MATERILENGKAP.MY.ID – Buddhism, between Sriwijaya and Borobudur . There is a strong and special correlation between the Buddha in Sriwijaya and Syailendra, the key word behind the construction of Borobudur. This combined wealth between Java and Sumatra, according to Bernard HM Vlekke’s interpretation, made the Indonesian nation able to build the great Borobudur.
Sriwijaya and Borobudur are proofs that Buddhism was once present as one of the dominant elements that colored the course of history in Indonesia. Interestingly, even though Buddhism is not native to Indonesia, its track record is very pronounced, not only coloring it, but also sparking the emergence of adaptive abilities and progress of the Indonesian nation at that time.
This means that the position of the Indonesian nation at that time was not a passive consumer nation in digesting the system of ideas or ideas. The Indonesian nation is clearly also able to sublimate the system of ideas or ideas creatively, thereby making its position grow into a nation of creators or producers.
Interestingly, talking about Indonesia’s capability as a creative nation is not only reflected in the greatness of Sriwijaya at the national or local level, but also in the great appreciation of the wider community to the Asian regional level.
Yes, at that time apart from being known as a maritime country, Sriwijaya at the Asian regional level was also known as a leading center of Buddhist education. Many foreign students are recorded to have studied there. Call Atisha Dipankara, for example, a monk and Buddhist philosopher from Bengali or Bangladesh today.
Referring to the site chinabuddhismencyclopedia.com , narrated at the age of thirty -one, Atisha accompanied by 100 of his disciples set out on a thirteen -month sea voyage to Sumatra to study Buddhism.
The recognition of Srivijaya as a center of Mahayana-Buddhist education is due to the role of Suvarnadvipi Dharmakrti, who in the Tibetan Buddhist tradition is called Serlingpa ( Gser-gling-pa ) and is considered Guru Bodhichitta. Apart from being the highest monk in Srivijaya whose knowledge was widely known, Dharmakriti is noted to have composed the Abhisamayalamkara book.
Thus the popularity of Dharmakriti made Atisha dared to take the risk of crossing the vast ocean to Sriwijaya to study. It is said that during his thirteen years of study, from 1011 to 1023 AD, Atisha also took the time to visit Borobudur in Java, and learn about the Mahayana text carved into the temple building.
However, unfortunately, the portrait of Sriwijaya’s history as a whole has not yet been fully constructed. Take for example the name Sriwijaya itself, for example, not a few people still cross words.
In Sanskrit, sri means “radiant” or “glorious,” and wijaya means “victory” or “triumph.” Sriwijaya means “glorious victory”. If Hendrik Kern interprets the term found on the Chalk City inscription as the name of a king; then Goerge Coedes gave the interpretation as the name of the kingdom.
Of course many other things are still fumbling. How the relationship between Sriwijaya and Syailendra in Java, for example, is not yet fully known. Even so far, between Sriwijaya and Syailendra in the context of reading history, each of them is often seen as partially independent.
With the exception of Sriwijaya’s relationship with the wider Asian regional context, it is still far from being fully disclosed. So far, what appears to be emerging are only fragments of events.
Athony Reid in “Towards the History of Sumatra” once stated that when comparing the traces of Sriwijaya (Sumatra) with those of Majapahit (Java) in the writing of national historiography, Sriwijaya’s position was relatively unlucky. The reason is that Dutch researchers seem to be more focused on researching Java. Dutch research on Sumatra seems simpler and separate from each other.
As a result, discussing research on Sumatra or Sriwijaya in depth is always the works of Europeans other than the Dutch. Call it George Coedes (1918) and Gabriel Ferrand (1922), for example, these two researchers from France who succeeded in providing strong evidence that Srivijaya was a large empire.
Chronicles of History and Various Interpretations
In addition to the inscriptions found in various inscriptions, the history of Srivijaya is usually based on news sources from China , India, and Arabia.
Fah-Hsien, a Buddhist pilgrim, in AD 414 once visited an island which he called Ye-p’o-t’i . Bernard HM Vlekke in Nusantara: a History of Indonesia identifies the term as Jawadwipa or Java. Fah-Hsien wrote in a somber tone that few people in the area knew about, or were interested in following, Buddhism.
But from his record it was also informed, in 420 Gunawarman, King of Kashmir, had become a monk and went to teach the way of salvation until he arrived in a country called Cho-p’o . Ten years later, continued Fah-Hseien, this same country sent ambassadors to the Emperor of China . Furthermore, according to Vlekke, this Cho-p’o could be Java or Sumatra.
More than two centuries since Fah-Hsien’s record, again news from China is worth listening to. Primarily from I-tsing, a Buddhist monk, who intended to make a pilgrimage to visit the homeland of Prince Siddhartha in India in the last quarter of the seventh century. Since the journey from China to India or vice versa takes several years, usually the pilgrims will stop halfway, either in Sumatra or in Java.
On the way back to China he stayed for four years somewhere. He described the place as follows:
“Many tribal kings and coconuts on the South Sea islands worship and believe (in Buddhism), and their hearts are full of determination to accumulate good deeds. In the fortified city of Bhoga, the Buddhist monks number more than a thousand and their minds are set on knowledge and good works. They researched and studied all the same things as in the Middle Kingdom (China); rules and ceremonies are not much different. If a Chinese monk wants to go west to listen (teachings) and read (original texts) he should stay here for a year or two and practice proper observance of the rules and then continue his journey to Central India.”
The I-tsing pilgrimage took place between 671 and 692 AD. A place where the theology and philosophy of Buddhism developed rapidly is strongly suspected to be in Sumatra and refers to the existence of Srivijaya. Fo-shih is the Chinese transcript for Srivijaya, the complete being Shi-li-fo-shih .
I-tsing’s records also inform, returning from there brought nearly 400 different Buddhist texts to China . From I-tsing’s notes, it is clear that Srivijaya was not only a Buddhist kingdom but also one of the leading centers of Buddhist study.
At least until now, 18 sites have been found in Sumatra from the Sriwijaya period. Some of them have a date around the 7th to 9th century, among others, Kedukan Bukit, Talang Tuwo, Kota Kapur. The oldest inscription is dated 682 AD, namely Kedukan Bukit in Palembang.
It is possible that no one in Indonesia had heard of Sriwijaya until the 1920s, before the French scholar George Coedes published his findings in Dutch and Indonesian newspapers. Coedes proclaimed the birth of the maritime trading empire through his essay “Le Royaume de rivijaya.”
Apart from Palembang, other places such as Muaro Jambi or Batanghari River in Jambi or it could be in Riau are the capital of Sriwijaya. Coedes prefers to place Palembang as the capital city, and it was only around 1992 – 1993 that Pierre Yves Manguin confirmed this hypothesis.
Yes, maybe Sriwijaya’s fate was not as lucky as Borobudur. Borobudur is the largest Buddhist temple and monument in the world. Completed around 830 AD by King Samaratungga, information about this temple has practically been published since the first quarter of the 19th century with the publication of Sir Thomas Stamford Raffles’ The History of Java (1817).
Obviously, according to Vlekke Syailendra from Java, he must be a very rich and powerful ruler, considering that this dynasty could build a monument as big and perfect as Borobudur. The ruling Buddhist dynasty in Central Java, namely the Syailendra dynasty, must have had a special relationship with the Srivijaya Kingdom located in Sumatra.
The question is, who is Syailendra? Syailendra’s name is first found in the Kalasan inscription (778 AD). Later it appears again in the inscriptions of Kelurak (782 AD), Abhayagiriwihara (792 AD), Sojomerto from around the end of the 7th century AD, and Kayumwunan (824 AD). Meanwhile, from outside Indonesia, this name is found in the Ligor inscription (775 AD) and the Nalanda Inscription. Referring to Vlekkek’s interpretation, Syailendra which means “King of the Mountain” must have been used for a long time in Fu-nan in Cambodia before being introduced in Java.
There are many interpretations surrounding the origin of this dynasty. Majumdar thinks that the Syailendra family both in Sriwijaya (Sumatra) and in Medang Kamulan (Java) came from Kalingga (South India). The same opinion was also expressed by Nilakanta Sastri and Moens. George Coedes another, this researcher is more inclined to the original assumption of Syailendra is Funan (Cambodia).
Meanwhile, Syailendra’s interpretation came from Indonesia, one of which was the figure of Poerbatjaraka. This theory proposes a hypothesis, that the Syailendra dynasty may have originated from Sumatra and then migrated to Java, or it may also have originated from Java but received strong influence and support from Srivijaya or Sumatra.
Even according to Poerbatjaraka, in fact Sanjaya and his descendants who were the founders of the first Hindu temples in Java were the kings of the Syailendra family. In the beginning, they did follow the Hindu-Shiva religion. However, since the King of Panamkaran or Panangkarana converted to embrace Mahayana Buddhism, even later in the next generation those in Java returned to embrace Siwais and those in Sumatra remained firmly embraced Buddhism.
Poerbatjaraka’s hypothesis is also in accordance with the contents of the King Sankhara Inscription. An inscription dating from the 8th century that was once collected by the Adam Malik Museum but is now lost somewhere.
Vlekke’s interpretation is also interesting to note. He points to the marriage of Vishnu, the son of King Sanjaya, the founder of Hindu Mataram in Java, and the daughter of the ruler of Fu-nan in Cambodia. Long story short, Sanjaya’s son then had two children who both became kings. His eldest son received the title Maharja, but lost in prestige to his younger brother who was titled “Sri Maharaja Syailendravamca Sarvarimadamathana,” “The master of exterminating his enemies.” It was also his younger brother who took the title Syailendra.
In his later journey after succeeding in becoming the most powerful king in Southeast Asia, he married his son, Samaragrawira, to the daughter of the heir of Srivijaya in Sumatra. In this context, following the interpretation of historian NJ Krom, Vlekke considers Samaragrawira to be identical with Samaratungga, the founder of Borobudur.
There is a strong and special correlation between the Buddha in Sumatra and in Java, the key word behind the construction of Borobudur. This combined wealth between Java and Sumatra, according to Vlekke’s interpretation, made the Indonesian nation able to build the great Borobudur.
What is important to note here: according to Denys Lombard (1996), in India or even in Sri Lanka, the location which is suspected to be the birthplace of Prince Siddhartha is actually not known at all for any building of the same type or type of Borobudur. This means that it is not an exaggeration, in fact, if Indonesia can claim here, not only that the Syailendra dynasty came from the archipelago, but even further that the architectural and technological design of Borobudur is a genius and authentic finding of the Indonesian nation.
In addition, it is also important to note that, until the early 11th century AD Srivijaya was still counted as one of the centers of Mahayana Buddhist studies in the Asian region. The Nalanda inscription (around the middle of the 9th century AD) records that King Balaputradewa, who is often referred to as the last king of the Syaliendra dynasty in Java and later king of Srivijaya, is said to have established an institution at the Buddhist “university” at Nalanda in Bengal.
“At the request of the famous Maharaja Balaputradewa, the king of Swarnadwipa through his envoy, I built this monastery.” Thus the sound of the first sentence of the contents of the inscription.