Bhagavan Buddha found religion in such a worthless state, with so many vile animal sacrifices, that he attacked religion. Sage Sankara did not seek to destroy religion like Bhagavan Buddha but he advocated reforming it for the better. Bhagavan Buddha did this because he saw that the masses had to have some form of religion as they were not ripe intellectually for truth.
Sage Sankara's sex experience in Benares occupying the body of another man and then having sexual intercourse with his wife, is a story created by pundits hiding the real fact. Sage Sankara had a scientific spirit and when told by Saraswati the woman that he was talking freely about sex, being a Sanyasi, he wanted to know the truth by having actual intercourse himself and thus learning by experiment and observation. Thus, this has to be viewed by the seeker from a rational standpoint, because sex is part of the illusion from the ultimate standpoint. Sage Sankara stressed the great importance of freeing our use of words from all ambiguity.
Buddhists and Jains did not believe in the Vedic positions and did not accept the scriptures. Hence, Sage Sankara had to meet their objections also. Biographical anecdotes about his persecution of Jains and Buddhists or of his challenges to “Self’ -immolation for the loser of a debate are all foolish tales fabricated after his lifetime either by his own followers who took him to be a religious propagator but not as a philosopher or by the dualistic cult.
The religious pundits of the Advaitic sect relate boastfully pseudo-historical stories of how Sage Sankara's school put down, persecuted, and exterminated the Buddhists, as though this was something to be proud of. However, these stories are either exaggerations or false stories fabricated by pundits or priestcraft. The religious pundits are mere followers of the religion, never having understood the depth of Advaitic philosophy. Sage Sankara gave religion scholasticism, and yoga no less than philosophy, to the world.
His commentary on Manduka is pure philosophy, but many of his other books are presented from a religious standpoint to help those who cannot rise up to philosophy. North India is the home of mysticism and deification and South India of keen rational truth.
Sage Sankara had only four fully trained disciples, although he advised some kings. His doctrines spread after his lifetime. His books were dictated to assistants as he traveled. So, only a few were capable of understanding his philosophy.
Sage Sankara always traveled and he never lived in a monastery. He simply instructed his disciples to build one here and there " and then left because he was busy spreading his doctrines.
In the commentary to "Brahma Sutras Sage Sankara says: ~." "The highest beatitude is not to be attained by Yoga." (Sacred Books of East Series page 298 Vol.1) And he also says Samadhi is the same as sleep (p.312).
~ This clearly indicates that yoga is not the means to Self-realization. And yogis Samadhi is not nondual wisdom.
Sage Sankara's commentary to Brahma Sutras (Chap.3.4.50) shows that the Gnani "should pass through life", not run away from life, and should take a middle course between seeking worldly honor and worldly abasement.
Sage Sankara did more than write books or initiate Sanyasins: He brought India into unity as a nation. He advised the masses to worship what they wish, remain in their particular religion but remember they are also part of a larger whole.
Few Pundits have caught the spirit; they are merely fond of his words. Sage Sankara’s Spirit is that of an appeal to reason, with scripture dragged in as second and lesser support afterward.
It may not have been possible for him to have written so many books during such a short term of existence of 32 years. The truth is that he wrote very few books. Those actually written by him were Commentaries on Brahma Sutras and the Upanishads and on the Gita. All other books ascribed to him were not written down by his own hand. They are merely collections of notes recorded by his disciples from his sayings, talks, and discussions.
Sage Sankara wrote his commentaries on Manduka Upanishad's commentary first, and then as this revealed that he thoroughly understood the subject, his Gurus requested him to write the commentary on Badarayana's Brahma Sutras, which was a popular theological work universally studied by Advaitins. That is why his commentary is written from a lower dualistic point, for those who cannot rise higher, save that here and there Sage Sankara occasionally has strewn a few truly Advaitic sentences.
Since Hinduism is a mixer of many ideologies one gets confused about which is true philosophy because the dual, non-dual, and qualified non-dual philosophies all claim that they are based on Vedas. And many believe the inherited beliefs of their forefathers are pure and sacred without verifying the facts. All rituals and individualized gods are added from time to time. Only when one tries to go deeper into the annals of history one will be able to find that all the present days’ beliefs and rituals are not part of the Santana Dharma or Vedic religion.
The seeker must do his homework, and verify the validity of all the claims, rather than blindly believe, what others expound as knowledge, till, the un-contradicted truth is obtained.
The seeker must have the courage of Buddha to accept the truth and reject the untruth. Since Buddha rejected religion, the idea of god, and the scriptures, therefore, it is evident that he has gone through every aspect and verified and found them to be inadequate and useless for the pursuit of truth.
Even Buddhism is mixed up with regional culture and traditions of the local religion, wherever it existed. Thus to get the full essence of Buddhism is very difficult.
The Buddhist scriptures were completely distorted by the time of Sage Sankara. Sage Sankara had to criticize the Buddhist literature prevailing then as the Buddhists themselves were confused as to what Shunyata is. Vasubandhu and his disciple Dignaga (the latter lived about a couple of centuries before Sage Sankara) could not retain the original teachings of Lord Buddha.
At first, Vasubandhu did not agree with his half-brother Asanga and wrote one book on Abhidharma later on, he went to the side of Asanga and wrote a second book, where? he opposed his own earlier views on Abhidharma. Sage Sankara? had to criticize Buddhist knowledge? and literature of his time as he wanted to bring us back the Pure Vedantic knowledge through his work on the Prasthanatraya. That is why there is a reference to the writing of Dharmakirti in Sutrabashya.
There is another aspect that in ~ Vishnu Purana also says that Bhagavan Buddha created confusion. In Sarnath, he first taught about the Moral code which is basic. He talked about Anatma. Then? two decades later he taught the concept of Shunyata and? the tenets of Mahayana Buddhism.? Despite Nagarjuna's telling that Shunyata is not Nihilism and that Parajanaparamita also mentions the Shunyata after one leaves? the five? Skandhas, there are and there will always be people who will go on calling Bhagavan Buddha's philosophy as Nihilism. There are also controversies about the origin of Tantric Buddhism.
Hindus hold BhagavanBuddha being an Avatara of Lord Vishnu. It seems that in many Buddha viharas, probably more in Sri Lanka, there are statues of Lord Vishnu, which are looked at reverentially. by the Buddhists. Sri, Ramakrishna Paramahansa also says that there is no doubt about Bhagavan Buddha being an Avatara of Lord Vishnu. Swami Vivekananda tells us about him very superlatively. Dr. Radhakrishan says that he was a reformer of Hinduism. Personally, I worship him as the Avatara of Lord Vishnu.
Religion, yoga, and scriptures are for the ignorant masses, who wholly accept the material world as it presents itself. The Atmic path is for those who have begun to realize that things are not what they seem.
Most intellectuals' approach is more practical, and they stuck with the reality of the practical life within the practical world, and they take it as real therefore it is difficult for them to realize the truth, which is beyond the form, time, and space.
The world is a reality on the base of the ego (you). Whatever one feels as a person is a reality within the world. The world, in which you exist, is present only when the waking experience is present.
If the world in which you exist is taken as a reality then there is no meaning in seeking the truth, because he has accepted the world as truth. Once the world in which you exist is accepted as a reality then the experiences of birth, life, and death that happen within the world prevail as a reality.
The seeker has to learn to view and judge the three states from the standpoint of the Soul, the “Self’, then only he become aware of the illusory nature of the world, in which he exists (waking). : ~ Santthosh Kumaar
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.