Methodological questions

The purpose of this book is to ground the historical study of Nepalese Buddhism.

We cannot know when in the first three hundred years of Buddhism it spread into the Kathmandu Valley, nor do we have enough evidence to write a proper account of Nepalese Buddhism as a type of Buddhism at any time before 750CE. As we shall see, even determining the distinct features of Nepalese Buddhism before about 1450CE is a difficult task, although certain elements can be proved. However after the 15^th-century re-formulation it is possible to describe and discuss a Nepalese Buddhism with distinct features which can be compared to those of other forms of Buddhism.

This book is thus a ‘historical-philological’ study of a rather traditional sort. I have accounted for the rewriting of traditional Buddhist texts by looking at the competition for prestige and patronage between elite groupings. The historical characters in my story are mostly monastics or aristocrats. The argument among historians of Nepalese religion over the relative numbers or influence of Śaiva or Bauddha priests are not arguments which would have interested the vast majority of the inhabitants of Nepāl in the 15^th century, for whom regular rainfall and smallpox were far more pressing issues. At points I have been able to consider problems which touch on debates in the wider field of Buddhist studies or the historical study of religions, such as the complex identity of a

Remaking Buddhism for Medieval Nepal 30

Vajrayāna deity with a localized cult, or the tension between canonicity and innovation.

In the main, however, this is a book which might have been written a century ago;

indeed, vital information and artifacts which have been lost to the Newars since 1900 would have been a great help to me.

That does not make this work irrelevant, however. Those fields of Asian religious studies such as Ch’an/Zen history, Tibetan biographical studies or vernacular Indian religion which have in the past decades and centuries accumulated solid strata of fieldwork and archival studies, have now progressed to the point where theoretically engaged research is both possible and necessary. In the young field of Nepalese Buddhism, we’re not there yet. There is of course no investigation free of method nor free of a theoretical bias; but it is also the case that there are methods, such as the historical-philological tools used here, that are useful for establishing an historical groundwork, and methods such as hermeneutical analysis which are better deployed when such facts as can be known have been sensibly outlined. Most scholars I speak with are as surprised as I was to discover that there is still a thriving Buddhism where Sanskrit is the canonical language, with perfectly able to edit and compose in Sanskrit.

Moreover, my work here is in some sense a defence of the value of traditional textual scholarship, not in opposition to more highly inflected methodologies, but as an invaluable partner. It is certainly possible to work exclusively from textual sources and so build cloud-castles which, while fascinating and even controversial, have very little to do with the dynamic cultural patterns which one might recognize as a religion. Here I have tried to use texts as historical evidence without severing them from their life as historical objects, subject to ritual use, decay, theft and royal patronage. It is a stubborn fact of the history of Nepalese Buddhism that in the mediaeval period the Garland texts are one of the few and precious sources of indigenous evidence, along with architecture, sculpture, paintings, inscriptions, account books and chronicles. Until there are no other moments in which Newar Buddhist sat down to write what they thought their religion was. As with the colossal act of composition which resulted in the Garland texts was not just descriptive, it was constitutive of Nepalese Buddhism from that point onwards.⁴⁶

This leads towards a difficult question: what is Nepalese Buddhism? I have tried above to address the problem of labels, of Newar and Nepalese. However, I am sure that, just as today, most 15^th-century inhabitants of the Kathmandu Valley would have politely avoided questions which required them to identify themselves as Bauddhamārgī or Śivamārgī. In contemporary Pharping, we find that Vajrācāryas perform the śraddhā rituals for many families who otherwise employ Brahmans for their life-cycle rituals; and many members of traditionally Buddhist Mānandhār families are happy to worship at the nearby shrine, and for that reason are uncomfortable with the label

‘Buddhist’. Nonetheless, all parties, Newar, Bahun-Chetri and Tamang alike, are happy to recognize the existence of Buddhism and refer questions about it to the Vajrācārya who lives up the hill at the Vajrayoginī shrine.⁴⁷ For the people of Pharping of whatever alignment or ascription, there is a Buddhism, indeed there is Vajrayāna Buddhism, and it is a tradition of teaching and rituals which is the special duty of the hereditary priests.

This is not the only definition of Buddhism active in the Valley right now, or even in Pharping—Western, East Asian and Tibetan modernizers in the Valley have a more

Introduction 31

complex notion of who controls Buddhism; many traditional Tibetans reject the legitimacy of Newar Buddhism altogether; and the Theravādin reformers in the Valley can be sharply critical of both Newar and Tibetan Vajrayāna. Individual Newars of all castes, but especially the priestly castes, negotiate between all these claims with remarkable sophistication, taking part in teaching and meditation sessions drawn from many sources, many of which would, if forced into contact, regard each other as less than legitimate. This eclecticism is, I believe, a distinguishing feature of 21^st century Buddhism in urban zones worldwide; but it has very little to do with the 15^th century. In that more parochial time, the understanding of Buddhism was closely tied to the belief in a living and potent tradition, the śāsana as guaranteed by tantric initiations, in a long chain of teachers who had been the students of other more ancient teachers. As we shall see, it is precisely this model of Buddhism which was used to argue for the legitimacy of both the GKV and Buddhism in Nepal.⁴⁸

My project here is of necessity introductory, done in the hopes that many others will follow. Historians and anthropologists of religion usually alternate between detailed studies of one tradition or area and broader comparative essays. I have rather uncomfortably straddled the fence. While most of this book avoids comparison in the interests of establishing the Nepalese history on its own terms, in the second chapter I have attempted to answer a query which some Nepalese scholars have put to me: if there is a distinctive Nepalese Buddhism, what is distinctive about it when compared to other Buddhisms? There is a far longer book to be written on that subject, one which has the time to discuss the ordinary Newar’s common-sense refusal to chop religious life into Bauddha, Śaiva and as well as the distinctive path-doctrine which emerges from a careful study of the GKV and the development of the twenty-four Tantric of Nepal.

This is also not a general history of Nepalese religion as it was experienced by mediæval members of the agricultural, artisan or mercantile castes, whose voices are almost entirely absent here. We simply do not yet have the materials for this sort of history. There are, however, materials for writing a detailed history of the life of a mediæval monastery and its patrons. Between and monastery account books (thyāsāphūs), colophons and chronicles it should be possible to derive a remarkable amount of information. Carlo Ginzburg, among others, has shown what fine history can be wrought from such pedestrian data. If over time a database of colophons and account books can be compiled, with names and places, we may be able to reconstruct lineages, marriages and ritual patterns, and thus move towards a proper historical account of the particularities of mediæval Nepalese Buddhism. I look forward to writing such a book one day, or reading it; but until then this essay will I hope be a usefully solid stone offered toward the construction of a grander edifice.

Notes for Chapter 1

1 is not listed as ‘reliquary’ in any of the standard lexica. The term means something fashioned from bamboo (cf. the bamboo duck) and specifically a small box for books (as in the Tibetan za.ma.tog). However there is a related Sinhala term

which means ‘reliquary’ and that, in the absence of a commentary, is the best translation I Remaking Buddhism for Medieval Nepal 32

have encountered for the term. The title is often given in colophons as

but in Nepal it is always referred to in the shorter form.

2 It belongs to a genre of Mahāyāna sūtra which use visualizations of the Buddha’s body as an image of totality, such as the This is directly related to the borrowing of the

mytheme from which we will meet below, and has other interesting parallels in Jain cosmology.

3 On this, see Studholme (2002), which fashionably proposes Śaiva influence on the

development of the mantra. Without editing the text properly such hypotheses are on shaky ground.

4 Brinkhaus (1993) and Tatelman (1996).

5 I suspect there may have been a special affinity between the Nepalese and Vikramaśīla, for this is also the only monastic university to be named in the Garland texts, in the story of Dharmaśrīmitra in SvP VI.

6 An edition and translation of the first two chapters is being published seperately. The edition as a work in progress is available at <http://www.nairatmya.org/>. Details of manuscripts not known at the time of writing will also be placed there.

7 For the modern form of Newar Buddhism Gellner (1992) is the standard reference.

8 To give two examples: the existence of an oligarchy in Lalitpur and their behaviour toward presumptive monarchs shows significant parallels with the Tibetan pattern observed by Charles Ramble in Mustang and the myths of the central Tibetan state; and Nick Allen (1997) has shown the existence of a widespread lake-draining myth throughout the Himalayas.

9 An example of the degree to which this sense of arrival is a feature of the identity of even a well established Newar clan is that at least one Vajrācārya family in Bu has three distinct kul devata or lineage deity sites: one in another monastery in Lalitpur, the previous and rather older at a site near Kīrtipur and the oldest ‘somewhere in India’. Although no one seems to remember its location, it is believed that a famous of the previous

generation (Ratna Bahādur Vajrācārya) did know its location (‘near Benares’, I have been told) and went on pilgrimage there.

10 Similarly asking for the name of a deity portrayed in a public image can lead to a

bewildering series of names as the answer invariably begins with the ‘easiest’ name, the one which best fits what the informant thinks a Westerner might recognize. This is not, as we will see in chapter 4, in any way a false answer; Newar Buddhist deities, especially those with esoteric identities, are routinely managed through a complex stack of more or less public names as well as multiple Hindu and Buddhist identities. Thus an esoteric form of Prajñāpāramitā might first be identified to a Westerner as Sarasvatī.

11 had already encountered British manuscript collectors, however. The Knox manuscript of the Lalitavistara, which dates from around 1803 and is presently held in the British Library, was probably copied out by and includes illustrations of

in conversation with Knox. Thus there is every reason to believe that the ‘old Lalitpur pundit’ was primed for his encounter with Hodgson, and indeed may already have composed some of the summary works which he used in his presentation of Nepalese Buddhism to Hodgson.

12 My sincere thanks to Peter Verhagen for this information.

13 Readers may wish to consult the English language summary in Min Bahadur Sakya’s edition of the Newari version in 21 chapters, which offers background and related narratives.

14 See 2.10 on page 59.

15 Although not named, he is clearly meant to be Śiva.

Introduction 33

16 This condition recurs in every one of the Avalokiteśvara teaching narratives in the GKV. It seems a little inappropriate here, but makes more sense when, in the guise of a sympathetic figure, he teaches asuras and cannibals to worship Lokeśvara.

17 The language used in this passage suggests an assimilation with the cult of the great caitya at 18 There is a three stage development observable here, from the to the KV and then

the GKV.

19 The numbering for this verse varies depending on the recension; in the 21 and 22 chapter versions, it’s part of chapter IV Here and in all following citations I will refer to manuscript N2 as a reference manuscript where there is no published edition.

20 False teachings here includes mentioned at III.296 (N2 24v.1). This almost certainly refers to Islam. While we know there was a Muslim community in Kathmandu from the 15^th century, it’s not clear whether this refers to Nepalese Islam or to the more apocalyptic construction of Islam which is found in late Buddhist tantra. Remember too that the Bengali sultan Shams ud-Din had ravaged the valley in the mid-14^th century.

21 This is an entirely different strategy for managing Śaivism from that presented in the previous chapter. Note, too, that plants are not on the list here; the lowest it goes is worms and bugs

22 Within nested narratives such as this one, the text to be venerated is always the KV.

On the question of the GKV and the KV, see the discussion at 2.3 on page 69 as well as chapter three.

23 Frequently spelled both in this and other Nepalese sources. I have followed the spelling in the Mahāvyutpatti.

24 It seems to me that this might refer to the iconography of some asuras, whose mouths are in their abdomens. These figure frequently in the horrible armies sent to frighten Śākyamuni on the night of his awakening.

25 This poem is one of the only direct citations of the KV within the GKV; it carries on for two more ślokas in the GKV. (N2 48r.2, VIII.16–23). A similar poem is found at the end of the chapter.

26 The extracts from the BCA here and in chapter XVII are discussed at more length in chapter 2.

27 Or ‘darkness-darkness’ land; the point is that this place is pitch black all the time.

28 Here again, the two great poles of Nepalese Buddhism, and are assimilated. While in most modern and indeed most historical material, the two cults are distinct and identified with Lokeśvara and Mañjuśrī respectively, I might note that the 11^th -century illustrated manuscripts which refer to Nepal list two Lokeśvaras, one at Bũga and one at moreover, the image usually identified as Mañjuśrī on the

hill is obviously an old Lokeśvara. This is by no means to suggest that the Mañjuśrī cult centred on is more recent, only that there appears to be substantial evidence for a Lokeśvara cult at which justifies this language in the GKV.

29 Logically this is a problem, as had he really done so before the events of chapter XV the horrific events portrayed there would never have taken place.

30 I have published a preliminary edition and translation of this chapter in Douglas (1998).

31 For a summary of the different versions of the story and their sources, see Locke (1973). The sources for Āśā Kaji Vajrācārya’s retelling of the story (Vajrācārya 1980) remain unclear;

however, the fact that is identified with Matsyendranāth in the GKV (see chapter 5) removes what was thought to be an obstacle. The assumption has been until now that this identification was a late development and thus there ought to have been a Malla-period version of the story which did not use the name Matsyendranāth.

Remaking Buddhism for Medieval Nepal 34

32 Although shorter than some, this is intended to be an exhaustive list of all kinds of being, beginning with the gods and ending with foreigners.

33 See the discussion of this problem below.

34 As a result of research underway for a collection of essays on Hodgson edited by David Waterhouse, other significant caches of Hodgson documents have come to light; I hope to prepare a complete list for publication.

35 It has been no small vexation to me that I have never been able to trace the whereabouts of this manuscript, referred to by both Burnouf and Mitra, although it must be in the possession of the Société Asiatique or more likely the Bibliothèque Nationale.

36 As I met with Prof. Chandra in 1998 and discussed my project of editing the GKV with him at the time—without his mentioning that his father had located a manuscript—I was surprised to see this publication. The rough nature of the publication is made clear by the proof marks preserved in the text (e.g. p. 120). In subsequent correspondence he claimed there were two manuscripts which he had used, but the lack of any critical apparatus and the idiosyncratic text he published suggests that it was one 20^th century manuscript. This book is an uncharacteristic departure from his earlier publications, which are invaluable for the study of Nepalese Buddhism.

37 The same point is also made in Regamey (1954)

38 This does not mean there are no consistent mistakes based on visual errors as well. See tya, above.

39 There is ample evidence that the better scribes of the Nepalese manuscripts did attempt to critically edit their texts.

40 This is unfortunately not true for Newari, where the orthography is not at all fixed, and the demands of the language (e.g., to distinguish between long and short nasals) are not always met by the script.

41 The y→j shift has, however, occurred in Bengali, where y when it occurs initially is always pronounced dz.

42 My thanks to Imre Bhanga for this.

43 This offers the possibility of dating the change rather precisely, as a significant number of the refugee scholars and monks who flooded into Nepal after 1200 were, of course, Bengali.

The close communication between Pāla Bengal and Nepal has been described for architectural and painterly style by John Huntington. It is evidenced in the manuscript tradition in the adoption of certain Bengali letterforms. Given the force of the Bengali influence, it should be possible to review the occurrence of this shift in the manuscript tradition of an older text and thereby discern whether the shift comes before or after the 13^th century.

44 There is a phonological shift due to sandhi, but it is not a change in case.

45 For an account of the effects of Newari syntax on Sanskrit composed by Newar authors, see Kölver (1999) where he focusses entirely on one version of the SvP. The GKV does not show so widespread a transformation of Sanskrit syntax as the SvP version Kölver discusses.

46 The similarity of these two moments is not surprising. Local, ‘small’ features of a society

46 The similarity of these two moments is not surprising. Local, ‘small’ features of a society