- Buddhists Are Hindus - Mr. Anagarika Dharmapala of Ceylon.
The Hindu Maha Sabha
We reproduce below the speech of the Venerable Anagarika Dharmapala at the 7th Session of the Hindu Mahasabha held at Benaras on the 19th August 1923 under the presidency of Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya.
Buddhists Are Hindus
Mr. Anagarika Dharmapala of Ceylon, in supporting the motion, for the election of Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya to the Presidentship, said that he had come from 2000 miles to attend the Sabha with a view to illustrate that Jains and Buddhists were also Hindus (cheers). The Buddhists held Benaras as sacred and everlasting "Achala-chaitya". Buddha preached his doctrine of love in Benaras. It was believed that Maitreya would soon be born in Benaras. The speaker came to India 33 years ago and he was forsaken by all, but his dream was realised that day, (cheers), 400 millions of people were worshipping Buddha. They were all Hindus, (cheers). Some might call them un-Aryans ("no," "no",) but Buddhists crossed the seas, taking Hindu civilisation with them to Japan and China and made them Aryans. He said, "I am an Aryan. My forefathers came from Bengal."
The Japanese called themselves Aryans. The speaker was anxious to unite Buddhists and Hindus, the two great families together, ("hear", "hear.") 90 per cent of Hindus and Buddhists were converted into Mussalmans ("shame"). They must all be brought back into Hinduism ("hear," "hear.")
In Kashmir, several Buddhists have become Mussalmans and they must all be reconverted ("hear", "hear.") India has yet vitality and India throbs. Time at present is propitious. He heard of Malaviya in 1885.
Malaviya is a kind-hearted, noble-hearted soul, a cultured Brahman and, as such, he is the fittest person to preside (cheers).
- A.B. Patrika.
2) The Vedas are old and the Dharma of the Buddhas is called the Sanatana Dharma
"Buddhism is the oldest of world religions. The Vedas are old and the Dharma of the Buddhas is called the Sanatana Dharma. Every Bodhisat who wishes to become a Buddha must be learned in the three Vedas, and it is a law of the Buddhas that a Bodhisat in his last life must be borne in the family of either a Brahman or a Kshatriya king."
- REVEREND ANAGARIKA DHARMAPALA
[Paragraph is from a lecture delivered on 20th April 1918 in Calcutta on the topic 'The Doctrine of Karma']
Ref : The Maha Bodhi and The United Buddhist World Vol.26 (1918), Page No.65
3. Brahmanism and Buddhism lived in friendly rivalry for 15 centuries, The Aryan gods were common to both the Brahmins and
Buddhists. In the Viharas were the images of Vishnu, Brahma, Indra and the lokapala devas. Brahman scholars became Buddhist, and Buddhist scholars now and then reverted to the older faith. They were brothers of the same mother. It was after the iconoclast vandals reached India from Arabia that both Brahmanism and Buddhism suffered equally at their destructive hands. It was utterly alien and non-Aryan the religion of the Moslem, and when it came into contact with the superior civilization of the Aryan, the latter went down under the fire and sword of the Yavanas. Oh what a loss it was to civilization, the loss of priceless. MSS in the vihára libraries at Peshawar, Taxila, Benares, Odantapura and Vikramashila.
The Buddhist Viharas that stood for 15 centuries as well as the deva temples of the Brahmans were destroyed by the common enemy, The images of Vishnu, Indra, Ganesh, Kartik, Brahma and other gods had each a niche in the Buddhist Viharas. The Brahmans could never have destroyed these images, and yet we see to-day that in every Buddhist Vihara now in rains all the deva images are found mutilated.
Ref :
Book Name :THE MAHA-BODHI AND THE UNITED BUDDHIST WORLD Vol22; Page #302
4. 1948 మాహోభోది సోసైటికి ఎన్నికైన వారిలో B.R. అంబేడ్కర్ , శ్యామ ప్రసాద్ ముఖర్జి (హిందూ మహాసభ), బాబు రాజెంద్ర ప్రసాద్ (కాంగ్రెస్) ఉన్నారు.
The 56th Annual General Meeting of the Maha Bodhi Society of India was held on 11th January, 1948 at the headquarters of the Society at Calcutta.
The list of elected members is
Among the many elected office-bearers for 1948, were the following names:
PRESIDENT: The Hon'ble Dr. Syama Prasad Mookerjee
GENERAL SECRETARY: Brahmachari Devapriya Valisinha
And among the elected HONORARY MEMBERS, were:
Hon'ble Dr. Rajendra Prasad (Congress President)
Hon'ble Dr. B.R. Ambedkar
Ref : The-Maha--Bodhivol56-No1-12jan-dec
Page No: 194-196.
5) Dr. B. R. Ambedkar advocates adoption of Buddhism by Hindus.
We are glad to note that all the articles in the Vaisakha Number of the Maha Bodhi have been much appreciated in the cultural and literary circles of Asia and Europe. It is surprising to find, however, that Dr. Ambedkar’s article, "Buddha and the future of his religion", published in the said issue, although it has been highly appreciated, should have evoked adverse criticism and that his innocent advice offered to the Hindu community to accept Buddhism as a cardinal principle in its religious life should have been misconstrued in some Vedantic quarters in India. It must be admitted by all students of Hinduism that the word Hindu itself is a word of foreign origin and is nowhere used in the old scriptures. It is also known that the Muslim invaders from outside India used this word for the first time to signify all religious sects across the Indus, namely, the Shaktas, the Vaisnavas, the Tantrikas, the Bauddhas, the Jains, etc. Thus from the standpoint of the origin of the word itself, a Brahminical Hindu alone cannot claim to be a Hindu, and deny the term to other religious sects in India. It is further to be seen that the religious scriptures in India, whatever might be their sectarian denominations, claim for themselves the common label, “Arya Dharma” or “Arya Marga”, i.e., Aryan path as opposed to the Non-Aryan paths. Nobody, not even a Brahmanical Hindu, can have objection, if one changes one form of Arya Dharma for another. Dr. Ambedkar has given some cogent reasons why a Brahmanical Hindu may sometimes like to adopt Buddhism and offer it to his co-religionists. The Indian constitution itself clearly lays down that “the reference to Hindus shall be construed as including a reference to persons professing the Sikh, Jain, or Buddhist religion”. It is also well known that the Brahmanical Hindus look upon Lord Buddha as the ninth Avatara (Incarnation) of God Sri Vishnu and the present age as the age of the Lord Buddha to be followed by the age of Sri Kalki, the last Avatara who would come only at the end of the Kali age. From all these considerations, it is surprising why a Brahmanical Hindu should object to one taking refuge in the Buddha, His Dharma and His Sangha, during this age of the Buddha. In by-gone days, brothers belonging to the same family in India could often be found professing different religious creeds - one being a Shaiva, another being a Vaisnava and the third being a Buddhist, and there had never been any domestic unhappiness on that account. If that was possible in by-gone days, why should not the same thing be possible now in free India when the constitution itself wants to obliterate all superficial differences amongst the Brahmanical Hindus, the Buddhists, the Sikhs, and the Jainas? Further, when Hindu India is proud of her cultural links with the Buddhist lands like Japan, China, Burma, Thailand, Indo-China, Ceylon, etc., it would be unwise for any Indian to minimise the intrinsic merit of the path of the Buddha.
Ref : The Maha Bodhi, Vol.58 (1950) Notes and News, Page No. 261-262
Ref : The Maha Bodhi, Vol.58 (1950) Notes and News, Page No. 261-262
"If Buddhism once again finds a place in India there is not the least doubt that untouchability will vanish in no time as many other evils. Lord Buddha has been incorporated as an avatar of Vishnu and consequently there cannot be any objection if the untouchables take to Buddhism. Buddhist temples will always be open to them and they will enjoy the same privileges which other Buddhists enjoy however high their position may be. At the same time they will not go out of the Hindu fold for Buddhism is an indigenous faith which a famous Indian described as 'the cream of Hinduism'. I, therefore, make this suggestion to all untouchable brethren that if they fail to obtain their just rights from those who adhere to the caste system, they may seriously consider the possibility of taking up Buddhism and thereby remaining within the Hindu fold and yet receiving the blessings of freedom from the tyranny of caste system."
- Devapriya Valisinha, General Secretary, Maha Bodhi Society
Ref : The Maha Bodhi, Vol.41 (1933)
There is no such thing as neo-Buddhism in the Constitution nor is there any such law as Buddhist Law. Only Buddhism. That's it. Ambedkar converted to Buddhism, under the guidance and supervision of Maha Bodhi. He did not convert to Neo-Buddhism. It's Buddhism.
Buddhists are governed under Hindu Law.
There is no separate law for Neo-Buddhists. They are governed under Hindu Law.
The 22 vows added are of Ambedkar, and NOT of the Buddha and nor of Buddhism.
Neo-Buddhism is linked to Hinduism in this way that Buddhism is linked to Modern Hindu Law and Hinduism. Ambedkarites/Neo-Buddhists are governed under the legal definition of Hindu. There is no such disconnect as of date from Hinduism. Laws are crystal clear and have been defined. You cannot escape it.
By the way, what's a Neo-Buddhist conversion?
Didn't Ambedkar convert to Theravada Buddhism? What was the version of Buddhism he converted to - Therevada, Mahayana, Hinayana, Tibetan, Chinese, Korean, Japanese, what else?
Ref : The Maha Bodhi, Vol.41 (1933)
Dr Ambedkar was connected with all kinds of people ... He knew well the traditional Buddhists/Dwija Buddhists & aware of their interpretations but did what he wanted . He added 22 vows to other oaths/ceremony on 14 oct , and made a difference to all others. What he wrote in Hindu code bill regarding our identity is little not compatible to Neo-Buddhism & modern Buddhist ideas. He knew what he did to pass the historic women rights bills which he couldn't.
There is no such thing as neo-Buddhism in the Constitution nor is there any such law as Buddhist Law. Only Buddhism. That's it. Ambedkar converted to Buddhism, under the guidance and supervision of Maha Bodhi. He did not convert to Neo-Buddhism. It's Buddhism.
Buddhists are governed under Hindu Law.
There is no separate law for Neo-Buddhists. They are governed under Hindu Law.
The 22 vows added are of Ambedkar, and NOT of the Buddha and nor of Buddhism.
Neo-Buddhism is linked to Hinduism in this way that Buddhism is linked to Modern Hindu Law and Hinduism. Ambedkarites/Neo-Buddhists are governed under the legal definition of Hindu. There is no such disconnect as of date from Hinduism. Laws are crystal clear and have been defined. You cannot escape it.
By the way, what's a Neo-Buddhist conversion?
Didn't Ambedkar convert to Theravada Buddhism? What was the version of Buddhism he converted to - Therevada, Mahayana, Hinayana, Tibetan, Chinese, Korean, Japanese, what else?
No comments:
Post a Comment