A Hindu’s Question
Buddhism and Hinduism – 39
Question:
What is wrong with calling Shakyamuni Buddha “an avatar of Vishnu”? That is respect, isn’t it? How is it injustice? By talking about two different Buddhas like this, does social harmony not get disturbed?
Answer:
The matter is neither as simple as that, nor is it about harmony in the way you have said. Let us try to understand a little.
First of all, the “Vishnu-avatar Buddha” mentioned in the Puranas and Shakyamuni Buddha are not the same. This truth alone is enough to prove how wrong and misleading this question is. Accepting the concept of two Buddhas, the four Shankaracharyas and other Hindu gurus have already signed an agreement with the Buddhist teacher Goenka that this matter will never again be discussed in that way.
Please watch these two videos.
In one, a Shankaracharya explains the existence of two different Buddhas. In the other video, Guru Goenka explains how all these misleading ideas spread in India and how he was able to convince the four Shankaracharyas on this matter in a simple manner.
a) Explanation by a Shankaracharya about two different Buddhas:
Click the link below to watch the video
https://youtu.be/unHZeSQ0Lqg
b) Context of the agreement signed by the four Shankaracharyas and Guru Goenka’s explanation of the false claim of Buddha as an avatar of Vishnu:
https://youtu.be/1UOjDYDAV64
Therefore, friend, this is the truth. Shakyamuni Buddha is not the Buddha written about in the Vedic Hindu Puranas—the Buddha believed in by Hindus and the Buddha believed in by Buddhists are different Buddhas.
Now, there are further problems in your question:
1)
Because a “Buddha-avatar of Vishnu,” whose name, place, and identity are unknown, was written in the Puranas with the name “Buddha,” a confusion arose among the general public that this must be Shakyamuni Buddha. As a result, Hindus worship Vishnu but do not come to learn the teachings of Shakyamuni. This was done intentionally. This is nothing but a clear and cunning strategy. Secondly, the Brahmins or learned Vedic Hindus who understand Sanskrit and can read scriptures—those who read those Puranas—never come to Buddhism, because there it is written that Vishnu took his worst and most negative “illusionary form” to delude demons. Therefore, those educated people regard Shakyamuni Buddha as bad, deceitful, fraudulent, cunning, someone who speaks against the Vedas, and believe that Shakyamuni Buddha’s teachings are not meant for good people. Thus, they also do not come to the Buddha’s teachings.
This is not a culture of harmony; this is a cunning strategy—on one hand making Buddha Vedic, and on the other hand defaming Buddha.
Let us also talk about certain individuals who try to discuss this matter in the name of harmony—these hypocritical people know very well about this “illusionary form.” When needed, they even circulate mantras like “Salutations to the one who deludes the demons” on social media, yet they do not stop claiming Buddha as their own, because if Vedic Hindus understood this truth, the number of Hindus would decrease. This is the truth.
That is why the Shankaracharyas, after understanding this clearly, made an agreement not to associate the “Vishnu-avatar Buddha” with Shakyamuni. Those who have read scriptures and truly understand Vedic Hinduism can easily accept this.
So this is not something said only by me—this is accepted by both Buddhists and Hindus. Even after understanding this, what you choose is your choice. But denying this truth and resorting to personal accusations is not right. Go and ask your own Shankaracharyas why they accepted that these two Buddhas are different. Buddhists will obviously say so, because that is the truth.
2)
There is a vast difference between the teachings of Shakyamuni Buddha and those of Vedic Vishnu—like the difference between sky and earth. Comparing the non-self, non-theistic Shakyamuni Buddha with the theistic, soul-based philosophy of Vishnu overshadows the true 2,500-year-old tradition of Shakyamuni Buddha. This is a visible truth. This is one major reason why Buddhism declined in India and Nepal.
And then your question is like saying—I am not allowed to say that your father resembles the face of my black dog, whom I like. Just because I like my black dog and find it dear, does that give me the right to compare your respected father to my dog? Would that be justice? Would that not be considered disrespect?
From many perspectives and angles, this idea is completely wrong, impractical, misleading, cunning, and conspiratorial. It is an insult to Shakyamuni Buddha for Buddhists.
Again, about harmony—did it not cause injustice to Shakyamuni, a faultless being, to describe him as the “worst illusionary form”? Can this be a culture that increases brotherhood, harmony, or coexistence? Can you even imagine harmony and brotherhood after assassinating someone’s character?
Again—by worshipping such a bad illusionary form that came to deceive, where will your spiritual journey reach? By chanting mantras like “Om Charles Sobhraj Namah,” will liberation now be attained in this world? Is this religion? Is this not madness? Is this not insanity? Is this not an indication of how confused and disturbed you are in the name of spirituality and religion?
In any world, in any religion, can one imagine that greed, hatred, delusion, and jealousy bring benefit to anyone? Have we lost even the ability to think rationally, that we now worship such low-level, criminal acts as spirituality? Does rape, stealing clothes, cutting, killing, and deceit all become spirituality and religion? In today’s world, even in countries and societies where Buddhism and Hinduism are not practiced or their notions of religion and non-religion are not accepted, such acts are considered unacceptable and against universal human values. If you can proudly call this “our culture,” then you might as well worship Hitler, Charles Sobhraj, and others too!
Thus, this is not only disrespect and injustice toward Shakyamuni—it is madness! For an educated person in today’s time to call such things spirituality and religion is nothing but mental derangement.
Again, keep your own beliefs to yourself. You have the right to decide what is religion and what is not for you. But these matters are invalid and irreligious based on evidence and from the Buddhist perspective.
Therefore, for the sake of social harmony, respecting the feelings of Buddhists, and as an act of justice and proper reverence toward Shakyamuni, calling him an avatar of Vishnu is inappropriate.
#buddhismhinduism #बौद्धधर्महिन्दुधर्म
Shared from Facebook wall: Bibek Sharma (Buddhist teacher and PhD candidate)
Please share your own views in the comments below!
