dissimilarities between Guruji and Budhha - by a devotee

A devotee points out the dissimilarities between Gautam Buddha and Gurudev , during a knowledge session

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• art of living
• guruji
• sri sri ravi shankar
• buddha

[amitsonu28]

Gurudev Replies ---- How do you know , Buddha dint come to you?? He may have come, [:D]. IF U dint wake up then ,wake up now .......[:D]........

.

.see how everything has merged on this path of knowledge.!!.......there was knowledge and silence in Buddhas time but no Bhajan Kirten no raas...........

.

.During Chaitanya MahaPrabhus time there was lot of raas but no silence.......and during Shakar s era there were lot of question and answers ...............

.

.

.

continued later

[amitsonu28]

3) Buddha was Kshatriya by birth but you are Brahmin

4)Buddha entered Grahastha Dharma {married} before attaining the knowledge , but u did not enterGrahastha Dharma

5)Buddha did not perform idol worship, but u do perform Rudra Pooja.

6)Buddha was born in north India in a Royal family, and u were born in a middle class family in south India.

7)Buddha did not reach us, but u did.

[amitsonu28]

Jai Gurudev.........Guruji this isnt my question but an Answer. 2 days back u said there were dissimilarities between Krishna and Rama s Character. and when somebody asked you about the dissimilarities between Mahatma Buddha and you [Gurudev] , you left that question on the [us] devotees ......

...I am writting down the dissimilarties which i have observed .

1)Mahatma buddha did not have beard and moustache but you have it.

2) Buddha s hair were curly , but urs are straight.

[ashik115]

Even this poor guy don't know Buddha was born in Nepal ? not in India 

[harishpsubramanian]

@goodmangillmanpharma

buddha was one of the greatest saints, any law which buddha says has a validity over what any priest says. Thanks. I agree with your comments

[harishpsubramanian]

@goodmangillmanpharma

well i am a normal scientific man i can never just conclude that krishna or rama was 100% right and so is my approach to buddha. then there is a question of interpretation of buddhistic legacy

[harishpsubramanian]

@goodmangillmanpharma

what varnashrama means is that a person who takes up the role of a priest should never be a king, this was the system it did not declare that a person belonging to one family cannot be a priest which was the system later.the evidence is available in the origin of rishis it was certainly not so barbaric as slavery.

Buddha was correct in condemning the heriditory system and ellaborating the importance of meditation as opposed to blind rituals and many hindus agree

[harishpsubramanian]

@goodmangillmanpharma

what varnashrama means is that a person who takes up the role of a priest should never be a king, this was the system it did not declare that a person belonging to one family cannot be a priest which was the system later. I am not supporting such a view but it was certainly not so barbaric as slavery.

Buddha was correct in condemning the heriditory system and ellaborating the importance of meditation as opposed to blind rituals.

[goodmangillmanpharma]

@harishpsubramanian U CANNOT EXPECT THAT EVERYTIME A PRIEST IS CORRECT SO THE BUDDHA HAS LAWS TO THE LAYMEN AND PRIESTS BOTH

[goodmangillmanpharma]

@harishpsubramanian some say even swami vivekananda and shivaji were ST

[goodmangillmanpharma]

@harishpsubramanian is it not that i am telling buddhism is eternal is 100 percent right

[goodmangillmanpharma]

@harishpsubramanian whatever it is both varnashrama and jati are proved wrong by the buddha in his divine revealations.....how can u think that only a brahmin can preach----or teach and others cannot----but krishna was OBC and jesus was OBC/SC/ST-----ONLY TRUE GENERAL MERIT IS THE BUDDHA BECAUSE HE WAS A KING------HA HA- HA-HA........what foolishness ?????

[harishpsubramanian]

@goodmangillmanpharma

my statement india did not practice slavery was recorded even 2000 years ago because thats what a greek traveller megasthanes wrote, indians didnt cook it up.he used the word unique in this regard. coming back to buddhism it emerged for all the right reasons to refrorm the country. if it were centrally opposed to hinduism like christianity then buddhists would have been a separate nation but buddhists just adoppted buddha with other gods like in thailand.