The Myths of the Buddha and the Christ. A Cross-Cultural Comparative Analyses

Table of Content

Introduction

Reflexivity

Theory and Thesis

Context, Historicity, Time and Space

The Hero Archetype

The Myth of the Buddha

The Myth of the Christ

Comparative Analyses of the Two Myths

Worldview Reflexivity

Differences between the Two Myths

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

The Buddha and the Christ are both worshipped, venerated and ritualized in the reality of hundreds of millions of people. In the spirit of comparativism and the methodological orientation of the class for which this paper was written, I would like to begin by establishing the comparative methods I will employ. First, I have employed a technique of reflexivity,^[1] and secondly, for the sake of understanding the context of this paper, I will list my biases. Then I will do a comparative analyses of two big myths, including the historical context of the myths, proving that mythology serves two purposes: to sustain a world or system of beliefs and to improve the general well-being of the individual practitioner. I will compare two of the most impactful myths; the myth of the Buddha and the myth of the Christ.

Reflexivity

Jeffery Kripal, a professor of religious studies at Rice University, describes reflexivity as “(the) capacity to think about thinking, become aware of awareness, and hence free consciousness temporarily from the parameters of society and ego.”^[2] A temporary freedom from our normal modes of consciousness is being called upon here. We have to step outside of our respective perspectives and see the patterns. Kripal, in his book Comparing Religions instructs his readers to reflect critically on themselves in order to understand the enculturation of their own mind. This is best done by listing your biases and noticing the similarities and the differences. Before writing this essay, I considered every major bias (that I could see!) of mine. I have a fundamental, Protestant Christian background, a military background, and I have let modern science run with my imagination while attempting the natural arduous task of interpreting reality. For the most part, I have been heavily critical about myself and my biases, understanding how conditioned I am, and how desperately frightening the programming has become. I have almost come to conclude (with some hope that it will be disproven) that we are purely encultured creatures. But I will not address determinism and agency in this paper, although it should be noted while going forward with this essay that I am suspicious that our daily routines, mythologies and every other aspect of culture is littered with repetition of some biological and environmental origin.^{[3] [4]} I have also been enormously affected by my studies at Rangung Yeshe Institute, which I now thank for having daily pratityasamutpada flashes of emptiness and dependent origination while walking down the street! I am almost certain there is no god or designer, and am inclined to think that it’s all in my head.^[5] I view the Buddha as a god. Because of his characteristics of immortality, omnipresence, non-omnipresence and omniscience, I have to categorize him and the bodhisattvas as a part of the Mahayana Buddhist pantheon.^[6] And I think that the phenomena of mysticism, of which I am somewhat vested in myself, is related to the brain and some invisible substance that causes everything to be connected like electricity. I am not a materialist, I am a mystic. A mystic-realist, you could say. Also I would like to set the premise that our consciousness is not limited to the head or body.

What is the purpose of mythology? How does it function to serve the people who are a part of it? Myths are translatable. Kripal called the humanities “the study of consciousness encoded in culture.”^[7] Mythology allows us to look inside the mind of a culture and understand their world from its relative, contextual perspective. Kripal encourages a methodology of reflexivity and a tremendous amount of imagination that requires the outsider to become the insider or the insider to become the outsider in order to better understand a culture and its myth. Kripal describes the shifting perspective of his method as world-founding:

“From the inside, a major myth expresses how the world works and what a people’s place in the world should be. From the outside, the myth is clearly a constructed, relative story that cannot possibly speak for anyone placed outside its particular cultural frame.”^[8]

Theory and Thesis

In this essay I will compare two incredible myths; the myth of the Buddha and the myth of the Christ. Buddhism and Christianity are both large religions and their mythologies function as grounding realities. They ground truth by reassuring the practitioner of his or her reality. They provide a frame of reference for what is good, right and lovely. Both mythologies provide answers to the questions that lie ever so subtle at the front of our minds, always under the current of the mind, but never answered. Myths provide answers! Or the substitute for answers. My theory is this: myth establishes world-sustaining perspectives, bringing order to community and well-being to the individual. I hope to prove this by comparing the two myths.

Context, Historicity, Time and Space

The Buddha appeared sometime around 500 – 300 BCE, centuries before Jesus. But the dates are never settled. It continues to be a topic of historical debate.^[9] The historicity of a thing is nothing without historical sources proving its existence. Concerning the Buddha, I am not particularly engaged in his historicity, but primary, secular historical sources^[10] are virtually non-existent. And it is my thoroughly investigated opinion that Jesus was not a historical figure. But regardless of whether either existed, their mythologies are very real to their adherents. So for the purpose of reflexivity, I will recognize this bias also.^[11]

These myths have origins in the same ancient trade networks that stretched from China to the Mediterranean. In 500 BCE there were roads going from Jerusalem, down the Euphrates to ports. From there, India was right around the Straits of Hormuz and reachable by small ships that would only take weeks of sailing. I imagine the deserts between Jerusalem and Magadha to be inhospitably horrid and the coastal route grueling, uncomfortable, and dangerous sailing.^[12] Currently, only Pakistan, Iran, Iraq and Jordan separate these two places. Roughly 500 years and 4000 kilometers (of land) apart.

The Hero Archetype

Joseph Campbell, an American mythologist and maker of the monomyth, defined a hero, saying:

“A hero ventures forth from the world of common day into a region of super natural wonder: fabulous forces are encountered there and a decisive victory is won: the hero comes back from his mysterious adventure with the power to bestow boons upon his fellow man.”^[13]

The Buddha and the Christ fit into this definition. The Buddha left his home as a young man. It was a home of pleasure and comfort. He saw suffering and was moved with compassion, so he went out into the world to discover a way to escape samsara. He battled with a demoness who tried to seduce him. He struggled with spiritual entities until finally attaining the great knowledge that he was searching for. Soon after, he returned to his friends and taught them emptiness. Jesus also began his journey as a young man. He left his home to live on the road and spread his message. He battled with Satan on his way, and after several miracles and teachings, was killed and resurrected to deliver the power of his atoning blood to a world in need of blood sacrifice. In Buddhist and Christian eschatology, both have forecasted the return of their hero who will restore order (just as Kripal describes the role of the hero in his comparative work).^{[14] [15]}

The Myth of the Buddha

Siddhartha Gautama was fortunate to have been born in a castle. From a Buddhist perspective one could say that luck had nothing to do with his birth place and life, but rather the Buddha and his life are the result of karmic formations. The Buddha left Tushita as a god and re-entered through the womb of a virtuous queen. Through divination he was prophesied to be either a king or an ascetic. The prophecy was fulfilled and he became an ascetic. He was disturbed by what he saw outside of the palace. He saw people suffering, getting sick and dying. He was troubled by the nature of reality and with the intention of ending suffering, he went out from his home of “common daily comfort” and struggled with the problem of human suffering for years, until finally, after an exhausting career as an ascetic, sat under a Bodhi tree and battled Mara. He overcame Mara and was awakened. He immediately returned to his friends and mentors and instructed them on how to also escape samsara.

The historical context of this myth is entrenched in ancient Hinduism, or as it is more accurately called, “Vedic culture.” During the time of the Buddha there was a popular counter-cultural reaction to the traditional ways of ancient Hinduism in the area known as Magadha.^[16] The Buddha, likely residing in the area of greater Magadha, adopted major elements of this culture: karma, rebirth, samsara, Indian cosmology and astrology. This is where we trace the roots of Buddhism. The Buddha was living in a spiritually rich era that saw the rise of the Jain, the Sikhs, and his own dharma, Buddhism. Different elements of Vedic culture were transferred into the new religious order and modified, respectively. This era saw a rapid increase in the number of people opposing the old order. It was a revolutionary period. Buddhism, we could say, was the end result of people turning away from their gods and their devices, and turning inward in order to achieve what they had hoped to receive from the gods they formerly appeased. Buddhism introduced a “do it yourself” soteriology, although at times help is requested (at which point the Buddha acts like a typical god).^[17] At the time, these rogue traditions were probably viewed more or less as heresy or heterodox forms of ancient Hinduism.^[18]

The Myth of the Christ

The Christ, 500 years later and only a few thousand kilometers from Magadha, came from his throne as a god and entered the virtuous Mary. He was fortunate to have been born into a good family, with a royal lineage, and a mother who was still a virgin.^[19] Or rather, like the Buddha, luck had nothing to do with it. It was the will of God. Had the Romans not taken over the Levant, he could have been heir to the throne of Israel. Three men from the east came and worshipped him upon his birth, having used divination and astrology to find the infant man-god king. Jesus was troubled by the state of humanity, which was poised to suffer the eternal fires of hell. Jesus went on a journey, fought with Satan, and overcame him. Following his victory over Satan he continued his ministry, performing miracles until he was executed by Jewish leadership and the Roman government. The death of Christ was not the end. His death is believed to have atoned for all the sins of the world (that people would otherwise have to make sacrifices for – according to the old order). He died and resurrected himself, took the keys of heaven and hell, and sat down at the right side of God.^[20]

The historical context of this myth is ripe with Jewish theology, Near Eastern religious motifs and Roman influence. Jesus allegedly existed in the Levant at a time when the Roman Empire had already established its power structures. It was a pluralistic empire at the time (but not for long), leaving the Jewish religion free to function alongside several other religions. The temple was also up and lively at this time and the Jews believed it to be the epicenter of everything. Jesus was Jewish and was influenced by Jewish theology, naturally. However, Jesus brought a new way to Jews and mystics in Jerusalem. He offered a final sacrifice and a less bloody lifestyle. Jesus marked a movement from the old order of sacrifice and offered a more direct, personal experience with God by bi-passing the Levitical order and making individuals their own priest. Jesus and the early church took the old cosmogony and cosmology with them, as well as Yahweh, Jewish prophecy, and the literal, historical interpretation of the Jewish exodus in the Pentateuch. Christians also inherited the Jewish calendar as well as numerous cultural beliefs and axioms. Heaven, the world, and hell, etc.

Comparative Analyses of the Two Myths

Both were moved with compassion to change the hell-bound existence of humanity. Both came down from (a) heaven. Both reincarnated/incarnated into a womb. Both were born into a royal lineage. Both had virtuous mothers. Both received prophecy about their role in the world. Both went on a journey away from home. Both battled with a malevolent entity. Both reached a decisive victory in their battle against the malevolent. Both lead a movement away from the old order. Both were revolutionary breaks from an older, established religion. Both became founders of a religion. And both are prophesied to return.

The heroes both mark major cultural transitions. For the Buddha, it was a transition from traditional Vedic ritual practices to a method of self-control and individual effort. The priests operated the rituals that were needed to improve one’s karma and they effectively controlled the people of a mundane world as special workers of the sacred. The Buddha offered a new way that doesn’t require the use of priests and their rituals. The Buddha taught emptiness, the Four Noble Truths and the Path. All describe a life-long journey and no priest or sacrifice is required. Not to say that in Buddhism there isn’t ritual. There is a lot of ritual in Buddhism, and depending on which form of Buddhism you choose, there will be initiation rites and various other rites and vows. The change that is notable in this transition is the marked uselessness of the priests of the old order and their blood sacrifices. On the Path, one has only the Buddha, the dharma and the sanga.

Jesus, 500 or 300 years later, like the Buddha, came with a new message that made the priests of the old order obsolete. Prior to the Christ, Jews had to visit the temple regularly for the sake of appeasing Yahweh and his consort. The many different kinds of sacrifices listed in Leviticus are the methods, manners and purity of sacrifices needed to protect themselves from punishments in the next life (whether in hell, the middle – “Abraham’s bosom, outer darkness or heaven or after the resurrection).”^[21] Jesus’ self-sacrifice finalized all necessary atonements. The blood of the son of God/incarnation of God ended the necessity. The God was now accessible on a personal level and nobody had to worship in blood or suffer in hell.

In comparing the myth of the Buddha and the myth of the Christ, we can’t help but notice many similarities. Early on, Buddhism offered a new way that broke from the old order. Buddhism was a do-it-yourself method of soteriology that required self-determination and self-sacrifice (as Mahayana increased in the 4th century). 500 years later the trend had reached Jerusalem, and just like the Buddha who broke from the old order, a Christ appeared and did the same. Christianity was, like the rest of the mystery religions in Jerusalem at the time, personal, social and direct. Jesus and the Buddha broke the old order and transferred the power that the priesthood held over the individual. Both answered basic human curiosity and insecurity. They answered the mysteries of life and death and supported the people practicing. These myths appear to reinforce the same things, but in different cultures. I will try to follow the cross-cultural structures and demonstrate that further.

Worldview Reflexivity

Placing the concept of worldviews into context, I will begin with Buddhism and try and imagine myself as a practitioner (and this is where the art of reflexivity comes into play). Being raised in a Buddhist family gives one the perspective of one who is born into a Buddhist family.^[22] So to start, I would have received a lot of cultural axioms, relating to Buddhism and rooted in ancient Vedic culture. From here, we can imagine that I would have some understanding of the kalpas, the mahakalpa and Mt. Meru^[23] – the ancient Vedic cosmology which was modified to make the Buddha the best. The irregularities of science in the Abhidharma would go unnoticed in some cases as it would in Christianity as well. I would have some understanding of the universe and wouldn’t accept “solar winds” as the drive behind the orbiting of the sun. I would find a way to ignore the ridiculous description of space and just let it slide. Time is circular for Buddhists. It’s a never-ending cycle of creation and destruction that concurrently happens within samsara. Samsara (another Indian element) is the cyclical existence that Tibetan Buddhists demonstrate with the detailed painting of the Bhavachakra at the front of every gompa. For these reasons I would view myself as suffering more or less in a world where my actions affect my life, consequentially. For all this and more, I would spend a great deal of time working to improve my karma, but even more so when I’m older. Daily routine, pilgrimage and meditative practice are all a part of the Buddhist’s life (although not all or even any can be present). Without the myth of the Buddha, I would have no reason to take up the Path. But now, with the myth of the Buddha and the Bodhisattva path, I would be poised to end the suffering of all sentient beings.

The story of the Buddha is absolutely essential to every aspect of Buddhist life. The cosmology, samsara and expectations of Maitreya’s arrival (a virtual return of the Buddha, like Christ) all affect the perspective of the Buddhist. From this vantage point, we can see how important it is to generate good karma, to accumulate good merit so that we might bring an end to suffering. And all of it (except for the Vedic elements) because of the myth of the Buddha.

Now if I were born into a Mahayana Buddhist family, I would have some measure of understanding about the Bodhisattva ideal and its existential and soteriological significance. In the Mahayana branch of Buddhism, Buddhists take vows to become bodhisattvas. Bodhisattvas are people who put off their enlightenment for the sake of aiding the rest of the world to enlightenment. It is really the ultimate example of the hero, and very much like Christ who also gave himself up for the whole world. It is not an easy task, being a bodhisattva. The bodhisattva has to go through many levels of purification, through eons, until finally reaching enlightenment. At which point, ideally, everybody else will, too. It is the ultimate heroes’ journey, and millions of people have made this commitment. Currently, like an army of compassion, there is a mass movement of Buddhists, who almost silently, are rescuing us all from hell. This “bodhisattva way” is based on the Buddha, basing its fundamental method on compassion, dedicating their efforts to the Buddha and all sentient beings.^[24] The myth of the Buddha sustains not only the Bodhisattva ideal of heroism, but many variations of similar worldviews. And regardless of the origins of Buddhist beliefs – the Buddha, his myths, his existence in history, are important and worldview-sustaining.

Historically, for Christians, and much like the Buddhists, earth was the center of the universe and everything revolved around it. The omnipresent Yahweh was all-pervading in it through the “Holy Spirit.”^[25] Science was eventually updated in many cases, but the idea of an omnipresent god didn’t change. He was still there, but we were no longer the center of the universe. In fact, the discovery of other galaxies and an apparently infinite universe only served to increase the Christian and Buddhist imagination^[26] in awe at the magnificence of a creator/karma. The myth of the Christ connects Christians to this incredible perspective because it is God’s design. God’s art. Many Christians believe that he made the universe with creativity only a god could have. They almost all believe that he is love and good and perfect. Without the myth of Christ, Christians wouldn’t have a personal connection to the cosmos. The myth of the Christ has a relational value as it puts into perspective the practitioner and his hero, making a connection with nature – God’s art.

The myth of Christ grounds many different worldviews. Like Buddhism, there are numerous forms of Christianity. And like Buddhism, Christians depend on their hero myth. But myths come with attachments. There is always some old stuff tacked on to the new stuff. The myth of Christ resulted in the gospels, drawing from the Pentateuch, the history of the Jews and the prophets; making everything in the Old Testament a correlated association to the myth of Christ. It’s like the Epic of Gilgamesh. There are ten chapters in the story, and rather randomly, a detailed flood account (predating the biblical flood account)^[27] of gods in the heavens destroying the world with a flood. It’s supposed to be the first novel ever, and its literary patterns and mythologies are so similar that it could be mistaken for biblical scripture. Gilgamesh was also searching for eternal life, and he almost got it. Jesus however, in his myth, brought eternal life from heaven and offered it to everybody, accomplishing what Gilgamesh failed to do about 2000 years prior.

Differences between the Two Myths

The Buddha and the Christ have a lot of similarities, and it is through recognizing their differences that the similarities become clear.^[28] They both play central roles in different religions. Both religions seem to serve the same existential purposes and their myths appear to reflect human behavioral patterns. There is an apparent sameness. But what about the differences? Other than language, symbolism and aesthetics, on a deeper philosophical level, the differences are quite large. And although I pointed to the similarities of priests being replaced by spiritual individualism, the soteriology is quite different. A Buddhist sets out on a lifelong work that could take multiple lifetimes or eons to attain liberation. A Christian however, only needs to have faith or fulfill enough moral, ritual acts to attain salvation in one life time. Buddhist liberation and Christian salvation are very different. Buddhist liberation is ineffable and releases the practitioner from his or her physical engagement with samsara and suffering. The Christian doesn’t exit reality, but rather continues on to the next life – the afterlife – where the Christian waits until the resurrection.^[29] Arguably, Buddhism may benefit one more. The Buddhist escapes, he becomes free. The Christian eventually ends up in the “new world” described in the book of Revelation, where Christ rules and all is done to glorify him.^[30]

Conclusion

Humans are curious to understand the nature of reality. They want to survive. They do not want to die. They are afraid of it! For whatever reason, people make up stories and build institutionalized forms of human spirituality, and they always end up filling in the scary uncertainty of our existence with a hopeful utopia that represents our fear more than it does an actual literal, physical place. The insecurity is minimal in some and greater in others, but constant in all. Philosophers might experience some trouble as they ponder into the abyss that is the unknown, and some probably force themselves to come to terms with it (some). It seems that we want to live and stay alive so much that we are prone to believing fanciful places like the new world in Revelation. For the sake of fear, angst and hoping to survive beyond this current world, the majority of humanity finds a medicinal use for these myths. All the mysteries of the universe are wrapped up safely in the arms of Jesus. Synonymous to religion should be “mystery box organizer.” We take the mysteries that we inherit and we arrange them into a hierarchical, divinely inspired group or sanga and put all of it (including the sanga) in a box, invisible to those who possess the antidote to ignorance or sin. These myths support the worldview that God is in heaven, he is our heavenly father, and you will be safe with him. Don’t worry about life after death or fear anything^[31] because God is on your side.”^[32] The worldview held by the Buddhists who follow the Abhidharma could close their eyes and see into a universe of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas and Mt. Meru and all the people in hell at the center of earth.^[33] Christians and Jews during the time of Christ had variations in their versions of afterlife, but typically one would have believed God to be in heaven above, while we live on earth, and the unrepentant in hell (or Abraham’s bosom).^[34] Supernatural factors change as well. In Buddhism, we have karma. In Christianity, we have the Holy Spirit and God’s unlimited abilities to influence anything (as we see in the book of Exodus where Yahweh manipulates the entire kingdom of Egypt and saves the enslaved Jewish minority).

These myths support the belief systems of many people. Together these religions represent a majority of humanity. Prior to the revolutionary work of the Buddha and the Christ, people would go to their priests for help in manipulating reality as a means of improving their lives. They went to the priests for health issues, financial problems, family matters and other spiritual reasons. Both heroes actually improved access to healthcare. Afflicted? Control your mind. Need a cure? Say a prayer. Relying on others to perform ceremonies to improve your well-being worked for a while for some, but the individual freedom to summon the Spirit and receive healing increased access to what was once controlled.

The myths tell us what we want to hear. We are in trouble – here’s the way out! For some reason people need security from the unknown. Marx famously called religion the “opium of the masses.” And it would seem that we have an ailment. We suffer in this reality and religion offers a treatment. Whether we project ourselves as Buddhas, submit to Allah or trust Jesus with our soul, we are seeking something that we need – rescue! We seek to improve our existential place in life as we approach the unknown future. What would happen if we woke up tomorrow and all religion and all of its material forms were gone? I imagine that humans would still be spiritual. And I imagine that they would try to organize that spirituality. And I imagine that that organized spirituality would become institutionalized to serve the same psychological ailments that Christianity and Buddhism do.

Bibliography

Campbell, Joseph, the Hero with a Thousand Faces, New World Library, 2008, 31

Kripal, Jeffery, Comparing Religions, Wiley Blackwell, 2014, 409

Apostle Luke, the Acts of the Apostles, New International Version, 2011 revision, 2:29-30

Jagmon Mipham Rinpoche, Gateway to Knowledge Vol. 1, Rangjung Yeshe Publications, 2000, 80-85

Shantideva, the Way of the Bodhisattva, Shambala Asian Edition, Boston, 2012, 3.23-24

^[1] As described by Kripal and discussed in the class.

^[2] Jeffery Kripal, Comparing Religions, Wiley Blackwell, 2014, 409

^[3] By “environment” I mean to include not only our physical environment, but also our mental environment.

^[4] In theory, primarily, humans and their conscious capacity reacted to the environment physiologically, after which behavioral patterns would have begun to emerged.

^[5] In a Yogacara way, not solipsistic.

^[6] In the academy, the Buddha is defined meticulously as a deity (which has its roots in Latin, deus - god), but outside within the masses of people who are the Buddhist laypeople, they describe the Buddha, using the word “god”. That is how they choose to communicate the Buddha. I believe very much that the meaning we place on gods in the West is similar to the meaning placed on the Buddha in Buddhism. This term “Mahayana Buddhist pantheon” is borrowed from a lecture by Douglas Duckworth at RYI, who gave me permission to quote him on the term, which he more precisely called the Tibetan pantheon.

^[7] Jeffery Kripal, Comparing Religions, Wiley Blackwell, 2014, 86

^[8] Jeffery Kripal, Comparing Religions, Wiley Blackwell, 2014, 114

^[9] The confusion is over the exact dates. There is no debate concerning which came first, the Buddha or the Christ.

^[10] Other than the records of Ashok (conveniently written in stone) who may not have existed during the time of the Buddha.

^[11] Specifically that I view each hero as mythological characters, real to the adherents, not real to me.

^[12] The invention of the galleon came much later as a European invention, meaning that only smaller vessels that carried less cargo and took more time would have been utilized.

^[13] Joseph Campbell, The Hero with a Thousand Faces, New World Library, 2008, 31

^[14] The archetype is described in his book on page 122, he doesn’t specifically mention either heroes, but cites Joseph Campbell, who does list these two heroes in his theory of the hero with a thousand masks.

^[15] In the book of Revelation, the new world order is described in great detail. Christ is to return with an army and establish an empire in Jerusalem, then called New Jerusalem.

^[16] Foundations of Buddhism, Rupert

^[17] The Buddha also possesses omnipresence, omniscience, immortal, etc. He possesses the major characteristics of any typical god.

^[18] Today, in Nepal, where Hinduism and Buddhism mix, Buddhism is still perceived as being a part of Hinduism.

^[19] The lineage that connects Jesus from Mary to David is in the first chapter of the book of Matthew, and the description of Christ coming from his form as a creator into Mary is found in the first chapter of John. All four gospels contain a very different account of him and for that reason, that we might have a fuller understanding, I’ll be making multiple citations for one event or claim that I make.

^[20] The Apostle Luke, the Acts of the Apostles, New International Version, 2011 revision, 2:29-30

^[21] In Jewish cosmology (and Christian cosmology to a certain extent) there is a horrible hell and there is a place where people are simply waiting. The place is called purgatory, Abraham’s Bosom, outer darkness, levels of heaven, and other things. Luke wrote in some detail about this in Acts chapter 2, where Jesus himself entered hell to take the keys from whoever he took them from.

^[22] As redundant as that might sound, I am just saying that people are born into religion, rather than religion being created by them. I often tell people that they are Christian or Buddhist because they were born into a Buddhist family. This isn’t always the case. Some people find their way into foreign traditions out of personal experience and/or conviction.

^[23] Jagmon Mipham Rinpoche, Gateway to Knowledge Vol. 1, Rangjung Yeshe Publications, 2000, 80-85

^[24] Shantideva, The Way of the Bodhisattva, Shambala Asian Edition, Boston, 2012, 3.23-24

^[25] This is only true in so far as Judaism evolved after captivity in Babylon when they reified the relatively new idea of monotheism.

^[26] I would assume this also happened in Buddhism. Members of a belief system don’t lose their beliefs when science changes. They just adapt or even increase their description of the universe or God.

^[27] Some say by a millennia

^[28] Karen Myers, Lecture on the Epistemology of Mysticism, Rangjung Yeshe Institute, Kathmandu, 2017

^[29] Or rapture for the denominations who believe in the catching up of the faithful that is to happen either before or after the tribulation (again, depending on the denomination).

^[30] Christian eschatology is very descriptive of a political environment that will rule over the planet, the new world system on earth, in a centralized manner.

^[31] Not fearing is repeated a lot in the bible.

^[32]

^[33] Jagmon Mipham Rinpoche, Gateway to Knowledge Vol. 2, Rangjung Yeshs Publications, 2000, 8.1-15

^[34] Unknown Author, the Book of Job, King James Version, 1611, 11:8