Philip S. Rawson writes in his book The Art of South East Asia:
“The culture of India has been one of the world’s most powerful civilizing forces. Countries of the Far East, including China, Korea, Japan, Tibet and Mongolia owe much of what is best in their own cultures to the inspiration of ideas imported from India. The West, too, has its own debts.” But the members of that circle of civilizations beyond Burma scattered around the Gulf of Siam and the Java Sea, virtually owe their very existence to the creative influence of Indian ideas… No conquest or invasion, no forced conversion imposed them. They were adopted because people saw that they were good and that they could use them…"
Amaury de Riencourt (1918 - ) was born in Orleans, France. He received his B.A. from the Sorbonne and his M.A. from the University of Algiers. He is author of several books including The American empire and The Soul of India, wrote:
"The brightest sun shining over Southeast Asia in the first centuries A.D. was Indian Civilization. Waves of Indian colonists, traders, soldiers, Brahmins and Buddhist beat upon one Southeast shore after another. Great military power based on superior technical knowledge, flourishing trade fostered by the remarkable increase in maritime exchanges between India and these areas, the vast cultural superiority of the Indians, everything conspired to heighten the impact of the Indian Civilization on the Southeast Asian. Passenger ships plied regularly between the Ganges, Ceylon and Malaya in the middle of the first millennium A.D. Indian settlers from Gujarat and Kalinga colonized Java, for instance, while others set out for Burma or Cambodia. Old Indian books – the Kathasagara, the Jatakas and others – refer to these wondorous regions that set the imagination of civilized Indians on fire, to Suvarnabhumi, the fabulous “Land of Gold.” On the whole, the Indianization of Southeast Asia proceeded peacefully. Local chiefs and petty chieftains were admitted into the caste structure as Ksatriyas through a ritual known as vratyastoma, performed by an Indian Brahmin. All over Southeast Asia tremendous ruins are strewn, testifying to the immense influence of Indian Civilization. "
Indian Civilization prevailed over an immense area stretching from Afghanistan to the Pacific, including most of what is known today as Southeast Asia. Passenger ships plied regularly between the Ganges, Sri Lanka and Malaya in the middle of the first millennium A.D. Indian settlers from Gujarat and Kalinga (Orissa) colonized Java, for instance, while others set out for Burma or Cambodia. Old Indian books - the Kathasaritsagara, the Jatakas and others -refer to these wondrous regions that set the imaginations of civilized Indians on fire, to Suvarnabhumi, the fabulous “Land of Gold” as Southeast Asia was then known. And all over Southeast Asia tremendous ruins are strewn, testifying to the immense influence of Indian Civilization. Side by side, the life history of Gautama Buddha carved delicately in stone continues the bas-reliefs depicting the legendary tales of Krishna, Vishnu and Rama. Moonlight Civilization glittered in all their magnificence, reflecting Indian Civilization at a time when it had been dealt a crippling blow at home, in India, after the Mohammedans arrived.
Everywhere, Indian influence prevailed over the Chinese, and for evident reasons: an undoubted cultural superiority owing to much greater philosophic and religious insight. Indian Civilization respected the political autonomy of its colonies and the cultural freedom of all its units, and, on the whole, worked through peaceful penetration. The Chinese, on the other hand, proceeded by conquest, assimilation and absorption into all encompassing Chinese Civilization.
(source: The Soul of India - By Amaury de Riencourt ISBN 0907855032 p. 157-162).
This really tells you the difference doesn’t it, between the Dharma civilisation and the Abrahamic civilisation. India’s martime empires with their ships travelled around the world trading and sharing knowledge and religion with the natives, who adapted it into their own cultural fold. On the other hand when Muslims and the Christians set seas, all they could see was subjects to exploit, wealth to be looted and souls to be harvested or exterminated in the name of their religion.
Is it even right to speak of Hinduism and Buddhism in the same breath as the Abrahamic religions? Probably as right as it is to speak of sages and serial killers in the same breath.