OFFICE OF SIRIDANTAMAHĀPĀLAKA / HSWAGATA BUDDHA TOOTH RELICS PRESERVATION MUSEUM – INTERNAL USE
ADMINISTRATIVE HEADER
Template No.: T98
Template Title: H98 SDG-Based Macro Governance Blueprint – State, Saṅgha & Heritage Network Dossier
Related Research Case IDs: H98 – SDG-Based Macro Governance Blueprint for Custody of Buddha’s Sacred Relics
Linked Templates / Cases:
H96 (custodian profile), H97 (peaceful institution scorecard), T70–T71 (donation / transfer), T78 (15 Principles), T81–T82 (documentation & audits), Cluster C MoUs, Cluster E testing cases, Cluster F–G conflict warnings, H100 dhātu-parinibbāna pedagogy
Cluster: H – Synthesis & Normative Models (Cases 96–100)
Date of form: ____ / ____ / ______
Blueprint file code (office): _______________________________________
Prepared by / Role: _________________________________________________
Office / Unit: _______________________________________________________
Country / Region covered by blueprint: _______________________________
Confidentiality Level:
[ ] Internal concept note
[ ] Restricted (state / Saṅgha / NGO partners)
[ ] Public summary allowed
Use of this form (tick):
[ ] Drafting a national / provincial relic governance framework
[ ] Drafting a Saṅgha council relic policy
[ ] Designing a network / NGO / heritage alliance blueprint
[ ] Reviewing / revising an existing framework
[ ] Input to SDG / UNESCO-related policy process
1. SCOPE & LEVEL OF THE BLUEPRINT
1.1 Jurisdiction & coverage
Jurisdiction / level (tick all that apply):
[ ] Single state / country: _________________________________________
[ ] Federal / provincial level: _____________________________________
[ ] Multi-country / regional network: _______________________________
[ ] Saṅgha council / ecclesiastical jurisdiction: ___________________
[ ] NGO / heritage network: _________________________________________
Types of relics / heritage covered (tick):
[ ] Buddha bodily relics (sarīra-dhātu / Tooth Relics, etc.)
[ ] Paribhoga-cetiya (objects used by Buddha / great teachers)
[ ] Uddesika-cetiya (images, stupas, symbolic objects)
[ ] Textual / documentary heritage
[ ] Mixed religious–cultural heritage (relic + art + sites)
Short scope description (3–6 sentences):
1.2 Relation to H96 & H97
This blueprint assumes:
[ ] H96 – ideal custodian profile is defined and used.
[ ] H97 – peace-oriented institution scorecard is in use.
Short note: How should this macro framework support and protect H96 & H97 in real institutions?
2. BUDDHIST DOCTRINAL–ETHICAL FOUNDATIONS (MACRO LEVEL)
2.1 Core doctrinal anchors
Tick the main sources used:
[ ] Dhātu-parinibbāna doctrine (final gathering and burning of relics).
[ ] Relics as shared supports for Buddhānussati, not private property.
[ ] Ten reasons for rules in Vinaya (restraint, harmony, protection of vulnerable).
[ ] Non-ownership / trusteeship (anattā; Dhammadāyāda).
[ ] Truth and right speech (sacca, sammā-vācā) in public communication and “science talk”.
[ ] Mettā / karuṇā for all affected by relic policies (donors, pilgrims, neighbours).
Short doctrinal summary (5–8 sentences):
2.2 Ethical macro-principles for states & networks
List 5–10 core ethical principles that this blueprint should enforce at macro level (e.g. “no sale of relics”, “transparent testing”, “no coercive donations”):
3. PEACE & STRUCTURAL VIOLENCE RATIONALE
3.1 Lessons from past conflicts
Which clusters / cases inform this blueprint? (codes only)
[ ] HGT conflicts (Cluster F)
[ ] BU neglect & relic loss (Cluster G)
[ ] Testing / misinformation cluster (Cluster E)
[ ] MoU and partnership cases (Cluster C)
[ ] Other: __________________________________________________________
Short neutral summary of harms this blueprint is trying to prevent (5–10 sentences):
3.2 Positive peace goals (macro level)
Tick and briefly describe:
[ ] Reduce intensity and frequency of relic-related disputes.
[ ] Create fair pathways for complaint, review and reform.
[ ] Support respectful interaction between Saṅgha, state, NGOs and communities.
[ ] Protect vulnerable groups (international monastics, minorities, donors).
[ ] Use relic sites as spaces for reconciliation and social harmony.
Short peace-goal statement (5–8 sentences):
4. SDG & LEGAL ALIGNMENT
4.1 SDG mapping
Tick relevant SDGs and describe briefly:
[ ] SDG 11.4 – Protect cultural and natural heritage
Notes: ___________________________________________________________
[ ] SDG 16 – Peace, justice & strong institutions
Notes: ___________________________________________________________
[ ] SDG 17 – Partnerships for the Goals
Notes: ___________________________________________________________
[ ] SDG 10 – Reduced inequalities (e.g. minorities, international monks)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________
Other SDGs (e.g. 1, 3, 4 through social-service MoUs):
4.2 Legal and policy references
List key laws / conventions / policies this blueprint must connect to:
| Code | Instrument (law / convention / policy) | Level (national / regional / UN) | Relevance to relics / peace / SDGs |
|---|---|---|---|
5. POLICY PILLARS & MEASURES
(Adapt, add or remove pillars as needed.)
5.1 Pillar A – Relic status, ownership & trusteeship
Goals (short):
Proposed measures (bullet points):
Key actors (state / Saṅgha / NGOs):
5.2 Pillar B – Documentation, testing & truthful communication
Goals:
Measures (e.g. lab protocols, document verification, public communication rules):
Links to Cluster E tools (testing, misinformation):
5.3 Pillar C – Conflict-sensitive governance & complaint pathways
Goals:
Measures (e.g. national relic committee, mediation procedures, ombuds):
Links to past cases (HGT, MCU, police, letters):
5.4 Pillar D – Equity & inclusion
Goals (e.g. protection of international monastics, minorities, gender):
Measures:
5.5 Pillar E – Partnerships, MoUs & social service (SDG 17)
Goals:
Measures (e.g. ethical MoUs linking relic devotion to education / health / community):
Examples to adapt (case IDs, e.g. MoU in Cluster C):
6. STAKEHOLDERS & ROLES (MACRO MAP)
6.1 Stakeholder map
| Code / Name | Type (state / Saṅgha / NGO / community / UNESCO, etc.) | Power (H/M/L) | Main interests / fears | Role in blueprint (lead / partner / consult) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
6.2 Participation & accountability mechanisms
Tick and describe:
[ ] National relic council / advisory board.
[ ] Cross-sector working groups (monks, officials, scientists, lawyers).
[ ] Routine consultation with local communities / donors.
[ ] Public reporting / websites / open data.
Short note (5–8 sentences):
7. INDICATORS & MONITORING (LINK TO T97)
7.1 Selected indicators from T97
List 5–10 key national-level indicators to track blueprint success:
-
Code ______ – _________________________________________________
-
Code ______ – _________________________________________________
-
Code ______ – _________________________________________________
-
Code ______ – _________________________________________________
-
Code ______ – _________________________________________________
7.2 Monitoring system
Tick and describe:
[ ] Annual national audit (using T82 + T97 indicators).
[ ] Regular reporting to Saṅgha council / parliament / relevant ministry.
[ ] Independent review by heritage / peace experts.
[ ] Mechanisms for communities to submit feedback and data.
Monitoring note (5–8 sentences):
8. RISK & IMPACT ASSESSMENT (H98 LEVEL)
8.1 Risks if blueprint is not implemented
Tick and comment:
[ ] Continued relic theft / loss / damage.
Notes: ___________________________________________________________
[ ] Ongoing structural violence (unsafe housing, blocked complaints).
Notes: ___________________________________________________________
[ ] Reputational harm for states, Saṅgha, institutions.
Notes: ___________________________________________________________
[ ] Difficulty cooperating with SDG / UNESCO partners.
Notes: ___________________________________________________________
Short risk narrative (5–8 sentences):
8.2 Positive impacts if blueprint is implemented
Tick and comment:
[ ] Stronger protection of relics and heritage (SDG 11.4).
[ ] More peaceful handling of disputes (SDG 16).
[ ] Fairer treatment of vulnerable groups (SDG 10).
[ ] Deeper cross-border cooperation (SDG 17).
Impact narrative (5–8 sentences):
9. IMPLEMENTATION PHASES (“CHRONOLOGY”)
9.1 Phased plan
(Example: Phase 1 – drafting; Phase 2 – pilots; Phase 3 – national adoption; Phase 4 – review.)
| Phase | Timeframe (years) | Key actions | Lead actors | Outputs / milestones |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ||||
| 2 | ||||
| 3 | ||||
| 4 |
9.2 Review & revision plan
Next blueprint review date: ____ / ____ / ______
Who should review (roles / bodies):
Scope of review (tick):
[ ] Check implementation progress.
[ ] Update indicators and targets.
[ ] Integrate new cases / lessons (Case IDs: ________).
[ ] Revise policies based on doctrinal / legal changes.
10. H96–H98 REFLECTION
10.1 Integrated question
Write a short reflection (8–12 sentences) answering:
-
How does this macro blueprint protect peace-oriented H96 custodians?
-
How does it strengthen H97-type peaceful institutions?
-
How does it align with dhātu-parinibbāna doctrine and non-ownership?
11. DECISIONS, SIGN-OFF & ARCHIVE
11.1 Decisions taken on this blueprint
Key decisions (short bullets):
Date(s) of decision: ____ / ____ / ______ and ____ / ____ / ______
Decision-making body / roles:
11.2 Sign-off
Prepared by:
Name: _______________________________ Role: _________________________
Signature: __________________________ Date: ____ / ____ / ______
Reviewed / Approved by (state / Saṅgha / NGO / network leadership):
Name: _______________________________ Role: _________________________
Signature: __________________________ Date: ____ / ____ / ______
11.3 Archive details
T98 / H98 blueprint file code: ____________________________________
Physical location (cabinet / box / folder): _________________________
Digital location (drive / folder path): _____________________________
Access level:
[ ] General internal [ ] Restricted [ ] Public summary only
Notes for future custodians and policy-makers:
(What should future leaders remember about this H98 macro blueprint and how it was used to protect relics, people and peace?)
