Correct me if I'm wrong, but am I not correct when I say Buddhism is just another name for the Jnana Yoga the Gita preached??? And was the Buddha not a practitioner of both Karma Yoga, and Raja Yoga???
All religions can be seen in this light. There are small differences as the spiritual practice or sadhana is modified to suit different cultures, personalities and time periods. The essence of all is one truth only. There is a saying in HIndu scripture "The truth is same, the wise teach it in different ways." But yes, Buddha is a jnanavatar, with the specifi purpose of spreading knowledge and the jnana marga.
Not only jnana yoga, but other aspects too are similar in Hindu and Buddhist teachings. The Pure Land school of Japan for instance have practices very reminiscent of Bhakti. I think the main difference between Hinduism and Buddhism is Buddha's rejection of the Vedas - Also, there may have been Buddhist influences on Hindu philosophy - I've heard Shankara refered to as 'Hinduism's answer to the Buddha' before now.
Shankara's teachings have always seemed very reminiscent to the Buddha's to me, only that he stresses the importance of Bhakti. I've read all over though that Shankara disagreed with Buddhism and said that his non-dualism wasn't the same at all as Mahayana's sunyata. But those are just words, are they not the same??? I suppose my spirituality so far has been a sort of mixture of Buddhism and Advaita(maybe, again, I'm not sure on the sects), so when I read about how the two schools don't work together, I get confused. I see no contradictions if you can jsut get past the words. I'm sort of trying to follow the Eightfold Path, but with the addition of Bhakti Yoga, and with a sort of combined philosophy of Advaita and Buddhism backing it all up. I should probably have just started a new thread, but I've got you guys here so if you could clear up more confusion for me that'd be wonderful! You guys have been a great deal of help to me (all of you, but specifically BBB, and Bhaskar), I don't have any like-minded spiritual friends, and therefore, very few friends at all. It's hard for me to trust my own intuition sometimes, so hearing your views has been very helpful.
This is a good place to find some like-minded people. As for Buddhism and Shankara - One of the main differences is in the Buddha's doctrine of 'no-self' - whilst according to Advaita, Brahman is the One Self of all. However, it's mainly, as you have intuited, a question of definitions, or of a different way of seeing and describing the same thing. Which is really beyond description, or the capacity of the thinking mind to grasp or know. If I want to go to Rome, there are many roads that lead there. But which one I select will depend on where I am now. Where different Yoga's are concerned, in practice, there is usually some overlap. So with Bhakti and Jnana - the more you love, the more you will know, the more you know, the more you will love. But also, they engage different parts of our being. Bhakti is more of the heart, Jnana of mind - or higher mind. Krishna says they lead to the same goal.
The way I've always looked at Buddhism, is that the Buddha preached almost the negation of the goal. Thus the not-self doctrine. He never really said much of Nirvana or Atman at all, he just taught what is, right now, and how to see it for what it is. But to me, it seems that if you can look at it from all sorts of different angles, than why not?
One famous saying - can't remember to whom it's attributed to now, but it comes from the Advaita, is that all we can say of Brahman is 'neti neti' - not this, not this. And that is really the method of Jnana Yoga - to detach the consciousness progressively from all it's objects, all the thoughts, perceptions, feelings etc, in a sense to negate all experience, until only the pure essential being remains.
At the time of Shankara Buddhism had lost the positive and life-affirming nature of Sri Buddha's teaching and dwindled to a nihilistic and joyless world-view, which is what the great acharya opposed. There was no argument against the Buddha, it was against those who had lost the grip on the true essence of buddhism.
Yes, I agree there is a unity in both these religions. Both fingers pointing at the moon... the moon is the one conciousness without seperation.
