his religious and political goals. Buddha on the other hand, had no desire to be a political leader, and all his actions and success were dependent on his religion. They only thing that the Buddha used in addition to his appearance and his dhamma was an occasional miracle to demonstrate his power. The aforementioned alteration in a decision the Buddha made stemmed from his feelings that if women entered the Order, it would compromise the progress of the men who were trying to abandon the desire caused by women in the first place. When he changed his mind allowing women into the Order, it was because women were capable of enlightenment and therefore, should be allowed to join the Order. Buddhas power stemmed only from the power wielded by his dhamma and powers he developed in his religious pursuits. The Buddhas decisions were based on his dhamma, and only changed because of his dhamma. This shows that in his actions, the Buddha was motivated by and was powerful because of the knowledge and abilities that stemmed from his enlightenment. He gained no power or followers because of his political moves and made no actions or decisions with regard to a political agenda. Finally, as a political leader, when Muhammad died, someone had to maintain his alliances and fulfill his other responsibilities. As someone whose significance was only to teach people the path to enlightenment, the Buddhas teachings would be sufficient in his place when he died. He had no political roles or duties that needed to be fulfilled, unlike Muhammad. So even in death, Muhammads political role was clear, and the Buddha made (well, attempted to make) preparations only with regard to his religious goals as a teacher. In effect, both men were so inspired by their religious beliefs that they went out and spread their religions. The source of and their actual religious power and skills differed, but both used them to spread their religion that responded to the...
