Full chapter text
Gangetic religious change
Shared landscape, distinct traditions
The eastern Gangetic plain was not the birthplace of one
undifferentiated 'heterodox' movement. Buddhist, Jain, Ajivika,
Brahmanical, and other renunciant or ritual communities
shared roads, cities, courts, markets, languages, and arguments
while maintaining distinct disciplines and claims to authority.
Vaishali, Rajagriha, Champa, Mithila, and the wider Magadhan
sphere appear repeatedly because political power, urban
concentration, merchant wealth, and itinerant teaching
converged there. Similar geography is therefore evidence of
interaction, not doctrinal identity. A responsible history
reconstructs specific institutions and debates before using broad
categories such as sramana or Greater Magadha (Bronkhorst
2007; Gombrich 2006; Dundas 2002).
Chronology: founders, texts, and transmitted memory
The lives of the Buddha and Mahavira are commonly placed
in the middle of the first millennium BCE, but exact dates
remain debated. The canonical texts that narrate their lives and
teachings were transmitted, organized, and redacted over time.
This does not make them historically useless; it changes the
kinds of claims that can safely be made. Named places,
institutional vocabulary, social categories, and repeated
narrative relationships can illuminate the world remembered
by early communities, while speeches and event sequences
require genre criticism. Absolute dates should be anchored in
independently datable inscriptions or archaeology wherever
possible rather than assigned merely because a canonical
biography supplies a sequence (Gombrich 2006; Dundas 2002;
Singh 2008).
The sramana field without a single origin story
Renunciation, wandering, fasting, meditation, debate, and
critiques of household or sacrificial life formed a broader
religious field in which Buddhism and Jainism developed. Some
practices may have had older precedents, and different groups
explained karma, rebirth, liberation, selfhood, and ascetic effort
in sharply different ways. It is therefore misleading to narrate
one movement as simply copying another or to make all non-
Vedic traditions expressions of a single anti-Brahmanical
programme. The evidence supports sustained competition and
borrowing within a shared intellectual environment whose
boundaries and internal diversity remain subjects of
scholarship (Bronkhorst 2007; Gombrich 2006).
Greater Magadha as a model, not a map
Johannes Bronkhorst's model of Greater Magadha has been
influential because it highlights an eastern cultural zone in
which doctrines of rebirth, karmic retribution, renunciation,
and liberation developed in forms not reducible to the older
Vedic heartland. The model is analytically productive, but it
should not be turned into a fixed archaeological province or a
claim that all inhabitants shared one ideology. Its geographical
limits, chronology, and internal diversity remain debated. In
this book Greater Magadha is therefore used as a
historiographical hypothesis that organizes questions about
eastern religious change, not as an ethnic or political label
attached to pottery, language, or every settlement east of the
Sadanira (Bronkhorst 2007).
Brahmanical presence in the eastern cities
Eastern renunciant movements did not operate in a
landscape without brahmins. The Sonadanda Sutta at Champa
stages a Buddhist debate with a wealthy brahmin beneficiary of
royal authority; other canonical narratives similarly place
brahmins in Magadhan and Vajjian settings. These texts are
polemical and pedagogical, but they show that the social world
imagined by Buddhist authors included learned brahmins,
householders, kings, ascetics, and competing teachers in the
same cities. Religious change is therefore better described as
interaction, competition, and redefinition than as the
replacement of an absent Vedic order by a wholly separate
eastern civilization (Walshe 1995; Bronkhorst 2007).
Buddhist renunciation and the institutional Sangha
The Buddhist Sangha transformed wandering renunciation
into a durable institution governed by discipline, ordination,
residence, property rules, and procedures for communal
decision. Canonical Vinaya is normative literature rather than
an administrative archive of one monastery, but its detailed
concern with robes, food, lodgings, medicines, disputes,
ordination, confession, and communal acts demonstrates how
intensely institutions mattered to Buddhist self-definition.
Monks were not imagined as autonomous mystics detached
from society: the Vinaya presupposes donors, households,
rulers, roads, settlements, and recurring negotiations over
acceptable material support (Gombrich 2006; Schopen 1997).
Jain mendicancy and radical care in the Acaranga
The Acaranga Sutra presents an exacting ascetic discipline in
which movement, food, bodily comfort, speech, and use of the
environment are governed by the imperative to avoid harm to
living beings. Jacobi's nineteenth-century translation must be
read critically as a translation, but the text remains central to
the history of Jain monastic ideals. Its attention to small forms of
life and to the ethical consequences of ordinary acts
distinguishes Jain asceticism from a generic category of
'renunciation'. The historical significance lies not merely in
severity but in the institutionalization of ahimsa as a practical
discipline shaping how mendicants walked, ate, accepted alms,
and related to household supporters (Jacobi 1884; Jaini 1979;
Dundas 2002).
Asceticism and polemic
Buddhist texts sometimes define the Buddha's path against
severe bodily austerity, while Jain traditions elevate disciplined
endurance and non-harm within their own soteriology.
Polemical contrast is historically useful because it reveals what
communities wished to distinguish, but the opponent in a
religious text is not a neutral ethnographic portrait. A Buddhist
description of Niganthas or a Jain description of rival ascetics
should therefore be analysed as argument as well as evidence.
The safest comparison reconstructs each tradition's own
disciplinary sources before asking how they represented one
another (Jaini 1979; Dundas 2002; Gombrich 2006).
Karma, rebirth, and liberation: shared questions, different
answers
Buddhist and Jain traditions both made karma, rebirth,
ethical causation, and release central, but their metaphysical
and practical explanations differ profoundly. Jain thought
understands karma through a doctrine of the soul and karmic
matter, with ascetic purification aimed at freeing the jiva; early
Buddhist teaching rejects a permanent self and analyses
suffering, dependent arising, craving, and cessation through
different conceptual tools. Similar vocabulary therefore does not
prove a common doctrine. The historical importance of the
eastern debate lies precisely in the coexistence of competing
answers to shared existential problems (Jaini 1979; Gombrich
2006; Bronkhorst 2007).
Cities, markets, and the rejection of a simple bourgeois thesis
Urbanization and expanding exchange helped create settings
in which itinerant teachers, merchants, rulers, and
householders encountered one another, but Buddhism and
Jainism should not be reduced to religions produced
automatically by a merchant class. Canonical literature gives
merchants and wealthy householders important roles, yet also
includes rulers, brahmins, cultivators, artisans, servants,
women, and renunciants from varied backgrounds. Economic
change created opportunities for patronage and mobility; it did
not dictate doctrine. Uma Chakravarti's social analysis remains
useful because it treats political economy, household wealth,
stratification, and the Sangha together rather than making one
class the sole motor of religious change (Chakravarti 1987).
The gahapati and household power
Pali texts frequently use gahapati for substantial
householders whose authority rested on property, dependants,
production, and social standing. The category is not identical to
a modern bourgeoisie, nor does it describe every lay follower.
Its prominence matters because renunciant institutions
depended on households capable of recurring gifts. Wealth
could be converted into food, land, groves, buildings, medicine,
ritual merit, and public status. The Sangha's relation to
household society was therefore structurally intimate even
when its ideals praised homelessness and detachment
(Chakravarti 1987; Gombrich 2006).
Royal patronage without a state church
Bimbisara, Ajatasattu, Pasenadi, Licchavi leaders, and other
rulers appear in Buddhist and Jain traditions as patrons,
interlocutors, relatives, rivals, or protectors. Royal patronage
could offer land, security, routes, prestige, and access to
resources. It did not create a single state religion. Courts could
support several ritual and renunciant traditions at once, while
individual texts naturally magnified the significance of patrons
important to their own community. Political and religious
history should therefore trace specific acts of support rather
than infer exclusive confessional allegiance from one narrative
(Dundas 2002; Gombrich 2006; Singh 2008).
Vaishali as an institutional crossroads
Vaishali is exceptional because Buddhist and Jain memories,
corporate politics, archaeological remains, and later pilgrimage
all converge there. Buddhist texts connect Vesali with the
Buddha's repeated visits, Ambapali's grove, the Great Forest,
Mahapajapati Gotami, the final journey, relic traditions, and the
disciplinary controversy later remembered as the Second
Council. Jain traditions connect the Vajjian world with
Mahavira's birth and kinship geography. The overlap
demonstrates the density of religious institutions; it does not
make every monument common property of both traditions or
turn one canon into confirmation of the other's biography
(Dundas 2002; Walshe 1995; Sinha and Roy 1969).
Mishra's 1962 catalogue of Vaishali's Buddhist institutional
memory
Yogendra Mishra's survey remains useful as a map of the
Vaishali material preserved across Buddhist textual traditions.
He gathers the narratives of the Buddha's visits to Vaishali, the
Ratana-sutta episode, Mahapajapati Gotami and the
remembered foundation of the order of nuns at the
Kutagarasala in the Mahavana, and Vinaya rules said to have
been formulated at Vaishali. Read together, these references
show how strongly Buddhist institutional memory localized
teaching, monastic discipline, female renunciation, scarcity,
water, food, robes, and donated space in the Vajjian capital and
its routes (Mishra 1962, pp. 151-156).
The compilation must nevertheless be disaggregated by
source and genre. The drought, epidemic, supernatural
expulsion, 7,707 rulers, 84,000 conversions, and precise regnal
or post-enlightenment dating belong to transmitted narratives
whose numbers and chronology cannot be read as
contemporary civic statistics. Mishra himself repeatedly notes
chronological uncertainty and traditional numbers. The
historical value lies first in the density and recurrence of
Vaishali as a remembered institutional setting; individual events
and quantities require separate textual criticism and, where
possible, archaeological or epigraphic control (Mishra 1962, pp.
151-156; Walshe 1995).
Mahapajapati Gotami and Vesali
The Buddhist ordination narrative places Mahapajapati
Gotami - the Buddha's foster mother - at the centre of the
foundation of the bhikkhuni community. In the Pali tradition
she travels to Vesali with Sakyan women after first being
refused permission to go forth, and Ananda intercedes in the
debate over women's ordination. The narrative is preserved in
Vinaya and related canonical material and has generated
extensive modern scholarship about textual strata, institutional
memory, and gender. Historically, it establishes that the early
Buddhist tradition remembered women's renunciation as an
institutional question requiring rules and negotiation; it should
not be simplified into either timeless equality or timeless
exclusion (AN 8.51; Collett 2014; Sujato 2012).
The garudhammas and textual controversy
The eight garudhammas or rules of respect associated with
the founding of the bhikkhuni order have been read in sharply
different ways. Within the received tradition they structure
relations between nuns and monks; modern textual scholarship
has questioned whether all elements belong to the earliest layer
of the ordination story and how the rules relate to parallel
Vinaya traditions. This book does not resolve that debate by
assertion. The secure historical point is that gendered hierarchy
became embedded in transmitted disciplinary literature, while
the exact chronology and original form of the rules require
comparative Vinaya analysis rather than quotation from one
recension alone (Sujato 2012; Collett 2014).
Women as renunciants, teachers, and subjects of discipline
Early Buddhist literature preserves women not only as
donors or relatives but as renunciants and teachers. The
Therigatha presents poetic voices attributed to nuns, and
comparative scholarship across Pali, Sanskrit, Gandhari,
Chinese, Tibetan, and other textual witnesses confirms that
women were integral to early Buddhist institutional memory.
Disciplinary texts also expose gendered anxieties about
sexuality, safety, dependence, and authority. Such evidence
should be read neither as a transparent census of lived
experience nor as mere ideology; it shows that women's
presence was substantial enough to require rules, stories,
lineages, and remembered speech (Collett 2014).
Ambapali: wealth, status, and female patronage
The Mahaparinibbana Sutta's account of Ambapali at Vesali
presents a courtesan with property-like control over a mango
grove, substantial public visibility, and the ability to donate the
grove to the Buddhist community. The narrative does not
establish the legal rights of all women, but it complicates any
model in which female religious agency is confined to domestic
piety. Patronage could intersect with elite urban status in forms
not reducible to wifehood or kinship. Ambapali belongs
simultaneously to the history of gender, property, urban
economy, and Buddhist memory (DN 16; Walshe 1995).
Jain women: nuns, laywomen, and the fourfold community
Jain tradition conceptualizes religious society through monks,
nuns, laymen, and laywomen, although the roles and
soteriological interpretations of women differ across later
Svetambara and Digambara traditions. Early canonical and later
sectarian evidence should not be collapsed into a single timeless
doctrine. The historically important point is institutional:
women were sufficiently central to Jain community formation to
appear within monastic lineages, lay practice, narrative, and
debates over liberation. Later disagreements about women's
capacity for liberation reveal sectarian development rather than
a single uncontested rule traceable directly to Mahavira (Jaini
1979; Dundas 2002).
Laywomen and the household economy of merit
Both Buddhist and Jain traditions depended on laywomen as
food donors, household managers, patrons, relatives, and
participants in ritual. Their economic contribution is easy to
understate because narrative texts often foreground male
household heads. A gift offered in a household may represent
labour and resources organized by several members. Later
inscriptions make women more visible as named donors, but
those records belong to different periods and places. The
methodological point is to use later inscriptional evidence to
widen questions about female economic agency without
projecting specific legal capacities unchanged into the fifth
century BCE (Schopen 2014; Collett 2014).
Diagram 16. Renunciant communities in the eastern Gangetic world: an
institutional ecology. Buddhist, Jain, and other renunciant institutions
depended on recurring relationships with households, rulers, markets, sacred
property, roads, rivers, and seasonal residence rather than existing outside
society.
Credit: Editorial diagram prepared for this book, 2026.
Conceptual framework informed by Gombrich 2006,
Chakravarti 1987, Schopen 1997 and 2014, Jaini 1979, and
Dundas 2002. Rights: © Gajendra Thakur, 2026.
Source links: https://www.routledge.com/Theravada-
Buddhism-A-Social-History-from-Ancient-Benares-to-Modern-
Colombo/Gombrich/p/book/9780415365093 ;
https://uhpress.hawaii.edu/title/bones-stones-and-buddhist-
monks-collected-papers-on-the-archaeology-epigraphy-and-
texts-of-monastic-buddhism-in-india/ ;
https://www.routledge.com/The-Jains-2nd-Edition/Dundas/p/boo
k/9780415266055
Monsoon, vassa, and institutional time
The rainy season mattered to religious organization. Buddhist
vassa and Jain rainy-season residence constrained mobility and
concentrated teachers and disciples in particular places for
extended periods. This had ecological and institutional
consequences: food supply, water, lodging, sanitation, donor
access, teaching, and dispute resolution became locally
intensified. Lists of rainy-season residences in Jain biography
and Vinaya rules about Buddhist residence therefore preserve a
seasonal geography of institutions. They should not be
converted into precise annual itineraries without textual
criticism, but they reveal how climate entered religious time
(Jacobi 1884; Gombrich 2006).
Groves, halls, and donated spaces
Canonical narratives repeatedly locate teaching in groves,
halls, forests, ponds, and donated pleasure grounds. Such places
complicate the simple opposition between city and wilderness. A
grove could be near an urban centre, accessible to donors while
providing space for residence and assembly. Ambapali's grove at
Vesali and other donated parks exemplify the conversion of elite
or private landscape into religious infrastructure. Archaeology
can sometimes recover monastic buildings or cult structures,
but matching a named canonical grove to a surviving mound
requires independent topographic and stratigraphic evidence
(DN 16; Schopen 1997).
Gift, merit, and reciprocity
A gift to a renunciant community was not merely economic
transfer. Buddhist and Jain traditions place giving within ethical
and karmic frameworks in which donors receive merit, prestige,
teaching, or social recognition while religious specialists receive
material support. This reciprocal structure allowed communities
committed to non-possession to become durable institutions.
The normative ideal of detached giving coexisted with questions
of ownership, inheritance, property management, and donor
commemoration that become increasingly visible in later
inscriptions and monastic law. Religious economy is therefore
not a contradiction in terms; it is part of how renunciation
became socially reproducible (Schopen 1997; Jaini 1979).
Monks and nuns as economic actors: the later evidence
Gregory Schopen's work on inscriptions and monastic law has
shown that Indian Buddhist monks and nuns could themselves
appear as donors, sponsors, property holders, and legal actors.
This evidence is crucial because it challenges an older picture in
which monks simply received gifts while lay people alone
participated in economic activity. Its chronology must be
respected: much of the inscriptional evidence belongs centuries
after the Buddha. It can therefore demonstrate the historical
capacities of developed monastic institutions and expose the
inadequacy of a purely idealized lay-versus-monastic
dichotomy, but it should not be used as proof that every fifth-
century-BCE community operated under identical legal
arrangements (Schopen 1997; 2014).
Relics and the making of sacred place
Buddhist relic traditions transformed bodily remains, stupas,
and pilgrimage into durable institutions of memory. Vaishali's
relic-stupa attribution, discussed in Chapter 7, is important
because early archaeological deposits and later canonical
memory converge without becoming identical. A relic casket can
establish cult practice and deposition; the biological identity of
remains is a separate question. Monks, nuns, rulers, and lay
patrons could all participate in relic cult in later periods. The
sacred landscape of eastern India was therefore made not only
by teaching itineraries but also by objects, architecture,
commemoration, and repeated visitation (Schopen 1997; ASI
Patna Circle).
Jain sacred biography and the making of place
Jain sacred geography likewise links Mahavira to
Kundagrama, Vaishali, Mithila, Campa, Rajagriha, and Pava or
Pavapuri in transmitted biography. These place associations
have shaped pilgrimage and regional identity for centuries.
Historical method separates three questions: whether a place-
name occurs in an early or later text; whether a modern locality
is convincingly identified with it; and how pilgrimage
institutions developed there afterward. Sacred geography can be
historically real even when exact event localization is uncertain
(Jacobi 1884; Dundas 2002).
Kundagrama and the historiography of Mahavira's birthplace
Mishra also devoted an extended discussion to the competing
modern identifications of Mahavira's birthplace. His preferred
reconstruction placed Kundagrama or Kundapura in the
Vaishali complex and identified it with the Basukund area,
arguing from Jain references to Vesali/Vaishali, Videha,
Kundagrama, and Mahavira's Jnatrika-Licchavi kinship setting.
The importance of this section for a regional history is not that a
1962 identification settles the archaeology, but that it records
how textual philology, local topography, sectarian pilgrimage
claims, and twentieth-century heritage-making became
intertwined in the localization of an ancient sacred biography
(Mishra 1962, pp. 212-225).
Accordingly, this book preserves a distinction between textual
association and modern site identification. Jain traditions
securely make Kundagrama/Kundapura and the wider Vaishali-
Videha landscape central to Mahavira's remembered origins;
whether any present village can be equated with the ancient
locality requires an independent chain of topographical and
archaeological evidence. Mishra's argument is therefore cited as
a major historiographical position, not converted into an
uncontested coordinate (Mishra 1962, pp. 212-225; Jacobi 1884;
Dundas 2002).
The Second Buddhist Council at Vaishali
Several Vinaya traditions preserve a disciplinary dispute at
Vaishali conventionally called the Second Buddhist Council and
often located roughly a century after the Buddha in traditional
chronologies. The accounts differ over participants, disputed
practices, chronology, and the relation of the event to later
sectarian divisions. Charles Prebish's survey of the scholarship
remains important because it treats the council narratives
comparatively rather than harmonizing them into one
transcript. The historically cautious conclusion is that a
significant Vinaya controversy associated with Vaishali is
plausible; the exact sequence and institutional consequences
remain debated (Prebish 1974).
The ten points and the politics of discipline
In the Pali Vinaya tradition the Vaishali dispute is organized
around contested practices later summarized as ten points,
involving such matters as stored salt, meal timing, and handling
of money or equivalents. These issues may look trivial beside
doctrines of liberation, but they reveal the social core of
monastic discipline. Food, time, gifts, and material exchange
determine how renunciants relate to donors and how
communal uniformity is enforced. The council narrative
therefore belongs to economic and institutional history as much
as to doctrinal history. Comparison with other Vinayas is
necessary before treating the Pali list as the sole original form
(Prebish 1974).
Council is not automatically schism
Older narratives often made the Second Council the direct
cause of the first great Buddhist schism. Comparative
scholarship has shown that the relationship between the
Vaishali disciplinary dispute and later divisions such as Sthavira
and Mahasanghika is more complicated. Different school
traditions preserve different causal sequences. This book
therefore avoids using 'Second Council' as shorthand for a single
decisive break. Institutional disagreement, later lineage identity,
and retrospective sectarian history must be distinguished
(Prebish 1974).
Jain councils and canon formation: a later institutional problem
Jain traditions also preserve accounts of councils, teachers,
and the preservation or loss of scriptures. Svetambara and
Digambara understandings of canon formation diverged, and
the surviving literary history extends well beyond Mahavira's
lifetime. These later institutional memories are essential for
explaining why Jain canonical corpora differ and how authority
was constructed, but they should not be projected backward as
if one extant canon were a stenographic archive of the sixth or
fifth century BCE. The history of Jain scripture is a history of
transmission, recitation, loss, compilation, and sectarian
memory (Dundas 2002; Jaini 1979).
Language: Pali, Ardhamagadhi, Sanskrit, and the problem of
speech
Buddhist and Jain traditions are preserved in languages
whose relationship to the speech of early eastern India is
historically complex. Pali is a literary Middle Indo-Aryan
language with a long transmission history; the Svetambara Jain
canon is associated especially with Ardhamagadhi and other
Prakrits; later scholarship and religious literature also used
Sanskrit. A canonical language cannot be mapped mechanically
onto the spoken dialect of one ancient city. Linguistic forms can
preserve regional and chronological clues, but literary
standardization, oral transmission, copying, commentary, and
sectarian education all reshape them (Dundas 2002; Bronkhorst
2007).
Orality, memorization, and institutional authority
Before widespread manuscript transmission, large bodies of
doctrine and discipline were preserved through organized
recitation and memorization. Oral transmission is not
equivalent to uncontrolled improvisation: institutions can
regulate wording, grouping, teacher lineages, and communal
rehearsal. At the same time, the existence of parallel recensions
and school differences shows that transmission was never
perfectly uniform. The correct historical stance is neither to
dismiss canonical texts because they were oral nor to assume
verbal identity with a founder's speech. Textual stratification
and comparison across traditions are indispensable (Gombrich
2006; Collett 2014).
Debate as social institution
Buddhist and Jain texts repeatedly stage debates with
brahmins, rival ascetics, householders, and rulers. Debate was
not only a literary form: courts, parks, monasteries, and urban
gatherings created arenas in which teachers competed for
followers and patronage. Yet a debate narrative is shaped to
demonstrate the superiority of a teaching, so the losing
opponent cannot be treated as a neutral transcript of a rival
position. Historians use such passages to reconstruct topics,
social settings, and polemical boundaries before treating
doctrinal claims as descriptions of other communities
(Gombrich 2006; Dundas 2002).
Nigantha Nataputta in Buddhist sources
Buddhist texts refer to Mahavira as Nigantha Nataputta and
preserve stories about his followers, doctrines, and disputes.
These passages confirm that Buddhist communities knew a
major rival associated with the Niganthas, but they remain
Buddhist representations. Where Jain sources survive,
comparison can reveal both shared historical reference and
polemical distortion. The same rule applies in reverse to Jain
depictions of rival teachers. Religious competition is best
reconstructed through triangulation, not by accepting one
tradition's caricature as ethnography (Dundas 2002; Jaini 1979).
Ajivikas and the danger of a two-religion story
The eastern religious field included more than Buddhism and
Jainism. Ajivikas and other teachers appear in Buddhist and Jain
sources, often through polemic. Their presence matters because
it prevents a false binary in which every debate is reduced to
Buddhist versus Jain positions. Doctrines of fate, karma,
austerity, and liberation circulated through a competitive
environment with several organized or semi-organized
communities. The fragmentary nature of independent Ajivika
evidence requires caution, but their visibility in rival texts is
itself historically significant (Bronkhorst 2007).
Caste, varna, and the limits of egalitarian claims
Buddhist texts contain critiques of brahmanical claims to
inherent superiority and admit members of different social
origins into the Sangha. Jain renunciation likewise reorganized
status around discipline and spiritual achievement. Neither fact
proves the disappearance of caste or hierarchy within early
religious communities or lay society. Monastic seniority, gender
rules, donor wealth, occupation, kinship, and inherited status
continued to shape interaction. The more defensible claim is
that renunciant institutions created alternative rankings and
arguments about human worth while remaining embedded in
stratified societies (Chakravarti 1987; Gombrich 2006).
Slavery, service, and the archive of silence
Canonical texts refer to servants, dependants, labourers, and
other socially subordinate people, but elite donors and religious
specialists receive disproportionate narrative attention. The
economic capacity to make major gifts was unequally
distributed. Monastic ideals of compassion or non-harm should
therefore not be treated as proof that coercive labour vanished
from the surrounding economy. Social history must read
prescriptions alongside silences, asking whose work made
donations, travel, construction, food preparation, and urban
residence possible (Chakravarti 1987).
Food rules as social history
Detailed monastic rules about acceptable food, meal times,
storage, invitations, and gifts reveal the dependence of
renunciants on social provisioning. They also show institutional
efforts to separate legitimate support from accumulation or
commercial behaviour. At Vaishali, disputes over food-related
practices later became part of council memory. Jain ascetic rules
regulate food with a different ethical logic centred on non-harm
and detachment. Comparative attention to food therefore
connects doctrine with agriculture, household labour, markets,
seasonality, and the practical maintenance of religious bodies
(Jacobi 1884; Gombrich 2006; Prebish 1974).
Medicine, illness, and embodied renunciation
Renunciation did not abolish the body. Buddhist Vinaya
devotes attention to medicines, illness, nursing, and permissible
material support; Jain disciplinary texts regulate bodily care
within a demanding ethic of restraint. Such rules reveal
negotiations between ascetic ideals and survival. They also
create demand for lay knowledge, substances, and services. The
history of medicine and care in religious communities should
therefore be reconstructed from rules, narratives, archaeology,
and later monastic documents rather than from the assumption
that spiritual discipline meant indifference to health (Gombrich
2006; Schopen 2004).
Violence, non-harm, and political patronage
Jain ahimsa and Buddhist ethical restraints developed in
societies whose rulers fought wars, punished offenders, hunted,
taxed, and protected routes. Patronage by kings did not mean
that royal institutions adopted monastic non-violence wholesale.
Religious texts could praise rulers, advise them, or criticize
forms of violence while remaining materially dependent on
political order. This tension is historically productive: it shows
how ethical ideals moved between renunciant communities and
states without erasing the distinct logic of kingship (Jaini 1979;
Gombrich 2006).
Sacred landscape without exclusive ownership
Vaishali, Rajagriha, Champa, Mithila, and Pava can belong to
more than one religious geography. A shared place does not
prove that communities shared a shrine or interpreted it
identically. Pilgrimage landscapes accumulate through repeated
acts of naming, building, donation, narration, and conservation.
Archaeology may show successive or neighbouring religious
uses without allowing every structure to be assigned
confidently. The correct map is therefore layered and temporal
rather than partitioned into permanently Buddhist or Jain
territories (Singh 2008; Dundas 2002).
Archaeology and the problem of sectarian identification
A stupa, monastery-like plan, image, inscription, or relic
deposit may justify a Buddhist identification when context is
secure. Jain identification likewise depends on diagnostic
iconography, inscriptions, architectural context, or reliable
historical association. Ordinary houses, wells, walls, pottery, and
coins cannot usually be given a sectarian label. At multi-period
sites such as Vaishali or Champa, the temptation to assign every
structure to a canonical episode must be resisted. Archaeology is
most powerful when it narrows possibilities rather than when it
is forced to illustrate a predetermined sacred history (Sinha and
Roy 1969; Schopen 1997).
Diagram 17. Religious history is reconstructed from sources of different dates
and purposes. Canonical texts, archaeology, inscriptions, and later sectarian or
pilgrimage traditions answer different questions; later evidence may illuminate
institutions but must not be treated as an eyewitness to an earlier century.
Credit: Editorial diagram prepared for this book, 2026.
Framework informed by Schopen 1997 and 2014, Prebish 1974,
Collett 2014, Jaini 1979, Dundas 2002, and the source-critical
method used throughout this book. Rights: © Gajendra Thakur,
2026.
Source links: https://uhpress.hawaii.edu/title/bones-stones-
and-buddhist-monks-collected-papers-on-the-archaeology-
epigraphy-and-texts-of-monastic-buddhism-in-india/ ;
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-asian-
studies/article/abs/review-of-scholarship-on-the-buddhist-
councils/61846CA964CC4C8E67B17A33163B6022 ;
https://academic.oup.com/book/3902
Inscriptions as a later but firmer social archive
For the first centuries of Buddhist and Jain history, narrative
and disciplinary literature is far richer than dated inscriptions.
From later centuries, donative inscriptions begin to identify
named lay people, monks, nuns, families, occupations, and gifts
with firmer chronological anchors. This later archive can
transform social history by revealing donors whom canonical
literature marginalizes. Its very strength makes chronological
discipline essential: a first-century BCE inscription cannot be
used as direct evidence for a fifth-century BCE institutional rule,
though it may demonstrate the range of practices that developed
within the tradition (Schopen 1997; 2014).
From charismatic teacher to institution
The deaths of founders created a problem of continuity.
Authority had to be relocated into doctrine, discipline, teachers,
recitation lineages, councils, relics, and community procedures.
Buddhist traditions emphasize Dhamma and Vinaya, relic
distribution, and communal recitation; Jain traditions developed
their own lineages, canonical memories, and accounts of
teachers after Mahavira. The institutional history of religion
begins precisely where biography ends: how a community
reproduces itself without the founder's physical presence
(Dundas 2002; Prebish 1974).
Religious change without a single conversion event
The growth of Buddhism and Jainism in eastern India was not
a one-time conversion of a region. Households could support
more than one religious specialist; rulers could patronize
several traditions; local cults and brahmanical rites continued;
monastic institutions expanded, contracted, or moved; and
sectarian boundaries hardened unevenly. Religious history
should therefore trace changing networks of patrons,
institutions, doctrines, and places rather than search for a date
when the east 'became Buddhist' or 'became Jain' (Gombrich
2006; Dundas 2002).
Decline is not disappearance
Later reductions in Buddhist monastic patronage do not mean
the immediate disappearance of Buddhist ideas, images, relic
cults, or pilgrimage. Jain communities likewise changed
regionally without a simple line from expansion to decline.
Religious institutions can lose land, merge with other sacred
landscapes, move centres, or survive through smaller
communities. The archaeological and textual record must be
read for reuse, transformation, and memory rather than a single
civilizational replacement (Schopen 1997; Singh 2008).
Evidentiary conclusions
The eastern Gangetic plain was a competitive institutional
environment in which Buddhist, Jain, Brahmanical, Ajivika, and
other communities debated shared questions while building
distinct disciplines. Urban centres and routes enabled mobility
and patronage, but doctrine cannot be reduced to commerce.
Women were present as renunciants, donors, and subjects of
disciplinary regulation, though gender hierarchy remained
embedded in institutions. Vaishali became a major Buddhist and
Jain sacred node; council traditions preserve real institutional
conflict but not one uncontested chronology. Later inscriptions
and archaeology greatly expand social history, yet their
chronology must not be back-projected. The most defensible
regional history therefore connects texts, institutions, material
evidence, and later memory while preserving the differences
between them.
Chapter-specific bibliography
Mishra, Yogendra. An Early History of Vaisali: From the Earliest Times to
the Fall of the Vajjian Republic, circa 484 B.C. Delhi, Patna and Varanasi:
Motilal Banarsidass, 1962.
Bronkhorst, Johannes. Greater Magadha: Studies in the Culture of Early
India. Brill, 2007.
Gombrich, Richard F. Theravada Buddhism: A Social History from Ancient
Benares to Modern Colombo. 2nd ed. Routledge, 2006.
Chakravarti, Uma. The Social Dimensions of Early Buddhism. Oxford
University Press, 1987.
Jaini, Padmanabh S. The Jaina Path of Purification. University of California
Press, 1979.
Dundas, Paul. The Jains. 2nd ed. Routledge, 2002.
Jacobi, Hermann, trans. Jaina Sutras, Part I: Acaranga Sutra and Kalpa
Sutra. Sacred Books of the East, vol. 22. Clarendon Press, 1884.
Walshe, Maurice, trans. The Long Discourses of the Buddha: A Translation
of the Digha Nikaya. Wisdom Publications, 1995.
Schopen, Gregory. Bones, Stones, and Buddhist Monks: Collected Papers on
the Archaeology, Epigraphy, and Texts of Monastic Buddhism in India.
University of Hawai'i Press, 1997.
Schopen, Gregory. Buddhist Monks and Business Matters: Still More Papers
on Monastic Buddhism in India. University of Hawai'i Press, 2004.
Schopen, Gregory. Buddhist Nuns, Monks, and Other Worldly Matters:
Recent Papers on Monastic Buddhism in India. University of Hawai'i
Press, 2014.
Collett, Alice, ed. Women in Early Indian Buddhism: Comparative Textual
Studies. Oxford University Press, 2014.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199326044.001.0001.
Prebish, Charles S. “A Review of Scholarship on the Buddhist Councils.” The
Journal of Asian Studies 33, no. 2 (1974): 239-254.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2052186.
Sujato, Bhikkhu. Bhikkhuni Vinaya Studies: Research and Reflections on
Monastic Discipline for Buddhist Nuns. Santipada, 2012.
https://sujato.me/bvs.html.
Singh, Upinder. A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the
Stone Age to the 12th Century. Pearson Education India, 2008.
Sinha, B. P., and Sita Ram Roy. Vaisali Excavations, 1958-1962. Directorate
of Archaeology and Museums, Bihar, 1969.