Report of a Tour through the Bengal Provinces/Barábar
BARÁBAR.
From Telâḍaka Hwen Thsang proceeded in the direction of his previous bearing 90 li (15 miles) lo a lofty mountain, from the summit of which Buddha had contemplated the kingdom of Magadha. This mountain General Cunningham, applying his proposed corrections, seeks in the range which runs from Gaya to Girak. But in this part of the pilgrim’s route I think no correction is needed. Adopting his bearing and distance, the spot falls in the group of isolated hills now known as the Barâbar hills. In this group the highest peak is named Murali by General Cunningham (Report on Barâbar). On this peak, however, no remains whatever exist, but close to it on the next highest peak overlooking the valley, where the rock-cut caves exist, are the remains of a very old temple. This hill or peak, which General Canningham in his map (Pl. XVIII, Vol. I, page 40) names Barâbar, was named to me Surajânk; on its summit is a temple extensively repaired, but of which a large portion of the original basement remains entire. Judging from the bold simple style of moulding, this temple must be very ancient.
The temple now contains Brahmanical deities, and is frequented by Hindu pilgrims. Close to it was another, of which only traces of the foundations exist. This was also Brahmanical, judging from a lingam and fragments of statues on the site; and it does not appear to me that these temples were originally Buddhist, as they do not face the east, and because there is in the existing temple a lingam which I was informed by my Hindu servant (I was not allowed to enter) to have been deeply embedded, and apparently in its original position (it is known as Siddheswara). But whether they were originally Buddhist or not, Buddhist temples must at one time have existed in the vicinity, for Buddhist statues are to be found within the precincts of the temple; they are now worshipped as Brahmanical deities.
It is clear, however, that from a remote period Brahmanical temples existed here, as attested by the large life-sized statue of a four-armed Devi, with an inscription in what may be Gupta characters. This statue cannot be Buddhist, as its vâhan is a lion on a pedestal, and the figures on its two sides are Ganesa and Siva, the latter with a serpent round the neck. One right hand of the female is empty and marked with a chakra on the palm; the other holds a rosary and a small Saivic emblem, i. e., a lingam in argha. The two left hands hold, the one a lily or lotus unopened, the other an object which may be meant for a bell or a skull.
In addition to this record of the antiquity of the temple, an inscription (in the Vapiya caves) of the 6th or 7th century records the existence, then, of the lingam now enshrined in this temple, and named "Siddheswara."
The most ancient available records then as to the purpose of the temples here, show that they were Brahmanical; it appears, therefore, that as no other remains of temples exist, the Buddhists at some subsequent period appropriated the temples and were again dispossessed.
Down below on the slope of the hill near the road leading up to it are remains of several statues, both detached and sculptured on the rock, some Hindu, some Buddhist; the Brahmanical ones, however, predominate.
Several natural caverns exist not worth detailed mention. I explored a few, but found nothing; they are now the residences of jogis.
As Hwen Thsang, however, does not describe any Buddhist institutions on the hill he visited, the absence of ancient and Buddhist remains in no way disproves the identification proposed.
But the subsequent route of Hwen Thsang so strongly supports the identification of this hill with the hill of Buddha, that even if Hwen Thsang had described Buddhist temples as existing in his time on the hill whence Buddha contemplated the kingdom of Magadha, their absence now would not invalidate the proposed identification.
Cunningham, vide Archæol. Reports, plate XVIII.