Stories that won't die -- the Lost City of Atlantis, the Illuminati Conspiracy, Mayan prophecies of the end of the world -- are all great fodder for speculative fiction. Today I ran into another oldie and moldie, the story that Jesus traveled East to study Buddhism. Variations of this theory have popped up from time to time since the late 19th century, and now someone has made a documentary about it.
The Bible says nothing about Jesus' life from the age of 12 until he was 30. Therefore, the theory goes, he must have spent that time in India studying Buddhism. What else? This tale has attached to it a number of accoutrements that people have heard of but which no one ever seems to have his hands on at the moment -- e.g., mysterious "lost" documents and enigmatic inscriptions on elusive ruins, all conspiratorially frozen out of mainstream academic research.
How much do I not believe this? Let me count the ways.
First, if we assume that the teachings of Jesus recorded in the canonical Gospels are mostly accurate, then Jesus must have been a really bad student of Buddhism. Although much of what Jesus taught harmonizes nicely with Buddhism, his worldview and doctrines are thoroughly monotheistic and built on a foundation of Judaism. (Here's a nice discussion of why this is significant by Rev. Jim Sanderson of the Jenkins Unitarian Universalist Fellowship.)
Second, much of the "evidence" is anachronistic. There are stories (with variations) that a mysterious document is being kept in some Tibetan monastery that proves Jesus studied there. However, Buddhism didn't reach Tibet until seven centuries after the Crucifixion. The first Buddhist monastery in Tibet, Samye, was built in the late 8th century.
I believe more recent variations on the story claim the document is just being kept in a Tibetan monastery but that Jesus studied somewhere else. In any event, the document never seems to see the light of day.
If Jesus had wanted to travel to study Buddhism, he needed to go no further than northern Afghanistan, which was part of the kingdom of Gandhara and a center of Buddhist civilization during the time of the life of Christ. The Kashmir region also was part of Gandhara from time to time (because of frequent invasions, the actual dimensions of Gandhara shifted continually). One of the "proofs" of Jesus' eastern travels is an old tomb bearing the name Yuz Asaf, which is supposed to be a variation of Jesus' Aramaic name, Yeshua. Yeshua is, in turn, a variation of Joseph, then and now a very common name. In other words, this is a bit like finding the tomb of Bob or Jim. How Jesus got himself buried in Kashmir is another story that seems to have a few kinks in it, but let's move on.
The Gnostic Gospels, which include the Gospel of Thomas, were among a collection of texts discovered in Nag Hammadi, Egypt, in 1945. These probably were written in the 3rd or 4th centuries and may reveal that some communities of 3rd and 4th century Christians were influenced by Buddhism, but this doesn't necessarily mean that Jesus was influenced by Buddhism.
Some scholars believe they see evidence of Christian-Buddhist cross-pollination in Buddhist texts of the early 1st millennium. What this tells us is that people of the ancient world were not as isolated from each other as we might believe. In those days the several routes of the Silk Road ran through China and India and through the Middle East to reach the Roman Empire. No doubt Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Zoroastrians, and people of many other religions met each other and compared theological notes from time to time.
So, we should not be astonished to find points of similarity in far-flung religions. But Jesus certainly didn't have to spend 18 years in India to account for those points of similarity.
I don’t think this controversy can ever be resolved with archeology or historical evidence. But I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss the premise that Jesus had access to the then about 500 year old teachings of the Buddha. And, as you said, he didn’t have to go to India to find them.
In all likelihood, he spend his “lost” years making furniture as a Jewish carpenter. Even so, Nazareth wasn’t such a back water that he might not have had contacts with traders and travelers. Or, how can we rule out he didn’t travel and run into Buddhism elsewhere? He lived as a Rabbi during his ministry much as a Buddhist monk; few possessions, living on the charity of others. His lack of means would not have prevented travel in this manner.
Obviously, the more complex the story, the more flaws can be found in it. Like mention of Tibet, for example. But given my one college class of comparative religion (so I’m an expert!), the parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the Buddha in terms living a virtuous life are very plain to see. And, those teachings were by no means either common nor even well accepted at the time by most or all of the other religions.
“Blessed are the peace makers” (or cheese makers according to Monty Python) was truly revolutionary in “Western” thought at the time. Yet it is something I feel the Buddha could of said had he been on the Mount instead of Jesus.
As for an underlying cosmology, of course there are major differences, most among them a belief in a personal God. But is it not common for people, even a Jesus, to pick and choose those beliefs they agree with and synthesize them into something for themselves? As a believing Jew, he couldn’t give up on the Covenant or the old Testament. But he could take those visions of a sometimes vengeful God who could destroy the entire Earth (the Flood) and morph Him into a God of love, acceptance, and forgiveness. All things I think that the Buddha would of approved, if one had to have a God in the first place.
What I’ve read is that Jesus was a stone worker, not a carpenter. Makes sense, considering the geographical area in which he worked. Not many trees in a desert area…
But monotheism is hardly Buddhism! Talking about the afterlife – that’s not part of Buddhism, from what I understand.
Chuck writes, “But I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss the premise that Jesus had access to the then about 500 year old teachings of the Buddha.”
I didn’t dismiss that. I specifically wrote that was a possibility.
However, I believe there is little or nothing in Jesus’ moral teaching — in particular, about a God of love, acceptance and forgiveness — that hadn’t already been taught by earlier rabbis such as Rabbi Hillel the Elder, who lived just before Jesus. He had no need to be influenced by Buddhism for that.
On the other hand, if he had made any serious study of Buddhism I would expect to see at least a hint of anatta, and it just isn’t there.
Heya – in my two or three comparative religion and philosophy of religion courses (now _I_ am an expert! HA!) I discovered that at their core, most religions say pretty much the same things. The biggest difference, I think, between, say Buddhism and Judaism is the idea of a Supreme Being that needs to be worshipped and/or respected. In Buddhism, at least the way I look at it, WE and the rest of existence (which we aren’t separate from, but that’s a whole ‘nother deal) are the “Supreme Being” we need to respect.
If the Divine is the light inside a lantern, then the different religious views of the world are just facets on the outside of the lantern, each with their own cultural “colors” and patterns.
Finally, with respect to whether or not there are Buddhist influences in Christianity, OF COURSE there are! The Silk Road was alive and well long before Christ was born and continued to be a major trade route for centuries. Likewise water routes from Europe to the Far East were established ‘way early on, so Eastern ideas and influences have been a part of Western and particularly Middle Eastern cultures and religions for many, many years. I was recently reading about Greco-Buddhist art discovered in Afghanistan. Greek from Alexander the Great back in the 3rd Century BCE, and Buddhist from well before that.
Since reading “The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ” I have always believed that Jesus was well versed in Buddhism as well as the ancient scriptures of Eqypt and Hermes. If indeed a man named Jesus lived, he was an advanced adept in the inner workings of spirit, harmony and the universe.
Hi, I know this might not be related to buddhism but what of the “amen” in christianity? Wouldn’t that have come from Eygpt? Just more fodder for the canon.
Amusing to think that Jesus might have been the first Jewish Buddhist, otherwise known as JewBu, but I must agree that this possibility is hardly likely. There is nothing in his teachings that could not have been derived from a liberal interpretation of Judaism. Two nickpicky language comments: Barbara, I believe that Yeshua is a variant of Yehoshua, i.e. Joshua. Joseph (Yosef) is from an entirely different Hebrew root. But your point still stands, as there were many Joshuas both then and now. Sky, “amen” is a Hebrew term of affirmation, from a root that indicates faith or belief. Perhaps you are thinking of the Egyptian god Amon Ra, but I do not see why that word has to have anything to do with Egypt or any other external culture.
Eric makes a great point about Jesus’ profession. Galilean “carpenters” were more than likely employed by the occupying Roman client-kings, who had them build metropolitan centers – not tables and chairs. See Richard A. Horsley’s “Jesus And Empire” for an in depth study of the culture of 1st Century Palestine.
One more thing – if the Dharma is true of itself, and would still be the truth whether or not there ever was a Buddha, than it isn’t difficult to see how another wise teacher would discover aspects of it simply by paying attention and being open to it. Yes, it’s likely that there may have been some cross-pollination of Eastern and Western religious traditions, but even more likely that the truth is out there to be discovered by any and all of us. I don’t know that anyone ever picks up on all of it, but it’s obvious that the great spiritual traditions of the world draw from the same Source of wisdom (at least to some degree).
http://www.heartlandsangha.org/parallel-sayings.html
Is it so hard to believe?
Barbara – I would be more pleased hearing that George Bush spent his last years repenting for the turmoil he plunged the world into than believing that Jesus studied Buddhism. Let’s face it. Christians have a low opinion about Buddhism while many (if not most) Buddhists view Christianity as riddled with mythology (divine birth) superstition (hoc est corpus meum) unbelievable fiction (walking on water) which few educated thinkers would subscribe to . Buddhists need no solace and comfort from Christians.
What Jackson said!
Isn’t it true that all the great religions have their own version of “The Golden Rule”? (If I recall correctly, Abrahamic, Buddhist, Hindu, and Confucian traditions all had something that was very close to “Don’t do to others what you’d rather not have done to you.”)
If we insist on digging for the One First Source of words, we’re doomed to assume that only ancient sages could have realized wisdom, and that it is only through words that we can explore wisdom.
That’s a lame excuse for spending our days doing whatever pleases us, and for not trusting our own “inner” wisdom, or seeking it out.
Rather, we should follow our wise and compassionate practices–whatever our religious tradition–”like your head was on fire!” (Dogen Zenji)
Thank God for Buddhism, without which “educated thinkers” might be walking on water, forever
This is all a bit silly, because JC didn’t exist historically.
I know there’s a lot of “junk history” out there claiming Jesus didn’t exist, but the overwhelming majority of scholars say there no doubt was a historical Jesus, or a real human being who probably was trying to reform Judaism and from whom the legend of the Christ grew and evolved.
Please note that there’s absolutely no historical corroboration that the historical Buddha existed, so I’m not terribly comfortable with saying Jesus didn’t exist. As far as historical scholarship is concerned, you can make a stronger case for the existence of Jesus than for the existence of the Buddha.
To me discussions like this are pretty pointless. There are a number of Christianities out there in 2009, and a number of varieties of Buddhism. Each person can pick the one they like and practice it. What happened 2000 years ago has no relevance to this decision, it seems to me. But people who like poking around in the histories of religions, in areas where there is precious little evidence to base sound conclusions on, are welcome to take it up as a hobby.
Whether Jesus visited India or Antartica, if there is evidence about his life and death, I will say he was a “Bodhisattva” equivalent. “Dhamma” was not an invention by “Buddha” he compiled,put it in his words and explained to the world.And also which are all the practices which can help us to get enlightened or reach near to that. There were people whether not read nor heard Dhamma could do a good job in many parts of the world. Why to waste our time. Jesus..was almost in Dhamma path to a larger extend.
Let us leave that job to Historians/fiction writers to find out where Christ was during the unwritten years.
Not only Jesus’s coming to India even Buddha’s living in India is a problem!
First of all the contry called india came in to being from 1947. There was no country called India before that. Today’s India was many smalle countries at the time of The Buddha and Jesus.
King Asoka erected pillars to indiacte certain places relevant to Buddha 250 years after his death. The king says he put up those pillars at places shown to him!
Though some say this is the subject of historians and archeologists I would say nobody will find the truth. They will simply come up with ideas based on physical evidence time to time. The use of five senses never gives correct results.
When one use the mind directly instead of the five senses the truth can only be seen.
With this method, 2500 after The Buddha, you can still find everything he taught as you have him infront.
Well said Keerthi, Words, meaning, inventions, discoveries have no boundaries and do not belong to any person, country or religion. What we understand beyond all these mental and physical barrier matters the most
would be cool if it were true. but…
http://monkeymindonline.blogspot.com/2008/12/did-jesus-visit-tibet-sorry-no.html
When I was in India in 1970, I was told the story about Jesus being there sometime in the ‘lost years’. But it was not about ’studying’ Buddhism, it was more that he was influenced by some of the religious ideas and practices of Hinduism and Buddhism around at that time, such as resurrection – apparently lots of Hindu saintly personages have done this. Also yes, that he was like a Boddhisatva – he came back to earth to bring a message after becoming one with ‘god’. There were other things, but my memory is hazy….., but they were ideas that were new to the Middle East. Then again, as you say, these ideas could have been brought on trade routes etc…..
my nonacademic understanding is that he went east not to study buddhism–at least not exclusively… but moreso to study experiencially the yogic meditation/consciousness practices that are associated with the hindu tradition, surely also studying the Vedas