Buddha

   

The 9th avatar of Lord Vishnu??? (Page 4)

Post Reply New Post

Page 4 of 11

ShivangBuch

Goldie

ShivangBuch

Joined: 31 August 2009

Posts: 1045

Posted: 21 July 2012 at 11:06am | IP Logged
Originally posted by JanakiRaghunath

If you have ever seen BRC's Vishnu Puraan, they show Matsya first killing Hayagriva and only then saving the saptarishis. I have also learnt the other story from my parents, about how Lord Vishnu took the form of Hayagriva to kill a demon by the same name. BRC's Vishnu Puraan says their main source is Vyasa's Vishnu Purana, so I think the story of Matsya killing Hayagriva is from there, though I cannot confirm it since I don't know for sure. 
No I haven't seen Vishnu Puran except a couple of scenes of it and I was interested to watch its Parashuram part that we have discussed before in scraps. Yes. These two completely different stories and also the number of other avatars separating Matsya and Haygreev in that link makes the stories very complicated. Exactly who killed Haygreev? That's the confusion which still remains even if two are based on different sources. 

I think Lakshman, Bharat, and Shatrughan are not included because they are not believed to be direct amsas of Vishnu. Though VR says they were all portions of Vishnu, other puranas say that Lakshman, like Balram, is am ansa of Seshnaag and Bharat and Shatrughan were Vishnu's Sudarshan Chakra and Panchajanya reborn. So yes, ultimately they are forms of Vishnu but not direct incarnations if that makes sense.
In RCM also, it is mentioned that all 4 brothers were Vishnu's parts.


This is exactly why I find it questionable. I find it hard to believe anything which two avatars of Vishnu contradict each other. Both Rama and Krishna performed yagnas and endorsed them for the welfare of mankind, because it is the yagnas that cause rains to come and the crops to flourish. And also, by pleasing the devtas through yagnas people will always be shown their protection and mercy. If devtas were really being threatened by yagnas in Kali yug, then it would be more believable for me if Buddha had killed those sinners instead of preaching against yagnas altogether. That logic doesn't hold with me because all of Vishnu's avatars tried to teach people to reform peacefully first, and used violence only when the sinners would not listen. Had Buddha preached peace to everyone and killed the sinners who went against him, then I'd be able to consider him as Vishnu's avatar, but his teachings do not seem like the teachings of Vishnu so I find it questionable.
Correct. May be different situation, different era, different philosophy. But I agree with you primarily. Just leaving still the other possibility open since I can't think Vishnu to be only one dimensional because of Geeta endorsing all kinds of opposite ways to reach the supreme. Absolute Ahinsa as Brahmin dharma and Peace are also preached in Geeta. 

Also, take for example Ravan, who performed yagnas to benefit himself and then used the powers he was granted to torment the devtas. This is the exact situation Buddha was preaching against, right? However, Rama did not tell everyone to quit doing yagnas since people like Ravan were getting boons. He killed Ravan and taught everyone what happens when they misuse their powers. This is the ultimate truth of Vishnu's teachings, whether it comes in the form of Ramayan or Bhagawad Gita. He is always merciful and kind to everyone, because they are his children. However, when they misbehave and walk on the wrong path, he will give them not one, but several warnings to improve their conduct and get rid of their sins, but if the sinners still do not listen, he will punish them.
RIght. If anyone who was supposed to be prevented from performing further yagyas was the one who was doing it (Like king Bali specifically only was prevented from completing his yagyas) with intentions of misusing of powers obtained through them. By preaching people in general, he was not going to be able to stop Ravan kind of people gathering power. On the contrary, righteous people would stop doing it and people who don't listen to Vishnu avatar would actually perform it and will get the fruit of karma inevitable out of it.
 
If Buddha was Vishnu's avatar, this is what I would expect him to do to the sinners who were misusing yagnas. Moreover, Kali Yug is the era of most sin. If you noticed, every one of Vishnu's avatars got more aggressive and more powerful as the yugas neared Kali Yug. Krishna taught people that one must fight for dharma, and he annihilated every sinner that walked the Earth in his time. So why would he come back to Earth in Kali Yuga as Buddha, and preach total peace when even more sin was rampant? I would expect someone like Kalki to come in Buddha's place.
Every progressive Vishnu avatar more aggressive?? How? And more powerful? Are you considering only Parshuram, Ram and Krishna? How Kurma was more powerful than Matsya and Vaaman more powerful than Narsinha? And in Kaliyug is the era of most sins but the absolute sinners are not that powerful like Ravan or Kans. Now the sin is spreaded and divided among ordinary  people. Now there are not many absolute evils and absolute goods. There are both good and evils in individuals primarily. So, peace between people and peace between nations is perhaps the most relevant and necessary teachings of Kaliyug. But if it means that if a neighbour country invades you and you let their soldiers win our country  without doing anything, then really that can't be digestible teaching if interpreted that way. I think Buddha's message was not for the mass. His message was for the true sanyasis and vairagis and not saansaarik people. His message was meant for very very small relevant mass. Revenge is the theme of Parshuram avatar (for dharmsansthapan and punishing evil). Individual Morality is the theme of Ramavatar. Sanaatan dharma is the theme of Krishnaavatar. Peace and non violence were the theme of Buddha. So if Buddha is the odd one out, other 3 are also not completely common due to different eras (I still see the fundamental nature and philosophies Ram and Krishna to be the same almost but era situations still differ and hence the practical approaches).
 
Vishnu puraan showed that Vishnu agreed to help the devtas in the form of Kurma, because it was pre-planned by them that Mohini would come and distribute the amrit. I kind of think of Mohini and Kurma as the same since they came in close proximity.
If we go that way, then even Dhanvantari would be included in it (in the middle of the two) with having the same motto and pre planned.

Only Krishna and Rama's avatars were the longest, otherwise all other avatars were short. I did not mean that Lakshmi had to be present in each one, but other Gods were always present in each one, weren't they? I don't know how to explain it, but every avatar of Vishnu shares a similarity in that some God or other (besides vishnu) is always present either being a catalyst or part of the audience, but in Buddha no one is mentioned. Most importantly, the avatars always start off with Vishnu proclaiming that he will come to Earth as so and so, to help so and so. But in buddha's avatar, even vishnu is not mentioned. His birth, childhood, adulthood, nowhere are any characters familiar to Hindu puranas ever make an appearance, so it makes doubt that he is vishnu's avatar.
Well Parashuram avatar was also very long. But anyway, I got the essence of your point.
 
Btw, which source did you say had Vishnu coming down as Buddha? Is it from an actual Hindu scripture?
I didn't say actually. It is written in those links I posted - Shreemad Bhagwatam which I just mentioned. Varaali also did mention this before IIRC. We can confirm this from her.


Edited by ShivangBuch - 21 July 2012 at 11:06am

The following 3 member(s) liked the above post:

Debipriya.Vrish...RamKiJanaki..

Dear Guest, Being an unregistered member you are missing out on participating in the lively discussions happening on the topic "The 9th avatar of Lord Vishnu??? (Page 4)" in Buddha forum. In addition you lose out on the fun interactions with fellow members and other member exclusive features that India-Forums has to offer. Join India's most popular discussion portal on Indian Entertainment. It's FREE and registration is effortless so JOIN NOW!

ShivangBuch

Goldie

ShivangBuch

Joined: 31 August 2009

Posts: 1045

Posted: 21 July 2012 at 12:19pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by varaali

Buddha is indeed mentioned as an avatar of Vishnu in Srimad Bhagavatham. And the Rishabhadeva mentioned in SB was not the  one who founded Jainism. I will discuss this later.
He he. I posted the above mentioning about you and saw your post afterwards. See we needed you and you were remembered and you are here. Kahan the? I am looking forward for your next post in Geeta Mahatmya thread.


It says that  when the scientific knowledge in the Vedas begins to be exploited by atheists who then shoot invisible rockets into the sky and try blast planets, etc in outer space, the Lord will divert their minds by dressing himself attractively as Buddha and preach a lot on social principles, code of conduct etc. 

There was some discussion above on how Gautama Buddha was against yagnas, idol worship etc, and hence cannot be considered as an avatar of Vishnu. But this point is answered by SB itself. SB specificaaly states the Buddha in question will preach extensively on social and moral ethics- not religon. (Upadharmayam- is the word used ; Meaning- Principles which do not strictly fall in the ambit of religion
 
As expected, timely and useful input. I wanted something similar to support my inner gut feeling if at all Buddha was actually Vishnu avatar but was not getting proper words. Still it's open for alternative interpretation logically.



The following 4 member(s) liked the above post:

Debipriyavaraali.Vrish...RamKiJanaki..

..RamKiJanaki..

IF-Stunnerz

..RamKiJanaki..

Joined: 20 August 2008

Posts: 44299

Posted: 21 July 2012 at 3:01pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by .Vrish.

In the ACK Parashuram, they mentioned that unfortunately, he started killing not only evil kshatriyas, but good ones as well.  It showed one scene of a king bowing to him and telling him that he was innocent and only interested in the good of his subjects, so why punish him.  Parashurama used his guilt by association reasoning to tell him that one of his caste had slaughtered his father, and then proceeded to decapitate him.  Panic ensued in that kingdom, and others where Parashurama repeated that process, and Bhumi Devi approached Kashyap appealing to him to stop the massacre.

That was the origin of the ban on Parashurama to rest anywhere on Bhulok.

I know that ACKs are by no means the last word.  But most ACKs embellished the good deeds of their heros and masked their bad ones.  But in this case, they showed Parashurama overdoing it, and hence the intervention from Kashyap.  Parashurama followed that by giving away all his wealth and everything, and when Drona approached him, all he had was his weapons, which he then gave/taught Drona (which begs the question - how did he have anything left for Karna?)
 
Like you said, the validity of what ACK tells us is debatable, and I too have noticed how they've embellished the acts of some people. I would actually like to know what Vishnu Puraan says about Parashuram, because I cannot believe that Vishnu's avatar would kill innocent people, as that is against dharm and no Vishnu avatar can behave in an adharmic manner. My dad told me that during the time Parashuram was born, except for a select few kings like Dashrath and Janak, almost everyone was steeped in evil and immoral acts, and that's why Parashuram went on a massacre to kill them all.
 
Since by Ram avatar, there were still many Kings alive, I doubt Parashuram killed all of them. He probably spared the good ones.

..RamKiJanaki..

IF-Stunnerz

..RamKiJanaki..

Joined: 20 August 2008

Posts: 44299

Posted: 21 July 2012 at 3:04pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by varaali

Now, the Buddha mentioned here is supposed to incarnate in the begining of Kali Yuga as the son of Anjana Devi in the province of Gaya. Does this information tally with that of Gautama Buddha? 
From what I read on Gautama Buddha, he was the son of Mahamaya and was born when his mother was travelling through a desert (I forgot the reason). Though he was born a kshatriya, he never liked his way of life from childhood itself and left home soon after he was married and had a son.
Now, my feeling is that the incorporation of Gautama Buddha into the Dasha- Avatar set must have been a latter day phenomenon, probably to stem a mass exodus of Hindus into Buddhism. The incorporation would not have been too difficult, given that SB itself mentions Buddha as one of the avatars. He may be one of the avatars, but I still don't think he was one of the dashavatars.

..RamKiJanaki..

IF-Stunnerz

..RamKiJanaki..

Joined: 20 August 2008

Posts: 44299

Posted: 21 July 2012 at 3:42pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by ShivangBuch

If Buddha was Vishnu's avatar, this is what I would expect him to do to the sinners who were misusing yagnas. Moreover, Kali Yug is the era of most sin. If you noticed, every one of Vishnu's avatars got more aggressive and more powerful as the yugas neared Kali Yug. Krishna taught people that one must fight for dharma, and he annihilated every sinner that walked the Earth in his time. So why would he come back to Earth in Kali Yuga as Buddha, and preach total peace when even more sin was rampant? I would expect someone like Kalki to come in Buddha's place.
Every progressive Vishnu avatar more aggressive?? How? And more powerful? Are you considering only Parshuram, Ram and Krishna? How Kurma was more powerful than Matsya and Vaaman more powerful than Narsinha? And in Kaliyug is the era of most sins but the absolute sinners are not that powerful like Ravan or Kans. Now the sin is spreaded and divided among ordinary  people. Now there are not many absolute evils and absolute goods. There are both good and evils in individuals primarily. So, peace between people and peace between nations is perhaps the most relevant and necessary teachings of Kaliyug. But if it means that if a neighbour country invades you and you let their soldiers win our country  without doing anything, then really that can't be digestible teaching if interpreted that way. I think Buddha's message was not for the mass. His message was for the true sanyasis and vairagis and not saansaarik people. His message was meant for very very small relevant mass. Revenge is the theme of Parshuram avatar (for dharmsansthapan and punishing evil). Individual Morality is the theme of Ramavatar. Sanaatan dharma is the theme of Krishnaavatar. Peace and non violence were the theme of Buddha. So if Buddha is the odd one out, other 3 are also not completely common due to different eras (I still see the fundamental nature and philosophies Ram and Krishna to be the same almost but era situations still differ and hence the practical approaches).
[/QUOTE]
 
I'm only quoting this part since there's nothing to argue against in the rest of your post.Embarrassed I'm not arguing againt this part either, but I just want to clarify on my post.
 
I don't mean that exactly every progressive Vishnu avatar was aggressive, but that since as Kali yug approaches and sin becomes more rampant, it's doubtable that Vishnu would have become more peaceful in his avatars. You are right that Lord Vishnu is not one-dimensional and that the manner he taught people was different as per the society he came into, but I also don't think his ultimate message would have changed drastically in another avatar. When he killed Ravan as Shri Ram and taught people that one must misuse the power they get through a yagna, why would he dismiss yagnas altogether in another avatar? Yagnas are extremely important to Hinduism because they bear fruit not just for the doer, but also the entire society. Not only are the devas pleased by yagnas, but also Brahma, Vishnu, and Mahesh.
 
To tell the truth, it's very difficult to say blatantly whether Buddha was Vishnu avatar or not, because there may be a lot of things we do not know about him. However, if Buddha did advocate against idol worship, yagnas, and rituals, then I cannot accept him as an avatar of Vishnu because while Vishnu did support all modes of worship in the Bhagawad Gita, he never supported a person following one form of worship while condeming another. It's very true that people connect to God different. Some can feel the essence of God only by doing pujas and yagnas, while others can feel the essence of God simply by hearing his name and stories. Neither mode of worship is wrong, but to condemn one form while advocating the other is not God's message, and if Buddha preached that the rituals of Hinduism are wrong, then he cannot be an avatar of Vishnu.
 
However, the Buddha mentioned in Bhagawatham may be different from the Gautama Buddha we know today, or even yet, the one mentioned in Bhagawatham may be the same but Buddha's message may have been distorted by people through the age. Even Buddha happened a long time ago, so we cannot exactly know what he did say or not, because his story was not written down as clearly as Vishnu's other avatars, and moreover, a whole new religion was created based upon his teachings. I do not know whether he himself created Buddhism or his followers created it because they wanted to break away from Hinduism, but if Buddha was indeed an avatar of Lord Vishnu, then his message should be more or less similar to the message his other avatars preached, though obviously also having differences since the society of Kali Yug is also different from Dwapar or Treta Yugs.

The following 2 member(s) liked the above post:

varaali.Vrish.

..RamKiJanaki..

IF-Stunnerz

..RamKiJanaki..

Joined: 20 August 2008

Posts: 44299

Posted: 21 July 2012 at 3:45pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by ShivangBuch

And in Kaliyug is the era of most sins but the absolute sinners are not that powerful like Ravan or Kans. Now the sin is spreaded and divided among ordinary  people.
 
This is true, but I'd also like to make a point that terrorists can be comparable to Ravan and Kans. In fact, I'd hold Ravan in a higher light than the terrorists because while he did do sins, he was also learned in Vedas and did lots of penance. Kans on the other hand has nothing good to say about himself so he's very much comparable to the terrorists of today.
 
To deal with such terrorists, someone like Rama or Krishna is necessary for our society, but I guess that's where Kalki avatar comes in since during Buddha's times, there probably weren't any terrorists, right?

The following 1 member(s) liked the above post:

ShivangBuch

varaali

IF-Dazzler

varaali

Joined: 17 July 2006

Posts: 2771

Posted: 22 July 2012 at 4:41am | IP Logged
As I understand, there are two points under discussion:

  1. Whether the Buddha mentioned in SB and  Gautama Buddha are one and the same.
  2. If so, how did the principles which Gautama preached differ so radically from the tenets of Hinduism.
As I mentioned in my previous post, it is mentioned in SB, that Buddha, the 21st avatar of Lord Vishnu would manifest Himself in the first half of Kali Yuga as the son of Anjana Devi and would be born in the region of Gaya.

Now the Gautama Buddha that we are familiar with was born to Maya devi in Nepal, but his enlightenment took place in Bodh Gaya. That can be said to be his second birth.  So one fact in SB is corroborated.

Now to the second point- If Buddha's overly pacifist teachings went against the grain of Hinduism, how can he be accepted as a legitimate avatar of Vishnu?

The answer to this also lies in SB itself which says that in the Buddha avatar which Vishnu will take he will talk and lecture (a lot ) - not on religion- but on social and moral principles. So, the SB itself says that in His avatar as Buddha, he will not preach religious doctrines. To that extent, we need not wonder why Buddha did not encourage religious rituals.

Moreover, one more key point emerges in SB here. It says that Buddha will take avatar when scientific knowledge advances to such levels as launching invisible rockets in outer space with a view of whole scale destruction. Then Buddha will try to 'divert'  (mati vimoham) their minds by preaching non violence. Obviously, such level of technology did not exist during Gautama Buddha's time- but it could also have been Vyasa's poetic hyperbole.



 


Edited by varaali - 22 July 2012 at 4:45am

The following 4 member(s) liked the above post:

DebipriyaShivangBuch.Vrish...RamKiJanaki..

..RamKiJanaki..

IF-Stunnerz

..RamKiJanaki..

Joined: 20 August 2008

Posts: 44299

Posted: 22 July 2012 at 5:37am | IP Logged
^^ That sounds valid Varaali, but I still have one small doubt. Did Buddha actually preach against religious practices or did he just not talk about them? Because if it's the latter, that's totally acceptable and may have been necessary for those times.
 
And did Vyasa mention launching rockets, or was he indicating that in latter Kali Yug that would happen, as well as atomic bombs and  all which cause greatr destruction?

The following 3 member(s) liked the above post:

DebipriyaShivangBuch.Vrish.

Post Reply New Post

Go to top

Related Topics

  Topics Topic Starter Replies Views Last Post
About Buddha & Vishnu

2 3

Proud-India 23 730 20 March 2014 at 4:42am
By .Vrish.
Himanshu Soni had played Vishnu in Zee TV Ramayan nneeiill 9 1745 30 October 2013 at 10:51am
By RoseFairy
Lord of Kings SRK-MS.DHONIfan 3 170 28 September 2013 at 4:20pm
By Ms.S.K.
Lord buddha is born in india

2

sandiya_21683 12 607 16 September 2013 at 7:15am
By jyoti06
Buddha-avatar of lord vishnu Joyel 7 473 10 September 2013 at 5:12pm
By SilverBell

Forum Quick Jump

Forum Category

Active Forums

Buddha Topic Index

Limit search to this Forum only.

 

Disclaimer: All Logos and Pictures of various Channels, Shows, Artistes, Media Houses, Companies, Brands etc. belong to their respective owners, and are used to merely visually identify the Channels, Shows, Companies, Brands, etc. to the viewer. Incase of any issue please contact the webmaster.