Download The Brahmanical Critique of Buddhism

The Brahmanical Critique of Buddhism: A Sociological and Historical Perspective The aim of my dissertation is to trace the lines of the Buddhist-Briihmat;ta philosophical debate and 10­
cate it in its social and historical context as clearly as I can. The debate between exponents of Buddhdar­
sana and upholders of Brahmanical orthodoxy has been presented almost entirely in both Indian and
Western histories of Indian philosophy as a matter of doctrines and arguments divested of their social re­
lations. This debate is immensely interesting in itself, representing as it does one of the great achieve­
,
ments of sustained human in'luiry, remarkable in its ingenuity, subtlety, and depth. A good part of my
work will involve simply unfolding it. It is evident, however, that this debate also has a social signifi­
cance, a contour and direction shaped by the course of South Asian history. This social, economic, and
political shaping can be delineated in a way that illuminates an important and neglected aspect of the
meaning of these doctrines and arguments. After surveying in more precise detail the field of the Bud­
dhist-Brahmava debate, its chronology, periodization, affiliations and oppositions, the point and counter­
point of argumentation, and the threads of similarity and divergence, I will then try to map the field of the
debate onto politico-economic changes to determine to what extent it can be seen to track them.
My dissertation is therefore intended as a contribution to the sociology of knowledge in India and an
effort at historicization that begins with the question, what was the ideological function and significance
of the Buddhist-Brahmanical debate, the social dynamic at work in it, the materiality of intellectual pro­
duction supporting it, and the reasons why the Buddhists appear to have lost it?
I will look at several kinds of texts: a preliminary survey of reports by Chinese and Tibetan pilgrims to
the Holy Land, literary and dramatic descriptions of Buddhists, mostly of a critical and often satiric na­
ture, and smarta references, that give us a vivid picture of Buddhism in practice, how Buddhists were ac­
tually living, and how they were viewed by their critics; but primarily, through the most important iistika
refutations of Buddhist ideas in Sanskrit. This will be the centerpiece of my dissertation, presenting a de­
tailed critical analysis of the main lines of sastric argumentation, outlining its dialogical interaction with
Buddhist thought. I will translate the essential sections of the relevant Nyi:lya, Si:lmkhya Yoga, Mimi:lmsi:l,
and Vedi:lntic texts, sticking to the big names among siitrakaras,
bha~akaras,
varttikakaras, and samgra­
hakaras. These texts will be discussed together with the relevant Buddhist texts and a wide range of his­
torical and cultural evidence to socially and historically contextualize the symbolic-ideational contest as it
develops between the Buddhists and their Brahmanical critics.
The period from Nilgarjuna in the second century C.B. to Si:lntarak~ita in the 8th century C.E. is. the
greatest age of philosophical creativity in Indian philosophy. The only comparable one is the ferment of
the sramana movement of 700-400 BCE, out of which emerged the sages of the Upanishads, the Bud­
dhists, the Jains, and the Ajrvikas. After 200 C.E. we see the crystallization ofthe sutras, concentrated tex­
tual production in the commentarial form, and the appearance on the scene of named personalities. The
reason for this is clearly the expanding use and standardizing effect of writing and large-scale manuscript
production and dissemination, which was superceding oral transmission. The circulation of manuscripts
gives rise to a symbiotic attention space of shared protocols, codes of discourse, and problems in which
intellectual exchange and argument is carried on. The language of this discursive space is Sanskrit. A
classical Sanskritic education becomes the price of entry. The material bases that support this space of
intellectual activity are laid down during the Gupta era. The Hindul challenge to Buddhist thought and the
Buddhist response is the energizing stimulus driving the burst of creativity that follows from 400-800 C.B.
The problem with the standard histories of Indian philosophy is that they are not sufficiently historical.
This is mainly due to the poor documentation and lack of evidence for the lives and times of Indian phi­
losophers. We simply don't have the sources of information-----;-letters, memoirs, and biographies-to re­
construct the, intellectual history of early India in the depth and detail possible for many philosophers
from Plato to Wittgenstein. What we do have are mostly fragments of anecdotal lore and the legends of
iconic figures. The personal lives and affiliations of Indian philosophers are almost completely lost to us.
We know little of the personal relations of and the influences on writers of sastras, how their texts are
produced and consumed, the public fora and schools, vihtlras, tlsramas and ghatikas, in which they stud­
ied, taught, and debated, the social status and reputation of pandits, the forms of patronage and remunera­
tion, and the whole social milieux in which the Brahmin intelligentsia moved and interacted.
Compounding the difficulties, all of these social forms were changing over the 2000 years of Indian
intellectual life. Some figures are clustered together in time and place and seem to have personal contact;
most are separated by decades, if not centuries, and linked only by textual traditions. Texts circulate in
different channels of transmission and a pan-Indian, synoptic, encyclopedic view of all darsanas, al­
though anticipated by Bhavaviveka, 5th cen. C.B. and Haribhadra, 8th cen. C.B., comes very late with Mad­
hava, 15 th century C.B., and other compilers of samgrahaktiras. The period from the 14th century to 18 th cen­
turies, understudied because regarded as stagnant and derivative, in fact sees the greatest outpouring of
Sanskrit textual production.
Neat paradigms such as the 'six darsanas' became popular during the later scholastic period of hand­
books and compendia when the long, tangled grow of sastric traditions is compacted into discrete and
static forms for students. Indian philosophic traditions have passed through several periods of retroactive
reformulation and reformation that can obscure or erase the earlier phases. Following the model of six
darsanas, standard accounts of Indian philosophy have tended, until very recently, to split up develop­
ments, treating each system or school separately as a self-contained entity. This approach misses the in­
terplay of social networks and the intertextuality that invigorates creative thought.
The symbiotic development of Buddhist-Brahmanical thought has been particularly ill-served by this
compartmentalized treatment by lifting it out of the field of oppositional interaction that generated it and
this lack of narrative histories that chart the evolving sequence of argument and recover the earlier phases
overlaid by subsequent systematization. Partial sketches of dynamics and interactions among schools are
to be found in older masters such as Theodore Stcherbats~ and Erich Frauwallner3, and more recently in
Stephen Phillips' exposition of the interactions of Nyaya and Advaita,4 and in Richard King's thematic
approach to Buddhist-Hindu thought. 5 My study of the Brahmanical-Buddhist debate is meant as a contri­
bution to these efforts.
More work needs to be done to recover the materiality of intellectual production in the first millen­
nium
C.B.
Ancient Indian producers of "philosophic" texts were almost exclusively members of educated elites. Even the Buddhists are largely Brahmins or of well-born
~atriya
origins. Far too little attention . has been paid to this fact. Brahmin intellectuals may not have conceived their work in terms of the sharp demarcation modern philosophers make between the religious and the philosophic (although Neo-Nyaya began to resemble Logical Positivism in its rigorous technical and unmetaphysical character), but they did not regard their work as having any more to do with the impure realms of the social or political than a modern academic philosopher does. Indeed, that ideas have a social or historical dimension fell largely outside of their conceptual horizon, notwithstanding that the Buddha had much to say about Brahmans,
and other social and political matters and Buddhists were palpably seen by Brahmans as a challenge to the
varntisrama social order legitimated by Vedic tradition and
~tika
metaphysics. Modern philosophers
have mostly treated Buddhadarsana and Brahmanical counter-arguments as pure philosophy, and thus
have colluded with and subscribed old Brahmin gurus in the occlusion of the social-symbolic significa­
tion of their texts. It is, therefore, a useful and interesting endeavor to recover this social dimension. For it
is also true to say that "Buddhism" as a religion apart from the state, society or economy is another of
2 Th. Stcherbatsky, 1930, Buddhist Logic, 2 vols. Bibliotheca Buddhica, XXVI, Leningrad, 1930; 1956, The Central Conception ofBuddhism, Calcutta.
.
3 Erich Frauwallner, 1974, History ofIndian Philosophy, intro. Leo Gabriel, tr. V.M. Bedekar, New York: Humanities Press. 4 Phillips, Stephen H. 1995, Classical Indian Metaphysics: Refotations ofReali.sm and the Emergence of "New LoJjc," Chicago: Open Court.
those Orientalist conceptual boxes that probably have little or no correspondence to how Buddhists in 700
C.E. imagined themselves or actually lived their lives.
6
Caste is another insufficiently explored aspect of the social-symbolic of Indian Philosophy. Indeed,
caste might be described as the social unconscious of the Buddhist-BrahmaJ;1a debate. Defense of the
varqasrama order is clearly a strong motivation in astika thinkers as they expound conceptions of self and
world that authorize it. The Buddhist critique of caste is a more complex case. The common view that
Buddhism was a revolt against caste is highly problematic. The evidence suggests that, like the Jains of
today, the Buddhist thinkers denied caste in theory, but were or became well-integrated into the caste sys­
tern in day-to-day life. Within the vihara there was a soteriological equality that did not translate into the
outside world. I wi1llook at a few of these theoretical manifestos, such as the Vajrasflcf. Buddhist monas­
ticism succeeded because of its multi-functionality in Indian society, mediating between resistance and
legitimation. Buddhists not only lived in accord with caste, they played a key role in the conception and
propagation of the ideas of karma and rebirth, shaping both the ,problem and its solution. The ideological
force of Buddhist philosophy in this regard needs more study than it has received. At bottom, both Bud­
dhist and Brahmanical thought were competing theorizations of how social life should be conducted. The
Buddhist denial of jati in both the social and philosophic sphere is not incidental. Social meaning and
practice is the real unavowed content of metaphysical ideas. In actuality, it is not that unavowed, given
the loud and clear insistence on the astika-nastika distinction.
Buddhism emerged out of the sramana movement, but was co-opted and brought within the fold of
varnasrama, very quickly losing whatever equalitarian edge it might have initially had. Bauddhas became
a wealthy, worldly elite concerned with money, status, and property. The tables are turned. Whereas
Brahmans had earlier been the objects of criticism, ridicule and humor in the Suttas and Jatakas of the
PilIi Canon, now Buddhist monks become the objects of satire for their vices and hypocrisy.
6 The Dumontian view of both Western and Indian scholars that Indian culture has been shaped more by the religious than the
Dolitical or economic. i.e. the here of hi tOry' involv man ro ems
c n ver ies c nce in Orie alism and ideali
BrahmaJ)a philosophy begins in the opposition of Brahmans as lay householders, serving as teachers
and ritual specialists, to the consolidation of Buddhist and Jain monastic organization and patronage by
the Mauryan and
Ku~ana
states. This opposition was based on the formation of an orthodox lay culture
from 300 B.C.E. to 200 C.E. This took place by three related processes: ftrst, by the recuperation of Brah­
manical education around Upanishadic traditions and the capture and control of lay education in Indian
culture; second, by the deftnition of a distinct social identity codifted in dharmasastric canons laying out
(
the duties and prohibitions for all social transactions; var1!iisrama becomes the theory, if not practice at
this early stage, for all social life, which is increasingly ritualized with Brahman priests becoming the of­
ftciating links in economic and property relations; third, the formation of an orthodox self-identity in op­
position to the niistika movements prompts intellectual challenge and the conftguration of philosophical
traditions through debate with the Buddhists.
The early stages of this formation occurred from 200 B.C.E. to 200 C.E., the Siitra period to which are
dated the founding texts of Nyaya,
Vaise~ika,
Mimamsa and Vedanta and their legendary authors, Gau­
tama, Kaqada, JaiminI, and B1ldarayana. The resistance only comes fully into view out of this opaque pe­
riod with the spread of writing. In the period from 400-800 C.E. we see' the Buddhist-Brahma1).a debate
reach its acme of sophistication and intensity. The brilliant new achievements of Mahayana-based
thought, Madhyamika and Yogacara are met by an equally astute orthodox response. Up to this point
Buddhists, in a culturally ascendant position, have largely been absorbed in the inter-sectarian differences
of the nikiiyas and the refmements of Abhidharmic analysis. The Sarvastivadins, Sautrantikas,
Mahasanghikas, and Andhakas were busy with the controversies out of which Mahayana would emanate.
Thereafter they begin to turn their attention to the new challengers.
Nyaya logic, which begins as the art of rhetoric--how to win an argument and influence people, so to
speak-is the first tool invented to counter the Buddhists and remains the most impressive instrument of
contestation. It is hard to underestimate the impact Nyaya has on the course of the Buddhist-BrahmaJ)a
debate as both sides adopt it. Nyaya shifts the debate onto the terrain of logic and epistemology, to ques­
consequences for Buddhism, as it moved the contest onto the enemies' field of assumptions and prob­
lems, accepting the terms of pramiirlavada. 7 On the other hand, this led to the most celebrated accom­
plishments in Indian philosophy. The brilliant logical and epistemological advances of Dignaga and
Dharmaklrti become the main targets of attack as the debate builds to great heights of technical virtuosity
and culminates in the Advaita tipping point.
In the cosmopolitan Gupta and Harsha eras, 300-700 C.E., one interlocking philosophical field emerges
as Buddhist and Brahmat,la opponents come to share the same intellectual space. The great lights of
Asanga, Vasubandhu, Dignaga, and Dharmakirti on the Buddhist side are matched in distinction by an
orthodox intelligentsia: Vatsyayana, Sabara, Vyasa, Uddyotakara, and Kumarila. There is much crossing
of lines by figures such as BhartJ;'hari and GaueJapada and cross-fertilization of ideas. After 700
C.E.,
things acquire a more sectarian edge as the astika begin to direct a fierce and unrelenting attack on Bud­
dhist thought and gain the upper hand in the Mimamsa reaction of Kumarila, the Advaita revolution of
Sankara, and the theologies of Rarnanuja and Madhva. The Madhyamika-Yogacara summa of Santarak~ita's
Tattvasa1!lgraha is a last rear-guard defense of Buddhism in retreat. With the comprehensive
works of Vacaspati MiSra, Jayanta Bhat{:a, Udayana and Srrdhara orthodox philosophy consolidates its
intellectual dominance. 8
7 Ronald Davidson, 2002, Indian Esoteric Buddhism: A Social History ofthe Tantric Movement, New
York: Columbia University Press, pp. 99-105.
B A preliminary survey ofthe critique mounted by each ofthe classical schools discloses interesting features. Lines of criticism
fall into patterns that attain an almost ritual character. Later Brahmanical writers frame Buddhism as a set offour vadas which
attract excl.usive attention: V aibh~ika, Sautrantika, Vijfianavada and Siinyavada. A subset ofBuddhist doctrines draw their fire;
the Sautrantika theory of momentariness and related problems of causality; VijfilinavDda anti-realism and the apparent denial of
an external world; the supposed nihilism ofMlidhyamika sunyatii and the denial of svabhiiva, and the Buddhist denial of a self.
Post-Dignttga and Dhannakrrti philosophers concern themselves with the intricacies of theories of perception, cognition, error,
negatiotl, and universals. Brahmana philosophers establish themselves as the champions ofrealism about the existence of the
soul, the external world, substance, universals and cognition against Buddhist anti-realism, falling at points, 1 will argue, into a
fundamental misconstrual of Buddhist phenomenalism.
Each school develops distinct lines of critique. The Nyiiyasil.tras and Vatsyayana in his bh~a criticize SarvlistivDda doctrines
and take note ofNttg1irjuna. Uddyotakara wrote his Nyayaviirtttika it seems solely to refute Dignaga and the 'bad logicians'. He
also criticizes Vijfianavlida according to the Sautrantika exposition ofVasubandhu's Abhidharamkosa. Uddyotakara in turn is
criticized by DharmakIrti, Santarak!lita, and Kamalasila. Vacaspatl Misra in the Nyiiyaviirttikatiitparyatfkti and Jayanta Bhana in
the Nyiiyamanjarfvindicate in magisterial style the Nyaya position and attack Sautrantika-Vijfianavada in the formidably logi­
cized form expounded by Dharmakirti and Dhannottara. Vacaspati Misra is himself assailed by JiiiiSrimitra and RatnakIrti. Fi­
nally. Udayana is regarded as having the last word on this exchange, refuting Jfianasrimitra in the Atmatattvaviveka.
Vaisesikas aooears not to engage with Buddhist ideas until very late when Sridhara addresses Viiiianavada as presented by
I want to show how these intellectual events are not just happening in a vacuum, but reflect changes in
the balance of social forces underwriting them. Roughly sketched, the Buddhists move from the intellec­
tual ascendancy they enjoyed under the· internationalizing empires of the Mauryans and Ku&anas into the
cosmopolitan world of the Gupta-Harsha eras where Buddhists still receive state patronage and exist
symbiotically with an orthodoxy revitalizing with Saivism and Vi&nuism, then into a period of "medieval"
feudalization, 700-1200 C.E., when the independent political-economic bases of Buddhism were eroded.
"Medieval" is in scare quotes, because I will question the appropriateness of such historiographic periodi­
zation. After 1200, Vedantists, sparring now with the Naiyayikas of Mithila, will continue to deploy the
time-tested refutations against the ghosts of a defunct Buddhadarsana, although, presumably, it is entirely
extinct on the peninsula. Madhava, for instance, places Bauddhamata above Carvaka as the second lowest
of 16 systems in his Vedantic hierarchy.
The Buddhist-Brahman debate has been seen by scholars as one of the factors contributing to the de­
cline of Buddhism in India insofar as the Buddhists were declared to have lost it by their Brahmanical
opponents. This is putting the cart before the horse. Buddhists ideas in themselves were never conclu­
sively and irrevocably refuted, although subject to over a millennium of ritualized attack and defense. The
Buddhist only lost the ideological struggle in India proper as shifts and displacements in the political
economy of the subcontinent eroded the material support for Buddhism and Buddhist intellectual pro­
ducion. My investigation of these, shifts and displacements as they impinged on the social and material
bases of Buddhadarsana, will be supplemented by reassessments of the narrative of Buddhism's decline
as it has been constructed in modem historiography, the changing position of South Asia in the world sys­
tern from the Mauryan Empire to the Muslim Sultanate, the imperial and international role of Buddhism,
and Buddhism in the evolution of caste society. The objective is a global perspective that understands that
Indian philosophical ideas cannot simply be reduced to the social or the ideological; they develop within a
Regarding Yoga, some ofPataiijali's siitras appear to be referring to Buddhism, and again, in many respects to have been influ­
enced by or co-developed with it. Vyllsa's bha!!ya makes brief but interesting references to Buddhism. In the Tattvavaisiiradr of
the polymath Vacasapati Misra we get a fuller discussion of Buddhamata from the Yoga position.
Sankhya criti ue as we find it in Ka ila's siitras the authorless Yuktidr ikii Aniruddha in the San 'asutravrtti and Vrfianab­
structured autonomy as a sovereign, self-regulating domain of cultural production. My sociological
method is much indebted to Randall Collins' Weberian conflict theory of philosophy and Pierre
Bourdieu's model of cultural production. 1o
Regarding the question of the disappearance of Buddhavacana in India itself, the view which I will
elaborate is that the overwhelmingly most important factor was the changed politico-economic state of
affairs in the subcontinent between 1200-1800 C.E. brought about by Muslim conquest and rule. The in­
ternational interconnections in which Buddhism has always flourished were cut off and suppressed in an
unprecedented way. Once these conditions changed again and international networks and cultural circula­
tion were restored, there was a brilliant resurgence. Islam supplanted Buddhism in South and Central Asia
as the international, imperial religion and dominant cultural force, playing the hegemonic role that Bud­
dhism had formerly played from Asoka to Harsha as the ideological currency of expanding empires of
trade.
The role of caste absorption and religious assimilation must be considered in this regard. I believe that
it had the effect that it did mainly in conjunction with the coup de grace of Muslim conquest and rule.
Bauddhas had gradually been coalescing with Brahma:va society since the Guptas. That was not new. This
process was intensified from 700 -1200 C.E. by the pressures of feudalization and the consequent tantriza­
tion and bhaktization of the cultural landscape. It was Muslim domination and the response of Hindu po­
litical retrenchment and caste consolidation that almost completely eliminated the social space for inde­
pendent Buddhist institution and thought in the sub-continent. Buddhists found a submerged existence
and sheltering niche within the encompassing edifices of emergent Hinduism especially in the fomier Piila
realms as Tantric Siddhas, Sahajiyas,
Vai~ava
worshippers of Buddha, the ninth avatar of Vi~u, Niitha
yogis, and devotees of Dharma-Cult. In the absence ofroyal patronage, the life-blood of religious support,
Buddhists were not in a position to recover and sustain their unique cultural institutions-viharas and in­
ternational universities-in the face of Muslim devastation and iconoclasm.
9
Randall Collins, 1998, The Sociology ofPhilosophies: A Global Theory ofIntellectual Change, Cam­
brid"e. Mass: Belknao Press ofHarvard Universi .
Buddhist thought has survived repeated ups and downs, peaks and troughs of efflorescence and de­
cline: Mauryan,
Ku~ana,
Gupta, Harsha, and Pala. The post-Pala interruption by the Sultanate and Mughal
Empire was only the longest and most devastating before its current world-wide renaissance. Without the
swathe of destruction wrought by the iconoclastic fury of her rival Buddhism would no doubt have per­
sisted in the form it had assumed under the Palas and continued to have in Nepal: a stable Buddhist-Hindu
Tantric syncretism. 11 In the 19th and 20th centuries transmission to Euro-America and the interest of Westem scholars, archaeologists, and spiritual seekers has led to renewal in its homeland. Ironically,
Buddhasasana's capacity for cultural adaptation, which has made it so extraordinarily successful around
the world, contributed heavily to disabling it for five centuries in the land of its birth.
!lOne might consider the fact that even in the supposed dark age of Buddhism, 1200 to 1700 C.E. Buddhasiisana lived on in the
nearby peripheries of Himachal Pradesh, Ladakh, Bhutan, Sikkim, Nepal, Tibet, Ceylon, and Burma. Diplomatic and trade mis­
sions were exchanged, pilgrims, holy men, and travelers from these countries still continued to visit and revere the holy places of
the Buddha and had contact with Buddhist teachers there. Buddhist siddhas like Buddhagupta in the 16th century were still wan­
dering around South Asia just as missionaries and pravriijakas had before him for centuries.
Although it is commonly believed that after the sack of NaIanda Buddhism was totally eradicated and nothing of its religious
traditions survived in the Indian sub-continent, there is an increasing body of evidence to show that this was not the case. In cer­
tain areas, in Bengal, Assam, Orissa, the Northeast territories, the Western Himalayas, Lahul, Spiti and the areas adjoining
Ladakh, Buddhism survived, in fact, at late as the 17th century. Caste identity, ethnic resistance, and the simple facts of geo­
graphical remoteness and inaccessibility oxygenated these survivals, as must have ongoing cultural contacts with Buddhists in
Tibet, Nepal, Ceylon, and Burma. The Hindu-Mahayana-Tantra of the Nepalese Newari, within access of these remnant
Bauddhas, and Tibetan Vajrayana, exerting its influence on the cultures of the Himalayan kingdoms, were a continuing living
presences for North Indians as was Theravada of Ce Ion for the South. It does not make sense to s eak of the total demise of
Outline of Topics Covered and Tentative Table of Contents.
I. Introduction: The Brahmanical critique of Buddhavacana historicized.
II. Review of the Scholarship.
III. Cultural Contestation.
A. The Buddhists lose the ideological battle.
B. Smiirta Bauddhas: Buddhists in Dharrnasastra, Pural).a, and Epic.
C. What literary satire tells us about Buddhists.
1. Selected translations and studies of texts.
a. BhavabhUti, Malatlm1idhava.
b. Dal).Q.in, Dasakumiiracarita.
c.
Kr~narnisra,
Prabodhacandrodaya.
d. Caturbh(ini or Sringarahata.
e. Ksemendra, Narma-Miilii.
f. Kaviraja Sankhadhara, Lataka-Melaka.
g. Mahendravarman I, Mattaviliisaprahasana.
h. Bodhayana, Bhagavadajjukam.
i. Kalidasa, Miilavikiignimitra.
D. Observations of Buddhists in India by Chinese and Tibetan pilgrims: Fa-Xien, Xuan-Zang, I-tsing,
Bu-ston, Tiiraniitha, Dharmasvarnin, Buddhagupta.
IV. Philosophical Counterattack and Co-option.
A. Discussion and translation of relevant passages.
1. Nyaya critique of Bauddhamata.
a. Vatsyayana, Nyayabhallya.
b. Uddyotakara, Nyiiyaviirtika.
c. Jayanta Bhatta, Nyiiyamanjari.
d. Vacaspati Misra, Nyiiyaviirttikatiitparyayatrkii.
e. Udayana, Atmatattvaviveka.
a. Sabara, SabarabhC4ya.
b. Kuma.ri1a, Slokavarttika.
c. Prabhakara, Brhatf.
3. Vedantic critique of Bauddhamata.
a. Badarayana, Brahmasiitras.
b. Sankara, Brahmasiitrabh~ya..
4. Sankhya-Yoga critique of Bauddhamata.
a. Patafijali, Yogasiitras.
b. Vyasa, YogabhC4ya.
c. Vacaspati Misra, Tattvava"iSaradi
d. Yuktidrpikii.
e. Vijf!linabhik~u, SiinkhyaprCIVacanabhiiflya.
B. The problem-space and trajectory of the Buddhist-Brahmanical debate.
V. The Buddhist-Brahmanical Controversy as Ideology and Ritual.
A. The defensive synthesis of Buddhist thought.
1. The dialectic of philosophical networl}s from Nagiirjuna to Santarak~ita.
B. Erosion and collapse of the political-economic base of Buddhist philosophy. C. Materiality of Buddhist intellectuaYproduction: monasteries, universities, libraries, state
subsidy and patronage.
D. Tantrization and feudalization oflate Buddhism.
E. Brahmanical thought, caste, and feudalization.
VI. Buddhist Thought and Caste.
A. The Buddhist critique of Brahmanism.
1. Suttanipata, Vaseltha Sutta, Madhura Sutta.
2. Siirdulakarf/iivadiina.
3. Vajrasiicf.
4. Kiilachakratantra, Vimalaprabhii, Paramiirthasevii.
C. Brahmanical reaction and the defense ofvan;tasrarna.
1. Evidence for the caste subordination of remnant and assimilated Buddhists.
D. The social unconscious of the Buddhist-BrahmaI}.a debate.
V. World System and Socio-Econornic Shift.
1. Islam displaces Buddhism in the international networks of trade.
2. Charkravartin: The wheel-turning monarch and the withering of Buddhism's imperial and interna­
tional role, 700-1200 CEo
3. Buddhism as ideological currency.
"VI. Under the Crescent Moon: The Impact of Muslim Conquest and Occupation on Hindu­
Buddhist Thought.
A. Loss of an independent social space.
B. Expropriation ofBuddhist cultural capital.
VII. The Disappearance of Buddhism and the Making of Mystical India 1500-1900 CEo
1. Retrenchment of orthodox darSanas in the space vacated by Buddhism
A. Madhava and Vijayanagara: Brahmanism under siege.
B. The analytic philosophy of the Mithila Naiyayikas.
C. Vedanta bhaktized and bhakti vedantized
VIII. The Relics of the Buddha: Bauddhamata, the Six dadanas, and Late Brllhmava Philosophy.
IX. The Buddha's Footprints: The Survivals of Buddhamata after the Sack of Nlilandli, 1200-1750.
A. Siddha, Dharma Cult, Sahajiya, and assimilation.
B. Buddhist communities in Bengal, Orissa, Northeast India, and the Western Himalayas up .
to the 18th cell.
1. Achyutananda, the Sunya Purii1J.a. and Vai!!:Qava-Buddhist syncretism
Coda: The Death and Rebirth of Buddhist Thought.
Bibliography
Sanskrit, Indic, and Tibetan Texts
Achutananda Dasa, Sunya Samhita Madhavavacrya SarvadarSanasamgraha
Asvaghosa, Vajrasuci Mahendravarman I, Mattaviliisaprahasana.
Badarayana, Brahmasiltras. Patafijali, Yogasiltras.
Bhavabhilti, MiilatImadhava. Prabhakara, Brhan.
Bodhayana, Bhagavadajjukam. Sabara, SabarabhiiSiya. Caturbhijni or Sringarahata. Sankara, BrahmasutrabhiiSfYa. DaI)Qin, Dasakumiiracarita. Drgha Nikiiya, 1890-1911, 3 vols., ed. T.W. Rhys Davids and J.E. Carpenter, Pali Text Society, Lon­
don: Luzac.
Siirdulakarl;lavadiina, in the Divyiivadlina, A Collec­
tion ofEarly Buddhist Legends, ed. Edward B. Cow­
ell and Robert A. Neil. Amsterdam: Philo Press Pub­
lishers, 1970, XXXIII, pp. 625-630.
Sutta-Niplita, 1985, tr. H. Saddhatissa, London: Cur­
zon
Kiilachakratantra with the Paramiirthasevii and Vi­
Press.
malaprabhii Udayana, Atmatattvaviveka.
Kalidasa, Miilavikiignimitra. U ddyotakara, Nyiiyavlirttika.
Kaviriija Sankhadhara, Lataka-Melaka. Vacaspati Misra, Nyiiyaviirttikatiitparyatrkii.
Kt{!namisra, Prabodhacandrodaya. Viicaspati Misra, Tattvavaisiiradi
Ksemendra, Narma-Miilii. Vatsyayana, NyayabhaV'a.
Kumiirila, Slokaviirttika. Vijiliinabhi~u, SlinkhyapravacanabhiiSf)Ja.
The Long Discourses of the Buddha: A Translation of the Digha Nikaya, by Maurice Walsh, Boston, Mass.:
Vyasa, YogabhiiS/ya.
Wisdom Books, 1995. Yuktidfpikii.
Madhurli Sutta in the Majjhima Nikiiya, 1951, 3 vo1s., ed. Lord Robert Charlmes, Pali Text Society, London: Oxford University Press. Jayanta Bhatta, Nyiiyamafijarf. Secondary Sources
Almond, Philip C., 1988, The British Discovery ofBuddhism, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ahir, D.C., 1991, Buddhism in Modern India, Delhi: Sri Sat Guru Publications. Basham, A L., 1989, The Origins and Development ofClassical Hinduism, New York: Oxford Univer~ sity Press.
Bailey, Greg and Mabbett, Ian, 2003, The Sociology ofEarly Buddhism, Cambridge University Press.
Bechert, Heinz and Gupta, Amit Das and Roth, Gustav, 1978, "Hindu Element in the Religion of the
Buddhist Barnas and Chakmas in Bengal", Buddhism in Ceylon and Studies on Religious Syncretism in
Buddhist Countries, Heinz Bechert, ed., Gottingen: Vandenhoeck, 199~213.
Bourdieu, Pierre, 1993, The Field ofCultural Production: Essays on Art and Literature, ed. Randal John~
son, N ew York: Columbia University Press.
Briggs, G.W.,1982, Gorakhnath and the Kanphata Yogis, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Chakravarti, Uma, 1987, The Social Dimensions ofEarly Buddhism, Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Chattopadhyaya, Debiprasad, 1972, Indian Philosophy, Delhi: People's Publishing House.
1979, Studies in the History ofIndian Philosophy, 3 vols. Calcutta: K.P. Bagchi.
Collins, Randall, 1998, The Sociology ofPhilosophies" A Global Theory ofIntellectual Change, Cam­
bridge, Mass: Belknap Press ofHarvard University.
Conze, Edward, 1959, Buddhism: Its Essence and Development, New York: Harper.
---1962, Buddhist Thought in India, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Das, Rahul Peter, 1987, "More remarks on the Bengali deity Dharma, its cult and study", in Anthropos,
v. 82, n. 1-3,221-251.
Das, Sri Paritosh, 1988, Sahajiya Cult ofBengal and Pancha Sakha Cult ofOrissa, Calcutta: Firma KLM
Private Ltd.
Dasgupta, Surendranath, 1922-1955, History ofIndian Philosophy, 5 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni­
versity Press.
Davidson, Ronald M., 2002, Indian Esoteric Buddhism: A Social History ofthe Tantric Movement, New
York: Columbia University Press.
Davies, C. Collin, 1949, An Historical Atlas ofthe Indian Peninsula, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Dharmasvamin, 1959, Biography ofDharmasvamin (Chag 10 tsa-ba Chos-Ije-dpal) a Tibetan monk pil­
grim; Original Tibetan text deciphered and translated by George Roerich, with a historical and critical
introd. by A. S. Altekar, . Historical researches series, 2, Patna: K. P. Jayaswal Research Institute.
Dutt, Sukumar. 1988, Buddhist Monks and Monasteries ofIndia, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
sityPress.
Encyclopedia ofIndian Philosophies, 1997, Vol 2, Indian Metaphysics and Epistemology: The Tradition
ofNyaya-Vaisesika up to Gangesa. 1981, Vol. 3, Advaita Vedanta up to Samkara and His Pupils.
1987, Vol. 4, Samkhya: A Dualist Tradition in Indian Philosophy. 1990, Vol. 5, The Philosophy ofthe
Grammarians. Vol. VI, Indian Philosophical Analysis: Nyaya-VaiSesikafrom Gang,!sa to Raghunatha
Siromay/i. Vol. VII, Abhidharma Philosophy to 150 A.D., Vol. VIII, Buddhist Philosophy from 100 to
350 A.D. ed. Karl Potter et al. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Eliot, Charles, 1954, Hinduism and Buddhism, 3 vols. New York: Barnes & Noble.
Frauwallner, 1974, Erich, History ofIndian Philosophy, intro. Leo Gabriel, tr. V.M. Bedekar, New York:
Humanities Press.
Gokhale, B.G., 1976, Buddhism in Maharashtra: A History. Bombay: Popular Prakashan.
Gombrich, Richard, 1988, Theravada Buddhism, London: Routledge.
Guenther, Herbert, 1972, Buddhist Philosophy, Baltimore: Penguin Books.
Halbfass, Wilhelm, 1988, India and Europe, Albany: SUNY Press.
- - - 1991, Tradition and Reflection: Explorations in Indian Thought, Albany: SUNY Press.
---1992, On Being and What There Is: Classical Vaisesika and the History ofIndian Ontology, Al­
bany: SUNY Press.
Hallisey, Charles and Reynolds, Frank, 1989, "Buddhist Religion, Culture, and Civilization," in Bud­
dhism and Asian History, Joseph M. Kitagawa and Mark D. Cummings, eds., New York: Macmillan,
3-49.
- - - 1989, "The Buddha," in Buddhism and Asian History, Joseph M. Kitagawa and Mark D. Cum­
mings, eds., New York: Macmillan, 3-49.
Hazra, Kani Lal,. 1995, The Rise and Decline ofBuddhism in India. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal
Publishers.
Hirakawa, Akira, 1990, A History ofIndian Buddhism: From Sakyamuni to Early Mahayana, Honolulu:
University Press.
Isayeva, Natalia, 1993, Shankara and Indian Philosophy, Albany: SUNY Press.
- - - 1995, From Early Vedanta to Kashmir Shaivism, Albany: SUNY Press.
Jacobi, Hermann, 1911, "The Dates of the Philosophical Sutras," vol. 31, Journal ofthe American
Oriental Society.
Joshi, Lal Mani, 1983, Discerning the Buddha: A Study ofBuddhism and the Brahmanical Hindu Attitude
to It. New Delhi: Munishiram Manoharlal.
Kalupahana, David, 1986, Nagarjuna: The Philosophy ofthe Middle Way, Albany: SUNY Press.
---1992, A History ofBuddhist Philosophy, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Keay, John, 2001, India: A History, Harper Collins.
Kher, Chitrarekha V., 1992, Buddhism As Presented by the Brahmanical Systems, Delhi: Sri Satguru Publications. King, Richard, 1995, Early Vedanta and Buddhism, Albany: SUNY Press. - - - 1999, Indian Philosophy: An Introduction to Hindu and Buddhist Philosophy, Edinburgh: Edinburgh Uni­ versity Press. - - - 1999, Orientalism and Religion: Postcolonial Theory, India and 'The Mystic East', London:
Routledge.
Kosambi, D.D., 1986, 'The Decline of Buddhism in India,' in Exasperating Essays: Exercises in the Dia­
lectical Method. Pune: RP. Nene.
Krishna, Daya (ed.) What Is Living and What Is Dead in Indian Philosophy? Waltair: India, Andhra Uni­
versity Press.
- - - 1991, Indian Philosophy' A Counter Perspective, New York: Oxford University Press.
Lamotte, Etienne, 1988, History oflndian Buddhism: From the Origins to the Saka Era, tr. Sara Webb­
Bonn, Universit6 Catholique de Louvain, Institute Orientaliste, Louvain-Paris: Peeters Press.
Ling, Trevor, 1978, "Buddhist Bengal and After", in History and Society, ed. D. Chattopaddhya, 317-375.
Mann, Michael, 1986, The Sources ofSocial Power, vol. 1 New York: Cambridge University Press.
Matilal, B.K., 1985, Logic, Language, and Reality: An Introduction to Indian Philosophical Studies,
Delhi: Motilala Banarsidas.
- - - 1986, Perception: An Essay on Classical Indian Theories ofKnowledge, New York:
Oxford University Press.
- - - 1990, The Word and the World: India's Contribution to the Study ofLanguage, New York: Ox­
ford University Press.
Misra, Pramatha Nath, 1993, An Outline History ofMUMla, Calcutta: Arnar Bharati.
Nakamura, Hajime, 1973, Religions and Philosophies ofIndia, Tokyo: Hokuseido Press.
- - 1980, Indian Buddhism: A Survey with Bibliographical Notes. KUFS Publication, Japan.
O'F1aherty, Wendy Doniger, 1980, Karma and Rebirth in Classical Indian Traditions, Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Oxford History ofIndia, 1981, 4th ed. Edited by Percival Spear, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Omvelt, Gail, 2003, Buddhism in India: Challenging Brahmanism and Caste, New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Pandey, Kanti, Chandra, 1986, An Outline ofHistory ofShaiva Philosophy, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Patra, Chittarajan, 1991, Present Buddhist Tribals and Viharas in West Bengal, Calcutta: Sarkar & Co.
Phillips, Stephen H. 1995, Classical Indian Metaphysics: Refutations ofRealism and the Emergence of
"New Logic," Chicago: Open Court.
- - - , Creel, Austin and Gerow, Edwin, 1988, Guide to Indian Philosophy, Boston, Mass.: G.K. Hall. Quigley, Declan, 1993, Interpretation ofCaste, Oxford: Clarendon Press. Raju, P.T., 1985, Structural Depths ofIndian Philosophy, Albany: SUNY Press. Rani, Vijaya, 1982, The Buddhist Philosophy as Presented in Mimamsa-Sloka-Varttika, Delhi: Parimal Publications. Ray, Himanshu, 1994, The Winds ofChange: Buddhism and the Maritime Links ofEarly South Asia, Delhi: OUP.
Rubin, Walter, 1954, Geschichte der indischen Philosophie, Berlin: Deutscher Verlag der Wissenschaften.
Sahu, N.K, 1958, Buddhism in Orissa. Bhubaneswar: Utkal University.
Sastri, K. A.N., 1999, A History ofSouth Asia: From Prehistoric Times to the Fall ofVijayanagar. New
Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Searle-ChatteIje, Mary and Sharma, Ursula, eds., 1994, Contextualizing Caste: Post Dumontian Approaches,
Oxford: Blackwell.
Sharma, R.S., Indian Feudalism, c. 300-1200. Calcutta: Calcutta University Press.
Shastri, Dharrnendranatha, 1964, Critique ofIndian Realism, Agra: Agra University.
---1976, ThePhilosophy ofNyaya-Vaisesika and its Conflict with the Buddhist Dignaga School,
Delhi: Bharatiya Vidhya Prakashan.
Smith, Brian K., 1994, Classifying the Universe: The Ancient Indian Varna System and the Origins of
Caste, New York: Oxford University Press.
Staal, Fritz, 1988, Universals. Studies in Indian Logic and Linguistics, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Stch~rbatsky,
Th., 1930, Buddhist Logic, 2 vols. Bibliotheca Buddhica, XXVI, Leningrad, 1930.
- - - 1956, The Central Conception ofBuddhism, Calcutta.
Subrarnaniam, V., 1993, Buddhist-Hindu Interactionsfrom Sakyamuni to Sankaracarya, ed. V. Subramaniam,
Delhi: Ajanta Publications.
Tiiraniitha 's History ofBuddhism in India, 1990, tr. Lama Chimpa Alaka Chattopadhyaya, Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidas,
Templeman, David (1997) "Buddhaguptanatha: A Late Indian Siddha in Tibet." In Helmut Krasser, Mi­
chael Torsten Much, Ernst Steinkellner and Helmut Tauscher (eds) Tibetan Studies. Proceedings ofthe
7th Seminar ofthe International Association o/Tibetan Studies, Graz 1995, Vol.Il pp.955-966.Wien:
Verlag der Dsterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. (Dsterreichische Akademie der Wissen­
schaften, Philosophisch-Historisch Klasse. Denkschriften, 256. Band. Beitrlige zur Kultur- und Geist
esgeschichte Asiens, Nr.21.)
Thapar, Romila, 1966, A History ofIndia, Baltimore: Penguin Books.
Tucci, G., 1931, "The Sea and Land Travels ofaBuddhist Sadhu in the Sixteenth Century", in The Indian
Vasu, Nagendra Nath, 1986. Modern Buddhism and its Followers in Orissa, Delhi: Gian Publishing
House.
Walters, Jonathan, 1998, Finding Buddhists in Global History, Washington D.C.: American Historical
Association.
Weber, Max, 1996, The Religion ofIndia. Delhi: Munshiram ManoharlaL
Willis, Janice Dean, 1979, On Knowing Reality: The Tattvartha Chapter ofAsanga 's Bodhisattvabhumi,
New York: Columbia University Press.
Wink, Andre, 2002, AI-Hind: The Making ofthe Indo-Islamic World, 3 vol. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
Zurcher, Erik, 1959, The Buddhist Conquest ofChina, Leiden: E.J. Brill.
---1962, Buddhism: Its Origins and Spread in Words, Maps, and Pictures, London: Routledge.