Vedanta - Discussion Forum I (introductory))

[Sunder]

<!--QuoteBegin-rajesh_g+Oct 30 2004, 12:54 PM-->QUOTE(rajesh_g @ Oct 30 2004, 12:54 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--> He said Buddha didnt believe in avatars (nastika darshana - actually he said he preferred to call it nirishwar (?) darshana ) and yet we consider him an avatar. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Rajesh_ji, Buddhism is NOT Nireeshwara Darshana as it does not negate or promote the existance of Eeshwara.. Buddha never addressed the issue of God. (There is a beautiful story of Buddha explaining to Malunkyaputta about the man who was shot by a poisonous arrow.) This is only a digression.

Buddha (Siddhartha Gauthama) perhaps was the only 'prophet' who did not associate himself with "God", he did not say he was God, or Son of God or Messenger of God. (IIRC, Raghuvamsha Rama also did not consider himself to be an Divine Incarnation. He played out his part only as a Human Being.)

Having said that, some Vaishnavas of the south do not accept Siddhartha Gauthama as one of the 10 Avatars of Vishnu. According to some schools the 10 avatars are (Matsya, Koorma, Varaha, Narasimha, Vamana, Parashurama, Rama, Balarama, Krishna, and Kalki.)

According to Jayadeva's Geetha Govindam the Avataras are Rama, Balarama, Buddha and Kalki.

I See from ISKCON's site that Srimad Bhagavatham also talks about Buddha being an Avatara.

http://www.salagram.net/Buddha-SB.html

My personal thoughts are that it is immaterial if Buddha was an avatara or not. Rajesh G, and Sunder too are the Incarnation of the same Supreme consciousness. It's only a matter of realizing it, like Buddha did... HH would be the best person to answer the historical part if there were any interpolations.