Jesus Christ through Buddhist Eyes

Christ as the Truth, the Light, the Life, but a Way?

Bokin Kim

A conservative Korean Presbyterian pastor asks me what I know about Christ. He asks again what a Buddhist can know about Christ. He claims that Christ cannot be understood from the other aspects of view, but only from the Christian view. Then do I know at all about Christ?

My Buddhist understanding of Christ does not start with how Christ has been understood in the Christian context. My understanding is based on the reading of the Christian scripture. My reading of the scripture is guided by Sot'aesan's understanding of Christianity. ¹

According to my reading, the Bible presents two meanings of Christ: Christ in the transhistorical sense and Christ in the historical sense. The meaning of Christ as the Truth, the Light, and the Life represents a Christ in the transhistorical sense. The meaning of Christ as a way represents a Christ in the historical sense. Because Jesus did not make any distinction or clarification between these two meanings, it is obvious that even the Christian tradition has confusion on the meaning of Christ. As a result, most Christians hold to an exclusive view of Christ that claims his uniqueness.

My attribution of two meanings of Christ is derived from a similar distinction in Buddhism. Buddha in the transhistorical sense represents the universal nature of Buddha, which is identical with Truth. Truth can be replaced by other terms, such as Light or Life. Buddha in the historical sense means the historical nature of Buddha. In this sense, Buddha is unique and should not be depicted as absolute nor as universal. Likewise, Christ can be construed in these two ways.

Christ as the Truth, Light, and Life

When I read the description of Christ as the Truth, Light, and Life in the Gospel according to John, I feel a strong urge to replace Christ with the term Buddha--not Gautama Buddha but Dharmakaya Buddha. Here Christ refers to the source of the historical Christ just as Dharmakaya Buddha is the source of historical Buddha. In this sense, Christ cannot be compared with any beings in the world and thus is being described absolutely. Christ only is the Truth, Light, and Life. Similarly, there is a Zen koan saying, "Buddha alone exists."

Here the terms Christ and Buddha do not point to historical figures such as Jesus of Nazareth and Siddhartha Gautama. According to a story related to the compilation of Buddha's teaching, Ananda, who heard Buddha talk the most, was excluded from the committee of compilation. The reason was that Ananda saw the corporal aspect of the Buddha only, but he could not meet the spiritual aspect of the Buddha. [End Page 76] The term awakening in the Buddhist tradition refers to understanding the absolute or universal nature within each transient being.

It seems wrong if one claims that only Christ, not Buddha, is the Truth, Light, or Life. By the same token it is wrong to say that Buddha alone, not Christ, exists in eternity. It is wrong to identify historical figures such as Jesus or Gautama with the Truth, Light, or Life. It is more erroneous to exclusively describe only one historical figure as the Truth, Light, or Life. According to my understanding, the terms Christ and Buddha are not the starting point for arguing the uniqueness of the historical Jesus or Gautama but for awakening our absolute or universal nature. That is, Christ as Truth, Light, and Life is our true nature or true self. In this nature there is no distinction between Christ and Buddha, between Christ and me, or between Buddha and me.

Regardless of how our foundation is named--Christ (or God), Buddha (Dharmakaya Buddha), Tao, or Wu-chi--our foundation is the basis from which religions are originated.

Christ as a Way

Christ is a way to our foundation--in other words, the Truth, Light, and Life. Christ's way is faith/grace. Jesus taught that the faith in God and grace from God would bring forth salvation to the believers. Similarly, Buddha is a way to the Truth, Light, and Life. Buddha's way is practice/enlightenment, which is different from Christ's way. Buddha taught that one would achieve liberation through practice/ enlightenment. Christ's way--equal to Buddha's way--functions as a means to achieve the religious goal, whether salvation or liberation. Thus, Christ's way or Buddha's way is a way, not 'The Way.'

Now I will introduce Sot'aesan's description of Christ's way. Sot'aesan defined Christ's way as faith. Based on his encounters with Christian scriptures and members of Christian denominations, Sot'aesan characterizes the Christian faith as a "reliance on other power" and as having "no immediate contact with the source of faith, namely God without spirit being open."

One Encounter

The Great Master (Sot'aesan), as he returned from a sightseeing trip to Mt. Diamond said, "The innkeeper where I stayed at Mt. Diamond happened to be a Christian. He was so devout and enjoyed his life so much that I could not but ask him about his personal history. He told me that he had believed in God for thirty years, and that despite many obstacles he remained thankful. During good times he thanked God for being good to him, and during bad times he thanked God for correcting and guiding him. Thus, strengthened by his faith on every favorable or unfavorable occasion, he lived a happy life. . . . The Christian man was able to acquire a happy life even though he relied solely on his faith in the Power of Another's Ability without perceiving the source of Truth." (The Scripture of Won Buddhism, Faith 12) [End Page 77]

Here the faith of the innkeeper--depicted as thankful for God on every occasion--is described as reliance on other power by Sot'aesan. Why is the innkeeper always thankful for God even during bad times? To him good times and bad times are not occurring incidentally, but they are given by God's love. An unfavorable occasion as well as favorable occasion is the mark of God's love. The unfavorable occasion occurs out of God's love as a way of showing an individual his wrongdoings. That is, God's love is given in order to set him on his guard against wrongdoings.

Sot'aesan describes the characteristics of the innkeeper's faith as "without perceiving the source of Truth." The innkeeper has not realized yet why God or God's love responds to him differently. The innkeeper partially perceives that the source of his faith is related to doing. He does not, however, have a clear understanding about the source of his faith; that is, he does not know whether the self or self-power is the source of faith.

According to Sot'aesan, complete faith is the integration of faith as other-reliance and faith as self-reliance. Thus, Sot'aesan suggests this integrated faith to the Christian tradition.

Another Encounter

When Cho, Song-Kwang came to see him for the first time, the Great Master said, "You look different from other people. What is your religion?" Song-Kwang answered, "I have been an elder in the Presbyterian Church for some years." The Great Master asked, "As you have believed in God for so many years, can you tell me where God is?" Song-Kwang replied, "God is omniscient and omnipresent. It is said that we see God everywhere." The Great Master asked again, "Then, have you seen him often, and have you heard him talk, and has God taught you directly?" Song-Kwang answered, "I have not seen him nor have I talked with him yet." The Great Master said, "Then you are still not qualified to be a true disciple of Jesus and have communion with him." Song-Kwang asked, "Pray tell me how to see God and how to be taught by God." The Great Master said, "If you constantly study so that you may become a true disciple of Jesus, you will see God and can be taught by God. . . . Even a Christian, if he deserves to be a true disciple of Jesus, will understand what I am doing. Also, my disciples who deserve to be my true disciples will understand what Jesus was doing." (The Scripture of Won Buddhism, Prospects for the Future 14)

Here Cho, Song-Kwang, an elder in the Presbyterian Church, is described as "having no immediate contact with God." The Presbyterian elder Cho has indirect contact with God through Jesus and only believes the message that Jesus spoke.

The elder Cho's faith, namely faith without immediate contact with God, shows that he has not become a true disciple of Jesus. The Gospel reads, "If you really knew me, you would know my father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him" (John 14:7). If one were a true disciple of Christ, one would know God, [End Page 78] Sot'aesan emphasized. If one does not have contact with God, then one has not become a true disciple of Christ.

Sot'aesan understands that if one practices well, then one's spirit will be open. That is, as the completion of faith for a true disciple of Jesus, Sot'aesan talks about practicing well and one's spirit being open. If one is practicing well and makes their spirit open, one sees or hears God. Thus one becomes a true disciple of Jesus. The Gospel also talks about the work of the Spirit. The Gospel says, "I will send him (the Spirit) to you . . . when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth" (John 16:7-13).

According to Sot'aesan's understanding, Christ's way is a way to understand other ways. Christ's way as well as other ways help us to reach the foundation. Though the Gospel has a passage saying, "I am the Way. . . . No one comes to the Father except through me," Sot'aesan understands that others from different ways really reach the Father. Only "through me" does not mean exclusion of other ways but total devotion to Christ's way.

Grace from Christ's Way

I understand Christ as a way, not as 'The Way.' I understand that Christ played a significant role to humanity. Faith as assurance is to go beyond ego-boundary and to point to the Truth, Light, and Life. As Paul says in his Epistle, "I no longer live, but Christ lives in me . . . I live by faith in the Son of God . . ." (Gal. 2:20). That is, by faith, the ego-boundary is gone and eternity is gained.

What Buddhists garner when they follow Buddha's path is the realization of the emptiness of beings and the empty nature of ego. As the Heart Sutra says, nothing can be attained, thus I have no obstruction, nor fear. Therefore, I finally achieve nirvana. That is, realization of nothingness or emptiness is the way to freedom and eternity.

A Christian's radical faith or a Buddhist's radical awakening serve the same goal--that is, how to go beyond ego-boundary. A Christian's faith is based on God's grace, where believers totally rely on God. The Spirit guides them to go beyond the limitation of self and achieve eternity. That is, Christians go beyond their ego-boundary while relying on other power. On the other hand, Buddhists can reach radical awakening by their strenuous effort of practice. Practice leads them to realize the true nature of self and to achieve freedom from the ego-boundary. That is, Buddhists rely on self power for radical awakening.

As a Buddhist I feel that Buddhist self-effort is not an easy way. Often self-effort leads us toward the opposite of the Truth. Though the Truth is formulated as the empty nature of Self, self-effort or practice in Buddhism hardens the shell of self far away from the truth of emptiness. Arrogance or an inconsiderate attitude are often derived from the wrong view that is created from practice or self-effort.

Paul's faith seems a good example of radical faith in Christianity. Though he is challenged by his egoistic desire after his dramatic experience of conversion, his firm [End Page 79] faith leads him to defeat his ego-boundary. Based on his experience, Paul strongly guides people to oneness with Christ. Christian faith, that is, faith in Christ as the savior, is truly a grace that leads one to go beyond one's ego-boundary.

As a Buddhist I understand that a Christian's faith in Christ--which helps the believer to go beyond one's ego-boundary--is equal to a Buddhist's faith in Dharmakaya Buddha or Truth. Based on faith in Christ, Christians attain salvation, or eternity. Similarly, Buddhists attain nirvana--namely freedom based on their faith in the Truth. In this context Buddhists also start with faith. Without faith a Buddhist practice for nirvana cannot be initiated. Though Buddhism does not emphasize that awakening is directly derived from faith, the Hwayen Sutra teaches that radical faith is equal to awakening.

Faith is a significant religious experience shared among Buddhists and Christians. Then why does Paul's conversion in Christianity or Hwayen's radical faith in Buddhism not occur to people easily? How can one have faith at all? There seem to be various views on these questions. Buddhists--whose explanations are very different from Christian ones--seem to start with what one can do now with one's self-power. Thus, Buddhists focus more on practice than faith because the occurrence of faith itself is very mysterious.

The tradition of Christianity, however, has placed more focus on faith. Christian believers follow the way of faith and live their lives with selfless giving, while going beyond the boundary of ego. As a Buddhist I feel the mysterious power within the Christian tradition, which has been transforming millions of people for centuries. I wonder, however, whether the faith of the Christian tradition is going to be an effective way or not in the future. If not, what kind of path does Christianity need to create?

Won Buddhist Temple of Philadelphia

Notes

1. Sot'aesan, Chungbin Park (1891-1943) is the founder of Won Buddhism, a reformed Buddhism started in Korea eighty years ago. Sot'aesan had twenty years' journey of searching the Truth. After his Great Awakening he encountered scriptures and believers from different religious traditions. There are written several episodes of Sot'aesan's meeting with Christian believers in The Scripture of Won Buddhism.

Bibliography

The Holy Bible: New International Version. 1984.

Pal Khn Chon (Trans.). The Scripture of Won Buddhism. Iksan, Korea: Won Buddhism Publishing, 1988.