[Buddha-l] Nalanda's library destruction

[Dan Lusthaus]

The question arose whether the destruction of Nalanda is indeed found in 
Maulana's Tabakat-i-Nasiri, and, having now procured the 2 vol edition 
(shipped from India), I can confirm that the account is indeed there, though 
the name Nalanda is not. It is in v. 1, p.552, as part of the story of 
Muhammed-i-Bakht-yar and his exploits. Making a name for himself and gaining 
support from various muslim quarters, "Having been honoured with such notice 
and favor, he led a force toward Bihar, and ravaged that territory." (p. 
551)

Maulana esp. notes that the account he gives of the seige of Nalanda was 
acquired by him from "trustworthy persons" who "have related on this wise, 
that he [i.e., Bakht-yar -- DL] advanced to the gateway of the fortress of 
Bihar [aka Nalanda - DL] with two hundred horsemen in defensive armour, and 
suddenly attacked the place. There were two brothers of Farghana, men of 
learning, one Nigam-ud-Din, the other Samsam-ud-Din... and the author of 
this book met with Samsam-ud-Din at Lakhanawati in the year 641 H., and this 
account is from him. These two brothers were soldiers among that band of 
holy warriors when they reached the gateway of the fortress and began the 
attack... the greater number of the inhabitants of that place were Brahmans, 
and the whole of those Brahmans had their head shaven [ie, they were 
Buddhist monks, not Hindus -DL]; and they were all slain. There were a great 
number of books there. ...[they summoned Hindus to reader them] but the 
whole of the Hindus had been killed... It was found that the whole fortress 
and city was a college, and in the Hindui tongue, they call a college Bihar 
[aka Vihara -- DL]." (pp. 551-52).

Major H G Raverty, who did that translation from the Persian back in 1881, 
adds a footnote that the Zubdat-ut-Tawarikh "which quotes our author 
verbatim on most occasions, says they sent for a number of Hindus, who made 
them acquainted with the contents of the books, and in them it was written 
that the fortress and city was called a college, but correctly, a Buddhist 
monastery." (p.552 n.2)

It then goes on to talk about the great celebration that followed this 
"victory" (viz. killing defenseless monks) and the political aftermath.

One might read this account as confirming that all the monks were slain, but 
the library survived at that stage.

If one follows the story of Bihar as it is weaved throughout the text, one 
wonders if its sorry state today might be a result of its repeated 
"ravaging" back then. As, for instance, we are told about Malik 
Sanjar-i-Kuret Khan:

"he was made feudatory of Buda'un and some time after that again, obtained 
the fief of Awadh. In that part he undertook many holy expeditions against 
infidels, achieved numerous gallant exploits, and reduced several powerful 
independent tribes. From Awadh he proceeded into Bihar and plundered that 
territory. Suddenly, when before the preserved city of Bihar, an arrow 
struck him in a mortal place, and he attained martyrdom. The mercy of the 
Almighty be upon him!" (v2. p. 747)

Not so easy when the inhabitants are not unarmed monks but people who shoot 
back.

And so on...

Dan