A while ago I posted a refutation of the claimed parallels between Jesus and Buddha. Since then I was given a comment that there were other parallels between the two other than the ones which were given by Acharya S. Acharya S is usually pretty easy to refute because of the lunacy of her claims. But I have come across another parallel that seems to have some real relevance and I would like to thank DougRogers for confirming it’s existence. Even though I posted a refutation of so-called parallels between Jesus and Buddha, I do not pretend to be an expert in Buddhism, so I greatly appreciate it.
The parallel is the story of Simon Peter walking on water to be with Jesus which is told in Matthew 14:22-33. — Likewise, there is a story about a disciple of the Buddha named Sàriputta who was said to have walked on water. The Buddhist texts say,
SOUTH of Savatthi is a great river, on the banks of which lay a hamlet of five hundred houses. Thinking of the salvation of the people, the World-honored One resolved to go to the village and preach the doctrine. Having come to the riverside he sat down beneath a tree, and the villagers seeing the glory of his appearance approached him with reverence; but when he began to preach, they believed him not.
When the world-honored Buddha had left Savatthi Sariputta felt a desire to see the Lord and to hear him preach. Coming to the river where the water was deep and the current strong, he said to himself: “This stream shall not prevent me. I shall go and see the Blessed One, and he stepped upon the water which was as firm under his feet as a slab of granite. When he arrived at a place in the middle of the stream where the waves were high, Sariputta’sheart gave way, and he began to sink. But rousing his faith and renewing his mental effort, he proceeded as before and reached the other bank.
The people of the village were astonished to see Sariputta, and they asked how he could cross the stream where there was neither a bridge nor a ferry. Sariputta replied: “I lived in ignorance until I heard the voice of the Buddha. As I was anxious to hear the doctrine of salvation, I crossed the river and I walked over its troubled waters because I had faith. Faith. nothing else, enabled me to do so, and now I am here in the bliss of the Master’s presence.”
The World-honored One added: “Sariputta, thou hast spoken well. Faith like thine alone can save the world from the yawning gulf of migration and enable men to walk dryshodto the other shore.” And the Blessed One urged to the villagers the necessity of ever advancing in the conquest of sorrow and of casting off all shackles so as to cross the river of worldliness and attain deliverance from death. Hearing the words of the Tathagata, the villagers were filled with joy and believing in the doctrines of the Blessed One embraced the five rules and took refuge in his name.
Anyone who reads the account in Matthew and the Buddhist texts will realize the one similarity between the two here, though there are some notable differences. The most basic difference is that Jesus had to personally save Peter from sinking while Sàriputta’s own faith saved him– Reading between the lines, it appears the Buddha wasn’t even present at the time. Peter would have been proud to be this man who had much more faith, was much more patient and humble than he was. (Source)
The basic question is: With the undeniable parallel in the story, is it a given that Matthew necessarily copied the Buddhist texts? — With what I have learned about “similarities” or similar stories, my answer is “no.” It should really come of no surprise that occasionally we have two different religions with a couple of similar details. That is bound to happen.
An example of this would be the one and only similarity between the Akkadian king Sargon of Akkad and the prophet Moses. — The similarity is that they were both placed in baskets and on rivers. Now, despite the fact that the first evidence we have of Sargon’s “Moses-like” story comes from the 7th century BC (during the reign of Sargon II, 8 centuries after Moses) skeptics have accused Moses of copying Sargon.
– Do I think that the story of Sargon was copied by Moses? Obviously not. Do I think that the Assyrians copied the story of Moses? No, absolutely not! I have no reason to suspect such a thing.
My basic point is: It is very possible for two different and two separated geographic cultures to obtain similar stories without one plagiarizing the other. — It often astounds me why so many people always feel the need to assume that if there are similarities then therefore someone had to have copied. Such logic is a “cause-effect” logical fallacy (i.e., an over-simplification).
Apparently they never take into account that separate peoples have been known to think on the same grounds independently of eachother. For example, Alexander Bell and Elisha Grey both invented the telephone independently of eachother. Also, Charles Darwin and Alfred RusellWallace both independently came to the idea of the evolution of species. These examples prove similar ideas do not indicate plagiarism or imitation.
One thing that should be mentioned is that stories about miracles are only to be expected in the sacred texts of different religions. If two different religions, for example, both have a story about a man who heals the sick supernaturally is that an indication that one copied the other? No, because such things are not surprising. The same cannot be ruled out with this one similar story between Buddhism and Christianity. — Besides, the similarities are only a minimum and also the purposes and points of the stories are so majorly different that it can be legitimetly argued that the “water walking” is at most a coincidence.
Also, when I was introduced to the idea that Simon Peter was an imitation of Sariputta, the person spelled his name as “Sari-Putra” which makes the two names seem all the more similar. — This leads me to question: Can Sariputta be divided into a first name and a surname (or a name followed by a title which is what “Peter” is)? Also, does Peter’s name and Sariputta’s have the same meaning? — Peter means “rock.” — If the answers to these questions is no, then the commentator that intrduced me to this claim in the first place in only playing worthless word games.
Besides, “Peter” is from the Greek “petros.” — Jesus, who likely spoke Aramaic, would have used the term from his own language: “Quepha.” — Considering this fact, it appears that the skeptics bringing up the apparent similar pronunciations from the Greek tranliteration of Peter’s name and the name of the Buddha’s disciple are only resorting word games after all.
The same person who brought up this topic aso claimed that the cross appeared in Buddhism. — If anyone can give a credible reference for this claim like DougRogers did for the “walking on water” story, I would be greatfull. — Again, I would like to thank DougRogers for pointing out that this one story does exist in Buddhism and is not just another bogus link that many skeptics of Christianity almost always resort to.
