ARJ

ARJ you are wrong! --unless you are 2000 yrs old, your postulations must be based on data collated from among the historic record.

 

Where are your citations?

 

Yajnas where wide spread, but under a different name and done by different cultures in the back-woods, back-hills & jungle depths and in the mid-east and eastern europe through-out the world at the time of buddha. The function of temples at that time was to solicit favors from pagan gods by way of animal offerings.

 

This is so common-place knowledge to us that I shudder at why you would post your postulations --(without offering literary resources that you MUST cite if you expect to be taken seriously by any real academian).

Common sense is a form of evidence that is based on conventional wisdom.

When people say “Actually, animal killing is there in the yägnic performance” this shows how much they know about Vedas, ignorant nerds like them would be astonished to know that there are not less than half a dozen verses in Vedas that strictly prohibits killing of not only cows but any living being and non-vegetarianism (someone well versed in Vedas should concur with me on this). From the oldest Vedas to later additions vegetarianism & non killing of animals is strictly endorsed. So the thought that vegetarianism or nonkilling is an outside influence or animals were sacrificed for yajnas can be safely ruled out.

Dear Bhaktajan, now if you want to know what exactly those verses say, you’ll have to do some hard work, you do need some ‘conventional wisdom’, find a good teacher & learn Vedas from him/her. Perhaps only then whatever I’m saying would make sense to you. Even you should research the precise meaning of the word ‘Yajna’

If I were to believe in every thing Godseed has said than majority of the Brahmans became anti Vedic, how could this be possible ? How can you expect people who lived by the Vedas to turn against them ? these are nothing but lies spread by Buddhist missionaries & western historians & by people with malicious intentions. A group of such people also believes that what is now Tirupati balaji temple was once a Buddhist shrine… lol

Maa Himsayat Sarva-Bhutaani - Rig Veda

There's no female Dalai Lama for a simple reason: he's considered the reincarnation of a male spirit (the Bodhisattva Avalokita).

Yes in every male dominated society everything has to be by the males, of the males & for the males. I didn’t know in Buddhism spirits have GENDER, but isn’t it a violation of the laws of ‘ANATTA'.

Yes!

Buddhaji came to start a great plan for devotional service. He Himself was Krishna. Krishna understands the potency of devotional service so He as Lord Buddha came to pave the way. Due to His teachings of ahimsa, the so-called brahmanas of Kali yuga, gave up their bad habits and became true brahmanas. It was essential to create some first class brahmanas so that pure devotion could be spread through the whole world.

wonder why people don't say the same for poor Vardhaman Mahavir.

anyway a good bunch of first class meat eating, gender-biased brahmans have been created in Tibet

Hey Indulekha Ji!

I think that the reason why H.H. Dalai Lama eats meat is b/c it's hard to come by vegetables in the mountains where he lives...

If this is the reason than don’t you think that P.P.H.H.Dalai Lama or his ancestors should have relocated themselves, to keep them from deviating from the path of Dharma ? As far as ‘public figures’ are concerned I don’t think someone like Swami Ramdev would start eating meat just cause there is dearth of vegetarian food. Also by relocating themselves, the ancestors of P.P.H.H.Dalia Lama would have saved the Chinese government a lot of trouble.

The Buddhists eat meat for the same reason Catholics & Muslims do. This is the reason why all these religions & the present day Hinduism needs something like the 'Varna Vyavastha' of the Vedic era.

The history is evident that proponents of Buddhism like Emperor Ashoka quashed Hinduism & Jainism with his might (do some research regarding this if your not aware of it)

As for the bhikshunies, was there a female Dalai Lama ? I don’t know if there was any. Or mebbe they don’t have a female Dalai Lama for the same reasons there is no black U.S. president.

But the corrupt and socalled brahmnas, out of their whim and for animal eating, started vehemently carrying out fake yagnas. Lord Buddha, appeared to stop these swindling brahmanas, and said that Ahimsä Paramo dharmah, i.e. the biggest duty of the mankind is to be nonviolent...

Your saying as if killing of animals for Yagna was a widespread practise & so there was a need for Buddha to teach them that Ahimsa is Paramo Dharma, don’t talk rubbish. Get your facts corrected before blindly bashing anyone.

anyway we are not discussing Jainism here & I personally don’t require any lecture from you on what true Jainism is.

There are many Hindus who don’t believe in Shri Krishna either. If one doesn’t believe in supremacy of Narayan, it doesn’t make him/her anti Vedic. There is need for ignorant fools like you to rise above such stereotyping. Narayan is just a name given to the truth. There are many ways in which this truth is outlined in the form of Shiva or Ganesha or Durga. By this our sages made an attempt to make it easier for spiritually uneducated people like us to REALISE what the truth is. Do you think it is easy to realise this truth, even Buddha failed at this. This is the reason why questions keep popping up in our head & there are forums like this in place.

Just coz we fail to realise anything doesn’t make it void.

God can never be explained, the truth can only be experienced - Hinduism

...why is he/she the founder

found this one the funniest ...lol :P

Having read through this discussion, I am interested in the statement that 'anatta' appears in one of the Upanishads. I would welcome a reference for that if it is possible. I think anatta is the Pali version of the Sanskrit anatma, so if it appears in that form it must be from one of the later secondary Upanishads of the Atharva Veda.

This sentence outlines anatta 'sa esa neti nety atma' - Brihadaranyaka Upanishad

as for what did buddhism present to india that was different from hinduism? well for one thing it abolished notions of caste and it gave women the opportunity to participate equally as ordained bhikshunis. (although it can be argued that neither issued forth from hinduism itself but were general cultural practices) in terms of philosophy i think it gets a bit more difficult to decipher because there seem to be so much over lapping of traditions. even when buddha teaches anatta...

Babuji

I know of an Upanishad that talks about 'Anatta', so once again it is not Buddha's invention, thank you.

& even before, during & after Buddha many Vedantas didn't find any need for varnas & yes since caste system is a cultural practise, all religions now have a caste (in India)

You think that the blacks after converting to buddhism or any religion won't be discriminated by the caucasians ?

Hey by the way, where do all the bhikshunies hide themselves ? I haven't seen many.

In Jayadeva's goswami's Dasavatara sastra it is stated that Buddha is an avatara of Lord Vishnu.

Actually he is a saktyavesa avatara and came to preach ahimsa so that the people would stop misinterpreting the vedas.

If the deal was to preach 'Ahimsa' than I think your ignorant of a man who was known as 'Vardhman Mahavir'. This guy redefined the word 'Ahimsa' & he could've been the frontrunner for the title of 'Avatar of Vishnu'. He was also born before Buddha (ofcourse not expecting the bigots to agree with me)

What's more, Mahavir also left his family & kingdom just like Buddha did, but only BEFORE Buddha.

Ok, with so many 'befores', i'm not saying Buddha imitated Mahavir, mebbe he was just inspired by Mahavir.

The explanations cited for the decline of Buddhism in India are either oppression by Hindu rulers or 'revival movements such as Advaita' so if Hindus were oppressive why couldn’t they defend themselves against the Arabian Invaders & why there were no “revival movements” in SE Asia & elsewhere ? but the sweethearts even have a theory that the Hindu Kingdoms were busy warring with each other, but no way they would consider Hindus as Ahimsak as only Buddhists reserve the right to practise Ahimsa & that Buddhism declined for just one reason, cause it failed to appeal the masses.

As for neo-buddhists, I can assure you that politicians & their followers in India didn’t convert to Buddhism for its eightfold path. I doubt if majority of them even know or have the time to learn what the heck is Buddhism all about. You have absolutely no idea how the political system works in India.

But why am I arguing wit an ignorant ‘Atman’ like you, when I very well know life is short. Next time don’t waste my time.

P.S. it seems no one has ever told you that Wikipedia is not a reliable source.

India

Further information: History of Buddhism in India

After the end of the Kushans, Buddhism flourished in India during the dynasty of the Guptas (4th-6th century). Mahayana centers of learning were established, especially at Nalanda in north-eastern India, which was to become the largest and most influential Buddhist university for many centuries, with famous teachers such as Nagarjuna. The Gupta style of Buddhist art became very influential from South-East Asia to China as the faith was spreading there.

 

Buddha and Bodhisattvas, 11th century, Pala Empire.

 

Indian Buddhism had weakened in the 6th century following the White Hun invasions and Mihirkulas persecution.

Xuanzang reports in his travels across India during the 7th century of Buddhism being popular in Andhra, Dhanyakataka, and Dravida which today roughly correspond to the modern day Indian states of Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu.[2] While reporting many deserted stupas in the area around modern day Nepal and the persecution of buddhists by Ssanka in the Kingdom of Gouda. (In modern day West Bengal.) Xuanzang compliments the patronage of Harshavardana during the same period. After Harshavardanas kingdom, the rise of many small kingdoms that lead to the rise of the Rajputs across the gangetic plains and marked the end of Buddhist ruling clans along with a sharp decline in royal patronage until a revival under the Pala Empire in the Bengal region. Here Mahayana Buddhism flourished and spread to Bhutan and Sikkim between the 8th and the 12th century before the Palas collapsed under the assault of the Hindu Sena dynasty. The Palas created many temples and a distinctive school of Buddhist art. Xuanzang noted in his travels that in various regions Buddhism was giving way to Jainism and Hinduism.[3] By the 10th century Buddhism had experienced a sharp decline beyond the Pala realms in Bengal under a resurgent Hinduism and the incorporation in Vaishnavite Hinduism of Buddha as the 9th incarnation of Vishnu.[4]

Sweet

Dear Bhaktajan, I've read many such fanciful explanations before, I've spent hours reading such stupid cooked up 'Adjusted' theories. Theories that are adjusted to specific needs. If we concur with such theories than yes Aryan is really a 'Race' & they (Aryans) were nomadic conquering invaders from Persia or that as claimed by a gentleman from Japan that it were Buddhists who introduced Yoga to the Hindus & that the Buddhists taught the Hindus how to carve stones & artistic temples & meditation techniques & what not HAHAHAHOHOHEEHEEE……… sorry, I couldn’t resist, see such theories are not reliable at all, you should take them with a pinch of salt. Your assertions made me remind of a guy named Dr. Zakir Naik.

& why Vedas can’t be any older than 3000-1500 BC as per Max Muller?? of course I’m aware of how the dates are fixed, but since the DATE the world was created is already mentioned in the Bible so how could Vedas be any older, of course theories presented by European historians & Eastern explorers have political & missionary interests, always bear this in mind. A lake at what is now Kashmir has been mentioned in the Rig Veda, Scientists now believe that there was indeed a lake in that region but during the ice age (even the internet has some info on this) so wouldn’t it simply make Vedas older than they are believed to be ? I’ve also read a theory that says stone age Shamans in Africa practised something like yoga & yoga originated out of such practises, HAHAHAHAHAHAHA……….

You can’t expect anyone to be fools enough to believe such crappy fabricated stories. Does such stories & the theory cited by you prove anything, to me they don’t make any sense at all. I have travelled India from E to W & N to S, I’ve seen many ruins, met many people, real scholars on Vedas & Hinduism, I can safely say that Jainism had more influence on the society, than Buddhism ever had. It simply doesn’t make any sense since there is NOTHING in Buddhism that can’t be traced back to Vedas, why would anyone deem it as a different philosophy.

Buddhism was the state official religion from circa 500BC to 1,000AD in India.

your great grand papa worked in the census department back then or buddha himself whispered this in your ears ?

hmmmm,,,,,,,must be some strong doobage

Niranjano Nirakara

Eko Devo Maheswara

Mrityu Mukhat Gatam Praanam

Bala Dakrishrakshaté

The university of Nalanda, apart from being the largest and oldest university of ancient time, was also first residential international university of the world. Around 2,000 teachers and 10,000 students, from all over the Buddhist world, stayed at this university. Emperor Ashoka and Harshavardhana got a number of temples, monasteries and viharas built here. Some time back, in 1951, an International Center for Buddhist Studies was set up at this place.

You mean Buddhism is so vast that it was studied in universities even than for your information the university of Nalanda was not meant only for Buddhists & people interested in Buddhism.

The universities of Taxila & Nalanda carried out Vedic studies which deals in subjects like health, mathematics, sex, astronomy, psychology & even law apart from spirituality. Buddhism was just another topic

I never said there wasn't a single Buddhist in that era, but that doesn't mean it was as poplular. Many new cults have popped up since Buddha & this will continue in the future, today there are atleast half a dozen spiritual gurus like Buddha in India, some have already proclamied themselves as 'Avatars' & they all have their own 6, 7, 8 fold path. You have no idea on how many people are following their cults. Even film actors have their own temples, SO WHAT DOES THAT PROVE ?

But what history has shown us that all these cults will eventually die out just like Buddhism (atleast in India).

Yeah? And what about it?

What else is new?

You just noticed Waldo?

And what do you guess it says in the Vedanta sutra, any guesses you'd like to share?

 

After all your waking hours studying Vedanta you may now make sweeping declarations about ... hm? ...

 

We like our Buddhists. "Buddhist", "Buddhist-Buddhist", "Buddhist-Buddhist-Buddhist"--it's even fun to say. Even the home boys are fond of Buddhists, Buddhas, Buddhis etc.

 

The Dali lama eats meat? Buddha ate meat?

Just because you saw your father eat your grandmother's and your mum's meat, doesn't mean that you can state that everyone is eating meat?

Dear Bhaktjan, just coz your mother didn't fellate you today, it doesn't mean you can vent out your frustration just anywhere

Now the very fact that the Greeks & Romans couldn't think up of the number 'zero' is because the concept of 'nothing is something' was somewhat contradictory to their philosophy. Hindus were the 1st to use the number 'zero' before Buddha which indicates that the concept of 'Shunyata' is integral to Hindu philosophy & not something which was introduced by Buddha.

As for Ahimsa I doubt if Buddha practised Ahimsa or his followers do. Although eastern martial arts originated in India (probably out of Hatha yoga) but it didn't get popular because there wasn't any need for martial arts for Ahimsak Hindus, but lethal forms of martial arts were endorsed & perfected in all the Buddhist nations like China, Korea, Japan etc. As a matter of fact the Samurai people from Japan who were also Buddhists were ardent martial art practitioners & believed in bloodshed as not only a means of achieving their aims but as something that was good in itself, well so much so for Ahimsa.

This is the very reason why buddhism didn't gain in popularity in India as it offered nothing new to the masses.

well jainism buddhism and sikhism are offshoots of hinduim...

 

just as christianity and islam are offshoots of judaism...

 

and when a offshoot believes it is different from the parent there is nothing the parent can do but agree.

the animosity betwen buddhism and hinduism is a remenant of the politics which happened around the period of Adi Shankaracharya.

but being a hindu i do believe that busddhism has cerainly scored over its parent religion by giving up a lot of deadwood (like the caste system) which bogged hinduism down...

yes & may be caste system was wrongly propagated to lure followers, mainly from the shudra community, who knows,,,,,,,, well I'm not saying Buddha can be compared with the present day politicians who evoke casteist passions to garner votes, just a thought

there are similarities between Samkhya & so called Buddhism & Mimamsa & Buddhism, the terminology is different however, even i'm thinking of starting my own cult based on any of the Hindu philosophies

Actually he is a saktyavesa avatara and came to preach ahimsa

Ahimsa was practised & preached much before Buddha.

Then Buddha came and preached sunyavada so that people would stop eating meat and killing animals

Some people believe that Buddha himself was a meat eater, but Dalai Lama definitely is

People are addicted to their labels. I have met a lot of Buddhists who look down on Hindus as being unintelligent. I have also met some Hindus who think Buddhists are stupid. Not only was Buddha a Hindu, but he may even have been an incarnation of Vishnu depending on who you ask.

It is not the question of "Who you ask", it is the question of "What's the truth". Knowledge needs to be built on proofs & not beliefs, yes it can be easily proved that buddha was a hindu, but it can also be proved easily that he wasn't an avatar of Vishnu. Similarly can the buddhists prove that hindus are unintelligent & vice versa ?

anyway thanks for sharing your opinion.

when Vedanta means conclusion to Vedas, the interpretation of Vedas, on these lines I feel the buddhist philosophy is just a form of Vedanta.

Thank you.

So who’s duty it is to make a mass cure ? it’s not Lavanya Swasthya’s job but the Concern of Government of India.You are forgetting that to reach to the masses and cure them you need funds. The Government of India should look into such claims and take it to the masses or at least fund such institutions. What is the government doing to encourage such institutions like Lavanya Swathya or Swami Ramdev’s Divya Yog Trust (who also claims to cure AIDS) ?

Ayurved has the potential to cure the incurable , but how many of us would believe it ? coz the Government of India is not doing enough to promote Ayurved. What more can a private institution with limited funds do? These institutions fund their own R & D. We should be grateful to Lavanya Swasthya or Swami Ramdev for raising hopes.

Generally if allopathy has no cure for any disease it is considered as incurable, which is not true.

if you wanna know more about it visit this site "www dot lavanyaswasthya dot com"

i'm not workin wit lavanya swasthya or being paid by them , i just wanted to share this info with others