Home » General » How the Buddhists and Jains were Persecuted in Ancient India.

How the Buddhists and Jains were Persecuted in Ancient India.

Start here


How the Buddhists and Jains were

Persecuted in Ancient India.
Murad A. Baig, http://www.chowk.com/articles/14150

“… Hiuen-Tsang, who visited India from 629 to 645 AD, describes the influence of a south Indian Brahmin queen on her husband who ordered the execution of many thousand Buddhists including 8,000 in Madurai alone. Kalhana’s Rajatarangani (written by a Shaivite scholar about 1149 AD and the first Brahmin account of India’s historic past from the time of Yudishthira) relates that Mihirikula, the Hun ruler was converted by Brahmins (in 515 AD) and unleashed a wave of violent destruction on Buddhist monasteries in Punjab and Kashmir. He reports (verse 290 in book 1) that “crows and birds of prey would fly ahead eager to feed on those within his armies reach”. He proudly proclaimed himself as the killer of three crores. … … – Buddhism that had been strong in India in the 7th Century was completely obliterated a century later.”

There are many who seem to believe that brutality and bloodshed were the sole preserve of Muslim rulers and that Hindu rajas lived in an idyllic ocean of peace and tranquility. Unfortunately, an examination of the history of the Indian sub continent does not support such an uninformed opinion.

Gaining and retaining power is a brutal business all around the world, and has been so, all through history, with the possible exception within Buddhist societies where brute violence is rare. Many people genuinely believe that Hinduism has always been a tolerant religion that assimilated other peoples and ideas without bloody conflict. That is how they teach it! The ugly scars of brutality in the history of all peoples, are sanitized in school history books. The ruling powers, everywhere, want to play down the politics of past racial or religious persecution. This has the result in our case that many people hold the opinion that brutality and violence in India were exclusive to ‘invaders’ like the Greeks, Mongols, Turks and even the British. While these were the `invaders’ easily condemned by the history books, it can be mentioned that most of the Arya, Scythian and Jat tribes, who came to India probably from central Asia, could also be described as ‘invaders’.

For those tribes the word ‘invasion’ is an exaggeration. Most of north western India was fairly sparsely populated in ancient times and the great Indian cities (after the Harappan period) were mainly in the region of present day Bihar until the 6th century BC, so many alien tribes from less fertile areas of the north simply entered with little opposition, unnoticed even, by the local inhabitants. Pastoralists never made wars on each other and it was only with growing populations and urbanization that rulers of the evolving city states had to keep standing armies that were dedicated to protect but also attack for plunder!
There were therefore not many major conflicts in ancient times. But historians and story tellers, as usual, would exaggerate small tribal skirmishes to become great legends of prowess and minimize murderous bloodshed on their part.

After Ashoka’s reportedly bloody battle against Kalinga, north India entered a thousand year period of relative peace under predominantly Buddhist rulers until the time of Harshavardhan who ruled from 606 to 647AD. But there had been many local wars between domestic kingdoms like the Cholas, Pallavas and Pandyas competing with the Satvahanas and the Guptas or the Rashrakutas, Gurjara Pratiharas and Palas in later times. There must have been considerable bloodshed in all these conflicts even if not much is recorded in Brahmin texts. These battles were however territorial and for loot, and religion does not seem to have been used to justify aggression.

Then there was a heady period of vigorous Brahmanical revivalism that rapidly gathered strength after the 7th century AD. It has to be remembered that this was not a `Hindu’ revival because the idea of Hindu as a religion was not known at this time. During this Puranic period most people worshipped numerous animist deities usually presided over by Brahmin priests who chanted elevating Vedic hymns even though all the Vedic deities like Indra, Rudra and Nasatyas had now vanished. Many animist deities including and several goddesses were absorbed into a new Puranic Hinduism that included non Vedic deities like Shiv, Ganesh, Hanuman, Kubera, Kali, Durga and others and new philosophies like reincarnation, Karma and Dharma were borrowed from Buddhism and Jainism. Even the Vishnu of the Puranas was very different from the Vedic Vishnu. At this time Ram or Krishna were still heroes of legend and had not yet become deities for worship. A. R. Mujumdar in The Hindu History (1979) observes … “From 650 AD, perhaps to suit the needs of the age, Hindus suppressed true history and invented nice legends instead”.

Many local rulers, probably at the urging of their Brahmin ministers and priests, now began to ruthlessly exterminate the previously dominant Buddhist and Jain faiths. Although the class of Kshatriyas had completely vanished from history during the thousand years of mainly Buddhist rule they were reinvented at this time to serve Brahmin interests. No doubt the rich lands and treasures of their defenseless monasteries and temples also gave material incentives to this religious fervor and many Buddhist and Jain stupas and monasteries were plundered and Hindu temples established at their sites.

Similar material motives had actuated religious persecutions in many lands including those by the Catholic and Protestant nobles in England during the much more recent period of the Reformation. There are many Hindu references to support this looting and plunder including the unedited versions of the original Puranas even though most Buddhist and Jain accounts were destroyed. Hiuen-Tsang, who visited India from 629 to 645 AD, describes the influence of a south Indian Brahmin queen on her husband who ordered the execution of many thousand Buddhists including 8,000 in Madurai alone. Kalhana’s Rajatarangani (written by a Shaivite scholar about 1149 AD and the first Brahmin account of India’s historic past from the time of Yudishthira) relates that Mihirikula, the Hun ruler was converted by Brahmins (in 515 AD) and unleashed a wave of violent destruction on Buddhist monasteries in Punjab and Kashmir. He reports (verse 290 in book 1) that “crows and birds of prey would fly ahead eager to feed on those within his armies reach”. He proudly proclaimed himself as the killer of three crores.

This spawned a revival. Later, Brahmins paid killers to assassinate the Buddhist ruler Harshavardhana. With the plot discovered, as a Buddhist, he was unwilling to take life and so banished those 500 Brahmins involved in the conspiracy to a remote area south of the Vindhyas. Brahmins needed money for their purposes. Kalhan reports that several avaricious Hindu rulers looted the treasuries and even burned Hindu temples of the Shahi and Katoch rulers in neighboring areas long before the well known looting by the Muslim Mahmud Ghazni.

According to The Rajatarangani (IV/112), Chandradip, a Buddhist ruler of Kashmir, was killed by Brahmins in 722 AD. His successor Tarapida was killed two years later. The newly anointed Brahma-Kshastra (Rajput) rulers usurped power in the kingdoms of Sind and Kota. Graha Varman Maukhari, married to Harsha’s sister, was treacherously killed by Sasanka, king of Gauda (Bengal). He proudly destroyed many stupas and cut down the sacred Bodhi tree at Gaya.

According to Gopinath Rao (East & West Vol. 35) the old tribal shrine at Jaganath Puri was usurped by Vaisnavas and the walls of the temple even today displays gory murals recording the beheading and massacre of Buddhists.

Epigraphica India Vol XXIX P 141-144 records that Vira Goggi Deva, a South Indian king, described himself as… “a fire to the Jain scriptures, a hunter of wild beasts in the form of the followers of Jina (Jains) and an adept at the demolition of Buddhist canon”. It also records “the deliberate destruction of non Brahminical literature like books of Lokayat/ Carvaca philosophy by Brihaspati mentioned by Albaruni in the 11th century.” The huge Buddhist complex at Nagarjunakonda was destroyed. According to Shankara Dig Vijaya, the newly anointed Brahma-Kshastra kings ordered every Kshatriya to kill every Buddhist young and old and to also kill those who would not kill the Buddhists. A Jain temple at Huli in Karnataka had a statue of five Jinas (Jain heroes) that was re carved into a Shaivite temple with five lingas.
E.S Oakley (in his ‘Holy Himalaya’) Rhys Davids (in ‘Buddhist India’) and Daniel Wright (in ‘History of Nepal’) quote several Nepalese and Kumoani documents showing that Buddhism had been the prevailing religion of the Himalayas with Badrinath and Kedarnath as Buddhist temples until Shankaracharya (788 -820 AD) usurped them in the 8th century and the shrines at Badri and Kedar were then converted into shrines of Shiv and Vishnu. Wright records that “there had been a curious intermixture of the two religions with Buddhist priests officiating at the temples of Pashupati (Shiv) and all the four castes following the religion of Buddha.” There is no evidence that Shankaracharya directed such persecution but what is likely is that power-hungry local rulers may have used his great name to lend legitimacy to their own destruction and looting. Many local hill rajas now invited Brahmins to their domains to get themselves elevated to the rank of Kshatriyas. And many were encouraged to attack Buddhist monasteries.

Several Nepalese accounts state that the followers of Buddha were ruthlessly persecuted, slain, exiled and forcibly converted – many converted rather than face death, humiliation or exile. The attackers tested their faith by making them perform ‘Hinsa’, or the sacrifice of live animals, that was so abhorrent to Buddhists and Jains. Many bhikshunis, or Buddhist nuns, were forcibly married and the learned Grihasthas were forced to cut off the distinguishing knot of hair on top of their heads. 84,000 Buddhist works were searched for and destroyed.

It is believed that Shankara introduced pilgrimages to those new Hindu holy places in the Himalayas for the first time to prevent their relapse into Buddhist or animist ways. As sufficient local Brahmins could not be found who were willing to preach in such remote places he imported Nambudri Brahmin priests from Kerala who, to this day, officiate at Badrinath, and Kedarnath.

Later as the mountain settlements grew other Brahmins like the Joshis and Pants from Maharashtra, Gairolas from Bengal and Negis from Gujarat were also invited to settle in the hills. Holy pilgrimages then ensured a constant influx of Hindu pilgrims with the presence of many traders, priests and rulers who had a vested interest in sustaining Hindu pilgrimages to these sacred spots.

Long held opinions admit reluctantly to the fact that oceans of blood were shed in the quest for power even among those who now consider themselves peace loving and spiritual Hindus. In India, as in every country, the hunger for political power and masculine dominance, and looting for treasure and girls, led to many examples of bloodshed and this became even more vicious when rulers used and abused the power of God-based religion to motivate their followers. The worst examples were undoubtedly the bloodshed in the name Christianity and Islam but there are also many examples among other people and their religions. Buddhism that had been so strong in India in the 7th Century had been completely obliterated a century later.

Advertisements

42 Comments

  1. Christian says:

    And Islam came as a judgement on the Hindus for destroying Buddhism. It was the Buddhist kings and Jain kings that welcomed the Parsees, jews and Syrian Christians to their kingdoms, as the Buddha taught brotherhood of all men, equality of all, and compassion for all. A hindu who feels polluted by outsiders, would never invite Jews, Parsees or Syrian Christians. Buddha was the greatest among men ever to walk the face of the earth. Thank you for writing this article.

    • Sourodip says:

      Hinduism is about universal acceptance!! ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam’ is the motto which means ‘The world is one family’ Swami Vivekananda the Hindu monk was the hero of ‘World Parliament of Religions’ at Chicago in 1893

    • Dax says:

      The parsis were accepted by the king of gujurat who was a rajput, I guess tht means a Hindu. Most of them are tolerent and good people, its just some whom are extreme

    • Hinduism is not a religion…It is the Law on how all religions should live together…we may wish to disagree with the laws, but that was the law of the land, wished by the rulers of the times.
      In the begining there was one Dravidian religion who worshiped all of nature and called their god Father and Mother. They were named Shiva (a personification of nature) and Parvati later

      Next came the invading Vaishnavi religion of the Aryans who’s gods were their Kings…
      …There was war waged on these differences (The Ramayan). After the defeat of the Dravidian king…The laws were made to have both religions cohabit this land.
      Both these religions are now considered to be one…Only after Buddhism took over the land and both the Vaishnavis and the Shivaites co-organized a revival of “Hinduism”

    • Athiest says:

      The whole article is bull shit. Not one Jain scripture ever talks about this.

      Muslims as usual trying to make people fight.

  2. […] How the Buddhists and Jains were Persecuted in Ancient … […]

  3. Bheja says:

    Original article written by Murad A. Baig. No wonder!

  4. vamsi says:

    lol. Murad ali baig on hindus. If anyone expect these rana ayyub types to write something positive, that will be end of this world. RIP kings Baladitya & Yashodharma

  5. sandy says:

    The author believes any conspiracy theory anyone hands to him it seems. Did you check facts before falling all for it and promoting this stupid theory? I am jain and no jain text has mention of persecution of 8000 jains in tamil. Its a stupid legend created by some i don’t know for what reason. This baig guy is another islamic fanatic trying t divide people in India. Don fall for it, do your own research.

    • Indian says:

      At least read the blog properly before commenting. Execution/persecution of 8000 Buddhists, not Jains is mentioned at Madurai.
      I’m not saying everything ever heard or read is to be believed, but your pathetic and myopic thoughts are ready to abuse a writer based on his religion without even reading the article correctly. Shame.

    • What is a shame is that you call yourself a Jain. The Jain texts which you refer to that are missing….was destroyed along with your fellow believers….Did you check the facts before retorting…???
      Check them again without a closed mind and give your religion the respect that it deserves with the truth…Seek and you shall find

  6. jaco says:

    In buddhist text asoka vadana written after the death of asoka persecution by hindu king is mentioned,so hindus don’t try to fool the world by blaming islamic invaders. Also the buddhist civilization in maldives ,sri lanka and indonesia were destroyed by hindu cholas. Hindus have no religious rules that prevent them from lying…so most of lie through their teeth ,shamelessly .

    • ok Mr. Jaco.. so according to you all these 3 countries you mentioned should now have Hindu majority demography.. isn’t it? but the fact is something else.. maldives is muslim majority (98%), indonesia holds world’s most “muslim” populous country and Srilanka has buddhist majority country having handful of Tamil Hindu population..so where those Hindu “murderers” gone to?. did they just vanish from earth?. who killed them later?.. just read a little bit and u will come to know that Buddhism came after Hinduism and if Hindus were so intolerant then it would not have spread so much and could have come this far.. No wonder where u got your education done.. definitely from some bloody MADARSSA!

  7. joe says:

    So what is difference between hindus and muslims. both of them are fanatic, both fast, both do sacrifices, both of them are butchers. they seem like brothers from same mother

    • Dax says:

      A lot of Hindus in Gujurat for example forbid the slaying of animals or harm for one. Preach non violence (Ahimsa). They both fast, pray,thats true but…

      There is no concept of Jihad, or the need to convert one to your religion unlike Islam. All paths have a destination in some way.
      There is no one holy book. There are instead many texts.
      There is no “Hindu”. There is Aryanism that has authority of vedas, Buddhism that follows Buddhas middle path.
      The covering of women in Islam has no equal in Hinduism.
      The concept of devas, Asuras and rakshasa common in both buddhism and hinduism (i.e Indra and Brahma)
      Buddha is revered by Hindus as an avatar whilst the Hindu Gods are revered in Buddhism as enlightened beings (as stated above)

  8. Quora says:

    Why Hinduism is the among the best religions in world like Judaism. They never occupied other countries and never involved in any massacre?

    Is Tamil Nadu a part of India? Can you say that a great majority of those living in Tamil Nadu are Hindus? Then it is wrong to say that Hindus never occupied other countries. The following has been taken from Wikipedia: The Chola territories stretched…

  9. Arihant says:

    Hindu name is itself of foreign origin. Vedic culture was prevalent only in Sapta – Sindhu region not in whole india. Analog of Sapta – Sindhu was Hapta – Hindu in old avestan language ( very similar to rigvedic sanskrit).
    Rigveda was composed in long period. Even during the composition of brahamans ( composed much latter after veda) southern boundary of Aryavarta was Vindhya mountain.
    Zoroastrian also called their country Aryavarta.

    Brahamans were afraid of rise of sramana tradition (jains & buddhist) in gangatic plain/ eastern india.

    Brahamans always promoted social inequality & illiteracy to safeguard their position.

    Brahamans used Savism as tool to destroy their opponents ( sramana i.e. Jains & buddhist)
    Buddhism was dominant in north while Jainism was dominant in south. Brahamans crushed both violently by using same tactic ( first fake allegations then fake propaganda to justify their action and finally invented fake stories to shape mind of illetrate people)

    There is fundamental different in vedic dharma & jain dharma. In vedic pray to god (as god is responsible for every thing) for fortune and pay God’s fee to brahamans ( god’s messenger).
    In Jainism or Buddhism we (human) & nature is responsible & Godhood is just symbol of perfection. Everyone can achieve god hood by abolishment of internal evil & by living a pious life.

    In Jainism god can’t behaves like human as they don’t have human weakness.

    Adi shankaracharya was “A hindu Jihadi”
    Savism was hindu jihad…

    In south (tamilnadu) 8000 jain monks were massacred (hiuen tsang mistakenly identified as buddhist). Tamil shaivates are celebrating ” Massacre of Jains” as religious festival from 1000 year. It is so inhuman act that no religion in world can do this ( except Savism & Islam)

    Brahamans have history of denying truth it it is challenged. Today they denied manusmriti & caste system but just 100 years ago it was truth sanctioned by god from time immemorial.

    Brahamans are very good in manipulation ( labeling & propaganda) to safeguard their intrests. They have well developed ” Hijacking attitude” ( only they have divine knowledge & every goodness comes from them)

  10. Arihant says:

    Hindu name is itself of foreign origin. Vedic culture was prevalent only in Sapta – Sindhu region not in whole india. Analog of Sapta – Sindhu was Hapta – Hindu in old avestan language ( very similar to rigvedic sanskrit).
    Rigveda was composed in long period. Even during the composition of brahamans ( composed much latter after veda) southern boundary of Aryavarta was Vindhya mountain.
    Zoroastrian also called their country Aryavarta.

    Brahamans were afraid of rise of sramana tradition (jains & buddhist) in gangatic plain/ eastern india.

    Brahamans always promoted social inequality & illiteracy to safeguard their position.

    Brahamans used Savism as tool to destroy their opponents ( sramana i.e. Jains & buddhist)
    Buddhism was dominant in north while Jainism was dominant in south. Brahamans crushed both violently by using same tactic ( first fake allegations then fake propaganda to justify their action and finally invented fake stories to shape mind of illetrate people)

    There is fundamental different in vedic dharma & jain dharma. In vedic pray to god (as god is responsible for every thing) for fortune and pay God’s fee to brahamans ( god’s messenger).
    In Jainism or Buddhism we (human) & nature is responsible & Godhood is just symbol of perfection. Everyone can achieve god hood by abolishment of internal evil & by living a pious life.

    In Jainism god can’t behaves like human as they don’t have human weakness.

    Adi shankaracharya was “A hindu Jihadi”
    Savism was hindu jihad…

    In south (tamilnadu) 8000 jain monks were massacred (hiuen tsang mistakenly identified as buddhist). Tamil shaivates are celebrating ” Massacre of Jains” as religious festival from 1000 year. It is so inhuman act that no religion in world can do this ( except Savism & Islam)

    Brahamans have history of denying truth it it is challenged. Today they denied manusmriti & caste system but just 100 years ago it was truth sanctioned by god from time immemorial.

    Brahamans are very good in manipulation ( labeling & propaganda) to safeguard their intrests. They have well developed ” Hijacking attitude” ( only they have divine knowledge & every goodness comes from them)

    Hindu jihad much prior to islamic jihad

  11. Siddharth Apte says:

    Brahamans have history of denying truth ( of course if it is challenged)

    Today brahamans deny manusmriti & caste system ( but just 100 years ago manusmriti & caste system was truth sanctioned by GOD from time immemorial)

    Today they try to deny Madurai Massacre but just 100 years ago it was a religious festival ” Samanar Kazuvetru” ( being celebrated from 1000 years).

    Brahamans never liked Jainism & Buddhism because both are based on social equality and against Brahman suprimecy.

    Brahamans didn’t want to do any work enjoyed on other’s hard work and claim they are messengers of god.

    Brahamans always promoted social inequality & illiteracy to safeguard their position.

    In south jains were dominant ( buddhist were dominant in north) brahamans crushed both violently . They did fake propaganda and invented fake stories to justify their action and also to shape mind of illiterate people.

  12. teri says:

    another abrahamic paid content to defame hinduism. buddhism and jainism both adopt great deals of teaching from hinduism and hinduism itself become large by these tow religion, putting less emphasis on movement of Hinduism, neglect islamic and christian prosecution of all religions of India but concentrate on some hindu attacks and conspiracy theories. let me guess who write this article. lol

  13. Raman Sehgal says:

    Half truths added with lies to support ones distorted narrative :

    Huns : “Interestingly Narasimha Gupta Baladitya, in whose period Gita was composed according to Dr.Ambedkar, was a Hindu emperor who defeated and humiliated Mihirahula the Hun who was massacring the Buddhists. Baladitya was so admired by the Buddhists that he was given the title ‘Buddhapaksha’. It was not only the Gupta emperor who raised the flag of resistance against the Hun massacre of Buddhists but also Yasodharma Vishnuvardhan, another Hindu chief, who also rose in revolt against the anti-Buddhist atrocities of the Hun. Both were ‘Brahminical’ emperors and both were well inclined towards Buddhism.

    Had ‘Brahminism’ with royal patronage in post-Sungha period decided to destroy Buddhism, Mihirahula offered the best opportunity. But history stands testimony to the fact that the kings of India with their allegiance to Brahminical religion stood by Buddhism and faced the ferocity of Huns in the battlefield. So the characterization of Buddhism and Brahminism being staunch enemies in combat with royal patronage for the latter seems to be a bit out of phase with historical reality.”

    Madurai Massacre : Romila Thapar writes that “the Shaivite saint Jnana Sambandar is attributed with having converted the Pandya ruler from Jainism to Shaivism, whereupon it is said that 8,000 Jainas were impaled by the king”. She omits that this king, Arikesari Parankusa Maravarman, is also described as having first persecuted Shaivas; that Sambandar vanquished the Jainas not in battle but in debate (upon which the king converted from Jainism to Shaivism); and that he had escaped Jaina attempts to kill him. Unlike the Muslim persecutions, this Shaiva-Jaina conflict was clearly not a one-way affair. For the sake of blackening Hinduism, the Buddhists and Jains had to be depicted as hapless victims, and their share in the intra- Hindu violence had to be concealed.

    for detailed read on the iconoclasm in hinduism read the following to get the complete picture :

    http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/books/negaind/ch2.htm

    http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/articles/ayodhya/eaton.html

    the true scholarship would be in case the above two write-ups are rebutted.

  14. Siddharth apte says:

    Brahmins called non – aryan (non – vedic) kingdom of eastern and south india vratya kshatriya (degraded kshatriya).

    Brahminism spread into non vedic kingdom of eastern & south india by spritual Jihad i.e. “Vratyastoma Ritual”

    Cast system and brahmin – buddha enimity was responsible for muslim conquest of india.

    Bhramins main interest were (off course are ) to maintain their hereditary supremacy. It were ( off course are) never for people welfare.

  15. Siddharth apte says:

    Vedic Brahminism ( So called Hinduism) spread into whole india by either spiritual jihad or by physical jihad ( massacre of jains , buddhist and other sects)

    Vedic aryan :
    – beef eater
    – follower of bloody yajan & sexual yajna ( Ashwamedha , narmedha etc)

    Brahamans copied vegetarianism of jains (where jains were powerful) but they never left their non vegetarian habit ( kashmiri brahmin, maithili brahmin , maharastrian saraswat brahmin, mainpuri brahmins, bengali brahmins all are non vegetarian)

  16. Gautam says:

    When muslim were crushing central asian buddhist kingdom & buddhist kingdom of afganistan no one helped them even some brahmin community like mohyala fought for muslims.

  17. Raman Sehgal says:

    Buddhism is part of Hinduism :

    watch : https://youtu.be/RGGsn2poETA

  18. Gautam Singh says:

    @ Raman Sehgal
    Jain religion is based on ” Non violence “. It has a wonderful concept of ” Anekantvada “. Jain monk even can not provoke violence at mental and verbal level.
    So arguments given in Periya Puranam for the justification of massacre is fake (like many other stories). These fake arguments are written to justify shaivates autocracy after 500 years of actual incident happened.
    It was fight for supremacy cleverly fought under the envelope of religion.
    And you remember fanatic shaivate chola king prosecuted sri vaishnav preacher ramanuj who found shelter in hoyasal jain king bittidevaraya.

    • Raman Sehgal says:

      Start reading from authors who are not marxists, especially Dr. Elst, Sita Ram Goel and Ram Swarup.

      Now r these authors speaking the truth. You should NOT believe them – but should seek and answer to their POV.

      Do U know Buddha called himself a incarnation of Ram?
      Do U know Buddha believed in Caste system and all past Hindu rituals?
      Do u know majority of Buddhists followers were Brahmins?
      Do u know Buddha never started any new religion?

      I am sure u know nothing of above. Seek truth and not be confined in your prejudice?

  19. Gautam Singh says:

    Buddhism is absolutely not part of hinduism. Brahminism were not well penetrated into cross gangatic religion of north west indian (i.e. magadh etc) during the time of buddha and mahavira. There is a reference in “Pali Tipitaka ” when brahamans first time entered into shakyan state they surprised & no one gave any special regard to them.
    There is numerous anti buddhist or anti bhikshu passages in hindu litrature.

    And mihirkula a white hun who destroyed buddhism adopted Savism as their religion and introduced shaivism to kashmir. After that prosecution of buddhist in kashmir started.

    Even today in rajasthan and gujarat local Rajput folklore proudly state ” rajputs who destroyed bodhidharm i.e. buddhism.

  20. Gautam Singh says:

    Madurai massacre was a war for supremacy cleverly fought under the envelope of religion. They blamed jains as their historical propaganda attitude by framing fake story to justify shaivates autocracy.

    What about … Fanatic shaivate chola king who prosecuted sri vaishnava preacher ramanuja. Ramanuja found shelter in hoyasala jain king bittidevaraya.

    The allegations against jains are absolutely false or fake. Jain monks even can not promote violence even in mind and speech. Jains have wonderful concept of ” Anekantvada “.

    And Celebration of madurai massacre is a insolent shameless act.

    Periyar puranam was written after 500 year of massacre. Chola king kullottonga was found of Jaina epic ” Jivaka chintamni “. To bring king back into shaivism he wrote periya puranam and blamed jains innocently so that they could get license to celebrate massacre as festival and in upcoming future no king or dynasty in tamil land dared to patronize jainism. ( a very cunning politically motivated propaganda)

  21. Gautam Singh says:

    Sekkizhar court poet of chola king kullottonga – II wrote periya puranam.

  22. Gautam Singh says:

    Correction/Error
    He (Sekkizhar) wrote periya puranam and blamed jains insolently (not innocently).

  23. AR says:

    It’s true at one point of time Buddhism was everywhere in Ancient India from Afghanistan to Burma. From Tibet to Srilanka.

    Buddhism taught non-violence, to the extent soldiers refused to fight. This made India specially attractive to foreign looters. Muslim invaders attacked & easily converted today’s Afghanistan, Pakistan. Forget Buddhism, even Indian civilization was wiped out from there.

    Shankaracharya saw the problem with Buddhism & Jainism. He realized entire India would fall prey to the invading Muslim parasites, it was then he revived Hinduism and suppressed Buddhism to save India & Indian civilization.

    Although Buddhism as a religion was obliterated from India but at least Indian civilization persisted.

    • Truth speak says:

      @ AR

      Adi Shankaracharya was a clever person. He used 7th political Havoc’s as a perfect time to destroy or crush opponents. Instead of preaching national & social unity for unified resistance ; he was busy in revival of Brahmanism. A very clever move.

      Muslim conquered sindh in 7th century. In next 300 years muslim slowly conquered whole north west india ( modern Afganistan and pakistan) & central Asia and started invading india proper after 1000 AD.

      During this brahmins were busy in consolidating their hegemony by defaming Buddhism and inventing Rajput clan.

      Adi Shankaracharya writing do not mention Muslim in fact his policies (crusade) were responsible for easy muslim conquest.

      Had Adi Shankaracharya or brahmins preached the concept of unity at the time of trouble muslim might not be able to conquer north west india (modern Afganistan and pakistan). Buddhist were left alone to die or to be crushed. Even notorious mohyala brahmins fought for muslims.

      Brahmins accumulated huge amount of money/wealth in temples it is the main reason muslim attacked & looted or destroyed so many temples.

      Temples became ” Spiritual Money Bank

  24. Truth speak says:

    Why brahmin was so intolerant to Jains in South & Buddhist in North.

    The answer is simple Jainism was dominant in South & Buddhism was dominant in North. And Jain monks or buddhist bhikshu were direct threat to brahmin hegemony.

    In contrast to hereditary brahmins superiority ; Jain or buddhist monks are elected from every castes.

    Buddhist ” Agganna sutta ” is very important historical document it clearly shows brahmins resistance towards spiritual equality and homogenization. It also show brahmins European character i.e fair complexion and their arrogance regarding this while other indians were of dark complexion.

    Vedic culture was developed by priestly class of tribes residing on bank of Sindhu – Saraswati having clear European affiliation. This culture spread first to Ganga – Yamuna basin & then to South India (beyond Vindhya mountains). When these tribes expended & become numerically weak they invented caste system to prevent homogenization i.e purity of blood or genetic composition. Both Herodotus & Baudhayana writing confirmed these facts.

    When they failed to conquer militarily due to numerical weakness; they started slow cultural conquest.Their priestly class conquered whole india & always resisted assimilation by the barrier of caste suprimacy.

    When Sramana movement that was always present as vratya tradition in Ganga – Yamuna basin became prominent counter cultural & spiritual movement ; brahmin initially respond by inventing assimilation i.e vratystoma ritual etc (But not granted them brahmin status). When this failed they branded them anArya. When Sramana movement became very powerful a section of brahmins infiltrated into them to safe mainstream brahmins. These infiltrated brahmins also acted as their agent though they were sramana monks but unable to give up historical or genetic hegemonic syndrome.

    To destroy sramana movement main stream Brahmanism adopted following strategy –

    1. They adopted strict conduct of sramana monks & vegetarianism. They allowed common peoples to follow loose conduct ( including non vegetarianism & liquor).
    Here it is important to note that Jains always maintained strict conduct for both monks and layperson while buddhist adopted moderate approach.

    2. Started anti – Jainism & Buddhism propaganda activities.

    3. Assimilated everything good of sramana movement in form of upanishad , purana & epic poems.

    4. Effectively reinforced brahmins – kshatriya alliance by allotting Veda ; spiritual narratives & other tactics.

    Whenever they found opportunity they did their best to destroy sramana movement actively or passively , directly or indirectly i.e by all means.

    Instead of social welfare they were always focused on priestly class welfare by branding their strong opponents as Shudra (worst than islamic or european slavery) or Asura/demons (worst that anti-Semitism of europe or islamic jihad).

  25. Truth speak says:

    It was brahmin – kshatriya alliance that destroyed the whole indian.

    By cementing kshatriya alliance brahmins secured easy live hood (All kshatriya ceremony had to be conducted by brahmins with dakshina i.e. service charge or consultation fee.

    By cementing brahmins alliance kshatriya secured nobility , extortion rite and consolidated power and wealth and used temple as money bank and society controlling tool.

  26. bharat_singh says:

    Who are brahman community i.e Historical priestly class….??

    Are they actually born from mouth of Brahma (as per Purusha Shukra of RV Mandala X) that’s why they have white complexion….???
    ..
    Well
    ..
    This was well refuted by Buddha in Agganna Sutta.

    The world ” Hindu or Sanatan dharma” is not present in Vedic literature.
    Then what is hinduism….??
    ..
    To answer these questions we have to go back in time .. The Indus Velly Civilization period.
    Yes there was Harappa and other Big cities ; and attached ” Tribal Horde “.
    ..
    Yes tribal Horde i.e ocean of tribes spreading from Modern Afganistan to India..
    Diverse belief & diverse culture and and sporadic conflicts.
    ..
    ..
    Ocean of tribes in whole indian peninsula (North & South)
    ..
    ..
    Tribes residing on Afganistan Haraxavati gave the birth of Zoroastrian religion i.e Avestan Aryavarta ” Modern Iran ”
    ..
    ..
    And sibling tribes first settled in Sapta Sindhu ” “Modern punjab ” on bank of Ghaggar – Harka river “Vedic Saraswati”

    After ” Battle of Ten King ” they migrated towards Ganga Yamuna Basin formed Kuru and Panchala Kingdom with intensive warfare with adjacent tribes.
    ..
    In Kuru Kingdom and also partially in Panchala Kingdom Formal Vedic Religion was synthesized as Srauta Ritual. And adopted process of expansion and amalgamation.
    ..
    That was the precursor of Modern Hinduism.
    ..
    ..
    Who are brahman community…??
    ..
    ..
    The answer is ~~~~ Descendents of Seven Tribes i.e. Sapta Rishies of Rig-Veda ” Group of seven tribes i.e. Seven tribal horde.
    ..
    They largely retained their tribal signature (R1A1) by inventing caste system.
    ..
    But during time of troubles some sort of dilution happened (cross marriage) leaving imprint of their signature (R1A1) in other castes or even Tribes too.
    ..
    In historical india slavery was prevalent. Dasa (male & female) were brought or sold in markets ; there is ample reference regarding this in old buddhist & Jaina literature.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: