Buddha and bhagavad gita?

[devotee]

Namaste Atanu,
For me, it is sometimes good to be away from this forum when I am able to meditate more deeply.  However, this forum gives an opportunity for Satsang (discussing with spiritual people) & that brings me back here again & again.

Buddha was basically a Vedanti. His teachings originally are not different from Hindu Vedanta philosophy but there have always been people who have tried to show it not only different but completely opposite. The Prjnaparamita taught by him consists of two portions – Heart Sutras & Diamond Sutras. The essence of the whole of Prajnaparamita is negation of form & names … total detachment from “individuality”. That is what Advait Vedanta teaches --- The One without a second.

The biggest point of difference that people point out between Buddhism & Advait Vedanta is “no-self” theory. Adavait Vedanta also proclaims --- Eko Brahman, so there is no scope of any individual soul. However, though there is no individual soul “in reality”, it appears to be so (one appears as many) within the first two states, which are the dream states when the “reality is wrongly perceived” or the Brahman is perceived as the world. So, Advait Vedanta also says that the multitude perceived in the dream states are false … it doesn’t really exist. What exists is the Turiya, the fourth state which is the screen wherein all the three states appear to originate & dissolve. So, where is the difference ? Buddhism directly talks about the fourth state whereas Advait Vedanta talks about the other three states too.

However, in Buddhism there is still concept of rebirths of the conditioned being. The whole of Jataka Katha is full of stories of Buddha going through many incarnations before finally coming to the form of Siddhartha. The whole doctrine of Buddhism is to get Nirvana i.e. to break the cycle of births & deaths. Now , question is, “if there is no self”, what goes into cycles of deaths & births ? If there is no continuity involved in one birth with the other, how Buddha’s Jataka stories fit in ? This answer cannot be given without accepting anything which has some individuality in all such incarnations … though it is an illusion but it is there until the enlightenment is attained by that individual conditioned being. If there was no individual conditioned being then as soon as Buddha had attained Nirvana, every being should have attained nirvana !

Can we explain this with the concept of Store Consciousness ? The reality is, the concept of Store consciousness has been criticised by some Buddhists as the “Atman” theory inserted from Hinduism in disguise. This theory is not originally attributed to Sakyamuni Buddha (Siddhartha Gautam) but to Yogachara School of Buddhism developed in Mahayana Buddhism in 4th Century AD i.e. nearly 900 years after Buddha.

What is this concept ? Store Consciousness is proposed as the Eighth Consciousness which is the seed for the other seven consciousness ( Eye, Ear, Nose ,tongue, body, ideation & manas). It is to be understood that this is not where the individuality is lost. This Store Consciousness is one for each being depending upon the Karma of that being & that decides any other skandha related with that being and also the rebirth of that being after death.

There is another concept “momentariness” which states that everything is changing every moment. So, any (conditioned) being is not the same next moment. This is nothing new. What I was in my childhood, certainly I am not the same now. The “i” is made of thoughts & keeps changing with thoughts but still within this changing “i”, there is something (even though only apparently within the waking & dreaming states) which continues & something that relates the past with the present. The Store-consciousness takes care of this continuity.

Any Hindu (by birth or who understand the essence of Hinduism) will say that the above theory is quite similar to Jiva or the lower self which goes from birth to birth until it attains Jnana.


Buddha also talks about many Buddhas before him, the most prominent one being the Dipankar Buddha. What religion did those Buddhas follow ? There was no so called Buddhism before Sakyamuni Buddha, so it has to be something with its roots in the Vedas.

Regards,

OM

[atanu]

Namaste Atanu,
For me, it is sometimes good to be away from this forum when I am able to meditate more deeply.

Buddha was basically a Vedanti.

Can we explain this with the concept of Store Consciousness ? The reality is, the concept of Store consciousness has been criticised by some Buddhists as the “Atman” theory inserted from Hinduism in disguise. This theory is not originally attributed to Sakyamuni Buddha (Siddhartha Gautam) but to Yogachara School of Buddhism developed in Mahayana Buddhism in 4th Century AD i.e. nearly 900 years after Buddha.

What is this concept ? Store Consciousness is proposed as the Eighth Consciousness which is the seed for the other seven consciousness ( Eye, Ear, Nose ,tongue, body, ideation & manas). It is to be understood that this is not where the individuality is lost. This Store Consciousness is one for each being depending upon the Karma of that being & that decides any other skandha related with that being and also the rebirth of that being after death.

OM

Namaste Devotee,

Thank you for nice lucid explanation and explanation of store. It appeared to me that the store may be another unsophisticated name of third state of shushupti, said to be the state wherein the potential names and forms reside just like a design may reside conceptually in an uncut piece of marble.
Thank you and Regards

Om Namah Shivaya

[atanu]

That is again correct, but whether experiential or in theory the doctrines of Hinduism and Buddhism cannot be followed or experienced at the same time because they are opposed to each other.

Either you experience the existance of a permament ground of conciousness that existed in the past and will exist in the future and is the same in the past present and future and you belive that there is a jiva that undergoes modification in time and there is an eternal perceiver, or you experience, or belive the opposite, which is that everything is momentary, -

Namaste MahaHrada,

Just let us think a bit. If Buddha does not teach of a permanent ground, then what is He meditating on and with what?

Om Namah Shivaya

[devotee]

Namaste Atanu,

I did some research on whether Buddha had so much allergy with the word Self.

If we look at the Mahaparinirvana Sutra as translated by Professor Jeffery Hopkins there are some places in the Sutras where Buddha equates Buddha Nature with SELF :

'... that which has permanence, bliss, Self, and thorough purity is called the "meaning of pure truth"'.
'Permanent is the Self; the Self is thoroughly pure. The thoroughly pure is called "bliss". Permanent, blissful, Self, and thoroughly pure is the one-gone-thus [i.e. Buddha]';
'Self means the matrix-of-one-gone-thus [i.e. the tathagatagarbha/ Buddha-nature]. The existence of the buddha-nature in all sentient beings is the meaning of "Self"'.
'The buddha-nature, by its own nature, cannot be made non-existent; it is not something that becomes non-existent. Just the inherent nature called "Self" is the secret matrix-of-one-gone-thus [i.e. tathagatagarbha / Buddha-nature]; in this way that secret matrix cannot be destroyed and made non-existent by anything.'

Dr. Shenpen Hookham in her book "The Buddha Within" states :

'In scriptural terms, there can be no real objection to referring to Buddha, Buddhajnana [Buddha Awareness/ Buddha Knowledge], Nirvana and so forth as the True Self, unless the concept of Buddha and so forth being propounded can be shown to be impermanent, suffering, compounded, or imperfect in some way ... in Shentong terms, the non-self is about what is not the case, and the Self of the Third Dharmachakra [i.e. the Buddha-nature doctrine] is about what truly IS.'

-------------------------
Apart from the above the Buddha Nature has also been described with following words in various Buddhist's scriptures:

a) incorruptible, uncreated, and indestructible
b) it is eternal "bodhi" (Knowledge, Jnan) indwelling samsara ... opens up the immanent possibility of Liberation from all suffering and impermanence
c) Eternal, Present in all beings
d) Unborn, does not die, does not transfer, does not arise. It is beyond the sphere of the characteristics of the compounded; it is permanent, stable and changeless
d) ultimate, all-equal, uncreated essence of all phenomena

So, is it really different from SELF ?

Regards,

OM

[shian]

Let us hear from a practicising Buddhist also.

http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/sho...75&postcount=3

The relevant portion is pasted below:



In whatever way one analyses and believes, shakyamuni has a reality. Is this shakyamuni also anAtmA?

see...

the debate of anatma and atma is only make many and many mistake, missunderstanding

computer or laptop in front of us is reality or no ?
what is reality ?
everyone have a different theory to explain this word

what is reality, what is anatma , what is atma

this is need pure mind to understand and experience

if only with mouth , is become far and far from anatman or even atma

[shian]

I guess your right I just dont know how to make it not any pain.

my friend...

when you dream about thief, you run and run , very affraid....

and then you just wake up

you will fell free after know that is only dream.

that is same

everyone who believe in religion is running and running in this world and the goal is only for rest in peace

and why you not get the GOAL ?
no need running

just GET the "Peace"
the things wo can make our mind peace and improve , brightening our life, use it.

and the others is rubbish.
please learn from history, that religion have many changed from ancient to now ! era to era...

for what ? why human beings still improve the religion and believe ?

because human beings search for peace.

just get the peace !

Shiva name is peace

Buddha name is peace

Durga name is peace

Allah name is peace

Jesus name is peace

but why many peoples make that name become enemy each others ???

that because the mind of the "people" is cant recognize peace.

why you follow peoples who cant find and not know about peace ?

just get the one name and form you love it (not because the lower and higest, one name is for being easy for our mind to keep it) and attach for peace and spread the peace to everyone who need it

if your heart follow and searching for peace but still blind and dark, do you know , you is not refuge in the name of God who peoples and you debate. You is follow ,refuge and chanting in the name of peoples who cannot find the peace. Even the name is Shiva, Buddha, Allah or Jesus.

why do that ? wasting time. Your life time is very valuable

[atanu]

see...

the debate of anatma and atma is only make many and many mistake, missunderstanding

if only with mouth , is become far and far from anatman or even atma

Namaste shian,

You are correct but in Hinduism, the discriminination of atma-anatman is a very important tool. A child tries to walk and falls down again and again and then walks. Discrimination is a way taught as Neti-Neti in Brihadarayanaka Upanishad and as "Who am I?" in Aitereya Upanishad.

Just mouthing peace word also does not bring peace, untill one experiences the peace in the imperishable. Similarly, atma and anatman are distinguished and separated, to find peace in atma.

Om Namah Shivaya

[atanu]

Namaste Devotee,

What you have searched out is invaluable for me, notwithstanding that intuitively it was understood.

THanks

Regards

Namaste Atanu,

I did some research on whether Buddha had so much allergy with the word Self.

If we look at the Mahaparinirvana Sutra as translated by Professor Jeffery Hopkins there are some places in the Sutras where Buddha equates Buddha Nature with SELF :

'... that which has permanence, bliss, Self, and thorough purity is called the "meaning of pure truth"'.
'Permanent is the Self; the Self is thoroughly pure. The thoroughly pure is called "bliss". Permanent, blissful, Self, and thoroughly pure is the one-gone-thus [i.e. Buddha]';
'Self means the matrix-of-one-gone-thus [i.e. the tathagatagarbha/ Buddha-nature]. The existence of the buddha-nature in all sentient beings is the meaning of "Self"'.
'The buddha-nature, by its own nature, cannot be made non-existent; it is not something that becomes non-existent. Just the inherent nature called "Self" is the secret matrix-of-one-gone-thus [i.e. tathagatagarbha / Buddha-nature]; in this way that secret matrix cannot be destroyed and made non-existent by anything.'

Dr. Shenpen Hookham in her book "The Buddha Within" states :

'In scriptural terms, there can be no real objection to referring to Buddha, Buddhajnana [Buddha Awareness/ Buddha Knowledge], Nirvana and so forth as the True Self, unless the concept of Buddha and so forth being propounded can be shown to be impermanent, suffering, compounded, or imperfect in some way ... in Shentong terms, the non-self is about what is not the case, and the Self of the Third Dharmachakra [i.e. the Buddha-nature doctrine] is about what truly IS.'

-------------------------
Apart from the above the Buddha Nature has also been described with following words in various Buddhist's scriptures:

a) incorruptible, uncreated, and indestructible
b) it is eternal "bodhi" (Knowledge, Jnan) indwelling samsara ... opens up the immanent possibility of Liberation from all suffering and impermanence
c) Eternal, Present in all beings
d) Unborn, does not die, does not transfer, does not arise. It is beyond the sphere of the characteristics of the compounded; it is permanent, stable and changeless
d) ultimate, all-equal, uncreated essence of all phenomena

So, is it really different from SELF ?

Regards,

OM

[shian]

Namaste shian,

Just mouthing peace word also does not bring peace, untill one experiences the peace in the imperishable. Similarly, atma and anatman are distinguished and separated, to find peace in atma.

Om Namah Shivaya

about peace you absolutely right my friend

do peace in mind and what we do everyday is very important.

lets do more practice everyday

[atanu]

about peace you absolutely right my friend
do peace in mind and what we do everyday is very important.lets do more practice everyday

and about arguments and discussions, you are absolutely right, my friend.

“Disputation and discussion are both futile.

Why is that?

Because nothing either party could say could possibly be true,
And whereas dispute picks out the false,
Which is too easy to see,
Discussion seeks the truth which is being pointed at,
Which is too difficult to describe.”

Wei Wu Wei from Posthumous Pieces, 1968

The address can only point to the abode.