that said, there is a well established tradition of Christian meditation so one need not go outside their paradigm to experience the benefits of meditation.

perhaps i'm being overly technical but i wouldn't characterize it as "followers of Amida" as this school falls under the rubric of Buddha Dharma and its followers would more aptly be considered to be followers of Buddha. the question may be "which Buddha" but that is a question which is, from the Buddhist point of view, ultimately nonsensical.

let me address the Buddha name calling thing and how it differs from Jesus name calling, in my view.

clearly, the CoC overrides any individual interpetations of what may be deemed offensive.. in this case, i do not think that any offense was intended nor comitted. in truth, to designate a Tathagata by way of qualities or charactersitics is to miss a subtle but vital aspect of the Dharma that is "Good in the beginning, good in the middle and good in the end".

metta,

~v
 
Yes, it's lovely, isn't it? I found it by accident (as is often the case).

The John Cobb article was interesting too, so thanks for that.:)

s.
What Cobb could put far more eloquently than me with his superior intellect (superior to mine anyway:) ) reflects my own current thoughts-that on the very deepest level in some way when we speak of Amida and of Christ we are essentially discussing the same thing for the reason he gives. It is the same river of compassion and wisdom flowing through different channels. It will reach some by "Buddhist" ones, others by "Christian," ones. Maybe when we're in the flow names mean nothing to us but all of us typically need to use a channel most suited to our own dispositions to begin to find that flow it seems. have a good one, earl
 
Maybe we are putting names to something that has no name?


The God who is pure emptiness
Is created as form:
Becoming substance, light and darkness,
The stillness and the storm.

- Angelus Silesius.
s.
 
Now as Luna is an Episcopalean(sp?), this one's particularly for her;) : it's the the website of John Keenan, a religion professor, deacon of an Episcopal church, and avid participant in Christo-Buddhist interchanges. His website has several of his old articles where he fleshes out what he calls "Mahayana theology."

Mahayana Theology

InLove-you got my heretical Christo-Buddhist juices agoin' earl
 
"For example, Pure Land Buddhism; which prescribes loving devotion to one such Buddha, Amida Buddha. It became, and possibly remains, the most popular school of Buddhism in Japan, from where it originated."

Pure Land was a purely Chinese origination.

In the southern regions, isolated from the influence of India, Buddhist doctrines became increasingly influenced by Chinese ideas, a keen interest in Buddhism was shown by the ruling elite, and indigenous forms of Buddhism first began to appear. In 402 C.E., Huiyuan (慧遠), the First Patriarch of the Pure Land school of Buddhism founded a monastery on Mount Lushan (廬山) in what is now Jiangxi province. However, his early education had been in the Confucian classics, and he had also studied and mastered both Zhuang Zi (莊子) and Lao Zi[FONT=&quot][1][/FONT] and therefore both his teachings and written texts relied on Taoist and Confucian terms and concepts.[FONT=&quot][2][/FONT] Therefore, his interpretations of Buddhism modified the original Buddhist teachings, clearly bringing the traditions closer together of a doctrinal level. He was also the first to endorse salvation through faith in Amitabha (阿彌陀佛), and thus laid the foundations of the Pure Land Sect of Buddhism, which, based on the teachings of the Pure Land Sutra (無量壽經). The sutra begins as a discourse between the Buddha and his closest disciple and personal attendant Ānanda (阿難/阿难). The Buddha explains his awareness of the existence of a multitude of Buddhas, who are also aware of him. He then details a lineage of Buddhas that existed before him, starting with Dipankara (燃燈佛), a Buddha said to have lived on earth for one hundred thousand years, all the way to the 53rd Buddha, Lokesvararaja Buddha, who lived long before the birth of the historical Buddha. The scripture then tells the story of Dharmakara (法藏), a king who lived eons ago, who met Lokesvararaja Buddha, and was so impressed by his sermon that he become a monk who renounced his royal status to pursue enlightenment. The similarity to the life story of the historical Buddha who was born son of King Suddhodana of the Shakya clan in Nepal should be noted. Dharmakara vowed to become a Buddha to be worthy of gaining a land of bliss, the Pure Land, whose inhabitants would be assured a life of bliss until they earned entry into Nirvana (涅槃), the state beyond the cycle of death and rebirth. Through his efforts, he attained this, and became the Amitabha Buddha (阿彌陀佛) The sutra describes the Pure Land and its inhabitants in glorious detail. It also details how sentient beings are able to attain rebirth into it. The text also provides a detailed account of the various levels and beings in the Mahayana Buddhist cosmology, laying a framework for the Mahayana pantheon of deities. The sutra also contains the Forty-eight vows made by the Amitabha Buddha to save all sentient beings. The eighteenth vow is among the most important as it forms a basic tenet of the Pure Land school. This vow states that if a sentient being makes even ten recitations of the Amitābha Buddha's name, they will attain rebirth into the Pure Land. This shortcut to a land of bliss proved popular with the common people unable to comprehend the subtleties of more complex Buddhist philosophies, and was destined to become the most popular school of Buddhism in eastern Asia, including Taiwan.

[FONT=&quot][1][/FONT] Cited at Zhuangzi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[FONT=&quot][2][/FONT] Buddhism in Chinese History. Wright, A. Stanford University Press 1959, SMC publishing, Chapter 3



By the way, if anyone could help with the question I posted "Buddhist deities adopted into Taoism" in this forum, would appreciate it very much.
 
It is the same river of compassion and wisdom flowing through different channels.

earl,

your words above capture my own thoughts in a way far more simple than the convoluted attempt I was about to make to express my views! Pure Land is not Christianity, and Amida is not Christ...........Historically each has expressed themselves in different ways. Why on earth does anything have to be the same as anything else? (And how could that be anyway, without returning to the "uncarved block" !) Surely people can walk "hand in hand" with each other without needing to agree on everything?

In the end "views" will ebb away within the reality of true wisdom................

:)
 
Thanks to everyone who has contributed to this thread so far. The links offered here are making for some very interesting reading. I haven't quite caught up on all of them yet, as I tend to go linking from the originals, hehe.

I've been so busy, and now I've got to rest a bit. I decided to stop in and just say so, so you guys wouldn't think I've gone missing. ;) :)

I have lots of thoughts that would like to go free, but they must for practical purposes here find their way from brain to fingertips to screen. And apparently, that just ain't happenin' until I get some shut-eye! Such are the shackles of my present vehicle. Then again, an afternoon nap has its own beauty. :)

InPeace,
InLove
 
Thanks to everyone who has contributed to this thread so far. The links offered here are making for some very interesting reading. I haven't quite caught up on all of them yet, as I tend to go linking from the originals, hehe.

I've been so busy, and now I've got to rest a bit. I decided to stop in and just say so, so you guys wouldn't think I've gone missing. ;) :)

I have lots of thoughts that would like to go free, but they must for practical purposes here find their way from brain to fingertips to screen. And apparently, that just ain't happenin' until I get some shut-eye! Such are the shackles of my present vehicle. Then again, an afternoon nap has its own beauty. :)

InPeace,
InLove
Sweet dreams! ;)
 
Namaste Everyone,

My apologies ahead of time for the long post. There is some apparent rambling involved, but I am offering those ramblings in order to help explain how I came to my current musings. Out of necessity, I have used some Christian terminology, but hopefully it will not be taken as a sermon of any kind!

Vaj, you asked me about whether I was introduced to these thoughts through meditation. I suppose one could call it meditation, but it seems more like a state of being to me. I guess I might describe it as “praying constantly”. But there is no set formula to these prayers most of the time, save that the Name of Jesus is always present—but it isn’t Christ to whom I pray. It is through Him, and I see Him as my constant Companion, because of the Holy Spirit of God. When I say I have “visions”, I don’t mean that I am special in any way. I think perhaps this is something available to everyone. Moreover, I think many do experience visions (as well as other things), but maybe do not attribute them to the Source in exactly the same manner, or place such importance on them. In fact, some Christians are appalled by such claims, as they believe that visions are no longer valid, and therefore based in lies. Needless to say, I disagree. After all, there is, in this existence, an element of individual perception, although ultimately, this may not be the most desirable way of seeing. For me, it has developed over time, and because they have been so helpful to me, I have learned to trust these experiences when they arise. And I profoundly hope that in telling about this, people realize that I am not holding my self forth as someone with “special knowledge” or something like that. It is just the way I am able to relate. And I know I am not alone, but I think it is a subject that is difficult to discuss, as it can set one up for so much scrutiny. And it can be a dangerous thing to tell, especially in some contemporary communities, whether religious or secular. Some of the things I say here in CR, I would not say in a non-virtual environment, except to those in my family and my very closest friends, because these folks have witnessed how it all plays out.

Anyway, as far as the “established Christian traditions of meditation” go, I find it terribly limiting, and nearly impossible to fit sincerely and neatly into any particular pocket of Christian theology (and this is most definitely not from a lack of effort!), or to experience prayer any less than all the time. I am aware that sometimes I sound quite fundamentalist to many liberals, but at the same time, most fundamentalists seem to think I am a radical liberal. So where and when do I rest? Where can I live? The answer is “in the present moment”. I have said it before, but I’ll say it again for purposes here: To me, it is in this very moment, each moment, where the past and the future meet. There aren’t many ideas that I believe in so strongly as this, but my experience so far proves it to me. To me, it is both logical and spiritual--and even Biblical. Exactly how this might embrace various Buddhist philosophies, I am not sure, but it does seem to want to weave its way in somehow. And for me, at the present moment, it does seem to involve Amida Buddha (oh, and by the way, I did hesitate to use the term “followers” in my previous post. I kind of knew that wasn’t quite right, but I am learning.)

The best guess I have about the reason for this is that in the Pureland Tradition, there seems to be a particular emphasis on (I hope I say this correctly) kyosei. From what I understand, this is about the idea of us all being born together. So, even though I may face physical death apparently alone, I am connected with others. And we are basically all One. There is purpose in physical death, and it is beneficial, not only to me, but to “posterity”. The reasons for this may be explained differently in Buddhism than in Christianity, but in me there is no conflict here. I won’t go into a drawn out analysis about this as this post is getting pretty lengthy already! In fact, I should probably wrap it up, for now.

I appreciate and welcome the conversation, all the links and comments provided, and even any concerns posted. I will write some more in a day or two. In the meantime, I love the following so very much:

“...my foolish self is embraced by infinite compassion; embraced never to be abandoned…”

If I see Amida and Jesus walking together, perhaps it is here. I know it may be hard to put together. I call on the Name of Christ as my Saviour, and I realize that Buddhism doesn't need this. Christ is an expression of Love that I choose to carry with me. But I feel certain that Amida walks in compassion, and at present, I see no threat for me from this vision. :)

InPeace,
InLove
 
So where and when do I rest? Where can I live? The answer is “in the present moment”. I have said it before, but I’ll say it again for purposes here: To me, it is in this very moment, each moment, where the past and the future meet. There aren’t many ideas that I believe in so strongly as this, but my experience so far proves it to me. To me, it is both logical and spiritual--and even Biblical. Exactly how this might embrace various Buddhist philosophies, I am not sure, but it does seem to want to weave its way in somehow.



So, even though I may face physical death apparently alone, I am connected with others. And we are basically all One. There is purpose in physical death, and it is beneficial, not only to me, but to “posterity”. The reasons for this may be explained differently in Buddhism than in Christianity, but in me there is no conflict here.
InPeace,
InLove

Hi InLove,

I would say (if you are exploring the extent to which your ideas compare with “Buddhism”) that these are two key ideas: life is only in the present moment and everything is inter-connected. We all need to learn from our past experiences and make plans for the future but living is here and now. The present that is gone (the past) are now memories and the present that may or may not occur (the future) are currently fantasies in our mind. But the living is in the now. On a Buddhist’s watch it always says “NOW”. The interconnectedness (interbeing – Thich Nhat Hanh) of all phenomena (physical and psychological) is called Pratitya Samutpada and from this flow the Seals of Existence, The Four Noble Truths and The Noble Eightfold Path. But you know this already, whether or not you know these terms.


s.

PS your posts are never too long BTW!
 
Thanks, Snoopy--I do think it is sometimes possible to understand various concepts without knowing exactly how to put them into words--at least words that are part of any particular tradition.

For example, my frequent use of the term "spirit". I doubt seriously that this term will ever leave my vocabulary--I would not want it to! Kind of like someone ceasing to speak English simply because she learns Spanish. Makes no sense at all. Then again, it would make little sense to speak Spanish in a room full of folks who speak only English, unless of course, it was a language comparison study. The idea of "spirit" goes a little beyond this analogy, but anyway....I ramble....blah, blah, blah....:D

InPeace,
InLove
 
Back
Top