What is the aim of Buddhism?

[kailasa 0]

O mine English, the grandmother spoke to me: "Study".

If in the material world there are qualities, hence their direct contrast is spiritual qualities?

 

[Ananga 0]

It appears you are right about the brainwashing, Jayasriradhey. I think some of these people need to actually study Vedanta first hand before they try and speak knowledgeably on it.

[animesh 0]

quote:

___________

O mine English, the grandmother spoke to me: "Study".

If in the material world there are qualities, hence their direct contrast is spiritual qualities?

___________

 

Kailasa ji,

Let me guess your question. Perhaps you are trying to ask, "If there are some good and bad qualities in material world, do the same good and bad qualities exist in spiritual world?

Did I understand your question correctly?

What language do you speak?

[Maitreya 0]

kailasa,

 

Yes.Like a tree reflecting into a pond.The reflection though lacks in true substance.Trying to pick a mango from the reflected tree results only in frustration.Even though you can see it's shape, color and position on the tree from the reflection it can yield no taste.

 

The qualities we see here are here only because we are here.We are sustaining this universe and reflecting qualities of life into it.

 

In otherwords, qualities are visible here because they really exist in the spirtual world first.

 

Hare Krishna

 

 

[kailasa 0]

To animesh

Thank to you.

I speak Russian, will go?

>" If there are some bad and bad qualities in material world, do the same good and good qualities exist in spiritual world? "

Yes I with you agree.

 

To Maitreya

>The reflection though lacks in true substance.Trying to pick a mango from the reflected tree results only in frustration.

I try it to apply to myself. Thank .

 

 

[talasiga 0]

Originally posted by kailasa:

" If there are some bad and bad qualities in material world, do the same good and good qualities exist in spiritual world? "

 

Oh Kailasa

Inaccesible Mountain

on this deceptive discussion

about the aim of Buddhism ?!

 

The aim of Buddhism

is the cessation of all worlds

material or spiritual

the state of Nirvana

the state of No Becoming.

The cessation of existence itself

for how can one exist

when coming from and going to

has ended in No Becoming?

Beyond movement

Beyond the cycles

non existence

Eternally.

An aim

with

no

mark.

 

 

.

.

.

aimless talasiga@hotmail.com

[talasiga 0]

NIRVANA

 

Nightly she bathes

Every shore her entry

Into the dissolving stream

Her heart so heavy

She dare not swim

 

The Enlightened One teaches

of an end to Suffering.

Her worlds have ended

Yet still she suffers

As she washes

tears with tears.

 

.

.

.

worldly talasiga@hotmail.com

[sabrina King 0]

Pardon me for interrupting such a delgihtful tit for tat..but once again methinks someone here is missing the whole point.

 

Satyaraja-the most simplest of truth in both faiths is that all paths lead to one Divinity...that all deities/indeed allt higns are merely manifestations of one Divine.

 

Sweet..either you are just argumentative..(and I will agree with someone earlier..your rhetoric is full of holes..) or you just totally missed the entire point of both faiths...why do you feel the need to assert a dissention...to cause opposing forces...to try and call out "my faith is more pure than yours? or older?"

 

All paths are the same...they all lead to One.

 

We are Each as are All things Divinity Manifest-Ghandi.

 

sabrina

 

 

[sabrina King 0]

Pardon me for interrupting such a delgihtful tit for tat..but once again methinks someone here is missing the whole point.

 

Satyaraja-the most simplest of truth in both faiths is that all paths lead to one Divinity...that all deities/indeed allt higns are merely manifestations of one Divine.

 

Sweet..either you are just argumentative..(and I will agree with someone earlier..your rhetoric is full of holes..) or you just totally missed the entire point of both faiths...why do you feel the need to assert a dissention...to cause opposing forces...to try and call out "my faith is more pure than yours? or older?"

 

All paths are the same...they all lead to One.

 

We are Each as are All things Divinity Manifest-Ghandi.

 

sabrina

 

 

[Maitreya 0]

sabrina,

 

It is nice to appreciate that there is value in all approaches toward enlightenment.

 

But there are some very real differences.Some are very obvious and others more subtle.

 

All on a highway may be headed the same way, but some may choose to take turn offs that are not quite to the final destination.A crude example but I think you will get what I am trying to say.

 

Hare Krishna

[amanpeter 0]

Dear Sabrina, Things can change quickly here, especially with Satyaraja prabhu. Renewing old threads can bring up all kinds of complications and also confusion for those who are just recently tuning in. Hope this might help in understanding and conflict avoidance. Sincerely, Peter

[Bhaktavasya 0]

 

The aim of Buddhism, or the results of Buddhist meditative practise, is to become free from suffering that comes from egotism and ignorance and then with enlightened compassion to work for the benefit of all sentient beings. To be mindful or conscious in each and every act and situation. "Before enlightenment, chopping wood and carrying water, after enlightenment, chopping wood and carrying water" is a familiar zen saying.

 

This is a nutshell explanation, as there are many different school of Buddhism from Zen to Mayayana to Theravada that often disagree on various points of doctrine, such as whether or not to pay homage to the wrathful deities, whether or not they actually exist. The Dalai Lama, for example, has denounced the inclusion of a particular wrathful deity (whose name escapes me), and Buddhists from another school denounced the Dalai Lama for exluding the wrathful deity, claiming that the massacre of Buddhists in Tibet came about because prayers to wrathful deity stopped after the Dalai Lama denounced him.

An excellent magazine on Buddhism, with articles by Western and Eastern teachers, modern day Buddhists and older traditionalists, is tricycle (see tricycle.com), the Buddhist Review.

 

In today's Daily Dharma:

 

The Dalai Lama, Compassion and the Individual

 

We humans have existed in our present form for about a hundred thousand years. I believe that if during this time the human mind had been primarily controlled by anger and hatred, our overall population would have decreased. But today, despite all our wars, we find that the humand population is greater than ever. Ths clearly indicates to me that love and compassion predominate in the world. And this is why unpleasant events are "news"; compassionate activities are so much a part of daily life that they are taken for granted and, therefore, largely ignored.

 

[talasiga 0]

Originally posted by amanpeter:

Renewing old threads can bring up all kinds of complications and also confusion for those who are just recently tuning in.

 

The Void

 

Mahamantra, the oldest thread

She feeds through

the Eye of the needle

 

.

 

.

 

.

hungry talasiga@hotmail.com

 

 

 

[Bhaktavasya 0]

 

Valaya, I don't understand how bringing up (reviving)old threads can cause confusion when the entire thread can be read by 'new readers'.

Sounds to me like you're picking at faults (sorry, but I have to say it) that don't really exist.

 

 

[amanpeter 0]

Originally posted by Bhaktavasya:

Valaya, I don't understand how bringing up (reviving)old threads can cause confusion when the entire thread can be read by 'new readers'.

Sounds to me like you're picking at faults (sorry, but I have to say it) that don't really exist.

 

It seems to me that discussions move between threads, conclusions are reached and sometimes peoples' opinions or philosophy has changed by the time an old thread is picked up again. It's o.k. for those of us that know each other somewhat and have been following our posts all over, even on dharma-mela, but I thought new-comers might get off on the wrong tangent. No big thing and certainly no fault finding intended, except possibly of these internet forums as a means of personal communication. Like, we can post the words of a song, but unless the reader has heard it along with the music so much is missing...

 

I find it somewhat frustrating and wish we could all meet face-to-face and share more intimately. Maybe that's due to my own isolation and/or something/someone lacking in my life. I tend towards unrealistic idealism and have always been a dreamer, I guess.

 

------------------

amanpeter@hotmail.com

 

[This message has been edited by amanpeter (edited 08-19-2001).]

[talasiga 0]

Originally posted by amanpeter:

It seems to me that discussions move between threads, conclusions are reached and sometimes peoples' opinions or philosophy has changed by the time an old thread is picked up again.

 

Dear Amanpeter

 

An old thread

is a dormant thread

and not a dead thread

When a thread is stitched

the Administrator will LOCK it

Until then the sleeper

is open

to new Dreams

 

Friend ! This thread has inspired

Some of my best poems

on Radha

Would you have me leave it ?

 

Come now.

I hope you're not sulking

because I asked you

not to call me "prabhu"

Please call me "friend"

or perhaps "old thread head".

 

Your brother

in Dust

talasiga@hotmail.com

 

 

[This message has been edited by talasiga (edited 08-20-2001).]

[Guest guest]

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

The post above is a msg that just arrived from nirvana!!!

[talasiga 0]

Message from Nirvana

 

It is written in invisible ink

Those who know It

Need not read It

 

 

 

[amanpeter 0]

Friend ! This thread has inspired

Some of my best poems

on Radha

Would you have me leave it ?

 

Come now.

I hope you're not sulking

because I asked you

not to call me "prabhu"

Please call me "friend"

or perhaps "old thread head".

 

 

Your brother

in Dust

talasiga@hotmail.com

RADHA

You say!

COME

Let us

PLAY!

 

 

I have neither family, friends nor guru, but it is friends I miss the most. That connection I consider most intimate and precious as it is wholly voluntary at all stages. Prabhu is used by me in a generic sense to indicate a particular respect for devotees and aspirants on this path, in spite of what some may believe who are unable or simply unwilling to see what motivates my actions.

 

As for lovers, the price is far too high for any to qualify, including Krsna. I worship Sri Radhika as my all-in-all and hold Her as most dear. What continues on these forum exchanges is not only greatly disheartening for me, but even crippling. Maybe later, `friend`...your heart calls, but you are not so alone as I.

 

------------------

amanpeter@hotmail.com

[jijaji 0]

The Ancient Order of Things Was Overwhelmed by the Buddha

 

by Svami Vivekananda\

 

(Please keep in mind I am not posting to challenge ANYONE'S conviction's. I am simply posting some of Vivekanandas writings on this subject as some of them are relevant..I do not agree with everything said here, but find much of it fasinating history)

 

1. The Social Wants at the Time of Buddha

Buddhism was the rebellion of the newly formed kshatriyas against Vedic priestcraft.

The struggle [between the priests and kings] began to be fiercer. Its culminating point came two thousand years after [the Upanishads] in Buddhism. The seed of Buddhism is here, [in] the ordinary struggle between the king and the priest; and [in the struggle] all religion declined. One wanted to sacrifice religion and the other wanted to cling to the sacrifices, the Vedic gods, etc.

 

[After the lull cause by the reconciliation effected by Sri Krishna], the ambition of the two classes - brahmin and kshatriya - to be the masters of the poor and ignorant was [still] there, and the strife once more became fierce. The meager literature that has come down to us from that period brings to us but faint echoes of that mighty past strife, but at last it broke out as a victory for the kshatriyas, a victory for jnana, for liberty - and ceremonial had to go down, much of it forever.

 

This upheaval is what is known as the Buddhistic reformation. On the religious side, it represented freedom from ceremonial; and on the political side, overthrow of the priesthood by the kshatriyas.

 

It is a significant fact that the two greatest men ancient India produced were both kshatriyas - Krishna and Buddha - and still more significant that both of these God-men threw open the door of knowledge to everyone, irrespective of birth or sex.

 

Though tension [in the triangular fight between ceremonials, philosophy and materialism had been toned down for the time being by Krishna’s teaching], it did not satisfy the social wants which were among the causes - the claim of the king-race to stand first in the scale of caste and the popular intolerance of priestly privilege.

 

Krishna had opened the gates of spiritual knowledge and attainment to all, irrespective of sex or caste, but he left undisturbed the same problem on the social side. This again has come down to our own days, in spite of the gigantic struggle of the Buddhists Vaishnavas, etc., to attain social equality for all.

 

The struggle [was] renewed all along the line in the seventh century before the Christian era and finally in the sixth, overwhelming the ancient order of things under Shakya Muni, the Buddha.

 

On the one hand there was the political jealousy between the kings and priests, and then these different dissatisfied sects [such as the Jains were] springing up everywhere. And there was the greater problem: the vast multitudes of people wanting the same rights as the Aryans, dying of thirst while the perennial stream of nature went flowing by them, and no right to drink a drop of water….

 

In India [there are] two great races: one is called the Aryan, the other, the non-Aryan. It is the Aryan race that has the three castes, but the whole of the rest are dubbed with one name - shudras - no caste. They are not Aryans at all. (Many people came from outside India and they found the shudras there, the aborigines of the country.)

 

However it may be, these vast masses of non-Aryan people and the mixed people among them, gradually became civilized, and they began to scheme for the same rights as the Aryans…. And the brahmin priest was the great antagonist of such claims. You see, it is the nature of priests in every country - they are the most conservative people, naturally. So long as it is a trade, it must be; it is to their interest to be conservative.

 

So this tide of murmur outside the Aryan pale the priests were trying to check with all their might. Within the Aryan pale, there was also a tremendous religious ferment, and [it was] mostly led by the military caste.

 

Buddhism Combated Not Only Priestcraft and Animal Sacrifice: It was the First to Break Down the Barriers of Caste

 

The intellectual world was divided before Buddha came. But for a correct understanding of his religion, it is also necessary to speak of the caste then existing.... These different social divisions developed or degenerated into iron-bound castes and an organized and crystallized priestcraft stood upon the necks of the nation. At this time Buddha was born and his religion is therefore the culmination of an attempt at religious and social reformation.

 

The air was full of the din of discussion: 20,000 blind priests were trying to lead 20,000,000 blind men, fighting amongst themselves. What was more needed at that time than for a Buddha to preach? "Stop quarreling, throw your books aside, and be perfect!" Buddha never fought true castes, for they are nothing but the congregation of those of a particular natural tendency, and they are always valuable.

 

But Buddha fought the degenerated castes with their hereditary privileges, and spoke to the brahmins: " True brahmins are not greedy, nor criminal, nor angry - are you such? If not, do not mimic the genuine, real men. Caste is a state, not an iron-bound class, and everyone who knows and loves God is a true brahmin." And with regard to the sacrifices, he said, "Where do the Vedas say that sacrifices make us pure? They may please, perhaps, the angels, but they make us no better. Hence, let off these mummeries - love God and strive to be perfect."

 

Original Buddhism... was but an attempt to combat caste and priestcraft; it was the first in the world to stand as champion of dumb animals, the first to break down caste, standing between human beings.

 

Buddhism... broke the chains of the masses. All castes and creeds alike became equal in a minute.

 

Brahmanya power was almost effaced from its field of work in Indian during the Jain and Buddhist revolutions; or, perhaps, was holding its feeble stand by being subservient to the strong, antagonistic religions.

 

Buddha Broke the Mental and Spiritual Bonds of Men by Preaching Vedanta to the Whole World

Buddha was the triumph in the struggle that had been going on between the priest and the prophets in India. One thing can be said for these Indian priests - they were not, and never are, intolerant of religion; they never have persecuted religion. Any man was allowed to preach against them. Theirs is such a religion; they never molested any one for his religious views.

 

But they suffered from the peculiar weakness of all priests: they also sought power, they also promulgated rules and regulations and made religion unnecessarily complicated, and thereby undermined the strength of those who followed their religion.

 

India was full of witchcraft in Buddha's day. There were the masses of the people, and they were debarred from all knowledge. If just a word of the Vedas entered the ears of a man, terrible punishment was visited upon him. The priests had made a secret of the Vedas - the Vedas that contained the spiritual truths discovered by the ancient Hindus!

 

At last, one man could bear it no more. He had the brain, the power and the heart - a heart as infinite as the broad sky. He felt how the masses were being led by the priests and how the priests were glorying in their power, and he wanted to do something about it. He did not want power over any one, and he wanted to break the mental and spiritual bonds of men.

 

What Buddha did was to break wide open the gates of that very religion which was confined in the Upanishads and to a particular caste.

 

Advaita (which gets its whole force on the subjective side of man), was never allowed to come to the people. At first some monks got hold of it and took it to the forests, and so it came to be called the "forest philosophy". By the mercy of the Lord, the Buddha came and preached it to the masses, and the whole nation became Buddhists.

 

Shakya Muni was himself a monk, and it was his glory that he had the largeheartedness to bring out the truths from the hidden Vedas and throw them broadcast all over the world.

 

Before the Buddha came, materialism had spread to a fearful extent; and it was of a most hideous kind, not like that of the present day, but of a far worse nature. I am a materialist in a certain sense, because I believe that there is only One. That is what the materialist wants you to believe; only he calls it matter and I call it God. The materialists admit that out of this matter all hope and religion and everything has come. I say all these have come out of Brahman. But the materialism that prevailed before Buddha was that crude sort of materialism which taught, "eat, drink and be merry; there is no God, soul, or heaven; religion is a concoction of wicked priests."

 

It taught the morality that as long as you live, you must try to live happily; eat, though you have to borrow money for the food, and never mind about repaying it. That was the old materialism and that kind of philosophy spread so much that even today it has the name of "popular philosophy".

Buddha brought the Vedanta to light, gave it to the people, and saved India.

 

How much good to the world and its beings came out of Buddha's ["fanaticism"]! How many monasteries and schools and colleges, how many public hospitals and veterinary refuges were established! How developed architecture became! ... What was there in India before Buddha's advent? Only a number of religious principles recorded on bundles of palm leaves - and those, too, known only to a few.

 

It was Lord Buddha who brought them down to the practical field and showed how to apply them in the everyday life of the people. In a sense he was the living embodiment of true Vedanta.

 

Shakya Muni came not to destroy; he was the fulfillment, the logical conclusion, the logical development of the religion of the Hindus.

 

Buddhism, one of the most philosophical religions in the world, spread all through the populace, the common people of India. What a wonderful culture there must have been among the Aryans twenty-five hundred years ago, to be able to grasp such ideas!

 

Buddha cut through all the excrescences [of rules and regulations promulgated by the priests]. He preached the most tremendous truths. He taught the very gist of the philosophy of the Vedas to one and all without distinction; he taught it to the world at Large, because one of his great messages was the equality of humanity. Human beings are all equal. No concession there to anybody! Buddha was the great preacher of equality. Every man and woman has the same right to attain spirituality - that was his teaching. The difference between the priests and the other castes he abolished. Even the lowest were entitles to the highest attainments; he opened the door to nirvana to one and all. His teaching was bold, even for India. No amount of preaching can ever shock the Indian soul, but it was hard for India to swallow Buddha's doctrine.

 

The Reasons Why Buddhism Had to Die a Natural Death in India

To Break the Tyranny of Priestcraft Buddhism Swept Away the Idea of the Personal God

The aim of Buddhism was reform of the Vedic religion, by standing against ceremonials requiring offerings of animals, against hereditary caste and exclusive priesthood, and against belief in permanent souls. It never attempted to destroy that religion, or to overturn the social order. It introduced a vigorous method by Organizing a class of sannyasins into a strong monastic brotherhood and the brahmavadinis into a body of nuns - by introducing images of saints in the place of altar fires….

 

In their reaction against the privileged priesthood, Buddhists swept off almost every bit of the old ritual of the Vedas, subordinated the gods of the Vedas to the position of servants to their own, human saints, and declared the "Creator and Supreme Ruler" as an invention of priestcraft and superstition.

 

Tyranny and priestcraft have prevailed wherever the idea [of the personal God] existed, and until the lie is knocked on the head, say the Buddhists, tyranny will not cease. So long as man thinks he has to cower before a supernatural being, so long will there be priests to claim rights and privileges to make men cower before them, while these poor men will continue to ask some priest to act as interceder for them.

 

You may do away with the brahmin; but, mark me, those who do so will put themselves in his place and be worse, because the brahmin has a certain amount of generosity in him, but these upstarts are always the worst of tyrannizers. If a beggar gets wealth, he thinks the whole world is a bit of straw. So these priests there must be so long as this personal God idea persists; and it will be impossible to think of any great morality in society.

 

The result of Buddha's constant inveighing against a personal God was the introduction of idols into India. In the Vedas they knew them not, because they saw God everywhere; but the reaction against the loss of God as creator and friend was to make idols, and Buddha became an idol.

 

Buddha's Rejection of All Religious Forms Was an Impossible Ideal Which Could Only Be Carried Out through Monasticism

Buddha is said to have denied the Vedas because there was so much killing.

 

Buddha wanted to make truth shine as truth. No softening, no compromise, no pandering to the priests, the powerful, the kings. No bowing before superstitious traditions, however hoary; no respect for forms and books just because they came down from the distant past. He rejected all scriptures, all forms of religious practice. Even the very language, Sanskrit, in which religions had traditionally been taught in India, he rejected, so that his followers would not have any chance to imbibe the superstitions that were associated with it.

 

Buddha made the fatal mistake of thinking that the whole world could be lifted to the height of the Upanishads. And self-interest spoilt all. Krishna was wiser, because he was more politic. But Buddha would have no compromise.

 

The great point of contrast between Buddhism and Hinduism lies in the fact that Buddhism said, "Realize all this as illusion", while Hinduism said, "Realize that within the illusion is the Real." Of how this was to be done, Hindus never presumed to enunciate any rigid law. The Buddhist command could only be carried out through monasticism; the Hindu might be fulfilled through any state of life. All alike were roads to the one Real.... Thus Buddhism became the religion of a monastic order, but Hinduism, in spite of its exaltation of monasticism, remains ever the religion of faithfulness to daily duty, whatever it be, as the path by which man may attain God.

 

Indian Buddhism's Extreme Desire to Be of the People Debased Buddha's Pure and Glorious Ideals

We must not have an impossible ideal. An ideal which is too high makes a nation weak and degraded. This happened after the Buddhist and Jain reforms. On the other hand, too much practicality is also wrong. If you have not even a little imagination, if you have no ideal to guide you, you are simply a brute. So we must not lower our idea, neither are we to lose sight of practicality. We must avoid the two extremes.

 

Buddha's work had one great defect, and for that we Indians are suffering, even today. No blame attaches to the Lord. He was pure and glorious; but, unfortunately, such high ideals could not be well assimilated by the different uncivilized and uncultured races of mankind who flocked within the fold of the Aryans. These races, with varieties of superstition and hideous worship, rushed within the fold of the Aryan, and for a time appeared as if they had become civilized; but, before a century had passed, they brought out their snakes, their ghosts, and all the other things their ancestors used to worship, and thus the whole of India became one degraded mass of superstition. The earlier Buddhists, in their rage against the killing of animals, had denounced the sacrifices of the Vedas, which used to be held in every house. There would be a fire burning and that was all the paraphernalia of worship. These sacrifices were obliterated, and in their place came gorgeous temples, gorgeous ceremonies, and gorgeous priests - and all that you see in India in modern times. I smile when I read books written y dome modern people who ought to have known better, that the Buddha was the destroyer of brahminical idolatry. Little do they know that Buddhism created brahminism and idolatry in India.

 

I have every respect for and veneration of Lord Buddha but, mark my words, the spread of Buddhism was less owing to the doctrines and the personality of the great preacher, than to the temples that were built, the idols that were erected, and the gorgeous ceremonials that were put before the nation. Thus Buddhism progressed. The little fireplaces in the houses in which people had poured their libations were not strong enough to hold their own against these gorgeous temples and ceremonies; but later on, the whole thing degenerated. It became a mass of corruption of which I cannot speak before this audience; but those who want to know about it may see a little of it in those big temples, full of sculptures, in Southern India; and that is all the inheritance we have from the Buddhists.

 

The exclusiveness of the old form of Vedic religion debarred it from taking ready help from outside. At the same time, it kept it pure and free from many debasing elements which Buddhism, in it propagandist zeal was forced to assimilate.

 

This extreme adaptability in the long run made Indian Buddhism lose almost all its individuality, and extreme desire to be of the people made it unfit to cope with the intellectual forces of the mother religion in a few centuries. The Vedic party in the meanwhile got rd of a good deal of its most objectionable features, such as animal sacrifice, and took lessons from its rival daughter in the judicious use of images, temple processions, and other impressive performances, and stood ready to take within her fold the whole empire of Buddhism, already tottering to its fall.

And the crash came with the Scythian invasions and the total destruction of the empire of Pataliputra.

 

The invaders, already incensed at the invasion of their central Asiatic home by the preachers of Buddhism, found in the sun-worship of the brahmins a great sympathy with their own solar religion - and when the brahminist party was ready to adapt and spiritualize many of the customs of the newcomers, the invaders threw themselves heart and soul into the brahmanic cause.

 

The aims of the Buddhist and Vedic religions were the same, but the means adopted by the Buddhists were not right. If the Buddhist means were correct, then why has [india] been hopelessly lost and ruined? It will not do to say that the efflux of time has naturally wrought this. Can time work, transgressing the laws of cause and effect?

 

On the philosophic side, the disciples of the great Master [buddha] dashed themselves against the theoretical rocks of the Vedas and could not crush them; and on the other side they took away from the nation that eternal God to which everyone, man or woman, clings so fondly. And the result was that Buddhism had to die a natural death in India. At the present day there is not one who calls himself a Buddhist in India, the land of its birth.

 

The Reconquest of India by Systematized Vedanta

The Dissipation of Both Priests and Kings in the Period after Buddha

It is probable that the [buddhist] reformers had for centuries the majority of the Indian people with them. The older forces, however, were never entirely pacified, and they underwent a good deal of modification during the centuries of Buddhist supremacy.

 

With the deluge that swept the land at the advent of Buddhism the priestly power fell into decay and the royal power was in the ascendant. Buddhist priests are renouncers of the world, living in monasteries and as homeless ascetics, unconcerned with secular affairs. They have neither the will nor the endeavor to bring and keep the royal power under their control through the threat of curses or magic arrows. Even if there were any remnant of such a will, its fulfillment had become then an impossibility.

 

For Buddhism had shaken the thrones of all the oblation-eating gods and brought them down forever from their heavenly positions. The state of being a Buddha was superior to the heavenly positions of many a Brahma or an Indra, who vie with each other in offering their worship at the feet of Buddha, the God-man! And to this Buddhahood, every man or woman has the privilege to attain; it is open to all even in this life. From the descent of the gods, as a natural consequence, the superiority of the priests who were supported by them was gone.

 

Accordingly, the reins of that mighty sacrificial horse - the royal power - were no longer held in the firm grasp of the Vedic priest; and, now being free, it could roam anywhere by its unbridled will. The center of power in that period was neither with the priests chanting the Sama hymns and performing the yajnas according to the Yajur Veda; nor is the power vested in the hands of the kshatriya kings separated from each other and ruling over small, independent states. The center of power in that age was in emperors whose unobstructed sway extended over vast areas bounded by the ocean, covering the whole of India, from one end to the other.

 

The leaders of that age were no longer Vishvamitra or Vashishtha [Vedic rishis], but emperors like Chandragupta, Dharmashoka, and others. There never were emperors who ascended the throne of India and led her to the pinnacle of glory such those lords of the earth who ruled over her in paramount sway during the Buddhist period. The end of this period is characterized by the appearance of Rajput power on the scene, and the re of modern Hinduism. With the rise of Rajput power on the decline of Buddhism, the scepter of Indian empire, dislodged from its paramount power, was again broken into a thousand pieces and wielded by small, powerless hands.

 

At this time the brahminical (priestly) power again succeeded in raising its head, not as an adversary as before, but this time as an auxiliary to the royal supremacy.

During this revolution, that perpetual struggle for supremacy between the priestly and the royal classes, which began from the Vedic times and continued through the ages till it reached its climax at the time of the Jain and Buddhist revolutions, had ceased for ever.

 

Now these two powers were friendly to each other; but neither was there any more that glorious kshatra (warlike) valor of the kings, nor that spiritual brilliance which characterized the brahmins; each had lost its former intrinsic strength. As might be expected, this new union of the two forces was soon engaged in the satisfaction of mutual self-interest, and became dissipated by spending its vitality on extirpating their common opponents, especially the Buddhists of the time, and on similar other deeds. Being steeped in the vices consequent on such a union, e.g. sucking of the blood of the masses, taking revenge on the enemy, spoliation of others' property, etc., they in vain tried to imitate the rajusuya and other Vedic sacrifices of the ancient kings, and only made a ridiculous farce of them.

 

The result was they were bound hand and foot by the formidable train of sycophantic attendance and its obsequious flatterers; and, being entangled in an interminable net of rites and ceremonies with flourishes of mantras and the like they soon became a cheap and ready prey to the Islamic invaders from the West....

 

Brahmanya power, since the appearance of the Rajput power (which held sway over India under the Mihira dynasty and others), made its last effort to recover its lost greatness; and in its effort to establish that supremacy, it sold itself at the feet of the fierce hordes of barbarians [scythians] newly come from Central Asia; and to win their pleasure, introduced into the land their hateful manners and customs.

 

Moreover, the brahmanya power, solely devoting itself to the easy means to dupe the ignorant barbarians, brought into vogue mysterious rites and ceremonies backed by its new mantras, and the like; and, in doing so, itself lost its former wisdom, its former vigor and vitality, and its own chaste habits of long acquirement.

 

Thus it turned the whole of Aryavarta into a deep and vast whirlpool of the most vicious, the most horrible, the most abominable, barbarous customs; and, as the inevitable consequence of countenancing these detestable customs and superstitions, it soon lost all its own internal strength and stamina and became the weakest of the weak.

 

 

------------------

PEACE OUT NOW

 

[This message has been edited by jijaji (edited 08-20-2001).]

[talasiga 0]

Originally posted by amanpeter:

...your heart calls, but you are not so alone as I.

 

Those who are truly Alone

have nothing to compare

 

 

.

.

comparable talasiga@hotmail.com

 

 

[amanpeter 0]

Originally posted by talasiga:

Those who are truly Alone

have nothing to compare

 

 

.

.

comparable talasiga@hotmail.com

 

Whatever.

[talasiga 0]

Originally posted by amanpeter:

Whatever.

"Whatever" happened to "prabhu"

Boo Boo ?

 

 

.

.

.

yogi talasiga@hotmail.com

 

 

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by talasiga (edited 08-21-2001).]

[amanpeter 0]

Originally posted by talasiga:

"Whatever" happened to "prabhu"

Boo Boo ?

 

 

.

.

.

yogi talasiga@hotmail.com

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by talasiga (edited 08-21-2001).]

You no want,

I no do!

After all,

You're PRABHU!

 

------------------

amanpeter@hotmail.com