Hello again after 7 years. Since 2023Oct07, I've been reading about the Israel vs Palestine conflict and then the underlying Abrahamic religions involved Christianity, Judaism & Islam. During my reading, there's a particular Bible verse that caught my attention, namely Luke 4:24 'No prophet is accepted in his hometown. ' I soon realised that Christianity is the only major religion among both Abrahamic & Dharmic religions more popular outside than inside its birthplace... 1. Hinduism (& Sikhism & Jainism ?) - Most Indians are Hindu. India is the top in Hindu population (but top 2 in population by percentage . Similarly, India is the top in Sikh population but top 2 in population by percentage for Sikhism behind... Canada. Oh ok, a non-Asian country. Nice. Good for Sikhism.) 2. Islam - Most Saudis are Muslim. Saudi Arabia isn't the top in Muslim population. But if you consider the Middle East and North Africa as a whole, then MENA beats Indonesia I guess. 3. Judaism - Most Israelis are Jewish. Also Israel is the top country in Jewish population. (But if you consider ethnic Jews and even further the extended definitions of 'Jew' under the law of return for Israel, then Israel is 2nd to the US . Eh.) 4. Christianity - Few Israelis or ethnic Jews are Christian. Most Christians are gentile non-Israelis, actually gentile non-Asians. 5. Donald Trump (lol) - accepted more by Israelis than American Jews based on the 2024 exit polls. ...**Oh but wait there's 1 exception (so much for trying to this argument of uniqueness of Christianity to Jews, atheists & Muslims ... Well at least Christianity is the only religion more popular outside than inside Asia, birthplace of all 5 major religions...and again assuming you don't count extended definition of 'Jew'.)**... 6. Buddhism - Apparently, Buddhism 's birthplace was Nepal or somewhere in greater India . The **secular/natural** reasons are given in other answers such as. 1. https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/46906/why-is-buddhism-popular-in-eastern-asia-compared-to-south-asia-where-it-originat 2. https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/3338/why-is-buddhism-followed-mainly-outside-of-india-when-it-originated-there 3. https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/20848/what-was-the-reason-behind-the-fall-of-buddhism-in-india 4. https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/25486/why-did-buddhism-declined-and-then-almost-extinguished-in-india 5. [Why is Buddhism more prevalent in East Asia than in South Asia where it originated from?](https://qr.ae/pYUKoB) 6. [Why do people associate Buddhism with China or Thailand but not with India where Buddha preached the majority of his life?](https://qr.ae/pYUKMX) # My question is now **religious/prophetic/scriptural/supernatural** reasons : 1. Were there any prophecies or something that Buddhism would be more popular outside than inside, similar to like how in Christianity, there are prophecies that speak of how the Messiah (Buddha?) would initially be rejected by his own people the Jews (Hindus? Indians? Idk). Eg Isaiah 49:6-7 , 29:10 , 53:8 2. Actually, in this regard, please also explain briefly (not necessarily in full detail. Just pertaining to prophecies or lack thereof) to me the relationship of Hinduism & Buddhism because I guess I'm implicitly assuming Jesus of Nazareth is analogous to Siddhartha Gautama like : | |Dharmic|Abrahamic| |:-|:-|:-| |Original religion|Hinduism|Judaism| |birthplace starts with letter 'i'|India/Greater India/South Asia|Israel/West Asia/Asia| |after WW2, has been at war w/ starts with the letter 'p'|Pakistan|Palestine| |whose religion is|Islam|Islam| |New religion w/ same birthplace|Buddhism|Christianity| |but more popular in|East Asia|Non-Asia| |Started by|Siddhartha Gautama|Jesus of Nazareth| |Title|Buddha, the Enlighted One|Messiah, the Anointed One| |The originals who believe|Bhagavata Sampradaya, Sat Vaishnavism, Gaudiya Vaishnavism, ISKCON|Messianic Judaism | Maybe there's no such 'prophecy' if it's not really that Gautama was Hindu trying to start a 'new religion' (sort of) like how Jesus was Jewish revolutionary or idk. Also, I read there's like a prophesised 'Kalki ' who in some denominations of Hinduism is a reincarnation of Buddha or Krishna (and is hopefully not Mohammed ). But idk are those Hindus who believe in Gautama like 'Messianic Jews', Jews who believe in Jesus? And anyway, if there's no prophecy, then, what, it's just some big coincidence and there are maybe only a few parallels in histories of how Christianity & Buddhism became more popular outside than inside their birthplaces? P.S. I haven't seen Saint Young Men , but I'm not quite a fan of Hikaru Nakamura . Lol.

I was reading Wikipedia about the extinction of Buddhism in Afghanistan, which said the Mongols ended Buddhism in Afghanistan. I found this difficult to believe because reputedly, many Mongols, including at times asserting Genghis Khan himself, were Tibetan Buddhists. I found a webpage by HHDL's friend [Alexander Berzin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Berzin_(scholar)) , which says: > Five years after the death of the Prophet Muhammad, in 637, the Arabs > defeated the Persian Sassanids and founded the Umayyad Caliphate in > 661. It ruled over Iran and much of the Middle East. In 663, they attacked Bactria, which the Turki Shahis had taken from the Western > Turks by this time. The Umayyad forces captured the area around Balkh, > including Nava Vihara Monastery, causing the Turki Shahis to retreat > to the Kabul Valley. > > The Arabs allowed followers of non-Muslim religions in the lands they conquered to keep their faiths if they submitted peacefully and paid a poll tax (Ar. jizya). Although some Buddhists in Bactria and even an abbot of Nava Vihara converted to Islam, **most Buddhists in the region accepted this dhimmi status as loyal non-Muslim protected subjects within an Islamic state. Nava Vihara remained open and functioning. The Han Chinese pilgrim Yijing (I-ching) visited Nava Vihara in the 680s and reported it flourishing as a Sarvastivada center of study**. > > An Umayyad Iranian author, al-Kermani, wrote a detailed account of Nava Vihara at the beginning of the **8th century**, preserved in the 10th-century work Book of Lands (Ar. Kitab al-Buldan) by al-Hamadhani. He described it in terms readily understandable to Muslims by drawing the analogy with the Kaaba in Mecca, the holiest site of Islam. He explained that the main temple had a stone cube in the center, draped with cloth, and that devotees circumambulated it and made prostration, as is the case with the Kaaba. The stone cube referred to the platform on which a stupa stood, as was the custom in Bactrian temples. The cloth that draped it was in accordance with the Iranian custom for showing veneration, applied equally to Buddha statues as well as to stupas. **Al-Kermani’s description indicates an open and respectful attitude by the Umayyad Arabs in trying to understand the non-Muslim religions, such as Buddhism, that they encountered in their newly conquered territories**. > > In 1215, Chinggis Khan, the founder of the Mongol Empire, conquered Afghanistan from the Ghurids. As was his policy elsewhere, Chinggis destroyed those who opposed his takeover and devastated their lands. It is unclear how the vestiges of Buddhism still left in Afghanistan fared at this time. Chinggis was tolerant of all religions, so long as its leaders prayed for his long life and military success. > > After Chinggis’ death in 1227 and the division of his empire among his > heirs, his son Chagatai inherited the rule of Sogdia and Afghanistan > and established the Chagatai Khaganate. In 1258, Hulegu, a grandson of > Chinggis, conquered Iran and overthrew the Abbasid Caliphate in > Baghdad. He established the Ilkhanate and soon invited to his court in > northwestern Iran Buddhist monks from Tibet, Kashmir, and Ladakh. The > Ilkhanate was more powerful than the Chagatai Khaganate and, at first, > it dominated its cousins there. Since the Buddhist monks had to pass > through Afghanistan on their way to Iran, they undoubtedly received > official support on their way. > > According to some scholars, the Tibetan monks who came to Iran were > most likely from the Drikung (Drigung) Kagyu School and Hulegu’s > reason for inviting them may have been political. In 1260, his cousin > Khubilai (Kublai) Khan, the Mongol ruler of northern China, declared > himself Grand Khan of all the Mongols. Khubilai supported the Sakya > Tradition of Tibetan Buddhism and gave its leaders nominal suzerainty > over Tibet. Prior to this, the Drikung Kagyu leaders had been in > political ascendance in Tibet. Khubilai’s main rival was another > cousin, Khaidu, who ruled East Turkistan and supported the Drikung > Kagyu line. Hulegu may have been wishing to align himself with Khaidu > in this power struggle. > > Some speculate that the reason for Khubilai and Khaidu’s turning to > Tibetan Buddhism was to gain the supernatural backing of Mahakala, the > Buddhist protector practiced by both the Sakya and Kagyu traditions. > Mahakala had been the protector of the Tanguts, who had ruled the > territory between Tibet and Mongolia. After all, their grandfather, > Chinggis Khan, had been killed in battle by the Tanguts, who must have > received supernatural help. It is unlikely that the Mongol leaders, > including Hulegu, chose Tibetan Buddhism because of its deep > philosophical teachings. > > After the death of Hulegu in 1266, the Chagatai Khaganate became more > indepen­dent of the Ilkhans and formed a direct alliance with Khaidu > in his struggle against Khubilai Khan. **Meanwhile, the line of Hulegu’s > successors alternated in their support of Tibetan Buddhism and Islam**, > apparently also for political expediency. **Hulegu’s son Abagha > continued his father’s support of Tibetan Buddhism. Abagha’s brother > Takudar, however, who succeeded him in 1282, converted to Islam to > help gain local support** when he invaded and conquered Egypt. Abagha’s > son **Arghun** defeated his uncle and became Ilkhan in 1284. He **made > Buddhism the state religion of Iran** and founded several monasteries > there. When Arghun died in 1291, his brother Gaihatu became the > Ilkhan. Tibetan monks had given Gaihatu the Tibetan name Rinchen > Dorje, but he was a degenerate drunkard and hardly a credit to the > Buddhist faith. He introduced paper money to Iran from China, which > caused economic disaster. > > Gaihatu died in 1295, one year after the death of Khubilai Khan. > **Arghun’s son Ghazan succeeded to the throne. He reinstated Islam as > the official religion of the Ilkhanate and des­troyed the new Buddhist > monasteries there**. Some scholars assert that Ghazan Khan’s reversal of > his father’s religious policy was to distance himself from his uncle’s > reforms and beliefs, and to assert his independence from Mongol China. > > Despite ordering the destruction of Buddhist monasteries, it seems that the Ghazan Khan did not wish to destroy everything associated with Buddhism. For example, he commissioned Rashid al-Din to write Universal History (Ar. Jami’ al-Tawarikh), with versions both in Persian and Arabic. In its section on the history of the cultures of the people conquered by the Mongols, **Rashid al-Din included The Life and Teachings of Buddha**. To assist the historian in his research, Ghazan Khan invited to his court Bakshi Kamalashri, a Buddhist monk from Kashmir. Like the earlier work by al-Kermani, Rashid’s work presented Buddhism in terms that Muslims could easily understand, such as **calling Buddha a Prophet**, the deva gods as angels, and Mara as the Devil. > > Rashid al-Din reported that in his day, **eleven Buddhist texts in Arabic translation were circulating in Iran**. These included Mahayana texts such as The Sutra on the Array of the Pure Land of Bliss (Skt. Sukhavativyuha Sutra, concerning Amitabha’s Pure Land), The Sutra on the Array Like a Woven Basket (Skt. Karandavyuha Sutra, concerning Avalokiteshvara, the embodiment of compassion) and An Exposition on Maitreya (Skt. Maitreyavyakarana, concerning Maitreya, the future Buddha and embodiment of love). These texts were undoubtedly among those translated under the patronage of the Abbasid caliphs at the House of Knowledge in Baghdad starting in the 8th century. > > Rashid al-Din finished his history in 1305, during the reign of Ghazan’s successor Oljaitu. It seems that Buddhist monks were still present in Iran, however, at least until Oljaitu’s death in **1316**, since **monks unsuccessfully tried to win the Mongol ruler back to Buddhism**. Thus, at least up until then, Buddhist monks still passed back and forth through Afghanistan and thus might still have been welcomed at the Chagatai court. > > In 1321, the Chagatai Empire split into two. The Western Chagatai Khaganate included Sogdia and Af­ghanistan. From the start, its khans converted to Islam. The Ilkhanate in Iran fragmented and fell apart in 1336. After this, there is no indication of the **continuing presence of Buddhism in Afghanistan. It had lasted there nearly nineteen hundred years**. Nevertheless, knowledge of Buddhism did not die out. Timur (Tamerlaine) conquered the Western Chagatai Khaganate in 1364 and the small successor states of the Ilkhanate in 1385. Timur’s son and successor, Shah Rukh, commissioned the historian, Hafiz-i Abru, to write in Persian A Collection of Histories (Ar. Majma’ al-Tawarikh). Completed in **1425** in Shahrukh’s capital, Herat, Afghanistan, the history **contained an account of Buddhism** modeled after Rashid al-Din’s work a century earlier > > [History of Buddhism in Afghanistan Dr. Alexander Berzin ](https://studybuddhism.com/en/advanced-studies/history-culture/buddhism-in-central-asia/history-of-buddhism-in-afghanistan) In the Pali Suttas or Bhikkhu Vinaya, did the Buddha ever warn of dangers of royal benefaction that could bring Buddhism into peril and destruction?

What are the similarities and contrasts between Buddhism and Christianity? To what extent do they make it possible (or not) to practice in and hold the beliefs of both?

>"I feel there is tremendous convergence and a potential for mutual enrichment through dialogue between the Buddhist and Christian traditions, especially in the areas of ethics and spiritual practice, such as the practices of compassion, love, meditation, and the enhancement of tolerance. I feel that this dialogue could go very far and reach a deep level of understanding. But when it comes to a philosophical or metaphysical dialogue, I feel that we must part company. The entire Buddhist worldview is based on a philosophical standpoint in which the central thought is the principle of interdependence, how all things and events come into being purely as a result of interactions between causes and conditions. Within that philosophical worldview it is almost impossible to have any room for an atemporal, eternal, absolute truth. Nor is it possible to accommodate the concept of a divine Creation. Similarly, for a Christian whose entire metaphysical worldview is based on a belief in the Creation and a Divine Creator, the idea that all things and events arise out of mere interaction between causes and conditions has no place within that worldview. So, in the realm of metaphysics, it becomes problematic at a certain point, and the two traditions must diverge (81-82).". *By The Christian Research Institute* - **If and when the two traditions don't diverge, is that necessarily problematic to Buddhism also?** - **If and when the two traditions don't diverge, is that necessarily problematic for all people?** - **Are Christian concepts pointing at the same things that Buddhism is pointing at but with different approaches?** - **How well does the Christian Research Institute understand Buddhism?**

Why is it that Buddhism never compiled a reasonably concise set of canonical texts like the Bible? Buddhism itself has universal beliefs such as the 4 Noble Truths, the Eightfold Path and the notion of going for refuge. To me then it doesn't seem unreasonable that there could have been a Buddhist Bible that complied these central beliefs in the same way as the Christian Bible. Even though the Christian world is diverse they still manage with one Bible (though I do appreciate there are different version such as the Orthodox Bible) and this Bible forms the basis of new forms of Christianity or new emphasis on Christian belief. However Buddhism seems to have an enormous array of texts over a number of different canons (Pali, Chinese, Tibetan) and commentaries and para canonical texts. Why the difference? Is there something in the history or culture of these two religions that caused them to treat their texts differently. Am I wrong and the differences aren't really there if you look at it correctly? Is it a theological matter? I appreciate you could ask the same question about Islam and Hinduism (I think) but I want to keep the question as on-topic and tractable as possible.

As someone that is actively seeking to be a Buddhist, how does one show emotional support for others in time of need? Christians offer to pray for them if someone or some person is going through a difficult situation. For example, during 9/11 often leaders would pray for people and their nation who are going through loss. Is there something in Buddhism that is similar? Is there something similar that Buddhists can offer to show that they are offering emotional or spiritual support.

In a discussion about suffering with my brother that got heated he said, "Buddhism can't end suffering any more than Christianity or Islam, it's a great sales pitch though. Formula to religion: life is bad, but we can end suffering in some distant end goal that no one can ever actually achieve." I'm a not very well studied or practiced, so I didn't know exactly how to respond and it's shaking my worldview.

This post is a revision of https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/39546/buddhism-or-christ which already closed. I posted that _Buddhism or Christ?_ question on a Christian forum too, and after quite a response from them, I felt I have some clues. I used to be a loyal person and have been studying Buddhism for 6 years. Indeed it helps me a lot to be a better person and almost 100% of my doubt and direction can be found from the legacy of Buddha. Now I have been in Church as an observer for 1 year. I have an influential and high-level family of Christ that is eager to invite me into Christianity. They even speak at country council level for all the Christian activities. But, I really miss so much of Buddha's teaching and I really want to do something for Buddhism before I turn to Christianity. But it will create a lot of complications; but I found the below is necessary to clear the misconception and Buddha's name. I believe all Buddhist has responsibility on the below. 1. There are too many misconception especially to Buddhism and Taoism -- [Top 10 MISCONCEPTIONS about BUDDHISM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYlQ0UZ1C2I) . Many Buddhism or Taoism disbelief the belief because they don't even know who is Siddhartha Gautama but claimed is a Buddhist. Most of them go to temple, pray something in return, which I believe is inappropriate. What Buddha wants us to do is practice way of life and not actually praying Buddha as an idol.  2. How they view Buddhism and other religion -- [4 Ways Christians can respond to a Satanic statue](https://erlc.com/resource-library/articles/4-ways-christians-can-respond-to-a-satanic-statue) . "Buddha is a Satan" wording is really "hurts". They will see Buddha is opponent and some really harsh wording from many Christian seniors is really hurting us as Buddhism Student. My sister went to Church for few months, back to house and screaming like a mad woman to request us to throw away all the Buddhism and Taoism statues.  3. Respect and be tactful to those Buddhist visitor to Church - I wish to have a lot of social media sharing, discussion and Church sharing on how to handle the 2 above. [This URL](https://answersingenesis.org/world-religions/buddhism/) for example speaks well on how to handle this.   > You must learn to distinguish original Buddhism from modern variants, in addition to determining which school of Buddhism your friend embraces. When in a discussion, do not be afraid to ask respectful probing questions. My #2 issue above was shared online today during their Church service and it really touched my heart. I didn't request them to do it during Church services too, but I did share many of the above to them. I am not sure Bodhisattva or Jesus (God) sent this high level Christ family as messenger to me. Question: Let me know your thought for my action for item #3. What i really wish is the those huge religion community to publish an apology online letter on the web site for against the Blasphemy Law and immediately remove the content (i.e. Buddha is Satan, Buddhist will go to hell , etc). That's the basic manner of human being. Cheers,

I was wondering what main stream Buddhism think of Jesus, was he a buddha? Can anyone tell me where Jesus fits into Buddhism?

Today, I received an email with a quote in the signature attributed to Blaise Pascal reading > All of human evil comes from a single cause, man's inability to sit still in a room. A [more accurate quote](http://fr.wikiquote.org/wiki/Blaise_Pascal) is, > tout le malheur des hommes vient d'une seule chose, qui est de ne pas savoir demeurer en repos dans une chambre > > All the **unhappiness** of men comes from only one thing, which is not knowing how to **stay** at rest (or 'remain peacefully') in a room. [Here is the whole passage in context](http://www.etudes-litteraires.com/pascal.php) (I translate), > When I put myself sometimes to considering the diverse agitations of > men and the dangers and trouble which they expose themselves to, in > the court, in war, from where are born so many troubles, passions, > endeavours that are hardy (or fool-hardy) and often bad, etc., I > discovered that all the unhappiness of man comes from just one cause, > which is not knowing how to stay peacefully in a room. A man who has > enough goods to live, if he knew how to live with pleasure in his > home, wouldn't leave it to go on the sea or to the seat of a place. > One buys such an expensive warrant for the army, only because one > finds it intolerable to not move from the town; and one looks for > conversations and the distraction of games only because one can't stay > at one's own home with pleasure. > > But when I thought about it more closely and after finding the cause > of all our unhappiness, I wanted to discover the reason for that, I > found there is one very effective (reason), which consists in the > natural unhappiness of our feeble and mortal condition, and so > miserable, that nothing can console us, when we think of it closely. > > Whatever condition one figures oneself to be in, if one assembles all > the goods which can belong to us, royalty is the most beautiful > position in the world, and nevertheless if one imagines oneself (in > that position), accompanied by all the satisfactions associated with > it. If it's without distraction, and if one lets oneself consider and > reflect on what is, that langorous happiness wouldn't sustain itself, > it necessarily falls among the sights which menace it, the revolts > which could happen, and finally the death and sickness which are > inevitable; such that, if it is without what one calls 'distractions' > (literally 'detours', figuratively 'games'), there he (the king) is > unhappy and more unhappy than the least of his subjects, who play and > distract (or entertain) themselves. How would a Buddhist respond to such a statement ? I have a feeling he or she would agree at least on some levels. Even though it seemed Buddhism was introduced to the west beginning mainly in the 20th century, this quote seems to echo that the West was not totally unawares. If I remember correctly, "Lines Composed a Few Mile Above Tintern Abbey" also seemed to reiterate some principles found in Buddhism. There were probably missionaries who came in contact with it after the birth of Christ. Reverand Kusala mentions Zen Buddhism was actual a reaction of missionaries coming in contact with the existing Therevadan tradition.

Namo Buddhaya! My neighbor is a hardcore Christian & is a very nice man, the only thing is that he goes outside every once & a while with a water gun & kills insects (and even shoots rabbits with the gun). He also really pushes his religion on others and expects people to be Christians, otherwise, they will suffer eternally in Hell. This makes me concerned about the amount of bad Kamma he may be accumulating from his actions, thoughts, & speech. I had 3 questions: - Is it skillful to not intervene in his acts of killing, knowing he will not understand? - What is an appropriate response to him asking if I "love Jesus only" or if I'm a "good Chrisitan"? - Should I not worry about un-deluding his mind to help him understand the Dhamma? Metta to all!

I posted the identikit question to Christianity stackexchange, and was met with dumb silence. Which, really, I was shocked by. E.g. the parable of the good samaratin: > Jesus answered, "A certain man was going down from Jerusalem to > Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who both stripped him and beat > him, and departed, leaving him half dead. By chance a certain priest > was going down that way. When he saw him, he passed by on the other > side. In the same way a Levite also, when he came to the place, and > saw him, passed by on the other side. But a certain Samaritan, as he > travelled, came where he was. When he saw him, he was moved with > compassion, came to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and > wine. He set him on his own animal, and brought him to an inn, and > took care of him. On the next day, when he departed, he took out two > denarii, and gave them to the host, and said to him, 'Take care of > him. Whatever you spend beyond that, I will repay you when I return.' > Now which of these three do you think seemed to be a neighbour to him > who fell among the robbers?" > > He said, "He who showed mercy on him." > > Then Jesus said to him, "Go and do likewise." 'Mercy' can be defined as - compassion or forgiveness shown towards someone whom it is within one's power to punish or harm. Which is very, very close to exactly what I mean: compassion towards someone who you have punished or harmed. Because it seems to me to be *the bedrock* of intelligent ethics, I was very interested in if the Buddha ever discussed this. 1. Did the Buddha ever teach that we have a special responsibility to those we have injured?

I was reading over at this post... https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/26834/13249 ...and saw this reply (quoted below) and wondered if I could get some elaboration. How is it a Christian could have jhanic potential? Are we talking about merit, morality, ethics, or spiritual health? Dispassion for material goods and wealth? Is this a common view held by Buddhist? "Also, at least in the West, many people with jhanic potential are Christians." ~ Dhammadhatu

I hope to have a go at reading a little about the Eucharist. Because my religious sympathies largely lie with Buddhism, I thought it'd be good to know of anything comparative therein.

What does Buddhism say that the laity should do when someone injuries them? So in Christianity there is "turn the other cheek ", which seems easy to do, if not understand. > The phrase originates from the Sermon on the Mount in the New > Testament. In the Gospel of Matthew, an alternative for "an eye for an > eye" is given by Jesus: 38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An > eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39 But I say unto you, That > ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, > turn to him the other also. How should we ordinary beings respond to injury?

What are the major Christian teachings that Buddhists don't accept and why? For further reading, can anyone recommend books which critique Christianity from a Buddhist viewpoint? For context, I am a follower of Jiddu Krishnamurti , whose teachings were similar to Buddha's.

There is the concept of faith (śraddhā) in Buddhism. There is also the concept of faith found in Christianity. Both concepts have been translated into the English word faith but in what ways are the concepts different and also are there ways in with the concepts have similarities. I'd find it particularly interesting if anyone knows the original roots of the word faith in Christianity (i.e. what was the original word in Greek or Hebrew) and how the translation compares to how śraddhā has been translated. Do the words have nuances that have been lost in the translation to the simple English word faith?

I realize that at least the first part of the title is probably the most easily researched question with relevance to Buddhism possible, but I'd say I've read quite a bit and though I've seen very appealing and interesting ideas, I have no idea how to actually apply many of them. I'm a fourteen year old male. I've always sorta felt like there was something more but that Christianity always looked outside yourself seemed wrong. Recently I had a spiritual experience and soon after read Be Here Now and it all seems to fit perfectly. I just have no idea what to do. I have little choice in what I eat, wear, how I look, none in what I live (etc)... what do I do? I'm trying to meditate and though it does make me conscious and alert, I feel like soon after I feel a strange warm sensation I "snap out of it" automatically. More than the actual lifestyle changes, of course, I'm looking for changes in the way I think and act. The spiritual experience sorta let me see the degree to which almost everything around me is fake and wrong. I feel like I'm a much better person compared to the guy I was before but I'm just having incredible difficulties making it stay because though my state of mind and experience has changed, my surroundings have not and I feel like due to my confidence problems I conform. I realize that this journey lasts a lifetime and forever, but I'm afraid that if I don't make progress and begin it'll just be a forgotten memory. Has anyone been in a similar situation? Any tips? What did you do that finally made you adopt the lifestyle? I'd be perfectly satisfied with a link or a name of a book but I need something.

Are there any contradictions between the Catholic Christianity and Buddhism(main stream)? Can someone be a Christian and Buddhist at the same time? I am looking for **contradictions**. Would you specify the **inconsistencies** between the two ideas? Do these ideas logically negate each other? And besides, Are there any ritual or ceremonies in one system that are opposed in another?

I am a faithful believer in the Buddha's teachings and I even believe in the iddhi powers they all had and that show up in our day as well. I also believe in the various Bodhisattvas and Buddha's even within Taoism and contemplate and marvel at them every day, their mysteriousness, hard work and wisdom. Some of the scriptures have some astounding excerpts though of millions of bodhisattvas and deities... Which is why I wonder why, if we are: 1. a bundle of skandhas with no central core; 2. quite subject to cause and effect; 3. crying for saving; 4. individuals the omnisicient, omnipresent, omnipotent (iddhis ) buddhas and bodhisattvas have vowed to save from actual suffering and also awaken; Then why don't the billions of bodhisattvas and buddhas just make manifestation bodies and march across the universe and pacify and awaken everything as the first Buddha vow states? What is your opinion on this matter?