Without Buddha I Could Not Be a Christian

Interesting read if you're a fence sitter looking how you might integrate Christain faith and Buddhism. I read this book because I am looking how to justify Gods love and compassion and the extreme suffering in the would. This book is a good starting place to understand how Buddhist views and Christian views are different in relation to suffering and compassion for humanity.

The subject was fascinating but the "thread" was very difficult to keep in view. Too much "crossing". BUT, the story, philosophy and theology is well told and very significant to the social-politics of the human condition.

Knitter claims Buddhism "has the firmest doctrinal foundation for...non-violence" (p 188).

Yet according to the Iris Chang's book "The Rape of Nanking" and Victoria's "Zen War Stories" Buddhism was the cause of such Japanese World War II atrocities as the Bataan Death March, the medical experiments which included vivisection without anesthesia, not to mention the civilians buried alive.

Every war is filled with horrors, but even the Nazis in Germany had a mere 4% death rate for their captured prisoners, whereas the Japanese were so brutal to their prisoners that close to 30% died. When a Japanese submarine came across the survivors of the Dutch ship Tsijalak, they slaughtered the survivors with swords. Those left alive had their hands tied and then were forced to stand on the submarine while it submerged.

In Manila, when it became clear the Americans would win, the Japanese soldiers pointlessly, vengefully, massacred the civilian population. Raped, beheaded, burned alive, shot - some 100,000 defenseless men, women and children butchered. For spite.

During, and directly prior to the war, "leaders ...interpreted...Buddhist doctrine of the non-existence of self, coupled with the oneness of life and death, in such a way as to produce an unquestioning willingness to die" (p 144 Zen War Stories) and also to kill. Yes, kill, and this was no new phenomenon. Buddhism "has a very long history of 'moral blindness'...as early as the eighth century...those who are enlightened transcend...good and evil. Enlightened beings ...are no longer subject to moral constraints" (p 15 Zen War Stories). Zen Master Dogen explained that, as Mahayana Bodhisattva, killing was justified, since killing was killing the False. If your heart was filled with compassion, you could kill without compunction.

Indignantly, Knitter assures us we need to "get beyond overly simplistic declarations like 'Buddhism denies evil'...Buddhists... don’t want to call any person...evil...you can't define anything as inherently “evil,” just as you can’t define anything as inherently “good.” (p 38).

I doubt all the people who were hacked to death would agree. But Knitter relishes that Buddhism rejects truth, insists there isn't any absolute truth. It rejects good and evil. It blames all the iniquity in this world on 'ignorance'.

But then what about justice? Don't the souls of the civilians buried alive cry out for justice? Alas, Buddhism denies justice, as well, whereas Christianity's answer to evil is that the God who is eternal love will ultimately draw good from every single evil done on earth. God will give perfect justice, not to mention perfect happiness, to every person who once suffered.

Knitter enthusiastically points out that "Buddhists are much more concerned about waking...our... compassion...than they are about working for justice" (p 184).

Ah, that would explain the last 2,500 years of almost total lack of action by Buddhists. Buddhists never tried to end slavery, never claimed slavery was wrong (it's pretty hard to claim something is wrong, when you don't believe in absolute right and wrong), never worked tirelessly like Mother Teresa of Calcutta to care for the poorest of the poor. Catholics have been helping the poor ever since the first Christian appeared, based upon the innate worth of every human soul. The worth of every person is why human rights were first argued by the Catholic Francisco de Vitoria in Ius Gentium, who taught them in another Catholic invention, the university.

Alfred North Whitehead placed the reason that, of all the great civilizations, only the west developed real science on Christian theology, as opposed to mere technology. "There seems but one source...It must come from the medieval insistence on the rationality of God." From the very start, Christian theologians like Tertullian and Augustine argued that there was absolute truth. Truth was God. And the truth could be discovered by reason.

The famous Roman physician Galen was stunned that Christians remained in Rome during the plague (he, of course, fled) and tended the sick, with the result that many died. The ancient Greeks tossed blind women into brothels; as soon as Christianity was legitimate, they formed homes to care for the blind. Even today, with all the government aids, one out of every three charities is Christian.

John Bradburne, who died this year, tended to lepers in Africa. He washed them, dressed their wounds, fed by hand those who were incapable. Again, even with government aid, the vast majority of lepers in the world today are cared for by Catholic nuns and priests. People who defeat evil by sacrificing oneself for others, compassion in action.

Whereas Buddhists are busy trying to explain why "if there is no self" (p 80), as they claim, then how can this nonexistent self have a rebirth?? Logic would say it's not possible. But then, how can there be karma in a meaningless, Godless universe, and what, what, pray tell, is making the choices for all this karma? Some malevolent Matrix computer? And for heaven's sake, what or who is it that decides what kind of a body the nonexistent self has earned, and what the next nonexistent rebirth will be in? What laws were we supposed to have followed? How dare they give us karma without a clear outline of what is right and what is wrong....oh, we're back to that again.

So what decides on every self's karma if there is no God running the show to decide on how the nonexistent self has done in in this life, and of course we haven't even answered the question of the nonexistent self having a new self? And anyone who has tried to have a Buddhist explain something clearly, when Buddhists have spent the last two thousand years muttering that intellectual activity is not helpful, and proving that if Buddhists had been in control we would have never have had modern dentistry.

Knitter dislikes "Christian creed and dogma – like 'only-begotten Son ... coming to judge the living and the dead'" God coming to judge is what everybody dislikes. But it's either true or not, and his feelings on the subject are irrelevant.

Knitter pontificates, "I can’t believe...in...eternal punishment in hell" (p 76) or that anyone will be "punished for ever and ever and ever – such a doctrine does not seem to promote mental health nor lay the foundations for a mature, adult morality" (p 77). Personally, I wouldn't care to call Jesus Christ a liar, but Knitter has no such qualms. The concept of hell scarcely exists in the Old Testament. The person who kept mentioning hell, and threatening it, was Jesus Christ.

Knitter scolds the Almighty God: "If God "loves us he should want to prevent...needless suffering" (p 30). Our capacity to love is dependent upon our ability to choose, so if we had been created without free will we could not freely choose and love God. Tragedy leads us to fear. And pity. And love.

Knitter complains that, if there is really only one God, then all other gods are false (p 58) which he objects to strongly, because then “'My truth' becomes opposed to...'your truth'” (p 69). He prefers that we should all see "the resurrection, the cornerstone of Christianity, can be considered a 'historical myth.'” (p 71). Such notions as a risen Christ make him ponder, "Do I really believe?...I don't. I don't because I can't." (p 93).

Knitter tries hard to convince us all by explaining further that "the very earliest account of the resurrection...Corinthians...insists that the body Jesus rose with was not physical but spiritual...in some of the earliest communities of Jesus-followers they didn't even talk of the resurrection" (p 103).

Simply not true. Decades have past since the atheist biblical scholars tried this one on so there are lots of books refuting it. Pick up a copy of 'Soma in Biblical Theology" by Gundry or Perkins' "Resurrection: New Testament Witness and Contemporary Reflection". And pick up a copy of "The Gospels for all Christians' by Bauckham, which squashes Bultmann's antique claims about communities.

Breathtaking narcissism: "But it has to be a relationship of authentic mutuality...which means a relationship in which I... can really affect the Divine. I feel it has to be not just God’s show" (p. 27).

More breathtaking narcissism: "relating to God...as an almighty...might... be inappropriate and harmful for me. In such a relationship, how much room was really left for me... If God is the captain of my ship, can I ever be more than a crew-member?" (p 28). Someone needs to tell Knitter that in a relationship in which one side keeps carping about on me, me, me, me, there's not a lot of hope for the relationship.

Knitter announces; "I can only be a Christian by being a Buddhist" (p 216).

He has achieved nothing of the sort. It is not possible to blend atheism and God, truth and the absence of truth, so he has merely rejected God, rejected Christianity, and rejected truth. And that's tragic.

I've been a practicing Buddhist for about 13 years, and started exploring Christianity about a year and a half ago. My Buddhist practice and study have zigzagged in and out of Theravada, Tibetan, Zen, and Shin (Japanese) Buddhism. I've taken Buddhism very seriously but also very joyfully over the years. I've also recently found much joy in seeing what the Bible and contemporary Christian authors have in store for me.

Having said all that, this sounds like the perfect book for me. Buddhism + Christianity = guaranteed five stars, right? Sadly, no. I have to say this is one of the most disappointing books I've read in a while.

The introduction to the book makes it clear that Knitter wrote this primarily to illuminate his own understanding for himself. As an example of why I find this problematic, Knitter's first chapter focus on his struggles with "God the transcendent other" and the like. Really? This is *the* most urgent topic, the opening salvo for your exploration of Christianity illumined by Buddhism? This is what you start with to grab the attention of your readers?

Maybe that *is* the most pressing subject for Knitter himself, but it starts things off on a note that is altogether too academic, too abstract, and far too cold for the people who will be attracted to this book. As a Buddhist, I might open with a chapter on the human relationship to suffering; as a Christian, I might imagine the opening topics could be about Jesus, or one's personal relationship with God. Either one of these would have been a vastly better way to open the book. Maybe not better for the author, but definitely better for the *readers* -- you know, us folks who actually pay money to read this.

Lastly, I'll point out that even though Knitter is a professor of "World Religions and Culture," he falls victim to the bias toward intellectualized Buddhism that is so prevalent in America and the West. Out of some 200 pages of text, he devotes a mere 8 pages to the less intellectual, more devotional Pure Land Buddhism. Throughout Buddhism's history, Pure Land has had significant influence on the everyday lives of common people, and has often had greater numbers of adherents than the brainy Buddhism that's so popular in the West. Though Knitter gives an 8-page nod to Pure Land, he does so ultimately to conclude that the distinctive features of Pure Land can be abstracted away into being the same as the more academic flavor of Buddhism he prefers.

There are genuinely beautiful ways that Christianity and Buddhism can illuminate each other. Though Knitter seems very passionate about being a Christian, his warmth and passion for Christianity do not extend to the "Buddhist flashlight" (his term) that he shines on his own faith. He's turned the living tradition of Buddhism into a cold, harsh LED flashlight that provides no warmth of its own.

I bought this thinking that it was a serious rethinking of the Buddhist/Christian dialogue. Instead, it's a relatively superficial work lacking in intellectual rigor and written in a jaunty, personal, pop-psychology sort of style. His presentation of the diverse Buddhist tradition is pathetically reductive and, though he trots out his theological course work with tiresome regularity, his presentation of the Catholic tradition is even worse. He ignores, willfully I have to think in light of his training, Catholic theological writings past and present that have addressed precisely the criticisms he makes. I think the kindest thing one can say about his comic book versions of what Christians think is that they are versions of what some, very simple folk may believe about such things as heaven, creation, and so on. This is a lazy, self-congratulatory sort of book that does justice to neither spiritual tradition. A smart book about the light each tradition sheds on the other would be welcome, but this is not that book.

"Preface: Am I still a Christian? ...this is rather a selfish book. I've written it mainly for myself." The opening to this book was about the only thing I agreed with the author on. After reading the book, my answer to the author's question is no. While reading it I couldn't help but feel sorry for the author, who devoted so many years to theology, as it is obvious that he lost his faith (if he ever had faith to begin with) a long time ago. He says he struggles with many Christian beliefs and asks if he is "cheating" on Jesus by practicing Buddhism. It sounds more like being a Christian is an inconvenience for him, so he wants to change the definition to suit his own beliefs.
This becomes clear in chapter seven, where the author's political agenda is revealed (not that it wasn't leaking through earlier in the book). The intent of this review is not to disrespect Buddhism. I believe Buddhism has much to offer, especially for finding inner peace through meditation. But I don't consider Buddhism to be a religion, but more of a hobby, like yoga, mountain climbing or fishing. I read the book hoping to get a perspective of Buddhism from a Christian's point of view. That's not what this book is. Fortunately I didn't buy it, I borrowed it.

I found it a fascinating dialogue that Paul Knitter has written about his experience and knowledge of both Buddhism and Christianity. He draws some helpful insights and while it can be a bit wordy, it is a helpful book for Christians who also have found their experience and reading of Buddhism valuable. Worth a read.

I enjoyed this book for many reasons but the best part comes at the end when Knitter speaks about how to blend both Buddhism and Christianity in a way that allows you to see Buddhism as a practice for "how" and Christianity as a practice for "why". Buddhism sees the big picture. Christianity is best for responding to the needs of the community with compassionate action and a sense of justice. Both are needed! I am also excited to delve into Christian Mysticism to complement my 15 years of Zazen.

I finished Marcus Borg's book wondering what was so special about Jesus. The American scholar paints a portrait of someone I would have like to have met, a man interested in the mystery of being, in personal transformation, in social and economic justice, a man who practiced peace through nonviolence, right up to the moment of his death. But with more than a few modern incarnations of the Jesus model - Mother Teresa, Desmond Tutu, Dalai Lama, Gandhi, Martin Luther King - I was left wondering, "Why bother with Jesus?"

Paul F Knitter in his new book , Without Buddha I Could Not Be A Christian, helped me find at least a partial answer.

Knitter is a former Catholic priest and retired scholar of comparative religions who since the 1980's has been exploring Buddhism as a way of enlightening, enlivening and refreshing Christian theology. His problems are nothing new: the distance between creator and created, between humans and and a divine Jesus; the presence of evil in a world controlled by an active god; Jesus' radical nonviolence and war in the name of God; the selfish nature of petitionary prayer and the exclusivity of Christian "truth." This book is Knitter's personal exploration of Buddhism as a means of addressing these issues and with an infusion of Eastern mysticism of rescuing Christianity from the literalists.

I'll leave it to the Christians to judge how well he has succeeded. What the book made clear to me is that Buddhism presents a more unified, less contradictory vehicle for approaching the great unknowable. It does not require belief, it does not preach or moralize, and it begins where all things begin - you and your perception of the world. As the Dhammapada says in the first two verses: "All experience is preceded by mind, led by mind, made by mind. Speak with a peaceful mind and happiness follows."

I couldn't help feeling as I progressed through the book that if Christianity needs such a drastic overhaul, then why not just go over to being a Buddhist? Why "rescue" Christianity from itself? Knitter doesn't provide a satisfactory answer. For him it seems to come down to a matter of nostalgia, of not being able to turn away from a tradition and a set of symbols that have defined most of his life. I suppose at the age of 70, Knitter will never be able to put Christianity aside entirely, though he did decide at the end of writing this book to take Buddhist refuge and the Bodhisattva vows, a kind of Buddhist baptism, if you will.

For myself, the book helped me find something about Jesus that matters. Like Socrates before him, Jesus was unflinching in the search for truth, allowing his guiding principles to play out in his life, up to and including the time and manner of his death.

"It was at this point that Jesus felt himself claimed - perhaps unconsciously but certainly agonizingly - by what Lonergan called the Law of the Cross. Faced and threatened by hatred and violence, Jesus knew - or better, he felt - that the divine Spirit acting through him could not respond to hatred and violence with more hatred and violence . . . But he also knew that if he didn't so respond, it was over. They would kill him. That horrified him. The Gospels report that he was so frightened that he sweat blood. He could neither avoid the issue by fleeing nor respond to it by violence. Somehow, having to die at this moment was part of his mission. Therefore, so be it. 'Thy will be done.'"

This is something to which we can all aspire, because so few of us make it that far, to live our principles regardless of the consequences to ourselves, even unto death.

#

This is an insightful, honest reflection by a Catholic theologian explaining how Buddhist practices inform and enhance his Christian faith. There;'s a lot of very useful background on contemplative traditions in Christianity, and Knitter presents powerful personal anecdotes describing how each tradition deals with suffering. Well worth the read!

Dr. Knitter is a respected theologian with a unique perspective and that is not in dispute. I find his writing style however stilted and pedantic which is unfortunate since he could have a much wider appeal with an important message. As true for many theologians Dr. Knitter writes as a theologian for other theologians. His purpose is thus to fit within that narrow world and pay the price of irrelevance to those most in need. Religious bigotry and dogmatism is the bane of our collective human condition and Dr. Knitter could have washed some of this away. Sadly he seems to have chosen to speak to himself and his tight circle.

Indeed, Christianity and Buddhism share so much in common: They are both concerned to opening our minds and hearts to discover the unconditioned consciousness that is beyond words and the dogmas based on words that separate us. It is through developing true presence and unconditional awareness - mindfulness - that we begin to see the similarities. This is an important book for the next phase of human spiritual evolution. I also recommend 'The Path of Mindfulness Meditation' available through the store.

The conflict that Professor Knitter seems trying to resolve in this book is not reconciling Buddhism with Christianity. It seems the real issue is that the good professor is trying to come to terms with the fact that he isn't actually Christian ,but some one who is of the secular faith ,yet he still wants all the trappings of being Christian. You can see this in his professing that he actually believes in none of the Christian mysteries. At the same time he affirms his beliefs in secular humanism. His lack of knowledge of Christianity also draws away from anything he says of the Buddhist faith. As a Orthodox Christian who student of both western philosophy and Buddhism I struggled to glean what diamonds I could from this writing ,but they were few. It just goes to show the state of modern academia that this man could actually be teaching theology.