4 ms·

For Hindus, Buddha was just one of the 10 avatars of Vishnu and he came for a time and purpose. It was never meant to be a separate religion but just took Hindu

For Hindus, Buddha was just one of the 10 avatars of Vishnu and he came for a time and purpose. It was never meant to be a separate religion but just took Hindu teachings on meditation and enlightenment and got adapted into another "ism". All the core teachings lie in Hindu scriptures, including Yoga, Meditation etc.

bowsamic 4y ago
That was something that came after the Buddha though. No Buddhist teaching or text would suggest this
unmole 4y ago
> For Hindus, Buddha was just one of the 10 avatars of Vishnu The Bhagavatam mentions 22 avatars of Vishnu. The arbitrary selection of 10 which sometimes include Buddha is a later day invention. > never meant to be a separate religion but just took Hindu teachings on meditation and enlightenment and got adapted into another "ism". This is revisionist nonsense.
- amriksohata 4y ago
  There are many more avatars but the dashavatars are considered most well known. Ah the revionist calling out revisionism , the irony of the comment on isms
  - unmole 4y ago
    > dashavatars are considered most well known. Right, so well known that there isn't even a consensus as to which of them constitute Dashavatara. You have no idea what you're talking about.
    - amriksohata 4y ago
      Terrible counter arguing by just saying "you have no idea what you're talking about".
robinsoh 4y ago
> All the core teachings lie in Hindu scriptures What does "scripture" mean in this context? Scripture normally means messages 'directly' from the 'Abrahamic God' received by certain 'special individuals' (prophets, etc), such as the Bible, Quran, Torah. I thought Hinduism did not have any belief in any messages being sent from "God" to humans. So could you give some examples on what would be Hindu scripture and other examples of what would NOT be Hindu scripture?
- unmole 4y ago
  > What does "scripture" mean in this context? Scripture normally means messages 'directly' from the 'Abrahamic God' Oxford disagrees: https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/scripture https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/englis... And Hindu scriptures is the example the lexicographers chose. Besides, the Old and New Testaments are traditionally attributed to specific authors. Only the Quran qualifies as scripture by your definition, not even the Hadith. > I thought Hinduism did not have any belief in any messages being sent from "God" to humans. The Vedas are considered revelation from the ultimate reality. There are other scriptures considered apauruseya i.e. of non-human origin.
  - selimthegrim 4y ago
    According to Shahrastani some Muslims had pretty positive views of Vedas. Moreover Dara Shikoh famously considered Upanishads the “guarded tablet” mentioned in Quran 85:22
  - robinsoh 4y ago
    > The Vedas are considered revelation from the ultimate reality. As far as I can tell from googling, they are just considered to be stories from Aryans that entered India. "The Vedas are considered the earliest literary record of Indo-Aryan civilization"
    - harpic 4y ago
democra 4y ago
For Hindus, claiming everything in the subcontinent as their own seems like a favorite passtime. Jainism, Buddhism are not part of Hinduism and never were.
- zozbot234 4y ago
  I think most people would agree that Buddhist doctrines first originated within a Hinduism-informed general milieu, and they can only be understood comprehensively in this light. Whereas Jainism seems to have developed in parallel with Vedic religion, and to have shared some of the same underlying concepts. Whether this means either are "part" of Hinduism probably depends on whom you ask.
- amriksohata 4y ago
  There are thousands of sects of Hinduism and most still list themselves as such until the British came in
  - unmole 4y ago
    The word Hindu itself is an exonym. What you are doing is playing language games by conflating everything Indian with Hindu.

bowsamic 4y ago

That was something that came after the Buddha though. No Buddhist teaching or text would suggest this

unmole 4y ago

> For Hindus, Buddha was just one of the 10 avatars of Vishnu The Bhagavatam mentions 22 avatars of Vishnu. The arbitrary selection of 10 which sometimes include Buddha is a later day invention. > never meant to be a separate religion but just took Hindu teachings on meditation and enlightenment and got adapted into another "ism". This is revisionist nonsense.

amriksohata 4y ago
There are many more avatars but the dashavatars are considered most well known. Ah the revionist calling out revisionism , the irony of the comment on isms
- unmole 4y ago
  > dashavatars are considered most well known. Right, so well known that there isn't even a consensus as to which of them constitute Dashavatara. You have no idea what you're talking about.
  - amriksohata 4y ago
    Terrible counter arguing by just saying "you have no idea what you're talking about".

robinsoh 4y ago

> All the core teachings lie in Hindu scriptures What does "scripture" mean in this context? Scripture normally means messages 'directly' from the 'Abrahamic God' received by certain 'special individuals' (prophets, etc), such as the Bible, Quran, Torah. I thought Hinduism did not have any belief in any messages being sent from "God" to humans. So could you give some examples on what would be Hindu scripture and other examples of what would NOT be Hindu scripture?

unmole 4y ago
> What does "scripture" mean in this context? Scripture normally means messages 'directly' from the 'Abrahamic God' Oxford disagrees: https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/scripture https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/englis... And Hindu scriptures is the example the lexicographers chose. Besides, the Old and New Testaments are traditionally attributed to specific authors. Only the Quran qualifies as scripture by your definition, not even the Hadith. > I thought Hinduism did not have any belief in any messages being sent from "God" to humans. The Vedas are considered revelation from the ultimate reality. There are other scriptures considered apauruseya i.e. of non-human origin.
- selimthegrim 4y ago
  According to Shahrastani some Muslims had pretty positive views of Vedas. Moreover Dara Shikoh famously considered Upanishads the “guarded tablet” mentioned in Quran 85:22
- robinsoh 4y ago
  > The Vedas are considered revelation from the ultimate reality. As far as I can tell from googling, they are just considered to be stories from Aryans that entered India. "The Vedas are considered the earliest literary record of Indo-Aryan civilization"
  - harpic 4y ago

democra 4y ago

For Hindus, claiming everything in the subcontinent as their own seems like a favorite passtime. Jainism, Buddhism are not part of Hinduism and never were.

zozbot234 4y ago
I think most people would agree that Buddhist doctrines first originated within a Hinduism-informed general milieu, and they can only be understood comprehensively in this light. Whereas Jainism seems to have developed in parallel with Vedic religion, and to have shared some of the same underlying concepts. Whether this means either are "part" of Hinduism probably depends on whom you ask.
amriksohata 4y ago
There are thousands of sects of Hinduism and most still list themselves as such until the British came in
- unmole 4y ago
  The word Hindu itself is an exonym. What you are doing is playing language games by conflating everything Indian with Hindu.