Oh, wise man, you should look for answer in the books you read, or may
be in "Bharat Itihaser Sandhane'- Dilip Kumar Gangopadhyay. The
Buddhists simply did not disappear or voluntarily convert into
Hinduism, contrary to the observation of Andre Malraux. The decay of
an organized religion like Buddhism into total paganism like Hinduism
occurred a few generations after Ashoka the Great. Following the
grandson of Ashoka, most kings found 'Hinduism' more convenient a
religion than Buddhism. Remember Bimbisara-Ajatashatru episode.
Hindu son turned his Buddhist father lame before putting him into
prison where no food was supplied allowing the poor father starve to
death. Such violence can not be unaccompanied by forcible conversion
which the later day historians preferred to forget. Even the
Jagannath temple in Puri belonged to the Buddhists.
The invasion by Alexander the Great also helped to renovate the
pantheon of Hindu Gods. Shankaracharya, Kumaril Bhatta came long
afterwards to enhance the deconstruction. Also Bakhtiar Khilji did a
lot to ruin the Buddhist institutions. Buddha first became 'Budo
Shiv' then 'Lord Shiva. If you visit the place where Ashoka got
converted into Buddhism, you would find a Buddhist temple built by the
Japanese. It is a small temple, but very significant. Both Nandee
the Bull, and Shivalingam are present there.
By the way, you should note that Chandalas were not pharias as you,
Nihar Roy, or others might think. Chandal and Dom were essentially
the same people. They were tantriks, Chandal and Dom used to worship
Chandi (an avatar of Kali) and Shiva, made a living by fishing and
funerary rites of Hindus. They were said to be born of Brahmin mother
and Sudra father. The Sastraguru of Sankaracharya was a chandal, also
as Mahabharata says Arjuna worshiped the Chandala icon Lord Shiva to
get pashupat weapon. That proves, Nihar Roy wrong.
One more point, never again ask me any question. Scripture prohibits
knowledge to an arrogant student. In good old ancient days, your
level of arrogance could draw the wrath of Vac Devi, who is also a
goddess of war.
On 2/26/12, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Dayananda Saraswati is a recent phenomenon. I said conversion idea was
> absent in Hinduism. It probably started with Chaitanya who is lot earlier
> than Dayananda. If you know about any conscious organized effort of
> conversion, please enlighten us. I am sure you are not a rock head like the
> rest of the mukto-mona members. I will not treat natural absorbption into
> Hindu community as a conscious organized effort. Was one of the Adi
> Sankaracharyya's missions conversion of non-hindus? Please enlighten us.
> Please do not behave like a typical Indian school teacher who thinks he
> knows every thing and his students are all rock heads. Don't behave like a
> arrogant Brahmin who has only right to learn Quantum Mechanics.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
> To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2012 9:35 PM
> Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Taqiya does not mean deceit. It means hiding or
> keeping secret one's religion. if some one feels danger if he discloses his
> faith
>
>
>
>
> With your yardstick and wisdom, you are in no position to measure my
> knowledge(or lack of it). I have mentioned Dayananda Saraswati. You may
> add a few more names like Sankaracharya, Kumaril Bhatta. A 'wise' man like
> you who can't account for the Buddhists who disappearing in different parts
> of India, and yet becoming successful elsewhere is not expected to have any
> vision, though he might have a pair of eyes located in right places.
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 1:22 AM, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>I have mentioned about Chaitanay of the 15th century as a preacher. I know
>> you are a gtreat pundit! Can you give any evidences of organizational
>> efforts to convert to Hinduism. Do not be too pundit to ignore Nihar Ray!
>>
>>
>> From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
>> Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2012 11:41 AM
>> Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Taqiya does not mean deceit. It means hiding or
>> keeping secret one's religion. if some one feels danger if he discloses
>> his faith
>>
>>
>>Apparently, you never heard of Dayananda Saraswati. He got killed as he
>> converted a few Muslims to 'Hinduism'. Even one of the close
>> associates(Rup or Sanatan Goswami) of Chaitanya was a Muslim. Any person
>> claiming to be knowledgeable should spend considerable time reading
>> informative books. Someone who can't identify the Afghans as Pathans
>> ain't even worth a lecture, let alone any debate. What happened to the
>> Jews? They were absorbed by the Indian society. Many of them even became
>> Brahmins. For example, 'Shet/Shetty' was originally a Jewish surname.
>> They retained their money lending business but lost their religion.
>> Instead of Yahweh, they started worshiping Lord Ganesh. Read Ronald Inden
>> instead of Nihar Roy to learn about caste system in India. (However, a
>> person should not read a book beyond his level of comprehension.) More
>> Buddhists got converted by Hindus than the other way round.. Lack of wit
>> doesn't permit one to
> understand a lot of things. Those who say, entry into Hinduism is
> difficult if not impossible are unaware of history, and also of contemporary
> events. How many of the Hare Krishnas were born as Hindus? Have an
> electroencephalogram, and take medicine to improve brain function.
>>On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 12:15 PM, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>What happened to the immigrant Jews? Did Hindu preachers convert them to
>>> Hindus? What I know about Buddhists is this: Hindus made Buddha as one of
>>> their "avatars". Can you please shed light on the parts of Indian history
>>> when Hindus tried to convert non-Hindus and "untouchables" including
>>> various tribes Hinduism? According to Nihar Ranjan Ray even the chandals
>>> in Bengal were outside the chaturvarna system. This means that they were
>>> not even shudras.I don't understand why you react so sharply when I want
>>> to say that exit from Hinduism is lot easier than getting into it if not
>>> impossible! This attitude of the Hindus made it lot easier for the
>>> Buddhist, Christian, and Muslim preachers to convert the Indians to their
>>> respective religions.
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
>>>To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
>>>Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 8:14 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Taqiya does not mean deceit. It means hiding or
>>> keeping secret one's religion. if some one feels danger if he discloses
>>> his faith
>>>
>>>"Hinduism" and "Judaism" are "too pure" to accept an outsider. Really???
>>> What happened to the three major waves of Jewish immigrants to India?
>>> What happened to the Buddhists who constituted ninety percent of Bengal
>>> populace before Adisur?
>>>On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 10:17 AM, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Preaching or propagating a religion if you will is marketing of an idea.
>>>> As in modern marketing you have to use all the marketing tools,
>>>> strategies, and tactics to be effective. Buddhism, Christianity, and
>>>> Islam have been being missionary religions. And we know what
>>>> missionaries do in general. Besides the soft spoken preachers, rulers
>>>> and conquerors also supplement the efforts of the preachers sometimes
>>>> with sword. Historically Christian and Islamic history of preaching have
>>>> not been always peaceful particularly when the rulers and conquerors
>>>> have taken active roles. Buddhism although a proselytizing religion was
>>>> an exception in this respect. "Hinduism" and "Judaism" are "too pure" to
>>>> accept an outsider. Hinduism within its own periphery will rather
>>>> suppress the lower casts obliging them to convert to another religion.
>>>> In that sense Hinduism is anti-preaching. In modern times, Chaitanyadeb
>>>> and Vivekananda made exceptions. While Christian
> missioneries risked their lives to go to remote araes in India, the
> custodians of Hinduism kept themselves busy with the task of making religion
> more and more inaccesible. Service to the distressed humanity and bringing
> light to the underprivileged and neglected people are the good sides of
> preaching. There are ugly sides too. Bribing for example is an example.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
>>>>To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
>>>>Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 5:58 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Taqiya does not mean deceit. It means hiding
>>>> or keeping secret one's religion. if some one feels danger if he
>>>> discloses his faith
>>>>
>>>>All religions allow lying to save one's life. If that's Taqiya, it's
>>>> understandable, but I heard - it also includes provision for any
>>>> deceitful tactics for propagation of Islam, including conversion. Is
>>>> that so? Could someone clarify this misunderstanding?
>>>>Jiten Roy--- On Tue, 2/21/12, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Taqiya
>>>> does not mean deceit. It means hiding or keeping secret one's religion.
>>>> if some one feels danger if he discloses his faithTo:
>>>> mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, February 21, 2012, 9:38 PM
>>>>>
>>>>>It also means telling a few lies.
>>>>>On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 9:18 PM, S A Hannan
>>>>> <sahannan@sonarbangladesh.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Taqiya does not mean deceit. It means hiding or keeping secret one's
>>>>>> religion. if some one feels danger if he discloses his faith.This is
>>>>>> permitted by some sects in Islam, not all. I feel it appropriate in
>>>>>> case of danger.
>>>>>>Nothing should be distorted.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Shah Abdul Hannan
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>From:mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com] On
>>>>> Behalf Of Kamal Das
>>>>>Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 8:33 AM
>>>>>To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
>>>>>Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Fw: OP meeting on "Hindu temples and
>>>>> properties are d estroyed in Chittagong, Bangladesh"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Even God supports deceit in the 'interest of religion', the Arabic word
>>>>> for it is taquia. About the 'referendum of 1940', the Lahore
>>>>> resolution was not a referendum. It was the result of a Muslim League
>>>>> meeting. The participants, e.g., Sikander Hyat Khan of the Unionist
>>>>> Party, G. M. Syed of Jiye Sind, and Fajlul Haque of K. S. P., were
>>>>> members of provincial parliaments elected in 1937 on the separate
>>>>> electorate basis. They were coerced by the British Governors to be
>>>>> members of the Muslim League, else their cabinets would be dissolved
>>>>> (Ref.- A. J. Moore in Escape from the Empire). According to Maulana
>>>>> Azad, Indian Muslims had grown weaker as a political force due to
>>>>> partition in 1947.
>>>>>On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 2:57 AM, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>
------------------------------------
****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration:
Call For Articles:
http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68
http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585
****************************************************
VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/
****************************************************
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
-Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mukto-mona/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mukto-mona/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mukto-mona-digest@yahoogroups.com
mukto-mona-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
mukto-mona-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/