5 ms·

This seems to not have any resemblance to the historical decline of the "Vedic Culture" way before any "colonising" by the "west". If the guys writing the hist

This seems to not have any resemblance to the historical decline of the "Vedic Culture" way before any "colonising" by the "west". If the guys writing the history didn't mess it up, wasn't buddha himself against the caste system? That seems way before there was even a Church in the West to begin with.

zozbot234 5y ago
The Mongolic ("Islamic") invasions from Central Asia starting in the late middle ages were quite comparable in their violence. And they still count as "west" from an Indian POV since Central Asia is directly west of the Indian subcontinent. (Note that these Mongolic invaders were, by and large, merely converts to Islam, and that a very comparable dynamic also caused the end of the Golden Age of Islam, around that same time.) Gautama Buddha was against any rigid interpretation of the varnas, but he was not unusual in that - this was close to Hindu orthodoxy even at the time.
naruvimama 5y ago
A lot of myths have been built around Buddha or Ashoka, in the recent years to fit politics. Buddha considered himself very much a Hindu.
- tln750 5y ago
  What an absolutely shocking misrepresentation of the Buddha ! The Buddha rejected the authority of the Vedas entirely and this infuriated the Brahmins of that time. He had both philosophical and pragmatic objections to the theistic stance of Brahminical groups, along with a total rejection of their focus on mass animal slaughter in the name of rituals. From the original Pali canon, this discourse captures the Buddha's position: https://suttacentral.net/an3.61/en/sujato https://suttacentral.net/an3.61/en/sujato And, Adi Sankara wrote an entire polemic trashing the Buddha as an insignificant man who should be shunned by everybody. Here is a passage straight from the Vedanta Sutras written by Sankara: Moreover, Buddha by propounding the three mutually contradictory systems, teaching respectively the reality of the external world, the reality of ideas only, and general nothingness, has himself made it clear either that he was a man given to make incoherent assertions, or else that hatred of all beings induced him to propound absurd doctrines by accepting which they would become thoroughly confused.--So that--and this the Sutra means to indicate--Buddha's doctrine has to be entirely disregarded by all those who have a regard for their own happiness. Source: https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe34/sbe34208.htm https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe34/sbe34208.htm
  - naruvimama 5y ago
    You clearly do not understand what Hinduism is. Brahmins are a small subset, who at different regions and times might have been corrupt. Just like the church. But unlike the church, Hinduism is experiential and no one has a monopoly, which is precisely why Buddhism is one of many 1000s of movements. There is no singular holy book and no need even in communities where it existed.
    - tln750 5y ago
      This obsession with trying to somehow make the Buddha and his teaching as a branch of Hinduism falls flat on its face when you look at his teaching even cursorily. The central tenet of the Buddha's position was his exposition of anatta (not-self), which is directly opposed to all Hindu doctrines which preach that finding one's 'true self' is the goal of existence. Instead, the Buddha taught that the search for a 'true self' (including God, Brahman etc.) is futile and pointless. This is an irreconcilable cleavage between Buddhism and Hinduism. You really need to look into the Buddha's teaching properly before trying to appropriate it to fit your agenda.
      - naruvimama 5y ago
        For me Hinduism is an ecosystem as is for millions of Hindus. A Hindu will feel very comfortable in a Buddhist temple and practice and vice versa. Hindus themselves have extremely diverse traditions. I see where we have diverging views. My Swedish landlords who happens to be a Christian once asked we where is your holy book. In her mind not having a one-one equivalent with Christianity delegitimises the religion. In trying to intellectualise the debate, you have taken the limited view of a Christian. The vast majority of the Hindus are open to the ideas of Buddhism as well as 1000s of tribal/rural/regional gods and rituals. Not only is there no conflict, there is perhaps no clear boundaries. This is completely alien to xtianity/Islam.
        ir123 5y ago
        You define Hinduism as an ecosystem of ideas, with no clear boundaries, sometimes adopting ideas from Buddhism as well as other tribal rituals. In another comment you said that casteism was brought by the West to India. (I do not agree with this but lets go with for now). So it clearly follows that Hindus (Hinduism) adopted casteism from somewhere externally. This is not for debate because we have seen and continue to see Hindus practicing casteism for whatever reason. Hinduism can be simultaneously extolled for adopting "good" ideas from Buddhism but is also beyond criticism for adopting casteism from the west? You arbitrarily laid the boundary for Hinduism at "caste" arguing that it was brought externally and hence not an inherent Hindu feature, yet somehow you take pride in Hinduism being a religion that does adopt external ideas. Which one is it?
- tln750 5y ago
  As for the new narrative being heavily pushed these days that the caste system is a remnant of British colonial times, a few words from an Untouchable girl can correct it - written in the year 1855. From the essay: Earlier, Gokhale, Apate, Trimkaji, Andhala, Pansara, Kale, Behre, etc [all Brahman surnames], who showed their bravery by killing rats in their homes, persecuted us, not sparing even pregnant women, without any rhyme or reason. This has stopped now. Harassment and torture of Mahars and Mangs, common during the rule of Peshwas in Pune, have stopped. Now, human sacrifice for the foundation of forts and mansions has stopped – now, nobody buries us alive. Now, our population is growing in numbers. Earlier, if any Mahar or Mang wore fine clothes, they would say that only Brahmans should wear such clothes. Seen in fine clothes, we were earlier accused of stealing such clothes. Their religion was in danger of being polluted when Untouchables put clothes around their bodies; they would tie them to a tree and punish them. But, under British rule, anybody with money can buy and wear clothes. Earlier, punishment for any wrongdoing against the upper castes was to behead the guilty Untouchable— now, it has stopped. Excessive and exploitative tax has stopped. The practice of untouchability has stopped in some places. Killing has stopped on the playground. Now, we can even visit the marketplace. Source: https://www.forwardpress.in/2020/02/165-years-ago-first-female-dalit-writer-wrote-about-the-grief-of-the-mangs-and-the-mahars/ https://www.forwardpress.in/2020/02/165-years-ago-first-fema...
  - naruvimama 5y ago
    Atrocity literate was quite convenient both for the colonizers as well as for the church. We have a cottage industry even today that churns out fake attacks on Christians to justify interference or bullying by western countries.
    - tln750 5y ago
      Imagine having a mind that is so saturated with hatred and propaganda that a young girl's cry of despair from 1855, protesting against centuries upon centuries of oppression and brutality, is blithely discarded as 'atrocity literature'. For all the warbling about 'dharmic' culture, basic humanity and a desire to develop an inner yardstick for truth is utterly missing from your absurd screeds.

zozbot234 5y ago

The Mongolic ("Islamic") invasions from Central Asia starting in the late middle ages were quite comparable in their violence. And they still count as "west" from an Indian POV since Central Asia is directly west of the Indian subcontinent. (Note that these Mongolic invaders were, by and large, merely converts to Islam, and that a very comparable dynamic also caused the end of the Golden Age of Islam, around that same time.) Gautama Buddha was against any rigid interpretation of the varnas, but he was not unusual in that - this was close to Hindu orthodoxy even at the time.

naruvimama 5y ago

A lot of myths have been built around Buddha or Ashoka, in the recent years to fit politics. Buddha considered himself very much a Hindu.

tln750 5y ago
What an absolutely shocking misrepresentation of the Buddha ! The Buddha rejected the authority of the Vedas entirely and this infuriated the Brahmins of that time. He had both philosophical and pragmatic objections to the theistic stance of Brahminical groups, along with a total rejection of their focus on mass animal slaughter in the name of rituals. From the original Pali canon, this discourse captures the Buddha's position: https://suttacentral.net/an3.61/en/sujato https://suttacentral.net/an3.61/en/sujato And, Adi Sankara wrote an entire polemic trashing the Buddha as an insignificant man who should be shunned by everybody. Here is a passage straight from the Vedanta Sutras written by Sankara: Moreover, Buddha by propounding the three mutually contradictory systems, teaching respectively the reality of the external world, the reality of ideas only, and general nothingness, has himself made it clear either that he was a man given to make incoherent assertions, or else that hatred of all beings induced him to propound absurd doctrines by accepting which they would become thoroughly confused.--So that--and this the Sutra means to indicate--Buddha's doctrine has to be entirely disregarded by all those who have a regard for their own happiness. Source: https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe34/sbe34208.htm https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe34/sbe34208.htm
- naruvimama 5y ago
  You clearly do not understand what Hinduism is. Brahmins are a small subset, who at different regions and times might have been corrupt. Just like the church. But unlike the church, Hinduism is experiential and no one has a monopoly, which is precisely why Buddhism is one of many 1000s of movements. There is no singular holy book and no need even in communities where it existed.
  - tln750 5y ago
    This obsession with trying to somehow make the Buddha and his teaching as a branch of Hinduism falls flat on its face when you look at his teaching even cursorily. The central tenet of the Buddha's position was his exposition of anatta (not-self), which is directly opposed to all Hindu doctrines which preach that finding one's 'true self' is the goal of existence. Instead, the Buddha taught that the search for a 'true self' (including God, Brahman etc.) is futile and pointless. This is an irreconcilable cleavage between Buddhism and Hinduism. You really need to look into the Buddha's teaching properly before trying to appropriate it to fit your agenda.
    - naruvimama 5y ago
      For me Hinduism is an ecosystem as is for millions of Hindus. A Hindu will feel very comfortable in a Buddhist temple and practice and vice versa. Hindus themselves have extremely diverse traditions. I see where we have diverging views. My Swedish landlords who happens to be a Christian once asked we where is your holy book. In her mind not having a one-one equivalent with Christianity delegitimises the religion. In trying to intellectualise the debate, you have taken the limited view of a Christian. The vast majority of the Hindus are open to the ideas of Buddhism as well as 1000s of tribal/rural/regional gods and rituals. Not only is there no conflict, there is perhaps no clear boundaries. This is completely alien to xtianity/Islam.
      - ir123 5y ago
        You define Hinduism as an ecosystem of ideas, with no clear boundaries, sometimes adopting ideas from Buddhism as well as other tribal rituals. In another comment you said that casteism was brought by the West to India. (I do not agree with this but lets go with for now). So it clearly follows that Hindus (Hinduism) adopted casteism from somewhere externally. This is not for debate because we have seen and continue to see Hindus practicing casteism for whatever reason. Hinduism can be simultaneously extolled for adopting "good" ideas from Buddhism but is also beyond criticism for adopting casteism from the west? You arbitrarily laid the boundary for Hinduism at "caste" arguing that it was brought externally and hence not an inherent Hindu feature, yet somehow you take pride in Hinduism being a religion that does adopt external ideas. Which one is it?
tln750 5y ago
As for the new narrative being heavily pushed these days that the caste system is a remnant of British colonial times, a few words from an Untouchable girl can correct it - written in the year 1855. From the essay: Earlier, Gokhale, Apate, Trimkaji, Andhala, Pansara, Kale, Behre, etc [all Brahman surnames], who showed their bravery by killing rats in their homes, persecuted us, not sparing even pregnant women, without any rhyme or reason. This has stopped now. Harassment and torture of Mahars and Mangs, common during the rule of Peshwas in Pune, have stopped. Now, human sacrifice for the foundation of forts and mansions has stopped – now, nobody buries us alive. Now, our population is growing in numbers. Earlier, if any Mahar or Mang wore fine clothes, they would say that only Brahmans should wear such clothes. Seen in fine clothes, we were earlier accused of stealing such clothes. Their religion was in danger of being polluted when Untouchables put clothes around their bodies; they would tie them to a tree and punish them. But, under British rule, anybody with money can buy and wear clothes. Earlier, punishment for any wrongdoing against the upper castes was to behead the guilty Untouchable— now, it has stopped. Excessive and exploitative tax has stopped. The practice of untouchability has stopped in some places. Killing has stopped on the playground. Now, we can even visit the marketplace. Source: https://www.forwardpress.in/2020/02/165-years-ago-first-female-dalit-writer-wrote-about-the-grief-of-the-mangs-and-the-mahars/ https://www.forwardpress.in/2020/02/165-years-ago-first-fema...
- naruvimama 5y ago
  Atrocity literate was quite convenient both for the colonizers as well as for the church. We have a cottage industry even today that churns out fake attacks on Christians to justify interference or bullying by western countries.
  - tln750 5y ago
    Imagine having a mind that is so saturated with hatred and propaganda that a young girl's cry of despair from 1855, protesting against centuries upon centuries of oppression and brutality, is blithely discarded as 'atrocity literature'. For all the warbling about 'dharmic' culture, basic humanity and a desire to develop an inner yardstick for truth is utterly missing from your absurd screeds.