Over the years I have come to realize that there are two forms of Buddhism that Christians have to face. One is the aggressive, overtly anti-Christian, Western version, promoted by Western converts and their Western-educated followers. The other is the conservative, respectful, Eastern version, lived day-to-day by the Asians who grew up with Buddhism. This latter form of Buddhism is the one I have written about in my book From Buddha to Jesus: An Insider’s View of Buddhism & Christianity.

Since the book’s release, numerous responses have come from both Buddhists and Christians who interact with Buddhists, telling us how relevant the material is to them. Their comments are posted at our website for all to see: Read Reviews. As I suggest in my book, most native Buddhists are very respectful and actually like Christians.

But this is not necessarily the case with Western converts to Buddhism. They are neo-atheists with little or no respect for Christians, Jews or anyone who believes in God. The good news is most Buddhists are not like them and do not follow them. Hostility is very unbecoming of a true Buddhist, especially a monk.

I read the Australian-born monk Shravasti Dhammika’s Good Question Good Answer half a year ago. Though I saw its fatal flaws, I thought not to respond to it. People have a right to their opinions and we should respect their point of view if they are sincere. I wanted to grant Dhammika the benefit of the doubt, until I recently was told that Dhammika posted a defamatory attack on Christianity, myself and my book From Buddha to Jesus: An Insider’s View of Buddhism & Christianity.

Dhammika is typical of Western converts to Buddhism. Using an aggressive and argumentative style (contrary to any native Buddhist I’ve ever met), he makes Buddhism out to be an anti-Christian religion (which it’s not). He claims “people turn to Buddhism… because it’s (sic) gentle, respectful attitude to other faiths…in keeping with goodwill and tolerance.” Yet he insists Buddhism is superior to Christianity. “Buddhism is the only truly universal religion” (p 12). “Buddhism… is certainly (sic) more scientific than any other religion” (p 10). He speaks out of both corners of his mouth when he says Buddhism is a religion of peace and tolerance, while he constantly puts down Christianity and other religions calling them “narrow-minded” (p 8) and “a myth, a legend or a belief that is difficult or impossible to verify” (p 12). Here are more put downs: “Westerners reject Christianity [because of] the contradictions between Christianity and science”; “The Buddha, like modern sociologists and psychologists, believed that religious ideas and especially the god idea have their origins in fear” (p 16); “There does not seem to be any evidence to support this idea [of God]… Is it not surprising that with so many different religions… still no real, concrete, substantial or irrefutable evidence has been found?” (p 17) What condescension!

Responding to Dhammika’s hostility will unlikely placate his hostile attitude, so I made the choice to respond for the benefit of those who may be offended and confused by him. He casts his net quite wide, attacking: monotheism (foolish according to him); Christianity (disproven according to him); Hillsong Church (of which I am not a part; I am not sure what scandal he is revelling over, but this is only gratuitous aggression); Thai Buddhism (conceited he calls it); my book; and myself. I will offer my response in 3 parts, addressing his comments on 1) science, 2) Christianity and 3) Buddhism.

Before we delve into these issues, let’s be clear what Dhammika is all about: fear. Knowing that I have led and am helping others lead thousands of willing Buddhists to Jesus Christ, a freedom of choice guaranteed by the UN Declaration of Human Rights, he is extremely afraid. Dhammika gloats over a claim that millions of Christians are leaving churches, but that is only out of the old churches. There is an unprecedented Christian revival going on in China. South Korea is home to the world’s largest churches, with 800,000 members in Yoido Full Gospel Church alone. Singapore, where Dhammika lives, is home to some of the most creative and fastest-growing churches in the world. Dhammika has been trying to convert others to Buddhism for 30 years and says on his website that he has no follower. He has followers, but not nearly as many as he would hope.

This is not personal to me. It’s about Christ. I will not defend myself. I will not address each of his ad hominem attacks against me, except to mention only one comment. Among his many presumptuous comments, Dhammika wrote: “He [me] came from a family of Catholics, Methodists, Buddhists and Muslims. This suggests to me that Cioccolanti came from a very nominally religious, not to say a religiously confused, background…” Why ‘confused’? Why not ‘well-informed’? Dhammika assumes that if one comes from a multi-faith background, one cannot possibly think clearly. An illustration not of my ignorance, but of Dhammika’s arrogance. Can I help it if I was born into a family of relatives who were committed to each of these faiths? Does Dhammika mock every person who comes from a multi-faith background?

Dhammika is a Westerner who has dedicated his life to studying the Tripitaka; I have no disrespect for that. I have dedicated my life to helping people through faith in Christ and learning the Bible; if he disrespects me it is not my problem.

Debating Buddhist texts in ancient languages is the pursuit of academics and the elite, of which Dhammika is one. I am interested in the millions of lay Buddhists whose faith is not perfect and often syncretic. That is why I wrote from the beginning of my book “an insider’s view of Buddhism and Christianity,” not an academic’s or professional’s or Western view. I never claimed to be a monk. I am only a commoner who has been involved in the lives of thousands of Buddhists and found out how they are suffering. I want to help end their suffering because I ended my suffering at the Cross of Jesus Christ.

This does not mean I do not value academics and textual studies. I think a scholarly analysis of the Tripitaka using the same standards by which the Bible is judged (number of ancient manuscripts, internal and external consistency among texts from different countries, scientific validity, fulfilled prophecies, global impact) would vindicate the Bible. But theory is not the primary pursuit of this book.

Westerner intellectuals like Dhammika tend to treat religion theoretically (arguing and debating about ontology, epistemology, etc., proving who’s right). Easterners tend to treat religion practically.  Easterners respect Mother Teresa and Billy Graham, even if they disagree with them, because their lives and conduct speak to the Eastern heart. Easterners emphasize smooth relationship and moral conduct over lofty theory. Knowing this I am more concerned about Buddhism as it is practiced among millions of polite locals rather than Buddhism as it is argued about by a few Western converts who overtly hate Christianity.

What I wrote concerning Buddhism is what the lay Buddhist knows: Buddha was a prince who left everything (including his former religion of Hinduism) in pursuit of the truth and a way out of karmic suffering. I greatly admire Buddha. Although Buddha did not have the privilege of knowing Christianity, I firmly believe if he were alive today, he would be open-minded enough to study the Bible and have a civil dialogue with well-informed Christians. I also admire the Buddhists who try to follow Buddha’s example.

Dhammika, on the other hand, wants to discredit opposing viewpoints and control people’s freedom to discover Christ for who He claims to be - Lord and Saviour. At stake are the freedom of information and the freedom of religion.

Continue to Part 2

© 2009 Steve Cioccolanti

All rights reserved. This article may be cut and pasted unabridged on your website to spread the Word, or you may simply link back to this website. Thank you.