| Sajha.com Archives | |
| Username | Post |
| Raru | Posted
on 21-Dec-02 04:37 PM
Hi Netizen Friends, What a ridiculous indian mind, they are publishing wrong information abt Buddha birth place and Mt. Everest? I encounter following site saying Buddha was born in northern India, in 563 BC. Please let's find such wrong information and write email abt the fact to the webmaster to change such wrong information. For your reference visit following site: http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/5minbud.htm and the section " Who Was the Buddha?" Let's write email to chage that info to follwing email: webmaster@buddhanet.net ven.pannyavaro@buddhanet.net bdea@buddhanet.net Unite and Praise for Nepal. Best Regards, Raru |
| safasaja | Posted
on 21-Dec-02 08:36 PM
Indian has been trying to convince the world that Buddha was born in India which is not true and Buddhist people laugh at them. Because India knows that can bring Billions of Dollars. And I see that why not? Nepal has done nothing to promote Lumbini. All they have done is make a grand planning so that Donor nations and others can pour the money. But look at the status of Lumbini, nothing but a masterplan which was made 20 yrs ago. We are ready to defend when articles like that appear in the news. However, when the issue of development and proper management comes, netas and others turn blind eye. Such a pathetic people and another reason to suppress Buddhism. |
| bb | Posted
on 21-Dec-02 09:07 PM
oopps, i just check the site and found it does say buddha was born in 6th century which is located in modern nepal. |
| johnny_doe | Posted
on 22-Dec-02 08:14 AM
Well, back then there was no Nepal or India, so naturally historians opt to call him an Indian prince. Please remember that people living in that area are INDIANS, ethnically speaking. But the territory that a country has defines one's citizenship, and that is the reason why they are Nepali citizens. And we are still not sure about Buddha's birthplace. Lumbini is in proximity to the Indian border, and there are still some anthropologists excavating the territory just outside Nepal's border to find artifacts, or even bigger loot, to prove that Buddha was indeed born in India. Even in books written by Americans, they mention that Buddha is of Indian origin. Plus, he mostly preached in India, not Nepal. |
| Raru | Posted
on 22-Dec-02 08:18 AM
Hello Guys, Yes, U are right some artical on that site says Buddha was born in Nepal and other artical on that site says Buddha was born in India. Please visit following site which says buddha was born in Nepal: http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/buddhistworld/buddha.htm And visit this site which says buddha was born in India http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/5minbud.htm (N.B. type exatcly same URL address to locate that controversal matter) |
| jhapali | Posted
on 22-Dec-02 11:15 AM
budhha was born in jhapa, sanichare wada number 9. any opposing views? |
| Aludai | Posted
on 22-Dec-02 01:41 PM
Mr Johny Doe, You could argue that back then there was no India (so it might not exist in future also!). So Jesus Christ was born in India, Queen Victoria was also born in India (India was British colony) and even Abraham Lincoln was born in India (they are currently excavating in Bihar to prove this). For the purpose of saying, you could say anything.Truth is what matters! |
| johnny_doe | Posted
on 22-Dec-02 03:05 PM
Uh, if most historians generally call the Indian subcontinent India when talking about ancient times, I think I should listen to them, not you. |
| Raru | Posted
on 22-Dec-02 04:44 PM
Mr johnny_doe There was Nepal, There is Nepal and There will Nepal always. So don't use your ridiculous indian mind to prove there was No Nepal in past. Nepal are not under any colony, its not to long that India become free from British Conlony. If british was not there ( British East India Company) India might unify with Greater Nepal. |
| papra | Posted
on 22-Dec-02 07:13 PM
Mr. Doe, Calling Buddha an Indian because Indian sub-continent existed but not Nepal when Buddha was born is wrong. In olden times there weren't Italy, or even France, so should all the Kings that were born in Rome not be called an Italian. Rome existed but Italy didn't, right? So now since Lumbini belongs to Nepal, who ever was born in Lumbini will be called a Nepali. And Indian civilization didn't begin from what we today call India, in fact it began from Indus Valley which now falls in Pakistan. There was no India, nor Pakistan, Nepal, Bangaladesh, Bhutan, before. There was just one big piece of land called Indian-Subcontinent which shouldn't be mistaken with today's India. |
| Anand Agrawal | Posted
on 22-Dec-02 08:46 PM
Papraji, Hi again. I am sure you came across my thread on Nepali movies.To all those who disagree about the birth place of Budhha. Here I go!! Yes buddha was born in Lumbini. But is there any hisotorical timeline that connects Lumbini to Prithvi Narayan Shah's Nepal before 1800 B.S.??? I don't think so. Nepal, except Kathmandu Valley, which was not well known to othe explorers as Shrong Chong Gompo, is also regarded as a part of extensive territory of India. Sita was a daughter of Janakpure King, but Janakpur is in Nepal only after Bahadur Shah invaded Parsa and other neighboring tiny kingdoms. Now we can gladlay say that Sita was a Nepali married with Indian prince just because of sentimental attachments. Nepal is and still is and will remain a cultural, religious, ecomonic, and traditional out post of Indian Domain. I don't remember Indian Government officially claimed Lumbini to be within the geographical inking of India. But Yes, back in 500BC it was a part of Indian sub-continent. Why is this uproar of Buddha's birth place controversy anyways? Is it obstructing the tourism industry in Nepal? What is the value of Lumbini to Nepal? The lumbini development Trust has been a begging bowl to the Kings and ministers of Nepal. If Lumbini was in India's hands, it would have been developed as another Mecca for the Budhdhist of the World. Look how sacred Taj Mahal is,it's only 400 kilometers from Lumbini. Have Japan, Korea, Thailand, Burma and other Buddhist majority countries said anything of Buddha's birth Place? Any High ranking buddhist monk from Nepal said anything about it? This uproar is all up to crating the confusion by the NGOs in Nepal. Nepali people know India would never ever claim an inch of Nepal. Nepal is a helpless neighbor to India, and will always be taken care of well in the security umbrella concept as declared in the 1950's Friendship Treaty as signed by Nehru and so Called Nepali Maha Manav Bisheswor Koirala. |
| 1975 | Posted
on 22-Dec-02 09:18 PM
Anand, are you talking on behalf of all the Indians?? |
| Anand Agrawal | Posted
on 22-Dec-02 09:25 PM
Satyamev jayete!!! I am talking in favor of truth which nepali stomach is too dried up of the gastric juice, I mean intelligence, to have it digested!!! Chetana Bhaya??? |
| 1975 | Posted
on 22-Dec-02 09:29 PM
Anand, why do you talk as if you are in the court defending India all the time?? does India need that?? you seem to be desparate.. Nepal is harmless to India whereas China is a threat.. please get into some Chinese forum and talk for India... India certainly needs youth like you... Mera Bharat Mahan!! Laloo ka ho kalyan.... |
| 1975 | Posted
on 22-Dec-02 09:57 PM
I pity India... poor India with Shuvachintaks like you who do more harm than good... |
| 1975 | Posted
on 22-Dec-02 10:07 PM
don't pity my ass for you have none... |
| safasaja | Posted
on 23-Dec-02 12:03 AM
I agree with Anand in pointing out that netas and governmnet has used Lumbini as a begginng bowl. If they can show all the hue and cry, why not take care of Lumbini and develop it. As a Buddhist, it is my right to raise this question and it concersn to all the Buddhist in Nepal. What is going on with our holiiest site? |
| Zubin | Posted
on 23-Dec-02 04:42 AM
There is one extreme irony in nepali conscience. Buddha was born in Lumbini which is in Terai. Janakpur is also in Terai. So both buddha and sita were madhesi. Should they be alive today, they would be treated as second class citizens today by pahadi racists. They would be denied the citizenship, even though it is of crap value and turn them into state of statelessness. They would be stoned with racial ethnic slurs. they would be discriminated in jobs, army, police, civil service. They would be beaten in streets just because it gets rumoured that Hritik Roshan said he hated nepalese. They would be called "dhoti" "Marsya""auta mareko madhise le das jyundo nepali khancha" while forgettinh their own existance of "bahadur" gatekeeper in India. And yet they are always into inferiority complex that India would snatch Buddha from them. Buddha was a madhesi and as you often suggest, madhesis are Indians by default, he was Indian. Sita was indian. |
| raru | Posted
on 23-Dec-02 06:14 AM
Hello Mr. Anand Agrawal Are U indian? If U are indian I have no thing to say co'z we all know indian dirty mind. If U hold Nepali citizen, don't to be "Chamcha" and spy for India. And other matter, don't to be over- smart to preach Nepali and even Indian history, which is not so clear to U. Maha Manav Bisheswor Koirala never involved to sign 1950's Treaty with Nehru. If Bisheswor Koirala involved may be that treaty never will sign for indian advantage. |