WHOSE BUDDHA ?

[Guest guest]

WHOSE KRISHNA ? WHOSE BUDDHA ? WHOSE JESUS ?

 

---

-----------

 

WHOSE BUDDHA ?

 

---

-----------

Copyright ? Tridandi Sannyasi Bhakti Ananda Goswami 2001 - All

Rights Reserved

---

-----------

 

What About Southern or Voidest Buddhism, Isn't It The Oldest /

Original Form of Buddhism ?

Recently i was asked if The Buddha taught atheism. I could not

give a simple answer, because there is an erroneous presupposition

in the question. Mahayana Buddhism teaches the existance of infinite

Buddhas, or incarnations of Lokesvara or the Adi Buddha, who preach

the Dharma according to time and circumstance. The Buddha of

Theravadin (T) Buddhism is not the same as the Buddha of Mahayana

(M) Buddhism. The Gautama, Sakyamuni, or Siddhartha Buddha of the

Theravadin (Southern or 'Hinayana') Buddhists has been considered

by them to be an 'awakened' man, the only Buddha, unique in world

history to his time. This Sakya Buddha OF THE THERAVADINS

definitely taught not only atheism, but voidism.. However, the

SAKYAMUNI Buddha of the Mahayana Buddhists was originally considered

to be the latest of infinite salvific incarnations of Vishnu

(Lokesvara). Not only did He teach a transcendental theism, but He

was always considered to be an incarnation of the Adi Purusha,

Bhagavan, HRIH / Amitabha the Dharma Kaya, Adi Purusha, the ADI

BUDDHA Himself. These M Buddhists (Sakyamuni worshipers) were

indistinguishable from Vaishnavas throughout the range of

Vaishnavism, and only became perceived as belonging to a separate

religion (Buddhism) as their traditions spread outside of India.

 

Is There Any Traditional Explanation For The Mahayana versus

Hinayana / Theravadin Differences ?

 

According to Mahayana Tradition, when the Lord descended as

Sakyamuni Buddha, he preached to the humble faithful and to the

proud atheists both. Even in mixed assemblies, the atheists could

not understand His Divinity and theistic revelations due to their

offensive mentality. Those hearers who lacked the BODHI HEART OF

COMPASSION could not hear / receive the revelation of the ADI

BUDDHA'S GRACE MEDIATED THROUGH HIS SECOND PERSON'S INFINITE

BODHISATTVA MANIFESTATIONS AND BUDDHA INCARNATIONS (INCLUDING

SAKYAMUNI). The proud intellectual elitists brought their jnana /

gnosis to the assemblies, and thus they took away with them the

atheistic conception of Sakyamuni and His teachings which they had

brought with them. They could not experiance His divinity, or even

hear His theistic, bhakti / grace teachings about the infinite

Buddhas, the Bodhisattvas and their infinite spirit-realms, the Adi

Buddha (HRIH) and His spiritual Lotus Dvipa PURE LAND (hence PURE

LAND BUDDHISM) . So it is that the Mahayanists explain why their

canon of scripture and oral traditions contain some entirely

different teachings than those of the Theravadins. Unfortunately,

over time, the pure transcendental theism of Mahayana Buddhism

became corrupted with 'esoteric' and then explicit voidism, creeping

into it from the T Tradition. I will explain more on one of the

mechanisms (foreign pilgrims in India) of this corruption later

below. As a form of elitist gnosticism or jnana, the corruption of

M Buddhism with atheism is analogous to the way that

gnostic 'esoteric wisdom' teachings have introduced voidism

and 'extreme apophatic' impersonalist teachings into Judaism and

Christianity in the West.

 

The Theravadins have always claimed that theirs' is the original

form of Buddhism, and this view has been adopted and promulgated

widely in both the East and West, despite vast evidence to the

contrary (more on this below). Sri Lanka has long been considered

the ancient homeland of Theravadin Buddhism, from which it spread

throughout South East Asia. There are vast differences between

Theravadin ('Southern Buddhism') and Mahayana , or 'Northern

Buddhism', which is closely related to Krishna-centric Vaishnavism.

The Theravadins claim that the Mahayana Tradition is a later

corruption of Theravada by Hinduism. Western academia has generally

adopted this view. However, if we study the antecedents of Mahayana

Buddhism in the PTAH CULTUS OF HELIOS IN EGYPT, it is clear that the

PURE LAND BUDDHIST CORE OF MAHAYANA BUDDHISM GOES BACK AT LEAST AS

FAR AS THE DOMINANT TRADITION OF HERU-ASAR-PTAH AT MEMPHIS CIRCA

3000 BC IN EGYPT. The ancient Eastern Hemisphere range of Northern

Buddhism in fact pre-dated Sakyamuni Buddha by centuries to

millinia, and included S.E. Asia, India north and east to Japan,

and west to Europe and Egypt. There is also evidence of its

presence among the Amerindians of the Western Hemisphere (several

other volumes at least.)

 

Having long studied the Mahayana- Vaishnava connections and M.

versus T. differences, on my Asian Independent Study through

Marylhurst College in 1982, i visited ancient Buddhist sites,

present temples and monasteries, lay and ordained practitioners,

scholars, museum and private collections of sacred art and

artifacts, libraries etc. collecting texts and icons, sketching

and photographing them, and discussing them with experts and

murti / icon makers from Japan, to Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan,

Sri Lanka, India and Nepal. As the Mainland USA Delegate to the

academic 1982 World Hindu Conference, sponsored by the Governments

of Tamil Nadu India, and Sri Lanka, i was a guest of the Sri Lankan

Government, and given a tour of the most important ancient Buddhist

and Hindu sites in Sri Lanka. Every one of the oldest TB sites had

either and / or Jaya and Vijaya (Vishnu's heavenly temple gate-

keepers) or a Devali shrine (with the stupa) clearly depicting

Vishnu (Lokesvara ) descending to take His birth as Sakyamuni

Buddha. The ancient and contemporary T Buddhist places of worship

were pervaded with the rich iconography and symbolism of

Vaishnavism, in spite of the fact that T Buddhism is militantly

voidest and iconoclastic. When i asked the TB masters and monks why

their holy places were full of such 'idols' and symbols, and why the

masses were worshiping the mere 'awakened man' Sakyamuni with

traditional Vaishnava-style pujas etc., they all disdainfully

responded that the sentimentality of Hinduism had corrupted

everything, and that it was very difficult for the common masses to

understand the sublime teaching / truth of anatta / no self. Only

the elite Arhants and their disciples could realize their non-being,

and thus escape the cycle of samsara. As a aside here i would like

to mention that when i asked about Krishna and Balarama, these same

T Buddhists responded with a similar teaching to the one i

encountered among some Jains in India. They considered Krishna

(or Vasudeva) and Baladeva to be demons. The only elaboration on

this that i could elicit, was that They caused a great war (the

Battle of Kuruksetra), and (as with some Jains) They, or Krishna

were in a hell for their sins in this conflict.

 

In spite of Sri Lanka's status as a kind of captital of Buddhist

atheism / voidism, i only saw ancient evidence there of MAHAYANA

Buddhism. Moreover, M B was still pervading the popular worship of

the so-called 'Theravadin' masses. For instance, on Wesak, the

thrice holy day of Sakyamuni's birth, enlightenment and 'nirvana',

in the public places and temples i visited, everyone was chanting

Mahayana Buddha's-births stories, which included references to his

previous salvific appearances. His enlightenment and 'death'

stories were also from the Northern canon / tradition, and full of

so-called 'mythical' and transcendent elements. I could not find a

single 'Theravadin' temple where lay buddhists were NOT worshiping

Sakyamuni according to Mahayana Traditions. The TB priests

disdainfully tolerated it and dutifully collected the 'Hinduized'

faithfuls' offerings. After my studies in Sri Lanka, the purported

ancient center and regional diffusion point for TB, i am convinced

that Southern, or 'atheistic / voidest Buddhism' in the S. Eastern

range is and was predominantly POPULARLY Mahayana, but treated as a

low-class corruption by the elitist religious, who were

the 'brahmin' class, patronised and made powerful by various

dynasties. I conclude that the voidests have always been in denial

regarding their true historical position in relationship to Mahayana

Tradition.

 

In S.E. Asia, theistic Buddhist dynasties / rulers (Jayavaram etc.)

were popular with the masses, and presided over the great 'Buddhist'

works that have survived to today. Thus it is clear that the '

Buddhism' of Angkor Wat in Cambodia was Vishnu worship, and

similar 'Buddhist' Vishnu temples can be found throughout S. East

Asia, Austranesia and the Pacific Islands. It is this popular

devotional (Bhakti) Buddhism which we find spread over enormous

territories throughout the ancient world. Thus we can compare HERU-

ASAR- PTAH iconography and symbolism from Egypt to Buddhist

iconography and symbolism throughout the East, finding truely

amazing consistancies and parallels. A wide range of other evidence

connects the Eastern and Mediterranean forms of 'Buddhism'. For

example, Memphite rock-cut temple and Necropolis techniques are

found in the great Buddhist Ajanta Caves, and textual scholars have

long noted the similarities between the Egyptian and Tibetan so-

called 'Book Of The Dead'.

 

Just as the Elite Mayavadi Brahmins of India have used their

influence to distort the world perception of India's religions, in

the same way the powerful Theravadins have distorted the world view

of Buddhism. The vast majority of so-called 'Hindus' are

Vaishnavas. The next largest numerical groups are the Shaivites, and

then the Devi worshipers. These are all bhakti, or devotional

theistic traditions. The Atheistic and iconoclastic Mayavadi

Brahmins have never been more than a tiny fraction of the

population.,but because of their elite / privileged / powerful

position, they have defined 'Hinduism' to the non-'Hindu' world.

Thus practically any western textbook entry on 'Hinduism' will

describe a popular exoteric 'polytheism' of thousands of gods, with

prominent ones like Vishnu, Shiva, etc., and a 'higher'

or 'esoteric' tradition of pantheism or monism, which ultimately

denies the transcendant reality of the 'gods' in favour of an

impersonal absolute...the energy field or ground of impersonal

existance called Brahman. The parallel in Buddhism is that the

Mahayana 'Great Vehicle / Way' has always been the dominant

tradition, with countless believers throughout the East. It was

once the main religion of China, Korea and Japan. The Hinayana,

or 'Small Vehicle / Way ' was again mainly an elitest tradition of

the few, and admittedly originally mostly confined to S.E. Asia.

Still the Theravadins / Hinayanas have managed to define 'Buddhism'

for the world.

 

The most outrageous example of this obscuration of the reality and

importance of Mahayana, and especially PURE LAND Buddhism that i

have personally encountered, was when i was working on my BA

degree. At the end of an entire course on the history and thought

of Buddhism, in which the Mahayana Tradition had never been

mentioned a single time, and Tibetan Buddhism was re-interpreted in

purely Theravadin terms, i asked the instructor / professor before

the entire class about this indefensible ommision and distortion.

Her response was predictible, that it was her class and she had the

right to present what she thought was "significant"

and "relevant"about Buddhism to her students ! I said that the

class should have been identified as a Theravadin Buddhist class,

and she should have at least acknowledged the existance of MB at the

outset. I noted that as recently as the pre-communist era in China,

that MAHAYANA BUDDHISM was the dominant Religion there. The

Chinese atheists targeted Chinese MB as their # ONE religious

object for destruction. Seeing MB for the theistic devotional

tradition that it was, the militant atheists ruthlessly sought to

root it out of the hearts, minds and lives of the Chinese people.

As in Tibet, the Communists' wholesale slaughter of priests, monks

and nuns, and destruction of their temples and monasteries, was

followed by a cruel 're-education' campaign to 'break the masses of

their superstitions'. Then some of the remnant of Buddhism left in

China was appropriated by the Communists to teach Theravadin

Voidism, which is in every way compatible with Communist atheism. Of

course, this is what they have attempted to do to Tibetan Buddhism,

by trying to appoint or control its High Lamas.

 

The Communists have revised history to fit their world-view and

serve their political agenda, but here in America, it was shocking

to see how the history of Buddhism at my college was being re-

written to edit-out the reality of the dominant MB Tradition ! I

later found out that the course instructor and her husband were

Theravadin 'Masters' who regularly taught their form of atheistic

Buddhism at their 'yoga studio' in the area. After receiving

all 'A's from her throughout the course, she gave me a final grade

of 'B' for daring to raise the issue of Mahayana Buddhism in her

Buddhism Class ! I had waited to the very end to hear one single

word of acknowlegement that the majority MB tradition had ever

existed, and my grade was lowered for daring to bring it up ! This

was the only 'B' i received in my whole college career ! I was an

expert on Buddhism taking the course because i needed the credits.

The rest of the students could not detect her bias. It was apalling

to see what she was getting away with in the name of objective

education. I watched her indoctrinate that class in Theravadin

teachings, and totally ignore the greater historical reality

of 'Northern Buddhism'. As tragic as this is, it is typical of the

state of knowledge regarding 'Hinduism' and 'Buddhism' in western

academia today. Hinduism courses are being taught that do not even

recognize Vaishnavism as the dominant Tradition, or even as a

separate Tradition from Mayavadi Brahminism or Shaivism ! Krishna

in the GITA is most often presented as a teacher of atheistic

Advaita Vedanta ! Thus we must always consider the sourse, and ask

WHOSE KRISHNA ? WHOSE BUDDHA ?

 

 

Many Have Said That Mahayana Buddhism Is Related To Hinduism, Why Do

You Claim It Is Specifically Krishna-Centric Vaishnavism That It Is

Most Closely Connected To ?

 

I have made an interdisciplinary study of Mahayana Buddhism,

specifically focusing on its core, which is the Pure Land

Tradition. In this study, i have sought the oldest sources in each

region, comparing texts and inscriptions with icons and symbols,

related architecture, rites and prayers etc. While the scriptures

of TB are in Pali, the original forms of the MB scriptures,

Litanies of HRIH-Lokesvara and Tara / Kuan Yin, rituals and prayers

are in Sanskrit. Because of my Vaishnava studies, i have been able

to recognize the Vaishnava Names of God and Shakti, and specific

Vaishnava related terms throughout the MB Sanskrit sources. Despite

the corruption of MB theism with TB esoteric atheism / voidism, it

is still very easy to recognize the Vaishnava basis of M Buddhism.

Any Krishna-centric Vaishnava with a rudimentary familiarty with

Sanskrit would recognize connections to their own tradition in the

Sanskrit Pure Land sources like the SADDHARMA PUNDARIKA or the

SUKHAVATI VYUHA. Throughout MB Sanskrit has been retained in much

prayer an ritual. For instance, for Tibetan Ritual, the original

Sanskrit forms have been preserved, and these retain their Vaishnava

content, including some names of Vishnu, like Bhagavan. THE CULT OF

TARA by Stephen Beyer is the authorised English presentation of Tara-

Lokesvara's Tibetan Ritual, which gives the full Sanskrit in English

transliteration. Sanskrit narratives from the Tibetan Book of the

Dead, like the rites and thangkas etc. of Nepalese and Tibetan

Buddhism, all contain Vaishnava Deity Names and Forms. Although

there are differences in emphasis between the various Northern MB

schools in ancient India, Afganistan, Tibet, China, Korea and Japan,

there is also a fundamental consistancy in the core of the MB Pure

Land teachings, iconography and rites etc. For over 100 years,

western scholars have commented on apparent connections between MB

and Vaishnavism, but Vaishnavas have not been studying the

historical and theological core / heart the the Pure Land Tradition

in relationship to Krishna-centric Vaishnavism. At present, the

general 'Hindu' perception of 'Buddhism' is that it is all voidest.

I will have to address this in another paper. This perception has

biased especially Vaishnava scholars against studying Buddhism.

The western scholars have lacked the necessary familiarty with

Krishna-centric Vaishvaism to recognize the detailed MB

corrospondances on every level. Their observation that Sakyamuni

in the Saddharma Pundarika is probably Vishnu is superficial and not

pursued to its historical or theological conclusion. This is why it

is essential for some Krishna Vaishnava scholars to take up the

study of Pure Land Buddhism and explore these obvious connections to

their lmits. The following are some of these connections. Since we

are on the topic of Tibetan Buddhism , i will begin with MB in Nepal

and Tibet.

 

OM MANI PADME HUM

Who Is The Jewel / Mani in the Lotus / Padme ?

 

Although Buddhism is considered to have arrived rather late in

Tibet, it certainly existed at an early time in Nepal and Afganistan

etc. Tibetan Buddhism is identical to Nepalese Buddhism. Tibetan

Buddhists fleeing the Chinese easily integrated into the MB worship

communities of Nepal. Despite 'mother tongue' language differences,

the Tibetan and Newarese etc. priests shared the same doctrines,

icons, symbols, rites, and Sanskrit as an ancient liturgical

language. In fact, Tibetan and Nepalese Buddhism are so similar to,

and compatible with Vaishnavism, Shaivism and Shaktism in Nepal,

that i frequently saw the same devotees worshiping at Vishnu, Shiva,

Devi and Buddhist temples and/or shrines, sometimes all in the same

day. The devotees clearly grasped that these were versions of the

same tradition, but the Buddhist priests i interviewed invariably

insisted that Vishnu was NOT lokesvara, Mahadeva was NOT Shiva and

Tara was NOT Tara the consort of Vishnu ! When i went to the

hereditary guild murti (icon) makers and asked for specific forms of

Vishnu, they unhesitatingly handed me the corrosponding forms of the

Buddhist Lokesvara ! Then i would say (in deference to the

exclusivistic sectarian insistance of the Buddhist priests) "No. I

don't want Buddha-Lokesvara, I want VISHNU" At this they would get

perturbed with me and explain that 'everyone knows there is no

difference...we only make one form of these murtis, and they are

used by both the Buddhists and the Vaishnavas. We do not have

separate forms of Vishnu to sell to you'. I visited over a hundred

murti makers, dealers, collections and places of worship in Nepal,

viewing approximately 5000 murtis...all with the same result.

The 'canon' of Nepalese Buddhist iconography is fundamentally

Vaishnava. Below i will explain how art historians associate this

phenomenon with Buddhist iconography originating IN THE VRINDAVAN-

MATHURA AREA OF INDIA.

 

So Who IS 'the Jewel in the Lotus' ? OM MANI PADME HUM is one of

the main mantras of Nepalese and Tibetan M Buddhism. It is

Sanskrit. It invokes 'the Jewel in the Lotus'. Mani means 'jewel'

or 'pearl' and Padme means 'lotus'. These words do not refere to a

mundane pearl in a lotus, or to mundane tantric intercourse as has

been promoted by the late 'Tantrists'. The Mani refered to is the

Dharma Kaya or Original Form of the Adi Buddha. He is called

AMITABHA in Sanskrit, and Chen Rei Zei in Tibetan....thus the Mani

Padme Mantra is sometimes refered to as the Mantra for Chen Rei

Zei. Chen Rei Zei's highest unity with His Feminine Shakti is not

depicted in full realistic detail, as with the multi-form of Tara

and Lokesvara. Instead, the 'Original' or Dharma Kaya Form of

Amitabha / Chen Rei Zei is depicted standing or sitting on His

Shakti in Her Form as His Hladini Shakti Lotus-abode. Since

secular scholars have long considered Amitabha to be in the class

of 'supreme solar deities', it amazes me that there have not been

any major studies ( that i know of anyway) comparing Helios of

Rhodes (in the Minoan Era Mediterranean), with the Mani Padme

Tradition of Amitabha. On ancient Rhodes, Helios Kouros (Krishna)

was worshiped with His Beloved Rhoda. They were consideed to be the

Transcendant Origin of all the gods and godesses. One of Rhoda-

Kore's names on Rhodes was Nymphia. Nymphia means both Maid /

Bride / Virgin and LOTUS. Rhoda means Red, Rose, or any Red or Pink

Flower. Another by-name of Rhoda-Nymhpia was ASTERIA meaning Star.

TARA means STAR. Asteria's symbol was the HEXAD, a pictorial pun on

another one of Her numerous by-names HEKATE. The Hexad is the

STAR, ROSE or LOTUS SYMBOL used for Shekinah & Eli-Yahu Bridal

Mysticism in the Judeo-Catholic Traditions, and for the unity of

Shiva & Shakti, Vishnu & Shakti and Lokesvara & Shakti. When the

Star, Lotus or Rose / Red Flower has a Jewel, Bija, Circle, Pearl,

Vajra or other Purusha / Masculine Deity symbol in it, this is an

iconographic short-hand for depicting the unity of Krishna and

Radha, Kouros and Rhoda, Eli-Yahu and Shekinah, Shiva and Shakti,

Vishnu and Padme / Sri Laxmi, Lokesvara and Tara, and Their Dharma

Kaya Forms as 'the Jewel in the Lotus'. From ancient Greco-

Egyptian and related Jewish CIRCLE-LOTUS symbols, all the way to

modern Tibetan and Japanese Pure Land Buddhist CIRCLE-LOTUS and

related icons, the Original / ADI PURUSHA and PRAKRITI have been

worshiped as 'the Jewel in the Lotus'. Two of the most important

Pure Land Mahayana Buddhist texts, the 'LOTUS SUTRA' or SADDHARMA

PUNDARIKA and the SUKHAVATI VYUHA both refere to this tradition.

Sakyamuni Buddha reveals the TRI KAYA and Transcendent Buddha

Realms, Salvation by Grace etc. in His LOTUS SUTRA. In the

SUKHAVATI VYUHA, just as in the Vaishnava Tradition, the supernal

Buddha Realms are Lotus island-lokas / planets in the spiritual sky

where there is no material birth death disease or old age. The

supreme Lotus Abode is that of Amitabha. In fact, He has created

the entire PURE LAND of the Spiritual Sky, in unity with His Supreme

Shakti / Padme. If we doubt Padme-Tara's association with Radha /

Rhoda, then there are numerous ways to confirm it. All red or pink

flowers are sacred to Tara ! These are offered to Her, and to step

on or defile a red or pink flower is an offence to Tara. In ancient

areas where the lotus or rose was not common, other red or pink

flowers subsituted. For instance, the PINK RHODAdendron (ROSE-tree)

was sacred to SITA in SRI LANKA and NEPAL. The red Chrysanthemum

became associated with Mother Kuan Yin (Tara) in the Orient.

 

In the ancient Vaishnava Scripture the BRAHMA SAMHITA, Krishna

is worshiped AS THE SUPREME WISH-FULLFILLING MANI (JEWEL) IN THE

SUPREME LOTUS-ABODE OF GOLOKA VRINDAVAN ! His abode is called

CHINTAMANI DHAM. In studying hundreds of icons of Amitabha / Chen

Rei Zei i saw scores of variations on His Original Form. Like

Krishna, He is a beautiful beardless, long haired youth, two armed,

three-curved, dressed and ornemented exactly like Krishna, often

blue in color, always on / in a lotus, often with a peacock

feather...in all respects as the Dharma Kaya in this Form, He is the

same as Krishna. He is often depicted on His Lotus in a mandala

like the western mandorla or 'almond' shaped radiance. This usually

represents His Feminine Shakti as Shekinah / Energy or Power, and is

related to Hekate (Egyptian SEKHET) as CORONIS (Sanskrit HARINI).

I saw dozens of murtis of CHINTAMANI LOKESVARA on His Lotus Abode

with a KALPA VRIKSHA TREE, Which He holds, revealing Himself to be

the wish-fulfiller of Chintamani Dham.! So Who is the 'Jewel in the

Lotus ' and Who is the Lotus of Nepalese and Tibetan Buddhism ? All

the interdisciplinary evidence related to the above confirms that

the JEWEL-LOTUS IS THE SUPREME FATHER-MOTHER GOD/ESS WORSHIPED AT

THE CORE OF INDO-EUROPEAN, SEMITIC, AFRICAN AND ASIAN DEVOTIONAL

TRADITIONS, AND KNOWN TO KRISHNA-CENTRIC VAISHNAVAS AS KRISHNA AND

RADHA.

 

The TRI KAYA and the Emanations and Incarnations of MANI PADME