The Bay State Monthly — Volume 1, No. 3, March, 1884 — John Shaqi
The Bay State Monthly — Volume 1, No. 3, March, 1884Various
History
The Bay State Monthly — Volume 1, No. 3, March, 1884
Various
Massachusetts -- Periodicals; New England -- Periodicals
It will be seen that the Buddhist idea of spirituality is very unlike
our Christian idea. The thought of man's higher sense striving after the
Divine, the whole conception, in short, of what the word spirituality
suggests to modern thought, is impossible in a system of philosophy
which has no personal God. To apply the term religion to a scheme which
has no place for the dependence of man upon a conscious protector, is to
use the word in a sense entirely new to us. Buddhism--notwithstanding
its claims to revelation--is a philosophy, not a religion.
I have sketched, as well as I can in so short a time, what seem to
me the main points in the book under review. There are many things
unexplained. Of some of them, the author claims to have no knowledge.
Others he does not make clear; but, "take it for all in all," the hook
will probably give the reader a very great number of suggestions. I am
heterodox enough to say that if the idea of a personal God, the Father
of all, were superadded to the system (or perhaps I ought to say were
substituted for the idea of absorption into Nirvana), there would be
nothing in Buddhism contradictory of Christianity. What orthodox
Christians of the present day and of this country believe with regard to
eternal punishment is a question about which they do not altogether
agree among themselves. Whether the so-called hell is a place of
everlasting degradation, is a point on which those who cannot deny to
each other the name of Christian are not in accord. Why, then, should it
be thought heretical to maintain that the future world of _rewards_
is _also_ not eternal? I believe that the Christian Scriptures use
the same words with reference to both conditions--
"[Greek: To pyr to aionion:--eis xoen aionion.]"
The Buddhist denial of the eternity of the condition next following the
separation of soul and body cannot, I think, be pronounced a subversion
of Christian doctrine by any one who will admit that the Greek word
[Greek: aionios] _may_ mean something less than endless.
Of the antiquity of Buddhistic philosophy, I have already spoken
indirectly. Buddha came upon the earth only 643 B.C. But he was not the
founder of the system. His purpose in reincarnating himself at that time
was to reform the lives of men. Doubtless he made many explanations of
doctrine, perhaps gave some new teaching; but the philosophy comes down
to us from, at least, the times of the fourth root-race, the men of
Atlantis.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account