2. Introduction
• Known by various names
• Lumbini inscription.
• The Aśōkan edict of Paḍariā.
• Doesn’t contain reference to propagation
od Dhamma by Ashoka.
• Significant for history of Buddhism.
3.
4. Discovery of the inscription
• Year: 1896
• By: Alois Anton Führer
• How: During a follow-up survey of the
nearby Nigali-Sagar pillar, discovered
and investigated by him the previous
year, in March 1895.
5.
6.
7.
8. Antiquity of reference to Lumbini
• Ashokavadana: mentions that Ashoka, under the guidance of his
preceptor, Upagupta, visited in succession the Lumbini garden, Kapilvastu,
Bodhi-tree at Bodhgaya, Rishipattana or Sarnath, Kushinagar, Jetavana
monastery at Sravasti, the stupa of Vakkula and the stupa of Ananda.
• Smith: Buddhist preceptor Upgaupta might be a real historical personage
as a famous monastery bearing his name was situated at Kankali Tila in
Mathura. His name was also associated to many stories in Sind. Upagupta
was the son of Gupta the perfumer.
9. Fa Xian
• Shortly after 400 CE, had gone to Kapilavastu.
• Fifty li (some 15 km) east of the city, reached the garden called LumbinI.
• Describes the infertile and abandoned countryside in a few brief words and
warns travelers about wild animals.
• Perhaps Fa-Xian had no problem finding the important place.
• From his words, though, it is clear that in 400 CE there were no vast hordes
of pilgrims to be seen in either Kapilavastu or in the park of LumbinI.
10. Xuan Xang
• Noted that the Tarai region was "very sparsely inhabited"
• Starting a bit south of Kapilavastu, he headed 80 or 90 li north-east and came
to the grove of LumbinI & a pool
• On the east of this was an Asoka tope.
• To the east of this were two clear springs.
• South of these were topes
• Near these topes was a stone pillar set up by Asoka with the figure of a horse
on the top.
• Afterwards the pillar had been broken in the middle, and laid on the ground
(that is, half of it), by a thunderbolt from a malicious dragon. Near this pillar
was a small stream flowing south-east, and called by the people the Oil River.
11. V. A.Smith’s description of pillar
• The broken pillar which bears the inscription stands close to a mound
of ruins.
• Near the top there is a shrine of a goddess known as Rummindei.
• This mound is close on the north of another mound which marks the
site of an ancient village or small town known by the name
Rummindei.
12. Discovery & Decipherment
• 1880: Smith had heard of the pillar and had rubbings of the inscriptions sent to him.
• At that time, Asoka's text lay buried underground, Smith secured only fairly modem
graffiti and attached no significance to the pillar.
• 1896: Alois Anton Führer. Styled at first “the Aśōka edict of Paḍariā
• 1896: Waddel’s guidebook mentioning many pilgrims from the north continued to seek
the way to Lumbini.
• 1897: Professor Bühler published the text.
• 1897: M. Barth translated it.
• 1905: V.A.Smith’s translation
• The record was fully edited by Professor Bühler, with an excellent facsimile.
13.
14.
15.
16. • the record cannot be properly classed as an " edict" of Asoka,
inasmuch as it does not commence with any of the formulae
presented in the edicts, and that there is not, in fact, anything to
mark it as a record framed by the king at all: it appears to have been
drawn up by the local authorities, and incised by them on the pillar
set up by Asoka.
17.
18.
19. Text
1. Devanapiyena Piyadasina lajina visati-vas-abhisitena
2. atana agacha mahiyite hida Budhe jate Sakya-mun = iti
3. sil-avi-gada-bhicha kalapita sila-thabhe cha usapapite
4. hida Bhagavam jate = ti Lurhmini-game ubalike kate
5. athabhagiye cha
20. Translation
“The king Devanaiiipiya-Piyadassi, twenty years after the consecration,
did (this place) the honor of coming (here) in person. Because Buddha
was born here, the Sakya saint, he caused a stone surrounding and
screening wall to be made, and a stone pillar to be set up. Because the
Blessed One was born here, he made the village Lummini free of rent and
entitled to the (king's) eighth share (of the grain)”
21. Authenticity
• V.A.Smith: Did not question the authenticity.
• The engraving is in extremely good condition and seems fresh.
• 1900: Rhys Davis noted that it was "almost as if freshly cut".
• Christopher I. Beckwith: Lumbini inscription is a later work/forgery.
• 2008: Charles Allen resurfaced this issue
22. Issues regarding the authenticity
• Uncertainty about the date of the pillar and the inscription
• Inconsistency with other Aśokan inscriptions
• Question mark on the carving and the letter quality
• Allegations of fraud
23. Date of the pillar and the inscription
• Whereas all other words of the inscription are either Arddhamāgadhī or Prākrit words, which were
being used during Aśoka’s time, Sakyamuni is a Sanskritized word.
• The corresponding Prākrit word would be either Sakamuni or Sakiyamuni.
• The fact that these were ignored in the inscription in favour of Sakyamuni, an adaptation of the
Sanskrit word Śakyamuni, points to a later date of the inscription.
• Beckwith: Sanskrit words were not used in inscriptions until the first century BCE. This means that
the inscription could not have been issued during Aśoka’s time.
• Mahapatra: Aśokan pillars are well proportioned and better polished compared to the Pāḍariyā
pillar so it cant be an Aśokan pillar.
• Smith: Brick railing surrounding the base of Rummindei pillar is built of small bricks and is
evidently of comparatively modern date.
24. Inconsistencies with other Aśokan inscriptions
• A peculiarity of Pāḍariyā inscription is that the word ‘Buddha’ is used in it.
• We do not find this word in any other Aśokan inscription, except the Calcutta-
Bairat inscription.
• The qualifier used for the Buddha in the inscription is Sakyamuni (𑀲𑀓𑁆𑀬𑀫𑀼𑀦𑀺), which
is normally a Sanskritized form of the Prakrit Sakamuni (𑀲𑀓𑁆𑀬𑀫𑀼𑀦𑀺 "Sage of the
Sakas).
• The use of these words makes the inscription unusual.
• Beckwith: The inscription has been written in third person. It indicates that the
inscription was written by someone else at a later date reporting the visit of King
Piyadasi to Lumbinī, which he undertook in the twentieth year of his coronation.
• In contrast, all other Aśokan inscriptions are issued in King Piyadasi’s own name.
• If the inscription was written by someone else, then it must have been written
after a gap from the time of visit and that such gap could be centuries.
25.
26.
27. Carving and the letter quality
1. The letters of the inscription are nearly perfect and appear as if printed characters.
2. Height to width ratio of the letters is more than that in other Aśokan inscriptions.
3. Lines and curves of letters are unusually smooth.
4. There is clear spacing between letters. There is no case of a letter touching another.
5. There is space to mark the end of each word unlike other Aśokan inscriptions.
6. Much larger spacing between lines; the spacing between lines is more than the height of
the letters.
7. Letters look more like geometric figures drawn using modern geometrical instruments
rather than free flow handwriting.
8. The letters have been carved to more depth than that in other Aśokan inscriptions. This
makes them look fresh, even now.
9. The lines and the curves of the letters have sharp sides unlike other Aśokan inscriptions.
10. The technology used to carve the letters of this inscription appear more sophisticated
than the prayer etched near the top of the pillar in the thirteenth-fourteenth century CE.
28. Allegations of fraud
• Pāḍariyā inscription has been mired in allegations of fraud ever since its discovery.
• Dr. Führer, the discoverer of the inscription had been engaged in fraudulent activities
since a few years before this discovery.
• He knew Prākrit language and Brāhmī script. He was the Assistant Editor of
Epigraphia Indica for some time. It was therefore easy for him to forge an inscription.
• More importantly, he had the inclination to commit forgery.
• Führer gave a bogus relic-casket to a Burmese monk claiming that it contained a
tooth-relic of Buddha, which later on turned out to be a tooth ‘of a horse’
• Führer claimed discovery of fictitious stupas near Niglivā pillar although there were
none.
• Every word of his elaborate description was false, his claim that Pāḍariyā was called
Rummindei too was false.
• The fraudulent activities of Dr. Führer were exposed after an investigation, following
which he was sacked
29. Forgery
• Führer left the excavation site after identifying the pillar to be Aśokan, but before
the inscription was actually exposed.
• Before leaving, however, he assured that an Aśokan inscription would be found after
further excavation.
• That he was able to predict the existence of an inscription below the ground level
indicates that he had seen the inscription on an earlier occasion and the fact he did
not claim discovery of the inscription on that occasion indicates his involvement in
engraving the inscription.
• Inscription was found to be at a height of 9’8” above the base. Since the inscription
was meant for common people to read, it should have been at a reasonable height.
30. Mahiyate
• Mahiyate =' homage was done,'' worship was done,'' reverence was done.
• To do puja' does not necessarily mean ' to do religious worship’
• It can also denote the act of paying respect to great, influential, or venerable
people.
• Mahiyate is ultimately connected with the root from which we have also
mahat, ' great,' there are numerous passages in which, we can see, it plainly
means ' to be made great, to be honored.'
31. Sildvigadabhicha
• Bühler 1899
• Sildvigadabhicha = big sun
• Charpentier vide Hultzsch 1925, Smith 1920
• Sildvigadabhicha = Horse
• Hultzsch, Rajvali Pandey
• Sildvigadabhicha = (brick) wall decorated (with stone)
• Bhandarkar 1902, Fleet 1908, Sen 1956
• Sildvigadabhicha = an enclosure/railing
• Basak 1959
• Sildvigadabhicha = She-ass
• B.Barua
• Stone pillar
32. Ubalika
• Ubalike = Bali, ' tax, impost, royal revenue.
• Term = meaning ' exempt from assessment,' ' free of taxes,' ' revenue-free.’
• A vernacular word umbalika meaning ‘free from rent' may be traced in
Southern India in the Kanarese umbali, umbalige, ummali, etc., ' a rent-free
grant,' as applied to either a plot of land or a village in Telgu.
33. Athabhagiye,
• Sanskrit Bhagya = entitled to a share.’
• Atha, attha = Prakrit forms of ashta, eight.
• Atha = substance, wealth, property, etc’
• Asth rights including all rights to discovered treasure (nidhi), unclaimed
collateral water and stones
• Athabhagiya = Religious tax
• Unanimity to the extent that aṭhabhāgiye implies some kind of a concession for
Lumbinī village
34. Aṭhabhāgiye
• Bühler 1899
• Recipient of wealth/ king’s bounty
• Fleet 1908, Mitra 1929
• Eight plots of land
• Thomas 1914, Hultzsch 1925, Sen 1956, Basak 1959, Tsukamoto 2006
• One-eighth of land produce
• Bhandarkar, 1908
• Religious tax levied on those who visited religious places
• Henry Falk, Venkatasubbiah
• Exempted the village of Lumbini from imposts and granted [it] the eight rights
35. Text
• 1. देवानंपियेन पियदसिन लाजिन वीितिविासिसििेन
• 2. अिन आगाच महीयिे हहद बुधे िािे िक्यमुनी ति
• 3. सिलपवगडिी चा कालापिि सिलाथमे च उििापििे
• 4. हहद िगवि िािे ति लुसमतनगामे उबसलक
े कटे
• 5. अठिागगये -च (॥)
36. Hid budhe jate sakyamuni and hid bhagavat(jate)
• Henry Falk: Asoka wanted to make a basic distinction:
• in the first sentence he talks of the Buddha as a man, a "muni of the Sakyas“
• in the second, by contrast, he calls him Bhagavan the Lord’.
• This split between man and higher being is reflected in the donations.
• In keeping with the Buddha as man, is a monument of the birth that brought into this
world the Siddhartha as Sakya. And Asoka established a pillar; all that he gave is stone, is
matter.
• In the second sentence, by contrast, he talks of Bhagavan. And a higher being receives
bali; a god commands bhaga.
37. An Alternate interpretation of the inscription
• All the attempts made in the past to interpret the Pāḍariyā inscription were loaded with the presumption
that Pāḍariyā was the birthplace of Buddha.
• It was believed that Lumbinī was situated in the North-Kośala region & near the Himalayas (Thomas 1931,
Watters 1898).
• Since the inscription says ‘here was born Buddha, the Sakyamuni’, and because Pāḍariyā is situated in the
North-Kośala region and near the Himalayas, it appeared to corroborate that belief.
• Śrāvastī and Kapilavastu were actually situated on the Southern Highway which joined Paithan on the bank
of Godavari with Rajgir (Mills).
• This means that Śrāvastī and Kapilavastu could not be situated in North-Kośala, rather they should belong to
South-Kośala (Mishra 2020), since the entire Southern Highway was located to the south of the Ganges
(Barua 1929).
• This is corroborated by the fact that a river named Sundar flows in South-Kośala region, which matches with
Chinese Buddhist scriptures which inform that there was a river named Sundara in Kośala (Watters 1904,
pp. 398-399). Within the South-Kośala region, Kapilabhata situated in Bolangir district, on the bank of river
Bāgihara, has been identified as the site of Kapilavastu (Mishra 2020).
• The location of Kapilabhata matches with the description given in some Chinese versions of Divyāvadāna
that Kapilavastu was situated on the bank of a river named Bhāgira (Watters 1898, p. 536). Limpara situated
near Kapilabhata has been identified as the site of Lumbinī (Mishra 2020 b, ch. 13.4). There is a small river
(jor) to the southeast of Limpara, which is a tributary of River Tel. Since ‘tel’ translates to ‘oil’, this matches
with the description of Lumbinī given by Hiuen Tsiang, who says that Lumbinī was situated near a little river
called ‘River of Oil’ (Beal 1884).
38. Copies o Lumbini inscription
• Inscription from Puri, Odisa.
• Terracotta copy in Mathura Museum bought in 1972.
• T.P.Verma: Because the text alludes to birth of Buddha, so probably
the Tantrayaanis prepared them to help those females who wanted
children.
39. 1929
• Another version of this inscription was found at Kapileswar in Odisha, which has
essentially the same text as Pāḍariyā (Mitra 1929; Mahapatra 1977).
• Mitra examined the Kapileswar inscription from various angles, including Linguistic,
Orthographic, Paleographic angles, and arrived at a conclusion.
• It was an original (Mitra 1929).
• However, he could not conjecture as to what could be the reason behind King
Piyadasi replicating the inscription.
• Since these inscriptions were believed to indicate their respective locations to be
the spot of Buddha’s birth, two copies of the inscription appeared unexplainable.
