If Ashoka had not converted to Buddhism

[civfanatic]

Rajendra Cholan I and some of his heirs conquered more territoris that Asoka

No.

WROMG. The combined armies of the 3 Tamil dynasties gathered somewhere in today's Andhra and spies told Asokan of it.

No they didn't.

No foreign army has EVER defeated the combined Tamil army of the 3 dynasties. NEVER EVER$.

The three Tamil dynasties spent much more time killing each other than fighting anyone else. There was never a time when they are unified. Never ever.

 

[Tolaha]

Rajendra Cholan I and some of his heirs conquered more territoris that Asoka






WROMG. The combined armies of the 3 Tamil dynasties gathered somewhere in today's Andhra and spies told Asokan of it. No foreign army has EVER defeated the combined Tamil army of the 3 dynasties. NEVER EVER$.

Power packed BS! Not a single line in your post is correct.

 

[Sabir]

I dont think fall of Mouryan empire had anything to do with becoming Buddist. Later many Buddist dynasties ruled India. People like Alauddin Khalji or Aurangjeb didnt become pacifist. Did that save their empire? No empire in India lasted more than few generation in true sense. Our forefathers were not much interested to be loyal to an unified political authority like we are today. It is work of Gandhiji (whom many of us like to term as the emperor of the pacifist) that make Indian mass aware of their potential in political arena; a rebirth of Indian people which still hold the Indian union together.

 

[bharata]

Maybe he would have trashed the greeks in middle east and the scythians of central asia.
:thumb:

 

[ITBP]

Ashoka converted to Buddhism because

1) Much of India was already under Maurya control so war was necessary.2) Maurya tax system was very harsh so he built many things to gain people's support, 3) He wanted to use Buddhism as unifying power.

 

[abhi_the _gr8_maratha]

as hindu philosophy says- if you remorse and try to overcome the mistake, then you are worth a great man.

 

[ITBP]

Ashoka converted to Buddhism because

1) Much of India was already under Maurya control so war was necessary

Oh correction, war was unnecessary, Typo mistake.

Ashoka was not peaceful at all as we think.

 

[HeinzGud]

Then Sri Lanka would have been a Hindu state. That's for sure.

 

[HeinzGud]

Re: Does anybody like emperor Ashoka ??

very truely someone ( a colonel rane writing in a marathi book on india's wars ) has said---'' why is it that all the mahatmas of the world had to be born into this country only . that is truely our nation's misfortune !! "

Why misfortune? It shows how great India and it's people are if not were.

 

[HeinzGud]

Buddhism is not a pacifist religion. It has a political component favorable for imperialism. The highly organized 'peaceful' Buddhist monks in Sri Lanka and Myanmar are testament to this fact.

IMO Downfall of Mauryan empire is simply a case of Ashoka's successors being incompetent

Actually Buddhism is hard to follow religion and Buddhism is not good in governing countries. That's why even though SL adopted Buddhism as the national religion it wasn't used as a governing tool.

 

[tarunraju]

Except that Buddhism wasn't something you "convert" to, back then. It was just a belief system like Greenpeace, Save the Tiger, and PETA are, today. Living the Buddhist way didn't in any way isolate you from the rest of the society. It's only after its spread to far eastern Asia, that Buddhism started cementing itself as a religion. Buddhist monks didn't pull any strings with Indian monarchs the way Brahmins did.

 

[Tshering22]

You cannot 'convert' to Buddhism. That is an Abrahamic nonsense. Even a practising Hindu can choose Buddhist ideas. Most of them have emerged from the abstract philosophies of mainstream Hindu Dharma itself.

Ashoka simply chose a particular stream.

Most of the modern 'distinctions' make us sound like Abrahamic religions.

We are not.

 

[anupamsurey]

I am writing it late as i saw the thread lately, i would like to make it clear that Ashoka was never great or declared great by Indian tradition, he was even forgotten for all purposes, He was excavated by Britishers, and made famous by nehru and his marxist pals as a socialit model for new India.
I the most common lie peddaled by these Marxist and Bollywood is that ashoka became buddhist after the shock of kalinga slaughter, but the truth is that he was buddhist before he invaded kalinga

 

[Bharatiya]

To add my 50 cents, regardless of his intentions, Ashoka's decisions affect us terribly to this day.

Look no further than our neighbor, China to see how an Emperor should've ruled his Empire.

Qin Shi Huang, the first emperor to unify China took a few forceful decisions that affect the Chinese to this day, positively.

The decisions of Ashoka—Pacifism, non-expansion, non-unifying standards, etc cost India heavily.

1. Pacifism made the army weak when the economy was at its peak.

China at the same time did the opposite. They needed an army because they faced barbarians. It is a proper justification.

But India too needed an army. The enemies of India historically came from northwest. So, when you have arguably the strongest empire till then, you should've gone ahead and exterminated the barbarian tribes.

Expand your outreach.

2. Religion vs State.

This is an Indian vs Chinese thing.

Rulers shouldn't rule states based on Religion. The emphasis of states should be on stability, security and growth.

For one, I believe a leader could follow religion personally but as a ruler, he must never let it influence him.
Take the good decisions for the state, even if they go against the religious principles.

3. Ashoka failed to instill a sense of oneness in the Mauryan Empire.

India is a large nation, very tough to govern. But so is China, even though China back then wasn't as large as India.

But the interesting fact about China is that it isn't the Emperor that ran the empire but the officials.

A strong official system was what made a unified China durable. These officials used the same written script, followed a same system and were rotated regularly so that they don't amass too much power.

4. Caste System.

Varna System was an efficient model for functioning of society while Caste System was a terrible curse—personally, I think this is the biggest reason India suffered so much throughout history.

Ashoka had a chance to reform things. Either brutally once and for all or through successive steps.

If he had reformed the caste system and by reform, I mean either abolishing it completely or making it fluid—anyone can become a kshatriya after training and joining army, anyone can become a brahman learning vedas and passing a central entrance test, etc et.

My first post, this isn't very coherent, apologizes.

 

[captain talion]

To add my 50 cents, regardless of his intentions, Ashoka's decisions affect us terribly to this day.

Look no further than our neighbor, China to see how an Emperor should've ruled his Empire.

Qin Shi Huang, the first emperor to unify China took a few forceful decisions that affect the Chinese to this day, positively.

The decisions of Ashoka—Pacifism, non-expansion, non-unifying standards, etc cost India heavily.

1. Pacifism made the army weak when the economy was at its peak.

China at the same time did the opposite. They needed an army because they faced barbarians. It is a proper justification.

But India too needed an army. The enemies of India historically came from northwest. So, when you have arguably the strongest empire till then, you should've gone ahead and exterminated the barbarian tribes.

Expand your outreach.

2. Religion vs State.

This is an Indian vs Chinese thing.

Rulers shouldn't rule states based on Religion. The emphasis of states should be on stability, security and growth.

For one, I believe a leader could follow religion personally but as a ruler, he must never let it influence him.
Take the good decisions for the state, even if they go against the religious principles.

3. Ashoka failed to instill a sense of oneness in the Mauryan Empire.

India is a large nation, very tough to govern. But so is China, even though China back then wasn't as large as India.

But the interesting fact about China is that it isn't the Emperor that ran the empire but the officials.

A strong official system was what made a unified China durable. These officials used the same written script, followed a same system and were rotated regularly so that they don't amass too much power.

4. Caste System.

Varna System was an efficient model for functioning of society while Caste System was a terrible curse—personally, I think this is the biggest reason India suffered so much throughout history.

Ashoka had a chance to reform things. Either brutally once and for all or through successive steps.

If he had reformed the caste system and by reform, I mean either abolishing it completely or making it fluid—anyone can become a kshatriya after training and joining army, anyone can become a brahman learning vedas and passing a central entrance test, etc et.

My first post, this isn't very coherent, apologizes.

Nicely done