# [Advaita-l] Dashavataras as per Harivamsha

Sunil Bhattacharjya sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com
Fri Jan 6 19:07:42 CST 2017

Dear friends,

Sorry, a part of the text got deleted by mistake. I am giving that below:

Saying Adi Shankara to be Prachanna Buddha is not wrong, provided the speaker understands what Lord Buddha really taught. Adi Shankara taught us that the Jivanmukta leaves the body (including all the five koshas) and becomes Videhamukta, and that is the state of realizing oneness with the Brahman. Lord Buddha taught that the Bodhisattva Sariputra saw that the skandhas (koshas) were empty, i.e,, he left the five skandhas or koshas. Lord Buddha did not use the word “Brahman” here, but not that Lord Buddha did not know the word Brahman. Lord Buddha did  use the word “Brahman” in Buddhist sutra. Buddha did not believe in the plurality of souls and he differed from his Sankhya guru on this. He did not believe in duality and he differed from his yoga guru also. Lord Budhha believed only in the Advayavada, which is the same as the advaitavada.

In Adi Shankara's time the Mahayana buddhists did not understand what Lord Buddha taught at the highest level, and that happened because of lapse of thirteen (13) centuries from the time of Lord Buddha to the time of Adi Shankara. Nagarjuna, who lived about eight (*) centuries before Adi Shankara told that Shunyata is not “non-existence”, but that also did not have any effect in Adi Shankara's time and the Mahayana buddhists were teaching nihilism in Adi Shankara's time. That is why Adi Shankara had not only to oppose the Sarvastivadins and the Vijnanavadins, he had also to oppose the Mahayana buddhists.

Adi Shankara is said to have composed the Dashavataara stotra, where he included Lord Buddha as the ninth avatara of Lord Vishnu. If any member has tseen hat stotra, may I request him to share that infornation with us.

Regards
Sunil K. Bhaattacharjya

--------------------------------------------
On Fri, 1/6/17, Sunil Bhattacharjya <sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com> wrote:

Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Dashavataras as per Harivamsha
To: "V Subrahmanian" <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>, "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>, "Kripa Shankar" <kripa.shankar.0294 at gmail.com>
Date: Friday, January 6, 2017, 4:29 PM

∞ {\displaystyle \infty }
Mathematicians are familiar with ∞, the symbol of
infinity. Thus mathematically speaking
1/∞ (infinity) = 0 (Zero or Shunya)

Regards,
Sunil K.Bhattacharjya

--------------------------------------------
wrote:

Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Dashavataras as per Harivamsha
To: "V Subrahmanian" <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>,
Date: Friday, January 6, 2017, 1:10 PM

As you can observe he
relies heavily on some obscure Vaishnava authors /books
and
Buddhist works which are sheer fantasies. If we are to
take
this guy seriously, we will have to accept Shankara as
prachanna baudha which is again a monumental lie.

Regards ‎
Kripa ‎

Vyasaya Vishnu roopaya Vyasa roopaya Vishnave
Namo vai Brahma nidhaye Vasishtaya namo namaha
Original Message
From:
Kripa Shankar
Sent: Saturday 7 January 2017
2:12 AM
To: V Subrahmanian; A discussion
Subject: Re:

That does not make any
difference at all. It is clearly established in the
shastras
/ Puranas that animals sacrificed in yajnas attain higher
topic. I can give reference if needed. This Ahimsa as
meant
by this pundit and by Buddha, whether I or I I, is
completely against the vedic view as mentioned previously.
So apparently Vishnu has got the fundamentals wrong.
Further, animals were being sacrificed from times
immemorial. How did it suddenly become hinsa? The same
yajnas involving animal sacrifices were practised by the
Pandavas as advised by none other than Krishna, another
avatara.
‎
‎Secondly
the Madhvas do not have credibility as they have
perpetuated
a series of lies. A guru/shiva nindaka is considered a
great
saint by them, so should we have comparisons with them. So
it's immaterial what they believe when we have first
hand evidence from Vyasa!

You will have to inevitably view it from a more
socio-political angle. It is similar to some reformer
we
which he is quoting. Above all, none of it makes any
difference as we have clear evidence to the contrary.

Regards
Kripa ‎
‎
Vyasaya Vishnu roopaya Vyasa roopaya Vishnave
Namo vai Brahma nidhaye Vasishtaya namo namaha
Original Message
From: V
Subrahmanian
Sent: Saturday 7 January 2017
1:35 AM
To: Kripa Shankar; A discussion
Subject: Re:

On Jan 7,
2017 1:18 AM, "Kripa Shankar" <kripa.shankar.0294 at gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Namaste
Subramanian,
>
> To
my knowledge, there is no mention of Buddha at all in the
Mahabharata.
>
>
Almost in every chapter of the Mahabharata, the Vedic
yajnas
are given utmost importance as can be seen in the Gita as
well. Further, the definition of Ahimsa is starkly
different
in the Vedas /MB. For eg, harsh speech is also considered
as
himsa as per Shastras. So Vishnu getting up from yoga
nidra
and donning an avatara to oppose everything that is held
sacred in the Vedas is just not sane.
>

Here
there is a proposal for two Buddhas:

http://www.stephen-knapp.com/were_there_two_buddhas.htm

avatars.

Regards
vs

>
> t

_______________________________________________