hhamilton2006@gmail.com

IN JULY 1843, Joseph Smith delivered a series of remarkable
sermons. On Sunday, the 9th, he proclaimed himself
a friend to all, having “no enmity against anyone.”
Echoing his opponents’ perplexity at his success, he asked,
“Why is it this babbler gains so many followers, and retains
them?” He explained his secret simply: “Because I possess the
principle of love.” Offering the world “a good heart and a good
hand,” he declared himself “as ready to die for a Presbyterian,
a Baptist, or any other denomination” as “for a Mormon.”
Narrowing the gap between Latter-day Saints and those of
other denominations, the prophet asserted, “we do not differ
so far in our religious views.” He declared the Saints’ faith
ready to receive the truths of all others: “One of the grand fundamental
principles of Mormonism is to receive truth, let it
come from where it may.”3

I know I’m late to the party, but there have been some recent links to this article and hopefully it will renew some discussion.

A very similar discussion (positively comparing the teachings of Jesus and the teachings of Buddha) nearly 10 years ago is what led to me realize the truth of the Buddha’s teachings and become a Buddhist. Many of the concepts are similar, if not the same. But beyond quoting a single line from the Dhammapada and matching it to a single line of Biblical scripture (which, again, is exactly what got me started), I find the term “Buddhist Mormon” interesting and want to really dig into it. First, late me state that I know NOTHING of Mormon philosophy. I have some understanding of Christian philosophy, but I don’t know what makes a Mormon different.

For those that support the term “Buddhist Mormon”, I want to know what the Bible (representing all of Christianity) and the Book of Mormon (representing Mormonism specifically) have to say about what is referred to as the Four Dharma Seals. Barbara O’Brien over at About.com does a pretty nice job summarizing them at http://buddhism.about.com/od/basicbuddhistteachings/a/fourseals.htm. Another good resource is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_marks_of_existence.

The summary of the Four Seals are:
1. All compounded things are impermanent.
2. All stained emotions are painful.
3. All phenomena are empty.
4. Nirvana is peace.

As stated on Barbara’s blog: The Four Seals reveal what is unique about Buddhism among all the world’s religions. Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche said, “Whoever holds these four [seals], in their heart, or in their head, and contemplates them, is a Buddhist.”

Are these Four Seals represented in Christianity or Mormonism? If so, where does one find them? If not, then do people really feel a connection to Buddhism just because the Buddha’s Sutras and the Bible share some similar sounding dialog?

I don’t view the position of other churches having some true teachings in opposition to the statement, we belong to the only true church. My oldest son had a class about world religions at NHU and his instructor had an interesting comment when he found out my son was a Mormon. “You Mormons don’t understand how strong of a position you have by stating you have authority. You’re foolish because you don’t talk about it more.”

Ray – I have recently been doing some more studying of the D&C and your concept of progression is something that I have come to understand. The phrase from everlasting to everlasting or eternity to eternity really is talking about developing stages that we go through: pre-existence, mortality, spirit world, resurrection. Each phase develops us in different ways and in different states of existence. I now view reincarnation differently.

JFQ – I’ve sent three sons on missions: Brazil, Norway and Malaysia. The experience has truly expanded their understanding of cultures and people. They seem to come back with a whole different view of home. However, I have found in all of them an expanded understanding and appreciation of other religions. My second oldest son still displays on his bookshelf the Quran that an investigator gave him.

You’re lucky you could give that talk in your ward. There are wards I’ve personally been in where you would have been pulled aside afterwards and told it would be preferable if you stuck with the church’s standard works and GA talks as references so as not to confuse anyone. Seriously. Additionally, there would have been fellow ward members who’d find a way to wedge in a comment in gospel doctrine and/or priesthood/RS about how they didn’t need to look any further than the Book of Mormon for anything inspirational.

There was a shift in the 90s and while you can find many talks before that shift which cite other faiths and scriptures, even other versions of the Bible besides KJV, since that shift those sorts of references are very few and far between.

Melds VERY well with Joseph Smith’s core insights all things mundane and Eternal.

The Gita has become one of my favorite books of scripture as of late. I wasn’t sure what I was getting my self into when I picked up. I decided to read not for the purpose of identifying parallels with mormonism, but rather with the “eye of faith” in an attempt to try to understand what made Hindu’s tick spiritually. I chose the Hindu faith particularly because it’s culture seemed so far away from my own. At the time LDS culture and history was giving me heartburn (well still does but is less acute currently) in away that was making my spirituality wain.

During my initial read there were notions about the nature of God and man/woman that ran contrary to my LDS understandings, but I pushed thru trying to understand the underlying power of those notions. I have read the Gita several times now and its main teachings have began to take hold in my life which has contributed to renewed and deepened faith in God, greater peace and love. Not to mention my reading of the New Testament and Book or Mormon has been reinvigorated. Bottom line is that I am also concurring with the premise of the post.

I think one of the strength’s of the Buddha’s teaching of the eight fold path was that there is no requirement to believe someone else’s ideas, especially about God. Follow the path and you will see for yourself what is real.

RE #32 Bruce – Meditation builds concentration and steadiness of mind which is necessary for prayer and communion with God which leads in tremendous love and peace which leads to greater ability (or less inhibition) to serve others.

Bruce, look at the description of “eternal existence” from this viewpoint:

We begin as intelligences, become spirits, are born into mortality, move back into a spiritual state, eventually experience a judgment, change into an immortal state of perfect, physical body and immortal soul, continue to progress until we reach a status that can be described as “divine” – and then participate in unity with our own divine ideal by directing that repeated that process of others. I count multiple “lives” – each with a distinctly different “form” – as part of a life-cycle that repeats forever.

If I explained that to a Buddhist, she at least would grasp the basic concept; if I explained that to almost any other Christian, he would ask which hallucinogenic I was smoking.

I see your point.

I suppose it depends on what you choose to emphasize and also on what form of Christity we are talking about. I’d argue that “C.S. Lewis” Christianity is more similar to Mormonism than to Buddism, but I’d also argue that modern-American-Fundamentalist-Christianity is less similar to Mormonism than Buddism. (As you so correctly pointed out.)

And your comparisons are well taken. They are certainly more similar to Buddism than to the average vocal (i.e. fundamentalis) Christian you see on the news or meet at anti-Mormon meetings.

That being said, I’m not sure I actually think Mormonism is all that similar to anything else. Or maybe what I mean to say is that it’s very similar to everything else.

As to “similarity” vs. “difference”, I usually classify one or the other based on what the Protestant statement would be. For example, you mentioned two concepts: 1) “Becoming “one” with God vs. joining the divine (and no longer being born)” compared to “living separately and spending eternity telling God how great He is” – which sounds like “give me thy glory”; 2) “All religions having truth and a level of salvation available to all vs. God accepting whatever form of worship someone wants to give to him” compared to “accept exactly what we believe (with special qualifications if we don’t like you) or burn in never-ending anguish forever”. I’m not saying Buddhist teachings can be overlaid perfectly onto Mormon teachings, but many of them are much closer to each other than they are to mainstream Protestantism.

I’m also curious what you mean by “a bit of arrogance, I know, but indulge me” in reference to taking something as a base for the purpose of comparison.

The connection you draw was obvious to me too. But it’s the underlying thought I felt was different. That is, to me, they didn’t seem so much like different ways of saying the same thing, they seemed like two different things altogether that has similar ways of saying them.

Other parallel’s I saw that weren’t as parallel as I first thought:
* Becoming “one” with God vs. joining the divine (and no longer being born)
* All religions having truth and a level of salvation available to all vs. God accepting whatever form of worship someone wants to give to him

There is definitely some surface similarities that are striking. I’m not saying otherwise. But once you get under the skin those similarities become more and more dis-similiar, at least to me. (And at least “so far”)