|
WELCOME TO BOROBUDUR.TV |
![]() |
| A
Brief Sketch of Javanese History Prior to the Eleventh Century, Part
Two |
![]() |
The following article includes selected material from Borobudur: Pyramid of the Cosmic Buddha by Caesar Voûte and Mark Long ©2008. All Rights Reserved. We do not know the precise
reason or reasons behind the relocation of
the Javanese kraton during the years 742 to 756. Some scholars believe
it was
in response to the rise in prominence of a competing royal house that
referred
to itself as the Śailendra — Sanskrit for ‘Lord
of
the
Mountain.’ The rulers of Fun-nan on the Asian
mainland had used the very
same title during an earlier stage of the region’s development. This
trading
empire had flourished along the southern coast of modern-day
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Lords of the Mountain |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The first Javanese
inscription to mention the Śailendra commemorates
the founding of a Buddhist temple in the According to
Buddhist legend, Some scholars believe that
Panamkarana had built Candi Kalasan under the
orders of a Śailendra monarch, while others hold that Panamkarana
himself had been
a member of the Śailendra dynasty. The ongoing debate is centered on
different
interpretations of the following lines from the Kalasa inscription: “The royal preceptor of the Śailendras
having...Maharaja dyah Panchapana Panamkarana built the splendid temple
of
Tārā....When 700 years of the Saka era had elapsed (782 CE) Maharaja
built the
temple of Tārā in deference to the (Śailendra-)Guru. He donated the
village
named Kalasa to the Sangha, having made the village officials...and
other
notable persons as witnesses. In accord with the noble traditions to be
observed by kings of the Śailendra dynasty, the mighty king gave this
ample
donation which is immeasurable.” [22] Professor Yutaka Iwamoto of The name Śrī Majārāja Rakai
Panankaran appears in the Mantyasih
inscription (907), which presents a list of Javanese kings that begins
with
Rakai Mataram, which undoubtedly refers to King Sañjaya of the
Candi Canggal
inscription (732). The Wanua Tengah III inscription (908) unearthed in
1983
presents an even longer list of kings that also includes a number of
reigns cut
short by revolts and coup d’etats. It even describes an
eight-year
hiatus between monarchs during which the kingdom had been without a
ruler. One
compelling reason for invalidating the identification of the Maharaja
Panamkarana as an ‘ornament of the Śailendra’
is the
fact that two known dates from the reign of the Śailendra
monarch
Samaratungga (792 and 824) span the respective reigns of both Rakai Panamkarana and his successor Rakai Panaraban. Table 1. Wanua
Tengah III & Mantyasih Inscriptions [24]
Roy Jordaan believes that the
longer list of kings that appears in the
Wanua Tengah III inscription is nevertheless incomplete. According to
his theory,
the composer of the Wanua Tengah III inscription had excluded the names
of
kings who were not members of Java’s landed gentry. The Śailendra
inscriptions
never incorporate the term Rakai (or Rake) — an
indigenous
Javanese title for a class of landed gentry — as part of the monarch’s
name.
Jordaan also notes that the establishment in It also is curious that none
of the rulers listed in either of the
inscriptions cited above had ever made a reference, either directly or
indirectly, to having had Śailendra ancestors. “If the Śailendras
really were a
Javanese royal family, it stands to reason that at least some of the
central
Javanese kings from the second half of the ninth century…would have
tried to
legitimize their position by tracing their descent to this illustrious
family….
The ‘persistence’ or rather the continuation of the dynastical name in
Sumatra
and the
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Mahārāja of Zabag |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The unearthing of the Stone
of
Ligor on the The proclaimed
might of the Śailendra may not have been
merely an idle boast. Discovered
along the coast of central The Javanese also appear to
have exercised authority over portions of The ritual
performance on top of Beginning in the mid-ninth century, the
written reports of various Arab traders began to refer to a maritime
empire
variously known as Zabag, Djawaga or Djaba, which was located in the
islands of
the Southern Sea somewhere between The Arab trader Sulayman
(851) has left us a detailed account of a
legend about a fateful encounter between a young Cambodian prince and
the
Maharaja of Zabag that presents a classic lesson in the Law of Karma—the
Buddhist
doctrine
of
cause
and effect. It is recorded in the annals
of the “I have one desire that I
would like to satisfy,” said the Khmer ruler
in a fit of jealousy. “What is that desire, O
King,” inquired his faithful councilor. “I wish to see the head of
the King of Zabag before me on a plate,”
remarked the monarch, “I do not wish, O King, that
my sovereign should express such a desire,”
answered the minister. “The Khmer people and Zabag have never
manifested hatred
towards one another, either in words or in acts. Zabag has never done
us any
harm. What the King has said should not be repeated.” Angered by this sage advice,
the Khmer ruler raised his voice and
repeated his desire so that all of the generals and nobles who were
present at
court could hear him. Word of the young ruler’s impetuous outburst
passed from
mouth to mouth until it finally arrived at the court of the Maharaja of
Zabag. Upon hearing the words of the
Khmer ruler repeated, the Maharaja ordered
his councilor to prepare a thousand ships for departure. When the fleet
was
ready, the Maharaja himself went aboard and announced to the crowd on
shore
that he would be making a pleasure trip amongst his islands. Once at
sea,
however, the Maharaja order the armada to proceed to the capital of the
Khmer
ruler, where his troops took the Khmers by surprise, seized the city,
and
surrounded the palace. After the Khmer ruler had been captured, he was
brought
before the Maharaja of Zabag. “What caused you to form a
desire which was not in your power to
satisfy, which would not have given you happiness if you had realized
it, and
would not even have been justified if it had been easily realizable?”
inquired
the Maharaja of Zabag. Since the Khmer king had
nothing to say in return, the Maharaja of Zabag
continued. “You have manifested the desire to see before you my head on
a
plate. If you also had wished to seize my country and my kingdom or
even only
to ravage a part of it, I would have done the same to you. But since
you have
only expressed the first of these desires, I am going to apply to you
the
treatment you wished to apply to me, and I will then return to my
country
without taking anything belonging to the Khmer, either of great or
small
value.” After the Maharaja had
arrived back in his own kingdom, he seated
himself on a throne which overlooked a lake and he had the platter
containing
the Khmer ruler’s head placed before him. He commanded for that head to
be
washed and embalmed, placed in a jar and then sent to the successor of
the
Khmer king, together with a note which explained that the act had been
performed for reasons of personal revenge, and that the Maharaja drew
no glory
from his victory. When the news of these events
reached the kings of Lokesh Chandra believes that
the previously mentioned coronation
ceremony for Jayavarman II had included elements that were intended to
be a
direct response to the beheading of his Khmer predecessor. “This
coronation was
for invincible security and uninterrupted stability of the kingdom,
further
fortified by the four Agamic rites ending in shirascheda
“beheading.”
Decapitation of the enemy king was a critical issue for the survival of
the
Cambodian state, and personally for Jayavarman II. The Javanese had
beheaded
the king of the Khmers and carried away his head to Java. The young
Jayavarman
II was taken away to the court of the Javanese Maharaja as a hostage.
On
return, he was chosen to be King by the ministers of the beheaded
monarch. The
shirascheda (beheading) rites conducted at the instance of Jayavarman
II were
to avenge the beheading of his predecessor as well as to preempt its
recurrence.” [30]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Rise and Fall of the Śailendra on Java |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Beginning in
the closing decades of the eighth century, the
Śailendra monarchs appear to have embarked upon an ambitious
temple-building
program that not only featured the construction of a large number of
entirely
new religious foundations but also involved major renovation and
modification
efforts at previously existing sites such as Candi Sewu. Historians
generally
credit the dynasty with having patronized the construction of more than
a dozen
Buddhist temples and monasteries within the short period of just 50
years,
several of which are among the finest examples of Hindu-Buddhist
architecture that
the world has ever known. The temple ruins that visitors see today are
merely
the skeletal remains of spires, balustrades and walls that originally
were
coated with stucco and perhaps painted in brilliant colors or even
gilded with
gold. In the interior of these magnificent buildings were numerous
statues hewn
out of stone as well as those that were cast in precious metals.
Treasure
hunters in search of easy riches undoubtedly melted down these
priceless images
long ago. However, a large number of beautifully carved stone images
remain in
their original places for visitors to see today. When these temples
were still
living religious institutions, many would have been surrounded by a
large
number of auxiliary buildings made of wood, including monastic quarters
as well
as guesthouses for visitors. The temples themselves would also have
been the
focus of a considerable amount of activity, both secular and religious,
on
specific days of the year when the monks conducted their religious
ceremonies. The Śailendra
renewed the kingdom’s temple designs
periodically through the addition of new architectural elements and
images.
This practice should come as no surprise for the renewal of stūpas and
other
Buddhist religious foundations has long been a common practice
throughout the
region. Just as it is the case today, each Śailendra generation must
have
considered the renovation and modification of sacred structures to be a
highly
effective means for accumulating spiritual merit. The many renovations
that
took place during their years in power on Java may also have been the
result of
the frequent arrival of new religious doctrines from abroad. The inscriptions of The last time that an
inscription specifically mentions a Śailendra
monarch was in the year 824. Their decline and fall from power took
place soon
thereafter and may have coincided with the death of King Samaratungga,
who is
mentioned in both the Ratu Boko (792) and Kayumwungan (824)
inscriptions. [31]
Whatever its
cause, the demise of the Śailendra dynasty on Java appears to have had
little
effect on Old Mataram’s temple construction boom. The next
ruler of Old
Mataram that we may infer had been associated with a Buddhist temple is
the
Hindu monarch Rakai Gurung (828-847). Due to the lengthy duration of
his reign,
Jordaan believes that Gurung may have played a major role in the
building of
Candi Prambanan (also known as Loro Jonggrang) which is located to the
South of
Candi Sewu on the eastern side of modern-day The first solid indication
that scholars have found to indicate that the
Śailendra had continued to be a powerful force in the region following
the
dynasty’s exit from Java comes from a copperplate
inscription
that
dates
from
the middle of the ninth century.
Discovered in Nalanda was renown throughout
Why would a Śailendra king
wish to build a monastery in far away The Nalanda inscription also
provides us with a pedigree for the
Śailendra king. Although the copperplate reports that Balaputra’s
grandfather
had been the king of Java, it does not set forth any claim to the
Javanese
throne on the part of Balaputra himself. The inscription simply
identifies
Balaputra as the king of Suvarnadvipa. “There was a king of Yavabhumi
(Java)
who was the ornament of the Śailendra dynasty, whose lotus-feet bloomed
by the
luster of the jewels in the row of trembling diadems, on the heads of
all the
princes, and who, as his name showed was the illustrious tormentor of
the brave
foes (Viravairimathana). His fame, incarnate, as it were, by
setting its
foot on the regions of (white) palaces, in white water lilies, in lotus
plants,
conches, moon, jasmine and snow and being incessantly sung in all the
quarters,
pervaded the whole universe.” The next stanza refers to the
ingenious methods that “crooked ones” may
employ when striking others, perhaps a veiled reference to those
responsible
for the Śailendra decline on Java. “At
the time when that king frowned in anger, the fortress of the enemies
also
broke down simultaneously with their hearts. Indeed the crooked in the
world
have got ways of moving which are very ingenious in striking others. He
had a
son who possessed prudence, prowess and good conduct, whose two feet
fondled
much with hundreds of diadems of mighty kings (bowing down). He was the
foremost warrior in battlefields.... The rulers of Old Mataram
gradually established a sphere of influence
that eventually encompassed Sundanese West Java, Sumatra, Bali and the Archeologists
and historians have tendered several
hypotheses for explaining the transfer of Old Mataram’s royal seat of
power to
East Java, including a cataclysmic eruption of From a purely economic point
of view, The coastline
of the Roy Jordaan has suggested the
possibility that the Old Mataram kraton
may have been located temporarily at the legendary capital of Medang
Kamulan on
Java’s northern seashore — back when the site was still an important
harbor on
the mouth of the river Lusi. In particular, he refers to a 1967 study
by
Soekmono that presents a geographical reconstruction of the
northeastern area
of Various researchers have
attributed the decline of the Mataram state at
least in part to the silting process that eventually led to the
kingdom’s loss
of its harbor facilities. Under these conditions the available harbors
in East
Java were the only suitable alternatives available that could have
allowed the
Javanese to maintain profitable trade relations with The loss of trade centers
such as Bergota and Medang Kamulan put an end
to the arrival of those who previously had greatly influenced the
religious and
cultural development of
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
FOOTNOTES |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
[20] De Casparis, J.G.
Prasasti
Indonesia. Bandung:
Nix (1956) [vol. II].
[21] See Jordaan, Roy E. “Tara and Nyai Lara Kidul: images of the divine feminine in Java.” Asian Folklore Studies, 56-2 (1997):285-331. [22] See Chandra, Lokesh. Cultural Horizons of India. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan (1995) [vol. IV]. [23] Iwamoto, Yutaka. "The Śailendra Dynasty and Chandi Borobudur". Soka University, Japan. Another compelling reason for invalidating the association of the Maharaja Panamkarana with the Shailendra is the fact that two dates from the reign of the Śailendra monarch Samaratungga-deva (792 and 824 CE) span the respective reigns of both Rake Panamkarana and his successor Rake Panaraban, according to the Wanua Tengah III inscription. [24] Sundberg, Jeffrey. "The State of Old Mataram". [25] Jordaan, Roy E. "Why the Śailendras were not a Javanese Dynasty." Paper presented at the symposium Non-Javanese, not yet Javanese, and un-Javanese: encounters and fissures in a civilization, Leiden University, 23-25 March 2004. See also Jordaan, Roy E. “Wanua Tengah III and the problem of the origin of the Sailendra dynasty.” International Conference on Indonesian Art, New Delhi, IGNCA, 4-6 March 2003. [26] Ibid. p. 10. See also Jordaan, Roy E. The Śailendras in Central Javanese History. Yogyakarta; Leiden: Penerbitan Universitas Sanata Dharma; KITLV Press (1996). [27] “Master of the inner surface” (kamraten phdai karom) means that only an indigenous king, and insider (not an outsider) should be the sovereign of Cambodia. Chandra, Lokesh. “Devaraja in Cambodian History.” Indologica Taurinensia, XVII-XVIII (1991-1992):109-110. [28] Ibid. pp. 104-106. [29] After Malcom MacDonald's version of the story as it appears in Angkor and the Khmers. Oxford University Press, Oxford - Singapore - New York, 1987. See also the summary provided in Coedes, George. Angkor: An Introduction. Oxford: University Press (1963):71-72. [30] Chandra, Lokesh. “Devaraja in Cambodian History.” In Indologica Taurinensia, XVII-XVIII (1991-1992):109. [31] Although the latter inscription describes King Samaratungga in the present tense, the French epigrapher Louis-Charles Damais believed that the Śailendra monarch had died prior to the inscription’s composition in 824 CE (Jeffrey Sundberg, personal communication). [32] Sastri, Hirananda. Nalanda and Its Epigraphic Material. Calcutta: Government of India Press (1942):92-96 [Memoirs of the Archaeology Survey of India, No. 66]. See also Jordaan, Roy E. “Pala Chronology, the dating of the Nalanda inscription and the end of Sailendra rule in Java.” 8th International Conference of the European Association of Southeast Asian Archaeologists, 2-6 October, 2000. [33] Hui-li. The Life of Hsuan-Tsang. Peking: The Chinese Buddhist Association (1959):106 - 109. [34] I-Tsing. A Record of the Buddhist Religion as Practiced in India and the Malay Archipelago, p. 155. [35] Sastri 1942:100-103. [36] Ibid. pp. 92-96. See also Jordaan, Roy E. “Pala Chronology, the dating of the Nalanda inscription and the end of Sailendra rule in Java.” 8th International Conference of the European Association of Southeast Asian Archaeologists, 2-6 October, 2000.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
copyright 2002 borobudur.tv. All Rights Reserved. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||