[Advaita-l] Questions on Mayavada.
sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com
Tue Nov 9 01:47:52 CST 2010
You said yourself that Jainisn preceded Buddhism and I asked you what proof do you have on that so that I can learn if you have any compelling proof to substantiate that. Now you are saying that even an elementary school child knows from history
books that Jainism preceded Buddhism. But the scholars who have done research on that know that Buddhism preceded Jainism. There has been no dispute regarding the date of Lord Mahavira. After formulating the Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT) Max Muller made a chronol;ogy to fit in with the AIT, according to which he fixed the date of the composition of the Vedas after the 15th century BCE and fixed the date of Lord Buddha in the 5th century BCE. Recent research has thoroughly discredited the AIT. and the date of Lord Buddha in the 5th century BCE does not hold any more. Buddhism was there in Iran (Persia) in the 7th century BCE. What even an elementary schoolboy knows does not hold any more. Recent brilliant research work of Prof. Narahari Achar of the Memphis Uninversity, using astronomical data and modern astronomical software had shown that Lord Buddha lived in the 19th century BCE. Alberuni's account showed that Buddhism prevailed in Iran (or
Persia) during the times of zarathustra and that was in the 7th century BCE ie one century before the birth of Lord Mahavir.
You brought in Jainism into picture for a purpose as you tried to explain in your earlier mail and now you are saying ".Further,it is immaterial to the present discussion". Do you think you are consistent in what say?
>From your statement you are showing that you do not value the original Mahayana literature like Prajnaparamita and its shorter version which has Lord Buddha's own statements and of Nagarjuna, who was the first to bring out the Mahayana literature. When one gets the truth that there is no separation and there is only unity there is no need for any further discussion on Buddhism. From what Lord Buddha said one can always say that he was silent on many things. His silence should not used against him.. Neither Gaudapada nor Adi Sankaracharya criticised Lord Buddha nor found fault with Lord Buddha. This is more important. I told you earlier that Vasubandhu had written on Abhidharma and then retracted his own views with another writing. That is the credential of Vasubandhu. Hope you are aware that Dignaga was Vasubandhu's disciple. Gaudapada was quite right in criticising the adventurist Buddhists like Dignaga but that does not mean Gaudapada and Adi
Sankara found fault with Lord Budhha and his original teaching.
--- On Mon, 11/8/10, srikanta <srikanta at nie.ac.in> wrote:
From: srikanta <srikanta at nie.ac.in>
Subject: [Advaita-l] Questions on Mayavada.
To: advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
Date: Monday, November 8, 2010, 12:56 AM
Dear Sunil Bhattacharji,
What proof do you have to deny that Jainism didnot precede Buddhism?.As a
historian you must know.Even an elementary school child knows from history
books that Jainism preceded Buddhism.Further,it is immaterial to the
present discussion.Buddhists say that awareness itself is "Shunya".They
deny any perception saying that it is an illusion,like "Fata
morgana"(castles in the sky),Ka pushpavat(like flowers in the sky),Mrga
marichika(mirage),Like Keshondrka(bhataraka)illusions of shapes created by
pressing one's eyes etc.In "Alambhana pareeksha",Dignaga says that there
is no basis for perception.When there is no scope for memory which are
fleeting,where is the scope for awareness.That is why Gaudapada says these
Buddhists are adventurists to deny what they see,and the nihilists(shunya
vadis) are more adventurists(sahasataram)because they want to catch the
sky in their fists!.Only,Adwaita or Vedanta say that Jnana alone or
awareness alone remains.
To unsubscribe or change your options:
For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list