[Advaita-l] bauddha mata

[Satish Arigela]

>– he saw himself as an
>>insider to the vaidika tradition of the Arya-s

>Source please ?

Of-course we ask for evidence when someone claims something different. But any 
mature person will have the sense to know when and for what to ask evidence for. 
One does not blindly ask for a source for everything.  


To further explain, you will not find any work which will say "Buddha saw 
himself as an insider to the vaidika tradition". It is a bit silly on one's part 
to ask for a source for that. We study related material and by applying good 
reason one deduces and arrives at that.

>How could you say that you are seeing without lenses ?

By a wide and critical study and by cross comparing notes on the subject with 
people who hold completely different opinions on the matter.

>How ? How did you reach this ?

Through study of course

>Without evidence this whole thing is useless. And what our tradition wrote as 
>history is opposed to this. >For that you may check sha~Nkara-digvijaya of 
>mAdhvAchArya, and other works.

It is immature, unwise and naive to rely on the sha~Nkara digvijaya to learn 
about buddhism(other than on some philosophical points) or other schools or to 
learn about historical details. The sha~Nkara digvijaya is a hagiographical 
account and not a historical record.

I expected this kind of naive respoonse and hence said in my earlier posting 
that "the subject was early bauddha-s and buddha"  and not 14 th century works 
and opinions on bauddha mata . 


Please re-read my earlier mails and respond when you completely understand 
them.. otherwise it is going to be a waste of time.

I do not see a point in continuing this discussion further. This is better 
continued off-line.