Hello Friends,
I am studying Buddhist hagiographies with a particular interest a-typical hagiographies – you might say heterodoxical ones. How we tell the story matters – it impacts our moral imagination and practice, and this is something I am exploring, esp. in the context of “socially engaged Buddhism.” Wondering if you can help.
I am currently researching Dr. Ambedkar’s particular re-construction of Siddhartha’s Going Forth as a form of political exile, or even satyagraha, as he objects to impending war between the Sakyans and the Koliyas, over an issue of shared resources (water). It’s actually quite complex in terms of the political dynamics of the Sakyans being under the tutelage of the King of Kosala, etc.
In other sources from the 1940s, Dr. Ambekar has told the story of the Siddhartha’s Going Forth in the more traditional way, following the Four Sights, etc, and along the lines of spiritual/existential angst. By the 1950s however, he makes a different narrative choice, of which it turns out he was not the originator.
The dramatic depiction of a conflict arising within the council of his clan, setting the scene for the political exile of Siddhartha as a pacifist and conscious objector, traces back to a very popular play in Marathi by Dharmananda Damodar Kosambi, called Bodhisatta, published in the 1949s.
Damodar Kosambi was a well known scholar of Pali and Sanskrit in his time. In his intro to the play he says this section of his play (and the unconventional rendition of the story) come from SnP 4.15. However, looking into that Sutta, which indeed touches upon the theme, there is nothing about the governance of the Sakyan kingdom, or issues of political strife that lead to Siddhartha leaving home.
Is there anyone here who has studied Damodar Kosambi’s work?
Are there other places in the EBT that point to the war between the Sakyans and the Koliyas? (even if not connected to the Buddha-to-be’s going forth?)
In other words, how far fetched is this, and what is the historical basis for the depiction?
I also noticed that the Japanese humanist manga artist, Osamu Tezuka, in his version of the story, also eludes to problems at the border, issues of strife between clans and resources not being shared. I suspect that all this is not coming out of thin air, even if there are fictional liberties being taken.
To be clear, I am not particularly interested in a critique of Dr. Ambekdar’s unconventional take on Buddhism. I am well aware of how people have found fault in his work. I am more interested in how he did what he did. He was a very thoughtful, deliberate and learned man. I am tracing his sources and his thinking, as it relates to this re-imagining of renunciation (and subsequent ‘different’ or even non-articulation of the 4NT). I am discovering he was not alone, Kosambi preceded him in this respect. I am also discovering that Damodar Kosambi was really a remarkable human being and scholar that hardly anyone has written about, it would seem? Unless I am wrong.
I am aware of Fiske and Emmrich’s exegetical work on Dr. Ambedkar’s seminal text, The Buddha and his Dhamma, but they do not seem to have been aware that Ambedkar drew from Kosambi. The question I have is - what did Kosambi draw from? And/or what further information might Dr. Ambedkar might have had on the socio-political context of Early Buddhism that could have substantiated his narrative? As you likely know, he died before being able to complete footnotes, which were added later by editors.
Any insights or tips are welcome!
Upayadhi