What's new

Oldest Buddhist shrine holds clues to Buddha's birth

On the contrary, you people are attempting to undermine Buddhism by granting importance to one of his followers who worked for Buddhism just like many others did. Such antics are always used by you people and I am surprised that some of you guys did not highlight that Ashoka helped spread Buddhism because Buddhism was a part of and was a sub-sect of Hinduism.
How can people undermine Budhism or Budha?
Budhism is a Dharmic faith and is considered as acceptable as Hinduism in India. Budha is revered by almost all Hindus. You would likely find a Budha statue in each house in India.
We cant downplay Budha even if we wanted to.

Something quite hard for you to understand since you and your brethren are taught all other religions are fake or..oh wait..we are all going to hell. :lol:
 
Last edited:
How can people undermine Budhism?
Budhism is a Dharmic faith and is considered as acceptable as Hinduism in India. Budha is revered by almost all Hindus.
We cant downplay Budha even if we wanted to.

Something quite hard for you to understand since you and your bretheren are taught all other religions are fake or..oh wait..we are all going to hell. :lol:

That is surprising. Indian Constitution and Indian Supreme Court are not ready to accept Buddhism as a separate religion, which is tantamount to religious discrimination meted through constitutional inequity and undermining the basic right of a minority community.

Historical persecution of Buddhists by the Brahmans is a part of history and can not be denied. And now you are even denying them their birthright to have a separate religious status. And then you call them your brethren - ironic isn't it.
 
That is surprising. Indian Constitution and Indian Supreme Court are not ready to accept Buddhism as a separate religion, which is tantamount to religious discrimination meted through constitutional inequity and undermining the basic right of a minority community.

Historical persecution of Buddhists by the Brahmans is a part of history and can not be denied. And now you are even denying them their birthright to have a separate religious status. And then you call them your brethren - ironic isn't it.
Are you serious?

Indian Constitution uses religion to define marriage and succession laws. Since Budhists dont have any different marriage and succession law than Hindus, they are clubbed together!

Haha..Historic persecution? Are you sure you know about that? Have you researched about it? And read differing academic views? Because what you read in pdf is generally trash just like how your views on Meluha are not to be taken seriously at all !

However in any case, I am talking about what is there today. Hard for you to accept I know, but being Dharmic, Budhism is as acceptable and as mainstream as Hinduism is or Sikhism is. People find any and all of the 4 - include Jainism here as well - equally comfortable. And thousands jump from one to the other each year.
 
Are you serious?

Indian Constitution uses religion to define marriage and succession laws. Since Budhists dont have any different marriage and succession law than Hindus, they are clubbed together!

Haha..Historic persecution? Are you sure you know about that? Have you researched about it? And read differing academic views? Because what you read in pdf is generally trash just like how your views on Meluha are not to be taken seriously at all !

However in any case, I am talking about what is there today. Hard for you to accept I know, but being Dharmic, Budhism is as acceptable and as mainstream as Hinduism is or Sikhism is. People find any and all of the 4 - include Jainism here as well - equally comfortable. And thousands jump from one to the other each year.

Please do not stink this forum with your blatant lies. Let me support what I stated with what the mainstream Indian media states:

Jains, Sikhs part of broader Hindu religion, says SC
New Delhi, August 10 [2005]

In a significant ruling defining the status of communities like Sikhs and Jains within the Constitutional frame work, the Supreme Court has declined to treat them as separate minority communities from the broad Hindu religion, saying encouraging such tendencies would pose serious jolt to secularism and democracy in the country.

The so-called minority communities like Sikhs and Jains were not treated as national minorities at the time of framing of the Constitution. Sikhs and Jains, in fact, have throughout been treated as part of wider Hindu community, which has different sects, sub-sects, faiths, modes of worship and religious philosophies, a Bench of Chief Justice R.C. Lahoti, Mr Justice D.M. Dharmadhikari and Mr Justice P.K. Balasubramanyan said.


The Tribune, Chandigarh, India - Nation

A separate petition has also been filed in Nov 2012 by a Sikh scholar Birendra Kaur, which is being heard by Indian Supreme Court.

If Indian constitution accepted Sikhs, Jains and Bhuddists as separate religions why would there be a bill tabled in the Lok Sabha to amend the constitution of India in this regard.

Sikhism is a separate religion and is acknowledged as such throughout the world, except in Indian legal system. Article 25 of the Constitution of India has amalgamated Sikhism into Hindu religion. The demand of separate status for Sikhism under the Constitution has been supported by the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC) headed by the former Chief Justice of India, Justice M.N. Venkatachaliah which in its report has recommended amended to Article 25 of the Constitution to restore the status of Sikhism as separate religion.

Panjpani Radio » Blog Archive » India – Sikh Identity Issue: Rights Group to Launch “Amend Article 25” Campaign

At present, Article 25 of the Constitution of India describes Sikhism, Jainism and Buddhism as parts of the Hindu religion. Sikhs have long been seeking amendment to this Article to grant Sikhism an independent identity under the law.

In a significant move, Lok Sabha Speaker Meira Kumar today allowed Shiromani Akali Dal’s Khadoor Sahib member Rattan Singh Ajnala’s private member Bill to amend Article 25 of the Constitution to meet the community’s pressing demand.

The Bill titled ‘Constitution Amendment Bill 2012’ seeks to drop Explanation II in Article 25, which — while guaranteeing a right to freely profess, practice and propagate religion — defines Sikhism, Jainism and Buddhism as components of the Hindu religion.

The Tribune, Chandigarh, India - Main News

Seeking a Constitutional amendment to provide independent religious status to Sikhs, Buddhist and Jain communities, SAD MP from Kadoor Sahib (Punjab) Rattan Singh Ajnala met Law Minister Salman Khurshid on Friday and him to bring a bill in this regard. Ajnala, who has been allowed by Lok Sabha Speaker Meira Kumar to introduce a Private Member Bill in the House, said Sikhism have been established as a separate religion.

Bring bill guaranteeing separate religious status to Sikhs: MP - Indian Express

You lie shamelessly and ought to be ashamed of yourself.
 
Buddha final and last destination was Julian , Taxila. Sirkap. Where the raider ( don t remember who ) kill every monk who was present in that temple, historian say , they were in thousands. Its on mountain top in Taxila. Isn't he look like came to sub continent from some foreign land ? .

quellen0507.jpg


86180407_72efeea993_o.jpg
 
Last edited:
Please do not stink this forum with your blatant lies. Let me support what I stated with what the mainstream Indian media states:
I was telling you the practical use of clubbing Dharmic religions together. What exactly are you trying to prove here?

I have already told you on the OP - Budha and Emperor Ashoka are inescapable and much loved legacies in India. Comprehension, again is not your forte, else you would have understood why the Indian poster mentioned Ashoka.
 
I was telling you the practical use of clubbing Dharmic religions together. What exactly are you trying to prove here?

I have already told you on the OP - Budha and Emperor Ashoka are inescapable and much loved legacies in India. Comprehension, again is not your forte, else you would have understood why the Indian poster mentioned Ashoka.

What he is trying to say is that the evil Hindus are slaughtering the Buddhists, Sikhs & Jains since they regard these people as being un-Dharmic. You know, like the Sunnis who kill the Shias and Ahmedias etc since they regard them as un-Islamic. If you persist he will pull out a newspaper cutting about a man with a Hindu surname who killed a man with a Sikh surname to prove his point. So just let it be :D
 
I was telling you the practical use of clubbing Dharmic religions together. What exactly are you trying to prove here?

I have already told you on the OP - Budha and Emperor Ashoka are inescapable and much loved legacies in India. Comprehension, again is not your forte, else you would have understood why the Indian poster mentioned Ashoka.

What he is trying to say is that the evil Hindus are slaughtering the Buddhists, Sikhs & Jains since they regard these people as being un-Dharmic. You know, like the Sunnis who kill the Shias and Ahmedias etc since they regard them as un-Islamic. If you persist he will pull out a newspaper cutting about a man with a Hindu surname who killed a man with a Sikh surname to prove his point. So just let it be :D

I posted this in another thread. Let me post it here as well so that you could understand our surprise when Indians like you claim that they love Buddhism which is part of the Dharmic, Indic and Hindutva based faiths.

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 that entry into a Buddhist temple was a sin, which could only be expiated for by taking a ritual bath.

Chanakya, the 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.

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.

Prakash, Buddh,in his book "Aspects of Indian History and Civilisation", Agra 1965, states that Nalanda was dDestroyed by Hindu zealots. He adds that, even after the Islamic invasions of India, Brahmanist 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".

According to the historian S. R. Goyal (author of A History of Indian Buddhism), the decline of Buddhism in India is the result of the hostility of the Hindu priestly caste of Brahmins. The Hindu ruler Shashanka of Gauda [Gaura in Bengali] (590–626) destroyed the Buddhist images and Bodhi Tree, under which Siddhartha Gautama (Buddha) is said to have achieved enlightenment. Pusyamitra Sunga (185 BC to 151 BCE) was hostile to Buddhism. He burned Sutras, Buddhist shrines, and massacred monks in large numbers.

He forcibly removed the Buddha’s image from the Bodh Vihara near the tree and installed one of Shiva in its place. Finally, Shashanka is said to have slaughtered all the Buddhist monks in the area around Kushinagar. Another such Hindu king was, Mihirakula, who is said to have completely destroyed over 1500 Buddhist shrines. The 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 Hindu 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 [also spelled as Math] 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.
 
Killing animals is not cruel...it is natural...we do not kill them unnecessarily....we eat them....this is how we have evolved....tigers lions or sharks are not cruel because they kill animals....it is a part of their living....Buddha was a great guy...but all of his teachings are not practical in the modern world...killing animals for food is one of them!
Agreed that teachings are not practical in modern world but from what I know about Buddhism, it doesn't have any rules that prohibits anything, nothing at all. Not to mention the last meal of Buddha was beef. I think what he talked about was that the intention is much more important than the action or the result.
 
Agreed that teachings are not practical in modern world but from what I know about Buddhism, it doesn't have any rules that prohibits anything, nothing at all. Not to mention the last meal of Buddha was beef. I think what he talked about was that the intention is much more important than the action or the result.

@Azizam
Are you a Buddhist as well my friend?
how many of sri lankans are buddhist?
 
On the contrary, you people are attempting to undermine Buddhism by granting importance to one of his followers who worked for Buddhism just like many others did. Such antics are always used by you people and I am surprised that some of you guys did not highlight that Ashoka helped spread Buddhism because Buddhism was a part of and was a sub-sect of Hinduism.

Ashoka is praised as much because without his patronage, Buddhism might not have survived and spread far and wide (and found newer safe havens). His children, Mahendra and Sangamitra, spread it to Sri Lanka while the many Bhikshus and ambassadors sent by Ashoka propagated Buddhism to China,Persia,Greece, Egypt, South East Asia etc. How do you think this would happen without the patronage of someone as Politically powerful as Ashoka? Similar movements like Charvak and Ajivika died out for lack of State patronage.

Besides this, isn't it for similar reasons that prophet Muhammad is revered today? He not only preached Islam, but led conquests, united the Arabian tribes and helped Islam spread, didn't he?
 
I am Christian but I am familiar with Buddhism. Up to 70% of Sri Lankans are Buddhists.
It is interesting for me how majority of Sri Lankans are buddhist and not hindu. I guess Sri Lankans are the the only major ethnic group of south indian subcontinent who are not hindu.
 
Prakash, Buddh,in his book "Aspects of Indian History and Civilisation", Agra 1965, states that Nalanda was dDestroyed by Hindu zealots. He adds that, even after the Islamic invasions of India, Brahmanist 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

What do you have to say about this?
An excerpt from “History Of Magadha” by L.L.S. Omalley; J.F.W. James (Veena Publication, Delhi, 2005, pp. 35: “ The Buddhism of Magadha was finally swept away by the Muhammadan invasion under Bakhtiyar Khilji, In 1197 the capital, Bihar, was seized by a small party of two hundred horsemen, who rushed the postern gate, and sacked the town. The slaughter of the “shaven-headed Brahmans,” as the Muslim chronicler calls the Buddhist monks, was so complete that when the victor searched for someone capable of explaining the contents of the monastic libraries, not a living man could be found who was able to do so. “It was discovered,” it was said, “that the whole fort and city was a place of study.” A similar fate befell the other Buddhist institutions, against which the combined intolerance and rapacity of the invaders was directed. The monasteries were sacked and the monks slain, many of the temples were ruthlessly destroyed or desecrated, and countless idols were broken and trodden under foot. Those monks who escaped the sword flied to Tibet, Nepal and southern India; and Buddhism as a popular religion in Bihar, its last abode in Northern India, was finally destroyed. Then forward Patna passed under Muhammadan rule.”
 
It is interesting for me how majority of Sri Lankans are buddhist and not hindu. I guess Sri Lankans are the the only major people of south indian subcontinent who are not hindu.
There is also an ethnic/racial mix to religion as well. The majority ethnic group (Sinhalese) that makes up 74% of the population is predominantly Buddhist and rest are Christians. Hindu population is consisted of a minority ethnic group called Tamils.
 

Latest posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom