Sankara vs The Buddhists

[Guest guest]

To the Experts:

I have a general understanding regarding Sankara's trimphs at

'discussions' with the Buddhists of that period. But, I am not an expert

on this. Are there any texts that outlines Sankara vs Buddhist

discussions?

What was Sankara arguing against? Were these discussions concerning the

actual Vedic religion being superior to the teachings of Buddha, or was

the topic Advaita vs Buddhism? Did Sankara also conduct discussions with

the Jains?

Will appreciate.

Regards,

Ram

[Guest guest]

advaitin, Ram Varmha <fritzv@a...> wrote:

> To the Experts:

> I have a general understanding regarding Sankara's trimphs at

> 'discussions' with the Buddhists of that period. But, I am not an

expert

> on this. Are there any texts that outlines Sankara vs Buddhist

> discussions?

 

 

YES! - http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe34/ sections II, 2, 18

onward to sections II, 2, 36 - these cover discussions of the three

major Buddhist schools (Realists, Idealists & Nihilists), as well as

the Jains.

 

> What was Sankara arguing against? Were these discussions concerning

the actual Vedic religion being superior to the teachings of Buddha,

or was the topic Advaita vs Buddhism?

 

 

Judging from the texts I mentioned, I believe they have mostly to do

with philosophy. However, I have read in a biography of Shankara that

he believed Buddha to have been originally part of Vedic religion, but

later misinterpreted,

 

It ( http://www.geocities.com/absolut_ism/shankarabio.htm ) says, "The

Acharya proved that Lord Buddha's spiritual practice was in accordance

with the Vedic injunctions and that he attained unqualified supreme

knowledge. He had also preached the Vedic truth and the eightfold

spiritual practice. It is because they had not properly understood the

instructions and the life of Lord Buddha that Buddhists were preaching

their theories against the Vedas." and also, "At the place where Lord

Buddha attained Buddha-hood, there was a large temple which housed an

image of Buddha. In course of time, the place had become a very sacred

pilgrimage center for the Buddhists all over the world. before this,

the Acharya had declared Lord Buddha to be one of the ten incarnations

of Sri Vishnu in his Dashavatara Stotra. Indeed it was through

spiritual practices following the Vedic path that Lord Buddha had

attained the state of realization. The nirvana that he spoke of was

not an empty state of mind but a state full of joy. Nirvana in the

Buddhist theory as preached originally by Lord Buddha and Moksha

according to Vedanta are synonymous. However, the later followers of

Buddhism misinterpreted the teachings and gave a different account of

Buddha's doctrine. The Acharya clarified this point and reformed many

Buddhist sects. As a result of the Acharya's acceptance of Buddha as

an incarnation of Sri Narayana, the foundations of the Buddhist

religion were weakened. The Brahmins of Gaya instituted the worship of

Lord Buddha as an incarnation of Sri Vishnu. The effect of such

worship was tremendous. House-holder Buddhists of different social

levels devoted themselves to the worship of Buddha as an incarnation

of Sri Vishnu. Within a short time in places around Gaya and also in

far away places, people in large numbers found refuge in Vaidika

Dharma."

 

The biography also records a dialogue with the Buddhists,

 

"Seeing the Acharya proceed towards another gate, Buddhist and Jain

scholars challenged him to a debate. Among the Buddhists, scholars of

all the four sects - Madhyamika, Yogachara, Soutantrika and

Vaibhashika were present. They said o the Acharya in an insolent

manner, 'O monk, explain the differences among our four sects and also

explain the distinction between the two different theories of

Bahyartha Vada (theories of the existence of external objects). What

is again the difference between Vedanta and these four doctrines?'

Without pausing a moment for deliberation, the Acharya replied, 'Among

the followers of Bahyartha Vada, the Sautantrikas say that all objects

are known through inference while the Vaibhashikas contend that these

are directly perceived. In both the theories, all matter is regarded

as momentary every moment, that is to say, matter is regarded as

transient. According to the nihilistic Madhyamika view, every thing by

nature is void. The awareness of the world is due to a stream of

momentary consciousness. In nirvana, even this awareness vanishes.

Then everything is realized as void. According to Vedanta, the eternal

Brahman alone which is pure, intelligent and free by nature is true.

Everything else is illusory and false. If the Sunyavadi (nihilist)

regards the void as something existent and the Vijnanavadi (idealist)

regards Vijnana (knowledge or consciousness) as fixed and unchanging

by nature, there is no difference between them and Vedanta'. The

Buddhists were so pleased with the Acharya's rational reply that they

all said in unison, 'Acharya, you are the fittest person to enter the

temple'."

 

It also records exchanges with Jains.

 

And such texts as the Yogavasistha seem to accept Buddha as a realized

sage. The quote in particular,

 

VI.1:93 (near the end) "It is by such total renunciation that the

Sakya Muni (Buddha) reached that state beyond doubt in which he was

firmly established."

[Guest guest]

respecteds,

of course.

of course, buddha was born into vaidik

traditionals.

of course, the state of nirvana if full of

supreme indescribable joy.

a.v.krshnan.

 

--- concordance909 <concordance909 wrote:

> advaitin, Ram Varmha

> <fritzv@a...> wrote:

> > To the Experts:

> > I have a general understanding regarding Sankara's

> trimphs at

> > 'discussions' with the Buddhists of that period.

> But, I am not an

> expert

> > on this. Are there any texts that outlines Sankara

> vs Buddhist

> > discussions?

>

>

> YES! - http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe34/

> sections II, 2, 18

> onward to sections II, 2, 36 - these cover

> discussions of the three

> major Buddhist schools (Realists, Idealists &

> Nihilists), as well as

> the Jains.

>

>

> > What was Sankara arguing against? Were these

> discussions concerning

> the actual Vedic religion being superior to the

> teachings of Buddha,

> or was the topic Advaita vs Buddhism?

>

>

> Judging from the texts I mentioned, I believe they

> have mostly to do

> with philosophy. However, I have read in a biography

> of Shankara that

> he believed Buddha to have been originally part of

> Vedic religion, but

> later misinterpreted,

>

> It (

> http://www.geocities.com/absolut_ism/shankarabio.htm

> ) says, "The

> Acharya proved that Lord Buddha's spiritual practice

> was in accordance

> with the Vedic injunctions and that he attained

> unqualified supreme

> knowledge. He had also preached the Vedic truth and

> the eightfold

> spiritual practice. It is because they had not

> properly understood the

> instructions and the life of Lord Buddha that

> Buddhists were preaching

> their theories against the Vedas." and also, "At the

> place where Lord

> Buddha attained Buddha-hood, there was a large

> temple which housed an

> image of Buddha. In course of time, the place had

> become a very sacred

> pilgrimage center for the Buddhists all over the

> world. before this,

> the Acharya had declared Lord Buddha to be one of

> the ten incarnations

> of Sri Vishnu in his Dashavatara Stotra. Indeed it

> was through

> spiritual practices following the Vedic path that

> Lord Buddha had

> attained the state of realization. The nirvana that

> he spoke of was

> not an empty state of mind but a state full of joy.

> Nirvana in the

> Buddhist theory as preached originally by Lord

> Buddha and Moksha

> according to Vedanta are synonymous. However, the

> later followers of

> Buddhism misinterpreted the teachings and gave a

> different account of

> Buddha's doctrine. The Acharya clarified this point

> and reformed many

> Buddhist sects. As a result of the Acharya's

> acceptance of Buddha as

> an incarnation of Sri Narayana, the foundations of

> the Buddhist

> religion were weakened. The Brahmins of Gaya

> instituted the worship of

> Lord Buddha as an incarnation of Sri Vishnu. The

> effect of such

> worship was tremendous. House-holder Buddhists of

> different social

> levels devoted themselves to the worship of Buddha

> as an incarnation

> of Sri Vishnu. Within a short time in places around

> Gaya and also in

> far away places, people in large numbers found

> refuge in Vaidika

> Dharma."

>

> The biography also records a dialogue with the

> Buddhists,

>

> "Seeing the Acharya proceed towards another gate,

> Buddhist and Jain

> scholars challenged him to a debate. Among the

> Buddhists, scholars of

> all the four sects - Madhyamika, Yogachara,

> Soutantrika and

> Vaibhashika were present. They said o the Acharya in

> an insolent

> manner, 'O monk, explain the differences among our

> four sects and also

> explain the distinction between the two different

> theories of

> Bahyartha Vada (theories of the existence of

> external objects). What

> is again the difference between Vedanta and these

> four doctrines?'

> Without pausing a moment for deliberation, the

> Acharya replied, 'Among

> the followers of Bahyartha Vada, the Sautantrikas

> say that all objects

> are known through inference while the Vaibhashikas

> contend that these

> are directly perceived. In both the theories, all

> matter is regarded

> as momentary every moment, that is to say, matter is

> regarded as

> transient. According to the nihilistic Madhyamika

> view, every thing by

> nature is void. The awareness of the world is due to

> a stream of

> momentary consciousness. In nirvana, even this

> awareness vanishes.

> Then everything is realized as void. According to

> Vedanta, the eternal

> Brahman alone which is pure, intelligent and free by

> nature is true.

> Everything else is illusory and false. If the

> Sunyavadi (nihilist)

> regards the void as something existent and the

> Vijnanavadi (idealist)

> regards Vijnana (knowledge or consciousness) as

> fixed and unchanging

> by nature, there is no difference between them and

> Vedanta'. The

> Buddhists were so pleased with the Acharya's

> rational reply that they

> all said in unison, 'Acharya, you are the fittest

> person to enter the

> temple'."

>

> It also records exchanges with Jains.

>

> And such texts as the Yogavasistha seem to accept

> Buddha as a realized

> sage. The quote in particular,

>

> VI.1:93 (near the end) "It is by such total

> renunciation that the

> Sakya Muni (Buddha) reached that state beyond doubt

> in which he was

> firmly established."

>

>

>

 

______________________

Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE

Messenger http://mail.messenger..co.uk