KC and World Religions 5 – Buddhism

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
…is growing religion in America… …and as mentioned Hawaii… …is majority Buddhist… …so if you look back at the roots… …Buddhism… …started with… …as we know it, it started with Buddha… …so Buddha was in the 5th, 6th century BC… …563 AD to 483 BC… …and… …like the life of Jesus… …which was recorded… …life and teachings of Jesus… …which was recorded a lot of time after Jesus departed… …similarly Buddha’s life was recorded… …much after he departed… …so… …he was as we know born in a very princely family… …wealthy family and it’s predicted that… …either he’ll become a king… …or he’ll become a… …renunciate… …so his father in order to protect… …avoid the possibility of him becoming a renunciate… …surrounded him with luxury and comfort… …at the age of 20 he married… …at the age of 21… …he got a son… …he gave his son the name Rahula… …the word Rahula in Sanskrit… …means fetter… …fetter means bond… …then his charioteer Channa… …once took him for a ride… …and at that time he had those three great frights… …he saw an old person, a deceased person… …and a corpse… …he was shocked… …he came back and he started thinking… …what is the meaning of all this enjoyment… …the next day his charioteer took him out again… …and this time… …he met for the first time in his life a renunciate… …this person was shaven headed… …carrying a staff… …and he asked him who are you… …what are you doing… …so that person said I am a sanyasi… …and I have renounced this world… …because I am afraid… …of the devouring chakra of samsara… …cycle of birth and death… …that… …two combinations… …one is… …seeing the misery… …and second is… …coming to know about a path out… …that night… …he renounced the world… …and went to the forest… …and for six years… …he was performing severe austerities… …initiating his body completely… …at that time… …five people came and saw that… …he was performing such austerity… …they came and sat with him… …but as he was performing austerities… …fasting… …torturing his body… …at that time he struck him… …he was on the verge of death… …and at that time he felt that… …actually… …this sort of tormenting the body… …is not of any use… …it will not lead to any realisation… …as he heard this… …according to Buddhist legend… …celestial milkmaid came there… …and gave him a glass of milk… …and he drank that… …when he drank that… …all the… …people who were with him doing meditation… …they thought he has given up his determination to… …attain enlightenment… …and they left him and went away… …but he again sat over there… …and all this happened in Gaya… …under that Bodh Gaya tree which they say… …then he got the… …realisation… …whatever it was… …so… …then he went back and met… …those five… …or rather he started going around and teaching… …and those five students came back to him again… …and they saw he was transformed… …he was looking very fulgent… …and then they became his followers after that… …so he taught basically eightfold path… …and it is more or less… …Sattva Guri… …we look at this more from a… …Vedic perspective… …basically… …he taught that… …as we know… …desire is the cause of suffering… …in the Bhagavatam in the eleventh canto… …in the… …realisations of Pingala… …there is a verse which more or less encapsulates… …the teachings of Buddha… …desire is the cause of all suffering… …giving up desire is the… …source of all happiness… …and how does one give up desire… …he taught of all these things… …one should have the right thoughts… …right intention… …right speech… …and that livelihood effort… …mindfulness and concentration… …and then… …he recommended… …how does one cultivate this… …the first thing he said is that… …don’t take any life… …there was that… …Angulimal, that famous bandit who was… …going around killing people… …he had a… …the story is almost like the Vallagol story… …that is there in the Vedic literature… …he was Angulimal… …he used to kill people and wear their… …fingers… …so he had a mala of Angulis, of fingers… …so Buddha by his… …effulgence and his… …potency transformed him… …and he said that… …if we can’t create life… …then we have no right to kill life… …that was his… …one of his fundamental teachings… …along with that the other principle Asteya… …Asteya is the… …among the Yama and Niyama of yogic path… …you should not take, steal anything… …then you avoid sexual misconduct… …we will talk about this later again… …to refrain from false speech… …and to refrain from intoxicants… …so on the positive side… …they have these three things… …they call it Buddha… …the Dharma and the Sangha… …so… …the Buddha is the physician… …he is a doctor… …the path of Dharma is the medicine… …and the Sangha… …they have their concept of association… …actually association is foundational to any spiritual path… …any various path… …so… …the Sangha is the nurse… …who administers the remedy… …and… …even today in Buddhist monasteries… …they have a great sense of community… …and they have a sort of… …Christianised version of the confession… …but it is different in the sense that… …in many of their monasteries… …where there are monks… …every fortnight… …they come together… …and they recite together… …the vow of monkhood… …what is the vow of monkhood… …and then… …whoever has… …committed any transgression of that vow… …he is told to publicly confess it at that time… …and… …if he publicly confesses it… …then Buddha says that… …he will be forgiven… …of course it depends on the level of the transgression… …but they have the idea of Sangha… …of association… …which is very similar to the… …concept of association that is there in Vedic literature… …so of course the Dharma… …is more of giving up the negative… …giving up the Rajasic and the Tamasic… …and coming to the Sattvic… …there is very little about transcendence in it… …so when Buddha was going around teaching… …at that time… …one person came and asked him… …so you must be a spirit… …isn’t it… …Buddha just remained silent… …he said… …and then he asked… …you must be a spirit… …no… …then you must be a god… …he said no… …then you must be an angel… …he said no… …then what are you… …I am awake… …I am awake… …that’s all… …don’t speak anything… …so another time… …Buddha asked… …Buddha asked… …so… …is the body same as the soul… …he did not reply anything… …is the body different from the soul… …he did not reply anything… …tell me something… …he just remained silent… …and then that person walked away… …and one of Buddha’s primary disciple was Ananda… …so he asked him… …why did you not reply anything to him… …he said… …this person was… …so much… …intoxicated with his own ideas of… …certainty… …that whatever I would have said… …it would only increase his confusion… …therefore I did not speak anything… …so… …Buddha basically taught something called agnosticism… …there is theism, there is atheism and there is agnosticism… …so theism means there is God… …atheism means there is no God… …agnosticism means we cannot know about God… …his idea was… …we know traditionally that because he… …rejected the Vedic literature… …so without the Vedic literature there is no way to know God… …so… …what Buddha emphasised… …was that… …ultimately… …whether God exists or not nobody can know… …whether… …what is there beyond this world nobody can know… …but what you can know is that… …desires cause suffering… …therefore desire… …give up desires… …then you will become peaceful… …and then you will become enlightened… …so the idea was… …that Buddha spoke very little philosophy… …but… …he was personally very charismatic… …and that’s how… …his path spread very rapidly… …it is said that… …his wife… …his aunt who had nursed him… …his son… …his cousin… …everybody became Buddhist after him… …and… …practically whole kingdom was converted… …former kingdom… …so now Buddha was very emphatic… …in giving up desires… …and… …some things… …may seem a little shocking… …so there is a code of conduct… …it is called the Vinaya Patra… …which Buddha himself is supposed to have read… …and there are many jarring things in this… …it is just a simple… …sample over here… …so he is saying… …it would be better… …if your penis had entered the mouth of a terrifying and poisonous snake… …in a woman’s vagina… …it would be better if your penis had entered a charcoal pit… …burning blazing of flame in a woman’s vagina… …so… …there are many… …very… …strong condemnations… …of… …sexuality in it… …and initially he was very adamant that… …only… …men can become monks… …so his cousin Ananda was one of his most faithful followers… …so Ananda told him… …that… …if you… …don’t accept women… …then… …half of the world will never become your followers… …so Buddha replied, if I accept women… …half of my followers will go away… …so the emphasis was very strongly on rejection… …of the world… …but eventually… …and Ananda’s persistence… …Buddha accepted women also… …now there are nuns also in Buddhism… …but… …Buddhism spread… …so Buddha lived for… …around… …almost a century or more… …nearly, I don’t know that much… …and then… …after he departed… …his successors Ananda and others started spreading it… …so for Buddhism, 300 years later… …Ashoka’s conversion… …was the crucial… …turning point in the spreading of Buddhism… …now Ashoka’s grandfather… …was Chandragupta Maurya… …and Chandragupta Maurya was counselled by Chanakya… …and Chanakya writes in his Arthashastra… …that the one thing a king should not do is… …associate with Buddhists… …associate with Buddhists or Jains… …the reason he says is that… …these philosophies are so world denying and world rejecting… …that the king will lose the impetus to rule the world… …so Chandragupta Maurya practically united… …the whole of North India, almost all of India… …and when Ashoka converted Buddhism… …he gave a big boost to Buddhism, in fact… …his own son, his own… …daughter… …he sent them to different parts of the world… …his son was the person who went to Sri Lanka… …and that’s how Buddhism spread in Sri Lanka… …and Ashoka sent his missionaries both in the East… …as well in the West… …so he sent it to almost Syria, Egypt and Greece also… …so here we see the… …Prabhupada when he talked about the spreading of Krishna consciousness… …he talked about two ways… …one is say the top down, the other is bottom up… …top down means… …say a Brahmana influences Kshatriya… …and the Kshatriya Brahmana combination change society… …the bottom up is that… …a large number of people become devotees… …and then they elect a devotional government or something like that… …so Buddhism spread from the top down approach… …that means there was a Buddhist monk who inspired… …Ashoka and that’s how it spread… …and after that… …you know the most famous… …post Buddha… …teachings are… …the Milinda Samadhi… …so Milinda was a king of Bactria… …and he met… …Naga Sena… …one of the Buddhist monks… …and he asked a lot of questions and… …basically Buddhism adopted much of the… …formats of Hinduism… …you see what it changed… …but the whole concept of renunciation, of association… …of discussion… …and of… …metaphysics… …it was largely adapted from Hinduism… …so now… …going backwards… …so now… …Shri Prabhupada writes this… …Lord Buddha incarnates at a time when the people are most materialistic… …and he preaches common sense religious principles… …very precise phrase Prabhupada is using… …common sense religious principles… …now… …if you see… …the list of incarnations in the Bhagavatam comes twice… …first is coming from the third chapter of the first canto… …and then it comes once again in the seventh chapter of the second canto… …and there it describes… …if you see… …the Buddhas were described by different Buddhas… …in the second canto when Buddha is described… …it is described that Buddha comes on an aeroplane and fights… …shoots weapons and kills people… …so what is being described… …even in the Buddhist tradition… …there are… …three concepts of Buddha… …there is the Adi Buddha, the original Buddha… …then there is the Bodhisattva Buddha and there is the Manav Buddha… …Adi Buddha is the original person who was Buddha… …then Bodhisattva Buddha is their concept that… …when a person attains Buddhahood, he becomes enlightened… …he again comes to this world… …he can show compassion to people and deliver other people… …Buddhahood is a state of enlightenment… …so if one has attained that but one comes back again to that world… …it is called a Bodhisattva Buddha… …and then there is a Manav Buddha… …Manav Buddha means a person who does his sadhana in this life… …and attains Buddhahood… …so now if you look at… …the stories of Buddhism… …Buddha himself had a series of stories called the Jataka tales… …and in the Jataka tales… …he tells about his previous incarnations… …and how he was in various incarnations… …and he showed compassion on many different people at different places… …so from the point of view of Buddha’s own self-narration… …Buddha was a Bodhisattva Buddha… …he is not the Adi Buddha… …the one who appeared 500 years ago… …and this is how… …if you look at the… …this is the Bhagavatam verse in the first canto… …in the beginning of Kali Yuga… …the Lord will appear as Buddha… …a son of Anjana in the province of Gaya… …just for the purpose of deluding those who are envious of the faithful at least… …so there are… …three significant points in this verse… …we’ll go for the province of Gaya… …now if we know historically… …Buddha or Gautama Siddhartha… …did not take birth in Gaya… …he took birth in Nepal… …and his mother’s name was not Anjana… …his mother’s name was Maya… …so what is the Bhagavatam talking about in this… …actually speaking… …the Bhagavatam may be… …Shila Prabhupada in his analysis… …talks about… …so there is a quote of Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur… …which… …says that Buddha is just another name for Vaishnava… …but then in the Bhakti Rasamrita Sindhu… …when… …Rupa Goswami is talking about… …following the Vedas and all the principles… …there he says that… …the Buddhists are actually not following the Vedas… …so… …Bhaktisiddhanta Thakur and Rupa Goswami… …are talking from two different perspectives… …Shila Prabhupada in his analysis kept things simple… …he did not talk about multiple Buddhas… …but when we talk about… …Bhaktisiddhanta Thakur talking about… …Buddha is just another name for Vaishnava… …he talks about this… …this comes in the Ray of Vishnu as well as Bhaktisiddhanta Vaibhav… …so basically… …Shila Prabhupada Thakur is talking about… …the mission with which Buddha came… …the ultimate purpose of that mission… …but the Bhagavatam is not talking about the ultimate purpose… …the Lord comes sometimes to give the ultimate revelation… …and sometimes the Lord may come… …to bring about a transitional elevation… …a transitional elevation means… …he does not give the full revelation… …he just gives a partial revelation… …just like in Maharashtra there is a verse called Atthatra… …Atthatra primarily taught impersonalism… …he did not talk about… …theism or devotion… …so like that… …Buddha… …he basically… …now today Buddhists consider themselves to be atheistic… …but there is no explicit statement… …in Deity of Buddha where he rejects God… …he is basically non-theistic… …he just doesn’t talk about God… …because once you don’t have Vedas… …you can’t talk about God… …there is no way to know God without Vedas… …Shastra Yonitvar… …the Vedanta Sutra says that… …Shastra is the way by which you can know about Brahman… …so… …Buddhism is not atheistic, it is non-theistic… …and more precisely it is not even non-theistic… …it is pre-theistic… …pre-theistic means… …it creates the foundation of morality and goodness… …by which people can later on… …take to theism… …so… …here… …Anjana was the name of the grandmother of Buddha… …and… …after Gautama was born… …within 7 days his mother passed away… …and… …his grandmother took care of him throughout his life… …and for all practical purposes… …she was like his mother… …so in that sense… …the Bhagavatam is talking more about… …who acted as his mother… …and secondly… …Siddhartha was born in Nepal… …but Buddha… …means he attained Buddhahood in Gaya… …so the Bhagavatam is… …bringing together many elements of… …Buddha’s life into one place… …because the Bhagavatam is not talking about… …the place where Gautama was born… …so Gautama or Siddhartha… …was his name before he attained Buddhahood… …after he attained Buddhahood… …his name was Buddha… …so where he attained Buddhahood… …that is Gaya… …so… …Sanskrit talker talks about this… …and he says that… …these two different perspectives are there on this issue… …so the Bhagavatam verse… …can either refer to the Adi Buddha… …the original Buddha… …whenever he appeared… …or… …as Srila Prabhupada considers this Buddha… …to be the same as the historical Buddha… …who appeared in 2500 years ago… …Teltan text which Bapu Sankara produces that… …this refers to… …we need to reconcile the details… …that Anjana is his grandmother… …and Gaya is the place where he attained Buddhahood… …now… …when we look at Buddhism… …they have two main divisions… …and then after that there were… …two further… …many further divisions but… …this is… …Buddhism is a classic example… …of a religion that… …almost entirely… …goes away from its roots… …when it spreads rapidly… …so… …the traditional divisions of Buddhism… …are they call it Mahayana… …and Hinayana… …so Yana is like a path… …like we have Ramayana… …path… …so Mahayana is called the great path… …and… …these people who follow Mahayana… …they call the other path as Hinayana… …the lower path… …so of course… …these people who follow Hinayana… …they don’t consider themselves as lower path… …so they have adopted a different name for themselves… …they call themselves Theravada Buddhism… …so… …now… …what is the main difference between the two… …there are several… …differences with respect to practise and teachings… …but the main thing is… …that… …Buddha basically… …as he lived and he taught… …he said this world is a place of misery… …and you just have to get out of this world… …so… …for the purpose of getting out of this world… …one has to attain Arhat… …Arhat is according to them… …a state of enlightenment… …if one attains that… …then… …one can become… …one can become free from this world… …and attain Nirvana… …so Nirvana… …when… …actually Prabhupada met one devotee… …he was a Buddhist… …had been a Buddhist… …and then Tamal Krishna Maharaj introduced him… …said Prabhupada he was following Buddhism… …now he has come to Krishnaloka… …Prabhupada said yes… …so what attracted you to Krishna Consciousness… …as compared to Buddhism… …so he said… …he said Buddhism told me that this world is false… …but in Krishna Consciousness I came to know what is the reality… …so Prabhupada said very good… …that is a perfect understanding… …and he says Buddhism basically takes you to nothingness… …nothingness… …so… …their idea of Nirvana is… …that… …there is a candle… …and… …as the candle is burning… …it consumes fuel but… …extinguish the candle… …and then… …it gets… …completely… …it goes out of existence… …so their idea is existence is suffering… …therefore end your existence… …then suffering will also end… …now of course… …some Buddhists… …especially Dalai Lama he says that Nirvana… …is not the ending of one’s existence… …he says just as when you take the same… …ultimately… …analogies and metaphors… …they can be used to teach whatever you want… …so they take the same analogy and they say… …actually when you extinguish the candle… …the candle may become… …extinct to our vision… …but the energy of the candle continues to exist at a different level… …so they say that… …Buddhism… …that whatever it is that continues to exist afterwards… …so they say that there is some sort of existence… …but mainstream Buddhism doesn’t talk much about… …what happens afterwards… …their idea is… …just become… …they have a very vague idea of morality… …but to some extent they get people to goodness… …and that’s how… …it is quite popular because it does not involve any surrender to God… …there is no idea of necessity to surrender to God and submit to anyone… …so… …in the main difference between these two… …was that the Arhathood… …that means you just get out of this world… …and attain Nirvana… …so that… …according to Buddha… …if one practises seriously one can attain that in three lives… …so several centuries after Buddha… …Buddha disappeared… …then… …several people… …at one… …some book started appearing… …it is called the Lotus Sutra book… …and this said that there was assembly of people… …assembly of Buddhist monk… …and suddenly Buddha came over there on the back of a vulture… …and he said… …that actually… …my death was just an illusion… …and I am a Bodhisattva… …and it was not that I attained enlightenment at that time… …I had attained enlightenment long ago… …and I will keep coming again and again… …to deliver people… …I will keep coming again and again to deliver people… …and for that purpose… …you should also not desire to get liberation… …you should desire to keep coming again and again… …so then… …so in their idea the soul who becomes liberated… …and attains the level of liberation that is called Arhat… …but a Bodhisattva is a person who… …who can attain liberation but he comes back to this world again and again… …for the sake of compassion… …but what happened is… …the Mahayana they said that we are more compassionate… …you are more selfish… …that was the idea of Vinayan… …but in the process of… …expanding… …their apparent compassion… …they started innovating a lot of things… …we saw how strongly Buddha was… …against any form of… …sexuality… …not just illicit sexuality… …any sexuality… …but in the Mahayana path they started saying that… …actually the Bodhisattva is so enlightened… …that he can… …he can… …give up all rules and regulations for the sake of compassion… …and through that… …they said that we are more compassionate… …but in the name of being more compassionate many times they will become more lax… …and this led to… …now Buddha as I said… …he was 5th century BC… …in the 7th century almost 1200 years later… …there was a path called Vajrayana… …and Vajrayana is the… …so again some people started claiming that… …we discovered some books… …which are the lives of Buddha… …and this Buddha… …is entirely the opposite of historical… …so this Buddha… …he consorts with women… …and he enjoys all kinds of luxuries… …and according to Vajrayana… …they say that… …if by giving up material desires… …you can slowly attain enlightenment… …but by using the power of desires… …and engaging in sense gratification… …you can attain enlightenment fast… …so… …the whole school of Tantra… …Tantra is… …there is left hand and right hand Tantra… …right hand Tantra is beauty worship… …left hand Tantra is a… …grotesque idea… …what they have the idea is that… …the sexual energy when released… …can lead to enlightenment… …so that whole idea… …later on it came into Hinduism also… …but it all started with this Vajrayana… …so Buddhism got… …so basically… …when we talk about Sahajiyas in Gaudiya Vaishnava… …the Sahajiyas were people… …who took… …Vaishnava teachings and mixed them with… …this Vajrayana Buddhism… …and they came up with the idea that… …through sexuality one can attain enlightenment… …but this… …in Vajrayana… …they have the idea that… …there is no need for Maunkhud… …in fact Maunkhud is a slow path forward… …unrestricted indulgence is the way faster forward… …and of course this has sadly been abused quite a bit also… …and in the modern times… …what is popular in the west… …as well as… …increasingly in other… …in Europe and other places… …is called Zen Buddhism… …now Zen Buddhism… …they say… …there is no need for any philosophy at all… …all that is needed is experience… …so what is the experience… …so there are many… …they will have… …a lot of paradoxical things… …like… …we have this… …the Mayavadi say… …hear the sound of silence… …so they have all sorts of… …unthinkable conceptions… …so one favourite exercise among Zen Buddhists is… …that… …the teacher will come and tell you… …visualise a beautiful garden… …and in the garden there is a lake… …and the lake… …soft breeze is going around your face… …and… …there is a sweet fragrance of the flowers… …birds are chirping… …enter deep into the meditation… …have the disciples entering deep deep deep into the meditation… …suddenly the guru will… …slap him on the face… …what happened… …he said… …did you feel the slap as real… …yeah of course… …what do you mean… …did you feel what you are visualising as real… …he says yeah that was also real… …so… …which is real… …so was your slap real or was your visualisation real… …you start thinking… …actually in there is real… …both are false… …so when you are here you are not there… …when you are there you are not here… …actually you are nowhere… …so… …modern Mayavad… actually a sort of conflation, a blending of Shankara’s Mayavad and modern Buddhistic ideas. So, Zen Buddhism is very popular because it just live in the moment, live in the moment and there will be several surveys done over the last 15-20 years.
Consistently, the most popular religious leader in the world is Dalai Lama. Uniformly, that is the, so he, because he has portrayed Buddhism as a religion of compassion and non-violence. There is no God in it.
So, naturally people find it very popular. Now, Srila Prabhupada, now we see in our tradition, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu met with the Buddhists once. So, Bhaktanath Thakur in his Gaurang Vashata Nama says, Bauddha, Jaina, Mayavadi, Uttarakhandana.
In South India Yatra, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu dealt with these three kinds of people, Bauddha, Jaina and Mayavadi. So, in the traditional biography of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, which Bhaktanath Thakur approved, there is no description of the encounter of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu with Jains, but there are some other biographies where there are some incidents with Jains also, but we have the incident with the Buddhist monks of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu meeting. And there in that purport, Srila Prabhupada systematically takes up the propositions of Buddhism and shows how they are inadequate.
Prabhupada is basically following the Gaudiya Bhashya of Bhakti Santhosh Thakur. Now, almost Prabhupada’s CC commentary, almost 90 to 95% of it is basically an English translation of the Gaudiya Bhashya. Mainly the things about Iskcon-Gaudiya Madh dynamics and some practical instructions for devotees, they are Srila Prabhupada’s direct additions.
Most of it Srila Prabhupada has taken from the Gaudiya Bhashya. So, there Bhakti Santhosh Thakur gives a sustained critique of Buddhism and he explains that essentially the problem with Buddhism is that, because they don’t accept scripture, so, they just stay in the zone of speculation. That’s why we see that now they may accept Buddha’s words as scripture, but Buddha himself, twice before Buddha departed, Ananda asked him, who will be your successor? And both times, Buddha was silent.
So, now, the Buddhists interpret this to mean that actually at that time nobody was competent to be the successor. So, actually from our understanding point of view, Buddha had come to teach a immoralist religion. Actually, that time the animal sacrifices were being done indiscriminately and that had to be checked.
So, Buddha’s silence when asked about the question of successor can also be seen to indicate that what he taught was not meant to be taught forever. It was a transitional emergency religion that he was there for the time being. But because there is no direct Vedic revelation, there is no positive knowledge about God.
So, it is ended largely in the realm of speculation. In India, Shankaracharya, by his powerful teachings, there are two ways of looking at it, he drew Buddhism out of India or he brought Buddhism into Hinduism. That means the idea of the two levels of reality, Yavaharik and Parmarthik which Mayavad talks about, that was directly taken from the teachings of the Buddhist monk Nagarjuna and he brought it into Hinduism.
But basically, either way he drew out Buddhism from India. And the second was when Islam came in India, at that time much of North India, see the revival of all the Acharyas of Vaishnalism happened in South India. Shankaracharya, Ramacharya, Madhvacharya, all of them were in South India.
Most of North India was Buddhist when Islam started attacking. There were some Hindus, but most were, so because of this philosophical reputation by Shankaracharya and by the direct attack by Islam, Buddhism was practically driven out of India. And Buddhists were very very few in number in India till 1950 almost, in the decade of 1950s.
So, at that time, we had Ambedkar who was from a lower caste and who was himself persecuted during his childhood and later on he fought to remove caste discrimination within India. Historically speaking, so there is, we discussed earlier about how we want to take the discussions, now we have a historical perspective of what happened in these religions, that is the Aitiha Pramana and then we have the words of Guru Sadhushastra, that is the Shruti or the Smriti. So, wherever it is possible, we will reconcile Aitiha and Shruti, wherever that is not possible, we give preference to what is said by our Acharyas.
So, from the historical record point of view, we discussed how Mohammed seems to be a very violent person, but because Shaila Prabhupada’s statements about Mohammed were almost singularly positive, so we understand that Shaila Prabhupada considered Mohammed to be a messenger of God, so we accept that primarily. Because history, Aitiha is always unreliable. The words of Guru Sadhushastra are a more reliable compass.
Similarly, Buddhists today don’t accept that Buddha was an incarnation of Vishnu. In fact, Buddhists resent this idea because they say that Buddha gave his own teachings, but Hindus appropriated Buddha into their own religion and they made him another incarnation. But actually speaking, if we see, right from the earliest records which we have, Bhagavatam comes before Buddha appeared and in that only the prediction of Buddha is coming.
And throughout, right from Ramamacharya, Sri Vaishnavas, so they all accept Buddha to be an incarnation. In fact, traditionally all Dasa avatars include Buddha. So, Buddhists don’t accept this and because they don’t accept that Buddha was an incarnation, so later on to try to prove that their religion is different from Hinduism, they brought in some new ideas.
So, as I said, from the Guru Sadhushastra point of view, Buddhism started to stop unwanted animal sacrifice and violence. From the historical perspective, Buddhism spread because it offered people an alternative to the discriminatory caste system. Jainism and Buddhism, these were basically offshoots from within the Vedic tradition and they adopted much of the culture of the Vedic tradition, but they rejected the philosophy because they felt the philosophy was responsible for the discriminatory caste system.
So, historically Buddhism spread because of this. It’s appealed that there is no caste system in the world. So, when Ambedkar, he felt that Hinduism, the caste system will never go away.
So, just a few months before his death, he along with lakhs of his followers, they accepted Buddhism. And then he wrote, when he accepted Buddhism, he wrote his own book about why he has accepted Buddhism. And in his book, he talked about what his idea of Buddhism is.
So, he did not accept the law of karma. He did not accept reincarnation. And of course, Buddhism itself doesn’t accept God directly.
So, now without karma and without reincarnation, there was a famous Lama in Calcutta. So, when he read this book of Ambedkar, he said what Ambedkar has accepted is not Buddhism, it is Ambedkarism. It is his own idea.
So, if you see, Buddhists in general are traditionally quite non-violent. But many of the Buddhists in India, they are Dalits and their main motivation for being Buddhists is to be anti-Hindu. And they are quite vengeful, they are quite aggressive about that.
Because for them Buddhism was just a political tool. It was not an ideological school that they had accepted. It was primarily a political tool.
So, similarly when Buddha gave his teachings, subsequently his successors, they wanted to prove their own distinctive identity separate from Hinduism. So, one of the things that they did for this was, they came up with the idea that because Buddha had talked about his own reincarnation so many times and because the idea was there that you have to go through many lives before you can accept reincarnation, before you can become Arhat, you can attain liberation. So, now the reincarnation was directly a Vedic teaching.
So, they couldn’t deny that. So, what they came up with this strange idea of they accept reincarnation but they don’t accept soul. So, how can you have reincarnation without soul? That is their current idea.
So, they asked them what is it that reincarnates? They said actually there is nothing that reincarnates but still there is something and that something is an illusion. And the purpose of life is to end the illusion of that something. So, they have their own word jugglery and what they say is that our sense of I-hood is just an illusion and it is created by our own memories and our imaginations.
And just in the sense of I-hood keeps changing. So, similarly there is no continuous self. Then what is it that goes from one life to another? They say actually it is just the illusion that goes from one life to another.
It is a composite of the karma, the memories and the desires. But okay the composite of karma, memories and desires. So, it is like they accept the subtle body but there is no soul on which the subtle body is situated.
So, it is a very peculiar idea. And there are Buddhist scholars who have also recognised this is an eternal perplexity for them. How can you have a reincarnation without the soul? And there are some Buddhist scholars who say that actually Buddha did not reject the soul.
Actually Buddha just did not talk about the soul. As he did not talk about God, he also did not talk about soul. Buddha’s religion, whatever his teachings were, they were primarily behavioural, they were not philosophical.
Behaviourally this is what you should do, this is what you should not do. He did not talk much about philosophy. But subsequently to gain philosophical autonomy, to prove that we are distinct, they came up with the idea that there is no soul.
So, Buddhism because of its Satyaguni appeal, it has spread a lot. And as of now in India, we don’t have to encounter Buddhism much, generally in our preaching. But in the West, it is very much there.
And it is something which is to some extent brought respectability also to Eastern spirituality. And it includes Buddhism and Hinduism. So, we have maybe ten minutes now.
Either I can talk about Sikhism and Jainism or we can have some questions or comments. Yeah, Jains also use the word Arhat. Actually, Jainism and Buddhism have many similarities.
Because both of them from the historical point of view were reactionary religions which rejected the Vedic path. In one sense, in the Vedic path we have Karmakand and we have Jnanakand. So, Karmakand focusses on engagement with the world for sense gratification.
And Jnanakand focusses on rejection of the world to gain some sort of liberation. So, both Buddhism and Jainism are sort of distortions of the Jnanakand. So, they have a lot of emphasis on renunciation.
So, Jains also have, they also emphasise on the right path, right talk, right action. And from the philosophical point of view, Jainism is quite antithetical to Vaishnavism. But from the cultural point of view, it is so similar that even they don’t take onion garlic and we can take food with Jains.
So, in that sense, culturally, they also, it’s like they reject the world and that’s why there are terms which are also very similar, like Arhat. But there are some detailed differences between. These Jains don’t accept Buddha as an enlightened being and Buddhas don’t accept Mahavira as an enlightened being.
So, although their thoughts are similar, their ideals, their ideal personalities are quite different. Actually, I had recently been to a Jain temple in Pune, Vaishnav Jai temple, because we hold our camps there. So, I just went inside the temple to just go around and see.
They also had Shiva, Vishnu in the sky in one of their pictures. I didn’t understand what is written below. They also have Devi, they also have Anantashesh in some other places.
So, my question was, our understanding of Jainism and Buddhism and Sikhism, if it could be taught in such a way that how we can find some commonality between this time and that time, then as of now, and what are the things we could tell them by which they will be inspired to become Krishna conscious. Then study of his intelligence in that light would be very helpful for us. After we objectively understand that.
Thank you. It’s important one. Actually, till now we have talked about Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
So, we did talk about a few similarities. We talked about what are the common points about existence of God and devotion to God. So, with respect to Buddhism and Jainism, it’s primarily the culture.
As I said, mode of goodness, that is very similar. And also in the beliefs, the concept of reincarnation is similar with Buddhism and also the concept of karma is there. So, like Srila Prabhupada appreciates the devotee saying that Buddhism tells you that the world is false.
But what is the reality? Vaishnavism tells us more clearly about that. Satyaraj Prabhu has written a book called From Nothingness to Personhood. So, nothingness is Buddhism, personhood is Vaishnavism.
So, he has given a systematic analysis of the similarities over there. But primarily the Satyaguni culture and the concepts of reincarnation and karma, these are the primary similarities. And generally emphasising the avatarhood of Buddha is something which alienates them.
Because they feel that you are appropriating our religious head as a sub-member within your own religion. So, it’s best not to emphasise that, if you are talking with Buddhists. But the cultural similarities are very good.
Now, Jains have a more complex history. In the sense that Buddhism tried to assert its autonomy. We are different from Hinduism.
But Jainism also had spread very rapidly in India till almost 7th, 8th centuries. And they did more than assert their autonomy. In fact, they tried to appropriate Hindu characters within their own tradition.
So, there is a whole Jain Ramayana, Jain Mahabharata. And in the Jain Ramayana, when Lord Ram goes to Vanvas, throughout his Vanvas, he is meeting Jain sadhus. And they are repeatedly offering him some wisdom.
And then, after that, when ultimately, Lord Ram comes back and then he exiles Sita and Sita returns and Sita goes into the earth. Then is the climax of their appropriation. They say, when Ram loses Sita, then he becomes detached, he becomes enlightened and then he becomes a Jain.
So, they literally convert Lord Ram from avatar into a Jain seeker and a Jain convert. And with respect to Krishna, they go even further. And they actually say that because Krishna had so many illicit relationships, they directly write in their version of Krishna Mahabharata, that Krishna is living in hell right now.
So, basically, they try to appropriate all the Vedic characters into their… and there are whole series of Jain Puranas. And they take the same characters. So, their idea is that these gods are something like in Mayavad, we have the idea of… they worship God, they have Saguna Brahma by which they can go to Nirguna ultimate.
You worship God so that you can go beyond God. But similarly, they consider all the Hindu characters to be in one sense models of how people can attain Jinnahood. Actually, Jain, the word comes from the word Jinnah.
Jinnah is enlightened beings. So, they are also called as Tirthankaras. There are 24 Tirthankaras are there.
So, primarily. So, they have reinvented all the whole stories. And that’s why in their temples, they have practically all the Vedic figures.
But they consider all these Vedic figures are either guides or models on the path to attain Jain enlightenment. So, in general, with respect to Jainism, ideologically, there is practically no similarity. But culturally, again, there is a lot of similarity.
And Jainism also, they have whole codes. I quoted from that Vinaya Patra. The Vinaya Patra of Buddhism has almost like 75,000 verses.
All of them are instructions of how people should live as monks. Similarly, in the Jain tradition also, they have huge books with commentaries of how monks should live. So, that in Jain tradition also, fasting is considered very important.
Because these are more world rejecting religions. So, basically, the cultural aspect and today’s Jains, if we see prominently, most of them are very unphilosophical. They don’t know practically anything about the philosophy of Jainism.
They are mostly, they have their own idea of building Jain temples and respecting the Jain sadhus. Now, generally, they will put either Mahavira or some of the other Tirthankaras over there and they will make their idols or deities, whatever you want to say, and they worship them. But most of them have no knowledge of philosophy.
So, if they see the cultural similarities and we talk about that, then we can develop bridges based on the cultural similarities primarily. But their philosophical reinventions of the Quranic stories are at one level ludicrous and at another level they are outrageous. So, it’s best not to go into that zone.
My discussions with a lot of Jain people is that Jainism is quite a lot atheism. They don’t really believe in God at all. So, what is your view about that? No, that’s what the point is.
It’s really about spiritual love. Yeah, yeah. So, the point is that I think Jainism, Buddhism, these were religions which were reactionary in their formation.
Reactionary means they were reactions to the distortion in the karmakanda of the Vedic religion. So, one distortion we know that was excessive animal sacrifice. Another distortion was the discriminatory caste system.
So, basically while rejecting the caste system, they rejected the whole concept of religion of God itself basically. So, if you look at the historical origins, they don’t, now they have the concept, ultimately one cannot, the heart cannot live without the concept of worshipping someone. So, although they reject God, but they revert their own Tirthankaras.
They have to make deities. They have to make temples. So, they will put their own Tirthankaras over there.
They will worship Mahavira. So, essentially it’s like they are rejecting God, but then although they are explicitly rejecting God, they are implicitly making someone else like God. So, in that sense, the principle of bhakti that the Vedic culture teaches towards Bhagavan or to the devatas, they apply in a slightly different way towards their enlightened beings.
So, essentially if you look at their context, because they were reactionary, it’s like they just threw out everything that was there in the Vedic culture which was associated with the discrimination that they felt was there. So, that’s why if you focus on the cultural aspect and then gradually give them the positive side. See, in the 4th century, 5th century, there were Jain scholars who would outright argue for atheism and there are whole books which they have written, they are trying to prove how there is no God at all.
So, they were quite aggressively atheistic at one time. They have written books about how there is no God also in their history. But presently, most of the Jains are primarily Jains at a cultural level.
If they go into the philosophy, then they find all these things, but mostly if we focus with them on the cultural level and then give them the positive side, because their level of their version of spirit, whatever liberation or enlightenment or whatever, it is very stark and unappealing. It’s a very austere and difficult path and that’s why although Jainism is so world-denying, the Jains have become largely divided between the congregation and the renunciates, their version and the congregation, they are quite materially well-to-do. They are not at all rejecting the world in the sense that they are all very savvy businessmen and they earn a lot of money.
So, in one sense, what has happened is because the Jain path was so austere and difficult, this idea of fully rejecting the world, then most of the Jain people who are householders, they primarily live some level of a mode of goodness life, but without any active pursuit of enlightenment, except for respecting the Jain modes. Apart from that, they don’t do much in the usual level as a sadhana. So, it’s a very dreary conception of the absolute.
They accept the fact that God exists. Now, philosophically, if you tell them, on Jainism, God doesn’t exist. Most Jains get a shock when they understand Jainism is atheism.
Because, that’s true, most Jains, they actually worship their particular saints or whatever, as if they are God and the principle of bhakti is there in the heart of everyone. It should be directed towards someone. So, actually, if you show them what is their philosophy and show how in the particular historical context it might have been relevant, but it is not a universal teaching, it is not a teaching for all time to come, then we can bring them down.
Similarly, most Buddhists don’t know that the ultimate goal of Buddhism is nothingness. They adopt Buddhism mostly for pragmatic purposes, practical purposes. They don’t know about ultimate philosophy.
That’s why, from the cultural point of view, we show the similarity and then show how philosophically, Gaudiya Vaishnavism offers a much more attractive, positive reality. Then we can get them. So, philosophically, actually, at least the way we are doing the practise now, there is not much appeal in the philosophy.
Yes, Nithyananda. Last question. Historical point of view, we heard that Buddhists speak as a philosophy, their philosophy is little abstract, that they don’t accept any existence of anything more than a second.
Like the example, if you look at a chair, they can’t say this is a chair because the chair doesn’t exist more than a second, as it is. They say things keep changing. So, for many hundreds of years, the Buddhists were dominating India with no philosophical basis, because there is no philosophy can give such explanation.
But then, the Brahmanas of India, later they became little, wanted to wipe out Buddhism. So, they brought a lot of philosophical ideas. And then, Buddhists understood that to keep their power, they have to also give some philosophical explanation.
So, they brought out their own sutras, philosophical treatise. So, Vedic scholars, they brought out these three concepts. They say Astitvam, Nyayatvam, Abhidayatvam.
They say that Astitvam means a substance is existing. So, if it exists, then it is Nyayatvam, knowable. And if it is knowable, then it is nameable.
Astitvam, Nyayatvam, Abhidayatvam. So then, fearing this kind of philosophical approach, this Buddhist also wrote a lot of philosophical treatises, which are very powerful because of the king’s support and a lot of intellectual people. And there is a famous historical character called Kumari Labhekta.
I thought that historical point of view, I can whole thing evolved in India. So, he went as a student and studied under these Buddhists and learned from them. And then, he came out and defeated the Buddhists.
In fact, the story is very kind of visionary spirit. He went and he behaved as if he is a Buddhist, studied under them. All their techniques he learned.
And then, he was caught. Actually, he was not a Buddhist, he is a Hindu and coming, learning their techniques. So then, he was brought to a mountain top and they were about to throw him down.
So then, when falling down, he said that if Vedas are true, that I may not die. So, he fell down and huge mountain cliff and he fell off. And nothing happened to him.
Just one eye was, you know, he lost one of his eyes. So then, he was brought back to all the students. Again, he went to the same Gurukul, a Buddhist Gurukul.
And everybody was aghast, how he can survive from such a fall, you know. So then, they asked, what is the reason that you survived, you didn’t die? So, they said, because I took a vow that if Vedas are true, then I should not die. So then, they asked him that, why did you lose one of your eyes? Then, he said that because I said, if Vedas are true, I should have told that Vedas are true, I should not die.
But if Vedas are true, I doubted. So, that’s why I got one of my eyes lost. So then, after this fall, after he came back, he had a debate with his own Guru and defeated Buddhism in a philosophical basis.
Then later, Shankaracharya adopted lot of his concepts of Kumarila Bhatta, who is a proponent of Mimamsa philosophy. And even though Shankaracharya did not agree with Kumarila Bhatta fully, he accepted his principles and philosophically, he soundly defeated Buddhism later. So, in that sense, Yuga Swami also, in many places, adopting Kumarila Bhatta’s philosophical points to defeat Buddhism and other things.
So, I thought of this historical aspect. Just two quick points about Kumarila Bhatta. Kumarila Bhatta was such a great follower of Vedic culture that he felt that although he had gone to this Guru to defeat the Guru, the principle he felt was that one has to submit to the Guru and I went against my Guru.
So, actually he had the mission of defeating Buddhism. But after defeating Buddhism, after debating with and defeating his own Guru, he felt that I have done something wrong by opposing my Guru. And so, he trained his disciples, one of his most prominent disciples was Mandan Mishra.
And then he decided to fast to death. He said that if I have committed any offence in cheating my Guru and then defeating my Guru, to atone for that offence, I will fast to death. So, then Shankaracharya went and he defeated Mandan Mishra.
And then Mandan Mishra took him to his Guru. And then there was a debate between Tarmimamsa and Purvamamsa. So, at that time Shankaracharya defeated Kumarila Bhatta also.
But he was very exemplary dedicated in bringing people back into the Vedic world. Now regarding the existence, because you raised the issue, I will just quickly complete this, about the chair. The Buddhists give the example of a candle.
They say when you see the flame of a candle, actually there is no such thing called as a flame. The only thing is, the content of the flame is constantly changing. It’s only because of our illusion that we think that the flame is constant.
Because the substance is getting burnt and as it is getting burnt, flame is coming up. The constitution of the flame is constantly changing. And there is no continuous flame.
And they say, they have the complete opposite idea, the body is like the candle and our consciousness, Chetana, is like the flame. So, when we die, the flame transfers from one candle to another. So, actually there is no such thing as flame.
And the candle from which the flame comes is temporary. But still, one illusion goes from one form to another. Now, this example is given in the Bhagavatam also, in Uddhava Gita, the same example.
But it is for an entirely different purpose. What Bhagavatam gives the example for is that, like you said the chair, he said, na sato vidyate bhavo, na bhavo vidyate sato. That is, the material reality as we see it is constantly changing.
So, because it is constantly changing, even modern physics says that, actually when I see this table, the atoms in it are constantly changing. Some of them are getting destroyed, some of them are getting recreated. So, the world as we see it is an illusion.
Just like in a movie frame, there is no actual person running on the movie screen. But because the images are moved so fast, we see a continuity. That is a Vedic concept.
It comes in Uddhava Gita, that actually the changes in the material realm are happening so subtly and swiftly that we can’t see them. And that’s why we see the material world as a continuity. But the essential difference is that there is a person who is continuously existing and who is seeing the continuity.
That means, okay, the flame is an illusion. But I exist and I am seeing the flame to be an illusion. So, I am continuous.
So, the Bhagavatam uses this example to say that material world is an illusion, in the sense that the reality that we see in the material realm is not existing continuous. But still there has to be a continuous seer to see it. And who is that continuous seer? If the consciousness is just like a flame and the flame is changing continuously, then who is seeing the apparent continuity of the changing flame? So, they take the same Vedic teaching which is for matter and they apply it on Jeeva or they apply it on Chetan.
That is a distortion. So, that principle is correct that the material reality doesn’t exist, but they have misapplied it to a wrong notion. So, yes, philosophically things are presented as our acharyas have done.
And surely we can present the glory of Krishna consciousness and attract many, many people to Krishna and lotus. Thank you very much. Shri Prabhupada ki Jai.
Gaur Bhakta Vindhya ki Jai. Shri Prabhupada ki Jai.