2

There are a lot of our scriptures mentioning Gautam Buddha as one of Vishnu's avatars. You can see this Wikipedia post for the list
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gautama_Buddha_in_Hinduism
If it is so under which varna do they come,like should they be allowed to perform the Sacred Thread ceremony and other vedic ceremonies ?
I want to know whether our scriptures give any guidelines on which varna do Buddhists belong (ideally, if our scriptures call Buddhists as Hindus,they should give details about their varna).
I am not talking about conversions here

Yogi
  • 10,470
  • 5
  • 55
  • 104
Raghav
  • 181
  • 5
  • There is a question which would be helpful to you. Also this question. – Sarvabhouma Jan 18 '17 at 04:03
  • @SreeCharan That answers one of my questions,thanks. But what about the varna thing and the performance of ceremonies ? – Raghav Jan 18 '17 at 04:08
  • 1)I don't think buddhists consider themselves as Hindus and follow the varna system in Hinduism. 2) One of the reasons Buddha formed a religion is the vedic rituals and sacrifices going on at that time. He condemned the brahmins who considered themselves superior than the others. Buddha rejected the concept of sacred thread. So, I am not sure about thread ceremony. Are you talking about conversion into Hinduism? – Sarvabhouma Jan 18 '17 at 04:18
  • @SreeCharan No not about conversion. If I were to call a Buddhist a Hindu then of which varna would I call them. I want to know whether our scriptures give any guidelines for this. – Raghav Jan 18 '17 at 04:25
  • 1
    @benzenefan Varnasrama Dharma is based on Guna/qualities and Karma. See this answer. It applies to all 7 billion people. – The Destroyer Jan 18 '17 at 05:35
  • 1
    buddhists are by definition non-hindus. they do not have a varna and since buddhism is anti-karma kanda, it does not apply. –  Jan 18 '17 at 06:03
  • benzenefan-Why do u assume that all buddhists will belong to one Varna? See @TheDestroyer's comment.. – Rickross Jan 18 '17 at 07:22
  • @Rickross ,@TheDestroyer Do you mean there are no exclusive guidelines for varnas of Buddhists in our scriptures ? A final yes or no expected – Raghav Jan 18 '17 at 09:15
  • @benzenefan If we go by Guna based Varnas,then obviously they won't all be having the same varnas..it will vary from person to person..and if we go by Varnas by Samskara then they are all Sudras.. – Rickross Jan 18 '17 at 09:28
  • 2
    Buddhists rejected teachings of the Hindu vedic scriptures, and therefore no varna and other things that those scriptures teach is relevant for them, and those things are not applied to them. Thus they do not belong to any varna. They are not allowed to perform any of the ceremonies that the Hindu scriptures teach. – brahma jijnasa Jan 18 '17 at 11:33
  • 2
    Varna depends on the psychology of a person through his Karma and Guna. Every person living today who has a mind will exhibit mixtures of different Varna. So Buddhists, Christians, Muslims, atheists, any one who has a mind, can be classified by Varna. It does not matter if they reject Vedic teachings since Varna is a universal concept. Buddha did not accept. Varna determined by last name and recommended Varna determined by conduct, i.e. Karma and Guna. Check his teaching on Brahmana in Dhammapada. – Pradip Gangopadhyay Jan 18 '17 at 12:17
  • @Rickross They cannot be pure Shudras, they would be mixed pratiloma people because they would marry without any concern of caste, so basically there won't be any pure deals with non-hindus. – Yogi Jan 24 '17 at 20:58
  • @Yogi Yes u are right they will be mixed castes also.. – Rickross Jan 25 '17 at 05:41
  • see https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/a/24623/13287 – zaxebo1 Apr 12 '18 at 03:11

3 Answers3

4

Since the Buddhists don't follow the Hindu Caste system they will fall in the category of "those having no cast"(or outcast) from the Hindu perspective.

If some generations ago some of their forefathers adhered to the Hindu caste system even then ,since that is all broken now,all the present Buddhists will fall in the outcast category only.Because mixed casts are outcast only.And,because there is no 5th caste in Hinduism.

Manu Smriti 10.4 Brahmano Kshatriyo Vaisyas Trayo Varna DvijatayoH|| Chaturtha Ekajatis Tu Sudro Na-asti Tu Panchamaha ||

Brahmana, the Kshatriya, and the Vaisya castes (varna) are the twice-born ones, but the fourth, the Sudra, has one birth only; there is no fifth (caste)

Now if you are among the ones who believe in a guna/karma-based caste system ,where one's birth plays no role,then i can't answer your question for sure.Because, then your guess is as good as mine.

But in Hinduism one's caste is mostly determined by birth,although gunas and karmas also play some role in it.

For example see the following verse from Manu:

Manu Smriti 10.3. On account of his pre-eminence, on account of the superiority of his origin, on account of his observance of (particular) restrictive rules, and on account of his particular sanctification the Brahmana is the lord of (all) castes (varna).

Here origin refers to birth,observance of some restrictions refers to karma and the sanctification process refers to the Saamskaras we have(viz-the 40 Samskaras,including Upanayana).

Rickross
  • 111,864
  • 14
  • 239
  • 439
2

It is generally believed in Eastern India ( Orissa,Bengal and Assam) ,that the Kayastha caste was created to accommodate the Buddhists who integrated with Hinduism .Since the Buddhists did not believe in a Caste System ,the Kayasthas were given the freedom to take up any profession and inter marry with people of any Caste in Hinduism.
I have ,however , not come across any written record ,in support of this belief...But till now , there are no caste related restrictions on the Kayasths (Karanas' in Orissa).

b.sahu
  • 681
  • 4
  • 5
  • -1 Buddhism is an atheist school of thought how can it merge with thestic vedanta school or Hinduism which is nothing but vedanta these days there are rarely any Purva Mimansakas these days? – Yogi Jan 24 '17 at 20:51
  • @Yogi Jainism is atheistic and not Buddhism. They are quite similar in many aspects though. – user1952500 Jan 28 '17 at 02:40
  • @user1952500 Anyone who doesn't believe in vedas or reject teachings of vedas is an atheist. Buddhism rejects existence of soul antmavada which makes it atheistic religion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism?wprov=sfla1 . – Yogi Jan 28 '17 at 05:17
  • @Yogi your definition of atheism is different from what a dictionary says, so we will not be able to communicate well in general. Also, Buddhism does believe in rebirth and has the concept of a soul. – user1952500 Jan 28 '17 at 05:21
  • @user1952500 Did you read that wikipedia page ? it clearly says that they dont believe in existence of soul. what dictionary are you talking about and obviously atheism is defined by your perspective not by a dictionary if you are a hindu and believe in vedanta then this is the definition of the word nastika – Yogi Jan 28 '17 at 06:37
  • @Yogi atheism in general means disbelief in gods. And there is a concept of bhavanga in Buddhism which is similar to a soul but not exactly the same as it removes the identity present in a soul. Buddhism has a more complex philosophy than is described in the wiki article. You could look at the Mahayana and learn more. The comment section or my personal explanations will not do it justice. – user1952500 Jan 28 '17 at 06:44
  • BTW Buddhism doesn't mention absence of gods. It maintains silence and theorizes that belief or non-belief will not help in the path to attainment of nibbana (which is grossly similar to moksha of Hinduism). – user1952500 Jan 28 '17 at 06:46
  • Also I believe you are translating Nastikatva to atheism which again is an approximate translation. It is in general tough to translate concepts like aatma, paapa, punya, bhagavaan, deva, asura etc into English. They are crudely similar but come with a lot of baggage which each religion assumes. So it's better to use the original terms in such areas and do finer comparisons of concepts rather than using the English name. – user1952500 Jan 28 '17 at 06:55
  • @user1952500 This http://sanskritdictionary.com/?iencoding=iast&q=%E0%A4%A8%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%B8%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%95&lang=sans&action=Search is a translation of Sanskrit word Nastika in Apte Dictionary which is one of the best Sanskrit to English Dictionary. Nirvana is similar to moksha only in terms of attaining freedom from cycle of rebirth, but the vedas and vedanta talk about bramhan which is the whole reason and cause of everything including you and me. In any case Vedantacharyas like Adi Shankarachayra and Bhagwad Ramanujacharya have criticised Buddhism for athestic thoughts – Yogi Jan 28 '17 at 07:00
  • @Yogi any dictionary will only make an attempt of giving a translation. Look at wiki (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%80stika_and_n%C4%81stika) which says specifically: "Astika and Nastika do not mean "theism" and "atheism" respectively in ancient or medieval era Sanskrit literature.[6] In current Indian languages like Hindi, āstika usually means "theist", while nāstika means "atheist".[12] However, the terms are used differently in Hindu philosophy.[13] For example, Sāṃkhya is both an atheist and āstika (Vedic) philosophy." – user1952500 Jan 28 '17 at 07:02
  • And FYI the etymology of the word 'na-asti-ka' also does not correspond to Atheist, which specifically means a person who maintains that there is no God. – user1952500 Jan 28 '17 at 07:05
  • @user1952500 Prove me whatever you are saying I will believe it, since Apte was an expert in Sanskrit I won't dare cross his words. Although many western scholars have misinterpreted the NAstika word. I think we should move this chat here http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/38640/vedanta-and-philosophy – Yogi Jan 28 '17 at 07:08
  • I know Apte has a good Dictionary and used it for most of the 5 years that I studied. However I know the limitations of encompassing a language with samasas into an English dictionary.

    Well, this will take a lot of time and I don't really have an intention to prove myself. I'll rather let someone else do it: http://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/16917/do-nastika-and-astika-have-direct-translations-in-english

     – user1952500 Jan 28 '17 at 07:14
  • @user1952500 Nastikatva in Hinduism is lack of faith and rejection of the veda. This is the definition of nastikatva which is loosely translated as atheism for lack of a better term. The western dictionary definition does not apply to HInduism. By this definition, Buddhism is nastika vada –  Jan 28 '17 at 17:39
  • Buddhism doesn't believe in Varna system. Who told you? –  Jul 26 '17 at 15:42
0

I have never heard of this theory before and I am from Eastern India. I am kulīna brāhmaṇa from Bengal and have no idea what you are talking about. Kayasthas are the descendants of the mixed caste Karana which is mentioned by both Yagnakalvya and Manu. They are definitely not Buddhists who are referred as Shekhara in Brahmavaivarta Purana. Current Bengali Buddhists are still found in Chittagong and they are called Baruas. They are Theravada Buddhists and they have very different social rituals than Kayasthas who follow Brahminical rules to the tee.

Parashara Shandilya
  • 1
  • 1
  • Your answer could be improved with additional supporting information. Please [edit] to add further details, such as citations or documentation, so that others can confirm that your answer is correct. You can find more information on how to write good answers in the help center. – Community Oct 13 '22 at 10:49