(7–12th centuries), most major and minor Indian dynasties gradually shifted their support towards various forms of
Hinduism or
Jainism (with the exception of the
Palas). The regionalisation of India after the end of the
Gupta Empire (320–650 CE) led to the loss of patronage and donations. The prevailing view of decline of Buddhism in India is summed by
A. L. Basham's classic study which argues that the main cause was the rise of an ancient Hindu religion again, "
Hinduism", which focused on the worship of deities like
Shiva and
Vishnu and became more popular among the common people while Buddhism, being focused on monastery life, had become disconnected from public life and its life rituals, which were all left to Hindu
Brahmins.
Religious competition The growth of new forms of
Hinduism (and to a lesser extent
Jainism) was a key element in the decline in Buddhism in India, particularly in terms of diminishing financial support to Buddhist monasteries from laity and royalty and also not having any support of kings . According to Kanai Hazra, Buddhism declined in part because of the rise of the Brahmins and their influence in socio-political process. According to Randall Collins,
Richard Gombrich and other scholars, Buddhism's rise or decline is not linked to Brahmins or the caste system, since Buddhism was "not a reaction to the caste system", but aimed at the salvation of those who joined its monastic order. The disintegration of central power also led to regionalisation of religiosity, and religious rivalry. Rural and devotional movements arose within Hinduism, along with
Shaivism,
Vaishnavism,
Bhakti and
Tantra, that competed with each other, as well as with numerous sects of
Buddhism and
Jainism. This fragmentation of power into feudal kingdoms was detrimental for
Buddhism, as royal support shifted towards other communities and
Brahmins developed a strong relationship with Indian states. These factors all slowly led to the replacement of Buddhism in the South and West of India by Hinduism and Jainism. Fogelin states that Buddhist sources also mention violence against Buddhists by Hindu Brahmins and kings. Hazra mentions that the eighth and ninth centuries saw "Brahminical hostilities towards Buddhism in South India"
Religious convergence and absorption at
Chennakesava Temple (Somanathapura). Buddhism's distinctiveness also diminished with the rise of Hindu sects. Though
Mahayana writers were quite critical of Hinduism, the devotional cults of Mahayana Buddhism and Hinduism likely seemed quite similar to laity, and the developing
Tantrism of both religions were also similar. Also, "the increasingly esoteric nature" of both Hindu and
Buddhist tantrism made it "incomprehensible to India's masses", for whom Hindu
devotionalism and the worldly power-oriented
Nath Siddhas became a far better alternative. Buddhist ideas, and even the Buddha himself, were absorbed and adapted into orthodox Hindu thought, while the differences between the two systems of thought were emphasised. Elements which medieval
Hinduism adopted during this time included vegetarianism, a critique of animal sacrifices, a strong tradition of monasticism (founded by figures such as
Shankara) and the adoption of the Buddha as an avatar of
Vishnu. On the other end of the spectrum, Buddhism slowly became more and more "Brahmanized", initially beginning with the adoption of Sanskrit as a means to defend their interests in royal courts. According to Bronkhorst, this move to the Sanskrit cultural world also brought with it numerous Brahmanical norms which now were adopted by the Sanskrit Buddhist culture (one example is the idea present in some Buddhist texts that the Buddha was a Brahmin who knew the Vedas). Bronkhorst notes that with time, even the
caste system eventually became widely accepted for "all practical purposes" by Indian Buddhists (this survives among the
Newar Buddhists of Nepal). Bronkhorst notes that eventually, a tendency developed in India to see Buddhism's past as having been dependent on Brahmanism and secondary to it. This idea, according to Bronkhorst, "may have acted like a Trojan horse, weakening this religion from within". The political realities of the period also led some Buddhists to change their doctrines and practices. For example, some later texts such as the
Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra and the Sarvadurgatipariśodhana Tantra begin to speak of the importance of protecting Buddhist teachings and that killing is allowed if necessary for this reason. Later Buddhist literature also begins to see kings as
bodhisattvas and their actions as being in line with the dharma (Buddhist kings like
Devapala and
Jayavarman VII also claimed this). Bronkhorst also thinks that the increase in the use of
apotropaic rituals (including for the protection of the state and king) and spells (
mantras) by 7th century Indian Buddhism is also a response to Brahmanical and
Shaiva influence. These included fire sacrifices, which were performed under the rule of Buddhist king
Dharmapala (r. c. 775–812). Alexis Sanderson has shown that Tantric Buddhism is filled with imperial imagery reflecting the realities of medieval India, and that in some ways work to sanctify that world. Perhaps because of these changes, Buddhism remained indebted to the crept in Brahmanical thought and practice now that it had adopted much of its world-view. Bronkhorst argues that these somewhat drastic changes "took them far from the ideas and practices they had adhered to during the early centuries of their religion, and dangerously close to their much-detested rivals." These changes which brought Buddhism closer to Hinduism, eventually made it much easier for it to be absorbed into Hinduism and lose its separate identity for them.
Patronage In ancient India, regardless of the religious beliefs of their kings, states usually treated all the important sects relatively even-handedly. This consisted of building monasteries and religious monuments, donating property such as the income of villages for the support of monks, and exempting donated property from taxation. Donations were most often made by private persons such as wealthy merchants and female relatives of the royal family, but there were periods when the state also gave its support and protection. In the case of Buddhism, this support was particularly important because of its high level of organisation and the reliance of monks on donations from the laity. State patronage of Buddhism took the form of land grant foundations. Numerous copper plate inscriptions from India as well as
Tibetan and
Chinese texts suggest that the patronage of
Buddhism and Buddhist monasteries in medieval India was interrupted in periods of war and political change, but broadly continued in Hindu kingdoms from the start of the common era through the early first millennium CE. The Gupta kings built Buddhist temples such as the one at Kushinagara, and monastic universities such as those at Nalanda, as evidenced by records left by three Chinese visitors to India.
Internal social-economic dynamics According to some scholars such as Lars Fogelin, the decline of Buddhism may be related to economic reasons, wherein the Buddhist monasteries with large land grants focused on non-material pursuits, self-isolation of the monasteries, loss in internal discipline in the
sangha, and a failure to efficiently operate the land they owned. With the growing support for Hinduism and Jainism, Buddhist monasteries also gradually lost control of land revenue. ==Turkic invasions and conquest (10th to 12th century)==