Buddhism - why it lost the mass appeal in Indian subcontinent ?

[Ghumanto]

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 ).

[orgaelin]

I'm not sure you're asking in the right place my friend. Very few people in the West recognise the historical importance and contribution of Indian faiths, and as such, most of us know little about them.

Having said that, I do think what you describe is unusual, and wonder what the explanation may be.

~ Org. :)

[Milton Bradley]

I think they were overrun by the people who are living there now, and they fled to the hills.

[Athena]

Buddhaism is a philosophy not a religion. It does not have a deity as does Hinduism and Islam. People in general are more drawn to religions than philosophy. Very important is Buddhism was not for the common man. Peasants must work hard for a living, and do not have the time, nor means, for the studying necessary to achieving Nirvana. This was changed in Japan, when the industrial age gave people easier work and better wages, following WWII, opening Buddhism to the common man.

The establishment of Buddhism in Tibet is amazing to me, because this is the territory of the Mongols. Genghis Khan was better known for slaughtering people and destroying their towns than for anything else. The mongols were undefeated for 3 generations, and collected tribute from China and Europe, or destroyed towns and cities. Later however, some very capable mongols emerged as great leaders with peaceful intent. Perhaps the harsh climate of Tibet, which prevents a labor intense agrarian society from developing, contributed to it becoming Buddhist? As well as a lack of commerce, which gives people many more choices of everything.

[Autolykos]

I'm sorry, Athena, but you are mistaken. Tibet is not the territory of the Mongols. The Mongols come from... Mongolia.

- Rob

[orgaelin]

And Genghis Kahn is also known for creating an empire which, though primitive, was at its largest three times larger than Rome at its largest. He was brutal, but that shouldn't overshadow the achievement of his uniting all of the mongolian tribes into a single empire when nothing like it had ever been done before (in Mongolia).

~ Org. :)

[Ghumanto]

Quote by: orgaelin And Genghis Kahn is also known for creating an empire which, though primitive, was at its largest three times larger than Rome at its largest. He was brutal, but that shouldn't overshadow the achievement of his uniting all of the mongolian tribes into a single empire when nothing like it had ever been done before (in Mongolia). ~ Org. :)

Mongolia surprise me to many extent. Ghengis Khan , Halaku Khan ruled the world. Now Monglia is nothing but a huge country with a very sparse population.
But are the Mongols Buddhist now? They seem not to bother for any relegion !

[Athena]

Quote by: Autolykos I'm sorry, Athena, but you are mistaken. Tibet is not the territory of the Mongols. The Mongols come from... Mongolia. - Rob

Huge thank you for that correction. My incorrect understanding didn't make much sense, and the correction is a big improvement. Internet is such a good thing.

[Athena]

Quote by: Ghumanto Mongolia surprise me to many extent. Ghengis Khan , Halaku Khan ruled the world. Now Monglia is nothing but a huge country with a very sparse population. But are the Mongols Buddhist now? They seem not to bother for any relegion !

I was wrong about where Tibet is in relation to Mongolia. But yes, they evidently are mostly Tibetan Buddhist. This is what I got when I googled Mongolia religion.

Population Demographics Anthem Details Population: 2,751,314 Languages: Khalkha Mongol 90%, Turkic, Russian (1999) Religion: Tibetan Buddhist Lamaism 96%, Muslim (primarily in the southwest), Shamanism, and Christian 4% (1998) Life Expectancy: 64.17 » Additional Mongolia Population Demographics

I think the environmental factors of Tibet and Mongolia are similar. It is my belief, that environment plays an important role in which religion makes the most sense to people.

[Athena]

Here is a much better answer to the question:

http://buddhism.kalachakranet.org/india.html Following this last flowering of Buddhist thought in India, Buddhism began to decline. It became increasingly a tradition of elite scholar-monks who studied in great monastic universities like Nalanda and Vikramashila in Northern India. Buddhism failed to adapt to changing social and political circumstances, and apparently lacked a wide base of support. When a series of invasions by Turkish Muslims descended on India in the ninth through twelfth centuries, after the invaders had sacked the great north Indian monastic universities and killed many prominent monks, Buddhism was dealt a death blow from which it never recovered. In 1193 the Moslems attacked and conquered Magadha, the heartland of Buddhism in India, and with the destruction of the Buddhist Monasteries, like Nalanda (1200) in that area Buddhism was wiped out.

[Elven6]

O I can answer this, basicly the kings converted to Buddism, since the religon is spirtual and non pasificst a lot of invaders entered India and took what they wanted. Some of the Hindu kings got together and exiled the Buddists.

Does this answer your question?

[Matt W]

Quote by: Elven6 O I can answer this, basicly the kings converted to Buddism, since the religon is spirtual and non pasificst a lot of invaders entered India and took what they wanted. Some of the Hindu kings got together and exiled the Buddists. Does this answer your question?

Riiiiigght. Now explain how Buddhist monks in Japan were some of the most militaristic threats to the feudal lords.

[Elven6]

Quote by: Matt W Quote by: Elven6 O I can answer this, basicly the kings converted to Buddism, since the religon is spirtual and non pasificst a lot of invaders entered India and took what they wanted. Some of the Hindu kings got together and exiled the Buddists. Does this answer your question? Riiiiigght. Now explain how Buddhist monks in Japan were some of the most militaristic threats to the feudal lords.

Mabye their are diffrent kinds of Buddists, sort of like the diffrent kinds of Catholics

[Kite]

Quote by: Elven6 Mabye their are diffrent kinds of Buddists, sort of like the diffrent kinds of Catholics

Right you are. There are different ways of practicing Buddhism. The Buddhists in Tibet are mostly Zen Buddhists. They are the type we usually picture when we think about Buddhists, orange clothes, bald heads and such. I'm not sure about the Buddhists in Japan though.