I am not a Buddhist, as you have heard, and yet I am. If China and Japan and Sri Lanka follow the teachings of the Buddha, India worships him as God incarnate on earth.
You have just now heard that I am going to criticize Buddhism, but by that I wish you to understand only this. Far be it from me to criticize him whom I worship as God incarnate on earth. Our view about the Buddha is that he was not understood properly by his disciples. The relation between Hinduism (by Hinduism, I mean the religion of the Vedas) and what is called Buddhism at the present day is nearly the same as between Judaism and Christianity. Jesus Christ was a Jew, and Shakya Muni [Buddha] was a Hindu. The Jews rejected Jesus Christ, nay, crucified him, whereas the Hindus accept Shakya Muni as God incarnate and worship him.
But the real difference that we Hindus want to show between modern Buddhism and what we should understand as the teachings of the Buddha lies principally in this: Shakya Muni came to preach nothing new. Like Jesus, the Buddha came to fulfill and not to destroy. In the case of Jesus, it was the old people, the Jews, who did not understand him, while in the case of the Buddha, it was his own followers who did not realize the import of his teachings. As the Jew did not understand the fulfillment of the Old Testament, so the Buddhist did not understand the fulfillment of the truths of the Hindu religion. Again, I repeat, Shakya Muni came not to destroy, but he was the fulfillment, the logical conclusion, the logical development of the religion of the Hindus.
The religion of the Hindus is divided into two parts: the ceremonial and the spiritual. The spiritual portion is specially studied by the monks. In it, there is no caste. In India a man from the highest caste and a man from the lowest can become monks, thus the two castes become equal. In religion there is no caste; caste is simply a social institution. Shakya Muni himself was a monk, and it was his glory that he had the large-heartedness to bring out the truths hidden in the Vedas and throw them broadcast all over the world. He was the first being in the world who brought missionaries into practice--nay, he was the first to conceive the idea of proselytizing.
The great glory of the Master lay in his wonderful sympathy for everybody, especially for the ignorant and the poor. Some of his disciples were Brahmins. When Buddha was teaching, Sanskrit was no more the spoken language in India. It was then only in the books of the learned. Some of Buddha's Brahmin disciples wanted to translate his teachings into Sanskrit, but he distinctly told them, "I am for the poor, for the people; let me speak in the tongue of the people." And so to this day the great bulk of his teachings are in the vernacular of that day in India.
Whatever may be the position of philosophy, whatever may be the position of metaphysics, so long as there is such a thing as death in the world, so long as there is such a thing as weakness in the human heart, so long as there is a cry going out of the human heart, there shall be faith in God.
On the philosophic side, the disciples of the Great Master dashed themselves against the eternal rocks of the Vedas and could not crush them; and on the other side, they took away from the nation that eternal God to which every one, man or woman, clings so fondly. And the result was that Buddhism had to die a natural death in India. At the present day there are very few who call themselves Buddhists in India, the land where Buddhism was born.
But at the same time, Hinduism lost something--that reforming zeal, that wonderful sympathy and charity for everybody, that wonderful leaven which Buddhism had brought to the masses and which had rendered Indian society so great that a Greek historian who wrote about India of that time was led to say that no Hindu was known to tell an untruth and no Hindu woman was known to be unchaste.
Hinduism cannot live without Buddhism, nor Buddhism without Hinduism. Then realize what the separation has shown to us, that the Buddhist cannot stand without the brain and philosophy of the Hindu, nor the Hindu without the heart of the Buddhist. This separation between the Buddhists and the Hindus is the cause of the downfall of India. That is why India is populated by three hundred millions of beggars, and that is why India has been the slave of conquerors for the last thousand years. Let us then join the wonderful intellect of the Hindus with the heart, the noble soul, the wonderful humanizing power of the Buddha.
It's all very simple because the scriptures or the teachings are completely different among each other.
"Shakyamuni said that there are 84,000 cultivation disciplines. And how many disciplines are there in Buddhism? It has just a few, like the Tendai sect, Huayan sect, Zen sect, Pure Land, and the Esoteric sect." copied from page #47 in the Zhuan Falun book on the web. The statements illustrate the fact that each school has its unique teaching.
Jainism doesn't teach meditation as a routine ritual.
"Before it vanished, Buddhism went through a number of reforms, and in the end it incorporated things from Brahmanism and formed a religion that?s found in India today, called Hinduism.", copied from page #48.
Falun Gong is a unique Buddhist School. Falun Gong is based upon the universal principles of Truthfulness, Compassion, and Tolerance. Falun Gong consists of five sets of powerful exercises.
Falun Gong, Tibetans, Buddhists, and Christians have been persecuted in China. The most offensive human right violation is the organ harvesting from the Falun Gong practitioners in China. Can you kindly sign a petition to stop persecution of Falun Gong practitioners in China, please ?
http://cipfg.org/en/news/petition.html
Indian_cow body's analysis of Buddhism and its juxtaposition to Judaism and Christianity is flawed in my opinion. Obviously the large influence of Islam and Christianity in India is Strong which means many Indians have major misconceptions what Judaism teaches (as most westerners do too). Stating Jesus came to fulfill Judaism is such a strange statement, even though Christians keep saying it. Similarly, stating Buddha came to fulfill Hinduism also seems flawed.
Buddha rejected the 'Hindu' teaching (Hinduism is a modern religion because it doesn't reflect the old medic religion, it keeps changing) of animal sacrifice, of caste, of worship ping gods, of asking outside powers to help you, of doing religious ceremonies, of the 'hollies' of the Vedas'. Buddhism was severely oppressed by Hindus for these types of teachings, which is partly why buddhism no longer exists in India.
Jainism takes compassion to extremes of self-torture. Jains to this day will starve themselves to death, which Buddha didn't allow. Buddha tried it but rejecting it as being pointless. Jains also aren''t allowed to travel far distances because of all the animals they'll kill along the way, and the monks in some sects have to sweep the floor before each step to ensure killing is minimised. Buddha said these kinds of actions aren't contributing to the important tenets of morality.
Buddhism itself is far from middle-way in some aspects. It doesn't allow monks or nuns to marry each other (celebacy is very difficult and unnatural), it developed into a religion of ceremonies and rituals and transference of merits, it values the life of a monk over a starving orphan (if you give food to a fat monk you'll get more good karma than giving it to a dying orphan), it believes you can fly through the air if you meditate in certain ways, plus lots of other teachings which rational people would probably consider nonsense.
MIddle path teaching is first highlighted in the first Sta / discourse given by Buddha. Dhammacakkappavattana Sta. In this Sta, it clearly outlines the middle path.
A middle path is obtained through avoidance of 2 extreme path namely indulgence in sensual pleasure and self mortification. Self mortification is the practice of Jainism as they believe that they can wash away their karma through this method.
The Buddha has clearly indicated in all his teaching that through middle path, insight and wisdom is achieved and not through indulging in sensual pleasure or the other extreme of self mortification.
A great guide for you, please go to this web, and read the Sta, then you will be cleared of all the doubts. It clearly shows the importance of middle path in the cessation of sufferings. By understanding the first discourse of the Buddha, you will truly understand the meaning of middle path.
Give some patient, and read through at least part 1 and 2.
How did the middle path of Buddhism distinguish it from the beliefs and practices of
