[lenkite]

Buddhism was the tranquilizing death of India. You can argue that Islamic invaders would have conquered India anyways - but with Buddhism they rarely even had to fight!

Their puzzlement is even captured in several journals where they could range for hundreds of miles and loot/burn with little to no resistance. And do it once again a few years later!

[rramadass]

There is a stronger argument to be made that it was because of the establishment of Buddhism as the de-facto state philosophy/religion/practice in North/Northwest part of India that the Islamic invaders could conquer India. Buddhism for all its intellectual/ethical/moral strengths was not a pragmatic religion. It ignored the realities of Life in favour of higher ideals in a context ill-suited to its survival and hence paid the price at the hands of barbaric muslim invaders. This happened through the elevation of Ahimsa into an all-encompassing tenet of state policy which severely sapped the Martial Spirit of the population and thus could offer no resistance to invaders bent on genocide. Prior to Buddhism (and Jainism) while Ahimsa was considered one of the central pillars of Hinduism its limitations in the practical world were acknowledged and Kings were expected to protect by force if necessary, those practicing Ahimsa as a way of life. With this gone, North/Northwest India was easy prey to barbaric muslim invaders who did not play by the same rules.

[selimthegrim]

In Sindh Buddhist regions yielded peacefully to Muslims as opposed to Hindus/Raja Dahir

[rramadass]

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41537302