Post 1/2
Sorry for the late response. Didn't want to obscure your post, plus -primary motive- wanted to spend my leave paw-printing (though that itself was coincidentally somewhat on topic).
Glad someone did. Did... Modi maybe get to hear them? I hear he - or his PR team - has a twitter account?
IIRC twitter no longer keeps everything indefinitely for public viewing (though I think twitter, facebook etc would be emulating Google in keeping things indefinitely for internal purposes). So your useful statements on there should be backed up somewhere permanent. Maybe in the meanwhile you could archive the actual tweets you made on the subject on IF.
2. The favourable treatment extended by Shinto (and elsewhere Taoists) to Hindu religion, and their peculiar (but perhaps not surprising) disfavour to Buddhism, is much in line with some cases - also from centuries back - that I had read about. An example was alluded to somewhere in the middle of post 122 of the Buddhism thread, and then again in a few other posts (about the case of 5 or 6 related Shinto martial sects, one of which got infiltrated and converted to Buddhism and which tried to convert the others by Bauddhicising their Shinto Gods and the Hindu Gods included in their pantheon and the associated Hindu rituals. Which last were dubbed "brahminical" rituals/texts by the Buddhists who were then complaining about the matter).
In this context it's worth adding that Buddhists also regularly tried commandeering/Bauddhicising Taoist rituals for protection and offence that were used by certain Shinto martial lineages.
3. On this:
And even present day Taoists seem to know enough about Hindus' religion to have drawn approximately* the same observations. Alternatively, I was just slow.
* Specifically, their statements sound more like: "Buddhism is a subversion of Hinduism [Vedic religion]". Which invariably/logically implies Hirata Atsutane's statement, now I think about it...
Actually, traditional Hindus also said (say) that Buddha pretty much mangled Vedanta (and the rest of the religion), got crowned an authority for it by his followers, and then his wrong views got peddled about. I guess the persistence and popularity of his following has modern Hindus so confused they think he's teaching the same thing as Vedanta, and that Buddhism is "therefore" still Vedic to "some extent".
Ur-Shramanism* was invented specifically because the Nastika religions realised that being recognised as subverted spin-offs of Hindus' religion (called "heresies of Hinduism" by western translators) was not conducive to the image they wanted to cultivate for themselves.
BTW, in Indonesia, where Taoism isn't (wasn't) one of the officially-recognised religions, whereas Buddhism and Hindu religion are among the recognised religions alongside islam and christianism, the Indonesian Taoists chose to register their temples as *Hindu* temples and specifically not as Buddhist ones.
The two-fold reason given was that besides relating more to Hindu religion, they didn't want the inevitable Buddhist encroachment.
* Ur-Shramanism = The modern (post-IE) trend started by nastikas to back-project the nastika religions/Shramanism (capital S) - under various names - to a point in India's ur-ur-history that not only far predates the actual founding of said nastika religions, but which is made co-eval with Vedic religion in India, though usually Shramanism is even made to predate Vedic religion thereby, both in order to claim originality for the Hindu elements that Nastika religions took from Hindus' Vedic religion AND in order to eject Vedic religion as an "oryan" invasion into India, while simultaneously claiming that Shramanisms were indigenous to India and were even "dravoodian", and that Shramanisms were the very indigenous dravoodians who were oppressed, replaced/converted and inculturated on by said "invading oryan Vedic religion" (by which time the latter generally gets equated with brahmins alone, since Buddhism and Jainism want to claim every other kind of Hindu - starting especially from the kShatriyas - as having "originally" been Jain/Buddhist, in order to missionise). Vedic religion is further accused of having copied all its Tantra and contents of its Upanishads - including Vedanta, pre-classical Sankhya, Yoga etc - from Ur-Shramanism. Ur-Shramanism is Nastikas' growing and highly opportunistic attempt to commandeer the other half of the AIT story: AIT tells of Vedic religion being alien to India, while Ur-Shramanism is the myth/theory of making Jainism/Buddhism the ancient indigenous religion of the natives who were oppressed and robbed by Vedic religion, all in order to missionise on the majority of today's Hindus by telling the latter that they had been converted out of the Nastika religions and forced into Vedic religion by the alien oryans.
Sorry for the late response. Didn't want to obscure your post, plus -primary motive- wanted to spend my leave paw-printing (though that itself was coincidentally somewhat on topic).
Quote:I raised some of these same points during Modi's visit
Glad someone did. Did... Modi maybe get to hear them? I hear he - or his PR team - has a twitter account?
IIRC twitter no longer keeps everything indefinitely for public viewing (though I think twitter, facebook etc would be emulating Google in keeping things indefinitely for internal purposes). So your useful statements on there should be backed up somewhere permanent. Maybe in the meanwhile you could archive the actual tweets you made on the subject on IF.
2. The favourable treatment extended by Shinto (and elsewhere Taoists) to Hindu religion, and their peculiar (but perhaps not surprising) disfavour to Buddhism, is much in line with some cases - also from centuries back - that I had read about. An example was alluded to somewhere in the middle of post 122 of the Buddhism thread, and then again in a few other posts (about the case of 5 or 6 related Shinto martial sects, one of which got infiltrated and converted to Buddhism and which tried to convert the others by Bauddhicising their Shinto Gods and the Hindu Gods included in their pantheon and the associated Hindu rituals. Which last were dubbed "brahminical" rituals/texts by the Buddhists who were then complaining about the matter).
In this context it's worth adding that Buddhists also regularly tried commandeering/Bauddhicising Taoist rituals for protection and offence that were used by certain Shinto martial lineages.
3. On this:
Quote:consult the early 1800's Shintoist Hirata Atsutane's Indo zoshi where he seemed to have explored connections between Hindu and Shinto pantheons. I have seen excerpts from it like this where he labeled Buddha a fraud who subverted the Vedic religion
And even present day Taoists seem to know enough about Hindus' religion to have drawn approximately* the same observations. Alternatively, I was just slow.
* Specifically, their statements sound more like: "Buddhism is a subversion of Hinduism [Vedic religion]". Which invariably/logically implies Hirata Atsutane's statement, now I think about it...
Actually, traditional Hindus also said (say) that Buddha pretty much mangled Vedanta (and the rest of the religion), got crowned an authority for it by his followers, and then his wrong views got peddled about. I guess the persistence and popularity of his following has modern Hindus so confused they think he's teaching the same thing as Vedanta, and that Buddhism is "therefore" still Vedic to "some extent".
Ur-Shramanism* was invented specifically because the Nastika religions realised that being recognised as subverted spin-offs of Hindus' religion (called "heresies of Hinduism" by western translators) was not conducive to the image they wanted to cultivate for themselves.
BTW, in Indonesia, where Taoism isn't (wasn't) one of the officially-recognised religions, whereas Buddhism and Hindu religion are among the recognised religions alongside islam and christianism, the Indonesian Taoists chose to register their temples as *Hindu* temples and specifically not as Buddhist ones.
The two-fold reason given was that besides relating more to Hindu religion, they didn't want the inevitable Buddhist encroachment.
* Ur-Shramanism = The modern (post-IE) trend started by nastikas to back-project the nastika religions/Shramanism (capital S) - under various names - to a point in India's ur-ur-history that not only far predates the actual founding of said nastika religions, but which is made co-eval with Vedic religion in India, though usually Shramanism is even made to predate Vedic religion thereby, both in order to claim originality for the Hindu elements that Nastika religions took from Hindus' Vedic religion AND in order to eject Vedic religion as an "oryan" invasion into India, while simultaneously claiming that Shramanisms were indigenous to India and were even "dravoodian", and that Shramanisms were the very indigenous dravoodians who were oppressed, replaced/converted and inculturated on by said "invading oryan Vedic religion" (by which time the latter generally gets equated with brahmins alone, since Buddhism and Jainism want to claim every other kind of Hindu - starting especially from the kShatriyas - as having "originally" been Jain/Buddhist, in order to missionise). Vedic religion is further accused of having copied all its Tantra and contents of its Upanishads - including Vedanta, pre-classical Sankhya, Yoga etc - from Ur-Shramanism. Ur-Shramanism is Nastikas' growing and highly opportunistic attempt to commandeer the other half of the AIT story: AIT tells of Vedic religion being alien to India, while Ur-Shramanism is the myth/theory of making Jainism/Buddhism the ancient indigenous religion of the natives who were oppressed and robbed by Vedic religion, all in order to missionise on the majority of today's Hindus by telling the latter that they had been converted out of the Nastika religions and forced into Vedic religion by the alien oryans.
Death to traitors.