Disappearance of Buddhism from "Non Violent India": An Untold Story

[Flintlock]

Then whats worng in other article? Because its from muslim, right?

Dude, please use your brains.

the Milli Gazette is obviously not an academic source. Its language, word usage reeks of propaganda.

The UCLA website is a purely academic source, obviously better suited to non-partisan discussion. What matters is the name of the institution, not the author.

 

[roadrunner]

The accounts in buddhist literature were written centuries after Pusyamitra's reign, and are considered by historians, to be references towards the maurya-sunga wars.

Moreover, the successors of Pusyamitra did patronize buddhism.

The Maurya-Sunga wars were the ones in which Buddhism was persecuted in !

 

[roadrunner]

Dude, please use your brains.

the Milli Gazette is obviously not an academic source. Its language, word usage reeks of propaganda.

The UCLA website is a purely academic source, obviously better suited to non-partisan discussion. What matters is the name of the institution, not the author.

The website is a webpage written by a Vinay Lal. It's just one (non-neutral) person's opinion, not even the opinion of UCLA.

 

[Always Neutral]

I think India should be proud of its heritage. Unfortunately Bodh Gaya is so beautiful but also is one of the dirtiest and most lawless place I have visited. I hope the Indian govt. does something about it.

Regards

 

[Flintlock]

The website is a webpage written by a Vinay Lal. It's just one (non-neutral) person's opinion, not even the opinion of UCLA.

Pleese. UCLA will never have its "official" opinion on buddhism, earthworms or dinosaurs.
That text is obviously a reference for students, and if you bothered to find out, its in the Social Sciences website www.sscnet.ucla.edu
The exact address is http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/southasia/Religions/paths/BuddhismDisappear.doc

Cheers

 

[Flintlock]

The Maurya-Sunga wars were the ones in which Buddhism was persecuted in !

What it means is, that buddhists living centuries later, interpreted the attacks on the Mauryas (who encouraged buddhism) as attacks on buddhism.

The descriptions occur in a book of legends, and can hardly be taken word for word.

 

[roadrunner]

Pleese. UCLA will never have its "official" opinion on buddhism, earthworms or dinosaurs.
That text is obviously a reference for students, and if you bothered to find out, its in the Social Sciences website www.sscnet.ucla.edu
The exact address is http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/southasia/Religions/paths/BuddhismDisappear.doc

Cheers

Then you'd be wrong. Here is the exact website to whom those pages belong to and are written by.

Manas: India and Its Neighbors
Web site created by: Vinay Lal
Associate Professor of History, UCLA
We welcome comments at: manassite@hotmail.com

Web site designed by: Anju Relan
Assistant Professor, School of Medicine
and Director of Instructional Design and Technology Unit, UCLA

All text on this site is by Vinay Lal, unless otherwise noted.

Site updated on February 7, 2007
This site accepts neither outside submissions nor any advertisements.
Please do not send any queries about reciprocal links, as MANAS does not
provide any outside links.
Copyright: Vinay Lal, 1998, 2007

Number of visitors since January 17, 1998:

 

[roadrunner]

What it means is, that buddhists living centuries later, interpreted the attacks on the Mauryas (who encouraged buddhism) as attacks on buddhism.

The descriptions occur in a book of legends, and can hardly be taken word for word.

Goodness. You really haven't got a clue, have you?

The Buddhists WERE the Mauryans. The "Sungas" where the Brahminical Hindus! The Mauryas enouraged Buddhism, but as has been recorded the Sungas persecuted them and massacred them because of their beliefs. You can believe it was legend, but they refer to real life people and wars, so it is doubtful it is legend, but historical truths it seems.

 

[Flintlock]

Then you'd be wrong. Here is the exact website to whom those pages belong to and are written by.

Manas: India and Its Neighbors
Web site created by: Vinay Lal
Associate Professor of History, UCLA
We welcome comments at: manassite@hotmail.com

Web site designed by: Anju Relan
Assistant Professor, School of Medicine
and Director of Instructional Design and Technology Unit, UCLA

All text on this site is by Vinay Lal, unless otherwise noted.

Site updated on February 7, 2007
This site accepts neither outside submissions nor any advertisements.
Please do not send any queries about reciprocal links, as MANAS does not
provide any outside links.
Copyright: Vinay Lal, 1998, 2007

Number of visitors since January 17, 1998:

So? This Vinay Lal is a prof. Any problems with that? Or is it his name that you are concerned with.
As I said, the website is a reference for students.

Oh, and you haven't convinced me that the Milli Gazette is a highly reputed source.

Thanks

 

[Flintlock]

Goodness. You really haven't got a clue, have you?

The Buddhists WERE the Mauryans. The "Sungas" where the Brahminical Hindus! The Mauryas enouraged Buddhism, but as has been recorded the Sungas persecuted them and massacred them because of their beliefs. You can believe it was legend, but they refer to real life people and wars, so it is doubtful it is legend, but historical truths it seems.

Pusyamitra was the commander-in-chief of Mauryan guard.
He assassinated Brihadata and took the throne.

As I said, the accounts were written centuries after the actual events took place. It has very little historical authenticity.

In any case, even if Pusyamitra did persecute buddhists, his successors reversed this by encouraging buddhism and building stupas.

 

[roadrunner]

So? This Vinay Lal is a prof. Any problems with that? Or is it his name that you are concerned with.
As I said, the website is a reference for students.

Oh, and you haven't convinced me that the Milli Gazette is a highly reputed source.

Thanks

Dude, VINAY LAL is an Indian professor at UCLA with a website where he writes down his own beliefs. He is obviously a biased source, and it is not the opinion of UCLA, just the opinion of one Indian academic that works at UCLA. It is clear he will have a biased opinion. To get a neutral opinion, you need to quote a non Buddhist and a non Hindu article. Just as you claim articles written by Muslims must be biased, so articles written by Hindus would also be biased.

Would Professor Ambedkar's opinions be any more creditable than Professor Lal's? I don't think so, yet you single out Professor Lal because it fits your views.

 

[roadrunner]

Pusyamitra was the commander-in-chief of Mauryan guard.
He assassinated Brihadata and took the throne.

As I said, the accounts were written centuries after the actual events took place. It has very little historical authenticity.

In any case, even if Pusyamitra did persecute buddhists, his successors reversed this by encouraging buddhism and building stupas.

There's no IF about it. Pusyimitra did persecute the Buddhists as per the Sarvastivadan literature .. "the number one enemy of the sons of the Sakya's[4] and a most cruel persecutor of the religion". This was not written after, the Sarvastivadan literature occurred during the persecution. You can tell by the way it is written in the present tense.

 

[sadiqams]

logic note get your facts right and stop this propaganda about buddism being part of Hindism as someone who is a buddist and I am sure he will put you right.

 

[KSRaj]

Goodness. You really haven't got a clue, have you?

The Buddhists WERE the Mauryans.

You really think you have some clue dont you?

The Mauryans were JAINS.

The founder of the Mauryan empire... Chandragupta Maurya... was the one responsible for the spread of Jainism in the South of the Vindhyas. His grandson Ashoka converted to Buddhism after the Kalinga war.

And in my opinion, you folks are seeing too much of "religion" for events in historic times.

 

[Gabbar]

logic note get your facts right and stop this propaganda about buddism being part of Hindism as someone who is a buddist and I am sure he will put you right.

Why are you reponding to a post that was posted in 2008?