Siddharta Gautama cuma seorang Nabi dan Rasul

bubpallo

thanks Dark utk pemjelasan saudara. salam dhamma juga utk semua warga buddhist yang memberikan pandangan dan tunjuk ajar dlm agama buddha. semoga kita semua akan mendapat mamfaat dari semua ini. saya pun baru disini dan terjumpa forum ini secara tidak sengaja. berckap mengenai penjelasan buddha mengenai kedatangan maitreya, bagi saya ia bukan ramalan kerana ramalan adalah bukan sesuatu yang betul2 benar tetapi kedatangan buddha maitreya adalah benar dan betul tetapi ia harnya akan terjadi bilamana agama buddha sekarang telah lenyap, iaitu manusia telah tidak mengenal lagi apa itu dhamma. di antara masa ketiadaan agama buddha tersebut, akan wujud buddha2 tetapi tidak mengajarkan dhamma kepada manusia dimana kita menggelarkannya sebagai silent buddha sehinggalah munculnya maitreya buddha iaitu samsara buddha. mengikut apa yang saya tahu, maitreya buddha adalah samsara buddha yang terakhir dan selepas itu bumi kita akan mencapai tempoh akhirnya. masa itu tempoh hayat manusia harnyalah sekitar 10 tahun sahaja. manusia pada masa itu juga, manusia adalah amat maju tetapi tidak beretika lagi. oleh itu, andai ada sesiapa yang menjelas atau mengatakan bahawa maitreya itu adalah muhammad  adalah tidak benar sekali.

Originally posted by alhaadi2 at 27-6-2006 05:00 PM

so dewa tu sebenarnya tinggal kat mana?? Bleh ke manusia lahir menjadi jadi Dewa?

ajaran Buddha percaya pd kelahiran semula, so bleh ke kita ingat kejadian masa kelahiran lepas?

camne plak ...

di dalam agama buddha , terbahagi 6 ,iatu ren dao ( dunia manusia), tian tang ( syurga), di yu ( neraka), a xiu luo dan sebagainya, di dalam agama buddha ,manusia boleh menjadi dewa jika dia membuat balasan yang sangat baik selalu menolong orang dan sebagainya.....jadi di dalam agama  buddha percaya ,jika menjadi dewa hanya boleh hidup 500 tahun sahaja, dan juga akan balik ke dunia manusia atau neraka ....jadi nak tinggal masalah ini,cara yang terbaik ialah ke dunia utara ,ialah dunia buddha ....tertapi bukan tujuan shaja bagi penganut agama buddha yang penting penganut agama buddha berikhlas berjumpa degan gautama siddharat ( na mo a mi tuo fo ) dan guan yin....


perjalanan ke barat juga ialah dalam agama buddha ( xi fang ji le shi jie ).

ariyamusafir

Originally posted by bubpallo at 27/8/2006 10:03
thanks Dark utk pemjelasan saudara. salam dhamma juga utk semua warga buddhist yang memberikan pandangan dan tunjuk ajar dlm agama buddha. semoga kita semua akan mendapat mamfaat dari semua ini. sa ...

Please take note, is NOT samsara Buddha. It is sammasam Buddha!

ariyamusafir

Originally posted by khookw64 at 31/8/2006 00:32



di dalam agama buddha , terbahagi 6 ,iatu ren dao ( dunia manusia), tian tang ( syurga), di yu ( neraka), a xiu luo dan sebagainya, di dalam agama buddha ,manusia boleh menjadi dewa jika dia  ...

Many chinese their wish is to go to xi tian, which is the Western Land of Bliss, a land created by Buddha Amitabha (namo Amituofo)! The Western Land of Bliss is NOT the negara-negara Barat like USA, Europe etc. Eventually, all Buddhist their final goal is the attainment of nibbana, and after that, parinibbana. The thing is that many people believe that they are not able to attain buddhahood in this lifetime and they would like to make be reborn in the Western Land of Bliss first to practise the dhamma vigorously there first, rather then having their minds tainted with worldly filths.

In each Buddha dispenssation, there will be only be ONE sammasam Buddha (mighty buddha) and NO pecceka Buddha. When the dispensation of a sammasam Buddha ends, there will not be a sammasam Buddha during a period of time. This is where during anytime in this dark periods, there might appear pecceka Buddha (silent Buddha), who would achieve nibbana, on their own. Arahants attain nibbana under the guidance of a sammasam Buddha, or the Buddha's teachings, that is, Arahant would appear during or when the dispensation of a sammasam Buddha still exists. Thus, a pecceka Buddha would not appear in this world when there is a sammasam buddha, or a arahant still living in this world.

also, Namo Amituofo is namo Amitabha Buddha, which is not Buddha Siddhata Gotama.

[ Last edited by  ariyamusafir at 1-9-2006 06:13 PM ]

jpl_fan

i just have my own curiousity ler..
i have told by one ustaz..that sidharta gautama nie mmg salah sorang nabi...but not Rasul..even he is not the nabi among 25 nabi yg patut kiter tau...

but..bnyk penyelewangan telah berlaku dlm ajaran2 dia..i mean there are a lot if misunderstanding..

tlg betulkan kalo pehaman saya nie salah...

ariyamusafir

Originally posted by jpl_fan at 5/9/2006 05:33
i just have my own curiousity ler..
i have told by one ustaz..that sidharta gautama nie mmg salah sorang nabi...but not Rasul..even he is not the nabi among 25 nabi yg patut kiter tau...

but..b ...

Yang kau maksud penyelewengan dalam ajaran maksud penyelewengan oleh siapa???


Let me make this clear to you. The Buddha is not a god, nor was he a messenger of any god. His venerable gain enlightenment all by himself, and having known the truth, he teach the world so that sentient beings would benefit from what his venerable knows. He is not a medium between the so called god and humans. He is one who has know the path, who has walked the path and is no longer in samsara, no longer subjected to birth and decay.

Dr. K Sri Dhammananda, having studied in a hindu university, knows that there are elements among those hindu believers which tries to make Buddha Gotama some sort like an incarnation of their god or an avatar, after when before the Buddha's parinibbana, they had strongly went against.

I can see now that there are some irresponsible people from other religion tries to give an image to the ignorant that the Buddha is a prophet in their religion, and avatar, an incarnation of their god, or a messenger of their god or religion which is not true.

To people of other religion, please do not misguide the ignorant, and please do not try to deviate from the truth. The christians have their rights to their own beliefs, same as the muslims and the hindus. However, please do not spread lies that the Buddha is a messenger of their god or a prophet of their religion. We respect yours and we do not convert your people, please do respect ours and dun try to spread rumours or lies in order to convert us. Those who knows won't buy it.

Thank you. Please take note that I have nothing against any other religion, and do respect them, and their rights and will never insult their religion, however, I am very unhappy with some individuals who spread a bunch of lies for their own agenda be it to get more converts, or something else.

CintaMalaysia

Originally posted by jpl_fan at 5-9-2006 05:33 AM
i just have my own curiousity ler..
i have told by one ustaz..that sidharta gautama nie mmg salah sorang nabi...but not Rasul..even he is not the nabi among 25 nabi yg patut kiter tau...

but..b ...

i think you really cannot mix buddhism with your islam teaching or christian teaching..
islam and christian originated from the same place, and in dispute over thousands of years, that's why they always try to give the idea taht one is actually part of another..
buddhism doesn't specifically have concept of nabi and rasul.. sidharta gautama was also just an ordinary person, but just that he was special to have enlightenment, and free  from the cycle of reincarnation.. he is more like a teacher/mentor..
in buddhism, the most important element is enlightenment, the righteous way..
it's not like chrisitians or islam whereby you talk about who created the world, who is the only god..
god, dewa-dewi and others are admitted to exist, however they don't create the world..

CintaMalaysia

Originally posted by ariyamusafir at 5-9-2006 01:57 PM



Yang kau maksud penyelewengan dalam ajaran maksud penyelewengan oleh siapa???


Let me make this clear to you. The Buddha is not a god, nor was he a messenger of any god. His venerable gai ...

this is due to the reason taht in christians and islam, they believe only their god is the only omnipotent god..
so, for them, others are just part or branches of theirs..

anyon996

Originally posted by Gravedigger at 23-4-2006 10:36 PM
Ini cuma dari pandangan peribadi aku saja...tidak ada cut&paste tapi hasil pembacaan-pembacaan dan perbandingan yang aku lihat dengan fahaman kesufian dalam Islam.

Aku lihat dalam ajaran Bu ...

i tak setuju dengan u..
kalau macam ini maksud u,buddha adalah islam..
ok..
sekiranya dia ialah,kenapa ajarannya sehingga hari ini berbeza dengan islam?
n wat u said like every religion is also from islam..
tis wil make ppl unhappy wit u..

I only know that Islam are the latest religion , it is developed after Christianity which alot of Islam teaching r copied from other religion.

I read an article from a Muslim saying that Allah are Arahant .

Below are some of the notes inside the article :

"Being registered as a Muslim, I'm able to expound on the teachings of Islam. But if I didn't grasp the essence of Buddhism through Buddhadasa, I might not be able to grasp the essence of Islam as well. I would have still memorised the teachings that have been passed on by tradition, without discovering any real solution.

"The Muslims like to lull their child to sleep by a short phrase - 'La illaha ill-Allah' - the declaration of truth made during prayer. They will keep reciting 'La illaha ill-Allah' on beads - until they achieve a state of mental concentration. Unfortunately, most people do not understand the core meaning; they usually translate it as 'There is no god but Allah.'

"The word 'Allah' consists of three letters: A, L and H. The word 'Araha[t]' consists of the letters: A, R and H. Typically, the L in the West has been transformed to R in the East. Thus 'elephant' becomes 'Erawan'. So does 'Ali' [the Noble] become 'Ariya' as in Ariyasaj [The Noble Truth].

"I used to discuss these linguistic issues [with others]. Here I repeat it for those who haven't heard about this principle. Allah is in fact Arahat. The meaning of Allah is broader than Illaha, which means 'idols', and La, which means 'no', or 'do not'. Most of the Muslims take Illaha to mean things like sculptures, trees and so on. But I think [the word] refers to the clinging to that very object in their heart. Those statues and trees are in themselves nothing sacred.

"But when people hold on to such things, they become objects of worship. If people do not hold on to them, they cannot be sacred. These things don't have their own power; it's the people who give them power. Therefore, illaha does not refer to those external objects, but to the clinging in human heart. So the sentence illaha ill-Allah means not to hold on to anything. Such is the state of Allah, or Arahat. How that is literally identical to the heart of Buddhism that professes against any attachment! How couldn't I say then that the heart of Buddhism is one and the same as that of Islam?"

ariyamusafir

Originally posted by tommy-6 at 21/10/2006 18:08
I only know that Islam are the latest religion , it is developed after Christianity which alot of Islam teaching r copied from other religion.

I read an article from a Muslim saying that Allah a ...

where you get such articles?

orangbesi

salam

maaf ya menjenguk kembali
pasal masih lagi dok kaji dan menkaji dan......
tapi tak dapat pergi jauh

cuma nak berkongsi sedikit
HINDU, BUDDHA, YAHUDI, KRISTIAN, ISLAM dan lain lain agama
adalah AGAMA TUHAN
(betul tak kenyataan ini?????)
dan bermaksud mereka mendapat KEPERCAYAAN TUHAN
utk menyeru masyarakat KEMBALI MENYEMBAH TUHAN
TUHAN YANG SATU

dan tak kira cam mana pun
kembali dan terus MENYEMBAH TUHAN YANG SATU
(harap faham tulisan ini.....)
atau memang TIADA TUHAN??????????

ariyamusafir

Originally posted by orangbesi at 5/11/2006 15:33
salam

maaf ya menjenguk kembali
pasal masih lagi dok kaji dan menkaji dan......
tapi tak dapat pergi jauh

cuma nak berkongsi sedikit
HINDU, BUDDHA, YAHUDI, KRISTIAN, ISLAM dan lain lain ag ...

Tak betul. Dalam Buddhisma ada banyak tuhan atau lebih dikenali sebagai deva. Namun deva ini semua satu hari nanti akan juga mati.

orangbesi

salam

maaf ya kalau tak betul
cuma masih nak tanya adakah deva tu SAMA cam TUHAN
adakah deva juga dicipta atau adalah PENCIPTA

dan adakah TAK BENAR, BUDDHIS tak ada PENCIPTA????????
maaf ya kerana selalu bertanya ttg ini.....
tapi saya akan tetap bertanya
yg datang dr NALURI HATI saya
yang hanya MENGHARAPKAN PERTOLONGAN DARI PENCIPTA SEKALIAN ALAM

ariyamusafir

Deva bukan pencipta dan bukan dicipta. Kita tidak percaya kepada concept satu maha berkuasa yang mencipta segala-galanya dan mempunyai kuasa untuk memusnahkan segala-galanya, yang mencipta semua mahkluk di dunia ini bagaikan konsep yang terdapat dalam agama Islam dan Kristian.

rurouni_khairul

Semua benda baik datang dari Tuhan..

Semua agama benda yang baik dan ajar kita jadi baik...

Jadi boleh dikatakan semua agama berilham dari Tuhan...

ariyamusafir

Dalam agama Buddha, baik buruk ialah diri sendiri.

alhaadi2

ada x perbezaan antara ajaran buddha kat india/china ngan kat Tibet??

tickmeoff

Akar umbi adalah sama.

Perbezaan hanya dari segi perhatian yang diberi kepada Boddhisatva dan juga penjelasan yang diberikan tentang alam semesta.

ariyamusafir

Many in China practices Buddhism from the Mahayana branch and many in Thai, and Sri Lanka, Burma etc. practice Theravada. Before the maha-parinibbana of the Buddha, there is no such split into mahayana or something like that. The obvious split was seen in the second council, one hundred years of the maha-parinibbana of the Buddha (orang yang tak tahu the true meaning of it, just assume in your own terms which is the passing of the Buddha, for now). In fact, the second council was due to such. I shall post an account on the second council:

The Second Buddhist Council

The Second Council was called one hundred years after the Buddha's Parinibbāna in order to settle a serious dispute over the 'ten points.' This is a reference to some monks breaking of ten minor rules. they were given to:

1. Storing salt in a horn.
2. Eating after midday.
3. Eating once and then going again to a village for alms.
4. Holding the Uposatha Ceremony with monks dwelling in the same locality.
5. Carrying out official acts when the assembly was incomplete.
6. Following a certain practice because it was done by one's tutor or teacher.
7. Eating sour milk after one had his midday meal.
8. Consuming strong drink before it had been fermented.
9. Using a rug which was not the proper size.
10. Using gold and silver.

Their misdeeds became an issue and caused a major controversy as breaking these rules was thought to contradict the Buddha's original teachings.

King Kalasoka was the Second Council's patron and the meeting took place at Vesali due to the following circumstances.

One day, whilst visiting the Mahavana grove in Vesali, the Elder Yasa came to know that a large group of monks known as the Vajjians were infringing the rule which prohibited monk's accepting gold and silver by openly asking for it from their lay devotees. He immediately criticized their behavior and their response was to offer him a share of their illegal gains in the hope that he would be won over. The Elder Yasa, however declined and scorned their behavior. The monks immediately sued him with a formal action of reconciliation, accusing him of having blamed their lay devotees. The Elder Yasa accordingly reconciled himself with the lay devotees, but at the same time, convinced them that the Vajjian monks had done wrong by quoting the Buddha's pronouncement on the prohibition against accepting or soliciting for gold and silver. The laymen immediately expressed their support for the Elder Yasa and declared the Vajjian monks to the wrong-doers and heretics, saying "the Elder Yasa alone is the real monk and Sakyan son. All the others are not monks, not Sakyan sons."

The Stubborn and unrepentant Vajjian monks then moved to suspend the Venerable Yasa Thera without the approval of the rest of the Sangha when they came to know of the outcome of his meeting with their lay devotees. The Elder Yasa, however escaped their censure and went in search of support from monks elsewhere, who upheld his orthodox views on the Vinaya. Sixty forest dwelling monks from western countries and eighty monks from the southern regions of Avanti who were of the same view, offered to help him to check the corruption of the Vinaya. Together they decided to go to Soreyya to consult the Venerable Revata as he was a highly revered monk and an expert in the Dhamma and the Vinaya.

As soon as the Vajjian monks came to know this they also sought the Venerable Revata's support by offering him the four requisites which he promptly refused. These monks then sought to use the same means to win over the Venerable Revata's attendant, the Venerable Uttara. At first he too, rightly declined their offer but they craftily persuaded him to accept their offer, saying that when the requisites meant for the Buddha were not accepted by him, Ananda would be asked to accept them and would often agree to do so. Uttara changed his mind and accepted the requisites. Urged on by them he then agreed to go and persuade the Venerable Revata to declare that the Vajjian monks were indeed speakers of the Truth and upholders of the Dhamma.

The Venerable Revata saw through their ruse and refused to support them. He then dismissed Uttara.

In order to settle the matter once and for all, the Venerable Revata advised that a council should be called at Valikarama with himself asking questions on the ten offenses of the most senior of the Elders of the day, the Thera Sabbakami. Once his opinion was given it was to be heard by a committee of eight monks, and its validity decided by their vote. The eight monks called to judge the matter were the Venerables Sabbakami, salha, Khujjasobhita and Vasabhagamika, from the East and four monks from the West, the Venerables Revata, Sambhuta-Sanavsai, Yasa and Sumana.

They thoroughly debated the matter with Revata as the questioner and Sabbakami answering his questions. After the debate was heard the eight monks decided against the Vajjian monks and their verdict was announced to the assembly. Afterwards seven-hundred monks recited the Dhamma and Vinaya and this recital came to be known as the Sattasati because seven-hundred monks had taken part in it. This historic council is also called, the Yasatthera Sangiti because of the major role the Elder Yasa played in it and his zeal for safeguarding the Vinaya.

The Vajjian monks categorically refused to accept the Council's decision and in defiance called a council of there own which was called the Mahasangiti (The Great Council).

My investigation which I cannot conclude as for now, which I am still NOT 100% sure for now, is that "some says" that Mahayana derives from this Mahasangiti, or Mahasanghika.

Tibetan which is Vajrayana some considered it as a branch of Mahayana same as Pure Land. It is said that the basic teachings is the same, but there is difference in belief and ALSO difference in the Vinaya Pitaka practiced by Theravada and Mahayana. Theravada is considered the original. However, according to Venerable Dhammavudo, a chief Theravada Monk in Temoh, Perak Darul Ridzuan, Bhante wrote, wrong teachings exist in modern Theravada and Mahayana. Why, he wrote that, you will have to find out by reading what he said.

To compare if that teaching is original or not, one would have to compare it with the earlier 4 Nikaya (in which in Mahayana is known as the agama sutra) which was establish in the first council presided by the Maha-Arahant Kassapa (The Buddha is also an arahant, a buddhist saint) and was attended by 500 FULLY Enlightened maha-arahant, 3 months after the Buddha's maha-parinibbana.

Please read also on the Buddhist Council: http://www.yellowrobe.com/the_great_buddhist_councils

[ Last edited by  ariyamusafir at 12-1-2007 09:59 AM ]