[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Article : About Hinduism and Buddhism
> 2.Buddha kept silent about the existence of the Ultimate Reality. To
> some Buddhist sects this implies that Buddha does not believe in any Ultimate
> Reality. Other Buddhist sects like the Tibetan system thinks that Buddha did
> believe in an Ultimate Reality. However, all Buddhist sects reject the concept
Can you provide some sort of proof that the Tibetan system believe
in *changeless* ultimate reality (brahman) ? I guess Shankara and others
would agree on a changeless brahman. To support the tibetan system, a quote
from the Dalai lama would be nice.
> however, one major difference. Hindus believe that the Atman transmigrates
> from one birth to another.
Not neccessarily. Neither did Shankara. If you forget the
wranglings on defining hinduism, you can safely assume Shankara is a
Hindu. See upadeshasahasri (Prose,50) 'The teacher says 'You are the
*non-transmigratory* supreme self, but you wrongly think you are one
liable to transmigration.'..' Or see upadeshasahasri (18,44) 'Who is the
experiencer of transmigatory existence as it cannot belong to the Self
which is changeless, neither to the reflection which is not real nor to
the ego which is not a conscious entity.' I will leave it to you to
read 18,55 for the answer.
> Sri Ramakrishna says that both positions are true and depends on the
> wish of the liberated person. If the liberated person is a devotee, he will
> not want to become sugar but want to eat sugar. Thus the devotee will retain
> his individuality to enjoy God's love. On the other hand, those who are jnani
> wants to merge with Brahman. Sri Ramakrishna also makes the point that
Let me ask you this. If the person is liberated (a jnani), does
(s)he have an individual will or wish other than the wish of Brahman ?
As I understand it, you are trying to say that if the devotee wishes to
become one with Vishnu (for example), his wish will be granted and he
will become a jnani. That would be ridiculous from a dvatic view
(especially the eternal bheda funda).
> Nirvikalpa Samadhi. In that state there is no I and thus no you and thus no
> world. However, you can not keep yourself at such a high state and your
> consciousness has to come down. Then you see the world again. Thus Sri
> Ramakrishna says that the Advaita position is a philosophical position. He
Nisargadatta Maharaj has explicity stated that 'he does not come
down.' It (non-dualism) is not a philosophical position, but a position
which is experienced in daily life by the jnanis. Or are you just denying
them ?
> 6. Buddha thinks that only monks can achieve nirvana. Hindus believe
> that while it is easier for monks to achieve Samadhi, it is possible for
> householders can experience Samadhi.
What does a monk renunciate ? Wealth/action or ego ? Did buddha
say that renunciation of action is necessary ?
Giri
