Lord Buddha was an Avatar of Vishnu

[Sri Vaishnava]

I am a Sri Vaishnava, but I agree with the Gaudiya Vaishnavas' general acceptance of Buddha as an avatar of Vishnu. Based on info. from certain sites, it can be proven that Lord Buddha was a Shaktyavesa Avatar of Vishnu.

Thus, while I agree with ISKCON that Buddha was an avatar, He was only an empowered incarnation and so, shouldn't be counted in the Dasavatara. Therfore, I follow the practice of including Balarama in Dasavatara and considering Lord Buddha as the 24th Avatar of Vishnu, on the same level of manifestation as Sri Vyasa or Sri Kapila.

Here is proof:

BUDDHISM FROM A HINDU PERSPECTIVE

Buddhism is incomplete Hinduism.

Lord Buddha was a Shaktyavesa Avatar of the Supreme Lord Vishnu. The Srimad Bhagavatam was written 2500 years before Lord Buddha and it has prophesised His coming:

"In the beginning of the Kali Yuga, the Supreme Lord Vishnu will incarnate as Buddha, Son of Anjana, at Gaya to delude the Atheists."

When Buddha came, people were misinterpreting the Vedic Texts and were slaughtering animals. So Vishnu came as Buddha and decided to mislead them into rejecting the Vedas. That way, they wouldn't misinterpret the texts and kill animals if they disowned the Religion.

Buddhists do not accept this, but the fact that this Prophecy is legitimate can by proved by studying Buddha's life and His philosophy. The Message of Lord Buddha and Lord Krishna's words in the Bhagavad Gita parallel each other more closely than many people think.

I shall now prove that Buddha was none other than Lord Vishnu in disguise.

1) Buddhists argue that Buddha was born in Nepal, not Gaya and that His mother was Maya, not Anjana. Actually, although that is true, Buddha attained enlightenment at Gaya, which is His true birth as Buddha and His mother died a few days after His birth, so He was raised by His Step-Mother of the Anjana Clan. Hence, the Prophecy is correct.

2) Buddhism talks of Anatma, ie, Lord Buddha said that the Skandha, the material existence, is not the Self. Buddhists interpret this in such a manner that they claim Lord Buddha said that there is no 'Self' or 'Soul'. This is not true. Buddha said the Material Existence is not Self, but He didn't say there was no Self. He remained silent on what exactly was the Self.

In the Bhagavad Gita, it is stated that the body and the Material Existence is the 'Field of Activity'. One who knows this 'Field of Activity' is the 'Knower of the Field' and he knows that he is different from the body. A true knower should also know the distinction between the Soul and the Supersoul (God). The Lord knows All bodies and all Individuals as well, hence He is the Superknower (Adi Buddha).

Lord Buddha said that the 5 Skandhas (Material Existence)are Non-Self. The Bhagavad Gita emphasises that the Material Body (Field of Activity) is different from the Self. So, if we correlate the Skandha to the Field of Activity, Lord Buddha says that the Skandha is not Self, and the Bhagavad Gita says that the Self is distinct from the Field of Activity. Both have become somewhat similar teachings now.

Hence, Buddha imparted the message of the Bhagavad Gita in a partial manner. He gave part of the truth and left the rest for all kinds of interpretation by the common people.

2) Buddhists ignore a few significant sayings of Buddha in their own scriptures. I quote Lord Buddha now, from the Scriptures of Buddhism:

"I am not a 'Deva', (demigod ), I am not a 'Gandharva' (celestial angel), nor 'Yaksa' (fierce guardian spirit), or human being." ~ Donasutta.

So, He is not a Demi-God, an Angel or a Demon/Guardian Spirit, or a Human. Then what is He? In a hidden manner, Lord Buddha has revealed that he is Vishnu, the Supreme Lord.

And in the Saddharma Punarika He announces to all :-

yam eva'ham lokapita swayambhu cikitsakah sarvaprajnan natah

"I am the self born, Father of all, the Lord of all beings and the remover of all ills."

This is a very clear statement. He has openly declared His true identity.

"Vakkali, he who sees the dhamma sees me; he who sees me sees the dhamma. Indeed, Vakkali, seeing the dhamma is seeing me; seeing me is seeing the dhamma" ~ Vakkali Sutra.

Buddha claims that He is the embodiment of Dharma. Lord Krishna, a previous Avatar of Vishnu, said the same thing in the Bhagavad Gita. The exact same message has ben given by both Avatars of Vishnu.

"They talk to me under these names, yet they fail to recognise that they are all my own appellations. There are some who call me the Self-existing One (svayambhuva), the Leader (nayaka), the Remover-of-obstacles (vinayaka), the Guiding One (parinayaka), Buddha, Rishi, Bull-king, Brahma, Vishnu, Isvara [God], the Originator (pradhana), Kapila, the Destroyer (bhutanta) [or: the Extreme of Reality], the Imperishable (arishta), Nemina, Soma (moon), Fire, Rama, Vyasa, Suka, Indra, the Strong One (Balin), or Varuna............ Teaching the Cause of Buddhahood, the All-Knowing, the Conquering One or the Will-Body." ~ Lankavatara Sutra.

Kapila, Rama, Vyasa, Suka, etc. are all previous Avatars of Vishnu. Isvara means 'God'. In addition, the Lord has often described Himself to be in everyone, even demi-gods like Brahma, Indra, Varuna, etc. Thus, one can gather that Lord Buddha is indeed Vishnu, from this statement.

"While I am thus known in hundreds of thousands of three-asamkhyeyas of titles, not only in this world, but in other worlds [too], my names are not exhausted; I am like the moon casting its shadow [reflection] on water, I am neither in it nor our of it. Those who know me will recognise me everywhere, but the ignorant who cannot rise above dualism will not know me." ~ Nirvana Sutra.

3) Lastly, Buddhism is also a truth. But it is an incomplete Truth, so the Path to liberation is more difficult. In Buddhism, you have to go searching for the truth by much struggle and you may even fail. But if you surrender to Lord Vishnu directly, truth will come to you automatically.

An incident occured in which Buddha's disciples asked Him if there were any truths greater than what He thought. Lord Buddha took a leaf from a tree and asked them who had more leaves now, the tree or Him. Just like the tree has more leaves as compared to the one leaf in Buddha's hand, there was more truth than what He had imparted.

Thus, the Bhagavad Gita is truth in entirety, Buddhism is a part of that great truth. Buddha was Vishnu. He imparted a half-truth. If we can summarise the message of Bhagavad Gita in 5 words, Buddha would describe only the first 3 words of that message and leave it to the people to figure out the last 2 words.

[izi]

Indeed, what a trickster. Anyone can see that Buddhism is a good religion in essence and the scriptures there are very helpful, of course it would make sense that only one like Vishnu could be capable of providing such a bright path...

[yajvan]

Hari Om
~~~~~~

Namaste,
So many limitations, so many boundries put on the Infinite for who is and who isn't...
Mine is the real One.. no Mine is, you both are wrong mine, no ,mine.

Ekam sad; vipra bahudha vadanti - Rig Veda I.164.46 Rsi dirghatamas
truth is One; sages call it variously


pranams

[Sri Vaishnava]

Originally Posted by LadyHydralisk

Indeed, what a trickster. Anyone can see that Buddhism is a good religion in essence and the scriptures there are very helpful, of course it would make sense that only one like Vishnu could be capable of providing such a bright path...

Our dear Lord Krishna playing tricks again. You gotta love Him.

[orlando]

O Kesava! O Lord of the universe! O Lord Hari,
who have assumed the form of Buddha! All
glories to You! O Buddha of compassionate
heart, you decry the slaughtering of poor
animals performed according to the rules of
Vedic sacrifice Sri Dasavatara Stotra, 9th Sloka

[srivijaya]

Many years ago, as I entered spiritual practice, I took as 'truth' certain opinions about other traditions I had gleaned from my "seniors". Carried along by admiration, euphoria and gratitude I never bothered to check for myself - I didn't think it necessary or important, as I was 100% sure I'd hit gold.

As I was very self-satisfied and stupid, it took me many years to get around to even bothering to investigate for myself - and what a shock I got when I finally did. I regret not doing it sooner, as a young man, but I'm still thankful that karma pushed me to do it - better late than never.

Do not feel that in satisfying your intellectual integrity, you are somehow being disloyal. Your duty is to your own path. It's not "theirs", it's yours. Anyone is entitled to whatever opinion they wish to hold but I would caution against not verifying such claims for oneself.

Life's too short.

Namaste

[TatTvamAsi]

Buddha was NOT an incarnation of Vishnu. At least, 99% of Hindus don't subscribe to that theory. He was an ordinary man, a prince however, who became enlightened like thousands of other men in India in the days of yore.

Since many Hindus converted to Buddhism, several orthodox Hindus immediately posited this theory that Buddha is the 9th Avatar of Vishnu. This is total bunk because it is totally unsupported by the scriptures.

[shian]

one said yes
and
other said no

so ?

i know.. some people who refuge in the name of ABC will think person who refuge in the name of DEF is stupid or lower

but dont forget the fact

some people who refuge in the name of XYZ is think person who refuge in the name of ABC is stupid or lower...

you said my beliefe is lower believe, but he said your believe is lower, and so on...

even we are same refuge in the name of ABC , but if we have different ways to refuge in the name of ABC, you can say that my way is lower and so on...

i believe we must have problem of "way" with our Dharma Brothers and Sisters , right ???

many Buddhist now can speak about "Anatta" but wow~ Ego still big! This is become very Atta Lol

many person who beliefe in the love of XXX name now heart is not full of XXX name, but full of wroth to convert others

very wonderfull if others see some good from us and start to attracted to what we believe (or the way).

[devotee]

Originally Posted by TatTvamAsi

He was an ordinary man, a prince however, who became enlightened like thousands of other men in India in the days of yore.

Namaste TatTvamAsi,

How can the man who attained enlightenment be ordinary ?

"Buddha is a Vishnu incarnate or not", may be a debatable issue but Hindus, in general, do have a high respect for him. The one who attains One-ness with the reality, becomes that. So, I don't see any harm in accepting Buddha an incarnation of Vishnu, though I agree with you that it is not supported by Hindu Scriptures.

OM

[srivijaya]

Originally Posted by devotee

How can the man who attained enlightenment be ordinary ?

If enlightenment is not possible for ordinary people, what is the point of religious teachings?

I don't see any harm in accepting Buddha an incarnation of Vishnu, though I agree with you that it is not supported by Hindu Scriptures.

Indeed. If Buddha were an incarnation of a Hindu God, whose mission was to teach the Hindu faith, he would have instructed his followers to pay homage to the gods and he would have confirmed teachings on the atman and so forth.

None of this can be found within the suttas. In fact the opposite is the case. He advises his followers to abandon such practices.

Now this does not make Buddhism better or worse than Hinduism - there's no value judgement implied here. But it does make them two different paths.

Namaste