Reading section 26

S. Lévi has suggested that the Bodhisattva Manjuśrî is of Tokharian origin[554]. His worship at Wu-tai-shan in Shan-si is ancient and later Indian tradition connected him with China. Local traditions also connect him with Nepal, Tibet, and Khotan, and he is sometimes represented as the first teacher of civilization or religion. But although his Central Asian origin is eminently probable, I do not at present see any clear proof of it.

The case of the Bodhisattva Kshitigarbha[555] is similar. He appears to have been known but not prominent in India in the fourth century A.D.: by the seventh century if not earlier his cult was flourishing in China and subsequently he became in the Far East a popular deity second only to Kuan-yin. This popularity was connected with his gradual transformation into a god of the dead. It is also certain that he was known in Central Asia[556] but whether he first became important there or in China is hard to decide. The devotion of the Chinese to their dead suggests that it was among them that he acquired his great position, but his rôle as a guide to the next world has a parallel in the similar benevolent activity of the Zoroastrian angel Srosh.

One of Central Asia's clearest titles to importance in the history of the East is that it was the earliest and on the whole the principal source of Chinese Buddhism, to which I now turn. Somewhat later, teachers also came to China by sea and still later, under the Yüan dynasty, Lamaism was introduced direct from Tibet. But from at least the beginning of our era onwards, monks went eastwards from Central Asia to preach and translate the scriptures and it was across Central Asia that Chinese pilgrims went to India in search of the truth.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 459: See Lüders, _Bruchstücke Buddhistischer Dramen_, 1911, and _id., Das Sâriputra-prakarana_, 1911.]

[Footnote 460: See Senart, "Le ms Kharoshṭhî du Dhammapada," in _J.A._, 1898, II. p. 193.]

[Footnote 461: Lüders, "Die Śakas und die Nordarische Sprache," _Sitzungsber. der Kōn. Preuss. Akad_. 1913. Konow, _Gōtting. Gel. Anz_. 1912, pp. 551 ff.]

[Footnote 462: See Hoernle in _J.R.A.S._ 1910, pp. 837 ff. and 1283 ff.; 1911, pp. 202 ff., 447 ff.]

[Footnote 463: An old Turkish text about Maitreya states that it was translated from an Indian language into Tokhri and from Tokhri into Turkish. See F.K.W. Müller, _Sitzungsber. der Kön. Preuss. Akad_. 1907, p. 958. But it is not clear what is meant by Tokhri.]

[Footnote 464: The following are some words in this language: Kant, a hundred; rake, a word; por, fire; soye, son υιοσ; suwan, swese, rain υει hυετοσ; âlyek, another; okso, an ox.]

[Footnote 465: The numerous papers on this language are naturally quickly superseded. But Sieg and Siegling Tokharisch, "Die Sprache der Indoskythen" (_Sitzungsber. der Berl. Ak. Wiss_. 1908, p. 815), may be mentioned and Sylvain Lévi, "Tokharien B, Langue de Kouteha," _J.A._ 1913, II. p. 311.]

[Footnote 466: See Radloff Tisastvustik (_Bibl. Buddh._ vol. xii.), p. v. This manuscript came from Urumtsi. A translation of a portion of the Saddharma-pundarîka (_Bibl. Buddh._ xiv.) was found at Turfan.]

[Footnote 467: Laufer in _T'oung Pao_, 1907, p. 392; Radloff, _Kuan-si-im Pursar_, p. vii.]

[Footnote 468: See especially Stein's _Ancient Khotan_, app. B, and Francke in _J.R.A.S._ 1914, p. 37.]

[Footnote 469: Chavannes, _Les documents chinois découverts par Aurel Stein_, 1913.]

[Footnote 470: See especially Chavannes and Pelliot, "Traité Manichéen" in _J.A._ 1911 and 1913.]

[Footnote 471: Hsüan Chuang notes its existence however in Kabul and Kapiśa.]

[Footnote 472: See for these Fergusson-Burgess, _History of Indian Architecture_, I. pp. 125-8.]

[Footnote 473: _J.R.A.S._ 1909, p. 313.]

[Footnote 474: _E.g._ Grünwedel, _Altbuddhistische Kultstätten_, fig. 624.]

[Footnote 475: Stein, _Ancient Khotan_, plates xiii-xvii and xl, pp. 83 and 482 ff.]

[Footnote 476: See Grünwedel, _Buddh. Kultstätten_, pp. 129-130 and plate. Foucher, "L'Art Gréco-Bouddhique," p. 145, _J.R.A.S._ 1886, 333 and plate i.]

[Footnote 477: See Wachsberger's "Stil-kritische Studien zur Kunst Chinesisch-Turkestan's" in _Ostasiatische Ztsft._ 1914 and 1915.]

[Footnote 478: See Grünwedel, _Buddh. Kultstätten_, pp. 332 ff.]

[Footnote 479: _Ancient Khotan_, vol. II. plates lx and lxi.]

[Footnote 480: Le Coq in _J.R.A.S._ 1909, pp. 299 ff. See the whole article.]

[Footnote 481: For some of the more striking drawings referred to see Grünwedel, _Buddh. Kultstätten_, figs. 51, 53, 239, 242, 317, 337, 345-349.]

[Footnote 482: In _Geog. Journal_, May 1916, p. 362.]

[Footnote 483: Chavannes, _Documents chinois découverts par Aurel Stein_, 1913.]

[Footnote 484: These of course are not the Osmanlis or Turks of Constantinople. The Osmanlis are the latest of the many branches of the Turks, who warred and ruled in Central Asia with varying success from the fifth to the eighth centuries.]

[Footnote 485: That is Kashgar, Khotan, Kucha and Tokmak for which last Karashahr was subsequently substituted. The territory was also called An Hsi.]

[Footnote 486: See for lists and details Chavannes, _Documents sur les Tou-kiue Occidentaux_, pp. 67 ff. and 270 ff.]

[Footnote 487: The conquest and organization of the present Chinese Turkestan dates only from the reign of Ch'ien Lung.]

[Footnote 488: Thus the pilgrim Wu-K'ung mentions Chinese officials in the Four Garrisons.]

[Footnote 489: See for this part of their history, Grenard's article in _J.A._ 1900, I. pp. 1-79.]

[Footnote 490: Pelliot also attributes importance to a Sogdian Colony to the south of Lob Nor, which may have had much to do with the transmission of Buddhism and Nestorianism to China. See _J.A._ Jan. 1916, pp. 111-123.]

[Footnote 491: These words have been connected with the tribe called Sacae, Sakas, or Sök.]

[Footnote 492: See Klaproth, _Tabl. Historique_, p. 166, apparently quoting from Chinese sources. Specht, _J.A._ 1897, II. p. 187. Franke, _Beitr.-zur Kenntniss Zentral-Asiens_, p. 83. The passage quoted by Specht from the Later Han Annals clearly states that the Yüeh-chih made a man of their own choosing prince of Kashgar, although, as Franke points out, it makes no reference to Kanishka or the story of the hostages related by Hsüan Chuang.]

[Footnote 493: Fa-Hsien's Chieh-ch'a has been interpreted as Skardo, but Chavannes seems to have proved that it is Kashgar.]

[Footnote 494: About 643 A.D. He mentions that the inhabitants tattooed their bodies, flattened their children's heads and had green eyes. Also that they spoke a peculiar language.]

[Footnote 495: At Bamian the monks belonged to the Lokottaravâdin School.]

[Footnote 496: Beal, _Records_, II. p. 278. The pilgrim is speaking from hearsay and it is not clear to what part of Persia he refers.]

[Footnote 497: See Chavannes, _Documents sur les Tou-kiue Occidentaux_, pp. 121, 125. The inhabitants of K'ang (Samarkand or Sogdiana) are said to honour both religions. _Ib_. p. 135.]

[Footnote 498: Known to the Chinese by several slightly different names such as Ku-chih, Kiu-tse which are all attempts to represent the same sound. For Kucha see S. Lévi's most interesting article "Le 'Tokharien B' langue de Koutcha" in _J.A._ 1913, II. pp. 311 ff.]

[Footnote 499: _J.A._ 1913, ii. p. 326.]

[Footnote 500: See Chavannes in Stein's _Ancient Khotan_, p. 544. The Western Tsin reigned 265-317.]

[Footnote 501: The circumstances which provoked the expedition are not very clear. It was escorted by the king of Turfan and other small potentates who were the vassals of the Tsin and also on bad terms with Kucha. They probably asked Fu-chien for assistance in subduing their rival which he was delighted to give. Some authorities (_e.g._ Nanjio Cat. p. 406) give Karashahr as the name of Kumârajîva's town, but this seems to be a mistake.]

[Footnote 502: S. Lévi, _J.A._ 1913, ii. p. 348, quoting Hsü Kao Sêng Chuan.]

[Footnote 503: Quoted by S. Lévi from the _Sung Kao Sêng Chuan_. See _J.A._ 1913, II. p. 344 and _B.E.F.E.O._ 1904, p. 562.]

[Footnote 504: As a proof of foreign influence in Chinese culture, it is interesting to note that there were seven orchestras for the imperial banquets, including those of Kucha, Bokhara and India and a mixed one in which were musicians from Samarkand, Kashgar, Camboja and Japan.]

[Footnote 505: Quoted by Bretschneider, _Mediaeval Researches_, ii. 189.]

[Footnote 506: Pelliot, _J.A._ 1912, i. p. 579, suggests that Chotscho or Qoco is the Turkish equivalent of Kao Ch'ang in T'ang pronunciation, the nasal being omitted.]

[Footnote 507: Chavannes, _Tou-kiue Occidentaux_, p. 101.]

[Footnote 508: For the history of Khotan see Rémusat, _Ville de Khotan_, 1820, and Stein's great work _Ancient Khotan_, especially chapter vii. For the Tibetan traditions see Rockhill, _Life of the Buddha_, pp. 230 ff.]

[Footnote 509: Ku-stana seems to have been a learned perversion of the name, to make it mean breast of the earth.]

[Footnote 510: The combination is illustrated by the Sino-Kharoshthî coins with a legend in Chinese on the obverse and in Prakrit on the reverse. See Stein, _Ancient Khotan_, p. 204. But the coins are later than 73 A.D.]

[Footnote 511: The Tibetan text gives the date of conversion as the reign of King Vijayasambhava, 170 years after the foundation of Khotan.]

[Footnote 512: See Sten Konow in _J.R.A.S._ 1914, p. 345.]

[Footnote 513: See Stein, _Ancient Khotan_, pp. 170, 456.]

[Footnote 514: Chavannes, _Tou-kiue_, p. 125, cf. pp. 121 and 170. For Hsien shên see Giles's _Chinese Dict._ No. 4477.]