>Christ is the Western equivalent of the Buddha.
Discuss
>>1204479
That's wrong but okay.
I thought Epictetus was the Western Equivalent of Buddha.
>>1204479
Only in the sense of religions coming to be founded in response to them but what they actually preached or taught could hardly be more different.
>>1204479
Yo! SHITPOSTER! Do you have a logical well thought out opinion on this or are you just throwing bait out there?
The key and irreconcilable difference is in their deaths. The Buddha died peacefully as a product of his teaching, while Christ died painfully to fulfill his. The importance of suffering in Christianity keeps a Buddhist-Christian synthesis from happening. Perhaps it is possible with the Orthodoxy's focus on the deification of man.
No, not at all. Christianity is about strength and glory through suffering, whereas Buddhism revolves around becoming indifferent to suffering. Buddhists fast to build indifference, Christians fast to increase sensitivity.
Not sure about that but Eastern Orthodoxy could be said to be the most closest to Buddhism of all the Christian denominations
>>1204525
Orthodox believe God suffers, so that doesn't really change anything.
>>1204531
The Mahayana does have the Bodhisattva ideal which strive towards the salvation of all creatures before oneself. The Theraveda may be more "individualistic" but they have a system of merit where living family members or the living can aid in giving the departed more good karma or something to be reincarnated into a better life.
>>1204479
If you remove the old testament, yeah, sort of. If you view him from a purely philosophical standpoint and look at the "son of God" angle as either a metaphor for enlightenment or a white lie he used to get more people to listen to his peaceful philosophy for the greater good, then I can see him being viewed as a Buddha born of western tradition. You *do* have to view the book through the lens of history though, the authors were probably Greeks writing to convert other Greeks.
>>1204541
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Passion is not the Orthodoxy's main focus, right?
>Levant
>West
>>1204542
Christianity is about looking to yourself before trying to tell others about their sins.
They're not comparable religions. Christianity says the righteous aren't promised any sort of karmic reward, in fact it says if you are righteous you will probably be screwed over. They're completely incompatible religions. They have in common ascetic practice and praying something over and over in silence for long periods, but beyond that the similarity ends, and it is wrong to both religions to try to syncretize them or force artificial similarity, it will only distort both faiths..
Jesus was an apocalyptic rabbi who was re-imagined as God by people who never met him. Compared to the handful of Jesus' sayings, we have far more information on what the Buddha taught.
>>1204552
>>1204549
I mean God suffers because we do, it hurts God to see us suffer.
The Passion is not any kind of focus as far as spiritual focus goes. None of our icons depict Christ on the cross except after his death. The Passion is crucial as a step to Christ's conquest of death, but it is not to be considered abstracted from that.
>>1204558
Like what?
>>1204556
There are certainly opposing differences between Buddhism and Christianity. But I'll accept that there are points of agreement and similarity
>>1204552
>Dominated by Rome
>inhabitants spoke koine Greek as well as Aramaic and Hebrew
>apostles spread out mostly to the west
Yeah.
Side discussion: with all the evidence for Thomas in India (and insular sect of Indian christianity) can we have a discussion about Christianity in Persia and India?
>>1204568
There aren't really except asceticism and constant prayer. Cosmetically they might look the same because of all the monks, but Buddhism strives toward oblivion, whereas the core and central experience of Christianity is physical communion of God by eating his body.
>>1204572
>Christianity in Persia and India
It was larger Nestorian, yeah? I remember reading somewhere that western travelers in the Mongol empire were surprised to find communities of Christians as far as China.
>>1204574
Fanaticism aside, can we just look at that as a ritual to remind the followers of the importance of sacrifice?
If you treat Christian ritual like excercises in philosophy it becomes way more interesting and reconcilable with modern materialism/eastern philosophy.
>>1204574
The whole nirvana thing doesn't really entail you becoming "nothing" or ceasing to exist. It is meant to escape the bonds of samsara and hence need not be reborn no longer. They also have a sort of theology of the Icon
RFeminder that Jesus was nothing more than a buddhist, possibly hitting stream entry (meaning an aryan who has sen the retardation in the self and who as seen the buddhist ''morality''), but clearly not an aharant=an awaken (otherwise he would not be theist).
buddha>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>JEsus
>>1204574
>Buddhism strives toward oblivion, whereas the core and central experience of Christianity is physical communion of God
Buddhism, at least Mahayana, strives to seek the very same communion. It has the Trikaya, the three bodies of the buddha- the created body which exists in time and space, the god body, and the cosmic body which encapsulates the true nature of reality. The goal is to seek union with the cosmic body by understanding, rather than knowing, the true nature of reality.
>>1204592
It's not the same communion at all, since the communion is physical in Christianity, hence the importance of physically eating God's body. This sanctifies one's own body, and allows you to partake of the immortality Christ's body had, so yours can come back from the dead as well, being part of his.
>>1204593
That is correct but you cannot deny that a sort of theology of the icon is there. Making a Buddha image literally contributes to your salvation
>>1204531
>whereas Buddhism revolves around becoming indifferent to suffering.
That's not true though. Buddhism revolves around realizing that everything is impermanent, suffering, happiness and even life.
And of course that suffering is caused by wanting things like happiness.
>>1204479
He brought Buddhist thought back to the Middle East and dumbed it right down for them.
>>1204596
Images being important is common to pretty much all religions apart from Abrahamic (Orthodox Christianity is the exception among Abrahamic religions)
>>1204595
Rites in Mahayana Buddhism are just as physical. If it were not, there would hardly be an institution outside the academia.
>>1204607
Right, but I mean suffering and life are only seen as undesirable because they ultimately lead to suffering. If they didn't, then they wouldn't be.
>>1204618
Buddhists don't have any sacrament of physical communion with God, in fact as far as I know, Buddhism wants to leave behind the material, not achieve physical immortality.
>>1204623
Just one example is the Goma Fire Ritual in Shingon, aimed at spiritual cleansing and said to exhibit trance-like states at times. Shugendo, though it developed as a separate religious tradition, is currently associated with Shingon and Tendai and has extreme tests of strength and courage aimed at the actualization of the self.
I suppose the communion is less about calling forth the presence of God, than it is about realizing that presence exists in the fundamental fabric of reality.
>>1204644
Communion is not just about realizing that presence exists. The Orthodox believe God's grace, or "energies", permeate and sustain all of reality. But communion is about not just having your body sustained by God, but about actually uniting with God's body. God became man, all the properties of God, all the properties of a human being, and he told us that truly we cannot be saved without eating his flesh and drinking his blood. So we eat the bread and wine believing them not to be mere bread and wine, but the true flesh and blood of God, God's own body. By ingesting it, we go beyond being merely sustained by God, and become living parts of God's Body, a Body which was Resurrected from death, and by being physical, living parts of that body, we partake of the Resurrection. This is considered the key of Christianity, what holds it all together, what it's all about, the great mystical truth that the religion revolves around.
>>1204620
In Christianity or Buddhism?
Because in Buddhism, there are two things that are of ultimate importance, and that's impermanence, and that the act of willing, or wanting, is what causes distress.
When you realize that wanting material objects for example does not make you happy for a very long time, your desire to acquire them lowers, and this will make you happier, which is ironic to say the least.
>>1204684
Christianity affirms suffering, Romans Romans 5:3-4
I'm saying Buddhism sees happiness and life as undesirable because they can lead to suffering.
>>1204700
>I'm saying Buddhism sees happiness and life as undesirable because they can lead to suffering.
It really doesn't though, because they think it is possible to reach states of consciousness where you do not suffer, which is what Nirvana is all about.
>>1204700
>I'm saying Buddhism sees happiness and life as undesirable because they can lead to suffering.
No, it recognizes the transient nature of both and posits that by waking up from the illusion that you can live a blissful existence free from troubles, and that as a natural result the cycle of rebirths stop.
Simply thinking about it like "life=suffering=bad" etc is a flawed way to approach Buddhism and only causes you to misunderstand it.
>>1204717
Nirvana is an obliteration of consciousness.
>>1204724
No it isn't
>>1204724
>Nirvana is an obliteration of consciousness.
No, it's an obliteration of the ego, and the act of wanting/desiring.
Nirvana isn't about dying.
>>1204717
Nirvana is not something thats used to describe anyone alive or anything that could happen to someone while alive. Typically someone that has become enlightened is referred to as an arahant and you can just say that they have become enlightened and don't need to use the term nirvana. You see this mistake a lot even on Wikipedia but its incorrect to say that someone who is alive has "reached" or "attained" nirvana.
>>1204731
But that's wrong though, because Nirvana isn't about being dead.
>>1204734
Extinguish the flames of desire
>>1204728
You are trying to describe enlightenment and not Nirvana. Nirvana more refers to what happens when an enlightened person physically dies and they aren't reborn.
>>1204724
Neither Nirvana nor enlightenment are the obliteration of consciousness.
>>1204738
Extinguish the self.
Is the Indo-Tibetan commentary tradition the Eastern equivalent of scholasticism?
>>1204749
No, there is no Eastern equivalent, unless you count Islam as Eastern since they invented religious scholasticism.
>>1204748
Yes but that doesn't mean you literally turn into something else. The Encyclopedia of Buddhism notes this too. I'll get the page up for you. Just hold your cum for a second :3
>>1204748
What self?
>>1204659
>become living parts of god
That is what union with the dharma body is about though. You say the nembutsu to call upon amida to bring you to the Pure Land when you die, so as to become one with the dharma body there. You can achieve momentary union through satori, but need mediation to truly sustain it. How is that different?
>>1204750
Which Tibetan works have you read?
>>1204563
Can't God do anything to alleviate our suffering?
>>1204751
>Yes but that doesn't mean you literally turn into something else.
Right, that's the point. Nirvana means escape from reincarnation, and the annihilation of the self.
>>1204754
It's an illusion in Buddhism, but apparently one that can be reincarnated.
>>1204756
None of these are physical unions, none of these are about making your physical body come back to life.
>>1204761
So you're confused about buddhist beliefs?
Buddhist want to destroy consciousness, aka nirvana.
Buddhist want to destroy their selves, but that self doesn't exist. Yet it reincarnates.
Get it together, which one is right?
>>1204736
Nirvana isn't about explicitly being dead but the Buddha made it clear in his discourses that Nirvana wasn't some mental or metaphysical state that you can reach while alive. The word itself refers to the end of rebirth and many experts generally agree that it refers to the literal end of the cycle when you die and aren't reborn and is not referring to the point when you become enlightened.
>>1204734
Thats not the obliteration of consciousness because from the Buddhist perspective each consciousness is just the function of the brain like smell is the function of the nose and that each consciousness exists only in one beings lifetime and each is permanently obliterated with each death anyway. From the Buddhist perspective its no different then saying death obliterates blood circulation or lung usage and so the options of Nirvana and rebirth both obliterate the consciousness of the being who dies.
>>1204761
The "self" is not really an illusion but rather the concept of a permanent non changing "self" that is seen as the illusion
>>1204750
That is a completely wrong assumption. Buddhism has strong foundations in institutions of scholarship in nearly every sect. I am partial to Nagarjuna and the madhyamaka.
>>1204761
How is achieving awakening in a Pure, blissful land created by Amida for our enlightenment any different than awakening in heaven?
>>1204757
None in depth, but I've read sections of them enough to know they aren't scholasticism by any stretch. Scholasticism is founded on Aristotle's Organon.
>>1204760
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XP0J2eDPIjU
Buddhism came to be because India is such a shithole that ceasing to exist is preferable to living.
>>1204764
It's not my fault Buddhist beliefs are a bit contradictory.
>>1204766
Seems a mischaracterization of the significance of fire
>Agni is worshipped as the symbol of piety and purity; as expression of two kinds of energy i.e. light and heat, he is the symbol of life and activity.
>>1204764
Read this post to see an explanation of what you are confused about.
>>1204761
>Nirvana means escape from reincarnation, and the annihilation of the self.
Thats wrong. There is no self to annihilate from the Buddhist perspective and Nirvana is the eventual result of when someone fully understands this. You can't annihilate something that doesn't exist.
>It's an illusion in Buddhism, but apparently one that can be reincarnated.
The self is not reborn, what happens is that craving and attachment cause karmic effects that result in rebirth, but there is no unchanging substance like self or soul that is transmitted between births.
>>1204777
It's moral in some vajrayana schools to kill people who live in shitholes because it would be near impossible for them to accrue any positive karma
>>1204780
That's because you are looking at the whole, when Buddhism is comprised of many different schools and sects. It's like looking at Catholicism, Nestorianism, Otrhodoxy, and Protestantism and saying that Christianity is contradictory.
>>1204774
In terms of intellectual rigor and longevity, it is definitely comparable to scholasticism.
>>1204773
>Buddhism has strong foundations in institutions of scholarship in nearly every sect
"Scholasticism" is not synonymous with "scholarship".
>How is achieving awakening in a Pure, blissful land created by Amida for our enlightenment any different than awakening in heaven?
Heaven is not a distinct realm in Christianity, it is an intersecting dimension with the physical, and we are meant to exist in both together. Our soul's separation from our body is considered an impairment to our humanity, which will be remedied.
>>1204791
Then it's not "rebirth" it's just "birth"
>>1204777
Christianity came to be because resentful Jews were jealous of Roman Chads enjoying all the boipussy they wanted.
>>1204790
I don't think so. A thing can have multiple symbolic meanings
>>1204802
Well the Pure Land, and even nirvana is a state of being as well. And since all is empty and depends on itself for existence, it is useless to call it a non-physical state. There is only the illusion that we are separated from it that keeps us from experiencing it.
>>1204796
Scholasticism isn't just rigorous, it's on the spectrum, and it sowed the seeds of the fall of Christianity in the West. It would have done the same to Islam of it didn't eventually run into very serious opposition.
>>1204790
Agni is a Vedic god and has nothing to do with Buddhism
>>1204780
If you leave out the teachings of the later schools that added on a lot of stuff the teachings of the Buddhas as best we know them are not contradictory. I explained how what that person thought was a contradiction wasn't one in the post I made that replied to them if you want to understand why it isn't contradictory.
>>1204817
Buddhism tends to appropriate Hindu and local deities. In Buddhist cosmology they are known as dewas and are still bound by Samsara
>>1204807
The term rebirth is appropriate when it is a cycle that causes birth after every death.
>>1204780
Its not your fault you haven't understood the buddhist principles. Your knowledge is clearly incomplete. Have you explored why these are contradictory? Maybe one of them is your own belief projecting onto buddhism? Maybe there is an explanation to this?
>>1204812
There can be, but this article is ruling out the primary significance completely
>>1204815
>it sowed the seeds of the fall of Christianity in the West
Would you mind elaborating on this, pretty please?
>>1204814
Nirvana is not something experienced until death
>>1204817
>Agni is a Vedic god and has nothing to do with Buddhism
I'm pretty sure if we're talking about the significance of fire in Indian culture, it's applicable.
>I explained how what that person thought was a contradiction wasn't one in the post I made that replied to them if you want to understand why it isn't contradictory.
No, you iterated another contradiction. If there is not reincarnation, then birth is never rebirth, it's just birth.
>>1204821
Yes and I understand that but for a discussion concerned with Buddha's teachings it makes no sense to bring them up. I just thought that the poster was under the impression that it was part of mainstream Buddhist doctrine which was why I wrote that.
>>1204825
No, "rebirth" for the same entity to have a new birth. It doesn't just mean a birth. Causation also presumably doesn't actually exist in Buddhism either, so the cycle is not really appropriate or sensible.
>>1204827
I presume, from a Buddhist perspective, it's a matter of seeing contradictions that are transcended spiritually.
>>1204815
I don't know what sort of evidence there is that scholasticism had a negative impact on Western Christianity, except in the sense that it was the centre of intellectual life for centuries and so influenced everything that came after.
>>1204839
>No, you iterated another contradiction. If there is not reincarnation, then birth is never rebirth, it's just birth.
see
>>1204825
Not only is that an argument based on a flawed premise but its over semantics and not doctrine. The word rebirth is not exclusively defined by whether a judeo-christian-type unchanging soul is reborn again, as I already stated it is an appropriate term to be used when it is describing a cycle that happens after every death.
>>1204839
>Nirvana is not something experienced until death
That is incorrect, my friend. Even when seen as a "end-life" state, it is not death. It is wholly different from death because it is outside the cycle of rebirth. I'll freely admit that Buddhism has some key differences from Christianity, but there are similarities. You must admit that your knowledge on Buddhism is lacking, and I advise you to stop making such broad statements on the matter until you've read up a bit more.
>>1204836
He held reason over spiritual insight as the highest faculty, and, well, the Enlightenment was only a matter of time from there. Spinoza merely used scholasticism against religion.
>>1204839
>Nirvana is not something experienced until death
Thats paranirvana, as in final nirvana. Nirvana is something is lived with in life.
>>1204840
Ok. I dunno why Constancute is misrepresenting Buddhism though
>>1204850
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebirth_(Buddhism)
>>1204853
No positive qualities are attributed to it, only things attributed are what are not. It's mainly, perhaps solely, defined by a total absence of suffering.
>>1204614
>supreme right view
Sounds like /pol/'s new religion
>>1204858
"For as long as one is entangled by craving, one remains bound in saṃsāra, the cycle of birth and death; but when all craving has been extirpated, one attains Nibbāna, deliverance from the cycle of birth and death."
>>1204846
If you actually take the time to understand it you see that there not contradictions. There are no contradictions to be "transcended spiritually".
>>1204846
Rebirth in the Buddhist sense of what we are talking about is just used as a placeholder translation for the term that was used by Buddha in a different language.
I'll sum up why your argument is flawed so you understand.
1. Buddha taught about a rebirth where there is nothing like soul or self that passes between lives. From the Buddhist sense it is considered rebirth because it is a cycle that happens after every death.
2. Obviously Buddha spoke in a different language and the english term rebirth is just used in place of what he said.
3. The way Buddha described it in his language had nothing to do with there being an unchanging thing that passed between lives.
4. You believe that there is contradiction in the doctrine because it is called rebirth and you think this is a contradiction because in your mind its not rebirth unless there is an unchanging thing like soul that is passed on and reborn again.
5. There is no contradiction and the mistake you are making is bringing your own assumptions and beliefs about what the word "rebirth" means into the discussion.
6. In order to understand that there is no contradiction in Buddhism you have to realize that you are attaching yourself to a Christian-definition of rebirth. You are basically arguing that something is a contradiction because it doesn't make sense when you switch around the meaning of the terms that it uses.
7. If you temporarily use the Buddhist sense of the word rebirth and set aside your own then you see that there is no contradiction, you are just getting hung up on language. In the language and setting Buddha taught in it was not a contradiction. Your Christian-based understanding of terms don't automatically apply to other times and cultures.
>>1204864
That article doesn't seem to be very well written and is missing some important qualifications and clarifications. While it is true that some sects believe in some sort of thing being passed between rebirths, in Theravada Buddhism (considered by most experts to be the most representative of what Buddha actually taught) and the Pali Canon that it is based on, both make it clear that there is nothing passed on during rebirth (rebirth meaning "rebirth in the sense that Buddha talked about it")
>>1204908
see
>>1204924
That intro paragraph contains some pretty inaccurate statements. Simply linking to it does not prove any argument or any point made by anyone.
This post here >>1204791 describes what Buddha taught about rebirth as best we know from the most solid sources and what most experts generally agree he taught.
>>1204924
It references the Pali Canon
>Another mechanistic rebirth theory that emerged in Buddhism posits that a being is reborn through "evolving consciousness" (Pali: samvattanika viññana, M.1.256)[40][41] or "stream of consciousness" (Pali: viññana sotam, D.3.105) that reincarnates.[42] Death dissolves all prior aggregates (Pali: khandhas, Sanskrit: skandhas), and this consciousness stream combined with karma of a being contributes to a new aggregation, which is rebirth. Nirvana is the state that marks the end of this consciousness continuum and the associated karmic cycle of suffering through rebirths and redeaths.[43]
>all these Buddhists coming from the wood
New age shit?
there is no morality as you think of it in the dhamma.
in the dhamma, there is a polarization of thoughts, speech, act:
-you have the pole of the material hedonist
-you have the pole of the spiritual hedonist
-you have the pole of nibanna
the goal is to understand
-that you begin as material hedonist
-that material hedonism is just here to support spiritual hedonism [=the jhanas, samatha]
-the jhanas are here to support the vision of the dhamma
-so far you have pure faith and you try to understand the dhamma (and fail)
-once you see the dhamma, you lose faith to gain certainty, you stop reflecting on all the dhamma and start practicing the dhamma
you go deeper into tranquility and paramitas, precisely because you know that what you feel and think is rubbish to be happy (and that rituals will never get you anything by themselves, that you must do the work yourself]
-then you have nibanna
what people call morality is ''the tranquility and paramitas towards what they think *is not* their self'' and what people call meditation is ''the tranquility and paramitas towards what they think *is* their self''.
They were the same in that they were both enlightened, but of course only Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God.
>>1204943
Realize that western Buddhism = new age is just a stupid meme. Europeans were Buddhist in large numbers centuries before they ever became Christian, Buddhism was practiced by many Greeks and white Caucasians before Christ was even born. Don't let memes stop you from educating yourself about something.
>>1204942
I don't know the context of that passage but it says "another theory that emerged" which makes me strongly suspect its not something Buddha actually said because nothing he taught was a theory and he only taught what he maintained was true so that may have been a later interpretation by someone else.
Buddhas was unequivocally clear that there is no unchanging self that is passed between lives and almost all experts will agree on this.
>>1204943
Buddhism as it came into the west in the early 20th century was a product of a Japanese orientalist movement as part of their mobilization and modernization. Do not mistake actual Buddhist thought with that watered down bastardization.
>>1204995
Thats hardly the only reason it came into the west though. Many 20th and 19th century western philosophers and intellectuals became interested in eastern philosophy/religion and wrote about it in their works which eventually generated further interest by the educated population of the west, especially after the 60's.
I do agree though that distinguishing between watered-down self-help type Buddhism and Buddha's actual teachings are very important.
>>1204995
Buddhism as it came to the west is a product of japan being a war-torn shithole in the 50s and the tibetan diaspora. Also 'Nam. War caused a spiritual brain-drain from a lot of places. Then there were westerners in the peace corps making contact with it and >>1205011 really driving it along.
who else /saintyoungmen/ here?
>>1205050
aye
>>1205063
I can agree with that. Suzuki 'Zen' has done a lot of damage to the perception of western buddhism. Actually this thread is the perfect example of the problem. Like maybe 2 anons have any idea at all what they are talking about and the rest is entirely baseless academic conjecture with no relation to actual theory or practice. Pure intellectual masturbation by the uninitiated.
I'm not for the hegemonic power structure of the orthodoxy prescribing what I am allowed to know, but buddhism is an initiatic lineage relying on direct transmission from a guru so that one does not think stupid thoughts that are wrong. I hate those assholes, but I've come to see that they aren't entirely wrong.
>>1205050
>Budhha's face halfway down the rollercoaster
>>1204833
Well, go and give it a read. Serves as a good introduction to Buddhism and its free on bookos if you want to sin by downloading from it.
>>1205109
That's the fundamental problem of discussion religion on /his/. It's only doctrine, and the communal and institutional aspects can never be properly addressed.
And that is why Buddhism remains elusive for many westerners, I feel. It is only accessible through a limited amount of translated doctrinal texts, whereas doctrine only makes up a small portion of religion. Especially with Buddhism, where the most popular (at least in East Asia) sects focus on participation over belief.
>>1204873
Tee-hee. I see what you did there. :D
Buddha is a title of many people, equivalent would be Messiah or something like that.
>>1204924
> OP suggests that Jesus and Buddha are similar
> People argue this
> Becomes argument about meaning of Buddhist doctrine
> Anons suggest that what Buddha said has been distorted by the surrounding commentary, and has strayed from the original intended meaning of the central figure
> OP's hypothesis is thereby confirmed
I read somewhere about John the baptist being influenced by budishm. It's posible?
>>1204525
>Buddha died peacefully
Didn't he die after days and days of shitting himself to death from dysentery? How is that peaceful? Sure, not quite as bad as dying from dehydration while nailed to a cross, but still far from peaceful.
>>1205519
Gautama Siddhartha was born somewhere between 500-400 BCE, so provided that the early formation of Buddhism was consolidated enough to be considered a religion and spread from India to the Middle East by then, then it seems completely likely.
If you read up on the Apocrypha, you'll find all sorts of Eastern philosophy (which makes sense, considering that Christianity is actually an Eastern religion).
>>1205344
Indeed
>>1205519
I don't know but as this >>1205553
guy says its very possible. There were large amounts of Buddhists in the Iran/Afghan/Pakistan area for hundreds of years and some of them traveled west to Greece and the Levant. There was an ascetic community in Alexandria that was likely Buddhist and the Greeks knew about them and the Skeptic branch of Greek philosophy was pretty much kickstarted when Pyrrho came back from his travels in the east where he had learned about Buddhism.
>>1204531
Makes Christians sound like masochists.
>>1206098
I think Constantine abandoned this thread. He wasn't in his element.
>>1206118
He never is.
>>1205541
Christ didn't die of dehydration, he was stabbed by a big spear.
>>1204577
The Sassanian Empire favored Nestorian Christianity after it was declared heretical in the Roman Empire, for obvious reasons.
Also Touraj Daryaee (in Sasanian Persia: the risa and fall of an empire) mentions that merchants were in the lowest strata of society according to Zoroastrianism, or at least the zoroastrian priesthood of the time. This meant that a lot of late antique persian merchants adopted different religions, helping the spread of manicheism and nestorian christianity in the silk road.
>>1206144
That's an interesting subject. I was always fascinated by internationalization and the spread of religion, particularly Christianity into Asia.
>>1204724
Constantine, you should be commended on promoting civil discussion, but there is a common thread going through your relatively blunt comments here regarding buddhism. What you keep nitpicking here is YOUR limited understanding of disparate concepts, stripped of context, which also are generally crude english translations of very old and nebulous terms, that themselves are introductory pointers of a doctrine centered on PRACTICE and understanding through personal experience and a change in perspective as a result of that, not intellectual differentiation from a closed system. This is not to say that buddhism is illogical, but its philosophy is a bit more subtle. There is a real problem with misinterpreting dukkha as on equal terms with the english "suffering", or self as our sense of everyday experience. Im running out of words here but these core concepts require a lot of study to even understand their context.
>>1204791
There. We have found an irreconcilable difference. In Buddhism there does not exist a self, while in Christianity there does.
>>1204902
Pick a different word mate, if the Buddhist sense of rebirth is different from the western sense of rebirth, then use a different word for the Buddhist sense. English is not an eastern language, it is also very flexible and able to appropriate new words.
>>1206227
You disparage Constantine but as far as I can tell, no one else in this thread can agree on anything. Basically people are saying that Christianity and Buddhism are similar but that Christians (like Constantine) completely do not understand Buddhism. If they were similar then Constantine would not be so dead wrong about everything because he knows Christian Doctrine, but since he is so dead wrong, they must be dissimilar.
Mahayana Buddhism was heavily influenced by Nestorian Christianity.
Since we are talking about Christianity and Buddhism here, anyone knows any good material on the Jesus Sutras and Nestorian Christianity on the Silk road?
Questions:
What is the influence of Nestorian Christianity on Buddhism in the common era?
What is the influence of Hellenistic philosophy on Buddhism in the time of Alexander and post-Alexander?
What is the influence of Hellenistic philosophy on Christianity and the interpretation of the Gospels and the Old Testament?
>>1206563
Additional questions you should be looking for, if you're objective about your search for knowledge.
>What is the influence of Buddhism on Nestorian Christianity in the common era?
>What is the influence of Buddhism on Hellenistic philosophy in the time of Alexander and post-Alexander?
>What is the influence of Christianity. the Gospels and the Old Testament on the interpretation of Hellenistic philosophy?
>>1204479
>Socrates is the Western equivalent of the Buddha.
ftfy
>>1204479
Wrong. It was Zeno. Sadly, it never took off.
>>1204479
Buddhism copied Christianity in a lot of ways, not the other way around.
>>1207000
are you talking about a particular branch of Buddhism? like Pure Land? because Indian Buddhism predates Christianity.
What was happening here, religiously and philosophically, in the 2nd century CE?
>>1207023
He's talking about how the diffusion of Christianity to the eastern fundamentally altered parts of Buddhism in some places. I don't know if that claim is true, because Buddhism seems to me to contain a gnostic mysticism, but that is what he is claiming.
>>1204479
Didn't Buddha die fat as fuck while shitting blood?
>>1207193
he wasn't fat. and he died while laying down under a tree (i think)
Budai (Hotei) is fat, and a lot of people in the West get him confused with the Buddha.
>>1207000
>Buddhism copied Christianity in a lot of ways, not the other way around.
you are smart
buddhists say that christians and other theists manage to get into jhanas, where the bliss that they feel is taken, by the theists, for the energies of God. but you can go far deeper in the jhanas and then even leave the jhanas to make nibanna happen.
>>1206452
That's a weird way of saying nondual Shiva tantra.
>>1207594
So you're saying all the good in Buddhism comes from Nestorian Christianity and the bad from Shiva? What?
>>1207415
you walk down that path in 30 years you'll realize you have been foiled and there is no enlightenment
>>1204479
I fucking hate when liberals do these culture/religion equivalence bullshit.
There are profound differences here. It's sad most churches don't even teach much about it any more.
>>1208262
Have you done so yourself? If you're saying enlightenment is nothing special, i would agree with you. If you're saying it's bullshit, you're likely speaking from assumptions based on your own beliefs.
I have practiced Soto Zen for 7 years in formal settings, and while I wouldnt contend to possess such a thing, I have engaged enough people and experienced insight to the degree that am more than certain it is a very real thing. It's just not quite like people would imagine it to be.. and I personally dislike the E word. It's quite presumptuous to dismiss other religions' tenets when you lack the experience or the understanding of their context.
in buddhism, you learn that there is no point in hurting animals and humans, whereas with Jesus, you learn only that there is no point in hurting humans.
>>1208262
>you walk down that path in 30 years you'll realize you have been foiled and there is no enlightenment
only for lazy people in chan
stream entry does exist
>>1204563
>None of our icons depict Christ on the cross except after his death.
We what?
>>1204479
But Christ was actually God and actually did miracles. Buddha did neither and told his followers not to make idols of him.
>>1208473
>actually did miracles
proof?
>>1208478
Historical records
>>1208504
>tfw modern Christians still believe some cucks son literally rose from the dead.
Yes, Jesus studied under Buddhists as a child.
Just as plausible a theory as anything else to do with his life.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAaW6BYhfNM
Reminder
>>1208504
Any historical records from when Jesus was alive?
>>1206563
>influence of Nestorian Christianity on Buddhism in the common era?
very little, Theravada never came much into contact with it, Mahayana developed and spread to Asia before Christ was born and Zen developed before Christianity reached Japan
>influence of Hellenistic philosophy on Buddhism in the time of Alexander and post-Alexander?
All the evidence suggests very little, its mostly that Buddhism influenced western philosophy. The only substantial changes that happened to early Buddhism was the split into more Mahayana-like schools and none of that seems related to the Greek philosophy at the time. Hellenistic culture had a significant effect on Buddhist art though and was responsible for what academics believe was the first art depicting Buddha as a person.
>influence of Hellenistic philosophy on Christianity and the interpretation of the Gospels and the Old Testament?
A decent amount, Neo-Platonism was in large much a major factor in changing early the Christianity/church into the type of one that eventually dominated in Europe
>>1206682
>influence of Buddhism on Nestorian Christianity in the common era?
IDK about Nestorianism in particular but there is some plausible evidence that Buddhism influenced Jesus and the early church but its not conclusive
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_influences_on_Christianity
>influence of Buddhism on Hellenistic philosophy in the time of Alexander and post-Alexander?
There is significant evidence that Buddhism had a moderate-to-large effect on western philosophy
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Buddhism#Exchanges
Pyrrho traveled east with Alexander and met and learned from what were probably Buddhists and when he returned to Greece he ended up started caused the Skeptic branch of Greek philosophy to form.
not enough letters in post for last one but yes it did but it greatly declined with time
>>1207000
1) There is virtually no evidence that Buddhism copied Christianity or was influenced by it in any significant way, Buddha lived 500 years before Christ in case you didn't know.
2) Christianity and Judaism are themselves just successive copies of Zoroastrianism. Judaism was no different then the other bronze-age tribal/city cults until the Jews came into contact with Zoroastrianism and adopted it as their religion but with Yahweh as the deity instead of Ahura Mazda.
>>1207027
not sure exactly but I believe it would have been a mix of Hinduism, Buddhism and Zoroastrianism
>>1211080
> Buddha lived 500 years before Christ
And Moses lived 1000 years before Quran but it was influenced by Judaism.
>>1208154
The majority of Mahayana, especially vajrayana, is Kashmiri shaivist with some slight differences in phenomenology and the addition of the Bodhisattva path. It's essentially a reaction to Hinayana and a return to the initiatic guru lineages that buddhism stems from, philosophy et al. I can't say what came first because the two are highly syncretic and concurrent practices with many of the recognized masters not being buddhist in a monastic sense and quite a few rejecting the orthodoxy for good reason.
There is no christism in buddhist scripture or practice. Outside of gnostic texts, there aren't even compelling parallels besides for a couple parables like the rubies and the pigs. If you want to pursue that thought, the collectivist bent of christism is one of the issues plaguing buddhism for the past 1500 years or so. NST is the philosophical and practical backbone of buddhism and syncretism ex post facto the spread outside its place of origin is minimal, all of which happened long before the spread of Christianity. If anything, it is Zoroastrian Mithraism, which it isn't because the cosmology of buddhism most resembles much older sects not focused on the good/evil dichotomy, if anything at all.
Don't really want to start another thread. Say a man commits murder and then has a heart attack shortly after. He did not repent, but it's possible he may have if not for the heart attack. Pls discuss
>>1211434
It's all about how he handles himself in bardö. Transgressive acts can be enlightening. But most generally it's about the sum total of everything he has done thus far and murder sends you off to one of the hells, of which there are many. Not that it is you, but among other things, including not being you, it is you.
>>1211103
Are you retarded? the point is that Buddhism wasn't influenced by Christianity because it developed way before Christ was even born. Islam was influenced by Judaism because it came after Judaism, that wasn't the case with Buddhism and Christianity. Also, Moses wasn't real.
>>1206452
No it wasn't, it developed way before Christ was born
>>1211678
Buddha and the order of Bhikkus that he founded in his life would only eat what they received from begging with their alms bowls and they didn't eat after mid-day.
He definitely wasn't fat.
Eastern religion is about finding harmony.
Good and evil are both needed for balance and enlightenment and balance are above all things.
On the other hand Christianity has no balance. Rather than the natural state being good and evil men must try to defeat evil and find good. Through their faith and deeds they will become one with god.
These two religions cannot work together.
religion is a coping mechanism once you face your failure of your life, just like other contrived fantasizes, your faith in the scientific method included.
Religions are meant to leave material-bodily hedonism, travels, concerts, foods, sex and so on, for a spiritual hedonism, through prayers for theists and mediation for atheists.
Plenty of material hedonist love to think of themselves as less hedonistic than they are, since it improves their hedonism in thinking that they are not animals...most people who claim to be religious are not all, it is just the way they are.
In buddhism, you even leave this spiritual hedonism, after you have gained it, which is called jhanas, since you understand that this bliss from prayers, which is just a great, but not perfect concentration-stilness, are not personal nor permanent and that you are still prone to avidity and aversion.
>>1211678
>Oh you're so wrong, I have a feeling your only understanding of Buddhism comes from internet memes or something.
what am i wrong about, exactly?
>>1212987
>rabbits before horses
>not eating rabbits
>horses not being faithful companions
When will yankees let us secede?
>>1204479
>"the" Buddha
Dumbass occidentcuck detected.
>>1213066
semitecuck detected
>>1213089
faulty detection system detected
>>1213107
if you are jewish, christian or muslim you are a semitecuck
>>1213138
I think he is referring to how Buddha is a title, and there myriad Buddhas.
>>1213296
This guy gets it.
>>1204808
Except a lot of early converts were Roman soldiers.
>>1206747
>There is no Western equivalent of Buddha
ftfy
>>1204479
Much of what we know of Buddha is passed down from legends and oral traditions. There are no written works mentioning him until several centuries after his death. The earliest written texts detailing his life and teachings are dated nearly 500 years after his death. Particular details about him, including finer details of his philosophy, are impossible to know with any certainty.
>See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. For in Him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, and you have been filled in Him, who is the head of all rule and authority.
Colossians 2:8-10
>>1204479
Watch pic related.
One of the sub-plots was the man ended up being Jesus and he only became so because he met Buddha and tried to bring his teachings to the west, but they just weren't ready/didn't understand.
>>1204558
See >>1217435
>He said to them, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you believe that I am He you will die in your sins.”
John 8:23-24
>>1211555
>Moses wasn't real
Wrong. The Holy Bible is also a history book.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_biblical_figures_identified_in_extra-biblical_sources
>>1217435
>Much of what we know of Buddha is passed down from legends and oral traditions. There are no written works mentioning him until several centuries after his death. The earliest written texts detailing his life and teachings are dated nearly 500 years after his death. Particular details about him, including finer details of his philosophy, are impossible to know with any certainty.
kind of like jesus, only a longer period between the death of Buddha and writings about him.
>The Holy Bible is also a history book.
That's a bit of a stretch. It's history mixed with mythology. It wouldn't pass as a history book in this day and age.
>>1217471
I don't see Moses as one of the figures listed in your link.
>>1217534
>kind of like jesus
Wrong.
>>1217561
There is more evidence for Moses than there is for Homer, Pythagoras or plenty of other ancient historical figures.
>>1217471
How could Moses be real if Jewish slaves didn't even build the pyramids? And he isn't listed on your link bro.
>>1217568
>that image
Kek, you're an idiot.
>>1217568
>There is more evidence for Moses than there is for Homer, Pythagoras or plenty of other ancient historical figures.
What historical evidence for Moses is there outside of the bible? he wasn't even listed in the link you provided.
>>1217568
>Wrong.
About what? The earliest parts of the New Testament were written several years after the death of Jesus. There are no records of Jesus during his lifetime, similar to the case of Buddha.
>>1217568
>There is more evidence for Moses than there is for Homer, Pythagoras or plenty of other ancient historical figures.
you live in a fantasy world
>>1217568
>look at all the evidence for Moses!!!!!!
>posts picture about the New Testament
top kek
>>1217578
See >>1217568
It was a very common egyptian practice to cover up or completely erase humiliating records so it isn't suprising that they did so when they got completely BTFO by God and His chosen people.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damnatio_memoriae#Similar_practices_in_other_societies
>>1217592
>There are no records of Jesus during his lifetime
He preached for 3 years only and He wasn't surrounded by historians. This is a pathetic argument. Wether you like it or not, Jesus Christ existed and what He preached has been well preserved for nearly two thousand years.
>>1217594
no u
>>1217622
>look at all the evidence for Moses!!!!!!
Who said this?
>posts picture about the New Testament
Yes, in response to the first post I replied to. Go shitpost elsewhere.
>>1217650
>what He preached has been well preserved for nearly two thousand years
>implying the people who wrote the New Testament actually wrote down what Jesus said
What some of contemporaries claimed that Jesus preached has been well preserved. Probably a lot of it is stuff that Jesus also preached, and certainly a lot of it isn't.
>>1217650
>Wether you like it or not, Jesus Christ existed
What historical evidence is there from his lifetime? I think you're the one who is proposing a pathetic argument here.
>>1217650
>He preached for 3 years only and He wasn't surrounded by historians
so why should we take his life story as historical fact? Nobody recorded anything of him during his life. it was all many years after his death.
>>1217664
>What historical evidence is there for Homer or Pythagoras from their lifetime?
That's not an answer to my question.
>>1217663
>why should we take his life story as historical fact?
Because of His resurrection, the greatest event in human history. The Apostles didn't lie. They didn't get crucified, beheaded, stabbed, burned alive, stoned and clubbed to death for nothing. If they didn't see the resurrected Jesus they would've kept denying Him.
>>1217674
That's not an answer to my question.
>>1217679
>the greatest event in human history
how come nobody recorded "the greatest event in human history" when it happened? how come nobody wrote about this huge and miraculous event until many years later?
>>1217679
>They didn't get crucified, beheaded, stabbed, burned alive, stoned and clubbed to death for nothing
Pretty sure people can stick to there convictions without needing someone to literally come back from the dead.
>>1217681
Because you never answered my original question.
>>1217568
>somebody exists as soon as I write his name in some of my books
you seem very smart
>>1217698
When are you going to admit that you're unable to answer my question?
>>1217699
>someone doesn't exist unless a historian followed him around throughout his life and wrote about him while he was still alive
you don't seem very smart
>>1217710
>someone doesn't exist unless a historian followed him around throughout his life and wrote about him while he was still alive
what's wrong with that, exactly?
>>1217722
>When you will die I will claim that you never existed.
Irrelevant. My birth is documented. Pictures exist of me. I've been recorded as being in various different places. your word isn't going to make a difference.
>>1217729
all this from during my lifetime, btw.
>>1217729
Are you one of the autistic kids who unironically say "pics or it didn't happen"?
>>1217748
>Are you one of the autistic kids who unironically say "pics or it didn't happen"?
nope.
>>1217435
Its almost impossible that Buddha didn't exist because there is no way that a relatively small group of possesionless monks could have decided to purposely create a false myth about a teacher and then create and memorize teachings and discourses that the imaginary teacher gave that together equal thousands of pages of text and are basically entirely coherent and give the impression of one person behind it all.
>See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition
Its ironic that you would post this because Buddhism is the religion that encourages critical thinking and critical examination of all its facets while Christianity is the one that discourages critical thinking and instead calls people to just have faith.
>>1217452
literally superstition
>>1217568
>>1217471
Virtually all respected historians and archaeologists agree that Moses wasn't real and was just a mythological figure.
>>1217802
>See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. For in Him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, and you have been filled in Him, who is the head of all rule and authority.
Colossians 2:8-10
>>1217817
he already responded to that.
>>1217825
He did not.
>>1217802
>Its ironic that you would post this because Buddhism is the religion that encourages critical thinking and critical examination of all its facets while Christianity is the one that discourages critical thinking and instead calls people to just have faith.
There's even a passage in the bible that tells you not to try and interpret it for yourself, because you might get it wrong.
>>1217802
Its almost impossible that Jesus didn't exist because there is no way that a relatively small group of possesionless monks could have decided to purposely create a false myth about a teacher and then create and memorize teachings and discourses that the imaginary teacher gave that together equal thousands of pages of text and are basically entirely coherent and give the impression of one person behind it all.
>>1217833
http://www.rationalchristianity.net/unknown_verses.html
>>1217848
I aint clicking on that shit.
>>1217679
>They didn't get crucified, beheaded, stabbed, burned alive, stoned and clubbed to death for nothing.
Yes, indeed. They violated Roman laws and defied Roman traditions. The Romans were distinctly not fucking around sorts when it came to that shit.
We have modern studies on religious movements that show that people can be goaded to do and believe utterly irrational, demonstrably false shit by figures they perceive as religiously significant; psychological studies on cults have been very enlightening in that regard, so there's no reason to assume that their actions were motivated in rationality.
>>1217854
t. Mr. "look how rational and skeptic I am!" Atheist
>The simple believes everything, but the prudent gives thought to his steps.
Proverbs 14:15
>Desire without knowledge is not good, and whoever makes haste with his feet misses his way.
Proverbs 19:2
>If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me.
John 10:37
>Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.
Acts 17:11
>Test everything; hold fast what is good.
1 Thessalonians 5:21
>Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.
1 John 4:1
>>1217864
>they were all just crazy xD
>>1217880
No, I just refuse to click on that link. Thanks for posting those.
That said, there is very certainly a passage that tells you not to interpret the Bible for yourself, you're supposed to leave that to religious authorities. Constantine pointed it out in a thread about protestantism.
>>1217888
They were either crazy or lying, since coming back from the dead is impossible.
>>1217899
>>They were either crazy or lying
See >>1217679
>>coming back from the dead is impossible
For a simple man like you and so is walking on water, the same cannot be said about the Son of Man.
>Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”
Matthew 19:26
>>1217930
Yes, I already addressed that post. They were killed for stirring up shit in the Empire, and religious devotion can encourage people to do and believe crazy shit.
>For a simple man like you and so is walking on water, the same cannot be said about the Son of Man.
No. It's flat out fucking impossible. If you have empirical proof to the contrary, I'd love to see it.
>>1217939
>I want empirical evidence for something spiritual and mystical
Fedoras: missing the point since forever
>>1217944
>I have no standards of proof.
Good for you.
>>1217939
For a simple man like you, not for the Son of Man.
Read Matthew 19:26.
>>1217959
Empirical proof. Provide it or shut up.
Was any historical evidence ever given for Jesus or Moses in this thread?
>>1217969
Jesus is attested to in the writings of Tacitus and Josephus. Which doesn't strictly rule out the possibility of hearsay, but seems to verify his existence. There is no evidence for Moses.
>>1217967
Boo!
>>1217980
>a face appeared in cloth
Real fucking impressive. Still doesn't prove he came back from the dead.
>>1217969
Take a guess.
>>1217988
The image on the Shroud is of a man 5 feet 10 ½ inches tall, about 175 pounds, covered with scourge wounds and blood stains. Numerous surgeons and pathologists (including Dr. Frederick Zugibe (Medical Examiner - Rockland, New York), Dr. Robert Bucklin (Medical Examiner - Las Vegas, Nevada), Dr. Herman Moedder (Germany), the late Dr. Pierre Barbet (France), and Dr. David Willis (England)) have studied the match between the Words, Weapons and Wounds, and agree that the words of the New Testament regarding the Passion clearly match the wounds depicted on the Shroud, and that these wounds are consistent with the weapons used by ancient Roman soldiers in Crucifixion.
Specifically, the scourge marks on the shoulders, back, and legs of the Man of the Shroud match the flagrum (Roman whip) which has three leather thongs, each having two lead or bone pellets (plumbatae) on the end. The lance wound in the right side matches the Roman Hasta (4cm x 1 cm spear wound). Iron nails (7" spikes) were used in the wrist area (versus the palms as commonly depicted in Medieval art). These marks, combined with the capping of thorns which is not found anywhere else in crucifixion literature of ancient Roman (Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Elder or Pliny the Younger) or Jewish (Flavius Joesphus, Philo of Alexandria) historians create a unique signature of the historical Jesus of Nazareth.
>>1218009
I didn't criticize the shroud. I specifically avoided doing so to avoid you autistically posting your conspiracy theory level shit. The shroud does not prove his resurrection. If it is indeed genuine, it proves that his face appeared in some cloth, you stupid fuck.
>>1218020
>conspiracy theory level shit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZKocFGQf24
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hp8AF7i9A3U
Summary of scientific and historical evidence supporting the authenticity of the Shroud:
http://www.newgeology.us/Shroud.pdf
Shroud-like coloration of linen by nanosecond laser pulses in the vacuum ultraviolet (it explains that they replicated the shroud's qualities using laser pulsations, which so far is the only way anyone has been able the replicate the shroud's qualities):
http://www.sindone.info/DILAZZA3.pdf
Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the shroud of Turin:
http://www.shroud.it/ROGERS-3.PDF
Nuclear imaging:
http://shroud.com/pdfs/whanger.pdf
http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/accett2.pdf
Raymond N. Rogers' observations and conclusions:
http://shroudnm.com/docs/2013-01-10-Yannick-Cl%C3%A9ment-Reflections-on-Ray-Rogers-Shroud-Work.pdf
Also, here's some secular peer-reviewed scientific journal articles on the Shroud of Turin:
http://shroud.typepad.com/topics/2005/10/secular_peerrev.html
>>1218030
This board would be objectively better without you.
Provide some peer-reviewed sources from a non-religious academic institution or fuck off and shut the fuck up for the rest of your goddamn miserable life.
>>1218041
Read the post that you just replied to.
>Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger; for the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God.
James 1:19-20
>>1218041
>atheist cuck mad as fuck
>>1218083
Not a single one is from a secular academic institution. It's all either from an insane conspiracy theory tier religious website, or a website dedicated specifically to the shroud. IE websites pushing a fucking agenda.
>>1218030
>newgeology.us
>Shroud.it
>Shroud.com
>shroudnm.com
Could you link to studies not hosted by an obviously biased source? It's pretty clear these people want the shroud to be true whether or not it is.
