Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism

Casual conversation between friends. Anything goes (almost).
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism

Post by Malcolm »

Sherlock wrote:
More like an innovation in India from whoever created the inner yogatantras.
Outer tantras.
Sherlock
Posts: 1202
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 3:14 pm

Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism

Post by Sherlock »

Well, there was an Indian classification of the four tantras by Alamkakalasha that said:
To convert the brahmin caste, the merchant caste,
The royal caste, and the menial caste or outcastes,
Tantra was presented in four parts:
Action, conduct, yoga, and highest yoga.
quoting from Treasury of Knowledge volume 6 part 4.

Maybe historically even the earlier outer tantras did accept shudras and untouchables but this classification might relate to a general historical trend of adapting practices that were already done in their converts' daily lives into tantric practice, either literally or metaphorically.
User avatar
BrianG
Posts: 441
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:59 pm

Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism

Post by BrianG »

Malcolm wrote: So now you are claiming Buddhist tantra comes from China?
I'd claim, that given the evidence I've seen, that some of the elements that are generally associated with Tantra, may have had origins in Pure Land/Proto-Tantric/Daoist practice in China, which of course, was conditioned, by Pure Land practice in India. For instance, obviously the Chinese wouldn't have written an apocryphal sutra named the "Abhiseka-sutra", if they didn't have knowledge of what an Abhiseka was, from India.

Likewise, the earliest records of techniques related to manipulating the subtle winds, are from the Mawangdui(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mawangdui) manuscripts, which, to my knowledge, predate anything similar from India by quite a bit.

I'd argue, that cultural exchange between India and it's neighbors was not uni-directional. I think it's obvious that the Tantra's were composed in India, but that doesn't preclude them from containing elements that had their genesis elsewhere.

Back to my original point, I think that there's sufficient evidence that Buddhist Tantra's( at least pre-yogini ), were not simply a copy and paste job from Saivites, as Sanderson seems to be suggesting.
Telepaths - I like to kill them
Rakz
Posts: 1381
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 8:04 am

Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism

Post by Rakz »

Zen Dude wrote: Right, the Pure Land sutra's predate anything from Saivism by 500 years.
This isn't true. The Shvetashvatara Upanishad is older than any Pure Land sutra.
User avatar
BrianG
Posts: 441
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 6:59 pm

Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism

Post by BrianG »

Nighthawk wrote:
Zen Dude wrote: Right, the Pure Land sutra's predate anything from Saivism by 500 years.
This isn't true. The Shvetashvatara Upanishad is older than any Pure Land sutra.
I should have been more specific. I meant the Shaiva Tantra's.
Telepaths - I like to kill them
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism

Post by Malcolm »

Zen Dude wrote:
Malcolm wrote: So now you are claiming Buddhist tantra comes from China?
I'd claim, that given the evidence I've seen, that some of the elements that are generally associated with Tantra, may have had origins in Pure Land/Proto-Tantric/Daoist practice in China, which of course, was conditioned, by Pure Land practice in India. For instance, obviously the Chinese wouldn't have written an apocryphal sutra named the "Abhiseka-sutra", if they didn't have knowledge of what an Abhiseka was, from India.
In Buddhist tantra, abhisheka and fire puja are derived from the Vedas, the mantras are similar etc.


Likewise, the earliest records of techniques related to manipulating the subtle winds, are from the Mawangdui(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mawangdui) manuscripts, which, to my knowledge, predate anything similar from India by quite a bit.
Nadis and cakras, from the early Upanishads and Ayurveda

Prāṇāyāma, corollaries to gtum mo and so on can be found in the Yoga sutras of Patañjali, and it is a daily part of Vedic practice and has been for three millennia.
Back to my original point, I think that there's sufficient evidence that Buddhist Tantra's( at least pre-yogini ), were not simply a copy and paste job from Saivites, as Sanderson seems to be suggesting.
He is not suggesting it is cut and paste job. He goes to great length to point out that it isn't that simple.
hop.pala
Posts: 253
Joined: Sat May 11, 2013 3:48 am

Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism

Post by hop.pala »

plwk wrote:
As if some of the Theravadins haven't suspected all this while what a 'fabrication' Mahayana stuff has been ...
Or the teaching of karma is directly adopted from hinduism,and that the Shakyamuni learned sankhya :P
Ah yes, I heard of this too but really, with the complex issues surrounding the historical Buddha, what he actually adopted or not are dealt with pages and pages of scholarship and facts, so I guess it would depend on whose version one is buying... Teachers like Ajahn Thanissaro, Bhante S Dhammika, Ajahn Sujato and many more have dealt on (and refuting) what are commonly held views on karma & rebirth in Hinduism (and Jainism) compared with or versus what the Buddha had taught in the Sutta Pitaka
Therfore,all the same:we speak about karma,deitis or even phowa etc.,the essential teaching of buddhist teaching the anatta doctrine, not the individual elements,but what you do with it,how to interpret that.
User avatar
Rakshasa
Posts: 148
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:29 am

Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism

Post by Rakshasa »

This issue shouldn't even be coming right now when Dr, Bhattacharya laid it to rest almost a century ago. Shaivism is not even documented in early Buddhist sources - which means it did not exist or was practiced by insignificant population.
Thus Benoytosh Bhattacharya in his Introduction to Buddhist
Esoterism. has come to the conclusion, "it is possible to declare. without
fear of contradiction, that the Buddhists were the first to introduce the
Tantras into their religion, and that the Hindus borrowed them from the
Buddhists in later times, and that it is idle to say that later Buddhism
was an outcome of Saivaism", (p.147)

-- Dr. Benoytosh Bhattacharya
http://www.dspace.cam.ac.uk/retrieve/63 ... _01_02.pdf

Even the famous Hindu Tantric website Kamakoti Mandali acknowledge this fact and quotes Dr. Bhattacharya (caution: Hindu bias evident in the article):

http://www.kamakotimandali.com/misc/bauddhatantra.html

To read Dr. Bhattacharya's article including evidence read:

A PEEP INTO THE LATER BUDDHISM
http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-BORI/bhat.htm
It is well known that the Hindus recognize to ten Siddbamantras with ten deities presiding over them. One of them is Taaraa and the Hindus claim her as their own. She is conceived as a fearful divinity with legs arranged in the Praty alii.dha (1) attitude with a garland of skulls, protruding tongue and have fangs. She is four-armed and carries the Katri(2) and the kapaala(3) in the two principal hands, and the sword and the blue lotus in the right and left hands respectively. She is decked in fiv e Mudraas (pa~ncamudraavibhuu.sitaa^m) with one tuft of hair (ekaja.taa^m) and bears the figure of Ak.sobhya on her crown (maulaav-akshobhya-bhuu.sitaa^m). For the purpose of comparison the last three points should be carefully noted. The Hindus have no deity known as Ekajataa,but they have this Taaraa who is regarded as a form of Ekaja.taa. They have a variety of Mudras(4), but none can be employed as an ornament. No other deity of the Hindu pantheon is known to have the figure of Ak.sobhya or any other deity on the crown. None of the three points raised therefore is explained in accordance with Hindu traditions. But when we try to explain the three points with the help of Buddhist traditions we find a satisfactory explanation. The Buddhists have a deity known as Ekaja.taa also called Ugrataaraa, Mahaacinataaraa, Vidyujjvaalaakaraalii, Prasannataa- raa, etc. and quite a large number of Sthese the form known as Mahaaciinataaraa agrees with the description of the Hindu Taaraa in all detauks. Yet Taaraa is Hindu and Mahaaciinataaraa is Buddhist. As regards the second point concerning the ornament of five Mudraas the Saadhanamaalaa offers a solution. The Buddhists recognized six Mudraas or ornaments all made of human bones representing the six Paaramitaas, as is evident from the following 'sloka¡

Image

"The Torque,the(two)Bracelets,a bejewelled girdle, ashes and the sacred thread represent the six Paaramitaas and are applied in the form of Mudraas." It may therefore be inferred that the adjective 'pa~ncamudraavibhuu.sitaam' stands for a goddess with five ornaments (made of human bones). The third point of having Ak.sobhya on her crown can be easily explained by a reference to the Buddhist Iconography. Taaraa belongs to the family or Kula of the Dhyaani Buddha Ak.sobhya, and therefore, according to the canons of Buddhist Iconography, she should bear the miniature figure of her parental Dhyani Buddha.
User avatar
Rakshasa
Posts: 148
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:29 am

Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism

Post by Rakshasa »

In Buddhist tantra, abhisheka and fire puja are derived from the Vedas, the mantras are similar etc.
Ritual Vedicism is very different from indigenous Indian religions, it is more closer to Zoroastrianism. The 'fire puja' in Vedas is similar to fire pujas of various Shamanistic cultures all over the world.

The defining feature of Shramanic indigenous religion was the belief in Karma and reincarnation - which is absent in ancient Vedicism. It is a conspiracy by Brahmins and some European scholars nowadays to give credit of Shramanistic religions to the Indo-Aryan, a Caucasian tribe related to many European peoples.
Nadis and cakras, from the early Upanishads and Ayurveda
Blanket statement from a very parochialistic and biased point of view. In fact, Ayurveda came from Buddhist sages.
Prāṇāyāma, corollaries to gtum mo and so on can be found in the Yoga sutras of Patañjali, and it is a daily part of Vedic practice and has been for three millennia.
The great Indian historian, Kashi Nath Upadhyaya, himself a Brahmin, has amply proven that the Patanjali Yoga sutra was in fact influenced heavily from Early Buddhism - not even later Mahayana Buddhism, but Early Buddhism.

Nagasena, the famous Buddhist advisor of Greek king Menander (Milinda) was himself a Brahmin, having memorized the three Vedas since childhood, but he later wrote that there is no truth in them whatsoever. Buddha himself got called as "black, menial, shaveling" by Brahmins like Ambattha, Sonadanta etc. It is very unlikely that Buddhism has sprouted out of Hinduism, which the right wing Hindutva nationalists are trying to propagate.
hop.pala
Posts: 253
Joined: Sat May 11, 2013 3:48 am

Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism

Post by hop.pala »

Even the famous Hindu Tantric website Kamakoti Mandali acknowledge this fact and quotes Dr. Bhattacharya (caution: Hindu bias evident in the article):
Moreover the hindus happy to claim,that jainism and buddhism actually not separate religion from hinduism.This is the opinion of hindus.Say it :|
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism

Post by Malcolm »

Rakshasa wrote:The 'fire puja' in Vedas
Upon which Buddhist fire pujas are clearly based.

The defining feature of Shramanic indigenous religion was the belief in Karma and reincarnation - which is absent in ancient Vedicism. It is a conspiracy by Brahmins and some European scholars nowadays to give credit of Shramanistic religions to the Indo-Aryan, a Caucasian tribe related to many European peoples.
PIE peoples believed in reincarnation.
Nadis and cakras, from the early Upanishads and Ayurveda
Blanket statement from a very parochialistic and biased point of view. In fact, Ayurveda came from Buddhist sages.
The earliest Ayurvedic text we gave is the Cakrasaṃhita. It is also the earliest source we have for Saṃkhya.

Prāṇāyāma, corollaries to gtum mo and so on can be found in the Yoga sutras of Patañjali, and it is a daily part of Vedic practice and has been for three millennia.
The great Indian historian, Kashi Nath Upadhyaya, himself a Brahmin, has amply proven that the Patanjali Yoga sutra was in fact influenced heavily from Early Buddhism - not even later Mahayana Buddhism, but Early Buddhism.
However, prāṇayāma, and so on, things found in the Yoga sutras, clearly have no precedent in Buddhist texts. Just examine the Vibhūti-pādaḥ. While there are certainly very common ideas found in "early" Buddhist texts and the Yogasūtras, these commonality can be explained as coming from a common religious milieu, with different emphasis. For example, Pantañjali has the four brahma viharas, but the mode of explantion is quite different than the Buddhas.

It is very unlikely that Buddhism has sprouted out of Hinduism,
I agree, but there is ample proof right in the early suttas that the Buddha's own world view was essentially informed by Vedic cosmological concepts. Later borrowings from Shaiva and other non-buddhist traditions have precedents in the Buddha's own lifetime.
ConradTree
Posts: 303
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 6:33 pm

Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism

Post by ConradTree »

As Malcolm mentions, phowa and the channels of the body are found in the Upanishads:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/49503946/The- ... ric-Bodies


I thought everyone knew this.
ConradTree
Posts: 303
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 6:33 pm

Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism

Post by ConradTree »

Rakshasa wrote: Ritual Vedicism is very different from indigenous Indian religions,
Vedism is indigenous.

David Gordon White cites 3 scholars who "have emphatically demonstrated" that Vedic religion is derived from the Indus Valley Civilizations. See pages 28 and 29 of Kiss of the Yogini.

And these are all mainstream western scholars.
Rakshasa wrote:This issue shouldn't even be coming right now when Dr, Bhattacharya laid it to rest almost a century ago.
You should be embarrassed for trotting out such outdated opinions.
hop.pala
Posts: 253
Joined: Sat May 11, 2013 3:48 am

Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism

Post by hop.pala »

" Among the various Hindu philosophies, Kashmir Shaivism (Kaśmir Śaivism) is a school of Śaivism consisting of Trika and its philosophical articulationPratyabhijña.[1] It is categorized by various scholars as monistic[2] idealism (absolute idealism, theistic monism,[3] realistic idealism,[4] transcendental physicalism or concrete monism.[4])
It is philosophically important to distinguish Kashmir Shaivism from the Advaita Vedanta of Shankara as both are non-dual philosophies which give primacy to Universal Consciousness (Chit or Brahman).[5] In Kashmir Shavisim, all things are a manifestation of this Consciousness.[6]"

http://oomhindu.blogspot.hu/2012/09/kas ... ivism.html

The buddhist say not that all thing in world the manifestation of Buddha.

http://buddhism.about.com/od/basicbuddh ... rseals.htm

Symbols,practices adopted from one to the other and vice versa.
Can say an hindu ,or the Sanders that "sombthing(Buddha) is manifestation from Shiva",but the level of consciousness by buddhist in fall of Brahman is only in janas,and enlightenment and nirvana is an other thing.
haha
Posts: 562
Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 3:30 pm

Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism

Post by haha »

Rakshasa wrote: Blanket statement from a very parochialistic and biased point of view. In fact, Ayurveda came from Buddhist sages.
Aranyaka and Brahmana are inseparable from the Vedas; actually they are the interpretation of Vedas. If one had read Aitareya Aranyaka and Brahmana, one would not proclaim such statement. They are talking not only about Nadi Cakra, but also about sign of death in the dreams and many more. Many chapters of those texts are preceded the historical Buddha.
Upanisadas are more complicated text. One cannot understand them just by guesswork.

Rakshasa wrote: The great Indian historian, Kashi Nath Upadhyaya, himself a Brahmin, has amply proven that the Patanjali Yoga sutra was in fact influenced heavily from Early Buddhism - not even later Mahayana Buddhism, but Early Buddhism.
one cannot claim Patanjal Yoga sutra is heavily influenced from early Buddhism just because that text has some topics about Brahmavihara, five indriyas, etc. Their view and meaning are completely different then the buddhist context.
In Nikaya, Sakyamuin retold that he practiced pranayama in such extreme that nobody had ever practice. That is not the same thing taught in yoga sutra. There is no textual evident Sakyamuin taught such methods, but except the hypothesis.

Actually KathaUpanisada has taught closing the nine doors and ejecting the consciousness (i.e. a person the size of a thumb resides within the body). Anyway this is not the Saiva text. one can relate the Sankaracharya legend about entering a king body to learn Kamasastra.
Sherlock
Posts: 1202
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 3:14 pm

Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism

Post by Sherlock »

According to that Germano article, the Upanishad channel involved a connection from the heart to the head, it wasn't the fully elaborated system that appears in the yoginitantras. There was no fully system of channels and cakras during the initial transmission of tantra to Tibet in the 8th-9th century so it was fully elaborated only in between then and around 1000CE.

Some Hindu tantras have references to tantras orignating from Mahacina, which might be a reference to either China or an area to the Northeast.
ConradTree
Posts: 303
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 6:33 pm

Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism

Post by ConradTree »

Due to a PM I must clarify:

Dzogchen is 100% Buddhist.

All scholars like Ronald Davidson (Tibetan Renaissance), David Germano (various articles) and AK Warder (buddhism in the krishna river valley of andhra) say Dzogchen is 100% Buddhist.

The debate is how much of Dzogchen is Indian Buddhist vs Tibetan Buddhist.

So again, Dzogchen is 100% Buddhist.
Sherlock
Posts: 1202
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 3:14 pm

Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism

Post by Sherlock »

That's a good point -- maybe the overall concept that there are subtle, not exactly physical channels and so on in the body is not uniquely Buddhist, but how it exists in Dzogchen seems to be completely Buddhist (and Bonpo, but then it is debatable how much Bon Dzogchen influenced Buddhist Dzogchen and vice versa and its precise origins).
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism

Post by Malcolm »

Sherlock wrote:According to that Germano article, the Upanishad channel involved a connection from the heart to the head, it wasn't the fully elaborated system that appears in the yoginitantras.
Correct.

There was no fully system of channels and cakras during the initial transmission of tantra to Tibet in the 8th-9th century so it was fully elaborated only in between then and around 1000CE.
Correct.
Some Hindu tantras have references to tantras orignating from Mahacina, which might be a reference to either China or an area to the Northeast.
Principally the Nilasarasvati tantras.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism

Post by Malcolm »

Sherlock wrote:That's a good point -- maybe the overall concept that there are subtle, not exactly physical channels and so on in the body is not uniquely Buddhist...

All the channels are described in the Buddhist tantras as physical structures. They are called "subtle" (sukṣma, phra) because they are very fine, not because they are immaterial or made of some quasi-material. For example, according to Kālacakra, the lower tips of the three main channels produce urine, feces and reproductive fluids. That is hard to do if they are not physical.

All the channels form during gestation in the womb. This is the same in Dzogchen.
Post Reply

Return to “Lounge”