Talk:Mimamsa-Karmamarga:Nyaya and Mimamsa: They brought about the Decline of Buddhism
By Sri Chandrasekharendra Saraswati Swami
It is a misconception that Buddhism lost its prominence in India due to attacks by Śaṅkara. The Ācārya’s commentaries contain only a few passing references to that tradition, which stood in opposition to the authority of the Veda-s. Instead, Śaṅkara directed his sharpest critiques toward the doctrines of the Sāṅkhya and Mīmāṃsā systems that, despite aligning with the Vaidika tradition, deny the role of Īśvara as the creator and dispenser of the fruits of action. Śaṅkara systematically dismantles these positions, affirming the Vedic view that the cosmos is a manifestation of Īśvara’s will.
He also maintains that Īśvara possesses the Lakṣaṇa-s or characteristics attributed to him by the Veda-s and the Brahmasūtra, and argues that there can be no world without Īśvara, and that it is wrong to maintain that our Karma-s yield fruits on their own. It is Īśvara, his resolve (Saṅkalpa), that has created this world, and it is he who awards us the fruits of our actions. We cannot find support in his commentaries for the view that he was responsible for the decline of Buddhism in India.
The decline of Buddhism in Bhārata cannot be attributed to Śrī Śaṅkara. Contrary to popular belief, Śaṅkara Bhagavatpāda did not launch any focused polemic against Buddhism. His references to that tradition are minimal, as his philosophical engagements were directed toward more immediate and enduring contenders within the Vaidika fold, such as the Sāṅkhya and Mīmāṃsā systems.
Then who, indeed, confronted Buddhism so forcefully as to contribute to its waning influence in this land? The answer lies with the Mīmāṃsaka-s and the Tārkika-s, the intellectual warriors rooted in the śāstra-s. The Tārkika-s, masters of Tarka (logic), and the Mīmāṃsaka-s, proponents of ritual precision and scriptural authority, challenged Buddhism on both metaphysical and ritualistic grounds. Tarka, forming a core of the Nyāya system—one of the fourteen traditional branches of Vedic knowledge (Caturdaśa-Vidyā) played a crucial role in this critique.
Among the most formidable figures were Udayanācārya, a stalwart of Nyāya, and Kumārila Bhaṭṭa, a leading Mīmāṃsaka. Udayana attacked Buddhism for its denial of Īśvara, exposing its theological vacuum. Kumārila, deeply rooted in the authority of the Veda and the efficacy of ritual injunctions, launched a systematic rejection of Buddhist doctrine, particularly its dismissal of Vaidika karma.
Their works, Tarkapāda of Kumārila and Bauddhādhikaraṇa of Udayana, are enduring testimonies to the intellectual dismantling of Buddhist arguments. These two ācārya-s, more than any others, were instrumental in Buddhism's decline in Bhārata. By the time Śrī Śaṅkara emerged, the foundational refutation of Buddhism had already been accomplished. His principal focus, therefore, was on refining the understanding of Vedānta by addressing internal distortions and re-establishing the supremacy of a unified Īśvara-tattva, correcting even the residual limitations found in the Mīmāṃsaka and Naiyāyika positions.
Recognizing the contributions of Udayana and Kumārila is essential to accurately understanding the trajectory of Indian philosophical history—and to dispelling the widespread misattribution of Buddhism's decline to Śrī Śaṅkara.
What we are taught on the subject in our textbooks of history is not true.