Hinduism & Buddhism

Hinduism and
Buddhism: An
Historical Sketch -
Volume III
Sir Charles Eliot

HINDUISM AND BUDDHISM
AN HISTORICAL SKETCH
BY
SIR CHARLES ELIOT
In three volumes
VOLUME III
First published 1921

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
The following are the principal abbreviations used:
Ep. Ind. Epigraphia India.

E.R.E. Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics (edited by Hastings).
I.A. Indian Antiquary.
J.A. Journal Asiatique.
J.A.O.S. Journal of the American Oriental Society.
J.R.A.S. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society.
P.T.S. Pali Text Society.
S.B.E. Sacred Books of the East (Clarendon Press).
CONTENTS
BOOK VI
BUDDHISM OUTSIDE INDIA
XXXIV. EXPANSION OF INDIAN INFLUENCE

XXXV. CEYLON
XXXVI. BURMA
XXXVII. SIAM
XXXVIII. CAMBOJA
XXXIX. CHAMPA
XL. JAVA AND THE MALAY ARCHIPELAGO
XLI. CENTRAL ASIA
XLII. CHINA. INTRODUCTORY
XLIII. CHINA (continued). HISTORY
XLIV. CHINA (continued). THE CANON
XLV. CHINA (continued). SCHOOLS OF CHINESE
BUDDHISM
XLVI. CHINA (continued). CHINESE BUDDHISM AT THE
PRESENT DAY
XLVII. KOREA
XLVIII. ANNAM
XLIX. TIBET. INTRODUCTORY
L. TIBET (continued). HISTORY
LI. TIBET (continued). THE CANON
LII. TIBET (continued). DOCTRINES OF LAMAISM
LIII. TIBET (continued). SECTS
LIV. JAPAN
BOOK VII
MUTUAL INFLUENCE OF EASTERN AND WESTERN RELIGIONS
LV. INFLUENCE OF CHRISTIANITY IN INDIA

LVI. INDIAN INFLUENCE IN THE WESTERN WORLD
LVII. PERSIAN INFLUENCE IN INDIA
LVIII. MOHAMMEDANISM IN INDIA
Hinduism and Buddhism: An Historical Sketch - Volume III
BOOK VI
BUDDHISM OUTSIDE INDIA
CHAPTER XXXIV
EXPANSION OF INDIAN INFLUENCE
INTRODUCTORY
The subject of this Book is the expansion of Indian influence

throughout Eastern Asia and the neighbouring islands. That
influence is clear and wide-spread, nay almost universal, and it is
with justice that we speak of Further India and the Dutch call their
colonies Neerlands Indië. For some early chapters in the story of this
expansion the dates and details are meagre, but on the whole the
investigator’s chief difficulty is to grasp and marshal the mass of
facts relating to the development of religion and civilization in this
great region.
The spread of Hindu thought was an intellectual conquest, not an

exchange of ideas. On the north-western frontier there was some
reciprocity, but otherwise the part played by India was consistently
active and not receptive. The Far East counted for nothing in her
internal history, doubtless because China was too distant and the
other countries had no special culture of their own. Still it is
remarkable that whereas many Hindu missionaries preached
Buddhism in China, the idea of making Confucianism known in
India seems never to have entered the head of any Chinese.
It is correct to say that the sphere of India’s intellectual conquests

was the East and North, not the West, but still Buddhism spread
considerably to the west of its original home and entered Persia.
Stein discovered a Buddhist monastery in “the terminal marshes of
the Helmund” in Seistan[1] and Bamian is a good distance from our
frontier. But in Persia and its border lands there were powerful state
religions, first Zoroastrianism and then Islam, which disliked and
hindered the importation of foreign creeds and though we may see
1
some resemblance between Sufis and Vedantists, it does not appear

that the Moslim civilization of Iran owed much to Hinduism.
But in all Asia north and east of India, excluding most of Siberia but
including the Malay Archipelago, Indian influence is obvious.
Though primarily connected with religion it includes much more,
such as architecture, painting and other arts, an Indian alphabet, a
vocabulary of Indian words borrowed or translated, legends and
customs. The whole life of such diverse countries as Tibet, Burma,
and Java would have been different had they had no connection with
India.
In these and many other regions the Hindus must have found a low
state of civilization, but in the Far East they encountered a culture
comparable with their own. There was no question of colonizing or
civilizing rude races. India and China met as equals, not hostile but
also not congenial, a priest and a statesman, and the statesman made
large concessions to the priest. Buddhism produced a great
fermentation and controversy in Chinese thought, but though its
fortunes varied it hardly ever became as in Burma and Ceylon the
national religion. It was, as a Chinese Emperor once said, one of the
two wings of a bird. The Chinese characters did not give way to an
Indian alphabet nor did the Confucian Classics fall into desuetude.
The subjects of Chinese and Japanese pictures may be Buddhist, the
plan and ornaments of their temples Indian, yet judged as works of
art the pictures and temples are indigenous. But for all that one has
only to compare the China of the Hans with the China of the T’angs
to see how great was the change wrought by India.
This outgrowing of Indian influence, so long continued and so wide

in extent, was naturally not the result of any one impulse. At no time
can we see in India any passion of discovery, any fever of conquest
such as possessed Europe when the New World and the route to the
East round the Cape were discovered. India’s expansion was slow,
generally peaceful and attracted little attention at home. Partly it was
due to the natural permeation and infiltration of a superior culture
beyond its own borders, but it is equally natural that this gradual
process should have been sometimes accelerated by force of arms.
The Hindus produced no Tamerlanes or Babers, but a series of
expeditions, spread over long ages, but still not few in number,
carried them to such distant goals as Ceylon, Java and Camboja.
But the diffusion of Indian influence, especially in China, was also

due to another agency, namely religious propaganda and the
2
deliberate despatch of missions. These missions seem to have been

exclusively Buddhist for wherever we find records of Hinduism
outside India, for instance in Java and Camboja, the presence of
Hindu conquerors or colonists is also recorded.[2] Hinduism
accompanied Hindus and sometimes spread round their settlements,
but it never attempted to convert distant and alien lands. But the
Buddhists had from the beginning the true evangelistic temper: they
preached to all the world and in singleness of purpose: they had no
political support from India. Many as were the charges brought
against them by hostile Confucians, it was never suggested that they
sought political or commercial privileges for their native land. It was
this simple disinterested attitude which enabled Buddhism, though
in many ways antipathetic to the Far East, to win its confidence.
Ceylon is the first place where we have a record of the introduction

of Indian civilization and its entry there illustrates all the phenomena
mentioned above, infiltration, colonization and propaganda. The
island is close to the continent and communication with the Tamil
country easy, but though there has long been a large Tamil
population with its own language, religion and temples, the
fundamental civilization is not Tamil. A Hindu called Vijaya who
apparently started from the region of Broach about 500 B.C. led an
expedition to Ceylon and introduced a western Hindu language.
Intercourse with the north was doubtless maintained, for in the reign
of Asoka we find the King of Ceylon making overtures to him and
receiving with enthusiasm the missionaries whom he sent. It is
possible that southern India played a greater part in this conversion
than the accepted legend indicates, for we hear of a monastery built
by Mahinda near Tanjore.[3] But still language, monuments and
tradition attest the reality of the connection with northern India.
It is in Asoka’s reign too that we first hear of Indian influence

spreading northwards. His Empire included Nepal and Kashmir, he
sent missionaries to the region of Himavanta, meaning apparently
the southern slopes of the Himalayas, and to the Kambojas, an
ambiguous race who were perhaps the inhabitants of Tibet or its
border lands. The Hindu Kush seems to have been the limit of his
dominions but tradition ascribes to this period the joint colonization
of Khotan from India and China.
Sinhalese and Burmese traditions also credit him with the despatch
of missionaries who converted Suvarṇabhûmi or Pegu. No mention
of this has been found in his own inscriptions, and European critics
have treated it with not unnatural scepticism for there is little
3
indication that Asoka paid much attention to the eastern frontiers of

his Empire. Still I think the question should be regarded as being sub
judice rather than as answered in the negative.
Indian expeditions to the East probably commenced, if not in the

reign of Asoka, at least before our era. The Chinese Annals[4] state
that Indian Embassies reached China by sea about 50 B.C. and the
Questions of Milinda allude to trade by this route: the Ramayana
mentions Java and an inscription seems to testify that a Hindu king
was reigning in Champa (Annam) about 150 A.D. These dates are
not so precise as one could wish, but if there was a Hindu kingdom
in that distant region in the second century it was probably preceded
by settlements in nearer halting places, such as the Isthmus of Kra[5]
or Java, at a considerably anterior date, although the inscriptions
discovered there are not earlier than the fifth century A.D.
Java seems to have left some trace in Indian tradition, for instance
the proverb that those who go to Java do not come back, and it may
have been an early distributing centre for men and merchandize in
those seas. But Ligor probably marks a still earlier halting place. It is
on the same coast as the Mon kingdom of Thaton, which had
connection with Conjevaram by sea and was a centre of Pali
Buddhism. At any rate there was a movement of conquest and
colonization in these regions which brought with it Hinduism and
Mahayanism, and established Hindu kingdoms in Java, Camboja,
Champa and Borneo, and another movement of Hinayanist
propaganda, apparently earlier, but of which we know less.[6]
Though these expeditions both secular and religious probably took
ship on the east coast of India, e.g. at Masulipatam or the Seven
Pagodas, yet their original starting point may have been in the west,
such as the district of Badami or even Gujarat, for there were trade
routes across the Indian Peninsula at an early date.[7]
It is curious that the early history of Burma should be so obscure and

in order not to repeat details and hypotheses I refer the reader to the
chapter dealing specially with this country. From an early epoch
Upper Burma had connection with China and Bengal by land and
Lower Burma with Orissa and Conjevaram by sea. We know too that
Pali Buddhism existed there in the sixth century, that it gained
greatly in power in the reign of Anawrata (c. 1060) and that in
subsequent centuries there was a close ecclesiastical connection with
Ceylon.
4
Siam as a kingdom is relatively modern but like Burma it has been

subject to several influences. The Siamese probably brought some
form of Buddhism with them when they descended from the north
to their present territories. From the Cambojans, their neighbours
and at one time their suzerains, they must have acquired some
Hinduism and Mahayanism, but they ended by adopting
Hinayanism. The source was probably Pegu but learned men from
Ligor were also welcomed and the ecclesiastical pre-eminence of
Ceylon was accepted.
We thus see how Indian influence conquered Further India and the
Malay Archipelago and we must now trace its flow across Central
Asia to China and Japan, as well as the separate and later stream
which irrigated Tibet and Mongolia.
Tradition as mentioned ascribes to Asoka some connection with

Khotan and it is probable that by the beginning of our era the lands
of the Oxus and Tarim had become Buddhist and acquired a mixed
civilization in which the Indian factor was large. As usual it is
difficult to give precise dates, but Buddhism probably reached China
by land a little before rather than after our era and the prevalence of
Gandharan art in the cities of the Tarim basin makes it likely that
their efflorescence was not far removed in time from the Gandharan
epoch of India. The discovery near Khotan of official documents
written in Prakrit makes colonization as well as religious missions
probable. Further, although the movements of Central Asian tribes
commonly took the form of invading India, yet the current of culture
was, on the whole, in the opposite direction. The Kushans and others
brought with them a certain amount of Zoroastrian theology and
Hellenistic art, but the compound resulting from the mixture of these
elements with Buddhism was re-exported to the north and to China.
I shall discuss below the grounds for believing that Buddhism was
known in China before A.D. 62, the date when the Emperor Ming Ti
is said to have despatched a mission to enquire about it. For some
time many of its chief luminaries were immigrants from Central Asia
and it made its most rapid progress in that disturbed period of the
third and fourth centuries when North China was split up into
contending Tartar states which both in race and politics were closely
connected with Central Asia. Communication with India by land
became frequent and there was also communication viâ the Malay
Archipelago, especially after the fifth century, when a double stream
of Buddhist teachers began to pour into China by sea as well as by
land. A third tributary joined them later when Khubilai, the Mongol
5
conqueror of China, made Lamaism, or Tibetan Buddhism, the state

religion.
Tibetan Buddhism is a form of late Indian Mahayanism with a

considerable admixture of Hinduism, exported from Bengal to Tibet
and there modified not so much in doctrine as by the creation of a
powerful hierarchy, curiously analogous to the Roman Church. It is
unknown in southern China and not much favoured by the educated
classes in the north, but the Lamaist priesthood enjoys great
authority in Tibet and Mongolia, and both the Ming and Ch́ing
dynasties did their best to conciliate it for political reasons. Lamaism
has borrowed little from China and must be regarded as an invasion
into northern Asia and even Europe[8] of late Indian religion and art,
somewhat modified by the strong idiosyncrasy of the Tibetan
people. This northern movement was started by the desire of
imitation, not of conquest. At the beginning of the seventh century
the Kingof Tibet, who had dealings with both India and China, sent a
mission to the former to enquire about Buddhism and in the eighth
and eleventh centuries eminent doctors were summoned from India
to establish the faith and then to restore it after a temporary eclipse.
In Korea, Annam, and especially in Japan, Buddhism has been a

great ethical, religious and artistic force and in this sense those
countries owe much to India. Yet there was little direct
communication and what they received came to them almost entirely
through China. The ancient Champa was a Hindu kingdom
analogous to Camboja, but modern Annam represents not a
continuation of this civilization but a later descent of Chinese culture
from the north. Japan was in close touch with the Chinese just at the
period when Buddhism was fermenting their whole intellectual life
and Japanese thought and art grew up in the glow of this new
inspiration, which was more intense than in China because there was
no native antagonist of the same strength as Confucianism.
In the following chapters I propose to discuss the history of Indian

influence in the various countries of Eastern Asia, taking Ceylon
first, followed by Burma and Siam. Whatever may have been the
origin of Buddhism in these two latter they have had for many
centuries a close ecclesiastical connection with Ceylon. Pali
Buddhism prevails in all, as well as in modern Camboja.
The Indian religion which prevailed in ancient Camboja was

however of a different type and similar to that of Champa and Java.
In treating of these Hindu kingdoms I have wondered whether I
6
should not begin with Java and adopt the hypothesis that the
settlements established there sent expeditions to the mainland and
Borneo.[9] But the history of Java is curiously fragmentary whereas
the copious inscriptions of Camboja and Champa combined with
Chinese notices give a fairly continuous chronicle. And a glance at
the map will show that if there were Hindu colonists at Ligor it
would have been much easier for them to go across the Gulf of Siam
to Camboja than viâ Java. I have therefore not adopted the
hypothesis of expansion from Java (while also not rejecting it) nor
followed any chronological method but have treated of Camboja
first, as being the Hindu state of which on the whole we know most
and then of Champa and Java in comparison with it.
In the later sections of the book I consider the expansion of Indian

influence in the north. A chapter on Central Asia endeavours to
summarize our rapidly increasing knowledge of this meeting place
of nations. Its history is closely connected with China and naturally
leads me to a somewhat extended review of the fortunes and
achievements of Buddhism in that great land, and also to a special
study of Tibet and of Lamaism. I have treated of Nepal elsewhere.
For the history of religion it is not a new province, but simply the
extreme north of the Indian region where the last phase of decadent
Indian Buddhism which practically disappeared in Bengal still
retains a nominal existence.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Geog. Jour. Aug., 1916, p. 362.
[2] The presence of Brahmans at the Courts of Burma and Siam is a

different matter. They were expressly invited as more skilled in
astrology and state ceremonies than Buddhists.
[3] Watters, Yüan Chuang, vol. II. p. 228.
[4] But not contemporary Annals. The Liang Annals make the
statement about the reign of Hsüan Li 73-49 B.C.
[5] Especially at Ligor or Dharmaraja.
[6] The statement of I-Ching that a wicked king destroyed Buddhism

in Funan is important.
[7] See Fleet in J.R.A.S. 1901, p. 548.
7
[8] There are settlements of Kalmuks near Astrakhan who have

Lama temples and maintain a connection with Tibet.
[9] The existence of a Hindu kingdom on the East Coast of Borneo in

400 A.D. or earlier is a strong argument in favour of colonization
from Java. Expeditions from any other quarter would naturally have
gone to the West Coast. Also there is some knowledge of Java in
India, but apparently none of Camboja or Champa. This suggests
that Java may have been the first halting place and kept up some
slight connection with the mother country.
8
CHAPTER XXXV
CEYLON
The island of Ceylon, perhaps the most beautiful tropical country in

the world, lies near the end of the Indian peninsula but a little to the
east. At one point a chain of smaller islands and rocks said to have
been built by Rama as a passage for his army of monkeys leads to the
mainland. It is therefore natural that the population should have
relations with southern India. Sinhalese art, religion and language
show traces of Tamil influence but it is somewhat surprising to find
that in these and in all departments of civilization the influence of
northern India is stronger. The traditions which explain the
connection of Ceylon with this distant region seem credible and the
Sinhalese, who were often at war with the Tamils, were not disposed
to imitate their usages, although juxtaposition and invasion brought
about much involuntary resemblance.
The school of Buddhism now professed in Ceylon, Burma and Siam

is often called Sinhalese and (provided it is not implied that its
doctrines originated in Ceylon) the epithet is correct. For the school
ceased to exist in India and in the middle ages both Burma and Siam
accepted the authority of the Sinhalese Sangha.[10] This Sinhalese
school seems to be founded on the doctrines and scriptures accepted
in the time of Asoka in Magadha and though the faith may have
been codified and supplemented in its new home, I see no evidence
that it underwent much corruption or even development. One is
inclined at first to think that the Hindus, having a continuous living
tradition connecting them with Gotama who was himself a Hindu,
were more likely than these distant islanders to preserve the spirit of
his teaching. But there is another side to the question. The Hindus
being addicted to theological and metaphysical studies produced
original thinkers who, if not able to found new religions, at least
modified what their predecessors had laid down. If certain old texts
were held in too high esteem to be neglected, the ingenuity of the
commentator rarely failed to reinterpret them as favourable to the
views popular in his time. But the Sinhalese had not this passion for
theology. So far as we can judge of them in earlier periods they were
endowed with an amiable and receptive but somewhat indolent
9
temperament, moderate gifts in art and literature and a moderate

love and understanding of theology. Also their chiefs claimed to
have come from northern India and were inclined to accept
favourably anything which had the same origin. These are exactly
the surroundings in which a religion can flourish without change for
many centuries and Buddhism in Ceylon acquired stability because
it also acquired a certain national and patriotic flavour: it was the
faith of the Sinhalese and not of the invading Tamils. Such Sinhalese
kings as had the power protected the Church and erected
magnificent buildings for its service.
If Sinhalese tradition may be believed, the first historical contact with

northern India was the expedition of Vijaya, who with 700 followers
settled in the island about the time of the Buddha’s death. Many
details of the story are obviously invented. Thus in order to explain
why Ceylon is called Sinhala, Vijaya is made the grandson of an
Indian princess who lived with a lion. But though these legends
inspire mistrust, it is a fact that the language of Ceylon in its earliest
known form is a dialect closely connected with Pali (or rather with
the spoken dialect from which ecclesiastical Pali was derived) and
still more closely with the Mahârâshtri Prakrit of western India. It is
not however a derivative of this Prakrit but parallel to it and in some
words presents older forms.[11] It does not seem possible to ascribe
the introduction of this language to the later mission of Mahinda, for,
though Buddhist monks have in many countries influenced
literature and the literary vocabulary, no instance is recorded of their
changing the popular speech.[12] But Vijaya is said to have
conquered Ceylon and to have slaughtered many of its ancient
inhabitants, called Yakkhas,[13] of whom we know little except that
Sinhalese contains some un-Aryan words probably borrowed from
them. According to the Dîpavaṃsa,[14] Vijaya started from
Bharukaccha or Broach and both language and such historical facts
as we know confirm the tradition that some time before the third
century B.C. Ceylon was conquered by Indian immigrants from the
west coast.
It would not be unreasonable to suppose that Vijaya introduced into

Ceylon the elements of Buddhism, but there is little evidence to
indicate that it was a conspicuous form of religion in India in his
time. Sinhalese tradition maintains that not only Gotama himself but
also the three preceding Buddhas were miraculously transported to
Ceylon and made arrangements for its conversion. Gotama is said to
have paid no less than three visits:[15] all are obviously impossible
and were invented to enhance the glory of the island. But the legends
10
which relate how Paṇḍuvâsudeva came from India to succeed

Vijaya, how he subsequently had a Sakya princess brought over
from India to be his wife and how her brothers established cities in
Ceylon,[16] if not true in detail, are probably true in spirit in so far as
they imply that the Sinhalese kept up intercourse with India and
were familiar with the principal forms of Indian religion. Thus we
are told[17] that King Paṇḍukâbhaya built religious edifices for
Nigaṇṭhas (Jains), Brahmans, Paribbâjakas (possibly Buddhists) and
Âjîvikas. When Devânampiya Tissa ascended the throne (circ. 245
B.C.) he sent a complimentary mission bearing wonderful treasures
to Asoka with whom he was on friendly terms, although they had
never met. This implies that the kingdom of Magadha was known
and respected in Ceylon, and we hear that the mission included a
Brahman. The answer attributed to Asoka will surprise no one
acquainted with the inscriptions of that pious monarch. He said that
he had taken refuge in the law of Buddha and advised the King of
Ceylon to find salvation in the same way. He also sent magnificent
presents consisting chiefly of royal insignia and Tissa was crowned
for the second time, which probably means that he became not only
the disciple but the vassal of Asoka.
In any case the records declare that the Indian Emperor showed the
greatest solicitude for the spiritual welfare of Ceylon and, though
they are obviously embellished, there is no reason to doubt their
substantial accuracy.[18] The Sinhalese tradition agrees on the whole
with the data supplied by Indian inscriptions and Chinese pilgrims.
The names of missionaries mentioned in the Dîpa and Mahâvamsas
recur on urns found at Sanchi and on its gateways are pictures in
relief which appear to represent the transfer of a branch of the Bo-
tree in solemn procession to some destination which, though
unnamed, may be conjectured to be Ceylon.[19] The absence of
Mahinda’s name in Asoka’s inscriptions is certainly suspicious, but
the Sinhalese chronicles give the names of other missionaries
correctly and a mere argumentum ex silentio cannot disprove their
testimony on this important point.
The principal repositories of Sinhalese tradition are the Dîpavamsa,

the Mahâvamsa, and the historical preface of Buddhaghosa’s
Samanta-pâsâdikâ.[20] All later works are founded on these three, so
far as concerns the conversion of Ceylon and the immediately
subsequent period, and the three works appear to be rearrangements
of a single source known as the Aṭṭhakathâ, Sihalaṭṭhakathâ, or the
words of the Porâṇa (ancients). These names were given to
commentaries on the Tipiṭaka written in Sinhalese prose interspersed
11
with Pali verse and several of the greater monasteries had their own
editions of them, including a definite historical section.[21] It is
probable that at the beginning of the fifth century A.D. and perhaps
in the fourth century the old Sinhalese in which the prose parts of the
Atthakathâ were written was growing unintelligible, and that it was
becoming more and more the fashion to use Pali as the language of
ecclesiastical literature, for at least three writers set themselves to
turn part of the traditions not into the vernacular but into Pali. The
earliest and least artistic is the unknown author of the short chronicle
called Dîpavamsa, who wrote between 302 A.D. and 430 A.D.[22]
His work is weak both as a specimen of Pali and as a narrative and
he probably did little but patch together the Pali verses occurring
from time to time in the Sinhalese prose of the Atthakathâ.
Somewhat later, towards the end of the fifth century, a certain
Mahânâma arranged the materials out of which the Dîpavamsa had
been formed in a more consecutive and artistic form, combining
ecclesiastical and popular legends.[23] His work, known as the
Mahâvamsa, does not end with the reign of Eḷâra, like the
Dîpavamsa, but describes in 15 more chapters the exploits of
Duṭṭhagâmaṇi and his successors ending with Mahâsena.[24] The
third writer, Buddhaghosa, apparently lived between the authors of
the two chronicles. His voluminous literary activity will demand our
attention later but so far as history is concerned his narrative is
closely parallel to the Mahâvamsa.[25]
The historical narrative is similar in all three works. After the

Council of Pataliputra, Moggaliputta, who had presided over it,
came to the conclusion that the time had come to despatch
missionaries to convert foreign countries. Sinhalese tradition
represents this decision as emanating from Moggaliputta whereas
the inscriptions of Asoka imply that the king himself initiated the
momentous project. But the difference is small. We cannot now tell
to whom the great idea first occurred but it must have been carried
out by the clergy with the assistance of Asoka, the apostle selected
for Ceylon was his[26] near relative Mahinda who according to the
traditions of the Sinhalese made his way to their island through the
air with six companions. The account of Hsüan Chuang hints at a
less miraculous mode of progression for he speaks of a monastery
built by Mahinda somewhere near Tanjore.
The legend tells how Mahinda and his following alighted on the
Missaka mountain[27] whither King Devânampiya Tissa had gone in
the course of a hunt. The monks and the royal cortege met: Mahinda,
after testing the king’s intellectual capacity by some curious
12
dialectical puzzles, had no difficulty in converting him.[28] Next

morning he proceeded to Anuradhapura and was received with all
honour and enthusiasm. He preached first in the palace and then to
enthusiastic audiences of the general public. In these discourses he
dwelt chiefly on the terrible punishment awaiting sinners in future
existences.[29]
We need not follow in detail the picturesque account of the rapid

conversion of the capital. The king made over to the Church the
Mahâmegha garden and proceeded to construct a series of religious
edifices in Anuradhapura and its neighbourhood. The catalogue of
them is given in the Mahâvamsa[30] and the most important was the
Mahâvihâra monastery, which became specially famous and
influential in the history of Buddhism. It was situated in the
Mahâmegha garden close to the Bo-tree and was regarded as the
citadel of orthodoxy. Its subsequent conflicts with the later
Abhayagiri monastery are the chief theme of Sinhalese ecclesiastical
history and our version of the Pali Piṭakas is the one which received
its imprimatur.
Tissa is represented as having sent two further missions to India. The

first went in quest of relics and made its way not only to Pataliputra
but to the court of Indra, king of the gods, and the relics obtained, of
which the principal was the Buddha’s alms-bowl,[31] were deposited
in Anuradhapura. The king then built the Thuparâma dagoba over
them and there is no reason to doubt that the building which now
bears this name is genuine. The story may therefore be true to the
extent that relics were brought from India at this early period.
The second mission was despatched to bring a branch of the tree[32]

under which the Buddha had sat when he obtained enlightenment.
This narrative[33] is perhaps based on a more solid substratum of
fact. The chronicles connect the event with the desire of the Princess
Anulâ to become a nun. Women could receive ordination only from
ordained nuns and as these were not to be found on the island it was
decided to ask Asoka to send a branch of the sacred tree and also
Mahinda’s sister Sanghamittâ, a religieuse of eminence. The mission
was successful. A branch from the Bo-tree was detached, conveyed
by Asoka to the coast with much ceremony and received in Ceylon
by Tissa with equal respect. The princess accompanied it. The Bo-
tree was planted in the Meghavana garden. It may still be seen and
attracts pilgrims not only from Ceylon but from Burma and Siam.
Unlike the buildings of Anuradhapura it has never been entirely
neglected and it is clear that it has been venerated as the Bo-tree
13
from an early period of Sinhalese history. Botanists consider its long

life, though remarkable, not impossible since trees of this species
throw up fresh shoots from the roots near the parent stem. The
sculptures at Sanchi represent a branch of a sacred tree being carried
in procession, though no inscription attests its destination, and Fa-
Hsien says that he saw the tree.[34] The author of the first part of the
Mahâvamsa clearly regards it as already ancient, and throughout the
history of Ceylon there are references to the construction of railings
and terraces to protect it.
Devânampiya Tissa probably died in 207 B.C. In 177 the kingdom

passed into the hands of Tamil monarchs who were not Buddhists,
although the chroniclers praise their justice and the respect which
they showed to the Church. The most important of them, Eḷâra,
reigned for forty-four years and was dethroned by a descendant of
Tissa, called Duṭṭhagâmaṇi.[35]
The exploits of this prince are recorded at such length in the

Mahâvamsa (XXII.-XXXII.) as to suggest that they formed the subject
of a separate popular epic, in which he figured as the champion of
Sinhalese against the Tamils, and therefore as a devout Buddhist. On
ascending the throne he felt, like Asoka, remorse for the bloodshed
which had attended his early life and strove to atone for it by good
works, especially the construction of sacred edifices. The most
important of these were the Lohapasâda or Copper Palace and the
Mahâthûpa or Ruwanweli Dagoba. The former[36] was a monastery
roofed or covered with copper plates. Its numerous rooms were
richly decorated and it consisted of nine storeys, of which the four
uppermost were set apart for Arhats, and the lower assigned to the
inferior grades of monks. Perhaps the nine storeys are an
exaggeration: at any rate the building suffered from fire and
underwent numerous reconstructions and modifications. King
Mahâsena (301 A.D.) destroyed it and then repenting of his errors
rebuilt it, but the ruins now representing it at Anuradhapura, which
consist of stone pillars only, date from the reign of Parâkrama Bâhu I
(about A.D. 1150). The immense pile known as the Ruwanweli
Dagoba, though often injured by invaders in search of treasure, still
exists. The somewhat dilapidated exterior is merely an outer shell,
enclosing a smaller dagoba.[37] This is possibly the structure erected
by Duṭṭhagâmaṇi, though tradition says that there is a still smaller
edifice inside. The foundation and building of the original structure
are related at great length.[38] Crowds of distinguished monks came
to see the first stone laid, even from Kashmir and Alasanda. Some
have identified the latter name with Alexandria in Egypt, but it
14
probably denotes a Greek city on the Indus.[39] But in any case

tradition represents Buddhists from all parts of India as taking part
in the ceremony and thus recognizing the unity of Indian and
Sinhalese Buddhism.
Of great importance for the history of the Sinhalese Church is the

reign of Vaṭṭagâmaṇi Abhaya who after being dethroned by Tamils
recovered his kingdom and reigned for twelve years.[40] He built a
new monastery and dagoba known as Abhayagiri,[41] which soon
became the enemy of the Mahâvihâra and heterodox, if the latter is
to be considered orthodox. The account of the schism given in the
Mahâvaṃsa[42] is obscure, but the dispute resulted in the Piṭakas,
which had hitherto been preserved orally, being committed to
writing. The council which defined and edited the scriptures was not
attended by all the monasteries of Ceylon, but only by the monks of
the Mahâvihâra, and the text which they wrote down was their
special version and not universally accepted. It included the
Parivâra, which was apparently a recent manual composed in
Ceylon. The Mahâvaṃsa says no more about this schism, but the
Nikâya-Sangrahawa[43] says that the monks of the Abhayagiri
monastery now embraced the doctrines of the Vajjiputta school (one
of the seventeen branches of the Mahâsanghikas) which was known
in Ceylon as the Dhammaruci school from an eminent teacher of that
name. Many pious kings followed who built or repaired sacred
edifices and Buddhism evidently flourished, but we also hear of
heresy. In the third century A.D.[44] King Voharaka Tissa
suppressed[45] the Vetulyas. This sect was connected with the
Abhayagiri monastery, but, though it lasted until the twelfth
century, I have found no Sinhalese account of its tenets. It is
represented as the worst of heresies, which was suppressed by all
orthodox kings but again and again revived, or was reintroduced
from India. Though it always found a footing at the Abhayagiri it
was not officially recognized as the creed of that Monastery which
since the time of Vaṭṭagâmaṇi seems to have professed the relatively
orthodox doctrine called Dhammaruci.
Mention is made in the Kathâ-vatthu of heretics who held that the

Buddha remained in the Tusita heaven and that the law was
preached on earth not by him but by Ananda and the
commentary[46] ascribes these views to the Vetulyakas. The
reticence of the Sinhalese chronicles makes it doubtful whether the
Vetulyakas of Ceylon and these heretics are identical but probably
the monks of the Abhayagiri, if not strictly speaking Mahayanist,
were an off-shoot of an ancient sect which contained some germs of
15
the Mahayana. Hsüan Chuang in his narrative[47] states (probably

from hearsay) that the monks of the Mahâvihâra were Hinayanists
but that both vehicles were studied at the Abhayagiri. I-Ching on the
contrary says expressly that all the Sinhalese belonged to the
Âryasthavira Nikâya. Fa-Hsien describes the Buddhism of Ceylon as
he saw it about 412 A.D., but does not apply to it the terms Hina or
Mahayana. He evidently regarded the Abhayagiri as the principal
religious centre and says it had 5000 monks as against 3000 in the
Mahâvihâra, but though he dwells on the gorgeous ceremonial, the
veneration of the sacred tooth, the representations of Gotama’s
previous lives, and the images of Maitreya, he does not allude to the
worship of Avalokita and Mañjusrî or to anything that can be called
definitely Mahayanist. He describes a florid and somewhat
superstitious worship which may have tended to regard the Buddha
as superhuman, but the relics of Gotama’s body were its chief visible
symbols and we have no ground for assuming that such teaching as
is found in the Lotus sûtra was its theological basis. Yet we may
legitimately suspect that the traditions of the Abhayagiri remount to
early prototypes of that teaching.
In the second and third centuries the Court seems to have favoured
the Mahâvihâra and King Goṭhâbhaya banished monks belonging to
the Vetulya sect,[48] but in spite of this a monk of the Abhayagiri
named Sanghamitta obtained his confidence and that of his son,
Mahâsena, who occupied the throne from 275 to 302 A.D. The
Mahâvihâra was destroyed and its occupants persecuted at
Sanghamitta’s instigation but he was murdered and after his death
the great Monastery was rebuilt. The triumph however was not
complete for Mahâsena built a new monastery called Jetavana on
ground belonging to the Mahâvihâra and asked the monks to
abandon this portion of their territory. They refused and according
to the Mahâvamsa ultimately succeeded in proving their rights
before a court of law. But the Jetavana remained as the headquarters
of a sect known as Sagaliyas. They appear to have been moderately
orthodox, but to have had their own text of the Vinaya for according
to the Commentary[49] on the Mahâvamsa they “separated the two
Vibhangas of the Bhagavâ[50] from the Vinaya ... altering their
meaning and misquoting their contents.” In the opinion of the
Mahâvihâra both the Abhayagiri and Jetavana were schismatical, but
the laity appear to have given their respect and offerings to all three
impartially and the Mahâvamsa several times records how the same
individual honoured the three Confraternities.
16
With the death of Mahâsena ends the first and oldest part of the
Mahâvamsa, and also in native opinion the grand period of
Sinhalese history, the subsequent kings being known as the
Cûlavaṃsa or minor dynasty. A continuation[51] of the chronicle
takes up the story and tells of the doings of Mahâsena’s son
Sirimeghavaṇṇa.[52] Judged by the standard of the Mahâvihâra, he
was fairly satisfactory. He rebuilt the Lohapasâda and caused a
golden image of Mahinda to be made and carried in procession. This
veneration of the founder of a local church reminds one of the
respect shown to the images of half-deified abbots in Tibet, China
and Japan. But the king did not neglect the Abhayagiri or assign it a
lower position than the Mahâvihâra for he gave it partial custody of
the celebrated relic known as the Buddha’s tooth which was brought
to Ceylon from Kalinga in the ninth year of his reign and has ever
since been considered the palladium of the island.
It may not be amiss to consider here briefly what is known of the

history of the Buddha’s relics and especially of this tooth. Of the
minor distinctions between Buddhism and Hinduism one of the
sharpest is this cultus. Hindu temples are often erected over natural
objects supposed to resemble the footprint or some member of a
deity and sometimes tombs receive veneration.[53] But no case
appears to be known in which either Hindus or Jains show reverence
to the bones or other fragments of a human body. It is hence
remarkable that relic-worship should be so wide-spread in
Buddhism and appear so early in its history. The earliest Buddhist
monuments depict figures worshipping at a stupa, which was
probably a reliquary, and there is no reason to distrust the traditions
which carry the practice back at least to the reign of Asoka. The
principal cause for its prevalence was no doubt that Buddhism,
while creating a powerful religious current, provided hardly any
objects of worship for the faithful.[54] It is also probable that the
rudiments of relic worship existed in the districts frequented by the
Buddha. The account of his death states that after the cremation of
his body the Mallas placed his bones in their council hall and
honoured them with songs and dances. Then eight communities or
individuals demanded a portion of the relics and over each portion a
cairn was built. These proceedings are mentioned as if they were the
usual ceremonial observed on the death of a great man and in the
same Sutta[55] the Buddha himself mentions four classes of men
worthy of a cairn or dagoba.[56] We may perhaps conclude that in
17
the earliest ages of Buddhism it was usual in north-eastern India to

honour the bones of a distinguished man after cremation and inter
them under a monument. This is not exactly relic worship but it has
in it the root of the later tree. The Piṭakas contain little about the
practice but the Milinda Pañha discusses the question at length and
in one passage[57] endeavours to reconcile two sayings of the
Buddha, “Hinder not yourselves by honouring the remains of the
Tathâgatha” and “Honour that relic of him who is worthy of
honour.” It is the first utterance rather than the second that seems to
have the genuine ring of Gotama.
The earliest known relics are those discovered in the stupa of

Piprâvâ on the borders of Nepal in 1898. Their precise nature and the
date of the inscription describing them have been the subject of
much discussion. Some authorities think that this stupa may be one
of those erected over a portion of the Buddha’s ashes after his
funeral. Even Barth, a most cautious and sceptical scholar,
admitted[58] first that the inscription is not later than Asoka,
secondly that the vase is a reliquary containing what were believed
to be bones of the Buddha. Thus in the time of Asoka the worship of
the Buddha’s relics was well known and I see no reason why the
inscription should not be anterior to that time.
According to Buddhaghosa’s Sumangalavilâsinî and Sinhalese texts

which though late are based on early material[59], Mahâkassapa
instigated Ajâtasattu to collect the relics of the Buddha, and to place
them in a stupa, there to await the advent of Asoka. In Asoka’s time
the stupa had become overgrown and hidden by jungle but when the
king was in search of relics, its position was revealed to him. He
found inside it an inscription authorizing him to disperse the
contents and proceeded to distribute them among the 84,000
monasteries which he is said to have constructed.
In its main outlines this account is probable. Ajâtasattu conquered

the Licchavis and other small states to the north of Magadha and if
he was convinced of the importance of the Buddha’s relics it would
be natural that he should transport them to his capital, regarding
them perhaps as talismans.[60] Here they were neglected, though
not damaged, in the reigns of Brahmanical kings and were rescued
from oblivion by Asoka, who being sovereign of all India and
anxious to spread Buddhism throughout his dominions would be
likely to distribute the relics as widely as he distributed his pillars
and inscriptions. But later Buddhist kings could not emulate this
imperial impartiality and we may surmise that such a monarch as
18
Kanishka would see to it that all the principal relics in northern India
found their way to his capital. The bones discovered at Peshawar are
doubtless those considered most authentic in his reign.
Next to the tooth, the most interesting relic of the Buddha was his
patra or alms-bowl, which plays a part somewhat similar to that of
the Holy Grail in Christian romance. The Mahâvaṃsa states that
Asoka sent it to Ceylon, but the Chinese pilgrim Fa-Hsien[61] saw it
at Peshawar about 405 A.D. It was shown to the people daily at the
midday and evening services. The pilgrim thought it contained
about two pecks yet such were its miraculous properties that the
poor could fill it with a gift of a few flowers, whereas the rich cast in
myriads of bushels and found there was still room for more. A few
years later Fa-Hsien heard a sermon in Ceylon[62] in which the
preacher predicted that the bowl would be taken in the course of
centuries to Central Asia, China, Ceylon and Central India whence it
would ultimately ascend to the Tusita heaven for the use of the
future Buddha. Later accounts to some extent record the fulfilment
of these predictions inasmuch as they relate how the bowl (or bowls)
passed from land to land but the story of its wandering may have
little foundation since it is combined with the idea that it is wafted
from shrine to shrine according as the faith is nourishing or
decadent. Hsüan Chuang says that it “had gone on from Peshawar to
several countries and was now in Persia.[63]“ A Mohammedan
legend relates that it is at Kandahar and will contain any quantity of
liquid without overflowing. Marco Polo says Kublai Khan sent an
embassy in 1284 to bring it from Ceylon to China.[64]
The wanderings of the tooth, though almost as surprising as those of

the bowl, rest on better historical evidence, but there is probably
more continuity in the story than in the holy object of which it is
related, for the piece of bone which is credited with being the left
canine tooth of the Blessed One may have been changed on more
than one occasion. The Sinhalese chronicles,[65] as mentioned, say
that it was brought to Ceylon in the ninth year of
Sirimeghavaṇṇa.[66] This date may be approximately correct for
about 413 or later Fa-Hsien described the annual festival of the tooth,
during which it was exposed for veneration at the Abhayagiri
monastery, without indicating that the usage was recent.
The tooth did not, according to Sinhalese tradition, form part of the
relics distributed after the cremation of the Buddha. Seven bones,
including four teeth,[67] were excepted from that distribution and
the Sage Khema taking the left canine tooth direct from the funeral
19
pyre gave it to the king of Kalinga, who enshrined it in a gorgeous

temple at Dantapura[68] where it is supposed to have remained 800
years. At the end of that period a pious king named Guhasiva
became involved in disastrous wars on account of the relic, and, as
the best means of preserving it, bade his daughter fly with her
husband[69] and take it to Ceylon. This, after some miraculous
adventures, they were able to do. The tooth was received with great
ceremony and lodged in an edifice called the Dhammacakka from
which it was taken every year for a temporary sojourn[70] in the
Abhayagiri monastery.
The cultus of the tooth flourished exceedingly in the next few

centuries and it came to be regarded as the talisman of the king and
nation. Hence when the court moved from Anuradhapura to
Pollunaruwa it was installed in the new capital. In the troubled times
which followed it changed its residence some fifteen times. Early in
the fourteenth century it was carried off by the Tamils to southern
India but was recovered by Parâkrama Bâhu III and during the
commotion created by the invasions of the Tamils, Chinese and
Portuguese it was hidden in various cities. In 1560 Dom Constantino
de Bragança, Portuguese Viceroy of Goa, led a crusade against Jaffna
to avenge the alleged persecution of Christians, and when the town
was sacked a relic, described as the tooth of an ape mounted in gold,
was found in a temple and carried off to Goa. On this Bayin Naung,
King of Pegu, offered an enormous ransom to redeem it, which the
secular government wished to accept, but the clergy and inquisition
put such pressure on the Viceroy that he rejected the proposal. The
archbishop of Goa pounded the tooth in a mortar before the
viceregal court, burned the fragments and scattered the ashes over
the sea.[71]
But the singular result of this bigotry was not to destroy one sacred
tooth but to create two. The king of Pegu, who wished to marry a
Sinhalese princess, sent an embassy to Ceylon to arrange the match.
They were received by the king of Cotta, who bore the curiously
combined name of Don Juan Dharmapâla. He had no daughter of his
own but palmed off the daughter of a chamberlain. At the same time
he informed the king of Pegu that the tooth destroyed at Goa was
not the real relic and that this still remained in his possession. Bayin
Naung was induced to marry the lady and received the tooth with
appropriate ceremonies. But when the king of Kandy heard of these
doings, he apprized the king of Pegu of the double trick that had
been played on him. He offered him his own daughter, a veritable
princess, in marriage and as her dowry the true tooth which, he said,
20
was neither that destroyed at Goa nor yet that sent to Pegu, but one
in his own possession. Bayin Naung received the Kandyan embassy
politely but rejected its proposals, thinking no doubt that it would be
awkward to declare the first tooth spurious after it had been
solemnly installed as a sacred relic. The second tooth therefore
remained in Kandy and appears to be that now venerated there.
When Vimala Dharma re-established the original line of kings, about
1592, it was accepted as authentic.
As to its authenticity, it appears to be beyond doubt that it is a piece

of discoloured bone about two inches long, which could never have
been the tooth of an ordinary human being, so that even the faithful
can only contend that the Buddha was of superhuman stature.
Whether it is the relic which was venerated in Ceylon before the
arrival of the Portuguese is a more difficult question, for it may be
argued with equal plausibility that the Sinhalese had good reasons
for hiding the real tooth and good reasons for duplicating it. The
strongest argument against the authenticity of the relic destroyed by
the Portuguese is that it was found in Jaffna, which had long been a
Tamil town, whereas there is no reason to believe that the real tooth
was at this time in Tamil custody. But, although the native literature
always speaks of it as unique, the Sinhalese appear to have produced
replicas more than once, for we hear of such being sent to Burma and
China.[72] Again, the offer to ransom the tooth came not from
Ceylon but from the king of Pegu, who, as the sequel shows, was
gullible in such matters: the Portuguese clearly thought that they had
acquired a relic of primary importance; on any hypothesis one of the
kings of Ceylon must have deceived the king of Pegu, and finally
Vimala Dharma had the strongest political reasons for accepting as
genuine the relic kept at Kandy, since the possession of the true tooth
went far to substantiate a Sinhalese monarch’s right to the throne.
The tooth is now preserved in a temple at Kandy. The visitor looking

through a screen of bars can see on a silver table a large jewelled case
shaped like a bell. Flowers scattered on the floor or piled on other
tables fill the chamber with their heavy perfume. Inside the bell are
six other bells of diminishing size, the innermost of which covers a
golden lotus containing the sacred tooth. But it is only on rare
occasions that the outer caskets are removed. Worshippers as a rule
have to content themselves with offering flowers[73] and bowing but
I was informed that the priests celebrate puja daily before the relic.
The ceremony comprises the consecration and distribution of rice
and is interesting as connecting the veneration of the tooth with the
21
ritual observed in Hindu temples. But we must return to the general

history of Buddhism in Ceylon.
The kings who ruled in the fifth century were devout Buddhists and
builders of vihâras but the most important event of this period, not
merely for the island but for the whole Buddhist church in the south,
was the literary activity of Buddhaghosa who is said to have resided
in Ceylon during the reign of Mahânâma. The chief authorities for
his life are a passage in the continuation of the Mahâvamsa[74] and
the Buddhaghosuppatti, a late Burmese text of about 1550, which,
while adding many anecdotes, appears not to come from an
independent source.[75] The gist of their account is that he was born
in a Brahman family near Gaya and early obtained renown as a
disputant. He was converted to Buddhism by a monk named Revata
and began to write theological treatises.[76] Revata observing his
intention to compose a commentary on the Piṭakas, told him that
only the text (pâlimattam) of the scriptures was to be found in India,
not the ancient commentaries, but that the Sinhalese commentaries
were genuine, having been composed in that language by Mahinda.
He therefore bade Buddhaghosa repair to Ceylon and translate these
Sinhalese works into the idiom of Magadha, by which Pali must be
meant. Buddhaghosa took this advice and there is no reason to
distrust the statement of the Mahâvamsa that he arrived in the reign
of Mahânâma, who ruled according to Geiger from 458 to 480,
though the usual reckoning places him about fifty years earlier. The
fact that Fa-Hsien, who visited Ceylon about 412, does not mention
Buddhaghosa is in favour of Geiger’s chronology.[77]
He first studied in the Mahâvihâra and eventually requested

permission to translate the Sinhalese commentaries. To prove his
competence for the task he composed the celebrated Visuddhi-
magga, and, this being considered satisfactory, he took up his
residence in the Ganthâkara Vihâra and proceeded to the work of
translation. When it was finished he returned to India or according
to the Talaing tradition to Thaton. The Buddhaghosuppatti adds two
stories of which the truth and meaning are equally doubtful. They
are that Buddhaghosa burnt the works written by Mahinda and that
his knowledge of Sanskrit was called in question but triumphantly
proved. Can there be here any allusion to a Sanskrit canon supported
by the opponents of the Mahâvihâra?
22
Even in its main outline the story is not very coherent for one would
imagine that, if a Buddhist from Magadha went to Ceylon to
translate the Sinhalese commentaries, his object must have been to
introduce them among Indian Buddhists. But there is no evidence
that Buddhaghosa did this and he is for us simply a great figure in
the literary and religious history of Ceylon. Burmese tradition
maintains that he was a native of Thaton and returned thither, when
his labours in Ceylon were completed, to spread the scriptures in his
native language. This version of his activity is intelligible, though the
evidence for it is weak.
He composed a great corpus of exegetical literature which has been

preserved, but, since much of it is still unedited, the precise extent of
his labours is uncertain. There is however little doubt of the
authenticity of his commentaries on the four great Nikâyas, on the
Abhidhamma and on the Vinaya (called Samanta-pâsâdikâ) and in
them[78] he refers to the Visuddhi-magga as his own work. He says
expressly that his explanations are founded on Sinhalese materials,
which he frequently cites as the opinion of the ancients (porânâ). By
this word he probably means traditions recorded in Sinhalese and
attributed to Mahinda, but it is in any case clear that the works
which he consulted were considered old in the fifth century A.D.
Some of their names are preserved in the Samanta-pâsâdikâ where
he mentions the great commentary (Mahâ-Aṭṭhakathâ), the Raft
commentary (Paccari, so called because written on a raft), the
Kurundi commentary composed at Kurunda-Velu and others[79].
All this literature has disappeared and we can only judge of it by
Buddhaghosa’s reproduction which is probably not a translation but
a selection and rearrangement. Indeed his occasional direct
quotations from the ancients or from an Aṭṭhakathâ imply that the
rest of the work is merely based on the Sinhalese commentaries.
Buddhaghosa was not an independent thinker but he makes amends

for his want of originality not only by his industry and learning but
by his power of grasping and expounding the whole of an intricate
subject. His Visuddhi-magga has not yet been edited in Europe, but
the extracts and copious analysis[80] which have been published
indicate that it is a comprehensive restatement of Buddhist doctrine
made with as free a hand as orthodoxy permitted. The Mahâvamsa
observes that the Theras held his works in the same estimation as the
Piṭakas. They are in no way coloured by the Mahayanist tenets
which were already prevalent in India, but state in its severest form
the Hinayanist creed, of which he is the most authoritative exponent.
The Visuddhi-magga is divided into three parts treating of conduct
23
(sîlam), meditation (samâdhi) and knowledge (paññâ), the first

being the necessary substratum for the religious life of which the
others are the two principal branches. But though he intersperses his
exposition with miraculous stories and treats exhaustively of
superhuman powers, no trace of the worship of Mahayanist
Bodhisattvas is found in his works and, as for literature, he himself is
the chief authority for the genuineness and completeness of the Pali
Canon as we know it.
When we find it said that his works were esteemed as highly as the
Piṭakas, or that the documents which he translated into Pali were the
words of the Buddha[81], the suspicion naturally arises that the Pali
Canon may be in part his composition and it may be well to review
briefly its history in Ceylon. Our knowledge appears to be derived
entirely from the traditions of the Mahâvihâra which represent
Mahinda as teaching the text of the Piṭakas orally, accompanied by a
commentary. If we admit the general truth of the narrative
concerning Mahinda’s mission, there is nothing improbable in these
statements, for it would be natural that an Indian teacher should
know by heart his sacred texts and the commentaries on them. We
cannot of course assume that the Piṭakas of Mahinda were the Pali
Canon as we know it, but the inscriptions of Asoka refer to passages
which can be found in that canon and therefore parts of it at any rate
must have been accepted as scripture in the third century B.C. But it
is probable that considerable variation was permitted in the text,
although the sense and a certain terminology were carefully
guarded. It was not till the reign of Vaṭṭagâmaṇi, probably about 20
B.C., that the canon was committed to writing and the Parivâra,
composed in Ceylon[82], was included in it.
In the reign of Buddhadâsa[83] a learned monk named

Mahâdhammakathi is said to have translated the Suttas into
Sinhalese, which at this time was esteemed the proper language for
letters and theology, but in the next century a contrary tendency,
probably initiated by Buddhaghosa, becomes apparent and Sinhalese
works are rewritten in Pali.[84] But nothing indicates that any part
of what we call the Pali Canon underwent this process.
Buddhaghosa distinguishes clearly between text and comment,
between Pali and Sinhalese documents. He has a coherent history of
the text, beginning with the Council of Râjagaha; he discusses
various readings, he explains difficult words. He treated the ancient
commentaries with freedom, but there is no reason to think that he
allowed himself any discretion or right of selection in dealing with
the sacred texts accepted by the Mahâvihâra, though it might be
24
prudent to await the publication of his commentaries on all the

Nikâyas before asserting this unreservedly.
To sum up, the available evidence points to the conclusion that in the
time of Asoka texts and commentaries preserved orally were
brought to Ceylon. The former, though in a somewhat fluid
condition, were sufficiently sacred to be kept unchanged in the
original Indian language, the latter were translated into the kindred
but still distinct vernacular of the island. In the next century and a
half some additions to the Pali texts were made and about 20 B.C. the
Mahâvihâra, which proved as superior to the other communities in
vitality as it was in antiquity, caused written copies to be made of
what it considered as the canon, including some recent works. There
is no evidence that Buddhaghosa or anyone else enlarged or
curtailed the canon, but the curious tradition that he collected and
burned all the books written by Mahinda in Sinhalese[85] may allude
to the existence of other works which he (presumably in agreement
with the Mahâvihâra) considered spurious.
Soon after the departure of Buddhaghosa Dhâtusena came to the

throne and “held like Dhammasoka a convocation about the three
Piṭakas.”[86] This implies that there was still some doubt as to what
was scripture and that the canon of the Mahâvihâra was not
universally accepted. The Vetulyas, of whom we heard in the third
century A.D., reappear in the seventh when they are said to have
been supported by a provincial governor but not by the king
Aggabodhi[87] and still more explicitly in the reign of Parâkrama
Bâhu (c. 1160). He endeavoured to reconcile to the Mahâvihâra “the
Abhayagiri brethren who separated themselves from the time of
king Vaṭṭagâmaṇi Abhaya and the Jetavana brethren that had parted
since the days of Mahâsena and taught the Vetulla Piṭaka and other
writings as the words of Buddha, which indeed were not the words
of Buddha[88].” So it appears that another recension of the canon
was in existence for many centuries.
Dhâtusena, though depicted in the Mahâvaṃsa as a most orthodox

monarch, embellished the Abhayagiri monastery and was addicted
to sumptuous ceremonies in honour of images and relics. Thus he
made an image of Mahinda, dedicated a shrine and statue to
Metteyya and ornamented the effigies of Buddha with the royal
jewels. In an image chamber (apparently at the Abhayagiri) he set up
figures of Bodhisattvas,[89] by which we should perhaps understand
the previous births of Gotama. He was killed by his son and
Sinhalese history degenerated into a complicated story of crime and
25
discord, in which the weaker faction generally sought the aid of the
Tamils. These latter became more and more powerful and with their
advance Buddhism tended to give place to Hinduism. In the eighth
century the court removed from Anuradhapura to Pollannaruwa, in
order to escape from the pressure of the Tamils, but the picture of
anarchy and decadence grows more and more gloomy until the
accession of Vijaya Bâhu in 1071 who succeeded in making himself
king of all Ceylon. Though he recovered Anuradhapura it was not
made the royal residence either by himself or by his greater
successor, Parâkrama Bâhu.[90] This monarch, the most eminent in
the long list of Ceylon’s sovereigns, after he had consolidated his
power, devoted himself, in the words of Tennent, “to the two grand
objects of royal solicitude, religion and agriculture.” He was lavish in
building monasteries, temples and libraries, but not less generous in
constructing or repairing tanks and works of irrigation. In the reign
of Vijaya Bâhu hardly any duly ordained monks were to be
found,[91] the succession having been interrupted, and the
deficiency was supplied by bringing qualified Theras from Burma.
But by the time of Parâkrama Bâhu the old quarrels of the
monasteries revived, and, as he was anxious to secure unity, he
summoned a synod at Anuradhapura. It appears to have attained its
object by recognizing the Mahâvihâra as the standard of orthodoxy
and dealing summarily with dissentients.[92] The secular side of
monastic life also received liberal attention. Lands, revenues and
guest-houses were provided for the monasteries as well as hospitals.
As in Burma and Siam Brahmans were respected and the king
erected a building for their use in the capital. Like Asoka, he forbade
the killing of animals.
But the glory of Parâkrama Bâhu stands up in the later history of

Ceylon like an isolated peak and thirty years after his death the
country had fallen almost to its previous low level of prosperity. The
Tamils again occupied many districts and were never entirely
dislodged as long as the Sinhalese kingdom lasted. Buddhism
tended to decline but was always the religion of the national party
and was honoured with as much magnificence as their means
allowed. Parâkrama Bâhu II (c. 1240), who recovered the sacred
tooth from the Tamils, is said to have celebrated splendid festivals
and to have imported learned monks from the country of the
Colas.[93] Towards the end of the fifteenth century the inscriptions
of Kalyani indicate that Sinhalese religion enjoyed a great reputation
in Burma.[94]
26
A further change adverse to Buddhism was occasioned by the arrival

of the Portuguese in 1505. A long and horrible struggle ensued
between them and the various kings among whom the distracted
island was divided until at the end of the sixteenth century only
Kandy remained independent, the whole coast being in the hands of
the Portuguese. The singular barbarities which they perpetrated
throughout this struggle are vouched for by their own historians,[95]
but it does not appear that the Sinhalese degraded themselves by
similar atrocities. Since the Portuguese wished to propagate Roman
Catholicism as well as to extend their political rule and used for this
purpose (according to the Mahâvaṃsa) the persuasions of gold as
well as the terrors of torture, it is not surprising if many Sinhalese
professed allegiance to Christianity, but when in 1597 the greater
part of Ceylon formally accepted Portuguese sovereignty, the chiefs
insisted that they should be allowed to retain their own religion and
customs.
The Dutch first appeared in 1602 and were welcomed by the Court of
Kandy as allies capable of expelling the Portuguese. This they
succeeded in doing by a series of victories between 1638 and 1658,
and remained masters of a great part of the island until their
possessions were taken by the British in 1795. Kandy however
continued independent until 1815. At first the Dutch tried to enforce
Christianity and to prohibit Buddhism within their territory[96] but
ultimately hatred of the Roman Catholic church made them
favourable to Buddhism and they were ready to assist those kings
who desired to restore the national religion to its former splendour.
In spite of this assistance the centuries when the Sinhalese were

contending with Europeans were not a prosperous time for
Buddhism. Hinduism spread in the north,[97] Christianity in the
coast belt, but still it was a point of honour with most native
sovereigns to protect the national religion so far as their distressed
condition allowed. For the seventeenth century we have an
interesting account of the state of the country called An Historical
Relation of the Island of Ceylon by an Englishman, Robert Knox, who
was detained by the king of Kandy from 1660 to 1680. He does not
seem to have been aware that there was any distinction between
Buddhism and Hinduism. Though he describes the Sinhalese as
idolaters, he also emphasizes the fact that Buddou (as he writes the
name) is the God “unto whom the salvation of souls belongs,” and
27
for whom “above all others they have a high respect and devotion.”
He also describes the ceremonies of pirit and bana, the perahera
procession, and two classes of Buddhist monks, the elders and the
ordinary members of the Sangha. His narrative indicates that
Buddhism was accepted as the higher religion, though men were
prone to pray to deities who would save from temporal danger.
About this time Vimala Dharma II[98] made great efforts to improve
the religious condition of the island and finding that the true
succession had again failed, arranged with the Dutch to send an
embassy to Arakan and bring back qualified Theras. But apparently
the steps taken were not sufficient, for when king Kittisiri Râjasiha
(1747-81), whose piety forms the theme of the last two chapters of the
Mahâvaṃsa, set about reforming the Sangha, he found that duly
ordained monks were extinct and that many so-called monks had
families. He therefore decided to apply to Dhammika, king of
Ayuthia in Siam, and like his predecessor despatched an embassy on
a Dutch ship. Dhammika sent back a company of “more than ten
monks” (that is more than sufficient for the performance of all
ecclesiastical acts) under the Abbot Upâli in 1752 and another to
relieve it in 1755.[99] They were received by the king of Ceylon with
great honour and subsequently by the ordination which they
conferred placed the succession beyond dispute. But the order thus
reconstituted was aristocratic and exclusive: only members of the
highest caste were admitted to it and the wealthy middle classes
found themselves excluded from a community which they were
expected to honour and maintain. This led to the despatch of an
embassy to Burma in 1802 and to the foundation of another branch
of the Sangha, known as the Amarapura school, distinct in so far as
its validity depended on Burmese not Siamese ordination.
Since ordination is for Buddhists merely self-dedication to a higher

life and does not confer any sacramental or sacerdotal powers, the
importance assigned to it may seem strange. But the idea goes back
to the oldest records in the Vinaya and has its root in the privileges
accorded to the order. A Bhikkhu had a right to expect much from
the laity, but he also had to prove his worth and Gotama’s early
legislation was largely concerned with excluding unsuitable
candidates. The solicitude for valid ordination was only the
ecclesiastical form of the popular feeling that the honours and
immunities of the order were conditional on its maintaining a certain
standard of conduct. Other methods of reform might have been
devised, but the old injunction that a monk could be admitted only
by other duly ordained monks was fairly efficacious and could not
28
be disputed. But the curious result is that though Ceylon was in

early times the second home of Buddhism, almost all (if indeed not
all) the monks found there now derive their right to the title of
Bhikkhu from foreign countries.
The Sinhalese Sangha is generally described as divided into four

schools, those of Siam, Kelani, Amarapura and Ramanya, of which
the first two are practically identical, Kelani being simply a separate
province of the Siamese school, which otherwise has its headquarters
in the inland districts. This school, founded as mentioned above by
priests who arrived in 1750, comprises about half of the whole
Sangha and has some pretensions to represent the hierarchy of
Ceylon, since the last kings of Kandy gave to the heads of the two
great monasteries in the capital, Asgiri and Malwatte, jurisdiction
over the north and south of the island respectively. It differs in some
particulars from the Amarapura school. It only admits members of
the highest caste and prescribes that monks are to wear the upper
robe over one shoulder only, whereas the Amarapurans admit
members of the first three castes (but not those lower in the social
scale) and require both shoulders to be covered. There are other
minor differences among which it is interesting to note that the
Siamese school object to the use of the formula “I dedicate this gift to
the Buddha” which is used in the other schools when anything is
presented to the order for the use of the monks. It is held that this
expression was correct in the lifetime of the Buddha but not after his
death. The two schools are not mutually hostile, and members of
each find a hospitable reception in the monasteries of the other. The
laity patronize both indifferently and both frequent the same places
of pilgrimage, though all of these and the majority of the temple
lands belong to the sect of Siam. It is wealthy, aristocratic and has
inherited the ancient traditions of Ceylon, whereas the Amarapurans
are more active and inclined to propaganda. It is said they are the
chief allies of the Theosophists and European Buddhists. The
Ramanya[100] school is more recent and distinct than the others,
being in some ways a reformed community. It aims at greater
strictness of life, forbidding monasteries to hold property and
insisting on genuine poverty. It also totally rejects the worship of
Hindu deities and its lay members do not recognize the monks of
other schools. It is not large but its influence is considerable.
It has been said that Buddhism flourished in Ceylon only when it

was able to secure the royal favour. There is some truth in this, for
the Sangha does not struggle on its own behalf but expects the laity
to provide for its material needs, making a return in educational and
29
religious services. Such a body if not absolutely dependent on royal

patronage has at least much to gain from it. Yet this admission must
not blind us to the fact that during its long and often distinguished
history Sinhalese Buddhism has been truly the national faith, as
opposed to the beliefs of various invaders, and has also ministered to
the spiritual aspirations of the nation. As Knox said in a period when
it was not particularly flourishing, the Hindu gods look after worldly
affairs but Buddha after the soul. When the island passed under
British rule and all religions received impartial recognition, the result
was not disastrous to Buddhism: the number of Bhikkhus greatly
increased, especially in the latter half of the nineteenth century. And
if in earlier periods there was an interval in which technically
speaking the Sangha did not exist, this did not mean that interest in
it ceased, for as soon as the kingdom became prosperous the first
care of the kings was to set the Church in order. This zeal can be
attributed to nothing but conviction and affection, for Buddhism is
not a faith politically useful to an energetic and warlike prince.
Sinhalese Buddhism is often styled primitive or original and it may

fairly be said to preserve in substance both the doctrine and practice
inculcated in the earliest Pali literature. In calling this primitive we
must remember the possibility that some of this literature was
elaborated in Ceylon itself. But, putting the text of the Piṭakas aside,
it would seem that the early Sinhalese Buddhism was the same as
that of Asoka, and that it never underwent any important change. It
is true that mediæval Sinhalese literature is full of supernatural
legends respecting the Buddha,[101] but still he does not become a
god (for he has attained Nirvana) and the great Bodhisattvas,
Avalokita and Manjuśrî, are practically unknown. The
Abhidhammattha-sangaha,[102] which is still the text-book most in use
among the Bhikkhus, adheres rigidly to the methods of the
Abhidhamma.[103] It contains neither devotional nor magical matter
but prescribes a course of austere mental training, based on
psychological analysis and culminating in the rapture of meditation.
Such studies and exercises are beyond the capacity of the majority,
but no other road to salvation is officially sanctioned for the
Bhikkhu. It is admitted that there are no Arhats now—just as
Christianity has no contemporary saints—but no other ideal, such as
the Boddhisattva of the Mahayanists, is held up for imitation.
30
Mediæval images of Avalokita and of goddesses have however been

found in Ceylon.[104] This is hardly surprising for the island was on
the main road to China, Java, and Camboja[105] and Mahayanist
teachers and pilgrims must have continually passed through it. The
Chinese biographies of that eminent tantrist, Amogha, say that he
went to Ceylon in 741 and elaborated his system there before
returning to China. It is said that in 1408 the Chinese being angry at
the ill-treatment of envoys whom they had sent to the shrine of the
tooth, conquered Ceylon and [made it pay tribute for fifty years. By
conquest no doubt is meant merely a military success and not
occupation, but the whole story implies possibilities of acquaintance
with Chinese Buddhism.
It is clear that, though the Hinayanist church was predominant

throughout the history of the island, there were up to the twelfth
century heretical sects called Vaitulya or Vetulyaka and Vâjira which
though hardly rivals of orthodoxy were a thorn in its side. A party at
the Abhayagiri monastery were favourably disposed to the Vaitulya
sect which, though often suppressed, recovered and reappeared,
being apparently reinforced from India. This need not mean from
southern India, for Ceylon had regular intercourse with the north
and perhaps the Vaitulyas were Mahayanists from Bengal. The
Nikâya-Sangrahawa also mentions that in the ninth century there
was a sect called Nîlapatadarśana,[106] who wore blue robes and
preached indulgence in wine and love. They were possibly Tantrists
from the north but were persecuted in southern India and never
influential in Ceylon.
The Mahâvaṃsa is inclined to minimize the importance of all sects

compared with the Mahâvihâra, but the picture given by the Nikâya-
Sangrahawa may be more correct. It says that the Vaitulyas,
described as infidel Brahmans who had composed a Piṭaka of their
own, made four attempts to obtain a footing at the Abhayagiri
monastery.[107] In the ninth century it represents king Matvalasen
as having to fly because he had embraced the false doctrine of the
Vâjiras. These are mentioned in another passage in connection with
the Vaitulyas: they are said to have composed the Gûḍha
Vinaya[108] and many Tantras. They perhaps were connected with
the Vajrayâna, a phase of Tantric Buddhism. But a few years later
king Mungayinsen set the church in order. He recognized the three
orthodox schools or nikâyas called Theriya, Dhammaruci and
Sâgaliya but proscribed the others and set guards on the coast to
prevent the importation of heresy. Nevertheless the Vâjiriya and
Vaitulya doctrines [were secretly practised. An inscription in
31
Sanskrit found at the Jetavana and attributed to the ninth

century[109] records the foundation of a Vihâra for a hundred
resident monks, 25 from each of the four nikâyas, which it appears to
regard as equivalent. But in 1165 the great Parâkrama Bâhu held a
synod to restore unity in the church. As a result, all Nikâyas (even
the Dhammaruci) which did not conform to the Mahâvihâra were
suppressed[110] and we hear no more of the Vaitulyas and Vâjiriyas.
Thus there was once a Mahayanist faction in Ceylon, but it was

recruited from abroad, intermittent in activity and was finally
defeated, whereas the Hinayanist tradition was national and
continuous.
Considering the long lapse of time, the monastic life of Ceylon has
not deviated much in practice from the injunctions of the Vinaya.
Monasteries like those of Anuradhapura, which are said to have
contained thousands of monks, no longer exist. The largest now to be
found—those at Kandy—do not contain more than fifty but as a rule
a pansala (as these institutions are now called) has not more than
five residents and more often only two or three. Some pansalas have
villages assigned to them and some let their lands and do not scruple
to receive the rent. The monks still follow the ancient routine of
making a daily round with the begging bowl, but the food thus
collected is often given to the poor or even to animals and the
inmates of the pansala eat a meal which has been cooked there. The
Pâtimokkha is recited (at least in part) twice a month and
ordinations are held annually.[111]
The duties of the Bhikkhus are partly educational, partly clerical. In

most villages the children receive elementary education gratis in the
pansala, and the preservation of the ancient texts, together with the
long list of Pali and Sinhalese works produced until recent times
almost exclusively by members of the Sangha,[112] is a proof that it
has not neglected literature. The [chief public religious observances
are preaching and reading the scriptures. This latter, known as Bana,
is usually accompanied by a word for word translation made by the
reciter or an assistant. Such recitations may form part of the ordinary
ceremonial of Uposatha days and most religious establishments have
a room where they can be held, but often monks are invited to reside
in a village during Was (July to October) and read Bana, and often a
layman performs a pinkama or act of merit by entertaining monks
for several days and inviting his neighbours to hear them recite. The
recitation of the Jâtakas is particularly popular but the suttas of the
Dîgha Nikâya are also often read. On special occasions such as entry
32
into a new house, an eclipse or any incident which suggests that it

might be well to ward off the enmity of supernatural powers, it is
usual to recite a collection of texts taken largely from the Suttanipâta
and called Pirit. The word appears to be derived from the Pali paritta,
a defence, and though the Pali scriptures do not sanction this use of
the Buddha’s discourses they countenance the idea that evil may be
averted by the use of formulæ.[113]
Although Sinhalese Buddhism has not diverged much from the Pali
scriptures in its main doctrines and discipline, yet it tolerates a
superstructure of Indian beliefs and ceremonies which forbid us to
call it pure except in a restricted sense. At present there may be said
to be three religions in Ceylon; local animism, Hinduism and
Buddhism are all inextricably mixed together. By local animism I
mean the worship of native spirits who do not belong to the ordinary
Hindu pantheon though they may be identified with its members.
The priests of this worship are called Kapuralas and one of their
principal ceremonies consists in dancing until they are supposed to
be possessed by a spirit—the devil dancing of Europeans. Though
this religion is distinct from ordinary Hinduism, its deities and
ceremonies find parallels in the southern Tamil country. In Ceylon it
is not merely a village superstition but possesses [temples of
considerable size[114], for instance at Badulla and near Ratnapura. In
the latter there is a Buddhist shrine in the court yard, so that the
Blessed One may countenance the worship, much as the Piṭakas
represent him as patronizing and instructing the deities of ancient
Magadha, but the structure and observances of the temple itself are
not Buddhist. The chief spirit worshipped at Ratnapura and in most
of these temples is Mahâ Saman, the god of Adam’s Peak. He is
sometimes identified with Lakshmana, the brother of Râma, and
sometimes with Indra.
About a quarter of the population are Tamils professing Hinduism.

Hindu temples of the ordinary Dravidian type are especially
frequent in the northern districts, but they are found in most parts
and at Kandy two may be seen close to the shrine of the Tooth.[115]
Buddhists feel no scruple in frequenting them and the images of
Hindu deities are habitually introduced into Buddhist temples.
These often contain a hall, at the end of which are one or more sitting
figures of the Buddha, on the right hand side a recumbent figure of
him, but on the left a row of four statues representing Mahâbrahmâ,
Vishṇu, Kârttikeya and Mahâsâman. Of these Vishṇu generally
receives marked attention, shown by the number of prayers written
on slips of paper which are attached to his hand. Nor is this worship
33
found merely as a survival in the older temples. The four figures

appear in the newest edifices and the image of Vishṇu never fails to
attract votaries. Yet though a rigid Buddhist may regard such
devotion as dangerous, it is not treasonable, for Vishṇu is regarded
not as a competitor but as a very reverent admirer of the Buddha and
anxious to befriend good Buddhists.
Even more insidious is the pageantry which since the days of King
Tissa has been the outward sign of religion. It may be justified as
being merely an edifying method of venerating the memory of a
great man but when images and relics are treated with profound
reverence or carried in solemn procession it is hard for the ignorant,
especially if they are accustomed to the ceremonial of Hindu
temples, not to think that these symbols are divine. This ornate
ritualism is not authorized in any known canonical text, but it is
thoroughly Indian. Asoka records in his inscriptions the institution
of religious processions and Hsüan Chuang relates how King Harsha
organized a festival during which an image of the Buddha was
carried on an elephant while the monarch and his ally the king of
Assam, dressed as Indra and Brahmâ respectively, waited on it like
servants.[116] Such festivities were congenial to the Sinhalese, as is
attested by the long series of descriptions which fill the Mahâvaṃsa
down to the very last book, by what Fa-Hsien saw about 412 and by
the Perahera festival celebrated to-day.
The Buddhism of southern India resembled that of Ceylon in

character though not in history. It was introduced under the auspices
of Asoka, who mentions in his inscriptions the Colas, Pândyas and
Keralaputras.[117] Hsüan Chuang says that in the Malakûta country,
somewhere near Madura or Tanjore, there was a stupa erected by
Asoka’s orders and also a monastery founded by Mahinda. It is
possible that this apostle and others laboured less in Ceylon and
more in south India than is generally supposed. The pre-eminence
and continuity of Sinhalese Buddhism are due to the conservative
temper of the natives who were relatively little moved by the winds
of religion which blew strong on the mainland, bearing with them
now Jainism, now the worship of Vishṇu or Śiva.
In the Tamil country Buddhism of an Asokan type appears to have

been prevalent about the time of our era. The poem Manimegalei,
which by general consent was composed in an early century A.D., is
34
Buddhist but shows no leanings to Mahayanism. It speaks of Śivaism

and many other systems[118] as flourishing, but contains no hint that
Buddhism was persecuted. But persecution or at least very
unfavourable conditions set in. Since at the time of Hsüan Chuang’s
visit Buddhism[ was in an advanced stage of decadence, it seems
probable that the triumph of Śivaism began in the third or fourth
century and that Buddhism offered slight resistance, Jainism being
the only serious competitor for the first place. But for a long while,
perhaps even until the sixteenth century, monasteries were kept up
in special centres, and one of these is of peculiar importance, namely
Kancîpuram or Conjeveram.[119] Hsüan Chuang found there 100
monasteries with more than 10,000 brethren, all Sthaviras, and
mentions that it was the birthplace of Dharmapâla.[120] We have
some further information from the Talaing chronicles[121] which
suggests the interesting hypothesis that the Buddhism of Burma was
introduced or refreshed by missionaries from southern India. They
give a list of teachers who flourished in that country, including
Kaccâyana and the philosopher Anuruddha.[122] Of Dharmapâla
they say that he lived at the monastery of Bhadratittha near
Kancipura and wrote fourteen commentaries in Pali.[123] One was
on the Visuddhi-magga of Buddhaghosa and it is probable that he
lived shortly after that great writer and like him studied in Ceylon.
I shall recur to this question of south Indian Buddhism in treating of

Burma, but the data now available are very meagre.
FOOTNOTES:
[10] E.g. Burma in the reign of Anawrata and later in the time of
Chapaṭa about 1200, and Siam in the time of Sûryavaṃsa Râma,
1361. On the other hand in 1752 the Sinhalese succession was
validated by obtaining monks from Burma.
[11] Geiger, Literatur und Sprache der Singhalesen, p. 91.
[12] Compare the history of Khotan. The first Indian colonists seem
to have introduced a Prakrit dialect. Buddhism and Sanskrit came
afterwards.
[13] Literally demons, that is wild uncanny men. I refrain from

discussing the origin and ethnological position of the Vaeddas for it
hardly affects the history of Buddhism in Ceylon. For Vijaya’s
conquests see Mahâvaṃsa VII.
35
[14] IX. 26.
[15] Dîpavaṃsa I. 45-81, II. 1-69. Mahâvaṃsa I. 19-83. The legend that
the Buddha visited Ceylon and left his footprint on Adam’s peak is
at least as old as Buddhaghosa. See Samanta-pâsâdikâ in
Oldenburg’s Vinaya Pitaka, vol. III, p. 332 and the quotations in
Skeen’s Adam’s Peak, p. 50.
[16] Dîpa. V. x. 1-9. Mahâvaṃsa VIII. 1-27, IX. 1-12.
[17] Mahâvaṃsa X. 96, 102.
[18] For the credibility of the Sinhalese traditions see Geiger introd.
to translation of Mahâvaṃsa 1912 and Norman in J.R.A.S. 1908, pp. 1
ff. and on the other side R.O. Franke in W.Z.K.M. 21, pp. 203 ff., 317
ff. and Z.D.M.G. 63, pp. 540 ff.
[19] Grünwedel, Buddhist art in India, pp. 69-72. Rhys Davids,

Buddhist India, p. 302.
[20] The Jâtaka-nidâna-kathâ is also closely allied to these works in

those parts where the subject matter is the same.
[21] This section was probably called Mahâvaṃsa in a general sense

long before the name was specially applied to the work which now
bears it.
[22] See introduction to Oldenburg’s edition, pp. 8, 9.
[23] Perhaps this is alluded to at the beginning of the Mahâvaṃsa

itself, “The book made by the ancients (porvâṇehi kato) was in some
places too diffuse and in others too condensed and contained many
repetitions.”
[24] The Mahâvaṃsa was continued by later writers and brought

down to about 1780 A.D.
[25] The Mahâvaṃsatîkâ, a commentary written between 1000 and

1250 A.D., has also some independent value because the old
Aṭṭhakathâ-Mahâvaṃsa was still extant and used by the writer.
[26] Son according to the Sinhalese sources but according to Hsüan

Chuang and others, younger brother. In favour of the latter it may be
said that the younger brothers of kings often became monks in order
to avoid political complications.
36
[27] The modern Mahintale.
[28] The Mahâvaṃsa implies that he had already some acquaintance

with Buddhism. It represents him as knowing that monks do not eat
in the afternoon and as suggesting that it would be better to ordain
the layman Bhandu.
[29] The chronicles give with some slight divergences the names of
the texts on which his preaching was based. It is doubtless meant
that he recited the Sutta with a running exposition.
[30] Mahâvaṃ. xx. 17.
[31] Many other places claimed to possess this relic.
[32] Of course the antiquity of the Sinhalese Bo-tree is a different

question from the identity of the parent tree with the tree under
which the Buddha sat.
[33] Mahâvaṃ. XVIII.; Dîpavaṃ. XV. and XVI.
[34] But he says nothing about Mahinda or Sanghamittâ and does

not support the Mahâvaṃsa in details.
[35] Duṭṭha, meaning bad, angry or violent, apparently refers to the

ferocity shown in his struggle with the Tamils.
[36] Dîpavaṃsa XIX. 1. Mahâvaṃsa XXVII. 1-48. See Fergusson, Hist.

Ind. Architecture, 1910, pp. 238, 246. I find it hard to picture such a
building raised on pillars. Perhaps it was something like the Sat-
mahal-prasâda at Pollanarua.
[37] Parker, Ancient Ceylon, p. 282. The restoration of the Ruwanweli

Dagoba was undertaken by Buddhists in 1873.
[38] Mahâvaṃsa XXVIII.-XXXI. Duṭṭhagâmaṇi died before it was

finished.
[39] Mahâvaṃsa XXIX. 37. Yonanâgarâlasanda. The town is also

mentioned as situated on an Island in the Indus: Mil. Pan. III. 7. 4.
[40] According to the common reckoning B.C. 88-76: according to

Geiger B.C. 29-17. It seems probable that in the early dates of
Sinhalese history there is an error of about 62 years. See Geiger,
Trans. Mahâvaṃsa, pp. XXX ff. and Fleet, J.R.A.S. 1909, pp. 323-356.
37
[41] For the site see Parker’s Ancient Ceylon, pp. 299 ff. The
Mahâvaṃsa (XXXIII. 79 and X. 98-100) says it was built on the site of
an ancient Jain establishment and Kern thinks that this tradition
hints at circumstances which account for the heretical and
contentious spirit of the Abhaya monks.
[42] Mahâv. XXXIII. 100-104. See too the Ṫîkâ quote by Turnour in
his introduction, p. liii.
[43] A work on ecclesiastical history written about 1395. Ed. and

Trans. Colombo Record Office.
[44] The probable error in Sinhalese dates mentioned in a previous

note continues till the twelfth century A.D. though gradually
decreasing. For the early centuries of the Christian era it is probable
that the accepted dates should be put half a century later
[45] Mahâvaṃsa XXXVI. 41. Vetulyavâdam madditvâ. According to

the Nikâya Sang, he burnt their Piṭaka.
[46] On Kathâ-vat. XVIII. 1 and 2. Printed in the Journal of the Pali

Text Soc. for 1889.
[47] Watters, II. 234. Cf. Hsüan Chuang’s life, chap. IV.
[48] Mahâvaṃ. XXXVI. iii. ff. Goṭhâbhaya’s date was probably 302-
315 and Mahâsena’s 325-352. The common chronology makes
Goṭhâbhaya reign from 244 to 257 and Mahâsena from 269 to 296
A.D.
[49] Quoted by Turnour, Introd. p. liii. The Mahâvaṃ. V. 13,

expressly states that the Dhammaruci and Sâgaliya sects originated
in Ceylon.
[50] I.e. as I understand, the two divisions of the Sutta Vibhanga.
[51] It was written up to date at various periods. The chapters which

take up the history after the death of Mahâsena are said to be the
work of Dhammakitti, who lived about 1250.
[52] He was a contemporary of the Gupta King Samudragupta who

reigned approximately 330-375 A.D. See S. Lévi in J.A. 1900, pp. 316
ff, 401 ff. This synchronism is a striking confirmation of Fleet and
Geiger’s chronology.
[53] E.g. the tomb of Râmânuja at Srîrangam.
38
[54] For a somewhat similar reason the veneration of relics is

prevalent among Moslims. Islam indeed provides an object of
worship but its ceremonies are so austere and monotonous that any
devotional practices which are not forbidden as idolatrous are
welcome to the devout.
[55] Dig. Nik. XVI. v. 27.
[56] Plutarch mentions a story that the relics of King Menander were
similarly divided into eight portions but the story may be merely a
replica of the obsequies of the Buddha.
[57] IV. 3, 24. The first text is from Mahâparinibbâna Sutta, V. 24. The
second has not been identified.
[58] Journal des Savants, Oct. 1906.
[59] See Norman, “Buddhist legends of Asoka and his times,” in

J.A.S. Beng. 1910.
[60] Just as the Tooth was considered to be the palladium of

Sinhalese kings.
[61] Record of Buddhist kingdoms. Legge, pp. 34, 35. Fa-Hsien

speaks of the country not the town of Peshawar (Purûshapura).
[62] Ibid. p. 109. Fa-Hsien does not indicate that at this time there was
a rival bowl in Ceylon but represents the preacher as saying it was
then in Gandhara.
[63] Watters, I. pp. 202, 203. But the life of Hsüan Chuang says
Benares not Persia.
[64] Marco Polo trans. Yule, II. pp. 320, 330.
[65] For the history of the tooth see Mahâvaṃsa, p. 241, in Turnour’s
edition: the Dathavaṃsa in Pali written by Dhammakitti in 1211
A.D.: and the Sinhalese poems Daladapujavali and Dhatuvansaya.
See also Da Cunha, Memoir on the History of the Tooth Relic of Ceylon,
1875, and Yule’s notes on Marco Polo, II. pp. 328-330.
[66] I.e. about 361 or 310, according to which chronology is adopted,

but neither Fa-Hsien or Hsüan Chuang says anything about its
arrival from India and this part of the story might be dismissed as a
legend. But seeing how extraordinary were the adventures of the
39
tooth in historical times, it would be unreasonable to deny that it

may have been smuggled out of India for safety.
[67] Various accounts are given of the disposal of these teeth, but
more than enough relics were preserved in various shrines to
account for all. Hsüan Chuang saw or heard of sacred teeth in Balkh,
Nagar, Kashmir, Kanauj and Ceylon. Another tooth is said to be kept
near Foo-chow.
[68] Plausibly supposed to be Puri. The ceremonies still observed in

the temple of Jagannath are suspected of being based on Buddhist
rites. Dantapura of the Kâlingas is however mentioned in some
verses quoted in Dîgha Nikâya XIX. 36. This looks as if the name
might be pre-Buddhist.
[69] They are called Ranmali and Danta in the Râjâvaliya.
[70] There is a striking similarity between this rite and the

ceremonies observed at Puri, where the images of Jagannâtha and
his relatives are conveyed every summer with great pomp to a
country residence where they remain during some weeks.
[71] See Tennent’s Ceylon, vol. II. pp. 29, 30 and 199 ff. and the
Portuguese authorities quoted.
[72] Fortune in Two Visits to Tea Countries of China, vol. II. pp. 107-8,
describes one of these teeth preserved in the Ku-shan monastery
near Foo-chow.
[73] This practice must be very old. The Vinaya of the

Mûlasarvâstivâdins and similar texts speak of offering flowers to a
tooth of the Buddha. See J.A. 1914, II. pp. 523, 543. The Pali Canon
too tells us that the relics of the Buddha were honoured with
garlands and perfumes.
[74] Chap. XXXVII.
[75] Both probably represent the tradition current at the Mahâvihâra,

but according to the Talaing tradition Buddhaghosa was a Brahman
born at Thaton.
[76] The Mahâvaṃsa says he composed the Jñânodaya and

Atthasâlinî at this time before starting for Ceylon.
[77] Fa-Hsien is chary of mentioning contemporary celebrities but he

refers to a Well-known monk called Ta-mo-kiu-ti (? Dhammakathi )
40
and had Buddhaghosa been already celebrated he would hardly

have omitted him.
[78] In the Coms. on the Dîgha and Dhammasangani.
[79] See Rhys Davids and Carpenter’s introduction to Sumangalavi, I.

p. x.
[80] In the Journal of Pali Text Soc. 1891, pp. 76-164. Since the above
was written the first volume of the text of the Visuddhi magga,
edited by Mrs. Rhys Davids, has been published by the Pali Text
Society, 1920.
[81] Bhagavato Sâsanam. See Buddhaghosuppatti, chap. I.
[82] It appears to be unknown to the Chinese Tripitaka. For some

further remarks on the Sinhalese Canon see Book III. chap. XIII. § 3.
[83] That is according to Geiger 386-416 A.D. Perhaps he was the Ta-
mo-kiu-ti mentioned by Fa-Hsien.
[84] The tendency seems odd but it can be paralleled in India where
it is not uncommon to rewrite vernacular works in Sanskrit. See
Grierson, J.R.A.S. 1913, p. 133. Even in England in the seventeenth
century Bacon seems to have been doubtful of the immortality of his
works in English and prepared a Latin translation of his Essays.
[85] It is reported with some emphasis as the tradition of the

Ancients in Buddhaghosuppatti, chap. VII. If the works were merely
those which Buddhaghosa himself had translated the procedure
seems somewhat drastic.
[86] Mahâv. XXXIII. Dhammasokova so kasi Piṭakattaye Saṇgahan.

Dhâtusena reigned from 459-477 according to the common
chronology or 509-527 according to Geiger.
[87] Mahâv. XLII. 35 ff.
[88] Mahâv. LXXVIII. 21-23.
[89] Mahâv. XXXVIII. Akâsi patimâgehe bahumangalacetiye

boddhisatte ca tathâsun. Cf. Fa-Hsien, chap. XXVIII. ad fin.
[90] Or Parakkama Bâhu. Probably 1153-1186.
[91] Mahâvaṃsa LX. 4-7.
41
[92] Mahâvaṃsa LXXVIII. 21-27.
[93] Mahâv. LXXXIV. If this means the region of Madras, the obvious
question is what learned Buddhist can there have been there at this
period.
[94] J. Ant. 1893, pp. 40, 41.
[95] I take this statement from Tennent who gives references.
[96] See Ceylon Antiquary, I. 3, pp. 148, 197.
[97] Râjasinha I (1581) is said to have made Śivaism the Court

religion.
[98] His reign is dated as 1679-1701, also as 1687-1706. It is

remarkable that the Mahâvaṃsa makes both the kings called Vimala
Dharma send religious embassies to Arakan. See XCIV. 15, 16 and
XCVII. 10, 11.
[99] See for some details Lorgeou: Notice sur un Manuscrit Siamois
contenant la relation de deux missions religieuses envoyées de Siam
à Ceylon au milieu du xviii Siècle. Jour. Asiat. 1906, pp. 533 ff. The
king called Dhammika by the Mahâvaṃsa appears to have been
known as Phra Song Tham in Siam. The interest felt by the Siamese
in Ceylon at this period is shown by the Siamese translation of the
Mahâvaṃsa made in 1796.
[100] Râmañña is the part of Burma between Arakan and Siam.
[101] See Spence Hardy, Manual of Buddhism, chap. VII.
[102] A translation by S.Z. Aung and Mrs. Rhys Davids has been
published by the Pali Text Society. The author Anuruddha appears
to have lived between the eighth and twelfth centuries.
[103] The Sinhalese had a special respect for the Abhidhamma.

Kassapa V (c. A.D. 930) caused it to be engraved on plates of gold.
Ep. Zeyl. I. p. 52.
[104] See Coomaraswamy in J.R.A.S. 1909, pp. 283-297.
[105] For intercourse with Camboja see Epigr. Zeylanica, II. p. 74.
[106] A dubious legend relates that they were known in the north
and suppressed by Harsha. See Ettinghausen, Harsha Vardhana, 1906,
42
p. 86. Nil Sâdhana appears to be a name for tantric practices. See

Avalon, Principles of Tantra, preface, p. xix.
[107] In the reigns of Vohâratissa, Goṭhâbhaya, Mahâsena and

Ambaherana Salamevan. The kings Matvalasen and Mungayinsen
are also known as Sena I and II.
[108] Secret Vinaya.
[109] Epigraphia Zeylan. I. p. 4.
[110] One of the king’s inscriptions says that he reconciled the clergy
of the three Nikâyas. Ep. Zeyl. I. p. 134.
[111] See Bowden in J.R.A.S. 1893, pp. 159 ff. The account refers to
the Malwatte Monastery. But it would appear that the Pâtimokkha is
recited in country places when a sufficient number of monks meet on
Uposatha days.
[112] Even the poets were mostly Bhikkhus. Sinhalese literature

contains a fair number of historical and philosophical works but
curiously little about law. See Jolly, Recht und Sitte, p. 44.
[113] E.g. in the Aṭânâṭiya sutta (Dig. Nik. XXXII.) friendly spirits
teach a spell by which members of the order may protect themselves
against evil ones and in Jâtaka 159 the Peacock escapes danger by
reciting every day a hymn to the sun and the praises of past
Buddhas. See also Bunyiu, Nanjios Catalogue, Nos. 487 and 800.
[114] See for an account of the Maha Saman Devale, Ceylon Ant. July,
1916.
[115] So a mediæval inscription at Mahintale of Mahinda IV records

the foundation of Buddhist edifices and a temple to a goddess. Ep.
Zeyl. I. p. 103.
[116] Similarly in a religious procession described in the Mahâvaṃsa

(XCIX. 52; about 1750 A.D.) there were “men in the dress of
Brahmâs.”
[117] Rock Edicts, II. and XIII. Three inscriptions of Asoka have been
found in Mysore.
[118] The Manimegalei even mentions six systems of philosophy

which are not the ordinary Darśanas but Lokâyatam, Bauddham,
Sâṇkhyam, Naiyâyikam, Vaiśeshikam, Mîmâmsakam.
43
[119] Kan-chih-pu-lo. Watters, Yüan Chuang, II. 226. The

identification is not without difficulties and it has been suggested
that the town is really Negapatam. The Life of the pilgrim says that it
was on the coast, but he does not say so himself and his biographer
may have been mistaken.
[120] See art. by Rhys Davids in E.R.E.
[121] See Forchhammer, Jardine Prize Essay, 1885, pp. 24 ff.
[122] Author of the Abhidhammattha-sangaha.
[123] Some have been published by the P.T. Society.
44
CHAPTER XXXVI
BURMA
Until recent times Burma remained somewhat isolated and

connected with foreign countries by few ties. The chronicles contain
a record of long and generally peaceful intercourse with Ceylon, but
this though important for religion and literature had little political
effect. The Chinese occasionally invaded Upper Burma and
demanded tribute but the invasions were brief and led to no
permanent occupation. On the west Arakan was worried by the
Viceroys of the Mogul Emperors and on the east the Burmese
frequently invaded Siam. But otherwise from the beginning of
authentic history until the British annexation Burma was left to itself
and had not, like so many Asiatic states, to submit to foreign
conquest and the imposition of foreign institutions. Yet let it not be
supposed that its annals are peaceful and uneventful. The land
supplied its own complications, for of the many races inhabiting it,
three, the Burmese, Talaings and Shans, had rival aspirations and
founded dynasties. Of these three races, the Burmese proper appear
to have come from the north west, for a chain of tribes speaking
cognate languages is said to extend from Burma to Nepal. The Mōns
or Talaings are allied linguistically to the Khmers of Camboja. Their
country (sometimes called Râmaññadesa) was in Lower Burma and
its principal cities were Pegu and Thaton. The identity of the name
Talaing with Telingana or Kalinga is not admitted by all scholars,
but native tradition connects the foundation of the kingdom with the
east coast of India and it seems certain that such a connection existed
in historical times and kept alive Hinayanist Buddhism which may
have been originally introduced by this route.
The Shan States lie in the east of Burma on the borders of Yünnan
and Laos. Their traditions carry their foundation back to the fourth
and fifth centuries B.C. There is no confirmation of this, but bodies of
Shans, a race allied to the Siamese, may [have migrated into this
region at any date, perhaps bringing Buddhism with them or
receiving it direct from China. Recent investigations have shown that
there was also a fourth race, designated as Pyus, who occupied
territory between the Burmese and Talaings in the eleventh century.
45
They will probably prove of considerable importance for philology

and early history, perhaps even for the history of some phases of
Burmese Buddhism, for the religious terms found in their
inscriptions are Sanskrit rather than Pali and this suggests direct
communication with India. But until more information is available
any discussion of this interesting but mysterious people involves so
many hypotheses and arguments of detail that it is impossible in a
work like the present. Prome was one of their principal cities, their
name reappears in P’iao, the old Chinese designation of Burma, and
perhaps also in Pagan, one form of which is Pugâma.[124]
Throughout the historical period the pre-eminence both in

individual kings and dynastic strength rested with the Burmese but
their contests with the Shans and Talaings form an intricate story
which can be related here only in outline. Though the three races are
distinct and still preserve their languages, yet they conquered one
another, lived in each other’s capitals and shared the same ambitions
so that in more recent centuries no great change occurred when new
dynasties came to power or territory was redistributed. The long
chronicle of bloodstained but ineffectual quarrels is relieved by the
exploits of three great kings, Anawrata, Bayin Naung and Alompra.
Historically, Arakan may be detached from the other provinces. The

inhabitants represent an early migration from Tagaung and were not
annexed by any kingdom in Burma until 1784 A.D. Tagaung,
situated on the Upper Irrawaddy in the Ruby Mines district, was the
oldest capital of the Burmese and has a scanty history apparently
going back to the early centuries of our era. Much the same may be
said of the Talaing kingdom in Lower Burma. The kings of Tagaung
were succeeded by another dynasty connected with them which
reigned at Prome. No dates can be given for these events, nor is the
part which the Pyus played in them clear, but it is said that the
Talaings [destroyed the kingdom of Prome in 742 A.D.[125]
According to tradition the centre of power moved about this time to
Pagan[126] on the bank of the Irrawaddy somewhat south of
Mandalay. But the silence of early Chinese accounts[127] as to
Pagan, which is not mentioned before the Sung dynasty, makes it
probable that later writers exaggerated its early importance and it is
only when Anawrata, King of Pagan and the first great name in
Burmese history, ascended the throne that the course of events
becomes clear and coherent. He conquered Thaton in 1057 and
transported many of the inhabitants to his own capital. He also
subdued the nearer Shan states and was master of nearly all Burma
as we understand the term. The chief work of his successors was to
46
construct the multitude of pagodas which still ornament the site of

Pagan. It would seem that the dynasty gradually degenerated and
that the Shans and Talaings acquired strength at its expense. Its end
came in 1298 and was hastened by the invasion of Khubilai Khan.
There then arose two simultaneous Shan dynasties at Panya and
Sagaing which lasted from 1298 till 1364. They were overthrown by
King Thadominpaya who is believed to have been a Shan. He
founded Ava which, whether it was held by Burmese or Shans, was
regarded as the chief city of Burma until 1752, although throughout
this period the kings of Pegu and other districts were frequently
independent. During the fourteenth century another kingdom grew
up at Toungoo[128] in Lower Burma. Its rulers were originally Shan
governors sent from Ava but ultimately they claimed to be
descendants of the last king of Pagan and, in this character, Bureng
or Bayin Naung (1551-1581), the second great ruler of Burma,
conquered Prome, Pegu and Ava. His kingdom began to break up
immediately after his death but his dynasty ruled in Ava until the
middle of the eighteenth century.
During this period Europeans first made their appearance and

quarrels with Portuguese adventurers were added to native
[dissensions. The Shans and Talaings became turbulent and after a
tumultuous interval the third great national hero, Alaung-paya or
Alompra, came to the front. In the short space of eight years (1752-
1760), he gained possession of Ava, made the Burmese masters of
both the northern and southern provinces, founded Rangoon and
invaded both Manipur and Siam. While on the latter expedition he
died. Some of his successors held their court at Ava but Bodawpaya
built a new capital at Amarapura (1783) and Mindon Min another at
Mandalay (1857). The dynasty came to an end in 1886 when King
Thibaw was deposed by the Government of India and his dominions
annexed.
The early history of Buddhism in Burma is obscure, as in most other

countries, and different writers have maintained that it was
introduced from northern India, the east coast of India, Ceylon,
China or Camboja.[129] All these views may be in a measure true,
for there is reason to believe that it was not introduced at one epoch
or from one source or in one form.
47
It is not remarkable that Indian influence should be strong among

the Burmese. The wonder rather is that they have preserved such
strong individuality in art, institutions and everyday life, that no one
can pass from India into Burma without feeling that he has entered a
new country. This is because the mountains which separate it from
Eastern Bengal and run right down to the sea form a barrier still
sufficient to prevent [communication by rail. But from the earliest
times Indian immigrants and Indian ideas have been able to find
their way both by land and sea. According to the Burmese chronicles
Tagaung was founded by the Hindu prince Abhirâja in the ninth
century B.C. and the kingdom of Arakan claims as its first ruler an
ancient prince of Benares. The legends have not much more
historical value than the Kshattriya genealogies which Brahmans
have invented for the kings of Manipur, but they show that the
Burmese knew of India and wished to connect themselves with it.
This spirit led not only to the invention of legends but to the
application of Indian names to Burmese localities. For instance
Aparantaka, which really designates a district of western India, is
identified by native scholars with Upper Burma.[130] The two
merchants Tapussa and Bhallika who were the first to salute the
Buddha after his enlightenment are said to have come from Ukkala.
This is usually identified with Orissa but Burmese tradition locates it
in Burma. A system of mythical geography has thus arisen.
The Buddha himself is supposed to have visited Burma, as well as

Ceylon, in his lifetime[131] and even to have imparted some of his
power to the celebrated image which is now in the Arakan Pagoda at
Mandalay. Another resemblance to the Sinhalese story is the
evangelization of lower Burma by Asoka’s missionaries. The
Dîpavamsa states[132] that Sona and Uttara were despatched to
Suvarṇabhûmi. This is identified with Râmaññadesa or the district of
Thaton, which appears to be a corruption of Saddhammapura[133]
and the tradition is accepted in Burma. The scepticism with which
modern scholars have received it is perhaps unmerited, but the
preaching of these missionaries, if it ever took place, cannot at
present be connected with other historical events. Nevertheless the
statement of the Dîpavaṃsa is significant. The work was composed
in the fourth century A.D. and taken from older chronicles. It may
therefore be [concluded that in the early centuries of our era lower
Burma had the reputation of being a Buddhist country.[134] It also
appears certain that in the eleventh century, when the Talaings were
conquered by Anawrata, Buddhist monks and copies of the Tipiṭaka
were found there. But we know little about the country in the
48
preceding centuries. The Kalyani inscription says that before

Anawrata’s conquest it was divided and decadent and during this
period there is no proof of intercourse with Ceylon but also no
disproof. One result of Anawrata’s conquest of Thaton was that he
exchanged religious embassies with the king of Ceylon, and it is
natural to suppose that the two monarchs were moved to this step
by traditions of previous communications. Intercourse with the east
coast of India may be assumed as natural, and is confirmed by the
presence of Sanskrit words in old Talaing and the information about
southern India in Talaing records, in which the city of Conjevaram,
the great commentator Dharmapâla and other men of learning are
often mentioned. Analogies have also been traced between the
architecture of Pagan and southern India.[135] It will be seen that
such communication by sea may have brought not only Hinayanist
Buddhism but also Mahayanist and Tantric Buddhism as well as
Brahmanism from Bengal and Orissa, so that it is not surprising if all
these influences can be detected in the ancient buildings and
sculptures of the country.[136] Still the most important evidence as
to the character of early Burmese Buddhism is Hinayanist and
furnished by inscriptions on thin golden plates and tiles, found near
the ancient site of Prome and deciphered by Finot.[137] They consist
of Hinayanist religious formulæ: the language is Pali: the alphabet is
of a south Indian type and is said to resemble closely that used in the
inscriptions of the Kadamba dynasty which ruled in Kanara from the
third to the [sixth century. It is to the latter part of this period that
the inscriptions are to be attributed. They show that a form of the
Hinayana, comparable, so far as the brief documents permit us to
judge, with the church of Ceylon, was then known in lower Burma
and was probably the state church. The character of the writing,
taken together with the knowledge of southern India shown by the
Talaing chronicles and the opinion of the Dîpavamsa that Burma was
a Buddhist country, is good evidence that lower Burma had accepted
Hinayanism before the sixth century and had intercourse with
southern India. More than that it would perhaps be rash to say.
The Burmese tradition that Buddhaghosa was a native of Thaton and

returned thither from Ceylon merits more attention than it has
received. It can be easily explained away as patriotic fancy. On the
other hand, if Buddhaghosa’s object was to invigorate Hinayanism in
India, the result of his really stupendous labours was singularly
small, for in India his name is connected with no religious
movement. But if we suppose that he went to Ceylon by way of the
holy places in Magadha and returned from the Coromandel Coast to
49
Burma where Hinayanism afterwards nourished, we have at least a

coherent narrative.[138]
It is noticeable that Târanâtha states[139] that in the Koki countries,

among which he expressly mentions Pukham (Pagan) and
Haṃsavatî (Pegu), Hinayanism was preached from the days of
Asoka onwards, but that the Mahayana was not known until the
pupils of Vasubandhu introduced it.
The presence of Hinayanism in Lower Burma naturally did not

prevent the arrival of Mahayanism. It has not left many certain traces
but Atîśa (c. 1000), a great figure in the history of Tibetan Buddhism,
is reported to have studied both in Magadha and in Suvarnadvîpa
by which Thaton must be meant. He would hardly have done this,
had the clergy of Thaton been unfriendly to Tantric learning. This
mediæval Buddhism was also, as in other countries, mixed with
Hinduism [but whereas in Camboja and Champa Śivaism, especially
the worship of the lingam, was long the official and popular cult and
penetrated to Siam, few Śivaite emblems but numerous statues of
Vishṇuite deities have hitherto been discovered in Burma.
The above refers chiefly to Lower Burma. The history of Burmese

Buddhism becomes clearer in the eleventh century but before
passing to this new period we must enquire what was the religious
condition of Upper Burma in the centuries preceding it. It is clear
that any variety of Buddhism or Brahmanism may have entered this
region from India by land at any epoch. According to both Hsüan
Chuang and I-Ching Buddhism flourished in Samaṭata and the latter
mentions images of Avalokita and the reading of the Prajñâ-
pâramitâ. The precise position of Samaṭata has not been fixed but in
any case it was in the east of Bengal and not far from the modern
Burmese frontier. The existence of early Sanskrit inscriptions at
Taungu and elsewhere has been recorded but not with as much
detail as could be wished.[140] Figures of Bodhisattvas and Indian
deities are reported from Prome,[141] and in the Lower Chindwin
district are rock-cut temples resembling the caves of Barabar in
Bengal. Inscriptions also show that at Prome there were kings,
perhaps in the seventh century, who used the Pyu language but bore
Sanskrit titles. According to Burmese tradition the Buddha himself
visited the site of Pagan and prophesied that a king called
Sammutiraya would found a city there and establish the faith. This
prediction is said to have been fulfilled in 108 A.D. but the notices
quoted from the Burmese chronicles are concerned less with the
progress of true religion than with the prevalence of heretics known
50
as Aris.[142] It has been conjectured that this name is a corruption of

Arya but it appears that the correct orthography is arañ representing
an original araṇyaka, that is forest priests. It is hard to say whether
they were degraded Buddhists or an indigenous priesthood who in
some [ways imitated what they knew of Brahmanic and Buddhist
institutions. They wore black robes, let their hair grow, worshipped
serpents, hung up in their temples the heads of animals that had
been sacrificed, and once a year they assisted the king to immolate a
victim to the Nats on a mountain top. They claimed power to expiate
all sins, even parricide. They lived in convents (which is their only
real resemblance to Buddhist monks) but were not celibate.[143]
Anawrata is said to have suppressed the Aris but he certainly did
not extirpate them for an inscription dated 1468 records their
existence in the Myingyan district. Also in a village near Pagan are
preserved Tantric frescoes representing Bodhisattvas with their
Śaktis. In one temple is an inscription dated 1248 and requiring the
people to supply the priests morning and evening with rice, beef,
betel, and a jar of spirits.[144] It is not clear whether these priests
were Aris or not, but they evidently professed an extreme form of
Buddhist Śaktism.
Chinese influences in Upper Burma must also be taken into account.

Burmese kings were perhaps among the many potentates who sent
religious embassies to the Emperor Wu-ti about 525 A.D. and the
T’ang[145] annals show an acquaintance with Burma. They describe
the inhabitants as devout Buddhists, reluctant to take life or even to
wear silk, since its manufacture involves the death of the silk worms.
There were a hundred monasteries into which the youth entered at
the age of seven, leaving at the age of twenty, if they did not intend
to become monks. The Chinese writer does not seem to have
regarded the religion of Burma as differing materially from
Buddhism as he knew it and some similarities in ecclesiastical
terminology shown by Chinese and Burmese may indicate the
presence of Chinese [influence.[146] But this influence, though
possibly strong between the sixth and tenth centuries A.D., and
again about the time of the Chinese invasion of 1284,[147] cannot be
held to exclude Indian influence.
Thus when Anawrata came to the throne[148] several forms of

religion probably co-existed at Pagan, and probably most of them
were corrupt, though it is a mistake to think of his dominions as
barbarous. The reformation which followed is described by Burmese
authors in considerable detail and as usual in such accounts is
ascribed to the activity of one personality, the Thera Arahanta who
51
came from Thaton and enjoyed Anawrata’s confidence. The story

implies that there was a party in Pagan which knew that the
prevalent creed was corrupt and also looked upon Thaton and
Ceylon as religious centres. As Anawrata was a man of arms rather
than a theologian, we may conjecture that his motive was to
concentrate in his capital the flower of learning as known in his
time—a motive which has often animated successful princes in Asia
and led to the unceremonious seizure of living saints. According to
the story he broke up the communities of Aris at the instigation of
Arahanta and then sent a mission to Manohari, king of Pegu, asking
for a copy of the Tipiṭaka and for relics. He received a contemptuous
reply intimating that he was not to be trusted with such sacred
objects. Anawrata in indignation collected an army, marched against
the Talaings and ended by carrying off to Pagan not only elephant
loads of scriptures and relics, but also all the Talaing monks and
nobles with the king himself.[149] The Piṭakas were stored in a
splendid pagoda and Anawrata [sent to Ceylon[150] for others
which were compared with the copies obtained from Thaton in order
to settle the text.[151]
For 200 years, that is from about 1060 A.D. until the later decades of
the thirteenth century, Pagan was a great centre of Buddhist culture
not only for Burma but for the whole east, renowned alike for its
architecture and its scholarship. The former can still be studied in the
magnificent pagodas which mark its site. Towards the end of his
reign Anawrata made not very successful attempts to obtain relics
from China and Ceylon and commenced the construction of the
Shwe Zigon pagoda. He died before it was completed but his
successors, who enjoyed fairly peaceful reigns, finished the work
and constructed about a thousand other buildings among which the
most celebrated is the Ananda temple erected by King
Kyansithâ.[152]
Pali literature in Burma begins with a little grammatical treatise

known as Kârikâ and composed in 1064 A.D. by the monk
Dhammasenâpati who lived in the monastery attached to this
temple. A number of other works followed. Of these the most
celebrated was the Saddanîti of Aggavaṃsa (1154), a treatise on the
language of the Tipiṭaka which became a classic not only in Burma
but in Ceylon. A singular enthusiasm for linguistic studies prevailed
especially in the reign of Kyocvâ (c. 1230), when even women are
said to have been distinguished for the skill and ardour which they
displayed in conquering the difficulties of Pali grammar. Some
treatises on the Abhidhamma were also produced.
52
Like Mohammedanism, Hinayanist Buddhism is too simple and

definite to admit much variation in doctrine, but its clergy are prone
to violent disputes about apparently trivial questions. In the
thirteenth century such disputes assumed grave proportions in
Burma. About 1175 A.D. a celebrated elder named [Uttarâjîva
accompanied by his pupil Chapaṭa left for Ceylon. They spent some
years in study at the Mahâvihâra and Chapaṭa received ordination
there. He returned to Pagan with four other monks and maintained
that valid ordination could be conferred only through the monks of
the Mahâvihâra, who alone had kept the succession unbroken. He
with his four companions, having received this ordination, claimed
power to transmit it, but he declined to recognize Burmese orders.
This pretension aroused a storm of opposition, especially from the
Talaing monks. They maintained that Arahanta who had reformed
Buddhism under Anawrata was spiritually descended from the
missionaries sent by Asoka, who were as well qualified to administer
ordination as Mahinda. But Chapaṭa was not only a man of learning
and an author[153] but also a vigorous personality and in favour at
Court. He had the best of the contest and succeeded in making the
Talaing school appear as seceders from orthodoxy. There thus arose
a distinction between the Sinhalese or later school and the old
Burmese school, who regarded one another as schismatics. A scandal
was caused in the Sinhalese community by Râhula, the ablest of
Chapaṭa’s disciples, who fell in love with an actress and wished to
become a layman. His colleagues induced him to leave the country
for decency’s sake and peace was restored but subsequently, after
Chapaṭa’s death, the remaining three disciples[154] fell out on
questions of discipline rather than doctrine and founded three
factions, which can hardly be called schools, although they refused
to keep the Uposatha days together. The light of religion shone
brightest at Pagan early in the thirteenth century while these three
brethren were alive and the Sâsanavaṃsa states that at least three
Arhats lived in the city. But the power of Pagan collapsed under
attacks from both Chinese and Shans at the end of the century [and
the last king became a monk under the compulsion of Shan chiefs.
The deserted city appears to have lost its importance as a religious
centre, for the ecclesiastical chronicles shift the scene elsewhere.
The two Shan states which arose from the ruin of Pagan, namely
Panya (Vijayapura) and Sagaing (Jeyyapura), encouraged religion
and learning. Their existence probably explains the claim made in
Siamese inscriptions of about 1300 that the territory of Siam
extended to Haṃsavatî or Pegu and this contact of Burma and Siam
53
was of great importance for it must be the origin of Pali Buddhism in

Siam which otherwise remains unexplained.
After the fall of the two Shan states in 1364, Ava (or Ratnapura)
which was founded in the same year gradually became the religious
centre of Upper Burma and remained so during several centuries.
But it did not at first supersede older towns inasmuch as the loss of
political independence did not always involve the destruction of
monasteries. Buddhism also flourished in Pegu and the Talaing
country where the vicissitudes of the northern kingdoms did not
affect its fortunes.
Anawrata had transported the most eminent Theras of Thaton to

Pagan and the old Talaing school probably suffered temporarily.
Somewhat later we hear that the Sinhalese school was introduced
into these regions by Sâriputta[155], who had been ordained at
Pagan. About the same time two Theras of Martaban, preceptors of
the Queen, visited Ceylon and on returning to their own land after
being ordained at the Mahâvihâra considered themselves superior to
other monks. But the old Burmese school continued to exist. Not
much literature was produced in the south. Sâriputta was the author
of a Dhammathat or code, the first of a long series of law books
based upon Manu. Somewhat later Mahâyasa of Thaton (c. 1370)
wrote several grammatical works.
The most prosperous period for Buddhism in Pegu was the reign of
Dhammaceti, also called Râmâdhipati (1460-1491). He was not of the
royal family, but a simple monk who helped a princess of Pegu to
escape from the Burmese court where she was detained. In 1453 this
princess became Queen of Pegu and Dhammaceti left his monastery
to become her prime minister, [son-in-law and ultimately her
successor. But though he had returned to the world his heart was
with the Church. He was renowned for his piety no less than for his
magnificence and is known to modern scholars as the author of the
Kalyani inscriptions[156], which assume the proportions of a treatise
on ecclesiastical laws and history. Their chief purpose is to settle an
intricate and highly technical question, namely the proper method of
defining and consecrating a sîmâ. This word, which means literally
boundary, signifies a plot of ground within which Uposatha
meetings, ordinations and other ceremonies can take place. The
expression occurs in the Vinaya Piṭaka[157], but the area there
contemplated seems to be an ecclesiastical district within which the
Bhikkhus were obliged to meet for Uposatha. The modern sîmâ is
much smaller[158], but more important since it is maintained that
54
valid ordination can be conferred only within its limits. To

Dhammaceti the question seemed momentous, for as he explains,
there were in southern Burma six schools who would not meet for
Uposatha. These were, first the Camboja[159] school (identical with
the Arahanta school) who claimed spiritual descent from the
missionaries sent by Asoka to Suvarṇabhûmi, and then five divisions
of the Sinhalese school, namely the three founded by Chapaṭa’s
disciples as already related and two more founded by the theras of
Martaban. Dhammaceti accordingly sent a mission to Ceylon
charged to obtain an authoritative ruling as to the proper method of
consecrating a sîmâ and conferring ordination. On their return a
locality known as the Kalyanisîmâ was consecrated in the manner
prescribed by the Mahâvihâra and during three years all the
Bhikkhus of Dhammaceti’s kingdom were reordained there. The
total number reached 15,666, and the king boasts that he had thus
purified religion and made the school of the Mahâvihâra the only
sect, all other distinctions being obliterated.
[There can be little doubt that in the fifteenth century Burmese

Buddhism had assumed the form which it still has, but was this form
due to indigenous tradition or to imitation of Ceylon? Five periods
merit attention. (a) In the sixth century, and probably several
centuries earlier, Hinayanism was known in Lower Burma. The
inscriptions attesting its existence are written in Pali and in a south
Indian alphabet. (b) Anawrata (1010-1052) purified the Buddhism of
Upper Burma with the help of scriptures obtained from the Talaing
country, which were compared with other scriptures brought from
Ceylon. (c) About 1200 Chapata and his pupils who had studied in
Ceylon and received ordination there refused to recognize the
Talaing monks and two hostile schools were founded, predominant
at first in Upper and Lower Burma respectively. (d) About 1250 the
Sinhalese school, led by Sâriputta and others, began to make
conquests in Lower Burma at the expense of the Talaing school. (e)
Two centuries later, about 1460, Dhammaceti of Pegu boasts that he
has purified religion and made the school of the Mahâvihâra, that is
the most orthodox form of the Sinhalese school, the only sect.
In connection with these data must be taken the important statement

that the celebrated Tantrist Atîśa studied in Lower Burma about 1000
A.D. Up to a certain point the conclusion seems clear. Pali
Hinayanism in Burma was old: intercourse with southern India and
Ceylon tended to keep it pure, whereas intercourse with Bengal and
Orissa, which must have been equally frequent, tended to import
Mahayanism. In the time of Anawrata the religion of Upper Burma
55
probably did not deserve the name of Buddhism. He introduced in

its place the Buddhism of Lower Burma, tempered by reference to
Ceylon. After 1200 if not earlier the idea prevailed that the
Mahâvihâra was the standard of orthodoxy and that the Talaing
church (which probably retained some Mahayanist features) fell
below it. In the fifteenth century this view was universally accepted,
the opposition and indeed the separate existence of the Talaing
church having come to an end.
But it still remains uncertain whether the earliest Burmese Buddhism

came direct from Magadha or from the south. The story of Asoka’s
missionaries cannot be summarily rejected [but it also cannot be
accepted without hesitation[160]. It is the Ceylon chronicle which
knows of them and communication between Burma and southern
India was old and persistent. It may have existed even before the
Christian era.
After the fall of Pagan, Upper Burma, of which we must now speak,
passed through troubled times and we hear little of religion or
literature. Though Ava was founded in 1364 it did not become an
intellectual centre for another century. But the reign of Narapati
(1442-1468) was ornamented by several writers of eminence among
whom may be mentioned the monk poet Sîlavaṃsa and Ariyavaṃsa,
an exponent of the Abhidhamma. They are noticeable as being the
first writers to publish religious works, either original or translated,
in the vernacular and this practice steadily increased. In the early
part of the sixteenth century[161] occurred the only persecution of
Buddhism known in Burma. Thohanbwâ, a Shan who had become
king of Ava, endeavoured to exterminate the order by deliberate
massacre and delivered temples, monasteries and libraries to the
flames. The persecution did not last long nor extend to other districts
but it created great indignation among the Burmese and was perhaps
one of the reasons why the Shan dynasty of Ava was overthrown in
1555.
Bayin (or Bureng) Naung stands out as one of the greatest

personalities in Burmese history. As a Buddhist he was zealous even
to intolerance, since he forced the Shans and Moslims of the northern
districts, and indeed all his subjects, to make a formal profession of
Buddhism. He also, as related elsewhere, made not very successful
attempts to obtain the tooth relic from Ceylon. But it is probable that
his active patronage of the faith, as shown in the construction and
endowment of religious buildings, was exercised chiefly in Pegu and
56
this must be the reason why the Sâsanavaṃsa (which is interested

chiefly in Upper Burma) says little about him.
His successors showed little political capacity but encouraged

religion and literature. The study of the Abhidhamma was [specially
flourishing in the districts of Ava and Sagaing from about 1600 to
1650 and found many illustrious exponents. Besides works in Pali,
the writers of this time produced numerous Burmese translations
and paraphrases of Abhidhamma works, as well as edifying stories.
In the latter part of the seventeenth century Burma was in a

disturbed condition and the Sâsanavaṃsa says that religion was
dimmed as the moon by clouds. A national and religious revival
came with the victories of Alompra (1752 onwards), but the
eighteenth century also witnessed the rise of a curious and not very
edifying controversy which divided the Sangha for about a hundred
years and spread to Ceylon[162]. It concerned the manner in which
the upper robe of a monk, consisting of a long piece of cloth, should
be worn. The old practice in Burma was to wrap this cloth round the
lower body from the loins to the ankles, and draw the end from the
back over the left shoulder and thence across the breast over the
right shoulder so that it finally hung loose behind. But about 1698
began the custom of walking with the right shoulder bare, that is to
say letting the end of the robe fall down in front on the left side. The
Sangha became divided into two factions known as Ekaṃsika (one-
shouldered) and Pârupana (fully clad). The bitterness of the
seemingly trivial controversy was increased by the fact that the
Ekaṃsikas could produce little scriptural warrant and appealed to
late authorities or the practice in Ceylon, thus neglecting sound
learning. For the Vinaya frequently[163] prescribes that the robe is to
be adjusted so as to fall over only one shoulder as a mark of special
respect, which implies that it was usually worn over both shoulders.
In 1712 and again about twenty years later arbitrators were
appointed by the king to hear both sides, but they had not sufficient
authority or learning [to give a decided opinion. The stirring political
events of 1740 and the following years naturally threw ecclesiastical
quarrels into the shade but when the great Alompra had disposed of
his enemies he appeared as a modern Asoka. The court religiously
observed Uposatha days and the king was popularly believed to be a
Bodhisattva[164]. He was not however sound on the great question
of ecclesiastical dress. His chaplain, Atula, belonged to the Ekaṃsika
party and the king, saying that he wished to go into the whole matter
himself but had not for the moment leisure, provisionally ordered
the Saṇgha to obey Atula’s ruling. But some champions of the other
57
side stood firm. Alompra dealt leniently with them, but died during
his Siamese campaign before he had time to unravel the intricacies of
the Vinaya.
The influence of Atula, who must have been an astute if not learned
man, continued after the king’s death and no measures were taken
against the Ekaṃsikas, although King Hsin-byu-shin (1763-1776)
persecuted an heretical sect called Paramats[165]. His youthful
successor, Sing-gu-sa, was induced to hold a public disputation. The
Ekaṃsikas were defeated in this contest and a royal decree was
issued making the Pârupana discipline obligatory. But the vexed
question was not settled for it came up again in the long reign (1781-
1819) of Bodôpayâ. This king has won an evil reputation for cruelty
and insensate conceit[166], but he was a man of vigour and kept
together his great empire. His megalomania naturally detracted from
the esteem won by his piety. His benefactions to religion were lavish,
the shrines and monasteries which he built innumerable. But he
desired to build a pagoda larger than any in the world and during
some twenty years wasted an incalculable amount of labour and
money on this project, still commemorated by a gigantic but
unfinished mass of brickwork now in ruins. In order to supervise its
erection he left his palace and lived at Mingun, where he [conceived
the idea that he was a Buddha, an idea which had not been entirely
absent from the minds of Alompra and Hsin-byu-shin. It is to the
credit of the Theras that, despite the danger of opposing an autocrat
as cruel as he was crazy, they refused to countenance these
pretensions and the king returned to his palace as an ordinary
monarch.
If he could not make himself a Buddha, he at least disposed of the

Ekaṃsika dispute, and was probably influenced in his views by
Ñânâbhivaṃsa, a monk of the Pârupana school whom he made his
chaplain, although Atula was still alive. At first he named a
commission of enquiry, the result of which was that the Ekaṃsikas
admitted that their practice could not be justified from the scriptures
but only by tradition. A royal decree was issued enjoining the
observance of the Pârupana discipline, but two years later Atula
addressed a letter to the king in which he maintained that the
Ekaṃsika costume was approved in a work called Cûlagaṇṭhipada,
composed by Moggalâna, the immediate disciple of the Buddha. The
king ordered representatives of both parties to examine this
contention and the debate between them is dramatically described in
the Sâsanavaṃsa. It was demonstrated that the text on which Atula
relied was composed in Ceylon by a thera named Moggalâna who
58
lived in the twelfth century and that it quoted mediæval Sinhalese

commentaries. After this exposure the Ekaṃsika party collapsed.
The king commanded (1784) the Pârupana discipline to be observed
and at last the royal order received obedience.
It will be observed that throughout this controversy both sides

appealed to the king, as if he had the right to decide the point in
dispute, but that his decision had no compelling power as long as it
was not supported by evidence. He could ensure toleration for views
regarded by many as heretical, but was unable to force the views of
one party on the other until the winning cause had publicly
disproved the contentions of its opponents. On the other hand the
king had practical control of the hierarchy, for his chaplain was de
facto head of the Church and the appointment was strictly personal.
It was not the practice for a king to take on his predecessor’s
chaplain and the latter could not, like a Lamaist or Catholic
ecclesiastic, claim any permanent supernatural powers. Bodôpayâ
did something towards organizing the hierarchy for he appointed
four [elders of repute to be Saṇgharâjas or, so to speak, Bishops, with
four more as assistants and over them all his chaplain Ñâṇa as
Archbishop. Ñâṇa was a man of energy and lived in turn in various
monasteries supervising the discipline and studies.
In spite of the extravagances of Bodôpayâ, the Church was

flourishing and respected in his reign. The celebrated image called
Mahâmuni was transferred from Arakan to his capital together with
a Sanskrit library, and Burma sent to Ceylon not only the monks
who founded the Amarapura school but also numerous Pali texts.
This prosperity continued in the reigns of Bagyidaw, Tharrawadi
and Pagan-min, who were of little personal account. The first
ordered the compilation of the Yazawin, a chronicle which was not
original but incorporated and superseded other works of the same
kind. In his reign arose a question as to the validity of grants of land,
etc., for religious purposes. It was decided in the sense most
favourable to the order, viz. that such grants are perpetual and are
not invalidated by the lapse of time. About 1845 there was a
considerable output of vernacular literature. The Dîgha, Samyutta
and Anguttara Nikâyas with their commentaries were translated
into Burmese but no compositions in Pali are recorded.
From 1852 till 1877 Burma was ruled by Mindon-min, who if not a
national hero was at least a pious, peace-loving, capable king. His
chaplain, Paññâsâmi, composed the Sâsanavaṃsa, or ecclesiastical
history of Burma, and the king himself was ambitious to figure as a
59
great Buddhist monarch, though with more sanity than Bodôpayâ,

for his chief desire was to be known as the Convener of the Fifth
Buddhist Council. The body so styled met from 1868 to 1871 and,
like the ancient Saṇgîtis, proceeded to recite the Tipiṭaka in order to
establish the correct text. The result may still be seen at Mandalay in
the collection of buildings commonly known as the four hundred
and fifty Pagodas: a central Stupa surrounded by hundreds of small
shrines each sheltering a perpendicular tablet on which a portion of
this veritable bible in stone is inscribed. Mindon-min also corrected
the growing laxity of the Bhikkhus, and the esteem in which the
Burmese church was held at this time is shown by the fact that the
monks of Ceylon sent a deputation to the Saṇgharâja of Mandalay
referring to his decision a dispute about a sîmâ or ecclesiastical
boundary.
[Mindon-min was succeeded by Thibaw, who was deposed by the

British. The Saṇgharâja maintained his office until he died in 1895.
An interregnum then occurred for the appointment had always been
made by the king, not by the Sangha. But when Lord Curzon visited
Burma in 1901 he made arrangements for the election by the monks
themselves of a superior of the whole order and Taunggwin
Sayâdaw was solemnly installed in this office by the British
authorities in 1903 with the title of Thathanabaing[167].
We may now examine briefly some sides of popular religion and

institutions which are not Buddhist. It is an interesting fact that the
Burmese law books or Dhammathats[168], which are still accepted as
regulating inheritance and other domestic matters, are Indian in
origin and show no traces of Sinhalese influence although since 1750
there has been a decided tendency to bring them into connection
with authorities accepted by Buddhism. The earliest of these codes
are those of Dhammavilâsa (1174 A.D.) and of Waguru, king of
Martaban in 1280. They professedly base themselves on the authority
of Manu and, so far as purely legal topics are concerned, correspond
pretty closely with the rules of the Mânava-dharmaśâstra. But they
omit all prescriptions which involve Brahmanic religious
observances such as penance and sacrifice. Also the theory of
punishment is different and inspired by the doctrine of Karma,
namely, that every evil deed will bring its own retribution. Hence
the Burmese codes ordain for every crime not penalties to be
suffered by the criminal but merely the payment of compensation to
60
the party aggrieved, proportionate to the damage suffered[169]. It is

probable that the law-books on which these codes were based were
brought from the east coast of India and [were of the same type as
the code of Nârada, which, though of unquestioned Brahmanic
orthodoxy, is almost purely legal and has little to say about religion.
A subsidiary literature embodying local decisions naturally grew up,
and about 1640 was summarized by a Burmese nobleman called
Kaing-zâ in the Mahârâja-dhammathat. He received from the king
the title of Manurâja and the name of Manu became connected with
his code, though it is really based on local custom. It appears to have
superseded older law-books until the reign of Alompra who
remodelled the administration and caused several codes to be
compiled[170]. These also preserve the name of Manu, but he and
Kaing-zâ are treated as the same personage. The rules of the older
law-books are in the main retained but are made to depend on
Buddhist texts. Later Dhammathats become more and more
decidedly Buddhist. Thus the Mohavicchedanî (1832) does not
mention Manu but presents the substance of the Manu
Dhammathats as the law preached by the Buddha.
Direct Indian influence may be seen in another department not

unimportant in an oriental country. The court astrologers,
soothsayers and professors of kindred sciences were even in recent
times Brahmans, known as Pônnâ and mostly from Manipur. An
inscription found at Pagan and dated 1442 mentions the gift of 295
books[171] to the Sangha among which several have Sanskrit titles
and about 1600 we hear of Pandits learned in the Vedaśâstras,
meaning not Vedic learning in the strict sense but combinations of
science and magic described as medicine, astronomy, Kâmaśâstras,
etc. Hindu tradition was sufficiently strong at the Court to make the
presence of experts in the Atharva Veda seem desirable and in the
capital they were in request for such services as drawing up
horoscopes[172] and [invoking good luck at weddings whereas
monks will not attend social gatherings.
More important as a non-Buddhist element in Burmese religion is

the worship of Nats[173] or spirits of various kinds. Of the
prevalence of such worship there is no doubt, but I cannot agree
with the authorities who say that it is the practical religion of the
Burmese. No passing tourist can fail to see that in the literal as well
as figurative sense Burma takes its colour from Buddhism, from the
gilded and vermilion pagodas and the yellow robed priests. It is
impossible that so much money should be given, so many lives
dedicated to a religion which had not a real hold on the hearts of the
61
people. The worship of Nats, wide-spread though it be, is humble in

its outward signs and is a superstition rather than a creed. On
several occasions the kings of Burma have suppressed its
manifestations when they became too conspicuous. Thus Anawrata
destroyed the Nat houses of Pagan and recent kings forbade the
practice of firing guns at funerals to scare the evil spirits.
Nats are of at least three classes, or rather have three origins. Firstly
they are nature spirits, similar to those revered in China and Tibet.
They inhabit noticeable natural features of every kind, particularly
trees, rivers and mountains; they may be specially connected with
villages, houses or individuals. Though not essentially evil they are
touchy and vindictive, punishing neglect or discourtesy with
misfortune and ill-luck. No explanation is offered as to the origin of
many Nats, but others, who may be regarded as forming the second
category, are ghosts or ancestral spirits. In northern Burma Chinese
influence encouraged ancestor worship, but apart from this there is a
disposition (equally evident in India) to believe that violent and
uncanny persons and those who meet with a tragic death become
powerful ghosts requiring propitiation. Thirdly, there are Nats who
are at least in part identified with the Indian deities recognized by
early Buddhism. It would seem that the Thirty Seven Nats, described
in a work called the Mahâgîtâ Medânigyân, correspond to the Thirty
Three Gods of Buddhist mythology, but that the number has been
raised for unknown [reasons to 37[174]. They are spirits of deceased
heroes, and there is nothing unbuddhist in this conception, for the
Piṭakas frequently represent deserving persons as being reborn in
the Heaven of the Thirty Three. The chief is Thagyâ, the Śakra or
Indra of Hindu mythology[175], but the others are heroes, connected
with five cycles of legends based on a popular and often inaccurate
version of Burmese history[176].
Besides Thagyâ Nat we find other Indian figures such as Man Nat
(Mâra) and Byammâ Nat (Brahmâ). In diagrams illustrating the
Buddhist cosmology of the Burmans[177] a series of heavens is
depicted, ascending from those of the Four Kings and Thirty Three
Gods up to the Brahmâ worlds, and each inhabited by Nats
according to their degree. Here the spirits of Burma are marshalled
and classified according to Buddhist system just as were the spirits
of India some centuries before. But neither in ancient India nor in
modern Burma have the devas or Nats anything to do with the
serious business of religion. They have their place in temples as
guardian genii and the whole band may be seen in a shrine adjoining
the Shwe-zi-gon Pagoda at Pagan, but this interferes no more with
62
the supremacy of the Buddha than did the deputations of spirits who
according to the scriptures waited on him.
Buddhism is a real force in Burmese life and the pride of the

Burmese people. Every male Burman enters a monastery when he is
about 15 for a short stay. Devout parents send their sons for the four
months of Was (or even for this season during three successive
years), but by the majority a period of from one month to one week
is considered sufficient. To omit this stay in a monastery altogether
would not be respectable: it is in common esteem the only way to
become a human being, for without it a boy is a mere animal. The
praises of the Buddha [and vows to lead a good life are commonly
recited by the laity[178] every morning and evening. It is the greatest
ambition of most Burmans to build a pagoda and those who are able
to do so (a large percentage of the population to judge from the
number of buildings) are not only sure of their reward in another
birth but even now enjoy respect and receive the title of pagoda-
builder. Another proof of devotion is the existence of thousands of
monasteries[179]—perhaps on an average more than two for each
large village and town—built and supported by voluntary
contributions. The provision of food and domicile for their
numerous inmates is no small charge on the nation, but observers
are agreed that it is cheerfully paid and that the monks are worthy of
what they receive. In energy and morality they seem, as a class,
superior to their brethren in Ceylon and Siam, and their services to
education and learning have been considerable. Every monastery is
also a school, where instruction is given to both day boys and
boarders. The vast majority of Burmans enter such a school at the
age of eight or nine and learn there reading, writing, and arithmetic.
They also receive religious instruction and moral training. They
commit to memory various works in Pali and Burmese, and are
taught the duties which they owe to themselves, society and the
state. Sir. J.G. Scott, who is certainly not disposed to exaggerate the
influence of Buddhism in Burma, says that “the education of the
monasteries far surpasses the instruction of the Anglo-vernacular
schools from every point of view except that of immediate success in
life and the obtaining of a post under Government[180].” The more
studious monks are not merely schoolmasters but can point to a
considerable body of literature which they have produced in the past
and are still producing[181]. Indeed among the Hinayanist churches
that of Burma has in recent centuries held the first place for learning.
63
The age and continuity of Sinhalese traditions have given the Sangha
of Ceylon a correspondingly great prestige but it has more than
[once been recruited from Burma and in literary output it can hardly
rival the Burmese clergy.
Though many disquisitions on the Vinaya have been produced in

Burma, and though the Jâtakas and portions of the Sutta Piṭaka
(especially those called Parittam) are known to everybody, yet the
favourite study of theologians appears to be the Abhidhamma,
concerning which a multitude of hand-books and commentaries
have been written, but it is worth mentioning that the
Abhidhammattha-sangaha, composed in Ceylon about the twelfth
century A.D., is still the standard manual[182]. Yet it would be a
mistake to think of the Burmese monks as absorbed in these
recondite studies: they have on the contrary produced a long series
of works dealing with the practical things of the world, such as
chronicles, law-books, ethical and political treatises, and even poetry,
for Sîlavamsa and Ratthapâla whose verses are still learned by the
youth of Burma were both of them Bhikkhus. The Sangha has always
shown a laudable reserve in interfering directly with politics, but in
former times the king’s private chaplain was a councillor of
importance and occasionally matters involving both political and
religious questions were submitted to a chapter of the order. In all
cases the influence of the monks in secular matters made for justice
and peace: they sometimes interceded on behalf of the condemned or
represented that taxation was too heavy. In 1886, when the British
annexed Burma, the Head of the Sangha forbade monks to take part
in the political strife, a prohibition which was all the more
remarkable because King Thibaw had issued proclamations saying
that the object of the invasion was to destroy Buddhism.
In essentials monastic life is much the same in Burma and Ceylon

but the Burmese standard is higher, and any monk known to
misconduct himself would be driven out by the laity. The
monasteries are numerous but not large and much space is wasted,
for, though the exterior suggests that they are built in several stories
the interior usually is a single hall, although it may be divided by
partitions. To the eastern side is attached a chapel containing images
of Gotama before which daily devotions [are performed. It is
surmounted by a steeple culminating in a hti, a sort of baldachino or
sacred umbrella placed also on the top of dagobas, and made of open
metal work hung with little bells. Monasteries are always built
outside towns and, though many of them become subsequently
enclosed by the growth of the larger cities, they retain spacious
64
grounds in which there may be separate buildings, such as a library,

dormitories for pupils and a hall for performing the ordination
service. The average number of inmates is six. A large establishment
may house a superior, four monks, some novices and besides them
several lay scholars. The grades are Sahin or novice, Pyit-shin or fully
ordained monk and Pôngyi, literally great glory, a monk of at least
ten years’ standing. Rank depends on seniority—that is to say the
greatest respect is shown to the monk who has observed his vows for
the longest period, but there are some simple hierarchical
arrangements. At the head of each monastery is a Sayâ or superior,
and all the monasteries of a large town or a country district are
under the supervision of a Provincial called Gaing-Ok. At the head
of the whole church is the Thathanabaing, already mentioned. All
these higher officials must be Pôngyîs.
Although all monks must take part in the daily round to collect alms
yet in most monasteries it is the custom (as in Ceylon and Siam) not
to eat the food collected, or at least not all of it, and though no solid
nourishment is taken after midday, three morning meals are
allowed, namely, one taken very early, the next served on the return
from the begging round and a third about 11.30. Two or three
services are intoned before the image of the Buddha each day. At the
morning ceremony, which takes place about 5.30, all the inmates of
the monastery prostrate themselves before the superior and vow to
observe the precepts during the day. At the conclusion of the
evening service a novice announces that a day has passed away and
in a loud voice proclaims the hour, the day of the week, the day of
the month and the year. The laity do not usually attend these
services, but near large monasteries there are rest houses for the
entertainment of visitors and Uposatha days are often celebrated by
a pious picnic. A family or party of friends take a rest-house for a
day, bring a goodly store of cheroots and betel nut, which are not
regarded as out of place during divine [service[183], and listen at
their ease to the exposition of the law delivered by a yellow-robed
monk. When the congregation includes women he holds a large fan-
leaf palm before his face lest his eyes should behold vanity. A
custom which might not be to the taste of western ecclesiastics is that
the congregation ask questions and, if they do not understand,
request the preacher to be clearer.
There is little sectarianism in Burma proper, but the Sawtis, an anti-

clerical sect, are found in some numbers in the Shan States and
similar communities called Man are still met with in Pegu and
Tenasserim, though said to be disappearing. Both refuse to recognize
65
the Sangha, monasteries or temples and perform their devotions in

the open fields. Otherwise their mode of thought is Buddhist, for
they hold that every man can work out his own salvation by
conquering Mâra[184], as the Buddha did, and they use the ordinary
formulæ of worship, except that they omit all expressions of
reverence to the Sangha. The orthodox Sangha is divided into two
schools known as Mahâgandi and Sûlagandi. The former are the
moderate easy-going majority who maintain a decent discipline but
undeniably deviate somewhat from the letter of the Vinaya. The
latter are a strict and somewhat militant Puritan minority who
protest against such concessions to the flesh. They insist for instance
that a monk should eat out of his begging bowl exactly as it is at the
end of the morning round and they forbid the use of silk robes,
sunshades and sandals. The Sûlagandi also believe in free will and
attach more value to the intention than the action in estimating the
value of good deeds, whereas the Mahâgandi accept good actions
without enquiring into the motive and believe that all deeds are the
result of karma.
In Burma all the higher branches of architecture are almost

exclusively dedicated to religion. Except the Palace at Mandalay
there is hardly a native building of note which is not connected with
a shrine or monastery. Burmese architectural [forms show most
analogy to those of Nepal and perhaps[185] both preserve what was
once the common style for wooden buildings in ancient India. In
recent centuries the Burmese have shown little inclination to build
anything that can be called a temple, that is a chamber containing
images and the paraphernalia of worship. The commonest form of
religious edifice is the dagoba or zedi[186]: images are placed in
niches or shrines, which shelter them, but only rarely, as on the
platform of the Shwe Dagon at Rangoon, assume the proportions of
rooms. This does not apply to the great temples of Pagan, built from
about 1050 to 1200, but that style was not continued and except the
Arakan Pagoda at Mandalay has perhaps no modern representative.
Details of these buildings may be found in the works of
Forchhammer, Fergusson, de Beylié and various archæological
reports. Their construction is remarkably solid. They do not, like
most large buildings in India or Europe, contain halls of some size
but are rather pyramids traversed by passages. But this curious
disinclination to build temples of the usual kind is not due to any
dislike of images. In no Buddhist country are they more common
66
and their numbers are more noticeable because there is here no

pantheon as in China and Tibet, but images of Gotama are
multiplied, merely in order to obtain merit. Some slight variety in
these figures is produced by the fact that the Burmese venerate not
only Gotama but the three Buddhas who preceded him[187]. The
Shwe Dagon Pagoda is reputed to contain relics of all four; statues of
them all stand in the beautiful Ananda Pagoda at Pagan and not
infrequently they are represented by four sitting figures facing the
four quarters. A gigantic group of this kind composed of statues
nearly 90 feet high [stands in the outskirts of Pegu, and in the same
neighbourhood is a still larger recumbent figure 180 feet long. It had
been forgotten since the capture of Pegu by the Burmans in 1757 and
was rediscovered by the engineers surveying the route for the
railway. It lies almost in sight of the line and is surprising by its mere
size, as one comes upon it suddenly in the jungle. As a work of art it
can hardly be praised. It does not suggest the Buddha on his death
bed, as is intended, but rather some huge spirit of the jungle waking
up and watching the railway with indolent amusement.
In Upper Burma there are not so many large images but as one
approaches Mandalay the pagodas add more and more to the
landscape. Many are golden and the rest are mostly white and
conspicuous. They crown the hills and punctuate the windings of the
valleys. Perhaps Burmese art and nature are seen at their best near
Sagaing on the bank of the Irrawaddy, a mighty flood of yellow
water, sweeping down smooth and steady, but here and there
showing whirlpools that look like molten metal. From the shore rise
hills of moderate height studded with monasteries and shrines.
Flights of white steps lead to the principal summits where golden
spires gleam and everywhere are pagodas of all ages, shapes and
sizes. Like most Asiatics the Burmese rarely repair, but build new
pagodas instead of renovating the old ones. The instinct is not
altogether unjust. A pagoda does not collapse like a hollow building
but understands the art of growing old. Like a tree it may become
cleft or overgrown with moss but it remains picturesque. In the
neighbourhood of Sagaing there is a veritable forest of pagodas;
humble seedlings built by widows’ mites, mature golden domes
reared by devout prosperity and venerable ruins decomposing as all
compound things must do.
The pagoda slaves are a curious institution connected with temples.

Under the Burmese kings persons could be dedicated to pagodas
and by this process not only became slaves for life themselves but
involved in the same servitude all their posterity, none of whom
67
could by any method become free. They formed a low caste like the
Indian Pariahs and though the British Government has abolished the
legal status of slavery, the social stigma which clings to them is said
to be undiminished.
Art and architecture make the picture of Burma as it [remains in

memory and they are the faithful reflection of the character and
ways of its inhabitants, their cheerful but religious temper, their love
of what is fanciful and graceful, their moderate aspirations towards
what is arduous and sublime. The most striking feature of this
architecture is its free use of gold and colour. In no country of the
world is gilding and plating with gold so lavishly employed on the
exterior of buildings. The larger Pagodas such as the Shwe Dagon
are veritable pyramids of gold, and the roofs of the Arakan temple as
they rise above Mandalay show tier upon tier of golden beams and
plates. The brilliancy is increased by the equally lavish use of
vermilion, sometimes diversified by glass mosaic. I remember once
in an East African jungle seeing a clump of flowers of such brilliant
red and yellow that for a moment I thought it was a fire. Somewhat
similar is the surprise with which one first gazes on these edifices. I
do not know whether the epithet flamboyant can be correctly
applied to them as architecture but both in colour and shape they
imitate a pile of flame, for the outlines of monasteries and shrines are
fanciful in the extreme; gabled roofs with finials like tongues of fire
and panels rich with carvings and fret-work. The buildings of
Hindus and Burmans are as different as their characters. When a
Hindu temple is imposing it is usually because of its bulk and
mystery, whereas these buildings are lighthearted and fairy-like:
heaps of red and yellow fruit with twining leaves and tendrils that
have grown by magic. Nor is there much resemblance to Japanese
architecture. There also, lacquer and gold are employed to an
unusual extent but the flourishes, horns and finials which in Burma
spring from every corner and projection are wanting and both
Japanese and Chinese artists are more sparing and reticent. They
distribute ornament so as to emphasize and lead up to the more
important parts of their buildings, whereas the open-handed,
splendour-loving Burman puts on every panel and pillar as much
decoration as it will hold.
The result must be looked at as a whole and not too minutely. The
best work is the wood carving which has a freedom and boldness
often missing in the minute and crowded designs of Indian art. Still
as a rule it is at the risk of breaking the spell that you examine the
details of Burmese ornamentation. Better rest content with your first
68
amazement on beholding these carved and pinnacled piles of gold

and vermilion, where the fantastic animals and plants seem about to
break into life.
The most celebrated shrine in Burma is the Shwe Dagon Pagoda

which attracts pilgrims from all the Buddhist world. No descriptions
of it gave me any idea of its real appearance nor can I hope that I
shall be more successful in giving the reader my own impressions.
The pagoda itself is a gilt bell-shaped mass rather higher than the
Dome of St. Paul’s and terminating in a spire. It is set in the centre of
a raised mound or platform, approached by lofty flights of steps. The
platform, which is paved and level, is of imposing dimensions, some
nine hundred feet long and seven hundred wide. Round the base of
the central pagoda is a row of shrines and another row runs round
the edge of the platform so that one moves, as it were, in a street of
these edifices, leading here and there into side squares where are
quiet retreats with palm trees and gigantic images. But when after
climbing the long staircase one first emerges on the platform one
does not realize the topography at once and seems to have entered
suddenly into Jerusalem the Golden. Right and left are rows of
gorgeous, fantastic sanctuaries, all gold, vermilion and glass mosaic,
and within them sit marble figures, bland, enigmatic personages
who seem to invite approach but offer no explanation of the singular
scene or the part they play in it. If analyzed in detail the artistic
merits of these shrines might be found small but the total impression
is unique. The Shwe Dagon has not the qualities which usually
distinguish great religious buildings. It is not specially impressive by
its majesty or holiness; it is certainly wanting in order and
arrangement. But on entering the platform one feels that one has
suddenly passed from this life into another and different world. It is
not perhaps a very elevated world; certainly not the final repose of
the just or the steps of the throne of God, but it is as if you were
walking in the bazaars of Paradise—one of those Buddhist Paradises
where the souls of the moderately pure find temporary rest from the
whirl of transmigration, where the very lotus flowers are golden and
the leaves of the trees are golden bells that tinkle in the perfumed
breeze.
FOOTNOTES:
[124] For the Pyus see Blagden in J.R.A.S. pp. 365-388. Ibid. in Epigr.
Indica, 1913, pp. 127-133. Also reports of Burma Arch. Survey, 1916,
1917.
69
[125] So C.C. Lowis in the Gazetteer of Burma, vol. I. p. 292, but

according to others the Burmese chronicles place the event at the
beginning of the Christian era.
[126] Sometimes called New Pagan to distinguish it from Old Pagan

which was a name of Tagaung. Also called Pagan or Pugâma and in
Pali Arimaddanapura.
[127] See the travels of Kia Tan described by Pelliot in B.E.F.E.O.

1904, pp. 131-414.
[128] More correctly Taung-ngu.
[129] For the history and present condition of Buddhism in Burma

the following may be consulted besides other works referred to in
the course of this chapter.
M. Bode, Edition of the Sâsanavaṃsa with valuable dissertations, 1897.

This work is a modern Burmese ecclesiastical history written in 1861
by Paññâsâmi.
M. Bode, The Pali Literature of Burma, 1909.
The Gandhavaṃsa: containing accounts of many Pali works written

in Burma. Edited by Minayeff in Jour. Pali Text Soc. for 1886, pp. 54 ff.
and indexed by M. Bode, ibid. 1896, 53 ff.
Bigandet, Vie ou Légende de Gautama, 1878.
Yoe, The Burman, his life and notions.
J.G. Scott, Burma, a handbook of practical information, 1906.
Reports of the Superintendent, Archaeological Survey, Burma, 1916-1920.
Various articles (especially by Duroiselle, Taw-Sein-Ko and R.C.

Temple) in the Indian Antiquary, Buddhism, and Bulletin de l’Ecole
Française de l’Extrême Orient.
[130] So too Prome is called Śrîkshetra and the name Irrawaddy

represents Irâvatî (the modern Ravi). The ancient town of Śrâvastî or
Sâvatthi is said to reappear in the three forms Tharawaddy,
Tharawaw and Thawutti.
[131] See Indian Antiquary, 1893, p. 6, and Forchhammer on the

Mahamuni Pagoda in Burmese Archaeological Report (? 1890).
70
[132] Dîpav. VIII. 12, and in a more embellished form in Mahâvaṃsa

XII. 44-54. See also the Kalyani Inscriptions in Indian Ant. 1893, p. 16.
[133] Through the form Saton representing Saddhan. Early European

travellers called it Satan or Xatan.
[134] The Burmese identify Aparantaka and Yona to which Asoka

also sent missionaries with Upper Burma and the Shan country. But
this seems to be merely a misapplication of Indian names.
[135] See Forchhammer, Jardine Prize Essay, 1885, pp. 23-27. He also
says that the earliest Talaing alphabet is identical with the Vengi
alphabet of the fourth century A.D. Burma Archaeol. Report, 1917, p.
29.
[136] See R.C. Temple, “Notes on Antiquities of Râmaññadesa,” Ind.

Antiq. 1893, pp. 327 ff. Though I admit the possibility that
Mahâyânism and Tantrism may have flourished in lower Burma, it
does not seem to me that the few Hindu figures reproduced in this
article prove very much.
[137] J.A. 1912, II. pp. 121-136.
[138] It is remarkable that Buddhaghosa commenting on Ang. Nik. 1.

14. 6 (quoted by Forchhammer) describes the merchants of Ukkala as
inhabiting Asitañjana in the region of Haṃsavatî or Pegu. This
identification of Ukkala with Burmese territory is a mistake but
accepted in Burma and it is more likely that a Burmese would have
made it than a Hindu.
[139] Chap. XXXIX.
[140] See however Epig. Indica, vol. V. part iv. Oct. 1898, pp. 101-102.
For the prevalence of forms which must be derived from Sanskrit not
Pali see Burma Arch. Rep. 1916, p. 14, and 1917, p. 39.
[141] Report of Supt. Arch. Survey Burma, 1909, p. 10, 1910, p. 13, and
1916, pp. 33, 38. Finot, Notes d’Epigraphie, p. 357.
[142] See especially Finot in J.A. 1912, II. p. 123, and Huber in
B.E.F.E.O. 1909 P. 584.
[143] The Aris are further credited with having practised a sort of jus
primæ noctis. See on this question the chapter on Camboja and
alleged similar customs there.
71
[144] See Burma Arch. Rep. 1916, pp. 12, 13. They seem to have been
similar to the Nîlapatanadarśana of Ceylon. The
Prabodhacandrodaya (about 1100 A.D.) represents Buddhist monks
as drunken and licentious.
[145] See Parker, Burma, 1892. The annalist says “There is a huge
white elephant (or image) 100 feet high. Litigants burn incense and
kneel before it, reflecting within themselves whether they are right
or wrong.... When there is any disaster or plague the king also kneels
in front of it and blames himself.” The Chinese character means
either image or elephant, but surely the former must be the meaning
here.
[146] See Taw-Sein-Ko, in Ind. Antiquary, 1906, p. 211. But I must

confess that I have not been able to follow or confirm all the
etymologies suggested by him.
[147] See for Chinese remains at Pagan, Report of the Superintendent,

Arch. Survey, Burma, for year ending 31st March, 1910, pp. 20, 21. An
inscription at Pagan records that in 1285 Khubilai’s troops were
accompanied by monks sent to evangelize Burma. Both troops and
monks halted at Tagaung and both were subsequently withdrawn.
See Arch. Survey, 1917, p. 38.
[148] The date of Anawrata’s conquest of Thaton seems to be now

fixed by inscriptions as 1057 A.D., though formerly supposed to be
earlier. See Burma Arch. Rep. 1916. For Anawrata’s religious reforms
see Sâsanavaṃsa, pp. 17 ff. and 57 ff.
[149] It has been noted that many of the inscriptions explanatory of

the scenes depicted on the walls of the Ananda temple at Pagan are
in Talaing, showing that it was some time before the Burmans were
able to assimilate the culture of the conquered country.
[150] See the Sâsanavaṃsa, p. 64 and p. 20. See also Bode, Pali
Literature of Burma, p. 15. But the Mahâvaṃsa, LX. 4-7, while
recording the communications between Vijaya Bahu and Aniruddha
( = Anawrata) represents Ceylon as asking for monks from Râmañña,
which implies that lower Burma was even then regarded as a
Buddhist country with a fine tradition.
[151] The Burmese canon adds four works to the Khuddaka-Nikâya,

namely: (a) Milinda Pañha, (b) Netti-Pakaraṇa, (c) Suttasaṇgaha, (d)
Peṭakopadesa.
72
[152] Inscriptions give his reign as 1084-1112 A.D. See Burma Arch.
Rep. 1916, p. 24. Among many other remarkable edifices may be
mentioned the Thapinyu or Thabbannu (1100), the Gaudapalin
(1160) and the Bodhi (c. 1200) which is a copy of the temple at
Bodhgaya.
[153] The best known of his works are the Sutta-niddesa on grammar
and the Sankhepavaṇṇanâ. The latter is a commentary on the
Abhidhammattha-sangaha, but it is not certain if Chapaṭa composed
it or merely translated it from the Sinhalese.
[154] Some authorities speak as if the four disciples of Chapaṭa had

founded four sects, but the reprobate Râhula can hardly have done
this. The above account is taken from the Kalyani inscription, Ind.
Ant. 1893, pp. 30, 31. It says very distinctly “There were in Pugama
(Pagan) 4 sects. 1. The successors of the priests who introduced the
religion from Sudhammanâgara (i.e. the Mramma Sangha). 2. The
disciples of Sîvalimahâthera. 3. The disciples of
Tâmalindamahâthera. 4. The disciples of Ananda Mahâthera.”
[155] Also known by the title of Dhammavitasa. He was active in

1246.
[156] Found in Zaingganaing, a suburb of Pegu. The text, translation

and notes are contained in various articles by Taw-Sein-Ko in the
Indian Antiquary for 1893-4.
[157] Mahâvagga, II. 11, 12, 13.
[158] According to Taw-Sein-Ko (Ind. Ant. 1893, p. 11) “about 105 or

126 feet in perimeter.”
[159] No contact with Cambojan religion is implied. The sect was so

called because its chief monastery was near the Camboja market and
this derived its name from the fact that many Cambojan (probably
meaning Shan) prisoners were confined near it.
[160] In favour of it, it may be said that the Dîpavaṃsa and the
earlier traditions on which the Dîpavaṃsa is based are ancient and
impartial witnesses: against it, that Asoka’s attention seems to have
been directed westwards, not towards Bengal and Burma, and that
no very early proof of the existence of Buddhism in Burma has been
found.
[161] Apparently about 1525-1530.
73
[162] See Sâsanavaṃsa, pp. 118 ff.
[163] E.g. Mahâvagga, I. 29, 2; IV. 3, 3. Ekaṃsam uttarâsangam

karitvâ. But both arrangements of drapery are found in the oldest
images of the Buddha and perhaps the Ekaṃsika fashion is the
commoner. See Grünwedel, Buddhist Art in India, 1901, p. 172.
Though these images are considerably later than the Mahâvagga and
prove nothing as to the original practice of the Saṇgha, yet they show
that the Ekaṃsika fashion prevailed at a relatively early period. It
now prevails in Siam and partly in Ceylon. I-Ching (chap. XI.) has a
discussion on the way robes were worn in India (c. 680 A.D.) which
is very obscure but seems to say that monks may keep their
shoulders covered while in a monastery but should uncover one
when they go out.
[164] Sâsanav. p. 123. Sakala-Maramma-raṭṭhavâsino ca: ayaṃ

amhakâṃ râjâ bodhisatto ti vohârimsu. In the Po-U-Daung
inscription, Alompra’s son, Hsin-byu-shin, says twice “In virtue of
this my good deed, may I become a Buddha, ... an omniscient one.”
Indian Antiquary, 1893, pp. 2 and 5. There is something Mahâyânist in
this aspiration. Cf. too the inscriptions of the Siamese King Śrî-
Sûryavaṃsa Râma mentioned below.
[165] They were Puritans who objected to shrines and images and
are said to be represented to-day by the Sawti sect.
[166] See The Burmese Empire by the Italian Father Sangermano, who
went to Burma in 1783 and lived there about 20 years.
[167] Thathana is the Pali Sâsana. In Burmese pronunciation the s of

Indian words regularly appears as th ( = θ), r as y and j as z. Thus
Thagya for Sakra, Yazawin for Râjavaṃśa.
[168] See E. Forchhammer, Jardine Prize Essay (on the sources and
development of Burmese Law), 1885. J. Jolly, “Recht und Sitte” in
Grundriss der Ind. Ar. Phil. 1896, pp. 41-44. M.H. Bode, Pali Lit. of
Burma, pp. 83 ff. Dhammathat is the Burmese pronunciation of
Dhammasattha, Sanskrit Dharmaśâstra.
[169] This theory did not prevent the kings of Burma and their
subordinates from inflicting atrociously cruel punishments.
[170] Forchhammer gives a list of 39 Dhammathats compiled

between 1753 and 1882.
74
[171] They seem to have included tantric works of the

Mahâkâlacakra type. See Bode, Pali Lit. of Burma, p. 108, Nos. 270,
271. But the name is given in the Pali form cakka.
[172] Among usages borrowed from Hinduism may be mentioned

the daily washing in holy water of the image in the Arakan temple at
Mandalay. Formerly court festivities, such as the New Year’s feast
and the festival of ploughing, were performed by Pônnâs and with
Indian rites. On the other hand the Râmâyana does not seem to have
the same influence on art and literature that it has had in Siam and
Java, though scenes from it are sometimes depicted. See Report, Supt.
Archaeolog. Survey, Burma, 1908, p. 22.
[173] See especially The Thirty Seven Nats by Sir. R.C. Temple, 1906,
and Burma by Sir. J.G. Scott, 1906, pp. 380 ff. The best authorities
seem agreed that Nat is not the Sanskrit Nâtha but an indigenous
word of unknown derivation.
[174] Possibly in order to include four female spirits: or possibly

because it was felt that sundry later heroes had as strong a claim to
membership of this distinguished body as the original 33.
[175] It is noticeable that Thagyâ comes from the Sanskrit Śakra not
the Pali Sakka. Th = Sk. s: y = Sk. r.
[176] See R.C. Temple, The Thirty Seven Nats, chaps. X.-XIII., for these
cycles.
[177] E.g. R.C. Temple, l.c. p. 36.
[178] According to Sir. J.G. Scott much more commonly than prayers
among Christians. Burma, p. 366.
[179] 15,371 according to the census of 1891. The figures in the last
census are not conveniently arranged for Buddhist statistics.
[180] Hastings’ Encycl. of Religion and Ethics, art. “Burma

(Buddhism).”
[181] See Bode, Pali Literature in Burma, pp. 95 ff.
[182] No less than 22 translations of it have been made into Burmese.

See S.Z. Aung in J.P.T.S. 1912, p. 129. He also mentions that night
lectures on the Abhidhamma in Burmese are given in monasteries.
[183] But on such occasions the laity usually fast after midday.
75
[184] Man is the Burmese form of Mâra.
[185] Among the most striking characteristics of the Nepalese style

are buildings of many stories each with a projecting roof. No
examples of similar buildings from ancient India have survived,
perhaps because they were made of wood, but representations of
two-storied buildings have come down to us, for instance on the
Sohgaura copper plate which dates probably from the time of Asoka
(see Bühler, W.Z.K.M. 1896, p. 138). See also the figures in Foucher’s
Art Gréco-bouddhique du Gandhâra, on pp. 121, 122. The monuments at
Mâmallapuram known as Raths (see Fergusson, Indian and Eastern
Architecture, I. p. 172) appear to be representations of many storied
Vihâras. There are several references to seven storied buildings in
the Jâtakas.
[186] = cetiya.
[187] Occasionally groups of five Buddhas, that is, these four

Buddhas together with Metteyya, are found. See Report of the Supt.
Arch. Survey (Burma) for the year ending March 31st, 1910, p. 16.
76
CHAPTER XXXVII
SIAM[188]
The Buddhism of Siam does not differ materially from that of Burma
and Ceylon but merits separate mention, since it has features of its
own due in some measure to the fact that Siam is still an
independent kingdom ruled by a monarch who is also head of the
Church. But whereas for the last few centuries this kingdom may be
regarded as a political and religious unit, its condition in earlier
times was different and Siamese history tells us nothing of the
introduction and first diffusion of Indian religions in the countries
between India and China.
[The people commonly known as Siamese call themselves Thăi

which (in the form Tai) appears to be the racial name of several tribes
who can be traced to the southern provinces of China. They spread
thence, in fanlike fashion, from Laos to Assam, and the middle
section ultimately descended the Menam to the sea. The Siamese
claim to have assumed the name Thăi (free) after they threw off the
yoke of the Cambojans, but this derivation is more acceptable to
politics than to ethnology. The territories which they inhabited were
known as Siem, Syâm or Syâma, which is commonly identified with
the Sanskrit Śyâma, dark or brown[189]. But the names Shan and A-
hom seem to be variants of the same word and Śyâma is possibly not
its origin but a learned and artificial distortion[190]. The Lao were
another division of the same race who occupied the country now
called Laos before the Tai had moved into Siam. This movement was
gradual and until the beginning of the twelfth century they merely
established small principalities, the principal of which was
Lamphun[191], on the western arm of the Mekong. They gradually
penetrated into the kingdoms of Svankalok, Sukhothai[192] and
Lavo (Lophburi) which then were vassals of Camboja, and they were
reinforced by another body of Tais which moved southwards early
in the twelfth century. For some time the Cambojan Empire made a
successful effort to control these immigrants but in the latter part of
the thirteenth century the Siamese definitely shook off its yoke and
founded an independent state with its capital at Sukhothai. There
was probably some connection between these events and the
77
southern expeditions of Khubilai Khan who in 1254 conquered Talifu

and set the Tai tribes in motion.
The history of their rule in Siam may be briefly described as a

succession of three kingdoms with capitals at Sukhothai, Ayuthia
and Bangkok respectively. Like the Burmese, the Siamese have
annals or chronicles. They fall into two divisions, [the chronicles[193]
of the northern kingdom in three volumes which go down to the
foundation of Ayuthia and are admitted even by the Siamese to be
mostly fabulous, and the later annals in 40 volumes which were
rearranged after the sack of Ayuthia in 1767 but claim to begin with
the foundation of the city. Various opinions have been expressed as
to their trustworthiness[194], but it is allowed by all that they must
be used with caution. More authoritative but not very early are the
inscriptions set up by various kings, of which a considerable number
have been published and translated[195].
The early history of Sukhothai and its kings is not yet beyond
dispute but a monarch called Râmarâja or Râma Khomhëng played a
considerable part in it. His identity with Phăya Rùang, who is said to
have founded the dynasty and city, has been both affirmed and
denied. Sukhothai, at least as the designation of a kingdom, seems to
be much older than his reign[196]. It was undoubtedly understood as
the equivalent of the Sanskrit Sukhodaya, but like Śyâma it may be
an adaptation of some native word. In an important inscription
found at Sukhothai and now preserved at Bangkok[197], which was
probably composed about 1300 A.D., Râma Khomhëng gives an
account of his kingdom. On the east it extended to the banks of the
Mekhong and beyond it to Chavâ (perhaps a name of Luang-
Prabang): on the south to the sea, as far as Śrî Dharmarâja or Ligor:
on the west to Haṃsavatî or Pegu. This last statement is important
for it enables us to understand how at this period, and no doubt
considerably earlier, the Siamese were acquainted with Pali
Buddhism. The king states that hitherto his people had no alphabet
but that he invented one[198]. This script subsequently [developed
into the modern Siamese writing which, though it presents many
difficulties, is an ingenious attempt to express a language with tones
in an alphabet. The vocabulary of Siamese is not homogeneous: it
comprises (a) a foundation of Thai, (b) a considerable admixture of
Khmer words, (c) an element borrowed from Malay and other
languages, (d) numerous ecclesiastical and learned terms taken from
Pali and Sanskrit. There are five tones which must be distinguished,
if either written or spoken speech is to be intelligible. This is done
partly by accents and partly by dividing the forty-four consonants
78
(many of which are superfluous for other purposes) into three

groups, the high, middle and deep.
The king also speaks of religion. The court and the inhabitants of
Sukhothai were devout Buddhists: they observed the season of Vassa
and celebrated the festival of Kaṭhina with processions, concerts and
reading of the scriptures. In the city were to be seen statues of the
Buddha and scenes carved in relief, as well as large monasteries. To
the west of the city was the Forest Monastery, presented to a
distinguished elder who came from Śri Dharmarâja and had studied
the whole Tripitaka. The mention of this official and others suggests
that there was a regular hierarchy and the king relates how he
exhumed certain sacred relics and built a pagoda over them. Though
there is no direct allusion to Brahmanism, stress is laid on the
worship of spirits and devas on which the prosperity of the kingdom
depends.
The form of Buddhism described seems to have differed little from

the Hinayanism found in Siam to-day. Whence did the Siamese
obtain it? For some centuries before they were known as a nation,
they probably professed some form of Indian religion. They came
from the border lands, if not from the actual territory of China, and
must have been acquainted with Chinese Buddhism. Also Burmese
influence probably reached Yünnan in the eighth century[199], but it
is not easy to say what form of religion it brought with it. Still when
the Thai entered what is now Siam, it is likely that their religion was
some form of Buddhism. While they were subject to Camboja they
must have felt the influence of Śivaism and possibly [of Mahayanist
Sanskrit Buddhism but no Pali Buddhism can have come from this
quarter[200].
Southern Siam was however to some extent affected by another

wave of Buddhism. From early times the eastern coast of India (and
perhaps Ceylon) had intercourse not only with Burma but with the
Malay Peninsula. It is proved by inscriptions that the region of Ligor,
formerly known as Śrî Dharmarâja, was occupied by Hindus (who
were probably Buddhists) at least as early as the fourth century
A.D.[201], and Buddhist inscriptions have been found on the
mainland opposite Penang. The Chinese annals allude to a change in
the customs of Camboja and I-Ching says plainly that Buddhism
once nourished there but was exterminated by a wicked king, which
may mean that Hinayanist Buddhism had spread thither from Ligor
but was suppressed by a dynasty of Śivaites. He also says that at the
end of the seventh century Hinayanism was prevalent in the islands
79
of the Southern Sea. An inscription of about the fourth century found

in Kedah and another of the seventh or eighth from Phra Pathom
both contain the formula Ye dharmâ, etc. The latter inscription and
also one from Mergui ascribed to the eleventh century seem to be in
mixed Sanskrit and Pali. The Sukhothai inscription summarized
above tells how a learned monk was brought thither from Ligor and
clearly the Pali Buddhism of northern Siam may have followed the
same route. But it probably had also another more important if not
exclusive source, namely Burma. After the reign of Anawrata Pali
Buddhism was accepted in Burma and in what we now call the Shan
States as the religion of civilized mankind and this conviction found
its way to the not very distant kingdom of Sukhothai. Subsequently
the Siamese recognized the seniority and authority of the Sinhalese
Church by inviting an instructor to come from Ceylon, but in earlier
times they can hardly have had direct relation with the island.
[We have another picture of religious life in a Khmer inscription[202]

of Lidaiya or Śrî Sûryavaṃsa Râma composed in 1361 or a little later.
This monarch, who is also known by many lengthy titles, appears to
have been a man of learning who had studied the Tipiṭaka, the
Vedas, the Śâstrâgama and Dharmañâya and erected images of
Maheśvara and Vishnu as well as of the Buddha. In 1361 he sent a
messenger to Ceylon charged with the task of bringing back a
Metropolitan or head of the Saṇgha learned in the Pitakas. This
ecclesiastic, who is known only by his title, was duly sent and on
arriving in Siam was received with the greatest honour and made a
triumphal progress to Sukhothai. He is not represented as
introducing a new religion: the impression left by the inscription is
rather that the king and his people being already well-instructed in
Buddhism desired ampler edification from an authentic source. The
arrival of the Saṇgharâja coincided with the beginning of Vassa and
at the end of the sacred season the king dedicated a golden image of
the Buddha, which stood in the midst of the city, and then entered
the order. In doing so he solemnly declared his hope that the merit
thus acquired might make him in future lives not an Emperor, an
Indra or a Brahmâ but a Buddha able to save mankind. He pursued
his religious career with a gratifying accompaniment of miracles and
many of the nobility and learned professions followed his example.
But after a while a deputation waited on his Majesty begging him to
return to the business of his kingdom[203]. An edifying contest
ensued. The monks besought him to stay as their preceptor and
guide: the laity pointed out that government was at an end and
claimed his attention. The matter was referred to the Saṇgharâja who
80
decided that the king ought to return to his secular duties. He

appears to have found little difficulty in resuming lay habits for he
proceeded to chastise the people of Luang-Prabang.
Two other inscriptions[204], apparently dating from this epoch,

[relate that a cutting of the Bo-tree was brought from Ceylon and
that certain relics (perhaps from Patna) were also installed with great
solemnity. To the same time are referred a series of engravings on
stone (not reliefs) found in the Vat-si-jum at Sukhothai. They
illustrate about 100 Jatakas, arranged for the most part according to
the order followed in the Pali Canon.
The facts that King Śrî Sûryavaṃsa sent to Ceylon for his
Metropolitan and that some of the inscriptions which extol his merits
are in Pali[205] make it probable that the religion which he professed
differed little from the Pali Buddhism which flourishes in Siam to-
day and this supposition is confirmed by the general tone of his
inscriptions. But still several phrases in them have a Mahayanist
flavour. He takes as his model the conduct of the Bodhisattvas,
described as ten headed by Metteyya, and his vow to become a
Buddha and save all creatures is at least twice mentioned. The
Buddhas are said to be innumerable and the feet of Bhikkhus are
called Buddha feet[206]. There is no difficulty in accounting for the
presence of such ideas: the only question is from what quarter this
Mahayanist influence came. The king is said to have been a student
of Indian literature: his country, like Burma, was in touch with China
and his use of the Khmer language indicates contact with Camboja.
Another inscription engraved by order of Dharmâsokarâja[207] and

apparently dating from the fourteenth century is remarkable for its
clear statement of the doctrine (generally considered as Mahayanist)
that merit acquired by devotion to the Buddha can be transferred.
The king states that a woman called Bunrak has transferred all her
merit to the Queen and that he himself makes over all his merit to his
teacher, to his relations and to all beings in unhappy states of
existence.
At some time in this period the centre of the Thai empire [changed
but divergent views have been held as to the date[208] and character
of this event. It would appear that in 1350 a Siamese subsequently
known as King Râmâdhipati, a descendant of an ancient line of Thai
princes, founded Ayuthia as a rival to Sukhothai. The site was not
new, for it had long been known as Dvâravatî and seems to be
mentioned under that name by I-Ching (c. 680), but a new city was
81
apparently constructed. The evidence of inscriptions indicates that

Sukhothai was not immediately subdued by the new kingdom and
did not cease to be a royal residence for some time. But still Ayuthia
gradually became predominant and in the fifteenth century merited
the title of capital of Siam.
Its rise did not affect the esteem in which Buddhism was held, and it
must have contained many great religious monuments. The jungles
which now cover the site of the city surround the remnants of the
Wăt Somarokot, in which is a gigantic bronze Buddha facing with
scornful calm the ruin which threatens him. The Wăt Chern, which
lies at some distance, contains another gigantic image. A curious
inscription[209] engraved on an image of Śiva found at Sukhothai
and dated 1510 A.D. asserts the identity of Buddhism and
Brahmanism, but the popular feeling was in favour of the former. At
Ayuthia the temples appear to be exclusively Buddhist and at
Lophburi ancient buildings originally constructed for the Brahmanic
cult have been adapted to Buddhist uses. It was in 1602 that the
mark known as the footprint of Buddha was discovered at the place
now called Phra-bat.
Ayuthia was captured by the Burmese in 1568 and the king was
carried into captivity but the disaster was not permanent, for at the
end of the century the power of the Siamese reached its highest point
and their foreign relations were extensive. We hear that five hundred
Japanese assisted them to repulse a Burmese attack and that there
was a large Japanese colony in Ayuthia. On the other hand when
Hideyoshi invaded Korea in 1592, the Siamese offered to assist the
Chinese. Europeans appeared first in 1511 when the Portuguese took
Malacca. But on the whole [the dealings of Siam with Europe were
peaceful and both traders and missionaries were welcomed. The
most singular episode in this international intercourse was the career
of the Greek adventurer Constantine Phaulcon who in the reign of
King Nărai was practically Foreign Minister. In concert with the
French missionaries he arranged an exchange of embassies (1682 and
1685) between Nărai and Louis XIV, the latter having been led to
suppose that the king and people of Siam were ready to embrace
Christianity. But when the French envoys broached the subject of
conversion, the king replied that he saw no reason to change the
religion which his countrymen had professed for two thousand
years, a chronological statement which it might be hard to
substantiate. Still, great facilities were given to missionaries and
further negotiations ensued, in the course of which the French
received almost a monopoly of foreign trade and the right to
82
maintain garrisons. But the death of Nărai was followed by a

reaction. Phaulcon died in prison and the French garrisons were
expelled. Buddhism probably flourished at this period for the
Mahâvaṃsa tells us that the king of Ceylon sent to Ayuthia for
monks in 1750 because religion there was pure and undefiled.
Ayuthia continued to be the capital until 1767 when it was laid in

ruins by the Burmese who, though Buddhists, did not scruple to
destroy or deface the temples and statues with which it was
ornamented. But the collapse of the Siamese was only local and
temporary. A leader of Chinese origin named Phăya Täk Sin rallied
their forces, cleared the Burmese out of the country and made
Bangkok, officially described as the Capital of the Angels, the seat of
Government. But he was deposed in 1782 and one of the reasons for
his fall seems to have been a too zealous reformation of Buddhism.
In the troublous times following the collapse of Ayuthia the Church
had become disorganized and corrupt, but even those who desired
improvement would not assent to the powers which the king
claimed over monks. A new dynasty (of which the sixth monarch is
now on the throne) was founded in 1782 by Chao Phăya Chakkri.
One of his first acts was to convoke a council for the revision of the
Tipiṭaka and to build a special hall in which the text thus agreed on
was preserved. His successor Phra: Buddha Löt La is considered the
best poet that Siam has produced and it is [probably the only
country in the world where this distinction has fallen to the lot of a
sovereign. The poet king had two sons, Phra: Nang: Klao, who
ascended the throne after his death, and Mongkut, who during his
brother’s reign remained in a monastery strictly observing the duties
of a monk. He then became king and during his reign (1851-1868)
Siam “may be said to have passed from the middle ages to modern
times[210].” It is a tribute to the excellence of Buddhist discipline
that a prince who spent twenty-six years as a monk should have
emerged as neither a bigot nor an impractical mystic but as an active,
enlightened and progressive monarch. The equality and simplicity of
monastic life disposed him to come into direct touch with his
subjects and to adopt straightforward measures which might not
have occurred to one who had always been surrounded by a wall of
ministers. While still a monk he founded a stricter sect which aimed
at reviving the practice of the Buddha, but at the same time he
studied foreign creeds and took pleasure in conversing with
missionaries. He wrote several historical pamphlets and an English
Grammar, and was so good a mathematician that he could calculate
the occurrence of an eclipse. When he became king he regulated the
83
international position of Siam by concluding treaties of friendship

and commerce with the principal European powers, thus showing
the broad and liberal spirit in which he regarded politics, though a
better acquaintance with the ways of Europeans might have made
him refuse them extraterritorial privileges. He abolished the custom
which obliged everyone to keep indoors when the king went out and
he publicly received petitions on every Uposatha day. He legislated
against slavery[211], gambling, drinking spirits and smoking opium
and considerably improved the status of women. He also published
edicts ordering the laity to inform the ecclesiastical authorities if they
noticed any abuses in the monasteries. He caused the annals of Siam
to be edited and issued numerous orders on archaeological and
literary questions, in which, though a good Pali scholar, he
deprecated the affected use of Pali words and enjoined the use of a
terse and simple Siamese style, which he certainly wrote himself. He
appears to [have died of scientific zeal for he caught a fatal fever on a
trip which he took to witness a total eclipse of the sun.
He was succeeded by his son Chulalongkorn[212] (1868-1911), a

liberal and enlightened ruler, who had the misfortune to lose much
territory to the French on one side and the English on the other. For
religion, his chief interest is that he published an edition of the
Tipiṭaka. The volumes are of European style and printed in Siamese
type, whereas Cambojan characters were previously employed for
religious works.
As I have already observed, there is not much difference between

Buddhism in Burma and Siam. In mediæval times a mixed form of
religion prevailed in both countries and Siam was influenced by the
Brahmanism and Mahayanism of Camboja. Both seem to have
derived a purer form of the faith from Pegu, which was conquered
by Anawrata in the eleventh century and was the neighbour of
Sukhothai so long as that kingdom lasted. Both had relations with
Ceylon and while venerating her as the metropolis of the faith also
sent monks to her in the days of her spiritual decadence. But even in
externals some differences are visible. The gold and vermilion of
Burma are replaced in Siam by more sober but artistic tints—olive,
dull purple and dark orange—and the change in the colour scheme
is accompanied by other changes in the buildings.
84
A religious establishment in Siam consists of several edifices and is

generally known as Wăt[213], followed by some special designation
such as Wăt Chang. Bangkok is full of such establishments mostly
constructed on the banks of the river or canals. The entrance is
usually guarded by gigantic and grotesque figures which are often
lions, but at the Wăt Phô in Bangkok the tutelary demons are
represented by curious caricatures of Europeans wearing tall hats.
The gate leads into several courts opening out of one another and not
arranged on any fixed plan. The first is sometimes surrounded by a
colonnade in which are set a long line of the Buddha’s eighty
disciples. The most [important building in a Wăt is known as
Bỗt[214]. It has a colonnade of pillars outside and is surmounted by
three or four roofs, not much raised one above the other, and bearing
finials of a curious shape, said to represent a snake’s head[215]. It is
also marked off by a circuit of eight stones, cut in the shape of Bo-
tree leaves, which constitute a sîmâ or boundary. It is in the Bỗt that
ordinations and other acts of the Sangha are performed. Internally it
is a hall: the walls are often covered with paintings and at the end
there is always a sitting figure of the Buddha[216] forming the apex
of a pyramid, the lower steps of which are decorated with smaller
images and curious ornaments, such as clocks under glass cases.
Siamese images of the Buddha generally represent him as crowned

by a long flame-like ornament called Sĩrô rồt[217], probably
representing the light supposed to issue from the prominence on his
head. But the ornament sometimes becomes a veritable crown
terminating in a spire, as do those worn by the kings of Camboja and
Siam. On the left and right of the Buddha often stand figures of Phra:
Môkha: la (Moggalâna) and Phra: Sárĩbŭt (Sâriputta). It is stated that
the Siamese pray to them as saints and that the former is invoked to
heal broken limbs[218]. The Buddha when represented in frescoes is
robed in red but his face and hands are of gold. Besides the Bỗt a
Wăt contains one or more wĩháns. The word is derived from Vihâra
but has come to mean an image-house. The wĩháns are halls not
unlike the Bỗts but smaller. In a large Wăt there is usually one
containing a gigantic recumbent image of the Buddha and they
sometimes shelter Indian deities such as Yama.
In most if not in all Wăt there are structures known as Phra: chedi
and Phra: prang. The former are simply the ancient cetiyas, called
dagobas in Ceylon and zedis in Burma. They do not depart
materially from the shape usual in other countries [and sometimes,
for instance in the gigantic chedi at Pra Pratom, the part below the
spire is a solid bell-shaped dome. But Siamese taste tends to make
85
such buildings slender and elongate and they generally consist of

stone discs of decreasing size, set one on the other in a pile, which
assumes in its upper parts the proportions of a flagstaff rather than
of a stone building. The Phra: prangs though often larger than the
Phra: chedis are proportionally thicker and less elongate. They
appear to be derived from the Brahmanic temple towers of Camboja
which consist of a shrine crowned by a dome. But in Siam the shrine
is often at some height above the ground and is reduced to small
dimensions, sometimes becoming a mere niche. In large Phra: prangs
it is approached by a flight of steps outside and above it rises the
tower, terminating in a metal spire. But whereas in the Phra: chedis
these spires are simple, in the Phra: prangs they bear three crescents
representing the trident of Śiva and appear like barbed arrows. A
large Wat is sure to contain a number of these structures and may
also comprise halls for preaching, a pavilion covering a model of
Buddha’s foot print, tanks for ablution and a bell tower. It is said that
only royal Wats contain libraries and buildings called chătta mŭkh,
which shelter a four-faced image of Brahmâ[219].
The monks are often housed in single chambers arranged round the
courts of a Wat but sometimes in larger buildings outside it. The
number of monks and novices living in one monastery is larger than
in Burma, and according to the Bangkok Directory (1907) works out
at an average of about 12. In the larger Wats this figure is
considerably exceeded. Altogether there were 50,764 monks and
10,411 novices in 1907[220], the province of Ayuthia being decidedly
the best provided with clergy. As in Burma, it is customary for every
male to spend some time in a monastery, usually at the age of about
20, and two months is considered the minimum which is respectable.
It is also common to enter a monastery for a short stay on the day
when a parent is cremated. During the season of Vassa all [monks go
out to collect alms but at other seasons only a few make the daily
round and the food collected, as in Burma and Ceylon, is generally
not eaten. But during the dry season it is considered meritorious for
monks to make a pilgrimage to Phra Bât and while on the way to live
on charity. They engage to some extent in manual work and occupy
themselves with carpentering[221]. As in Burma, education is in
their hands, and they also act as doctors, though their treatment has
more to do with charms and faith cures than with medicine.
As in Burma there are two sects, the ordinary unreformed body, and
the rigorous and select communion founded by Mongkut and called
Dhammayut. It aims at a more austere and useful life but in outward
observances the only distinction seems to be that the Dhammayuts
86
hold the alms-bowl in front of them in both hands, whereas the

others hold it against the left hip with the left hand only. The
hierarchy is well developed but somewhat secularized, though
probably not more so than it was in India under Asoka. In the official
directory where the departments of the Ministry of Public
Instruction are enumerated, the Ecclesiastical Department comes
immediately after the Bacteriological, the two being clearly regarded
as different methods of expelling evil spirits. The higher clerical
appointments are made by the king. He names four Primates[222],
one of whom is selected as chief. The Primates with nineteen
superior monks form the highest governing body of the Church.
Below them are twelve dignitaries called Gurus, who are often heads
of large Wats. There are also prelates who bear the Cambojan title of
Burien equivalent to Mahâcârya. They must have passed an
examination in Pali and are chiefly consulted on matters of
ceremonial.
It will thus be seen that the differences between the churches of

Burma, Ceylon and Siam are slight; hardly more than the local
peculiarities which mark the Roman church in Italy, Spain, and
England. Different opinions have been expressed as to the moral
tone and conduct of Siamese monks and most critics state that they
are somewhat inferior to their Burmese [brethren. The system by
which a village undertakes to support a monk, provided that he is a
reasonably competent school-master and of good character, works
well. But in the larger monasteries it is admitted that there are
inmates who have entered in the hope of leading a lazy life and even
fugitives from justice. Still the penalty for any grave offence is
immediate expulsion by the ecclesiastical authorities and the
offender is treated with extreme severity by the civil courts to which
he then becomes amenable.
The religious festivals of Siam are numerous and characteristic.

Many are Buddhist, some are Brahmanic, and some are royal.
Uposatha days (wăn phra:) are observed much as in Burma. The
birth, enlightenment and death of the Buddha (which are all
supposed to have taken place on the 15th day of the 6th waxing
moon) are celebrated during a three days festival. These three days
are of peculiar solemnity and are spent in the discharge of religious
duties, such as hearing sermons and giving alms. But at most
festivals religious observances are mingled with much picturesque
but secular gaiety. In the morning the monks do not go their usual
round[223] and the alms-bowls are arranged in a line within the
temple grounds. The laity (mostly women) arrive bearing wicker
87
trays on which are vessels containing rice and delicacies. They place
a selection of these in each bowl and then proceed to the Bỗt where
they hear the commandments recited and often vow to observe for
that day some which are usually binding only on monks. While the
monks are eating their meal the people repair to a river, which is
rarely far distant in Siam, and pour water drop by drop saying “May
the food which we have given for the use of the holy ones be of
benefit to our fathers and mothers and to all of our relatives who
have passed away.” This rite is curiously in harmony with the
injunctions of the Tirokuḍḍasuttam in the Khuddakapâtha, which is
probably an ancient work[224]. The rest of the day is usually devoted
to pious merrymaking, such as processions by day and illuminations
by night. On some feasts [the laws against gambling are suspended
and various games of chance are freely indulged in. Thus the New
Year festival called Trŭt (or Krŭt) Thăi lasts three days. On the first
two days, especially the second, crowds fill the temples to offer
flowers before the statues of Buddha and more substantial presents
of food, clothes, etc., to the clergy. Well-to-do families invite monks
to their houses and pass the day in listening to their sermons and
recitations. Companies of priests are posted round the city walls to
scare away evil spirits and with the same object guns are fired
throughout the night. But the third day is devoted to gambling by
almost the whole population except the monks. Not dissimilar is the
celebration of the Só̆ngkran holidays, at the beginning of the official
year. The special religious observance at this feast consists in bathing
the images of Buddha and in theory the same form of watery respect
is extended to aged relatives and monks. In practice its place is taken
by gifts of perfumes and other presents.
The rainy season is preceded and ended by holidays. During this

period both monks and pious laymen observe their religious duties
more strictly. Thus monks eat only once a day and then only what is
put into their bowls and laymen observe some of the minor vows. At
the end of the rains come the important holidays known as Thòt
Kăthí̆n[225], when robes are presented to monks. This festival has
long had a special importance in Siam. Thus Râma Khomhëng in his
inscription of A.D. 1292[226] describes the feast of Kaṭhina which
lasts a month. At the present day many thousands of robes are
prepared in the capital alone so as to be ready for distribution in
October and November, when the king or some deputy of high rank
visits every temple and makes the offering in person. During this
season Bangkok witnesses a series of brilliant processions.
88
These festivals mentioned may be called Buddhist though their light-

hearted and splendour-loving gaiety, their processions and gambling
are far removed from the spirit of Gotama. Others however are
definitely Brahmanic and in Bangkok are superintended by the
Brahmans attached to the Court. Since the time of Mongkut Buddhist
priests are also present as a sign that the rites, if not ordered by
Buddhism, at least have its [countenance. Such is the R`ëk Na[227],
or ploughing festival. The king is represented by the Minister of
Agriculture who formerly had the right to exact from all shops found
open such taxes as he might claim for his temporary sovereignty. At
present he is escorted in procession to Dusit[228], a royal park
outside Bangkok, where he breaks ground with a plough drawn by
two white oxen.
Somewhat similar is the Thĩb-Chĩng-Cha, or Swinging holidays, a

two days’ festival which seems to be a harvest thanksgiving. Under
the supervision of a high official, four Brahmans wearing tall conical
hats swing on a board suspended from a huge frame about 100 ft
high. Their object is to catch with their teeth a bag of money hanging
at a little distance from the swing. When three or four sets of
swingers have obtained a prize in this way, they conclude the
ceremony by sprinkling the ground with holy water contained in
bullock horns. Swinging is one of the earliest Indian rites[229] and as
part of the worship of Krishna it has lasted to the present day. Yet
another Brahmanic festival is the Loi Kăthŏng[230], when miniature
rafts and ships bearing lights and offerings are sent down the
Menam to the sea.
Another class of ceremonies may be described as royal, inasmuch as

they are religious only in so far as they invoke religion to protect
royalty. Such are the anniversaries of the birth and coronation of the
king and the Thú̓ Năm or drinking of the water of allegiance which
takes place twice a year. At Bangkok all officials assemble at the
Palace and there drink and sprinkle on their heads water in which
swords and other weapons have been dipped thus invoking
vengeance on themselves should they prove disloyal. Jars of this
water are despatched to Governors who superintend the
performance of the same ceremony in the provincial capitals. It is
only after the water has been drunk that officials receive their half
yearly salary. Monks are excused from drinking it but the chief
ecclesiastics of Bangkok meet in the Palace temple and perform a
service in honour of the occasion.
89
Besides these public solemnities there are a number of domestic

festivals derived from the twelve Saṃskâras of the Hindus. Of these
only three or four are kept up by the nations of Indo-China, namely
the shaving of the first hair of a child a month after birth, the giving
of a name, and the piercing of the ears for earrings. This last is
observed in Burma and Laos, but not in Siam and Camboja where is
substituted for it the Kôn Chũ̆k or shaving of the topknot, which is
allowed to grow until the eleventh or thirteenth year. This ceremony,
which is performed on boys and girls alike, is the most important
event in the life of a young Siamese and is celebrated by well-to-do
parents with lavish expenditure. Those who are indigent often avail
themselves of the royal bounty, for each year a public ceremony is
performed in one of the temples of Bangkok at which poor children
receive the tonsure gratis. An elaborate description of the tonsure
rites has been published by Gerini[231]. They are of considerable
interest as showing how closely Buddhist and Brahmanic rites are
intertwined in Siamese family life.
Marriages are celebrated with a feast to which monks are invited but
are not regarded as religious ceremonies. The dead are usually
disposed of by cremation, but are often kept some time, being either
embalmed or simply buried and exhumed subsequently. Before
cremation the coffin is usually placed within the grounds of a
temple. The monks read Suttas over it and it is said[232] that they
hold ribbons which enter into the coffin and are supposed to
communicate to the corpse the merit acquired by the recitations and
prayers.
In the preceding pages mention has often been made not only of
Brahmanic rites but of Brahman priests[233]. These are [still to be
found in Bangkok attached to the Court and possibly in other cities.
They dress in white and have preserved many Hindu usages but are
said to be poor Sanskrit scholars. Indeed Gerini[234] seems to say
that they use Pali in some of their recitations. Their principal duty is
to officiate at Court functions, but wealthy families invite them to
take part in domestic rites, and also to cast horoscopes and fix lucky
days. It is clear that the presence of these Brahmans is no innovation.
Brahmanism must have been strong in Siam when it was a province
of Camboja, but in both countries gave way before Buddhism. Many
rites, however, connected with securing luck or predicting the future
were too firmly established to be abolished, and, as Buddhist monks
90
were unwilling to perform them[235] or not thought very competent,

the Brahmans remained and were perhaps reinforced from time to
time by new importations, for there are still Brahman colonies in
Ligor and other Malay towns. Siamese lawbooks, like those of
Burma, seem to be mainly adaptations of Indian Dharmaśâstras.
On a cursory inspection, Siamese Buddhism, especially as seen in

villages, seems remarkably free from alien additions. But an
examination of ancient buildings, of royal temples in Bangkok and
royal ceremonial, suggests on the contrary that it is a mixed faith in
which the Brahmanic element is strong. Yet though this element
appeals to the superstition of the Siamese and their love of
pageantry, I think that as in Burma it has not invaded the sphere of
religion and ethics more than the Piṭakas themselves allow. In art
and literature its influence has been considerable. The story of the
Ramayana is illustrated on the cloister walls of the royal temple at
Bangkok and Indian mythology has supplied a multitude of types to
the painter and sculptor; such as Yŏmma: ràt (Yâma), Phăya Man
(Mâra), Phra: In (Indra). These are all deities known to the Piṭakas
but the sculptures or images[236] in Siamese temples also [include
Ganeśa, Phra: Nărai (Nârâyana or Vishṇu) riding on the Garuda and
Phra: Isuén (Śiva) riding on a bull. There is a legend that the Buddha
and Śiva tried which could make himself invisible to the other. At
last the Buddha sat on Śiva’s head and the god being unable to see
him acknowledged his defeat. This story is told to explain a small
figure which Śiva bears on his head and recalls the legend found in
the Piṭakas[237] that the Buddha made himself invisible to Brahmâ
but that Brahmâ had not the corresponding power. Lingas are still
venerated in a few temples, for instance at Wăt Phô in Bangkok, but
it would appear that the majority (e.g. those found at Pra Pratom and
Lophburi) are survivals of ancient Brahmanic worship and have a
purely antiquarian importance. The Brahmanic cosmology which
makes Mt. Meru the centre of this Universe is generally accepted in
ecclesiastical treatises and paintings, though the educated Siamese
may smile at it, and when the topknot of a Siamese prince is cut off,
part of the ceremony consists in his being received by the king
dressed as Śiva on the summit of a mound cut in the traditional
shape of Mt. Kailâśa.
Like the Nâts of Burma, Siam has a spirit population known as

Phís[238]. The name is occasionally applied to Indian deities, but the
great majority of Phís fall into two classes, namely, ghosts of the
dead and nature spirits which, though dangerous, do not rise above
the position of good or bad fairies. In the first class are included the
91
Phí Prẽt, who have the characteristics as well as the name of the
Indian Pretas, and also a multitude of beings who like European
ghosts, haunt houses and behave in a mysterious but generally
disagreeable manner. The Phíăm is apparently our nightmare. The
ghosts of children dying soon after birth are apt to kill their mothers
and in general women are liable to be possessed by Phís. The ghosts
of those who have died a violent death are dangerous but it would
seem that Siamese magicians know how to utilize them as familiar
spirits. The better sort of ghosts are known as Chào Phí and shrines
called San Chào are set up in their honour. It does not however
appear that there is any hierarchy of Phís like the thirty-seven Náts
of Burma.
[Among those Phís who are not ghosts of the dead the most
important is the Phí ru̓en or guardian spirit of each house.
Frequently a little shrine is erected for him at the top of a pole. There
are also innumerable Phís in the jungle mostly malevolent and
capable of appearing either in human form or as a dangerous animal.
But the tree spirits are generally benevolent and when their trees are
cut down they protect the houses that are made of them.
Thus the Buddhism of Siam, like that of Burma, has a certain

admixture of Brahmanism and animism. The Brahmanism is perhaps
more striking than in Burma on account of the Court ceremonies: the
belief in spirits, though almost universal, seems to be more retiring
and less conspicuous. Yet the inscription of Râma Komhëng
mentioned above asserts emphatically that the prosperity of the
Empire depends on due honour being shown to a certain mountain
spirit[239].
It is pretty clear that the first introduction of Hinayanist Buddhism

into Siam was from Southern Burma and Pegu, but that somewhat
later Ceylon was accepted as the standard of orthodoxy. A learned
thera who knew the Sinhalese Tipitaka was imported thence, as well
as a branch of the Bo-tree. But Siamese patriotism flattered itself by
imagining that the national religion was due to personal contact with
the Buddha, although not even early legends can be cited in support
of such traditions. In 1602 a mark in the rocks, now known as the
Phra: Bãt, was discovered in the hills north of Ayuthia and identified
as a footprint of the Buddha similar to that found on Adam’s Peak
and in other places. Burma and Ceylon both claim the honour of a
visit from the Buddha but the Siamese go further, for it is popularly
believed that he died at Praten, a little to the north of Phra Pathom,
on a spot marked by a slab of rock under great trees[240]. For this
92
reason when the Government of India presented [the king of Siam

with the relics found in the Piprava vase, the gift though received
with honour, aroused little enthusiasm and was placed in a
somewhat secluded shrine[241].
FOOTNOTES:
[188] The principal sources for information about Siamese Buddhism

are: Journal of Siam Society, 1904, and onwards.
L. Fournereau, Le Siam Ancien, 2 vols. 1895 and 1908 in Annales du

Musée Guimet. Cited here as Fournereau.
Mission Pavie II, Histoire du Laos, du Cambodge et du Siam, 1898.
Gerini, Researches on Ptolemy’s Geography of Eastern Asia, 1909. Cited

here as Gerini, Ptolemy.
Gerini, Chŭlăkantamangala or Tonsure Ceremony, 1893.
H. Alabaster, The Wheel of the Law, 1871.
P.A. Thompson, Lotus Land, 1906.
W.A. Graham, Siam, 1912.
Petithuguenin, “Notes critiques pour servir à l’histoire du Siam,”

B.E.F.E.O. 1916, No. 3.
Coedès, “Documents sur la Dynastie de Sukhodaya,” ib. 1917, No. 2.
Much curious information may be found in the Directory for Bangkok

and Siam, a most interesting book. I have only the issue for 1907.
I have adopted the conventional European spelling for such words

as may be said to have one. For other words I have followed
Pallegoix’s dictionary (1896) for rendering the vowels and tones in
Roman characters, but have departed in some respects from his
system of transliterating consonants as I think it unnecessary and
misleading to write j and x for sounds which apparently correspond
to y and ch as pronounced in English.
The King of Siam has published a work on the spelling of His

Majesty’s own language in Latin letters which ought to be
authoritative, but it came into my hands too late for me to modify
the orthography here adopted.
93
As Pallegoix’s spelling involves the use of a great many accents I

have sometimes begun by using the strictly correct orthography and
afterwards a simpler but intelligible form. It should be noted that in
this orthography “:” is not a colon but a sign that the vowel before it
is very short.
[189] The name is found on Champan inscriptions of 1050 A.D. and

according to Gerini appears in Ptolemy’s Samarade = Sâmaraṭṭha. See
Gerini, Ptolemy, p. 170. But Samarade is located near Bangkok and
there can hardly have been Tais there in Ptolemy’s time.
[190] So too in Central Asia Kustana appears to be a learned

distortion of the name Khotan, made to give it a meaning in Sanskrit.
[191] Gerini states (Ptolemy, p. 107) that there are Pali manuscript
chronicles of Lamphun apparently going back to 924 A.D.
[192] Strictly Sŭkhồthăi.
[193] Phongsá va: dan or Vaṃsavâda. See for Siamese chronicles,

B.E.F.E.O. 1914, No. 3, “Recension palie des annales d’Ayuthia,” and
ibid. 1916, pp. 5-7.
[194] E.g. Aymonier in J.A. 1903, p. 186, and Gerini in Journal of Siam
Society, vol. II. part 1, 1905.
[195] See especially Fournereau and the publications of the Mission

Pavie and B.E.F.E.O.
[196] Gerini, Ptolemy, p. 176.
[197] See Fournereau, I. p. 225. B.E.F.E.O. 1916, III. pp. 8-13, and
especially Bradley in J. Siam Society, 1909, pp. 1-68.
[198] This alphabet appears to be borrowed from Cambojan but

some of the letters particularly in their later shapes show the
influence of the Môn or Talaing script. The modern Cambojan
alphabet, which is commonly used for ecclesiastical purposes in
Siam, is little more than an elaborate form of Siamese.
[199] See B.E.F.E.O. 1904, p. 161.
[200] Bradley, J. Siam Society, 1913, p. 10, seems to think that Pali
Buddhism may have come thence but the objection is that we know a
good deal about the religion of Camboja and that there is no trace of
Pali Buddhism there until it was imported from Siam. The fact that
94
the Siamese alphabet was borrowed from Camboja does not prove
that religion was borrowed in the same way. The Mongol alphabet
can be traced to a Nestorian source.
[201] See for these inscriptions papers on the Malay Peninsula and
Siam by Finot and Lajonquière in Bull. de la Comm. Archéol. de l’Indo-
Chine, 1909, 1910 and 1912.
[202] Fournereau, pp. 157 ff. and Coedès in B.E.F.E.O. 1917, No. 2.
Besides the inscription itself, which is badly defaced in parts, we
have (1) a similar inscription in Thai, which is not however a
translation, (2) a modern Siamese translation, used by Schmitt but
severely criticized by Coedès and Petithuguenin.
[203] This portion of the narrative is found only in Schmitt’s version

of the Siamese translation. The part of the stone where it would have
occurred is defaced.
[204] See Fournereau, vol. II. inscriptions xv and xvi and the account
of the Jâtakas, p. 43.
[205] Fournereau, I. pp. 247, 273. B.E.F.E.O. 1917, No. 2, p. 29.
[206] See the texts in B.E.F.E.O. l.c. The Bodhisattvas are described as
Ariyametteyâdînam dasannam Bodhisattânam. The vow to become a
Buddha should it seems be placed in the mouth of the King, not of
the Metropolitan as in Schmitt’s translation.
[207] See Fournereau, pp. 209 ff. Dharmâsokarâja may perhaps be

the same as Mahâdharmarâja who reigned 1388-1415. But the word
may also be a mere title applied to all kings of this dynasty, so that
this may be another inscription of Śrî Sûryavaṃsa Râma.
[208] 1350 is the accepted date but M. Aymonier, J.A. 1903, pp. 185 ff.
argues in favour of about 1460. See Fournereau, Ancien Siam, p. 242,
inscription of 1426 A.D. and p. 186, inscription of 1510 described as
Groupe de Sajjanalaya et Sukhodaya.
[209] Fournereau, vol. I. pp. 186 ff.
[210] O. Frankfürter, “King Mongkut,” Journal of Siam Society, vol. I.

1904.
[211] But it was his son who first decreed in 1868 that no Siamese
could be born a slave. Slavery for debt, though illegal, is said not to
be practically extinct.
95
[212] = Cûlâlaṇkâra.
[213] The word has been derived from Vâta, a grove, but may it not
be the Pali Vatthu, Sanskrit Vâstu, a site or building?
[214] = Uposatha.
[215] These finials are very common on the roof ends of Siamese
temples and palaces. It is strange that they also are found in
conjunction with multiple roofs in Norwegian Churches of eleventh
century. See de Beylié, Architecture hindoue dans l’extrême Orient, pp.
47, 48.
[216] The Buddha is generally known as Phra: Khodom ( = Gotama).
[217] In an old Siamese bronze from Kampeng Pet, figured in

Grünwedel’s Buddhist Art in India, p. 179, fig. 127, the Sirô rồt seems
to be in process of evolution.
[218] P.A. Thompson, Lotus Land, 1906, p. 100.
[219] Four images facing the four quarters are considered in Burma
to represent the last four Buddhas and among the Jains some of the
Tirthankaras are so represented, the legend being that whenever
they preached they seemed to face their hearers on every side.
[220] These figures only take account of twelve out of the seventeen
provinces.
[221] Thompson, Lotus Land, p. 120.
[222] They bear the title of Só̆mdĕt Phra: Chào Ràjagama and have
authority respectively over (a) ordinary Buddhists in northern Siam,
(b) ordinary Buddhists in the south, (c) hermits, (d) the Dhammayut
sect.
[223] For this and many other details I am indebted to P.A.

Thompson, Lotus Land, p. 123.
[224] When gifts of food are made to monks on ceremonial occasions,

they usually acknowledge the receipt by reciting verses 7 and 8 of
this Sutta, commonly known as Yathâ from the first word.
[225] Kathina in Pali. See Mahâvag. cap. VII.
[226] Fournereau, p. 225.
96
[227] The ploughing festival is a recognized imperial ceremony in

China. In India ceremonies for private landowners are prescribed in
the Gṛihya Sûtras but I do not know if their performance by kings is
anywhere definitely ordered. However in the Nidâna Kathâ 270 the
Buddha’s father celebrates an imposing ploughing ceremony.
[228] I.e. Tusita. Compare such English names descriptive of

beautiful scenery as Heaven’s Gate.
[229] See Keith, Aitereya Aranyaka, pp. 174-178. The ceremony there
described undoubtedly originated in a very ancient popular festival.
[230] I.e. float-raft. Most authors give the word as Krathong, but
Pallegoix prefers Kathong.
[231] Chulakantamangalam, Bangkok, 1893.
[232] P.A. Thompson, Lotus Land, p. 134.
[233] For the Brahmans of Siam see Frankfürter, Oriental. Archiv.

1913, pp. 196-7.
[234] Chulakantamangala, p. 56.
[235] They are mostly observances such as Gotama would have

classed among “low arts” (tîracchânavijjâ). At present the monks of
Siam deal freely in charms and exorcisms but on important occasions
public opinion seems to have greater confidence in the skill and
power of Brahmans.
[236] King Śrî Sûryavaṃsa Râma relates in an inscription of about

1365 how he set up statues of Parameśvara and Vishṇukarma (?) and
appointed Brahmans to serve them.
[237] Maj. Nik. 47.
[238] Siam Society, vol. IV. part ii. 1907. Some Siamese ghost-lore by A.J.
Irwin.
[239] Jour. Siam Soc. 1909, p. 28. “In yonder mountain is a demon
spirit Phră Khăphŭng that is greater than every other spirit in this
realm. If any Prince ruling this realm reverences him well with
proper offerings, this realm stands firm, this realm prospers. If the
spirit be not reverenced well, if the offerings be not right, the spirit in
the mountain does not protect, does not regard:—this realm
perishes.”
97
[240] The most popular life of the Buddha in Siamese is called

Pa:thó̆mma Só̆mphôthĩyan, translated by Alabaster in The Wheel of
the Law. But like the Lalita vistara and other Indian lives on which it
is modelled it stops short at the enlightenment. Another well-known
religious book is the Traiphûm ( = Tribhûmi), an account of the
universe according to Hindu principles, compiled in 1776 from
various ancient works.
The Pali literature of Siam is not very large. Some account of it is

given by Coedès in B.E.F.E.O. 1915, III. pp. 39-46.
[241] When in Bangkok in 1907 I saw in a photographer’s shop a

photograph of the procession which escorted these relics to their
destination. It was inscribed “Arrival of Buddha’s tooth from
Kandy.” This shows how deceptive historical evidence may be. The
inscription was the testimony of an eye-witness and yet it was
entirely wrong.
98
CHAPTER XXXVIII
CAMBOJA[242]
The French Protectorate of Camboja corresponds roughly to the

nucleus, though by no means to the whole extent of the former
Empire of the Khmers. The affinities of this race have given rise to
considerable discussion and it has been proposed to connect them
with the Muṇḍa tribes of India on one side and with the Malays and
Polynesians on the other[243]. They are allied linguistically to the
Mons or Talaings of Lower Burma and to the Khasias of Assam, but
it is not proved that they are similarly related to the Annamites, and
recent investigators are not disposed to maintain the Mon-Annam
family of languages [proposed by Logan and others. But the
undoubted similarity of the Mon and Khmer languages suggests that
the ancestors of those who now speak them were at one time spread
over the central and western parts of Indo-China but were
subsequently divided and deprived of much territory by the
southward invasions of the Thais in the middle ages.
The Khmers also called themselves Kambuja or Kamvuja and their

name for the country is still either Srŏk Kâmpûchéa or Srŏk
Khmer[244]. Attempts have been made to find a Malay origin for this
name Kambuja but native tradition regards it as a link with India
and affirms that the race is descended from Kambu Svayambhuva
and Merâ or Perâ who was given to him by Śiva as wife[245]. This
legend hardly proves that the Khmer people came from India but
they undoubtedly received thence their civilization, their royal
family and a considerable number of Hindu immigrants, so that the
mythical ancestor of their kings naturally came to be regarded as the
progenitor of the race. The Chinese traveller Chou Ta-kuan (1296
A.D.) says that the country known to the Chinese as Chên-la is called
by the natives Kan-po-chih but that the present dynasty call it Kan-
p’u-chih on the authority of Sanskrit (Hsi-fan) works. The origin of
the name Chên-la is unknown.
There has been much discussion respecting the relation of Chên-la to

the older kingdom of Fu-nan which is the name given by Chinese
historians until the early part of the seventh century to a state
99
occupying the south-eastern and perhaps central portions of Indo-

China. It has been argued that Chên-la is simply the older name of
Fu-nan and on the other hand that Fu-nan is a wider designation
including several states, one of which, Chên-la or Camboja, became
paramount at the expense of the others[246]. But the point seems
unimportant for their [religious history with which we have to deal.
In religion and general civilization both were subject to Indian
influence and it is not recorded that the political circumstances
which turned Fu-nan into Chên-la were attended by any religious
revolution.
The most important fact in the history of these countries, as in

Champa and Java, is the presence from early times of Indian
influence as a result of commerce, colonization, or conquest.
Orientalists have only recently freed themselves from the idea that
the ancient Hindus, and especially their religion, were restricted to
the limits of India. In mediæval times this was true. Emigration was
rare and it was only in the nineteenth century that the travelling
Hindu became a familiar and in some British colonies not very
welcome visitor. Even now Hindus of the higher caste evade rather
than deny the rule which forbids them to cross the ocean[247]. But
for a long while Hindus have frequented the coast of East Africa[248]
and in earlier [centuries their traders, soldiers and missionaries
covered considerable distances by sea. The Jâtakas[249] mention
voyages to Babylon: Vijaya and Mahinda reached Ceylon in the fifth
and third centuries B.C. respectively. There is no certain evidence as
to the epoch when Hindus first penetrated beyond the Malay
peninsula, but Java is mentioned in the Ramayana[250]: the earliest
Sanskrit inscriptions of Champa date from our third or perhaps
second century, and the Chinese Annals of the Tsin indicate that at a
period considerably anterior to that dynasty there were Hindus in
Fu-nan[251]. It is therefore safe to conclude that they must have
reached these regions about the beginning of the Christian era and,
should any evidence be forthcoming, there is no reason why this
date should not be put further back. At present we can only say that
the establishment of Hindu kingdoms probably implies earlier visits
of Hindu traders and that voyages to the south coast of Indo-China
and the Archipelago were probably preceded by settlements on the
Isthmus of Kra, for instance at Ligor.
The motives which prompted this eastward movement have been

variously connected with religious persecution in India, missionary
enterprise, commerce and political adventure. The first is the least
probable. There is little evidence for the systematic persecution of
100
Buddhists in India and still less for the persecution of Brahmans by

Buddhists. Nor can these Indian settlements be regarded as
primarily religious missions. The Brahmans have always been
willing to follow and supervise the progress of Hindu civilization,
but they have never shown any disposition to evangelize foreign
countries apart from Hindu settlements in them. The Buddhists had
this evangelistic temper and the journeys of their missionaries
doubtless stimulated other classes to go abroad, but still no
inscriptions or annals suggest that the Hindu migrations to Java and
Camboja were parallel to Mahinda’s mission to Ceylon. Nor is there
any reason to think that they were commanded or encouraged by
[Indian Rajas, for no mention of their despatch has been found in
India, and no Indian state is recorded to have claimed suzerainty
over these colonies. It therefore seems likely that they were founded
by traders and also by adventurers who followed existing trade
routes and had their own reasons for leaving India. In a country
where dynastic quarrels were frequent and the younger sons of Rajas
had a precarious tenure of life, such reasons can be easily imagined.
In Camboja we find an Indian dynasty established after a short
struggle, but in other countries, such as Java and Sumatra, Indian
civilization endured because it was freely adopted by native chiefs
and not because it was forced on them as a result of conquest.
The inscriptions discovered in Camboja and deciphered by the

labours of French savants offer with one lacuna (about 650-800 A.D.)
a fairly continuous history of the country from the sixth to the
thirteenth centuries. For earlier periods we depend almost entirely
on Chinese accounts which are fragmentary and not interested in
anything but the occasional relations of China with Fu-nan. The
annals of the Tsin dynasty[252] already cited say that from 265 A.D.
onwards the kings of Fu-nan sent several embassies to the Chinese
Court, adding that the people have books and that their writing
resembles that of the Hu. The Hu are properly speaking a tribe of
Central Asia, but the expression doubtless means no more than
alphabetic writing as opposed to Chinese characters and such an
alphabet can hardly have had other than an Indian origin. Originally,
adds the Annalist, the sovereign was a woman, but there came a
stranger called Hun-Hui who worshipped the Devas and had had a
dream in which one of them gave him a bow[253] and ordered him
to sail for Fu-nan. He conquered the country and married the Queen
but his descendants deteriorated and one Fan-Hsün founded another
dynasty. The annals of the Ch’i dynasty (479-501) give substantially
the same story but say that the stranger was called Hun-T’ien (which
101
is probably the correct form of the name) and that he came from Chi
or Chiao, an unknown locality. The same annals state that towards
the end [of the fifth century the king of Fu-nan who bore the family
name of Ch’iao-ch’ên-ju[254] or Kauṇḍinya and the personal name
of Shê-yeh-po-mo (Jayavarman) traded with Canton. A Buddhist
monk named Nâgasena returned thence with some Cambojan
merchants and so impressed this king with his account of China that
he was sent back in 484 to beg for the protection of the Emperor. The
king’s petition and a supplementary paper by Nâgasena are
preserved in the annals. They seem to be an attempt to represent the
country as Buddhist, while explaining that Maheśvara is its tutelary
deity.
The Liang annals also state that during the Wu dynasty (222-280) Fan
Chan, then king of Fu-nan, sent a relative named Su-Wu on an
embassy to India, to a king called Mao-lun, which probably
represents Muruṇḍa, a people of the Ganges valley mentioned by the
Purâṇas and by Ptolemy. This king despatched a return embassy to
Fu-nan and his ambassadors met there an official sent by the
Emperor of China[255]. The early date ascribed to these events is
noticeable.
The Liang annals contain also the following statements. Between the
years 357 and 424 A.D. named as the dates of embassies sent to
China, an Indian Brahman called Ch’iao-ch’ên-ju (Kauṇḍinya) heard
a supernatural voice bidding him go and reign in Fu-nan. He met
with a good reception and was elected king. He changed the customs
of the country and made them conform to those of India. One of his
successors, Jayavarman, sent a coral image of Buddha in 503 to the
Emperor Wu-ti (502-550). The inhabitants of Fu-nan are said to make
bronze images of the heavenly genii with two or four heads and four
or eight arms. Jayavarman was succeeded by a usurper named Liu-
t’o-pa-mo (Rudravarman) who sent an image made of sandal wood
to the Emperor in 519 and in 539 offered him a hair of the Buddha
twelve feet long. The Sui annals (589-618) state that Citrasena, king
of Chên-la, conquered Fu-nan and was succeeded by his son
Iśânasena.
Two monks of Fu-nan are mentioned among the translators of the

Chinese scriptures[256], namely, Saṇghapâla and Mandra. [Both
arrived in China during the first years of the sixth century and their
works are extant. The pilgrim I-Ching who returned from India in
695 says[257] that to the S.W. of Champa lies the country Po-nan,
formerly called Fu-nan, which is the southern corner of Jambudvîpa.
102
He says that “of old it was a country the inhabitants of which lived
naked; the people were mostly worshippers of devas and later on
Buddhism flourished there, but a wicked king has now expelled and
exterminated them all and there are no members of the Buddhist
brotherhood at all.”
These data from Chinese authorities are on the whole confirmed by

the Cambojan inscriptions. Rudravarman is mentioned[258] and the
kings claim to belong to the race of Kauṇḍinya[259]. This is the name
of a Brahman gotra, but such designations were often borne by
Kshatriyas and the conqueror of Camboja probably belonged to that
caste. It may be affirmed with some certainty that he started from
south-eastern India and possibly he sailed from Mahâbalipûr (also
called the Seven Pagodas). Masulipatam was also a port of
embarcation for the East and was connected with Broach by a trade
route running through Tagara, now Têr in the Nizam’s dominions.
By using this road, it was possible to avoid the west coast, which was
infested by pirates.
The earliest Cambojan inscriptions date from the beginning of the

seventh century and are written in an alphabet closely resembling
that of the inscriptions in the temple of Pâpanâtha at Paṭṭadkal in the
Bîjapur district[260]. They are composed in[ Sanskrit verse of a
somewhat exuberant style, which revels in the commonplaces of
Indian poetry. The deities most frequently mentioned are Śiva by
himself and Śiva united with Vishṇu in the form Hari-Hara. The
names of the kings end in Varman and this termination is also
specially frequent in names of the Pallava dynasty[261]. The
magnificent monuments still extant attest a taste for architecture on a
large scale similar to that found among the Dravidians. These and
many other indications justify the conclusion that the Indian
civilization and religion which became predominant in Camboja
were imported from the Deccan.
The Chinese accounts distinctly mention two invasions, one under

Ch’iao-ch’ên-ju (Kaundinya) about 400 A.D. and one considerably
anterior to 265 under Hun-T’ien. It might be supposed that this name
also represents Kauṇḍinya and that there is a confusion of dates. But
the available evidence is certainly in favour of the establishment of
Hindu civilization in Fu-nan long before 400 A.D. and there is
nothing improbable in the story of the two invasions and even of
two Kauṇḍinyas. Maspéro suggests that the first invasion came from
Java and formed part of the same movement which founded the
kingdom of Champa. It is remarkable that an inscription in Sanskrit
103
found on the east coast of Borneo and apparently dating from the
fifth century mentions Kuṇḍagga as the grandfather of the reigning
king, and the Liang annals say that the king of Poli (probably in
Borneo but according to some in Sumatra) was called Ch’iao-ch’ên-
ju. It seems likely that the Indian family of Kauṇḍinya was
established somewhere in the South Seas (perhaps in Java) at an
early period and thence invaded various countries at various times.
But Fu-nan is a vague geographical term and it may be that Hun-
T’ien founded a Hindu dynasty in Champa.
[It is clear that during the period of the inscriptions the religion of
Camboja was a mixture of Brahmanism and Buddhism, the only
change noticeable being the preponderance of one or other element
in different centuries. But it would be interesting to know the value
of I-Ching’s statement that Buddhism flourished in Fu-nan in early
times and was then subverted by a wicked king, by whom
Bhavavarman[262] may be meant. Primâ facie the statement is not
improbable, for there is no reason why the first immigrants should
not have been Buddhists, but the traditions connecting these
countries with early Hinayanist missionaries are vague.
Târanâtha[263] states that the disciples of Vasubandhu introduced
Buddhism into the country of Koki (Indo-China) but his authority
does not count for much in such a matter. The statement of I-Ching
however has considerable weight, especially as the earliest
inscription found in Champa (that of Vocan) appears to be inspired
by Buddhism.
It may be well to state briefly the chief facts of Cambojan history[264]

before considering the phases through which religion passed. Until
the thirteenth century our chief authorities are the Sanskrit and
Khmer inscriptions, supplemented by notices in the Chinese annals.
The Khmer inscriptions are often only a translation or paraphrase of
Sanskrit texts found in the same locality and, as a rule, are more
popular, having little literary pretension. They frequently contain
lists of donations or of articles to be supplied by the population for
the upkeep of pious foundations. After the fourteenth century we
have Cambojan annals of dubious value and we also find
inscriptions in Pali or in modern Cambojan. The earliest Sanskrit
inscriptions date from the beginning of the seventh century and
mention works undertaken in 604 and 624.
104
The first important king is Bhavavarman (c. 500 A.D.), a [conqueror

and probably a usurper, who extended his kingdom considerably
towards the west. His career of conquest was continued by
Mahâvarman (also called Citrasena), by Iśânavarman and by
Jayavarman[265]. This last prince was on the throne in 667, but his
reign is followed by a lacuna of more than a century. Notices in the
Chinese annals, confirmed by the double genealogies given for this
period in later inscriptions, indicate that Camboja was divided for
some time into two states, one littoral and the other inland.
Clear history begins again with the reign of Jayavarman II (802-869).

Later sovereigns evidently regard him as the great national hero and
he lives in popular legend as the builder of a magnificent palace,
Beng Mealea, whose ruins still exist[266] and as the recipient of the
sacred sword of Indra which is preserved at Phnom-penh to this day.
We are told that he “came from Javâ,” which is more likely to be
some locality in the Malay Peninsula or Laos than the island of that
name. It is possible that Jayavarman was carried away captive to this
region but returned to found a dynasty independent of it[267].
The ancient city of Angkor has probably done more to make

Camboja known in Europe than any recent achievements of the
Khmer race. In the centre of it stands the temple now called Bayon
and outside its walls are many other edifices of which the majestic
Angkor Wat is the largest and best preserved. [King Indravarman
(877-899) seems responsible for the selection of the site but he merely
commenced the construction of the Bayon. The edifice was
completed by his son Yaśovarman (889-908) who also built a town
round it, called Yaśod harapura, Kambupuri or Mahânagara. Angkor
Thom is the Cambojan translation of this last name, Angkor being a
corruption of Nokor ( = Nagara). Yaśovarman’s empire comprised
nearly all Indo-China between Burma and Champa and he has been
identified with the Leper king of Cambojan legend. His successors
continued to embellish Angkor Thom, but Jayavarman IV
abandoned it and it was deserted for several years until
Rajendravarman II (944-968) made it the capital again. The Chinese
Annals, supported by allusions in the inscriptions, state that this
prince conquered Champa. The long reigns of Jayavarman V,
Suryavarman I, and Udayâdityavarman, which cover more than a
century (968-1079) seem to mark a prosperous period when
architecture flourished, although Udayâdityavarman had to contend
with two rebellions. Another great king, Sûryavarman II (1112-1162)
followed shortly after them, and for a time succeeded in uniting
Camboja and Champa under his sway. Some authorities credit him
105
with a successful expedition to Ceylon. There is not sufficient

evidence for this, but he was a great prince and, in spite of his
foreign wars, maintained peace and order at home.
Jayavarman VII, who appears to have reigned from 1162 to 1201,

reduced to obedience his unruly vassals of the north and successfully
invaded Champa which remained for thirty years, though not
without rebellion, the vassal of Camboja. It was evacuated by his
successor Indravarman in 1220.
After this date there is again a gap of more than a century in

Cambojan history, and when the sequence of events becomes clear
again, we find that Siam has grown to be a dangerous and
aggressive enemy. But though the vigour of the kingdom may have
declined, the account of the Chinese traveller Chou Ta-kuan who
visited Angkor Thom in 1296 shows that it was not in a state of
anarchy nor conquered by Siam. There had however been a recent
war with Siam and he mentions that the country was devastated. He
unfortunately does not tell us the name of the reigning king and the
list of sovereigns begins again only in 1340 when the Annals of
Camboja take up the history.[ They are not of great value. The
custom of recording all events of importance prevailed at the
Cambojan Court in earlier times but these chronicles were lost in the
eighteenth century. King Ang Chan (1796-1834) ordered that they
should be re-written with the aid of the Siamese chronicles and such
other materials as were available and fixed 1340 as the point of
departure, apparently because the Siamese chronicles start from that
date[268]. Although the period of the annals offers little but a
narrative of dissensions at home and abroad, of the interference of
Annam on one side and of Siam on the other, yet it does not seem
that the sudden cessation of inscriptions and of the ancient style of
architecture in the thirteenth century was due to the collapse of
Camboja, for even in the sixteenth century it offered a valiant, and
often successful, resistance to aggressions from the west. But Angkor
Thom and the principal monuments were situated near the Siamese
frontier and felt the shock of every collision. The sense of security,
essential for the construction of great architectural works, had
disappeared and the population became less submissive and less
willing to supply forced labour without which such monuments
could not be erected.
The Siamese captured Angkor Thom in 1313, 1351 and 1420 but did
not on any occasion hold it for long. Again in 1473 they occupied
Chantaboun, Korat and Angkor but had to retire and conclude
106
peace. King Ang Chan I successfully disputed the right of Siam to

treat him as a vassal and established his capital at Lovek, which he
fortified and ornamented. He reigned from 1505 to 1555 and both he
and his son, Barom Racha, seem entitled to rank among the great
kings of Camboja. But the situation was clearly precarious and when
a minor succeeded to the throne in 1574 the Siamese seized the
opportunity and recaptured Lovek and Chantaboun. Though this
capture was the death blow to the power of the Khmers, the
kingdom of Camboja did not cease to exist but for nearly three
centuries continued to have an eventful but uninteresting history as
the [vassal of Siam or Annam or even of both[269], until in the
middle of the nineteenth century the intervention of France
substituted a European Protectorate for these Asiatic rivalries.
The provinces of Siem-reap and Battambang, in which Angkor Thom

and the principal ancient monuments are situated, were annexed by
Siam at the end of the eighteenth century, but in virtue of an
arrangement negotiated by the French Government they were
restored to Camboja in 1907, Krat and certain territories being at the
same time ceded to Siam[270].
The religious history of Camboja may be divided into two periods,

exclusive of the possible existence there of Hinayanist Buddhism in
the early centuries of our era. In the first period, which witnessed the
construction of the great monuments and the reigns of the great
kings, both Brahmanism and Mahayanist Buddhism nourished, but
as in Java and Champa without mutual hostility. This period extends
certainly from the sixth to the thirteenth centuries and perhaps its
limits should be stretched to 400-1400 A.D. In any case it passed
without abrupt transition into the second period in which, under
Siamese influence, Hinayanist Buddhism supplanted the older faiths,
although the ceremonies of the Cambojan court still preserve a good
deal of Brahmanic ritual.
During the first period, Brahmanism and Mahayanism were

professed by the Court and nobility. The multitude of great temples
and opulent endowments, the knowledge of Sanskrit literature and
the use of Indian names, leave no doubt about this, but it is highly
probable that the mass of the people had their own humbler forms of
worship. Still there is no record of anything that can be called
Khmer—as opposed to Indian—religion. As in Siam, the veneration
107
of nature spirits is universal in Camboja and little shrines elevated

on poles are erected in their honour in the neighbourhood of almost
every house. [Possibly the more important of these spirits were
identified in early times with Indian deities or received Sanskrit
names. Thus we hear of a pious foundation in honour of
Brahmarakshas[271], perhaps a local mountain spirit. Śiva is adored
under the name of Śrî Śikhareśvara, the Lord of the Peak and
Krishṇa appears to be identified with a local god called Śrî
Champeśvara who was worshipped by Jayavarman VI[272].
The practice of accepting and hinduizing strange gods with whom

they came in contact was so familiar to the Brahmans that it would
be odd if no examples of it occurred in Camboja. Still the Brahmanic
religion which has left such clear records there was in the main not a
hinduized form of any local cult but a direct importation of Indian
thought, ritual and literature. The Indian invaders or colonists were
accompanied by Brahmans: their descendants continued to bear
Indian names and to give them to all places of importance: Sanskrit
was the ecclesiastical and official language, for the inscriptions
written in Khmer are clearly half-contemptuous notifications to the
common people, respecting such details as specially concerned them:
Aśramas and castes (varṇa) are mentioned[273] and it is probable that
natives were only gradually and grudgingly admitted to the higher
castes. There is also reason to believe that this Hindu civilization was
from time to time vivified by direct contact with India. The embassy
of Su-Wu has already been mentioned[274] and an inscription
records the marriage of a Cambojan princess with a Brahman called
Divâkara who came from the banks of the Yamunâ, “where Kṛishṇa
sported in his infancy.”
During the whole period of the inscriptions the worship of Śiva

seems to have been the principal cultus and to some extent the state
religion, for even kings who express themselves in their inscriptions
as devout Buddhists do not fail to invoke him. But there is no trace
of hostility to Vishnuism and the earlier inscriptions constantly
celebrate the praises of the compound deity Vishṇu-Śiva, known
under such names as [Hari-Hara[275], Śambhu-Vishṇu, Śaṇkara-
Narâyaṇa, etc. Thus an inscription of Ang-Pou dating from
Iśânavarman’s reign says “Victorious are Hara and Acyuta become
one for the good of the world, though as the spouses of Parvatî and
Śrî they have different forms[276].” But the worship of this double
being is accompanied by pure Śivaism and by the adoration of other
deities. In the earliest inscriptions Bhavavarman invokes Śiva and
dedicates a linga. He also celebrates the compound deity under the
108
name of Śambhu-Vishṇu and mentions Umâ, Lakshmî, Bhâratî,

Dharma, the Maruts, and Vishṇu under the names of Caturbhuja and
Trailokyasâra. There appears to be no allusion to the worship of
Vishṇu-Śiva as two in one after the seventh century, but though Śiva
became exalted at the expense of his partner, Vishṇu must have had
adorers for two kings, Jayavarman III and Sûryavarman II, were
known after their death by the names of Vishṇu-loka and Parama-
Vishṇu-loka.
Śiva became generally recognized as the supreme deity, in a

comprehensive but not an exclusive sense. He is the universal spirit
from whom emanate Brahmâ and Vishṇu. His character as the
Destroyer is not much emphasized: he is the God of change, and
therefore of reproduction, whose symbol is the Linga. It is
remarkable to find that a pantheistic form of Śivaism is clearly
enunciated in one of the earliest inscriptions[277]. Śiva is there styled
Vibhu, the omnipresent, Paramvrahmâ ( = Brahmâ), Jagatpati,
Paśupati. An inscription found at Angkor[278] mentions an Acârya
of the Pâśupatas as well as an Acârya of the Śaivas and Chou Ta-
kuan seems to allude to the worshippers of Paśupati under the name
of Pa-ssŭ-wei. It would therefore appear that the Pâśupatas existed
in Camboja as a distinct sect and there are some indications[279] that
ideas which prevailed among the Lingayats also found their way
thither.
The most interesting and original aspect of Cambojan religion is its

connection with the state and the worship of deities somehow
identified with the king or with prominent personages[280]. These
features are also found in Champa and Java. In all these countries it
was usual that when a king founded a temple, the god worshipped
in it should be called by his name or by something like it. Thus when
Bhadravarman dedicated a temple to Śiva, the god was styled
Bhadreśvara. More than this, when a king or any distinguished
person died, he was commemorated by a statue which reproduced
his features but represented him with the attributes of his favourite
god. Thus Indravarman and Yaśovarman dedicated at Bakô and
Lolei shrines in which deceased members of the royal family were
commemorated in the form of images of Śiva and Devî bearing
names similar to their own. Another form of apotheosis was to
describe a king by a posthumous title, indicating that he had gone to
the heaven of his divine patron such as Paramavishṇuloka or
Buddhaloka. The temple of Bayon was a truly national fane, almost a
Westminster abbey, in whose many shrines all the gods and great
men of the country were commemorated. The French archæologists
109
recognize four classes of these shrines dedicated respectively to (a)

Indian deities, mostly special forms of Śiva, Devî and Vishṇu; (b)
Mahayanist Buddhas, especially Buddhas of healing, who were
regarded as the patron saints of various towns and mountains; (c)
similar local deities apparently of Cambojan origin and perhaps
corresponding to the God of the City worshipped in every Chinese
town; (d) deified kings and notables, who appear to have been
represented in two forms, the human and divine, bearing slightly
different names. Thus one inscription speaks of Śrî Mahendreśvarî
who is the divine form (vraḥ rûpa) of the lady Śrî Mahendralakshmî.
The presiding deity of the Bayon was Śiva, adored under the form of
the linga. The principal external ornaments of the building are forty
towers each surmounted by four heads. These were formerly
thought to represent Brahmâ but there is little doubt that they are
meant for lingas bearing four faces of Śiva, [since each head has three
eyes. Such lingas are occasionally seen in India[281] and many metal
cases bearing faces and made to be fitted on lingas have been
discovered in Champâ. These four-headed columns are found on the
gates of Angkor Thom as well as in the Bayon and are singularly
impressive. The emblem adored in the central shrine of the Bayon
was probably a linga but its title was Kamrateṇ jagat ta râja or
Devarâja, the king-god. More explicitly still it is styled Kamrateṇ jagat
ta râjya, the god who is the kingdom. It typified and contained the
royal essence present in the living king of Camboja and in all her
kings. Several inscriptions make it clear that not only dead but living
people could be represented by statue-portraits which identified
them with a deity, and in one very remarkable record a general
offers to the king the booty he has captured, asking him to present it
“to your subtle ego who is Iśvara dwelling in a golden linga[282].”
Thus this subtle ego dwells in a linga, is identical with Śiva, and
manifests itself in the successive kings of the royal house.
The practices described have some analogies in India. The custom of

describing the god of a temple by the name of the founder was
known there[283]. The veneration of ancestors is universal; there are
some mausolea (for instance at Ahar near Udeypore) and the notion
that in life the soul can reside elsewhere than in the body is an
occasional popular superstition. Still these ideas and practices are
not conspicuous features of Hinduism and the Cambojans had
probably come within the sphere of another influence. In all eastern
Asia the veneration of the dead is the fundamental and ubiquitous
form of religion and in China we find fully developed such ideas as
that the great should be buried in monumental tombs, that a spirit
110
can be made to reside in a tablet or image, and that the human soul
is compound so that portions of it can be in different places. These
beliefs combined with the Indian doctrine that the deity [is
manifested in incarnations, in the human soul and in images afford a
good theoretical basis for the worship of the Devarâja. It was also
agreeable to far-eastern ideas that religion and the state should be
closely associated and the Cambojan kings would be glad to imitate
the glories of the Son of Heaven. But probably a simpler cause
tended to unite church and state in all these Hindu colonies. In
mediæval India the Brahmans became so powerful that they could
claim to represent religion and civilization apart from the state. But
in Camboja and Champa Brahmanic religion and civilization were
bound up with the state. Both were attacked by and ultimately
succumbed to the same enemies.
The Brahmanism of Camboja, as we know it from the inscriptions,

was so largely concerned with the worship of this “Royal God” that
it might almost be considered a department of the court. It seems to
have been thought essential to the dignity of a Sovereign who
aspired to be more than a local prince, that his Chaplain or preceptor
should have a pontifical position. A curious parallel to this is shown
by those mediæval princes of eastern Europe who claimed for their
chief bishops the title of patriarch as a complement to their own
imperial pretensions. In its ultimate form the Cambojan hierarchy
was the work of Jayavarman II, who, it will be remembered,
reestablished the kingdom after an obscure but apparently
disastrous interregnum. He made the priesthood of the Royal God
hereditary in the family of Śivakaivalya and the sacerdotal dynasty
thus founded enjoyed during some centuries a power inferior only to
that of the kings.
In the inscriptions of Sdok Kâk Thom[284] the history of this family

is traced from the reign of Jayavarman II to 1052. The beginning of
the story as related in both the Sanskrit and Khmer texts is
interesting but obscure. It is to the effect that Jayavarman, anxious to
assure his position as an Emperor (Cakravartin) independent of
Javâ[285], summoned from Janapada a Brahman called
Hiranyadâma, learned in magic (siddhividyâ), who arranged the
rules (viddhi) for the worship of the Royal God and taught the king’s
Chaplain, Śivakaivalya, four treatises called Vrah Vinâśikha,
Nayottara, Sammoha and [Śiraścheda. These works are not
otherwise known[286]. The king made a solemn compact that “only
the members of his (Śivakaivalya’s) maternal[287] family, men and
women, should be Yâjakas (sacrificers or officiants) to the exclusion
111
of all others.” The restriction refers no doubt only to the cult of the
Royal God and the office of court chaplain, called Purohita, Guru or
Hotri, of whom there were at least two.
The outline of this narrative, that a learned Brahman was imported

and charged with the instruction of the royal chaplain, is simple and
probable but the details are perplexing. The Sanskrit treatises
mentioned are unknown and the names singular. Janapada as the
name of a definite locality is also strange[288], but it is conceivable
that the word may have been used in Khmer as a designation of
India or a part of it.
The inscription goes on to relate the gratifying history of the priestly

family, the grants of land made to them, the honours they received.
We gather that it was usual for an estate to be given to a priest with
the right to claim forced labour from the population. He then
proceeded to erect a town or village embellished with temples and
tanks. The hold of Brahmanism on the country probably depended
more on such priestly towns than on the convictions of the people.
The inscriptions often speak of religious establishments being
restored and sometimes say that they had become deserted and
overgrown. We may conclude that if the Brahman lords of a village
ceased for any reason to give it their attention, the labour and
contributions requisite for the upkeep of the temples were not
forthcoming and the jungle was allowed to grow over the buildings.
Numerous inscriptions testify to the grandeur of the Śivakaivalya

family. The monotonous lists of their properties and slaves, of the
statues erected in their honour and the number of parasols borne
before them show that their position was almost regal, even when
the king was a Buddhist. They prudently refrained from attempting
to occupy the throne, but [probably no king could succeed unless
consecrated by them. Sadaśiva, Śaṇkarapaṇḍita and
Divâkarapaṇḍita formed an ecclesiastical dynasty from about 1000 to
1100 A.D. parallel to the long reigns of the kings in the same
period[289]. The last-named mentions in an inscription that he had
consecrated three kings and Śaṇkarapaṇḍita, a man of great learning,
was de facto sovereign during the minority of his pupil
Udayâdityavarman nor did he lose his influence when the young
king attained his majority.
The shrine of the Royal God was first near Mt. Mahendra and was
then moved to Hariharâlaya[290]. Its location was definitely fixed in
the reign of Indravarman, about 877 A.D. Two Śivakaivalya
112
Brahmans, Śivasoma and his pupil Vâmaśiva, chaplain of the king,

built a temple called the Śivâśrama and erected a linga therein. It is
agreed that this building is the Bayon, which formed the centre of
the later city of Angkor. Indravarman also illustrated another
characteristic of the court religion by placing in the temple now
called Prah Kou three statues of Śiva with the features of his father,
grandfather and Jayavarman II together with corresponding statues
of Śakti in the likeness of their wives. The next king, Yaśovarman,
who founded the town of Angkor round the Bayon, built near his
palace another linga temple, now known as Ba-puon. He also erected
two convents, one Brahmanic and one Buddhist. An inscription[291]
gives several interesting particulars respecting the former. It fixes the
provisions to be supplied to priests and students and the honours to
be rendered to distinguished visitors. The right of sanctuary is
accorded and the sick and helpless are to receive food and medicine.
Also funeral rites are to be celebrated within its precincts for the
repose of the friendless and those who have died in war. The royal
residence was moved from Angkor in 928, but about twenty years
later the court returned thither and the inscriptions record that the
Royal God accompanied it.
The cultus was probably similar to what may be seen in the Sivaite
temples of India to-day. The principal lingam was placed in a shrine
approached through other chambers and accessible only to
privileged persons. Libations were poured over the emblem and
sacred books were recited. An interesting inscription[292] of about
600 A.D. relates how Śrîsomasarman (probably a Brahman)
presented to a temple “the Râmâyaṇa, the Purâṇa and complete
Bhârata” and made arrangements for their recitation. Sanskrit
literature was held in esteem. We are told that Sûryavarman I was
versed in the Atharva-Veda and also in the Bhâshya, Kâvyas, the six
Darśanas, and the Dharmaśâstras[293]. Sacrifices are also frequently
mentioned and one inscription records the performance of a
Koṭihoma[294]. The old Vedic ritual remained to some extent in
practice, for no circumstances are more favourable to its survival
than a wealthy court dominated by a powerful hierarchy. Such
ceremonies were probably performed in the ample enclosures
surrounding the temples[295].
Mahayanist Buddhism existed in Camboja during the whole of the

period covered by the inscriptions, but it remained in such close
113
alliance with Brahmanism that it is hard to say whether it should be

regarded as a separate religion. The idea that the two systems were
incompatible obviously never occurred to the writers of the
inscriptions and Buddhism was not regarded as more distinct from
Śivaism and Vishnuism than these from one another. It had
nevertheless many fervent and generous, if not exclusive, admirers.
The earliest record of its existence is a short inscription dating from
the end of the sixth or beginning of the seventh century[296], which
relates how a person called Pon Prajnâ Candra dedicated male and
female slaves to the three Bodhisattvas, Śâstâ[297], Maitreya and
[Avalokiteśvara. The title given to the Bodhisattvas (Vrah
Kamratâañ) which is also borne by Indian deities shows that this
Buddhism was not very different from the Brahmanic cult of
Camboja.
It is interesting to find that Yaśovarman founded in Angkor Thom a

Saugatâśrama or Buddhist monastery parallel to his Brâhmaṇâśrama
already described. Its inmates enjoyed the same privileges and had
nearly the same rules and duties, being bound to afford sanctuary,
maintain the destitute and perform funeral masses. It is laid down
that an Acârya versed in Buddhist lore corresponds in rank to the
Acâryas of the Śaivas and Pâsupatas and that in both institutions
greater honour is to be shown to such Acâryas as also are learned in
grammar. A Buddhist Acârya ought to be honoured a little less than
a learned Brahman. Even in form the inscriptions recording the
foundation of the two Aśramas show a remarkable parallelism. Both
begin with two stanzas addressed to Śiva: then the Buddhist
inscription inserts a stanza in honour of the Buddha who delivers
from transmigration and gives nirvâṇa, and then the two texts are
identical for several stanzas[298].
Mahayanism appears to have flourished here especially from the

tenth to the thirteenth centuries and throughout the greater part of
this period we find the same feature that its principal devotees were
not the kings but their ministers. Sûryavarman I († 1049) and
Jayavarman VII († 1221) in some sense deserved the name of
Buddhists since the posthumous title of the former was Nirvâṇapada
and the latter left a long inscription[299] beginning with a definitely
Buddhist invocation. Yet an inscription of Sûryavarman which states
in its second verse that only the word of the Buddha is true, opens by
singing the praises of Śiva, and Jayavarman certainly did not neglect
the Brahmanic gods. But for about a hundred years there was a
series of great ministers who specially encouraged Buddhism. Such
were Satyavarman (c. 900 A.D.), who was charged with the erection
114
of the building in Angkor known as Phimeanakas;

Kavindrârimathana, minister under Râjendravarman II and
Jayavarman V, who erected many Buddhist statues and Kîrtipaṇḍita,
minister of Jayavarman V. Kîrtipaṇḍita was the [author[300] of the
inscription found at Srey Santhor, which states that thanks to his
efforts the pure doctrine of the Buddha reappeared like the moon
from behind the clouds or the sun at dawn.
It may be easily imagined that the power enjoyed by the court

chaplain would dispose the intelligent classes to revolt against this
hierarchy and to favour liberty and variety in religion, so far as was
safe. Possibly the kings, while co-operating with a priesthood which
recognized them as semi-divine, were glad enough to let other
religious elements form some sort of counterpoise to a priestly
family which threatened to be omnipotent. Though the identification
of Śivaism and Buddhism became so complete that we actually find
a Trinity composed of Padmodbhava (Brahmâ), Ambhojanetra
(Vishṇu) and the Buddha[301], the inscriptions of the Buddhist
ministers are marked by a certain diplomacy and self-congratulation
on the success of their efforts, as if they felt that their position was
meritorious, yet delicate.
Thus in an inscription, the object of which seems to be to record the

erection of a statue of Prajñâ-pâramitâ by Kavindrârimathana we are
told that the king charged him with the embellishment of
Yaśodharapura because “though an eminent Buddhist” his loyalty
was above suspicion[302]. The same minister erected three towers at
Bàṭ C̆uṃ with inscriptions[303] which record the dedication of a
tank. The first invokes the Buddha, Vajrapâni[304] and Lokeśvara. In
the others Lokeśvara is replaced by Prajñâ-pâramitâ who here, as
elsewhere, is treated as a goddess or Śakti and referred to as Devî in
another stanza[305]. The three inscriptions commemorate the
construction of a sacred tank [but, though the author was a
Buddhist, he expressly restricts the use of it to Brahmanic
functionaries.
The inscription of Srey Santhor[306] (c. 975 A.D.) describes the

successful efforts of Kîrtipaṇḍita to restore Buddhism and gives the
instructions of the king (Jayavarman V) as to its status. The royal
chaplain is by no means to abandon the worship of Śiva but he is to
be well versed in Buddhist learning and on feast days he will bathe
the statue of the Buddha with due ceremony.
115
A point of interest in this inscription is the statement that

Kîrtipaṇḍita introduced Buddhist books from abroad, including the
Śâstra Madhyavibhâga and the commentary on the Tattvasangraha.
The first of these is probably the Mâdhyântavibhâga śâstra[307] by
Vasubandhu and the authorship is worth attention as supporting
Târanâtha’s statement that the disciples of Vasubandhu introduced
Buddhism into Indo-China.
In the time of Jayavarman VII (c. 1185 A.D.), although Hindu

mythology is not discarded and though the king’s chaplain
(presumably a Śivaite) receives every honour, yet Mahayanist
Buddhism seems to be frankly professed as the royal religion. It is
noteworthy that about the same time it becomes more prominent in
Java and Champa. Probably the flourishing condition of the faith in
Ceylon and Burma increased the prestige of all forms of Buddhism
throughout south-eastern Asia. A long inscription of Jayavarman in
145 stanzas has been preserved in the temple of Ta Prohm near
Angkor. It opens with an invocation to the Buddha, in which are
mentioned the three bodies, Lokeśvara[308], and the Mother of the
Jinas, by whom Prajñâ-pâramitâ must be meant. Śiva is not invoked
but allusion is made to many Brahmanic deities and Bhikkhus and
Brahmans are mentioned together. The inscription contains a curious
list of the materials supplied daily for the temple services and of the
personnel. Ample provision is made for both, but it is not clear how
far a purely Buddhist ritual is contemplated and it seems probable
that an extensive Brahmanic cultus existed side by side with the
Buddhist ceremonial. [We learn that there were clothes for the deities
and forty-five mosquito nets of Chinese material to protect their
statues. The Uposatha days seem to be alluded to[309] and the
spring festival is described, when “Bhagavat and Bhagavatî” are to
be escorted in solemn procession with parasols, music, banners and
dancing girls. The whole staff, including Burmese and Chams
(probably slaves), is put down at the enormous figure of 79,365,
which perhaps includes all the neighbouring inhabitants who could
be called on to render any service to the temple. The more sacerdotal
part of the establishment consisted of 18 principal priests
(adhikâriṇaḥ), 2740 priests and 2232 assistants, including 615
dancing girls. But even these figures seem very large[310].
The inscription comes to a gratifying conclusion by announcing that

there are 102 hospitals in the kingdom[311]. These institutions,
which are alluded to in other inscriptions, were probably not all
founded by Jayavarman VII and he seems to treat them as being, like
temples, a natural part of a well-ordered state. But he evidently
116
expended much care and money on them and in the present

inscription he makes over the fruit of these good deeds to his
mother. The most detailed description of these hospitals occurs in
another of his inscriptions found at Say-fong in Laos. It is, like the
one just cited, definitely Buddhist and it is permissible to suppose
that Buddhism took a more active part than Brahmanism in such
works of charity. It opens with an invocation first to the Buddha who
in his three bodies transcends the distinction between existence and
non-existence, and then to the healing Buddha and the two
Bodhisattvas who drive away darkness and disease. These divinities,
who are the lords of a heaven in the east, analogous to the paradise
of Amitâbha, are still worshipped in China and Japan and were
evidently gods of light[312]. The hospital erected [under their
auspices by the Cambojan king was open to all the four castes and
had a staff of 98 persons, besides an astrologer and two sacrificers
(yâjaka).
These inscriptions of Jayavarman are the last which tell us anything

about the religion of mediæval Camboja but we have a somewhat
later account from the pen of Chou Ta-kuan, a Chinese who visited
Angkor in 1296[313]. He describes the temple in the centre of the
city, which must be the Bayon, and says that it had a tower of gold
and that the eastern (or principal) entrance was approached by a
golden bridge flanked by two lions and eight statues, all of the same
metal. The chapter of his work entitled “The Three Religions,” runs
as follows, slightly abridged from M. Pelliot’s version.
“The literati are called Pan-ch’i, the bonzes Ch’u-ku and the Taoists
Pa-ssŭ-wei. I do not know whom the Pan-ch’i worship. They have no
schools and it is difficult to say what books they read. They dress
like other people except that they wear a white thread round their
necks, which is their distinctive mark. They attain to very high
positions. The Ch’u-ku shave their heads and wear yellow clothes.
They uncover the right shoulder, but the lower part of their body is
draped with a skirt of yellow cloth and they go bare foot. Their
temples are sometimes roofed with tiles. Inside there is only one
image, exactly like the Buddha Śâkya, which they call Po-lai ( =
Prah), ornamented with vermilion and blue, and clothed in red. The
Buddhas of the towers (? images in the towers of the temples) are
different and cast in bronze. There are no bells, drums, cymbals, or
flags in their temples. They eat only one meal a day, prepared by
117
someone who entertains them, for they do not cook in their temples.
They eat fish and meat and also use them in their offerings to
Buddha, but they do not drink wine. They recite numerous texts
written on strips of palm-leaf. Some bonzes have a right to have the
shafts of their palanquins and the handles of their parasols in gold or
silver. The prince consults them on serious matters. There are no
Buddhist nuns.
“The Pa-ssŭ-wei dress like everyone else, except that they wear on
their heads a piece of red or white stuff like the Ku-ku [worn by
Tartar women but lower. Their temples are smaller than those of the
Buddhists, for Taoism is less prosperous than Buddhism. They
worship nothing but a block of stone, somewhat like the stone on the
altar of the God of the Sun in China. I do not know what god they
adore. There are also Taoist nuns. The Pa-ssŭ-wei do not partake of
the food of other people or eat in public. They do not drink wine.
“Such children of the laity as go to school frequent the bonzes, who

give them instruction. When grown up they return to a lay life.
“I have not been able to make an exhaustive investigation.”
Elsewhere he says “All worship the Buddha” and he describes some

popular festivals which resemble those now celebrated in Siam. In
every village there was a temple or a Stûpa. He also mentions that in
eating they use leaves as spoons and adds “It is the same in their
sacrifices to the spirits and to Buddha.”
Chou Ta-kuan confesses that his account is superficial and he was

perhaps influenced by the idea that it was natural there should be
three religions in Camboja, as in China. Buddhists were found in
both countries: Pan-ch’i no doubt represents Paṇḍita and he saw an
analogy between the Brahmans of the Cambojan Court and
Confucian mandarins: a third and less known sect he identified with
the Taoists. The most important point in his description is the
prominence given to the Buddhists. His account of their temples, of
the dress and life of their monks[314] leaves no doubt that he is
describing Hinayanist Buddhism such as still nourishes in Camboja.
It probably found its way from Siam, with which Camboja had
already close, but not always peaceful, relations. Probably the name
by which the bonzes are designated is Siamese[315]. With Chou Ta-
kuan’s statements may be compared the inscription of the Siamese
King Râma Khomhëng[316] which dwells on the nourishing
condition of Pali Buddhism in Siam about 1300 A.D. The contrast
118
indicated by Chou Ta-kuan is significant. The Brahmans held [high

office but had no schools. Those of the laity who desired education
spent some portion of their youth in a Buddhist monastery (as they
still do) and then returned to the world. Such a state of things
naturally resulted in the diffusion of Buddhism among the people,
while the Brahmans dwindled to a Court hierarchy. When Chou Ta-
kuan says that all the Cambojans adored Buddha, he probably makes
a mistake, as he does in saying that the sculptures above the gates of
Angkor are heads of Buddha. But the general impression which he
evidently received that everyone frequented Buddhist temples and
monasteries speaks for itself. His statement about sacrifices to
Buddha is remarkable and, since the inscriptions of Jayavarman VII
speak of sacrificers, it cannot be rejected as a mere mistake. But if
Hinayanist Buddhism countenanced such practices in an age of
transition, it did not adopt them permanently for, so far as I have
seen, no offerings are made to-day in Cambojan temples, except
flowers and sticks of incense.
The Pa-ssŭ-wei have given rise to many conjectures and have been
identified with the Basaih or sacerdotal class of the Chams. But there
seems to be little doubt that the word really represents Pâśupata and
Chou Ta-kuan’s account clearly points to a sect of linga worshippers,
although no information is forthcoming about the “stone on the altar
of the Sun God in China” to which he compares their emblem. His
idea that they represented the Taoists in Camboja may have led him
to exaggerate their importance but his statement that they were a
separate body is confirmed, for an inscription of Angkor[317] defines
the order of hierarchical precedence as “the Brahman, the Śaiva
Acârya, the Pâśupata Acârya[318].”
From the time of Chou Ta-kuan to the present day I have [found few
notices about the religion of Camboja. Hinayanist Buddhism became
supreme and though we have few details of the conquest we can
hardly go wrong in tracing its general lines. Brahmanism was
exclusive and tyrannical. It made no appeal to the masses but a
severe levy of forced labour must have been necessary to erect and
maintain the numerous great shrines which, though in ruins, are still
the glory of Camboja[319]. In many of them are seen the remains of
inscriptions which have been deliberately erased. These probably
prescribed certain onerous services which the proletariat was bound
to render to the established church. When Siamese Buddhism
invaded Camboja it had a double advantage. It was the creed of an
aggressive and successful neighbour but, while thus armed with the
weapons of this world, it also appealed to the poor and oppressed. If
119
it enjoyed the favour of princes, it had no desire to defend the rights

of a privileged caste: it offered salvation and education to the
average townsman and villager. If it invited the support and alms of
the laity, it was at least modest in its demands. Brahmanism on the
other hand lost strength as the prestige of the court declined. Its
greatest shrines were in the provinces most exposed to Siamese
attacks. The first Portuguese writers speak of them as already
deserted at the end of the sixteenth century. The connection with
India was not kept up and if any immigrants came from the west,
after the twelfth century they are more likely to have been Moslims
than Hindus. Thus driven from its temples, with no roots among the
people, whose affections it had never tried to win, Brahmanism in
Camboja became what it now is, a court ritual without a creed and
hardly noticed except at royal functions.
It is remarkable that Mohammedanism remained almost unknown to

Camboja, Siam and Burma. The tide of Moslim invasion swept
across the Malay Peninsula southwards. Its effect was strongest in
Sumatra and Java, feebler on the coasts of Borneo and the
Philippines. From the islands it reached Champa, where it had some
success, but Siam and Camboja lay on one side of its main route, and
also showed no sympathy [for it. King Rama Thuppdey Chan[320]
who reigned in Camboja from 1642-1659 became a Mohammedan
and surrounded himself with Malays and Javanese. But he alienated
the affections of his subjects and was deposed by the intervention of
Annam. After this we hear no more of Mohammedanism. An
unusual incident, which must be counted among the few cases in
which Buddhism has encouraged violence, is recorded in the year
1730, when a Laotian who claimed to be inspired, collected a band of
fanatics and proceeded to massacre in the name of Buddha all the
Annamites resident in Camboja. This seems to show that Buddhism
was regarded as the religion of the country and could be used as a
national cry against strangers.
As already mentioned Brahmanism still survives in the court

ceremonial though this by no means prevents the king from being a
devout Buddhist. The priests are known as Bakus. They wear a top-
knot and the sacred thread after the Indian fashion, and enjoy certain
privileges. Within the precincts of the palace at Phnom Penh is a
modest building where they still guard the sword of Indra. About
two inches of the blade are shown to visitors, but except at certain
festivals it is never taken out of its sheath.
120
The official programme of the coronation of King Sisowath (April 23-

28, 1906), published in French and Cambojan, gives a curious
account of the ceremonies performed, which were mainly
Brahmanic, although prayers were recited by the Bonzes and
offerings made to Buddha. Four special Brahmanic shrines were
erected and the essential part of the rite consisted in a lustral bath, in
which the Bakus poured water over the king. Invocations were
addressed to beings described as “Anges qui êtes au paradis des six
séjours célestes, qui habitez auprès d’Indra, de Brahmâ et de
l’archange Sahabodey,” to the spirits of mountains, valleys and
rivers and to the spirits who guard the palace. When the king has
been duly bathed the programme prescribes that “le Directeur des
Bakous remettra la couronne â M. le Gouverneur Général qui la
portera sur la tête de Sa Majesté au nom du Gouvernement de la
République Française.” Equally curious is the “Programme des fêtes
royales à l’occasion de la crémation de S.M. Norodom” (January 2-
16, 1906). The lengthy ceremonial consisted of a strange mixture of
prayers, [sermons, pageants and amusements. The definitely
religious exercises were Buddhist and the amusements which
accompanied them, though according to our notions curiously out of
place, clearly correspond to the funeral games of antiquity. Thus we
read not only of “offrande d’un repas aux urnes royales” but of
“illuminations générales ... lancement de ballons ... luttes et assauts
de boxe et de l’escrime ... danses et soirée de gala.... Après la
crémation, Sa Majesté distribuera des billets de tombola.”
The ordinary Buddhism of Camboja at the present day resembles

that of Siam and is not mixed with Brahmanic observances.
Monasteries are numerous: the monks enjoy general respect and
their conduct is said to be beyond reproach. They act as
schoolmasters and, as in Siam and Burma, all young men spend
some time in a monastery. A monastery generally contains from
thirty to fifty monks and consists of a number of wooden houses
raised on piles and arranged round a square. Each monk has a room
and often a house to himself. Besides the dwelling houses there are
also stores and two halls called Salâ and Vihéar (vihâra). In both the
Buddha is represented by a single gigantic sitting image, before
which are set flowers and incense. As a rule there are no other
images but the walls are often ornamented with frescoes of Jâtaka
stories or the early life of Gotama. Meals are taken in the Salâ at
about 7 and 11 a.m.[321], and prayers are recited there on ordinary
days in the morning and evening. The eleven o’clock meal is
followed by a rather long grace. The prayers consist mostly of Pali
121
formulæ, such as the Three Refuges, but they are sometimes in

Cambojan and contain definite petitions or at least wishes
formulated before the image of the Buddha. Thus I have heard
prayers for peace and against war. The more solemn ceremonies,
such as the Uposatha and ordinations, are performed in the Vihear.
The recitation of the Pâtimokkha is regularly performed and I have
several times witnessed it. All but ordained monks have to withdraw
outside the Sîmâ stones during the service. The ceremony begins
about 6 p.m.: the Bhikkhus kneel down in pairs face to face and
rubbing their foreheads in the dust ask for mutual forgiveness if they
have inadvertently offended. [This ceremony is also performed on
other occasions. It is followed by singing or intoning lauds, after
which comes the recitation of the Pâtimokkha itself which is marked
by great solemnity. The reader sits in a large chair on the arms of
which are fixed many lighted tapers. He repeats the text by heart but
near him sits a prompter with a palm-leaf manuscript who, if
necessary, corrects the words recited. I have never seen a monk
confess in public, and I believe that the usual practice is for sinful
brethren to abstain from attending the ceremony and then to confess
privately to the Abbot, who assigns them a penance. As soon as the
Pâtimokkha is concluded all the Bhikkhus smoke large cigarettes. In
most Buddhist countries it is not considered irreverent to
smoke[322], chew betel or drink tea in the intervals of religious
exercises. When the cigarettes are finished there follows a service of
prayer and praise in Cambojan. During the season of Wassa there are
usually several Bhikkhus in each monastery who practise meditation
for three or four days consecutively in tents or enclosures made of
yellow cloth, open above but closed all round. The four stages of
meditation described in the Piṭakas are said to be commonly attained
by devout monks[323].
The Abbot has considerable authority in disciplinary matters. He

eats apart from the other monks and at religious ceremonies wears a
sort of red cope, whereas the dress of the other brethren is entirely
yellow. Novices prostrate themselves when they speak to him.
Above the Abbots are Provincial Superiors and the government of

the whole Church is in the hands of the Somdec práh sanghrâc.
There is, or was, also a second prelate called Lòk práh só̆kŏn, or Braḥ
Sugandha, and the two, somewhat after the manner of the two
primates of the English Church, supervise the clergy in different
parts of the kingdom, the second being inferior to the first in rank,
but not dependent on him. But it is said that no successor has been
appointed to the last Braḥ Sugandha who died in 1894. He was a
122
distinguished scholar and introduced the Dhammayut sect from

Siam into Camboja. The king is recognized as head of the Church,
but cannot alter its doctrine or confiscate ecclesiastical property.
No account of Cambojan religion would be complete without some

reference to the splendid monuments in which it found expression
and which still remain in a great measure intact. The colonists who
established themselves in these regions brought with them the
Dravidian taste for great buildings, but either their travels enlarged
their artistic powers or they modified the Indian style by assimilating
successfully some architectural features found in their new home.
What pre-Indian architecture there may have been among the
Khmers we do not know, but the fact that the earliest known
monuments are Hindu makes it improbable that stone buildings on a
large scale existed before their arrival. The feature which most
clearly distinguishes Cambojan from Indian architecture is its
pyramidal structure. India has stupas and gopurams of pyramidal
appearance but still Hindu temples of the normal type, both in the
north and south, consist of a number of buildings erected on the
same level. In Camboja on the contrary many buildings, such as Ta-
Keo, Ba-phuong and the Phimeanakas, are shrines on the top of
pyramids, which consist of three storeys or large steps, ascended by
flights of relatively small steps. In other buildings, notably Angkor
Wat, the pyramidal form is obscured by the slight elevation of the
storeys compared with their breadth and by the elaboration of the
colonnades and other edifices, which they bear. But still the general
plan is that of a series of courts each rising within and above the last
and this gradual rise, by which the pilgrim is led, not only through
colonnade after colonnade, but up flight after flight of stairs, each
leading to something higher but invisible from the base, imparts to
Cambojan temples a sublimity and aspiring grandeur which is
absent from the mysterious halls of Dravidian shrines.
One might almost suppose that the Cambojan architects had

deliberately set themselves to rectify the chief faults of Indian
architecture. One of these is the profusion of external ornament in
high relief which by its very multiplicity ceases to produce any effect
proportionate to its elaboration, with the [result that the general
view is disappointing and majestic outlines are wanting. In
Cambojan buildings on the contrary the general effect is not
sacrificed to detail: the artists knew how to make air and space give
123
dignity to their work. Another peculiar defect of many Dravidian

buildings is that they were gradually erected round some ancient
and originally humble shrine with the unfortunate result that the
outermost courts and gateways are the most magnificent and that
progress to the holy of holies is a series of artistic disappointments.
But at Angkor Wat this fault is carefully avoided. The long paved
road which starts from the first gateway isolates the great central
mass of buildings without dwarfing it and even in the last court,
when one looks up the vast staircases leading to the five towers
which crown the pyramid, all that has led up to the central shrine
seems, as it should, merely an introduction.
The solidity of Cambojan architecture is connected with the

prevalence of inundations. With such dangers it was of primary
importance to have a massive substructure which could not be
washed away and the style which was necessary in building a firm
stone platform inspired the rest of the work. Some unfinished
temples reveal the interesting fact that they were erected first as piles
of plain masonry. Then came the decorator and carved the stones as
they stood in their places, so that instead of carving separate blocks
he was able to contemplate his design as a whole and to spread it
over many stones. Hence most Cambojan buildings have a peculiar
air of unity. They have not had ornaments affixed to them but have
grown into an ornamental whole. Yet if an unfavourable criticism is
to be made on these edifices—especially Angkor Wat—it is that the
sculptures are wanting in meaning and importance. They cannot be
compared to the reliefs of Boroboedoer, a veritable catechism in
stone where every clause teaches the believer something new, or
even to the piles of figures in Dravidian temples which, though of
small artistic merit, seem to represent the whirl of the world with all
its men and monsters, struggling from life into death and back to life
again. The reliefs in the great corridors of Angkor are purely
decorative. The artist justly felt that so long a stretch of plain stone
would be wearisome, and as decoration, his work is successful.
Looking [outwards the eye is satisfied with such variety as the trees
and houses in the temple courts afford: looking inwards it finds
similar variety in the warriors and deities portrayed on the walls.
Some of the scenes have an historical interest, but the attempt to
follow the battles of the Ramayana or the Churning of the Sea soon
becomes a tedious task, for there is little individuality or inspiration
in the figures.
This want of any obvious correspondence between the decoration

and cult of the Cambojan temples often makes it difficult to say to
124
what deities they were dedicated. The Bayon, or Śivâśrama, was

presumably a linga temple, yet the conjecture is not confirmed as one
would expect by any indubitable evidence in the decoration or
arrangements. In its general plan the building seems more Indian
than others and, like the temple of Jagannâtha at Puri, consists of
three successive chambers, each surmounted by a tower. The most
remarkable feature in the decoration is the repetition of the four-
headed figure at the top of every tower, a striking and effective
motive, which is also found above the gates of the town. Chou Ta-
kuan says that there were golden statues of Buddhas at the entrance
to the Bayon. It is impossible to say whether this statement is
accurate or not. He may have simply made a mistake, but it is
equally possible that the fusion of the two creeds may have ended in
images of the Buddha being placed outside the shrine of the linga.
Strange as it may seem, there is no clear evidence as to the character

of the worship performed in Camboja’s greatest temple, Angkor
Wat. Since the prince who commenced it was known by the
posthumous title of Paramavishṇuloka, we may presume that he
intended to dedicate it to Vishṇu and some of the sculptures appear
to represent Vishṇu slaying a demon. But it was not finished until
after his death and his intentions may not have been respected by his
successors. An authoritative statement[324] warns us that it is not
safe to say more about the date of Angkor Wat than that its extreme
limits are 1050 and 1170. Jayavarman VII (who came to the throne at
about this latter date) was a Buddhist, and may possibly have used
the great temple for his own worship. The sculptures are hardly
[Brahmanic in the theological sense, and those which represent the
pleasures of paradise and the pains of hell recall Buddhist
delineations of the same theme[325]. The four images of the Buddha
which are now found in the central tower are modern and all who
have seen them will, I think, agree that the figure of the great teacher
which seems so appropriate in the neighbouring monasteries is
strangely out of place in this aerial shrine. But what the designer of
the building intended to place there remains a mystery. Perhaps an
empty throne such as is seen in the temples of Annam and Bali
would have been the best symbol[326].
Though the monuments of Camboja are well preserved the grey and
massive severity which marks them at present is probably very
different from the appearance that they wore when used for
worship. From Chou Ta-kuan and other sources[327] we gather that
the towers and porches were gilded, the bas-reliefs and perhaps the
whole surface of the walls were painted, and the building was
125
ornamented with flags. Music and dances were performed in the

courtyards and, as in many Indian temples, the intention was to
create a scene which by its animation and brilliancy might amuse the
deity and rival the pleasures of paradise.
It is remarkable that ancient Camboja which has left us so many

monuments, produced no books[328]. Though the inscriptions and
Chou Ta-kuan testify to the knowledge of literature (especially
religious), both Brahmanic and Buddhist, diffused among the upper
classes, no original works or even adaptations of Indian originals
have come down to us. The length and [ambitious character of many
inscriptions give an idea of what the Cambojans could do in the way
of writing, but the result is disappointing. These poems in stone
show a knowledge of Sanskrit, of Indian poetry and theology, which
is surprising if we consider how far from India they were composed,
but they are almost without exception artificial, frigid and devoid of
vigour or inspiration.
FOOTNOTES:
[242] See among other authorities:
(a) E. Aymonier, Le Cambodge, Paris, 3 vols. 1900, 1904 (cited as

Aymonier).
(b) A. Barth, Inscriptions Sanscrites du Cambodge (Notices et extraits des

MSS. de la Bibliot. Nat.), Paris, 1885 (cited as Corpus, I.).
(c) A. Bergaigne, Inscriptions Sanscrites de Campâ et du Cambodge (in

same series), 1893 (cited as Corpus, II.).
(d) L. Finot, “Buddhism in Indo-China,” Buddhist Review, Oct. 1909.
(e) G. Maspéro, L’Empire Khmèr, Phnom Penh, 1904 (cited as Maspéro).
(f) P. Pelliot, “Mémoires sur les Coutumes de Cambodge par Tcheou

Ta-kouan, traduits et annotés,” B.E.F.E.O. 1902, pp. 123-177 (cited as
Pelliot, Tcheou Ta-kouan).
(g) Id. “Le Founan,” B.E.F.E.O. 1903, pp. 248-303 (cited as Pelliot,
Founan).
(h) Articles on various inscriptions by G. Coedès in J.A. 1908, XI. p.

203, XII. p. 213; 1909, XIII. p. 467 and p. 511.
126
(i) Bulletin de la Commission Archéologique de l’Indochine, 1908

onwards.
(j) Le Bayon d’Angkor Thom, Mission Henri Dufour, 1910-1914. Besides

the articles cited above the Bulletin de l’Ecole Française d’Extrême
Orient (quoted as B.E.F.E.O.) contains many others dealing with the
religion and archaeology of Camboja.
(k) L. Finot, Notes d’Epigraphie Indo-Chinoise, 1916. See for literature

up to 1909, G. Coedès, Bibliothèque raisonnée des travaux relatifs à
l’Archéologie du Cambodge et du Champa. Paris, Imprimerie Nationale,
1909.
[243] See especially P.W. Schmitt, Die Mon-Khmer Völker. Ein

Bindeglied zwischen Völkern Zentral-Asiens und Austronesiens.
Braunschweig, 1906.
[244] Cambodge is the accepted French spelling of this country’s

name. In English Kamboja, Kambodia, Camboja and Cambodia are
all found. The last is the most usual but di is not a good way of
representing the sound of j as usually heard in this name. I have
therefore preferred Camboja.
[245] See the inscription of Bàksĕ, Càṃkró̆ṇ, J.A. XIII. 1909, pp. 468,
469, 497.
[246] The Sui annals (Pelliot, Founan, p. 272) state that “Chên-la lies
to the west of Lin-yi: it was originally a vassal state of Fu-nan.... The
name of the king’s family was Kshatriya: his personal name was
Citrasena: his ancestors progressively acquired the sovereignty of the
country: Citrasena seized Fu-nan and reduced it to submission.” This
seems perfectly clear and we know from Cambojan inscriptions that
Citrasena was the personal name of the king who reigned as
Mahendravarman, c. 600 A.D. But it would appear from the
inscriptions that it was his predecessor Bhavavarman who made
whatever change occurred in the relations of Camboja to Fu-nan and
in any case it is not clear who were the inhabitants of Fu-nan if not
Cambojans. Perhaps Maspéro is right in suggesting that Fu-nan was
something like imperial Germany (p. 25), “Si le roi de Bavière
s’emparait de la couronne impériale, rien ne serait changé en
Allemagne que la famille régnante.”
[247] It is remarkable that the Baudhâyana-dharma-sûtra enumerates

going to sea among the customs peculiar to the North (I. 1, 2, 4) and
then (II. 1, 2, 2) classes making voyages by sea as the first of the
127
offences which cause loss of caste. This seems to indicate that the
emigrants from India came mainly from the North, but it would be
rash to conclude that in times of stress or enthusiasm the
Southerners did not follow their practice. A passage in the second
chapter of the Kautilîya Arthaśâstra has been interpreted as referring
to the despatch of colonists to foreign countries, but it probably
contemplates nothing more than the transfer of population from one
part of India to another. See Finot, B.E.F.E.O. 1912, No. 8. But the
passage at any rate shows that the idea of the King being able to
transport a considerable mass of population was familiar in ancient
India. Jâtaka 466 contains a curious story of a village of carpenters
who being unsuccessful in trade built a ship and emigrated to an
island in the ocean. It is clear that there must have been a
considerable seafaring population in India in early times for the Rig
Veda (II. 48, 3; I. 56, 2; I. 116, 3), the Mahabharata and the Jâtakas
allude to the love of gain which sends merchants across the sea and
to shipwrecks. Sculptures at Salsette ascribed to about 150 A.D.
represent a shipwreck. Ships were depicted in the paintings of
Ajanta and also occur on the coins of the Andhra King Yajñaśrî (c.
200 A.D.) and in the sculptures of Boroboedoer. The Dîgha Nikâya
(XI. 85) speaks of sea-going ships which when lost let loose a land
sighting bird. Much information is collected in Radhakumud
Mookerji’s History of Indian Shipping, 1912.
[248] Voyages are still regularly made in dhows between the west
coast of India and Zanzibar or Mombasa and the trade appears to be
old.
[249] See Jâtaka 339 for the voyage to Baveru or Babylon. Jâtakas 360
and 442 mention voyages to Suvaṇṇabhûmi or Lower Burma from
Bharukaccha and from Benares down the river. The Milinda Pañha
(VI. 21) alludes to traffic with China by sea.
[250] Râm. iv. 40, 30.
[251] Pelliot, Founan, p. 254. The Western and Eastern Tsin reigned
from 265 to 419 A.D.
[252] Pelliot, Founan, p. 254. Most of the references to Chinese annals

are taken from this valuable paper.
[253] The inscription of Mi-son relates how Kauṇḍinya planted at

Bharapura (? in Camboja) a javelin given to him by Aśvatthâman.
128
[254] This is the modern reading of the characters in Peking, but

Julien’s Méthode justifies the transcription Kau-ḍi-nya.
[255] See S. Lévi in Mélanges Charles de Harlez, p. 176. Deux peuples

méconnus. i. Les Murunḍas.
[256] Nanjio Catalogue, p. 422.
[257] I-Tsing, trans. Takakusu, p. 12.
[258] Corpus, I. p. 65.
[259] Corpus, I. pp. 84, 89, 90, and Jour. Asiatique, 1882, p. 152.
[260] When visiting Badami, Paṭṭadkal and Aihole in 1912 I noted the
following resemblances between the temples of that district and
those of Camboja. (a) The chief figures are Harihara, Vâmana and
Nṛisiṃha. At Paṭṭadkal, as at Angkor Wat, the reliefs on the temple
wall represent the Churning of the Sea and scenes from the
Râmâyana. (b) Large blocks of stone were used for building and after
being put in their positions were carved in situ, as is shown by
unfinished work in places. (c) Medallions containing faces are
frequent. (d) The architectural scheme is not as in Dravidian temples,
that is to say larger outside and becoming smaller as one proceeds
towards the interior. There is generally a central tower attached to a
hall. (e) The temples are often raised on a basement. (f) Mukhalingas
and kośhas are still used in worship. (g) There are verandahs
resembling those at Angkor Wat. They have sloping stone roofs,
sculptures in relief on the inside wall and a series of windows in the
outside wall. (h) The doors of the Linga shrines have a serpentine
ornamentation and are very like those of the Bayon. (i) A native
gentleman told me that he had seen temples with five towers in this
neighbourhood, but I have not seen them myself.
[261] E.g. Mahendravarman, Narasinhavarman, Parameśvaravarman, etc.

It may be noticed that Paṭṭadkal is considerably to the N.W. of
Madras and that the Pallavas are supposed to have come from the
northern part of the present Madras Presidency. Though the Hindus
who emigrated to Camboja probably embarked in the
neighbourhood of Madras, they may have come from countries
much further to the north. Varman is recognized as a proper
termination of Kshatriya names, but it is remarkable that it is found
in all the Sanskrit names of Cambojan kings and is very common in
Pallava names. The name of Aśvatthâman figures in the mythical
129
genealogies of both the Pallavas and the kings of Champa or perhaps

of Camboja, see B.E.F.E.O. 1904, p. 923.
[262] Some authorities think that Kaundinya is meant by the wicked

king, but he lived about 300 years before I-Ching’s visit and the
language seems to refer to more recent events. Although
Bhavavarman is not known to have been a religious innovator he
appears to have established a new order of things in Camboja and
his inscriptions show that he was a zealous worshipper of Śiva and
other Indian deities. It would be even more natural if I-Ching
referred to Iśânavarman (c. 615) or Jayavarman I (c. 650), but there is
no proof that these kings were anti-buddhist.
[263] Schiefner, p. 262.
[264] See Maspéro, L’Empire Khmèr, pp. 24 ff.
[265] Perhaps a second Bhavavarman came between these last two

kings; see Coedès in B.E.F.E.O. 1904, p 691.
[266] See Mecquenem in B.E.F.E.O. 1913, No. 2.
[267] But the captivity is only an inference and not a necessary one.
Finot suggests that the ancient royal house of Fu-nan may have
resided at Javâ and have claimed suzerain rights over Camboja
which Jayavarman somehow abolished. The only clear statements on
the question are those in the Sdok Kak Thom inscription, Khmer text
c. 72, which tell us that Camboja had been dependent on Javâ and
that Jayavarman II instituted a special state cult as a sign that this
dependence had come to an end.
It is true that the Hindu colonists of Camboja may have come from
the island of Java, yet no evidence supports the idea that Camboja
was a dependency of the island about 800 A.D. and the inscriptions
of Champa seem to distinguish clearly between Yavadvîpa (the
island) and the unknown country called Javâ. See Finot, Notes d’Epig.
pp. 48 and 240. Hence it seems unlikely that the barbarous pirates
(called the armies of Java) who invaded Champa in 787 (see the
inscription of Yang Tikuh) were from the island. The Siamese
inscription of Râma Khomhëng, c. 1300 A.D., speaks of a place called
Chavâ, which may be Luang Prabang. On the other hand it does not
seem likely that pirates, expressly described as using ships, would
have come from the interior.
130
[268] For these annals see F. Garnier, “La Chronique royale du

Cambodje,” J.A. 1871 and 1872. A. de Villemereuil, Explorations et
Missions de Doudard de Lagrée, 1882. J. Moura, Le Royaume de
Cambodje, vol. II. 1883. E. Aymonier, Chronique des Anciens rois du
Cambodje. (Excursions et reconnaissances. Saigon, 1881.)
[269] E.g. Ang Chan (1796-1834) received his crown from the King of
Siam and paid tribute to the King of Annam; Ang Duong (1846-1859)
was crowned by representatives of Annam and Siam and his
territory was occupied by the troops of both countries.
[270] The later history of Camboja is treated in considerable detail by

A. Leclerc, Histoire de Cambodge, 1914.
[271] Inscrip. of Moroun, Corpus, II. 387.
[272] Other local deities may be alluded to, under the names of Śrî
Jayakshetra, “the field of victory” adored at Basset Simâdamataka,
Śrî Mandareśvara, and Śrî Jalangeśvara. Aymonier, II. p. 297; I. pp.
305, 306 and 327.
[273] Inscrip. of Lovek.
[274] Prea Eynkosey, 970 A.D. See Corpus, I. pp. 77 ff.
[275] This compound deity is celebrated in the Harivamsa and is

represented in the sculptures of the rock temple at Badami, which is
dated 578 A.D. Thus his worship may easily have reached Camboja
in the sixth or seventh century.
[276] Jayato jagatâm bhûtyai Kritasandhî Harâcyutau, Parvatîśrîpatitvena

Bhinnamûrttidharâvapi. See also the Inscrip. of Ang Chumnik (667 A.D.),
verses 11 and 12 in Corpus, I. p. 67.
[277] The Bayang Inscription, Corpus, I. pp. 31 ff. which mentions the
dates 604 and 626 as recent.
[278] Corpus, II. p. 422 Śaivapaśupatâcâryyau. The inscription fixes

the relative rank of various Acâryas.
[279] See B.E.F.E.O. 1906, p. 70.
[280] See specially on this subject, Coedès in Bull. Comm. Archéol. de

l’Indochine, 1911, p. 38, and 1913, p. 81, and the letterpress of Le Bayon
d’Angkor Thorn, 1914.
131
[281] I have seen myself a stone lingam carved with four faces in a
tank belonging to a temple at Maḥakut not far from Badami.
[282] Suvarṇamayalingagateśvare te sûkshmântarâtmani. Inscrip. of

Prea Ngouk, Corpus, I. p. 157.
[283] E.g. see Epig. Indica, vol. III. pp. 1 ff. At Paṭṭadkal (which region
offers so many points of resemblance to Camboja) King Vijayâditya
founded a temple of Vijayeśvara and two Queens, Lokamahâdevî
and Trailokyamahâdevî founded temples of Lokeśvara and
Trailokyeśvara.
[284] Aymonier, II. pp. 257 ff. and especially Finot in B.E.F.E.O. 1915,
xv. 2, p. 53.
[285] See above.
[286] Sammohana and Niruttara are given as names of Tantras. The

former word may perhaps be the beginning of a compound. There
are Pali works called Sammohavinodinî and S. vinâśinî. The
inscription calls the four treatises the four faces of Tumburn.
[287] This shows that matriarchy must have been in force in

Camboja.
[288] Jânapada as the name of a locality is cited by Böthlingck and

Roth from the Gaṇa to Pâniṇi, 4. 2. 82.
[289] Possibly others may have held office during this long period,
but evidently all three priests lived to be very old men and each may
have been Guru for forty years.
[290] This place which means merely “the abode of Hari and Hara”
has not been identified.
[291] Corpus, II. Inscrip. lvi. especially pp. 248-251.
[292] Veal Kantel. Corpus, I. p. 28.
[293] Inscr. of Prah Khan, B.E.F.E.O. 1904, p. 675.
[294] B.E.F.E.O. 1904, p. 677.
[295] Just as a Vedic sacrifice was performed in the court of the

temple of Chidambaram about 1908.
[296] Aymonier, Cambodja, I. p. 442.
132
[297] Śâstâ sounds like a title of Śâkyamuni, but, if Aymonier is

correct, the personage is described as a Bodhisattva. There were
pagoda slaves even in modern Burma.
[298] See Coedès, “La Stèle de Tép Praṇaṃ,” in J.A. XI. 1908, p. 203.
[299] Inscrip. of Ta Prohm, B.E.F.E.O. 1906, p. 44.
[300] See Senart in Revue Archéologique, 1883. As in many inscriptions

it is not always plain who is speaking but in most parts it is
apparently the minister promulgating the instructions of the king.
[301] Inscript. of Prasat Prah Khse, Corpus, I. p. 173.
[302] Buddhânâm agraṇîr api, J.A. XX. 1882, p. 164.
[303] See Coedès, “Inscriptions de Bàt Cuṃ,” in J.A. XII. 1908, pp.
230, 241.
[304] The Bodhisattva corresponding to the Buddha Akshobhya. He

is green or blue and carries a thunderbolt. It seems probable that he
is a metamorphosis of Indra.
[305] An exceedingly curious stanza eulogizes the doctrine of the

non-existence of the soul taught by the Buddha which leads to
identification with the universal soul although contrary to it.
Vuddho vodhîm vidaddhyâd vo yena nairâtmyadarśanaṃ
viruddhasyâpi sâdhûktaṃ sâdhanaṃ paramâtmanaḥ.
[306] Aymonier, I pp. 261 ff. Senart, Revue Archéologique, Mars-Avril,

1883.
[307] Nanjio, 1244 and 1248.
[308] The common designation of Avalokita in Camboja and Java.

For the inscription see B.E.F.E.O. 1906, pp. 44 ff.
[309] Stanza XLVI.
[310] The inscription only says “There are here (atra).” Can this mean
in the various religious establishments maintained by the king?
[311] See also Finot, Notes d’Epig. pp. 332-335. The Mahâvaṃsa
repeatedly mentions that kings founded hospitals and distributed
medicines. See too, Yule, Marco Polo, I. p. 446. The care of the sick
was recognized as a duty and a meritorious act in all Buddhist
133
countries and is recommended by the example of the Buddha

himself.
[312] Their somewhat lengthy titles are :
Bhaishajyaguruvaidûryaprabharâja, Sûryavairocanacaṇḍaroci and

Candravairocanarohinîśa. See for an account of them and the texts
on which their worship is founded the learned article of M. Pelliot,
“Le Bhaiṣajyaguru,” B.E.F.E.O. 1903, p. 33.
[313] His narrative is translated by M. Pelliot in B.E.F.E.O. 1902, pp.

123-177.
[314] Pelliot (B.E.F.E.O. 1902, p. 148) cites a statement from the Ling
Wai Tai Ta that there were two classes of bonzes in Camboja, those
who wore yellow robes and married and those who wore red robes
and lived in convents.
[315] M. Finot conjectures that it represents the Siamese Chao (Lord)

and a corruption of Guru.
[316] See chapter on Siam, sect. 1.
[317] Corpus, II. p. 422.
[318] The strange statement of Chou Ta-kuan (pp. 153-155) that the
Buddhist and Taoist priests enjoyed a species of jus primæ noctis has
been much discussed. Taken by itself it might be merely a queer
story founded on a misunderstanding of Cambojan customs, for he
candidly says that his information is untrustworthy. But taking it in
connection with the stories about the Aris in Burma (see especially
Finot, J.A. 1912, p. 121) and the customs attributed by Chinese and
Europeans to the Siamese and Philippinos, we can hardly come to
any conclusion except that this strange usage was an aboriginal
custom in Indo-China and the Archipelago, prior to the
introductions of Indian civilization, but not suppressed for some
time. At the present day there seems to be no trace or even tradition
of such a custom. For Siamese and Philippine customs see B.E.F.E.O.
1902, p. 153, note 4.
[319] The French Archæological Commission states that exclusive of

Angkor and the neighbouring buildings there are remains of 600
temples in Camboja, and probably many have entirely disappeared.
[320] Maspéro, pp. 62-3.
134
[321] The food is prepared in the monasteries, and, as in other

countries, the begging round is a mere formality.
[322] But in Chinese temples notices forbidding smoking are often

posted on the doors.
[323] The word dhyâna is known, but the exercise is more commonly
called Vipassanâ or Kammathâna.
[324] M.G. Coedès in Bull. Comm. Archéol. 1911, p. 220.
[325] Although there is no reason why these pictures of the future

life should not be Brahmanic as well as Buddhist, I do not remember
having seen them in any purely Brahmanic temple.
[326] After spending some time at Angkor Wat I find it hard to

believe the theory that it was a palace. The King of Camboja was
doubtless regarded as a living God, but so is the Grand Lama, and it
does not appear that the Potala where he lives is anything but a large
residential building containing halls and chapels much like the
Vatican. But at Angkor Wat everything leads up to a central shrine. It
is quite probable however that the deity of this shrine was a deified
king, identified with Vishṇu after his death. This would account for
the remarks of Chou Ta-kuan who seems to have regarded it as a
tomb.
[327] See especially the inscription of Bassac. Kern, Annales de

l’Extrème Orient, t. III. 1880, p. 65.
[328] Pali books are common in monasteries. For the literature of

Laos see Finot, B.E.F.E.O. 1917, No. 5.
135
CHAPTER XXXIX
CHAMPA[329]
The kingdom of Champa, though a considerable power from about

the third century until the end of the fifteenth, has attracted less
attention than Camboja or Java. Its name is a thing of the past and
known only to students: its monuments are inferior in size and
artistic merit to those of the other Hindu kingdoms in the Far East
and perhaps its chief interest is that it furnishes the oldest Sanskrit
inscription yet known from these regions.
Champa occupied the south-eastern corner of Asia beyond the

Malay Peninsula, if the word corner can be properly applied to such
rounded outlines. Its extent varied at different epochs, but it may be
roughly defined in the language of modern geography as the
southern portion of Annam, comprising the provinces of Quãng-nam
in the north and Bînh-Thuan in the south with the intervening
country. It was divided into three provinces, which respectively
became the seat of empire at different periods. They were (i) in the
north Amarâvatî (the modern Quãng-nam) with the towns of
Indrapura and Sinhapura; [(ii) in the middle Vijaya (the modern
Bing-Dinh) with the town of Vijaya and the port of Śrî-Vinaya; (iii) in
the south Pâṇḍurânga or Panran (the modern provinces of Phanrang
and Binh-Thuan) with the town of Vîrapura or Râjapura. A section of
Pâṇḍurânga called Kauthâra (the modern Kanh hoa) was a separate
province at certain times. Like the modern Annam, Champa appears
to have been mainly a littoral kingdom and not to have extended far
into the mountains of the interior.
Champa was the ancient name of a town in western Bengal near

Bhagalpur, but its application to these regions does not seem due to
any connection with north-eastern India. The conquerors of the
country, who were called Chams, had a certain amount of Indian
culture and considered the classical name Champa as an elegant
expression for the land of the Chams. Judging by their language
these Chams belonged to the Malay-Polynesian group and their
distribution along the littoral suggests that they were invaders from
the sea like the Malay pirates from whom they themselves
136
subsequently suffered. The earliest inscription in the Cham language

dates from the beginning of the ninth century but it is preceded by a
long series of Sanskrit inscriptions the oldest of which, that of Vo-
can[330], is attributed at latest to the third century, and refers to an
earlier king. It therefore seems probable that the Hindu dynasty of
Chaṃpa was founded between 150 and 200 A.D. but there is no
evidence to show whether a Malay race already settled in Champa
was conquered and hinduized by Indian invaders, or whether the
Chams were already hinduized when they arrived, possibly from
Java.
The inferiority of the Chams to the Khmers in civilization was the

result of their more troubled history. Both countries had to contend
against the same difficulty—a powerful and aggressive neighbour on
either side. Camboja between Siam and Annam in 1800 was in very
much the same position as Champa had been between Camboja and
Annam five hundred years earlier. But between 950 and 1150 A.D.
when Champa by no means enjoyed stability and peace, the history
of Camboja, if not altogether tranquil, at least records several long
reigns of powerful kings who were able to embellish their capital
and assure its security. The Chams were exposed to attacks not only
[from Annam but also from the more formidable if distant Chinese
and their capital, instead of remaining stationary through several
centuries like Angkor Thom, was frequently moved as one or other
of the three provinces became more important.
The inscription of Vo-can is in correct Sanskrit prose and contains a

fragmentary address from a king who seems to have been a
Buddhist and writes somewhat in the style of Asoka. He boasts that
he is of the family of Śrîmârarâja. The letters closely resemble those
of Rudradaman’s inscription at Girnar and contemporary
inscriptions at Kanheri. The text is much mutilated so that we know
neither the name of the writer nor his relationship to Śrîmâra. But the
latter was evidently the founder of the dynasty and may have been
separated from his descendant by several generations. It is noticeable
that his name does not end in Varman, like those of later kings. If he
lived at the end of the second century this would harmonize with the
oldest Chinese notices which fix the rise of Lin-I (their name for
Champa) about 192 A.D.[331] Agreeably to this we also hear that
Hun T’ien founded an Indian kingdom in Fu-nan considerably
before 265 A.D. and that some time between 220 and 280 a king of
Fu-nan sent an embassy to India. The name Fu-nan may include
Champa. But though we hear of Hindu kingdoms in these districts at
an early date we know nothing of their civilization or history, nor do
137
we obtain much information from those Cham legends which

represent the dynasties of Champa as descended from two clans,
those of the cabbage palm (aréquier) and cocoanut.
Chinese sources also state that a king called Fan-yi sent an embassy
to China in 284 and give the names of several kings who reigned
between 336 and 440. One of these, Fan-hu-ta, is apparently the
Bhadravarman who has left some Sanskrit inscriptions dating from
about 400 and who built the first temple at Mĩ-so’n. This became the
national sanctuary of Champa: it was burnt down about 575 A.D. but
rebuilt. Bhadravarman’s son Gangarâja appears to have abdicated
and to have gone on a pilgrimage to the Ganges[332]—another
instance of the intercourse prevailing between these regions and
India.
[It would be useless to follow in detail the long chronicle of the kings
of Champa but a few events merit mention. In 446 and again in 605
the Chinese invaded the country and severely chastised the
inhabitants. But the second invasion was followed by a period of
peace and prosperity. Śambhuvarman (†629) restored the temples of
Mi-so’n and two of his successors, both called Vikrântavarman, were
also great builders. The kings who reigned from 758 to 859, reckoned
as the fifth dynasty, belonged to the south and had their capital at
Vîrapura. The change seems to have been important, for the Chinese
who had previously called the country Lin-I, henceforth call it Huan-
wang. The natives continued to use the name Champa but
Satyavarman and the other kings of the dynasty do not mention Mi-
so’n though they adorned and endowed Po-nagar and other
sanctuaries in the south. It was during this period (A.D. 774 and 787)
that the province of Kauthâra was invaded by pirates, described as
thin black barbarians and cannibals, and also as the armies of
Java[333]. They pillaged the temples but were eventually expelled.
They were probably Malays but it is difficult to believe that the
Javanese could be seriously accused of cannibalism at this
period[334].
The capital continued to be transferred under subsequent dynasties.

Under the sixth (860-900) it was at Indrapura in the north: under the
seventh (900-986) it returned to the south: under the eighth (989-
1044) it was in Vijaya, the central province. These internal changes
were accompanied by foreign attacks. The Khmers invaded the
southern province in 945. On the north an Annamite Prince founded
the kingdom of Dai-côviêt, which became a thorn in the side of
Champa. In 982 its armies destroyed Indrapura, and in 1044 they
138
captured Vijaya. In 1069 King Rudravarman was taken prisoner but

was released in return for the cession of the three northernmost
provinces. Indrapura however was rebuilt and for a time successful
wars were waged against Camboja, but though the kings of Champa
did not acquiesce in the loss of the northern provinces, and [though
Harivarman III (1074-80) was temporarily victorious, no real
progress was made in the contest with Annam, whither the Chams
had to send embassies practically admitting that they were a vassal
state. In the next century further disastrous quarrels with Camboja
ensued and in 1192 Champa was split into two kingdoms, Vijaya in
the north under a Cambojan prince and Panran in the south
governed by a Cham prince but under the suzerainty of Camboja.
This arrangement was not successful and after much fighting
Champa became a Khmer province though a very unruly one from
1203 till 1220. Subsequently the aggressive vigour of the Khmers was
tempered by their own wars with Siam. But it was not the fate of
Champa to be left in peace. The invasion of Khubilai lasted from
1278 to 1285 and in 1306 the provinces of O and Ly were ceded to
Annam.
Champa now became for practical purposes an Annamite province

and in 1318 the king fled to Java for refuge. This connection with
Java is interesting and there are other instances of it. King Jaya
Simhavarman III († 1307) of Champa married a Javanese princess
called Tapasi. Later we hear in Javanese records that in the fifteenth
century the princess Darawati of Champa married the king of
Madjapahit and her sister married Raden Radmat, a prominent
Moslim teacher in Java[335].
The power of the Chams was crushed by Annam in 1470. After this
date they had little political importance but continued to exist as a
nationality under their own rulers. In 1650 they revolted against
Annam without success and the king was captured. But his widow
was accorded a titular position and the Cham chronicle[336]
continues the list of nominal kings down to 1822.
In Champa, as in Camboja, no books dating from the Hindu period

have been preserved and probably there were not many. The Cham
language appears not to have been used for literary purposes and
whatever culture existed was exclusively Sanskrit. The kings are
credited with an extensive knowledge of Sanskrit literature. An
inscription at Po-nagar[337] (918 A.D.) says that Śrî Indravarman
was acquainted with the Mîmâṃsâ and other [systems of
philosophy, Jinendra, and grammar together with the Kâśikâ (vṛitti)
139
and the Śaivottara-Kalpa. Again an inscription of Mi-son[338]

ascribes to Jaya Indravarmadeva (c. 1175 A.D.) proficiency in all the
sciences as well as a knowledge of the Mahâyâna and the
Dharmaśâstras, particularly the Nâradîya and Bhârgavîya. To some
extent original compositions in Sanskrit must have been produced,
for several of the inscriptions are of considerable length and one[339]
gives a quotation from a work called the Purâṇârtha or
Arthapurâṇaśâstra which appears to have been a chronicle of
Champa. But the language of the inscriptions is often careless and
incorrect and indicates that the study of Sanskrit was less flourishing
than in Camboja.
The monuments of Champa, though considerable in size and

number, are inferior to those of Camboja. The individual buildings
are smaller and simpler and the groups into which they are
combined lack unity. Brick was the chief material, stone being used
only when brick would not serve, as for statues and lintels. The
commonest type of edifice is a square pyramidal structure called by
the Chams Kalan. A Kalan is as a rule erected on a hill or rising
ground: its lowest storey has on the east a porch and vestibule, on
the other three sides false doors. The same shape is repeated in four
upper storeys of decreasing size which however serve merely for
external decoration and correspond to nothing in the interior. This is
a single windowless pyramidal cell lighted by the door and probably
also by lamps placed in niches on the inner walls. In the centre stood
a pedestal for a linga or an image, with a channel to carry off
libations, leading to a spout in the wall. The outline of the tower is
often varied by projecting figures or ornaments, but the sculpture is
less lavish than in Camboja and Java.
In the greater religious sites several structures are grouped together.

A square wall surrounds an enclosure entered by a gateway and
containing one or more Kalans, as well as smaller buildings,
probably for the use of priests. Before the gateway there is frequently
a hall supported by columns but open at the sides.
[All known specimens of Cham architecture are temples; palaces and

other secular buildings were made of wood and have disappeared.
Of the many sanctuaries which have been discovered, the most
remarkable are those of Mi-son, and Dong Duong, both in the
neighbourhood of Tourane, and Po Nagar close to Nhatrang.
140
Mi-son[340] is an undulating amphitheatre among mountains and

contains eight or nine groups of temples, founded at different times.
The earliest structures, erected by Bhadravarman I about 400, have
disappeared[341] and were probably of wood, since we hear that
they were burnt (apparently by an accident) in 575 A.D. New
temples were constructed by Śambhuvarman about twenty-five
years later and were dedicated to Śambhu-bhadreśvara, in which
title the names of the founder, restorer and the deity are combined.
These buildings, of which portions remain, represent the oldest and
best period of Cham art. Another style begins under Vikrântavarman
I between 657 and 679 A.D. This reign marks a period of decadence
and though several buildings were erected at Mi-son during the
eighth and ninth centuries, the locality was comparatively
neglected[342] until the reign of Harivarman III (1074-1080). The
temples had been ravaged by the Annamites but this king, being a
successful warrior, was able to restore them and dedicated to them
the booty which he had captured. Though his reign marks a period
of temporary prosperity in the annals of Champa, the style which he
inaugurated in architecture has little originality. It reverts to the
ancient forms but shows conscious archaism rather than fresh
vigour. The position of Mi-son, however, did not decline and about
1155 Jaya Harivarman I repaired the buildings, dedicated the booty
taken in battle and erected a new temple in fulfilment of a vow. But
after this period the princes of Champa had no authority in the
district of Mi-son, and the Annamites, who seem to have disliked the
religion of the Chams, plundered the temples.
[Po-nagar[343] is near the port of Nha-trang and overlooks the sea.

Being smaller that Mi-son it has more unity but still shows little
attempt to combine in one architectural whole the buildings of which
it is composed.
An inscription[344] states with curious precision that the shrine was

first erected in the year 5911 of the Dvâpara age and this fantastic
chronology shows that in our tenth century it was regarded as
ancient. As at Mi-son, the original buildings were probably of wood
for in 774 they were sacked and burnt by pirates who carried off the
image[345]. Shortly afterwards they were rebuilt in brick by King
Satyavarman and the existing southern tower probably dates from
his reign, but the great central tower was built by Harivarman I (817
A.D.) and the other edifices are later.
Po Nagar or Yang Po Nagar means the Lady or Goddess of the city.

She was commonly called Bhagavatî in Sanskrit[346] and appears to
141
have been the chief object of worship at Nha-trang, although Śiva

was associated with her under the name of Bhagavatîśvara. In 1050
an ardhanarî image representing Śiva and Bhagavatî combined in
one figure was presented to the temple by King Parameśvara and a
dedicatory inscription describes this double deity as the cosmic
principle.
When Champa was finally conquered the temple was sold to the
Annamites, who admitted that they could not acquire it except by
some special and peaceful arrangement. Even now they still continue
the worship of the goddess though they no longer know who she
is[347].
Dong Duong, about twenty kilometres to the south of Mi-son, marks

the site of the ancient capital Indrapura. The monument which has
made its name known differs from those already described.
Compared with them it has some pretensions to be a whole, laid out
on a definite plan and it is Buddhist. It consists of three courts[348]
surrounded by walls and entered by massive porticoes. In the third
there are about twenty buildings [and perhaps it did not escape the
fault common to Cham architecture of presenting a collection of
disconnected and unrelated edifices, but still there is clearly an
attempt to lead up from the outermost portico through halls and
gateways to the principal shrine. From an inscription dated 875 A.D.
we learn that the ruins are those of a temple and vihâra erected by
King Indravarman and dedicated to Avalokita under the name of
Lakshmîndra Lokeśvara.
The religion of Champa was practically identical with that of

Camboja. If the inscriptions of the former tell us more about
mukhalingas and koshas and those of the latter have more allusions
to the worship of the compound deity Hari-hara, this is probably a
matter of chance. But even supposing that different cults were
specially prominent at different places, it seems clear that all the
gods and ceremonies known in Camboja were also known in
Champa and vice versa. In both countries the national religion was
Hinduism, mainly of the Śivaite type, accompanied by Mahayanist
Buddhism which occasionally came to the front under royal
patronage. In both any indigenous beliefs which may have existed
did not form a separate system. It is probable however that the
goddess known at Po-nagar as Bhagavatî was an ancient local deity
142
worshipped before the Hindu immigration and an inscription found

at Mi-son recommends those whose eyes are diseased to propitiate
Kuvera and thus secure protection against Ekâkshapingalâ, “the
tawny one-eyed (spirit).” Though this goddess or demon was
probably a creation of local fancy, similar identifications of Kâlî with
the spirits presiding over cholera, smallpox, etc., take place in India.
The social system was theoretically based on the four castes, but
Chinese accounts indicate that in questions of marriage and
inheritance older ideas connected with matriarchy and a division
into clans still had weight. But the language of the inscriptions is
most orthodox. King Vikrântavarman[349] quotes with approval the
saying that the horse sacrifice is the best of good deeds and the
murder of a Brahman the worst of sins. Brahmans, chaplains
(purohita), pandits and ascetics are frequently mentioned [as worthy
of honour and gifts. The high priest or royal chaplain is styled
Śrîparamapurohita but it does not appear that there was a sacerdotal
family enjoying the unique position held by the Śivakaivalyas in
Camboja. The frequent changes of capital and dynasty in Champa
were unfavourable to continuity in either Church or State.
Śivaism, without any hostility to Vishṇuism or Buddhism, was the

dominant creed. The earliest known inscription, that of Vo-can,
contains indications of Buddhism, but three others believed to date
from about 400 A.D. invoke Śiva under some such title as
Bhadreśvara, indicating that a temple had been dedicated to him by
King Bhadravarman. Thus the practice of combining the names of a
king and his patron deity in one appellation existed in Champa at
this early date[350]. It is also recorded from southern India, Camboja
and Java. Besides Śiva one of the inscriptions venerates, though in a
rather perfunctory manner, Umâ, Brahmâ, Vishṇu and the five
elements. Several inscriptions[351] give details of Śivaite theology
which agree with what we know of it in Camboja. The world
animate and inanimate is an emanation from Śiva, but he delivers
from the world those who think of him. Meditation, the practice of
Yoga, and devotion to Śiva are several times mentioned with
approval[352]. He abides in eight forms corresponding to his eight
names Śarva, Bhava, Paśupati, Iśâna, Bhîma, Rudra, Mahâdeva, and
Ugra. He is also, as in Java, Guru or the teacher and he has the usual
mythological epithets. He dances in lonely places, he rides on the
bull Nandi, is the slayer of Kâma, etc. Though represented by figures
embodying such legends he was most commonly adored under the
form of the linga which in Champa more than elsewhere came to be
regarded as not merely symbolic but as a personal god. To mark this
143
individuality it was commonly enclosed in a metal case (kosha)

bearing one or more human faces[353]. It was then called
mukhalinga and the [faces were probably intended as portraits of
royal donors, identified with the god in form as well as in name. An
inscription of 1163 A.D. records the dedication of such a kosha,
adorned with five royal faces, to Śrîśânabhadreśvara. The god, it is
said, will now be able to give his blessing to all regions through his
five mouths which he could not do before, and being enclosed in the
kosha, like an embryo in the matrix, he becomes Hiraṇyagarbha. The
linga, with or without these ornaments, was set on a snânadroṇi or
stone table arranged for receiving libations, and sometimes (as in
Java and Camboja) four or more lingas were set upon a single slab.
From A.D. 400 onwards, the cult of Śiva seems to have maintained
its paramount position during the whole history of Champa, for the
last recorded Sanskrit inscription is dedicated to him. From first to
last it was the state religion. Śiva is said to have sent Uroja to be the
first king and is even styled the root of the state of Champa.
An inscription[354] of 811 A.D. celebrates the dual deity Śankara-

Nârâyaṇa. It is noticeable that Nârâyaṇa is said to have held up Mt.
Govardhana and is apparently identified with Kṛishṇa. Râma and
Kṛishṇa are both mentioned in an inscription of 1157 which states
that the whole divinity of Vishṇu was incarnate in King Jaya
Harivarman I[355]. But neither allusions to Vishṇu nor figures of
him[356] are numerous and he plays the part of an accessory though
respected personage. Garuḍa, on whom he rides, was better known
than the god himself and is frequently represented in sculpture.
The Śakti of Śiva, amalgamated as mentioned with a native goddess,

received great honour (especially at Nhatrang) under the names of
Umâ, Bhagavatî, the Lady of the city (Yang Po Nagar) and the
goddess of Kauthâra. In another form or aspect [she was called
Maladâkuṭhâra.[357] There was also a temple of Ganeśa (Śri-
Vinâyaka) at Nhatrang but statues of this deity and of Skanda are
rare.
The Chinese pilgrim I-Ching, writing in the last year of the seventh
century, includes Champa (Lin-I) in the list of countries which
“greatly reverence the three jewels” and contrasts it with Fu-nan
where a wicked king had recently almost exterminated Buddhism.
He says “In this country Buddhists generally belong to the Arya-
sammiti school, and there are also a few followers of the
Aryasarvâstivâdin school.” The statement is remarkable, for he also
tells us that the Sarvâstivâdins were the predominant sect in the
144
Malay Archipelago and flourished in southern China. The

headquarters of the Sammitîyas were, according to the accounts of
both Hsüan Chuang and I-Ching, in western India though, like the
three other schools, they were also found in Magadha and eastern
India. We also hear that the brother and sister of the Emperor Harsha
belonged to this sect and it was probably influential. How it spread
to Champa we do not know, nor do the inscriptions mention its
name or indicate that the Buddhism which they knew was anything
but the mixture of the Mahayana with Śivaism[358] which prevailed
in Camboja.
I-Ching’s statements can hardly be interpreted to mean that

Buddhism was the official religion of Champa at any rate after 400
A.D., for the inscriptions abundantly prove that the Śivaite shrines of
Mi-son and Po-nagar were so to speak national cathedrals where the
kings worshipped on behalf of the country. But the Vo-can
inscription (? 250 A.D.), though it does not mention Buddhism,
appears to be Buddhist, and it would be quite natural that a dynasty
founded about 150 A.D. should be Buddhist but that intercourse
with Camboja and probably with India should strengthen Śivaism.
The Chinese annals mention[359] that 1350 Buddhist books were
carried off during a Chinese invasion in 605 A.D. and this allusion
implies the existence of Buddhism and monasteries with libraries. As
in Camboja it was [perhaps followed by ministers rather than by
kings. An inscription found[360] in southern Champa and dated as
829 A.D. records how a sthavira named Buddhanirvâṇa erected two
vihâras and two temples (devakula) to Jina and Śankara (Buddha
and Śiva) in honour of his deceased father. Shortly afterwards there
came to the throne Indravarman II (860-890 A.D.), the only king of
Champa who is known to have been a fervent Buddhist. He did not
fail to honour Śiva as the patron of his kingdom but like Asoka he
was an enthusiast for the Dharma[361]. He desires the knowledge of
the Dharma: he builds monasteries for the sake of the Dharma: he
wishes to propagate it: he even says that the king of the gods
governs heaven by the principles of Dharma. He wishes to lead all
his subjects to the “yoke and abode of Buddha,” to “the city of
deliverance.”
To this end he founded the vihâra of Dong Duong, already

described, and dedicated it to Śri Lakshmîndra Lokeśvara[362]. This
last word is a synonym of Avalokita, which also occurs in the
dedicatory inscription but in a fragmentary passage. Lakshmîndra is
explained by other passages in the inscription from which we learn
that the king’s name before he ascended the throne was
145
Lakshmîndra Bhûmîśvara, so that the Bodhisattva is here adored

under the name of the king who erected the vihâra according to the
custom prevalent in Śivaite temples. Like those temples this vihâra
received an endowment of land and slaves of both sexes, as well as
gold, silver and other metals[363].
A king who reigned from 1080 to 1086 was called Paramabodhisattva,

but no further epigraphic records of Buddhism are known until the
reigns of Jaya Indravarmadeva (1167-1192) and his successor
Sûryavarmadeva[364]. Both of these monarchs, while worshipping
Śiva, are described as knowing or practising the jñâna or dharma of
the Mahayana. Little emphasis seems to be laid on these expressions
but still they imply that the [Mahayana was respected and
considered part of the royal religion. Sûryavarmadeva erected a
building called Śrî Herukaharmya[365]. The title is interesting for it
contains the name of the Tantric Buddha Heruka.
The grotto of Phong-nha[366] in the extreme north of Champa

(province of Quang Binh) must have been a Buddhist shrine.
Numerous medallions in clay bearing representations of Buddhas,
Bodhisattvas and Dagobas have been found there but dates are
wanting.
It does not appear that the Hinayanist influence which became

predominant in Camboja extended to Champa. That influence came
from Siam and before it had time to traverse Camboja, Champa was
already in the grip of the Annamites, whose religion with the rest of
their civilization came from China rather than India. Chinese culture
and writing spread to the Cambojan frontier and after the decay of
Champa, Camboja marks the permanent limit within which an
Indian alphabet and a form of Buddhism not derived through China
have maintained themselves.
A large number of the Chams were converted to Mohammedanism

but the time and circumstances of the event are unknown. When
Friar Gabriel visited the country at the end of the sixteenth century a
form of Hinduism seems to have been still prevalent[367]. It would
be of interest to know how the change of religion was effected, for
history repeats itself and it is likely that the Moslims arrived in
Champa by the route followed centuries before by the Hindu
invaders.
There are still about 130,000 Chams in the south of Annam and
Camboja. In the latter country they are all Mohammedans. In Annam
146
some traces of Hinduism remain, such as mantras in broken Sanskrit

and hereditary priests called Baśaih. Both religions have become
unusually corrupt but are interesting as showing how beliefs which
are radically distinct become distorted and combined in Eastern
Asia[368].
FOOTNOTES:
[329] Also spelt Campâ and Tchampa. It seems safer to use Ch for C
in names which though of Indian origin are used outside India. The
final a though strictly speaking long is usually written without an
accent. The following are the principal works which I have consulted
about Champa.
(a) G. Maspéro, Le Royaume de Champa. Published in T’oung Pao, 1910-

1912. Cited as Maspéro.
(b) A. Bergaigne, “Inscriptions Sanskrites de Champa” in Notices et

Extraits des Manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Nationale, tome XXVII. 1re
partie. 2e fascicule, 1893, pp. 181-292. Cited as Corpus, II.
(c) H. Parmentier, Inventaire descriptif des Monuments Ćams de

l’Annam. 1899.
(d) L. Finot, “La Religion des Chams,” B.E.F.E.O, 1901, and Notes
d’Epigraphie. “Les Inscriptions de Mi-son,” ib. 1904. Numerous other
papers by this author, Durand, Parmentier and others in the same
periodical can be consulted with advantage.
(e) Id., Notes d’Epigraphie Indo-Chinoise, 1916.
[330] Corpus, II. p. 11, and Finot, Notes d’Epig. pp. 227 ff.
[331] See authorities quoted by Maspéro, T’oung Pao, 1910, p. 329.
[332] Finot in B.E.F.E.O. 1904, pp. 918 and 922.
[333] Corpus, II. Stêle de Po Nagar, pp. 252 ff. and Stêle de Yang Tikuh,
p. 208, etc.
[334] The statements that they came from Java and were cannibals
occur in different inscriptions and may conceivably refer to two
bodies of invaders. But the dates are very near. Probably Java is not
the island now so called. See the chapter on Camboja, sec. 2. The
147
undoubted references in the inscriptions of Champa to the island of

Java call it Yavadvîpa.
[335] Veth. Java, I. p. 233.
[336] See “La Chronique Royale,” B.E.F.E.O. 1905, p. 377.
[337] Corpus, II. p. 259. Jinendra may be a name either of the Buddha
or of a grammarian. The mention of the Kâśikâ vṛitti is important as
showing that this work must be anterior to the ninth century. The
Uttara Kalpa is quoted in the Tantras (see Bergaigne’s note), but
nothing is known of it.
[338] B.E.F.E.O. 1904, p. 973.
[339] From Mi-son, date 1157 A.D. See B.E.F.E.O. 1904, pp. 961 and
963.
[340] = Chinese Mei shan, beautiful mountain. For an account of the

temples and their history see the articles by Parmentier and Finot,
B.E.F.E.O. 1904, pp. 805-977.
[341] But contemporary inscriptions have been discovered.

B.E.F.E.O. 1902, pp. 185 ff.
[342] Doubtless because the capital was transferred to the south

where the shrine of Po-nagar had rival claims.
[343] See especially the article by Parmentier, B.E.F.E.O. 1902, pp. 17-
54.
[344] XXVI Corpus, II. pp. 244, 256; date 918 A.D.
[345] Śivamukham: probably a mukhalinga.
[346] Also Yäpunagara even in Sanskrit inscriptions.
[347] Parmentier, l.c. p. 49.
[348] This is only a very rough description of a rather complicated

structure. For details see Parmentier, Monuments C̆ams, planche
XCVIII.
[349] Inscrip. at Mi-son of 658 A.D. See B.E.F.E.O. 1904, p. 921.
[350] Other examples are Indrabhadreśvara, Corpus, II. p. 208.

Harivarmeśvara, B.E.F.E.O. 1904, p. 961.
148
[351] E.g. B.E.F.E.O. pp. 918 ff. Dates 658 A.D. onwards.
[352] Yogaddhyâna, Śivârâdha, Śivabhakti. See B.E.F.E.O. 1904, pp.

933-950. Harivarman III abdicated in 1080 and gave himself up to
contemplation and devotion to Śiva.
[353] See B.E.F.E.O. 1904, pp. 912 ff. and esp. p. 970. I have seen a
kosha which is still in use in the neighbourhood of Badami. It is kept
in a village called Nandikeśvara, but on certain festivals it is put on a
linga at the temple of Mahakut. It is about 2 feet high and 10 inches
broad; a silver case with a rounded and ornamented top. On one side
is a single face in bold embossed work and bearing fine moustaches
exactly as in the mukhalingas of Champa. In the tank of the temple
of Mahakut is a half submerged shrine, from which rises a stone
linga on which are carved four faces bearing moustaches. There is
said to be a gold kosha set with jewels at Śringeri. See J. Mythic.
Society (Bangalore), vol. VIII. p. 27. According to Gopinatha Rao,
Indian Iconography, vol. II. p. 63, the oldest known lingas have figures
carved on them.
[354] Corpus, II. pp. 229, 230.
[355] B.E.F.E.O. 1904, pp. 959, 960.
[356] See for an account of same B.E.F.E.O. 1901, p. 18.
[357] Corpus, II. p. 282.
[358] In several passages Hsüan Chuang notes that there were

Pâśupatas or other Śivaites in the same towns of India where
Sammitiyas were found. See Watters, Yüan Chwang, I. 331, 333; II. 47,
242, 256, 258, 259.
[359] Maspéro, T’oung Pao, 1910, p. 514.
[360] At Yang Kur. See Corpus, II. pp. 237-241.
[361] For his views see his inscriptions in B.E.F.E.O. 1904, pp. 85 ff.
But kings who are not known to have been Buddhists also speak of
Dharma. B.E.F.E.O. 1904, pp. 922, 945.
[362] Apparently special forms of deities such as Śrîśânabhadreśvara

or Lakshmînda Lokeśvara were regarded as to some extent separate
existences. Thus the former is called a portion of Śiva, B.E.F.E.O.
1904, p. 973.
149
[363] Presumably in the form of vessels.
[364] B.E.F.E.O. 1904, pp. 973-975.
[365] B.E.F.E.O. 1904, p. 975.
[366] Ib. 1901, p. 23, and Parmentier, Inventaire des Monuments Chams,
p. 542.
[367] Gabriel de San Antonio, Breve y verdadera relation de los successes

de Reyno de Camboxa, 1604.
[368] See for the modern Chams the article “Chams” in E.R.E. and
Ethics, and Durand, “Les Chams Bani,” B.E.F.E.O. 1903, and “Notes
sur les Chams,” ib. 1905-7.
150
CHAPTER XL
JAVA AND THE MALAY ARCHIPELAGO
In most of the countries which we have been considering, the native

civilization of the present day is still Indian in origin, although in the
former territories of Champa this Indian phase has been superseded
by Chinese culture with a little Mohammedanism. But in another
area we find three successive stages of culture, indigenous, Indian
and Mohammedan. This area includes the Malay Peninsula with a
large part of the Malay Archipelago, and the earliest stratum with
which we need concern ourselves is Malay. The people who bear this
name are remarkable for their extraordinary powers of migration by
sea, as shown by the fact that languages connected with Malay are
spoken in Formosa and New Zealand, in Easter Island and
Madagascar, but their originality both in thought and in the arts of
life is small. The three stages are seen most clearly in Java where the
population was receptive and the interior accessible. Sumatra and
Borneo also passed through them in a fashion but the indigenous
element is still predominant and no foreign influence has been able
to affect either island as a whole. Islam gained no footing in Bali
which remains curiously Hindu but it reached Celebes and the
southern Philippines, in both of which Indian influence was
slight[369]. The destiny of south-eastern Asia with its islands
depends on the fact that the tide of trade and conquest whether
Hindu, Moslim or European, flowed from India or Ceylon to the
Malay Peninsula and Java and thence northwards towards China
with a reflux westwards in Champa and Camboja. Burma and Siam
lay outside this track. They received their culture from India mainly
by land and were untouched by Mohammedanism. But the
Mohammedan current [which affected the Malays was old and
continuous. It started from Arabia in the early days of the Hijra and
had nothing to do with the Moslim invasions which entered India by
land.
151
Indian civilization appears to have existed in Java from at least the

fifth century of our era[370]. Much light has been thrown on its
history of late by the examination of inscriptions and of fairly ancient
literature but the record still remains fragmentary. There are
considerable gaps: the seat of power shifted from one district to
another and at most epochs the whole island was not subject to one
ruler, so that the title king of Java merely indicates a prince pre-
eminent among others doubtfully subordinate to him.
The name Java is probably the Sanskrit Yava used in the sense of
grain, especially millet. In the Ramayana[371] the monkeys of
Hanuman are bidden to seek for Sîtâ in various places including
Yava-dvîpa, which contains seven kingdoms and produces gold and
silver. Others translate these last words as referring to another or
two other islands known as Gold and Silver Land. It is probable that
the poet did not distinguish clearly between Java and Sumatra. He
goes on to say that beyond Java is the peak called Śiśira. This is
possibly the same as the Yavakoṭi mentioned in 499 A.D. by the
Indian astronomer Aryabhaṭṭa.
[Since the Ramayana is a product of gradual growth it is not easy to

assign a definite date to this passage, but it is probably not later than
the first or second century A.D. and an early date is rendered
probable by the fact that the Alexandrian Geographer Ptolemy (c.
130 A.D.) mentions[372] Νῆσος Ἰαβαδίου ἢ Σαβαδίου and by various
notices collected from inscriptions and from Chinese historians. The
annals of the Liang Dynasty (502-556 A.D.) in speaking of the
countries of the Southern Ocean say that in the reign of Hsüan Ti (73-
49 B.C.) the Romans and Indians sent envoys to China by that
route[373], thus indicating that the Archipelago was frequented by
Hindus. The same work describes under the name of Lang-ya-hsiu a
country which professed Buddhism and used the Sanskrit language
and states that “the people say that their country was established
more than 400 years ago[374].” Lang-ya-hsiu has been located by
some in Java by others in the Malay Peninsula, but even on the latter
supposition this testimony to Indian influence in the Far East is still
important. An inscription found at Kedah in the Malay Peninsula is
believed to be older than 400 A.D.[375] No more definite accounts
are forthcoming before the fifth or sixth century. Fa-Hsien[376]
relates how in 418 he returned to China from India by sea and
“arrived at a country called Ya-va-di.” “In this country” he says
152
“heretics and Brahmans flourish but the law of Buddha hardly

deserves mentioning[377].” Three inscriptions found in west Java in
the district of Buitenzorg are referred for palæographic reasons to
about 400 A.D. They are all in Sanskrit and eulogize a prince named
Pûrṇavarman, who appears to have been a Vishnuite. The name of
his capital is [deciphered as Narumâ or Tarumâ. In 435 according to
the Liu Sung annals[378] a king of Ja-va-da named Shih-li-pa-da-do-
a-la-pa-mo sent tribute to China. The king’s name probably
represents a Sanskrit title beginning with Śrî-Pâda and it is
noticeable that two footprints are carved on the stones which bear
Pûrṇavarman’s inscriptions. Also Sanskrit inscriptions found at
Koetei on the east coast of Borneo and considered to be not later than
the fifth century record the piety and gifts to Brahmans of a King
Mûlavarman and mention his father and grandfather[379].
It follows from these somewhat disjointed facts that the name of

Yava-dvîpa was known in India soon after the Christian era, and that
by the fifth century Hindu or hinduized states had been established
in Java. The discovery of early Sanskrit inscriptions in Borneo and
Champa confirms the presence of Hindus in these seas. The T’ang
annals[380] speak definitely of Kaling, otherwise called Java, as lying
between Sumatra and Bali and say that the inhabitants have letters
and understand a little astronomy. They further mention the
presence of Arabs and say that in 674 a queen named Sima ascended
the throne and ruled justly.
But the certain data for Javanese history before the eighth century
are few. For that period we have some evidence from Java itself. An
inscription dated 654 Śaka ( = 732 A.D.) discovered in Kĕdoe
celebrates the praises of a king named Sanjaya, son of King Sanna. It
contains an account of the dedication of a linga, invocations of Śiva,
Brahmâ and Vishṇu, a eulogy of the king’s virtue and learning, and
praise of Java. Thus about 700 A.D. there was a Hindu kingdom in
mid Java and this, it would seem, was then the part of the island
most important politically. Buddhist inscriptions of a somewhat later
date (one is of 778 A.D.) have been found in the neighbourhood of
Prambânam. They are written in the Nagari alphabet and record
various pious foundations. A little later again (809 and 840 A.D.) are
the inscriptions found on the Dieng (Dihyang), a [lonely mountain
plateau on which are several Brahmanic shrines in fair preservation.
There is no record of their builders but the New T’ang Annals say
that the royal residence was called Java but “on the mountains is the
district Lang-pi-ya where the king frequently goes to look at the
sea[381].” This may possibly be a reference to pilgrimages to Dieng.
153
The inscriptions found on the great monument of Boroboedoer

throw no light on the circumstances of its foundation, but the
character of the writing makes it likely that it was erected about 850
and obviously by a king who could command the services of
numerous workmen as well as of skilled artists. The temples of
Prambânam are probably to be assigned to the next century. All
these buildings indicate the existence from the eighth to the tenth
century of a considerable kingdom (or perhaps kingdoms) in middle
Java, comprising at least the regions of Mataram, Kĕdoe and the
Dieng plateau. From the Arabic geographers also we learn that Java
was powerful in the ninth century and attacked Qamar (probably
Khmer or Camboja). They place the capital at the mouth of a river,
perhaps the Solo or Brantas. If so, there must have been a
principality in east Java at this period. This is not improbable for
archæological evidence indicates that Hindu civilization moved
eastwards and flourished first in the west, then in mid Java and
finally from the ninth to the fifteenth centuries in the east.
The evidence at our disposal points to the fact that Java received
most of its civilization from Hindu colonists, but who were these
colonists and from what part of India did they come? We must not
think of any sudden and definite conquest, but rather of a
continuous current of immigration starting perhaps from several
springs and often merely trickling, but occasionally swelling into a
flood. Native traditions collected by Raffles[382] ascribe the
introduction of Brahmanism and the Śaka era to the sage Tritresta
and represent the invaders as coming from Kalinga or from Gujarat.
The difference of locality may be due to the fact that there was a
trade route running from Broach to Masulipatam through Tagara
(now Ter). People arriving in the Far East by this route might be
described as coming either from Kalinga, where they [embarked, or
from Gujarat, their country of origin. Dubious as is the authority of
these legends, they perhaps preserve the facts in outline. The earliest
Javanese inscriptions are written in a variety of the Vengi script and
the T’ang annals call the island Kaling as well as Java. It is therefore
probable that early tradition represented Kalinga as the home of the
Hindu invaders. But later immigrants may have come from other
parts. Fa-Hsien could find no Buddhists in Java in 418, but Indian
forms of Mahayanism indubitably flourished there in later centuries.
The Kalasan inscription dated 778 A.D. and engraved in Nâgari
characters records the erection of a temple to Târâ and of a
Mahayanist monastery. The change in both alphabet and religion
suggests the arrival of new influences from another district and the
154
Javanese traditions about Gujarat are said to find an echo among the
bards of western India and in such proverbs as, they who go to Java
come not back[383]. In the period of the Hunnish and Arab invasions
there may have been many motives for emigration from Gujarat. The
land route to Kalinga was probably open and the sea route offers no
great difficulties[384].
Another indication of connection with north-western India is found

in the Chinese work Kao Sêng Chuan (519 A.D.) or Biographies of
Eminent Monks, if the country there called Shê-p’o can be identified
with Java[385]. It is related that Guṇavarman, son of the king of
Kashmir, became a monk and, declining the throne, went first to
Ceylon and then to the kingdom of Shê-p’o, which he converted to
Buddhism. He died at Nanking in 431 B.C.
Târanâtha[386] states that Indo-China which he calls the Koki

country[387], was first evangelized in the time of Asoka and that
[Mahayanism was introduced there by the disciples of Vasubandhu,
who probably died about 360 A.D., so that the activity of his
followers would take place in the fifth century. He also says that
many clergy from the Koki country were in Madhyadeśa from the
time of Dharmapâla (about 800 A.D.) onwards, and these two
statements, if they can be accepted, certainly explain the character of
Javanese and Cambojan Buddhism. Târanâtha is a confused and
untrustworthy writer, but his statement about the disciples of
Vasubandhu is confirmed by the fact that Dignâga, who was one of
them, is the only authority cited in the Kamahâyânikan[388].
The fact that the terms connected with rice cultivation are Javanese
and not loan-words indicates that the island had some indigenous
civilization when the Hindus first settled there. Doubtless they often
came with military strength, but on the whole as colonists and
teachers rather than as conquerors. The Javanese kings of whom we
know most appear to have been not members of Hindu dynasties
but native princes who had adopted Hindu culture and religion.
Sanskrit did not oust Javanese as the language of epigraphy, poetry
and even religious literature. Javanese Buddhism appears to have
preserved its powers of growth and to have developed some special
doctrines. But Indian influence penetrated almost all institutions and
is visible even to-day. Its existence is still testified to by the alphabet
in use, by such titles as Arjo, Radja, Praboe, Dipati ( = adhipati), and
by various superstitions about lucky days and horoscopes.
Communal land tenure of the Indian kind still exists and in former
times grants of land were given to priests and, as in India, recorded
155
on copper plates. Offerings to old statues are still made and the
Tenggerese[389] are not even nominal Mohammedans. The Balinese
still profess a species of Hinduism and employ a Hindu Calendar.
From the tenth century onwards the history of Java becomes a little
plainer.
Copper plates dating from about 900 A.D. mention Mataram. A

certain Mpoe Sindok was vizier of this kingdom in 919, but ten years
later we find him an independent king in east Java. He lived at least
twenty-five years longer and his possessions included Pasoeroean,
Soerabaja and Kediri. His great-grandson, Er-langga (or Langghya),
is an important figure. Er-langga’s early life was involved in war, but
in 1032 he was able to call himself, though perhaps not with great
correctness, king of all Java. His memory has not endured among the
Javanese but is still honoured in the traditions of Bali and Javanese
literature began in his reign or a little earlier. The poem Arjuna-
vivâha is dedicated to him, and one book of the old Javanese prose
translation of the Mahabharata bears a date equivalent to 996
A.D.[390]
One of the national heroes of Java is Djajabaja[391] who is supposed

to have lived in the ninth century. But tradition must be wrong here,
for the free poetic rendering of part of the Mahabharata called
Bhârata-Yuddha, composed by Mpoe Sĕdah in 1157 A.D., is
dedicated to him, and his reign must therefore be placed later than
the traditional date. He is said to have founded the kingdom of Daha
in Kediri, but his inscriptions merely indicate that he was a
worshipper of Vishṇu. Literature and art flourished in east Java at
this period for it would seem that the Kawi Ramayana and an ars
poetica called Vṛitta-sañcaya[392] were written about 1150 and that
the temple of Panataran was built between 1150 and 1175.
In western Java we have an inscription of 1030 found on the river

Tjitjatih. It mentions a prince who is styled Lord of the World and
native tradition, confirmed by inscriptions, which however give few
details, relates that in the twelfth century a kingdom called
Padjadjaran was founded in the Soenda country south of Batavia by
princes from Toemapĕl in eastern Java.
There is a gap in Javanese history from the reign of Djajabaja till 1222
at which date the Pararaton[393], or Book of the Kings of Toemapĕl
and Madjapahit, begins to furnish information. The Sung annals[394]
also give some account of the island but it is not [clear to what years
156
their description refers. They imply, however, that there was an

organized government and that commerce was flourishing. They
also state that the inhabitants “pray to the gods and Buddha”: that
Java was at war with eastern Sumatra: that embassies were sent to
China in 992 and 1109 and that in 1129 the Emperor gave the ruler of
Java (probably Djajabaja) the title of king.
The Pararaton opens with the fall of Daha in 1222 which made
Toemapĕl, known later as Singasari, the principal kingdom. Five of
its kings are enumerated, of whom Vishṇuvardhana was buried in
the celebrated shrine of Tjandi Djago, where he was represented in
the guise of Buddha. His successor Śrî Râjasanâgara was praised by
the poet Prapantja[395] as a zealous Buddhist but was known by the
posthumous name of Śivabuddha. He was the first to use the name
of Singasâri and perhaps founded a new city, but the kingdom of
Toemapĕl came to an end in his reign for he was slain by Djaja
Katong[396], prince of Daha, who restored to that kingdom its
previous primacy, but only for a short time, since it was soon
supplanted by Madjapahit. The foundation of this state is connected
with a Chinese invasion of Java, related at some length in the Yüan
annals[397], so that we are fortunate in possessing a double and
fairly consistent account of what occurred.
We learn from these sources that some time after Khubilai Khan had
conquered China, he sent missions to neighbouring countries to
demand tribute. The Javanese had generally accorded a satisfactory
reception to Chinese missions, but on this occasion the king
(apparently Djaja Katong) maltreated the envoy and sent him back
with his face cut or tattooed. Khubilai could not brook this outrage
and in 1292 despatched a punitive expedition. At that time Raden
Vidjaja, the son-in-law of Kĕrtanagara, had not submitted to Djaja
Katong and held out at Madjapahit, a stronghold which he had
founded near the river Brantas. He offered his services to the
Chinese and after a two months’ campaign Daha was captured and
Djaja Katong killed. Raden Vidjaja now found that he no longer
[needed his Chinese allies. He treacherously massacred some and
prepared to fight the rest. But the Mongol generals, seeing the
difficulties of campaigning in an unknown country without guides,
prudently returned to their master and reported that they had taken
Daha and killed the insolent king.
Madjapahit (or Wilwatikta) now became the premier state of Java,

and had some permanency. Eleven sovereigns, including three
queens, are enumerated by the Pararaton until its collapse in 1468.
157
We learn from the Ming annals and other Chinese documents[398]

that it had considerable commercial relations with China and sent
frequent missions: also that Palembang was a vassal of Java. But the
general impression left by the Pararaton is that during the greater
part of its existence Madjapahit was a distracted and troubled
kingdom. In 1403, as we know from both Chinese and Javanese
sources, there began a great war between the western and eastern
kingdoms, that is between Madjapahit and Balambangan in the
extreme east, and in the fifteenth century there was twice an
interregnum. Art and literature, though not dead, declined and
events were clearly tending towards a break-up or revolution. This
appears to have been consummated in 1468, when the Pararaton
simply says that King Paṇḍansalas III left the Kraton, or royal
residence.
It is curious that the native traditions as to the date and

circumstances in which Madjapahit fell should be so vague, but
perhaps the end of Hindu rule in Java was less sudden and dramatic
than we are inclined to think. Islam had been making gradual
progress and its last opponents were kings only in title. The Chinese
mention the presence of Arabs in the seventh century, and the
geography called Ying-yai Shêng-lan (published in 1416), which
mentions Grissé, Soerabaja and Madjapahit as the principal towns of
Java, divides the inhabitants into three classes: (a) Mohammedans
who have come from the west, “their dress and food is clean and
proper”; (b) the Chinese, who are also cleanly and many of whom
are Mohammedans; (c) the natives who are ugly and uncouth, devil-
worshippers, filthy in food and habits. As the Chinese do not
generally speak so severely of the hinduized Javanese it would
appear that Hinduism lasted longest among the lower and more
savage [classes, and that the Moslims stood on a higher level. As in
other countries, the Arabs attempted to spread Islam from the time
of their first appearance. At first they confined their propaganda to
their native wives and dependents. Later we hear of veritable
apostles of Islam such as Malik Ibrahim, and Raden Rahmat, the
ruler of a town called Ampel[399] which became the head quarter of
Islam. The princes whose territory lay round Madjapahit were
gradually converted and the extinction of the last Hindu kingdom
became inevitable[400].
158
It is remarkable that the great island of Sumatra, which seems to lie

in the way of anyone proceeding from India eastwards and is close
to the Malay peninsula, should in all ages have proved less
accessible to invaders coming from the west than the more distant
Java. Neither Hindus, Arabs nor Europeans have been able to
establish their influence there in the same thorough manner. The
cause is probably to be found in its unhealthy and impenetrable
jungles, but even so its relative isolation remains singular.
It does not appear that any prince ever claimed to be king of all
Sumatra. For the Hindu period we have no indigenous literature and
our scanty knowledge is derived from a few statues and inscriptions
and from notices in Chinese writings. The latter do not refer to the
island as a whole but to several states such as Indragiri near the
Equator and Kandali (afterwards called San-bo-tsai, the Sabaza of
the Arabs) near Palembang. The annals of the Liang dynasty say that
the customs of Kandali were much the same as those of Camboja and
apparently we are to understand that the country was Buddhist, for
one king visited the Emperor Wu-ti in a dream, and his son
addressed a letter to His Majesty eulogizing his devotion to
Buddhism. Kandali is said to have sent three envoys to China
between 454 and 519.
[The Chinese pilgrim I-Ching[401] visited Sumatra twice, once for

two months in 672 and subsequently for some years (about 688-695).
He tells us that in the islands of the Southern Sea, “which are more
than ten countries,” Buddhism flourishes, the school almost
universally followed being the Mûlasarvâstivâda, though the
Sammitîyas and other schools have a few adherents. He calls the
country where he sojourned and to which these statements primarily
refer, Bhoja or Śrîbhoja (Fo-shih or Shih-li-fo-shih), adding that its
former name was Malayu. It is conjectured that Shih-li-fo-shih is the
place later known as San-bo-tsai[402] and Chinese authors seem to
consider that both this place and the earlier Kandali were roughly
speaking identical with Palembang. I-Ching tells us that the king of
Bhoja favoured Buddhism and that there were more than a thousand
priests in the city. Gold was abundant and golden flowers were
offered to the Buddha. There was communication by ship with both
India and China. The Hinayana, he says, was the form of Buddhism
adopted “except in Malayu, where there are a few who belong to the
Mahayana.” This is a surprising statement, but it is impossible to
159
suppose that an expert like I-Ching can have been wrong about what
he actually saw in Śrîbhoja. So far as his remarks apply to Java they
must be based on hearsay and have less authority, but the sculptures
of Boroboedoer appear to show the influence of Mûlasarvâstivâdin
literature. It must be remembered that this school, though nominally
belonging to the Hinayana, came to be something very different
from the Theravâda of Ceylon.
The Sung annals and subsequent Chinese writers know the same
district (the modern Palembang) as San-bo-tsai (which may indicate
either mere change of name or the rise of a new city) and say that it
sent twenty-one envoys between 960 and 1178. The real object of
these missions was to foster trade and there was evidently frequent
intercourse between eastern Sumatra, Champa and China.
Ultimately the Chinese seem to have thought that the entertainment
of Sumatran diplomatists cost more than they were worth, for in
1178 the emperor ordered that they should not come to Court but
present themselves in [the province of Fu-kien. The Annals state that
Sanskrit writing was in use at San-bo-tsai and lead us to suppose
that the country was Buddhist. They mention several kings whose
names or titles seem to begin with the Sanskrit word Śrî[403]. In 1003
the envoys reported that a Buddhist temple had been erected in
honour of the emperor and they received a present of bells for it.
Another envoy asked for dresses to be worn by Buddhist monks. The
Ming annals also record missions from San-bo-tsai up to 1376,
shortly after which the region was conquered by Java and the town
decayed[404]. In the fourteenth century Chinese writers begin to
speak of Su-mên-ta-la or Sumatra by which is meant not the whole
island but a state in the northern part of it called Samudra and
corresponding to Atjeh[405]. It had relations with China and the
manners and customs of its inhabitants are said to be the same as in
Malacca, which probably means that they were Moslims.
Little light is thrown on the history of Sumatra by indigenous or

Javanese monuments. Those found testify, as might be expected, to
the existence here and there of both Brahmanism and Buddhism. In
1343 a Sumatran prince named Adityavarman, who was apparently
a vassal of Madjapahit, erected an image of Manjuśrî at Tjandi Djago
and in 1375 one of Amoghapâśa.
160
The Liang and T’ang annals both speak of a country called Po-li,
described as an island lying to the south-east of Canton. Groeneveldt
identified it with Sumatra, but the account of its position suggests
that it is rather to be found in Borneo, parts of which were
undoubtedly known to the Chinese as Po-lo and Pu-ni[406]. The
Liang annals state that Po-li sent an embassy to the Emperor Wu-ti in
518 bearing a letter which described the [country as devoted to
Buddhism and frequented by students of the three vehicles. If the
letter is an authentic document the statements in it may still be
exaggerations, for the piety of Wu-ti was well known and it is clear
that foreign princes who addressed him thought it prudent to
represent themselves and their subjects as fervent Buddhists. But
there certainly was a Hindu period in Borneo, of which some
tradition remains among the natives[407], although it ended earlier
and left fewer permanent traces than in Java and elsewhere.
The most important records of this period are three Sanskrit

inscriptions found at Koetei on the east coast of Borneo[408]. They
record the donations made to Brahmans by King Mûlavarman, son
of Aśvavarman and grandson of Kuṇḍagga. They are not dated, but
Kern considers for palæographical reasons that they are not later
than the fifth century. Thus, since three generations are mentioned, it
is probable that about 400 A.D. there were Hindu princes in Borneo.
The inscriptions testify to the existence of Hinduism there rather
than of Buddhism: in fact the statements in the Chinese annals are
the only evidence for the latter. But it is most interesting to find that
these annals give the family name of the king of Poli as
Kauṇḍinya[409] which no doubt corresponds to the Kuṇḍagga of the
Koetei inscription. At least one if not two of the Hindu invaders of
Camboja bore this name, and we can hardly be wrong in supposing
that members of the same great family became princes in different
parts of the Far East. One explanation of their presence in Borneo
would be that they went thither from Camboja, but we have no
record of expeditions from Camboja and if adventurers started
thence it is not clear why they went to the east coast of Borneo. It
would be less strange if Kaundinyas emigrating from Java reached
both Camboja and Koetei. It is noticeable that in Java, Koetei,
Champa and Camboja alike royal names end in varman.
161
The architectural monuments of Java are remarkable for their size,

their number and their beauty. Geographically they fall into two
chief groups, the central (Boroboedoer, Prambanan, Dieng plateau,
etc.) in or near the kingdom of Mataram and the eastern (Tjandi
Djago, Singasari, Panataran, etc.) lying not at the extremity of the
island but chiefly to the south of Soerabaja. No relic of antiquity
deserving to be called a monument has been found in western Java
for the records left by Pûrnavarman (c. 400 A.D.) are merely rocks
bearing inscriptions and two footprints, as a sign that the monarch’s
triumphal progress is compared to the three steps of Vishṇu.
The earliest dated (779 A.D.) monument in mid Java, Tjandi Kalasan,
is Buddhist and lies in the plain of Prambanan. It is dedicated to Târâ
and is of a type common both in Java and Champa, namely a chapel
surmounted by a tower. In connection with it was erected the
neighbouring building called Tjandi Sari, a two-storied monastery
for Mahayanist monks. Not far distant is Tjandi Sevu, which
superficially resembles the 450 Pagodas of Mandalay, for it consists
of a central cruciform shrine surrounded by about 240 smaller
separate chapels, everyone of which, apparently, contained the
statue of a Dhyâni Buddha. Other Buddhist buildings in the same
region are Tjandi Plaosan, and the beautiful chapel known as Tjandi
Mendut in which are gigantic seated images of the Buddha, Manjuśrî
and Avalokita. The face of the last named is perhaps the most
exquisite piece of work ever wrought by the chisel of a Buddhist
artist.
It is not far from Mendut to Boroboedoer, which deserves to be

included in any list of the wonders of the world. This celebrated
stûpa—for in essence it is a highly ornamented stûpa with galleries
of sculpture rising one above the other on its sides—has been often
described and can be described intelligibly only at considerable
length. I will therefore not attempt to detail or criticize its beauties
but will merely state some points which are important for our
purpose.
It is generally agreed that it must have been built about 850 A.D., but
obviously the construction lasted a considerable time and there are
indications that the architects altered their original plan. The
unknown founder must have been a powerful [and prosperous king
for no one else could have commanded the necessary labour. The
162
stûpa shows no sign of Brahmanic influence. It is purely Buddhist

and built for purposes of edification. The worshippers performed
pradakshiṇâ by walking round the galleries, one after the other, and
as they did so had an opportunity of inspecting some 2000 reliefs
depicting the previous births of Śakyamuni, his life on earth and
finally the mysteries of Mahayanist theology. As in Indian pilgrim
cities, temple guides were probably ready to explain the pictures.
The selection of reliefs is not due to the artists’ fancy but aims at
illustrating certain works. Thus the scenes of the Buddha’s life
reproduce in stone the story of the Lalita Vistara[410] and the Jâtaka
pictures are based on the Divyâvadâna. It is interesting to find that
both these works are connected with the school of the
Mûlasarvâstivâdins, which according to I-Ching was the form of
Buddhism prevalent in the archipelago. In the third gallery the
figure of Maitreya is prominent and often seems to be explaining
something to a personage who accompanies him. As Maitreya is said
to have revealed five important scriptures to Asaṇga, and as there is
a tradition that the east of Asia was evangelized by the disciples of
Asaṇga or Vasubandhu, it is possible that the delivery and progress
of Maitreya’s revelation is here depicted. The fourth gallery seems to
deal with the five superhuman Buddhas[411], their paradises and
other supra-mundane matters, but the key to this series of sculptures
has not yet been found. It is probable that the highest storey proved
to be too heavy in its original form and that the central dagoba had
to be reduced lest it should break the substructure. But it is not
known what image or relic was preserved in this dagoba. Possibly it
was dedicated to Vairocana who was regarded as the Supreme Being
and All-God by some Javanese Buddhists[412].
The creed here depicted in stone seems to be a form of [Mahayanism.

Śâkyamuni is abundantly honoured but there is no representation of
his death. This may be because the Lalita Vistara treats only of his
early career, but still the omission is noteworthy. In spite of the
importance of Śâkyamuni, a considerable if mysterious part is
played by the five superhuman Buddhas, and several Bodhisattvas,
especially Maitreya, Avalokita and Manjuśrî. In the celestial scenes
we find numerous Bodhisattvas both male and female, yet the
figures are hardly Tantric and there is no sign that any of the
personages are Brahmanic deities.
Yet the region was not wholly Buddhist. Not far from Boroboedoer
and apparently of about the same age is the Sivaite temple of Banon,
and the great temple group of Prambanam is close to Kalasan and to
163
the other Buddhist shrines mentioned above. It consists of eight

temples of which four are dedicated to Brahmâ, Śiva, Vishṇu and
Nandi respectively, the purpose of the others being uncertain. The
largest and most decorated is that dedicated to Śiva, containing four
shrines in which are images of the god as Mahâdeva and as Guru, of
Ganeśa and of Durgâ. The balustrade is ornamented with a series of
reliefs illustrating the Ramayana. These temples, which appear to be
entirely Brahmanic, approach in style the architecture of eastern Java
and probably date from the tenth century, that is about a century
later than the Buddhist monuments. But there is no tradition or other
evidence of a religious revolution.
The temples on the Dieng plateau are also purely Brahmanic and
probably older, for though we have no record of their foundation, an
inscribed stone dated 800 A.D. has been found in this district. The
plateau which is 6500 feet high was approached by paved roads or
flights of stairs on one of which about 4000 steps still remain.
Originally there seem to have been about 40 buildings on the plateau
but of these only eight now exist besides several stone foundations
which supported wooden structures. The place may have been a
temple city analogous to Girnar or Śatrunjaya, but it appears to have
been deserted in the thirteenth century, perhaps in consequence of
volcanic activity. The Dieng temples are named after the heroes of
the Mahabharata (Tjandi Ardjuno, Tjandi Bimo, etc.), but these
appear to be late designations. They are rectangular towerlike
[shrines with porches and a single cellule within. Figures of Brahma,
Śiva and Vishṇu have been discovered, as well as spouts to carry off
the libation water.
Before leaving mid Java I should perhaps mention the relatively

modern (1435-1440 A.D.) temples of Suku. I have not seen these
buildings, but they are said to be coarse in execution and to indicate
that they were used by a debased sect of Vishṇuites. Their interest
lies in the extraordinary resemblance which they bear to the temples
of Mexico and Yucatan, a resemblance “which no one can fail to
observe, though no one has yet suggested any hypothesis to account
for it[413].”
The best known and probably the most important monuments of

eastern Java are Panataran, Tjandi Djago and Tjandi Singasari[414].
The first is considered to date from about 1150 A.D. It is practically a

three-storied pyramid with a flat top. The sides of the lowest storey
are ornamented with a series of reliefs illustrating portions of the
164
Ramayana, local legends and perhaps the exploits of Krishna, but

this last point is doubtful[415]. This temple seems to indicate the
same stage of belief as Prambanam. It shows no trace of Buddhism
and though Śiva was probably the principal deity, the scenes
represented in its sculptures are chiefly Vishṇuite.
Tjandi Djago is in the province of Pasoeroean. According to the

Pararaton and the Nâgarakrĕtâgama[416], Vishṇuvardhana, king of
Toemapĕl, was buried there. As he died in 1272 or 1273 A.D. and the
temple was already in existence, we may infer that it dates from at
least 1250. He was represented there in the form of Sugata (that is the
Buddha) and at Waleri in the form of Śiva. Here we have the custom
known also in Champa and Camboja of a deceased king being
represented by a statue with his own features but the attributes of his
tutelary deity. It is strange that a king named after Vishṇu should be
portrayed in the guise of Śiva and Buddha. But in spite of this
impartiality, the cult practised at Tjandi Djago seems to have been
not a mixture but Buddhism of a late Mahayanist type. It was
[doubtless held that Buddhas and Bodhisattvas are identical with
Brahmanic deities, but the fairly numerous pantheon discovered in
or near the ruins consists of superhuman Buddhas and Bodhisattvas
with their spouses[417].
In form Tjandi Djago has somewhat the appearance of a three-storied

pyramid but the steps leading up to the top platform are at one end
only and the shrine instead of standing in the centre of the platform
is at the end opposite to the stairs. The figures in the reliefs are
curiously square and clumsy and recall those of Central America.
Tjandi Singasari, also in the province of Pasoeroean, is of a different

form. It is erected on a single low platform and consists of a plain
rectangular building surmounted by five towers such as are also
found in Cambojan temples. There is every reason to believe that it
was erected in 1278 A.D. in the reign of Krĕtanâgara, the last king of
Toemapĕl, and that it is the temple known as Śiva-buddhâlaya in
which he was commemorated under the name of Śiva-buddha. An
inscription found close by relates that in 1351 A.D. a shrine was
erected on behalf of the royal family in memory of those who died
with the king[418].
The Nâgarakrĕtagama represents this king as a devout Buddhist but

his very title Śivabuddha shows how completely Sivaism and
Buddhism were fused in his religion. The same work mentions a
temple in which the lower storey was dedicated to Śiva and the
165
upper to Akshobhya: it also leads us to suppose that the king was

honoured as an incarnation of Akshobhya even during his life and
was consecrated as a Jina under the name of Śrîjnânabajreśvara[419].
The Singasari temple is less ornamented with reliefs than the others
described but has furnished numerous statues of excellent
workmanship which illustrate the fusion of the Buddhist and Sivaite
pantheons. On the one side we have Prajnâpâramitâ, Manjuśrî and
Târâ, on the other Ganeśa, the Linga, Śiva in various forms (Guru,
Nandîsvara, Mahâkâla, etc.), Durgâ and Brahmâ. Not only is [the
Sivaite element predominant but the Buddhist figures are concerned
less with the veneration of the Buddha than with accessory
mythology.
Javanese architecture and sculpture are no doubt derived from India,

but the imported style, whatever it may have been, was modified by
local influences and it seems impossible at present to determine
whether its origin should be sought on the eastern or western side of
India. The theory that the temples on the Dieng plateau are
Chalukyan buildings appears to be abandoned but they and many
others in Java show a striking resemblance to the shrines found in
Champa. Javanese architecture is remarkable for the complete
absence not only of radiating arches but of pillars, and consequently
of large halls. This feature is no doubt due to the ever present danger
of earthquakes. Many reliefs, particularly those of Panataran, show
the influence of a style which is not Indian and may be termed,
though not very correctly, Polynesian. The great merit of Javanese
sculpture lies in the refinement and beauty of the faces. Among
figures executed in India it would be hard to find anything equal in
purity and delicacy to the Avalokita of Mendut, the Manjuśri now in
the Berlin Museum or the Prajñâpâramitâ now at Leyden.
From the eleventh century until the end of the Hindu period Java can
show a considerable body of literature, which is in part theological. It
is unfortunate that no books dating from an earlier epoch should be
extant. The sculptures of Prambanam and Boroboedoer clearly
presuppose an acquaintance with the Ramayana, the Lalita Vistara
and other Buddhist works but, as in Camboja, this literature was
probably known only in the original Sanskrit and only to the
learned. But it is not unlikely that the Javanese adaptations of the
Indian epics which have come down to us were preceded by earlier
attempts which have disappeared.
166
The old literary language of Java is commonly known as Båså Kawi

or Kawi, that is the language of poetry[420]. It is [however simply
the predecessor of modern Javanese and many authorities prefer to
describe the language of the island as Old Javanese before the
Madjapahit period, Middle-Javanese during that period and New
Javanese after the fall of Madjapahit. The greater part of this
literature consists of free versions of Sanskrit works or of a
substratum in Sanskrit accompanied by a Javanese explanation. Only
a few Javanese works are original, that is to say not obviously
inspired by an Indian prototype, but on the other hand nearly all of
them handle their materials with freedom and adapt rather than
translate what they borrow.
One of the earliest works preserved appears to be the Tantoe

Panggĕlaran, a treatise on cosmology in which Indian and native
ideas are combined. It is supposed to have been written about 1000
A.D. Before the foundation of Madjapahit Javanese literature
flourished especially in the reigns of Erlangga and Djajabaja, that is
in the eleventh and twelfth centuries respectively. About the time of
Erlangga were produced the old prose version of the Mahabharata,
in which certain episodes of that poem are rendered with great
freedom and the poem called Arjuna-vivâha, or the marriage of
Arjuna.
The Bhâratayuddha[421], which states that it was composed by

Mpoe Sedah in 1157 by order of Djajabaja, prince of Kediri, is, even
more than the prose version mentioned above, a free rendering of
parts of the Mahabharata. It is perhaps based on an older translation
preserved in Bali[422]. The Kawi Ramayana was in the opinion of
Kern composed about 1200 A.D. It follows in essentials the story of
the Ramayana, but it was apparently composed by a poet
unacquainted with Sanskrit who drew his knowledge from some
native source now unknown[423]. He appears to have been a Sivaite.
To the eleventh century are also referred the Smaradahana and the
treatise on prosody called Vrittasañcaya. All this literature is based
upon classical Sanskrit models and is not distinctly Buddhist
although the prose version of the Mahabharata states that it was
written for Brahmans, Sivaites and Buddhists[424]. Many other
translations [or adaptations of Sanskrit work are mentioned, such as
the Nîtiśâstra, the Sârasamuccaya, the Tantri (in several editions), a
prose translation of the Brahmândapurâṇa, together with grammars
and dictionaries. The absence of dates makes it difficult to use these
works for the history of Javanese thought. But it seems clear that
during the Madjapahit epoch, or perhaps even before it, a strong
167
current of Buddhism permeated Javanese literature, somewhat in

contrast with the tone of the works hitherto cited. Brandes states that
the Sutasoma, Vighnotsava, Kuñjarakarna, Sang Hyang
Kamahâyânikan, and Buddhapamutus are purely Buddhist works
and that the Tjantakaparva, Arjunavijaya, Nâgarakrĕtagama, Wariga
and Bubukshah show striking traces of Buddhism[425]. Some of
these works are inaccessible to me but two of them deserve
examination, the Sang Hyang Kamahâyânikan[426] and the story of
Kuñjarakarṇa[427]. The first is tentatively assigned to the Madjapahit
epoch or earlier, the second with the same caution to the eleventh
century. I do not presume to criticize these dates which depend
partly on linguistic considerations. The Kamahâyânikan is a treatise
(or perhaps extracts from treatises) on Mahayanism as understood in
Java and presumably on the normal form of Mahayanism. The other
work is an edifying legend including an exposition of the faith by no
one less than the Buddha Vairocana. In essentials it agrees with the
Kamahâyânikan but in details it shows either sectarian influence or
the idiosyncrasies of the author.
The Kamahâyânikan consists of Sanskrit verses explained by a

commentary in old Javanese and is partly in the form of questions
and answers. The only authority whom it cites is Dignâga. It
professes to teach the Mahâyâna and Mantrâyana, which is
apparently a misspelling for Mantrayâna. The emphasis laid on Bajra
(that is vajra or dorje), ghantâ, mudrâ, maṇḍala, mystic syllables, and
Devîs marks it as an offshoot of Tantrism and it offers many parallels
to Nepalese literature. On the other hand it is curious that it uses the
form Nibâṇa not Nirvâṇa[428]. Its [object is to teach a neophyte, who
has to receive initiation, how to become a Buddha[429]. In the second
part the pupil is addressed as Jinaputra, that is son of the Buddha or
one of the household of faith. He is to be moderate but not ascetic in
food and clothing: he is not to cleave to the Purâṇas and Tantras but
to practise the Pâramitâs. These are defined first as six[430] and then
four others are added[431]. Under Prajñâpâramitâ is given a
somewhat obscure account of the doctrine of Śûnyatâ. Then follows
the exposition of Paramaguhya (the highest secret) and Mahâguhya
(the great secret). The latter is defined as being Yoga, the bhâvanâs,
the four noble truths and the ten pâramitâs. The former explains the
embodiment of Bhaṭâra Viśesha, that is to say the way in which
Buddhas, gods and the world of phenomena are evolved from a
primordial principle, called Advaya and apparently equivalent to the
Nepalese Adibuddha[432]. Advaya is the father of Buddha and
Advayajñâna, also called Bharâlî Prajñâpâramitâ, is his mother, but
168
the Buddha principle at this stage is also called Divarûpa. In the next
stage this Divarûpa takes form as Śâkyamuni, who is regarded as a
superhuman form of Buddhahood rather than as a human teacher,
for he produces from his right and left side respectively Lokeśvara
and Bajrapâni. These beings produce, the first Akshobhya and
Ratnasambhava, the second Amitâbha and Amoghasiddhi, but
Vairocana springs directly from the face of Śâkyamuni. The five
superhuman Buddhas are thus accounted for. From Vairocana
spring Iśvara (Śiva), Brahmâ, and Vishṇu: from them the elements,
the human body and the whole world. A considerable part of the
treatise is occupied with connecting these various emanations of the
Advaya with mystic syllables and in showing how the five Buddhas
correspond to the different skandas, elements, senses, etc. Finally we
are told that there are five Devîs, or female counterparts
corresponding in the same order to the Buddhas named above and
called Locanâ, Mâmakî, Pâṇḍaravâsinî, Târâ and Dhâtvîśvarî. But it
is declared that [the first and last of these are the same and therefore
there are really only four Devîs.
The legend of Kuñjarakarṇa relates how a devout Yaksha of that

name went to Bodhicitta[433] and asked of Vairocana instruction in
the holy law and more especially as to the mysteries of rebirth.
Vairocana did not refuse but bade his would-be pupil first visit the
realms of Yama, god of the dead. Kuñjarakarṇa did so, saw the
punishments of the underworld, including the torments prepared for
a friend of his, whom he was able to warn on his return. Yama gave
him some explanations respecting the alternation of life and death
and he was subsequently privileged to receive a brief but more
general exposition of doctrine from Vairocana himself.
This doctrine is essentially a variety of Indian pantheism but peculiar

in its terminology inasmuch as Vairocana, like Kṛishṇa in the
Bhagavad-gîtâ, proclaims himself to be the All-God and not merely
the chief of the five Buddhas. He quotes with approval the saying
“you are I: I am you” and affirms the identity of Buddhism and
Śivaism. Among the monks[434] there are no muktas (i.e. none who
have attained liberation) because they all consider as two what is
really one. “The Buddhists say, we are Bauddhas, for the Lord
Buddha is our highest deity: we are not the same as the Śivaites, for
the Lord Śiva is for them the highest deity.” The Śivaites are
represented as saying that the five Kuśikas are a development or
incarnations of the five Buddhas. “Well, my son” is the conclusion,
“These are all one: we are Śiva, we are Buddha.”
169
In this curious exposition the author seems to imply that his doctrine
is different from that of ordinary Buddhists, and to reprimand them
more decidedly than Śivaites. He several times uses the phrase Namo
Bhaṭâra, namaḥ Śivâya (Hail, Lord: hail to Śiva) yet he can hardly be
said to favour the Śivaites on the whole, for his All-God is Vairocana
who once (but only once) receives the title of Buddha. The doctrine
attributed to the Śivaites that the five Kusikas are identical with the
superhuman Buddhas remains obscure[435]. These five personages
are said to be often mentioned in old Javanese literature but to be
variously [enumerated[436]. They are identified with the five Indras,
but these again are said to be the five senses (indriyas). Hence we
can find a parallel to this doctrine in the teaching of the
Kamahâyânikan that the five Buddhas correspond to the five senses.
Two other special theses are enounced in the story of Kuñjarakarṇa.

The first is Vairocana’s analysis of a human being, which makes it
consist of five Atmans or souls, called respectively Atman,
Cetanâtman, Parâtman, Nirâtman and Antarâtman, which somehow
correspond to the five elements, five senses and five Skandhas. The
singular list suggests that the author was imperfectly acquainted
with the meaning of the Sanskrit words employed and the whole
terminology is strange in a Buddhist writer. Still in the later
Upanishads[437] the epithet pancâtmaka is applied to the human
body, especially in the Garbha Upanishad which, like the passage
here under consideration, gives a psychophysiological explanation of
the development of an embryo into a human being.
The second thesis is put in the mouth of Yama. He states that when a
being has finished his term in purgatory he returns to life in this
world first as a worm or insect, then successively as a higher animal
and a human being, first diseased or maimed and finally perfect. No
parallel has yet been quoted to this account of metempsychosis.
Thus the Kuñjarakarṇa contains peculiar views which are probably

sectarian or individual. On the other hand their apparent singularity
may be due to our small knowledge of old Javanese literature.
Though other writings are not known to extol Vairocana as being
Śiva and Buddha in one, yet they have no scruple in identifying
Buddhist and Brahmanic deities or connecting them by some system
of emanations, as we have already seen in the Kamahâyânikan. Such
an identity is still more definitely proclaimed in the old Javanese
version of the Sutasoma Jâtaka[438]. It is called Purushâda-Śânta and
was [composed by Tantular who lived at Madjapahit in the reign of
Râjasanagara (1350-1389 A.D.). In the Indian original Sutasoma is
170
one of the previous births of Gotama. But the Javanese writer

describes him as an Avatâra of the Buddha who is Brahmâ, Vishṇu
and Iśvara, and he states that “The Lord Buddha is not different
from Śiva the king of the gods.... They are distinct and they are one.
In the Law is no dualism.” The superhuman Buddhas are identified
with various Hindu gods and also with the five senses. Thus
Amitâbha is Mahâdeva and Amoghasiddhi is Vishṇu. This is only a
slight variation of the teaching in the Kamahâyânikan. There
Brahmanic deities emanate from Śâkyamuni through various
Bodhisattvas and Buddhas: here the Buddha spirit is regarded as
equivalent to the Hindu Trimûrti and the various aspects of this
spirit can be described in either Brahmanic or Buddhistic
terminology though in reality all Buddhas, Bodhisattvas and gods
are one. But like the other authors quoted, Tantular appears to lean
to the Buddhist side of these equations, especially for didactic
purposes. For instance he says that meditation should be guided “by
Lokeśvara’s word and Śâkyamuni’s spirit.”
Thus it will be seen that if we take Javanese epigraphy, monuments

and literature together with Chinese notices, they to some extent
confirm one another and enable us to form an outline picture,
though with many gaps, of the history of thought and religion in the
island. Fa-Hsien tells us that in 418 A.D. Brahmanism flourished (as
is testified by the inscriptions of Pûrṇavarman) but that the
Buddhists were not worth mentioning. Immediately afterwards,
probably in 423, Guṇavarman is said to have converted Shê-po, if
that be Java, to Buddhism, and as he came from Kashmir he was
probably a Sarvâstivâdin. Other monks are mentioned as having
visited the southern seas[439]. About 690 I-Ching says that
Buddhism of the Mûlasarvâstivâdin school was flourishing in
Sumatra, which he visited, and in the other islands of the
Archipelago. The remarkable series of Buddhist monuments in mid
Java [extending from about 779 to 900 A.D. confirms his statement.
But two questions arise. Firstly, is there any explanation of this
sudden efflorescence of Buddhism in the Archipelago, and next,
what was its doctrinal character? If, as Târanâtha says, the disciples
of Vasubandhu evangelized the countries of the East, their influence
might well have been productive about the time of I-Ching’s visit.
But in any case during the sixth and seventh centuries religious
travellers must have been continually journeying between India and
China, in both directions, and some of them must have landed in the
171
Archipelago. At the beginning of the sixth century Buddhism was

not yet decadent in India and was all the fashion in China. It is not
therefore surprising if it was planted in the islands lying on the
route. It may be, as indicated above, that some specially powerful
body of Hindus coming from the region of Gujarat and professing
Buddhism founded in Java a new state.
As to the character of this early Javanese Buddhism we have the

testimony of I-Ching that it was of the Mûlasarvâstivâdin school and
Hinayanist. He wrote of what he had seen in Sumatra but of what he
knew only by hearsay in Java and his statement offers some
difficulties. Probably Hinayanism was introduced by Guṇavarman
but was superseded by other teachings which were imported from
time to time after they had won for themselves a position in India.
For the temple of Kalasan (A.D. 779) is dedicated to Târâ and the
inscription found there speaks of the Mahayana with veneration. The
later Buddhism of Java has literary records which, so far as I know,
are unreservedly Mahayanist but probably the sculptures of
Boroboedoer are the most definite expression which we shall ever
have of its earlier phases. Since they contain images of the five
superhuman Buddhas and of numerous Bodhisattvas, they can
hardly be called anything but Mahayanist. But on the other hand the
personality of Śâkyamuni is emphasized; his life and previous births
are pictured in a long series of sculptures and Maitreya is duly
honoured. Similar collections of pictures and images may be seen in
Burma which differ doctrinally from those in Java chiefly by
substituting the four human Buddhas[440] and Maitreya for the
superhuman Buddhas. But Mahayanist teaching declares that these
human Buddhas are reflexes of [counterparts of the superhuman
Buddhas so that the difference is not great.
Mahayanist Buddhism in Camboja and at a later period in Java itself

was inextricably combined with Hinduism, Buddha being either
directly identified with Śiva or regarded as the primordial spirit
from which Śiva and all gods spring. But the sculptures of
Boroboedoer do not indicate that the artists knew of any such
amalgamation nor have inscriptions been found there, as in
Camboja, which explain this compound theology. It would seem that
Buddhism and Brahmanism co-existed in the same districts but had
not yet begun to fuse doctrinally. The same condition seems to have
prevailed in western India during the seventh and eighth centuries,
for the Buddhist caves of Ellora, though situated in the
neighbourhood of Brahmanic buildings and approximating to them
172
in style, contain sculptures which indicate a purely Buddhist cultus

and not a mixed pantheon.
Our meagre knowledge of Javanese history makes it difficult to

estimate the spheres and relative strength of the two religions. In the
plains the Buddhist monuments are more numerous and also more
ancient and we might suppose that the temples of Prambanan
indicate the beginning of some change in belief. But the temples on
the Dieng plateau seem to be of about the same age as the oldest
Buddhist monuments. Thus nothing refutes the supposition that
Brahmanism existed in Java from the time of the first Hindu
colonists and that Buddhism was introduced after 400 A.D. It may be
that Boroboedoer and the Dieng plateau represent the religious
centres of two different kingdoms. But this supposition is not
necessary for in India, whence the Javanese received their ideas,
groups of temples are found of the same age but belonging to
different sects. Thus in the Khajraho group[441] some shrines are
Jain and of the rest some are dedicated to Śiva and some to Vishṇu.
The earliest records of Javanese Brahmanism, the inscriptions of

Pûrnavarman, are Vishnuite but the Brahmanism which prevailed in
the eighth and ninth centuries was in the main Śivaite, though not of
a strongly sectarian type. Brahmâ, Vishṇu and Śiva were all
worshipped both at Prambanan and on the Dieng but Śiva together
with Ganeśa, Durgâ, and Nandi [is evidently the chief deity. An
image of Śiva in the form of Bhaṭâra Guru or Mahâguru is installed
in one of the shrines at Prambanan. This deity is characteristic of
Javanese Hinduism and apparently peculiar to it. He is represented
as an elderly bearded man wearing a richly ornamented costume.
There is something in the pose and drapery which recalls Chinese art
and I think the figure is due to Chinese influence, for at the present
day many of the images found in the temples of Bali are clearly
imitated from Chinese models (or perhaps made by Chinese artists)
and this may have happened in earlier times. The Chinese annals
record several instances of religious objects being presented by the
Emperors to Javanese princes. Though Bhaṭâra Guru is only an
aspect of Śiva he is a sufficiently distinct personality to have a shrine
of his own like Ganeśa and Durgâ, in temples where the principal
image of Śiva is of another kind.
The same type of Brahmanism lasted at least until the erection of

Panataran (c. 1150). The temple appears to have been dedicated to
Śiva but like Prambanan it is ornamented with scenes from the
Ramayana and from Vishnuite Purânas[442]. The literature which
173
can be definitely assigned to the reigns of Djajabaja and Erlangga is

Brahmanic in tone but both literature and monuments indicate that
somewhat later there was a revival of Buddhism. Something similar
appears to have happened in other countries. In Camboja the
inscriptions of Jayavarman VII (c. 1185 A.D.) are more definitely
Buddhist than those of his predecessors and in 1296 Chou Ta-kuan
regarded the country as mainly Buddhist. Parakrama Bahu of
Ceylon (1153-1186) was zealous for the faith and so were several
kings of Siam. I am inclined to think that this movement was a
consequence of the flourishing condition of Buddhism at Pagan in
Burma from 1050 to 1250. Pagan certainly stimulated religion in both
Siam and Ceylon and Siam reacted strongly on Camboja[443]. It is
true that the later Buddhism of Java was by no means of the Siamese
type, but probably the idea was current that the great kings of the
world were pious Buddhists and consequently in [most countries the
local form of Buddhism, whatever it was, began to be held in esteem.
Java had constant communication with Camboja and Champa and a
king of Madjapahit married a princess of the latter country. It is also
possible that a direct stimulus may have been received from India,
for the statement of Târanâtha[444] that when Bihar was sacked by
the Mohammedans the Buddhist teachers fled to other regions and
that some of them went to Camboja is not improbable.
But though the prestige of Buddhism increased in the thirteenth

century, no rupture with Brahmanism took place and Pali Buddhism
does not appear to have entered Java. The unity of the two religions
is proclaimed: Buddha and Siva are one. But the Kamahâyânikan
while admitting the Trimûrti makes it a derivative, and not even a
primary derivative, of the original Buddha spirit. It has been stated
that the religion of Java in the Madjapahit epoch was Sivaism with a
little Buddhism thrown in, on the understanding that it was merely
another method of formulating the same doctrine. It is very likely
that the bulk of the population worshipped Hindu deities, for they
are the gods of this world and dispense its good things. Yet the
natives still speak of the old religion as Buddhâgama; the old times
are “Buddha times” and even the flights of stairs leading up to the
Dieng plateau are called Buddha steps. This would hardly be so if in
the Madjapahit epoch Buddha had not seemed to be the most
striking figure in the non-Mohammedan religion. Also, the majority
of religious works which have survived from this period are
Buddhist. It is true that we have the Ramayana, the Bhârata Yuddha
and many other specimens of Brahmanic literature. But these,
especially in their Javanese dress, are belles lettres rather than
174
theology, whereas Kamahâyânikan and Kuñjarakarna are dogmatic

treatises. Hence it would appear that the religious life of Madjapahit
was rooted in Buddhism, but a most tolerant Buddhism which had
no desire to repudiate Brahmanism.
I have already briefly analysed the Sang Hyang Kamahâyânikan

which seems to be the most authoritative exposition of this creed.
The learned editor has collected many parallels from Tibetan and
Nepalese works and similar parallels between Javanese and Tibetan
iconography have been indicated by [Pleyte[445] and others. The
explanation must be that the late forms of Buddhist art and doctrine
which nourished in Magadha spread to Tibet and Nepal but were
also introduced into Java. The Kamahâyânikan appears to be a
paraphrase of a Sanskrit original, perhaps distorted and mutilated.
This original has not been identified with any work known to exist in
India but might well be a Mahayanist catechism composed there
about the eleventh century. The terminology of the treatise is
peculiar, particularly in calling the ultimate principle Advaya and
the more personal manifestation of it Divarûpa. The former term
may be paralleled in Hemacandra and the Amarakosha, which give
respectively as synonyms for Buddha, advaya (in whom is no
duality) and advayavâdin (who preaches no duality), but Divarûpa
has not been found in any other work[446]. It is also remarkable that
the Kamahâyânikan does not teach the doctrine of the three bodies of
Buddha[447]. It clearly states[448] that the Divarûpa is identical with
the highest being worshipped by various sects: with Paramaśûnya,
Paramaśiva, the Purusha of the followers of Kapila, the Nirguṇa of
the Vishnuites, etc. Many names of sects and doctrines are
mentioned which remain obscure, but the desire to represent them
all as essentially identical is obvious.
The Kamahâyânikan recognizes the theoretical identity of the

highest principles in Buddhism and Vishnuism[449] but it does not
appear that Vishṇu-Buddha was ever a popular conception like Śiva-
Buddha or that the compound deity called Śiva-Vishṇu, Hari-Hara,
Śaṇkara-Narâyaṇa, etc., so well known in Camboja, enjoyed much
honour in Java, Vishṇu is relegated to a distinctly secondary position
and the Javanese version of the Mahabharata is more distinctly
Śivaite than the Sanskrit text. Still he has a shrine at Prambanan, the
story of the Ramayana is depicted there and at Panataran, and
various [unedited manuscripts contain allusions to his worship,
more especially to his incarnation as Narasimha and to the Garuḍa
on which he rides[450].
175
At present nearly all the inhabitants of Java profess Islam although

the religion of a few tribes, such as the Tenggarese, is still a mixture
of Hinduism with indigenous beliefs. But even among nominal
Moslims some traces of the older creed survive. On festival days
such monuments as Boroboedoer and Prambanan are frequented by
crowds who, if they offer no worship, at least take pleasure in
examining the ancient statues. Some of these however receive more
definite honours: they are painted red and modest offerings of
flowers and fruit are laid before them. Yet the respect shown to
particular images seems due not to old tradition but to modern and
wrongheaded interpretations of their meaning. Thus at Boroboedoer
the relief which represents the good tortoise saving a shipwrecked
crew receives offerings from women because the small figures on the
tortoise’s back are supposed to be children. The minor forms of
Indian mythology still flourish. All classes believe in the existence of
raksasas, boetas (bhûtas) and widadaris (vidyâdharîs), who are
regarded as spirits similar to the Jinns of the Arabs. Lakshmî
survives in the female genius believed even by rigid Mohammedans
to preside over the cultivation of rice and the somewhat disreputable
sect known as Santri Birahis are said to adore devas and the forces of
nature[451]. Less obvious, but more important as more deeply
affecting the national character, is the tendency towards mysticism
and asceticism. What is known as ngelmoe[452] plays a considerable
part in the religious life of the modern Javanese. The word is simply
the Arabic ‘ilm (or knowledge) used in the sense of secret science. It
sometimes signifies mere magic but the higher forms of it, such as
the ngelmoe peling, are said to teach that the contemplative life is the
way to the knowledge of God and the attainment of supernatural
powers. With such [ngelmoe is often connected a belief in
metempsychosis, in the illusory nature of the world, and in the
efficacy of regulating the breath. Asceticism is still known under the
name of tåpå and it is said that there are many recluses who live on
alms and spend their time in meditation. The affinity of all this to
Indian religion is obvious, although the Javanese have no idea that it
is in any way incompatible with orthodox Islam.
Indian religion, which in Java is represented merely by the influence

of the past on the present, is not dead in Bali[453] where, though
much mixed with aboriginal superstitions, it is still a distinct and
national faith, able to hold its own against Mohammedanism and
Christianity[454].
176
The island of Bali is divided from the east coast of Java only by a
narrow strait but the inhabitants possess certain characters of their
own. They are more robust in build, their language is distinct from
Javanese though belonging to the same group, and even the alphabet
presents idiosyncrasies. Their laws, social institutions, customs and
calendar show many peculiarities, explicable on the supposition that
they have preserved the ancient usages of pre-Mohammedan Java.
At present the population is divided into the Bali-Agas or aborigines
and the Wong Madjapahit who profess to have immigrated from
that kingdom. The Chinese references[455] to Bali seem uncertain
but, if accepted, indicate that it was known in the middle ages as a
religious centre. It was probably a colony and dependency of
Madjapahit and when Madjapahit fell it became a refuge for those
who were not willing to accept Islam.
Caste is still a social institution in Bali, five classes being recognized,

namely Brahmans, Kshatriyas (Satriyas), Vaisyas (Visias), Sudras
and Parias. These distinctions are rigidly observed and though
intermarriage (which in former times was often punished with
death) is now permitted, the offspring are not recognized as
belonging to the caste of the superior parent. The bodies of the dead
are burned and Sati, which was formerly frequent, is believed still to
take place in noble families. Pork [is the only meat used and, as in
other Hindu countries, oxen are never slaughtered.
An idea of the Balinese religion may perhaps be given most easily by

describing some of the temples. These are very abundant: in the
neighbourhood of Boeleling (the capital) alone I have seen more than
ten of considerable size. As buildings they are not ancient, for the
stone used is soft and does not last much more than fifty years. But
when the edifices are rebuilt the ancient shape is preserved and what
we see in Bali to-day probably represents the style of the middle
ages. The temples consist of two or more courts surrounded by high
walls. Worship is performed in the open air: there are various
pyramids, seats, and small shrines like dovecots but no halls or
rooms. The gates are ornamented with the heads of monsters,
especially lions with large ears and winglike expansions at the side.
The outermost gate has a characteristic shape. It somewhat
resembles an Indian gopuram divided into two parts by a sharp,
clean cut in the middle and tradition quotes in explanation the story
of a king who was refused entrance to heaven but cleft a passage
through the portal with his sword.
177
In the outer court stand various sheds and hollow wooden cylinders
which when struck give a sound like bells. Another ornamented
doorway leads to the second court where are found some or all of
the following objects: (a) Sacred trees, especially Ficus elastica. (b)
Sheds with seats for human beings. It is said that on certain
occasions these are used by mediums who become inspired by the
gods and then give oracles, (c) Seats for the gods, generally under
sheds. They are of various kinds. There is usually one conspicuous
chair with an ornamental back and a scroll hanging behind it which
bears some such inscription as “This is the chair of the Bhatâra.” Any
deity may be invited to take this seat and receive worship.
Sometimes a stone linga is placed upon it. In some temples a stone
chair, called padmâsana, is set apart for Sûrya. (d) Small shrines two
or three feet high, set on posts or pedestals. When well executed they
are similar to the cabinets used in Japanese temples as shrines for
images but when, as often happens, they are roughly made they are
curiously like dovecots. On them are hung strips of dried palm-
leaves in bunches like the Japanese gohei. As a rule the shrines
contain no image but only a small seat and some [objects said to be
stones which are wrapped up in a cloth and called Artjeh[456]. In
some temples (e.g. the Bale Agoeng at Singaraja) there are erections
called Meru, supposed to represent the sacred mountain where the
gods reside. They consist of a stout pedestal or basis of brick on
which is erected a cabinet shrine as already described. Above this are
large round discs made of straw and wood, which may be described
as curved roofs or umbrellas. They are from three to five in number
and rise one above the other, with slight intervals between them. (e)
In many temples (for instance at Sangsit and Sawan) pyramidal
erections are found either in addition to the Merus or instead of
them. At the end of the second court is a pyramid in four stages or
terraces, often with prolongations at the side of the main structure or
at right angles to it. It is ascended by several staircases, consisting of
about twenty-five steps, and at the top are rows of cabinet shrines.
Daily worship is not performed in these temples but offerings are

laid before the shrines from time to time by those who need the help
of the gods and there are several annual festivals. The object of the
ritual is not to honour any image or object habitually kept in the
temple but to induce the gods, who are supposed to be hovering
round like birds, to seat themselves in the chair provided or to enter
into some sacred object, and then receive homage and offerings.
Thus both the ideas and ceremonial are different from those which
prevail in Hindu temples and have more affinity with Polynesian
178
beliefs. The deities are called Dewa, but many of them are
indigenous nature spirits (especially mountain spirits) such as Dewa
Gunung Agung, who are sometimes identified with Indian gods.
Somewhat different are the Durgâ temples. These are dedicated to

the spirits of the dead but the images of Durgâ and her attendant
Kaliki receive veneration in them, much as in Hindu temples. But on
the whole the Malay or Polynesian element seemed to me to be in
practice stronger than Hinduism in the religion of the Balinese and
this is borne out by the fact that the Pĕmangku or priest of the
indigenous gods ranks higher than the Pĕdanda or Brahman priest.
But by talking to Balinese one may obtain a different impression, for
they are proud of their connection with Madjapahit and Hinduism:
they [willingly speak of such subjects and Hindu deities are
constantly represented in works of art. Ganeśa, Indra, Vishṇu,
Kṛishṇa, Sûrya, Garuḍa and Śiva, as well as the heroes of the
Mahâbhârata, are well known but I have not heard of worship being
offered to any of them except Durgâ and Śiva under the form of the
linga. Figures of Vishṇu riding on Garuḍa are very common and a
certain class of artificers are able to produce images of all well
known Indian gods for those who care to order them. Many Indian
works such as the Veda, Mahâbhârata, Râmâyana, Brahmâpurâṇa
and Nîtiśâstra are known by name and are said to exist not in the
original Sanskrit but in Kawi. I fancy that they are rarely read by the
present generation, but any knowledge of them is much respected.
The Balinese though confused in their theology are greatly attached
to their religion and believe it is the ancient faith of Madjapahit.
I was unable to discover in the neighbourhood of Singarâja even

such faint traces of Buddhism as have been reported by previous
authors[457], but they may exist elsewhere. The expression Śiva-
Buddha was known to the Pĕdandas but seemed to have no living
significance, and perhaps certain families have a traditional and
purely nominal connection with Buddhism. In Durgâ temples
however I have seen figures described as Pusa, the Chinese
equivalent of Bodhisattva, and it seems that Chinese artists have
reintroduced into this miscellaneous pantheon an element of corrupt
Buddhism, though the natives do not recognize it as such.
The art of Bali is more fantastic than that of ancient Java. The carved
work, whether in stone or wood, is generally polychromatic. Figures
are piled one on the top of another as in the sculptures of Central
America and there is a marked tendency to emphasize projections.
Leaves and flowers are very deeply carved and such features as ears,
179
tongues and teeth are monstrously prolonged. Thus Balinese statues

and reliefs have a curiously bristling and scaly appearance and are
apt to seem barbaric, especially if taken separately[458]. Yet the
general aspect of the temples is not unpleasing. The brilliant colours
and [fantastic outlines harmonize with the tropical vegetation which
surrounds them and suggest that the guardian deities take shape as
gorgeous insects. Such bizarre figures are not unknown in Indian
mythology but in Balinese art Chinese influence is perhaps stronger
than Indian. The Chinese probably frequented the island as early as
the Hindus and are now found there in abundance. Besides the
statues called Pusa already mentioned, Chinese landscapes are often
painted behind the seats of the Devas and in the temple on the
Volcano Batoer, where a special place is assigned to all the Balinese
tribes, the Chinese have their own shrine. It is said that the temples
in southern Bali which are older and larger than those in the north
show even more decided signs of Chinese influence and are
surrounded by stone figures of Chinese as guardians.
FOOTNOTES:
[369] I have not been able to find anything more than casual and
second-hand statements to the effect that Indian antiquities have
been found in these islands.
[370] There is no lack of scholarly and scientific works about Java,

but they are mostly written in Dutch and dissertations on special
points are more numerous than general surveys of Javanese history,
literature and architecture. Perhaps the best general account of the
Hindu period in Java will be found in the chapter contributed by
Kern to the publication called Neerlands Indië (Amsterdam, 1911,
chap. VI. II. pp. 219-242). The abundant publications of the
Bataviaasch Genootschap van Kunsten en Wetenschappen comprise
Verhandelingen, Notulen, and the Tijdschrift voor Indische Taal-, Land-,
en Volkenkunde (cited here as Tijdschrift), all of which contain
numerous and important articles on history, philology, religion and
archæology. The last is treated specially in the publications called
Archaeologisch Onderzoek op Java en Madura. Veth’s Java, vols. I. and
IV. and various articles in the Encyclopaedie van Nederlandsch-Indië
may also be consulted. I have endeavoured to mention the more
important editions of Javanese books as well as works dealing
specially with the old religion in the notes to these chapters.
180
Although Dutch orthography is neither convenient nor familiar to

most readers I have thought it better to preserve it in transcribing
Javanese. In this system of transcription j = y; tj = ch; dj = j; sj = sh; w =
v; oe = u.
[371] Râm. IV. 40. 30. Yavadvîpam saptarâjyopaśobhitam

Suvarṇarûpyakadvîpam suvarṇakaramaṇḍitam.
[372] Ptolemy’s Geography, VII. 2. 29 (see also VIII. 27, 10). Ἰαβαδίου
(ἢ Σαβαδίου), ὅ σημαίνει κριθῆς, νῆσος. Εὐφορωτάτη δὲ λέγεται ἡ
νῆσος εἶναι καὶ ἔτι πλεῖστον χρυσὸν ποιεῖν, ἔχειν τε μητρόπολιν
ὄνομα Ἀργυρῆν ἐπῖ τοῖς δυσμικοῖς πέρασιν .
[373] The Milinda Pañhâ of doubtful but not very late date also
mentions voyages to China.
[374] Groeneveldt, Notes on the Malay Archipelago compiled from

Chinese sources, 1876 (cited below as Groeneveldt), p. 10. Confirmed
by the statement in the Ming annals book 324 that in 1432 the
Javanese said their kingdom had been founded 1376 years before.
[375] Kern in Versl. en Med. K. Ak. v. W. Afd. Lett. 3 Rks. I. 1884, pp. 5-
12.
[376] Chap. XL. Legge, p. 113, and Groeneveldt, pp. 6-9.
[377] He perhaps landed in the present district of Rembang “where

according to native tradition the first Hindu settlement was situated
at that time” (Groeneveldt, p. 9).
[378] Groeneveldt, p. 9. The transcriptions of Chinese characters

given in the following pages do not represent the modern sound but
seem justified (though they cannot be regarded as certain) by the
instances collected in Julien’s Méthode pour déchiffrer et transcrire les
noms sanscrits. Possibly the syllables Do-a-lo-pa-mo are partly
corrupt and somehow or other represent Pûrṇavarman.
[379] Kern in Versl. en Meded, Afd. Lett. 2 R. XI. D. 1882.
[380] Groeneveldt, pp. 12, 13.
[381] Groeneveldt, p. 14.
[382] History of Java, vol. II. chap. X.
181
[383] Jackson, Java and Cambodja. App. IV. in Bombay Gazetteer, vol. I.
part 1, 1896.
[384] It is also possible that when the Javanese traditions speak of

Kaling they mean the Malay Peninsula. Indians in those regions
were commonly known as Kaling because they came from Kalinga
and in time the parts of the Peninsula where they were numerous
were also called Kaling.
[385] See for this question Pelliot in B.E.F.E.O. 1904, pp. 274 ff. Also
Schlegel in T’oung Pao, 1899, p. 247, and Chavannes, ib. 1904, p. 192.
[386] Chap. xxxix. Schiefner, p. 262.
[387] Though he expressly includes Camboja and Champa in Koki, it

is only right to say that he mentions Nas-gling ( = Yava-dvipa)
separately in another enumeration together with Ceylon. But if
Buddhists passed in any numbers from India to Camboja and vice
versa, they probably appeared in Java about the same time, or rather
later.
[388] See Kamaha. pp. 9, 10, and Watters, Yüan Chwang, II. pp. 209-
214.
[389] They preserve to some extent the old civilization of Madjapahit.

See the article “Tengereezen” in Encyclopaedie van Nederlandsch-Indië.
[390] See Kern, Kawi-studien Arjuna-vivâha, I. and II. 1871. Juynboll,

Drie Boeken van het oudjavaansche Mahâbhârata, 1893, and id.
Wirâtaparwwa, 1912. This last is dated Śaka 918 = 996 A.D.
[391] Or Jayabaya.
[392] See Râmâyana. Oudjavaansche Heldendicht, edited Kern, 1900,

and Wṛtta Sañcaya, edited and translated by the same, 1875.
[393] Composed in 1613 A.D.
[394] Groeneveldt, p. 14.
[395] In the work commonly called “Nâgarakrĕtâgama” (ed.

Brandes, Verhand. Bataav. Genootschap. LIV. 1902), but it is stated that
its real name is “Deçawarṇnana.” See Tijdschrift, LVI. 1914, p. 194.
[396] Or Jayakatong.
[397] Groeneveldt, pp. 20-34.
182
[398] Groeneveldt, pp. 34-53.
[399] Near Soerabaja. It is said that he married a daughter of the king

of Champa, and that the king of Madjapahit married her sister. For
the connection between the royal families of Java and Champa at this
period see Maspéro in T’oung Pao, 1911, pp. 595 ff., and the
references to Champa in Nâgarakrĕtagama, 15, 1, and 83, 4.
[400] See Raffles, chap, X, for Javanese traditions respecting the

decline and fall of Madjapahit.
[401] See Takakusu, A record of the Buddhist religion, especially pp. xl

to xlvi.
[402] In another pronunciation the characters are read San-fo-chai.

The meaning appears to be The Three Buddhas.
[403] E.g. Si-li-ma-ha-la-sha ( = Śrîmahârâjâ) Si-li-tieh-hwa (perhaps =

Śrîdeva).
[404] The conquest however was incomplete and about 1400 a

Chinese adventurer ruled there some time. The name was changed
to Ku-Kang, which is said to be still the Chinese name for
Palembang.
[405] The Ming annals expressly state that the name was changed to
Atjeh about 1600.
[406] For the identification of Po-li see Groeneveldt, p. 80, and Hose
and McDougall, Pagan Tribes of Borneo, chap. II. It might be identified
with Bali, but it is doubtful if Hindu civilization had spread to that
island or even to east Java in the sixth century.
[407] See Hose and McDougall, l.c. p. 12.
[408] See Kern, “Over de Opschriften uit Koetei” in Verslagen Meded.

Afd. Lett. 2 R. XI. D. Another inscription apparently written in
debased Indian characters but not yet deciphered has been found in
Sanggau, south-west Borneo.
[409] Groeneveldt, p. 81. The characters may be read Kau-ḍi-nya

according to Julien’s method. The reference is to Liang annals, book
54.
183
[410] See Pleyte, Die Buddhalegende in den Sculpturen von Borobudur.

But he points out that the version of the Lalita Vistara followed by
the artist is not quite the same as the one that we possess.
[411] Amitâbha, Amoghasiddhi, Ratnasambhava, Akshobhya,

Vairocana, sometimes called Dhyânî Buddhas, but it does not seem
that this name was in common use in Java or elsewhere. The
Kamahâyânikan calls them the Five Tathâgatas.
[412] So in the Kunjarakarna, for which see below. The

Kamahâyânikan teaches an elaborate system of Buddha emanations
but for purposes of worship it is not quite clear which should be
adored as the highest.
[413] Fergusson, History of Indian and Eastern Architecture, ed. 1910,

vol. II. p. 439.
[414] See Archaeologisch Onderzoek op Java en Madura, I. “Tjandi

Djago,” 1904; II. “Tj. Singasari en Panataran,” 1909.
[415] See Knebel in Tijds. voor Indische T., L. en Volkenkunde, 41, 1909,
p. 27.
[416] See passages quoted in Archaeol. Onderzoek, I. pp. 96-97.
[417] Hayagrîva however may be regarded as a Brahmanic god

adopted by the Buddhists.
[418] See for reasons and references Archaeol. Onderzoek, II. pp. 36-40.
The principal members of the king’s household probably committed
suicide during the funeral ceremonies.
[419] Kern in Tijds. voor T., L. en Volkenkunde, Deel LII. 1910, p. 107.
Similarly in Burma Alompra was popularly regarded as a
Bodhisattva.
[420] Sanskrit Kavi, a poet. See for Javanese literature Van der Tuuk
in J.R.A.S. XIII. 1881, p. 42, and Hinloopen Labberton, ib. 1913, p. 1.
Also the article “Litteratuur” in the Encyc. van Nederlandsch-Indië, and
many notices in the writings of Kern and Veth.
[421] Edited by Gunning, 1903.
[422] A fragment of it is printed in Notulen. Batav. Gen. LII. 1914, 108.
184
[423] Episodes of the Indian epics have also been used as the subjects
of Javanese dramas. See Juynboll, Indonesische en achterindische
tooneelvoorstellingen uit het Râmâyana, and Hinloopen Labberton,
Pepakem Sapanti Sakoentala, 1912.
[424] Juynboll, Drie Boeken van het Oudjavaansche Mahâbhârata, p. 28.
[425] Archaeol. Onderzoek, I. p. 98. This statement is abundantly

confirmed by Krom’s index of the proper names in the
Nâgarakrĕtâgama in Tijdschrift, LVI. 1914, pp. 495 ff.
[426] Edited with transl. and notes by J. Kat, ‘s Gravenhage, 1910.
[427] Edited with transl. by H. Kern in Verh. der K. Akademie van

Wetenschappen te Amsterdam. Afd. Lett. N.R. III. 3. 1901.
[428] But this probably represents nizbâṇa and is not a Pali form. Cf.
Bajra, Bâyu for Vajra, Vâyu.
[429] Adyâbhishiktâyushmanta, p. 30. Prâptam buddhatvam

bhavadbhir, ib. and Esha mârga varah śrîmân mahâyâna mahodayah
Yena yûyam gamishyanto bhavishyatha Tathâgatâh.
[430] Dâna, śîla, kshânti, vîrya, dhyâna, prajñâ.
[431] Maitrî, karunâ, muditâ, upekshâ.
[432] The Kâraṇḍavyûha teaches a somewhat similar doctrine of

creative emanations. Avalokita, Brahmâ, Śiva, Vishṇu and others all
are evolved from the original Buddha spirit and proceed to evolve
the world.
[433] The use of this word, as a name for the residence of Vairocana,
seems to be peculiar to our author.
[434] This term may include Śivaite ascetics as well as Buddhist

monks.
[435] See further discussion in Kern’s edition, p. 16.
[436] As are the Panchpirs in modern India.
[437] Garbha. Up. 1 and 3, especially the phrase asmin pancâtmake

śarîre. Piṇḍa Up. 2. Bhinne pancâtmake dehe. Mahâ Nâr. Up. 23. Sa
vâ esha purushaḥ pancadhâ pancâtmâ.
185
[438] See Kern, “Over de Vermenging van Civaisme en Buddhisme

op Jâva” in Vers. en Meded. der Kon. Akad. van Wet. Afd. Lett. 3 R. 5
Deel, 1888.
For the Sutasomajâtaka see Speyer’s translation of the Jâtakamâlâ,

pp. 291-313, with his notes and references. It is No. 537 in the Pali
Collection of Jâtakas.
[439] See Nanjio Cat. Nos. 137, 138.
[440] Gotama, Kassapa, Konâgamana and Kakusandha.
[441] About 950-1050 A.D. Fergusson, Hist. of Indian Architecture, II.

p. 141.
[442] See Knebel, “Recherches préparatoires concernant Krishna et

les bas reliefs des temples de Java” in Tijdschrift, LI. 1909, pp. 97-174.
[443] In Camboja the result seems to have been double. Pali

Buddhism entered from Siam and ultimately conquered all other
forms of religion, but for some time Mahayanist Buddhism, which
was older in Camboja, revived and received Court patronage.
[444] Chap. 37.
[445] “Bijdrage tot de Kennis van het Mahâyâna opJava” in Bijd. tot
de Taal Lund en Volkenkunde van Nederlandsch-Indië, 1901 and 1902.
[446] This use of advaya and advayavâdin strengthens the suspicion

that the origins of the Advaita philosophy are to be sought in
Buddhism.
[447] It uses the word trikâya but expressly defines it as meaning

Kâya, vâk and citta.
[448] In a passage which is not translated from the Sanskrit and may
therefore reflect the religious condition of Java.
[449] So too in the Sutasoma Jâtaka Amoghasiddhi is said to be

Vishṇu.
[450] See Juynboll in Bijdragen tot de Taal Land en Volkenkunde van

Ned.-Indië, 1908, pp. 412-420.
[451] Veth, Java, vol. IV. p. 154. The whole chapter contains much
information about the Hindu elements in modern Javanese religion.
186
[452] See Veth, l.c. and ngelmoe in Encycl. van Nederlandsch-Indië.
[453] Also to some extent in Lombok. The Balinese were formerly the
ruling class in this island and are still found there in considerable
numbers.
[454] It has even been suggested that hinduized Malays carried some
faint traces of Indian religion to Madagascar. See T’oung Pao 1906, p.
93, where Zanahari is explained as Yang ( = God in Malay) Hari.
[455] Groeneveldt, pp. 19, 58, 59.
[456] This word appears to be the Sanskrit area, an image for

worship.
[457] E.g. Van Eerde, “Hindu Javaansche en Balische Eeredienst” in

Bijd. T.L. en Volkenkunde van Nederlandsch-Indië, 1910. I visited Bali in
1911.
[458] See Pleyte, Indonesian Art, 1901, especially the seven-headed

figure in plate XVI said to be Krishna.
187
CHAPTER XLI
CENTRAL ASIA
The term Central Asia is here used to denote the Tarim basin,
without rigidly excluding neighbouring countries such as the Oxus
region and Badakshan. This basin is a depression surrounded on
three sides by high mountains: only on the east is the barrier
dividing it from China relatively low. The water of the whole area
discharges through the many branched Tarim river into Lake
Lobnor. This so-called lake is now merely a flooded morass and the
basin is a desert with occasional oases lying chiefly near its edges.
The fertile portions were formerly more considerable but a quarter of
a century ago this remote and lonely region interested no one but a
few sportsmen and geographers. The results of recent exploration
have been important and surprising. The arid sands have yielded not
only ruins, statues and frescoes but whole libraries written in a
dozen languages. The value of such discoveries for the general
history of Asia is clear and they are of capital importance for our
special subject, since during many centuries the Tarim region and its
neighbouring lands were centres and highways for Buddhism and
possibly the scene of many changes whose origin is now obscure.
But I am unfortunate in having to discuss Central Asian Buddhism
before scholars have had time to publish or even catalogue
completely the store of material collected and the reader must
remember that the statements in this chapter are at best tentative and
incomplete. They will certainly be supplemented and probably
corrected as year by year new documents and works of art are made
known.
Tarim, in watery metaphor, is not so much a basin as a pool in a tidal

river flowing alternately to and from the sea. We can imagine that in
such a pool creatures of very different provenance might be found
together. So currents both from east to west and from west to east
passed through the Tarim, leaving behind whatever could live there:
Chinese administration and [civilization from the east: Iranians from
the west, bearing with them in the stream fragments that had drifted
from Asia Minor and Byzantium, while still other currents brought
Hindus and Tibetans from the south.
188
One feature of special interest in the history of the Tarim is that it

was in touch with Bactria and the regions conquered by Alexander
and through them with western art and thought. Another is that its
inhabitants included not only Iranian tribes but the speakers of an
Aryan language hitherto unknown, whose presence so far east may
oblige us to revise our views about the history of the Aryan race. A
third characteristic is that from the dawn of history to the middle
ages warlike nomads were continually passing through the country.
All these people, whether we call them Iranians, Turks or Mongols
had the same peculiarity: they had little culture of their own but they
picked up and transported the ideas of others. The most remarkable
example of this is the introduction of Islam into Europe and India.
Nothing quite so striking happened in earlier ages, yet tribes similar
to the Turks brought Manichæism and Nestorian Christianity into
China and played no small part in the introduction of Buddhism.
A brief catalogue of the languages represented in the manuscripts

and inscriptions discovered will give a safe if only provisional idea
of the many influences at work in Central Asia and its importance as
a receiving and distributing centre. The number of tongues
simultaneously in use for popular or learned purposes was
remarkably large. To say nothing of great polyglot libraries like Tun-
huang, a small collection at Toyog is reported as containing Indian,
Manichæan, Syriac, Sogdian, Uigur and Chinese books. The writing
materials employed were various like the idioms and include
imported palm leaves, birch bark, plates of wood or bamboo, leather
and paper, which last was in use from the first century A.D.
onwards. In this dry atmosphere all enjoyed singular longevity.
Numerous Sanskrit writings have been found, all dealing with

religious or quasi religious subjects, as medicine and grammar were
then considered to be. Relatively modern Mahayanist literature is
abundant but greater interest attaches to portions of an otherwise
lost Sanskrit canon which agree in substance though not verbally
with the corresponding passages in the Pali Canon and are
apparently the original text from [which much of the Chinese
Tripitaka was translated. The manuscripts hitherto published
include Sûtras from the Samyukta and Ekottara Agamas, a
considerable part of the Dharmapada, and the Prâtimoksha of the
Sarvâstivâdin school. Fa-Hsien states that the monks of Central Asia
were all students of the language of India and even in the seventh
century Hsüan Chuang tells us the same of Kucha. Portions of a
Sanskrit grammar have been found near Turfan and in the earlier
period at any rate Sanskrit was probably understood in polite and
189
learned society. Some palm leaves from Ming-Ŏi contain fragments

of two Buddhist religious dramas, one of which is the Sâriputra-
prakaraṇa of Aśvaghosha. The handwriting is believed to date from
the epoch of Kanishka so that we have here the oldest known
Sanskrit manuscripts, as well as the oldest specimens of Indian
dramatic art[459]. They are written like the Indian classical dramas
in Sanskrit and various forms of Prâkrit. The latter represent hitherto
unknown stages in the development of Indian dialects and some of
them are closely allied to the language of Aśoka’s inscriptions.
Another Prâkrit text is the version of the Dharmapada written in
Kharoshṭhî characters and discovered by the Dutreuil de Rhins
mission near Khotan[460], and numerous official documents in this
language and alphabet have been brought home by Stein from the
same region. It is probable that they are approximately coeval with
the Kushan dynasty in India and the use of an Indian vernacular as
well as of Sanskrit in Central Asia shows that the connection
between the two countries was not due merely to the introduction of
Buddhism.
Besides these hitherto unknown forms of Prâkrit, Central Asia has

astonished the learned world with two new languages, both written
in a special variety of the Brahmi alphabet called Central Asian
Gupta. One is sometimes called Nordarisch and is regarded by some
authorities as the language of the Śakas whose incursions into India
appear to have begun about the second century B.C. and by others as
the language of the Kushans and of Kanishka’s Empire. It is stated
that the basis of the language is Iranian but strongly influenced by
Indian [idioms[461]. Many translations of Mahayanist literature (for
instance the Suvarṇaprabhâsa, Vajracchedikâ and Aparimitâyus
Sûtras) were made into it and it appears to have been spoken
principally in the southern part of the Tarim basin[462]. The other
new language was spoken principally on its northern edge and has
been called Tokharian, which name implies that it was the tongue of
the Tokhars or Indoscyths[463]. But there is no proof of this and it is
safer to speak of it as the language of Kucha or Kuchanese. It exists
in two different dialects known as A and B whose geographical
distribution is uncertain but numerous official documents dated in
the first half of the seventh century show that it was the ordinary
speech of Kucha and Turfan. It was also a literary language and
among the many translations discovered are versions in it of the
Dharmapada and Vinaya. It is extremely interesting to find that this
language spoken by the early and perhaps original inhabitants of
Kucha not only belongs to the Aryan family but is related more
190
nearly to the western than the eastern branch. It cannot be classed in

the Indo-Iranian group but shows perplexing affinities to Latin,
Greek, Keltic, Slavonic and Armenian[464]. It is possible that it
influenced Chinese Buddhist literature[465].
Besides the “Nordarisch” mentioned above which was written in

Brahmi, three other Iranian languages have left literary remains in
Central Asia, all written in an alphabet of Aramaic origin. Two of
them apparently represent the speech of south-western Persia under
the Sassanids, and of north-western Persia under the Arsacids. The
texts preserved in both are Manichæan but the third Iranian
language, or Sogdian, has [a more varied literary content and offers
Buddhist, Manichæan and Christian texts, apparently in that
chronological order. It was originally the language of the region
round Samarkand but acquired an international character for it was
used by merchants throughout the Tarim basin and spread even to
China. Some Christian texts in Syriac have also been found.
The Orkhon inscriptions exhibit an old Turkish dialect written in the

characters commonly called Runes and this Runic alphabet is used in
manuscripts found at Tun-huang and Miran but those hitherto
published are not Buddhist. But another Turkish dialect written in
the Uigur alphabet, which is derived from the Syriac, was (like
Sogdian) extensively used for Buddhist, Manichæan and Christian
literature. The name Uigur is perhaps more correctly applied to the
alphabet than the language[466] which appears to have been the
literary form of the various Turkish idioms spoken north and south
of the Tien-shan. The use of this dialect for Buddhist literature
spread considerably when the Uigurs broke the power of Tibet in the
Tarim basin about 860 and founded a kingdom themselves: it
extended into China and lasted long, for Sûtras in Uigur were
printed at Peking in 1330 and Uigur manuscripts copied in the reign
of K’ang Hsi (1662-1723) are reported from a monastery near
Suchow[467]. I am informed that a variety of this alphabet written in
vertical columns is still used in some parts of Kansu where a Turkish
dialect is spoken. Though Turkish was used by Buddhists in both the
east and west of the Tarim basin, it appears to have been introduced
into Khotan only after the Moslim conquest. Another Semitic script,
hitherto unknown and found only in a fragmentary form, is believed
to be the writing of the White Huns or Hephthalites.
As the Tibetans were the predominant power in the Tarim basin

from at least the middle of the eighth until the middle of the ninth
century, it is not surprising that great stores of Tibetan manuscripts
191
have been found in the regions of Khotan, Miran and Tun-huang. In

Turfan, as lying more to the north, traces of Tibetan influence,
though not absent, are fewer. The [documents discovered must be
anterior to the ninth century and comprise numerous official and
business papers as well as Buddhist translations[468]. They are of
great importance for the history of the Tibetan language and also
indicate that at the period when they were written Buddhism at most
shared with the Bön religion the allegiance of the Tibetans. No
Manichæan or Christian translations in Tibetan have yet been
discovered.
Vast numbers of Chinese texts both religious and secular are

preserved in all the principal centres and offer many points of
interest among which two may be noticed. Firstly the posts on the
old military frontier near Tun-huang have furnished a series of dated
documents ranging from 98 B.C. to 153 A.D.[469] There is therefore
no difficulty in admitting that there was intercourse between China
and Central Asia at this period. Secondly, some documents of the
T’ang dynasty are Manichæan, with an admixture of Buddhist and
Taoist ideas[470].
The religious monuments of Central Asia comprise stupas, caves and

covered buildings used as temples or vihâras. Buddhist, Manichæan
and Christian edifices have been discovered but apparently no
shrines of the Zoroastrian religion, though it had many adherents in
these regions, and though representations of Hindu deities have
been found, Hinduism is not known to have existed apart from
Buddhism[471]. Caves decorated for Buddhist worship are found not
only in the Tarim basin but at Tun-huang on the frontier of China
proper, near Ta-t’ung-fu in northern Shensi, and in the defile of
Lung-mên in the province of Ho-nan. The general scheme and style
of these caves are similar, but while in the last two, as in most Indian
caves, the figures and ornaments are true sculpture, in the caves of
Tun-huang and the Tarim not only is the wall prepared for frescoes,
but even the figures are executed in stucco. This form of decoration
was congenial to Central Asia for the images which embellished the
temple walls were moulded in the same fashion. Temples and caves
were sometimes combined, for instance at Bäzäklik where many
edifices were erected on a terrace in front [of a series of caves
excavated in a mountain corner. Few roofed buildings are well
preserved but it seems certain that some were high quadrilateral
structures, crowned by a dome of a shape found in Persia, and that
others had barrel-shaped roofs, apparently resembling the chaityas
of Ter and Chezarla[472]. Le Coq states that this type of architecture
192
is also found in Persia[473]. The commonest type of temple was a

hall having at its further end a cella, with a passage behind to allow
of circumambulation. Such halls were frequently enlarged by the
addition of side rooms and sometimes a shrine was enclosed by
several rectangular courts[474].
Many stupas have been found either by themselves or in

combination with other buildings. The one which is best preserved
(or at any rate reproduced in greatest detail)[475] is the Stupa of
Rawak. It is set in a quadrangle bounded by a wall which was
ornamented on both its inner and outer face by a series of gigantic
statues in coloured stucco. The dome is set upon a rectangular base
disposed in three stories and this arrangement is said to characterize
all the stupas of Turkestan as well as those of the Kabul valley and
adjacent regions.
This architecture appears to owe nothing to China but to include

both Indian (especially Gandharan) and Persian elements. Many of
its remarkable features, if not common elsewhere, are at least widely
scattered. Thus some of the caves at Ming-Ŏi have dome-like roofs
ornamented with a pattern composed of squares within squares, set
at an angle with each other. A similar ornamentation is reported
from Pandrenthan in Kashmir and from Bamian[476].
The antiquities of Central Asia include frescoes executed on the walls

of caves and buildings, and paintings on silk paper[477]. The origin
and affinities of this art are still the subject of investigation and any
discussion of them would lead me too far from my immediate
subject. But a few statements can be [made with some confidence.
The influence of Gandhara is plain in architecture, sculpture, and
painting. The oldest works may be described as simply Gandharan
but this early style is followed by another which shows a
development both in technique and in mythology. It doubtless
represents Indian Buddhist art as modified by local painters and
sculptors. Thus in the Turfan frescoes the drapery and composition
are Indian but the faces are eastern asiatic. Sometimes however they
represent a race with red hair and blue eyes.
On the whole the paintings testify to the invasion of Far Eastern art
by the ideas and designs of Indian Buddhism rather than to an equal
combination of Indian and Chinese influence but in some forms of
decoration, particularly that employed in the Khan’s palace at
Idiqutshähri[478], Chinese style is predominant. It may be too that
the early pre-buddhist styles of painting in China and Central Asia
193
were similar. In the seventh century a Khotan artist called Wei-ch’ih

Po-chih-na migrated to China, where both he and his son Wei-ch’ih
I-sêng acquired considerable fame.
Persian influence also is manifest in many paintings. A striking

instance may be seen in two plates published by Stein[479]
apparently representing the same Boddhisattva. In one he is of the
familiar Indian type: the other seems at first sight a miniature of
some Persian prince, black-bearded and high-booted, but the figure
has four arms. As might be expected, it is the Manichæan paintings
which are least Indian in character. They represent a “lost late
antique school[480]“ which often recalls Byzantine art and was
perhaps the parent of mediæval Persian miniature painting.
The paintings of Central Asia resemble its manuscripts. It is

impossible to look through any collection of them without feeling
that currents of art and civilization flowing from neighbouring and
even from distant lands have met and mingled in this basin. As the
reader turns over the albums of Stein, Grünwedel or Le Coq he is
haunted by strange reminiscences and resemblances, and wonders if
they are merely coincidences or whether the pedigrees of these
pictured gods and men really [stretch across time and space to far off
origins. Here are coins and seals of Hellenic design, nude athletes
that might adorn a Greek vase, figures that recall Egypt, Byzantium
or the Bayeux tapestry, with others that might pass for Christian
ecclesiastics; Chinese sages, Kṛishṇa dancing to the sound of his
flute, frescoes that might be copied from Ajanta, winged youths to be
styled cupids or cherubs according to our mood[481].
Stein mentions[482] that he discovered a Buddhist monastery in the

terminal marshes of the Helmund in the Persian province of Seistan,
containing paintings of a Hellenistic type which show “for the first
time in situ the Iranian link of the chain which connects the Græco-
Buddhist art of extreme north-west India with the Buddhist art of
Central Asia and the Far East.”
Central Asian art is somewhat wanting in spontaneity. Except when

painting portraits (which are many) the artists do not seem to go to
nature or even their own imagination and visions. They seem
concerned to reproduce some religious scene not as they saw it but
as it was represented by Indian or other artists.
194
Only one side of Central Asian history can be written with any
completeness, namely its relations with China. Of these some
account with dates can be given, thanks to the Chinese annals which
incidentally supply valuable information about earlier periods. But
unfortunately these relations were often interrupted and also the
political record does not always furnish the data which are of most
importance for the history of Buddhism. Still there is no better
framework available for arranging our data. But even were our
information much fuller, we should probably find the history of
Central Asia scrappy and disconnected. Its cities were united by no
bond of common blood or language, nor can any one of them have
had a continuous development in institutions, letters or art. These
were imported in a mature form and more or less assimilated in a
precocious Augustan age, only to be overwhelmed in some
catastrophe which, if not merely destructive, at least brought the
ideas and baggage of another race.
[It was under the Emperor Wu-ti (140-87 B.C.) of the Han dynasty
that the Chinese first penetrated into the Tarim basin. They had
heard that the Hsiung-nu, of whose growing power they were afraid,
had driven the Yüeh-chih westwards and they therefore despatched
an envoy named Chang Ch’ien in the hope of inducing the Yüeh-
chih to co-operate with them against the common enemy. Chang
Ch’ien made two adventurous expeditions, and visited the Yüeh-
chih in their new home somewhere on the Oxus. His mission failed
to attain its immediate political object but indirectly had important
results, for it revealed to China that the nations on the Oxus were in
touch with India on one hand and with the more mysterious west on
the other. Henceforth it was her aim to keep open the trade route
leading westwards from the extremity of the modern Kansu
province to Kashgar, Khotan and the countries with which those
cities communicated. Far from wishing to isolate herself or exclude
foreigners, her chief desire was to keep the road to the west open,
and although there were times when the flood of Buddhism which
swept along this road alarmed the more conservative classes, yet for
many centuries everything that came in the way of merchandize, art,
literature, and religion was eagerly received. The chief hindrance to
this intercourse was the hostility of the wild tribes who pillaged
caravans and blocked the route, and throughout the whole stretch of
recorded history the Chinese used the same method to weaken them
and keep the door open, namely to create or utilize a quarrel
195
between two tribes. The Empire allied itself with one in order to
crush the second and that being done, proceeded to deal with its
former ally.
Dated records beginning with the year 98 B.C. testify to the presence
of a Chinese garrison near the modern Tun-huang[483]. But at the
beginning of the Christian era the Empire was convulsed by internal
rebellion and ceased to have influence or interest in Central Asia.
With the restoration of order things took another turn. The reign of
the Emperor Ming-ti is the traditional date for the introduction of
Buddhism and it also witnessed the victorious campaigns of the
famous general and adventurer Pan Ch’ao. He conquered Khotan
and Kashgar and victoriously repulsed the attacks of the Kushans or
Yüeh-chih who were interested in these regions and endeavoured to
stop his progress. The Chinese annals do not give the name of their
[king but it must have been Kanishka if he came to the throne in 78. I
confess however that this silence makes it difficult for me to accept
78-123 A.D. as the period of Kanishka’s reign, for he must have been
a monarch of some celebrity and if the Chinese had come into
victorious contact with him, would not their historians have
mentioned it? It seems to me more probable that he reigned before or
after Pan Ch’ao’s career in Central Asia which lasted from A.D. 73-
102. With the end of that career Chinese activity ceased for some
time and perhaps the Kushans conquered Kashgar and Khotan early
in the second century. Neither the degenerate Han dynasty nor the
stormy Three Kingdoms could grapple with distant political
problems and during the fourth, fifth and sixth centuries northern
China was divided among Tartar states, short-lived and mutually
hostile. The Empire ceased to be a political power in the Tarim basin
but intercourse with Central Asia and in particular the influx of
Buddhism increased, and there was also a return wave of Chinese
influence westwards. Meanwhile two tribes, the Hephthalites (or
White Huns) and the Turks[484], successively became masters of
Central Asia and founded states sometimes called Empires—that is
to say they overran vast tracts within which they took tribute
without establishing any definite constitution or frontiers.
When the T’ang dynasty (618-907) re-united the Empire, the Chinese
Government with characteristic tenacity reverted to its old policy of
keeping the western road open and to its old methods. The Turks
were then divided into two branches, the northern and western, at
war with one another. The Chinese allied themselves with the latter,
defeated the northern Turks and occupied Turfan (640). Then in a
series of campaigns, in which they were supported by the Uigurs,
196
they conquered their former allies the western Turks and proceeded
to organize the Tarim basin under the name of the Four
Garrisons[485]. This was the most glorious period of China’s foreign
policy and at no other time had she so great a position as a western
power. The [list of her possessions included Bokhara in the west and
starting from Semirechinsk and Tashkent in the north extended
southwards so as to embrace Afghanistan with the frontier districts
of India and Persia[486]. It is true that the Imperial authority in many
of these regions was merely nominal: when the Chinese conquered a
tribe which claimed sovereignty over them they claimed sovereignty
themselves. But for the history of civilization, for the migration of art
and ideas, even this nominal claim is important, for China was
undoubtedly in touch with India, Bokhara and Persia.
But no sooner did these great vistas open, than new enemies
appeared to bar the road. The Tibetans descended into the Tarim
basin and after defeating the Chinese in 670 held the Four Garrisons
till 692, when the fortunes of war were reversed. But the field was
not left clear for China: the power of the northern Turks revived, and
Mohammedanism, then a new force but destined to ultimate
triumph in politics and religion alike, appeared in the west. The
conquests of the Mohammedan general Qutayba (705-715) extended
to Ferghana and he attacked Kashgar. In the long reign of Hsüan
Tsung China waged a double warfare against the Arabs and
Tibetans. For about thirty years (719-751) the struggle was successful.
Even Tabaristan is said to have acknowledged China’s suzerainty.
Her troops crossed the Hindu Kush and reached Gilgit. But in 751
they sustained a crushing defeat near Tashkent. The disaster was
aggravated by the internal troubles of the Empire and it was long
before Chinese authority recovered from the blow[487]. The Tibetans
reaped the advantage. Except in Turfan, they were the dominant
power of the Tarim basin for a century, they took tribute from China
and when it was refused sacked the capital, Chang-an (763). It would
appear however that for a time Chinese garrisons held out in Central
Asia and Chinese officials exercised some authority, though they
obtained no support from the Empire[488]. But although even late in
the tenth century Khotan sent embassies to the Imperial Court,
China [gradually ceased to be a Central Asian power. She made a
treaty with the Tibetans (783) and an alliance with the Uigurs, who
now came to the front and occupied Turfan, where there was a
flourishing Uigur kingdom with Manichæism as the state religion
from about 750 to 843. In that year the Kirghiz sacked Turfan and it
is interesting to note that the Chinese who had hitherto tolerated
197
Manichæism as the religion of their allies, at once began to issue

restrictive edicts against it. But except in Turfan it does not appear
that the power of the Uigurs was weakened[489]. In 860-817 they
broke up Tibetan rule in the Tarim basin and formed a new kingdom
of their own which apparently included Kashgar, Urumtsi and
Kucha but not Khotan. The prince of Kashgar embraced Islam about
945, but the conversion of Khotan and Turfan was later. With this
conversion the connection of the Tarim basin with the history of
Buddhism naturally ceases, for it does not appear that the triumphal
progress of Lamaism under Khubilai Khan affected these regions.
The Tarim basin, though sometimes united under foreign rule, had
no indigenous national unity. Cities, or groups of towns, divided by
deserts lived their own civic life and enjoyed considerable
independence under native sovereigns, although the Chinese, Turks
or Tibetans quartered troops in them and appointed residents to
supervise the collection of tribute. The chief of these cities or oases
were Kashgar in the west: Kucha, Karashahr, Turfan (Idiqutshähri,
Chotscho) and Hami lying successively to the north-east: Yarkand,
Khotan and Miran to the south-east[490]. It may be well to review
briefly the special history of some of them.
The relics found near Kashgar, the most western of these cities, are
comparatively few, probably because its position exposed it to the
destructive influence of Islam at an early date. Chinese writers
reproduce the name as Ch’ia-sha, Chieh-ch’a, etc., but also call the
region Su-lê, Shu-lê, or Sha-lê[491]. It is [mentioned first in the Han
annals. After the missions of Chang-Ch’ien trade with Bactria and
Sogdiana grew rapidly and Kashgar which was a convenient
emporium became a Chinese protected state in the first century B.C.
But when the hold of China relaxed about the time of the Christian
era it was subdued by the neighbouring kingdom of Khotan. The
conquests of Pan-Ch’ao restored Chinese supremacy but early in the
second century the Yüeh-chih interfered in the politics of Kashgar
and placed on the throne a prince who was their tool. The
introduction of Buddhism is ascribed to this epoch[492]. If Kanishka
was then reigning the statement that he conquered Kashgar and
Khotan is probably correct. It is supported by Hsüan Chuang’s story
of the hostages and by his assertion that Kanishka’s rule extended to
the east of the Ts’ung-ling mountains: also by the discovery of
Kanishka’s coins in the Khotan district. Little is heard of Kashgar
198
until Fa-Hsien visited it in 400[493]. He speaks of the quinquennial

religious conferences held by the king, at one of which he was
present, of relics of the Buddha and of a monastery containing a
thousand monks all students of the Hinayana. About 460 the king
sent as a present to the Chinese Court an incombustible robe once
worn by the Buddha. Shortly afterwards Kashgar was incorporated
in the dominions of the Hephthalites, and when these succumbed to
the western Turks about 465, it merely changed masters.
Hsüan Chuang has left an interesting account of Kashgar as he

found it on his return journey[494]. The inhabitants were sincere
Buddhists and there were more than a thousand monks of the
Sarvâstivâdin school. But their knowledge was not in proportion to
their zeal for they read the scriptures diligently without
understanding them. They used an Indian alphabet into which they
had introduced alterations.
[According to Hsüan Chuang’s religious conspectus of these regions,

Kashgar, Osh and Kucha belonged to the Small Vehicle, Yarkand
and Khotan mainly to the Great. The Small Vehicle also flourished at
Balkh and at Bamian[495]. In Kapiśa the Great Vehicle was
predominant but there were also many Hindu sects: in the Kabul
valley too Hinduism and Buddhism seem to have been mixed: in
Persia[496] there were several hundred Sarvâstivâdin monks. In
Tokhara (roughly equivalent to Badakshan) there was some
Buddhism but apparently it did not flourish further north in the
regions of Tashkent and Samarkand. In the latter town there were
two disused monasteries but when Hsüan Chuang’s companions
entered them they were mobbed by the populace. He says that these
rioters were fire worshippers and that the Turks whom he visited
somewhere near Aulieata were of the same religion. This last
statement is perhaps inaccurate but the T’ang annals expressly state
that the population of Kashgar and Khotan was in part
Zoroastrian[497]. No mention of Nestorianism in Kashgar at this
date has yet been discovered, although in the thirteenth century it
was a Nestorian see. But since Nestorianism had penetrated even to
China in the seventh century, it probably also existed in Samarkand
and Kashgar.
The pilgrim Wu-K’ung spent five months in Kashgar about 786, but
there appear to be no later data of interest for the study of
Buddhism.
199
The town of Kucha[498] lies between Kashgar and Turfan, somewhat

to the west of Karashahr. In the second century B.C. it was already a
flourishing city. Numerous dated documents show that about 630
A.D. the language of ordinary life was the interesting idiom
sometimes called Tokharian B, and, since the Chinese annals record
no alien invasion, we may conclude that Kucha existed as an Aryan
colony peopled by the speakers of [this language some centuries
before the Christian era. It is mentioned in the Han annals and when
brought into contact with China in the reign of Wu-ti (140-87 B.C.) it
became a place of considerable importance, as it lay at the
junction[499] of the western trade routes leading to Kashgar and
Aulieata respectively. Kucha absorbed some Chinese civilization but
its doubtful loyalty to the Imperial throne often involved it in
trouble. It is not until the Western Tsin dynasty that we find it
described as a seat of Buddhism. The Tsin annals say that it was
enclosed by a triple wall and contained a thousand stupas and
Buddhist temples as well as a magnificent palace for the king[500].
This implies that Buddhism had been established for some time but
no evidence has been found to date its introduction.
In 383 Fu-chien, Emperor of the Tsin dynasty, sent his general Lü-
Kuang to subdue Kucha[501]. The expedition was successful and
among the captives taken was the celebrated Kumârajîva. Lü-Kuang
was so pleased with the magnificent and comfortable life of Kucha
that he thought of settling there but Kumârajîva prophesied that he
was destined to higher things. So they left to try their fortune in
China. Lü-Kuang rose to be ruler of the state known as Southern
Liang and his captive and adviser became one of the greatest names
in Chinese Buddhism.
Kumârajîva is a noticeable figure and his career illustrates several

points of importance. First, his father came from India and he
himself went as a youth to study in Kipin (Kashmir) and then
returned to Kucha. Living in this remote corner of Central Asia he
was recognized as an encyclopædia of Indian learning including a
knowledge of the Vedas and “heretical śâstras.” Secondly after his
return to Kucha he was converted to Mahayanism. Thirdly he went
from Kucha to China where he had a distinguished career as a
translator. Thus we see how [China was brought into intellectual
touch with India and how the Mahayana was gaining in Central Asia
territory previously occupied by the Hinayana. The monk
Dharmagupta who passed through Kucha about 584 says that the
king favoured Mahayanism[502]. That Kucha should have been the
home of distinguished translators is not strange for a statement[503]
200
has been preserved to the effect that Sanskrit texts were used in the
cities lying to the west of it, but that in Kucha itself Indian languages
were not understood and translations were made, although such
Sanskrit words as were easily intelligible were retained.
In the time of the Wei, Kucha again got into trouble with China and
was brought to order by another punitive expedition in 448. After
this lesson a long series of tribute-bearing missions is recorded, sent
first to the court of Wei, and afterwards to the Liang, Chou and Sui.
The notices respecting the country are to a large extent repetitions.
They praise its climate, fertility and mineral wealth: the magnificence
of the royal palace, the number and splendour of the religious
establishments. Peacocks were as common as fowls and the Chinese
annalists evidently had a general impression of a brilliant, pleasure-
loving and not very moral city. It was specially famous for its music:
the songs and dances of Kucha, performed by native artists, were
long in favour at the Imperial Court, and a list of twenty airs has
been preserved[504].
When the T’ang dynasty came to the throne Kucha sent an embassy
to do homage but again supported Karashahr in rebellion and again
brought on herself a punitive expedition (648). But the town was
peaceful and prosperous when visited by Hsüan Chuang about 630.
His description agrees in substance with other notices, but he praises

the honesty of the people. He mentions that the king was a native
and that a much modified Indian alphabet was in use. As a
churchman, he naturally dwells with pleasure on the many
monasteries and great images, the quinquennial [assemblies and
religious processions. There were more than 100 monasteries with
upwards of 5000 brethren who all followed the Sarvâstivâda and the
“gradual teaching,” which probably means the Hinayana as opposed
to the sudden illumination caused by Mahayanist revelation. The
pilgrim differed from his hosts on the matter of diet and would not
join them in eating meat. But he admits that the monks were strict
according to their lights and that the monasteries were centres of
learning.
In 658 Kucha was made the seat of government for the territory
known as the Four Garrisons. During the next century it sent several
missions to the Chinese and about 788 was visited by Wu-K’ung,
who indicates that music and Buddhism were still flourishing. He
mentions an Abbot who spoke with equal fluency the language of
the country, Chinese and Sanskrit. Nothing is known about Kucha
201
from this date until the eleventh century when we again hear of
missions to the Chinese Court. The annals mention them under the
heading of Uigurs, but Buddhism seems not to have been extinct for
even in 1096 the Envoy presented to the Emperor a jade Buddha.
According to Hsüan Chuang’s account the Buddhism of Karashahr
(Yenki) was the same as that of Kucha and its monasteries enjoyed
the same reputation for strictness and learning.
Turfan is an oasis containing the ruins of several cities and possibly

different sites were used as the capital at different periods. But the
whole area is so small that such differences can be of little
importance. The name Turfan appears to be modern. The Ming
Annals[505] state that this city lies in the land of ancient Ch’e-shih
(or Kü-shih) called Kao Ch’ang in the time of the Sui. This name was
abolished by the T’ang but restored by the Sung.
The principal city now generally known as Chotscho seems to be

identical with Kao Ch’ang[506] and Idiqutshähri and is called by
Mohammedans Apsus or Ephesus, a curious designation connected
with an ancient sacred site renamed the Cave of the Seven Sleepers.
Extensive literary remains have been found in the oasis; they include
works in Sanskrit, Chinese, and various Iranian and Turkish idioms
but also in two dialects of so-called [Tokharian. Blue-eyed, red-
haired and red-bearded people are frequently portrayed on the walls
of Turfan.
But the early history of this people and of their civilization is chiefly
a matter of theory. In the Han period[507] there was a kingdom
called Kü-shih or Kiü-shih, with two capitals. It was destroyed in 60
B.C. by the Chinese general Chêng-Chi and eight small principalities
were formed in its place. In the fourth and fifth centuries A.D.
Turfan had some connection with two ephemeral states which arose
in Kansu under the names of Hou Liang and Pei Liang. The former
was founded by Lü-Kuang, the general who, as related above, took
Kucha. He fell foul of a tribe in his territory called Chü-ch’ü,
described as belonging to the Hsiung-nu. Under their chieftain
Mêng-hsün, who devoted his later years to literature and Buddhism,
this tribe took a good deal of territory from the Hou Liang, in
Turkestan as well as in Kansu, and called their state Pei Liang. It was
conquered by the Wei dynasty in 439 and two members of the late
reigning house determined to try their fortune in Turfan and ruled
there successively for about twenty years. An Chou, the second of
these princes, died in 480 and his fame survives because nine years
202
after his death a temple to Maitreya was dedicated in his honour

with a long inscription in Chinese.
Another line of Chinese rulers, bearing the family name of Ch’iu,

established themselves at Kao-ch’ang in 507 and under the Sui
dynasty one of them married a Chinese princess. Turfan paid due
homage to the T’ang dynasty on its accession but later it was found
that tributary missions coming from the west to the Chinese court
were stopped there and the close relations of its king with the
western Turks inspired alarm. Accordingly it was destroyed by the
imperial forces in 640. This is confirmed by the record of Hsüan
Chuang. In his biography there is a description of his reception by
the king of Kao-ch’ang on his outward journey. But in the account of
his travels written after his return he speaks of the city as no longer
existent.
Nevertheless the political and intellectual life of the oasis was not
annihilated. It was conquered by the Uigurs at an uncertain date, but
they were established there in the eighth and ninth centuries and
about 750 their Khan adopted Manichæism as the state religion. The
many manuscripts in Sogdian and [other Persian dialects found at
Turfan show that it had an old and close connection with the west. It
is even possible that Mani may have preached there himself but it
does not appear that his teaching became influential until about 700
A.D. The presence of Nestorianism is also attested. Tibetan influence
too must have affected Turfan in the eighth and ninth centuries for
many Tibetan documents have been found there although it seems to
have been outside the political sphere of Tibet. About 843 this Uigur
Kingdom was destroyed by the Kirghiz.
Perhaps the massacres of Buddhist priests, clearly indicated by

vaults filled with skeletons still wearing fragments of the monastic
robe, occurred in this period. But Buddhism was not extinguished
and lingered here longer than in other parts of the Tarim basin. Even
in 1420 the people of Turfan were Buddhists and the Ming Annals
say that at Huo-chou (or Kara-Khojo) there were more Buddhist
temples than dwelling houses.
Let us now turn to Khotan[508]. This was the ancient as well as the
modern name of the principal city in the southern part of the Tarim
basin but was modified in Chinese to Yü-t’ien, in Sanskrit to
Kustana[509]. The Tibetan equivalent is Li-yul, the land of Li, but no
explanation of this designation is forthcoming.
203
Traditions respecting the origin of Khotan are preserved in the

travels of Hsüan Chuang and also in the Tibetan scriptures, some of
which are expressly said to be translations from the language of Li.
These traditions are popular legends but they agree in essentials and
appear to contain a kernel of important truth namely that Khotan
was founded by two streams of colonization coming from China and
from India[510], the latter being somehow connected with Asoka. It
is remarkable that the introduction of Buddhism is attributed not to
these original colonists but to a later missionary who, according to
Hsüan Chuang, came from Kashmir[511].
[This traditional connection with India is confirmed by the discovery

of numerous documents written in Kharoshṭhî characters and a
Prakrit dialect. Their contents indicate that this Prakrit was the
language of common life and they were found in one heap with
Chinese documents dated 269 A.D. The presence of this alphabet and
language is not adequately explained by the activity of Buddhist
missionaries for in Khotan, as in other parts of Asia, the
concomitants of Buddhism are Sanskrit and the Brahmi alphabet.
There was also Iranian influence in Khotan. It shows itself in art and
has left indubitable traces in the language called by some
Nordarisch, but when the speakers of that language reached the
oasis or what part they played there, we do not yet know.
As a consequence of Chang Ch’ien’s mission mentioned above,

Khotan sent an Embassy to the Chinese Court in the reign of Wu-ti
(140-87 B.C.) and the T’ang Annals state that its kings handed down
the insignia of Imperial investiture from that time onwards. There
seems however to have been a dynastic revolution about 60 A.D. and
it is possible that the Vijaya line of kings, mentioned in various
Tibetan works, then began to reign[512]. Khotan became a powerful
state but submitted to the conquering arms of Pan-Ch’ao and
perhaps was subsequently subdued by Kanishka. As the later Han
dynasty declined, it again became strong but continued to send
embassies to the Imperial Court. There is nothing more to mention
until the visit of Fa-Hsien in 400. He describes “the pleasant and
prosperous kingdom” with evident gusto. There were some tens of
thousands of monks mostly followers of the Mahayana and in the
country, where the homes of the people were scattered “like stars”
about the oases, each house had a small stupa before the door. He
stopped in a well ordered convent with 3000 monks and mentions a
magnificent establishment called The King’s New Monastery. He
also describes a great car festival which shows the Indian colour of
204
Khotanese religion. Perhaps Fa-Hsien and Hsüan Chuang unduly

emphasize ecclesiastical features, but they also did not hesitate to say
when they thought things unsatisfactory and their praise shows that
Buddhism was flourishing.
In the fifth and sixth centuries Khotan passed through troublous

times and was attacked by the Tanguts, Juan-Juan [and White Huns.
Throughout this stormy period missions were sent at intervals to
China to beg for help. The pilgrim Sung Yün[513] traversed the oasis
in 519. His account of the numerous banners bearing Chinese
inscriptions hung up in the temple of Han-mo proves that though
the political influence of China was weak, she was still in touch with
the Tarim basin.
When the T’ang effectively asserted their suzerainty in Central Asia,

Khotan was included in the Four Garrisons. The T’ang Annals while
repeating much which is found in earlier accounts, add some points
of interest, for they say that the Khotanese revere the God of Heaven
(Hsien shên) and also the Law of Buddha[514]. This undoubtedly
means that there were Zoroastrians as well as Buddhists, which is
not mentioned in earlier periods. The annals also mention that the
king’s house was decorated with pictures and that his family name
was Wei Ch’ih. This may possibly be a Chinese rendering of Vijaya,
the Sanskrit name or title which according to Tibetan sources was
borne by all the sovereigns of Khotan.
Hsüan Chuang broke his return journey at Khotan in 644. He

mentions the fondness of the people for music and says that their
language differed from that of other countries. The Mahâyâna was
the prevalent sect but the pilgrim stopped in a monastery of the
Sarvâstivâdins[515]. He describes several sites in the neighbourhood,
particularly the Go’sringa or Cow-horn mountain[516], supposed to
have been visited by the Buddha. Though he does not mention
Zoroastrians, he notices that the people of P’i-mo near Khotan were
not Buddhists.
About 674 the king of Khotan did personal homage at the Chinese
Court. The Emperor constituted his territory into a government
called P’i-sha after the deity P’i-sha-mên or Vai’sravana and made
him responsible for its administration. Another king did homage
between 742 and 755 and received an imperial princess as his
consort. Chinese political influence was effective until the last decade
of the eighth century but after 790 the conquests of the Tibetans put
an end to it and there is [no mention of Khotan in the Chinese
205
Annals for about 150 years. Numerous Tibetan manuscripts and

inscriptions found at Endere testify to these conquests. The rule of
the Uigurs who replaced Tibet as the dominant power in Turfan and
the northern Tarim basin does not appear to have extended to
Khotan.
It is not till 938 that we hear of renewed diplomatic relations with

China. The Imperial Court received an embassy from Khotan and
deemed it of sufficient importance to despatch a special mission in
return. Eight other embassies were sent to China in the tenth century
and at least three of them were accompanied by Buddhist priests.
Their object was probably to solicit help against the attacks of
Mohammedans. No details are known as to the Mohammedan
conquest but it apparently took place between 970 and 1009 after a
long struggle.
Another cultural centre of the Tarim basin must have existed in the
oases near Lob-nor where Miran and a nameless site to the north of
the lake have been investigated by Stein. They have yielded
numerous Tibetan documents, but also fine remains of Gandharan
art and Prakrit documents written in the Kharoshthî character.
Probably the use of this language and alphabet was not common
further east, for though a Kharoshthî fragment was found by Stein in
an old Chinese frontier post[517] the library of Tun-huang yielded
no specimens of them. That library, however, dating apparently
from the epoch of the T’ang, contained some Sanskrit Buddhist
literature and was rich in Sogdian, Turkish, and Tibetan
manuscripts.
Ample as are the materials for the study of Buddhism in Central

Asia those hitherto published throw little light on the time and
manner of its introduction. At present much is hypothetical for we
have few historical data—such as the career of Kumârajîva and the
inscription on the Temple of Maitreya at Turfan—but a great mass of
literary and artistic evidence from which various deductions can be
drawn.
It is clear that there was constant intercourse with India and the
Oxus region. The use of Prakrit and of various Iranian idioms points
to actual colonization from these two quarters and [it is probable that
there were two streams of Buddhism, for the Chinese pilgrims agree
that Shan-shan (near Lob-nor), Turfan, Kucha and Kashgar were
206
Hînayânist, whereas Yarkand and Khotan were Mahâyânist. Further,

much of the architecture, sculpture and painting is simply
Gandharan and the older specimens can hardly be separated from
the Gandharan art of India by any considerable interval. This art was
in part coeval with Kanishka, and if his reign began in 78 A.D. or
later the first specimens of it cannot be much anterior to the
Christian era. The earliest Chinese notices of the existence of
Buddhism in Kashgar and Kucha date from 400 (Fa-Hsien) and the
third century (Annals of the Tsin, 265-317) respectively, but they
speak of it as the national religion and munificently endowed, so that
it may well have been established for some centuries. In Turfan the
first definite record is the dedication of a temple to Maitreya in 469
but probably the history of religion there was much the same as in
Kucha.
It is only in Khotan that tradition, if not history, gives a more

detailed narrative. This is found in the works of the Chinese pilgrims
Hsüan Chuang and Sung Yün and also in four Tibetan works which
are apparently translated from the language of Khotan[518]. As the
story is substantially the same in all, it merits consideration and may
be accepted as the account current in the literary circles of Khotan
about 500 A.D. It relates that the Indians who were part-founders of
that city in the reign of Asoka were not Buddhists[519] and the
Tibetan version places the conversion with great apparent accuracy
170 years after the foundation of the kingdom and 404 after the death
of the Buddha. At that time a monk named Vairocana, who was an
incarnation of Manjuśri, came to Khotan, according to Hsüan
Chuang from Kashmir[520]. He is said to have introduced a new
language as well as Mahâyânism, and the king, Vijayasambhava,
built for him the great monastery of Tsarma outside the capital,
which was miraculously supplied with relics. We cannot be sure
[that the Tibetan dates were intended to have the meaning they
would bear for our chronology, that is about 80 B.C., but if they had,
there is nothing improbable in the story, for other traditions assert
that Buddhism was preached in Kashmir in the time of Asoka. On
the other hand, there was a dynastic change in Khotan about 60 A.D.
and the monarch who then came to the throne may have been
Vijayasambhava.
According to the Tibetan account no more monasteries were built for

seven reigns. The eighth king built two, one on the celebrated
Gośirsha or Gośringa mountain. In the eleventh reign after
Vijayasambhava, more chaityas and viharas were built in connection
with the introduction of the silkworm industry. Subsequently, but
207
without any clear indication of date, the introduction of the

Mahâsanghika and Sarvâstivâdin schools is mentioned.
The Tibetan annals also mention several persecutions of Buddhism

in Khotan as a result of which the monks fled to Tibet and Bruzha.
Their chronology is confused but seems to make these troubles
coincide with a persecution in Tibet, presumably that of Lang-dar-
ma. If so, the persecution in Khotan must have been due to the early
attacks of Mohammedans which preceded the final conquest in
about 1000 A.D.[521]
Neither the statements of the Chinese annalists about Central Asia

nor its own traditions prove that Buddhism flourished there before
the Christian era. But they do not disprove it and even if the dream
of the Emperor Ming-Ti and the consequent embassy are dismissed
as legends, it is admitted that Buddhism penetrated to China by land
not later than the early decades of that era. It must therefore have
been known in Central Asia previously and perhaps Khotan was the
place where it first flourished.
It is fairly certain that about 160 B.C. the Yüeh-chih moved

westwards and settled in the lands of the Oxus after ejecting the
Sakas, but like many warlike nomads they may have oscillated
between the east and west, recoiling if they struck against a powerful
adversary in either quarter. Le Coq has put forward an interesting
theory of their origin. It is that they were one of the tribes known as
Scythians in Europe and at an unknown [period moved eastwards
from southern Russia, perhaps leaving traces of their presence in the
monuments still existing in the district of Minussinsk. He also
identifies them with the red-haired, blue-eyed people of the
Chotscho frescoes and the speakers of the Tokharian language. But
these interesting hypotheses cannot be regarded as proved. It is,
however, certain that the Yüeh-chih invaded India[522], founded the
Kushan Empire and were intimately connected (especially in the
person of their great king Kanishka) with Gandharan art and the
form of Buddhism which finds expression in it. Now the Chinese
pilgrim Fa-Hsien (c. 400) found the Hînayâna prevalent in Shan-
shan, Kucha, Kashgar, Osh, Udyana and Gandhara. Hsüan Chuang
also notes its presence in Balkh, Bamian, and Persia. Both notice that
the Mahâyâna was predominant in Khotan though not to the
exclusion of the other school. It would appear that in modern
language the North-West Frontier province of India, Afghanistan,
Badakshan (with small adjoining states), the Pamir regions and the
208
Tarim basin all accepted Gandharan Buddhism and at one time

formed part of the Kushan Empire.
It is probably to this Gandharan Buddhism that the Chinese pilgrims

refer when they speak of the Sarvâstivâdin school of the Hînayâna as
prevalent. It is known that this school was closely connected with the
Council of Kanishka. Its metaphysics were decidedly not Mahâyânist
but there is no reason why it should have objected to the veneration
of such Bodhisattvas as are portrayed in the Gandhara sculptures.
An interesting passage in the life of Hsüan Chuang relates that he
had a dispute in Kucha with a Mahâyânist doctor who maintained
that the books called Tsa-hsin, Chü-shê, and P’i-sha were sufficient
for salvation, and denounced the Yogaśâstra as heretical, to the great
indignation of the pilgrim[523] whose practical definition of
Mahâyânism seems to have been the acceptance of this work,
[reputed to have been revealed by Maitreya to Asanga. Such a
definition and division might leave in the Hînayâna much that we
should not expect to find there.
The Mahâyânist Buddhism of Khotan was a separate stream and

Hsüan Chuang says that it came from Kashmir. Though Kashmir is
not known as a centre of Mahâyânism, yet it would be a natural
route for men and ideas passing from any part of India to Khotan.
The Tarim basin and the lands of the Oxus[524] were a region where
different religions and cultures mingled and there is no difficulty in
supposing that Buddhism might have amalgamated there with
Zoroastrianism or Christianity. The question is whether there is any
evidence for such amalgamation. It is above all in its relations with
China that Central Asia appears as an exchange of religions. It
passed on to China the art and thought of India, perhaps adding
something of its own on the way and then received them back from
China with further additions[525]. It certainly received a great deal
from Persia: the number of manuscripts in different Iranian
languages puts this beyond doubt. Equally undoubted is its debt to
India, but it would be of even greater interest to determine whether
Indian Buddhism owes a debt to Central Asia and to define that
debt. For Tibet the relation was mutual. The Tibetans occupied the
Tarim basin during a century and according to their traditions
monks went from Khotan to instruct Tibet.
209
The Buddhist literature discovered in Central Asia represents, like its

architecture, several periods. We have first of all the fragments of the
Sanskrit Agamas, found at Turfan, Tun-huang, and in the Khotan
district: fragments of the dramas and poems of Aśvaghosha from
Turfan: the Prâtimoksha of the Sarvastivâdins from Kucha and
numerous versions of the anthology called Dharmapada or Udâna.
The most interesting of these is the Prakrit version found in the
neighbourhood of Khotan, but fragments in Tokharian and Sanskrit
have also been discovered. [All this literature probably represents
the canon as it existed in the epoch of Kanishka and of the
Gandharan sculptures, or at least the older stratum in that canon.
The newer stratum is composed of Mahâyânist sutras of which there

is a great abundance, though no complete list has been
published[526]. The popularity of the Prajñâ-pâramitâ, the Lotus and
the Suvarṇa-prabhâsa is attested. The last was translated into both
Uigur (from the Chinese) and into “Iranien Oriental.” To a still later
epoch[527] belong the Dhâraṇîs or magical formulæ which have
been discovered in considerable quantities.
Sylvain Lévi has shown that some Mahâyânist sutras were either
written or re-edited in Central Asia[528]. Not only do they contain
lists of Central Asian place-names but these receive an importance
which can be explained only by the local patriotism of the writer or
the public which he addressed. Thus the Sûryagarbha sutra praises
the mountain of Gośringa near Khotan much as the Puranas
celebrate in special chapters called Mâhâtmyas the merits of some
holy place. Even more remarkable is a list in the Chandragarbha
sutra. The Buddha in one of the great transformation scenes common
in these works sends forth rays of light which produce innumerable
manifestations of Buddhas. India (together with what is called the
western region) has a total of 813 manifestations, whereas Central
Asia and China have 971. Of these the whole Chinese Empire has
255, the kingdoms of Khotan and Kucha have 180 and 99
respectively, but only 60 are given to Benares and 30 to Magadha.
Clearly Central Asia was a very important place for the author of
this list[529].
One of the Turkish sutras discovered at Turfan contains a discourse

of the Buddha to the merchants Trapusha and Bhallika who are
described as Turks and Indra is called Kormusta, that is Hormuzd.
In another Brahmâ is called Aṣrua, identified as the Iranian deity
Zervan[530]. In these instances no innovation of doctrine is implied
but when the world of spirits and men [becomes Central Asian
210
instead of Indian, it is only natural that the doctrine too should take
on some local colour[531].
Thus the dated inscription of the temple erected in Turfan A.D. 469 is
a mixture of Chinese ideas, both Confucian and Taoist, with Indian.
It is in honour of Maitreya, a Bodhisattva known to the Hînayâna,
but here regarded not merely as the future Buddha but as an active
and benevolent deity who manifests himself in many forms[532], a
view which also finds expression in the tradition that the works of
Asanga were revelations made by him. Akâśagarbha and the
Dharmakâya are mentioned. But the inscription also speaks of
heaven (t’ien) as appointing princes, and of the universal law (tao)
and it contains several references to Chinese literature.
Even more remarkable is the admixture of Buddhism in

Manichæism. The discoveries made in Central Asia make intelligible
the Chinese edict of 739 which accuses the Manichæans of falsely
taking the name of Buddhism and deceiving the people[533]. This is
not surprising for Mani seems to have taught that Zoroaster, Buddha
and Christ had preceded him as apostles, and in Buddhist countries
his followers naturally adopted words and symbols familiar to the
people. Thus Manichæan deities are represented like Bodhisattvas
sitting cross-legged on a lotus; Mani receives the epithet Ju-lai or
Tathâgata: as in Amida’s Paradise, there are holy trees bearing
flowers which enclose beings styled Buddha: the construction and
phraseology of Manichæan books resemble those of a Buddhist
Sutra[534]. In some ways the association of Taoism and Manichæism
was even closer, for the Hu-hua-ching identifies Buddha with Lao-
tzû and Mani, and two Manichæan books have passed into the
Taoist Canon[535].
[Nestorian Christianity also existed in the Tarim basin and became

prominent in the seventh century. This agrees with the record of its
introduction into China by A-lo-pen in 635 A.D., almost
simultaneously with Zoroastrianism. Fragments of the New
Testament have been found at Turfan belonging mostly to the ninth
century but one to the fifth. The most interesting document for the
history of Nestorianism is still the monument discovered at Si-ngan-
fu and commonly called the Nestorian stone[536]. It bears a long
inscription partly in Chinese and partly in Syriac composed by a
foreign priest called Adam or in Chinese King-Tsing giving a long
account of the doctrines and history of Nestorianism. Not only does
this inscription contain many Buddhist phrases (such as Sêng and
Ssû for Christian priests and monasteries) but it deliberately omits
211
all mention of the crucifixion and merely says in speaking of the

creation that God arranged the cardinal points in the shape of a
cross. This can hardly be explained as due to incomplete statement
for it reviews in some detail the life of Christ and its results. The
motive of omission must be the feeling that redemption by his death
was not an acceptable doctrine[537]. It is interesting to find that
King-Tsing consorted with Buddhist priests and even set about
translating a sutra from the Hu language. Takakusu quotes a passage
from one of the catalogues of the Japanese Tripitaka[538] which
states that he was a Persian and collaborated with a monk of Kapiśa
called Prajña.
We have thus clear evidence not only of the co-existence of

Buddhism and Christianity but of friendly relations between
Buddhist and Christian priests. The Emperor’s objection to such
commixture of religions was unusual and probably due to zeal for
pure Buddhism. It is possible that in western China and Central Asia
Buddhism, Taoism, Manichæism, Nestorianism and Zoroastrianism
all borrowed from one another just as the first two do in China to-
day and Buddhism may have become modified by this contact. But
proof of it is necessary. In most places Buddhism was in strength and
numbers the most [important of all these religions and older than all
except Zoroastrianism. Its contact with Manichæism may possibly
date from the life of Mani, but apparently the earliest Christian
manuscripts found in Central Asia are to be assigned to the fifth
century.
On the other hand the Chinese Tripiṭaka contains many translations

which bear an earlier date than this and are ascribed to translators
connected with the Yüeh-chih. I see no reason to doubt the
statements that the Happy Land sutra and Prajñâ-pâramitâ (Nanjio,
25, 5) were translated before 200 A.D. and portions of the
Avataṃsaka and Lotus (Nanjio, 100, 103, 138) before 300 A.D. But if
so, the principal doctrines of Mahayanist Buddhism must have been
known in Khotan[539] and the lands of Oxus before we have definite
evidence for the presence of Christianity there.
Zoroastrianism may however have contributed to the development

and transformation of Buddhism for the two were certainly in
contact. Thus the coins of Kanishka bear figures of Persian
deities[540] more frequently than images of the Buddha: we know
from Chinese sources that the two religions co-existed at Khotan and
Kashgar and possibly there are hostile references to Buddhism (Buiti
and Gaotema the heretic) in the Persian scriptures[541].
212
It is true that we should be cautious in fancying that we detect a

foreign origin for the Mahâyâna. Different as it may be from the
Buddhism of the Pali Canon, it is an Indian not an exotic growth.
Deification, pantheism, the creation of radiant or terrible deities,
extreme forms of idealism or nihilism in metaphysics are tendencies
manifested in Hinduism as clearly as in Buddhism. Even the
doctrine of the Buddha’s three bodies, which sounds like an
imitation of the Christian Trinity, has roots in the centuries before
the Christian era. But late Buddhism indubitably borrowed many
personages from the Hindu pantheon, and when we find Buddhas
and Bodhisattvas such as Amitâbha, Avalokita, Manjuśrî and
Kshitigarbha without clear antecedents in India we may suspect that
they are borrowed from some other mythology, and if similar figures
were known to Zoroastrianism, that may be their source.
[The most important of them is Amitâbha. He is strangely obscure in

the earlier art and literature of Indian Buddhism. Some of the
nameless Buddha figures in the Gandharan sculptures may
represent him, but this is not proved and the works of Grünwedel
and Foucher suggest that compared with Avalokita and Târâ his
images are late and not numerous. In the earlier part of the
Lotus[542] he is only just mentioned as if he were of no special
importance. He is also mentioned towards the end of the Awakening
of Faith ascribed to Aśvaghosha, but the authorship of the work
cannot be regarded as certain and, if it were, the passage stands
apart from the main argument and might well be an addition. Again
in the Mahâyâna-sûtrâlaṇkâra[543] of Asanga, his paradise is just
mentioned.
Against these meagre and cursory notices in Indian literature may be

set the fact that two translations of the principal Amidist scripture
into Chinese were made in the second century A.D. and four in the
third, all by natives of Central Asia. The inference that the worship
of Amitâbha flourished in Central Asia some time before the earliest
of these translations is irresistible.
According to Târanâtha, the Tibetan historian of Buddhism[544], this

worship goes back to Saraha or Rahulabhadra. He was reputed to
have been the teacher of Nâgârjuna and a great magician. He saw
Amitâbha in the land of Dhingkoṭa and died with his face turned
towards Sukhâvatî. I have found no explanation of the name
Dhingkoṭa but the name Saraha does not sound Indian. He is said to
have been a sudra and he is represented in Tibetan pictures with a
beard and topknot and holding an arrow[545] in his hand. In all this
213
there is little that can be called history, but still it appears that the
first person whom tradition connects with the worship of Amitâbha
was of low caste, bore a foreign name, saw the deity in an unknown
country, and like many tantric teachers was represented as totally
unlike a Buddhist monk. It cannot be proved that he came from the
lands of the Oxus or Turkestan, but such an [origin would explain
much in the tradition. On the other hand, there would be no
difficulty in accounting for Zoroastrian influence at Peshawar or
Takkasila within the frontiers of India.
Somewhat later Vasubandhu is stated to have preached faith in

Amitâbha but it does not appear that this doctrine ever had in India
a tithe of the importance which it obtained in the Far East.
The essential features of Amidist doctrine are that there is a paradise

of light belonging to a benevolent deity and that the good[546] who
invoke his name will be led thither. Both features are found in
Zoroastrian writings. The highest heaven (following after the
paradises of good thoughts, good words and good deeds) is called
Boundless Light or Endless Light[547]. Both this region and its
master, Ahuramazda, are habitually spoken of in terms implying
radiance and glory. Also it is a land of song, just as Amitâbha’s
paradise re-echoes with music and pleasant sounds[548]. Prayers can
win this paradise and Ahura Mazda and the Archangels will come
and show the way thither to the pious[549]. Further whoever recites
the Ahuna-vairya formula, Ahura Mazda will bring his soul to “the
lights of heaven[550],” and although, so far as I know, it is not
expressly stated that the repetition of Ahura Mazda’s name leads to
paradise, yet the general efficacy of his names as invocations is
clearly affirmed[551].
Thus all the chief features of Amitâbha’s paradise are Persian: only
his method of instituting it by making a vow is Buddhist. It is true
that Indian imagination had conceived numerous paradises, and that
the early Buddhist legend tells of the Tushita heaven. But Sukhâvatî
is not like these abodes of bliss. It appears suddenly in the history of
Buddhism as something exotic, grafted adroitly on the parent trunk
but sometimes overgrowing it[552].
[Avalokita is also connected with Amitâbha’s paradise. His figure,

though its origin is not clear, assumes distinct and conspicuous
proportions in India at a fairly early date. There appears to be no
reason for associating him specially with Central Asia. On the other
hand later works describe him as the spiritual son or reflex of
214
Amitâbha. This certainly recalls the Iranian idea of the Fravashi

defined as “a spiritual being conceived as a part of a man’s
personality but existing before he is born and in independence of
him: it can also belong to divine beings[553].” Although India offers
in abundance both divine incarnations and explanations thereof yet
none of these describe the relationship between a Dhyânî Buddha
and his Boddhisattva so well as the Zoroastrian doctrine of the
Fravashi.
S. Lévi has suggested that the Bodhisattva Manjuśrî is of Tokharian

origin[554]. His worship at Wu-tai-shan in Shan-si is ancient and
later Indian tradition connected him with China. Local traditions
also connect him with Nepal, Tibet, and Khotan, and he is sometimes
represented as the first teacher of civilization or religion. But
although his Central Asian origin is eminently probable, I do not at
present see any clear proof of it.
The case of the Bodhisattva Kshitigarbha[555] is similar. He appears

to have been known but not prominent in India in the fourth century
A.D.: by the seventh century if not earlier his cult was flourishing in
China and subsequently he became in the Far East a popular deity
second only to Kuan-yin. This popularity was connected with his
gradual transformation into a god of the dead. It is also certain that
he was known in Central Asia[556] but whether he first became
important there or in China is hard to decide. The devotion of the
Chinese to their dead suggests that it was among them that he
acquired his great position, but his rôle as a guide to the next world
has a parallel in the similar benevolent activity of the Zoroastrian
angel Srosh.
[One of Central Asia’s clearest titles to importance in the history of

the East is that it was the earliest and on the whole the principal
source of Chinese Buddhism, to which I now turn. Somewhat later,
teachers also came to China by sea and still later, under the Yüan
dynasty, Lamaism was introduced direct from Tibet. But from at
least the beginning of our era onwards, monks went eastwards from
Central Asia to preach and translate the scriptures and it was across
Central Asia that Chinese pilgrims went to India in search of the
truth.
FOOTNOTES:
[459] See Lüders, Bruchstücke Buddhistischer Dramen, 1911, and id.,

Das Sâriputra-prakarana, 1911.
215
[460] See Senart, “Le ms Kharoshṭhî du Dhammapada,” in J.A., 1898,

II. p. 193.
[461] Lüders, “Die Śakas und die Nordarische Sprache,” Sitzungsber.

der Kōn. Preuss. Akad. 1913. Konow, Gōtting. Gel. Anz. 1912, pp. 551 ff.
[462] See Hoernle in J.R.A.S. 1910, pp. 837 ff. and 1283 ff.; 1911, pp.
202 ff., 447 ff.
[463] An old Turkish text about Maitreya states that it was translated
from an Indian language into Tokhri and from Tokhri into Turkish.
See F.K.W. Müller, Sitzungsber. der Kön. Preuss. Akad. 1907, p. 958. But
it is not clear what is meant by Tokhri.
[464] The following are some words in this language: Kant, a

hundred; rake, a word; por, fire; soye, son (Greek υἱός); suwan,
swese, rain (Greek ὔει ὑετύς); âlyek, another; okso, an ox.
[465] The numerous papers on this language are naturally quickly

superseded. But Sieg and Siegling Tokharisch, “Die Sprache der
Indoskythen” (Sitzungsber. der Berl. Ak. Wiss. 1908, p. 815), may be
mentioned and Sylvain Lévi, “Tokharien B, Langue de Kouteha,”
J.A. 1913, II. p. 311.
[466] See Radloff Tisastvustik (Bibl. Buddh. vol. xii.), p. v. This

manuscript came from Urumtsi. A translation of a portion of the
Saddharma-pundarîka (Bibl. Buddh. xiv.) was found at Turfan.
[467] Laufer in T’oung Pao, 1907, p. 392; Radloff, Kuan-si-im Pursar, p.

vii.
[468] See especially Stein’s Ancient Khotan, app. B, and Francke in

J.R.A.S. 1914, p. 37.
[469] Chavannes, Les documents chinois découverts par Aurel Stein,

1913.
[470] See especially Chavannes and Pelliot, “Traité Manichéen” in

J.A. 1911 and 1913.
[471] Hsüan Chuang notes its existence however in Kabul and

Kapiśa.
[472] See for these Fergusson-Burgess, History of Indian Architecture, I.

pp. 125-8.
216
[473] J.R.A.S. 1909, p. 313.
[474] E.g. Grünwedel, Altbuddhistische Kultstätten, fig. 624.
[475] Stein, Ancient Khotan, plates xiii-xvii and xl, pp. 83 and 482 ff.
[476] See Grünwedel, Buddh. Kultstätten, pp. 129-130 and plate.

Foucher, “L’Art Gréco-Bouddhique,” p. 145, J.R.A.S. 1886, 333 and
plate i.
[477] See Wachsberger’s “Stil-kritische Studien zur Kunst

Chinesisch-Turkestan’s” in Ostasiatische Ztsft. 1914 and 1915.
[478] See Grünwedel, Buddh. Kultstätten, pp. 332 ff.
[479] Ancient Khotan, vol. II. plates lx and lxi.
[480] Le Coq in J.R.A.S. 1909, pp. 299 ff. See the whole article.
[481] For some of the more striking drawings referred to see

Grünwedel, Buddh. Kultstätten, figs. 51, 53, 239, 242, 317, 337, 345-349.
[482] In Geog. Journal, May 1916, p. 362.
[483] Chavannes, Documents chinois découverts par Aurel Stein, 1913.
[484] These of course are not the Osmanlis or Turks of

Constantinople. The Osmanlis are the latest of the many branches of
the Turks, who warred and ruled in Central Asia with varying
success from the fifth to the eighth centuries.
[485] That is Kashgar, Khotan, Kucha and Tokmak for which last
Karashahr was subsequently substituted. The territory was also
called An Hsi.
[486] See for lists and details Chavannes, Documents sur les Tou-kiue
Occidentaux, pp. 67 ff. and 270 ff.
[487] The conquest and organization of the present Chinese

Turkestan dates only from the reign of Ch’ien Lung.
[488] Thus the pilgrim Wu-K’ung mentions Chinese officials in the

Four Garrisons.
[489] See for this part of their history, Grenard’s article in J.A. 1900, I.
pp. 1-79.
217
[490] Pelliot also attributes importance to a Sogdian Colony to the

south of Lob Nor, which may have had much to do with the
transmission of Buddhism and Nestorianism to China. See J.A. Jan.
1916, pp. 111-123.
[491] These words have been connected with the tribe called Sacae,
Sakas, or Sök.
[492] See Klaproth, Tabl. Historique, p. 166, apparently quoting from

Chinese sources. Specht, J.A. 1897, II. p. 187. Franke, Beitr.-zur
Kenntniss Zentral-Asiens, p. 83. The passage quoted by Specht from
the Later Han Annals clearly states that the Yüeh-chih made a man
of their own choosing prince of Kashgar, although, as Franke points
out, it makes no reference to Kanishka or the story of the hostages
related by Hsüan Chuang.
[493] Fa-Hsien’s Chieh-ch’a has been interpreted as Skardo, but

Chavannes seems to have proved that it is Kashgar.
[494] About 643 A.D. He mentions that the inhabitants tattooed their
bodies, flattened their children’s heads and had green eyes. Also that
they spoke a peculiar language.
[495] At Bamian the monks belonged to the Lokottaravâdin School.
[496] Beal, Records, II. p. 278. The pilgrim is speaking from hearsay
and it is not clear to what part of Persia he refers.
[497] See Chavannes, Documents sur les Tou-kiue Occidentaux, pp. 121,
125. The inhabitants of K’ang (Samarkand or Sogdiana) are said to
honour both religions. Ib. p. 135.
[498] Known to the Chinese by several slightly different names such

as Ku-chih, Kiu-tse which are all attempts to represent the same
sound. For Kucha see S. Lévi’s most interesting article “Le
‘Tokharien B’ langue de Koutcha” in J.A. 1913, II. pp. 311 ff.
[499] J.A. 1913, ii. p. 326.
[500] See Chavannes in Stein’s Ancient Khotan, p. 544. The Western

Tsin reigned 265-317.
[501] The circumstances which provoked the expedition are not very
clear. It was escorted by the king of Turfan and other small
potentates who were the vassals of the Tsin and also on bad terms
with Kucha. They probably asked Fu-chien for assistance in
218
subduing their rival which he was delighted to give. Some

authorities (e.g. Nanjio Cat. p. 406) give Karashahr as the name of
Kumârajîva’s town, but this seems to be a mistake.
[502] S. Lévi, J.A. 1913, ii. p. 348, quoting Hsü Kao Sêng Chuan.
[503] Quoted by S. Lévi from the Sung Kao Sêng Chuan. See J.A. 1913,
II. p. 344 and B.E.F.E.O. 1904, p. 562.
[504] As a proof of foreign influence in Chinese culture, it is

interesting to note that there were seven orchestras for the imperial
banquets, including those of Kucha, Bokhara and India and a mixed
one in which were musicians from Samarkand, Kashgar, Camboja
and Japan.
[505] Quoted by Bretschneider, Mediaeval Researches, ii. 189.
[506] Pelliot, J.A. 1912, i. p. 579, suggests that Chotscho or Qoco is the
Turkish equivalent of Kao Ch’ang in T’ang pronunciation, the nasal
being omitted.
[507] Chavannes, Tou-kiue Occidentaux, p. 101.
[508] For the history of Khotan see Rémusat, Ville de Khotan, 1820,
and Stein’s great work Ancient Khotan, especially chapter vii. For the
Tibetan traditions see Rockhill, Life of the Buddha, pp. 230 ff.
[509] Ku-stana seems to have been a learned perversion of the name,

to make it mean breast of the earth.
[510] The combination is illustrated by the Sino-Kharoshthî coins

with a legend in Chinese on the obverse and in Prakrit on the
reverse. See Stein, Ancient Khotan, p. 204. But the coins are later than
73 A.D.
[511] The Tibetan text gives the date of conversion as the reign of
King Vijayasambhava, 170 years after the foundation of Khotan.
[512] See Sten Konow in J.R.A.S. 1914, p. 345.
[513] See Stein, Ancient Khotan, pp. 170, 456.
[514] Chavannes, Tou-kiue, p. 125, cf. pp. 121 and 170. For Hsien shên
see Giles’s Chinese Dict. No. 4477.
[515] Beal, Life, p. 205.
219
[516] Identified by Stein with Kohmari Hill which is still revered by

Mohammedans as a sacred spot.
[517] Desert Cathay, II. p. 114.
[518] See Watters, Yüan Chwang, II. p. 296. Beal, Life. p. 205.
Chavannes, “Voyage de Sung Yun.” B.E.F.E.O. 1903, 395, and for the
Tibetan sources, Rockhill, Life of the Buddha, chap. VIII. One of the
four Tibetan works is expressly stated to be translated from
Khotanese.
[519] The Tibetan Chronicles of Li-Yul say that they worshipped

Vaiśravana and Śrîmahâdevî.
[520] A monk from Kashmir called Vairocana was also active in Tibet
about 750 A.D.
[521] It is also possible that Buddhism had a bad time in the fifth and
sixth centuries at the hands of the Tanguts, Juan-Juan and White
Huns.
[522] The Later Han Annals say that the Hindus are weaker than the
Yüeh-chih and are not accustomed to fight because they are
Buddhists. (See T’oung Pao, 1910, p. 192.) This seems to imply that
the Yüeh-chih were not Buddhists. But even this was the real view of
the compiler of the Annals we do not know from what work he took
this statement nor to what date it refers.
[523] See Beal, Life, p. 39, Julien, p. 50. The books mentioned are
apparently the Samyuktâbhidharmahṛidaya (Nanjio, 1287),
Abhidharma Kosha (Nanjio, 1267), Abhidharma-Vibhâsha (Nanjio,
1264) and Yogâcâryabhûmi (Nanjio, 1170).
[524] The importance of the Tarim basin is due to the excellent

preservation of its records and its close connection with China. The
Oxus regions suffered more from Mohammedan iconoclasm, but
they may have been at least equally important for the history of
Buddhism.
[525] E.g. see the Maitreya inscription of Turfan.
[526] Or at least is not accessible to me here in Hongkong, 1914.
[527] I do not mean to say that all Dhâraṇîs are late.
220
[528] It is even probable that apocryphal Sûtras were composed in

Central Asia. See Pelliot in Mélanges d’Indianisme, Sylvain Lévi, p.
329.
[529] The list of manifestations in Jambudvipa enumerates 56

kingdoms. All cannot be identified with certainty, but apparently
less than half are within India proper.
[530] See Bibl. Budd. XII. pp. 44, 46, XIV. p. 45.
[531] The Turkish sutras repeatedly style the Buddha God (t’angri)
or God of Gods. The expression devâtideva is applied to him in
Sanskrit, but the Turkish phrases are more decided and frequent.
The Sanskrit phrase may even be due to Iranian influence.
[532] An Chou, the Prince to whose memory the temple was

dedicated, seems to be regarded as a manifestation of Maitreya.
[533] J.A. 1913, I. p. 154. The series of three articles by Chavannes and
Pelliot entitled “Un traité Manichéen retrouvé en Chine” (J.A. 1911,
1913) is a most valuable contribution to our knowledge of
Manichæism in Central Asia and China.
[534] E.g. see J.A. 1911, pp. 509 and 589. See also Le Coq, Sitzb. preuss.
Akad. der Wiss. 48, 1909, 1202-1218.
[535] J.A. 1913, I. pp. 116 and 132.
[536] See especially Havret, “La stèle chrétienne de Si-ngan-fu” in

Variétés Sinologues, pp. 7, 12 and 20.
[537] See Havret, l.c. III. p. 54, for some interesting remarks
respecting the unwillingness of the Nestorians and also of the Jesuits
to give publicity to the crucifixion.
[538] See Takakusu, I-tsing, pp. 169, 223, and T’oung Pao, 1896, p. 589.
[539] Turfan and Kucha are spoken of as being mainly Hînayânist.
[540] See Stein, Zoroastrian deities on Indo-Scythian coins, 1887.
[541] See S.B.E. IV. (Vendîdad) pp. 145, 209; XXIII. p. 184, V. p. III.
[542] Chap. VII. The notices in Chaps. XXII. and XXIV. are rather
more detailed but also later.
[543] XII. p. 23.
221
[544] Transl. Schiefner, pp. 93, 105 and 303, and Pander’s Pantheon,
No. 11. But Târanâtha also says that he was Aryadeva’s pupil.
[545] Śara in Sanskrit.
[546] The doctrine of salvation by faith alone seems to be later. The

longer and apparently older version of the Sukhâvatî Vyûha insists
on good works as a condition of entry into Paradise.
[547] S.B.E. IV. p. 293; ib. XXXIII. pp. 317 and 344.
[548] It may also be noticed that Ameretât, the Archangel of

immortality, presides over vegetation and that Amida’s paradise is
full of flowers.
[549] S.B.E. XXIII. pp. 335-7.
[550] S.B.E. XXXI. p. 261.
[551] S.B.E. XXIII. pp. 21-31 (the Ormasd Yasht).
[552] Is it possible that there is any connection between Sukhâvatî

and the land of Saukavastan, governed by an immortal ruler and
located by the Bundehish between Turkistan and Chinistan? I
imagine there is no etymological relationship, but if Saukavastan
was well known as a land of the blessed it may have influenced the
choice of a significant Sanskrit word with a similar sound.
[553] E.R.E. sub voce.
[554] J.A. 1912, I. p. 622. Unfortunately only a brief notice of his

communication is given with no details. See also S. Lévi, Le Népâl,
pp. 330 ff.
[555] Ti-tsang in Chinese, Jizo in Japanese. See for his history Visser’s
elaborate articles in Ostasiatische Ztsft. 1913-1915.
[556] He was accepted by the Manichæans as one of the Envoys of

Light. J.A. 1911, II. p. 549.
222
CHAPTER XLII
CHINA
Prefatory note.
For the transcription of Chinese words I use the modern Peking

pronunciation as represented in Giles’s Dictionary. It may be justly
objected that of all dialects Pekingese is perhaps the furthest
removed from ancient Chinese and therefore unsuited for historical
studies and also that Wade’s system of transcription employed by
Giles is open to serious criticism. But, on the other hand, I am not
competent to write according to the pronunciation of Nanking or
Canton all the names which appear in these chapters and, if I were, it
would not be a convenience to my readers. Almost all English works
of reference about China use the forms registered in Giles’s
Dictionary or near approximations to them, and any variation would
produce difficulty and confusion. French and German methods of
transcribing Chinese differ widely from Wade’s and unfortunately
there seems to be no prospect of sinologues agreeing on any
international system.
INTRODUCTORY.
The study of Chinese Buddhism is interesting but difficult[557]. Here

more than in other Asiatic countries we feel that the words and
phrases natural to a European language fail to render justly the
elementary forms of thought, the simplest relationships. But
Europeans are prone to exaggerate the mysterious, topsy-turvy
character of the Chinese mind. Such epithets are based on the
assumption that human thought and conduct normally conform to
reason and logic, and that when such conformity is wanting the
result must be strange and hardly human, or at least such as no
respectable European could expect or approve. But the assumption is
wrong. In no country with which I am [acquainted are logic and co-
ordination of ideas more wanting than in the British Isles. This is not
altogether a fault, for human systems are imperfect and the rigorous
application of any one imperfect system must end in disaster. But the
student of Asiatic psychology must begin his task by recognising
that in the West and East alike, the thoughts of nations, though not
223
always of individuals, are a confused mosaic where the pattern has

been lost and a thousand fancies esteemed at one time or another as
pleasing, useful or respectable are crowded into the available space.
This is especially true in the matter of religion. An observer fresh to
the subject might find it hard to formulate the relations to one
another and to the Crown of the various forms of Christianity
prevalent in our Empire or to understand how the English Church
can be one body, when some sections of it are hardly distinguishable
from Roman Catholicism and others from non-conformist sects. In
the same way Chinese religion offers startling combinations of
incongruous rites and doctrines: the attitude of the laity and of the
government to the different churches is not to be defined in ordinary
European terms and yet if one examines the practice of Europe, it
will often throw light on the oddities of China.
The difficulty of finding a satisfactory equivalent in Chinese for the

word God is well known and has caused much discussion among
missionaries. Confucius inherited and handed on a worship of
Heaven which inspired some noble sayings and may be admitted to
be monotheism. But it was a singularly impersonal monotheism and
had little to do with popular religion, being regarded as the
prerogative and special cult of the Emperor. The people selected
their deities from a numerous pantheon of spirits, falling into many
classes among which two stand out clearly, namely, nature spirits
and spirits of ancestors. All these deities, as we must call them for
want of a better word, present odd features, which have had some
influence on Chinese Buddhism. The boundary between the human
and the spirit worlds is slight. Deification and euhemerism are
equally natural to the Chinese. Not only are worthies of every sort
made into gods[558], but foreign deities are explained on the same
[principle. Thus Yen-lo (Yama), the king of the dead, is said to have
been a Chinese official of the sixth century A.D. But there is little
mythology. The deities are like the figures on porcelain vases: all
know their appearance and some their names, but hardly anyone can
give a coherent account of them. A poly-dæmonism of this kind is
even more fluid than Hinduism: you may invent any god you like
and neglect gods that don’t concern you. The habit of mind which
produces sects in India, namely the desire to exalt one’s own deity
above others and make him the All-God, does not exist. No Chinese
god inspires such feelings.
The deities of medieval and modern China, including the spirits

recognized by Chinese Buddhism, are curiously mixed and vague
personalities[559]. Nature worship is not absent, but it is nature as
224
seen by the fancy of the alchemist and astrologer. The powers that
control nature are also identified with ancient heroes, but they are
mostly heroes of the type of St. George and the Dragon of whom
history has little to say, and Chinese respect for the public service
and official rank takes the queer form of regarding these spirits as
celestial functionaries. Thus the gods have a Ministry of Thunder
which supervises the weather and a Board of Medicine which looks
after sickness and health.
The characteristic expression of Chinese popular religion is not

exactly myth or legend but religious romance. A writer starts from
some slender basis of fact and composes an edifying novel. Thus the
well-known story called Hsi-Yu-Chi[560] purports to be an account
of Hsüan Chuang’s journey to India but, except that it represents the
hero as going there and returning with copies of the scriptures, it is
romance pure and simple, a [fantastic Pilgrim’s Progress, the scene
of which is sometimes on earth and sometimes in the heavens. The
traveller is accompanied by allegorical creatures such as a magic
monkey, a pig, and a dragon horse, who have each their own
significance and may be seen represented in Buddhist and Taoist
temples even to-day. So too another writer, starting from the
tradition that Avalokita (or Kuan-Yin) was once a benevolent human
being, set himself to write the life of Kuan-Yin, represented as a
princess endued with every virtue who cheerfully bears cruel
persecution for her devotion to Buddhism. It would be a mistake to
seek in this story any facts throwing light on the history of Avalokita
and his worship. It is a religious novel, important only because it still
finds numerous readers.
It is commonly said that the Chinese belong to three religions,

Confucianism, Buddhism and Taoism, and the saying is not
altogether inaccurate. Popular language speaks of the three creeds
and an ordinary person in the course of his life may take part in rites
which imply a belief in them all[561]. Indeed the fusion is so
complete that one may justly talk of Chinese religion, meaning the
jumble of ceremonies and beliefs accepted by the average man. Yet at
the same time it is possible to be an enthusiast for any one of the
three without becoming unconventional.
Of the three religions, Confucianism has a disputable claim to the

title. If the literary classes of China find it sufficient, they do so only
by rejecting the emotional and speculative sides of religion. The
Emperor Wan-li[562] made a just epigram when he said that
Confucianism and Buddhism are like the wings of a bird. Each
225
requires the co-operation of the other. Confucius was an ethical and

political philosopher, not a prophet, hierophant or church founder.
As a moralist he stands in the first rank, and I doubt if either the
Gospels or the Pitakas contain maxims for the life of a good citizen
equal to his sayings. But he ignored that unworldly morality which,
among Buddhists and Christians, is so much admired and so little
practised. In religion he claimed no originality, he brought no
revelation, but [he accepted the current ideas of his age and time,
though perhaps he eliminated many popular superstitions. He
commended the worship of Heaven, which, if vague, still connected
the deity with the moral law, and he enjoined sacrifice to ancestors
and spirits. But all this apparently without any theory. His definition
of wisdom is well known: “to devote oneself to human duties and
keep aloof from spirits while still respecting them.” This is not the
utterance of a sceptical statesman, equivalent to “remember the
political importance of religion but keep clear of it, so far as you
can.” The best commentary is the statement in the Analects that he
seldom spoke about the will of Heaven, yet such of his utterances
about it as have been preserved are full of awe and submission[563].
A certain delicacy made him unwilling to define or discuss the
things for which he felt the highest reverence, and a similar detached
but respectful attitude is still a living constituent of Chinese society.
The scholar and gentleman will not engage in theological or
metaphysical disputes, but he respectfully takes part in ceremonies
performed in honour of such venerated names as Heaven, Earth and
Confucius himself. Less willingly, but still without remonstrance, he
attends Buddhist or Taoist celebrations.
If it is hard to define the religious element in Confucianism, it is still

harder to define Taoism, but for another reason, namely, that the
word has more than one meaning. In one sense it is the old popular
religion of China, of which Confucius selected the scholarly and
gentlemanly features. Taoism, on the contrary, rejected no godlings
and no legends however grotesque: it gave its approval to the most
extravagant and material superstitions, especially to the belief that
physical immortality could be insured by drinking an elixir, which
proved fatal to many illustrious dupes. As an organized body it
owes its origin to Chang-Ling (c. 130 A.D.) and his grandson Chang-
Lu[564]. The sect received its baptism of blood but made terms with
the Chinese Government, one condition being that a member of the
house of Chang should be recognized as its hereditary [Patriarch or
Pope[565]. Rivalry with Buddhism also contributed to give Taoism
something of that consistency in doctrine and discipline which we
226
associate with the word religion, for in their desire to show that they
were as good as their opponents the Taoists copied them in
numerous and important particulars, for instance triads of deities,
sacred books and monastic institutions.
The power of inventive imitation is characteristic of Taoism[566]. In

most countries great gods are children of the popular mind. After
long gestation and infancy they emerge as deities bound to humanity
by a thousand ties of blood and place. But the Taoists, whenever
they thought a new deity needful or ornamental, simply invented
him, often with the sanction of an Imperial Edict. Thus Yü-Ti[567],
the precious or jade Emperor, who is esteemed the supreme ruler of
the world, was created or at least brought into notice about 1012
A.D. by the Emperor Chên Tsung[568] who pretended to have
correspondence with him. He is probably an adaptation of Indra and
is also identified with a prince of ancient China, but cannot be called
a popular hero like Rama or Krishna, and has not the same hold on
the affections of the people.
But Taoism is also the name commonly given not only to this fanciful
church but also to the philosophic ideas expounded in the Tao-tê-
ching and in the works of Chuang-tzŭ. The Taoist priesthood claim
this philosophy, but the two have no necessary connection. Taoism
as philosophy represents a current of thought opposed to
Confucianism, compared with which it is ascetic, mystic and
pantheistic, though except in comparison it does not deserve such
epithets. My use of pantheistic in particular may raise objection, but
it seems to me that Tao, however hard to define, is analogous to
Brahman, the impersonal Spirit of Hindu philosophy. The universe
is the expression of Tao and in conforming to Tao man finds
happiness. For Confucianism, as for Europe, man is the pivot and
centre of things, [but less so for Taoism and Buddhism. Philosophic
Taoism, being somewhat abstruse and unpractical, might seem to
have little chance of becoming a popular superstition. But from early
times it was opposed to Confucianism, and as Confucianism became
more and more the hall-mark of the official and learned classes,
Taoism tended to become popular, at the expense of degrading itself.
From early times too it dallied with such fascinating notions as the
acquisition of miraculous powers and longevity. But, as an appeal to
the emotional and spiritual sides of humanity, it was, if superior to
Confucianism, inferior to Buddhism.
Buddhism, unlike Confucianism and Taoism, entered China as a

foreign religion, but, in using this phrase, we must ask how far any
227
system of belief prevalent there is accepted as what we call a

religion. Even in Ceylon and Burma people follow the observances
of two religions or at least of a religion and a superstition, but they
would undoubtedly call themselves Buddhists. In China the laity use
no such designations and have no sense of exclusive membership.
For them a religion is comparable to a club, which they use for
special purposes. You may frequent both Buddhist and Taoist
temples just as you may belong to both the Geographical and
Zoological Societies. Perhaps the position of spiritualism in England
offers the nearest analogy to a Chinese religion. There are, I believe,
some few persons for whom spiritualism is a definite, sufficient and
exclusive creed. These may be compared to the Buddhist clergy with
a small minority of the laity. But the majority of those who are
interested or even believe in spiritualism, do not identify themselves
with it in this way. They attend séances as their curiosity or
affections may prompt, but these beliefs and practices do not prevent
them from also belonging to a Christian denomination. Imagine
spiritualism to be better organized as an institution and you will
have a fairly accurate picture of the average Chinaman’s attitude to
Buddhism and Taoism. One may also compare the way in which
English poets use classical mythology. Lycidas, for instance, is an
astounding compound of classical and biblical ideas, and Milton
does not hesitate to call the Supreme Being Jove in a serious passage.
Yet Milton’s Christianity has never, so far as I know, been called in
question.
[There is an obvious historical parallel between the religions of the

Chinese and early Roman Empires. In both, the imperial and official
worship was political and indifferent to dogma without being
hostile, provided no sectary refused to call the Emperor Son of
Heaven or sacrifice to his image. In both, ample provision was made
outside the state cult for allaying the fears of superstition, as well as
for satisfying the soul’s thirst for knowledge and emotion. A Roman
magistrate of the second century A.D. may have offered official
sacrifices, propitiated local genii, and attended the mysteries of
Mithra, in the same impartial way as Chinese magistrates took part a
few years ago in the ceremonies of Confucianism, Taoism and
Buddhism. In both cases there was entire liberty to combine with the
official religious routine private beliefs and observances incongruous
with it and often with one another: in both there was the same
essential feature that no deity demanded exclusive allegiance. The
popular polytheism of China is indeed closely analogous to the
paganism of the ancient world[569]. Hinduism contains too much
228
personal religion and real spiritual feeling to make the resemblance

perfect, but in dealing with Apollo, Mars and Venus a Roman of the
early Empire seems to have shown the mixture of respect and
scepticism which is characteristic of China.
This attitude implies not only a certain want of conviction but also a
utilitarian view of religion. The Chinese visit a temple much as they
visit a shop or doctor, for definite material purposes, and if it be
asked whether they are a religious people in the better sense of the
word, I am afraid the answer must be in the negative. It is with
regret that I express this opinion and I by no means imply that there
are not many deeply religious persons in China, but whereas in India
the obvious manifestations of superstition are a superficial disease
and the heart of the people is keenly sensitive to questions of
personal salvation and speculative theology, this cannot be said of
the masses in China, where religion, as seen, consists of superstitious
rites and the substratum of thought and feeling is small.
[This struck me forcibly when visiting Siam some years ago. In

Bangkok there is a large Chinese population and several Buddhist
temples have been made over to them. The temples frequented by
Siamese are not unlike catholic churches in Europe: the decoration is
roughly similar, the standard of decorum much the same. The
visitors come to worship, meditate or hear sermons. But in the
temples used by the Chinese, a lower standard is painfully obvious
and the atmosphere is different. Visitors are there in plenty, but their
object is to “get luck,” and the business of religion has become
transformed into divination and spiritual gambling. The worshipper,
on entering, goes to a counter where he buys tapers and incense-
sticks, together with some implements of superstition such as rods or
inscribed cards. After burning incense he draws a card or throws the
rods up into the air and takes an augury from the result. Though the
contrast presented in Siam makes the degradation more glaring, yet
these temples in Bangkok are not worse than many which I have
seen in China. I gladly set on the other side of the account some
beautiful and reverent halls of worship in the larger monasteries, but
I fear that the ordinary Chinese temple, whether Taoist or Buddhist,
is a ghostly shop where, in return for ceremonies which involve
neither moral nor intellectual effort, the customer is promised good
luck, offspring, and other material blessings.
It can hardly be denied that the populace in China are grossly

superstitious. Superstition is a common failing and were statistics
available to show the number and status of Europeans who believe
229
in fortune-telling and luck, the result might be startling. But in most

civilized countries such things are furtive and apologetic. In China
the strangest forms of magic and divination enjoy public esteem. The
ideas which underlie popular practice and ritual are worthy of
African savages: there has been a monstrous advance in
systematization, yet the ethics and intellect of China, brilliant as are
their achievements, have not leavened the lump. The average
Chinese, though an excellent citizen, full of common sense and
shrewd in business, is in religious matters a victim of fatuous
superstition and completely divorced from the moral and intellectual
standards which he otherwise employs.
Conspicuous among these superstitions is Fêng Shui or

[Geomancy[570], a pseudo-science which is treated as seriously as
law or surveying. It is based on the idea that localities have a sort of
spiritual climate which brings prosperity or the reverse and depends
on the influences of stars and nature spirits, such as the azure dragon
and white tiger. But since these agencies find expression in the
contours of a locality, they can be affected if its features are modified
by artificial means, for instance, the construction of walls and towers.
Buddhism did not disdain to patronize these notions. The principal
hall of a monastery is usually erected on a specially auspicious site
and the appeals issued for the repair of sacred buildings often point
out the danger impending if edifices essential to the good Fêng Shui
of a district are allowed to decay. The scepticism and laughter of the
educated does not clear the air, for superstition can flourish when
neither respected nor believed. The worst feature of religion in China
is that the decently educated public ridicules its external
observances, but continues to practise them, because they are
connected with occasions of good fellowship or because their
omission might be a sign of disrespect to departed relatives or
simply because in dealing with uncanny things it is better to be on
the safe side. This is the sum of China’s composite religion as visible
in public and private rites. Its ethical value is far higher than might
be supposed, for its most absurd superstitions also recommend love
and respect in family life and a high standard of civic duty. But
China has never admitted that public or private morality requires the
support of a religious creed.
As might be expected, life and animation are more apparent in sects

than in conventional religion. Since the recent revolution it is no
longer necessary to confute the idea that the Chinese are a stationary
and unemotional race, but its inaccuracy was demonstrated by many
previous movements especially the T’ai-p’ing rebellion, which had at
230
first a religious tinge. Yet in China such movements, though they

may kindle enthusiasm and provoke persecution, rarely have the
religious value attaching to a sect in Christian, Hindu and
Mohammedan countries. Viewed as an ecclesiastical or spiritual
movement, the T’ai-p’ing is insignificant: it was a secret society
permitted by circumstances to become a formidable rising and in its
important phases the political element was paramount. The same is
true of many sects which have not achieved such notoriety. They are
secret societies which adopt a creed, but it is not in the creed that
their real vitality lies.
If it is difficult to say how far the Buddhism of China is a religion, it

is equally difficult to define its relation to the State. Students well
acquainted with the literature as well as with the actual condition of
China have expressed diametrically opposite views as to the
religious attitude of the Imperial Government[571], one stating
roundly that it was “the most intolerant, the most persecuting of all
earthly Governments,” and another that it “at no period refused
hospitality and consideration to any religion recommended as
such[572].”
In considering such questions I would again emphasize the fact that

Chinese terms have often not the same extension as their apparent
synonyms in European languages, which, of course, means that the
provinces of human life and thought have also different boundaries.
For most countries the word clergy has a definite meaning and, in
spite of great diversities, may be applied to Christian clerics, Mollahs
and Brahmans without serious error. It means a class of men who are
the superintendents of religion, but also more. On the one side,
though they may have serious political differences with the
Government, they are usually in touch with it: on the other, though
they may dislike reformers and movements from below, they
patronize and minister to popular sentiment. They are closely
connected with education and learning and sometimes with the law.
But in China there is no class which unites all these features.
Learning, law and education are represented by the Confucian
scholars or literati. Though no one would think of calling them
priests, yet they may offer official sacrifices, like Roman [magistrates.
Though they are contemptuous of popular superstition, yet they
embody the popular ideal. It is the pride of a village to produce a
scholar. But the scholarship of the literati is purely Confucian:
Buddhist and Taoist learning have no part in it.
231
The priest, whether Buddhist or Taoist, is not in the mind of the

people the repository of learning and law. He is not in religious
matters the counterpart of the secular arm, but rather a private
practitioner, duly licensed but of no particular standing. But he is
skilful in his own profession: he has access to the powers who help,
pity and console, and even the sceptic seeks his assistance when
confronted with the dangers of this world and the next.
The student of Chinese history may object that at many periods,

notably under the Yüan dynasty, the Buddhist clergy were officially
recognized as an educational body and even received the title of
Kuo-shih or teacher of the people. This is true. Such recognition by
no means annihilated the literati, but it illustrates the decisive
influence exercised by the Emperor and the court. We have, on the
one side, a learned official class, custodians of the best national
ideals but inclined to reject emotion and speculation as well as
superstition: on the other, two priesthoods, prone to superstition but
legitimately strong in so far as they satisfied the emotional and
speculative instincts. The literati held persistently, though
respectfully, to the view that the Emperor should be a Confucianist
pure and simple, but Buddhism and Taoism had such strong
popular support that it was always safe and often politic for an
Emperor to patronize them. Hence an Emperor of personal
convictions was able to turn the balance, and it must be added that
Buddhism often flourished in the courts of weak and dissolute
Emperors who were in the hands of women and eunuchs. Some of
these latter were among its most distinguished devotees.
All Chinese religions agreed in accepting the Emperor as head of the

Church, not merely titular but active. He exercised a strange
prerogative of creating, promoting and degrading deities. Even
within the Buddhist sphere he regulated the incarnations of
Bodhisattvas in the persons of Lamas and from time to time re-
edited the canon[573] or added new works to it. This [extreme
Erastianism had its roots in Indian as well as Chinese ideas. The
Confucianist, while reminding the Emperor that he should imitate
the sages and rulers of antiquity, gladly admitted his right to control
the worship of all spirits[574] and the popular conscience, while
probably unable to define what was meant by the title Son of
Heaven[575], felt that it gave him a viceregal right to keep the gods in
order, so long as he did not provoke famine or other national
calamities by mismanagement. The Buddhists, though tenacious of
freedom in the spiritual life, had no objection to the patronage of
princes. Asoka permitted himself to regulate the affairs of the
232
Church and the success of Buddhists as missionaries was due in no

small measure to their tact in allowing other sovereigns to follow his
example.
That Buddhism should have obtained in China a favourable

reception and a permanent status is indeed remarkable, for in two
ways it was repugnant to the sentiments of the governing classes to
say nothing of the differences in temper and outlook which divide
Hindus and Chinese. Firstly, its ideal was asceticism and celibacy; it
gave family life the lower place and ignored the popular Chinese
view that to have a son is not only a duty, but also essential for those
sacrifices without which the departed spirit cannot have peace.
Secondly, it was not merely a doctrine but an ecclesiastical
organization, a congregation of persons who were neither citizens
nor subjects, not exactly an imperium in imperio nor a secret society,
but dangerously capable of becoming either. Such bodies have
always incurred the suspicion and persecution of the Chinese
Government. Even in the fifth century Buddhist monasteries were
accused of organizing armed conspiracies and many later sects
suffered from the panic which they inspired in official bosoms. But
both difficulties were overcome by the suppleness of the clergy. [If
they outraged family sentiment they managed to make themselves
indispensable at funeral ceremonies[576]. If they had a dangerous
resemblance to an imperium in imperio, they minimized it by their
obvious desire to exercise influence through the Emperor. Though it
is true that the majority of anti-dynastic political sects had a
Buddhist colour, the most prominent and influential Buddhists
never failed in loyalty. To this adroitness must be added a solid
psychological advantage. The success of Buddhism in China was due
to the fact that it presented religious emotion and speculation in the
best form known there, and when it began to spread the intellectual
soil was not unpropitious. The higher Taoist philosophy had made
familiar the ideas of quietism and the contemplative life: the age was
unsettled, harassed alike by foreign invasion and civil strife. In such
times when even active natures tire of unsuccessful struggles, the
asylum of a monastery has attractions for many.
We have now some idea of the double position of Buddhism in

China and can understand how it sometimes appears as almost the
established church and sometimes as a persecuted sect. The reader
will do well to remember that in Europe the relations of politics to
religion have not always been simple: many Catholic sovereigns
have quarrelled with Popes and monks. The French Government
supports the claims of Catholic missions in China but does not
233
favour the Church in France. The fact that Huxley was made a Privy
Councillor does not imply that Queen Victoria approved of his
religious views. In China the repeated restrictive edicts concerning
monasteries should not be regarded as acts of persecution. Every
politician can see the loss to the state if able-bodied men become
monks by the thousand. In periods of literary and missionary zeal,
large congregations of such monks may have a sufficient sphere of
activity but in sleepy, decadent periods they are apt to become a
moral or political danger. A devout Buddhist or Catholic may
reasonably hold that though the monastic life is the best for the elect,
yet for the unworthy it is more dangerous than the temptations of
the world. Thus the founder of the Ming dynasty had himself been a
bonze, yet he limited the number [and age of those who might
become monks[577]. On the other hand, he attended Buddhist
services and published an edition of the Tripitaka. In this and in the
conduct of most Emperors there is little that is inconsistent or
mysterious: they regarded religion not in our fashion as a system
deserving either allegiance or rejection, but as a modern Colonial
Governor might regard education. Some Governors are enthusiastic
for education: others mistrust it as a stimulus of disquieting ideas:
most accept it as worthy of occasional patronage, like hospitals and
races. In the same way some Emperors, like Wu-Ti[578], were
enthusiasts for Buddhism and made it practically the state religion: a
few others were definitely hostile either from conviction or political
circumstances, but probably most sovereigns regarded it as the
average British official regards education, as something that one
can’t help having, that one must belaud on certain public occasions,
that may now and then be useful, but still emphatically something to
be kept within limits.
Outbursts against Buddhism are easy to understand. I have pointed

out its un-Chinese features and the persistent opposition of the
literati. These were sufficient reasons for repressive measures
whenever the Emperor was unbuddhist in his sympathies, especially
if the monasteries had enjoyed a period of prosperity and become
crowded and wealthy. What is harder to understand is the
occasional favour shown by apparently anti-Buddhist Emperors.
The Sacred Edict of the great K’ang Hsi forbids heterodoxy (i tuan)
in which the official explanation clearly includes Buddhism[579]. It
was published in his extreme youth, but had his mature approval,
and until recently was read in every prefecture twice a month. But
the same Emperor gave many gifts to monasteries, and in 1705 he
issued a decree to the monks of P’uto in which he said, “we since our
234
boyhood have been earnest students of Confucian lore and have had
no time to become minutely acquainted with the sacred books of
Buddhism, but we are satisfied that Virtue is the one word [which
indicates what is essential in both systems. Let us pray to the
compassionate Kuan-yin that she may of her grace send down upon
our people the spiritual rain and sweet dew of the good Law: that
she may grant them bounteous harvests, seasonable winds and the
blessings of peace, harmony and long life and finally that she may
lead them to the salvation which she offers to all beings in the
Universe[580].” The two edicts are not consistent but such
inconsistency is no reproach to a statesman nor wholly illogical. The
Emperor reprimands extravagance in doctrine and ceremonial and
commends Confucianism to his subjects as all that is necessary for
good life and good government, but when he finds that Buddhism
conduces to the same end he accords his patronage and politely
admits the existence and power of Kuan-yin.
But I must pass on to another question, the relation of Chinese to

Indian Buddhism. Chinese Buddhism is often spoken of as a strange
and corrupt degeneration, a commixture of Indian and foreign ideas.
Now if such phrases mean that the pulse of life is feeble and the old
lights dim, we must regretfully admit their truth, but still little is to
be found in Chinese Buddhism except the successive phases of later
Indian Buddhism, introduced into China from the first century A.D.
onwards. In Japan there arose new sects, but in China, when
importation ceased, no period of invention supervened. The T’ien-
t’ai school has some originality, and native and foreign ideas were
combined by the followers of Bodhidharma. But the remaining
schools were all founded by members of Indian sects or by Chinese
who aimed at scrupulous imitation of Indian models. Until the
eighth century, when the formative period came to an end, we have
an alternation of Indian or Central Asian teachers arriving in China
to meet with respect and acceptance, and of Chinese enquirers who
visited India in order to discover the true doctrine and practice and
were honoured on their return in proportion as they were believed
to have found it. There is this distinction between China and such
countries as Java, Camboja and Champa, that whereas in [them we
find a mixture of Hinduism and Buddhism, in China the traces of
Hinduism are slight. The imported ideas, however corrupt, were
those of Indian Buddhist scholars, not the mixed ideas of the Indian
layman[581].
Of course Buddhist theory and practice felt the influence of their

new surroundings. The ornaments and embroidery of the faith are
235
Chinese and sometimes hide the original material. Thus Kuan-yin,

considered historically, has grown out of the Indian deity Avalokita,
but the goddess worshipped by the populace is the heroine of the
Chinese romance mentioned above. And, since many Chinese are
only half Buddhists, tales about gods and saints are taken only half-
seriously; the Buddha periodically invites the immortals to dine with
him in Heaven and the Eighteen Lohan are described as converted
brigands.
In every monastery the buildings, images and monks obviously bear

the stamp of the country. Yet nearly all the doctrines and most of the
usages have Indian parallels. The ritual has its counterpart in what I-
Ching describes as seen by himself in his Indian travels. China has
added the idea of fêng-shui, and has modified architectural forms.
For instance the many-storeyed pagoda is an elongation of the
stupa[582]. So, too, in ceremonial, the great prominence given to
funeral rites and many superstitious details are Chinese, yet, as I
have often mentioned in this work, rites on behalf of the dead were
tolerated by early Buddhism. The curious mingling of religious
services with theatrical pagents which Hsüan Chuang witnessed at
Allahabad in the reign of Harsha, has its modest parallel to-day in
many popular festivals.
The numerous images which crowd a Chinese temple, the [four

kings, Arhats and Bodhisattvas, though of unfamiliar appearance to
the Indian student, are Indian in origin. A few Taoist deities may
have side chapels, but they are not among the principal objects of
worship. The greater part of the Chinese Tripitaka is a translation
from the Sanskrit and the Chinese works (only 194 against 1467
translations) are chiefly exegetical. Thus, though Chinese bonzes
countenance native superstitions and gladly undertake to deal with
all the gods and devils of the land, yet in its doctrine, literature, and
even in many externals their Buddhism remains an Indian
importation. If we seek in it for anything truly Chinese, it is to be
found not in the constituents, but in the atmosphere, which, like a
breeze from a mountain monastery sometimes freshens the gilded
shrines and libraries of verbose sutras. It is the native spirit of the Far
East which finds expression in the hill-side hermit’s sense of freedom
and in dark sayings such as Buddhism is the oak-tree in my garden.
Every free and pure heart can become a Buddha, but also is one with
the life of birds and flowers. Both the love of nature[583] and the
belief that men can become divine can easily be paralleled in Indian
texts, but they were not, I think, imported into China, and joy in
236
natural beauty and sympathy with wild life are much more
prominent in Chinese than in Indian art.
Is then Buddhist doctrine, as opposed to the superstitions tolerated

by Buddhism, something exotic and without influence on the
national life? That also is not true. The reader will perceive from
what has gone before that if he asks for statistics of Buddhism in
China, the answer must be, in the Buddha’s own phrase, that the
question is not properly put. It is incorrect to describe China as a
Buddhist country. We may say that it contains so many million
Mohammedans or Christians, because these creeds are definite and
exclusive. We cannot quote similar figures for Buddhism or
Confucianism. Yet assuredly Buddhism has been a great power in
China, as great perhaps as Christianity in Europe, if we remember
how much is owed by European art, literature, law and science to
non-Christian sources. The Chinese language is full of Buddhist
phraseology[584], not only in literature [but in popular songs and
proverbs and an inspection of such entries in a Chinese dictionary as
Fo (Buddha), Kuan Yin, Ho Shang (monk)[585] will show how large
and not altogether flattering a part they play in popular speech.
Popular literature bears the same testimony. It is true that in what

are esteemed the higher walks of letters Buddhism has little place.
The quotations and allusions which play there so prominent a part
are taken from the classics and Confucianism can claim as its own
the historical, lexicographical and critical[586] works which are the
solid and somewhat heavy glory of Chinese literature. But its lighter
and less cultivated blossoms, such as novels, fairy stories and poetry,
are predominantly Buddhist or Taoist in inspiration. This may be
easily verified by a perusal of such works as the Dream of the Red
Chamber, Strange Stories from a Chinese Studio, and Wieger’s Folk Lore
Chinois Moderne. The same is true in general of the great Chinese
poets, many of whom did not conceal that (in a poetic and unascetic
fashion) they were attached to Buddhism.
It may be asked if the inspiration is not Taoist in the main rather than
Buddhist. Side by side with ethics and ceremony, a native stream of
bold and weird imagination has never ceased to flow in China and
there was no need to import tales of the Genii, immortal saints and
vampire beauties. But when any coherency unites these ideas of the
supernatural, that I think is the work of Buddhism and so far as
Taoism itself has any coherency it is an imitation of Buddhism. Thus
the idea of metempsychosis as one of many passing fancies may be
indigenous to China but its prevalence in popular thought and
237
language is undoubtedly due to Buddhism, for Taoism and

Confucianism have nothing definite to say as to the state of the dead.
Much the same story of Buddhist influence is told by Chinese art,

especially painting and sculpture. Here too Taoism is by no means
excluded: it may be said to represent the artistic side [of the Chinese
mind, as Confucianism represents the political. But it is impossible to
mistake the significance of chronology. As soon as Buddhism was
well established in China, art entered on a new phase which
culminated in the masterpieces of the T’ang and Sung[587].
Buddhism did not introduce painting into China or even perfect a
rudimentary art. The celebrated roll of Ku K’ai-chih[588] shows no
trace of Indian influence and presupposes a long artistic tradition.
But Mahayanist Buddhism brought across Central Asia new shapes
and motives. Some of its imports were of doubtful artistic value,
such as figures with many limbs and eyes, but with them came ideas
which enriched Chinese art with new dramatic power, passion and
solemnity. Taoism dealt with other worlds but they were gardens of
the Hesperides, inhabited by immortal wizards and fairy queens, not
those disquieting regions where the soul receives the reward of its
deeds. But now the art of Central Asia showed Chinese painters
something new; saints preaching the law with a gesture of authority
and deities of infinite compassion inviting suppliants to approach
their thrones. And with them came the dramatic story of Gotama’s
life and all the legends of the Jatakas.
This clearly is not Taoism, but when the era of great art and
literature begins, any distinction between the two creeds, except for
theological purposes, becomes artificial, for Taoism borrowed many
externals of Buddhism, and Buddhism, while not abandoning its
austere and emaciated saints, also accepted the Taoist ideal of the
careless wandering hermit, friend of mountain pines and deer. Wei
Hsieh[589] who lived under the Chin dynasty, when the strength of
Buddhism was beginning to be felt, is considered by Chinese critics
as the earliest of the great painters and is said to have excelled in
both Buddhist and Taoist subjects. The same may be said of the most
eminent names, such as Ku K’ai-chih and Wu Tao-tzŭ[590], and we
may also remember that Italian artists painted the birth of Venus and
the origin of the milky way as well as Annunciations and
[Assumptions, without any hint that one incident was less true than
another. Buddhism not only provided subjects like the death of the
Buddha and Kuan Yin, the Goddess of Mercy, which hold in Chinese
art the same place as the Crucifixion and the Madonna in Europe,
and generation after generation have stimulated the noblest efforts of
238
the best painters. It also offered a creed and ideals suited to the
artistic temperament: peace and beauty reigned in its monasteries: its
doctrine that life is one and continuous is reflected in that love of
nature, that sympathetic understanding of plants and animals, that
intimate union of sentiment with landscape which marks the best
Chinese pictures.
FOOTNOTES:
[557] For Chinese Buddhism see especially Johnston, Chinese

Buddhism, 1913 (cited as Johnston). Much information about the
popular side of Buddhism and Taoism nay be found in Recherches sur
les superstitions en Chine par le Père Henri Doré, 10 vols. 1911-1916,
Shanghai (cited as Doré).
[558] A curious instance of deification is mentioned in Muséon, 1914,

p. 61. It appears that several deceased Jesuits have been deified. For a
recent instance of deification in 1913 see Doré, X. p. 753.
[559] The spirits called San Kuan or San Yüan are a

good instance of Chinese deities. The words mean Three Agents or
Principles who strictly speaking have no names: (a) Originally they
appear to represent Heaven, Earth and Water. (b) Then they stand
for three periods of the year and the astrological influences which
rule each, (c) As Agents, and more or less analogous to human
personalities, Heaven gives happiness, Earth pardons sins and Water
delivers from misfortune. (d)They are identified with the ancient
Emperors Yao, Shun, Yü. (e) They are also identified with three
Censors under the Emperor Li-Wang, B.C. 878-841.
[560] Hsüan Chuang’s own account of his travels
bears the slightly different title of Hsi-Yü-Chi. The

work noticed here is attributed to Chiu Ch’ang Ch’un, a Taoist priest
of the thirteenth century. It is said to be the Buddhist book most
widely read in Korea where it is printed in the popular script. An
abridged English translation has been published by T. Richard under
the title of A Mission to Heaven.
239
[561] I am writing immediately after the abolition of the Imperial

Government (1912), and what I say naturally refers to a state of
things which is passing away. But it is too soon to say how the new
regime will affect religion. There is an old saying that China is
supported by the three religions as a tripod by three legs.
[562] strictly speaking the title of his reign 1573-1620.
[563] Compare Anal. IX. 1 and xiv. 38. 2. See also Doctrine of the Mean,
chap, xvi, for more positive views about spirits.
[564] and See De Groot, “Origins of the Taoist

Church” in Trans. Third Congress Hist. Relig. 1908.
[565] Chang Yüan-hsü, who held office in 1912, was deprived of his
titles by the Republican Government. In 1914 petitions were
presented for their restoration, but I do not know with what result.
See Peking Daily News, September 5th, 1914.
[566] Something similar may be seen in Mormonism where angels

and legends have been invented by individual fancy without any
background of tradition.
[567]
[568]
[569] The sixth Æneid would seem to a Chinese quite a natural

description of the next world. In it we have Elysium, Tartarus,
transmigration of souls, souls who can find no resting place because
their bodies are unburied, and phantoms showing still the wounds
which their bodies received in life. Nor is there any attempt to
harmonize these discordant ideas.
[570] A somewhat similar pseudo-science called vatthu-

vijjâ is condemned in the Pali scriptures. E.g. Digha N. I. 21.
Astrology also has been a great force in Chinese politics. See Bland
and Backhouse, Ann. and Memoirs, passim. The favour shown at
240
different times to Buddhist, Manichæan and Catholic priests was

often due to their supposed knowledge of astrology.
[571] I may again remind the reader that I am not speaking of the
Chinese Republic but of the Empire. The long history of its relations
to Buddhism, Taoism and Confucianism, though it concerns the past,
is of great interest.
[572] De Groot and Parker. For an elaboration of the first thesis see
especially De Groot’s Sectarianism and Religious Persecution in China.
[573] But it must be remembered that the Chinese canon is not

entirely analogous to the collections of the scriptures current in
India, Ceylon or Europe.
[574] The Emperor is the Lord of all spirits and has the right to
sacrifice to all spirits, whereas others should sacrifice only to such
spirits as concern them. For the Emperor’s title “Lord of Spirits,” see
Shu Ching IV., VI. 2-3, and Shih Ching, III., II. 8, 3.
[575] The title is undoubtedly very ancient and means Son of Heaven
or Son of God. See Hirth, Ancient History of China, pp. 95-96. But the
precise force of Son is not clear. The Emperor was Viceregent of
Heaven, high priest and responsible for natural phenomena, but he
could not in historical times be regarded as sprung (like the Emperor
of Japan) from a family of divine descent, because the dynasties, and
with them the imperial family, were subject to frequent change.
[576] Similarly it is a popular tenet that if a man becomes a monk all

his ancestors go to Heaven. See Paraphrase of sacred Edict, VII.
[577] Japanese Emperors did the same, e.g. Kwammū Tennō in 793.
[578]
[579] K’ang Hsi is responsible only for the text of the Edict which
merely forbids heterodoxy. But his son Yung Chêng who published
the explanation and paraphrase repaired the Buddhist temples at
P’uto and the Taoist temple at Lung-hu-shan.
[580] See Johnston, p. 352. I have not seen the Chinese text of this
edict. In Laufer and Francke’s Epigraphische Denkmäler aus China is a
long inscription of Kang Hsi’s giving the history both legendary and
recent of the celebrated sandal-wood image of the Buddha.
241
[581] This indicates that the fusion of Buddhism and Hinduism was
less complete than some scholars suppose. Where there was a
general immigration of Hindus, the mixture is found, but the Indian
visitors to China were mostly professional teachers and their
teaching was definitely Buddhist. There are, however, two non-
Buddhist books in the Chinese Tripitaka. Nanjio Cat. Nos. 1295 and
1300.
[582] It has been pointed out by Fergusson and others that there
were high towers in China before the Buddhist period. Still, the
numerous specimens extant date from Buddhist times, many were
built over relics, and the accounts of both Fa-hsien and Hsüan
Chuang show that the Stupa built by Kanishka at Peshawar had
attracted the attention of the Chinese.
I regret that de Groot’s interesting work Der Thüpa: das heiligste

Heiligtum des Buddhismus in China, 1919, reached me too late for me
to make use of it.
[583] The love of nature shown in the Pali Pitakas (particularly the
Thera and Therî Gâthâ) has often been noticed, but it is also strong in
Mahâyânist literature. E.g. Bodhicaryâvatâra VIII. 26-39 and 86-88.
[584] See especially Watters, Essays on the Chinese Language, chaps,

VIII and IX, and Clementi, Cantonese Love Songs in English, pp. 9 to 12
[585]
[586] I cannot refrain from calling attention to the difference between

the Chinese and most other Asiatic peoples (especially the Hindus)
as exhibited in their literature. Quite apart from European influence
the Chinese produced several centuries ago catalogues of museums
and descriptive lists of inscriptions, works which have no parallel in
Hindu India.
[587] There are said to have been four great schools of Buddhist
painting under the T’ang. See Kokka 294 and 295.
[588] Preserved in the British Museum and published.
[589] of the dynasty.
242
[590]
243
CHAPTER XLIII
CHINA (continued)
HISTORY.
The traditional date for the introduction of Buddhism is 62 A.D.,

when the chronicles tell how the Emperor Ming-Ti of the Later Han
Dynasty dreamt that he saw a golden man fly into his palace[591]
and how his courtiers suggested that the figure was Fo-t’o[592] or
Buddha, an Indian God. Ming-Ti did not let the matter drop and in
65 sent an embassy to a destination variously described as the
kingdom of the Ta Yüeh Chih[593] or India with instructions to bring
back Buddhist scriptures and priests. On its return it was
accompanied by a monk called Kâśyapa Mâtanga[594], a native of
Central India. A second called Chu Fa-Lan[595], who came from
Central Asia and found some difficulty in obtaining permission to
leave his country, followed shortly afterwards. Both were installed at
Loyang, the capital of the dynasty, in the White Horse
Monastery[596], so called because the foreign monks rode on white
horses or used them for carrying books.
The story has been criticized as an obvious legend, but I see no

reason why it should not be true to this extent that Ming-Ti sent an
embassy to Central Asia (not India in our sense) with the result that
a monastery was for the first time established under imperial
patronage. The gravest objection is that before the campaigns of Pan
Ch’ao[597], which began about 73 A.D., Central Asia was in rebellion
against China. But those [campaigns show that the Chinese Court
was occupied with Central Asian questions and to send envoys to
enquire about religion may have been politically advantageous, for
they could obtain information without asserting or abandoning
China’s claims to sovereignty. The story does not state that there was
no Buddhism in China before 62 A.D. On the contrary it implies that
though it was not sufficiently conspicuous to be known to the
Emperor, yet there was no difficulty in obtaining information about
it and other facts support the idea that it began to enter China at least
half a century earlier. The negotiations of Chang Ch’ien[598] with the
Yüeh Chih (129-119 B.C.) and the documents discovered by Stein in
the ancient military posts on the western frontier of Kansu[599]
prove that China had communication with Central Asia, but neither
244
the accounts of Chang Ch’ien’s journeys nor the documents contain

any allusion to Buddhism. In 121 B.C. the Annals relate that “a
golden man” was captured from the Hsiung-nu but, even if it was an
image of Buddha, the incident had no consequences. More important
is a notice in the Wei-lüeh which gives a brief account of the
Buddha’s birth and states that in the year 2 B.C. an ambassador sent
by the Emperor Ai to the court of the Yüeh Chih was instructed in
Buddhism by order of their king[600]. Also the Later Han Annals
intimate that in 65 A.D. the Prince of Ch’u[601] was a Buddhist and
that there were Śramanas and Upâsakas in his territory.
The author of the Wei-lüeh comments on the resemblance of

Buddhist writings to the work of Lao-tzŭ, and suggests that the latter
left China in order to teach in India. This theory found many
advocates among the Taoists, but is not likely to commend itself to
European scholars. Less improbable is a view held by [many Chinese
critics[602] and apparently first mentioned in the Sui annals, namely,
that Buddhism was introduced into China at an early date but was
exterminated by the Emperor Shih Huang Ti (221-206) in the course
of his crusade against literature. But this view is not supported by
any details and is open to the general objection that intercourse
between China and India viâ Central Asia before 200 B.C. is not only
unproved but improbable.
Still the mystical, quietist philosophy of Lao-tzŭ and Chuang-tzŭ has

an undoubted resemblance to Indian thought. No one who is
familiar with the Upanishads can read the Tao-Tê-Ching without
feeling that if Brahman is substituted for Tao the whole would be
intelligible to a Hindu. Its doctrine is not specifically Buddhist, yet it
contains passages which sound like echoes of the Pitakas. Compare
Tao-Tê-Ching, 33. 1, “He who overcomes others is strong: he who
overcomes himself is mighty,” with Dhammapada, 103, “If one man
overcome a thousand thousand in battle and another overcome
himself, this last is the greatest of conquerors”; and 46. 2, “There is
no greater sin that to look on what moves desire: there is no greater
evil than discontent: there is no greater disaster than covetousness,”
with Dhammapada, 251, “There is no fire like desire, there is no
monster like hatred, there is no snare like folly, there is no torrent
like covetousness.” And if it be objected that these are the
coincidences of obvious ethics, I would call attention to 39. 1̣, “Hence
if we enumerate separately each part that goes to form a cart, we
have no cart at all.” Here the thought and its illustration cannot be
called obvious and the resemblance to well-known passages in the
Samyutta Nikâya and Questions of Milinda[603] is striking.
245
Any discussion of the indebtedness of the Tao-Tê-Ching to India is

too complicated for insertion here since it involves the [question of
its date or the date of particular passages, if we reject the hypothesis
that the work as we have it was composed by Lao-tzŭ in the sixth
century B.C.[604] But there is less reason to doubt the genuineness of
the essays of Chuang-tzŭ who lived in the fourth century B.C. In
them we find mention of trances which give superhuman wisdom
and lead to union with the all-pervading spirit, and of magical
powers enjoyed by sages, similar to the Indian iddhi. He approves the
practice of abandoning the world and enunciates the doctrines of
evolution and reincarnation. He knows, as does also the Tao-Tê-
Ching, methods of regulating the breathing which are conducive to
mental culture and long life. He speaks of the six faculties of
perception, which recall the Shaḍâyatana, and of name and real
existence (nâmarûpam) as being the conditions of a thing[605]. He
has also a remarkable comparison of death to the extinction of a fire:
“what we can point to are the faggots that have been consumed: but
the fire is transmitted and we know not that it is over and ended.”
Several Buddhist parallels to this might be cited[606].
The list of such resemblances might be made longer and the

explanation that Indian ideas reached China sporadically, at least as
early as the fourth century B.C., seems natural. I should accept it, if
there were any historical evidence besides these literary parallels.
But there seems to be none and it may be justly urged that the roots
of this quietism lie so deep in the Chinese character, that the plant
cannot have sprung from some chance wind-wafted seed. That
character has two sides, one seen in the Chinese Empire and the
classical philosophy, excellent as ethics but somewhat stiff and
formal: the other in revolutions and rebellions, in the free life of
hermits and wanderers, in poetry and painting. This second side is
very like the temper of Indian Buddhism and easily amalgamated
with it[607], but it has a special note of its own.
[The curiosity of Ming-Ti did not lead to any immediate triumph of

Buddhism. We read that he was zealous in honouring Confucius but
not that he showed devotion to the new faith. Indeed it is possible
that his interest was political rather than religious. Buddhism was
also discredited by its first convert, the Emperor’s brother Chu-Ying,
who rebelled unsuccessfully and committed suicide. Still it
flourished in a quiet way and the two foreign monks in the White
Horse Monastery began that long series of translations which
assumed gigantic proportions in the following centuries. To Kâśyapa
is ascribed a collection of extracts known as the Sûtra of forty-two
246
sections which is still popular[608]. This little work adheres closely

to the teaching of the Pali Tripitaka and shows hardly any traces of
the Mahâyâna. According to the Chinese annals the chief doctrines
preached by the first Buddhist missionaries were the sanctity of all
animal life, metempsychosis, meditation, asceticism and Karma.
It is not until the third century[609] that we hear much of Buddhism

as a force at Court or among the people, but meanwhile the task of
translation progressed at Lo-yang. The Chinese are a literary race
and these quiet labours prepared the soil for the subsequent
efflorescence. Twelve[610] translators are named as having worked
before the downfall of the Han Dynasty and about 350 books are
attributed to them. None of them were Chinese. About half came
from India and the rest from Central Asia, the most celebrated of the
latter being An Shih-kao, a prince of An-hsi or Parthia[611]. The
Later Han Dynasty was [followed by the animated and romantic
epoch known as the Three Kingdoms (221-265) when China was
divided between the States of Wei, Wu and Shu. Loyang became the
capital of Wei and the activity of the White Horse Monastery
continued. We have the names of five translators who worked there.
One of them was the first to translate the Pâtimokkha[612], which
argues that previously few followed the monastic life. At Nanking,
the capital of Wu, we also hear of five translators and one was tutor
of the Crown Prince. This implies that Buddhism was spreading in
the south and that monks inspired confidence at Court.
The Three Kingdoms gave place to the Dynasty known as Western

Tsin[613] which, for a short time (A.D. 265-316), claimed to unite the
Empire, and we now reach the period when Buddhism begins to
become prominent. It is also a period of political confusion, of
contest between the north and south, of struggles between Chinese
and Tartars. Chinese histories, with their long lists of legitimate
sovereigns, exaggerate the solidity and continuity of the Empire, for
the territory ruled by those sovereigns was often but a small fraction
of what we call China. Yet the Tartar states were not an alien and
destructive force to the same extent as the conquests made by
Mohammedan Turks at the expense of Byzantium. The Tartars were
neither fanatical, nor prejudiced against Chinese ideals in politics
and religion. On the contrary, they respected the language, literature
and institutions of the Empire: they assumed Chinese names and
sometimes based their claim to the Imperial title on the marriage of
their ancestors with Chinese princesses.
247
During the fourth century and the first half of the fifth some twenty
ephemeral states, governed by Tartar chieftains and perpetually
involved in mutual war, rose and fell in northern China. The most
permanent of them was Northern Wei which lasted till 535 A.D. But
the Later Chao and both the Earlier and Later Ts’in are important for
our purpose[614]. Some writers make it a reproach to Buddhism that
its progress, which had been [slow among the civilized Chinese,
became rapid in the provinces which passed into the hands of these
ruder tribes. But the phenomenon is natural and is illustrated by the
fact that even now the advance of Christianity is more rapid in
Africa than in India. The civilization of China was already old and
self-complacent: not devoid of intellectual curiosity and not
intolerant, but sceptical of foreign importations and of dealings with
the next world. But the Tartars had little of their own in the way of
literature and institutions: it was their custom to assimilate the arts
and ideas of the civilized nations whom they conquered: the more
western tribes had already made the acquaintance of Buddhism in
Central Asia and such native notions of religion as they possessed
disposed them to treat priests, monks and magicians with respect.
Of the states mentioned, the Later Chao was founded by Shih-

Lo[615] (273-332), whose territories extended from the Great Wall to
the Han and Huai in the South. He showed favour to an Indian
monk and diviner called Fo-t’u-ch’êng[616] who lived at his court
and he appears to have been himself a Buddhist. At any rate the
most eminent of his successors, Shih Chi-lung[617], was an ardent
devotee and gave general permission to the population to enter
monasteries, which had not been granted previously. This
permission is noticeable, for it implies, even at this early date, the
theory that a subject of the Emperor has no right to become a monk
without his master’s leave.
In 381 we are told that in north-western China nine-tenths of the

inhabitants were Buddhists. In 372 Buddhism was introduced into
Korea and accepted as the flower of Chinese civilization.
The state known as the Former Ts’in[618] had its nucleus in [Shensi,
but expanded considerably between 351 and 394 A.D. under the
leadership of Fu-Chien[619], who established in it large colonies of
Tartars. At first he favoured Confucianism but in 381 became a
Buddhist. He was evidently in close touch with the western regions
and probably through them with India, for we hear that sixty-two
states of Central Asia sent him tribute.
248
The Later Ts’in dynasty (384-417) had its headquarters in Kansu and
was founded by vassals of the Former Ts’in. When the power of Fu-
Chien collapsed, they succeeded to his possessions and established
themselves in Ch’ang-an. Yao-hsing[620], the second monarch of this
line was a devout Buddhist, and deserves mention as the patron of
Kumârajîva[621], the most eminent of the earlier translators.
Kumârajîva was born of Indian parents in Kucha and, after following

the school of the Sarvâstivâdins for some time, became a Mahayanist.
When Kucha was captured in 383 by the General of Fu-Chien, he
was carried off to China and from 401 onwards he laboured at
Ch’ang-an for about ten years. He was appointed Kuo Shih[622], or
Director of Public Instruction, and lectured in a hall specially built
for him. He is said to have had 3000 disciples and fifty extant
translations are ascribed to him. Probably all the Tartar kingdoms
were well disposed towards Buddhism, though their unsettled
condition made them precarious residences for monks and scholars.
This was doubtless true of Northern Wei, which had been growing
during the period described, but appears as a prominent home of
Buddhism somewhat later.
Meanwhile in the south the Eastern Tsin Dynasty, which represented

the legitimate Empire and ruled at Nanking from 317 to 420, was
also favourable to Buddhism and Hsiao Wu-Ti, the ninth sovereign
of this line, was the first Emperor of China to become a Buddhist.
The times were troubled, but order was gradually being restored.
The Eastern Tsin Dynasty had been much disturbed by the struggles
of rival princes. These were brought to an end in 420 by a new
dynasty known as Liu Sung which reigned in [the south some sixty
years. The north was divided among six Tartar kingdoms, which all
perished before 440 except Wei. Wei then split into an Eastern and a
Western kingdom which lasted about a hundred years. In the south,
the Liu Sung gave place to three short dynasties, Ch’i, Liang and
Ch’ên, until at last the Sui (589-605) united China.
The Liu Sung Emperor Wên-Ti (424-454) was a patron of Confucian

learning, but does not appear to have discouraged Buddhism. The
Sung annals record that several embassies were sent from India and
Ceylon to offer congratulations on the flourishing condition of
religion in his dominions, but they also preserve memorials from
Chinese officials asking for imperial interference to prevent the
multiplication of monasteries and the growing expenditure on
superstitious ceremonies. This marks the beginning of the desire to
249
curb Buddhism by restrictive legislation which the official class

displayed so prominently and persistently in subsequent centuries.
A similar reaction seems to have been felt in Wei, where the
influential statesman Ts’ui Hao[623], a votary of Taoism, conducted
an anti-Buddhist campaign. He was helped in this crusade by the
discovery of arms in a monastery at Ch’ang-an. The monks were
accused of treason and debauchery and in 446 Toba Tao[624], the
sovereign of Wei, issued an edict ordering the destruction of
Buddhist temples and sacred books as well as the execution of all
priests. The Crown Prince, who was a Buddhist, was able to save
many lives, but no monasteries or temples were left standing. The
persecution, however, was of short duration. Toba Tao was
assassinated and almost the first act of his successor was to re-
establish Buddhism and allow his subjects to become monks. From
this period date the sculptured grottoes of Yün-Kang in northern
Shan-si which are probably the oldest specimens of Buddhist art in
China. In 471 another ruler of Wei, Toba Hung, had a gigantic image
of Buddha constructed and subsequently abdicated in order to
devote himself to [Buddhist studies. His successor marks a reaction,
for he was an ardent Confucianist who changed the family name to
Yüan and tried to introduce the Chinese language and dress. But the
tide of Buddhism was too strong. It secured the favour of the next
Emperor in whose time there are said to have been 13,000 temples in
Wei.
In the Sung dominions a conspiracy was discovered in 458 in which

a monk was implicated, and restrictive, though not prohibitive,
regulations were issued respecting monasteries. The Emperor Ming-
Ti, though a cruel ruler was a devout Buddhist and erected a
monastery in Hu-nan, at the cost of such heavy taxation that his
ministers remonstrated. The fifty-nine years of Liu Sung rule must
have been on the whole favourable to Buddhism, for twenty
translators flourished, partly natives and partly foreigners from
Central Asia, India and Ceylon. In 420 a band of twenty-five Chinese
started on a pilgrimage to India. They had been preceded by the
celebrated pilgrim Fa-Hsien[625] who travelled in India from 399 to
414.
In the reign of Wu-Ti, the first Emperor of the Ch’i dynasty, one of
the imperial princes, named Tzŭ Liang[626], cultivated the society of
eminent monks and enjoyed theological discussions. From the
specimens of these arguments which have been preserved we see
that the explanation of the inequalities of life as the result of Karma
250
had a great attraction for the popular mind and also that it provoked
the hostile criticism of the Confucian literati.
The accession of the Liang dynasty and the long reign of its first
emperor Wu-Ti (502-549) were important events in the history of
Buddhism, for this monarch rivalled Asoka in pious enthusiasm if
not in power and prosperity. He obviously set the Church above the
state and it was while he was on the throne that Bodhidharma came
to China and the first edition of the Tripitaka was prepared.
His reign, though primarily of importance for religion, was not

wanting in political interest, and witnessed a long conflict with Wei.
Wu-Ti was aided by the dissensions which distracted Wei but failed
to achieve his object, probably as a result of his religious
preoccupations, for he seemed unable to estimate the [power of the
various adventurers who from time to time rose to pre-eminence in
the north and, holding war to be wrong, he was too ready to accept
insincere overtures for peace. Wei split into two states, the Eastern
and Western, and Hou-Ching[627], a powerful general who was not
satisfied with his position in either, offered his services to Wu-Ti,
promising to add a large part of Ho-nan to his dominions. He failed
in his promise but Wu-Ti, instead of punishing him, first gave him a
post as governor and then listened to the proposals made by the
ruler of Eastern Wei for his surrender. On this Hou-Ching conspired
with an adopted son of Wu-Ti, who had been set aside as heir to the
throne and invested Nanking. The city was captured after the
horrors of a prolonged siege and Wu-Ti died miserably.
Wu-Ti was not originally a Buddhist. In fact until about 510, when he
was well over forty, he was conspicuous as a patron of
Confucianism. The change might be ascribed to personal reasons,
but it is noticeable that the same thing occurred in Wei, where a
period of Confucianism was succeeded by a strong wave of
Buddhism which evidently swept over all China. Hu[628], the
Dowager Empress of Wei, was a fervent devotee, though of
indifferent morality in both public and private life since she is said to
have poisoned her own son. In 518 she sent Sung Yün and Hui
Shêng[629] to Udyâna in search of Buddhist books of which they
brought back 175.
Wu-Ti’s conversion is connected with a wandering monk and

magician called Pao-Chih[630], who received the privilege of
approaching him at all hours. A monastery was erected in Nanking
at great expense and edicts were issued forbidding not only the
251
sacrifice of animals but even the representation of living things in

embroidery, on the ground that people might cut up such figures
and thus become callous to the sanctity of life. The emperor
expounded sûtras in public and wrote a work on Buddhist
ritual[631]. The first Chinese edition of the Tripitaka, in manuscript
and not printed, was collected in 518. [Although Wu-Ti’s edicts,
particularly that against animal sacrifices, gave great dissatisfaction,
yet the Buddhist movement seems to have been popular and not
merely an imperial whim, for many distinguished persons, for
instance the authors Liu Hsieh and Yao Ch’a[632], took part in it.
In 520 (or according to others, in 525) Bodhidharma (generally called

Ta-mo in Chinese) landed in Canton from India. He is described as
the son of a king of a country called Hsiang-chih in southern India,
and the twenty-eighth Patriarch[633]. He taught that merit does not
lie in good works and that knowledge is not gained by reading the
scriptures. The one essential is insight, which comes as illumination
after meditation. Though this doctrine had subsequently much
success in the Far East, it was not at first appreciated and
Bodhidharma’s introduction to the devout but literary Emperor in
Nanking was a fiasco. He offended his Majesty by curtly saying that
he had acquired no merit by causing temples to be built and books to
be transcribed. Then, in answer to the question, what is the most
important of the holy doctrines, he replied “where all is emptiness,
nothing can be called holy.” “Who,” asked the astonished Emperor,
“is he who thus replies to me?” “I do not know,” said Bodhidharma.
Not being able to come to any understanding with Wu-Ti,

Bodhidharma went northwards, and is said to have crossed the
Yang-tse standing on a reed, a subject frequently represented in
Chinese art[634]. He retired to Lo-yang where he spent nine years in
the Shao-Lin[635] temple gazing silently at a wall, whence he was
popularly known as the wall-gazer. One legend says that he sat so
long in contemplation that his legs fell off, and [a kind of legless doll
which is a favourite plaything in Japan is still called by his name. But
according to another tale he preserved his legs. He wished to return
to India but died in China. When Sung Yün, the traveller mentioned
above, was returning from India, he met him in a mountain pass
bare-footed and carrying one sandal in his hand[636]. When this was
reported, his coffin was opened and was found to contain nothing
but the other sandal which was long preserved as a precious relic in
the Shao-Lin temple.
252
Wu-Ti adopted many of the habits of a bonze. He was a strict

vegetarian, expounded the scriptures in public and wrote a work on
ritual. He thrice retired into a monastery and wore the dress of a
Bhikkhu. These retirements were apparently of short duration and
his ministers twice redeemed him by heavy payments.
In 538 a hair of the Buddha was sent by the king of Fu-nan and
received with great ceremony. In the next year a mission was
despatched to Magadha to obtain Sanskrit texts. It returned in 546
with a large collection of manuscripts and accompanied by the
learned Paramârtha who spent twenty years in translating
them[637]. Wu-Ti, in his old age, became stricter. All luxury was
suppressed at Court, but he himself always wore full dress and
showed the utmost politeness, even to the lowest officials. He was so
reluctant to inflict the punishment of death that crime increased. In
547 he became a monk for the third time and immediately
afterwards the events connected with Hou-Ching (briefly sketched
above) began to trouble the peace of his old age. During the siege of
Nanking he was obliged to depart from his vegetarian diet and eat
eggs. When he was told that his capital was taken he merely said, “I
obtained the kingdom through my own efforts and through me it
has been lost. So I need not complain.”
Hou-Ching proceeded to the palace, but[638], overcome with awe,

knelt down before Wu-Ti who merely said, “I am afraid you must be
fatigued by the trouble it has cost you to destroy my kingdom.”
Hou-Ching was ashamed and told his officers that [he had never felt
such fear before and would never dare to see Wu-Ti again.
Nevertheless, the aged Emperor was treated with indignity and soon
died of starvation. His end, though melancholy, was peaceful
compared with that in store for Hou-Ching who, after two years of
fighting and murdering, assumed the imperial title, but immediately
afterwards was defeated and slain. The people ate his body in the
streets of Nanking and his own wife is said to have swallowed
mouthfuls of his flesh.
One of Wu-Ti’s sons, Yüan-Ti, who reigned from 552 to 555,

inherited his father’s temper and fate with this difference that he was
a Taoist, not a Buddhist. He frequently resided in the temples of that
religion, studied its scriptures and expounded them to his people. A
great scholar, he had accumulated 140,000 volumes, but when it was
announced to him in his library that the troops of Wei were
marching on his capital, he yielded without resistance and burnt his
books, saying that they had proved of no use in this extremity.
253
This alternation of imperial patronage in the south may have been

the reason why Wên Hsüan Ti, the ruler of Northern Ch’i[639], and
for the moment perhaps the most important personage in China,
summoned Buddhist and Taoist priests to a discussion in 555. Both
religions could not be true, he said, and one must be superfluous.
After hearing the arguments of both he decided in favour of
Buddhism and ordered the Taoists to become bonzes on pain of
death. Only four refused and were executed.
Under the short Ch’ên dynasty (557-589) the position of Buddhism

continued favourable. The first Emperor, a mild and intelligent
sovereign, though circumstances obliged him to put a great many
people out of the way, retired to a monastery after reigning for two
years. But in the north there was a temporary reaction. Wu-Ti, of the
Northern Chou dynasty[640], first of all defined the precedence of
the three religions as Confucianism, Taoism, Buddhism and then, in
575, prohibited the two latter, ordering temples to be destroyed and
priests to return to the world. But as usual the persecution was not of
long duration. Five years later Wu-Ti’s son withdrew his father’s
edict and in 582, the founder of the Sui dynasty, gave the population
permission to become monks. He may be said to have used
[Buddhism as his basis for restoring the unity of the Empire and in
his old age he became devout. The Sui annals observe that Buddhist
books had become more numerous under this dynasty than those of
the Confucianists, and no less than three collections of the Tripitaka
were made between 594 and 616.
With the seventh century began the great T’ang dynasty (620-907).
Buddhism had now been known to the rulers of China for about 550
years. It began as a religion tolerated but still regarded as exotic and
not quite natural for the sons of Han. It had succeeded in
establishing itself as the faith of the majority among both Tartars and
Chinese. The rivalry of Taoism was only an instance of that imitation
which is the sincerest flattery. Though the opposition of the
mandarins assumed serious proportions whenever they could
induce an Emperor to share their views, yet the hostile attitude of the
Government never lasted long and was not shared by the mass of the
people. It is clear that the permissions to practise Buddhism which
invariably followed close on the prohibitions were a national relief.
Though Buddhism tended to mingle with Taoism and other
indigenous ideas, the many translations of Indian works and the
increasing intercourse between Chinese and Hindus had diffused a
knowledge of its true tenets and practice.
254
The T’ang dynasty witnessed a triangular war between

Confucianism, Buddhism and Taoism. As a rule Confucianism
attacked the other two as base superstitions but sometimes, as in the
reign of Wu Tsung, Taoism seized a chance of being able to
annihilate Buddhism. This war continued under the Northern Sung,
though the character of Chinese Buddhism changed, for the
Contemplative School, which had considerable affinities to Taoism,
became popular at the expense of the T’ien T’ai. After the Northern
Sung (except under the foreign Mongol dynasty) we feel that, though
Buddhism was by no means dead and from time to time flourished
exceedingly, yet Confucianism had established its claim to be the
natural code and creed of the scholar and statesman. The Chinese
Court remained a strange place to the end but scholarship and good
sense had a large measure of success in banishing extravagance from
art and literature. Yet, alas, the intellectual life of China lost more in
fire and brilliancy than it gained in sanity. Probably the most critical
times for literature and indeed for thought were those [brief periods
under the Sui and T’ang[641] when Buddhist and Taoist books were
accepted as texts for the public examinations and the last half
century of the Northern Sung, when the educational reforms of
Wang An Shih were intermittently in force. The innovations were
cancelled in all cases. Had they lasted, Chinese style and mentality
might have been different.
The T’ang dynasty, though on the whole favourable to Buddhism,

and indeed the period of its greatest prosperity, opened with a
period of reaction. To the founder, Kao Tsu, is attributed the saying
that Confucianism is as necessary to the Chinese as wings to a bird
or water to a fish. The imperial historiographer Fu I[642] presented
to his master a memorial blaming Buddhism because it undervalued
natural relationships and urging that monks and nuns should be
compelled to marry. He was opposed by Hsiao Yü[643], who
declared that hell was made for such people as his opponent—an
argument common to many religions. The Emperor followed on the
whole advice of Fu I. Magistrates were ordered to inquire into the
lives of monks and nuns. Those found pure and sincere were
collected in the large establishments. The rest were ordered to return
to the world and the smaller religious houses were closed. Kao Tsu
abdicated in 627 but his son Tai Tsung continued his religious policy,
and the new Empress was strongly anti-Buddhist, for when mortally
ill she forbade her son to pray for her recovery in Buddhist shrines.
Yet the Emperor cannot have shared these sentiments at any rate
towards the end of his reign[644]. He issued an edict allowing every
255
monastery to receive five new monks and the [celebrated journey of

Hsüan Chuang[645] was made in his reign. When the pilgrim
returned from India, he was received with public honours and a title
was conferred on him. Learned monks were appointed to assist him
in translating the library he had brought back and the account of his
travels was presented to the Emperor who also wrote a laudatory
preface to his version of the Prajnâpâramitâ. It was in this reign also
that Nestorian missionaries first appeared in China and were
allowed to settle in the capital. Diplomatic relations were maintained
with India. The Indian Emperor Harsha sent an envoy in 641 and
two Chinese missions were despatched in return. The second, led by
Wang Hsüan-Ts’ê[646], did not arrive until after the death of Harsha
when a usurper had seized the throne. Wang Hsüan-Ts’ê collected a
small army in Tibet, dethroned the usurper and brought him as a
prisoner to China.
The latter half of the seventh century is dominated by the figure of

the Dowager Empress Wu, the prototype of the celebrated lady who
took charge of China’s fate in our own day and, like her,
superhuman in decision and unscrupulousness, yet capable of
inspiring loyalty. She was a concubine of the Emperor Tai Tsung and
when he died in 649 lived for a short time as a Buddhist nun. The
eventful life of Wu Hou, who was at least successful in maintaining
order at home and on the frontiers, belongs to the history of China
rather than of Buddhism. She was not an ornament of the faith nor
an example of its principles, but, mindful of the protection it had
once afforded her, she gave it her patronage even to the extent of
making a bonze named Huai I[647] the minister of her mature
passions when she was nearly [seventy years old. A magnificent
temple, at which 10,000 men worked daily, was built for him, but the
Empress was warned that he was collecting a body of vigorous
monks nominally for its service, but really for political objects. She
ordered these persons to be banished. Huai I was angry and burnt
the temple. The Empress at first merely ordered it to be rebuilt, but
finding that Huai I was growing disrespectful, she had him
assassinated.
We hear that the Mahâmegha-sûtra[648] was presented to her and

circulated among the people with her approval. About 690 she
assumed divine honours and accommodated these pretensions to
Buddhism by allowing herself to be styled Maitreya or Kuan-yin.
After her death at the age of 80, there does not appear to have been
any religious change, for two monks were appointed to high office
and orders were issued that Buddhist and Taoist temples should be
256
built in every Department. But the earlier part of the reign of Hsüan
Tsung[649] marks a temporary reaction. It was represented to him
that rich families wasted their substance on religious edifices and
that the inmates were well-to-do persons desirous of escaping the
burdens of public service. He accordingly forbade the building of
monasteries, making of images and copying of sutras, and 12,000
monks were ordered to return to the world. In 725 he ordered a
building known as “Hall of the Assembled Spirits” to be renamed
“Hall of Assembled Worthies,” because spirits were mere fables.
In the latter part of his life he became devout though addicted to

Taoism rather than Buddhism. But he must have outgrown his anti-
Buddhist prejudices, for in 730 the seventh collection of the Tripitaka
was made under his auspices. Many poets of this period such as Su
Chin and the somewhat later Liu Tsung Yüan[650] were Buddhists
and the paintings of the great Wu Tao-tzŭ and Wang-wei (painter as
well as poet) glowed with the inspiration of the T’ien-t’ai teaching. In
740 there were in the city of Ch’ang-An alone sixty-four monasteries
and [twenty-seven nunneries. A curious light is thrown on the
inconsistent and composite character of Chinese religious
sentiment—as noticeable to-day as it was twelve hundred years
ago—by the will of Yao Ch’ung[651] a statesman who presented a
celebrated anti-Buddhist memorial to this Emperor. In his will he
warns his children solemnly against the creed which he hated and
yet adds the following direction. “When I am dead, on no account
perform for me the ceremonies of that mean religion. But if you feel
unable to follow orthodoxy in every respect, then yield to popular
custom and from the first seventh day after my death until the last
(i.e. seventh) seventh day, let mass be celebrated by the Buddhist
clergy seven times: and when, as these masses require, you must
offer gifts to me, use the clothes which I wore in life and do not use
other valuable things.”
In 751 a mission was sent to the king of Ki-pin[652]. The staff

included Wu-K’ung[653], also known as Dharmadhâtu, who
remained some time in India, took the vows and ultimately returned
to China with many books and relics. It is probable that in this and
the following centuries Hindu influence reached the outlying
province of Yünnan directly through Burma[654].
Letters, art and pageantry made the Court of Hsüan Tsung brilliant,
but the splendour faded and his reign ended tragically in disaster
and rebellion. The T’ang dynasty seemed in danger of collapse. But it
emerged successfully from these troubles and continued for a
257
century and a half. During the whole of this period the Emperors
with one exception[655] were favourable to Buddhism, and the latter
half of the eighth century marks in Buddhist history an epoch of
increased popularity among the masses but also the spread of ritual
and doctrinal corruption, for it is in these years that its connection
with ceremonies for the repose and honour of the dead became more
intimate.
These middle and later T’ang Emperors were not exclusive

Buddhists. According to the severe judgment of their own officials,
they were inclined to unworthy and outlandish superstitions. Many
of them were under the influence of eunuchs, magicians and
soothsayers, and many of those who were not assassinated died
from taking the Taoist medicine called Elixir of Immortality. Yet it
was not a period of decadence and dementia. It was for China the
age of Augustus, not of Heliogabalus. Art and literature flourished
and against Han-Yü, the brilliant adversary of Buddhism, may be set
Liu Tsung Yüan[656], a writer of at least equal genius who found in
it his inspiration. A noble school of painting grew up in the Buddhist
monasteries and in a long line of artists may be mentioned the great
name of Wu Tao-tzŭ, whose religious pictures such as Kuan-yin,
Purgatory and the death of the Buddha obtained for him a fame
which is still living. Among the streams which watered this paradise
of art and letters should doubtless be counted the growing
importance of Central and Western Asia in Chinese policy and the
consequent influx of their ideas. In the mid T’ang period
Manichæism, Nestorianism and Zoroastrianism all were prevalent in
China. The first was the religion of the Uigurs. So long as the
Chinese had to keep on good terms with this tribe Manichæism was
respected, but when they were defeated by the Kirghiz and became
unimportant, it was abruptly suppressed (843). In this period, too,
Tibet became of great importance for the Chinese. Their object was to
keep open the passes leading to Ferghana and India. But the Tibetans
sometimes combined with the Arabs, who had conquered Turkestan,
to close them and in 763 they actually sacked Chang An. China
endeavoured to defend herself by making treaties with the Indian
border states, but in 175 the Arabs inflicted a disastrous defeat on her
troops. A treaty of peace was subsequently made with Tibet[657].
When Su-Tsung (756-762), the son of Hsüan-Tsung, was safely

established on the throne, he began to show his devotion to
Buddhism. He installed a chapel in the Palace which was [served by
several hundred monks and caused his eunuchs and guards to dress
up as Bodhisattvas and Genii. His ministers, who were required to
258
worship these maskers, vainly remonstrated as also when he

accepted a sort of Sibylline book from a nun who alleged that she
had ascended to heaven and received it there.
The next Emperor, Tai-Tsung, was converted to Buddhism by his

Minister Wang Chin[658], a man of great abilities who was
subsequently sentenced to death for corruption, though the Emperor
commuted the sentence to banishment. Tai-Tsung expounded the
scriptures in public himself and the sacred books were carried from
one temple to another in state carriages with the same pomp as the
sovereign. In 768 the eunuch Yü Chao-En[659] built a great Buddhist
temple dedicated to the memory of the Emperor’s deceased mother.
In spite of his minister’s remonstrances, His Majesty attended the
opening and appointed 1000 monks and nuns to perform masses for
the dead annually on the fifteenth day of the seventh month. This
anniversary became generally observed as an All Souls’ Day, and is
still one of the most popular festivals in China. Priests both Buddhist
and Taoist recite prayers for the departed, rice is scattered abroad to
feed hungry ghosts and clothes are burnt to be used by them in the
land of shadows. Large sheds are constructed in which are figures
representing scenes from the next world and the evening is
enlivened by theatricals, music and fire-works[660].
The establishment of this festival was due to the celebrated teacher

Amogha (Pu-k’ung), and marks the official recognition by Chinese
Buddhism of those services for the dead which have rendered it
popular at the cost of forgetting its better aspects. Amogha was a
native of Ceylon (or, according to others, of Northern India), who
arrived in China in 719 with his teacher Vajrabodhi. After the latter’s
death he revisited India and Ceylon in search of books and came
back in 746. He wished to return to his own country, but permission
was refused and until his death in 774 he was a considerable
personage at Court, [receiving high rank and titles. The Chinese
Tripitaka contains 108 translations[661] ascribed to him, mostly of a
tantric character, though to the honour of China it must be said that
the erotic mysticism of some Indian tantras never found favour
there. Amogha is a considerable, though not auspicious, figure in the
history of Chinese Buddhism, and, so far as such changes can be the
work of one man, on him rests the responsibility of making it
become in popular estimation a religion specially concerned with
funeral rites[662].
Some authors[663] try to prove that the influx of Nestorianism under

the T’ang dynasty had an important influence on the later
259
development of Buddhism in China and Japan and in particular that

it popularized these services for the dead. But this hypothesis seems
to me unproved and unnecessary. Such ceremonies were an essential
part of Chinese religion and no faith could hope to spread, if it did
not countenance them: they are prominent in Hinduism and not
unknown to Pali Buddhism[664]. Further the ritual used in China
and Japan has often only a superficial resemblance to Christian
masses for the departed. Part of it is magical and part of it consists in
acquiring merit by the recitation of scriptures which have no special
reference to the dead. This merit is then formally transferred to them.
Doubtless Nestorianism, in so far as it was associated with
Buddhism, tended to promote the worship of Bodhisattvas and
prayers addressed directly to them, but this tendency existed
independently and the Nestorian monument indicates not that
Nestorianism influenced Buddhism but that it abandoned the
doctrine of the atonement.
In 819 a celebrated incident occurred. The Emperor Hsien-Tsung had

been informed that at the Fa-mên monastery in Shen-si a bone of the
Buddha was preserved which every thirty years exhibited
miraculous powers. As this was the auspicious year, he ordered the
relic to be brought in state to the capital [and lodged in the Imperial
Palace, after which it was to make the round of the monasteries in
the city. This proceeding called forth an animated protest from Han-
Yü[665], one of the best known authors and statesmen then living,
who presented a memorial, still celebrated as a masterpiece. The
following extract will give an idea of its style. “Your Servant is well
aware that your Majesty does not do this (give the bone such a
reception) in the vain hope of deriving advantage therefrom but that
in the fulness of our present plenty there is a desire to comply with
the wishes of the people in the celebration at the capital of this
delusive mummery.... For Buddha was a barbarian. His language
was not the language of China. His clothes were of an alien cut. He
did not utter the maxims of our ancient rulers nor conform to the
customs which they have handed down. He did not appreciate the
bond between prince and minister, the tie between father and son.
Had this Buddha come to our capital in the flesh, your Majesty
might have received him with a few words of admonition, giving
him a banquet and a suit of clothes, before sending him out of the
country with an escort of soldiers.
“But what are the facts? The bone of a man long since dead and
decomposed is to be admitted within the precincts of the Imperial
Palace. Confucius said, ‘respect spiritual beings but keep them at a
260
distance.’ And so when princes of old paid visits of condolence, it

was customary to send a magician in advance with a peach-rod in
his hand, to expel all noxious influences before the arrival of his
master. Yet now your Majesty is about to introduce without reason a
disgusting object, personally taking part in the proceedings without
the intervention of the magician or his wand. Of the officials not one
has raised his voice against it: of the Censors[666] not one has
pointed out the enormity of such an act. Therefore your servant,
overwhelmed with shame for the Censors, implores your Majesty
that these bones may be handed over for destruction by fire [or
water, whereby the root of this great evil may be exterminated for all
time and the people may know how much the wisdom of your
Majesty surpasses that of ordinary men[667].”
The Emperor became furious when he read the memorial and

wished to execute its author on the spot. But Han-Yü’s many friends
saved him and the sentence was commuted to honourable
banishment as governor of a distant town. Shortly afterwards the
Emperor died, not of Buddhism, but of the elixir of immortality
which made him so irritable that his eunuchs put him out of the way.
Han-Yü was recalled but died the next year. Among his numerous
works was one called Yüan Tao, much of which was directed against
non-Confucian forms of religion. It is still a thesaurus of arguments
for the opponents of Buddhism and, let it be added, of Christianity.
It is not surprising that the prosperity of the Buddhist church should

have led to another reaction, but it came not so much from the
literary and sceptical class as from Taoism which continued to enjoy
the favour of the T’ang Emperors, although they died one after
another of drinking the elixir. The Emperor Wu-Tsung was more
definitely Taoist than his predecessors. In 843 he suppressed
Manichæism and in 845, at the instigation of his Taoist advisers, he
dealt Buddhism the severest blow which it had yet received. In a
trenchant edict[668] he repeated the now familiar arguments that it is
an alien and maleficent superstition, unknown under the ancient and
glorious dynasties and injurious to the customs and morality of the
nation. Incidentally he testifies to its influence and popularity for he
complains of the crowds thronging the temples which eclipse the
imperial palaces in splendour and the innumerable monks and nuns
supported by the contributions of the people. Then, giving figures,
he commands that 4600 great temples and 40,000 smaller rural
temples be demolished, that their enormous[669] landed property be
confiscated, that 260,500 monks and nuns be secularized and 150,000
temple slaves[670] set free. These statistics are probably exaggerated
261
and in any case the Emperor had barely time to execute his drastic
orders, [though all despatch was used on account of the private
fortunes which could be amassed incidentally by the executive.
As the Confucian chronicler of his doings observes, he suppressed

Buddhism on the ground that it is a superstition but encouraged
Taoism which is no better. Indeed the impartial critic must admit
that it is much worse, at any rate for Emperors. Undeterred by the
fate of his predecessors Wu-Tsung began to take the elixir of
immortality. He suffered first from nervous irritability, then from
internal pains, which were explained as due to the gradual
transformation of his bones, and at the beginning of 846 he became
dumb. No further explanation of his symptoms was then given him
and his uncle Hsüan Tsung was raised to the throne. His first act was
to revoke the anti-Buddhist edict, the Taoist priests who had
instigated it were put to death, the Emperor and his ministers vied in
the work of reconstruction and very soon things became again much
as they were before this great but brief tribulation. Nevertheless, in
852 the Emperor received favourably a memorial complaining of the
Buddhist reaction and ordered that all monks and nuns must obtain
special permission before taking orders. He was beginning to fall
under Taoist influence and it is hard to repress a smile on reading
that seven years later he died of the elixir. His successor I-Tsung
(860-874), who died at the age of 30, was an ostentatious and
dissipated Buddhist. In spite of the remonstrances of his ministers he
again sent for the sacred bone from Fa-mên and received it with even
more respect than his predecessor had shown, for he met it at the
Palace gate and bowed before it.
During the remainder of the T’ang dynasty there is little of

importance to recount about Buddhism. It apparently suffered no
reverses, but history is occupied with the struggle against the
Tartars. The later T’ang Emperors entered into alliance with various
frontier tribes, but found it hard to keep them in the position of
vassals. The history of China from the tenth to the thirteenth
centuries is briefly as follows. The T’ang dynasty collapsed chiefly
owing to the incapacity of the later Emperors and was succeeded by
a troubled period in which five short dynasties founded by military
adventurers, three of whom were of Turkish race, rose and fell in 53
years[671]. In 960 the [Sung dynasty united the Chinese elements in
the Empire, but had to struggle against the Khitan Tartars in the
north-east and against the kingdom of Hsia in the north-west. With
the twelfth century appeared the Kins or Golden Tartars, who
demolished the power of the Khitans in alliance with the Chinese but
262
turned against their allies and conquered all China north of the
Yang-tze and continually harassed, though they did not capture, the
provinces to the south of it which constituted the reduced empire of
the Sungs. But their power waned in its turn before the Mongols,
who, under Chinggiz Khan and Ogotai, conquered the greater part
of northern Asia and eastern Europe. In 1232 the Sung Emperor
entered into alliance with the Mongols against the Kins, with the
ultimate result that though the Kins were swept away, Khubilai, the
Khan of the Mongols, became Emperor of all China in 1280.
The dynasties of T’ang and Sung mark two great epochs in the
history of Chinese art, literature and thought, but whereas the
virtues and vices of the T’ang may be summed up as genius and
extravagance, those of the Sung are culture and tameness. But this
summary judgment does not do justice to the painters, particularly
the landscape painters, of the Sung and it is noticeable that many of
the greatest masters, including Li Lung-Mien[672], were obviously
inspired by Buddhism. The school which had the greatest influence
on art and literature was the Ch’an[673] or contemplative sect better
known by its Japanese name Zen. Though founded by Bodhidharma
it did not win the sympathy and esteem of the cultivated classes
until the Sung period. About this time the method of block-printing
was popularized and there began a steady output of comprehensive
histories, collected works, encyclopædias and biographies which
excelled anything then published in Europe. Antiquarian research
and accessible editions of classical writers were favourable [to
Confucianism, which had always been the religion of the literati.
It is not surprising that the Emperors of this literary dynasty were

mostly temperate in expressing their religious emotions. T’ai-Tsu,
the founder, forbade cremation and remonstrated with the Prince of
T’ang, who was a fervent Buddhist. Yet he cannot have objected to
religion in moderation, for the first printed edition of the Tripitaka
was published in his reign (972) and with a preface of his own. The
early and thorough application of printing to this gigantic Canon is a
proof—if any were needed—of the popular esteem for Buddhism.
Nor did this edition close the work of translation: 275 later
translations, made under the Northern Sung, are still extant and
religious intercourse with India continued. The names and writings
of many Hindu monks who settled in China are preserved and
Chinese continued to go to India. Still on the whole there was a
decrease in the volume of religious literature after 900 A.D.[674] In
the twelfth century the change was still more remarkable. Nanjio
263
does not record a single translation made under the Southern Sung
and it is the only great dynasty which did not revise the Tripitaka.
The second Sung Emperor also, T’ai Tsung, was not hostile, for he
erected in the capital, at enormous expense, a stupa 360 feet high to
contain relics of the Buddha. The fourth Emperor, Jên-tsung, a
distinguished patron of literature, whose reign was ornamented by a
galaxy of scholars, is said to have appointed 50 youths to study
Sanskrit but showed no particular inclination towards Buddhism.
Neither does it appear to have been the motive power in the projects
of the celebrated social reformer, Wang An-Shih. But the dynastic
history says that he wrote a book full of Buddhist and Taoist fancies
and, though there is nothing specifically Buddhist in his political and
economic theories, it is clear from the denunciations against him that
his system of education introduced Buddhist and Taoist subjects into
the public examinations[675]. It is also clear that this system was
favoured by those Emperors of the Northern Sung dynasty who
were able to think for themselves. In 1087 it was abolished [by the
Empress Dowager acting as regent for the young Chê Tsung, but as
soon as he began to reign in his own right he restored it, and it
apparently remained in force until the collapse of the dynasty in
1127.
The Emperor Hui-Tsung (1101-1126) fell under the influence of a

Taoist priest named Lin Ling-Su[676]. This young man had been a
Buddhist novice in boyhood but, being expelled for misconduct,
conceived a hatred for his old religion. Under his influence the
Emperor not only reorganized Taoism, sanctioning many
innovations and granting many new privileges, but also
endeavoured to suppress Buddhism, not by persecution, but by
amalgamation. By imperial decree the Buddha and his Arhats were
enrolled in the Taoist pantheon: temples and monasteries were
allowed to exist only on condition of describing themselves as Taoist
and their inmates had the choice of accepting that name or of
returning to the world.
But there was hardly time to execute these measures, so rapid was
the reaction. In less than a year the insolence of Lin Ling-Su brought
about his downfall: the Emperor reversed his edict and, having
begun by suppressing Buddhism, ended by oppressing Taoism. He
was a painter of merit and perhaps the most remarkable artist who
ever filled a throne. In art he probably drew no distinction between
creeds and among the pictures ascribed to him and preserved in
Japan are some of Buddhist subjects. But like Hsüan Tsung he came
264
to a tragic end, and in 1126 was carried into captivity by the Kin
Tartars among whom he died.
Fear of the Tartars now caused the Chinese to retire south of the
Yang-tse and Hang-chow was made the seat of Government. The
century during which this beautiful city was the capital did not
produce the greatest names in Chinese history, but it witnessed the
perfection of Chinese culture, and the background of impending
doom heightens the brilliancy of this literary and aesthetic life. Such
a society was naturally eclectic in religion but Buddhism of the
Ch’an school enjoyed consideration and contributed many landscape
painters to the roll of fame. But the most eminent and perhaps the
most characteristic thinker of the period was Chu-Hsi (1130-1200),
the celebrated [commentator on Confucius who reinterpreted the
master’s writings to the satisfaction of succeeding ages though in his
own life he aroused opposition as well as enthusiasm. Chu-Hsi
studied Buddhism in his youth and some have detected its influence
in his works, although on most important points he expressly
condemned it. I do not see that there is much definite Buddhism in
his philosophy, but if Mahayanism had never entered China this
new Confucianism would probably never have arisen or would have
taken another shape. Though the final result may be anti-Buddhist
yet the topics chosen and the method of treatment suggest that the
author felt it necessary to show that the Classics could satisfy
intellectual curiosity and supply spiritual ideals just as well as this
Indian religion. Much of his expositions is occupied with cosmology,
and he accepts the doctrine of world periods, recurring in an eternal
series of growth and decline: also he teaches not exactly
transmigration but the transformation of matter into various living
forms[677]. His accounts of sages and saints point to ideals which
have much in common with Arhats and Buddhas and, in dealing
with the retribution of evil, he seems to admit that when the universe
is working properly there is a natural Karma by which good or bad
actions receive even in this life rewards in kind, but that in the
present period of decline nature has become vitiated so that vice and
virtue no longer produce appropriate results.
Chu-Hsi had a celebrated controversy with Lu Chiu-Yüan[678], a

thinker of some importance who, like himself, is commemorated in
the tablets of Confucian temples, although he was accused of
Buddhist tendencies. He held that learning was not indispensable
and that the mind could in meditation rise above the senses and
attain to a perception of the truth. Although he strenuously denied
the charge of Buddhist leanings, it is clear that his doctrine is near in
265
spirit to the mysticism of Bodhidharma and sets no store on the

practical ethics and studious habits which are the essence of
Confucianism.
The attitude of the Yüan or Mongol dynasty (1280-1368) towards

Buddhism was something new. Hitherto, whatever may have been
the religious proclivities of individual Emperors, [the Empire had
been a Confucian institution. A body of official and literary opinion
always strong and often overwhelmingly strong regarded imperial
patronage of Buddhism or Taoism as a concession to the whims of
the people, as an excrescence on the Son of Heaven’s proper faith or
even a perversion of it. But the Mongol Court had not this prejudice
and Khubilai, like other members of his house[679] and like Akbar in
India, was the patron of all the religions professed by his subjects.
His real object was to encourage any faith which would humanize
his rude Mongols. Buddhism was more congenial to them than
Confucianism and besides, they had made its acquaintance earlier.
Even before Khubilai became Emperor, one of his most trusted
advisers was a Tibetan lama known as Pagspa, Bashpa or Pa-ssŭ-
pa[680]. He received the title of Kuo-Shih, and after his death his
brother succeeded to the same honours.
Khubilai also showed favour to Mohammedans, Christians, Jews and

Confucianists, but little to Taoists. This prejudice was doubtless due
to the suggestions of his Buddhist advisers, for, as we have seen,
there was often rivalry between the two religions and on two
occasions at least (in the reigns of Hui Tsung and Wu Tsung) the
Taoists made determined, if unsuccessful, attempts to destroy or
assimilate Buddhism. Khubilai received complaints that the Taoists
represented Buddhism as an offshoot of Taoism and that this
objectionable perversion of truth and history was found in many of
their books, particularly the Hua-Hu-Ching[681]. An edict was
issued ordering all Taoist books to be burnt with the sole exception
of the Tao-Tê-Ching but it does not appear that the sect was
otherwise persecuted.
The Yüan dynasty was consistently favourable to Buddhism.

Enormous sums were expended on subventions to monasteries,
printing books and performing public ceremonies. Old restrictions
were removed and no new ones were imposed. But the sect which
was the special recipient of the imperial favour was [not one of the
Chinese schools but Lamaism, the form of Buddhism developed in
Tibet, which spread about this time to northern China, and still exists
there. It does not appear that in the Yüan period Lamaism and other
266
forms of Buddhism were regarded as different sects[682]. A lamaist

ecclesiastic was the hierarchical head of all Buddhists, all other
religions being placed under the supervision of a special board.
The Mongol Emperors paid attention to religious literature. Khubilai

saw to it that the monasteries in Peking were well supplied with
books and ordered the bonzes to recite them on stated days. A new
collection of the Tripitaka (the ninth) was published 1285-87. In 1312,
the Emperor Jên-tsung ordered further translations to be made into
Mongol and later had the whole Tripitaka copied in letters of gold. It
is noticeable that another Emperor, Chêng Tsung, had the Book of
Filial Piety translated into Mongol and circulated together with a
brief preface by himself.
It is possible that the Buddhism of the Yüan dynasty was tainted

with Śâktism from which the Lama monasteries of Peking (in
contrast to all other Buddhist sects in China) are not wholly free. The
last Emperor, Shun-ti, is said to have witnessed indecent plays and
dances in the company of Lamas and created a scandal which
contributed to the downfall of the dynasty[683]. In its last years we
hear of some opposition to Buddhism and of a reaction in favour of
Confucianism, in consequence of the growing numbers and
pretensions of the Lamas.
Whole provinces were under their control and Chinese historians

dwell bitterly on their lawlessness. It was a common abuse for
wealthy persons to induce a Lama to let their property be registered
in his name and thus avoid all payment of taxes on the ground that
priests were exempt from taxation by law[684].
The Mongols were driven out by the native Chinese dynasty known
as Ming, which reigned from 1368 to 1644. It is not [easy to point out
any salient features in religious activity or thought during this
period, but since the Ming claimed to restore Chinese civilization
interrupted by a foreign invasion, it was natural that they should
encourage Confucianism as interpreted by Chu-Hsi. Yet Buddhism,
especially Lamaism, acquired a new political importance. Both for
the Mings and for the earlier Manchu Emperors the Mongols were a
serious and perpetual danger, and it was not until the eighteenth
century that the Chinese Court ceased to be preoccupied by the fear
that the tribes might unite and again overrun the Empire. But the
Tibetan and Mongolian hierarchy had an extraordinary power over
these wild horsemen and the Government of Peking won and used
their goodwill by skilful diplomacy, the favours shown being
267
generally commensurate to the gravity of the situation. Thus when

the Grand Lama visited Peking in 1652 he was treated as an
independent prince: in 1908 he was made to kneel.
Few Ming Emperors showed much personal interest in religion and

most of them were obviously guided by political considerations.
They wished on the one hand to conciliate the Church and on the
other to prevent the clergy from becoming too numerous or
influential. Hence very different pictures may be drawn according as
we dwell on the favourable or restrictive edicts which were
published from time to time. Thus T’ai-Tsu, the founder of the
dynasty, is described by one authority as always sympathetic to
Buddhists and by another as a crowned persecutor[685]. He had
been a bonze himself in his youth but left the cloister for the
adventurous career which conducted him to the throne. It is
probable that he had an affectionate recollection of the Church which
once sheltered him, but also a knowledge of its weaknesses and this
knowledge moved him to publish restrictive edicts as to the numbers
and qualifications of monks. On the other hand he attended sermons,
received monks in audience and appointed them as tutors to his
sons. He revised the hierarchy and gave appropriate titles to its
various grades. He also published a decree ordering that all monks
should study [three sutras (Lankâvatâra, Prajnâpâramitâ and
Vajracchedikâ), and that three brief commentaries on these works
should be compiled (see Nanjio’s Catalogue, 1613-15).
It is in this reign that we first hear of the secular clergy, that is to say,
persons who acted as priests but married and did not live in
monasteries. Decrees against them were issued in 1394 and 1412, but
they continued to increase. It is not clear whether their origin should
be sought in a desire to combine the profits of the priesthood with
the comforts of the world or in an attempt to evade restrictions as to
the number of monks. In later times this second motive was certainly
prevalent, but the celibacy of the clergy is not strictly insisted on by
Lamaists and a lax observance of monastic rules[686] was common
under the Mongol dynasty.
The third Ming Emperor, Ch’êng-tsu[687], was educated by a

Buddhist priest of literary tastes named Yao Kuang-Hsiao[688],
whom he greatly respected and promoted to high office.
Nevertheless he enacted restrictions respecting ordination and on
one occasion commanded that 1800 young men who presented
themselves to take the vows should be enrolled in the army instead.
His prefaces and laudatory verses were collected in a small volume
268
and included in the eleventh collection of the Tripitaka[689], called

the Northern collection, because it was printed at Peking. It was
published with a preface of his own composition and he wrote
another to the work called the Liturgy of Kuan-yin[690], and a third
introducing selected memoirs of various remarkable monks[691]. His
Empress had a vision in which she imagined a sûtra was revealed to
her and published the same with an introduction. He was also
conspicuously favourable to the Tibetan clergy. In 1403 he sent his
head eunuch to Tibet to invite the presence of Tsoṇ-kha-pa, who
refused to come himself [but sent a celebrated Lama called
Halima[692]. On arriving at the capital Halima was ordered to say
masses for the Emperor’s relatives. These ceremonies were attended
by supernatural manifestations and he received as a recognition of
his powers the titles of Prince of the Great Precious Law and Buddha
of the Western Paradise[693]. His three principal disciples were
styled Kuo Shih, and, agreeably to the precedent established under
the Yüan dynasty, were made the chief prelates of the whole
Buddhist Church. Since this time the Red or Tibetan Clergy have
been recognized as having precedence over the Grey or Chinese.
In this reign the Chinese made a remarkable attempt to assert their

authority in Ceylon. In 1405 a mission was sent with offerings to the
Sacred Tooth and when it was ill received a second mission
despatched in 1407 captured the king of Ceylon and carried him off
as a prisoner to China. Ceylon paid tribute for fifty years, but it does
not appear that these proceedings had much importance for
religion[694].
In the reigns of Ying Tsung and Ching-Ti[695] (1436-64) large

numbers of monks were ordained, but, as on previous occasions, the
great increase of candidates led to the imposition of restrictions and
in 1458 an edict was issued ordering that ordinations should be held
only once a year. The influence of the Chief Eunuchs during this
period was great, and two successive holders of this post, Wang-
Chên and Hsing-An[696], were both devoted Buddhists and induced
the Emperors whom they served to expend enormous sums on
building monasteries and performing ceremonies at which the
Imperial Court were present.
[The end of the fifteenth century is filled by two reigns, Hsien Tsung
and Hsiao Tsung. The former fell under the influence of his favourite
concubine Wan and his eunuchs to such an extent that, in the latter
part of his life, he ceased to see his ministers and the chief eunuch
became the real ruler of China. It is also mentioned both in 1468 and
269
1483 that he was in the hands of Buddhist priests who instructed him
in secret doctrines and received the title of Kuo-Shih and other
distinctions. His son Hsiao Tsung reformed these abuses: the Palace
was cleansed: the eunuchs and priests were driven out and some
were executed: Taoist books were collected and burnt. The
celebrated writer Wang Yang Ming[697] lived in this reign. He
defended and illustrated the doctrine of Lu Chin-Yüan, namely that
truth can be obtained by meditation. To express intuitive knowledge,
he used the expression Liang Chih[698] (taken from Mencius). Liang
Chih is inherent in all human minds, but in different degrees, and can
be developed or allowed to atrophy. To develop it should be man’s
constant object, and in its light when pure all things are understood
and peace is obtained. The phrases of the Great Learning “to
complete knowledge,” “investigate things,” and “rest in the highest
excellence,” are explained as referring to the Liang Chih and the
contemplation of the mind by itself. We cannot here shut our eyes to
the influence of Bodhidharma and his school, however fervently
Wang Yang Ming may have appealed to the Chinese Classics.
The reign of Wu-tsung (1506-21) was favourable to Buddhism. In

1507 40,000 men became monks, either Buddhist or Taoist. The
Emperor is said to have been learned in Buddhist literature and to
have known Sanskrit[699] as well as Mongol and Arabic, but he was
in the hands of a band of eunuchs, who were known as the eight
tigers. In 1515 he sent an embassy to Tibet with the object of
inducing the Grand Lama to visit Peking, but the invitation was
refused and the Tibetans expelled the mission with force. The next
Emperor, Shih-T’sung (1522-66), [inclined to Taoism rather than
Buddhism. He ordered the images of Buddha in the Forbidden City
to be destroyed, but still appears to have taken part in Buddhist
ceremonies at different periods of his reign. Wan Li (1573-1620),
celebrated in the annals of porcelain manufacture, showed some
favour to Buddhism. He repaired many buildings at P’u-t’o and
distributed copies of the Tripitaka to the monasteries of his Empire.
In his edicts occurs the saying that Confucianism and Buddhism are
like the two wings of a bird: each requires the co-operation of the
other.
European missionaries first arrived during the sixteenth century,

and, had the Catholic Church been more flexible, China might
perhaps have recognized Christianity, not as the only true religion
but as standing on the same footing as Buddhism and Taoism. The
polemics of the early missionaries imply that they regarded
Buddhism as their chief rival. Thus Ricci had a public controversy
270
with a bonze at Hang-Chou, and his principal pupil Hsü Kuang-

Ch’i[700] wrote a tract entitled “The errors of the Buddhists
exposed.” Replies to these attacks are preserved in the writings of
the distinguished Buddhist priest Shen Chu-Hung[701].
In 1644 the Ming dynasty collapsed before the Manchus and China
was again under foreign rule. Unlike the Mongols, the Manchus had
little inclination to Buddhism. Even before they had conquered
China, their prince, T’ai Tsung, ordered an inspection of monasteries
and limited the number of monks. But in this edict he inveighs only
against the abuse of religion and admits that “Buddha’s teaching is
at bottom pure and chaste, true and sincere: by serving him with
purity and piety, one can obtain happiness[702].” Shun-Chih, the
first Manchu Emperor, wrote some prefaces to Buddhist works and
entertained the Dalai Lama at Peking in 1652[703]. His son and
successor, commonly known as K’ang-Hsi (1662-1723), dallied for a
while with Christianity, but the net result of his religious policy was
to secure to Confucianism all that imperial favour can give. I have
mentioned above his Sacred Edict and the [partial favour which he
showed to Buddhism. He gave donations to the monasteries of P’u-
t’o, Hang-chou and elsewhere: he published the Kanjur with a
preface of his own[704] and the twelfth and last collection of the
Tripitaka was issued under the auspices of his son and grandson.
The latter, the Emperor Ch’ien Lung, also received the Teshu Lama
not only with honour, but with interest and sympathy, as is clear
from the inscription preserved at Peking, in which he extols the
Lama as a teacher of spiritual religion[705]. He also wrote a preface
to a sutra for producing rain[706] in which he says that he has
ordered the old editions to be carefully corrected and prayer and
worship to be offered, “so that the old forms which have been so
beneficial during former ages might still be blessed to the desired
end.” Even the late Empress Dowager accepted the ministrations of
the present Dalai Lama when he visited Peking in 1908, although, to
his great indignation she obliged him to kneel at Court[707]. Her
former colleague, the Empress Tzŭ-An was a devout Buddhist. The
statutes of the Manchu dynasty (printed in 1818) contain regulations
for the celebration of Buddhist festivals at Court, for the periodical
reading of sutras to promote the imperial welfare, and for the
performance of funeral rites.
Still on the whole the Manchu dynasty showed less favour to

Buddhism than any which preceded it and its restrictive edicts
limiting the number of monks and prescribing conditions for
ordination were followed by no periods of reaction. But the vitality
271
of Buddhism is shown by the fact that these restrictions merely led to

an increase of the secular clergy, not legally ordained, who in their
turn claimed the imperial attention. Ch’ien Lung began in 1735 by
giving them the alternative of becoming ordinary laymen or of
entering a monastery but this drastic measure was considerably
modified in the next few years. Ultimately the secular clergy were
allowed to continue as such, if they could show good reason, and to
have one disciple each.
FOOTNOTES:
[591] See B.E.F.E.O. 1910, Le Songe et l’Ambassade de l’Empereur

Ming Ti, par M. H. Maspéro, where the original texts are translated
and criticized. It is a curious coincidence that Ptolemy Soter is said to
have introduced the worship of Serapis to Egypt from Sinope in
consequence of a dream.
[592] No doubt then pronounced something like Vut-tha.
[593]
[594]
[595]
[596]
[597]
[598]
[599] See Chavannes, Les documents Chinois découverts par Aurel Stein,
1913, Introduction. The earliest documents are of 98 B.C.
272
[600] The Wei-lüeh or Wei-lio composed between 239

and 265 A.D., no longer exists as a complete work, but a considerable
extract from it dealing with the countries of the West is incorporated
in the San Kuo Chih of P’ei-Sung-Chih
(429 A.D.). See Chavannes, translation and notes in

T’oung Pao, 1905, pp. 519-571.
[601] See Chavannes, l.c. p. 550.
[602] See Francke, Zur Frage der Einführung des Buddhismus in China,
1910, and Maspéro’s review in B.E.F.E.O. 1910, p. 629. Another Taoist
legend is that Dipankara Buddha or Jan Têng, described as the
teacher of Śâkyamuni was a Taoist and that Śâkyamuni visited him
in China. Giles quotes extracts from a writer of the eleventh century
called Shên Kua to the effect that Buddhism had been flourishing
before the Ch’in dynasty but disappeared with its advent and also
that eighteen priests were imprisoned in 216 B.C. But the story adds
that they recited the Prajnâpâramitâ which is hardly possible at that
epoch.
[603] Sam. Nik. v. 10. 6. Cf. for a similar illustration in Chuang-tzŭ,

S.B.E. XL. p. 126.
[604] I may say, however, that I think it is a compilation containing

very ancient sayings amplified by later material which shows
Buddhist influence. This may be true to some extent of the Essays of
Chuang-tzŭ as well.
[605] See Legge’s translation in S.B.E. Part I. pp. 176, 257, II. 46, 62; ib.
I. pp. 171, 192, II. 13; ib. II. p. 13; ib. II. p. 9, I. p. 249; ib. pp. 45, 95, 100,
364, II. p. 139; ib. II. p. 139; ib. II. p. 129.
[606] Ib. I. p. 202; cf. the Buddha’s conversation with Vaccha in Maj.
Nik. 72.
[607] Kumârajîva and other Buddhists actually wrote commentaries

on the Tao-Tê-Ching.
273
[608] It speaks, however, in section 36 of

being born in the condition or family of a Bodhisattva (P’u-sa-chia),
where the word seems to be used in the late sense of a devout
member of the Buddhist Church.
[609] But the Emperor Huan is said to have sacrificed to Buddha and
Lao-tzŭ. See Hou Han Shu in T’oung Pao, 1907, p. 194. For early
Buddhism see “Communautés et Moines Bouddhistes Chinois au II
et au III siècles,” by Maspéro in B.E.F.E.O. 1910, p. 222. In the second
century lived Mou-tzŭ a Buddhist author with a strong

spice of Taoism. His work is a collection of questions and answers,
somewhat resembling the Questions of Milinda. See translation by
Pelliot (in T’oung Pao, vol. XIX. 1920) who gives the date
provisionally as 195 A.D.
[610] Accounts of these and the later translators are found in the
thirteen catalogues of the Chinese Tripitaka (see Nanjio, p. xxvii) and
other works such as the Kao Sang-Chuan (Nanjio, No. 1490).
[611] He worked at translations in

Loyang 148-170.
[612] Dharmakâla, see Nanjio, p. 386. The Vinaya used in these early
days of Chinese Buddhism was apparently that of the Dharmagupta
school. See J.A. 1916, II. p. 40. An Shih-kao (c. A.D. 150) translated a
work called The 3000 Rules for Monks (Nanjio, 1126), but it is not
clear what was the Sanskrit original.
[613]
[614]
[615]
274
[616] He was a remarkable man and famous in his

time, for he was credited not only with clairvoyance and producing
rain, but with raising the dead. Rémusat’s account of him, based on
the Tsin annals, may still be read with interest. See Nouv. Mélanges
Asiatiques, II. 1829, pp. 179 ff. His biography is contained in chap. 95
of the Tsin annals.
[617] Died 363 A.D.
[618] Ts’in must be distinguished from Tsin the name of

three short but legitimate dynasties.
[619]
[620]
[621] See Nanjio, Catalogue, p. 406.
[622] For this title see Pelliot in T’oung Pao, 1911, p. 671.
[623]
[624] He was canonized under the name of Wu

and the three great persecutions of Buddhism are sometimes
described as the disasters of the three Wu, the others being Wu of the
North Chou dynasty (574) and Wu of the T’ang (845).
[625] For the 25 pilgrims see Nanjio, p. 417.
275
[626]
[627]
[628]
[629] See Chavannes, “Voyage de Song Yun

dans l’Udyâna et le Gandhâra, 518-522,” p. E in B.E.F.E.O. 1903, pp.
379-441. For an interesting account of the Dowager Empress see pp.
384-5.
[630]
[631]
[632]
[633] See chap. XXIII. p. 95, and chap. XLV below (on schools of
Chinese Buddhism), for more about Bodhidharma. The earliest
Chinese accounts of him seem to be those contained in the Liang and
Wei annals. But one of the most popular and fullest accounts is to be
found in the Wu Têng Hui Yüan (first volume) printed at Kushan
near Fuchow.
[634] His portraits are also frequent both in China and Japan (see
Ostasiat. Ztsft 1912, p. 226) and the strongly marked features
attributed to him may perhaps represent a tradition of his personal
appearance, which is entirely un-Chinese. An elaborate study of
Bodhidharma written in Japanese is noticed in B.E.F.E.O. 1911, p.
457.
[635]
276
[636] The legend does not fit in well with chronology since Sung-Yün
is said to have returned from India in 522.
[637] See Takakusu in J.R.A.S. 1905, p. 33.
[638] Mailla, Hist. Gén. de la Chine, p. 369.
[639]
[640]
[641] See Biot, Hist, de l’instruction publique en Chine, pp. 289, 313.
[642] Is celebrated in Chinese history as one of the

greatest opponents of Buddhism. He collected all the objections to it
in 10 books and warned his son against it on his death bed. Giles,
Biog. Dict. 589.
[643] An important minister and apparently a man of

talent but of ungovernable and changeable temper. In 639 he
obtained the Emperor’s leave to become a priest but soon left his
monastery. The Emperor ordered him to be canonized under the
name Pure but Narrow. Giles, Biog. Dict. 722. The monk Fa-Lin
also attacked the views of Fu I in two treatises which have

been incorporated in the Chinese Tripitaka. See Nanjio, Cat. Nos.
1500, 1501.
[644] Subsequently a story grew up that his soul had visited hell
during a prolonged fainting fit after which he recovered and became
a devout Buddhist. See chap. XI of the Romance called Hsi-yu-chi, a
fantastic travesty of Hsüan Chuang’s travels, and Wieger, Textes
Historiques, p. 1585.
[645] This name has been transliterated in an

extraordinary number of ways. See B.E.F.E.O. 1905, pp. 424-430.
Giles gives Hsüan Chuang in his Chinese Dictionary, but Hsüan
277
Tsang in his Biographical Dictionary. Probably the latter is more

correct. Not only is the pronunciation of the characters variable, but
the character was tabooed as being part of the Emperor K’ang
Hsi’s personal name and substituted for it. Hence the spelling
Yüan Chuang.
[646] See Vincent Smith, Early History of India, pp.

326-327, and Giles, Biog. Dict., s.v. Wang Hsüan-T’sê. This worthy
appears to have gone to India again in 657 to offer robes at the holy
places.
[647] Some of the principal statues in the caves of

Lung-men were made at her expense, but other parts of these caves
seem to date from at least 500 A.D. Chavannes, Mission Archéol. tome
I, deuxième partie.
[648] Ta-Yün-Ching. See J.A. 1913, p. 149. The late

Dowager Empress also was fond of masquerading as Kuan-yin but it
does not appear that the performance was meant to be taken
seriously.
[649] “That romantic Chinese reign of Genso (713-756) which is the

real absolute culmination of Chinese genius.” Fenollosa, Epochs of
Chinese and Japanese art I. 102.
[650]
[651]
[652] The meaning of this name appears to vary at

different times. At this period it is probably equivalent to Kapisa or
N.E. Afghanistan.
278
[653]
[654] See B.E.F.E.O. 1904, p. 161. This does not exclude the possibility
of an opposite current, viz. Chinese Buddhism flowing into Burma.
[655] Wu-Tsung, 841-847.
[656] “Liu-Tsung-Yuan has left behind him much that for purity of
style and felicity of expression has rarely been surpassed,” Giles,
Chinese Literature, p. 191.
[657] Apparently in 783 A.D. See Waddell’s articles on Ancient

Historical Edicts at Lhasa in J.R.A.S. 1909, 1910, 1911.
[658]
[659]
[660] See Eitel, Handbook of Chinese Buddhism, p. 185 s.v. Ullambana, a

somewhat doubtful word, apparently rendered into Chinese as Yü-
lan-p’ên.
[661] Sec Nanjio Catalogue, pp. 445-448.
[662] He is also said to have introduced the images of the Four Kings
which are now found in every temple. A portrait of him by Li Chien
is reproduced in Tajima’s Masterpieces, vol. viii, plate ix. The artist
was perhaps his contemporary.
[663] E.g. Sacki, The Nestorian Monument in China, 1916. See also
above, p. 217.
[664] See Khuddaka-Patha, 7; Peta Vatthu, 1, 5 and the commentary;

Milinda Panha, iv. 8, 29; and for modern practices my chapter on
Siam, and Copleston, Buddhism, p. 445.
[665] Some native critics, however, have doubted the

authenticity of the received text and the version inserted in the
Official History seems to be a summary. See Wieger, Textes
279
Historiques, vol. iii. pp. 1726 ff., and Giles, Chinese Literature, pp. 200
ff.
[666] The officials whose duty it was to remonstrate with the

Emperor if he acted wrongly.
[667] Giles, Chinese Literature, pp. 201, 202—somewhat abbreviated.
[668] See Wieger, Textes Historiques, vol. III. pp. 1744 ff.
[669] “Thousands of ten-thousands of Ch’ing.” A Ch’ing = 15.13

acres.
[670] Presumably similar to the temple slaves of Camboja, etc.
[671] One Emperor of this epoch, Shih-Tsung of the later Chou

dynasty, suppressed monasteries and coined bronze images into
currency, declaring that Buddha, who in so many births had
sacrificed himself for mankind, would have no objection to his
statues being made useful. But in the South Buddhism nourished in
the province of Fukien under the princes of Min and the
dynasty which called itself Southern T’ang.
[672] See Kokka No. 309, 1916.
[673]
[674] The decrease in translations is natural for by this time Chinese

versions had been made of most works which had any claim to be
translated.
[675] See Biot, L’instruction publique en Chine, p. 350.
[676]
[677] See Le Gall, Variétés Sinologiques, No. 6 Tchou-Hi: Sa doctrine

Son influence. Shanghai, 1894, pp. 90, 122.
[678] Compare the similar doctrines of Wang Yang-

Ming.
280
[679] E.g. his elder brother Mangku who showed favour to

Buddhists, Mohammedans and Nestorians alike. He himself wished
to obtain Christian teachers from the Pope, by the help of Marco
Polo, but probably merely from curiosity.
[680] More accurately hPhags-pa. It is a title rather than a name,

being the Tibetan equivalent of Arya. Khubilai seems to be the
correct transcription of the Emperor’s name. The Tibetan and
Chinese transcriptions are Hvopilai and Hu-pi-lieh.
[681] For this curious work see B.E.F.E.O. 1908, p. 515, and J.A. 1913,
I, pp. 116-132. For the destruction of Taoist books see Chavannes in
T’oung Pao, 1904, p. 366.
[682] At the present day an ordinary Chinese regards a Lama as

quite different from a Hoshang or Buddhist monk.
[683] The Yüan Emperors were no doubt fond of witnessing religious

theatricals in the Palace. See for extracts from Chinese authors, New
China Review, 1919, pp. 68 ff. Compare the performances of the T’ang
Emperor Su Tsung mentioned above.
[684] For the ecclesiastical abuses of the time see Köppen, II. 103, and
de Mailla, Histoire de la Chine, IX. 475, 538.
[685] See Wieger, Textes Historiques, III. p. 2013, and De Groot,

Sectarianism and Religious Persecution in China, I. p. 82. He is often
called Hung Wu which is strictly speaking the title of his reign. He
was certainly capable of changing his mind, for he degraded
Mencius from his position in Confucian temples one year and
restored him the next.
[686] See de Mailla, Histoire de la Chine, IX. p. 470.
[687] Often called Yung-Lo which is strictly the title of his reign.
[688]
[689] See Nanjio, Cat. 1613-16.
[690] See Beal, Catena of Buddhist Scriptures, p. 398. The Emperor says:
“So we, the Ruler of the Empire ... do hereby bring before men a
mode for attaining to the condition of supreme Wisdom. We
therefore earnestly exhort all men ... carefully to study the directions
of this work and faithfully to follow them.”
281
[691] Nanjio, Cat. 1620. See also ib. 1032 and 1657 for the Empress’s
sûtra.
[692] Or Kalima In Tibetan Karma de bshin gshegs-

pa. He was the fifth head of the Karma-pa school. See Chandra Das’s
dictionary, s.v., where a reference is given to kLong-rdol-gsung-
hbum. It is noticeable that the Karma-pa is one of the older and more
Tantric sects.
[693]
Yüan Shih K’ai prefixed to this latter the four characters
[694] See Yule, Cathay and the Way Thither, pp. 75 ff.
[695] When Ying Tsung was carried away by the Mongols in 1449 his
brother Ching-Ti was made Emperor. Though Ying Tsung was sent
back in 1450, he was not able to oust Ching-Ti from the throne till
1457.
[696]
[697] His real name was Wang Shou Jên
[698]
[699] Though the ecclesiastical study of Sanskrit decayed under the

Ming dynasty, Yung-lo founded in 1407 a school of language for
training interpreters at which Sanskrit was taught among other
tongues.
[700]
282
[701]
[702] De Groot, l.c. p. 93.
[703] Some authorities say that he became a monk before he died, but
the evidence is not good. See Johnston in New China Review, Nos. 1
and 2, 1920.
[704] See T’oung Pao, 1909, p. 533.
[705] See E. Ludwig, The visit of the Tcshoo Lama to Peking, Tien Tsin
Press, 1904.
[706] The Ta-yün-lung-ch’ing-yü-ching. Nanjio’s Catalogue, Nos.

187-8, 970, and see Beal, Catena of Buddhist Scriptures, pp. 417-9.
[707] See for an account of his visit “The Dalai Lamas and their
relations with the Manchu Emperor of China” in T’oung Pao, 1910, p.
774.
283
CHAPTER XLIV
CHINA (continued)
THE CANON
The Buddhist scriptures extant in the Chinese language are known

collectively as San Tsang[708] or the three store-houses, that is to say,
Tripitaka. Though this usage is justified by both eastern and
European practice, it is not altogether happy, for the Chinese
thesaurus is not analogous to the Pali Canon or to any collection of
sacred literature known in India, being in spite of its name arranged
in four, not in three, divisions. It is a great Corpus Scriptorum
Sanctorum, embracing all ages and schools, wherein translations of
the most diverse Indian works are supplemented by original
compositions in Chinese. Imagine a library comprising Latin
translations of the Old and New Testaments with copious additions
from the Talmud and Apocryphal literature; the writings of the
Fathers, decrees of Councils and Popes, together with the opera omnia
of the principal schoolmen and the early protestant reformers and
you will have some idea of this theological miscellany which has no
claim to be called a canon, except that all the works included have at
some time or other received a certain literary or doctrinal hall-mark.
The collection is described in the catalogue compiled by Bunyiu

Nanjio[709]. It enumerates 1662 works which are classified in four
great divisions, (a) Sûtra, (b) Vinaya, (c) Abhidharma, (d)
Miscellaneous. The first three divisions contain translations only; the
fourth original Chinese works as well.
The first division called Ching or Sûtras amounts to nearly two-

thirds of the whole, for it comprises no less than 1081 [works and is
subdivided as follows: (a) Mahâyâna Sûtras, 541, (b) Hînayâna
Sûtras, 240, (c) Mahâyâna and Hînayâna Sûtras, 300 in number,
admitted into the canon under the Sung and Yüan dynasties, A.D.
960-1368. Thus whereas the first two subdivisions differ in doctrine,
the third is a supplement containing later translations of both
schools. The second subdivision, or Hînayâna Sûtras, which is less
284
numerous and complicated than that containing the Mahâyâna

Sûtras, shows clearly the character of the whole collection. It is
divided into two classes of which the first is called A-han, that is,
Agama[710]. This comprises translations of four works analogous to
the Pali Nikâyas, though not identical with the texts which we
possess, and also numerous alternative translations of detached
sûtras. All four were translated about the beginning of the fifth
century whereas the translations of detached sûtras are for the most
part earlier. This class also contains the celebrated Sûtra of Forty-two
Sections, and works like the Jâtaka-nidâna. The second class is styled
Sûtras of one translation[711]. The title is not used rigorously, but the
works bearing it are relatively obscure and it is not always clear to
what Sanskrit texts they correspond. It will be seen from the above
that the Chinese Tripitaka is a literary and bibliographical collection
rather than an ecclesiastical canon. It does not provide an authorized
version for the edification of the faithful, but it presents for the use of
the learned all translations of Indian works belonging to a particular
class which possess a certain age and authority.
The same characteristic marks the much richer collection of

Mahâyâna Sûtras, which contains the works most esteemed by
Chinese Buddhists. It is divided into seven classes:
1. Pan-jo (Po-jo) or Prajnâpâramitâ[712].
2. Pao-chi or Ratnakûṭa.
3. Ta-chi or Mahâsannipâta.
4. Hua-yen or Avatamsaka.
5. Nieh-pan or Parinirvâṇa.
6. Sûtras in more than one
285
translation but not falling into any of the above five classes.
7. Other sûtras existing in only one translation.
Each of the first five classes probably represents a collection of sûtras

analogous to a Nikâya and in one sense a single work but translated
into Chinese several times, both in a complete form and in extracts.
Thus the first class opens with the majestic Mahâprajnâpâramitâ in
600 fasciculi and equivalent to 200,000 stanzas in Sanskrit. This is
followed by several translations of shorter versions including two of
the little sûtras called the Heart of the Prajnâpâramitâ, which fills
only one leaf. There are also six translations of the celebrated work
known as the Diamond-cutter[713], which is the ninth sûtra in the
Mahâprajnâpâramitâ and all the works classed under the heading
Pan-jo seem to be alternative versions of parts of this great Corpus.
The second and third classes are collections of sûtras which no

longer exist as collections in Sanskrit, though the Sanskrit text of
some individual sûtras is extant. That called Pao-chi or Ratnakûṭa
opens with a collection of forty-nine sûtras which includes the longer
version of the Sukhâvatîvyûha. This collection is reckoned as one
work, but the other items in the same class are all or nearly all of
them duplicate translations of separate sûtras contained in it. This is
probably true of the third class also. At least seven of the works
included in it are duplicate translations of the first, which is called
Mahâsannipâta, and the sûtras called Candragarbha, Kshitig.,
Sumerug., and Akâśag., appear to be merely sections, not separate
compositions, although this is not clear from the remarks of Nanjio
and Wassiljew.
The principal works in class 4 are two translations, one fuller than
the other, of the Hua-yen or Avatamsaka Sûtra[714], still one of the
most widely read among Buddhist works, and at least sixteen of the
other items are duplicate renderings of [parts of it. Class 5 consists of
thirteen works dealing with the death of the Buddha and his last
discourses. The first sûtra, sometimes called the northern text, is
imperfect and was revised at Nanking in the form of the southern
text[715]. There are two other incomplete versions of the same text.
To judge from a specimen translated by Beal[716] it is a collection of
late discourses influenced by Vishnuism and does not correspond to
the Mahâparinibbânasutta of the Pali Canon.
286
Class 6 consists of sûtras which exist in several translations, but still

do not, like the works just mentioned, form small libraries in
themselves. It comprises, however, several books highly esteemed
and historically important, such as the Saddharmapuṇḍarîka (six
translations), the Suvarṇaprabhâsa, the Lalitavistara, the
Lankâvatâra, and the Shorter Sukhâvatîvyûha[717], all extant in
three translations. In it are also included many short tracts, the
originals of which are not known. Some of them are Jâtakas, but
many[718] deal with the ritual of image worship or with spells.
These characteristics are still more prominent in the seventh class,
consisting of sûtras which exist in a single translation only. The best
known among them are the Śûrângama and the Mahâvairocana (Ta-
jih-ching), which is the chief text of the Shin-gon or Mantra
School[719].
The Lü-tsang or Vinaya-pitaka is divided into Mahâyâna and

Hînayâna texts, neither very numerous. Many of the Mahâyâna texts
profess to be revelations by Maitreya and are extracts of the
Yogâcâryabhûmiśâstra[720] or similar to it. For practical purposes
the most important is the Fan-wang-ching[721] or net of Brahmâ. The
Indian original of this work is not known, but since the eighth
century it has been accepted in China as the standard manual for the
monastic life[722].
The Hînayâna Vinaya comprises five very substantial recensions of

the whole code, besides extracts, compendiums, and manuals. The
five recensions are: (a) Shih-sung-lü in sixty-five fasciculi, translated
in A.D. 404. This is said to be a Vinaya of the Sarvâstivâdins, but I-
Ching[723] expressly says that it does not belong to the
Mûlasarvâstivâdin school, though not unlike it. (b) The Vinaya of
this latter translated by I-Ching who brought it from India. (c) Shih-
fen-lü-tsang in sixty fasciculi, translated in 405 and said to represent
the Dharmagupta school. (d) The Mi-sha-so Wu-fên Lü or Vinaya of
the Mahîśâsakas, said to be similar to the Pali Vinaya, though not
identical with it[724]. (e) Mo-ko-sêng-chi Lü or Mahasanghika
Vinaya brought from India by Fa-Hsien and translated 416 A.D. It is
noticeable that all five recensions are classed as Hinayanist, although
(b) is said to be the Vinaya used by the Tibetan Church. Although
Chinese Buddhists frequently speak of the five-fold Vinaya[725], this
expression does not refer to these five texts, as might be supposed,
and I-Ching condemns it, saying that[726] the real number of
divisions is four.
287
The Abhidharma-Pitaka or Lun-tsang is, like the Sûtra Pitaka,

divided into Mahayanist and Hinayanist texts and texts of both
schools admitted into the Canon after 960 A.D. The Mahayanist texts
have no connection with the Pali Canon and their Sanskrit titles do
not contain the word Abhidharma[727]. They are philosophical
treatises ascribed to Aśvaghosha, Nâgârjuna, Asanga, Vasubandhu
and others, including three works supposed to have been revealed
by Maitreya to Asanga[728]. The principal of these is the Yogâcârya-
bhûmiśâstra, a scripture of capital importance for the Yogâcârya
school. It describes the career of a Bodhisattva and hence parts of it
are treated as belonging to the Vinaya. Among other important
works in this section may be mentioned the Madhyamaka Śâstra of
Nâgârjuna, the Mahâyânasûtrâlankâra of Asanga, and the
Awakening of Faith ascribed to Aśvaghosha[729].
The Hînayâna texts also show no correspondence with the Pali

Pitaka but are based on the Abhidharma works of the Sarvâstivâdin
school[730]. These are seven in number, namely the
Jnânaprasthânasâstra of Kâtyâyanîputra with six accessory treatises
or Pâdas[731]. The Mahâvibhâshasâstra, or commentary on the
Jnânaprasthâna, and the Abhidharmakósa[732] are also in this
section.
The third division of the Abhidharma is of little importance but

contains two curious items: a manual of Buddhist terminology
composed as late as 1272 by Pagspa for the use of Khubilai’s son and
the Sânkhyakârikâbhâshya, which is not a Buddhist work but a
compendium of Sânkhya philosophy[733].
The fourth division of the whole collection consists of miscellaneous

works, partly translated from Sanskrit and partly composed in
Chinese. Many of the Indian works appear from their title not to
differ much from the later Mahâyâna Sûtras, but it is rather
surprising to find in this section four translations[734] of the
Dharmapada (or at least of some similar anthology) which are thus
placed outside the Sûtra Pitaka. Among the works professing to be
translated from Sanskrit are a History of the Patriarchs, the
Buddhacarita of Aśvaghosha, a work similar to the Questions of
King Milinda, Lives of Aśvaghosha, Nâgârjuna, Vasubandhu and
others and the Suhrillekha or Friendly Epistle ascribed to Nâgârjuna.
The Chinese works included in this Tripitaka consist of nearly two

hundred books, historical, critical, controversial and homiletic,
composed by one hundred and two authors. Excluding late treatises
288
on ceremonial and doctrine, the more interesting may be classified as

follows:
(a) Historical.—Besides general histories of Buddhism, there [are

several collections of ecclesiastical biography. The first is the Kao-
sêng-chuan[735], or Memoirs of eminent Monks (not, however,
excluding laymen), giving the lives of about five hundred worthies
who lived between 67 and 519 A.D. The series is continued in other
works dealing with the T’ang and Sung dynasties. For the
Contemplative School there are further supplements carrying the
record on to the Yüan. There are also several histories of the Chinese
patriarchs. Of these the latest and therefore most complete is the Fo-
tsu-t’ung-chi[736] composed about 1270 by Chih P’an of the T’ien-
T’ai school. The Ching-tê-ch’uan-têng-lu[737] and other treatises give
the succession of patriarchs according to the Contemplative School.
Among historical works may be reckoned the travels of various
pilgrims who visited India.
(b) Critical.—There are thirteen catalogues of the Tripitaka as it

existed at different periods. Several of them contain biographical
accounts of the translators and other notes. The work called Chên-
chêng-lun criticizes several false sûtras and names. There are also
several encyclopædic works containing extracts from the Tripitaka,
arranged according to subjects, such as the Fa-yüan-chu-lin[738] in
100 volumes; concordances of numerical categories and a dictionary
of Sanskrit terms, Fan-i-ming-i-chi[739], composed in 1151.
(c) The literature of several Chinese sects is well represented. Thus

there are more than sixty works belonging to the T’ien T’ai school
beginning with the San-ta-pu or three great books attributed to the
founder and ending with the ecclesiastical history of Chih-p’an,
written about 1270. The Hua-yen school is represented by the
writings of four patriarchs and five monks: the Lü or Vinaya school
by eight works attributed to its founder, and the Contemplative
School by a sûtra ascribed to Hui-nêng, the sixth patriarch, by works
on the history of the Patriarchs and by several collections of sayings
or short compositions.
[(d) Controversial.—Under this heading may be mentioned polemics

against Taoism, including two collections of the controversies which
took place between Buddhists and Taoists from A.D. 71 till A.D. 730:
replies to the attacks made against Buddhism by Confucian scholars
and refutations of the objections raised by sceptics or heretics such as
the Chê-i-lun and the Yüan-jên-lun, or Origin of man[740]. This latter
289
is a well-known text-book written by the fifth Patriarch of the Hua-

yen school and while criticizing Confucianism, Taoism, and the
Hînâyana, treats them as imperfect rather than as wholly
erroneous[741]. Still more conciliatory is the Treatise on the three
religions composed by Liu Mi of the Yüan dynasty[742], which
asserts that all three deserve respect as teaching the practice of
virtue. It attacks, however, anti-Buddhist Confucianists such as Han-
Yü and Chu-Hsi.
The Chinese section contains three compositions attributed to

imperial personages of the Ming, viz., a collection of the prefaces and
laudatory verses written by the Emperor T’ai-Tsung, the Shên-Sêng-
Chuan or memoirs of remarkable monks with a preface by the
Emperor Ch’êng-tsu, and a curious book by his consort the Empress
Jên-Hsiao, introducing a sûtra which Her Majesty states was
miraculously revealed to her on New Year’s day, 1398 (see Nanjio,
No. 1657).
Though the Hindus were careful students and guardians of their

sacred works, their temperament did not dispose them to define and
limit the scriptures. But, as I have mentioned above[743], there is
some evidence that there was a loose Mahayanist canon in India
which was the origin of the arrangement found in the Chinese
Tripitaka, in so far as it (1) accepted Hinayanist as well as
Mahayanist works, and (2) included a great number of relatively late
sûtras, arranged in classes such as Prajnâpâramitâ and
Mahâsannipâta.
The Tripitaka analyzed by Nanjio, which contains works assigned to

dates ranging from 67 to 1622 A.D., is merely the [best known
survivor among several similar thesauri[744]. From 518 A.D.
onwards twelve collections of sacred literature were made by
imperial order and many of these were published in more than one
edition. The validity of this Canon depends entirely on imperial
authority, but, though Emperors occasionally inserted the works of
writers whom they esteemed[745], it does not appear that they
aimed at anything but completeness nor did they favour any school.
The Buddhist Church, like every other department of the Empire,
received from them its share of protection and supervision and its
claims were sufficient to induce the founder, or at least an early
Sovereign, of every important dynasty to publish under his
290
patronage a revised collection of the scriptures. The list of these

collections is as follows[746]:
1. A.D. 518 in the time of Wu-Ti, founder of the Liang.

2. ” 533-4 Hsiao-Wu of the Northern Wei.
3. ” 594 } Wan-ti, founder of the Sui.
4. ” 602 } Wan-ti, founder of the Sui.
5. ” 605-16 Yang-Ti of the Sui.
6. ” 695 the Empress Wu of the T’ang.
7. ” 730 Hsüan-Tsung of the T’ang.
8. ” 971 T’ai-Tsu, founder of the Sung.
9. ” 1285-7 Khubilai Khan, founder of the Yüan.
10. ” 1368-98 Hung-Wu, founder of the Ming.
11. ” 1403-24 Yung-Lo of the Ming.
12. ” 1735-7 Yung-Ching and Ch’ien-Lung of the Ch’ing..
Of these collections, the first seven were in MS. only: the last five
were printed. The last three appear to be substantially the same. The
tenth and eleventh collections are known as [southern and
northern[748], because they were printed at Nanking and Peking
respectively. They differ only in the number of Chinese works
admitted and similarly the twelfth collection is merely a revision of
the tenth with the addition of fifty-four Chinese works.
As mentioned, the Tripitaka contains thirteen catalogues of the

Buddhist scriptures as known at different dates[749]. Of these the
most important are (a) the earliest published between 506 and 512
A.D., (b) three published under the T’ang dynasty and known as
Nei-tien-lu, T’u-chi (both about 664 A.D.), and K’ai-yüan-lu (about
720 A.D.), (c) Chih-Yüan-lu or catalogue of Yüan dynasty, about
1285, which, besides enumerating the Chinese titles, transliterates the
Sanskrit titles and states whether the Indian works translated are
also translated into Tibetan. (d) The catalogue of the first Ming
collection.
The later collections contain new material and differ from the earlier
by natural accretion, for a great number of translations were
produced under the T’ang and Sung. Thus the seventh catalogue
(695 A.D.) records that 859 new works were admitted to the Canon.
But this expansion was accompanied by a critical and sifting process,
so that whereas the first collection contained 2213 works, the Ming
edition contains only 1622. This compression means not that works
of importance were rejected as heretical or apocryphal, for, as we
have seen, the Tripitaka is most catholic, but that whereas the earlier
291
collections admitted multitudinous extracts or partial translations of

Indian works, many of these were discarded when complete
versions had been made.
Nanjio considers that of the 2213 works contained in the first

collection only 276 are extant. Although the catalogues are
preserved, all the earlier collections are lost: copies of the eighth and
ninth were preserved in the Zō-jō-ji Library of Tokyo[750] and
Chinese and Japanese editions of the tenth, eleventh and twelfth are
current. So far as one can judge, when the eighth catalogue, or K’ai-
yüan-lu, was composed (between 713 and 741), the older and major
part of the Canon had been definitively fixed and the later collections
merely add the translations made by Amogha, and by writers of the
Sung and Yüan dynasties.
The editions of the Chinese Tripitaka must be distinguished from the

collections, for by editions are meant the forms in which each
collection was published, the text being or purporting to be the same
in all the editions of each collection. It is said[751] that under the
Sung and Yüan twenty different editions were produced. These
earlier issues were printed on long folding sheets and a nun called
Fa-chên[752] is said to have first published an edition in the shape of
ordinary Chinese books. In 1586 a monk named Mi-Tsang[753]
imitated this procedure and his edition was widely used. About a
century later a Japanese priest known as Tetsu-yen[754] reproduced
it and his publication, which is not uncommon in Japan, is usually
called the Ō-baku edition. There are two modern Japanese editions:
(a) that of Tokyo, begun in 1880, based on a Korean edition[755] with
various readings taken from other Chinese editions. (b) That of
Kyoto, 1905, which is a reprint of the Ming collection[756]. A Chinese
edition has been published at Shanghai (1913) at the expense of Mrs.
Hardoon, a Chinese lady well known as a munificent patron of the
faith, and I believe another at Nanking, but I do not know if it is
complete or not[757].
The translations contained in the Chinese Tripitaka belong to several

periods[758]. In the earliest, which extends to the middle of the
fourth century, the works produced were chiefly renderings of
detached sûtras[759]. Few treatises classified as Vinaya or
Abhidharma were translated and those few are mostly extracts or
compilations. The sûtras belong to both the Hîna and Mahâyâna. The
292
earliest extant translation or rather compilation, the Sûtra of Forty-

two sections, belongs to the former school, and so do the majority of
the translations made by An-Shih-Kao (148-170 A.D.), but from the
second century onwards the Prajnâpâramitâ and Amitâbha Sûtras
make their appearance[760]. Many of the translations made in this
period are described as incomplete or incorrect and the fact that most
of them were superseded or supplemented by later versions shows
that the Chinese recognized their provisional character. Future
research will probably show that many of them are paraphrases or
compendiums rather than translations in our sense.
The next period, roughly speaking 375-745 A.D., was extraordinarily

prolific in extensive and authoritative translations. The translators
now attack not detached chapters or discourses but the great
monuments of Indian Buddhist literature. Though it is not easy to
make any chronological bisection in this period, there is a clear
difference in the work done at the beginning and at the end of it.
From the end of the fourth century onwards a desire to have
complete translations of the great canonical works is apparent.
Between 385 and 445 A.D. were translated the four Agamas,
analogous to the Nikâyas of the Pali Canon, three great collections of
the Vinaya, and the principal scriptures of the Abhidharma
according to the Sarvâstivâdin school. For the Mahâyâna were
translated the great sûtras known as Avatamsaka, Lankâvatâra, and
many others, as well as works [ascribed to Aśvaghosha and
Nâgârjuna. After 645 A.D. a further development of the critical spirit
is perceptible, especially in the labours of Hsüan Chuang and I-
Ching. They attempt to give the religious public not only complete
works in place of extracts and compendiums, but also to select the
most authoritative texts among the many current in India. Thus,
though many translations had appeared under the name of
Prajnâpâramitâ, Hsüan Chuang filled 600 fasciculi with a new
rendering of the gigantic treatise. I-Ching supplemented the already
bulky library of Vinaya works with versions of the
Mûlasarvâstivâdin recension and many auxiliary texts.
Amogha (Pu-K’ung) whose literary labours extended from 746 to 774

A.D. is a convenient figure to mark the beginning of the next and last
period, although some of its characteristics appear a little earlier.
They are that no more translations are made from the great Buddhist
classics—partly no doubt because they had all been translated
already, well or ill—but that renderings of works described as
Dhâraṇî or Tantra pullulate and multiply. Though this literature
deserves such epithets as decadent and superstitious, yet it would
293
appear that Indian Tantras of the worst class were not palatable to
the Chinese.
The Chinese Tripitaka is of great importance for the literary history

of Buddhism, but the material which it offers for investigation is
superabundant and the work yet done is small. We are confronted
by such questions as, can we accept the dates assigned to the
translators, can we assume that, if the Chinese translations or
transliterations correspond with Indian titles, the works are the
same, and if the works are professedly the same, can we assume that
the Chinese text is a correct presentment of the Indian original?
The dates assigned to the translators offer little ground for

scepticism. The exactitude of the Chinese in such matters is well
attested, and there is a general agreement between several
authorities such as the Catalogues of the Tripitaka, the memoirs
known as Kao-Sêng Chuan with their continuations, and the chapter
on Buddhist books in the Sui annals. There are no signs [of a desire
to claim improbable accuracy or improbable antiquity. Many works
are said to be by unknown translators, doubtful authorship is frankly
discussed, and the movement of literature and thought indicated is
what we should expect. We have first fragmentary and incomplete
translations belonging to both the Mahâ and Hînayâna: then a series
of more complete translations beginning about the fifth century in
which the great Hînayâna texts are conspicuous: then a further series
of improved translations in which the Hînayâna falls into the
background and the works of Asanga and Vasubandhu come to the
front. This evidently reflects the condition of Buddhist India about
500-650 A.D., just as the translations of the eighth century reflect its
later and tantric phase.
But can Chinese texts be accepted as reasonably faithful

reproductions of the Indian originals whose names they bear, and
some of which have been lost? This question is really double; firstly,
did the translators reproduce with fair accuracy the Indian text
before them, and secondly, since Indian texts often exist in several
recensions, can we assume that the work which the translators knew
under a certain Sanskrit name is the work known to us by that
name? In reply it must be said that most Chinese translators fall
short of our standards of accuracy. In early times when grammars
and dictionaries were unknown the scholarly rendering of foreign
294
books was a difficult business, for professional interpreters would

usually be incapable of understanding a philosophic treatise. The
method often followed was that an Indian explained the text to a
literary Chinese, who recast the explanation in his own language.
The many translations of the more important texts and the frequent
description of the earlier ones as imperfect indicate a feeling that the
results achieved were not satisfactory. Several so-called translators,
especially Kumârajîva, gave abstracts of the Indian texts[761].
Others, like Dharmaraksha, who made a Chinese version of
Aśvaghosha’s Buddhacarita, so amplified and transposed the
[original that the result can hardly be called a translation[762].
Others combined different texts in one. Thus the work called Ta-o-
mi-to-ching[763] consists of extracts taken from four previous
translations of the Sukhâvatîvyûha and rearranged by the author
under the inspiration of Avalokita to whom, as he tells us, he was
wont to pray during the execution of his task. Others again, like
Dharmagupta, anticipated a method afterwards used in Tibet, and
gave a word for word rendering of the Sanskrit which is hardly
intelligible to an educated Chinese. The later versions, e.g. those of
Hsüan Chuang, are more accurate, but still a Chinese rendering of a
lost Indian document cannot be accepted as a faithful representation
of the original without a critical examination[764].
Often, however, the translator, whatever his weaknesses may have

been, had before him a text differing in bulk and arrangement from
the Pali and Sanskrit texts which we possess. Thus, there are four
Chinese translations of works bearing some relation to the
Dhammapada of the Pali Canon. All of these describe the original
text as the compilation of Dharmatrâta, to whom is also ascribed the
compilation of the Tibetan Udânavarga[765]. His name is not
mentioned in connection with the Pali text, yet two of the Chinese
translations are closely related to that text. The Fa-chü-ching[766] is a
collection of verses translated in 224 A.D. and said to correspond
with the Pali except that it has nine additional chapters and some
additional stanzas. The Fa-chü-p’i-yü-ching[767] represents another
edition of the same [verses, illustrated by a collection of parables. It
was translated between 290 and 306. The Ch’u-yao-ching[768],
translated in 399, is a similar collection of verses and parables, but
founded on another Indian work of much greater length. A revised
translation containing only the verses was made between 980 and
1001[769]. They are said to be the same as the Tibetan Udâna, and
the characteristics of this book, going back apparently to a Sanskrit
original, are that it is divided into thirty-three chapters, and that
295
though it contains about 300 verses found in Pali, yet it is not merely
the Pali text plus additions, but an anthology arranged on a different
principle and only partly identical in substance[770].
There can be little doubt that the Pali Dhammapada is one among
several collections of verses, with or without an explanatory
commentary of stories. In all these collections there was much
common matter, both prose and verse, but some were longer, some
shorter, some were in Pali and some in Sanskrit. Whereas the
Chinese Dhammapada is longer than the Indian texts, the Chinese
version of Milinda’s Questions[771] is much shorter and omits books
iv-vii. It was made between 317 and 420 A.D. and the inference is
that the original Indian text received later additions.
A more important problem is this: what is the relation to the Pali

Canon of the Chinese texts bearing titles corresponding to Dîrgha,
Madhyama, Samyukta and Ekottara? These collections of sûtras do
not call themselves Nikâya but A-han or Agama: the titles are
translated as Ch’ang (long), Chung (medium), Tsa (miscellaneous)
and Tseng-i, representing Ekottara rather than Anguttara[772]. There
is hence prima facie reason [to suppose that these works represent not
the Pali Canon, but a somewhat similar Sanskrit collection. That one
or many Sanskrit works may have coexisted with a somewhat
similar Pali work is clearly shown by the Vinaya texts, for here we
have the Pali Canon and Chinese translations of five Sanskrit
versions, belonging to different schools, but apparently covering the
same ground and partly identical. For the Sûtra Pitaka no such body
of evidence is forthcoming, but the Sanskrit fragments of the
Samyuktâgama found near Turfan contain parts of six sûtras which
are arranged in the same order as in the Chinese translation and are
apparently the original from which it was made. It is noticeable that
three of the four great Agamas were translated by monks who came
from Tukhara or Kabul. Guṇabhadra, however, the translator of the
Samyuktâgama, came from Central India and the text which he
translated was brought from Ceylon by Fa-Hsien. It apparently
belonged to the Abhayagiri monastery and not to the Mahâvihâra.
Nanjio[773], however, states that about half of it is repeated in the
Chinese versions of the Madhyama and Ekottara Agamas. It is also
certain that though the Chinese Agamas and Pali Nikâyas contain
much common matter, it is differently distributed[774].
There was in India a copious collection of sûtras, existing primarily

as oral tradition and varying in diction and arrangement, but
codified from time to time in a written form. One of such
296
codifications is represented by the Pali Canon, at least one other by

the Sanskrit text which was rendered into Chinese. With rare
exceptions the Chinese translations were from the Sanskrit[775]. The
Sanskrit codification of the sûtra literature, while [differing from the
Pali in language and arrangement, is identical in doctrine and almost
identical in substance. It is clearly the product of the same or similar
schools, but is it earlier or later than the Pali or contemporary with
it? The Chinese translations merely fix the latest possible date. A
portion of the Samyuktâgama (Nanjio, No. 547) was translated by an
unknown author between 220 and 280. This is probably an extract
from the complete work which was translated about 440, but it
would be difficult to prove that the Indian original was not
augmented or rearranged between these dates. The earliest
translation of a complete Agama is that of the Ekottarâgama, 384
A.D. But the evidence of inscriptions[776] shows that works known
as Nikâyas existed in the third century B.C. The Sanskrit of the
Agamas, so far as it is known from the fragments found in Central
Asia, does not suggest that they belong to this epoch, but is
compatible with the theory that they date from the time of Kanishka
of which if we know little, we can at least say that it produced much
Buddhist Sanskrit literature. M. Sylvain Lévi has suggested that the
later appearance of the complete Vinaya in Chinese is due to the late
compilation of the Sanskrit original[777]. It seems to me that other
explanations are possible. The early translators were clearly shy of
extensive works and until there was a considerable body of Chinese
monks, to what public would these theological libraries appeal? Still,
if any indication were forthcoming from India or Central Asia that
the Sanskrit Agamas were arranged or rearranged in the early
centuries of our era, the late date of the Chinese translations would
certainly support it. But I am inclined to think that the Nikâyas were
rewritten in Sanskrit about the beginning of our era, when it was felt
that works claiming a certain position ought to be composed in what
had become the general literary language of India[778]. [Perhaps
those who wrote them in Sanskrit were hardly conscious of making a
translation in our sense, but simply wished to publish them in the
best literary form.
It seems probable that the Hinayanist portion of the Chinese

Tripitaka is in the main a translation of the Canon of the
Sarvastivâdins which must have consisted of:
(1) Four Agamas or Nikâyas only, for the Dhammapada is

placed outside the Sutta Pitaka.
297
(2) A voluminous Vinaya covering the same ground as the Pali

recension but more copious in legend and anecdote.
(3) An Abhidharma entirely different from the Pali works

bearing this name.
It might seem to follow from this that the whole Pali Abhidharma
and some important works such as the Thera-Therîgâthâ were
unknown to the Hinayanists of Central Asia and Northern India in
the early centuries of our era. But caution is necessary in drawing
such inferences, for until recently it might have been said that the
Sutta Nipâta also was unknown, whereas fragments of it in a
Sanskrit version have now been discovered in Eastern
Turkestan[779]. The Chinese editors draw a clear distinction between
Hinayanist and Mahayanist scriptures. They exclude from the latter
works analogous to the Pali Nikâyas and Vinaya, and also the
Abhidharma of the Sarvâstivâdins. But the labours of Hsüan Chuang
and I-Ching show that this does not imply the rejection of all these
works by Mahayanists.
Buddhist literary activity has an interesting side aspect, namely the

expedients used to transliterate Indian words, which [almost
provided the Chinese with an alphabet. To some extent Indian
names, particularly proper names possessing an obvious meaning,
are translated. Thus Asoka becomes Wu-yu, without sorrow:
Aśvaghosha, Ma-ming or horse-voice, and Udyâna simply Yüan or
park[780]. But many proper names did not lend themselves to such
renderings and it was a delicate business to translate theological
terms like Nirvâṇa and Samâdhi. The Buddhists did not perhaps
invent the idea of using the Chinese characters so as to spell with
moderate precision[781], but they had greater need of this procedure
than other writers and they used it extensively[782] and with such
variety of detail that though they invented some fifteen different
syllabaries, none of them obtained general acceptance and
Julien[783] enumerates 3000 Chinese characters used to represent the
sounds indicated by 47 Indian letters. Still, they gave currency[784]
to the system known as fan-ch’ieh which renders a syllable
phonetically by two characters, the final of the first and the initial of
the second not being pronounced. Thus, in order to indicate the
sound Chung, a Chinese dictionary will use the two characters chu
yung, which are to be read together as Ch ung.
298
The transcriptions of Indian words vary in exactitude and the later

are naturally better. Hsüan Chuang was a notable reformer and
probably after his time Indian words were rendered in Chinese
characters as accurately as Chinese words are now transcribed in
Latin letters. It is true that modern pronunciation makes such
renderings as Fo seem a strange distortion of the original. But it is an
abbreviation of Fo-t’o and these syllables were probably once
pronounced something like Vut-tha[785]. Similarly Wên-shu-shih-
li[786] seems a parody of Manjuśri. But the evidence of modern
dialects shows that the first two syllables may have been
pronounced as Man-ju. The pupil was probably taught to eliminate
the obscure vowel of shih, and li was taken as the nearest equivalent
of ri, just as European authors write chih and tzŭ without pretending
that they are more than conventional signs for Chinese sounds
unknown to our languages. It was certainly possible to transcribe not
only names but Sanskrit prayers and formulæ in Chinese characters,
and though many writers sneer at the gibberish chanted by Buddhist
priests yet I doubt if this ecclesiastical pronunciation, which has
changed with that of the spoken language, is further removed from
its original than the Latin of Oxford from the speech of Augustus.
Sanskrit learning flourished in China for a considerable period. In

the time of the T’ang, the clergy numbered many serious students of
Indian literature and the glossaries included in the Tripitaka show
that they studied the original texts. Under the Sung dynasty (A.D.
1151) was compiled another dictionary of religious terms[787] and
the study of Sanskrit was encouraged under the Yüan. But the
ecclesiastics of the Ming produced no new translations and
apparently abandoned the study of the original texts which was no
longer kept alive by the arrival of learned men from India. It has
been stated that Sanskrit manuscripts are still preserved in Chinese
monasteries, but no details respecting such works are known to me.
The statement is not improbable in itself[788] as is shown by the
Library which Stein discovered at Tun-huang and by the Japanese
palm-leaf manuscripts which came originally from China. A few
copies of Sanskrit sûtras printed in China in the Lanja variety of the
Devanâgari alphabet have been brought to Europe[789]. Max Müller
published a facsimile of part of the Vajracchedikâ obtained at Peking
and printed in Sanskrit from wooden blocks. The place of production
is unknown, but the characters are similar to those used for printing
Sanskrit in Tibet, as may be seen from [another facsimile (No. 3) in
the same work. Placards and pamphlets containing short invocations
in Sanskrit and Tibetan are common in Chinese monasteries,
299
particularly where there is any Lamaistic influence, but they do not

imply that the monks who use them have any literary acquaintance
with those languages.
FOOTNOTES:
[708] For an account of some of the scriptures here

mentioned see chap. XX.
[709] A catalogue of the Chinese Translation of the Buddhist Tripitaka.

Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1893. An index to the Tokyo edition has
been published by Fujii. Meiji XXXI (1898). See too Forke, Katalog des
Pekinger Tripitaka, 1916.
[710]
[711] Tan-i-ching Some of the works classed under

Tan-i-ching appear to exist in more than one form, e.g. Nanjio, Nos.
674 and 804.
[712] These characters are commonly read Pojo by Chinese

Buddhists but the Japanese reading Hanṇya shows that the
pronunciation of the first character was Pan.
[713] Vajracchedikâ or Chin Kang.
[714] Winternitz (Gesch. Ind. Lit. II. i. p. 242) states on the authority of
Takakusu that this work is the same as the Gaṇḍavyûha. See also
Pelliot in J. A. 1914, II. pp. 118-21. The Gaṇḍavyûha is probably an
extract of the Avatamsaka.
[715] Nos. 113 and 114
[716] Catena of Buddhist Scriptures, pp. 160 ff.
[717] The longer Sukhâvatîvyûha is placed in the Ratnakûta class.
300
[718] The Sûtra of Kuan-yin with the thousand hands and eyes is
very popular and used in most temples. Nanjio, No. 320.
[719] No. 399 and 530
[720] Said to have been revealed to Asanga by Maitreya. No. 1170.
[721] No. 1087. It has nothing to do with the Pali

Sûtra of the same name. Digha, I.
[722] See below for an account of it.
[723] Record of Buddhist Practices, p. 20.
[724] See Oldenberg, Vinaya, vol. I. pp. xxiv-xlvi.
[725] See Watters, Yüan Chwang, I. p. 227. The five schools are given
as Dharmagupta, Mahîs’âsika, Sarvâstivâdin, Kâ’syapîya and
Mahâsanghika. For the last Vatsiputra or Sthavira is sometimes
substituted.
[726] Record of Buddhist Practices, p. 8.
[727] The Chinese word lun occurs frequently in them, but though it
is used to translate Abhidharma, it is of much wider application and
means discussion of Śâstra.
[728] See Watters, Yüan Chwang, I, pp. 355 ff.
[729] Nos. 1179, 1190, 1249.
[730] For a discussion of this literature see Takakusu on the

Abhidharma Literature of the Sarvâstivâdins, J. Pali Text Society,
1905, pp. 67 ff.
[731] Nanjio, Cat. Nos. 1273, 1275, 1276, 1277, 1292, 1281, 1282, 1296,
1317. This last work was not translated till the eleventh century.
[732] Nanjio, Cat. Nos. 1263, 1267 and 1269.
[733] See Takakusu’s study of these translations in B.E.F.E.O. 1904,

pp. 1 ff. and pp. 978 ff.
[734] Nanjio, Cat. Nos. 1321, 1353, 1365, 1439.
301
[735] No. 1490.
[736] No. 1661. For more about

the Patriarchs see the next chapter.
[737] No. 1524, written A.D. 1006.
[738] No. 1482.
[739] No. 1640.
[740] Nos. 1634 and 1594.
[741] See for some account of it Masson-Oursel’s article in J.A. 1915,

I. pp. 229-354.
[742]
[743] See chap. XX on the Mahayanist canon in India.
[744] It is described at the beginning as Ta Ming San Tsang, but

strictly speaking it must be No. 12 of the list, as it contains a work
said to have been written about 1622 A.D. (p. 468).
[745] Thus the Emperor Jên Tsung ordered the works of Ch’i Sung
to be admitted to the Canton in 1062.
[746] Taken from Nanjio’s Catalogue, p. xxvii.
[747] Ch’ien-Lung is said to have printed the Tripitaka in four

languages, Chinese, Tibetan, Mongol and Manchu, the whole
collection filling 1392 vols. See Möllendorf in China Branch, J.A.S.
xxiv. 1890, p. 28.
302
[748] But according to another statement the southern recension was

not the imperial collection begun in 1368 but a private edition now
lost. See Nanjio, Cat. p. xxiii.
[749] See for the complete list Nanjio, Cat. p. xxvii. Those named
above are (a) Nos. 1483,
1485, 1487, and (b) No. 1612. For the date of the
first see Maspéro in B.E.F.E.O. 1910, p. 114. There was a still earlier
catalogue composed by Tao-an in 374 of which only fragments have
been preserved. See Pelliot in T’oung Pao, XIX. 1920, p. 258.
[750] For the Korean copy now in Japan, see Courant, Bibliographie
coréenne, vol. III. pp. 215-19.
[751] See Nanjio, Cat. p. xxii.
[752]
[753]
[754] Also called Do-ko.
[755] The earlier collections of the Tripitaka seem to have been

known in Korea and about 1000 A.D. the king procured from China
a copy of the Imperial Edition, presumably the eighth collection (971
A.D.). He then ordered a commission of scholars to revise the text
and publish an edition of his own. The copy of this edition, on which
the recent Tokyo edition was founded, was brought to Japan in the
Bun-mei period 1469-1486.
[756] A supplement to the Tripitaka containing non-canonical works

in 750 volumes (Dai Nippon Zoku-Zōkyō) was published in 1911.
[757] The Peking Tripitaka catalogued by Forke appears to be a set of

1223 works represented by copies taken from four editions published
in 1578, 1592, 1598 and 1735 A.D., all of which are editions of the
collections numbered 11 and 12 above.
303
[758] For two interesting lives of translators see the T’oung Pao, 1909,
p. 199, and 1905, p. 332, where will be found the biographies of Sêng
Hui, a Sogdian who died in 280 and Jinagupta a native of Gandhâra
(528-605).
[759] But between 266 and 313 Dharmaraksha translated the

Saddharmapundarîka (including the additional chapters 21-26) and
the Lalitavistara. His translation of the Prajñâpâramitâ is incomplete.
[760] In the translations of Lokâkshî 147-186, Chih-Ch’ien 223-243,

Dharmaraksha 266-313.
[761] But his translation of the Lotus won admiration for its literary
style. See Anesaki Nichiren, p. 17. Wieger (Croyances, p. 367) says
that the works of An-shih-kao illustrate the various methods of
translation: absolutely literal renderings which have hardly any
meaning in Chinese: word for word translations to which is added a
paraphrase of each sentence in Chinese idiom: and elegant
renderings by a native in which the original text obviously suffers.
[762] Yet it must have been intended as such. The title expressly
describes the work as composed by the Bodhisattva Ma-Ming
(Aśvaghosha) and translated by Dharmaraksha. Though his idea of a
translation was at best an amplified metrical paraphrase, yet he
coincides verbally with the original so often that his work can hardly
be described as an independent poem inspired by it.
[763] No. 203.
[764] See Sukhâvatîvyûha, ed. Max Müller and Bunyiu Nanjio,

Oxford, 1883. In the preface, pp. vii-ix, is a detailed comparison of
several translations and in an appendix, pp. 79 ff., a rendering of
Sanghavarman’s Chinese version of verses which occur in the work.
Chinese critics say that Tao-an in the third century was the first to
introduce a sound style of translation. He made no translations
himself which have survived but was a scholar and commentator
who influenced others.
[765] This is an anthology (edited by Beckh, 1911: translated by

Rockhill, 1892) in which 300 verses are similar to the Pali
Dhammapada.
304
[766] No. 1365.
[767] No. 1353.
[768] No. 1321.
[769] Fa-chi-yao-sung-ching, No. 1439.
[770] There seem to be at least two other collections. Firstly a Prâkrit

anthology of which Dutreuil de Rhins discovered a fragmentary MS.
in Khotan and secondly a much amplified collection preserved in the
Korean Tripitaka and reprinted in the Tokyo edition (xxiv.’g). The
relation of these to the other recensions is not clear.
[771] Nanjio, Cat. 1358. See Pelliot, J.A. 1914, II. p. 379.
[772] For the relations of the

Chinese translations to the Pali Tripitaka, and to a Sanskrit Canon
now preserved only in a fragmentary state, see inter alia, Nanjio, Cat.
pp. 127 ff., especially Nos. 542, 543, 545. Anesaki, J.R.A.S. 1901, p.
895; id. “On some problems of the textual history of the Buddhist
scriptures,” in Trans. A. S. Japan, 1908, p. 81, and more especially his
longer article entitled, “The Four Buddhist Agamas in Chinese” in
the same year of the Trans.; id. “Traces of Pali Texts in a Mahâyana
Treatise,” Muséon, 1905. S. Lévi, Le Samyuktâgama Sanskrit, T’oung
Pao, 1904, p. 297.
[773] No. 544.
[774] Thus seventy sûtras of the Pali Anguttara are found in the
Chinese Madhyama and some of them are repeated in the Chinese
Ekottara. The Pali Majjhima contains 125 sûtras, the Chinese
Madhyamâgama 222, of which 98 are common to both. Also twenty-
two Pali Majjhima dialogues are found in the Chinese Ekottara and
Samyukta, seventy Chinese Madhyama dialogues in Pali Anguttara,
nine in Digha, seven in Samyutta and five in Khuddaka. Anesaki,
305
Some Problems of the textual history of the Buddhist Scriptures. See also
Anesaki in Muséon, 1905, pp. 23 ff. on the Samyutta Nikâya.
[775] Anesaki, “Traces of Pali Texts,” Muséon, 1905, shows that the
Indian author of the Mahâprajnâpâramitâ Sâstra may have known
Pali texts, but the only certain translation from the Pali appears to be
Nanjio, No. 1125, which is a translation of the Introduction to
Buddhaghosa’s Samanta-pâsâdikâ or commentary on the Vinaya.
See Takakusu in J.R.A.S. 1896, p. 415. Nanjio’s restoration of the title
as Sudarśana appears to be incorrect.
[776] See Epigraphia Indica, vol. II. p. 93.
[777] In support of this it may be mentioned that Fa-Hsien says that

at the time of his visit to India the Vinaya of the Sarvâstivâdins was
preserved orally and not committed to writing.
[778] The idea that an important book ought to be in Sanskrit or

deserves to be turned into Sanskrit is not dead in India. See Grierson,
J.R.A.S. 1913, p. 133, who in discussing a Sanskrit version of the
Râmâyana of Tulsi Das mentions that translations of vernacular
works into Sanskrit are not uncommon.
[779] J.R.A.S. 1916, p. 709. Also, the division into five Nikâyas is
ancient. See Bühler in Epig. Indica, II. p. 93. Anesaki says (Trans. A.S.
Japan, 1908, p. 9) that Nanjio, No. 714, Pên Shih is the Itivuttakam,
which could not have been guessed from Nanjio’s entry. Portions of
the works composing the fifth Nikâya (e.g. the Sutta Nipata) occur in
the Chinese Tripitaka in the other Nikâyas. For mentions of the fifth
Nikâya in Chinese, see J.A. 1916, II. pp. 32-33, where it is said to be
called Tsa-Tsang. This is also the designation of the last section of the
Tripitaka, Nanjio, Nos. 1321 to 1662, and as this section contains the
Dharmapada, it might be supposed to be an enormously distended
version of the Kshudraka Nikâya. But this can hardly be the case, for
this Tsa-Tsang is placed as if it was considered as a fourth Piṭaka
rather than as a fifth Nikâya.
[780]
[781] See Watters, Essays on the Chinese Language, pp. 36, 51, and, for
the whole subject of transcription, Stanislas Julien, Méthode pour
déchiffrer et transcrire les noms Sanscrits qui se rencontrent dans les livres
chinois.
306
[782] Entire Sanskrit compositions were sometimes transcribed in

Chinese characters. See Kien Ch’ui Fan Tsan, Bibl. Budd. XV. and
Max Müller, Buddhist Texts from Japan, III. pp. 35-46.
[783] L.c. pp. 83-232.
[784] See inter alia the Preface to K’ang Hsi’s Dictionary. The fan-
ch’ieh system is used in the well-known dictionary called

Yü-Pien composed 543 A.D.
[785] Even in modern Cantonese Fo is pronounced as Fat.
[786]
[787] Nanjio, Cat. No. 1640.
[788] History repeats itself. I have seen many modern Burmese and
Sinhalese MSS. in Chinese monasteries.
[789] Buddhist Texts from Japan, ed. Max Müller in Anecdota

Oxoniensia, Aryan Series, I, II and III. For the Lanja printed text see
the last facsimile in I, also III. p. 34 and Bibl. Budd. XIV (Kuan-si-im
Pusar), pp. vi, vii. Another copy of this Lanja printed text was
bought in Kyoto, 1920.
307
CHAPTER XLV
CHINA (continued)
SCHOOLS[790] OF CHINESE BUDDHISM
The Schools (Tsung) of Chinese Buddhism are an intricate subject of

little practical importance, for observers agree that at the present day
all salient differences of doctrine and practice have been obliterated,
although the older monasteries may present variations in details and
honour their own line of teachers. A particular Bodhisattva may be
singled out for reverence in one locality or some religious
observance may be specially enjoined, but there is little
aggressiveness or self assertion among the sects, even if they are
conscious of having a definite name: they each tolerate the deities,
rites and books of all and pay attention to as many items as leisure
and inertia permit. There is no clear distinction between Mahâyâna
and Hînayâna.
The main division is of course into Lamaism on one side and all
remaining sects on the other. Apart from this we find a record of ten
schools which deserve notice for various reasons. Some, though
obscure in modern China, have flourished after transportation to
Japan: some, such as the T’ien-t’ai, are a memorial of a brilliant
epoch: some represent doctrines which, if not now held by separate
bodies, at least indicate different tendencies, such as magical
ceremonies, mystical contemplation, or faith in Amitâbha.
[The more important schools were comparatively late, for they date
from the sixth and seventh centuries. For two or three hundred years
the Buddhists of China were a colony of strangers, mainly occupied
in making translations. By the fifth century the extent and diversity
of Indian literature became apparent and Fa-Hsien went to India to
ascertain which was the most correct Vinaya and to obtain copies of
it. Theology was now sufficiently developed to give rise to two
schools both Indian in origin and merely transported to China,
known as Ch’êng-shih-tsung and San-lun-tsung[791].
The first is considered as Hinayanist and equivalent to the

Sautrântikas[792]. In the seventh century it passed over to Japan
where it is known as Ji-jitsu-shu, but neither there nor in China had
308
it much importance. The San-lun-tsung recognizes as three

authorities (from which it takes its name) the Mâdhyamikaśâstra and
Dvâdasanikâyaśâstra of Nâgârjuna with the Śataśâstra of his pupil
Deva. It is simply the school of these two doctors and represents the
extreme of Mahayanism. It had some importance in Japan, where it
was called San-Ron-Shu.
The arrival of Bodhidharma at Canton in 520 (or 526) was a great

event for the history of Buddhist dogma, although his special
doctrines did not become popular until much later. He introduced
the contemplative school and also the institution of the Patriarchate,
which for a time had some importance. He wrote no books himself,
but taught that true knowledge is gained in meditation by
intuition[793] and communicated by transference of thought. The
best account of his teaching is contained in the Chinese treatise
which reports the sermon preached by him before the Emperor Wu-
Ti in 520[794]. The chief thesis of this discourse is that the only true
reality is the Buddha nature[795] in the heart of every man. Prayer,
asceticism and good works are vain. All that man need do is to turn
his gaze inward and see the Buddha in his own heart. This vision,
which gives light and deliverance, comes in a moment. It is a simple,
natural act like swallowing or dreaming which cannot be taught or
learnt, for it is not something imparted but an experience of the soul,
and teaching can only prepare the way for it. Some are impeded by
their karma and are physically incapable of the vision, whatever
their merits or piety may be, but for those to whom it comes it is
inevitable and convincing.
We have only to substitute âtman for Buddha or Buddha nature to

see how closely this teaching resembles certain passages in the
Upanishads, and the resemblance is particularly strong in such
statements as that the Buddha nature reveals itself in dreams, or that
it is so great that it embraces the universe and so small that the point
of a needle cannot prick it. The doctrine of Mâyâ is clearly indicated,
even if the word was not used in the original, for it is expressly said
that all phenomena are unreal. Thus the teaching of Bodhidharma is
an anticipation of Śankara’s monism, but it is formulated in
consistently Buddhist language and is in harmony with the views of
the Mâdhyamika school and of the Diamond-cutter. This Chinese
sermon confirms other evidence which indicates that the ideas of the
Advaita philosophy, though Brahmanic in their origin and severely
condemned by Gotama himself, were elaborated in Buddhist circles
before they were approved by orthodox Hindus.
309
Bodhidharma’s teaching was Indian but it harmonized marvellously

with Taoism and Chinese Buddhists studied Taoist books[796]. A
current of Chinese thought which was old and strong, if not the main
stream, bade man abstain from action and look for peace and light
within. It was, I think, the junction of this native tributary with the
river of inflowing Buddhism which gave the Contemplative School
its importance. It lost that importance because it abandoned its
special doctrines [and adopted the usages of other schools. When
Taoism flourished under the Sung Emperors it was also flourishing
and influenced art as well as thought, but it probably decayed under
the Yüan dynasty which favoured religion of a different stamp. It is
remarkable that Bodhidharma appears to be unknown to both Indian
and Tibetan[797] writers but his teaching has imparted a special tone
and character to a section (though not the whole) of Far Eastern
Buddhism. It is called in Chinese Tsung-mên or Ch’an-tsung, but this
word Ch’an[798] is perhaps better known to Europe in its Japanese
form Zen.
Bodhidharma is also accounted the twenty-eighth Patriarch, a title

which represents the Chinese Tsu Shih[799] rather than any Indian
designation, for though in Pali literature we hear of the succession of
teachers[800], it is not clear that any of them enjoyed a style or
position such as is implied in the word Patriarch. Hindus have
always attached importance to spiritual lineage and every school has
a list of teachers who have transmitted its special lore, but the sense
of hierarchy is so weak that it is misleading to describe these
personages as Popes, Patriarchs or Bishops, and apart from the
personal respect which the talents of individuals may have won, it
does not appear that there was any succession of teachers who could
be correctly termed heads of the Church. Even in China such a title is
of dubious accuracy for whatever position Bodhidharma and his
successors may have claimed for themselves, they were not generally
accepted as being more than the heads of a school and other schools
also gave their chief teachers the title of Tsu-shih. From time to time
the Emperor appointed overseers of religion with the title of Kuo-
shih[801], instructor of the nation, but these were officials appointed
by the Crown, not prelates consecrated by the Church.
Twenty-eight Patriarchs are supposed to have flourished between

the death of the Buddha and the arrival of Bodhidharma in China.
The Chinese lists[802] do not in the earlier part agree with [the
Singhalese accounts of the apostolic succession and contain few
eminent names with the exception of Aśvaghosha, Nâgârjuna, Deva
and Vasubandhu.
310
According to most schools there were only twenty-four Patriarchs.

These are said to have been foretold by the Buddha and twenty-four
is a usual number in such series[803]. The twenty-fourth Patriarch
Simha Bhikshu or Simhâlaputra went to Kashmir and suffered
martyrdom there at the hands of Mihirakula[804] without
appointing a successor. But the school of Bodhidharma continues the
series, reckoning him as the twenty-eighth, and the first of the
Chinese Patriarchs. Now since the three Patriarchs between the
martyr and Bodhidharma are all described as living in southern
India, whereas such travellers as Fa-Hsien obviously thought that
the true doctrine was to be found in northern India, and since
Bodhidharma left India altogether, it is probable that the later
Patriarchs represent the [spiritual genealogy of some school which
was not the Church as established at Nâlandâ[805].
It will be convenient to summarize briefly here the history of

Bodhidharma’s school. Finding that his doctrines were not altogether
acceptable to the Emperor Wu-Ti (who did not relish being told that
his pious exertions were vain works of no value) he retired to Lo-
yang and before his death designated as his successor Hui-k’o. It is
related of Hui-k’o that when he first applied for instruction he could
not attract Bodhidharma’s attention and therefore stood before the
sage’s door during a whole winter night until the snow reached his
knees. Bodhidharma indicated that he did not think this test of
endurance remarkable. Hui-k’o then took a knife, cut off his own
arm and presented it to the teacher who accepted him as a pupil and
ultimately gave him the insignia of the Patriarchate—a robe and
bowl. He taught for thirty-four years and is said to have mixed freely
with the lowest and most debauched reprobates. His successors were
Sêng-ts’an, Tao-hsin, Hung-jên, and Hui-nêng[806] who died in 713
and declined to nominate a successor, saying that the doctrine was
well established. The bowl of Bodhidharma was buried with him.
Thus the Patriarch was not willing to be an Erastian head of the
Church and thought the Church could get on without him. The
object of the Patriarchate was simply to insure the correct
transmission from teacher to scholar of certain doctrines, and this
precaution was especially necessary in sects which rejected scriptural
authority and relied on personal instruction. So soon as there were
several competent teachers handing on the tradition such a
safeguard was felt to be unnecessary.
That this feeling was just is shown by the fact that the school of
Bodhidharma is still practically one in teaching. But its small regard
for scripture and insistence on oral instruction caused the principal
311
monasteries to regard themselves as centres with an apostolic

succession of their own and to form divisions which were
geographical rather than doctrinal. They are often [called school
(tsung), but the term is not correct, if it implies that the difference is
similar to that which separates the Ch’an-tsung and Lü-tsung or
schools of contemplation and of discipline. Even in the lifetime of
Hui-nêng there seems to have been a division, for he is sometimes
called the Patriarch of the South, Shên-Hsiu[807] being recognized as
Patriarch of the North. But all subsequent divisions of the Ch’an-
tsung trace their lineage to Hui-nêng. Two of his disciples founded
two schools called Nan Yüeh and Ch’ing Yüan[808] and between the
eighth and tenth centuries these produced respectively two and
three subdivisions, known together as Wu-tsung or five schools.
They take their names from the places where their founders dwelt
and are the schools of Wei-Yang, Lin-Chi, Ts’ao-Tung, Yün-Mên and
Fa-Yen[809]. This is the chronological order, but the most important
school is the Lin-Chi, founded by I-Hsüan[810], who resided on the
banks of a river[811] in Chih-li and died in 867. It is not easy to
discriminate the special doctrines[812] of the Lin-Chi for it became
the dominant form of the school to such an extent that other variants
are little more than names. But it appears to have insisted on the
transmission of spiritual truths not only by oral instruction but by a
species of telepathy between teacher and pupil culminating in
sudden illumination. At the present day the majority of Chinese
monasteries profess to belong to the Ch’an-tsung and it has
encroached on other schools. Thus it is now accepted on the sacred
island of P’uto which originally followed the Lü-tsung.
Although the Ch’an school did not value the study of scripture as
part of the spiritual life, yet it by no means neglected letters and can
point to a goodly array of ecclesiastical authors, extending down to
modern times[813]. More than twenty of their treatises have been
admitted into the Tripitaka. Several of these are historical and
discuss the succession of Patriarchs and abbots, but the most
characteristic productions of the sect are collections of aphorisms,
usually compiled by the disciples of a teacher who himself
committed nothing to writing[814].
In opposition to the Contemplative School or Tsung-mên, all the

others are sometimes classed together as Chiao-mên. This dichotomy
perhaps does no more than justice to the importance of Bodhidharma’s
school, but is hardly scientific, for, whatever may be the numerical
proportion, the other schools differ from one another as much as
they differ from it. They all agree in recognizing the authority not
312
only of a founder but of a special sacred book. We may treat first of

one which, like the Tsung-mên, belongs specially to the Buddhism of
the Far East and is both an offshoot of the Tsung-mên and a protest
against it—there being nothing incompatible in this double
relationship. This is the T’ien-t’ai[815] school which takes its name
from a celebrated monastery in the province of Chê-kiang. The
founder of this establishment and of the sect was called Chih-K’ai or
Chih-I[816] and followed originally Bodhidharma’s teaching, but
ultimately rejected the view that contemplation is all-sufficient,
while still claiming to derive his doctrine from Nâgârjuna. He had a
special veneration for the Lotus Sûtra and paid attention to
ceremonial. He held that although the Buddha-mind is present in all
living beings, yet they do not of themselves come to the knowledge
and use of it, so that instruction is necessary to remove error and
establish true ideas. The phrase Chih-kuan[817] is almost the motto
of the school: it is a translation of the two words Samatha and
Vipassanâ, taken to mean calm and insight.
The T’ien-T’ai is distinguished by its many-sided and almost

encyclopædic character. Chih-I did not like the exclusiveness of the
Contemplative School. He approved impartially of ecstasy,
literature, ceremonial and discipline: he wished to find a place for
everything and a point of view from which every doctrine might be
admitted to have some value. Thus he divided the teaching of the
Buddha into five periods, regarded as progressive not contradictory,
and expounded respectively in (a) the Hua-yen Sûtra; (b) the
Hînayâna Sûtras; (c) the Lêng-yen-ching; (d) the Prajnâ-pâramitâ; (e)
the Lotus Sûtra which is the crown, quintessence and plenitude of all
Buddhism. He also divided religion into eight parts[818], sometimes
counted as four, the latter half of the list being the more important.
The names are collection, progress, distinction and completion.
These terms indicate different ways of looking at religion, all
legitimate but not equally comprehensive or just in perspective. By
collection is meant the Hînayâna, the name being apparently due to
the variously catalogued phenomena which occupy the disciple in
the early stages of his progress: the scriptures, divisions of the
universe, states of the human minds and so on. Progress (T’ung,
which might also be rendered as transition or communication) is
applicable to the Hîna and Mahâyanâ alike and regards the religious
life as a series of stages rising from the state of an unconverted man
to that of a Buddha. Pieh, or distinction, is applicable only to the
Mahâyanâ and means the special excellences of a Bodhisattva. Yüan,
completeness or plenitude, is the doctrine of the Lotus which
313
embraces all aspects of religion. In a similar spirit of synthesis and

conciliation Chih-I uses Nâgârjuna’s view that truth is not of one
kind. From the stand-point of absolute truth all phenomena are void
or unreal; on the other hand they are indubitably real for practical
purposes. More just is the middle view which builds up the religious
character. It sees that all phenomena both exist and do not exist and
that thought cannot content itself with the hypothesis either of their
real existence or of the void. Chih-I’s teaching as [to the nature of the
Buddha is almost theistic. It regards the fundamental (pên)
Buddhahood as not merely the highest reality but as constant
activity exerting itself for the good of all beings. Distinguished from
this fundamental Buddhahood is the derivative Buddhahood or trace
(chi) left by the Buddha among men to educate them. There has been
considerable discussion in the school as to the relative excellence of
the pên and the chi[819].
The T’ien-T’ai school is important, not merely for its doctrines, but as
having produced a great monastic establishment and an illustrious
line of writers. In spite of the orders of the Emperor who wished to
retain him at Nanking, Chih-I retired to the highlands of Chê-Kiang
and twelve monasteries still mark various spots where he is said to
have resided. He had some repute as an author, but more as a
preacher. His words were recorded by his disciple Kuan-Ting[820]
and in this way have been preserved two expositions of the Lotus
and a treatise on his favourite doctrine of Chih-Kuan which together
are termed the San-ta-pu, or Three Great Books. Similar spoken
expositions of other sûtras are also preserved. Some smaller treatises
on his chief doctrines seem to be works of his own pen[821]. A
century later Chan-Jan[822], who is reckoned the ninth Patriarch of
the T’ien-t’ai school, composed commentaries on the Three Great
Books as well as some short original works. During the troubled
period of the Five Dynasties, the T’ien-t’ai monasteries suffered
severely and the sacred books were almost lost. But the school had a
branch in Korea and a Korean priest called Ti-Kuan[823] re-
established it in China. It continued to contribute literature to the
Tripitaka until 1270 but after the tenth century its works, though
numerous, lose their distinctive character and are largely concerned
with magical formulæ and the worship of Amida.
The latter is the special teaching of the Pure Land school, also known
as the Lotus school, or the Short Cut[824]. It is indeed a short cut to
salvation, striking unceremoniously across all systems, for it teaches
that simple faith in Amitâbha (Amida) and invocation of his name
can take the place of moral and intellectual endeavour. Its popularity
314
is in proportion to its facility: its origin is ancient, its influence

universal, but perhaps for this very reason its existence as a
corporation is somewhat indistinct. It is also remarkable that though
the Chinese Tripitaka contains numerous works dedicated to the
honour of Amitâbha, yet they are not described as composed by
members of the Pure Land school but appear to be due to authors of
all schools[825].
The doctrine, if not the school, was known in China before 186, in
which year there died at Lo-yang, a monk of the Yüeh-chih called
Lokâkshi, who translated the longer Sukhâvatî-vyûha. So far as I
know, there is no reason for doubting these statements[826]. The
date is important for the history of doctrine, since it indicates that the
sûtra existed in Sanskrit some time previously. Another translation
by the Parthian An Shih-Kao, whose activity falls between 148 and
170 A.D. may have been earlier and altogether twelve translations
were made before 1000 A.D. of which five are extant[827]. Several of
the earlier translators were natives of Central Asia, so it is
permissible to suppose that the sûtra was esteemed there. The
shorter Sukhâvatî-vyûha was translated by Kumârajîva (c. 402) and
later by Hsüan Chuang. The Amitâyurdhyânasûtra was translated
by Kâlayaśas about 424. These three books[828] are the principal
scriptures of the school and copies of the greater Sukhâvatî may still
be found in almost every Chinese monastery, whatever principles it
professes.
Hui Yüan[829] who lived from 333 to 416 is considered as the

founder of the school. He was in his youth an enthusiastic [Taoist
and after he turned Buddhist is said to have used the writings of
Chuang-tzŭ to elucidate his new faith. He founded a brotherhood,
and near the monastery where he settled was a pond in which lotus
flowers grew, hence the brotherhood was known as the White Lotus
school[830]. For several centuries[831] it enjoyed general esteem.
Pan-chou, one of its Patriarchs, received the title of Kuo-shih about
770 A.D., and Shan-tao, who nourished about 650 and wrote
commentaries, was one of its principal literary men[832]. He
popularized the doctrine of the Pai-tao or White Way, that is, the
narrow bridge leading to Paradise across which Amitâbha will guide
the souls of the faithful. But somehow the name of White Lotus
became connected with conspiracy and rebellion until it was
dreaded as the title of a formidable secret society, and ceased to be
applied to the school as a whole. The teaching and canonical
literature of the Pure Land school did not fall into disrepute but since
it was admitted by other sects to be, if not the most excellent way, at
315
least a permissible short cut to heaven, it appears in modern times

less as a separate school than as an aspect of most schools[833]. The
simple and emotional character of Amidism, the directness of its
“Come unto me,” appeal so strongly to the poor and uneducated,
that no monastery or temple could afford to neglect it.
Two important Indian schools were introduced into China in the

sixth and seventh centuries respectively and flourished until about
900 A.D. when they began to decay. These are the Chü-shê-tsung
and Fa-hsiang-tsung[834]. The first name is merely a Chinese
transcription of the Sanskrit Ko’sa and is due to the fact that the chief
authority of the school is the Abhidharmakośaśâstra [of
Vasubandhu[835]. This work expounds the doctrine of the
Sarvâstivâdins, but in a liberal spirit and without ignoring other
views. Though the Chü-shê-tsung represented the best scholastic
tradition of India more adequately than any other Chinese sect, yet it
was too technical and arid to become popular and both in China and
Japan (where it is known as Kusha-shu) it was a system of scholastic
philosophy rather than a form of religion. In China it did not last
many centuries.
The Fa-Hsiang school is similar inasmuch as it represented Indian

scholasticism and remained, though much esteemed, somewhat
academic. The name is a translation of Dharmalakshaṇa and the
school is also known as Tz’ŭ-ên-tsung[836], and also as Wei-shih-
hsiang-chiao because its principal text-book is the Ch’êng-wei-shih-
lun[837]. This name, equivalent to Vidyâmâtra, or Vijnânamâtra, is
the title of a work by Hsüan Chuang which appears to be a digest of
ten Sanskrit commentaries on a little tract of thirty verses ascribed to
Vasubandhu. As ultimate authorities the school also recognizes the
revelations made to Asanga by Maitreya[838] and probably the
Mahâyânasûtrâlankâra[839] expresses its views. It claims as its
founder Śîlabhadra the teacher of Hsüan Chuang, but the latter was
its real parent.
Closely allied to it but reckoned as distinct is the school called the

Hua-yen-tsung[840] because it was based on the Hua-yen-ching or
Avatamsakasûtra. The doctrines of this work and of Nâgârjuna may
be conveniently if not quite correctly contrasted as pantheistic and
nihilistic. The real founder and first patriarch was Tu-Fa-Shun who
died in 640 but the school sometimes bears the name of Hsien-Shou,
the posthumous title of its third Patriarch who contributed seven
works to the Tripitaka[841]. It began to wane in the tenth century but
has a distinguished literary record.
316
The Lü-tsung or Vinaya school[842] was founded by Tao Hsüan

(595-667). It differs from those already mentioned inasmuch as it
emphasizes discipline and asceticism as the essential part of the
religious life. Like the T’ien-t’ai this school arose in China. It bases
itself on Indian authorities, but it does not appear that in thus laying
stress on the Vinaya it imitated any Indian sect, although it caught
the spirit of the early Hînayâna schools. The numerous works of the
founder indicate a practical temperament inclined not to mysticism
or doctrinal subtlety but to biography, literary history and church
government. Thus he continued the series called Memoirs of
Eminent Monks and wrote on the family and country of the Buddha.
He compiled a catalogue of the Tripitaka, as it was in his time, and
collections of extracts, as well as of documents relating to the
controversies between Buddhists and Taoists[843]. Although he took
as his chief authority the Dharmagupta Vinaya commonly known as
the Code in Four Sections, he held, like most Chinese Buddhists, that
there is a complete and perfect doctrine which includes and
transcends all the vehicles. But he insisted, probably as a protest
against the laxity or extravagance of many monasteries, that morality
and discipline are the indispensable foundation of the religious life.
He was highly esteemed by his contemporaries and long after his
death the Emperor Mu-tsung (821-5) wrote a poem in his honour.
The school is still respected and it is said that the monks of its
principal monastery, Pao-hua-shan in Kiangsu, are stricter and more
learned than any other.
The school called Chên-yen (in Japanese Shin-gon), true word, or Mi-
chiao[844], secret teaching, equivalent to the Sanskrit Mantrayâna or
Tantrayâna, is the latest among the recognized divisions of Chinese
Buddhism since it first made its appearance in the eighth century.
The date, like that of the translation of the Amida scriptures is
important, for the school was introduced [from India and it follows
that its theories and practices were openly advocated at this period
and probably were not of repute much earlier. It is akin to the
Buddhism of Tibet and may be described in its higher aspects as an
elaborate and symbolic pantheism, which represents the one spirit
manifesting himself in a series of emanations and reflexes. In its
popular and unfortunately commoner aspect it is simply polytheism,
fetichism and magic. In many respects it resembles the Pure Land
school. Its principal deity (the word is not inaccurate) is Vairocana,
analogous to Amitâbha, and probably like him a Persian sun god in
origin. It is also a short cut to salvation, for, without denying the
efficiency of more laborious and ascetic methods, it promises to its
317
followers a similar result by means of formulæ and ceremonies. Like

the Pure Land school it has become in China not so much a separate
corporation as an aspect, and often the most obvious and popular
aspect, of all Buddhist schools.
It claims Vajrabodhi as its first Patriarch. He was a monk of the

Brahman caste who arrived in China from southern India[845] in 719
and died in 730 after translating several Tantras and spells. His
companion and successor was Amoghavajra of whose career
something has already been said. The fourth Patriarch, Hui Kuo, was
the instructor of the celebrated Japanese monk Kobo Daishi who
established the school in Japan under the name of Shingon[846].
The principal scripture of this sect is the Ta-jih-ching or sûtra of the

Sun-Buddha[847]. A distinction is drawn between exoteric and
esoteric doctrine (the “true word”) and the various phases of
Buddhist thought are arranged in ten classes. Of these the first nine
are merely preparatory, but in the last or esoteric phase, the adept
becomes a living Buddha and receives full intuitive knowledge. In
this respect the Tantric school resembles the teaching of
Bodhidharma but not in detail. It teaches that Vairocana is the whole
world, which is divided into Garbhadhâtu (material) and Vajradhâtu
(indestructible), the two together forming Dharmadhâtu. The
manifestations of [Vairocana’s body to himself—that is Buddhas and
Bodhisattvas—are represented symbolically by diagrams of several
circles[848]. But it would be out of place to dwell further on the
dogmatic theology of the school, for I cannot discover that it was
ever of importance in China whatever may have been its influence in
Japan. What appealed only too powerfully to Chinese superstition
was the use of spells, charms and magical formulæ and the doctrine
that since the universe is merely idea, thoughts and facts are
equipollent. This doctrine (which need not be the outcome of
metaphysics, but underlies the magical practices of many savage
tribes) produced surprising results when applied to funeral
ceremonies, which in China have always formed the major part of
religion, for it was held that ceremonial can represent and control the
fortunes of the soul, that is to say that if a ceremony represents
figuratively the rescue of a soul from a pool of blood, then the soul
which is undergoing that punishment will be delivered. It was not
until the latter part of the eighth century that such theories and
ceremonies were accepted by Chinese Buddhism, but they now form
a large part of it.
318
Although in Japan Buddhism continued to produce new schools

until the thirteenth century, no movement in China attained this
status after about 730, and Lamaism, though its introduction
produced considerable changes in the north, is not usually reckoned
as a Tsung. But numerous societies and brotherhoods arose
especially in connection with the Pure Land school and are
commonly spoken of as sects. They differ from the schools
mentioned above in having more or less the character of secret
societies, sometimes merely brotherhoods like the Freemasons but
sometimes political in their aims. Among those whose tenets are
known that which has most religion and least politics in its
composition appears to be the Wu-wei-chiao[849], founded about
1620 by one Lo-tsu[850] who claimed to have received a revelation
contained in five books. It is strictly vegetarian [and antiritualistic,
objecting to the use of images, incense and candles in worship.
There are many other sects with a political tinge. The proclivity of
the Chinese to guilds, corporations and secret societies is well known
and many of these latter have a religious basis. All such bodies are
under the ban of the Government, for they have always been
suspected with more or less justice of favouring anti-social or anti-
dynastic ideas. But, mingled with such political aspirations, there is
often present the desire for co-operation in leading privately a
religious life which, if made public, would be hampered by official
restrictions. The most celebrated of these sects is the White Lotus.
Under the Yüan dynasty it was anti-Mongol, and prepared the way
for the advent of the Ming. When the Ming dynasty in its turn
became decadent, we hear again of the White Lotus coupled with
rebellion, and similarly after the Manchus had passed their meridian,
its beautiful but ill-omened name frequently appears. It seems clear
that it is an ancient and persistent society with some idea of creating
a millennium, which becomes active when the central government is
weak and corrupt. Not unlike the White Lotus is the secret society
commonly known as the Triad but called by its members the Heaven
and Earth Association. The T’ai-p’ing sect, out of which the
celebrated rebellion arose, was similar but its inspiration seems to
have come from a perversion of Christianity. The Tsai-Li sect[851] is
still prevalent in Peking, Tientsin, and the province of Shantung. I
should exceed the scope of my task if I attempted to examine these
sects in detail[852], for their relation to Buddhism is often doubtful.
Most of them combine with it Taoist and other beliefs and some of
them expect a Messiah or King of Righteousness who is usually
identified with Maitreya. It is easy to see how at this point hostility
319
to the existing Government arises and provokes not unnatural

resentment[853].
[Recently several attempts have been made to infuse life and order
into Chinese Buddhism. Japanese influence can be traced in most of
them and though they can hardly be said to represent a new school,
they attempt to go back to Mahayanism as it was when first
introduced into China. The Hinâyâna is considered as a necessary
preliminary to the Mahâyâna and the latter is treated as existing in
several schools, among which are included the Pure Land school,
though the Contemplative and Tantric schools seem not to be
regarded with favour. They are probably mistrusted as leading to
negligence and superstition[854].
FOOTNOTES:
[790] See especially Hackmann, “Die Schulen des

chinesischen Buddhismus” (in the Mitth. Seminars für Orientalische
Sprachen, Berlin, 1911), which contains the text and translation of an
Essay by a modern Chinese Buddhist, Yang Wên Hui. Such a review
of Chinese sects from the contemporary Buddhist point of view has
great value, but it does not seem to me that Mr. Yang explains clearly
the dogmatic tenets of each sect, the obvious inference being that
such tenets are of little practical importance. Chinese monasteries
often seem to combine several schools. Thus the Tz’ŭ-Fu-Ssŭ
monastery near Peking professes to belong both to the Lin-Chi and
Pure Land schools and its teachers expound the Diamond-cutter,
Lotus and Shou-Lêng-Ching. So also in India. See Rhys Davids in
article Sects Buddhist, E.R.E. Hackmann gives a list of authorities.
Edkins, Chinese Buddhism (chaps. VII and VIII), may still be
consulted, though the account is far from clear.
[791]
[792] It based itself on the Satyasiddhiśâstra of Harivarman, Nanjio,

Cat. 1274.
[793] This meditation however is of a special sort. The six Pâramitâs

are, Dâna, Sîla, Kshanti, Vîrya, Dhyâna and Prajñâ. The meditation
320
of Bodhidharma is not the Dhyâna of this list, but meditation on

Prajñâ, the highest of the Pâramitâs. See Hackmann’s Chinese text, p.
249.
[794] Ta-mo-hsüe-mai-lun, analyzed by Wieger in his Histoire des

Croyances religieuses en Chine, pp. 520 ff. I could wish for more
information about this work, but have not been able to find the
original.
[795] Also called Fa-shên or dharmakâya in the discourse.

Bodhidharma said that he preached the seal of the heart (hsinyin). This
probably corresponds to some Sanskrit expression, but I have not
found the Indian equivalent.
[796] I-Ching, in his Memoirs of Eminent Monks, mentions three

pilgrims as having studied the works of Chuang-tzŭ and his own
style shows that he was well-read in this author.
[797] He is not mentioned by Târanâtha.
[798]
[799]
[800] Acâriyaparamparâ. There is a list of such teachers in

Mahâvaṃsa, V. 95 ff., Dîpavaṃsa, IV. 27 ff. and V. 69.
[801]
[802] The succession of Patriarchs is the subject of several works

comprised in the Chinese Tripitaka. Of these the Fu-fa-tsang-yin-
yüan-ching (Nanjio, 1340) is the most important, because it professes
to be translated (A.D. 472) from an Indian work, which, however, is
not in the Tibetan Canon and is not known in Sanskrit. The Chinese
text, as we have it, is probably not a translation from the Sanskrit,
but a compilation made in the sixth century which, however,
acquired considerable authority. See Maspéro in Mélanges
d’Indianisme: Sylvain Lévi, pp. 129-149, and B.E.F.E.O.1911, pp. 344-
348. Other works are the Fo-tsu-t’ung-chi (Nanjio, 1661), of Chih P’an
(c. 1270), belonging to the T’ien-t’ai school, and the Ching-tê-ch’uan-
têng-lu together with the Tsung-mên-t’ung-yao-hsü-chi (Nanjio,
321
1524, 1526) both belonging to the school of Bodhidharma. See also

Nanjio, 1528, 1529. The common list of Patriarchs is as follows: 1.
Mahâkâśyapa; 2. Ananda; 3. Śanavâsa or Śanakavâsa; 4. Upagupta;
5. Dhṛitaka; 6. Micchaka. Here the name of Vasumitra is inserted by
some but omitted by others; 7. Buddhanandi; 8. Buddhamitra; 9.
Pârśva; 10. Punyayasas; 11. Aśvaghosha; 12. Kapimala; 13.
Nâgârjuna; 14. Deva (Kâṇadeva); 15. Râhulata; 16. Sanghanandi; 17.
Sanghayaśas; 18. Kumârata; 19. Jayata; 20. Vasubandhu; 21. Manura;
22. Haklena or Padmaratna; 23. Simha Bhikshu; 24. Basiasita; 25.
Putṇomita or Punyamitra; 26. Prajnâtara; 27 (or 28, if Vasumitra is
reckoned) Bodhidharma. Many of these names are odd and are only
conjectural restorations made from the Chinese transcription, for
which see Nanjio, 1340. Other lists of Patriarchs vary from that given
above, partly because they represent the traditions of other schools.
It is not strange, for instance, if the Sarvâstivâdins did not recognize
Nâgârjuna as a Patriarch. Two of their lists have been preserved by
Sêng-yu (Nanjio, 1476) who wrote about 520. Some notes on the
Patriarchs and reproductions of Chinese pictures representing them
will be found in Doré, pp. 244 ff. It is extremely curious that
Aśvaghosha is represented as a woman.
[803] It is found, for instance, in the lists of the Jain Tirthankaras and
in some accounts of the Buddhas and of the Avatâras of Vishnu.
[804] See Watters, Yüan Chwang, p. 290. But the dates offer some
difficulty, for Mihirakula, the celebrated Hun chieftain, is usually
supposed to have reigned about 510-540 A.D. Târanâtha (Schiefner,
p. 95) speaks of a martyr called Mâlikabuddhi. See, too, ib. p. 306.
[805] It is clear that the school of Valabhi was to some extent a rival
of Nâlandâ.
[806] For a portrait of Hui-nêng see Kokka, No. 297. The names of
Bodhidharma’s successors are in Chinese characters
[807]
[808] Much biographical information

respecting this and other schools will be found in Doré, vols. VII and
322
VIII. But there is little to record in the way of events or literary and
doctrinal movements.
[809]
[810]
[811] Lin-Chi means coming to the ford. Is this an allusion to the Pali
expression Sotâpanno? The name appears in Japanese as Rinzai.
Most educated Chinese monks when asked as to their doctrine say
they belong to the Lin-Chi.
[812] They are generally called the three mysteries (Hsüan) and the
three important points (Yao), but I have not been able to obtain any
clear explanation of what they mean. See Edkins, Chinese Buddhism,
p. 164, and Hackmann, l.c. p. 250.
[813] Wieger, Bouddhisme Chinois, p. 108, states that 230 works

belonging to this sect were published under the Manchu dynasty.
[814] See e.g. Nanjio, Cat. 1527, 1532.
[815] Tendai in Japanese. It is also called in China
Fa-hua.
[816] Also often spoken of as Chih-chê-ta-shih
Officially he is often styled the fourth Patriarch

of the school. See Doré, p. 449.
[817] In Pali Buddhism also, especially in later works,

Samatha and Vipassanâ may be taken as a compendium of the
higher life as they are respectively the results of the two sets of
religious exercises called Adhicitta and Adhipaññâ. (See Ang. Nik.
III 88.)
323
[818] In Chinese
Tun, Chien, Pi-mi, Pu-ting, Tsang, T’ung, Pieh, Yüan. See Nanjio,
1568, and for very different explanations of these obscure words.
Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, p. 182, and Richard’s New Testament of
Higher Buddhism, p. 41. Masson-Oursel in J.A. 1915, I. p. 305.
[819]
[820] The books are Nanjio, Nos. 1534, 1536, 1538.
[821] Among them is the compendium for beginners called Hsiao-

chih-kuan, (Nanjio, 1540), partly translated in Beal’s Catena, pp. 251
ff.
[822]
[823]
[824]
[825] The list of Chinese authors in Nanjio’s Catalogue, App. III,

describes many as belonging to the T’ien-t’ai, Avatamsaka or
Dhyâna schools, but none as belonging to the Ching-T’u.
[826] For the authorities, see Nanjio, p. 381.
[827] Nanjio, p. 10, note.
[828] They are all translated in S.B.E. XLIX. The two former exist in
Sanskrit. The Amitâyurdhyâna is known only in the Chinese
translation. They are called in Chinese
324
[829]
[830] The early history of the school is related in a

work called Lien-shê-kao-hsien-ch’uan, said to date from the Tsin
dynasty. See for some account of the early worthies, Doré, pp. 280 ff.
and 457 ff. Their biographies contain many visions and miracles.
[831] Apparently at least until 1042. See De Groot, Sectarianism, p.

163. The dated inscriptions in the grottoes of Lung-mên indicate that
the cult of Amitâbha flourished especially from 647 to 715. See
Chavannes, Mission. Archéol. Tome I, deuxième partie, p. 545.
[832]
[833] See for instance the tract called Hsüan-Fo-P’u

and translated by Richard under the title of A Guide to Buddhahood,
pp. 97 ff.
[834]
[835] See Watters, On Yüan Chwang, I. 210, and also Takakusu,

Journal of the Pali Text Soc. 1905, p. 132.
[836] The name refers not to the doctrines of the

school, but to Tz’ŭ-ên-tai-shih, a title given to Kuei-chi the disciple of
Hsüan Chuang who was one of its principal teachers and taught at a
monastery called Tz’ŭ-ên.
[837] See Nanjio, Cat. Nos. 1197 and 1215.
[838] See Watters, On Yüan Chwang, I. pp. 355 ff.
[839] Ed. and transl. by Sylvain Lévi, 1911.
325
[840]
[841] His name when alive was Fa-tsang. See Nanjio, Cat. p. 462, and
Doré, 450. The Empress Wu patronized him.
[842] Also called Nan Shan or Southern mountain school

from a locality in Shensi.
[843] Nanjio, Cat. 1493, 1469, 1470, 1120, 1481, 1483,

1484, 1471.
[844]
[845] From Mo-lai-yè, which seems to mean the extreme south of

India. Doré gives some Chinese legends about him, p. 299.
[846] For an appreciative criticism of the sect as known in Japan, see

Anesaki’s Buddhist Art, chap. III.
[847] Nanjio, No. 530. Nos. 533, 534 and 1039 are also important texts
of this sect.
[848] In the T’ien-t’ai and Chên-yen schools, and indeed in Chinese

Buddhism generally, Dharma (Fa in Chinese) is regarded as cosmic
law. Buddhas are the visible expression of Dharma. Hence they are
identified with it and the whole process of cosmic evolution is
regarded as the manifestation of Buddhahood.
[849] See the account by Edkins, Chinese Buddhism, pp.

271 ff.
[850]
[851] See China Mission Year Book, 1896, p. 43.
326
[852] For some account of them, see Stanton, The Triad Society,
White Lotus Society, etc., 1900, reprinted from China Review, vols.
XXI, XXII, and De Groot, Sectarianism and religious persecution in
China, vol. I. pp. 149-259.
[853] The Republic of China has not changed much from the ways of
the Empire. The Peking newspapers of June 17, 1914, contain a
Presidential Edict stating that “the invention of heretical religions by
ill-disposed persons is strictly prohibited by law,” and that certain
religious societies are to be suppressed.
[854] See, for an account of such a reformed sect, O. Francke, “Ein

Buddhistischer Reformversuch in China,” T’oung Pao, 1909, p. 567.
327
CHAPTER XLVI
CHINA (continued)
CHINESE BUDDHISM AT THE PRESENT DAY
The Buddhism treated of in this chapter does not include Lamaism,

which being identical with the religion of Tibet and Mongolia is
more conveniently described elsewhere. Ordinary Chinese
Buddhism and Lamaism are distinct, but are divided not so much by
doctrine as by the race, language and usages of the priests. Chinese
Buddhism has acquired some local colour, but it is still based on the
teaching and practice imported from India before the Yüan dynasty,
whereas Lamaist tradition is not direct: it represents Buddhism as
received not from India but from Tibet. Some holy places, such as
P’uto and Wu-t’ai-shan are frequented by both Lamas and Chinese
monks, and Tibetan prayers and images may sometimes be seen in
Chinese temples, but as a rule the two divisions do not coalesce.
Chinese Buddhism has a physiognomy and language of its own. The

Paraphrase of the Sacred Edict in a criticism, which, though
unfriendly, is not altogether inaccurate, says that Buddhists attend
only to the heart, claim that Buddha can be found in the heart, and
aim at becoming Buddhas. This sounds strange to those who are
acquainted only with the Buddhism of Ceylon and Burma, but is
intelligible as a popular statement of Bodhidharma’s doctrine.
Heart[855] means the spiritual nature of man, essentially identical
with the Buddha nature and capable of purification and growth so
that all beings can become Buddhas. But in the Far East the doctrine
became less pantheistic and more ethical than the corresponding
Indian ideas. The Buddha in the heart is the internal light and
monitor rather than the universal spirit. Amida, Kuan-yin and Ti-
tsang with other radiant and benevolent spirits have risen from
humanity and will help man to rise as they have done. Chinese
Buddhists do not regard Amida’s vows as an isolated achievement.
All [Boddhisattvas have done the same and carried out their
resolution in countless existences. Like the Madonna these gracious
figures appeal directly to the emotions and artistic senses and their
divinity offers no difficulty, for in China Church and State alike have
always recognized deification as a natural process. One other
characteristic of all Far Eastern Buddhism may be noticed. The
328
Buddha is supposed to have preached many creeds and codes at

different periods of his life and each school supposes its own to be
the last, best and all inclusive.
As indicated elsewhere, the essential part of the Buddhist Church is

the monkhood and it is often hard to say if a Chinese layman is a
Buddhist or not. It will therefore be best to describe briefly the
organization and life of a monastery, then the services performed
there and to some extent attended by the laity, and thirdly the rites
performed by monks on behalf of the laity, especially funeral
ceremonies.
The Chinese Tripitaka contains no less than five recensions of the

Vinaya, and the later pilgrims who visited India made it their special
object to obtain copies of the most correct and approved code. But
though the theoretical value of these codes is still admitted, they
have for practical purposes been supplemented by other manuals of
which the best known are the Fan-wang-ching or Net of Brahmâ[856]
and the Pai-chang-ts’ung-lin-ch’ing-kuei or Rules of Purity of the
Monasteries of Pai Chang.
The former is said to have been translated in A.D. 406 by Kumârajîva

and to be one chapter of a larger Sanskrit work. Some passages of it,
particularly the condemnation of legislation which forbids or
imposes conditions on the practice of Buddhism[857], read as if they
had been composed in China rather than India, and its whole
attitude towards the Hinayanist Vinaya as something inadequate
and superseded, can hardly have been usual in India or China even
in the time of I-Ching (700 A.D.). Nothing is known of the Indian
original, but it certainly was not the Brahmajâlasutta of the Pali
Canon[858]. Though the translation [is ascribed to so early a date,
there is no evidence that the work carried weight as an authority
before the eighth century. Students of the Vinaya, like I-Ching,
ignore it. But when the scholarly endeavour to discover the most
authentic edition of the Vinaya began to flag, this manual
superseded the older treatises. Whatever external evidence there
may be for attributing it to Kumârajîva, its contents suggest a much
later date and there is no guarantee that a popular manual may not
have received additions. The rules are not numbered consecutively
but as 1-10 and 1-48, and it may be that the first class is older than
the second. In many respects it expounds a late and even degenerate
form of Buddhism for it contemplates not only a temple ritual
(including the veneration of images and sacred books), but also
burning the head or limbs as a religious practice. But it makes no
329
allusion to salvation through faith in Amitâbha and says little about

services to be celebrated for the dead[859].
Its ethical and disciplinary point of view is dogmatically Mahayanist

and similar to that of the Bodhicaryâvatâra. The Hînayâna is several
times denounced[860] and called heretical, but, setting aside a little
intolerance and superstition, the teaching of this manual is truly
admirable and breathes a spirit of active charity—a desire not only to
do no harm but to help and rescue.
It contains a code of ten primary and forty-eight secondary

commandments, worded as prohibitions, but equivalent to positive
injunctions, inasmuch as they blame the neglect of various active
duties. The ten primary commandments are called Prâtimoksha and
he who breaks them is Pârâjika[861], that is to say, he ipso facto leaves
the road leading to Buddhahood and is condemned to a long series
of inferior births. They prohibit taking life, theft, unchastity, lying,
trading in alcoholic liquors, evil speaking, boasting, avarice, hatred
and blasphemy. Though infraction of the secondary commandments
has less permanently serious consequence, their observance is
indispensable for all monks. Many of them are amplifications of the
[ten major commandments and are directed against indirect and
potential sins, such as the possession of weapons. The Bhikshu may
not eat flesh, drink alcohol, set forests on fire or be connected with
any business injurious to others, such as the slave trade. He is
warned against gossip, sins of the eye, foolish practices such as
divination and even momentary forgetfulness of his high calling and
duties. But it is not sufficient that he should be self-concentrated and
without offence. He must labour for the welfare and salvation of
others, and it is a sin to neglect such duties as instructing the
ignorant, tending the sick, hospitality, saving men or animals from
death or slavery, praying[862] for all in danger, exhorting to
repentance, sympathy with all living things. A number of
disciplinary rules prescribe a similarly high standard for daily
monastic life. The monk must be strenuous and intelligent; he must
yield obedience to his superiors and set a good example to the laity:
he must not teach for money or be selfish in accepting food and gifts.
As for creed he is strictly bidden to follow and preach the Mahâyâna:
it is a sin to follow or preach the doctrine of the Srâvakas[863] or
read their books or not aspire to ultimate Buddhahood. Very
remarkable are the injunctions to burn one’s limbs in honour of
Buddhas: to show great respect to copies of the scriptures and to
make vows. From another point of view the first and forty-seventh
secondary commandments are equally remarkable: the first bids
330
officials discharge their duties with due respect to the Church and
the other protests against improper legislation.
The Fan-wang-ching is the most important and most authoritative

statement of the general principles regulating monastic life in China.
So far as my own observation goes, it is known and respected in all
monasteries. The Pai-chang-ch’ing-kuei[864] deals rather with the
details of organization and ritual and has not the same universal
currency. It received the [approval of the Yüan dynasty[865] and is
still accepted as authoritative in many monasteries and gives a
correct account of their general practice. It was composed by a monk
of Kiang-si, who died in 814 A.D. He belonged to the Ch’an school,
but his rules are approved by others. I will not attempt to summarize
them, but they include most points of ritual and discipline
mentioned below. The author indicates the relations which should
prevail between Church and State by opening his work with an
account of the ceremonies to be performed on the Emperor’s
birthday, and similar occasions.
Large Buddhist temples almost always form part of a monastery, but

smaller shrines, especially in towns, are often served by a single
priest. The many-storeyed towers called pagodas which are a
characteristic beauty of Chinese landscapes, are in their origin stupas
erected over relics but at the present day can hardly be called
temples or religious buildings, for they are not places of worship and
generally owe their construction to the dictates of Fêng-shui or
geomancy. Monasteries are usually built outside towns and by
preference on high ground, whence shan or mountain has come to be
the common designation of a convent, whatever its position. The
sites of these establishments show the deep feeling of cultivated
Chinese for nature and their appreciation of the influence of scenery
on temper, an appreciation which connects them spiritually with the
psalms of the monks and nuns preserved in the Pali Canon. The
architecture is not self-assertive. Its aim is not to produce edifices
complete and satisfying in their own proportions but rather to
harmonize buildings with landscape, to adjust courts and pavilions
to the slope of the hillside and diversify the groves of fir and bamboo
with shrines and towers as fantastic and yet as natural as the
mountain boulders. The reader who wishes to know more of them
should consult Johnston’s Buddhist China, a work which combines in
a rare degree sound knowledge and literary charm.
A monastery[866] is usually a quadrangle surrounded by a wall.

[Before the great gate, which faces south, or in the first court is a
331
tank, spanned by a bridge, wherein grows the red lotus and tame
fish await doles of biscuit. The sides of the quadrangle contain
dwelling rooms, refectories, guest chambers, store houses, a library,
printing press and other premises suitable to a learned and pious
foundation. The interior space is divided into two or three courts,
bordered by a veranda. In each court is a hall of worship or temple,
containing a shelf or alcove on which are set the sacred images: in
front of them stands a table, usually of massive wood, bearing vases
of flowers, bowls for incense sticks and other vessels. The first
temple is called the Hall of the Four Great Kings and the figures in it
represent beings who are still in the world of transmigration and
have not yet attained Buddhahood. They include gigantic images of
the Four Kings, Maitreya, the Buddha designate of the future, and
Wei-to[867], a military Bodhisattva sometimes identified with Indra.
Kuan-ti, the Chinese God of War, is often represented in this
building. The chief temple, called the Precious Hall of the Great
Hero[868], is in the second court and contains the principal images.
Very commonly there are nine figures on either side representing
eighteen disciples of the Buddha and known as the Eighteen Lohan
or Arhats[869]. Above the altar are one or more large gilt [images.
When there is only one it is usually Śâkya-muni, but more often
there are three. Such triads are variously composed and the monks
often speak of them vaguely as the “three precious ones,” without
seeming to attach much importance to their identity[870]. The triad
is loosely connected with the idea of the three bodies of Buddha but
this explanation does not always apply and the central figure is
sometimes O-mi-to or Kuan-yin, who are the principal recipients of
the worship offered by the laity. The latter deity has usually a special
shrine at the back of the main altar and facing the north door of the
hall, in which her merciful activity as the saviour of mankind is
represented in a series of statuettes or reliefs. Other Bodhisattvas
such as Ta-shih-chi (Mahâsthâmaprâpta) and Ti-tsang also have
separate shrines in or at the side of the great hall[871]. The third hall
contains as a rule only small images. It is used for expounding the
scriptures and for sermons, if the monastery has a preacher, but is set
apart for the religious exercises of the monks rather than the
devotions of the laity. In very large monasteries there is a fourth hall
for meditation.
Monasteries are of various sizes and the number of monks is not

constant, for the peripatetic habit of early Buddhism is not extinct: at
one time many inmates may be absent on their [travels, at another
there may be an influx of strangers. There are also wandering monks
332
who have ceased to belong to a particular monastery and spend their

time in travelling. A large monastery usually contains from thirty to
fifty monks, but a very large one may have as many as three
hundred. The majority are dedicated by their parents as children, but
some embrace the career from conviction in their maturity and these,
if few, are the more interesting. Children who are brought up to be
monks receive a religious education in the monastery, wear monastic
clothes and have their heads shaved. At the age of about seventeen
they are formally admitted as members of the order and undergo
three ceremonies of ordination, which in their origin represented
stages of the religious life, but are now performed by accumulation
in the course of a few days. One reason for this is that only
monasteries possessing a licence from the Government[872] are
allowed to hold ordinations and that consequently postulants have
to go some distance to be received as full brethren and are anxious to
complete the reception expeditiously. At the first ordination the
candidates are accepted as novices: at the second, which follows a
day or two afterwards and corresponds to the upasampadâ, they
accept the robes and bowl and promise obedience to the rules of the
Prâtimoksha. But these ceremonies are of no importance compared
with the third, called Shou Pu-sa-chieh[873] or acceptance of the
Bodhisattva precepts, that is to say the fifty-eight precepts
enunciated in the Fan-wang-ching. The essential part of this
ordination is the burning of the candidate’s head in from three to
eighteen places. The operation involves considerable pain and is
performed by lighting pieces of charcoal set in a paste which is
spread over the shaven skull.
Although the Fan-wang-ching does not mention this burning of the

head as part of ordination, yet it emphatically enjoins the practice of
burning the body or limbs, affirming that those who neglect it are
not true Bodhisattvas[874]. The prescription is founded on the
twenty-second chapter of the Lotus[875] which, though a later
addition, is found in the Chinese translation [made between 265 and
316 A.D.[876] I-Ching discusses and reprobates such practices.
Clearly they were known in India when he visited it, but not
esteemed by the better Buddhists, and the fact that they form no part
of the ordinary Tibetan ritual indicates that they had no place in the
decadent Indian Buddhism which in various stages of degeneration
was introduced into Tibet[877]. In Korea and Japan branding is
practised but on the breast and arms rather than on the head.
It would appear then that burning and branding as part of initiation

were known in India in the early centuries of our era but not
333
commonly approved and that their general acceptance in China was

subsequent to the death of I-Ching in A.D. 713[878]. This author
clearly approved of nothing but the double ordination as novice and
full monk. The third ordination as Bodhisattva must be part of the
later phase inaugurated by Amogha about 750[879].
This practice is defended as a trial of endurance, but the earlier and

better monks were right in rejecting it, for in itself it is an unedifying
spectacle and it points to the logical conclusion that, if it is
meritorious to cauterize the head, it is still more meritorious to burn
the whole body. Cases of suicide by burning appear to have occurred
in recent years, especially in the province of Che-Kiang[880]. The
true doctrine of the Mahâyâna is that everyone should strive for the
happiness and salvation of all beings, but this beautiful truth may be
sadly perverted [if it is held that the endurance of pain is in itself
meritorious and that such acquired merit can be transferred to
others. Self-torture, seems not to be unknown in the popular forms
of Chinese Buddhism[881].
The postulant, after receiving these three ordinations, becomes a full

monk or Ho-shang[882] and takes a new name. The inmates of every
monastery owe obedience to the abbot and some abbots have an
official position, being recognized by the Government as
representing the clergy of a prefecture, should there be any business
to be transacted with the secular authorities. But there is no real
hierarchy outside the monasteries, each of which is an isolated
administrative unit. Within each monastery due provision is made
for discipline and administration. The monks are divided into two
classes, the Western who are concerned with ritual and other purely
religious duties and the Eastern who are relatively secular and
superintend the business of the establishment[883]. This is often
considerable for the income is usually derived from estates, in
managing which the monks are assisted by a committee of laymen.
Other laymen of humbler status[884] live around the monastery and
furnish the labour necessary for agriculture, forestry and whatever
industries the character of the property calls into being. As a rule
there is a considerable library. Even a sympathetic stranger will often
find that the monks deny its existence, because many books have
been destroyed in political troubles, but most monasteries possess
copies of the principal scriptures and a complete Tripitaka, usually
the edition of 1737, is not rare. Whether the books are much read I do
not know, but I have observed that after the existence of the library
has been [admitted, it often proves difficult to find the key. There is
334
also a printing press, where are prepared notices and prayers, as well
as copies of popular sûtras.
The food of the monks is strictly vegetarian, but they do not go

round with the begging bowl nor, except in a few monasteries, is it
forbidden to eat after midday. As a rule there are three meals, the
last about 6 p.m., and all must be eaten in silence. The three
garments prescribed by Indian Buddhism are still worn, but beneath
them are trousers, stockings, and shoes which are necessary in the
Chinese climate. There is no idea that it is wrong to sleep on a bed, to
receive presents or own property.
Two or three services are performed daily in the principal temple,

early in the morning, about 4 p.m., and sometimes in the middle of
the day. A specimen of this ritual may be seen in the service called
by Beal the Liturgy of Kuan Yin[885]. It consists of versicles,
responses and canticles, and, though strangely reminiscent both in
structure and externals (such as the wearing of vestments) of the
offices of the Roman Church[886], appears to be Indian in origin. I-
Ching describes the choral services which he attended in Nalanda
and elsewhere—the chanting, bowing, processions—and the Chinese
ritual is, I think, only the amplification of these ceremonies. It
includes the presentation of offerings, such as tea, rice and other
vegetables. The Chinese pilgrims testify that in India flowers, lights
and incense were offered to relics and images (as in Christian
churches), and the Bodhicaryâvatâra[887], one of the most spiritual
of later Mahayanist works, mentions offerings of food and drink as
part of worship. Many things in Buddhism lent themselves to such a
transformation or parody of earlier teaching. Offerings of food to
hungry ghosts were countenanced, and it was easy to include among
the recipients other spirits. It was meritorious to present food,
raiment and property to living saints: oriental, [and especially
Chinese, symbolism found it natural to express the same devotion by
offerings made before images.
In the course of most ceremonies, the monks make vows on behalf of

all beings and take oath to work for their salvation. They are also
expected to deliver and hear sermons and to engage in meditation.
Some of them superintend the education of novices which consists
chiefly in learning to read and repeat religious works. Quite recently
elementary schools for the instruction of the laity have been
instituted in some monasteries[888].
335
The regularity of convent life is broken by many festivals. The year is

divided into two periods of wandering, two of meditation and one of
repose corresponding to the old Vassa. Though this division has
become somewhat theoretical, it is usual for monks to set out on
excursions in the spring and autumn. In each month there are six
fasts, including the two uposatha days. On these latter the 250 rules
of the Prâtimoksha are recited in a refectory or side hall and
subsequently the fifty-eight rules of the Fan-wang-ching are recited
with greater ceremony in the main temple.
Another class of holy days includes the birthdays[889] not only of

Sâkya-muni, but of other Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, the
anniversaries of events in Sâkya-muni’s life and the deaths of
Bodhidharma and other Saints, among whom the founder or patron
of each monastery has a prominent place. Another important and
popular festival is called Yü-lan-pên or All Souls’ day, which is an
adaptation of Buddhist usages to Chinese ancestral worship. Of
many other festivals it may be said that they are purely Chinese but
countenanced by Buddhism: such are the days which mark the
changes of the seasons, those sacred to Kuan-ti and other native
deities, and (before the revolution) imperial birthdays.
The daily services are primarily for the monks, but the laity may
attend them, if they please. More frequently they pay their devotions
at other hours, light a few tapers and too often have recourse to some
form of divination before the images. [Sometimes they defray the
cost of more elaborate ceremonies to expiate sins or ensure
prosperity. But the lay attendance in temples is specially large at
seasons of pilgrimage. For an account of this interesting side of
Chinese religious life I cannot do better than refer the reader to Mr.
Johnston’s volume already cited.
Though the services of the priesthood may be invoked at every crisis

of life, they are most in requisition for funeral ceremonies. A detailed
description of these as practised at Amoy has been given by De
Groot[890] which is probably true in essentials for all parts of China.
These rites unite in incongruous confusion several orders of ideas.
Pre-Buddhist Chinese notions of the life after death seem not to have
included the idea of hell. The disembodied soul is honoured and
comforted but without any clear definition of its status. Some
representative—a person, figure, or tablet—is thought capable of
giving it a temporary residence and at funeral ceremonies offerings
are made to such a representative and plays performed before it.
336
Though Buddhist language may be introduced into this ritual, its

spirit is alien to even the most corrupt Buddhism.
Buddhism familiarized China with the idea that the average man
stands in danger of purgatory and this doctrine cannot be described
as late or Mahayanist[891]. Those epithets are, however, merited by
the subsidiary doctrine that such punishment can be abridged by
vicarious acts of worship which may take the form of simple prayer
addressed to benevolent beings who can release the tortured soul.
More often the idea underlying it is that the recitation of certain
formulæ acquires merit for the reciter who can then divert this merit
to any purpose[892]. This is really a theological refinement of the
ancient and widespread notion that words have magic force. Equally
ancient and unBuddhist in origin is the theory of sympathetic magic.
Just as by sticking pins into a wax figure you may kill the person
represented, so by imitating physical operations of rescue, you may
deliver a soul from the furnaces and morasses of hell. Thus [a paper
model of hades is made which is knocked to pieces and finally burnt:
the spirit is escorted with music and other precautions over a mock
bridge, and, most singular of all, the priests place over a receptacle of
water a special machine consisting of a cylinder containing a
revolving apparatus which might help a creature immersed in the
fluid to climb up. This strange mummery is supposed to release
those souls who are condemned to sojourn in a pool of blood[893].
This, too, is a superstition countenanced only by Chinese Buddhism,
for the punishment is incurred not so much by sinners as by those
dying of illnesses which defile with blood. Many other rites are
based on the notion that objects—or their paper images—
ceremonially burnt are transmitted to the other world for the use of
the dead. Thus representations in paper of servants, clothes,
furniture, money and all manner of things are burned together with
the effigy of the deceased and sometimes also certificates and
passports giving him a clean bill of health for the Kingdom of
Heaven.
As in funeral rites, so in matters of daily life, Buddhism gives its

countenance and help to popular superstition, to every kind of
charm for reading the future, securing happiness and driving away
evil spirits. In its praise may be said that this patronage, though far
too easy going, is not extended to cruel or immoral customs. But the
reader will ask, is there no brighter side? I believe that there is, but it
is not conspicuous and, as in India, public worship and temple ritual
display the lower aspects of religion. But in China a devout Buddhist
is generally a good man and the objects of Buddhist associations are
337
praiseworthy and philanthropic. They often include vegetarianism

and abstinence from alcohol and drugs. The weakness of the religion
to-day is no doubt the want of intelligence and energy among the
clergy. There are not a few learned and devout monks, but even
devotion is not a characteristic of the majority. On the other hand,
those of the laity who take their religion seriously generally attain a
high standard of piety and there have been [attempts to reform
Buddhism, to connect it with education and to spread a knowledge
of the more authentic scriptures[894].
When one begins to study Buddhism in China, one fears it may be

typified by the neglected temples on the outskirts of Peking, sullen
and mouldering memorials of dynasties that have passed away. But
later one learns not only that there are great and nourishing
monasteries in the south, but that even in Peking one may often step
through an archway into courtyards of which the prosaic streets
outside give no hint and find there refreshment for the eye and soul,
flower gardens and well-kept shrines tended by pious and learned
guardians.
FOOTNOTES:
[855] For a specimen of devotional literature about the heart

see the little tract translated in China Branch, R.A.S. XXIII. pp. 9-22.
[856] For text translation and commentary, see De

Groot, Code du Mahâyâna en Chine, 1893, see also Nanjio, No. 1087.
[857] De Groot, p. 81.
[858] The identity of name seems due to a similarity of metaphor.

The Brahmajâla sutta is a net of many meshes to catch all forms of
error. The Fan-wang-ching compares the varieties of Buddhist
opinion to the meshes of a net (De Groot, l.c. p. 26), but the net is the
all-inclusive common body of truth.
[859] See, however, sections 20 and 39.
[860] See especially De Groot, l.c. p. 58, where the reading of the
Abhidharma is forbidden. Though this name is not confined to the
338
Hînayâna, A-pi-t’an in Chinese seems to be rarely used as a title of

Mahayanist books.
[861] The Indian words are transliterated in the Chinese text.
[862] More accurately reading the sûtras on their behalf, but this
exercise is practically equivalent to intercessory prayer.
[863]
[864] The full title is Pai Chang is

apparently to be taken as the name of the author, but it is the
designation of a monastery used as a personal name. See Hackmann
in T’oung Pao, 1908, pp. 651-662. It is No. 1642 in Nanjio’s Catalogue.
He says that it has been revised and altered.
[865] See T’oung Pao, 1904, pp. 437 ff.
[866] It is probable that the older Chinese monasteries attempted to

reproduce the arrangement of Nâlanda and other Indian
establishments. Unfortunately Hsüan Chuang and the other pilgrims
give us few details as to the appearance of Indian monasteries: they
tell us, however, that they were surrounded by a wall, that the
monks’ quarters were near this wall, that there were halls where
choral services were performed and that there were triads of images.
But the Indian buildings had three stories. See Chavannes, Mémoire
sur les Religieux Eminents, 1894, p. 85.
[867] For this personage see the article in

B.E.F.E.O. 1916. No. 3, by Péri who identifies him with Wei, the
general of the Heavenly Kings who appeared to Tao Hsüan the
founder of the Vinaya school and became popular as a protecting
deity of Buddhism. The name is possibly a mistaken transcription of
Skandha.
[868]
339
[869] See Lévi and Chavannes’ two articles in J.A. 1916, I

and II, and Watters in J.R.A.S. 1898, p. 329, for an account of these
personages. The original number, still found in a few Chinese
temples as well as in Korea, Japan and Tibet was sixteen. Several late
sûtras contain the idea that the Buddha entrusted the protection of
his religion to four or sixteen disciples and bade them not enter
Nirvana but tarry until the advent of Maitreya. The Ta-A-lo-han-
nan-t’i-mi-to-lo-so-shuo-fa-chu-chi (Nanjio, 1466) is an account of
these sixteen disciples and of their spheres of influence. The Buddha
assigned to each a region within which it is his duty to guard the
faith. They will not pass from this life before the next Buddha comes.
Piṇḍola is the chief of them. Nothing is known of the work cited
except that it was translated in 654 by Hsüan Chuang, who,
according to Watters, used an earlier translation. As the Arhats are
Indian personalities, and their spheres are mapped out from the
point of view of Indian geography, there can be no doubt that we
have to do with an Indian idea, imported into Tibet as well as into
China where it became far more popular than it had ever been in
India. The two additional Arhats (who vary in different temples,
whereas the sixteen are fixed) appear to have been added during the
T’ang dynasty and, according to Watters, in imitation of a very select
order of merit instituted by the Emperor T’ai Tsung and comprising
eighteen persons. Chavannes and Lévi see in them spirits borrowed
from the popular pantheon.
Chinese ideas about the Lohans at the present day are very vague.
Their Indian origin has been forgotten and some of them have been
provided with Chinese biographies. (See Doré, p. 216.) One popular
story says that they were eighteen converted brigands.
In several large temples there are halls containing 500 images of

Arhats, which include many Chinese Emperors and one of them is
often pointed out as being Marco Polo. But this is very doubtful. See,
however, Hackmann, Buddhismus, p. 212.
[870] Generally they consist of Śâkya-muni and two superhuman

Buddhas or Bodhisattvas, such as O-mi-to (Amitâbha) and Yo-shih-
fo (Vaidûrya): Pi-lu-fo (Vairocana) and Lo-shih-fo (Lochana): Wên-
shu (Manjuś-ri) and P’u-hsien (Śamantabhadra). The common
340
European explanation that they are the Buddhas of the past, present
and future is not correct.
[871] For the importance of Ti-

tsang in popular Buddhism, which has perhaps been
underestimated, see Johnston, chap. VII.
[872] I speak of the Old Imperial Government which came to an end

in 1911.
[873]
[874] De Groot, l.c. p.51.
[875] See Kern’s translation, especially pp. 379 and 385.
[876] See Nanjio, Nos. 138 and 139. The practice is not entirely
unknown in the legends of Pali Buddhism. In the Lokapaññatti, a
work existing in Burma but perhaps translated from the Sanskrit,
Asoka burns himself in honour of the Buddha, but is miraculously
preserved. See B.E.F.E.O. 1904, pp. 421 and 427.
[877] See I-Tsing, Records of the Buddhist Religion, trans. Takakusu, pp.
195 ff., and for Tibet, Waddell, Buddhism of Tibet, p. 178, note 3, from
which it appears that it is only in Eastern Tibet and probably under
Chinese influence that branding is in vogue. For apparent instances
in Central Asian art, see Grünwedel, Budd. Kultst. p. 23, note 1.
[878] Branding is common in many Hindu sects, especially the

Mâdhvas, but is reprobated by others.
[879] It is condemned as part of the superstition of Buddhism in a

memorial of Han Yü, 819 A.D.
[880] See those cited by De Groot, l.c. p. 228, and the article of
MacGowan (Chinese Recorder, 1888) there referred to. See also
Hackmann, Buddhism as a Religion, p. 228. Chinese sentiment often
approves suicide, for instance, if committed by widows or the
adherents of defeated princes. For a Confucian instance, see
Johnston, p. 341.
341
[881] See e.g. Du Bose, The Dragon, Image and Demon, p. 265. I have
never seen such practices myself. See also Paraphrase of the Sacred
Edict, VII. 8.
[882] This word, which has no derivation in Chinese, is

thought to be a corruption of some vernacular form of the Sanskrit
Upâdhyâya current in Central Asia. See I-tsing, transl. Takakusu, p.
118. Upâdhyâya became Vajjha (as is shown by the modern Indian
forms Ojha or Jha and Tamil Vâddyar). See Bloch in Indo-
Germanischen Forschungen, vol. XXV. 1909, p. 239. Vajjha might
become in Chinese Ho-sho or Ho-shang for Ho sometimes represents
the Indian syllable va. See Julien, Méthode, p. 109, and Eitel, Handbook
of Chinese Buddhism, p. 195.
[883] For details see Hackmann in T’oung Pao, 1908.
[884] They apparently correspond to the monastic lay servants or

“pure men” described by I-Ching, chap. XXXII, as living as Nâlanda.
[885] A Catena of Buddhist Scriptures from the Chinese, pp. 339 ff.
[886] The abbot and several upper priests wear robes, which are
generally red and gold, during the service. The abbot also carries a
sort of sceptre. The vestments of the clergy are said to be derived
from the robes of honour which used to be given to them when they
appeared at Court.
[887] II. 16. Cf. the rituals in De la Vallée Poussin’s Bouddhisme et

Matériaux, pp. 214 ff. Târanâtha frequently mentions burnt offerings
as part of worship in medieval Magadha.
[888] I do not refer to the practice of turning disused temples into

schools which is frequent. In some monasteries the monks, while
retaining possession, have themselves opened schools.
[889] It is not clear to me what is really meant by the birthdays of

beings like Maitreya and Amitâbha.
[890] Actes du Sixième Congres des Orientalistes, Leide, 1883, sec. IV.
pp. 1-120.
[891] E.g. in Dipavamsa, XIII; Mahâv. XIV. Mahinda is represented as

converting Ceylon by accounts of the terrors of the next world.
342
[892] The merit of good deeds can be similarly utilized. The

surviving relatives feed the poor or buy and maintain for the rest of
its life an animal destined to slaughter. The merit then goes to the
deceased.
[893] It may possibly be traceable to Manichæism which taught that

souls are transferred from one sphere to another by a sort of cosmic
water wheel. See Cumont’s article, “La roue Ã puiser les âmes du
Manichéisme” in Rev. de l’Hist, des Religions, 1915, p. 384. Chavannes
and Pelliot have shown that traces of Manichæism lingered long in
Fu-Kien. The metaphor of the endless chain of buckets is also found
in the Yüan Jên Lun.
[894] See Francke, “Ein Buddhistischer Reformversuch in China,”

T’oung Pao, 1909, pp. 567-602.
343
CHAPTER XLVII
KOREA[895]
The Buddhism of Korea cannot be sharply distinguished from the

Buddhism of China and Japan. Its secluded mountain monasteries
have some local colour, and contain halls dedicated to the seven stars
and the mountain gods of the land. And travellers are impressed by
the columns of rock projecting from the soil and carved into images
(miriok), by the painted walls of the temples and by the huge rolled-
up pictures which are painted and displayed on festival days. But
there is little real originality in art: in literature and doctrine none at
all. Buddhism started in Korea with the same advantages as in China
and Japan but it lost in moral influence because the monks
continually engaged in politics and it did not win temporal power
because they were continually on the wrong side. Yet Korea is not
without importance in the annals of far-eastern Buddhism for,
during the wanderings and vicissitudes of the faith, it served as a
rest-house and depot. It was from Korea that Buddhism first entered
Japan: when, during the wars of the five dynasties the T’ien-t’ai
school was nearly annihilated in China, it was revived by a Korean
priest and the earliest extant edition of the Chinese Tripitaka is
known only by a single copy preserved in Korea and taken thence to
Japan.
For our purposes Korean history may be divided into four periods:
I. The three States. (B.C. 57-A.D. 668).

II. The Kingdom of Silla. (668-918).
III. The Kingdom of Korye. (918-1392).
IV. The Kingdom of Chosen. (1392-1910).
The three states were Koguryu in the north, Pakche in the south-west
and Silla in the south-east[896]. Buddhism, together [with Chinese
writing, entered Koguryu from the north in 372 and Pakche from the
south a few years later. Silla being more distant and at war with the
other states did not receive it till about 424. In 552 both Japan and
Pakche were at war with Silla and the king of Pakche, wishing to
make an alliance with the Emperor of Japan sent him presents which
included Buddhist books and images. Thus Korea was the
intermediary for introducing Buddhism, writing, and Chinese
344
culture into Japan, and Korean monks played an important part

there both in art and religion. But the influence of Korea must not be
exaggerated. The Japanese submitted to it believing that they were
acquiring the culture of China and as soon as circumstances
permitted they went straight to the fountain head. The principal
early sects were all imported direct from China.
The kingdom of Silla, which became predominant in the seventh

century, had adopted Buddhism in 528, and maintained friendly
intercourse with the T’ang dynasty. As in Japan Chinese civilization
was imitated wholesale. This tendency strengthened Buddhism at
the time, but its formidable rival Confucianism was also introduced
early in the eighth century, although it did not become predominant
until the thirteenth[897].
In the seventh century the capital of Silla was a centre of Buddhist

culture and also of trade. Merchants from India, Tibet and Persia are
said to have frequented its markets and several Korean pilgrims
visited India.
In 918 the Wang dynasty, originating in a northern family of humble

extraction, overthrew the kingdom of Silla and with it the old Korean
aristocracy. This was replaced by an official nobility modelled on
that of China: the Chinese system of examinations was adopted and
a class of scholars grew up. But with this attempt to reconstruct
society many abuses appeared. The number of slaves greatly
increased[898], and there were many [hereditary low castes, the
members of which were little better than slaves. Only the higher
castes could compete in examinations or hold office and there were
continual struggles and quarrels between the military and civil
classes. Buddhism flourished much as it flourished in the Hei-an
period of Japan, but its comparative sterility reflected the inferior
social conditions of Korea. Festivals were celebrated by the Court
with great splendour: magnificent monasteries were founded: the
bonzes kept troops and entered the capital armed: the tutor of the
heir apparent and the chancellor of the kingdom were often
ecclesiastics, and a law is said to have been enacted to the effect that
if a man had three sons one of them must become a monk. But about
1250 the influence of the Sung Confucianists began to be felt. The
bonzes were held responsible for the evils of the time, for the
continual feuds, exactions and massacres, and the civil nobility
tended to become Confucianist and to side against the church and
the military. The inevitable outburst was delayed but also rendered
more disastrous when it came by the action of the Mongols who, as
345
in China, were patrons of Buddhism. The Yüan dynasty invaded

Korea, placed regents in the principal towns and forced the Korean
princes to marry Mongol wives. It was from Korea that Khubilai
despatched his expeditions against Japan, and in revenge the
Japanese harried the Korean coast throughout the fourteenth
century. But so long as the Yüan dynasty lasted the Korean Court
which had become Mongol remained faithful to it and to Buddhism;
when it was ousted by the Ming, a similar movement soon followed
in Korea. The Mongolized dynasty of Korye was deposed and
another, which professed to trace its lineage back to Silla, mounted
the throne and gave the country the name of Chosen.
This revolution was mainly the work of the Confucianist party in the
nobility and it was not unnatural that patriots and reformers should
see in Buddhism nothing but the religion of the corrupt old regime
of the Mongols. During the next century and a half a series of
restrictive measures, sometimes amounting to persecution, were
applied to it. Two kings who dared to build monasteries and favour
bonzes were deposed. Statues were melted down, Buddhist learning
was forbidden: marriages and burials were performed according to
the rules of Chu-hsi. About the beginning of the sixteenth century
(the date is [variously given as 1472 and 1512 and perhaps there was
more than one edict) the monasteries in the capital and all cities were
closed and this is why Korean monasteries are all in the country and
often in almost inaccessible mountains. It is only since the Japanese
occupation that temples have been built in towns.
At first the results of the revolution were beneficial. The great

families were compelled to discharge their body-guards whose
collisions had been a frequent cause of bloodshed. The public
finances and military forces were put into order. Printing with
moveable type and a phonetic alphabet were brought into use and
vernacular literature began to flourish. But in time the Confucian
literati formed a sort of corporation and became as troublesome as
the bonzes had been. The aristocracy split into two hostile camps and
Korean politics became again a confused struggle between families
and districts in which progress and even public order became
impossible. For a moment, however, there was a national cause. This
was when Hideyoshi invaded Korea in 1592 as part of his attack on
China. The people rose against the Japanese troops and, thanks to
the death of Hideyoshi rather than to their own valour, got rid of
them. It is said that in this struggle the bonzes took part as soldiers
fighting under their abbots and that the treaty of peace was
negotiated by a Korean and a Japanese monk[899].
346
Nevertheless it does not appear that Buddhism enjoyed much

consideration in the next three centuries. The Hermit Kingdom, as it
has been called, became completely isolated and stagnant nor was
there any literary or intellectual life except the mechanical study of
the Chinese classics. Since the annexation by Japan (1910) conditions
have changed and Buddhism is encouraged. Much good work has
been done in collecting and reprinting old books, preserving
monuments and copying inscriptions. The monasteries were
formerly under the control of thirty head establishments or sees,
with somewhat conflicting interests. But about 1912 these thirty sees
formed a union under a president who resides in Seoul and holds
office for a year. A theological seminary also has been founded and a
Buddhist magazine is published.
FOOTNOTES:
[895] See various articles in the Trans. of the Korean Branch of the
R.A.S., and F. Starr, Korean Buddhism. Also M. Courant, Bibliographie
coréenne, especially vol. III. chap. 2.
[896] The orthography of these three names varies considerably. The

Japanese equivalents are Koma, Kudara and Shiragi. There are also
slight variations in the dates given for the introduction of Buddhism
into various states. It seems probable that Mârânanda and Mukocha,
the first missionaries to Pakche and Silla were Hindus or natives of
Central Asia who came from China and some of the early art of Silla
is distinctly Indian in style. See Starr, l.c. plates VIII and IX.
[897] These dates are interesting, as reflecting the changes of thought

in China. In the sixth century Chinese influence meant Buddhism. It
is not until the latter part of the Southern Sung, when the philosophy
of Chu-hsi had received official approval, that Chinese influence
meant Confucianism.
[898] The reasons were many, but the upper classes were evidently
ready to oppress the lower. Poor men became the slaves of the rich to
obtain a livelihood. All children of slave women were declared
hereditary slaves and so were the families of criminals.
[899] These statements are taken from Maurice Courant’s Epitome of

Korean History in Madrolle’s Guide to North China, p. 428. I have not
been successful in verifying them in Chinese or Japanese texts. See,
however, Starr, Korean Buddhism, pp. 29-30.
347
CHAPTER XLVIII
ANNAM
The modern territory called Annam includes the ancient Champa,

and it falls within the French political sphere which includes
Camboja. Of Champa I have treated elsewhere in connection with
Camboja, but Annam cannot be regarded as the heir of this ancient
culture. It represents a southward extension of Chinese influence,
though it is possible that Buddhism may have entered it in the early
centuries of our era either by sea or from Burma.
At the present day that part of the French possessions which

occupies the eastern coast of Asia is divided into Tonkin, Annam
and Cochin China. The Annamites are predominant in all three
provinces and the language and religion of all are the same, except
that Cochin China has felt the influence of Europe more strongly
than the others. But before the sixteenth century the name Annam
meant rather Tonkin and the northern portion of modern Annam,
the southern portion being the now vanished kingdom of Champa.
Until the tenth century A.D.[900] Annam in this sense was a part of
the Chinese Empire, although it was occasionally successful in
asserting its temporary independence. In the troubled period which
followed the downfall of the T’ang dynasty this independence
became more permanent. An Annamite prince founded a kingdom
called Dai-cô-viêt[901] and after a turbulent interval there arose the
Li dynasty which reigned for more than two centuries (1009-1226
A.D.). It was under this dynasty that the country was first styled An-
nam: previously the official designation of the land or its inhabitants
was Giao-Chi[902]. The Annamites were at this period a considerable
[ military power, though their internal administration appears to
have been chaotic. They were occasionally at war with China, but as
a rule were ready to send complimentary embassies to the Emperor.
With Champa, which was still a formidable antagonist, there was a
continual struggle. Under the Tran dynasty (1225-1400) the foreign
policy of Annam followed much the same lines. A serious crisis was
created by the expedition of Khubilai Khan in 1285, but though the
Annamites suffered severely at the beginning of the invasion, they
348
did not lose their independence and their recognition of Chinese

suzerainty remained nominal. In the south the Chams continued
hostilities and, after the loss of some territory, invoked the aid of
China with the result that the Chinese occupied Annam. They held
it, however, only for five years (1414-1418).
In 1428 the Li dynasty came to the throne and ruled Annam at least
in name until the end of the eighteenth century. At first they proved
vigorous and capable; they organized the kingdom in provinces and
crushed the power of Champa. But after the fifteenth century the
kings became merely titular sovereigns and Annamite history is
occupied entirely with the rivalry of the two great families, Trinh
and Nguyen, who founded practically independent kingdoms in
Tonkin and Cochin-China respectively. In 1802 a member of the
Nguyen family made himself Emperor of all Annam but both he and
his successors were careful to profess themselves vassals of China.
Thus it will be seen that Annam was at no time really detached from
China. In spite of political independence it always looked towards
the Chinese Court and though complimentary missions and nominal
vassalage seem unimportant, yet they are significant as indicating
admiration for Chinese institutions. Between Champa and Annam
on the other hand there was perpetual war: in the later phases of the
contest the Annamites appear as invaders and destroyers. They seem
to have disliked the Chams and were not disposed to imitate them.
Hence it is natural that Champa, so long as it existed as an
independent kingdom, should mark the limit of direct Indian
influence on the mainland of Eastern Asia, though afterwards
Camboja became the limit. By direct, I do not mean to exclude the
possibility of transmission through Java or elsewhere, but by
whatever route Indian civilization came to [ Champa, it brought its
own art, alphabet and language, such institutions as caste and forms
of Hinduism and Buddhism which had borrowed practically nothing
from non-Indian sources. In Annam, on the other hand, Chinese
writing and, for literary purposes, a form of the Chinese language
were in use: the arts, customs and institutions were mainly Chinese:
whatever Buddhism can be found was imported from China and is
imperfectly distinguished from Taoism: of Hinduism there are
hardly any traces[903].
The Buddhism of Annam is often described as corrupt and decadent.

Certainly it would be vain to claim for it that its doctrine and
worship are even moderately pure or primitive, but it cannot be said
to be moribund. The temples are better kept and more numerously
349
attended than in China and there are also some considerable

monasteries. As in China very few except the monks are exclusive
Buddhists and even the monks have no notion that the doctrines of
Lao-tzŭ and Confucius are different from Buddhism. The religion of
the ordinary layman is a selection made according to taste from a
mass of beliefs and observances traceable to several distinct sources,
though no Annamite is conscious that there is anything incongruous
in this heterogeneous combination. This fusion of religions, which is
more complete even than in China, is illustrated by the temples of
Annam which are of various kinds[904]. First we have the Chua or
Buddhist temples, always served by bonzes or nuns. They consist of
several buildings of which the principal contains an altar bearing a
series of images arranged on five or six steps, which rise like the tiers
of a theatre. In the front row there is usually an image of the infant
Śâkyamuni and near him stand figures of At-nan (Ănanda) and
Muc-Lien (Maudgalyâyana). On the next stage are Taoist deities (the
Jade Emperor, the Polar Star, and the Southern Star) and on the
higher stages are images representing (a) three Buddhas[905] with
attendants, (b) the Buddhist Triratna and (c) the three [ religions,
Buddhism, Confucianism and Taoism. But the arrangement of the
images is subject to much variation and the laity hardly know who
are the personages represented. At side altars there are generally
statues of Quan-Am, guardian deities, eminent bonzes and other
worthies. Representations of hell are also common. Part of the
temple is generally set apart for women who frequent it in the hope
of obtaining children by praying to Quan-Am and other goddesses.
Buddhist literature is sometimes printed in these Chua and such
works as the Amitâyurdhyânasûtra and collections of Dhâraṇîs are
commonly placed on the altars.
Quan-Am (Kuan-Yin) is a popular deity and the name seems to be

given to several goddesses. They would probably be described as
incarnations of Avalokita, if any Annamite were to define his beliefs
(which is not usual), but they are really legendary heroines who have
left a reputation for superhuman virtue. One was a daughter of the
Emperor Chuang of the Chou dynasty. Another (Quan-Am-Thi-
Kinh), represented as sitting on a rock and carrying a child in her
arms, was a much persecuted lady who passed part of her life
disguised as a bonze. A third form, Quan-Am-Toa-Son, she who
dwells on the mountains, has an altar in nearly every temple and is
specially worshipped by women who wish for sons. At Hanoi there
is a small temple, rising on one column out of the water near the
shore of a lake, like a lotus in a tank, and containing a brass image of
350
Quan-Am with eight arms, which is evidently of Indian origin.

Sometimes popular heroines such as Cao Tien, a princess who was
drowned, are worshipped without (it would seem) being identified
with Quan-Am.
But besides the Chua there are at least three other kinds of religious
edifices: (i) Dinh. These are municipal temples dedicated to beings
commonly called genii by Europeans, that is to say, superhuman
personages, often, but not always, departed local worthies, who for
one reason or another are supposed to protect and supervise a
particular town or village. The Dinh contains a council room as well
as a shrine and is served by laymen. The genius is often represented
by an empty chair and his name must not be pronounced within the
temple. (ii) Taoist deities are sometimes worshipped in special
temples, but the Annamites do not seem to think that such worship
is antagonistic to Buddhism or even distinct from it. (iii) Temples [
dedicated to Confucius (Van mien) are to be found in the towns, but
are generally open only on certain feast days, when they are visited
by officials. Sometimes altars dedicated to the sage may be found in
natural grottoes or other picturesque situations. Besides these
numerous elements, Annamite religion also includes the veneration
of ancestors and ceremonies such as the worship of Heaven and
Earth performed in imitation of the Court of Peking. To this must be
added many local superstitions in which the worship of animals,
especially the tiger, is prominent. But a further analysis of this
composite religion does not fall within my province.
There is little to be said about the history of Buddhism in Annam,

but native tradition places its introduction as late as the tenth
century[906]. Buddhist temples usually contain a statue of Phat
To[907] who is reported to have been the first adherent of the faith
and to have built the first pagoda. He was the tutor of the Emperor
Li-Thai-To who came to the throne in 1009. Phat-To may therefore
have been active in the middle of the tenth century and this agrees
with the statement that the Emperor Dinh Tien-Hoang Dê (968-979)
was a fervent Buddhist who built temples and did his best to make
converts[908]. One Emperor, Li Hué-Ton, abdicated and retired to a
monastery.
The Annals of Annam[909] record a discussion which took place

before the Emperor Thai-Tôn (1433-1442) between a Buddhist and a
sorcerer. Both held singularly mixed beliefs but recognized the
Buddha as a deity. The king said that he could not decide between
the two sects, but gave precedence to the Buddhists.
351
FOOTNOTES:
[900] The dates given are 111 B.C.-939 A.D.
[901] French scholars use a great number of accents and even new
forms of letters to transcribe Annamite, but since this language has
nothing to do with the history of Buddhism or Hinduism and the
accurate orthography is very difficult to read, I have contented
myself with a rough transcription.
[902] This is the common orthography, but Chiao Chih would be the
spelling according to the system of transliterating Chinese adopted
in this book.
[903] It is said that the story of the Râmâyana is found in Annamite

legends (B.E.F.E.O. 1905, p. 77), and in one or two places the
Annamites reverence statues of Indian deities.
[904] The most trustworthy account of Annamite religion is perhaps

Dumoutier, Les Cultes Annamites, Hanoi, 1907. It was published after
the author’s death and consists of a series of notes rather than a
general description. See also Diguet, Les Annamites, 1906, especially
chap. VI.
[905] Maitreya is called Ri-lac = Chinese Mi-le. The equivalence of the

syllables ri and mi seems strange, but certain. Cf. A-ri-da = Amida or
O-mi-to.
[906] Pelliot (Meou-Tseu, traduit et annoté, in T’oung Pao, vol. XIX. p.

1920) gives reasons for thinking that Buddhism was prevalent in
Tonkin in the early centuries of our era, but, if so, it appears to have
decayed and been reintroduced. Also at this time Chiao-Chih may
have meant Kuang-tung.
[907] Diguet, Les Annamites, p. 303.
[908] Maybon et Russier, L’Histoire d’Annam, p. 45.
[909] Dumoutier, Les Cultes Annamites, p. 58.
352
CHAPTER XLIX
TIBET
INTRODUCTORY
The religion of Tibet and Mongolia, often called Lamaism, is

probably the most singular form of Buddhism in existence and has
long attracted attention in Europe on account of its connection with
politics and its curious resemblance to the Roman Church in ritual as
well as in statecraft. The pontiffs and curia of Lhasa emulated the
authority of the medieval papacy, so that the Mings and Manchus in
China as well as the British in India had to recognize them as a
considerable power.
Tibet had early relations with Kashmir, Central Asia and China
which may all have contributed something to its peculiar
civilization, but its religion is in the main tantric Buddhism imported
from Bengal and invigorated from time to time by both native and
Indian reformers. But though almost every feature of Lamaism finds
a parallel somewhere in India, yet too great insistence on its source
and historical development hardly does justice to the originality of
the Tibetans. They borrowed a foreign faith wholesale, but still the
relative emphasis which they laid on its different aspects was
something new. They had only a moderate aptitude for asceticism,
meditation and metaphysics, although they manfully translated
huge tomes of Sanskrit philosophy, but they had a genius for
hierarchy, discipline and ecclesiastical polity unknown to the
Hindus. Thus taking the common Asiatic idea that great and holy
men are somehow divine, they made it the principle of civil and
sacerdotal government by declaring the prelates of the church to be
deities incarnate. Yet in strange contrast to these practical talents, a
certain innate devilry made them exaggerate all the magical,
terrifying and demoniac elements to be found in Indian Tantrism.
The extraordinary figures of raging fiends which fill Tibetan shrines

suggest at first that the artists simply borrowed and made more
horrible the least civilized fancies of Indian sculpture, yet the [
majesty of Tibetan architecture (for, judging by the photographs of
Lhasa and Tashilhumpo, it deserves no less a name) gives another
impression. The simplicity of its lines and the solid, spacious walls
353
unadorned by carving recall Egypt rather than India and harmonize

not with the many-limbed demons but with the calm and dignified
features of the deified priests who are also portrayed in these halls.
An atmosphere of mystery and sorcery has long hung about the

mountainous regions which lie to the north of India. Hindus and
Chinese alike saw in them the home of spirits and wizards, and the
grand but uncanny scenery of these high plateaux has influenced the
art and ideas of the natives. The climate made it natural that priests
should congregate in roomy strongholds, able to defy the cold and
contain the stores necessary for a long winter, and the massive walls
seem to imitate the outline of the rocks out of which they grow. But
the strange shapes assumed by mists and clouds, often dyed many
colours by the rising or setting sun, suggest to the least imaginative
mind an aerial world peopled by monstrous and magical figures. At
other times, when there is no fog, distant objects seem in the still,
clear atmosphere to be very near, until the discovery that they are
really far away produces a strange feeling that they are unreal and
unattainable.
In discussing this interesting faith, I shall first treat of its history and
then of the sacred books on which it professes to be based. In the
light of this information it will be easier to understand the doctrines
of Lamaism and I shall finally say something about its different sects,
particularly as there is reason to think that the strength of the
Established Church, of which the Grand Lama is head, has been
exaggerated.
354
CHAPTER L
TIBET (continued)
HISTORY
It is generally stated that Buddhism was first preached in Tibet at the

instance of King Srong-tsan-gam-po[910] who came to the throne in
629 A.D. Some legendary notices of its earlier appearance[911] will
bear the natural interpretation that the Tibetans (like the Chinese)
had heard something about it from either India or Khotan before
they invited instructors to visit them[912].
At this time Tibet played some part in the politics of China and [
northern India. The Emperor Harsha and the T’ang Emperor T’ai
Tsung exchanged embassies but a second embassy sent from China
arrived after Harsha’s death and a usurper who had seized the
throne refused to receive it. The Chinese with the assistance of the
kings of Tibet and Nepal dethroned him and carried him off captive.
There is therefore nothing improbable in the story that Srong-tsan-
gam-po had two wives, who were princesses of Nepal and China
respectively. He was an active ruler, warlike but progressive, and
was persuaded by these two ladies that Buddhism was a necessary
part of civilization. According to tradition he sent to India a
messenger called Thonmi Sanbhota, who studied there for several
years, adapted a form of Indian writing to the use of his native
language and translated the Karaṇḍa Vyûha. Recent investigators
however have advanced the theory that the Tibetan letters are
derived from the alphabet of Indian origin used in Khotan and that
Sanbhota made its acquaintance in Kashmir[913]. Though the king
and his two wives are now regarded as the first patrons of Lamaism
and worshipped as incarnations of Avalokita and Târâ, it does not
appear that his direct religious activity was great or that he built
monasteries. But his reign established the foundations of civilization
without which Buddhism could hardly have flourished, he to some
extent unified Central Tibet, he chose the site of Lhasa as the capital
and introduced the rudiments of literature and art. But after his
death in 650 we hear little more of Buddhism for some decades.
About 705 King Khri-gtsug-lde-btsan is said to have built

monasteries, caused translations to be made, and summoned monks
355
from Khotan. His efforts bore little fruit, for no Tibetans were willing
to take the vows, but the edict of 783 preserved in Lhasa mentions
his zeal for religion, and he prepared the way for Khri-sroṇ-lde-btsan
in whose reign Padma-Sambhava, the real founder of Lamaism,
arrived in Tibet[914].
This event is said to have occurred in 747 and the epoch is noticeable
for two reasons. Firstly Tibet, which had become an important
military power, was now brought into contact both in peace and war
with China and Central Asia. It was predominant in the Tarim Basin
and ruled over parts of Ssŭ-chuan and Yunnan. China was obliged to
pay tribute and when it was subsequently refused the Tibetans
sacked the capital, Chang-an. In 783 China made a treaty of peace
with Tibet. The king was the son of a Chinese princess and thus
blood as well as wide experience disposed him to open Tibet to
foreign ideas. But in 747 relations with China were bad, so he turned
towards India and invited to his Court a celebrated Pandit named
Śântarakshita, who advised him to send for Padma-Sambhava.
Secondly this was the epoch when Amogha flourished in China and
introduced the Mantrayâna system or Chên Yen. This was the same
form of corrupt Buddhism which was brought to Tibet and was
obviously the dominant sect in India in the eighth century. It was
pliant and amalgamated easily with local observances, in China with
funeral rites, in Tibet with demonolatry.
At this time Padma-Sambhava was one of the most celebrated

exponents of Tantric Buddhism, and in Tibet is often called simply
the Teacher (Guru or Mahâcârya). His portraits represent him as a
man of strongly marked and rather angry features, totally unlike a
conventional monk. A popular account of his life[915] is still widely
read and may contain some grains of history, though the narrative as
a whole is fantastic. It describes him as born miraculously in Udyâna
but as having studied at Bodhgaya and travelled in many regions
with the intention of converting all the world. According to his plan,
the conversion of his native land was to be his last labour, and when
he had finished his work in Tibet he vanished thither miraculously.
Thus Udyâna is not represented as the source and home of Tantric
Buddhism but as being like Tibet a land of magic and mystery but,
like [ Tibet, needing conversion: both are disposed to welcome
Tantric ideas but those ideas are elaborated by Padma-Sambhava not
in Udyâna but in Bengal which from other sources we know to have
been a centre of Tantrism.
356
Some other points of interest in these legends may be noticed.

Padma-Sambhava is not celibate but is accompanied by female
companions. He visits many countries which worship various deities
and for each he has a new teaching suited to its needs. Thus in Tibet,
where the older religion consisted of defensive warfare against the
attacks of evil spirits[916], he assumes the congenial character of a
victorious exorcist, and in his triumphant progress subdues local
demons as methodically as if he were suppressing the guerilla
warfare of native tribes. He has new revelations called Terma which
he hides in caves to be discovered by his successors. These
revelations are said to have been in an unknown language[917].
Those at present existing are in Tibetan but differ from the canonical
scriptures in certain orthographical peculiarities. The legend thus
admits that Padma-Sambhava preached a non-celibate and magical
form of Buddhism, ready to amalgamate with local superstitions and
needing new revelations for its justification.
He built the monastery of Samye[918] about thirty miles from Lhasa

on the model of Odantapuri in Bengal. Śântarakshita became abbot
and from this period dates the foundation of the order of
Lamas[919]. Mara (Thse Ma-ra) was worshipped as well as the
Buddhas, but however corrupt the cultus may have been, Samye was
a literary centre where many translations were made. Among the
best known translators was a monk from Kashmir named
Vairocana[920]. It would appear however that [ there was
considerable opposition to the new school not only from the priests
of the old native religion but from Chinese Buddhists[921].
Numerous Tibetan documents discovered in the Tarim basin[922]

date from this period. The absence in them of Buddhist personal
names and the rarity of direct references to Buddhism indicate that
though known in Tibet it was not yet predominant. Buddhist priests
(ban-de) are occasionally mentioned but the title Lama has not been
found. The usages of the Bonpo religion seem familiar to the writers
and there are allusions to religious struggles.
When Padma-Sambhava vanished from Tibet, the legend says that

he left behind him twenty-five disciples, all of them magicians, who
propagated his teaching. At any rate it flourished in the reign of
Ralpachan (the grandson of Khri-sroṇ-lde-btsan). Monasteries
multiplied and received land and the right to collect tithes. To each
monk was assigned a small revenue derived from five tenants and
the hierarchy was reorganized[923]. Many translators were at work
in this period and a considerable part of the present canon was then
357
rendered into Tibetan. The king’s devotion to Buddhism was

however unpopular and he was murdered[924] apparently at the
instigation of his brother and successor Lang-dar-ma[925], who
endeavoured to extirpate Lamaism. Monasteries were destroyed,
books burnt, Indian monks were driven out of the country and many
Lamas were compelled to become hunters or butchers. But the
persecution only lasted three years[926], for the wicked king was
assassinated by a Lama who has since been canonized by the Church
and the incident of his murder or punishment is still acted in the
mystery plays performed at Himis and other monasteries.
After the death of Lang-dar-ma Tibet ceased to exist as a united [

kingdom and was divided among clans and chieftains. This was
doubtless connected with the collapse of Tibetan power in the Tarim
basin, but whether as effect or cause it is hard to say. The persecution
may have had a political motive: Lang-dar-ma may have thought
that the rise of monastic corporations, and their right to own land
and levy taxes were a menace to unity and military efficiency. But
the political confusion which followed on his death was not due to
the triumphant restoration of Lamaism. Its recovery was slow. The
interval during which Buddhism almost disappeared is estimated by
native authorities as from 73 to 108 years, and its subsequent revival
is treated as a separate period called phyi-dar or later diffusion in
contrast to the sṇa-dar or earlier diffusion. The silence of
ecclesiastical history during the tenth century confirms the gravity of
the catastrophe[927]. On the other hand the numerous translations
made in the ninth century were not lost and this indicates that there
were monasteries to preserve them, for instance Samye.
At the beginning of the eleventh century we hear of foreign monks

arriving from various countries. The chronicles[928] say that the
chief workers in the new diffusion were La-chen, Lo-chen, the royal
Lama Yeśes Ḥod and Atîśa. The first appears to have been a Tibetan
but the pupil of a teacher who had studied in Nepal. Lo-chen was a
Kashmiri and several other Kashmiri Lamas are mentioned as
working in Tibet. Yeśes Ḥod was a king or chieftain of mṄ̇a-ris in
western Tibet who is said to have been disgusted with the debased
Tantrism which passed as Buddhism. He therefore sent young
Lamas to study in India and also invited thence learned monks. The
eminent Dharmapâla, a monk of Magadha who was on a pilgrimage
in Nepal, became his tutor. Yeśes Ḥod came to an unfortunate end.
He was taken captive by the Raja of Garlog, an enemy of Buddhism,
and died in prison. It is possible that this Raja was the ruler of
Garhwal and a Mohammedan. The political history of the period is
358
far from clear, but evidently there were numerous Buddhist schools
in Bengal, Kashmir and Nepal and numerous learned monks ready
to take up their residence in Tibet. This readiness has been explained
as due to fear of the rising tide of Islam, but was more probably the
result of the revival of Buddhism in Bengal during the eleventh
century. The most illustrious of these pandits was Atîśa[929] (980-
1053), a native of Bengal, who was ordained at Odontapuri and
studied in Burma[930]. Subsequently he was appointed head of the
monastery of Vikramaśîla and was induced to visit Tibet in
1038[931]. He remained there until his death fifteen years later;
introduced a new calendar and inaugurated the second period of
Tibetan Buddhism which is marked by the rise of successive sects
described as reforms. It may seem a jest to call the teaching of Atîśa a
reform, for he professed the Kâlacakra, the latest and most corrupt
form of Indian Buddhism, but it was doubtless superior in discipline
and coherency to the native superstitions mixed with debased
tantrism, which it replaced.
As in Japan during the eleventh and twelfth centuries many

monasteries were founded and grew in importance, and what might
have happened in Japan but for the somewhat unscrupulous
prescience of Japanese statesmen actually did happen in Tibet.
Among the numerous contending chiefs none was pre-eminent: the
people were pugnacious but superstitious. They were ready to build
and respect when built the substantial structures required to house
monastic communities during the rigorous winter. Hence the
monasteries became the largest and safest buildings in the land,
possessing the double strength of walls and inviolability. The most
important was the Sakya monastery. Its abbots were of royal blood
and not celibate, and this dynasty of ecclesiastical statesmen
practically ruled Tibet at a critical period in the history of eastern
Asia and indeed of the world, namely, the conquests of
Chinggiz[932] and the rise of the Mongol Empire.
There is no evidence that Chinggiz was specially favourable to

Buddhism. His principle was one King and one God[933] and like
other princes of his race he thought of religions not as incompatible
systems but as different methods of worship of no more importance
than the different languages used in prayer. The destruction
wrought by the Mongol conquerors has often been noticed, but they
had also an ample, unifying temper which deserves recognition.
China, Russia and Persia all achieved a unity after the Mongol
conquest which they did not possess before, and though this
unification may be described as a protest and reaction, yet but for the
359
Mongols and their treatment of large areas as units it would not have
been possible. The Mings could not have united China before the
Yüan dynasty as they did after it.
In spite of some statements to the contrary there is no proof that the

early Mongols invaded or conquered central Tibet, but Khubilai
subdued the eastern provinces and through the Lamaist hierarchy
established a special connection between Tibet and his dynasty. This
connection began even in the time of his predecessor, for the head
Lama of the Sakya monastery commonly known as Sakya Pandita
(or Sa-skya-pan-cen) was summoned to the Mongol Court in 1246-8,
and cured the Emperor of an illness[934]. This Lama was a man of
great learning and influence. He had received a double education
both secular and religious, and was acquainted with foreign
languages. The favourable impression which he created no doubt
facilitated the brilliant achievements of his nephew and successor,
who is commonly known as Bashpa or Pagspa[935].
Khubilai Khan was not content with the vague theism of Central
Asia and wished to give his rude Mongols a definite religion with
some accessories of literature and manners. Confucianism was
clearly too scholastic for a fighting race and we may surmise that he
rejected Christianity as distant and unimportant, Mohammedanism
as [ inconveniently mixed with politics. But why did he prefer
Lamaism to Chinese Buddhism? The latter can hardly have been too
austerely pure to suit his ends, and Tibetan was as strange as
Chinese to the Mongols. But the Mongol Court had already been
favourably impressed by Tibetan Lamas and the Emperor probably
had a just feeling that the intellectual calibre of the Mongols and
Tibetans was similar and also that it was politic to conciliate the
uncanny spiritual potentates who ruled in a land which it was
difficult to invade. At any rate he summoned the abbot of Sakya to
China in 1261 and was initiated by him into the mysteries of
Lamaism[936].
It is said that before Pagspa’s birth the God Ganeśa showed his
father all the land of Tibet and told him that it would be the kingdom
of his son. In later life when he had difficulties at the Chinese Court
Mahâkâla appeared and helped him, and the mystery which he
imparted to Khubilai is called the Hevajravaśîtâ[937]. These legends
indicate that there was a large proportion of Sivaism in the religion
first taught to the Mongols, larger perhaps than in the present
Lamaism of Lhasa.
360
The Mongol historian Sanang Setsen relates[938] that Pagspa took a

higher seat than the Emperor when instructing him and on other
occasions sat on the same level. This sounds improbable, but it is
clear that he enjoyed great power and dignity. In China he received
the title of Kuo-Shih or instructor of the nation and was made the
head of all Buddhists, Lamaists and other. In Tibet he was
recognized as head of the Church and tributary sovereign, though it
would appear that the Emperor named a lay council to assist him in
the government and also had a commissioner in each of the three
provinces. This was a good political bargain and laid the foundations
of Chinese influence in a country which he could hardly have
subdued by force.
Pagspa was charged by the Emperor to provide the Mongols with an

alphabet as well as a religion. For this purpose he used a square [
form of the Tibetan letters[939], written not in horizontal but in
vertical lines. But the experiment was not successful. The characters
were neither easy to write nor graceful, and after Pagspa’s death his
invention fell into disuse and was replaced by an enlarged and
modified form of the Uigur alphabet. This had already been
employed for writing Mongol by Sakya Pandita and its definitive
form for that purpose was elaborated by the Lama Chos-kyi-ḥod-zer
in the reign of Khubilai’s successor. This alphabet is of Aramaic
origin, and had already been utilized by Buddhists for writing
religious works, so its application to Mongol was merely an
extension of its general currency in Asia[940].
Pagspa also superintended the preparation of a new edition of the

Tripitaka, not in Mongol but in Chinese. Among the learned editors
were persons acquainted with Sanskrit, Chinese, Tibetan and Uigur.
An interesting but natural feature of this edition is that it notes
whether the various Chinese texts are found in the Tibetan Canon or
not.
Khubilai further instituted a bureau of fine arts, the head of which

was a Lama called Aniko, skilled in both sculpture and painting. He
and his Chinese pupil Liu Yüan introduced into Peking various
branches of Tibetan art such as Buddhist images of a special type,
ornamental ironwork and gold tapestry. The Chinese at this period
appear to have regarded Tibetan art as a direct importation from
India[941]. And no doubt Tibetan art was founded on that of Nepal
which in its turn came from Bengal. Miniature painting is a
characteristic of both. But in later times the individuality of Tibet,
shown alike in its monstrous deities and its life-like portraits of
361
Lamas, imposed itself on Nepal. Indian and Tibetan temples are not
alike. In the former there is little painting but the walls and pillars
are covered with a superabundance of figures carved in relief: in
Tibet pictures and painted banners are the first thing to strike the
eye, but carvings in relief are rare.
It is hard to say to what extent the Mongols beyond such parts of

northern China as felt the direct influence of the imperial court were
converted to Lamaism. At any rate their conversion was only
temporary for, as will be related below, a reconversion was
necessary in the sixteenth century. It looks as if the first growth of
Mongolian Buddhism was part of a political system and collapsed
together with it. But so long as the Yüan dynasty reigned, Lamaist
influence was strong and the downfall of the Yüan was partly caused
by their subservience to the clergy and extravagant expenditure on
religious buildings and ceremonies. After the departure of Pagspa,
other Lamas held a high position at the Court of Peking such as
Chos-kyi-hod-zer and gYuṇ-ston rDo-rje-dpal. The latter was a
distinguished exponent of the Kâlacakra system and the teacher of
the historian Bu-ston who is said to have arranged the Tibetan
Canon.
Although the Yüan dynasty heaped favours upon priests and

monasteries, it does not appear that religion flourished in Tibet
during the fourteenth century for at the end of that period the grave
abuses prevalent provoked the reforming zeal of Tsong-kha-pa.
Prom 1270 to 1340 the abbots of Sakya were rulers of both Church
and State, and we hear that in 1320 they burned the rival monastery
of Dikung. The language of Sanang Setsen implies that each abbot
was appointed or invested by the Emperor[942] and their power
declined with the Yüan dynasty. Other monasteries increased in
importance and a chief known as Phagmodu[943] succeeded, after
many years of fighting, in founding a lay dynasty which ruled parts
of Tibet until the seventeenth century.
In 1368 the Ming superseded the Yüan. They were not professed
Buddhists to the same extent and they had no preference for
Lamaism but they were anxious to maintain good relations with
Tibet and to treat it as a friendly but vassal state. They accorded
imperial recognition (with an implication of suzerainty) to the
dynasty of Phagmodu and also to the abbots of eight monasteries.
Though they were doubtless glad to see Tibet a divided and
contentious house, it does not appear that they interfered actively in
its affairs or did more than recognize the status quo. In the time of
362
Khubilai the [ primacy of Sakya was a reality: seventy years later

Sakya was only one among several great monasteries.
The advent of the Ming dynasty coincided with the birth of Tsong-
kha-pa[944], the last reformer of Lamaism and organizer of the
Church as it at present exists. The name means the man of the onion-
bank, a valley near the monastery of Kumbum in the district of
Amdo, which lies on the western frontiers of the Chinese province of
Kansu. He became a monk at the age of seven and from the hair cut
off when he received the tonsure is said to have sprung the
celebrated tree of Kumbum which bears on its leaves wondrous
markings[945]. According to the legend, his birth and infancy were
attended by miracles. He absorbed instruction from many teachers
and it has been conjectured that among them were Roman Catholic
missionaries[946]. In early manhood he proceeded to Tibet and
studied at Sakya, Dikung and finally at Lhasa. His reading
convinced him that Lamaism as he found it was not in harmony with
the scriptures, so with the patronage of the secular rulers and the
support of the more earnest clergy he successfully executed a
thorough and permanent work of reform. This took visible shape in
the Gelugpa, the sect presided over by the Grand Lama, which
acquired such paramount importance in both ecclesiastical and
secular matters that it is justly termed the Established Church of
Tibet. It may also be conveniently termed the Yellow Church, yellow
being its special colour particularly for hats and girdles, in
opposition to the red or unreformed sects which use red for the same
purpose. Tsong-kha-pa’s reforms took two principal lines. Firstly he
made monastic discipline stricter, insisting on celibacy and frequent
services of prayer: secondly he greatly reduced, although he did not
annihilate, the tantric and magical element in Lamaism. These [
principles were perpetuated by an effective organization. He himself
founded the great monastery of Gandan near Lhasa and became its
first abbot. During his lifetime or shortly afterwards were founded
three others, Sera and Depung both near Lhasa and
Tashilhunpo[947]. He himself seems to have ruled simply in virtue
of his personal authority as founder, but his nephew and successor
Geden-dub[948] claimed the same right as an incarnation of the
divine head of the Church, and this claim was supported by a
hierarchy which became overwhelmingly powerful.
Tsong-kha-pa died in 1417 and is said to have been transfigured and

carried up into heaven while predicting to a great crowd the future
glories of his church. His mortal remains, however, preserved in a
363
magnificent mausoleum within the Gandan monastery, still receive

great veneration.
Among his more eminent disciples were Byams-chen-chos-rje and

mKhas-grub-rje who in Tibetan art are often represented as
accompanying him. The first played a considerable part in China.
The Emperor Yung-Lo sent an embassy to invite Tsong-kha-pa to his
capital. Tsong-kha-pa felt unable to go himself but sent his pupil to
represent him. Byams-chen-chos-rje was received with great
honour[949]. The main object of the Ming Emperors was to obtain
political influence in Tibet through the Lamas but in return the
Lamas gained considerable prestige. The Kanjur was printed in
China (1410) and Byams-chen-chos-rje and his disciples were
recognized as prelates of the whole Buddhist Church within the
Empire. He returned to Tibet laden with presents and titles and
founded the monastery of Serra in 1417. Afterwards he went back to
China and died there at the age of eighty-four.
mKhas-grub-rje founded the monastery of Tashilhunpo and became

its abbot, being accepted as an incarnation of the Buddha Amitâbha.
He was eighth in the series of incarnations, which henceforth were
localized at Tashilhunpo, but the first is said to have been Subhûti, a
disciple of Gotama, and the second Mañjuśrîkirti, king of the country
of Śambhala[950].
The abbot of Tashilhunpo became the second personage in the

ecclesiastical and political hierarchy. The head of it was the prelate
commonly known as the Grand Lama and resident at Lhasa. Geden-
dub[951], the nephew of Tsong-kha-pa, is reckoned by common
consent as the first Grand Lama (though he seems not to have borne
the title) and the first incarnation of Avalokita as head of the Tibetan
Church[952]. The Emperor Ch’êng Hua (1365-1488) who had
occasion to fight on the borders of Tibet confirmed the position of
these two sees as superior to the eight previously recognized and
gave the occupants a patent and seal. From this time they bore the
title of rGyal-po or king.
It was about this time that the theory of successive incarnations[953]

which is characteristic of Lamaism was developed and defined. At
least two ideas are combined in it. The first is that divine persons
appear in human form. This is common in Asia from India to Japan,
especially among the peoples who have accepted some form of
Hindu religion. The second is that in a school, sect or church there is
real continuity of life. In the unreformed sects of Tibet this was
364
accomplished by the simple principle of heredity so that celibacy,

though undeniably correct, seemed to snap the thread. But it was
reunited by the theory that a great teacher is reborn in the successive
occupants of his chair. Thus the historian Târanâtha is supposed to
be reborn in the hierarchs of Urga. But frequently the hereditary soul
is identified with a Buddha or Bodhisattva, as in the great
incarnations of [ Lhasa and Tashilhunpo. This dogma has obvious
advantages. It imparts to a Lamaist see a dignity which the papacy
cannot rival but it is to the advantage of the Curia rather than of the
Pope for the incarnate deity of necessity succeeds to his high office as
an infant, is in the hands of regents and not unfrequently dies when
about twenty years of age. These incarnations are not confined to the
great sees of Tibet. The heads of most large monasteries in Mongolia
claim to be living Buddhas and even in Peking there are said to be
six.
The second Grand Lama[954] enjoyed a long reign, and set the
hierarchy in good order, for he distinguished strictly clerical posts,
filled by incarnations, from administrative posts. He was summoned
to Peking by the Emperor, but declined to go and the somewhat
imperative embassy sent to invite him was roughly handled. His
successor, the third Grand Lama bSod-nams[955], although less
noticed by historians than the fifth, perhaps did more solid work for
the holy see of Lhasa than any other of his line for he obtained, or at
least received, the allegiance of the Mongols who since the time of
Khubilai had woefully backslidden from the true faith.
As mentioned above, the conversion of the Mongols to Buddhism

took place when their capital was at Peking and chiefly affected
those resident in China. But when the Yüan dynasty had been
dethroned and the Mongols, driven back into their wilds, were
frequently at war with China, they soon relapsed into their original
superstitions. About 1570 Altan[956] Khagan, the powerful chief of
the Tümed, became more nearly acquainted with Tibet, since some
Lamas captured in a border fray had been taken to his Court. After
causing China much loss and trouble he made an advantageous
peace and probably formed the idea (which the Manchus
subsequently proved to be reasonable) that if the Mongols were
stronger they might repeat the conquests of Khubilai. The Ming
dynasty was clearly decadent and these mysterious priests of Tibet
appeared to be on the upward grade[957]. They might help him both
to become the undisputed chief of all the Mongol tribes and also to
reconquer Peking. So he sent an embassy to invite the Grand Lama’s
365
presence, and when it was not successful he followed it with a

second.
The Grand Lama then accepted and set out on his travels with great
pomp. According to the story he appeared to the astonished
Mongols in the guise of Avalokita with four arms (of which two
remained folded on his breast) and the imprint of his horse’s hoofs
showed the six mystic syllables om mani padme hum. These wonders
are so easily explicable that they may be historical.
A great congregation was held near Lake Kokonor and Sanang

Setsen records an interesting speech made there by one of his
ancestors respecting the relations of Church and State, which he
compared with the sun and moon. The Lama bestowed on the
Khagan high sounding titles and received himself the epithet Dalai
or Talai, the Mongol word for sea, signifying metaphorically vast
extent and profundity[958]. This is the origin of the name Dalai
Lama by which the Tibetan pontiff is commonly known to
Europeans. The hierarchy was divided into four classes parallel to
the four ranks of Mongol nobles: the use of meat was restricted and
the custom of killing men and horses at funerals forbidden. The
observance of Buddhist festivals was made compulsory and native
idols were destroyed, but the deities which they [ represented were
probably identified with others in the new pantheon. The Grand
Lama specially recommended to the Mongols the worship of the
Blue Mahâkâla, a six armed representation of Śiva standing on a
figure of Ganeśa, and he left with them a priest who was esteemed
an incarnation of Mañjuśrî, and for whom a temple and monastery
were built in Kuku-khoto.
His Holiness then returned to Tibet, but when Altan Khagan died in
1583 he made a second tour in Mongolia in order to make sure of the
allegiance of the new chiefs. He also received an embassy from the
Chinese Emperor Wan-Li, who conferred on him the same titles that
Khubilai had given to Pagspa. The alliance between the Tibetans and
Mongols was naturally disquieting to the Ming dynasty and they
sought to minimize it by showing extreme civility to the Lamas.
This Grand Lama died at the age of forty-seven, and it is significant

that the next incarnation appeared in the Mongol royal house, being
a great-grandson of Altan Khagan. Until he was fourteen he lived in
Mongolia and when he moved to Lhasa a Lama was appointed to be
his vicar and Primate of all Mongolia with residence at Kuren or
Urga[959]. The prelates of this line are considered as incarnations of
366
the historian Târanâtha[960]. In common language they bear the

name of rJe-btsun-dam-pa but are also called Maidari Khutuktu, that
is incarnation of Maitreya. About this time the Emperor of China
issued a decree, which has since been respected, that these hierarchs
must be reborn in Tibet, or in other words that they must not
reappear in a Mongol family for fear of uniting religion and
patriotism too closely.
Lozang[961], the fifth Grand Lama, is by common consent the most

remarkable of the pontifical line. He established the right of himself
and his successors—or, as he might have said, of himself in his
successive births—to the temporal and ecclesiastical sovereignty of
Tibet: he built the Potala and his dealings with the Mongols and [ the
Emperor of China are of importance for general Asiatic history.
From the seventeenth century onwards there were four factors in

Tibetan politics.
1. The Gelugpa or Yellow Church, very strong but anxious to become

stronger both by increasing its temporal power and by suppressing
other sects. Its attitude towards Chinese and Mongols showed no
prejudice and was dictated by policy.
2. The Tibetan chiefs and people, on the whole respectful to the

Yellow Church but not single-hearted nor forgetful of older sects:
averse to Chinese and prone to side with Mongols.
3. The Mongols, conscious of their imperfect civilization and anxious

to improve themselves by contact with the Lamas. As a nation they
wished to repeat their past victories over China, and individual
chiefs wished to make themselves the head of the nation. People and
princes alike respected all Lamas.
4. The Chinese, apprehensive of the Mongols and desirous to keep

them tranquil, caring little for Lamaism in itself but patiently
determined to have a decisive voice in ecclesiastical matters, since
the Church of Lhasa had become a political power in their border
lands.
Lo-zang was born as the son of a high Tibetan official about 1616 and
was educated in the Depung monastery under the supervision of
Chos-kyi-Gyal-tsan, abbot of Tashilhunpo and a man of political
weight. The country was then divided into Khamdo, Wu and Tsang,
or Eastern, Central and Western Tibet, and in each province there
ruled a king of the Phagmodu dynasty. In Central Tibet, and
367
specially at Lhasa, the Gelugpa was the established church and

accepted by the king but in the other provinces there was much
religious strife and the older sects were still predominant. About
1630 the regent of Tsang captured Lhasa and made himself sovereign
of all Tibet. He was a follower of the Sakya sect and his rule was a
menace to the authority and even to the existence of the Yellow
Church, which for some years suffered much tribulation. When the
young Grand Lama grew up, he and his preceptor determined to
seek foreign aid and appealed to Gushi Khan[962]. This prince was a
former pupil of Chos-kyi-Gyal-tsan and chief of the Oelöt, the
ancestors of the Kalmuks and other western tribes, but then living
near Kokonor. He was a staunch member of the Yellow Church and
had already made it paramount in Khamdo which he invaded in
1638. He promptly responded to the appeal, invaded Tibet, took the
regent prisoner, and, after making himself master of the whole
country, handed over his authority to the Grand Lama, retaining
only the command of his Mongol garrisons. This arrangement was
advantageous to both parties. The Grand Lama not only greatly
increased his ecclesiastical prestige but became a temporal sovereign
of considerable importance. Gushi, who had probably no desire to
reside permanently in the Snow Land, received all the favours which
a grateful Pope could bestow on a king and among the superstitious
Mongols these had a real value. Further the Oelöt garrisons which
continued to occupy various points in Tibet gave him a decisive
voice in the affairs of the country, if there was ever a question of
using force.
The Grand Lamas had hitherto resided in the Depung monastery but
Lo-zang now moved to the hill of Marpori, the former royal
residence and began to build on it the Potala[963] palace which,
judging from photographs, must be one of the most striking edifices
in the world, for its stately walls continue the curves of the mountain
side and seem to grow out of the living rock. His old teacher was
given the title of Panchen Rinpoche, which has since been borne by
the abbots of Tashilhunpo, and the doctrine that the Grand Lamas of
Lhasa and Tashilhunpo are respectively incarnations of Avalokita
and Amitâbha was definitely promulgated[964].
The establishment of the Grand Lama as temporal ruler of Tibet

coincided with the advent of the Manchu dynasty (1644). The
Emperor and the Lama had everything to gain from friendly
relations and their negotiations culminated in a visit which Lo-zang
paid to Peking in [ 1652-3. He was treated as an independent
sovereign and received from the Emperor a long title containing the
368
phrase “Self-existent Buddha, Universal Ruler of the Buddhist faith.”

In return he probably undertook to use his influence with the
Mongols to preserve peace and prevent raids on China.
After his return to Tibet, he appears to have been a real as well as a

nominal autocrat for his preceptor and Gushi Khan both died, and
the new Manchu dynasty had its hands full. His chief adviser was
the Desi[965] or Prime Minister, supposed to be his natural son. In
1666 the great Emperor K’ang-hsi succeeded to the throne: and
shortly afterwards the restlessness of the Mongol Princes began to
inspire the Chinese Court with apprehension. In 1680 Lo-zang died
but his death was a state secret. It was apparently known in Tibet
and an infant successor was selected but the Desi continued to rule
in Lo-zang’s name and even the Emperor of China had no certain
knowledge of his suspected demise but probably thought that the
fiction of his existence was the best means of keeping the Mongols in
order. It was not until 1696 that his death and the accession of a
youth named Thsang-yang Gya-thso were made public.
But the young Grand Lama, who owing to the fiction that his
predecessor was still alive had probably been brought up less strictly
than usual, soon began to inspire alarm at Peking for he showed
himself wilful and intelligent. He wrote love songs which are still
popular and his licentious behaviour was quite out of harmony with
the traditions of the holy see. In 1701, under joint pressure from the
Chinese and Mongols, he resigned his ecclesiastical rights and
handed over the care of the Church to the abbot of Tashilhunpo,
while retaining his position as temporal ruler. But the Chinese still
felt uneasy and in 1705 succeeded in inducing him to undertake a
journey to Peking. When he got as far as Mongolia he died of either
dropsy or assassination. The commander of the Oelöt garrisons in
Tibet was a friend of the Chinese, and at once produced a new
Grand Lama called Yeśes, a man of about twenty-five, who claimed
to be the true reincarnation of the fifth Grand Lama, the pretensions
of the dissolute youth who had just died being thus set aside. It
suited the Chinese to deal with an adult, who could be made to
understand [ that he had received and held his office only through
their good will, but the Tibetans would have none of this
arrangement. They clung to the memory of the dissolute youth and
welcomed with enthusiasm the news that he had reappeared in Li-
t’ang as a new-born child, who was ultimately recognized as the
seventh Grand Lama named Kalzang. The Chinese imprisoned the
infant with his parents in the monastery of Kumbum in Kansu and
gave all their support to Yeśes. For the better control of affairs in
369
Lhasa two Chinese Agents were appointed to reside there with the
Manchu title of Amban[966].
But the Tibetans would not accept the rule of Yeśes and in 1717 the
revolutionary party conspired with the Oelöt tribes of Ili to put
Kalzang on the throne by force. The troops sent to take the holy child
were defeated by the Chinese but those which attacked Lhasa were
completely successful. Yeśes abdicated and the city passed into the
possession of the Mongols. The Chinese Government were greatly
alarmed and determined to subdue Tibet. Their first expedition was
a failure but in 1720 they sent a second and larger, and also decided
to install the youthful Kalzang as Grand Lama, thus conciliating the
religious feelings of the Tibetans. The expedition met with little
difficulty and the result of it was that China became suzerain of the
whole country. By imperial edict the young Grand Lama was
recognized as temporal ruler, the four ministers or Kalön were given
Chinese titles, and garrisons were posted to keep open the road from
China. But the Tibetans were still discontented. In 1727 a rebellion,
instigated it was said by the family of the Grand Lama, broke out,
and the Prime Minister was killed. This rising was not permanently
successful and the Chinese removed the Grand Lama to the
neighbourhood of their frontier. They felt however that it was unsafe
to give ground for suspicion that they were ill-treating him and in
1734 he was reinstated in the Potala. But the dislike of the Tibetans
for Chinese supervision was plain. In 1747 there was another
rebellion. The population of Lhasa rose and were assisted by Oelöt
troops who suddenly arrived on the scene. Chinese rule was saved
only by the heroism of the two Chinese Agents, who invited the chief
conspirators to a meeting and engaged them in personal combat.
They lost their own lives but killed the principal rebels. The Chinese
then [ abolished the office of Prime Minister, increased their garrison
and gave the Agents larger powers.
About 1758 the Grand Lama died and was succeeded by an infant
called Jambal. The real authority was wielded by the Panchen Lama
who acted as regent and was so influential that the Emperor Ch’ien-
Lung insisted on his visiting Peking[967]. He had a good reception
and probably obtained some promise that the government of Tibet
would be left more in the hands of the Church but he died of
smallpox in Peking and nothing came of his visit except a beautiful
tomb and an epitaph written by the Emperor. After his death a new
complication appeared. The prelates of the Red Church encouraged
an invasion of the Gurkhas of Nepal in the hope of crushing the
Yellow Church. The upshot was that the Chinese drove out the
370
Gurkhas but determined to establish a more direct control. The

powers of the Agents were greatly increased and not even the Grand
Lama was allowed the right of memorializing the throne, but had to
report to the Agents and ask their orders.
In 1793 Ch’ien-Lung issued a remarkable edict regulating the

appearance of incarnations which, as he observed, had become
simply the hereditary perquisites of certain noble Mongol families.
He therefore ordered that when there was any question of an
incarnation the names of the claimants to the distinction should be
written on slips of paper and placed in a golden bowl: that a
religious service should be held and at its close a name be drawn
from the bowl in the presence of the Chinese Agents and the public.
The child whose name should be drawn was to be recognized as the
true incarnation but required investiture by an imperial patent.
A period of calm followed, and when the Grand Lama died in 1804
the Tibetans totally neglected this edict and selected a child born in
eastern Tibet. The Chinese Court, desirous of avoiding unnecessary
trouble, approved[968] the choice on the ground that the infant’s
precocious ability established his divine character but when he [ died
in 1815 and an attempt was made to repeat this irregularity, a second
edict was published, insisting that the names of at least three
candidates must be placed in the golden urn and that he whose
name should be first drawn must be Grand Lama. This procedure
was followed but the child elected by the oracle of the urn died
before he was twenty and another infant was chosen as his successor
in 1838. As a result the Lama who was regent acquired great power
and also unpopularity. His tyranny caused the Tibetans to petition
the Emperor; and His Majesty sent a new Agent to investigate his
conduct. Good reason was shown for holding him responsible for
the death of the Grand Lama in 1838 and for other misdeeds. The
Emperor then degraded and banished him and, what is more
singular, forbade him to reappear in a human reincarnation.
The reigns of Grand Lamas in the nineteenth century have mostly

been short. Two others were selected in 1858 and 1877 respectively.
The latter who is the present occupant of the post was the son of a
Tibetan peasant: he was duly chosen by the oracle of the urn and
invested by the Emperor. In 1893 he assumed personal control of the
administration and terminated a regency which seems to have been
oppressive and unpopular. The British Government were anxious to
negotiate with him about Sikhim and other matters, but finding it
impossible to obtain answers to their communications sent an
371
expedition to Lhasa in 1904. The Grand Lama then fled to Urga, in

which region he remained until 1907. In the autumn of 1908 he was
induced to visit Peking where he was received with great ceremony
but, contrary to the precedent established when the fifth Grand
Lama attended Court, he was obliged to kneel and kotow before the
Empress Dowager. Neither could he obtain the right to memorialize
the throne, but was ordered to report to the Agents. The Court duly
recognized his religious position. On the birthday of the Empress he
performed a service for her long life, at which Her Majesty was
present. It was not wholly successful, for a week or two later he
officiated at her funeral. At the end of 1908 he left for Lhasa. He
visited India in 1910 but this created dissatisfaction at Peking. In the
same year[969] a decree was issued deposing him from his spiritual
as well as his [ temporal powers and ordering the Agents to seek out
a new child by drawing lots from the golden urn. This decree was
probably ultra vires and certainly illogical, for if the Chinese
Government recognized the Lama as an incarnation, they could not,
according to the accepted theory, replace him by another incarnation
before his death. And if they regarded him as a false incarnation,
they should have ordered the Agents to seek out not a child but a
man born about the time that the last Grand Lama died. At any rate
the Tibetans paid no attention to the decree.
The early deaths of Grand Lamas in the nineteenth century have

naturally created a presumption that they were put out of the way
and contemporary suspicion accused the regent in 1838. There is no
evidence that the deaths of the other three were regarded as
unnatural but the earlier Grand Lamas as well as the abbots of
Tashilhunpo lived to a good age. On the other hand the Grand
Lamas of Urga are said to die young. If the pontiffs of some lines live
long and those of others die early, the inference is not that the life of
a god incarnate is unhealthy but that in special cases special
circumstances interfere with it, and on the whole there are good
grounds for suspecting foul play. But it is interesting to note that
most Europeans who have made the acquaintance of high Lamas
speak in praise of their character and intelligence. So Manning (the
friend of Charles Lamb) of the ninth Grand Lama (1811), Bogle of the
Tashi Lama about 1778, Sven Hedin of his successor in 1907, and
Waddell of the Lama Regent in 1904.
The above pages refer to the history of Lamaism in Tibet and

Mongolia. It also spread to China, European Russia, Ladak, Sikhim
and Bhutan. In China it is confined to the north and its presence is
easily explicable by the genuine enthusiasm of Khubilai and the
372
encouragement given on political grounds by the Ming and Manchu

dynasties. Further, several Mongol towns such as Kalgan and Kuku-
khoto are within the limits of the eighteen provinces.
The Kalmuks who live in European Russia are the descendants of

tribes who moved westwards from Dzungaria in the seventeenth
century. Many of them left Russia and returned to the east in 1771,
but a considerable number remained behind, chiefly between the
Volga and the Don, and [ the population professing Lamaism there is
now reckoned at about 100,000.
Buddhist influences may have been at work in Ladak from an early

period. In later times it can be regarded as a dependency of Tibet, at
any rate for ecclesiastical purposes, for it formed part of Tibet until
the disruption of the kingdom in the tenth century and it
subsequently accepted the sovereignty of Lhasa in religious and
sometimes in political matters. Concerning the history of Bhutan, I
have been able to discover but little. The earliest known inhabitants
are called Tephu and the Tibetans are said to have conquered them
about 1670. Lamaism probably entered the country at this time, if not
earlier[970]. At any rate it must have been predominant in 1774
when the Tashi Lama used his good offices to conclude peace
between the Bhutiyas and the East India Company. The established
church however is not the Gelugpa but the Dugpa, which is a
subdivision of the Kar-gyu-pa. There are two rulers in Bhutan, the
Dharmarâja or spiritual and the Debrâja or temporal. The former is
regarded as an incarnation of the first class, though it is not clear of
what deity[971].
The conversion of Sikhim is ascribed to a saint named Latsün

Ch’embo, who visited it about 1650 with two other Lamas. They
associated with themselves a native chief whom they ordained as a
Lama and made king. All four then governed Sikhim. Though
Latsün Ch’embo is represented as a friend of the fifth Grand Lama,
the two sects at present found in Sikhim are the Nying-ma-pa, the
old unreformed style of Lamaism, and the Karmapa, a branch of the
Kar-gyu-pa, analogous to the Dugpa of Bhutan. The principal
monasteries are at Pemiongchi (Peme-yang-tse) and Tashiding[972].
373
FOOTNOTES:
[910] Tibetan orthography Sroṇ-btsan-sgam-po. It is hard to decide

what is the best method of representing Tibetan words in Latin
letters:
(a) The orthography differs from the modern pronunciation more

than in any other language, except perhaps English, but it apparently
represents an older pronunciation and therefore has historical value.
Also, a word can be found in a Tibetan dictionary only if the native
spelling is faithfully reproduced. On the other hand readers
interested in oriental matters know many words in a spelling which
is a rough representation of the modern pronunciation. It seems
pedantic to write bKaẖ-ẖgyur and ẖBras-spuṇs when the best known
authorities speak of Kanjur and Debung. On the whole, I have
decided to represent the commoner words by the popular
orthography as given by Rockhill, Waddell and others while giving
the Tibetan spelling in a foot-note. But when a word cannot be said
to be well known even among Orientalists I have reproduced the
Tibetan spelling.
(b) But it is not easy to reproduce this spelling clearly and

consistently. On the whole I have followed the system used by Sarat
Chandra Das in his Dictionary. It is open to some objections, as, for
instance, that the sign h has more than one value, but the more
accurate method used by Grünwedel in his Mythologie is extremely
hard to read. My transcription is as follows in the order of the
Tibetan consonants.
k, kh, g, ṇ, c, oh, j, ny.

t, th, d, n, p, ph, b, m.
ts, ths, ds, w.
zh, z, ḥ, y.
r, l, ś, s, h.
Although tsh is in some respects preferable to represent an aspirated

ts, yet it is liable to be pronounced as in the English words hat shop,
and perhaps ths is on the whole better.
[911] See Waddell, Buddhism of Tibet, p. 19.
[912] It has been argued (e.g., J.R.A.S., 1903, p. 11) that discoveries in
Central Asia indicate that Tibetan civilization and therefore Tibetan
374
Buddhism are older than is generally supposed. But recent research

shows that Central Asian MSS. of even the eighth century say little
about Buddhism, whatever testimony they may bear to civilization.
[913] See Hoernle MS. Remains found in E. Turkestan, 1916, pp. xvii ff.,
and Francke, Epig. Ind. XI. 266 ff., and on the other side Laufer in
J.A.O.S. 1918, pp. 34 ff. There is a considerable difference between
the printed and cursive forms of the Tibetan alphabet. Is it possible
that they have different origins and that the former came from
Bengal, the latter from Khotan?
[914] There were some other streams of Buddhism, for the king had a
teacher called Sântarakshita who advised him to send for Padma-
Sambhava and Padma-Sambhava was opposed by Chinese bonzes.
[915] The Pad-ma-than-yig. It indicates some acquaintance with

Islam and mentions Hulugu Khan. See T’oung Pao, 1896, pp. 526 ff.
See for a further account Grünwedel, Mythologie, p. 47, Waddell,
Buddhism, p. 380, and the Tibetan text edited and translated by
Laufer under the title Der Roman einer tibetischen Königin, especially
pp. 250 ff. Also E. Schlagintweit, “Die Lebensbeschreibung von
Padma-Sambhava,” Abhand. k. bayer. Akad. I. CL. xxi. Bd. ii. Abth.
419-444, and ib. I. CL. xxii. Bd. iii. Abth. 519-576.
[916] Much of Chinese popular religion has the same character. See
De Groot, Religious System of China, vol. VI. pp. 929, 1187. “The War
against Spectres.”
[917] Both he and the much later Saskya Pandita are said to have
understood the Bruzha language, for which see T’oung Pao, 1908, pp.
1-47.
[918] Or bSam-yas. See Waddell, Buddhism, p. 266, for an account of

this monastery at the present day.
[919] The Tibetan word bLama means upper and is properly

applicable to the higher clergy only though commonly used of all.
[920] He was temporarily banished owing to the intrigues of the

Queen, who acted the part of Potiphar’s wife, but he was
triumphantly restored. A monk called Vairocana is also said to have
introduced Buddhism into Khotan from Kashmir, but at a date
which though uncertain must be considerably earlier than this.
375
[921] See Journal of Buddhist Text Society, 1893, p. 5. I imagine that by

Hoshang Mahâyâna the followers of Bodhidharma are meant.
[922] J.R.A.S. 1914, pp. 37-59.
[923] See Rockhill, Life of the Buddha, p. 225.
[924] Various dates are given for his death, ranging from 838 to 902.
See Rockhill (Life of the Buddha), p. 225, and Bushell in J.R.A.S. 1880,
pp. 440 ff. But the treaty of 822 was made in his reign.
[925] g Lan-dar-ma.
[926] But see for other accounts Rockhill (Life of the Buddha), p. 226.
According to Csoma de Körös’s tables the date of the persecution
was 899.
[927] See the chronological table in Waddell’s Buddhism, p. 576. Not a

single Tibetan event is mentioned between 899 and 1002.
[928] Pag Som Jon Zang. Ed. Sarat Chandra Das, p. 183.
[929] Or Dîpaṇkara Śrîjñâna. See for a life of him Journal of Buddhist

Text Society, 1893, “Indian Pandits in Tibet,” pp. 7 ff.
[930] Suvarṇadvîpa, where he studied, must be Thaton and it is

curious to find that it was a centre of tantric learning.
[931] From 1026 onwards see the chronological tables of Sum-pa

translated by Sarat Chandra Das in J.A.S.B. 1889, pp. 40-82. They
contain many details, especially of ecclesiastical biography. The
Tibetan system of computing time is based on cycles of sixty years
beginning it would seem not in 1026 but 1027, so that in many dates
there is an error of a year. See Pelliot, J.A. 1913, I. 633, and Laufer,
T’oung Pao, 1913, 569.
[932] Or Jenghiz Khan. The form in the text seems to be the more
correct.
[933] Tegri or Heaven. This monotheism common to the ancient

Chinese, Turks and Mongols did not of course exclude the worship
of spirits.
[934] Guyuk was Khagan at this time but the Mongol History of
Sanang Setsen (Schmidt, p. 3) says that the Lama was summoned by
376
the Khagan Godan. It seems that Godan was never Khagan, but as an
influential prince he may have sent the summons.
[935] ḥPhagspa (corrupted in Mongol to Bashpa) is merely a title

equivalent to Ayra in Sanskrit. His full style was ḥPhagspa bLo-gros-
rgyal-mthsan.
[936] By abhiśekha or sprinkling with water.
[937] Vaśitâ is a magical formula which compels the obedience of

spirits or natural forces. Hevajra (apparently the same as Heruka) is
one of the fantastic beings conceived as manifestations of Buddhas
and Bodhisattvas made for a special purpose, closely corresponding,
as Grünwedel points out, to the manifestations of Śiva.
[938] Schmidt’s edition, p. 115.
[939] It is given in Isaac Taylor’s The Alphabet, vol. II. p. 336. See also
J.R.A.S. 1910, pp. 1208-1214.
[940] E.g. see the Tisastvustik, a sûtra in a Turkish dialect and Uigur
characters found at Turfan and published in Bibliotheca Buddhica, XII.
[941] See Kokka, No. 311, 1916, Tibetan Art in China.
[942] Sanang Setsen, p. 121. The succession of the Sakya abbots is not
clear but the primacy continued in the family. See Köppen, II. p. 105.
[943] Strictly speaking a place-name.
[944] The Tibetan orthography is bTsoṇ (or Tsoṇ)-kha-pa. He was

called rJe-rin-po-che bLo-bzaṇ-grags-pa in Tibetan and Arya-
mahâratna Sumatikîrti in Sanskrit. The Tibetan orthography of the
monastery is sKu-ḥbum or hundred thousand pictures. See, for
accounts of his life, Sarat Chandra Das in J.A.S.B. 1882, pp. 53-57 and
127. Huth, Buddhismus in der Mongolei, ii. pp. 175 ff.
[945] There is some difference of statement as to whether these

markings are images of Tsong-kha-pa or Tibetan characters. Hue,
though no Buddhist, thought them miraculous. See his Travels in
Tartary, vol. ii. chap. ii. See also Rockhill, Land of the Lamas, p. 67, and
Filchner, Das Kloster Kumbum, chap. vi.
[946] But the tradition mentioned by Hue that he was instructed by a

long-nosed stranger from the west, has not been found in any
Tibetan biography.
377
[947] Tibetan orthography writes dGaḥ-ldan, Se-ra, hBras-spuns and

bKra-śis-Lhun-po. dGaḥ-ldan, the happy, is a translation of the
Sanskrit Tushita or Paradise. Tsong-kha-pa’s reformed sect was
originally called dGaḥ-lugs-pa or those who follow the way of dGȧ-
ldan. But this possibly suggested those who pursue pleasure and the
name was changed to dGe-lugs-pa or those of the virtuous order.
[948] dGe-’dun grub.
[949] He was not the same as Ha-li-ma (see p. 277) of whom more is
heard in Chinese accounts. Ha-li-ma or Karma was fifth head of the
Karma-pa school and was invited on his own merits to China where
he died in 1426 or 1414. See Huth, l.c. vol. I. p. 109 and vol. II. p. 171.
Also Köppen, die Rel. des Buddha, II. 107. Byams-chen-chos-rje was
invited as the representative of Tsong-ka-pa. See Huth, l.c. vol. I. p.
120, vol. II. p. 129.
[950] See for a list of the Lamas of Tashilhunpo and their lives
J.A.S.B. 1882, pp. 15-52. The third incarnation was Abhayakara
Gupta, a celebrated Bengali Pandit who flourished in the reign of
Râmapâla. This appears to have been about 1075-1115, but there is
considerable discrepancy in the dates given.
[951] See for his life J.A.S.B. 1882, p. 24.
[952] Tsong-kha-pa is not reckoned in this series of incarnations, for

firstly he was regarded as an incarnation of Mañjuśrî and secondly
Geden-dub was born before his death and hence could not represent
the spirit which dwelt in him.
[953] Tibetan sPrul-pa, Mongol Khubilghan. Both are translations of

the Sanskrit Nirmâna and the root idea is not incarnation but
transformation in an illusive form.
[954] The following list of Grand Lamas is taken from Grünwedel’s

Mythologie, p. 206. Their names are followed by the title rGya-mThso
and in many cases the first part of the name is a title.
1. dGe-ḥdun-dub, 1391-1478.
2. dGe-ḥdun, 1479-1541.
3. bSod-nams, 1543-1586.
4. Yon-tan, 1587-1614.
5. Ṅag-dbaṇ bLo-bzaṇ, 1617-1680.
6. Rin-chen Thsaṇs-dbyaṇs, 1693-1703.
7. bLo-bzaṇ sKal-dan, 1705-1758.
378
8. bLo-bzaṇ ḥJam-dpal, 1759-1805.

9. bLo-bzaṇ Luṇ-rtogs, 1806-1815.
10. bLo-bzaṇ Thsul-khrims, 1817-1837.
11. bLo-bzaṇ dGe-dmu, 1838-1855.
12. bLo-bzaṇ Phrin-las, 1856-1874.
13. Ṅag-dbaṇ bLo-bzaṇ Thub-ldam, 1875.
[955] See for an account of his doings Sanang Setsen, chap. IX. Huth,
Geschichte, II. pp. 200 ff. Köppen, II. pp. 134 ff. It would appear that
about 1545 northwestern Tibet was devastated by Mohammedans
from Kashgar. See Waddell, Buddhism, p. 583.
[956] Also known as Yenta or Anda. See, for some particulars about
him, Parker in N. China Branch of R.A.S. 1913, pp. 92 ff.
[957] Naturally the narrative is not told without miraculous

embellishment, including the singular story that Altan who suffered
from the gout used to put his feet every month into the ripped up
body of a man or horse and bathe them in the warm blood.
Avalokita appeared to him when engaged in this inhuman cure and
bade him desist and atone for his sins.
[958] In Tibetan rGya-mThso. Compare the Chinese expression hai

liang (sea measure) meaning capacious or broad minded. The
Khagan received the title of lHai thsaṇs-pa chen-po equivalent to
Divyamahâbrahmâ.
[959] The correct Mongol names of this place seem to be Örgö and
Kürä. The Lama’s name was bSam-pa rGya-mThso.
[960] He finished his history in 1608 and lived some time longer so
that bSam-pa rGya-mThso cannot have been an incarnation of him.
[961] This is an accepted abbreviation of his full name Ṅag-dbaṇ

bLo-zaṇ rGya-mThso. Ṅag-dbaṇ is an epithet meaning eloquent.
[962] The name is variously written Gushi, Gushri, Gus’ri, etc., and is
said to stand for Guruśrî. The name of the tribe also varies: Oirad
and Oegeled are both found.
[963] So called from the sacred hill in India on which Avalokita lives.
The origin of the name is doubtful but before the time of Hsüan
Chuang it had come to be applied to a mountain in South India.
[964] Some European authorities consider that Lo-zang invented this

system of incarnations. Native evidence seems to me to point the
379
other way, but it must be admitted that if he was the first to claim for
himself this dignity it would be natural for him to claim it for his
predecessors also and cause ecclesiastical history to be written
accordingly.
[965] sDe-srid.
[966] It is said that all Ambans were Manchus.
[967] See E. Ludwig, The visit of the Teshoo Lama to Peking, Tientsin
Press, 1904. See also J.A.S.B. 1882, pp. 29-52.
[968] See the curious edict of Chia Ch’ing translated by Waddell in

J.R.A.S. 1910, pp. 69 ff. The Chinese Government were disposed to
discredit the sixth, seventh and eighth incarnations and to pass
straight from the fifth Grand Lama to the ninth.
[969] See for a translation of this curious decree, North China Herald
of March 4th, 1910.
[970] In the List of the Bhutan Hierarchs given by Waddell

(Buddhism, p. 242) it is said that the first was contemporary with the
third Grand Lama, 1543-1580.
[971] According to Waddell (Buddhism, p. 242) he appears to be a

rebirth of Du The fullest account of Sikhimese Buddhism is given by
Waddell in the Gazetteer of Sikhim, 1894. See also Rémy, Pèlerinage au
Monastère de Pemmiontsi, 1880; Silacara “Buddhism in Sikkim,”
Buddhist Review, 1916, p. 97.
380
CHAPTER LI
TIBET (continued)
THE CANON
Tibet is so remote and rude a land that it is a surprise to learn that it

has a voluminous literature and further that much of this literature,
though not all, is learned and scholastic. The explanation is that the
national life was most vigorous in the great monasteries which were
in close touch with Indian learning. Moreover Tibetan became to
some extent the Latin of the surrounding countries, the language of
learning and religion.
For our purpose the principal works are the two great collections of
sacred and edifying literature translated into Tibetan and known as
the Kanjur and Tanjur[973]. The first contains works esteemed as
canonical, including Tantras. The second is composed of exegetical
literature and also of many treatises on such subjects as medicine,
astronomy and grammar[974]. The two together correspond roughly
speaking to the Chinese Tripitaka, but are more bulky. The canonical
part is smaller but the commentaries and miscellaneous writings
more numerous. There are also other differences due to the fact that
the great literary epoch of Tibet was in the ninth century, whereas
nearly three-quarters of the Chinese Tripitaka had been translated
before that date. Thus the Kanjur appears to contain none[975] of the
Abhidhamma works of the Hînayâna and none of the great Nikâyas
as such, though single sûtras are entered in the catalogues as
separate books. Further there is only one version of the Vinaya
whereas the Chinese Tripitaka has five, but there are several
important [ Tantras which are wanting in Chinese. The Tibetan
scriptures reflect the late Buddhism of Magadha when the great
books of the Hinayanist Canon were neglected, though not wholly
unknown, and a new tantric literature was flourishing exuberantly.
The contents of the Kanjur and Tanjur are chiefly known by analyses
and indices[976], although several editions and translations of short
treatises have been published[977]. The information obtained may be
briefly summarized as follows.
381
The Kanjur in its different editions consists of one hundred or one

hundred and eight volumes, most of which contain several treatises,
although sometimes one work, for instance the Vinaya, may fill
many volumes. The whole collection is commonly divided into
seven parts[978].
I. The Dulva[979], equivalent to the Vinaya. It is stated to be the

Mûla-sarvâstivâda Vinaya, and so far as any opinion can be formed
from the small portions available for comparison, it agrees with the
Chinese translation of Kumârajîva and also (though with some
difference in the order of paragraphs) with the Sanskrit Prâtimoksha
found at Kucha[980]. It is longer and more mixed with narrative than
the corresponding Pali code.
II. The second division is known as Śer-chin[981], corresponding to

the Prajñâ-pâramitâ and in the estimation of the Tibetans to the
Abhidharma. It is said to have been first collected by Kâśyapa and to
represent the teaching delivered by the Buddha in his fifty-first year.
This section appears to contain nothing but versions, longer or
shorter, of the Prajñâpâramitâ, the limit of concentration being
reached by a text in which the Buddha explains that the whole of this
teaching is comprised in the letter A. As in China and Japan, the
Vajracchedikâ (rDo-rJe-gCod-pa) is very popular and has been
printed in many editions.
III. The third division is called Phal-chen, equivalent to Avataṃsaka.

Beckh treats it as one work in six volumes with out subdivisions.
Feer gives forty-five subdivisions, some of which appear as separate
treatises in the section of the Chinese Tripitaka called Hua Yen[982].
IV. The fourth division called dKon-brtsegs or Ratnakûṭa agrees

closely with the similar section of the Chinese Tripitaka but consists
of only forty-eight or forty-five sûtras, according to the edition[983].
V. The fifth section is called mDo, equivalent to Sûtra. In its narrower

sense mDo means sûtras which are miscellaneous in so far as they do
not fall into special classes, but it also comprises such important
works as the Lalita-vistara, Lankâvatâra and Saddharma-puṇḍarîka.
Of the 270 works contained in this section about 90 are prima facie
identical with works in the Ching division of the Chinese Tripitaka
and probably the identity of many others is obscured by slight
changes of title. An interesting point in the mDo is that it contains
several sûtras translated from the Pali[984], viz. Nos. 13-25 of vol.
XXX, nine of which are taken from the [ collection known as Paritta.
382
The names and dates of the translators are not given but the
existence of these translations probably indicates that a knowledge of
Pali lingered on in Magadha later than is generally supposed. It will
also be remembered that about A.D. 1000, Atîśa though a Tantrist,
studied in Burma and presumably came in contact with Pali
literature. Rockhill notes that the Tanjur contains a commentary on
the Lotus Sûtra written by Prithivibandhu, a monk from Ceylon, and
Pali manuscripts have been found in Nepal[985]. It is possible that
Sinhalese may have brought Pali books to northern India and given
them to Tibetans whom they met there.
VI. The sixth division is called Myaṇg-ḥdas or Nirvâṇa, meaning the

description of the death of the Buddha which also forms a special
section in the Chinese Tripitaka. Here it consists of only one work,
apparently corresponding to Nanjio 113[986].
VII. The seventh and last section is called rGyud[987] or Tantra. It

consists of twenty-two volumes containing about 300 treatises.
Between thirty and forty are prima facie identical with treatises
comprised in the Chinese Tripitaka and perhaps further examination
might greatly increase the number, for the titles of these books are
often long and capable of modification. Still it is probable that the
major part of this literature was either deliberately rejected by the
Chinese or was composed at a period when religious intercourse had
become languid between India and China but was still active
between India and Tibet. From the titles it appears that many of
these works are Brahmanic in spirit rather than Buddhist; thus we
have the Mahâgaṇapati-tantra, the Mahâkâla-tantra, and many
others. Among the better known Tantras may be mentioned the
Arya-mañjuśrî-mûla-tantra and the Śrî-Guhya Samaja[988], both
highly praised by Csoma de Körös: but perhaps more important is
the Tantra on which the Kâlacakra system is founded. [ It is styled
Paramâdibuddha-uddhṛita-śrî-kâlacakra and there is also a
compendium giving its essence or Hṛidaya.
The Tanjur is a considerably larger collection than the Kanjur for it

consists of 225 volumes but its contents are imperfectly known. A
portion has been catalogued by Palmyr Cordier. It is known to
contain a great deal of relatively late Indian theology such as the
works of Aśvaghosha, Nâgârjuna, Asanga, Vasubandhu, and other
Mahayanist doctors, and also secular literature such as the
Meghadûta of Kâlidâsa, together with a multitude of works on logic,
rhetoric, grammar and medicine[989]. Some treatises, such as the
Udâna[990] occur in both collections but on the whole the Tanjur is
383
clearly intended as a thesaurus of exegetical and scientific literature,

science being considered, as in the middle ages of Europe, to be the
handmaid of the Church. Grammar and lexicography help the
understanding of scripture: medicine has been of great use in
establishing the influence of the Lamas: secular law is or should be
an amplification of the Church’s code: history compiled by sound
theologians shows how the true faith is progressive and triumphant:
art and ritual are so near together that their boundaries can hardly be
delimitated. Taking this view of the world, we find in the Tanjur all
that a learned man need know[991].
It is divided into two parts, mDo (Sûtra) and rGyud (Tantra), besides
a volume of hymns and an index. The same method of division is
really applicable to the Kanjur, for the Tibetan Dulva is little more
than a combination of Sûtras and Jâtakas and sections two, three,
four and six of the Kanjur are collections of special sûtras. In both
compilations the tantric section appears to consist of later books
expounding ideas which are further from the teaching of Gotama
than the Mahayanist sûtras.
To the great majority of works in both collections is prefixed a title

which gives the Sanskrit name first in transcription and then in
translation, for instance “In Sanskrit Citralakshana: in Tibetan Ri-
moi-mthsan-ñid[992].” Hence there is usually no doubt as to what
the Tibetan translations profess to be. Sometimes however the
headings are regrettably brief. The Vinaya for instance appears to be
introduced with that simple superscription and with no indication of
the school or locality to which the text belonged.
Although the titles of books are given in Sanskrit, yet all Indian
proper names which have a meaning (as most have) are translated.
Thus the name Drona (signifying a measure and roughly equivalent
to such an English name as Dr. Bushell) is rendered by Bre-bo, a
similar measure in Tibetan. This habit greatly increases the difficulty
of reading Tibetan texts. The translators apparently desired to give a
Tibetan equivalent for every word and even for every part of a word,
so as to make clear the etymology as well as the meaning of the
sacred original. The learned language thus produced must have
varied greatly from the vernacular of every period but its slavish
fidelity makes it possible to reconstruct the original Sanskrit with
tolerable certainty.
I have already mentioned the presence of translations from the Pali.

There are also a few from the Chinese[993] which appear to be of no
384
special importance. One work is translated from the Bruza language

which was perhaps spoken in the modern Gilgit[994] and another
from the language of Khotan[995]. Some works in the Kanjur have
no Sanskrit titles and are perhaps original compositions in Tibetan.
The Tanjur appears to contain many such.
But the Kanjur and Tanjur as a whole represent the literature

approved by the late Buddhism of Bengal and certain resemblances
to the arrangement of the Chinese Tripitaka suggest that not only
new [ sûtras but new classifications of sûtras had replaced the old
Pitakas and Agamas. The Tibetan Canon being later than the Chinese
has lost the Abhidharma and added a large section of Tantras. But
both canons recognize the divisions known as Prajñâ-pâramitâ,
Ratnakuṭa, Avatamsaka, and Mahâparinirvâṇa as separate sections.
The Ratnakûta is clearly a collection of sûtras equivalent to a small
Nikâya[996]. This is probably also true of the voluminous Prajñâ-
pâramitâ in its various editions, but the divisions are not commonly
treated as separate works except the Vajracchedikâ. The imperfectly
known Avatamsaka Sûtra appears to be a similar collection, since it
is described as discourses of the Buddha pronounced at eight
assemblies. The Mahâparinirvâṇa Sûtra though not nominally a
collection of sûtras (at least in its Pali form) is unique both in subject
and structure, and it is easy to understand why it was put in a class
by itself.
The translation of all this literature falls into three periods, (i) from
the seventh century until the reign of Ralpachan in the ninth, (ii) the
reign of Ralpachan, and (in) some decades following the arrival of
Atîśa in 1038. In the first period work was sporadic and the
translations made were not always those preserved in the Kanjur.
Thonmi Sanbhota, the envoy sent to India in 616 is said to have made
renderings of the Karaṇḍa Vyûha and other works (but not those
now extant) and three items in the Tanjur are attributed to him[997].
The existence of early translations has been confirmed by Stein who
discovered at Endere a Tibetan manuscript of the Śalistambhasûtra
which is said not to be later than about 740 A.D.[998] The version
now found in the Kanjur appears to be a revision and expansion of
this earlier text.
A few translations from Chinese texts are attributed to the reign of

Khri-gtsug-lde-btsan (705-755) and Rockhill calls attention to the
interesting statement that he sent envoys to India who learned
Sanskrit books by heart and on their return reproduced them in
Tibetan. If this was a common habit, it may be one of the reasons
385
why Tibetan translations sometimes show differences in length, [

arrangement and even subject matter when compared with Sanskrit
and Chinese versions bearing the same name. During the reign of
Khri-sroṇ-lde-btsan and the visit of Padma-Sambhava (which began
in A.D. 747 according to the traditional chronology) the number of
translations began to increase. Two works ascribed to the king and
one to the saint are included in the canon, but the most prolific
writer and translator of this period was Kamalaśîla. Seventeen of his
original works are preserved in the Tanjur and he translated part of
the Ratnakûta. The great period of translation—the Augustan age of
Tibet as it is often called—was beginning and a solid foundation was
laid by composing two dictionaries containing a collection of
Sanskrit Buddhist terms[999].
The Augustus of Tibet was Ralpachan who ruled in the ninth

century, though Tibetan and Chinese chronicles are not in accord as
to his exact date. He summoned from Kashmir and India many
celebrated doctors who with the help of native assistants took
seriously in hand the business of rendering the canon into Tibetan.
They revised the existing translations and added many more of their
own. It is probable that at least half of the works now contained in
the Kanjur and Tanjur were translated or revised at this time and
that the additions made later were chiefly Tantras (rGyud). On the
other hand it is also probable that many tantric translations ascribed
to this epoch are really later[1000]. The most prolific of Ralpachan’s
translators was Jinamitra, a pandit of Kashmir described as
belonging to the Vaibhâshika school, who translated a large part of
the Vinaya and many sûtras[1001]. Among the many Tibetan
assistants Ye’ses-sde and Dpal-brTsegs are perhaps those most
frequently mentioned. These Tibetan translators are commonly
described by the title of Lo-tsa-va. As in China the usual procedure
seems to have been that an Indian pandit explained the sacred text to
a native. The latter then wrote it down, but whereas in China he
generally paraphrased whatever he understood, in Tibet he
endeavoured to reproduce it with laborious fidelity.
The language of the translations, which is now the accepted form of

literary Tibetan, appears to have been an archaic and classical dialect
even in the early days of Tibetan Buddhism, for it is not the same as
the language of the secular documents dating from the eighth
century, which have been found in Turkestan, and it remains
unchanged in the earliest and later translations. It may possibly have
been the sacred language of the Bonpo[1002] priests.
386
As narrated in the historical section Buddhism suffered a severe

reverse with the death of Ralpachan and it was nearly a century
before a revival began. This revival was distinctly tantric and the
most celebrated name connected with it is Atîśa. According to
Csoma de Körös’s chronology the Kâlacakra system was introduced
in 1025 and the eminent translator bLo-ldan-shes-rab[1003], a
follower of Atîśa, was born in 1057. It is thus easy to understand how
during the eleventh century a great number of tantric works were
translated and the published catalogues of the Kanjur and Tanjur
confirm the fact, although the authors of the translations are not
mentioned so often as in the other divisions. To Atîśa is ascribed the
revision of many works in the Tantra section of the Kanjur and
twenty others composed by him are found in the Tanjur[1004]. It is
said that the definitive arrangement of the two collections as we
know them was made by Bu-ston early in the thirteenth
century[1005]. The Kanjur (but not the Tanjur) was translated into
Mongol by order of Khutuktu Khagan (1604-1634) the last prince of
the Chakhar Mongols but a printed edition was first published by
the Emperor K’ang-Hsi. Though it is said that the Tanjur was
translated and printed by order of Ch’ien-Lung, the statement is
doubtful. If such a translation was made it was probably partial and
in manuscript[1006].
Manuscripts are still extensively copied and used in Tibet but the
Kanjur has been printed from wooden blocks for the last 200 years.
There are said to be two printing presses, the older at Narthang near
Tashilhunpo where an edition in 100 volumes is produced and
another at Derge in the eastern province. This edition is in 108
volumes. An edition was also printed at Peking by order of K’ang-
Hsi in red type and with a preface by the Emperor himself[1007].
Besides the canon the Tibetans possess many religious or edifying

works composed in their own language[1008]. Such are the Padma-
than-yig, or life of Padma-Sambhava, the works of Tsong-kha-pa,
and several histories such as those of Bu-ston, Târanâtha, Sum-pa,
and hJigs-med-nam-mkha[1009], biographies of Lamas without
number, accounts of holy places, works of private devotion, medical
treatises and grammars.
There are also numerous works called Terma which profess to be

revelations composed by Padma-Sambhava. They are said to be
popular, though apparently not accepted by the Yellow Church.
387
Although it hardly comes within the scope of the present study, I

may mention that there is also some non-Buddhist literature in Tibet,
sometimes described as scriptures of the Bön religion and sometimes
as folklore. As samples may be cited Laufer’s edition and translation
of the Hundred Thousand Nâgas[1010] and Francke’s of parts of the
Kesar-saga[1011].
FOOTNOTES:
[973] The Tibetan orthography is bKah-hgyur (the translated

command) and bsTan-ḥgyur (the translated explanation). Various
spellings are used by European writers such as Kah-gyur, Kandjour,
Bkahgyur, etc. Waddell writes Kah-gyur and Tän-gyur.
[974] Though this distinction seems to hold good on the whole, yet it
is not strictly observed. Thus the work called Udâna and
corresponding to the Dhammapada is found in both the Kanjur and
Tanjur.
[975] Nanjio’s catalogue states that a great many Abhidhaṛma works

in Chinese agree with Tibetan, but their titles are not to be found in
Csoma’s analysis of the Kanjur. They may however be in the Tanjur,
which is less fully analyzed.
[976] Analysis of the Dulva, etc., four parts in Asiatic Researches, vol.
XX. 1836, by A. Csoma Körösi. Translated into French by Feer,
Annales du Musée Guimet, tome 2me, 1881. Index des Kanjur,
herausgegeben von I.J. Schmidt (in Tibetan), 1845. Huth, Verzeichnis
der in Tibetischen Tanjur, Abtheilung mDo, erhaltenen Werke in
Sitzungsber. Berlin. Akad. 1895. P. Cordier, Catalogue du fonds Tibétain
de la Bibliothèque Nationale. Beckh, Verzeichnis der tibetischen
Handscriften der K. Bibliothek zu Berlin, 1 Abth., Kanjur, 1914. This is
an analysis of the edition in 108 volumes, whereas Csoma de Körösi
and Feer analyzed the edition in 100 volumes. The arrangement of
the two editions is not quite the same. See too Pelliot’s review of
Beckh’s catalogue in J.A. 1914, II. pp. 111 ff. See also Waddell,
“Tibetan Manuscripts and Books” in Asiatic Quarterly, July, 1912, pp.
80-113, which, though not an analysis of the Canon, incidentally
gives much information.
[977] E.g. Udâna ( = Dhammapada) by Rockhill, 1892 (transl.), and

Beckh (text 1911) Madhyamakâvatâra: de la Vallée Poussin, 1912,
Madyamika-śâstra: Max Walleser, 1911 (transl.), Citralakshana, ed.
388
and trans. Laufer, 1913; Feer, Fragments extraits du Kanjur, Annales du

Musée Guimet, tome 5me, 1883.
[978] It is also sometimes divided into three Pitakas. When this is

done, the Dulva is the Vinaya P., the Śer-chin is the Abhidharma P.,
and all the other works whether Sûtras or Tantras are classed
together as the Sûtra P.
[979] hDul-ba.
[980] See Nanjio, Nos. 1115-1119, 1122, 1132-4. Rockhill, Prâtimoksha

Sûtra selon la version Tibétaine, 1884. Huth, Tibetische Version der
Naihsargikaprâyaccittikadharmâs, 1891. Finot and Hüber, “Le
Prâtimoksa des Sarvâstivadins,” J.A. 1913, II. p. 465.
[981] Strictly Śer-phyin.
[982] Waddell in Asiatic Quarterly, 1912, XXXIV. p. 98, renders the

title as Vata sangha, which probably represents Avataṃsaka. Sarat
Chandra Das, sub voce, says Phal-chen-sde-pa = Mahâsanghika.
[983] The statements of Nanjio as to “deest in Tibetan” are not quite

accurate as regards the edition in 108 volumes. Compare his
catalogue with Beckh’s.
[984] This statement made by such scholars as Feer (Anal. du Kanjour,

p. 288) and Rockhill (Udâna, p. x) is of great weight, but I have not
found in their works any quotation from the Tibetan translation
saying that the original language was not Sanskrit and the titles
given by Peer are in Sanskrit not in Pali. I presume it is not meant
that the Tibetan text is a translation from a Sanskrit text which
corresponds with the Pali text known to us. In Beckh’s catalogue of
the edition in 108 volumes the same titles occur in the Prajñâ-
pâramitâ section, but without any statement that the works are
translated from Pali. See Beckh, p. 12, and Feer, pp. 288 ff.
[985] Life of the Buddha, p. 224, and J.R.A.S. 1899, p. 422.
[986] There is another shorter sûtra on the same subject in the mDo
section of the Kanjur. Feer, p. 247. In the edition of 108 volumes, the
whole section is incorporated in the mDo, Beckh, p. 33.
[987] The word seems originally to mean string or chain.
[988] Apparently not the same as the Tathâgata-Guhyaka alias Guhya

Samagha described by R. Mitra, Sk. Bud. Lit. p. 261.
389
[989] See notices of these in four articles by Satiścandra

Vidyâbhûshana in J.A.S. Beng. 1907.
[990] I.e. the Dhammapada.
[991] Huth’s analysis of vols. 117-124 of the Tanjur (Sitzungsber. Kōn.

Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin, 1895) shows that they contain inter alia,
eight works on Sanskrit literature and philology besides the
Meghadûta, nine on medicine and alchemy with commentaries,
fourteen on astrology and divination, three on chemistry (the
composition of incense), eight on gnomic poetry and ethics, one
encyclopædia, six lives of the Saints, six works on the Tibetan
language and five on painting and fine art. Cordier gives further
particulars of the medical works in B.E.F.E.O. 1903, p. 604. They
include a veterinary treatise.
[992] See title in Laufer’s edition.
[993] See Feer, l.c. for instance, pp. 287, 248.
[994] See Feer, l.c. p. 344, and Laufer, “Die Bruza Sprache” in T’oung
Pao, 1908. It is said that King Ru-che-tsan of Brusha or Dusha
translated (? what date) the Mûla-Tantra and Vyâkhyâ-Tantra into
the language of his country. See J.A.S.B. 1882, p. 12. Beckh states that
four works have titles in Chinese, one in Bruža and one in Tartar
(Hor-gyi-skad-du).
[995] Laufer, ibid. p. 4.
[996] See Nanjio, No. 87, and Feer, l.c. pp. 208-212, but the two works
may not be the same. The Tibetan seems to be a collection of 45
sûtras.
[997] Rockhill, l.c. p. 212.
[998] Stein, Ancient Khotan, pp. 426-9 and App. B. See also Pelliot in
B.E.F.E.O. 1908, pp. 507 ff.
[999] The Mahâvyutpatti edited by Minayeff in Bibl. Buddhica and an

abridgement.
[1000] According to Feer (Analyse, p. 325) Tibetan historians state

that at this epoch kings prohibited the translation of more than a few
tantric works.
390
[1001] Numerous works are also ascribed to Sarvajñâdeva and

Dharmaka, both of Kashmir, and to the Indian Vidyâkaraprabhâ and
Surendrabodhi.
[1002] See Francke in J.R.A.S. 1914, pp. 56-7.
[1003] See Pander, Pantheon, No. 30.
[1004] Waddell, Buddhism, p. 36, gives a list of them.
[1005] It appears to me that there is some confusion between Brom-

ston, a disciple of Atîśa, who must have flourished about 1060 and
Bu-ston, who was born in 1288. Grünwedel says that the latter is
credited with the compilations of the Kanjur and Tanjur, but Rockhill
(Life of the Buddha, p. 227) describes Bu-ston as a disciple of Atîśa.
[1006] See Huth, Geschichte des Budd. in der Mongolei, 291, and Laufer,
“Skizze der Mongolischen Literatur” (in Keleti Szemle, 1907), p. 219.
Also Pelliot in J.A. 1914, II. pp. 112-3.
[1007] See Laufer in Bull. de l’Acad. de S. Pétersbourg, 1909, pp. 567-

574. There are some differences in the editions. That of Narthang is
said to contain a series of sûtras translated from the Pali and wanting
in the Red Edition, but not to contain two translations from Chinese
which are found in the Red Edition. See the preface to Beckh’s
catalogue. The MS. analyzed by him was obtained at Peking, but it is
not known whence it came. An edition by Ch’ien Lung is mentioned
by some authors. It is also said that an edition is printed at Punakha
in Bhutan, and another in Mongolian at Kumbum.
[1008] Some of these are probably included in the Tanjur, which has
not been fully catalogued. See J.A.S. Beng. 1904, for a list of 85
printed books bought in Lhasa, 1902, and Waddell’s article in Asiatic
Quarterly, July, 1912, already referred to.
[1009] Edited and translated by Huth as Geschichte des Buddhismus in

der Mongolei, 1892.
[1010] Finno Ugrian Society of Helsingfors, 1898.
[1011] Same Society, 1900 and 1902, and J.A.S.B. 1906-7.
391
CHAPTER LII
TIBET (continued)
DOCTRINES OF LAMAISM
Lamaism may be defined as a mixture of late Indian Buddhism

(which is itself a mixture of Buddhism and Hinduism) with various
Tibetan practices and beliefs. The principal of these are
demonophobia and the worship of human beings as incarnate
deities. Demonophobia is a compendious expression for an obsession
which victimizes Chinese and Hindus to some extent as well as
Tibetans, namely, the conviction that they are at all times
surrounded by fierce and terrible beings against whom they must
protect themselves by all the methods that religion and magic can
supply. This is merely an acute form of the world-wide belief that all
nature is animated by good and bad spirits, of which the latter being
more aggressive require more attention, but it assumes startlingly
conspicuous forms in Tibet because the Church has enlisted all the
forces of art, theology and philosophy to aid in this war against
demons. The externals of Tibetan worship suffer much from the idea
that benevolent deities assume a terrible guise in order to strike fear
into the hosts of evil[1012]. The helpers and saviours of mankind
such as Avalokita and Târâ are often depicted in the shape of raging
fiends, as hideous and revolting as a fanciful brush and distorted
brain can paint them. The idea inspiring these monstrous images is
not the worship of cruelty and terror, but the hope that evil spirits
may be kept away when they see how awful are the powers which
the Church can summon. Nevertheless the result is that a Lama
temple often looks like a pandemonium and meeting house for
devil-worship, an Olympus tenanted by Gorgons, Hydras and
Furies. It is only fair to say that Tibetan art sometimes represents
with success gods and saints in attitudes of repose and authority,
and has produced [ some striking portraits[1013], but its most
marked feature (which it shares with literature) is a morbid love of
the monstrous and terrible, a perpetual endeavour to portray fiends
surrounded with every circumstance of horror, and still more
appalling deities, all eyes, heads and limbs, wreathed with fire,
drinking blood from skulls and trampling prostrate creatures to
death beneath their feet. Probably the wild and fantastic landscapes
of Tibet, the awful suggestions of the spectral mists, the real terrors
392
of precipice, desert and storm have wrought for ages upon the minds
of those who live among them.
Like demonophobia, the worship of incarnate deities is common in

eastern Asia but here it acquires an extent and intensity unknown
elsewhere. The Tibetans show a strange power of organization in
dealing with the supernatural. In India incarnations have usually
been recognized post-mortem and as incalculable manifestations of
the spirit[1014]. But at least since the seventeenth century, the Lamas
have accepted them as part of the Church’s daily round and
administrative work. The practices of Shamanism probably prepared
the way, for in his mystic frenzies the Shaman is temporarily
inhabited by a god and the extreme ease with which distinguished
persons are turned into gods or Bodhisattvas in China and Japan is
another manifestation of the same spirit. An ancient inscription[1015]
applies to the kings of Tibet the word ḥphrul which is also used of the
Grand Lamas and means that a deity is transformed, or as we say,
incarnate in a human person. The Yellow Church officially
recognized[1016] the Emperor of China as an incarnation of Mañjuśrî
and the Mongols believed the Tsar of Russia to be an incarnation of
the White Târâ.
The admixtures received by Buddhism in Tibet are not alien to

Indian thought. They received an unusual emphasis but India
provided terrible deities, like Kâlî with her attendant fiends, and also
the idea that the divine embodies itself in human personalities or
special manifestations. Thus Tibetan Buddhism is not so much an
amalgam, as a [ phase of medieval Hindu religion disproportionately
developed in some directions. The Lamas have acquired much the
same status as the Brahmans. If they could not make themselves a
hereditary caste, they at least enforced the principle that they are the
necessary intermediaries between gods and men. Though they
adopted the monastic system of Buddhism, they are not so much
monks as priests and ghostly warriors who understand the art of
fighting with demons.
Yet Tibet like Japan could assimilate and transform as well as

borrow. The national and original element in Lamaism becomes
plain when we compare Tibet with the neighbouring land of Nepal.
There late Indian Buddhism simply decayed under an overgrowth of
Brahmanism. In Tibet it acquired more life and character than it had
in its native Bengal. This new character has something monstrous
and fantastic in government as well as art: the magic fortresses of the
Snowland, peopled by priests and demons, seem uncanny homes for
393
plain mortals, yet Lamaism has the strength belonging to all genuine
expressions of national character and it clearly suits the Tibetans and
Mongols. The oldest known form of Tibetan religion had some of the
same characteristics. It is called Bön or Pön. It would be outside my
province to discuss it here, but even when first heard of it was more
than a rude form of animism. In the eighth century its hierarchy was
sufficiently strong to oppose the introduction of Buddhism and it
possibly contained a pre-buddhist stratum of Iranian ideas[1017]. In
later times it adopted or travestied Buddhist dogma, ritual and
literature, much as Taoism did in China, but still remained a
repository of necromancy, magic, animal sacrifices, devil-dancing,
and such like practices, which have in all ages corrupted Tibetan
Buddhism though theoretically disapproved.
Of Tibetan Buddhism anterior to 747 there is little to be said. It

consisted in the sporadic introduction of books and images from
India and did not assume any national character, for it is clear that in
this period Tibet was not regarded as a Buddhist country. The first
phase deserving the name of Lamaism begins with the arrival of
Padma-Sambhava in 747. The Nying-ma-pa or Old School claims to [
represent his teaching, but, as already mentioned, the various sects
have interacted on one another so much that their tenets are hardly
distinctive. Still it is pretty clear that what Padma-Sambhava brought
with him was the late form of India Buddhism called Mantrayâna,
closely allied to the Chên Yen of China, and transported to Japan
under the name of Shingon and also to the Buddhism of Java as
represented in the sculptures of Boroboedoer. The Far East felt shy of
the tantric element in this teaching, whereas the Tibetans
exaggerated it, but the doctrinal basis is everywhere the same,
namely, that there are five celestial Buddhas, of whom Vairocana is
the principal and in some sense the origin. These give rise to celestial
emanations, female as well as male, and to terrestrial reflexes such as
Śâkyamuni. Among the other features of Padma-Sambhava’s
teaching the following may be enumerated with more or less
certainty: (a) A readiness to tolerate and incorporate the local cults of
the countries where he preached. (b) A free use of spells (dhâraṇî)
and magical figures (maṇḍala) for the purpose of subduing demons
and acquiring supernatural powers. (c) The belief that by such
methods an adept can not only summon a deity but assume his form
and in fact become the deity. (d) The worship of Amitâbha, among
other deities, and a belief in his paradise. (e) The presentation of
offerings, though not of flesh, in sacrifice[1018] and the performance
of ceremonies on behalf of departed souls. (f) The worship of
394
departed and perhaps of living teachers. His image is a conspicuous

object of veneration in the Nying-ma-pa sect but he does not appear
to have taught the doctrine of hierarchical succession by incarnation.
Grünwedel[1019] has pointed out that the later corruptions of
Buddhism in northern India, Tibet and Central Asia are connected
with the personages known as the eighty-four Mahâsiddhas, or great
magicians. Their appearance as shown in pictures is that of
Brahmanic ascetics rather than of Buddhist Bhikshus, but many of
them bear names which are not Indian. Their dates cannot be fixed at
present and appear to cover a [ period from the early centuries of our
era up to about 1200, so that they represent not a special movement
but a continuous tendency to import into Buddhism very various
currents of thought, north Indian, Iranian, Central Asian and even
Mohammedan.
The visit of Padma-Sambhava was followed by a period of religious

activity which culminated in the ninth century under King
Ralpachan, but it does not appear that the numerous translations
from Indian works made in this reign did more than supplement and
amplify the doctrine already preached. But when after a lengthy
eclipse Buddhism was reinstated in the eleventh century under the
auspices of Atîśa and other foreign teachers we hear of something
new, called the Kâlacakra[1020] system also known as the Vajrayâna.
Pending the publication of the Kâlacakra Tantra[1021], it is not easy
to make definite statements about this school which presumably
marks the extreme point of development or degeneration in
Buddhism, but a persistent tradition connects it with a country called
Śambhala or Zhambhala, translated in Tibetan as bDe-ḥbyuṇ or
source of happiness. This country is seen only through a haze of
myth: it may have been in India or it may have been somewhere in
Central Asia, where Buddhism mingled with Turkish ideas[1022]. Its
kings were called Kulika and the Tibetan calendar introduced by
Atîśa is said to have come from it. This fact and the meaning of the
word Kâlacakra (wheel of time) suggest that the system has some
connection with the Turkish cycle of twelve animals used for
expressing dates[1023]. A legend[1024] states that Śâkyamuni
promulgated the Kâlacakra system in Orissa (Dhânyakaṭaka) and
that Sucandra, king of Śambhala, having miraculously received this
teaching wrote the Kâlacakra Tantra [ in a prophetic spirit, although
it was not published until 965 A.D. This is really the approximate
date of its compilation and I can only add the following disjointed
data[1025].
395
Tibetan authorities state that it was introduced into Nâlandâ by a

Pandit called Tsilu or Chilu and accepted by Narotapa who was then
head of the University. From Nâlandâ it spread to Tibet.
Manjuśrîkîrti, king of Śambhala, is said to have been an exponent of
it and to have begun his reign 674 years after the death of the
Buddha. But since he is also the second incarnation of the Panchen
Lama and since the fourth (Abhayakara) lived about 1075, he may
really have been a historical character in the latter part of the tenth
century. Its promulgation is also ascribed to a personage called
Siddha Pito. It must be late for it is said to mention Islam and
Mohammed. It is perhaps connected with anti-mohammedan
movements which looked to Kalkî, the future incarnation of Vishnu,
as their Messiah, for Hindu tradition says that Kalkî will be born in
Śambhalagrâma[1026]. We hear also of a Siddha called Telopa or
Tailopa, who was a vigorous opponent of Islam. The mythology of
the school is Vishnuite, not Sivaitic, and it is noticeable that the
Pâncarâtra system which had some connection with Kashmir lays
stress on the wheel or discus (cakra or sudarśana) of Vishnu which is
said to be the support of the Universe and the manifestation of
Creative will. The Kâlacakra is mentioned as a special form of this
cosmic wheel having six spokes[1027].
The peculiar doctrine of the Buddhist Kâlacakra is that there is an

Adi-Buddha[1028], or primordial Buddha God, from whom all other
Buddhas are derived. It is possible that it represents a last effort of
Central Asian Buddhism to contend with Moslims, which instead of
denying the bases of Mohammed’s teaching tried to show that
monotheism (like everything else) could be found in Buddhism—a
method of argument frequent in India. The doctrine of the Adi-
Buddha was not [ however new or really important. For the Indian
mind it is implied in the dogma of the three bodies of Buddha, for
the Sambhogakâya is practically an Indian Deva and the
Dharmakâya is the pantheos or Brahmâ. Under the influence of the
Kâlacakra the Lamas did not become theists in the sense of
worshipping one supreme God but they identified with the Adi-
Buddha some particular deity, varying according to the sects. Thus
Samantabhadra, who usually ranks as a Bodhisattva—that is as
inferior to a Buddha—was selected by some for the honour. The
logic of this is hard to explain but it is clearly analogous to the
procedure, common to the oldest and newest phases of Hindu
religion, by which a special deity is declared to be not only all the
other gods but also the universal spirit[1029]. It does not appear that
396
the Kâlacakra Tantra met with general acceptance. It is unknown in

China and Japan and not well known in Nepal[1030].
The Kâlacakra adopted all the extravagances of the Tantras and

provided the principal Buddhas and Bodhisattvas with spouses,
even giving one to the Adi-Buddha himself[1031]. Extraordinary as
this is from a Buddhist point of view, it is little more than the Hindu
idea that the Supreme Being became male and female for the
purpose of producing the universe. But the general effect of the
system on monastic and religious life was bad. Celibacy was not
observed; morals, discipline and doctrine alike deteriorated. A
striking instance is afforded by the ceremonies used by Pagspa when
receiving Kublai into the Church. The Tibetan prelate presumably
wished to give the Emperor what was best and most important in his
creed and selected a formula for invoking a demoniac Buddha.
The latest phase of Lamaism was inaugurated by Tsong-kha-pa’s

reformation and is still vigorous. Politically and socially it was of
capital importance, for it disciplined the priesthood and enabled [
the heads of the Church to rule Tibet. In doctrine it was not marked
by the importation of new ideas, but it emphasized the worship of
Avalokita as the patron of Tibet, it systematized the existing beliefs
about reincarnation, thereby creating a powerful hierarchy, and it
restricted Tantrism, without abolishing it. But many monasteries
persistently refused to accept these reforms.
Tibetan mythology and ceremonial have been described in detail by

Grünwedel, Waddell and others. The pantheon is probably the
largest in the world. All heaven and hell seem to meet in it. The
originals of the deities are nearly all to be found in Nepalese
Buddhism[1032] and the perplexing multiplicity of Tibet is chiefly
due to the habit of representing one deity in many forms and
aspects, thus making him a dozen or more personages both for art
and for popular worship. The adoration of saints and their images is
also more developed than in Nepal and forms some counterpoise to
the prevalent demonolatry.
I will not attempt to catalogue this fantastic host but will merely
notice the principal elements in it.
The first of these may be called early Buddhist. The figure of

Śâkyamuni is frequent in poses which illustrate the familiar story of
his life and the statue in the cathedral of Lhasa representing him as a
young man is the most venerated image in all Tibet. The human
397
Buddhas anterior to him also receive recognition together with

Maitreya. The Pratimoksha is still known, the Uposatha days are
observed and the details of the ordination services recall the
prescriptions of the Pali Vinaya; formulæ such as the four truths, the
eightfold path and the chain of causation are still in use and form the
basis of ethics.
The later (but still not tantric) doctrines of Indian Mahayanism are
naturally prominent. The three bodies of Buddha are well known
and also the series of five Celestial Buddhas with corresponding
Bodhisattvas and other manifestations. I feel doubtful whether the
table given by Waddell[1033] can be accepted as a compendium of [
the Lamaist creed. The symmetry is spoiled by the existence of other
groups such as the Thirty Buddhas, the Thousand Buddhas, and the
Buddhas of Healing, and also by the habit just mentioned of
representing deities in various forms. For instance Amoghapâśa,
theoretically a form of Avalokita, is in practice distinct. The fact is
that Lamaism accepted the whole host of Indian Buddhas and
Bodhisattvas, with additions of its own. The classifications made by
various sûtras and tantras were not sufficiently dogmatic to become
articles of faith: chance and fancy determined the prominence and
popularity of a given figure. Among the Buddhas those most
worshipped are Amitâbha, Śâkya and Bhaishajyaguru or the Buddha
of Healing: among the Bodhisattvas, Avalokita, Maitreya and
Mañjuśrî.
There is nothing in the above differing materially from Chinese or

Japanese Buddhism. The peculiarities of Tibet are brought out by the
tantric phase which those countries eschewed. Three characteristics
of Tibetan Tantrism, which are all more or less Indian, may be
mentioned. Firstly, all deities, even the most august, become familiar
spirits, who are not so much worshipped as coerced by spells. The
neophyte is initiated into their mysteries by a special
ceremonial[1034]: the adept can summon them, assume their
attributes and attain union with them. Secondly, great prominence is
given to goddesses, either as the counterparts of male deities or as
independent. Thirdly, deities appear in various forms, described as
mild, angry or fiendish. It is specially characteristic of Lamaism that
naturally benevolent deities are represented as raging in furious
frenzy.
Whether the superhuman beings of Tantrism are Buddhas,

Bodhisattvas, or Hindu gods like Mahâkala, it is correct to describe
them as deities, for they behave and are treated like Indian Devas.
398
Besides the relatively old and simple forms of the various Buddhas
and Bodhisattvas, there are many others which are usually
accommodated to the system by being described as protecting
spirits, that is virtuous and religious fiends who expend their
ferocity on the enemies of the Church.
Of these Protectors there are two classes, which are not mutually
exclusive, namely, the tutelary deities of individuals, and the [
defenders of the faith or tutelaries of the whole Church. The former,
who are extremely important in the religious life of the Lamas, are
called Yi-dam and may be compared with the Ishṭa-devatâs of the
Hindus: the latter or Chos Skyoṇ correspond to the Dharmapâlas.
Every Lama selects a Yi-dam either for life or for a period. His choice
must remain a secret but he himself has no doubts, as after fasting
and meditation the deity will appear to him[1035]. Henceforth he
every morning repeats formulæ which are supposed to give him the
appearance of his tutelary and thus scare away hostile demons. The
most efficacious tutelaries are tantric forms of the Dhyâni Buddhas,
especially Vajrasattva, Vajradhara and Amitâyus. The deity is
represented not in the guise of a Buddha but crowned, robed, and
holding a thunderbolt, and his attributes appear to be derived from
those of Indra[1036]. In his arms he always clasps a Śakti.
A second class of tutelaries is composed of so-called Buddhas,

accompanied by Śaktis and terrific in aspect, who are manifestations
of the Buddhahood for special purposes. I do not know if this
description is theologically correct, for these fantastic figures have no
relation to anything deserving the name of Buddhism, but
Grünwedel[1037] has shown that they are comparable with the
various forms of Śiva. This god does not become incarnate like
Vishnu but manifests himself from time to time in many shapes
accompanied by a retinue who are sometimes merely attendants and
sometimes alternative forms of the Lord. Vîrabhadra, the terrible
being created by Śiva from himself in order to confound Daksha’s
sacrifice, is a close parallel to the demoniac Buddhas of Lamaism.
Some of them, such as Mahâkâla and Samvara, show their origin in
their names and the rest, such as Hevajra, Buddhakapâla and
Yamântaka, are similar. This last is a common subject for art, a many
headed and many limbed minotaur, convulsed by a paroxysm of
devilish passion. Among his heads the most conspicuous is the face
of an ox, yet this grotesque demon is regarded as a manifestation of
the benign and intellectual Mañjuśri whose images in other lands are
among the most gracious products of Buddhist sculpture.
399
Most tutelary deities of this class act as defenders of the faith and
each sect has one or two as its special guardians[1038]. The idea is
ancient for even in the Pitakas, Sakka and other spirits respectfully
protect the Buddha’s disciples, and the Dharmapâlas of Gandharan
art are the ancestors of the Chos Skyoṇ. But in Tibet these assume
monstrous and manifold disguises. The oldest is Vajrapâṇi and
nearly all the others are forms of Śiva (such as Acala or Mi-gyo-ba
who reappears in Japan as Fudo) or personages of his retinue. Eight
of them are often adored collectively under the name of the Eight
Terrible Ones. Several of these are well-known figures in Hindu
mythology, for though the Lamas usually give Buddhist titles to
their principal deities, yet they also venerate Hindu gods, without
any explanation of their status. Thus hJigs-med-nam-mkha says that
he composed his history with the help of Śiva[1039]. The members of
this group vary in different enumerations but the following usually
form part of it.
(a) Hayagrîva[1040], the horse-necked god. In India he appears to be

connected with Vishnu rather than Śiva. The magic dagger with
which Lamas believe they can stab demons is said to be a form of
him. The Mongols regard him as the protector of horses. (b) Yama,
the Indian god of the dead, accompanied by a hellish retinue
including living skeletons. (c) Mahâkâla, the form of Śiva already
mentioned. It was by his inspiration that Pagspa was able to convert
Khubilai Khan. (d) Lha-mo, the goddess, that is Devî, the spouse of
Śiva. (e) lCam-sraṇ, a war god of somewhat uncertain origin but
perhaps a Tibetan form of Kârtikeya. Other deities frequently
included in this group are Yamântaka, mentioned above, Kubera or
Vaiśravana, the Hindu god of wealth, and a deity called the White
Brahmâ (Thsangspa dKarpo). This last is an ordinary human figure
riding on a white horse and brandishing a sword. He wears white
clothes and a crown or turban. He is perhaps Kalkî who, as
suggested above, had some connection with the Kâlacakra. The Eight
Terrible Ones and their attendants are represented by grotesquely
masked figures in the dances and mystery plays enacted by Lamas.
These performances are said to be still [ known among the vulgar as
dances of the Red Tiger Devil, but in the hands of the Yellow Church
have become a historical drama representing the persecution of
Buddhism under King Lang-dar-ma and its ultimate triumph after
he has been slain by the help of these ghostly champions.
Lamaist books mention numerous other Indian divinities, such as

Brahmâ, the thirty-three Devas, the Kings of the four quarters, etc.
These have no particular place in the system but their appearance in
400
art and literature is natural, since they are decorative though not
essential parts of early Buddhism. The same may be said of all the
host of Nâgas, Yakshas, Rakshasas, etc. But though these
multitudinous spirits have been rearranged and classified in
conformity with Hindu ideas they are not an importation but rather
part of the old folklore of Tibet, in many ways identical with the
same stratum of thought in India. Thus the snake demigods or
Nâgas[1041] occupy in both countries a large place in the popular
imagination. In the higher ranks of the Lamaist pantheon all the
figures seem to be imported, but some indigenous godlings have
retained a place in the lower classes. Such are rDo-rje-legs, at first an
opponent of Buddhism as preached by Padma-Sambhava but
honoured as a deity after making due submission, and the Five
Kings[1042], a group of fierce spirits, under the presidency of dPe-
dkar.
It remains to say a word of the numerous goddesses who play an

important part in Tibetan Buddhism, as in Hindu Tantrism. They are
usually represented as the female counterparts or better halves of
male deities, but some are self-sufficient. The greatest of these
goddesses is Târâ[1043]. Though Lamaist theology describes her as
the spouse of Avalokita she is not a single personality but a generic
name applied to a whole class of female deities and, as in many other
cases, no clear distinction is drawn between her attendants and the
forms which she herself assumes. Originally benevolent and
depicted with the attributes of Lakshmî she is transformed by a turn
of Tibetan [ imagination, with which the reader is now familiar, into
various terrible shapes and is practically the same as the spouse of
Śiva, celebrated in the Tantras under countless names. Twenty-one
Târâs are often enumerated in a list said to be well known even to
the laity[1044] and there are others. Among them are (a) the Green
Târâ, the commonest form in Tibet. (b) The White Târâ, much
worshipped by Mongols and supposed to be incarnate in the Tsar of
Russia, (c) Bhrikutî, a dark blue, angry, frowning form, (d)
Ushṇîshavijayâ[1045], a graceful and benevolent form known to the
Japanese. She is mentioned in the Horiuji palm-leaf manuscript
which dates from at least 609 A.D. (e) Parṇaśavarî, represented as
wearing a girdle of leaves and also called Gandhârî, Piśâcî and
Sarva-Śavarâṇâm Bhagavatî[1046]. She is apparently the goddess of
an aboriginal tribe in India. (f) Kurukullâ, a goddess of riches,
inhabiting caves. She is said to have given great wealth to the fifth
Grand Lama, and though she might be suspected of being a native
deity was known in Nepal and India[1047].
401
The Goddess Marîcî, often depicted with Târâ, appears to be distinct

and in one form is represented with a sow’s head and known as
Vajravarâhî. As such she is incarnate in the abbesses of several
monasteries, particularly Samding on lake Yamdok[1048].
A notice of Tibetan Buddhism can hardly avoid referring to the use

of praying wheels and the celebrated formula Om maṇi padme hum.
Though these are among the most conspicuous and ubiquitous
features of Lamaism their origin is strangely obscure[1049]. Attempts
to connect the praying wheel with the wheel of the law, the
cakravartin and other uses of the wheel in Indian symbolism, are
irrelevant, for the object to be explained is not really a wheel but a
barrel, large or small, containing written prayers, or even a whole
library. Those who turn [ the barrel acquire all the merit arising from
repeating the prayers or reading the books. In Tibet this form of
devotion is a national mania. People carry small prayer wheels in
their hands as they walk and place large ones in rivers to be turned
by the current. In China, Japan and Korea we find revolving libraries
and occasional praying machines, though not of quite the same form
as in Tibet[1050], but, so far as I know, there is nothing to show that
these were not introduced from Tibet into China and thence found
their way further East. The hypothesis that they were known in India
and thence exported to Tibet on one side and China on the other
naturally suggests itself, but the total absence of praying machines in
India as well as in the ruined cities of Central Asia and the general
Hindu habit of regarding scriptures and spells as words rather than
written documents lend it no support. It may be that when the
illiterate Tibetans first became acquainted with written prayers, they
invented this singular method of utilizing them without reading
them.
Equally obscure is the origin of the formula Om maṇi padme[1051]

hum, which permeates Tibet, uttered by every human voice,
revolved in countless machines, graven on the rocks, printed on
flags. It is obviously a Dhâraṇî[1052] and there is no reason to doubt
that it came to Tibet with the first introduction of Buddhism, but also
no record. The earliest passage hitherto quoted for its occurrence is a
Chinese translation made between 980 and 1001 A.D.[1053] and said
to correspond with the Kanjur and the earliest historical mention of
its use is found in Willelm de Rubruk (1254) and in the writings of
Bu-ston[1054]. The first legend of its origin is contained in the [
Manikambum, a work of doubtful age and authorship but perhaps
as old as the fifteenth century[1055]. The popularity of the prayer
may date from the time when the pontiffs of Lhasa were recognized
402
as incarnations of Avalokita. The first and last words are mystic

syllables such as often occur in these formulæ. Maṇi padme is
generally interpreted to mean the jewel in the lotus[1056], but
Thomas has pointed out that it is more consonant with grammar and
usage to regard the syllables as one word and the vocative of a
feminine title similar to Padmapâṇi, one of Avalokita’s many names.
The analogy of similar spells supports this interpretation and it
seems probable that the formula was originally an invocation of the
Śakti under the title of Maṇipadmâ, although so far as I know it is
now regarded by the Tibetans as an address to the male Avalokita. It
has also been suggested that the prominence of this prayer may be
due to Manichæan influence and the idea that it contained the name
of Mani. The suggestion is not absurd for in many instances
Manichæism and Buddhism were mixed together, but if it were true
we should expect to find the formula frequently used in the Tarim
basin, but of such use there is no proof.
FOOTNOTES:
[1012] The Shingon sect in Japan depict benevolent deities in a raging

form, Funnu. See Kokka, No. 292, p. 58. The idea goes back to India
where the canons of sacred art recognize that deities can be
represented in a pacific (śânta or saumya) or in a terrific (ugra or
raudra) form. See Gopinath Rao, Hindu Iconography, vol. I. p. 19, and
vol. II of the same for a lengthy description of the aspects of Śiva.
[1013] E.g. Grünwedel, Buddhist art in India, fig. 149, id. Mythologie,
fig. 54.
[1014] But there is still a hereditary incarnation of Ganeśa near

Poona, which began in the seventeenth century. See Asiatic
Researches, VII. 381.
[1015] See Waddell in J.R.A.S. 1909, p. 941.
[1016] See e.g. J.A.S.B. 1882, p. 41. The Svayambhû Purâna also states
that Mañjuśrî lives in China. See J. Buddhist Text Society, 1894, vol. II.
part II. p. 33.
[1017] See T’oung Pao, 1908, p. 13. For the Bön generally see also
J.A.S. Bengal, 1881, p. 187; Rockhill, Land of the Lamas, pp. 217-218;
and T’oung Pao, 1901, pp. 24-44.
403
[1018] The Lamas offer burnt sacrifices but it is not quite clear
whether these are derived from the Indian homa adopted by Tantric
Buddhism or from Tibetan and Mongol ceremonies. See, for a
description of this ceremony, My Life in Mongolia, by the Bishop of
Norwich, pp. 108-114.
[1019] Mythologie des Buddhismus, p. 40.
[1020] In Tibetan Dus-kyi-hkhor-lo. Mongol, Tsagun kürdün.
[1021] Announced in the Bibliotheca Buddhica.
[1022] See Pelliot, Quelques transcriptions apparentÃ©es Ã Cambhala

dans les textes Chinois (in T’oung Pao, vol. XX. 1920, p. 73) for some
conjectures. Kulika is translated into Tibetan as Rigs-Ldan. Tibetan
texts speak of books coming from Śambhala, see Laufer in T’oung
Pao, 1913, p. 596.
[1023] See Laufer in T’oung Pao, 1907, p. 402. In Sumpa’s chronology,

J.A.S. Beng. p. 46, the reign of a Kulika Emperor seems to be simply a
designation for a century.
[1024] See J.A.S.B. 82, p. 225. The king is also (but apparently
incorrectly) called Candra-Bhadra.
[1025] See Grünwedel, Mythologie, p. 41. Sarat Chandra Das in J.A.S.

Beng. 1882, p. 15, and J.A.S. Beng. 1912, p. 21, being reprints of earlier
articles by Csoma de Körös.
[1026] See Kalkî Purâna. Vishnu Purâna, IV. XXIV, Bhâg. Pur. XII. ii.
18, and Norman in Trans. III, Int. Congress Religions, vol. II. p. 85.
Also Aufrecht, Cat. Cod. Sansk. 73A, 84B.
[1027] See Schrader, Introd. to the Pâncarâtra, pp. 100-106 and 96.
[1028] See the article “Adi Buddha” by De la Vallée Poussin in

Hastings’ Encyc. of Religion and Ethics.
[1029] See, for a modern example of this, the

Ganeśâtharvaśirshopanishad (Anândâ srama edition, pp. 11 and 16)
Tvam eva sarvam khalvidam Brahmâsi ... Tvam Brahmâ Tvam
Vishnus Tvam Rudras Tvam Indras Tvam Agnis Tvam Vâyus Tvam
Sûryas Tvam Candramâs Tvam Brahma. Here Gaṇeśa includes all the
deities and the Pantheos. There is also a book called
Gaṇeśadarśanam in which the Vedanta sûtras are rewritten and
404
Gaṇeśa made equivalent to Brahma. See Madras, Cat. of Sk. MSS.

1910-1913, p. 1030.
[1030] It is just mentioned in S. Lévi’s Nepal II, p. 385, but is not in

Rajendralal Mitra’s Catalogue.
[1031] Waddell, Buddhism, p. 131. Pander, Pantheon, p. 59, No. 56.
[1032] Nepalese Buddhism knows not only the Dhyâni Buddhas,

Śaktis and Bodhisattvas including Vajrasattva and Vajradhara, but
also deities like Hayagrîva, Yamântaka, Bhrikutî, Marîcî, Kurukullâ.
In both Nepal and Tibet are found pictures called Thsogs-śiṇ in
which the deities of the Pantheon (or at least the principal of them)
are grouped according to rank. See for an example containing 138
deities the frontispiece of Getty’s Gods of Northern Buddhism.
[1033] Buddhism, pp. 350-1.
[1034] For an outline of the method followed by Tibetans in studying

the Tantras, see Journal Buddhist Text Society, 1893, vol. I. part III. pp.
25-6.
[1035] The deity may appear in an unusual form, so the worshipper

can easily persuade himself that he has received the desired
revelation.
[1036] A figure identified with Indra or Vajrapâni is found in

Gandhara sculptures.
[1037] Mythologie, p. 97.
[1038] The Dhyâni Buddhas however seem to be the Yi-dam of

individuals only.
[1039] Huth’s edition, p. 1.
[1040] See Buddhist Text Society, vol. II. part II. appendix II. 1904, p. 6.
[1041] See Laufer, “Hundert Tausend Nâgas” in Memoirs of Finno-

Ugrian Society, 1898.
[1042] Or Five Bodies, sKu-Lṇa. dPe-dKar or Pe-har is by some

authorities identified with the Chinese deity Wei-to. This latter is
represented in the outer court of most Chinese temples.
[1043] In Tibetan sGrol-ma, in Mongol Dara äkä. For the early history
of Târâ see Blonay, Matériaux pour servir à l’histoire de ... Târâ, 1895.
405
[1044] Waddell, Buddhism, p. 360.
[1045] Tibetan gTsug-tor-rnam-par-rgyal-ma.
[1046] Cf. Whitehead’s statement (Village Gods of S. India, p. 79) that

women worshipping certain goddesses are clad only in the twigs of
the mimosa tree.
[1047] See Foucher, Icon. Bouddhique, 1900, p. 142, and Târanâtha tr.
Schiefner, p. 102.
[1048] See Waddell. Grünwedel seems to regard Vajra-Varâhî as

distinct from Marîcî.
[1049] As for instance is also the origin of Linga worship in India.
[1050] See Steiner in Mitth. der Deutsch. Gesellsch. Natur-u. Völkerkunde

Ost-Asiens, 1909-10, p. 35.
[1051] Padme is said to be commonly pronounced peme.
[1052] Waddell quotes a similar spell known in both Tibet and Japan,
but addressed to Vairocana. Om Amogha Vairocanamahâmudra
mani padma jvalapravarthtaya hūm. Buddhism, p. 149.
[1053] Divyâvadâna (Cowell and Neil), pp. 613-4, and Raj. Mitra,
Nepalese Bud. Lit. p. 98. See also the learned note of Chavannes and
Pelliot, based on Japanese sources in J.A. 1913, I. 314. The text
referred to is Nanjio, No. 782. It is not plain if it is the same as earlier
translations with similar titles. A mantra of six syllables not further
defined is extolled in the Divyâvadâna and the Guṇakâraṇḍavyûha.
[1054] Bu-ston was born in 1288 and the summary of his writings
contained in the Journal of the Buddhist Text Society, vol. I. 1893,
represents the formula as used in the times of Atîśa, c. 1030.
[1055] See for this legend, which is long but not very illuminating,
Rockhill’s Land of the Lamas, pp. 326-334.
[1056] J.R.A.S. 1906, p. 464, and Francke, ib. 1915, pp. 397-404. He
points out the parallel between the three formulae: Om vagîśvari
mum: Om maṇipadme hum: Om vajrapâṇi hum. The hymn to Durgâ in
Mahâbhâr. Bhîshmapar, 796 (like many other hymns) contains a long
string of feminine vocatives ending in e or i.
406
CHAPTER LIII
TIBET (continued)
SECTS
Lamaism is divided into various sects, which concern the clergy

rather than the laity. The differences in doctrine are not very
important. Each sect has special tutelary deities, scriptures and
practices of its own but they all tend to borrow from one another
whatever inspires respect or attracts worshippers. The baser sort try
to maintain their dignity by imitating the institutions of the superior
sects, but the superior cannot afford to neglect popular superstitions.
So the general level is much the same. Nevertheless, these sectarian
differences are not without practical importance for each sect has
monasteries and a hierarchy of its own and is outwardly
distinguished by peculiarities of costume, especially by the hat.
Further, though the subject has received little investigation, it is
probable that different sects possess different editions of the Kanjur
or at any rate respect different books[1057]. Since the seventeenth
century the Gelugpa has been recognized as the established church
and the divinity of the Grand Lama is not disputed, but in earlier
times there were many monastic quarrels and forced conversions. In
the eighteenth century the Red clergy intrigued with the Gurkhas in
the hope of supplanting their Yellow brethren and even now they
are so powerful in eastern Tibet that this hope may not be
unreasonable, should political troubles shake the hierarchy of Lhasa.
In spite of the tendency to borrow both what is good and what is
bad, some sects are on a higher grade intellectually and morally than
others. Thus the older sects do not insist on celibacy or abstinence
from alcohol, and Tantrism and magic form the major part of
religion, whereas the Gelugpa or established church maintains strict
discipline, and tantric and magical rites, though by no means
prohibited, are at least practised in moderation.
Setting aside the earliest period, the history of Buddhism in Tibet is

briefly that it was established by Padma-Sambhava about 750, [
reformed by Atîśa about 1040 and again reformed by Tsong-kha-pa
about 1400. The sects correspond to these epochs. The oldest claims
to preserve the teaching of Padma-Sambhava, those of middle date
are offshoots of the movement started by Atîśa, and the newest
407
represents Atîśa’s principal sect corrected by the second reformation.

The oldest sect is known as Nying-ma-pa or rNyiṇ-ma-pa, signifying
the old ones, and also as the Red Church from the colour of the hats
worn by the clergy. Among its subdivisions one called the sect of
Udyâna[1058], in reference to Padma-Sambhava’s birthplace,
appears to be the most ancient and still exists in the Himalayas and
eastern Tibet. The Nying-ma Lamas are said to have kept the
necromancy of the old Tibetan religion more fully than any of the
reformed sects. They pay special worship to Padma-Sambhava and
accept the revelations ascribed to him. Celibacy and abstinence are
rarely observed in their monasteries but these are by no means of
low repute. Among the more celebrated are Dorje-dag and
Mindolling: the great monastery of Pemiongchi[1059] in Sikhim is a
branch establishment of the latter.
Of the sects originating in Atîśa’s reformation the principal was the

Kadampa[1060], but it has lost much of its importance because it was
remodelled by Tsong-kha-pa and hence hardly exists to-day as an
independent body. The Sakya sect is connected with the great
monastery of the same name situated about fifty miles to the north of
Mount Everest and founded in 1071 by Sakya, a royal prince. It
acquired great political importance, for from 1270 to 1340 its abbots
were the rulers of Tibet. The historian Târanâtha belonged to one of
its sub-sects, and about 1600 settled in Mongolia where he founded
the monastery of Urga and established the line of reincarnate Lamas
which still rules there. But shortly after his death this monastery was
forcibly taken over by the Yellow Church and is still the centre of its
influence in Mongolia. In theology the Sakya offers nothing specially
distinctive but it mixes the Tantras of the old and new sects and
according to Waddell[1061] is practically indistinguishable from the
Nying-ma-pa. The same is probably true of the Kar-gyu-pa[1062]
said to have been founded by Marpa and his [ follower Milaräpa,
who set an example of solitary and wandering lives. It is sometimes
described as a Nying-ma sect[1063] but appears to date from after
Atîśa’s reforms, although it has a strong tendency to revert to older
practices. It has several important sub-sects, such as the Karmapa
found in Sikhim and Darjiling, as well as in Tibet, the Dugpa which
is predominant in Bhotan and perhaps in Ladak[1064], and the
Dikung-pa, which owns a large monastery one hundred miles north-
east of Lhasa. Milaräpa (or Mila), the cotton-clad saint who
wandered over the Snow-land in the light garments of an Indian
ascetic, is perhaps the post picturesque figure in Lamaism and in
some ways reminds us of St. Francis of Assisi[1065]. He was a
408
worker of miracles and, what is rarer in Tibet, a poet. His

compositions known as the Hundred Thousand Songs are still
popular and show the same delicately sensitive love of nature as the
Psalms of the Theragâthâ.
The main distinction is between the Gelugpa or Yellow Church and

all the other sects. This is merely another way of saying that Atîśa
reformed the corrupt superstitions which he found but that his
reformed church in its turn became corrupt and required correction.
This was given by Tsong-kha-pa who belonged originally to the
Kadampa. He collected the scattered members of this sect,
remodelled its discipline, and laid the foundations of the system
which made the Grand Lamas rulers of Tibet. In externals the
Gelugpa is characterized by the use of the yellow cap and the
veneration paid to Tsong-kha-pa’s image. Its Lamas are all celibate
and hereditary succession is not recognized. Among the many great
establishments which belong to it are the four royal monasteries or
Ling in Lhasa; Gandan, Depung and Serra near Lhasa; and
Tashilhunpo.
It has often been noticed that the services performed by the

Gelugpa[1066] and by the Roman Catholic Church are strangely [
similar in appearance. Is this an instance of borrowing or of
convergence? On the one hand it is stated that there were Roman
missions in Amdo in Tsong-kha-pa’s youth, and the resemblances
are such as would be natural if he had seen great celebrations of the
mass and taken hints. In essentials the similarity is small but in
externals such as the vestments and head-dresses of the officiants,
the arrangement of the choir, and the general mise-en-scène, it is
striking. On the other hand many points of resemblance in
ceremonial, though not all, are also found in the older Japanese sects,
where there can hardly be any question of imitating Christianity, and
it would seem that a ritual common to Tibet and Japan can be
explained only as borrowed from India. Further, although Tsong-
kha-pa may have come in contact with missionaries, is it likely that
he had an opportunity of seeing Roman rites performed with any
pomp? It is in the great choral services of the two religions that the
resemblance is visible, not in their simpler ritual. For these reasons, I
think that the debt of Lamaism to the Catholic Church must be
regarded as not proven, while admitting the resemblance to be so
striking that we should be justified in concluding that Tsong-kha-pa
copied Roman ceremonial, could it be shown that he was acquainted
with it.
409
The life and ritual of the Lamas have often been described, and I
need not do more than refer the reader to the detailed account given
by Waddell in his Buddhism of Tibet [1067], but it is noticeable that the
monastic system is organized on a larger scale and inspired by more
energy than in any other country. The monasteries of Tibet, if
inferior to those of Japan in the middle ages, are the greatest
Buddhist establishments now existing. For instance Depung has 7000
monks, Serra 5500 and Tashilhunpo 3800: at Urga in Mongolia there
are said to be 14,000. One is not surprised to hear that these
institutions are veritable towns with their own police and doubtless
the spirit of discipline learned in managing such large bodies of
monks has helped the Lamaist Church in the government of the
country. Also these monasteries are universities. Candidates for
ordination study a course of theology and are not received as novices
or full [ monks unless they pass successive examinations. In every
monastery there is a central temple in which the monks assemble
several times a day to chant lengthy choral offices. Of these there are
at least five, the first before dawn and the last at 7 p.m. Though the
value of Lamas’ learning and ritual may be questioned, it is clear that
many of them lead strenuous lives in the service of a religion which,
if fantastic, still expresses with peculiar intensity the beliefs and
emotions of the Tibetans and Mongols and has forced men of
violence to believe that a power higher than their own is wielded by
intellect and asceticism.
There seems to be no difference between Tibetan and Mongolian

Lamaism in deities, doctrines or observances[1068]. Mongolian
Lamas imitate the usages of Tibet, study there when they can and
recite their services in Tibetan, although they have translations of the
scriptures in their own language. Well read priests in Peking have
told me that it is better to study the canon in Tibetan than in Mongol,
because complete copies in Mongol, if extant, are practically
unobtainable.
The political and military decadence of the Mongols has been

ascribed by some authors to Lamaism and to the substitution of
priestly for warlike ideals. But such a substitution is not likely to
have taken place except in minds prepared for it by other causes and
it does not appear that the Moslims of Central Asia are more virile
and vigorous than the Buddhists. The collapse of the Mongols can be
easily illustrated if not explained by the fate of Turks and Tartars in
the Balkan Peninsula and Russia. Wherever the Turks are the ruling
race they endeavour to assert their superiority over all Christians,
often by violent methods. But when the positions are reversed and
410
the Christians become rulers as in Bulgaria, the Turks make no

resistance but either retire or acquiesce meekly in the new regime.
FOOTNOTES:
[1057] See for instance the particulars given as to various branches of

the Nying-ma pa sect in J.A.S.B. 1882, pp. 6-14.
[1058] Urgyen-pa or Dzok-chen-pa.
[1059] Or Pemayangtse.
[1060] bKah-gDams-pa.
[1061] Buddhism, p. 70.
[1062] bKah-brGyud-pa.
[1063] Sandberg, Handbook of Tibetan, p. 207.
[1064] Authorities differ as to the name of the sect which owns Himis
and other monasteries in Ladak.
[1065] See for some account of him and specimens of his poems,
Sandberg, Tibet and the Tibetans, chap. XIII.
[1066] I do not know whether the ceremonies of the other sects offer
the same resemblance. Probably they have all imitated the Gelugpa.
Some authors attribute the resemblance to contact with Nestorian
Christianity in early times but the resemblance is definitely to
Roman costumes and ceremonies not to those of the Eastern church.
Is there any reason to believe that the Nestorian ritual resembled that
of western catholics?
[1067] See also Filchner, Das Kloster Kumbum, 1906.
[1068] Almost the only difference that I have noticed is that whereas
Tibetans habitually translate Indian proper names, Mongols
frequently use Sanskrit words, such as Manjuśrî, or slightly modified
forms such as Dara, Maidari ( = Târâ, Maitreya). The same practice is
found in the old Uigur translations. See Bibl. Buddh. XII. Tisastvustik.
For an interesting account of contemporary Lamaism in Mongolia
see Binstead, “Life in a Khalkha Steppe Monastery,” J.R.A.S. 1914,
847-900.
411
CHAPTER LIV
JAPAN
This work as originally planned contained a section on Japanese

Buddhism consisting of three chapters, but after it had been sent to
the publishers I was appointed H.M. Ambassador in Tokyo and I
decided to omit this section. Let not any Japanese suppose that it
contained disparaging criticism of his country or its religions. It
would, I hope, have given no offence to either Buddhists or
Shintoists, but an ambassador had better err on the side of discretion
and refrain from public comments on the institutions of the country
to which he is accredited.
The omission is regrettable in so far as it prevents me from noticing

some of the most interesting and beautiful developments of
Buddhism, but for historical purposes and the investigation of the
past the loss is not great, for Japanese Buddhism throws little light
on ancient India or even on ancient China. It has not influenced other
countries. Its interest lies not in the relics of antiquity which it has
preserved but in the new shape and setting which a race at once
assimilative and inventive has given to old ideas.
Though the doctrine of the Buddha reached Japan from China

through Korea[1069], Chinese and Japanese Buddhism differ in
several respects. Lamaism never gained a footing in Japan, probably
because it was the religion of the hated Mongols. There was hardly
any direct intercourse with India. Whereas the state religion of China
was frequently hostile to Buddhism, in Japan such relations were
generally friendly and from the seventh century until the Meiji era
an arrangement known as Ryō-bu Shintō or two-fold Shintō was in
force, by which Shintō shrines were with few exceptions handed
over to the custody of Buddhist priests, native deities and historical
personages being declared to be manifestations of various Buddhas
and Bodhisattvas. Again, Buddhism in Japan has had a more
intimate connection with social, political and even military matters
in various periods than in China. This is one reason for its chief
characteristic, namely, [ the large number and distinct character of its
sects. They are not merely schools like the religious divisions of India
and China, but real sects with divergent doctrines and sometimes
antagonistic to one another.
412
It became the fashion in Japan to talk of the twelve sects, but the
names given are not always the same.
One of the commonest lists is as follows[1070]:
1. Kusha. 5. Hossō. 9. Jōdo.

2. Jo-jitsu. 6. Kegon. 10. Zen.
3. Ritsu-shu or
Risshu. 7. Tendai. 11. Shin.
4. Sanron. 8. Shingon. 12. Nichiren.
This list is historically correct, but Nos. 1-4 are almost or quite
extinct, and the number twelve is therefore sometimes made up as
follows:
1. Hossō. 5. Yūzū 9. Ōbaku.

Nembutsu.
2. Kegon. 6. Jōdo. 10. Shin.

3. Tendai. 7. Rinzai. 11. Nichiren.
4. Shingon. 8. Sōdō. 12. Ji.
Here Nos. 7, 8, 9 are subdivisions of the Zen and 5 and 12 are two
small sects.
Taking the first list, we may easily distinguish two classes. The first
eight, called by the Japanese Hasshū, are all old and all imported
from China. They represent the Buddhism of the Nara and Hei-an
periods. The other four all arose after 1170 and were all remodelled,
if not created, in Japan. Chronologically the sects may be arranged as
follows, the dates marking the foundation or introduction of each:
(i) Seventh century: Sanron, 625; Jo-jitsu, 625; Hossō, 657;

Kusha, 660.
(ii) Eighth century: Kegon, 735; Ritsu, 745.
(iii) Ninth century: Tendai, 805; Shingon, 806.
(iv) Twelfth and thirteenth centuries: Yūzū Nembutsu,
1123; Jōdo, 1174; Zen, 1202; Shin, 1224; Nichiren,

1253; Ji, 1275.
All Japanese sects of importance are Mahayanist. The Hinayana is

represented only by the Kusha, Jo-jitsu and Risshu. The two former
are both extinct: the third still numbers a few adherents, but is not
anti-Mahayanist. It merely insists on the importance of discipline.
413
Though the Hossō and Kegon sects are not extinct, their survival is
due to their monastic possessions rather than to the vitality of their
doctrines, but the great sects of the ninth century, the Tendai and
Shingon, are still flourishing. For some seven hundred years,
especially in the Fujiwara period, they had great influence not only
in art and literature, but in political and even in military matters, for
they maintained large bodies of troops consisting of soldier monks
or mercenaries and were a considerable menace to the secular
authority. So serious was the danger felt to be that in the sixteenth
century Nobunaga and Hideyoshi destroyed the great monasteries
of Hieizan and Negoro and the pretensions of the Buddhist Church
to temporal power were brought to an end.
But apart from this political activity, new sects which appeared in
the twelfth and thirteenth centuries suited the popular needs of the
time and were a sign of true religious life. Two of these sects, the
Jōdo and Shinshū[1071], are Amidist—that is to say they teach that
the only or at least the best way of winning salvation is to appeal to
the mercy of Amida, who will give his worshippers a place in his
paradise after death. The Jōdo is relatively old fashioned, and does
not differ much in practice from the worship of Amida as seen in
China, but the Shinshū has no exact parallel elsewhere. Though it
has not introduced many innovations in theology, its abandonment
of monastic discipline, its progressive and popular spirit and its
conspicuous success make it a distinct and remarkable type. Its
priests marry and eat meat: it has no endowments and relies on
voluntary subscription, yet its temples are among the largest and
most conspicuous in Japan. But the hierarchical spirit is not absent
and since Shinshū priests can marry, there arose the institution of
hereditary abbots who were even more like barons than the celibate
prelates of the older sects.
The Nichiren sect is a purely Japanese growth, without any

prototype in China, and is a protest against Amidism and an attempt
to [ restore Shaka—the historical Buddha—to his proper position
from which he has been ousted. Nichiren, the founder, is one of the
most picturesque figures of Japanese history. His teaching, which
was based on the Lotus Sûtra, was remarkable for its combative
spirit and he himself played a considerable part in the politics of his
age. His followers form one of the most influential and conspicuous
sects at the present day, although not so numerous as the Amidists.
Zen is the Japanese equivalent of Ch’an or Dhyâna and is the name

given to the sect founded in China by Bodhidharma. It is said to
414
have been introduced into Japan in the seventh century, but died
out. Later, under the Hōjō Regents, and especially during the
Ashikaga period, it flourished exceedingly. Zen ecclesiastics
managed politics like the French cardinals of the seventeenth century
and profoundly influenced art and literature, since they produced a
long line of painters and writers. But the most interesting feature in
the history of this sect in Japan is that, though it preserves the
teaching of Bodhidharma without much change, yet it underwent a
curious social metamorphosis, for it became the chosen creed of the
military class and contributed not a little to the Bushido or code of
chivalry. It is strange that this mystical doctrine should have spread
among warriors, but its insistence on simplicity of life, discipline of
mind and body, and concentration of thought harmonized with their
ideals.
Apart from differences of doctrine such as divide the Shinshu,

Nichiren and Zen, Japanese sects show a remarkable tendency to
multiply subdivisions, due chiefly to disputes as to the proper
succession of abbots. Thus the Jōdo sect has four subsects, and the
first and second of these are again subdivided into six and four
respectively. And so with many others. Even the little Ji sect, which
is credited with only 509 temples in all Japan, includes thirteen
subdivisions.
FOOTNOTES:
[1069] The accepted date is A.D. 552.
[1070] These names are mostly borrowed from the Chinese and
represent: 1. Chü-shê; 2. Ch’êng-shih; 3. Lü; 4. San-lun; 5. Fa-hsiang;
6. Hua-yen; 7. T’ien-t’ai; 8. Chên-yen; 9. Ching-t’u; 10. Ch’an. See my
remarks on these sects in the section on Chinese Buddhism. See
Haas, Die Sekten dea Japanischen Buddhismus, 1905: many notices in
the same author’s Annalen des Jap. Bud. cited above and Ryauon
Fujishima, Le Buddhisme Japonais, 1889.
[1071] As well as the smaller sects called Ji and Yūzūnembutsu.
415
BOOK VII
MUTUAL INFLUENCE OF EASTERN AND WESTERN RELIGIONS
CHAPTER LV
INFLUENCE OF CHRISTIANITY IN INDIA
In phrases like the above title, the word influence is easy and
convenient. When we hesitate to describe a belief or usage as
borrowed or derived, it comes pat to say that it shows traces of
external influence. But in what circumstances is such influence
exercised? It is not the necessary result of contact, for in the east of
Europe the Christian Church has not become mohammedanized nor
in Poland and Roumania has it contracted any taint of Judaism. In
these cases there is difference of race as well as of religion. In
business the Turk and Jew have some common ground with the
oriental Christian: in social life but little and in religion none at all.
Europe has sometimes shown an interest in Asiatic religions, but on
the whole an antipathy to them. Christianity originated in Palestine,
which is a Mediterranean rather than an Asiatic country, and its
most important forms, particularly the Roman Catholic Church, took
shape on European soil. Such cults as the worship of Isis and Mithra
were prevalent in Europe but they gained their first footing among
Asiatic slaves and soldiers and would perhaps not have maintained
themselves among European converts only. And Buddhism, though
it may have attracted individual minds, has never produced any
general impression west of India. Both in Spain and in south-eastern
Europe Islam was the religion of invaders and made surprisingly
few converts. Christian heretics, such as the Nestorians and
Monophysites, who were expelled from Constantinople and had
their home in Asia, left the west alone and proselytized in the east.
The peculiar detestation felt by the Church for the doctrines of the
Manichæans was perhaps partly due to the fact that they were in
spirit Asiatic. And the converse of this antipathy is also true: the
progress of Christianity in Asia has been insignificant.
But when people of the same race profess different creeds, these
creeds do influence one another and tend to approximate. This is
416
specially remarkable in India, where Islam, in theory the

uncompromising opponent of image worship and polytheism, is [
sometimes in practice undistinguishable from the lower
superstitions of Hinduism. In the middle ages Buddhism and
Hinduism converged until they coincided so completely that
Buddhism disappeared. In China it often needs an expert to
distinguish the manifestations of Taoism and Buddhism: in Japan
Buddhism and the old national religion were combined in the mixed
worship known as Ryōbu Shintō. In the British Isles an impartial
observer would probably notice that Anglicans and English Roman
Catholics (not Irish perhaps) have more in common than they think.
There are clearly two sets of causes which may divide a race between
religions: internal movements, such as the rise of Buddhism, and
external impulses, such as missions or conquest. Conquest pure and
simple is best illustrated by the history of Islam, also by the
conversion of Mexico and South America to Roman Catholicism. But
even when conversion is pacific, it will generally be found that, if it
is successful on a large scale, it means the introduction of more than
a creed. The religious leader in his own country can trust to his
eloquence and power over his hearers. The real support of the
missionary, however little he may like the idea, is usually that he
represents a superior type of civilization. At one time in their career
Buddhism and Christianity were the greatest agencies for spreading
civilization in Asia and Europe respectively. They brought with
them art and literature: they had the encouragement of the most
enlightened princes: those who did not accept them in many cases
remained obviously on a lower level. Much the same thing happens
in Africa to-day. The natives who accept Mohammedanism or
Christianity are moved, not by the arguments of the Koran or Bible,
but by the idea that it is a fine thing to be like an Arab or a European.
A pagan in Uganda is literally a pagan; an uninstructed rustic from a
distant village.
Now if we consider the relations of India with the west, we find on

neither side the conditions which usually render propaganda
successful. Before the Mohammedan invasions and the Portuguese
conquest of Goa, no faith can have presented itself to the Hindus
with anything like the prestige which marked the advent of
Buddhism in China and Japan. Alexander opened a road to India for
Hellenic culture and with it came some religious ideas, but the
Greeks had no [ missionary spirit and if there were any early
Christian missions they must have been on a small scale. The same is
true of the west: if Asoka’s missions reached their destination, they
417
failed to inspire any record of their doings. Still there was traffic by
land and sea. The Hindus, if self-complacent, were not averse to new
ideas, and before the establishment of Christianity there was not
much bigotry in the west, for organized religion was unknown in
Europe: practices might be forbidden as immoral or anti-social but
such expressions as contrary to the Bible or Koran had no equivalent.
Old worships were felt to be unsatisfying: new ones were freely
adopted: mysteries were relished. There was no invasion, nothing
that suggested foreign conquest or alarmed national jealousy, but the
way was open to ideas, though they ran some risk of suffering
transformation on their long journey.
As I have repeatedly pointed out, Hinduism and Buddhism are

essentially religions of central and eastern, not of western Asia, but
they came in contact with the west in several regions and an enquiry
into the influence which they exercised or felt can be subdivided.
There is the question whether they owe anything to Christianity in
their later developments and also the question whether Christianity
has borrowed anything from them[1072]. Other questions to be
considered are the relations of Indian religions to Zoroastrianism in
ancient and to Islam in more recent times, which, if of less general
interest than problems involving Christianity, are easier to
investigate and of considerable importance.
Let us begin with the influence of Christianity on Indian religion. For

earlier periods the record of contact between Hindus and Christians
is fragmentary, but the evidence of the last two centuries may give a
significant indication as to the effect of early Christian influence. In
these two centuries Christianity has been presented to the Hindus in
the most favourable circumstances: it has come as the religion of the
governing power and associated with European [ civilization: it has
not, like Mohammedanism, been propagated by force or
accompanied by any intolerance which could awaken repugnance,
but its doctrines have been preached and expounded by private
missionaries, if not always with skill and sympathy, at least with zeal
and a desire to persuade. The result is that according to the census of
1911 there are now 3,876,000 Christians including Europeans, that is
to say, a sect a little stronger than the Sikhs as against more than
sixty-six million Mohammedans. Of these 3,876,000 many are drawn
from the lowest castes or from tribes that are hardly considered as
Hindus. Some religious associations, generally known as Somaj,
have been founded under the influence of European philosophy as
much as of Christianity: imitation of European civilization (which is
quite a different thing from Christianity) is visible in the objects and
418
methods of religious and philanthropic institutions: some curious

mixed sects of small numerical strength have been formed by the
fusion of Christian with Hindu or Mohammedan elements or of all
three together. Yet the religious thought and customs of India in
general seem hardly conscious of contact with Christianity: there is
no sign that they have felt any fancy for the theology of the
Athanasian Creed or the ceremonies of the Roman Catholic Church
which might have interested speculative and ritualistic minds.
Similarly, though intellectual intercourse between India and China
was long and fairly intimate and though the influence of Indian
thought on China was very great, yet the influence of China on
Indian thought is negligible. This being so, it would be rash to
believe without good evidence that, in the past, doctrines which
have penetrated Indian literature during centuries and have found
acceptance with untold millions owe their origin to obscure foreign
colonists or missions.
Writers who wish to prove that Indian religions are indebted to

Christianity often approach their task with a certain misconception.
They assume that if at some remote epoch a few stray Christians
reached India, they could overcome without difficulty the barriers of
language and social usage and further that their doctrine would be
accepted as something new and striking which would straightway
influence popular superstition and philosophic thought. But Lyall
gives a juster perspective in his poem about the Meditations of a [
Hindu Prince who, grown sceptical in the quest of truth, listens to
the “word of the English,” and finds it:
“Naught but the world wide story how the earth and the heavens began,
How the gods were glad and angry and a deity once was man.”
Many doctrines preached by Christianity such as the love of God,

salvation by faith, and the incarnation, had been thought out in India
before the Christian era, and when Christian missionaries preached
them they probably seemed to thoughtful Hindus a new and not
very adequate version of a very old tale. On the other hand the
central and peculiar doctrine of dogmatic Christianity is that the
world has been saved by the death of Christ. If this doctrine of the
atonement or the sacrifice of a divine being had appeared in India as
an importation from the west, we might justly talk of the influence of
Christianity on Indian religion. But it is unknown in Hinduism and
Buddhism or (since it is rash to make absolute statements about
these vast and multifarious growths of speculation) it is at any rate
exceedingly rare. These facts create a presumption that the
419
resemblances between Christianity and Indian religion are due to

coincidence rather than borrowing, unless borrowing can be clearly
proved, and this conclusion, though it may seem tame, is surely a
source of satisfaction. The divagations of human thought are
manifold and its conclusions often contradictory, but if there is
anything that can be called truth it is but natural that logic, intuition,
philosophy, poetry, learning and saintship should in different
countries sometimes attain similar results.
Christianity, like other western ideas, may have reached India both
by land and by sea. After the conquests of Alexander had once
opened the route to the Indus and established Hellenistic kingdoms
in its vicinity, the ideas and art of Greece and Rome journeyed
without difficulty to the Panjab, arriving perhaps as somewhat
wayworn and cosmopolitan travellers but still clearly European. A
certain amount of Christianity may have come along this track, but
for any historical investigation clearly the first question is, what is
the earliest period at which we have any record of its presence in
India? It would appear[1073] that the first allusions to the presence
of [ Christians in Parthia, Bactria and the border lands of India date
from the third century and that the oldest account[1074] of Christian
communities in southern India is the narrative of Cosmas
Indicopleustes (c. 525 A.D.). These latter Christians probably came to
India by sea from Persia in consequence of the persecutions which
raged there in 343 and 414, exactly as at a later date the Parsees
escaped the violence of the Moslims by emigrating to Gujarat and
Bombay.
The story that the Apostle Thomas preached in some part of India
has often been used as an argument for the early introduction and
influence of Christianity, but recent authorities agree in thinking that
it is legendary or at best not provable. The tale occurs first in the Acts
of St. Thomas[1075], the Syriac text of which is considered to date
from about 250. It relates how the apostle was sold as a slave skilled
in architecture and coming to the Court of Gundaphar, king of India,
undertook to build, a palace but expended the moneys given to him
in charity and, when called to account, explained that he was
building for the king a palace in heaven, not made with hands. This
sounds more like an echo of some Buddhist Jâtaka written in praise
of liberality than an embellishment of any real biography. Other
legends make southern India the sphere of Thomas’s activity, though
he can hardly have taught in both Madras and Parthia, and a similar
uncertainty is indicated by the tradition that his relics were
transported to Edessa, which doubtless means that according to
420
other accounts he died there. Tradition connects Thomas with

Parthians quite as much as with Indians, and, if he really contributed
to the diffusion of Christianity, it is more likely that he laboured in [
the western part of Parthia than on its extreme eastern frontiers. The
fact that there really was an Indo-Parthian king with a name
something like Gondophares no more makes the legend of St.
Thomas historical than the fact that there was a Bohemian king with
a name something like Wenceslas makes the Christmas carol
containing that name historical.
On the other hand it is clear that during the early centuries of our era
no definite frontier in the religious and intellectual sphere can be
drawn between India and Persia. Christianity reached Persia early: it
formed part of the composite creed of Mani, who was born about
216, and Christians were persecuted in 343. From at least the third
century onwards Christian ideas may have entered India, but this
does not authorize the assumption that they came with sufficient
prestige and following to exercise any lively influence, or in
sufficient purity to be clearly distinguished from Zoroastrianism and
Manichæism.
By water there was an ancient connection between the west coast of

India and both the Red Sea and Persian Gulf. Traffic by the former
route was specially active, from the time of Augustus to that of Nero.
Pliny[1076] complains that every year India and the East took from
Italy a hundred million sesterces in return for spices, perfumes and
ornaments. Strabo[1077] who visited Egypt tells how 120 ships sailed
from Myos Hormos (on the Red Sea) to India “although in the time
of the Ptolemies scarcely any one would undertake this voyage.”
Muziris (Cranganore) was the chief depot of western trade and even
seems to have been the seat of a Roman commercial colony. Roman
coins have been found in northern and even more abundantly in
southern India, and Hindu mints used Roman models. But only
rarely can any one except sailors and merchants, who made a
speciality of eastern trade, have undertaken the long and arduous
journey. Certainly ideas travel with mysterious rapidity. The debt of
Indian astronomy to Greece is undeniable[1078] and if the same
cannot be affirmed of Indian mathematics and medicine yet the
resemblance between Greek and Indian [ treatises on these sciences
is remarkable. Early Tamil poems[1079] speak of Greek wines and
dumb (that is unintelligible) Roman soldiers in the service of Indian
kings, but do not mention philosophers, teachers or missionaries.
After 70 A.D. this trade declined, perhaps because the Flavian
Emperors and their successors were averse to the oriental luxuries
421
which formed its staple, and in 215 the massacre ordered by

Caracalla dealt a blow to the commercial importance of Alexandria
from which it did not recover for a long time. Thus the period when
intercourse between Egypt and India was most active is anterior to
the period when Christianity began to spread: it is hardly likely that
in 70 or 80 A.D. there were many Christians in Egypt.
As already mentioned, colonies of Christians from Persia settled on

the west coast of India, where there are also Jewish colonies of
considerable antiquity. The story that this Church was founded by
St. Thomas and that his relics are preserved in south India has not
been found in any work older than Marco Polo[1080]. Cosmas
Indicopleustes states that the Bishop of Kalliana was appointed from
Persia, and this explains the connection of Nestorianism with
southern India, for at that time the Nestorian Catholicos of
Ctesiphon was the only Christian prelate tolerated by the Persian
Government.
This Church may have had a considerable number of adherents for it

was not confined to Malabar, its home and centre, but had branches
on the east coast near Madras. But it was isolated and became
corrupt. It is said that in 660 it had no regular ministry and in the
fourteenth century even baptism had fallen into disuse. Like the
popular forms of Mohammedanism it adopted many Hindu
doctrines and rites. This implies on the one hand a considerable
exchange of ideas: on the other hand, if such reformers as Râmânuja
and Râmânanda were in touch with these Nestorians we may doubt
if they would have imbibed from them the teaching of the New
Testament. There is evidence that Roman Catholic missions on their
way to or from China landed in Malabar during the thirteenth and
fourteenth centuries and made some converts. In 1330 [ the Pope sent
a Bishop to Quilon with the object of bringing the Nestorians into
communion with the see of Rome. But the definite establishment of
Roman Catholicism dates from the Portuguese conquest of Goa in
1510, followed by the appointment of an Archbishop and the
introduction of the Inquisition. Henceforth there is no difficulty in
accounting for Christian influence, but it is generally admitted that
the intolerance of the Portuguese made them and their religion
distasteful to Hindus and Moslims alike. We hear, however, that
Akbar, desiring to hear Christian doctrines represented in a
disputation held at his Court, sent for Christian priests from Goa,
and his Minister Abul Fazl is quoted as having written poetry in
which mosques, churches and temples are classed together as places
where people seek for God[1081].
422
Such being the opportunities and approximate dates for Christian

influence in India, we may now examine the features in Hinduism
which have been attributed to it. They may be classified under three
principal heads, (i) The monotheistic Sivaism of the south. (ii)
Various doctrines of Vaishnavism such as bhakti, grace, the love and
fatherhood of God, the Word, and incarnation. (iii) Particular
ceremonies or traditions such as the sacred meal known as Prasâda
and the stories of Krishna’s infancy.
In southern India we have a seaboard in communication with Egypt,

Arabia and the Persian Gulf. The reality of intercourse with the west
is attested by Roman, Jewish, Nestorian and Mohammedan
settlements, but on the other hand the Brahmans of Malabar are
remarkable even according to Hindu standards for their strictness
and aloofness. As I have pointed out elsewhere, the want of
chronology in south Indian literature makes it difficult to sketch with
any precision even the outlines of its religious history, but it is
probable that Aryan religion came first in the form of Buddhism and
Jainism and that Sivaism made its appearance only when the ground
had been prepared by them. They were less exposed than the
Buddhism of the north to the influences which created the
Mahâyâna, but they no doubt mingled with the indigenous beliefs of
the Dravidians. There is no record of what these may have been
before contact with Hindu civilization; in [ historical times they
comprise the propitiation of spirits, mostly malignant and hence
often called devils, but also a strong tendency to monotheism and
ethical poetry of a high moral standard. These latter characteristics
are noticeable in most, if not all, Dravidian races, even those which
are in the lower stages of civilization[1082]. This temperament,
educated by Buddhism and finally selecting Sivaism, might
spontaneously produce such poems as the Tiruvâçagam. Such ideas
as God’s love for human souls and the soul’s struggle to be worthy
of that love are found in other Indian religions besides Tamil Sivaism
and in their earlier forms cannot be ascribed to Christian influence,
but it must be admitted that the poems of the Sittars show an
extraordinary approximation to the language of devotional literature
in Europe. If, as Caldwell thinks, these compositions are as recent as
the sixteenth or seventeenth century, there is no chronological
difficulty in supposing their contents to be inspired by Christian
ideas. But the question rather is, would Portuguese Catholicism or
corrupt Nestorianism have inspired poems denouncing idolatry and
inculcating the purest theism? Scepticism on this point is
permissible. I am inclined to think that the influence of Christianity
423
as well as the much greater influence of Mohammedanism was

mostly indirect. They imported little in the way of custom and
dogma but they strengthened the idea which naturally accompanies
sectarianism, namely, that it is reasonable and proper for a religion
to inculcate the worship of one all-sufficient power. But that this idea
can flourish in surroundings repugnant to both Christianity and
Islam is shown by the sect of Lingâyats.
The resemblances to Christianity in Vishnuism are on a larger scale

than the corresponding phenomena in Sivaism. In most parts of
India, from Assam to Madras, the worship of Vishnu and his
incarnations has assumed the form of a monotheism which, if
frequently turning into pantheism, still persistently inculcates loving
devotion to a deity who is himself moved by love for mankind. The
corresponding phase of Sivaism is restricted to certain periods and
districts of southern India. The doctrine of bhakti, or devotional faith,
is common to Vishnuites and Sivaites, but is more prominent among
the former. [ It has often been conjectured to be due to Christian
influence but the conjecture is, I think, wrong, for the doctrine is
probably pre-Christian. Pâṇini[1083] appears to allude to it, and the
idea of loving devotion to God is fully developed in the Śvetâśvatara
Upanishad and the Bhagavad-gîtâ, works of doubtful date it is true,
but in my opinion anterior to the Christian era and on any
hypothesis not much posterior to it. Some time must have elapsed
after the death of Christ before Christianity could present itself in
India as an influential doctrine. Also bhakti does not make its first
appearance as something new and full grown. The seed, the young
plant and the flower can all be found on Indian soil. So, too, the idea
that God became man for the sake of mankind is a gradual Indian
growth. In the Veda Vishnu takes three steps for the good of men. It
is probable that his avatâras were recognized some centuries before
Christ and, if this is regarded as not demonstrable, it cannot be
denied that the analogous conception of Buddhas who visit the
world to save and instruct mankind is pre-Christian[1084]. Similarly
though passages may be found in the writings of Kabir and others in
which the doctrine of Śabda or the Word is stated in language
recalling the fourth Gospel, and though in this case the hypothesis of
imitation offers no chronological difficulties, yet it is unnecessary.
For Śabda, in the sense of the Veda conceived as an eternal self-
existent sound, is an old Indian notion and when stated in these
terms does not appear very Christian. It is found in Zoroastrianism,
where Manthra Spenta the holy word is said to be the very soul of
God[1085], and it is perhaps connected with the still more primitive
424
notion that words and names have a mysterious potency and are in
themselves spells. But even if the idea of Śabda were derived from
the idea of Logos it need not be an instance of specifically Christian
influence, for this Logos idea was only utilized by Christianity and
was part of the common stock of religious thought prevalent about
the time of Christ in Egypt, Syria and Asia Minor, and it is even
possible that its earlier forms may owe something to India. And were
it proved that the [ teaching of Kabir, which clearly owes much to
Islam, also owes much to Christianity, the fact would not be very
important, for the followers of Kabir form a small and eccentric
though interesting sect, in no way typical of Hinduism as a whole.
The form of Vishnuism known as Pancarâtra appears to have had its

origin, or at least to have flourished very early, in Kashmir and the
extreme north-west, and perhaps a direct connection may be traced
between central Asia and some aspects of the worship of Krishna at
Muttra. The passage of Greek and Persian influence through the
frontier districts is attested by statuary and coins, but no such
memorials of Christianity have been discovered. But the leaders of
the Vishnuite movement in the twelfth and subsequent centuries
were mostly Brahmans of southern extraction who migrated to
Hindustan. Stress is sometimes laid on the fact that they lived in the
neighbourhood of ancient Nestorian churches and even Garbe thinks
that Râmânuja, who studied for some time at Conjevaram, was in
touch with the Christians of Mailapur near Madras. I find it hard to
believe that such contact can have had much result. For Râmânuja
was a Brahman of the straitest sect who probably thought it
contamination to be within speaking distance of a Christian[1086].
He was undoubtedly a remarkable scholar and knew by heart all the
principal Hindu scriptures, including those that teach bhakti. Why
then suppose that he took his ideas not from works like the
Bhagavad-gîtâ on which he wrote a commentary or from the
Pancarâtra which he eulogizes, but from persons whom he must
have regarded as obscure heretics? And lastly is there any proof that
such ideas as the love of God and salvation by faith flourished
among the Christians of Mailapur? In remote branches of the oriental
Church Christianity is generally reduced to legends and
superstitions, and this Church was so corrupt that it had even lost
the rite of [ baptism and is said to have held that the third person of
the Trinity was the Madonna[1087] and not the Holy Ghost. Surely
this doctrine is an extraordinary heresy in Christianity and far from
having inspired Hindu theories as to the position of Vishnu’s spouse
425
is borrowed from those theories or from some of the innumerable

Indian doctrines about the Śakti.
It is clear that the Advaita philosophy of Śankara was influential in

India from the ninth century to the twelfth and then lost some of its
prestige owing to the rise of a more personal theism. It does not
seem to me that any introduction or reinforcement of Christianity, to
which this theistic movement might be attributed, can be proved to
have taken place about 1100, and it is not always safe to seek for a
political or social explanation of such movements. But if we must
have an external explanation, the obvious one is the progress of
Mohammedanism. One may even suggest a parallel between the
epochs of Śankara and of Râmânuja. The former, though the avowed
enemy of Buddhism, introduced into Hinduism the doctrine of Mâyâ
described by Indian critics as crypto-Buddhism. Râmânuja probably
did not come into direct contact with Islam[1088], which was the
chief enemy of Hinduism in his time, but his theism (which,
however, was semi-pantheistic) may have been similarly due to the
impression produced by that enemy on Indian thought[1089].
It is easy to see superficial parallels between Hindu and Christian

ceremonies, but on examination they are generally not found to
prove that there has been direct borrowing from Christianity. For
instance, the superior castes are commonly styled twice born in
virtue of certain initiatory ceremonies performed on them in youth,
and it is natural to compare this second birth with baptismal
regeneration. But, though there is here a real similarity of ideas, it
would be hard to deny that these ideas as well as the practices which
express them have [ arisen independently[1090]. And though a
practice of sprinkling the forehead with water similar to baptism is
in use among Hindus, it is only a variety of the world-wide
ceremony of purification with sacred water. Several authors have
seen a resemblance between the communion and a sacred meal often
eaten in Hindu temples and called prasâd (favour) or mahâprasâd.
The usual forms of this observance do not resemble the Mass in
externals (as do certain ceremonies in Lamaism) and the analogy, if
any, resides in the eating of a common religious meal. Such a meal in
Indian temples has its origin in the necessity and advantage of
disposing of sacrificial food. It cannot be maintained that the deities
eat the substance of it and, if it is not consumed by fire, the obvious
method of disposal is for mankind to eat it. The practice is probably
world-wide and the consumers may be either the priests or the
worshippers. Both varieties of the rite are found in India. In the
ancient Soma sacrifices the officiants drank the residue of the sacred
426
drink: in modern temples, where ample meals are set before the god
more than once a day, it is the custom, perhaps because it is more
advantageous, to sell them to the devout. From this point of view the
prasâd is by no means the equivalent of the Lord’s Supper, but rather
of the things offered to idols which many early Christians scrupled
to eat. It has, however, another and special significance due to the
regulations imposed by caste. As a rule a Hindu of respectable social
status cannot eat with his inferiors without incurring defilement. But
in many temples members of all castes can eat the prasâd together as
a sign that before the deity all his worshippers are equal. From this
point of view the prasâd is really analogous to the communion
inasmuch as it is the sign of religious community, but it is clearly
distinct in origin and though the sacred food may be eaten with great
reverence, we are not told that it is associated with the ideas of
commemoration, sacrifice or transubstantiation which cling to the
Christian sacrament[1091].
The most curious coincidences between Indian and Christian legend

are afforded by the stories and representations of the birth and
infancy of Krishna. These have been elaborately discussed by Weber
in a well-known monograph[1092]. Krishna is represented with his
mother, much as the infant Christ with the Madonna; he is born in a
stable[1093], and other well-known incidents such as the appearance
of a star are reproduced. Two things strike us in these resemblances.
Firstly, they are not found in the usual literary version of the Indian
legend[1094], and it is therefore probable that they represent an
independent and borrowed story: secondly, they are almost entirely
concerned with the mythological aspects of Christianity. Many
Christians would admit that the adoration of the Virgin and Child is
unscriptural and borrowed from the worship of pagan goddesses
who were represented as holding their divine offspring in their
arms. If this is admitted, it is possible that Devakî and her son may
be a replica not of the Madonna but of a pagan prototype. But there
is no difficulty in admitting that Christian legends and Christian art
may have entered northern India from Bactria and Persia, and have
found a home in Muttra. Only it does not follow from this that any
penetrating influence transformed Hindu thought and is responsible
for Krishna’s divinity, for the idea of bhakti, or for the theology of the
Bhagavad-gîtâ. The borrowed features in the Krishna story are
superficial and also late. They do not occur in the Mahâbhârata and
the earliest authority cited by Weber is Hemâdri, a writer of the
thirteenth century. Allowing that what he describes may have
existed several centuries before his own date, we have still no
427
ground for tracing the main ideas of Vaishnavism to Christianity and

the later vagaries of Krishnaism are precisely the aspects of Indian
religion which most outrage Christian sentiment.
One edition of the Bhavishya Purana contains a summary of the

book of Genesis from Adam to Abraham[1095]. Though it is a late
interpolation, it shows conclusively that the editors of Puranas had
no objection to borrowing from Christian sources and it maybe that
some incidents in the life of Krishna as related by the Vishnu,
Bhâgavata and other Puranas are borrowed from the Gospels, such
as Kamsa’s orders to massacre all male infants when Krishna is born,
the journey of Nanda, Krishna’s foster-father, to Mathurâ in order to
pay taxes and the presentation of a pot of ointment to Krishna by a
hunchback woman whom he miraculously makes straight. In
estimating the importance of such coincidences we must remember
that they are merely casual details in a long story of adventures
which, in their general outline, bear no relation to the life of Christ.
The most striking of these is the “massacre of the Innocents.” The
Harivaṃsa, which is not later than the fifth century A.D., relates that
Kamsa killed all the other children of Devakî, though it does not
mention a general massacre, and Pâtanjali (c. 150 B.C.) knew the
legend of the hostility between Krishna and Kamsa and the latter’s
death[1096]. So if anything has been borrowed from the Gospel
account it is only the general slaughter of children. The mention of a
pot of ointment strikes Europeans because such an object is not
familiar to us, but it was an ordinary form of luxury in India and
Judæa alike, and the fact that a woman honoured both Krishna and
Christ in the same way but in totally different circumstances is
hardly more than a chance coincidence. The fact that both Nanda
and Joseph leave their homes in order to pay their taxes is certainly
curious and I will leave the reader to form his own opinion about it.
The instance of the Bhavishya Purana shows that Hindus had no
scruples about borrowing from the Bible and in some Indian dialects
the name Krishna appears as Krishto or Kushto. On the other hand,
whatever borrowing there may have been is concerned exclusively
with trivial details: the principal episodes of the Krishna legend were
known before the Christian era.
This is perhaps the place to examine a curious episode of the

Mahâbhârata which narrates the visit of certain sages to a region [
called Śvetadvîpa, the white island or continent, identified by some
with Alexandria or a Christian settlement in central Asia. The
episode occurs in the Śantiparvan[1097] of the Mahâbhârata and is
introduced by the story of a royal sacrifice, at which most of the gods
428
appeared in visible shape but Hari (Vishnu or Krishna) took his

offerings unseen. The king and his priests were angry, but three
sages called Ekata, Dvita and Trita, who are described as the
miraculous offspring of Brahmâ, interposed explaining that none of
those present were worthy to see Hari. They related how they had
once desired to behold him in his own form and after protracted
austerities repaired under divine guidance to an island called
Śvetadvîpa on the northern shores of the Sea of Milk[1098]. It was
inhabited by beings white and shining like the moon who followed
the rules of the Pancarâtra, took no food and were continually
engaged in silent prayer. So great was the effulgence that at first the
visitors were blinded. It was only after another century of penance
that they began to have hopes of beholding the deity. Then there
suddenly arose a great light. The inhabitants of the island ran
towards it with joined hands and, as if they were making an offering,
cried, “Victory to thee, O thou of the lotus eyes, reverence to thee,
producer of all [ things: reverence to thee, Hṛishikeśa, great Purusha,
the first-born.” The three sages saw nothing but were conscious that
a wind laden with perfumes blew past them. They were convinced,
however, that the deity had appeared to his worshippers. A voice
from heaven told them that this was so and that no one without faith
(abhakta) could see Nârâyaṇa.
A subsequent section of the same book tells us that Nârada visited

Śvetadvîpa and received from Nârâyaṇa the Pancarâtra, which is
thus definitely associated with the locality.
Some writers have seen in this legend a poetical account of contact

with Christianity, but wrongly, as I think. We have here no
mythicized version of a real journey but a voyage of the imagination.
The sea of milk, the white land and its white shining inhabitants are
an attempt to express the pure radiance proper to the courts of God,
much as the Book of Revelation tells of a sea of glass, elders in white
raiment and a deity whose head and hair were white like wool and
snow. Nor need we suppose, as some have done, that the worship of
the white sages is an attempt to describe the Mass. The story does
not say that whenever the White Islanders held a religious service
the deity appeared, but that on a particular occasion when the deity
appeared they ran to meet him and saluted him with a hymn. The
idea that prayer and meditation are the sacrifice to be offered by
perfected saints is thoroughly Indian and ancient. The account
testifies to the non-Brahmanic character of this worship of Vishnu,
which was patronized by the Brahmans though not originated by
them, but there is nothing exotic in the hymn to Nârâyaṇa and the
429
epithet first-born (pûrvaja), in which some have detected a Christian

flavour, is as old as the Rig Veda. The reason for laying the scene of
the story in the north (if indeed the points of the compass have any
place in this mythical geography) is no doubt the early connection of
the Pancarâtra with Kashmir and north-western India[1099]. The
facts that some Puranas people the regions near Śvetadvîpa with
Iranian sun-worshippers[1100] and that some details of the
Pancarâtra (though not the system as a whole) show a resemblance
to Zoroastrianism suggest interesting hypotheses as to origin of this
form of Vishnuism, but more facts are needed to confirm them.
Chronology gives us little [ help, for though the Mahâbhârata was
substantially complete in the fourth century, it cannot be denied that
additions may have been made to it later and that the story of
Śvetadvîpa may be one of them. There were Nestorian Bishops at
Merv and Herat in the fifth century, but there appears to be no
evidence that Christianity reached Transoxiana before the fall of the
Sassanids in the first half of the seventh century.
Thus there is little reason to regard Christianity as an important

factor in the evolution of Hinduism, because (a) there is no evidence
that it appeared in an influential form before the sixteenth century
and (b) there is strong evidence that most of the doctrines and
practices resembling Christianity have an Indian origin. On the other
hand abundant instances show that the Hindus had no objection to
borrowing from a foreign religion anything great or small which
took their fancy. But the interesting point is that the principal
Christian doctrines were either indigenous in India—such as bhakti
and avatâras—or repugnant to the vast majority of Hindus, such as
the crucifixion and atonement. I do not think that Nestorianism had
any appreciable effect on the history of religious thought in southern
India. Hellenic and Zoroastrian ideas undoubtedly entered north-
western India, but, though Christian ideas may have come with
them, few of the instances cited seem even probable except some
details in the life of Krishna which affect neither the legend as a
whole nor the doctrines associated with it. Some later sects, such as
the Kabirpanthis, show remarkable resemblances to Christianity, but
then the teaching of Kabir was admittedly a blend of Hinduism and
Islam, and since Islam accepted many Christian doctrines, it remains
to be proved that any further explanation is needed. Barth observed
that criticism is generally on the look out for the least trace of
Christian influence on Hinduism but does not pay sufficient
attention to the extent of Moslim influence. Every student of Indian
religion should bear in mind this dictum of the great French savant.
430
After the sixteenth century there is no difficulty in supposing direct

contact with Roman Catholicism. Tukaram, the Maratha poet who
lived comparatively near to Goa, may have imitated the diction of
the Gospels.
Some authors[1101] are disposed to see Christian influence in

Chinese and Japanese Buddhism, particularly in the Amidist sects. I
have touched on this subject in several places but it may be well to
summarize my conclusions here.
The chief Amidist doctrines are clearly defined in the Sukhâ vatî-
vyûha which was translated from Sanskrit into Chinese in the latter
half of the second century A.D. It must therefore have existed in
Sanskrit at least in the first century of our era, at which period
dogmatic Christianity could hardly have penetrated to India or any
part of Central Asia where a Sanskrit treatise was likely to be
written. Its doctrines must therefore be independent of Christianity
and indeed their resemblance to Christianity is often exaggerated,
for though salvation by faith in Amida is remarkably like
justification by faith, yet Amida is not a Saviour who died for the
world and faith in him is coupled with the use of certain invocations.
The whole theory has close parallels in Zoroastrianism and is also a
natural development of ideas already existing in India.
Nor can I think that the common use of rites on behalf of the dead in
Buddhist China is traceable to Christianity. In this case too the
parallel is superficial, for the rites are in most cases not prayers for
the dead: the officiants recite formulae by which they acquire merit
and they then formally transfer this merit to the dead. Seeing how
great was the importance assigned to the cult of the dead in China, it
is not necessary to seek for explanations why a religion trying to win
its way in those countries invented ceremonies to satisfy the popular
craving, and Buddhism had no need to imitate Christianity, for from
an early period it had countenanced offerings intended to comfort
and help the departed.
Under the T’ang dynasty Manichæism, Nestorianism and new

streams of Buddhism all entered China. These religions had some
similarity to one another, their clergy may have co-operated and
Manichæism certainly adopted Buddhist ideas. There is no reason
why Buddhism should not have adopted Nestorian ideas and, in so
far as the Nestorians familiarized China with the idea of salvation by
faith in a divine personage, they may have helped the spread of
Amidism. But the evidence that we possess seems to show not that
431
the Nestorians introduced the story of Christ’s life and sacrifice into
Buddhism but that they suppressed the idea of atonement by his
death, possibly under Buddhist influence.
FOOTNOTES:
[1072] The most learned and lucid discussion of these questions,

which includes an account of earlier literature on the subject, is to be
found in Garbe’s Indien und das Christentum, 1914. But I am not able
to accept all his conclusions. The work, to which I am much
indebted, is cited below as Garbe. See also Carpenter, Theism in
Medieval India, 1921, pp. 521-524.
[1073] See Garbe and Harnack, Mission und Ausbreitung des

Christentums, ii. Chrysostom (Hom. in Joh. 2. 2) writing at the end of
the fourth century speaks of Syrians, Egyptians, Persians and ten
thousand other nations learning Christianity from translations into
their languages, but one cannot expect geographical accuracy in so
rhetorical a passage.
[1074] Eusebius (Ecc. Hist. v. 10), supported by notices in Jerome and

others, states that Pantænus went from Alexandria to preach in India
and found there Christians using the Gospel according to Matthew
written in Hebrew characters. It had been left there by the Apostle
Bartholomew. But many scholars are of opinion that by India in this
passage is meant southern Arabia. In these early notices India is used
vaguely for Eastern Parthia, Southern Arabia and even Ethiopia. It
requires considerable evidence to make it probable that at the time of
Pantænus (second century A.D.) any one in India used the Gospel in
a Semitic language.
[1075] See, for the Thomas legend, Garbe, Vincent Smith, Early
History of India, 3rd ed. pp. 231 ff., and Philipps in I.A.. 1903, pp. 1-15
and 145-160.
[1076] Nat. Hist. xii. 18 (41).
[1077] II. iv. 12. Strabo died soon after 21 A.D.
[1078] It is seen even in borrowed words, e.g. hora = ὢρα: Jyau =

Ζεὺς: Heli = ἢλιος:
[1079] See Kanakasabhai’s book, The Tamils 1800 years ago.
432
[1080] Harnack (Mission und Ausbreitung des Christentums, II. 126)

says “Dass die Thomas-Christen welche man im 16 Jahrhundert in
Indien wieder entdeckte bis ins 3 Jahrhundert hinaufgehen lässt sich
nicht erweisen.”
[1081] For Akbar and Christianity, see Cathay and the Way Thither
(Hakluyt Society), vol. IV. 172-3.
[1082] See Gover, Folk Songs of Southern India, 1871.
[1083] iv. 3. 95, 98.
[1084] Cf. the Pali verses in the Therîgâthâ, 157: “Hail to thee,
Buddha, who savest me and many others from suffering.”
[1085] See Yasht, 13. 81 and Vendidad, 19. 14.
[1086] The liberal ideas as to caste held by some Vishnuites are due
to Râmânand (c. 1400) who was excommunicated by his
coreligionists. I find it hard to agree with Garbe that Râmânuja
admitted the theoretical equality of all castes. He says himself (Srî-
Bhâshya, II. 3. 46, 47) that souls are of the same nature in so far as
they are all parts of Brahman (a proposition which follows from his
fundamental principles and is not at all due to Christian influence),
but that some men are entitled to read the Veda while others are
debarred from the privilege. All fire, he adds, is of the same nature,
but fire taken from the house of a Brahman is pure, whereas fire
taken from a cremation ground is impure. Even so the soul is defiled
by being associated with a low-caste body.
[1087] See Grieson and Garbe. But I have not found a quotation from
any original authority. Mohammed, however, had the same notion
of the Trinity.
[1088] But the Mappilahs or Moplahs appear to have settled on the

Malabar coast about 900 A.D.
[1089] Similarly the neo-Confucianism of the Sung dynasty was

influenced by Mahâyânist Buddhism. Chu-hsi and his disciples
condemned Buddhism, but the new problems and new solutions
which they brought forward would not have been heard of but for
Buddhism.
[1090] The idea of the second birth is found in the Majjhima Nikâya,
where in Sutta 86 the converted brigand Angulimala speaks of his
regenerate life as Yato aham ariyâya jâtiyâ jâto, “Since I was born by
433
this noble (or holy) birth.” Brahmanic parallels are numerous, e.g.
Manu, 2. 146.
[1091] It is said, however, that the celebration of the Prasâd by the

Kabirpanthis bears an extraordinary resemblance to the Holy
Communion of Christians. This may be so, but, as already
mentioned, this late and admittedly composite sect is not typical of
Hinduism as a whole.
[1092] Krishṇajanmâshṭamî, Memoirs of Academy of Berlin, 1867.
[1093] In spite of making enquiry I have never seen or heard of these

representations of a stable myself. As Senart points out (Légende, p.
336) all the personages who play a part in Krishna’s early life are
shown in these tableaux in one group, but this does not imply that
shepherds and their flocks are supposed to be present at his birth.
[1094] Though the ordinary legend does not say that Krishna was
born in a stable yet it does associate him with cattle.
[1095] Pargiter, Dynasties of the Kali age, p. xviii.
[1096] Commentary on Pânini, 2. 3. 36, 3. 1. 36 and 3. 2. 111. It seems

probable that Pâtanjali knew the story of Krishna and Kamsa
substantially as it is recounted in the Harivaṃsa.
[1097] Section 337. A journey to Śvetadvîpa is also related in the

Kathâsarit sâgara, LIV.
[1098] The most accessible statement of the geographical fancies here

referred to is in Vishnu Purâna, Book II, chap. IV. The Sea of Milk is
the sixth of the seven concentric seas which surround Jambudvîpa
and Mt. Meru. It divides the sixth of the concentric continents or
Śâkadvîpa from the seventh or Pushkara-dvîpa. The inhabitants of
Śâkadvîpa worship Vishnu as the Sun and have this much reality
that at any rate, according to the Vishnu and Bhavishya Purânas,
they are clearly Iranian Sun-worshippers whose priests are called
Magas or Mṛigas. Pushkara-dvîpa is a terrestrial paradise: the
inhabitants live a thousand years, are of the same nature as the gods
and free from sorrow and sin. “The three Vedas, the Purânas, Ethics
and Polity are unknown” among them and “there are no distinctions
of caste or order: there are no fixed institutes.” The turn of fancy
which located this non-Brahmanic Utopia in the north seems akin to
that which led the Greeks to talk of Hyperboreans. Fairly early in the
history of India it must have been discovered that the western,
434
southern, and eastern coasts were washed by the sea so that the
earthly paradise was naturally placed in the north. Thus we hear of
an abode of the blessed called the country of the holy Uttara Kurus
or northern Kurus. Here nothing can be perceived with human
senses (Mahâbh. Sabhâ, 1045), and it is mentioned in the same breath
as Heaven and the city of Indra (ib. Anusâs. 2841).
It is not quite clear (neither is it of much moment), whether the

Mahâbhârata intends by Śvetadvîpa one of these concentric world
divisions or a separate island. The Kûrma and Padma Purânas also
mention it as the shining abode of Vishnu and his saintly servants.
[1099] Garbe thinks that the Sea of Milk is Lake Balkash. For the
Pancarâtra see book v. iii. 3.
[1100] See note 2 on last page.
[1101] E.g. several works of Lloyd and Saeki, The Nestorian Monument
in China.
435
CHAPTER LVI
INDIAN INFLUENCE IN THE WESTERN WORLD
The influence of Indian religion on Christianity is part of the wider

question of its influence on the west generally. It is clear that from
200 B.C. until 300 A.D. oriental religion played a considerable part in
the countries round the Mediterranean. The worship of the Magna
Mater was known in Rome by 200 B.C. and that of Isis and Serapis in
the time of Sulla. In the early centuries of the Christian era the cultus
of Mithra prevailed not only in Rome but in most parts of Europe
where there were Roman legions, even in Britain. These religions
may be appropriately labelled with the vague word oriental, for they
are not so much the special creeds of Egypt and Persia transplanted
into Roman soil as fragments, combinations and adaptations of the
most various eastern beliefs. They differed from the forms of
worship indigenous to Greece and Italy in being personal, not
national: they were often emotional and professed to reveal the
nature and destinies of the soul. If we ask whether there are any
definitely Indian elements in all this orientalism, the answer must be
that there is no clear case of direct borrowing, nothing Indian
analogous to the migrations of Isis and Mithra. If Indian thought had
any influence on the Mediterranean it was not immediate, but
through Persia, Babylonia and Egypt. But it is possible that the
doctrine of metempsychosis and the ideal of the ascetic life are
echoes of India. Though the former is found in an incomplete shape
among savages in many parts of the world, there is no indication
that it was indigenous in Egypt, Syria, Babylonia, Asia Minor, Greece
or Italy. It crops up now and again as a tenet held by philosophers or
communities of cosmopolitan tastes such as the Orphic Societies, but
usually in circumstances which suggest a foreign origin. It is said,
however, to have formed part of the doctrines taught by the Druids
in Gaul. Similarly though occasional fasts and other mortifications
may have been usual in the worship of various deities and though
the rigorous Spartan discipline was a sort of military asceticism, still
the idea [ that the religious life consists in suppressing the passions,
which plays such a large part in Christian monasticism, can be traced
not to any Jewish or European institution but to Egypt. Although
monasticism spread quickly thence to Syria, it is admitted that the
first Christian hermits and monasteries were Egyptian and there is
some evidence for the existence there of pagan hermits[1102]. Egypt
436
was a most religious country, but it does not appear that asceticism,
celibacy or meditation formed part of its older religious life, and
their appearance in Hellenistic times may be due to a wave of Asiatic
influence starting originally from India.
Looking westwards from India and considering what were the

circumstances favouring the diffusion of Indian ideas, we must note
first that Hindus have not only been in all ages preoccupied by
religious questions but have also had a larger portion of the
missionary spirit than is generally supposed. It is true that in wide
tracts and long periods this spirit has been suppressed by Brahmanic
exclusiveness, but phenomena like the spread of Buddhism and the
establishment of Hinduism in Indo-China and Java speak for
themselves. The spiritual tide flowed eastwards rather than
westwards; still it is probable that its movement was felt, though on
a smaller scale, in the accessible parts of the west. By land, our
record tells us mainly of what came into India from Persia and
Bactria, but something must have gone out. By water we know that
at least after about 700 B.C. there was communication with the
Persian Gulf, Arabia and probably the Red Sea. Semitic alphabets
were borrowed: in the Jâtakas we hear of merchants going to Baveru
or Babylon: Solomon’s commercial ventures brought him Indian
products. But the strongest testimony to the dissemination of
religious ideas is found in Asoka’s celebrated edict (probably 256
B.C.) in which he claims to have spread the Dhamma as far as the
dominions of Antiochus “and beyond that Antiochus to where dwell
the four kings named Ptolemy, Antigonus, Magas and Alexander.”
The kings mentioned are identified as the rulers of Syria, Egypt,
Macedonia, Cyrene and Epirus. Asoka compares his missionary
triumphs to the military conquests of other monarchs. It may be that
the [ comparison is only too just and that like them he claimed to
have extended his law to regions where his name was unknown. No
record of the arrival of Buddhist missions in any Hellenistic
kingdom has reached us and the language of the edict, if examined
critically, is not precise. On the other hand, however vague it may
be, it testifies to two things. Firstly, Egypt, Syria and the other
Hellenistic states were realities to the Indians of this period, distant
but not fabulous regions. Secondly, the king desired to spread the
knowledge of the law in these countries and this desire was shared,
or inspired, by the monks whom he patronized. It is therefore
probable that, though the difficulties of travelling were great and the
linguistic difficulties of preaching an Indian religion even greater,
missionaries set out for the west and reached if not Macedonia and
437
Epirus, at least Babylon and Alexandria. We may imagine that they

would frequent the temples and the company of the priests and not
show much talent for public preaching. If no record of them remains,
it is not more wonderful than the corresponding silence in the east
about Greek visitors to India.
It is only after the Christian era that we find Apollonius and Plotinus
looking towards India as the home of wisdom. In earlier periods the
definite instances of connection with India are few. Indian figures
found at Memphis perhaps indicate the existence there of an Indian
colony[1103], and a Ptolemaic grave-stone has been discovered
bearing the signs of the wheel and trident[1104]. The infant deity
Horus is represented in Indian attitudes and as sitting on a lotus.
Some fragments of the Kanarese language have been found on a
papyrus, but it appears not to be earlier than the second century
A.D.[1105] In 21 A.D. Augustus while at Athens received an
embassy from India which came viâ Antioch.
It was accompanied by a person described as Zarmanochegas, an

Indian from Bargosa who astonished the Athenians by publicly
burning himself alive[1106]. We also hear of the movement of an
Indian tribe from the [ Panjab to Parthia and thence to Armenia (149-
127 B.C.)[1107], and of an Indian colony at Alexandria in the time of
Trajan. Doubtless there were other tribal movements and other
mercantile colonies which have left no record, but they were all on a
small scale and there was no general outpouring of India westwards.
The early relations of India were with Babylon rather than with
Egypt, but if Indian ideas reached Babylon they may easily have
spread further. Communication between Egypt and Babylon existed
from an early period and the tablets of Tel-el-Amarna testify to the
antiquity and intimacy of this intercourse. At a later date Necho
invaded Babylonia but was repulsed. The Jews returned from the
Babylonian captivity (538 B.C.) with their religious horizon enlarged
and modified. They were chiefly affected by Zoroastrian ideas but
they may have become acquainted with any views and practices then
known in Babylon, and not necessarily with those identified with the
state worship, for the exiles may have been led to associate with
other strangers. After about 535 B.C. the Persian empire extended
from the valley of the Indus to the valley of the Nile and from
Macedonia to Babylon. We hear that in the army which Xerxes led
against Greece there were Indian soldiers, which is interesting as
showing how the Persians transported subject races from one end of
their empire to the other. After the career of Alexander, Hellenistic
438
kingdoms took the place of this empire and, apart from inroads on
the north-west frontier of India, maintained friendly relations with
her. Seleucus Nicator sent Megasthenes as envoy about 300 B.C. and
Ptolemy Philadelphus (285-247 B.C.) a representative named
Dionysius. Bindusâra, the father of Asoka, exchanged missions with
Antiochus, and, according to a well-known anecdote[1108],
expressed a wish to buy a professor (σοφιστήν). But Antiochus
replied that Greek professors were not for sale.
Egyptologists consider that metempsychosis is not part of the earlier

strata of Egyptian religion but appears first about 500 B.C., and
Flinders Petrie refers to this period the originals of the earliest
Hermetic literature. But other authorities regard these works as
being both in substance and language considerably posterior to the [
Christian era and as presenting a jumble of Christianity,
Neoplatonism and Egyptian ideas.
I have neither space nor competence to discuss the date of the

Hermetic writings, but it is of importance for the question which we
are considering. They contain addresses to the deity like I am Thou
and Thou art I ( ἐγώ εἰμι σὺ καὶ σὺ ἐγώ ). If such words could be
used in Egypt several centuries before Christ, the probability of
Indian influence seems to me strong, for they would not grow
naturally out of Egyptian or Hellenistic religion. Five hundred years
later they would be less remarkable. Whatever may be the date of the
Hermetic literature, it is certain that the Book of Wisdom and the
writings of Philo are pre-Christian and show a mixture of ideas
drawn from many sources, Jewish, Neoplatonic and
Neopythagorean. If these hospitable systems made the acquaintance
of Indian philosophy, we may be sure that they gave it an
unprejudiced and even friendly hearing. In the centuries just before
the Christian era Egypt was a centre of growth for personal and
private religious ideas[1109], hardly possessing sufficient
organization to form what we call a religion, yet still, inasmuch as
they aspired to teach individual souls right conduct as well as true
knowledge, implicitly containing the same scheme of teaching as the
Buddhist and Christian Churches. But it is characteristic of all this
movement that it never attempted to form a national or universal
religion and remained in all its manifestations individual and
personal, connected neither with the secular government nor with
any national cultus. Among these religious ideas were monotheism
mingled with pantheism to the extent of saying that God is all and
all is one: the idea of the Logos or Divine Wisdom, which ultimately
assumes the form that the Word is an emanation or Son of God;
439
asceticism, or at least the desire to free the soul from the bondage of
the senses; metempsychosis and the doctrine of conversion or the
new birth of the soul, which fits in well with metempsychosis,
though it frequently exists apart from it. I doubt if there is sufficient
reason for attributing the doctrine of the Logos[1110] to India, but it
is possible that asceticism and the belief in [ metempsychosis
received their first impulse thence. They appear late and, like the
phraseology of the Hermetic books, they do not grow naturally out
of antecedent ideas and practices in Egypt and Palestine. The life
followed by such communities as the Therapeutæ and Essenes is just
such as might have been evolved by seekers after truth who were
trying to put into practice in another country the religious ideals of
India. There are differences: for instance these communities laboured
with their hands and observed the seventh day, but their main ideas,
retirement from the world and suppression of the passions, are those
of Indian monks and foreign to Egyptian and Jewish thought.
The character of Pythagoras’s teaching and its relation to Egypt have

been much discussed and the name of the master was clearly
extended by later (and perhaps also by early) disciples to doctrines
which he never held. But it seems indisputable that there were
widely spread both in Greece and Italy societies called Pythagorean
or Orphic which inculcated a common rule of life and believed in
metempsychosis. The rule of life did not as a rule amount to
asceticism in the Indian sense, which was most uncongenial to
Hellenic ideas, but it comprised great self-restraint. The belief in
metempsychosis finds remarkably clear expression: we hear in the
Orphic fragments of the circle of birth and of escape from it,
language strikingly parallel to many Indian utterances and strikingly
unlike the usual turns of Greek speech and thought. Thus the soul is
addressed as “Hail thou who hast suffered the suffering” and is
made to declare “I have flown out of the sorrowful weary
wheel[1111].” I see no reason for discrediting the story that
Pythagoras visited Egypt[1112]. He is said to have been a Samian
and during his life (c. 500 B.C.) Samos had a special connection with
Egypt, for Polycrates was the ally of Amasis and assisted him with
troops. The date, if somewhat early, is not far removed from the time
when metempsychosis became part of Egyptian religion. The general
opinion of antiquity connected the Orphic [ doctrines with Thrace
but so little is known of the Thracians and their origin that this
connection does not carry us much further. They appear, however, to
have had relations with Asia Minor and that region must have been
440
in touch with India[1113]. But Orphism was also connected with

Crete, and Cretan civilization had oriental affinities[1114].
The point of greatest interest naturally is to determine what were the

religious influences among which Christ grew up. Whatever they
may have been, his originality is not called in question. Mohammed
was an enquirer: in estimating his work we have often to ask what
he had heard about Christianity and Judaism and how far he had
understood it correctly. But neither the Buddha nor Christ were
enquirers in this sense: they accepted the best thought of their time
and country: with a genius which transcends comparison and eludes
definition they gave it an expression which has become immortal.
Neither the substance nor the form of their teaching can reasonably
be regarded as identical, for the Buddha did not treat of God or the
divine government of the world, whereas Christ’s chief thesis is that
God loves the world and that therefore man should love God and his
fellow men. But though their basic principles differ, the two
doctrines agree in maintaining that happiness is obtainable not by
pleasure or success or philosophy or rites but by an unselfish life,
culminating in the state called Nirvana or the kingdom of heaven.
“The kingdom of heaven is within you.”
In the Gospels Christ teaches neither asceticism nor metempsychosis.

The absence of the former is remarkable: he eats flesh and allows
himself to be anointed: he drinks wine, prescribes its use in religion
and is credited with producing it miraculously when human cellars
run short. But he praises poverty and the poor: the Sermon on the
Mount and the instructions to the Seventy can be put in practice only
by those who, like the members of a religious community, have
severed all [ worldly ties and though the extirpation of desire is not
in the Gospels held up as an end, the detachment, the freedom from
care, lust and enmity prescribed by the law of the Buddha find their
nearest counterpart in the lives of the Essenes and Therapeutæ.
Though we have no record of Christ being brought into contact with
these communities (for John the Baptist appears to have been a
solitary and erratic preacher) it is probable that their ideals were
known to him and influenced his own. Their rule of life may have
been a faint reflex of Indian monasticism. But the debt to India must
not be exaggerated: much of the oriental element in the Essenes, such
as their frequent purifications and their prayers uttered towards the
sun, may be due to Persian influence. They seem to have believed in
the pre-existence of the soul and to have held that it was imprisoned
in the body, but this hardly amounts to metempsychosis, and
metempsychosis cannot be found in the New Testament[1115]. The
441
old Jewish outlook, preserved by the Sadducees, appears not to have

included a belief in any life after death, and the supplements to this
materialistic view admitted by the Pharisees hardly amounted to the
doctrine of the natural immortality of the soul but rather to a belief
that the just would somehow acquire new bodies and live again.
Thus people were ready to accept John the Baptist as being Elias in a
new form. Perhaps these rather fragmentary ideas of the Jews are
traceable to Egyptian and ultimately to Indian teaching about
transmigration. That belief is said to crop up occasionally in rabbinical
writings but was given no place in orthodox Christianity[1116].
With regard to the teaching of Christ then, the conclusion must be

that it owes no direct debt to Indian, Egyptian, Persian or other
oriental sources. But inasmuch as he was in sympathy with the more
spiritual elements of Judaism, largely borrowed during the
Babylonian captivity, and with the unworldly and self-denying lives
of the [ Essenes, the tone of his teaching is nearer to these newer and
imported doctrines than to the old law of Israel[1117].
Some striking parallels have been pointed out between the Gospels
and Indian texts of such undoubted antiquity that if imitation is
admitted, the Evangelists must have been the imitators. Before
considering these instances I invite the reader’s attention to two
parallel passages from Shakespeare and the Indian poet Bhartrihari.
The latter is thus translated by Monier Williams[1118]:
Now for a little while a child, and now

An amorous youth; then for a season turned
Into the wealthy householder: then stripped
Of all his riches, with decrepit limbs
And wrinkled frame man creeps towards the end
Of life’s erratic course and like an actor
Passes behind Death’s curtain out of view.
The resemblance of this to the well-known lines in As You Like It,

“All the world’s a stage,” etc., is obvious, and it is a real resemblance,
although the point emphasized by Bhartrihari is that man leaves the
world like an actor who at the end of the piece slips behind the
curtain, which formed the background of an Indian stage. But, great
as is the resemblance, I imagine that no one would maintain that it
has any other origin than that a fairly obvious thought occurred to
two writers in different times and countries and suggested similar
expressions.
442
Now many parallels between the Buddhist and Christian

scriptures—the majority as it seems to me of those collected by
Edmunds and Anesaki—belong to this class[1119]. One of the most
striking is the passage in the Vinaya relating how the Buddha
himself cared for a sick monk who was neglected by his colleagues
and said to these latter, “Whosoever would wait upon me let him
wait on the sick[1120].” Here the resemblance to Matthew xxv. 40
and 45 is remarkable, but I do not imagine that the writer of the
Gospel had ever heard or read of the Buddha’s words. The sentiment
which prompted them, if none too common, is at least widespread
and is the same that made Confucius show respect and courtesy to
the blind. The setting of the saying in the Vinaya and in the Gospel is
quite different: the common point is that one whom all are anxious
to honour sees that those around him show no consideration to the
sick and unhappy and reproves them in the words of the text, words
which admit of many interpretations, the simplest perhaps being “I
bid you care for the sick: you neglect me if you neglect those whom I
bid you to cherish.”
But many passages in Buddhist and Christian writings have been

compared where there is no real parallel but only some word or
detail which catches the attention and receives an importance which
it does not possess. An instance of this is the so-called parable of the
prodigal son in the Lotus Sûtra, Chapter iv, which has often been
compared with Luke xv. 11 ff. But neither in moral nor in plot are the
two parables really similar. The Lotus maintains that there are many
varieties of doctrine of which the less profound are not necessarily
wrong, and it attempts to illustrate this by not very convincing
stories of how a father may withhold the whole truth from his
children for their good. In one story a father and son are separated
for fifty years and both move about: the father becomes very rich, the
son poor. The son in his wanderings comes upon his father’s palace
and recognizes no one. The father, now a very old man, knows his
son, but instead of welcoming him at once as his heir puts him
through a gradual discipline and explains the real position only on
his deathbed. These incidents have nothing in common with the
parable related in the Gospel except that a son is lost and found, an
event which occurs in a hundred oriental tales. What is much more
remarkable, though hardly a case of borrowing, is that in both
versions the chief personage, that is Buddha or God, is likened to a
father as he also is in the parable of the carriages[1121].
One of the Jain scriptures called Uttarâdyayana[1122] contains the

following remarkable passage, “Three merchants set out on their
443
travels each with his capital; one of them gained much, the second
returned with his capital and the third merchant came home after
having lost his capital; The parable is taken from common life; learn
to apply it to the Law. The capital is human life, the gain is heaven,”
etc. It is impossible to fix the date of this passage: the Jain Canon in
which it occurs was edited in 454 A.D. but the component parts of it
are much older. It clearly gives a rough sketch of the idea which is
elaborated in the parable of the talents. Need we suppose that there
has been borrowing on either side? Only in a very restricted sense, I
think, if at all. The parable is taken from common life, as the Indian
text truly says. It occurred to some teacher, perhaps to many teachers
independently, that the spiritual life may be represented as a matter
of profit and loss and illustrated by the conduct of those who employ
their money profitably or not. The idea is natural and probably far
older than the Gospels, but the parable of the talents is an original
and detailed treatment of a metaphor which may have been known
to the theological schools of both India and Palestine. The parable of
the sower bears the same relation to the much older Buddhist
comparison of instruction to agriculture[1123] in which different
classes of hearers correspond to different classes of fields.
I feel considerable hesitation about two other parallels. What relation

does the story of the girl who gives two copper coins to the Sangha
bear to the parable of the widow’s mite? It occurs in Aśvaghosa’s
Sûtrâlankâra, but though he was a learned poet, it is very unlikely
that he had seen the Gospels, Although his poem ends like a fairy
tale, for the poor girl marries the king’s son as the reward of her
piety, yet there is an extraordinary resemblance in the moral and the
detail of the two mites. Can the origin be some proverb which was
current in many countries and worked up differently?
The other parallel is between Christ’s meeting with the woman of

Samaria and a story in the Divyâvadâna[1124] telling how Ananda
asked an outcast maiden for water. Here the Indian work, which is
probably not earlier than the third century A.D., might well be the
borrower. Yet the incident is thoroughly Indian. The resemblance is
not in the conversation but in the fact that both in India and Palestine
water given by the impure is held to defile and that in both countries
spiritual teachers rise above such rules. Perhaps Europeans, to
whom such notions of defilement are unknown, exaggerate the
similarity of the narratives, because the similarity of customs on
which it depends seems remarkable.
444
There are, however, some incidents in the Gospels which bear so

great a likeness to earlier stories found in the Pitakas that the two
narratives can hardly be wholly independent. These are (a) the
testimony of Asita and Simeon to the future careers of the infant
Buddha and Christ: (b) the temptation of Buddha and Christ: (c) their
transfiguration: (d) the miracle of walking on the water and its
dependence on faith: (e) the miracle of feeding a multitude with a
little bread. The first three parallels relate to events directly
concerning the life of a superhuman teacher, Buddha or Christ. In
saying that the two narratives can hardly be independent, I do not
mean that one is necessarily unhistorical or that the writers of the
Gospels had read the Pitakas. That a great man should have a mental
crisis in his early life and feel that the powers of evil are trying to
divert him from his high destiny is eminently likely. But in the East
superhuman teachers were many and there grew up a tradition,
fluctuating indeed but still not entirely without consistency, as to
what they may be expected to do. Angelic voices at their birth and
earthquakes at their death are coincidences in embellishment on
which no stress can be laid, but when we find that Zoroaster, the
Buddha and Christ were all tempted by the Evil One and all at the
same period of their careers, it is impossible to avoid the suspicion
that some of their biographers were influenced by the idea that such
an incident was to be expected at that point, unless indeed we regard
these so-called temptations as mental crises natural in the
development of a religious genius. Similarly it is most remarkable
that all accounts of the transfiguration of the Buddha and of Christ
agree not only in describing the shining body but in adding a
reference to impending death. The resemblance between the stories
of Asita and Simeon seems to me less striking but I think that they
owe their place in both [ biographies to the tradition that the
superman is recognized and saluted by an aged Saint soon after
birth.
The two stories about miracles are of less importance in substance

but the curious coincidences in detail suggest that they are pieces of
folklore which circulated in Asia and Eastern Europe. The Buddhist
versions occur in the introductions to Jatakas 190 and 78, which are
of uncertain date, though they may be very ancient[1125]. The idea
that saints can walk on the water is found in the Majjhima-
nikâya[1126], but the Jâtaka adds the following particulars. A
disciple desirous of seeing the Buddha begins to walk across a river
in an ecstasy of faith. In the middle, his ecstasy fails and he feels
himself sinking but by an effort of will he regains his former
445
confidence and meets the Buddha safely on the further bank. In

Jâtaka 90 the Buddha miraculously feeds 500 disciples with a single
cake and it is expressly mentioned that, after all had been satisfied,
the remnants were so numerous that they had to be collected and
disposed of.
Still all the parallels cited amount to little more than this, that there
was a vague and fluid tradition about the super man’s life of which
fragments have received a consecration in literature. The Canonical
Gospels show great caution in drawing on this fund of tradition, but
a number of Buddhist legends make their appearance in the
Apocryphal Gospels and are so obviously Indian in character that it
can hardly be maintained that they were invented in Palestine or
Egypt and spread thence eastwards. Trees bend down before the
young Christ and dragons (nâgas) adore him: when he goes to
school to learn the alphabet he convicts his teacher of ignorance and
the good man faints[1127]. When he enters a temple in Egypt the
images prostrate themselves before him just as they do before the
young Gotama in the temple of Kapilavastu[1128]. Mary is luminous
before the birth of Christ which takes place without pain or
impurity[1129]. But the parallel which is most curious, because the
incident related is [ unusual in both Indian and European literature,
is the detailed narrative in the Gospel of James, and also in the
Lalita-vistara relating how all activity of mankind and nature was
suddenly interrupted at the moment of the nativity[1130]. Winds,
stars and rivers stayed their motion and labourers stood still in the
attitude in which each was surprised. The same Gospel of James also
relates that Mary when six months old took seven steps, which must
surely be an echo of the legend which attributes the same feat to the
infant Buddha.
Several learned authors have discussed the debt of medieval

Christian legend to India. The most remarkable instance of this is the
canonization by both the Eastern and the Western Church of St.
Joasaph or Josaphat. It seems to be established that this name is
merely a corruption of Bodhisat and that the story in its Christian
form goes back to the religious romance called Barlaam and Joasaph
which appears to date from the seventh century[1131]. It contains the
history of an Indian prince who was converted by the preaching of
Barlaam and became a hermit, and it introduces some of the well-
known stories of Gotama’s early life, such as the attempt to hide
from him the existence of sickness and old age, and his meetings
with a cripple and an old man. The legends of St. Placidus (or
Hubert) and St. Christopher have also been identified with the
446
Nigrodha and Sutasoma Jâtakas[1132]. The identification is not to

my mind conclusive nor, if it is admitted, of much importance. For
who doubts that Indian fables reappear in Aesop or Kalilah and
Dimnah? Little is added to this fact if they also appear in legends
which may have some connection with the Church but which most
Christians feel no obligation to believe.
But the occurrence of Indian legends in the Apocryphal Gospels is

more important for it shows that, though in the early centuries of
Christianity the Church was shy of this oriental exuberance, yet the
materials were at hand for those who chose to use them. Many
wonders attending the superman’s birth were deliberately rejected
but some were accepted and oriental practices, such as asceticism,
appear with a suddenness that makes the suspicion of foreign
influence legitimate.
Not only was monasticism adopted by Christianity but many

practices common to Indian and to Christian worship obtained the
approval of the Church at about the same time. Some of these, such
as incense and the tonsure, may have been legacies from the Jewish
and Egyptian priesthoods. Many coincidences also are due to the fact
that both Buddhism and Christianity, while abolishing animal
sacrifices, were ready to sanction old religious customs: both
countenanced the performance before an image or altar of a ritual
including incense, flowers, lights and singing. This recognition of old
and widespread rites goes far to explain the extraordinary similarity
of Buddhist services in Tibet and Japan (both of which derived their
ritual ultimately from India) to Roman Catholic ceremonial. Yet
when all allowance is made for similar causes and coincidences, it is
hard to believe that a collection of such practices as clerical celibacy,
confession, the veneration of relics, the use of the rosary and bells
can have originated independently in both religions. The difficulty
no doubt is to point out any occasion in the third and fourth
centuries A.D. when oriental Christians other than casual travellers
had an opportunity of becoming acquainted with Buddhist
institutions. But the number of resemblances remains remarkable
and some of them—such as clerical celibacy, relics, and confession—
are old institutions in Buddhism but appear to have no parallels in
Jewish, Syrian, or Egyptian antiquity. Up to a certain point, it is a
sound principle not to admit that resemblances prove borrowing,
unless it can be shown that there was contact between two nations,
but it is also certain that all record of such contact may disappear.
For instance, it is indisputable that Hindu civilization was
introduced into Camboja, but there is hardly any evidence as to how
447
or when Hindu colonists arrived there, and none whatever as to how

or when they left India.
It is in Christian or quasi-Christian heresies—that is, the sects which

were rejected by the majority—that Indian influence is plainest. This
is natural, for if there is one thing obvious in the history of religion it
is that Indian speculation and the Indian view of life were not
congenial to the people of Europe and western Asia. But some
spirits, from the time of Pythagoras onwards, had a greater affinity
for oriental ways of thinking, and such sympathy was specially
common among the Gnostics. Gnosticism consisted in the
combination of Christianity with the already mixed religion which
prevailed in Alexandria, Antioch and other centres, and which was
an uncertain and varying compound of Judaism, Hellenistic thought
and the ideas of oriental countries such as Egypt, Persia and
Babylonia. Its fundamental idea, the knowledge of God or Gnosis, is
clearly similar to the Jñânakâṇḍa of the Hindus[1133], but the
emphasis laid on dualism and redemption is not Indian and the
resemblances suggest little more than that hints may have been
taken and worked up independently. Thus the idea of the
Demiurgus is related to the idea of Iśvara in so far as both imply a
distinction not generally recognized in Europe between the creator
of the world and the Highest Deity, but the Gnostic developments of
the Demiurgus idea are independent. Similarly though the Aeons or
emanations of the Gnostics have to some extent a parallel in the
beings produced by Brahmâ, Prajâpati or Vâsudeva, yet these latter
are not characteristic of Hinduism and still less of Buddhism, for the
celestial Buddhas and Bodhisattvas of the Mahâyâna are justly
suspected of being additions due to Persian influence.
Bardesanes, one of the latest Gnostic teachers (155-233), wrote a book

on Indian religion, quoted by Porphyry. This is important for it
shows that he turned towards India for truth, but though his
teaching included the pre-existence of the soul and some doctrine of
Karma, it was not specially impregnated with Indian ideas. This,
however, may be said without exaggeration of Carpocrates and
Basilides who both taught at Alexandria about 120-130 A.D.
Unfortunately we know the views of these interesting men only from
the accounts of their opponents. Carpocrates[1134] is said to have
claimed the power of coercing by magic the spirits who rule the
world and to have taught metempsychosis in the form that the soul
is imprisoned in the body again and again until it has performed all
possible actions, good and evil. Therefore the only way to escape
reincarnation (which is the object of religion) and to rise to a superior
448
sphere of peace is to perform as much action as possible, good and

evil, for the distinction between the two depends on intention, not on
the nature of deeds. It is only through [ faith and love that a man can
obtain blessedness. Much of the above sounds like a caricature, but it
may be a misrepresentation of something analogous to the Indian
doctrine that the acts of a Yogi are neither black nor white and that a
Yogi in order to get rid of his Karma creates and animates many
bodies to work it off for him.
In Basilides we find the doctrines not only of reincarnation, which

seems to have been common in Gnostic schools[1135], but of Karma,
of the suffering inherent in existence and perhaps the composite
nature of the soul. He is said to have taught that the martyrs suffered
for their sins, that is to say that souls came into the world tainted
with the guilt of evil deeds done in another existence. This guilt must
be expiated by commonplace misfortune or, for the nobler sort, by
martyrdom. He considered the world process to consist in sorting
out confused things and the gradual establishment of order. This is
to some extent true of the soul as well: it is not an entity but a
compound (compare the Buddhist doctrine of the Skandhas) and the
passions are appendages. He called God οὐκ ὢν θεός which seems
an attempt to express the same idea as Brahman devoid of all
qualities and attributes (nirguṇa). It is significant that the system of
Basilides died out[1136].
A more important sect of decidedly oriental affinities was

Manichæism, or rather it was a truly oriental religion which
succeeded in penetrating to Europe and there took on considerably
more Christianity than it had possessed in its original form. Mani
himself (215-276) is said to have been a native of Ecbatana but visited
Afghanistan, Bactria and India, and his followers carried his faith
across Asia to China, while in the west it was the parent inspiration
of the Bogomils and Albigenses. The nature and sources of his creed
have been the subject of considerable discussion but new light is
now pouring in from the Manichæan manuscripts discovered in
Central Asia, some of which have already been published. These
show that about the seventh century and probably considerably
earlier the Manichæism of those [ regions had much in common with
Buddhism. A Manichæan treatise discovered at Tun-huang[1137] has
the form of a Buddhist Sûtra: it speaks of Mani as the Tathâgata, it
mentions Buddhas of Transformation (Hua-fo) and the Bodhisattva
Ti-tsang. Even more important is the confessional formula called
Khuastuanift[1138] found in the same locality. It is clearly similar to
the Pâtimokkha and besides using much Buddhist terminology it
449
reckons killing or injuring animals as a serious sin. It is true that

many of these resemblances may be due to association with
Buddhism and not to the original teaching of Mani, which was
strongly dualistic and contained many Zoroastrian and Babylonian
ideas. But it was eclectic and held up an ascetic ideal of celibacy,
poverty and fasting unknown to Persia and Babylon. To take life was
counted a sin and the adepts formed an order apart who lived on the
food given to them by the laity. The more western accounts of the
Manichæans testify to these features as strongly as do the records
from Central Asia and China. Cyril of Jerusalem in his polemic
against them[1139] charges them with believing in retributive
metempsychosis, he who kills an animal being changed into that
animal after death. The Persian king Hormizd is said to have accused
Mani of bidding people destroy the world, that is, to retire from
social life and not have children. Alberuni[1140] states definitely that
Mani wrote a book called Shâburkân in which he said that God sent
different messengers to mankind in different ages, Buddha to India,
Zarâdusht to Persia and Jesus to the west. According to Cyril the
Manichæan scriptures were written by one Scythianus and revised
by his disciple Terebinthus who changed his name to Boddas. This
may be a jumble, but it is hard to stifle the suspicion that it contains
some allusion to the Buddha, Śâkya-muni and the Bo tree.
I think therefore that primitive Manichæism, though it contained less

Buddhism than did its later and eastern forms, still owed to India its
asceticism, its order of celibate adepts and its regard for animal life.
When it spread to Africa and Europe it became more [ Christian, just
as it became more Buddhist in China, but it is exceedingly curious to
see how this Asiatic religion, like the widely different religion of
Mohammed, was even in its latest phrases the subject of bitter hatred
and persistent misrepresentation.
Finally, do the Neoplatonists, Neopythagoreans and other pagan

philosophers of the early centuries after Christ owe any debt to
India? Many of them were consciously endeavouring to arrest the
progress of Christianity by transforming philosophy into a non-
Christian religion. They gladly welcomed every proof that the higher
life was not to be found exclusively or most perfectly in Christianity.
Hence bias, if not accurate knowledge, led them to respect all forms
of eastern mysticism. Apollonius is said to have travelled in
India[1141]: in the hope of so doing Plotinus accompanied the
unfortunate expedition of Gordian but turned back when it failed.
We may surmise that for Plotinus the Indian origin of an idea would
have been a point in its favour, although his writings show no
450
special hostility to Christianity[1142]. So far as I can judge, his

system presents those features which might be expected to come
from sympathy with the Indian temperament, aided perhaps not by
reading but by conversation with thoughtful orientals at Alexandria
and elsewhere. The direct parallels are not striking. Plato himself had
entertained the idea of metempsychosis and much that seems
oriental in Plotinus may be not a new importation but the
elaboration of Plato’s views in a form congenial to the age[1143].
Affirmations that God is τὸ ὄυ and τὸ ἕυ are not so much
borrowings from the Vedânta philosophy as a re-statement of
Hellenic ideas in a mystic and quietist spirit, which may owe
something to India. But Plotinus seems to me nearer to India than
were the Gnostics and Manichæans, because his teaching is not
dualistic to the same extent. He finds the world unsatisfying not
because it is the creation of the Evil One, but because it is transitory,
imperfect and unreal.
His system has been called dynamic pantheism and this description
applies also to much Indian theology which regards God in himself
as devoid of all qualities and yet the source of the forces which move
the universe. He held that there are four stages of being: primæval
being, the ideal world, the soul and phenomena. This, if not exactly
parallel to anything in Indian philosophy, is similar in idea to the
evolutionary theories of the Sânkhya and the phases of conditioned
spirit taught by many Vishnuite sects.
For Plotinus neither moral good nor evil is ultimate: the highest
principle, like Brahman, transcends both and is beyond good
(ὑπεράγαθον). The highest morality is a morality of inaction and
detachment: fasting and abstinence from pleasure are good and so is
meditation, but happiness comes in the form of ecstasy and union
with God. In human life such union cannot be permanent, though
while the ecstasy lasts it affords a resting place on the weary journey,
but after death it can be permanent: the divine within us can then
return to the universal divine. In these ideas there is the real spirit of
India.
FOOTNOTES:
[1102] See Scott Moncrieff, Paganism and Christianity in Egypt, p. 199.

Petrie, Personal Religion in Egypt, p. 62. But for a contrary view see
Preuschen, Mönchtum und Serapiskult, 1903.
[1103] Flinders Petrie, Man, 1908, p. 129.
451
[1104] J.R.A.S. 1898, p. 875.
[1105] Hultzsch, Hermas, xxxix. p. 307, and J.R.A.S. 1904, p. 399.
[1106] Nicolaus Damascenus, quoted by Strabo, xv. 73. See also Dion
Caasius, ix. 58, who calls the Indian Zarmaros. Zarmanochegas
perhaps contains the two words Śramana and Acârya.
[1107] See J.R.A.S. 1907, p. 968.
[1108] See Vincent Smith, Early History of India, edition III. p. 147. The
original source of the anecdote is Hegesandros in Athenæus, 14. 652.
[1109] See Flinders Petrie, Personal Religion in Egypt before Christianity,

1909.
[1110] As I have pointed out elsewhere there is little real analogy

between the ideas of Logos and Śabda.
[1111] Κύκλου δ᾽ ἔξεπταν βαθυπένθεος ἀργαλέοιο. From the tablet

found at Compagno. Cf. Proclus in Plat. Tim. V. 330, ἧς καὶ οἳ παρ᾽
Ὄρφει τῷ Διονύσῳ καὶ τῇ κόρῃ τελούμενοι τυχεῖν εὔχονται Κύκλου
τ᾽ αὖ λῆξαι καὶ ἀναπνεῦσαι κακότητος. See J.E. Harrison, Proleg. to
the study of Greek Religion, 1908, chap. XI. and appendix.
[1112] Burnet, Early Greek Philosophy, p. 94, says that it first occurs in
the Busiris of Isocrates and does not believe that the account in
Herodotus implies that Pythagoras visited Egypt.
[1113] Whatever may have been the true character and history of the
enigmatic people of Mitanni it appears certain that they adored
deities with Indian names about 1400 B.C. But they may have been
Iranians, and it may be doubted if the Aryan Indians of this date
believed in metempsychosis.
[1114] J.E. Harrison, l.c. pp. 459 and 564, seems to think that Orphism
migrated from Crete to Thrace.
[1115] The question of the Disciples in John ix. 2. Who did sin, this
man or his parents, that he was born blind? must if taken strictly
imply some form of pre-existence. But it is a popular question, not a
theological statement, and I doubt if severely logical deductions
from it are warranted.
[1116] The pre-existence of the soul seems to be implied in the Book

of Wisdom viii. 20. The remarkable expression in the Epistle of James
452
iii. 6 τρόχος τἣς γενήσεως suggests a comparison with the Orphic

expressions quoted above and Samsâra, but it is difficult to believe it
can mean more than “the course of nature.”
[1117] As in their legends, so in their doctrines, the uncanonical

writings are more oriental than the canonical and contain more
pantheistic and ascetic sayings. E.g. “Where there is one alone, I am
with him. Raise the stone and thou shalt find me: cleave the wood
and I am there” (Oxyrhynchus Logia). “I am thou and thou art I and
wheresoever thou art I am also: and in all things I am distributed
and wheresoever thou wilt thou gatherest me and in gathering me
thou gatherest thyself” (Gospel of Eve in Epiph. Haer. xxvi. 3).
“When the Lord was asked, when should his kingdom come, he said:
When two shall be one and the without as the within and the male
with the female, neither male nor female” (Logia).
[1118] Hinduism, p. 549. The original is to be found in Bhartrihari’s

Vairogyaśatakam, 112.
[1119] The Buddhist and Christian Gospels, 4th ed. 1909.
[1120] Mahâvagga, VIII. 26.
[1121] Lotus, chap. V.
[1122] VII. 15-21 in S.B.E. XLV. p. 29.
[1123] Sam. Nik. XLII. VII.
[1124] Ed. Cowell, p. 611.
[1125] See Rhys Davids, Buddhist India, p. 206, and Winternitz, Ges.
Ind. Lit. II. 91.
[1126] Maj. Nik. VI.
[1127] Gospel of Thomas: longer version, chaps, VI. XIV. See also the
Arabic and Syriac Gospels of the Infancy, cf. Lalita-vistara, chap. X.
[1128] Pseudo-Matthew, chap, XXII.-XXIV. and Lal. Vist. chap. VIII.
[1129] Pseudo-Matthew, XIII. Cf. Dig. Nik. 14 and Maj. Nik. 123.
Neumann’s notes on the latter give many curious medieval parallels.
[1130] See Gospel of James, XVIII. and Lal. Vist. VII. ad init.
453
[1131] See Rhys Davids, Buddhist Birth stories, 1880, introduction; and
Joseph Jacobs, Barlaam and Josaphat, 1896.
[1132] Nos. 12 and 537.
[1133] As is also the idea that γνὣσις implies a special ascetic mode
of life, the βίος γνωστικός.
[1134] Irenæus, I. XXV.
[1135] It appears in the Pistis Sophia which perhaps represents the

school of Valentinus. Basilides taught that “unto the third and fourth
generation” refers to transmigration (see Clem. Al. fragm. sect. 28
Op., ed. Klotz, IV. 14), and Paul’s saying “I was alive without the law
once” (Rom. vii. 9), to former life as an animal (Orig. in Ep. ad Rom.
V. Op. iv. 549).
[1136] For Gnosticism, see Buddhist Gnosticism, J. Kennedy in J.R.A.S.

1902, and Mead, Fragments of a faith Forgotten.
[1137] Chavannes et Pelliot, “Un traité Manichéen retrouvé en

Chine,” J.A. 1911, I, and 1913, II.
[1138] Le Coq in J.R.A.S. 1911, p. 277.
[1139] Catechetic Lectures, VI. 20 ff. The whole polemic is curious

and worth reading.
[1140] Alberuni, Chronology of ancient nations, trans. Sachau, p. 190.
[1141] The account in Philostratus (books II. and III.) reads like a
romance and hardly proves that Apollonius went to India, but still
there is no reason why he should not have done so.
[1142] He wrote, however, against certain Gnostics.
[1143] Similarly Sallustius (c. 360 A.D.), whose object was to revive
Hellenism, includes metempsychosis in his creed and thinks it can be
proved. See translation in Murray, Four Stages of Greek Religion, p.
213.
454
CHAPTER LVII
PERSIAN INFLUENCE IN INDIA
Our geographical and political phraseology about India and Persia

obscures the fact that in many periods the frontier between the two
countries was uncertain or not drawn as now. North-western India
and eastern Persia must not be regarded as water-tight or even
merely leaky compartments. Even now there are more Zoroastrians
in India than in Persia and the Persian sect of Shiite Mohammedans
is powerful and conspicuous there. In former times it is probable that
there was often not more difference between Indian and Iranian
religion than between different Indian sects.
Yet the religious temperaments of India and Iran are not the same.
Zoroastrianism has little sympathy for pantheism or asceticism: it
does not teach metempsychosis or the sinfulness of taking life.
Images are not used in worship[1144], God and his angels being
thought of as pure and shining spirits. The foundation of the system
is an uncompromising dualism of good and evil, purity and
impurity, light and darkness. Good and evil are different in origin
and duality will be abolished only by the ultimate and complete
victory of the good. In the next world the distinction between heaven
and hell is equally sharp but hell is not eternal[1145].
The pantheon and even the ritual of the early Iranians resembled
those of the Veda and we can only suppose that the two peoples
once lived and worshipped together. Subsequently came the reform
of Zoroaster which substituted theism and dualism for this nature
worship. For about two centuries, from 530 B.C. onwards, Gandhara
and other parts of north-western India were a Persian province.
Between the time of Zoroaster (whatever that may be) and this
period we cannot say what [ were the relations of Indian and Iranian
religions, but after the seventh century they must have flourished in
the same region. Aristobulus[1146], speaking of Taxila in the time of
Alexander the Great, describes a marriage market and how the dead
were devoured by vultures. These are Babylonian and Persian
customs, and doubtless were accompanied by many others less
striking to a foreign tourist. Some hold that the Zoroastrian
scriptures allude to disputes with Buddhists[1147].
455
Experts on the whole agree that the most ancient Indian architecture
which has been preserved—that of the Maurya dynasty—has no
known antecedents in India, but both in structure (especially the
pillars) and in decoration is reminiscent of Persepolis, just as Asoka’s
habit of lecturing his subjects in stone sermons and the very turns of
his phrases recall the inscriptions of Darius[1148]. And though the
king’s creed is in some respects—such as his tenderness for animal
life—thoroughly Indian, yet this cannot be said of his style and
choice of themes as a whole. His marked avoidance of theology and
philosophy, his insistence on ethical principles such as truth, and his
frank argument that men should do good in order that they may fare
happily in the next world, suggest that he may have become familiar
with the simple and practical Zoroastrian outlook[1149], perhaps
when he was viceroy of Taxila in his youth. But still he shows no
trace of theism or dualism: morality is his one concern, but it means
for him doing good rather than suppressing evil.
After the death of Asoka his Empire broke up and races who were
Iranian in culture, if not always in blood, advanced at its expense.
Dependencies of the Persian or Parthian empire extended into India
or like the Satrapies of Mathurâ and Saurâshṭra lay wholly within it.
The mixed civilization which the Kushans brought with them
included Zoroastrianism, as is shown by the coins of Kanishka, and
late Kushan coins indicate that Sassanian influence had become very
strong in northern India when the dynasty collapsed in the third
century A.D.
I see no reason to suppose that Gotama himself was influenced by

Iranian thought. His fundamental ideas, his view of life and his
scheme of salvation are truly Hindu and not Iranian. But if the
childhood of Buddhism was Indian, it grew to adolescence in a
motley bazaar where Persians and their ways were familiar. Though
the Buddhism exported to Ceylon escaped this phase, not merely
Mahayanism but schools like the Sarvâstivadins must have passed
through it. The share of Zoroastrianism must not be exaggerated.
The metaphysical and ritualistic tendencies of Indian Buddhism are
purely Hindu, and if its free use of images was due to any foreign
stimulus, that stimulus was perhaps Hellenistic. But the altruistic
morality of Mahayanism, though not borrowed from Zoroastrianism,
marks a change and this change may well have occurred among
races accustomed to the preaching of active charity and dissatisfied
with the ideals of self-training and lonely perfection. And
Zoroastrian influence is I think indubitable in the figures of the great
Bodhisattvas, even Maitreya[1150], and above all in Amitâbha and
456
his paradise. These personalities have been adroitly fitted into Indian
theology but they have no Indian lineage and, in spite of all
explanations, Amitâbha and the salvation which he offers remain in
strange contradiction with the teaching of Gotama. I have shown
elsewhere[1151] what close parallels may be found in the Avesta to
these radiant and benevolent genii and to the heaven of boundless
light which is entered by those who repeat the name of its master.
Also there is good evidence to connect the early worship of
Amitâbha with Central Asia. Later Iranian influence may have
meant Mithraism and Manichæism as well as Zoroastrianism and
the school of Asanga perhaps owes something to these
systems[1152]. They may have brought with them fragments of
Christianity or doctrines similar to Christianity but I think that all
attempts to derive Amitâbhist teaching from Christianity are
fanciful. The only point which the two have in common is salvation
by faith, and that doctrine is certainly older than Christianity.
Otherwise the efforts of Amitâbha to save humanity have no
resemblance to the Christian atonement. Nor do the relations
between the various Buddhas and Bodhisattvas recall the Trinity but
rather the Persian Fravashis.
Persian influences worked more strongly on Buddhism than on

Hinduism, for Buddhism not only flourished in the frontier districts
but penetrated into the Tarim basin and the region of the Oxus
which lay outside the Indian and within the Iranian sphere. But they
affected Hinduism also, especially in the matter of sun-worship. This
of course is part of the oldest Vedic religion, but a special form of it,
introduced about the beginning of our era, was a new importation
and not a descendant of the ancient Indian cult[1153].
The Brihatsaṃhita[1154] says that the Magas, that is Magi, are the
priests of the sun and the proper persons to superintend the
consecration of temples and images dedicated to that deity, but the
clearest statements about this foreign cult are to be found in the
Bhavishya Purana[1155] which contains a legend as to its
introduction obviously based upon history. Sâmba, the son of
Krishna, desiring to be cured of leprosy from which he suffered
owing to his father’s curse, dedicated a temple to the sun on the river
Candrabhâgâ, but could find no Brahmans willing to officiate in it.
By the advice of Gauramukha, priest of King Ugrasena, confirmed
by the sun himself, he imported some Magas from Śâkadvîpa[1156],
whither he flew on the [ bird Garuda[1157]. That this refers to the
importation of Zoroastrian priests from the country of the Śâkas
(Persia or the Oxus regions) is made clear by the account of their
457
customs—such as the wearing of a girdle called Avyanga[1158]—

given by the Purana. It also says that they were descended from a
child of the sun called Jaraśabda or Jaraśasta, which no doubt
represents Zarathustra.
The river Candrabhâgâ is the modern Chenab and the town founded
by Samba is Mûlasthana or Multan, called Mu-la-san-pu-lu by the
Chinese pilgrim Hsüan Chuang. The Bhavishya Purana calls the
place Sâmbapuri and the Chinese name is an attempt to represent
Mûlasâmba-puri. Hsüan Chuang speaks enthusiastically of the
magnificent temple[1159], which was also seen by Alberuni but was
destroyed by Aurungzeb. Târanâtha[1160] relates how in earlier
times a king called Śrî Harsha burnt alive near Multan 12,000
adherents of the Mleccha sect with their books and thereby greatly
weakened the religion of Persians and Sakas for a century. This
legend offers difficulties but it shows that Multan was regarded as a
centre of Zoroastrianism.
Multan is in the extreme west Of India, but sun temples are found in
many other parts, such as Gujarat, Gwalior and the district of Gaya,
where an inscription has been discovered at Govindapur referring to
the legend of Sâmba. This same legend is also related in the Kapila
Saṃhita, a religious guide-book for Orissa, in connection with the
great Sun temple of Konarak[1161].
In these temples the sun was represented by images, Hindu

convention thus getting the better of Zoroastrian prejudices, but the
costume of the images shows their origin, for the Brihatsaṃhitâ[1162]
directs that Sûrya is to be represented in the dress of the northerners,
covered from the feet upwards and wearing the girdle called avyaṇga
or viyaṇga. In Rajputana I have seen several statues of him in high
boots and they are probably to be found elsewhere.
Fortuitously or otherwise, the cult of the sun was often associated

with Buddhism, as is indicated by these temples in Gaya and Orissa
and by the fact that the Emperor Harsha styles his father,
grandfather and great-grandfather paramâdityabhakta, great devotees
of the sun[1163]. He himself, though a devout Buddhist, also showed
honour to the image of Sûrya, as we hear from Hsüang Chuang.
458
FOOTNOTES:
[1144] They are forbidden by strict theology, but in practice there are
exceptions, for instance, the winged figure believed to represent
Ahura Mazda, found on Achæmenian reliefs.
[1145] Though the principles of Zoroastrianism sound excellent to

Europeans, I cannot discover that ancient Persia was socially or
politically superior to India.
[1146] See Strabo, XV. 62. So, too, the Pitakas seem to regard
cemeteries as places where ordinary corpses are thrown away rather
than buried or burnt. In Dig. Nik. III, the Buddha says that the
ancient Sakyas married their sisters. Such marriages are said to have
been permitted in Persia.
[1147] “He who returns victorious from discussions with Gaotama

the heretic,” Farvadin Yasht in S.B.E. XXIII. p. 184. The reference of
this passage to Buddhism has been much disputed and I am quite
incompetent to express any opinion about it. But who is Gaotama if
not the Buddha? It is true that there were many other Gautamas of
moderate eminence in India, but would any of them have been
known in Persia?
[1148] The inscriptions near the tomb of Darius at Nakshi-Rustam

appear to be hortatory like those of Asoka. See Williams Jackson,
Persia, p. 298 and references. The use of the Kharoshtri script and of
the word dipi has also been noted as indicating connection with
Persia.
[1149] Perhaps the marked absence of figures representing the

Buddha in the oldest Indian sculptures, which seems to imply that
the holiest things must not be represented, is due to Persian
sentiment.
[1150] Strictly speaking there is nothing final about Maitreya who is

merely the next in an infinite series of Buddhas, but practically his
figure has many analogies to Soshyos or Saoshant, the Parsi saviour
and renovator of the world.
[1151] See chap. XLI. p. 220.
[1152] See chap, on Mahâyâna, VI.
459
[1153] A convenient statement of what is known about this cult will

be found in Bhandarkar, Vaishnavism and Saivism, part II. chap. XVI.
[1154] Chap. 60. 19. The work probably dates from about 650 A.D.
[1155] Chap. 139. See, for extracts from the text, Aufrecht. Cat. Cod.
Sansc. p. 30.
[1156] For Śâkadvîpa see Vishnu, p. II. IV. where it is said that
Brahmans are called there Mṛiga or Maga and Kshattriyas Mâgadha.
The name clearly means the country of the Śâkas who were regarded
as Zoroastrians, whether they were Iranian by race or not. But the
topography is imaginary, for in this fanciful geography India is the
central continent and Śakadvîpa the sixth, whereas if it means Persia
or the countries of the Oxus it ought to be near India.
[1157] The Garuḍa may itself be of Persian provenance, for birds

play a considerable part in Persian mythology.
[1158] The Aivyâonghen of the Avesta.
[1159] Watters, vol. II. 254, and Life, chap. IV.
[1160] Târanâtha, tr. Schiefner, p. 128, and Vincent Smith’s remarks

in Early History, p. 347, note 2.
[1161] See Râjendralâla Mitra, Antiquities of Orissa, vol. n. p. 145. He

also quotes the Sâmba Purâna. The temple is said to have been built
between 1240 and 1280 but the beauty of its architecture suggests an
earlier date.
[1162] 58. 47.
[1163] See Epig. Ind. 72-73.
460
CHAPTER LVIII
MOHAMMEDANISM IN INDIA
Let us now turn to Mohammedanism. This is different from the cases

which we have been considering and we need not trouble ourselves
with any enquiry into opportunities and possibilities. The presence
and strength of the Prophet’s religion in India are patent facts and it
is surprising that the result has not been greater.
The chief and most obvious method by which Islam influenced India
was the series of invasions, culminating in the Mughal conquest,
which poured through the mountain passes of the north-west
frontier. But there was also long established communication and to
some extent intermigration between the west coast and
Mohammedan countries such as Arabia and Persia. Compared with
the enormous political and social changes wrought by the land
invasions, the results of this maritime intercourse may seem
unworthy of mention. Yet for the interchange of ideas it was not
without importance, the more so as it was unaccompanied by
violence and hostility. Thus the Mappilas or Moplahs of Malabar
appear to be the descendants of Arab immigrants who arrived by sea
about 900 A.D., and the sects known as Khojas and Bohras owe their
conversion to the zeal of Arab and Persian missionaries who
preached in the eleventh century. Apart from Mohammedan
conquests there must have been at this time in Gujarat, Bombay, and
on the west coast generally some knowledge of the teaching of Islam.
In the annals of invasions and conquests several stages can be

distinguished. First we have the Arab conquest of Sind in 712, which
had little effect. In 1021 Mahmud of Ghazni annexed the Panjab. He
conducted three campaigns against other kingdoms of India but,
though he sacked Muttra, Somnath and other religious centres, he
did not attempt to conquer these regions, still less to convert them to
Islam. The period of conquests as distinguished from raids did not
begin until the end of the twelfth century when Muhammad Ghori
began his [ campaigns and succeeded in making himself master of
northern India, which from 1193 to 1526 was ruled by Mohammedan
dynasties, mostly of Afghan or Turki descent. In the south the
frontiers of Vijayanagar marked the limits of Islam. To the north of
them Rajputana and Orissa still remained Hindu states, but with
461
these exceptions the Government was Mohammedan. In 1526 came

the Mughal invasion, after which all northern India was united
under one Mohammedan Emperor for about two centuries.
Aurungzeb (1659-1707) was a fanatical Mohammedan: his intolerant
reign marked the beginning of disintegration in the Empire and
aroused the opposition of the Mahrattas and Sikhs. But until this
period Mohammedan rule was not marked by special bigotry or by
any persistent attempt to proselytize. A woeful chronicle of selected
outrages can indeed be drawn up. In the great towns of the north
hardly a temple remained unsacked and most were utterly
destroyed. At different periods individuals, such as Sikander Lodi of
Delhi and Jelaluddin (1414-1430) in Bengal, raged against Hinduism
and made converts by force. But such acts are scattered over a long
period and a great area; they are not characteristic of Islam in India.
Neither the earlier Mughal Emperors nor the preceding Sultans were
of irreproachable orthodoxy. Two of them at least, Ala-ud-Din and
Akbar, contemplated founding new religions of their own. Many of
them were connected with Hindu sovereigns by marriage or political
alliances.
The works of Alberuni and Mohsin Fani show that educated

Mohammedans felt an interest not only in Indian science but in
Indian religion. In the Panjab and Hindustan Islam was strengthened
by immigrations of Mohammedan tribes from the north-west
extending over many centuries. Mohammedan sultans and
governors held their court in the chief cities, which thus tended to
become Mohammedan not only by natural attraction but because
high caste Hindus preferred to live in the country and would not
frequent the company of those whom they considered as outcasts.
Still, Hindus were often employed as accountants and revenue
officers. All non-Moslims had to pay the jiziya or poll tax, and the
remission of this impost accorded to converts was naturally a
powerful incentive to change of faith. Yet Mohammedanism cannot
record any wholesale triumph in India such as it has won in Persia,
Egypt and [ Java. At the present day about one-fifth of the
population are Moslim. The strength of Islam in the Panjab is due to
immigration as well as conversion[1164], but it was embraced by
large numbers in Kashmir and made rapid progress in Oudh and
Eastern Bengal. The number of Mohammedans in Bengal (twenty-
five millions out of a total of sixty-two in all India) is striking, seeing
that the province is out of touch with the chief Mohammedan
centres, but is explicable by the fact that Islam had to deal here not
with an educated and organized Hindu community but with
462
imperfectly hinduized aboriginal races, who welcomed a creed with

no caste distinctions. Yet, apart from the districts named, which lie
on the natural line of march from the Panjab down the Ganges to the
sea, it made little progress. It has not even conquered the slopes of
the Himalayas or the country south of the Jumna. If we deduct from
the Mohammedan population the descendants of Mohammedan
immigrants and of those who, like the inhabitants of Eastern Bengal,
were not Hindus when they embraced the faith, the impression
produced by Islam on the religious thought of India is not great,
considering that for at least five centuries its temporal supremacy
was hardly contested.
It is not until the time of Kabir that we meet with a sect in which
Hindu and Mohammedan ideas are clearly blended, but it may be
that the theology of Râmânuja and Madhva, of the Lingayats and
Sivaite sects of the south, owes something to Islam. Its insistence on
the unity and personality of God may have vivified similar ideas
existing within Hinduism, but the expression which they found for
themselves is not Moslim in tone, just as nowadays the Arya Samaj is
not European in tone. Yet I think that the Arya Samaj would never
have come into being had not Hindus become conscious of certain
strong points in European religion. In the north it is natural that
Moslim influence should not have made itself felt at once. Islam
came first as an enemy and a raider and was no more sympathetic to
the Brahmans than it was to the Greek Church in Europe. Though
Indian theism may sometimes seem practically equivalent to Islam,
yet it has a different and gentler tone, and it often rests on the idea
that God, the soul and matter are all separate and eternal, an idea
foreign to Mohammed’s doctrine of [ creation. But from the fifteenth
century onwards we find a series of sects which are obviously
compromises and blends. Advances are made from both sides.
Thoughtful Mohammedans see the profundity of Hindu theology:
liberal Hindus declare that no caste or condition, including birth in a
Moslim family, disqualifies man for access to God.
The fusion of Islam with Hinduism exhibited in these sects has for its
basis the unity and omnipresence of God in the light of which minor
differences have no existence. But fusion also arises from an opposite
tendency, namely the toleration by Indian Moslims of Hindu ideas
and practices, especially respect for religious teachers and their
deification after death. While known by some such title as saint,
which does not shock unitarian susceptibility, they are in practice
honoured as godlings. The bare simplicity of the Arabian faith has
not proved satisfying to other nations, and Turks, Persians and
463
Indians, even when professing orthodoxy, have allowed

embellishments and accretions. Such supplementary beliefs thrive
with special luxuriance in India, where a considerable portion of the
Moslim population are descended from persons who accepted the
new faith unwillingly or from interested motives. They brought with
them a plentiful baggage of superstitions and did not attempt to
sever the ties which bound them to their Hindu neighbours. In the
last century the efforts of the Wahabis and other reformers are said
to have been partly successful in purifying Islam from Hindu
observances, but even now the mixture is noticeable, especially in
the lower classes. Brahmans are employed to cast horoscopes, Hindu
ceremonies are observed in connection with marriages and funerals,
and the idea of pollution by eating with unbelievers is derived from
caste rules, for Mohammedans in other countries have no objection
to eating with Christians. Numerous sacred sites, such as the shrine
of Sheikh Chisti at Ajmere and of Bhairav Nath at Muttra[1165], are
frequented by both Moslims and Hindus, and it is an interesting
parallel to find that the chief Moslim shrines of Turkestan are erected
on spots which were once Buddhist sanctuaries. Sometimes the
opposite happens: even Brahmans are known to adopt the [
observances of Shiahs[1166]. But on the whole it is chiefly the
Mohammedans who borrow, not the main doctrines of Hinduism,
but popular magic and demonology. Ignorant Mohammedans in
Bengal worship Sitalâ, Kâlî, Dharmarâj, Baidyanath and other Hindu
deities and also respect certain mythical beings who seem to have a
Moslim origin, but to have acquired strange characters in the course
of time. Such are Khwaja Khizr who lives in rivers, Zindah Ghazi
who rides on a tiger in the Sandarbans, and Sultan Shahid who is
said to be the bodyguard and lover of Devî. But it is in the adoration
of Pirs that this fusion of the two religions is most apparent. A Pir is
the Moslim equivalent of a Guru and distinct from the Mollahs or
official hierarchy. Just as Hindus receive initiation from their Guru
so most Moslims, except the Wahabis and other purists, make a
profession of faith before their Pir, accept his guidance and promise
him obedience. When an eminent Pir dies his tomb becomes a place
of prayer and pilgrimage. Even educated Mohammedans admit that
Pirs can intercede with the Almighty and the uneducated offer to
them not only direct supplications but even sacrifices. The Shrine of
an important Pir, such as Hazrat Moin-ud-Din Chisti at Ajmere, is an
edifice dedicated to a superhuman being as much as any Hindu
temple.
464
This veneration of saints attains its strangest development in the sect

of the Panchpiriyas or worshippers of the five Pirs. They are treated
by the last census of India as “Hindus whose religion has a strong
Mohammedan flavour[1167].” There is no agreement as to who the
five saints or deities are, but though the names vary from place to
place they usually comprise five of the best known semi-mythical
Pirs[1168]. Whoever they may be, they are worshipped under the
form of a small tomb with five domes or of a simple mound of clay
set in the corner of a room. Every Wednesday the mound is washed
and offerings of flowers and incense are made. A somewhat similar
sect are the Mâlkânas of the Panjab. These appear to be Hindus
formerly converted to Islam and now in process of reverting to
Hinduism.
The influence of Hinduism on Indian Mohammedanism is thus

obvious. It is responsible for the addition to the Prophet’s creed of
much superstition but also for rendering it less arid and more
human. It is harder to say how far Moslim mysticism and Sufiism are
due to the same influence. History and geography raise no
difficulties to such an origin. Arabia was in touch with the western
coast of India for centuries before the time of Mohammed: the same
is true of the Persian Gulf and Bagdad, and of Balkh and other
districts near the frontiers of India. But recent writers on
Sufiism[1169] have shown a disposition to seek its origin in
Neoplatonism rather than in the east. This hypothesis, like the other,
presents no geographical difficulties. Many Arab authors, such as
Avicenna (Ibn Sina) and Averroes (Ibn Rushd) were influenced by
Greek Philosophy: Neoplatonists are said to have taken refuge in
Persia at the Court of Nushirwan (c. A.D. 532): the Fihrist (c. 988)
mentions Porphyry and Plotinus. If, therefore, Sufiism, early or late,
presents distinct resemblances to Neoplatonism, we need not
hesitate to ascribe them to direct borrowing, remembering that
Neoplatonism itself contains echoes of India. But, admitting that
much in the doctrine of the Sufis can be found to the west as well as
to the east of the countries where they flourished, can it be said that
their general tone is Neoplatonic? Amongst their characteristics are
pantheism; the institution of religious orders and monasteries; the
conception of the religious life as a path or journey; a bold use of
language in which metaphors drawn from love, wine and music are
freely used in speaking of divine things and, although the doctrine of
metempsychosis may be repudiated as too obviously repugnant to
Islam, a tendency to believe in successive existences or states of the
soul. Some of these features, such as the use of erotic language, may
465
be paralleled in other ancient religions as well as Hinduism but the

pantheism which, not content with speaking of the soul’s union with
God, boldly identifies the soul with the divinity and says I am God,
does not seem traceable in Neoplatonism. And though a distinction
may justly be drawn between early and later Sufiism and Indian
influence be admitted as stronger in the later developments, still an
early Sufi, Al-Hallaj, was [ executed in 922 A.D. for saying Ana ‘l-
Haqq, I am the Truth or God, and we are expressly told that he
visited India to study magic. Many important Sufis made the same
journey or at least came within the geographical sphere of Indian
influence. Faridu-’d-Din Attar travelled in India and Turkestan;
Jalalu-’d-Din er-Rumi was born at Balkh, once a centre of Buddhism:
Sa’di visited Balkh, Ghazna, the Panjab, and Gujarat, and
investigated Hindu temples[1170]. Hafiz was invited to the Deccan
by Sultan Muhammad Bahmani and, though shipwreck prevented
the completion of the visit, he was probably in touch with Indian
ideas. These journeys indicate that there was a prevalent notion that
wisdom was to be found in India and those who could not go there
must have had open ears for such Indian doctrines as might reach
them by oral teaching or in books. After the establishment of the
Caliphate at Bagdad in the eighth century translations of Indian
authors became accessible. Arabic versions were made of many
works on astronomy, mathematics and medicine and the example of
Alberuni shows how easily such treatises might be flavoured with a
relish of theology. His book and still more the Fihrist testify to the
existence among Moslims, especially in Bagdad and Persia, of an
interest in all forms of thought very different from the self-satisfied
bigotry which too often characterizes them. The Caliph Ma’mun was
so fond of religious speculation and discussion that he was
suspected of being a Manichee and nicknamed Amiru-’l-Kafirin,
Commander of the Unbelievers. Everything warrants the
supposition that in the centuries preceding Mohammed, Indian ideas
were widely disseminated in western Asia, partly as a direct
overflow from India, for instance in Turkestan and Afghanistan, and
partly as entering, together with much other matter, into the
doctrines of Neoplatonists and Manichæans. Amid the intolerant
victories of early Islam such ideas would naturally retreat, but they
soon recovered and effected an entrance into the later phases of the
faith and were strengthened by the visits of Sufi pilgrims to
Turkestan and India.
The form of Jewish mysticism known as Kabbala, which in Indian

terminology might be described as Jewish Tantrism, has a historical
466
connection with Sufiism and a real analogy to it, for both arise [ from
the desire to temper an austere and regal deism with concessions to
the common human craving for the interesting and picturesque, such
as mysticism and magic. If the accent of India can sometimes be
heard in the poems of the Sufis we may also admit that the Kabbala
is its last echo.
Experts do not assign any one region as the origin of the Kabbala but
it grew on parallel lines in both Egypt and Babylonia, in both of
which it was naturally in touch with the various oriental influences
which we have been discussing. It is said to have been introduced to
Europe about 900 A.D. but received important additions and
modifications at the hands of Isaac Luria (1534-72) who lived in
Palestine, although his disciples soon spread his doctrines among the
European Jews.
Many features of the Kabbala, such as the marvellous powers

assigned to letters, the use of charms and amulets, the emanations or
phases of the deity and the theory of the correspondence between
macrocosm and microcosm, are amazingly like Indian Tantrism but
no doubt are more justly regarded as belonging to the religious ideas
common to most of Asia[1171]. But in two points we seem able to
discern definite Hindu influence. These are metempsychosis and
pantheism, which we have so often found to have some connection
with India when they exist in an extreme form. Their presence here
is specially remarkable because they are alien to the spirit of
orthodox Judaism. Yet the pre-existence and repeated embodiment
of the soul is taught in the Zohar and even more systematically by
Luria, in whose school were composed works called Gilgûlim, or
lists of transmigrations. The ultimate Godhead is called En soph or
the infinite and is declared to be unknowable, not to be described by
positive epithets, and therefore in a sense non-existent, since nothing
which is predicated of existing beings can be truly predicated of it.
These are crumbs from the table of Plotinus and the Upanishads.
FOOTNOTES:
[1164] But see on this point Census of India, 1911, vol. I. part I. p. 128.
[1165] Another instance is the shrine of Saiyad Salar Masud at

Bahraich. He was a nephew of Mahmud of Ghazni and was slain by
Hindus, but is now worshipped by them. See Grierson, J.R.A.S. 1911,
p. 195.
467
[1166] See for examples, Census of India, 1901, Panjab, p. 151, e.g. the
Brahmans of a village near Rawal Pindi are said to be Murids of
Abdul-Kadir-Jilani.
[1167] Census of India, 1911, vol. I. part I. p. 195. The Mâlkânas are
described on the same page.
[1168] Such as Ghazi Miyan, Pir Badar, Zindha Ghazi, Sheikh Farid,
Sheikh Sadu and Khwaja Khizr.
[1169] E.G. Browne, Literary History of Persia: R.A. Nicholson, Selected

Poems from the Divan of Shems-i-Tabriz.
[1170] He describes how he discovered the mechanism by which the

priests made miraculous images move. See Browne, Lit. Hist. Persia,
II. 529.
[1171] But there is something very Indian in the reluctance of the

Kabbalists to accept creation ex nihilo and to explain it away by
emanations, or by the doctrine of limitation, that is God’s self-
withdrawal in order that the world might be created, or even by the
eternity of matter.
468

Hinduism & Buddhism

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hinduism & Buddhism

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hinduism and

Sir Charles Eliot

SIR CHARLES ELIOT

First published 1921

The following are the principal abbreviations used:

Ep. Ind. Epigraphia India.

BUDDHISM OUTSIDE INDIA

XXXIV. EXPANSION OF INDIAN INFLUENCE

MUTUAL INFLUENCE OF EASTERN AND WESTERN RELIGIONS

LV. INFLUENCE OF CHRISTIANITY IN INDIA

BUDDHISM OUTSIDE INDIA

EXPANSION OF INDIAN INFLUENCE

The subject of this Book is the expansion of Indian influence

The spread of Hindu thought was an intellectual conquest, not an

It is correct to say that the sphere of India’s intellectual conquests

some resemblance between Sufis and Vedantists, it does not appear

This outgrowing of Indian influence, so long continued and so wide

But the diffusion of Indian influence, especially in China, was also

deliberate despatch of missions. These missions seem to have been

Ceylon is the first place where we have a record of the introduction

It is in Asoka’s reign too that we first hear of Indian influence

indication that Asoka paid much attention to the eastern frontiers of

Indian expeditions to the East probably commenced, if not in the

It is curious that the early history of Burma should be so obscure and

Siam as a kingdom is relatively modern but like Burma it has been

Tradition as mentioned ascribes to Asoka some connection with

conqueror of China, made Lamaism, or Tibetan Buddhism, the state

Tibetan Buddhism is a form of late Indian Mahayanism with a

In Korea, Annam, and especially in Japan, Buddhism has been a

In the following chapters I propose to discuss the history of Indian

The Indian religion which prevailed in ancient Camboja was

In the later sections of the book I consider the expansion of Indian

[1] Geog. Jour. Aug., 1916, p. 362.

[2] The presence of Brahmans at the Courts of Burma and Siam is a

[3] Watters, Yüan Chuang, vol. II. p. 228.

[5] Especially at Ligor or Dharmaraja.

[6] The statement of I-Ching that a wicked king destroyed Buddhism

[7] See Fleet in J.R.A.S. 1901, p. 548.

[8] There are settlements of Kalmuks near Astrakhan who have

[9] The existence of a Hindu kingdom on the East Coast of Borneo in

The island of Ceylon, perhaps the most beautiful tropical country in

The school of Buddhism now professed in Ceylon, Burma and Siam

temperament, moderate gifts in art and literature and a moderate

If Sinhalese tradition may be believed, the first historical contact with

It would not be unreasonable to suppose that Vijaya introduced into

which relate how Paṇḍuvâsudeva came from India to succeed

The principal repositories of Sinhalese tradition are the Dîpavamsa,

The historical narrative is similar in all three works. After the

dialectical puzzles, had no difficulty in converting him.[28] Next

We need not follow in detail the picturesque account of the rapid

Tissa is represented as having sent two further missions to India. The

The second mission was despatched to bring a branch of the tree[32]

from an early period of Sinhalese history. Botanists consider its long

Devânampiya Tissa probably died in 207 B.C. In 177 the kingdom

The exploits of this prince are recorded at such length in the

probably denotes a Greek city on the Indus.[39] But in any case

Of great importance for the history of the Sinhalese Church is the

Mention is made in the Kathâ-vatthu of heretics who held that the

the Mahayana. Hsüan Chuang in his narrative[47] states (probably

It may not be amiss to consider here briefly what is known of the

the earliest ages of Buddhism it was usual in north-eastern India to

The earliest known relics are those discovered in the stupa of

According to Buddhaghosa’s Sumangalavilâsinî and Sinhalese texts