[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: ARTICLE : Re:Hinduism and Buddhism
Pradip Gangopadhyay <pradip@lism.usc.edu> writes:
> My view is different. What do Brahman, Dharma Kaya or Transcendental
>Reality mean? They are all different names or labels for the Infinite. They
>all have to be changeless. Why does not Brahman change? It is because Infinite
[snipped]
> You have raised the issue whether Nagarjuna would believe in a
>changeless reality. The experience of Dharmakaya and the constancy of Shunyata
[snipped]
>contradiction. The Buddhadharma will then have no ultimate standard to compare.
>It is only the relative world that changes.
Namaste Pradipji :
Thanks for your views and thoughts. Maybe I have misunderstood
Nagarjuna to mean that *everything including Atman* is subject to change.
Please see the talk.religion.buddhism newsgroup,
ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet/talk.religion.buddhism/
--
Is there "something" that is experienced as a self having continuity
in time -- a self with will, and joy, and pain? Of course there is,
there would be no need for the Buddha's teaching otherwise. But is
there a permanent and substantial self? Buddhist doctrine says no.
--
I would say that Buddhism says
dukkha, anicca and anataa are all characteristics of
conditioned phenomena including the soul.
>>The nirmana kaya are emanations created by buddhas to benefit sentients. The
>>closest it can be equated in Hinduism is grace.
> I think it is more than grace. The Nirmankaya is the earthly
>manifestations of a Buddha. A Buddha actually takes a physical body to help
>the suffering sentient. Doesn't this remind you of the Gita and its Avatar
>concept?
I would say that Avatars are only external manifestations of the
Self. Even the Guru is only an external manifestation of the Self. Therefore,
it is only the grace. Advaitins may agree that there is essentially no
difference between myself, my Guru and an Avathar.
>not separate paths. Infact the Neo-Advaita position is that these different
>paths are bound to appear irreconcilable precisely because they are paths.
>They are not Brahman. All contradictions are resolved only where these paths
>meet - at the Infinite Brahman.
>Why does Sri Ramakrishna say that Brahman is
>Personal-Impersonal? Precisely because Brahman is Infinite.
This is your (and Sri Ramakrishna's) contention. For example, the
dvaita school would never agree that the Atman is the same as Brahman
in the long run (or at infinite time).
There is an advaita school which says that a person who attains Saguna
Brahman reaches brahmaloka and stays there for a long time before it
finally 'merges' into Nirguna Brahman. This is described in Shankara's
Brahma sutra bhashya. However, this will not be supported by any dvaitic
school, as far as i can tell.
> In Euclidean Geometry all parallel paths meet at infinity. It is this
How can you tell me that one who says he is an eternal servant
to Vishnu (the key word here is eternal) is same as the person who
wants to merge with Brahman ? Basically, I understand you as saying that
worshipping Saguna Brahman or Ishta Devata is only a *step* in final
liberation.
>important insight that Sri Ramakrishna incorporated into modern Hinduism. He
>is no ordinary saint. His teachings are the foundation of the only important
>school founded in 500 years, the Neo-Vedanta school. Since the beginning of
First, to be recognized as a vedantin one has to write commentaries
on the prasthana-traya. Secondly, however great Ramakrishna may have been,
he is not recognized by dvaitins as a vedantin.
>the century, you can not describe Sanatan Dharma to contain only Advaita,
>Vishistadvaita or Dvaita. That is why I discussed the Neo-Vedanta school in
>addition to the other schools.
My original contention was that you discussed *only* the neo-advaita
school (whatever that term may mean) and not the classical advaita, dvaita
paths when comparing Buddhism and Hinduism.
>Regards
>Pradip
I think only two of us are reading this thread :-) Therefore,
please allow me to refrain from further postings. You can, of course,
reply to this posting or move into a mailing list such as the advaita
mailing list. Finally, I would say that I am impressed by your knowledge
and it was a pleasure discussing with you.
dhanyavaad.h
Giri
