Lamaist Ceremony called the Making of the Mani Pills:”—
“Certain indestructible particles of the bodies of the Buddhas and
saints, as well as certain other bodily remains, have ever been
considered by Buddhists to enjoy certain properties, such as that of
emitting light, and of having great curative properties. The travels of
Huein-Tsang and of Fa-hsien are filled with accounts of the discovery of
such treasures, and of the supernatural properties which they possessed.
Among Thibetans, the first class of these relics is known as ‘pedung’
(upel-gedung), the second as ‘dung-rus’ (gdung-rus). They say the pedung
are minute globules found in the bones of Buddhas and saints, that they
possess wonderful brilliancy, and that sometimes they may be seen on
the exterior of some saintly person, when they have the appearance of
brilliant drops of sweat. While these pedung have most potent curative
properties, they become also the palladium of the locality fortunate
enough to have them. By a natural extension of the idea of the power of
pedung, Thibetans have come to think that if one preserves and carries
about on one’s person even a little of the excretions, or of the hair
or nail-trimmings of a saint who is known to have pedung, such, for
instance, as the Tale-Lama, or the Panchan-Rimpoche, they will shield him
from gun or sword wounds, sickness, etc.; hence the extraordinary objects
one so often finds in Thibetan charm-boxes (Ka-Wo).
“The properties of pedung have also given rise to another belief, with
which this paper is more properly concerned,—that of manufacturing pills,
to which the god Shourizog, at the supplication of the officiating lamas,
imparts the properties of his own divine body, and then imparts to them
the curative and protective properties of real pedung. These pills are
known as mani-rilbu, or ‘precious pills,’ and are in constant use as
medicine among the people of Thibet and Mongolia. Large quantities of
them are also sent by each tribute-bearing minion to the Emperor of
China. In Chinese, they are called ‘Tsu-mu-yas,’ or ‘thih-ma-yao,’ and
must not be confounded with a liliaceous plant of same name (Hanbury’s
_Anemarhena asphodeloides_), the rhizome of which is used in medicine,
and which is also a product of Thibet.
“Perhaps the better name for ‘mani-rilbu’ is ‘tzu-sheng-wan,’ ‘dilated
pills,’ which I have heard used for them in Pekin, as will be better
seen after reading the following account of the manner in which they are
manufactured.
“The greater part of the account here given of the process of making the
pills is taken from a Thibetan work containing a minute account of the
ceremony, together with the prayers to be recited, etc., the title of
which is ‘Ceremony of Making Mani Pills’ (Mani Rilbu grub gi choga), in
seven leaves.
“Verbal explanations from the lamas who explained the text to me are
incorporated wherever necessary.
“Seven days prior to the commencement of the ceremony the lama who is to
conduct it and the priests who are to take part in it commence to abstain
from the use of meat, spirits, garlic, tobacco, and other articles of
food held impure, or which are bad-smelling, and during the progress
of the ceremony, which is twenty-one, forty-nine, or one hundred days
in length, none of the above articles are allowed in the temple, nor
are unclean persons or those who are partaking of the above prohibited
substances.
“The ceremony begins by making the pills, and the process is described,
in the work mentioned above, as follows: “The Lama, his head
clean-shaved, and his vestments being as they should be, grinds into
fine flour some roasted grain, then mixing it with pure and sweet-scented
water, he makes the necessary amount of paste; the pills are then
made and coated over with red. When all this has been done, a vase is
taken which is dry and without any flaw or blemish, and which is also
perfectly clean, and in it the pills are poured until it is two-thirds
full. The vase is then wrapped in a silk cover, which is tied on with
a silk thread, and sealed. The vase, after this, is put on a stand,
in a perfectly upright position, and around the latter are arranged
bowls of water and other offerings, two by two. The most revered image
of Tug-je-chon-po (i. e., Shouresig) which the lamasery possesses is
then clothed in its robes, and placed on top of the vase; then, without
shaking the vase, a dorje (a marginal note explains that this is the
Thunder-bolt or Sadjra of Indra: it is in constant use in all the Lamaist
ceremonies, and is generally held in the right hand, between the thumb
and index, while prayers are being read. In the left hand the lama
usually holds a bell), wrapped in a clean piece of cotton or woollen
stuff, is tied to the string around the neck of the vase. After an
interval of meditation and prayer, offerings are made of ‘water, flowers,
incense, lamps, perfumes, food, etc., ... while music plays.’ Then the
help of the god is invoked ‘to impart the necessary virtues to the pills,
... for this world is sunk in sin and iniquity, and Shouresig alone can
help it, and drag it out of the mire.’ As a means thereto he is now
besought, in his great mercifulness, to bless these pills, so that they
may free from the orb of transmigration those who shall have attained
maturity of mind, to impart to them by absorption the peculiar flavor of
his resplendent person, so that they may become indistinguishable from
it, like water poured into water, etc., etc.
“This ceremony, which is a most expensive one, and most trying on the
Lamas, is not at all common in the Lamaseries of China or Mongolia, and
is confined to the larger one in Thibet; the only one at Pekin, where
it is sometimes performed, is the Shih-fang-tang, to the west of the
Hsi-huang-tsu, outside of the north side of the city.”
The above ceremony describes a symbolical alvine dejection, and the
most plausible explanation is, that the lamas, finding trade good and
the Buddhist laity willing to accept more “amulets” than the Grand Lama
was able, unaided, to supply, hit upon this truly miraculous mode of
replenishing their stock.
Mr. Rockhill explains that the word “pedung,” used in the above
description, means “remains.” Taking into consideration the fact that
these people, although remotely, are related to the Aryan stock, which
is the ancestor of the English, German, Irish, Latin, and others, from
which we spring, the meaning, as here given, is certainly not without
significance. “Dung,” in our own tongue, means nothing more nor less than
remains, reliquiæ of a certain kind.
Webster traces the word “dung” to the Anglo-Saxon dung, dyncg,
dincg,—excrement; Dyngan, to dung; N. H. German, dung, dunger; O. H.
German, Tunga; Sw. Dynga; Danish, Dynge and Dyngd; Icelandic, Dyngia and
Dy. This shows it to be essentially Indo-Germanic in type, and fairly
to be compared with the words “pedung” and “dung-rus” of Mr. Rockhill’s
manuscript.
In the country of Ur of the Chaldees, which was the home of Abraham (Gen.
xi. 2), there reigned a king, “the father of Dungi.” The exact meaning of
the name “Dungi” has not been made known. The name of the king himself,
strangely enough, was “Urea,” or “Uri,”—it is read both ways. His date
has been fixed at 3,000 years B.C.
The information in preceding paragraph was furnished by Prof. Otis T.
Mason, of the National Museum, Washington, D.C.
Lenormant makes him out as of high antiquity,—“the most ancient of the
Babylonian kings,” “kings who can vie in antiquity with the builders of
the Egyptian pyramids,—Dungi, for instance.”—(“Chaldean Magic,” p. 333.)
Smith ascribes him to the date of at least 2,000 B.C.—(“Assyrian
Discoveries,” New York, 1876, p. 232.)
Mr. W. W. Rockhill, for six years secretary of the Legation of the United
States, in Pekin, is a member of the Oriental Society, and a scholar of
the highest attainments, more particularly in all that relates to the
languages, customs, and religions of China and Thibet, in which countries
he has travelled extensively.
The sacred pills presented by him to the author were enclosed in a silver
reliquary, elaborately chased and ornamented; in size they were about as
large as quail-shot; their color was almost orange, or between that and
an ochreous red.
Through the kindness of Surgeon-General John Moore, U. S. Army, they were
analyzed by Dr. Mew, U. S. Army, with the following results:—
“April 18, 1889.
“I have at length found time to examine the Grand Lama’s
ordure, and write to say that I find nothing at all remarkable
in it. He had been feeding on a farinaceous diet, for I found
by the microscope a large amount of undigested starch in the
field, the presence of which I verified by the usual iodine
test, which gave an abundant reaction.
“There was also present much cellulose, or what appeared to be
cellulose, from which I infer that the flour used (which was
that of wheat) was of a coarse quality, and probably not made
in Minnesota.
“A slight reaction for biliary matter seemed to show that there
was no obstruction of the bile ducts. These tests about used up
the four very small pills of the Lama’s ordure.
“Very respectfully and sincerely yours,
(Signed) “W. M. MEW.”
IX.
THE STERCORANISTES.
That Christian polemics have not been entirely free from such ideas may
be shown satisfactorily to any one having the leisure to examine the
various phases of the discussion upon the doctrine of the Eucharist.
The word “stercoranistes,” or “stercorarians,” is not to be found in
the last edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica; but in the edition
of 1841 the definition of the word is as follows: “Stercorarians, or
Stercoranistes, formed from _stercus_, ‘dung,’ a name which those of the
Romish church originally gave to such as held that the host was liable to
digestion and all its consequences, like other food.” This definition was
copied verbatim in Rees’s Cyclopædia of Arts, Sciences, and Literature,
Philadelphia.
The dispute upon “Stercoranisme” began in 831, upon the appearance of
a theological treatise by a monk named Paschasius Radbert.—(See the
“Institutes of Ecclesiastical History,” John Lawrence von Mosheim,
translated by John Murdock, D.D., New Haven, 1832, vol. ii. p. 104 _et
seq._)
The grossly sensual conception of the presence of the Lord’s body in
the sacrament, according to which that body is eaten, digested, and
evacuated like ordinary food, is of ancient standing, though not found
in Origen, nor perhaps in Rhabanus Maurus. It certainly originated with
a class of false teachers contemporary with or earlier than Rhabanus
Maurus, whom Paschasius Radbert condemns,—“Frivolum est ergo in hoc
mysterio cogitare in stercore ne commisceatur in digestione alterius
cibi” (De Corp. et Sanguin. Domin. cap. 20). He does not, however, apply
the term “Stercoranistes” to his opponents. Cardinal Humbert is the
first to so employ the word. This use was in a polemic against Nicetas
Pectoratus, written in support of Azymitism, etc. From this source the
word was adopted into common usage.—(Schrockli Kirchengesch. XXIII.? 429,
499; Herzog, Real Encyclop., s. v.; McClintock and Strong, Cyclop. of
Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, New York, 1880; see
also Schaff-Herzog, “Cyclopædia of Religious Knowledge,” New York, 1881,
article “Stercoranistes.”)
(Stercoranistes.) (Hist. Eccles.) “Nom que quelques écrivains ont donné
a ceux qui pensoient que les symboles eucharistiques êtoient sujets à
la digestion et à toutes ses suites de même que les autres nourritures
corporelles.... Ce mot est dérivé du Latin, ‘stercus,’ excrement.
On ne convient pas généralement de l’existence de cette erreur. Le
président Manguin l’attribue à Amalaire, auteur du neuvième siècle....
Et le cardinal Humbert dans sa réponse a Nicetas Pectoratus, l’appelle
nettement stercoraniste, parceque celui-ci prétendoit que la perception
de l’hostie rompoit le jeûne. Enfin, Alger attribue la même erreur
aux Grecs. Mais ces accusations ne paroissent pas fondées, car; ...
Amalaire propose à la vérité la question si les espèces eucharistiques
se consument comme les aliments ordinaires; mais, il ne la décide pas.
Nicetas prétend aussi que l’Eucharistique rompt le jeûne, soit qu’il
reste dans les espèces quelque vertu nutritive, soit parce qu’après avoir
récu l’Eucharistique, ou peut prendre autres aliments; mais, il ne paroit
pas avoir admis la consequence que lui impute le Cardinal Humbert. Il ne
paroit pas non plus que les autres Grecs soient tombés dans cette erreur.
S. Jean Damascene les en disculpe. Mais, soit que le Stercoranisme
ait existé ou non, les protestans n’en peuvent tirer aucun avantage
contre la présence réele, que cette erreur suppose plutôt qu’elle ne
l’ébranle.”—(Voyez M. Wuitass, traité de l’Eucharistie, première partie,
quest. 2, art. 1; p. 416 et suiv. Encyclop. ou Diction. Raisson. des
Sciences, des Arts, et des Metiers, tome quinzième, Neufchatel, 1765,
art. “Stercoranistes.”)
“Si qui fuerunt, fuere nonnulli nono sæculo, qui Corpus Christi quod in
Eucharistia continetur secessui, ac defectioni obnoxium esse putabat ita
ut corruptis speciebus et ipsum Corpus Christi corrumperatur.”—(“Dict. of
Sects and Heresies,” etc., T. H. Blunt, Oxford, 1874, where a number of
references are given.)
“Stercorantistarum, nomen non sectæ, sed convitii fuit.”—(Baronius,
“Annales,” Lucca, 1758.)
Stercoranisme. Stercoranistes. Stercus. “Membre d’une secte qui souténait
que les espèces de l’Eucharistie étaient digérées et transformées en
excrément comme les autres aliments” (Encyclop.).
“On a désigné dans le XIX. siècle sous le nom de Stercoranistes, les
théologiens qui niaient que la substance du pain et du vin fut changée
dans l’Eucharistie au corps et au sang de Jesus Christ.”
“Tout ce qui entre dans la bouche, descend le ventre et va au rétrait.”
“Prétendirent que si le corps et le sang de Jésus Christ, avaient pris la
place de la substance du pain et du vin, ils devraient subir les mêmes
accidents qui seraient arrivés à cette substance si elle avait été reçue
par le communiant.”—(P. Larousse, “Grand Dictionnaire Universel,” Paris,
1875.)
Brand, in his “Encyclopædia of Science, Literature, and Art,” article
“Stercoranism,” says: “A nickname which seems to have been applied in
the Western churches in the fifth and sixth centuries to those who held
the opinion that a change took place in the consecrated elements, so as
to render the divine body subject to the act of digestion.” He refers to
Mosheim’s “Ecclesiastical History” for a fuller account.
The same ideas obtained among the illiterate as a matter of course.
The First Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus Christ seems to have been
received by the Gnostics of the second century as canonical, and accepted
in the same sense by Eusebius, Athanasius, Chrysostom, and others of the
Fathers and writers of the Church. Sozomen was told by travellers in
Egypt that they had heard in that country of the miracles performed by
the water in which the infant Jesus had been washed. According to Ahmed
ben Idris, this gospel was used in parts of the East in common with the
other gospels; while Ocobius de Castro asserts that in many churches of
Asia and Africa it was recited exclusively. (See Introduction to the
“Apocryphal New Testament,” William Hone, London, 1820.) But, on the
other hand, all the apocrypha were condemned by Pope Gelasius in the
fifth century; and this interdict was not repealed until the time of Paul
IV. in the sixteenth century.—(See Bunsen, “Analecta,” Hamburg, 1703.)
In the following extracts it will be noted that the miracles recorded
were wrought either by the swaddling-clothes themselves or by the water
in which they had been cleansed; and the inference is that the excreta of
Christ were believed, as in many other instances, to have the character
of a panacea, as well as generally miraculous properties.
The Madonna gave one of the swaddling clothes of Christ to the Wise Men
of the East who visited him; they took it home, “and having, according
to the custom of their country, made a fire, they worshipped it.... And
casting the swaddling cloth into the fire, the fire took it and kept it”
(1 Inf. iii. 6, 7).
We read of the Finnish deity Wainemoinen that “the sweat which dropped
from his body was a balm for all diseases.” The very same virtues
were possessed by the sweat of the Egyptian god Ra (“Chaldean Magic,”
Lenormant, p. 247, quoting the Kalewala, part 2, r. 14).
On arrival in Egypt after the Flight—“When the Lady Saint Mary had washed
the swaddling clothes of the Lord Christ and hanged them out to dry upon
a post ... a certain boy ... possessed with the devil, took down one of
them and put it upon his head. And presently the devils began to come out
of his mouth and fly away in the shape of crows and serpents. And from
this time the boy was healed by the power of the Lord Christ.”—(1 Inf.
iv. 15, 16, 17.)
“On the return journey from Egypt, Christ had healed by a kiss a lady
whom cursed Satan ... had leaped upon ... in the form of a serpent. On
the morrow, the same woman brought perfumed water to wash the Lord Jesus;
when she had washed him, she preserved the water. And there was a girl
whose body was white with leprosy, who being sprinkled with this water
was instantly cleansed from her leprosy.”—(1 Inf. vi. 16, 17).
There is another example of exactly the same kind in 1 Inf. vi. 34. See,
again, 1 Inf. ix. 1, 4, 5, 9; x. 2, 3; xii. 4, 5, 6. “And in Matarea the
Lord Jesus caused a well to spring forth, in which Saint Mary washed his
coat. And a balsam is produced or grown in that country from the sweat
which ran down there from the Lord Jesus.”—(Gospel of the Infancy, viii.:
“The Apocryphal New Testament,” William Hone, London, 1820, p. 47.)
“In Ireland, weakly children are taken to drink the ablution, that is,
the water and wine with which the chalice is rinsed after the priest has
taken the communion,—the efficacy arising from the cup having just before
contained the body of our Lord.” (See “Folk-Medicine,” Black, London,
1883, p. 88.) The same cure was also in vogue in England, and in each
case for the whooping-cough.
This has all the appearance of a commingling of two separate streams
of thought; compare with it the notes on the expression from Juvenal,
“Priapo ille bibit vitreo,” page 428, as well as those in regard to the
canons of Beauvais on page 429.
“An offshoot of the Khlysti, known as the “Shakouni,” or Jumpers, openly
professed debauchery and libertinism to excess.... Others of their rites
are abject and disgusting; their chief is the living Christ, and their
communion consists in embracing his body,—ordinary disciples may kiss
his hand or his foot; to those of a more fervent piety, he offers his
tongue.”—(“The Russian Church and Russian Dissent,” Albert F. Heard, New
York and London, 1887, pp. 261-262.)
The subjoined extract is from “Mélusine” (Gaidoz), Paris, May 5, 1888.
UN DALAI-LAMA IRLANDAIS.
“A l’occasion des reliques journalières du Dalai-Lama dont on fait des
pilules pour les dévots, histoire que les imprimeurs de cette Revue
n’avaient pas voulu ‘avaler’ (voir plus haut, col. 24) Mr. Wh. Stokes
nous a signalé un curieux passage des annales irlandaises. Nous croyons
intéressant de le traduire ici. Cet ‘acte de foi’ se passait en l’an 605,
et le héros en est le roi Aedh, surnommé Uairidhnach.[14]
“Un jour il passa, n’étant encore que prince royal, par le territoire
d’Othain-Muira; il lava ses mains à la rivière qui traversa le territoire
de la ville. Othain est le nom de la rivière, et c’est de là que la ville
a son nom. Il prit de l’eau pour s’en laver la figure. Un de ses gens
l’arrêta. ‘Roi, dit-il, ne mets pas cette eau sur ton visage.’ ‘Quoi
donc?’ dit le roi. ‘J’ai honte de le dire,’ dit-il. ‘Quelle honte as-tu
à dire la vérité? dit le roi. ‘Voici ce que c’est,’ dit-il; ‘c’est sur
cette eau que se trouve le _water-closet_ des clercs.’ ‘Est-ce ici, que
vient le clerc lui-même’ (c’est à dire le chef des clercs) ‘pour se
soulager?’
“‘C’est ici même,’ dit le page. ‘Non seulement,’ dit le roi, ‘je mettrai
cette eau sur ma figure, mais j’en mettrai dans ma bouche, et j’en
boirai’ (et il en but trois gorgées); ‘car l’eau où il se soulage vaut
pour moi l’eucharistie.’
“Cela fut raconté à Muira (le chef des clercs), et il rendit grâces à
Dieu de ce que Aedh avait une semblable foi; et il appela auprès de lui
Aedh et il lui dit: ‘Cher fils, en récompense de ce respect que tu as
montré à l’Église, je te promets, en présence de Dieu, que tu obtiendras
bientôt la royauté d’Irlande, que tu auras victoire et triomphe sur tes
ennemis, que tu ne mourras pas de mort subite,[15] que tu recevras le
corps de Christ de ma main, et je prierai le Seigneur pour toi, pour que
ce soit la vieillesse qui t’enlève de cette vie.’
“Ce fut peu de temps après cela qu’Aedh obtint la royauté d’Irlande et il
donna des terres fertiles à Muira d’Othain.[16]
“Comme le lecteur ne manquera pas de le remarquer, c’est par édification
que l’annaliste, clerc lui-même, raconte cette histoire. En effet, elle
fait honneur à la piété du roi et elle prouve que ‘le respect montré à
l’Église ... a obtenu sa récompense.’ Ce qui vient des hommes de Dieu
participe en effet au caractère sacré de Dieu qu’ils représentent.
“Si l’on cherchait à étendre cette enquête de scatologie hiératique on
trouverait sans doute bien des croyances et des pratiques répugnantes à
notre goût de civilisés, mais raisonnables en un sens quand on accepte le
point de départ, quand on ne condamne pas la logique, et surtout quand
on se rappelle que le dégoût pour les résidus de la digestion n’est
devenu instinctif que pour la vie civilisée et les habitudes sociales.
Les peuples qui ne se lavent pas doivent certainement sentir autrement
que nous, et même ne pas sentir du tout; et nos ancêtres de l’âge des
cavernes n’avaient certainement l’odorat plus difficile. On assure que
chez les Namas, tribu hottentote, le shaman qui célèbre un mariage
asperge les conjoints de son urine. Cela remplace notre eau bénite. Le
shaman est en effet ’un homme de Dieu,’ par excellence; car, lorsqu’il se
livre à ces danses désordonnées qui sont une partie du culte, on croit
que le dieu descend en lui, non en esprit, mais en réalité.
“C’est aussi le cas de rappeler un usage linguistique des habitants de
Samoa dans la Polynésie. Lorsqu’une femme est sur le point d’accoucher,
on adresse des prières au dieu ou génie de la famille du père et à celui
de la famille de la mère. Quand l’enfant est né, la mère demande quel
dieu on était en train de prier à ce moment. On en prend soigneusement
note et ce dieu sera en quelque sorte le “patron” de l’enfant pendant le
reste de sa vie.
“Par respect pour ce dieu, l’enfant est appelé son excrément et pendant
son enfance on l’appelle réellement, comme ‘petit-nom,’ ‘m⸺ de Tongo,’
ou de Satia, ou de tout autre dieu, suivant le cas. La formule est
grossière, mais l’intention, sous une apparence tout matérielle, part
d’un sentiment de respect et de piété à l’égard de la divinité.”
The last two paragraphs of the above are taken from the work of the
missionary Turner, who lived for seventeen years in the islands of
Polynesia; they appear in his “Samoa,” London, 1884, p. 79. But in the
same book, issued under the title “Polynesia,” London, 1861, it has been
expunged.
The mother of the King of Uganda invited Speke to visit her and drink
pombé, the native plantain wine; when she happened to spill some of
this the servants “instantly fought over it, dabbing their noses on the
ground, or grabbing it with their hands, that not one atom of the queen’s
favor might be lost; for everything must be adored that comes from
royalty, whether by design or accident.” (Speke, “Nile,” London, 1863,
vol. ii. p. 313.) This is the Grand Lama business over again and nothing
else.