Did Bakhtiyar Khilji Destroy Nalanda University?

Prime Minister Narendra Modi inaugurated the new campus of Nalanda University on June 19 in the presence of Ambassadors from many countries like Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, Japan and Korea among others. Most of these countries are ones where Buddhism was spread by preachers sent by emperor Ashoka.

The idea of reviving Nalanda as a premier global University was floated by former president A.P.J. Abul Kalam in 2006. It was later ratified by the Bihar Assembly and the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government. At the inauguration ceremony, Modi said that the university was burnt by foreign invaders in the 12th century. He was just parroting the popular perception that Bakhtiyar Khilji, the courtier of Mahmud Ghori, had burnt it.

This perception is an add-on to the other such ‘social common sense’ that Muslim invaders destroyed Hindu temples and spread Islam by force. Incidentally, the propagation of these understandings began with the introduction of communal historiography by the British and was later picked up, with big gusto, by Hindu and Muslim communal streams.

While myths propagated against Hindus by the Muslim League played havoc in Pakistan, in India, it is the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh which caused communal flare ups and spread hate against Muslims to the extent that Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel had to write this about RSS: “All their speeches were full of communal poison. It was not necessary to spread poison in order to enthuse the Hindus and organise for their protection. As a final result of the poison, the country had to suffer the sacrifice of the invaluable life of Gandhiji.”

Modi’s claim about Nalanda being burnt by foreign invaders falls into the same category of falsehoods used to spread hatred against Muslims. Nalanda had a glorious residential university, spread out over a large area in Rajgir, Bihar, built by the Guptas in the sixth century. It was a Buddhist centre, as archaeological evidence shows. Other than Buddhist philosophy, Brahminical scriptures, mathematics, logic, and health science were also taught. Its tradition of open discussion and logic were so popular that it attracted students and scholars from various destinations. The university was supported by kings but with the coming of the Pala and Sena dynasties, its patronage was reduced and eventually redirected to new universities, particularly Odantapuri and Vikramshila. This was the beginning of Nalanda’s decline.

Who set fire to the great library housing millions of books, manuscripts and rare collections? While it is often attributed to Khilji, especially after the arrival of the British, there is no primary source that mentions this. Khilji’s primary goal was to loot and plunder. En route from Ayodhya to Bengal, he attacked Kila-i-Bihar mistaking it for a fort with wealth. But Nalanda was not on this route. In fact, it was quite far away and Khilji had no reason to attack a university.

Most of the primary sources related to the history of that time do not mention Khilji going to Nalanda. Tabakat-a-Nasiri, written by Minhaj-e-Siraj, has no mention of this. Two Tibetan scholars, Dharmaswamin and Sumpa, who were keenly studying the history of India, particularly related to Buddhism, also do not mention Khilji going to Nalanda or burning it. Taranath, another well-known Buddhist scholar from Tibet, does not mention any such fact either. Interestingly, other Buddhist structures of importance like Ajanta, Ellora, and Sanchi stupa were also not the subject of the ire of ‘invaders’. Indian historians Jadunath Sarkar and R.C. Majumdar also do not endorse Nalanda being destroyed by Khilji.

Professor D. N. Jha, an authority on ancient Indian history, provides an excellent summary of a relevant section of the book History of Buddhism in India by Tibetan monk Taranath, in his essay Responding to a Communalist. “During the consecration ceremony of the Temple built by Kakutsiddha at Nalendra [Nalanda] the young naughty Shamans threw slops at tirthika beggars…Angered by this, one of them went for arranging livelihood and the other sat in a deep pit and engaged himself in ‘Surya Sadhana’…He performed a sacrifice and scattered the charmed ashes all around which resulted in the miraculous fire.”

History of Indian Logic, cited by D.R. Patil in The Antiquarian Remains in Bihar, says that this incidence refers to the actual scuffle between Buddhist and Brahmanical mendicants. The latter propitiated the Sun god, performed a sacrifice and threw the living ambers and ashes from the sacrificial pit to Buddhist temples. This is what led to the burning of the great collection of books at that time.

We also need to remember that this was a period when attacks against Buddhism were increasing significantly due to the resurgence of Brahmanism. After the period of Ashoka, when Buddhism became widespread in India, the notions of equality gained significant prominence. As a result, Brahamanical rituals declined, causing great dissatisfaction in the community. Later, when Ashoka’s grandson, Brihdrath, was in power, his commander-in-chief, Pushyamitra Shung, murdered him and persecuted Buddhists.

All reliable sources point to the fact that Brahmins burnt the library as revenge. Bringing in Khilji fits into the general Islamophobic propaganda against Muslims and, at the same time, hides the true story of the persecution of Buddhists during that period.

What we need to preserve from the Buddhist period is a spirit of free debate and logic as the underlying base of education. Especially at a time when our universities are being stifled by the imposition of a culture of obedience and subordination in the matters of academia. Knowledge cannot be imbibed or developed under such conditions. If we can learn this from the tragic history of the struggle between Buddhism and Brahmanism in India, it will be a crucial aspect of the development of academia in the country. 

Ram Puniyani is president of the Centre for Study of Society and Secularism.