Introducing Buddhism. Kodo Matsunami
that we can avoid partial judgement and disrespect of either of these religions. Thirdly, we must make certain qualifications and clarifications of the terms and concepts found in both religions so that we can avoid the semantic discrepancies and ambiguities of these religious thoughts. Particularly, we must be careful about the translations of Buddhist terms and concepts into English or other Western languages. Such terms as grace, justice, righteousness, prayer, sin, etc. are quite foreign to Buddhism, and yet some Western scholars have misused them as Buddhist terms. With the above mentioned precautions, we can safely proceed to the comparative study of Christianity and Buddhism.
Superficially speaking, there are certain similarities in both religions. They have been founded on the same assumption that there is an ultimate truth, often interpreted as the saving power which transcends the individual. The founders, Jesus Christ and Gautama Buddha, perceived and experienced the ultimate truth and revealed it to their respective followers in their historical and cultural settings. And the teachings they revealed aim at the salvation of all mankind. In order to bring us greater relief they require us to have individual or collective faith and to do certain religious practices. Therefore, from the beginning their teachings have been evangelic, desiring that the rest of the people could be embraced in their teachings. However, these similarities do not necessarily mean identities. There are certain differences in the content of these similar frameworks, namely in perceiving and experiencing the ultimate truth by the founders of these religions. They must be carefully examined in terms of their doctrinal implications.
First of all, the most basic difference between Christianity and Buddhism lies in their concepts of God and Buddha. In Christianity, God is the creator of the Universe in which the world and human beings exist. He is the judge since He is responsible for what He has created in this Universe. He is the Almighty and has the power and authority to intervene the Universal Law of cause and effect. He is the Holy Other so that we can never become God. On the other hand, Buddha is not a god who has supernatural powers but a human being who was enlightened to perceive the ultimate truth. In Buddhism, the known and unknown universe has existed from time immemorial, and though it is in constant flux, nothing can be added or detracted from it due to the law of cause and effect. Buddha is embodied and identified with all sentient beings, and is also subject to that law. He is immanent in us though being distinct from us. Therefore, in Buddhism a personalistic concept of God is quite foreign. The traditional Western reaction has been to label Buddhism as "atheistic." However, Buddhists have their own basic presuppositions in their encounter with the transcendent.
Secondly, in conjunction with the above, there are different views of man in each religion. In Christianity, God created man in His own image by breathing into him an entity called the soul. Because of this soul, man is called superior to the rest of the world. God gives man the right to rule it and use it, since it was made by God to serve man's needs. On the other hand, Buddhism does not talk about man as a distinct entity with an individual immortal soul existing against the rest of nature. Buddhism considers the universe in a unitary way. It does not speak of God and the world, but only of Buddha-nature which is immanent in man and in this mutually inter-relating and inter-penetrating world itself. Therefore, all life is considered most precious and sacred for each speck of life, no matter how insignificant it may seem, has its meaning in the overall universe.
Thirdly, there are differences in the view of man's life problem. In Christianity, the existence of misery and pain is due to man's disobedience or transgression of God's will. Sin originated in the days of Adam and Eve and was a punishment for man's disobedience to God's commandments. Jesus was crucified and redeemed for man's sins, and his whole life was a revelation of God's wish for man's salvation. With this destiny sin-ridden man is helpless unless he repents his sins and is saved by the love and grace of God through faith in Him. So Jesus said, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel." His gospel is directed toward the sinners, and not the righteous, and those who have no faith in Him will be punished at the final judgement. On the other hand, the concept of original sin is quite foreign to Buddhism. What Gautama revealed is the Oneness of Life, the experience of the basic identity of all life though having distinctions within it. Because of man going against Oneness by affirming the egoistic Manyness, he suffers. Gautama only taught through his own struggles of life problems, the existence of suffering and the way to overcome it. Suffering is, therefore, a product of man's individual or collective ignorance of the ultimate truth. It is of man's own making due to his imperfections as found in the individual, social, moral and spiritual levels of his existence. Gautama said, "Awake to the reality of life, and know what you are in the context of your surroundings." His gospel is directed toward all who suffer regardless of whether they are sinners or righteous.
Based on these doctrinal assumptions, Christianity and Buddhism have created and developed their symbols, philosophical systems, rituals and disciplines, and have appealed to those who are sinful and suffering. Western scholars in their treatment of religion are primarily concerned with doctrinal problems. But the actual religious life does not consist of doctrines but of other practical elements in every day life. Therefore, we must make clear distinctions between the doctrinal teachings of religions and the experiential content found in the consciousness and behavior of their followers. I have attempted this comparative study of religions in the first sense, and leave the other to the readers, because to study a religion means to experience it, the implication being that there is no other way to study it.
When we glance at the phenomenal side of these two religions, we can not ignore the fact that they are deeply affected by the natural climate and the temperament of those who support them. Some scholars presuppose that Christianity was originated in the vast expanse of cattle-breeding waste land, whereas Buddhism was originated in a fertile farm land. They have spread into the West and East respectively, and formed different cultural patterns among their followers. Accordingly, the characteristic of Christianity is more likely brutal as symbolized in the crucifixion of Jesus Christ on the cross, and that of Buddhism is tranquil as symbolized in the passing-away of recumbent Buddha. Furthermore, it is generally said that the former emphasizes the complete distinction between God and man, subject and object, love and hate, etc. whereas the latter emphasizes the identity of these two opposite components. Therefore, the attitude of Christians seems to be logical, straight-forward and intolerant, whereas that of Buddhists, paradoxical, flexible and tolerant. Although no clear-cut demarcation can be drawn between them, they are just like both ends of the Middle Way.
Florence Kluckhohn, an American anthropologist, once wrote that value orientations are complex but definitely patterned (rank ordered) principles, resulting from the transactional interplay of three analytically distinguishable elements of the evaluative process—the cognitive, the affective, and the directive elements which give order and direction to the ever-flowing streams of human acts and thoughts as these relate to the solution of "common human problems." She classified the relationship between man and nature into three types, namely, Subjugation-to-Nature, Harmony-with-Nature, and Mastery-over-Nature. It seems that the first can be applied to primitive peoples, the second to the Buddhists, and the third to the Christians. This classification cannot be taken for granted as the gradational development of culture from the first stage to the third, but is valid in so far as each man and his society are isolated from, or stand against others. Nowadays the people in different societies or nations are gradually intermingling with each other, and can hardly expand their possibilities without hurting others. Hereby, the mastery of man over or against others is almost impossible: the various ways of thinking and behavior patterns of people must find their places in the context of universal co-existence. At this time, the doctrinal assumption in regard to the differences, if not peculiarities, between religions is less significant than the adaptation of their teachings to our pertinent problems. World-wide secularization is the modern trend, and is in a sense favorable as an attempt to make us known the raison d'etre of true religion. However, if such adaptation means the complete surrender of religion to secularism, it leaves nothing but the destruction of all religiousness which is found in the consciousness and behavior of each religious follower.
Now is not the time to look at each other and discuss matters concerning the inferiorities and superiorities of religions, but to look upon something together which will give us the solution to save our divided and troubled world. Coincidentally speaking, the general theme of the Expo '70, which was held