Volconvo Debate Forums - View Single Post - Buddhism - why it lost the mass appeal in Indian subcontinent ?

Ghumanto · Mar 29, 2006, 06:13 am

I was in Mahasthangarh last week. This is a 2500 years old ruins of a fortified city built by the Hindus . The excavation is very slow and will take many more years to complete. The ancient name is " Poundrabardhan ".

Near the ruins is a place called " Vasu Vihar " . It's the ruin of a Buddhist monastary . History says Buddha was here for 3 months . It was built by the famous " Asoka ".

Right in the middle of the fortified city is the shrine of a Muslim saint. He was born in Balkh ( Afghanistan ) who defeated the Hindu king .
There is no more Muslim arcitechture.

There are many Muslim + Hindu's living near the ruins. But NO Buddhist. Is it so that Buddhist are not practical enough to live upto the occasion ? How come the relegion became so unimportant where once they were so popular ?

As a whole, very few Buddhist are in India , Bangladesh , Pakistan . But the Tibetans are Buddhist - Atish Dipankar ( from what is now Bangladesh ) went to Tibet to preach Buddhism . Fyi, some of the largest Buddhist Monastary ruins are in Bangladesh .

My posts here is to seek more insight on this issue. Why Buddhism survived in countries outside Indian Subcontinent but not in it's birthplace ?
( Buddha was born in Lumbini in Nepal but he was preaching in Indian subcontinent ; more precisely in the north eastern Indian states ).

Mar 29, 2006, 06:13 am	#1 (permalink) (top)
Ghumanto Igneous Magma Posts: 244	Buddhism - why it lost the mass appeal in Indian subcontinent ? I was in Mahasthangarh last week. This is a 2500 years old ruins of a fortified city built by the Hindus . The excavation is very slow and will take many more years to complete. The ancient name is " Poundrabardhan ". Near the ruins is a place called " Vasu Vihar " . It's the ruin of a Buddhist monastary . History says Buddha was here for 3 months . It was built by the famous " Asoka ". Right in the middle of the fortified city is the shrine of a Muslim saint. He was born in Balkh ( Afghanistan ) who defeated the Hindu king . There is no more Muslim arcitechture. There are many Muslim + Hindu's living near the ruins. But NO Buddhist. Is it so that Buddhist are not practical enough to live upto the occasion ? How come the relegion became so unimportant where once they were so popular ? As a whole, very few Buddhist are in India , Bangladesh , Pakistan . But the Tibetans are Buddhist - Atish Dipankar ( from what is now Bangladesh ) went to Tibet to preach Buddhism . Fyi, some of the largest Buddhist Monastary ruins are in Bangladesh . My posts here is to seek more insight on this issue. Why Buddhism survived in countries outside Indian Subcontinent but not in it's birthplace ? ( Buddha was born in Lumbini in Nepal but he was preaching in Indian subcontinent ; more precisely in the north eastern Indian states ).