This is patently false. Indian kingdoms prior to the Mughals were not absolute monarchies. Earliest source [1]: "Buddha, however, had stated explicitly to his

This is patently false. Indian kingdoms prior to the Mughals were not absolute monarchies. Earliest source [1]: "Buddha, however, had stated explicitly to his disciples on several occasions that, after he had passed away, the Dharma itself would serve as their teacher. He wished his community to continue on the model of the parliamentary system of Vajji. He did not intend for them to model themselves after a kingdom like Kosala and Magadha and have a single chief monk as its head." Vajji, amongst other states, is known from various sources to have a representative council system of government [2]. This form of government was called "Gana Sangha" or "Council of Tribes"[3] Furthermore, most Indian rulers prior to the Mongols (Mughals) separated their Dharma (religion) and State. I say most, because some like Ashoka were intolerant if Buddhist scriptures are to be believed. The idea of Church and State separation as enshrined in Western Constitutions is an artefact peculiar to Semitic religions. The Judeo-Christian-Islamic traditions see church and state as one - viz - the Holy Roman empire, the Caliph - religious and temporal ruler. Even today the Queen of England is the head of the Church of England the head of state. Dharmic traditions (Hindu/Buddhist/Jain) - do not have this notion of political power being vested in the religious authority. Hindu/Buddhist rulers gave patronage to most sects including Christians (52 AD), Jews (since King Solomon's time) and Zoroastrians (8th century AD). [1] https://studybuddhism.com/en/advanced-studies/history-cultur https://studybuddhism.com/en/advanced-studies/history-cultur... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic. See citations for 35,36 [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ga%E1%B9%87a_sangha https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ga%E1%B9%87a_sangha