To begin with, even the name of the Sutta is "Sona Sutta"( Dog sutta).
But this Sutta has nothing to do with Dogs. It is a rant against Brahmins. Dogs feature only when they have to be compared with Brahmins.
And every comparison concludes that Dogs were better than Brahmins
What is this Sutta about?
It is about Buddha's stereotyping and generalisation against Brahmins.
He begins by saying that Brahmins of his time mated with females of all backgrounds. He compares Brahmin sexual mating pattern with that of dogs.
Here Buddha condemns Brahmins of his time for intermarrying with other varnas/communities and compares them with dogs who mate with every breed.
This is not an innocent comparison. Sexual behaviour of dogs is known for its licentiousness and promiscuity
https://t.co/vGcaki8K2h
This is the reason why words like "k*tti", "bit*h" denoting dogs is used as a grave sexual insult.
Although modern Buddhists flaunt egalitarianism now, for the historic Buddha intercaste marriage was a horror that amounted to licentious social behavior resembling dogs.
To push further his caricature that Brahmins were licentious like dogs, he then accuses Brahmins of indulging in sex even during periods.
Buddha then makes his third accusation.
He says all Brahmin males of his time buy and sell females. Note the gross generalization and stereotyping.
Buddha then condemns Brahmins of his time for earning money.
Note that according to Buddha a brahmin has to either beg for food or starve himself to death. He has no right to earn or stash anything.
Buddha then condemns the all Brahmins of his time for overeating and "swelling their bellies".
The fat tummied brahmin is a very common stereotype that Buddha also uses.
In every comparison, the dogs comes out better. Buddha makes these laughable claims in the process
1) Dogs are not as licentious as Brahmins.
2) Dogs dont mate during periods unlike Brahmins
3) Dogs dont sell their women unlike Brahmins
4) Dogs eat only twice unlike Brahmins
Stereotyping is a very common weapon used in racist generalisation.
Did buddha enter the private bedrooms of every brahmin house to check whether Brahmin females mated during periods?
Did he take a survey to check that every Brahmin sold his wives?
If we have to stereotype, it must start with the Buddhist monks themselves.
Buddhist monasteries were full of nashedi intoxicated Buddhist monks. Wine production in ancient India was a business over which Buddhist monks held monopoly.
https://t.co/jaxRFL0MRD
During excavations in Swat, Archaeologists found wine making distilleries inside Buddhist monasteries.
Buddhist monks loved to indulge in wine revelries
https://t.co/VreLPAZrbP
During ASI Nagarjunakonda excavations , mint machine was found in monasteries.
In Satavahana state, no one except king had the right to mint coins.
The archaeologist Longhurst concluded that Buddhist monks "made their own coins".
In other words, they indulged in counterfeit
There is no evidence that Brahmins of Buddha's time were more lustful voracious wife-sellers than other communities (I would like to see if such evidence exists), but it can be said that Buddhist monks themselves indulged in wine making, intoxication and fraud counterfeiting.
Creating an imaginary past caricature for appropriation to use as a stick with which to beat the current community is a common trope in religious polemics
When Prophet Mohd extolled ancient Jews like Moses, he had no love lost for Jews of his present
https://t.co/UjDV5EQMhh
A Sculpture from Buddhist center of Nagarjunakonda proudly displays devout Buddhist Ikshavaku king Virapurishadatta trampling a Shiva Linga with his feet (c.3rd century AD)
Buddhists later invented a deity named Vignantaka( such a deity does not exist in early Pali canon).
This deity Vignantaka is ALWAYS shown trampling Hindu god Ganesha with his feet
In their scriptures, Buddhists also circulated stories of a Boddhisttva named Vajrapani kiIIing Hindu God Shiva.
Shiva is described as a very malevolent being. He deludes people with his malevolent Shiva Bhakti
Bodhisattva Vajrapani orders Shiva to accept Buddhism.
Shiva does not comply. A battle ensues. Shiva loses the fight. Both Shiva and durga fall at the feet of Bodhisattva Vajrapani.
Yet, Shiva is eventually kiIIed by this Bodhisattva
Buddha also had a lot to say about ancient Indian epic characters revered by Hindus.
About Draupadi, Buddha says in Kunala Jataka that although Draupadi (Krishna/Kanha) was wed to five Pandava princes, she lusted for many more and she "became the wh*re of a hunch back dwarf"
Buddha accuses Sati Draupadi of having an illegitimate affair with a hunch back dwarf. In Dasaratha Jataka, he says Rama and Sita were biological siblings, thereby reducing the "Sita Rama Kalyana" performed by Hindus every year to a mere sibling incest
When JNUwalas addressed Goddess Durga a "wh*re", entire RW erupted.
Well, such JNUites have not fallen down from the sky. Their antecedents were also in India
Once upon a time, Hinduism was largest religion of Cambodia. Angkor wat was largest Hindu temple of the world.
Today, there is no Hinduism in Cambodia. Like most C Hindu temples, Angkor wat was converted to Buddhist temple.
Even four armed Vishnu Murti was converted to Buddha
*Eight armed Vishnu.
The Buddhists also invented a deity called Trailokyavijaya (He is absent in early Buddhist texts).
This Buddhist deity kiIIs Shiva. He stands on Shiva's decapitated head and tramples Goddess Parvati's breasts with his feet
Sculpture provenance: Nalanda. 8-9th century
Source:
https://t.co/5g6E1bSIiT
More information about this Buddhist deity Trailokya Vijaya who loves to sexually assault Goddess Parvati even after she begs for his mercy
https://t.co/TxIiDDo1Az
When Buddhist deities themselves love to trample and sexually assault Goddess Parvati with their feet, is it any wonder that some modern Bheemtas addressed Goddess Parvati as "wh*re"?
I could go on and on. But here is the thing. When Adi Shankaracharya opposed this cult tooth and nail, it was not because he was intolerant. He was more knowledgeable and wiser than all of us put together, and we need to trust that everything he did was for the greater good
Many people are asking me to comment on Gautama Buddha and his alleged status as a Vishnu Avatara.
I have not much to say. But just one observation.
There was an Upanishad named Allopanishad which declared Akbar was an incarnation of Vishnu.