Stillness or Communion

I. The Surface Similarity

At the level of practice, both traditions aim at freedom from ego distortion. A mature Buddhist practitioner might exhibit:

• Non-reactivity
• Simplicity
• Compassion
• Calm awareness
• Freedom from attachment

A mature Christian contemplative might exhibit:

• Humility
• Self-surrender
• Love of neighbor
• Deep interior silence
• Trust in God

From the outside, these lives can look strikingly similar. But similarity of interior states does not imply identity of ultimate claims.

II. The Divergence Beneath the Experience

The real difference emerges when asking: What ultimately exists? Classical Buddhism teaches anattā — no permanent self. The “I” is a constructed aggregation of processes. Liberation is the cessation of clinging to that illusion. Christianity teaches the opposite: The self is created, real, and eternally known by God. Salvation does not dissolve identity — it redeems and transforms it. One path loosens identity. The other purifies identity. This is not merely semantic. It is ontological.

III. The Teleological Split

What is the final good? Buddhism aims at liberation from suffering and the cycle of becoming. Christianity aims at eternal communion — love between distinct persons. Buddhism optimizes for freedom from craving. Christianity optimizes for perfected love. Both reduce ego distortion. But their end states are not the same. One moves toward release from identity. The other moves toward fulfillment of identity.

IV. The Civilizational Question

I asked myself a stress-test question: If everyone in the world became fully realized under each system, what kind of world would emerge? A fully Buddhist world would likely be:

• Calm
• Non-competitive
• Detached from excess ambition
• Stable
• Less driven by consumption

A fully sanctified Christian world would likely be:

• Service-oriented
• Institution-building
• Justice-seeking
• Creative
• Relationally engaged

Buddhism leans toward renunciation. Christianity leans toward redemption of creation. One exits the wheel. The other renews the world.

V. The Question of Identity

The deepest tension for me became this: Is personal identity ultimately real — or ultimately constructed? If identity is reducible to process, then dissolution makes sense. If identity is metaphysically grounded — then resurrection becomes coherent. The Christian claim is radical: You are not merely a pattern. You are known. And that knowing sustains you. Buddhism is equally radical: The clinging to a permanent self is the root of suffering. Both are internally coherent. But they cannot both be ultimately true in the same sense.

VI. My Honest Leaning

If I imagine ultimate peace, I do not imagine erasure. I imagine myself — without fear, without ego distortion, fully alive. That intuition does not prove Christianity. But it reveals something. What I seem to desire is not disappearance. It is purification. And that distinction matters.

VII. Where I Land (For Now)

I suspect part of my alignment toward Christianity may be cultural. But I also recognize that Christianity offers something Buddhism does not attempt to offer: A metaphysical grounding for eternal love between distinct persons. If love is fundamental to reality, then distinct personhood must be real. If personhood dissolves, love becomes provisional. That is the fork. I am not dismissing Buddhism. It offers profound psychological insight and disciplined clarity. But I am beginning to see that its ultimate telos differs from the Christian claim of resurrection and communion. Stillness is beautiful. But communion may be deeper. And perhaps what I am seeking is not vast impersonal quiet — but fearless, ego-free aliveness.