I don't know if this has ever been done before, but I'd like to know if anyone knows the major and minor differences between the two traditions. I have gained some understanding of the underlying meanings in the Tripitaka, but am still somewhat in the dark when it comes to the Vedas. Could someone please enlighten me on the subject?

Buddhism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism)

Hinduism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism)

Geez, that was easy.

Hinduism is cool. Buddhism is not.

quote:Originally posted by niggersexual:

Hinduism is cool. Buddhism is not.

Whats cool about Hinduism? Why is Buddhism not cool?

I was hoping for something along the lines of a cross-examination.

I would really like to know why you place more merit in Hinduism than Buddhism, niggersexual.

[This message has been edited by NurotiK_SykotiK (edited 05-25-2006).]

Hinduism is possibly the oldest religion which developed a sort of orthodoxy (yes, I'm aware that current Hindu beliefs vary greatly and encompass somewhere in the millions of devas). Buddhism evolved from Hinduism, and in doing so, Siddhartha Gautama saught to eliminate dogma and, in a general sense, a caste system.

Buddhism, and when I say Buddhism I mean the more traditional forms rather than Mahayana, is a personal path for growth and enlightenment. No deity is included, none is necessary.

Hinduism is an odd religion in that it can both be said that it is monotheistic and polytheistic. Polytheistic in the sense that devas are deific. However, when taken into consideration that all of the devas are manifestations of the one supreme Brahman it can be said that their beliefs consititute a monotheistic religion (albeit pantheistic as well).

When you ask for them to be compared and contrasted I don't really know what to say more than that. Any specific questions about either one I can probably answer for you though.... Or maybe what I have said has been enough.

quote:Originally posted by Iam:

Hinduism is possibly the oldest religion which developed a sort of orthodoxy (yes, I'm aware that current Hindu beliefs vary greatly and encompass somewhere in the millions of devas). Buddhism evolved from Hinduism, and in doing so, Siddhartha Gautama saught to eliminate dogma and, in a general sense, a caste system.

Buddhism, and when I say Buddhism I mean the more traditional forms rather than Mahayana, is a personal path for growth and enlightenment. No deity is included, none is necessary.

Hinduism is an odd religion in that it can both be said that it is monotheistic and polytheistic. Polytheistic in the sense that devas are deific. However, when taken into consideration that all of the devas are manifestations of the one supreme Brahman it can be said that their beliefs consititute a monotheistic religion (albeit pantheistic as well).

When you ask for them to be compared and contrasted I don't really know what to say more than that. Any specific questions about either one I can probably answer for you though.... Or maybe what I have said has been enough.



When you speak of the deities in Buddhism, I wouldn't really consider them to be an actual objective entity. From what I've encountered they're typically a personification of the virtues of Buddhahood and Bodhisattvahood (particularly in the Varjrayana Vehicle), and being that there are many variations of Buddhism I wouldn't say they are necessary.

Anyways, I was looking for particular philsophical elements and the perspective taken toward intrinsic and extrinsic phenomena. For example, I understand that Buddhism holds the doctrine of the three characteristics of existence: suffering, impermanence, and selflessness.

What approach does Hinduism take?

Did Hinduism ever attempt to refute Buddhism when it was first established?

How do both traditions view one another?

i dont know too much about hinduism....but i believe it has much in common with buddhism.

i wouldnt say buddhism evolved from hinduism... i would say the buddha's search was not fulfilled so he searched and tried many things until he realised something profound....

that he could teach others to end suffering forever....that is all he taught..

for those who want an end to suffering forever....budhism is a fantastic path ....

for those who want other things....then another path is going to be more suitable

than buddhism...

for the buddhist teachings will only teach you to end suffering forever...that is all.

Nurotik, I'm not sure what you're getting at in the first paragraph of your response.. I agree with you that Buddhism sees no deity, and I said so in my post. "No deity is included, none is necessary." Perhaps I have read your paragraph incorrectly.

Your understanding of Buddhism's take on existence is well grounded, though perhaps it would be better said (and more simply) that Buddhists believe that existence is characterized by suffering (1st Noble Truth) and that the cause of the suffering is an inability to form concrete relationships with the world around us because of impermanence (2nd Noble Truth). The path to ending the suffering is selflessness, it is not necessarily a "Characteristic of existence," as it is. Just the path to which we experience the cessation of suffering.

Hindus, and all vedic faiths (Buddhism, Hinduism, and Jainism) agree that life is characterized by suffering. Buddhism is, at is claims to be, the middle path. In one extreme (Jainism) you have a people who have been known to die from starvation because they refuse to do anything that can be construde as harmful, where sheets over their mouths so as not to inhale and kill bacteria and bugs, and don't bathe so as not to kill bacteria and then at the other extreme that is Hinduism you have a religious lifestyle that is similar to other major world religions. One that includes devotion and community and worship, but doesn't really seem to impose strict guidelines upon its adherents. This is, perhaps, caused by the fact that they DO incorporate worship and deity into their lives. They believe that the worship and devotion is the primary factor for cleansing the Atman, whereas Buddhism and Jainism take more the perspective of a.... well, an ascetic really (of course, Buddhism is much less so than Jainism).

I don't believe that Hinduism has ever made an attempt to refute Buddhism at all. In fact, in common times we see that the Hindu belief system is quite varied (as I alluded to in my original post) and it is for this reason that most Hindus actually consider Buddhism to BE simply a sort of subgroup within Hinduism. They did make an attempt to stop Buddhism from achieving a worldwide religion's status though, because they believe that Buddhists are still Hindus.

Personally, I disagree however. The Mahayana vehicle is the only one that I would say could be considered Hinduism. I actually like to call the group 'a Buddhist sect bastardized by Hindu influence'.

There is no hostility between the two, the relationship is one of mutual courtesy and respect, with the exception being that Hindus don't believe Buddhism is a religion unto itself.

quote:Originally posted by Iam:

Nurotik, I'm not sure what you're getting at in the first paragraph of your response.. I agree with you that Buddhism sees no deity, and I said so in my post. "No deity is included, none is necessary." Perhaps I have read your paragraph incorrectly.

Your understanding of Buddhism's take on existence is well grounded, though perhaps it would be better said (and more simply) that Buddhists believe that existence is characterized by suffering (1st Noble Truth) and that the cause of the suffering is an inability to form concrete relationships with the world around us because of impermanence (2nd Noble Truth). The path to ending the suffering is selflessness, it is not necessarily a "Characteristic of existence," as it is. Just the path to which we experience the cessation of suffering.

Hindus, and all vedic faiths (Buddhism, Hinduism, and Jainism) agree that life is characterized by suffering. Buddhism is, at is claims to be, the middle path. In one extreme (Jainism) you have a people who have been known to die from starvation because they refuse to do anything that can be construde as harmful, where sheets over their mouths so as not to inhale and kill bacteria and bugs, and don't bathe so as not to kill bacteria and then at the other extreme that is Hinduism you have a religious lifestyle that is similar to other major world religions. One that includes devotion and community and worship, but doesn't really seem to impose strict guidelines upon its adherents. This is, perhaps, caused by the fact that they DO incorporate worship and deity into their lives. They believe that the worship and devotion is the primary factor for cleansing the Atman, whereas Buddhism and Jainism take more the perspective of a.... well, an ascetic really (of course, Buddhism is much less so than Jainism).

I don't believe that Hinduism has ever made an attempt to refute Buddhism at all. In fact, in common times we see that the Hindu belief system is quite varied (as I alluded to in my original post) and it is for this reason that most Hindus actually consider Buddhism to BE simply a sort of subgroup within Hinduism. They did make an attempt to stop Buddhism from achieving a worldwide religion's status though, because they believe that Buddhists are still Hindus.

Personally, I disagree however. The Mahayana vehicle is the only one that I would say could be considered Hinduism. I actually like to call the group 'a Buddhist sect bastardized by Hindu influence'.

There is no hostility between the two, the relationship is one of mutual courtesy and respect, with the exception being that Hindus don't believe Buddhism is a religion unto itself.



Thank you very much for this post Iam. I believe it is I who misread your post with regard to the deity aspect. I guess I've tried grasping the most intricate teachings of Buddhism with such intensity that I've forgotten the most rudimentary. One thing that I have admired from the two is how tolerant they are of other beliefs. From what I can pull from memory, isn't the Buddha considered an avatar of Vishnu in Hinduism? Such a connection seems to reinforce the tolerance, if not overall acceptance.

Yeah, Hindus and certain groups of Buddhists believe that the Shakyamuni Buddha is the 9th incarnation of Vishnu. There is a difference here though, as Buddhists believe Vishnu was a human figure and so the Buddha is the incarnation of a human whereas Hindus regard him as the incarnation of a divine being.