European Buddhism in a world without Christianity or Islam?

I'd also mention that I've been slowly working on a long-term project which is basically this scenario. It involves some of the followers of Epicurus interacting with Ashoka's Buddhist missionaries to create a new form of Buddhism. This has some similarities with how Mahayana Buddhism emerged in OTL (although appearing earlier), and also has some twists due to the interaction with Epicurean ideas. This starts to spread throughout the Greco-Roman world beginning in the early second century BCE. This eventually becomes the official religion of the *Roman Empire, at least for a few emperors (not necessarily for most of that history). This has the side-effect of butterflying away Christianity and then Islam, although Judaism survives and is if anything more diverse than in OTL, as some of the different beliefs in Judaism around the first centuries BCE and CE survive and spread.

This isn't being written quickly, mostly because I'm trying to tell the bulk of the tale through the various philosophical and religious writings which emerge in this timeline. That is interesting but slow to write, so this scenario is still a while away from finishing.

That sounds very interesting. I should like to read it when it's ready.

If definitely be interested in that as well.

******

Would Buddhist monks and nuns be able to keep literacy to the same rate as Catholic monks did in OTL?
 
If definitely be interested in that as well.

******

Would Buddhist monks and nuns be able to keep literacy to the same rate as Catholic monks did in OTL?
Potentially even higher than in OTL.

In some Buddhist societies in OTL (notably Burma), the pre-colonial male literacy rate was quite high due to the practice of most men having monastic education. If memory serves, in Burma's case the male literacy rate before colonialism was around 60%. While the particular conditions of Burma won't be matched everywhere, if there's a similar tradition of most men spending at least some part of their lives in a monastery, male literacy rates could be significantly high.

Female literacy rates would almost certainly be lower, though it would depend on how strong the early Buddhist social institution of nuns continues ITTL. (Early Buddhism established institutions for nuns, though in some Buddhist traditions they became less prevalent over time).
 
Potentially even higher than in OTL.

In some Buddhist societies in OTL (notably Burma), the pre-colonial male literacy rate was quite high due to the practice of most men having monastic education. If memory serves, in Burma's case the male literacy rate before colonialism was around 60%. While the particular conditions of Burma won't be matched everywhere, if there's a similar tradition of most men spending at least some part of their lives in a monastery, male literacy rates could be significantly high.

Female literacy rates would almost certainly be lower, though it would depend on how strong the early Buddhist social institution of nuns continues ITTL. (Early Buddhism established institutions for nuns, though in some Buddhist traditions they became less prevalent over time).

The potential effects of a more literate Europe are fascinating at least
 
Potentially even higher than in OTL.

In some Buddhist societies in OTL (notably Burma), the pre-colonial male literacy rate was quite high due to the practice of most men having monastic education. If memory serves, in Burma's case the male literacy rate before colonialism was around 60%. While the particular conditions of Burma won't be matched everywhere, if there's a similar tradition of most men spending at least some part of their lives in a monastery, male literacy rates could be significantly high.

Female literacy rates would almost certainly be lower, though it would depend on how strong the early Buddhist social institution of nuns continues ITTL. (Early Buddhism established institutions for nuns, though in some Buddhist traditions they became less prevalent over time).

On a practical level, though, how would Buddhist clergy run Europe differently than the Christian clergy of our timeline?

For instance, I know that the Catholic Church took great pains to stamp out incest, keeping records to prevent folks from getting married if they were too closely related. Would European Buddhism likely have the same focus? What about other facets of life? What would the priorities be?
 
I’d be interested to see which boddhisvatas and Tara’s syncretise with which european gods and goddesses and whether there would be monks in the classical era of India coming to study at nalanda all the way from Europe. Really for any proper cultural exchange you’d need an Iran/Egypt that’s not hostile to Buddhism/ provides a safe route to travel

I would assume at one point, universities like Nalanda might pop up in Greece or in Rome drawing inspiration from the university at Nalanda as well as Aristotle’s Academy. Scholars would continue to travel for sure, but “Western Buddhism” for a lack of better term would formalize into its own local tradition or group of traditions with defining characteristics that are different from Mahayana or Theraveda Buddhism.

However, I would assume Bodhgaya and Nalanda would be centers of pilmigrage for Western Buddhists.


If for some reason the areas between India and the Greco-Roman world are hostile to Buddhism. There would be greater divergences between the strains of Buddhist thought.
 
On a practical level, though, how would Buddhist clergy run Europe differently than the Christian clergy of our timeline?

For instance, I know that the Catholic Church took great pains to stamp out incest, keeping records to prevent folks from getting married if they were too closely related. Would European Buddhism likely have the same focus? What about other facets of life? What would the priorities be?

In Japan at least, lay people had to register with a temple, donate to it, volunteer at specific services throughout the year. If Buddhism becomes the dominant religion in Europe, it could fill a similar roll. After all, many marriage ideas were carryovers from the Roman Empire.
 
What do y’all think European Buddhist temples would look like with no Christian Churches to influence them
Probably they'd either look like Greco-Roman pagan temples, or actually a fair bit like Christian basilicas, since they were based on a Roman administrative building, also called a basilica.
North European temples might take more inspiration from local architecture. As would Near Eastern temples, I could see Ziggurat-shaped stupas.
 
Not sure if someone has asked this already, but as someone with a Laymen's or lower understanding of both, could you elaborate?
Iirc,
Plato proposed eternal, perfect 'ideals', prototypes of everything in existance that all physical things are just imperfect copies of.
Buddhism considers all things to be imperfect and impermanent, and its goal is to transend this impermanence and imperfection to reach Nirvana, a state of blissful oblivion.
 
Not sure if someone has asked this already, but as someone with a Laymen's or lower understanding of both, could you elaborate?
Sure :)

A very abridged version:

Epistemology: Platonism deals with constant absolutes. Things have value, and there is an ultimate expression of that value (being god in neoplatonism.
Buddhist epistemics instead lacks individual value, but recognises value as exclusively a phenomenalistic outcome in the relation from one thing to another.

To give a mathmatical example to the above, Platonism would agree with the Law of Identity - a=a, b=b, a=/=c, b=c therefore a=/=b.
Buddhism however is more focused on the expression of what gives said identity in it's relation to others - b=(a=/=b)

For theology, neoplatonists believe in an entity above all material things.
Buddhi has Buddhas, ex normal people, as being able to achieve a status beyond gods. Siddartha for instance literally outsmarts Brahma and pranks him (because the Pali Canon is actually quite comedic in places).

Neoplatonism is dualist, recognising a distinction between body and soul, the body being an inferior emanation of the soul.
Buddhism not only has no soul, but doesn't draw a distinction between mind and body.
 
Although the comparison is often made, Platonism is in virtually every sense an antithesis to Buddhism.
While true Radical impermanence and eternal forms are both ways to deal with the same issue of a world of change. Whitehead for example in the 20th century reconciles them nicely with process and events and change as the nature of the world but with eternal objects providing for the possibilities that come out of change. If they where both popular in the same area I don’t see why they couldn’t come together in some way.
 
While true Radical impermanence and eternal forms are both ways to deal with the same issue of a world of change. Whitehead for example in the 20th century reconciles them nicely with process and events and change as the nature of the world but with eternal objects providing for the possibilities that come out of change. If they where both popular in the same area I don’t see why they couldn’t come together in some way.
As much as I like Whitehead, honestly I find most of his work is a refutation of his idea of God. His process phonomenology quite clearly deconstructs the notion of anything eternal, and when I read his trying to justify it I get more of an impression that, like any human, he wants to have his cake and eat it too in that regard over facing his epistemics excluding his faithm
 
As much as I like Whitehead, honestly I find most of his work is a refutation of his idea of God. His process phonomenology quite clearly deconstructs the notion of anything eternal, and when I read his trying to justify it I get more of an impression that, like any human, he wants to have his cake and eat it too in that regard over facing his epistemics excluding his faithm
I have a similar feeling, it I just want to point out the meeting of Buddha and Plato isn’t so far out
 
I have a similar feeling, it I just want to point out the meeting of Buddha and Plato isn’t so far out
Today perhaps, but back then I think the Buddhists would see the philosophical similarities between the Brahminical philosophy and Platonism. That kind of thing tends to build gates on bridges so to speak.
 
I'd also mention that I've been slowly working on a long-term project which is basically this scenario. It involves some of the followers of Epicurus interacting with Ashoka's Buddhist missionaries to create a new form of Buddhism. This has some similarities with how Mahayana Buddhism emerged in OTL (although appearing earlier), and also has some twists due to the interaction with Epicurean ideas. This starts to spread throughout the Greco-Roman world beginning in the early second century BCE. This eventually becomes the official religion of the *Roman Empire, at least for a few emperors (not necessarily for most of that history). This has the side-effect of butterflying away Christianity and then Islam, although Judaism survives and is if anything more diverse than in OTL, as some of the different beliefs in Judaism around the first centuries BCE and CE survive and spread.

This isn't being written quickly, mostly because I'm trying to tell the bulk of the tale through the various philosophical and religious writings which emerge in this timeline. That is interesting but slow to write, so this scenario is still a while away from finishing.
does this leave western Europe pagan? also i can see the Greco-Roman gods surviving by just assimilating in to Buddhism.
 
Would that energize both faiths in their struggle for supremacy?
Possibly.
On the Indian subcontinent, the philosophical battles between Jainism, Brahminism, Buddhism and (to a much lesser extent) other schools very much helped in buidling up popular and philosophical fortitude, something that was less "on the line" for the hellenic world due to the largely compatible beliefs. Marcus Aurelius for instance, in his famous meditations, gives Stoic, Epicurean and Platonisr views.
 
Top