Wednesday, December 26, 2007

Buddhism & Hinduism

Why am I writing so much about Buddhism? There are two main reasons, first, in today’s politically charged atmosphere it is all most impossible to get correct information. Forget about the reality of scriptures, politicians and so called ‘Samaj-Sevak’ will go to any extent to achieve their selfish agenda. In such times, it is imperative for educated people to propagate the reality. Second, need of the time is unity of Dharmic religion. Now, what is Dharmic religion? Any religion that originated from the land of Bharat is a Dharmic religion. The basic tenet of Sanatan Dharma, Sikh, Buddha and Jain Dharma are similar to the extent of being same. Yet, we keep squabbling among ourselves. The aim of Abrahmic religion is complete annihilation not only of Sanatan Dharma but also of Buddhism, Sikkhism and Jainism. If we want to survive the onslaught 2.0 of Islam and Christianity then we better stand together otherwise we are destined to join the Mayan or Incan civilization.

I have no intention of saying that Buddhism is Hinduism. How can a daughter be same as her mother? She can’t be. Yet, they are attached to each-other by umbilical chord for whole of their life. If politics dictates us to cut that chord then that’s shame on us- the educated class.

According to L.T. the similarities between Hindu and Buddhist scriptures are remarkable. The nature of a Purush who can achive Moksha are quite similar in Geeta and host of other Dhamma-pad. But the similarity doesn’t just stop here.


When ever we say that Sikhism, Buddhism and Jainism are branches of Sanatan Dharma, we usually get heated response from respective communities. But they being branches of Sanatan Dharma is as true as Sun rising at east and setting up at west. The basic tenet of all Dharmic religions i.e. Santan Sanstha, Buddhism, Sikhism and Jainism is same.



They all believe in –:
• In Karma theory
• In reincarnation
• In Moksha or Nirvana.

The world is actually a myth and humans don’t realize this ‘Maya’ and keep repeating same mistakes again and again. As in accounting, humans have to take multiple birth to negate effect of Karma. The cycle of birth and death is nothing but ‘Dukhha’ and it is imperative for a human being to work incessantly towards escaping from this cycle. Even though, ‘Yagya-Karma-kaanda’ are considered as helpful in Santan Sanstha, Upanishad clearly mentions that doing rituals isn’t ultimate way for Moksha. Buddha goes a step further and pronounces these rituals as violent and absolutely usless. (Geeta Rahasya 482) Once a person realizes this, he detaches himself from the work he is doing and achieves the Moksha.

Buddhism pretty much treads on this concept except for some minor changes. It is as if they are running along with us on this ‘Karma’ path except for certain distance where Buddha takes detour and runs parallel to Sanatan dharma for time being before joining the mainstream.

Buddha believes in the concept of Karma and reincarnation but he doesn’t agree with Sanatan Dharma that there is a ‘Brahma’- ultimate energy or gate to eternal bliss at the end of Moksha. He believes that Brahma and Aatma are myths and hence, working towards assimilation of Aatma and Brahma is useless. But if Brahma is myth then what is the ultimate way to achieve Moksha i.e. Nirvana?

Buddha believes that in order to get rid of an ailment, we need to nip it at it’s source. Similarly, in order to get rid of all ‘Dukkha’ in our life, we need to find the source and destroy it at its source. For that a person need to renounce ‘Gruhastha-aashram’ and take ‘Sanyas’. Once a person destroys Dukkha at its source, he/she don’t need to take multiple birth and they escape from the cycle. (all though, where does ‘Aatma’ goes after Nirvana is a mystery to me) The four concepts of Pain (Dukkha), it’s source ( Samuday), destruction of source (Nirodh) and way to do it (Marga) are known as Aarya-Satya.

The important concept to understand here is the ‘Marga’ that Buddha talks about is pretty similar to what Upanishad advices. But instead of calling the state of eternal bliss as Brahma-Sanstha, Brahma-bhutata or Aatma-Nishta, Buddha simply calls it as Nirvana –i.e. death of death. (Geeta Rahasya 483)

Once a person achieves Nirvana, he or she doesn’t care about human body and they are dissociated from the concepts of Paap-Punya or Karma. This concept that appears in Bruhadaranya-Upnishad comes word to word in Buddhists scriptures like Dhammapad or Milind-Prashna.

In short, Buddha firmly believes that it is impossible to achieve Nirvana while still practicing Gruhasth-Aashram. And, only way that a person can achieve Nirvana is by taking ‘Sanyas’. Then what about common man? Any peson who believes in Buddha, his Dharma and oraganization of Buddha Bikkhu is a Upasak. i.e. Buddham Sharanam gacchami, Dhammam SharaNam Gacchami, Sangham Sharanam Gacchami. All though, unlike Jain Tirthankar who rejects everything including clothes, Buddha doesn’t go this far.

An Upasak is not supposed to get tangled into rituals (as in rituals of Santan Sanstha) but he is supposed to stick to the Dharma of Ahimsa, Satyasheel behavior, philanthropy, Neeti-yogya behavior. In Sanatan-Sanstha these behavior is also expected and they are known as Smarta-Pancha-yagya. It’s quite obvious that Buddha took thise Smarta-Pancha-Yagya concepts from Sanatan Sanstha. In fact regarding this behavior Buddha himself gives example of his contemporary Brahmins. (Geeta-Rahasya 484)

4 comments:

वेद प्रकाश said...

Your aim is nothing but to prove that all other religions are manifestations of Hinduism, which is not true. regions are
1. Hinduism believes in caste system and Buddhism oppose it.
2. Hinduism believes in the concept of god, Buddhism does not.
3. Buddhism believes in egalitarian society, Hinduism in hierarchical society.
4. Buddhism is a scientific religion Hinduism is against the scientific temperament and give more importance to VEDA's and ancient scriptures.
5. Buddhism is a humanist religion and does not believe in any kind of discrimination whereas Hinduism and even you discriminate between Indian and non Indian religions.

many more. your political motive of absorbing Buddhism into the Hindu fold will never be fulfilled. please stop spreading discriminatory ideology in the name of india and nationality. stop abusing democracy. pay respect to knowledge.

वेद प्रकाश said...

Your aim is nothing but to prove that all other religions are manifestations of Hinduism, which is not true. regions are
1. Hinduism believes in caste system and Buddhism oppose it.
2. Hinduism believes in the concept of god, Buddhism does not.
3. Buddhism believes in egalitarian society, Hinduism in hierarchical society.
4. Buddhism is a scientific religion Hinduism is against the scientific temperament and give more importance to VEDA's and ancient scriptures.
5. Buddhism is a humanist religion and does not believe in any kind of discrimination whereas Hinduism and even you discriminate between Indian and non Indian religions.

many more. your political motive of absorbing Buddhism into the Hindu fold will never be fulfilled. please stop spreading discriminatory ideology in the name of india and nationality. stop abusing democracy. pay respect to knowledge.

वेद प्रकाश said...

Your aim is nothing but to prove that all other religions are manifestations of Hinduism, which is not true. reasons are
1. Hinduism believes in caste system and Buddhism oppose it.
2. Hinduism believes in the concept of god, Buddhism does not.
3. Buddhism believes in egalitarian society, Hinduism in hierarchical society.
4. Buddhism is a scientific religion Hinduism is against the scientific temperament and give more importance to VEDA's and ancient scriptures.
5. Buddhism is a humanist religion and does not believe in any kind of discrimination whereas Hinduism and even you discriminate between Indian and non Indian religions.

many more. your political motive of absorbing Buddhism into the Hindu fold will never be fulfilled. please stop spreading discriminatory ideology in the name of india and nationality. stop abusing democracy. pay respect to knowledge.

Ranjay Dakhane said...

Hi,
Hopefully my strong Buddhist biasing does not get reflected in here. But I would like you to please do little more investigation in History. More I read old Hindu scripture, more I start disliking it. Following are few points, the list is endless. If you insist I can also provided the proof for the same.
1. The word HINDU has itself flaw in it, it were the invaders who did not have word 'S' in their script mentioned SINDHU as HINDU and hence it came in picture. So you have to mind the existence of Hinduism in long history, specially before the 'Bouddhik Kaal'
2. The different people believed in different system in India, and believed in different god in ancient time, remember a Vaishanv strongly opposes the Shaive and vise versa. They did not even visited each other's temple.
3. Upanishada and Veda, all though in later part of the history was learned and taught by Brahmins, were never a part of Hindu religion (Hindu itself believed not to have existed then). They were the knowledge spread orally by some people whose Nomad culture came to halt near Sarwasati and Sindh rivers. They were believed to be early Nomad Aryans who supposedly have come from somewhere Russia or Europe.
3. After Bouddhik Kaal, and especially after the Moryan Dynasti, many kings splitted the Moryan empire and hence killed Moryans followers. In that process they not only Killed many Buddhist scholars, but manipulated most of its scriptures and gave (so called) Hindu Flavor. Later this was done my Moghuls when they invaded.
4. Buddhism which then continued to grow in different parts of the world still preaches the Buddhist upadeshas (mind it is not Upanishadas). And every Monk is supposed to understand and give a correct logic to it. That may be different for different Monk, then only any Monk gets the degree in Bhuddhism and he is entitled to carry his 101 shilas (quite different that a Brahmin born Brahmin right?). But there is similarity, even upanishadas are taught like that, so request you to take it, that it is other way round.
Now last but not least, LORD Buddha and later his Sangha never believed in God carrying Arms in his many hands, they were against the 'Yadhnya' and Animal Ahutis.
A sad part of the History is, there was a time when Buddhism was flourished and spread up to Afghanistan and ahead. It was then no more a Sangha, but a religion. The evidence of this is seen in all parts of India too, the Buddhist prints are shown in Karanataka, Andhra and other south Indian states, dates back up to 400 BC or so. But then few rulers came, which believed in Caste system and realized that it is not good to get its 'praja' liberated. They realized that if common man is liberated, there will be end of a Hierarchical system and hence the Kingdoms. So they started killing the monks and destroying the universities. History shows that, in those eras, if a Buddhist monk is spotted then he would be beheaded. Some of the Monks to keep Buddhism alive travelled far deep in Mountains and crossed the border.

This is the History......... Hinduism and Buddhism though existed on same land, have the different ideology itself. To me Hinduism is not a religion, but in later part of History when there was more invasions, people started threading the native way of life into a religion ( In Hindi it is called Murty Pujak dharma, who believe in praying Statues) contrary to the Bookish religion which was founded by somebody (like Islam , Christianity, Sikhism and Buddhism).