The Moor in the Idol Junkyard

HN:

I am surprised by Ambedkar`s hypothesis. If I am not mistaken, Buddha`s idols predate Islam by a long period; and the idol worship among buddhists is not uncommon in countries where Islam has not gone. I think that the dalit conversion to buddhism has very little to do with faith and everything to do with a political statement against the hindu society; unfortunately, it also means that buddhism in India probably gets tainted as a religion of the illiterate and the wretched.

satyamvada:
I have no problem with your differentiating between religion and dharma. I dont think that Buddha ever renounced his caste or whatever religion/dharma he identified with before he became the enlightened one. I think that one of the reasons why many christians and jews have no problem becoming Buddhist is that it involves no formal conversion. They can retain their earlier identities while accepting Buddha`s message. Among hindus, too, I think that for many people their religion is more a matter of communal/political identity than of dharma or metaphysics.

As to idolatory and polytheism, the only idolators and polytheists, in the true sense of the words, are Muslims and Christians. We need to explain that too, because intelligent people should be able to see the errors of their ways.

It is upto them, then, to either continue in their idolatory and polytheism or to give it up.

satyamvada

You need to expand upon some of those thoughts and put them in a language more accessible to lay people like us.

I find it humorous that there is a disdain for ``imagology`` or ``idolatory`` or ``polytheism``.

Our lifes are full of all kinds of rituals, images and other sensory stimuli. If these
sensory stimuli can help us develop and train our minds what is wrong with them ?

As Krishna says, samatvam yogam uchyate - equanimity or balance is yoga.

For a person of the dharmic traditions - ``polytheism`` or ``monotheism`` are strange
concepts.

Dost and others,
We have to stop thinking in terms of ``religion``. There are only three ``religions``
in the world: islam, christianity and judaism.

The dharmic perspective has a world view which is totally different from that of
``religion`` of having an exclusivistic ``God``, one book etc.

There is no such thing as a holy book of the Buddhists. The dhammapada is one
of many literary sources of buddhist thinking. The Buddha was not some great ``social
reformer`` of his time, all that is nonsense. Infact most of the Buddhist philosophers
themselves were brahmins. One should not back-project current views and agendas
onto the past.

All the dharmic-traditions have a common language of philosophical views but they
definitely have differences.
The common beliefs/language are on the ideas of dharma,karma,
punarjanma, moksha,nirvana, shunyata, atma, paramatma and jivatma. The buddhist
difference is of course that buddhists reject the `apaureshaytva` (non-human made)
aspect of the vedas. However, the philosophy of the Upanishads is contiguous with
that of the Buddhist tradition. Advaitins (Shankara) are referred to as `prachanna
bouddha` (disguised buddhists) by their other critical authors of other schools.
Having such a hoary tradition - there is a rainbow of thought available in India, from
the materialistic-lokayata school to the dvaitins(paramatma and jivatma are
separate) to advaitins(paramatma-jivatma are same) back to the atheistic
bouddha and to jaina. The concept of a ``God`` as known in ``religions`` itself is
unknown to the dharmic schools.

Second, at the socio-cultural-political level - there is no difference at all between the
various buddhist schools and other traditions of India. This should be obvious, because
their discussions are at a philosophical level.

The ``Buddhism`` of the Richard-Gere variety is of course that Dost-Mitter is referring to.
Even then, without rites/rituals/practices to train the mind, there can be no progress
towards nirvana or moksha.

dost,

It is an irony worth chewing. The states that are officially Buddhist, and in fact a lot of Buddhism in the age of imagology suggests things that were not very tasteful to the Buddha himself. Like Satyamvada suggests, Tibetan Buddhism for example uses tantric totems etc.

And yet, the Buddhism you mention, the intellectual candy for the ivory tower crowd, is a distilled intellectual version that avoids all the rituals and its profligacies. It is a kind of religion that does not exist in a ``living people.`` So, in a manner of speaking, their Buddhism is more an intellectual Bahaism.

Another strand popped into the head. I read long ago a very invigourating essay by Dr B R Ambedkar where he traces idol worship among the Buddhists to the influence of Islam. He traces the idol worship of Buddhism to Islamic excursions into the sub-continent. Unfortunately, i read that eassay long back, in a scholarly journal. I forget everything...the name of the essay as well as the journal.

If you notice, the Buddhism in India that currently exists is Ambedkar`s own followers, dalits who converted to Buddhism from Hinduism at Ambedkar`s bidding. However, their Buddhism is rather odd. And in any case, Buddha idols sell less among them than Ambedkar idols.

HN
One very interesting version of

Harish:

Just noticed this in your response:
``It seemed to make and beget only those that were intellectual.``

This is akin to what is happening in the West now. While islam is reaping a rich harvest in numbers, Buddha is making a clean sweep of the conversion minded academics, intellectuals and pseudo-intellectuals. This is probably also what happened in India until Ashoka came along. He chose Buddha over many other competing philosophers with whom Buddha had locked horns. When the Raja announced his allegiance, the praja probably followed, but the allegiance was weak and not deeply rooted in emotions. This is again similar to what seems to be happening now in some Buddhist countries of Asia, where christianity is satisfying the emotional needs that Buddhism does not.

Harish:
The volley you tossed at me is not a return but a new serve:)

I did not go into the question of why Buddhism disappeared from India, though that too is a matter more of speculation than of recorded history. My speculation was wrt the effect of Ashoka`s adoption of the ahimsa creed on weakening the society in general and the emasculation of the warrior class in particular. As satyamvada has said, my knowledge of history is superficial and this issue might have been addressed by hitorians in depth already.

satyamvada:

You are right.

Satyamvada

Wasn`t the Buddha essentially extending the Samkhya school? Did I mix that up?

Samkhya philosophy did not become as popular did the Vedanta philosophy because people just WANT more supernatural stuff in their lives.

We like to believe we know about God. We fight much hard to extend the glory an unknown God than to save the skin of a known neighbor.

Within a Buddhist framework that would be absolutely unthinkable.

Dost-Mitter, what is it about the Buddha that you like ?
How different/common is it from advaita or general vedanta ?
Do you know all the rituals and practices involved with Tibetan Tantric Buddhism ?
Do you know the rituals and practices of Mahayan ?
The reason I ask, is that you are pretty flippant and make statements without
thinking like that fellow romair.
BTW, have you noticed that in the Indian subcontinent, areas which had huge
buddhist presence/influence are the ones that are primarily islamic - just something
for you to chew on.

tarun

So long as you live half in ignorance and half in deceit, your God merely fudges and lies.


Ana

Agreed.

what exactly does a semitic mess mean? i thought semitic messes would be like jews and arabs, considering well, they`re semitic. . and yes that`s all a mess.

anyway let`s try not to take good man harish`s board too far off track, what say you?

yes ralph/kaalchakra/rational faith etc etc

you have been around sir

as for me - pls. recall my God smiles

rgds

t

tarun # 28

I have been around for far longer than any ralph. And, how would it matter if you were correct or not correct?

Tarun, you need to get out of this semitic mess, which obsesses you with labelling and politicking. Then your own confusion about your identity will clear away.

You have any ideas on Buddhism?

you had a similar hunch?

ah. . . i guessed correctly then, eh?!