Incredible India In Chinese Media

[WAR-rior]

Leave it. This thread is not to show anyone's superiority.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Leave it. This thread is not to show anyone's superiority.

If you love your religion, why are you using it in an internet flame war to prove your "superiority" over another country?

Don't you guys respect your religion at all?

You guys are spewing delusional stuff about how "Hinduism ruled China". You are just asking for people to flame your religion when you guys say ridiculous stuff like that.

 

[WAR-rior]

Hey, I like Hinduism. Or at least I did.

But when you guys start talking crap about how Hinduism "ruled" China then you aren't going to like the answer. Or about how India was the cultural center of the "whole world".

That is just too delusional, and you are really asking for flaming.



Hindu hindu hindu hindu.

Can you not talk about anything else? Why do you want to put your religion in the middle of a flame war, do you hate your own religion?

I know the former statement hurts ur ego and its completely justified but it was said coz it does have some truth and credability. We dont want to fight with u just for the sake of proving it. There are statement QUOTE by some of the great International Historians and thats what our references are. If u disown their words then we have nothing else to say

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

I know the former statement hurts ur ego and its completely justified but it was said coz it does have some truth and credability. We dont want to fight with u just for the sake of proving it. There are statement QUOTE by some of the great International Historians and thats what our references are. If u disown their words then we have nothing else to say

So you also think that Hinduism "ruled" China?



Buddhism came from Nepal, and is a completely different religion to Hinduism. And Buddhism NEVER "ruled" China, it never called the shots (Emperor always had higher authority), it was accepted willingly by some Emperors and not by others.

It shared prominence with Taoism and Confucianism, though China today is majority non-religious.

 

[WAR-rior]

If you love your religion, why are you using it in an internet flame war to prove your "superiority" over another country?

Don't you guys respect your religion at all?

You guys are spewing delusional stuff about how "Hinduism ruled China". You are just asking for people to flame your religion when you guys say ridiculous stuff like that.

But before all that u need to be mature enough to understand context rather than words. When someone says HINDUISM ruled CHINA. it has a much deeper concept. Buddism was a by filtered byproduct of Hinduism and Chinese culture has a lot to owe to Buddhism.

So you also think that Hinduism "ruled" China?

Conceptually -> YES

Actually -> U need to be a moron to say that.

 

[PakShah]

India is actually crashing. What do you mean by incredible?

people dance naked in bollywood.
More poor than all of sub-saharan africa.

How is India incredible?
Its not.

 

[WAR-rior]

India is actually crashing. What do you mean by incredible?

See their bollywood, dancing naked.
More poor than all of sub-saharan africa.

How is India incredible?
Its not.

OK. Next time sue those scholars who say so.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

But before all that u need to be mature enough to understand context rather than words. When someone says HINDUISM ruled CHINA. it has a much deeper concept. Buddism was a by filtered byproduct of Hinduism and Chinese culture has a lot to owe to Buddhism.

I respect you as a person, and I do respect Hinduism (so far), so I'm going to refrain from posting further in this thread.

Just know, that when you say something like that, you are making a mockery of your own religion and asking for other people to attack it, even if they didn't have a problem with it before.

Only someone who hated their own religion would use it in a flame war like that.

 

[neokautilya2]

Buddha was born in Nepal, this is a fact. And Nepal was never a part of India.

And Hu Shih was an ambassador from the ROC (Taiwan), not from us.

Point is not weder nepal was a part of india or not

but point is that buddhism as a whole originated in india

 

[WAR-rior]

I respect you as a person, and I do respect Hinduism (so far), so I'm going to refrain from posting further in this thread.

Just know, that when you say something like that, you are making a mockery of your own religion and asking for other people to attack it, even if they didn't have a problem with it before.

Only someone who hated their own religion would use it in a flame war like that.

Its for ppl to comprehend. If u wanna do it negatively then so it be. If u do it positively u wud understand the real meaning of what we r saying.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Its for ppl to comprehend. If u wanna do it negatively then so it be. If u do it positively u wud understand the real meaning of what we r saying.

Ask Joe Shearer, I commonly discuss the relationship between Buddhism and Hinduism on this forum.

And I have acknowledged that it went like this: Vedas -> Hinduism -> Buddhism.

But when your fellow Indians say things like "Hinduism ruled China for 2000 years, hahaha China has no culture, Hinduism gave China culture hahahaha"... then WTF do you expect?

 

[Joe Shearer]

Nepal was never a part of India, go read up on the history.

Nepal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have been observing this thread with half-an-eye, while skimming through a lot of deadly boring mail, chores to be done, and some packing for an overnight trip. At this point, I have a sinking heart, as I recognise the same syndrome that overcomes enthusiastic young Pakistanis re-discovering south Asian history and leaping to the wrong conclusions. It seems that we are facing the same passage, with an entirely different set of people.

It must be assumed, however, that everyone is approaching the area with a sincere attitude and having made an effort to grasp the material. If that is the basis for our discussion, it is then for those of us who disagree to provide the most reasonable account of what they disagree with, why and what consequences follow from any change in the interpretation. That is the approach I have used in the past, except for regrettable moments of irritation due to some reason or the other, and that is the approach, minus the moments of irritation, that would appear to suggest itself for the future, starting with this instance.

Nepal was never a part of India, go read up on the history.

Nepal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am interested to know what in the Wikipedia article you cited gave you the impression that Nepal was not part of India. Is it perhaps that your definition of India is slightly different from that of various Indians on this forum, including myself?

 

[Joe Shearer]

no one should takes Indians as friends. I live among them here in Canada and they're disgusting people. More than half their population is starving

A VERY wise decision. It is clear that your thinking is superior to those of others around you, and that you are bound to distinguish yourself in later life. Our sincere congratulations.

 

[timetravel]

someone should read history furthur when he wants to claim India and Hindus have no role to play in Gautum Buddha's learnings and discovery of Buddhism from Hinduism. The fact remains that India had a deep significant impact on moulding Buddha's life experiences and in making him a scholar. So it is only ignorant person who will disregard the completely open and transparent history and also the statements given by scholars across the world, who describe the advent of Buddhism in India when Gayam buddha was learning and practicing Hinduism in India.

"Buddhism is a religion indigenous to the Indian subcontinent that encompasses a variety of traditions, beliefs, and practices largely based on teachings attributed to Siddhartha Gautama"

Buddhism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is not to show that Hinduism is supreme. I am not talking from religions point of view. But yes you cannot deny that Buddhism originated here and that India influenced China culturally for 2000 years. Indeed Buddhism spread from India to far and wide places. As much as there is no need to feel ashamed of being influenced by Buddhims (which some are trying to deny) there cannot be a denial that India and Hinduism gave birth to Buddhism.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Do you know what "vassal state" means?

Vassal state - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



You just helped to back up MY argument. Nepal was never a part of India.

And the Gupta Empire? That wasn't India. India didn't exist back then.

A vassal state is not necessarily distinct, nationally or in any other sense, from its ruling state.

For starters, the use of 'vassal state' in the article is wrong; a state cannot be a vassal to another state, as vassalage is a personal bond between two individuals. Only the ruler of a state might be defined as the vassal of another individual. For instance, the Duke of Lancaster might be a vassal to the King of England. Note that both belong to the same kingdom. To avoid confusion, since one of these two individuals is the King himself, the Earl of Shrewsbury might be vassal to the Duke of Lancaster; they both happen to be members of the same kingdom. The Earl of Angus might be vassal to the Duke of Northumberland; here, they happen to belong to two different kingdoms, but one may very well be vassal to another.

Even a King may be vassal to another King, not in respect of his kingdom, but in respect of some other fief he happens to hold. A famous example is that Henry II, King of England, was vassal to the King of France in respect of his holdings of Anjou and Maine. As King of England, he was sovereign; as Count of Anjou, he was a vassal to the sovereign King of France, and that vassalage had no impact on his independent status as King of England.

A feudal lord might be vassal to more than lord, owning more than one domain in fee. In that case, a potential for conflict would arise, when his different lords pulled in different political directions. For such a case, there was a provision,and only one of his lords was designated his 'liege' lord, the lord whose authority overrode that of all others.

When Nepal is described as a vassal state, it is grossly iincorrect, the result of allowing an encyclopaedia to be written by Everyman. The correct description should have been that Nepal was a tributary state of the Gupta Empire. The definition is quite clear in that respect. However, what the Wikipedia does not address is the question of what the Gupta Empire was if not India.

T

Do you know what "vassal state" means?

Vassal state - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



You just helped to back up MY argument. Nepal was never a part of India.

And the Gupta Empire? That wasn't India. India didn't exist back then.

Perhaps it would help to clarify what India was and was not. When you say India did not exist back then, what did you mean?