Origin of Gautama Buddha

Meditationtime Forum Post

Date: Posted 3 years before Aug 17, 2016

MiBeloved 3 years ago

There appears to be much misinformation about Buddha in regards to what sort of being he was. People are thinking that he was just any ordinary entity. There are descriptions of him in the Pali Cannon but it seems that Westerners and some people from the East even, are not able to get their hands on the information or see it and gloss over it.

This is from “In the Buddha’s Words" by Bhikku Bodhi. (page 52)

===================

Then the Blessed One addressed the Venerable Ananda: ‘That being so Ananda, explain more fully the Tathagata’s wonderful and marvelous qualities.”

‘I heard and learnt this venerable sir, from the Blessed One’s own lips. Mindful and clearly comprehending, Ananda, that the Bodhisattva appeared in the Tushita heaven.’ That mindful and clearly comprehending the Bodhisattva appeared in the Tushita heaven – this I remember as a wonderful and marvelous quality of the Blessed One.

I heard and learned this from the Blessed One’s own lips: ‘For the whole of his lifespan the Bodhisattva remained in the Tushita heaven. This too I remember as a wonderful and marvelous quality of the Blessed One.

I hear and learned this from the Blessed One’s own lips: ‘Mindful and clearly comprehending the Bodhisattva passed away from the Tushita heaven and descended into his mother’s womb. This too I remember as a wonderful and marvelous quality of the Blessed One.

I hear and learned this from the Blessed One’s own lips: ‘When the Bodhisattva passed away from the Tushita heaven and descended into his mother’s womb, an immeasurable great radiance surpassing the divine majesty of the devas appeared in the world with its devas, Mara and Brahma, in this population with its ascetics and brahmins, with its devas and human beings. And even in those abysmal world intervals of vacancy, gloom and utter darkness, where the moon and the sun, mightily and powerful as they are, cannot make their light prevail, there too an immeasurable great radiance surpassing the divine majesty of the devas appeared, And beings reborn there perceived each other by that light: ‘So indeed there are also other being reborn here.’ And this ten-thousand-fold world system shook, quaked and trembled, and again an immeasurable great radiance surpassing the divine majesty of the devas appeared in the world.

I hear and learned this from the Blessed One’s own lips: ‘When the Bodhisattva had descended into his mother’s womb, four young devas came to guard at the four quarters so that no human or nonhumans or anyone at all could harm the Bodhisattva or his mother. This too, I remember as a wonderful and marvelous quality of the Blessed one.

I hear and learned this from the Blessed One’s own lips: ‘she became intrinsically virtuous, refraining from killing living beings, from taking what is not given, from sexual misconduct, from false speech, and from wines, liquors, and intoxicants, the basis of negligence.

===================

If this does not clear up the issue I do not know what will. The word devas is Sanskrit for god or God, meaning for a supernatural being with extensive jurisdictional powers or it could mean the Supreme Being also.

The Tushita heaven is higher astral world. One does not die there like a human body does on earth. Instead one disappears from there and appears somewhere else at one’s death there.

All the persons in the Tushita heavens are self-realized entities but some are higher than some.

I do not see how this person can be a regular soul and how there is no evidence of his having no other births except lowly ones in creature bodies in physical or lower astral dimensions.

His influence on his mother also shows that he came in with certain qualities already and did not really develop that while in the physical birth. Anyway, if one still does not get it, then what I can do.

Before birth in Nepal this person had an effulgence which surpassed even Brahma the planetary creator-god, so it is hard for me to follow the explanation that he was just another soul.

Paul 3 years ago

There is a subtle message here, and as I reflect on what it might be what I come up with this, and please correct me if I'm wrong, because I see here, that folks do not have a great regard for Scripture as Authority, as in Ancient times. people today have been ushered through very heavy conditioning and propaganda, and rigorously have had their brains mismanaged to the extent that they have come to cherish cynicism and disregard the fundamental foundations upon which our current language has been developed. Thus we find no common ground. Thus people live in this collective paradigm that is utterly fraught with misunderstanding piled upon misunderstanding and it is through these ears, along with the eyes that Time and mundane experience affords that the semblance of listening takes place.

And why is this important?

Why is God, the concept of God, the philosophy of God, the religion important here and now?

Were they are just projections of mans hopes and dreams and the need to believe in something beyond this shear empty human condition?

Is God important here because the words that were left, are in fact True Authority? Authority in the sense that they can be trusted? Man is so cynical even though scientists have misled humanity for hundreds of years, producing drugs that have more side effects than curative means, producing weapons ready willing and capable of mass destruction, creating a medical profession that is profoundly corrupt at nearly every level..Why then do we, as a people, continue to put our trust in their words while we continue to neglect the words that come from Divine Inspiration?

Well part of the problem, I suppose is that people simply have not encountered Real Divine Beings. Have not had the privilege of seeing how they walk and talk and go about the day. The Beings they encounter in Dreams or the Astral worlds has some meaning, but for me I don't put much stalk in most of the testimony because it ends up being filtered through a limited conditioned being, and so what you get is a mixture of a genuine experience transcribed by a child who can't really make heads or tails of what it is he just experienced, and so he puts it into his own terms, which are street terms, and what is the real value of that?

And so if I understand what you are saying, and again, please correct me if I'm wrong. The relevance of this concept of Divinity is that it must carry with it Real Authority..as it's coming from the REAL Authentic Author of this Existence?

And therefore we as children can in fact trust it..work with that knowledge that will lead to The Author Himself?

Not mere belief, or blind faith, but in much the same way as when a parent tells the child "Don't put your hands on the stove", "Look both ways before crossing the Street", Eat a balanced Diet, Tell, the truth " etc....This is all good advice, and will in fact protect the child and guide her along until, the understanding arrives, that tells her, "Oh, THAT's why he told me not to put my hands on the stove top!"?

Is it something like that?

or is it something entirely different?

MiBeloved 3 years ago

So if we follow that line of reasoning let us follow it all the way, which is to say that we should not accredit any part of the life of Buddha which is recorded to have any value. If it has no value then why does it suddenly have value when we are saying the guy was just an ordinary bloke.

Either it has value or it does not. Why give it value to say that the guy was an ordinary bloke and then it has no value to say that he is a divine being an avatar?

Why play these games? Why follow anything the guys said at all?

If he is a fake then he is a fake and the matter is closed there.

Or we accept his divinity and the matter is closed there with that consideration in the forefront.

Neo_Yogi 3 years ago

This world is not black or white; we know that a story gets distorted from mouth to ear in a couple of hours, so much more if this story tells an event which occurred hundreds of years ago.

We know that in history rulers have manipulated the scriptures in order to gain more control over the masses (the Catholic Church knows a lot about this). Even in Buddhism, if one reads the early texts, one can see that some discourses are different depending on the sect which supports it. And when these pali texts went to China, they got colored by this culture so it's easy to read descriptions with thousands of deities, devas, dragons, etc accompanying the Buddha in a story full of magic tricks, but if one reads the Pali version of that very same discourse (if it exists), it's usually more moderate and simpler in its exposition.

If I'm not mistaken, MiBeloved, you said somewhere else that the whole story about the resurrection of Christ was stupid because Christ didn't need a body after the crucifixion. However you can find this story in the Christian scriptures... should we rule the whole Christian scriptures out as fake and close this matter?

I agree with Paul when he says:

Well part of the problem, I suppose is that people simply have not encountered Real Divine Beings. Have not had the privilege of seeing how they walk and talk and go about the day.

We have no way of corroborating these stories; we don't see gods or devas in our daily lives. Just a few are capable of seeing supernatural beings (psychics) or able to astral travel and see certain things that make them believe there's more to this life.

MiBeloved 3 years ago

NEO,

If you are going to reject the particular scripture or religion, then that is okay but do so sincerely and do not at the same time take from the religion and use it.

If a person is into Christianity they should take it as it is, instead of using part of it with one side of the mouth and spitting on it with the other side.

If you want to use Buddha then do so sincerely.

There will always be a way to be cynical with religious text. One is better off to leave a religion aside totally than to be cynical about it while at the same time trying to use something from it which is a distortion of what that scripture says.

If you have no faith in gods because you cannot see them, then that makes sense, so then for you, the whole of Buddhism should be dumped because it speaks about Buddha's experiences with such gods.

If you do this wholeheartedly then I can follow what you are saying.

You do not see gods but I do so for me it is not a problem.

I have stated what I did about the subtle body and Christianity but you won't find me cutting up their scripture all the same. For people who have no experience of a subtle body, it is a worthwhile investment of their faith, and I do not object to that or try to deride that.

I grew up under a Christian family and it served the purpose as a child, because that happened to be my situation. Later I grew out of it and then I left it alone and went on but I do not have a cynical attitude towards it and I respect Christ as a divine being.

Your cynicism will tell on you because to really advance you will have to take help from a superior being and in doing so you will need to have the proper attitude.

Neo_Yogi 3 years ago

But I haven't been cynical here, MiBeloved, I just explained a situation about scriptures that we all have to keep in mind when we read them. It's a fact that the Christian religious leaders picked those scriptures more convenient for them or for the Church in those times from among a group of different gospels. The ones left behind are considered apocryphal or inauthentic, and that is history. Men chose what to believe, what was going to be the foundation of their religion. God didn't do this nor wrote any book.

MiBeloved said:

Neo_Yogi's Reply:

I think that you have misinterpreted my intentions when I've been posting on this topic. There's not cynicism in my words nor is my purpose to mock any religion.

MiBeloved said:

If you have no faith in gods because you cannot see them, then that makes sense, so then for you, the whole of Buddhism should be dumped because it speaks about Buddha's experiences with such gods.

Neo_Yogi's Reply:

When I said: “We have no way of corroborating these stories; we don't see gods or devas in our daily lives” I was talking in general terms, 'We' as worldly human beings. Personally I believe in the existence of gods, even when I haven't seen them... But I understand that my friends and colleagues don't believe any of this, I don't blame them.

On the other hand, I don't remember saying in this group that I don't believe any certain thing said by the Buddha or told in the suttas. In fact, I used his words to explain a certain idea stated in the pali canon.

Replies (0)