Asoka killed 99 brothers to get the throne | Fact or Myth ? | A Debate

history_geek thumbnail
11th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail + 5
Posted: 9 years ago
#1


Hi all,

I am back with a new post. The topic this time is quite different from the usual debate about Emperor Asoka. This post aims to critically examine the veracity of the information contained in ancient texts about Asoka, including Buddhist, Tibetan and Sanskrit texts.

According to these texts, Asoka slew 99 of his brothers to occupy the throne of Magadha. This post analyses the circumstances in which Asoka ascended the throne of Magadha and whether he was truly guilty of fratricide on a mass scale.


The post is not only limited to the above topic. This post also aims to answer various questions like:-

1. Did Asoka kill Susima? If yes, then why and how ?

2. Was Asoka extremely ruthless and highly ambitious in his early youth ?

3. Who did Bindusara want to succeed him to the throne - Asoka or Susima ?

4. Who was Rani Dharma? Was she a commoner or a royal princess ?


I wrote in an earlier post about the family background of Asoka:-


" The life history of this monarch is replete with countless incidents, many of which are sourced from the Buddhist legends / texts. Often, while reading about this monarch, we come across incidents, which oscillate between fact and fiction, establishing the veracity of which has proved to be a Herculean task even for the best historians. So, while discussing him, we will be debating the information obtained from his edicts, which are considered as facts, along with that obtained from Buddhist / Jain legends from various countries. "

Now let's put this theory to the test in the present discussion. I have made use of as many traditions and accounts as possible whose names are present in the post itself. English, Sanskrit, Pali, German, etc. scans from those texts are present along with them.

Here is the Link to the Post:

Mauryan Emperor Asoka Killed 99 brothers to get the Throne | Fact or Myth ? And other Questions | A Discussion

Looking forward to your views / readings on this topic.


DO NOT COPY THIS POST AS THIS IS EXCLUSIVE TO INDIA FORUMS


Created

Last reply

Replies

53

Views

34.3k

Users

15

Likes

131

Frequent Posters

RadhikaS0 thumbnail
11th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 9 years ago
#3
Abhay

This is an extremely well-researched and well-presented post about the manner in which Asoka became the Mauryan emperor.

I do feel convinced that greater weightage should be given to Asoka's rock edict. The man who documented much of the important events of his reign as well as his vision for the future of the Mauryan empire would most certainly have mentioned at least in passing how he ascended the throne if it had been unusual in any way.

There has always been this question mark as to whether Bindusara wanted Asoka to be his heir, esp after reading the Asokavadana, wherein it is mentioned that Bindusara was repulsed by Asoka's looks. So Prof. Chatterjee's notes that indeed Asoka was the chosen heir and not Susima is heartening to discover.

Just recently, we saw how Akbar's sons and grandsons struggled to ascend the throne after him. Now we see how Asoka was also depicted in the Buddhist / Tibetan legends to be involved in a power struggle with his brothers for the throne. Power seems to be the ultimate goal in any period. Still, while I can accept that Mughals inherited their ruthless streak from their Central Asian ancestors, I find it hard to accept that Asoka could be so ruthless for power. It is one thing to kill the enemy, and another to kill one's own family. It does seem to be an exaggeration of the negative traits of Asoka to show the calming influence of Buddhism on him later on.

Similarly, you have mentioned that an ascetic predicted that Asoka would support only Buddhism and destroy other "heretic" sects. This too seems to be an exaggeration to me. Some kind of negative propaganda by rival sects to depict Asoka's devotion to Buddhism as some kind of fanaticism, which it was not.

Thanks so much for such an in-depth analysis of the topic! :)
Edited by RadhikaS0 - 9 years ago
musicndance2 thumbnail
10th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail
Posted: 9 years ago
#4
First of all a big Thank you to you Abhay for all the information.
The texts and legends were written thousands of years ago and it is possible that they might have been later changed or fabricated. Importance must indeed be given to Ashoka 's edicts. And as per the translation of the 5th rock edict of Ashoka that you posted in the blog, I don't think there is any need for an argument whether Ashoka killed his brothers. Apparently he did not, that 's how it seemed to me. And in the case of who was "Yuvraj", I am still confused. Somewhere I feel like the negative character Sushim didn't exist at all. Even if he did exist, he might not have been the coal black personality that they show in the serial. And also as general human psycology, for a man who didn't feel an ounce of guilt in killing his own blood, mourning over the death of common people is also not possible.

Well these are my opinions. And Abhay I really wish you will share such great knowledge again. I am a fan of Indian history, especially of Kings like Ashoka. I would like to read the translations of the whole of his edicts. Could you help me with it?
Edited by musicndance2 - 9 years ago
Kaana thumbnail
11th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail
Posted: 9 years ago
#5
Abhay, just brilliant. Was missing you in this forum as there is this incompleteness without your history blogs to go alongwith the show:-) and ofcourse one gets to learn so much of great men of history.

Big thanks for this well researched article. One could see the mammoth effort behind it.

Regd, Ashok I feel his edict should be taken into consideration more than the accounts from sources. It cannot be so varied that one says that he was chosen heir apparent while another says he killed 99 brothers. There coukd be variation in account but not such stark contrast. So do I get a feel that his story has been played with to give the required effect.

And the God giving weapons and showing him as king at Bindusar's death bed - to me, these are stories. I would not believe in such things.

Either, Bindusar and ministers were carried by the prophecy and the added prowess declared him heir. Or that Sushim was away and the temporary guardian theory with a layer crowning eliminating Sushim. From the edict it's not for sure that he killed no r of his brothers - so maybe Sushim was done away with- that too am tempted to believe the Radhagupt version or similar chal by RG and Ashoka.

Problem with history is and even our forums for that matter is, one gets carried away by their hero worship and so facts gets compromised. I am not completely convinced that Susima lived peacefully with Ashoka - he should have eliminated him.

Interesting discussion and a fab post. Thanks yet again and bigger thanks for coming back :-)
musicndance2 thumbnail
10th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail
Posted: 9 years ago
#6
Sushim might have been eliminated for reason other than the throne. May be due to his bad conduct. But not whole of his brothers were killed by Ashoka it seems.
Kaana thumbnail
11th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail
Posted: 9 years ago
#7
Regarding destroying other sects, I tend not to believe it.
- if Buddhism was dear to his heart he would not have indulged in the likes of Kalinga battle
- if he transformed after Kalinga war and took refuge in Buddhism, he would not have indulged in such religious war. If he cannot kill enemies in battle field, how could he inflict pain to normal others?

Basically if he was genuinely under the influence of Buddhism as a religion he would not have done these. But he could have under the influence of some ill willed Buddhist priests. But his heart transformed is my understanding and not just getting into some religion.

A heart full of compassion cannot do such IMO.
MaddyO thumbnail
12th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail Networker 1 Thumbnail
Posted: 9 years ago
#8
Abhay 😃😃 I am so glad to see your post here.
Wonderful blog, as usual you have dug up rare archives and so many different sources.

I don't think Ashoka could have killed 99 brothers for getting the throne. For simple reason if one prince was on killing spree of 99 others they wouldn't wait around to be killed! They were also royal blood with I am sure their own influences and power centers.

It is possible that Ashok might have killed Sushim or RG did it by trickery. Sushim was the eldest and a clear rival. Ashok could never have been able to rule in peace if Sushim was around. Maybe few others who supported Sushim.

It seems Ashok was coronated 4 years after Bindusaar's death. Here there are two possibilities,
The throne tussle went on for long, with some brothers declaring support to Sushim, some to Ashok. Ashok achieved full control in 4 years
Or
Ashok became Samrat after Bindusaar's death, he gained complete control but the coronation ceremony "actual Vidhivat Rajyabhishek" was done after 4 years, so created this confusion. Those days auspicious period would be considered, could be it was advised to wait for 4 years.

I don't think religion could have changed Ashok. He deeply regretted the Kalinga war bloodshed and the brutality and that changed his thinking. He maybe turned to religion for the answers AFTER renouncing "himsa".

I find it hard to believe that a person can just let go of the teachings that have shaped his personality for almost 30+ years, yes he can seek solace or embrace new thought processes, without totally abandoning the old persona and teachings. They might have combined in his personality.

It is hugely to his credit that he changed himself when he was under no compulsion to. He had become the most powerful man, he changed himself.

Thanks to CAS and you, we are now thinking about him 2400 years later and trying to learn about his magnificent reign which encompassed from Afghanistan to Bangladesh to almost entire India.

Moumimon thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Stunner Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 9 years ago
#9

well a very well written and well researched post...thanks for posting abhay...

ashoka's 99 brothers which fact always left me in confusion no matter how much i read about this fact still its seems impossible for me to reach at any conclusion... for the fact that ashok was actually killed his 99 come 100 brothers of him i feel like its kind of fictional for me... its not like i believe he was not killed any of his brother but still the number100 disturb me much...

this number firstly make me sick about Bindusar.. that actually with how many women he was involved...its really a big number to believe a man with 100 of sons...SICK...

well whatever that was, your post is surely well researched..and really helpful...thanks for sharing it all...



chicksoup thumbnail
12th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 9 years ago
#10
That was a thoroughly researched article, and a pleasure to read. Thank You for it.
I don't know if it is a fact or myth. But it does seem possible to me...He could easily have had 100 brothers...I imagine the number must have been more than 6, considering concubines would have given sons too. Considering there was no contraception, that many pregnancies are possible by a single sperm donor😉.

So, if Ashoka had 100 brothers, did he kill 99 of them? I find that possible too...I am guessing there was an army formed by these brothers against him and he vanquished them all.

My Q is, if at all there were 100 brothers, how many sisters did Ashoka have? Biologically, I am sure there was at least one sister if there were 100 brothers. May be they were not considered worth mentioning.😕

Probably there were only 6 children from the queens.
Edited by chicksoup - 9 years ago

Related Topics

Top

Stay Connected with IndiaForums!

Be the first to know about the latest news, updates, and exclusive content.

Add to Home Screen!

Install this web app on your iPhone for the best experience. It's easy, just tap and then "Add to Home Screen".