MOUNT OMEI AND CHOU KUNG SHAN

There are vague traditions that Mount Omei was a centre of primitive nature-worship long before the days of Buddhism. There is a passage in the Shu Ching from which we learn that the semi-mythical emperor Yü (about the twenty-third century B.C.), after the completion of some of the famous drainage and irrigation works with which his name is associated, offered sacrifices on (or to) certain hills named Ts'ai and Mêng. It is a disputed point among the commentators where these hills are. Mêng is said to be one of the mountains that overlook Ya-chou, and we shall see in Chapter VIII. that one of those mountains is still the resort of pilgrims. As to Ts'ai, one commentator at least has inclined to the opinion that it must be looked for in the Omei range (see Legge's Chinese Classics, vol. iii. part i. p. 121). If this identification be correct, we must regard the brief notice in the Shu Ching as the oldest reference in extant literature to Mount Omei. The student of Chinese who wishes to pursue further the vexed question of Mêng and Ts'ai will find a discussion of it in the 16th chüan of the Ssuch'uan T'ung Chih. The probability seems to be that both Mêng and Ts'ai were close to Ya-chou, and that neither of them should be identified with Omei. Mêng seems to be one of the hills that lie to the south of the city; Ts'ai may or may not be the somewhat famous mountain generally known as Chou Kung Shan, or the Hill of Duke Chou, which is situated a couple of miles to the east. Chou Kung, who is said to have died in B.C. 1105, is perhaps chiefly known to Europeans as the legendary inventor of the famous "south-pointing chariot," but he is regarded by the Chinese as a pattern of many virtues. His zeal for the public good was so great that he seems—if we may believe Mencius—to have anticipated the all-night sittings of the House of Commons. His merits indeed were of so extraordinary a nature that, as we know from the Lun Yü, Confucius regarded it as a sign of his approaching dotage that for a long time he had ceased to dream of Chou Kung.

Other people besides Confucius were in the habit of dreaming of this great and good man. The hill near Ya-chou, according to a story preserved in the official annals of Ssuch'uan, owes its name to a dream-vision that came to the famous Chinese general, Chu-ko Liang. This distinguished warrior flourished in the second and third centuries of our era. He made his name by his successful campaigns against the Wild Men of the West—the Man-tzŭ and others—and on one occasion when he was proceeding at the head of his army to inflict chastisement upon them he spent a night on the slopes of the Ya-chou Hill and dreamed that Chou Kung paid him a visit. He regarded this as of such happy omen for the success of his expedition that he immediately caused a temple to Chou Kung to be erected on the auspicious spot. Since that time, the hill—which may or may not have been already sacred, under the name of Ts'ai, to the memory of the Emperor Yü—has always been known as Chou Kung Shan. The fame of the general Chu-ko Liang has almost rivalled that of Chou Kung himself. This "darling hero of the Chinese people," as Professor Giles calls him, has had temples erected in his honour in many towns of Ssuch'uan, and he is a well-known and popular figure on the Chinese theatrical stage.

NOTE 2 ([p. 65])

BODHIDARMA

Bodhidarma (逹摩大師) is the original of the Ta Mo so often found in Ssuch'uanese temples. Catholic missionaries, struck by the sound of the name and the fact that Ta-Mo is sometimes found wearing an ornament shaped like a Christian cross, have clung to the idea that Ta-Mo was no other than the Apostle St Thomas. (See Croix et Swastika, by Father Gaillard, pp. 80 seq.) Bodhidarma is regarded as the founder of the Zen sect in Japan. Japanese children know him well, for he is a conspicuous object in the toy-shops in the form of the legless Daruma. (See Lafcadio Hearn's charming essay in A Japanese Miscellany.)

NOTE 3 ([p. 70])

"GODS" IN BUDDHISM

NIRVANA

On this subject may be consulted the passage on the "Eel-wrigglers" in the Brahma-gâla Suttanta, translated by Rhys Davids in the Sacred Books of the Buddhists, vol. ii. Buddhism refrains from denying, rather than distinctly affirms, the existence of the Brahmanical gods; but these gods, if existent, are regarded as neither omnipotent nor immortal. They are subject to the law of karma just as man himself is subject. The Arahat is greater than any "god" because released from all change and illusion, to which the "gods" are still subject. (See Rhys Davids, Hibbert Lectures, pp. 210 seq., 4th edn.) The abolition or retention of the Brahmanical deities would really make little or no difference to the philosophical position of canonical Buddhism.