佛舍利之謎 Mystery of the Piprahwa gems
Some months ago, my Indian colleagues asked me to write an article commenting on the (non)response of local Chinese Buddhists to the planned auction of the Piprahwa gems in Hong Kong earlier this year. The gist of my paper is that contact relics, such as the Piprahwa gems, are not considered the same as the Buddha’s bodily relics. Without a continuous history of worship, they are just archaeological discoveries of antiquarian, not spiritual, interest.
My questions, however, turned to India: How should contact relics such as the Piprahwa gems be returned to the Buddhist communities? Since the Peppé family received from the British colonial government only 20% of the gems, what happened to the remaining 80% retained by Indian museums?
The Delhi exposition may preempt some of these tricky questions from the Buddhist communities.

