Visakha and Ayodhya

cmeritus in the Department of Comparative Religion at Western Michigan University insists ‘the grand heroine’ of Buddhist literature “is not the nuns founder, Mahapajapati, as one might expect, but Vishakha”. 

 
Visakha was born in the village of Bhaddiya which fell under the jurisdiction of Magadha Kingdom of King Bimbisara. However, later her family moved into the Kingdom of Kosala on the request of Kosala King, Pasenadi.   

Chronicles state that on hearing the exceptionally virtuous ways of Visakha’s grandfather and his descendants King Pasenadi had requested his brother- in- law King Bimbisara to send a member of that family to Kosala kingdom to inspire the subjects there. Visakha’s grandfather Mendaka had then decided to send his son Dhananjaya along with his wife and daughter Visakha to Kosala Kingdom.   

As a result Visakha’s family had relocated themselves in some 100km south of Sravasti, the capital of Kosala kingdom. Buddhist commentary Dhammapada-atthakatha reports that Visakha’s father Dhananjaya founded a new city by the name Saketha in the location. It became a flourishing Buddhist centre later and had reportedly reached peak of its religious splendour during the reign of Buddhist emperor of Kushan dynasty, Kanishka (127–150 CE). Later Saketha went on to become the capital city of the Gupta Empire.  

The township of Saketha interestingly was later renamed as Ayodhya and today, as everyone knows, is the epicentre of India’s Hindu-Muslim communal tensions.  

Last week saw the Indian Supreme Court reserving the verdict of the much hyped Ayodhya title suit over the disputed 2.77 acres of land in the township, which right-wing Hindus insists was the birthplace of Lord Ram. The verdict is now slated to be delivered before Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi who leaves office on November 17.  

The daily hearing of petitions which began on August 6th continued till last week and among the 14 applications is a petition filed by a Buddhist, Vineet Kumar Maurya claiming that the disputed land was part of a Buddhist centre that existed there.   

The last structure on the disputed site, the 16th century Babri Mosque, was demolished in 1992 by right wing Hindu groups led by the BJP, RSS and Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP). They maintained that the mosque had been built by the Mughals after demolishing a Hindu temple that was there.   

However the archaeological excavations carried out during the 2000-2003 period on court orders have not found any evidence of an ancient Hindu temple in the site. On the other hand evidence of the existence of a Buddhist centre with ruins of stupas and Buddhist style pillars and structures, surfaced.  

Despite lack of evidence the Hindu groups are confident that the next month’s verdict would be in their favour. The groups have started declaring that they would also reclaim the Hindu temple lands in the Uttar Pradesh districts of Mathura and Varanasi on which, they claim, Islamic structures had been erected during Mughal era.  

Last week, on the last day of the hearing of petitions saw a lawyer representing the Sunni Waqf Board and other Muslim groups, tearing down papers, maps handed over to him by counsel of All India Hindu Mahasabha, in the courts.  

Whatever the verdict is, it is very unlikely to be one pleasing all parties and instead is very likely to heighten the existing tensions between the Hindus and Muslims. On the other hand Buddhists are worried whether their petition would receive its much deserved attention in the din made by the two dominant parties to the case – the Hindus and Muslims.