PDA

View Full Version : Lord Siva in Tripitaka



shian
13 February 2009, 09:54 PM
Om Mahamahesvaraye Svaha

this is pic of Lord Shiva and some text from Tripitaka , speak by Sakyamuni Buddha

http://www.ucchusma.net/station/subject/960703_12/Tokyo_Museum_12_Isana.jpg

left is like Art Devi, in Tripitaka said, Art Devi is born when Siva was dancing in His Kingdom with many Vidyadhari and than from His hair born Art Goddess...

http://www.ucchusma.net/station/subject/960703_12/V01_12_Isana.jpg

Chinesse Text of Tripitaka Tantrayana No. 1297 (http://www.cbeta.org/result/normal/T21/1297_001.htm)


《供養十二大威德天報恩品》卷1 (Offering for pay a debt of gratitude of 12 DEVAS
(http://www.cbeta.org/result/normal/T21/1297_001.htm)

Buddha said : 12 Devas is manifestasion of Ancient Buddha !
When ... Isna is :
伊舍那天
ISNA
(MAHAMAHESVARA)

Happy
伊舍那天喜時諸天亦喜。魔眾不亂也。舊名摩醯首羅也。
佛言若供養摩醯首羅(唐云大自在)已為供養一切諸天。

When Isna is happy all of Gods is happy, mara not make disorderly. So He's name is Mahesvara !
Buddha said : if you puja for Mahesvara, so its mean you is puja for all of Gods !
嗔(怒)
angry
此天瞋時魔眾皆現國土荒亂。
when Mahesvara angry, Mara will appear and country will chaos !

shian
13 February 2009, 10:04 PM
so...

what your opinion about the Shiva form in Buddhist ???

and what your opinion about Siva in Buddhism Tantrayana text ???

please give me your opinion friends

(not many Buddhist know this, coz many Tripitaka Sutra is still in Chinesse, not yet in english)

This is why many Buddhist ancient Guru is take respect to many Hinduism Gods ! and then althought have some Guru is defeat some Shiva bhakta is because that bhakta is in wrong way, but this is not mean every Shiva Bhakta is in wrong way.
Because in Nagarjuna Bodhisattva live, He even puja Shiva with flowers with pure mind, and then Lord Shiva images is moving to receive the flower.
And the old bhakta of Shiva said : "I already puja to you in many years, but why you not move to receive ? now this boy is coming why you moving receive the flower by yourself ?"
Shiva said : "coz i like this boy have pure mind !"

and then in some Sutra, Sakyamuni Buddha said :
in Mahesvara svarga is palace when Vairocana teaching the 10 Bhumi Bodhisattva !
and also appear Heaven of lord Shiva is have two side.
and then Shiva Maya is Mara who controling the Trisahasra Mahasahasra Lokadhatu and Triloka !
But Buddha also said : "Mara is Great and Deep Bhumi Bodhisattva , want to save beings with Great Mercyfull, so He is appear in Mara form."

without Mara, we cant recognize our Buddha Nature, coz our self is more terryfing than Mara Deva !

Thank you ^^

saddha
21 April 2009, 08:47 PM
Actually Shiva is nibbana itself in Buddhism...Sivam is one of the words used to describe Nibbana in the Tipitika.

Buddhism is the complete religion. In Hinduism, you have divisions vaishnavas and shaivites and vedantists, Rama and Krishna followers.

In Buddhism, they are all PERFECTLY united.

All I need to do is worship Buddha, and all worship is given to all dieties in perfection.

When I follow the dhamma in faith, that is Vishnu pada (dhammapada), this path which preserves one from decay.

When I reach Nibbana, I reach Sivam, the truth!

That is why Buddha is the ONLY refuge!

With Buddhi you understand all, for God without Buddhi cannot be called God...and so we worship this intelligence.

shian
24 April 2009, 02:34 AM
yesterday i am read Padmasambhava's life
in Vimalamitra story

have this :

When Vimalamitra come to Tibet from India, he not bow to King and Vairochana rupang.

The King ask : "I dont like, why you not bow to Vairochana Tathagata?"

The sage Vimalamitra said : "My bow if my pure heart in the celestial Vairochana, and this rupang only stuff wordly Vairochana, it cant embanked my bow!"

and Vimalamitra bow to Vairocana rupang,

and the rupang is broken !!!

and The Sage know the King is not happy, and then Vimalamitra touch head of the rupang and the rupang broken again, from there is appear radiant light, very beautyfull!!!

So... even Buddha's rupang is broken for teach the Dharma.

why many ancient Sages broken the rupang ?
it is for teach the peoples who need that teaching.

so the broken rupang is not only mean XXX God is lower than AAA god

XXX teaching become lower or higer , is beacause the different peoples.

srivijaya
24 April 2009, 11:33 AM
A very interesting thread and something which I have looked into myself and discussed on occasion with people who have knowledge of this.
As a Buddhist with a tantric background, I am aware of the connection between Shaivism, in its Monist, Kashmiri form and certain tantric cycles in Vajrayana.

The doctrine of Spanda is very close to teachings in Buddhism too. The actual meeting point seems to be around the Kapalika sects, whose iconography is virtually identical in both Hindu and Buddhist forms.

There is much in a book by David Gray about it:
http://www.wisdom-books.com/ProductDetail.asp?PID=14190

The introductory essay provides an analysis of the historical and intellectual contexts in which the tantra was composed, including its complex interrelationship with Hindu Saiva traditions, and also investigates the history of its adaptation by Buddhists.

There are contradictory tales of how this came to be. The Buddhists claim that Ishvara devotees where practicing animal sacrifice and other nasty stuff so Buddha manifested within the Ishvara mandala to subdue it and lead those people to full enlightenment.

Shaivites tell a very different story, namely that a deviant offshoot of their religion were doing bad things and Buddhists were pressing them hard too. As long as the deviant Shaivites were paying homage to Shiva, they could not be punished, so they were infiltrated by a pure Shaivite who persuaded them to adopt Buddhism, thus "polluting" and damaging Buddhism and removing them from Shiva's protection - all in one go!

I find the two stories quite revealing, as neither side really wants to admit that they were 'in bed' with these tantriks. I have heard some Tibetan lamas say, on the quiet, that whilst followers of Shaivism and Tantric Buddhism have their arguments, the masters are always at peace with one another, as they acknowledge the true relationship of both.

Namaste

saddha
24 April 2009, 07:20 PM
Lord Buddha is a "Cousellar of Gods and Men" - Sasta Deva Manusanam.

The story of Shiva in Hinduism is that Buddha takes on a form, teaches non-vedic teachings and leads demons to adopt Buddhism, thus leading them to their destruction.

However, this teaching is always misrepresented by Hindus to mean Buddhist teachings are non-Vedic.

Buddha DOES NOT teach demons, as his title of "teacher of Gods' and men" suggests...this is why demons who follow Buddhism will get nothing out of it, and thus the triple city is destroyed.

Essentially, Buddhism is the true Shaivite religion, nibbana is only open to the Gods and men...NOT DEMONS!:)

srivijaya
25 April 2009, 04:19 AM
The story of Shiva in Hinduism is that Buddha takes on a form, teaches non-vedic teachings and leads demons to adopt Buddhism, thus leading them to their destruction.
Hi saddha,
I've never heard this version of the story before. It appears that there are many versions in circulation.


Buddha DOES NOT teach demons
There are plenty of accounts in Tibetan Buddhism of Nagas being subdued and subsequently serving Buddha Dharma. Buddha will teach any being, if that being has the capacity to learn and understand. Buddha has compassion for all sentient beings. As the Dharma is the truth, then it is indestructible. The acts of demons and so forth are acts committed within ignorance. The truth may be clouded or obscured but never touched by this.


Essentially, Buddhism is the true Shaivite religion
I think many Shaivites and Buddhists would take issue with that, if we are looking at externals, like worship and ritual etc. Perhaps there is a case to be made for Nirvana equating with Shiva in stasis of the deepest mode (Parama Shiva?) not sure of the correct terminology here.

Interesting points you have raised here though.

Namaste

saddha
25 April 2009, 06:07 PM
Hi saddha,
I've never heard this version of the story before. It appears that there are many versions in circulation.



There are plenty of accounts in Tibetan Buddhism of Nagas being subdued and subsequently serving Buddha Dharma. Buddha will teach any being, if that being has the capacity to learn and understand. Buddha has compassion for all sentient beings. As the Dharma is the truth, then it is indestructible. The acts of demons and so forth are acts committed within ignorance. The truth may be clouded or obscured but never touched by this.



We have the Lanka Avatar sutra where Buddha supposedly teaches Ravana, a demon.

Absolutely NOT.

Buddha's Dharma kaya CANNOT BE KNOWN TO ANY DEMON! What the demon's see is NOT the REAL BUDDHA, only an image.

A demon must purify his heart in order to become a Sangha member, that is why Buddha is the Kaliyuga avatar -- in a way, we are in this darkness because we are all demonic in nature.

That's the only reason we reject Buddha, because our hearts are not pure enough.



I think many Shaivites and Buddhists would take issue with that, if we are looking at externals, like worship and ritual etc. Perhaps there is a case to be made for Nirvana equating with Shiva in stasis of the deepest mode (Parama Shiva?) not sure of the correct terminology here.

Interesting points you have raised here though.

Namaste

I am not here to please Shaivites (who without Buddha cannot be called real Shaivites) or those who call themselves "Buddhists" and remain ignorant of Shiva in Bodha Dharma. :) I only speak about the truth -- if the truth not please those who are prejudiced and impure in mind, so be it.

Nirvana is spoken of as "sivam" in the earliest Buddhist scriptures. It is the auspicious.


Samyutta Nikaya IV gives the synonyms of Nibbana:

asankhata/the unconditioned,
antam/the end,
anasavam/without cankers,
saccam/the truth,
param/the ultimate,
nipunam/the subtle,
sududdasam/the very hard to see,
ajaram/the no-decay,
dhuvam/the stable,
apalokitam/the taken leave of,
anidassanam/the non-indicative,
nippapam/the without impediment,
santam/the peace,
amatam/the deathless,
panitam/the excellent,
sivam/the auspicious :)
khemam/the security,
tanhakkhaya/the destruction of tanha,
acchariyam/the wonderful,
abbhutam/the astonishing,
anitikam/the freedom from harm,
anitikadhammam/the state of freedom from harm,
nibbanam,
avyapajjho/the harmless,
virago/non-attachment,
suddhim/purity,
mutti/the release,
analayo/the done away with,
dipam/the island,
lena/the cave,
tanam/the shelter,
saranam/the refuge, :)
and parayanam/the ultimate goal.


In Buddhism Sivam describes the Sublime state of Supreme Bodhi or Knowledge and Peace of Nibbana


In the Samyukta Nikaya 7:18


I say it is marvelous. You look so happy, alone in the forest.
Accherarūpaṃ paṭibhāti maṃ idaṃ,
Yadekako pītimano vane vase.

I’m guessing you’re longing for the three highest
Heavens, there to befriend the Lord of the World.
‘‘Maññāmahaṃ lokādhipatisahabyataṃ,
Ākaṅkhamāno tidivaṃ anuttaraṃ;

Why do you choose the forest without people?
Are you practicing austerities to attain the highest Brahma?
Kasmā bhavaṃ vijanamaraññamassito,
Tapo idha kubbasi brahmapattiyā’’ti.
Buddha replies:

6. ßAll doubts, all enjoyments or to be established in various elements forever
Spring from desires not knowing the root cause
I have destroyed them completely
I am without doubts free from greed and undertakings
I have a pure vision of all Dhammas
‘‘Svāhaṃ akaṅkho asito anūpayo,
Sabbesu dhammesu visuddhadassano;
Having gained the sublime, highest awakening.
Pappuyya sambodhimanuttaraṃ sivaṃ,:)
I meditate, priest, in ripened seclusion.
Jhāyāmahaṃ brahman raho visārado’’ti.
Brahmin, I concentrate secretly, with confidence.


So here I stand on the truth.

srivijaya
27 April 2009, 04:06 AM
I only speak about the truth -- if the truth not please those who are prejudiced and impure in mind, so be it.

So here I stand on the truth.

Hi saddha,
Why do you assume that any who would question what you write to be either "prejudiced" or "impure in mind"? Is this not (itself) an agressive assertion?

And also in what way do you "stand on the truth". Is it a case of quoting scripture, or sharing your meditative insight in a compassionate way?

I think it is more helpful to discuss in what ways we can experience the similarities between the schools, rather than just writing people off as prejudiced or of an impure mind. You may have amazing and true information in your hands but who would wish to hear more if they feel thus categorized?

I mean this well.

Namaste

saddha
27 April 2009, 05:11 PM
Hi saddha,
Why do you assume that any who would question what you write to be either "prejudiced" or "impure in mind"? Is this not (itself) an agressive assertion?

And also in what way do you "stand on the truth". Is it a case of quoting scripture, or sharing your meditative insight in a compassionate way?

I think it is more helpful to discuss in what ways we can experience the similarities between the schools, rather than just writing people off as prejudiced or of an impure mind. You may have amazing and true information in your hands but who would wish to hear more if they feel thus categorized?

I mean this well.

Namaste

You can question what I write. Now, if I call Shaivites who don't accept Buddha or Buddhists who don't accept Shiva EVEN AFTER BEING GIVEN THE INFORMATION, than they are of impure mind -- for they don't even accept the obvious.

Now for you to take it personally would mean, that you are one of the above. :)

I gave quotes from the Tipitika. I think that should settle the argument that Buddha is talking about Nibbana as Sivam.

srivijaya
28 April 2009, 01:43 AM
Now for you to take it personally would mean, that you are one of the above. :)
Well, unlike you, I'm far from pure, so you must be right.


I gave quotes from the Tipitika. I think that should settle the argument that Buddha is talking about Nibbana as Sivam.
I've read some stuff on Spanda which seems to suggest the same thing. It's a very interesting topic but one which unfortunately attracts sectarian views from both sides.

Namaste