Richard Rumana
Seated Buddha
This is a small metal pin.
For the most part, I am western in religious orientation (loosely a Christian); however, I find lots of spiritual insight in Buddhism. Both Jesus and the Buddha include Peace as one of the highest virtues available for human life.
However, however, not to get too academic, eastern and western religions are "essentially" (whatever that word means) different in my opinion. They are both religions or have a religious view (a non-materialistic explanation of things) that the world, despite what it seems, has a moral order. It's the difference between these moral orders that is in dispute. {I am not a Mystic so I do not buy into the Underlying Unity Thesis that Eastern and Western Religions are saying the same thing.} And this difference, to me, becomes apparent in very practical aspects that have to do with, for example, death and ethics. Consider this: In Western Religions, there is--One life to live and then the judgment. In Eastern Religions there are many lives to live and then the judgment. These two views are different "essentially" (whatever that word means). The reason for this difference gets far too academic. Not that I have a method of choosing between them. Both believe in an afterlife. Just they are different.
Both eastern and western religious teachings provide a way of morally understanding life and events in space and time. Western religions see the final ends of Justice are best served by the Personal Will of God [in whatever way]. Eastern religions are based on an idea of an Impersonal Force beyond the will of any personal God: Karma; so even the Gods would be a force for the Karmic Law. Krishna In the BG seems to imply that he is the personal manifestation of Karma. But Karma is Karma; He didn't create it by his will. In Western religions, if there were such a thing as Karma, it would ultimately be under God's command and control; the personal will tips the scales of balance in its favor. As a consequence, If one is ultimately looking for Justice and not how to use the word "justice," I'm not sure, which religious attitude satisfies more. Both explain how things could be Moral and Religious at the same time. There are, or at least it seems to me, both Personal or Impersonal Notions of Morality and Justice in discussing Religions. As I said earlier, I am loosely a Christian and one who likes Buddhism. [I'm sure I share this with many other Christians and Buddhists].
However, however, however, either one, an Eastern or Western religious framework is good. Either one is more satisfactory than a materialist explanation.
Seated Buddha
This is a small metal pin.
For the most part, I am western in religious orientation (loosely a Christian); however, I find lots of spiritual insight in Buddhism. Both Jesus and the Buddha include Peace as one of the highest virtues available for human life.
However, however, not to get too academic, eastern and western religions are "essentially" (whatever that word means) different in my opinion. They are both religions or have a religious view (a non-materialistic explanation of things) that the world, despite what it seems, has a moral order. It's the difference between these moral orders that is in dispute. {I am not a Mystic so I do not buy into the Underlying Unity Thesis that Eastern and Western Religions are saying the same thing.} And this difference, to me, becomes apparent in very practical aspects that have to do with, for example, death and ethics. Consider this: In Western Religions, there is--One life to live and then the judgment. In Eastern Religions there are many lives to live and then the judgment. These two views are different "essentially" (whatever that word means). The reason for this difference gets far too academic. Not that I have a method of choosing between them. Both believe in an afterlife. Just they are different.
Both eastern and western religious teachings provide a way of morally understanding life and events in space and time. Western religions see the final ends of Justice are best served by the Personal Will of God [in whatever way]. Eastern religions are based on an idea of an Impersonal Force beyond the will of any personal God: Karma; so even the Gods would be a force for the Karmic Law. Krishna In the BG seems to imply that he is the personal manifestation of Karma. But Karma is Karma; He didn't create it by his will. In Western religions, if there were such a thing as Karma, it would ultimately be under God's command and control; the personal will tips the scales of balance in its favor. As a consequence, If one is ultimately looking for Justice and not how to use the word "justice," I'm not sure, which religious attitude satisfies more. Both explain how things could be Moral and Religious at the same time. There are, or at least it seems to me, both Personal or Impersonal Notions of Morality and Justice in discussing Religions. As I said earlier, I am loosely a Christian and one who likes Buddhism. [I'm sure I share this with many other Christians and Buddhists].
However, however, however, either one, an Eastern or Western religious framework is good. Either one is more satisfactory than a materialist explanation.