Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

dogra's Achievements

  1. this is in response to the thread about buddist persecution, which has been locked, due to reasons deemed:"axe to grind", well let sus be clear a few facts were stated of Chinese travellers to India who stated what they saw at the time and what historinas said, so these are the point of view from an historical perspective.

  2. Over three hundred years ago, The ninth Guruji of the Sikh faith along with disciples: Bhai Mati Dass, Bhai Dyal Dass and Bhai Sati Das, sacrificed their lives for a group of opressed people, this self sacrifice is an example to all humanity. http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/M...u_Tegh_Bahadur http://www.sikh-history.com/sikhhist/gurus/nanak9.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religi...hbahadur.shtml 24th November in the Gurdwaras people wil go and pay their respects to this great example to all humanity!
  3. and some other facts: "And what did the Hindus that were fighting the Muhammadan invaders do for Buddhism during the invasions? Here are some excerpts from Alexander Berzin’s “The Historical Interaction between the Buddhist and Islamic Cultures before the Mongol Empire”: Although the Mithila rulers were Shaivite Hindus, they continued the Pala patronage of Buddhism and offered strong resistance against the Ghurids. They stopped, for example, an attempted drive to take Tibet in 1206. The Sena king (Hindu) installed defensive garrisons at Odantapuri and Vikramashila Monasteries, which were imposing walled citadels directly on the Ghurids’ line of advance. " well there u have it...
  4. Myth #4: Adi Shankaracharya instigated Hindu kings to rid India of Buddhism "The debates that Shankara engaged in had the criterion that the one that lost the debate should embrace the faith of the victor. When Buddhist scholars lost debate after debate with Shankara, they had no choice but to honor the commitment and when they did so, the king / prince to whom these Buddhist scholars were mentors ended up following suit. There is nothing in the historical records, even remotely, to suggest that Shankara forced Hindu kings to unleash violence against the Buddhists. While he did engage in discussions with many rulers persuasively about Hindu dharma, the charge of this Hindu Guru engaging in violence against Buddhists is the unilateral dream of biased historians. There is not even a shred of evidence that substantiates the charge of Adi Shankaracharya instigating violence against Buddhists. And just to be sure, if we deep dive into the Advaita philosophy, as expounded by Adi Shankaracharya, the same ethics that are seen in the Vedas, Upanishads & Bhagavad Gita, like truth, non-violence, service etc are seen. Had Adi Shankaracharya acted against what he publicly preached or had he done things blatantly contradicted the message of Vedas, he would have ceased to be the philosopher / saint he is. "
  5. also: "So what the above instances go to show is that Hindu kings were not Hindu extremists that destroyed Buddhism, as, the modern day historians try to claim. Given the obvious gaps in their falsified accunts, some of the historians use King Mihirakula as a Hindu poster boy that unleashed violence against Buddhists. But what they willfully gloss over is that this king was not a Hindu but was a Hun ruler that belonged to a clan (of Central Asian Xionites origin) that invaded North West India. The historians claim that King Mihirakula was a Shiavitie but in his campaigns against the kingdom of Malwa and Gwalior, he razed down temples and Buddhist stupas alike and this confirms his non-Hindu origins. Just to be doubly sure, I am also presenting his lineage which proves he was not a Hindu. Mihirakula was the son of the Hun ruler called Toramana and their Hun lineage and the spread of the kingdom can be seen in the Jain literary work called Kuvalayamala. "
  6. then we have: "Myth #2: King Pushyamitra was a Hindu bigot that slaughtered Buddhist monks. there are historical accounts of King Pushyamitra patronizing the construction of many Buddhist monasteries. This is where the statement of the historian Etienne Lamotte assumes significance: “To judge from the documents, Pushyamitra must be acquitted through lack of proof.” (History of Indian Buddhism, Institut Orientaliste, Louvain-la-Neuve 1988/1958, p.109) " then some more: "Myth #3: Hindu rulers systematically uprooted Buddhism. This is a very generic myth and to counter it we are going to use chronicles of Chinese travelers, some of whom, where students of Buddhist theology And where did Hieun Tsang pursue further studies? He did it in Buddhist University of Nalanda. Had Hindu rulers were so intent on finishing off Buddhism, how did this University survive? And a couple of centuries prior to this assembly at Kanauj, another Chinese traveler Faxian (330 – 420 AD) had chronicled the hold of Buddhism in India. Even in the two centuries between these two Chinese travelers, Buddhism did not wither away, which, clearly indicates that across this land ruled by Hindu kings, the growth of Buddhism was never curtailed. "
  7. Have heard statements that bhuddism declined due to persecution, but some things dont add up, lets see http://agniveer.com/5936/were-buddhists-persecuted-by-hindus/ King Asoka, whose chariot wheel adorns the Indian flag, became bhudist and gave India just and humane edicts, but we have: "As we all know, Ashoka, propelled by a sense of guilt after the bloodbath in Kalinga embraced Buddhism as some form of redemption to overcome the same. Not many Marxist historians and Islamic historians in India do seem to acknowledge a little fact that Emperor Ashoka was helped by two of his Hindu mentors in this move. So, to start with, if Hindus were as dogmatic about their faiths, as these historians have projected Hindus to be and had persecuted Buddhists, why and how did those that had sway over this great emperor allow him to embrace Buddhism as his personal faith? "
  8. This account goes into detail of what happended: http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Muslim_League_Attack_on_Sikhs_and_Hindus_in_the_Punjab_1947 But their were Muslim faith community leaders who were against great evil of partition, such as Allah Baksh-Sind province first premier and Abdul Ghaffar Khan-NWFP leader: Great human beings. http://www.sasnet.lu.se/news-sources/article-shamsul-islam http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khan_Abdul_Ghaffar_Khan#Ghaffar_.22Badshah.22_Khan The apostles of pacifism surrendered to fascist violence of the league: "The new Interim Government to which the Viceroy had invited both the Congress and the Muslim League was due to take office on the 2nd of September, 1946. The Congress accepted the offer but the League rejected it. All appeared to be set for the word of command on the part of the League to let slip the blood hounds which would plunge the country into the horrors of a terrible Civil War. The comments of the British Press, seldom pro-Congress in its views and very consistent in voicing a pro-League bias, were on this occasion revealing, as they found in this Direct Action threat of the Muslim League nothing less than the design to plung the country into a Civil War: Said the �News Chronicle� of the 30th July, 1946, a day after the passage of the Direct Action Resolution: �What precisely does Mr. Jinnah think he will achieve by embracing violence-and at a moment when so substantial a part of his claims has been conceded? �Does he think that communal strife will benefit India or even the Muslim part of India? He has only to look at other parts of Asia to see what lies at the end of that tunnel. �Does he want his country to become another China, ravaged and utterly impoverished by interminable Civil War? �It is hopeless, of course, if Mr. Jinnah is wedded to complete intransigeance-if, as now seems the case he really is thirsting for a holy war. �If Mr. Jinnah nosy resorts to violence, it will be very difficult to save India from disaster.� In the above extract occur the prophetic words �Civil War� and �holy War�, and the Muslim League attitude plunged the country soon after into both these "
  9. http://agniveer.blogspot.com/2010/06/origin-of-vedas.html
  10. may not be straighforward but enough examples have been given. any person can be anyone depending on his work and qualifications:
  11. Birth based caste is not in scriptures, which is older then when it came about through corruption through number of people at top jobs who wanted to maintain their kids intop positions, and 21st century is not when a number of Hindu faith have said no birth based caste, Ramanuja one thousand years ago: then later we had Sri Ramanand: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramananda Scriptures thousands of years ago have not mentioned birth based caste, and so have a number of individuals, there is more to be done and discussions and arguments are taking place to remove this social evil of birth based caste, which blights many millions in India.
  12. First place do not recognise this 'dalits' term, birth based cased divisions which reject, as God resides in heart of all beings, our functions of course are different, but each function is to be respected, anyway lets see: http://agniveer.com/888/caste-system/
  13. Vedas were written in India, and this aryan invasion theory which dispersed the Harrapan civilisation, has been slam dunked to the dustbin of human history: My link Take river saraswati a river mentioned in vedas, and scientifically proven to exist, this river dried out, and hence the harappan civilisation dispersed, and thats a fact! Therre of course were later migrations and earliers ones, as well invasions, point is of Harrapan civilisation disappearance here. Lets see some more: My link
  14. Is sanatan dharma worshipping many gods or one: It is quite clear -one god, but many manifestations. Now is there idol worship in scriptures: No idol worship, but sanatan dharma does not speak against other practices as there many paths to god all deserving of respect
  • Create New...