The Discovery of Buddha's Birthplace

By G. Buhler
The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland
February, 1897. pp. 429-433


[Go directly to the portion about Champaran]


p. 439



            The kindness  of Dr. Fuhrer  enables  me to  give

        some  account  of  his  discoveries  in the  Nepalese

        Terai, north of the district of Gorakhpur, which were

        briefly  noticed in all Indian telegram  of the Times

        of December  28, 1896.  He has sent  me two excellent

        impressions of the new Ashoka edict on the Pillar of

        Paderia, together with  a  memorandum  regarding  his

        tour   and  the  situation   of  the  ruins   in  its

        neighbourhood.



            The edict leaves no doubt that  Dr. Fuhrer  has

        accomplished all the telegram claimed for him. He has

        found the Lumbini garden, the spot where the founder

        of Buddhism was born, according  to the tradition  of

        the canonical  works  of the South  and of the North.

        The decisive  passages  of the Paderia  Edict  are as

        follows:-- "King Piyadasi [or Ashoka], beloved of the

        gods, having been anointed twenty years, himself came

        and worshipped, saying, `Here Buddha  Shakyamini  was

        born'.... and he caused a stone pillar to be erected,

        which declares, 'Here the worshipful  one was born.'"

        Immediately afterwards the edict mentions the village

        of Lummini  (Lumminigama), and adds, according  to my

        interrpretation  of the rather  difficult  new words,

        that Ashoka appointed there two new officials.



            However   that  may  be,  Lummini   is  certainly

        equivalent  to Lumbini, and the pillar marks the site

        which was pointed  out to Ashoka  as the royal garden

        to which Mayadevi



                                p. 430



        retired  immediately  before  her  confinement.   The

        evidence  of the edict could only be set aside if it

        were shown that the pillar has been carried from some

        other  place  to  its  present  site.  But  there  is

        collateral  evidence  to  prove  that  it is  in  its

        original position.  The Chinese pilgrim Hiuen Tsiang,

        who visited the sacred places of the Buddhists  all

        over India and reached  the Lumbini  garden ill A.D.

        636, mentions  the pillar erected by Ashoka.  He says

        that it stood  close  to four Stupas, and Dr.  Fuhrer

        says that the;r ruins are still extant.  Hiuen Tsiang

        further alleges  that the pillar had been broken into

        two  pieces  through  the  contrivance  of  a  wicked

        dragon, and Dr.  Fuhrer remarks  that it has lost its

        top part, which  appears  to have been  shattered  by

        lightning.  The Buddhists consider destructive storms

        to be due to the anger of the snake-deities or Nagas,

        whom the Chinese  call dragons.  If Hiuen Tsiang does

        not mention  the inscription, the reason  is no doubt

        that it was not visible in his time. When Dr.  Fuhrer

        first  saw the pillar  on December  1, only  a piece,

        nine  feet  high, was above  the  ground, and  it was

        covered  with pilgrims'  records, one of which  beers

        the date A.D.  800.  This piece must, therefore, have

        been accessible, and the surface  of the ground  must

        have  been  at the present  level  for  nearly  1,100

        years.   When  the  excavation   of  the  pillar  was

        afterwards  undertaken, the  Ashoka  inscription  was

        found 10 feet below the surface  and 6 feet above the

        base.  It seems impossible to believe that 10 feet of

        debris  could  have  accumulated  in the  sixty-four

        years between  the date of Hiuen  Tsiang's  visit and

        the incision  of the oldest  pilgrim's  record at the

        top.  Finally, it may be mentioned  that the site  is

        still  called  Rumindei, and the first  part  of this

        name evidently represents Ashoka's Lummini and the



            The identification  of the Lumbini  garden  fixed

        also  the  site  of Kapilavastu, the  capital  of the

        Shakyas,  and  that  of  Napeikia   or  Nabhika,  the

        supposed  birthplace   of  Shakyamuni's   mythical

        predecessor  Krakuchanda.  According  to the  Chinese

        Buddhist Fahien, Hiuen Tsiang's predecessor,



                                p. 431



        Kapilavastu  lay 50 ii (about  8 miles)  west  of the

        garden.   Following   this  indication,  Dr.   Fuhrer

        discovered  extensive  ruins  8 miles  north-west  of

        Paderia, stretehing  in the middle of the forest from

        the villages  of Amauli  and Bikuli  (north-west)  to

        Ramghat  on the Banganga  (south-east), over nearly 7

        miles.  Again, Fahien gives the distance  of Napeikia

        from Kapilavastu as one yojana. Dr.  Fuhrer found its

        ruins with the Stupa, which  is still 80 feet high, 7

        miles south-west. As the Stupa of Konagamana, another

        mythical  Buddha,  had  already  been  found  by  Dr.

        Fuhrer, together  with its Ashoka  edict, in l895, at

        Nigliva, 13 miles from Paderia, all the sacred  sites

        in the western  part of the Nepalese  Terai mentioned

        by the  Chinese  pilgrims  have  been  satisfactorily

        idevtified.  Some others, particularly  Ramagrama and

        Kusinara, the place where Buddha  died, will probably

        be found  in the  eastern  portion  of  the  Nepalese

        lowlands.  For, if the  direction  of the route  from

        Kapila-  vastu  to these  places  has been  correctly

        given by the Chinese, Kusinara  cannot  be identical

        with Kasia in the Gorakhpur  district, where  Sir A.

        Cunningham and Mr.  Carlleyle believed they had found

        it.



            Dr.  Fuhrer's discoveries  are the most important

        which  have been  made for many years.  They  will be

        hailed  with enthusiasm  by the Buddhists  of India,

        Ceylon, and the liar East.  For the student of Indian

        history they yield already some valuable results, and

        they are rich in promise.



            It  is now  evident  that  the  kingdom  of  the

        Shakyas  lay, as their legend  asserts, on the slopes

        of the  Himalaya, and  that  they  were, as they  too

        admit, jungle and hill Rajputs  exiled  from the more

        civilized  districts.   Their  settlement   ill  the

        hill-forest  must have separated them for a prolonged

        period  from their brethren  further  south and west.

        Their isolation  no doubt forced them to develop  the

        entirely  un-Aryan and un-Indian  custom of endogamy,

        as well as other bahits not in accordance  with those

        of   their   kindred.    This   also   explains   why

        intermarriages  between  them  and  the  other  noble

        families of Northern India did not take



                                p. 432



        place.  It was  not, as their  tradition  says, their

        pride  of blood which  prevented  such alliances, but

        the stigma attaching to exiles wile had departed from

        the customs  of their race, and were perhaps not even

        free from a strong admixture of un-Aryan blood.



            For the history  of Ahoka, the Paderia  Edict and

        the  Nigliva.  inscription, the  mutilated  lines  of

        which  may now be restored  with  perfect  certainty,

        teach  us that  the king visited  in his twenty-first

        year the sacred  places of the Buddhists  in Northern

        India.  His journey  extended  probably  also in the

        east  to  Kusinara, and  further  west  to Shravasti,

        where Hiuen Tsiang saw his inscribed  pillars And his

        route  from  his capital  at Patna  to the  Terai  is

        probably  marked  by the  row of columns  found  from

        Bakhra, near Vaishali  or Besarh, as far as Rampurva,

        in the Champaran  district.  The journey may indicate

        that  Ashoka  was at the time  already  a convert  to

        Buddhism, or  it  may  have  been, as  I  think  more

        probable,  one  of  the  "religious   tours"   which,

        according  to  the  eighth  Rock  Edict, he regularly

        undertook  from his eleventh year "in order to obtain

        enlightenment.'



            The fact that he planted  a number of pillars all

        over  the Terai  indicates  that also  this  district

        belonged then to his extensive empire. If I am rightt

        in my interpretation  of the concluding  sentence  of

        the  Paderia   Edict,  according   to  which  Ashoka,

        appointed there two afficials, this inference becomes

        indisputable.



            The promise which Dr.  Fuhrer's discoveries  hold

        out is that excavations of the newly-found ruins will

        make us acquainted  with monuments  and documents not

        only  of'  the third  century  B.C., but  of a.  much

        earlier  period, extending  to the  fifth  and  sixth

        centuries, which latter will be partly Buddhistic and

        partly pre-Buddhistic, like the ancient  Shiva temple

        seen by Hiuen Tsiang ("Siyuki," vol. ii, p. 23, Beal)

        outside  the eastern  gate of Kapilavastu, where  the

        Shakyas  used to present their children.  Kapilavastu

        and its neighbourhood are particularly favourable for

        the discovery.  of really ancient  monuments;  for in

        Fahien's time, about



                                p. 433



        A.D.  400, the country was already a wilderness, with

        very few inhabitants, and full of ancient  mounds and

        ruins. Hiuen Tsiang's description is very similar. It

        is therefore  to be expected  that  the old buildings

        have not been dis- figured by late restorations. I am

        glad to learn from Dr.  Fuhrer's memorandum  that the

        Nepalese  Governor  of the  district, General  Khadga

        Shamsher  Jang  Rana  Bahadur, who had the pillar  of

        Paderia  excavated,  but  did  not  think  any  other

        operations  feasible  on account of the severe famine

        has generously promised to lend nest year a number of

        his sappers for more extensive  excavations.  I trust

        that  the  Indian  Government  will  now  consent  to

        prolong   the   existence   of   the   Archacological

        Department, which, if the rumours  in the papers are

        true, was recently  threatened.  The services  of the

        few officers  still employed  are sorely  needed  for

        conducting the researches in a really systematic  and

        scientific manner.