It is difficult to succinctly summarize the historical context of Buddhism between 200 bce and 200 ce. This difficulty is not simply the result of the 400-year sweep of the analysis. Rather, this difficulty is the product of the dynamic and fractious nature of the political, economic, and religious lives of South Asians throughout the period. During this time, the fortunes of different kingdoms waxed and waned. New sources of wealth and power emerged as guilds and merchants assumed greater prominence. Within this dynamic backdrop, religious ascetics—Buddhists included—competed for financial support.
Following the collapse of the Mauryan Empire in 185 bce, numerous successor states emerged across India. None of these states ever achieved the same territorial control or hegemonic power as the Mauryas. Rather, these states cycled through periods of greater and lesser power, greater and lesser centralization. In the Gangetic Plain, the Mauryan Empire was followed by a succession of states, including the Shungas (185-73 bce) and Kushanas (first-third centuries ce). In South India, the Satavahanas controlled large areas between the second century bce and the second century ce, though the fortunes of the empire were highly variable (Sinopoli 2001). In northeastern India, the Kalinga re-established themselves as an independent state after the collapse of the Mauryas. As illustrated in a long inscription by the Kalinga King Kharavela (c. second century bce), later kings throughout India presented themselves in roughly the same way that Ashoka had—listing their conquests, good deeds, and professing support for all faiths within their territories (Strong 1983, 1994).
Figure 4.1: Archaeological sites discussed in Chapter 4
Through much of Indian history, groups from outside India heavily influenced the Northwest. In the first and second centuries bce, a series of Indo-Greek kingdoms were dominant in the Northwest. Beginning in the first century bce, the region increasingly came under the control of Central Asian states, including the Sakas (first century BCE-first century ce) and later the Kushanas (first-third centuries ce). Throughout this period, the Northwest was a crossroads for the trade of goods and ideas between China, Central Asia, India, and the Mediterranean. At the same time, ports along the coast of peninsular India were heavily engaged in trade that linked Africa, Egypt, the Persian Gulf, India, and, by the first century GE, Southeast Asia. Goods transported by ocean and overland routes included gold, silk, aromatic woods, resins, spices, wine, olive oil, beads, and many others. With the trade came the movement of ideas—religious, economic, artistic, and political.
Numerous historians have suggested that new religious orders, particularly Jainism and Buddhism, allowed merchants and traders to more easily interact with foreigners and each other in ways that Brahmanical caste prohibitions had formerly prevented (Singh 2009; Thapar 2002). For this reason, Buddhism and Jainism flourished in the cities where new trade relationships were being forged. With the increase in international and local trade came new sources of power. Between 200 bge and 200 GE, associations of craftspeople, merchants, and traders began to emerge as rivals to the traditional political elite. In addition to setting prices, training apprentices, and establishing production standards, guilds increasingly acted as moneylenders and landholders. With their rise in power, guilds began to engage in activities that were formerly restricted to royal families—they began making large donations to religious institutions.
Thapar (2002) and Ray (1986) argued that, by the first century bge, much of the support for Buddhist institutions (monasteries and pilgrimage centers) was derived from craft guilds rather than the royalty. Thapar interpreted these gifts as evidence that Buddhist institutions were the recipients of donations resulting from competitive giving between guilds, lesser elite, and the royalty. In Weber’s terms, these competitive donations were legitimations performed by the economic and political elite in an attempt to associate themselves with the divine. In contrast, Ray saw Buddhist institutions as more actively engaged in economic activities, serving as nodes on long-distance trade networks (see also Lahiri 1992; but see Morrison 1995) and managing agricultural production in the peripheries of developing states (see also Heitzman 1997). Schopen (2004) has argued that monasteries even acted as moneylenders, building their endowments by lending to Buddhist and non-Buddhists alike. By this view, gifts to religious orders were not solely intended as legitimations, but rather as investments with tangible rewards. Whatever the case, it seems that merchants and guilds adopted the same “noble” practices that had been promulgated by Ashoka and that defined the proper behavior of a king. At the same time, monasteries took on some of the economic roles of guilds and landholders. As a result, between 200 bge and 200 CE the sources of financial support for Buddhist institutions greatly expanded. Where previously almost all the support came from royal families, by the first century bce the sangha could rely on the support of royal families, guilds, prominent merchants, and landholders, not to mention their own economic activities.
Between 200 bce and 200 CE, Buddhism continued to expand beyond India. In Sri Lanka, Buddhism became well established and supported by the rulers. At the same time, the sangha, following the Silk Road, brought Buddhism to Central Asia and China. With the development of sea trade between India and China in the first century CE, Buddhism also began to be established in Southeast Asia. With the geographic spread of Buddhism across Asia came a gradual fragmentation of Buddhist orders, both outside and within India. This fragmentation is best illustrated by the fourth Buddhist council, or more accurately, councils. The “first” fourth Buddhist council is traditionally dated to the first century bce in Sri Lanka. This council is credited with producing the first written form of the Pali Canon of the Theravada tradition. The “second” fourth Buddhist council was held in Kashmir in the first century CE. Similar to the Sri Lankan fourth Buddhist council, the Kashmiri fourth council was primarily concerned with recording, collating, and systematizing Buddhist commentaries. This council appears to have been primarily the product of the Sarvastivadan school of Buddhism, though these texts were later foundational in the emergence of Mahayana Buddhism (see Chapter 5). The Sarvastividans were one of many Buddhist schools in India during this period, all with overlapping and distinct traditions and doctrinal interpretations.9
World History
