Issue no. 5: 2006 1st Quarter; article overview:
Page 1:First Article;The Messianic context of Psalm 110 -exegesis part two
Page 2:Second Article;Samson Option, Samson as national allegory in Deuteronomistic theology
Page 3:Third Article;Qohelet and the background to Ecclesiastes
Page 4:Fourth Article;Nathaniel under the Bo-tree - Buddhism and the problem of suffering
Page 5:Fifth Article;The Spirit in the latter days-Part four
Page 6:Sixth Article;Book review of the writings of Santala
For the PDF version of this article click here
Nathaniel under the Bo-tree
“Unlike the religions of Middle Eastern origin, the idea of an almighty God does not play any role in Buddhism. Not God or gods (although such are recognised) but man is the object of Buddhist thought.” [Schumann]
The problem of suffering
This essay will focus on Theravadah Buddhism which is closest to the teachings of Buddha himself. The First Noble Truth is that all of life is dukkha, suffering. The word means “out-of-joint-ness” or separation — something very similar to “sin,” but without the personal, relational dimension: not a broken relationship but a broken consciousness. [1] Buddhism does not teach a system of metaphysics; it offers relief of the suffering of this immediate material existence. The human in this world is analogized to a man wounded by an arrow who can waste no time in asking questions about the shape and origin of the arrow and about the man who shot it. Rather, he must exert all his energy towards removing the arrow which is the immediate cause of his suffering. [2]
Dukkha need not be painful physical suffering but is understood in a more abstract and pervasive sense: it suggests that even when life is not painful it can be unsatisfactory and unfulfilling. The Truth of Suffering refers to a more subtle kind of suffering which might be termed “existential.” [3] Buddha states, “Birth is suffering, old age is suffering, disease is suffering, death is suffering, association is suffering, separation from what is pleasant is suffering, not obtaining that which one desires is suffering. . . .” By this rather negative statement, Buddha does not summarily dismiss all pleasure and happiness. Rather, he means to point out the transiency of all mental and physical pleasures. [4]
If Dukkha is intrinsically bound up with existence itself, then a higher plain of existence must be sought that neutralises the problem. In order for this to occur one must identify the source of human suffering.
The cause of suffering
According to the views elaborated by Scheler, Freud, Heidegger and Jaspers, there is in the core of our being a basic anxiety, a little empty hole from which all other forms of anxiety and unease draw their strength. [5] For the Buddhist this “existential angst” is caused by desire. The Second Noble Truth is that the cause of suffering is tanha, “grasping,” selfish desire. We suffer because of the gap between what we want and what we have. This gap is created by our dissatisfaction, our wanting to get what we do not have or wanting to keep what we do have (e.g., life, which causes fear of death). Thus desire is the villain for Buddha, the cause of all suffering. [6] Whereas the Judaeo-Christian tradition attributes the Fall of Man to pride and disobedience, Buddhism locates the origin of human suffering in desire. [7]
Enlightenment
Enlightenment comes from the realization that desire rests on an illusion – the illusion that the self is a separate entity from the desired object. Once desire has been extinguished then suffering ceases to exist; but desire can only be neutralized by the negation of self. The state of enlightenment that is attained by the negation of self is known as Nirvana. Scholars differ in their interpretation of Nirvana.
Within the modern interpretations of the meaning of nirvana we may take four views as representative of the major schools of thought: (1) nirvana as annihilation; (2) nirvana as eternal life; (3) nirvana as an ethical state in this world; and (4) nirvana as a transcendent, ineffable state in which time and person are superceded. [8]
Tillich along with most modern scholars understands Nirvana as an ontological symbol. Its material is taken from the experience of finitude, separation, blindness, suffering, and, in answer to all this, the image of the blessed oneness of everything, beyond finitude and error, in the ultimate Ground of Being. [9]
In this he is in agreement with Becker who states: “With typical Buddhist logic, we are left with this conclusion: Nirvana neither exists nor does not exist, i.e., it is neither within the realm of existence as we know it, nor is it an illusion. The saint is not reborn, nor does he die, nor is it proper to use any ordinary adjectives about the ineffable state he experiences. His old personality does not continue, and yet the person is not utterly annihilated. Such a state of nirvana is achievable, and it is a viable alternative to rebirth after death.” [10]
In other words, through the proper understanding and discipline, suffering can be uprooted and Nirvana attained. Two types of cessation are outlined: -- cessation with a remnant, or that state experienced when an adept removes all his impurities in experiencing Nirvana while still in the body; cessation without a remnant, or that which is attained when the enlightened adept lays down his body. [11]
Critique
Although Buddhism has much that is admirable it is a religion (or philosophy? [12]) grounded in man (as Schumann observed) and the Bo tree represents the age old quest of humanity to become god-like. The Bo tree is similar to the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, it promises enlightenment and esoteric wisdom that is attainable without God – its fruit is desirable – desired to make one wise (Gen.3:6) but the outcome is not Nirvana, only annihilation (which in the end is probably the same as Nirvana). Buddha has replaced petty human desire with the greatest desire of all; to be divine (although Buddha would not see it as such). James Bissett Pratt finds only one passage requiring “the desire for the holy life!” be given up, and shortly after this the Buddha is made to assert “with the aid of craving does one eliminate craving.” [13]
The problem of human suffering is caused by sin not by desire, it is craving the wrong things (or the right things in the wrong way; like Buddha) that causes alienation from God in the ground of our very being. We desire too many things: “One thing have I desired of the Lord, that will I seek after; that I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life, to behold the beauty of the Lord and to inquire in his temple.”(Ps.27: 4) [14] Jesus himself had only one desire; to do his Fathers will – “with desire, I have desired to eat this Passover.”
Buddhism leaves itself open to the charge of self-adsorption, (cosmic navel gazing) where human desire instead of being extinguished is elevated to a quest after divinity, where the illusion of self is replaced with the delusion of self righteousness. As a consequence the compassion of Buddhism is a sterile fruit incomparable with the agape displayed by God, who sent his own Son to demonstrate to the world that God is not indifferent to human suffering. The cross is a violent image that puts suffering and death before us in a way that is unavoidable and demands a response.
Conclusion
It was not Buddha but Nathaniel who was truly enlightened when he sat under the Bo tree;
Philip findeth Nathaniel, and saith unto him, we have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph. And Nathaniel said unto him, ‘Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth?’ Philip saith unto him come and see. Jesus saw Nathaniel coming to him, and saith of him, Behold an Israelite indeed in whom is no guile! Nathaniel saith unto him, ‘Whence knowest thou me?’ Jesus answered and said unto him, before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee. Nathaniel answered him, Rabbi thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.”(John 1:45-51).
How can we explain Nathaniel’s instant conversion? The suggestion is that Nathaniel was contemplating his forthcoming marriage, which is recounted in the next chapter ( John 2). As he sat under the fig (Bo) tree his thoughts wandered to the marriage of Jacob, who had been tricked into marrying the wrong woman! Jacob, whose name means the deceiver, used deception [guile] at every stage of his life in order to obtain the blessing, but at his wedding Jacob the deceiver had himself been deceived. This explains Jesus’ greeting: “Behold an Israelite indeed in whom is no guile.” [Jacob was renamed Israel-“God rules” when he acknowledged that God was sovereign in his life and that all his wrestling’s to obtain the blessing had been in vain].
In other words Jesus read Nathaniel’s mind (this explains Nathaniel’s instant conversion). The passage ends with Jesus referring to Jacob’s ladder; a vision seen by Jacob at Beth-el (Beth-el means he house of God –Gen 28: 11-22):
“Verily, verily, I say unto you, hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man.” (John 1:51)
Jesus himself is both the house of God and the bridge between heaven and earth; the ladder between God and man. The vision of the ladder at Beth-el is parallel with the tower of Babel (Gen. 11) reaching to heaven. The moral of the story is that neither Jacob, nor Buddha, nor anyone else could build the ladder to heaven by their own strength (or by deception), Jacob wrestled his whole life with God (as most of us do) until he acknowledged this fact. God’s answer to the problem of suffering is the suffering servant – Jesus Christ – this was the enlightenment that Nathaniel received as he sat under the Bo tree.
Notes
[1] Kreeft
[2] Becker, p.35
[3] Keown, p.46
[4] Prebish, p.29
[5] Conze, p.22
[6] Kreeft
[7] Keown, p.31
[8] Becker,p.24
[9] Tillich, [Chapter 3: A Christian-Buddhist Conversation]
[10] Becker,p.43
[11] Prebish, p.30
[12] Ninian Smart defines ‘seven dimensions’ under which it seems justifiable to classify Buddhism as a religion. [op., cit., Keown, p.5]
[13] Bisset, p.27
[14] David’s desire was granted – he went into the tabernacle to inquire – his question was how a man like himself – a non Levite, was allowed to enter into the divine presence. (2 Sam.7:18-20) His answer was the promise of a son who would also be God’s son – God would build a house for David (not vice versa) – David recorded what he saw on that occasion (the vision of a resurrected Christ) in Psalm 110. David did not fully understand the implications of the covenant until he had committed murder and adultery. True enlightenment is the realization that without the grace that God provides we are utterly lost despite our best endeavors.
Bibliography
Becker C., Breaking the Circle: Death and the Afterlife in Buddhism, (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1993)
Bisset J., Pilgrimage of Buddhism, (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1928)
Conze E., Buddhism; Its Essence and Development, (New York: Harper, 1959)
Keown D., Buddhism A Very Short Introduction, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996)
Kreeft P., Comparing Christianity & Buddhism, (1987 National Catholic Register)
Prebish C., Buddhism- A Modern Perspective, (University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1975)
Tillich P., Christianity and the Encounter of the World Religions,(Columbia University Press, 1963)