If Buddha was born in Saudi Arabia!

Just imagine! A rebel like Buddha having born in Saudi Arabia post 622 A.D! Being a rebel doesn’t mean that one has to go against the establishment through an armed rebellion or though violence. One can go bereft of them as well. Buddha proved to the world it can be done.

At the time when Buddha got enlightened (he never claimed that he was the chosen one as some later sectarian prophets did), the great spiritual truths were not accessible to common public. It was in the besieged castle of the priestly class. The first thing Buddha did was that he made them available for the public. Sanskrit was a priestly language even then. Prakrit was the common language of the people. So, he preached to the people in Prakrit. Buddha never had any intention of starting a religion but later it was nevertheless started in his name. As they say if Christ and Buddha come back now and see what’s being done in their name they will be crying seeing the ignorance of people. 

Buddha was against established believes, dogmas, doctrines of his day. He declared there was no god. That was a big blow for the established religion of the time. He said ‘Believe nothing, no matter where you read it or who has said it, not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.’ They said everything was ‘atman’ (the soul). Buddha declared all are ‘anatman’ (no-soul). There was no god, no soul. That was a death blow for the religion of his time because most of the doctrines were banked on these two concepts. Still, people did not kill him. They invited him for debates and knowledge was expounded. They worshiped him as god incarnate though he mocked at their customs and belief systems. 

If Buddha was born in some Arab nation and if he was vociferous enough to declare there was no god and if he had mocked at their belief in prophet-hood, we would never have known who the Buddha was because he would have been killed. It requires a great maturity to listen to the critics and counter-argument to the established belief system. Indians always had that maturity. Take Jesus Christ for example. He did not tell any revolutionary truths in the beginning at all. He said some simple truths for common people. But people saw him as a threat to their established religion and they exterminated him. If Jesus had been born in India he would have been worshipped as the god incarnate.

India’s religion was never organized. It had many systems and sub-systems. So, it gave a great freedom like no-where else. One could believe in god, one could believe in no-god, one could believe in nothing and still be a Hindu (though the word ‘Hindu’ was coined much later than the time of Buddha). There were idol worshippers, there were advaitins (who believed in the self and god are the same), there were charvakas (downright materialists who believed in nothing they could not see and for whom sensual enjoyment was everything).There was no action which was considered sacrilegious. In fact, in most of the Indian languages there is no exact word which matches with the meaning of the word sacrilege or blasphemy because the freedom given was such that there was no act which was blasphemous in this nation.

The Indian culture had an incredible assimilation power which was unprecedented. If anyone looks at the ethnicity of Indian population, there is all possible kind of races, religions in this country and all are assimilated so well. Swami Vivekananda while delivering the speech in the World's Parliament of Religions in Chicago said “I am proud to belong to a religion which has taught the world both tolerance and universal acceptance. We believe not only in universal toleration, but we accept all religions as true. I am proud to belong to a nation which has sheltered the persecuted and the refugees of all religions and all nations of the earth. I am proud to tell you that we have gathered in our bosom the purest remnant of the Israelites, who came to Southern India and took refuge with us in the very year in which their holy temple was shattered to pieces by Roman tyranny. I am proud to belong to the religion which has sheltered and is still fostering the remnant of the grand Zoroastrian nation.” That’s the uniqueness and strength of this culture. The very factor that this culture is living despite of various severe assaults from different people starting from Alexander to the Muslim invaders to the British is a testimony to the fact.

There have been many great civilizations but the Indian civilization is the only civilization which has not withered away with time. There should be something immense in this civilization which has made it to stand the test of time. Tolerance to other people and assimilation power are natural traits of Indian culture. So, if anyone comes to me and say Hindus have to learn tolerance, I just throw him a smile and with all contempt possible I’ll say ‘buddy! You don’t know what you are talking about’!!