[Advaita-l] A discussion group on Adaita Vedanta
sunil_bhattacharjya at yahoo.com
Mon Oct 11 14:28:49 CDT 2010
Presently I am away from my regular place of residence in Mumbai and shall returm ther only after some weeks. I came across a book by an American lady researcher, who did her research in Pune, where she shows how Maya has been given in the Vedic literature. That book was published by the Bhandarkar Oriental research Institute. Neither I have the book with me at this time nor I remember the exact details to tell you. But the book should be widely read by the Advaitins.
Regarding the philosophy of Lord Buddha you have made your onservations as follows :
<<< From what has come as Buddhism oer the years,we see that Buddhism later split into many schools,like,Yogacara vigyana vada,Sunyavada,Vajrayana,etc.Nagarjuna and vasubandhu
expounded their respective schools and clained that theirs is what Buddha said.But none knows the truth.The research on these schools continue till today. >>>
Lord Buddha was himself apprehensive that what he preached will get corrupted in about one thousand years and possibly earlier due to introduction of the nuns, whom he was reluctant to admit. To know about the different schools and their relevance to Lord Buddha's original teachings, one must have the proper chronologcal perspective. Astronomical data as studied by Professor Achar give us the accurate date of Lord Buddha and Kaniska. My own studies on the Dotted Records show how the Sri Lankan Buddhists bulldozed the Dotted Record to reduce the antiquity of the date of Lord Buddha by about thirteen centuries and Max muller grabbed that to fortify his Aryan Invasion Theory as well as his dateline of the Ancient
Indian History. Kaniska ruled about 500 years after Lord Buddha and Ashvaghosha and Nagarjuna were of those tomes. So there is absolutely no doubt that what Nagarjuan says or even Ashvaghosha says are the closest representative of Lord Buddha's teachings.
Vasubandhu came several centuries after Nagarjuna and Dignaga was Vasubandhu's disciple. Dharmakiriti cale still later and he was just senior contemporary of Adi Sankaracharya. The later developments in Buddhism should be understood in the light of what Nagarjuna wrote and not in contradicition of that.
As regards Adi Sankara being called as pracchanna Buddha (ie. the secret Buddha) and the same was applied to even Gaudapadacharya. In case of Adi Sankaracharya the term was first applied by Yamunacharya, as the Advaita was really beyond their comprehension. They thought that the world created by God is here to stay and how can any being permanently get away from the Sansara. As Adi sankara explained the Vedantic way to be one
with the Brahman they thought that Adi Sankara was out to destroy the world and then started calling names. We have to understand that and also realise that all cannot have the same spiritual progress (ie. to the same extent) at the same time. Appreciation of that will help the Advaitins not to get perturbed.
Sunil K. Bhattacharjya
--- On Mon, 10/11/10, srikanta <srikanta at nie.ac.in> wrote:
From: srikanta <srikanta at nie.ac.in>
Subject: [Advaita-l] A discussion group on Adaita Vedanta
To: advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org
Date: Monday, October 11, 2010, 6:12 AM
In his reply to Sri. Jaldharji,Sri.sunil Bhattacharyaji has given some
points on Lord Buddha and Shankara.The term "Maya" has given raise to many
doubts among the jigyasus.Buddha came much
later than the vedic times and
the time of Sri Krishna.Infact there are many statements in Bhagawadgita
which point to this effect.Infact,the "sthitaprajnasya lakshanani"
contains many aspects about the Jnani and his characteristics.This is much
striking in contrast with the rest of the chapters in Bhagawadgita.No
where in the rest of the book Sri Krihna categorically discusses the
characteristics of a Jnani.From what has come as Buddhism oer the years,we
see that Buddhism later split into many schools,like,Yogacara vigyana
vada,Sunyavada,Vajrayana,etc.Nagarjuna and vasubandhu expounded their
respective schools and clained that theirs is what Buddha said.But none
knows the truth.The research on these schools continue till today.But,all
the followers of Buddhism claim that Buddha was enlightened.Shankara was
called a Praccanna Bauddha by other schools because he used the
word'"maya".But the difference in the use of
this word by Buddha and
Shankara is very clear to any discerning scholar.Ramanuja and Vedanta
Desika use still blasphemous words on Shankara.Vedanta Desika calls
a "brama Bhikshu,Rahu mimamsaka,Chhadma veshadari",Etc.Madhwacharya
follows suit.The book,"Manimanjari"by Trivikrama panditacharya is a yellow
journal of his times.In his book"Paramata bhangham",vedanta Desika calls
Shankara as one who studied vedas in the shop of "Madhyamika",a reference
to Gaudapada,who was mistaken to be a Madhyamika buddhist by the scholars
of those days.If one carefully studies,Gaudapada's,"Mandukyaupanishad
karikas",one can clearly see the difference between Adwaita and Buddhism.
Further,the word"Sunya"in Vishnu sahasranamam,means "lakshana sunya"on the
basis of the Shankara's commentary.In the north,Buddha has been accepted
as an avatar of Vishnu,in states of Bengal,orissa and to some extent in
his song,"Jaya Jagadisha Hare" accords a place to
Buddha,as one who criticised Yajnas,as"nindati yajna vide..."No where we
find a criticism of Vedas or the Brahmins by Buddha in the "Nikayas'.He
calls a Brahmin,as "Samana".
Thanking You, N.Srikanta.
To unsubscribe or change your options:
For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list