Why no documentaries about Bayon Temple?

Bayon Buddhist Temple: Angkor Archaeological Park, Siem Reap, Cambodia

Bayon Temple complex to Maha Brahma, Angkor Thom, Cambodia (Wikipedia)

.

Forbidden? Why no one makes a documentary about Bayon Temple

(Praveen Mohan, 12/12/20) Let's look at a very strange Cambodian Buddhist temple. No, this is not the world-famous Angkor Wat.

Many people assume this is part of Angkor Wat, but this is a different temple. This is Cambodia's Bayon Temple, a very large complex with many intriguing features.

There are many pictures circulating of these mysterious stone faces (similar to Olmec ones in the jungles of ancient Mesoamerica/Mexico). But here is the shocker: No documentaries have ever been made about this temple.

This is very very odd because such a fantastic ancient site should have plenty of videos and TV programs made about it. But there is nothing. I could not even find a documentary on YouTube.

I have formed a strong opinion, formulated a theory, and have come up with a shocking reason as why no documentaries can be aired on any TV channel about this temple.

Bayon Temple, Cambodia (wiki)

So welcome to the first and the only documentary about Bayon Temple!

According to historians Bayon was built as a Buddhist wat. And to them these mysterious faces represent the Buddha built about 800 years ago.

Even before one enters Bayon, when one is approaching the gate, one sees giants figures lined up on both side of the road. Who are they? On one side, there are deities (devas) and on the other side demons (asuras).

And look what they have in their hands: the body of a giant snake, dragon, sea serpent (naga). What are they doing with this reptilian? They are churning a sea of milk (Milky Way). But this event is central to ancient Hindu (Vedic, Brahmanical) texts, not Buddhist texts that inherit and utilize the story.

In fact, originally Buddhism shunned features like this, but later (reformed) Mahayana Buddhism embraced Hindu ideas, themes, gods, cosmologies, and theologies.

So why does a Buddhist temple built many centuries after the historical Buddha taught things contrary to the Vedas inherited by later Hindus show a mainly Hindu depiction outside its gate?

Bayon Temple to close for renovations, Cambodia (siemreap.net)

.

When one enters Bayon Temple, one realizes it makes a unique visual impact. It is built differently than any other temple in the world. There are a total of 54 towers cramped together, and each tower has multiple smiling faces carved on them.

There are a total of 216 faces on these towers. The faces may look small from ground level, but when one gets to the top level, they are breathtaking. One becomes speechless for a few seconds because the giant faces with their mysterious smiles emanate a strange vibration.

Who does this face belong to? Why did ancient builders construct this temple with so many towers with these strange faces embedded on all four sides?

Archeologists and historians say this face depicts the historical Buddha, and King Jayavarman the 7th, who wanted to glorify the Buddha and wanted people to remember him forever.

This is why he built this temple. It simultaneously establish the glory of the Buddha and the king, turning himself into a god king, a deva among humans.

But this entire theory is completely wrong, I say. These faces do not depict the Buddha or the king who built them. These faces depict the Hindu God Brahma (Buddhism's Maha Brahma).

Brahma is a god or divinity with four heads. The Buddha is not. This is why every tower is shown with four heads or faces, facing the four directions.

Bayon - the Buddhist Temple of the mysterious stone face towers (renown-travel.com)

• [It is interesting to note that, while Buddhism (a nontheistic religion that is quite polytheistic  and only in one sense atheistic) recognized Maha Brahma, "Great Brahma," Hinduism seems to avoid his worship and only rarely mentions him/it, as the brahmas ("divinities") transcend sex. I asked monks why Buddhists do not worship Brahma or Sakka, "gods" the Buddha interacted with in the texts. The answer was that there is no need to worship anyone; these gods cannot grant enlightenment or avoid the consequences of karma. I then asked Hindus why there are no temples to Brahma, who is a third of the holy trinity of Generator, Operator, Destroyer (G.O.D.), that is the Creator Brahma, Sustainer or Preserver Vishnu, and Destroyer Shiva. They said Brahma's job is done, so there's no need to pay him any mind. Others have said that his worship is too powerful and that if people worshiped him, they could not be overcome. Maybe that's why Brahmin priests emphasize worship of countless deities and incarnations but reserve Brahma and Brahman for themselves, telling everyone else to focus on sensual Krishna or beloved Shiva and never mind Vishnu unless one is into Buddhism, Jainism, or other troublemaking shramana dharmas. Polytheistic Hinduism under the influence of Brahmins focuses a tiny bit on the veneration of Lord Vishnu (Vaishnavism), with the outrageous notion that the Buddha (like Lord Jesus) is an emanation, incarnation, or avatar of this God. In Shaivism, the greater regard is for Lord Shiva. And it seems anyone who says "Lord Buddha" or "Buddha" as if that were a great awakened being's personal name rather than a title, like many Mahayanists, is buying into this fiction. The Buddha was not a God, not a deva, not an avatar, not an incarnation but awakened. And we can awaken, whether or not Great Brahma created this or some other world-system (cakkavala) for beings to be reborn in. There are countless world-systems in all directions, and Great Brahma certainly did not create the universe (multiverse), rebirth, karma, or a self or soul, as Brahmin priests and Hindu masses as well as Christians might imagine and teach. Anyone can gain the power to create or wield power over the creation of others through the jhanas, the "meditative absorptions," and yet that is no first cause, no initial creation, no beginning of the world. (See the 31 Planes of Existence and the causes of rebirth in each, which for the higher worlds is the karma of the various jhanas). It is merely another spin, so there's no reason and no value in "worshipping" a creator or imagining any creator created anything in the actual beginning. "In the beginning," whether told as a Sumerian tale repeated in the Judeo-Christian Bible or the Vedas or other holy books refers only to the latest iteration not the actual beginning. Buddhas (supremely awakened teachers) come along to point out the path to liberation from this interminable cycling of samsara, but who listens? Who takes the advice to abandon all becoming, which is forever fraught with three characteristics of being impermanent (no matter how long lasting), disappointing (no matter how pleasurable), and impersonal (no matter how apparently personal things seem). It's nice that Brahma gets a temple, but if all it does is feed into the ancient Vedas and not the Buddha-Dharma, the Path to Ultimate Liberation, what's the ultimate good of it?]

Bayon Buddhist Temple Travel Guide, Khmer Cambodia (bestpricetravel.com)

.

Ancient Vedic (and later Hindu) texts clearly mention that Great Brahma should be shown with four heads facing the four directions.

On the other hand, the Buddha is never shown with four faces. Even more interesting, look at the ornaments. He is wearing a spectacular necklace, He wears very ornate earrings and more jewelry on his head.

This is completely against the way the Buddha is usually depicted, because the Buddha never wears jewelry like he did when he was Prince Siddhartha, before his great enlightenment, or when he's depicted as the Bodhisatta (Bodhisattva) before becoming the Buddha.

It is also how he's depicted when shown as a past or future chakravartin (cakkavatti) king in Central Asia, a "world monarch" who rules by dharma or righteousness and has a weapon (flying saucer, vimaan) that is a chakra or thousand-spoked "wheel" as depicted at the center of the modern Indian flag (as found imprinted on the Buddha's foot), having forsaken spirituality for worldly power.

 

"India" (ancient Vedic Maha Bharat) has been a country since the time of the Buddhist Emperor Ashoka's conquest and formation of an empire, uniting lands in Central Asia and South Asia.

Empires in Southeast Asia seem to have followed his example, as India extended its influence as far away as Indonesia, which has many Buddhist and Hindu features, such as the great Borobudur. It is no surprise the kings and emperors kept both religions, which blended into one as Mahayana Buddhism.

The Awakened One believed in and promoted simplicity rather than self-adornment. Even more significant is the giant crown, like something a world monarch would wear.

It is a large conical helmet like the headdress of a brahma (divinity), a crown with diadem on top. There is an ancient Sanskrit text called the Manasara-Silpasastra which explicitly details how Brahma should be carved and represented.

The ancient builders have depicted Brahma exactly as per that text. Again, the Buddha is never shown with a giant headdress or crown, unless he is being shown as the Future Buddha Maitreya or as a royal warrior before his renunciation and attainment of buddhahood.

Instead, he is shown with a simple knot top hairdo over the bump on the crown of his head. And there is another fascinating detail:

Look how he is shown with a third eye. Most people think only Shiva is shown with a third eye, but Brahma is also depicted with a third eye. This feature is also mentioned in ancient texts.

This means that ancient Cambodian sculptors had a thorough knowledge of some aspects of ancient Vedic and/or later Hindu texts, and they followed these details carefully. This is stunning because even ancient Indians sometimes omitted these details. But artisans have dutifully followed them thousand of miles outside of India.

• Facebook.com/praveenmohanfans
• Instagram.com/praveenET
• Twitter.com?IamPraveenMohan
• phenomenaltravelvideos@gmail.com
• patreon.com/PraveenMohan
• #Cambodia | #Hinduism | #PraveenMohan