Hello everyone,
Yes, I am still here. I am working on finding and purchasing a domain for The Buddhist Maps Project, so I can move off of the blog system and on to something more akin to www.tibetart.com. I want a site to immediately catch the viewer’s attention and hold it. The likely domain will be www.buddhistmaps.com and will probably happen towards the end of April. Until then, I will be working on an interactive FLASH interface for the site to ensure easy accessibility.

When BMAPS makes its official move I will put up the Lumbini and Kusinara maps to complete the Four Holy Pilgrimage sites.

Shanti,

Matt

[Edit September 2007] This site will soon be moving to http://www.buddhistmaps.com and will be highly interactive and informative. Please be patient! Thanks and come back soon =)

Stupa. What exactly is this funny sounding word? Why is it important to Buddhism? To answer this question, we might look first to Debala Mitra’s tome Buddhist Monuments to find out what exactly a stupa was to her thirty-some years ago.

The above image is of Stupa no. 1 at Sanchi, after Mitra 1971

According to Mitra, the Sanskrit word stūpa is derived from the root √stūp which means literally “to heap.” Stūpa is literally “mound.” In Mitra’s own words:

Originally, they had a funerary associate, being mounds containing the ashes and charred remains of the dead collected from [a] funeral pyre. The practice of erecting stūpas over corporeal relics was pre-Buddhist. In reply to Ananda’s query about the ceremonies to be performed after the demise of the Master [Gautama Buddha]. Buddha remarked that his bones, left after cremation, should receive the honours of a universal monarch by stūpas erected over them at the crossing of four highways. Indeed, the custom was not peculiar to India alone; it was only an adaptation of the world-wide practice of burying the dead under a tumulus or cairn. Among the Buddhists, however, it assumed an importance unprecedented in any other cult or community. They made such an extensive use of this particular form of structure as an object of supreme veneration and sanctity and developed it along their own lines to such an extent that in course of time stūpa were converted mounds of earth into ostentatious structures of great architectural magnificence and became the chief emblem of the Buddhist faith. To a Buddhist, the erection of a stūpa, even of sand, was an act of profound merit (Mitra 1971: pp. 21).

Stūpas in Sri Lanka are sometimes called dagaba while in places in Southeast and East Asia they are called simply pagodas. Whatever they may be called, stūpas are not to be confused with the term chaitya, which is a complicated term that will be inevitably dealt with elsewhere. Mitra goes on to group stūpas into four categories which may or may not be true of Buddhist reliquary mounds outside of India. 1.) sharirika (reliquary mounds housing remains of Gautama, his disciples, and later Buddhist saints), 2.) paribhogika (reliquary mounds housing objects used by Gautama like a begging-bowl, robe, etc.), 3.) uddeshika (purely aesthetic mounds commemorating incidents in Gautama’s life), and 4.) votive (small mounds erected by pilgrims for the purpose of attaining merit) (Mitra 1971: pp. 21-2).

Sarkar has a slightly different take on stūpas. He emphasizes Mauryan King Ashoka’s role in the immense popularity of stūpas during the Early Historic period (300 BCE – 300 CE). Sarkar says

The Buddhists in India introduced several architectural forms, of which the stūpa, representing a structural dome, attained maximum importance in ancient times. This well-known form, besides the rock-cut caves and the free-standing pillars, owed much of their popularity to Ashoka, who is said to have set up such monuments throughout the length and breadth of his empire (Sarkar 1966: 25).

He also discusses the a structure called the gṛiha-stūpa, which he describes as the memorial versions. The gṛiha-stūpas are “inseparably connected with the ideas of bhakti and worship, at least in the sense in which these terms are now used” (Sarkar 1966: 25). He, like Mitra, describes categories that stūpas can be grouped in to: 1.) circular, 2.) apsidal and other cognate forms and 3.) quadrilateral stūpas. Nevertheless, what Sarkar is trying to say is that stūpas are much more than just “mounds” as the Sanskrit translation would have us belief. For many ancient Buddhists, they were a ritual focus in shrines and, at times, taking on symbolic ritual qualities that cairns and other reliquary features do not share.

Stūpas are also a popular subject in Buddhist literature. According to the Mahaparinirvana-Sutra, after Buddha Gautama’s parinirvana, his relics were distributed to eight different kingdoms to prevent a war (Strong 2001: 27-8). In each of these kingdoms, stupas were erected for lay worshippers. In the Divyavadana lay Buddhist King Bimbisara sends King Udrayana of Roruka a gift of an image of Buddha Gautama cast from his divine shadow (Strong 2001: 39-41). Upon receiving the image and hearing the word “Buddha,” King Udrayana is immediately converted.

In the end, probably the most common archaeological feature at ancient Buddhist sites are stūpas, whatever their form or shape. And, to answer the major question of the day: they were good for rituals, aesthetics, tombs, and even shrines. From the caves of Ajanta to the dotted landscape of Bodh-Gaya, stūpas were once the ambassadors of Buddhism all across ancient India, and, in modern times, the world.

Works Cited

Mitra, D.
1971 Buddhist Monuments. Sri Sarasvati Press, Kolkata.

Sarkar, H.
1966 Studies in Early Buddhist Architecture of India. Munshiram Monharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi.

Strong, J. S.
1989 The Legend of King Asoka. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
2001 The Experience of Buddhism. Wadsworth Publishing.