FOOTNOTES:
[973] The Tibetan orthography is bKah-hgyur (the translated command) and bsTan-ḥgyur (the translated explanation). Various spellings are used by European writers such as Kah-gyur, Kandjour, Bkahgyur, etc. Waddell writes Kah-gyur and Tän-gyur.
[974] Though this distinction seems to hold good on the whole, yet it is not strictly observed. Thus the work called Udâna and corresponding to the Dhammapada is found in both the Kanjur and Tanjur.
[975] Nanjio's catalogue states that a great many Abhidhaṛma works in Chinese agree with Tibetan, but their titles are not to be found in Csoma's analysis of the Kanjur. They may however be in the Tanjur, which is less fully analyzed.
[976] Analysis of the Dulva, etc., four parts in Asiatic Researches, vol. XX. 1836, by A. Csoma Körösi. Translated into French by Feer, Annales du Musée Guimet, tome 2me, 1881. Index des Kanjur, herausgegeben von I.J. Schmidt (in Tibetan), 1845. Huth, Verzeichnis der in Tibetischen Tanjur, Abtheilung mDo, erhaltenen Werke in Sitzungsber. Berlin. Akad. 1895. P. Cordier, Catalogue du fonds Tibétain de la Bibliothèque Nationale. Beckh, Verzeichnis der tibetischen Handscriften der K. Bibliothek zu Berlin, 1 Abth., Kanjur, 1914. This is an analysis of the edition in 108 volumes, whereas Csoma de Körösi and Feer analyzed the edition in 100 volumes. The arrangement of the two editions is not quite the same. See too Pelliot's review of Beckh's catalogue in J.A. 1914, II. pp. 111 ff. See also Waddell, "Tibetan Manuscripts and Books" in Asiatic Quarterly, July, 1912, pp. 80-113, which, though not an analysis of the Canon, incidentally gives much information.
[977] E.g. Udâna ( = Dhammapada) by Rockhill, 1892 (transl.), and Beckh (text 1911) Madhyamakâvatâra: de la Vallée Poussin, 1912, Madyamika-śâstra: Max Walleser, 1911 (transl.), Citralakshana, ed. and trans. Laufer, 1913; Feer, Fragments extraits du Kanjur, Annales du Musée Guimet, tome 5me, 1883.
[978] It is also sometimes divided into three Pitakas. When this is done, the Dulva is the Vinaya P., the Śer-chin is the Abhidharma P., and all the other works whether Sûtras or Tantras are classed together as the Sûtra P.
[979] hDul-ba.
[980] See Nanjio, Nos. 1115-1119, 1122, 1132-4. Rockhill, Prâtimoksha Sûtra selon la version Tibétaine, 1884. Huth, Tibetische Version der Naihsargikaprâyaccittikadharmâs, 1891. Finot and Hüber, "Le Prâtimoksa des Sarvâstivadins," J.A. 1913, II. p. 465.
[981] Strictly Śer-phyin.
[982] Waddell in Asiatic Quarterly, 1912, XXXIV. p. 98, renders the title as Vata sangha, which probably represents Avataṃsaka. Sarat Chandra Das, sub voce, says Phal-chen-sde-pa = Mahâsanghika.
[983] The statements of Nanjio as to "deest in Tibetan" are not quite accurate as regards the edition in 108 volumes. Compare his catalogue with Beckh's.
[984] This statement made by such scholars as Feer (Anal. du Kanjour, p. 288) and Rockhill (Udâna, p. x) is of great weight, but I have not found in their works any quotation from the Tibetan translation saying that the original language was not Sanskrit and the titles given by Peer are in Sanskrit not in Pali. I presume it is not meant that the Tibetan text is a translation from a Sanskrit text which corresponds with the Pali text known to us. In Beckh's catalogue of the edition in 108 volumes the same titles occur in the Prajñâ-pâramitâ section, but without any statement that the works are translated from Pali. See Beckh, p. 12, and Feer, pp. 288 ff.
[985] Life of the Buddha, p. 224, and J.R.A.S. 1899, p. 422.
[986] There is another shorter sûtra on the same subject in the mDo section of the Kanjur. Feer, p. 247. In the edition of 108 volumes, the whole section is incorporated in the mDo, Beckh, p. 33.
[987] The word seems originally to mean string or chain.
[988] Apparently not the same as the Tathâgata-Guhyaka alias Guhya Samagha described by R. Mitra, Sk. Bud. Lit. p. 261.
[989] See notices of these in four articles by Satiścandra Vidyâbhûshana in J.A.S. Beng. 1907.
[990] I.e. the Dhammapada.
[991] Huth's analysis of vols. 117-124 of the Tanjur (Sitzungsber. Kōn. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin, 1895) shows that they contain inter alia, eight works on Sanskrit literature and philology besides the Meghadûta, nine on medicine and alchemy with commentaries, fourteen on astrology and divination, three on chemistry (the composition of incense), eight on gnomic poetry and ethics, one encyclopædia, six lives of the Saints, six works on the Tibetan language and five on painting and fine art. Cordier gives further particulars of the medical works in B.E.F.E.O. 1903, p. 604. They include a veterinary treatise.
[992] See title in Laufer's edition.
[993] See Feer, l.c. for instance, pp. 287, 248.
[994] See Feer, l.c. p. 344, and Laufer, "Die Bruza Sprache" in T'oung Pao, 1908. It is said that King Ru-che-tsan of Brusha or Dusha translated (? what date) the Mûla-Tantra and Vyâkhyâ-Tantra into the language of his country. See J.A.S.B. 1882, p. 12. Beckh states that four works have titles in Chinese, one in Bruža and one in Tartar (Hor-gyi-skad-du).
[995] Laufer, ibid. p. 4.
[996] See Nanjio, No. 87, and Feer, l.c. pp. 208-212, but the two works may not be the same. The Tibetan seems to be a collection of 45 sûtras.
[997] Rockhill, l.c. p. 212.
[998] Stein, Ancient Khotan, pp. 426-9 and App. B. See also Pelliot in B.E.F.E.O. 1908, pp. 507 ff.
[999] The Mahâvyutpatti edited by Minayeff in Bibl. Buddhica and an abridgement.
[1000] According to Feer (Analyse, p. 325) Tibetan historians state that at this epoch kings prohibited the translation of more than a few tantric works.
[1001] Numerous works are also ascribed to Sarvajñâdeva and Dharmaka, both of Kashmir, and to the Indian Vidyâkaraprabhâ and Surendrabodhi.
[1002] See Francke in J.R.A.S. 1914, pp. 56-7.
[1003] See Pander, Pantheon, No. 30.
[1004] Waddell, Buddhism, p. 36, gives a list of them.
[1005] It appears to me that there is some confusion between Brom-ston, a disciple of Atîśa, who must have flourished about 1060 and Bu-ston, who was born in 1288. Grünwedel says that the latter is credited with the compilations of the Kanjur and Tanjur, but Rockhill (Life of the Buddha, p. 227) describes Bu-ston as a disciple of Atîśa.
[1006] See Huth, Geschichte des Budd. in der Mongolei, 291, and Laufer, "Skizze der Mongolischen Literatur" (in Keleti Szemle, 1907), p. 219. Also Pelliot in J.A. 1914, II. pp. 112-3.
[1007] See Laufer in Bull. de l'Acad. de S. Pétersbourg, 1909, pp. 567-574. There are some differences in the editions. That of Narthang is said to contain a series of sûtras translated from the Pali and wanting in the Red Edition, but not to contain two translations from Chinese which are found in the Red Edition. See the preface to Beckh's catalogue. The MS. analyzed by him was obtained at Peking, but it is not known whence it came. An edition by Ch'ien Lung is mentioned by some authors. It is also said that an edition is printed at Punakha in Bhutan, and another in Mongolian at Kumbum.
[1008] Some of these are probably included in the Tanjur, which has not been fully catalogued. See J.A.S. Beng. 1904, for a list of 85 printed books bought in Lhasa, 1902, and Waddell's article in Asiatic Quarterly, July, 1912, already referred to.
[1009] Edited and translated by Huth as Geschichte des Buddhismus in der Mongolei, 1892.
[1010] Finno Ugrian Society of Helsingfors, 1898.
[1011] Same Society, 1900 and 1902, and J.A.S.B. 1906-7.
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.