DBWI - Siddartha Gautama Becomes a Sage instead of Emperor ?

[Brahman]

Samrat Siddhartha Gautama is one of the most influential figures in Human history, Born as a Prince in Shakya Republic, He was prophesied to be either the Ruler of all India or one of histories greatest philosopher, Fearing this his father kept him locked up in his kingdom for most of his life, till the age of 29, when he finally went out to see how things are really, but was horrified to see suffering of people, and things like diseases, old age, natural death, aestheticism as well as discrimination based on caste, religion, gender or language and conflicts between local rulers, All this astonished him as he was always presented with a rose tinted view of the world.

After witnessing all this suffering and misery, he felt that the only way it all can be changed could be changed was through A Strong State the uses strict Legalistic and State Policies , A meritocratic and highly centralized form of governance to achieve this, A common Linguistic and Cultural Identity through assimilation, A meritocratic form of government that does not see caste as a way of governance and integration and common Economic policy along with complete standardization of all form of measurements such as Time, Distance, Calculation, Language, Weapons etc to create unity.

As Such Siddhartha, with this new form knowledge and ambition set out to conquer All of India to impose his will across India. leading to what will be called the Wars for Indian Unification, which after nearly 30 years, succeeded in creating a Common Indian Political, Economical, Social, Cultural and Linguistic unity and identity, which will last till modern day, Stretching from Gandhara in North to Lanka in South and Paratarajas in the West to Manipur in the East, It was all unified by this One Man under his one policy of unification, and the Juggernaut of the Country throughout history might not have existed

So, how different would history be if Siddartha Gautama does not become a Emperor, and Instead becomes of of the many thousand Sages across India, Does he actually find something revolutionary in teaching ?

 

[AltoRegnant]

It would change all of human history. And I mean all of it. The Indian empires and dynasties are why areas like the Tibetan plateau or the regions around the three Great Rivers of Asia never congealed. Whenever they tried, India got angry and helped the defenders ward off the expansionist. So we could see a role reversal.

This stability was of course a double edge sword that limited how much of a need for constant improvement was though, hence why Persia invented gunpowder and not india, eventually enabling a lot of European empires to dominate Asia

 

[Brahman]

It would change all of human history. And I mean all of it. The Indian empires and dynasties are why areas like the Tibetan plateau or the regions around the three Great Rivers of Asia never congealed. Whenever they tried, India got angry and helped the defenders ward off the expansionist. So we could see a role reversal.

This stability was of course a double edge sword that limited how much of a need for constant improvement was though, hence why Persia invented gunpowder and not india, eventually enabling a lot of European empires to dominate Asia

Yes, That is true, The Dynasty of Siddhartha Gautama has ruled India in atleast someway since the Inception of India, leading to much higher levels of stabilty than anywhere else, Persians unfortunately got the short end of the stick

Persians were first beaten and driven out of north west India by the Siddhartha himself, and the later Greek conquest also ended in the same border, Persia later became a punching bag of Romans and Indians who used to team up to bully Iranian empires
Persia might have had a head start in gunpowder, but Indians still gave them hell

 

[GeographyDude]

I think Gautama probably would have come up with a pro-striving, anti-go-with-the-flow philosophy. I mean, do you think?

 

[Brahman]

I think Gautama probably would have come up with a pro-striving, anti-go-with-the-flow philosophy. I mean, do you think?

Yes, perhaps something that emphasis on change through violent means to achieve its goals, seems to be much more possible

 

[AltoRegnant]

Yes, perhaps something that emphasis on change through violent means to achieve its goals, seems to be much more possible

Unlikely to be all that violent. Even as a conqueror, he maintained incredibly harsh punishments for those who were cruel to civilians or dishonored their enemies, and was pretty damn tolerant. He created one of the first codes of human rights for a reason, and made sure the religious figures knew to depose any noble- emperor included- who disobeyed them through any means necessary. A check that lasted four hundred years before Chandra III

 

[Brahman]

Unlikely to be all that violent. Even as a conqueror, he maintained incredibly harsh punishments for those who were cruel to civilians or dishonored their enemies, and was pretty damn tolerant. He created one of the first codes of human rights for a reason, and made sure the religious figures knew to depose any noble- emperor included- who disobeyed them through any means necessary. A check that lasted four hundred years before Chandra III

Yes, however, remember a few things, he was incredibly violent when it came for the unification of India in many aspects, such as -

1. He forced everyone to use the Sanskrit in Brahmi Script, and as such he had Books in all other languages translated and then burnt, this resulted in burning of entire libraries and thousands of books, many were not translated, along with many countless poets and linguists of other languages were all killed in order to preserve the Supremacy of Sanskrit
2. He had almost all nobles and chiefs killed as he felt they decentralizing the country and had placed an meritocratic system open to all, not just nobles
3. He is the first one to reduce any form of institutionalized Slavery by just recruiting these slaves into the Army and having them released after a period of Time
4. He also had no problem in committing what would be called genocide to preserve the national unity
5. His policies of Aggressive Expansion bought him to war with almost every Indian Kingdom, which he was able to defeat, often destroying everything in order to build a new system and history for the people
6. His Human rights were instituted a Decade after he Controlled India, and even then it is a very clear form of Human rights, where one who worshipped Sanatana Dharma and Spoke Sanskrit as his first language would be the more favoured one than the one who didnt
7. He also created he Cult around him and his bloodline in order to preserve his family as he felt as long as his family was not removed from power, there will be relative stability, this proved to be somewhat true, as despite numerous dynasties replacing and ruling India, they all felt the need to intertwine themselves with the the Blood of Siddhartha's Dynasty as such married the closest living relative into the current ruling family
8. Siddhartha also had done away with regional dynasties and called himself the Bharatvamsam or the Lineage of Bharata and Changed his family name from Shakya to Bharata to signify he was the ruler of all India, not just a small group at the fringes, essentially tying himself into the identity of the Empire

Siddhartha was definitely respectful, as he had a keen eye for talent and allowed anyone who wanted to assimilate the opportunity to do so, but he was not a benevolent emperor as some potray him

 

[HIM Dogson]

It's really hard to say; this would change so much. The Gautama Dynasty have had such a massive influence on history, and they seem to be about the one constant in Bharat's history.

I actually went to college with a Gautama princess- I think the niece of the current Samrajni. You wouldn't have known she's from a dynasty that makes the Barca Dynasty look like commoners in terms of longevity. She ended up leaving to join the Bharat police action against anti-monarchist rebels in Nihon- now there's a region of the world that's often disunited and changing dynastic hands!

 

[Brahman]

It's really hard to say; this would change so much. The Gautama Dynasty have had such a massive influence on history, and they seem to be about the one constant in Bharat's history.

I actually went to college with a Gautama princess- I think the niece of the current Samrajni. You wouldn't have known she's from a dynasty that makes the Barca Dynasty look like commoners in terms of longevity. She ended up leaving to join the Bharat police action against anti-monarchist rebels in Nihon- now there's a region of the world that's often disunited and changing dynastic hands!

Yes, East Asia seems to be severely divided on the basis of different smaller independent kingdom, with occasional unity here and there and are highly diverse, whereas India has been consistently united for most of its history, Leading to it being the number one in history, I wonder whether east Asia could have its own Siddhartha ?

 

[Brahman]

I also wonder how without a United India, A Iran would have fought off the Islamic Caliphate, whuch was gaining a lot of ground before India Came to Iran's aid and restricted Islam to Arabian peninsula

 

[PulkitNahata]

The fact is that while Siddharta did unify the Bharat Kshetra, it was his son Rahula who really stabilized the empire. With the help of Ajatshatru, friend of Siddhartha and Rahula's father in law he made the Arthashastra (Code of laws) which is attributed to Siddhartha. His rule was the start of the golden period of the empire. The sole reason his rule was accepted by all was that he claimed his decent from emperor Bharat of the Suryavanshi (solar dynasty) while his wife claimed her decent from emperor Bharat of the Chandravasnhi (lunar dyasty) thus uniting the two grand dynasties.

 

[Brahman]

The fact is that while Siddharta did unify the Bharat Kshetra, it was his son Rahula who really stabilized the empire. With the help of Ajatshatru, friend of Siddhartha and Rahula's father in law he made the Arthashastra (Code of laws) which is attributed to Siddhartha. His rule was the start of the golden period of the empire. The sole reason his rule was accepted by all was that he claimed his decent from emperor Bharat of the Suryavanshi (solar dynasty) while his wife claimed her decent from emperor Bharat of the Chandravasnhi (lunar dyasty) thus uniting the two grand dynasties.

Yes, Siddhartha is the one who controlled and conquered all of India, but his son was the one who picked up the pieces to unify India, these were some features of his rule -

1. Anyone can right a test called Rashtrapariksha, which was on Arthshastra and pass could have guaranteed position in governance, leading to a highly meritocratic system
2. He funded schools called Gurukul, which funded a standardized sanskrit education for all at a very minimal level, this was used to unite to linguistic diversity
3. He had divided the nation into 100 new provinces, each of these contained internal subdivisions of 100 districts, all of these were headed by officials appointed through the aforementioned test rather than local landlords
4. Often times, people from different provinces were posted as officials, this was to integrate the social and vast cultural differences
5. He destroyed the local self sustaining economies of these provinces and created a pan indian economy such that one province cannot even survive without the help and free trade from others
6. He deforested vast tracts in forests in East and Central India to create new mixed population centers that were more Pan Indian than regional
7. His river irrigation system to connect Indus to Ganga and to direct excess water into arid deserts of Thar led to the desert becoming somewhat fertile and new population center emerging
8. His effort to create a Consripted military force led to massive armies that were useful for internal and external safety

He is the one who gave India its internal unity, without him, any national integration would be nearly impossible, he after built many new cities that stand to this day

 

[Dolan]

Yes, East Asia seems to be severely divided on the basis of different smaller independent kingdom, with occasional unity here and there and are highly diverse, whereas India has been consistently united for most of its history, Leading to it being the number one in history, I wonder whether east Asia could have its own Siddhartha ?

Why not have the role reversal with The Great Taoist Sage Ying Zheng being the one who united "All Under Heaven"?

I meant, he has the almost identical background with Siddhartha, being son of a King. Yet he left the palace to pursue the Truth of The Great Path of Peace.

Imagine if the enlightened sage ended up being some sort of Conquering Emperor while the original one being a sage.

 

[Brahman]

Why not have the role reversal with The Great Taoist Sage Ying Zheng being the one who united "All Under Heaven"?

I meant, he has the almost identical background with Siddhartha, being son of a King. Yet he left the palace to pursue the Truth of The Great Path of Peace.

Imagine if the enlightened sage ended up being some sort of Conquering Emperor while the original one being a sage.

Yes, I heard there was a prophecy regarding him too, on whether would he become a Sage or Emperor, he obviously choose the former and is perhaps one of the most if not the the most important Philosophers and Spiritual leaders in human history

It seems Asia was spared of having two great conquerers in its most populated areas

 

[Brahman]

Who has voted against Siddhartha's wars, can anyone tell me the reasons why you think Siddhartha's war of Indian unification were unnecessary?

 

[GeographyDude]

Yes, perhaps something that emphasis on change through violent means to achieve its goals, seems to be much more possible

I suspect he’d say, don’t be overly afraid of violence. Might say try diplomacy (insincerely!) first, and perhaps add one to two other things to try.

Might even trot out the old, fighting as a last resort, not a first resort. Even though we know it’s closer to the opposite!

 

[Brahman]

I suspect he’d say, don’t be overly afraid of violence. Might say try diplomacy (insincerely!) first, and perhaps add one to two other things to try.

Might even trot out the old, fighting as a last resort, not a first resort. Even though we know it’s closer to the opposite!

That seems way too unlikely to me, an antithesis of what Siddhartha stands for, I expect that out of Ying Zheng, not Siddhartha Gautama