Buddha in the Qur'an?

[ohhcuppycakee]

I am reading this document by Sheikh Hamza Yusuf right now. I have to say, it is incredibly interesting. Maybe you guys would be interested in it as well and like to discuss the points made.

Here is the link:
Buddha in the Quran? by Sh Hamza Yusuf

 

[fenrisx]

The sufi path I am on (Chisti) has an interesting influence of Tibetan Buddhism in it, a large part of why I have a bit of Shugendo in my path as well.

 

[A-ManESL]

Some of the Muslim Indian commentators have considered the prophet Dhu'l-i-Kifl mentioned in the Quran to be the Buddha of Kifl (Kapilavastu) and the Fig tree of Surah 95 to be the Bodhi tree under which the Buddha recieved his illumination.

 

[Shia Islam]

I am reading this document by Sheikh Hamza Yusuf right now. I have to say, it is incredibly interesting. Maybe you guys would be interested in it as well and like to discuss the points made.

Here is the link:
Buddha in the Quran? by Sh Hamza Yusuf

Shaikh Hamza yousuf is an outstanding scholar, who is tolerant, learned and active in his area.

I once came across a source claiming that some Muslim rulers who ruled over India did not want their non-Muslim ssubjects to convert to Islam, because they thought that the conversion would be against the narrow interests of the rulers.

--
The overwelmig traditions left by Shia imams is very likely to have cover the subject of Budha. I once have found shia imams narrations about Paul, in which he was referenced by name. I'll try- if i have got chance- searching about Budha in these resources.

 

[Breathe]

Out of curiosity, how can one reconcile the differences between Buddha's rejection of a creator deity who dispenses out karma and his doctrine of rebirth with Islamic tawhid? If Buddha was a messenger of God, then would he not of spoken of a personal deity, as opposed to the idea that personal gods are born, die, and are reborn as something else?

 

[Shia Islam]

Out of curiosity, how can one reconcile the differences between Buddha's rejection of a creator deity who dispenses out karma and his doctrine of rebirth with Islamic tawhid? If Buddha was a messenger of God, then would he not of spoken of a personal deity, as opposed to the idea that personal gods are born, die, and are reborn as something else?

I came across some Muslim scholars who suspect that the chinese philosopher Confucius was a prophet sent by Allah, however, they don't think that people who currently claim to follow Confucius are truly followers of his teachings. The same could be said about people who suspect that Buddha was a man following an Abrahamic religion.

 

[Breathe]

Isn't that some serious distortion of teachings..?

 

[A-ManESL]

The same could be said about people who suspect that Buddha was a man following an Abrahamic religion.

I dont think that is a correct approach. The idea of all messengers should not be taken literally as "messengers" in the Abrahamic sense but can be understood or equated with spokesman/intermediary/manifestation/symbol of God. Similarly the idea of God can be equated with Reality/Absolute. (see Schuon's Understanding Islam for details).

God's message has been sent in various languages on earth depending on the type of people there and the language (or culture or understanding) they had. The Quran says, "We never sent a messenger save the language of his folk."-14:4.

 

[Shia Islam]

I dont think that is a correct approach. The idea of all messengers should not be taken literally as "messengers" in the Abrahamic sense but can be understood or equated with spokesman/intermediary/manifestation/symbol of God. Similarly the idea of God can be equated with Reality/Absolute. (see Schuon's Understanding Islam for details).

God's message has been sent in various languages on earth depending on the type of people there and the language (or culture or understanding) they had. The Quran says, "We never sent a messenger save the language of his folk."-14:4.

It seems that some of the points you made are in line with this verse:

سورة آل عمران - سورة 3 - آية 42

واذ قالت الملائكة يا مريم ان الله اصطفاك وطهرك واصطفاك على نساء العالمين

And when the angels said: O Mary! Lo! Allah hath chosen thee and made thee pure, and hath preferred thee above (all) the women of creation

Although Mariam (Mary) was not a messenger, she Angels talk to her.

Also in Shia Islam, Angels talk to the Imams.

 

[Shia Islam]

Isn't that some serious distortion of teachings..?

I don't know whether I have understood your point, but man tends to distort teachings

 

[Breathe]

I don't know whether I have understood your point, but man tends to distort teachings

That's correct.

Isn't it usually the case that some semblance of the teacher's teachings stay, even if distorted? If Buddha taught tawhid, then how come his followers made it claim there was no creator deity or salvation from them, in your opinion? Not debating, just curious.

 

[Shia Islam]

That's correct.

Isn't it usually the case that some semblance of the teacher's teachings stay, even if distorted? If Buddha taught tawhid, then how come his followers made it claim there was no creator deity or salvation from them, in your opinion? Not debating, just curious.

In my opinion, In religions like Islam and Judaism, the gap between the general public and the clergy in understanding the religion is not that huge. I mean the general public are very educated regarding many aspects of Islam and Judaism. On the other hand, the Philosophy behind Budhism is very difficult for the layman to understand. It seems that in Buddhism there is a huge divide between the general public and the layman in understanding the religion.

That explains how some Muslim scholars, when studding Buddhist literature found that Buddha may have believed in Tauheed (Monotheism), while generally, the normal people who follows Buddhism nowadays are not aware about these teachings.

On the other hand, in any religion, there are normally some sects who have very deviated interpretation of the religion. For instance in the ancient history of Islam there were some people who thought Imam Ali was divine. Looking at the point that Buddhism is a very old religion, and that political powers used to make use of religions for their own interests, it's possible that a deviated interpretation of the Buddha teachings have prevailed by making alliance with a political power. Such a scenario can be supposed to be possible by looking to the fact that Buddhism spread in areas where people at that time were illiterate, and at those times political powers were far more brutal than today...

At the end, all of these are speculations :rainbow1:

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

And all of your points could be said about any religion, Shia.

 

[Shia Islam]

And all of your points could be said about any religion, Shia.

You are right. That's why there is a need to have logical justifications and proofs that the current teachings of any religion can be traced back to resources, which are undoubtedly attributed to the founders of the religion.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

You are right. That's why there is a need to have logical justifications and proofs that the current teachings of any religion can be traced back to resources, which are undoubtedly attributed to the founders of the religion.

I agree, but I don't think that's possible in any religion. Well, for most religions anyway. Some are new enough to still be able to trace any sayings back to the founder, such as in Bahai. But we can also watch the evolution of those newer religions to see how much they eventually deviate from the original, if at all, and use that as a litmus test to analyze other religions and their teachings.

 

[Shia Islam]

I agree, but I don't think that's possible in any religion. Well, for most religions anyway. Some are new enough to still be able to trace any sayings back to the founder, such as in Bahai. But we can also watch the evolution of those newer religions to see how much they eventually deviate from the original, if at all, and use that as a litmus test to analyze other religions and their teachings.

Indeed it's not only tracing teachings back to the founders of the religions, that became harder as time pass. But also, the older the religion, the harder it's to understand the sayings of the founder of the religion. That's why in Shia Islam we believe the founder of a religion must appoint his successor, and the successor must in his turn appoint his own successor and so on...

Of course we have our own beliefs on the characteristics of the founder and his successor. Indeed we believe that they must be prophets or people who have the characteristics of the prophets without being so. I must say that we believe that Muhammad is the final prophet.

 

[Breathe]

That's why in Shia Islam we believe the founder of a religion must appoint his successor, and the successor must in his turn appoint his own successor and so on...

What would happen if a successor could not (or did not) appoint a successor to his teachings, in your view?

Are there any restrictions on who can be appointed successors, or can it be anyone?

 

[Shia Islam]

What would happen if a successor could not (or did not) appoint a successor to his teachings, in your view?

Are there any restrictions on who can be appointed successors, or can it be anyone?

Religions brings with them sociological change and normally shifts of powers. Understandingly, this change would serve some parts of the society, and at the same time it represents a threat to the interests of other parts. The problem is that the disadvantaged groups are the ones who are longing for change, while the advantaged and empowered groups find this change against their interests.

That's why normally the mass of the people who initially accept a new religion are the disadvantaged people, who may sincerely believe in it and may not. The advantaged people on the other hand tend to resist the new religion initially.

It is very unlike that within the life span of the founder of the new religion that this confrontation can be settled completely with a decisive victory of the new religion's beliefs, as people tend to defend their old beliefs.

That's why the death of the religion's founder is the golden chance for all the enemies of the new religion, whether they are open enemies or hypocrites to strike back against the new religion. And the easy way is end the effects of the new religion is to hijack it, where a competition to take over the position of the founder is expected.

One the other hand, Religions are about claiming to represent the ideal way of living. It's about claims for certainties and not doubts. As most religions are based on the teachings of the existence omniscient and omnipotent god, religions claims for certainty and for calling for the ideal way of living can’t be fulfilled without having someone who is conveying the God's commands to humans.

Nobody can claim to be conveying god's commands unless he is in contact with God. It's not enough to have access to the resources left by the religion founder. As there is no guarantee that teachings of the founders is to be applied to our life today in the same way that they were applied during the life of the religion founder.

That's why the only one who has the right to appoint a successor of the religion founder is god himself. And the teaching that god is omniscient and omnipotent leads to the teaching that God's way is to have someone representing him among humans. Otherwise how can God bring human into accountability without informing them what laws they must follow?

All in all, at any point of time throughout the long human history god's way is to appoint for humans someone who conveys God's command to his creatures.

 

[paarsurrey]

@Shia Islam
What did one find from the Imams about Buddha , please?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Out of curiosity, how can one reconcile the differences between Buddha's rejection of a creator deity who dispenses out karma and his doctrine of rebirth with Islamic tawhid? If Buddha was a messenger of God, then would he not of spoken of a personal deity, as opposed to the idea that personal gods are born, die, and are reborn as something else?

We are not discussing as to what the Buddhism scripture say about Buddha, that is of interest to Buddhism people. We are discussing about Buddha from the Quran and Sunnah. Right, please?

Regards