Fake buddha means who’s existed is questioned. For convenience I will refer 1 buddha as Non Veg Buddha and another as Narayana Avatar Buddha

Adiyen

Srimate Ramanujaya Namaha

Actually Fake word suits better because the very existence of Fake Buddha is questioned. I request you to study history of religions, especially about Buddha. Many scholars aruge, he never existed. I also doubt he ever existed? I firmly believe Fake Buddha never did. I didn’t write this because I felt its irrelevant. Narayana Avatar Buddha exist. Only.

Buddha in Buddhism means who is enlightened. it is actually a tittle. Not a person. like Sanyasi. It’s a tittle. Not a person. When one understand this, anyone can get why I used that word. This has nothing to do with Buddhism. It’s irrelevant that swamy you pointed respecting religious. Nothing to do with religion. It’s history.

Adiyen

Swamy I changed “Fake” with “Non Veg” Buddha.

Adiyen

Srimate Ramanujaya Namaha

“So if we say that the Buddha we refer to and the Buddha they are worshipping are different, it would solve a lot of problems…”

Spot on. I agree swamy. That’s why I said that. I wanted to clearly differentiate between the two Buddhas. One Buddha ate Non Veg. Narayana never eats Non Veg! So our Narayana Avatar Buddha is totally different and has no correlation with Non Veg eating Buddha.

Adiyen

Namaskaaram Acharya dasar Swami,

Yes swami adiyen agree all your points. All except the fact that Lord Narayana never eats non veg.

This is because it’s said that Lord Rama hunted several animals in the forest, and consumed them when He was with Mother Sita.

So by this adiyen not supporting meat-eating. But the laws for humans cannot be applied to him. Also if He descends in other yugas there is a chance He may consume meat. But, in Kali-yuga not necessarily as in Kali-yuga ahimsa is a very much recommended dharma

Devareer may reject my view, but adiyen presented my humble opinion.

அடியேன்

So if we say that the Buddha we refer to and the Buddha they are worshipping are different, it would solve a lot of problems…From Shravanan Of Swami's Upanyasams

Namaskaaram Swami,

Although you have understood the above quote, for more clarity what adiyen was trying to tell was that, the truth should be well known to all. I am not trying to say that we should lie to others and make up stories. The above mentioned different Buddhas is what is the general understanding of Acharyas, not our made up stories… 

Although devareer has understood this, for the benefit of others, adiyen is mentioning this…

adiyen

Srimate Ramanujaya Namaha

“This is because it’s said that Lord Rama hunted several animals in the forest, and ****consumed them**** when He was with Mother Sita.”

No! They didn’t. Sriman Narayana or Sita Mata or Sri Lakshman never ate or eat Non Veg!

I’m absolutely disheartened to read that. How can this be said in Sri Vaishnava platform? It’s such a offensive statement.

In olden times, Kshatriyas hunted animals. Not to eat them. But, to practise fighting skills. Even Arjun Pandavas did Hunting. Not to eat them, but to practise archery or skills.

Rama ate Non Veg. Rama was a misogynist. Rama was irresponsible husband who dumped his wife when pregnant. Rama doubted his wife by hearing a stupid washmen and did Agnipariksha, atheistic feminism vs Rama devaru etc – All are fiction. They never happened. it’s all done by Anti God Asuras. Don’t listen or agree or take side with them.

Even if they bring the verses which shows Sriman Rama or Sita Mata or Sri Lakshman ate Non Veg. I don’t agree.

It’s all editing by Asuras. I oppose them.

Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan

Namaskaaram Swami,

Please forgive me…

adiyen

Srimate Ramanujaya Namaha

I’m not qualified and ask apologies to great Bhagavathas like you all swamy. But whatever Yuga Dharma it is, I will only agree that Sriman Rama or Sri Laxman or Vaishnavas like Pandavas don’t and never ate Non Veg.

Adiyen