[Based on this discovery and the location with respect to Lumbini, the Buddha’s birthplace in Nepal , Piprahwa was identified as Kapilavastu. But there were counter claims. In 1896, and again in 1899, a few archaeologists identified Tilaurakot, a village in Nepal ’s terai region as Kapilavastu. Though they could not find any relics, the presence of a large ensemble of structures and their correlation with the Chinese pilgrims’ description supported their claim. Tilaurkot’s case was bolstered by the disagreement among archaeologists over the decipherment of the Piprahwa inscription.]
By A.
Srivathsan
India uses history and artefacts
contested by Nepal to build bridges with Sri Lanka
Four bone fragments of the Buddha
housed in the National Museum , Delhi are on a two-week tour of Sri Lanka to enable Buddhists there to pay homage to them. While
all relics of the Buddha are revered, these are special. They are part of the
trove of 22 bone fragments that were discovered by the Archaeological Survey of
India (ASI) in the 1970s in Kapilavastu, Uttar Pradesh, where he grew up as a
prince before renouncing the world.
The journey of the relics, from New Delhi to Colombo , and to six other places in Sri Lanka this year, being observed as the 2,600th anniversary of
the Buddha’s enlightenment, brings up some old questions.
For the two governments, the
historical antecedent of the relics is a settled fact, and the exchange of
cultural artefacts between the two countries is a continuation of the long
history that dates back to the days of Emperor Ashoka.
But Nepal has for years raised doubts about the relics, claiming
that the true Kapilavastu lies in its territory, and not in U.P. as Indian
archaeologists claim.
After Gautama Buddha died or
attained Mahaparinirvana in the 5th century BCE, eight ruling families shared
the relics from his body. Among them were the Sakyas, the clan to which the
Buddha belonged. They built a stupa over
their share in Kapilavastu, the capital city. After the decline of Buddhism,
manystupas and
monasteries were abandoned and the one built by the Sakyas too went to seed.
When the Chinese pilgrims Fa-hien and Hiuen Tsang visited India centuries later in the 5th and 7th C.E respectively,
most of these sites lay in ruins.
Peppé’s
Discovery
It was in the 19th century that
Buddhist archaeology began to be properly noticed as British antiquarians set
out to pursue the Buddha’s trail. In 1898, William Peppé, a planter, while
clearing his estate near Piprahwa, a village in eastern Uttar Pradesh near the
India-Nepal border, found a brick dome that contained a sand stone box with
five caskets, relics said to be that of the Buddha, and other artefacts. An
inscription found on one of the caskets, though dated to after the Buddha’s
death, established the authenticity of the relics.
Based on this discovery and the
location with respect to Lumbini, the Buddha’s birthplace in Nepal , Piprahwa was identified as Kapilavastu. But there were
counter claims. In 1896, and again in 1899, a few archaeologists identified Tilaurakot,
a village in Nepal ’s terai region as Kapilavastu. Though they could not
find any relics, the presence of a large ensemble of structures and their
correlation with the Chinese pilgrims’ description supported their claim.
Tilaurkot’s case was bolstered by the disagreement among archaeologists over
the decipherment of the Piprahwa inscription.
The dispute continued in the
post-independence period. Nepal commenced a series of excavations in 1962 and found more
structures around Tilaurakot, but failed to locate any relics. Matters turned
in India ’s favour in 1971. K.M. Srivastava, an archaeologist with
the ASI, following a complaint forwarded to him from the Prime Minister’s
Office regarding the poor upkeep of Piprahwa, decided to look afresh at the place.
He began new excavations and dug deeper to discover two remarkable soap stone
urns. One of them contained 10 bone fragments and the other 12, all dateable to
5th century BCE. Besides this, many terracotta seals with inscriptions found at
the site supported India ’s claim. This was “an epoch making discovery” that
settled the location of Kapilavastu, Mr. Srivastava said in his report. For
reasons that are still unknown, the ASI published the report only 20 years
after the excavations were completed.
Evidently none of the contesting
claims has worried Sri Lanka . It was the first county to invite the relics and
exhibit them in 1978. The exhibition, The Hindureported then, drew more than 10 million
visitors.
Tiruketheeswaram
Project
The exchange of ideas and objects
around Buddhism between India and Sri Lanka go back more than two millennia. In the 3rd century BCE,
a mission led by Mahinda, Ashoka’s son, reached Sri Lanka and converted the Sri Lankan king Tissa to Buddhism. One
of Tissa’s first requests, as the Sri Lankan text Mahavamsa compiled in 6th
century CE describes, was for a branch of the Bodhi tree. The request was
accepted, and Sanghamitra, Ashoka’s daughter, carried the branch to Anuradhapura .
Unlike in 1978, when the Indian
government first exhibited the relics at Chennai’s Egmore
Museum , en route to Sri Lanka , this time, in the current atmosphere of political
antipathy in Tamil Nadu towards the Sri Lankan government, it evidently did not
want to take chances. The relics were flown directly to Colombo .
This brings us to a second
question around the lending of the relics to Sri Lanka . In the light of the unresolved Tamil issue, at least
one political party, the MDMK, has objected to it. In a letter to Prime
Minister Manmohan Singh, its leader Vaiko wrote that this was an “unpardonable
betrayal” of Sri Lankan Tamils by the Indian government.
Perhaps it was in anticipation of
such criticism that at the same time as the inauguration of the relics exposition
in Colombo , India will launch a project for the conservation of the
Tiruketheeswaram temple in Mannar.
Indeed, in the joint declaration
issued on June 9, 2010, during the visit of Sri Lankan President Mahinda
Rajapaksa to India, alongside the plans for “joint activities” by the two
countries to mark this year’s anniversary of Buddha’s enlightenment, there is
also the following line: “Both leaders also welcomed the proposal for the
restoration of Tiruketheeswaram temple at Mannar to be undertaken with the
assistance of the Archaeological Survey of India and the College of
Architecture and Sculpture, Mamallapuram, with the involvement of the
Department of Archaeology of Sri Lanka.”
Union Minister of Culture Kumari
Selja, who has accompanied the relics to Colombo , will travel to Mannar on Monday to launch the project,
to which New Delhi has committed Rs.135 million.
srivathsan.a@thehindu.co.in
Keywords: Buddhist relics, India-Sri Lanka ties, Kapilavastu