Vol. V, No. 1.] The Vikramasilé Monastery. a) 
[N.S.] 
reform the degenerated Buddhism of Thibet. He started the 
Lamaist Reformation in 1038. At the latter end of the twelfth 
century when the province of Bihar was conquered by Muham- 
mad Bakhtyar Khiliji,! the Bikramasil4 vihara was destroyed by 
the Mahomedans. The monks were killed or they fled to other 
countries.2. This event took place during the reign of Indra- 
to have been the last of the Pala kings of Magadha,? when 
Sakyasri was the High Priest of the monastery, who fled to Orissa 
and afterwards to Ihibet. 
ow, the ci is where was the Vikramasilaé Sangha- 
rama ? So far as I am aware no serious attempt has been made 
to fix the dene of this distinyuished monastery. General 
Cunningham suggests that Sildo, a small village three miles to 
the south of Bargdon (the ancient Nalanda) and six miles to the 
north of Rajgir, the ancient capital of Magadha, in the subdivi- 
sion of Bihar in the district of Patna, was the ancient Vikrama- 
sila.* No donbt there is a large mound of earth at Sildo, te is 
being gradually encroached upon by the cultivators and whic 
perhaps the remains of a stupa or monastery. But the sugves- 
tion must be objected to on several grounds. Vikramasila vihara, 
as I have stated, was situated ona hill on the right bank of the 
Ganges. The river Ganges, however, never flowed by the side of 
3 ; 
ancient Nalanda, which is only three miles, precludes us from 
believing that the Vikramasilé monastery should have been con- 
structed so close to this famous seat of learning, which in the 
eighth century was in the highest pitch of its glory. 
The next attempt at identification that has been made is by 
Mahamahopadhyava Satischandra Vidyabhusana. He identifies 
Vikramasila Sanghér4ma with Sultanganj in the sees of 
ur.’ But the learned Professor has assigned n reasons 
for this identification. No amount of assertion can ove the 
1 According to Major Raverty the name of the conqueror of Bengal and 
Bihar was Muhammad, the son o of Bakbtyar  crREMET? 9" on ee and 
r 1193 
Mr. ¥ cone 
Blochmann donbts the anthority cited by Major Raverty and his con- 
clusion (Journ. Asiatic Soc. Bengal, 1871, p. 275— History and Geography of 
Bengal). He says that Bengal was ssiaciietont in the second year after the 
A.D., and not jn 1202-3 A D., as fixed upon by ot Thomas. According to 
Mr, Stewart. Bibar was gee ed by aphenraetatery Bakhtyar about 596 A.H. 
(5964-622 —18 = 1200 00 A.D.) or 1199 A gE ocace on Bengal). 
n’s oe 1 of Indian Buddhis m, p. 
roh ep. v -» VOL. i ; Buchanan’s Eastern Pidie, ‘vol. ii, p. 26, 
‘ie h. Report, a. vii 3. 
5 Bhérati, Baisékh, 1 
