By right, the teachings of a sage if embraced by a culture should be integrated into the culture so as to enrich it and not be stand alone, let alone displace the culture of the person and replace it with a new culture. If for example, he is a French, he can never be a Jew even if he can speak the Jewish tongue.
Any new teachings introduced to a community must co-exist and complement the teachings of other sages in that race or culture of that community. Thus the teachings of Buddha complemented and enriched that of Taoism and that of Confucius so much so that it is of little or no value to say in old China that one is a Buddhist, Taoist or Confucian.
In fact Hindu gods and sages became embraced into Chinese culture so much so that they became distinct gods and deities in old China with new legends and myths. Jesus too is to be found in the pantheon of gods and saints in Chinese culture though this integration was found distasteful and frowned at by others. Chinese remain Chinese though they accept teachings of sages from other races and speak their tongues.
On a more realistic note, the term religion is more a Western concept that may lead to the believer of Christ who is a Jew be viewed as different from that of another who is not a Jew.
Likewise, it may lead to the believer of Buddha who is an Indian (Hindu) as different from the believer (Buddhist) who is not an Indian. Of course, the cultural context of belief in Buddha would differ in some significance in the two categories of believers.
It may be best to drop the term religion so as not to cause divides but as it is already an accepted convention, the word will continue to be used out of convenience.
It is better to think in terms of social-religious culture of a community instead so that we know that a person of a certain race or mixed race is of that race or community.
It would come then as understandable if an Indian revers Buddha or Goddess of Mercy as much as they do for Rama or Krishna. This does not make them any less Hindu or Indian or any more Buddhist just because they worship Buddha or Goddess of Mercy.
The teachings and culture of believers of a sage if embraced by another race should be integrated into the culture of that race and not alienate those of that race from their culture and make them behave like they are no longer of that race.
Let us be open minded and not let religion divide men. Cross cultural exchanges do not displace one culture with another but enrich the original culture. Thus in Chinese culture it is the norm to embrace the sages of other races as part of the culture of Chinese. This has been borne out by the march of time.
The teachings of all sages should be respected and this is the view of the good lord Lord Bo Tien (武天菩萨) who emphasizes on the oneness amid the diversity of religions.
Any new teachings introduced to a community must co-exist and complement the teachings of other sages in that race or culture of that community. Thus the teachings of Buddha complemented and enriched that of Taoism and that of Confucius so much so that it is of little or no value to say in old China that one is a Buddhist, Taoist or Confucian.
In fact Hindu gods and sages became embraced into Chinese culture so much so that they became distinct gods and deities in old China with new legends and myths. Jesus too is to be found in the pantheon of gods and saints in Chinese culture though this integration was found distasteful and frowned at by others. Chinese remain Chinese though they accept teachings of sages from other races and speak their tongues.
On a more realistic note, the term religion is more a Western concept that may lead to the believer of Christ who is a Jew be viewed as different from that of another who is not a Jew.
Likewise, it may lead to the believer of Buddha who is an Indian (Hindu) as different from the believer (Buddhist) who is not an Indian. Of course, the cultural context of belief in Buddha would differ in some significance in the two categories of believers.
It may be best to drop the term religion so as not to cause divides but as it is already an accepted convention, the word will continue to be used out of convenience.
It is better to think in terms of social-religious culture of a community instead so that we know that a person of a certain race or mixed race is of that race or community.
It would come then as understandable if an Indian revers Buddha or Goddess of Mercy as much as they do for Rama or Krishna. This does not make them any less Hindu or Indian or any more Buddhist just because they worship Buddha or Goddess of Mercy.
The teachings and culture of believers of a sage if embraced by another race should be integrated into the culture of that race and not alienate those of that race from their culture and make them behave like they are no longer of that race.
Let us be open minded and not let religion divide men. Cross cultural exchanges do not displace one culture with another but enrich the original culture. Thus in Chinese culture it is the norm to embrace the sages of other races as part of the culture of Chinese. This has been borne out by the march of time.
The teachings of all sages should be respected and this is the view of the good lord Lord Bo Tien (武天菩萨) who emphasizes on the oneness amid the diversity of religions.
But let not people be divided in the name of religion. It is alright to learn and believe new aspects but let this new learning add on and enrich the person and his culture - definitely not rob him off his cultural background and richness.
At Bo Tien Temple, Christmas is celebrated even though it is a Buddhist and Taoist orientated Chinese temple. It has become part of the culture of the temple. Christmas has become part of culture of Chinese regardless of professed religion.
Some of the members and devotees at the temple are professed Christians but that has not stopped them from supporting the good works. Many too are not Christians but still rejoice in Christmas and the love of Christ. Christmas has become integral to the culture of the people of the temple and the land. Cheers.
