5
These inscriptions of Jayavarman are the last which tell us anything about the religion of mediæval Camboja but we have a somewhat later account from the pen of Chou Ta-kuan, a Chinese who visited Angkor in 1296[313]. He describes the temple in the centre of the city, which must be the Bayon, and says that it had a tower of gold and that the eastern (or principal) entrance was approached by a golden bridge flanked by two lions and eight statues, all of the same metal. The chapter of his work entitled "The Three Religions," runs as follows, slightly abridged from M. Pelliot's version.
"The literati are called Pan-ch'i, the bonzes Ch'u-ku and the Taoists Pa-ssŭ-wei. I do not know whom the Pan-ch'i worship. They have no schools and it is difficult to say what books they read. They dress like other people except that they wear a white thread round their necks, which is their distinctive mark. They attain to very high positions. The Ch'u-ku shave their heads and wear yellow clothes. They uncover the right shoulder, but the lower part of their body is draped with a skirt of yellow cloth and they go bare foot. Their temples are sometimes roofed with tiles. Inside there is only one image, exactly like the Buddha Śâkya, which they call Po-lai ( = Prah), ornamented with vermilion and blue, and clothed in red. The Buddhas of the towers (? images in the towers of the temples) are different and cast in bronze. There are no bells, drums, cymbals, or flags in their temples. They eat only one meal a day, prepared by someone who entertains them, for they do not cook in their temples. They eat fish and meat and also use them in their offerings to Buddha, but they do not drink wine. They recite numerous texts written on strips of palm-leaf. Some bonzes have a right to have the shafts of their palanquins and the handles of their parasols in gold or silver. The prince consults them on serious matters. There are no Buddhist nuns.
"The Pa-ssŭ-wei dress like everyone else, except that they wear on their heads a piece of red or white stuff like the Ku-ku worn by Tartar women but lower. Their temples are smaller than those of the Buddhists, for Taoism is less prosperous than Buddhism. They worship nothing but a block of stone, somewhat like the stone on the altar of the God of the Sun in China. I do not know what god they adore. There are also Taoist nuns. The Pa-ssŭ-wei do not partake of the food of other people or eat in public. They do not drink wine.
"Such children of the laity as go to school frequent the bonzes, who give them instruction. When grown up they return to a lay life.
"I have not been able to make an exhaustive investigation."
Elsewhere he says "All worship the Buddha" and he describes some popular festivals which resemble those now celebrated in Siam. In every village there was a temple or a Stûpa. He also mentions that in eating they use leaves as spoons and adds "It is the same in their sacrifices to the spirits and to Buddha."
Chou Ta-kuan confesses that his account is superficial and he was perhaps influenced by the idea that it was natural there should be three religions in Camboja, as in China. Buddhists were found in both countries: Pan-ch'i no doubt represents Paṇḍita and he saw an analogy between the Brahmans of the Cambojan Court and Confucian mandarins: a third and less known sect he identified with the Taoists. The most important point in his description is the prominence given to the Buddhists. His account of their temples, of the dress and life of their monks[314] leaves no doubt that he is describing Hinayanist Buddhism such as still nourishes in Camboja. It probably found its way from Siam, with which Camboja had already close, but not always peaceful, relations. Probably the name by which the bonzes are designated is Siamese[315]. With Chou Ta-kuan's statements may be compared the inscription of the Siamese King Râma Khomhëng[316] which dwells on the nourishing condition of Pali Buddhism in Siam about 1300 A.D. The contrast indicated by Chou Ta-kuan is significant. The Brahmans held high office but had no schools. Those of the laity who desired education spent some portion of their youth in a Buddhist monastery (as they still do) and then returned to the world. Such a state of things naturally resulted in the diffusion of Buddhism among the people, while the Brahmans dwindled to a Court hierarchy. When Chou Ta-kuan says that all the Cambojans adored Buddha, he probably makes a mistake, as he does in saying that the sculptures above the gates of Angkor are heads of Buddha. But the general impression which he evidently received that everyone frequented Buddhist temples and monasteries speaks for itself. His statement about sacrifices to Buddha is remarkable and, since the inscriptions of Jayavarman VII speak of sacrificers, it cannot be rejected as a mere mistake. But if Hinayanist Buddhism countenanced such practices in an age of transition, it did not adopt them permanently for, so far as I have seen, no offerings are made to-day in Cambojan temples, except flowers and sticks of incense.
The Pa-ssŭ-wei have given rise to many conjectures and have been identified with the Basaih or sacerdotal class of the Chams. But there seems to be little doubt that the word really represents Pâśupata and Chou Ta-kuan's account clearly points to a sect of linga worshippers, although no information is forthcoming about the "stone on the altar of the Sun God in China" to which he compares their emblem. His idea that they represented the Taoists in Camboja may have led him to exaggerate their importance but his statement that they were a separate body is confirmed, for an inscription of Angkor[317] defines the order of hierarchical precedence as "the Brahman, the Śaiva Acârya, the Pâśupata Acârya[318]."
From the time of Chou Ta-kuan to the present day I have found few notices about the religion of Camboja. Hinayanist Buddhism became supreme and though we have few details of the conquest we can hardly go wrong in tracing its general lines. Brahmanism was exclusive and tyrannical. It made no appeal to the masses but a severe levy of forced labour must have been necessary to erect and maintain the numerous great shrines which, though in ruins, are still the glory of Camboja[319]. In many of them are seen the remains of inscriptions which have been deliberately erased. These probably prescribed certain onerous services which the proletariat was bound to render to the established church. When Siamese Buddhism invaded Camboja it had a double advantage. It was the creed of an aggressive and successful neighbour but, while thus armed with the weapons of this world, it also appealed to the poor and oppressed. If it enjoyed the favour of princes, it had no desire to defend the rights of a privileged caste: it offered salvation and education to the average townsman and villager. If it invited the support and alms of the laity, it was at least modest in its demands. Brahmanism on the other hand lost strength as the prestige of the court declined. Its greatest shrines were in the provinces most exposed to Siamese attacks. The first Portuguese writers speak of them as already deserted at the end of the sixteenth century. The connection with India was not kept up and if any immigrants came from the west, after the twelfth century they are more likely to have been Moslims than Hindus. Thus driven from its temples, with no roots among the people, whose affections it had never tried to win, Brahmanism in Camboja became what it now is, a court ritual without a creed and hardly noticed except at royal functions.