Was Jesus A Buddhist?

Originally posted by calihan_12

Originally posted by Sendran
That theory isn't new, it was used in a movie: The Man From Earth. A professor gathers his friends to help him move house and reveals to them that he is in fact fourteen thousand years old. He claims he studied under the Bhudda and took his teachings to the Middle East where they were construed and the story of Jesus was born.

Good movie, probably based on these documents.

definitely couldve been based on those documents. sounds like an interesting movie, might have to check it out

I´ve seen that movie to and it´s not that far from the idea of Jesus.
Everyone should see it, you might learn something!

And if you study the teachings of Buddha you might convert as I once did!
Here ya go, totally free! www.sacred-texts.com...

To me Buddhism is more a way of life than a religion and to me the Bible is a book with selected stories where the ruling church and founders of Christianity have taken the parts which mostly suit their agenda.

I spend very much time investigating our ancient history and in order to succeed in that area one has to go trough every religious book, myth and legend.

Why did they leave out the gospel of Maria magdalene in the bible and called her a whore?
The lost gospel of John the Baptist?
The lost gospel of Judas?
The lost gospel of Jesus!

Not to mention the gnostic gospel of the Nazirenes!
www.bibliotecapleyades.net...


"Many Christian scriptures that failed to be admitted into the Bible were outlawed, collected, and destroyed."

To me the repressive church states a few facts...

1. You are born with original sin and so you are an unworthy piece of # from the day you arrive on the planet.

2. You can only be saved by believing in the ‘Saviour’ and that means doing what the priesthood tell you to do.

3. If you don’t do that, you will be condemned to the bowels of hell forever.

Sigh...

It´s nothing wrong with having a faith as long as one see the true light deep in side oneself-Gnostisicm

Investigate!

Why would Jesus really care what the world thinks? Its already obvious that none of could know if he did study with the buddist before the age of 30. The Mormons also believe Jesus walked and taught among peaceful indian tribes 2000 years ago, but everyone labels them nut jobs too. TO a certain degree I think I could appreciate an understanding Jesus who walks among us to teach and learn about us. This really makes me think the inplanted seed in Mary must have come from beyond this world (He did say that too) or maybe perhaps another galaxy. Who knows. I do know the Gospel of Judas was found in an Egyptian desert in 2006. Like the Gospel of Thomas, Judas was also written off as esoteric knowledge which violated modern itchy ear dogma. Judas quotes Jesus in saying that christ employed him to give him up to the Romans to fulfill his mission. It goes into detail of how the people of the image of god came into existance by another race of humanoids who are also in the image of God. This shocked much people of interest as it shows a definate reality showing us not being alone in the universe. The itchy dogmatic ears just cant take that, especially the eyes, ears and noses that hide behind their immoral sins instead of the christ being told of. I walked away from tax loophole churches some time ago and learned much about God through independent study, especially through the Gospel parallels which have been banned by the tax loop churches who cant change because of the money. The more people hide behind the money the worse this little make shift tribulation will get. To actually keep Christ on the cross out of a desire for a better miniscule short life is pathetic. The understanding Jesus with the message of peace is very real to me. It feels good to know there are so many out there who hold the same logic concerning it, although difficult to proove because of the time constraint. Its time to put the Roman's ear back upon him and bless the itchy ears with the truth. Render unto Ceaser what is Ceaser's and render unto God which is God's.

Originally posted by m4ng4n

It´s nothing wrong with having a faith as long as one see the true light deep in side oneself-Gnostisicm.

Interesting you should word it that way ...

Many folk see the parallels between Buddhism and Gnosticism.

In fact Christian and Jewish gnosticism were considered heresy for the very reason that they pointed within for divinity ... a fact that did not escape those who wished to build religions. As you can imagine, not much need for carrot and stick doctrines if folk realized that all that was required was already within them.

reply to post by m4ng4n


Look to the Council of Nicea as to why the mainstream is the sorry example of a religion it is today.

As for Jesus being Buddhist. Not really, the mans (or god-man used as an example) teachings are simply the best parts of human nature expressed in language.
The same as in all religions.
The reason they/he become "divine". They are rarely expressed and even more rarely practiced.

Actually i remember reading and listening to a monk that THEY HAVE RECORDS, that they went to to the area, where jesus was believed to have lived (before he became "jesus"), and says that they taught/preached to everyone IN THE AREA. AND THAT a man named jesus, as well as his friends or "disciples" also learned the ways of a great Buddhist monk. And that this man also told the monks after HIS journey was done, that he would be going back to his home, and teach the people what HE LEARNED.
Kinda ironic isn't ? both have records, yet everyone will deny it.

When you really think of Buddhism, and Christianity/catholic. It is pretty much the exact same. The only difference is...is that Christianity/catholic go about teaching in a far far different way. MORE DIRECTION, than letting you decide for yourself what is right and wrong (Buddhism) it is essentially the same thing. just Christianity likes to make RULES RULES RULES, and if u don't follow them....well then you go to hell lol

reply to post by Majestic23


I guess if we wnat to throw buddhism into the same basket as the rest generally it is of coarse, just another religion.
The interesting thing is that the teachings of Buddha, are to provide enlightenment to the individual, using themselves as a conduit for this process.
Buddhist have temples and the like ( places of worship) again like other designated religions. The difference is in this respect is that: The teacher or prophet does not, and is not portaited as a representation of God anymore than the laity.
Buddhist monks are venerated as a mark of respect for their austere/altruistic choice; the fact that the laity may consult them as a deeper understanding of Buddha's teachings are best embellished by someone whom has dedicated part or all of their lives to exploring the teachings.
the buddhas' collectively are seen as teachers rather than Gods.

In this respect it may have been the same for Jesus the christ. It is obvious that his TRUE story has been hyjacked and mutated by the Catholic church, and spawned many other sects into modern day.
I believe Jesus was a mystical teacher of similar calibre to the Buddha; his story was economized and mutated for political/ fraternal control.

[edit on 8/19/2009 by KRISKALI777]

Originally posted by inregardstoo
Why would Jesus really care what the world thinks? Its already obvious that none of could know if he did study with the buddist before the age of 30. The Mormons also believe Jesus walked and taught among peaceful indian tribes 2000 years ago, but everyone labels them nut jobs too. TO a certain degree I think I could appreciate an understanding Jesus who walks among us to teach and learn about us. This really makes me think the inplanted seed in Mary must have come from beyond this world (He did say that too) or maybe perhaps another galaxy. Who knows. I do know the Gospel of Judas was found in an Egyptian desert in 2006. Like the Gospel of Thomas, Judas was also written off as esoteric knowledge which violated modern itchy ear dogma. Judas quotes Jesus in saying that christ employed him to give him up to the Romans to fulfill his mission. It goes into detail of how the people of the image of god came into existance by another race of humanoids who are also in the image of God. This shocked much people of interest as it shows a definate reality showing us not being alone in the universe. The itchy dogmatic ears just cant take that, especially the eyes, ears and noses that hide behind their immoral sins instead of the christ being told of. I walked away from tax loophole churches some time ago and learned much about God through independent study, especially through the Gospel parallels which have been banned by the tax loop churches who cant change because of the money. The more people hide behind the money the worse this little make shift tribulation will get. To actually keep Christ on the cross out of a desire for a better miniscule short life is pathetic. The understanding Jesus with the message of peace is very real to me. It feels good to know there are so many out there who hold the same logic concerning it, although difficult to proove because of the time constraint. Its time to put the Roman's ear back upon him and bless the itchy ears with the truth. Render unto Ceaser what is Ceaser's and render unto God which is God's.

umm... mormons dont believe that. i grew up mormon

Originally posted by badmedia
Real knowledge of the holy is understanding. Understanding is universal and available to all those who seek it. Only the manner in which that understanding is expressed changes.

I don't think the OP is trying to ask what is a universal religion, and what isn't. IT IS QUITE OBBBVVIOOUUSS that any religion preaches fundamentally the exact same things. I think what she is trying to say, did he LEARN from a Buddhist monk, and was it essential to the founding of Christianity. Was his teachings influenced from Buddhism.
Can we try to stay on track to the forum please?

reply to post by calihan_12


You mean to say
you've never asked anyone a question
fully knowing the answer ahead of time?


It never ceases to amaze me, the stuff that folks will conjure up
when they lack the correct information, or possibly wish to annoy people,
hard to say...


Yeshua spent most of His youth with His uncle, Joseph of Arimathea.
Much of it was around the british isles, that's why there is not much info on His youth that has been recorded. It's possible that He was in India, this is not the 1st I heard of it. I don't have enuf info to really tell one way or another if it is fact or fiction.



[edit on 19-8-2009 by toasted]

reply to post by Geladinhu


What kind of documentation is there on this?

I'd love to know more.

Hi , Im new here...
But I think this explains this theorie.
Hope the video works


Ok, not sure yet how to place a youtube video here..
its called "Jesus in kashmir" its a bbc documentary
you can find on youtube


[edit on 19-8-2009 by samsamm9]

reply to post by samsamm9

Originally posted by EdCase512
Look to the Council of Nicea as to why the mainstream is the sorry example of a religion it is today.

Originally posted by m4ng4n

I spend very much time investigating our ancient history and in order to succeed in that area one has to go trough every religious book, myth and legend.

Which part didn´t you read my friend?

As for Constantine I´d like to go back in time, lock him up and throw away the key...

The theory of Jesus going to the British Isles is more of an urban legend invented by the ones behind "The ring of power" correct me if I´m wrong.
There´s no evidence for this.

But as stated here several times there are plenty of evidence that Jesus taught the teachings of Budda.
In my opinion Jesus excisted for real some 2000 years ago but he´s not a son of a god, just a simple man who tried to teach his fellow companions a whole lot of good things.

If you compare the Sofia of Jesus with the teachings of Buddha you will find a perfect match.

The Romans where the debunkers of that time and they didn´t want competition. They institutionalized the saying: -In order to conquer and rule one has to divide first.

Originally posted by toasted
reply to post by calihan_12

 

You mean to say
you've never asked anyone a question
fully knowing the answer ahead of time?


It never ceases to amaze me, the stuff that folks will conjure up
when they lack the correct information, or possibly wish to annoy people,
hard to say...


Yeshua spent most of His youth with His uncle, Joseph of Arimathea.
Much of it was around the british isles, that's why there is not much info on His youth that has been recorded. It's possible that He was in India, this is not the 1st I heard of it. I don't have enuf info to really tell one way or another if it is fact or fiction.



[edit on 19-8-2009 by toasted]

okay ... does anyone on this site really know ANY of the things we talk about on here? its all theory and what-ifs. thats the whole point.

of course no one knows all the answers, thats the point of discussing it and seeing what people think about it

Originally posted by kaskade

Originally posted by badmedia

I don't think the OP is trying to ask what is a universal religion, and what isn't. IT IS QUITE OBBBVVIOOUUSS that any religion preaches fundamentally the exact same things. I think what she is trying to say, did he LEARN from a Buddhist monk, and was it essential to the founding of Christianity. Was his teachings influenced from Buddhism.
Can we try to stay on track to the forum please?

thank you for clearing that up for people.

the whole point of the thread was to present what facts i have and what ive learned and discuss it. plain and simple. im not sure why threads always go so off topic towards the end. its as though people dont read any of the beginning of the thread.

Originally posted by calihan_12

okay ... does anyone on this site really know ANY of the things we talk about on here? its all theory and what-ifs. thats the whole point.

of course no one knows all the answers, thats the point of discussing it and seeing what people think about it

Now that´s indeed a sentence I´d like to put in my signature!

The Gods of Eden by William Bramley. From chapter 12 The Jesus Ministry.

Most New Testament information about Jesus's life covers
only the three years immediately prior to his crucifixion.
Those were the years of Jesus's public ministry. During that
time, Jesus did not live inside the Essene communities for
the simple reason that he was engaged in a traveling ministry
which would occupy him until his crucifixion. Every Essene
was given, or created for himself, a "calling" or life's goal
to pursue. Jesus pursued his as a teacher on the road.
In both the New Testament and Apocrypha, the life of
Jesus seems to be fairly well covered up until about the
age of 5 or 6. Then, abruptly, there is a complete void of
information about where Jesus went or what he did. We find
in the New Testament one episode of Jesus appearing before
Hebrew scholars at the age of 12, followed by an eighteenyear
silence in which Jesus's activities are unaccounted for.
Suddenly, at about the age of 30, Jesus re-emerged and
launched his short and tumultuous religious career. Where
had Jesus gone, and what had he done, during the unknown
years?
Most Christians believe that Jesus spent his teens and
young adulthood working for his father as a carpenter.
No doubt Jesus did occasionally visit his father and learn
carpentry on those visits. Many historians, however, feel
that there was much more happening in Jesus's life and
they have tried to discover what else Jesus might have done
during those critical years when his thoughts, personality,
and motives were developing. As it turns out, Jesus was
being intensively trained for his future religious role.
It was common for Essene boys to enter an Essene monastery
at about the age of 5 to begin their educations. This
will account for Jesus's sudden disappearance from history
at that age. Some researchers believe that Jesus was brought
up and educated in the Essene community above Haifa by
the Mediterranean Sea. He apparently remained there until
his teens. At the age of 12, he made a trip to Jerusalem
in preparation for his bar mitzvah the following year.
It was during that trip that Jesus had the debate with Hebrew scholars.
Jesus then vanished from history again. Now where did he go?
Several years ago I happened to see an intriguing film
documentary by Richard Bock entitled, The Lost Years.
This film regularly shows up on local American television
stations around Christmas and Easter. It is well worth watching.
The film suggests that Jesus journeyed to Asia where
he spent his teens and early adulthood studying the religions
practiced there. One source from which the filmmaker drew
this remarkable conclusion was the "Legend of Issa," a very
old Buddhist document purportedly discovered in the Himi
Monastery of India by Russian traveler Nicolas Notovitch
in 1887. Notovitch published his translation of the Buddhist
legend in 1890 in his book, The Unknown Life of Jesus.
According to the Buddhist legend uncovered by Notovitch,
a remarkable young man named "Issa" had departed
for Asia at the age of thirteen. Issa studied under several
religious masters of the East, did some preaching of his own,
and returned to Palestine sixteen years later at the age of
29. The significant parallels between the lives of "Issa" and
Jesus have led to the conclusion that Issa was, in fact, Jesus.
If true, such a journey would certainly be omitted from the
Bible because it contradicts the idea that Jesus had achieved
spiritual enlightenment solely by divine inspiration.
If Jesus was an Essene and he travelled to Asia under
Essene sponsorship, and if the Essenes indeed followed
an Aryan tradition, we would expect Jesus to be sent to
study under the Aryan Brahmans of the Indian subcontinent.
According to the Legend of Issa, that is precisely what happened:
In his fourteenth year, young Issa, the Blessed One,
came this side of the Sindh [a province in Western
Pakistan] and settled among the Aryas [Aryans]. . . .'
Upon Jesus's arrival, "the white priests of Brahma welcomed
him joyfully"2 and taught him, among other things,
to read and understand the Vedas, and to teach and expound
sacred Hindu scriptures. This joyful reception quickly turned
sour, however, because Jesus insisted upon associating with the lower castes.
That led to friction between the young headstrong Jesus and his
Brahmin hosts. According to the legend:
But the Brahmins and the Kshatriyas [members of the
military caste] told him that they were forbidden by
the great Para-Brahma [Hindu god] to come near to
those who were created from his belly and his feet
[the mythical origin of the lower castes];
That the Vaisyas [members of the merchant and
agricultural caste] might only hear the recital of the
Vedas, and this only on the festival days, and
That the Sudras [one of the lower castes] were not
only forbidden to attend the readings of the Vedas,
but even to look on them; for they were condemned
to perpetual servitude, as slaves of the Brahmins, the
Kshatriyas and even the Vaisyas.
But Issa, disregarding their words, remained with
the Sudras, preaching against the Brahmins and
Kshatriyas.
He declaimed strongly against man's arrogating to
himself the authority to deprive his fellow-beings of
their human and spiritual rights. "Verily," he said,
"God has made no difference between his children,
who are all alike dear to Him."
Issa denied the divine inspiration of the Vedas and
the Puranas [a class of sacred writings]. .. .3
The white priests and warriors were so angered that they
sent servants to murder Jesus. Warned of the danger, Jesus
fled the holy city of Djagguernat by night and escaped
into Buddhist country. There he learned the Pali language
and studied sacred Buddhist writings ("Sutras"). After six
years, Jesus "could perfectly expound the sacred [Buddhist]
scrolls."4
The Issa legend has some remarkable implications. It
portrays Jesus as a sincere religious reformer who found
himself turning against the Custodial/Aryan traditions in
which he had been raised. His sympathies went instead to
the maverick Buddhists. The Buddhist influence in Jesus's teachings
are evident in the Bible, as in Jesus's "Sermon
on the Mount" which contains some philosophy strikingly
similar to the Buddhism of his day.
After fifteen or so years in and about Asia, Jesus travelled
back to Palestine via Persia, Greece, and Egypt. According
to one tradition, Jesus was initiated into the higher ranks of
the Brotherhood in the Egyptian city of Heliopolis. After
completing that initiation, Jesus returned to Palestine, now
a man of 29 or 30. Immediately upon his return, Jesus
embarked on his public ministry.
The rift between Jesus and his Aryan hosts in India did
not, at first, seem to adversely affect Jesus's relationship
to the Essene Order. It did not take long, however, for
trouble to erupt. Jesus did not share the ascetism of his
Essene brothers and downplayed the importance of ritualism
for achieving spiritual salvation. Jesus was surrounded by
Essene sponsors who strongly believed in the coming of a
Messiah and they were determined to have their investment,
Jesus, proclaimed that new Messiah. Jesus forbade them to
do so. According to historian Will Durant, Jesus "repudiated
all claim to Davidic descent"5 and for a long time "forbade
the disciples to call him the messiah.. . ."6 Most historians
attribute those actions to the political climate of the time.
Palestine was under Roman occupation and the Romans
took a dim view of the Hebrew prophecies because of their
political overtones. Jesus did not wish to run afoul of the
Romans, or so the thinking goes.
There is, however, a much better reason why Jesus did not
want to be proclaimed the Hebrew Messiah. He knew that the
proclamation was untrue and he was being honest about it.
Jesus wanted to bring to Palestine a genuine spiritual science
of the type the mavericks were still attempting in India.
Jesus therefore became a rebel inside of the very Brotherhood
organization backing him. Jesus's greatest mistake was
believing that he could use the channels of the corrupted
Brotherhood network to spread a maverick religion, even
if he had many close friends and loved ones in the Essene
Order.
Jesus never had time to establish his maverick religious
system because some of his Essene backers and, according to
the Bible, even some Custodial "angels," quickly got
him into trouble by proclaiming him the Messiah. It did
not take the Romans and some Hebrew leaders long to
arrest Jesus and put him on trial. The Hebrews objected to
his unorthodox religious ideas and the Romans his alleged
political pretensions. A mere three years after beginning his
ministry, Jesus was reportedly nailed to a cross. Although
there is evidence that Jesus did not die on the cross but
survived to live out the rest of his life in seclusion, the
crucifixion ended his public ministry and paved the way
for his name to be used to implant the very Judgment Day
philosophies he had opposed.*
Jesus's problems cannot be blamed on his backers alone,
however. Certainly Jesus's own errors contributed to his
downfall. Despite his maverick leanings, Jesus was unable
to entirely undo within himself a lifetime of indoctrination as
an Essene. There is good Biblical and Apocryphal evidence
that Jesus tried to mix Custodial dogma with maverick tenets.
This will cause any honest attempt at spiritual reform
to fail. The Bible also indicates that Jesus taught some of
his lessons through a system of mysteries. Jesus's only hope
had been to break completely with the Essene Order and its
methods, but it is easy to understand why he had not done
so. His life, family, and friends were too much a part of
that organization.
Although Jesus had a large enough following to invite
attention, he did not preach long enough to enter the history
books of his own time. His fame grew after the crucifixion
when his disciples traveled far and wide to establish their
*A set of documents dating from around 400 A.D.—the Nag Hammadi
scrolls—were discovered in Egypt in 1945. The scrolls are hand-inscribed
copies of earlier original manuscripts. Many or all of those originals were
written no later than 150 A.D., i.e. before the standard New Testament
gospels were penned. Some scholars believe many of the Nag Hammadi
scrolls to be as authentic, and less altered, than the accepted Gospels of
the New Testament. According to the Nag Hammadi, Jesus was not nailed
to a cross, but another man, Simon, had been cleverly substituted to suffer
Jesus's fate. Whatever the truth of this might be, what is important to us is
simply that the crucifixion signaled the end of Jesus's public ministry.
new apocalyptic sect. With the continued help of their
Custodial "angels," Christian missionaries made Jesus a
household name and created a powerful new faction that
would further divide human beings into battling groups.
The successful effort to make Jesus the figurehead of a
new Judgment Day religion brought about the most famous
apocalyptic writing in the western world: the Revelation
of St. John. This work, which is also known as the Book
of Revelation or Apocalypse, is the last book of the New
Testament. It leaves Christians with the same type of dire
prophecy that the Hebrews had been left with at the end of
the Old Testament: the coming of a great global catastrophe
followed by a Day of Judgment. The Book of Revelation is
well worth taking a closer look at.

reply to post by visible_villain


No. I'm saying that I'd like to see what the actual recordings say. If it says "Jesus Christ slept here, 7BC", it's probably an account recorded much after.

reply to post by WickettheRabbit

Understood.



And that's just the problem ( IMHO ) - there aren't any recordings left from way back then. All we have today are copies of copies of copies. These copies are always corrupted in some manner due to either the human error of the copiest, the translator, damage to the original text being copied, or some other personal, political, social or religious agenda.

As you know, that's why the scholars who study these 'old books' get their hands on as many of these copies which are still extant as possible and then compare all the texts to one another when making their modern translations from the ancient languages of the copies ...

It's a giant 'can of worms' ... and what we end up with is not so much a 'modern translation' as the 'scholars best guess' at what the original text actually said ...

Bottom line - we know nothing about what the original text actually said. We only know what the modern scholar's best guess is ...

Makes it really easy to rewrite history, if you catch my drift.

-Edited and bumped-
Ooops

[edit on 20-8-2009 by rjmelter]