Buddha and Vishnu Avataars

[Guest guest]

yatindramatadipika, one of the primary texts on visishtadvaitham

does not consider Buddha as an avataar of vishnu. Vishnu Puraanam,

which is used extensively by Sir Ramaanuja, does not consider Buddha

as an avataar of Vishnu, In fact there a chapter (in H. H. Wilson

Vol1) where it is mentioned that Buddha and the Bouddhya sect were

defeated by Vishnu, at the request of some of his diehard believers.

The chapter is not very clear as to who or what the Bouddhyas are,

except that they are the group who reject the vedas.

 

It is believed that Raama and Krishna are the primary avataars,

while the rest are secondary, since in both cases, the establishment

of the dharmaa was the main reason.

 

However, i was reading the book titled "The Structural Depths of

Indian Thought" by P.T. Raju, who includes Buddha as an avataar of

vishnu in place of Krishna. Buddhists completely reject the vedas,

and hence would not even think about considering buddha as an avataar

of Vishnu. The vedaanta schools do not consider buddha as an

avataar. It seems that the majority of authors from outside India

have the opinion that Buddha was an avataar of Vishnu. It would be

interesting to find out how this opinion took shape.

 

 

-venkatesh

[Guest guest]

On Jan 3, 2:27pm, Venkatesh Elayavalli/DCOM wrote:

> Buddha and Vishnu Avataars

> However, i was reading the book titled "The Structural Depths of

> Indian Thought" by P.T. Raju, who includes Buddha as an avataar of

> vishnu in place of Krishna. Buddhists completely reject the vedas,

> and hence would not even think about considering buddha as an avataar

> of Vishnu. The vedaanta schools do not consider buddha as an

> avataar. It seems that the majority of authors from outside India

> have the opinion that Buddha was an avataar of Vishnu.

 

As far as I know, Bhakta Jayadeva who existed sometime around 9-12th Century

lists Buddha as the ninth incarnation in his Dasavataaralahari. Balarama is

also included (Haldhara) as an avatara here and mentions that all these

avataras are of Krishna/Kesava/Narayana. (Krishna is not mentioned as an

explicit avatara).

 

The Bhagavatam gives a list of around 24 avataras which includes

Hayagriva, Dattatreya, Rsaba (first tirthankara of Jains), Kapila, Buddha

among others. The dasaavataras enlisted by the acaryas are the prominent ones,

as I understand.

 

(I agree with Sri Mani regarding the Dasavatara festival)

With respect to Dasavatara festival, I feel any way of utilizing our holidays

and time in remembering/meditating on the Lord and His pasttimes is a good

exercise as long as we don't dilute the importance of the festivals of

traditional authority. Just as everything has its place in Nature, even the

days (time) have their significance in this system controlled by God.

 

btw, Happy New Year to all of you.

-ravi.

 

--

 

-----------------------kirtaniyah sada Hari---------------------------

[Guest guest]

Dear Readers,

 

With due respect to all your views and to those from differing scriptures and

texts, I would like to mention the following re the dashavatharam.

 

The ten incarnations are not merely that of emperuman Narayana but Narayana the

cosmic being, who is common to the Buddhists, Jains, Zens, Muslims, Christians

etc.. But as each of these sects define Him in a different manner, it is

understandable as to why our acharyas have not mentioned Buddha in their

writings and teachings.

 

One must look at it with a more global perspective and visualise the

incarnations to be the evolution of species. Matsya is the basic rudimentary

stage of a fish and through time, evolution occurs and we eventually have a

Buddha -- the enlightened soul; one who is the ultimate form of the evolutionary

process.

 

With regards,

Ranga

[Fijin]

A close study of two early texts in Buddhism and Brahmanism show that Buddha and Vishnu are two separate beings.

 

 

In the Maha-samya Sutta there was an occasion when the devas from almost all the planes came to see the Buddha when he was dwelling in the Great Wood together with 500 bhikkhus, all of them arahants. The Buddha introduced their names to the monks, Vishnu was one of those present. The Buddha mentioned him by the name Venhu.

The Venhu Sutta shows Vishnu as one of the young devas who came to visit and talked with the Buddha:

At Savatthi. Standing to one side, the young deva Venhu recited this verse in the presence of the Blessed One: " Happy indeed are those human beings attending on the Fortunate One. Applying themselves to Gotama's Teaching, who train in it with diligence." The Blessed One said: "When the course of teaching is proclaimed by me, O Venhu," said the Blessed One, "Those meditators who train therein. Being diligent at the proper time. Will not come under Death's control."

According to "Hinduism and Buddhism An Historical Sketch", Sir Charles Elliot who was a British diplomat mentioned that this correlates with the Rig Veda text before Hinduism started. Both texts mentioned that Vishnu and Shiva are minor deities instead of the Lords of the Universe as popularly known by worshippers:

" Vishnu and Rudra (Shiva) are known even to the Rig Veda but as deities of no special eminence. It is only after the Vedic age that they became , each for his own worshippers, undisputed Lords of the Universe…..The Pali Pitakas frequently introduce popular deities , but give no prominence to Vishnu and Siva. They are apparently mentioned under the names of Venhu and Isana, but are not differentiated from a host of spirits now forgotten. ….The suttas of the Digha Nikaya in which these lists of deities occur were perhaps composed before 300 B.C. "- Sir Charles Elliot

 

 

The texts above included quotes from the Pali canon showing that Buddha and Vishnu are two different people. It is supported by the Charles Elliot's comparative studies of early Hindu and Buddhist texts before the changes that take place in later texts. His book is called " Hinduism and Buddhism a Historical Sketch. There are three volumes that goes into detail on the subject. The quote above is from Vol. 2 page 746. The other is from The Connected Discourse of the Buddha" A Translation of the Samyutta Nikaya by Bhikkhu Bodhi ,page 432).

[chandu_69]

 

A close study of two early texts in Buddhism and Brahmanism show that Buddha and Vishnu are two separate beings.

 

What Texts?.Buddha's teachings have nothing to do with God(s).

 

 

 

 

In the Maha-samya Sutta there was an occasion when the devas from almost all the planes came to see the Buddha

 

There is no such sutta taught by Buddha.

 

 

 

The Venhu Sutta shows Vishnu as one of the young devas who came to visit and talked with the Buddha:

 

Again no such sutta taught by Buddha.

 

 

 

 

According to "Hinduism and Buddhism An Historical Sketch", Sir Charles Elliot who was a British diplomat mentioned that this correlates with the Rig Veda text before Hinduism started. Both texts mentioned that Vishnu and Shiva are minor deities instead of the Lords of the Universe as popularly known by worshippers:

 

Lord Vishnu is the one who gives names to all devas.There are innumerable threads in indiadivine threads showing quotes from rigveda.

 

 

The Pali Pitakas frequently introduce popular deities , but give no prominence to Vishnu and Siva. They are apparently mentioned under the names of Venhu and Isana, but are not differentiated from a host of spirits now forgotten. ….The suttas of the Digha Nikaya in which these lists of deities occur were perhaps composed before 300 B.C. "- Sir Charles Elliot

 

Sir elliot has a problem reading scriptures.Dieties are irrelevent in Buddhas teaching.

 

The maitthreya buddha and all such extra literature are NOT recognised as Buddha teachings.

 

 

 

 

Which pali cannons?.

 

 

 

Another nonsense.Buddha consciously refrains from mentioning God(s).Buddha delinks creator to life all together.