Hinduism and Buddhism: Convergent or Divergent - Rajath V

[@shaan10800]

I am a practitioner of Mahayana. Rajath has got it wrong when he collapses NIHILISM, SHUNYAVADA and MADHYAMIKA into one view. Nagarjuna's commentaries on Shunyavada constitute what has now come to be known as MADHYAMIKA, and it IS NOT NIHILISM (a Western category). I am fully with Rajiv Malhotra's initiative to re-member the Bharatiya narrative, take ownership of it with responsibility, and rigorously debunk the false narratives being dangerously disseminated by the neo-orientalists of the like of Pollock. But, in order to see this Bharatiya narrative in its proper form, it is essential not to oversimplify the complex fabric of Buddha Dharma. Pollock's take on Buddhism is flawed in many respects. In responding to Pollock, it is important that we study Buddha Dharma, especially the work of the Nalanda Panditas throughly and rigorously. Please, let us not make the mistake of just glossing over Buddha Dharma in a cursory fashion.

[@kusali11]

Jayashankar Rajagopalan, as an Indian thanks for this post. Anyone who calls Madhyamika Nihilism clearly doesn't understand Buddha's most profound teaching. Like you I'm also a big supporter of Rajivji's work but for myself really disappointed in his support of this one sided apologetics. I really feel he'll have the greatest impact on the world if he approaches his work with a more impartial stance on Indian philosophical tenents, let scholars from every view point hash it out. Rajivji is proving to be a great catalyst and facilitator, he can reach even greater heights with that kind of openness. Strangely with a view like that he can even win over minds prone to a more leftist viewpoint. It's interesting to me that in these lectures they've almost given ownership of Buddhism to the likes of Pollock. Certainly Buddha doesn't belong to any one nation or race but it's a special thing if Indians can find some ownership in him again. Some of these people in this video surely had ancestors who were Buddhist. When His Holiness the Dalai Lama addresses an Indian crowd all he repeatedly says is "this is your knowledge".

[@shaan10800]

Also, there are many Mahayana practitioners who have also translated Buddhist Sutras and Shastras exceptionally well. Swadeshi Indology ought to try and get some of them into this current endeavour which aspires to reclaim scholarly and academic ownership of Bharatiyata. Among those who have made presentations on Swadeshi Indology so far, I see no Mahayana practitioners (correct me if I am wrong). It will be desirable to get someone to collaborate from among the Mahayana practitioners. Someone who has studied under Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche, for instance. I am concerned about getting the Mahayana practitioners to collaborate with Infinity Foundation's laudable efforts because I get a sense that if that is not done, the work will remain incomplete. IT IS IMPORTANT TO GET THE MAHAYANA VIEW INTO THIS ALL IMPORTANT EXERCISE. We can not be contented with just presentations on Buddhism by those who are not practitioners of the Buddha Dharma. If our thinking tells us that it is enough to get non-practitioners of Buddha Dharma, especially Mahayana, to comment and write on Buddha Dharma, it will end up being a big mistake.

[@kusali11]

Jayashankar, yes I agree Rajivji and Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche would form a great alliance. DKR recent letter about Aung San Suu Kyi reveals that facebook.com/djkhyentse/photos/pcb.2820135831345213/2820134431345353/?type=3&theater

[@viveknsharma]

This is the precise reason why Our Hinduism gets so easily dubbed as a mistake by the western scholars. The notion of Yagya and associated rituals of "sacrifice" was very hotly debated by Sri Sri Sri Ayyappa Dikshitar. He proved that indeed the sacrifice does not mean the physical sacrifice of animal species, at the very first place. However, such was His Staunch and Awe-Inspiring Faith on the Vedas that He said even if the mantric prescriptions are taken to literally interpret sacrifice as physical sacrifice of horses, in Vajpayee Yagya as referred to in this talk, even then, The Vedic Yagya will be Moksha-Daayak to those Horses and Sri Sri Sri Ayyappa Dikshitar demonstrated that empirically. However, the Mighty Ayyappa, the Knower of The Vedas as verily He was, quickly added the caveat that such Yagyas and such ceremonies should be conceived and invoked only in the rarest of the rare situations. Faithlessness and tremendous disrespect to the Vedas is the root reason for hinduphobia in academics.

[@poonamabbi7448]

I am no expert on it, but I do have some sort of understanding of the language & the white culture. The western "culture" have an almost nonexistent concept of reverence & respect the only respect understood by them & accepted by them is very subjective,,, each ne accepts respect ONLY when HE is being shown any respect. The moment it ie expressed in a way that they DO NOT UNDERSTAND & DO NOT KNOW, they begin to criticise it in their language, using vocabulary , a part of which, even they don't understand & use it ONLY to APPEAR scholarly

[@viveknsharma]

Brilliantly articulated...

[@punchipoint8457]

Westerners have so many theories about Indian culture and history. The new Indian interest for many things, especially Buddhism is a reaction to these western theories.

[@punchipoint8457]

@ 20:10 Please don't waste time with what these westerners say - its so ridiculous to say that Buddhism was an intermediate thing which was paving the way to Christianity. There's no dispute that Buddhism is an Indian philosophy. Its relationship to Hinduism is very close, not opposite or against Hinduism as westerners want to claim.

[@viveknsharma]

Prof. Rajath is an extremely intelligent man... However, His remarks on Brahma Sutras not including naastika darshanas are a bit thought provoking and interesting.

[@nanjappa42]

Many interesting points, but in rushing through, the focus gets lost. I felt the theme is not developed well. May be time constraint.

[@vittalaswamy551]

Sacrifices means we have to take different meaning?

[@ivarhakuse8572]

Just from the introduction to the speaker I can imagine the immediate response would be, no matter how good the speaker and his research, well he's not a got his doctorate in a related subject such as Buddhism has he? Electrical engineering?

[@folkmusicloverscentre340]

I can,t understand that why u always see the indian philosophy with a abrahimc lens like christian raise against the jwese islam raise against christianity then budhism raise against brahminism what is this why u thing it is always against sanatan culture have too many philosophy some point they looks on same ground but at some point they looks at diffrent ground the may have conflicts but they all are hindu philosophy there are many truth and many way to find it but according to abrahmic tradition u should leave one to join other but in indian tradition there is no need to leave anything for join a new thing