DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.2371#0071
RAJGIR.
49
appear in Peppe's photograph from -which the woodcut is taken,
we must pause before accepting his statement. On the "whole,
therefore, taking the evidence as it stands, there seems no good
aason for doubting that the Son Bhandar caves belong to the
Great Mauryan dynasty, B.C. 319 to 180. At the same time the
whole evidence tends to show that they are more modern than the
dated caves at Barabar, and that they were consequently excavated
subsequently to the year 225 B.C.
"We are fortunately relieved from the necessity of dismissing
the theory, so strongly insisted upon by General Cunningham, that
the Son Bhandar cave is identical with the Sattapanni cave, where
the first convocation was held,1 from the fortunate discovery by
Mr. Beglar of a group of caves which almost undoubtedly were
the seven caves that originally bore that name (Sapta parna, seven
leaved).2 On the northern side of the Vaibhara (Webhara) hill
1 Cunningham, Arch. Report, vol. iii. pp. 140 to 144.
2 Although we may not be able to fix with precision either the purpose for which
the Son Bhandar caves were excavated, nor their exact date, it is quite clear they are
not the Sattapanni cave, near which, according to all tradition, the first convocation
was held immediately after the decease of the founder of the religion. In the first
place, a hall, only 34 feet by 17, about the size of an ordinary London drawing-room,
is not a place where an assembly of 500 Arhats could assemble, and the verandah,
8 feet wide, would add little to the accommodation for this purpose. It is hardly worth
while attempting to refute in any great detail the various arguments brought forward
in favour of this hypothesis, for there is no proof except the assertion of modern
Ceylonese and Burmese authorities, who knew nothing of the localities, that the convo-
cation was held in a cave at all, and everything shows that this was not the case.
The Mahawanso (p. 12) states that it was in a splendid hall like to those of the Devas
at the entrance of the Sattapanni cave. Mr. Beat's Translation of Fa Ilian (p. 118)
makes exactly the same assertion, but with an ambiguity of expression that might be
construed into the assertion that it was in and not at the cave that (he convocation
was held. But Bemusat's translation, as it is in strict accordance with the more
detailed statements of Hiuen Thsang, is at least equally entitled to respect. He says :—
" Au nord de la montagne, et dans un endroit ombrage, il y a une maison de pierre
nomine Tchheti, c'est le lieu ou apres le Nirvana de Foe, 500 Arhans recueillirent la col-
lection des livres sacres." x Hiuen Thsang makes no mention of a cave, but describes
the foundations which he saw of " une grande maison en pierre," which was built by
Ajatasatru for the purpose in the middle of a vast forest of bambus.2 Even the
Burmese authorities, who seem to have taken up the idea of its having been held in a
cave, assert that the ground was first encircled with a fence,—which is impossible
with a cave,—and within which was built a magnificent hall.3 The truth seems to be
1 FoeKueKi, 272.
Y m.
Julien, vol. iii. p. 32.
Bigandet, Life of Gaudama, p. 354.
49
appear in Peppe's photograph from -which the woodcut is taken,
we must pause before accepting his statement. On the "whole,
therefore, taking the evidence as it stands, there seems no good
aason for doubting that the Son Bhandar caves belong to the
Great Mauryan dynasty, B.C. 319 to 180. At the same time the
whole evidence tends to show that they are more modern than the
dated caves at Barabar, and that they were consequently excavated
subsequently to the year 225 B.C.
"We are fortunately relieved from the necessity of dismissing
the theory, so strongly insisted upon by General Cunningham, that
the Son Bhandar cave is identical with the Sattapanni cave, where
the first convocation was held,1 from the fortunate discovery by
Mr. Beglar of a group of caves which almost undoubtedly were
the seven caves that originally bore that name (Sapta parna, seven
leaved).2 On the northern side of the Vaibhara (Webhara) hill
1 Cunningham, Arch. Report, vol. iii. pp. 140 to 144.
2 Although we may not be able to fix with precision either the purpose for which
the Son Bhandar caves were excavated, nor their exact date, it is quite clear they are
not the Sattapanni cave, near which, according to all tradition, the first convocation
was held immediately after the decease of the founder of the religion. In the first
place, a hall, only 34 feet by 17, about the size of an ordinary London drawing-room,
is not a place where an assembly of 500 Arhats could assemble, and the verandah,
8 feet wide, would add little to the accommodation for this purpose. It is hardly worth
while attempting to refute in any great detail the various arguments brought forward
in favour of this hypothesis, for there is no proof except the assertion of modern
Ceylonese and Burmese authorities, who knew nothing of the localities, that the convo-
cation was held in a cave at all, and everything shows that this was not the case.
The Mahawanso (p. 12) states that it was in a splendid hall like to those of the Devas
at the entrance of the Sattapanni cave. Mr. Beat's Translation of Fa Ilian (p. 118)
makes exactly the same assertion, but with an ambiguity of expression that might be
construed into the assertion that it was in and not at the cave that (he convocation
was held. But Bemusat's translation, as it is in strict accordance with the more
detailed statements of Hiuen Thsang, is at least equally entitled to respect. He says :—
" Au nord de la montagne, et dans un endroit ombrage, il y a une maison de pierre
nomine Tchheti, c'est le lieu ou apres le Nirvana de Foe, 500 Arhans recueillirent la col-
lection des livres sacres." x Hiuen Thsang makes no mention of a cave, but describes
the foundations which he saw of " une grande maison en pierre," which was built by
Ajatasatru for the purpose in the middle of a vast forest of bambus.2 Even the
Burmese authorities, who seem to have taken up the idea of its having been held in a
cave, assert that the ground was first encircled with a fence,—which is impossible
with a cave,—and within which was built a magnificent hall.3 The truth seems to be
1 FoeKueKi, 272.
Y m.
Julien, vol. iii. p. 32.
Bigandet, Life of Gaudama, p. 354.