• No results found

The project of the GKV

Amoghapāśa and the vrata

5.5 The vrata in the Garland literature

5.5.1 The project of the GKV

This is not the only mention of the in the GKV. It does not occur in every chapter, but a reader of the GKV could be excused for thinking it did. In the first chapter Aśoka, the great human emperor, is advised to perform the fast, as is Jinaśrī his Nepalese counterpart; but so too are pretas (III.78), asuras (IV.238 and 249ff), a different group of asuras (V.66), the adhomukhas (VI.33) and even Bali, the king of the asuras (VIII.114).

This emphasis tails off, however, and we do not find it mentioned in the episode of the worms of or the cannibals of Magadha. It is, however, inserted into the great vision quest of the second nirvyūha of the KV, which forms chapter XVI in the GKV (XVI.8). Nonetheless, the successful interpolation of this lay ritual into the narratives which the GKV inherits is one of the most visible transformations which distinguish the Nepalese work from its sources.

The is not the only vrata known to the GKV. The term vrata in the Garland literature is used to refer to vows or precepts as well as lay fasting rituals. The upāsakavrata is only mentioned once at III.42, and probably refers to the five precepts for lay Buddhists. Moreover, the text is aware of a (III. 191), which probably refers to Śivarātrī. The terms bodhicaryāvrata and bhadracaryāvrata occur

Remaking Buddhism for Medieval Nepal 176

frequently, usually referring simply to the Bodhisattva vow, as do phrases such as

śubham. As is proper for a Mahāyāna text, the Bodhisattva vow, which in this text is equivalent to developing the thought of enlightenment, is the single most important vow.

When the term occurs it means the understood as the lay fast that requires taking the eight fasting precepts.71 The is without doubt the most important lay fast for the GKV. However, this ambiguity in the term ‘vrata’ means that it is understood, as with the Bodhicaryā vrata, as an important step on the path with salvific powers, not simply a ritual for bringing rain, offspring or wealth.

In the 15th century we do know that kings performed vratas, for one of

Malla’s questions when Vanaratna suggests he adopt Buddhism is whether he would still be able to perform the Ekādaśī vrata. It is reasonable, then, for the GKV to recommend that kings perform the vrata. The final chapter of the GKV, while it does not mention the itself, is a long list of the material benefits which are found in nations whose kings correctly worship Avalokiteśvara:

At the right time, the clouds shall rain, and Earth shall be replete with grain. There will be no calamities. There will be tremendous industry and perpetual food stocks. In that land, the cattle will produce abundant milk, the trees will have flowers and fruit and the herbs will always be potent.

All living beings will be healthy and long-lived, all suitably provided for, glorious and well-behaved. The king shall be especially pious and the ministers law-abiding. The people shall all be extremely prosperous and accomplished in the Dharma. No one there shall be perverse, a thief, a crook or a swindler, or poor, unlucky, depressed, drunk or arrogant. (XIX.

126–30)72

As I argued in chapter 2, the GKV uses its framing structure to present a model of kingship for 15th-century Nepal. The ideal Indian Buddhist king was Aśoka; the ideal Nepalese Buddhist king was Jayaśrī. The irreducible loss of continuity with the Indian tradition, and a strong assertion of lineage continuity from that tradition, is signified by the two pairs of kings and their respective rājagurus. Now, given that within the actual narrative that comprises that framing structure, the question which is repeatedly put forward by the two kings is, “How do I correctly perform the vrata?” it is clear that the authors of the GKV wished their audience, including any kings or court officials who happened to listen, to see the as essential to the rituals performed by a Nepalese king. It is the form of devotion to Avalokiteśvara which is most appropriate for a king.

Other kings? The comparative evidence from outside Nepal is tantalizing. I have not been able to extensively research Nara or Heian Japan, when we might expect to see something similar; but so far I have detected no parallel. In the Tibetan cultural sphere the transformation of the after and the lack of competing sects or cults vitiates the comparison. However, the Indonesian evidence is suggestive indeed. Although we do not see the same ritual structures as in the Nepalese tradition—

Amoghapasa and the posadha vrata 177

that is, the four —the form of the Amoghapāśa as expressed in the Jago is very similar to the Nepalese Red Amoghapāśa, and we have already seen (5.3.2 on page 175) a reference to the king who built the Jago as a performer of vratas.

Local deity In any case the GKV makes it clear that it is not simply Avalokiteśvara or Amoghapāśa who is the deity in question, it is and the arguments of the GKV would not have quite the force that they do if he were not the ancient rain-bringing deity of the Kathmandu Valley. The name does not occur frequently, but it does not have to; and the name never occurs.73 Manuscripts of the GKV almost always have an image of the red two-armed form of Avalokiteśvara which is unquestionably or rarely his white-hued brother, the Lokeśvara of Jāna As I have argued in the previous chapter, the ritual timing of the vrata was originally linked to the ritual calendar of The real punch to the argument of the last chapter of the GKV is its implied threat: the withholding of orderly rain. Thus the argument of the GKV is that if you, the king, want rain, you will have to accept that (1) your rain god is a form of Avalokiteśvara and (2) he requires Buddhist priests to help you perform his ritual.

To achieve this argument, however, the authors of the GKV have engaged in a crucial move of verbal manipulation. Just as I did in the previous paragraph, they depend on the identity of and for their argument to work. It would appear that one of the hidden challenges for the GKV is to assist in a process which had surely begun long before it was written: the construction of a local form of Avalokiteśvara.

5.6 Amoghapāśa in Nepal

The name is unique to Nepal; it occurs only in the Newar Sanskrit texts, and it refers to the multilayered and multivalent form of Avalokiteśvara proper to the valley of Nepal. In origin, was born from the mapping of the Indian Buddhist identity of Lokeśvara onto a chthonic deity, He is small and bright red, and has been so for many centuries; his image peers out from an illuminated manuscript of the Prajñāpāramitā dated 1015CE. The name occurs almost exclusively in the Newar Sanskrit Buddhist literature.74 Before that time, as in the Prajñāpāramitā manuscript, he was known as Bugama Lokeśvara; the name also occurs in chronicles from the 14th century As we have seen, though, there is evidence for an identification of and Amoghapāśa Lokeśvara in the 13th century and even before. As for the name the GKV appears to have inherited the term and to be negotiating rather carefully with an established understanding rather than proposing a new label or identification. Unfortunately we do not find the reverse identification so easily; the earliest texts or illustrations of Amoghapāśa in Nepal do not mention either or By the 16th century, the identification is commonplace in

Remaking Buddhism for Medieval Nepal 178

both directions; but this is, I would suggest, more a problem to do with the emergence of a vernacular literature fully at ease with local traditions than it is evidence for the lack of this identification before the 15th century

Tibetan evidence The only known instance of the name outside the valley is in the mantra of an Amoghapāśa visualization deriving from Ba.ri Lotsava, mooted at 5.3.2 on page 173. The usual term is found for example in the sādhanas transmitted from Ba.ri may have been acquainted with the Nepalese cult; but I have only seen this material in Tārānātha’s collection and have not yet been able to look at the original texts of Ba.ri or his biography By itself this pushes the antiquity of the name back to the 11th century, but if, as I suspect, the Ba.ri sādhana is linked to then we also have further evidence for the regional importance of this cult.