Buddhism - Declined or Brutalized in the land of its birth?

[Juggernaut_Flat_Plane_V8]

Are you aware of Adi Shankaracharya ? Notice how the region inside the 4 peetha remained Hindu ? while those outside the peeta became Islamic.

Mahayana borrowed from Hinduism, not the other way around. Look up Narayana (Vishnu) in Mahayana.

Bhakti movement also was aimed at countering Islam, not buddhism.

wait for my essays on this thread next weekend, I would provide necessary references...these things require nuance and 20+ hours of painstaking research, writing and visits to the libary..Ohh well I have something to look forward to the next weekend


Buddhism died with the war for Kannauj...Hinduism also committed suicide with the war for Kannauj....if the struggle for Kannauj didnot happen, Islam would have been limited to Sindh, Balochistan and the other side of the Khyber Pass...rest of the subcontinent --a patchwork of Hinduism and Buddhism...it is the egg headed stupidity of our ancestors that one of our traditions has been wiped out and the other has been largely shorn of its legacy and architecture in North India

Had Buddhism effectively died and been reduced to a fringe faith on the fringes of greater mainland India by the time of the first Islamic conquests?

Or was it a thriving faith that was killed by Islam?

Cheers, Doc

@padamchen


It was THE DOMINANT faith in Eastern India till the weakening of Pala Empire following their defeat in Kannauj Triangle...The Pala Empire was followed by Sen Dynasty which chose Hinduism as their jersey in order to block any resurgence by Pala sympathizers surreptiously




If you want to blame anybody, blame the chodus who did the Warring States Period of the Kannauj Triangle...Downfall of India lies in the fact that three Superpowers went to war against one another , and in the end nothing changed but they were too exhausted..end result...another culture (Turkic) and religion (Islam) moved in to establish dominance



Same situation with the Romans and Persians...they went to war with each other for 750 years...in the end they got exhausted to fight properly anymore..end result: Another warring tribe and religion moved in.....

We can see the end result: Christianity (Byzantines) and Zoroastrianism (Sassanids) virtually wiped out from the Middle-East

 

[Gadkari]

Buddhism died with the war for Kannauj...Hinduism also committed suicide with the war for Kannauj....if the struggle for Kannauj didnot happen, Islam would have been limited to Sindh, Balochistan and the other side of the Khyber Pass...rest of the subcontinent --a patchwork of Hinduism and Buddhism...it is the egg headed stupidity of our ancestors that one of our traditions has been wiped out and the other has is largely shorn of its legacy and architecture in North India

It was Afghanistan and Pakistan and today's Bangladesh which was predominantly Buddhist back then. Today they are totally Islamic.

Hindu religion was never a "state sponsored" religion and the Hindu dharmic adhikar always rested with the rishis, sadhu's and Brahmins. Not with Kings and generals.

Buddhism however has a history of being state sponsored and state propagated.

Which is why any change in political power never disturbed Hinduism to a large degree while it wiped out Buddhism.

It was THE DOMINANT faith in Eastern India till the weakening of Pala Empire following their defeat in Kannauj Triangle...The Pala Empire was followed by Sen Dynasty which chose Hinduism as their jersey in order to block any resurgence by Pala sympathizers surreptiously

You are mistaking State sponsorship for "Dominance".

In India, the religious dominance came from philosophical debate, not political will. Adi Sankara settled that debate in his lifetime.

Life cycle of Hinduism is not similar to the life cycle of Islam or christiantiy or state sponsored Buddhism.

If you want to blame anybody, blame the chodus who did the Warring States Period of the Kannauj Triangle...Downfall of India lies in the fact that three Superpowers went to war against one another , and in the end nothing changed but they were too exhausted..end result...another culture (Turkic) and religion (Islam) moved in to establish dominance

I am not into this blame game. That is a game the sick parsi called padamchen plays in his frustrated attempts to paint Hinduism as an evil and intolerant religion and Hindus as "Jihadis'.

Same situation with the Romans and Persians...they went to war with each other for 750 years...in the end they got exhausted to fight properly anymore..end result: Another warring tribe and religion moved in.....

We can see the end result: Christianity (Byzantines) and Zoroastrianism (Sassanids) virtually wiped out from the Middle-East

That is the fate of all Sate sponsored political religion.

Which is why Hinduism will survive any and all political changes and wars and all kinds of Bigotry.


PS: I mistook your reply to padamchen for a reply to me. Hence my long post.

 

[Gadkari]

@Gadkari quote specific verses from the Digha Nikaya to support your argument..else this discussion wont move forward...if you are not able to do so, then let's give this discussion a rest..and let us agree to disagree

Saw this post late,

It is mentioned in the second half of the Assalayana Suta.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aggañña_Sutta

"The Buddha said that sooner or later, after a very long time, there would come a time when the world shrinks. At a time of contraction, beings are mostly born in the Abhassara Brahma world. And there they dwell, mind-made, feeding on delight, self-luminous, moving through the air, glorious — and they stay like that for a very long time. But sooner or later, after a very long period, this world begins to expand again. "

The implosion of the universe is called Samvattatti and the expansion of the universe is called Vivattatti.

This is further expanded in the Visuddhimarga by explaining that this pulsating universe comprises of a a slow progressive cycle of contracting, stability, expanding, stability, with the cycle repeating endlessly. The period of this creation and dissolution is the Kalpa.


Now this is exactly the same as the Hindu Sankya Philosophy of the creation of the Universe called the Prakarta sarga. The entire cycle of Brahma's creation and destruction is called the Visesa kalpa.

In Sankhya, after the end of each Kalpa, Naimittika Pralaya takes place and Brahma absorbs all life back into him. Recreation is Prakritika.

 

[Juggernaut_Flat_Plane_V8]

Saw this post late,

It is mentioned in the second half of the Assalayana Suta.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aggañña_Sutta

"The Buddha said that sooner or later, after a very long time, there would come a time when the world shrinks. At a time of contraction, beings are mostly born in the Abhassara Brahma world. And there they dwell, mind-made, feeding on delight, self-luminous, moving through the air, glorious — and they stay like that for a very long time. But sooner or later, after a very long period, this world begins to expand again. "

The implosion of the universe is called Samvattatti and the expansion of the universe is called Vivattatti.

This is further expanded in the Visuddhimarga by explaining that this pulsating universe comprises of a a slow progressive cycle of contracting, stability, expanding, stability, with the cycle repeating endlessly. The period of this creation and dissolution is the Kalpa.


Now this is exactly the same as the Hindu Sankya Philosophy of the creation of the Universe called the Prakarta sarga. The entire cycle of Brahma's creation and destruction is called the Visesa kalpa.

In Sankhya, after the end of each Kalpa, Naimittika Pralaya takes place and Brahma absorbs all life back into him. Recreation is Prakritika.

This shows Buddha advocating a steady state Universe going through endless expansions and contractions ...He talks neither of the Original Creator nor of the Original Singularity or Creation point....Visudhimagga is post-Buddhist from Sri-Lanka, far removed in time and geography from the original Buddha

 

[Gadkari]

This shows Buddha advocating a steady state Universe going through endless expansions and contractions ...He talks neither of the Original Creator nor of the Original Singularity or Creation point....Visudhimagga is post-Buddhist from Sri-Lanka, far removed in time and geography from the original Buddha

Buddha is not advocating anything, He is explaining the creation of the universe and the dissolution of the universe.

If you read further on he also talks about how life first took place on earth and how humans an other animals evolved.

Like I said, books on his teachings were limited to topics related to helping his disciples become successful monks and find enlightenment. He does not venture more information beyond what is necessary for that discipline.

Hindu scriptures goes beyond and explains it in detail.

There is not "original singularity" or "Creation point" in Hinduism either.

But Buddha is called "Sankya Muni" , i.e. a Muni of the Sankya order in Hinduism. So his philosophy IS the sankya philosophy.

 

[Juggernaut_Flat_Plane_V8]

Buddha is called ShakyaMuni---the Muni of the Shakyan race not Sankhya Muni...tell me where is Buddha called Sankhya Muni...but yes Buddha's two meditation teachers , Uddaka Ramaputta and Alara Kalama, believed in a Brahmanistic conception of the Universe...


Original Hinduism of the Vedas was much enlightened and much grounded in reality , till the numbnuts started destroying it since the creation of the Puranas and Epics

 

[salimpheku]

@Gadkari and @Juggernaut_is_here Nice debate. Keep it up and keep it going.

 

[Gadkari]

Buddha is called ShakyaMuni---the Muni of the Shakyan race not Sankhya Muni...tell me where is Buddha called Sankhya Muni...but yes Buddha's two meditation teachers , Uddaka Ramaputta and Alara Kalama, believed in a Brahmanistic conception of the Universe...


Original Hinduism of the Vedas was much enlightened and much grounded in reality , till the numbnuts started destroying it since the creation of the Puranas and Epics

Shakya Muni is a corruption of the word "Sankya Muni".

Mistaking Sankya for a clain is a common misconception based on ignorance of lazy british translators and ignorant disciples of Buddha who thought Sankya Muni meant his Clan name was "sankya".

Buddha's clan name was "Gotama". His fathers name was King Suddhodana and his mother's name was Maya and they ruled Kapilavastu. Kapila-Vastu means the land of Rishi Kapila, the found of the Sankya Philosophy.

This is admitted by Buddha himself in the "Mahapadana Sutta". This is what he says,

(He is talking about all the Buddha's who came before him. Buddha means enlightened saints)

"The Lord Buddha Vipassi was of the Kondanna clan; the lord Sikhi likewise; the Lord Buddha Vessabhu likewise; the Lord Buddha Kakusandha was of the Kassapa clan; the Lord Buddha Konagamana likewise; the Lord Buddha Kassapa likewise; I who am now the Arahant and fully enlightened Buddha, am of the Gotama clan. "

Here "Kassapa Clan" means "Kashyapa Clan" for Rishi Kashyapa.



Puranasa are as old as the Vedas and help people understand the Vedas better. But most people read them without reference to the Vedas and come up with absurd conclusion.

Similarly Ramayan was written by Rishi Valmiki and Mahabharat was written by Rishi Veda Vyasa who was an avatar of Vishnu. So its pretty absurd to say they were written by "numbnuts".

 

[Juggernaut_Flat_Plane_V8]

@Gadkari If you believe things told within religious tradition equates to real history, we have really nothing to debate about...let's wind down this debate...cuz we will disagree on everything as now I know where you are coming from...I tend to go for the academic historical consensus and almost always refute religious tradition as a valid source of history...I will produce those two essays with academic references regarding the history of Buddhism in India...and that's about it...anymore reply and back and forth between you and me would be extremely tiring for both of us

 

[salimpheku]

@Gadkari If you believe things told within religious tradition equates to real history, we have really nothing to debate about...let's wind down this debate...cuz we will disagree on everything as now I know where you are coming from...I tend to go for the academic historical consensus and almost always refute religious tradition as a valid source of history...I will produce those two essays with academic references regarding the history of Buddhism in India...and that's about it...anymore reply and back and forth between you and me would be extremely tiring for both of us

To be fair, that can be said about every religion & every religious guru.
As a rational personal you can't for a moment believe all the 'magical' things happening in all other religions except Hinduism.
Logic would demand that you can not debate that way. Either be a rationalist or believe in religious texts.

 

[Gadkari]

@Gadkari If you believe things told within religious tradition equates to real history, we have really nothing to debate about...let's wind down this debate...cuz we will disagree on everything as now I know where you are coming from...I tend to go for the academic historical consensus and almost always refute religious tradition as a valid source of history...I will produce those two essays with academic references regarding the history of Buddhism in India...and that's about it...anymore reply and back and forth between you and me would be extremely tiring for both of us

Pretty much everything in the historical reference will have come from the buddhist religious books.

Once upon a time there was a consensus to gas the jews and view jews as untrustworthy, so consensus is not the holy grail.

There is no point in quoting jaded british historians about what they wrote about dharmic religion and religious figures, and the later day communist historians who goes on to quote the british.

Repeat a lie a thousand times and it becomes the truth. What is the point in debating such "truths" ?

There is no sound reason to discard history just because it happens to be mentioned in a religious book.

Why is "Jesus" a "historical" figure ? How about "king solomon" ? Where is a non religious source that claim Buddha is from a "Shakya" clan ? or that he is from Kapila vastu ?

 

[Juggernaut_Flat_Plane_V8]

To be fair, that can be said about every religion & every religious guru.
As a rational personal you can't for a moment believe all the 'magical' things happening in all other religions except Hinduism.
Logic would demand that you can not debate that way. Either be a rationalist or believe in religious texts.

I am complete rationalist, donot believe in the supernatural claims of any text..But sometime do embrace the worldview of the Buddha in order to have a better understanding of how his mind operated and what sort of supernatural stuffs he had conviction in..but if you want to ask me personally, No the Laws of Physics cannot be broken by any Holy man...Boom! Called It! Confirmed!

Pretty much everything in the historical reference will have come from the buddhist religious books.

Once upon a time there was a consensus to gas the jews and view jews as untrustworthy, so consensus is not the holy grail.

There is no point in quoting jaded british historians about what they wrote about dharmic religion and religious figures, and the later day communist historians who goes on to quote the british.

Repeat a lie a thousand times and it becomes the truth. What is the point in debating such "truths" ?

There is no sound reason to discard history just because it happens to be mentioned in a religious book.

Why is "Jesus" a "historical" figure ? How about "king solomon" ? Where is a non religious source that claim Buddha is from a "Shakya" clan ? or that he is from Kapila vastu ?

Unless and until Hindu Historians believing in the Supernatural are taking over the History departments of Each and every university around the world, the words of jaded British Historians and Western accredited Indian Historians will remain canon in academia...I operate from that canon..Change the canon with the takeover and I will believe you..till that happens , this debate will remain postponed..you are free to post your version of the History of Buddhism in India here next week and me mine...Other posters will judge the veracity of each of the accounts..and yes I will only post references from academia and not pseudo-historical , non-accredited sites

 

[salimpheku]

I am complete rationalist, donot believe in the supernatural claims of any text..But sometime do embrace the worldview of the Buddha in order to have a better understanding of how his mind operated and what sort of supernatural stuffs he had conviction in..but if you want to ask me personally, No the Laws of Physics cannot be broken by any Holy man...Boom! Called It! Confirmed!

That's convenient and selective, don't you think?

Give the same courtesy to other beliefs as well instead of just shaming them like you did.
The debate you was going well until you brought THAT hammer down.

 

[Juggernaut_Flat_Plane_V8]

That's convenient and selective, don't you think?

Give the same courtesy to other beliefs as well instead of just shaming them like you did.
The debate you was going well until you brought THAT hammer down.

Let me put it this way, The Buddhist worldview in my opinion is a faulty magical worldview and yes the Buddha was mistaken if seen from modern rational perspective...But I have to embrace his worldview while reading the Suttas, if I want to better understand where he is coming from....Understand NOT accept---there is the difference

 

[salimpheku]

Let me put it this way, The Buddhist worldview in my opinion is a faulty magical worldview and yes the Buddha was mistaken if seen from modern rational perspective...But I have to embrace his worldview while reading the Suttas, if I want to better understand where he is coming from....Understand NOT accept---there is the difference

I completely accept your view.
I was only pointing to the hammer you brought down on puranas and epics. I am just asking you to give a little bit consideration & courtesy to the other beliefs as well.
It's not about whether you are right or the other person.
Once you post an absolute and bring the hammer down, the debate sort of ends.