Guest guest Posted April 20, 2006 Report Share Posted April 20, 2006 Pure Land Buddhism as Vaishnavism Part Nine: Exposing the Historical Emptiness of Theravadin Buddhist Claims by Bhakti Ananda Goswami So far I have stated that the Buddhist iconography of both the Northern or Mahayana (with the Pure Land devotional tradition at its core) and Southern or Hinayana (Theravadin or atheistic) schools is the same. I have described seeing examples of this canon of sacred forms from the earliest known Buddhist sites from Japan and Angkor Wat Cambodia to Nepal and Sri Lanka, the proud `capital' of Buddhist atheism. Furthermore I have stated that this symbology and iconography is easily recognizable as deriving from Krishna-centric Vaishnavism, as exemplified by the devotional cultus of Sri Krishna (Hari = HRIH Dharma Kaya Amitabha) and Sri Baladeva (Sankarshan Vishnu = Sambhogya Kaya Amitayus-Lokeshvara) at Their ancient Indian Center of devotion in Vrindavana-Mathura. I have explained that authentic (pure Pure Land) early Buddhism was a form of Krishna-centric Vaishnavism, but that atheistic Buddhism has misrepresented itself to the world as the original form of Buddhism. Because the Theravadin Buddhist elite of Sri Lanka proudly proclaim Sri Lanka to be the historical capital of Buddhist atheism (Theravada), and this claim is not disputed in the Theravadin Buddhist world, I have very carefully sought evidence to support this claim. Since the Sri Lankan Theravadins themselves assert that their Buddhism first came to Sri Lanka as part of the Indian Emperor Ashoka the Great's Buddhist missionary effort, logically one should be able to understand the `original' Buddhism of the island from gaining an accurate understanding of the Buddhism promoted by Ashoka's missionaries. So I carefully investigated the Buddhism of Emperor Ashoka, and here is what I found. (Remember that the earliest archeological evidence of Buddhist Sacred Art throughout both the Northern and Southern ranges of Buddhism has striking commonalities with Vrindavana-Mathuran Krishna-centric Vaishnava iconography and symbolism.) The Central Significance of Vrindavana-Mathura in Mahayana Buddhist History In Joseph Campbell's Masks of God (4 volumes, Viking) and other comparative and exclusive studies of Buddhism, it has been readily acknowledged that Ashoka's own Buddhist Master had a great monastery in Mathura. Campbell cites a reference to this claiming that Ashoka's Master's (Third Century BCE) monastery in Mathura had 10,000 monks residing in it! About Mathura This area, popularly known as Brij Bhoomi, is a major pilgrimage place of Hindus. Shree Krishna, the popular incarnation of Vishnu, is believed to have been born in Mathura (Muttra) and the area is closely linked with many episodes in his early life. Nearby is Vrindavan (Vrindaban) where Krishna `sported' with his gopis (milkmaids). History Mathura is an ancient cultural and religious center. The Buddhist monasteries that were built here received considerable patronage from Ashoka, and Mathura was mentioned by Ptolemy and by the Chinese visitors Fahsien (who visited India from 401 to 410 AD) and Xuan Zhang (634-762 AD) in their works… Ashoka (Third Century BCE) was the last of the great Mauryan Dynasty Emperors. The Mauryas were Vaishnavas, but Ashoka, after a particularly horrific military campaign (against Kalinga) that consolidated his rule over much of India, is said to have `converted' to the non-violent discipline of `Buddhism', becoming its greatest royal advocate. Filled with missionary zeal, he energetically patronized this `Buddhism', building up its holy places and supporting its monasteries and sending missionaries with its messages of benevolence as far as the Mediterranean! It is one of these missions (actually related to his personal family) that supposedly reached the Island of Sri Lanka, establishing Buddhism there. He participated in Buddhist councils, and while he protected Vaishnavism and some other traditional Indian religions, he also suppressed heterodox groups. In fact, "There is also evidence from the Edicts [of Ashoka] that he intervened to expel dissident elements from the Buddhist Order..." (Page 100, The Oxford Dictionary of World Religions, 1997, Oxford University Press.) It is not contested that Ashoka continued his protection and support of Vaishnavism, or that his own Buddhist Master's ashram was in Mathura, the royal religio-cultural capital of Krishna-centric Vaishnavism, so what was the so-called `Buddhism' that in his liberality he found so intolerable that he actually suppressed and expelled as "dissident"? Well, what is the heterodox `Buddhism' that arrived in Sri Lanka at that time? What `Buddhism' has continuously denied the clearly Mahayana-related evidence of Pure Land Ashokan Buddhism, which from all of the archeological hard evidence arrived in Sri Lanka during the same era, and was spread throughout the entire region (and beyond) by Ashoka's missionaries? Considered heterodox, it appears that Theravadin Buddhism was expelled from India by the Emperor Ashoka! Is it conceivable that everywhere else Ashoka's Missionaries were spreading Vaishnava-Bhakti-related Pure Land Mahayana Buddhism, but that in Sri Lanka alone they were teaching Theravada / Hinayana atheism? Is it conceivable that atheistic Theravadin Buddhism would be blissfully co-existing with Krishna-centric Vaishnavism in Mathura, the very world intellectual epicenter of Krishna-centrism? Would the `Vatican City' of Krishna-Vaishnavism tolerate the presence of thousands of Theravadin Buddhist Atheists who believed that Krishna was a demon? Nearby Vrindavana, as the more esoteric `Bridal Mysticism' Center of pastoral (Bucolic / Gokula / Gokura) Krishna-Vaishnavism was never the university (monastery) intellectual or royal seat of Krishna Vaishnavism. As the sanctum sanctorum of Sri Sri Radha-Krishna and Baladeva and the Gopis' Bridal Mysticism Rasa Lila `Pastimes', Vrindavana's sacred pastoral character was always religiously safeguarded from certain kinds of development. However, as the center of awesome and reverential royal / raja Krishna-worship, nearby Mathura was the diffusional royal epicenter of Krishna-centric Vaishnavism for countless centuries. At the time of Ashoka, it was the intellectual and artistic capital of Krishna-centric Vaishnavism. How could Ashoka's own Master have had an ashram with 10,000 monks in it in the royal capital of Sri Krishna's worship (Sri Krishna's own birthplace), if he had been a Theravadin Buddhist ? The Theravadin Buddhists of Sri Lanka teach that Krishna and Balarama are demons, and some teach the Jain doctrine that Krishna is in a hell for his role in the Great (Mahabharata) War! In fact, in both of the university-like intellectual `Buddhist' centers of Mathura and Gandhara, the Vaishnavas and Buddhists were completely compatible as members of various lineages or orders of the SAME RELIGION. This fact cannot be contested. No honest scholar can deny that Gandhara and Mathura, the two greatest early Mahayana centers of Buddhist intellectual and artistic activity and diffusion were also Vaishnava centers of the same! This was not a sequential phenomenon either! The Vaishnava and Buddhist presence in these centers of Bhakti Yoga was contemporaneous. In fact, there was a Western Bhakti Asyla Temple Federation representation in the visitors and residents of these two great Vaishnava and Buddhist `university' Centers of Gandhara and Mathura too! Greeks, Romans and other western Eli-Yahu / Heli-os / Heri-Asu worshipers visited and lived in these two Centers. (In my next installment in this series I plan to describe a little about the Greek and specifically Rhodian connections to the Vaishnava-Buddhist Sacred Art of these two Centers.) When it is known that Mathura was the North Indian regional Center of Krishna Bhakti, how is it possible that the very antithesis of Krishna-Vaishnavism and closely related Pure Land Buddhist Bhakti, namely atheistic Theravadin Buddhism, could have been the Buddhism that Ashoka patronized there? When it is clear from evidence all over the region (and beyond) that Ashoka equally protected and supported Vaishnavism and Mahayana (Pure Land) Buddhism, and that at the time these two great Bhakti Traditions were considered part of the SAME RELIGION, how is it conceivable that the `Buddhism' that he patronized in Sri Lanka was Theravadin, the historical and doctrinal antithesis of both Vaishnavism and Pure Land Buddhism? The Ongoing Iconoclastic Destruction of the Evidence in Sri Lanka It is inconceivable that Ashoka's Mathuran Vaishnava-related Pure Land Buddhism became Theravadin Atheism upon arrival in Sri Lanka. This is why the Theravadin Buddhists of Sri Lanka must misrepresent the historical evidence to support their claim. This is why they have been (and still are) involved in the occupation and destruction of important early Buddhist and Hindu archeological sites, and why they have stolen, obscured and defaced, etc. so much iconographic evidence from their own early Buddhist history. Like the Taliban and other iconoclastic Muslim barbarians, the Sri Lankan Theravadin Buddhist atheists must obscure or destroy the ancient Buddhist Sacred Art, which is the constant reminder of their hostile occupation of a land once populated by a people of faith in the Personal God of Grace, Who has incarnated to save the world. By erasing this `Hindu-related' Buddhist Sacred Art of the Incarnate God, the atheistic Sri Lankan Theravadin Buddhist iconoclasts are attempting to erase the truth of history, and in its place to assert the originality and authenticity of their own corrupt God-less tradition. However, if we examine the evidence (before the iconoclasts have stolen or destroyed it all and it is too late), we will learn the truth about Ashoka-related Sri Lankan Buddhism's original relationship to Vaishnavism, and we will learn that the Theravadin Buddhist's historical claims to being the world's original Buddhism are, like their doctrine, full of only "emptiness." If the case supporting the historical claims of atheistic Buddhism in Sri Lanka (its undisputed world-capital) is empty, then there is no meritorious case for it anywhere. May Buddhists everywhere recover the theistic devotional purity of their original Pure Land tradition, and may they, in doing so, rediscover their ancient unity with the Great Bhakti Traditions of India and the Asyla Federations of the West. Praying for the day when a new university will rise, like a phoenix from the ashes of the memory of Gandhara and Mathura, to reunite the Lord's Bhakti Yoga devotees of the East and West, Your aspiring Catholic-Vaishnava-Pure Land Buddhist servant, Bhakti Ananda Goswami <http://www.saragrahi.org/Header%20Links/Articles%20By%20Author/Bhakti%20Anand%2\ 0Goswami/966%20Pure%20Land%20Buddhism%20As%20Vaishnavism%20Part%2009.htm> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.