Bhakta_Glenn wrote:The reason why Hindus see the Buddha as an Avatar is because they have a different, uncompounded view of reality. From this perspective, the Buddha could not be considered to be anything else than an Avatar of God.
"In the world with its devas, I have no counterpart."
"Teacher of divine & human beings (sattha deva-manussanam)"
On seeing him, he went to him and said, "Master, are you a deva?"
"No, brahman, I am not a deva."
' Then what sort of being are you?"
"Brahman, the fermentations by which — if they were not abandoned — I would be a deva: Those are abandoned by me, their root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising...Remember me, brahman, as 'awakened.'
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... el414.html
http://www.parami.org/buddhistanswers/m ... buddha.htm
http://www.bps.lk/wheels_library/wheels ... 50_151.pdf
(Dear Mods, may I beg your kind indulgence on this section to be seen as I think it's important to see how this never ending claim of Buddha as Vishnu's Avatar must end as even their own kind have refuted that very claim and I have used some of these excerpts in my many debates with my Vaishnavaite frens)
It starts with:
Bhagavata Purana, Canto 1, Chapter 3 - SB 1.3.24:
"Then, in the beginning of Kali-yuga, the Lord will appear as Lord Buddha, the son of Anjana, in the province of Gaya, just for the purpose of deluding those who are envious of the faithful theist."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddha_as_ ... _of_Vishnu
Son of Anjana? Province of Gaya? Wasn't the historical Buddha born in Lumbini, son of Suddhodana Maharajah and Maha Mayadevi?
An interesting comment from a Hindu website:
"It is said that Sakyasimha Buddha, the son of Suddhodana and Maya, and Buddha-avatara, the Vaishnavas’ object of adoration, are not one and the same person."
"Our Most Revered Nityalilapravishta Om Vishnupada 108 Sri Srimad Bhakti Siddhanta Sarasvati Gosvami Prabhupada has clearly said,
“Sakyasimha Buddha was merely a vastly learned person, so we cannot call him the original Buddha or Lord Buddha.”
Thus, Sugata Buddha and Sunyavadi (Sakyasimha) Buddha are not the same person."
And apparently, the confusion may have stem from:
"It is written in Chapter 21, Page 178 of Lalitavistara-grantha that Gautama Buddha performed penances at the same place as the previous Buddha (Vishnu-avatara Buddha). Maybe it is for this reason that in later ages he and Lord Buddha are considered as being one.."
"Therefore, this source leaves no doubt that the ancient avatara-Buddha and the modern Gautama Buddha are not the same person."
According to the German scholar Max Muller, Sakyasimha Buddha was born in the Lumbini Forest of Kapilavastu in 477 B.C.
Ancient Kapilavastu is a famous district situated near Nepal. Gautama’s father’s name was Suddhodana and His mother’s name was Mayadevi.
Anjana’s son and Maya’s son both share the same name but one appeared at Gaya and the other at Kapilavastu.
Thus, the appearance places and parents of Vishnu Buddha and Gautama Buddha are totally different."
And a thought on what the Buddha taught:
"While other religions lead us outward — towards ideas of a deity who determines our fate, or to lofty philosophical abstractions like the idea of a universal self or a nondual reality in which all opposites are resolved — the Buddha leads us back to ourselves, always keeping his teaching attuned to the hard facts of experience.
He places the mind at the forefront of his analysis and says that it is the mind which fashions our actions, the mind which shapes our destiny, the mind which leads us towards misery or happiness.
The beginning point of the teaching is the ordinary mind, in bondage and subject to suffering; the end point is the enlightened mind, completely purified and liberated from suffering.
The whole teaching unfolds between these two points, taking the most direct route."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... el433.html
Personally, as a figure of speech, I won't ask an Engineer what is a cardio arrest, even tho he may know SOMETHING about it, but it does not cover ALL things about it as compared to a medical doctor.
Similarly, as a Buddhist, only the Tipitaka/Tripitaka is qualified to speak on the totality of the Buddha and His Dhamma.
Other than that, other books may be just be a past time indulgence on Buddhism and comparative religious study.
Namo Amitabha Buddha