Talk:Lumbini

Confusion

There is some confusion as to whether Lumbini is in Nepal or in India. Let me make things pretty clear; some people in India are falsely claiming their rights on the birthplace of the Buddha by trying to re-make Lumbini in India!

This is the same group that is also trying to spread worldwide rumors that Nepal is NOT the birthplace of the holy man as was origially seen !!

All such ideas are totally rubbbish... it is again a case of a bigger and a stronger country trying to impose its powers on a smaller and a naiive one.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.131.70 (talk) 18:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I understand that your pro Nepal and you think your seperate and different from the rest of the Indian sub-continent but Nepal is historically and culturally linked to Ancient India. 71.105.87.54 (talk) 22:11, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry about it. Historical records and chronicles are the best evidence available that prove Lumbini has always been in Nepal, and that Gautama's mother, Mahamaya, was indeed in Lumbini at the time of the birth. Many accounts show that the Shakya clan lived in Nepal, not India, and that the palace of Suddhodana, Gautama's father, was somewhere "in the foothills of the Himalaya". If this is true then there are very few places in India where Gautama could have spent his early life, as the southern foothills of the Himalaya (of the region) rest mostly in Nepal and not in India. It is possible though that Suddhodana relocated his family at some point later. --Bentonia School 16:22, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

If you look at Gautam Buddha Article it states that Lumbini was part of India. No matter how many times I change it to Nepal it always changes back to India. How can I make the change Permanent? Spartathreehundred 05:56, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

A simple answer to all questions is DID NEPAL EXIST DURING THE TIME OF BUDDHA??? NO! Nepal didnot exist until a few hundered years ago. So, this discussion is meaningless. Its true Lumbini is located inside modern Nepal's terai region close to the boundary agreed to by gurkhas and the british doesn't change the fact that Buddha was a prince from Ancient Indian(Aryavarta) kingdom Kapilavastu of Shakyas(which by the way was located on both sides of the present border) in the Kosala region. As for the location of Lumbini even the Buddha article provides a link to this article. Lumbini, Kapilavastu, Kosala, Kushinagar, Bodh Gaya, Sarnath were all located in Ancient India(Aryavarta not modern India) eventhough these palces maybe in modern Nepal or India today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.145.76.44 (talk) 08:23, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

According to ancient Buddhist text(written around 500 AD), Mulasarvasti vadavinaya, Shakyas of Kabilvastu (Kapilvastu i.e kingdom of Buddha) and Baniyas of Sravasti, came to Newal (believed to be Kathmandu Valley, Nepal) from the south. Sometime later, Bhikshu Ananda also entered Newal. The word Kabilvastu refers to Kapilvastu and Newal refers to Nepal. It is to be recalled that the indigenous people of Nepal call themselves Nepami or Newami. Other people call them Newar.

So Kapilavastu and Nepal mandala were two different entities. So, how has Lumbini always been part of Nepal? as some calim here when Nepal itself is not mentioned until 400 AD. Even at that time it corresponds to Kathmandu Valley, and Kapliavastu was still a separate kingdom then.

Another Buddhist text Manjushrimula Kalpa has mentioned Manadeva as king of Nepal Mandala(Kathmandu Valley and sorrounding areas). It also mentions Lalitpur and Bhaktapur mandalas. The time of the composition of Mulasarvastivadavinaya is 3 century A.D(400's). And the time of the composition of Manjushriulakalpa is not beyond the reign of Manadeva (464–506A.D).

Now Buddha lived around 480-500 BC a full 1000 years later the name Nepal appears that too to describe a small part of modern Nepal(i.e Kathmandu Valley) which even at that later date(i.e a 1000 years later, did not include Lumbini and Kapilavastu(as Kapilavastu is mentioned separately). Even here Nepal or Newal is described as a Mandala, not a country or kingdom, it was a tributary of Guptas at one point. Mauryas also held sway over Kapilavastu. Terai(where Lumbini is located) was not part of Gurkha kingdom during Mughal era but was under Mughal rule. It is NOW in the country of Nepal. End of Discussion!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.145.76.44 (talk) 08:59, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

No, never, Lumbini was never in India. It was always in Nepal. Read the history books well and then only comment about it.

And one more fact, India was under the British rule. But Nepal was always an independent sovereign country. Its none of the part or land was ever in India. So was the Lumbini. Rather, some lands like Tista and Kangada were lost by Nepal to the British-India and Nepal got back its lost lands viz. Banke, Bardiya, Kailali and Kanchanpur by Sugauli Treaty. These lands have no relation with Buddha. Can you say at which date Buddha's birth-place belonged to Nepal? You can not answer this question because this place always belonged to India. Wiki sometimes gives the false information. This can not be taken as an evidence. Let us take this issue to UNO and international court.

Shakya bansha did not rule in India, they did in Nepal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.207.227.120 (talk) 02:58, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I dont understand why india and indians want to claim that lumbini is in india, another place called lumbini might be in india but the birth place of buddha was always in Nepal.if anyone is confused about the birth place of buddha those people can always have a reference of wikipedia for gautam buddha, it is clearly mentioned that buddha was born in Nepal. If buddha was born in india then why buddhist's from china, Japan, srilanka and other counties deciples visit Lumbini, Nepal. please people have some common sense and do write the things do not spread a rumour.I request Wikipedia to state the clear reference related to buddha should not post any confusing references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.79.35.90 (talk) 10:27, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

The answer is because Nepal was historically and culturally part of Ancient India. 71.105.87.54 (talk) 22:11, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Not right. Ancient India did not exist with borders. As such, Nepal was never a part of anything ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DBSSURFER (talk • contribs) 05:55, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

I think that one has to look at the divergent path from ancient Aryan republics and convergent path towards Nepal of the place that presently is Lumbini in Nepal. Mahajanapada were spread throughout the South Asia during the time of Buddha, as is revealed by Pali Canons. Mahajanapada have never been mentioned as India or Bharat in any of the ancient literature. "Ancient India" was a term coined in the British Raj to study the history of British colonies, most probably. The vagueness of Ancient India can be palpated by the numerous possibilities illustrated at the page itself. It seems that the term is being used as a tool for jingoistic bashing synonym directed against non ROI nations of South Asia. Such a gross generalization would not yield anything academic or scholarly. The claim that Nepal was under Guptas or Mughal is unsubstantiated. Gopal Vansawali and other vansawalis as well as the historical documents never mention the claim. If there is any document that proves the claim, please enlighten the community here. The parts of Aryan Mahajanapadas consisting portions of Brijjis, Mallas, Lichhavis, later fragmented to independent micro kingdoms. These along with Mongloid tiny kingdoms were later consolidated to form modern Nepal by the Gurkhas.

About the term Nepal not being used, it is ridiculous and a product of lack of research. Himwat Khanda of Upanishads (check in Nepal) and Kautilya arthashastram CLEARLY state the name Nepal LONG BEFORE Manadeva. So does Gopalvanshawali and Swayambhu Puran. So, editors, please open your eyes to possibilities other than gross generalization. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.248.84.92 (talk) 20:20, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

A Correction

The article says that Gautama was the founder of Buddhism, but this is not true. Buddha and the philosophy of an earlier Buddhism existed when Gautama was born in 586 BCE. In fact, it is told, that the mystic Kala Devala, upon seeing the baby Gautama a few days after the birth, reacted first with a smile, then with tears, then by bowing and touching the baby Gautama's feet. When asked by Gautama's father, Suddhodana, why he reacted so, Kala Devala said: "I smiled when I saw him because I have been privileged to see a being who will know Buddhahood. Then I wept, because as I know my own future I know that I shall not live to meet him then. Then I bowed to touch the feet of the greatest being in the whole world." Gautama became a revolutionary in that he redefined Buddhism, but he did not found it. --Bentonia School 16:12, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Relevant books

Source http://www.asianstudies.emory.edu/sinhas/kprb0401a.html

Lumbini Chakra: Geometric Interpretation of the Archaelogical Remains (1998, Sashi Rimal) by Shankar Nath Rimal was written in response to a request by the Lumbini Development Trust regarding how the Mayadevi temple complex could be reconstructed and developed. Through various diagram-generating exercises, Rimal tries to prove that Lumbini did not grow on its own without formal planning, and shows how the remains that have been located at the birth-site of Gautam Buddha are related to each other in a geometric pattern. He suspects that "the planning process could have been initiated by the Emperor Ashoka." We should expect expert commentary on Rimal's attempt from archaelogists who have studied the site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Famousnepali (talk • contribs) 18:15, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Foothills of the Himalaya

I take issue with the statement that Lumbini is in the foothills of the Himalaya. It simply isn't. Lumbini is near the border with India, an area of plains with the Terai just to the east. The foothills, if a particular starting point can be drawn, are some distance to the north. As simple topographic map will prove this. I know a source is given for the statement, but it is simply wrong. I suggest removing it and questioning any other information cited from the source. --Bentonia School (talk) 11:23, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

The map of Nepal is wrong

On the lower left side of the Nepal map, it says Nepal in Indian terrority. I know this might not be done in bad way and / or a negative way, but it should say Nepal where Nepal is, or have an arrow there, and where India is it should say India. 71.105.87.54 (talk) 23:36, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Near border of India important?

Yes, Lumbini is near the Indian border but is it really important to mention that Lumbini is near the the Indian border? Feels like all that does is get the name "India" out there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.215.103.121 (talk) 02:02, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

False information

budda was burned in napal,in lumbini zone,rupandehi district,which is located in western part of nepal,it is need to visit once to every one who is coming in nepal.however now our neighbour country india saying he is burned in india and advertising sucha a false informations among the peoples around the world,so every one be sure that light of asia i.elord buddha has got birth in our himalayan country nepal.our country nepal is rich in all the natural things than man-made physical structure.so we are sure that every one will feel to our, its like heaven. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.199.185.117 (talk) 06:37, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Nepal was always independent nation from history.but India was the part of British .it was colonized by British . Aayam kc (talk) 06:37, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Please add this section from Wikitravel: Transport Links

{{editsemiprotected}}

By air

The closest airport is at Bhairahawa (also known as Sidhhartha Nagar) (22km), where there are flights to and from Kathmandu. Other airports serving more destinations include Gorakhpur and Faizabad in India.

By rail

The closest rail link is in Gorakhpur, India

By road

Buses ply the route between Sunauli (from stop across from Hotel Yeti) and Lumbini (you will need to walk 1km from the nearest stop). The last return bus departs at 5 PM.

Buses also run from Kathmandu, Pokhara and Varanasi to Sunauli.

Taxis are probably the best option for reaching Lumbini from Sunauli, though you will need to know the going rate to avoid paying well over the odds. As everywhere else in the sub-continent, ensure that the fare has been agreed before heading out. This will save trouble at the destination.

Bikes can be rented at hotels in Lumbini (80 NRs/day) and offer a good way to see the site. Make sure of the condition of the tires, as a flat will mean pushing it back over miles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.12.155.97 (talk) 19:31, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Partly done: added air and rail sections, but the road section (while fine on Wikitravel) is a bit too no original research-y for Wikipedia, it would need to be written from a neutral point of view to be acceptable here. -- gtdp ^(T)/_(C) 19:47, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

China project

There are comments and sources out there to show this project is still highly controversial and not committed. The more aggressive comments are like this. Where the goal of the PRC is to overshadow the Dala Lama as the final preserver of Buddhism. Benjwong (talk) 04:57, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

The sources presented are not trustworthy. Check nepal governments webpage. Nothing has been rejected yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.72.17.160 (talk) 05:50, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Agreed!. There are no authentic sources at all which says anything about the deal. DBSSURFER (talk) 18:14, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

The point is not to say whether it was just passed or rejected. The point is to show the contentions along the way. Even if it passed 100% tomorrow, it has already been rejected at one time. Benjwong (talk) 22:18, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

It has NOT been rejected. You cannot just bring referenced of blogs and unpopular news websites. I can give you hundred websites of that level which say the deal was signed.DBSSURFER (talk) 17:28, 25 September 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.114.81.206 (talk)

Both of you need to stop--you're edit warring on the article, which is not allowed per WP:Edit warring. Discuss the issue here. If you cannot reach consensus among yourselves, please use dispute resolution. Since there's only 2 of you commenting on the issue, probably the best, first option is to request a third opinion. Any more reverts from either of you instead of discussing will result in you being blocked for edit warring. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:35, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

I have a third party opinion..what difference does it make whether it`s India or Nepal? This is typical of how organized religion divides people..by the way I`m a Buddhist..get off your soap boxes. Lonepilgrim007 (talk) 00:15, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Map

Something should be done with the map. It is titled something like "location of Lumbini" -- but I needed to blow the map up to find the town. Maybe instead of a thin red line, an arrow of some sort should be used to point to the town. Kdammers (talk) 07:14, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Paderia

Paderia Pillar Edict of Aśoka, Epigraphia Indica Vol. V.

Can Paderia be redirected here? Wiki-uk (talk) 17:23, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I came to this because of the image (shown here on the right) that I found on Wiki Commons. After doing a search on Google Books, I came to the conclusion that the 'Paderia Pillar' refers to the Lumbini Pillar, so I added this image to the Category 'Ashoka pillar (Lumbini)'. Now I found another image of the Lumbini inscription, halfway through http://narendranath.webs.com which confirms that they are the same, so I'm creating the redirect now. Wiki-uk (talk) 04:38, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Dispute

Some mention of the fact that there is a dispute about present day Lumbini in Nepal being the birthplace of the Buddha should at least receive a mention in the article. Information about this dispute may be found at: http://www.lumkap.org.uk/Lumbini%20On%20Trial.htm

Chris Fynn (talk) 07:54, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

POV about buddha's chronology

The article says "Siddhartha Gautama lived roughly between 623 and 543 BCE", but even according to the recent paper about excavations at Lumbini, many influential scholars believe in chronologies that range from 340 BC to 480 BC: "Most scholars waver between a Nepali and Sri Lankan tradition of 623 BC, a long ‘southern Buddhist’ chronology of 544/3 BC, a long chronology of 480 BC, and short chronologies between 390 and 340 BC, although key individuals have begun to favour the shorter chronologies (Bechert 1995: 12–34)" (Cite: R.A.E. Coningham; et al. "The earliest Buddhist shrine : excavating the birthplace of the Buddha, Lumbini (Nepal). - Durham Research Online". Retrieved 2013-11-26. {{cite news}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help)). I guess that this article shouldn't make strong claims, and refer instead to another article where all the POV are included. ★NealMcB★ (talk) 15:26, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

History of Lumbini and India

The main four pilgrimage sites related to the life of Gautama Buddha being Kushinagar, Lumbini, bodh Gaya and Sarnath.

India and Nepal share 4 things which we cannot change at all. (It might be ignorance of people who don't study history ! But history cannot be changed. It can only be accepted as it is. );

1) Both Share similar religion like Hinduism , Buddhism.

2) Both share Border

3) Both share common history of Aryans.

4) Buddha was born in Kapilvastu , Lumbini , (present day) NEPAL. Present day Lumbin is 2x6 km area. But in Buddha's time it was not so small. Lumbini was subsidiary kingdom to Magadh ( present day Bihar). Its territories crossed Indian border. Hence today's Lumbini is divided between India and Nepal.

There are 4 facts which Nepal cannot change ;

1) Buddha got enlightment in Buddhagaya/Gaya in India

2) Buddha first himself taught Buddhism to Indians. Later it spread to other countries.

3) He lived his entire life in India . He died in India.

4) He travelled to various places in India.

There are 5 facts regarding Nationality of Buddha:

1) Lumbini was independent kingdom with free king and independent government. Iumbini was never part of Bihar govt or Nepal Govt because both did not existed at that time. Although the entire land was called "Bharat Chhetra/ Arya Vrat " . The culture, and citizens of Lumbini of that time is currently divided b/w both the countries. He was independent prince of Lumbini kingdom which is currently divided between India and Nepal.

2) Buddha never spoke in Nepali language. He never wore Nepali costumes " Daura Suruwal and Nepali Topi. He had never heard the word " Nepal " in his lifetime. Because Nepal came into existence 1000 years after his birth (534BC) . The first king of Nepal was Manadeva.

3) Hence he was not a citizen of Nepal. He was citizen of his own country, ie Lumbini !

4) There are no records of his travel to Kathmandu , bhairahwa, butwal etc cities of Nepal.

5) It is highly inappropriate to cut and paste past history and citizens of Lumbini with current history and location of Lumbini. People of that time have migrated to both Nepal and India . Lumbini was annexed by Gupta dynasty and Muguls of India and Later by Gorkha king of Nepal.

Explanation with evidence and source of information :

Buddha was born 563 BC in Lumbini, present day Nepal on the following auspicious Baisakhi purnima. As Siddhartha, he renounced his family at the age of 29 his gaining enlightenment in 534 BC and travelled and meditated in search of truth. After meditating for six years at Urubela (Buddhagaya) in Gaya, India he attained Buddhatva or enlightenment. There he sat in meditation under a bodhi (fig) tree (Ficus religiosa). After three days and three nights of meditation, Siddhartha claimed to have attained enlightenment and insight, and the answers that he had sought.

Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodh_Gaya#Demographics

After seven weeks, he travelled to Sarnath, where he began teaching Buddhism.The deer park in Sarnath is where Gautama Buddha first taught the Dharma, and where the Buddhist Sangha came into existence through the enlightenment of Kondanna. Sarnath is located 13 kilometres north-east of Varanasi , in Uttar Pradesh, India. It was here that he preached his first discourse in the deer park to set in motion the 'Wheel of the Dharma'. It is one of the most holy sites as in this place the stream of the Buddha's teaching first flowed.

Source :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarnath

The language of that time was Pali or Prakrit and hence all Buddhist texts were written in Prakrit in "Pali cannon" . Prakrit language evolved from Sanskrit. The culture and tradition was different . The Nepali language had not evolved. There was nothing like ' Nepali topi ' and 'Daura suruwal' to be worn by Buddha. Hence the concept of Nepali or Indian Nationality of Buddha is in question ! Did Buddha ever said that he was Nepali? He is mentioned as shakya or Arya . To be a national , the nationalism must be evolved. Source; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pāli_Canon

Buddha was born in lumbini. Lumbini was independent kingdom with free king and independent government. He was independent prince of Lumbini kingdom which is currently divided between India and Nepal. Iumbini was never part of Bihar govt or Nepal Govt because both did not existed at that time. The culture, and citizens of Lumbini of that time is currently divided b/w both the countries. Lumbini is currently at border between India and Nepal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.184.167.205 (talk) 07:04, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Mahajanapada were spread throughout the South Asia during the time of Buddha, as is revealed by Pali Canons. Mahajanapada has been mentioned as " Arya Vrat" or " Bharat chhetra / rule of chakravrati samrat Bharat ". Mahajanapada have never been mentioned as India in any of the ancient literature. "Ancient India" was a term coined in the British Raj to study the history of British colonies. Therefore history itself says Lumbini Mahajanapada was part of Ancient India, and iit doesn't mentions word "Nepal" instead of Arya Vrat.

Buddhist text "Manjushrimula Kalpa" written by Manjushree has mentioned Manadeva as king of Nepal Mandala(Kathmandu Valley and sorrounding areas). It also mentions Lalitpur and Bhaktapur mandalas at around 3 century A.D (not B.C) . King Manadeva ruled between 464–506A.D.

Now Buddha lived around 480-500 BC (not AD) a full 1000 years gap in history between Manadeva and Buddha . The name Nepal appears to describe Kathmandu Valley which even at that date(i.e a 1000 years after Buddha birth ) did not include Lumbini and Kapilavastu(as Kapilavastu is mentioned separately). Even here "Nepal or Newal or Newar "is described as a Mandala, not a country or kingdom. Later Lumbini was conquered by "Gupta Dynasty " of India . The "Ashoka pillar " erected by king Ashoka of India in Lumbini bears " 4 faced Lion " which is current day logo of govt. Of India . Later "Mauryas Dynasty " also held sway over Kapilavastu. Terai(where Lumbini is located) was not part of Gurkha kingdom during Mughal era but was under Mughal rule. The entire Nepal was never under Guptas or Mughal but Lumbini was. Lumbini is still at border between India and Nepal. This is true history and " I personally cannot change it at all" . Source; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pillars_of_Ashoka

Gopal Vansawali and other vansawalis as well as the historical documents never mention the claim that Lumbini was part of their kingdom at that point of time. If there is any document that proves the claim, please enlighten the community here. The parts of Aryan Mahajanapadas consisting portions of Brijjis, Mallas, Lichhavis, later fragmented to independent micro kingdoms. These along with Mongloid kingdoms were later consolidated to form modern Nepal by the Gurkhas.The entire Nepal was never a Part of India . It has never and should never be a part of Islamic India. It had always remained independent. People are free and happy. Hindus and Buddhists can freely practice their religions.

India and Nepal share 3 things which we cannot change at all. 1) Both similar religion like Hinduism , Buddhism. 2) Both share Border 3) Both share common history of Aryans.

Buddha spent a lot of time in India. Probably that's why, he is loved by many people in India. He was undoubtedly born in Lumbini which is in current day Nepal. Nepal, Sagarmatha or Prithvi Narayan shah were never claimed as a part of India and Indian history. It might be ignorance of people who don't study history ! But history cannot be changed. It can only be accepted as it is. Let us see this, 'Sita' was married to 'Ram'. Sita was princess of "Janakpur, Mithila" ( present day Nepal ) . Ram was prince of "Ayodhya " present day Uttarpradesh, India. Both were Aryans, neither Nepali or Indian. Because no such border or Nationalism had developed at that time. These two nations evolved Later in history.

"Ancient India" was a term coined in the British Raj to study the history of British colonies. Therefore, sometimes the glory of Nepal or you can say history of parts of Nepal gets mixed with Indian history. For example, when Ram and Sita are mentioned, both history of Nepal and India get mixed equally. When king Ashoka and Buddhism is mentioned, the history is inseparable between India and Nepal. When Bodhgaya , and Sarnath is mentioned, Indian history gets mixed. Hence it is inseparable.

In totality , Nepal is a complete Nation with freedom, separate culture and tradition. It was never a part of India . Nepal is free to enjoy its glory . And India similarly enjoy its diversity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.184.167.205 (talk) 06:43, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

On 7 July 2013 at around 5.15 a.m. a low intensity bomb blast took place in the 1500 year old Mahabodhi Temple complex. This was followed by a series of nine low intensity blasts and at least two monks are reported to be injured, one Tibetan and the other a Burmese. These blasts were carried out by an Islamic terrorist organisation, to seek revenge for the killings of Muslims in Burma. The secular Congress govt of India and Nitish govt. Of Bihar did nothing to protect the heritage site of Buddhism in order to please Muslims. Buddhism was always under attack by Islamic rulers. Had Lumbini been under Bihar govt. It would been demolished in the good name of secularism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.176.231.127 (talk) 06:09, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Nationality of Buddha !

It is quite straight forward fact that lumbini belongs to present day Nepal. Kapilvastu lumbini is a part of nepal and buddha was born there. But he lived his entire life in India and got pari nirvana in India . He got enlightenment in 'Bodh Gaya, India' . He set his wheel of dharma in Sarnath, Uttar Pradesh , India .Therefore there is common history which cannot be separated. Hence both India and Nepal are correct when they claim about Buddha. Although the land that was glorified by his birth is in nepal,... . Similarly India is glorified by his teachings and religion. BUDDHA WAS BORN IN LUMBINI.....lets not use Nepal or India.

History is relevant here because Buddha was born 2600 years ago, not today. Because he was a historical person and we read history to know about him. One cannot cut and paste the past history (and citizens) with the current history ( and location of Lumbini) to tell the nationality of Buddha.

Let us see this ; Although the people of lumbini who are Nepali are still proud to be born in Lumbini and they are citizens of Nepal. But people of Buddha times had never heard about the word 'Nepal' . What Did they call them self ? Were they proud to be called as Nepali ? When king Ashoka and Buddhism is mentioned, the history is inseparable between India and Nepal. When Bodhgaya , and Sarnath is mentioned, Indian history gets mixed. Hence it is inseparable. Similarly Buddha can also be accepted (just like Sita ) in both Indian and Nepali history .

Let us see this, 'Sita' was married to 'Ram'. Sita was born in janakpur which is in Nepal. Sita was princess of "Janakpur, Mithila" ( present day Nepal ) . Ram was prince of "Ayodhya " present day Uttarpradesh, India. When Ram and Sita are mentioned, both history of Nepal and India get mixed equally. Both were Aryans, neither Nepali nor Indian. Because no such border or Nationalism had developed at that time. These two nations evolved Later in history. People from janakpur are proud that Sita belonged to their place and those people are now Nepali. At present they are not just janakpureli, they are also Nepali. But Sita also called as Janaki was just janakpureli only ( no other nationality -at that time ) . Was Sita "Nepali " or "aryan" ? Did she called herself Nepali ?

Lumbini & janakpur both belong to Nepal only !!! But both India and Nepal can use names of Sita and Buddha in day to day life . It is just like useing Rama and Krishna , Meera and Sudhama by all hindus. So places like Lumbini, Ayodhya or dwarka are not questioned to be part of India or Nepal . It is mean to actually personify or exclude Nepalese or Indians from using their names. PEOPLE will quote Buddha , Krishna and Rama in both countries. Don't get hurt. Love them and cherish them ! Rama, Krishna , Radha are all ours. Just like water , air and sunlight cannot be personified or restricted with nationality . It is mean to say that these people were Indians or Nepalese because they were born there. And current citizenship of Ayodhya , Dwarka is irrelevant due to COMMON ancestors and History.

Indians were taught Buddhism by lord Buddha himself . Buddha spent a lot of time in India. Probably that's why, he is loved by many people in India. Hence they speak out THAT BUDDHA WAS GIFT OF INDIA . Because philosophy of Buddhism flourished in India . Hence no one can deny that indians are also proud of Buddha. Indians say that he belongs to them also .

His birth place is not in question at all. Because he was born in Lumbini / kapilvastu. However he cannot be exclusively classified as proprietary of Nepal . Indians cannot be excluded from using his name, his philosophy and history. We cannot delete him and his teachings from memories of Indian history just because he was born in Nepal. Buddha was born there but he became global. He spent most of his life and teachings in India. Therefore he was not exclusively of Nepal or India . People will mention him in their speeches, get inspired throughout their life. They will give his examples to teach honesty and other good traits to their children. This tradition is centuries old . So people of Nepal should feel good when anyone in India loves and cherishes Buddha in India .

I do agree that Buddhas don't just belong to India or Nepal , just like electricity does not belong to the white men. Kindly be neutral and allow people to identify themself with Buddha itself. Both countries flourished in neighbourhood and both have Aryan predecessors. So similarity is inevitable. Enjoy similarities just as we enjoy differences.

Present day Lumbini is only 2x3 sq km. was Lumbini kingdom so small in past? some of its territories are in both India (Bihar) and Nepal . Moreover people of those days might have migrated to other places of India or Nepal just like we have migrated. I never said Buddha was not born in Lumbini, kapilvastu, Nepal. Therefore, Please focus on teachings of Buddha . Not on his nationality . Buddha was neither Nepali nor Indian. He was simple human. Now instead of fighting over exact place of birth . Rather share the values of Buddha and practice his teachings as much as we can.

Buddha and Buddhism is purely shared history. Current day bihar (Magadh) was linked with Buddha & Lumbini .Buddha spent a lot of time in India. Probably that's why, he is loved by many people in India. In totality , Nepal is a complete Nation with freedom, separate culture and tradition. It was never a part of India . Nepal is free to enjoy its glory . And India similarly enjoy its diversity.

Buddha was born in lumbini

There is mistake on Buddhism. Aayam kc (talk) 06:23, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Gombrich's dispute with Coningham

@Joshua Jonathan, JimRenge, and Farang Rak Tham: Perhaps this and other Lumbini-mentioning Buddhism articles could use your review, given it cites Robin Coningham. See this note by Richard Gombrich. The ocbs website, of course, is the Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 17:48, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Woah, Gombrich really destroys the article. And he's probably right too. Do we have any other opinions, preferably peer-reviewed, to further substantiate this? I think we need this, to establish whether the article is fringe or not, since the journal (Antiquity) appears legit.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 21:49, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

The guy even has his own Wiki page at Robin Coningham. Not to mention that many major media outlets reported his work. If this is fringe, it is huge. I think I will check with this Prof. Gombrich myself.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 21:55, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

This Oxford University Press-published source describes the findings as "solid archeological evidence" and as "convincing". This confused me at first, but historian Stephen Batchelor explains the findings in more detail on page 5 of a recent article: he agrees with Gombrich that the findings do not say anything about the dating of the Buddha's life, but they apparently still were significant for the fact that they proved that Lumbini was revered as a holy site before the time of Ashoka. E.i. the article's findings are not regarded as incorrect, but Coningham's interpretations (and subsequent news reports) of them are. The sources I have linked should be reliable enough to conclude that Coningham was mostly wrong, but right about some things.

I dislike the Batchelor guy for his stupid secularism, but you gotta give it to him he is a good historian. Now, if you agree with my conclusions, I am going to trim all the Coningham 2013 content or designate it as incorrect.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 22:45, 9 January 2018 (UTC) Edited.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 22:48, 9 January 2018 (UTC) Edited: apparently, Batchelor has no academic credentials.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 17:30, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

FRT: Lets try to include all sides here, for balance and NPOV. Gombrich is RS, needless to emphasize. You will find a good review on Lumbini and of other archaeological sites in this link you also give: An Archaeological History of Indian Buddhism, (Lars Fogelin, 2015, Oxford University Press, pages 22-31 and all of chapter 3). He mentions Coningham's work, including the Coningham's 2013 paper. Fogelin has a good review, which this article and our other related articles do not mention currently but should. His summary is along the lines of Gombrich's publications on early Buddhism. Key points in Fogelin: No archaeological materials can be unequivocally shown to both be Buddhist and date prior to 3rd century BCE (Lumbini site's "possible temple" may be an exception, but this is contested); Traditional Buddhist textual sources claim BCE dates but likely date to the beginning of the first millennium CE. Yet, adds Fogelin, there are "numerous archaeological sites" from 4th, 5th and 6th century BCE in that region (ancient India+Sri Lanka)... but very little if anything in these sites is unequivocally Buddhist; archaeology so far, at best, suggests only the general social / cultural / theological context in which Buddhism emerged on the Indian subcontinent prior to the 3rd century BCE. Lumbini, and possibly a Vaisali monument, may be early Buddhist site. It is this "conditional, uncertain" part, along with other views of Gombrich, Fogelin etc that need to be explained more clearly. But deleting Coningham entirely would not be wise, as you will then likely see a lot of edit warring and unstable article(s). Trimming that you suggest plus balancing would be better. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 00:09, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Coningham's own book on archaeology in the subcontinent came out in 2015, through Cambridge University Press, but I haven't read it yet to comment. It can be cited, but carefully as it is a primary source. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 00:27, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

I remember this discussion from a few years ago; the claims about 600 BCE were criticised right away, as far as I remember. It may have appeared here, or at the Buddha page; I don't know anymore. And of course, building new structures on older sites is not exceptional; I wouldn't be surprised if there was a Roman site at the place of the Reformed Church, at the village square at my town. And before that, a pagan site. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:17, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

The discussion about"New Archaeological Evidence for Birthdate" took place in Talk:Gautama_Buddha/Archive_9. I agree with Ms Sarah Welch, trimming plus balancing would be helpful. JimRenge (talk) 09:45, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Okay, we agree on trimming and adding opinions to balance. I have seen a handful of occurrences of the 2013 study in Wikipedia articles. I do not think I will be able to do this today, so if anyone wants to start, go right ahead.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 10:20, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

I also propose to report the 2013 study of Coningham to the noticeboard for fringe, so numerous editors will help to make sure that the misunderstandings about his 2013 study are kept in check.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 10:30, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

FRT: Lets reconsider, not go that far quickly. Before adding it to the fringe noticeboard, we should find additional scholarly sources that persuasively places it as fringe. Gombrich criticism is solid, and a good start. Some real-life commitments limit me. Whoever amongst us finds the time, or page watchers of this article willing to volunteer, should try to clarify the Coningham claims, with trimming and balancing based on Gombrich, Batchelor etc. Thanks JR for that archive link, Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 14:53, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Ms Sarah Welch, the fringe noticeboard is meant to discuss whether the article contains fringe, and therefore requires more editorial attention. It is a precaution and a platform of discussion, not directly a disciplinary measure.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 15:27, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Agreed. But, we will have a more fruitful discussion and more informed outcome with couple more RS. I am okay if you want to trigger the discussion on the fringe noticeboard now. Gombrich's criticism is strong indeed. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 15:46, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Another from JR's link above. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 15:52, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for that, Sarah. I didn't know Silk could read Dutch... Having taken a look at the Lumbini article, I think it actually is quite accurate and doesn't follow the Buddha's birth hype. Checking any other articles for fringe now.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 22:21, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Maya Devi Temple, Lumbini seems to be much worse.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 22:33, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes. JimRenge has already fixed some of the blatant problems a while ago. The subtle issues may also need some attention in this and other articles. The "followed by the development of a Buddhist monastery-like community by approximately 550 BCE" in this article, using Coningham as source for example, is problematic in light of Gombrich, Fogelin etc. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 01:42, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Ancient History Related with Gautama Buddha

Source:

[1]From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koliya ,

[2]Marques, Joan (12 March 2015). Business and Buddhism. Routledge. ISBN 9781317663430.https://books.google.co.in/books?id=jNAqBwAAQBAJ&pg=PA55&dq=Koli+Shakya&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Koli%20Shakya&f=false

[3] Nan, Huaijin (1 January 1997). Basic Buddhism: Exploring Buddhism and Zen. Weiser Books. ISBN 9781578630202. https://books.google.co.in/books?id=YAoZ5m9u8OwC&pg=PA37&dq=Koli+Shakya&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Koli%20Shakya&f=false

Gautama Buddha (born in Lumbini) and related facts: He belonged to Koli Clan of Rajputs:

The Sakyan and Koliyan ruled on opposite banks of the Rohni River. Their representatives were called rajas and their chief was the maharaja or Ganapati. However, they both were independent republics. The Koliya owned two chief settlements of Santhagara, at Ramagama and at Devadaha of Nawalparasi Nepal. Present day Lumbini Zone, Kapilvastu, Nepal.

Suddhodana was the father of Siddhartha Gautama, who later became Buddha. Siddhartha Gautama later became known as Shakyamuni, the "Sage of the Shakyans," or the Buddha. Suddhodana's paternal aunt was married to the Koliyan ruler Añjana. Their daughters, Mahamaya and Mahapajapati Gotami, were married to Śuddhodana, the chief of the Sakyans. Yashodhara (Koliyan Princess), daughter of Suppabuddha, who was Añjana’s son (Koli), was married to the Sakyan prince, Gautama Buddha. Thus, the two royal families were related by marriage bonds between maternal and paternal cousins since ancient times.

History

Prashanna01 (talk) 10:39, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Koliya

The Koliyas/Koli were Kshatriya of the Adicca (Iksvaku) clan of the Solar Dynasty from the Indian subcontinent, during the time of Gautama Buddha. The family members of the two royal families, that is the Koliyas and Sakyas married only among themselves. Both clans were very proud of the purity of their royal blood and had practised this tradition of inter-marriage since ancient times. In spite of such close blood-ties, there would be occasional rifts between the two royal families, which sometimes turned into open hostility.

The Koli are an ethnic Indian group in Rajasthan, Himachal Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Haryana, Karnataka and Jammu and Kashmir states.

These ancient kingdoms of India ruled by Koli Clan (Rajputs) over thousands of years were shown in maps of Nepal after British raj.History of Nepal doesn't show historical records of how & when these different parts of Kapilvastu became part of Nepal without any war/victory/annexation. Because of negligence/ignorance of british indian authorities; that caused transfer of territory.

I just thought you might like to know. I personally feel above facts are important to add to the page. I think the revert of my edit is not justified because it will not improve the article and will not conform with WP:lead. You should think twice in similar situations.

Please prove that historical facts are not true if you want to delete this talk as per wikipedia policies. Sources of information can be found as mentioned above. Deletion of this talk won't change history. Truth will come out again & again in books, literature & historical munuments.

Best regards. Prashanna01 (talk) 12:45, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

New Map of Nepal

Here, we are still using the old map of Nepal.. Being a user of Wikipedia, I would love to ask the authority to maintain map of Nepal in every other sites so that we can keep Wikipedia articles updated... Thank You! ISHANBULLS (talk) 03:39, 23 May 2020 (UTC)