Throughout India’s history, two towering figures—Chanakya, the mastermind behind the Mauryan Empire, and Emperor Ashoka, the champion of Buddhism—represent contrasting visions of governance, society, and spirituality.
This blog dives deep into the fascinating dynamics between Chanakya’s oppressive measures against Buddhist ascetics and Ashoka’s profound transformation into a Buddhist emperor who reshaped India’s sociopolitical landscape.
Why Did Chanakya Oppress Buddhist Monks?
Chanakya, also known as Kautilya, was a philosopher, economist, and the architect behind Chandragupta Maurya’s ascension to power during the fourth century BC. He assisted Chandragupta Maurya in establishing one of the first empires of India.
He authored Arthasastra, an ancient book written in the 4th century BC. The Arthashastra, provided a detailed blueprint for governance, prioritizing wealth (artha) and power above all else.
Arthasastra is a lengthy work of 5348 verses in 150 chapters and meticulously analyses the teachings of several sages. The Arthasastra is solely concerned with acquiring and preserving artha, which means wealth and power.
While Chanakya declared that the king’s happiness depended on the happiness of his subjects, his strategies often contradicted this sentiment, favoring cold pragmatism over morality.
He had little interest in religion, except for using religion to promote the power of the king and the state. For him, the only use of holy men and ascetics was to employ them as spies.
Chanakya’s Hostility Toward Ascetic Orders
Chanakya perceived ascetic movements, including Buddhism, as threats to societal stability and the agrarian economy. His reasons were rooted in:
- Economic Disruption: Renunciation by men and women joining ascetic orders led to the disintegration of families, disrupting the workforce and agricultural productivity.
- Social Fragmentation: The growing wave of renunciation destabilized the rigid caste and family-based systems, essential pillars of Aryan society.
- Political Threat: Chanakya viewed Buddhist monks as potential agitators who could influence people against the state.
Renouncing the life of a householder to become an ascetic, without providing for the maintenance of his wife and children was not permitted. A person was allowed to become an ascetic only after attaining old age, that also only after receiving permission from a judge.
The great wave of renunciation, which was both cause and effect of ascetic streams including Buddhism, threatened the integrity of the family and the varnashrama system of Aryan society. Husbands were leaving wives, and wives were leaving husbands to join the sangha. This disturbed the economic and social life of the villages and cities. Chanakya came up with some of the most extreme measures against asceticism.
He discouraged imprisonment as a punishment measure, instead, he believed in a physical and monetary fine. He saw no point in feeding the criminals at the state’s expense.
Harsh Measures Against Monks
Chanakya’s Arthashastra recommended strict controls over ascetics, including Buddhist monks:
- Restricted Movement: Monks were barred from entering crown villages and required to live beyond cremation grounds.
- Severe Punishments: Whipping with iron rods, heavy fines, and forced fasting were imposed on monks who violated these rules.
- Bans on Sanghas: Organizing Buddhist communities (Sanghas) within villages was prohibited.
- Targeting Women: Severe punishments were handed to those encouraging women to join ascetic orders.
Interestingly, Brahmin hermits (Sanyasis) were exempt from these restrictions, reflecting Chanakya’s preference for preserving traditional Vedic systems over emerging movements like Buddhism.
Chanakya’s Vision of a Totalitarian State
Chanakya’s governance model was one of meticulous control over every aspect of life:
- Economic Focus: He prioritized agriculture and strictly monitored movements within villages to prevent disruptions.
- Environmental Protection: Heavy fines were imposed for damaging trees or polluting public spaces, reflecting an early concern for ecological preservation.
- Regulated Renunciation: Citizens could only become ascetics after fulfilling familial responsibilities, with court approval.
This rigid system placed artha (wealth) and rajya (state power) at the core, relegating spiritual pursuits and dharma to the margins.
The Kautilyan state was totalitarian which attempted to control every aspect of the life of its subject through the large bureaucracy. The state kept track of everything from birth and death to the movement of people. He also recommended keeping track of every aspect of the economy.
He imposed a fine for throwing garbage on streets or roads. There was heavy fine on urination near the road, temples, water bodies or royal properties. Throwing out dead bodies or body parts of animals or human beings within city limits was also not permitted.
There were even detailed traffic regulations, though the traffic of the Mauryan cities consisted mostly of pedestrians and ox or horse-driven carts. A cart moving without any driver or driven by a minor was not permitted.
But the highest fine mentioned in Arthasastra was reserved for forcing a man into slavery. For Chanakya forcing someone into slavery was one of the most serious crimes.
The Ashokan Revolution: Dharma at the Center
After Chanakya’s death, his vision continued to shape the Mauryan Empire, but this dominance was short-lived. Emperor Ashoka, one of Chandragupta’s successors, radically departed from Kautilya’s materialistic ideology.
Following the devastating Kalinga War, Ashoka decided to govern through dharma (righteousness) rather than fear or wealth. This shift not only marked the decline of Chanakya’s rigid system but also elevated Buddhism to the forefront of Indian society.
Ashoka’s Reforms Favoring Buddhism
- Patronage of Sanghas: Buddhist monks and nuns gained a central place in society, receiving royal patronage and support.
- Edicts of Peace: Ashoka spread Buddhist principles of compassion and non-violence through inscriptions across his empire.
- Integration of Dharma: Ashoka reintroduced morality into politics, emphasizing welfare and justice over conquest and power.
Under Ashoka, Buddhist monasteries flourished, and Buddhism transformed from a marginalized ascetic movement into a major spiritual force across Asia.
Chanakya vs. Ashoka: Contrasting Legacies
The contrast between Chanakya and Ashoka highlights two competing philosophies of governance:
- Chanakya’s Legacy: A materialistic, power-centric approach that prioritized the state’s control over spiritual and moral values.
- Ashoka’s Legacy: A compassionate, dharma-driven model that placed human welfare and spiritual growth at the heart of governance.
Chanakya’s rigid system unraveled under Ashoka’s reforms, and by the 6th century CE, the Arthashastra was lost to history, only rediscovered in the 20th century. Meanwhile, Ashoka’s vision of Buddhist-inspired governance continued to resonate globally.
The Lessons of History
Chanakya’s harsh measures against Buddhist monks stemmed from his pragmatic vision of a state that controlled every aspect of its subjects’ lives. However, Ashoka’s embrace of Buddhism demonstrated the transformative power of compassion and morality in governance.
Today, their contrasting legacies remind us that while power and wealth are vital for statecraft, true progress lies in balancing these with empathy, justice, and spirituality.
Let the stories of Chanakya, Buddha, and Ashoka inspire us to reflect on the importance of harmony between material success and moral responsibility in building a just and inclusive society.
