For Buddhists the chief virtue is compassion. For Christians the chief virtue is charity

For Buddhists the chief virtue is compassion

For Christians the chief virtue is charity

Both understand these virtues as the summation of a cosmic law

Which is greater and which is correct?

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

Ape Out Shirt $21.68

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

  1. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Buddhist compassion is exactly the same as "love your neighbor as yourself"

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      The type of love there is charity i.e. benevolence toward humankind. Compassion naturally flows from charity according to Christianity.

  2. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Buddhist's chief virtue is nonexistence. They're an ego-death suicide cult.

  3. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Jesus and Buddha are the two most likable humans in history tbh tbh. Then there's Mo of Pisslam. lol.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Jesus: "Life sucks but don't worry there is forgiveness and mercy."
      >Buddha: "Life sucks, we shouldn't exist, starve yourself until you stop existing."

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        That's the opposite of what Buddhism teaches. Buddhism teaches the middle way. It teaches about non-permanence and about letting go as the road to escaping suffering. Christianity also teaches a middle path but embraces suffering too as a key to redemption from it especially at the end of the world. Islam just teaches people to be slaves to God.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        Both come from the same source. Begome Perennialist.

        It's incredible how much of a pseud filter buddhism is

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          >It's incredible how much of a pseud filter buddhism is

          >>look how DUMB midwit takes on Buddhism is! lul
          >can you explain the difference between Nirvana and the atheist conception of death?
          >>uhh uhh uhh

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >can you explain the difference between Nirvana and the atheist conception of death?
            Nirvana is never expanded upon beyond the fact that it's...
            1) the end of suffering
            2) the end of reincarnation
            Beyond these two details, Nirvana is not ever expanded upon. Some strains of Buddhism think that it is true nonexistence. Others believe that that Nirvana is a realm in and of itself, a "Pure Land" not too dissimilar to heaven. Most don't actually care too much about the details, content with knowing that it's a state without suffering. The Buddha advocated this position in the parable of the poisoned arrow
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Poisoned_Arrow

            This is all very basic shit about Buddhism that you would know if you weren't a pseud. It takes very little reading to reach this level of understanding.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >parable is a non sequitur to the topic
            had to be b*ddhists

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            The parrable is literally related to the topic. It's a parrable about Nirvana being unknown, and how full knowledge of it isn't necessary.

            Do you really need to know any details of Heaven besides that it's eternity in God's presence without pain and without sin?

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          >pseud filter
          >look at my cool drawing of 2 point perspective fundamentals

  4. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Just to be clear, nobody knows why the Buddha "moved". The idea of compassion comes from the MahaYana.

  5. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Jesus and Buddha are both benevolent

    Mo is malevolent

  6. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    It's love for Christianity, not charity. Agape love.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Agape is translated as charity, idiot. Charity = agape = love

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        moreso sacrificial and willed love.
        to quote C.S. Lewis' definition
        >Agape could be defined as charity. However, we often think of charity nowadays as giving away money or things, which doesn’t encompass all of what agape is about. Agape love is unconcerned with the self and concerned with the greatest good of another. Agape isn’t born just out of emotions, feelings, familiarity, or attraction but from the will and as a choice. Agape requires faithfulness, commitment, and sacrifice without expecting anything in return.

  7. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Christianism because charity is natural, grief isn't

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *