(Translator’s note: This speech appeared in Prabuddha Bharat in Marathi and this speech summarizes Babasaheb’s great insights into Indian history. Please give it a read to understand Babasaheb on the key issues. Translated from Marathi by Mangesh Dahiwale)
……..
So much ignorance is prevalent regarding the origin of Buddhism. The impartial students of ancient India will find that there were two conflicts before the advent of the Buddha. The first conflict was between the Aryans and the Nagas, and second was between the Brahmins and Kshatriyas.
Majority of the people known as Hindus today are the Nagas. The culture of the Nagas inhabiting India was superior to the Aryans. The Aryans conquest of the Nagas doesn’t mean that the Aryans had a superior culture. The reason for the success of the Aryans was their vehicles. While the Aryans fought on the horses, the Nagas fought on their feet. The struggle between the Aryans and the Nagas was fierce. If the mythological veil is removed from the story of Mahabharat, the severity of the conflict between the Aryans and the Nagas becomes visible.
The Aryans went on destroying the settlements of the Nagas by setting afire their settlements is depicted in the Khandavvava and Sarp-Tantra in Mahabharat. This was the Scorched earth policy.
There is a story that Agastya saved one Naga from this mayhem and destruction. Even if the story is exaggerated, it is clear how the Aryans were fighting to destroy the settlements of the Nagas. The Nagas were furious over their defeat. Takshak who killed Parikshit is not a serpent, but he was the great warrior of the Nagas. The example of the Aryans’ hatred for the Nagas is evident in the dialogue between Karna and Ananta before the war between Karna and Arjun. Before the war between Karna and Arjun, Ananta, the Naga warrior, went to Karna to promise his support, but Karna denied his support. The reason was in the war between the Aryans, the support of the Nagas was not acceptable.
Before the advent of the Buddha, the second conflict was between the Brahmins and the Kshatriyas. The description of this conflict is present in the Puranas written later. Because of this, the Manu in his codes has asked the Kshatriyas to give reverence to the Brahmins citing the conflict between them in the past.
The Brahmins interpolated Purush Sukta in the Rig Veda during the conflict between the Aryans and the Nagas and between the Brahmins and the Kshatriyas. Before the Purush Sukta, the four Varnas were equal. The Purush Sukta brought the principle of inequality in society. This was the time, the Buddha entered the scene. The Sakya clan in which Gautam was born was a democratic republic. The Buddha grew up in the democratic culture and he had an utmost disregard for the Varna system. Buddhism today is the vast ocean of many many principles, but the central principle of Buddhism is equality. The philosophy of the Buddha is centrally based on equality.
Majority of the people embracing Buddhism were the Nagas and from the Varnas treated as inferior. The love of Nagas for the Buddha is proved by the story of Mucchalind Naga. The Mucchalind Naga was the enemy of fire worshipper Kassapa. But Mucchalind became the disciple of the Buddha who came as a guest to Kassapa. The reason Buddhism was spread like a wildfire was the majority of the people embraced Buddhism. This can be proved with Buddhist texts, especially the Therigatha and Thergatha.
Today, there is propaganda that Buddhism is a branch of Hinduism. In reality, whatever religion existed at the time of the Buddha was way different from the Vaidic and Brahminical religion. The Vaidic believed in the truth of the Vedas, the Buddha was totally opposed to the Vedas. In the Kalama Sutta, the Buddha taught that Human beings should think freely, and never believed that the Vedas contain eternal truth for mankind for the future. The Buddha’s attack on the Vedas reverberated in unfolded history later. In the later period, the Bhagwat Gita was influenced by this and the Gita compared the recitation of the Vedas with the croaking of the frogs. The Buddha compared the Vedas with the desert. Vedas are only prayers to Indras and others for horses, weapons, victory over enemies, and material enjoyment. There is no moral teaching in the Vedas and therefore the Buddha repudiated the Vedas.
The Buddha’s second attack on the contemporary religion was on Yagya. The Buddha questioned the sacrifices of animals and cows and declared it useless to achieve the highest blessings. Because of the Buddha’s criticism, the Hindus have to give up the worship of the gods like Indra and Varun. I will digress here a little. Is the concept of god in Hinduism real? The Mahadeo that you worship in Kashi is really a God who marries and dances with his wife. This is the same story of Brahma and Vishnu. Should we call them God? Your Puranas only tell that the sins they have committed will put even the common man to shame. Please show me any god whom we can take as an ideal and worthy of following today. The gods of Hinduism are the King’s Kuldaivat, their praises of victory are what is written by Brahmins as Puranas to please the kings. What kinds of gods Indra and Krishna are? Just look at the abuses heaped by the wife of Indra on Indra at the end of Rigveda. Look at the conspiracy of the Krishna to kill Duryodhana. If your neighbour behaves like this what would you say? Let us move further. Because the Buddha convinced the masses against the animal sacrifices and the futility of Yagyas, the Brahmins had to give up the ancient practices of animal sacrifices.
On the Ashram system, the Buddha had a different opinion than the existing Vaidic thinking. According to Brahmins, it was necessary to accept the life of a householder after the life of celibacy. According to the Buddha, there was no harm in becoming homeless after the life of celibacy. The original meaning of life of celibacy was the period of learning, the celibacy was linked later with this. In order to increase the period of household, the Brahmins attached another phase of Vanaprastha. The Brahmins were opposed to the life of the homeless afterlife was learning. After 11 centuries, Kumarila Bhat attacked the Buddha’s freedom of going forth.
Fourthly, the Buddha opposed the four-fold Varna. His disciples came from all social backgrounds. He was very cautious to remove the discrimination between his disciples. To remove the Kshatriya pride among his cousins, the Buddha gave initiation to Upali. Those who were initiated before were to be respected by those initiated later. Therefore the Sakyas has the pay respect to Upali, the former barber. At the end of his life, the Buddha accepted a meal from Cunda who was considered inferior as he was an iron Smith and food at his home was considered unhealthy. This is how the Buddha sacrificed his life for social equality. Many examples can be given showing Buddha’s attack on the four-fold Varna system. He used to compare his Sangha with the ocean. As the individual and different rivers lost their differences when they merge with the ocean, the Sangha melted their differences. The Jains also did not approve the Varna system, but they were not ready to fight against it. But the Buddha was not silent over it. He considered himself a warrior of his Dhamma and to establish it he knew that he had to fight against ignorance. The Brahmins did not like this attack on Varna and therefore they could accept the atheistic Sankya Kapilmuni who was silent on Chaturvarna, but considered the Buddha their arch enemy.
The fifth objection of the Buddha was to the concept of God and Soul. According to the Buddha, the existence of omniscient, omnipotent, merciful, just, and omnipresent God cannot be proved with our sensual experiences and the logic. And for the Buddha, the purpose of the religion was to end the suffering. Belief in God does not end suffering. How one human should behave with other humans so that humanity will prosper was the teaching of the religion. Therefore God is not relevant to the religion. The existence of God is speculative and because of this speculative faith, the prayers and the priests lead to superstition which obstructs the Right View in the Noble Eightfold path. The relationship between human beings should be governed by wisdom, ethics, compassion, and friendship, instead of that, they are governed by the notion of purity and inequality. The Buddha’s opposition to god was not just practical but using the paticcasamuppada (the law cause and effect) the Buddha posed a logical and intellectual challenge to the belief in God. According to the logic of paticcasamuppada, whether God exists or does not is a secondary question. Whether God created the universe or not is also the main question. The main question is How God created the universe? The existence of God or its non-existence depends on the answer to this question. In this context, the main question is: whether God created this world out of nothing/nowhere or he created it out of something/somewhere?
Intellectually, it cannot be accepted that the world was created out of nothing. If God created it out of something means we have to accept that “something” existed before God created the universe. Then God cannot be called the creator of what already existed. Therefore the God cannot be called the original creator of the universe. In a nutshell, the Buddha denied the existence of God based on reason and logic and against the Right View.
Buddha also opposed the principle of Moksha as Atma merging into Parmatma as it was illogical and did not lead to making human life happy. The Buddha commented on Brahma in his dialogue with two Brahmins: Vasistha and Bhardwaj. The Buddha criticized the soul on the same line of the criticism of the speculative concept of God. The Buddha also explained the various function attributed to Atma with his thesis of Namarupa. With the emergence of Corporality, the consciousness emerges. Intelligence, emotions, and volition are the functions of consciousness. Therefore, to believe in independent soul is redundant.
Therefore the Brahmins devised many schemes to defeat the Buddhism which opposed the Vaidic religion. They also used the popular elements of Buddhism as opposed to Brahminical Vaidik religion as well. This is what is evident in Ellora caves. The Brahmins carved their caves next to the Buddhist caves. In reality, the Brahmins are householders and fire-worshippers. They had no reasons to stay in the caves. The Buddha taught his disciples to spend three months of the rainy season at one place and therefore they needed caves. The Brahmins did not need caves. But many people were attracted to the Buddhist caves and therefore the in order to attract the larger mass, the Brahmins started carving their caves. The disappearance of Buddhism, as claimed by the Brahmins, is not because they were defeated by Brahmins Kumarila and Shankar. Because both of them never could attack the basic teachings of the Buddha-like social equality, the path to end the suffering by reforming the human mind, ethics for Reconstruction of society and rationalism. After them, Buddhism was alive in India for many centuries. The main reason for the decline of Buddhism was widespread among different and disparate cultures on various levels. Their cultural practices and their cultural understanding left an adverse impact on Buddhism.
The greatest blow to Buddhism came from Islamic invasion. When the hordes of Islamic armies marched to India, they met Buddhists on their way to India. In their language, the images are called “But” and “Butshikan” or being iconoclastic was part of their faith. Their attack on Buddhists was more vicious than their attack on Hindus. The pages of history between 11 to 13 centuries are written with the blood of slain Buddhist monks. They destroyed the world-famous the Buddhist University of Nalanda. In Buddhism, there is no group of hereditary teachers like Brahminism, Buddhism started disappearing from India after the massacre of Buddhist monks. This is an example of how truth is defeated. But now after 600 years, India is remembering the Buddha and without the teachings of the Buddha, the future of India is in trouble.
Editors Note – This article was appeared first on velivada under the heading of “Babasaheb Ambedkar’s Speech at BHU on 25 November 1956”.