By Xavier Zambrano
How has one of the world’s main religions fallen into such decay in its own birthplace? This article analyzes the historical causes behind the decline of Buddhism in India.
The Golden AgeThe key council for the spreading of Buddhism was the Third, held under the auspices of Emperor Ashoka in the 3rd century B.C. The most important decision was the Emperor sending forth of monks to preach in nine different countries. Ashoka consolidated Buddhism as the hegemonic religion in India and initiated its expansion with the conversion of Sri Lanka. By the 7th century A.D. it had spread to East Asia and Southeast Asia (modern Thailand, Tibet, Cambodia, China, Vietnam, Korea and Japan). Ashoka, despite his preference and active promotion of Buddhism advocated for religious tolerance, as stated in one of his stone edicts -some current leaders should mark his words:
"But it is better to honor other religions for this reason. By so doing, one's own religion benefits, and so do other religions, while doing otherwise harms one's own religion and the religions of others. Whoever praises his own religion, due to excessive devotion, and condemns others with the thought "Let me glorify my own religion," only harms his own religion. Therefore contact (between religions) is good.[24] One should listen to and respect the doctrines professed by others. Beloved-of-the-Gods, King Piyadasi, desires that all should be well-learned in the good doctrines of other religions."
Decay and fallBuddhism enjoyed promotion from power until the end of the reign Harshavardhana (8th A.D.) when royal patronage ended. This marked the beginning of a decay that extended until the Muslim invasions in the 13th century. Although Hindu scholars attribute the progressive decay to the divergences between sects and the appearance of tantric deviated conducts in monasteries, Hinduism, and most particularly, Brahmanism (a strict social organization on the basis of some religious ideas) tried to dilute Buddhism by presenting it as a kind of Hinduism. Thus, from the 7th century Buddha was included in the list of Avataras of Vishnu. The Muslim invasions in the 13th century brought the destruction of Buddhist Universities and the killings of Buddhist monks. Again, it is common for Hindu scholars to put the full blame on Muslims, but it is also a fact that there was a certain connivance of the Brahmin class at the local levels of administration, where they retained their privileges, with the new Muslim rulers. Moreover, the formation of Buddhist monks was conducted through rigorous training and therefore, they were less easily replaced than Brahmin priests ready-made by birth. Many Buddhist lay worshipers were driven to Islam by persecution. Evidently, the tolerant spirit of the Ashoka reign had long passed away.
RebirthAfter the 2nd World War, Buddhism initiated a process of recovery in India. In Sri Lanka, 29 countries gathered in 1950 to discuss the preliminary works leading to the Sixth Council, held in Rangoon in 1954. One personality that went to this preliminary works was to become a milestone of Buddhist patronage in India: Babasaheb Ambedkar. He was one of the great activists for Indian independence , a process in which he held some sour discussions with Gandhi on account of his distrust in Hindus willingness to address the caste problem in India. He was a great supporter of the abolition of the caste system, having founded in 1942 The All-India Scheduled Castes Federation to unite all ‘untouchables’ in political party. After independence he became an architect of the Indian constitution passed in 1949. On the occasion he stated that: "I appeal to all Indians to be a nation by discarding castes, which have brought separation in social life and created jealousy and hatred." When he came back from the Sri Lanka conference in 1950 he made another historical statement: "In order to end their hardships, people should embrace Buddhism. I am going to devote the rest of my life to the revival and spread of Buddhism in India". This call was addressed mainly to the untouchables and the lower castes. He blamed Hinduism and its passive acceptance by the lower castes, as the cause of the perpetuation of the caste system. Buddhism could provide an egalitarian ground (one of the principles of Buddhism is the view that all beings have a Buddha nature and are equally equipped to attain enlightment), without completely discarding the traditional Indian religious devotion or introducing forced foreign ideas. In 1956 he wholly embraced Buddhism in a ceremony in which half a million untouchables proclaimed their conversion. Millions of untouchables followed his appeal and converted to Buddhism. In 1891 there were only 50.000 Buddhists in India, while in 1965 the figure raised to 4 million. Actually, the Wheel of Law at the center of the national flag refers to the Dharma-vinaya in Buddhas’ doctrine, and the official seal of the republic is the Lion Capital of Ashoka.
Despite this situation, Buddhism global health is solid and India can be credited for having provided the world with a religious philosophical system and practice that, while remaining deeply rooted into traditional Indian philosophy, has open ground for adaptation to radically different social and cultural realities. This adaptability has proven vital for Buddhism expansion and survival, a survival that in some phases of Indian history was strongly menaced by bigotry and religious persecution.
Oct 31, 2010
Oct 28, 2010
Mahavira and the Buddha
By A. Berriedale Keith
Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies
1932.09, pp. 859-866
p. 859
In a very interesting article, (l) Professor
Jacobi has arrived at the conclusion that, contrary
to the Buddhist tradition, we must hold that Mahavira
outlived the Buddha, probably by some seven years. In
point of fact, of course, it may seem of very little
consequence whether we accept this view or that of
Buddhist tradition, but the issue involves a very
important question affecting the value of our
authorities, and on this point it seems to me clear
that the position adopted by Professor Jacobi
involves serious difficulties.
Professor Jacobi treats as the assured
foundations for his investigations the dates of the
Nirvanas of the Buddha and of Mahavira, as 484 and
477 B.C. But it must be admitted that both these
dates rest on very unsatisfactory and late evidence.
The question of the date of the Buddha has been set
out, with his usual acumen and precision, recently by
Professor de La Vallee Poussin,(2) and he has shown
how utterly uncertain is the date 483 or 484 B.C. for
the Nirvana. From a very different point of view the
late Professor Rhys Davids confessed(3) that the date
was purely conjectural. We may readily believe that
the Buddha died sometime in the fifth century B.C.,
but to lay any stress on the exact date is completely
impossible with the evidence available. What is
perfectly clear is that knowledge of the early period
of Buddhism was imperfect,(4) and the same remark
applies even more strikingly to the traditions of
Jainism. In the case of Mahavira the earlier
tradition--of uncertain date--is emphatic in allowing
470 years between his Nirvana and the beginning of
the Vikrama era, which places the date in 528 or 527
B.C. The later tradition, given in Hemacandra's
Paricistaparvan, viii, 339, and somewhat earlier in
Bhadrecvara's Kahavali, ascribes 155 years as the
period between the death of Mahavira and
Candragupta's accession to the throne of Magadha,
which gives 477 B.C. as the probable date of
Mahavira's death. Here again we are on utterly
uncertain ground. We are obliged to treat the earlier
Jain tradition as of minimal value
______________________
1. SBA. 1930, pp. 557-68.
2. Indo-europeens et Indo-iraniens, pp.238--48; L'Inde
aux Temp des Mauryas, p.50
3. CHI. i, pp. 171, 172.
4. Keith, Buddhist Philosophy, chap. i.
p. 860
and there seems every ground for so doing; but the
tradition accepted by Hemacandra rests equally on no
assured foundation. The only possible conclusion
regarding it is that it cannot be trusted to be
accurate within a few years, and it seems wholly
impossible to base on two dates so acquired the view
that we must believe that the Buddha. predeceased
Mahavira. Nor is it irrelevant to note that Professor
Jacobi(1) himself has adopted slightly different
dates, namely 477 and 467 B.C. in other
contributions; but what is more important is that the
Jaina tradition contains one certain error which, if
rectified, destroys the value of its testimony for
477 B.C. By that tradition, apparently accepted by
Hemacandra as well as the rest of Jain opinion, the
date of the accession of Candragupta is placed at 255
years before the Vikrama era, i.e., in 313 or 312
B.C. This date is obviously too late; if we take 322,
as does Professor Jacobi, as a probable date(2) then
we must admit a clear error in the Jain tradition of
about ten years in respect of this interval;
admitting a like error regarding the earlier
interval, that between the accession of Candragupta
and the death of Mahavira, we would arrive at 487
B.C. for the death of the latter, and this would
place that event before the death of the Buddha, and
confirm the Buddhist tradition. This shows clearly
with what inadequate data we have to reckon, and
leaves the conviction that the supposed dates of the
deaths of the two great teachers are of too uncertain
character to afford_any conclusion as to the priority
of these events.
On the other hand, we have the clear and distinct
tradition of the Buddhist Canon which asserts that
Mahavira, died before the Buddha and does so, not
incidentally, but as giving rise to allocutions of
the Master regarding the tenets of his teaching,
recorded in the Pasadika Suttanta of the Digha Nikaya
and the Samagama Suttanta of the Majjhima Nikaya, and
of Sariputta, at the Master's bidding, in the this
definite tradition recorded in canonical texts?(3)
That these texts belong to the Period immediately
after the death of the Buddha. I confess I do not
believe, but they far outrank in age the tradi-
tions of the dates of the deaths of the Buddha and
Mahavira, and give us
______________________
1. Introduction to Kalpa Sutra, p. 9; Introduction to
Paricistaparvan, p.6.
2. In CHI. i, pp. 471-3, 321 is suggested as plausible.
For other dates see L. de La Vallee Poussin, L'Inde
aux Temps des mauryas, pp. 51, 52.
3. The Upali Suttanta clearly asserts an illness, if
not the death, of Mahavira; Chalmers SBB. v, p. 278,
n.2.
p. 861
authentic views of the belief held in Buddhist
circles at some period considerably before the
Christian era. If we are to discredit their account,
we must be prepared to accept the consequences, which
involve acceptance of a scepticism as to the value of
the Buddhist and Indian traditions in general, which
is quite inconsistent with the faith placed by
Professor Jacobi in the tradition as to the dates of
the Nirvanasa or his acceptance of the view that the
Kautill;ya Arthacastra is the work of a minister of
the Emperor Candragupta. If we are on any logical
ground to discredit the Buddhist tradition, very
strong arguments are necessary, and those adduced
seem quite inadequate.
It is contended by Professor Jacobi that the
evidence of the three Suttantas is destroyed by the
fact that, while all agree in making the occasion of
Mahavira's death and consequent unrest in his
community the cause of the dissertations on the
Buddhist tenets, the divergence of the form of
argument in the three Suttas shows that cannot
represent what the Buddha actually said. This may, of
course, be conceded at once by those who believe(1)
that we have little or nothing of the ipsissima verba
of the Master. The view which seems natural is that
the Buddhists believed that there was difficulty in
the Jain community on the death of their leader, and
that this took place before the Buddha's death,
eliciting from him comments, which were probably not
preserved in any authentic form, leaving it open for
the composers of the Suttantas to present the
teachings each in his own way. The essential point is
really that different Buddhist authors held the same
tradition, which shows that it was a belief handed
down by tradition and widely spread in Buddhist
circles.
In the second place, Professor Jacobi argues that
the account in these Suttantas is contradicted by the
account in the Mahaparinibbana Suttanta, the oldest
account of the proceedings of the Buddha's last year
up to his Nirvana. This text does not refer to any
special anxiety of the Buddha as to the fate of his
community after his death as having been elicited by
the report of the dissensions in the community of
Mahavira, whence it is deduced that this report is a
later invention. But this reasoning rests on several
unproved assumptions. (1) That the Mahaparinibbana
Suttanta is older than the other three Suttantas is
assumed without any arguments being adduced, and its
age certainly is far from obvious. On the contrary,
______________________
1. See Winternitz, Geschichte der Indischen Litteratur,
ii, pp. 360 f.
p. 862
it appears to be a very sophisticated and worked up
account of the last days of the Buddha, and in fact
it is not open to Professor Jacobi to contend for its
early date. He himself shortly afterwards (p.562)
refers to the account given in that text of the plans
of Ajatacatru for the subjection of the Vrjis, and
points out that the undertaking was one demanding
careful planning. He adds: "Uber die von ihm
getroffenen Massnahmen enthalt das M.P.S. Angaben,
die aber in viel spaterer Zeit entstanden und darum
so gut wie wertlos sind." Very probably Professor
Jacobi's view of the statements of the Suttanta is
correct; but it is quite impossible to hold this view
of it, and then to ask us to accept the silence of
the Suttanta as entitling us to negate the evidence
of three Suttantas, two of which at least may well be
older than the Mahaparinibbana Suttanta. (2)
Moreover, the argument is essentially one ex silentio
and there is no form of contention more dangerous. It
would be necessary, in order to give it weight, to
show that the omission of the episode of the Buddha's
views on hearing of Mahavira's death is inexplicable,
if its occurrence were widely believed in Buddhist
circles. No such proof, however, is possible.
Professor Jacobi's view appears to be that the
episode of the hearing of the death of Mahavira took
place during the last journey of the Buddha en route
to Kusinara, and that, therefore, any full account of
his last days must necessarily include the episode in
question. If this view were sound, there might be
something to say for his contention, though the
argument would be far from conclusive. But there
seems no ground whatever to assume that the Buddhists
thought that the news of Mahavira's death came to the
Buddha just before his own
The Samagama Suttanta has nothing to suggest such
a conclusion. On the contrary the Buddha is at
Samagama when he hears of the death of Mahavira at
Pava,(l) and equally in the other two Suttantas the
Buddha's utterances are not connected with his own
last stay at Pava.(2) The fact that the death of
Mahavira evokes the mention Nirvana.
______________________
1. Cunda here appears as a novice, and so also in the
Pasadika Suttanta, which marks him out from his
description in the Mahaparinibbana Suttanta. The
Samgiti Suttanta does not use this term of him,
and seems to have been influenced by the
Mahaparinibbana in this point; compare Franke,
Digha Nikaya, p. 229. Two Cundas can hardly be
admitted, though the Mahaparinibbana is certainly
confused.
2. The Samgiti sets the scene in Pava, but under quite
other circumstances than those of the
Mahaparinibbana, namely the consecration of the
new Mote-Hall of the Mallas. This indicates that
the author had on desire to connect the episode
recorded with the death of the Buddha also. The
location at Samagama seems the more accurate
account. The fact that Cunda of Pava brought the
news to Ananda no doubt encouraged the idea that
the declaration of views took place at that town.
p. 863
of the possibility of the effect on the order of the
Buddha's death does not indicate that that death was
then imminent. It may be noted also that in the Upali
Suttanta the Buddha was at Nalanda when the episode
of the defection of Upali had so evil an effect on
Mahavira that it brought about, according to the
tradition followed by Buddhaghosa, his death at Pava.
At any rate, it is clear that we have no reason to
assert that Buddhist tradition placed the death of
Mahavira close to that of the Buddha, and it is then
obvious that the silence of the Mahaparinibbana
Suttanta is inevitable. If the tradition placed the
episode as to Mahavira before the short period
covered by that Suttanta, it could not possibly
include it in its narrative. So far, therefore, from
correcting the version of the other Suttantas, the
Mahaparinibbana Suttanta accords excellently with
them. Nor(3) can it be admitted that the Buddha,
according to tradition, shows no concern for the
future of his order after his death. This runs
counter to the fact, recorded in the Mahaparinibbana
Suttanta itself, that he assured Ananda that the
place of himself as teacher would be taken by his
doctrine. This assurance is significant of the
position. It accords exactly with the frame of mind
asserted in the other Suttantas to have been
engendered by the news of the dissensions in the Jain
community on Mahavira's death. In the three Suttantas
alike, the result of the news is to make the Buddha
insist that his doctrines provided a definite system
which would prevent schisms in the community. In the
Mahaparinibbana the Buddha gives the same advice; his
doctrine is to serve as the norm. So far, therefore,
from the Mahaparinibbana contradicting the testimony
of the three Suttantas, it is perfectly consistent
with it, while there is no evidence whatever that it
is earlier in date that the other three Suttantas, or
at least two of them.
Thirdly, to strengthen his view that the Buddha
could not have known of strain in the Jain community
on Mahavira's death, Professor Jacobi insists that
there is no record in the Jain tradition of such a
catastrophe in the Jain community at the death of
Mahavira as is suggested by the Buddhist tradition.
No schism, it can be asserted, was occasioned by the
death of Mahavira. Indeed sects among the Jains
developed relatively late, save in the case of the
division into Cvetambaras and Digambaras which was
not the result of a single period of conflict. The
Buddhists, on the other hand, knew of schisms in
their own community, arising soon after the Master's
death and resulting in the development of the new
religion of the Mahayana. They did not realize that
Mahavira was not the founder
p. 864
of a new religion, but merely the reformer of that of
Parcva, so that on Mahavira's death no catastrophe
was possible. The Buddhist account, therefore, in the
three Suttantas is based erroneous assumptions and
was evoked by dogmatic needs.
This interesting suggestion rests on a very
unsound basis. It assumes that the Buddhists believed
that a formal schism or a catastrophe afficted the
Jain congregation on the death of Mahavira. But this
is much more than we can justly deduce from the
Buddhist statements. All that is said is that there
arose disputes, division, and a wordy warfare in the
community and that the lay followers were disgusted
with the monks. Not a suggestion is made of a real
schism or catastrophe, and there seems no reason
whatever to suppose that the Suttantas intended to
assert that such a schism occurred. Moreover, it
seems hard to accept the view of the paucity and
lateness of schisms in the Jain community. The
evidence is that Mahavira was much troubled by the
rivalry of Gocala, whether we regard him as strictly
within the Jain community or not,(l) that in his
fourteenth year of power his son-in-law, Jamali,
raised opposition to him, and persisted in opposition
to his death, while two years after Jamali's revolt,
Tisagutta stood out in opposition.(2) Moreover, the
divergence between Cvetambara and Digambara is
fundamental, as is fully recognized by Jains at the
present day,(3) so that it was certainly unnecessary
for Buddhists to go to their own experience to find
justification for the belief in divergence within the
Jain community. There is, in fact, nothing whatever
to suggest that Buddhist tradition was wrong in
asserting that Mahavira's death caused commotions in
the Jain community. To judge from the bitter feud
between Mahavira and Gocala and from the revolts of
Jamali and Tisagutta, not to mention the defection of
Upali, we may take it as certain that the community
was far from being in ideal unity of heart. The
argument that there could be no schism, because (1)
Mahavira was the child of parents who were adherents
of Parcvanatha, as he perhaps also was, and (2) as a
Kevalin, Mahavira was above all worldly interests,
cannot be accepted. Apart from the fact that we are
not told of anything so serious as a definite schism
or catastrophe, it is clear that Mahavira was no mere
follower of Parcvanatha. The Jain tradition
______________________
1. Hoernle, ERE. i, pp. 267 ff., held that the Jain
division into Digambara and Cvetambara mav be
traced back to the beginning of Jainism, being due
to the antagonism of Mahavira and Gocala, the
representatives of two hostile sects.
2. See Chimanlal J. Shah, Jainism in Northern India,
pp. 60-5.
3. Chimanlal J. Shah, op. cit., p.78.
p. 865
does not even assert that he was an adherent, but, on
the contrary, tells us distinctly that he departed in
an essential from the doctrines of his predecessor,
as was long ago stressed by Professor Jacobi(1)
himself, who held that the innovation postulated a
decline in the morality of the community between
Parcva and Mahavira. Moreover, even if, as a Kevalin,
Mahavira was superior to worldly considerations, what
has that to do with the effect of his death on the
community? The disappearance of a great teacher is
always a time of trial for his adherents, and, so far
from doubting the truth of the assertions of the
Buddhist texts, we may treat them as representing the
normal result as in the case of Purana Kassapa, and
common sense invites us to believe that what is
normal really happens.
Still less satisfactory is the explanation
offered by Professor Jacobi of the cause of the
alleged Buddhist error. The Buddhists, he holds,
confused the place of Mahavira's death, which is now
identified with a village, Papapuri (Pavapuri) in the
Bihar part of the Patna district, with the town(2)
Pava in which the Buddha stayed in the house of Cunda
on the way to Kusinara. The correctness of the Jain
identification, Professor Jacobi holds, cannot be
doubted. This seems a strange assertion, for he holds
that the three Suttantas fall in the second or third
century after the Nirvana of the Buddha, and he does
not give any indication of the age of the Jain
identification.(3) To assert an error on the part of
the Buddhists demands support by adduction of proof
of the early date of the Jain view, which appears to
be lacking and, at any rate, is urgently required.
But, apart from this minor consideration, what ground
is there for holding that a mistake as to a place was
sufficient to cause the invention of an assertion of
the death of Mahavira in the lifetime of the Buddha?
It is perfectly legitimate to suppose that the
Buddhists were right in placing the death of the
rival teacher before that of Buddha, even if they
confused the two places. But that they were wrong in
their identification is so far quite unproved, though
possible.
It must be added that the tradition that the
Buddha died after Mahavira, thus asserted with
particularity in the Buddhist texts, recorded within
two or three centuries after his death, according to
______________________
1. IA. ix, p. 160.
2. Jacobi (p. 561) ascribes Pava to the Cakyas, but it
is clear that it was a Malla town.
3. The Kalpa Sutra ascribed to Bhadrabahu is clearly
not by that author, and is wholly uncertain in date;
see Winternitz, Geschichte der Indischen Litteratur,
ii, pp. 309 f.
p. 866
Professor Jacobi's own dating, is not contradicted by
anything expressed in the Jain tradition, and that
the contradiction rests on the strength of a
deduction from two late and unsatisfactory traditions
fixing the date of the deaths of the two teachers. If
the Jain tradition contradicted the Buddhist by
asserting that Mahavira died after the Buddha, the
case for Professor Jacobi's view would assume a
different aspect; but, though the Jains must for many
centuries have been aware of the Buddhist assertion,
there has been adduced no passage in which they
negatived it. The obvious conclusion is that no doubt
existed in either comunity on this point.
Professor Jacobi has endeavoured on the basis of
the Jain and Buddhist traditions to throw some light
on the political development of Magadha in the time
of the great teachers. but it may seriously be
doubted if we can make anything very satisfactory out
of these confused and obviously biased records. There
is no independent control available, and combinations
thus become subjective to the highest degree. But one
point with which he deals elsewhere(1) should be
noted, his belief that Parcva can be assigned
confidently to a period 250 years before Mahavira, a
view which is utilized by him as assigning to the
early part of the eighth century B.C. that influence
of popular religious belief on Indian philosophy,
which led to the innovations of the Yoga and Samkhya
systems, involving (1) belief in the personal
immortality of souls, and (2) the recognition of
moral principles, and thus advancing beyond the
monistic tendency of the older Upanisads with their
intellectual disdain for morals. We really cannot
accept, as in any sense valid, the date assigned to
Parcvanatha. If Jain tradition was wrong, as
Professor Jacobi holds it was. in dating the Nirvana
of Mahavira, how can we trust its assertions for a
period 250 years earlier? The mere figure is
suspicious, and why should We give it any greater
credence than we do to the figures equally afforded
by tradition(2) for the number of his adherents? All
that we can possibly rescue from the tradition is the
belief in the existence of Parcva at some time before
Mahavira; to claim more is misleading. There are
other objections to certain features of Professor
Jacobi's most interesting reconstruction of the early
Yoga, but these must be dealt with on another
occasion.(3)
______________________
1. SBA. 1930, pp. 326, 327.
2. See Kalpa Sutra, sections 161-4.
3. It is dubious if the Bhagavati vii, 9, 2, can be
understood, as by Professor Jacobi (p. 564), as
meaning that the Mallakis and Licchavis were the
chief of the Kacis and Kosalas.
Oct 26, 2010
Was Buddha Murdered for His Progressive Teachings?
By Grant Lawrence
In his new book, Confessions of a Buddhist Atheist, to be out in the US early March, this author of eight other books on Buddhism claims the Buddha was a man whose teachings were regarded by his contemporaries as not only radical, but "queer" enough for him to be denounced by one of his own former disciples as a "fake", who not only managed to win the patronage of the three most powerful political figures of his time, but was worldly enough to survive in the midst of court intrigues, murders and betrayals, effectively quelling a rebellion within his own flock before he was done in by the ambitions of his own family.
But it is Batchelor's findings on the Buddha's last days that are the most startling: in the last 10 months of his life, Batchelor says, the Buddha, old and ailing, saw his two main disciples die, one of them brutally murdered, and was forced to flee with a handful of loyalists from all the three political bases he had spent a lifetime building up, until he was possibly poisoned to death by one of his many rivals, leaving a pretender to take over the community after an intense power struggle..
The story of the Buddha's death always seemed a bit odd to me and a bit convenient.
The story goes that an aged Buddha sat down to eat a meal that included spoiled pork. The Buddha ate it and shortly after died.
But is there something more to the story?
Here we have a man that has ordained woman monks, spoken out against the caste system and any other form of slavery, and called humanity to use their heads as well as their hearts.
If you consider that woman were often expected to practice Sati, in which they would kill themselves at their husbands funeral pyre. Also consider that there was an entrenched and brutal caste system and that the Buddha allowed untouchables to become Monks. Then you might come to some understanding how progressive and transformational the Buddha's teachings were to the society of his time.
So it is only reasonable that there would be attempts on the Buddha's life.
And there were.
The texts talk about a few attempts on the Buddha's life. The Buddha skillfully avoided being killed.
But in his old age, was the last attempt successful?
It is possible, and maybe even likely, that the Buddha was poisoned on purpose. Perhaps the Buddha understood that it was his time to go and took the poisoned meat knowing that the Dharma would flourish without him.
The Buddha's death would certainly be viewed as convenient to those warring Kingdoms that wanted to continue to War. They certainly would have welcomed the end to the Progressive ideas and the Progressive visionary.
The Buddha may have been assassinated just like other great Progressives throughout history that act to make a real change in society. It is often the fate of those that have the wisdom and the ability to make a real change in society to water the seeds of their Progressive work with their own blood.
Also Read:
http://jainology.blogspot.com/2010/10/who-killed-gautam-buddha.html
In his new book, Confessions of a Buddhist Atheist, to be out in the US early March, this author of eight other books on Buddhism claims the Buddha was a man whose teachings were regarded by his contemporaries as not only radical, but "queer" enough for him to be denounced by one of his own former disciples as a "fake", who not only managed to win the patronage of the three most powerful political figures of his time, but was worldly enough to survive in the midst of court intrigues, murders and betrayals, effectively quelling a rebellion within his own flock before he was done in by the ambitions of his own family.
But it is Batchelor's findings on the Buddha's last days that are the most startling: in the last 10 months of his life, Batchelor says, the Buddha, old and ailing, saw his two main disciples die, one of them brutally murdered, and was forced to flee with a handful of loyalists from all the three political bases he had spent a lifetime building up, until he was possibly poisoned to death by one of his many rivals, leaving a pretender to take over the community after an intense power struggle..
The story of the Buddha's death always seemed a bit odd to me and a bit convenient.
The story goes that an aged Buddha sat down to eat a meal that included spoiled pork. The Buddha ate it and shortly after died.
But is there something more to the story?
Here we have a man that has ordained woman monks, spoken out against the caste system and any other form of slavery, and called humanity to use their heads as well as their hearts.
If you consider that woman were often expected to practice Sati, in which they would kill themselves at their husbands funeral pyre. Also consider that there was an entrenched and brutal caste system and that the Buddha allowed untouchables to become Monks. Then you might come to some understanding how progressive and transformational the Buddha's teachings were to the society of his time.
So it is only reasonable that there would be attempts on the Buddha's life.
And there were.
The texts talk about a few attempts on the Buddha's life. The Buddha skillfully avoided being killed.
But in his old age, was the last attempt successful?
It is possible, and maybe even likely, that the Buddha was poisoned on purpose. Perhaps the Buddha understood that it was his time to go and took the poisoned meat knowing that the Dharma would flourish without him.
The Buddha's death would certainly be viewed as convenient to those warring Kingdoms that wanted to continue to War. They certainly would have welcomed the end to the Progressive ideas and the Progressive visionary.
The Buddha may have been assassinated just like other great Progressives throughout history that act to make a real change in society. It is often the fate of those that have the wisdom and the ability to make a real change in society to water the seeds of their Progressive work with their own blood.
Also Read:
http://jainology.blogspot.com/2010/10/who-killed-gautam-buddha.html
Who Killed Gautam Buddha?
-Sheela Reddy
Seven years ago, when Buddhist scholar and former monk Stephen Batchelor embarked on a search for the real Siddhartha Gautama, rooting through over 6,000 pages of the Pali Canon—the oldest set of texts on his teachings, which provide glimpses into his social and political world—perhaps he didn’t even dream of the Buddha that would emerge from his research. Far from the picture we have of Siddhartha as a prince who grew up in a palace, who renounced it all and became the Buddha, attracting the rich and powerful as well as hundreds of monks and nuns by his teachings, until one day he just lay down and died, Batchelor’s portrait of the Buddha “is not that simple”. In his new book, Confessions of a Buddhist Atheist, to be out in the US early March, this author of eight other books on Buddhism claims the Buddha was a man whose teachings were regarded by his contemporaries as not only radical, but “queer” enough for him to be denounced by one of his own former disciples as a “fake”, who not only managed to win the patronage of the three most powerful political figures of his time, but was worldly enough to survive in the midst of court intrigues, murders and betrayals, effectively quelling a rebellion within his own flock before he was done in by the ambitions of his own family.
But it is Batchelor’s findings on the Buddha’s last days that are the most startling: in the last 10 months of his life, Batchelor says, the Buddha, old and ailing, saw his two main disciples die, one of them brutally murdered, and was forced to flee with a handful of loyalists from all the three political bases he had spent a lifetime building up, until he was possibly poisoned to death by one of his many rivals, leaving a pretender to take over the community after an intense power struggle.
The Buddha, according to Batchelor, owed his exile—and eventual death—to the same king who had lifted him to the heights of power: King Pasenadi of Kosala. According to the records, the king—the monarch of the most powerful kingdom north of the Ganges—and the Buddha—the son of a chieftain in one of the kingdom’s rural provinces—met for the first time when they were both about the age of 40. Hearing of his renown as a teacher, the king paid a visit to the Buddha’s retreat outside his capital city of Shravasti. At first sceptical, Pasenadi was soon won over by the Buddha, and asked to be accepted as his follower. “This was a—if not the—key moment in Gotama’s career,” writes Batchelor: with Pasenadi’s support, Gautama’s tenure in Shravasti was assured, and for the next 25 years, he spent every rainy season here in a grove gifted to him by a rich admirer, giving most of his discourses.
Pasenadi, according to the references that Batchelor so painstakingly culled from the Pali Canon, was a paranoid tyrant given to impaling his enemies—imagined or real—on stakes. His friendship with the Buddha, which lasted for the next 25 years, seems to have had little effect on Pasenadi. “The only time he is seen to benefit from Gotama’s instruction is when he follows his advice to go on a diet,” writes Batchelor. From “a bucket measure of boiled rice” he reduces his intake to “a pint-pot measure” and becomes “quite slim”.
Nor did the friendship improve the king’s suspicious nature, even when it came to the Buddha himself. For example, in one of the countless plots to discredit him by rival groups of ascetics, the Buddha was accused of sexual impropriety with a female renunciant called Sundari. When Pasenadi’s men found her body hidden not far from the Buddha’s hut, nothing could persuade the king of his teacher’s innocence. Fortunately, the king’s spies soon discovered the plot to discredit the Buddha.
Some 15 or more years after they first met, the tyrant and the monk turned from friends into relatives: hoping for a male heir, Pasenadi decided to marry from the Buddha’s homeland, Sakiya or Shakya. The king approached the Buddha’s cousin, Mahanama, who had taken over the governorship of Shakya after the death of the Buddha’s father. It was a signal honour for the Buddha, but there was a problem: the notoriously proud Shakyans refused to allow any pure-blooded woman to marry outside their clan, forcing Mahanama to send to the king the illegitimate daughter he sired through a slavewoman, passing her off as a noblewoman. It was a deception that, Batchelor says, was not just dangerous and foolhardy, but would lead one day to a bloodbath, and the Buddha’s exile from Kosala.
It’s impossible, points out Batchelor, the Buddha wouldn’t have known of the treachery, considering his close relations with all the main players. There’s a misconception, according to Batchelor, that the Buddha cut off all ties with his own community in Shakya after he left home. On the contrary, the Buddha returned to Kapilavastu after his enlightenment, reconciled with his family, and some of his most important followers were, in fact, his cousins, including Devadatta, who subsequently tried to overthrow him, Ananda, who memorised all the texts, and Aniruddha, who was present at his death. As a result of the deception, Batchelor writes, the Buddha “was placed in an impossible situation”: to reveal the situation would have put his life’s work in jeopardy, costing him the support of his most powerful patron, and to remain silent would have made him appear complicit in it. The Buddha chose silence, but he was no doubt aware of the precarious nature of his tenure in his Kosalan headquarters in Jeta’s grove.
Meanwhile, the slave girl not only gave birth to a son, Prince Vidudabha, but was able to fob off all questions regarding his maternal ancestry until he was 16, when she finally relented and let him go on a visit to the Shakyan headquarters in Kapilavastu. Vidudabha’s visit went off uneventfully, until his departure. One of his soldiers, returning to the Shakyan guesthouse to retrieve his sword, overheard a woman muttering as she scrubbed with milk the seat which Vidudabha had used: “This is where the son of the slave-woman Vasabha sat!” Inevitably, there was an uproar when the Kosalan royal party heard of it. The young prince vowed: “When I gain my throne, I will wash it with the blood of their throats.”
When Pasenadi heard of the Shakyans’ treachery, he vented his fury on his wife and son, stripping them of their royal positions, cropping their hair, and returning them to the condition of slavery. It fell on the Buddha to plead with the king on their behalf. He prevailed for the moment, but his idyll in Jeta’s grove was over. From then on, Batchelor writes, the Buddha was on the run, losing one by one all the three strongholds from where he spread his teachings. In Rajgir, the Magadhan king Bimbisara, his first royal patron, was forced to abdicate in favour of his son Ajatasattu, who imprisoned and then starved his father to death.
At the same time, cracks began to appear within his own monastic community. His cousin Devadatta, who was also Ajatasattu’s mentor, plotted to overthrow the Buddha. Some of the texts say Devadatta tried to assassinate the Buddha by dropping a big boulder on him, and sending a wild elephant in his way. But the passages that give the most information about Devadatta say he tried to persuade the Buddha to step down on grounds of age. The Buddha dismissed the proposal decisively, saying: “I would not even ask Sariputta and Moggallana (his most indispensable and senior-most monks) to head this community, let alone a lick-spittle like you.” Till the very end, Batchelor says, the Buddha was adamant about not appointing a successor, stating that his teachings were his only successor.
Having failed in his bid for power, Devadatta then walked out of the community, taking a sizeable section of the monks along with him. But eventually, the Buddha’s two senior-most followers, Sariputta and Moggallana, healed the schism and persuaded the renegade monks to return to the fold.
There were other cracks within the community: the Buddha’s former attendant, Sunakkhatta, a nobleman of Vaishali who had left the monastic order, denounced him in the parliament of Vaishali as a “fake”. While the Buddha received the news with his usual calm, it was clear that he was losing favour even in Vaishali. That’s probably why, reasons Batchelor, the Buddha didn’t stay in his usual place during his last retreat in Vaishali, but in a village outside the city walls by himself, telling his monks to go and find lodging in the city for their support.
Frail and elderly, the Buddha suffered yet another blow in the last months of his life: both Sariputta and Moggallana died within two weeks of each other—the latter brutally murdered, according to the commentaries, by the supporters of Jains, who saw the Buddha as a great threat to their own survival.
For the Buddha, Batchelor points out, his last few months were dogged by a sense of failure—the society in which he’d worked a lifetime spreading his teachings was erupting into violence. The new king of Kosala, Vidudabha, was invading the Buddha’s homeland and the Buddha was powerless to prevent the massacre that ensued, with the royal troops being ordered to kill every Shakyan they see, “sparing not even infants at the breast”. So he headed south for Rajgir, where Ajatasattu was planning to cross the Ganges and invade the Vajjian republic, despite the Buddha’s advice to the contrary. An exhausted and sick Buddha then wound towards home again, in Kapilavastu, accompanied by less than half-a-dozen monks of the many hundreds of followers he had in his heyday. And when he stopped at the town of Pavi, 75 miles from home, instead of the hospitality of the rich and powerful he had always enjoyed, he ended up at the house of a butcher or blacksmith.
For Batchelor, the Buddha’s death is the biggest mystery of all. The texts only say that a man called Cunda the Smith invited the Buddha and his attendants, including Ananda, home. “From the moment it was offered to him, it seems that Gotama suspected something was amiss with the food,” writes Batchelor. According to the texts, the Buddha told his host: “Serve the pork to me, and the remaining food to the other monks.” When the meal was over, he said to Cunda: “You should bury any leftover pork in a pit.” Then he “was attacked by a severe sickness with bloody diarrhoea”. His only response was to say to Ananda: “Let us go to Kusinara.” Which, under the circumstances, Batchelor says, sounds like, “Let’s get out this place.”
Batchelor puzzles over this passage included in the Pali Canon: why did the Buddha prevent the others from eating the pork? Did he suspect it was poisoned? He had no shortage of enemies, Batchelor reasons—Pava was not only in the Kosalan province adjoining Shakya, but was also a shrine to his principal rival, Mahavira, who is said to have died there a few years previously. Only a few months ago, his senior-most disciple Moggallana had been killed by hired assassins of Mahavira’s followers.
But what’s the point in killing an old man who is already dying? Batchelor points out that the best revenge the Buddha’s enemies could have taken on him was to kill not him but Ananda, his faithful attendant. Ananda was the only one left after the death of Sariputta and Moggallana to have memorised the entire teachings of the Buddha. “If you killed Ananda, you killed Buddhism,” points out Batchelor. “By insisting that he alone be served with the pork and the leftovers be buried, the Buddha prevented Ananda from eating it.” The Buddha “hastened his own death”, according to Batchelor, “in order that his teaching would survive”.
But the monk for whom the Buddha laid down his life ended up being upstaged by a relative outsider even before his cremation pyre was lit. Mahakassapa was a Brahmin from Magadha who became a monk towards the end of the Buddha’s life. He arrived with a large group of monks just before the pyre was lit, and insisted that the cremation not take place till he too had paid his last respects to the Buddha.
This episode marked the beginning of a power struggle, with the newcomer claiming to be the rightful successor of the Buddha, and taking over the community. “There are two sutras in the Pali Canon where Mahakassapa is very dismissive, almost abusive in his dealings with Ananda,” says Batchelor, “dismissing him as a mere ‘boy’”. Ananda responds to this by pointing to his head, and saying: “Are these not grey hair?”
Courtesy: OUTLOOK
Oct 24, 2010
How Buddhism Disappeared from India?
Why did Buddhism disappear from Bharat?
Jainism was in full swing in India prior to Hinduism. All royal people were influenced by Jain monks and their speech on ruthless Hindu Kshatriya or warrior dharma/religion of protection & offense. They highlighted the path of peace and salvation that could only be attained by Jainism.
The Brahmins performed a great Puja and earnestly prayed Lord Shiva to stop the progress of Jainism. According to aggressive Hindu beliefs Adi Shankaracharya was born. Regarding Shankaracharya it is said in at least one case he was not able to answer questions placed by a married woman regarding sex and he was not aware of sexual behaviors because being a Brahmin he was performing vrat of Brahmcharya where a person is supposed to fight back any sexual thoughts arising in mind. Hence his knowledge regarding sex was either zero or in infancy or very less as compared to sex indulged people of his age.
The antics of Adi Shankara in the 8th century assuming he was born in 788 and died in 820 CE are well known and part of history. Sankara postulated the Vedas as authority; and hence was ranked as a Sanatani. Later on, the priestly class appropriated this and Max Muller called it Hinduism. Thus Hinduism dates back to to the 8th century.
He was the arch foe of Buddhism and the principal architect of its downfall in India (Pande 1994: p. 255). Adi Shankara, along with Madhva and Ramanuja, was instrumental in the revival of Hinduism through aggressive and violent means.
The historians like Vincent Smith suggested that it was due to Adi Sankaracharya there was decline of Buddhism in India. Others argue that it was due to the Muslim invasion (of Bakhtyar) that Nalanda was routed and the library there was burned and thousands of Buddha viharas were destroyed subsequently. Much of this is described in The Book of Thoth(Leaves of Wisdom).
Shashanka was the Shaivite Brahmin king of Bengal. He was manipulated by the Brahmins to become a ferocious oppressor of the Buddhists. He had destroyed the Bodhi tree of Bodh Gaya and ordered the mass destruction of all Buddhist images and monasteries in his kingdom.
1. Lal, V. 2004. Buddhism’s Disappearance from India [serial online]. [cited 2009 August 26]; [2 screens]. Available from: URL:
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/southasia/Religions/paths/BuddhismDisappear.doc.
2. Jaini, P.S., Narain A.K., ed., 1980. The Disappearance of Buddhism and the Survival of Jainism: A Study in Contrast. Studies in History of Buddhism. Delhi: B.R. Publishing Company:181-91.
3. Ahir, D.C. 2005. Buddhism Declined in India: How and Why? Delhi: B.R. Publishing.
Prof. P. Sankaranarayanan in his article The life and work of Sri Sankara published in the web page of Kanchi Mutt writes: “Buddhism, the rebel child of the Vedic religion and philosophy, denied God and the soul, laid the axe at the very roots of Vedic thought and posed a great danger to its very survival. This onslaught was stemmed occasionally, compelling Buddhism to seek refuge in other lands. While the credit for this should go primarily to the Mimamsaka, Kumarila Bhatta, it was because of Sri Sankara’s dialectical skill and irrefutable arguments that it ceased to have sway over the minds of the inheritors of Vedic religion.”
The hold of Buddhism on the masses of India could be seen from the writing of celebrated Chinese pilgrim Faxian (334-420 AD). He made a journey that marked the high point of the first wave of Chinese pilgrims in India. He left China in 399 AD and returned in 414 AD. We see that even two centuries later the religion was hardly weakened as may be gleaned from the detailed historic accounts of the reign of Harshavardhana (606-647AD). The sources for such accounts are: coins and inscriptions, the reports of pilgrims, official Chinese documents and writings by well-known personalities like the Chinese traveler Huien Tsang.
Though a Hindu, King Harshavardhana maintained an impartial tolerance towards the other religions, especially Buddhism that at that time was the religion of the common masses. To honor Huien Tsang, a devout student Buddhist theology and admirer of the holy land of Buddha, Harshavardhana organized the Kanauj Assembly in 643 AD. This was a grand assembly of many rajas including King Bhaskaravarman of Kamrupa (Assam) and the Vallabhi king, Dhuvabhatti. The Assembly at Kanauj included a large congregation of Brahmans, Buddhist monks ands Jains, who were involved in religious discourses. We should not forget to mention that Huien Tsang, along with thousands of students from many countries, studied in the well-known Buddhist university of Nalanda. If so, how could the religion that Sankara opposed and helped drive out of India flourish
1) The Divyavadana (ed. Vaidya, 282). The most important of the murderous Hindu bigots who carried out their systematic campaign of violence against the peaceful followers of Lord Buddha was Pushyamitra (184-48 B.C.), the founder of the Shunga dynasty. For details and refrences do see BELOW
2) Goyal [430] “The culprit in this case was Toramana, a member of the same dynasty as the Shaivite Mihirakula who did “immense damage to the Buddhist shrines in Gandhara, Punjab and Kashmir.” For details and refrences do see BELOW
3) Mihirakula is said to have razed 1600 viharas, stupas and monasteries, and “put to death 900 Kotis, or lay adherents of Buddhism” [Joshi, 404].
4) The Aryamanjushrimulakalpa tells us that Pushyamitra “destroyed monasteries with relics and killed monks of good conduct.” [Jayaswal, 18-19]
5) As Goyal [394] notes, “According to many scholars hostility of the Brahmanas was one of the major causes of the decline of Buddhism in India.”
6) The celebrated Tibetan historian Lama Taranatha mentions the march of Pushyamitra from Madhyadesha to Jalandhara. In the course of his campaigns, the book states, Pushyamitra burned down numerous Buddhist monasteries and killed a number of learned monks The archaeological evidence for the ravages wrought by Pushyamitra and other Hindu fanatic rulers on famous Buddhist shrines is abundant.
7) The Brhannaradiya-purana lays it down as a principal sin for a Brahmana to enter the house of a Buddhist even in times of great peril.
8) The drama Mrchchhakatika shows that in Ujjain the Buddhist monks were despised and their sight was considered inauspicious.
9) The Vishnupurana (XVIII 13-18) also regards the Buddha as Mayamoha who appeared in the world to delude the demons. Kumarila is said to have instigated King Sudhanvan of Ujjain to exterminate the Buddhists.
10) The Kerala-utpatti describes how he exterminated the Buddhists from Kerala.”
11) The Chinese traveller Yuan Chwang (Huen Tsang), who visited India in the seventh century records the oppressions of Shashanka, the king of Gauda, who was a devotee of Shiva.
12) Yuan Chwang’s account reads, “In recent times Shashanka, the enemy and oppressor of Buddhism, cut down the Bodhi tree, destroyed its roots down to the water and burned what remained.” [Watters II p.115] He also says that Shashanka tried “to have the image (of Lord Buddha at Bodhgaya) removed and replaced by one of Shiva”.
13) Another independent account of Shashanka’s oppressions is found in the Aryamanjushrimulakalpa, which refers to Shashanka destroying “the beautiful image of Buddha” [Jayaswal, 49-50].
14) Another prominent seventh century murderer of Buddhists was Sudhanvan of Ujjain, already mentioned in the quotation from Goyal above as having been supposedly instigated by Kumarila Bhatt.
15) Madhava Acharya, in his “Sankara-digvijayam” of the fourteenth century A.D., records that Suddhanvan “issued orders to put to death all the Buddhists from Ramesvaram to the Himalayas”.
16) Even after the Islamic invasions of India, Hindu bigotry and hatred for Buddhists was not subdued. According to Sharmasvamin, a Tibetan pilgrim who visited Bihar three decades after the invasion of Bakhtiaruddin Khilji in the 12th century, the biggest library at Nalanda was destroyed by Hindu mendicants who took advantage of the chaos produced by the invasion.
He says that “they (Hindus) performed a Yajna, a fire sacrifice, and threw living embers and ashes from the sacrifice into the Buddhist temples. This produced a great conflagration which consumed Ratnabodhi, the
nine-storeyed library of the Nalanda University“. [Prakash, 213]. Numerous destroyed Buddhist shrines were converted into Hindu temples after their destruction.
17) Ahir [58] notes that “The Seat of Buddha’s Enlightenment was in the possession of a Hindu Mahant till 1952.
18) Similarly, at Kushinara, where the Buddha had entered into Mahaparinirvana, the cremation stupa had been converted into a Hindu temple, and on top of it stood the temple of Rambhar Bhavani when
Cunningham discovered the site in 1860-61.
19) Among the shrines which still continue to be dedicated to Hindu gods mention may be made of the Caityas of Chezrala and Ter in Andhra Pradesh which are now Shiva and Vishnu temples respectively.
20) The temple of Madhava at Sal Kusa, opposite Gauhati in Asam, was once a sacred shrine of the Buddhists. …
21) And the famous Jagannatha temple at Puri in Orissa was also originally a Buddhist shrine.
22) Similarly, the Vishnupada temple at Gaya was also once a Buddhist shrine.” As Rajendralal Mitra notes in his famous work of 1878 [quoted in Ahir, 59] the feet of Buddha at Gaya were rechristened the feet of Vishnu and held as the most sacred object of worship in the new Vishnupada temple.
23) According to the records of Hieun Tsang and Kalhana’s Rajaatarangini, Asoka the great repented, converted to Buddhism (273-232 BC) and did a lot for Buddhism. Asoka renounced violence, and renounced his religion after the Kalinga war, and he became a Buddhist. During Asoka, Buddhism had become the state religion. The Brahmans did not like him, and many historians think the Brahaman opposition to Asoka led to the destruction of the Muyarian dynasty.
24) In Glimpses of World History Jawahrlal Nehru says the following about the Kushans (emphasis is mine and not Nehru’s): ” This Kushan Empire is interesting in many ways. IT WAS A BUDDHIST EMPIRE, and one of its famous rulers-the Emperor Kanishka-was ardently devoted to the dharma…the Kushans were Mongolians or closely allied to them. From the Kushan capital there must have been a continuous coming and going to the Mongolian homelands, and Buddhist learning and Buddhist culture must have gone to China and Mongolia…the Kushan Empire sat like a colossus astride the back of Asia, in between the Greaco-Roman world in the south. It was a halfway house both between India, and Rome, and India and China. The Kushan period corresponded with the last days of the Roman Republic when Julius Ceaser was alive, and first 200 years of the Roman Empire
25) THE HINDU KASHATRIYA HINDU AND BUDDHIST WARS
Jawarhalal Nehru in his book Glimpses of World History says (Page 103 and 104) “Chandragupta proclaimed his holy war “against all foreign rulers in India. The Kashatriyas and the Aryan aristocracy, deprived of their power and positions by the aliens (Kushans), were at the back of this war. After a dozen or so years of fighting, Chandragupta managed to gain control over Northern India including what is now called UP. He then crowned himself king of kings. Thus began the Gupta dynasty. It was a period of somewhat aggressive Hinduism and nationalism. The foreign rulers-the Turkis and Parathions and other Non-Aryans were rooted our and forcibly removed. We thus find racial antagonism at work. The Indo-Aryan aristocrat was proud of his race and looked down upon these barbarians and malachas. Indo-Aryan States and rulers were conquered by the Guptas were dealt with leniently, But there was not leniency for non-Aryans.
26) Jawarhalal Nehru in his book Glimpses of World History says “Chandragupta’s son Samadugupta was an even more aggressive fighter than his father….the Kushans were pushed back across the Indus…Samadugupta’s son, Chandragupta II was also a warrior king, and he conquered Kathiwad and Gujrat, which had been under the rule of a Saka or Turki dynasty for a long time. He took the name Vikramaditya…..The Gupta period was a period of Hindu imperialism in India. There was a great revival of old Aryan culture and Sanskrit learning. The Hellenistic, or Greek and Mongolian elements in Indian life and culture which had been brought by the Greeks, Kushans and others were not encouraged, and were in fact deliberately superseded by laying stress on the Indo-Aryan traditions. Sanskrit was the official court language. But EVEN IN THOSE DAYS SANSKRIT WAS NOT THE COMMON LANGUAGE OF THE PEOPLE.
The spoken language was a form of Prakrit….Kalidasa belonged to this period ……………. Samadragupta changed the capital of his empire from Pataliputra (Peshawar) to Ayodhia. Perhaps he felt that Ayodhiya
offered a more suitable outlook–with its story of Ramachandra immortalized in Valmikis epic.
27) HINDU BUDDHIST CONFLICT
Jawarhalal Nehru in his book Glimpses of World History says “The Gupta revival of Aryanism and Hinduism was naturally not very favorably inclined towards Buddhism. This was partly because this movement was aristocratic, with the Kashatriya chiefs backing it, and Buddhism had more democracy in it; partly because the Mahayana form of Buddhism was closely associated with the Kushans and other alien rulers of northern India….but Buddhism declined in India…Chandragupta the first was a contemporary of Constantine the great, the Roman Emperor who founded Constantinople. “
The Buddha was a true revolutionary—and his crusade against Brahminical supremacy won him his most ardent followers from among the oppressed castes. The Buddha challenged the divinity of the Vedas, the bedrock of Brahminism. He held that all men are equal and that the caste system or varnashramadharma, to which the Vedas and Other Brah’minical’ books had given religious sanction, was completely false. Thus, in the Anguttara Nikaya, the Buddha is said to have exhorted the Bhikkus, saying,
“Just, O brethren, as the great rivers, when they have emptied themselves into the Great Ocean, lose their different names and are known as the Great Ocean Just so, O brethren, do the four varnas—Kshatriya, Brahmin, Vaishya and Sudra—when they begin to follow the doctrine and discipline propounded by the Tathagata [i.e. the Buddha], renounce the different names of caste and rank and become the members of one and the same society.”
The Buddha’s fight against Brahminism won him many enemies from among the Brahmins. They were not as greatly opposed to his philosophical teachings as they were to his message of universal brotherhood and equality for it directly challenged their hegemony and the scriptures that they had invented to legitimize this. To combat Buddhism and revive the tottering Brahminical hegemony, Brahminical revivalists resorted to a three-pronged strategy.
Firstly, they launched a campaign of hatred and persecution against the Buddhists. Then, they appropriated many of the finer aspects of Buddhism into their own system so as to win over the “lower” caste Buddhist masses, but made sure that this selective appropriation did not in any way undermine Brahminical hegemony. The final stage in this project to wipeout Buddhism was to propound and propagate the myth that the Buddha was merely another ‘incarnation’ (avatar) of the Hindu god Vishnu. Buddha was turned into just another of the countless deities of the Brahminical pantheon. The Buddhists were finally absorbed into the caste system, mainly as Shudras and ‘Untouchables’, and with that the Buddhist presence was completely obliterated from the land of its birth. Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar writes in his book, The Untouchables, that the ancestors of today’s Dalits were Buddhists who were reduced to the lowly status of ‘untouchables’ for not having accepted the supremacy of the Brahmins. They were kept apart from other people and were forced to live in ghettos of their own. Being treated worse that beasts of burden and forbidden to receive any education, these people gradually lost touch with Buddhism, but yet never fully reconciled themselves to the Brahminical order. Many of them later converted to Islam, Sikhism and Christianity in a quest for liberation from the Brahminical religion.
To lend legitimacy to their campaign against Buddhism, Brahminical texts included fierce strictures against Buddhists. Manu, in his Manusmriti, laid down that, “If a person touches a Buddhist […] he shall purify himself by having a bath.” Aparaka ordained the same in his Smriti. Vradha Harit declared entry into a Buddhist temple a sin, which could only be expiated for by taking a ritual bath. Even dramas and other books for lay people written by Brahmins contained venomous propaganda against the Buddhists. In the classic work, Mricchakatika, (Act VII), the hero Charudatta, on seeing a Buddhist monk pass by, exclaims to his friend Maitriya— “Ah! Here is an inauspicious sight, a Buddhist monk coming towards us.”
The Brahmin Chanakya, author of Arthashastra, declared that, “When a person entertains in a dinner dedicated to gods and ancestors those who are Sakyas (Buddhists), Ajivikas, Shudras and exiled persons, a fine of one hundred panas shall be imposed on him.” Shankaracharaya, the leader of the Brahminical revival, struck terror into the hearts of the Buddhists with his diatribes against their religion.
The simplicity of the Buddha’s message, its stress on equality and its crusade against the bloody and costly sacrifices and ritualism of Brahminism had attracted the oppressed casts in large numbers. The Brahminical revivalists understood the need to appropriate some of these finer aspects of Buddhism and discarded some of the worst of their own practices so as to be able to win over the masses back to the Brahminical fold. Hence began the process of the assimilation of Buddhism by Brahminism.
The Brahimns, who were once voracious beef-eaters, turned vegetarian, imitating the Buddhists in this regard. Popular devotion to the Buddha was sought to be replaced by devotion to Hindu gods such as Rama and Krishna. The existing version of the Mahabharata was written in the period in which the decline of Buddhism had already begun, and it was specially meant for the Shudras, most of whom were Buddhists, to attract them away from Buddhism. Brahminism, however, still prevented the Shudras from having access to the Vedas, and the Mahabharata was possibly written to placate the Buddhist Shudras and to compensate them for this discrimination.
The Mahabharata incorporated some of the humanistic elements of Buddhism to win over the Shudras, but, overall, played its role of bolstering the Brahminical hegemony rather well. Thus, Krishna, in the Gita, is made to say that a person ought not to violate the “divinely ordained” law of caste. Eklavya is made to slice off his thumb by Drona, who is finds it a gross violation of dharma that a mere tribal boy should excel the Kshatriya Arjun in archery.
The various writer of the puranas, too, carried on this systematic campaign of hatred, slander and calumny against the Buddhists. The Brahannardiya Purana made it a principal sin for Brahmins to enter the house of a Buddhist even in times of great peril. The Vishnu Purana dubs the Buddha as Maha Moha or ‘the great seducer’. It further cautions against the “sin of conversing with Buddhists” and lays down that “those who merely talk to Buddhist ascetics shall be sent to hell.”
In the Gaya Mahatmaya, the concluding section of the Vayu Purana, the town of Gaya is identified as Gaya Asura, a demon who had attained such holiness that all those who saw him or touched him went straight to heaven. Clearly, this ‘demon’ was none other the Buddha who preached a simple way for all, including the oppressed castes, to attain salvation. The Vayu Purana story goes on to add that Yama, the king of hell, grew jealous at this, possibly because less people were now entering his domains. He appealed to the gods to limit the powers of Asura Gaya. This the gods, led by Vishnu, were able to do by placing a massive stone on the “demon’s” head. This monstrous legend signified the ultimate capture of Budhdhism’s most holy centre by its most inveterate foes.
Kushinagar, also known as Harramba, was one of the most important Buddhist centres as the Buddha breathed his last there. The Brahmins, envious of the prosperity of this pilgrim town and in order to discourage people from going there, invented the absurd theory that one who dies in Harramba goes to hell, or is reborn as an ass, while he who dies in Kashi, the citadel of Brahminism, goes straight to heaven. So pervasive was the belief in this bizarre theory that when the Sufi saint Kabir died in 1518 AD at Maghar, not far from Kushinagar, some of his Hindu followers refused to erect any memorial in his honor there and instead set up one at Kashi. Kabir’s Muslim followers were less superstitious. They set up a tomb for him at Maghar itself.
In addition to vilifying the fair name of the Buddha, the Brahminical revivalists goaded Hindu kings to persecute and even slaughter innocent Buddhists. Sasanka, the Shaivite Brahmin king of Bengal, murdered the last Buddhist emperor Rajyavardhana, elder brother of Harshavardhana, in 605 AD and then marched on to Bodh Gaya where he destroyed the Bodhi tree under which the Buddha had attained enlightenment. He forcibly removed the Buddha’s image from the Bodh Vihara near the tree and installed one of Shiva in its place.
Finally, Sasanka is said to have slaughtered all the Buddhist monks in the area around Kushinagar. Another such Hindu king was, Mihirakula, a Shaivite, who is said to have completely destroyed over 1500 Buddhist shrines. The Shaivite Toramana is said to have destroyed the Ghositarama Buddhist monastery at Kausambi.
The extermination of Buddhism in India was hastened by the large-scale destruction and appropriation of Buddhist shrines by the Brahmins. The Mahabodhi Vihara at Bodh Gaya was forcibly converted into a Shaivite temple, and the controversy lingers on till this day. The cremation stupa of the Buddha at Kushinagar was changed into a Hindu temple dedicated to the obscure deity with the name of Ramhar Bhavani. Adi Shankara is said to have established his Sringeri Mutth on the site of a Buddhist monastery which he took over. Many Hindu shrines in Ayodhya are said to have once been Buddhist temples, as is the case with other famous Brahminical temples such as those at Sabarimala, Tirupati, Badrinath and Puri.
References:
4. Yu-Ki Or, Buddhist Records of the Western Countries written by Hsien-tsang (circa 650 AD). Taken from Translations by Thomas Watters (1904) and Samuel Beal (1884) http://www.iras.ucalgary.ca/~volk/sylvia/Hsien-Tsang.htm)
5. Messengers of light: Chinese Buddhist pilgrims in India by Paul Magnin Unesco Courier, Vol. 48 No.5 May.1995 Pp.24-27.
6. Discovery of India by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru
http://rupeenews.com/2009/03/24/the-manuwadi-hindus-destroyed-buddhism-in-its-own-land-of-birth/
Recently we read in the Mississauga’s Weekly Voice dated December 5, 2009 relating to the Crowning Glory entitled “Politician Donates $10 million Crown for Tirupati Deity.” It is also most remarkable that medical surgeon Dr. K. Jamanadas writes a book entitled “Tirupate Balaji was a Buddhist Shrine” and this book has potential credibility to accept that Buddha statues become God Vishnu in Hinduism. Hindu rulers made the shiva linga in the Buddhagaya temple and declared that Buddhagaya Mahabodhi Temple belongs to Hindus. Today Indian Buddhists have no democratic and human rights in the Puri Jagannatha Buddhist temple and Mahabodhi temple of Buddhagaya, Bihar. Hindu fanatic are taking over Mosque, Buddhist temples and churches in India. There are no human rights in Hindu society. Non-violence is the supreme religion in Buddhist philosophy. Violence or tragedy of caste system is the Vedic way of life in Hinduism. Hindu fanatics burnt Buddhist monks and Buddhists alive.
The ruthless manner in which all the buildings at Nagarjuna Konda were destroyed is simply appalling and cannot represent the work of treasure seekers because many of the pillars, statues and sculptures have been wantonly smashed to pieces. Local tradition relates that the Brahmin teacher Sankaracharya came to Nagarjuna Konda with a host of followers and destroyed the Buddhist monuments. The cultivated lands on which the ruined buildings stand was a religious grant made to Sankaracharya. In Kerala, Sankaracharya and his Hindu fanatic close associate Kumarila Bhatta, an avowed enemy of Buddhism, organized a religious crusade against the Buddhists. We get a vivid description of the pleasure of Sankaracharaya on seeing the people of non-Brahmanic faith being burnt to death from the book Sankara Digvijaya (World Victory).
According to the Charyapada (First Bangla Book)and Sankara’s Digvijaya book havoc played in Kerala, Bangladesh, West Bengal, Bihar and all South Asia. Kumarila Bhatta instigated king Suddvannan of Ujjaini to exterminate the Buddhists. From the Mirchakatika of Sudraka we learnt that King’s brother-in-law in Ujjain persecuted the Buddhist monks and nuns. They were treated as bullocks by passing a string through their noses and yoking them to carts. The keralopathi documents refer to the extermination of Buddhism from Kerala by Kumarila Bhatta.
In 1906 Pandit Haraprasad Sastri discovered the first Bangla book the “Charyapada” from the Royal Library of Nepal and he declared that Bangla language was started from the Buddhist thoughts. Dr. Mohammad Shahidullaha and Dr. Suniti Kumar Chatterjee discovered that Brahmanism was started to destroy Buddhism. Hindu politics pays respect to the Buddha as the “Vishnu’s 9th Avatar.” Hindu rulers did not convert to Buddhism but they convert the Buddha as the Hindu god and the sinister conspiracy was started to destroy Buddhists in India. Hindu and Brahmin politics could not tolerate at all as the separate Buddhist existence in India.
There are hundred of places in Keral, Bangladesh, Bihar, West Bengla and Uttar Pradesh having the names like Buddha vihar, (Dharma Thakur), palli (or Buddha Vihar in Kerala) either affixed or suffixed with them. In Kerala karungapalli, Karthikapalli, Pallickal, Pallipuram are some of the examples of these places. The term palli means a Budhist Vihara in Kerala. It should be noted that Kerala had 1, 200 years Buddhist tradition. Till recently schools in Kerala had been called as Ezhuthupalli or Pallikoodam. Our Christian and Muslim brothers use the term Palli to donate their place of worship in Kerala. The Buddhist Temples or Palli were wantonly smashed by the Hindu Nazis under the leadership of Sankaracharya and Kumarila Bhatta. They exterminated 1, 200 Buddhist tradition and transformed Kerala into a Brahmanical State. Original inhabitants of Kerala like the Ezhavas, Pulayas etc. were crushed under the yoke of cateism. Many Buddhist Temples or Viharas transformed into Hindu temples and the majority of the people were prevented from entering the temples under the pretext of tragedy of caste system. A number of the Buddha statues have been found at places like Ambalapuzha, karungaoalli, Pallickal, Bharanikkavu, Mavelikkara and Neelamperur. They are all in disfigured state.
A large number of Buddhist temples were usurped by the Fanatic Brahmins and were converted into Hindu temples where the poor Hindus and Untouchables, Srisailam of Karnataka and many others as they were originally the Buddhist temples. Anti-Brahmanism is particularly discussed in the context of the Human Enlightenment of the Buddha and Racial Harmony. Lord Buddha’s enlightenment and his Noble Community are a movement that opposes the Vedic Tragedy of Caste system. We pray to Lord Buddha for peace in the world as the great poet Rabindranath Tagore writes, “Buddha, my Lord, my Master, they birthplace, is truly here where cruel is the world of men, for thy mercy is to fill the blank of their utter failure, to help them who have lost their faith and betrayed their trust; to forget themselves in thee an thus forget their malignant were given no entrance. The Buddhist places were projected as the Hindu temples by writing puranas which were concocted myths or pseudo-history. Badrinath, Mathura, Ayodhya, Srinegeri, Buddhagaya, Saranath, Delhi, Nalanda, Gudiallam, Nagarjuna konda, Srisailam and Sabarimala (Lord Ayyappa) in Kerala are some of the striking examples of the Brahmanic usurpation of the Buddhist centres. At Nagarjunakonda, the Adi Sankara (8th century) of Kerala played a demon’s role in destroying the Buddhist statues and monuments. Longhurst who conducted excavations of Nagarjuna Konda has recorded this in his book Memoirs of Archaelogical Survey of India No. 54, The Buddhist Antiquites of Nagarjuna Konda (Delhi, 1938, page 6).
In this way, Hindu scholars including Swami Vivekananda discovered that the temples of Lord Jagannath of Puri, Vithula of Pandharpur, Ayyappa of Keraladay. The Master Lord Buddha to whose inspiration he owed his greatness needs to be invoked today even more fervently than in his day. The cruel stupidity of wicked racial discrimination and caste and color bars, parading as religion, has stained the earth with blood and deep hatred more than mutual violence, outrages humanity at every step. Today, in this hapless land poisoned by fratricidal malice, we yearn for a word from him who had proclaimed love and compassion for all creatures as the path to salvation.”
Gautam Buddha is not the enemy of Hindu society and now Hindu politicians use the Buddha as the Hindus’ trade mark. India emphasizes her mother India abiding Lord Buddha’s teaching and Great Emperor Asoka’s Buddhist heritage. The wheel in the centre of the Indian national flag is the wheel of the Law of the Buddha’s Teaching – the Dharma, and the state emblem of India is an adaptation of the famous Lion Capital was erected by the Great Emperor Asoka at Saranath, where the Buddha –Enlightened One first delivered his teaching of compassion and wisdom to the world.
Buddhism invites anyone to come and see for himself and permits him to accept only those facts which agree with reason, logic and truth. It encourages the seeker of a new way to discard heresies, blind faith, miracles and magic. So scientist Einstein expressed this appreciation of Buddhism, “The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend a personal God and avoid dogmas and theology. Covering both the natural and spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experiences of all things, natural and spiritual, as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description.”
It is well documented in several books that Buddhism was never and is not a part of Hinduism. Because of its uniqueness and noble teachings Buddhism spread almost all over the world, especially in the South and South-East Asian countries where the peoples still regard “South Asia” as the ‘Land of Buddha’ who had unfolded to them a new path, a new direction for a better life. In fact from the 5th century BC to the 8th century AD India had passed through a golden period of history in all spheres of human activities in ethics, art, architecture, sculpture, trade and commerce, interactions with the peoples of different countries.
Can Hindus compare the Buddha with other leader of India? Puri’s Jagannath Temple belongs to Buddhists. When the Indian Government tested nuclear bombs then the government broadcasted “The Buddha laughs.” Please do not loss your temper in showing your spirit of brotherhood in human rights system. In Buddhagaya even now there is a Shiva Linga hole which is worshipped by Hindu priests every day on the original floor stone just in front of the statue of Lord Buddha main hall of the Mahabodhi temple in Bihar. As the Daily Telegraph of Kolkata dated May 9, 2009 reported that Indian Buddhist community wanted freedom in Buddhagaya. You are ignorant relating to freedom of Buddhists in India. Hindu politicians kidnapped Buddhism and they boast it sings the glory of Hindu politicians and scholars who scarcely reveal an awareness of the delicate difficulty in understanding the faith of other men. Hindu scholars write the Allah Upanisad during the reign of Emperor Akbar- the great. Have you read it? Try your best to read again and again in the Discovery of India by Jawaharlal Nehru “How did Brahmanism absorb Buddhism? Have you found Human Rights in the Bhagavad Gita (in the chapter 18) and slokas: 41, 42, 43 and 44. You are a stupid by your ego and delusion. Please find more from “Asoka and the Decline of the Mauryas by Romila Thapar.”
United Nations marks the International Buddha Purnima in Bangkok, Thailand. World Buddhists New year’s Buddha Jayanti of Buddhist Era 2553 in the Asian Heritage Month May – begins with the Buddha’s blessings and tribute of Vaishaki – Buddha Purnima in Asia. Over 2553 years through out the world history, Buddhism was started with boundless tolerance and compassion. The very identity of independent Bangladesh the Charyapada (An Anthology of Buddhist Tantric Songs), emphasize mother Bangladesh abiding Bangla language and its democratic heritage. Buddha Purnima holds most glorious significance for the millions of Buddhists who – comprise half of the world’s total population.
Buddha Purnima commemorates three great events: The Birth, Supreme Enlightenment and the Great Passing Away of Gautama – the Buddha. On this day all Buddhists are expected to reaffirm their faith in the Buddha Dharma and to lead a noble religious life. It is a day for meditation, and radiating loving kindness. In thousands of temples across the world from Tokyo in the East to San Francisco in the west, Buddhists will pay homage to an Indian Prince who renounced the pleasures of a royal household to bring peace and happiness to mankind. The Buddha or the Supremely Enlightened One was born in 623 B.C. on a Boisakhi Full –Moon day. The young Prince was named Siddhartha or “the one who has brought about all good.” The parents, King Sudhodana and Queen Devi Mahamayaa, ruled a Sakya kingdom called Kapilavastu in Nepal.
Finally, on the 35th Anniversary of his (Prince Siddhartha) birth, again on the full moon day of Vesak, and seated under the Bodhi tree in Buddha Gaya the ascetic prince (in Nepal) Siddhartha became the Buddha, the Fully Enlightened One. For the next forty five years the Buddha traveled around Northern India preaching his message of universal loving kindness for all beings and the realization of the nature of existence with the Four Noble Truths (1. sufferings of life 2, causes of sufferings : Desires 3. Removal of sufferings is Nirvana), 4.The Noble Eightfold Path. Scientist Albert Einstein great genius of the 20th century found that among religious only Buddhism emphasizes the importance of the scientific outlook in dealing with the problems of morality and religions. This threat has been leveled against religious conceptions of man and the universe from the time of Galileo, Bruno and Copernicus (17th century) who instrumental in altering erroneous motions of the universe. However, in a world of darkness and distress, the Buddha Dharma still shines across the gulf of twenty five centuries and it is not yet too late for us to follow its guiding beams and emerge triumphant into a brighter and happier future. At no time in history has the message of the Buddha been more relevant than it is now to present day society of the 21st century.
Psychology & Philosophy relating to Right understanding of life, 2. Right Thought, 3.Right Speech, 4.Right Action, 5.Right Livlihood, 6.Right Effort 7.Right Mindfulness & 8.Right Concentration. The Principles of Buddhism concern the Four Noble Truths, the first being that existence of full of sufferings or unsatisfactoriness. The second Boble is that all suffering has a cause. The third noble is that suffering can be made to come an end and the fourth noble Truth that there is a way to end suffering – the Noble Eightfold Path.
According to Buddhism Karma (intentional action) is not predestination imposed on us by any mysterious creator to which we must helplessly submit ourselves. The karma or deed may be mental, oral or physical. Its nature judged by the accompanying volition. The Buddha teaches, “Every living being has karma as its master, its inheritance, its congenital cause, its kinsman, its refuge. It is karma that differentiates all beings into low and high states.
Nirvana, the ideal requires constant spiritual exercise and mind-development. The Buddha imbued the robber Angulimala’s mind with metta (universal love) and the robber was converted into a spiritual wayfarer. In this effect, even in the Nuclear Age Buddhists the world over owe a duty to cooperate and coordinate their efforts in spreading the principles of Buddhism which has love peace, human rights, happiness, and right understanding for all mankind. The Buddha teaches, “A good ruler is delighted in righteousness, a good person is endowed with wisdom, a good friend does not betray his friends and happiness is achieved by not doing evil.”
In the violent world through all dangers and difficulties not a single drop of blood was shed in the name of Buddhism. Human beings are walking with the Dharma light of the Buddha as His followers (monks and Nuns) and pilgrims in the Buddhist Pilgrimages at home (India) and abroad. Spiritual enlightenment develops in our human minds and consciousness systems by practicing universal love with donation, right meditation and insight wisdom. India’s Buddhism invites anyone to come and see for himself and permits him to accept only those facts which agree with reason, logic, and truth.
Buddhism encourages the seeker of a new way to discard heresies, blind faith, miracles and magic. Principles of Buddhism invite criticism and testing. Buddhism is therefore, the most appealing and most compelling factor that leads the modern minds in the East and West. The Buddha then points out that to hold any kind of fixed view about the past or the future is to be trapped in a net like fish. Suffering lies in clinging to views.
Guru Nanak’s birth day is the government holiday in West Bengal government’s calendar. Mr. L. K Advani, former minister of Home Affairs, Government of India, a statement wherein him self had mentioned that Buddhism is nothing but an integral part of Hinduism and Buddha’s teachings were derived from the holy Gita which was, in fact, compiled much later than the advent of Buddhism. Such type of Brahman conspiracy statement has wounded not only the Buddhists of India, but also those of Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Thailand, China, Japan, Korea, Tibet, Mongolia, Burma, (Myanmar), Combodia, Laos, Singapore, Bhutan, Nepal, Mongolia and all over the world where Buddhism is still a living faith. Indian Buddhists have already received from those countries many complaints regarding this statement which has tarnished the image of India there.
The writer is the former librarian, Assistant Editor of the W. F. B. REVIEW, Meditation Advisor and Representative of the World Fellowship of Buddhists to the United Nations
http://mingkok.buddhistdoor.com/en/news/d/2619
More References:
4. Kantowsky, D. 2003. Buddhists in India Today: Descriptions, Pictures and Documents. Delhi: Manohar Publications: 156.
5. Goyal, S.R. 1987. A History of Indian Buddhism. Meerut: 394.
6. Beal, S. 1884. Si-Yu Ki: Buddhist Records of the Western World. London: Trubner & Co., reprint ed., Delhi: Oriental Books Reprint Corporation.
During the rule of the Kushanas and the Guptas (325-497 AD), both Buddhists and adherents of Brahmanism received royal patronage. However, the royal patronage had shifted from Buddhist to Hindu religious institutions from the beginning of the sixth century A.D. Buddhism began to suffer a decline as Brahmanism veered off into Vaishnavism and Saivism. This was followed by some regional kingdoms subsequently developing into the major sites of power.1,2,3,5
Shashanka, the Shaivite Brahmin king of Bengal was manipulated by the Brahmins to become a ferocious oppressor of the Buddhists. The single original source for all subsequent narratives about Shashanka’s ruinous conduct towards Buddhists was documented by Ven. Hsuan Tsang during his visit to India in early part of the seventh century A.D.
But the exact reasons for his hostile attitude towards Buddhism were not known. It was believed that the Brahminical revivalists had goaded the Hindu kings like him to persecute and even slaughter innocent Buddhists.7 It was reported that Shashanka had destroyed the Bodhi tree of Bodh Gaya and ordered the mass destruction of all Buddhist images and monasteries in his kingdom. This biased and sectarian policy of Shashanka had broken the backbone of Buddhism in India.1,2,3,5,6
Shashanka had also murdered the last Buddhist emperor Rajyavardhana, elder brother of Harshavardhana, in 605 AD. He had marched on to Bodh Gaya and destroyed the Bodhi tree under which the Buddha had attained enlightenment. He forcibly removed the Buddha’s image from the Bodhi Vihara near the tree and installed one of Shiva in its place. Shashanka is alleged to have slaughtered all the Buddhist monks in the area around Kushinagar.1,2,3,7
After the rule of Shashanka, the Pala kingdom was established in Bengal. Though the Palas of Bengal had been hospitable to Vaishnavism and Saivism, but nonetheless they were major supporters of Buddhism. However, when Bengal came under the rule of the Senas (1097-1223), Saivism was promulgated and Buddhism was neglected. 1,2,3 Another hostile Shaivite king like Shashanka was Mihirakula who had completely destroyed over 1500 Buddhist shrines. His hostile action was followed by the Shaivite, Toramana who had destroyed the Ghositarama Buddhist monastery at Kausambi.7
Conclusions
The despotism of Shashanka and his hostile behavior towards the Buddhists was carried forward by the revival of Hinduism that led to the further decline of Buddhism in India. Many scholars often relate this Vedic revival as a tyrannical faith that caused massive destruction of the Buddhist monasteries.
But this matter is however, far more complicated than this. A recent study of the Bengal Puranas proved that the Buddhists were mocked and projected as mischievous and malicious in Brahminical narratives as well as subjected to immense rhetorical violence. This rhetorical violence should be interpreted as both physical and mental violence perpetrated upon the Buddhists. The extermination of Buddhism in India was hastened by the large-scale destruction of Buddhist shrines by the Brahmins. The Maha Bodhi Vihara at Bodh Gaya was forcibly converted into a Shaivite temple.
From Times of Bombay
Jainism was in full swing in India prior to Hinduism. All royal people were influenced by Jain monks and their speech on ruthless Hindu Kshatriya or warrior dharma/religion of protection & offense. They highlighted the path of peace and salvation that could only be attained by Jainism.
The Brahmins performed a great Puja and earnestly prayed Lord Shiva to stop the progress of Jainism. According to aggressive Hindu beliefs Adi Shankaracharya was born. Regarding Shankaracharya it is said in at least one case he was not able to answer questions placed by a married woman regarding sex and he was not aware of sexual behaviors because being a Brahmin he was performing vrat of Brahmcharya where a person is supposed to fight back any sexual thoughts arising in mind. Hence his knowledge regarding sex was either zero or in infancy or very less as compared to sex indulged people of his age.
The antics of Adi Shankara in the 8th century assuming he was born in 788 and died in 820 CE are well known and part of history. Sankara postulated the Vedas as authority; and hence was ranked as a Sanatani. Later on, the priestly class appropriated this and Max Muller called it Hinduism. Thus Hinduism dates back to to the 8th century.
He was the arch foe of Buddhism and the principal architect of its downfall in India (Pande 1994: p. 255). Adi Shankara, along with Madhva and Ramanuja, was instrumental in the revival of Hinduism through aggressive and violent means.
The historians like Vincent Smith suggested that it was due to Adi Sankaracharya there was decline of Buddhism in India. Others argue that it was due to the Muslim invasion (of Bakhtyar) that Nalanda was routed and the library there was burned and thousands of Buddha viharas were destroyed subsequently. Much of this is described in The Book of Thoth(Leaves of Wisdom).
Shashanka was the Shaivite Brahmin king of Bengal. He was manipulated by the Brahmins to become a ferocious oppressor of the Buddhists. He had destroyed the Bodhi tree of Bodh Gaya and ordered the mass destruction of all Buddhist images and monasteries in his kingdom.
1. Lal, V. 2004. Buddhism’s Disappearance from India [serial online]. [cited 2009 August 26]; [2 screens]. Available from: URL:
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/southasia/Religions/paths/BuddhismDisappear.doc.
2. Jaini, P.S., Narain A.K., ed., 1980. The Disappearance of Buddhism and the Survival of Jainism: A Study in Contrast. Studies in History of Buddhism. Delhi: B.R. Publishing Company:181-91.
3. Ahir, D.C. 2005. Buddhism Declined in India: How and Why? Delhi: B.R. Publishing.
Prof. P. Sankaranarayanan in his article The life and work of Sri Sankara published in the web page of Kanchi Mutt writes: “Buddhism, the rebel child of the Vedic religion and philosophy, denied God and the soul, laid the axe at the very roots of Vedic thought and posed a great danger to its very survival. This onslaught was stemmed occasionally, compelling Buddhism to seek refuge in other lands. While the credit for this should go primarily to the Mimamsaka, Kumarila Bhatta, it was because of Sri Sankara’s dialectical skill and irrefutable arguments that it ceased to have sway over the minds of the inheritors of Vedic religion.”
The hold of Buddhism on the masses of India could be seen from the writing of celebrated Chinese pilgrim Faxian (334-420 AD). He made a journey that marked the high point of the first wave of Chinese pilgrims in India. He left China in 399 AD and returned in 414 AD. We see that even two centuries later the religion was hardly weakened as may be gleaned from the detailed historic accounts of the reign of Harshavardhana (606-647AD). The sources for such accounts are: coins and inscriptions, the reports of pilgrims, official Chinese documents and writings by well-known personalities like the Chinese traveler Huien Tsang.
Though a Hindu, King Harshavardhana maintained an impartial tolerance towards the other religions, especially Buddhism that at that time was the religion of the common masses. To honor Huien Tsang, a devout student Buddhist theology and admirer of the holy land of Buddha, Harshavardhana organized the Kanauj Assembly in 643 AD. This was a grand assembly of many rajas including King Bhaskaravarman of Kamrupa (Assam) and the Vallabhi king, Dhuvabhatti. The Assembly at Kanauj included a large congregation of Brahmans, Buddhist monks ands Jains, who were involved in religious discourses. We should not forget to mention that Huien Tsang, along with thousands of students from many countries, studied in the well-known Buddhist university of Nalanda. If so, how could the religion that Sankara opposed and helped drive out of India flourish
1) The Divyavadana (ed. Vaidya, 282). The most important of the murderous Hindu bigots who carried out their systematic campaign of violence against the peaceful followers of Lord Buddha was Pushyamitra (184-48 B.C.), the founder of the Shunga dynasty. For details and refrences do see BELOW
2) Goyal [430] “The culprit in this case was Toramana, a member of the same dynasty as the Shaivite Mihirakula who did “immense damage to the Buddhist shrines in Gandhara, Punjab and Kashmir.” For details and refrences do see BELOW
3) Mihirakula is said to have razed 1600 viharas, stupas and monasteries, and “put to death 900 Kotis, or lay adherents of Buddhism” [Joshi, 404].
4) The Aryamanjushrimulakalpa tells us that Pushyamitra “destroyed monasteries with relics and killed monks of good conduct.” [Jayaswal, 18-19]
5) As Goyal [394] notes, “According to many scholars hostility of the Brahmanas was one of the major causes of the decline of Buddhism in India.”
6) The celebrated Tibetan historian Lama Taranatha mentions the march of Pushyamitra from Madhyadesha to Jalandhara. In the course of his campaigns, the book states, Pushyamitra burned down numerous Buddhist monasteries and killed a number of learned monks The archaeological evidence for the ravages wrought by Pushyamitra and other Hindu fanatic rulers on famous Buddhist shrines is abundant.
7) The Brhannaradiya-purana lays it down as a principal sin for a Brahmana to enter the house of a Buddhist even in times of great peril.
8) The drama Mrchchhakatika shows that in Ujjain the Buddhist monks were despised and their sight was considered inauspicious.
9) The Vishnupurana (XVIII 13-18) also regards the Buddha as Mayamoha who appeared in the world to delude the demons. Kumarila is said to have instigated King Sudhanvan of Ujjain to exterminate the Buddhists.
10) The Kerala-utpatti describes how he exterminated the Buddhists from Kerala.”
11) The Chinese traveller Yuan Chwang (Huen Tsang), who visited India in the seventh century records the oppressions of Shashanka, the king of Gauda, who was a devotee of Shiva.
12) Yuan Chwang’s account reads, “In recent times Shashanka, the enemy and oppressor of Buddhism, cut down the Bodhi tree, destroyed its roots down to the water and burned what remained.” [Watters II p.115] He also says that Shashanka tried “to have the image (of Lord Buddha at Bodhgaya) removed and replaced by one of Shiva”.
13) Another independent account of Shashanka’s oppressions is found in the Aryamanjushrimulakalpa, which refers to Shashanka destroying “the beautiful image of Buddha” [Jayaswal, 49-50].
14) Another prominent seventh century murderer of Buddhists was Sudhanvan of Ujjain, already mentioned in the quotation from Goyal above as having been supposedly instigated by Kumarila Bhatt.
15) Madhava Acharya, in his “Sankara-digvijayam” of the fourteenth century A.D., records that Suddhanvan “issued orders to put to death all the Buddhists from Ramesvaram to the Himalayas”.
16) Even after the Islamic invasions of India, Hindu bigotry and hatred for Buddhists was not subdued. According to Sharmasvamin, a Tibetan pilgrim who visited Bihar three decades after the invasion of Bakhtiaruddin Khilji in the 12th century, the biggest library at Nalanda was destroyed by Hindu mendicants who took advantage of the chaos produced by the invasion.
He says that “they (Hindus) performed a Yajna, a fire sacrifice, and threw living embers and ashes from the sacrifice into the Buddhist temples. This produced a great conflagration which consumed Ratnabodhi, the
nine-storeyed library of the Nalanda University“. [Prakash, 213]. Numerous destroyed Buddhist shrines were converted into Hindu temples after their destruction.
17) Ahir [58] notes that “The Seat of Buddha’s Enlightenment was in the possession of a Hindu Mahant till 1952.
18) Similarly, at Kushinara, where the Buddha had entered into Mahaparinirvana, the cremation stupa had been converted into a Hindu temple, and on top of it stood the temple of Rambhar Bhavani when
Cunningham discovered the site in 1860-61.
19) Among the shrines which still continue to be dedicated to Hindu gods mention may be made of the Caityas of Chezrala and Ter in Andhra Pradesh which are now Shiva and Vishnu temples respectively.
20) The temple of Madhava at Sal Kusa, opposite Gauhati in Asam, was once a sacred shrine of the Buddhists. …
21) And the famous Jagannatha temple at Puri in Orissa was also originally a Buddhist shrine.
22) Similarly, the Vishnupada temple at Gaya was also once a Buddhist shrine.” As Rajendralal Mitra notes in his famous work of 1878 [quoted in Ahir, 59] the feet of Buddha at Gaya were rechristened the feet of Vishnu and held as the most sacred object of worship in the new Vishnupada temple.
23) According to the records of Hieun Tsang and Kalhana’s Rajaatarangini, Asoka the great repented, converted to Buddhism (273-232 BC) and did a lot for Buddhism. Asoka renounced violence, and renounced his religion after the Kalinga war, and he became a Buddhist. During Asoka, Buddhism had become the state religion. The Brahmans did not like him, and many historians think the Brahaman opposition to Asoka led to the destruction of the Muyarian dynasty.
24) In Glimpses of World History Jawahrlal Nehru says the following about the Kushans (emphasis is mine and not Nehru’s): ” This Kushan Empire is interesting in many ways. IT WAS A BUDDHIST EMPIRE, and one of its famous rulers-the Emperor Kanishka-was ardently devoted to the dharma…the Kushans were Mongolians or closely allied to them. From the Kushan capital there must have been a continuous coming and going to the Mongolian homelands, and Buddhist learning and Buddhist culture must have gone to China and Mongolia…the Kushan Empire sat like a colossus astride the back of Asia, in between the Greaco-Roman world in the south. It was a halfway house both between India, and Rome, and India and China. The Kushan period corresponded with the last days of the Roman Republic when Julius Ceaser was alive, and first 200 years of the Roman Empire
25) THE HINDU KASHATRIYA HINDU AND BUDDHIST WARS
Jawarhalal Nehru in his book Glimpses of World History says (Page 103 and 104) “Chandragupta proclaimed his holy war “against all foreign rulers in India. The Kashatriyas and the Aryan aristocracy, deprived of their power and positions by the aliens (Kushans), were at the back of this war. After a dozen or so years of fighting, Chandragupta managed to gain control over Northern India including what is now called UP. He then crowned himself king of kings. Thus began the Gupta dynasty. It was a period of somewhat aggressive Hinduism and nationalism. The foreign rulers-the Turkis and Parathions and other Non-Aryans were rooted our and forcibly removed. We thus find racial antagonism at work. The Indo-Aryan aristocrat was proud of his race and looked down upon these barbarians and malachas. Indo-Aryan States and rulers were conquered by the Guptas were dealt with leniently, But there was not leniency for non-Aryans.
26) Jawarhalal Nehru in his book Glimpses of World History says “Chandragupta’s son Samadugupta was an even more aggressive fighter than his father….the Kushans were pushed back across the Indus…Samadugupta’s son, Chandragupta II was also a warrior king, and he conquered Kathiwad and Gujrat, which had been under the rule of a Saka or Turki dynasty for a long time. He took the name Vikramaditya…..The Gupta period was a period of Hindu imperialism in India. There was a great revival of old Aryan culture and Sanskrit learning. The Hellenistic, or Greek and Mongolian elements in Indian life and culture which had been brought by the Greeks, Kushans and others were not encouraged, and were in fact deliberately superseded by laying stress on the Indo-Aryan traditions. Sanskrit was the official court language. But EVEN IN THOSE DAYS SANSKRIT WAS NOT THE COMMON LANGUAGE OF THE PEOPLE.
The spoken language was a form of Prakrit….Kalidasa belonged to this period ……………. Samadragupta changed the capital of his empire from Pataliputra (Peshawar) to Ayodhia. Perhaps he felt that Ayodhiya
offered a more suitable outlook–with its story of Ramachandra immortalized in Valmikis epic.
27) HINDU BUDDHIST CONFLICT
Jawarhalal Nehru in his book Glimpses of World History says “The Gupta revival of Aryanism and Hinduism was naturally not very favorably inclined towards Buddhism. This was partly because this movement was aristocratic, with the Kashatriya chiefs backing it, and Buddhism had more democracy in it; partly because the Mahayana form of Buddhism was closely associated with the Kushans and other alien rulers of northern India….but Buddhism declined in India…Chandragupta the first was a contemporary of Constantine the great, the Roman Emperor who founded Constantinople. “
The Buddha was a true revolutionary—and his crusade against Brahminical supremacy won him his most ardent followers from among the oppressed castes. The Buddha challenged the divinity of the Vedas, the bedrock of Brahminism. He held that all men are equal and that the caste system or varnashramadharma, to which the Vedas and Other Brah’minical’ books had given religious sanction, was completely false. Thus, in the Anguttara Nikaya, the Buddha is said to have exhorted the Bhikkus, saying,
“Just, O brethren, as the great rivers, when they have emptied themselves into the Great Ocean, lose their different names and are known as the Great Ocean Just so, O brethren, do the four varnas—Kshatriya, Brahmin, Vaishya and Sudra—when they begin to follow the doctrine and discipline propounded by the Tathagata [i.e. the Buddha], renounce the different names of caste and rank and become the members of one and the same society.”
The Buddha’s fight against Brahminism won him many enemies from among the Brahmins. They were not as greatly opposed to his philosophical teachings as they were to his message of universal brotherhood and equality for it directly challenged their hegemony and the scriptures that they had invented to legitimize this. To combat Buddhism and revive the tottering Brahminical hegemony, Brahminical revivalists resorted to a three-pronged strategy.
Firstly, they launched a campaign of hatred and persecution against the Buddhists. Then, they appropriated many of the finer aspects of Buddhism into their own system so as to win over the “lower” caste Buddhist masses, but made sure that this selective appropriation did not in any way undermine Brahminical hegemony. The final stage in this project to wipeout Buddhism was to propound and propagate the myth that the Buddha was merely another ‘incarnation’ (avatar) of the Hindu god Vishnu. Buddha was turned into just another of the countless deities of the Brahminical pantheon. The Buddhists were finally absorbed into the caste system, mainly as Shudras and ‘Untouchables’, and with that the Buddhist presence was completely obliterated from the land of its birth. Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar writes in his book, The Untouchables, that the ancestors of today’s Dalits were Buddhists who were reduced to the lowly status of ‘untouchables’ for not having accepted the supremacy of the Brahmins. They were kept apart from other people and were forced to live in ghettos of their own. Being treated worse that beasts of burden and forbidden to receive any education, these people gradually lost touch with Buddhism, but yet never fully reconciled themselves to the Brahminical order. Many of them later converted to Islam, Sikhism and Christianity in a quest for liberation from the Brahminical religion.
To lend legitimacy to their campaign against Buddhism, Brahminical texts included fierce strictures against Buddhists. Manu, in his Manusmriti, laid down that, “If a person touches a Buddhist […] he shall purify himself by having a bath.” Aparaka ordained the same in his Smriti. Vradha Harit declared entry into a Buddhist temple a sin, which could only be expiated for by taking a ritual bath. Even dramas and other books for lay people written by Brahmins contained venomous propaganda against the Buddhists. In the classic work, Mricchakatika, (Act VII), the hero Charudatta, on seeing a Buddhist monk pass by, exclaims to his friend Maitriya— “Ah! Here is an inauspicious sight, a Buddhist monk coming towards us.”
The Brahmin Chanakya, author of Arthashastra, declared that, “When a person entertains in a dinner dedicated to gods and ancestors those who are Sakyas (Buddhists), Ajivikas, Shudras and exiled persons, a fine of one hundred panas shall be imposed on him.” Shankaracharaya, the leader of the Brahminical revival, struck terror into the hearts of the Buddhists with his diatribes against their religion.
The simplicity of the Buddha’s message, its stress on equality and its crusade against the bloody and costly sacrifices and ritualism of Brahminism had attracted the oppressed casts in large numbers. The Brahminical revivalists understood the need to appropriate some of these finer aspects of Buddhism and discarded some of the worst of their own practices so as to be able to win over the masses back to the Brahminical fold. Hence began the process of the assimilation of Buddhism by Brahminism.
The Brahimns, who were once voracious beef-eaters, turned vegetarian, imitating the Buddhists in this regard. Popular devotion to the Buddha was sought to be replaced by devotion to Hindu gods such as Rama and Krishna. The existing version of the Mahabharata was written in the period in which the decline of Buddhism had already begun, and it was specially meant for the Shudras, most of whom were Buddhists, to attract them away from Buddhism. Brahminism, however, still prevented the Shudras from having access to the Vedas, and the Mahabharata was possibly written to placate the Buddhist Shudras and to compensate them for this discrimination.
The Mahabharata incorporated some of the humanistic elements of Buddhism to win over the Shudras, but, overall, played its role of bolstering the Brahminical hegemony rather well. Thus, Krishna, in the Gita, is made to say that a person ought not to violate the “divinely ordained” law of caste. Eklavya is made to slice off his thumb by Drona, who is finds it a gross violation of dharma that a mere tribal boy should excel the Kshatriya Arjun in archery.
The various writer of the puranas, too, carried on this systematic campaign of hatred, slander and calumny against the Buddhists. The Brahannardiya Purana made it a principal sin for Brahmins to enter the house of a Buddhist even in times of great peril. The Vishnu Purana dubs the Buddha as Maha Moha or ‘the great seducer’. It further cautions against the “sin of conversing with Buddhists” and lays down that “those who merely talk to Buddhist ascetics shall be sent to hell.”
In the Gaya Mahatmaya, the concluding section of the Vayu Purana, the town of Gaya is identified as Gaya Asura, a demon who had attained such holiness that all those who saw him or touched him went straight to heaven. Clearly, this ‘demon’ was none other the Buddha who preached a simple way for all, including the oppressed castes, to attain salvation. The Vayu Purana story goes on to add that Yama, the king of hell, grew jealous at this, possibly because less people were now entering his domains. He appealed to the gods to limit the powers of Asura Gaya. This the gods, led by Vishnu, were able to do by placing a massive stone on the “demon’s” head. This monstrous legend signified the ultimate capture of Budhdhism’s most holy centre by its most inveterate foes.
Kushinagar, also known as Harramba, was one of the most important Buddhist centres as the Buddha breathed his last there. The Brahmins, envious of the prosperity of this pilgrim town and in order to discourage people from going there, invented the absurd theory that one who dies in Harramba goes to hell, or is reborn as an ass, while he who dies in Kashi, the citadel of Brahminism, goes straight to heaven. So pervasive was the belief in this bizarre theory that when the Sufi saint Kabir died in 1518 AD at Maghar, not far from Kushinagar, some of his Hindu followers refused to erect any memorial in his honor there and instead set up one at Kashi. Kabir’s Muslim followers were less superstitious. They set up a tomb for him at Maghar itself.
In addition to vilifying the fair name of the Buddha, the Brahminical revivalists goaded Hindu kings to persecute and even slaughter innocent Buddhists. Sasanka, the Shaivite Brahmin king of Bengal, murdered the last Buddhist emperor Rajyavardhana, elder brother of Harshavardhana, in 605 AD and then marched on to Bodh Gaya where he destroyed the Bodhi tree under which the Buddha had attained enlightenment. He forcibly removed the Buddha’s image from the Bodh Vihara near the tree and installed one of Shiva in its place.
Finally, Sasanka is said to have slaughtered all the Buddhist monks in the area around Kushinagar. Another such Hindu king was, Mihirakula, a Shaivite, who is said to have completely destroyed over 1500 Buddhist shrines. The Shaivite Toramana is said to have destroyed the Ghositarama Buddhist monastery at Kausambi.
The extermination of Buddhism in India was hastened by the large-scale destruction and appropriation of Buddhist shrines by the Brahmins. The Mahabodhi Vihara at Bodh Gaya was forcibly converted into a Shaivite temple, and the controversy lingers on till this day. The cremation stupa of the Buddha at Kushinagar was changed into a Hindu temple dedicated to the obscure deity with the name of Ramhar Bhavani. Adi Shankara is said to have established his Sringeri Mutth on the site of a Buddhist monastery which he took over. Many Hindu shrines in Ayodhya are said to have once been Buddhist temples, as is the case with other famous Brahminical temples such as those at Sabarimala, Tirupati, Badrinath and Puri.
References:
4. Yu-Ki Or, Buddhist Records of the Western Countries written by Hsien-tsang (circa 650 AD). Taken from Translations by Thomas Watters (1904) and Samuel Beal (1884) http://www.iras.ucalgary.ca/~volk/sylvia/Hsien-Tsang.htm)
5. Messengers of light: Chinese Buddhist pilgrims in India by Paul Magnin Unesco Courier, Vol. 48 No.5 May.1995 Pp.24-27.
6. Discovery of India by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru
http://rupeenews.com/2009/03/24/the-manuwadi-hindus-destroyed-buddhism-in-its-own-land-of-birth/
Recently we read in the Mississauga’s Weekly Voice dated December 5, 2009 relating to the Crowning Glory entitled “Politician Donates $10 million Crown for Tirupati Deity.” It is also most remarkable that medical surgeon Dr. K. Jamanadas writes a book entitled “Tirupate Balaji was a Buddhist Shrine” and this book has potential credibility to accept that Buddha statues become God Vishnu in Hinduism. Hindu rulers made the shiva linga in the Buddhagaya temple and declared that Buddhagaya Mahabodhi Temple belongs to Hindus. Today Indian Buddhists have no democratic and human rights in the Puri Jagannatha Buddhist temple and Mahabodhi temple of Buddhagaya, Bihar. Hindu fanatic are taking over Mosque, Buddhist temples and churches in India. There are no human rights in Hindu society. Non-violence is the supreme religion in Buddhist philosophy. Violence or tragedy of caste system is the Vedic way of life in Hinduism. Hindu fanatics burnt Buddhist monks and Buddhists alive.
The ruthless manner in which all the buildings at Nagarjuna Konda were destroyed is simply appalling and cannot represent the work of treasure seekers because many of the pillars, statues and sculptures have been wantonly smashed to pieces. Local tradition relates that the Brahmin teacher Sankaracharya came to Nagarjuna Konda with a host of followers and destroyed the Buddhist monuments. The cultivated lands on which the ruined buildings stand was a religious grant made to Sankaracharya. In Kerala, Sankaracharya and his Hindu fanatic close associate Kumarila Bhatta, an avowed enemy of Buddhism, organized a religious crusade against the Buddhists. We get a vivid description of the pleasure of Sankaracharaya on seeing the people of non-Brahmanic faith being burnt to death from the book Sankara Digvijaya (World Victory).
According to the Charyapada (First Bangla Book)and Sankara’s Digvijaya book havoc played in Kerala, Bangladesh, West Bengal, Bihar and all South Asia. Kumarila Bhatta instigated king Suddvannan of Ujjaini to exterminate the Buddhists. From the Mirchakatika of Sudraka we learnt that King’s brother-in-law in Ujjain persecuted the Buddhist monks and nuns. They were treated as bullocks by passing a string through their noses and yoking them to carts. The keralopathi documents refer to the extermination of Buddhism from Kerala by Kumarila Bhatta.
In 1906 Pandit Haraprasad Sastri discovered the first Bangla book the “Charyapada” from the Royal Library of Nepal and he declared that Bangla language was started from the Buddhist thoughts. Dr. Mohammad Shahidullaha and Dr. Suniti Kumar Chatterjee discovered that Brahmanism was started to destroy Buddhism. Hindu politics pays respect to the Buddha as the “Vishnu’s 9th Avatar.” Hindu rulers did not convert to Buddhism but they convert the Buddha as the Hindu god and the sinister conspiracy was started to destroy Buddhists in India. Hindu and Brahmin politics could not tolerate at all as the separate Buddhist existence in India.
There are hundred of places in Keral, Bangladesh, Bihar, West Bengla and Uttar Pradesh having the names like Buddha vihar, (Dharma Thakur), palli (or Buddha Vihar in Kerala) either affixed or suffixed with them. In Kerala karungapalli, Karthikapalli, Pallickal, Pallipuram are some of the examples of these places. The term palli means a Budhist Vihara in Kerala. It should be noted that Kerala had 1, 200 years Buddhist tradition. Till recently schools in Kerala had been called as Ezhuthupalli or Pallikoodam. Our Christian and Muslim brothers use the term Palli to donate their place of worship in Kerala. The Buddhist Temples or Palli were wantonly smashed by the Hindu Nazis under the leadership of Sankaracharya and Kumarila Bhatta. They exterminated 1, 200 Buddhist tradition and transformed Kerala into a Brahmanical State. Original inhabitants of Kerala like the Ezhavas, Pulayas etc. were crushed under the yoke of cateism. Many Buddhist Temples or Viharas transformed into Hindu temples and the majority of the people were prevented from entering the temples under the pretext of tragedy of caste system. A number of the Buddha statues have been found at places like Ambalapuzha, karungaoalli, Pallickal, Bharanikkavu, Mavelikkara and Neelamperur. They are all in disfigured state.
A large number of Buddhist temples were usurped by the Fanatic Brahmins and were converted into Hindu temples where the poor Hindus and Untouchables, Srisailam of Karnataka and many others as they were originally the Buddhist temples. Anti-Brahmanism is particularly discussed in the context of the Human Enlightenment of the Buddha and Racial Harmony. Lord Buddha’s enlightenment and his Noble Community are a movement that opposes the Vedic Tragedy of Caste system. We pray to Lord Buddha for peace in the world as the great poet Rabindranath Tagore writes, “Buddha, my Lord, my Master, they birthplace, is truly here where cruel is the world of men, for thy mercy is to fill the blank of their utter failure, to help them who have lost their faith and betrayed their trust; to forget themselves in thee an thus forget their malignant were given no entrance. The Buddhist places were projected as the Hindu temples by writing puranas which were concocted myths or pseudo-history. Badrinath, Mathura, Ayodhya, Srinegeri, Buddhagaya, Saranath, Delhi, Nalanda, Gudiallam, Nagarjuna konda, Srisailam and Sabarimala (Lord Ayyappa) in Kerala are some of the striking examples of the Brahmanic usurpation of the Buddhist centres. At Nagarjunakonda, the Adi Sankara (8th century) of Kerala played a demon’s role in destroying the Buddhist statues and monuments. Longhurst who conducted excavations of Nagarjuna Konda has recorded this in his book Memoirs of Archaelogical Survey of India No. 54, The Buddhist Antiquites of Nagarjuna Konda (Delhi, 1938, page 6).
In this way, Hindu scholars including Swami Vivekananda discovered that the temples of Lord Jagannath of Puri, Vithula of Pandharpur, Ayyappa of Keraladay. The Master Lord Buddha to whose inspiration he owed his greatness needs to be invoked today even more fervently than in his day. The cruel stupidity of wicked racial discrimination and caste and color bars, parading as religion, has stained the earth with blood and deep hatred more than mutual violence, outrages humanity at every step. Today, in this hapless land poisoned by fratricidal malice, we yearn for a word from him who had proclaimed love and compassion for all creatures as the path to salvation.”
Gautam Buddha is not the enemy of Hindu society and now Hindu politicians use the Buddha as the Hindus’ trade mark. India emphasizes her mother India abiding Lord Buddha’s teaching and Great Emperor Asoka’s Buddhist heritage. The wheel in the centre of the Indian national flag is the wheel of the Law of the Buddha’s Teaching – the Dharma, and the state emblem of India is an adaptation of the famous Lion Capital was erected by the Great Emperor Asoka at Saranath, where the Buddha –Enlightened One first delivered his teaching of compassion and wisdom to the world.
Buddhism invites anyone to come and see for himself and permits him to accept only those facts which agree with reason, logic and truth. It encourages the seeker of a new way to discard heresies, blind faith, miracles and magic. So scientist Einstein expressed this appreciation of Buddhism, “The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend a personal God and avoid dogmas and theology. Covering both the natural and spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experiences of all things, natural and spiritual, as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description.”
It is well documented in several books that Buddhism was never and is not a part of Hinduism. Because of its uniqueness and noble teachings Buddhism spread almost all over the world, especially in the South and South-East Asian countries where the peoples still regard “South Asia” as the ‘Land of Buddha’ who had unfolded to them a new path, a new direction for a better life. In fact from the 5th century BC to the 8th century AD India had passed through a golden period of history in all spheres of human activities in ethics, art, architecture, sculpture, trade and commerce, interactions with the peoples of different countries.
Can Hindus compare the Buddha with other leader of India? Puri’s Jagannath Temple belongs to Buddhists. When the Indian Government tested nuclear bombs then the government broadcasted “The Buddha laughs.” Please do not loss your temper in showing your spirit of brotherhood in human rights system. In Buddhagaya even now there is a Shiva Linga hole which is worshipped by Hindu priests every day on the original floor stone just in front of the statue of Lord Buddha main hall of the Mahabodhi temple in Bihar. As the Daily Telegraph of Kolkata dated May 9, 2009 reported that Indian Buddhist community wanted freedom in Buddhagaya. You are ignorant relating to freedom of Buddhists in India. Hindu politicians kidnapped Buddhism and they boast it sings the glory of Hindu politicians and scholars who scarcely reveal an awareness of the delicate difficulty in understanding the faith of other men. Hindu scholars write the Allah Upanisad during the reign of Emperor Akbar- the great. Have you read it? Try your best to read again and again in the Discovery of India by Jawaharlal Nehru “How did Brahmanism absorb Buddhism? Have you found Human Rights in the Bhagavad Gita (in the chapter 18) and slokas: 41, 42, 43 and 44. You are a stupid by your ego and delusion. Please find more from “Asoka and the Decline of the Mauryas by Romila Thapar.”
United Nations marks the International Buddha Purnima in Bangkok, Thailand. World Buddhists New year’s Buddha Jayanti of Buddhist Era 2553 in the Asian Heritage Month May – begins with the Buddha’s blessings and tribute of Vaishaki – Buddha Purnima in Asia. Over 2553 years through out the world history, Buddhism was started with boundless tolerance and compassion. The very identity of independent Bangladesh the Charyapada (An Anthology of Buddhist Tantric Songs), emphasize mother Bangladesh abiding Bangla language and its democratic heritage. Buddha Purnima holds most glorious significance for the millions of Buddhists who – comprise half of the world’s total population.
Buddha Purnima commemorates three great events: The Birth, Supreme Enlightenment and the Great Passing Away of Gautama – the Buddha. On this day all Buddhists are expected to reaffirm their faith in the Buddha Dharma and to lead a noble religious life. It is a day for meditation, and radiating loving kindness. In thousands of temples across the world from Tokyo in the East to San Francisco in the west, Buddhists will pay homage to an Indian Prince who renounced the pleasures of a royal household to bring peace and happiness to mankind. The Buddha or the Supremely Enlightened One was born in 623 B.C. on a Boisakhi Full –Moon day. The young Prince was named Siddhartha or “the one who has brought about all good.” The parents, King Sudhodana and Queen Devi Mahamayaa, ruled a Sakya kingdom called Kapilavastu in Nepal.
Finally, on the 35th Anniversary of his (Prince Siddhartha) birth, again on the full moon day of Vesak, and seated under the Bodhi tree in Buddha Gaya the ascetic prince (in Nepal) Siddhartha became the Buddha, the Fully Enlightened One. For the next forty five years the Buddha traveled around Northern India preaching his message of universal loving kindness for all beings and the realization of the nature of existence with the Four Noble Truths (1. sufferings of life 2, causes of sufferings : Desires 3. Removal of sufferings is Nirvana), 4.The Noble Eightfold Path. Scientist Albert Einstein great genius of the 20th century found that among religious only Buddhism emphasizes the importance of the scientific outlook in dealing with the problems of morality and religions. This threat has been leveled against religious conceptions of man and the universe from the time of Galileo, Bruno and Copernicus (17th century) who instrumental in altering erroneous motions of the universe. However, in a world of darkness and distress, the Buddha Dharma still shines across the gulf of twenty five centuries and it is not yet too late for us to follow its guiding beams and emerge triumphant into a brighter and happier future. At no time in history has the message of the Buddha been more relevant than it is now to present day society of the 21st century.
Psychology & Philosophy relating to Right understanding of life, 2. Right Thought, 3.Right Speech, 4.Right Action, 5.Right Livlihood, 6.Right Effort 7.Right Mindfulness & 8.Right Concentration. The Principles of Buddhism concern the Four Noble Truths, the first being that existence of full of sufferings or unsatisfactoriness. The second Boble is that all suffering has a cause. The third noble is that suffering can be made to come an end and the fourth noble Truth that there is a way to end suffering – the Noble Eightfold Path.
According to Buddhism Karma (intentional action) is not predestination imposed on us by any mysterious creator to which we must helplessly submit ourselves. The karma or deed may be mental, oral or physical. Its nature judged by the accompanying volition. The Buddha teaches, “Every living being has karma as its master, its inheritance, its congenital cause, its kinsman, its refuge. It is karma that differentiates all beings into low and high states.
Nirvana, the ideal requires constant spiritual exercise and mind-development. The Buddha imbued the robber Angulimala’s mind with metta (universal love) and the robber was converted into a spiritual wayfarer. In this effect, even in the Nuclear Age Buddhists the world over owe a duty to cooperate and coordinate their efforts in spreading the principles of Buddhism which has love peace, human rights, happiness, and right understanding for all mankind. The Buddha teaches, “A good ruler is delighted in righteousness, a good person is endowed with wisdom, a good friend does not betray his friends and happiness is achieved by not doing evil.”
In the violent world through all dangers and difficulties not a single drop of blood was shed in the name of Buddhism. Human beings are walking with the Dharma light of the Buddha as His followers (monks and Nuns) and pilgrims in the Buddhist Pilgrimages at home (India) and abroad. Spiritual enlightenment develops in our human minds and consciousness systems by practicing universal love with donation, right meditation and insight wisdom. India’s Buddhism invites anyone to come and see for himself and permits him to accept only those facts which agree with reason, logic, and truth.
Buddhism encourages the seeker of a new way to discard heresies, blind faith, miracles and magic. Principles of Buddhism invite criticism and testing. Buddhism is therefore, the most appealing and most compelling factor that leads the modern minds in the East and West. The Buddha then points out that to hold any kind of fixed view about the past or the future is to be trapped in a net like fish. Suffering lies in clinging to views.
Guru Nanak’s birth day is the government holiday in West Bengal government’s calendar. Mr. L. K Advani, former minister of Home Affairs, Government of India, a statement wherein him self had mentioned that Buddhism is nothing but an integral part of Hinduism and Buddha’s teachings were derived from the holy Gita which was, in fact, compiled much later than the advent of Buddhism. Such type of Brahman conspiracy statement has wounded not only the Buddhists of India, but also those of Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Thailand, China, Japan, Korea, Tibet, Mongolia, Burma, (Myanmar), Combodia, Laos, Singapore, Bhutan, Nepal, Mongolia and all over the world where Buddhism is still a living faith. Indian Buddhists have already received from those countries many complaints regarding this statement which has tarnished the image of India there.
The writer is the former librarian, Assistant Editor of the W. F. B. REVIEW, Meditation Advisor and Representative of the World Fellowship of Buddhists to the United Nations
http://mingkok.buddhistdoor.com/en/news/d/2619
More References:
4. Kantowsky, D. 2003. Buddhists in India Today: Descriptions, Pictures and Documents. Delhi: Manohar Publications: 156.
5. Goyal, S.R. 1987. A History of Indian Buddhism. Meerut: 394.
6. Beal, S. 1884. Si-Yu Ki: Buddhist Records of the Western World. London: Trubner & Co., reprint ed., Delhi: Oriental Books Reprint Corporation.
During the rule of the Kushanas and the Guptas (325-497 AD), both Buddhists and adherents of Brahmanism received royal patronage. However, the royal patronage had shifted from Buddhist to Hindu religious institutions from the beginning of the sixth century A.D. Buddhism began to suffer a decline as Brahmanism veered off into Vaishnavism and Saivism. This was followed by some regional kingdoms subsequently developing into the major sites of power.1,2,3,5
Shashanka, the Shaivite Brahmin king of Bengal was manipulated by the Brahmins to become a ferocious oppressor of the Buddhists. The single original source for all subsequent narratives about Shashanka’s ruinous conduct towards Buddhists was documented by Ven. Hsuan Tsang during his visit to India in early part of the seventh century A.D.
But the exact reasons for his hostile attitude towards Buddhism were not known. It was believed that the Brahminical revivalists had goaded the Hindu kings like him to persecute and even slaughter innocent Buddhists.7 It was reported that Shashanka had destroyed the Bodhi tree of Bodh Gaya and ordered the mass destruction of all Buddhist images and monasteries in his kingdom. This biased and sectarian policy of Shashanka had broken the backbone of Buddhism in India.1,2,3,5,6
Shashanka had also murdered the last Buddhist emperor Rajyavardhana, elder brother of Harshavardhana, in 605 AD. He had marched on to Bodh Gaya and destroyed the Bodhi tree under which the Buddha had attained enlightenment. He forcibly removed the Buddha’s image from the Bodhi Vihara near the tree and installed one of Shiva in its place. Shashanka is alleged to have slaughtered all the Buddhist monks in the area around Kushinagar.1,2,3,7
After the rule of Shashanka, the Pala kingdom was established in Bengal. Though the Palas of Bengal had been hospitable to Vaishnavism and Saivism, but nonetheless they were major supporters of Buddhism. However, when Bengal came under the rule of the Senas (1097-1223), Saivism was promulgated and Buddhism was neglected. 1,2,3 Another hostile Shaivite king like Shashanka was Mihirakula who had completely destroyed over 1500 Buddhist shrines. His hostile action was followed by the Shaivite, Toramana who had destroyed the Ghositarama Buddhist monastery at Kausambi.7
Conclusions
The despotism of Shashanka and his hostile behavior towards the Buddhists was carried forward by the revival of Hinduism that led to the further decline of Buddhism in India. Many scholars often relate this Vedic revival as a tyrannical faith that caused massive destruction of the Buddhist monasteries.
But this matter is however, far more complicated than this. A recent study of the Bengal Puranas proved that the Buddhists were mocked and projected as mischievous and malicious in Brahminical narratives as well as subjected to immense rhetorical violence. This rhetorical violence should be interpreted as both physical and mental violence perpetrated upon the Buddhists. The extermination of Buddhism in India was hastened by the large-scale destruction of Buddhist shrines by the Brahmins. The Maha Bodhi Vihara at Bodh Gaya was forcibly converted into a Shaivite temple.
From Times of Bombay
Oct 19, 2010
Cultural Contribution of Jain Acharyas
By Dr. Vilas Sangave
The survival of Jainas, though as a minority community for the last so many centuries in India and especially in South India, can be safely attribute, among other things, to the glorious and continuous tradition of Jaina Saints for more than a thousand years. The Jaina Saints were extremely talented persons with a high and developed sense of social responsibility. They never attempted to lead a solitary life in isolation from others. On the contrary, the Jaina Saints always tried to forge and preserve intimate contacts with general masses so as to encourage them to lead a religious and virtuous life. further, the Jaina Saints took continuous interest in the social, political and educational advancement of the region. They exercised their benign influence to banish harmful anti - social practices from society, to create facilities for the spread of religious and secular education among the general public. Moreover, by their, valuable and strenuous scholastic and missionary activities the Jaina Saints made significant and lasting contributions with a view to enriching the cultural life of the region.The varied activities of a large number of eminent Jaina Saints contributed to the continuation of the Jaina community for a long period, because these activities produced a deep impression upon the general public regarding the sterling qualities of Jaina Saints. They were mainly responsible for the spread of Jainism all over India. The Chronicles of Ceylon a test that Jainism also spread in Ceylon. As regards South India, it can be maintained that the whole of it in ancient times was strewn with small groups of learned Jaina ascetics who were slowly but surely spreading their morals through the medium of their sacred literature composed in various vernaculars of the country. It is clear that these literary, educational and missionary activities of the Jaina Saints ultimately helped the Jainas in South India to strengthen their position for a long time in the face of the Hindu revival. The important Jaina Saints from the South were Kunda-Kunda, Umasvati, Samantabhadra, Pujyapada, Akalanka, Vidyanandin, Manikyanandin, Prabhachandra, Virasena. Jinasena, Gunabhadra and Somadeva.
Of these illustrious Jaina Saints, Acharya Samantabhadra and Acharya Akalanka were the foremost in their zeal of spread of Jainism. Acharya Samantabhadra toured all over India and defeated his opponents in the public disputations. In the Shravana-Belgola inscription Acharya Samantabhadra is described as “One whose sayings are an adamantine goad to the elephant, the disputant, and by whose power this whole earth became barren (i.e. was rid) of even the talk of false speakers”. Similarly Acharya Akalanka defeated the Buddhists in public disputation at Kanchi in the 7th or 8th century A.D. in consequence of which they were banished to Ceylon.
Even in the political matters the Jaina Saints used to take keen interest and guide the people whenever required in the Karnataka region the Gangas and the Hoyasalas were inspired to establish new kingdoms by the Jaina Saints. The Ganga Kingdom in the 2nd century A.D. was a virtual creation of the famous Jaina Saint Simhanandi and naturally practically all Ganga monarchs championed the cause of Jainism. Like the Ganga Kingdom in the 2ne century A.D. the Hoyasala monarchs and generals extended their patronage to Jainism and carefully looked after the interest of the Jainas.
Along with the carrying of these missionary and political activities, the Jaina Saints tried to excel in their personal accomplishment also. In a work entitled “Pujyapadacharita” the names of 37 arts and sciences mastered by Acharya Pujyapada are given. In the 7th century A.D. the famous Chinese pilgrim Hiuen Tsiang had heard of old times during which the Nirgranthas (i.e. the Jaina ascetics) were skilled in divination.
In face the most impressive and permanent contribution of Jaina Saints has been in the field of literature, both religious and secular. Among the Jaina saint authors of the South. Acharya Kunda-kunda is by far the earliest, the best known and the most important. His influence over Jainism as a whole is indicated by the fact that almost all later writers, teachers and men of not, either in their works, genealogies or inscriptions, trace their descent from Acharya Kund-Kunda, calling themselves “Kundakundanvaya.” He is supposed to have composed in all not less than 84 works, but only 23 works are now extant of which Pravachanasara, Samayasara, Niyamsara, Panchastikaya, Rayanasara, Astapahuda and Baras Anuvekkha are more prominent. After Acharya Kunda-Kunda the next name in importance is that of Umasvati or Umasvami who is said to have been a disciple of Acharya Kunda-Kunda.umasvati is best known for his unique treatise entitled, “Tattvarthadhigama Sutra” which is respected both by the Digambara and the Svetambara sects of the Jains. This popular treatise is sometimes called “Jaina Bible” just as Acharya Kunda-Kunda’s works are at times described as “the Jaina Vedanta”. The Tattvarthadhigama Sutra” is considered unique because it has attracted several commentators of repute. Chief among these commentators are Samanabhadra, Pujypada, akalanka, Vidyananda, Prabhachandra and Shrutasagara. The extreme importance of Umasvati’s this treatise can be judged both by the number and extend of these commentaries. For example Samntabhadra’s commentary entitled “Gandhagasti-Mahabhashya” is supposed to have run into 84,000 stanzas, but unfortunately the work is not extant. Another Jaina Saint author of high eminence is Somadeva, perhaps by far the most learned of Jaina writers of the South. Somadev’s two works, which immensely raised his reputation among the authors of India are “Yashodhara written in mixed prose and verse, and ‘Nitivakyamruta’ a treatise on polity. What make Somadeva’s work of very great importance are the learning of the author which they display, and the masterly style in which they are composed. The esteemed position which he earned by his merit could be gauged by his following honorific titles; ‘Syadvadachalasimha’ i.e. the lion on the mountain of Syadvada, ‘Tarkika-chakravartin’ i.e. the lord of the logician, “Vadibhapanchanana’ i.e. a lion to the disputants, Vakkallaola payonidhi, i.e. an ocean of the waves of eloquence, and ‘Kavikularaja’ i.e. the king of the poets. As regards Somadeva’s position in Sanskrit literature, the great oriental scholar Dr. K.K. Handiqui observes thus : while Somadeva made substantial contributions to Jaina religious literature, his literary importance and achievement go beyond its narrow limits; and the value of his work can be assessed in relation to Sanskrit literature as a whole. He is one of the most versatile talents in history of Indian literature, and his masterpiece ‘Yashastilaka and Nitivakyamruta’ supplement each other. He is a redactor of ancient folk tales and religious stories, and at times shows himself and adept in dramatic dialogue. Last but not least, he is a keen observer of man and manners. The position of Somadeva is indeed, unique in Sanskrit literature”
a remarkable feature of Jaina Saint authors of the South is the direct succession of highly qualified and equally capable teachers and their disciples. The classic example of this rare type is that of Acharya Virasena, his disciple Acharya Jinasena, and Jinasena’s disciple Acharya Gunabhadra, who flourished in the 9th and 10th centuries A.D. during the reign of the Rashtrakuta monarchs.
Acharya Virasena is supposed to have written “Siddha-bhupaddhatitika” a learned treatise on the measurement of land as he was a great mathematician also. But this treatise has not been traced as yet. He composed his famous “Dhavala - Tika” consisting of 72,000 stanzas in Prakrit and Sanskrit language. It is a commentary on the renowned work “Shatkhandagama Sutra”. Acharya Virasena also undertook to write “Jayadhavala-Tika” as a commentary on “Kashaya-Prabhruta” of Acharya Gunabhadra. Acharya Virasena died after composing 20,000 stanzas of the “Jayadhavala -Tika” which was to consist of 60,000 stanzas. The remaining 40,000 stanzas of the “Jayadhavala -Tika” Acharya Jinasena composed “Vardhamana-Purana”, the distinctive poetic work “Parshva-bhyudya”. In his “Parshvabhyudya” Jinasena has performed the wonderful feat of utilising each line of the love poem “Meghafuta” of Kalidasa for narrating the life of the 23rd Tirthankara Lord Parshvanatha. The concluding line of each verse in Jinasena’s poem has been borrowed from the successive stanzas of Meghaduta. Thus poetic work “Parshvabhyudaya” consisting of 334 stanzas in unparalleled in Sanskrit literature. Later on Acharya Jinasena started to write a great poetic work to be known as “Mahapurana” depicting the life-history of 63 Great Ones in Jainism. But unfortunately he could not finish the work. After composing 1 to 42 Parvas or Chapters and 3 stanzas of 43rd Parva, i.e. in all 10, 380 stanzas, Jinasena died. This portion of “Mahapurana” known as “Adi-Purana” was ably completed by Acharya Gunabhadra the disciple of Acharya Jinasena. Gunabhadra composed 43rd to 47th Parvas (i.e. In all 1620 stanzas) and completed the “Adipurana” the unfinished work of his teacher. In the same strain Gunabhadra also composed “Uttara-Purana” consisting of 8000 stanzas.
In this manner Gunabhadra very satisfactorily completed the literary project of “Mahapurana” commenced by his teacher, Jinasena. In addition, Gunabhadra composed “Atmanushasana” a poem of 272 stanzas and 3 Sargas or Chapters of “Jinadatta Charitra”. Thus in a very significant manner the continuity of literary activities was ably maintained by the Jaina Saints.
More than anything else, the role played by the Jaina Saints in the realm of learning is supreme. They educated the rising generations from the rudimentary knowledge of three R’s to the highest levels of literary and scientific studies. They initiated the intelligential into the mysteries of literary art and inspired their creative genius. All this produced epoch making results as witnessed by the posterity. Some of the best and the earliest literary productions in South India are from the Jaina Saint authors. It must be said to the credit of the Jaina saints that they took a leading part in the education of the masses. Various relics show that formerly Jaina ascetics took a great share in teaching children in southern regions viz. Andhra, Tamilnadu, Karnataka and Maharashtra. In this connection Dr. Altekar rightly observes that before beginning the alphabet proper the children are required to pay homage to Ganesh, by reciting the “Shri Ganeshya Namah”, (natural in Hindu Society), but in the Deccan even today following the Jaina formula,” “Om Namah Siddham” shows that the Jaina teachers of the medieval age had so completely controlled the mass education that the Hindus continued to teach their children this originally Jaina formula even after the decline of Jainism. As a result of these varied and significant activities the Jaina Saints or monks greatly succeeded in exercising a mighty influence for serve centuries on the cultural life of the people of the south and in moulding its course in various respects. With a view to achieving the rapid spread of religion, the Jaina Saints penetrated into the farthest recesses of the land and established temples and monasteries for this purpose. The Jaina Saints, with their continuos, devoted and self-less service, made lasting impression on the mind and heart of the masses. The Jaina Saints attended not only to the spiritual yearnings and religious needs of the masses, but also looked to their material requirements.
Thus in South India the Jaina Saint came to be regarded as a symbol of learning and passed into the proverb as a “scholar par excellence”. This is illustrated by the following interesting citation which, though a series of epic metaphors, bestows the highest praise on him. The passage runs thus; “Who can withstand the Jaina Monk in a contest, when he lifts his pen, as when Arjuna, his Gandiva bow, Indra, his thunderbolt, Vishnu, his disc, or Bhima, his mace?”
In view if these high accomplishments of the Jaina saints and their varied contributions to the culture of the region concerned, princes and people alike had a great regard for the Jaina Saints in different parts of the country. Even the Muslim rulers of Delhi honoured and showed reverence to the learned Jaina Saints of South India. Similarly, the Muslim Emperors like Aurangazeb, Farrukhasiyar, Mohammadshah and Ahmedshah granted some privileges to the Jaina Saints of Marwar. Regarding the influence of Jaina Saints in Rajasthan, Lieutenant Colonel James Todd remarks: “To show the respect in which the high priests of Jainas are held, the princes of Rajputana invariably advance outside the walls of their capital to receive and to conduct them to it - mark of respect paid only to princes. It is no wonder that the character and activities of such influential Jaina Saints created and atmosphere which helped to lengthen the life of the Jaina community.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Popular Posts
-
Parshuram is the famous sage of Hindu scriptures. He was the man who massacred the Kshatriys, the warrior people of ancient India for many t...
-
By Mr. C. M. Lodha Acharya Sri Ratna Prabh Suri in the year Veer Sanvat 70 converted Raja Utpaldev of Upkeshpur Pattan (presently...
-
A student of music here has brought me a text aboutGamelan music based on a palm leaf manuscript in Indonesian which has anunmistakeably San...
-
-Mahavir Sanglikar Chaturth is the largest caste (endogamous group) in respect of population in Digambar Jain community, and the second larg...
-
Mrs. N. R. Guseva As is already indicated, the entire Jain community is divided into two sects-Digambaras and Shvetambaras. Digambaras in th...
-
Dr. C. L. Prabhakar (Inscribed to the sacred memory of Late Tumuluri Anjaneyulu) Sakalajinatibhyah pavnebhyah namah sannayanavaradebhyah Sar...
-
By Unknown Jainism has always held a predominant position in Karnataka.The history of South India is the history of Jains, Jainism and Jain ...
-
From Wikipedia, with some add-ons by Mahavir Sanglikar Agrawals (Hindi: अग्रवाल or अगरवाल) are a large and influential community in India...
-
By Parshwanath Chamundaraya1, the minister of the Gangas, has carved an indelible record in the glorious history of Shravanabelagola. He w...
-
By Mahavir Sanglikar Why Chavundray wrote it in Marathi too? Shavanbelagola is an ancient shrine of Jains and its history goes back to at le...