Well according to the history, every religion requires patronage from the local king and should be able to capture the minds of the people to flourish.
Both Buddhism and Jainism were equally popular, but were still in the nascent stage in India before the time of Ashoka. Ashok’s father Bindusara and probably his grandfather Chandragupta left the kingdom and adopted a simple Jain living. Then all of a sudden Ashok adopted Buddhism and spread it across the length and breadth of the world (known to him at that time) and Buddhism in India reached its peak.
A very good indicator (although an indirect one) is the mention of religious clashes. There were various places where Ashoka asked his people not to fight against each other and maintain religious harmony. Since such reference of clashes between Buddhist and Hindus were never heard before or afterwards, it directly refers to the growing chaos and changing demography of India. After the death of Ashoka, Hindu zealots led by the Gupta dynasty re-established the Hindu rule (within 50 years of end of Ashoka’s reign of 44 years).
Was loss of political patronage the only reason why Buddhism in India peaked and died within 50 years? A remarkable point to be noted is.. tough both religions ( jain and buddism) are quite similiar, Jain never had a patronage of a king during the period of his rule. This is the reason why Jain religion never peaked, and there was an attempt to wipe it out. In a way the attempt of Indian kings to wipe out Buddhism allowed it to break the cultural and demographic barriers and spread.
Chanakya’s views —–
Did Bhuddism in India die a natural death? I cannot to believe it. If you take a look around one still finds that jaininsm still exists in some parts of the country especially in rajasthan. In restaurants we get jain foods. Jains are so powerful in jaipur/jodhpur that they were able to stop the opening of a Macdonalds there. Yet the religion which far outstripped them vanished from the very face of the country in which it was born. I cannot remember a single ruler that has patronised jainism. the death of bhuddism coincides too much with the rise of the Hindu kings – the Guptas. State apathy cannot alone be the cause of the death of a religion.
Indians have resisted change against the greatest odds. While there were so many muslim rulers never once was there a decrease in the faith so drastic that an entire religion was wiped out from a singleplace. Bhuddhism spread rapidly through China. A look into their history shows the rise to be phenomenal and very fast without patronization from the kings. A mass exodus from this country seems to be the most plausible explanation for this (at least to me). An exodus because the unfavourable conditions in india seems to me he most likely explanation.
Don’t believe it when you heard it being said that India is a very peaceful country. A country which was never an agressor. If we always had friendly relations with our neighbors they why is it that we have 15 territorial disputes with China itself. Forget Pakistan. and Bangladesh ?? The country for whose independence so many indians laid down there lives happily shoots indian jawans on any pretext. We have a very voilent past. Our religion is anything but tolerant. Ok its tolerant with comparison to other religions but like all other reliions and other countries histories we have this wonderous belief that we have nor can do wrong (but we have bad politicans though — an oxymoron if i ever saw 1)
Bhuddhuism died out because we had an enthusiastic hindu ruler. Ever notice that before akbar everytime there was widespread peace between all religions,the dynasty got wiped out in half a centuary, Yes i admit 50 years is a long time especially in the history of this country, but for a religion to die out? i dont think so.
20 replies on “Did Buddhism die out so easily?”
initially Ankoo’z viewz seemed +ve to me but.. i more agree with wat chanakya says! If atall Indian kings really wanted to wipe out buddishm..they shud have destroyed minute detail from Ashoka’z empire! I guess it was more.. a way that.. hinduz cud also practice buddhism without converting into one. Yes india had a violent history.. but I always feel that indians.. maybe hinduz specifically.. never had this image of deleting the entire sturcture of the past and rebuilt it whether be it religion or any kingz empire! It was more that we added the gud parts of buddishm in our lifestyle! n isn’t it true Hindu is not really a religion itz just a way of living life properly!
oopz just random thoughts i guess!
Loved this postie!
waiting 4 new onez like this!
n i love the way u guyz rite n share different point of views but with nonempty intersection!
wud be bac again! take care and always keep smiling :)–>
Nice site, will visit again!
Buddhism Still Exists!
in india less than 1% of the population is budhist. so it is not a predominant religion even in a single district.
well all ur theorys r the realm of speculation
buddhism exists in the way people live life, so it is not really dead
ahimsa is more a buddhist theme than hindu dont u think
i really don’t know. Buddhism in SE Asia is very different from what it is in India.
btw it is not uncommon to find a hindu deity (esp ganesha) in a Buddhist temple of SE Asia.
have u seen neo buddhist worship area in india?
they have a buddha an ambedkar and a ganpati together
is it any different ?
i know ambedkar got converted to Buddhism, but worshipping him is simple outrageous.
but i think it is ok he did a lot for them
they see god in him , but the current lot of bc leaders want to make him god and attach to his image , not emulating his actions but deriving state benefits on his name which is indeed sad.
well even though Ambedkar Jayanti is not an official holiday, every year only a week ago govt will declare it an official holiday. Why don’t they declare him as a second mahatama and be done with it
id like to roughly quote r n kow on the bcs
they are growing aware of their strength as a vote bank
Ankur,//Jain never had a patronage of a king during the period of his rule. This is the reason why Jain religion never peaked, and there was an attempt to wipe it out.//-Jainism was not a very easy religion to practice especially for the king.The most important aspect of Jainism is non-violence. They are not supposed to kill even small insects.For a king it is not practical.
i know and sometimes i feel good that the oppressed community is uniting. but what i don’t like is that the leadership that is controlling this united force sucks.
if you did not know, the Ashoka’s father Bindusara became a Jain Monk
i know it was a tough religion to follow, but before the Ashoka’s patronage both jain and Buddhism had almost equal patronage. and pure buddhism is also a hard religion to follow.
ur cent percent correct , except for fooling their electorate
and assuring jobs thru reservation to the cream, they havent done
each person has his /her comfort level to religion
ur birth cert states ur a hindu right? it is u who choose
how much u follow and what practices u follow
the problem with many monotheistic religions are in the rigors or
implementation of faith
what hurts me is that even after 60 years the people have not awaken up and started demanding performance from the leaders.
about religion, hindu gives a flexibility of how to practice, but ya as u mentioned most other religion dictate ur lifestyle and what u should do and can’t do
you people are missing the point..Buddhism disappeared from Indian sub continent because soley by Islam. Hindus protected themselves from islam but buddhist were like sheeps and the muslims the wolf. We can see that all the buddhist centres are now hard core muslim regions, I’ll start from the north west India the present afghanistan was a big centre for buddhist, so was western Punjab,so was Kashmir, so was Bihar, so was Bengal,so was mid uttar pradesh, so was present Andhra Pradesh.
All the muslims today were 90 % buddhist and 10% Hindus of the past who were converted to Islam. A major part of conversion was POW and the rest by the sufi deceivers saints. I think about a peaceful place like swat from where Padmasambhav took buddhism to Tibet in the 8th century and today Swvastu (swat)is a barbaric place, so is pakistan, bangladesh, kashmir etc.
your analysis is off by a couple of centuries
Buddhism is an IDEA, it is not a religion, this is an idea to control our own emotions, likes and dislikes. To find solutions for your own problems, to have positive attitude which defines your destiny and last there was no more PROBLEMS for them. In short you start controlling your on future and life. You start enjoying your life and the world. The reason it fainted from India is because people started to become more like slave, commitments and diseases made them week. People started talking to idols and God men, which gave them few results, soon this habit became a procedure and then a system and a religion.
People changed they no more think, they lost problem solving skills, they relied on God men to solve the problems. Now even if few people wanted to change, these God men will not let them to change. These God men made sure people had problems or they made one for them. Thus POLITICS began. So no one dared and God men became priority. These God men started controlling people life (for their own benefit). People were afraid to accept Buddhism, but few practiced few skills (yoga, art of breathing and fasting) which was used by Buddhism for their own benefit and it was never carried forward by generation. Real Buddhism faded out of India. Thanks for reading
Buddhism was stamped out of India because it NEEDED to be stamped out by Hindus. Buddhism is most opposite to Hinduism than even Islam. Example: Buddhism denies God, Soul, priesthood, superstitions, rites, rituals, caste system etc. Buddhism is based on Rationality and science. Without active questioning of anything noone can call himself a Buddhist. Yes Meditation is an important aspect of Buddhism but most important aspect is Pragnya(Rationality and insight) and more than anything Buddha was a great rationalist and a scientist. Read Pali Canon, here Buddha answers most questions by using simple rationality and science. Hinduism depends on myths,avators,stories,rites,rituals,temples,caste system and above all Priesthood. Go and examine why Brahmins call themselves Bhu-deva(God on Earth).
Buddhism most differs Hinduism in morality more than anything. The entire Pali canon consists mainly of Morality. In fact in most of Suttas you see Buddha admonishing Brahmin priests. Hinduism hardly has any morality in it. Hindu scriptures contain plenty of Incest and Vedic age consisted mainly Sacrifices(both Animal and human) and sex as evidenced by anyone who has read the Vedas.
Hindu Kings who ruled over India persecuted Buddhists mercilessly. The evidence is present in Chanakyas Arthashastra,Puranic literature, ManuSmriti, other Dharmashastras, Ramayana(Ravana was a Buddhist and Lanka was really sri lanka where Buddhism was predominant).
I might add that any progress in science and technology was due to the period Buddhists ruled India. Sunyata in fact is a core concept of Buddhism. It is ridiculous to believe that Hindus discovered the Number Zero. Hindu Puranas consist of Earth being flat and Snakes surrounding the Earth. Such is the level of progress of Science in Hindu religion.
So among the two ONE needed to be stamped out. It was impossible for both Hinduism and Buddhism to survive together because to the above reasons.
It was the decline of Buddhism from the 5th century AD and the eventual destruction of Buddhism and revival of Hinduism by 10th century AD which brought dark ages to India which continues till this day.