NOTES ON BUDDHA AND HIS DHAMMA
Based on the book: “The Buddha and His Dhamma” by B.R. Ambedkar
We chanced upon a book on Buddha written by B.R. Ambedkar. We read it to find what it contains. Though B.R. Ambedkar’s book is not seen by most Buddhists as depicting Buddha’s spirituality to its fullest, we tried to make our observations on the historical narrations of Buddha’s life, as given by B.R. Ambedkar. It is evident from our notes that the Buddhists forsake the core teachings of Buddha the moment he died, just as Mohammad’s core teachings were forsaken even before he was buried.
We are hereby giving our notes on various events and incidents described in B.R. Ambedkar’s book to give an indication how far deviated we are from Buddha’s teachings. Read on…
In his book, B.R. Ambedkar writes: “Bodhisatta, named Sumedha, appeared before Mahamaya (Siddharth Gautama’s mother) in her dream and said, “I have decided to take my last and final birth on this earth, will you consent to be my mother?” She said, “Yes, with great pleasure.” The dream was interpreted by brahmins in these words: “Be not anxious. You will have a son, and if he leads a householder’s life he will become a universal monarch, and if he leaves his home and goes forth into a homeless state, and becomes a sanyasi, he will become a Buddha, a dispeller of illusions in the world.”
It is evident that Siddharth Gautama’s parents were believers of the Sanatan dharma. This can be seen from the brahmins trying to understand the dream of Mahamaya. The learned brahmins too wanted a great monarch or sanyasi to come. But when Siddhartha Gautama indeed became an enlightened person and began to impart teachings, the brahmins were displeased. History has shown repeatedly in the past that the learned feel the greatest displeasure when somebody brings forth learning that is contrary to their understanding. This is so because they develop an egoistic attachment to their learnings and it is not easy to shed those attachments in the path of truth. There are countless examples to this. Krishna was opposed by the most learned of the times. Most learned of the Jews didn’t accept the teachings of Jesus. And Ali was cursed from nearly 70,000 mosques for 90 years. Naturally, the Imams leading the Friday prayers were the learned of their times. But they had sold their selfs to material charms. And hence they became the greatest obstacle in promotion of teachings of truth.
......................................................................................
The interpretation of the dream by the brahmins shows that the high and the mighty, including the universal monarchs, owe their position to somebody else’s plan. If a great monarch or a sanyasi owes his position to birth of a pure spirit, how can we conclude that the spiritual teacher has no relationship with God and is merely a worldly Guru. Such a teacher, one who shows us the true path, has to be part of a Divine Plan.
When you read our commentary of Gita, you will find that even Krishna maintains the same view when he says that those who perform very good acts but are unable to attain salvation take birth in the family of kings or in the progeny of the Devatas themselves.
In fact, it was the Divine Plan which was working and Sumedha’s birth as Buddha was part of it. After all, the child Siddharth Gautama had no say in deciding which womb he would take nor in showing the dream to the would-be mother. Siddharth was to become Buddha much later in life. Till then he himself was not aware whether he was to attain enlightenment or not. But Sumedha knew it and so did the Devatas.
But prone as we are to material attachments, we saw all those Avatars in their material bodies, forgetting that they all were from the same source. As Quran says, Messengers have been sent in different regions and times, speaking the language of the people among whom they have been sent. The express purpose of sending them was to guide us and lead us to the path of truth. We got attached to the bodies of one or the other of them, leading to creation of different religions, though in essence, they were all giving teachings from the same source; in fact, the teachings were not only similar but showed a similar trend of development, in all corners of the world. We find in history, when Buddha was talking of need to purify the spirit, Messengers were imparting similar teachings in other parts of the world as well. Though there is no doubt that the kind of reach and following that Buddha got, others of his period didn’t get it.
......................................................................................
As per Ambedkar, Buddha was born in the year 563 B.C. on the Vaishaka Purnima day.
......................................................................................
B.R. Ambedkar writes that when the child (Siddharth Gautama) was born, “there dwelt on the Himalayas a great sage named Asita,” who “heard that the gods (read Devatas) over the space of the sky were shouting the word “Buddha” and making it resound. He beheld them waving their garments and coursing hither and thither in delight.”
This statement showed that this child’s birth made the gods (translation for the word Devatas) happy. When none on earth knew that Siddharth Gautam would become the Buddha, the Divinities knew it; there was happiness all around, even among the Devatas and the angels. This proves there were certain higher powers who were happy and knew even at the time of birth that the child was to be a great Divine Teacher. Those who claim Buddha is god or who see nobody else above Buddha need to take notice!
This statement also shows that there were some beings – the Devatas – translated as gods by commentators, who were clearly of higher position than Buddha and were greatly happy at the birth of Buddha. We have shown in earlier Parts that the 7 Lights that got created from the One devatma-sakti (Noorani Rooh) had taken upon themselves to guide mankind and this boy, Siddharth Gautama was to grow up to become another such source of Divine Teachings, having link to the Devatas. Siddharth Gautama’s link with the Devatas too is vividly mentioned and cannot be denied. Yet his followers chose to carve a religion out of his teachings.
Asita came to Sidhharth Gautama’s house at the time of his birth. Does this not show that it was a selfless act by Asita, based on what he had seen and observed? True that Buddha got enlightenment after self-development and meditation, those who knew the future knew very well that the Buddha had taken birth. They knew it when even the child Siddharth Gautama was unaware, thereby proving there were higher powers. It is true that even a pious spirit, when it gets entangled in a material human body, and is surrounded by materialism all around, need to reach an elevated level where it is able to defeat all material enslavements, but a pure spirit from the moment it comes in a human body always enjoy the protection and blessings of the Manifest Self.
Some people say of Prophet Mohammad that he was given Prophethood at the age of 40. Their view too is based on falsehood. Miracles at the time of Prophet’s birth, the predictions of the Christian Priest upon seeing Mohammad in his youth and several other incidents from Mohammad’s life show clearly that his position was a predestined one but even then he had to strive and meditate, both in house and in cave, so as to achieve enlightenment. Even before he reached that level, he was known as the most just and most truthful among the Arabs, which confirm his high spiritual level, which continued to grow till the body of Mohammad developed the desired relationship with the Noor that descended in the body.
If you have read our analysis of the Upanishads, you must have seen that at innumerable instances they talk of an invisible Absolute God creating a visible Self, to which it bestowed the power of creation, preservation and destruction. The beings emanated from this power and to keep them on the true path always, Messengers or Avatars were sent from time to time. That Rama and Krishna formed part of this chain is evident. Siddharth Gautama too formed a part of this system created by the Manifest Self. Proofs of this are manifest in Siddharth’s mother, Mahamaya’s dream wherein Bodhsatta named Sumedha spoke of his last and final birth and also in the incident regarding Asita.
......................................................................................
Asita was a person of great eminence. B.R.Ambedkar writes: “Surveying with his divine eyes the whole of the Jambudvipa, Asita saw that a boy was born in the house of Suddhodhana shining with all brilliance and that it was over his birth that the gods (read ‘Devatas’) were excited.” The fact that gods (read ‘Devatas’) were happy over his birth proves that they were aware of the events of the future. If we find events of the birth and life of Devatas - as Ahlulbayt in the Arab region - disclosed all through the Vedas, why should we have doubt?
Asita wept at the fact that he was old and would not be able to live till the day Buddha “attain supreme and complete enlightenment and having done so, will turn the supreme wheel of the Doctrine that has not been turned before him by any other being in the world; for the weal and happiness of the world will he teach his Doctrine.” This statement shows that supreme and complete enlightenment was to be attained at a later age. Perhaps at a predestined time or when people had already started acknowledging the high traits of Siddharth Gautama’s personality. But certain level of spiritual loftiness was very much present even at the time of birth.
There is one more point! Krishna says in Gita that the self inside us has two parts – lower and upper. Lower part leads the person to the material world and it is the duty of each of us to transcend this and dwell in the higher part of the self, which is directly related to the Manifest Self. Purushottama or the Ideal person even transcends this stage and starts showing the characteristics of the God Himself. This is true enlightenment that leads to salvation, called nirvana by Buddha. You will agree that this does not prove that the person who has attained enlightenment gains supremacy over the God or His Manifest Self.
Any person who takes his self to the stage where it gets directly attached to the Manifest Self, starts getting revelations from the Manifest Self directly? This is why we see a similar pattern of evolution of teachings all across the world. Wherever any person uplifted himself to the stage where his self got attuned to the frequency of the Manifest Self, he became an Arahat, as per Buddha’s terminology, and became the teacher of the true path. That is why when a revered brahmin of the time came to Buddha and said that an Arahat should not tell others of his position, Buddha had to explain to him why it was necessary for an Arahat to say so and preach the true teachings to all.
We are of the opinion that though becoming an Arahat is prerequisite for Divine Messengers, it is not necessary that all Arahats are given the position of being an Avatar/Rasool. The term ‘Arahat’ might therefore be equivalent of ‘nabi’ or ‘nubuwat’. This is evident in the example of Asita, who had reached a stage where he was able to hear and see the gods (read ‘Devatas’) move and who could search with his divine eye where the child was born, but who was not a Divinely appointed Avatar and who even wept at the fact that he would not be alive to witness the time when Buddha would reach the highest level of Arahatship and would be given the position of a Divine Avatar/Messenger. Whether one of the 7 Divine Spirits later chose the body of Siddharth Gautama to work as their office, we cannot say with certainty, because that is the highest stage, but there is no denying the fact that Buddha was very much a part of the Divine System of Guidance that the powers of Noor have created against Zulmat.
Asita said:
The religious life, the Doctrine, that he will proclaim will be good in the beginning, good in the middle, complete in the letter and the spirit, whole and pure.
Just as an Oudumbara flower at some time and place arises in the world, even so at some time and place after countless cycles, revered Buddhas arise in the world.
This statement of Asita further shows that such people of great eminence, who may also be the teachers of Doctrine of True Path (Messengers) keep appearing from time to time and birth of Buddha was perhaps the last of the Messenger in a region (say India) or the last birth of a particular Devata assigned this task, before the appearance of all the spirits together in the Middle Region.
Asita again tells the reason why Devatas were happy and what is expected of all of us. He says:
So also, O Raja! This boy will without doubt obtain supreme, complete enlightenment, and having done so will take countless beings across the ocean of sorrow and misery to a state of happiness.
Is the same not the theme of Krishna’s conversation all through Gita? That indeed is the work that Devatas (of Noor) have taken as task for themselves while Zulmat works ceaselessly to deviate us from becoming the followers of the teachings of Devatas.
......................................................................................
One of the chief reforms ascribed to Buddha was to eradicate the age-old belief as per which “a worker was born to serve and that in serving his master he was only fulfilling his destiny.” Fact is that even Krishna was against the evil of casteism, and if he did not dwell too much on the subject it was either because he was engaged in dealing with more pressing problems or because of the fact that we know too little of his teachings during his life-time, other than those mentioned in Gita.
Reading our commentary of Gita will prove to you the veracity of our claim.
......................................................................................
Now we come to the degradation of thoughts and morals that had enveloped the people of the time, which necessitated the coming of another Preacher. This is evident in Buddha’s cousins’ penchant for game and hunting. This is also evident in the hard labour that masters made their servants do. Even the priests, at the time of indulging in the ritual sacrifices, thrashed the servants or made them perform acts beyond their capacity. Greater example is that of the family priest Udayin, who gave the idea of construction of a harem to Buddha’s father Suddhodana “with very beautiful inmates” “to prevent the prophecy from coming true.” The priest gave long lectures to Siddharth Gautama and tried his best to make him fall to beckoning of all the beautiful women in the harem. And Siddharth Gautama’s chief “sin” was that he “was addicted to the company of saints and sages”. Does this not show the degradation in morals and a very materialistic outlook of the priests and people of the period, including Siddharth Gautama’s father. Will any priest today suggest that a harem be built for a person indulging in spiritual learning? Even if one suggests so, will the people allow him to remain a priest thereafter? Or will any father of today go on to build such a harem for his son? This shows that the society had reached its nadir or lowest point. How could the Manifest Self remain a passive witness without attempting to rectify this by sending another Preacher? Thus another birth of Bodhisata, named Sumedha, as Mahamaya’s child, who was called Siddharth Gautama became inevitable.
......................................................................................
Family priest Udayin’s words to the inmates of the harem built specifically for Siddharth show how the graceful movement, how the coquetry, grace and beauty of women have brought to naught all the penance, all the spirituality of great sages who have succumbed to the desires. Read the words of Udayin and see how Satanic forces have used women’s sensuality time and again to disrupt man from attaining closeness to God. Likewise, men’s ego and anger too has always worked against them and against mankind. See whether it is more apt in today’s world of peeping cleavages and displaying physical contours in the name of equality. That is why nearly all the scriptures, including the Puranas, the Vedas as well as the sayings of Prophet Mohammad and Ali have repeated time and again that, towards the end of the world and prior to the appearance of the Divine Saviour, it would become extremely difficult for adherents to abstain from sins.
Udayin said: “Ye are all skilled in all the graceful arts, ye are proficient in understanding the language of amorous sentiments, ye are possessed of beauty and gracefulness, ye are thorough masters in your own styles.
“With these graces of yours, ye are able to move even sages who have lost all their desires, and to ensnare even the gods, who are charmed by heavenly nymphs.
“By your skill in expressing the heart’s feelings, by your coquetry, your grace, and your perfect beauty ye are able to enrapture even women, how much more easily men.
“Thus, skilled as ye are, each set in your own proper sphere, it should not be beyond your reach to captivate and capture the prince and hold him in your bondage.
“Any timid action on your part would be fit for new brides whose eyes are closed through shame.
“What though this here be, great by his exalted glory, yet ‘great is the might of woman.’ Let this be your firm resolve.
“In olden times a great seer, hard to be conquered even by gods, was spurned by a harlot, the beauty of Kasi, planting her feet upon him.
“And the great seer Viswamitra, though plunged in a profound penance, was carried captive for ten years in the forests by the nymph Ghritaki.
“Many such seers as these have women brought to naught, how much more than a delicate prince in the first flower of his age?
“This being so, boldly put forth your efforts that the prosperity of the king’s family may not be turned away from him.
“Ordinary women captivate simple men; but they are truly women, who subdue the nature of high and hard.”
Does this speech not reveal the mind-set of men who have used women for their own advantage, at times to subdue other men? It is this nature of women why we find some Buddhist sages speaking so ill of women on the whole. Christian priests tried to further suppress woman so much so that in the post-Jesus society there was a time when Christian women were to observe such staunch purdah that even the presence of another man in the house of a married woman was looked as sin. This was the other extreme. Islam tried to rectify this and gave a middle path where the sensuality was to be subdued in the strictest terms and attempt was made to bring out the positive features of a woman’s personality. Unfortunately, the Muslim clergy misunderstood the Islamic teachings and attempt was made to make women a household slave, much on the lines of what was happening in Christian Europe at that time.
However, curtailing the sensuality necessitated that a dress code be made obligatory. Please remember, the dress code was never to wear a burqah or confine women to the interiors of the house but to wear clothes where the physical contours or too much of skin was not visible. And there was to be a similar dress code for men as well. The male dominated society of the Muslims couldn’t understand this and instead of making her work shoulder-to-shoulder with men, while adhering to the dress code, they confined her to the house, thus hampering her development. The result was that women who rebelled against this treatment started wearing clothes that left little to imagination.
......................................................................................
In spite of all their attempts to wow and seduce Siddharth, his thoughts show he understood that winning the world through physical beauty or trying to accomplish selfish goals through use of physical beauty which is temporary, is despicable. See Siddharth’s words:
What is it that these women lack that they perceive not that youth is fickle? For old age will destroy whatever beauty has?
This is the reason why later day Messengers never allowed visual display of physical features even though women were free to do business or earn a living like in the case of Mohammad’s wife Khadija. This example shows why teachings of the Preachers should not be understood through the practice of the adherents. Mohammad married a woman who was the richest woman of the time and who had built her business through her own efforts. There was lot of mutual respect between Mohammad and Khadija and there are several evidences where they not only discussed the affairs but also helped each other. On the contrary, you know the present state of Muslim women, who claim to be followers of Mohammad and revere Khadija.
Following are some of the terms used to entice Buddha. Is it not true that the same modes of enticement continue to remain in vogue even today? If religion puts a check on violent display of these things, why blame it?
See: With their brows, their glances, their coquetries, their smiles, their delicate movements; urge by passion, pressed him with their full, firm bosoms in gentle collisions; leaning on him with their shoulders drooping down, and with their gentle-creeper-like arms; mouths spelling of spirituous liquor, their lower lips red like copper, whispered in his ear; with her blue garments continually slipping down in pretended intoxication, stood conspicuous with her tongue visible like the night with its lightning lashing; with their golden ones tinkling, wandered about here and there, showing him their bodies veiled with thin cloth; leaned, holding a mango bough in hand, displaying their bosoms like golden jars; another sang a sweet song easily understood and with proper gesticulations, rousing him…”
If all these are banned, why have problem or reasons to complain? Prophet Mohammad banned doing all this for men other than husbands. But yes, even the men are not allowed to reveal their physical contours or sexual parts in front of women. This is conveniently forgotten.
......................................................................................
Prince Siddharth’s response is noteworthy and we all need to salute him for his steadfastness in front of all attempts by the most beautiful women of the time. See what he said:
This speech manifesting affection is well-befitting in thee; but I will convince thee as to where thou wrongly judgest me.
I do not despise worldly objects, I know that all mankind is bound up therein. But remembering that the world is transitory, my mind cannot find pleasure in them.
Yet even though this beauty of women were to remain perpetual, still delight in the pleasures of desires would not be worthy of the wise man.
And as for what thou sayest as to even those great men having become victims to desire, do not be led away by them; for destruction was also their lot.
Real greatness is not to be found there, where there is destruction, or where there is attachment to worldly objects, or a want of self-control.”
And when thou sayest, “’Let one deal with women by guile,’ I know about guile, even if it be accompanied with courtesy.
That compliance too with a woman’s wishes pleases me not, if truthfulness be not there; if there be not a union with one’s soul and nature, then ‘out upon it’ say I.
A soul overpowered by passion, believing in falsehood, carried away by attachment and blind to the faults of its objects, what is there in it worth being deceived?
And if the victims of passion do deceive one another, are not men unfit for women to look at and women for men?
Since then these things are so, thou surely wouldst not lead me astray into ignoble pleasures.”
We invite you to read this statement of Buddha again? Is it not clear that he has very clear views about existence of soul and its role? We fail to understand why people get misled into saying that Buddha denied the existence of soul. There is no doubt that Buddha’s true views are yet to be understood.
B.R. Ambedkar himself is perplexed at his. He writes: “The third problem relates to the doctrines of soul, of karma and rebirth. The Buddha denied the existence of the soul. But he is also said to have affirmed the doctrine of karma and rebirth. At once a question arises. If there is no soul, how can there be karma? If there is no soul, how can there be rebirth? These are baffling questions. In what sense did the Buddha use the words karma and rebirth? Did he use them in a different sense than the sense in which they were used by the brahmins of his day? If so, what sense? Did he use them in the same sense in which the brahmins used them? If so, is there not a terrible contradiction between the denial of the soul and the affirmation of karma and rebirth? This problem needs to be resolved.”
There seems no doubt about Buddha’s belief in the presence of soul. As you progress reading, we will give several more examples to prove this. Our view is that there is not an iota of difference in this regard, between the theory propounded by Krishna and Rama and that propounded by Buddha. Did Buddha say that his God was different from the God of Krishna? Did he ever say that his path was different from that of Rama and Krishna? Is it not sad that we take them to be preaching two different religions? If Krishna and Rama owed their origin to one source and clearly it must be as we all believe that there is but One God, their definition and understanding too must be the same. Problem, if any, lies with the self-proclaimed experts who sit down to write commentaries on their respective subjects of expertise.
......................................................................................
There is one more thing we wish to highlight. Imagine a man living in present society who is fully given up to materialistic pursuits. There can still be found men who maintain harems. But do such men boast about it in front of the society, more importantly, their sons. Even in the present society, when morals are fast losing ground, it will be difficult to find a person who talks about his own carnal life to his son, lest make preparations to have his son succumb to the lust of a carnal life. On the contrary we find Suddhodana and his ministers spend a great deal of their time “in consultation hoping to find some means to draw Siddharth to the pleasures of carnal life and thus to dissuade him from the likely turn which he may give to his life.”
The example of Siddharth shows the extent to which materialism and pleasure exploits had enveloped the society at that time. Therefore, it was but natural that Buddha would have addressed this problem with great intensity. When materialism existed to such extent, it was but natural that people be asked to leave all and proceed to forest. This was the only solution available. We must remember that all the Messengers gave solutions to the problems that were more topical in nature during that particular period. It is this reason why we find Krishna criticizing the evils of sanyasa and ritual worship in Gita. Because in Krishna’s period the basic problem facing the people in general was not materialism alone but also wrong understanding of the Vedic teachings and false rituals that got attached to societal living as well as to the lives of the sanyasis.
This is the reason why these Messengers appear to be saying different things. Otherwise, if you go deeper into what they have to say, you will find all saying one and the same thing.
It is this reason why when the sanyasa itself got misunderstood, Messengers had to work to bring the people back to living in the cities. We find one such incident in an Upanishad where the forest of Bimbisara is described to be buzzing with people who had brought all their materialistic evils to the forest and Narada had to tell them to first go and live for a particular period in the city and then come to live in forest. Remember, Messengers also have to keep in mind the mind-set of the people and the effect their teachings would have on them. When all the people had come to live in the forest, then if Narada had ordered them to go back to city life, nobody would have obeyed. So a slow treatment was given, just as Mohammad didn’t abrogate slavery but framed such rules that the system of keeping slaves vanished in Islam far before the Christian world understood its evils.
Such is the intensity with which people adhere to their beliefs, even if they are on wrong. Our role is to find the truth about the ideal way that God wants us to lead – the right path – through the teachings of the various Messengers and then tread on that path. Upon going deeper, you will find that all talk of one and only one path.
......................................................................................
Leaving Kapilavatsu, Siddharth Gautama halted at the hermitage of a brahmin woman Saki, then at the hermitage of another brahmin woman by name Padma and then at the hermitage of the brahmin sage Raivata. This is interesting indeed. Do you find Ashrams owned by women now. That was the time when while there were harems existing, with multitude of women ready to present themselves to the desires of men, there were also women who lived in hermitages or rather had their own hermitages.
We know from history that the quick rise of Buddhism was followed by an equally quick decline in India. This was followed by centuries of waywardness when there was no religion whatsoever existing and only a handful managed to keep the teachings of their respective religions intact. It was only in the 9th or 10th century A.D., nearly 300-400 years after coming of Mohammad and his assertion that he was the last Prophet that attempts were made in India at reviving Hinduism and commentators like Ramanuja and others sat down to reinterpret Vedas and Gita and rewrite Puranas and other religious scriptures. But during these centuries of collective waywardness or lack of religiosity, the system of women running hermitages slowly got extinct and all we know about women during these dark centuries is again in the form of erotica from the innumerable temples like Khajuraho and others that suddenly appeared during the 9th-10th centuries A.D.
But why erotica on temples too? Judging by the sheer number of these temples which came up, it appears that they may have been a by-product of vengeance or vehemence to a certain way of life. If this is not true, then the other logic can be that there were a certain segment of people who wanted the public to remain engrossed in materialistic pursuits, just as Suddhodhama wanted from his son Siddharth so as to shield him from the call of his conscience or the call of truth.
......................................................................................
Reasons for early decline of Buddhism
Buddhism’s decline was as fast as its rise. My view is that Buddhism’s decline cannot be attributed to any failings in the teachings but because of wrong interpretation of the teachings. We have seen how materialism pervaded the society at the time of Buddha. In the initial years of his life, Siddharth Gautama (or Buddha) fought all the materialistic forces while living within the society itself. So much so that he was made to live in a harem where all the female inhabitants had been instructed to seduce him with their charm. This was a clear example of material beckoning at its extreme. Likewise, he was the son of a king and had all the chances to exploit the wealth of his father. Yet he was fighting these evils while living in the society itself.
Later, when the Sakya Sangh ruled a war against Koliyas, he was seen to be against the decision of the majority. Says BR Ambedkar: “Siddharth Gautama was a man of great principles and could not have comprised on truth.” This angered the Sangh and the consequences of this led to Siddharth Gautama opting for Parivraja but only as a way out when compelled, as he wanted to adhere to his ideals and also save his family from confiscation of property or expulsion.
Unfortunately, Siddharth Gautama’s compulsion to take Parivraja or sanyasa was accepted as part of the Buddhist teachings. This was perhaps because renunciation by going to the forests or high altitude caves had remained a part of the beliefs of the people for a long time, and Siddharth Gautama too had done the same.
The followers of Buddha didn’t understand this at least initially. This led to hordes of new recruits to Buddhism starting to live in caves and hermitages, resulting in situation where all good teachings and knowledge got confined to these secluded hermitages and the common man continued to live in ignorance. Slowly, when these hermitages collapsed, the only link of the common men to the true teachings collapsed and Buddhism declined as quickly as it had emerged.
Why did the system of hermitages collapse? This happened because the way of life that these hermits had adapted was not the desired way of life as per Buddhism. Universality of religion lies in the ability of the entire society to accept and live that religion. Clearly, it was not possible for the entire society to start living in caves and hermitages. The initial zeal and enthusiasm made the adherents live a harsh life. But when this died slowly or materialism started brewing inside those very monasteries, the entire structure started to crumble like a pack of cards.
They were doing all this in remembrance of Buddha whom people had seen passing from amongst themselves, with a shaven head, and clothes of a hermit and begging for food in a bowl. They didn’t realize that this was a life that Buddha was forced to live due to certain compulsions which were the consequence of his promise made to the Sangh.
One may ask at this juncture the reason for materialism making inroads into the Buddhist hermitages. The reason is simple. Buddha’s overzealous followers had tried to see his teachings as a new religion when in truth these were not. All Buddha had done was to remove the evils that had permeated in the society that believed in the Vedas. Several of those who accepted his teachings were brahmins. But portraying Buddha’s teachings as a religion had a negative effect as several ardent believers of Vedas rejected the teachings. Therefore, a lot many serious people who would have otherwise contributed to development of Buddha’s teachings did not come under its fold. After Ashoka’s conversion, the new recruits were mainly those who converted due to compulsion. A lot many of these entered the caves and hermitages and thereafter corrupted the entire system. Infighting, fight for supremacy, ego tussles and all other evils of a materialistic society entered these hermitages. This led to the entire system collapsing once Hindu kings replaced the Buddhist rulers.
......................................................................................
Another clear example which shows that Buddha very much believed in the presence of a soul can be seen in his conversation with Bimbisara – the king of Magadhas. In spite of such clear proofs, people went out of the way to prove that Buddha was against the presence of soul. This was perhaps because they were hell-bent on proving that Buddha’s religion was different from that of his predecessors, viz. Rama, Krishna and Mahavira.
Buddha said:
I am not so afraid even of serpents nor of thunderbolts falling from heaven, nor of flames blown together by the wind, as I am afraid of these worldly objects.
These transient pleasures, - the robbers of our happiness and our wealth, and which float empty and like illusions through the world, - infatuate man’s minds even when they are only hoped for, - still more then they take up their abode in the soul.
The victims of pleasure attain not to happiness even in the heaven of the gods (Devatas), still less in the world of mortals; he who is athirst is never satisfied with pleasures, as the fire, the friend of the wind, with fuel.
There is no calamity in the world like pleasures, people are devoted to them through delusion; when he once knows the truth and so fears evil, what wise man would of his own choice desire evil?
This is a long sermon and Buddha talks about various evils plaguing our society. Is it not evident that the pleasures and other evils that Buddha is talking about are the evils plaguing the society even now and are to be fought by the members of the society while living in the society itself?
There is another important point to be noted. Earlier we had seen that sage Asita had talked of the Devatas’ (wrongly translated as gods) happiness at the time of Buddha’s birth. Now Buddha is himself talking of the heaven of the Devatas (again wrongly translated as gods). It is interesting to note that Gita too has referred to the Devatas time and again and also talked of Indra’s heaven. Indra, we know from Vedas, is the chief of the Devatas. We have also seen that the entire Vedas are full of talk of Devatas, whose identity was a big secret till now until we set about to reveal the truth. The fact that both Krishna and Buddha have talked of them show the kind of importance these Devatas deserve to be given. Heaven, it seems, is attached only to these Devatas (not just in Buddhism and Hinduism but also in Islam). Instead of trying to know who the Devatas are, so that we can aspire to reach their Heaven, we made different religions based on the wrongly or partially understood teachings. Did Krishna say anywhere that his followers are to be called Hindus? Did Buddha say anywhere that his religion should be called Buddhism? Did Krishna say that Rama’s or Buddha’s teachings are to be ignored? Or did Buddha, particularly so because he was consequent to both Rama and Krishna, denied the importance of their teachings, denounced either Rama or Krishna, or even criticized the Vedas? No! Wrong understanding of the Vedas has been criticized, even Krishna did the same in Gita, but both Buddha and Krishna have did their entire best to uphold the importance of the personalities (Devatas) mentioned in the Vedas. Their presence, their role in our life and their importance in relation to religious pursuits are endorsed by both time and again. Truth is that both Krishna and Buddha belonged to the same chain of Messengers.
Since both Buddha and Krishna endorsed the position of Devatas, they must be surely aware that Upanishads and Vedas say that they were the names of God’s visible power and it were they who controlled entire cosmos and directly supervised the work of the Messengers sent by them from time to time to lead the mankind to the worship of the Absolute God. Devatas have been talked about in Upanishads as the rulers of our organs of senses and action and as rope between our selfs and the Manifest Self, responsible for the consciousness within us, etc.
Fact is that religions are man-made but the God’s path is truly one and only one. Deviations or misunderstandings created all the religions of the world while the core of these religions is still the God’s true path, which got obliterated with time, and from time to time.
Today, we are surely far more evolved intellectually than the man 2500 to 5000 years back. Yet, for unknown reasons, we accept the conclusions drawn by those semi-civilized men to be binding. Yes, the revealed scriptures need to be blindly followed as they have divinity or superhuman relationship attached to them. But how can we say the same about their interpretations or about books written by general people. A man who sets up a harem for his son or a Sangh that draws plans to attack the other tribe for water cannot be our role models. Think for a while. It was these very men who became interpreters of Buddha’s teachings a little later. Will you still accept their inferences blindly?
......................................................................................
Buddha’s views on the pleasures of the world too are not new but have been presented in a more contemporary fashion.
There is no calamity in the world like pleasures, people are devoted to them through delusion; when he once knows the truth and so fears evil, what wise man would of his own choice desire evil?
When they have obtained all the earth girdled by the sea, kings wish to conquer the other side of the great ocean; mankind is never satiated with pleasures, as the ocean with the waters that fall into it.
It is worthwhile to note that pleasure seems to be the evil that has plagued society at all times. Even Krishna laments that people of the time were spending more time in pursuit of entertainment. How true are these words even now! Only some of the modes and instruments of pleasure have changed, while many remain the same, as before.
Commentators say Siddharth Gautama’s pursuit of perfect knowledge made him learn all the existing forms of religion, albeit in their deviated form, and only when he was dissatisfied with one, he moved to the next. But this is never the case with Avatars. Vedas say words flow from the mouth of an Avatar as flute player plays his flute, the Avatar speaks what is divinely ordained. Therefore, while the Avatars are apparently reacting to the situations they face, their reaction is exactly as divinely ordained.
......................................................................................
The mortification of the body in quest for heaven was something that was despised by Krishna in Gita. But we find that the same continued to happen in the name of Krishna himself. Those who called themselves as adherents to Krishna’s teachings continued to do all that Krishna condemned so much so that self-mortification and rituals that Krishna had negated were still being seen as positive solutions to go to heaven, even in the time of Buddha. Krishna had said that actions should not be performed in love of heaven, as such persons care little for the well-being of others and yet people were doing the same in Buddha’s period. In fact, they continue to do the same activities till this day while calling themselves as devout Krishna bhakts. Likewise, we have mentioned how entertainment was looked down upon by Krishna but when Buddha gave his teachings it was again the chief evil in the society. And it continues to remain the same till this day.
The purpose of writing this is to bring home the point that the people at the time of these Messengers’ arrival were not superior to us. In fact, arrival of Messengers became necessary only when religious values went to nadir. These were the people who never understood the teachings of those very Messengers they held in high esteem. A very clear example can be given from Mohammad’s or Ali’s period where people asked questions like how many hair are there in the head? Unfortunately, scholars treat all those who were close or present in the company of these Messengers as pious and virtuous. They forget that in case of all the Messengers or Avatars, the number of people opposing them has always been higher than those on their side. They forget that Zulmat (or Mara, as per Buddha) still kept working, perhaps overtime, when the Messengers were present in person to deliver the teachings of truth. They forget also that human character is so frail that it can get swayed under slightest brush with ego, lust, anger and other similar ailments and one has to keep a firm control over oneself at all times to prevent this from happening. Therefore, it becomes necessary that we keep in mind that there is still a chance that teachings of these Messengers have not been understood truly. Just as Buddha found negativities in the practices performed by the revered saints of the time, whereas they were of opinion always that they were on the true path, it is still possible that our understanding of the religion till date may have been based on false foundations. After all, those very practices that Buddha found negative continue to remain in vogue till date with perhaps as equal dedication as the saints of Buddha’s period would have done. We must remember that intelligence is the biggest defence and we should apply our intelligence at all times, without allowing it to get affected because of vagaries of organs of senses and action and other attachments or detachments.
Another point is that there has never been any fault in the teachings of God’s Messengers. They have always tagged the same line and shown the same straight path, be it Rama or Krishna, Buddha or Jesus, Abraham or Mohammad. Fault has always been in our inability to comprehend the message.
As Buddha said:
Some undergo misery for the sake of this world, others meet toil for the sake of heaven; all living beings wretched through hope and always missing their aim, fall certainly for the sake of happiness into misery.
Has not something like this happened to me?
It is not the effort itself which I blame, - which flinging aside the base pursues a high path of its own.
What I ask is, ‘Can the mortification of body be called religion?’
Since it is only by the mind’s authority that the body either acts or ceases to act, therefore, to control the thought is alone befitting – without thought the body is like a dog.” …
New light cannot be attained by him who has lost his strength and is wearied with hunger, thirst and fatigue with his mind no longer self-possessed through fatigue.
How could he who is not absolutely calm, reach the end which is to be attained by his mind?
True calm and the self-possession of the mind is properly obtained by the constant satisfaction of the body’s wants.
This brings us to an important conclusion. A great evil plaguing the period of Buddha’s time was the practice of self-mortification, performed by the sages who were revered and looked upon with esteem. This had led to the entire population of people getting deviated. Buddha had to rectify this and to do so he decided to become one like them. The idea was perhaps to remove the evils. To some extent he was successful. But the overzealous adherents of his dhamma took it to other extreme, so much so that we find history full of Buddhist bhikshus and mendicants roaming from place to place or living in secluded places. Was it not because the Buddha they saw was doing the same? They forgot that Buddha’s compulsions were altogether different. Result was that all type of people, who had nothing to do with spirituality or religion, adopted living in this manner, thereby leading to degradation.
Krishna too said the same in Gita though we must confess that Buddha elaborated a lot on this point. Krishna said that it was possible for him to retire to solitude or start living the life of a mendicant but that is not the solution and it is the duty of each of us to continue to work for making this world a better place to live, even if we had to give sacrifices of our pleasures, our leisure, etc. to accomplish this.
......................................................................................
Mara (Kama) seems to be name for Zulmat or Tamas, which has been described by Buddha as “another name for evil passions.”
......................................................................................
Buddha too was of the opinion that reason and investigation were prerequisites for seeking truth. Unfortunately this is the least that we are doing, involved as we are in with performing the religious acts in the manner in which our forefathers used to do. These were the chief tools that helped Gautam attain enlightenment and if we call ourselves to be his followers, we must never forsake these. Tools which are said to have helped Gautam attain enlightenment are:
* Reason and investigation
* Next, concentration
* Equanimity and mindfulness
* Added purity to equanimity and equanimity to mindfulness
Aren’t these tools going to be handy for us as well in case we decide to go for the search of truth?
......................................................................................
Very much like Krishna, Buddha too came to conclusion that sufferings need to be removed to make mankind happy. Who will do it? God? No! This will be done by the pious and righteous, as it is the duty of all to keep endeavouring to make this world a better place to live. For whom will they do it? Naturally, for the entire mankind, which comprise of the not so pious and righteous.
......................................................................................
Unfortunately, with time, the Buddhists too acted in the same manner as adherents of all other religions had done. The Banyan tree under which Buddha got enlightenment became sacred and reverential. It was named Bodhi tree. Statues of Buddha were erected, inclusive of those like The Sitting Buddha, The Reclining Buddha and so on.
Is this not duality that while the records of the Buddha’s life were not kept by some claiming that Buddha never wanted it to be done, the various things that got associated to him became reverential?
......................................................................................
Buddha traversed the journey from Bodhisatta to Buddha in one life itself but it was told to the Bodhisattas (learners of Buddhism) that a Bodhisatta has to be a Bodhisatta for ten lives to become a Buddha. Does anybody know of the previous lives? This means that all would continue to remain Boddhisattas for all times and no one would aspire to become Buddha in his lifetime. Bodhisatta became a ritual with no real attempt by these to become Buddhas or attain Arahatship. It was also taught that in the sixth life a Bodhisatta becomes prepared to fully grasp the evolution of things, its cause, the Twelve Nidanas, and this knowledge awakens compassion in his heart for all beings. In the seventh birth, he practices charity, patience, tactfulness, energy, calmness, intelligence and the highest wisdom. The inherent meaning is that these are not desirable in the earlier births. Hence we do not go for the search of the truth. How do we know which life it is? It could be the tenth life but we will still keep saying that ‘in the sixth life a Bodhisatta becomes prepared to fully grasp the evolution of things….”
......................................................................................
It is written that Buddha agreed to three points that Kapila Rishi propagated. These were – Buddha accepted these things.
* He accepted that reality must rest on proof. Thinking must be based on rationalism.
* He accepted that there was no logical or factual basis for the presumption that God exists or that he created the universe.
* He accepted that there was Dukha (suffering) in the world.
In this entire BOOK, we are only using rationalism to give proofs from various divine scriptures. Those who have capacity to accept rationalism will accept it as true.
We will prove later that even though Buddha may have agreed that there is no logical or factual basis for this presumption, Buddha did actually believed in God.
......................................................................................
In his opinion, nothing was infallible and nothing could be final. Everything must be open to re-examination and re-construction whenever grounds for re-examination and re-consideration arise.”
How true was Buddha? If you are reading my explanations of the Vedas, you will agree that nearly 2500 years back, Buddha knew people weren’t having a true understanding of the Vedas. This shows that our observations are not new and some people had remained aware of the truth regarding Vedas at all times and it is only during the last 1200 years or so that the truth has remained buried under the larger mass of untruth.
Buddha’s wordings clearly show that his remarks were more regarding the interpretation of Vedas, which should always be open for re-examination and reconsideration, rather than the text of the Vedas itself.
Secondly, we wish to ask the Buddhists: Do they believe that the Buddha’s teachings are final or they too can be re-examined and reconsidered in altered situations? After all, it is the Buddha who is saying that nothing is infallible.
I am sure Buddha meant the same when he said:
Man must know the truth and reach truth.
To him freedom of thought most essential. And he was sure that freedom of thought was the only way to the discovery of truth.
Yes, the Hindu religion had got distorted to such an extent by the time of Buddha that instead of good deeds or piety or auspiciousness, sacrifices of animals was considered as a way to reach heaven. The very fact that Hindus are no longer of the opinion shows that Messengers come to impart teachings, which invariably had effect on bringing about a transformation in the society, and this is the very purpose why Messengers were sent. Buddha came to change the mind-set of the people living in a particular region and those who named his followers as Buddhists were on the wrong.
......................................................................................
Of these schools of philosophy there was one headed by Purana Kassapa. His doctrine was known as Akriyavada. He maintained that the soul was not affected in any way by karma. One may do, or one may get things done. One may do injury or one may get someone to kill. One may commit theft or dacoity or one may get theft or dacoity committed, one may commit adultery or one may get adultery committed, one may tell a lie or one may get a lie told. Nothing affects the soul. An act, however licentious, does not affect the soul with sin. An act, however good, does not bring merit to the soul. Nothing has any Kriya (result) on the soul. When a person dies, all the elements of which he is made join in their originals. Nothing survives after death, neither body nor soul. [Remember this name of Purana Kassapa as he is going to be discussed in detail later in these notes. He accepted Buddha’s teachings but we will prove to you that the teachings were accepted for the namesake. It were people like him, who carried such absurd views on soul and karma, who were instrumental in giving shape to the Buddhist view that Buddha was against the presence of soul.]
Another school of though was known as Niyativada. Its chief propounder was Makhali Ghosal. His doctrine was a kind of fatalism or determinism. He taught that no one can do anything or undo anything. Things happen. No one can make them happen. No one can remove unhappiness, increase it or diminish it. One must undergo one’s share of the experiences of the world.
The third school was known as Ucchedavada. Its chief propounder was Ajit Kesakambal. His doctrine was a kind of Annihilism. He taught that there was nothing in Yajna, Haom; there is no such thing as the fruits or effects of deeds to be enjoyed or suffered by the soul. There is neither heaven nor hell. Man is made up of certain elements of unhappiness in the world. The soul cannot escape it. Whatever sorrow or unhappiness there was in the world the soul cannot escape. This sorrow or unhappiness will come to an end automatically. The soul must undergo rebirth during eighty-four lakhs of cycles of Mahakalpas. Then only the sorrow and unhappiness of the soul will end, not before nor by any other means.
The fourth school was known as Annyonyavad. The head of this school was Pakudha Kacchyana. He preached that there are seven elements which go to make up a being, namely, Prathvi, Apa, Tej, Vayu, Sukha, Dukha and the Soul. Each is independent of the other; one does not affect the other. They are self-existent and they are eternal. Nothing can destroy them. If anyone chops off the head of man he does not kill them. All that happens is that the weapon has entered the seven elements.
Sanjaya Belaputta had his own school of philosophy. It was known as Vikshepavada, a kind of skepticism. He argued, “If anyone asked me is there heaven, if I feel there was I would say yes. But if I feel there was no heaven I would say no. If I am asked whether human beings are created, whether man has to suffer the fruits of his action whether good or bad, and whether the soul lives after death, I say nay to all these because I don’t think they exist. This is how Sanjaya Belaputta summed up his doctrine.
The sixth school of philosophy was known as Chaturyamsamvarvad. The head of this school who was alive when Gautama was searching for light was Mahavir, who was also called Nigantha Nathaputta. Mahavir taught that the soul had to undergo rebirth because of the bad karmas done in the past life and in the present life. One must therefore get over the bad, he suggested, by tapascharya. For preventing the doing of bad karmas in this life Mahavira prescribed the observance of chaturyama dharma, i.e., observance of four rules: (i) not to kill; (ii) not to steal; (iii) not to tell a lie; and (iv) not to have property and to observe celibacy.”
A look at these philosophies shows the degradation that had enveloped society. All, save the sixth one described above, paid no heed to importance of karma or good deeds. The very fact that these so-called philosophies existed and were popular is enough to suggest the condition of Indo-Aryans who were predominantly Hindus. Please keep in mind that these teachings have no similarity with Krishna’s teachings. In fact several of them are totally in contrast to what Krishna said. Yet they all believed themselves to be adherents of the Vedas. In such a situation, if Buddha reinforced the same path that had been laid by Krishna earlier, it was bound to be seen as a new religion. Though, in truth, it was not.
This also confirms that Buddha as an Avatar or Messenger was sent among those who called themselves followers of the Vedic teachings. This does not mean that the degenerative views of the people of the time were in coherence with the original Divine Scriptures of the Indo-Aryans.
The coming of Buddha was necessitated because of the degeneration in the religious beliefs and social customs that had occurred. If Buddha did not talk much about his belief in the Vedas, it was because the Vedas were already part and parcel of the society and people had developed diverse understanding of the Vedas. Wherever deviations had come from true Vedic teachings, he tried to correct them. Thus he is very much an Avatar or Messenger for the Hindus, as were Rama and Krishna. Hindus of that period, who discarded Buddha out of their love for pseudo-beliefs, their ego or ignorance, were on the wrong. Likewise, so were those who accepted Buddha’s teachings and were quick to give the teachings the name of Buddhism. Did Buddha call at any moment that his God was different from that of Krishna or that his teachings were from a different source? Neither was Buddhism the name given by Buddha nor did he criticize Rama or Krishna. In fact we have seen credible evidence that he endorsed Vedas and the Devatas who form the chief part of discussion in the Vedas. There are several references of him talking of the Devatas and even meeting some of them, including Brahma. Yes, the degeneration, that we have mentioned, itself is an indicator he had no choice but to criticize the existing beliefs vigorously.
Yes, Buddha is important because his teachings may be more contemporary to present time, as he came several centuries after Krishna. But Buddha cannot be understood without understanding the true teachings of Krishna and Rama and the deviations that occurred therein by the time of Buddha. More importantly, Buddha’s teachings are not an iota different from the teachings of Krishna and Rama nor from the teachings of other messengers in other parts of the world. If there is difference, the fault lies in our understanding.
It is indeed sorry that Messengers or those who attained enlightenment from Divine Sources were misinterpreted and it was said that Buddha created the religion. B.R. Ambedkar writes: “Can anyone say that the Buddha’s religion was not his own creation?”
If Buddhism was Buddha’s creation then from whom was he seeking enlightenment when he threw the bowl of food which Sujata’s maid had brought, into the river Nairanja, saying:
If I am to have enlightenment let the bowl ascend the stream; if not let it go down.’ The vessel, indeed, began to float against the current and at last sank near the abode of Kala, a Naga king.
If Buddhism was Buddha’s creation, then why did Asita saw Devatas happy at the time of Buddha’s birth? If Buddha had no relation with God and his religion is only the philosophic reasoning of a human mind, then how can we conclude that his reasoning was not flawed? If Buddhism was Buddha’s creation then who was Brahma Sahampati who helped Buddha when he was perplexed. B.R. Ambedkar has himself written that Brahma Sahampati got to know what was passing in Buddha’s mind and left the Brahma’s world to guide Buddha. Let us accept that Buddha’s doctrine too was Divine, told to Buddha either as revelation or through enlightenment. Otherwise, what does enlightenment mean? A philosopher’s reasoning is a by-product of a long period of contemplation. Has any philosopher said till date that his conclusions were formed at a particular point in time? The more we contemplate, the more we are bound to contemplate that enlightenment is something supernatural when a Light from heavens enters the body. We have no choice but to accept the presence of certain higher powers who were responsible for enlightenment.
The same higher powers were responsible for Prophet Mohammad receiving enlightenment while he meditated and prayed in the cave. The Quran says in clear words that Mohammad had no knowledge of the book (Quran) nor Imaan (faith), until the Noorani Spirit chose his body to act as its office.
See what B.R. Ambedkar writes: “He (Buddha) said to himself: “True, I have gained a new doctrine. But it is too difficult for the common man to accept it and follow it. It is too subtle even for the wise…
“If I were to teach my doctrine, and others did not understand it or understanding it did not accept or accepting it did not follow it, it would be weariness to others and a vexation to me.
“Why not remain a Sanyasi away from the world and use my gospel to perfect my own self?” He asked himself: “At least I can do good to myself.” Thus as he reflected, his mind turned to inaction, not to teaching of the gospel.”
This shows that Buddha’s religion would never have materialized if Brahma Sahampati had not come to guide him at this stage. One who revealed or gave enlightenment to Buddha had given it so that the teachings reach the people. See what B.R. Ambedkar writes further:
“Then Brahma Sahampati knowing what was passing in the mind of the Buddha thought:
Verily the world is being destroyed, verily the world is going to destruction, if the Tathagata, the fully enlightened, turns to inaction, and not to teaching his doctrine.
Fuelled with anxiety Brahma Sahampati left the Brahma world and appeared before the Buddha. And arranging his upper robe on one shoulder he bent down and with clasped hands said:
Thou art no longer Siddharth Gautama. Thou art Buddha. Thou art the Blessed One who is blessed with the fullest enlightenment. Thou art the Tathagatha. How canst thou refuse to enlighten the world? How canst thou refuse to save erring humanity?
There are beings full of impurity that are falling away through not hearing the doctrine.
As the Lord knows,” proceeded Brahma Sahampati, “Among the Magadhas arose in ancient times, doctrine impure, with many blemishes Devised.
Will not the Lord open for them the door of his immortal doctrine?
Who is Brahma Sahampati, who from his place in heaven, got to know what was passing in Buddha’s mind? So there is a heaven but there is no God? There are Devatas but there is no God? As per present belief! The immortal doctrine – the straight path – had been one and the same during all times. Man kept digressing to such an extent that whenever the immortal doctrine was repeated, people saw them as different teachings. How sad that scholars continue to stress that Buddha’s teachings were his own creation and had nothing to do with Heavenly Powers.
Truth is that Brahma Sahampati is the same Brahma of Vedas who yet again revealed the truth to a great soul. If this is not so, how is it that he knows what’s passing in Buddha’s heart? Buddha too was aware of Brahma’s identity and didn’t ask Brahma who he was and from where had he come. Instead, we find him giving a great deal of respect to Brahma. Buddha called him: “Eminent and Excellent among men.”
This is what Buddha said:
O Brahma, Eminent and Excellent among men, if I did not give public utterance to my gospel, it is because I perceived vexation.
Is there duality here? It has been said earlier that Brahma Sahampati came from the Brahma world and it is being said here that Brahma is the eminent and excellent among men. To know the truth behind this, you will have to accept our views on who Brahma is and how he remained in Deva state in Brahma world and that Deva state needed human bodies to interact with other human beings.
B.R. Ambedkar writes further: “He (Buddha) realized that he left the world because there was so much conflict resulting in misery and unhappiness and for which he knew no remedy. If he can banish misery and unhappiness from the world by the propagation of his doctrine, it was his duty to return to the world and serve it and not sit silent as the personification of inactive impassivity.”
Buddha returned to the world but his followers perhaps delighted in keeping him away in solitude and continued to believe so and followed his ‘footsteps’ by becoming wandering heretics.
......................................................................................
There are few more very interesting observations that are necessary to make. Gita talks of three modes: Sattvik (pure), Rajasik (materialistic) and Tamasik (dark). The opposite ends are the perfectly pure and the perfectly impure. They have been referred to in Quran as Noor and Zulmat. God says in Quran that He is the creator of Noor and Zulmat. We have seen who the carriers of Noor are and how the Noor kept descending in pious human bodies. While Zulmat is the opposing force. It is perpetually trying to deviate mankind. Amidst this is the test for man! Man has not been created as angels – as robots who merely act and carry on performing their duties as per divine orders. Man has to pass the test. He has to identify the true path being shown by the Avatars of Noor, amid all the maze developed by forces of Zulmat. Those who are able to defeat all the attractions and lures presented by Zulmat and move on the path of Noor are victorious. External actions and performance of rituals alone don’t show the desired results. The external actions must necessarily bring about a change inside, slowly leading our self on ascent towards purity – towards attaining unity with the Manifest Self. The light of the Devatas work as rope, both within and without.
Ascent of the self was the ultimate purpose for attaining salvation. On the contrary, the various schools of thoughts that were prevalent, mention of six of whom have been given by us before, show people had erroneously created their own understandings of self. Many engaged in outwardly actions in a ritualistic manner and felt they would lead to salvation. For instance, they thought of obtaining salvation by as mundane actions as a dip in a river or an oblation by the fire; while their self remain engrossed in material pursuits. The entire meaning of salvation and soul had been lost and altogether wrong meanings had been evolved and they were being understood as the true path. This explains why Buddha did not talk of soul much and instead concentrated on need for internal purification alone.
We must remember that Buddha was merely about 550 years before Jesus. Kalyug had commenced much before. Do we know what kalyug is? Kalyug is the period when evil predominates good on earth. But why would this happen? This would happen because all the obedient souls, who could easily attain salvation, would have already attained salvation by then. The selfs of remaining majority, in the kalyug, is afflicted with various diseases of the soul. Just as there are various diseases of the body, soul too gets afflicted. Sensual attractions, ego, anger, hatred, jealousy, lust, etc. – all these have made the soul incapable of finding the true path and/or treading on it. All those who remain on earth must know they are living in this age because their souls couldn’t attain salvation. And they couldn’t attain salvation because their souls are severely inflicted with one disease or the other. They have become incapable of treading the path of salvation.
Buddha knew external actions performed to keep remembrance of God had become rituals. They were not doing any good internally. In such a situation, as a last resort, Buddha once again focussed on the need to look within.
Gita says evil actions are leading to the decay of the world. Noor and Zulmat both are trying ceaselessly: while Noor is trying to lead mankind towards path of good and worship, Zulmat is trying to deviate us from the path. As long as there are souls on earth which are attached to Noor; Noor is powerful. The more such souls, the more powerful Noor is. But if Zulmat gains in power, decay of the world is imminent. We are food for both, says Brhad-aranyaka Upanishad!
We know Manifest Self was given power to create when it desired there be more worshippers. Angels were created as robots who worshipped at all times. And man was created as someone with an extraordinary brain, who has the potential to choose between right and wrong. A test was kept for him. Zulmat created a maze around him. He is supposed to get out of the maze, understand the purpose of his creation, identify the path and the torch-bearers to the path, and then worship God in the way He ought to be worshipped.
If we see the same from Jesus’s words, there are very few wheat grains left; most of us are husk. Husk is increasing with more souls becoming incapable of attaining salvation. Wheat grains are on decrease. Most of those who could attain salvation have already moved ahead. Later day Avatars tried to make more worshippers out of those incapable of attaining salvation. Buddha was doing the same. One last time, in India, he was giving the teachings of need for internal purification. He didn’t talk of all that was taught before, because people had derived their own meanings. They already had made deviated understandings of the teachings (as we have seen in the case with their differing schools of thought). Every time they were told the truth, they deviated. Buddha was once again teaching the middle path which was the straight path. He was only focussing on the need to look within. But even then, we find narrations where Buddha scolded the Bhikshus who were talking of material attractions. An oft repeated incident is of Bhikshus discussing what the best pleasure on earth was: was it rajbhog (rulership), kaambhog (sex), material wealth, or anything else. It is evident, Buddha was trying to make real worshippers out of souls afflicted with materialism. Some of them must have went ahead toattain salvation as a consequence of Buddha’s teachings.
As Jesus said, most of the wheat has been taken away. Only men akin to husk remain. Since the world would have perished if there was no worship (as the purpose of creation would have been lost), all those Noors created by Manifest Self decided to come on earth one after another. The forces of Zulmat rallied around them with all the powers. As history records, Ali was cursed in each Friday prayer, week after week, from nearly 70,000 mosques for more than 70 years. Zulmat did its best to strangulate the teachings so as to curtail their affect.
Selfs of men remaining on earth by this time had reached such nadir that they had become incapable of attaining salvation through inner purification. As a last resort, Ahlulbayt laid stress on external actions to remember God. Once again, a great number of worshippers happened, due to the force of their teachings. Ahlulbayt taught that the internal actions shall result in internal elevation of soul. That is why Prophet Mohammad said if you wish to see whether your prayer has been accepted, see whether some goodness grew in you after the prayer or not. This meant there could be external exercises which had no meaning. Only those external oblations were successful wherein a contact of self with the Manifest Self was established. Establishment of such a contact would eventually lead to ascent of self towards purity and ascent of self would eventually lead to more goodness showing in nature. Ahlulbayt themselves led by example. While many of their adherents could not come out of their diseased souls, their external supplications led them nowhere. But there were a few who performed external supplications which had effect inside their souls. Out of husk, some wheat grains were found.
The combined forces of the Divine Spirit were able to bring about a revolution among a moribund multitude of disease afflicted souls. The savage Arabs got attracted to the teachings. That effect too has waned with time. Muslims are fighting over the Ahlulbayt, some claim they are the torchbearers while others give them no importance. Two things are necessary for salvation - the knowledge of the torchbearers to the path and treading the path. There is a group that tries to tread the path of worship but have left the torchbearers (the Ahlulbayt) altogether while those who claim to hold on to the torchbearers, think they need to worship no more as they have taken hold of the Ahlulbayt. The illnesses of their spirit have surfaced, making most of them incapable of attaining salvation. Increasingly, Muslims are being seen as the worst of men on earth.
Jesus says upon coming of Messiah, wheat will be separated from the husk. Only a few true worshippers will remain. As long as we work to increase their number, life will remain on earth. Or else, this world will decay, as has been predicted by Gita.
......................................................................................
The Madhyama Marg (Majjhima Patipada) that Buddha preached was the middle path, which was neither the path of pleasure nor the path of self-mortification. Said he:
Only when the self in ye has been conquered that ye are free from lust; ye will then not desire worldly pleasures, and the satisfaction of your natural wants will not defile ye. Let ye eat and drink according to the needs of your body.
We invite you to read Gita. Is not Krishna saying the same? Is it not apparent that both teachings had same origin? It is apparent from Buddha’s talk on the need to satisfy the needs of life and to keep the body in good health that he wanted his disciples to live in the society.
Buddha knew that the disease is within. It is the self which has become afflicted with disease. Curbing of lust and worldly pleasures won’t happen unless this disease is eradicated. Therefore, he focussed on the need to remove the diseases through meditation and other such exercises. When you read Gita, Krishna has talked of even higher stage than meditation. Not that Buddha was not aware of this! That is detachment, you perform actions but only as a duty, having no attachment.
......................................................................................
All the evils that were prevailing were either in connection with man’s relationship to God or man’s relationship with his soul. There were stories prevailing about God and many of these were false. As regards to soul, people were committing all kinds of sins and wanted to attain salvation. There was another section which performed rituals in love for life after death. Humanity and doing good to others as a way of life was forgotten. Therefore Buddha saying that his teachings have nothing to do with God does not mean that there is no God. Buddha emphasized on human relationship with other humans and left other teachings as they were already being practiced to the limit of excess. In other words, Buddha as a last resort tried to show to man that it is in his interest that he follows the Dhamma. As Buddha said:
“The centre of his Dhamma is man and the relation of man to man in his life on earth.”
This he said was his first postulate.
His second postulate was that men are living in sorrow, in misery and poverty. The world is full of suffering and that how to remove this suffering from the world is the only purpose of Dhamma. Nothing else is Dhamma!
The recognition of the existence of suffering and to show the way to remove suffering is the foundation and basis of his Dhamma.”
Surely, there is no denying the fact that Buddha’s entire teachings are centred on recognizing and removing suffering from this world. If we see Gita, stress is more on purity of self and attaining salvation. But if you read Gita with us, through our commentary, you will agree that the eventual focus is on trying to make each human a better person so that all the sufferings and evils of this mortal world are removed. There is no explanation for Krishna indulging in the war with Kauravas but that there was a need to fight the forces of evil, eventual purpose being to make this world a better place. Just as the consequence of such good acts is salvation in the case of Krishna, it is nirvana (salvation) in the case of Buddha.
Unfortunately, neither did the self-confessed followers adhere to Krishna’s teachings nor Buddha’s teachings. People understood the meaning of Self wrongly and devised rituals for the Self. Rest of the life, outside of rituals, they continued to live as before. The illusion of the self even contributed to people becoming more self-centred. Buddha’s teachings tried to do away with the evils which had crept in and we have to see them from this point.
Let us ponder at this very interesting point! In all the civilizations, teachings were slowly upgraded. The first stage we witness all through the world is the attempt to identify the Devatas in God’s creation plan. Unfortunately, be it India, China, Egypt, Mesopotamia, Greece, or even Latin America, these Devatas began to be worshipped as gods. Then the teachings reached the 2nd stage where the presence of self inside us, its relation with the Divine Self or Paramatma and consequently with God is emphasized upon. Preachers talking about human values and interrelationship between creations succeeded the aforementioned teachings. They at times even resorted to philosophical debates to put forth their point. This was followed by the completion of teachings at the hands of Ahlulbayt, who comprehensively incorporated all the earlier teachings together.
The same upward gradation of teachings, and in the same manner, is visible not only in India but also in the rest of the civilizations; including Chinese, Greek, Mesopotamian and Egyptian. When there was Krishna talking of self in India, you will no doubt see a preacher talking on the same subject in Greece or China. Those who are called gods, and who were actually God’s own manifest form – the Devatas of the Vedas – can be seen identified nearly in all civilizations. Likewise, you will find a striking similarity between the teachings of Buddha on human relationship and those of Jesus, who came about 500 years later. Unless we conclude that there was superhuman force working, it won’t be possible for us to understand why similar pattern of teachings is visible all around the world and around the same periods. So much so that the lands that were not discovered till then, like the America or Australia too show the same pattern of evolution of teachings. The similarity is more starkly visible in the case of five centres of civilization, viz. India, China, Mesopotamia, Greece and Egypt.
......................................................................................
Buddha needs to be saluted surely for his greatness. But if Buddhism is a religion, not Buddha alone, but also Rama and Krishna and several other Avatars or enlightened persons that came in the Indian subcontinent contributed to it. Similar is the case of Hinduism; this is aptly reflected in the state of Hindus in India prior to Buddha commencing his teachings.
......................................................................................
Likewise, wisdom and need to use one’s intellect too has always been the subject of discussion. Man is invited to use his wisdom. Anything that does not appeal to wisdom cannot be true religion. Wisdom is a gift of God. He bestows it on whosoever pursues it with sincerity. Otherwise we often see people on TV shows like Big Fight who applause on a view presented by a person and again applause on the counter view presented by other. All believe they are wise, yet very few use their wisdom while they blindly follow others.
Krishna has devoted an entire chapter to wisdom in Gita. Now see how Buddha describes it:
Mind is the only instrument through which light can come to man.
But the mind of these dungeon-dwellers is by no means a perfect instrument for the purpose.
It lets through only a little light, just enough to show to those with sight that there is such a thing as darkness.
Thus defective in its nature, such understanding as this is.
But know, ye Parivrajas! The case of the prisoner is not as hopeless at it appears.
For there is in man a thing called will. When the appropriate motives arise the will can be awakened and set in motion.
With the coming of just enough light to see in what directions to guide the motions of the will, man may so guide them that they shall lead to liberty.
Thus though no man is bound, yet he may be free, he may at any moment begin to take the first steps that will ultimately bring him to freedom.
This is because it is possible to train the mind in whatever directions one chooses. It is mind that makes us to be prisoners in the house of life, and it is mind that keeps us so.
But what mind has done, that mind can do. If it has brought man to thralldom, it can also, when rightly directed, bring him to liberty.”
This is Samma Ditti, which leads to destruction of Avijja (Nescience) [Avidya of Krishna).
Buddha’s words here are extremely important and should not be taken lightly. Come, we invite all in the name of Buddha and Krishna to use their minds so as to do away with ignorance and attain the knowledge of the true path. As Buddha said:
The Path of Virtue must, therefore, be subject to test of Prajna which is another name for understanding and intelligence.
......................................................................................
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 seen in the Vedas that the biggest dana of all times is the sacrifice of one’s life in the path of God. The biggest sacrifice as per Quran too is the sacrifice of life in the way of God.
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) and Buddha of Paramitas (states of perfection). Islam talk of Ashraful Makhluqat (the best among all creation).
......................................................................................
Fire sacrifice was common among Hindus. When Buddha admonished against fire sacrifice, it was viewed as a religion that was against the existing religion and a new name was given to it. We have shown in our commentary of Gita 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 because of their ignorance about their own religious teachings. That is why they discarded the teachings of Buddha. Those who converted 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. The latter day writers on Buddhism were unable to distinguish between the two and hence got confused.
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.
......................................................................................
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. People started expecting all types of worldly benefits in return for fire sacrifices. Even today, most fire sacrifices are performed for worldly benefits. The real spirit of the rituals had been forgotten.
......................................................................................
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. Wealth itself was not bad, but a particular cleaving to wealth was despised at by Buddha. This again brings us to the teachings of Krishna and Mohammad who never taught of leaving the world as sanyasi. It is evident Buddha too didn’t talk of this but his followers misinterpreted to mean that Buddhist way of life meant leaving the world and living as a bhikshu.
As per our personal view, that path can never be divine which cannot be followed by the entire humanity. For instance, if people of all the villages where Buddha roamed with his bhikshus had taken to so-called Buddhist way of life, who would have given bhiksha to the bhikshus. It is recounted in history that there was a time when Buddha used to move with about 50,000 bhikshus following him.
Ali was the caliph of the entire Islamic world at a time. Even then we find each evening, before closing the treasury, each and every penny therein was spent. There is an oft quoted incident of Talha and Zubayr visiting Ali. Ali asked them whether they had come for an official purpose or a personal one. When they said they had come for a personal work, Ali put off the oil lamp and lit another one. When asked the reason, he said the first lamp belonged to the treasury while this lamp was his own.
Even when Ali was the Caliph, he used to work at a Jew’s farm or used to dig wells to earn a living. During Prophet’s lifetime, nearly all the victories in battles came because of Ali’s valour. The booty that he got was distributed among the poor even before Ali used to reach his home. At a time, Ali is reported to have said that the attractions of this world were inferior to him than the sneeze of a goat. Even when he was the Caliph, Ali knew all the houses which had orphans, widows, poor and destitute living. Late in the night, he used to carry food on his shoulders and distribute it in such a manner that even the householders didn’t come to know who their benefactor was.
......................................................................................
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. Buddha too is talking of Noor and Zulmat of Quran. Gaining knowledge of the truth means moving on the path of Noor or guidance. A wise man will continue to move ahead on the path of Noor while certain people are pulled away from the path of guidance by Zulmat and there are others who feel they are on the Noor’s path of guidance but are groping in the dark.
......................................................................................
The following statement sums up why Buddha didn’t talk of several issues pertaining to God and soul. Even when Buddha talked of Paramatma on several occasions didn’t make his followers conclude that there has to be an atma for there to be Paramatma.
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.
It also shows Buddha’s real predicament. Truth had been told by earlier Avatars, but people had shown they were incapable of understanding it. Beyond what had already been told about the Devatas and the Manifest Self, nothing more could have been told. As you know, the true identities of the Devatas, when they would take birth in human bodies, could not have been revealed for obvious reasons.
People used to come to him with all the controverted theories, and which involved a hundred prepossessions. For instance, they had formulated a lot many meanings of self (as we have seen from the description of various existing schools of thought during Buddha’s time). Buddha was not in position to say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to any of the theories. He knew all theories were wayward but there was a truth underneath all of them. Take the example of the concept of ‘Devatas’. People had such wild beliefs that Buddha couldn’t have said there are Devatas and yet he couldn’t have denied the presence of Devatas. Therefore, Buddha says a wise man won’t go by another’s belief but will find the truth for himself. The words “mankind is like the blind directed in darkness by the blind” sums up why Buddha didn’t stress on certain issues. He knew a person who will search with sincerity will find the truth. That is why his stress was to search within, without any preconceived attachments and detachments.
......................................................................................
We see another instance when Buddha refers to Brahma Deva or rather Brahma’s 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 Devatas - is the subject of discussion. This means Buddha did acknowledge the presence of Devatas and their highest position, next only to the Absolute God and His Manifest Self (Paramatma). We also know that Krishna has referred to Indra’s heaven in Gita and Buddha is referring to Brahma’s heaven. Earlier in this BOOK, we have proved that Brahma and Indra are very close to each other. 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.
A little later, Buddha said this to the men of the clan:
He (who practices mercifulness) has no evil dreams, he is protected by Heaven (Devatas) 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).
It is unfortunate that despite such utterances, commentators concluded that Buddha talked of nobody higher. They even claim he never talked of heaven and hell though they agree that he talked of rebirth and salvation. If there is rebirth happening, if there are certain souls who attain salvation, if he is talking of heaven, that too of Brahma’s heaven, this means he knew and believed that Brahma owned that heaven and there were higher powers who were doing all this.
......................................................................................
B.R. Ambedkar is of the opinion that Buddha never claimed he was a prophet or a messenger of God. In fact he repudiated any such description. We have shown earlier through Buddha’s repeated talk of his link with Brahma, through the prediction by a sage of the time of Buddha’s birth linking his birth to the happiness of the Devatas, through the manner in which Buddha attained enlightenment and through Buddha’s own mention of super human Devatas that there is clearly a link between Buddha and the higher divinities. Why commentators couldn’t come to such simple conclusions remain a puzzle?
More hints of links can be seen! Buddha’s coming had already been foretold. Asita recognized this by seeing the thirty-two marks of a great man. In fact, we find that learned brahmins used to keep coming to Buddha to verify the thirty-two signs which had already been foretold. Whose prophecy it was? It shows that the coming of Buddha had already been foretold 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.
......................................................................................
B.R. Ambedkar says that twice Buddha was requested by his followers to appoint a successor but every time Buddha refused. Why? Several reasons come to our mind. Firstly, he knew that his was a divinely appointed designation and it was not up to him to appoint a successor. One who appointed him would himself appoint someone else at a suitable time and place. After all, he tried for enlightenment but certain other power decided whether he was to get it or not!
Or is it that Buddha knew that his disciples were not that worthy? Or can there be a possibility that unworthy but shrewd disciples had won over the hearts of the rest of the disciples. This is merely a hypothesis but there are certain indicators that made us frame this hypothesis.
B.R. Ambedkar says that Buddha carved for himself no place in his religion by laying down any conditions. This is the reason, as per him, that not much is known of the incidents of his life. But if that was so, Buddha also did not stop his followers from doing so. Why is it that his followers didn’t try to write the incidents of his life, after Buddha had passed away from amidst them?
More importantly, when the first Buddhist congregation was held soon after the death of Buddha at Rajagraha, it is explicitly written that Kasyapa presided over the congregation. Who made him the President? B.R. Ambedkar says that Buddha had clearly rejected any question of a successor. Even if a President was to be appointed, why not one from the five Parivrajakas, who were one of the first converts. Also, why not Ananda, who had the distinction of being Buddha’s personal attendant and was also alongside him when Buddha died?
What we find on the other hand is Kasyapa presiding over the congregation, that too in a manner that it appears that he wanted to control what was to be discussed and what not to be discussed. Kasyapa raised only two questions during the congregation, one regarding the Dhamma and the other regarding the Vinaya. B.R. Ambedkar writes that he (Kasyapa) closed the questions after Dhamma and Vinaya were told. What was the reason for closing the questions? Why were others not given a chance to speak?
Interestingly, Buddhist interpreted Buddha’s teachings in such a manner that Buddha didn’t talk of God or anybody superior to him. Thus, Buddha was the one and end all of teachings. And they decided not to write incidents of Buddha’s life too? Doesn’t it raise eyebrows? Reason why eyebrows are not raised is that we have the habit of wrongly concluding that those who were close to Buddha were beyond questioning. The same is the case with Muslims. They consider all those who had the honour of being in company of the Prophet, even for a moment, as truthful. So much so that even those who committed adultery or theft or murder are considered as truthful. At times, these companions (sahabis) are found acting very much against the traditions of Prophet Mohammad and teachings of Quran but these Muslims shut a blind eye to the conduct of these companions, supporting each and every act of theirs. The same appears to be the case of Buddha’s followers.
See what B.R. Ambedkar has written:
Kasyapa then should have put the third question to someone present in the congregation to record some important incidents in the life of the Buddha.
But Kasyapa did not. These were the only two questions with which he thought the Sangh was concerned.
If Kasyapa had collected the record of the Buddha’s life we would have had today a full-fledged biography of the Buddha.
Why did it not strike Kasyapa to collect the record about the Buddha’s life?
It could not be indifference. The only answer one can give is that the Buddha had carved no niche for himself in his religion.
This statement of B.R. Ambedkar proves that the Buddha’s not carving any niche for himself in his religion were not the words of Buddha himself but conclusions drawn by B.R. Ambedkar due to his inability to cast an opinion on Kasyapa’s integrity. There are several instances where what Buddha did in private is known to us. Had there been a second person alongside Buddha, we could have thought that the other person narrated the incident. But there are narrations talking of how Buddha attained enlightenment, what did he do to attain enlightenment, etc. that were performed exclusively in private. This shows that Buddha was not trying to hide incidents from his life from getting known. Moreover, the entire region at least was following what this erstwhile prince of Sakya was up to since Buddha took the Parivraja. Incidents from the time when Buddha had not even attained enlightenment are mentioned in detail. If records were not kept about Buddha’s life, it was because somebody wanted that they should not be kept. Later in these notes we will give two or three incidents to prove that Kasyapa’s intentions could be doubtful.
The same is the case of naming Buddha’s teachings as a religion. Not once did Buddha say so. Also, we find that even at the time of the congregation, Kasyapa mentions the word Dhamma meaning path, thus showing that till that time, at least, Buddha’s teachings had not been labelled as a separate religion. Is it not an irony that those very people who said that Buddha had carved no niche for himself named their religion as Buddhism but did not keep the records of the life of the propagator of their religion?
There is one more point that proves our hypothesis. Let us study the circumstances in which Kasyapa accepted Buddha’s Dhamma. When we study the same for the five Parivrajakas, Yashas and several others, we find that they had the choice of accepting or denying Buddha’s Dhamma, yet accepted it on the basis of its truth. While Kasyapa accepted Buddha’s Dhamma under circumstances where he had no other choice of continuing with his earlier path of giving fire sacrifice.
Kasyapa was a fire worshipper and he was in fact proud of this fact. Conditions became such that the Naga king Muchalinda, who was influenced with Buddha’s teachings, was already troubling Kasyapa because of Kasyapa being a fire-worshipper when Buddha came to his ashram. Buddha desired to stay in his ashram for the night. Kasyapa raised several objections in spite of the fact that Buddha was persistently insisting. Kasyapa allowed Buddha finally to stay outside while he went off to sleep in spite of knowing that his guest (Buddha) might have been burnt up by Muchalinda. He came to look at his guest only the next morning. There he saw Muchalinda paying obeisance to Buddha. The man who had not dared to come out in the night, leaving his guest to the fate of Muchalinda, knew that it would be impossible for him to continue with his fire worship anymore. Thereafter, he invited Buddha to stay there and build an ashram.
Another point! All Buddhists would agree that it was not possible for Kasyapa to gain salvation through fire-worship. The very fact that Kasyapa accepted Buddha’s Dhamma shows that he confessed that he was on the wrong. Had he achieved salvation why would he have converted? Yet B.R. Ambedkar writes: “The fame of Uruvella Kasyapa had spread far and wide. He was known to have obtained mukti (salvation) while alive. People from faraway places came to his ashram which was located on the banks of the river Falgu.”
This incident reveals that Kasyapa’s religiosity was suspect even when he was a fire worshipper. The word had been spread that he had attained salvation and he didn’t deny it even when people came to visit his ashram. Does it not show the cunningness, shrewdness and on top of it utter disrespect and disregard for religious terms like salvation on part of Kasyapa, who was taking help of a lie to achieve fame. Moreover, religiosity had not given him courage and steadfastness. If he was on true path, why was he afraid of Muchalinda? Why did he convert?
It appears that Kasyapa used all his time-tested tactics to gain a position of respect in Buddha’s camp. We will see later that Kasyapa had a following that showed no respect to Buddha, not to speak of his teachings. The simple Bhikkus might not have seen behind the plan. But the Buddha knew and that is why he kept on insisting till his last breath that Dhamma itself is sufficient. Unfortunately, Kasyapa and some more of his type didn’t allow this to happen.
If you read the row over Prophet Mohammad’s successorship, you will find a lot many similarities; you will realize how a teacher’s teachings can be hijacked by a select few and given a direction of their choice. You will also see how Zulmat or Tamas has used the same time tested techniques of deceit again and again in history. That is the reason perhaps why it is said that history repeats itself.
......................................................................................
B.R. Ambedkar is of the view that while all prophets promised salvation, Buddha didn’t make any such promise. True, but we must understand the reason. Buddha was one who had come to show the way to salvation and hence called himself marga data (the torch bearer or path shower). moksha-data (salvation giver) is someone else, higher than Buddha. That is why he did not call himself moksha-data. Truth is that none of the Avatars have said they are salvation-giver; instead they stressed they are showing the path to salvation. If you are reading the BOOK since beginning, we are sure you know who the moksha-data are. Fact is that all the Messengers including Rama and Krishna were marga-datas or those who showed the way to salvation. None claimed to be moksha-data. All they did was to talk about the merits of salvation, and so did Buddha. But, yes, if on occasions the Paramatma spoke from their bodies, as It spoke from the body of Krishna in Gita, It was the moksha-data that was speaking.
......................................................................................
One of the chief teachings of Buddha is that Dhamma means reaching perfection in life. The perfections are perfection in body, speech and mind. Krishna taught the same but only in a different manner. His Purushottam or the Perfect man is one who has attained perfection in all spheres of life. And the Ahlulbayt, when the Devatas took birth in human body, were the most perfect men (and women, in case of Fatima) to ever live on earth.
......................................................................................
There is one more point that proves that Buddha’s teachings were based on Divine assistance. Hope you agree!
For instance, it is possible for an extra brilliant mind to sit and ponder and come to conclusion about the cause of human sufferings, their cure, etc. But how can that mind foretell the conclusions that none other than the Creator knows, at that point of time. For instance, it is only now that we know that whereas oxygen gives energy to our body for all the minor and major acts that it performs, at the same time it burns up the body and it is because of oxygen that youthfulness degenerates into old age.
And Buddha said:
All things, O Bhikkus, are on fire. And what, O Priests, are all these things which are on fire?
The Eye, O Bhikkus, is on fire; forms are on fire; eye-consciousness is on fire; impressions received by the eye are on fire; and whatever sensation, pleasant, unpleasant, or indifferent, originates in dependence on impression received by the type, that also is on fire.
“And with what are these on fire?” “With the fire of passion say I, with the fire of hatred, with the fire of infatuation, with birth, old age, sorrow, lamentation, misery, grief and despair are they on fire.”
The ear is on fire; sounds are on fire; the nose is on fire; odours are on fire. The body is on fire; ideas are on fire; and whatever sensation, pleasant, unpleasant, or indifferent originates in dependence on impression received by the mind, that also is on fire.
And with what are these on fire.
With the fire of passion, say I; with the fire of hatred; with the fire of infatuation; with birth, old age, death, sorrow, lamentation, misery, grief, and despair are they on fire.”
Perceiving this, O Bhikkus, the learned and noble conceive an aversion. And in conceiving this aversion, he becomes divested of passion, and by the absence of passion he become free and when he is free he becomes aware that he is free.
......................................................................................
In great detail, Buddha explains his theory of the impermanence of all things as per which all things are in a continuous phase of becoming that would lead it to Sunnya Vad (Zero State). The moral of this doctrine, as per Buddha, is to cultivate detachment. Also, we see that nearly every chapter of Gita talks of detachment, though it excludes the talk on Sunnya Vad, and includes the talk on self-realization.
......................................................................................
There is no doubt that Buddha was against ritual sacrifices. He minced no words in condemning it. But what sacrifices was he condemning? Fire sacrifices, animal sacrifices, etc. These sacrifices formed the chief part of Hindu religion at that time. Even today, there are a few who continue this practice. These sacrifices were performed to the burning of fire and to the chanting of hymns from the Vedas.
From where did these sacrifices originated is not known. We have seen in our study of the Vedas that they talk about serious subjects, of the sacrifices of life and happiness, peace, etc. given by a few for the benefit of humanity. In our study of the Vedas, we have seen that not a single verse of Vedas endorse the traditional sacrifices and this practice originated perhaps due to misunderstanding of the Vedic hymns. Alternately, these sacrifices might have been started as a ploy by the revered sages of the period, so as to safeguard the true verses of Vedas from getting lost. Making the common people remember the verses by heart was important, as writing had not developed by then. Had it not been for these rituals, it would have become impossible for the Vedic hymns to reach to us unaltered.
With time these sacrifices deviated to such an extent that people were performing grand sacrifices, at times consisting of thousands of animals to be sacrificed, and paying no heed to the moral and ethical values that are prerequisite for entering in the fold of any religion. If Buddha, the enlightened, was against such sacrifices, it is quite understandable. They had never been part of true Hindu religion and were result of deviation.
To give an example, most Shias follow the custom of beating their chests, at times with knives and swords, and injuring themselves. They do it in the remembrance of Husain’s sacrifice and consider it part of their faith. What are we supposed to do? If we discourage them or talk against them, people might understand that we are preaching against the tenets of their religion. But we do so because we know that any action, even if its collectively being followed by a great multitude, can be religious only if the end-result of the action is that it leads to the worship of God. If that is not happening, all actions become mis-actions.
You will be interested to know that the Buddha is actually endorsing the true sacrifices that Vedas talk about, which we have highlighted in our commentary. People who embraced Buddha’s teachings, and were performing those ritual sacrifices in the name of Vedic sacrifices felt Buddha was against the sacrifices of the Vedas but didn’t realize that those sacrifices had no sanction even in true Vedic teachings. We have shown in our commentary of Gita that Krishna too condemned performing of ritual sacrifices.
Buddha’s answer to Brahmin Udayin confirms that the sacrifices given while treading the true path, as were given by the Devatas when they would come on earth, were the true sacrifices. The following translation shows that the same subject is being talked about in spite of the fact that this has been translated by translator who himself never understood the true meaning of sacrifice nor knew anything about the identity of the Devatas. See what Buddha has said, as per existing translations:
Fit sacrifice performed in season due
And free from cruelty, to such draw near
Those well-trained in the God-life, even those
who have the veil rolled back while (yet on earth),
who have transcended time and going. Such do
the enlightened praise, those skilled in merit.
Whether in sacrifice or act of faith,
Oblation fitly made with heart devout
To that good field of Merit, - those who live
The Good – life, sacrificed, conferred, - so given
Lavish the offering; Devas there with are pleased.
Thus offering, the thoughtful, thereby becoming wise,
Wins the blissful world from suffering fire.
Read again. The ‘veil rolled back’ refers to the Devatas, who were in veil as they were not visible during Buddha’s period, who were ‘well-trained in the God-life’ and ‘who have transcended time’. The term ‘fit sacrifice performed in season due’ too indicates that the sacrifice was to be given in the future. These Devatas gave oblations, either through sacrifice of life or happiness (some Devatas were even kept in prison for a long time) or even gave sacrifices in acts of faith like giving away of the only bread in possession to a beggar while getting ready to break the fast, that too for three days in succession. Interestingly, it is not being said that ‘such people are the enlightened ones’. Instead, it is said that “such do the enlightened praise”, thereby confirming people being talked about are far higher than the enlightened souls. Buddha is praising the very same Devatas who were praised by the Vedas.
Surely some people might come and say this is wishful thinking on part of us, but we wish to point out that the same translation also refers to the Devatas thereby confirming that Buddha was talking of Devatas and none else. It is pity that the followers of Buddha did not try to explore who these Devatas were, even when there existed clear texts talking of Devatas being pleased of our offerings ‘in sacrifice or act of faith’ or of ‘oblation fitly made with heart devout’. Is it not the fact that this sentence includes all, not even excluding the Buddha?
Winning of the blissful world from suffering fire is a clear reference to salvation; thereby confirming Buddha too was aware of the role of Devata’s in bestowing salvation. Moreover, we have shown earlier in these notes that Buddha has referred to Brahma’s heaven, which further proves that the Devatas, even as per the Buddha, are the lords of heaven (and hell). They are the ones who would bestow heaven or hell, they are the ones who are masters of our organs of senses and actions, as has been said in the Upanishads.
Does all this not endorse our understanding of the Vedas and Upanishads? Also, does it not endorse the fact that Buddha was preaching the same path and in fact continuing the teachings of Krishna earlier, and Rama even before Krishna?
Fact is that the existing beliefs about soul, about God and about sacrifices were so deviated that Buddha had to criticize them vehemently. People unaware of the true teachings of the Vedas and Krishna saw the existing practices as Hindu practices and when Buddha criticized them, it was interpreted as though he was criticizing the teachings of Vedas and Krishna. This too confirms our conclusion that Buddha and Krishna belonged to the same chain of Avatars. When people deviated from the path shown by Krishna, there was a need to send another Messenger, just as the need to send Krishna arose when people had deviated from the Vedas and the teachings of earlier Messengers including Rama had been forgotten. A very significant example of this is given in a Purana, which lists the descendants of Rama by name and concludes with the name of Rama’s descendant who fought against Krishna in the battle of Mahabharata and got killed. Is it not a clear example of deviations occurring? The direct descendent of Rama fighting against the epitome of goodness and virtue – Krishna – and getting killed at the hands of none other than Krishna.
If you read Buddha’s words again, you will even find reference to ‘God’, something which is refuted by at least one school of Buddhists.
......................................................................................
Another example to prove our point is that when questions like ‘How was the Universe created; Is it everlasting, etc.?’ were asked, Buddha refused to entertain these questions and said that they could only be asked and entertained by wrong-headed people. He said:
To answer these questions required omniscience which nobody had.
We have seen in the Vedas and the Upanishads that there exist long passages that talk about the creation of the Universe, the role of the Devatas and their relationship with the Absolute God on one hand and we, the humans, on the other hand. Yet, the adherents of the Vedas were unable to understand all these passages and were either doubting those very theories or misinterpreting them when Buddha arrived. Buddha knew that the people in general were not sufficiently elevated to understand these complex issues. If they were still asking such questions, and not giving time to the more important task of elevating their self and their moral and ethical values, then they were wrong-headed people.
Fact remains that the wrong beliefs of the people as regard to the God, to the Devatas, to the purpose of creation, and to their own soul, had become so deviated that Buddha did not find befitting to reply to their questions and stressed solely on the need to perform righteous deeds in life. When he did criticize God or soul, which was to give them a jolt out of their slumber from applying their mind regarding the corruption that they had allowed to penetrate in their beliefs.
......................................................................................
B.R. Ambedkar has written a long list of questions that people used to ask about the Self and the origin of the universe. Innumerable questions that are mentioned is enough to suggest that people of the time were more involved in spending time and energy in discussing these subjects while the more important task of working to purify one’s self, of doing good to others and leading a good and virtuous life was ignored. It was but natural that Buddha condemned such thinking.
Take for instance the origin of the Universe! The questions that were asked were about its creation, existence and future. They were like: the world is everlasting, - the world is not everlasting, – the world is finite, - the world is infinite, - the body is the life (jiva), - the body is one thing and life another, - truth-finder exists after death, - he both exists and does not exist after death, - he neither exists nor does not exist after death.”
Some said the universe was created by Brahma, others said it was created by Prajapati sacrificing himself. There were innumerable similar questions that were hotly debated.
There is no doubt that there must have been an answer to all these questions. For instance, there must be some beginning to the universe, even if the beginning was not what the people of the time believed it to be. The very fact that Buddha said that such questions could be asked by wrong-headed persons proves that he was not against the origin of universe, after all there must be some origin, but against spending time in seeking answers to these questions which are least important in comparison to the overall important need to do good deeds and to work to make this world a better place to live, something for which man has been created.
The same logic can be extended to other areas like the concept of God, existence of soul, etc. Experts of Buddhism are wrong when they try to prove that Buddha was against all these; Buddha was actually trying to focus on other more important areas concerning mankind. Moreover, if we acknowledge Buddha as belonging to the same chain of Messengers, there was no need to spend time imparting the same teachings that had already been given by the Vedas and the Upanishads earlier.
Buddha himself said that knowledge is never final. There is always something more to be known. On the basis of this we are sure that learned scholars would add new dimensions to knowledge and give more examples to endorse our view, based on our inferences presented here.
B.R. Ambedkar unnecessarily tries to put forward the argument that these theories were merely speculative. Our view is that they may have been true or false, but the amount of interest people had in such subjects angered Buddha as they were supposed to spend time in improving their selves.
Then B.R. Ambedkar writes: “The Buddha did not believe that the world was created. He believed that the world had evolved.” Is evolution from nothingness not creation?
The brahmins of the period emphasized on knowledge but their character never showed humanity. B.R. Ambedkar has referred to slaves being pushed and beaten up if they were slow in bringing condiments for sacrifice. Such sacrifices or for that matter such knowledge was useless. That is why Buddha was particular that he who has knowledge must have Sila (virtue) and that knowledge without Sila was most dangerous. We again come to the earlier point. When Buddha criticized such knowledge, B.R. Ambedkar and others did not conclude that Buddha was against knowledge. But when he criticized the prevailing concepts of God, soul and sacrifices, they concluded that Buddha was against all these.
......................................................................................
There is another point regarding the Vedas. B.R. Ambedkar has construed that Buddha “denied that the Vedas were sacred. He denied that whatever the Vedas said was final. He denied that the Vedas were infallible.”
This too is based on misunderstanding. The entire Vedas talk of the Devatas and nothing else. Brahma, Prajapati, IndraDeva, AgniDeva, VarunaDeva, VasuDeva, Devi Saraswati, etc. are the subjects of discussion. During our little study so far, we have already encountered several instances where Devatas, Brahma, etc. are being mentioned by Buddha himself. In fact it is Brahma who told Buddha to start preaching to others when Buddha was in doubt.
Yes, it is true that in Tvijja Sutta the Buddha has declared the Vedas as a waterless desert, pathless jungle, in fact perdition (as per present translation). In that regard, Buddha and Krishna are on the same path as Krishna himself has said that to a true knower, Vedas are like a pond which has been flooded by an ocean. Fact is that both Krishna and Buddha criticized the Vedas because people of the time had understood them wrongly and clung to the Devatas mentioned therein, while forgetting the Absolute God who ought to be the purpose of all worship. Various false myths had been generated regarding the Devatas and the hymns too were translated as per their own understanding. These falsely understood hymns were chanted in sacrifices and people expected to gain salvation out of it. In subsequent part of this BOOK you will see how Vedas were wrongly understood. Buddha – the enlightened - knew the true content of the Vedas by the virtue of being enlightened and hence wanted people to disbelieve what had been told, what had been handed down, what was commonly reported, what was the agreeable belief or view, but test them on the basis of their intellect and understanding.
When you read our understanding of Vedas later, you will realize that all that has been understood as the true Vedas is just a pack of false understanding and Buddha actually wanted us to go for the search of truth, just as Krishna too tried to make us do the same, but in vain.
See Buddha’s words:
Come, O you Kalamas, do not go merely by what you hear; do not go merely by what has been handed down from one to another; do not go by what is commonly reported; do not go merely by what is found in the scriptures; do not go by the subtleties of reasoning, do not go by subtleties of logic; do not merely by considerations based upon mere appearances; do not go merely by what looks to be genuine; do not go merely by word of some ascetic or superior.
“What then should we do? What test should we apply?” asked the Kalamas.
“The tests are these,” replied the Blessed One; “ask yourselves, do we know whether: ‘these things are insalutary; these things are blameworthy; these things are reprehended by the wise; these things being done or attempted lead to ill-being and to suffering.’
“Kalamas, you should go further and ask whether the doctrine taught promotes craving, hatred, delusion, and violence.
This is not enough, Kalamas, you should go further and see whether the doctrine is not likely to make a man captive of his passions, and is not likely to lead him to kill living creature; take what has not been given to him; go after another’s wife; utter falsehood, and cause others to practice like deeds?
And finally you should ask: ‘whether all this does not tend to his ill-being and suffering.’
Truly, the understanding of Vedas based on wrong translations led to all these evils. Those hell-bent on proving a religion called Buddhism out of Buddha’s teachings surely got enough points to put forth their claim.
......................................................................................
Similarly, BR Ambedkar has derived on wrong conclusion when he writes: “all religions preach that to reach this kingdom of heaven should be the aim of man and how to reach it is the end of all.”
True, many people are of this opinion. But that does not mean that this thought has sanction from religion. Krishna ridiculed those, in Gita, who performed actions in love of heaven. And Ali said:
I do not perform virtuous deeds in love of heaven or in fear of hell. I do them because I am in the habit of performing actions.
If you read our commentary of Gita, you will find similar words spoken by the Manifest Self.
Islam too talks of nijaat or salvation as the higher virtue, higher than merely attaining heaven.
......................................................................................
In his conversation with one Potthapeda, Buddha says clearly that he has expressed no opinion on subjects related to the creation and existence of world, soul and its relation to body, life after death. He gives the reason for not expressing any opinion by saying: “Because this question is not calculated to profit, it is not concerned with the Dhamma, it does not redound even to the elements of right conduct, nor to detachment, nor to purification from lusts, nor to quietude, nor to tranquillisation of heart, nor to real knowledge, nor to the insight (of the higher stages of the Path), nor to nirvana. Therefore is it that I express no opinion upon it.”
See what B.R. Ambedkar writes: “Now on another occasion the Rajah went to visit the Exalted One, and on coming to him saluted him and sat down at one side. So seated he said to the Exalted One:
“Pray, Lord, does the Tathagata exist after death?”
Not revealed by me, maharajah, is this matter.
“Then Lord, the Tathagata does not exist after death.”
That also, maharajah, is not revealed by me.
Is it not in confirmation of what we have said earlier?
......................................................................................
It is said that past karma is inherited in the next birth. Buddhists go on to explain this in flowery language. It is even said Buddha foretold that human birth is genetic. On the other hand, it is said that there is no soul and the elements of the body disintegrate and get united with the elements. When the next birth takes place it is not necessary that the same part of elements is used. If that is so, how can past karma have an effect on future birth? The answer is simple. We have proved from Gita that Hindus of that period didn’t understand the true concept of rebirth as told by Krishna. By denying the presence of soul, Buddha is only reaffirming the same and confirming that he fully agrees with Krishna, though only in the original form of teachings. This has to be true, as we have proved time and again in these notes that Buddha agreed to the presence of soul and has talked about it on various occasions.
On the other hand, if Buddha is talking of disintegration of the body (and not spirit), then all religions, be it Hinduism, Christianity, Judaism, Zoroastrianism and Islam believe in discarding the body upon death.
We mention here three different statements of B.R. Ambedkar separated only by 11 pages in his book, which reveal the duality in understanding Buddha’s teachings.
See what B.R. Ambedkar writes on page 341:
“In the Hindu doctrine of karma a child inherits nothing from its parents except the body. The past karma in the Hindu doctrine is the inheritance of the child by the child and for the child.
The parent contributes nothing the child brings everything.
Such a doctrine is nothing short of absurdity. As shown above the Buddha did not believe in such an absurdity.”
At one place he says that parents also contribute in childbirth and at other place say that disintegrated elements recombine to form another birth. Who combines them is not told? See page 331:
“According to Buddha there are four elements of Existence which go to compose the body. They are (i) Prithvi; (2) Apa; (3) Tej; and (4) Vayu.
Question is when the human body dies what happens to these four elements? Do they also die along with dead body? Some say they do!
The Buddha said no. They join the mass of similar elements floating in (Akash) space.
When the four elements from this floating mass join together a new birth takes place.
This is what the Buddha meant by rebirth?
The elements need not and are not necessary from the same body which is dead. They may be drawn from different dead bodies.
It must be noted that the body dies, but the elements are ever living.
This is the kind of rebirth in which the Buddha believed.”
At another place, he tells the Jains in a Sutta called the Cula-Khanda that: “Niganthas, you have done evil in the past; extirpate it by these very austerities. Every present restraint on body, speech and mind will hereafter undo the evil doings of the past.”
So as per the aforementioned quotes, it is the rejoining of elements that becomes rebirth but at the same time past karma too contributes to rebirth. How is it possible? However, some critics say that the concept of karma is not from Buddha but has been “bodily introduced into Buddhism by someone who wanted to make Buddhism akin to Hinduism or who did not know what the Buddhist doctrine was.”
For the first time, B.R. Ambedkar has admitted that some Buddhist concepts may be the result of deliberate alteration of teachings by mischievous persons. Unfortunately, he had to say this when, because of apparent duality, he was unable to explain the teachings.
As far as we are concerned, we are of the opinion that since we believe Buddha to be an Avatar of the same chain and reporting to the same source, there can be no duality in Buddha’s teachings and also between the teachings of Buddha, Rama, Krishna and other Messengers associated with that one source. If there is duality, we should sit down and try to see whether we have understood it wrongly. At all times we should keep our eyes open to trace mischievous persons who are actually responsible for this duality to emerge. We should also remember that such persons could have only succeeded when they wear the garb of that very religion to which they were trying to harm. Other than mischievous persons, the foolish and the ignorant too have contributed to leading the teachings astray.
Also, we must keep in mind that the true teachings cannot be understood by a person immersed in material attractions. They can be truly understood only by those who are at certain levels of spirituality.
......................................................................................
On page 348 he writes: “The Blessed Lord preached that there was rebirth. But the blessed Lord also preached that there was no transmigration.”
Now combine this statement with his earlier view. Buddha preached that there was rebirth but there is nothing like past karmas. Does that mean that we keep taking birth after birth without rebirth having any link to the previous birth or the sins of previous birth having any relation to future birth?
B.R. Ambedkar agrees that Bhikkus erred at times in transmitting the content of Buddha’s teachings. He writes:
“The Buddhist canonical literature is as vast as ocean. To memorize all this was indeed a great feat.
In reporting the Buddha it has often been found that he has been misreported.
Many cases of misreporting had been brought to the knowledge of the Buddha while he was alive.”
When there can be “many” cases of misreporting, why should we have doubt if there are certain cases of misunderstanding, particularly in the light of misreported teaching.
In this regard, B.R.Ambedkar has given a test. He says that anything that is irrational, illogical or not profitable should not be accepted. Fact is that we are trying to do the same in these notes.
Moreover, to distinguish between irrational, illogical or not profitable teachings and the rest, man should have true and complete knowledge. Or else, there are innumerable cases of people who considered fire worship to be rational, logical and profitable act one day and irrational, illogical and unprofitable act the next day. That is why it is essential that we base our acts on the path shown by those whose enlightenment had a direct link with the Creator and hence there is no chance of our getting astray. That is why it also becomes essential that instead of disapproving Buddha’s link with anyone higher, we should try to identify his teachings with higher ups, who are fully aware of the process and purpose of creation and who bestowed Buddha with the 32 signs, even at the time of his birth, knowing fully well that this child was going to be the next Buddha.
......................................................................................
We present here a few lines from B.R. Ambedkar’s book, which he would have liked to remain confined solely to Buddha, hell-bent as he is on cutting all links of Buddha with anybody higher. However, if you have read our commentary of Gita, see whether these lines of B.R. Ambedkar have not resounded in Gita as well. He writes:
If one has self, let him practice self-conquest. This is the Buddhist Way of Life.
Self is the lord of self, who else could be the Lord? With self well subdued, a man finds a lord such as few can find.
The foolish man who scorns the rule of the venerable (arahat), of the elect (ariya), of the virtuous and follows a false doctrine, he bears fruits to his own destruction, like the fruits of the kattaka reed.
See, Buddha is talking of the rule of the venerable, of the elect and of the virtuous. Venerable, agreed! Virtuous, agreed! But who are the ‘elected’ when B.R. Ambedkar takes pain to explain that Buddha did not elect a successor, was not elected himself, as he had no link with a God, and neither wanted himself to be discussed. There can be nobody more venerable and virtuous than Buddha in his time. But if his life is not to be discussed, as we have seen earlier in these notes, then whose life will be discussed. Buddha wants the virtuous, the elected and the venerable to be remembered along with their path. This shows that the virtuous, the elected and the venerable are some other beings, whose search is compulsory on us if we claim ourselves to be followers of Buddha. These are perfected beings described in other scriptures!
When we find that Buddhists, guided by Buddha’s contemporaries like Kasyapa, decided not to keep the record of Buddha’s life, we will have to accept that Kasyapa belonged to the categories of those who had erred or were misguided, in spite of keeping company with the Buddha.
......................................................................................
Another quote of Buddha, which shows that there have been many preachers and Buddha is one of them, is given by B.R. Ambedkar on page 370 of his book:
The Right Path is for the happiness not of the few but of all.
It must be good at the beginning, good in the middle and good at the end…
You yourself must make an effort. The Tathagatas are only preachers.
Buddha too is saying exactly what we said earlier. Right path should be such that not few but all could tread it. Since it is not possible for all to start living as bhikshus (because if all start doing so, there will none left to give them alms), we will have to conclude that Buddha’s and Gita’s teachings are not different; both are talking of internal purification rather than leaving the society.
Even if we believe for a moment that Buddha indeed wanted those joining his sangh to live as wandering hermits, it might be because materialism had engulfed all walks of life to such an extent that it was not possible to seek internal purification without leaving all attachments to life. A true wayfarer is one who lives in the society as any normal human being but does not develop attachment to any of the materialistic or sensual attractions surrounding him.
Question arises if Buddha himself is talking of Tathagatas in plural, why did the followers of Buddha based their religion on only one Tathagata? Earlier we have seen the dream of Buddha’s mother wherein Sumedha appeared and said he was about to take a final birth.
......................................................................................
There is another interesting observation that you would love to read. We have seen that Buddha’s relationship with Indra, Devatas and Brahma has been mentioned on countless occasions. Most Buddhists believe that Buddha was superior to the Devatas. Likewise, Hindus too are of opinion that Krishna was superior to the Devatas. Even Jains believe that Mahavira was superior to the Devatas. This is despite the fact that life story of Mahavira is full of description of IndraDeva and other Devatas, though they are always shown as inferior to Mahavira and at times are even shown as jealous of Mahavira. But these Devatas are shown in stories as rejoicing at the birth of both Mahavira and Buddha. Purana’s even mention that it was the Devi who took birth as the girl who replaced Krishna and when Kansa was about to kill the girl child, she flew in the air, spoke to him that Krishna has already taken birth, and flew off. Mahavira’s mother even saw a dream of One Devata becoming five; we have shown from the Upanishads in Part-I of this BOOK how one Noor created by the Manifest Self became 5 and later 7 or 14.
Why is it that Devatas are inevitably linked to all the three? And why is it that they are shown as inferior to all of them? You will have to accept our view to get an answer.
When a Noor or Light emanated from the Manifest Self (Paramatma), it divided to make 5 and then 7 Noors or Lights which were exactly similar in shape, form and power to the first Noor. The purpose of creating more Noors or Lights was that the Manifest Self had desired there be more worshippers and pleased with Its worship, the Absolute God gave a go-ahead to the Manifest Self to create further. But another power Zulmat or Darkness got created at the same time, either due to the Will of God or as a natural corollary to Noor or Light, just as absence of ligh is night and absence of darkness is day. Since Quran says that God is the creator of Noor and Zulmat, we believe that Zulmat was not born out of accident or as a natural corollary but due to the Will of God. While it is the job of Noor to guide towards the worship of Absolute God, it is the job of Zulmat to misguide from the worship and from the path of the torchbearers to the path. Our spirits have been sent to this world and the only way in which the spirit can get out of this world is through attaining such levels of purity which enables it to attain union with the Manifest Self, from which the spirit had emerged. The Devatas are the Divine Torchbearers to the path of salvation; they have also been described as the rope to salvation. Salvation can be attained by defeating Zulmat, which is ceaselessly pulling us to the world, and then climbing the rope of the Devatas to reach the desired level of purity.
Since Noor and Zulmat are opposite forces, and since it is not possible to attain salvation without coming to the path of Noor, it is but natural that Zulmat has the greatest enmity with Devatas – made of Noor. Man’s material attachments make us look at this relationship from the way Zulmat wants us to look at it. The Noor of one or the other Devata comes down in pure human bodies and then that body starts working as the office of the Manifest Self. This is the reason why when Mahavira and Buddha aspired for their physical purity, they attained enlightenment. Enlightenment is nothing but one or the other Noors descending into the mind of a pure body on earth. Once that connection gets built, the person becomes all knowing; Paramatma starts speaking from his mouth. This is the reason why we find Paramatma speaking from Krishna’s mouth (which became Gita) and also from Mohammad’s mouth (which became Quran). The tone of both Gita and Quran – we will show later – is exactly the same.
Since Devatas are the rope to salvation, Zulmat never wanted that true cognizance of the role of Devatas get established. Man’s material tendencies made him worship the body in which Noor was working. Since we are prone to material afflictions, we all started valuing the physical personality of Avatars, whom we considered our own. Thus, we find that lovers of Rama, Krishna, Mahavira, Buddha, Jesus, Mohammad and Ali – all loved their physical bodies more than their teachings. How many people are trying to emulate Rama to become maryada purushottam? How many are following Krishna’s teachings given in Gita? How many are working to purify their selfs, as Mahavira or Buddha had talked of? How many are following the path of Jesus or indulging in complete devotion to God, as shown by Mohammad and Ali? Yet we are ready to fight and die in the name of one or the other of these, forgetting that Rama, Krishna, Mahavira, Buddha, Jesus, Mohammad and Ali was the name given to the bodies of children who grew up to become pure human beings, and it were these bodies which were chosen by the Devatas to impart the teachings of truth.
Zulmat would never want man to know the path of salvation. Hence, during all times, attempt was made to belittle their identity and role. Whenever one or the other Devata’s Noor started working in any body, the sheer spirituality that emanated attracted the truth seeking spirits to those bodies. Some, who understood the true teachings of the Avatars, attained salvation, whereas others succumbed to the pulls of Zulmat, which at all times was trying to distort the teachings of Devatas, through their Avatars. This is the reason why we find so many canards built around the identity of Devatas; be it among the Vedic Hindus, among the Jains, among the Buddhists and among others. Later, when all the 7 Noors descended in 14 human bodies one after another, and they were called Ahlulbayt, Zulmat unleashed its forces around them. They were killed and poisoned, imprisoned and put under house arrest. Lives and properties of those who met them or were considered close to them were not safe. Their friends were imprisoned and tortured. Ali was cursed in every Friday sermon from nearly 70000 mosques in the Islamic world for more than 70 years. Nearly a lakh paid allegiance to Ali in Ghadeer-e-Khumm in the presence of Mohammad but when Mohammad died just about 3 months later, Zulmat had worked its cards in such a manner that only a handful remained loyal to Ali. Even when Ali and these handful of his loyal friends were not done with burying the Prophet, Muslims had chosen their own Caliph, at a specially invited congregation, a few kilometres outside the city of Medina. You will see later how similar story was enacted at the death of Buddha.
We maintain that Zulmat tries its time-tested techniques of distraction repeatedly. What happened at the death of Mohammad was very similar to how people left Buddha’s vicegerent and thus left Buddha’s teachings upon his death, even before Buddha was cremated.
Path to salvation is again within the grasp of truth-seeking spirits. Take lessons from the past! Zulmat will not allow many of you to attain salvation. It will try to distract once again. It may use any of its time-tested techniques. It may be having several techniques up its sleeves that you cannot even fathom in your wildest imaginations. If you continue to remain linked to Noor, you will not be misguided. The moment you succumb to sensual and material attractions and leave the side of your wisdom, you will once again be pulled away.
......................................................................................
Gita, we have seen, talks of our duty to make this world a better place to live. Argument given by Krishna is that the evils in this world are leading to its decay. Based on this argument, Krishna even sanctions a mortal fight against evil, if the need so arises.
That Buddha too agrees with this can be seen in these words by him, though it may be said that rising here means awakening:
He who does not rouse himself when it is time to rise, who, though young and strong, is full of sloth, whose will and thought are weak, that lazy and idle man never finds the way to knowledge.
......................................................................................
Ego, anger, false pride, attachments, sensual and material attractions does not allow a person to reach the truth. People criticize everybody. You cannot be above criticism. Ali said if you do some work and there is no criticism, think again, whether you are on the right course. This is so because Zulmat will never allow you to live in peace, if you are a true wayfarer. It was for this reason alone that Ali said that his followers should be prepared for so much of tests and problems in life as water falls from a fall.
Buddha too knew that criticism will come, come what may. He himself has been subject of much criticism. His words alone have shown us the way:
There is an old saying. ‘They blame him who sits silently, they blame him who speaks much, they also blame him who says little.’ There is no one on earth who is not blamed.
There never was, there never will be, nor is there now, a man who is always blamed, or a man who is always praised.
......................................................................................
Layman, observe this law: Shun drink; make no man drink; sanction no drinking. Mark how drink to madness leads.
See, not only are we to restrain ourselves but we are to stop others as well. “Make no man drink” has an aura of force in it.
We have discussed at length, while commenting on Gita, how Krishna’s sanction to Arjuna to fight was aimed at rectifying the evils plaguing the society. Krishna’s concept of a fight is exactly similar to the true Islamic concept of Jehad. Buddha too is giving sanction to fighting the evils of the society. This is exactly the concept of true Jehad.
As regards to the Hindus, we have mentioned explicitly in the BOOK that drinking comprised the five great sins, as per the Upanishads. What’s more, there are only four biggest sins mentioned and the fifth sin is to keep company with one who commits the four sins. This means that giving company or keeping relationship to one who drinks too is a great sin, as per Upanishads. The same is mentioned at more than one place in the Upanishads.
Some Hindus try to justify their acts of drinking by pointing to IndraDeva having soma-drink or Siva consuming drink. We have proved in our BOOK that consuming the soma, as per Vedas, is something altogether different in meaning. Perhaps somebody did this false interpretation so as to give sanction to his own act. Or Zulmat might have a role in this too; so as to degrade the personality and stature of Indra just in the same manner as certain priests were accusing IndraDeva of seducing the young maidens when in truth they were trying to hide their own crimes. Also, we have proved that nobody had seen IndraDeva or Siva and whatever stories are prevalent today are canards, based on wrong interpretation of the Vedic hymns.
......................................................................................
Another instance where Buddha makes this very clear that his objection to Brahminism was because of their distorted ways can be seen in his conversation with Vasettha. If you look at the wordings carefully, you will agree that Buddha is endorsing the presence of Indra, Brahma, Isana and Prajapati and is against the way people beckon them and try to reach them. A sanction to the Vedas also exists in these lines.
If this river Achiravati were full of water even to the brim and overflowing, and a man with business to be done on the further bank of it should come up, and want to cross river:
And standing on that bank, he should invoke the further bank and say: ‘Come hither, O further bank! Come over to this side!’
Now what think you, Vasettha? Would the further bank of the river Achiravati, by that man’s invoking and praying, and hoping, and praising, come over to this side?
In just the same way, Vasettha, do the Brahmins, versed in the three Vedas, omitting the practice of those qualities which really make a man a Brahmin and adopting the practice of those qualities which really make men non-Brahmins say thus:
’Indra we call upon, Brahma we call upon, Isana we call upon, Prajapati we call upon, Brahma, we call upon, we call, we call.’
Verily, Vasettha, that these Brahmins, by reason of their invoking and praying and hoping and praising, should after death become united with Brahma – verily such a condition of things can in nowise be.
Has Buddha denied the presence of Brahma, Indra, Isana or Prajapati anywhere? No! In fact, this is very much an acknowledgement of their presence. And also acknowledgement that people of yore were calling the Devatas to come here in human bodies. What Buddha is criticizing is the practice that was common as per which brahmins performed all kinds of ritual sacrifices to invoke or call these, knowing not that they do not come in this manner but one has to endeavour and try to reach them through dedication and righteous living. This can be achieved by swimming against the tides of the call of organs of senses and action and by pursuing a righteous life.
......................................................................................
Buddha says that killing is bad but eating or not eating meat does not come in the way of truth seeking. Is it not the same view as the view of Islam? Buddha’s view is that killing and maiming, theft, lies, fraud, deceit, adultery, pursuit of pleasure, lust for guzzling, life unclean, blatant dissent, back biting, cruelty, betrayals, ruthless pride, mean stinginess, anger, conceit, revolt, guile, envy, bluster, pride, low company, base living, slander, fraud, cheating, the trickster’s wiles, foul infamies, rage to slay and steal - these crimes are fraught with doom and end in hell. He says:
Not meats, but these are carrion.
And he goes on to say:
No abstinence from meat and fish, no nudity, no top knots, shaven crowns, or garb of pelt, no cult of sacred fire, no stark austerities to purchase future bliss, no rinsing, burnt-offering, rites can cleanse the man who doubts.
Control thy sense, rule thy powers, hold to Truth, be kind. The saint who leaves all ties and vanquishes all ills, is stained by naught he either sees or hears.
This shows that abstinence from meat eating emerged because of the taste and good food tag associated with meat and not because of abstinence from killing. This was just as people started roaming in nude, started shaving their head or performed other austerities, which had nothing to do with religion. True path is through controlling the senses, something that Krishna also preached but was misunderstood and people interpreted him wrongly (proofs of which can be seen in our commentary).
We invite you to read the mention of hell, which proves that Buddha fully agreed with the concept of heaven and hell and the presence of Indra, Brahma, Prajapati, Isana etc. and if he did not give stress, that was because people had gone to the extreme while worshipping them.
It was similar to a person who eats too much of rice and you tell him not to eat rice. That does not mean that the preacher is against eating of rice; he is saying so because the person has gone wayward in his approach to eating rice.
Controlling the senses and holding on to truth is important!
......................................................................................
We should remember the conditions of the time to analyze the Buddha’s actions. B.R. Ambedkar writes: “The old Parivrajakas were persons who had abandoned family life and were mere floating body of wanderers.
They roamed about with a view to ascertain the truth by coming into contact with various teachers and philosophers, listening to their discourses, entering into discussions on matters of ethics, philosophy, nature, mysticism, etc.
Some of the old type of Parivrajakas lived under a teacher until they found another. Others lived singly without acknowledging any master.
Among these older types of Parivrajas there were also women wanderers. The female Parivrajakas sometimes lived with men Parivrajakas; sometimes they lived alone and by themselves.
Those old type of Parivrajakas had no Sangh, had no rules of discipline and had no ideal to strive for.
It was for the first time that the Blessed Lord organized his followers into a Sangh or fraternity, and gave them rules of discipline and set before them an ideal to pursue and realize.”
Let us first comment on the subject of fraternity. Islam too gives a concept of brotherhood or fraternity for Muslims, which is often criticized. Neither the critics nor most Muslims understand that this fraternity is not to vanquish non-Muslims but, as Buddha said, “this is on the basis of rules of discipline and set before them an ideal to pursue and realize.”
Now we invite you to read the description of Parivrajakas. There is no doubt that they were considered as more righteous and revered by the common people. They were supposed to be more learned. People looked at them with respect. But at the same time there are several instances to show that some of them had deviated from the true path. The fact that they were leading an aimless life full of vices shows the kind of degeneration that had enveloped the society. This was consequence or aftermath of materialism that had deeply filled the society. Therefore, if Buddha tried to do away with their vices first, it is understandable. But Buddha never meant all the right thinking Buddhists to become Parivrajakas, as was to later to happen. It appears that becoming a Parivrajakas had become a way of life for truth seekers and the same concept got attached to Buddha’s teachings as well.
Buddha’s teachings were for all, including the kings and those living as householders. His overzealous followers were quick to adopt the ritual of Parivrajakas under the name of Bhikkus, forgetting that Buddha spent his life cleansing the existing rituals. This ritualistic exercise of becoming Parivrajakas (later called Bhikkus) was to bestow greatest harm on Buddha’s teachings in the years to come.
......................................................................................
Following Brahmacharya too was a misunderstood concept that was incorporated into the life of Bhikkus and Bhikkunis. Buddha perhaps observed it to show that this cannot be path that can be followed by the entire world. Buddha criticized the existing beliefs on several occasions by giving the logic that such concepts cannot be universal and hence they are illogical. Likewise, the concept of Brahmacharya, as is accepted today, is illogical and cannot be followed by the entire world. If this cannot be universal, it has to be illogical, as per Buddha.
The consequence of making Bhikkuism a ritualistic exercise was that while they were told to take the vows of poverty, we find grand Viharas constructed for them where they lived in all comforts, but continued to follow the eight rules of carrying three pieces of cloth, a girdle for the loins, an alms-bowl, a razor, a needle, a water-strainer; thus making it a ritualistic exercise.
A more near example can be of the kavadi Siva-bhakts, who go to fetch water from the Ganges on foot once every year. The purpose of initiating the ritual was to make the bhakts remember the importance of Siva in their lives and when they would go on foot, while keeping the remembrance of Siva in mind, they will get to understand the purpose and mission of Siva. But look at the modern day kavadis. They discard all traffic rules, go and come back without even bothering to remember Siva. And if Siva is remembered as well, it is remembered only as a ritual; even those who organize food and stay for kavadis all along their route too have little understanding of the real purport behind initiating the ritual. This is a perfect example how Bhikkus were doing various acts as a ritual exercise.
......................................................................................
Shariat courts are criticized today for the vices they carry. It is forgotten that the vices of the shariat courts are due to lack of proper knowledge among the qazis and wrong interpretation of religion by them. Otherwise, such courts are common in other religions too, like Buddhism. The Bhikkus living in a particular Vihara are allowed to constitute a court. This court can give rulings that could include Pravrajniya Karma (expulsion from the Sangh), Vtskhepriya Karma (boycott) or even Parivasa Karma (expulsion from vihar). These rulings can be given for offences that are not offences in the minds of general public. Offence could include accepting gifts of robes, woollen mats, bowls and medical requisites, engagement of monk in buying or selling of property or falling in love with an unmarried lady.
This show that the rules cannot be criticized by a person, who has no knowledge of religion and its teachings, as some people do in regard to Islamic teachings. If the followers are ignorant of the teachings, the teachings can never be criticized.
......................................................................................
The concept of Devatas is again strengthened, who have roots in the Vedas, by these words of the Buddha:
A Bhikku who, though he receives little, does not despise what he has received, even the gods (Devas) will praise him, if his life is pure, and if he is not slothful.
It is absurd that while on one hand people like B.R. Ambedkar says that the Buddha did not believe in God, on the other hand he is translating ´Deva‘ as ´gods‘. What is to be noted is that gaining praise of the Devatas is important in Buddha’s view. Moreover, Buddha is saying that the Devatas will praise a person only if his life is pure and not slothful. We are repeatedly saying that Devatas are made from pure tattvas (elements) and it is possible to attain salvation only through attaining certain desired levels of purity. Buddha too is confirming the same.
......................................................................................
Parivrajakas, we know, were the roaming ascetics, who were famous mostly for performing acts of self-mortification and ritual sacrifices. In all likelihood this concept of Parivrajakas too must have been similar to what the Buddha preached for his Bhikkus. But man‘s evil nature that makes him fall prey to the senses and an inbuilt tendency to do things in a ritualistic manner, led to digressions of such magnitude that the acts of Parivrajakas became monstrous in nature. The very fact that the house of the Bhikkus too was to later become a place of feuds and discord and ritual worship, albeit of a different nature, proves our point.
......................................................................................
Begging of alms was an extreme step propagated by the Buddha, which had its effect on the society by giving them a jolt. At a time when materialism reigned supreme, even amongst the Parivrajakas, it enabled Buddha to take his message far and wide. We have seen in the records innumerable incidents where the Parivrajakas had been allotted large grants and huge pieces of lands and lived a lavish lifestyle. The implications of people seeing a large number of Bhikkus, led by somebody who had shunned the lure of kingship, moving around with begging bowls in hands, had a deep impact on the thinking of the people. They realized that the worldly goods like good food, property, wealth and riches are to be avoided.
Fact remains that Krishna too had talked of the need to shun these things. But Buddha had to adopt the extreme step because mere plain words were not having an effect on people.
......................................................................................
Music of a certain kind, singing and dancing are to be shunned, as per Islam. This too is a subject of criticism on Islam. We have shown in our commentary of Gita how Krishna talks of restraining the ears and eyes. Buddha too is against singing and dancing and has in fact given a strict code of do‘s and don‘t‘s for a Buddha.
Buddha said of himself:
He (Buddha) refrains from being a spectator at shows, at fairs, with nautch dances, singing and music.
At another point, the Buddha said:
Six are the perils from the haunting of fairs: he is ever thinking where is there dancing? Where is there singing? Where is there music? Where is recitation? Where are the cymbals? Where the tam-tams?
Does this not substantiate our claim that all these – Buddha, Krishna and Mohammad – acquired their teachings from the same source? We have also claimed in the BOOK that the greatest sins for which Islam was to put capital punishment at a later stage are those that have been described as the five great sins in the Upanishads. Other than these, Islam gives no capital punishment and all other acts are to get rewards in the next life. Five great sins, as per the Upanishads are murder, theft, adultery, drinking and keeping company with those who commit these sins. Later, when the teachings were completed by Mohammad, he reserved the strictest punishment only for these acts.
In similar manner, it is said Buddha shuns music and dance. If Mohammad shunned music and dance for his adherents, we should not raise eyebrows. Moreover, music and dance, from being an exercise reserved for paying oblations to God had deteriorated to become acts of sensous gratifications and it cannot be expected of a spiritual guide to allow his followers to become victims of sensuous gratifications, as salvation can happen only upon refraining or controlling the senses.
......................................................................................
Who are the Licchavis? This is the question whose answer we would be most interested in knowing. This is so because a very important prediction of the Buddha is related with the Licchavis of Vesali. The prediction is related to Licchavis’ relationship with Devatas and also clearly confirm what had already been said in the Vedas that the Devatas would take birth in a future age. See this passage from B.R. Ambedkar’s book:
“When the Exalted One saw the Licchavis approaching in the distance, he addressed the brethren and said: “Brethren, let those of the brethren who have never seen the Devas, gaze upon this company of the Licchavis, behold this company of the Licchavis – for they are even a company of next-world Devas.”
It is not understandable that the commentators have not tried to go deeper into these words of the Buddha. Licchavis, whoever they are, either gave company to the Devas when they took birth on earth or would give company to the last of them – the Kalki Avatar – when he would arrive in the near future. The fact that Buddha is talking of ‘next world Devas’ fully indicates that the Devatas were to appear in a future age.
......................................................................................
The extent to which evil had entered the lives of the Parivrajakas in spite of the fact that they were revered by the society can be understood by these words from B.R. Ambedkar‘s book:
“At that time there used to live in Shravasti a Brahmani Parivrajaka, known as Chincha. In bodily formation and physical charms she was a seductive beauty. She used to radiate grace with her bodily movements.”
The fact that Jain Tirthikas used her to sabotage the teachings of Buddha by trying to malign his reputation reveal the extent of degradation that had occurred among the followers of Mahavira. Several instances can be found which show that these Jain Tirthikas too had got discredited among people. But if such Parivrajakas were seen with respect by people, it speaks of the moral and spiritual levels of the common men.
Question remains why woman has been used time and again to discredit a man aiming to build a relationship of his self with the Divine Self? If we see the nature of a woman, we find it is mostly centred around her own physical form. For her, what matters more is her beauty, the dresses she would wear and the jewellery she would possess. On the contrary, man’s fights has been over principles of philosophy, religious beliefs, truth and untruth and possession of material wealth where he sees woman too as a material commodity. This difference is because of the altogether different nature that God has bestowed on the two sexes.
This natural difference is the reason why all divine representatives have addressed the issue of man’s and woman’s conduct and how they should behave in each other’s company.
A similar example of woman being used to digress or blame a Divine Person is seen in the life of an Imam. The Imam was in the prison of the Abbasid rulers for a long time. All his time in the dark dungeon was spent in worshipping the Lord. The self-proclaimed Abbasid caliph thought of using woman to defame the Imam. The most beautiful prostitute of the time was sought. She was told the entire plan. She was to attempt at digressing the Imam from his worship and even if she didn’t succeed, she was to put the blame on Imam the next day. She was sent inside the dungeon. Once in the dungeon, she found the Imam engrossed in worship. She kept waiting for a chance but the entire night Imam continued to worship and she felt a Noor or Light was emanating from the Imam that was going to the heavens.
The next morning, the King sought this woman. She was asked to narrate the ‘misdeeds’ of the Imam. But she had been moved. Unmindful of the punishment that the king could inflict on her, she revealed the Caliph’s plot, and said the entire night Imam was engrossed in the prayers.
We have seen from the Upanishads that the Noor was created because the Manifest Self wanted more worshippers. The Ahlulbayt, when they were on earth, were the highest epitome of worship of the Absolute God. It is a pity that Shias who claim to be following the Ahlulbayt are far behind the Sunnis in worshipping the Absolute God. Zulmat has worked overtime on them!
......................................................................................
We have said earlier that Buddha‘s donning the garb of an ascetic was something that he did before his enlightenment and when compelled to do so by circumstances beyond his control. However, the concept of Parivrajakas was so deep-rooted among people that he could not do away with that and when people started coming to him for similar purpose, he had no choice but to put extremely severe conditions before allowing them to gain entry as Bhikkus. The idea perhaps was that the severity of conditions would slowly lead to the extinction of the system. This appears similar to the stance that Islam adopted in regard to slavery; it did not forbid it straightaway but put such conditions that eventually lead to the death of slavery in Islam.
We are of this opinion also because we have seen Buddha on several occasions refuting the argument presented by others by saying that this cannot be true as it lacks universality. The concept of Bhikkus, living with a begging bowl in hand, not marrying and not doing anything for a living, cannot be followed by the entire world and does not stand in the light of Buddha‘s own arguments. The following conversation of Buddha, with Prince Boddhi, further substantiates our claim.
Prince Bodhi said to the Lord: “My view, sir, is that true weal must be sought not through things pleasant but through things unpleasant.”
“In days gone by, Prince,” said the Blessed One, “I too held the same view in the days before my enlightenment. Time was when being quite young – with a wealth of coal-black hair and in all the beauty of my early prime – despite the wishes of my parents who wept and lamented, I cut off hair and beard, donned the yellow robes and went forth from home to homelessness as a pilgrim. A pilgrim now, in quest of the God and in search for the road to that utter peace which is beyond all compare.
“Now I hold a different view. If a man knows the Doctrine he will find the destruction of all ills.”
Wisdom and use of intellect, leaving all sense afflictions, leaving aside ego, anger, fear and other evils that cloud the mind and reasoning, and then a sincere pursuit, will enable a person to know the doctrine and not becoming a mere wandering hermit.
......................................................................................
Buddha’s last words indicate that he was concerned about the continuance of the order that he had created among the fraternity. The same was the concern of Mohammad who feared that the teachings would not remain as effective if the Divinely Appointed Successor was not acknowledged. (Read Part II of the BOOK for more on this)
Look at Buddha‘s last wordings to find traces of this concern. From these words, it is clear that he had apprehensions about Channa creating mischief. If he already had these apprehensions, why did he not expel Channa from the brotherhood when he was still recruiting more people till the last moment (the case of Sudhoddhama the Wanderer is an example). This show that Buddha identified certain people as mischief mongers but didn‘t say so because these people were held in high esteem by the lay people and doing any such thing without proofs of their offence would have alienated these people from the teachings.
The “extreme penalty” was to be applied in case of Channa when Buddha had departed from this world. This meant that Channa was not to be spoken to, not to be admonished, not to be instructed, and just left alone.
Even during the last moments, Buddha spoke chiefly of the doubts or perplexity that might still be remaining in the mind of the members of fraternity about the Buddha, about the Norm, or the Order, or the Path, or the Way to the Path. This shows that he was concerned that people might deviate from the teachings or ignore them. He repeated his question thrice to the 500 brethren present, indicating stress and concern. After this he confirmed that the 500 brethren of him were all winners, assured from the downfall, assured of reaching the Supreme Wisdom.
It is ironical that when we read the life of Prophet Mohammad, we find a similar concern as regards to the teachings and more particularly regarding the successor, during the last moments of his life. The successor appointed by Mohammad was discarded by the public immediately after Mohammad‘s departure; we will know later whether the same happened in case of Buddha.
......................................................................................
It is evident from Buddha‘s last words that if there was a successor, it had to be Ananda. He was praised, he was declared as wise man, it was clearly said that he would be free from the great evil – from sensuality, from individuality, from delusion, and from ignorance. His closeness to Buddha and his understanding of Buddha‘s teachings and even nature was praised. Then four special things were declared about Ananda.
All are happy to visit Ananda. They are filled with joy on beholding him; they are happy to hear him. They are ill at ease when Ananda is silent.
Even the last minute instructions were given to Ananda. All this too is starkly similar to the case of Mohammad and Ali wherein all the praises of Mohammad regarding Ali were ignored, his clear instructions were deliberately forgotten, and the moment Mohammad died, his so-called followers gathered and elected a successor from among themselves, even before Mohammad was buried.
Is this not clear that if Buddha was silent on earlier occasions when the question of successor was asked, it was either because no revelation had come by then or he feared revolt from within his Sangh. There is no doubt that Ananda was to be the successor. Even if that was not so, he was to remain in the thick of decision-making. But we see that when the first congregation is called for, Kassappa is the President. Whether Ananda was even present in this conclave is not known? And Kassappa did not try or made effort to bring all the facets of Buddha‘s life to open, perhaps fearing that the subject of Ananda or certain other subjects that he didn’t want to be known, would come out in the open.
We invite you to read a very similar incident from the life of Prophet Mohammad. When the Prophet, on his death bed, tried one more time to identify Ali as his successor, those around him did their best that he is not heard, so much so that the Prophet got annoyed and expelled all those people from the room. The Prophet’s head was on Ali’s lap when he passed away. Ali was extremely grief-stuck over the Prophet’s departure. Consequently he got busy with the preparations for the burial. Even before the burial, the same people who had been expelled by the Prophet from his company during the last moments of his life, gathered in a conclave outside the city and elected one from among themselves as the successor.
Read the description of Buddha’s passing away, the grief of Ananda even at the thought of Buddha’s death, more than necessary praise of Ananda on the death-bed, Buddha’s apparent concern that all the teachings have been properly understood and the conclave where Ananda does not appear to be present and it appears that what happened with Ali was something that the history had witnessed earlier.
It is said that history repeats itself. And we say that Zulmat or Tamas or Mara uses the same time-tested methods time and again. Buddha died in the year 483 B.C., more than 1000 years prior to the time when a similar incident was enacted in the city of Medina.
......................................................................................
When Buddha died and prior to dying when he announced that all the 500 brethren in his company were on the right path, Kassappa was not among them. Therefore, there is no sanction from Buddha that Kassappa was on the right path. We recount here the words of B.R. Ambedkar regarding the ‘venerable Maha Kassappa’. Such was the respect that Kassappa had built for himself that B.R. Ambedkar, who does not use similar words for Ananda, whom Buddha praised even on his death-bed, is using such adjectives in Kassappa’s praise. He writes: “Venerable Maha Kassappa was journeying along the high road from Pava to Kushnara with a great company of brethren (at the time when Buddha passed away).”
See what B.R. Ambedkar writes further which will give you an idea that Kassappa being venerable is itself a subject of dispute. He writes: “Just at the time (when venerable Maha Kassappa was journeying) a certain naked ascetic was coming along the high road to Pava.
And the venerable Maha Kassappa saw the naked ascetic coming in the distance; and when he had seen him he said to the naked ascetic: “O friend! Surely thou knowest our Master?”
“Yes, friend! I know him.” “This day the Samana Gautama has been dead a week!”
Immediately on hearing the news the brethren were overcome with grief and started weeping.
Now at that time a brother named Subhadda, who had been received into the Sangh in his old age, was seated in their company.
And this Subhadda addressed the brethren and said: “Enough brethren! Weep not, neither lament! We are well rid of the great Samana. We used to be annoyed by being told, ‘This beseems you, this beseems you not.’ But now we shall be able to do whatever we like and whatever we do not like, that we shall not have to do! Isn’t it good he is dead? Why weep, why lament? It is a matter of joy.”
So great and harsh a disciplinarian the Blessed One was.”
This passage from B.R. Ambedkar’s book indicates the mind-set of the Buddhist writers who do not want to see anything negative or criticize those who had given company to the Buddha. Fact is that these lines truly indicate that something was wrong. Instead of trying to point that out, B.R. Ambedkar concludes by saying: “So great and harsh a disciplinarian the Blessed One was.”
Are these words not serious and worthy of investigation, spoken as they are immediately upon hearing the news of Buddha’s death. Was there no need to analyse and try to understand the purpose of such utterances, instead of merely concluding that this statement too praises Buddha’s disciplinarian life? Try to use your reasoning capacities! If this incident has come down to us in its exact form, then it suggests that there were Bhikkus, and not one or two, who were fed up with Buddha’s teachings. It appears from Subhadda’s statement that he was straightforward and concerned and was merely mocking at the fraternity for what they used to say. Since Subbhadda was traveling with ‘venerable Maha Kassappa’ and others, he surely must have been witness to such conversation and the news of Buddha’s death and the sight of Bhikkus weeping on hearing the news gave vent to the anger in him.
This also shows that there were surely some who were annoyed with Buddha’s teachings and were likely to benefit if the teachings were moulded as per their choice. If these people tried or went on to sabotage some of Buddha’s teachings, why do we want to overlook it?
We ask the Buddhists of today what they would do if somebody shows happiness upon the fact that Buddha died. Won’t you grab his neck? Even if you are an ardent follower of Buddha who is against harming a living being, at least you will try to put forth your point or voice your dissent. Why is it that the ‘venerable Maha Kassappa’ didn’t say a word? Or is it that the words of Subbhadda were aimed at Kassappa himself? This is also authenticated by the fact that, true to Subbaddha’s words, Kassappa is visible again, only a few days later, presiding a conclave that interpreted Buddha’s teachings in the manner he liked and ignored stress on what he did not like.
To Kassappa, it was good that Buddha had died. This was the chance that he had been waiting for. Yet, he surely must have wept and lamented upon hearing the news, which gave vent to Subbaddha’s anger, as he had been hearing such things during the course of the journey. Is it not a logical conclusion?
You will ask, if this conclusion is logical, why Buddha’s followers didn’t object to the changes. Answer lies in Subbhadda’s statement itself. “But now we shall be able to do whatever we like and what we do not like, that we shall not have to do!” Moreover, it was more profitable to portray Buddha’s teachings as separate from the earlier Messengers or Avatars and become the revered figures of this new religion than being one in many. The great number of converts to Buddha’s teachings during his lifetime included the rich and the powerful and presiding and controlling them meant all the joys of the world. Unfortunately for them, in spite of all their efforts, their mischief did not remain hidden behind the interpretations of the commentators permanently, and it is being unearthed now, when God has decided that there will remain only one religion, that of the True Path and all the rest will get exposed.
One question remains! Why is it all and sundry go on to call Kassappa with such glorified attributes like ‘venerable Maha Kassappa’. Part of the answer we have already given in the previous notes. A little later we will give another point to justify our view.
......................................................................................
We have seen Buddha had talked ill of dancing and singing on several occasions. But what we find happening on Buddha’s death is singing and dancing that continued for 7 days. How will you explain this? It is apparent that there were more people on Kassappa’s side who wanted to get rid of the harsh teachings imposed upon them under Buddha but at the same time also continue to reap the benefits. This number was much more than the number who wished to abide by the true teachings of Buddha and remained loyal to Ananda. This is so similar to the incidents that occured at the death of Mohammad. .
Read how B.R. Ambedkar describes the events that unfolded upon Buddha’s death:
“Then the Mallas of Kushinara said: “It is much too late to burn the body of the Blessed One today. Let us now perform the cremation tomorrow.”
And the Mallas of Kushinara gave orders to their attendants, saying: Make preparations for the funeral of the Tathagata and gather perfumes and garlands and the musicians of Kushinara.”
But in paying honour, reverence, respect, and homage to the remains of the Tathagata with dancing and hymns and music and with garlands and perfumes; and in making canopies of their garments, and preparing decoration wreath to hang thereon, they passed the 2nd day too, and then the 3rd day, and the 4th and 5th and the 6th day also.
Then on the 7th day the Mallas of Kushinara thought: “Let us carry the body of the Blessed One and let us perform the cremation ceremony.”
Read Subbhadda’s statement again and compare it with the dancing and music progressing around Buddha’s dead body. The excuse given was that it was too late to cremate that day. Why was he not cremated the next day? Were there some sympathizers of Kassappa here as well who wanted to drag the cremation till he return? Or was it to make people forget the last words regarding Ananda, who, we have seen, was lamenting and crying in a corner. Music, dance and hymns, when Buddha himself was against it – think and ponder!.
If you see, even the ashes were kept for 7 days and dancing and music and songs proceeded. We have seen that the ascetic had told Kassappa that it was 7 days since Buddha’s death. If the ascetic reached the place where Kassappa was traveling in 7 days, then we are justified in concluding that it would have taken 7 days for Kassappa to return. The dancing and music continued till the time Kassappa returned. This was followed by the congregation that Kassappa presided, in which the subject of succession and that of documenting the life of Buddha were conveniently ignored.
There is another irony attached to it! The same people who were fighting over the ashes of Buddha a few moments before came to a collective decision during the conclave that Buddha’s life is not to be remembered, as Buddha was against it. B.R. Ambedkar writes that the King of Magadha, Ajatshatru, Licchavis of Vaishali, Sakyas of Kapilavastu, Bulis of Attakappa, Koliyas of Ramagama, Mallas of Pava, a Brahmin of Vethadipa – all wanted part of the ashes. And the Mallas of Kushinara said: “The Blessed One died in our village. We will not give away any part of the remains of the Blessed One. They belong to us.”
Material remains were important but remembering the life of Buddha was not. Surely, there were certain people who didn’t want this to happen, as they feared this would either expose them or pave hurdles in their attempt to shape the Dhamma as per their liking.
The fight that nearly happened over ashes also tell clearly to what extent Buddha’s teachings were being adhered to by the majority, even when he had taught for nearly 50 years and had just departed.
Similar is the case of Prophet Mohammad, after his death. Within a few years, power had gone to the Umayyad rulers, in whose rule, death was the penalty for writing even one line on the life of Mohammad. Most books of hadees (traditions) that we find today were written about 200-300 years Mohammad’s death. Despite this, a greater number of Muslims consider Umayyad rulers as Muslims.
......................................................................................
In Brahma Gala Sutta, Buddha talks of himself.
He refrains from being a spectator at shows, at fairs, with nautch dances, singing, and music. At another place, he refers to nautch dances (nakkam), singing of songs (gitam), instrumental music (vaditam) and shows at fairs (pekkham), ballad recitations (akkhanam), hand music (panissaram), the chanting of bards (vetalam), tam-tam playing (kumbhathunam), fairy scenes (sobhanagarakam), acrobatic feats by Kandalas (Kandala-vam-sa-dhopanam), combats of elephants, horses, buffaloes, bulls, goats, rams, cocks and quails, bouts at quarter staff, boxing, wrestling and sham-fights, roll-calls, manoeuvres, reviews.
Yet, we saw song and dances in front of Buddha’s dead body. Moreover, wasn’t it an irony that while Buddha talked so much about himself, his followers decided those narrations are not to be preserved.
......................................................................................
Following notes are based on the content of the book: Sacred Books of the Buddhists
(Edited by Max Muller, published 1899)
We claim that teachings of the Straight or True Path evolved in a similar manner all over the world. The aforementioned book substantiates this when it says that a great similarity is found in the writings of “several scholars, and especially – with more knowledge and detail – Dr. Karl Neumann, have maintained that the position of Buddhism in the history of Indian philosophy is analogous to that of Schopenhauer in European philosophy. On the other hand, it is maintained by Professor Deussen that Schopenhauer’s position is analogous to that of Upanishads. The reconciliation will probably be found to be that what Buddhism took over, with more or less of modification, from the Upanishads, is about the same as that part of the Upanishad doctrine which is found in European phraseology, in Schopenhauer; and what Buddhism rejected altogether is not to be found in Schopenhauer.”
......................................................................................
People say Buddha is against the presence of soul. This is based on wrong understanding of Buddha’s teachings. Buddha has criticized those who had formed diverse beliefs pertaining to soul but had forgotten that the purpose of soul’s creation is to attain enough purity so as to enable it to attain salvation. Buddha is repeatedly talking of salvation and rebirth. If there is no soul, how would a person attain salvation or upon failure to attain salvation, get a rebirth.
We have seen there were innumerable schools of thought who all subscribed to one or the other theory pertaining to soul. Looking at Buddha’s wordings, you will realize that his objection is not against the presence of soul but against the various notions that people had developed. People who were already confused because of the elaborate discussions that took place between various schools of thought prior to Buddha’s enlightenment wrongly concluded that there was no soul.
Buddha says that some of the sages and recluses are even able to tell the place and form of their previous births. This confirms that Buddha is not against rebirth. If you read our commentary of Gita, you’ll see Krishna’s dialogue wherein he says that while Arjuna is not aware of his previous birth, he (Krishna) is fully aware of each of his previous birth. Does this not show that Krishna’s views were similar to those of Buddha’s and if the followers were unable to understand, it was because of their preconceived notions and ignorance?
Krishna has elaborated on the need to get rid of the continuous cycle of rebirth through attaining union with the Paramatma. This has been called salvation. To achieve salvation, it is necessary to perform good deeds and abstain from allowing one to become a slave to the organs of senses and actions, anger, lust, greed, etc. Is Buddha not talking of salvation or performing righteous deeds? What is the difference then? Fact is that the people of the time, while believing in the eternal nature of soul and world, had forsaken the concept of performing righteous deeds and were not aware that the ultimate aim of soul is to attain union with Paramatma so as to gain freedom from the cycle of rebirth. Obviously their belief was based on wrong understanding, both from the point of view of Krishna and Buddha. Instead of performing righteous deeds, they had concluded that since rebirth is a continuous process, there was no need to perform good acts or pursue leading a righteous life. Is this thought not worth criticizing? Was not there a need to stress on righteous living, which was very much forgotten? This is exactly what Buddha did.
Does this not show that the path of Krishna and Buddha is the same? And if Buddha’s stress was on other things than Krishna’s, it was because of the needs of the time.
Buddha confirms our view when he said about soul and world:
These, brethren, are those other things, profound, difficult to realize, not to be grasped by mere logic, subtle, comprehensible only by the wise, which the Tathagata, having himself realized and seen face to face, hath set forth; and it is concerning these that they who would rightly praise the Tathagata in accordance with the truth, should speak.
Does this not show that soul can only be comprehended by wise and thus it means that Buddha is not against the presence of soul?
......................................................................................
A lot many more similarities can be found between the teachings of Krishna and Buddha. Krishna says in Gita that the ultimate aim is to attain salvation. However, those who are unable to do so, but perform good deeds in life, they are made to live in the heaven and once the merits of their deeds are exhausted, they come back to live in this world where they are again subjected to a life of rebirth. Buddha too talks of the same. He says that when this world-system passes away, those who have not attained salvation goes to the world of Radiance[Noor]. And once the merits have exhausted, they are sent back to this world through the Palace of Brahma.
We have seen earlier that Buddha has referred to the heaven of Brahma and Krishna has referred to the heaven of Indra. We have also proven that both – Brahma and Indra – have a relation. While Brahma is the name of the first Noor created by the Manifest Self; when this Noor divided into 2 exactly similar Noors, also exactly similar to the first from which division took place, one was named IndraDeva and the other Vayu Deva. Indra’s heaven and Brahma’s heaven cannot be different because both, as Noors, dwell at the same place. This is the highest level of heaven where only those who attain salvation go. Muslims too have given a name for this highest level, where the Ahlulbayt dwell. A person who is unable to attain salvation goes to lower levels of heaven. Such a person dwell in the heaven for hundreds or thousands of years, till the end of Brahma’s night and the commencement of a new Brahma’s dawn. When the new world is created, spirit of this person is sent again for another test. The soul will be free permanently from the test only when it attains salvation or when it reaches such a nadir from where there is no coming back.
See if Buddha’s views are in anyway different from Krishna’s:
Now there comes a time, brethren, when, sooner or later, after the lapse of a long long period, this world-system passes away. And when this happens beings have mostly been reborn in the World of Radiance, and there they dwell made of mind, feeding on joy, radiating light from themselves, traversing the air, continuing in glory; and thus they remain for a long long period of time.
Now there comes also a time, brethren, when, sooner or later, this world-system begins to re-evolve. When this happens the Palace of Brahma appears, but this is empty.
Does this not remind of the Brahma-day and night of the Upanishads, Vedas and Puranas? We have shown in the BOOK that Brhad-aranyaka Upanishad talks of the entire creation originating from Brahma and a Purana saying that this is the 994th creation of this Brahma-day. We have also shown how Mohammad said he was still a Prophet when Adam was being created and Ali talked of Adams prior to the Adam 70 times over, until the questioner ceased to ask. Relate all these and you have found the truth regarding the Straight and True Path.
Palace of Brahma being empty means that there will be a time when it will get filled up. A great portion of Part-I of our BOOK talks of the process of this ‘Palace of Brahma’ getting filled up, as has been talked about in various Upanishads.
Those who had attained union with the Manifest Self will come back no more. But those who had not attained salvation (who were people with actions in right hand or left hand, as described in Surah Waqiya of Quran), upon being given the reward and/or punishment for their deeds, will be sent again in the new creation for yet another test.
Buddha is talking of a world of radiance and also saying that they (read the Devatas) “appear in the Palace of Brahma as companions to him, and in all respects like him.” This is exactly equivalent to the Upanishads saying that all those who emanated from the One Light were exactly same to each other. This is also exactly same to Prophet Mohammad saying all are Mohammad. All 7 spirits are one and same!
This proves that Brahma is talking of the Devatas or the Noors of the Ahlulbayt and not about normal beings like you and me. In fact, Buddha’s own words confirm this when he says that he is talking of the ‘venerable beings’ and not just ‘beings’. This is what he says:
And what is it that these venerable ones depend upon, what is that they start from, in arriving at this conclusion.
These “venerable ones” are the dwellers of the Palace of Brahma. They are the 7 Noors who dwell in Brahma’s heaven. When Buddha says that the spirit or souls are routed to the world again through the Palace of Brahma, he is eventually saying that the Devatas (who are the dwellers of the Palace of Brahma) are responsible for routing the spirits or souls to the world again. They themselves come in human bodies, if and when required. Referring to these Divinities (of Noor), Quran calls them judges on the Day of Judgment (and calls Allah as Judge of the judges), calls them Light (and Allah as Noor an-Noor i.e. Light of the lights) and calls them Aaleen (the higher beings).
It is unfortunate that Muslims too identify the Ahlulbayt from their bodies and presence on earth. Once all humanity starts seeing the role of Noor descending in pure bodies on earth, who are loved and followed by adherents of one religion or the other, all differences of religion, of ego and supremacy will be resolved.
These startling conclusions have been derived by us on the basis of present translations done by those who themselves didn’t understand the subject of discussion. If fresh translations are attempted, more startling conclusions will be derived.
......................................................................................
The various questions, which have been mentioned by Buddha in regard to the soul, world and other similar things indicate that the people of the time were involved in meaningless debates regarding these subjects. For instance, a hot and raging topic was that “the soul after death, not subject to decay and unconscious,
i) has form,
ii) is formless,
iii) neither has, nor has not, form
iv) is finite,
v) is infinite,
vi) is both,
vii) is neither.”
Such meaningless debates without knowing the truth meant that Buddha had to deny them all.
......................................................................................
Buddha has clearly stated that there were 62 opinions that people used to put forth and all of them were wrong. That is why Buddha had to criticize the concept of soul. Those who deny that the Buddha believed in soul should note that Buddha is giving an exactly similar explanation of it as Krishna has given in Gita. Read:
For whosoever, brethren, whether recluses or Brahmans, are thus reconstructors of the past or arrangers of the future, or who are both, whose speculations are concerned with both, who put forward various propositions with regard to the past and to the future, they, all of them, are entrapped in the net of these sixty-two modes; this way and that they may flounder, but they are included in it, caught in it.
Just, brethren, as when a skilful fisherman or fisher lad should drag a tiny pool of water with a fine-meshed net he might fairly think: “Whatever fish of size may be in this pond, everyone will be in this net; flounder about as they may, they will be included in it, and caught” – just so is it with these speculators about the past and the future, in this net, flounder as they may, they are included and caught.
The outward form, brethren, of him who has worn the truth, stands before you, but that which binds it to rebirth is cut in twain. So long as his body shall last, so long do gods (read Devas) and men behold him, on the dissolution of the body, beyond the end of his life, neither gods (read Devas) nor men shall see him.
Just brethren, as when the stalk of a bunch of mangoes has been cut, all the mangoes that were hanging on that stalk go with it; just so, brethren, though the outward form of him who has won the truth stands before you, that which binds it to rebirth has been cut in twain. So long as his body shall last, so long do gods (read Devas) and men behold him. On the dissolution of the body, beyond the end of his life, neither gods (read Devas) nor men shall see him.
Though the text is not very comprehensible, it is clear that discussion on salvation and rebirth cannot happen without bringing in the role of Devatas into play.
On hearing this, the venerable Ananda said to the Blessed One:
Strange, Lord, is this, and wonderful! And what name has this exposition of the truth?
Ananda, you may remember this exposition as the Net of Advantage, and as the Net of Truth, and as the Supreme Net, and as the Net of Theories; remember it even as the Glorious Victory in the day of battle!
The stress on this knowledge and the various names that Buddha has given to this knowledge, in this text from Brahma-gala Sutta is exactly similar to the emphasis laid by Krishna on this during the entire discussions with Arjuna in the Gita. Devatas, you can see, play as important a part in Buddha’s teachings as in the teachings of any other Divine Messenger. It is said that we all understood them wrongly!
......................................................................................
Some commentators wrongly conclude that the realization of the Four Truths, the destruction of the Asavas, and attainment of Arahatship are purely Buddhists. While the Buddha’s teachings were preached in Pali, Krishna’s original teachings were in Sanskrit. Therefore, the terminology and their explanation can be different. But when you see that Arahatship deals with the concept of Nirvana or salvation and Krishna too stresses on this alone and nothing else, you realize that the teachings of the two were highlighting the One and Only Path to God. In fact, Islamic concept too is exactly the same.
......................................................................................
Buddha’s teachings are for the entire humanity and at no point did he confine those rules to his own order. For instance, the honour and respect that he talks about has to be shown to members of all religious orders, irrespective of the fact that the person is adherent of Buddha’s teachings or opposed to it.
Mercy and kindness to all living beings, honesty, chastity, truthfulness, peacefulness, courtesy, and good sense in speech, abstinence from luxury of 12 kinds, and freedom from trickery and violence; not injuring plants, not laying up treasure, of 7 kinds, not frequenting shows, of 26 specified kinds, not using toilet luxuries, of which 22 are specified, not talking vain things, of which 27 instances are given, not using sophistical and rude phrases when talking of higher things, not acting as go-between; not practicing trickery and mystery under the guise of religion; not earning a living by low arts, such as auguries, advising as to the best sorts of various things; prophesying as to war and its results; astrology; foretelling famine or plague; or the reverse; arranging marriages using spells, or worshipping gods (Devatas); various sorts of medical trickery; the confidence of heart, absence of fear, resulting from the consciousness of right doing; the habit of keeping guarded the door of his senses; the constant self-possession he thus gains; the power of being content with little, with simplicity of life; the emancipation of heart from the Five Hindrances to self-mastery – covetousness, ill-temper, laziness, worry and flurry, and perplexity; the joy and peace that, as a result of the sense of this emancipation, fills his whole being; the practice of the Four Ghanas; the Insight arising from the knowledge (nana-dassana); the power of projecting mental images; the 5 modes of mystic Insight; the practice of Iddhi; the Heavenly Ear – hearing heavenly sounds; knowledge of others’ thoughts; memory of his own previous births; knowledge of other people’s previous births (the Heavenly Eye); the realization of the Four Truths, the destruction of the Asavas, and attainment of Arahatship – are his chief teachings.
In fact, all other teachings are meant only for attainment of Arahatship. All our readers, irrespective of which faith they belong to at the moment, must try to incorporate these teachings in their lives.
This show the Dhamma was to improve the society and to curb down the evils. Of these only the last viz. the realization of Four Truths is said to be exclusively Buddhist by commentators. Why then are they bent on proving that Buddha’s teachings are a different religion?
One reason perhaps why people thought and concluded Buddha was teaching a different religion could be issues like his admonishing of those who worshipped the Devatas, as mentioned in the passage above. Those people had begun worshipping the Devatas in some manner or the other just as most Hindus are doing now. Worship of kul-devata is still common in various households. Therefore, it must have been difficult to digest Buddha admonishing such people. But if you read our commentary of Gita you will find that Krishna too is admonishing those who worshipped the Devatas and he in fact came to war with worshippers of pseudo-Vedic teachings.
......................................................................................
In the Galiya, the question is whether the soul is the same as, or is other than, the body. The answer is a question. Repeating all the attributes mentioned above and omitting last two; the Buddha asks, at the end of each subdivision, whether men who do that would be likely to trouble themselves as to speculations about the soul. And the answer being, of course, ‘No’, he rejoins that neither does he. This shows that Buddha has never said no to the presence of soul. What he says is that those who do not show mercy and kindness to living beings, who are lacking in honesty, chastity, truthfulness, peacefulness, courtesy and good sense in speech and also perform various other evils that he mentions, ought not to ask such questions. People had taken to evil so much so that Buddha says at a place that all the people were influenced by one or the other 62 schools of thought that were in vogue.
We will have to remember that Zulmat builds its web in this manner. Various schools of thought are prevalent, debates between Hindus and Muslims and Muslims and Christians and Christians and Jews and between one sect with other, one school with other, one philosophy with another, is going on relentlessly. Self-made preachers are trying to enforce their views on others. Unmindful of developing their own self, they are finding faults in the conduct of others. Modern day communication tools like WhatsApp and FaceBook have enabled even the youth to become champions of their respective religions and sects. Owing to the attachment they have developed with the religion or sect in which they have taken birth, the religion of their forefathers, they are criticizing others, and are even willing to abuse or harm others for that. How much have they themselves endeavoured to know the truth? How much have they attempted to curb their senses and pursue the path of righteous living? Truly speaking all are deviated from the straight path. All will have to shun their deviations and the true path will remain starkly visible in front of them.
......................................................................................
Samanna-Phalla Sutta or the Fruits of the Life of a Recluse is a very interesting Sutta which is available in English for those who wish to read. In this Sutta, Magadha Ajatshatru engages in a discussion with the Buddha. This discussion is especially interesting because it reveals the degradation in thoughts of the supposedly learned of the time like Purana Kassappa, Makkhali of the cow-pen, Ajita of the garment of hair, Pakuddha Kakkayana, Sangaya of Belattha clan and Nigantha of the Nata clan. Answers are given by these people to Ajatshatru’s question asking about the immediate fruit, visible in this very world, of the life of a recluse. All these were much revered people of the time and some like Makkhali Gosala had a large following called Agivakas and their mention can be seen in both Buddhist and the Jain texts.
Writes the author of the book edited by Max Muller: “Of these six teachers Purana denies the evil karma in a bad act and vice versa; Ajita, in preaching annihilation at death, shuts out the possibility of any effect to be worked by karma; and Makkhali rejects both karma and its effect. The theory of Pakudha seems to exclude responsibility; the Nigantha simply begs the question, by asserting that a Nigantha has attained the end; and Sanjaya gives no answer at all.”
There is another interesting point here. Once again Buddha talks of the worlds above of the god (read Devas), the Brahmas and the Maras (in plural, thereby indicating that the agents of Zulmat too are many, just as agents of Noor are 7), which clearly shows that he too confirmed their existence. Says Buddha:
Suppose, O King, there appears in the world one who has won the truth, an Arahat, a fully awakened one, abounding in wisdom and goodness, happy, who knows all worlds, unsurpassed as a guide to mortals willing to be led, a teacher for gods and men, a Blessed One, a Buddha. He, by himself, thoroughly knows and sees, as it were, face to face this universe, - including the worlds above of the gods, the Brahmas, and the Maras, and the world below with its recluses and Brahmans, its princes and peoples, - and having known it, he makes his knowledge known to others.
......................................................................................
Recluse defined by Buddha is the perfect recluse with not an iota of non-recluseness. In fact divine words are always absolutist in nature! This will be evident when you will read that Buddha’s recluse is one who becomes aware of his previous births. Therefore, recluse is non one who joins the Ashram or Order. Krishna too says to Arjuna in Gita that while Arjuna was not aware of his previous births, Krishna was aware of all previous births. See, the benefits of being a recluse:
This, O King, is an immediate fruit of the life of a recluse. Visible in this world, and higher and sweeter than the last.
With his heart thus serene (& c. as before), he directs and bends down his mind to the knowledge of the fall and rise of beings. With the pure Heavenly Eye (Dibba-kakkhu), surpassing that of men, he sees beings as they pass away from one form of existence and take shape in another; he recognizes the mean and the noble, the well favoured and the ill-favoured, the happy and the wretched, passing away according to their deeds: Such and such beings, my brethren, in act and word and thought, revilers of the noble ones, holding to wrong views, acquiring for themselves that Karma which results from wrong views, they, on the dissolution of the body, after death, are reborn in some unhappy state of suffering or woe. But such and such beings, my brethren, well doers in act and word and thought, not revilers of the noble ones, holding to right views, acquiring for themselves that Karma that results from right views, they, on the dissolution of the body, after death, are reborn, in some happy state in heaven.
Thus, with the pure Heavenly Eye, surpassing that of men, he sees beings as they pass away from one state of existence, and take form in another; he recognizes the mean and the noble, the well favoured and the ill-favoured, the happy and the wretched, passing away according to their deeds.
Just, O King, as if there were a house with an upper terrace on it in the midst of a place where four roads meet, and a man standing thereon, and with eyes to see, should watch men entering a house, and coming forth out of it, and walking hither and thither along the street, and seated in the square in the midst. Then he would know: Those men are entering a house, and those are leaving it, and those are walking to and fro in the street, and those are seated in the square in the midst.
This, O King, is an immediate fruit of the life of a recluse, visible in this world, and higher and sweeter than the last.
......................................................................................
It is wrongly believed that Krishna propounded the caste system. In our commentary of the Gita, we have shown that Krishna was of the view that people higher in merit were superior. He says that the wise men see brahmins, dog-eaters and dogs as one and the same. This is so because the brahmin can become a dog or a dog-eater can become a brahmin in future birth. Karma is most important on the basis of which the next birth is decided. Buddha’s teachings too are the same!
Yes, Krishna did advise the people to remain in the professions of their families. The reason for this was that profession did not matter as much as salvation, which was the highest goal for all individuals, and was based on the elevation of the self through performing righteous deeds. Otherwise, belief was that the brahmins were the most distinguished of all castes. Unfortunately, when the brahmins sat to write the commentaries of Gita, they downplayed all this and tried to keep the age-old notions of supremacy of brahmins alive.
......................................................................................
People knew that Buddha, “by himself, thoroughly knows and sees, as it were, face to face this universe, - including the worlds above of the gods (read Devas), the Brahmas, and the Maras, and the world below with its recluses and brahmins, its princes and peoples, - and having known it, he makes his knowledge known to others.”
Does this not portray Buddha’s link with Divine Powers higher up? After all, it was not Buddha who was bestowing salvation or giving rebirths to the people! Buddha knew of the worlds of the Devatas, even of the agents of Zulmat, and knew about all people on earth, only because of Noor that had descended in his body on the day of enlightenment. One or the other of 7 Noors has been working in the bodies of all the Avatars that came and also in the bodies of the Ahlulbayt.
It is mentioned time and again that the brahmins of the period, the learned in scriptures, identified Buddha through the 32 bodily signs of a great man handed down in the scriptures. This is evident in the Ambattha Sutta wherein Pokkarasadi talks of the same. Commenting on this, the author of the book says: “The knowledge of these 32 marks of a Great Being (Maha-purusha) is one of the details in the often – recurring paragraph giving the points of brahmin wisdom... No such list has been found, so far as I know, in those portions of the pre-Buddhistic priestly literature that have survived. And the inference from both our passages is that the knowledge is scattered through the brahmin texts. Many of the details of Buddhist list are very obscure; and a collection of the older brahmin passages would probably throw light on them, and upon a curious chapter in mythological superstition.”
Does this also not verify our claim that Buddha was a successor of the same chain of Messengers or Avatars, sent by somebody higher up? How else would you explain the 32 marks identified beforehand. Who gave these marks? Clearly there were certain powers who knew the child was to become a Buddha and therefore gave the marks at the time of his birth. Since the brahmins who came to cognize these marks talked of their mention in their scriptures, it becomes certain that this was not merely the prophecy of an astrologer. Nevertheless, it shows a link between Buddha with those earlier ones, who have been confined to themselves by the Hindus. It also shows that a good mass of so-called Sanatan literature got lost with time.
......................................................................................
The Ambattha Sutta also talks of a spirit who bears the thunderbolt appearing in the sky and not only Buddha but Ambattha as well perceived the Spirit. Question is what was this enlightenment that Buddha got which made the spirits come to defend his words or because of which whosover did not, even up to the third time of asking, answered a reasonable question put by a Tathagata (one who has won the truth), his head splitted into pieces on the subject.
Buddha asks a reasonable question and you didn’t answer and your head splitted into pieces! Why the Spirit that bears the thunderbolt is helping the Buddha? And yet people concluded there was no higher up. You will have to agree that his enlightenment as Buddha was not just about acquiring a certain knowledge but assignment of a certain power by the Higher Spirit. As Quran says, Mohammad knew nothing of the book (Quran) nor of faith until the (Noorani) Spirit descended on him. The same is meant by Enlightenment. We maintain Enlightenment is a heavenly Light [Noor/Power] descending in a body that has been purified by virtuous and sinless living. The Light that descends starts using the pious body as Its office; this body works as connect between material beings and the Manifest Self [Paramatma]. The connection happens because this person is connected to both ends; to humans because of the body being human and to the Manifest Self because of the body being filled up with the Divine Noor.
......................................................................................
The book ‘Sacred books of the Buddhists’ talks of Sanat-kumara (the Sanskrit form of the name Sanam-kumara) meaning ‘ever virgin’. According to the legend - common ground to Brahman and Buddhists – there were 5 ‘mind born’ sons of Brahma, who remained always pure and innocent, and this Brahma was one of the 5.
Who are these sons? Can the Buddhists explain without taking recourse to so-called Hindu scriptures or to our explanation? These 5 sons of Brahma have been described elaborately in the Upanishads and the Vedas, who were again erroneously believed to be 5 basic elements. Chhandogya has described 5 persons as gate-keepers of heaven. The above narration confirms one of the 5 Noors that later descended and were called Panj-tan by Muslims had earlier descended in the body of Buddha.
Interestingly, they have been described as always pure in Buddhist scriptures and Quran too takes a guarantee of the perfect purity of Ahlulbayt, when the 5 of them gathered under a vestment and the Quranic verse was revealed talking of their perfect purity, with not an iota of impurity reaching close to them. We have shown earlier that Upanishads too have talked of the 5 as made from ‘pure tatwas’.
......................................................................................
Serving the fire-god [Agnideva] too has been mentioned by Buddha as the highest of merits time and again. You will know soon, later in this part, that narrations pertaining to AgniDeva is the favourite subject of Vedas. Vedas have talked of no other Devatas as much as they have talked of AgniDeva. AgniDeva is synonymous with sacrifice; we have shown that it was the Noor of this Devata, which when descended in the body of a child named Husain, gave the greatest sacrifice for the humanity in the battle of Karbala.
Now see what Buddha says to Ambattha:
Then what think you, Ambattha? Although you have not attained unto this supreme perfection of wisdom and goodness, and have not attained to living on fruits fallen of themselves, and have not attained to living on bulbs and roots and fruits, and have not attained to serving the fire-god, have you been taught to build yourself a four-doored alms-house at a spot where four high roads cross, and dwell there as one who would fain observe the vow to entertain whosoever might pass.
Buddha is even talking of serving AgniDeva. Irony is when you show Buddha preaching a different religion altogether, how can you serve the AgniDeva who is considered by Hindus as their own.
......................................................................................
Describing Buddha’s Dhamma, the writer says: “A theory which placed the ideal in Self-Conquest, regarded final salvation as obtainable in this world, and in this world only, and only by self-conquest – a view of life that ignored the ‘soul’ and brought the very gods (Devas) themselves under the domain of law – a religious movement which aimed its keenest shafts against all those forms of belief in the supernatural and mysterious, appealing most strongly alike to the hopes and to the fears of the people – a philosophy that confined itself to gaining back, step by step, from effect to cause, and poured scorn on speculations as to the ultimate origin and end of all things – might gain, by the powerful personality of its founder and the enthusiasm and zeal of his early followers, a certain measure of temporary success. But it fought against too many enemies, it tried in ‘pouring new wine into the old bottles’ to retain too much of the ancient phraseology, for lasting victory – at least at that time, and in an advancing country then assimilating to itself surrounding peoples at a lower grade of culture. The end was inevitable. And it was actually brought about, not by persecution, but the gradual weakening of the theory itself, the gradual creeping back, under new forms and new names, of the more popular beliefs.”
This explains why the teachings of Buddha diminished almost as abruptly as they became popular. One basic reason for this was that those who adopted his teachings, out of their over-enthusiasm, labelled his teachings as a new religion and therefore cut themselves from the masses of people whom Buddha couldn’t reach in his lifetime. Their influence was so overpowering that they gradually rose in prominence alongside the diminishing of the teachings.
An important point mentioned by the writer is that the teachings “brought the very gods (read Devas) themselves under the domain of law. This is true because the Devatas, when they descended in human body, themselves observed and obeyed the teachings.
We have proved that Devatas are all-powerful and were entrusted with several important assignments in the creation and continuance of this world. It is they who have complete control over us. But we must remember that there are certain things that even the Devatas, nor even the God, cannot do. For instance, it is not possible for God or the Devatas to act unjustly, pure as they are. Being untruthful too is ungodly. It is not possible for them to practice deceit, trickery or any other evil. They are pure, in the absolutist sense. Unfortunately, people of the period had ascribed all the evils they would have liked to do, to the gods. Gods were drinking to the extent of becoming inebriated, they were producing children out of innocent maidens going to the forest for ablutions; they were fighting and killing. We have seen that all these were based on the stories concocted by few and had nothing to do with the original scriptures. Krishna too was born when this problem was rampant but his endeavours could not put an end to the practice. By the time of Buddha, people had further deviated from the true understanding of their scriptures. The beliefs of the so-called learned of the time and their apparent absurdities can be seen in several suttas. Buddha tried to rectify these evils and also endeavoured to do away with the myths associated with Devatas which belittled their true character and stature. Those unaware thought that the Devatas were being brought under the domain of law when what Buddha was actually doing was to do away with the unlawful acts that had got falsely ascribed to the Devatas.
The writer of book edited by Max Muller writes further: “The very event, which seemed, in the eyes of the world to be the most striking proof of the success of the new movement, the conversion and strenuous support of Asoka, the most powerful ruler India had had – indeed the first real overlord over practically the whole of India – only hastened the decline. The adhesion of large numbers of nominal converts, more especially from the newly incorporated and less advanced provinces, produced weakness, rather than strength, in the movement for reforms. The day of compromise had come. Every revelation of the old thorough-going position was widely supported by converts only half converted. And the margin of difference between the Buddhists and their opponents gradually faded almost entirely away. The soul theory, step by step, gained again the upper hand. The caste system was gradually built up into a completely organized system. The social supremacy of the brahmins by birth became accepted as an incontrovertible fact. And the in-flood of popular superstition which overwhelmed the Buddhist movement, overwhelmed also the whole pantheon of the Vedic gods. Buddhism and Brahmanism alike passed practically away, and modern Hinduism arose on the ruins of both.”
This new Hinduism, which did away with the Vedic Devatas (though not entirely), created idols of Krishna and Rama, though some of the strong-rooted stories regarding Indra, Siva, Vishnu, Parvati, Brahma and the rest continued to remain in circulation, even though having roots in false believes. But they were too far away from the truth, both in years and thoughts, to be able to perceive the truth.
Thus it is clear that Buddha’s teachings originally intended to rectify the deviations that had occurred, themselves got deviated, thereby leading to further deviations from the true path.
......................................................................................
We again revert back to Ambattha Sutta which talks of Ambattha, a learned brahmin who was sent by his teacher brahmin Pokkharasadi to verify the thirty-two bodily signs of a great man. Sutta has described Ambattha in these words: “He was a repeater (of the sacred words) knowing the mystic verses by heart, one who had mastered the Three Vedas, with the indices, the ritual, the phonology, and the exegesis (as a fourth), and the legends as a fifth, learned in the idioms and the grammar, versed in Lokayata sophistry, and in the theory of the signs on the body of a Great Being (Maha-purusha) is one of the details in the often-recurring paragraph giving the points of brahmin wisdom. No such list has been found, so far as I know, in those portions of the pre-Buddhistic priestly literature that have survived. And the inference from both our passages is that the knowledge is scattered through the brahmin texts. Many of the details of the Buddhist list are very obscure; and a collection of the older brahmin passages would probably throw light upon them, and upon a curious chapter in mythological superstition. Who will write us a monograph (historical of course) on the Maha-purusha theory as held in early times among the Aryans in India?”
We have proved time and again in our earlier notes that Buddha represented the same chain of Divine Messengers and his enlightenment was actually descent of Noor in a body purified through hard work or tapasya. The aforementioned description too supplements our view. The signs possessed by the Maha-purusha were already known to people and Buddha fully fitted with this description. The fact that these signs were physical in nature, including those like an exceedingly large tongue and the member different from all others is a proof of this.
The words of teacher Pokkarasadi to Ambattha confirm that such descriptions were present in the mystic verses of the brahmins. See for yourself what Pokkharasadi says: “There have been handed down, Ambattha, in our mystic verses, thirty-two bodily signs of a great man, - signs which, if a man has, he will become one of two things, and no other. If he dwells at home he will become a Sovran of the world, a righteous king, bearing rule even to the shores of the four great oceans, a conqueror, the protector of his people, possessor of the seven royal treasures. And these are the seven treasures that he has – the Wheel, the Elephant, the Horse, the Gem, the Woman, the Treasure, and the Adviser as a seventh. And he has more than a thousand sons, heroes, mighty in frame, beating down the armies of the foe. And he dwells in complete ascendancy over the wide earth from sea to sea, ruling it in righteousness without the need of baton or of sword. But if he goes forth from the household life into the houseless state, then he will become a Buddha who removes the veil from the eyes of the world. Now I, Ambattha, am a giver of the mystic verses; you have received them from me.”
Are we not apt in concluding that Buddha and Krishna belonged to the same source? Now see how Buddha helped Ambattha in recognizing those signs, thereby showing that Buddha too confirmed that he belonged to that successive chain of Messengers, about whom the verses had already been foretold.
“Then the Blessed One went forth from his chamber, and began to walk up and down. And Ambattha did the same. And as he walked up and down, following the Blessed One, he took stock of the thirty-two signs of a great man, whether they appeared on the body of the Blessed One or not. And he perceived them all save only two. With respect of those two – the concealed member and the extent of the tongue – he was in doubt and perplexity, not safisfied, not sure.
And the Blessed One knew he was so in doubt. And he so arranged matters by his wondrous Gift that Ambattha the brahmin saw how that part of the Blessed One that ought to be hidden by clothes was enclosed in a sheath. And the Blessed One so bent round his tongue that he touched and stroked both his ears, touched and stroked both his nostrils, and the whole circumference of his forehead he covered with his tongue.
And Ambattha, the young Brahman thought: “The Samana Gautam is endowed with the thirty-two signs of a great man, with them all, not only with some of them.””
See how people have remained eternally confused about these signs. The author of the book says: “Neither text nor commentary make it clear what those two marks really quite mean. The first, says Buddhaghosa, is ‘like an elephant’s’ and the second seems, from what follows, to be the power of extending the tongue, like a snakes, to a great length. This last is possibly derived from poetical descriptions of the tongues of flame or light playing round the disk of the sun.
As to the means by which the Buddha made the first sign visible to Ambattha, Buddhaghosa simply quotes Nagasena (at Mil. 169) to show that he made a visible image of himself fully dressed in his robes. And the difficulty is to see how that would have helped matters. Only an historical explanation of the meaning of the marks can here guide us to what is inferred.”
There is no doubt that the sign in contention was related to Buddha’s sexual organ. See the words: “And he so arranged matters by his Wondrous Gift that Ambattha the brahmin saw how that part of the Blessed One that ought to be hidden by clothes was enclosed in a sheath.” The words “enclosed in a sheath” are interesting. It is a firm belief of the Muslims that the Ahlulbayt (all thirteen of the male Ahlulbayt) were born with circumcised sexual organ. Now imagine how a person unknown to the process of circumcision would describe a circumcised sexual organ: “enclosed in a sheath.”
The same Sutta tells that the learned brahmin Pokkarasadi too came to confirm whether Buddha had those thirty-two signs. See the text of the Sutta: “And the brahmin Pokkharasadi took stock, on the body of the Blessed One, of the thirty-two marks of a Great Being. And he saw them all plainly, save only two. As to two of them – the sheath-concealed member and the extensive tongue – he was still in doubt and undecided. But the Blessed One showed them to Pokkharasadi, even as he had shown them to Ambattha. And Pokkharasadi perceived that the Blessed One was endowed with the thirty-two marks of a Great Being, with all of them, not only with some.”
......................................................................................
Sonadanda Sutta is an interesting description of how the revered brahmins of the time, in spite of their aversion to Buddha’s doctrine, had to accept Buddha’s teachings when they were outwitted in discussions pertaining to their own scriptures. Thus, brahmin Sonadanda, the aged learned teacher of scriptures had to accept that a man without wisdom and uprightness could not be a brahmin. And he had to confess before Buddha in these words: “For wisdom, Oh Gautam, is purified by uprightness, and uprightness is purified by wisdom. Where there is uprightness, wisdom is there, and where there is wisdom, uprightness is there. To the upright there is wisdom, to the wise there is uprightness, and wisdom and goodness are declared to be the best thing in the world. Just, Oh Gautam, as one might wash hand with hand, or foot with foot, just even so, Oh Gautam, is wisdom purified by uprightness, and uprightness is purified by wisdom. Where there is uprightness, wisdom is there, and where there is wisdom, uprightness is there. To the upright there is wisdom, to the wise there is uprightness, and wisdom and goodness are declared to be the best thing in the world.”
The brahmins are invited to read this! Wisdom, uprightness, goodness (of character) were considered the chief traits of brahmins. And wisdom was pertaining to certaining knowledge that got lost with time, for remembrance of which, the brahmins had started wearing the sacred thread inside their clothes. It appears during the time of Buddhist supremacy, when brahmins had to hide their books, the greatest fear among the righteous brahmins of the period must have been to keep the remembrance of those who are the rope to salvation so that when their Noor descends on earth in human bodies, their progeny recognizes them. But this was not to happen. By the time the Hindus came out of the period of Buddhist prominence, the knowledge of the reason why they started wearing the sacred thread was lost.
......................................................................................
The Kutadanta Sutta shows the extent to which degradation had occurred as regards to sacrifice. Brahmin Kutadanta was about to sacrifice a hundred bulls, and a hundred steers, and a hundred heifers, and a hundred goat, and a hundred rams in one great sacrifice. His discussions with Buddha changed his view and he realized that there were far better sacrifices that can be given. This alteration in the brahmin’s view is based on the fact that he realized he was performing the physical sacrifice out of ignorance of true knowledge and when Buddha told him the true meaning of sacrifice, he accepted his view and acknowledged him as teacher. Where is another religion coming in picture that is different from the previous one? Not even a single instance can be sighted where Buddha said that he was teaching a new religion. Likewise, those who acknowledged his teachings too didn’t talk of embracing his religion. The path that Buddha preached was the true path even in the times of earlier Avatars like Rama or Krishna and continues to be the right path even now.
Buddha has cited several acts that are better than the sacrifice of animals. Better than this sacrifice is the sacrifice of giving perpetual gifts kept in the family where they are given specifically to virtuous recluses. Better than this is the putting up of a dwelling place (Vihara) on behalf of the Order in all the four directions. Even better than this is one who with trusting heart takes a Buddha as his guide, and the Truth, and the Order – that is a sacrifice better than open largesse, better than perpetual alms, better than the gift of a dwelling place. Even better than this is a sacrifice when a man with trusting heart takes upon himself the precepts – abstinence from destroying life; abstinence from taking what has not been given, abstinence from evil conduct in respect of lusts; abstinence from lying words; abstinence from strong, intoxicating, maddening drinks, the root of carelessness. But better than all this is the sacrifice which enable a man to uphold his morality, give his confidence in this birth and the next, make him guard his senses from getting astray, enable him to become mindful and self-possessed, enable him to understand the virtues of content and solitude and refrain from five hindrances and also understand the first Ghana. Buddha has described all these in detail signifying that good conduct, righteous living and abstinence from all that is evil and untruth is the best sacrifice that a man can give to his Creator. This is the true purpose of life.
There are lessons in this for the adherents of all religions.
We invite you to read our commentary of Gita. You will find that Krishna too has criticized the practice of physical sacrifice. Unfortunately, those who call themselves worshippers of Krishna continue to interpret Krishna wrongly and also continue to perform sacrifices by fire. Fact is that Krishna and Buddha’s message was one and the same. The believers of the two made it appear to be different because of their wrong understanding or their eagerness to label it differently.
......................................................................................
As regards to the soul, we have seen that Buddha has never said that there was no soul. In fact, whenever the question is asked to him, he replies by asking another question. In Mahali Sutta, he even tries to explain this by telling a story. He tells a story how, in ancient days, a similar riot having taking place [as was taking place because of differences regarding the presence of soul]. The king had all the blind men in the city brought together, and had an elephant brought in. Each of the blind men touches a different part of the elephant. The King then asks them to explain what an elephant is like. He who had felt the head said it was like a water-pot. He who had felt the ear said it was like a winnowing basket. He who had felt the tusk said it was like a plough-share. He who had felt the trunk said it was like a plough-handle. He who had felt its legs said it was like a pillar. He who had felt its back said it was like a mortar. He who had felt its tail said it was like a pestle. He who had felt its bristles said it was like a broom. And each one was so sure he was right that they clamoured one against the other, and came to blows, to the amusement of the king.
Then comes the moral:
In such points brahmins and recluses stick
Wrangling on them, they violently discuss –
Poor folk! They see but one side of the shield!
This explains clearly why Buddha discouraged the view that people had made of soul and yet never said there was no soul. People were seeing just one aspect and though each of them might be partially right, they all were grossly on the wrong. For neither a winnowing basket, a pot or a pillar can describe an elephant. Likewise, Buddha was asking his followers to search what soul is in reality and the followers, perhaps out of their over enthusiasm to show Buddha’s path as different from his predecessors, interpreted it otherwise.
......................................................................................
Max Muller’s book says: “By a natural anthropomorphism the gods (read the Devas) too were supposed, for like ends, to offer sacrifice and to perform tapas. Thus it is sometimes by sacrifice, but more often by tapas, that in the different cosmological legends one god or the other is supposed to bring forth creation. (Source Satapatha-Br. VI, I, I, 13 and several times in the early Upanishads). In the latter case an expression often used on such occasions is tapas atapasyata, literally ‘he glowed a glow’, and the exact meaning of this enigmatic phrase is by no means certain. It may have been meant to convey that he glowed with fierce resolve, or that he glowed with deep thought, or that he glowed with strong desire, or that he carried out each or some or all of the practices given in Kassapa’s three lists of self-mortification in our Sutta. All these various ideas may possibly be meant to be inferred together, and before they were ascribed to gods similar actions must have been well known among men.”
Does this not confirm our view that very much like Krishna, Buddha too was aware of the role of Devatas in creation and acknowledged that they were not physical entities like you and me but a power that was like a glow or Noor, as per Quran. We have also shown that the word ‘Deva’ itself has been derived from root word ‘divya’ or light. “He glowed like a glow” would therefore mean that glowing was not an external character but inherent part of the Devatas. Devatas are nothing but the glow. And that glow was so powerful that when it glowed in its own Light, it brought forth creations.
Siva as the head of the 12 glowing and creative powers named ‘Adityas’ in Vedas and called ‘Imams’ by some Muslims is the chief creating power. Says the writer: “There were some, as one would expect, who therefore placed austerity above sacrifice, or held that it could take the place of sacrifice. The more conservative view of the learned brahmins – that it is repeating by heart to oneself, and teaching others, the Vedic verses, that is the chief thing (with which twelve other qualities or practices should always be associated) – is only given with the interesting note that one teacher thinks ‘the true’ only, another thinks austerity only to be necessary, and yet a third thinks that learning and teaching the Veda is enough by itself, ‘for that is tapas, that is tapas.”
That gods (read Devatas or Devas) are superior most, next only to God, can be seen in this sentence by the writer of the book: “According to the Chhandogya, those who know a certain mystical doctrine about five fires, and those who in the forest follow faith and austerity (tapas), go along the path of the gods (read Devas) to the Brahma world.” Just think for a while, where would those go who do not even know who these Devatas are, nor know their role in the creation and in relation to our existence.
Interestingly, we invite you to juxtapose ‘glowed like a glow’ of Buddha’s description with the five fires of the Chhandogya Upanishad, whose knowledge, faith in them and practicing austerity as essential for salvation and you will be left with no option but to conclude that both are talking of the Devatas as our guides and saviours and the bestowers of salvation.
......................................................................................
The life of Samanaship or Brahminaship, as per Buddha’s words in Kassapa-Sihanada Sutta is hard to lead. Righteous living and good deeds (karma) form the basis of this. Fact is that all the Messengers of God preached leading such a life. And at all times, Zulmat induced people to things other than righteousness and thereby misled them away from the True Path. This is the path of love, which knows no anger, no ill will. Salvation is not possible without a certain level of purity of the self and this purity cannot be attained without performing righteous and good deeds, while keeping the remembrance of God alive in the heart.
......................................................................................
Krishna in Gita talks of Indra’s heaven and Buddha in Kevaddha Sutta talks of a Brahma’s heaven. Question is how the Buddhists aspire to dwell in heaven when they know nothing about Brahma and think the Dhamma was Buddha’s own creation?
......................................................................................
This is not perplexing for us at all. For we have seen that even in the case of Krishna in Gita, the ideal is salvation or getting free from the cycle of rebirth. Salvation is also the ideal as per the teachings of Mohammad. But even though Buddha’s ideal was arahatship or salvation, even Buddha knew majority of his followers won’t attain salvation. Krishna also talks of those who performed good deeds but were unable to attain salvation. These people go to various stages of heaven, depending on the type of acts they performed, and once the merit of their acts has exhausted, they return back to births.
The writer of the book further writes: “It would seem that the particular point here discussed was regarded as so important that it could scarcely be left out. And we recollect that the highest teaching current before the Buddha, and still preserved in the pre-Buddhistic Upanishads, was precisely about union with Brahma; we may, without much danger of error, explain the position occupied in the series of dialogues by this Suttanta by the supposition that it was deliberately inserted here as the Buddhist answer to the Upanishad theory. In this respect it is noteworthy that the neuter Brahman is quietly ignored. This is quite in accordance with the method of the Suttantas. The Buddha is in them often represented as using, in his own sense, words familiar to his interlocutors in a different sense. The neuter Brahman is, so far as I am aware, entirely unknown in the Nikayas, and of course the Buddha’s idea of Brahma, in the masculine, really differs widely from that of the Upanishads.”
“There is nothing original in the Buddhist belief that a man’s habit of mind at the time of his death would determine, save only in the one case of the Arahat, the nature of his rebirth. It is as Indian - not an exclusively Buddhist – theory. The Buddhist texts represent it as held by non-Buddhists, and by all as a matter of course. And it is even not exclusively Indian. As I have pointed out elsewhere, it is ascribed by Plato to Socrates. [Phaedo 69]. The essentially Buddhist parts of the theory are three. In the first place, the choice of the particular details they held essential to such a habit of mind as would lead to rebirth in the Brahma-worlds; secondly, their doctrine that there was not really any ‘soul’ to be reborn; and thirdly, that the highest ideal was not to be reborn at all (even only once, and into union with Brahma).”
“The Jataka commentary in numerous passages states that the four Brahma Viharas were practiced, long before the time of the rise of Buddhism, by the sages of old. I have not found such a statement in the Nikayas; and it is most probable therefore that the Jataka commentator is antedating the particular meditations in question. However this may be, they remained, throughout the long history of Buddhism, an essential part of Buddhist practice. They are even mentioned in the Jataka Mala, a work usually supposed to be Mahayanist, and dated about a thousand years later than the Buddha. [In the well-known story of the Bodhisattva giving his body to feed a tigress.] They are well-known today in Burma, Siam, and Ceylon. And it would be interesting to know whether they still form a part of the regulated meditations which are known to be practiced by Buddhists in Tibbet, China and Japan. But they have not been found in any Indian book not a Buddhist work, and are therefore almost certainly exclusively Buddhist. Even the most determined anti-Buddhist may admit the beauty of the language (in spite of its repetitions), the subtle depth of the ideas, and the great value of the practice from the point of view of ethical self-training. He would probably rejoin, and with truth, that similar sentiments are met with in other (post-Buddhistic) Indian books. But it is one thing to give expression in isolated passages to such views, and quite another to have selected just these four as the four cornerstones of habitual endeavour.”
“It should be recollected that the argument here is only an argumentum ad hominem. If you want union with Brahma – which you had much better not want - this is the way to attain to it.”
This is a long debate which the author has undertaken. In fact, if you have seen the views of Krishna in Gita, you will realize that both Krishna and Buddha have one and the same view. It appears from the description above that even Plato too subscribed to similar views, thereby further enhancing our claim that the Messengers were sent all over the world and that too with a similar pattern of evolution of teachings, with the difference being difference in time, place and local situations.
In Tevigga Sutta, Buddha confirms that he was familiar with Brahma just as a man born in a city is aware of his city. Says he:
For Brahma, I know, Vasettha, and the world of Brahma, and the path which leadeth into it. Yea, I know it even as one who has entered the Brahma-world, and has been born within it!
Buddha’s words here disapproves those who say that he attained enlightenment on the basis of his efforts and had no other relationship with God or gods (read Devatas). Contrary to this, Buddha speaks of the births of Tathagata in various ages.
Know, Vasettha, that (from time to time) a Tathagata is born into the world, an Arahat, a fully awakened one, abounding in wisdom and goodness, happy, with knowledge of the worlds, unsurpassed as a guide to mortals willing to be led, a teacher of gods and men, a Blessed One, a Buddha. He, by himself, thoroughly understands, and sees, as it were, face to face this universe – including the worlds above with the gods, the Maras, and the Brahmas; and the world below with its Samanas and Brahmans, its princes and people; - and he then makes his knowledge known to others. The truth doth he proclaims both in the letter and in the spirit, lovely in its origin, lovely in its progress, lovely in its consummation: the higher life doth he make known, in all its purity and in all its perfectness.
No comments:
Post a Comment