Bhairava in Buddhism?

Moderator: Tibetan Buddhism moderators

Re: Bhairava in Buddhism?

Postby Maninder » Fri Sep 27, 2013 6:53 pm

Karinos wrote:
Namdrol wrote:I know that Bhairava and Mahākala are not the same.

However, Bhairava shrines in Nepal are considered Mahākala shrines by Tibetans.

It is the same principle with Vajrayogini statures being considered to be emanations of Kali.

N


all right, no worries :namaste:

also Buddha is considered by Hindu an incarnation of Vishnu. Confusing isn't it? :)


Actually ,its good ,as it brings hinduism and buddhism closer and can enable reform of hinduism from its caste ridden state.
Maninder
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 3:28 pm

Re: Bhairava in Buddhism?

Postby Karma Jinpa » Tue Oct 29, 2013 1:41 am

Maninder wrote:
Karinos wrote: also Buddha is considered by Hindu an incarnation of Vishnu. Confusing isn't it? :)


Actually ,its good ,as it brings hinduism and buddhism closer and can enable reform of hinduism from its caste ridden state.


Depends on who you ask. Many I've met have respect for the Dharmas of both "Buddhism" & "Hinduism," and in Nepal especially these are not distinct entities for the reasons highlighted in by the OP.

However, for those Hindus who wish to draw such distinctions between themselves and Buddhists, often Shakyamuni is said to have been the avatar of Vishnu that came to lead the apostates away from the Vedas.

In other words, we're the infidels who fell for Vishnu's ruse. This despite the fact that much of what we call "Hinduism" today comes from Buddhadharma being co-opted when the various strands were in decline.

In India, as everywhere else, there are those who wish for ethnic and socio-religious purity by segregation. This type of tension is more between the Hindu and Muslim populations (just as the India/Pakistan tension on a national scale), but negative views towards Buddhists are not unheard of, lest we allow ourselves to become naive Orientalists. It is one of the main reasons behind conflicts such as the bombing, dismantling and demolishing of Muslim places of worship in order to build Hindu temples.
"The Sutras, Tantras, and Philosophical Scriptures are great in number. However life is short, and intelligence is limited, so it's hard to cover them completely. You may know a lot, but if you don't put it into practice, it's like dying of thirst on the shore of a great lake. Likewise, it happens that a common corpse is found in the bed of a great scholar." ~ Karma Chagme

དྲིན་ཆེན་རྗེ་བཙུན་བླ་མ་རཱ་ག་ཨ་སྱ་མཁྱེན་ནོ།
ཀརྨ་པ་མཁྱེན་ནོ།


:namaste:
User avatar
Karma Jinpa
 
Posts: 460
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:19 pm

Re: Bhairava in Buddhism?

Postby Karma Dorje » Tue Oct 29, 2013 1:05 pm

Karma Jinpa wrote:In India, as everywhere else, there are those who wish for ethnic and socio-religious purity by segregation. This type of tension is more between the Hindu and Muslim populations (just as the India/Pakistan tension on a national scale), but negative views towards Buddhists are not unheard of, lest we allow ourselves to become naive Orientalists. It is one of the main reasons behind conflicts such as the bombing, dismantling and demolishing of Muslim places of worship in order to build Hindu temples.


That is to completely ignore the historical wrongs that have been committed. If you are speaking of the Babri Masjid affair, there was no bombing involved nor was there an active mosque at the site. In fact, Hindu images had been installed there and regular worship was done to them. This is all conveniently ignored by the media who speaks of "Hindu chauvinism" in ways they would never speak of "Christian chauvinism". There are definitely those that seek political advantage by stoking the fires of communalism. They do so by fanning the flames of real wrongs that took place, particularly under generations of Muslim invaders and later under the bloodthirsty Aurangzeb. It was common for them to raze a temple leaving only a foundation and then build a mosque on top of it to show the triumph of Islam at the same time killing generations of purohits. If Muslim invaders did that to the Vatican, how long do you expect a desire for redress would last?
"As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."
~Arthur Carlson
User avatar
Karma Dorje
 
Posts: 972
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 10:35 pm

Re: Bhairava in Buddhism?

Postby Sherab Dorje » Tue Oct 29, 2013 1:37 pm

Karma Dorje wrote:It was common for them to raze a temple leaving only a foundation and then build a mosque on top of it to show the triumph of Islam at the same time killing generations of purohits. If Muslim invaders did that to the Vatican, how long do you expect a desire for redress would last?
This is exactly what the Byzantine era Christians did during and after the rule of Emperor Justinian I from around 530AD onwards. Up until this point the Byzantine Emperors actually funded (via the state) the functioning of the temples of all religious sects.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE
User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Former staff member
 
Posts: 10289
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Bhairava in Buddhism?

Postby Karma Dorje » Tue Oct 29, 2013 1:48 pm

Sherab Dorje wrote:
Karma Dorje wrote:It was common for them to raze a temple leaving only a foundation and then build a mosque on top of it to show the triumph of Islam at the same time killing generations of purohits. If Muslim invaders did that to the Vatican, how long do you expect a desire for redress would last?
This is exactly what the Byzantine era Christians did during and after the rule of Emperor Justinian I from around 530AD onwards. Up until this point the Byzantine Emperors actually funded (via the state) the functioning of the temples of all religious sects.


Yes, exactly. The difference being that the Christians managed to either starve all other traditions of resources, or kill their followers outright over the centuries following. In India, with a Hindu majority they can think realistically of redress. This is not to justify the persecution of the Muslim minority. The problem arises in that the Muslim majority is almost completely unwilling to compromise, and Babri Masjid/Ram Janmabhumi is a perfect example. The politicos on the Muslim side stirred up opposition even when the mosque was no longer used.
"As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."
~Arthur Carlson
User avatar
Karma Dorje
 
Posts: 972
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 10:35 pm

Re: Bhairava in Buddhism?

Postby Jainarayan » Tue Oct 29, 2013 2:18 pm

Karinos wrote:also Buddha is considered by Hindu an incarnation of Vishnu. Confusing isn't it? :)


I know this an old post, but I just came across it. I want to clarify that not all Hindus consider The Buddha to be an incarnation or avatar of Vishnu. In fact, not all Hindus believe in incarnations or avatars, especially Shaivas. Not even all Vaishnavas, devotees of Vishnu, consider Lord Buddha to be an incarnation or avatar of Vishnu. It's actually a minority. In place of Lord Buddha as the 9th incarnation/avatar of Lord Vishnu, many representations of the Daśāvatāra have Balarama, Krishna's older brother. In my Hindu days, I did consider The Buddha as an incarnation of Vishnu, with me being part of the minority; I still do, for reasons not relevant to this thread.
Worthy, wise and virtuous: Who is energetic and not indolent, in misfortune unshaken,
flawless in manner and intelligent, such one will honor gain. - Digha Nikaya III 273
User avatar
Jainarayan
 
Posts: 284
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 2:23 am
Location: New Jersey, USA

Re: Bhairava in Buddhism?

Postby Karma Jinpa » Tue Oct 29, 2013 5:58 pm

Karma Dorje wrote:
Karma Jinpa wrote:In India, as everywhere else, there are those who wish for ethnic and socio-religious purity by segregation. This type of tension is more between the Hindu and Muslim populations (just as the India/Pakistan tension on a national scale), but negative views towards Buddhists are not unheard of, lest we allow ourselves to become naive Orientalists. It is one of the main reasons behind conflicts such as the bombing, dismantling and demolishing of Muslim places of worship in order to build Hindu temples.


That is to completely ignore the historical wrongs that have been committed. If you are speaking of the Babri Masjid affair, there was no bombing involved nor was there an active mosque at the site. In fact, Hindu images had been installed there and regular worship was done to them. This is all conveniently ignored by the media who speaks of "Hindu chauvinism" in ways they would never speak of "Christian chauvinism." There are definitely those that seek political advantage by stoking the fires of communalism. They do so by fanning the flames of real wrongs that took place, particularly under generations of Muslim invaders and later under the bloodthirsty Aurangzeb. It was common for them to raze a temple leaving only a foundation and then build a mosque on top of it to show the triumph of Islam at the same time killing generations of purohits. If Muslim invaders did that to the Vatican, how long do you expect a desire for redress would last?

I took it that any practicing Buddhist would know the history of Muslim invasions in India, since these are one of the main reasons Buddhism (nearly) died out in its native land. We've all committed atrocities and fallen prey to the Three Poisons since beginingless time.

Being ethnically Jewish, I'm no stranger to Christian chauvanism. Nor am I ignorant of hate based solely on ethnicity, religion, or even the more common phenotypical expressions of a group of people, such as the Nazis perpetrated. In a similar fashion, should I hate and all fear all Germans for the horrors committed during the Sho'ah (a.k.a. the Holocaust)? Obviously the answer is no. That is certainly more recent than the Muslim invasions and ensuing carnage.

Atrocities certainly have happened, but we must find a way to grow as a species rather than constantly seek revenge. "An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind," as they say. To otherize an entire group, making generalized statements about "them" (which relies on there being an "us") is a prime source of why conflict arises. None are less human for their beliefs or any other factor. To loose sight of this is to ignore that we all have Buddha-nature.
"The Sutras, Tantras, and Philosophical Scriptures are great in number. However life is short, and intelligence is limited, so it's hard to cover them completely. You may know a lot, but if you don't put it into practice, it's like dying of thirst on the shore of a great lake. Likewise, it happens that a common corpse is found in the bed of a great scholar." ~ Karma Chagme

དྲིན་ཆེན་རྗེ་བཙུན་བླ་མ་རཱ་ག་ཨ་སྱ་མཁྱེན་ནོ།
ཀརྨ་པ་མཁྱེན་ནོ།


:namaste:
User avatar
Karma Jinpa
 
Posts: 460
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:19 pm

Re: Bhairava in Buddhism?

Postby Karma Dorje » Tue Oct 29, 2013 6:13 pm

Karma Jinpa wrote:Atrocities certainly have happened, but we must find a way to grow as a species rather than constantly seek revenge. "An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind," as they say. To otherize an entire group, making generalized statements about "them" (which relies on there being an "us") is a prime source of why conflict arises. None are less human for their beliefs or any other factor. To loose sight of this is to ignore that we all have Buddha-nature.


Who said anything about revenge? The recovering of plundered holy sites is a means of making things right, not of exacting revenge. This is about self-identity for Hindus in their own country. The Muslim minority should negotiate with them, but will not. As a result, communal tension grows, stoked by events like the burning of the Godhra Sabarmati Express and the Mumbai assaults by Pakistani nationals and enflamed by the violence provoked against innocent Muslims in response.
"As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."
~Arthur Carlson
User avatar
Karma Dorje
 
Posts: 972
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 10:35 pm

Re: Bhairava in Buddhism?

Postby Karma Jinpa » Wed Oct 30, 2013 2:47 am

Karma Dorje wrote:Who said anything about revenge? The recovering of plundered holy sites is a means of making things right, not of exacting revenge. This is about self-identity for Hindus in their own country. The Muslim minority should negotiate with them, but will not. As a result, communal tension grows, stoked by events like the burning of the Godhra Sabarmati Express and the Mumbai assaults by Pakistani nationals and enflamed by the violence provoked against innocent Muslims in response.

One person's recovery is another person's revenge. After a certain amount of time, how can we justifiably say that one group has more of a claim than the other? I daresay that the Muslims who had practiced at Babri Masjid (even in the decades past) were likewise dismayed when Hindus razed their mosque, or when they were denied access to their cemeteries.

And let's face it: there is no unified Hindu identity. Not even all Hindus revere the Vedas. And in the modern state of India, Muslims have just as much right to call themselves Indians as do Hindus. Same goes with the Jains, etc. We can no more say terrorists are exclusively Muslim than that all murderers are white or all "gangbangers" are Latino.

There absolutely needs to be dialogue and compromise. The other thing is that groups like the BHP need to stop stoking the fires of hatred in order to get votes. If any political party so be involved, it should be the Indian Communists as mediators.
"The Sutras, Tantras, and Philosophical Scriptures are great in number. However life is short, and intelligence is limited, so it's hard to cover them completely. You may know a lot, but if you don't put it into practice, it's like dying of thirst on the shore of a great lake. Likewise, it happens that a common corpse is found in the bed of a great scholar." ~ Karma Chagme

དྲིན་ཆེན་རྗེ་བཙུན་བླ་མ་རཱ་ག་ཨ་སྱ་མཁྱེན་ནོ།
ཀརྨ་པ་མཁྱེན་ནོ།


:namaste:
User avatar
Karma Jinpa
 
Posts: 460
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:19 pm

Re: Bhairava in Buddhism?

Postby Karma Dorje » Wed Oct 30, 2013 2:59 am

Karma Jinpa wrote:One person's recovery is another person's revenge. After a certain amount of time, how can we justifiably say that one group has more of a claim than the other? I daresay that the Muslims who had practiced at Babri Masjid (even in the decades past) were likewise dismayed when Hindus razed their mosque, or when they were denied access to their cemeteries.

And let's face it: there is no unified Hindu identity. Not even all Hindus revere the Vedas. And in the modern state of India, Muslims have just as much right to call themselves Indians as do Hindus. Same goes with the Jains, etc. We can no more say terrorists are exclusively Muslim than that all murderers are white or all "gangbangers" are Latino.

There absolutely needs to be dialogue and compromise. The other thing is that groups like the BHP need to stop stoking the fires of hatred in order to get votes. If any political party so be involved, it should be the Indian Communists as mediators.


Oh yeah, now there's a neutral party. There is no need for a unified Hindu identity for there to be a collective identity and that collective identity is strong because of its diversity of viewpoints. However, I am not sure which Hindus you are saying do not revere the Vedas. While there may be more focus on itihasa or purana in terms of actual worship, all Hindu schools I can think of are astika by definition.

By and large though, white guys like us from the world hegemon should probably shut up and let the people of India make their own decisions. We have Mr. Drone-happy Kenyan dude to worry about.
"As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly."
~Arthur Carlson
User avatar
Karma Dorje
 
Posts: 972
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 10:35 pm

Re: Bhairava in Buddhism?

Postby Karma Jinpa » Wed Oct 30, 2013 12:31 pm

Karma Dorje wrote:
Karma Jinpa wrote:There absolutely needs to be dialogue and compromise. The other thing is that groups like the BHP need to stop stoking the fires of hatred in order to get votes. If any political party so be involved, it should be the Indian Communists as mediators.


Oh yeah, now there's a neutral party. There is no need for a unified Hindu identity for there to be a collective identity and that collective identity is strong because of its diversity of viewpoints. However, I am not sure which Hindus you are saying do not revere the Vedas. While there may be more focus on itihasa or purana in terms of actual worship, all Hindu schools I can think of are astika by definition.

I mention them because, from what I've seen at least, they seem to acknowledge that all Indians are brothers & sisters. Guilty of painting them all with a broad stroke, I suppose. As for which Hindus don't revere the Vedas, I lean unto the understanding of my much more learned professor, Dr. Kathleen Erndl, who taught as such. She's one of the participant-observer types, and even got a degree from one of the universities over there. I'll dig thru the old uni notes and see if I can find the name(s) of the specific sect(s) she was referring to.

By and large though, white guys like us from the world hegemon should probably shut up and let the people of India make their own decisions.

Quite true. First world problems and all that. And now, back to your regularly scheduled program...
:focus:
"The Sutras, Tantras, and Philosophical Scriptures are great in number. However life is short, and intelligence is limited, so it's hard to cover them completely. You may know a lot, but if you don't put it into practice, it's like dying of thirst on the shore of a great lake. Likewise, it happens that a common corpse is found in the bed of a great scholar." ~ Karma Chagme

དྲིན་ཆེན་རྗེ་བཙུན་བླ་མ་རཱ་ག་ཨ་སྱ་མཁྱེན་ནོ།
ཀརྨ་པ་མཁྱེན་ནོ།


:namaste:
User avatar
Karma Jinpa
 
Posts: 460
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:19 pm

Previous

Return to Nyingma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

>