satyarthi wrote:mayurav wrote:I think it is because of Buddhism which stunned the nation with its ahimsa and priority of renunciation and Moksha over everything else.
Budhism didn't come to India from outside! It arose in India and swept through India without any aid of physical force.
Therefore it is futile to someow disown Buddhism. India wasn't just ready for Budhism, but going by many such isms including the other great tradition Jainism, was a fertile ground for it.
We can't disown this national trait by simply cursing Buddhism. Indian nation and dharma's character have a strong liberal, pacifist core. A dharma-yuddha is a war where the combatants put constraints on themselves in a moral conduct of war. Compare that to Islamic Jihad's conduct of a religious-war.
India is different. Budhhism is a product of that character and can't be disowned when convenient.
You misread my posts disfavoring Buddhism. I have NOT disowned it. Pointing out the faults of a phenomenon does not say anything about ownership and causes of that phenomenon.
The vedic religion emphasized Moksha, but made sure that society did not collapse due to everybody simultaneously rushing for Moksha at once abandoning their svadharma.
From East and the West by Swami Vivekananda
What does Buddha or Christ prescribe for the man who neither wants Moksha nor is fit to receive it? â€” Nothing! Either you must have Moksha or you are doomed to destruction â€” these are the only two ways held forth by them, and there is no middle course. You are tied hand and foot in the matter of trying for anything other than Moksha. There is no way shown how you may enjoy the world a little for a time; not only all openings to that are hermetically sealed to you, but, in addition, there are obstructions put at every step. It is only the Vedic religion which considers ways and means and lays down rules for the fourfold attainment of man, comprising Dharma, Artha, Kama, and Moksha. Buddha ruined us, and so did Christ ruin Greece and Rome! Then, in due course of time, fortunately, the Europeans became Protestants, shook off the teachings of Christ as represented by Papal authority, and heaved a sigh of relief. In India, KumÃ¢rila again brought into currency the Karma-MÃ¢rga, the way of Karma only, and Shankara and RÃ¢mÃ¢nuja firmly re-established the Eternal Vedic religion, harmonising and balancing in due proportions Dharma, Artha, Kama, and Moksha. Thus the nation was brought to the way of regaining its lost life; but India has three hundred million souls to wake, and hence the delay. To revive three hundred millions â€” can it be done in a day?
The aims of the Buddhistic and the Vedic religions are the same, but the means adopted by the Buddhistic are not right. If the Buddhistic means were correct, then why have we been thus 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?
Therefore, though the aims are the same, the Bauddhas for want of right means have degraded India. Perhaps my Bauddha brothers will be offended at this remark, and fret and fume; but there's no help for it; the truth ought to be told, and I do not care for the result. The right and correct means is that of the Vedas â€” the JÃ¢ti Dharma, that is, the Dharma enjoined according to the different castes â€” the Svadharma, that is, one's own Dharma, or set of duties prescribed for man according to his capacity and position â€” which is the very basis of Vedic religion and Vedic society.