And so we can now back to the question which started it all. As Biggie pointed out, Joe talks about Christ realizing that he had to exist within the confines of his gross matter, while contemplating the subtle matter.Some people solve that problem by becoming fundamentalists either of science or religion. I assume, for most readers this is no option. How can we reconcile those two values: The ideal of esteeming every single human being on one hand, and the notion of being at the mercy of a merciless god (or mysterious universe) on the other hand? Many people seek salvation in Eastern traditions. However, it’s important to find our own way, without giving up our own tradition and identity, because …
"[…] every single individual is imperfect. And […] it is precisely in his imperfections that he is charming, that he is wonderful, that he is of value. All of the Buddhas on the other hand, are alike. When you see in a temple in India, and in particularly the Jain temples where the Illuminated Ones are shown in a row, they are all exactly identical. They are perfect human beings, they are absolutely cold—they aren’t human at all."
Quoted from: Lecture I.1.3 - Symbolism and the Individual
Is it an option to become “imperfect Buddhas”?
Many Christians have told me that Christ was/is perfect. In fact, a Catholic friend of mine often says:
"Well....nobody is perfect...and the one guy who was got hung on a cross for it"
Is the idea of perfection like altruism? A concept which does not exist in reality?