http://www.UrbanDharma.org ...Buddhism for Urban America


The Urban Dharma Newsletter... October 21, 2003


In This Issue: Special Issue - The Self in Christianity and Buddhist

1. Christian Forums > Buddhism and Christianity
2. Self and No Self
...Dharma Talk ...Albuquerque Zen Center
...By Upasika Khema Sally Jantrarit
4. The Self in Christianity and Buddhism
5. Temple/Center/Website- of the Week:
The North American Interfaith Network
6. Book/CD/Movie Review: MY FAVORITE BUDDHIST-CHRISTIAN BOOKS ...by djgnostic


1. Christian Forums > Open Discussion & Debate > Spirituality & Religion > Buddhism and Christianity


In another thread, someone said something like, "I believe that the teachings of the Buddha were a pointer to the message of Jesus Christ."

This is strange to me. The central theme of Buddhism and the central theme of Christianity seem to be diametrically opposed. The aim of Buddhism is to realise that there is no persisting self (and no eternal soul), while the aim of Christianity (today, at least) seems to be ensuring the neverending existence of the soul in Heaven.

Any thoughts?


Namaste zoot,

hmm, my thoughts... the poster that said that was incorrect


Yeah, but it's a common attitude among all kinds of people, not just Christians who want Buddha singing for their label. Plenty of feel-gooders enjoy saying that all religions are basically the same, and all that.


Well just a different spin. In both Buddhism and Christianity and all religion, it's meant to transcend one beyond one's human condition. In Buddhism the 4 noble truths and the 8 path ways are meant to do that, just as Jesus teachings as how one gets to Heaven, through faith and actions.

Love God and love your neighbor, and the Sermon on the Mount when put into practical application all transforms the individual in the here and now, right here on earth, just as Buddhism does. While Buddhism to me is more a life philsophy, when it's all said in done that's the bottom line. You and the here and now. That's the whole point of religion.



The morality in practice of Buddhism and Christianity may be similar, and the transformative effects on a person's life may be similar, but are you so certain that there is similarity between the essence of the Christian's spirituality (relationship with God) and the essence of the Buddhist's spirituality (emptiness and impermanence)? Buddhism doesn't recognise that fundamental aspect of Christianity (God/Jesus) and Christianity doesn't recognise that fundamental aspect of Buddhism (no-self).

Actually, I read an interesting essay by a Jesuit (it's always the Jesuits) priest about a re-examination of Christian concepts of the soul in light of the Bible, returning to a more Judaic idea of a person's spirit than Christianity's Greek idea of an immortal soul. But few Christians would agree with that.


Namaste zoot,

you may also be interested in some of the Benedictine writings on how Christianity has lost it's comtemplative aspect and become a very legalist tradition.

one guy in particular you may want to read about is a Trappist Monk named Thomas Merton.

there are other, perhaps more basic, differences between them. Creator/no creator, sin/ no sin and so forth.

it is, from our view, a mistake to try to form a "world wide" or "universal" religion. people vary in their capacities and, according to the Madhyamika school, that is why the different religious traditions were expounded... each one for a people in a place and time in which they could understand it.


But it is, and I'm assuming you're Mahayana, the goal of bodhisattvas to liberate all beings, and it is the teaching of Buddhism that liberation comes only through the prajna that there is no persisting self. If that's so, then the bodhisattva's hopes will only come to pass if religions that encourage a belief in individal persisting selves are gone.

Yeah, I've read all of Merton's stuff.


"The worship of one's self is the worship of nothing. And the worship of nothing is the worship of Hell" -Thomas Merton


Yes, people try to forget that Merton was ridiculously Catholic, however much they want to make him out to be a Buddhist.


I see them as two different vehicles seeking the same earthly paths, under the guise of reaching their perspective destinations.

I understand the different nuiances, but my point was the transcending of the spiritual experience within the our human realm, the here and now, as what occurs with both and all religions.

With that said, I see the Sermon on the Mount as being "no-self" it's just that it's not taught as a absolute doctrine within Chrisitianity, even though this is the essense of Jesus...rather odd.

Can't comment on the soul as some seperate entity. I see it as the metaphysical you, one's, characteristics, thoughts, experiences, which loses it's existance once we lose our human existance.

2. Self and No Self ...Dharma Talk ...Albuquerque Zen Center


When we divide our experience into self and world, we see ourselves as "here" (with a corresponding interior world) and the world "over there" - outside and around us. We see our lives as a series of interactions between the outside, "the objective world," and our interior subjective world.

In this view, our self and our subjective content are almost synonymous. We feel responsible for our inner world of thoughts, memories and emotions. Our relationship with the outer world is often expressed as reaching out and perceiving experience. This viewpoint is inherently centered on what we think our self does. We believe our self is an actor on the world's stage.

This is an admittedly simple, broad model. Even though it leaves many questions unanswered, it readily corresponds to our sense of everyday life. Many people go through life without ever questioning this basic scheme.

If the circumstances of life inspire us to investigate Buddhism, we will probably bring this distinction between self and world into our practice and be challenged to examine it. To find peace, clarity and satisfaction in our lives something must change. As a first step, accepting various Buddhist beliefs and practices can have a beneficial impact on our lives. For example, we can apply the teaching of the Eightfold Path; we can meditate on compassion and wisdom; we can practice generosity and the other paramitas. These are all worthy practices. However, until we examine our underlying assumptions about self, world and relationship, the strength and effectiveness of these practices will necessarily be limited. The more completely our understanding corresponds to Buddhist teaching, the more likely we are to realize the full benefits of Buddhist practice. Therefore, it is useful to examine our assumptions in the light of Buddhist teaching.

One of the cornerstones of Buddhist teaching is the teaching of "no self." There is no self in the sense of a permanent and independent substance within existence. This is true of all existence, not just the personal self. If we identify our self with our subjectivity, this teaching can seem terrifying. We may be afraid that if we let go of our identification with our thoughts, memories and emotions, we will cease to exist. But this is not what the teaching implies. It is important to realize how "no self" shows us a path out of suffering.

We all have experiences that we recognize as selfless. Perhaps when we were listening to music; perhaps when we watch our child growing; perhaps when we first look into a true lover's eyes. Any experience that is vital and penetrating is a moment of selflessness. This is not really an exotic activity, but our ideas of self keep us from recognizing its everyday occurrence.

We make a fist with our hands. With our fist we can do some useful things, knocking on a door for instance. But when we want to do other things, caressing our lover's face for example, a fist isn't very helpful. So we open our hands. Where did the fist go? "Fist" is simply a concept. It is a description of activity - bringing our fingers together in a certain way. "Fist" is not a fixed thing. When our hand comes together in a certain way, fist appears; when we open our hand, fist disappears. There is no essence of fist, no fist soul or self. It is only a concept that describes a certain activity. The real fist is no fist; what is perceptible, "real," is the activity of our hand coming together. When we confuse the concept with the activity, we become confused and worried when "something" that was present is no longer here. We open our hand, our fist disappears, but we are unconcerned because we understand the nature of "fist." When we do not understand the nature of self, we may be fearful when we hear Buddhism proclaim there is no self.

When Buddhism teaches that there is no self, it is just like saying there is no fist. Buddhism is asking us to look beyond the concepts and ideas of self and realize the activity from which self arises and disappears. "No self" opens a door for us to discover our nature through realizing our profound dynamic relationship with everything around us.

Imagine hiking in the mountains. We come around a ridge and suddenly, surprisingly, we see a magnificent vista. It "blows us away." The teaching of no self means that in the activity that we describe as "seeing the vista," the self that we are is the activity - seeing the vista. In the moment of seeing (or hearing, tasting, etc.) our self is pure activity. In this activity there is no "I am" self ("I am seeing the vista.") There is no self-consciousness; there is no recognition. In this moment the real self is no self; there is only selfless activity - "seeing the vista." Some religions posit a witness, an observer, independent from the activity. Buddhism rejects this idea - defines it as delusion.

The teaching of no self means that the activity of experiencing is selfless. In extraordinary experiences, such as seeing a magnificent vista, this may be apparent. But the teaching goes further. It tells us that the foundational activity of all experiencing is selfless. Whether tying our shoes, hugging our child, or driving our car - in all these experiences the underlying activity is selfless.

Within this selfless activity our personal self arises. After realizing the vista, in the next moment we arise, "Ah…beautiful." In the moment we say, "Ah…beautiful," suddenly there is self and world, space and time. This is the moment of recognition, consciousness; this is the human realm of subject and object.

In the instant of activity - seeing the vista - there is neither self nor world; there is only activity. In the next moment self and world arise together. Whatever the characteristics of this born self its appearance is transitory. In the next moment a bird calls, the wind stirs the trees, or a deer catches our eye; the self and world dissolve into activity, experiencing the new moment. Appearing, disappearing, appearing, disappearing - this is the fundamental pulse of personal self.

The realm of self and world is the realm of ordinary consciousness: subject, object, space and time. Most of our efforts to understand our situation work within this framework. But Buddhism insists on no self. In Buddhism the essential foundation is selfless activity. The instance of pure activity, pure experiencing, is prior to recognition. The subject and object polarity of conventional experience is secondary to the primacy of activity. In other words, the essential condition is relating. All living is relating. All experience of self and world arise from the foundation of relating.

Our lives are shaped by our sense of our self. Our perception of the world, how we cultivate relationships, what we think of our lives, all depend on how we see ourselves. If we believe in a substantive self, then self is our starting point for perceptions and interpretations of experience and relationship. If we believe in self, then we will attach to self. Standing within our self, we judge everything: good (to me), bad (to me), beautiful (to me), and ugly (to me). Direct experiencing gives way to the world of our interpreting.

Every moment we act from the standpoint of self perpetuates the belief in self. "I want this; I dislike that." The course of our lives is shaped by desire and attachment, fear and confusion. If we acquire what we currently desire, we are momentarily happy; if not, then we are disappointed. In the continuing struggle to maintain happiness or avoid disappointment there is no enduring peace of mind. We can exhaust ourselves upholding and defending our self-image, all the while bemoaning our sense of isolation. When our understanding is based on belief in a substantive self, then all relationship becomes problematical.

When we understand that self is selfless, then our ground, our starting point, is the activity of relating. We arise from the unity of relating, we dissolve into the unity of relating. We don't need to "figure things out." When we don't separate, we don't need to interpret. When we don't attach, we don't suffer. Peace of mind does not come from being clever or intelligent, merely awake. The simple path to clarity is to dissolve our self into relating.

Every moment self arises from and returns to selfless activity. The teaching of no self reminds us of our common origin and destination. When we practice the teaching of no self, we dissolve the barriers and distinctions that divide our lives. We reunite with the activity that is the source of our living. The apparent problems, conflicts, judgments, and interpretations that dominate our self's vision pale in the light of our origin and destination.

In the realm of fundamental activity there is no self; there is no world. Self and world arise from this foundation and return to this foundation. If we are clear in the arising and disappearing of self, then we can find our way home in any situation. When we willingly dissolve ourselves into relating, then the subsequent arising of self can be free from desire and attachment. Peace and completeness are not distant promises, but the natural condition from which we arise and to which we return.

The personal self that we identify with is an ephemeral appearance in the activity of life. Clinging to an "I am" self perpetuates the belief in a separate, objective world around us. It can create distance in our intimate relationships and diminish the vitality of experience. When we believe we are separate from our experience, alone in our relationships, then dropping our attachments is a long and difficult process. As we continue to learn that our foundation is relationship, that from the beginning self and separation are an illusion, we can step free in a heartbeat. Then the primacy of relationship is relating and the vividness of experience is experiencing. Many teachings emphasize that dissolving our illusion of an "I am" self is the essential practice of Buddhism. We will return to this insight again and again and again.

The critical work we must do is to develop insight into our nature. When we are empty sky, we are free from boundaries and restrictions. When we identify our self with subject, object or some idea, we bind ourselves. When we understand what a fist is, we are not afraid of losing it when we open our hands.

3. A SIMPLE PERSPECTIVE ON 'NO SELF' ...By Upasika Khema Sally Jantrarit


One of the most complex concepts in Buddhism for most people is the idea of 'no-self'. We refer to it in the teachings as "there nothing to be thought of as I or mine". In Buddhism we also know that we truly understand Dhamma when we see things as they really are. But is it possible to conceptualize it? That is, to get a picture in our minds, even if we don't completely see the reality of it as an Arahant would? We can understand the concept of greed, anger and delusion. $o could we understand that there is no self that feels, thinks, etc.?

Many people I have met, Buddhists, still fret over the concept of 'no-self'. They feel we can't exist or feel or love or create or work without it. I believe it isri t really that important. And I believe that it is possible for us to do all these things without a 'self .

I believe that the idea of non-self does not mean non-existence; it doesri t mean that we aren't here or that we aren't real. It is an idea of selfishness vs. selflessness. It means that when we act and interact in the world we are not concerned with thoughts about our personal being, feelings or even our own bodies. We act out of compassion or lovingkindness or equanimity or (sympathetic) joy. It releases us from conceit, anger and delusion.

Buddhism shows us that the world and the universe beyond is nothing more than the sum of its parts. All the atoms of the universe, in constant changing states, meet together and form matter. This matter can be plant, animal, or neither, gas, liquid, solid. Atoms connect with each to generate life forms that can be visible and non-visible.

Take the example of a wooden table. A table is nothing more than several pieces of wood cut into various lengths and nailed or glued together to make what we call a 'table'. Take those pieces apart and connect them in a different configuration and you might have a chair or a crate or a seesaw: but it's still nothing more than a bunch of cut pieces of wood.

Think about a film on the movie screen. When we view a movie we believe it to be a continuous flow of experiences but in reality it is only a series of thousands of individual images which, when put in order and fed through the projector, become a flow only because of the speed at which fine individual images are delivered. There is no real action going on, the people on the screen aren't real, there's nothing solid about anything we see.

Look at the human body. It is nothing more than a mass of atoms attracted to one another to create blood, bones, muscles, organs. There are chemicals, enzymes, hormones, and acids in the body and they all work together. But they are not in our control. In fact, our bodies are merely machines run by chemical processes and electricity. The only things we can control are the voluntary functions of the body: moving arms, legs, sitting, walking, etc. Even thinking is a voluntary function in the sense that we can (if we choose to or are capable of it) determine the outcome of thinking (good thoughts generate good outcomes and negative thoughts generate unhappy outcomes). When we make a decision to act, speak or think about something who is doing it? Who is really deciding or thinking or acting?

When we are absorbed in something we enjoy very much, a great book, movie, building a model airplane, listening to a great speaker, we speak of 'losing ourselves' to the object. We speak about not being aware of our surroundings. I see this as a form of 'no-self'. Our focus is on the object and not us.

Animals have minds, they decide, they act, they feel and although they may have a feeling of 'self' they cannot express it. So why is it that humans worry that if they have no self they cannot be fulfilled?

I believe in the world there are two great examples of people who had no feeling of self and yet created more than any Picasso, Mozart, or even Einstein.

Of course there is the Buddha. Everything he did was done out of selflessness. He acted and spoke with no thought for his own needs, cares, or pains. He just did; he taught and roused people to understand what he discovered. He acted purely out of compassion for others, loving-kindness for others, and equanimity. He knew what needed to be done and he did it. He did not need to be concerned with his 'self. It wasn't a necessary part of his existence. He had a purpose and he was able to fulfill it.

In modern times my example of a totally selfless person would be Mother Theresa. She tended to the sick; her faith was so totally absorbing that she never gave a thought for her own needs. She acted because this is what she felt should be done. She helped others; she was compassionate and loving. She probably never second-guessed what she did. There were people who needed her and she was there for them. Yet she accomplished a great deal in her lifetime and certainly made a mark on the world. If Mother Theresa had acted with Right Understanding she would have been a Buddhist.

I believe it is possible to truly understand the concept of 'no-self'. I think we should stop worrying about it. We should stop thinking that if we believe in it we have lost something. It's just something to strive to understand further as we continue to study Buddhist teachings. Eventually, like everything in Buddhism, it will come to our clear understanding. Buddhism is a religion of repetition. The ideas needs to be read and heard over and over again because we have misunderstood them for so many eons in samsara that we should not worry about 'getting it' right away. Old habits die hard. The splendor of Buddhism is that we have the chance to keep hearing it and practicing and slowly it will come into our scope of awareness and understanding. Some day we might even reach Nibbana at which time we will see the reality of 'no-self and say 'Ah, now I've got it'!

4. The Self in Christianity and Buddhism


The philosophy lecture was very stimulating. The student felt compelled to raise his hand. "Professor, how can I be sure that I have a self, indeed that I even exist?" The professor smiled knowingly. He looked the student in the eye and said, "And who may I say is asking?"

The Global Culture and Intersecting Faiths

The 21st century will most certainly teach humanity that Rudyard Kipling's maxim "East is east, west is west, and never the twain shall meet" is incorrect. We are living in an era of unprecedented intercultural exchange. People throughout the world have greater access to information about other cultures than at any point in human history. An aspect of this small world is an increased frequency of religious dialogue and analysis, which has resulted in striking shifts in religious understanding and practices. One effect of this phenomenon is an increased interest in eastern spiritualism among people outside of Asia. Today, there are hundreds of thousands of people following Buddhism in the United States alone, many of them born to families that were not Buddhist.

Several books have been written recently with the goal of inducing a philosophical merger between Christianity and Buddhism, offering that the faiths are but different paths up the same mountain. Living Buddha, Living Christ, Going Home,: Jesus and Buddha as Brothers both by Thich Nhat Hanh, as well as Jesus and Buddha : The Parallel Sayings by Marcus Borg are among the most popular. In these books, the Jesus that is represented is the Jesus as avatar, one among many of history's wise teachers, a sage. He is said to be more like the Buddha than different. As a gentle counter to this paradigm, this essay will seek to thoughtfully and respectfully explore an essential and profound difference between the Christian and Buddhist faiths - the question of the nature and destination of the self.

Buddhism in a Nutshell

A brief overview of Buddhism is in order to orient the reader's basic understanding around its basic precepts and tenets. Buddhism was founded in the late 6th century B.C. by Siddhartha Gautama, the Buddha ("enlightened one"). His teachings, called dharma, offer the essential model of the Buddhist religious life. Gautama lived a luxurious life, but was reputed to be grieved by the deep suffering of humanity. He followed an extreme ascetic path, which lead to his "enlightenment". He developed an understanding of life that was generally oriented around ideas that have been codified into four "noble truths" and something called "the eight fold path". The noble truths are:

* life is suffering

* suffering is caused by craving -- for sense pleasures and for things to be as they are not

* suffering has an end point

* there is a means to the end of suffering which is the "middle way", which declares that no extremes should be sought, and an "eight fold path" - comprised of right views, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right endeavor, right mindfulness (focus in activities), and right concentration (meditation).

The final result of following the Buddhist path to "enlightenment", or total awareness, in that the self is shed and an individual ceases to exist, achieving a state called "nirvana", in which only peace and joy exist.

No-Self versus Self Denial

What follows are a few statements from Buddhists about the self:

* "One of the cornerstones of Buddhist teaching is the teaching of 'no self.' There is no self in the sense of a permanent and independent substance within existence." Albquerque Zen Center - http://www.azc.org/azc/azc-talk-2000-04.html

* "What is Buddhism? I think that the most adequate description is the three Dharma marks; suffering, impermanence, no self. Of the three only the idea of no self is uniquely Buddhist. Buddhism's unique contribution to the world is no self yet the majority of people seek it as a form of self improvement." - John Hite, http://www.shindharmanet.com/writings/self.htm

* "In this sense, the anatta teaching is not a doctrine of no-self, but a not-self strategy for shedding suffering by letting go of its cause, leading to the highest, undying happiness. At that point, questions of self, no-self, and not-self fall aside. Once there's the experience of such total freedom, where would there be any concern about what's experiencing it, or whether or not it's a self?" - Thanissaro Bhikkhu, http://www.buddhismtoday.com/english/buddha/Teachings/025-noself.htm

The Buddhist doctrine of no-self offers that the self is a passing locality of impulses, experiences, and ideas, yet in the final sum, does not exist. Thanissaro Bhikkhu offers a variation on this theme, declaring that the existence of the self is ultimately inconsequential to the enlightened mind. The self in Buddhism is illusory, as is the suffering that the self experiences. These ideas can be juxtaposed against the Christian profession of the self. The Christian profession of the self is most clearly captured in the words of John the Baptist speaking of Jesus, "He must increase, but I must decrease." (John 3:30) The Christian self is to die to the world, and only then can it come alive to Christ. It is only after a Christian self joins Christ in the grave that it can come to new life by being born again. This theme was aptly summarized by Dietrich Bonhoffer in The Cost of Discipleship, "Self-denial is never such a series of isolated acts of mortification or asceticism. It is not suicide, for there is an element of self-will even in that. To deny oneself is to be aware only of Christ and no more of self, to see only him who goes before and no more the road which is too hard for us. Once more, all that self-denial can say is: 'He leads the way, keep close to him'.... The cross is laid on every Christian. The first Christ-suffering which every man must experience is the call to abandon the attachments of this world. It is that dying of the old man which is the result of the encounter with Christ."(1) The Christian self cannot be transcended of its own volition, rather it is to die so that room can be made for the ultimate and eternal self, that of Jesus Christ. Where the Buddhist offers that the wise mind will finally see that the self is a non-entity, the Christian offers that the self is an entity of insufficiency until it diminishes in the presence of Christ. The Buddhist seeks to abnegate the self. Cessation of the self is the highest attainment of the Buddhist faith. The Christian seeks to deny the self. The death of the self is a joyous event in which a Christian joins "the fellowship of His suffering" from which new life comes. These are radically different understandings of the self, and any attempt at reconciliation of these faiths must by its very definition put aside this very important distinction.

A Decision

To offer that Buddhism and Christianity are parallel truths is to take many of the essential doctrines of each faith and discard them. While there are elements of each faith that are similar in content and theme, certain of the essential elements are irreconcilable. From these differences, the seeker of the truth is faced with a decision - is there a self, what is its nature and composition, and where is its destination? What is the fate of the self? These questions are asked that one may pursue an answer. Seek that answer in truth and in deed, and you will find the Truth Indeed, Jesus Christ. And make sure you keep asking yourself, "And who may I say is asking?"

(1) - The Cost of Discipleship, Simon and Schuster, 1959, pages 88-89

5. The North American Interfaith Network



The North American Interfaith Network is a non-profit association of interfaith organizations and agencies in Canada, Mexico and the United States.


This web site presents information about, and insights to, some of the many interfaith activities and organizations in North America and throughout the world. It also provides connections via membership lists, resources, and selected links to information about religions and their communities, interfaith sites and faith-based groups. We invite you to interact with this Network  "in the flesh or on-line" in whatever way is appropriate for you.


Subscribe to our quarterly newsletter or read it on line at  NAIN NEWS and DIGEST    Send news intems to newseditor@nain.org

Our Mission

NAIN's programs seek to build communication and mutual understanding among interfaith organizations and diverse religious groups throughout North America.

Through its annual conference, newsletter, web site, member organizations, Board and supportive participants, NAIN offers networking opportunities to person of many religious traditions and numerous interfaith organizations.

NAIN affirms humanity's diverse and historic spiritual resources, bringing these to bear on contemporary global, national, regional and local issues. Without infringing on the effort of existing organizations, NAIN facilitates the networking possibilities of these organizations. NAIN encourages cooperative interaction based on serving the needs and promoting the aspirations of all member groups.

6. Amazon.com - MY FAVORITE BUDDHIST-CHRISTIAN BOOKS ...by djgnostic, ESL Teacher/reader of religion

1. Going Home: Jesus and Buddha As Brothers - by Thich Nhat Hanh (Paperback - October 2000)

List Price: $13.00

djgnostic's comments: inspiration by a master Buddhist monk


2. Living Buddha, Living Christ - by Thich Nhat Hanh, et al (Paperback - September 1997)

List Price: $13.00

djgnostic's comments: Thich Nhat Hanh is a master!!!


3. Buddhists Talk About Jesus Christians Talk About the Buddha - by Rita M. Gross (Editor), Terry Muck (Editor) (Paperback - July 2000)

List Price: $15.95

djgnostic's comments: acedemic essays by members of each fatih (Crossan, Borg, Gross, etc.)


4. The Gethsemani Encounter: A Dialogue on the Spiritual Life by Buddhist and Christian Monastics - by Donald W. Mitchell (Editor), et al (Paperback - May 1999)

List Price: $19.95

djgnostic's comments: set in Merton's KY monestary (my home state!!)


5. A Broader Vision: Perspectives on the Buddha and the Christ - by Richard Henry Drummond, Kenneth M. Skidmore (Editor) (Paperback - October 1995)

List Price: $16.95

djgnostic's comments: definately a BROADER vision.....isn't that why you're looking at this list????


6. Buddha & Christ: Images of Wholeness - by Robert Elinor (Hardcover - September 2000)

djgnostic's comments: author is an ordained Presbyterian minister, a member of the Buddhist Society, London, and the Society of Buddhist-Christian Studies.


7. Buddha and Jesus: Conversations - by Carrin Dune, Carrin Dunne (Paperback - September 1994)

List Price: $10.95

djgnostic's comments: BEAUTIFUL!!!!


8. The Drum of Immortality - by Hugh Fincher, Janice Phelps (Editor) (Paperback)

List Price: $8.95

djgnostic's comments: very important for the world!!


9. The Good Heart: A Buddhist Perspective on the Teachings of Jesus - by Dalai Lama, et al (Paperback - April 1998)

List Price: $14.95

djgnostic's comments: views on Jesus from the #1 Buddhist in the world!!


10. Jesus and Buddha: The Parallel Sayings - by Marcus J. Borg (Editor), et al (Paperback - January 1999)

List Price: $14.00


The Urban Dharma Newsletter Archives:



The Los Angeles Buddhist-Catholic Dialogue:



To Subscribe or Unsubscribe:



Support UrbanDharma.org: