What people are saying - Write a review
really a great book. every one has to read it.
He should have called his book as " A Buddhist version of Indian History" than Social History Of India.This so called history book has dedicated 200 pages to underline the fact that Buddhism is the one which magically transformed and created our history. Though I don't have any issue with the Lord Buddha or The Buddha ,author didn't have to invite readers in a betraying title and didn't even think that the readers ain't fool to understand that it is biased.Who else in the world would come up with a Social History of any nation with dialogue deliveries of any religious icons,be it The Buddha , Jesus ,Mohammed, Krishna or anyone, in hundreds of pages? Definitely readers haven't picked this book up to know about life of Buddha just like a reader interested in knowing about history of Europe wouldn't be interested in knowing about Jesus's life.
Interestingly most of the citations of this book whenever he tries to protest against Hinduism are from Rev fathers of churches or American or European Indologists which are ridiculous.He frequently mentions about Brahminic Hinduism.What should then non-brahminic Hinduism comprise of?
Author found that Ramayana and Mahabharata were made popular in India because of Ramanand Sagar and Ravi Chopra, the TV series makers! Who in film industry would spend crores to create an impression or to preach any in any culture without studying the public interest in that area?Film makers or episode makers would only exploit or use the already prevailing interests for their marketing.If not why nobody came up with any great serials of the Buddha and try to appeal the majority?Films can invite audience only if the subject is interesting and close to their hearts.
The line "Shasta is exclusively and entirely a Kerala god" is hilarious. I didn't know that god can be exclusive to a particular region!
He has given various versions of Ramayana from Buddhist stories and Jataka stories but won't
accept Valmiki Ramayana.According to him, the most acceptable version of Ramayana is Rama was Sita's brother and after completing 14 years of exile he married Sita. Also has mentioned such type of marriages between siblings are not against morality too. Author should understand that Ramayana is the history and stories of an ideal king,ideal brother,ideal husband,ideal wife and ideal faith. Nothing will fall apart in believing in that.I recommend you to read the book by Pushkar Bhatnagar for this case-Dating the Era of Lord rama. And for your knowledge this is based on western planetarium software too.So if you dare to question this,do it after reading it once.
Sadasivan, do you have enough bravery to question any other religious books?Secularism is the shroud which acts differently to majorities and minorities now.The shroud is so weak and let any stab go inside when it is Hinduism. Any European,Hindu or non-Hindu can come and pierce it.
On the other hand, things would turn bloody when the questioned book is of other religions.
There is a Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code which criminalizes "deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class of citizens” .(Remember that incident in February 2014, as part of settlement with plaintiff to a lawsuit brought before an Indian district court, The Hindus-An Alternate History by Wendy Doniger was recalled by Penguin India.)
1.Calling Siva as a blood thirsty and naked being formed by the Brahminic Hindus
2.Findings like Vishnu being created to oppose Buddhism.
3.Clucking his tongue to the great epics-Ramayana and Mahabharata and attributing its success and remembrance in the heart of millions to Ramanand Sagar.
4. Proclaiming that Sita was Rama's sister
This itself is a crime as per Indian Law. Still this book is available!
The Aryan Invasion of India
The Vedic Religion and Society
The Age of the Buddha
The Expansion of Buddhism
Buddhism in Kerala
The Brahminic Reaction
The Pyramid of Brahminic Victory
Caste Invades Kerala