Buddhism's Decline in India

Why did Buddhism decline and eventually disappear in India, the land where it all began? We will look at the reasons and how they are different from the usual stories we are told. In particular we will look at factors internal to Buddhism in India at the time, as well as to competition with Hinduism and Islam. Lastly we will turn to some lessons we can take from all this, and to the eventual resurgence of Buddhism in India at the end.
Thanks to Bernat Font for help locating resources for this video!
☸️ Free mini-course at the Online Dharma Institute: onlinedharma.org.
🧡 If you find this material useful, check out my Patreon page and get fun benefits like exclusive behind-the-scenes videos, audio-only versions, and extensive show notes: / dougsseculardharma
🧡 You can also make donations through: paypal.me/dougsdharma
Facebook: / onlinedharmainstitute
Twitter: / dougsdharma
✅ Video recommended:
History of Vajrayana or Tantric Buddhism: Power and Transgression • History of Vajrayana o...
✅ Source materials:
Richard Eaton, “Temple Desecration and Indo-Muslim States” in the Journal of Islamic Studies, Vol. 11, No. 3 (Sept. 2000).
Johan Elverskog, Buddhism and Islam on the Silk Road (U.Penn, 2010). amzn.to/3fy0GYx
Lars Fogelin, An Archaeological History of Indian Buddhism (Oxford, 2015) (This book is recommendable for material after the turn into the Common Era). amzn.to/2UT6RyJ
Peter Harvey, An Introduction to Buddhism 2nd Ed. pp. 194-196. amzn.to/37DH42m
PVB Karunatilaka, “Book Review: The Decline of Buddhism in India: A Fresh Perspective by KTS Sarao”, in Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Sri Lanka, New Series, 58, no. 1 (2013): 91-98. Accessed June 18, 2020. www.jstor.org/stable/43854937
James Mallinson, “Kālavañcana in the Konkan: How a Vajrayāna Haṭhayoga Tradition Cheated Buddhism’s Death in India”, in Religions 2019, 10, 273.
KTS Sarao, The Decline of Buddhism in India: A Fresh Perspective (Munshiram Manoharlal, 2012). amzn.to/2AFkqeh
Audrey Truschke, “The Power of the Islamic Sword in Narrating the Death of Indian Buddhism”, in History of Religions 57, no. 4 (May 2018). www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi...
AK Warder, Indian Buddhism, 3rd Ed. amzn.to/30YrUDw
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline...
❤️ Thanks to Patreon Patrons:
Anonymous (1)
Matthew Smith
Kathy Voldstad
Bob Snead
JC
Pritom Phookun
Shantha Wengappuli
Margo
Karma_CAC
Johan Thelander
Michael Roe
Jorge Seguel
Christopher Apostolof
GailJM
Steven Kopp
Brett Merritt
David Bell
T Pham
VCR
LaShanda Williams
Upayadhi
Andi and Erik
Steve Marlor
ATGuerrero686
Michael Scherrer
Michael Seefeld
Ernie
Rob
khobe schofield
Abhinav Jalan
Alex Perdomo
#onlinedharmainstitute #buddhism #earlybuddhism #secularbuddhism
Thumbnail photo by Jens Johnsson on Unsplash.
Disclaimer: Amazon links are affiliate links where I will earn a very small commission on purchases you make, at no additional cost to you. This goes a tiny way towards defraying the costs of making these videos. Thank you!

[@DougsDharma]

Check out this video next on Dr. BR Ambedkar's revival of "new" Buddhism in India: kzbin.info/www/bejne/p52rkKSfmqiaeaM Consider joining us on Patreon if you find benefit in these videos, and get fun extras like exclusive behind-the-scenes videos, audio-only versions, and extensive show notes: www.patreon.com/dougsseculardharma 🙂

[@user-Void-Star]

Your comment is saying it's one month old 😂

[@DougsDharma]

@@user-Void-Star Yes, I upload these videos in advance actually! 🙂

[@sachinjain377]

@@DougsDharma There are lot of assumptions and western point of views in this video, few examples not all: 1)Defining Hinduism as only the Home/hearth and sacrificial activities even if it is just a tiny part of it. Hinduism celebrate multiple school of thoughts e.g. astik and nastik which means one who believe in vedas, one who dont believe in vedas and other who believe in veda but dont take it as authority. One who believe in vedas have more generally classified in 6 school of thoughts like samkhya, yoga, mimansa, vedant etc, newer one are like sikhism, neo vedantism. Whereas one who dont believe in Vedas are like jainism, bhuddism, charvaka, lokayukta etc. Then there is third type of school of thoughts which are based on agamas and believe in veda but not as an authority like astika. Examples are Kashmir shaivism , shaktism etc. Most of the thought process of Buddhism is similar to Mimansa and samkhya as almost all school of thoughts in India are related. Take for example this sutra of upnishad, .................................. " Om Puurnnam-Adah Puurnnam-Idam Puurnnaat-Puurnnam-Udacyate | Puurnnasya Puurnnam-Aadaaya Puurnnam-Eva-Avashissyate || Om Shaantih Shaantih Shaantih || " which means "That is whole; this is whole; From that whole this whole came; From that whole, this whole removed, What remains is whole." ....................................... Now sunayavada sees whole as sunya, vedanta sees whole as Brahma, Kashmir shavisim sees whole as Shiva, Samkhya sees whole as purusha and prakriti. Second: Hinduism is limited to life cycle ceremonies and priest only do that. There are thousands of communities and sects who dont do life cycle ceremonies or have officiated priest. Further, there are multiple communities of Buddhists who do all these ceremonies and have offciated priests also. Buddha was never concerned about it. Buddha as much followed Hinduism as other used to follow at that time. Let me take few texts from the early Buddhist tradition at random: The Dhammapada, a major text ascribed to the Buddha himself and Sonadanda Sutta, a minor text recording Buddha’s dialogues. The last chapter of the Dhammapada (Carter and Palihawardana, Trans., 1987) is about the Brahmins. Here are three from the fifty-odd verses on the issue: "Not by matted hair, or by clan, Or by birth does one become a brahmana In whom is truth and dhamma, He is the pure one, and he is the brahmana (§393; 78) Again, And I do not call one brahmana Merely by being born from a [brahmana] womb, Sprung from a [brahmana] mother. He is merely a “bho-sayer” If he is a possessor of things. One who has nothing and takes nothing, That one I call a brahmana. (§396; 78) Or again, Who, here, having abandoned the human bond, Has transcended the heavenly bond, Who is released form all bonds, That one I call brahmana. (417; 81) In tenor, theme, and substance, all the verses are of the same nature: Buddha tells us who or what a ‘true’ Brahmin is. He does not say that he is talking about Hinduism in general. Bhudda never ever in any speech or text rejected Hinduism or differentiated himself from Hinduism. Fourth: Lingam doesn't mean male penis. Lingam means sign or symbol. The lingam is supported by a "lingi" i.e. symbol/sign/ distinguishing symbol is supported or represents or depicts some entity or some energy form. That is why human sex organ is sign or distinguishing symbol of their gender/form of energy which differentiate between male, female etc, similarly like multiple different signs or symbols e.g. as world is lingam of iccha, gyan and karma sakti ( desire, knowledge and action energy/power) of Shiva as per Kashmir shavisim. Fifth: Hatha yoga is way older than so called Buddhist concept. Its root philosophy is Samkhya which is said to be as old as vedas. Sixth: There is only one instance of destruction of temple by Hindu king and that too was personal reason related to his family not religious issue. There is no text which tells that Hindus or Indians have destroyed any temple for religious issue as no one used to see one self as western religions identity about self. Seventh:" Islam didn't impact much on Buddhism. " An absolute lie based on new kind of scholars. You dont need to work hard to know real history. read the books written by these Muslim rulers themselves.There is one word "Bhut", most of the temples and statues of Buddha in Gandhar or current Afghanistan and Pakistan were destroyed by Islam. From these only this word "Bhut" came in existence and it is still used in Hindi which means Statue as mostly Buddha's statues were destroyed by Islam. Eight: For Islam there is no difference in Hinduism and Buddhism, both are kafir/non believers. They called everybody who were not following Islam in Indian subcontinent as "Hindoo" not some as Buddhist and other as Hindu. Further, Hinduism is not just concerned about local deities as thought by Islam ( i dont know whom among Islam thought so as you haven't named anyone), Hinduism or people of India used to think and still thinks "vasudev kutumbakam", which concerns with whole world/universe. Buddhism never disappeared from India, it just dissolved itself in the ways of life of Indians. As none of the school of thoughts is called as religion in India so was Buddhism was also not called as a religion. All school of thoughts mingles and mingled with each other and effected and effects the way of livings of Indians still today. It is just western encounter with Buddhism outside India called it is as Buddhism nothing more. Buddhism is as much part of Indian school of thoughts and you can find multiple examples of it in Tark ( debates) in multiple commentaries about multiple texts/Sanskrit text/pali text/Tamil text/regional texts where opposite side of the principal school of thought is described as vedantist, Samkhyian, Mimansa follower, Chanikvadi ( one type of Buddhism), Sunyavadi ( One type of Buddhism) etc.

[@rayzard3687]

Oi

[@goo-lamokadoctor181]

Pakistan, Afghanistan , Baluchistan was Buddhist majority ...Just Like Persia was Parsi Majority.. Islamic Invasion cleansed them all with force ,and the multiple genocides and destruction evidence still resides in all these areas. Only Hinduism fought back and managed to survive somehow . The oldest living civilisation of the world,even after 1000 yrs of Invasion rule

[@acesolta4045]

In South Asia, Buddhism survived on himalayas and islands where invaders couldn’t reach.

[@AbdulRehman-ge2yc]

You perfectly wrong.

[@gobimurugesan2411]

It's Hindu kings who destroyed Jainism and Buddhism in India. Before Islam we fought ourselves

[@Grandwarden936]

​​@@gobimurugesan2411well there are many who patronized buddhism jainism and so called hinduism and some who tried to eradicate buddhism For eg the guptas Lalitaditya Muktapida palas chandras and other build many buddhist stupas And shungas who tried to destroy buddhism But the one thing to agree is that the brahmins who were in king's court manipulated many text just to keep society under their control

[@12SPASTIC12]

​@@gobimurugesan2411 Jains still in exist... Have you never been to Mumbai?

[@gobimurugesan2411]

@@12SPASTIC12 ya but they are majority before

[@apurvaj3319]

As a practitioner of Navayana and being an Indian "Buddhist", it is my duty to revive the traditions of Buddha, Nalanda, Tantra and moreover human sensibility (Budhatva) in this land of full of memories

[@DougsDharma]

Interesting thanks Apurv!

[@italianalcapone]

Ambedkar's Buddhism rejects the foundational doctrines and historic practices of traditional Theravada and Mahayana traditions, such as monk lifestyle after renunciation, karma, rebirth, samsara, meditation, nirvana, Four Noble Truths and others. 🙄

[@apurvaj3319]

@@italianalcapone Firstly, no school of Buddhism can disagree on the 4 noble truths (Arya Satyani) taught by Buddha because that's the main teaching of Buddha.. Ambedkar has justified and agreed with the Arya Satyani in his book "The Buddha and his Dhamma". Please read it before reaching on any conclusions to decide what were exactly Ambedkar's views.

[@apurvaj3319]

@@italianalcapone and also not just Buddhism, no Indian philosophy rejects the idea of ultimate liberation or Nirvana as called in Buddhism. In fact this is the final goal of an individual in all these thought systems. In Yoga, it is referred to as MahaSamadhi, while in Vedic systems it is Moksha, in other traditions like Jain, it is Mukti, while in Buddhism it is called Nirvana...Approach to attain this liberation may vary among these thought systems but nonetheless that's the goal towards which all converge. Hence, Navayana does not have a slightest scope to reject the concept of Nirvana

[@italianalcapone]

@@apurvaj3319 according to Ambedkar, the four noble truths is a ' gospel of pessimism ' and may have been inserted into Buddhism by wrong headed Buddhist monks of a later era

[@petagonkyi]

Even the Arabic historian has written about the destruction of Buddhist monasteries in India. The last Abbot of Nalanda escaped and sought refuge in Tibet.

[@DougsDharma]

Yes, there was destruction of Buddhist monasteries in India, and many people from Nalanda did flee to Tibet.

[@BarbarraBay]

Which Arabic historian? Keep in mind Buddhism teaches those who engage in false speech go to hell.

[@furtivedolus2504]

@@BarbarraBay It also teaches that there is nobody per se to go to hell. And 'hell' is a matter of perspective.

[@BarbarraBay]

@@furtivedolus2504 No. This idea is very wrong. Hell depends on self-view; just as all suffering depends on self-view. The idea that "nobody" suffers is intellectual nonsense purported by the Brahmin Buddhaghosa.

[@vampireducks1622]

@Peta. What "Arabic historian" are you talking about?

[@osumarko]

In their book on Buddhism, Huston Smith & Philip Novak make a similar point to one you make in this vid. They argue that Hinduism made changes to incorporate Buddhist reforms and that with the develop of Mahayana, Buddhism started to sound more like Hinduism. In the end Buddhism was reabsorbed back into Hinduism.

[@DougsDharma]

Interesting, thanks for the info osumarko. There are aspects of Mahāyāna Buddhism that do recall Vedic Brahmanism or Hinduism, but in general the only place where Buddhism or Buddhists were absorbed into Hinduism was India. Elsewhere Buddhism developed quite on its own.

[@haragopal1]

@@DougsDharma Upanishads have philosophy (advita) and have nothing to do with Buddhism.... Nagarjuna from South India travelers to North becomes buddist... His philosophy is foundation for Mahayana school in Buddhism

[@tenzindolma1911]

@@haragopal1 what 😳😂non duality has nothing to do with buddhism get your facts corrected, all teachings of tathagata are to destroy duality and about nagarjuna he was born in bhrahmin caste, he wrote commentaries on tathagata's teachings and his contribution is commendable ,there were many great naladna scholars they preserved the authencity of tathatas's words so that next generation may benefit

[@haragopal1]

@@tenzindolma1911 non duality means Advaita in hindu concept It Means onenes self or state called ""brahman"" It's pantheism... On the other hand Buddhism says there's absolutely nothing ... It's emptiness or there's no self in Buddhism....

[@tenzindolma1911]

@@haragopal1 both traditions has a concept of non duality not only vedanta but both sees in a diiferent angle , no self is nothingness😳 im sorry that is absolutely wrong , it never said nothing is there ,things are there but in absolute level it's not there, emptiness doesn't mean nothingness ,emptiness means things has no inherent existence,phenomena are empty of substance or essence because they are dependently co-arising Likewise it is because they are dependently co-arisen that they have no intrinsic, independent reality of their own. Yes Madhyamaka tradition in buddhism rejects the existence of absolute realities or beings such as Brahaman or Self . In the highest sense, "ultimate reality" is not an ontological Absolute reality that lies beneath an unreal world, nor is it the non-duality of a personal self (atman) and an absolute Self. Instead, it is the knowledge which is based on a deconstruction of such reifications and conceptual proliferations .It also means that there is no "transcendental ground," and that "ultimate reality" has no existence of its own, but is the negation of such a transcendental reality, and the impossibility of any statement on such an ultimately existing transcendental reality: it is no more than a fabrication of the mind . and lastly there were many traditions in ancient india and india cherished and preserved those traditions for long, india was a land of seekers not mere believers, reason why bhramanical tradition always look down on buddha's way just because it has different view and beacuse has different view unlike vedas and upnishads ,he never said that is wrong , so what if one's mental dispositions works in this way ,what's wrong in it ,if one's mental dispositions doesn't work in that way then what is the loss,either way we should believe in what our mental dispostions can digest , there is nothing wrong or right in it, today india lost valuable knowledge even other traditions are almost on the verge of perishing just beacuse habit of thinking and anlysing is no more cherised today 🙏

[@knowledgedesk1653]

Buddhism in Western India declined due to adoption of Hinduism and forgein invasions (Huns and Muslim Invasions). It declined due to adoption of Saivism in Southern India. And due to Turkic invasion in Eastern India.

[@taidelek9994]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z4aym3ePeaaJbJY

[@srikanthyadav9507]

@@taidelek9994 Turkic invasion in western India mostly present Pak

[@arindambose9863]

Buddhism was declined way before muslims came to India and it was not due to that there where 64 schools of thought in india who used to persuade the other to convert to his faith if they lost the debate with them Buddhism and jainism were also one of those school of thoughts so after many years after Buddhism rised their school of thoughts kept loosening the debates and Hinduism revived

[@AliAhmed-ve5xl]

Muslims are a lot more recent as oppose to Buddhism

[@kartikrajsingh1895]

@@arindambose9863 Brahmans literally converted everything back to Hinduism.

[@sharanagato]

Being an Indian, I feel it's resurrection of Hinduism through Advaita Vedanta philosophy is the main reason which is almost similar to Buddhism except they talked about one absolute God theory against dependent origination theory of Buddhism and was led by Adi Shankaracharya.

[@DougsDharma]

The link between Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta is quite complex and interesting, one I'm still trying to get my head around. 🙂

[@rakshithsridharan5078]

@@DougsDharma Zen = Advaita.

[@Magnulus76]

Yes, that's a prominent reason that wasn't mentioned. Vedanta could appeal to the same Indian elites as Buddhism, and reinterpret Hindu praxis in a way that undercut Buddhism. To this day, Buddhism is mostly a religion in India of elites and those on the margins of society.

[@Magnulus76]

@@DougsDharma Both are nondual religious philosophies, but Vedanta developed more as a response to Buddhism. So while Buddhism denies essentialism as valid, Vedanta says essence is the very foundation of reality. Given the vagueries of language, however, it's arguable that the differences mostly come down to religious loyalties and praxis. Interestingly enough, modern Vedanta was also influenced by contact with European religions, specifically Unitarianism (brought by the British).

[@DipayanPyne-wo8cx]

@ Magnulus76 Actually, that may not be true. More and more researchers from India keep finding the Indian influences on European thought, that have been hidden for so long. So it might have been the other way. Also, the very idea of 'Neo Hinduism' has problems becoz it basically shows a lack of proper understanding of Vedic Hinduism (which has been tagged Brahminism by propagandists). But anyway. To understand what I am talking about, I want you to watch one video. Please type the following and watch the first video that follows: 'Rajiv Malhotra India's Unacknowledged Contributions to Mind Sciences'

[@sudfromindia5763]

What I would emphasize and which I saw in comments section too is that "Hinduism was a folkish religion of India just like Shinto religion of Japan and Taoism/folk religions of china. It was an open architecture with an amazingly solid and intricate Philosophical structure with a almost infinite flexibility to absorb the philosophy/teachings of other teachings. It has a tendency to accommodate/assimilate rather to uproot/destroy. Buddhism being Indian religion has also those similar properties. Buddhism in India never grew sans the shadow of Hinduism. It grew with the Hinduism. People were not rigid anyhow in India. The clergy may have been slightly hostile but usually they weren't to the verge to making another sect/belief extinct." The Indian religions are by their thinking and nature mostly pluralistic and accommodative as they usually believe in multiplicity of paths and nature of seeking. I am proud of this tradition.

[@DougsDharma]

Yes well Buddhism grew up partly in opposition to the Vedic Brahmanism of the Buddha's day; although he did accept many of the tenets of the Upaniṣadic belief system, he rejected its focus on a permanent self, its acceptance of the Vedas as revealed truth, as well as its belief in caste superiority.

[@islamandchristianityhater5713]

@@DougsDharma actually caste system and varna system arent same at that time the vedas got corrupted... later scholars like adi shankaracharya and ramanujacharya came to reform it

[@tommygun7614]

@@DougsDharma Caste System has origin in 10th Mandala of Rig Veda (Earliest text of Vedic Religion). This Mandala was added at laater stages. Earlier Rig Veda had only 7 Chapters (2-8). 1,9 and 10 were added later. Also, it was Varna System and not Caste system at the starting which was based on Qualities and not on Birth. But, evil Brahmins changed everything for their benefit with the help of Shastras and Puranas. Buddha did the right thing by rejecting Vedas, as they were already corrupted by the Brahmins. Even, I am thinking of joining Buddhism to get out of such a religion (Hinduism) which propagtes Casteism.

[@paramitachakraborty8338]

@@tommygun7614 why change your religion? Why not fight along with right minded fellow Hindus like me for equality. #Hindutva

[@tommygun7614]

@@paramitachakraborty8338 Are you ready to give up all Shastras and Puranas?

[@jaibhimjaibharatjaisamvidh4739]

I am a Buddhist from India, and very glad to see people from the other side of the world become interested in our religion. I am glad to see many Americans making their way to Buddhism. Here are the main reasons why Buddhism ended in its native country: 1. Islamic invasions. This is probably the biggest blow to Buddhism not only for India but for several Buddhist nations that were invaded by Islam and converted to Islam. Examples include Afghanistan, all of Central Asia, Indonesia, Maldives, Bangladesh, and even some parts of Iran as well. *DID YOU KNOW* that the Ghurids, the first Islamic empire to have permanently make establishment in India were actually converts to Islam from Buddhism? They are from Afghanistan. A Rajput King by the name Prithviraj Chauhan defeated Muhammad Ghor of the Ghurid dynasty several times, but finally lost to the Ghurids in the Second Battle of Tarain in 1192. Also, a mamluk of Muhammad Ghor started and established the Delhi Sultanate, and Khilji was a general of the Delhi Sultanate who destroyed Nalanda. The Turks not only in India, but even in Central Asia converted the populations from Buddhism to Islam. 2. Brahmanical ideologies and brainwash. The Brahmins defeated the Buddhists in the debates, and started to integrate the religion of the Buddha with Hinduism. They even made claims such as Buddha being an avatar of Vishnu which many people started to believe. One must not forget Pushyamitra Shunga, a Brahmin king who tried to decimate Buddhism in India. 3. Hun invasions. A Chinese traveller to India Xuanzang saw that Buddhism was vanishing in the Gandhara region, and it was mostly due to the invasions by the Hun invaders from Central Asia.

[@DougsDharma]

Thanks for your comment. I suggest watching the video and reading the scholarship linked in the show notes for an alternate view.

[@jaibhimjaibharatjaisamvidh4739]

@@DougsDharma Will do, thanks for the reply!

[@jaibhimjaibharatjaisamvidh4739]

@wrong notes Yeah. It goes against Brahmanical ideas and Islamic ideas

[@utkarshkher]

Pushpamitra Shung attacked them but even after his attacks it continued to flourish, it was Adi Shankaracharya who revived Hinduism in the 8th century through non-violence. And it mostly disappeared in the 12th century when the sultanate was invading our country.

[@sahildarrenbodh]

There was no debate only genocide of Buddhists. They remodeled Buddhists temple into brahmns temple.

[@cvry2813]

Buddhists suffered from so many invasions as Buddhism follows Ahima, which is to refrain from violence. I think Buddhists were helpless. As a result, the Muslims of Afghanistan, Central Asia, Maldives, Indonesia, Malaysia are all converted from Buddhism to Islam.

[@DougsDharma]

This may be one background condition, but what's needed is historical investigation and analysis rather than speculation.

[@ravisharma9294]

@@DougsDharmaHe is right. he is not speculating for example Eastern bengal which was buddhist converted to Islam very easily but western bengal which was hindu survived hundreds of years of Islamic occupation.

[@mayankbadola23]

There was no such thing called Hinduism or religion in India. People used to follow different belives and collectively called Hindus by outsiders. That is why I believe Buddhism absorbed in one of the beliefs in India and never was separate religion.

[@jinofhell]

@Siyovaxsh En-sipad-zid-ana to put more simply. There were multiple tribal/natural belief system but brahminical/vedic system were always able to have certain control over other belief systems. They failed to do that for Buddhism for a long period but finally managed it by reforming their own system.

[@jinofhell]

@Siyovaxsh En-sipad-zid-ana to put more simply. There were multiple tribal/natural belief system but brahminical/vedic system were always able to have certain control over other belief systems. They failed to do that for Buddhism for a long period but finally managed it by reforming their own system.

[@subhadramahanta452]

Agree, we have too many diversity of practices happening to put in one religion

[@yasithperera5700]

Also On another occasion, Kassapa asked the Buddha: "What is the reason that formerly there were fewer rules, but more monks were established in the knowledge of Arahatship, while now there are more rules, but fewer monks are established in the knowledge of Arahatship?" The Buddha replied: "So it happens, Kassapa, when beings deteriorate and the true Dhamma vanishes: then there are more rules and fewer Arahats. There will be, however, no vanishing of the true Dhamma until a sham Dhamma arises in the world. But when a sham Dhamma arises in the world, there will be more rules and fewer Arahats. "But, Kassapa, it is not a cataclysm of the four elements - earth, water, fire and air - that makes the Dhamma disappear. Nor is the reason for its disappearance similar to the overloading of a ship that causes it to sink. It is rather the presence of five detrimental attitudes that causes the obscuration and disappearance of the Dhamma. "These are the five: it is the lack of respect and regard for the Buddha, the Dhamma, the Sangha, the training, and for meditative concentration, on the part of monks and nuns, and male and female lay devotees. But so long as there is respect and regard for those five things, the Dhamma will remain free of obscuration and will not disappear."

[@DougsDharma]

That's right Yasith, that too might make a difference.

[@byron-ih2ge]

my man u have said a lot of truth but u have said a lot of wrong too, northwest india was majorly buddhist during the islamic invasions although ruled by hindu kings , in fact the very reason why the first arab invasion into india was successful was because sindh was ruled by a hindu king " RAJA DAHIR SEN" but about 60-70 percent of his kingdom's population was buddhist and they supported the arab invasion , buddhists also formed the majority in eastern afghanistan, eastern balochistan ,western pakistan( that entire pashtun areas) and east bengal(modern day bangladesh) . the only regions that had a clear hindu majority when islam invaded and r majority muslim today were punjab and kashmir . Also do u know whats the persian word for idol?? its "Buth" !! do i even need to say anything more , we all know how gracefully islam treats idol worshippers.scholars like audrey truskey have an extreme lvl of islamic bias and that seems to have incalculated such a false image of islam within you .

[@altafwani9445]

Kashmir was also Buddhist majority ,it was major centre of Buddhism where 4 th Buddhist council was held .Hindus were always minority in kashmir

[@Dhksksjjsjjs]

@@altafwani9445 Nope

[@rajhegde6548]

I agree with you . His thinking is in line with all the left wing liberals of India .

[@byron-ih2ge]

@@altafwani9445 nope kashmir was the centre of shaiva dharma tantra...and went through extreme bloodshed to become the hell it is today..

[@altafwani9445]

@@byron-ih2ge it was Buddhism and from Buddhism converted to islam ,hinduism was always minority

[@SK-ig4cd]

Just throwing this out there, a video on southern esoteric Buddhism/ Tantra in Theravada would be super interesting to see. I greatly enjoy your channel!

[@DougsDharma]

Thanks S K! Yes, I've read a bit about that and it is interesting. It's something I might do when I feel I have more of a handle on the material. 🙂

[@emptyemptiness8372]

Most of the theravadin esoteric practices in Thailand, laos,cambodia and myanmar predate the arival of buddhism. Many are khmer in origin and have anamist roots and were absorbed by local buddhist sects long before the buddhist reformation.

[@kdnguyen1444]

Reluctant arguments. Buddhism was already at its golden age in China, Korea an Japan from 6th century. They didn’t wait for islam invasion to have Buddhism. Nalanda had 10 000 monks killed but you said as a small conflict.

[@DougsDharma]

Historians I've read question these numbers as inflated.

[@DougsDharma]

That said, of course there was violence and bloodshed in India. The main question I am interested in is why Buddhism declined in India and whether and to what degree this sort of violence was responsible.

[@xXKillaBGXx]

The golden age of Buddhism was during the life and time of Buddha himself, not in the 6th century. As time passes, the teachings of Buddha becomes more and more further away from his teachings.

[@kdnguyen1444]

Doug's Dharma I appreciate your analysis of the internal decline of Buddhism. That’s was a probably the major reason for the downfall of Buddhism in India. However, the Islamic invasion was definitely the decisive terminator, obviously not a myth. Your approach, to me, seems to be over sympathetic with the bloody invasion, otherwise “revisionistic”.

[@kdnguyen1444]

Maitreya Buddha it’s your definition. The historical definition means that when something dominates and has the largest influence in the largest areas, it’s its golden age. Around 6th century, Buddhism dominates East Asia, Central and South Asia, which means it’s the biggest religion at that time, in regards to the vast area of influence.

[@lahirudharmasena8764]

Nice video. Very thoughtful, and backed with knowledge. Can you please make a video of why Buddhism declined in Central Asia, Afghanistan, Maldives next?

[@DougsDharma]

Thanks Lahiru. I might do more videos about this in the future if I can find good scholarship, we’ll see.

[@Amit-mt9ko]

Arrival of islam

[@sunilyt4]

Its simple. Islamic invasion

[@hotdogflavoureddrink]

Thank you for taking a balanced approach to the topic. I'll be checking out the rest of your videos!

[@DougsDharma]

Glad you enjoyed it Altair, my pleasure! 🙏

[@hotdogflavoureddrink]

@@DougsDharma Actually I happen to be Muslim but I love learning about Eastern religions. Unfortunately there is usually a lot of vitriol when Islam's impact is bought up on those religions.

[@Khemadhammo]

Very well-done video. I once heard a learned scholar-monastic from Thailand say that emperor Aśoka's involvement in sending missionaries to other countries was because he suspected Buddhism might decline in India. In your view, do you think this is supported by the evidence?

[@DougsDharma]

It's hard to say, there's virtually no evidence about Asoka's beliefs apart from his rock and pillar edicts. The Buddha himself though seems to have sent missionaries out to other countries already to spread the dharma. So it was probably not new to Asoka.

[@Khemadhammo]

@@DougsDharma Thanks, sādhu.

[@Nope-111]

Bro there is no concept of missionaries in Indian dharmic culture whether it is jainism or Hinduism or buddhism

[@neoloaded]

@@Nope-111 Then who were Bodhidharma (Zen) and Sanghamitra and Mahindra (Sri Lanka)?

[@Nope-111]

@@neoloaded 😅well illetarate they are just spreading knowledge and enlightenment to public 😅 🙂Buddha never said I started buddhism or follow buddhism he just put his thoughts 🤭

[@opanpro9772]

Assimilation of Hindu and Buddhist practices and the arrival of Islam lead to Buddhism's decline in India.

[@DougsDharma]

These were certainly aspects of it.

[@tejmachhar4903]

Yes the King Dahir of Sindh was Hindu cum Buddhist ruler fought against Arabs. There was many schools of thought in India and there was no struggle. It was the Muslim rule that destroyed peace and the spiritual growth.

[@yasithperera5700]

Supreme Buddha did mention that the Dhamma will vanish within 5000 years. So this is something that is slowly happening even right now. Islamic invasion made it more worse in India, and made Buddhism vanish there. And Hinduism was created with vedic aspects and fusion of Buddhist teachings. It lead to that because the Brahmins wanted to regain their power, therefore the caste system is the cause of the declining of Buddhism. Fortunately, Emperor Ashoka came to power and converted to Buddhism and spread the Dhamma around the world. So he made Buddhism flourish again. Sri Lanka played the important role of protecting Buddhism and the true Dhamma. I would say Thailand, Sri Lanka and Cambodia are the most Buddhist practising countries right now

[@DougsDharma]

Yes well, the Buddha is recorded to have said that the dhamma would vanish in 500 years, which fortunately hasn't happened! (This may however have been a later interpolation, arguably fitting the rising of new innovations towards the early centuries of the new millennium).

[@emptyemptiness8372]

@@DougsDharma 500 years well i supose in one sense the Buddha was correct. 500 years after the Buddha passed the sangha had changed, the practice had changed , new texts and concepts had started to be introduced, new sects had apeared. Idols, worship and permanant temples had spread and become wealthy. It had become an established religion, the Buddhas life had become full of miracles like walking after birth with lotus sprouting from his footprints and giving a talk with miricles and superpowers throughout his life, he had become godlike no longer just a man who discovered a practice to escape suffering, this places enlightenment out of reach for mere mortals. The dhamma was no longer the dhamma and practice of the Buddha and his disciples. So yes 500 yrs was pretty much correct. Edit: i should add that it is still posible to become an arahant, rare but possible and was even achieved in the 20th century by monks like Empty Cloud, Lp Mum , Lp Khao etc..if you practice what the Buddha did and not the religous culty twaddle.

[@theyoungindians9027]

Buddha had said that only Brahmana & Kshatriyas are meant for enlightenment and next Buddha would be from Brahmana community, which lead to many Brahmanas joining his movement. Where was the threat of loss of power of Brahmanas? Even Ashoka about whom you are talking specifically mentioned protecting & respecting brahmanas hundreds of time. Ashoka targetted & persecuted Jaina & Ajivaka monks but not Vedic brahamana or brahamanas in general.

[@emptyemptiness8372]

@@theyoungindians9027 umm no. No he didnt, no it isnt and no it wont.

[@theyoungindians9027]

@@emptyemptiness8372 About what specifically? Go read what Buddha talked in Lalitavistara Sutra about who could become Bhodisattva? Or even how Buddha stressed so much on preserving blood lineage while talking about his sister's marriage within same family. Buddha is not some modern day left progressive as you people are making him out to be. Buddhism was always faith/practice of elites/rich globalists/existing establishment in every country that in entered - India, China , Japan. It was not some revolution against 'brahminical caste system' as taught by fee Buddhists. koenraadelst.blogspot.com/2012/05/buddha-and-caste.html?m=1

[@nikhilkay1]

Buddhism never declined it is just faded away, Indians just soaked up whatever Buddhism had to offer and Hinduism is related to culture of India which recycles itself every few centuries. Other reason is Buddhism fell into what Hinduism struggled with, it became elite just like Brahmanical Hinduism. Buddhism dropped 'pali' language of the people and adopted Sanskrit which was more priestly and language of the royal. Also, after Muslim invasion the royalties Buddhist got from merchants and Hindu kings just declined drastically while Hinduism was not Sangha based or had no core organization it thrived in villages of India. Hinduism didn't require any donation and it was so much decentralized that every attempt to eradicate Hinduism by foreign powers failed miserably. Hinduism just reinvents itself every few centuries.

[@heathenwizard]

Thank you for this very informative video, my friend. Be well, and stay healthy!

[@DougsDharma]

You're very welcome heathenwizard, you too!

[@lamcs5133]

The most important message conveyed in your research is the survival of Buddhism depends very much on the interdependence of the Sangha and the laity, which is the original intent of the Buddha. Once the link is broken or weaken, the metaphysical research of Sangha in an ivory tower even under royal patronage may not be relevant to daily life and eventually will be discarded by the society. Thanks a lot for your reminder to Buddhist around the world.

[@DougsDharma]

Yes, I think that's an important lesson. 🙏

[@AlessandroZir]

oh, this was very comprehensive, useful and clear information, like in other of your videos (I should add); thank you for your generosity in making your knowledge available;

[@DougsDharma]

Glad it was helpful Alessandro!

[@Ragnar638]

​@@DougsDharma Not even a single mention of Adi Shankaracharya who walked lengths and breadths of india debated great buddhist converts into sanatana dharma school of purva mimamsa called mandana mishra?

[@rohiniajaikumar7222]

Why no mention of Advaita Vedanta? That was one among the reasons why Buddhism faded away from India

[@DougsDharma]

Well Advaita Vedanta was one aspect of the Hinduism that I mentioned in the video.

[@ZenTeaNow]

Thank you for this very helpful video. It gives a sufficiently broad sweep to help the average person understand yet provides the necessary nuances so that we don't see history in simple terms of black and white. This gives me a building block and a launchpad to read up and study further and to understand different areas in the history and development of Buddhism. I really appreciate this.

[@DougsDharma]

You're very welcome! Glad to help. 🙏

[@monodeep1]

Sindh had a Buddhist majority in 712 AD. Raja Dahirsen was last hindu ruler of Sindh. Come 1947, still Sindh had a sizeable hindu population, however, zero Buddhist population. What you are saying is true, however, I cannot agree with your assessment that your third point is least important. I have given you the case of Sindh as an example. You are correct that Buddhism had become dependent on royal patronage and donations. As they dried out, Buddhism could not take on the islamic onslaught. Hinduism as you very correctly pointed out was much grounded. If you see the almost 1,000 years of Islamic rule, some Hindu kings or groups was constantly opposing the western invaders, whether be it east west south or north. Ofcourse there were some Hindu collaborators also. Though, I am not a student of history, I cannot recall a single Buddhist struggle against Islamic invaders. I agree with you that Hinduism was a religion of home and hearth. Hinduism's world view was indeed global, however grounded in its soil. Buddhism thrived out of the monasteries, royal patronage and contribution from merchant class. When these factors collapsed, Bhuddism had no stomach for a good fight. Hindus kept on fighting. You give Hindus less credit for the struggle they waged for hundreds of years. From Alexander to the British, some Hindu was always there for a fight.

[@shivansh9813]

yes ,this video is the same liberal bullsh*t without proper facts

[@goo-lamokadoctor181]

Pakistan, Afghanistan , Baluchistan was Buddhist majority ...Just Like Persia was Parsi Majority.. Islamic Invasion cleansed them all with force ,and the multiple genocides and destruction evidence still resides in all these areas. Only Hinduism fought back and managed to survive somehow . The oldest living civilisation of the world,even after 1000 yrs of Invasion rule

[@BarbarraBay]

Very good effort Doug (apart from the final few minutes).

[@DougsDharma]

😄 Thanks Barbarra.

[@Walaoehpaul]

5:20 The Buddha made it clear that bhikkhus should not beg for food and things, except in times of great need, but rather wait for something to be offered. During alms round, the bhikkhu makes no request, does not even look at people, although he may quietly wait to see if an offering is to be made before moving on. And usually dhamma talks are only conducted upon an invitation, also known as pavaaranaa. Otherwise there is no contacts or communications during the alms round as both bhikkhus and lay people are to observe mindfulness. Hence an alms round is not considered begging, for the bhikkhu does not solicit anything but is ready mindfully to receive any alms that lay people may wish to give. 🙂

[@DougsDharma]

The Buddha said the monastic was to rely upon alms food for sustenance at all times, not simply during times of great need. Whether we term that "begging" or not is I guess a matter of semantics. It is soliciting donations of food, etc.

[@sudfromindia5763]

The area of today's Taliban was the area of Gandharan Buddhism. Kumarjiva, Ashvaghosa, Dignaga, Kanishka etc were active in that area. Its unbelievable seeing the today's violence and fanaticism in that area.

[@DougsDharma]

Yes it's very sad to see.

[@alankuntz4406]

You didn't mention anything about how A.D Shankaracharya Clobbered Buddhism in the 8th century to the point of oblivion. Now that's really fascinating. I just got done reading this 71 page essay by some one named Kencho Tenzin, Shankar Shankara: A Hindu Re a: A Hindu Revivalist or a Crypto-Buddhist? I'm curious if you have done any video's on Shankara and the debates between him and various buddhist in his day. ?

[@DougsDharma]

Most of what I do is on early Buddhism. Shankara is much later, and his role is wrapped in polemics, so to do a reasonable history of him one would have to get underneath the myth. If I can find anything useful I might do something on him eventually.

[@alankuntz4406]

@@DougsDharma yeah I got you , well thanks for the reply. It says you said there's so much that went on prior to shankara in 700 something and the destruction of Nalanda in the 12th century. Thanks for sharing that and helping us tune into those earlier days of Buddhism.

[@WJSpies]

I've been binging somewhat on your instructional videos from your KZbin channel. I like going back to consider and re-learn things I had grown to take for granted. Anyway it is always a good thing to touch base with basics, as it were. I just simply want to say these free lectures are quite good, more or less non-dogmatic as humanity possible I imagine. So, long intro to simply say thanks. Very powerful stuff by its inherent spiritual neutrality and underlying simplicity! Heartfelt thanks!

[@DougsDharma]

My pleasure, W. J.!

[@nikhilkay1]

"Islam thinks Buddhism as more cosmopolitan....." You are dead wrong here. So, how did they view Buddhist idol worshipping? Why most of Buddhist monasteries got burned down by Islamic rulers. Nalanda University, people say was the biggest university at that time with more than 10,000 scholars from around the world which Khilji brought it down and it burnt for months. Why Buddhism hasn't survived in any of the Islamic countries? Why Buddha idols are being destroyed even to this date?

[@DougsDharma]

This video is talking about attitudes many centuries ago, and is based on scholarship in the books cited in the information box below the video.

[@nikhilkay1]

@@DougsDharma evidences are quite opposite to whatever the book is saying. If you look at the todays India most of the major hindu temples were converted to mosques, even today hindus are fighting in courts to get some of those restored. Islam brought many good things to India, tolerance was not one of them. I don want to argue here as you have cited the book but todays books are written with their own biased lenses.

[@dhitikabarua7677]

@@nikhilkay1 right

[@arzhvr9259]

@@DougsDharma Doug you’re still wrong. You’re being prideful.

[@ftst4756]

They were burned and destroyed by hindu rulers many times too. Study about Shashanka, The senas, The varmans and how they ruthlessly masscared the buddhists of Bengal and magdha Islam hammered the final nail in Buddhism's coffin. It is also said that the buddhists persuaded the turks to attack the sena dynasty of bengal because to save themselves from sena kindom's oppression.

[@polinabb8256]

Very interesting topic 🙂👌🏻 Thank you so much 🙏

[@DougsDharma]

My pleasure Polinab! 😊

[@thenoblesearch07]

Excellent! Very profound explanation. Thanks for the Video!

[@DougsDharma]

You're very welcome!

[@krishnasastri6740]

Sir, Buddhism became half when Sankara defeated them philosophically. It became a quarter when split within itself. It became one eighth when the money and precious metals hoarded by Buddhists affected the country’s economy and the kings seized them. The last nail on its coffin was self inflicted when the Buddhists betrayed Hindus and joined Islamists.

[@middlewayers]

There is no mention of any such debate.. adi Sankar is known for his debate with Mandan Misra..

[@kikum3067]

Bhuddhism is wrogly interpreted that it is thrown away from India by Brahmins & Muslims....but the truth is it is taken away from India by more sophisticated countries. as taken away of software CEOs, Best Engineers, best doctors, eminent business men and Kohinur. Bhuddism is like ENERGY, it can never be destroyed but only can modify without changing its core principles.

[@radhakrishnanv2286]

*PEOPLE COOLLY HAVE FORGOTTEN BUDDHA AND HOLDING ONTO AN "ISM" BY THE NAME BUDDHISM. SO IT'S NOT WORKING. PEOPLE WANT TO BE 100% WORLDLY BUT STILL WANT TO BECOME A GODMAN LIKE BUDDHA. EVERY RELIGION HAS THIS PROBLEM OF RELIGIOUS-CONFLICT; PEOPLE WANT TO BE IN A RELIGIOUS GROUP BUT DON'T LISTEN TO THEIR MASTERS' VOICE.*

[@kartikrajsingh1895]

Hello sir! I have been watching you for the past year! I love your videos they are so informative! By the way I’m also from the USA 🇺🇸

[@DougsDharma]

Hey great, thanks for watching and commenting!

[@visnaya1]

Doug, thanks for the well-researched balanced video. I agree with most of your points. Thanks.

[@DougsDharma]

My pleasure!

[@andregonzalez1496]

Thank you so much, another great video.

[@DougsDharma]

My pleasure, Andre!

[@thenoblesearch07]

Hey Doug! Could you do a video on how the splitting of the Sangha took place from the second council?🙏🏻

[@DougsDharma]

Thanks for the suggestion noblesearch. It’s a very contested part of history so if I can get some good objective, scholarly accounts of it I might do so.

[@thenoblesearch07]

@@HariOm-ri8hw Yeah... I agree with that. She is biased historian. She glorifies invaders.

[@furtivedolus2504]

I would echo Ambedkar here and say Islam has something akin to a caste system baked into it. You have the religious authority and rulers on top, the believers below that, then the people of the book (flowery as that sounds, they're second-class citizens at best), and the people who don't fall into any of the above are outcasts and enemies by default.

[@DougsDharma]

Well Islam was opposed to the caste system. Unfortunately most any belief system (including Buddhism) tends to produce in many people a sense of insiders and outsiders. For example we have the monastics, the lay followers, and the non followers. Even the Buddha made these sorts of distinctions.

[@furtivedolus2504]

​@@DougsDharma You cannot really call the monks a caste because it's not something you are born into and anyone can become a monk and any monk can simply leave the order. Anyone in the lay community can, likewise, remain a lay person, become a monk or leave the community of their own volition.

[@BarbarraBay]

@@DougsDharma Islamic culture is very hierarchical. For example, countries such as Syria & Iran have a 1% similar to the USA. You been watching too much CNN Doug.

[@BarbarraBay]

@Michal Nazareth I never ever referred to an ideal of "egalitarianism". Your comment is unrelated to anything I posted and sounds like a product of Judaic ideological conditioning.

[@furtivedolus2504]

@Michal Nazareth Some may condemn the Hindu caste system while knowing Islam has something baked into it which is akin to it, but arguably even worse. I'd suggest reading 'Pakistan, or, The Partition of India', by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar which can be found on the Internet Archive.

[@dfdgfdgf0000]

This channel is so awesome. Thank you very much.

[@DougsDharma]

Glad you're enjoying it, Avida. Thanks for the comment! 🙏

[@radhakrishnanv2286]

@@DougsDharma If the message as told in Dhammapada by Bhagvan Buddha is probagated then that can be a good service done by this channel to Buddha Bhagvan.

[@kraut1982]

During my visit to Mumbai India I saw some Buddhist and Hindu caves and the Buddhist caves were well preserved vs the Hindu caves which were said to be destroyed by the Portuguese. I wondered who was preserving these caves if there were no Buddhist around during Portuguese period in the region. Consider how small the Portuguese colonies were it is hard to believe that they did not discover these caves.

[@mananmody9355]

My understanding is a bit different. While I agree that decentralised nature of Hinduism ensured it survived in the rural parts of India and also assimilated Buddhist laity which lost touch with the Sangha especially after collapse of monasteries post Islamic invasion, what I do not understand is why Buddhism got completely wiped out of Afghanistan where there were very few Hindus, if we do not ascribe destruction of Buddhism to Islamic invasion. What I have been able to understand out of my reading is that under Buddhist dynasties, Sangha gained a lot of influence and power. This led to many people of questionable morals to join the Sangha. Infact, in the third (?) Buddhist council to debate over vices affecting the monasteries such as drunkenness amongst monks and a debate on whether to ban wine. No reason to believe such issues got sorted out post collapse of Buddhist dynasties as royal patronage of the Sangha continued even under Hindu dynasties. Once Islamic invasions happened and destroyed monasteries as well as stopped royal patronage, there was no incentive in people joining Sangha. Laity had as you said, already been assimilated amongst Hindus in rural areas. Also, with the Central Asians adopting Islam, silk route trade which was controlled by Buddhist traders fell into the hands of Muslims, thus decreasing patronage from the urban rich.

[@DougsDharma]

Yes, this is a very high overview, there likely were different causes in different places.

[@vampireducks1622]

Great video and much-needed clarification. And lovely shade of yellow! (T-shirt.)

[@DougsDharma]

Thanks Vampire, I was concerned it might be a bit too bright but hey at least it might help keep the viewers awake! 😄

[@vampireducks1622]

@@DougsDharma hah the brighter the better! :) Thanks for sharing your knowledge, btw

[@trinp.6334]

Thank you for sharing the fruits of your researches with us. With an end note that serves that as a very powerful remainders or warnings to those that study the Buddha’s teachings. “Hard it is, human birth obtained. Hard it is, living life Rare it is, the chance to hear the sublime Dhamma. Rare it is, the arising of Awakened One in this world.” As a layperson who loiter around youtube. Your vdo and a gist of Dhamma is like a pleasant breeze.

[@DougsDharma]

Thank you Trin! 🙏

[@loney403]

The chachnama which chronicled Arab invasion of Sindh mentions a significant number of Buddhists living in North West India (including some parts of Afghanistan) and their relation with the invaders & local rulers?

[@DougsDharma]

Interesting, thanks.

[@ekamsat429]

A key historic point that must not be missed is the occurrence of the "Golden Age of India" under the (Hindu) Gupta empire which existed from the early 4th century CE to late 6th century CE. The region flourished with remarkable advances in newer dynamic schools of thought, such as in the intellectual spheres of mathematics, astronomy, science, medicine, philosophy, literature, art and architecture as well as various religions. Some of these were, in fact, taught at Nalanda University. In other words, there was a rich variety of intellectual pursuits that peaked at the time in India, and naturally, Buddhism had also to compete with those currents. (As a fun analogy, Silicon Valley is among the least religious regions of the US, according to the Pew Research Center.)

[@DougsDharma]

Yes it's a fascinating time in history, that's for sure. Thanks Ekam.

[@md.shahiquesubhani7241]

Gupta was not hindu empire. Don't read just your ncert books

[@CrueltyFreeMan]

Thank you so much Doug 🙏 Like I have mentioned before, I was really interested in this topic, read here and there but never could get a clear understanding. This video is very comprehensive, and I truly thank you for it 🙏🤓

[@DougsDharma]

My pleasure Uygen!

[@CrueltyFreeMan]

Robin Stern ...even you 😉 you also sound very confident but the question is who to believe, everyone is biased on their own thoughts. So don’t worry too much bro, live and let live 🤓

[@gorgeouslandscape4551]

Buddhism, Hinduism , Jainism, Sikhism they look different but core is same that is dharma and moksha.

[@doriswoo4455]

Thank you for all the talks. Love you so much.

[@DougsDharma]

Glad you like them! 😊

[@vishypai7554]

Very good and explanation on decline of Buddhism in India. Could have touched upon the role of Shankaracharya the vedic scholar of 8th century who travelled the length and breadth of India debating with Buddhist scholars and converting them to Sanatana Dharma. His efforts are also said to have played a great role in the decline of Buddhism.

[@girishm5880]

Shankaracharya's Advaita is called as "Buddhism in disguise" by other Vaishnava schools.

[@ashilyjustin4748]

@@girishm5880 cuz shankara copy pasted aspects of Buddhism

[@girishm5880]

@@ashilyjustin4748 OK.

[@acho5424]

We have an entire text on Shankar Acharya ( something they don’t teach you in India ) Although Shankar Acharya did defeat Buddhist Monks ( plain monks ). Shankar Acharya himself was defeated by Dharma Kriti. Dharma Kriti asked Shankar Archarya to follow Buddhism but the humiliation of defeat made Shankar Acharya to commit suicide in Ganges.

[@xp_money7847]

​@@acho5424what a load of bull. Can you give me the link to that text lmao

[@lostballintallgrass1]

Buddhism is pretty helpful in understanding your nature and tendencies, but it gives me a kind of vertigo if I mess with it for too long. That feeling of groundlessness is unnerving and scary. It has an appeal to me, nonetheless. In some way, it makes me sorry I ever started.

[@DougsDharma]

Interesting thoughts Allen, yes I guess there is an element of groundlessness to it. Still, maybe without the ground we can fly.

[@lostballintallgrass1]

It’s like the scene in Close Encounters withal the Third Kind when Richard Dreyfus boards the alien craft. How many of us can renounce the past and wrong thinking fully? This world feels like Hell sometimes but it’s a familiar Hell. We get homesick for the suffering. It just feels like that, that’s all.

[@markantrobus8782]

The raids by the Turks in the thirteenth century devastated Pataliputra university.

[@joydeeproy1580]

Buddhism is part of Hinduism. It lives on within Hinduism. Gautama Siddhartha was the greatest Indian.

[@iamrebel660]

Hinduism is Copy paste of Vajrayana Buddhism. Hindu Converted Buddhist Vihar to Hindu mandir and Buddhisatva toa Hindu kalpnik Devi and Devta.

[@thenewwaydevil]

A video comparing buddhism to advaita vedanta would be good.

[@DougsDharma]

Yes this is a very complex topic, but one that's been on my mind.

[@westsidesmitty1]

Several weeks ago, when you focused on the direction of this channel, I noted that historical context is one of the (virtually) unique aspects and attractions of ''Doug's Dharma''. In the vastness of KZbin, to own a niche is precious indeed. At the time, I failed to qualify what (for me) is the qualifier of perfect ''length and depth''. There are other sources on KZbin for this material, but it is invariably just recorded university lectures, running in excess of an hour. You have a gift of covering as much ground (with MORE outside scholarship), in far less time. This is gold. Usually, your videos get placed in my bursting ''favorites'' cache. The essential doctrinal material is not going to be worked through in even a lifetime, at the rate I'm going. Allow me to remark that it is VERY satisfying to watch a video once, and trusting the viewpoint, feel like, ''Awesome! Got it.'' Now I don't really believe I've ''got it'' (I'm sure one could make a career out of specializing in Buddhist historiography). But, of course, while I'm very interested in the subject and it's very important, my concern is mostly soteriological (oh my, KZbin spellchecker giving me the angry, wiggly red line!). To get this kind of ancillary material in a positively ''entertaining'' 37 minute format, and on a channel that occurs automatically in my ''up next'' is priceless and much appreciated. Metta.

[@DougsDharma]

That's great Smitty. Yes, there's no way to be comprehensive with this kind of very complicated historical period, but I've tried at least to sketch an outline.

[@prakasmohan8448]

The most reasonable explanation for Buddhist disappearance I heard. Thank you.

[@DougsDharma]

My pleasure, thanks for the comment.

[@knightsremains]

What an important discussion Doug! This topic can be easily underestimated and I encourage your willingness to highlight the pitfalls of blind devotion. Yes, it is true that embracing our intelligence and ability to question is compatible with following a guru. I find that the Tibetan tradition is fraternal (non-gender) and in many ways collaborative. Very much aligned with a communal philosophy. Indeed philosophy is where I like to appreciate Buddhism as opposed to religiosity. While this is subtle, the intent is so distinct. A philosophy is an explanation of our human nature, and the religious may have as a goal the conversion of non-believers. I am going off tangents but this video hit a chord and one that finally illustrates why Buddhism and studying the Dharma is so inviting, rewarding and even shamelessly forgiving. Your eloquence in word selection is inspiring. Cheers!

[@DougsDharma]

Thanks Eigh! I'm thinking this might have been posted to the wrong video, but glad you enjoyed anyway!

[@xiaomaozen]

Very interesting video! 😊 Also your conclusion sounds very plausible to me. If something loses touch with daily/ordinary life and becomes a more or less purely scholastic endeavor, it's gonna decline. Think of the Christian scholastics who seriously discussed the question: "How many angels can sit on the top of a needle?" 🤣😋 And compare that to Zen Master Nan-chuan's "Ordinary Mind is the Way". 😍🤭

[@DougsDharma]

Yes, thanks xiao mao, there's a lot of food for thought in ancient history ... 🙂

[@theevolutionpath]

Excellent, thanks! The big question I have is why the human being chose the “easy” way first... why sangha retreat themselves and “leave” the lay people out. Doesn’t that be the reason why Buddha criated the Sangha? In other words... was the growing of buddhism a goal? Or is just free to happen whatever it happens... thanks Doug!

[@DougsDharma]

Well my sense is that it was easier to grow the sangha in power and prestige by allying with powerful lords rather than with the local people. There is a delicate balance here that got a bit out of whack over time. But yes, one of the Buddha's goals was to grow the sangha around the world.

[@drajaganesan]

at once based on deep and wide knowledge and in simple narrative style. congrats.It is such videos that can keep alive knowledge of Buddhism.

[@DougsDharma]

My pleasure, thanks for the comment! 🙏😊

[@Johnoines]

An excellent history lesson. Thanks Doug.

[@DougsDharma]

Very welcome! 🙏

[@guruladakhi7960]

I don’t get why zealots of Islam always gets a pass . I had commented earlier that we cannot understate the wholesale destruction of great institutions like Nalanda and Vikramshila. In Nalanda alone nine million books were burnt and it took nine months for the embers to die out. This is narrated by the Upadhaya (Head) of Nalanda who fled to Tibet after the destruction he witnessed. In today’s equivalency it is like destroying all the great universities of the world and incinerating every research on science and scientific achievements and then ascribing the decline of science on peripheral reasons. You just have to follow the patterns of systematic destruction of Buddhism and Hinduism unleashed in South East Asian countries where Islam is the majority religion today. History must endeavour to reflect the facts with sincerity however unpleasant they may appear today.

[@DougsDharma]

I certainly wouldn't give zealots of any religion a pass, though neither would I strive to foment hatred among people. "Hatreds never cease through hatred in this world; through love alone they cease. This is an eternal law." Dhp. 5.

[@subhadramahanta452]

Agree, people so easily give pass to Islamic oppression, it was not just universities, they also burned down cities in similar manner, brutally tortured and raped people as they came, yet people overlook them so easily. Like the saying goes, "People will only see/hear what they wanna see/hear".

[@rajabhaysingh]

Thank you

[@DougsDharma]

You're very welcome!

[@vb2556]

Only Reason was Adi Shankaracharya and His Vedanta Philosophy. Even today Shankars Advait Vedanta is studied and discussed among universities all over the world especially West

[@prashant1760]

i also want to purchase one buddha as you have. from where can i get it??

[@DougsDharma]

I'm not sure prashant! I'd suggest searching online or on eBay perhaps.

[@shrimppaste1692]

I am born where Pala (Bengal) kingdom ruled. My ancestors were likely Buddhist but later we became Muslim. I agree with you Buddhism is more compatible with the Islamic religion rather than Hinduism. Buddhism did decline in Eastern Indian Buddhist dynasty area due to South Indian Hindu dynasty weaking the Pala dynasty. Though the remaining Buddhism In the area started accepting non Buddhist teachings and practices. Hence why new Theravada Nikayas came back to the area recently to go back and remove non Buddhist sources and practices to practice closer to the Buddha's teachings

[@shrimppaste1692]

The Vendata teachers mixed and down played the Buddha's teachings. Calling Buddhism and Jainism as Hindusim but as a Nastik (Hetrodox) sects. Which makes no sense when they their own unique beliefs and practices separate from the Vedic or Hindu religion

[@DougsDharma]

Thanks for your input ShrimpPaste. To be fair, I think Buddhism can be compatible with many religions or belief systems.

[@knowledgedesk1653]

@@shrimppaste1692 Vedanta started from Upanishads(800BCE). It isn't mix of Buddhism and Jainism.

[@knowledgedesk1653]

@@shrimppaste1692 Buddhism remained in Eastern India till 13th century while Cola empire was in decline from 12th century only.

[@shrimppaste1692]

@@knowledgedesk1653 Cola empire..? Which provinces or country does that fall under. I never heard or read any historical accounts on that. Buddhism remained in India till the 15th century but it was already in decline but was growing else where mainly East and Southeast Asia.

[@MrAllmightyCornholioz]

Great Video! 南無阿弥陀仏

[@DougsDharma]

Thanks Mr. Almighty!

[@zvpzvp]

Of course the background and the circumstances of the decline are complex. That should be pointed put. But never, never underestimate the disastrous impact of the teachings of the religion founder who was the extreme opposite of the Buddha. There has always been a track of war and destruction following those teachings.

[@jays5186]

I am sick of this topic of 'decline' of Buddhism. It never declined. Both Hindu practices and Buddhism merged and influenced each other to a point indistinguishable. Many of the hindu concepts around karma and karuna, daya etc were heavily shaped by buddhist philosophy. Mahayana buddhism became very similar to hinduism. The destruction of Nalanda was however, a major blow to the identity of Buddhism as a separate philosophy. Having visited Nalanda, I was astonished that both vedic and buddhist philosophy were taught with equal importance.

[@vikashmohapatra2077]

Audrey Truskhey is one of the worst historian I ever read. She is preety much aurangzeb lover I guess. Nd twist history in her flavor.

[@DougsDharma]

Perhaps Vikash, but very little of this video depended upon her scholarship.

[@piyushgarggarg9131]

@@DougsDharma she is the worst historian. She even blocks people who present facts and debunked her book. You should never trust her.

[@petagonkyi]

You have seen the Taliban destruction of the Bamiyan Buddha and the destruction of statues in the Middle East during the last decade. Even today the excavated Buddha statues are being destroyed in Pakistan and Afganistan.

[@DougsDharma]

Yes and that is very unfortunate.

[@Viveknair7561]

Yaa.. recently it happen in Pakistan

[@SonofSethoitae]

I wonder how much of it is due to the fact that the Buddha often taught that laypeople should keep their shrines and practices (outside of a few obvious ones, such as sacrifices) for prosperity and social cohesion. It stands to reason that, hearing this, Buddhist laypeople said "okay, we will", and that was the end of it.

[@DougsDharma]

I think the Buddha's relative ecumenism is one of the most endearing parts of his teaching. I did a video on that topic awhile back: kzbin.info/www/bejne/b5jIaoFrltxlgMU

[@petagonkyi]

Until very recently everything was under royal control all over the world, not just Nalanda or India. How did the Angela church came into existence because of royal authority?

[@KitKrash]

II think you hit it when you mentioned the syncretic nature of ‘religion’ in ancient India. The idea of a singular religion of “Hinduism” did not exist and this could be true with early Buddhism as well. A person could follow elements of one philosophy while worshipping a local god and having a Brahmin priest initiate a wedding ceremony. Even Shankaracharya, who is mentioned by others here was not defending Hinduism in debates but rather the validity of the Vedas and accumulated written knowledge in general. So he may have been looking for Buddhist ideas in the ancient texts which made Buddhism redundant. But I would not discount Islamic invaders as there is quite a lot of documentation on the history of Afghanistan being a predominantly Buddhist country that was invaded.

[@DougsDharma]

Yes, agreed. And the history of Afghanistan is different, at least to my knowledge!

[@ravikumar-oi3ok]

Most all of the buddhist scriptures, literature, symbols, methodology of worships, food & dress habits, are stolen by Brahmin ism, even stupas are converted into shiva linga. All buddhist vihara are converted into big temples, even mythological stories also are stolen, cut&paste. Very sad sir

[@DougsDharma]

Well it's good to keep in mind that there was plenty of sharing on all sides. Many of the Buddha's early ideas came from Jainism and Brahminism, although of course he had his own take on them and disagreed with much that he found there.

[@johnjacobastoriv688]

ha ha ha buddhism came after hinduism

[@DipayanPyne94]

@@johnjacobastoriv688 No. Buddhism came after Brahmanism. Hinduism has evolved over a very long time ...

[@douglasober7068]

This is a fair and noble explanation, Doug. As with many things public, I sympathize with your attempt to speak to a certain audience that would be familiar with certain misguided narratives. However, I can't help but wonder if you've inadvertently gone onto replicate many of those antiquated Buddhological paradigms about the sasana being aloof from the laity, about the notion of a singular 'Hinduism' that can be spoken of as a conglomerate in the pre-colonial world in competition with Buddhism, and so on. I understand the desire to minimize the narrative of violence--particularly in our contemporary climate where these histories, imagined or real, have severe implications for those living in the subcontinent--but was 9th - 12th century India not simply one of immense political fragmentation where violence, both intellectual and physical, was simply part of the game? The Buddha-sasana was a player in the field and thereby complicit in these struggles for survival and resources (material and immaterial), which in part also explains the 'radical' transition to violent symbolism in late Mahayana and Sahajyana, Vajrayana iconography and practices. of course, we also know that Buddhist institutions and figures, although greatly diminished, continued to populate parts of the subcontinent up through the 16th and 17th century in places like Tamil nadu (Naggapatinam), Chittagong, and of course Himalayas. Nobody likes to talk about these aspects because it challenges the received wisdom and the messages that have been crafted by the modern curators of Buddhism (to use Lopez's phrase). I wonder if you read Giovanni Verardi's magnum opus, Hardships and Downfall of Buddhism in India (just republished as the Gods and the Heretics)--I think it might shift your thinking on many of these issues and I'd be very curious to hear what you thought. In any case, this probably sounds very critical, but it's meant with all respect and earnest. I think your videos are great and I'm grateful for you producing them and for all your work in showcasing these important issues with us. --Doug (!!)

[@DougsDharma]

Thanks for your comment Doug. The picture I've given is from the scholarly material in the description box, as best I can summarize it. The problem with any complex, centuries-long event like this is that it is significantly too complex to get across all its nuances in a single book, much less a short video. That said, there clearly were examples of violence as well as more peaceful change. (The introduction of violence in Vajrayāna practice is certainly one that I accept and have discussed in the past, and which the scholars I cite discuss in some detail). The question is one of which overarching picture is more accurate. Verardi has one idea, though my understanding is that his picture is far from completely accepted among scholars. But likely the truth is somewhere in the confluence of these various pieces of evidence. There is always more to be said!

[@douglasober7068]

@@DougsDharma I think you're absolutely right and I certainly don't envy the job of trying to summarize such a vast temporal and spatial landscape into 30 minute 'sound bytes'! (I do it all the time teaching, so can fully sympathize.) So you have read Verardi? Yes, his book is far from being widely accepted and I think it's unfortunate that it hasn't been given more space, although personally I think that stems more from the conservatism of the field than from an actual engagement/disagreement with his work (last I checked it had only received one major review in the Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies!). I think he gets a lot wrong, partially because of the difficulties of trying to understand such a long, complex process (particularly when working in such a difficult multi-lingual archive) , but also because he probably overstated the argument to make a point. But the overall body of evidence that he has (un)covered is something that the academy will someday have to reckon with. My two cents at least! Thanks again.

[@douglasober7068]

Dear Hari Om, while I disagree with some of Truschke’s arguments, your assessment seems to be based on nothing more than an ad hominem attack, much of which I’ll add is a complete fabrication. There are real scholars who debate her interpretations but if you’re going to challenge her ideas (and to reiterate I’m not convinced by all of them) please do so on the basis of her actual arguments. If I was her I would block most everyone too: she has been subject to such vile abuse and threats that she has almost no other choice.

[@pipinapradhan1958]

One of the main thing is Hinduism or sanatan dharm is way before buddhism where hermits were roamed in India with various upanishads as base. Hinduism is way before buddhism except there may be tantra ways, and buddha also practiced the yoga way before so technically originated from sanatan dharm. Get ur things from both point of view, not only from ur own kind..

[@middlewayers]

The oldest Upanishad is Brahdryanka which is around 500 BC..so it is not older than Sharman Religion and it was added to Vedas later

[@rajabhaysingh]

All of that you said is true 🙏

[@DougsDharma]

Thanks Abhay! 🙏

[@aronmindfulman7727]

Do you think S.N. Goenka was a factor in the resurgence of Buddhism in India?

[@DougsDharma]

I'm not sure Aron. He might have had at least a small effect, though Dr. Ambedkar's work was much broader based and earlier.

[@ravindraganage7562]

I am not great authority on this topic but I am an Indian and follower of Buddha. So I think I can tell my observation on this. You know India is divided in castes. Babasaheb Ambedkar's movement converted a large population to Buddhism but most of the newly converted Buddhists were illiterate and unknown towards buddhism. Then some of them studied Buddhism is neighbouring countries and come back but they bought only the pariyatti part, the Tipitaka but Goenka Ji's work was broad, what I think, he worked in those newly converted Buddhists and simultaneously he taught Buddha's message in the so called upper caste Hindus in a very secular way so they also accepted Buddha wholeheartedly. And VRI has been doing tremendous work to transliteration the Tipitaka in indian scripts. Yes, Goenka Ji's work is broad but Babasaheb's work was pioneering so I think we can not compare both the great personalities.

[@DougsDharma]

Thanks Ravindra.

[@rahult1518]

As always your analysis is amazing and on point. To be fair buddhas core thinking was absorbed into greater "hindu" practises and adwaita. The canonical budddhism had its peak but even today as a practising "hindu" and a brahmin , i think of buddhas arguments more than any philosophy as a whole in my life. Buddhism is still strong in india as a core philosophy of many hindus Athah deepo bhav .

[@DougsDharma]

🙏😊

[@TheShuryansh]

Buddha's core teachings were not absorbed by Hinduism , Buddha himself was inspired by upanishadic ideas of equality and enlightenment for all. But Buddhism's missionary work was challenged by advita vedanta. And it could not withstand the competitive wisdom of adwait vedanta. The main problem of Buddhism is that it's more flowery than practical. And concepts of Buddhism are muddy too, like karma , reincarnation and mind. It doesn't pay down confident philosophy in comparison to Hinduism.

[@rahult1518]

@@TheShuryansh "hindu" in my response is in quotes and i dont mean canonical hinduism. I stand by what i wrote based on my own study and other expert opinions i read on historical buddhism . i am not being much elaborate on what exact aspects . But i find Adi Sankara's hagiography and attempts at resurrecting adwaita influenced by concurrent buddhist philosophy . i also find my conclusions line up with Doughs secular analysis of EARLY buddhism . cheers

[@TheShuryansh]

@@rahult1518 your assumption and studies are erroneous

[@rahult1518]

@@TheShuryansh i am not making you a judge of my studies lmao. Read my quotes carefully and leave it if you dont agree.

[@tiagocarioca]

It is interesting because in Southeast Asia the result was the opposite. Hinduism was supplanted by Buddhism.

[@DougsDharma]

Interesting to hear Tiago, I wonder about the history there.

[@tiagocarioca]

@@DougsDharma Angkor Wat is a good example. It was a major Hindu temple and it became a Buddhist one.

[@rish2664]

Buddhism had dealt a heavy blow to Brahminical faith. Threatened with extinction, Hinduism started to re-organize itself. Attempts were now made to give up the complex system of rites and rituals and make Hinduism simple and attractive. The Hindus even came to accept the Buddha as a Hindu incarnation and accepted the principle of non-violence. This helped revive Hinduism and made it popular again. This took away the fragrance out of the flower of Buddhism. The decline of Buddhism became inevitable

[@BeatTheBrahmin]

Rise my Dalit people. Revive the great faith of Lord Buddha

[@DougsDharma]

🙏

[@manojsekharan5846]

@Voices. Why convert to Buddhism? Should they not convert to Jesu? At least, the missionaries would bring money and milk powder with them, in return for vote against Hinduism and India.

[@Infiniteemptiness]

Rise my dalit people? And how can you be follower of Buddha? Buddhism is not hate mongering religion or anti brahmin one in fact Buddha first disciples and ones who wrote down Buddha's teachings are brahmins. This new bhim navya Buddhism is not buddhism at all rather is hate against others in the name of Buddhism which was totally against of Buddha's teachings

[@RAMTA_SLAYER]

@@Infiniteemptiness you don't know the reality. Buddhism founded by Buddha was almost against superstitions prevailing in Vedic cult. Even Vedic cult is the reason for the decline of Buddhism in India. Love and compassion can only be showered on the people who respects it,and not on those who will back stab you. First know the history of Buddhism and then pass on your illogical comments. Indian Buddhism is the purest Buddhism which is present till date. All other sects are mere diluted one.

[@Infiniteemptiness]

@@RAMTA_SLAYER There's no religion which doesn't have superstitions, over time every religion acquire them but vedic Hinduism reformed later with many philosophers and same is case for many religions they start, acquire superstitions and reform and as per scholars main reason for Buddhist decline in India is same that Buddhist monasteries became too superstitions, disconnected from people etc.. Anyways as vedas say if we're getting good from any direction we must humbly accept so should be character of every religion Reform is sign of religion being touch with ordinary people

[@samuelsantos7455]

Thank you so much Doug

[@DougsDharma]

You are very welcome Samuel!

[@oldstudent2587]

The evolution of any major religion is much like the evolution of species. It has a lot of the gradual stuff you mention, but it also has very sharp punctuations when things change all at one time. Neither this explanation nor those which concentrate only on invasions have it right. And Buddhism Leaving India depends on what and where you define India to be, the current boundaries are since 1947, for instance.

[@masteredfitness.7774]

Hi doug. It's really sad MAHATMA(Great soul) BUDDHA spent so much time in India fighting Brahminsim But Buddhist are only 1%population in india. It's half true..The government sensus records 1% Buddhist monk in india there are more people like you and me who follows practice but aren't monk . People from scheduled caste (UNTOUCHABLES before independence) shows their interest in bauddh dhamma After Dr.Ambedkar left hinduim and become follower of buddha. Millions of people use bauddh as there sirname but few state government count them in hindu when cencus is done. 1% is estimate its actually around 3-5% of the total population. Sorry if you find any grammatical errors in my comment 😊

[@DougsDharma]

Yes, thanks for the comment MS.

[@nuwanperera1977]

Thank you Dough for doing this video. You point out an important fact in 10:25. That is the adaption of Sanskrit in to Buddhist literature, something Buddha prohibited to do (see advice to Yamelu & Thekalu in Vinaya Pitaka). You have also pointed out the influence of other belief systems on Buddhism. This is the reason why Thrilakshana (Anichcha, Dukkha, Anaththa) has the meaning of [impermanent], [suffering] and [non-self]. According to Pali script this is incorrect and should be corrected as [Insatiable], [suffering] and [no essence]. Concept of self and non-self is part of brahmin veda teaching and something Buddha excluded in his teachings. I understand Buddhist scholars like yourself (specially in western countries) had to accept what was given to you in translation and make sense of it, therefore this is not a criticism of your great work here or anyone else for that matter. I am only asking you to draw your attention in this direction as well. It will give you goosebumps if you see some of the actual meanings of dhamma. Do you know that actual Buddhist breath meditation has nothing to do with breathing air in and out? Here’s a brief explanation of Thrilakshana according to Pali script. [Anichcha(Pali)] = Insatiable = five aggregates of each sensory faculty (30 altogether, AKA world) are not the way we want, we have no control over and has zero gratification. Example (for Eye): take two people called A and B, one loves Buddhism (A) and other hates Buddhism(B). Let’s say we place A and B in front of a statue of lord Buddha. Both have the picture of lord Buddha statue in front of them now. BUT, Person ‘A’ feels happy and thinks statue of Buddha gave him/her happiness Person ‘B’ feels unhappy and thinks statue of Buddha gave him/her unhappiness you see, this proves that statue of Buddha did not have happiness or unhappiness, but ‘A’ felt happy and ‘B’ felt unhappy related to their attachment. This is the issue with all of us and we think outside world give us happiness or unhappiness, but it is ALWAYS not the case, this mental fabrication of ours using attachment (or Thanha) give us those feelings. This zero gratification called Anichcha or Insatiable (shunyatha) and it is not impermanent. [Dukkha(Pali)] = Suffering = Not fulfilling - you try to fulfill your six sensory faculties with gratification from five aggregates that has zero gratification - this will never happen therefore it is dukkha. [Anaththa(Pali)] = no essence = Because of above, five aggregates (or world) has no essence, it gives you suffering. You can apply above to anything in your life and you see this is the cause of each and every problem in the world. Also, if you take this meaning you will see it will fit with all suttas like piece of a puzzle.

[@DougsDharma]

Thanks for your input Nuwan.

[@nuwanperera1977]

@@DougsDharma My pleasure, hope this helps someone.

[@nuwanperera1977]

@@julianoaraujo8155 Thank you Juliano for your question. My English is not good enough to explain this properly. This is always the case with Buddhism, everything in it including nirvana is an understanding rather than a knowledge so it is difficult to explain. Nevertheless, I will try my best. My main source for this is Ānāpānasati sutta. But this understanding should also tally with other definitions that buddha gave us in other suttas, because dhamma should never contradict. You will see that dhamma never contradicts one sutta to other when you know the correct meaning of Thrilakshana (the drawback of gratification of five aggregates). In Pali Ānāpānasati sutta there are two important words, one is “assa” and the other is “passa” these two words are homonyms in Pali, they have meanings of breathing in and out as well as take something in to mind (adopt) and put something out from mind (let go). But in translation to Sanskrit these words translated as “Ashwaasa” and “Prashwasa” that has the exact meaning of breathing in and out. The reason for this is because the lay people who did this translation thought that buddha meant breathing in and out because the sutta has the name Ānāpānasati which is the breath meditation described in brahmin meditation practices. They never bothered to consider two important things. First is that why buddha introduce same breath meditation brahmins had after he explored these teachings for years and found out that was not the way to nibbana. Second, they totally disregarded Ven. Saariputta’s very detailed explanation of “assa” and “passa” in Seela sutta. So, what do we have to adopt and let go from our mind to attain nibbana according to Ven. Saariputta? He explains how to [adopt] non-lustful, non-hateful and non-delusional (alobha, adwesha, amoha) thoughts according to Thrilakshana and how to [let go] lustful, hateful and delusional (lobha, dwesha, moha) thoughts according to Thrilakshana by developing four Dhyana in detail. I can’t imagine why someone disregard such profound and technical explanation. There are number of dhamma contradictions if we take this as breath in and out as well, but I am not going to write them here. “Breathing in long he knows ‘I am breathing in long.’ Breathing in short he knows ‘I am breathing in short.’ [1] Breathing out long he knows ‘I am breathing out long.’ Breathing out short he knows ‘I am breathing in short.’ [2]. You might wonder how to explain this according to Ven. Saariputta’s explanation. I will leave this for you to research because it’s difficult to write here :). Think along the lines of things hard to adopt and things hard to let go (and vice versa). This very high level and incomplete answer to your question, and apologies for any language issues. If you are really interested in this, I can point you towards someone who can give you more in-depth answer in English.

[@fab8187]

it was just like decline of Christianity in Jerusalem 1. one of the prominent reasons would have been the Huns who were recent converts to hinduism and were strictly monotheist in a sense they only worshipped Shiva 2. And brahmins too discriminated against their own children who became buddhists 3. the non violent nature of buddhism may have been a reason for people opting for a more violent hinduism to safeguard themselves from turkic raiders

[@fab8187]

@@HariOm-ri8hw yes she is complete moron and Bigotted Aurangazeb was most cruel human but we cannot blame him He followed his book of terrorism (quran) line by line His sky god requires to kill non believers apostates and idolators But one great thing happend all native hindus got fed up of him and started to revolt which led to birth of ahoms sikhs and marathas who finished the mughal rule

[@johnjacobastoriv688]

kon hai ye log

[@penguins0392]

These are so good

[@DougsDharma]

Thanks, penguins0!

[@arvindshende5075]

Very briefly explained, main reasons of decline but missed or wrongly interpreted Dr Ambedkar’s views on this that is... 1) the philosophical conflict that took place ( within the various kingdoms ) btw Buddhism (Sangha) versus Brahmanism. There were philosophical debates happening btw various Buddhist scholars and Brahmins in universities like Nalanda. Also the sects developed with Buddhism (Mahayana sect played larger role here bcz sanskritization of Buddha teaching took place by this sect, later tantric or vajrayana sect emerges) This was first and foremost reason for declining Buddhism at philosophical level 2) Later the structural damage came from invasion of Islam in india which was quiet easy ( this is only reason been told in Indian history) Also invasion of Islam is very aptly explained by Babasaheb. With invasion why only Buddhism destroyed and not Brahmanism ?? In order for survivals, the Brahmins facilitate & supported the foreign invaders and gain their confidence whereas the Buddhist Sangha monks fled to northern part of india many to Tibet.

[@DougsDharma]

Thanks for your thoughts Arvind.

[@BarbarraBay]

Amazing. One intelligent comment here. Well done.

[@indiafirst3530]

Good joke 🤣🤣🤣 Muslim allow other religions....what about afganistan, Iran, Pakistan...they once belongs to other religions.stop fake showoff 🙏

[@DougsDharma]

The muslim religion has had a long history, and has always allowed those of other religions to practice (I believe it is even in the Koran).

[@johnjacobastoriv688]

@@DougsDharma ha ha ha

[@pankajahire5098]

@@DougsDharma Are you born mad

[@4imagesmore]

Very interesting - I learned a great deal.

[@DougsDharma]

Glad it was helpful!

[@darshiliyanage9429]

Buddhism is a philosophy, open to all religion

[@DougsDharma]

🙏😊

[@mr.profundis3804]

Simple Answer - Pushyamitra Shunga. Made Brahminism Great Again.

[@rajabhaysingh]

Not as simple as you think

[@mr.profundis3804]

@@rajabhaysingh Lol, that's why I used the word 'simple' . There are multiple factors which leads to the decline of Buddhism in India.

[@Sahil-dz5ur]

Really Pushyamitra whose empire himself was confined to the Bihar and bengal wiped out Buddhism from india. Gotta say great joke👍👍👍👍

[@mr.profundis3804]

@@Sahil-dz5ur Gain your knowledge from history books not from WhatsApp forwards.

[@Sahil-dz5ur]

@@mr.profundis3804 then tell me how Pushyamitra wiped out Buddhism from all over the india as his own empire covered just 2-3 states of India 🙄🙄🙄

[@sayalishahare9388]

Yes u r right sir, it declined ..but it never fade away because of br.ambedakar.

[@DougsDharma]

Yes Sayali, well it has come back now due to his efforts.

[@sayalishahare9388]

@@DougsDharma yes Sir,and we will continue his afforts..to next generation

[@madhavnatekar4674]

Good work.. convincing argument

[@DougsDharma]

🙏😊