WI - Buddhist India

[Sarthak]

If India was Completely Buddhist, there is a good chance that Religious Identity will become more pronounced and they will band together against external invasion, especially if its against their religion

that worked nowhere in the medieval era. The Vikings, the Arabs, the Mongol Raiders, the Nippon pirates etc all showed that centralized religion meant nothing in front of politics. Also Hinduism varies in India from place to place. So will this Buddhist India. Just like how in the early days, Catholics denounced Orthodox and Protestants, there is no saying this kind of things won't happen within India as well.
Some Southern King will say ' The northern version of buddhism is heresy, why should i support them' and everything will go down the drain. it's like how Indochinese and Chinese buddhists look at each other with suspicion and distrust but much more pronounced because of geopolitics.

 

[WilliamOfOckham]

We as a forum should move beyond "yes / no" polls, into a bright future of "yes / no / the butterflies of this across more than two millennia of history make a sweeping single-word judgement completely meaningless" polls.

 

[Brahman]

that worked nowhere in the medieval era. The Vikings, the Arabs, the Mongol Raiders, the Nippon pirates etc all showed that centralized religion meant nothing in front of politics. Also Hinduism varies in India from place to place. So will this Buddhist India. Just like how in the early days, Catholics denounced Orthodox and Protestants, there is no saying this kind of things won't happen within India as well.
Some Southern King will say ' The northern version of buddhism is heresy, why should i support them' and everything will go down the drain. it's like how Indochinese and Chinese buddhists look at each other with suspicion and distrust but much more pronounced because of geopolitics.

I agree on this, But Buddhism is much more religion focused, whereas Hinduism by then had become a Caste based system, as such it will be easier for Buddhists to declare war for religion compared to Hinduism

 

[Kaushlendra pratap singh]

OTL, Indian states banded together only after wasIslam came knocking at their doors and gave them their worst defeats, this was after the Collapse of Guptas and Gujara, Palas and Rashtrakuts wars

Indian king stop Muslim conquest in their golden age for 500 years .
Muslim inter in to India after fall of Kabul Shahi dynasty 1026, until then Kabul Sahhi defeated regularly Muslim wannabe conquer.

Hindu Shahis - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

In therr golden era muslim try to conquer India https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umayyad_campaigns_in_India
You people clearly read a bised history written by communist .

 

[Brahman]

Indian king stop Muslim conquest in their golden age for 500 years .
Muslim inter in to India after fall of Kabul Shahi dynasty 1026, until then Kabul Sahhi defeated regularly Muslim wannabe conquer.

Hindu Shahis - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

In therr golden era muslim try to conquer India https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umayyad_campaigns_in_India
You people clearly read a bised history written by communist .

now now, no need for accusing others with personal insults

 

[Brahman]

We as a forum should move beyond "yes / no" polls, into a bright future of "yes / no / the butterflies of this across more than two millennia of history make a sweeping single-word judgement completely meaningless" polls.

You are right, but on the whole, I feel Buddhist India would have been better than a Hindu India, solely due lack Caste System, also, it attracts people to the Discussion if only to vote

 

[Sarthak]

Indian king stop Muslim conquest in their golden age for 500 years .
Muslim inter in to India after fall of Kabul Shahi dynasty 1026, until then Kabul Sahhi defeated regularly Muslim wannabe conquer.

Hindu Shahis - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

In therr golden era muslim try to conquer India https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umayyad_campaigns_in_India
You people clearly read a bised history written by communist .

dude, you are writing with clear bias in your tone. This is a forum, where all history is debated upon. Please do not state such things.

 

[Kaushlendra pratap singh]

now now, no need for accusing others with personal insults

But I am frustrated showing early victory of Indian king against Muslim conquest , they stop them for 500 years .
Which is gloss over by Indian historian .

 

[Sarthak]

Indian king stop Muslim conquest in their golden age for 500 years .
Muslim inter in to India after fall of Kabul Shahi dynasty 1026, until then Kabul Sahhi defeated regularly Muslim wannabe conquer.

Hindu Shahis - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

In therr golden era muslim try to conquer India https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umayyad_campaigns_in_India
You people clearly read a bised history written by communist .

Also you realize they faced more pressing problems like the Byzantines to focus on India?

 

[Brahman]

dude, you are writing with clear bias in your tone. This is a forum, where all history is debated upon. Please do not state such things.

Yes, please do not go on with personal insults, and get this discussion locked

 

[Kaushlendra pratap singh]

dude, you are writing with clear bias in your tone. This is a forum, where all history i

Sorry but Indian defeated Muslim army from 730 -1191 .

 

[Sarthak]

Sorry but Indian defeated Muslim army from 730 -1191 .

Yeah the Arab-Byzantine Wars lasted from the 650s to the 1150s. Think they were distracted.

 

[Brahman]

But I am frustrated showing early victory of Indian king against Muslim conquest , they stop them for 500 years .
Which is gloss over by Indian historian .

Yes, I agree with it, But let us peacefully try to engage with people we do not agree with

 

[Kaushlendra pratap singh]

Also you realize they faced more pressing problems like the Byzantines to focus on India?

Same thing also true for Indian king who fight with each other for control in India , if a Harsha empire did not ended with him and North India never divided between East and West . Muslim army could never be crossed Hindukush .https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harsha

 

[Brahman]

Yeah the Arab-Byzantine Wars lasted from the 650s to the 1150s. Think they were distracted.

No, Arabs for example Said Rashtrakuta were one of the four principle power of the world, and Indian Kingdoms gave Arabs their worst defeat, worse than that of Byzantine and they did it without any Greek fire but just pure military

 

[Sarthak]

Same thing also true for Indian king who fight with each other for control in India , if a Harsha empire did not ended with him and North India never divided between East and West . Muslim army could never be crossed Hindukush .https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harsha

No, Arabs for example Said Rashtrakuta were one of the four principle power of the world, and Indian Kingdoms gave Arabs their worst defeat, worse than that of Byzantine and they did it without any Greek fire but just pure military

Look, I agree that the Islamic foothold in India would be weaker, and smaller, but the internal divisions between India has always been its downfall, and the Muslims had hundreds of capable leaders, who all would easily exploit this, and did OTL. They would eventually cross into Hindu Kush and there's really nothing stopping them. It's like the situation in Celtic Britain with the Anglo-Saxon invasions; too busy with internal affairs to really focus on exterior threats.

 

[Sarthak]

Indian king stop Muslim conquest in their golden age for 500 years .
Muslim inter in to India after fall of Kabul Shahi dynasty 1026, until then Kabul Sahhi defeated regularly Muslim wannabe conquer.

Hindu Shahis - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

In therr golden era muslim try to conquer India https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umayyad_campaigns_in_India
You people clearly read a bised history written by communist .

also, wikipedia isn't the best source out there considering it can be edited by anyone.

 

[Brahman]

Look, I agree that the Islamic foothold in India would be weaker, and smaller, but the internal divisions between India has always been its downfall, and the Muslims had hundreds of capable leaders, who all would easily exploit this, and did OTL. They would eventually cross into Hindu Kush and there's really nothing stopping them. It's like the situation in Celtic Britain with the Anglo-Saxon invasions; too busy with internal affairs to really focus on exterior threats.

India had three fold division, whereas many countries two fold division - Religion and Ethnicity, India had Religion, Ethnicity and Caste, which prevented any effective response, if India becomes Buddhist, the Third is eliminated, leading to a much stronger societal structure in India, more manpower for Army and more united religion to attack or react to Arabs

 

[Brahman]

also, wikipedia isn't the best source out there considering it can be edited by anyone.

But it was true, for example, Nuristan was not converted till last 1800 form an ancient form of Hinduism to Islam, it did show Indian religions were really resistant

 

[Sarthak]

India had three fold division, whereas many countries two fold division - Religion and Ethnicity, India had Religion, Ethnicity and Caste, which prevented any effective response, if India becomes Buddhist, the Third is eliminated, leading to a much stronger societal structure in India, more manpower for Army and more united religion to attack or react to Arabs

Who said Buddhism equals centralized religion? Japan and China and Indochina would clearly like to dispute that fact, considering they repeatedly fell to foreign invasion (barring Japan who had the protection of being an island). Japan too didn't let Buddhism stop them from the Sengoku Jidai. They also repeatedly fractured up.