THE SAME CONTINUED. THE HISTORY OF SAGAMONI BORCAN AND THE
BEGINNING OF IDOLATRY.
Furthermore you must know that in the Island of Seilan there is an
exceeding high mountain; it rises right up so steep and precipitous
that no one could ascend it, were it not that they have taken and fixed
to it several great and massive iron chains, so disposed that by help
of these men are able to mount to the top. And I tell you they say that
on this mountain is the sepulchre of Adam our first parent; at least
that is what the Saracens say. But the Idolaters say that it is the
sepulchre of SAGAMONI BORCAN, before whose time there were no idols.
They hold him to have been the best of men, a great saint in fact,
according to their fashion, and the first in whose name idols were
made.{1}
He was the son, as their story goes, of a great and wealthy king.
And he was of such an holy temper that he would never listen to any
worldly talk, nor would he consent to be king. And when the father saw
that his son would not be king, nor yet take any part in affairs, he
took it sorely to heart. And first he tried to tempt him with great
promises, offering to crown him king, and to surrender all authority
into his hands. The son, however, would none of his offers; so the
father was in great trouble, and all the more that he had no other son
but him, to whom he might bequeath the kingdom at his own death. So,
after taking thought on the matter, the King caused a great palace to
be built, and placed his son therein, and caused him to be waited on
there by a number of maidens, the most beautiful that could anywhere
be found. And he ordered them to divert themselves with the prince,
night and day, and to sing and dance before him, so as to draw his
heart towards worldly enjoyments. But ’twas all of no avail, for none
of those maidens could ever tempt the king’s son to any wantonness, and
he only abode the firmer in his chastity, leading a most holy life,
after their manner thereof. And I assure you he was so staid a youth
that he had never gone out of the palace, and thus he had never seen a
dead man, nor any one who was not hale and sound; for the father never
allowed any man that was aged or infirm to come into his presence. It
came to pass however one day that the young gentleman took a ride, and
by the roadside he beheld a dead man. The sight dismayed him greatly,
as he never had seen such a sight before. Incontinently he demanded of
those who were with him what thing that was? and then they told him it
was a dead man. “How, then,” quoth the king’s son, “do all men die?”
“Yea, forsooth,” said they. Whereupon the young gentleman said never a
word, but rode on right pensively. And after he had ridden a good way
he fell in with a very aged man who could no longer walk, and had not a
tooth in his head, having lost all because of his great age. And when
the king’s son beheld this old man he asked what that might mean, and
wherefore the man could not walk? Those who were with him replied that
it was through old age the man could walk no longer, and had lost all
his teeth. And so when the king’s son had thus learned about the dead
man and about the aged man, he turned back to his palace and said to
himself that he would abide no longer in this evil world, but would go
in search of Him Who dieth not, and Who had created him.{2}
So what did he one night but take his departure from the palace
privily, and betake himself to certain lofty and pathless mountains.
And there he did abide, leading a life of great hardship and sanctity,
and keeping great abstinence, just as if he had been a Christian.
Indeed, an he had but been so, he would have been a great saint of Our
Lord Jesus Christ, so good and pure was the life he led.{3} And when
he died they found his body and brought it to his father. And when the
father saw dead before him that son whom he loved better than himself,
he was near going distraught with sorrow. And he caused an image in the
similitude of his son to be wrought in gold and precious stones, and
caused all his people to adore it. And they all declared him to be a
god; and so they still say.{4}
They tell moreover that he hath died fourscore and four times. The
first time he died as a man, and came to life again as an ox; and then
he died as an ox and came to life again as a horse, and so on until he
had died fourscore and four times; and every time he became some kind
of animal. But when he died the eighty-fourth time they say he became
a god. And they do hold him for the greatest of all their gods. And
they tell that the aforesaid image of him was the first idol that the
Idolaters ever had; and from that have originated all the other idols.
And this befel in the Island of Seilan in India.
The Idolaters come thither on pilgrimage from very long distances and
with great devotion, just as Christians go to the shrine of Messer
Saint James in Gallicia. And they maintain that the monument on the
mountain is that of the king’s son, according to the story I have
been telling you; and that the teeth, and the hair, and the dish that
are there were those of the same king’s son, whose name was Sagamoni
Borcan, or Sagamoni the Saint. But the Saracens also come thither on
pilgrimage in great numbers, and _they_ say that it is the sepulchre of
Adam our first father, and that the teeth, and the hair, and the dish
were those of Adam.{5}
Whose they were in truth, God knoweth; howbeit, according to the Holy
Scripture of our Church, the sepulchre of Adam is not in that part of
the world.
Now it befel that the Great Kaan heard how on that mountain there was
the sepulchre of our first father Adam, and that some of his hair
and of his teeth, and the dish from which he used to eat, were still
preserved there. So he thought he would get hold of them somehow or
another, and despatched a great embassy for the purpose, in the year
of Christ, 1284. The ambassadors, with a great company, travelled on
by sea and by land until they arrived at the island of Seilan, and
presented themselves before the king. And they were so urgent with
him that they succeeded in getting two of the grinder teeth, which
were passing great and thick; and they also got some of the hair, and
the dish from which that personage used to eat, which is of a very
beautiful green porphyry. And when the Great Kaan’s ambassadors had
attained the object for which they had come they were greatly rejoiced,
and returned to their lord. And when they drew near to the great city
of Cambaluc, where the Great Kaan was staying, they sent him word that
they had brought back that for which he had sent them. On learning this
the Great Kaan was passing glad, and ordered all the ecclesiastics and
others to go forth to meet these reliques, which he was led to believe
were those of Adam.
And why should I make a long story of it? In sooth, the whole
population of Cambaluc went forth to meet those reliques, and the
ecclesiastics took them over and carried them to the Great Kaan, who
received them with great joy and reverence.{6} And they find it written
in their Scriptures that the virtue of that dish is such that if food
for one man be put therein it shall become enough for five men: and the
Great Kaan averred that he had proved the thing and found that it was
really true.{7}
So now you have heard how the Great Kaan came by those reliques; and a
mighty great treasure it did cost him! The reliques being, according to
the Idolaters, those of that king’s son.
NOTE 1.—_Sagamoni Borcan_ is, as Marsden points out, SAKYA-MUNI,
or Gautama-Buddha, with the affix BURKHAN, or “Divinity,” which is
used by the Mongols as the synonym of _Buddha_.
“The Dewa of Samantakúta (Adam’s Peak), Samana, having heard of
the arrival of Budha (in Lanka or Ceylon) ... presented a request
that he would leave an impression of his foot upon the mountain
of which he was guardian.... In the midst of the assembled Dewas,
Budha, looking towards the East, made the impression of his foot,
in length three inches less than the cubit of the carpenter; and
the impression remained as a seal to show that Lanka is the
inheritance of Budha, and that his religion will here flourish.”
(_Hardy’s Manual_, p. 212.)
[Ma-Huan says (p. 212): “On landing (at Ceylon), there is to be
seen on the shining rock at the base of the cliff, an impress of
a foot two or more feet in length. The legend attached to it is,
that it is the imprint of Shâkyamuni’s foot, made when he landed at
this place, coming from the Ts’ui-lan (Nicobar) Islands. There is a
little water in the hollow of the imprint of this foot, which never
evaporates. People dip their hands in it and wash their faces, and
rub their eyes with it, saying: ‘This is Buddha’s water, which will
make us pure and clean.’”—H. C.]
[Illustration: Adam’s Peak.
“=Or est voir qe en ceste ysle a une montagne mout haut et si
degrot de les rocches qe nul hi puent monter sus se ne en ceste
mainere qe je voz dirai=” ...]
“The veneration with which this majestic mountain has been regarded
for ages, took its rise in all probability amongst the aborigines
of Ceylon.... In a later age, ... the hollow in the lofty rock
that crowns the summit was said by the Brahmans to be the footstep
of Siva, by the Buddhists of Buddha, ... by the Gnostics of Ieu,
by the Mahometans of Adam, whilst the Portuguese authorities were
divided between the conflicting claims of St. Thomas and the eunuch
of Candace, Queen of Ethiopia.” (_Tennent_, II. 133.)
[“Near to the King’s residence there is a lofty mountain reaching
to the skies. On the top of this mountain there is the impress of
a man’s foot, which is sunk two feet deep in the rock, and is some
eight or more feet long. This is said to be the impress of the foot
of the ancestor of mankind, a Holy man called _A-tan_, otherwise
P’an-Ku.” (_Ma-Huan_, p. 213.)—H. C.]
Polo, however, says nothing of the _foot_; he speaks only of
the _sepulchre_ of Adam, or of Sakya-muni. I have been unable
to find any modern indication of the monument that was shown by
the Mahomedans as the tomb, and sometimes as the house, of Adam;
but such a structure there certainly was, perhaps an ancient
_Kist-vaen_, or the like. John Marignolli, who was there about
1349, has an interesting passage on the subject: “That exceeding
high mountain hath a pinnacle of surpassing height, which on
account of the clouds can rarely be seen. [The summit is lost in
the clouds. (_Ibn Khordâdhbeh_, p. 43.)—H. C.] But God, pitying
our tears, lighted it up one morning just before the sun rose, so
that we beheld it glowing with the brightest flame. [They say that
a flame bursts constantly, like a lightning, from the Summit of
the mountain.—(_Ibn Khordâdhbeh_, p. 44.)—H. C.] In the way down
from this mountain there is a fine level spot, still at a great
height, and there you find in order: first, the mark of Adam’s
foot; secondly, a certain statue of a sitting figure, with the left
hand resting on the knee, and the right hand raised and extended
towards the west; lastly, there is the house (of Adam), which he
made with his own hands. It is of an oblong quadrangular shape like
a sepulchre, with a door in the middle, and is formed of great
tabular slabs of marble, not cemented, but merely laid one upon
another. (_Cathay_, 358.) A Chinese account, translated in _Amyot’s
Mémoires_, says that at the foot of the mountain is a Monastery of
Bonzes, in which is seen the veritable body of Fo, in the attitude
of a man lying on his side” (XIV. 25). [Ma-Huan says (p. 212):
“Buddhist temples abound there. In one of them there is to be seen
a full length recumbent figure of Shâkyamuni, still in a very good
state of preservation. The dais on which the figure reposes is
inlaid with all kinds of precious stones. It is made of sandalwood
and is very handsome. The temple contains a Buddha’s tooth and
other relics. This must certainly be the place where Shâkyamuni
entered Nirvâna.”—H. C.] Osorio, also, in his history of Emanuel
of Portugal, says: “Not far from it (the Peak) people go to see a
small temple in which are two sepulchres, which are the objects of
an extraordinary degree of superstitious devotion. For they believe
that in these were buried the bodies of the first man and his wife”
(f. 120 _v_.). A German traveller (_Daniel Parthey_, Nürnberg,
1698) also speaks of the tomb of Adam and his sons on the mountain.
(See _Fabricius, Cod. Pseudep. Vet. Test._ II. 31; also _Ouseley’s
Travels_, I. 59.)
It is a perplexing circumstance that there is a double set of
indications about the footmark. The Ceylon traditions, quoted
above from Hardy, call its length 3 inches less than a carpenter’s
cubit. Modern observers estimate it at 5 feet or 5½ feet. Hardy
accounts for this by supposing that the original footmark was
destroyed in the end of the sixteenth century. But Ibn Batuta, in
the 14th, states it at 11 spans, or _more_ than the modern report.
[Ibn Khordâdhbeh at 70 cubits.—H. C.] Marignolli, on the other
hand, says that he measured it and found it to be 2½ palms, or
about half a Prague ell, which corresponds in a general way with
Hardy’s tradition. Valentyn calls it 1½ ell in length; Knox says
2 feet; Herman Bree (De Bry?), quoted by Fabricius, 8½ spans; a
Chinese account, quoted below, 8 feet. These discrepancies remind
one of the ancient Buddhist belief regarding such footmarks, that
they seemed greater or smaller in proportion to the faith of the
visitor! (See _Koeppen_, I. 529, and _Beal’s Fah-hian_, p. 27.)
The chains, of which Ibn Batuta gives a particular account,
exist still. The highest was called (he says) the chain of the
_Shahádat_, or Credo, because the fearful abyss below made pilgrims
recite the profession of belief. Ashraf, a Persian poet of the
15th century, author of an Alexandriad, ascribes these chains to
the great conqueror, who devised them, with the assistance of the
philosopher _Bolinas_,[1] in order to scale the mountain, and reach
_the sepulchre of Adam_. (See _Ouseley_, I. 54 _seqq._) There are
inscriptions on some of the chains, but I find no account of them.
(_Skeen’s Adam’s Peak_, Ceylon, 1870, p. 226.)
NOTE 2.—The general correctness with which Marco has here related
the legendary history of Sakya’s devotion to an ascetic life, as
the preliminary to his becoming the Buddha or Divinely Perfect
Being, shows what a strong impression the tale had made upon him.
He is, of course, wrong in placing the scene of the history in
Ceylon, though probably it was so told him, as the vulgar in all
Buddhist countries do seem to localise the legends in regions known
to them.
Sakya Sinha, Sakya Muni, or Gautama, originally called Siddhárta,
was the son of Súddhodhana, the Kshatriya prince of Kapilavastu, a
small state north of the Ganges, near the borders of Oudh. His high
destiny had been foretold, as well as the objects that would move
him to adopt the ascetic life. To keep these from his knowledge,
his father caused three palaces to be built, within the limits of
which the prince should pass the three seasons of the year, whilst
guards were posted to bar the approach of the dreaded objects. But
these precautions were defeated by inevitable destiny and the power
of the Devas.
When the prince was sixteen he was married to the beautiful
Yasodhara, daughter of the King of Koli, and 40,000 other
princesses also became the inmates of his harem.
“Whilst living in the midst of the full enjoyment of every kind of
pleasure, Siddhárta one day commanded his principal charioteer to
prepare his festive chariot; and in obedience to his commands four
lily-white horses were yoked. The prince leaped into the chariot,
and proceeded towards a garden at a little distance from the
palace, attended by a great retinue. On his way he saw a decrepit
old man, with broken teeth, grey locks, and a form bending towards
the ground, his trembling steps supported by a staff (a Deva had
taken this form).... The prince enquired what strange figure it was
that he saw; and he was informed that it was an old man. He then
asked if the man was born so, and the charioteer answered that he
was not, as he was once young like themselves. ‘Are there,’ said
the prince, ‘many such beings in the world?’ ‘Your highness,’ said
the charioteer, ‘there are many.’ The prince again enquired, ‘Shall
I become thus old and decrepit?’ and he was told that it was a
state at which all beings must arrive.”
The prince returns home and informs his father of his intention to
become an ascetic, seeing how undesirable is life tending to such
decay. His father conjures him to put away such thoughts, and to
enjoy himself with his princesses, and he strengthens the guards
about the palaces. Four months later like circumstances recur, and
the prince sees a leper, and after the same interval a dead body
in corruption. Lastly, he sees a religious recluse, radiant with
peace and tranquillity, and resolves to delay no longer. He leaves
his palace at night, after a look at his wife Yasodhara and the boy
just born to him, and betakes himself to the forests of Magadha,
where he passes seven years in extreme asceticism. At the end of
that time he attains the Buddhahood. (See _Hardy’s Manual_, p. 151
_seqq._) The latter part of the story told by Marco, about the body
of the prince being brought to his father, etc., is erroneous.
Sakya was 80 years of age when he died under the sál trees in
Kusinára.
The strange parallel between Buddhistic ritual, discipline, and
costume, and those which especially claim the name of CATHOLIC
in the Christian Church, has been often noticed; and though the
parallel has never been elaborated as it might be, some of the
more salient facts are familiar to most readers. Still many may be
unaware that Buddha himself, Siddhárta the son of Súddhodhana, has
found his way into the Roman martyrology as a Saint of the Church.
In the first edition a mere allusion was made to this singular
story, for it had recently been treated by Professor Max Müller,
with characteristic learning and grace. (See _Contemporary Review_
for July, 1870, p. 588.) But the matter is so curious and still so
little familiar that I now venture to give it at some length.
The religious romance called the History of BARLAAM and JOSAPHAT
was for several centuries one of the most popular works in
Christendom. It was translated into all the chief European
languages, including Scandinavian and Sclavonic tongues. An
Icelandic version dates from the year 1204; one in the Tagal
language of the Philippines was printed at Manilla in 1712.[2] The
episodes and apologues with which the story abounds have furnished
materials to poets and story-tellers in various ages and of very
diverse characters; _e.g._ to Giovanni Boccaccio, John Gower, and
to the compiler of the _Gesta Romanorum_, to Shakspere, and to the
late W. Adams, author of the _King’s Messengers_. The basis of this
romance is the story of Siddhárta.
The story of Barlaam and Josaphat first appears among the works
(in Greek) of St. John of Damascus, a theologian of the early part
of the 8th century, who, before he devoted himself to divinity had
held high office at the Court of the Khalif Abu Jáfar Almansúr. The
outline of the story is as follows:—
St. Thomas had converted the people of India to the truth; and
after the eremitic life originated in Egypt many in India adopted
it. But a potent pagan King arose, by name ABENNER, who persecuted
the Christians and especially the ascetics. After this King had
long been childless, a son, greatly desired, is born to him, a boy
of matchless beauty. The King greatly rejoices, gives the child
the name of JOSAPHAT, and summons the astrologers to predict his
destiny. They foretell for the prince glory and prosperity beyond
all his predecessors in the kingdom. One sage, most learned of all,
assents to this, but declares that the scene of these glories will
not be the paternal realm, and that the child will adopt the faith
that his father persecutes.
This prediction greatly troubled King Abenner. In a secluded city
he caused a splendid palace to be erected, within which his son
was to abide, attended only by tutors and servants in the flower
of youth and health. No one from without was to have access to the
prince; and he was to witness none of the afflictions of humanity,
poverty, disease, old age, or death, but only what was pleasant, so
that he should have no inducement to think of the future life; nor
was he ever to hear a word of CHRIST or His religion. And, hearing
that some monks still survived in India, the King in his wrath
ordered that any such, who should be found after three days, should
be burnt alive.
The Prince grows up in seclusion, acquires all manner of learning,
and exhibits singular endowments of wisdom and acuteness. At last
he urges his father to allow him to pass the limits of the palace,
and this the King reluctantly permits, after taking all precautions
to arrange diverting spectacles, and to keep all painful objects
at a distance. Or let us proceed in the Old English of the Golden
Legend.[3] “Whan his fader herde this he was full of sorowe, and
anone he let do make redy horses and ioyfull felawshyp to accompany
him, in suche wyse that nothynge dyshonest sholde happen to hym.
And on a tyme thus as the Kynges sone wente he mette a mesell and a
blynde man, and whã he sawe them he was abasshed and enquyred what
them eyled. And his seruaũtes sayd: These ben passions that comen
to men. And he demaunded yf the passyons came to all men. And they
sayd nay. Thã sayd he, ben they knowen whiche men shall suffre....
And they answered, Who is he that may knowe ye aduentures of men.
And he began to be moche anguysshous for ye incustomable thynge
hereof. And another tyme he found a man moche aged, whiche had his
chere froũced, his tethe fallen, and he was all croked for age....
And thã he demaũnded what sholde be ye ende. And they sayd deth....
And this yonge man remembered ofte in his herte these thynges, and
was in grete dyscõforte, but he shewed hỹ moche glad tofore his
fader, and he desyred moche to be enformed and taught in these
thỹges.” [Fol. ccc. lii.]
At this time BARLAAM, a monk of great sanctity and knowledge in
divine things, who dwelt in the wilderness of Sennaritis, having
received a divine warning, travels to India in the disguise of a
merchant, and gains access to Prince Josaphat, to whom he unfolds
the Christian doctrine and the blessedness of the monastic life.
Suspicion is raised against Barlaam, and he departs. But all
efforts to shake the Prince’s convictions are vain. As a last
resource the King sends for a magician called Theudas, who removes
the Prince’s attendants and substitutes seductive girls, but
all their blandishments are resisted through prayer. The King
abandons these attempts and associates his son with himself in the
government. The Prince uses his power to promote religion, and
everything prospers in his hand. Finally King Abenner is drawn to
the truth, and after some years of penitence dies. Josaphat then
surrenders the kingdom to a friend called Barachias, and proceeds
into the wilderness, where he wanders for two years seeking
Barlaam, and much buffeted by the demons. “And whan Balaam had
accõplysshed his dayes, he rested in peas about ye yere of Our
Lorde .cccc. & .lxxx. Josaphat lefte his realme the .xxv. yere of
his age, and ledde the lyfe of an heremyte .xxxv. yere, and than
rested in peas full of vertues, and was buryed by the body of
Balaam.” [Fol. ccc. lvi.] The King Barachias afterwards arrives and
transfers the bodies solemnly to India.
This is but the skeleton of the story, but the episodes and
apologues which round its dimensions, and give it its mediæval
popularity, do not concern our subject. In this skeleton the story
of Siddhárta, _mutatis mutandis_, is obvious.
The story was first popular in the Greek Church, and was embodied
in the lives of the saints, as recooked by Simeon the Metaphrast,
an author whose period is disputed, but was in any case not later
than 1150. A Cretan monk called Agapios made selections from the
work of Simeon which were published in Romaic at Venice in 1541
under the name of the _Paradise_, and in which the first section
consists of the story of Barlaam and Josaphat. This has been
frequently reprinted as a popular book of devotion. A copy before
me is printed at Venice in 1865.[4]
From the Greek Church the history of the two saints passed to the
Latin, and they found a place in the Roman martyrology under the
27th November. When this first happened I have not been able to
ascertain. Their history occupies a large space in the _Speculum
Historiale_ of Vincent of Beauvais, written in the 13th century,
and is set forth, as we have seen, in the Golden Legend of nearly
the same age. They are recognised by Baronius, and are to be found
at p. 348 of “The Roman Martyrology set forth by command of Pope
Gregory XIII., and revised by the authority of Pope Urban VIII.,
translated out of Latin into English by G. K. of the Society of
Jesus ... and now re-edited ... by W. N. Skelly, Esq. London, T.
Richardson & Son.” (Printed at Derby, 1847.) Here in Palermo is a
church bearing the dedication _Divo Iosaphat_.
Professor Müller attributes the first recognition of the identity
of the two stories to M. Laboulaye in 1859. But in fact I find that
the historian de Couto had made the discovery long before.[5] He
says, speaking of _Budão_ (Buddha), and after relating his history:
“To this name the Gentiles throughout all India have dedicated
great and superb pagodas. With reference to this story we have been
diligent in enquiring if the ancient Gentiles of those parts had in
their writings any knowledge of St. Josaphat who was converted by
Barlam, who in his Legend is represented as the son of a great King
of India, and who had just the same up-bringing, with all the same
particulars, that we have recounted of the life of the Budão....
And as a thing seems much to the purpose, which was told us by a
very old man of the Salsette territory in Baçaim, about Josaphat,
I think it well to cite it: As I was travelling in the Isle of
Salsette, and went to see that rare and admirable Pagoda (which we
call the Canará Pagoda[6]) made in a mountain, with many halls cut
out of one solid rock ... and enquiring from this old man about
the work, and what he thought as to who had made it, he told us
that without doubt the work was made by order of the father of St.
Josaphat to bring him up therein in seclusion, as the story tells.
And as it informs us that he was the son of a great King in India,
it may well be, as we have just said, that _he_ was the Budão, of
whom they relate such marvels.” (Dec. V. liv. vi. cap. 2.)
Dominie Valentyn, not being well read in the Golden Legend, remarks
on the subject of Buddha: “There be some who hold this Budhum for a
fugitive Syrian Jew, or for an Israelite, others who hold him for a
Disciple of the Apostle Thomas; but how in that case he could have
been born 622 years before Christ I leave them to explain. Diego de
Couto stands by the belief that he was certainly _Joshua_, which is
still more absurd!” (V. deel, p. 374.)
[Since the days of Couto, who considered the Buddhist legend but
an imitation of the Christian legend, the identity of the stories
was recognised (as mentioned _supra_) by M. Edouard Laboulaye, in
the _Journal des Débats_ of the 26th of July, 1859. About the same
time, Professor F. Liebrecht of Liège, in _Ebert’s Jahrbuch für
Romanische und Englische Literatur_, II. p. 314 _seqq._, comparing
the Book of Barlaam and Joasaph with the work of Barthélemy St.
Hilaire on Buddha, arrived at the same conclusion.
In 1880, Professor T. W. Rhys Davids has devoted some pages
(xxxvi.–xli.) in his _Buddhist Birth Stories; or, Jataka Tales_,
to _The Barlaam and Josaphat Literature_, and we note from them
that: “Pope Sixtus the Fifth (1585–1590) authorised a particular
Martyrologium, drawn up by Cardinal Baronius, to be used throughout
the Western Church.”. In that work are included not only the saints
first canonised at Rome, but all those who, having been already
canonised elsewhere, were then acknowledged by the Pope and the
College of Rites to be saints of the Catholic Church of Christ.
Among such, under the date of the 27th of November, are included
“The holy Saints Barlaam and Josaphat, of India, on the borders of
Persia, whose wonderful acts Saint John of Damascus has described.
Where and when they were first canonised, I have been unable, in
spite of much investigation, to ascertain. Petrus de Natalibus,
who was Bishop of Equilium, the modern Jesolo, near Venice, from
1370 to 1400, wrote a Martyrology called _Catalogus Sanctorum_; and
in it, among the ‘Saints,’ he inserts both Barlaam and Josaphat,
giving also a short account of them derived from the old Latin
translation of St. John of Damascus. It is from this work that
Baronius, the compiler of the authorised Martyrology now in use,
took over the names of these two saints, Barlaam and Josaphat.
But, so far as I have been able to ascertain, they do not occur in
any martyrologies or lists of saints of the Western Church older
than that of Petrus de Natalibus. In the corresponding manual of
worship still used in the Greek Church, however, we find, under
26th August, the name ‘of the holy Iosaph, son of Abenēr, King of
India.’ Barlaam is not mentioned, and is not therefore recognised
as a saint in the Greek Church. No history is added to the simple
statement I have quoted; and I do not know on what authority it
rests. But there is no doubt that it is in the East, and probably
among the records of the ancient church of Syria, that a final
solution of this question should be sought. Some of the more
learned of the numerous writers who translated or composed new
works on the basis of the story of Josaphat, have pointed out
in their notes that he had been canonised; and the hero of the
romance is usually called St. Josaphat in the titles of these
works, as will be seen from the Table of the Josaphat literature
below. But Professor Liebrecht, when identifying Josaphat with the
Buddha, took no notice of this; and it was Professor Max Müller,
who has done so much to infuse the glow of life into the dry
bones of Oriental scholarship, who first pointed out the strange
fact—almost incredible, were it not for the completeness of the
proof—that Gotama the Buddha, under the name of St. Josaphat, is
now officially recognised and honoured and worshipped throughout
the whole of Catholic Christendom as a Christian saint!” Professor
T. W. Rhys Davids gives further a Bibliography, pp. xcv.–xcvii.
M. H. Zotenberg wrote a learned memoir (_N. et Ext._ XXVIII. Pt.
I.) in 1886 to prove that the Greek Text is not a translation
but the original of the Legend. There are many MSS. of the Greek
Text of the Book of Barlaam and Joasaph in Paris, Vienna, Munich,
etc., including ten MSS. kept in various libraries at Oxford.
New researches made by Professor E. Kuhn, of Munich (_Barlaam
und Joasaph. Eine Bibliographisch-literargeschichtliche Studie_,
1893), seem to prove that during the 6th century, in that part
of the Sassanian Empire bordering on India, in fact Afghanistan,
Buddhism and Christianity were gaining ground at the expense of the
Zoroastrian faith, and that some Buddhist wrote in Pehlevi a _Book
of Yûdâsaf_ (Bodhisatva); a Christian, finding pleasant the legend,
made an adaptation of it from his own point of view, introducing
the character of the monk Balauhar (Barlaam) to teach his religion
to Yûdâsaf, who could not, in his Christian disguise, arrive at the
truth by himself like a Bodhisatva. This Pehlevi version of the
newly-formed Christian legend was translated into Syriac, and from
Syriac was drawn a Georgian version, and, in the first half of the
7th century, the Greek Text of John, a monk of the convent of St.
Saba, near Jerusalem, by some turned into St. John of Damascus, who
added to the story some long theological discussions. From this
Greek, it was translated into all the known languages of Europe,
while the Pehlevi version being rendered into Arabic, was adapted
by the Mussulmans and the Jews to their own creeds. (_H. Zotenberg,
Mém. sur le texte et les versions orientales du Livre de Barlaam
et Joasaph, Not. et Ext._ XXVIII. Pt. I. pp. 1–166; _G. Paris,
Saint Josaphat_ in _Rev. de Paris_, 1ᵉʳ Juin, 1895, and _Poèmes et
Légendes du Moyen Age_, pp. 181–214.)
Mr. Joseph Jacobs published in London, 1896, a valuable little
book, _Barlaam and Josaphat, English Lives of Buddha_, in which he
comes to this conclusion (p. xli.): “I regard the literary history
of the Barlaam literature as completely parallel with that of the
Fables of Bidpai. Originally Buddhistic books, both lost their
specifically Buddhistic traits before they left India, and made
their appeal, by their parables, more than by their doctrines. Both
were translated into Pehlevi in the reign of Chosroes, and from
that watershed floated off into the literatures of all the great
creeds. In Christianity alone, characteristically enough, one of
them, the Barlaam book, was surcharged with dogma, and turned to
polemical uses, with the curious result that Buddha became one of
the champions of the Church. To divest the Barlaam-Buddha of this
character, and see him in his original form, we must take a further
journey and seek him in his home beyond the Himalayas.”
[Illustration: Sakya Muni as a Saint of the Roman Martyrology.
“=Wie des Kunigs Sun in dem aufscziechen am ersten sahe in dem Weg
eynen blinden und eyn aufsmörckigen und eynen alten krummen
Man.=”[7]]
Professor Gaston Paris, in answer to Mr. Jacobs, writes (_Poèmes
et Lég. du Moyen Age_, p. 213): “Mr. Jacobs thinks that the Book
of Balauhar and Yûdâsaf was not originally Christian, and could
have existed such as it is now in Buddhistic India, but it is
hardly likely, as Buddha did not require the help of a teacher to
find truth, and his followers would not have invented the person
of Balauhar-Barlaam; on the other hand, the introduction of the
Evangelical Parable of _The Sower_, which exists in the original
of all the versions of our Book, shows that this original was a
Christian adaptation of the Legend of Buddha. Mr. Jacobs seeks
vainly to lessen the force of this proof in showing that this
Parable has parallels in Buddhistic literature.”—H. C.]
NOTE 3.—Marco is not the only eminent person who has expressed
this view of Sakyamuni’s life in such words. Professor Max Müller
(_u.s._) says: “And whatever we may think of the sanctity of
saints, let those who doubt the right of Buddha to a place among
them, read the story of his life as it is told in the Buddhistic
canon. If he lived the life which is there described, few saints
have a better claim to the title than Buddha; and no one either in
the Greek or the Roman Church need be ashamed of having paid to his
memory the honour that was intended for St. Josaphat, the prince,
the hermit, and the saint.”
NOTE 4.—This is curiously like a passage in the _Wisdom of
Solomon_: “Neque enim erant (idola) ab initio, neque erunt in
perpetuum ... acerbo enim luctu dolens pater cito sibi rapti filii
fecit imaginem: et illum qui tunc quasi homo mortuus fuerat nunc
tamquam deum colere cœpit, et constituit inter servos suos sacra et
sacrificia” (xiv. 13–15). Gower alludes to the same story; I know
not whence taken:—
“Of _Cirophanes_, seith the booke,
That he for sorow, whiche he toke
Of that he sigh his sonne dede,
Of comfort knewe none other rede,
But lete do make in remembrance
A faire image of his semblance,
And set it in the market place:
Whiche openly to fore his face
Stood euery day, to done hym ease;
And thei that than wolden please
The Fader, shuld it obeye,
Whan that thei comen thilke weye.”—_Confessio Amantis_.[8]
NOTE 5.—Adam’s Peak has for ages been a place of pilgrimage to
Buddhists, Hindus, and Mahomedans, and appears still to be so. Ibn
Batuta says the Mussulman pilgrimage was instituted in the 10th
century. The book on the history of the Mussulmans in Malabar,
called _Tohfat-ul-Mujáhidín_ (p. 48), ascribes their first
settlement in that country to a party of pilgrims returning from
Adam’s Peak. Marignolli, on his visit to the mountain, mentions
“another pilgrim, a Saracen of Spain; for many go on pilgrimage to
Adam.”
The identification of Adam with objects of Indian worship occurs
in various forms. Tod tells how an old Rajput Chief, as they stood
before a famous temple of Mahádeo near Udipúr, invited him to
enter and worship “Father Adam.” Another traveller relates how
Brahmans of Bagesar on the Sarjú identified Mahadeo and Parvati
with Adam and Eve. A Malay MS., treating of the _origines_ of Java,
represents Brahma, Mahadeo, and Vishnu to be descendants of Adam
through Seth. And in a Malay paraphrase of the Ramáyana, _Nabi
Adam_ takes the place of Vishnu. (_Tod_ I. 96; _J. A. S. B._ XVI.
233; _J. R. A. S._ N.S. II. 102; _J. Asiat._ IV. s. VII. 438.)
NOTE 6.—The _Pâtra_, or alms-pot, was the most valued legacy
of Buddha. It had served the three previous Buddhas of this
world-period, and was destined to serve the future one, Maitreya.
The Great Aṣoka sent it to Ceylon. Thence it was carried off by
a Tamul chief in the 1st century, A.D., but brought back we know
not how, and is still shown in the Malagawa Vihara at Kandy.
As usual in such cases, there were rival reliques, for Fa-hian
found the alms-pot preserved at Pesháwar. Hiuen Tsang says in
his time it was no longer there, but in Persia. And indeed the
_Pâtra_ from Pesháwar, according to a remarkable note by Sir Henry
Rawlinson, is still preserved at Kandahár, under the name of
_Kashkul_ (or the Begging-pot), and retains among the Mussulman
Dervishes the sanctity and miraculous repute which it bore among
the Buddhist _Bhikshus_. Sir Henry conjectures that the deportation
of this vessel, the palladium of the true _Gandhára_ (Pesháwar),
was accompanied by a popular emigration, and thus accounts for
the transfer of that name also to the chief city of Arachosia.
(_Koeppen_, I. 526; _Fah-hian_, p. 36; _H. Tsang_, II. 106; _J. R.
A. S._ XI. 127.)
Sir E. Tennent, through Mr. Wylie (to whom this book owes so
much), obtained the following curious Chinese extract referring to
Ceylon (written 1350): “In front of the image of Buddha there is a
sacred bowl, which is neither made of jade nor copper, nor iron;
it is of a purple colour, and glossy, and when struck it sounds
like glass. At the commencement of the Yuen Dynasty (_i.e._ under
Kúblái) three separate envoys were sent to obtain it.” Sanang
Setzen also corroborates Marco’s statement: “Thus did the Khaghan
(Kúblái) cause the sun of religion to rise over the dark land of
the Mongols; he also procured from India images and reliques of
Buddha; among others the _Pâtra_ of Buddha, which was presented
to him by the four kings (of the cardinal points), and also the
_chandana chu_” (a miraculous sandal-wood image). (_Tennent_, I.
622; _Schmidt_, p. 119.)
The text also says that several _teeth_ of Buddha were preserved in
Ceylon, and that the Kaan’s embassy obtained two molars. Doubtless
the envoys were imposed on; no solitary case in the amazing history
of that relique, for _the_ Dalada, or tooth relique, seems in all
historic times to have been unique. This, “the left canine tooth”
of the Buddha, is related to have been preserved for 800 years at
Dantapura (“_Odontopolis_”), in Kalinga, generally supposed to
be the modern Púri or Jagannáth. Here the Brahmans once captured
it and carried it off to Palibothra, where they tried in vain to
destroy it. Its miraculous resistance converted the king, who sent
it back to Kalinga. About A.D. 311 the daughter of King Guhaśiva
fled with it to Ceylon. In the beginning of the 14th century it
was captured by the Tamuls and carried to the Pandya country on
the continent, but recovered some years later by King Parakrama
III., who went in person to treat for it. In 1560 the Portuguese
got possession of it and took it to Goa. The King of Pegu, who then
reigned, probably the most powerful and wealthy monarch who has
ever ruled in Further India, made unlimited offers in exchange for
the tooth; but the archbishop prevented the viceroy from yielding
to these temptations, and it was solemnly pounded to atoms by the
prelate, then cast into a charcoal fire, and finally its ashes
thrown into the river of Goa.
The King of Pegu was, however, informed by a crafty minister of
the King of Ceylon that only a sham tooth had been destroyed by
the Portuguese, and that the real relique was still safe. This
he obtained by extraordinary presents, and the account of its
reception at Pegu, as quoted by Tennent from De Couto, is a curious
parallel to Marco’s narrative of the Great Kaan’s reception of the
Ceylon reliques at Cambaluc. The extraordinary object still so
solemnly preserved at Kandy is another forgery, set up about the
same time. So the immediate result of the viceroy’s virtue was that
two reliques were worshipped instead of one!
The possession of the tooth has always been a great object of
desire to Buddhist sovereigns. In the 11th century King Anarauhta,
of Burmah, sent a mission to Ceylon to endeavour to procure it, but
he could obtain only a “miraculous emanation” of the relique. A
tower to contain the sacred tooth was (1855), however, one of the
buildings in the palace court of Amarapura. A few years ago the
King of Burma repeated the mission of his remote predecessor, but
obtained only a _model_, and this has been deposited within the
walls of the palace at Mandalé, the new capital. (_Turnour_ in _J.
A. S. B._ VI. 856 _seqq._; _Koeppen_, I. 521; _Tennent_, I. 388,
II. 198 _seqq._; _MS. Note by Sir A. Phayre; Mission to Ava_, 136.)
[Illustration: Teeth of Buddha.
1. At Kandy, after Tennent. 2. At Fu-Chau, from Fortune.]
Of the four eye-teeth of Sakya, one, it is related, passed to the
heaven of Indra; the second to the capital of Gandhára; the third
to Kalinga; the fourth to the snake-gods. The Gandhára tooth was
perhaps, like the alms-bowl, carried off by a Sassanid invasion,
and may be identical with that tooth of Fo, which the Chinese
annals state to have been brought to China in A.D. 530 by a Persian
embassy. A tooth of Buddha is now shown in a monastery at Fu-chau;
but whether this be either the Sassanian present, or that got from
Ceylon by Kúblái, is unknown. Other teeth of Buddha were shown
in Hiuen Tsang’s time at Balkh, at Nagarahára (or Jalálábád), in
Kashmir, and at Kanauj. (_Koeppen_, u.s.; _Fortune_, II. 108; _H.
Tsang_, II. 31, 80, 263.)
NOTE 7.—Fa-hian writes of the alms-pot at Pesháwar, that poor
people could fill it with a few flowers, whilst a rich man should
not be able to do so with 100, nay, with 1000 or 10,000 bushels of
rice; a parable doubtless originally carrying a lesson, like Our
Lord’s remark on the widow’s mite, but which hardened eventually
into some foolish story like that in the text.
The modern Mussulman story at Kandahar is that the alms-pot will
contain any quantity of liquor without overflowing.
This _Pâtra_ is the Holy Grail of Buddhism. Mystical powers of
nourishment are ascribed also to the Grail in the European legends.
German scholars have traced in the romances of the Grail remarkable
indications of Oriental origin. It is not impossible that the
alms-pot of Buddha was the prime source of them. Read the prophetic
history of the _Pâtra_ as Fa-hian heard it in India (p. 161); its
mysterious wanderings over Asia till it is taken up into the heaven
_Tushita_, where Maitreya the Future Buddha dwells. When it has
disappeared from earth the Law gradually perishes, and violence and
wickedness more and more prevail:
——“What is it?
The phantom of a cup that comes and goes?
* * * * * If a man
Could touch or see it, he was heal’d at once,
By faith, of all his ills. But then the times
Grew to such evil that the holy cup
Was caught away to Heaven, and disappear’d.”
—_Tennyson’s Holy Grail._
----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] _Apollonia_ (of Macedonia) is made _Bolina_; so _Bolinas_ =
Apollonius (Tyanaeus).
[2] In 1870 I saw in the Libary at Monte Cassino a long French poem on
the story, in a MS. of our traveller’s age. This is perhaps one
referred to by Migne, as cited in _Hist. Litt. de la France_, XV.
484. [It “has even been published in the Spanish dialect used in
the Philippine Islands!” (_Rhys Davids, Jataka Tales_, p. xxxvii.)
In a MS. note, Yule says: “Is not this a mistake?”—H. C.]
[3] Imprynted at London in Flete Strete at the sygne of the Sonne, by
Wynkyn de Worde (1527).
[4] The first Life is thus entitled: Βίος καὶ Πολιτεία τοῦ Ὁσίου Πατρὸς
ἡμῶν καὶ Ἰσαποστόλου Ἰωάσαφ τοῦ βασιλέως τῆς Ἰνδίας. Professor
Müller says all the Greek copies have _Ioasaph_. I have access to
no copy in the ancient Greek.
[5] Also _Migne’s Dict. Légendes_, quoting a letter of C. L. Struve,
Director of Königsberg Gymnasium, to the _Journal Général de
l’Inst. Publ._, says that “an earlier story is entirely reproduced
in the Barlaam,” but without saying what story.
[6] The well-known Kánhari Caves. (See _Handbook for India_, p. 306.)
[7] The quotation and the cut are from an old German version of Barlaam
and Josaphat printed by Zainer at Augsburg, _circa_ 1477. (B. M.,
Grenv. Lib., No. 11,766.)
[8] Ed. 1554, fol. xci. _v_. So also I find in _A. Tostati Hisp.
Comment. in primam ptem. Exodi_, Ven. 1695, pp. 295–296: “Idola
autem sculpta in Aegypto primo inventa sunt per _Syrophenem_ primum
Idolotrarum; ante hoc enim pura elementa ut dii colebantur.” I
cannot trace the tale.