--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote: > > > > One of the reasons Buddhism had such a large impact and spread > > initially was because of what Vedic religion was doing in some > > kingdoms: it was driving them into bankruptcy. In particular the > > vedic horse sacrifice--which sometimes involved copulation with a > > male horse and then it's slaughter--had becoming increasingly > > elaborate and grandiose. > > One of the reasons I love Roger Zelazny's "Lord > Of Light" is that he captures this aspect of > Buddha's life, the rebel preaching a more pure > form of teaching and fighting against a system > that had grown corrupt and oppressive. Some > aspects of the popularity of Buddhism in its > early days remind me of the popularity of > Catharism in medieval Europe. The Cathars > represent a return to the purity of spiritual > teaching that was self-generated and self- > sustaining, and that required no "intercession" > by a priest class who, by that time, were in > it only for the money. Similarly, the main > reason the Hindu priesthood was so down on > Buddha and his teachings is that he was > cutting into their livelihood by telling folks > that they didn't need priests to realize their > enlightenment. > > It is a source of never-ending amusement to me > that soon after he was safely dead and gone they > co-opted him into the Hindu pantheon and claimed > that he was "really" an incarnation of Vishnu. :-) >
But.. if Vishnu exists the way they claim, OF COURSE he was really an incarnation of Vishnu... Sorta the inverse of all those ants at Indra's feet...
