The history of the emergence of Buddhism in ancient India. Long before the emergence of Buddhism, India had original religious teachings, cultures and traditions Development of Buddhism in India

As a religious movement, Buddhism originated in the northeastern part of India. Its founder was Prince Siddhartha Gautama Shakyamuni, who later became known as Buddha, i.e. "awakened".

From birth he was predicted to become a great ruler or a mystic and ascetic. Siddhartha's father believed that if the prince was protected from the negative aspects of life, he would make a choice in favor of the worldly rather than the spiritual.

Until the age of 29, Siddhartha lived a luxurious life in his father's palace. The prince did not know any worries; he was surrounded by servants and beautiful girls. But one day the young man secretly left the palace and during his walk for the first time he could observe grief, illness and poverty. Everything he saw shocked the prince.

Buddha began to think about the vanity of existence, he came to the conclusion that earthly joys are too insignificant and fleeting. Siddhartha left the palace forever and began to live as a hermit. For many years he led an ascetic lifestyle until he achieved enlightenment.

For reference: the history of the emergence of Buddhism does not reveal exactly the moment of the birth of this religion. According to the Theravada traditions (one of the oldest Buddhist schools), Buddha lived from 624 to 544 AD. BC. The Ganges Valley, located in India, became the historical homeland of the religious movement.

Four Noble Truths of Buddhism

These Truths are the essence of Buddhism. They should be known to anyone interested in this Eastern religion:

• Dukkha - suffering, dissatisfaction
• Causes that give rise to dukkha
• Ending Suffering
• The Path Leading to the Cessation of Dukkha

What do the four noble truths of Buddhism teach us? First of all, they testify that life, birth and death are suffering. Dissatisfaction is inherent in every person, be he a beggar or a king. Everywhere and everywhere people are faced with death, illness and other misfortunes.

According to Buddhist traditions, suffering is caused by human desires. Until the thirst for pleasure leaves a person, he will be forced to reincarnate on earth again and again (go through the circle of Samsara). The inability to get what you want, as well as the loss of what you want or satiation, cause dissatisfaction.

The Third Noble Truth teaches that it is possible to end all suffering once and for all and achieve the state of nirvana. Buddha was very reluctant to explain what nirvana is. This is an indescribable state of fullness of being, liberation from bonds, attachments and desires.

The Fourth Truth shows adepts the way in which nirvana can be achieved. This is the Noble Eightfold Path, which includes a set of moral and ethical instructions. One of the attributes of the “Path” is “right concentration”, i.e. meditation practice.

Death and rebirth

In the course of his life, every person commits good and bad deeds. By this he is either positive or negative. Until karma is exhausted, a person cannot achieve nirvana and gain freedom.

Adherents of Buddhism believe that the law of karma largely determines the human condition. Past actions determine whether an individual will be born rich or poor, healthy or sick, and whether his parents will love him.

It is noteworthy that not only bad, but also good karma binds a person to the earth. Therefore, in order to free oneself, an individual must not only get rid of accumulated “debts”, but also receive a reward for good deeds.

It so happened that we arrived in the small, relatively secluded town of Rewalsar in the Himalayas quite late, so late that the small, sleepy and lazy provincial hotels had a hard time bothering with our check-in. The hotel owners shrugged their shoulders, shook their heads and waved their hands somewhere towards the night and slammed the doors in our faces. But we were willingly, although not free of charge, accepted to live in a guest house on the territory of a Tibetan Buddhist monastery on the shore of the lake.

As is often the case in Tibetan places, our meeting and accommodation were handled by a Hindu, since it is not appropriate for Tibetan monks to deal with monetary and worldly matters. In addition, the monastery had been immersed in the darkness of night for several hours, and the monks needed to get enough sleep so that tomorrow early in the morning they would have to go to meditation with a cheerful and pious face. The Indian who gave us the keys to the hotel room told us about this and other sorrows of the world, and in order to somehow console himself, he insistently recommended that we attend this event at seven in the morning.

The main topics are below: buses and trains, air tickets and visas, health and hygiene, safety, choosing a route, hotels, food, required budget. The relevance of this text is spring 2017.

Hotels

“Where will I live there?” - for some reason this question is very, simply terribly annoying for those who have not yet traveled to India. There is no such problem. There are a dime a dozen hotels there. The main thing is to choose. Next we are talking about inexpensive, budget hotels.

In my experience, there are three main ways to find a hotel.

Spiral

Typically you will arrive in a new city by bus or train. So there is almost always a great mass of hotels around them. Therefore, it is enough to move a little away from the place of arrival and start walking in a circle with an ever-increasing radius in order to come across many hotels. Inscriptions "Hotel" throughout large parts of India, it indicates a place where you can eat, so the main landmarks are signs "Guest house" And "Lounge".

In areas of mass idleness (Goa, the resorts of Kerala, the Himalayas), the private sector is developed, well, like we have on the Black Sea coast. There you can inquire about housing from the local population and follow the signs " Rent"In Buddhist places you can live in monasteries, in Hindu places in ashrams.

The further you move from the bus or railway station, the lower the prices, but hotels are becoming less and less common. So you look at several hotels that are acceptable in price and quality and return to the chosen one.

If you are traveling in a group, then you can send one or two people lightly to find a hotel while the rest wait at the station with their things.

If the hotel refuses and says that the hotel is only for Indians, then insisting on check-in is practically useless.

Ask a taxi driver

For those who have a lot of luggage or are simply too lazy to look. Or you want to settle near a landmark, for example, the Taj Mahal, and not near the train station. Even in large cities there are places where tourists traditionally gather: in Delhi it is Main Bazaar, in Calcutta it is Sader Street, in Bombay it is also called something, but I forgot, that is, you have to go there in any case.

In this case, find an auto-rickshaw or taxi driver and set the task of where you want to live, in what conditions and for what approximately money. In this case, they can sometimes take you to the desired hotel for free, and even show you several places to choose from. It is clear that the price immediately increases; there is no point in haggling, since the taxi driver’s commission is already included in the price. But sometimes, when you are lazy or in the middle of the night, using this method can be very convenient.

Book online

This is for those who like certainty and guarantees, more comfort and less adventure.

Well, if you book in advance, then book hotels of higher quality and not too cheap (at least $30-40 per room), because otherwise there is no guarantee that in reality everything will be as wonderful as in the photographs. They also complained to me that sometimes they arrived at a booked hotel, and the rooms, despite the reservation, were already occupied. The hotel owners were not embarrassed, they said that a client came with money, and the client with cash did not have the willpower to refuse. The money was returned, of course, but it’s still a shame.

Finding, checking into and staying in budget Indian hotels can be an adventure in itself, a source of fun and sometimes not so fun memories. But there will be something to tell you at home later.

Settlement technology

• Free yourself from the presence of “Hindu assistants” and barkers, their presence automatically increases the cost of accommodation.
• Go to a hotel that seems worthy of you and ask how much it costs and decide whether it’s worth living there, at the same time you have time to evaluate the interior and helpfulness.
• Be sure to ask to see the room before checking in, show your dissatisfaction and indignation with all your appearance, ask to see another room, most likely it will be better. This can be done several times, achieving ever better placement conditions.

Those who are interested in the energy of Osho and Buddha, meditation and India, we invite you all on a journey to the places where the greatest mystic of the 20th century Osho was born, lived the first years of his life and gained enlightenment! In one trip we will combine the exoticism of India, meditation, and absorb the energy of Osho’s places!
The tour plan also includes visits to Varanasi, Bodhgaya and possibly Khajuraho (subject to availability of tickets)

Key travel destinations

Kuchvada

A small village in central India, where Osho was born and lived for the first seven years, surrounded and cared for by his loving grandparents. There is still a house in Kuchwad that remains exactly as it was during Osho’s lifetime. Also next to the house there is a pond, on the banks of which Osho loved to sit for hours and watch the endless movement of reeds in the wind, funny games and flights of herons over the surface of the water. You will be able to visit Osho's house, spend time on the banks of the pond, stroll through the village, and absorb that serene spirit of rural India, which undoubtedly had an initial influence on the formation of Osho.

In Kuchvad there is a fairly large and comfortable ashram under the patronage of sannyasins from Japan, where we will live and meditate.

A short video of the “emotional impression” of visiting Kuchvada and Osho’s house.

Gadarwara

At the age of 7, Osho and his grandmother moved to his parents in the small town of Gadarwara, where he spent his school years. By the way, the school class where Osho studied still exists, and there is even a desk where Osho sat. You can go into this class and sit at the desk where our beloved master spent so much time in his childhood. Unfortunately, getting into this class is a matter of chance and luck, depending on which teacher teaches in the class. But in any case, you can walk along the streets of Gadarvara, visit the primary and secondary schools, the house where Osho lived, Osho’s beloved river...

And most importantly, on the outskirts of the city there is a quiet, small and cozy ashram, where there is a place where, at the age of 14, Osho experienced a deep experience of death.

Video from Osho Ashram in Gadarwara

Jabalpur

In Jabalpur we will live in a quiet and cozy ashram with a magnificent park.

Varanasi

Varanasi is famous for its cremation pyres, which burn day and night. But it also has a surprisingly pleasant promenade, the famous Kashi Vishwanath Temple, and boat rides on the Ganges. Near Varanasi there is a small village called Sarnath, famous for the fact that Buddha gave his first sermon there, and the first listeners were ordinary deer.

bodhgaya

Buddha's Enlightenment Place. In the main temple of the city, which is surrounded by a beautiful and vast park, a tree still grows in the shade of which Buddha gained enlightenment.

In addition, in Bodhgaya there are many different Buddhist temples erected by followers of Buddha from many countries: China, Japan, Tibet, Vietnam, Thailand, Burma... Each temple has its own unique architecture, decoration, and ceremonies.

Khajuraho

Khajuraho itself is not directly connected with Osho, except that Osho often mentioned the tantric temples of Khajuraho, and his grandmother was directly related to Khajuraho.

Buddhism in Ancient India

Mid-1st millennium BC e. was marked by the emergence of new religious movements. The most important of these was Buddhism, which later became the first world religion. The traditional formula calls the "three jewels" of Buddhism - the Buddha himself, the dharma - his teachings, and the sangha - the community of his followers.

The founder of Buddhism is considered to be Prince Siddhartha from the noble Shakya family. The thought of the suffering of living beings turned him to asceticism. After many years of wandering in Magadha, in the shadow of a mighty fig tree, enlightenment descended on him. Siddhartha then became the Enlightened One (Buddha). In the Deer Park near the ancient city of Varanasi, he delivered his first sermon on dharma, outlining the basics of the teaching. His fame spread, and by the time of his death the Buddha was surrounded by numerous disciples.

A characteristic feature of Buddhist teaching is the definition of life as suffering. Suffering is associated not only with the inevitable arrival of illness and death, but also with the desire for a better rebirth, with the very chain of rebirths. Buddha calls the cause of suffering a passionate desire for life, wealth, pleasure or a better fate in a new existence. The path to liberation from suffering appears to him in the form of complete control over his spirit and behavior, and the ultimate goal is nirvana (literally, “extinction”), after which a person breaks the chain and is no longer born again.

Significant differences between the Vedic religion and Buddhism are clearly visible. If the Vedic sacrificial cult was aimed mainly at achieving the well-being of the family and community, then the goal of the Buddhist doctrine was the salvation of the individual. This, of course, was precisely about religious salvation, and the teaching

was formulated largely in the traditional concepts of karma, the chain of rebirths, etc. At the same time, not without reason, it was noted in the scientific literature that Buddhism is a religion without God. There really was no place for a creator God, although Buddhist texts repeatedly mention deities - supernatural beings who are able to assist people in their earthly existence. They even seem to be enthusiastic listeners of Buddha's sermons, but mainly for this religion - the achievement of nirvana

These gods can neither harm nor help. If the Brahmin priests acted as intermediaries for people in their communication with the gods, then in the matter of salvation, according to the ideas of early Buddhism, there can be no helpers. External rituals turn out to be useless, and bloody sacrifices are even sinful, because Buddhism spreads the idea of ​​​​not causing harm to living beings.

Observance of ritual purity is also not essential, and although the existence of a caste hierarchy in the world is not questioned, religious liberation is not made dependent on a person’s social status. Buddhism does not place much importance on the differences between people based on their tribe or caste and does not prevent communication between them. To achieve salvation, it was considered necessary to renounce worldly life - property and family, traditional external ties and spiritual attachments. Shaven-headed, in orange clothes, with a pot in hand for alms, the followers of the Enlightened One, Buddha, wandered through the cities and villages. They were called the word “bhikkhus”, i.e. beggars.

The mendicant brethren spent four months of the year - the rainy season - in caves, and subsequently in monasteries specially built for them. Bhikkhus constituted a monastic community - the sangha. The internal organization of the monastery corresponded to the general principles of ancient Indian associations - be it a village or a city craft and trading corporation. The most important issues were decided by general voting, and everyday life was regulated by an elected council. Boys from the age of eight were considered novices, and after twenty they became monks. Their duty was the constant fulfillment of the monastic charter and repetition of numerous commandments. Collective repentances were periodically organized, during which each monk confessed his sins and accepted the atonement assigned to him. The monks could work to improve their monastery, often engaged in healing and teaching, but their main task was tireless mental training, which was supposed to promote complete self-control and ultimately lead to liberation - nirvana.

In original Buddhism there was no tradition of depicting the Teacher; symbols of Buddha were worshiped. Some of these symbols and sacred objects are much older than Buddhism itself. The veneration of the fig tree, for example (under which Siddhartha achieved enlightenment), apparently goes back to the ancient cult of trees. The wheel - an ancient symbol of the Sun and royal power - in Buddhism became the personification of the Teaching (the Buddhist sermon itself was called “turning the wheel of dharma”). The main religious building was a stupa - an artificial hill, usually topped with an umbrella. Believers worshiped the stupa and the relic contained in it (Buddha's hair, Buddha's tooth, etc.), walking around it from left to right (along the Sun).

The monks lived by collecting alms from pious laity. Over time, donations appeared that brought constant income. The ban on owning property applied only to individual monks, but not to entire communities. Monasteries were not forbidden to receive grants of villages from which they could collect taxes. Individual monasteries played a significant role in political life. The chronicles of Sri Lanka, for example, talk about the active intervention of the sangha in state affairs and sometimes bloody clashes between the most influential monasteries.

Household rituals were not of great importance for Buddhism, and the laity continued to turn to the brahmans, inviting them to weddings, funerals and other ceremonies. They were expected to help in ordinary worldly affairs - to obtain crops, offspring of livestock, etc., but at the same time

It was secular admirers of the Buddha and his teachings who sought to improve their lot in a new rebirth by fulfilling the commandments and providing material support to holy monks. Buddhist texts, compiled in local spoken languages, were more understandable to the population than the Sanskrit literature of the Brahmins, carefully hidden from the uninitiated. Buddhism enjoyed particular success among city dwellers, since the very emergence of cities was associated with the collapse of traditional social ties, the development of private property, and the isolation of the individual.

Buddhism, as a rule, enjoyed the patronage of the kings of major powers. On the other hand, in Buddhist texts the ideal of a world ruler was put forward, on whom the foundation of the kingdom of righteousness depends. The spread of righteousness (“turning the wheel of dharma”) simultaneously meant strengthening the power of the ruler who corresponded to this religious ideal. The desire to convert more and more people to the Buddhist faith fundamentally distinguishes this religion from the Vedic one - the latter, on the contrary, was intended only for those who by origin belonged to one of the “twice-born” varnas.

The increasing spread of Buddhism contributed to the emergence of new schools and directions, the evolution of all religious teachings. Initially, it was believed that a layman who fulfilled the commandments of truthfulness, sobriety, non-harm to living beings, and who did not skimp on alms to monasteries, thus deserved a better rebirth for himself, but salvation - nirvana - remained inaccessible to him, being the lot of only monks. But gradually, some Buddhist schools began to recognize the possibility of salvation for laypeople who did not renounce earthly ties - family and property. Such a “broad path” of salvation naturally seemed more attractive to wealthy laymen, who could afford generous donations to monks, but did not themselves show an inclination to severe asceticism.

Moreover, supporters of the “broad path” of salvation accused their opponents of selfishness, saying that a monk who strives only for personal salvation has not yet renounced his own self. Compassion for loved ones becomes a new religious ideal, and the idea of ​​a magnanimous bodhisattva appears, who, by sacrificing himself and renouncing nirvana, helps free people from torment and the chain of rebirths. Thus, contrary to the original teaching, the idea of ​​saints as helpers in the work of salvation emerges. The magnificent cult of bodhisattvas, to whose mercy believers appeal, brings Buddhism closer to more traditional religions and contributes to the assimilation of local beliefs in the process of spreading the world religion.

The attitude towards Buddha himself is changing. His images appear, temples dedicated to him are established, the cult of him as a divine being is established, ideas about the end of the world and the coming of the future Buddha-Savior are developed.

Many Buddhist schools are divided into two main directions: the “small vehicle” (or “narrow path of salvation”) and the “great vehicle” (or “broad path of salvation”). The first of them claims to be of great antiquity as the “teaching of the elders” (Theravada) - even in the time of Ashoka, Buddhism in this variety established itself in Lanka, and then in Southeast Asia. The "great chariot" schools enjoyed greater success. Under the patronage, in particular, of the Kushan kings, they actively spread in Eastern Iran and Central Asia, then in China, and later in Japan, Tibet and Mongolia. Each of these countries created its own canonical texts, and in general the Buddhist religion acquired very unique features. Theravada Buddhism still dominates in Lanka. In northern India, even in ancient times, the schools of the “great vehicle” acquired special influence, and then Buddhism, becoming more and more close to Hinduism, was eventually almost completely supplanted by it.

Buddhism is one of the most popular world religions! It ranks 3rd–4th in the list of most frequently occurring religions. Buddhism is widespread in Europe and Asia. In some countries this religion is the main one, and in others it is one of the main ones on the list of religions preached in the state.

The history of Buddhism goes back centuries. This is a middle-aged religion that has long been firmly entrenched in the world. Where did it come from and who gave people faith in Buddha and his philosophy? Let's learn more about this religion in search of answers to these questions.

Where and when did Buddhism originate?

The date of the birth of Buddhism is considered to be the historical moment of the Buddha’s departure into the next world. However, there is an opinion that it is more correct to count the years of life of the progenitor of the religion. Namely, the period of enlightenment of Gautama Buddha.

According to official information recognized by UNESCO, Buddha's parinirvana occurred in 544 BC. Literally half a century ago, namely in 1956, the world was illuminated by the solemn celebration of the 2500th anniversary of Buddhism.

The capital of Buddhism and other countries where the religion is preached

Today Buddhism is the state religion in 4 countries: Laos, Bhutan, Cambodia, Thailand. But the birth of this religion took place in India. About 0.7–0.8% (about 7 million people) of the population of this country preach Buddhism. This wonderful country gave the world one of the largest religions. Therefore, India is rightfully called the capital of Buddhism.

In addition to India, Buddhism is preached in countries such as China, Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, Sri Lanka, and Myanmar. In these countries, Buddhism is the officially recognized religion, which ranks 1st or 2nd on the list. They preach Buddhism in Tibet, Malaysia, and Singapore. More than 1% of Russian residents preach this religion.

The spread of this belief is growing. The reason for this is the special peace-loving nature of religion, its colorfulness, philosophical richness, and intellectual background. Many people find peace, hope, and knowledge in Buddhism. Therefore, interest in religion does not dry out. Buddhism is spreading in different parts of the world. But, of course, India has been and will remain forever the capital of world Buddhism.

The emergence of Buddhism

Many people who have plunged into the knowledge of Buddhism or are just studying this type of religion will be interested in how this religion arose and what lies at the origins of the development of Buddhism.

The creator of the doctrine on the basis of which the religion was formed is Gautama. It is also called:

• Buddha - enlightened by the highest knowledge.
• Siddhartha - the one who fulfilled his destiny.
• Shakyamuni is a sage from the Shakya tribe.

And yet, the most familiar name for a person who has little knowledge of the foundations of this religion is the name of the founder - Buddha.

The Legend of Buddha's Enlightenment

According to legend, an unusual boy named Siddhartha Gautama was born to a couple of Indian kings. After conception, Queen Mahamaya saw a prophetic dream, which indicated that she was destined to give birth not to an ordinary person, but to a great personality who would go down in history, illuminating this world with the light of knowledge. When the baby was born, noble parents saw for him the future of a ruler or an Enlightened One.

Siddhartha's father, King Shuddhodana, protected the boy from worldly imperfections, illnesses and misfortunes throughout his childhood and youth. Until his twenty-ninth birthday, the young Buddha lived in a flourishing palace, far from the frailty of existence and the hardships of ordinary life. At the age of 29, the young handsome prince married the beautiful Yashodhara. The young couple gave birth to a healthy, glorious son, Rahula. They lived happily, but one day the young husband and father walked out of the palace gates. There he found people exhausted by illness, suffering, and poverty. He saw death and realized that old age and illness exist. He was upset by such discoveries. He realized the futility of existence. But despair did not have time to overwhelm the prince. He met a renounced monk - a samanu. This meeting was an omen! She showed the future Enlightened One that by renouncing worldly passions, one can find peace and serenity. The heir to the throne abandoned his family and left his father's house. He went in search of the truth.

On his path, Gautama adhered to strict asceticism. He wandered in search of wise men to listen to their teachings and thoughts. As a result, Buddha found his ideal way to get rid of suffering. He discovered for himself the “golden mean,” which implied the denial of strict asceticism and the rejection of immoderate excesses.

At the age of 35, Siddhartha Gautama gained Enlightenment and became Buddha. From that time on, he joyfully shared his knowledge with people. He returned to his native place, where his loved ones were very happy with him. After listening to the Buddha, the wife and son also chose the path of monasticism. Buddha found liberation and peace in his early 90s. He left a huge legacy - Dharma.

How Buddhism Spread

The total number of Buddhists throughout the world is more than 500 million people. And this figure is growing irrepressibly. The ideas and principles of Buddhism interest and touch the hearts of many people.

This religion is distinguished by the absence of obsessive philosophy. The ideas of Buddhism really touch people, and they themselves acquire this faith.

The geography of the origin of this religion primarily played a role in the spread of religion. Countries where Buddhism has long been the main religion have donated this faith to neighboring states. The opportunity to travel around the world exposed people from distant countries to Buddhist philosophy. Today there is a lot of literature, documentary and artistic video materials about this faith. But, of course, you can only become truly interested in Buddhism once you touch this unique culture.

There are ethnic Buddhists in the world. These are people born into families with this religion. Many people adopted Buddhism consciously, having become acquainted with the philosophy of Enlightenment in adulthood.

Of course, acquaintance with Buddhism is not always marked by the adoption of this religion for oneself. This is everyone's personal choice. However, we can definitely say that the philosophy of Buddhism is an interesting area that is of interest to many from the point of view of self-development.

What is Buddhism

To summarize, I would like to note that Buddhism is an entire philosophy based on a religion that originated in India before our era. The progenitor of the sacred teaching of Dharma is Buddha (the Enlightened One), who was once the heir to the Indian throne.

There are three main directions in Buddhism:

• Theravada;
• Mahayana;
• Vajrayana.

There are different schools of Buddhism that are scattered throughout the countries. Some teaching details may vary depending on the school. But in general, Buddhism, Tibetan or Indian, Chinese, Thai and any other, carries the same ideas and truths. This philosophy is based on love, kindness, renunciation of excesses and the passage of the ideal path to get rid of suffering.

Buddhists have their own temples, datsans. In every country where this religion is preached, there is a Buddhist community where every sufferer can find informational and spiritual support.

People who practice Buddhism maintain special traditions. They have their own understanding of the world. As a rule, these people strive to bring good to others. Buddhism does not limit intellectual development. On the contrary, this religion is filled with meaning; it is based on centuries-old philosophy.

Buddhists have no icons. They have statues of Buddha and other Saints who follow this faith. Buddhism has its own special symbolism. It is worth highlighting eight good symbols:

1. Umbrella (chhatra);
2. Treasure Vase (bumpa);
3. Goldfish (matsya);
4. Lotus (padma);
5. Shell (shankha);
6. Banner (dvahya);
7. Wheel of Drachma (Dharmachakra);
8. Infinity (Srivatsa).

Each symbol has its own rationale and history. There is nothing random or empty in Buddhism at all. But in order to understand the truths of this religion, you will have to spend time familiarizing yourself with them.

translation shus 2017

One of the greatest mysteries of Indian history is the reason for the gradual decline in the influence of Buddhism, followed by its complete disappearance in the second millennium AD. as a public religion and way of life. Buddhism has never been a religion that has sole power in all spheres of public life, like Christianity or Islam, for example. It coexisted in China with Confucianism, in Japan with Shintoism, and in Southeast Asian countries with various local cults and religious practices. In all of these countries there have been periods of conflict, negative attitudes towards Buddhist teachings and its institutions, and even repression. But Buddhism in one form or another (nevertheless recognizable) has survived in such diverse national and religious communities as China, Japan and Korea. Why didn't this happen in India? Why couldn't Buddhism coexist with Brahmanical Hinduism?

To answer all these questions, we must first analyze the sociological aspect of this phenomenon. But first it must be noted that just as “Buddhism” is not a religion in the ordinary sense of the word, so “Brahmanism” is more than just a religion. Including as an indispensable element its own social system (varnashrama dharma, varnashrama-dharma), it absorbed (or, more correctly, integrated and reinterpreted) many local beliefs and religious cults. With all this, we are observing a rather strange situation when a religion such as Hinduism, which claims to be a kind of “tolerance,” could not find practically any points of contact with Buddhism. It seems that the “innate” contradictions between Buddhist and Brahmanical teachings could only be resolved by replacing one of them with the other. Following this, a question arises that should not remain unanswered: if this is indeed the case, then why did Buddhism finally give in to Brahmanism?

The works of Chinese travelers who describe the state of Indian Buddhism at that time can help us clarify this situation.

1. Visit to India by Xuan-tsang

Perhaps the most famous traveler in world history is the Chinese monk Xuanzang, who visited India in the early 7th century during the reign of Emperor Harsha. He was a native of Chinese Buddhism, and his main task was to find and acquire the most significant Buddhist texts, as well as to visit the sacred places of his religion. Xuanzang was of little interest in the social and everyday features of the places he visited, and more often than not he was a guest of either monasteries or the powers that be. The only Indian language he knew was Sanskrit, and so he interacted mainly with Brahmins, as a result of which many of his comments (for example, that the language spoken in remote regions is a degeneration of "pure" Sanskrit) reflect both theirs and his own biased opinion. However, he was very attentive and observant and conscientiously described everything he saw, and also carefully recorded the geographical details of his travel route. The significance of his observations is even greater when one considers the paucity of historical sources describing life in India at that time (all further references, unless otherwise noted, are to Beal 1983, Parts I and II) (1) (*).

(1) To accurately understand Xuanzang's travel routes, I have used maps provided by geographers Philip Schwartzberg and Joseph Schwartzberg, although I have some disagreements with them, especially regarding traditional interpretations of his route through Maharashtra. Doubts about the distances traveled and directions of movement are sometimes so great that it is assumed that Xuanzang lost most of his manuscripts on the way back while crossing the Atak River. In this summary I have given either the modern spelling of place names or their Prakrit/Pali sound, as this is closer to the actual colloquial names of these places than their Sanskritized forms used by the traveler himself, who spoke only Sanskrit to his translators. Another set of problems arises from the peculiarities of translation, and also from the fact that many places in India often have the same names (for example, "Kosala" in central India, which is derived from the name of the northern states of the first millennium BC).

———————————————————————————————————

———————————————————————————————————

(*) The author uses the translation of S. Beale, which was published more than a hundred years ago (in 1884-1886) and reflects the scientific knowledge and views of that time. True, quite a lot of scientific publications were subsequently published clarifying and supplementing his work, but at the present time, probably, the best is the translation of “Notes...” of Xuan-tsang from Chinese into Russian, performed by N.V. Aleksandrova (Samozvantseva). (Before that, she also translated “Notes ...” of Faxian). In 2012, her book with this translation was published, which also includes a voluminous introduction, detailed comments on each chapter, an index of geographical names and ethnonyms, a dictionary of plants and an index of terms.

“Xuan-tsang. Notes on the Western countries [of the era] of the Great Tang (Da Tang si yu ji)"; intro., trans. and comment. N.V. Alexandrova; Institute of Oriental Studies RAS. M.: Vost. lit., 2012.

Rtveladze E.V. “Xuanzang’s route through Central Asia”, Materials of the Tokharistan Expedition, Issue 8, 2011

approx. shus

———————————————————————————————————

At the beginning of his "Notes ..." Xuanzang gives a brief overview of India, noting the caste division of society and mentioning the purity and nobility of the Brahmins. “Tradition has so sanctified the name of this clan that ... people usually speak of India as a country of Brahmins” (I: 69). In his description of castes, which he apparently quotes from the Brahmins, four varnas are mentioned. Unlike the earlier classification, according to which farmers had the status of Vaishyas, he describes trade as a Vaishya occupation and agriculture as a Sudra occupation, which clearly demonstrates how much the status of farmers has declined since the time of the Buddha. He then writes that “there are many other groups of people who marry among themselves according to their occupations. But it is quite difficult to describe them in detail” (I: 82). Here we are talking either about a variety of jatis (jatis), which have just begun to form in the form in which we now know them, or Hsuan-tsang gives the Brahmanic method of classifying “mixed jatis”, and not his own observations. He writes, quite obviously indicating the status of “untouchables,” that “butchers, fishermen, dancers, executioners, scavengers, etc. live outside the city walls. When traveling, these people are obliged to keep to the left side of the road until their homes” (II: 74). This differs from earlier descriptions by the 5th century Chinese pilgrim Faxian, according to whom the "Candalas" lived in their own separate villages. Apart from these references, when reading the Notes ... one does not get any specific impression of the existence of a caste system, except that they several times mention rulers as representatives of a particular varna.

Xuanzang was amazed at the softness of the local political authorities. He describes India as a country where corporal punishment was rarely used, where criminals were only occasionally punished by cutting off a nose, hand or foot and exile into the wilderness, and where ordeals were used in the process of justice (I: 83-84). All this seems quite mild compared to the torture used at the time in Europe and China. Administration, according to Hsuan-tsang, is “based on humane principles,” and conscription and forced labor are not onerous. In general, this description seems to indicate the minimal administrative functions of the state, which obtains most of its wealth through centralized control of subject territories:

“The revenues from the royal lands are divided into four main parts: the first is intended to ensure the execution of national affairs and provide sacrifices; the second - for awards to ministers and chief officials of the state; the third - to reward people of outstanding ability; the fourth is for donations to various religious communities... At the same time, taxes for people are easy, and duties are not burdensome. Everyone is peacefully going about their business, and everyone is cultivating the land for their food. Those who use the royal lands pay for it one-sixth of the harvest. Merchants who engage in trade come and go to carry out their transactions. They are allowed through crossings and roadblocks for a small fee. When public works are required, participation in them is mandatory, but they are paid. Payment is in strict proportion to the work performed...” (I: 87).

Although Hsuan-tsang describes the greatness of Harsha, whose empire at that time covered almost all of northern India, the subcontinent itself in his “Notes ...” from a political point of view looks fragmented into rather small “countries”, each of which has its own capital and, as usually its own “ruler”. For each of them, he gives the approximate number of Buddhist monasteries and bhikkus (Pali / Prakr. bhikku - Buddhist monk), as well as the number of “temples of the devas” (Skr. deva - god, deity) and some considerations about the number of non-Buddhists (non-believers) with them . Among the latter he counts both Jains (nirgrantha) and Shaivites-Pashupatas (pashupata).

Xuanzang's Travel Map

From the book Wriggins S.H. “The Silk Road journey with Xuanzang”

Xuanzang entered India from the northwest, from the territory of modern Afghanistan, and describes it starting approximately from the borders of modern Pakistan. The first "countries" (*) with which his description begins include Taxila, then a tributary of Kashmir, as were most of the other small territories located around it. Here he sets out the biography of Panini and Kanishka. He describes Kashmir itself with the romanticism to which this land inspired almost everyone. In his account of why the Buddhist council was held in Kashmir, he says that Kanishka "desired to do it in his own country, as he suffered from the heat and humidity of [mainland India]," and what his advisor replied to him:

“The intention to hold a council will be well received in this country; its lands are guarded on each side by mountains, the Yakshas protect its borders, and the soil is rich and fertile, providing an abundance of food. Here saints and sages gather and reside; here the pious rishis wander and rest” (III: 153).

———————————————————————————————————

(*) “(52) Xuanzang considers the eastern border of [Gandhara] r. Indus, i.e. It includes lands only in the river valley. Kabul, in the lower reaches, before the confluence with the Indus, without the surrounding area of ​​​​the present-day. Rawalpindi, which belong to this ancient region." See note. to Juan II in the translation of “Notes...” by N.V. Aleksandrova. – approx. shus

———————————————————————————————————

This northwestern region was the historical center of the Kushana empire, and also the scene of various conflicts: between the Kushans and the pre-Buddhist rulers of Kashmir, between the Shaivites and the Buddhists, between the Hephthalite ruler Mihirakula and his rival, described by Hsuan-tsang as the ruler of the Tukhura Himatala (* ), who traces his origins to the Shakya family (Sakya) (I: 157-58). Apparently Mihirakula destroyed most of the Buddhist structures not only in Taxila but throughout the entire Gandhara region, leaving numerous monasteries in ruins with only a few bhikkus living there. According to the traveler, since Kashmir began to be ruled by the anti-Buddhist krityas, "this state is not very committed to the faith"; nevertheless, he saw there one hundred monasteries in which 5000 bhikkus lived, as well as four stupas erected by Ashoka (I: 148-57). In addition, Xuanzang tells many stories about the nagas, the legends of which were very common in this region, calling them "dragons".

———————————————————————————————————

(*) This spelling of the ruler's name is taken from S. Beal's translation. Alexandrova N.V. writes: “(74) King [of the country] Symodalo... - in the text: 無貨邏國咽摩咀羅王，where you can understand Symodalo 咽摩咀羅 as the name of the king who is the ruler of the “country of Duholo.” However, in tsz. XII Symodalo is found as the name of a country, which gives reason to interpret this phrase specifically as “the king of the country Symodalo.” See also tsz. XII, note. 21. (75) King [of the country] Xueshanxia 雪山下王一 here the name Xueshanxia 雪山下一 is the same as Symodalo 咽摩咀羅 (presumably Himatala - “the foot of the Snowy [Mountains]”). In this case, the name is expressed by translation; see tsz. XII, note. 21." See note. to Juan III in the translation of “Notes...” by N.V. Aleksandrova – approx. shus

———————————————————————————————————

Xuanzang's route ran through the whole of Northern India and everywhere he observed the decline of Buddhism. Perhaps the only exception was the capital of Harsha's state, Kanyakumbja (modern Kannauj in Uttar Pradesh), where Hsuan-tsang refers to "an equal number of Buddhists and heretics" and notes the presence of 100 monasteries and 10,000 bhikkus along with 200 “temples of the devas” and “several thousand” of their worshipers (I: 206-07).

However, the most striking thing was to observe this decline in the historical lands of Buddhism, i.e. where the modern Indian state of Bihar (and the eastern part of Uttar Pradesh - approx. shus). Of course, one could expect that in Prayag (modern Allahabad), which even then was one of the sacred cities of Brahmanism, there would be a “very large number” of heretics. However, even in the Lichhavi capital of Sravasti, non-Buddhists (including Jains) greatly outnumbered the “believers,” and the birthplace of Gotama Buddha, Kapilavastu, was an area of ​​deserted cities, with the capital lying in ruins and a small number of inhabited villages. The same could be said about Kusinagara, a small village that was the site of the Buddha's mahaparinibbana. In Varanasi, for 30 monasteries with 3,000 bhikkhus, there were one hundred “temples of devas” and 10,000 of their parishioners, mainly Pashupatas and Jains. In Vaishali, where “the ruins of sacred places were so numerous that it is difficult to count them all” (II: 73), there were “several hundred monasteries, most of them in a dilapidated state,” in which very few bhikkus remained, and “several dozen temples of devas,” among whose worshipers the Jains were the most numerous (II: 66). Former meeting place of the gana-sangha (high council) of the Vajji confederation (Vaishali - approx. shus) was in the same desolation. Only Magadha, the center of the Mauryan Empire, looked different: there were 50 monasteries with 10,000 bhikkhus. In his story, Xuanzang tells many legends about Ashoka and describes the rich and luxurious Nalanda University.

Overall, this description not only demonstrates the state of decline in which Buddhism found itself, but also suggests that its displacement by Indian Brahmanical culture was not so simple or painless. Since the sources describe open political conflicts and religious repression, we can assume that the disappearance of the population and devastation in Kapilavastu and Kushinagar may be the result of serious repression.

The overall picture begins to change as Xuanzang moves east and south. Brahmanism entered Bengal and the eastern territories quite late, and therefore did not have significant influence there. About Pundravardhana (located in northern Bengal, the land of the Pundra people (*), who according to Brahmanical laws were considered a low “mixed caste”), Xuanzang writes that here the land is “regularly cultivated and rich in grain crops” (II : 199) and that it is a small state containing 20 monasteries with 3,000 monks, as well as “several hundred temples of devas,” mostly Jain. Of the seacoast state of Samatata, a longtime center of Buddhism and trade with Southeast Asia, he writes that it is “rich in all kinds of grain crops” (II: 199) and that it contains about 30 monasteries with approximately 2,000 monks, and among others the Jains dominate again. However, in nearby Tamralipti (located in West Bengal in the delta region), Buddhism is represented much more modestly: only 10 monasteries, and in addition to these there are 50 “temples of the devas, which are shared by believers of various sects” (II: 201).

———————————————————————————————————

———————————————————————————————————

About Kamarupa (modern Assam) Xuan-tsang writes that it is almost completely non-Buddhist territory. And in Udra (one of the ancient names of Orissa), according to him, the people are mainly Buddhist and there are one hundred monasteries with 10,000 bhikkhus. There he visited the miraculous monastery located on the mountain and the seaport of Charitra, where “merchants departing for distant countries and arriving foreigners stop on their way. The walls of the city are mighty and high. There are many rare and precious things here” (II: 205). Oriya, according to his description, is “tall... with a yellowish-black complexion. Their speech pattern and language are different from Central India. They love to learn and do it all the time” (II: 204).

From Orissa, Xuanzang went south and, passing through the “great forests,” after about 240 miles of travel, arrived at the small state of Konyodha (*), in which there was no Buddhism. Then, traveling south another 300-500 miles through “vast deserts, jungles and forests in which the trees reach into the sky and blot out the sun,” he reached the state of Kalinga (apparently this place is on the border of the modern states of Orissa and Andhra). He describes Kalinga as having extensive agriculture, an abundance of flowers and fruits, "huge dark wild elephants" and a very hot climate. He writes that “people here are unrestrained and impulsive in their behavior” and most of them adhere to non-Buddhist beliefs (Jains predominate - approx. shus). He further adds that in ancient times this country was very densely populated, but then almost depopulated (II: 208), which is associated with the story of a rishi with magical powers who cursed the local people (it is possible that this legend is based on lies the real story of Ashoka's bloody victory over Kalinga).

———————————————————————————————————

(*) This country, like its name, is not precisely identified. In Alexandrova N.V. like this: “(29) Gunyuuto 恭御陀 - according to Saint-Martin’s assumption, this ancient country was located in the lake area. Chilka off the coast of the Bay of Bengal (Orissa state). The name of the country is difficult to restore; only Cunningham connects it with the name of the city of Ganjam, which is located near the lake. Chilka on its southern side.” See note. to Juan X in the translation of “Notes...” by N.V. Aleksandrova. – approx. shus

———————————————————————————————————

From Kalinga the traveler traveled about 360 miles northwest and reached Kosala. It is most likely that its capital at that time was the city of Pawnee (Pauni, by the author - Pavani - approx. shus) (*) in the Bhandara district of the modern Indian state of Maharashtra, which contains the remains of stupas dating from the Maurya-Shunga period. In the 1950s, Dalits in Maharashtra believed that the "nagas" after whom the city of Nagpur was apparently named were early Buddhists, and their main reason for holding the "dhammadiksha" ceremony (* *) near Nagpur there was precisely a connection between these places and ancient Buddhism (see Moon 2001: 149). Here is what Xuan-tsang writes about this:

“The borders are a chain of mountain cliffs; forests and jungles grow interspersed... the soil is rich and fertile and produces abundant harvests. Cities and villages are located close to each other. The population is very large. The people are tall and black. The people here are harsh and furious in character; they are brave and ardent. There are both heretics and believers here. They are zealous in learning and very intelligent. The ruler belongs to the Kshatriya caste; he greatly respects the law of the Buddha, and his virtue and mercy are widely known" (II: 209).

———————————————————————————————————

(*) This is a controversial opinion (perhaps even related to the author’s political views). Alexandrova N.V. writes about it this way: “(31) Koshala (Jiaosalo 懦薩羅） - having passed the indicated distance to the northwest, Xuanzang should have ended up in the area of ​​​​the modern city of Nagpur, which is consistent with information about Koshala in other sources... It is difficult to identify the capital of Koshaly with any famous city." See note to juan X in the translation of "Notes ..." by N.V. Aleksandrova - approx. shus

(**) Mass public ceremony to convert about 500,000 Dalits to Buddhism in 1956. – approx. shus

———————————————————————————————————

Koshala and its capital were also associated with the work of the famous Mahayana monk-philosopher Nagarjuna, and Hsuan-tsang further tells of the amazing feats and compassion of this great Buddhist, as well as his relationship with the ruler of the Satavahana dynasty.

Today, political agitators call the western districts of Orissa "Koshala" and demand the creation of a separate state with the same name on their basis (see Kosal state movement - approx. shus) . In this region, which includes drought-prone Kalahandi and its surrounding areas, people migrate west to Raipur and Nagpur rather than east to coastal Orissa during natural disasters. It appears that in ancient times the entire region from eastern Nagpur to western Orissa was considered Koshala or Mahakoshala. Pauni/Pavani, located on the banks of the Wainganga River, is mentioned in an early Satavahana epigraphic inscription as Benakatha, i.e. "the banks of Bena/Vena", and this territory itself can be identified with the "southern Koshala", which Rama is said to have given as a gift to his son Kusha after the division of his kingdom (Mirashi II: 227-30). Adivasis (adivasi, non-caste aboriginal tribes - approx. shus) of this region are represented by the Gonds, and of western Orissa by the Khonds, i.e. ethnic groups speaking languages ​​of the Dravidian language family. Vidarbha, or otherwise "Mahakoshala", was indeed the home of a group of peoples known in classical literature as the "Nagas". Moreover, according to the references, they were supposed to be rulers, therefore the story of Xuanzang testifies in favor of the Dravidian origin of the Naga people, since the Gond rulers always declared their status as kshatriyas. According to Hsuan-tsang, there were 100 monasteries at Koshala with just under 10,000 bhikkhus, as well as approximately 70 “temples of the devas.”

Moving further south, Xuanzang observed the struggle of Buddhism with Jainism and the growing strength of Shaivism to maintain its influence in the Dravidian regions. In the state of Andhra, whose capital was the city of Vengi, Buddhists and non-Buddhists were present in almost equal numbers. He describes the soil of this country as abundant and fertile and notes that “the climate is very hot, and the people are impulsive and aggressive in their manners” (II: 217). Traveling south about 200 more miles “through desolate forests,” Xuanzang arrived in a country called Dhanakataka (modern Vijayawada). Not far from her capital there was an old Buddhist center, which can now be identified by the remains of a stupa and magnificent ruins located near Amravati. The region also had a hot climate, vast uninhabited areas, and a small population. There were a large number of "mostly abandoned and ruined" monasteries, of which about 20 were inhabited and housed approximately 1,000 bhikkhus. Religious life here was dominated by “a hundred temples of devas”, which were attended by many people of various faiths, which was evidence of the growing influence of Saivism and Jainism in this region.

Traveling another 200 miles to the southwest, the traveler arrived in the lands of the Tamils. Culya, or otherwise Chola, was the first country that did not make at least the slightest positive impression on him:

“The climate here is hot; people are dissolute and cruel in their manners. The temperament of the population here is wild in nature; it follows heretical teaching. Sangharama (Buddhist monastery - approx. shus) are ruined and dirty, just like the priests. There are several dozen temples of devas and many [Jain] hermits here” (II: 227).

However, depressed by what he saw, Xuanzang remained true to himself even in this situation: he further writes that he saw the stupa built by Ashoka, and reports that in ancient times the Tathagata himself stayed in these places.

Next, Xuanzang went south and, having passed 300-325 miles through “uninhabited forests”, came to the state of Dravida, the capital of which is identified as Kanchipuram - a fertile, rich and hot country with hundreds of monasteries and 10,000 bhikkhus , competing with 80 “deva temples” and numerous Jains. He writes: “In the old days, the Tathagata, living in the world, visited this country very often; he preached the Dhamma here and converted people to his faith, and therefore Ashoka Raja built stupas in all the sacred places where traces of his presence were preserved” (II: 229). Although Hsuan-tsang describes a country called Malakuta and the island of Ceylon, which he could easily reach by sea, he most likely did not visit the states located south of Dravida.

From Kanchipuram he headed north or north-west and, traveling 400 miles through “a forest wilderness, in which there are rare deserted cities and very few villages, [where] robbers, gathering together, rob and capture travelers” (II: 253 ), arrived in the country which he calls "Kong-kin-na-pu-lo" (this name was restored as Konkanapura). Scientists have had some difficulty identifying this site (2), and one possibility is modern Kolhapur, located in southern Maharashtra. According to the traveler's description, the people living here were “dark-skinned, fierce and rude in character,” but at the same time respecting learning, virtue and talent. He writes about the presence in this state of a large number of both Buddhists and non-Buddhists, and the presence of about one hundred sangharama with approximately 10,000 bhikkus.

———————————————————————————————————

(2) Beal identifies this place as Golconda (II: 254n), and he also argues for other places located in the southern tip of the Uttar Canara district of Karnataka or widely distant from each other, like Mysore and Vanavasi. Schwartzbergs places it near Badami/Vatapi, Bharat Patankar suggests Kolhapur. The distances and direction from Kanchipuram to "Konkanapur" corresponds to either Badami/Vatapi or Kolhapura, and in general the movement in a northern direction from either of them leads further to either Nasik or some place in Khandesh. The identification of Nasik with "Maharashtra" would justify the assumption (made by Schwartbergs) and relating to the next stage of the journey (to the country of Bharuch) that Xuanzang visited the caves of Ajanta, and then proceeded approximately west and crossed the river Narmada. In this case, the direction for this stage of the journey is not in doubt, which cannot be said about the distance. The Kolhapur version needs to be worked out further, even only because Brahmin scholars are still arguing that Nasik is their holy city, and they do not like the description of the “color” of the population of Kolhapur. However, the indisputable fact is that the common people of Maharashtra are mostly dark-skinned Dravidians.

———————————————————————————————————

From here Xuanzang went northwest, again through dense forests with wild animals and bands of robbers, and after about 500 miles he reached the state of Maharashtra, the capital of which, according to his description, is located on the western bank of a large river. Although the place is usually identified with Nasik, located on the banks of the Godavari River, the only river whose location is consistent with the description of the next stage of the journey west across the Narmada River to the country of Bharuch is the Tapi. This reasoning places this state in the territory of Khandesh, located at the northern tip of modern Maharashtra. At that time, the center of the empire of Pulakesin II, the great conqueror and the only Indian ruler who defeated Harsha, was located in these places. Here Xuan-tsang makes one of his most colorful descriptions:

“The climate here is hot; people are simple and honest in nature; They are tall, and by nature they are stern and vindictive. They are favorable to their benefactors; they are merciless towards their enemies... If a general loses a battle, he is not punished, but he is presented with women's clothing, and thus forced to commit suicide. The state maintains a detachment of soldiers numbering several hundred people. Every time they are about to take part in a battle, they intoxicate themselves with wine, after which one such person with a spear in his hands can challenge ten thousand in battle. The ruler of a country, having such people and elephants, treats his neighbors with contempt. He belongs to the Kshatriya caste and his name is Pulakeshi... His plans and undertakings are vast, and his generosity is felt even at a great distance... At present, Shiladitya Maharaj (i.e. Harsha) has conquered the peoples in the east and west and has extended his power to the most distant places, and only the people of this country did not submit to him...” (II: 256-57).

The traveler also notes the presence of various faiths in this country: about 100 monasteries with approximately 5000 bhikkhus and about 100 “temples of devas” (their affiliation is not mentioned). He also describes what can only be the Ajanta Caves, which were built under previous dynasties.

Next, Xuanzang headed towards Gujarat and, having traveled approximately 200 miles to the west and crossed the Narmada River, arrived at Bharukaccha (modern Bharuch). This once famous seaport, the center of brisk trade with Rome and other distant countries, eventually became a minor state, containing approximately an equal number of monasteries and “temples of the devas.” The local people, apparently gripped by a collective depression due to the loss of their economic status, made a negative impression on the traveler: “In their manners they are cold and indifferent; by character people are insincere and treacherous” (II: 259). From here he went northeast (*) and arrived at Malava (Malwa), whose people, he says, are “distinguished for great learning” and where there are one hundred monasteries with 2000 bhikkus, who are outnumbered by “very numerous heretics.” , mainly Shaivites. Hsun-tsang's description of his route through Gujarat seems to contain some confusion: he went southwest to the bay, then northwest to Atali, then northwest again to Kaccha, and then 200 miles north to Valabhi (**).

———————————————————————————————————

(*) Xuanzang himself said “to the northwest,” which caused lively controversy among scientists. The author probably shares the opinion of those who consider this simply a textual error. The map above shows the direction northwest. – approx. shus

(**) Regarding the Gujarati part of Xuan-tsang's journey, scholars still do not have a consensus (this is largely due to the identification of the names that Xuan-tsang gives). See Juan XI from page 305 and notes to it in the translation of “Notes …” by N.V. Aleksandrova. – approx. shus

———————————————————————————————————

Valabhi was a fairly large country where “the population is very numerous; noble people are rich. There are several hundred or so families whose wealth runs into hundreds of lakhs (1 lakh = 100,000 - approx. shus). Rare and valuable goods from distant regions are stored here in large quantities.” Those. Unlike Bharukachchha, the wealth of the merchants of Gujarat was immediately noticeable. Valabhi had about a hundred monasteries with approximately 6,000 priests, mostly Theravada Buddhists (this is probably a mistake, it should read "Sammatiya schools" - approx. shus), competing with "several hundred deva temples with many sectarians of various persuasions." Xuanzang describes the king as a kshatriya who has recently declared himself a Buddhist and who presents great values ​​to the Buddhist sangha at the annual meeting (II: 266-68). Valabhi was also the site of a large monastic complex with a famous university (Dutt 1988: 224-32). From here Xuanzang again went northeast, but it should be noted that further distances and descriptions of his route do not correspond to each other, as a result of which Beal suggests that perhaps the traveler lost the originals of his travel notes and restored them from memory (II : 269n).

Xuanzang then proceeded 360 miles north to Gurjjara, a country occupying part of modern Rajasthan and Malwa, where he discovered only one monastery. After this he went southeast and after 560 miles reached Ujjain, where almost all the monasteries lay in ruins and Saivism dominated, and then, first turning northeast and further north, he returned back to Gurjara. From here he went north and, having traveled about 400 miles “through wild deserts and dangerous mountain gorges [and] crossing the great river Sin-tu, arrived in the state of Sin-tu, i.e. Sind)" is one of the few whose ruler was a Shudra (II: 272).

In all the countries of the Gujarat-Rajasthan region there were either no Buddhists at all or very few (*). In contrast, Sindh, which Hsuan-tsang describes as a land yielding rich crops of wheat and millet, suitable for raising sheep, camels and other animals, with people who are "stern and impulsive, but honest and straightforward", was truly a Buddhist country. People “learn without trying to stand out in any way; they have faith in the teachings of the Buddha. There are several hundred [monasteries] here, home to approximately 10,000 priests.” All of them were Theravada Buddhists (here should also be read “sammatiya schools” - approx. shus), and the traveler, being a follower of the Mahayana, describes them as “lazy and prone to self-indulgence and promiscuity” (**). As is the case with many other places throughout India, he writes that the Buddha often visited this country, and therefore Ashoka erected “several dozen stupas in those places where sacred traces of his presence remained.” The traveler also describes a large and rather strange group of families living along the river who raised cattle and were Theravada Buddhists (***):

“Along the Sindh River, among flat and swampy lowlands for about a thousand li (about 350 km - approx. shus), several hundred thousand (really a great many) families live. They have a cruel and hot-tempered character and are prone to bloodshed. They derive their livelihood exclusively from raising cattle. There is no authority over them, among their men and women there is neither rich nor poor; they shave their heads and wear the robes of bhikkhus, whom they resemble in appearance until they begin to engage in ordinary worldly affairs” (II: 273).

———————————————————————————————————

(**) In Alexandrova N.V. this passage is translated as follows: “There are several hundred monasteries, about 10,000 monks. They profess both the “small” and “great chariot” of the Sammatiya school. For the most part, they are lazy and dissolute by nature. Those who are diligent, following wisdom and goodness, settle in a secluded place, retire to the mountains and forests.” See Juan XI p. 311 in the translation of “Notes...” by N.V. Aleksandrova. – approx. shus

(***) Xuanzang does not indicate their tradition. They only write that they “stubbornly adhere to a narrow view and deny the great chariot,” i.e. are followers of the “small vehicle” (Hinayana). Here he describes the history of their adoption of Buddhism and their degradation. See Juan XI p. 312 in the translation of “Notes...” by N.V. Aleksandrova. – approx. shus

———————————————————————————————————

From Sindh, Xuan-tsang walked almost 200 miles to Multan (Multan, this is the modern name, the ancient one is Mulasthana - approx. shus), where there were no Buddhists at all, but there were many who “bring sacrifices to the spirits.” Here he examined the “very impressive” temple of the Sun (II: 274). As he continued his journey through what is now Pakistan, he saw in various places a significant number of Buddhists and many Saivites, but only after he had traveled some 400 miles to the northwest, "crossing high mountains and crossing wide valleys." , began to believe that he had left India (II: 282).

Xuanzang made an impressive journey around the entire subcontinent. And although the presence of Buddhism at that time was still very significant, it was clear that it was in decline. Even though many dhamma strongholds still remained, the haunting image of dilapidated and abandoned monasteries with a few surviving bhikkhus became more widespread. It seems that by the time of Xuanzang's journey a turning point had occurred and, after a thousand years of historical conflict, Brahmanism had entered the stage of dominance. At the same time, the slow decline of Buddhism began, which led to the fact that after a number of centuries it finally disappeared from the land on which it once originated.

But why did this happen?

2. Some interpretations of the reasons for the decline of Buddhism

The currently prevailing interpretation of the reasons for the decline of Buddhism in India belongs to A.L. A.L. Basham, who in his now classic work argues that the persecution of Buddhism played only a minor role in its disappearance, but that the main factor was the opposition to the reformed religion that we now call "Hinduism", which transformed the worship of Shiva and Vishnu (the latter also in various autaras, which were able to absorb some local deities) into cults of ardent devotion. Relying on the aggressive agitation and organizational work of Sankara, this revived Hinduism came into confrontation with Buddhism, which, while continuing to concentrate in monasteries, lost its strength and began to decline. Although Buddhism was theoretically (and for some time practically) a separate religion that challenged the caste system and rejected the authority of the Vedas, it failed to integrate the practical aspects of the life of the common people, so life cycle rituals, including for Buddhist families, always performed by Brahmins. As a result of all this, Buddha eventually appeared as the ninth avatar of Vishnu, while his own teachings were simply ignored. When the Muslim invasions began, the final blow was dealt to this almost extinct Buddhism, which was also particularly vulnerable due to its weak population base and concentration in monasteries (Basham 1958: 265-66).

In an article originally written in 1956, D.D. D.D. Kosambi gives these popular themes a Marxist interpretation, arguing in terms of social phenomena related to industrial relations (i.e., describing the economic functions of Buddhism and Hinduism):

“The main civilizing function of Buddhism had exhausted itself by the seventh century AD. The doctrine of ahimsa (the principle of non-violence - approx. shus) has received widespread recognition, even if it has not been put into practice. Vedic sacrifices were stopped... the new problem was the need to achieve the submission of the village farmers without abuse of force. It was done through religion, but it was not Buddhism. A new class structure appeared in the villages in the form of castes, a division into which Buddhists had always rejected. At the same time, primitive tribes were defined as new castes. The lives of tribal and peasant people depended heavily on rituals, which Buddhist monks were prohibited from performing, so rituals became a monopoly of the Brahmins. In addition, at that time, the Brahmans were pioneers in managing agricultural production, since they had a calendar of work that made it possible to reliably predict the time of plowing, sowing and harvesting. They also had some knowledge of new crops and trade opportunities. Apart from this, they did not consume any significant portion of the crops grown, like their ancestors who made lavish sacrifices, or the large Buddhist monasteries. In the case of Buddha, a compromise was also reached - he became the avatar of Vishnu. As a result of all this, formal Buddhism simply disappeared" (Kosambi 1986: 66).

To prove his words about the degradation of Buddhism, he writes the following, referring to the notes of Xuan-tsang:

“The Sangha was now dependent on the upper classes, having lost the minimum contact with the common people that was necessary to even serve these upper classes well. The Buddha Tooth Relic was displayed for a fee of one gold coin. As one would expect, the prophecies spoke of the imminent disappearance of religion, as a result of which such and such images should disappear, plunging underground. That religion itself had actually sunk into the quagmire of wealth and superstition was quite obvious to any contemporary who was not blinded by faith” (Kosambi 1975: 315-16).

This sounds eloquent enough, but it should be noted that Kosambi, a Marxist by conviction and the son of a prominent Buddhist convert (see Chapter 7), never spoke with such sarcasm about Brahmanical rituals!

The theme of the degradation of Buddhism is quite common, and it finds support in Marxist studies of the wealth of the sangha as a highly unproductive accumulation and, at the same time, obtained as a result of the exploitation of peasants by taking away their surplus product. A good example of this is Jacques Gerne's study of the economic role of Buddhism in Chinese society. He argues that the Vinaya texts contain rather complicated legal concepts concerning property issues, and therefore, with the support of the state, monasteries were exempted from taxation and involvement in government work. For this reason, people sought them in order to exchange the hard peasant life for less strenuous work. Some monasteries were administered by the imperial state, others were supported by private donations, and some functioned as large estates, subsisting on the labor of serfs. Many of them have essentially become commercial enterprises. In other words, monasteries were far from being centers of collective living and spiritual pursuits according to their original purpose (Gernet 1995). Although there is currently insufficient data to study in detail the activities of monasteries in India, most Marxists, including Kosambi, continue to adhere to the view of exploitative nature.

Finally, it is now widely believed in India that the final blow to Buddhism came from the Muslim invasions, which resulted in the sack of many of the great Buddhist centers, such as the monastery and university at Nalanda. Even Ambedkar supported this thesis about the “sword of Islam”:

“Brahmanism, defeated and crushed by the Muslim invaders, managed to attract the attention of the new rulers in order to obtain support and livelihood, and, in the end, received them. Buddhism, also defeated and destroyed by the Muslim invaders, had no hope for this. He was an abandoned orphan, he withered under the indifferent gaze of local rulers and burned in the fire kindled by the conquerors... This was the greatest disaster that befell the teachings of Buddha in India. The fierce sword of Islam has fallen on the community of Buddhist priests. Some of them died, while others fled outside India. There was no one left, and there was no one to keep the flame of the Buddhist teaching alive” (Ambedkar 1987: 232-33).

3. Certain problems and contradictions

But there are some not entirely clear aspects that sometimes contradict all these interpretations. For example, if Buddhism, with its monasteries and commercial orientation, encouraged capitalism, then why was it defeated by Brahmanism, whose activities were aimed mainly at expanding agricultural production? By all accounts, the mode of production espoused by Brahmanism was more backward, more feudal, more ritualized, less commercial, and less oriented towards an urban lifestyle. So why has it come to dominate India in an era of expanding global trade? Why did the historical process take a path that is undoubtedly a step back to a form of production oriented towards agriculture? All this, to some extent, relates to the debate about the nature of “feudalism” in India, and raises a logical question: whether the hegemony achieved by Brahmanism in the second half of the first millennium really represented a step backward in socio-economic understanding.

Apart from this, there are other questions regarding why Brahmanism was able to achieve victory. First, was monastery-centered Buddhism by the middle of the millennium really a “degrading” or “exploitative” social phenomenon and did not provide anything significant in exchange for the surplus product that it appropriated? Secondly, how true is the statement that its lack of ritualism and life-cycle rites left significant gaps that Brahmanism could fill? But if these statements are in doubt, what can be provided in their place?

———————————————————————————————————

(*) The total number of monasteries is 2079, monks are 124,800, of which:

– Sammatia – 1351 monasteries, 66,500 monks;

– Sthaviravada – 401 monasteries, 26,800 monks;

– Sarvastivada – 158 monastery, 23,700 monks;

– Mahasanghika – 24 monasteries, 1100 monks;

– unspecified schools – 145 monasteries, 6,700 monks. – approx. shus

———————————————————————————————————

Those who say that, unlike the countless ritual ties that bound Brahman priests to non-Brahman households, Buddhism offered nothing to its lay followers, are careful not to focus our attention on the fundamental difference between what Brahmanism and Buddhism taught lay believers. Buddhism actively fought against the excessive ritualization of life-cycle rituals prescribed by Brahmanism, highlighting instead righteous behavior and seeking to actively displace both Vedic sacrifices and newly created rituals from the lives of Buddhist believers. But this does not mean that he did not offer them anything to satisfy their religious and ritual needs. In fact, there were simple rituals and forms of lay participation in monastic life. And the religious zeal in Mahayana Buddhism was quite capable of satisfying the emotional needs of any people (as Whalen Lai clearly demonstrates in the example of Chinese society). The ability of Brahmanism to co-exist and absorb local cults is well known (with often only the elite interpreting the local deity as an avatra of Vishnu or a form of Shiva), but Buddhism has done the same in many countries in Southeast Asia, and we have evidence that Buddhism in India also, over a long period, adapted various cults of local gods and goddesses.

Finally, we know quite little about the actual rituals and culture of the populace of the period. Basham's assertion that Buddhist families employed Brahmin priests and performed Vedic rituals ignores the fact that it may only be true of the elites. It is also quite obvious that the ritual practices and rites of the populace were different from the rituals of traditional Brahmanism, just as they are different today.

4. Historiographical issues

One of the most important objections to all the superficial generalizations made about the decline of Buddhism in India is the lack of historical facts. This is a common problem throughout the history of ancient India, and when compared with societies such as China, the difference is simply shocking. With the exception of reports from outside observers (occasional Greek and Chinese travelers) and such indirect facts that can be gleaned from the literature, we basically lack any descriptions of the social structure of this period. Buddhist literature, which gives such descriptions, was simply destroyed in India, while not a single Buddhist text in Pali or Sanskrit (*) survived in the country. Today's references to this literature refer to manuscripts preserved in Sri Lanka, Tibet and China.

———————————————————————————————————

(*) This is not entirely true (or the author means only the modern state of India). See Gandharan Buddhist texts and Gilgit manuscripts. See also Buddhist manuscripts of Nepal. – approx. shus

———————————————————————————————————

The closest thing to existing Indian "history" are the Itihasa-puranas, which are basically dynastic lists of rulers compiled after the 8th century, but mention only those monarchs who reigned before the 3rd century AD. e. They relate mainly to northern India and are based on Brahmanical texts (vamsavalis (genealogies) and charitas (biographies)), through which their authors sought to legitimize the status of their rulers (Wink 1990: 282-83). Romila Thapar defended the authenticity of these Itihasa Puranas, arguing that such literature could well be a source for creating a history of Indian society. However, she herself essentially confirms their bias. Early India had its bards and chroniclers, known as suta and magadha, who recorded events and sang the glorious deeds of the rulers (as was the case in every society). However, in the Brahmanical dharmasashtras these bards were regarded as representatives of the lower or "mixed" jati, and since their chronicles and songs were in Prakrit, they were lost over time, and only after the 4th century AD . this material was partly used by the Brahminical elite to compose the Puranas by translating (or rewriting) it into Sanskrit (Thapar 1979: 238-40). Thus, the Itihas tradition developed not only for the purpose of using the orthodox Brahmanical approach in compiling genealogies, its authors also had a very obvious interest in concealing the origins of many ruling families, which, according to Brahmanical ideology, were in Varna terms "low" or even "barbaric" " Apart from these Brahmanical (and other orthodox social and philosophical) texts, as well as external sources, the reconstruction of Indian history down to the times of the Turks and Mughals has been done mainly on the basis of epigraphic inscriptions, coins and the results of archaeological excavations. This is a strange situation for a society whose elite prides itself on its literary and intellectual achievements.

Forming an adequate historical tradition requires both a sense of skepticism and a commitment to empirical realism, as well as organizational or institutional independence from the rulers themselves. China had one of the most developed historical traditions; however, it did not avoid bias and tendentiousness, especially in the accounts of the actions of rulers, and sometimes their subjects, made during the reign of the dynasty described. Although in India "history" was not one of the early "sciences" recognized by Buddhism, as it was in China, Buddhism did contribute to the development of a historical approach: the early Pali texts show an orientation towards a fairly sober description of historical events, and the monasteries were institutions with great autonomy. The Sri Lankan Buddhist community is known to have produced two very important historical accounts that add to our knowledge of early India. The most striking thing is that only the Buddhist chronicles of Sri Lanka contain reports about the activities of the greatest emperor of India, Ashoka (*), while Brahmanical sources mention only his name. The only example of such a chronicle in India is the Kashmiri Rajatarangini, written in the 12th century under King Jayasimha, who may have been influenced by Buddhism (Thapar 1979: 243-44; Kosambi 1985: 116n).

———————————————————————————————————

(*) Another of the most famous narratives about the life and work of Ashoka is “Ashokavadana”, included in the Mulasarvastivadana collection of avadanas “Divyavadana”. But there is no mention of Ashoka's son Mahinda, who brought Buddhism to Sri Lanka. – approx. shus

———————————————————————————————————

Thapar defends the use of Brahmanical sources using the argument that "every society has a concept of its past and therefore no society can be called unhistorical" (1979: 238). However, this is not consistent with the facts that what survived in India was the Brahmins' "perception of their past" and not some nebulous "society." The concept of the past presented in Brahmanical literature is quite different from that described in Buddhist sources, not to mention the sources of other Indian traditions or the then unliterate ethnic groups living within India. We must not forget that this different idea of ​​the past, embodied in Buddhist literature, was completely destroyed in India itself, along with Buddhist texts.

I would like to believe that someday we will have access to a wealth of literature, including historical chronicles. But this seems unlikely, since the Buddhist manuscripts that were the sources of the chronicles, popular works, sacred texts and national versions of Chinese and Tibetan translations from Sanskrit that we now have must have been kept mainly in monasteries and were almost certainly lost through destruction these monasteries. Such manuscripts undoubtedly existed, and formed the basis, for example, of the Pali texts preserved in Sri Lanka, as well as Tibetan, Chinese and other translations of Buddhist literature. Taranatha, a Tibetan chronicler of the history of Indian Buddhism in the early 17th century, mentions manuscripts on which he relied in creating his works and which are unknown to anyone today. Thus, the disappearance of Buddhism in India led to the disappearance of a large part of the most valuable Indian historiography and the emergence of a significant Brahmanical bias in the existing historical documents.

It is important to understand that we are talking about a fairly long period in the history of Indian society. And this history is not, as Kosambi argues, a simple description of a sequence of changes in the state of the means of production and relations of production (Kosambi 1975: 1); but is (as, indeed, any history) a narrative about how the activities of people and the relationships between them changed and developed over time. Of course, everything we talk about is related to changing methods of production, but cannot be completely identified with them. And this activity of people and their relationships are exactly what we know very little about. To make it clear that all of the above is not only related to the history of the decline of Buddhism, we can look at this issue from a gender perspective. One of the results of the dominance of Brahmanical literature is a complete disregard for the role of female rulers and matrilineal monarchies in many parts of ancient India. For example, the Satavahana dynasties in Maharashtra and Andhra and their successors in Andhra Ikshvaku were matrilineal(*). Judging by the epigraphic evidence, such consorts of the rulers of the Satavahana dynasty as Nayanika and Gotami Bala-siri, as well as members of the ruling family from the Iksvaku dynasty Chamti-siri and Bhati-Deva were influential and significant persons, some of them perhaps even ruling their own states for some time. Proof of this is the epigraphic inscriptions of the Satavahanas published by Mirashi in Devanagari transcription (especially Mirashi 1981, II: 5-20) and Dutt's description of the role of women from the family of rulers of the Ikshvaku dynasty, based on the epigraphy of Nagarjunakonda (1988: 128-31). ) (**), as well as such Mahayana texts as the Srimaladevisimhanada-sutra. However, these and similar women are not mentioned at all in the Puranic sources and therefore nothing is said about them in standard books on Indian history (eg Thapar 1996; Sastri 1999). And Mirashi, ignoring his own evidence, even argues that it is impossible for women to have so much power (Mirashi 1981, II: 4-16, 34n, 41-49).

This situation puts a big question mark on all the generalizations made about the decline of Buddhism in India.

———————————————————————————————————

(*) Among the Satavahanas, the throne was passed down through the male line, but the ruler received his name from his mother’s name (unlike Northern India), while the ruler’s mother had a high status and had great influence in the state (including, possibly, the rules on behalf of the son until he comes of age). – approx. shus

(**) All these (and some other) women from the ruling families are known thanks to epigraphic inscriptions containing information about gifts to Buddhist monasteries, which were discovered in Nagarjunakonda and some cave monasteries in Maharashtra. – approx. shus

———————————————————————————————————

5. On the issue of violence

What can be said about the role of coercion and violence in the disappearance of Buddhism in India? The main argument of the Hindutva movement, which enjoys enormous influence in modern India, is that throughout its history Hinduism has been a tolerant religion that, instead of using force, absorbed and integrated its opponents, while They portray Islam as a religion of forced proselytism. But this argument is easily refuted when we turn to historical facts. Those who plunder monasteries and kill monks or their lay followers leave no evidence of their crimes! Think about how widely known, for example, the attacks and murders of Indian Christians and missionaries in Adivasi regions in 1999-2000 would have been, if not for international Christian connections and modern media?

That Brahmanism was intolerant of “heretics” (pashandas) is clear from the Sanskrit sources themselves. The story of Rama killing Shambuk (Shambuk, a sudra who became an ascetic, and thereby violated dharma - approx. shus), is a symbol of violence shown both against “lower” castes who violated their social restrictions and against “heretic hermits”. The Arthashastra very clearly places the sramana sects and the untouchables on the same level: “Heretics and Chandalas (Candalas) should remain on the land reserved for them near the cremation grounds” (Arthasastra 1992: 193). More specifically, Kautilya's words are translated by Rangarajan: “The hermits who live in ashrams and pasandas [who live in designated areas] should do so without interfering with each other; they must also tolerate minor contradictions. Those already living in the area must make room for newcomers; anyone who objects to the provision of a place should be expelled" (*). It is clear from this passage that the Pashandas were forced to live in something like "reservations".

———————————————————————————————————

(*) It seems to me that this translation option does not look very logical. In the Russian translation of the Arthashastra, this passage reads as follows: “Hermits or heretics should live in large, spacious places so as not to disturb each other. They must endure minor (mutual) difficulties. It is also possible for the one who arrived first (to a given place) to give the opportunity to live in turn (to others). He who does not provide (place) must be expelled....” IN AND. Kalyanov (ed.) “Arthashastra or the science of politics.”

In general, heretics are mentioned quite rarely in the Artahashastra. Here are two more notable passages: “... if anyone feeds low-class hermits, such as Buddhists, Ajivikas, etc., during sacrifices in honor of the gods and the dead, he pays a fine of 100 panas.” “Heretics who do not own money or gold are considered saints. (In cases of disputes) such persons must atone (for their guilt) in accordance with the vows they have taken upon themselves, with the exception of cases when it comes to insults, theft, robbery and adultery...” – approx. shus

——————————————————————————————————–

The general thrust of the Arthashastra suggests that Buddhists were seen as equivalent to untouchables. Maharashtrian historian B.G. Gokhale takes a similar view, reporting that in the late period in Maharashtra the Buddhists were targeted by revived Brahmanism, noting that locally in Ellora and other places some of their groups were known as Dhedwada and Maharwada (Gokhale 1976: 118). Thus, Dalit leaders of the 19th and 20th centuries, Iyothee Thass and Ambedkar, argued, not without reason, that Dalits were the descendants of Buddhists who were forcibly converted into untouchables by Brahmins.

Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty's research into the puranas of the Gupta period makes it clear that the attitude of the Brahmins towards the pashandas only became more bitter with the passage of time. The tolerance of the period of the Upanishads and Ashoka in the Puranas was replaced by an attitude towards killing non-believers. As the Linga Purana relates in its version of the history of the universe, the dharma was destroyed due to the Buddha avatar, after which a “pacifier” called Pramitra was born, who “destroyed the barbarians by the thousands and killed all the rulers who were born Shudras, and also destroyed the heretics. At the age of 32 he set out on a campaign, and for 20 years he killed all creatures by the hundreds and thousands until his merciless deeds left nothing but ashes on the earth (O'Flaherty 1983: 123). The version of this event that she quotes from the Matsya Purana is equally stark:

“Those who were unrighteous - he killed them all: those in the north and in the central country, and the people in the mountains, the inhabitants of the east and the west, those in the Vindhyas and those in the Deccan, as well as the Dravidians and Sinhalas, the Gandharas and Pardas, the Pahlavas and Yavanas and the Shakas, the Tusakas, the Barbarians, the Shwetas, the Khaliks, the Darads, the Khashas, ​​the Lampaks, the Andhras and the Chola tribes. Spinning the wheel of conquest, the mighty one put an end to the Shudras, putting all creatures to flight...”

O'Flaherty names the Matsya Purana, the Vayu Purana, the Brahmananda Purana, the Vishnu Purana and the Bhagavad Purana. Bhagwat Purana) "the main scriptures of the Guptas, reflecting their paranoia and anxiety about their position" (ibid.: 124). In fact, it would be more accurate to talk about Brahmin paranoia, since the author makes it clear that the Guptas' attitude towards various religious traditions was in fact quite tolerant (3).

———————————————————————————————————

(3) In his work, O'Flaherty shows that the origin of the myth of Buddha as an avatar of Vishnu was associated with the incitement of rulers to destroy heretics. Another version, set out in the Bhavishya Purana, tells of the destruction of Buddhists by four kshatriyas who were born as a result of a fire ceremony. Later, in Muslim times, these "fire-born" kshatriyas were identified with the Rajputs in a similar story according to which they were created to oppose the Buddhist "traitors" as well as the Muslim and Christian mlecchas (Hiltebeitel 2001: 278 -81).

———————————————————————————————————

Buddhist sources point more specifically to many instances of violence during the thousand-year conflict between Buddhism and Brahmanism. For example, Hsuan-tsang cites many accounts, including the famous story of the Saivite ruler Sashanka, who cut down the Bodhi Tree, about the destruction of monuments and various Buddhist images (Beal 1983: II, 91, 118, 121). He also mentions a monumental cave monastery in the highlands of Vidarbha (*), built, he says, by one of the Satavahana rulers at the insistence of Nagarjuna, which was completely destroyed (ibid.: 214-17).

The Tibetan Buddhist chronicler of the late 16th and early 17th centuries, Tarnatha, also describes many similar incidents, mentioning the "three hostilities" towards Buddhism, i.e. three periods when Buddhism was attacked with violence. The first of these was the reign of Pushyamitra Shunga, who ascended the throne after the Mauryas:

“The Brahmana king Pushyamitra along with other tirthikas started a war and they burnt down many monasteries from Madhyadesa to Jalandhara. They also killed many particularly learned monks. But most of them still fled to other countries. As a result of this, the teaching in the north died out for five years” (Taranatha 1990: 121).

———————————————————————————————————

(*) In Beal and Alexandrova N.V. – Brahmagiri – approx. shus

———————————————————————————————————

The "second hostility" appears to date back to the time of Mihirakula (a fierce anti-Buddhist ruler who attacked northern India in the 6th century), although Taranatha does not mention his name, but instead reports that the "Persian" king destroyed Magadha with an army of Turushks (Turuska, Turks - approx. shus), reduced many temples to ruins and damaged Nalanda (*). The “third hostility” took place in the south, with less obvious connections to state power. In this case, the heroes of the story are two brahmin beggars, one of whom became the owner of magical powers and, with the help of fire, destroyed 84 temples and a huge number of valuable documents in the country of Krishnaraja (Taranatha 1990: 138, 141-42).

Fierce debates with Brahmin pandits were also often marked by violence. Taranatha writes that in Orissa, after the debate

“... the tirthikas won and destroyed many temples of the followers of the Teaching. In particular, they robbed the centers of the Teaching and took away deva-dasa (monastery slaves). [Many debates were lost in the south and] as a result there were many cases of Tirthika Brahmins plundering the property and followers of the Teaching" (Taranatha 1990: 226).

———————————————————————————————————

(*) Scientists estimate the advance of Mihirakula maximum to Sarnath. Here, in all likelihood, the plot is based on the story of the campaign of Bakhtiyar Khilji, which took place at the end of the 12th century - approx. shus

———————————————————————————————————

Finally, regarding the destruction of Vikramasila and Odantapura by the Turks in the 12th century, Taranatha writes that this happened because they mistook them for fortresses and the local ruler stationed soldiers there (Taranatha 1990: 318 -19), i.e. the Turks were simply mistaken! This destruction is perceived by him as the final blow to Buddhism and marks the end of his chronicle. Taranatha also reports that from these places the monks fled to Nepal, southwest India and Southeast Asia (4).

Violence in history is easily forgotten. The main example in the case of India is probably the war with Kalinga, which is evidenced by the epigraphic inscriptions of Ashoka himself. Visiting the country of Kalinga in the 7th century, Xuanzang wrote that when it was a densely populated country, but then it became depopulated, and as the only explanation for the reasons for this phenomenon, he cites the story of a mythical rishi who cursed the people. And in many Buddhist legends about Ashoka, which emphasize his immorality before converting to Buddhism, for some reason there is no description of the destructive results of his main war.

The ravages of time also played a role in the disappearance of India's Buddhist heritage. The famous Ajanta murals were only able to survive because this cave complex was completely inaccessible until British times. At the same time, other monuments were simply consigned to oblivion, and their restoration, which began in the 19th and 20th centuries, led to an increase in theft of works of art (as a result of which many significant relics ended up in European museums or private collections). The destruction of many monuments was also possible due to the inability to maintain them properly, including the current failure of the Archaeological Survey of India! (Menon 2001; Kalidas 2001) (5).

———————————————————————————————————

(4) In his recent book, Richard Eaton (2000: 94-132) points out that of the more than sixty thousand cases of temple destruction by Muslim rulers cited by modern Hindutva sources, only eighty cases can be reliably identified “whose historicity seems to be fairly undisputed." He also explains that Indian rulers raided Indian states, destroying temples and seizing sacred statues, and Muslim rulers committed atrocities against Muslims. His conclusion is that almost all cases of violence were primarily political in nature, i.e. were aimed at establishing symbolic or real power.

(5) There is no doubt that restoration methods are still improving, and Indians and their “foreign” advisers are learning from each other.

———————————————————————————————————

Ultimately, the most important thing for both Buddhism and Brahmanism was the patronage of the rulers, so the decisive factor was the gradual acceptance of Brahmanical ideology by local rulers. The rulers provided financial support to the Brahmins, and also took responsibility for enforcing varna laws and discriminating against “heretical” sects, refusing state protection of their members and property, in addition to cases of outright robbery and murder.

Over time, ideas about the times of decline of the teaching gained popularity among Buddhists, which became one of the main topics in their doctrinal literature. The idea that dharma must disappear over time is also contained in the writings of Taranatha, who notes in relation to Pushyamitra Shunga that “as predicted, the first 500 years represented the period of flowering of the Master's Law, and the next 500 years the period of its decline.” (Taranatha 1990: 121), and also writes that “under the influence of time, the Law became not as bright as before.” It should be noted that Taranatha's own interpretation is often based on the impressions of observers who simply saw the natural process of decline of Buddhism, and is supplemented by his account of the periodic restoration of the dharma by eminent bodhisattvas and masters. His stories about the cyclical destruction and restoration of manuscripts, as well as the teachings themselves, contain at their core the idea of ​​​​impermanence, which is fundamental to Buddhist teachings. At the same time, his works show the multi-level, bitter and often violent conflicts that occurred at the social level at that time.

6. Alliance of Brahmins and Rulers

The main factor behind the revival of Brahmanism was the patronage of local rulers (for an almost identical argument, see Weber 1996: 130). Moreover, the support of state power was of decisive importance regardless of the growing influence of the growing Vaishnava and Shaivite cults (not all manifestations of which were directly related to Brahmanism), since it was the rulers who, by their choice, gave legal force to either the exclusivist Brahman Varnashrama dharma (varnashrama dharma), or the tolerant Buddhist Dhamma. After Ashoka, most rulers until about the 7th century embraced both religions (encouraging Buddhism and discouraging Brahmanism), but we do not have any historical evidence from that time for the number of truly Buddhist rulers (or their consorts). Most likely, most of them still acted in accordance with the current situation. However, (and this is a striking fact) new regional dynasties of India emerged after the 7th and 8th centuries: Karkota and Pratihara in the north, Rashtrakuta in the Deccan, Pandya and Pallava Pallava) in the south, were mostly supporters of Brahmanism and established centralized state cults based on Hindu veneration of sacred images. The only exception among them was the Pala dynasty, which ruled in Bengal (ca. 750-1161 AD). And it was precisely this patronage of Brahmanism by the rulers that played a major role in the defeat of Buddhism.

A key aspect of this patronage was the famous land grants, the practice of which, which began to take shape by the 6th century, quickly became widespread, with these gifts most often being made to Brahmins. While Kosambi emphasizes their economic function and interprets these gifts as a consequence of the technological knowledge of the Brahmins, ensuring improved quality of agriculture, political motives are still seen as more likely. The peasants themselves had sufficient technological knowledge in agriculture, but what they did not have and what the Brahmins had was access to sacred texts that legitimized the power of the rulers and were a source of knowledge for education. The shastra allowed the brahmins who studied them, as Herman Kulke notes, “to have at their disposal an impressive amount of knowledge of public administration and political economy” (Kulke 1997: 237).

Brahmins were more political than technical specialists. People from this caste group were not only priests, but also advisers, administrators and officials in the administrative apparatus of the state. They assisted in the creation of local governments, not only in the villages granted to them, but also in the surrounding settlements owned by the state. At a higher level, they ensured the legitimization of the power of local rulers by creating genealogies and mythologies that confirmed their kshatriya origins, and by organizing impressive ceremonial performances, as a result of which the rulers were endowed with all the paraphernalia and mystique of Indian royalty; at a lower level, they preached a mystical doctrine of their social superiority and the right to political power. In addition, they taught the dharma to the population, established ritual and priestly relationships with noble householders of the region, and also propagated the caste system and the inviolability of the rights of rulers. At the same time, unlike Buddhist monasteries, they did not support any social structures and ideologies that could give rise to social protest.

Unlike Buddhism and Jainism, Brahmanism offered rulers very easy conditions for confirming their status and legitimacy, without making any moral demands on them. In contrast, the exaggerated descriptions of selfless rulers in the traditions of Buddhism and Jainism seemed a rebuke to those who could not or would not accept such an ideal as a model. Another example is the Tamil epic Silappadikaram, which is full of stories of rulers who died due to their immoral acts, and its central plot is the death of the ruler and his wife and the almost complete destruction of the great city of Madurai due to them injustice. Such stories also gave legitimacy to the resistance of the people against the injustice of the rulers. If we compare this with the Laws of Manu, which declare the divinity of rulers and their absolute right to punish the guilty to maintain dharma (danda), as the basic principle of power, then the attractiveness of Brahmanism for Indian rulers becomes quite obvious. Buddhist rulers were expected to adhere to moral standards throughout their lives and to be fair and generous to their subjects. And rulers who accepted Brahmanism were obliged to enforce the laws of the caste system. This ensured that their use of force would be backed by law, without any ethical restrictions.

At the organizational level, Buddhism sought to keep monks from direct involvement in social and political activities, including government service. And although the sangha in many countries (Thailand, Sri Lanka and even China) still provided ideological and material support to the rulers (6), its autonomy and the potential for the formation on its basis of opposition to the current government (in contrast to the weakly structured Brahmanism) looked like them a constant threat. Thus, ideologically, socially and organizationally, Brahmanism turned out to be more useful (in a narrowly mercantile sense) for Indian rulers than Buddhism. At the same time, none of them even thought about the fact that such a decision impedes closer political consolidation at the all-Indian level and significantly weakens the political unity of Indian society.

———————————————————————————————————

(6) Whalen Lai's review of Buddhism in China indicates that in certain historical periods even monks acted as authoritative advisors in wartime (Lai 1995: 284-89).

———————————————————————————————————

7. The role of Islam

Almost all historians consider the Turkic invasion, which marked the beginning of Islamic rule in India, as the final blow to Indian Buddhism. In reality, as we have already seen, everything was much more complicated. The idea that only “Muslims”, as opposed to followers of other religions (e.g. “Hindus”), destroyed and looted monasteries and temples is deeply erroneous and has its origins in the Hindutva ideology, which began to take shape in India in the 19th century . Conquerors of any religion and nationality, as a rule, always robbed and destroyed, while their aggression was almost always directed at the symbols of culture, wealth and power of the conquered people. Rulers of past historical periods, regardless of their nationality and religion, usually discriminated against people of other religions and nationalities to varying degrees, often subjecting them to social exclusion and sometimes, depending on the economic or political situation, using force against them. The idea of ​​“jihad”, “just war”, “conquest of the mlecchas” (mleccha, Sanskrit barbarians, infidels) and other various ways of victory over “evil” ideology and people of other views are present in all religions, and in Buddhism, perhaps to a lesser extent degrees. However, rulers of all religions allowed people of other faiths to live in their territory, especially if they had any socio-economic importance or utility. At the same time, the scope of their rights (more precisely, privileges) in comparison with the level of social exclusion and discrimination usually depended on non-religious factors.

Islam in this regard was not much different from other leading religions. If Buddhism had been strong enough economically and socially during the period of conquest, Buddhists would have been treated much the same as "Hindus." In general, the tolerance of Islam of those times towards the Christian, Jewish and "Hindu" populations of the territories ruled by Muslims was the same as towards other religions. In this sense, Ambedkar (as well as such eminent historians as Basham), while blaming Islam, is essentially following the false concepts of Hindutva.

However, a combination of a number of religious and ideological factors contributed to the fact that the “sword of Islam” became for Indian Buddhism, if not the “greatest disaster,” then certainly the main blow. The competition between Buddhism and Islam was significantly different from the similar relationship between Islam and Brahmanism. The first two were universal religions, attracting adherents from all ethnic groups and in all countries. In addition, they were both missionary faiths and therefore did not limit themselves only to their historical territory, sending their teachers and preachers to all corners of the world to convert men and women of different countries to the true faith. Finally, both were associated with commerce and trade, with the Muslim trading network effectively replacing the network of Buddhist trade routes that linked India to Rome, Persia, Greece and Africa in the west and through Central Asia to China in the east. In the West, confrontation between Islam and Christianity led to bitter wars. Buddhism disapproved of militarism to a greater extent than Islam or Christianity, the opposition between which was no less profound, not because of their differences, but because of their common features.

Brahmanism did not have all these qualities and therefore was not a challenge to Islam. Apart from the fact that he did not attract converts to his ranks, the Brahmins also did not seem to be too concerned about the conversion of people from lower castes or border regions to Islam, as long as it did not affect their ancestral territories. They could coexist with the mleccha rulers if they were willing to implement varnasrama-dharma. Ironically, the alliance between the Brahmans and the Muslim overlords (and later with the British colonial administration) was almost as effective as that with the formally “Hindu” rulers.

In his voluminous study of this period, Al-Hind, Wink notes the long-standing dominance of Buddhism and suggests that it was only gradually and with the support of rulers that it was supplanted by Brahmanism. This in turn was due to the external dominance of Islam:

“Epigraphical sources throughout India make it clear that the power of local rulers was decisive in the restoration of the new Brahmanical order. Brahmanism, which culminated under the patronage of established regional monarchs in the cults of Shiva and Vishnu, with its huge stone temples spread out in the newly emerged regional capitals, which now housed the previously wandering courts of the rulers, as well as sedentarization (the transition to a sedentary lifestyle - approx. shus) and the settlement of fertile lands by nomadic or wandering ethnic groups, accompanied by the intensification of agriculture - this was the new “vertical” model, which in its monolithic forms fell upon the free world of the traveling merchant and the Buddhist monk.

But, he adds, this does not mean that trade disappeared; rather, “the increasing concentration of regional economic systems was a function of India's growing role in world trade,” which now took place under the auspices of the Muslims, the era's major commercial civilization. “All this development would have been unthinkable without the new cosmopolitan religion of Islam, which replaced Buddhism at the same time as the “Brahmanical restoration” took place” (Wink 1990: 230).

Why did this happen? Wink emphasizes the relationship between the rise and fall of Indian states and foreign trade relations, especially with the beginning of Arab dominance in trade with the west and the rise of China in the east. The "medieval" period in India was a time of agricultural intensification, but the development of regional economic systems was linked to world trade dominated by Islam. Therefore, Brahminized regional states could only hope to achieve pan-Indian hegemony through alliances with Muslims and other external powers.

Wink's work touches on some of these processes, particularly in his survey of the dynasties that dominated India in the second half of the first millennium. The first of these was the Kashmiri dynasty of Karkota, founded in the early 7th century, which controlled trade routes going west and to Rome (as the author says - approx. shus) and entered into an alliance with the Chinese, concerned about the actions of the Muslims and the growing power of Tibet. Based on this alliance and using military personnel recruited from Central Asia and the Punjab, the ruler of Karakota, Lalitaditya, began digvijaya, i.e. “conquest of the world” (Sanskrit digvijaya, lit. “conquest of the cardinal points”). As part of this campaign, which lasted during 713-747, he captured Kanauj, at one time the capital of Harsha, then marched through Orissa to the Bay of Bengal, turned to the Deccan, reached Konakan and returned through Gujarat to Kashmir . This event, according to many historians, marked the transition from the "classical" to the "medieval" period of India. Having accumulated enormous wealth during the military campaign, Lalitaditya had the opportunity to engage in the construction of sanctuaries, monuments and temples, among which the most grandiose was the temple of the solar deity Martand (Martand Sun Temple - approx. shus), which became a kind of symbol of the revival of Brahmanism in Kashmir (ibid.: 237-54).

In the second half of the 8th century, North India was dominated by the Bengali Pal dynasty. Among them, the most powerful monarch was Dharmapala (769-815), who ruled Bengal, Bihar, Orissa, Nepal and Assam, and also took possession of Kanauj for a time. For the first time, the historical lands of Buddhism were conquered from the east. During the same historical period, Arabs from the west advanced into Sindh, the power of Tibet increased, and the Tang dynasty began to rule in China. All these factors contributed to the strengthening of the power of the Pals. Unlike other Indian rulers, the Palas were unconditionally adherents of Buddhism throughout the reign of their dynasty, although they also patronized Shaivism and Vaishnavism and supported the migration of Brahmins from the Kanauj region. It was under their rule that the famous monastic university of Vikramashila achieved its prominent position in the Buddhist world, and it was through Bengal that Buddhism penetrated into Tibet. The full-scale growth of Brahmanism began later, during the reign of the Sena dynasty (1097-1223), descended from warriors from southern Indian Karnataka who were ardent Shaivites and supported Hindu cults throughout Bengal (ibid.: 259 -72; see also Eaton 1997: 9-16).

Other significant rulers, according to Wink, were the Gurjara-Pratiharas from northern Gujarat and Rajasthan, whose ancestors were local pastoral and hunting tribes, as well as the Huns (meaning the Hephthalites/“White Huns”) who settled in these lands – approx. shus). From these ethnic groups, the Rajputs were later formed, which over time developed into a typical landed nobility and were recognized as Kshatriyas in northern India. With the advent of the Rajputs, the ancient "Brahmin-Kshatriya" antagonism, reflected in the story of Parashurama killing all the Kshatriyas, was soon replaced by symbolic interpretations of the relationship between these two varnas, as this ethno-social class became the central figure in the new Brahmanical myth-making. The Rajputs acted as protectors and patrons of Brahmanical orthodoxy, but since their Kanauj-centered states were landlocked, they were unable to claim true hegemony (Wink 1990: 276-92).

The Rashtrakutas, who ruled Maharashtra, Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh from the late 8th to the 10th century, were described by the Arabs as the true supreme rulers of India. Their greatest monarch, Krishnaraja I (738-773), became the creator of the incredible Kailasha Temple, carved entirely from stone, a monument that became a symbol of Hindu appropriation of the heritage of the cave temples of Buddhists and Jains (*) . At the same time, the power of the Rashtrakutas was based on the favorable position of Gujarat in maritime trade with the Islamic world, so their rise went in parallel with the development of this trade (ibid.: 303-09).

———————————————————————————————————

(*) Here we are talking about the Ellora cave temple complex, among which is the Kailasha temple. – approx. shus

———————————————————————————————————

Finally, in the late 10th and 11th centuries, the Chola dynasty of Tamil Nadu became the dominant power in India. The basis of their power was the Brahmins who inhabited the countryside, and its expression was the huge temple complexes symbolizing the divinity of the rulers, such as the Rajeshwari temple (ibid.: 231). Over time, both Shaivite and Vaishnava bhakti movements spread in the Cholov state, which in the struggle practically supplanted the “heretical” religions of Buddhism and Jainism. The rise of the Cholas was associated with the economic growth of China during the Song Dynasty, which caused a huge increase in inter-regional trade turnover. The Cholas also spread their influence to Southeast Asia, resulting in the emergence of local rulers whose courts adhered to Brahmanism, although most of the population of these countries was still loyal to Buddhism. In terms of navigation, the Cholas were an exception among Indians, who traditionally did not play a significant role in navigation and maritime trade (ibid.: 311-34).

“On all sides there is a mandala” (*) is how John Keay describes the shifting centers of power and the largely meaningless conquests of the era (Keay 2000: 167). The common features of all these states were decentralized and "feudalized" administration, constant shifts in the pan-Indian power hierarchy, funding for the construction of elaborate and magnificent temple complexes glorifying both kings and brahmins, and access to foreign trade as the main source of power and income. Unlike the craft guilds of earlier times and entire villages of carpenters, weavers, etc., such as those described in the Jatakas, now at the village level, along with the expansion of agricultural production, there was an increase in the number and types of craft and service jati. And in numerous village temples there were local gods and goddesses identified with Vishnu, Shiva or some other deity of the “great tradition”. The rituals and accumulated wealth of these temples were administered by priests who were mainly Brahmins. Castes of "untouchables" (as we call these groups of people today) began to take on distinct contours, including tanners, butchers and field laborers. The proud title of gahapati householder-landowner had disappeared forever, and now the leading landowners of the village sought to present themselves as kshatriyas, otherwise they were doomed to the lowest status of sudra in the varna hierarchy. Although trade links with the outside world still existed, they were now largely (with the exception of eastern India) in the hands of merchants from non-Indian communities, particularly the Arabs, etc. India stagnated in its development.

———————————————————————————————————

(*) We are talking about the “mandala of the state” described in the Arthashastra. – approx. shus

———————————————————————————————————

8. Conversion to Islam

The vast majority of Muslims discovered in the Indian subcontinent by the British were not descendants of immigrants, i.e. Turks, Mongols or Arabs, and their ancestors were Indian converts. The question of why all these people converted to Islam has always been of great interest both from Indians themselves and from scientists.

In his recent study of Islam in Bengal, Richard Eaton describes "four generally accepted theories", which he refers to as:

(1) the thesis about the “religion of the sword” (forced conversion);

(2) the thesis of “patronage of power” (self-serving treatment for the benefit of being a Muslim under a Muslim ruler);

(3) the thesis about the “religion of social liberation” thesis (Islam, being an egalitarian religion, attracted low-caste converts fleeing the oppression of the Brahmanical society based on the principles of varnashrma);

(4) the migrant thesis.

He rejects the first two theses on the grounds that a large number of poor Muslims are not located in the centers of Muslim rule, where both power and patronage would be of great importance for them, but in the northeast and northwest, i.e. on the periphery. However, he also rejects the "social liberation" thesis, arguing that most of the converts were never actually caste Hindus. Previously, they were mainly engaged in hunting, fishing, etc., i.e. were a group of people who came to Islam directly from tribal culture. However, most of these tribes, such as the Rajbansi, Pod, Candal, Kuch and other local ethnic groups, were only slightly influenced by Brahmanical culture. Instead, Eaton argues that converts to Bengal came mainly from the eastern regions, while they were not settled farmers and, accordingly, were not “Hinduized.” Thus, he identified Islam in Bengal with the expansion of agriculture (Eaton 1997: 118). He also adds (rather sarcastically) that the "social liberation" thesis attributes "modern values ​​to past peoples", suggesting that they had a desire for equality:

"It is believed that before their contact with the Muslims the lower castes of India possessed (almost as if they were familiar with the works of Jean-Jacques Rousseau or Thomas Jefferson) some innate idea of ​​the fundamental equality of all mankind, which was denied to them by the oppressive Brahmanical tyranny" (there same: 117).

Eaton does not give a name to his own thesis, but since he implies that the mass of Indian Muslims belonging to the lower classes are of direct "tribal" origin, i.e. is the descendants of people from backgrounds beyond the reach of the Brahmanical caste system, we could call it the “from tribes to Islam” thesis.

However, if we look at the situation in Bengal, especially during the period of the Muslim conquests, this thesis does not seem to stand up to criticism. Despite the centuries-long rise of Brahmanism in India, he was in no hurry to conquer East India. In Bengal itself, the main centers of Buddhism were located in its southern and eastern parts, i.e. in those states whose seaports were connected by thriving trade with the Buddhist monarchies of Southeast Asia. It should also be noted that compared to West Bengal, this region was less affected by Brahmin migration. But Brahmanization cannot be reduced only to the issue of the emergence of agricultural settlements. Indeed, according to Xuanzang, eastern and northern Bengal also had a good climate. It appears that while Islam did assist in the expansion of agriculture, it did not initiate it, since most of the local population must have been engaged in agriculture before their conversion to the new religion.

In connection with all this, an interesting question again arises: who exactly were the Candalas? Bengal was the only country that had an untouchable caste called the Chandala during the British rule (in fact, they eventually organized a powerful social movement calling themselves the Namasudras). As Eaton points out, many of the indigenous people of Bengal probably spoke a "proto-Munda" language, i.e. used in communication one of the Austroasiatic languages, which, when spreading to the east (*), absorbed Indo-Aryan and Dravidian language forms. The word "chandal" was used, as we have already indicated, to designate this kind of people not only in the east, but also in Madhyadesha (the Gangetic plains) and central India. It is remarkably similar to the current name of the "scheduled tribe" Santhal, speaking the Mundari language. Therefore, the hypothesis according to which tribes speaking proto-Mundan languages ​​penetrated from Bengal into central India, as well as into some areas on the Gangetic plains, seems quite reasonable. As the hegemony of Brahmanism spread, the conquered and subjugated tribes began to be called “Chandalas” and were considered, despite their resistance, as untouchables, while those who lived in mountainous, forested and remote regions could remain independent for a long time. They may have had some kind of “collective consciousness,” nurtured by their mentors and ancient traditions, that spread from the “chandals” of central India to the east. In the east, many of these tribal groups must have supported Buddhism, which in their eyes appeared to be a highly developed egalitarian tradition. Taranatha describes the story of a chieftain from eastern Bengal whose son, studying in a Brahmin school, was beaten by Brahman boys who told him: “You were born in a low family.” When he asked why they thought so, he was told: “Being a Tantric Buddhist, your father gave the Shudra queen the highest status, and in religious ceremonies he does not distinguish between low and high castes and allows them to mix (Taranatha 1990: 291).

———————————————————————————————————

(*) So from the author, although according to the meaning of her further presentation it should be read “to the west”. Moreover, according to the generally accepted theory, the place of origin of the Munda people and culture is the Chhota Nagpur plateau (the main part of which is located in the “tribal” state of Jharkhand). Historical Bengal is located to the east of this plateau, and the historical Buddhist regions (Magadha) are to the north and west. – approx. shus

———————————————————————————————————

These "native" peoples, who were by no means mere "savages", did not need to read Rousseau or Jefferson to understand the value of equality - all this was given to them by the study of Buddhist traditions. Once Buddhism had finally lost its influence in India and the possibility of escaping social discrimination had disappeared, they understandably turned to a religion that, although in many respects significantly different from it, also had an egalitarian tradition (which, however, was radically changed by medieval hierarchicalism ). Those who converted to Islam began to be called simply Muslim farmers (or weavers, etc.). And although they were also considered from the point of view of the caste system, they were never untouchables. Those who for some reason were not converted to Islam, or were unable to otherwise identify themselves with the Muslim community, were categorized as Chandals, Kaivarta (fishermen caste), etc. Thus, despite the authority of Eaton's research, the thesis of “social liberation” turned out to be correct.

9. The nature of Indian feudalism

Finally, we return to one of the most important questions: whether the hegemony of Brahmanism was a step forward (or a step back) in terms of developing the productive forces and improving the lives of people. At the same time, there is no doubt that from the point of view of such human values ​​as equality, rationality and non-violence, Buddhism contributed to the development of higher forms of social relations. In Chapter 4 we argued that, from the first millennium B.C.E. and for many centuries to follow, India was a major force in world trade and domestic development. This was largely facilitated by a dynamic and open commercial society, which ensured relative progress in the development of productive forces.

But what was the impact of the hegemony of Brahmanism on the economy? Part of this issue was discussed in India in the context of the problem of "feudalism". While Kosambi's version of feudalism emphasizes the relationships of dependency that developed between the paramount lords and their subordinate rulers, in the publications of the later Marxist historian R.S. Sharma also points to relative economic backwardness: demonetization and some stagnation of production, isolationism and enslavement of most of the peasantry (Sharma 1997: 48-85). A vigorous debate among historians developed around this problem, and under these conditions Andre Wink (author of the three-volume book “Al-Hind: The Making of the Indo-Islamic World”) intervened in the discussion. approx. shus). Wink links the surge of Brahmanical orthodoxy beginning around the 7th century to the influence of the Muslim world, pointing to the dependence of the fortunes of India's new regional states on external alliances and emphasizing the role of Arab-Muslim control of world trade. Moreover, he does this in the context of refuting the thesis of “feudalization.” He argues that demonetization did not actually happen in India because in many cases Arabic coins simply replaced local ones. He emphasizes that the Arabs in the 9th and 10th centuries saw India as a land of great wealth and that they described the Rashtrakuta as the fourth richest in the entire world and as the "lord of lords" of India (Wink 1990: 219-31). In his opinion, this is quite enough to refute Sharma’s arguments and the thesis of feudalism. Beyond this, he argues that India experienced a "deepening" of regional economic systems, a rise in agricultural production, a continuous expansion of trade (even as coinage occurred overseas), and a "reurbanization" that was "more robust" than the world." a traveling merchant and a Buddhist monk" (ibid.: 230). According to his description, Buddhism supported a more scattered, loosely structured and economically less developed society, while the Brahmanism/Islam combination was identified with economic progress.

However, trade in the earlier period was hardly the activity of "itinerant" traders; in fact, it covered vast geographical areas and was well organized. And the “deepening” of new regional economic systems could be called (using different terminology) “agricultural involution”, as there was a weakening of commercial ties and a gradual stagnation in the field of entrepreneurship and innovation. Sharma is right to point out this aspect of feudalism, although he does not link it to the conflict between Brahmanism and Buddhism. A rich subcontinent with many states, as reported by the Arabs in the 9th and 10th centuries, emerged after a long period of economic development under the influence of Buddhism. Moreover, many of these states were soon to become victims of new energetic invaders, whose rules and customs differed significantly from those of the early “barbarians”, absorbed in the hierarchy of Brahmanism. Trade relations continued to exist, but Indian merchants no longer played a significant role in them, since now in foreign trade they were not its creators, but simple recipients of goods. The contrast with China's vigorous economic growth and political consolidation around the same time is striking, and it is from this period that China emerges as the leader ahead of India. Unlike Confucianism in China, Brahmanism defeated Buddhism completely and irrevocably, but this was done at the expense of a complete weakening of the economic and political potential of Indian society.

The contrast with China can be seen in another example. We can analyze the fate of Buddhism by comparing its relationship with Confucianism and Taoism in China on the one hand, and with Brahmanism in India on the other. Buddhism in China has had its ups and downs, including periods of severe repression and restoration. At the same time, both Confucianism, which was the ideology/religion of the elite, and Taoism, based on the masses and representing a mystical materialism similar to tantra, opposed Buddhism almost as thoroughly as Brahmanism. In China, according to Whalen Lai, the "Holocaust of 845", in which "the system of Buddhist institutions was destroyed as the state decimated the members of the sangha and confiscated its property", led to a significant decline in Buddhism throughout the country (Lai 1995: 339 ). In time, this approximately coincided with the period of Brahmanical repressions and the triumph of Brahmanism in India.

We know that the victorious neo-Confucianism adopted a number of specific Buddhist features (including helping the poor), and Taoism adapted local gods and various cults (Wright 1959: 93-97) just as Brahmanism borrowed the Buddhist principle of non-violence and integrated local folk deities and cults into a general Sanskrit-Vedantic structure. It should also be noted that some scholars from China, such as Wright, argued that Buddhism was a “politically incompetent religion” (ibid.: 106), while they were echoed by scholars from India such as Drekmeier, who wrote that in arriving at a solution problems associated with government and the disintegration of tribal communities, Buddhism at the “spiritual-psychological level” maintained a “remoteness from politics” in contrast to the “code of political administration” of Brahmanism, which, apparently, was originally present in the dharma of Brahminical Hinduism (Drekmeier 1962 : 294-300).

However, in all this we see extremely important differences. Buddhism really survived in China, in particular we know that the schools of Pure Land and Zen Buddhism (as the author says - approx. shus) subsequently developed and flourished. Buddhist sacred books survived, as did communities of people who considered themselves Buddhists. The statement about “remoteness from politics” cannot explain the dramatically different fate of Buddhism in these two countries, and certainly does not explain the disappearance of Buddhism in India.

As a result, it seems that the confrontation between Brahmanism and Buddhism was stronger than between Buddhism and Confucianism and Taoism. At the same time, the key issue was the social hierarchy, which for Brahmanism included the caste system and varnasrama-dharma, which Buddhism could never come to terms with. The family-oriented culture of Confucianism was also in conflict with the universalistic ethics of Buddhism, but the differences were not so significant, and the rationalism of Confucianism proved to be something of a bridge between the two teachings. Confucianism fostered an elite society, but included quite a lot of universalist values ​​that ensured social mobility for the poor and people from the “lower” strata of society, which was fundamentally unacceptable to Brahmanism.

It was the caste system that allowed Brahmanism to penetrate the lowest social strata of rural and urban communities, something that Confucianism in China did not fully possess. But despite this penetration, deep differences continued to exist, so that the culture and religious beliefs of the Dalit-Bahujan masses were sharply different from the culture of the more Brahminized rural and urban elites. But although these masses also had their own traditions and culture, albeit already interpreted by Brahmanism, they were not able to create and maintain their own socio-political structures. Almost none of them could become members of the intelligentsia, and those who became rulers or were part of influential political and economic local groups had to accept the intellectual and social hegemony of Brahmanism. The Brahmins themselves still had significant economic, political and cultural-religious power and represented one of the most powerful and wealthy social groups, united by a complex ideology and an extensive network of institutional structures.

Brahmanism, unlike Buddhism and Islam, was a closed structure. He viewed India as his “sacred” land, but was afraid of any expansion of it, considering everyone who lived outside India to be “unclean barbarians” (i.e. mleccha). It was rural and agrarian at its core, but did not provide any meaningful social status to those who worked the land. Its dominance in India signaled the advent of a new era of "feudalism", which was characterized by economic backwardness and the dominance of the caste system in Indian society. A large portion of the populace embraced Islam to identify themselves with the new militant and egalitarian religion, and those who were still the Brahminical flock could protest their low social status through the worship of bhakti. But on this path, as we will see later, there were also serious obstacles.

10. Bibliography for Ch. 5

Arthasastra, 1992, edited, rearranged, translated and introduced by L.N. Rangarajan, Kautilya: The Arthasastra, New Delhi: Penguin Books.

Basham, A.L., 1959, The Wonder That Was India: A Survey of the Culture of the Indian Sub-Continent before the Coming of the Muslims, New York: Grove Press.

Beal, Samuel, 1983, Si-Yu Ki, Buddhist Records of the Western World, Translated from the Chinese of Hiuen Tisang AD 629 by Samuel Beal (Originally published 1884, London: Trubner and Company), New Delhi: Oriental Books Reprint Corporation.

Drekmeier, Charles, 1962, Kingship and Community in Ancient India, Bombay: Oxford University Press.

Eaton, Richard, 2000, Essays on Islam and Indian History, Delhi: Oxford University Press.

1997, The Rise of Islam and the Bengal Frontier, 1204–1760, New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Hiltebeitel, Alf, 2001, Draupadi among Rajputs, Muslims and Dalits: Rethinking India’s Oral and Classical Ethics, Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Kalidas, S., 2001, ‘Criminal Neglect,’ India Today, August 20.

Keay, John, 2001, India: A History, HarperCollins India.

Kosambi, Damodar Dharmanand, 1986, ‘The Decline of Buddhism in India’ in Exasperating Essays: Exercises in the Dialectical Method, Pune, R.P. Nene.

1985, ‘The Origins of Feudalism in Kashmir,’ in A.J. Syed, ed., D.D. Kosambi on History and Society: Problems of Interpretation, University of Bombay: Department of History.

Kulke, Hermann, 1997, ‘The Early and Imperial Kingdom: A Processual Model of Integrative State Formation in Early Medieval India,’ in Hermann Kulke, editor, The State in India, 1000–1700, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, pp. 233–262.

Lai, Whalen, 1995, ‘The Three Jewels in China,’ in Takeuchi Yoshinori, editor, Buddhist Spirituality: Indian, Southeast Asian, Tibetan, Early Chinese, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, pp. 275–342.

Menon, Amarnath, 2001, ‘Easy Pickings,’ India Today, July 30.

Mirashi, V.V., 1981, The History and Inscriptions of the Satavahanas and the Western Ksatrapas, Bombay: Maharashtra State Board for Literature and Culture.

O'Flaherty, Wendy Doniger, 1983, ‘The Image of the Heretic in the Gupta Puranas,’ in Bardwell Smith, ed., Essays on Gupta Culture, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

Sharma, R.S., 1997, ‘How Feudal was Indian Feudalism?’ (Revised and Updated 1992), in Hermann Kulke, editor, The State in India,

1000–1700, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, pp. 48–85.

Sastri, K.A. Nilakanta, 1999, A History of South India: From Prehistoric Times to the Fall of Vijayanagar, New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Taranatha, 1990, Taranatha’s History of Buddhism in India, 1990, edited by Debiprasad Chattopadhyaya; translated from Tibetan by Lama Chimpa and Alaka Chattopadhyaya, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

Thapar, Romila, 1984, From Lineage to State: Social Formations in the Mid-First Millennium BC in the Ganga Valley, Bombay: Oxford University Press.

Wink, Andre, 1990, Al-Hind: The Making of the Indo-Islamic World, Volume I: Early Medieval India and the Expansion of Islam, Seventh to Eleventh Centuries, Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Wright, Arthur, 1965, Buddhism in Chinese History, New York: Atheneum