DECLINE OF BUDDHISM IN INDIA Scholars throughout the world have had various thoughts on what led to the decline

of Buddhism in India; however it is also pertinent to know how Buddhism increased and what factors led to its disappearance from India. Renowned scholar L. M. Joshi avers that the present Bhakti movement, of which the present day Brahmanic scholars are so proud of, and they feel this is the legacy of

Aryan/Brahmanic/Vedic tradition and not of Buddhist origin, and go on congratulating each other for its survival during the Muslim onslaught, was in fact, the gift of the Siddhas, labeled by Brahmins as 'corrupt'. While referring to the activities of the saint poets of Karnataka and Maharashtra like Basaveswara and Namdeva, and of North India like Raidas, Kabir and Nanak etc. and of Sufi Muslim saints, he says: "The Buddhist message of social equality and communal harmony had left a deep impression on the mind of Indian people which continued after the transformation of the classical Buddhist movement. ... The task of fighting the evils of casteism and untouchability was

continued by the Buddhist Siddhas -the adepts of Tantrika culture, during the early medieval centuries. A large number of these Siddhas came from lower caste families, but their greatness was assured by their success (siddhi) in esoteric culture (sadhana). This mission of social reform was then resumed by the saint poets of the bhakti movement throughout the Middle Ages. Though these saint poets (sants) were, generally speaking within the fold of the Brahmanical "Hindu" religious tradition, yet they revolted freely against many fundamental dogmas and authentic customs of traditional Brahmanism. Their social and moral teachings were more in keeping with Buddhism than with Brahmanism. All of them disregarded the rules of the varna-ashram-dharma scheme and attacked social distinctions based on birth and profession. Many of them were born in shudra families. They became exalted through their pure character, sincere devotion and

magnanimity,

(Joshi L. M., 1973,)

However, Rahul Sankrutayan blames Vajrayanis for decline of Buddhism, saying that decline of Buddhism started with the rise of Vajrayana and was completed after Turkish invasion.

(Sankrutayan Rahula, 1973).

He opines that the use of women and

wine by the Vajrayani bhikshus also could have been a contributory factor in fall of Buddhism. He says that it is a wrong propaganda that Shankaracharya, in 8 th century, drove away Buddhism from India. On the contrary, Buddhism was flourishing during this time. This was the time of glory of Nalanda University and of foundation of Vikramshila University. This was the time when the most powerful Buddhist Dynasty of Palas was established. This was the time that the great Buddhist philosophers like Shantirakshita and Dharmottara emerged from the University of Nalanda. Even four centuries after Shankaracharya, till the end of twelfth century Buddhism was not vanished from North India. The Gaharwad dynasty not only supported Brahmanism, they also supported Buddhism. Gahadwar queen Kumaradevi built the "Dharmachakra maha vihara" at Sarnath. Govindachandra gave gifts of several villages to the Jetvana Mahavihara.

Jaganmitrananda (Mitrayogi), the preceptor (dikshaguru) of last Gahardwad king Jaychanda, was a Buddhist saint. His letter to his disciple king Jaychanda is still available in Tibetan language

as "Chandraraja-Lekh". This king is being defamed in proBrahmanic literature as a traitor to have invited Md. Ghori. The Buddhist scholar Bhikshu Dharmarakshit feels that the real reason for his being termed as such was because of his Buddhist leanings.
(ibid, p. 63 ff.)

Pala kings in East remained Buddhist till end of their dynasty. In south, the Shilahar Dynasty of Konkan, was purely Buddhist. Even in Kerala, the mother land of Shankaracharya, Buddhist influence persisted. They did not restrict the Buddhist learning, but on the contrary, it was they who preserved the "Manjushri mula kalpa" and handed over to us. The bhikshus could be easily spotted because of their Yellow robes, which had become a kind of death warrant for them. It was due to massacre of bhikhus, the leaders of Buddhist laity, and the destruction of their Viharas, by the Muslims, the fall of Buddhism occurred. The Chief of Indian Buddha Sangha, a Kashmiri pundit, Shakyasribhadra, had to migrate to Bengal after the devastation of Vikramshila University. Later when Muslims reached Bengal, he left for Tibet with his disciples. He

was respectfully invited by King Kirtidwaja. There, he stayed for many years and ultimately came to his mother land, Kashmir, and died there in 1226 A.D. Similarly many Bhikshus had to run away from India. As Dr. Ambedkar has explained, the causes of fall and decline are different. Muslim invasion was the cause of fall of Buddhism, not only in India, but also all over the world. Before Islam, countries like Bactria, Parthia, Afghanistan, Gandhar and Chinese Turkasthan, as well as whole of Asia were Buddhists. It had also spread to Europe and the Celts in Britain were Buddhists,
&Speeches,

according
vol.3,

to

Donald

A.

Mackenzie.

(Writings

p.230).

The reasons why Buddhism was

destroyed but Brahmanism survived the massacre by Muslims must be understood. There are three reasons enumerated by Ambedkar - (1) support of State to Brahmanism, (2) Buddhist Bhikkus, once perished had be created from scratch by rigorous training, while Brahmin priests are ready-made by birth and (3) that Buddhist lay worshipers were driven to Islam by Brahmanic persecution.
(ibid)

Where some scholars feel that decline of Buddhism resulted just from old age or sheer exhaustion
(Edward Conze, 1960:86),

others felt that the rise and fall of Buddhism began almost simultaneously
(Umesh Mishra: 111-12)

whereas some put it not However it is generally

earlier than the 7th cent. AD

(P.C. Bagchi).

agreed that whatever may have been the time of the beginning of decline, it collapsed rather quickly towards the end of 12 th cent. Many scholars of Buddhism, Hinduism, Indian history, and of religion more generally have been devoted to unraveling this puzzle. There is no absolute consensus on this matter, and a few scholars have even contended that Buddhism never disappeared as such from India. On this view, Buddhism simply changed form, or was absorbed into Hindu practices. Such an argument is, in fact, a variation of the view, which perhaps has more adherents than any other, that Buddhism disappeared, not on account of persecution by Hindus, but because of the ascendancy of reformed Hinduism. However, the view that

Buddhists were persecuted by Brahmins, who were keen to assert their caste supremacy, still has some adherents, and in

recent years has been championed not only by some Dalit writers and their sympathizers but by at least a handful of scholars of pre-modern Indian history .(D.
C. Ahir, 2005).

What is

not disputed is the gradual decline of Buddhism in India, as the testimony of the Chinese traveler, Hsuan Tsang, amply demonstrates. Though Buddhism had been the dominant

religion in much of the Gangetic plains in the early part of the Christian era, Hsuan Tsang, traveling in India in the early years of the 7th century, witnessed something quite different. In

Prayag, or Allahabad as it is known to many, Hsuan Tsang encountered mainly heretics, or non-Buddhists, but that is not surprising given the importance of Prayag as a pilgrimage site for Brahmins. But, even in Sravasti, the capital city of the

Lichhavis, a north Indian clan that came to power around 200 AD, established their capital in Pasupathinath, and in a long and glorious period of reign extending through the early part of the ninth century endowed a large number of both Hindu and Buddhist monuments and monasteries, Hsuan Tsang witnessed a much greater number of Hindus (ie, non-Buddhists, such as Jains and Saivites) than Buddhists. Kusinagar, the small village

some 52 kilometres from Gorakhpur where the Buddha had gone into Mahaparinirvana, was in a rather dilapidated state and Hsuan Tsang found few Buddhists. In Varanasi, to be sure, Hsuan Tsang found some 3000 Bhikkus or Buddhist monks, but they were out-shadowed by more than 10,000 non-Buddhists. There is scarcely any question that Hsuan Tsang arrived in India at a time when Buddhism was entering into a state of precipitous decline, and by the 13 th century Buddhism, as a formal religion, had altogether disappeared from India .(Samuel
Beal, Si-Yu Ki,1884).

Hence to have a right approach to the reasons for decline of Buddhism in India, we need to look into the internal history of the Sangha, the prevalent secular and political situation and relation with Brahmanism. Moral and ethical degeneracy of Buddhist monks is one of the reasons for decline in Buddhism in India. Even some earlier Buddhist texts point out to this attitude of the monks. Some renowned monasteries issued their own seals and coins. They even owned villages, land and cattle. Chinese travelers have noted the feudal character of monastic institutions which had

amassed property and wealth.

(Legge, 43).

There are references

of Buddhist monks visiting sex-workers, consuming alcoholic drinks, indulging in theft, robbery and also working as matchmakers.
(L.M.Joshi).

Some scholars hold the Tantra practices of the Mahayana tradition responsible for decline. The Vajrayana, especially, is blamed for abetting moral anarchy. It is also noted that many monks often used to visit their teachers with their female partners. All the 84 siddhas of Tantrika Buddhism were either married or had yoginis as their partners. Scholars like L.M.Joshi and E.Lamotte consider Mahayana responsible for qualitative decay. Schism was another reason for the disputes within the Sangha and it pinnacled to an extent that by the end of 7 th cent., Buddhism had become a house divided. The Buddha had visualized schism as one of the 5 deadly sins. Various sects of Buddhists fought amongst themselves. As Charles Eliot says, it was to the corruptions of the Mahayana rather than that of Hinayana that the decay of Buddhism in India was due
1954) (C. Eliot;

From the social angle, the adaptability of Buddhism led to its success and spread in foreign lands; however the same principle could not be a success here. The Mahayana laid emphasis on image worship, prayers, pompous ceremonies and rituals so much so that it created an approach to Hinduism. The laymen found no difference between Buddha and Vishnu, Siva and Avalokiteshwara or Tara and Parvati. acceptance of Buddha as an incarnation
(L.M.Joshi).

The by

of

Vishnu

Brahmanism dealt a blow to Buddhism. As M.Monier Williams says, Vaisanavas and Saivas crept up softly to their rival and drew the vitality out of its body by close and friendly embraces
(M.Monier Williams).

Because of Buddhisms adaptability, the laity

did not give up their earlier practices and ceremonies. So though they appreciated the Buddha teachings, due to no rules for them or any religious identification, social codes or modes of worship, these laymen continued to remain in their earlier Brahmanic fold. Thus Buddhism failed to create a distinctive group which can be socially identified as a Buddhist. Right from its inception, Buddhism was popular among royalty, businessmen and bureaucrats, householders, etc. As the

Maurayan Empire faded, the huge contribution that had been made to the spread of Buddhism started fading. Lack of support from the subsequent Brahmanical kings and royals led to its decline. Under the Kushanas and the Guptas, both Buddhism and Brahmanism received royal patronage; however as

Vaishnavism and Shaivism spread, the kingdoms supporting it became powerful and Buddhism started loosing the royal patronage. The Pala dynasty was supportive of Buddhism; however when the Senas came into power, Saivism

promulgated and Buddhism was pushed out. Though Buddhism had already entered the decline phase during Hsuan Tsangs visit in the reign of Harsha of Kanauj in 7 th cent, the arrival of Muslim invaders dealt a severe blow to Buddhism. In the 12 th century, Muhammad Bin Bakhtiar Khilji destroyed many viharas and famed universities like Nalanda and Vikramshila and thousands of Buddhists monks were massacred. Many of the monks fled to Bengal, Bangladesh, Burma, northern Thailand and Nepal. Buddhism existed in the monasteries and learning institutes, so when the monasteries disappeared, Buddhism disappeared.

Nalanda was sacked by the Turks in 1197 A.D, Vikramsila too met the same fate. Bodhgaya was also ransacked. Nalanda was again attacked in 1235. Monks were exterminated in cruel manner. The books were burned. When Nalanda was ransacked again in 1325, all the students had to flee. The Buddhist institutions were pillaged and torched by the invaders resulting in the complete disappearance of Buddhism in its

ecclesiastically established forms. Conclusion: The decline of Buddhism resulted from majorly 2 reasons. One was internal - the lethargy and degeneration of the monks and second was external -the political-social scenario Buddhism. The lethargy of the monks ensured that Buddhism was easy go way of life and digressed the basic purpose of Buddhism to spread/preach the truth, practice it and lead the fellowmen to enlightenment. This also caused a terrible backlash at the image of monks and since they represented the Buddha's philosophy, their attitude damaged Buddhism. The laymen that systematically planned the uprooting of

though followers of Buddhism never had any formal rules. They appreciated Buddhas words; however in the absence of any strict codes, were free to follow any faith. The second reason was quite influential in declining growth of Buddhism in India. The rulers who had more Brahmanic attitude and bend, non-cooperated and thus Buddhism lost its vital support. Paganism entered by way of Mahayanist and the everso-adaptable Buddhism was corrupted. Its philosophy

amalgamated with Hinduism and there was less difference between the two. Buddhism lost its essentials. The Muslim invaders plundered Buddhist institution and whatever remained after various onslaughts was finally razed to ground by the Muslims. Buddhist monks had no other way but to run amok to save their lives.

Atul Bhosekar M.A 1st Year

References:
Joshi L. M., "Aspects of Buddhism in Indian History", 1973, Wheel publication No. 195/196, Buddhist Publication Society, Kandy Sankrutayan Rahula, "Baudha sanskruti - Bharat", marathi tr. by Shramaner Vimalakirti, publ. Bhikshu Nivas, Dikshabhumi Nagpur, 1973 Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings &Speeches, vol.3, p.230 Edward Conze; A Short History of Buddhism;1960, Oxford Umesh Mishra: Journal of G.N.Jha Research Institute, Vol. IX P.C. Bagchi, Decline of Buddhism and its Causes: 412 D. C. Ahir, Buddhism Declined in India: How and Why?;Delhi: B. R. Publishing, 2005 Samuel Beal, Si-Yu Ki: Buddhist Records of the Western World : Trubner & Co., 1884; reprint ed., Delhi: Oriental Books Reprint Corporation Legge, The travels of Fa-Hein, 43 Joshi.L.M: Studies in the Buddhist culture of India C. Eliot; Hinduism and Buddhism, vol.2; 1954 M.Monier Williams: Buddhism: in its connection with Brahmanism and Hinduism and its contrast with Christianity, N.Delhi