The Mauryan Polity c11.s2.t8: Buddhist India, a misnomer
The Mauryan Polity c11.s2.t8
- Language
- English
Buddhist India, a misnomer
c11.s2.t8.1
If the inference of Colebrooke is right, then the epoch of earlier Hinduism, viz., the religion and institutions of the orthodox Hindus (the followers of the Veda), continued to flourish with no diminished glory, at least from the time of Alexander to A.D. 300. In this intervening period it was the Mauryan dynasty that held a vast empire in pre-eminent scale. It would not be therefore proper to entitle this epoch of the History of India as *Buddhist India* as Rhys Davids has done.¹ This was due to the fact that the word *dharma* in the Edicts was sought to connote Buddhist *dharma*, and Aśoka was hence taken to be a Buddhist, and the epoch in which Aśoka flourished was again taken to be the period of Buddhist ascendency, all contributing to a theory of Buddhist India. But the fact is that the *dharma* of the Edicts despite all straining on our part cannot be said to differ from the established ethical code of the orthodox Hinduism. The evidence of Greek writers and the evidence of Sanskrit literature show a continued period of ascendency of the followers of the Vedic school only. Granting for the sake of argument that a single monarch of the dynasty is a Buddhist in his faith, is it reasonable on that account to style the whole dynasty as Buddhist?
c11.s2.t8.2
¹ *The Story of the Nations Series.*