The Bihar government has decided that the pilgrim city of Gaya would now be called Gaya ji. The announcement in this regard was officially made by the government after a cabinet meeting held in Patna. Ironically, the Bihar government so far has not uttered a single sentence about the legitimate demand of the Buddhists from all over the world to hand over the historic MahaBodhi Vihar Temple to them. The Buddhists have been silently protesting since February 12, 2025 at Gaya but sadly this issue has been largely ignored by large sections of the media as well as political parties. While some of political leaders of various parties have raised the issue in Bihar Assembly, however, nationally none of the top-ranking political leaders across parties have been vocal on the issue.
On the Buddha Purnima Day, May 12, 2025, Bihar governor, Arif Mohammad Khan visited the holy shrine, waxed eloquent about the greatness of Buddha but remained silent on the issue of the MahaBodhi Vihar being handed over to a Buddhist only management. Buddhist activists have also accused the governor of offering archana to Lord Shiva too, ignoring the sentiments of the Buddhists. Shockingly, while speaking “highly” of Buddha at an event, the governor did not even acknowledge that Buddhists have been protesting through a sit-in –for over two months —asking for a change in the BodhGaya Temple Management Committee.
Prior to Buddha Purnima day, there was a continuous dharana at the site and Buddhists particularly from Maharashtra were thronging the site. Bahujan Vikas Aghadi leader Prakash Ambedkar too visited and expressed his strong solidarity with the movement. BSP leader Ms Mayawati too expressed her solidarity with the movement though she has not yet travelled to Bodh Gaya. Except for these two leaders, no other leader of any recognised party has spoken about it. RJD which is the main opposition party in Bihar has been conspicuously silent on the question. PDA leader Akhilesh Yadav and his party have not bothered to address Buddhist concerns. Rahul Gandhi, the eloquent Leader of the Opposition (LoP in the Lok Sabha) who has made several visits to Bihar and even raised the issue of Dalit opporession has not uttered a word about the Mahabodhi Temple issue. Incidentally, there were prompt greetings to one and all on social media on Buddha Purnima day, but around the MahaBodhi Vihar there has been only silence.
None of the legacy media, newspapers or electronic media –with the exception of some Youtubers and Ambedkarite portals —have interrogated the festering issue. Instead, reports have come in only from activist cadres and some leaders from Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh. There is a clash of political ideologies here too and that is natural. For millions of Dalits in India, the road to Buddhism goes via Baba Saheb Ambedkar while for a number of Buddhists in the Himalayan regions like Ladakh, Darjeeling, Himachal or Uttar Pradesh, Buddhism may not have the same political connotation as for the Ambedkarites who look upon it like a liberation theology. That contradiction seems to be emerging here too. Unfortunately therefore a blame game too has begun.
Read: Why the Bodh Gaya temple must be handed over to Buddhists
There was a call for a large gathering at Gaya on Buddha Purnima Day. However, it seems, that except for some dedicated Buddhists from Maharashtra and many from Uttar Pradesh, there was not a significant gathering here. To date, one Akash Lama has been leading the ‘non-political movement’ but suddenly he announced the suspension of the Dharana on Buddha Purnima day resulting in public accusations of his conniving with RSS and the NDA government. It is at this point of time another mendicant, Bhante Vinaya Acharya who seems to have questioned this suspension of Dharna as well as the inactive movement and wanted to launch a bigger movement to liberate the holiest shrines of the Buddhists, has been missing suddenly from the night of May 12. Unconfirmed reports suggest that he has been arrested by the police though there is no information about his whereabouts. It is also strange that Bhant’s arrest or disappearance has not found its way in the Bihar media. Not much is heard from the political class about him. So, nobody actually knows what is happening as there is not a single official line from among India’s Buddhists, either..
A video has gone viral in which a local vendor is heard responding with ‘Jai Shri Ram’ to calls of ‘Jai Bhim’. Thereafter an altercation follows over why a non-Buddhist or anti Buddhist person has been allowed to be in the location of MahaBodhi Vihar. The issue of Maha Bodhi Vihar has suffered from the absence of enough local Buddhists living in Bodh Gaya. Despite all the sloganeering by national and regional opposition parties –espousing the politics of Pichda Dalit Adivasi (PDA) or the Bahujans – a vast majority of the Bahujan masses actually suffer from their own caste hierarchies. The sole thing that unites them is the discrimination unleashed by Brahmanical forces. However, they have been unsuccessful so far in launching a movement that could eliminate Brahmanism from among themselves. Many intellectuals claim that it is a conspiracy to speak on these internal contradictions. The irony is that while a majority of the people, communities and castes that live in and around the Mahabodhi Vihar belong to Dalit Bahujan communities, the issue of independent Buddhist management has not yet galvanised enough local support in a manner that could politically threaten the state government.
Leaders like Chirag Paswan or Jeetan Ram Manjhi have remained absolutely silent on the question. It is clear that the issue has not yet captured the emotion and sentiments of the local Bahujan masses which itself is a failure of its reach. Bihar’s social justice politics actually revolves around a class of agrarian-involved OBCs who have not been delinked from Brahmanical traditions. The cultural affiliation of communities like Dusadh as well as Charmkars too is heavily turned towards the rituals and practices which are often linked to Brahmanism. Unlike the Mahars in Maharashtra and Jatavs and Chamars in Uttar Pradesh, Dalits as well as OBCs in Bihar are culturally inclined to Brahmanical practices and rituals.
Even at the start, the Mahabodhi Mahavihara issue was not one raised by locals. It was the Sri Lankan Bhikkhu Anagarika Dharmapala who internationalised it. The Buddhist movement in India spread afresh among the masses only after Babasaheb Ambedkar revived this with his mass conversion, however, unfortunateky after his ‘Mahaparinirvana’, the movement remained confined to Maharashtra alone and thereafter spread only partly to Western Uttar Pradesh. The movement got revitalised after the ascendancy of BSP in power in the state when Ms Mayawati became chief minister of the state. She promoted Buddhism, created separate districts like Kushinagar, Mahamayanagar and Panchsheel Nagar etc apart implementing some key policy measures.
However, the issue of Mahabodhi Mahavihara has always haunted the Buddhist community world over — why has their holiest shrine not been handed over to them for independent management. There is no dispute over the authenticity and historicity of the Mahabodhi Mahavihara but it is disturbing to see the deafening silence of all the major political players. Prime Minister Narendra Modi on his foreign tours, speaks about Buddha and Buddhism as India’s cultural heritage but so far he has remained mute on the issue. Bihar government too has not spoken anything of it. The Ambedkarites are also pinning their hopes on the Chief Justice of India Justice B R Gavai but the fact is that the most important influencer in this regard can only be Prime Minister Narendra Modi apart from other Hindu organisations who should peacefully resolve this issue by handing over the Management of the BodhGaya Temple Management Committee to the Buddhists. While Hindu organisations have been seeking a positive response from Muslims in relation to all the religious places that they feel were originally ‘Hindu’ but were ‘demolished’ or appropriated as Mosques. The argument for Ayodhya Ram Temple movement was the same that Muslims should respect the sentiments of Hindus and hand over the temple to Hindus. The Supreme Court order in this regard was more to ‘honour’ the sentiments of Hindus rather than a judgement based on facts and constitutionality. The court used its own power in the good faith so that a political issue which should have been resolved long back, is now settled amicably. It is surprising why the same court cannot ask Hindus to respect the sentiments of Buddhists and ask the government to make due changes in the BodhGaya Temple Management Committee and hand it over to Buddhists. There is no dispute on its historicity and Buddhist background yet neither the court nor the political leaders have spoken about it.
For all political parties, any issue relates to the wider support and the linked political profit or loss in raising it. This is the only reason (motive) for a party with not much stake in Bihar –like the Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi –is vocal while those in Bihar are silent only because of the absence of a popular local movement in its supports. Neither Lalu Yadav nor Chirag Paswan have spoken . Rahul Gandhi who has been vocal on the issues of Dalits as well as EBCs, has remained mute. He recently travelled to Darbhanga, addressed the SC students at the Ambedkar Hostel and later saw the film Phule with various activists, academics, students and politicians at a mall in Patna but did not utter a single word about the Buddhists demanding justice at Bodh Gaya.
This clearly indicates that for the political class, an issue only becomes important when it has the mass support. It seems locally there is no support for the movement in and around Bodh Gaya and a majority of the support that the issue has galvanised, is from outside. The Buddhist movement initiated by Baba Saheb Ambedkar has not reached diverse Dalit communities in India. Politically, all Bahujan parties do pay tribute to Lord Buddha and speak about Buddhism’s importance, but on the ground, their politics does not reflect the same commitment. Thirdly, even among the Dalits, it is mostly the Mahars and Jatavs who have embraced Buddhism and rest of the communities and leaders have not shown much inclination to it. For the OBCs, it does not concern much at the moment though exceptions are there but they are too small to impact the majority. Finally, there are also the cultural differences between the Buddhists from other regions and the Ambedkarite approach to it who have been aggressively speaking against the ‘Brahmanical’ onslaught on it. The non Ambedkarite Buddhists approach is through matured political dialogue with the government as it does not necessarily consider Hindus as adversary but for Ambedkarites Buddhists, aggressive critique of Brahmanism is the main theme of Buddhism. There are other issues of leadership of the movement too. People are missing Bhadant Nagarjun Surai Sasai who had once, , decades ago. Today, age has limited his political activism though he remains active in Maharashtra.
Two approaches can resolve the issue. One is if the Supreme Court takes note of it and gives direction to the Bihar government. Second, by Narendra Modi himself, who has been persistently using Buddhism as a symbol of India’s soft power, the world over. He participates in most Buddhist festivals and speaks greatly about Buddhism globally whenever he meets world leaders. Buddha is India’s biggest global influencer and one is sure that the government understands it. The government can call an all-party meeting and resolve the issue. This is not an issue which cannot be resolved. Unlike Ayodhya, the issue is not really that of the origin and historicity of the temple but about its management which rightfully belongs to Buddhists.
Whether there are political movements or not, the government of India must take notice of this issue and provide a helping hand to the Bihar government, towards a resolution.
Buddha and Buddhism are India’s most powerful symbols of soft power. If the government has positive intent, it can resolve this issue peacefully and democratically. Will this, however, actually happen?
Related:
Bodh Gaya: Why the Mahabodhi Temple must be handed over to Buddhists