teachings of Lord Mahavira and Gautam Buddha
Answers
Answered by
3
the GAUTAMA BUDDHA and MAHAVIRA.....absolute topic to discuss, as these two were at the same time.
Basically, there is difference in EXPLANATION of the experience but there is no difference on the platform of experience itself.
The greatest contradiction between the two is that GAUTAMA BUDDHA DENIES THE SOUL AND MAHAVIRA ENDORSE THE SOUL.
But, at the deepest point they do not have any differences.
The acceptance and denial of soul from both respectively is based on the ego.
On the other hand Mahavir said, the person who realise himself as a soul, is liberated. On the deepest point, he meant to explain that, once a person realise himself as a soul, than the body does not have any meaning and when body does not have any meaning than the "I"ness comes to an end and soul is existence...the purest of one.
Buddha never preached nihilism
Anatta refers only to the absence of the permanent soul as pertains any one of the psycho-physical (namo-rupa) attributes, or Khandhas (skandhas, aggregates). Anatta/Anatman in the earliest Buddhist texts, the Nikayas, is an adjective, (A is anatta, B is anatta, C is anatta). The commonly held belief to wit that: “Anatta means no-soul, therefore Buddhism taught that there was no soul” is a concept, which cannot be found or doctrinally substantiated by means of the Nikayas, the sutras, of Buddhism.
KARMAS OF MANY LIFE TIMES MAKES ONE’S NATURE
Veda vyasa on karma of gods- Devipuran
O king! Everybody, even Brahmâ, Visnu and Mahes'a all under the influence of this Karma! And they experience pleasure, pain, old age, disease and death, joy and sorrow, lust, anger, greed and other bodily qualities, out of the effects of this Karma, which we call ordinarily Fate. Therefore love,hatred and other bodily qualities all predominate equally in all bodies. Anger, jealousy, hatred, and other similar qualities arise in the Devas, men, and birds owing to some sort of dislikes on previous occasions; and love, compassion, pity, etc., arise out of some sort of likings, existing already.
Gautama Buddha and Mahavira ;They followed Intellect- Conscience and both are observed Sattvic- Virtues nature therefore observed limits on Senses and followed Dharma. Buddha did not make another Buddha and Mahavira did not make another Mahavira. They gave Art of Living, Not Salvation
Basically, there is difference in EXPLANATION of the experience but there is no difference on the platform of experience itself.
The greatest contradiction between the two is that GAUTAMA BUDDHA DENIES THE SOUL AND MAHAVIRA ENDORSE THE SOUL.
But, at the deepest point they do not have any differences.
The acceptance and denial of soul from both respectively is based on the ego.
On the other hand Mahavir said, the person who realise himself as a soul, is liberated. On the deepest point, he meant to explain that, once a person realise himself as a soul, than the body does not have any meaning and when body does not have any meaning than the "I"ness comes to an end and soul is existence...the purest of one.
Buddha never preached nihilism
Anatta refers only to the absence of the permanent soul as pertains any one of the psycho-physical (namo-rupa) attributes, or Khandhas (skandhas, aggregates). Anatta/Anatman in the earliest Buddhist texts, the Nikayas, is an adjective, (A is anatta, B is anatta, C is anatta). The commonly held belief to wit that: “Anatta means no-soul, therefore Buddhism taught that there was no soul” is a concept, which cannot be found or doctrinally substantiated by means of the Nikayas, the sutras, of Buddhism.
KARMAS OF MANY LIFE TIMES MAKES ONE’S NATURE
Veda vyasa on karma of gods- Devipuran
O king! Everybody, even Brahmâ, Visnu and Mahes'a all under the influence of this Karma! And they experience pleasure, pain, old age, disease and death, joy and sorrow, lust, anger, greed and other bodily qualities, out of the effects of this Karma, which we call ordinarily Fate. Therefore love,hatred and other bodily qualities all predominate equally in all bodies. Anger, jealousy, hatred, and other similar qualities arise in the Devas, men, and birds owing to some sort of dislikes on previous occasions; and love, compassion, pity, etc., arise out of some sort of likings, existing already.
Gautama Buddha and Mahavira ;They followed Intellect- Conscience and both are observed Sattvic- Virtues nature therefore observed limits on Senses and followed Dharma. Buddha did not make another Buddha and Mahavira did not make another Mahavira. They gave Art of Living, Not Salvation
Attachments:
Similar questions