In this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPINIZmQDwI Sadhguru claims that Buddha explored just an aspect of Shiva’s teachings. Supposedly Shiva explored 112 ways of getting enlightened and Buddha just the awareness path.
I’m surprised by this. Can anyone comment and/or point to sources (shiva’s sutras?).
Moderator note: Topic moved for better placement
What he says, makes sense. The 112 ways are based on the Vigyan Bairav. Read lesson 136 here at AYP, where it is covered briefly.
Hi Microcosm,
As Jusmail says, the 112 techniques that Sadhguru is referring to come from the Vijnana Bhairava Tantra which is a popular text in the Trika school of Kashmir Shaivism. The text is part of a larger text and is written as if it is a discussion between Bhairava and his consort Bhairavi. It was probably composed around the 9th century AD, around 1,400 years after the Buddha was born.
Some of the things that Sadhguru says in the video are misleading. Many of the techniques described in the Vijnana Bhairava Tantra are techniques designed to increase awareness. These include increasing awareness of the breath, of the body, of the senses and the objects of the senses, awareness of the mind and of non-dual reality and so on. The Buddha also taught various techniques for increasing awareness, amongst other things that he taught. So, the two paths are similar in that respect. It is not the case that there is only one teaching on awareness in the Vijnana Bhairava Tantra.
Both the Buddhist path and the yogic path include milestones to help people recognise where they are and how far they have come on the way. So again, they are very similar there. And again, both the Buddhist path and the yogic path talk in terms of lifetimes of practice.
It is true that at a certain stage on the path of yoga, the process of surrender to truth becomes similar to a process of falling into a bottomless pit. But that is also the case on the Buddhist path. The specific Buddhist teaching on this is called Dzogchen.
There is an essential difference between the teachings described in the Vijnana Bhairava Tantra and the teachings of Gautama Buddha. This is that the Buddha described the essential cause of suffering as being desire, whereas the author of the Vijnana Bhairava Tantra considers the cause of suffering to be the idea that desire should be fulfilled, rather than simply desire itself. So, desire is considered to be another emotion or feeling and it is our relationship to that desire, which either binds us to pain and suffering, or leads us to liberation and enlightenment.
This is from verse 73:
“The yogin who relishes music and song to the extent that he merges with it, becomes filled with unparalleled happiness, attains heightened awareness and experiences oneness with the Divine.”
This is markedly different from anything that you would find in the original Buddhist teachings and marks a transition that took place during the Tantric period away from ascetisism/ monasticism and towards a more all-encompassing and broader form of spiritual practice.
But, although there are some differences between the teachings of the Vijnana Bhairava Tantra and the teachings of the Buddha, they are certainly not as distinct as Sadhguru is implying here. It is important that we do not fall into the trap of encouraging (and even inventing) division, where we should be cultivating harmony and unity between spiritual traditions. This is especially true for popular teachers who have a large reach in terms of audience.
Christi
1 Like
Thanks jusmail, Christi.
I’m very interested in this topic and found the posts above interesting.
For the sake of anyone else who is interested, my investigations have found that Sadhguru at least could be correct (and in any case that is what he believes to be true).
If you would like to investigate for yourself, Osho has a meditation on each of the 112 ways and each one is very deep, each one could be a path to follow for a lifetime.
Sadhguru has said that according to his beliefs, there are no other ways to be realised other than the 112 ways, the story in his tradition, is that Shiva challenged his wife to find other ways, and she was forced to humble herself to him as she could not find any. I don’t think Buddha necessarily followed 1 of the paths but the idea is that all the paths are within the 112.
Vigyan bhairav tantra might have came later but vedas Exists way before buddha was born. What shiva taught to sapt rishis weren’t documented they were maukhik (oral) for 7 rishis he taught them seven dimensions from which every each and every path came. I hope it clears your confusion. In those 7 dimensions tantra and occult path was also one of them. I hope you get your answer.
1 Like
Hi Sahil,
It is true that in the oral tradition Shiva taught seven yogis the whole of yoga a long time before the Buddha was born. However, this is a more modern story, possibly developing between 1,000 and 1,500 years ago, around a thousand years after the Buddha lived. There is no historical or archeological evidence that it is true. In fact the historical evidence suggests very strongly that it is not true. The historical evidence that we have, shows that knowledge of yogic practices, and the various aspects of yoga, developed slowly over thousands of years, rather than being transmitted in one go. And of course Shiva did not exist in the early Vedas. The story has been popularised recently by Sadhguru and some other Shaivaits, despite the lack of evidence of its accuracy. I would say that the story is best viewed as inspirational, rather than factual.
I hope this clears up any confusion.
2 Likes
It is true that the modern Adiyogi-Saptarishi narrative is difficult to verify historically. However, saying that “Shiva did not exist in the early Vedas” is inaccurate. Rudra, who is widely regarded as the Vedic precursor of Shiva, appears repeatedly in the Rig Veda, centuries before Buddha. Likewise, yogic and meditative traditions are documented in the Vedas and early Upanishads before Buddha’s lifetime. Buddha inherited and transformed an already existing ascetic and yogic culture rather than creating it from nothing.
Fiat lux, har har mahadev.
1 Like
Hi Sahil,
The case of Rudra is an interesting example of how yogic beliefs changed over time. Rudra was considered a lesser deity in the early Vedas. He was a God associated with storms, wind, hunting, destruction, disease, and sudden death, but also with healing if invoked and appeased. When I said that Shiva did not exist at all in the early Vedas, I meant that if we went back in time to the period in history when they were being produced (1500-1200 BCE) and asked anyone if there was a deity called Shiva, they would have said “no”. The linking of Shiva to Rudra came much later on.
Rudra went through quite a pronounced transformation over a 1,000-year period before people began associating him with Shiva. This change begins in the later Vedic ritual texts (1000–800 BCE) Rudra began to gain more ritual importance. He is increasingly identified as a god who must be pacified through offerings. His role as a healer becomes more emphasized and he starts absorbing attributes of other protective deities.
In the Upanishads (800–300 BCE), Rudra undergoes a major conceptual shift. He is increasingly identified with Brahman (ultimate reality). He becomes less just a storm god and more a cosmic principle, and the term “Shiva” (meaning “auspicious”) begins to appear as an epithet used to describe him. By this stage the terrifying Rudra is also considered to be the benevolent, auspicious reality behind the universe. This is also the period in history where “Shiva” becomes the preferred elevated name of Rudra.
In the Epic and early sectarian stage (500 BCE–400 CE) Shiva becomes a fully developed deity, not just an aspect of Rudra. He is described as an ascetic yogi, a cosmic destroyer and transformer, and lord of meditation and liberation. By this stage Rudra is often treated as a form or manifestation of Shiva, and Shaivism (devotion to Shiva) begins forming as a major tradition.
So, the creation of Shiva out of Rudra is gradual and involves Rudra being transformed quite considerably beforehand. So, we could say that “many modern Indians, and Indians from around 500 BC onwards, consider Rudra to be an early manifestation of Shiva”. But that is a later imposition on the early Vedas, not an idea that existed at the time the early Vedas were composed.
This kind of “back-dating” happened to the Buddha as well. Many Indians believe that the Buddha was an incarnation of Vishnu. So, that would mean that the Buddha also existed in the early Vedic period, as Vishnu is mentioned in the early Vedas.
And yes, it is true that the Buddha was born into a time when the practice of yoga had been around already for many hundreds of years, if not more. The Buddha joined the Shramanas (ascetics) in the forests of Northern India at a time when the Shramana tradition was already well established, and contemplation and ascetic practices date back as far as the early Vedic period.
1 Like
What the Buddha taught will never be known because his teachings were not written down for hundreds of years after his death.
As far as the Vijñana Bhairava tantra is concerned it details 112 methods for attaining nirvikalpa samadhi, which is pure awareness in the absence of all objects and time itself. This is what constitutes enlightenment.
1 Like
Hi Waylander,
Welcome to the forums! 
So, the Vijñana Bhairava Tantra may well have existed for hundreds of years before it was written down. At that time in India it was quite normal for teachings to be composed orally, and to be passed down from teacher to student orally. Written texts were fragile and could easily rot, be eaten by termites, or lost in a fire, so they were considered unreliable means of preserving spiritual teachings. The oral transmission system was much more reliable.
We do not know how long the Vijñana Bhairava Tantra existed in oral form before being written down, but that does not mean we do not know what the original teaching said. Oral transmission in India is exceptional, and teams of people chant texts together every day in temples, rarely making a mistake. If one person does make a mistake, they get corrected by the others.
So, we can be pretty sure that the copy of the Vijñana Bhairava Tantra we have today is very close to the original. We do not have an original manuscript, but rely on copies of copies of the first textual writing of the oral transmission. This also means we do not know the exact date of composition. It could have been the 9th century CE, as I mentioned above, but also could be as old as the 7th century CE.
And so the same is true for the Buddha’s teachings. They were transmitted orally and then memorised by teams of monks who passed them down through the generations before they were committed to writing. So, in the same way that we can know what the Vijñana Bhairava Tantra taught, we can also know what the Buddha taught.
1 Like