Report of a Tour through the Bengal Provinces/Kauwa-dol
KAUWA-DOL
From the Gunamati monastery Hwen Thsang went southwest 20 li to the Silabhadra monastery, which was situated on an isolated hill. Following the pilgrim’s bearing and distance, we get to the vicinity of the isolated Kauwa-dol hill. At the foot of this hill, or rather a little way up a low spur at its south-east foot, are the remains of a large temple of stone with tall plain granite pillars. This temple must have been very large and complete, as there are traces of an arddha mandapa, a mandapa, a maha mandapa, an antarála, and the sanctum. The few pillars of the temple still standing form a long colonnade leading to the sanctum, the back and portions of side walls of which still exist in a ruinous condition. The cell is occupied by a colossal statue of Buddha seated on a pedestal; on either side are two smaller statues on smaller pedestals; the pedestal of one bears the usual Buddhist creed in Kutila characters.
The walls of this temple were apparently of brick. The floor of the sanctum appears to have been lower than that of the mandapa, &c. The large statue has been described by General Cunningham (Report I, page 41); he also describes the various rock sculptures.
The spot where this temple stood is tolerably level, and could well have contained other structures besides the temple.
Native tradition calls this colossal statue of Buddha an Asur, and considers it to be one of the petrified sentries of Banâsur. Wonderful indeed are the stories current of Banâsur; his gigantic size, the extent of his dominions, and his power. The whole of the ancient ruins found here, in the Barâbar hills, at Dharâwat, at Kispa, at Ner, and indeed all round for miles, are ascribed to him. A curse of some kind has converted his soldiers into stone, but he is not dead; when the course of the curse has been run, he and his people will be restored to life. I could not ascertain when or why or by whom the curse was pronounced; the people have only a vague idea that a curse does hang over him.
From the Silabhadra monastery, which I identify with the Kauwa-dol temple, Hwen Thsang went 40 or 50 li south-west to Gaya. The actual distance of the north end of Gaya from here is 12 miles; the bearing is about south-west. The only difficulty is the mention of his crossing the Nairanjana river, which, going from Kauwa-dol to Gaya, he would not have to cross. As, however, the old road to Gaya runs along the east bank of the Nairanjana river, it is almost certain the pilgrim travelled by that road from Telâḍaka up to the fork, then he struck westwards to visit the various monasteries detailed before, after which it is difficult to decide whether he struck across country from Silabhadra monastery (Kauwa-dol) to Gaya without any road, or whether he returned to the road he had left. I myself am of opinion that the pilgrim returned to the road he had left and followed it to Gaya, thus necessarily crossing the Nairanjana. A careful study of the words of the traveller can alone yield a satisfactory solution of the question as to whether, as I suppose, on leaving the Silabhadra monastery he regained the road from Telâḍaka to Gaya, and whether the recorded distance does not refer to the distance along the main road alone, independent of the excursion.
We know from the inscriptions in the Barâbar caves that they had been excavated long before Hwen Thsang’s pilgrimage. They were for a long time famous seats of Buddhist priests; and it is most unlikely that Hwen Thsang passing so close to them should have omitted to visit them. In adopting my identifications, not only are Hwen Thsang’s bearings and distances found to be nearly correct, but the anomaly of his passing close and yet omitting to visit these famous places is avoided. The absence of all notice of the caves themselves by Hwen Thsang is, however, strange, and only to be accounted for on. the supposition that in his time they had been appropriated by Brahmanists—a supposition confirmed by the inscriptions in them.