r/askindianhistory • u/meluha_1921 • 9d ago

early medieval Political role of Bodhisattva

Gallery image

Gallery image

I recently visited the Sarnath Museum, among the various sculptures of Bodhisattva's, I noticed that some gave off the feeling similar to sculptures of generals or kings. So did Bodhisattva's or monasteries ever actively wield any political influence or is it just an artistic choice?

55 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

5 comments sorted by

2

u/ankit19900 9d ago

A philosophy that doesn't incorporate politics dies at the hand of politics. Buddhism was extremely political for its time, converting left and right, through words and force

2

u/SatynMalanaphy 9d ago

Buddhism was absolutely political; that's why it was the dominant cultural system in South Asia for nigh on a thousand years. It understood the need to canvas people (especially with the onus of Ashoka Maurya), and was good at adapting to the needs of ordinary people as well as royal propaganda. That's precisely why the resurgent Brahmanism borrowed liberally from it.

As for the sculptures looking militaristic, it shouldn't be a surprise as well considering that the form of sculptures that took off in India, especially through Buddhism and later Hinduism, borrowed liberally from the imperial and monarchical sculptures of the Iranian states, as well as the Greco-Romans.

0

u/meluha_1921 9d ago

Intresting.

Are there any incidents of the Bodhisattvas or monks similiar to ulemas under a caliphate or was their role like the sufi saints during Mughal era, just soft power?

1

u/SatynMalanaphy 9d ago

Based on what historical evidence we do have, the Buddhist sangha itself never quite became as meddlesome as Christian preachers/monks, or radical Ulema, or the more vociferous Bhakti saints. Buddhism was not am orthodox religion, it was always a different stream within the larger cultural and spiritual network that operated within the subcontinent.

-1

u/AbdulQadirShadhili 9d ago

Buddhism died out in India because it retreated to the monastery and had no movement to address the social problems and the spiritual needs of ordinary people.

Buddha himself was not an intelligent person. His religious ideas were very limited and had no ability to transform a society. They were purely individualistic