to my somewhat limited understanding… didn’t Ashoka stop the conquest of his neighbors more because his empire was getting too big to manage anyways- spending more time putting down the inevitable rebellions rather than invading new places. Remember, few places ever truly forget they were subjugated.
Regardless, his conversion happened after, and Buddhism definitely benefited from his prior conquest as he built shitloads of temples everywhere to “enlighten” the normies. perhaps it is my own bias, but I’m doubting that the people converting didn’t feel at least some coercion to it.
I’m inclined to agree this seems like a clear case where a ruler was forcing Buddhism as a religion on his people, though I do think it’s a bit different than the Crusades in terms of thinking about it as “violence spreading a religion” - it’s more like past violence resulted in a regime that then adopted Buddhism as a religion afterwards (an Ashoka’s case, largely in reaction to the violence of his conquests), so it feels different - but it’s still coercive and built on past violence (and the threat of possible future violence if not compliant), and that’s worth acknowledging.
to my somewhat limited understanding… didn’t Ashoka stop the conquest of his neighbors more because his empire was getting too big to manage anyways- spending more time putting down the inevitable rebellions rather than invading new places. Remember, few places ever truly forget they were subjugated.
Regardless, his conversion happened after, and Buddhism definitely benefited from his prior conquest as he built shitloads of temples everywhere to “enlighten” the normies. perhaps it is my own bias, but I’m doubting that the people converting didn’t feel at least some coercion to it.
I’m inclined to agree this seems like a clear case where a ruler was forcing Buddhism as a religion on his people, though I do think it’s a bit different than the Crusades in terms of thinking about it as “violence spreading a religion” - it’s more like past violence resulted in a regime that then adopted Buddhism as a religion afterwards (an Ashoka’s case, largely in reaction to the violence of his conquests), so it feels different - but it’s still coercive and built on past violence (and the threat of possible future violence if not compliant), and that’s worth acknowledging.