Righteous Christians and holy Hindus

I shall now turn to another traditional aspect of Buddhist Dharma: the claim that Buddhism is, in some sense, right, and that other religions are wrong. Traditionally, Buddhists have a high regard for righteous Christians and holy Hindus, yet they would also have to say that their beliefs were mistaken in a way that even the most limited Buddhist ones were not.

This is one area where the Middle Way often gets a mention, with it being explained that Christians and Hindus, believing in the eternal soul, are eternalists whose beliefs, for that reason, are less useful in seeking enlightenment than those of Buddhists, whose beliefs follow the Middle Way. Unfortunately, this way of interpreting the Middle Way is contextual, not universal, Dharma. In the Buddha’s time, whether or not you believed in an eternal soul or self was of some importance in determining other beliefs and practices. Today, this pair of opposed beliefs are only two of many possible metaphysical positions to which one may become attached. The developments of Christianity, Islam, science, and 2500 years of Western philosophy since the time of the Buddha have made the debate very much wider.

A Christian or Hindu is, indeed, very likely to believe in an eternal self or soul, even today (though there are some Christians who rightly point out that belief in the soul came to Christianity from Greek philosophy, not from the Bible). They will also probably believe in the existence of God, and that an infinite, perfect God is nevertheless capable of taking the finite, human, form of an incarnation such as Jesus or Krishna. If one takes the Middle Way seriously, one needs to recognise that it may very well be the case that these metaphysical beliefs will prove an impediment even to the best of Christians and Hindus in grasping the truth beyond delusion.

But are these beliefs any more of an impediment than the corresponding Buddhist metaphysical ideas? Compare the Christian and Hindu beliefs with the Buddhist beliefs that the Buddha gained the most perfect state available to humans, and that this state gave him access to a truth beyond all delusion. The Buddhist beliefs here are just as far beyond experience. The claims for the Buddha’s achievements may be more modest than those of God, but slightly smaller metaphysics is still just as metaphysical as big metaphysics. Smaller metaphysics is just as likely as big metaphysics to form the basis of dogmatic beliefs. If someone makes a claim on the basis that the Buddha experienced the truth of that claim in his enlightened state, that is just as dogmatic as claiming that God revealed truth to him, and in neither case is the claim then open to any re-evaluation on the basis of new evidence.

So, if the Middle Way is to be consistently and universally applied, Hindus and Christians are indeed mistaken in their eternalist beliefs, but no more mistaken than most Buddhists. This means that Buddhists really have no grounds to criticise their beliefs, for (at least without a better understanding of the Middle Way), they have no better alternative to offer in their place.

To look at this more positively, however, it is clear that we are all hampered by different metaphysical beliefs. Those who bear them should be objects of compassion rather than malice. Righteous Christians and holy Hindus are no more hampered by metaphysics than are good Buddhists. This should come as a relief to Buddhists who may have a real respect for their Christian neighbours, but struggle to reconcile this experience with a theoretical commitment to the idea that they are wrong (similarly to Christians who struggle to keep thinking that their kind, radiant Buddhist neighbours are going to Hell).

Traditional Buddhist claims to exclusivity of religious truth by appeal to a crude traditional form of the Middle Way, are completely incompatible with other traditional Buddhist truth-claims, which fall foul of the Middle Way as much as other religions do. It is only if Buddhists abandon many of these traditional positions that they begin to have any grounds to criticise righteous Christians and holy Hindus. However, in letting go of metaphysics they are far more likely to drop the criticism, recognising that metaphysics is a burden for all to work with, and the Middle Way in no way a “Buddhist” monopoly.

Continue to Chapter 8 part d 'Oversold tolerance'

Return to Chapter 8 index page

Return to 'Trouble with Buddhism' index page

Return to moralobjectivity.net home page