I feel the misconception about Hindus destroying Buddhist places of worship might have arisen from Kalki Purana describing the war between Kalki Avatar and the Boudhas.
This description has been widely publicised by the Hindu baiters.
I have never heard of any Jain temple being desecrated.
However I am told that quite a few Hindu temples in Western Orissa were plundered even by the Marathas (Badgis) in the name of Chouth; but it was all after Shivaji and it is evident that the tradition of plundering was learnt from the Moghuls.
With regards,
Yours truly,
D.D.Misra
----- Original Message -----
From: "S. Kalyanaraman"
To: undisclosed-recipients, :
Subject: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Did Hindu destroy Jaina/Bauddha temples?
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 06:49:43 -0400
http://satyameva-jayate.org/2010/10/12/jain-buddhist-temples/
Dear Salil, I read lots and lots…
…but still could not find anything to support your contention that “many…jain/buddhist temples (were) destroyed to build hindu temples” (pl read the beginning of this discussion here; emphasis added, throughout)*** CAUTION: Long Post ***
Below, I have made an attempt at addressing each of your points (in bold blue) one-by-one. I have also made serious efforts to provide references wherever possible. Pl do point out if I have missed something. You will recall that in the first response to my tweet asking you to name three Jain/Buddhist temples destroyed to build Hindu temples, you wrote (emphasis added):
1. chola destruction of buddhist temples in what’s now tamil nadu;
I asked you for specific names since I could not find any material/ information on this. The only link that came close to describing what you had mentioned was an from Outlook, titled, “Bodhi’s Tamil Afterglow” by S. Anand. The article mentioned:
…60 granite images of the Buddha (have been found) in Perambalur, Tiruchi, Thanjavur, Thiruvarur and Pudukkottai districts, adding at least 16 to the earlier recorded Buddhas. The survey covered only five of the state’s 30 districts.
Is it not strange to discover such a large number of impressive images in the face of “destruction” of the kind you allude to in your tweet? The article further mentions:
The Cholas, otherwise hostile to Jainism and Buddhism, granted land for a Buddhist vihara in Nagapattinam, a key coastal town, in 1006. It survived in dilapidated condition till 1867, when Jesuit missionaries levelled it.
Note that while the article talks about “deadly fueds” between the various sects, there is not a single mention of a Buddhist/Jain temple destroyed to build a Hindu temple. While explaining the discovery of Buddhist statues near/in the vicinity of temples, Sh Anand states that the “builders of Shiva and Vishnu temples would have found the granite Buddhas too large to move very far away from the original sites“. Leaving aside the fact that no source appears to have been cited for this assertion, please note that the builders could have simply smashed the idols – but they did not. And is there not a distinct possibility that invading Mughal armies could have caused the plunder – give the reverence with which some of these status are are still treated?
In fact the article later notes, “The otherwise Shaivism-friendly Cholas gave Buddhism token space as it was essentially a religion of traders south of the Vindhyas”. So where is the question of destruction of these temples to build Hindu temples on top of them? You may also want to read the logical inconsistency pointed out by alert reader Rahul Malviya in a comment to the article:
I’m trying to come to terms with some logical problems of your piece. Check this out
“The Cholas, otherwise hostile to Jainism and Buddhism, granted land for a Buddhist vihara in Nagapattinam, a key coastal town, in 1006.” And contrast this with
“In the Chola-ruled Kaveri delta areas, several huge Buddha granites have been recovered within or close to temples.
So, were Hindu temples built on old Buddhist shrines?”Either these Chola fellows were confused or cunning? On one hand, they give grants to Buddhist viharas, and on the other, they destroy their temples to make way for Hindu temples. I’m sure there is a deeper significance, please explain
Allow me to present some counter-evidence. Below, an excerpt from When Buddhism was a bridge between Lanka and Tamil Nadu:
The fascinating story of the historical links between the Buddhists of Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka was narrated by Dr S Pathmanathan, Professor of History at the University of Peradeniya, in his Fourth Vesak Commemoration Lecture delivered under the auspices of the Deputy High Commission of Sri Lanka at Chennai on May 14.
As the religion of the elite, Buddhism contributed tremendously to Tamil Nadu’s art, literature and culture. This was so even when the Tamil Nadu kings, namely, the Pallavas, Cholas, Cheras, and Pandyas, were Hindus. Contrary to the general impression, the non-Buddhist Tamil kings patronised Buddhism.
Buddhism declined in Tamil Nadu in the 7th.century AD. The monasteries in Kanchi and Kaveripattinam were almost abandoned. But under the Cholas (9th to the 13th century AD) Nagapattinam became a major centre of Buddhism. Pathmanathan says that Rajaraja Perumpalli and the Rajendra Chola Perumpalli were the principal monastic establishments during Chola rule in the Coromandel coast.
These were named after Chola Kings who were worshippers of Shiva. These establishments were handsomely funded by merchants and artisans as well as royalty. Under the Cholas, the Tamil Nadu Buddhists produced exquisite bronzes for which the Tamil country is well known even now. Among the great religious works of this period, Pathmanathan mentions “Veeracholiyam” a treatise on grammar and poetics. It was written by the monk Puttamittirar (Buddhamitra) of Ponparri during the reign of Vira Rajendra. Chola rule also saw the revival of the Theravada school in terms of the growth of study centres. Prof Pathmanathan notes that this also led to the revival of Pali studies in Tamil Nadu.
……
Prof Pathmanathan quotes fellow Sri Lankan historian, Amaradasa Liyanagamage, to say that King Parakramabahu II revived Buddhism in Sri Lanka by bringing all the religious texts from Jambudvipa (India).
“Although Jambudvipa meant the entire Indian sub-continent and even much more, in this context, in all probability, it meant the Chola country, where Theravada Buddhism was very much alive during this period,” Liyanagamage says. Sri Lanka preserves documents By the 5th century AD, confrontation between the Maha Vihara, Abhayagiri Vihara and Dakkhina Vihara orders ceased, and they started documentation and preservation of texts for mutual benefit.***
The next example you cited was:
2. jayavarman at angkor
I responded by pointing out that we were talking about India and not Cambodia (Angkor). Nevertheless, I did some digging out of curiousity and found via Wikipedia that (emphasis added):
The Hindu restoration (in Angkor) began around 1243 A.D., with the death of Jayavarman VII’s successor, Indravarman II. The next king, Jayavarman VIII, was a Shaivite iconoclast who specialized in destroying Buddhist images and inreestablishing the Hindu shrines that his illustrious predecessor had converted to Buddhism. During the restoration, the Bayon was made a temple to Shiva, and its central 3.6 meter tall statue of the Buddha was cast to the bottom of a nearby well. Everywhere, cultist statues of the Buddha were replaced by lingams.
Note that even during the “reclamation” and “restoration”, no mention is made of statues being smashed or temples being destroyed…
***
Your third example was
jain impalement see http://bit.ly/cZvjOp
This is a red herring. I had specifically asked you to name three Jain/Buddhist temples destroyed to build Buddhist temples. Where does Jain impalement figure in this? But since I had promised you I am going to read up on this, I did. Below is what I found that is somewhat relevant to the present discussion.
Comment by Shaan @ #18 on this post below (emphasis added):
Periya Puranam says that there was debate between buddhists (or jains, I don’t remember exactly) and a Saiva saint and the buddhists who were defeated killed themselves (kaluvaerinar – hanged themselves in kalu. kalu – a wooden pole that had nails protruding out.) The king never killed them. On the other hand the well known Saivite saint ‘Thirunavukkarasar’ who was initially a jain and then converted to Saivism was tortured by the king Narasimha Pallavan (who built Mahabalipuram). Later the king also converted to Saivism. No stupas were destroyed. In fact the the great Chola king Rajaraja Cholan who built the Tanjore temple also built the Choodamani Vihara in Nagapattinam.
There were conflicts between Saivites and Vaishnavites but no temples were destroyed. But the main deities were converted from Shiva/Subramanya to Vishnu and Vishnu to Shiva. In Courtallam Sage Agastya converted the Vishnu temple to Shiva temple. Even Tirupathi temple’s main deity Venkateshwara is said to be originally a Subramanya statue now worshiped as Vishnu. And it is a known fact that in Tamil nadu Subramanya temples were always built on hilltop/mountain and Vishnu temples are built near forest lands.The follow-up comment (#19) also by Shaan is relevant too:
Historically in Tamil nadu (and other parts of India) kings destroyed each other’s palaces but not the temples. For example Gangaikonda Cholapuram a Chola city in Tamil nadu was destroyed by a Pandya king but the temple is still there.
***
The fourth example you mentioned was:
Chola sacking of Anuradhapura;
I assume you are referring to Anuradhapura in Sri Lanka. Again, let me remind you that we are talking about India – not Cambodia or Sri Lanka. Two, can you pl. cite specific examples of Jain/Buddhist temples destroyed to build Hindu temples during this “sacking” of Anuradhapura? As an aside (and partly to pre-empt another line of argument) – if this was an act done by troops – or happended during the general rampage and destruction, would you hold the king responsible? Was the act celebrated as an act of bravery or piety by the King (a la the destruction of Hindu temples and sacred sites by Islamic invaders)? If it was done by soldiers not under command, is it right to hold the King responsible?
***
The fifth example you mentioned was:
Kukuthonga Chola vs Shaivites;
As I had mentioned in my response, “Neither Jain impalement nor Chola sacking/”Kukuthonga Chola” r abt Jain/Buddhist temples destroyed 2 bld Hindu temples“. But, as promised, I did look further…
First of all, I am not sure if you meant “and” rather than “vs.” – this is because the Cholas were (apparently) predominantly Shaiva worshippers (and I assume you mean Kulothunga, not Kukuthonga) E.g.,
*** Pl continue reading here: http://satyameva-jayate.org/2010/10/12/jain-buddhist-temples/ --
अथ चेत्त्वमिमं धर्म्यं संग्रामं न करिष्यसि।
ततः स्वधर्मं कीर्तिं च हित्वा पापमवाप्स्यसि।।
तस्मादुत्तिष्ठ कौन्तेय युद्धाय कृतनिश्चयः।
निराशीर्निर्ममो भूत्वा युध्यस्व विगतज्वरः।। (भ.गी.)
BVP