Built during the 8th and 9th century, Borobudur was probably the largest and most elaborate Buddhist monument built in the world. But who exactly was the builder of Borobudur and what was the intention to build a monument of such immense size and stature.
Borobudur was built during a period when Buddhism was just being introduced to Java and beginning to make its reputation in that region. One puzzling question was that Borobudur was actually initiated at the early age of Buddhism influences in Java, instead of when Buddhism was most popular and prevalent in Java. This is very unlike most monuments as they were normally built during the "golden period" of whatever period or era they were trying to commemerate. So what was actually the intention of building Borobudur, a monument of such immense size and stature when it was not to commemerate Buddhism in its grandest era in Java.Or did the person who built Borobudur already foresaw that Buddhism would eventually one day be dominant in Java or was the builder simply a devoted Buddhist who wanted to use Borobudur as a means to further spread and strengthen the faith of Buddhism. For whatever intentions, it was without a doubt that Borobudur had acted as a timeline to witness the rise and fall of Buddhism in Java.
Who exactly was the builder of Borobudur? Is the person who built the Borobudur also the designer or architect of this monument? The answer is difficult to establish as Borobudur was actually built over a period of about 70 years and it was also over the course of the rise and fall of various rulers. The design of the monument was most probably changed many times during this period as different rulers came into control. As a result the intention of the monument could have also changed several times during its construction.
During the 8th and 9th century, Buddhism was less popular than Hinduism in ancient Java, but it was closely related to the Sailendras, an influential elite family who claimed themselves to be the "Lords of Mountains". Although it is difficult to establish which ruler ordered the construction of Borobudur, but it can be safely deduced that the initial stages of works are by the Sailendras. From the periods of the stages of construction of Borobudur, it can be roughly deduced which stages of construction were carried out during which ruler's reign. The initiative of the first period of Borobudur appeared to be contemporary of the reign of Visnu, a Sailendra king during 780 A.D. The second and third stage seemed to be carried out during Indra's reign, Visnu's successor. The fourth stage of no great importance by Samaratunga marked the decline of the Sailendra dynasty and the fifth stage around 833 A.D. by the Sanjayas, initially under the Sailendra's reign but later freed of its control. The last two stages showed a profound change in conception, not only architecturally but also doctrinally.
Now having known which stages of construction of the Borobudur was built by whom, the motives and intentions of building Borobudur should be now studied. Why did the Javanese chose to devote such a major portion of their resources and time to build this monument? Is it entirely for religious purposes; to state that the area around Borobudur was a prosperous farming area; to communicate with ordinary people or with the gods; or to fulfill the ruler's ambitious aim? Could the answers be found in the five stages of construction? Could the reliefs carved on Borobudur reflect the intentions?
The clearest intention seen is the religious context. Built at the beginnings of Buddhism influence in Java, the Sailendra ruler, a Buddhist monarch probably meant Borobudur to serve as a means to spread and strengthen the faith of Buddhism in his empire. It was also to be a tool to educate his people on the philosophy of life. In a way, it strengthened his role as a Buddhist king. Even the reliefs carved on the hidden base and the first level gallery informed us this intention. The base reliefs depicted a version of a Sanskrit work known as the Mahakarmavibhangga or "Great Classsification of Action" . The reliefs depicted men and women performing both good and evil deeds and then being rewarded in heaven or punished in hell for their actions. These served as moral lessons for the people who visited Borobudur. The reliefs on the first gallery showed the Lalitavistara, telling the life story of Buddha, from the birth, his early life, his marriage, his four encounters of life, death, sickness and suffering, and his enlightenment. This shows that Borobudur was not a monument solely for the worship of the Buddha but also a means of educating people and teaching them to become bodhisattvas.
However, it could not be denied that the construction of Borobudur clearly reflected the degree of prosperity and civilisation in that empire during that time. To build such a huge monument, a great deal of materials and manpower was needed. This showed how rich the empire is, producing enough surplus food and labour to support this great deal of activities that did not generate any economic benefits. This also showed that the empire had a talented population and was a highly civilised society. There must be many skilled craftsmen to produce such an impressive and beautiful monument. There must also be well-organised institutions to coordinate such an ambitious and complex project. Although such of the design stimulus and material support could have come from the ruler, there must be people to offer their labour. But did these people did it willingly to earn religious merits or were them compelled by the institutions?
Borobudur could also be a platform for the ruler to communicate with his people or the gods? As mentioned earlier, the relief-carvings on the galleries served as a means to educate the people and convey certain messages that the king would want his people to know. But what about communicating with the gods? Ancient kings of Java claimed to be able to call upon gods to bring about fertility of the soil and to conquer their enemies. Does the Borobudur works like the Tian Tan in Peking where the ruler will make a pilgrimage to the holy site to pray for fertility, prosperity and welfare for the empire?
And what about satisfying the ambitious aim of the ruler? Surely a monument of this size would confer its builder a great amount of prestige for having the wealth and capabilities to embark on such a complex and immense project. However, in this case, the possiblity of building Borobudur to satisfy the ruler's personal desire to be hero-worship seemed slightly low as there were hardly any vivid evidences or carvings that deliberately left so that the future descendants know who initiated or built this project. Neither were there many historical records about stating clearly who built it. It was very much like the medieval art whereby the maker or artist is not supposed to be known as the art is used solely for the celebration of God. However, it cannot be ruled out that the later rulers who took over this project had such desires. This can be seen from the change of relief carvings on the galleries of Borobudur. On the second, third and fourth gallery, carvings were attributed to a single text, Gandavyuha. It was about the pilgrim of a young man, Sudhana, a rich merchant's son who had chosen the path of a Bodhisattava. Striving after supreme wisdom, and seeking teachers, he visits a long series of sages. This text actually had taken up the most relief panels in the entire Borobudur. This showed that this text possessed a very special importance to the Borobudur builders. But is this text chosen to remind pilgrims that they are like Sudhana seeking for wisdom and enlightenment, or it Sudhana seen as the king who is seeking wisdom and enlightenment to become a better leader to lead his people into a life without sufferings, like a Bodhisattva.
Borobudur was designed to be modelled like a mountain. There were beliefs that it was supposed to symbolise the cosmological Mount Meru. But it so happened that the Sailendras also called themselves "Lords of the Mountains". So was Borobudur modelled after a mountain to symbolise Mount Meru or was it designed so as to hero-worship the Sailendras?
And what was the intention of building Borobudur after the Sanjayas took over the construction? Why was there such a stark contrast in building form and architectural details between the galleries and the circular platforms for the stupas? The galleries were squares in plan and were very elaborately decorated with carvings. But the towards the summit, the plans became circular and were very plain and simple. Why did the later builders not follow the same architectural language as the base of Borobudur? There were beliefs that the plain circular platforms for the stupas were to symbolise Formlessness and Enlightenement. As such the design was the way it is now. But could it be that the Sanjaya ruler faced pressure from his people to complete the construction of Borobudur. Afterall the Sanjayas were Hindu devotees. Probably they ordered the last stage of construction to be plain in contrast to be Sailendra's design.
In Borobudur, who was the hero to be worshipped here? It could be Buddha or the kings of the different construction period. Probably Borobudur itself is the hero we are looking for. Many archaeologists and historians had tried to come up with a single concept to explain the design and construction of the Borobudur. But is a single concept possible for such a huge monument which had spanned a period of 70 years, underwent the changing reigns of different rulers. Would the initial concept that had propelled the building of Borobudur be able to continue and not undergo changes and evolutions with time? So is the question of a single concept a relevant one?
