Menyanggah Klaim Umat Kristiani atas agama Buddha

[hanes]

semangat semua...........
knapa org baik selalu byk masalah y ?

[ryu]

semangat semua...........
knapa org baik selalu byk masalah y ?

ah gak juga, kata siapa ?

[Edward]

 [at] SandaljepiT
Soal yg bakar2an, anda Lebay dah....
Klo mengenai kr****n, secara 12 tahun sekolah di sekolah yang ketat sama Paroki, kalo kata guru agama-nya, sudah ada pengakuan secara tertulis resmi dari Gereja ka****k Roma bahwa Gereja ka****k pernah mengalami masa2 "gelap", dan munculnya gerakan Protestan itu lebih banyak karena kecurangan yang dilakukan oleh otoritas tertinggi Gereja saat itu...Baru, berkembang sub2 aliran kr****n lainnya...Dan sampai saat ini kr****n Protestan tetap diakui oleh Gereja ka****k koq...Kalo mo minta referensi-nya, aye nyerah dah, soalnya mesti tanya sama Romo ka****k yg wakti itu ngajarin ttng sejarah Gereja...

[GandalfTheElder]

Umat Katholik menganggap umat Protestan sebagai "saudara yang terpisah."


The Siddha Wanderer

[SandalJepit]

Kalau mengutarakan pendapat tanpa fakta, sungguh seperti pepesan kosong. berikut ini saya sampaikan fakta sejarah, bagaimana Protestan dianggap sebagai sesat, dan dibasmi oleh Khatholik. hal ini memicu perang selama 30 tahun antara Khatholik dengan Protestan.

btw protestan tidak hanya menolak Paus sebagai pimpinan tertinggi, umat protestan juga menganggap bahwa kitab suci Khatholik tidak valid, sehingga mereka  mengubah isi kitab sucinya. selain itu protestan juga  menghapus tradisi selibat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_of_Augsburg
History

The Peace of Passau, which in 1552 gave Lutheran religious freedom after a victory by Protestant armies, foreshadowed the formation of this document. The one major problem of this document was that it did not legally recognize various religious minorities, such as Calvinism and Anabaptism. Not until the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 would these sects be given legal recognition.

The treaty effectively gave Lutheranism official status within the domains of the Holy Roman Empire. According to the policy of cuius regio, eius religio ("whose reign, that religion", or "in the Prince's land, the Prince's religion"), the religion (Roman Catholic or Lutheran) of a region's ruler determined the religion of its people. During a grace period, families could choose to move to a region where their faith was practiced. (Article 24: "In case our subjects, whether belonging to the old religion or the Augsburg Confession, should intend leaving their homes with their wives and children in order to settle in another, they shall be hindered neither in the sale of their estates after due payment of the local taxes nor injured in their honour.")

Although the Peace of Augsburg was moderately successful in relieving tension in the empire and increasing tolerance, it left important things undone. Neither the Anabaptists nor the Calvinists were protected under the peace, so many Protestant groups living under the rule of a Lutheran prince still found themselves in danger of the charge of heresy. (Article 17: "However, all such as do not belong to the two above named religions shall not be included in the present peace but be totally excluded from it.") Tolerance was not officially extended to Calvinists until the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. Many who did not wish to adopt Catholicism or Lutheranism emigrated from the empire, with high numbers settling in the Netherlands and France.

The intolerance towards Calvinists caused them to take desperate measures that led to the Thirty Years' War. One of the more notable measures was the Second Defenestration of Prague (1618) in which two representatives of the fiercely Catholic Holy Roman Emperor Ferdinand II were thrown out of a castle window in Prague. This eventually led to more involved conflict between Protestants and Roman Catholics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years_War
Origins of the War

The Peace of Augsburg (1555), signed by Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, confirmed the result of the 1526 Diet of Speyer, ending war between German Lutherans and Catholics.[16]

The Augsburg Peace states:

    * German princes (numbering 225) could choose the religion (Lutheranism or Catholicism) of their realms according to their consciences (the principle of cuius regio, eius religio).
    * Lutherans living in an ecclesiastical state (under the control of a bishop) could continue to practice their faith.
    * Lutherans could keep the territory that they had captured from the Catholic Church since the Peace of Passau in 1552.
    * The ecclesiastical leaders of the Catholic Church (bishops) that had converted to Lutheranism were required to give up their territories (the principle called reservatum ecclesiasticum).
    * Those occupying a state that had officially chosen either Lutheranism or Catholicism could not practice a religion differing from that of the state.

Although the Peace of Augsburg created a temporary end to hostilities, it did not solve the underlying religious conflict. In addition, Calvinism spread quickly throughout Germany in the years that followed. This added a third major faith to the region, but its position was not recognized in any way by the Augsburg terms, to which only Catholicism and Lutheranism were a party.[17][18]

The rulers of the nations surrounding the German states also contributed to the outbreak of the Thirty Years' War:

    * Spain was interested in the German states because it held the territories of the Spanish Netherlands on the western border of the German states and states within Italy which were connected by land through the Spanish Road. The Dutch revolted against the Spanish domination during the 1560s, leading to a protracted war of independence that led to a truce only in 1609.
    * France was threatened by two surrounding Habsburg states (Spain and the Holy Roman Empire), and was eager to exert its power against the weaker German states; this dynastic concern overtook religious ones and led to Catholic France's participation on the otherwise Protestant side of the war.
    * Sweden and Denmark were interested in gaining control over northern German states bordering the Baltic Sea.

The Holy Roman Empire was a fragmented collection of largely independent states. One of these, the Austrian House of Habsburg (including also Bohemia and Hungary), was a major European power, ruling over some eight million subjects. The Empire also contained several regional powers, such as Bavaria, Electoral Saxony, the Margraviate of Brandenburg, the Palatinate, Hesse, the Archbishopric of Trier and Württemberg (containing from 500,000 to one million inhabitants). A vast number of minor independent duchies, free cities, abbeys, bishoprics, and petty lords (whose authority sometimes extended to no more than a single village) rounded out the Empire. Apart from Austria and perhaps Bavaria, none of those entities was capable of national-level politics; alliances between family-related states were common, due partly to the frequent practice of splitting a lord's inheritance among the various sons.
Ferdinand I, Holy Roman Emperor and King of Bohemia. He urged the Council of Trent to approve Communion in Both kinds for German and Bohemian Catholics.
Ferdinand I, Holy Roman Emperor and King of Bohemia. He urged the Council of Trent to approve Communion in Both kinds for German and Bohemian Catholics.

Religious tensions remained strong throughout the second half of the 16th century. The Peace of Augsburg began to unravel as some converted bishops refused to give up their bishoprics, and as certain Catholic rulers in Spain and Eastern Europe sought to restore the power of Catholicism in the region. This was evident from the Cologne War (1583-88), a conflict initiated when the prince-archbishop of the city converted to Calvinism. As he was an imperial elector, this could have produced a Protestant majority in the College that elected the Holy Roman Emperor  – a position that had always been held by a Catholic.

In the Cologne War, Spanish troops expelled the prince-archbishop and replaced him with Ernst of Bavaria, a Roman Catholic. After this success, the Catholics regained pace, and the principle of cuius regio eius religio began to be exerted more strictly in Bavaria, Würzburg and other states. This forced Lutheran residents to choose between conversion or exile. Lutherans also witnessed the defection of the lords of Palatinate (1560), Nassau (1578), Hesse-Kassel (or Hesse-Cassel) (1603) and Brandenburg (1613) to the new Calvinist faith. Thus at the beginning of the 17th century the Rhine lands and those south to the Danube were largely Catholic, while Lutherans predominated in the north, and Calvinists dominated in certain other areas, such as west-central Germany, Switzerland and the Netherlands. However, minorities of each creed existed almost everywhere. In some lordships and cities the number of Calvinists, Catholics, and Lutherans were approximately equal.

Much to the consternation of their Spanish ruling cousins, the Habsburg emperors who followed Charles V (especially Ferdinand I and Maximilian II, but also Rudolf II, and his successor Matthias) were supportive of their subjects' religious choices. These rulers avoided religious wars within the empire by allowing the different Christian faiths to spread without coercion. This angered those who sought religious uniformity.[19] Meanwhile, Sweden and Denmark, both Lutheran kingdoms, sought to assist the Protestant cause in the Empire, and also wanted to gain political and economic influence there as well.
Ferdinand II, Holy Roman Emperor and King of Bohemia. His firm Catholicism was the proximate cause of the war.
Ferdinand II, Holy Roman Emperor and King of Bohemia. His firm Catholicism was the proximate cause of the war.

Religious tensions broke into violence in the German free city of Donauwörth in 1606. There, the Lutheran majority barred the Catholic residents of the Swabian town from holding a procession, which provoked a riot. This prompted foreign intervention by Duke Maximilian of Bavaria (1573–1651) on behalf of the Catholics. After the violence ceased, Calvinists in Germany (who remained a minority) felt the most threatened. They banded together and formed the League of Evangelical Union in 1608, under the leadership of the Palatine elector Frederick IV (1583–1610), (whose son, Frederick V, married Elizabeth Stuart, the daughter of James I of England).[20] Incidentally, the Prince-Elector had control of the Rhenish Palatinate, a state along the Rhine that Spain sought to acquire. The establishment of the League prompted the Catholics into banding together to form the Catholic League in 1609, under the leadership of the Duke Maximilian.

By 1617 it was apparent that Matthias, Holy Roman Emperor and King of Bohemia, would die without an heir, with his lands going to his nearest male relative, his cousin Archduke Ferdinand II of Austria, heir-apparent and Crown Prince of Bohemia.

Ferdinand, having been educated by the Jesuits, was a staunch Catholic who wanted to impose religious uniformity on his lands. This made him highly unpopular in Protestant (primarily Hussite) Bohemia. The population's sentiments notwithstanding, the added insult of the nobility's rejection of Ferdinand, who had been elected Bohemian Crown Prince in 1617, triggered the Thirty Years' War in 1618 when his representatives were thrown out of a window into a pile of horse manure. This act of defiance, led by a group of nobles with the temerity to hold a trial and convict three of his representatives in a questionable act of civil disorder, became known as the Defenestration of Prague—Defenestration meaning the act of being tossed out of a window. Bohemia was in open revolt and had foreign allies. Ferdinand II of Austria, a staunch supporter of the German Catholic League, a ruler of vast Habsburg monarchy demesnes, and soon to be elected Holy Roman Emperor, was quite upset by this calculated insult, but his intolerant policies in his own lands had already positioned him weakly. The Habsburg cause in the next couple of years would seem to suffer unrecoverable reverses. The Protestant cause seemed to wax toward a quick overall victory.

The War can be divided into four major phases: The Bohemian Revolt, the Danish intervention, the Swedish intervention and the French intervention.

[SandalJepit]

Umat Katholik menganggap umat Protestan sebagai "saudara yang terpisah."


The Siddha Wanderer

protestan masih dianggap saudara terpisah, setelah melakukan 3 hal:
1. Menolak mengakui pimpinan tertinggi (paus)
2. Melegalkan pernikahan pimpinan agama (pastur, uskup, dll)
3. Mengganti isi bible


Sebagai perbandingan apabila ada aliran buddhist yang merombak 3 point penting saja:
1. Menolak mengakui Pimpinan Tertinggi ( misalnya Dalai Lama)
2. Melegalkan Pernikahan Bhiksu
3. Mengganti isi Tripitaka

apakah umat Buddhist dapat menganggap aliran tersebut sebagai "Saudara Terpisah"
ini adalah point penting yang menunjukkan seberapa sekuler/liberal pemikiran umat Buddhist dibandingkan dengan umat Karistiani

[JackDaniel]

Bukannya ka****k sering di hina umat protestan karna menyembah maria?

[meichen]

Setau aye nh ya kitab suci ka****k n kr****n sama,cuma ka****k lebih menekankan akan perjanjian baru n kr****n menekankan akan perjanjian lama. Ya jelas aje ga sama.....

Ya kalo dulu emang perang kalo sekarang kan mereka bersahabat karib kalau ga percaya tanya aja ama RYU si juru selamat.....

[at] jackdaniel
bukan dihina tp dipertanyakan sebenarnya yg mana nh TUHANnya MARIA ato YESUS

[K.K.]

Kitab sucinya sama kok. Terbalik, Protestant lebih menekankan Perjanjian Baru, walaupun 2-2nya tetap berpegang pada Perjanjian lama dan Baru. Alkitab Kath0lik juga kadang memuat Deuterokanonika (kanon ke 2).

[JackDaniel]

Tman aku protestan dia hina ka****k,katanya menyembah patung

[K.K.]

Tman aku protestan dia hina ka****k,katanya menyembah patung

Itu oknum. Anjurkan baca Alkitab yang bener supaya ngerti "berhala".

"So kill (deaden, deprive of power) the evil desire lurking in your members [those animal impulses and all that is earthly in you that is employed in sin]: sexual vice, impurity, sensual appetites, unholy desires, and all greed and covetousness, for that is idolatry."
-Colossian 3:5.

[meichen]

Kitab sucinya sama kok. Terbalik, Protestant lebih menekankan Perjanjian Baru, walaupun 2-2nya tetap berpegang pada Perjanjian lama dan Baru. Alkitab Kath0lik juga kadang memuat Deuterokanonika (kanon ke 2).

kr****n itu perjanjian lama, yg perjanjian baru ka****k...... coba ditengok lg...... dan emang sama cuma penekanannya berbeda karena itu kan perumpamaan dan cara pandang orang berbeda2

[K.K.]

kr****n itu perjanjian lama, yg perjanjian baru ka****k...... coba ditengok lg...... dan emang sama cuma penekanannya berbeda karena itu kan perumpamaan dan cara pandang orang berbeda2

Kath0lik masih mengikuti tradisi perjanjian lama "perdamaian dengan Tuhan" dengan melakukan pengakuan dosa pada hari tertentu; Protestant menganggap  sebagai korban, sehingga 'ritual' itu sudah tidak diperlukan.

Kath0lik masih mengikuti tradisi perjanjian lama menggunakan "wakil" Tuhan (dahulu para nabi, sekarang Paus); Protestant menganggap kematian  sudah menghancurkan batasan manusia dengan Allah, sehingga hubungan pribadi dan Allah bisa berlangsung tanpa perlu perantara.

Pemimpin spiritual Kath0lik masih mengikuti tradisi selibat pada perjanjian lama; Protestant mengikuti perjanjian baru di mana tidak ada keharusan untuk hidup selibat bagi para pemimpin spiritualnya.

[ryu]

Tambahan , di katholik ada meditasi, di prosetan gak ada

[GandalfTheElder]

protestan masih dianggap saudara terpisah, setelah melakukan 3 hal:
1. Menolak mengakui pimpinan tertinggi (paus)
2. Melegalkan pernikahan pimpinan agama (pastur, uskup, dll)
3. Mengganti isi bible

Sebagai perbandingan apabila ada aliran buddhist yang merombak 3 point penting saja:
1. Menolak mengakui Pimpinan Tertinggi ( misalnya Dalai Lama)
2. Melegalkan Pernikahan Bhiksu
3. Mengganti isi Tripitaka

apakah umat Buddhist dapat menganggap aliran tersebut sebagai "Saudara Terpisah"
ini adalah point penting yang menunjukkan seberapa sekuler/liberal pemikiran umat Buddhist dibandingkan dengan umat Karistiani

Itu kan sejarah masa lalu bro. sandal jepit........

Tahukah anda bahwa sedari dulu pengikut-pengikut "Hinayana" (saya menggunakan istilah ini tanpa maksud apapun, hanya untuk memudahkan penyebutan bagi sekte-sekte Buddhis awal selain Mahayana) seperti Sarvastivada dan Sautantrika (dapat diperbandingkan dengan Theravada) telah menganggap Mahayana bukan ajaran asli Sang Buddha?

Jadi kasus bahwa ada beberapa umat Theravada yang menganggap Mahayana bukan ajaran asli Sang Buddha, sebenarnya bukanlah kasus yang belakangan ini saja terjadi. Tetapi lebih dari 1500 tahun yang lampau, kasus-kasus yang meragukan Mahayana telah muncul. Namun para pakar Mahayana pada masa itu di India dengan piawai dapat menampik setiap tuduhan tersebut. Ini terbukti dari betapa berkembangnya aliran Mahayana di India.

Tapi sekarang toh, Theravada, Mahayana dan Vajrayana dianggap sebagai aliran-aliran mainstream agama Buddha. Karena apa? Karena aliran-aliran tersebut semuanya sama-sama berlindung pada Buddha Dharma Sangha dan 4 Kebenaran Mulia.

Meskipun Theravada tidak mengakui kitab Mahayana, namun kedua-duanya masih dalam mainstream agama Buddha karena alasan di atas.

Demikian juga dengan Jonangpa. Karena dahulu terjadi kesalahpahaman pada penekanan doktrinal, maka Jonangpa dianggap sesat. Namun karena Jonangpa masih berlindung di bawah Buddha Dharma Sangha dan 4 Kebenaran Mulia, maka akhirnya aliran Jonangpa diterima menjadi bagian dari agama Buddha dan kesalahpahaman pada zaman lampau dapat terselesaikan.

Sama kasusnya dengan Katholik dan Protestan. Masalah tidak mengakui Paus ataupun melegalkan pernikahan pimpinan agama itu kan masalah kecil. Coba anda sebutkan apa ada kalimat dalam Alkitab yang mengharuskan seseorang mengakui Paus atau melarang pernikahan pemimpin agama??? Kalau tidak ada, berarti sah-sah saja umat Protestan menolak beberapa ajaran Katholik.

Alkitab sendiri beberapa kali mengalami perubahan pada masa-masa awal, maka dari itu bukanlah hal yang aneh apabila umat Protestan tidak mengakui Deuterokanonika.

Maka dari itu, sebuah aliran dianggap sebagai mainstream bukan karena tidak dianggap sesat pada masa lalu. Bisa saja aliran yang dianggap sesat pada zaman dahulu, pada zaman sekarang termasuk mainstream.

Seperti para pengikut "Hinayana" yang dahulu mencap Mahayana sebagai bukan ajaran Sang Buddha. Namun toh Mahayana sekarang merupakan aliran mainstream karena Triratna dan Catur Arya Satyani.

Bahkan Sang Buddha sendirilah yang menyebutkan bahwa umat Buddha adalah mereka yang berlindung pada Triratna dan 4 Kebenaran Mulia.

Demikian juga Trinitas (Allah Bapa, Putra, dan Roh Kudus) adalah seperti Triratna dalam agama Buddha. Trinitas adalah tolak ukur untuk melihat dan memahami apakah sebuah aliran itu agama Kristiani atau tidak. Bukan Paus. Masalah Paus dsb itu hanyalah masalah kekuasaan saja. tidak ada kaitannya dengan ajaran agama pokok.

Sedangkan aliran seperti Nichiren Shoshu, IKT, Maitreya itu kan nggak berlindung pada Triratna dan 4 Kebenaran Mulia, maka dari itu bukan agama Buddha. Apalagi di negara asalnya sendiri, IKT dan Maitreya berdiri sebagai agama sendiri dan Nichiren Shoshu di Jepang (secara organisatoris bukan agama) juga berdiri sendiri, tidak termasuk dalam JBF (Japan Buddhist Federation).

Ada lagi aliran yang katanya berlindung dalam Triratna, tapi ajarannya campur aduk gak keruan dengan agama lain. Begini bagaimana bisa dikatakan berlindung pada Dharma dan 4 kebenaran Mulia???

Tampaknya anda harus lebih teliti lagi......

Respon atas Argumen no.1 anda:

Dalai Lama bukanlah pemimpin tertinggi aliran apapun, apalagi agama Buddha. Banyak yang menyangka Dalai Lama adalah pemimpin tertinggi aliran Gelug, padahal bukan. Pimpinan tertinggi aliran Gelug adalah Ganden Tripa. Sedangkan Kagyu, Sakya, Nyima memiliki pemimpin spiritualnya sendiri-sendiri. Dalai Lama bukanlah pemimpin spiritual mereka, namun lebih sebagai pemimpin rakyat Tibet secara keseluruhan (mirip2 presiden gitu lah).

Maka dari itu dalam agama Buddha nggak ada seorang pimpinan yang mewakili seluruh umat agama Buddha. Jadi apabila ada masalah menolak pimpinan terus kemudian dicap sesat, itu adalah suatu hal yang tidak dianjurkan dalam agama Buddha.

Kalaupun ada kasus seperti New Kadampa dan Dalai Lama, maka itu adalah urusan mereka sendiri. Menurut saya lebih mengarah ke persoalan politik, ketimbang agama. Tidak ada kaitannya dengan "Pimpinan spiritual Tertinggi" karena Dalai Lama bukan pimpinan spiritual aliran apapun, beliau hanya pemimpin rakyat Tibet.

Argumen no. 2 anda:

Nah, "bhiksu" Jodo Shinshu yang diizinkan untuk menikah itu, kok masih diterima sama JBF? Demikian juga "bhiksu-bhiksu" Zen yang kawin itu kenapa kok diterima juga sama JBF? Sedangkan Nichiren Shoshu tidak?

Sebenarnya "Bhiksu-bhiksu" Jepang tersebut tidak mengambil sila Bhiksu/Bhiksuni (Vinaya) tetapi mengambil Bodhisattva Sila dalam Brahmajala Sutra sebagai pegangannya. Oleh karena itu mereka bukanlah seorang Bhiksu secara resmi, namun mereka berada dalam posisi di tengah-tengah antara Bhiksu dan umat awam.

Jadi kalau ada "bhiksu" yang menikah, hal itu tidak menjadi persoalan. Karena mereka mengikuti Bodhisattva Sila dalam Brahmajala Sutra yang ada dalam Tripitaka. Bodhisattva Sila tidak mewajibkan para umat untuk hidup selibat.

Nah kalau sampai ada yang mengambil sila Bhiksu (Vinaya) terus kemudian menikah... ya ini baru yang nggak beres.....

Argumen no.3:

Mengganti isi Tripitaka?? Bahkan setahu saya aliran yang dicap "nyeleneh" dalam agama Buddha pun, tidak berani mengganti isi kitab Tripitaka.

Yang kebanyakan dilakukan oleh aliran-aliran yang "nyeleneh" adalah membuat sutra-sutra baru yang aneh dan bertentangan dengan poin penting ajaran Sang Buddha. Bukannya ngganti isi Tripitaka, tetapi malah nambahi sutra yang bahkan tidak akan termasuk dalam kanon Tripitaka.


The Siddha Wanderer