The Hindus ... appropriated the Buddhist sacred places and shrines in the due course and supplanted the Buddha's images with those of Vishnu or Surya or even Shiva-Bhairava. Apart from converting thousands of Viharas into important centres of Hinduism, the most important Buddhist shrines which met this fate include the great Maha Bodi Temple at Buddha Gaya ...
When Cunningham in 1860-61 discovered Kushinara, the sacred spot where the Buddha had entered Mahaparinibbana, he found that the cremation stupa had been converted into a Hindu temple and on the top of it stood the shrine of Rambhar Bhavani.
Among the Buddhist shrines which still continue to be dedicated to the Hindu gods include Caityas of Cheerala and Ter in Andhra Pradesh as Shiva and Vishnu temples respectively
Kanchipuram in Tamil Nadu, at present one of the abodes of Shankaracharya, was till the 14th century A.D. a famous Buddhist centre ... Nobody can ignore the story of the Vishnupada temple at Gaya which is at present an important place of pilgrimage for Hindus ... Though the footprints in Vishnupada temple have been venerated by the Hindus as the legendary feet of Vishnu, yet in reality, it is not so. The footprints are the Buddha's footprints and not of Vishnu, and were appropriated by the Hindus after the fall of Buddhism in Gaya and around.
The Gayawals, the priests of the Vishnupada temple are, in the opinion of some scholars, the descendants of the Buddhist Bhikkhus who were converted by Shankaracharya and persuaded them to act as Hindu priests under the name of Gayawals. Significantly enough, the Gayawals, having no base within the Hindu caste system, claim themselves to have been specially created by the Brahma to act as Shradha priests of Gaya.
... Jagannath ... Vaishnavite temple (at Puri) till the 9 century was a very flourishing Buddhist institution when Buddhism disappeared it was taken over and converted into a Hindu institution ... What Harekrishna Mehtab, freedom fighter, Governor and C.M. of Orissa, has written in his book entitled "The History of Orissa". He says: "There is no doubt that at one time the symbols of Buddha, Dharma and Sangha were being worshipped all over India. Recently a stone of Asokan polish with the symbols of Buddha, Dharma and Sangha at the top has been found out at Bhubaneswar and it is now preserved in the Ashutosh Museum at Calcutta. The symbols are a little different from those found out at Sanchi and other places but the Bhubaneswar symbols are almost exactly like the images of Jagannath, Balabhadra and Subhadra. The Bhubaneswar discovery proves that in Orissa the worship of the symbols was prevalent since the Asokan period.
"From the foregoing considerations we may conclude that during the reign of Asoka, the Savaras of Orissa were converted to Buddhism. A Buddhistic stupa was constructed at Puri and the symbols of Tri-Ratna was there ... "
Most of the early works of Indian Art are Buddhist. There are no examples of buildings from pre-Mauryan or Mauryan times except the sand-stone columns of the palaces of Asoka unearthed in the excavations near Patna ... of which ten bear inscriptions speaking of Asoka's efforts to popularise the Dharma among the people. Many of these pillars bear the figures of lions, bulls or elephants.
The lions on the pillar of Sarnath representing the fearlessness of Buddha's preaching ... Vincent Smith records a shrine in Sholapur district, originally Buddhist but later converted into a Brahminical temple and so preserved from destruction. At Cherala in Guntur district of Andhra Pradesh, we have also a free standing Chaitya hall (now converted into a Hindu temple) with a wagon-vaulted roof ...
(Source: The Dalit Voice, 16-30 November, 1999) [S. Subbanna is a Retird Ad.D.G. of the AIR]
Illogical Propaganda on Muslim Conquest
Shahabuddin's Letter to Organiser, 9 Dec., 99
Mr. Daya Krishna's article "Muslim Rule" (12 December, 1999) suffers from a clear logical flow. He attributes Muslim conquest primarily to the Buddhist emphasis on non-violence and mentions the NW region as peopled by the Buddhist. Yet according to him, "it took Muslim 400 years for conquering NW of India". But they took "only 20 years more for conquering the Gange Valley and only 10 years more for conquering whole of Deccan and South India". This appears to be illogical.
Secondly, the basis for K.S. Lal's compilation of Muslim population upto 1800 is not known. In 1901, there was a census. So it was, every 10 years. It should have been better to quote the official census. As it is, the total population is said to have increased by 223.53 between 1810 and 1947 and Muslim population, by 384%.
How is this difference to be explained? No Buddhist people were conquered by Muslims during this period; there were no military expedition by Muslims and no 'mass enslavement ', no Jizia, no Aurangzeb, not even Tipu Sultan, and certainly no immigration. Can this all be explained by conversion of Hindu males for marriage with Muslim females? Even if this is assumed to have occurred on a large scale between 1800 and 1947 (which did not), this would not contribute to the high growth rate of Muslim population as the number of child-bearing females remained unchanged.
Will Mr. Daya Krishna explain which part of his thesis applies to the period 1800-1947?