佛教在印度的衰落应该归咎于谁？
who is to blame for the fall of buddhism in india?
译文简介
根据汉文献和藏文献记载，印度僧侣在15世纪初的明朝宫廷中仍然相当常见。在永乐和宣德年间，有一群僧侣被称为西天僧（即印度僧侣），由中国僧人智光领导，他的梵名为 Yañarāśīmi 雅纳哕释弥。他甚至曾前往尼泊尔执行外交任务，尽管他翻译的大部分经文来自藏文而非梵文，但两者都被称为梵文，这造成了很多混淆。然而到了15世纪中叶，这些西方僧侣统统被称为藏僧，这显示印度的影响力逐渐减弱。但根据文献记载，佛教僧侣直到17世纪仍存在于印度。
正文翻译
Buddhism, as we know, was preached by Siddharta Gautama around 25 hundred years ago and first arose as an order of mendicant, wanderer monks - the sangha - in the northern kingdom of Maghada in India.
佛教，如我们所知，是由悉达多·乔达摩大约在2500年前所宣讲的，最初以一群托钵游行的僧侣——僧伽（saṅgha）的形式，在印度摩揭陀国的北部兴起。
More than hundred years later, the sangha split over matters of vinaya, that is, monastic discipline - the liberal party, the Mahasanghikas & the conservative, the Sthaviras. In fact, this was just the first in a series of splits that produced several different Buddhist schools, as the Theravada, the Sarvastivada, the Mula-Sarvastivada, the Dharmaguptaka, the Caitika, etc.
一百多年后，僧伽因戒律（vinaya，即僧团纪律）问题而产生分裂——自由派为“大众部”（Mahāsāṃghika），保守派为“上座部”（Sthavira）。事实上，这只是一系列分裂中的第一次，随后又产生了若干不同的佛教学派，例如上座部佛教（Theravāda）、说一切有部（Sarvāstivāda）、根本说一切有部（Mūla-Sarvāstivāda）、法藏部（Dharmaguptaka）、制多山部（Caitika）等等。
Under this context, Mahayana arose half a millenia after the death of the historical Buddha, and with it, a creative explosion generating hundreds of new texts, probably one of the greatest creative outbursts in the history of India - conveniently enough, Mahayana ideologists as Nagarjuna claimed they have simply "found" the texts in some supernatural realm... which of course, doesn’t subtract any merit to such creativity.
在这种背景下，大乘佛教于佛陀入灭约五百年后兴起，并伴随而来的是一次创造力的爆发，产生了数以百计的新经典，或许是佛教在印度历史上最为宏大的创造性喷发之一。大乘思想家龙树等人声称，他们只是“在某个超自然领域中发现”了这些经典……当然，这并不削弱这一创造力的思想价值。
As we see, so far Buddhism had been eminently an Indian religion, born & shaped through Indic idiosyncrasies and languages. Mahayana, however, with the charismatic devotionalism it inspired, made it suitable for export via Gandhara, Central Asia, the Silk Route... until it finally reached China, where it would find whole new cultural expressions, and eventually, new golden ages.
佛教一直是一种印度宗教，由印度的文化特质与语言塑造而成。然而，大乘佛教凭借其充满魅力的虔信精神，使之成为一种适合传播的宗教，经由犍陀罗、中亚、丝绸之路……最终传入中国，并在那里开创新的文化表现形式，甚至迎来新的黄金时代。
In the meantime, in India the Buddhist empires had fallen, and its middle ages featured regimes as the Gupta, which heavily patronized the resurgent Hinduism, which proved very useful for kings and rulers out of their rituals to support those in power. The decline of Buddhism had began, but it still had time to try what it knew better to resist: a new creative outburst. This time it would be centered around the tantra, with its very peculiars mahasiddhis, a new kind of saint with extremely heterodox practices, including sexual feasts... these new 'saints' suspiciously emerged from the same charnel grounds where Shivaist practices were performed. This is how Vajrayana Buddhism arose. Some say this very same fact made it easier for Hinduist ideologists to feast on Buddhism...
与此同时，在印度本土，佛教帝国已然覆灭，中世纪的政权如笈多王朝则大力扶持复兴印度教，其祭祀仪式对国王与统治者巩固权力非常有用。佛教的衰落已然开始，但它仍然尝试以自己最擅长的方式抵抗：再一次创造性的爆发。这一次是密教（Tantra），出现了一群非常独特的大成就者（Mahāsiddha）修行群体，拥有极其异端的修行方式，包括性仪式……这些新的修行者开始出现在湿婆派修行的尸陀林中。密乘佛教（Vajrayāna）由此兴起。有人说，正因这一事实，使得印度教能够更容易地吞并佛教。
After this, there were no further creative outbursts of Buddhism in India. By the time the Muslim Turkic armies started to overrun the northern plains, Buddhism had all but vanished from what as once one of its safest strongholds, Ghandara, and was in frank decadence everywhere else.
此后，印度佛教不再出现新的创造性爆发。当穆斯林突厥军队开始攻占北印度平原时，佛教从其曾经最稳固堡垒—健驮罗那里消失了，并且在其他地方也处于彻底衰落中。
Hence, we can say there's an unsettled question asked from the abyss... who is to blame from the vanishing of Buddhism from the Indian subcontinent?
因此，一个来自深渊的未解之问仍在回荡……佛教从印度次大陆的消逝，到底该归咎于谁？
The Hinduist rulers from medi India?
中世纪印度的印度教统治者？
The Muslim armies who stroke the coup de grace?
给予致命一击的穆斯林军队？
Or Indian Buddhism itself, contempt with being exported and finding a new home abroad?
还是印度佛教本身，甘于被其他教派竞争输出，于是在海外找到新的家园？
佛教，如我们所知，是由悉达多·乔达摩大约在2500年前所宣讲的，最初以一群托钵游行的僧侣——僧伽（saṅgha）的形式，在印度摩揭陀国的北部兴起。
More than hundred years later, the sangha split over matters of vinaya, that is, monastic discipline - the liberal party, the Mahasanghikas & the conservative, the Sthaviras. In fact, this was just the first in a series of splits that produced several different Buddhist schools, as the Theravada, the Sarvastivada, the Mula-Sarvastivada, the Dharmaguptaka, the Caitika, etc.
一百多年后，僧伽因戒律（vinaya，即僧团纪律）问题而产生分裂——自由派为“大众部”（Mahāsāṃghika），保守派为“上座部”（Sthavira）。事实上，这只是一系列分裂中的第一次，随后又产生了若干不同的佛教学派，例如上座部佛教（Theravāda）、说一切有部（Sarvāstivāda）、根本说一切有部（Mūla-Sarvāstivāda）、法藏部（Dharmaguptaka）、制多山部（Caitika）等等。
Under this context, Mahayana arose half a millenia after the death of the historical Buddha, and with it, a creative explosion generating hundreds of new texts, probably one of the greatest creative outbursts in the history of India - conveniently enough, Mahayana ideologists as Nagarjuna claimed they have simply "found" the texts in some supernatural realm... which of course, doesn’t subtract any merit to such creativity.
在这种背景下，大乘佛教于佛陀入灭约五百年后兴起，并伴随而来的是一次创造力的爆发，产生了数以百计的新经典，或许是佛教在印度历史上最为宏大的创造性喷发之一。大乘思想家龙树等人声称，他们只是“在某个超自然领域中发现”了这些经典……当然，这并不削弱这一创造力的思想价值。
As we see, so far Buddhism had been eminently an Indian religion, born & shaped through Indic idiosyncrasies and languages. Mahayana, however, with the charismatic devotionalism it inspired, made it suitable for export via Gandhara, Central Asia, the Silk Route... until it finally reached China, where it would find whole new cultural expressions, and eventually, new golden ages.
佛教一直是一种印度宗教，由印度的文化特质与语言塑造而成。然而，大乘佛教凭借其充满魅力的虔信精神，使之成为一种适合传播的宗教，经由犍陀罗、中亚、丝绸之路……最终传入中国，并在那里开创新的文化表现形式，甚至迎来新的黄金时代。
In the meantime, in India the Buddhist empires had fallen, and its middle ages featured regimes as the Gupta, which heavily patronized the resurgent Hinduism, which proved very useful for kings and rulers out of their rituals to support those in power. The decline of Buddhism had began, but it still had time to try what it knew better to resist: a new creative outburst. This time it would be centered around the tantra, with its very peculiars mahasiddhis, a new kind of saint with extremely heterodox practices, including sexual feasts... these new 'saints' suspiciously emerged from the same charnel grounds where Shivaist practices were performed. This is how Vajrayana Buddhism arose. Some say this very same fact made it easier for Hinduist ideologists to feast on Buddhism...
与此同时，在印度本土，佛教帝国已然覆灭，中世纪的政权如笈多王朝则大力扶持复兴印度教，其祭祀仪式对国王与统治者巩固权力非常有用。佛教的衰落已然开始，但它仍然尝试以自己最擅长的方式抵抗：再一次创造性的爆发。这一次是密教（Tantra），出现了一群非常独特的大成就者（Mahāsiddha）修行群体，拥有极其异端的修行方式，包括性仪式……这些新的修行者开始出现在湿婆派修行的尸陀林中。密乘佛教（Vajrayāna）由此兴起。有人说，正因这一事实，使得印度教能够更容易地吞并佛教。
After this, there were no further creative outbursts of Buddhism in India. By the time the Muslim Turkic armies started to overrun the northern plains, Buddhism had all but vanished from what as once one of its safest strongholds, Ghandara, and was in frank decadence everywhere else.
此后，印度佛教不再出现新的创造性爆发。当穆斯林突厥军队开始攻占北印度平原时，佛教从其曾经最稳固堡垒—健驮罗那里消失了，并且在其他地方也处于彻底衰落中。
Hence, we can say there's an unsettled question asked from the abyss... who is to blame from the vanishing of Buddhism from the Indian subcontinent?
因此，一个来自深渊的未解之问仍在回荡……佛教从印度次大陆的消逝，到底该归咎于谁？
The Hinduist rulers from medi India?
中世纪印度的印度教统治者？
The Muslim armies who stroke the coup de grace?
给予致命一击的穆斯林军队？
Or Indian Buddhism itself, contempt with being exported and finding a new home abroad?
还是印度佛教本身，甘于被其他教派竞争输出，于是在海外找到新的家园？
评论翻译
很赞 ( 14 )
收藏
The British. It's always the fault of the British. Whatever it is.
当然怪英国人。无论发生什么事，永远都是英国人的错。
Rhymehouse
I'm no expert, but after a resurgence of Hinduism, many Hindu priests publicly criticized Buddhism and made moves against it. Indian society as a whole was preferring the polytheistic, ritual-focused religion in Hinduism over the non-theistic Buddhism. The final deathblow to Buddhism in India were the Muslim invasions. The attacking Arabs and Central Asians destroyed almost every Buddhist temple and monastery they came across. Hinduism was able to survive better without centralization.
我不是专家，但在印度教复兴之后，许多印度教祭司公开批评佛教，并采取行动打击它。整个印度社会更倾向于多神论、注重仪式的印度教，而不是非神论的佛教。佛教在印度遭受的最后一击来自穆斯林的入侵。阿拉伯人和中亚游牧民族的军队摧毁了他们遇到的几乎所有佛教寺庙和僧院。印度教因为没有中央集权，反而更容易存续下来。
Aupmanyav
IMHO, Buddhist scholars. They made it so technical, and there was no God to help people in distress or fulfill their desires.
The rest was done by Muslim invaders, right from Bamiyan in Afghanistan to Peshawar to Taxila to Nalanda in Bihar.
Muslims seem to have been more severe on Buddhists than on Hindus.
在我看来，问题出在佛教学者身上。他们把佛教弄得过于技术化，而且没有神明可以帮助人们在困境中解脱或满足他们的愿望。
剩下的则是穆斯林入侵者造成的，从阿富汗的巴米扬到白沙瓦、到塔克西拉、再到比哈尔的那烂陀。
穆斯林对佛教徒的打击似乎比对印度教徒更为严厉。
charlie ia
the problem with this my friend is that budhism was always extremely technical, from the very beginning. the noble eightfold path, the complementary tenfold path, the 4 jhanas, the 3 knowledges, the 5 excellent states, the 4 dhamma groups, the 7 good qualities, the 3 attainments... followed by an extremely long etcetera.
问题在于，我的朋友，佛教从一开始就非常技术化。八正道、十善道、四禅、三明、五根、四法、七觉支、三果位……后面还有极其冗长的一大串。
arguably, the whole point of buddhism from its inception was indeed to plug the cable out of this world...
可以说，佛教自创立以来，其根本目的就是要把人与世界连接的“电缆”拔掉……
anyway mahayana ideologists' fear of the end of the dhamma was related to this disconnection, and that's why they put their efforts in taking the faith to the lay people, making it more devotionalist. over time indeed mahayana buddhism was much more inclusive of the everyday guy, as we can see today for example in China or japan.
无论如何，大乘佛教思想家们对于“佛法末世”的担忧与这种脱离感有关，这就是他们努力将信仰推广到在家人群体，使佛教更具虔信色彩的原因。随着时间的推移，大乘佛教确实变得更加包容普通人，就像我们今天在中国或日本所看到的那样。
frankly, i feel the huge problem was not really the technicalities... but the other way around, that anxiety to keep pushing the faith to meet the cultural trends of the indian courts making buddhism less and less budhist and more and more... shivaist. in the end, why would u buy the copy if u can have the original at the same price?
坦率地说，我觉得真正的大问题并不是佛教的技术性……而是另一面：佛教不断努力迎合印度王室，使佛教变得越来越不像佛教，而越来越像……湿婆派。最终，既然你能以同样的“价格”得到原版（印度教），又何必去买一个“复制品”呢？
yes nalanda was destroyed by the muslim armies. but the situation by that time for buddhism was all but finished. that's why i said it was a 'coup de grace'.
那烂陀确实被穆斯林军队摧毁了。但在那之前，佛教几乎已经失败了。穆斯林军队只是给予最后一击。
as gail omvedt put it in her masterly Buddhism in India "There seem to have been inherent contradictions between Buddhist and Brahmanic teachings, such that one had to drive out the other".
正如盖尔·奥姆维德在其名著《印度的佛教》中所言：“佛教与婆罗门教的教义之间似乎存在内在的矛盾，以至于二者必有一方将另一方驱逐。”
based on the descxtions from the travels of xuanzang, she points out:
根据玄奘游记中的记载，他指出：
On the whole, this poor condition not only shows the major set-back suffered by Buddhism, but also suggests that it was not simply and voluntarily replaced by the Brahmanic Hindu culture. Some open political conflict and religious repression is described, and we can also infer that the depopulation and devastation, that characterised Kapilavastu and Kusinagara, must have resulted from a severe repression.
佛教在印度的凋敝状态不仅表明佛教遭受了重大挫折，也说明佛教并非单纯自愿地被婆罗门教的印度教文化所取代。文献中描述了一些公开的政治冲突与宗教压制，我们还可以推断，迦毗罗卫与拘尸那罗所发生的人口锐减与荒凉，必然是严重迫害的结果。
the problem was not only the guptas... almost all regional dynasties after the 7th century were hindu, with the exception of the pala in bengal.
问题并不仅仅出在笈多王朝……7世纪之后，印度几乎所有的地区王朝都是信奉印度教的，唯一的例外是孟加拉的波罗王朝。
and they werent quite tolerant towards non-hindus...
而且这些王朝对非印度教徒并不算宽容……
beside the fact that hinduism was far more attractive to the royals: budhism demanded them to be moral, meanwhile hindu brahmins didnt care for such a thing. the only thing hindu brahmins demanded from the king... was to enforce the caste system. we can imagine everyone at the royal court smiling.
印度教对王室更具吸引力：佛教要求他们讲求道德，而印度教婆罗门对此毫不在意。婆罗门对国王唯一的要求……就是维护种姓制度。可以想象王室里的人们有多喜欢印度教。
starstrike
I'd go so far as to argue that state violence was integral to the spread of Buddhism. Ashoka for eg. exhorted the common people to be non-violent, but the same rules clearly never applied to his army.
我甚至可以说，国家暴力是佛教传播的一个组成部分。例如，阿育王劝诫百姓要非暴力，但显然这些规则从未适用于他的军队。
Yury
No ruler ever followed his religion to the letter. If one did he would never survive for too long.
没有任何统治者会严格遵循自己信奉的宗教，如果真那样做，他也无法长久存活。
Aupmanyav said:
Brahmanism was smart, it accepted Buddha as the ninth avatara of Lord Vishnu.
婆罗门教很聪明，它接受佛陀，称其为毗湿奴的第九化身。
Aupmanyav
Assimilation again. Accepted Buddhist teaching in their own views (Advaita has both 'anicca' (non-permanence) and 'anatta' (no-self), or one can say that these teachings were already there from which Buddha picked them up. Accepted Buddha as avatara of Vishnu. So, there was no difference other than in name. Both subscribed to the concept of 'dharma'. Who among the Hindus, Jains and Sikhs will differ with the 'Noble Eight-fold Path'? This common thread runs through all Indian religions.
佛教被印度教同化了。他们吸收了佛教教义（阿德瓦塔哲学中也包含“无常”（anicca）与“无我”（anatta），或者可以说这些教义本来就存在，佛陀只是借用而已）。接受佛陀为毗湿奴的化身。因此，除了名称之外，没有区别。两者都认同“法”（dharma）的概念。在印度教、耆那教和锡克教中，谁会反对“八正道”？这一共同点贯穿了所有印度宗教。
Richard Chen
There's no single thing to blame, it's just a bunch of things that happened in the process of Indian history.
1. Originally Buddhism took off (as influential mass religion) because Ashoka wanted to use them counterbalance the Brahmin caste power. So it became the tool of the secular powers to fight off that of the traditional spiritual leading class.
2. One of the big turning points was the Kushan invasion of India, where the foreign power also favored Buddhism for similar reasons, but this then put the local Warrior / secular powers at odds with them.
3. The reform of the old Vedic religions into what became Hinduism was the second big blow, as this reformed version of the old religion took on the lessons and managed to really weaken Buddhism in general.
4. The final deathblow of course was Islam, who was kind of fighting for the same pie as Buddhism (the lower castes in many cases.), on top of physically destroying the Buddhist temples.
And ultimately Buddhism also found more fertile grounds outside of it's original homeland, and there were just much more Indian monks leaving for China / SEA and even Japan than vice versa. The Chinese version was kind of a somewhat different evolution of Buddhism.
没有单一原因可以归咎，这是印度历史进程中发生的一系列事情造成的。
1. 佛教最初能够兴起（成为有影响力的大众宗教），是因为阿育王想用佛教来制衡婆罗门阶层的权力。因此，佛教成为世俗政权对抗传统宗教领袖阶层的工具。
2. 第一次重大打击是贵霜帝国入侵印度，当时外国势力出于类似原因也支持佛教，但这使得当地的武士/世俗势力与佛教产生矛盾。
3. 吠陀宗教改革后的印度教，对佛教来说是第二次重大打击，这种改革后的古老宗教吸收了佛教的教训，并成功地削弱了佛教的整体影响力。
4. 最终的致命一击当然是伊斯兰教，他们争夺的对象与佛教相同（下层阶级），此外还摧毁了佛教寺庙。
最终，佛教在其原生地以外找到了更肥沃的土壤，去中国、东南亚甚至日本的印度僧侣远多于相反方向。中国佛教是一种稍有不同的版本。
songtsen
Look at Buddhism in kathmandu and you will see why Buddhism vanished in India. Buddhism in Newar community has castes, has special priests and is virtually indistinguishable from bigger Hindu community. The only reason it still exists is largely due to neighboring Tibet and business caravans that moved between them and ethnic pride. The profits from these trips made Buddhist sangha and community somewhat self reliant. When all you gods have Hindu counterparts it is very hard not to assimilate.
看看加德满都的佛教，你就会明白佛教为何在印度消失。尼瓦尔社区的佛教有种姓，有专门的祭司，几乎无法与印度教社区区分开来。它仍然存在的唯一原因，主要是邻近西藏，以及往返的商队和民族自豪感。这些商队带来的供奉使佛教僧团和社区在一定程度上自给自足。当你所有的神都有印度教的神与之对应时，很难不被同化。
Aupmanyav
There is no difference between Hinduism and Buddhism. 'Dharma' is the same in both. Buddha did not rail against Gods, he just considered them irrelevant. As I have always said, I am partly a Buddhist.
印度教和佛教没有区别。“法”（Dharma）在两者中都是相同的。佛陀并没有攻击诸神，他只是认为它们无关紧要。我其实算是个佛教徒。
AYYASH
Dharam means righteousness or religion or the way. Hindu Dharam means the way or the religion of Hindu, Bodh Dharam means the way or the religion of Bodh and Sikh Dharam means the way or the religion of Sikh. Dharam does not mean some secret set of rules or something divine. Hinduism or Hindu Dharam or Sanatan Dharam believes in Brahman or Ishwar or Ultimate God and believes the Ved to be the divine set of books and purest form of knowledge. Violence is an integral part of Hindu Dharm where most of the human manifestations or Avatars of God have to use violence to destroy evilhood. Examples include Krishna in Mahabharat, Ram in Ramayana etc. In Mahabharat, Krishna also mentions Dharmayudh or "war in defence of righteousness". Buddhism or Bodh Dharam on the other hand outright rejects Ved and God. Ahinsa or Non-violence is a big thing in Bodha Dharam and violence for any reasons is wrong in Bodh Dharam. So both are fundamentally different.
Dharam“法”意思是正义、宗教或道路。Bodh Dharam“佛法”意思是佛教的道路或宗教，。Dharam“法”并不意味着某种秘密规则或神圣事物。印度教信仰梵天或至高神（Ishwar）认为吠陀是神圣的书籍集合，是最纯粹的知识形式。暴力是印度教“法”的一部分，大多数神的化身或人类表现必须使用暴力来消灭邪恶。例子包括《摩诃婆罗多》中的克里希纳、《罗摩衍那》中的罗摩等。在《摩诃婆罗多》中，克里希纳也提到 Dharmayudh，即“为了正义而战”。另一方面，佛教或“佛法”完全否定吠陀和神。Ahinsa（非暴力）是 Bodh Dharam“佛法” 的核心理念，任何理由的暴力都是错误的。因此，两者在根本上是不同的。
heavenlykaghan
We know from Chinese and Tibetan sources that Indian monks were still pretty common in the Ming court in the early 15th century. There was a group of Monks known as xitian seng, or Monks of the western heaven (India) under Yongle and Xuande's reign headed by the Chinese monk Zhiguang, whose Sanskrit name was Yañarāśīmi 雅纳哕释弥, who even went to Nepal for diplomatic purposes, although much of the sutras he translated were from Tibetan rather than Sanskrit, but they were BOTH called Sanskrit, which creates a lot of Confusion. By the mid-15th century, all these western monks were referred to as Tibetan monks however, showing that India's influence became less and less. Yet we hear from Chinese and Tibetan sources that Buddhist monks are still in India as late as the 17th century.
根据汉文献和藏文献记载，印度僧侣在15世纪初的明朝宫廷中仍然相当常见。在永乐和宣德年间，有一群僧侣被称为西天僧（即印度僧侣），由中国僧人智光领导，他的梵名为 Yañarāśīmi 雅纳哕释弥。他甚至曾前往尼泊尔执行外交任务，尽管他翻译的大部分经文来自藏文而非梵文，但两者都被称为梵文，这造成了很多混淆。然而到了15世纪中叶，这些西方僧侣统统被称为藏僧，这显示印度的影响力逐渐减弱。但根据文献记载，佛教僧侣直到17世纪仍存在于印度。
Starstrike
We know that a few Buddhist monasteries survived in the Gangetic plain well into the 15th cent., supported by minor Hindu kings. We also know that the Kashmir valley and Nepal (Kathmandu Valley) too had Buddhist monasteries well into the 14th cent, thanks to being relatively well protected behind mountain ranges. However, Kashmir had completely Islamized by the 15th cent. Nepal continues to have Buddhist monasteries. It's possible that these Indian 17th cent. monks were from Nepal. We know that a lot of the Buddhist talent fled to Nepal.
恒河平原上的一些佛教寺院一直存活到15世纪，由一些印度小邦国的国王提供支持。我们还知道，克什米尔山谷和尼泊尔（加德满都谷地）也一直有佛教寺院存续到14世纪，这得益于它们背靠山脉，相对安全。然而，到15世纪，克什米尔已经完全伊斯兰化。尼泊尔至今仍有佛教寺院。这些17世纪的印度僧侣可能来自尼泊尔。我们知道许多佛教徒都逃到了尼泊尔。
Histeeker
I have a strong suspicion that it was not the Muslim invaders directly, but rather the more decentralized and (relatively) non-hierarchical form of Buddhist clerical institutions, compared to Hinduism's Brahmin caste, in resisting Islamic expansion. Essentially I believe it to be a case of an arms race, between Islamic Imams and Hindu Brahmins, each shoring up and buttressing their spiritual authority and ability to command the masses. In this arms race which was a question of survival of two competing clerical religions, Buddhisms's relative egalitarianism lost out. By contrast, traditional Chinese culture never faced an existential threat of Muslim expansion, having defeated the Abbasids at Talas already in 751 and thus Buddhism was able to survive there. Unlike Hinduism, Confucianism claimed no rival cosmology or teleology, it was rather a set of principles of living and of civic virtue, similar to that of the Ancient Greeks, thus could be fitted "hand in glove" with Buddhism's more "egalitarian" cosmogony, each serving different functions.
我强烈怀疑，印度佛教的衰落并非直接由穆斯林入侵造成，而是佛教僧团制度相对分散、非等级化的形式在抵御伊斯兰扩张时不如印度教婆罗门种姓制度有效。本质上，我认为这是一次军备竞赛，伊斯兰教的伊玛目与印度教婆罗门之间的竞争，他们各自巩固和强化自己的权威及对大众的号召力。在这场关于两种竞争性宗教生存的军备竞赛中，佛教相对平等主义的特性败下阵来。相比之下，传统中国文化从未面临穆斯林扩张的威胁，中国早在751年的怛罗斯之战中遏制了阿拔斯帝国的扩张，因此佛教得以在中国存续。
与印度教不同，儒家不竞争辩论宇宙观或目的论，它是一套生活原则和公民美德规范，类似于古希腊文化，因此可以与佛教更“平等主义”的宇宙观结合，各自发挥不同功能。
Starstrike
There were no Hindu institutions in northern India either. The reasons the Brahmins survived is precisely because, unilike Buddhists, they didn't need any kind of institutional support. They could simply memorize and embody the tradition and transmit it orally to their children.
Buddhism died in India when the last bhikshu died, and he had no vihara where he could teach a new generation of bhikshus. Brahmins had no such problem - they could simply marry and teach their sons.
This is also why Buddhism also died in what is now Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and so on. They depended on the phyical infrastructure of the vihara, which depended on royal patronage. Once the viharas were replaced by mosques and the patronage was gone, Buddhism was gone.
北印度也没有专门的印度教机构。婆罗门得以存续的原因正是因为与佛教不同，他们不需要任何制度化的支持。他们只需记忆并践行传统，并口头传给子孙。
佛教在印度的消亡，发生在最后一位比丘去世时，他没有寺院可以教授新一代比丘。婆罗门则不存在这个问题，他们可以结婚并教育自己的儿子。这也解释了为什么佛教在现在的阿富汗、乌兹别克斯坦、塔吉克斯坦、土库曼斯坦等地也消亡了。佛教依赖寺院的物质设施，而这些设施依赖皇家资助。一旦寺院被清真寺取代，资助消失，佛教也随之消失。
starstrike
I see the relationship of India and Buddhism as similar to the relationship of Germany and Communism. Karl Marx was German, yet Communism never really dominated Germany the way it dominated say China or Russia. In India, Buddhism was just another sect amongst many sects competing for patronage from kings and commoners. It was never the basis of an entire identity or a separate religion on the lines of Christianity or Islam. People picked and chose what they liked, just like Germans picked and chose from the ideas of Marx.
我认为印度与佛教的关系类似于德国与共产主义的关系。卡尔·马克思是德国人，但共产主义从未像在中国或俄罗斯那样真正主导德国。在印度，佛教只是众多宗派之一，它们争取国王和平民的资助。佛教从未成为整个身份认同的基础，也未形成像基督教或伊斯兰教那样的独立宗教。人们选择自己喜欢的，就像德国人从马克思的思想中挑选取舍一样。
charlie ia
in spanish we have an idiom telling 'no one is a prophet in his own land', which is in fact a jesus' saying in the gospels. its curious how many great innovators tend to be despised at home.
there was a work of adaptation of buddhism to China too. the great adaptator undoubtly was... language & translation. by meticulously sexting the best suited words for their new audience and getting the support of educated local disciples well versed in the Chinese cultural frxwork, great translators as kumarajiva provided a great service for buddhism to get a Chinese soul of its own.
on the other hand, i do agree with you. besides the muslim invasion, the disappearance of buddhism in india had a lot to do with the competing hinduism.
在西班牙有一句谚语说“没有人能在自己的土地成为先知”，实际上这是耶稣在福音书中的话。很奇怪，许多伟大的创新者在本土往往不被重视。佛教传入中国也经历了一次适应过程。
最伟大的贡献无疑是那些翻译家。通过仔细挑选最适合新受众的词汇，并得到熟悉中国文化的，受过教育的本地弟子支持，像鸠摩罗什这样的伟大译者，为佛教的中国化做出了巨大贡献。另一方面，我同意你的看法。除了穆斯林入侵，佛教在印度的消失与印度教的竞争也有很大关系。