Can followers of Buddha be considered "Hindus"?

[Rick O'Shez]

Isn't that enough for you Buddhists to realize that we do not welcome you guys here.

Oh dear! Such negative vibes! Fortunately you're the only contributor on this thread who has come out with such a dismissive and negative attitude. And ironically, despite the use of the royal "we", you're not even a Hindu according to your label which says: "Valentinianism, Sauram, Tibetan Buddhism, Taoism, Paganism and Neoplatonism"

 

[Sumit]

Anyway, if and when I do visit a Hindu temple I expect a warm welcome and some nice cake. So there!

Yup you would be welcomed, not sure about that cake thing
However you can enjoy temple feast

 

[Vinayaka]

I personally don't see the value in mixing the two, as each stands as a great faith on it's own. But that doesn't say another individual might not find value in it. Obviously some have. Here in my community I know of no Buddhists who come to Hindu temples regularly, or vice versa. I would certainly go into a Buddhist temple just to sit if I had the opportunity, but I don't go looking for it.

As with anything, there are of course many divergent views. Traditionalist fear a watering down effect, as in some schools of Buddhism, God is put out of the equation. This is valid fear, in my opinion.

I trust, punkd, that you'll be able to sort this out in your OWN MIND, given the wide range of opinion.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I guess the reason why this question interests me is because I attend a Buddhist sangha, and find Buddhist teachings and meditative practices to be very appealing.. however, I'm also very interested in Hinduism due to the role "Spirit" plays in the religion, for I find this lacking in Buddhism.

I'm not sure what Buddhist school you're currently involved in, but Tibetan Buddhism might be more to your liking.

 

[StarryNightshade]

I'm not sure what Buddhist school you're currently involved in, but Tibetan Buddhism might be more to your liking.

I agree. Tibetan might be what @punkdbass is looking for. However, if there are any nearby, I would also look into Shingon, Tendai, or even Pure Land Dharma.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Yes, there are lots of options.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I would say it's more like the existence or non-existence of Brahman isn't relevant in terms of Buddhist practice.

Yes, Buddha had a very different perspective.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Anyway, if and when I do visit a Hindu temple I expect a warm welcome and some nice cake. So there!

Yup you would be welcomed, not sure about that cake thing
However you can enjoy temple feast.

In a temple, the cake would have to be non-vegetarian (without eggs). We suffer such a cake on every family birthday. However, can you sit cross-legged on the floor and relish spicy food?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Cake and spicy food? Yum-yum!

 

[Vrindavana Das]

Hello,

The story which I have heard on Hinduism and the advent of Buddha is produced below. Even though this do not completely pertain to the question, still I write it is relevant to this very interesting topic.

Hindus celebrate Buddha as the ninth avatāra of Lord Viṣṇu.

Initially, traditional India followed the Vedic division of society known as the varṇa-āśrama dharma. In the varṇa-āśrama dharma, the intelligent class who studied and taught the Vedic sciences are Brahamanas. And, a person was considered to be Brahamana based on merit (actions and qualities), and not on being simply being born into a Brahamana family (caste system).

The Vedas enjoin many sacrifices for serving a higher purpose. For example, there is go-medha sacrifice, where an old cow is sacrificed on an altar and the Brahamanas give the cow a new body by the power of the Vedic mantras. This benefited both the cow and the Brahmanas who would use its milk, butter, urine etc. for religious purposes.

However, with the passage of time the varṇa-āśrama dharma system degraded and was replaced by caste system. Unqualified Brahamanas started performing Vedic sacrifices to satisfy their taste buds and of those who would pay for the performance of such sacrifices.

In the name of the Vedas and Vedic sacrifices, animals were being slaughtered mercilessly. The Hindu civilization lost the aim of the Vedas - which is the realization of the Supreme.

Supreme Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa declares in the Bhagavad Gītā.

sarvasya cāhaṁ hṛdi sanniviṣṭo
mattaḥ smṛtir jñānam apohanaṁ ca
vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyo
vedānta-kṛd veda-vid eva cāham​

[Bhagavad Gītā 15.15]​

I am seated in everyone's heart, and from Me come remembrance, knowledge and forgetfulness. By all the Vedas am I to be known; indeed I am the compiler of Vedānta, and I am the knower of the Vedas.

It was then that the Supreme Lord advented as Buddha. He taught ahiṁsā, or non-violence, and that the humans will achieve the highest benefit by helping each other. As the Vedas were in the center of it all, He rejected the Vedas.

Thus, the Supreme Lord appeared as Buddha, according to the time, place and circumstance, to rescue the conditioned souls from the clutches of ignorance (māyā), and show them the path of eternal welfare.

 

[ShivaFan]

The problem here is that Siddhartha Buddha wasn't a Buddhist. He was born a Hindu who had some Jains in the Royal Court and influenced by Jain contemporaries, who was a reformer of some aspects of Vedaism and practice at that time such as animal sacrifice. Buddhism came later. I think you should keep the two in their own category, you can have a Hindu who honors or worships Buddha, but as for the otherway around a Buddhist should remain in it's own notable umbrella.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

There have been two Buddhas. The Buddha I mention is the ninth avatāra of the Supreme Lord, the founder of Buddhism. He has also been mentioned in the Puranic literatures compiled by Veda Vyāsa. For more information, this link of Wiki can be helpful: Gautama Buddha in Hinduism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Pleroma]

Oh dear! Such negative vibes! Fortunately you're the only contributor on this thread who has come out with such a dismissive and negative attitude. And ironically, despite the use of the royal "we", you're not even a Hindu according to your label which says: "Valentinianism, Sauram, Tibetan Buddhism, Taoism, Paganism and Neoplatonism"

Sauram is a Hindu sect and what the heck are you doing here in the Hinduism DIR being a Theravada Buddhist? Please mind your own business. If you have any queries about Hinduism then start a new thread but don't preach Buddhism here.

 

[Vinayaka]

This is the Hindu DIR, and it is blue. The OP asked this question of Hindus, and he's gotten a variety of opinions. I don't see anything at all wrong with answering the question from your POV, if its Hindu. I just hope it's all been helpful to the OP. If you want to give the Buddhist perspective, please go to a thread I'm going to start in a minute.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Sauram is a Hindu sect and what the heck are you doing here in the Hinduism DIR being a Theravada Buddhist? Please mind your own business. If you have any queries about Hinduism then start a new thread but don't preach Buddhism here.

I'm not "preaching" anything, just having a friendly chat. I find your defensive negativity puzzling and inappropriate.

 

[Maya3]

I'm not "preaching" anything, just having a friendly chat. I find your defensive negativity puzzling and inappropriate.

He is stirring up emotions on purpose. He does it on every thread.
I have already reported him.
There is no reason to agree with everything, we challenge each other here all the time, sometimes the debates get heated too, but rudeness like this? No thank you.

Maya

 

[LuisDantas]

Is it a good idea to consider a religious group part of one's own religion against the judgement of the members of that group?

Hasn't Hinduism had some trouble with such a notion, both in relation to Christianity by one perspective and in relation to Sikhism (at least) by the complementary perspective?

 

[Pleroma]

Hindus do not know the Vedas and hence they incorporate even their enemy religions into their religion. They have lots of sympathies for Jesus, Allah, Buddha, Mahavira. They in fact even accept Caravaka which is anti-theism as Hinduism. No wonder why Hinduism never enters into any Intellectual debates. Any outsider should think Wow! Hindus are so liberal and pluralistic and look how fanatical are the Abrahamic faiths but this is not something to be proud of actually Hindus should be ashamed of themselves for their ignorance and for not having a firm faith in their religious scriptures.

 

[Asha]

Jai Shree Krisna ,

My 108 th post so very auspicious !

Very auspicious indeed !

Buddhists are our freinds, we consider Lord Buddha to be an incarnation of Vishnu.

Even non Vaishnavas that I know also consider Lord Buddha very favorably.

We love the followers of Lord Buddha and they love us.

Let us all work together.

No, Buddhists are our enemies and they cannot be considered as Hindus. You are free to choose your religion but do not mix Hinduism and Buddhism, both of their philosophies are entirely incompatible.

No we do not all need to think exactly alike but we are not entirely incompatable.

Jai Buddha deva

 

[Poeticus]

Hindus do not know the Vedas and hence they incorporate even their enemy religions into their religion. They have lots of sympathies for Jesus, Allah, Buddha, Mahavira. They in fact even accept Caravaka which is anti-theism as Hinduism. No wonder why Hinduism never enters into any Intellectual debates. Any outsider should think Wow! Hindus are so liberal and pluralistic and look how fanatical are the Abrahamic faiths but this is not something to be proud of actually Hindus should be ashamed of themselves for their ignorance and for not having a firm faith in their religious scriptures.

Explain your "Valentianism", and then we'll talk.