Buddhism and Christianity: A Parallel and a ContrastScott, Archibald
Religion
Buddhism and Christianity: A Parallel and a Contrast
Scott, Archibald
Buddhism -- Relations -- Christianity; Christianity and other religions -- Buddhism
understand, and they seem to have been published, as Saint-Hilaire
observes, in a language so “simple and vernacular” as to induce even the
children and the ignorant to enter the paths that lead to
deliverance.[182]
He entered upon his travail, in order to find a way of escape from the
endless cycles of unsatisfying change, and he believed that he had
discovered it. Leavening every part of his system is his impression of
the universality of suffering; and suffering, its origin, its
extinction, and the path or method that leads to its extinction, are the
so-called “four noble truths” which constitute in Buddhism the “Law of
the Wheel.” In Buddhism the wheel is the dominant symbol, corresponding
to the cross in Christianity, and he who would preach or roll onward the
wheel must present to the affectionate consideration of the hearers
these “four sacred verities”—the verity of suffering, the verity that
concupiscence is the cause of suffering, the verity that concupiscence
can be quenched in Nirvana, and the verity that the way that leads to
Nirvana is the sublime eightfold path of Buddha’s law. From his first
public discourse at Benares—corresponding to our Lord’s Sermon on the
Mount—on to his last words on the night on which he died, this, with
manifold amplifications, but ever as the one pathetic refrain, is the
substance of his teaching, “through not understanding and grasping
which, O monks, we have had to run and wander so long in weary paths,
both you and I.”[183]
The primitive creed of Buddhism was different from, though not wholly
antagonistic to, the popular creed or theory of life of Brahmanism.
Weighed by Brahmanism, existence was found wanting, as only illusion, a
specious something which truly was a mere nothing, and identity of the
personal with the universal self was the only reality. By Buddhism
existence was condemned, not as an illusion, but as wholly and solely
suffering.[184] “What think ye, O disciples: whether is more, the water
that is in the four great oceans, or the tears which have flown from
you, and have been shed by you, while ye strayed and wandered in this
long pilgrimage, and sorrowed and wept, because that which ye abhorred
was your portion, and that which ye loved was not your portion?”[185] It
was not “vanity of vanities!” but “misery of miseries! all is misery!”
Life was misery, because governed by the immeasurable and wretched past;
death was misery, because opening up an equally immeasurable and
wretched future. As long as man exists he must be miserable, unable to
“cease his wanderings,” and “still from one sorrow to another thrown.”
The only deliverance conceivable from this interminable evil would be to
break the bands of existence altogether. “Surely ’twere better not to
be.” And how “not to be” seems to have been the problem which Buddha
professed to solve.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account