Unpacking Christian Doctrine

[Jhanananda]

I saw this translation as well, and thought that it was very interesting. I find it is worthwhile to exchange Christian words with Indian equivalents. If we do this, it gives us a very different (and in my opinion more correct) understanding of Christianity.

I agree, and in fact I believe it goes both ways.  People who were raised Christian could understand Buddhism better, if Buddhist doctrine was translated using common Christian terms.  It could be what Bodhi was getting at when he used the term 'deliverance' for 'vimokha'.  However, the term 'deliverance' does not at all have the same nuance that 'liberation' has.  One would have to understand what liberation (vimokha) is, and it is doubtful that Bodhi understands that term.  It means to be liberated from the fetters, which are almost identical to the Christian concept of the 7 deadly sins.

Since we are 2,000 years-removed from Jesus, it is fair to say that our modern understandings of Christian words are incorrect. Further, we are ignorant of what Jesus directly taught the apostles. If we knew, it would allow us to correct ourselves.

I agree, but I find Buddhism has the same problem.  Most of the problem is related to language shift, in which the meaning of terms changes, or shifts, over time.  Typically it is the mystical terminology that gets lost, because mainstream interpretations, such as Bodhi (for example) does not understand the mystical terminology.

Jesus had two teachings. He had a public teaching (the parables), and a direct teaching (for the apostles).

"He spoke to [the public] at length in parables. [...] The apostles approached him and said, 'Why do you speak to them in parables?' He said to them in reply, 'Because knowledge of the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven has been granted to you, but to them it has not been granted.'" (Mt 13:3-11)

"Peter said [after Christ told a parable to the crowd], 'Master, is this parable meant for us or for everyone?'" (Lk 12:41)

It is unfortunate there is no record of Jesus' direct teachings. Although, I would argue that there are fragments of it here and there: mostly, preserved in the Eastern Church, for example in the writings of the desert fathers.

Yes, but it is doubtful that most of his apostles understood his inner teaching, or Christianity, and the Gospels would be quite different.

I agree with Jhananda about the Persian influence on Jesus. It is encouraging to me that we have come to the same conclusion. Ironically, there is only one hint about it in the Gospels: the visit of the "magicians" in Matthew.

In antiquity, Persia was a land of magic and mystery. It was at the crossroads between Rome and India, and it had a large, scholarly class who studied disciplines that are very obscurely known to us today.

Obviously, the story in Matthew is an allegory. The magi did not actually visit Jesus. But, they demonstrate that he is a successor of the Persian magicians, and that he is empowered with profane authority (the gold) and spiritual authority (the incense).

Good points; however, I do not reject the story of the Magi.  Perhaps that story is true, but it is just so misinterpreted by mainstream Christianity to be a ridiculous Christmas tale.

[Michel]

What do you think Jesus was referring to in this passage?

20 ¶ And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: 21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you. Luke 17:20 - 21

[Alexander]

What do you think Jesus was referring to in this passage?

20 ¶ And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: 21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you. Luke 17:20 - 21

One of the beliefs of contemporary Christians is that just by "believing" in the dogmas of the Church, when they die they go to heaven. I personally find this teaching silly: and I can only interpret it as being based on laziness.

What Jesus argues for is a complete transformation of the human being in the image of Reality. That transformation begins with "metanoia" (a process he taught beside John the Baptist): to think over one's whole life and one's character, to suffer one's flaws, and to remake oneself. Both Jesus and John the Baptist said, "only sinners can enter the kingdom of heaven." In other words, only a sinner will have the "material" (past experiences) with which he can examine himself properly, and learn about himself.

"He told them another parable: 'The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and planted in his field. Though it is the smallest of all seeds, yet when it grows, it is the largest of garden plants and becomes a tree.'" Mt 12:31-2

This sounds like an analogy for the journey we are all on here: we all begin with an inkling, with a suspicion, that there exists something more than the world that we know. Over time that suspicion, that "particle," expands and grows and accretes until, eventually, it becomes the real "I," the real me, and has an existence which exists almost independently of the external world.

What Jesus says is that the Kingdom of Heaven must be built within you: in other words if you have it HERE, NOW, ON EARTH, then, posthumously, you might count on a continuation of that kingdom after death. But, don't plan on heaven in the afterlife, unless you first build it here in the mortal life.

[Michel]

Metanoia (from the Greek μετάνοια, metanoia, changing one's mind) in the psychological theory of Carl Jung denotes a process of reforming the psyche as a form of self healing, a proposed explanation for the phenomenon of psychotic breakdown. Here, metanoia is viewed as a potentially productive process, and therefore patients' psychotic episodes are not necessarily always to be thwarted.
In Carl Jung's psychology, metanoia indicates a spontaneous attempt of the psyche to heal itself of unbearable conflict by melting down and then being reborn in a more adaptive form. Jung believed that psychotic episodes in particular could be understood as existential crises which were sometimes attempts at self-reparation. Jung's concept of metanoia influenced R. D. Laing and the therapeutic community movement which aimed, ideally, to support people whilst they broke down and went through spontaneous healing, rather than thwarting such efforts at self-repair by strengthening their existing character defences and thereby maintaining the underlying conflict.

What Jesus argues for is a complete transformation of the human being in the image of Reality. That transformation begins with "metanoia" (a process he taught beside John the Baptist): to think over one's whole life and one's character, to suffer one's flaws, and to remake oneself. Both Jesus and John the Baptist said, "only sinners can enter the kingdom of heaven." In other words, only a sinner will have the "material" (past experiences) with which he can examine himself properly, and learn about himself.

Very interesting. Are there other references in the gospel to Jesus and John the Baptist teaching a process of metanoia aside from, "only sinners can enter the kingdom of heaven?" 

"He told them another parable: 'The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and planted in his field. Though it is the smallest of all seeds, yet when it grows, it is the largest of garden plants and becomes a tree.'" Mt 12:31-2

This sounds like an analogy for the journey we are all on here: we all begin with an inkling, with a suspicion, that there exists something more than the world that we know. Over time that suspicion, that "particle," expands and grows and accretes until, eventually, it becomes the real "I," the real me, and has an existence which exists almost independently of the external world.

What Jesus says is that the Kingdom of Heaven must be built within you: in other words if you have it HERE, NOW, ON EARTH, then, posthumously, you might count on a continuation of that kingdom after death. But, don't plan on heaven in the afterlife, unless you first build it here in the mortal life.

I get the impression that the Christian gospels show us that John the Baptist and Jesus where teaching a very comprehensive process of spiritual development. What is left of their teachings is fragmentary, incomplete, and pales in comparison to the Pali Canon.

[Alexander]

Metanoia (from the Greek μετάνοια, metanoia, changing one's mind) in the psychological theory of Carl Jung denotes a process of reforming the psyche as a form of self healing, a proposed explanation for the phenomenon of psychotic breakdown. Here, metanoia is viewed as a potentially productive process, and therefore patients' psychotic episodes are not necessarily always to be thwarted.

In Carl Jung's psychology, metanoia indicates a spontaneous attempt of the psyche to heal itself of unbearable conflict by melting down and then being reborn in a more adaptive form. Jung believed that psychotic episodes in particular could be understood as existential crises which were sometimes attempts at self-reparation.

Jung's concept of metanoia influenced R. D. Laing and the therapeutic community movement which aimed, ideally, to support people whilst they broke down and went through spontaneous healing, rather than thwarting such efforts at self-repair by strengthening their existing character defences and thereby maintaining the underlying conflict. [...]

Carl Jung is the modern re-discoverer of this transformation, and he was very wise because he knew:

(1) to throw out all the Christian language which has totally wrong meanings to it,

(2) to explain the process in secular terms, and

(3) to explain it as an objective process.

Most people would never imagine what is hidden behind Jungian psychology: the only clue he kept was that Greek word of Jesus and John the Baptist.

I get the impression that the Christian gospels show us that John the Baptist and Jesus where teaching a very comprehensive process of spiritual development. What is left of their teachings is fragmentary, incomplete, and pales in comparison to the Pali Canon.

One of the things I was thinking recently was how remarkable the book The Dark Night of the Soul is. At one stage I would never have anticipated it. But here in John of the Cross was a Master, a veritable spiritual genius, and an exquisite author. And he developed in solitude, in Castille, in the 16th century.

What are we missing, then, about John the Baptist? About Jesus? It is gone. What we know about John the Baptist is speculative: That he was a contemporary of Jesus. That Jesus may have been his follower for a short time. And that he taught about a very unique way by which the human being can re-make himself.

[Michel]

Carl Jung is the modern re-discoverer of this transformation, and he was very wise because he knew:

(1) to throw out all the Christian language which has totally wrong meanings to it,

(2) to explain the process in secular terms, and

(3) to explain it as an objective process.

Most people would never imagine what is hidden behind Jungian psychology: the only clue he kept was that Greek word of Jesus and John the Baptist.

Metanoia is equivalent to the dark night of the soul. I am glad to have come across Jung's concept of metanoia, thanks to you, aglorincz. When I under go a dark night, I'll be able to use Jung's language to explain it to my psychiatrist. Hopefully he won't have me committed and heavily medicated when I am undergoing this process. I should start preparing them for this possibility.

One of the things I was thinking recently was how remarkable the book The Dark Night of the Soul is. At one stage I would never have anticipated it. But here in John of the Cross was a Master, a veritable spiritual genius, and an exquisite author. And he developed in solitude, in Castille, in the 16th century.

I look forward to reading John of the Cross's writings after I finish reading the Nikayas. It is noteworthy that in mainstream Buddhism the dark night of the soul is not mentioned. Check out Ajhan Brahm and most other Thervadins, for instance. To them the process of the death of the ego is unheard of. However there are some groups on internet forums, like Dharma Overground, who acknowledge it. Many think the dark night is just a manifestation of mental illness. I know that Jhananda thinks sutta MN 36 is the closest description we have to the dark night in the discourses. But the sutta describes what happens when the Buddha stopped his breaths during meditation. I can tell you that if I stopped my breaths some of the symptoms described in the sutta below would not occur. This leads me to believe that the original sutta in the Pali may have been somehow misinterpreted or tampered with.

(Dark Night of the Soul)

Aggivessana, then it occurred to me, what if I practiced stopping the in-breaths and the out-breaths, entering through the nose and mouth? When I practiced stopping in-breaths and out-breaths entering through the nose and mouth, air entering through the ears made much noise. It was like the sound that came from the bellows of the smithy. In the same manner when I stopped in-breaths and out breaths, entering through the nose and mouth, air entering through the ears made much noise. My effort was aroused repeatedly, my mindfulness was established, the body was not appeased owing to the difficult exertion. Aggivessana, even these arisen unpleasant feelings did not take hold of my mind and settle.

Aggivessana, then it occurred to me what if I practiced stopping the in-breaths and the out-breaths further. I stopped the air, entering through the nose and mouth and ears. When I practiced stopping in-breaths and out-breaths entering through the nose, mouth and the ears, a lot of air disturbed the top of my head. Like a strong man was carving the top of my head with a sharp blade. In the same manner when I stopped in-breaths and out breaths, entering through the nose and mouth, and ears, a lot of air disturbed the top of my head. My effort was aroused repeatedly, my mindfulness was established, and the body was not appeased owing to the difficult exertion. Aggivessana, even these arisen unpleasant feelings did not take hold of my mind and settle.

Aggivessana, then it occurred to me what if I practiced stopping the in-breaths and the out-breaths still more. I stopped the air, entering through the nose, mouth and ear lobes, further. When I practiced stopping in-breaths and out-breaths entering through the nose, mouth and the ears further, I felt a lot of pain in the head...Like a strong man giving a head wrap with a strong turban. In the same manner when I stopped in-breaths and out breaths, entering through the nose, mouth, and ears further, I felt a lot of pain in the head. My effort was aroused repeatedly, unconfused mindfulness established, the body was not appeased owing to the difficult exertion. Aggivessana, even then these arisen unpleasant feelings did not take hold of my mind and settle.

Aggivessana, then it occurred to me what if I practiced stopping the in-breaths and the out-breaths, for a longer time. I stopped the air, entering through the nose mouth and ears, for a longer time. When I practiced stopping in-breaths and out-breaths entering through the nose, mouth and the ears for a longer time, I felt a lot of pain in the stomach .As though a clever butcher or his apprentice was carving the stomach with a butcher"s knife. In the same manner when I stopped in-breaths and out breaths, entering through the nose and mouth, and ears for a longer time I felt a lot of pain in the stomach. My effort was aroused repeatedly, unconfused mindfulness established. My body was not appeased owing to the difficult exertion. Aggivessana, even then these arisen unpleasant feelings did not take hold of my mind and settle.

Aggivessana, then it occurred to me what if I practiced stopping the in-breaths and the out-breaths, for a longer time. I stopped the air, entering through the nose mouth and ears, for a longer time. When I practiced stopping in-breaths and out-breaths entering through the nose, mouth and the ears for a longer time, I felt a lot of burning in the body. Like a strong man taking a weaker one, by his hands and feet was burning and scorching him in a pit of burning charcoal. In the same manner when I stopped in-breaths and out breaths, entering through my nose and mouth, and ears for a longer time I felt a lot of burning in the body. My effort was aroused repeatedly, unconfused mindfulness established, the body was not appeased owing to the difficult exertion. Aggivessana, even then these arisen unpleasant feelings did not take hold of my mind and settle. Then the gods seeing me thus said, the recluse Gotama is dead. A certain deity said thus: The recluse Gotama is not dead. Will not die. He will become perfect like this.

[Jhanananda]

Thank-you aglorincz, and Michel for this most interesting exploration into the term metanoia, and how it has been mistranslated from the Greek to Latin, to English, as merely repentance, when it really was more about transformation through self discovery/self-awareness.  Surely a contemplative's version of the bible would end up so very radically different than what is accepted by the mainstream Christian religion. 

[Jhanananda]

This morning I found myself reflecting upon a verse from the King James

Matthew 18:20
For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

Matthew 18:20
20 For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.”

For where there are two or three gathered together in my name,+ there I am in their midst.”

Mattityahu 18:20 Orthodox Jewish Bible (OJB)
20 For where two or three are gathered as a Chavurah and are a Kehillah in my name [Moshiach], there I am in the midst of them.

I just have a problem with any mystic saying something like this.  It is just too self-promotional. So, I searched the key term "Moshiach."  Wiki gave us the following:

Messiah (Hebrew: מָשִׁיחַ‎; mashiah, moshiah, mashiach, or moshiach, "anointed [one]") is a term used in the Hebrew Bible to describe priests and kings, who were traditionally anointed with holy anointing oil as described in Exodus 30:22-25. For example, Cyrus the Great, the king of Persia, although not a Hebrew, is referred to as "God's mashiach" in the Bible.

Historical

In Jewish eschatology, the term mashiach, or "Messiah," came to refer to a future Jewish King from the Davidic line, who is expected to be anointed with holy anointing oil and rule the Jewish people during the Messianic Age.[1][2][3] The Messiah is often referred to as "King Messiah" or, in Hebrew, מלך המשיח (melekh mashiach), and in Aramaic, malka meshiḥa.[4]

Orthodox views have generally held that the Messiah will be descended from his father through the line of King David,[5] and will gather the Jews back into the Land of Israel, usher in an era of peace, build the Third Temple, father a male heir and re-institute the Sanhedrin, among other things. Jewish tradition alludes to two redeemers, both of whom are called mashiach and are involved in ushering in the Messianic age: Mashiach ben David and Mashiach ben Yosef. In general, the term Messiah unqualified refers to Mashiach ben David (Messiah, son of David).[1][2]

We can conclude that the "my name" in the translation of Matthew 18:20 is wrong.  It really should be translated as "Messiah," which might very well have been a larger concept than a self-reference if Jesus ever indeed uttered this phrase. Thus we have the following rendering of this passage:

For where there are two or three gathered together (for the) Messiah, there I am in their midst.”

If we consider that the idea of the Messiah in Jesus' mind was not that he was the only begotten son of god, who would now be worshiped as part of a trinity, which is not monotheism, but for him messianism was all about himself being the Messiah of his age, not for every more, which is reasonable, and thus he was promoting the concept of a divinely chosen ruler/king of Israel among his followers.

[Jhanananda]

Here is another web page that examines whether Jesus was The Only Begotten Son of God (What does ‘μονογενης υιος’ mean?)

So where did this word begotten come from? The word that is being translated as only begotten by the KJV is monogenes. The KJV translators liked to translate word-for-word when it was possible. So when they came to monogenes they translated mono as only and genes as begotten. That is easy...

 Reasons why monogenes should not be translated as only begotten:

The word monogenes also appears elsewhere in the New Testament:

    By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had received the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only [monogenes] son, even though God had said to him, "It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned." Abraham reasoned that God could raise the dead, and figuratively speaking, he did receive Isaac back from death.
    —Hebrews 11:17-19 (NIV)

This time the NIV (1973) does not have an explanatory footnote offering only begotten as an alternate rendering, as it does for John 3:16, but it is the same Greek word monogenes. To say Isaac was Abraham’s only-begotten son would make no sense since according to the Bible, Abraham begat Ishmael as well as Isaac. But "one of a kind", "one and only", or "unique" would fit because Isaac was special. Abraham's wife, Sarah, was too old to have a child but she nevertheless became pregnant.

Dr. James R. White notes,

    The key element to remember in deriving the meaning of monogenes is this: it is a compound term, combining monos, meaning only, with a second term. Often it is assumed that the second term is gennasthai/gennao, to give birth, to beget. But note that this family of terms has two nu’s, νν, rather than a single nu, ν, found in monogenes. This indicates that the second term is not gennasthai but gignesthai/ginmai, and the noun form, genos. G. L. Prestige discusses the differences that arise from these two derivations in God in Patristic Thought (London: SPCK, 1952), 37-51, 135-141, 151-156.

    Genos means "kind or type", ginomai is a verb of being. Hence the translations "one of a kind," "one and only," "of sole descent." Some scholars see the -genes element as having a minor impact upon the meaning of the term, and hence see monogenes as a strengthened form of monos, thereby translating it "alone," "unique," "incomparable."

    An example of this usage from the LXX is found in Psalm 25:16,

        turn to me and be gracious to me,
        for I am lonely (monogenes) and afflicted: (NASB)

    (White, The Forgotten Trinity [Minneapolis, MN, Bethany House Publishers, 1998], pp. 201-202, fn. 27)

Note that the so-called LXX (mentioned above) is a Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament that existed in Jesus' day. Sometimes we can gain insight into Greek New Testament words by how Hebrew words were translated into Greek by the Jewish scholars. In this case, the Hebrew word for lonely was translated into Greek as monogenes. So this helps us justify that monogenes means "alone," "unique," or "incomparable."

Reasons why monogenes may be translated as only begotten:

From the discussion above, we see that the seemingly obvious translation of monogenes to only begotten may not be the most accurate. However, the Greek word monogenes does not have a single equivalent corresponding word in English. 

[Alexander]

Thank you, Jhanananda, for the additional reading. There is so much that is altered in translation; you also see how whole dogmas come to be built up based on translation errors.

I cannot read the original Greek, but the glimpses I've had of it suggest that the Greek texts are very rich, and more relevant to the mystic. It is no wonder the west and east had a schism: given the west was working with a different language version of the religion.

[Cal]

(Dark Night of the Soul)

Aggivessana, then it occurred to me, what if I practiced stopping the in-breaths and the out-breaths, entering through the nose and mouth? When I practiced stopping in-breaths and out-breaths entering through the nose and mouth, air entering through the ears made much noise. It was like the sound that came from the bellows of the smithy. In the same manner when I stopped in-breaths and out breaths, entering through the nose and mouth, air entering through the ears made much noise. My effort was aroused repeatedly, my mindfulness was established, the body was not appeased owing to the difficult exertion. Aggivessana, even these arisen unpleasant feelings did not take hold of my mind and settle.

Aggivessana, then it occurred to me what if I practiced stopping the in-breaths and the out-breaths further. I stopped the air, entering through the nose and mouth and ears. When I practiced stopping in-breaths and out-breaths entering through the nose, mouth and the ears, a lot of air disturbed the top of my head. Like a strong man was carving the top of my head with a sharp blade. In the same manner when I stopped in-breaths and out breaths, entering through the nose and mouth, and ears, a lot of air disturbed the top of my head. My effort was aroused repeatedly, my mindfulness was established, and the body was not appeased owing to the difficult exertion. Aggivessana, even these arisen unpleasant feelings did not take hold of my mind and settle.

Aggivessana, then it occurred to me what if I practiced stopping the in-breaths and the out-breaths still more. I stopped the air, entering through the nose, mouth and ear lobes, further. When I practiced stopping in-breaths and out-breaths entering through the nose, mouth and the ears further, I felt a lot of pain in the head...Like a strong man giving a head wrap with a strong turban. In the same manner when I stopped in-breaths and out breaths, entering through the nose, mouth, and ears further, I felt a lot of pain in the head. My effort was aroused repeatedly, unconfused mindfulness established, the body was not appeased owing to the difficult exertion. Aggivessana, even then these arisen unpleasant feelings did not take hold of my mind and settle.

Aggivessana, then it occurred to me what if I practiced stopping the in-breaths and the out-breaths, for a longer time. I stopped the air, entering through the nose mouth and ears, for a longer time. When I practiced stopping in-breaths and out-breaths entering through the nose, mouth and the ears for a longer time, I felt a lot of pain in the stomach .As though a clever butcher or his apprentice was carving the stomach with a butcher"s knife. In the same manner when I stopped in-breaths and out breaths, entering through the nose and mouth, and ears for a longer time I felt a lot of pain in the stomach. My effort was aroused repeatedly, unconfused mindfulness established. My body was not appeased owing to the difficult exertion. Aggivessana, even then these arisen unpleasant feelings did not take hold of my mind and settle.

Aggivessana, then it occurred to me what if I practiced stopping the in-breaths and the out-breaths, for a longer time. I stopped the air, entering through the nose mouth and ears, for a longer time. When I practiced stopping in-breaths and out-breaths entering through the nose, mouth and the ears for a longer time, I felt a lot of burning in the body. Like a strong man taking a weaker one, by his hands and feet was burning and scorching him in a pit of burning charcoal. In the same manner when I stopped in-breaths and out breaths, entering through my nose and mouth, and ears for a longer time I felt a lot of burning in the body. My effort was aroused repeatedly, unconfused mindfulness established, the body was not appeased owing to the difficult exertion. Aggivessana, even then these arisen unpleasant feelings did not take hold of my mind and settle. Then the gods seeing me thus said, the recluse Gotama is dead. A certain deity said thus: The recluse Gotama is not dead. Will not die. He will become perfect like this.

Hi Michel. o/

This is indeed indicative of the Dark Night of the Soul, the first one, in fact. What happens when one cannot breathe? They die. The passage is an allegory, which is rich with metaphor. The Buddha did not physically "hold his breathe" he intended on what it was to be dead. The point in the repetition signifies a "true intent". This man was consumed with this thought or belief. In this case, what it is to be dead.

The result of this: hands and feet was burning and scorching him in a pit of burning charcoal. (Charism arises) In the same manner when I stopped in-breaths and out breaths, entering through my nose and mouth, and ears for a longer time (The action of what it is to be dead, Meditation. I believe the notation of the ears, and the earlier reference to wind or air coming though them could indicate the meaning of a quiet place. "meditated in a quiet place") I felt a lot of burning in the body. (Charism) My effort was aroused repeatedly, (The word aroused indicates an observation, not a cognitive action)  unconfused mindfulness established, (Observing thoughts that arise but not grasping or engaging. "unconfused" in that you are indeed dead) the body was not appeased owing to the difficult exertion. (It was uncomfortable, yet made only as observation.  This particular line is very interesting. In my own experiences this is not always the case, yet there are times that it is.)  Aggivessana, even then these arisen unpleasant feelings did not take hold of my mind and settle.(Did not give up the meditation session, nor did he "grasp" any of them. They were only observed.)

The burning of the hands and feet are the charisms. As described by "burning" means that the body is interpreting them, there is desire present. Most likely in this case desire was the intent on what it was to be dead.

Then the gods seeing me thus said, the recluse Gotama is dead.
This is the second Jhana, the thoughts have stopped, the mind is silent, therefor Gotama (Identity) is dead. This also means that the mediator stuck with the interpreted burning charisms (desire), until it was relinquished here.

A certain deity said thus: The recluse Gotama is not dead. Will not die. He will become perfect like this.
So if we can conclude that the mind was still to this point, what does  a certain deity refer to? Insight, the inner "you". "Gotama knew" at that point that his identity was not dead. He "knew" that "this" Gotama will not die. And that the path to the death of the identity is through meditation.

Think of Dissociation, or math equations.
1. "Gotama knew" at that point that his identity was not dead because a certain deity (Insight) told him so. (A certain deity said thus: The recluse Gotama is not dead.)
2. Dissociated from 1. He "knew" that "this Gotama" will not die. (Will not die. There was intention in simply leaving that sentence like that. It does not give a title to "who" will not die. It refers to the inner self.)

1+2=3

3. The recluse Gotama + the un-named inner self = He. "He" can only become perfect by following the instruction given above in the passage.

So, the dark night of the soul, what do we know about it? Well, lets start at the 4 Noble Truths.

1. The truth of Suffering- the truth that life is suffering

2. The truth of Origin of suffering- impermanence is the origin

3.The truth of Cessation of suffering- the identity, that is perception, is the origin of impermanence

4.The truth of a Path of liberation from suffering- culminates to the 8th fold of the Noble Eightfold Path (within the context of the 4 noble truths)

In order for a meditator to attain the first Jhana, or the 8th fold of the N8P he has assimilated the 4 Noble truths, much in the way the Buddha describes above, as was his first experience with religious phenomena, or jhana, or the 8th fold of the N8P.

The assimilation of the 4 noble truths is the first Dark Night of the Soul.
 
(Sorry guys, please feel free to move this to Ecstatic Buddhism, or Unpacking Buddhism, or another Buddhist focused thread. I hadnt realised where I was responding.^.^)

[Jhanananda]

Thank you, Jhanananda, for the additional reading. There is so much that is altered in translation; you also see how whole dogmas come to be built up based on translation errors.

I cannot read the original Greek, but the glimpses I've had of it suggest that the Greek texts are very rich, and more relevant to the mystic. It is no wonder the west and east had a schism: given the west was working with a different language version of the religion.

Alexander, I am glad that you gained from the investigation into the correct translation of the Bible and Gospels.  I believe we will all have to spend quite a bit of time digging into them many more times.

Cal, I am not sure if your reflections upon the dark night of the soul as expressed in the suttas needs to move or not, because I believe unpacking Buddhist doctrine can help us unpack Christian doctrine, and vice versa.

[Jhanananda]

It is interesting to note that the Qur'an comments upon central Christian doctrine.

They say: "Allah has begotten a Son". Glory be to Him! His is what the heavens and the earth contain; all things are obedient to Him. Creator of the heavens and the earth! When he decrees a thing, He need only say "Be", and it is.

Then God will say: ‘Jesus, son of Mary, did you ever say to mankind: "Worship me and my mother as gods besides God?"’

Wonderful Originator of the heavens and the earth; how can He have a son when He has no consort? He created all things, and He hath full knowledge of all things.

The Jews say Ezra is the son of God, while the Christians say the Messiah is the son of God. Such are their assertions, by which they imitate the infidels of old. God confound them! How perverse they are!

They say, ‘God has begotten a son.’ God forbid! Self-sufficient is He. His is all that the heavens and the earth contain. Surely for this you have no sanction. Whould you say of God what you know not?

Such was Jesus, the son of Mary. That is the whole truth, which they still doubt. God forbid that He Himself should beget a son! When He decrees a thing He need only say: ‘Be,’ and it is.

Those who say: ‘The Lord of Mercy has begotten a son,’ preach a monstrous falsehood, at which the very heavens might crack, the earth break asunder, and the mountains crumble to dust. That they should ascribe a son to the Merciful, when it does not become the Lord of Mercy to beget one!

Say: ‘How then can you be so bewitched?’

We have revealed to them the truth, but they are liars all.

Never has God begotten a son, nor is there any other god besides Him. Were this otherwise, each god would govern his own creation, each holding himself above the other. Exalted be God above their falsehoods!

Surely they lie when they declare: "Allah has begotten children".

Had it been His will to adopt a son, He would have chosen whom He pleased out of His own Creation.

Say: 3 "If the Lord of Mercy had a son, I would be the first to worship him".

He (exalted be the glory of our Lord!) has taken no wife, nor has He begotten any children. The Blaspheming One among us has uttered a wanton falsehood against God, although we had supposed no man or jinee could tell of Him what is untrue.

Say: ‘GOD is One, the Eternal God. He begot none, nor was He begotten. None is equal to Him.’

[Alexander]

One of the things which I got from the study of G. I. Gurdjieff was a greater insight into the Christian religion.

People have been told almost since the creation of the world that they are asleep and that they must awaken. How many times is this said in the Gospels, for instance? "Awake," "watch," "sleep not." Christ's disciples even slept when he was praying in the Garden of Gethsemane for the last time. It is all there. But do men understand it? Men take it simply as a form of speech, as an expression, as a metaphor. They completely fail to understand that it must be taken literally. And again it is easy to understand why. In order to understand this literally it is necessary to awaken a little, or at least to try to awaken. I tell you seriously that I have been asked several times why nothing is said about sleep in the Gospels. Although it is there spoken of almost on every page.

It turns out he is right, and injunctions to "awaken," "watch," and "sleep not" are recurring in the Gospels.

"But of that day or hour, no one knows, neither the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. Be watchful! Be alert! You do not know when the time will come. It is like a man traveling abroad. He leaves home and places his servants in charge, each with his own work, and orders the gatekeeper to be on the watch. Watch, therefore; you do not know when the lord of the house is coming, whether in the evening, or at midnight, or at cockcrow, or in the morning. May he not come suddenly and find you sleeping. What I say to you, I say to all: 'Watch!'"

At that time the kingdom of heaven will be like ten virgins who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom. Five of them were foolish and five were wise. The foolish ones took their lamps but did not take any oil with them. The wise, however, took oil in jars along with their lamps. The bridegroom was a long time in coming, and they all became drowsy and fell asleep. At midnight the cry rang out: 'Here's the bridegroom! Come out to meet him!' "Then all the virgins woke up and trimmed their lamps. The foolish ones said to the wise, 'Give us some of your oil; our lamps are going out.' 'No,' they replied, 'there may not be enough for both us and you. Instead, go to those who sell oil and buy some for yourselves.' But while they were on their way to buy the oil, the bridegroom arrived. The virgins who were ready went in with him to the wedding banquet. And the door was shut. Later the others also came. 'Sir! Sir!' they said. 'Open the door for us!' But he replied, 'I tell you the truth, I do not know you.' Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour.

I interpret these quotes to reference the religious experience; with the arrival of the master or the groom representing its appearance. Watchfulness is key for the religious experience. In the second quote, the lesson seems to be that a wholesome lifestyle is not enough: watchfulness is also needed.

It turns out there is a Greek word for the "watchfulness" recommended by Jesus in the Gospels, and which played a larger role in the Eastern Church.

Nepsis
It signifies an attitude of attentiveness, whereby one keeps watch over one's inward thoughts and fantasies, maintaining guard over the heart and intellect.

I don't know what everyone else's experience is, but whenever I heard the word "watchfulness" in the west, it was interpreted to mean "keep watch for the apocalypse/second coming." So, the interpretation of the word in the west is completely incorrect.

The Greek meaning shows the clear parallel to the 7th fold of the 8th fold path.

Samma-sati
And what is right mindfulness? There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... the mind in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. This is called right mindfulness...

Now, who would have suspected this was in the Christian religion? It does not help Jesus taught the apostles in secret, and the record of his teachings we have is mostly parables.

"He spoke to [the public] at length in parables. [...] The apostles approached him and said, 'Why do you speak to them in parables?' He said to them in reply, 'Because knowledge of the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven has been granted to you, but to them it has not been granted.'"

[Jhanananda]

Thank-you, Alexander, for posting an interesting nuance to the Gospels in Greek, that the English versions may not have.  Yes, I take that sense of watchfulness to be mindfulness (sati).