RongzomFan

I never said the Buddha rejected Vedantic teaching. I have always been consistent that this is not possible, since Vedanta did not exist at the time. And the quote YOU provided says the Upanishads came AFTER the Buddha.

LOL The further funny thing, is I addressed this stuff on like page 11. I remember talking about aesthetism and jainism. And it looks like hajimesaito already addressed this in more detail early on as well

Shramana, as your lengthly quote says http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shramana

dwai, did you even read what you quoted and underlined?

Interesting read

I studied hinduism and buddhism in college a few years ago. I do not know where this info is exaclty from, but I do know that in my part of India, the population was buddhist. So I am restored to the true faith of my ancestors. And also buddhism practically speaking has much clearer texts to understand things than hinduism, which is often full of poetry and bhakti.

Of course there are different schools of buddhist teaching. But one school does not reject the other. Ask a Theravidin monk if he rejects Mahayana. He doesn't

They were not Vedic/Upanishadic gurus

Schools do not reject other schools. Some theravadins have even adopted Madhyamkia, which is simply a return to the message of the Pali canon after abhidharma

Are you now saying the Buddha STUDIED Vedanta and Sankhya personally? There is no indication of this at all in the Pali canon! I have read as much critical edition of the Pali canon as I could. Thats how I know Buddha practiced kechari mudra. That is why I said that online discussion was bullshit! Buddha's gurus were mystics. That is all you can say about them, without being a deluded hindu nationalist.

Not true. I don't even really think you believe it. Even Vajrayana does not reject Theravada as being untrue.

dwai your criticism of hamije doesn't make sense The buddhist scriptures talk about Brahma not Brahman. Yes Brahma the creator deity. That was his entire point. And then you criticized him for not knowing what he is talking about?

Thats Ok I don't think anyone buys that buddhism was pro-brahminism. Good luck with your trolling.

If David Gordon White is not sufficient.... I have to look through my college textbooks and notes to find definitive proof for the percentage/size of the buddhist population in india at its peak. Unfortunately I am away on business. I also emailed a couple of historians. Real ones like David Gray at Santa Clara I just happened to read David Gordon White recently, which is why I mentioned him.

Probably neither, since I don't have a teacher or master

dwai, I don't know who those two other authors are, but I really don't have a problem with David Gordon White. He is a fine scholar in my opinion. Are you basing this opinion on a couple of bad amazon reviews? If I was a New Age tantrist I would probably give him a bad review too! His books are scholarly, not meant to provide some manual on yoga as it seems some people wanted!!

it is about the history of India, not spirituality or dick measuring thanks

No it is definitely true for many areas like Andhra. Thats why I asked which part of India you are from. Why do you think Vaishnavism is so prevalent in India? Ever heard of buddhistic vaishnavism? All the buddhists became Vaishnava. I even see this fact detailed in books such as the The Alchemical Body by David Gordon White, as if it is common knowledge in academia, which it is. I would love for you to explain all the Mahayana elements in Hinduism. Where did idol worship come from?

Buddhism was a small passing phase? It was the biggest and longest phase. I guess you really don't have a clue. Hinduism today is full of Mahayana elements. There are ancient temples in India today where the Shiva lingas are actually old Ashoka pillars.

FINALLY Some logic. Thats all I wanted. Congrats. Now you just have to acknowledge that "India" was buddhist at one point. BTW, philbrowser, that amateur discussion is the biggest load of crap I have read in a long time.

mikaelz Thanks for those articles! Looks like our friend dwai is actually carrying out the tradtion of European orientalists NOT ME!

No that is utter nonsense! Really now? Really? What part of India are you from by the way? And what percentage of Indian population was ever Tribal, since 7000 BCE? Not even 5 %! What does that have to do with anything? All I am saying is that some modern people who were isolated have preserved an ancient religion predating hinduism, which is buddhism. Kapila predated the Buddha by a good 3 millenia. Yeah in mythology, not in actual history. Samkhya in actual history came WAY after the Buddha. You can't argue with this. What are the oldest texts we have? Everyone does this shit. Like in the west certain medieval texts are ascribed to King Solomon. You are not supposed to take it seriously. This is like believing Adi Shankara defeated buddhists in debate. This has been debunked by Eliot Deutsch and others. I said Vedanta is significantly older than The Buddha. Post ONE piece of evidence to support this statement. It is 13 pages already. It is time to put up or shut up. Heck I don't even need evidence. Just give me ONE logical argument! Did it ever occur to you that Adi Shankara could have resurrrected an ancient form of knowledge that STILL post dates the Buddha? The Buddha is that old! Not even all Brahmins have accepted the Vedanta yet. P.S. I admit the Vedas are older than the Buddha. So why do I have read that book about astrological correspondances within the vedas?

Yes you would have a problem accepting your ancestors were buddhist. Are you kidding me about this? Do you deny that most of India was buddhist at one point? Ok maybe your ancestors were the minority Brahmin community and continued 100% pure bloodlines to the present day. Congrats. Most Indians are supposed to be descended from sages. Don't give me that shit. I am descended from Baradwaj supposedley. My arguments are too feeble to address? I am not even arguing anything. I am suggesting you read some actual books. I have actually studied Indian history in college at the University of Pittsburgh. I have read many academic history books. I have cited wikipedia entries from which you can read actual history books. They are the references at the bottom. Are you claiming the tribals practicing buddhism references on wikipedia are wrong? So basically the whole of academia is wrong and you are right? Again I challenge you to email any worthwhile historian. I frequently email authors after reading their books. Like James Mallinson after reading his kecharividya book. Explain to me again how vedanta came before the Buddha? I am really curious what you will come up this time. Your precious Sankhya philophy cannot be dated reliably back to that ancient sage you cited. It is post buddhist. Was Adi Shankara or Buddha a time traveler? Logically one of them would have to be, unless you are using the Upanishads in your argument. Are you? And someone cited Vivekananda. I don't know how reliable he is, but don't make me whip out his quotes about hinduism being a hybrid of buddhism, because I will.

OH COME ON NOW If nothing else, we have demonstrated that buddhism predated vedanta by millenia! Vedism does not equal vedanta at all!! There are some brahmins that have never adopted the vedanta! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nambudiri For some reason, I was shown a documentary of these very same brahmins in high school. This is mainstream academia!!! Also wikipedia mentions tribals being buddhist in multiple places.....Hopefully you will read some of the references on wikipedia, an actual book or two, and realize the true faith of your ancestors. Your ancestors were buddhist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of_Buddhism_in_India#Survival_of_Buddhism_in_India I read in one book that first came buddhism, then came female deity worship, and then finally modern male deity worship.

I thought Samkhya was WAY after the Buddha. And I agree yoga predates the Buddha. Buddha performed kechari mudra in the pali canon believe it or not. What I am saying is that: Patanjali's branches of yoga and notions of samadhi are influenced heavily by buddhism.