Re: Atman-Brahman in Buddhism
Namaste Skull Ji,
Its a good question, and I think that any sincere aspiring or attained transcendentalists or sadhaka that aspires for the enlightened goal what ever that may be will be naturally engaged in works that benefit all beings. but the questions begs what is the ultimate benefit, both Buddhists and Hindus agree that liberation from samsara is the goal and is the highest attainment and gives the ultimate relief from the distress and sufferings that come in the realms of samsara, Mahayana seems to think that Hinayana is a lesser path and has no concern for all beings and they are not engaged in Altruistic activities, and elevates itself as the path of the Bodhisattva as being superior to the attainment of Buddha, its not always like this but this misconception can creep in.
[QUOTE]Too much focus on liberation and unity with the 'eternal, all pervading' atman will result in ignoring all other beings/QUOTE]
I feel its a tough one to really put in this way, because full focus on our svarupa or eternal identity brings in the sense of one-ness or not being a separate entity, the individual Jiva more or less works for his own selfish needs and is dictated within his selfishness within the modes of nature, goodness, passion and ignorance, so until one comes to the stage of wanted liberation or to be situated again it ones own true nature then there will always be a trace of selfishness.
The problem of selfishness does not lie within the teachings of any particular school , for me this will remain within the individual, as most the practices of and complete understanding of any of the main accepted schools will have compassion, altruism and the search for total liberation as main tenants.
As for weather anyone once the objective self has been purified and arrives back at his original nature comes back into the world so to speak and works till each jiva is also back to his original nature within Hinduism may not totally exists, because once one has arrived back in his original nature he see's that nothing is separate from itself, so the concept of samsara and liberation does not exists, so what then exactly needs to be done....? I think most the deeper teachings of Buddhism also agrees with this
Re: Atman-Brahman in Buddhism
Hi,
Quote:
Originally Posted by
markandeya 108 dasa
As for weather anyone once the objective self has been purified and arrives back at his original nature comes back into the world so to speak and works till each jiva is also back to his original nature within Hinduism may not totally exists, because once one has arrived back in his original nature he see's that nothing is separate from itself, so the concept of samsara and liberation does not exists, so what then exactly needs to be done....?
The Jivanmukta is an elightened being who while being alive and after having burned away all prior karma, continues to operate in this world with no new karmic accumulation.
Re: Atman-Brahman in Buddhism
Indeed the differences between the teachings of Buddha and Shankara (Advaita Vedanta) are only in vocabulary :D
Buddha says there is no Atma, by which he meant there is no individuality ... and Shankra says jivo, brahmaiva na parah ... there is no jiva or individual other than the "Whole" !
Shankara rejected two schools : the shunyavada or the idea that "something is born out of nothing" and skhanika vijnana vada ... the idea that "awareness is born and dies every instant ... and between thoughts there is no awareness" ! He rejected these two schools, but we do not find these schools in modern day i suppose. Today we find most buddhists agree on "Buddha Nature" or some such understanding which is primordial Awareness ... on this point Advaita Vedanta is 100% in agreement.
Love!
Silence
Re: Atman-Brahman in Buddhism
M108dasa:
Quote:
once one has arrived back in his original nature he see's that nothing is seperate from itself, so the concept of samsara and liberation does not exists, so what then exactly needs to be done....? I think most the deeper teacings of Buddhism also agrees with this
***************
Both before full buddhahood, theoretically, and at full buddhahood (even before as great bodhisattva) samsara is known as identical with nirvana. But the question of what 'needs to be done' at that point never arises for Mahayana, because vows were taken over many lives to continue to help those still deluded.
Without that powerful, compassionate intent or bodhisattva vow such service for others will not happen for kalpa after kalpa. Even if liberation makes such service possible, as a jnani or jivanmukta, that may be for only one lifetime.
Re: Atman-Brahman in Buddhism
Pranams,
Not exactly sure where your going with this, as it seems your understanding of compassion and service within Sanatana Dharma is lacking. If this is about measuring whose religion is best then i will fall silent. I always find vows rudimentary and artificial, when the sadhaka is advancing the qualities of true altruism arise spontaneously.
Re: Atman-Brahman in Buddhism
I guess from your response to my original question about "if the varied Hindu paths emphasize the bodhisattva vow? That is, returning voluntarily after liberation, to help for countless lives the countless unenlightened beings?" - the answer is no, for 'vows are rudimentary and artificial - always'. By the way, a 'vow' is not just or even always verbal, but a clear intention or will.
Thanks for clarifying.
Re: Atman-Brahman in Buddhism
Namaste,
To briefly clarify, what is meant by taking a vow, like the Bodhisattva vows is as you say to induce a will, but that will inherently exists within consciousness when one has advanced, so the altruistic values of wanting to save all beings will Arise naturally, and one will be working for the benefit of all living beings by default.
Re: Atman-Brahman in Buddhism
Guatam Buddha firmly rejected the permanence of ATMA as believed in Sanatan religion in those days.
He said that the reason of sufferings is belief in permanence of ATMA.
Re: Atman-Brahman in Buddhism
Guatam Buddha was silent about BRAHMAN . He would avoid the answer to this direct question.
His reply was that the answer in not relevent to Exustence or Buddhahood .
To be more clear....It is a waste of time and energy to think or talk or discuss about BRAHMAN
Re: Atman-Brahman in Buddhism
There are 2 academic books which compare and contrast Hindu and Buddhist philosophy:
Early Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism by Richard King
The Method of Early Advaita Vedānta by Michael Comans