<p>If you are interested in comparative religion, it is worthwhile to ask American or other Westernized Buddhists, precisely because they are probably converts who were raised with another religion.  It is easier for us to compare Buddhism (rationally) to other faiths.</p>

<p>In Protestant Christianity (of the evangelical variety) there is deep emphasis on "salvation by grace, not works".  You go to heaven because Jesus allows you to go to heaven, in spite of you not deserving it.  "Lest any man should boast."  There are, of course, other takes on soteriology within Christendom, and there are faith-based doctrines as well as works-based doctrines enshrined in Christian scriptures.</p>

<p>What I find appealing about Buddhism is that it is entirely works-based; there is nothing un-earned about progress, transformation, and enlightenment in the Buddha Way.  In Buddhism, there is no shortcut around the law of Karma.  Everybody who deserves to go to hell, will go to hell, and will stay there until they learn the appropriate lessons.</p>

<p>But the doctrine of hell (in Buddhism) is different than the doctrine of hell in Christianity (or Islam for that matter).  In Christian teachings, hell is a place where souls are tortured and tormented after having received a well-deserved prison sentence from a judgmental Higher Power.  In Buddhism, you are not going to be sent to burn in hell; you are "in hell" already.  "Hell" is temporary happiness.  "Hell" is a mental state of anguish, ignorance, hatred, confusion, regret, loneliness.  "Hell" is your future lives, your past lives, and your present life where you believe that happiness comes from sensory pleasure, flattery and praise, the absence of difficulty, accumulation of more for oneself at others' expense -- when that is absolutely not the case.  Happiness cannot come  from any of those things.  This is the meaning of hell.  This is the cause of suffering.</p>

<p>And, whether you believe it or not, you are going to continue to relive the same pointless struggles over and over again until you learn what happiness actually is.</p>

<p>While enlightenment is entirely based upon our own merit, the Way to enlightenment was offered as a free gift, from the Buddha... lest any man should boast.  For the Buddha to teach us the dharma, it was necessary that he be born into this world, full of suffering and death and decay, with a human body that would necessarily get old and die like ours.  He had sufficient merit to be born in a much better world, but he endured the suffering of this life for our benefit.  In that way, the Christian can readily see how the Buddha's birth and death was like a crucifixion, but at the same time he did not "pay the price" for us to actually attain enlightenment.  We must pay that price ourselves.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-04-18T22:03:18.470Z
Pardon me, I think I mistakenly believed that the original question came from the "I have to interview a Buddhist for my college class" guy.  I don't know if he's still around.

Not sure that my answer is actually appropriate for this question....
hell demon
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-04-19T08:36:28.840Z
I meant "... of different *Buddhist* traditions" -- I wasn't asking for a comparison with Christianity, but thank you.
ChrisW
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-04-18T21:56:54.243Z
2020-04-18T21:56:54.243Z
hell demon
<p>They have differing aims in that one is unaware the other even has aims! LOL</p>

<p>Here’s how i “became a buddhist”
My guru saw me suffering greatly. Threw me a bone, woke me up. Only because it was easy and convenient and we were neighbors. In the process of him doing his charitable dharma we had consensual sex. I am not saying it was not consensual but it is funny how so many powerful, faithful male teachers use generosity as the claim for them to “spread the dharma” and the accidental surprise side effect is that they get laid in the process....I digress.We slept together. Then he ghosted me which is how he taught me the 8 worldly winds which MIND YOU ISNT REALLY NICE/CHIVALROUS but i learned. Eventually i became very angry with him. This anger burned until the flames consumed me and taught me extinction. When i learned extinction i heard his voice in my ear. “Now u see i gave you what you wanted. Now u know how to put out ur own flames. Go now you can be a theravedan”
The idea is that they are the same. But one group uses the collective tools for specific purposes that may or not be secretive or may need to be kept hidden for protection, safety, fear of harm or persecution etc.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-15T17:09:15.607Z
2020-02-15T17:25:37.957Z
2020-02-15T17:25:37.957Z
4N4G4M1N
<p>From <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/36765/254">this answer</a> ...</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>I would suggest dropping this line of inquiry or at least treading very carefully as you seem quite confused about what is being taught by the differing traditions and their soteriological aims.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>... which I read as saying that differing traditions have differing soterioloical aims.</p>

<p>All I've seen of that before was:</p>

<ul>
<li>The list in item 2 of <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/7275/254">this answer</a> (which seemed to me a good answer, though what do I know?).</li>
<li>Also Wikipedia's <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soteriology#Buddhism" rel="noreferrer">Soteriology (Buddhism)</a> which is fair enough but not detailed.</li>
<li>And occasionally a post about a specific tradition (for example <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/192/254">Shin</a>).</li>
</ul>

<p>What are the aims (plural)? And can you summarise what the the doctrine or practice or discipline is, towards achieving those aims?</p>

<p>If it helps you answer, please assume I'm more familiar with the Pali suttas than other traditions -- so I might be principally asking about other traditions, perhaps you needn't quote the suttas.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-01-20T17:35:57.330Z
I suspect it is so, and I quoted out of context to make the question. And I don't want to say that they are different i.e. that they don't have something in common, but even so it might help as a way to better understand each (or all). I find it difficult to even ask introductory questions about other traditions -- [here](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/13703/254) was one earlier attempt.
ChrisW
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-01-22T16:41:04.800Z
@PeterJ It might be too broad (asking about several traditions) and shallow (asking for a summary or overview).
ChrisW
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-01-24T11:45:10.273Z
@PeterJ We decided (early, before I was asked to moderate, Andrei decided and I accepted) that this specific question -- [Which type of Buddhism is for me?](https://buddhism.meta.stackexchange.com/q/393/254) -- wasn't *askable* and for the  reasons Andrei gave at the time. But this one appears to be *permissible* even if not easily *answerable* (or is it, not worth answering). A good answer to this question (about a tradition) could be based on personal experience (within that tradition) and/or one or more references -- I think this question is theoretically answerable and a moderator could...
ChrisW
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-01-24T11:47:57.100Z
... discern off-topic answer (e.g. an answer which does little but criticise other traditions). I do find it hard to ask introductory questions (perhaps comparable to the introductory questions I asked about the Pali canon), if you might have any suggestions?
ChrisW
<comparative-religion>
What are the soteriological aims of different traditions?
# What are the soteriological aims of different traditions?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2020-01-20)

From [this answer](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/36765/254) ...

> I would suggest dropping this line of inquiry or at least treading very carefully as you seem quite confused about what is being taught by the differing traditions and their soteriological aims.

... which I read as saying that differing traditions have differing soterioloical aims.

All I've seen of that before was:

* The list in item 2 of [this answer](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/7275/254) (which seemed to me a good answer, though what do I know?).
* Also Wikipedia's [Soteriology (Buddhism)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soteriology#Buddhism) which is fair enough but not detailed.
* And occasionally a post about a specific tradition (for example [Shin](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/192/254)).

What are the aims (plural)? And can you summarise what the the doctrine or practice or discipline is, towards achieving those aims?

If it helps you answer, please assume I'm more familiar with the Pali suttas than other traditions -- so I might be principally asking about other traditions, perhaps you needn't quote the suttas.

**Tags:** comparative-religion

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: I suspect it is so, and I quoted out of context to make the question. And I don't want to say that they are different i.e. that they don't have something in common, but even so it might help as a way to better understand each (or all). I find it difficult to even ask introductory questions about other traditions -- [here](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/13703/254) was one earlier attempt.  
> **username_0**: @PeterJ It might be too broad (asking about several traditions) and shallow (asking for a summary or overview).  
> **username_0**: @PeterJ We decided (early, before I was asked to moderate, Andrei decided and I accepted) that this specific question -- [Which type of Buddhism is for me?](https://buddhism.meta.stackexchange.com/q/393/254) -- wasn't *askable* and for the  reasons Andrei gave at the time. But this one appears to be *permissible* even if not easily *answerable* (or is it, not worth answering). A good answer to this question (about a tradition) could be based on personal experience (within that tradition) and/or one or more references -- I think this question is theoretically answerable and a moderator could...  
> **username_0**: ... discern off-topic answer (e.g. an answer which does little but criticise other traditions). I do find it hard to ask introductory questions (perhaps comparable to the introductory questions I asked about the Pali canon), if you might have any suggestions?  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2020-04-18. Score: 2

If you are interested in comparative religion, it is worthwhile to ask American or other Westernized Buddhists, precisely because they are probably converts who were raised with another religion. It is easier for us to compare Buddhism (rationally) to other faiths.

In Protestant Christianity (of the evangelical variety) there is deep emphasis on "salvation by grace, not works". You go to heaven because Jesus allows you to go to heaven, in spite of you not deserving it. "Lest any man should boast." There are, of course, other takes on soteriology within Christendom, and there are faith-based doctrines as well as works-based doctrines enshrined in Christian scriptures.

What I find appealing about Buddhism is that it is entirely works-based; there is nothing un-earned about progress, transformation, and enlightenment in the Buddha Way. In Buddhism, there is no shortcut around the law of Karma. Everybody who deserves to go to hell, will go to hell, and will stay there until they learn the appropriate lessons.

But the doctrine of hell (in Buddhism) is different than the doctrine of hell in Christianity (or Islam for that matter). In Christian teachings, hell is a place where souls are tortured and tormented after having received a well-deserved prison sentence from a judgmental Higher Power. In Buddhism, you are not going to be sent to burn in hell; you are "in hell" already. "Hell" is temporary happiness. "Hell" is a mental state of anguish, ignorance, hatred, confusion, regret, loneliness. "Hell" is your future lives, your past lives, and your present life where you believe that happiness comes from sensory pleasure, flattery and praise, the absence of difficulty, accumulation of more for oneself at others' expense -- when that is absolutely not the case. Happiness cannot come from any of those things. This is the meaning of hell. This is the cause of suffering.

And, whether you believe it or not, you are going to continue to relive the same pointless struggles over and over again until you learn what happiness actually is.

While enlightenment is entirely based upon our own merit, the Way to enlightenment was offered as a free gift, from the Buddha... lest any man should boast. For the Buddha to teach us the dharma, it was necessary that he be born into this world, full of suffering and death and decay, with a human body that would necessarily get old and die like ours. He had sufficient merit to be born in a much better world, but he endured the suffering of this life for our benefit. In that way, the Christian can readily see how the Buddha's birth and death was like a crucifixion, but at the same time he did not "pay the price" for us to actually attain enlightenment. We must pay that price ourselves.

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Pardon me, I think I mistakenly believed that the original question came from the "I have to interview a Buddhist for my college class" guy.  I don't know if he's still around.  Not sure that my answer is actually appropriate for this question....  
> **username_0**: I meant "... of different *Buddhist* traditions" -- I wasn't asking for a comparison with Christianity, but thank you.  

---

### Answer by username_2 on 2020-02-15. Score: 0

They have differing aims in that one is unaware the other even has aims! LOL

Here’s how i “became a buddhist”
My guru saw me suffering greatly. Threw me a bone, woke me up. Only because it was easy and convenient and we were neighbors. In the process of him doing his charitable dharma we had consensual sex. I am not saying it was not consensual but it is funny how so many powerful, faithful male teachers use generosity as the claim for them to “spread the dharma” and the accidental surprise side effect is that they get laid in the process....I digress.We slept together. Then he ghosted me which is how he taught me the 8 worldly winds which MIND YOU ISNT REALLY NICE/CHIVALROUS but i learned. Eventually i became very angry with him. This anger burned until the flames consumed me and taught me extinction. When i learned extinction i heard his voice in my ear. “Now u see i gave you what you wanted. Now u know how to put out ur own flames. Go now you can be a theravedan”
The idea is that they are the same. But one group uses the collective tools for specific purposes that may or not be secretive or may need to be kept hidden for protection, safety, fear of harm or persecution etc.


---

