This paper was written for my MTh course in Asian Religions and Christianity in 2012...
Contents:
Introduction
What are the possibilities for two
religions that seem to be on opposite ends of the theological spectrum to
engage with each other? This is the question with which I initially approached
this paper on Tibetan Buddhism and Christianity. The answer, as I discovered in
my research and reflection is that engagement is possible on a number of
levels. However any engagement must be approached carefully and with a correct
methodology.
On
the surface Tibetan Buddhism and Christianity are radically different in some
of the core aspects of beliefs. Tibetan
Buddhists refute the very idea of an independently existent, uncaused, and
Supreme Being who is not only the first cause of all that there is, but who
also is the Sustainer of the Universe and holds all things in it together. The
Bible, on the other hand, reveals that the world as we know it, would totally
disintegrate if God withdrew his sustaining power.[1]
Buddhism teaches
that a deep philosophical insight into the nature of things is needed for
complete liberation from the wheel of life.[2] As a result, all Buddhist practitioners
seeks liberation from the cycle of rebirth (which is the ultimate goal of all
practitioners in Theravadan Buddhism) but in Tibetan Buddhism there is the
aspiration to become fully enlightened just as the Buddha is said
to have become enlightened. In fact it is taught that within every person lies
the potential to become Buddha (i.e. enlightened) and consequently become
omniscient.[3] Christians
in contrast understand the world and humanity as inherently broken and flawed
by sin as a result of the Fall. It is only through the salvation offered as
uncreated and unmerited grace through Jesus Christ that one can be cleansed of
sin, enter into a new relationship with God and have the assurance of eternal
life.
It
becomes obvious, even at a cursory level that there are fundamental differences
not just in theology but more importantly in the worldview of Tibetan Buddhists
and Christians. It is this difference of worldviews that must be understood as
the foundational point of engagement of the two religions. Thus the method of
engagement that I have chosen is based on Knitter’s Accommodation Model[4], or something akin to a “Christocentric
Model of pluralism”. Within these models,
the uniqueness of Christ is maintained while accepting that different
worldviews and expressions of the otherness of God result in ‘many salvations’.
The image is not of many paths leading up the same mountain as in the
Mutuality/Theo-centric model but of each path leading up different mountains.
The Acceptance/Christo-centric model provides, in my opinion the best options
for meaningful and friendly dialogue and learning between Tibetan Buddism and Christianity.[5]
What follows in this paper, then, is what
I have learned as a result of my friendly conversation, as a Christian, with
Tibetan Buddhism.
Conversing with Tibetan Buddhism
According to L.
Austine Waddell, Buddhism was introduced to Tibet by Ogyen from India in around
747 CE. The type of Buddhism however was not pure Mahayanan but a hybrid that
included Trantism and traditional Tibetan shamanism known as Bon. The
reformation led by Atisa between 1038 to 1050CE saw the development of Lamanist
tradition, which is the main form of Tibetan Buddhism today.[6] Waddell
argued that there was a minor influence of Christianity in the development of
the Lamanist tradition by Atisa. While it is not widely substantiated, Waddell
stated that Atisa included among the two hundred and thirty five Vinaya rules,
“retirement during Lent for meditation etc”. Furthermore he believed that Atisa
attracted followers by instituting “highly ritualistic services” which in part
“borrowed from Christian missionaries, who undoubtedly were settled at that
time in Tsön-Ka, the province of his childhood in Western China.”[7]
I have not come
across any other author who makes the same claim as Waddell about Christian
influence on the early Lamanist tradition of Tibetan Buddhism. Even if Waddell
claims are not true, it makes for an interesting point on comparing Tibetan
Buddhist and Christian practice.
As Tibetan
Buddhism flows from Mahayana Buddhism my conversation begins with this “Great
Raft”. In particular in terms of what it offers in the practice of scriptural
hermeneutics. Mahayana Buddhism makes a distinction between two categories of
scriptures: (1) interpretable scriptures, which are those whose meaning can, at
best, be taken as provisional and therefore require further interpretation
beyond their literal meaning; and (2) definitive scriptures, which are those
crucial scriptures that can be taken at face value as literally true. Crucial
to this hermeneutical approach is the Mahayana principle of the four reliances:
(a) the reliance on the teaching, not on the teacher; (b) reliance on the
meaning, not the words that express it; (c) reliance on the definitive meaning,
not on the provisional meaning; and (d) reliance on the transcendent wisdom of
deep experience, not on mere knowledge.[8]
Buddhism places a lot of emphasis on meditation and
the purpose of some of these meditational practices is to encourage the
practitioner to become acutely aware of all that is going on with regard to his
or her own psychophysical makeup. If one spends time in quiet
reflection upon one’s own mind and body, it soon becomes obvious that one’s
thoughts largely revolve around the self (ego / the ‘I’). The
practice of mindfulness is meant to make one alert to this tendency.
Consequently the Buddhist must try to over-ride the natural functioning of
his/her mind in an attempt to destroy one’s clinging to self or ego. All Tibetan Buddhist spiritual practice
is directed toward developing the altruistic thought of the awakening mind.[9]
Buddha
considered mere trance-like states to be only a diversion in the goal of
removing suffering. He developed a completely new meditational
technique: first the practice of Samatha or 'calming meditation' where there is a
cessation of intellectual activity; secondly, vispassana or 'insight meditation' where the aim is
not that of peace and tranquillity but the generation of penetrating and
critical insight whereby the critical faculties are brought fully into play in
a detailed
reflexive analysis of the meditator's own state of mind.[10]
Tantra harnesses
the power of imagination in meditation through a practice called deity yoga.
Deity yoga combines wisdom and compassionate motivation ; a single
consciousness realises emptiness and also appears compassionately in the form
of an altruistic deity. This is different from the Sutra system in Buddhism
because it includes motivation and wisdom in one consciousness.[11]
Buddhist
meditation practice can be utilised as a form of Christian reflection. The Tibetan tradition holds two principal
types of mediation. The first of these involves a certain amount of analysis
and reasoning and is called contemplative or analytical meditation. The second,
known as single-pointed or placement meditation, is more absorptive and
focussing.
An example of a
Christian meditation on love and compassion using the analytical/ contemplative
meditation process would follow the reflection that to truly love God one must
demonstrate that love through the action of loving fellow human beings in a
genuine way, loving one’s neighbour. Reflecting on the life and example of
Jesus, would contemplate how Jesus conducted his life, how he worked for the
benefit of other sentient beings, and how this actions illustrated a
compassionate way of life. These reflections help develop a profound
understanding of the intrinsic value of compassion and tolerance in the
Christian life. That profound understanding causes a sense of being touched and
transformed from within. Focusing on this deep conviction is the
absorptive/placement aspect of meditation. [12]
Often the
criticism of Buddhism is that it is a path to “nothingness”. This leads many to
label it as a philosophy or religion of nihilism. Perhaps this because of the
particular system of Buddhism critiqued. Mahayana explains selflessness, in
more depth than Theravada systems, as the absence of self-identity; that the
person totally lacks any form of independent nature or inherent existence. This
realisation leads then to an understanding of interdependence – a genuine
realisation of selflessness /emptiness reaffirms one’s conviction about the
interdependent nature of things and events.[13]
This understanding of
‘equanimity’ is all about looking at other people and treating them without any
partiality whatsoever is a challenge for the Christian because by nature, humankind
is self-centred. The process is
an overcoming the grasping at a solid ego identity and self cherishing
attitudes, which obstruct us from generating genuine empathy towards others and
limits our outlook to the narrow confines of our own self-centred concerns.”[14] Christianity
also challenges humanity to move beyond the self. In the Letter of James, the
author calls for impartiality or non-discrimination:
My dear friends, don't let public opinion influence how you
live out our glorious, Christ-originated faith. If a man enters your church
wearing an expensive suit, and a street person wearing rags comes in right
after him, and you say to the man in the suit, "Sit here, sir; this is the
best seat in the house!" and either ignore the street person or say,
"Better sit here in the back row," haven't you segregated God's
children and proved that you are judges who can't be trusted? [15]
The Buddhist, in his or her efforts to
reduce attachment to self and others, finds the practice of equanimity helpful
in breaking down his/her own mental barriers between himself/herself and
others.
The cultivation of ‘equanimity’ in the
context of Christian practice may be approached from the understanding of
Creation and that all creatures are equal in the sense that they are all
creations of the same God, much in the understanding of Francis of Assisi.
While Christians understand human beings as created in the image of God, this
sharing in the common divine nature (imperfect and broken as it is) is similar
to the idea of Buddha-nature in Buddhism which provides a very strong basis for
the possibility for every person to develop a genuine sense of ‘equanimity’
toward all beings.[16]
This leads to another area of
conversation I have had with Tibetan Buddhism, on the subject of Compassion. In the Tibetan Buddhist pantheon of enlightened beings,
Chenrezig is renowned as the embodiment of the compassion of all the Buddhas,
the Bodhisattva of Compassion. Avalokiteshvara is the earthly manifestation of the self born,
eternal Buddha, Amitabha. He guards this world in the interval between the
historical Sakyamuni Buddha, and the next Buddha of the Future Maitreya.
Tibetan Buddhism understands Bodhichitta
('Bodhi' is Sanskrit for Enlightenment and 'Citta'
means Mind)as the compassionate wish to achieve Buddhahood for the sake
of others. This is the practice of great compassion – a sense of personal
responsibility to shoulder the task of freeing sentient beings from sufferings
and providing them with happiness.[17] The realisation of Bodhicitta is quite profound, as it is
obviously not easy to unconsciously put the welfare of others above one's own
welfare. Someone who lives with this realisation is called a Bodhisattva: in
all respects a genuine saint.
Compassion is
rooted in the earlier discussed theme of selflessness or interdependence. To be
genuine, compassion must be based on respect for the other, and on the realization
that others have the right to be happy and overcome suffering just as much as
you. On this basis, since you can see that others are suffering, you develop a
genuine sense of concern for them.[18]
Compassion also brings a certain inner strength. Once it is developed, it
naturally opens an inner door, through which we can communicate with other
fellow human beings, and even other sentient beings, with ease and heart to
heart.[19]
For Christians, Jesus is the embodiment of
Compassion. The Hebrew verb רָחַם râcham,
which
means is also the same as the noun רַחַם racham
which means womb. The word compassion is evocative of
nourishing, caring, embracing and encompassing. This was Jesus’ understanding
of God and so the imitatio dei
(imitation of God) was to manifest these qualities in one’s life. Paul’s use of
love/agape is the same as Jesus use of compassion, stating that we need to
understand compassion as the primary or main fruit of the Spirit. According to Jesus compassion is to be the central
quality of a life faithful to God the compassionate one. [20]
As Christians we are called to have a deep
compassion for all. I think this is one of the areas in which Tibetan Buddhism
come close to having common expressions.
That
the 14th Dalai Lama considers not only
Jesus to be a Bodhisattva, but Mother Teresa as well is a double-edged sword.
In one sense it can be taken to mean that one does not have to be a Buddhist to
be a Bodhisattva. At the same time while it can be argued that this reduces
Jesus’ Christology. It cannot be denied that our reasons for showing
others respect are very different and it is important to acknowledge this. For
a Buddhist it is based upon the concept of ‘rebirth’. But for the Christian it
should arise out of God’s deep love for all mankind. Jesus said that we should
love others to the same extent that we love ourselves (Matthew 22v.39). I believe that this statement by the Dalai Lama challenges
and affirms Christians to strive towards Christ-likeness even within our
weakened limited humanity through the practice of agape/compassion/love of God
through love of neighbour.
We should also
remember that once we cultivate a compassionate attitude, nonviolence comes
automatically. Nonviolence is not a diplomatic word, it is compassion in action.
If you hatred in your heart, then often your actions will be violent, whereas
if you have compassion in your heart, your actions will be nonviolent.[21]
Dialogue and Ethics as Opportunities for Engagement
A major landmark in the area of inter-religious dialogue came in
1977 at a meeting in Chiang Mai, Thailand where a group of Christians
representing many different ecclesiastical traditions drew up Guidelines on Dialogue with People of Living
Faiths and Ideologies.[22]
In May 2006, an inter-faith reflection on "Conversion:
Assessing the Reality", was
organised by the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, Vatican City, and
the Office on Interreligious Relations & Dialogue of the World
Council of Churches, Geneva at Lariano, Italy. Many differences
and disagreements among the participants remained at the end of the
consultation. Indeed, there was no unanimity even on the meaning of
"conversion". Nevertheless, the participants agreed that their
deliberations helped develop a convergent understanding of the several aspects
of the issue of religious conversion, making them more sensitive to each
other's concerns, and thus strengthening their understanding that such concerns
need to be addressed through appropriate action locally, nationally and
internationally.
During our
dialogue, we recognized the need to be sensitive to the religious language and
theological concepts in different faiths. Members of each faith should listen
to how people of other faiths perceive them. This is necessary to remove and
avoid misunderstandings, and to promote better appreciation of each other's
faiths. [23]
In his “Inconclusive” conclusion to “Introducing Theologies of
Religions,” Knitter writes of engaging with other religions in friendship in ethical
responses of their beliefs to situations of suffering and violence.[24]
As this
conversation has shown, there is greater awareness of the interdependence of
human life. This awareness of interdependence has led to the understanding of
the need for collaboration across religious barriers in dealing with the
pressing problems of the world caused by globalization of political, economic,
and even religious life.
All religious
traditions, therefore, are challenged to contribute to the emergence of a global
community that would live in mutual respect and peace. At stake is the
credibility of religious traditions as forces that can bring justice, peace,
and healing to a broken world.
It is
becoming clearer everyday that a viable economic system must be based on a true
sense of universal responsibility. In other words, what we need is a genuine
commitment to the principles of universal brotherhood and sisterhood. This is
not just a holy, moral, or religious ideal. Rather it is the reality of our
modern human existence. As human beings, we must also respect our fellow
members of the human family: our neighbours, our friends, and so forth.
Compassion, loving kindness, altruism, and a sense of brotherhood and
sisterhood are the keys to human development in both the present and the
future.[25]
From 22 - 26 August
2010, thirty Buddhists from the Theravada, Mahayana and Vajrayana traditions
and Christians from the Anglican, Lutheran, Baptist, Reformed and Roman
Catholic traditions met at Payap University, Chiang Mai, Thailand, under the
theme, “Buddhists and Christians Engaging Structural Greed Today.” The
consultation was jointly organized by the World Council of Churches (WCC) and
the Lutheran World Federation (LWF) and hosted by the Institute of Religion,
Culture and Peace at Payap University. Participants included activists,
economists, religious leaders and scholars from Australia, Germany, Hong Kong,
Indonesia, Japan, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Switzerland,
Taiwan, Thailand, UK and USA.
Buddhists understand greed as a human
disposition, one of the Three Poisons of greed, hatred and delusion. Greed is a
cause of suffering and an obstacle to enlightenment. On the path toward
enlightenment, human beings can overcome the overwhelming power of the Three
Poisons and thereby become generous, loving and compassionate persons.
Christians understand that they live in
structures of domination and greed, traditionally related to the power of sin.
Since the time of the prophets, biblical faith resisted these oppressive
structures and worked for legal and community related alternatives. Following
in this tradition, Jesus Christ lived a life in opposition to the forces of
domination and died in fierce struggle against these. In his resurrection,
Christians believe that he was victorious over these structures and empowers
his followers, through the Holy Spirit, to resist and transform similar
structures today.[26]
To avoid addressing structural greed and
to focus on individual greed is to maintain the status quo. As Buddhists and
Christians, we are convinced that greed has to be understood both personally
and structurally. Individual and structural greed feed each other in their
interactive relation of cause and effect. They need each other for their
sustenance and expansion.[27]
As Buddhists and
Christians, we also affirm that meditation, prayer and other spiritual
practices offer people access to spiritual power that gives them perseverance,
release from their egos, compassion with those who suffer and the inner strength
to love and deal non-violently with those who they have to oppose. As Buddhist
teachers have reminded us: we
must be peace in order to make peace.[28]
This process may not always be easy.
Knitter recounting his experience with the Interreligious Peace Council shares
that while sharing religious beliefs and motivations in determining the
response to a situation has being for the most mutually supportive and
clarifying, there have been occasions in which differences produced tensions.
However he goes on to state that because they were speaking to each other as
friends, they had to truly listen to each other out of friendship and learn
from each other.[29]
Conclusion
I approached this paper from the
position of not only a Christian but someone who comes from a multi-ethnic,
multi-cultural and multi-cultural context. This, no doubt, has shaped my
perspective / lens towards my conversation with Tibetan Buddhism. While I
acknowledge there are many differences in theological understanding between
Christianity and Tibetan Buddhism, this conversation has shown me that there
are some points of convergence in expression, practice or response to religious
belief. This is an important factor of the accommodation model of religious
pluralism.
The approach of comparative religion,
deep listening and friendship in dialogue with other faiths does not diminish
my own faith but allows me, as a result of my faith to engage meaningfully with
other human beings.
In my
conversation, I have found that the Christian elements of love of one's
neighbour, kindness, and compassion, present in Tibetan Buddhism – albeit from
a different motivation. In spite of divergent philosophical views, it is
possible to understand and approach this religious tradition on the basis of
these common traits. Perhaps the Tibetan Buddhist practice of meditation and
understanding of selflessness and compassion will help us to be better
Christians.
Thanka (Tibetan Art form) Depicting the Life of Jesus
How
to understand this thanka[30]
To the Western eye this painting may at first seem
to have little meaning. But to the Buddhist people of Central Asia its style is
very familiar. The painted ‘thanka’ is a traditional Tibetan art form which is
used in teaching and worship by followers of Tibetan Buddhism.
There is a well-known Buddhist thanka that portrays life as an unbroken wheel, held tightly by the demonic ‘Lord of Death’. This ancient painting has some superficial similarities to this Christian thanka, but the concepts illustrated show a number of crucial differences.
It is a basic Buddhist belief that, because we are attached to worldly things, our ‘souls’ continue to remain within the ‘wheel of life’. After death, reincarnation in various forms occurs many times until eventually we manage to rid ourselves of our earthly desires and obtain enlightenment. Only then is it possible to escape rebirth and enter the ‘undefinable essencelessness’ known as ‘nirvana’. Although the Buddhist thanka’s wheel of life remains unbroken, in this Christian painting the circle is broken in two places: once when Jesus came into the world and again when He ascended into heaven. This illustrates the fact that when Jesus entered the world from an unchanging eternal realm He came fully omniscient ( all knowing ) and it also shows that He did not have to enter the Buddhist process of repeated rebirth in order to escape from the wheel of life. Jesus’ leaving the circle at His ascension symbolises the opening up of the way to enter the kingdom of heaven.
In the Christian painting, the Lord of Death, who once held the wheel of life, has been forced to let go because Jesus conquered death when he rose from the dead. This is powerfully symbolic to Buddhists because the Lord of Death is seen as a terrifying being, trapping them in the wheel of Life. In the bottom two corners you will also see demons fleeing from the circle and entering eternal judgement.
The cross in the centre of the wheel, representing our salvation, replaces three animals which are found on the Buddhist thanka. These animals represent ignorance, desire and hatred. The replacement of these animals illustrates the total forgiveness of sins through Jesus dying on the cross.
To show that Jesus was a human being you see His face once — when He was a baby. However in the other pictures of Jesus His face is not portrayed, reminding those who see this thanka that it should never be made an object of worship.
There is a well-known Buddhist thanka that portrays life as an unbroken wheel, held tightly by the demonic ‘Lord of Death’. This ancient painting has some superficial similarities to this Christian thanka, but the concepts illustrated show a number of crucial differences.
It is a basic Buddhist belief that, because we are attached to worldly things, our ‘souls’ continue to remain within the ‘wheel of life’. After death, reincarnation in various forms occurs many times until eventually we manage to rid ourselves of our earthly desires and obtain enlightenment. Only then is it possible to escape rebirth and enter the ‘undefinable essencelessness’ known as ‘nirvana’. Although the Buddhist thanka’s wheel of life remains unbroken, in this Christian painting the circle is broken in two places: once when Jesus came into the world and again when He ascended into heaven. This illustrates the fact that when Jesus entered the world from an unchanging eternal realm He came fully omniscient ( all knowing ) and it also shows that He did not have to enter the Buddhist process of repeated rebirth in order to escape from the wheel of life. Jesus’ leaving the circle at His ascension symbolises the opening up of the way to enter the kingdom of heaven.
In the Christian painting, the Lord of Death, who once held the wheel of life, has been forced to let go because Jesus conquered death when he rose from the dead. This is powerfully symbolic to Buddhists because the Lord of Death is seen as a terrifying being, trapping them in the wheel of Life. In the bottom two corners you will also see demons fleeing from the circle and entering eternal judgement.
The cross in the centre of the wheel, representing our salvation, replaces three animals which are found on the Buddhist thanka. These animals represent ignorance, desire and hatred. The replacement of these animals illustrates the total forgiveness of sins through Jesus dying on the cross.
To show that Jesus was a human being you see His face once — when He was a baby. However in the other pictures of Jesus His face is not portrayed, reminding those who see this thanka that it should never be made an object of worship.
The Tibetan writing used here is in ‘every day’
language so that most Tibetans will be able to understand the script.
The top of the thanka reads: “BEFORE ANYTHING WAS MADE GOD EXISTED.”
The writing around the wheel states: “GOD IS SPIRIT AND THOSE WHO WORSHIP GOD MUST BE LED BY THE SPIRIT TO WORSHIP HIM ACCORDING TO THE TRUTH. THE WAY TO GOD THE FATHER IS THROUGH JESUS HIS SON.”
And the wording at the centre of the wheel is: “JESUS DEFEATED SIN, DEATH AND THE POWER OF THE LORD OF THE DEMONS.”
The top of the thanka reads: “BEFORE ANYTHING WAS MADE GOD EXISTED.”
The writing around the wheel states: “GOD IS SPIRIT AND THOSE WHO WORSHIP GOD MUST BE LED BY THE SPIRIT TO WORSHIP HIM ACCORDING TO THE TRUTH. THE WAY TO GOD THE FATHER IS THROUGH JESUS HIS SON.”
And the wording at the centre of the wheel is: “JESUS DEFEATED SIN, DEATH AND THE POWER OF THE LORD OF THE DEMONS.”
The various sections of the thanka show the earthly
life of Jesus.
v His birth. Luke 2, verses 6-7.
v Discussing in the Jewish temple. Luke 2, verses 46-50.
v His baptism followed by his
temptation. Luke 3, verses 21-22. Luke 4, verses 1-2.
v Teaching the people. Matthew 5,
verses 1-2.
v Healing the sick. Luke 4, verses
38-39.
v His authority over evil spirits. Luke 8, verses 26-39.
v The last supper. Luke 22, verses
14-16.
v The trial. Luke 23, verses 13-14.
v The crucifixion. Luke 23, verses
32-46.
v The Resurrection Luke 24, verses 1-7.
v Jesus appears to his disciples. Luke 24, verses 36-48.
v The Ascension. Luke 24, verses
50-52.
Bibliography
Borg, M. Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time. San
Francisco.Harper. 1994
Gyatso,
T. The Essential Dalai Lama: His
Important Teachings. London. Penguin Books. 2005
Gyatso,
T. The World of Tibetan Buddhism.
Boston. Wisdom Publications. 1995.
http://www.tibetanresearch.org/Thanka.html
Keown, D. Buddhism: A Very Short Introduction
Oxford. Oxford University Press. 1996.
Knitter,
P.F. Introducing Theologies of Religions.
Maryknoll. Orbis Books. 2002.
Robson, E.M. KALACHAKRA: Toronto Christians ask for
clarification, http://www.tibetanresearch.org/Kalachakra_article.htm
Accessed 5/20/2012
Waddell,
L.A. Tibetan Buddhism. New York.
Dover Publications. 1885/1972.
World Council of Churches
Documents
A Buddhist-Christian
Common Word on Structural Greed: A Joint Statement, http://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/wcc-programmes/interreligious-dialogue-and-cooperation/interreligious-trust-and-respect/buddhist-christian-common-word-on-structural-greed.html
Accessed 05/20/2012
Guidelines on Dialogue
with People of Living Faiths and Ideologies, http://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/wcc-programmes/interreligious-dialogue-and-cooperation/interreligious-trust-and-respect/guidelines-on-dialogue-with-people-of-living-faiths-and-ideologies.html
Accessed 05/20/2012
Report from inter-religious
consultation on "Conversion - assessing the reality”. 2006.
[1]
Elaine M Robson, KALACHAKRA: Toronto
Christians ask for clarification, http://www.tibetanresearch.org/Kalachakra_article.htm
Accessed 5/20/2012
[2] Damien Keown, Buddhism: A Very Short Introduction
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), 98-100
[8] Tenzin
Gyatso- 14th Dalai Lama, The
World of Tibetan Buddhism, Ed. Geshe Thupten Jinpa (Boston: Wisdom
Publications, 1995), 25
[9]Tenzin
Gyatso-14th Dalai Lama, The
Essential Dalai Lama: His Important Teachings, Ed. Rajiv Mehrotra (London:
Penguin Books, 2005), 142
[22] Guidelines
on Dialogue with People of Living Faiths and Ideologies, http://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/wcc-programmes/interreligious-dialogue-and-cooperation/interreligious-trust-and-respect/guidelines-on-dialogue-with-people-of-living-faiths-and-ideologies.html
Accessed 05/20/2012
[23] Report
from inter-religious consultation on "Conversion - assessing the
reality" (Lariano/Velletri: May
12-16, 2006 ), Accessed 05/20/2012
[26] A
Buddhist-Christian Common Word on Structural Greed: A Joint Statement, http://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/wcc-programmes/interreligious-dialogue-and-cooperation/interreligious-trust-and-respect/buddhist-christian-common-word-on-structural-greed.html,
(17th September, 2010), Accessed 05/20/2012
No comments:
Post a Comment