What do Buddhists think of the Vaishnavists accepting Buddha as an avatar of Vishnu?

[SageTree]

Yes

Thanks, Bud.


:namaste

 

[DreadFish]

Hey! check it out! There was a Buddhist debate about whether a supreme being exists, AND whether there is a self, AND a comparison of that view to the view of Advaita, AND a DEBATE in the Dharmic DIR about HINDUISM! All in one thread!


How stereotypical

Par for the course, my friends.

Did I miss any others?

 

[shivadas]

I always wondered what was up with an atheist Buddha being an incarnation of God...
the whole idea that he came to teach people an atheist philosophy to divinity really clicks with me, because as ive noticed with my mom, who blattently denies the existance of God has gained much enlightenment through Buddhist philosophies...
I think God made Buddhism to teach the faithless how to be liberated, because someone with faith becomes enlightened via God...

 

[Secret Chief]

It's disingenuous. It's a common theme to see, in the study of comparative religion, how one religion or sect in contact with another will attempt to suborn it by encompassing and downgrading it. This is a perfect example of this tendency.

^ ^ ^ ^ this.

 

[shivadas]

i understand all enlightening sources to come from the same force, knowing this most religions preach God as the route to salvation, it would make sense for God to send at least one religion for atheists to reach liberation, Buddhism was that religion...
i dont think its for "evil" people, just for people who are'nt believers.

 

[Bhairava]

I am interested in knowing the actual views and opinions of Buddhists on the Hindu Vaishnavist sect claiming that Buddha is an avatar of Vishnu as the deceiver, who incarnated on Earth to deceive the ignorant worldly people by teaching them an atheist philosophy to ultimately bring them back to the real religion of Vishnu worship. For, so far I have only heard what Hindus have to say about what Buddhists thinks, not what Buddhists think themselves. Also, is there any official response in Buddhism to this?

Silly.

In my experience its kind of similar to that. I dont think he was an avatar but he was a genius, teaching the same thing as Sanatana Dharma in general yet from an atheist point of view. He set up the religion to bring even atheists into a spiritual path. Sunyavada Buddhism is basically the religion of nihilism so of course I fell in love lol. Without Buddhism would I have ever found Advaita Vedanta or Kashmir Shaivism? Ultimately they say the same thing only difference is Buddhism doesnt affirm the Self.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

Ultimately they say the same thing only difference is Buddhism doesnt affirm the Self.

Depends; anatta is one of the most misunderstood topics within Buddhism. Even Theravada upholds pabhassara citta, and good Theravada views anatta more as 'not-self' than 'no-self.'

Mahayana and, especially, Vajrayana philosophies take it much further - as with shunyavada.

Misapprehension of Prasangika Madhyamaka has crystallized in an anti-self view of the gelugpa rangtong, but other interpretations of rangtong merge seamlessly with zhentong; that is to say, they have a doctrine of the self as the heart of the void

 

[Bhairava]

Depends; anatta is one of the most misunderstood topics within Buddhism. Even Theravada upholds pabhassara citta, and good Theravada views anatta more as 'not-self' than 'no-self.'

Mahayana and, especially, Vajrayana philosophies take it much further - as with shunyavada.

Misapprehension of Prasangika Madhyamaka has crystallized in an anti-self view of the gelugpa rangtong, but other interpretations of rangtong merge seamlessly with zhentong; that is to say, they have a doctrine of the self as the heart of the void

Exactly. Damn those are so big words lol.

Thats one of the things I hate about Buddhism, the vagueness but it is also a part I love; its like the Ultimate Riddle.

 

[SageTree]

Depends; anatta is one of the most misunderstood topics within Buddhism. Even Theravada upholds pabhassara citta, and good Theravada views anatta more as 'not-self' than 'no-self.'

Mahayana and, especially, Vajrayana philosophies take it much further - as with shunyavada.

Misapprehension of Prasangika Madhyamaka has crystallized in an anti-self view of the gelugpa rangtong, but other interpretations of rangtong merge seamlessly with zhentong; that is to say, they have a doctrine of the self as the heart of the void

I dig your post.

I have a friend who seem to be clinging to no-self and the complete abandonment of free-will.
Not-Self and Freedom (not to say free-will) are words he doesn't seem to follow me on when I try to lay out some thoughts and opinions in our exchanges.

I appreciate your sharing here. Thanks.

:namaste

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

Depends; anatta is one of the most misunderstood topics within Buddhism. Even Theravada upholds pabhassara citta, and good Theravada views anatta more as 'not-self' than 'no-self.'

Mahayana and, especially, Vajrayana philosophies take it much further - as with shunyavada.

Misapprehension of Prasangika Madhyamaka has crystallized in an anti-self view of the gelugpa rangtong, but other interpretations of rangtong merge seamlessly with zhentong; that is to say, they have a doctrine of the self as the heart of the void

I dig your post.

I have a friend who seem to be clinging to no-self and the complete abandonment of free-will.
Not-Self and Freedom (not to say free-will) are words he doesn't seem to follow me on when I try to lay out some thoughts and opinions in our exchanges.

I appreciate your sharing here. Thanks.

Exactly. This is something that I misunderstood when I first came to Buddhism. Many people, both non-Buddhist and Buddhist, still misunderstand exactly what anatta is. The proper translation would be "not-self", as in, what we believe to be the self, actually isn't, but there is a self, which is the tathagatagarbha, contrasted with "no-self", which is that there isn't a self at all.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

Exactly. Damn those are so big words lol.

Thats one of the things I hate about Buddhism, the vagueness but it is also a part I love; its like the Ultimate Riddle.

And then you have Zen, a riddle wrapped in a paradox.