Buddha chose Hinduism as "wrong path" to teach us a lesson?

[honeydakini]

Well, this is something I haven't heard before and I find the comparison to the Shugden issue quite a strange one. I have been intrigued by the recent discussions about Kopan / FPMT / Lama Zopa with regards to their practice of Shugden so have been doing some reading on the Lama Yeshe Wisdom Archives. I found this:

At one point, when things in Tibet became very difficult politically, His Holiness came to Dromo Geshe Rinpoche’s monastery in southern Tibet. At that time the Tibetan government could not decide whether His Holiness should go on to India or back to Lhasa. So His Holiness and his ministers consulted Dromo Geshe Rinpoche’s monastery’s protector, the one in question. Through the oracle, Shugden said that His Holiness should not go to India. This protected Tibet for another year or for so. What I have heard is that after that experience, His Holiness would recite prayers to Shugden regularly. However, after many years of analysis, when His Holiness was about to take the initiation of Shugden, he received signs in a dream that he should not. As a result, he didn’t take the initiation.

This is the same as what Guru Shakyamuni Buddha did. He first became enlightened inconceivably long ago, not, as history tells us, two-and-a-half thousand years ago in India. According to the Theravada tradition, that’s what happened, but the Mahayana does not accept this—we believe he became enlightened inconceivably long ago. Therefore, as an enlightened being, how can the Buddha make a mistake? He simply practiced Hinduism to show sentient beings that it was the wrong path. This is just what His Holiness did; he practiced Shugden to show us it was wrong.

The blinding difference, I'm sure you'll all note however, is that when Buddha decided not to pursue the path of Hinduism, there was no forced voting, persecution, ostracism or burning of Hindu statues. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

Just wondering what your thoughts may be on this?

[thor]

One possible analysis (which will probably be unpopular in this forum) is that during Buddha Shakyamuni's time, people had the merits to understand and practice easily hence by merely abandoning the practice, it was sufficient to indicate that Hinduism was wrong. Whereas in our time, Dalai Lama has to perform much more severe actions to convey the same message that Dorje Shugden is 'wrong'.

Similar to how the commentaries have become longer and longer in order for people of this degenerate age to understand them. Or how people would gain attainments, realisations, arhat-hood merely by listening to Buddha's teachings but not today.

I like what you say tho "The blinding difference, I'm sure you'll all note however, is that when Buddha decided not to pursue the path of Hinduism, there was no forced voting, persecution, ostracism or burning of Hindu statues."

Very true

[Lineageholder]

I'm sorry as I'm about to speak quite strongly and directly:  I hope it won't offend anyone but the truth has to be said.

Dignaga advised the wise ones to cover their ears if anyone said that logic was not required to attain enlightenment.  Now we have a similar situation - the silver tongued but illogical mara-like arguments of those who wish to justify the Dalai Lama's actions at any cost, losing Buddhism in the process.

These are degenerate times.  The Dalai Lama is a fraud and the FPMT are apparently following a fraud.  They will do anything to exalt the Dalai Lama and make his actions look like Avalokiteshvara's.  This is the truth.

Therefore, for the wise ones who have faith in the true tradition of the Ganden Tradition of Manjugosha Losang Dragpa and who wish to maintain his holy tradition as taught by the Glorious Pabongkha and Kyabje Trijang Dorjechang, COVER YOUR EARS when confronted with the distorted justifications of the FPMT for the Dalai Lama's destruction of Losang Dragpa's tradition.

[Lineageholder]

However, after many years of analysis, when His Holiness was about to take the initiation of Shugden, he received signs in a dream that he should not. As a result, he didn’t take the initiation.

So the Dalai Lama trusted his own dreams, which are mistaken appearances to a confused mind, instead of his own Guru's wisdom and didn't take the initiation of Dorje Shugden, EVEN THOUGH Dorje Shugden had proved to be reliable through his own experience and had actually enabled the DL to safely escape from Tibet?

What is that if not stupidity?  How can any of the Dalai Lama's decisions be trusted on the basis of this event?

[Middleway]

If Buddha Shakyamuni had persecuted Hindu's I would NOT be a Buddhist today!!!

[Vajraprotector]

The Perfection of Wisdom pronounces that dreams are not reliable.  Actually according to the DL himself in his 1978 speech, he didn't take the initiation because "Nechung" advised him not to.  Given the fact that the DL was considering taking the initiation means he did a lot of consideration about it, and knew that it entailed adherence to the pure Gelug view.  His initial objection to it was not on that ground, instead it was based on the oracle's advice.  That means his arguments now that it is a sectarian practice that limited his "ecumenicalism" is an anachronistic excuse.

I find it quite weird that Dalai Lama didn't consult/ listen to his Guru but followed Nechung's advice.

Also, in the 70s, Dalai Lama's reason for discouraging DS practice was that the practice is in conflict with the state protector Pehar and with the main protective goddess of the Gelug tradition and the Tibetan people, Palden Lhamo. Anyone knows more about the conflict with Palden Lhamo?

Dalai Lama's also stated that DS practice conflict with his eclectic religious approach as well as his political responsibilities, but how can Dalai Lama be "sectarian" if the Dalai Lama is already the spiritual head of Tibet?

The practice is never sectarian, but by HH denouncing the practice 'sectarian' and giving it up, people will label it sectarian because Dalai Lama is supposed to be all embracing but HH despise this particular practice.

[Midakpa]

I agree with Trinley Kalsang's comments. Buddhism was driven out of India, due to the inability of the Buddhists to debate, and other reasons. Hinduism, being an all-embracing religion, never rejected Buddhism. It regards Buddhism as just "a page in the book of Hinduism". Buddha is just one of its avatars.

Buddhism has also been influenced by Hinduism. Some of the Buddhas practised by Buddhists are also deities worshipped by the Hindus. In Buddhist literature, we find stories of Hindu gods helping the Buddha and going to him for advice. So, in Buddhism, Buddha is supreme, the enlightened one, while the Hindu gods are still in samsara. Try telling the Hindus that.

[Lee Dhi]

Wow, this is a very new and interesting piece of information for me. Thank you for sharing and presenting an opportunity for a fresh discussion regarding Dorje Shugden and Dalai Lama.

As Duldzin pointed out: different times require different methods and approaches. From my point of view, maybe before the time Buddhadharma flourished through the teachings of Lord Shyakamuni, the mind set of the people as well as the living conditions were more “raw” and undeveloped. Therefore, Hinduism was a more suitable path for that time. As civilization changed form, Budddhism became the “new” path towards attainments and enlightenment.

I do not believe that this would define either Hinduism or Buddhism to be the right/wrong path. The most important matter is that both paths are intended to help sentient beings achieve liberation and happiness.

Relating this to Dalai Lama and Dorje Shugden: Dalai Lama is in his mid-seventies and, with due respect, his time is coming to an end. With the foreseeable succession conflict that may arise between Karmapa Lama (official # 3 in status) and Panchen Lama (official # 2 in status), it is important that a powerful Dharma protector with strong karmic link with sentient beings of this time has strong presence. There are reading materials that state Dorje Shugden is such a Dharma Protector. Therefore, I do not see that H.H practiced Dorje Shugden to show is it is “wrong”. Instead, based on results, H.H banned the practice to have it obtain publicity and awareness internationally.

[Geronimo]

There we go again with face saving egotism to secure one's own disposition not to have been made a fool.
Lee Dhi, you say," Instead, based on results, H.H banned the practice to have it obtain publicity and awareness internationally."
 I am nobody's fool or patsy! If the Dalia Lama is playing a ruse, he forgot and attacked me and mine personally as he Rused his way through the faux Kalachakra of 1999. I think they call it Black Magic not Practicing the Dharma. I am quite tired of this Sunday School rheotic to enshrine a man who for better or worse, ran and maintained a Serf-Slave Racket for hundreds of years. Now, as man who believes the world is a better place for democratic ideals and the Bill Of Rights came into being approximately at the same time as this Lama Serf Institution stuff. The Dalia Lamas were not uneducated or completely cut off from the world. One or all of the past 1775 began to hear the Ring Of Freedom and France made it impossible for the lamas to ignore completely. So, why would a God King, a Buddha of Compassion keep millions of Tibetans locked up in isolation for centuries? Looking at Tibet through the aristocrats eyes, is like living with Bill Gates and living his lifestyle.Microscopically tiny segment of an entire population. How was living for 34-37 years in Tibet as a slave or a serf a praise to the Dalia Lama and the Overseers,these people were no better than the worst
Southern Plantation Slave Owners of the American South.Get a grip on what was going on from the common man's view. What kind of Bodichitta gets generated by people being mutilated?How is he equated to a Living Buddha. He is no fool, he knew exactly what was going on ,even though in the movie called Kundun, he has a spy glass to peer over the edge of the top floor of his private apartment building the Potala. While below people starved and died and were sick of being worked to death. WHAT DID THE DALIA LAMAS EVER REALLY DO FOR THEM? HE COULD HAVE TREATED THEM WITH COMPASSION AND KINDNESS INSTEAD OF BEING A DESPOT. Ask him about the murder rap and then you might suspect what he is hiding.  I have never met a lama that told me this was a ruse. haha! Not even remotely funny! Is it?

[Middleway]

"Therefore, I do not see that H.H practiced Dorje Shugden to show is it is “wrong”. Instead, based on results, H.H banned the practice to have it obtain publicity and awareness internationally. "

Have you read the whole thread 'Are the Buddhas, DalaiLama & Dorje Shugden insane? Or is it divine crazy wisdom?'?

There's some logical refutations of the idea that a ban can be a cause of the banned thing flourishing in there which I think you should read.  It's helpful to read them in light of A friends assertions regarding pure view found in 'KYABJE TRIJANG RINPOCHE'S ADVICE REGARDING DORJE SHUGDEN AND DALAI LAMA...'
If you have read them you have obviously concluded they are wrong.  Can I ask why?

If you are going to respond to this maybe you could do so in one of these threads, or maybe the one you started recently about 'a new choice' - keeping track of this debate over various threads reduces the power of the debate to produce clear results.

Thanks

[Big Uncle]

I think it is blatantly obvious that the logic is unsound and I have never heard that theory about Buddha Shakyamuni practicing Hinduism in order to discredit it. It sounds ridiculous and furthermore, it is a very poor reason to associate it with Dorje Shugden. I can't believe great scholars and teachers are reduced to spouting such things in order enforce a ban. It only serves to reinforce my belief that Dorje Shugden is indeed beneficial and powerful.

[emptymountains]

Therefore, Hinduism was a more suitable path for that time. As civilization changed form, Budddhism became the “new” path towards attainments and enlightenment.

I do not believe that this would define either Hinduism or Buddhism to be the right/wrong path. The most important matter is that both paths are intended to help sentient beings achieve liberation and happiness.

Does Hinduism have teachings on the emptiness of inherent existence of all phenomena? 

I don't believe that to co-exist we have to say that all religions teach the same thing:

http://dharmaprotector.wordpress.com/2008/11/27/arent-all-religions-saying-the-same-thing/

[honeydakini]

thanks for all the views.

Thanks Trinley kelsang for pointing out also that Hinduism was the religion of the day after all. It wasn't so much that Shakyamuni "tried it out to diss it" but that he also skilfully chose to follow certain conventions or traditions at the time. This would have helped him gain greater adherence with the people later. More importantly too, is that he always respected the existing traditions of the time and the prevalence of debate allowed people to discover and learn the right paths for themselves.

What is most disappointing in all this is to see that this is the line of argument that such a prevalent and well-respected Buddhist organisation is taking. It is not insulting to both Buddhists and to Hindus, as they directly suggest that Hinduism is "not the right way" while Buddhism is... which is something even Shakyamuni never said!

[emptymountains]

Through its teachings on moral discipline, practitioners of non-Buddhist religions can achieve higher rebirth, but without teachings on emptiness of inherent existence it is not a path to liberation.

Even Chandrakirti said that the paths (i.e., actions) leading to the higher realms are "wrong paths."

[emptymountains]

Samadhi without renunciation = mundane concentration

Samadhi with renunciation = supramundane concentration

In addition to emptiness and bodhichitta, renunciation of pervasive suffering is also only taught in Buddhadharma. The two religions don't identify samsara in the same way, which of course means that they don't identify moksha in the same way.

Of course, Trinley, I agree with what you are saying. It is easy to veer off into one extreme or another. The extreme I am concerned about is saying that if the two religions have something in common (e.g., path to higher realms, or samadhi, etc.), this does not automatically mean that the two religions on their own lead to the same result (i.e., liberation).