Adux
Senior Member
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2009
- Messages
- 4,022
- Likes
- 1,707
Are you trying to say Hinduism had no violent role in the demise of Buddhism? Well, I dont agree with Hindu point of view especially when it is at fault; consider that the Indianess in me, which is quite different to being born a Hindu. This we are victims onlee and never have done anything to wrong any other community sprouted by the Hindu's is a big fat lie, a criminal one at that. Hindu's were not much different that the Islamist, when it meant killing the less powerful. The only difference is Islam was able to do that in a much bigger scale than the Hindu's, call that 'kazhivu kedu' or rather impotence of Hindu's, they would have done it if they could as their ancestors did to the Buddhist.What you imply is implicitly correct,History of a nation is narrated,juxtaposed and and ultimately perceived from the point of view of its dominant society which constitutes its nationhood.Hence Indian history is always told from the Hindu point of view.Otherwise a history as a neutral social narrative serves no purpose of the society,it will remain merely an academic pursuit.