UP主大胆质疑：佛教是耆那教和婆罗门教的拼凑宗教？

在当今世界的主要世界性宗教当中，佛教是一个非常奇特的存在。在当今世界也越来越受到人们的关注。不过网上有一个比较喜欢标新立异的UP主，说了一些佛教很不堪的话。其主要观点大致如下：佛教并没有什么独创的观点。他的大部分概念都借鉴自婆罗门教，只是拿掉了婆罗门教的种姓制度核心，取消了婆罗门之上的种姓制度，以及其他业力轮回的概念，都是源于婆罗门教的。

而佛教自创的那些概念，往往又经不起逻辑推敲。例如，佛教的核心概念是“无我”，既然没有一个恒常的我，那又是什么在轮回呢？为了给佛祖打补丁，后来的大乘佛教又发明了阿赖耶识这个概念，说它是一粒种子，里面记载着所有轮回的因果业力。而这个阿赖耶识也仅仅是一种容器而已。甚至还提出了一个非常耸动的观点，就是佛陀这个人可能并不是真实存在的。当然他也只是合理的怀疑，并没有严格的论证。

因为佛教的很多概念，除了借鉴婆罗门教之外，其他来源就是印度的另一种宗教耆那教。佛陀的经历与耆那教创始人的经历高度相似，都是曾经是一个小国的王子，因为看到了人间的疾苦，要为世人找出解脱之道而修行，最后大彻大悟，开始传教。而且这个耆那教在今天的印度，还有不少的信徒，而佛教在印度却已几乎绝迹。

耆那教的特点就是苦修，可以说其修行方式比佛教要严苛得多。所以那位UP主的观点就是：佛教是因为政治需要而临时拼凑出来的宗教。原因就是当时的印度，因为从中国引入了水稻，粮食供给大大充足。人们靠天吃饭的需求小了很多，那么主要负责和神沟通，并不创造任何实际价值的婆罗门阶层也就不再受到重视。人们特别需要一种新的意识形态，取代婆罗门教的种姓制度，而愿望最强烈的就是婆罗门之下的刹帝利阶层。

于是他们短期内，通过借鉴婆罗门教和耆那教的教义和形式，拼凑出了佛教，来表达自己的政治诉求和观点。怎么说呢？这个也只是他的一家之言，他也说了，他没有任何证据。这个大的背景我觉得是没有问题的，但是可能性还是很小的。刹帝利阶层就是以国王和武士阶层为代表的，这些征服者大多是武力者，武德比较充沛但文化知识不足的阶层，不可能自己去做这种创设宗教、有很高文化和技术含量的事情，必然是先有佛教，然后其教义很符合刹帝利阶层的胃口，然后给他们利用。

---

Among the major world religions in today's world, Buddhism is a very peculiar existence. It is also attracting more and more attention in today's world. However, there is a rather unconventional UP master online who said some very unpleasant things about Buddhism. Its main viewpoints are roughly as follows: Buddhism does not have any original viewpoints.

However, those concepts created by Buddhism itself often cannot stand up to logical scrutiny. For instance, the core concept of Buddhism is "non-self". Since there is no constant self, then what is in the cycle of rebirth? To patch up the Buddha, Mahayana Buddhism later invented the concept of the alaya consciousness, saying that it is a seed containing all the karmic forces of reincarnation. And this Alaya consciousness is merely a vessel. It even put forward a very sensational view that the Buddha might not be a real person. Of course, he only had reasonable doubts and did not provide strict arguments.

Because many concepts of Buddhism, apart from drawing on Brahmanism, originated from another religion in India, Jainism. The experiences of the Buddha are highly similar to those of the founder of Jainism. Both were once princes of small countries. Seeing the sufferings of the human world, they sought to find a way to liberation for the world and thus practiced. Eventually, they achieved great enlightenment and began to preach. Moreover, Jainism still has many believers in today's India, while Buddhism has almost vanished in India.

The characteristic of Jainism is asceticism. It can be said that its way of practice is much more rigorous than that of Buddhism. So the viewpoint of that UP master is that Buddhism is a religion pieced together temporarily due to political needs. The reason was that at that time in India, due to the introduction of rice from China, the food supply was greatly abundant. The demand for people to rely on the weather for their livelihood has decreased significantly. As a result, the Brahmin class, which is mainly responsible for communicating with the gods and does not create any practical value, is no longer valued. People particularly need a new ideology to replace the caste system of Brahmanism, and the most intense desire is for the Kshatriya class beneath the Brahmins.

So in a short period of time, they pieced together Buddhism by drawing on the doctrines and forms of Brahmanism and Jainism to express their political demands and viewpoints. How to put it? This is just his personal opinion. He also said that he has no evidence at all. I think there is no problem with this broad background, but the possibility is still very small. The Kshatriya class is represented by the king and samurai class. Most of these conquerors were martial artists. They were a class with relatively abundant martial ethics but insufficient cultural knowledge. It was impossible for them to create such a religion with high cultural and technical content. It must have been Buddhism that came first, and its doctrines were very much to the taste of the Kshatriya class, and then they made use of it.