An Evangelical Response to Thich Nhat Hanh's Living Buddha, Living Christ
Written: Nov 04 '06 (Updated Nov 04 '06)
|
Product Rating:
|
|
|
Pros: Interesting insight into an influencial Buddhist's mind.
Cons: Either Nhat Hanh is only speaking to liberal Christianity or he's stretching things too far.
The Bottom Line: Worth reading if you're interested in a comparison of Buddhism and Christianity from a Buddhist perspective.
|
|
|
| joshg2fl's Full Review: |
Thich Nhat Hanh is a Buddhist monk from Vietnam. His name is closely associated with Plum Village, a monastery in France. But, perhaps he’s better known for his numerous books on Buddhism. He also was a friend of Martin Luther King, Jr., encouraging him against the war in Vietnam. King ended up nominating Nhat Hanh for the Nobel Peace prize.
Living Buddha, Living Christ is Nhat Hanh’s attempt to show the close relation of Christianity and Buddhism. If I’m forced to label myself, I guess I’d be placed by most into the conservative evangelical circle (which is a broad circle with plenty of stereotypes, but what circle of society doesn’t have stereotypes?). I’m approaching this review from the perspective of the “Living Christ” side of Nhat Hanh’s title. In other words, how does an evangelical respond to Nhat Hanh’s attempts to coincide the two faiths?
Although the book is somewhat scattered in its thoughts, each chapter is full of fairly related ideas split up into shorter topics (for example, “Freedom from Notions” or “Living in the Presence of God”). Almost all themes of the book are related to the similarities of Buddhism and Christianity. Some of these similarities are legitimate. But, many times Nhat Hanh seems to stretch things or perhaps downplay key issues of Christianity.
I’ll start with the positive. I was surprised to find that several sections of the book I not only agreed with Thich Nhat Hanh, but I found his thoughts helpful in my own spiritual walk. For example:
Whenever there is understanding, compassion is born. (pg. 11)
&
Jesus told us to love our enemy. ‘Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.’ This teaching helps us know how to look at the person we consider to be the cause of our suffering. If we practice looking deeply into his situation and the causes of how he came to be the way he is now, and if we visualize ourselves as being born in his condition, we may see that we could have become exactly like him. (pg. 83)
I think that there is much truth to these two quotes. Perhaps, compassion for the poor could be used as an example. In general, there seems to be a sense in society (especially, American society?) that the poor could get out of their state if they wanted to. But, if you consider a poor person’s experiences, family background, sickness, tragedy, then a whole new sense of appreciation and “compassion” is born. If we took more time to hear people’s stories I believe much more love would exist in the world. The same holds true in our workplace with the “annoying” guy who works down the hall or the guy who cuts us off in traffic. We express our displeasure to ourselves or those around us, but if we knew the stories of their last few years or last few hours of life, we would likely have a greater desire to love them instead of curse them (James 3:9-12).
I think the Bible agrees with this. We can see Jesus doing this when he deals with the rich, young ruler. Mark says “Jesus looked at him and loved him” (10:21 – TNIV). When you look at the context and see Jesus’ insightful questions you can tell that Jesus could see into the man’s heart. I’m not sure that we can do this as quickly as Jesus did without asking questions and getting to know people. But, when we get to this point of relational understanding, I think we can look at people (“understand them”) and love them (I think “compassion” would be included in love). So, I think Nhat Hanh is on to something here.
Another example of agreeing with Nhat Hanh:
Usually we say, ‘Wait until I finish school and get my Ph.D. degree, and then I will be really alive.’ But when we obtain it, we say, ‘I have to wait until I have a job in order to be really alive.’ After the job, we need a car, and after the car, a house. We are not capable of being alive in the present moment. We always postpone being alive to the future, we don’t know exactly when. It is possible we will never be truly alive in our entire life. (pg. 17)
Referring to the Jewish tradition: The entire world, all the good things in life, belong to God, so when you enjoy something, you think of God and enjoy it in His presence. (pg. 28)
I think the number one thing I appreciate about Buddhism is its reminders to be aware. And, if I allow my judgmentalness to shine through for a minute, I’d say, evangelical Christians are to be especially scolded for their lack of awareness. We claim that the Bible is inspired and inerrant. We use the argument that “no one is without excuse” in knowing God because “the heavens declare the glory of God”. However, our actions show that the reality of what we say we believe hasn’t hit us. For example, if you really had a document that is true…and is God’s “love letter” to us…wouldn’t we actually spend time enjoying its thoughts…being aware of it…during the week (perhaps, on a non-Sunday day of the week)? If we really believe that nature is an example of the glory of God shouldn’t there be more appreciation of nature…more silent walks appreciating trees, grass, etc.? It’s ridiculous (in my mind) that Christians don’t spend more time meditating on the food we chew and the steps we take (similar to Buddhists). After all, we claim to know a supreme God, a loving God who gives good gifts…
I wish I could give more examples of words from Nhat Hanh that I agree with; however, for reasons of space I will move on. I accused Nhat Hanh of stretching things earlier in the review. For the most part, this isn’t so much to do with his Scripture exposition, but with the way he defines terms to make them fit both Christian contexts and Buddhist contexts. Here are some examples:
Baptism
I see the rite of Baptism as a way of recognizing that every human being, when opened to the Holy Spirit, is capable of manifesting these qualities (the meanings of the ten names of Buddha), which are also the qualities of being a son or daughter of God. (pg 44)
Thich Nhat Hanh never necessarily claims that the Bible agrees with his purpose of baptism, he uses the words “I see”. If I understand Nhat Hanh correctly here he’s saying that Baptism recognizes that (with the Holy Spirit’s help) people can show good, positive, moral qualities. The Bible would agree that the Holy Spirit does help us become good people. But, Baptism seems to have a different purpose. John, the baptizer of Christ, says: “the reason I came baptizing with water was that he might be revealed to Israel” (John 1:31). Baptism in the Bible seems to show an identification with Christ. It’s saying “Yes, I’m a Christian, I’m identifying my Christianity by symbolizing Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection.”
Resurrection
In Christianity, you have to believe in the resurrection or you are not considered a Christian. I am afraid this criterion may discourage some people from looking into the life of Jesus. That is a pity… (pg. 35) For me, the life of Jesus is His most basic teaching, more important than even faith in the resurrection or faith in eternity. (pg 36)
Once again, the “For me” makes things hard to argue with because he doesn’t claim that he’s agreeing with the Bible. On top of that, what he’s saying doesn’t necessarily disagree with the Bible. The resurrection discourages some from looking into the life of Christ – True. The life of Jesus is His most basic teaching – arguable, but not inherently wrong. What’s troubling for a Christian is any downplay of the resurrection, because so much rests on it. One example is I Corinthians 15: 17-18, which says: “if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all others.” Paul in this passage seems to take an opposite view from Nhat Hanh…Paul’s pity exists only if Christ was not raised from the dead.
Holy Spirit
…all of us also have the seed of the Holy Spirit in us, the capacity of healing, transforming, and loving. When we touch that seed, we are able to touch God the Father and God the Son. (pg. 15)
When we read, ‘The heavens opened and the Holy Spirit descended upon Him like a dove,’ we can see that Jesus Christ was already enlightened. (pg. 37)
Whenever we see someone who is loving, compassionate, mindful, caring, and understanding, we know that the Holy Spirit is there. (pg. 151)
The Holy Spirit is the energy of God that shines forth and shows you the way. (pg. 181)
Once again, I halfway agree with some of what Nhat Hanh says here. But, from an inspired-Bible position of Christianity, it’s hard to agree with all of it. For, example, the verses below imply that not everyone has a “seed of the Holy Spirit”. They also imply that the Bible views the Holy Spirit as more of a person than an energy.
“And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever—the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him not knows him.” John 14:16-17
“The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.” I Cor. 2:14
I have to give Thich Nhat Hanh some credit because at the end of the book he presents a very orthodox view of the Trinity (and the Holy Spirit) through the Book of Common Prayer (pg. 191-192)
Part of the reason I pointed out my faith at the beginning of this review was to show that this review may be more biased than usual. However, I think a Christian bias is fair with a book like this because of the claims regarding Buddhism and Christianity. But, just to add disclaimer upon disclaimer:
I realize that not everyone is going to believe the same thing. I should be allowed to use Buddhist truths to inspire thoughts in my own Christian brain. And, I can’t stop a Buddhist from taking Christian concepts and playing with them to inspire themselves in their religion. However, with that said, I don’t feel as though overall Nhat Hanh did a good job of convincing me that Christianity and Buddhism are as similar as he claims that they are. In case you aren’t sick of quotes yet, here are some more:
I do not think there is that much difference between Christians and Buddhists. Most of the boundaries we have created are artificial. Truth has no boundaries. Our differences may be mostly in emphasis. (pg. 154)
In this small book, I shall try to share some of my experiences of and insights into two of the world’s beautiful flowers, Buddhism and Christianity, so that we as a society can begin to dissolve our wrong perceptions, transcend our wrong views, and see one another in fresh, new ways. (pg. 12)
I will grant him that there are some similarities in Buddhism and Christianity. But, I’m not sold on the fact that “our differences are mostly in emphasis”. Our greatest differences…resurrection, eternal life, sin, deity of Christ, to name a few…seem to have been downplayed by Nhat Hanh with little regard for what Christianity holds to be important.
I also wonder if Nhat Hanh has actually dissolved “wrong perceptions” and transcended “wrong views” as he intended to do. Or, has he instead made the gap between Christians and Buddhists greater by expressing a view of Christianity that many Christians would not ascribe themselves to (speaking of the conservative side of the Christian world). I’ve seen this sort of thing done often in my Christian circles. I’ve seen other faiths described in overly simplistic terms so that in mere moments I can feel as though I understand their religion, only to find at a later date, when I talk to someone who believes in this other faith, that I don’t really understand them as well as I thought.
Nhat Hanh says: I think it is important to look deeply into every act and every teaching of Jesus during His lifetime, and use this as a model for our own practice. (pg. 36) I try to understand deeply the context in which they (Jesus and Buddha) spoke in order to really understand their meaning. (pg. 53) & The way is Jesus Himself and not just some idea of Him. (pg 56)
I’m not convinced that Nhat Hanh truly did this in his book. Perhaps, if he had, our two faiths may not have lined up as neatly as he would have liked.
---
Also on Buddhism:
Cinema Nirvana: Enlightenment Lessons From The Movies
Recommended:
Yes
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
joshg2fl
|
|
Location: Kenosha, WI
Reviews written: 111
Trusted by: 39 members
|
|
|
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.