Dana, as per Buddha, means the
giving of one’s possessions, blood and limbs and even one’s life, for the good
of others without expecting anything in return. Krishna took the same thought
to the extreme limit when he told Arjuna to sacrifice his life, if need be, in
the fight for upholding the truth. We have shown in our earlier posts that the
same is the concept of Jehad.
We have seen in our study of
Vedas how the biggest dana of all times has been discussed elaborately when
mentioning the sacrifice given by Agnidev or Husain at Karbala. We will have to
wait and see whether Buddha refers to any such person or event.
Both Krishna and Buddha wanted
their disciples to be best of men. That is why Krishna brought the concept of
Purushottam (the perfect among men), Buddha of Paramitas (states of perfection)
and Mohammad of Ashraful Makhlooqat (the best among all creatures).
* * * * *
Fire sacrifice was common
among Hindus. Hindus wrongly believed that following their religion meant
performing sacrifices by the fire. Therefore when Buddha admonished against
fire sacrifice, it was viewed as if Buddha was against Sanatan dharma and was
this was a new religion against teachings of Sanatan Dharma. We have shown
earlier that the Vedic hymns were associated with various rituals by the
foresighted people of those times because they feared that the hymns would be
forgotten. Therefore associating them with rituals meant that people remembered
the hymns by heart and recited them on various occasions. This safeguarded that
hymns from getting lost, though some eventually got lost. If you read my
commentary on Gita, you will find that Krishna too was against fire sacrifice
and this was actually the cause of the war of Mahabharata. This fact was not
known to those who hold Krishna as avatar only due to their ignorance about
their own religious teachings. Out of their ignorance they concluded that
Buddha’s teachings were different from their own teachings, which were actually
deviated understanding, though the teachings of Gita too were the same as those
of Buddha. Therefore, they discarded the teachings of Buddha. Those who
accepted Buddha’s teachings too were Hindus who were following the same
ritualistic religion. This conversion was possible because Buddha made them see
things differently, in the light of the wisdom that he showed to them. However,
all those who converted were not of the same level. Surely, there were some who
understood the true context of Buddha’s teachings. And there must have been a
group who applauded, like those who do on the Big Fight show, even though they
have not understood the real meaning that the speaker wishes to convey. The
latter day writers on Buddhism were unable to distinguish between the two and
hence got confused with the real teachings.
Buddha had showed them light
when they were in darkness and they converted. But the ignorance in their minds
did not allow them to understand all teachings of Buddha in their true
meanings. Gradually ritualism entered their religion as well, though in a
different form. A very vivid example is of turning the wheel, which is
practised to this day. Did Buddha talked about any such ritual is a question
that need to be answered?
* * * * *
How the fire sacrifice itself
had degenerated can be understood by Uruvella Kassyapa’s statement in front of
Buddha. “It is sights and sounds, and also tastes, and women of sense desire
that the sacrifices promise; because I understood that those things are impure
that I took no more delight in sacrifices and offerings.”
Fire sacrifice had begun to be
all rituals and materialism.
* * * * *
When Ananthapindika asked
whether accepting Buddha’s Dhamma meant giving up the wealth, Buddha had this
to say: “The bliss of a religious life is attainable by everyone who walks in
the noble eight-fold path. He that cleaves to wealth, had better cast it away
than allow his heart to be poisoned by it; but he who does not cleave to
wealth, and possessing riches, uses them rightly will be a blessing unto his
fellow-beings.”
This shows again that leaving
the world was not a solution prescribed by Buddha.
* * * * *
Buddha said: “There are ways
from light into darkness and from darkness into light. There are ways, also,
from gloom into deeper darkness, and from the dawn into brighter light. The
wise man will use the light as he has to receive more light. He will constantly
advance to the knowledge of the truth.”
Again this is an invitation
for us to use our wisdom. This is also an indicator that Forces of Darkness and
Forces of Light are working ceaselessly to lead us in their directions.
* * * * *
And there is a very
interesting comment in this regard: “It is not for me to accept a theory which
depends on the unknown and is all controverted, and which involves a hundred
prepossessions, what wise man would go by another’s belief? Mankind is like the
blind directed in darkness by the blind.
* * * * *
We see another instance when
Buddha refers to Brahma Deva or rather Brahma Heaven. Since Buddha did not say
that this Brahma is different from Brahma of the Vedas, we have reason to
believe that the Brahma of the Vedas – who is the cause of all creation and
head of all devas is the subject of discussion. This shows that Buddha did
acknowledge the presence of devas and their highest position, next only to the
Absolute God. We also know that Krishna has referred to Indra’s heaven in Gita
and Buddha is referring to Brahma’s heaven. We have repeatedly proved that
Brahma and Indra are one and the same. Thus, it would be paramount to saying
that both Buddha and Krishna believed in the same heaven. If that is so how can
Buddha be against the presence of God, as is widely believed?
The incident in the mountains
near Rajagraha is described by B.R. Ambedkar where Buddha says to the women of
a clan: “Politeness, indifference to worldly things, hunting no one, without
place for annoyance – this is the character of the Brahma Heaven (the heaven
belonging to Brahma Deva).
“Every exercising love towards
the infirm; pure, according to the teachings of Buddha; knowing when sufficient
has been had; knowing when to stop, - this is to escape (the recurrence of)
birth and death.”
We invite you to read our
commentary of Gita and you will find Krishna too stressing on more or less the
same virtues for an abode in Indra’s heaven or for attaining salvation, which
is freedom from life and death cycle.
At another occasion, Buddha
said this to the men of the clan:
“He (who practices
mercifulness) has no evil dreams, he is protected by Heaven (Devas) and loved
by man; he is unmolested by poisonous things, and escapes the violence of war; he
is unharmed by fire or water.
“He is successful wherever he
lives, and when dead goes to the Heaven of Brahma. These are the eleven
(advantages). Does it not prove yet again that teachings of Krishna, Buddha and
Mohammad were from one and only one source?
* * * * *
B.R. Ambedkar is of the
opinion that Buddha never claimed that he was a prophet or a messenger of God.
In fact he repudiated any such description. However, we have mentioned before
that Buddha and superhuman links with Brahma and the sage’s prediction of the
time of Buddha’s birth linking his birth to the happiness of the devas and
Buddha’s own mention of super human devas proves that there is a link. Why it
did not find space in the pages need to be explored? Perhaps, there was a
deliberate attempt to delink Buddha’s teachings from everything Sanatan!
More hints of links of Buddha
with Sanatan dharma can be seen. Asita recognized that Buddha was a divine
person by seeing the thirty-two marks of a great man. In fact, we find that
learned Brahmins used to keep coming to recognize the thirty-two signs. Whose
prophecy was it? It shows that the coming of Buddha had already been told and
there were at least some people awaiting him. Does this not show a superhuman
link? How then can we believe that Buddha’s learning and the subsequent
enlightenment were independent of all else?
Another example can be seen in
B.R. Ambedkar’s description of Buddha’s birth. He proudly talks of the four
world-guardians who took Mahamaya, Buddha’s mother, in her dream to the lake
Mansarover, where a Bodhisatta, by name Sumedha, appeared before her and said
that he had decided to take tenth and final birth. It was only on this dream
that Suddhodhana, Buddha’s father, summoned the eight famous Brahmins in
divination, who foretold of Buddha’s birth.
Does this not create duality?
Why is Dr. Ambedkar not refuting Mahamaya’s dream as a pack of lies or
challenging the claim of the Brahmins who were expert in divination? Fact is
that he himself has not explored the ramifications of what all he is writing or
believing to be true.
No comments:
Post a Comment