Features
The Ignominious Disappearance of Buddhism from India
by K.H.J. Wijedasa
Former Secretary to the President
(Continued from last week)
The complete disappearance of Buddhism from the land of its birth after its glorious flourish is one of the greatest puzzles of history. In present day India Buddhism survives only in the Himalayan fringes, along the Tibetan frontier and in small pockets in Northern and Western India among recent Ambedkar’s Dalit converts. Buddhism reached many countries of Asia at an early date. However, it did not survive for long in the countries to the north west and north of India due to foreign invasions and the advent of Islam; but remained firmly established in Tibet, China Mongolia, Korea, Japan as well as in the whole of South East Asia and Sri Lanka. The ignominious disappearance of Buddhism from India has triggered much debate among historians, social scientists and theologians. The following analysis attempts to figure out the possible reasons for this incongruous phenomenon.
During the time of the Buddha, Hinduism or Brahaminism, a polytheistic religion of Hindus or the Aryans of North India was the sole preserve of the Brahmins or the elevated Hindu priestly caste. The bedrock of Brahminism was the Vedas. The Buddha held that all men are equal and that the caste system or varanadharma to which the Vedas and other Brahmanical books had given religious sanction was completely false. The Buddha is said to have exhorted the Bhikkus saying “Just as the great rivers, when they have emptied themselves to the great ocean lose their different names; so do the four varnas or castes; Kshatriya, Brahmin, Vaishya and Sudra; when they begin to follow the doctrine propounded by the Buddha renounce the different names of caste and rank and become the members of one and the same society.” The simplicity of the Buddha’s message, its stress on equality and its crusade against the bloody and costly sacrifices, and ritualism of Brahmanism had attracted the hitherto oppressed and despised masses to Buddhism in large numbers.
Buddhism by nature is a non- aggressive, non-violent and non-invasive religion. Even though Buddhism was promulgated more than 2,500 years ago, its propagation and expansion throughout northern and Central India took place around 300 years later during the reign of Emperor Asoka (268-239 BC). Thus firmly rooted, Buddhism flourished in India under royal patronage for about 800 years from 2nd century BC, without serious competition or ruthless aggression from other faiths and invading armies. From the 6th century AD up to the 14th century AD, a period of 800 years, Buddhism was harassed and hounded by invading armies of Muslims and mauled by the Brahmanical revival followed by the rise of Hiduism which drove the final nail in the coffin.
Various theories have been put forward which seek to explain the tragic eclipse of Buddhism from India. Many historians have surmised that waves of Arab, Turkish and Muslim invasions which took place from about to 6th century AD to the 14th century AD had dealt several lethal blows to Buddhism in northern and central India in particular. It is on record that in the 6th century AD the Huna King Mihirakula caused the demolition of some 1,600 Buddhist monuments in north-western India where the great Gandhara civilization had flourished for several centuries. Sasanka, a Brahmanical king of Bengal is reported to have persecuted Buddhism in and around Boddh Gaya early in the 7th century AD. In the early part of 12th century AD invading Muslim armies had destroyed the magnificent temples and monasteries at Saranath, one of the centres of Buddhist learning and scholarship from the 2nd century BC.
Bodh Gaya the site of Buddha’s enlightenment, highly venerated and sacred to Buddhists, was subjected to vandalism by Muslim invaders at the beginning of the 13th century AD. Nalanda the seat of the famous ancient Buddhist University was the premier seat of Buddhist learning for many centuries. Invading Turkish armies devastated this vast and magnificent institution in the closing years of the 12th century AD. Chinese pilgrim scholars Hsuan-tsang and I-tsing have stated that Nalanda housed thousands of scholars, numerous libraries, observatories, prayer halls and monk’s hostels. Successive Muslim invasions over several centuries, ruthlessly wiped out the ruling indigenous dynasties which fostered, nurtured and provided royal patronage to Buddhism.
Another plausible argument advanced by scholars to substantiate the gradual decline and eventually the disappearance of Buddhism from India is the corruption as well as the disunity in the Sangha or priesthood. While it is true that with time Buddhist priests became increasingly lax in the observance of the Vinaya or religious rules, corruption alone cannot explain the death of Buddhism. After all it should be borne in mind that Buddhism was replaced in India by an even more corrupt Brahmanism. Buddhism was not a regimented or an institutionalized religion; hence the emergence of Tantra Buddhism weakened Buddhism by making it look like a form of Hinduism.
Another important factor that has been overlooked by historians is the gradual disappearance of Buddhist dynastic rule in some regions of India and the emergence of Brahmanical dynastic rule which adversely impacted on the Buddhists. Thus, in places such as Bengal and Sind which were ruled by Brahmanical dynasties but had Buddhist majorities, Buddhists are said to have welcomed the Muslims as saviours who had freed them from the tyranny of “upper caste” rule. This explains why most of the “lower caste” people in eastern Bengal and Sind embraced Islam. In actual fact, few among the “upper castes” too of these regions did the same.
Since Buddhism was replaced by triumphant Brahmanism, the eclipse of Buddhism in India was primarily a result of the Brahmanical revival. The Buddha’s fight against Brahmanism won him many enemies from among the Brahmins. When Buddhism was on the ascendancy under royal patronage and universal acceptance in India, the Brahmins kept a low profile and marked time until such time “the iron was hot enough to strike”. The Brahmins were not as greatly opposed to the Buddha’s philosophical teachings as they were to his message of universal brotherhood and equality; for it directly challenged their hegemony and the scriptures they had invented to legitimize them.
After Buddhism lost ground in northern and central India, following on successive Muslim invasions, the sacking of temples and monasteries and the prohibition of Buddhist worship, it sought refuge in the Chola, Chera and Pandya Kingdoms of South India up to medieval times. Buddhist missionaries who went to South India initially had to encounter stiff resistance from Jain and Hindu opponents. However, these missionary monks quite often had the good fortune of receiving the encouragement and support of kings, noblemen and wealthy merchants. As a result these monks were able to move freely in many parts of South India, build monasteries and establish centres of Buddhist learning.
These missionary monks undertook various social services in addition to the propagation of the Dhamma. Caste differences were immaterial to them and this provided great relief to the depressed communities. Undoubtedly, the depressed classes found their emancipation in Buddhism. However, between the 13th and 15th centuries AD Buddhism was wiped out of South India as well; with Hinduism making great strides under state patronage.
Today, Brahmanism or Hinduism is the most widely accepted religion in India; practiced by nearly one billion people. To combat Buddhism and revive the tottering Brahmanical hegemony, Brahmanical revivalists resorted to a three-pronged strategy. Firstly, they launched a campaign of hatred and persecution against the Buddhists Secondly, 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 Brahmanical hegemony. The final stage in this campaign to wipe out Buddhism was to propound and propagate the myth that the Buddha was merely another incarnation or Avatar of the Hindu god Vishnu. Thus the Buddha was turned into just another of the countless deities of the Brahmanical pantheon.
The Brahmanical campaign of hatred and persecution against Buddhists was multi–pronged, continuous and relentless. To lend legitimacy to their campaign against Buddhism, Brahmanical 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. Vardha Harit declared that entry into a Buddhist temple is a sin, which could only be expiated by taking a ritual bath. Even dramas and other books for lay people written by Brahmins contained venomous propaganda against the Buddhists. Fines were imposed on those who associated or entertained Buddhists. Shankracharya the leader of the Brahmanical revival, struck terror into the hearts of the Buddhists with all sorts of diatribes against Buddhism.
In order to win over the Buddhist masses, the Brahmanical revivalists appropriated many of the finer aspects of Buddhism into their own system. The Vedic Brahmins taught that animal sacrifice was highly meritorious. The Buddha categorically denounced animal sacrifice. However on account of Buddhist influence, some Hindus renounced the slaughter of animals and adopted the first precept of Buddhism. The Bodhi tree is sacred to Buddhists because the Buddha attained enlightenment seated at the foot of the Bodhi tree. The Buddhist practice of worshipping the Bodhi tree has been emulated by the Hindus of South India. Consequent to the gradual fading out of Buddhism from South India many Buddhist temples were converted to Hindu Kovils, Buddha statues were paraded in the guise of Hindu Gods and the Buddhist history of many of their shrines was transferred to that of Hindu geneology.
In order to make Hinduism more attractive to the Buddhists, many Buddhist concepts were incorporated into Hinduism. Further, the Hindus made an attempt to absorb the Islamic faith. During the reign of King Akbar a new Upanishad named Allah Upanishad was proclaimed. Even after Buddhism was wiped out, Hindus continued to worship the Buddha as the 9th Avatar or incarnation of the Hindu god Vishnu. The Shaivites, one of the main branches of Hinduism made the Buddha one of their gods, calling him Sasta Aiyanar and Dharmarajan. They called him Buddha Vinayaka and equated him to Hindu God Ganesh. The Dharmaraja Vihara and the Vinayaka Vihara were converted to Dharmaraja Kovil and Vinayaka Kovil.
Finally, the Buddhists were absorbed into the caste system as Shudras and Untouchables and with that the Buddhist presence was completely obliterated from the land of its birth. The process of the assimilation of Buddhism by Brahmanism was minutely planned and expertly executed. The Brahmins who were once voracious beef eaters, turned vegetarian imitating Buddhists in this regard. Popular devotion to the Buddha was replaced by devotion to Hindu gods such as Rama and Krishna.
(Concluded)
Author
- News Advertiesment
See Kapruka’s top selling online shopping categories such as Toys, Grocery, Flowers, Birthday Cakes, Fruits, Chocolates, Clothing and Electronics. Also see Kapruka’s unique online services such as Money Remittence,News, Courier/Delivery, Food Delivery and over 700 top brands. Also get products from Amazon & Ebay via Kapruka Gloabal Shop into Sri Lanka.
Author
-
There’s an ill more dangerous and pervasive than the Coronavirus that’s currently sweeping Sri Lanka. That is the fear to express one’s convictions. Across the public sector of the country in particular many persons holding high office are stringently regulating and controlling the voices of their consciences and this bodes ill for all and the country.
The corrupting impact of fear was discussed in this column a couple of weeks ago when dealing with the military coup in Myanmar. It stands to the enduring credit of ousted Myanmarese Head of Government Aung San Suu Kyi that she, perhaps for the first time in the history of modern political thought, singled out fear, and not power, as the principal cause of corruption within the individual; powerful or otherwise.
To be sure, power corrupts but the corrupting impact of fear is graver and more devastating. For instance, the fear in a person holding ministerial office or in a senior public sector official, that he would lose position and power as a result of speaking out his convictions and sincere beliefs on matters of the first importance, would lead to a country’s ills going unaddressed and uncorrected.
Besides, the individual concerned would be devaluing himself in the eyes of all irrevocably and revealing himself to be a person who would be willing to compromise his moral integrity for petty worldly gain or a ‘mess of pottage’. This happens all the while in Lankan public life. Some of those who have wielded and are wielding immense power in Sri Lanka leave very much to be desired from these standards.
It could be said that fear has prevented Sri Lanka from growing in every vital respect over the decades and has earned for itself the notoriety of being a directionless country.
All these ills and more are contained in the current controversy in Sri Lanka over the disposal of the bodies of Covid victims, for example. The Sri Lankan polity has no choice but to abide by scientific advice on this question. Since authorities of the standing of even the WHO have declared that the burial of the bodies of those dying of Covid could not prove to be injurious to the wider public, the Sri Lankan health authorities could go ahead and sanction the burying of the bodies concerned. What’s preventing the local authorities from taking this course since they claim to be on the side of science? Who or what are they fearing? This is the issue that’s crying out to be probed and answered.
Considering the need for absolute truthfulness and honesty on the part of all relevant persons and quarters in matters such as these, the latter have no choice but to resign from their positions if they are prevented from following the dictates of their consciences. If they are firmly convinced that burials could bring no harm, they are obliged to take up the position that burials should be allowed.
If any ‘higher authority’ is preventing them from allowing burials, our ministers and officials are conscience-bound to renounce their positions in protest, rather than behave compromisingly and engage in ‘double think’ and ‘double talk’. By adopting the latter course they are helping none but keeping the country in a state of chronic uncertainty, which is a handy recipe for social instabiliy and division.
In the Sri Lankan context, the failure on the part of the quarters that matter to follow scientific advice on the burials question could result in the aggravation of Islamophobia, or hatred of the practitioners of Islam, in the country. Sri Lanka could do without this latter phobia and hatred on account of its implications for national stability and development. The 30 year war against separatist forces was all about the prevention by military means of ‘nation-breaking’. The disastrous results for Sri Lanka from this war are continuing to weigh it down and are part of the international offensive against Sri Lanka in the UNHCR.
However, Islamophobia is an almost world wide phenomenon. It was greatly strengthened during Donald Trump’s presidential tenure in the US. While in office Trump resorted to the divisive ruling strategy of quite a few populist authoritarian rulers of the South. Essentially, the manoeuvre is to divide and rule by pandering to the racial prejudices of majority communities.
It has happened continually in Sri Lanka. In the initial post-independence years and for several decades after, it was a case of some populist politicians of the South whipping-up anti-Tamil sentiments. Some Tamil politicians did likewise in respect of the majority community. No doubt, both such quarters have done Sri Lanka immeasurable harm. By failing to follow scientific advice on the burial question and by not doing what is right, Sri Lanka’s current authorities are opening themselves to the charge that they are pandering to religious extremists among the majority community.
The murderous, destructive course of action adopted by some extremist sections among Muslim communities world wide, including of course Sri Lanka, has not earned the condemnation it deserves from moderate Muslims who make-up the preponderant majority in the Muslim community. It is up to moderate opinion in the latter collectivity to come out more strongly and persuasively against religious extremists in their midst. It will prove to have a cementing and unifying impact among communities.
It is not sufficiently appreciated by governments in the global South in particular that by voicing for religious and racial unity and by working consistently towards it, they would be strengthening democratic development, which is an essential condition for a country’s growth in all senses.
A ‘divided house’ is doomed to fall; this is the lesson of history. ‘National security’ cannot be had without human security and peaceful living among communities is central to the latter. There cannot be any ‘double talk’ or ‘politically correct’ opinions on this question. Truth and falsehood are the only valid categories of thought and speech.
Those in authority everywhere claiming to be democratic need to adopt a scientific outlook on this issue as well. Studies conducted on plural societies in South Asia, for example, reveal that the promotion of friendly, cordial ties among communities invariably brings about healing among estranged groups and produces social peace. This is the truth that is waiting to be acted upon.
Author
By Sanjeewa Jayaweera
It was on 3rd January 1972 that our family arrived in Karachi from Moscow. Our departure from Moscow had been delayed for a few weeks due to the military confrontation between Pakistan and India. It ended on 16th December 1971. After that, international flights were not permitted for some time.
The contrast between Moscow and Karachi was unbelievable. First and foremost, Moscow’s temperature was near minus 40 degrees centigrade, while in Karachi, it was sunny and a warm 28 degrees centigrade. However, what struck us most was the extreme warmth with which the airport authorities greeted our family. As my father was a diplomat, we were quickly ushered to the airport’s VIP Lounge. We were in transit on our way to Rawalpindi, the airport serving the capital of Islamabad.
We quickly realized that the word “we are from Sri Lanka” opened all doors just as saying “open sesame” gained entry to Aladdin’s cave! The broad smile, extreme courtesy, and genuine warmth we received from the Pakistani people were unbelievable.
This was all to do with Mrs Sirima Bandaranaike’s decision to allow Pakistani aircraft to land in Colombo to refuel on the way to Dhaka in East Pakistan during the military confrontation between Pakistan and India. It was a brave decision by Mrs Bandaranaike (Mrs B), and the successive governments and Sri Lanka people are still enjoying the fruits of it. Pakistan has been a steadfast and loyal supporter of our country. They have come to our assistance time and again in times of great need when many have turned their back on us. They have indeed been an “all-weather” friend of our country.
Getting back to 1972, I was an early beneficiary of Pakistani people’s love for Sri Lankans. I failed the entrance exam to gain entry to the only English medium school in Islamabad! However, when I met the Principal, along with my father, he said, “Sanjeewa, although you failed the entrance exam, I will this time make an exception as Sri Lankans are our dear friends.” After that, the joke around the family dinner table was that I owed my education in Pakistan to Mrs B!
At school, my brother and I were extended a warm welcome and always greeted “our good friends from Sri Lanka.” I felt when playing cricket for our college; our runs were cheered more loudly than of others.
One particular incident that I remember well was when the Embassy received a telex from the Foreign inistry. It requested that our High Commissioner seek an immediate meeting with the Prime Minister of Pakistan, Mr Zulifikar Ali Bhutto (ZB), and convey a message from Mrs B. The message requested that an urgent shipment of rice be dispatched to Sri Lanka as there would be an imminent rice shortage. As the Ambassador was not in the station, the responsibility devolved on my father.
It usually takes about a week or more to get an audience with the Prime Minister (PM) of a foreign country due to their busy schedule. However, given the urgency, my father spoke to the Foreign Ministry’s Permanent Sectary, who fortunately was our neighbour and sought an urgent appointment. My father received a call from the PM’s secretary around 10 P.M asking him to come over to the PM’s residence. My father met ZB around midnight. ZB was about to retire to bed and, as such, was in his pyjamas and gown enjoying a cigar! He had greeted my father and had asked, “Mr Jayaweera, what can we do for great friend Madam Bandaranaike?. My father conveyed the message from Colombo and quietly mentioned that there would be riots in the country if there is no rice!
ZB had immediately got the Food Commissioner of Pakistan on the line and said, “I want a shipload of rice to be in Colombo within the next 72 hours!” The Food Commissioner reverted within a few minutes, saying that nothing was available and the last export shipment had left the port only a few hours ago to another country. ZB had instructed to turn the ship around and send it to Colombo. This despite protests from the Food Commissioner about terms and conditions of the Letter of Credit prohibiting non-delivery. Sri Lanka got its delivery of rice!
The next was the visit of Mrs B to Pakistan. On arrival in Rawalpindi airport, she was given a hero’s welcome, which Pakistan had previously only offered to President Gaddafi of Libya, who financially backed Pakistan with his oil money. That day, I missed school and accompanied my parents to the airport. On our way, we witnessed thousands of people had gathered by the roadside to welcome Mrs B.
When we walked to the airport’s tarmac, thousands of people were standing in temporary stands waving Sri Lanka and Pakistan flags and chanting “Sri Lanka Pakistan Zindabad.” The noise emanating from the crowd was as loud and passionate as the cheering that the Pakistani cricket team received during a test match. It was electric!
I believe she was only the second head of state given the privilege of addressing both assemblies of Parliament. The other being Gaddafi. There was genuine affection from Mrs B amongst the people of Pakistan.
I always remember the indefatigable efforts of Mr Abdul Haffez Kardar, a cabinet minister and the President of the Pakistan Cricket Board. From around 1973 onwards, he passionately championed Sri Lanka’s cause to be admitted as a full member of the International Cricket Council (ICC) and granted test status. Every year, he would propose at the ICC’s annual meeting, but England and Australia’s veto kept us out until 1981.
I always felt that our Cricket Board made a mistake by not inviting Pakistan to play our inaugural test match. We should have appreciated Mr Kardar and Pakistan’s efforts. In 1974 the Pakistan board invited our team for a tour involving three test matches and a few first-class games. Most of those who played in our first test match was part of that tour, and no doubt gained significant exposure playing against a highly talented Pakistani team.
Several Pakistani greats were part of the Pakistan and India team that played a match soon after the Central Bank bomb in Colombo to prove that it was safe to play cricket in Colombo. It was a magnificent gesture by both Pakistan and India. Our greatest cricket triumph was in Pakistan when we won the World Cup in 1996. I am sure the players and those who watched the match on TV will remember the passionate support our team received that night from the Pakistani crowd. It was like playing at home!
I also recall reading about how the Pakistani government air freighted several Multi Barrell artillery guns and ammunition to Sri Lanka when the A rmy camp in Jaffna was under severe threat from the LTTE. This was even more important than the shipload of rice that ZB sent. This was crucial as most other countries refused to sell arms to our country during the war.
Time and again, Pakistan has steadfastly supported our country’s cause at the UNHCR. No doubt this year, too, their diplomats will work tirelessly to assist our country.
We extend a warm welcome to Mr Imran Khan, the Prime Minister of Pakistan. He is a truly inspirational individual who was undoubtedly an excellent cricketer. Since retirement from cricket, he has decided to get involved in politics, and after several years of patiently building up his support base, he won the last parliamentary elections. I hope that just as much as he galvanized Sri Lankan cricketers, his political journey would act as a catalyst for people like Kumar Sangakkara and Mahela Jayawardene to get involved in politics. Cricket has been called a “gentleman’s game.” Whilst politics is far from it!.
Author
Believe me, seeing certain videos, on social media, depicting action, on the dance floor, at some of these entertainment venues, got me wondering whether this Coronavirus pandemic is REAL!
To those having a good time, at these particular venues, and, I guess, the management, as well, what the world is experiencing now doesn’t seem to be their concerned.
Obviously, such irresponsible behaviour could create more problems for those who are battling to halt the spread of Covid-19, and the new viriant of Covid, in our part of the world.
The videos, on display, on social media, show certain venues, packed to capacity – with hardly anyone wearing a mask, and social distancing…only a dream..
How can one think of social distancing while gyrating, on a dance floor, that is over crowded!
If this trend continues, it wouldn’t be a surprise if Coronavirus makes its presence felt…at such venues.
And, then, what happens to the entertainment scene, and those involved in this field, especially the musicians? No work, whatsoever!
Lots of countries have closed nightclubs, and venues, where people gather, in order to curtail the spread of this deadly virus that has already claimed the lives of thousands.
Thailand did it and the country is still having lots of restrictions, where entertainment is concerned, and that is probably the reason why Thailand has been able to control the spread of the Coronavirus.
With a population of over 69 million, they have had (so far), a little over 25,000 cases, and 83 deaths, while we, with a population of around 21 million, have over 80,000 cases, and more than 450 deaths.
I’m not saying we should do away with entertainment – totally – but we need to follow a format, connected with the ‘new normal,’ where masks and social distancing are mandatory requirements at these venues. And, dancing, I believe, should be banned, at least temporarily, as one can’t maintain the required social distance, while on the dance floor, especially after drinks.
Police spokesman DIG Ajith Rohana keeps emphasising, on TV, radio, and in the newspapers, the need to adhere to the health regulations, now in force, and that those who fail to do so would be penalised.
He has also stated that plainclothes officers would move around to apprehend such offenders.
Perhaps, he should instruct his officers to pay surprise visits to some of these entertainment venues.
He would certainly have more than a bus load of offenders to be whisked off for PCR/Rapid Antigen tests!
I need to quote what Dr. H.T. Wickremasinghe said in his article, published in The Island of Tuesday, February 16th, 2021:
“…let me conclude, while emphasising the need to continue our general public health measures, such as wearing masks, social distancing, and avoiding crowded gatherings, to reduce the risk of contact with an infected person.
“There is no science to beat common sense.”
But…do some of our folks have this thing called COMMON SENSE!
