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 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 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 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].

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 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

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. 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.

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

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].

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 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:

[Footnote 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.]

[Footnote 1013: _E.g._ Grünwedel, _Buddhist art in India_, fig. 149,

_id. Mythologie_, fig. 54.]

[Footnote 1014: But there is still a hereditary incarnation of

Ganeśa near Poona, which began in the seventeenth century. See

_Asiatic Researches_, VII. 381.]

[Footnote 1015: See Waddell in _J.R.A.S._ 1909, p. 941.]

[Footnote 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.]

[Footnote 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.]

[Footnote 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.]

[Footnote 1019: _Mythologie des Buddhismus_, p. 40.]

[Footnote 1020: In Tibetan Dus-kyi-hkhor-lo. Mongol, Tsagun kürdün.]

[Footnote 1021: Announced in the _Bibliotheca Buddhica_.]

[Footnote 1022: See Pelliot, _Quelques transcriptions apparentées 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.]

[Footnote 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.]

[Footnote 1024: See _J.A.S.B._ 82, p. 225. The king is also (but

apparently incorrectly) called Candra-Bhadra.]

[Footnote 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.]

[Footnote 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.]

[Footnote 1027: See Schrader, _Introd. to the Pâncarâtra_, pp. 100-106

and 96.]

[Footnote 1028: See the article "Adi Buddha" by De la Vallée Poussin

in Hastings' _Encyc. of Religion and Ethics_.]

[Footnote 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 Gaṇeśa made equivalent to

Brahma. See Madras, _Cat. of Sk. MSS_. 1910-1913, p. 1030.]

[Footnote 1030: It is just mentioned in S. Lévi's _Nepal II_, p. 385,

but is not in Rajendralal Mitra's _Catalogue_.]

[Footnote 1031: Waddell, _Buddhism_, p. 131. Pander, _Pantheon_, p.

59, No. 56.]

[Footnote 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_.]

[Footnote 1033: _Buddhism_, pp. 350-1.]

[Footnote 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.]

[Footnote 1035: The deity may appear in an unusual form, so the

worshipper can easily persuade himself that he has received the

desired revelation.]

[Footnote 1036: A figure identified with Indra or Vajrapâni is found

in Gandhara sculptures.]

[Footnote 1037: _Mythologie_, p. 97.]

[Footnote 1038: The Dhyâni Buddhas however seem to be the Yi-dam of

individuals only.]

[Footnote 1039: Huth's edition, p. 1.]

[Footnote 1040: See _Buddhist Text Society_, vol. II. part II.

appendix II. 1904, p. 6.]

[Footnote 1041: See Laufer, "Hundert Tausend Nâgas" in _Memoirs of

Finno-Ugrian Society_, 1898.]

[Footnote 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.]

[Footnote 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.]

[Footnote 1044: Waddell, _Buddhism_, p. 360.]

[Footnote 1045: Tibetan gTsug-tor-rnam-par-rgyal-ma.]

[Footnote 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.]

[Footnote 1047: See Foucher, _Icon. Bouddhique_, 1900, p. 142, and

Târanâtha tr. Schiefner, p. 102.]

[Footnote 1048: See Waddell. Grünwedel seems to regard Vajra-Varâhî as

distinct from Marîcî.]

[Footnote 1049: As for instance is also the origin of Linga worship in

India.]

[Footnote 1050: See Steiner in _Mitth. der Deutsch. Gesellsch.

Natur-u. Völkerkunde Ost-Asiens_, 1909-10, p. 35.]

[Footnote 1051: Padme is said to be commonly pronounced peme.]

[Footnote 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.]

[Footnote 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.]

[Footnote 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.]

[Footnote 1055: See for this legend, which is long but not very

illuminating, Rockhill's _Land of the Lamas_, pp. 326-334.]

[Footnote 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_.]

Hinduism and Buddhism, An Historical Sketch, Vol. 3 · 第 20 / 24 章