3 ms·
The same Ashoka continued to slaughter en masse people who seemed to disagree with him, even after his conversion to Buddhism and taking up ahimsa (nonviolence)
by kranner 6y ago
The same Ashoka continued to slaughter en masse people who seemed to disagree with him, even after his conversion to Buddhism and taking up ahimsa (nonviolence) as a governing principle [1]. Except after his conversion he restricted the genocide to non-Buddhists. Though this may have been an improvement from before his conversion to Buddhism when he executed or enslaved the entire population of Kalinga [2].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashokavadana https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashokavadana
> Ashokavadana mentions two incidents of Ashoka turning towards violence after adopting Buddhism. In one instance, a non-Buddhist in Pundravardhana drew a picture showing the Buddha bowing at the feet of Nirgrantha Jnatiputra (identified with Mahavira, the founder of Jainism). On complaint from a Buddhist devotee, Ashoka issued an order to arrest him, and subsequently, another order to kill all the Ajivikas in Pundravardhana. Around 18,000 followers of the Ajivika sect were executed as a result of this order.
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalinga_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalinga_War
- alexmingoia 6y agoYes, he was a warring bloodthirsty emperor that used the popular religion at the time to consolidate his power. Like most other empires on the planet two thousand years ago. I’m not sure what that is supposed to prove about Buddhism in particular.
- kranner 6y agoIt doesn't prove anything about Buddhism. I only meant Ashoka is constantly put up as an example of someone whose conduct improved after conversion to Buddhism, but that is a very selective reading.