Hinduism and Buddhism, An Historical Sketch, Vol. 3

CHAPTER XXXVIII

CAMBOJA[242]

1

The French Protectorate of Camboja corresponds roughly to the nucleus, though by no means to the whole extent of the former Empire of the Khmers. The affinities of this race have given rise to considerable discussion and it has been proposed to connect them with the Muṇḍa tribes of India on one side and with the Malays and Polynesians on the other[243]. They are allied linguistically to the Mons or Talaings of Lower Burma and to the Khasias of Assam, but it is not proved that they are similarly related to the Annamites, and recent investigators are not disposed to maintain the Mon-Annam family of languages proposed by Logan and others. But the undoubted similarity of the Mon and Khmer languages suggests that the ancestors of those who now speak them were at one time spread over the central and western parts of Indo-China but were subsequently divided and deprived of much territory by the southward invasions of the Thais in the middle ages.

The Khmers also called themselves Kambuja or Kamvuja and their name for the country is still either Srŏk Kâmpûchéa or Srŏk Khmer[244]. Attempts have been made to find a Malay origin for this name Kambuja but native tradition regards it as a link with India and affirms that the race is descended from Kambu Svayambhuva and Merâ or Perâ who was given to him by Śiva as wife[245]. This legend hardly proves that the Khmer people came from India but they undoubtedly received thence their civilization, their royal family and a considerable number of Hindu immigrants, so that the mythical ancestor of their kings naturally came to be regarded as the progenitor of the race. The Chinese traveller Chou Ta-kuan (1296 A.D.) says that the country known to the Chinese as Chên-la is called by the natives Kan-po-chih but that the present dynasty call it Kan-p'u-chih on the authority of Sanskrit (Hsi-fan) works. The origin of the name Chên-la is unknown.

There has been much discussion respecting the relation of Chên-la to the older kingdom of Fu-nan which is the name given by Chinese historians until the early part of the seventh century to a state occupying the south-eastern and perhaps central portions of Indo-China. It has been argued that Chên-la is simply the older name of Fu-nan and on the other hand that Fu-nan is a wider designation including several states, one of which, Chên-la or Camboja, became paramount at the expense of the others[246]. But the point seems unimportant for their religious history with which we have to deal. In religion and general civilization both were subject to Indian influence and it is not recorded that the political circumstances which turned Fu-nan into Chên-la were attended by any religious revolution.

The most important fact in the history of these countries, as in Champa and Java, is the presence from early times of Indian influence as a result of commerce, colonization, or conquest. Orientalists have only recently freed themselves from the idea that the ancient Hindus, and especially their religion, were restricted to the limits of India. In mediæval times this was true. Emigration was rare and it was only in the nineteenth century that the travelling Hindu became a familiar and in some British colonies not very welcome visitor. Even now Hindus of the higher caste evade rather than deny the rule which forbids them to cross the ocean[247]. But for a long while Hindus have frequented the coast of East Africa[248] and in earlier centuries their traders, soldiers and missionaries covered considerable distances by sea. The Jâtakas[249] mention voyages to Babylon: Vijaya and Mahinda reached Ceylon in the fifth and third centuries B.C. respectively. There is no certain evidence as to the epoch when Hindus first penetrated beyond the Malay peninsula, but Java is mentioned in the Ramayana[250]: the earliest Sanskrit inscriptions of Champa date from our third or perhaps second century, and the Chinese Annals of the Tsin indicate that at a period considerably anterior to that dynasty there were Hindus in Fu-nan[251]. It is therefore safe to conclude that they must have reached these regions about the beginning of the Christian era and, should any evidence be forthcoming, there is no reason why this date should not be put further back. At present we can only say that the establishment of Hindu kingdoms probably implies earlier visits of Hindu traders and that voyages to the south coast of Indo-China and the Archipelago were probably preceded by settlements on the Isthmus of Kra, for instance at Ligor.

The motives which prompted this eastward movement have been variously connected with religious persecution in India, missionary enterprise, commerce and political adventure. The first is the least probable. There is little evidence for the systematic persecution of Buddhists in India and still less for the persecution of Brahmans by Buddhists. Nor can these Indian settlements be regarded as primarily religious missions. The Brahmans have always been willing to follow and supervise the progress of Hindu civilization, but they have never shown any disposition to evangelize foreign countries apart from Hindu settlements in them. The Buddhists had this evangelistic temper and the journeys of their missionaries doubtless stimulated other classes to go abroad, but still no inscriptions or annals suggest that the Hindu migrations to Java and Camboja were parallel to Mahinda's mission to Ceylon. Nor is there any reason to think that they were commanded or encouraged by Indian Rajas, for no mention of their despatch has been found in India, and no Indian state is recorded to have claimed suzerainty over these colonies. It therefore seems likely that they were founded by traders and also by adventurers who followed existing trade routes and had their own reasons for leaving India. In a country where dynastic quarrels were frequent and the younger sons of Rajas had a precarious tenure of life, such reasons can be easily imagined. In Camboja we find an Indian dynasty established after a short struggle, but in other countries, such as Java and Sumatra, Indian civilization endured because it was freely adopted by native chiefs and not because it was forced on them as a result of conquest.

The inscriptions discovered in Camboja and deciphered by the labours of French savants offer with one lacuna (about 650-800 A.D.) a fairly continuous history of the country from the sixth to the thirteenth centuries. For earlier periods we depend almost entirely on Chinese accounts which are fragmentary and not interested in anything but the occasional relations of China with Fu-nan. The annals of the Tsin dynasty[252] already cited say that from 265 A.D. onwards the kings of Fu-nan sent several embassies to the Chinese Court, adding that the people have books and that their writing resembles that of the Hu. The Hu are properly speaking a tribe of Central Asia, but the expression doubtless means no more than alphabetic writing as opposed to Chinese characters and such an alphabet can hardly have had other than an Indian origin. Originally, adds the Annalist, the sovereign was a woman, but there came a stranger called Hun-Hui who worshipped the Devas and had had a dream in which one of them gave him a bow[253] and ordered him to sail for Fu-nan. He conquered the country and married the Queen but his descendants deteriorated and one Fan-Hsün founded another dynasty. The annals of the Ch'i dynasty (479-501) give substantially the same story but say that the stranger was called Hun-T'ien (which is probably the correct form of the name) and that he came from Chi or Chiao, an unknown locality. The same annals state that towards the end of the fifth century the king of Fu-nan who bore the family name of Ch'iao-ch'ên-ju[254] or Kauṇḍinya and the personal name of Shê-yeh-po-mo (Jayavarman) traded with Canton. A Buddhist monk named Nâgasena returned thence with some Cambojan merchants and so impressed this king with his account of China that he was sent back in 484 to beg for the protection of the Emperor. The king's petition and a supplementary paper by Nâgasena are preserved in the annals. They seem to be an attempt to represent the country as Buddhist, while explaining that Maheśvara is its tutelary deity.

The Liang annals also state that during the Wu dynasty (222-280) Fan Chan, then king of Fu-nan, sent a relative named Su-Wu on an embassy to India, to a king called Mao-lun, which probably represents Muruṇḍa, a people of the Ganges valley mentioned by the Purâṇas and by Ptolemy. This king despatched a return embassy to Fu-nan and his ambassadors met there an official sent by the Emperor of China[255]. The early date ascribed to these events is noticeable.

The Liang annals contain also the following statements. Between the years 357 and 424 A.D. named as the dates of embassies sent to China, an Indian Brahman called Ch'iao-ch'ên-ju (Kauṇḍinya) heard a supernatural voice bidding him go and reign in Fu-nan. He met with a good reception and was elected king. He changed the customs of the country and made them conform to those of India. One of his successors, Jayavarman, sent a coral image of Buddha in 503 to the Emperor Wu-ti (502-550). The inhabitants of Fu-nan are said to make bronze images of the heavenly genii with two or four heads and four or eight arms. Jayavarman was succeeded by a usurper named Liu-t'o-pa-mo (Rudravarman) who sent an image made of sandal wood to the Emperor in 519 and in 539 offered him a hair of the Buddha twelve feet long. The Sui annals (589-618) state that Citrasena, king of Chên-la, conquered Fu-nan and was succeeded by his son Iśânasena.

Two monks of Fu-nan are mentioned among the translators of the Chinese scriptures[256], namely, Saṇghapâla and Mandra. Both arrived in China during the first years of the sixth century and their works are extant. The pilgrim I-Ching who returned from India in 695 says[257] that to the S.W. of Champa lies the country Po-nan, formerly called Fu-nan, which is the southern corner of Jambudvîpa. He says that "of old it was a country the inhabitants of which lived naked; the people were mostly worshippers of devas and later on Buddhism flourished there, but a wicked king has now expelled and exterminated them all and there are no members of the Buddhist brotherhood at all."

These data from Chinese authorities are on the whole confirmed by the Cambojan inscriptions. Rudravarman is mentioned[258] and the kings claim to belong to the race of Kauṇḍinya[259]. This is the name of a Brahman gotra, but such designations were often borne by Kshatriyas and the conqueror of Camboja probably belonged to that caste. It may be affirmed with some certainty that he started from south-eastern India and possibly he sailed from Mahâbalipûr (also called the Seven Pagodas). Masulipatam was also a port of embarcation for the East and was connected with Broach by a trade route running through Tagara, now Têr in the Nizam's dominions. By using this road, it was possible to avoid the west coast, which was infested by pirates.

The earliest Cambojan inscriptions date from the beginning of the seventh century and are written in an alphabet closely resembling that of the inscriptions in the temple of Pâpanâtha at Paṭṭadkal in the Bîjapur district[260]. They are composed in Sanskrit verse of a somewhat exuberant style, which revels in the commonplaces of Indian poetry. The deities most frequently mentioned are Śiva by himself and Śiva united with Vishṇu in the form Hari-Hara. The names of the kings end in Varman and this termination is also specially frequent in names of the Pallava dynasty[261]. The magnificent monuments still extant attest a taste for architecture on a large scale similar to that found among the Dravidians. These and many other indications justify the conclusion that the Indian civilization and religion which became predominant in Camboja were imported from the Deccan.

The Chinese accounts distinctly mention two invasions, one under Ch'iao-ch'ên-ju (Kaundinya) about 400 A.D. and one considerably anterior to 265 under Hun-T'ien. It might be supposed that this name also represents Kauṇḍinya and that there is a confusion of dates. But the available evidence is certainly in favour of the establishment of Hindu civilization in Fu-nan long before 400 A.D. and there is nothing improbable in the story of the two invasions and even of two Kauṇḍinyas. Maspéro suggests that the first invasion came from Java and formed part of the same movement which founded the kingdom of Champa. It is remarkable that an inscription in Sanskrit found on the east coast of Borneo and apparently dating from the fifth century mentions Kuṇḍagga as the grandfather of the reigning king, and the Liang annals say that the king of Poli (probably in Borneo but according to some in Sumatra) was called Ch'iao-ch'ên-ju. It seems likely that the Indian family of Kauṇḍinya was established somewhere in the South Seas (perhaps in Java) at an early period and thence invaded various countries at various times. But Fu-nan is a vague geographical term and it may be that Hun-T'ien founded a Hindu dynasty in Champa.

It is clear that during the period of the inscriptions the religion of Camboja was a mixture of Brahmanism and Buddhism, the only change noticeable being the preponderance of one or other element in different centuries. But it would be interesting to know the value of I-Ching's statement that Buddhism flourished in Fu-nan in early times and was then subverted by a wicked king, by whom Bhavavarman[262] may be meant. Primâ facie the statement is not improbable, for there is no reason why the first immigrants should not have been Buddhists, but the traditions connecting these countries with early Hinayanist missionaries are vague. Târanâtha[263] states that the disciples of Vasubandhu introduced Buddhism into the country of Koki (Indo-China) but his authority does not count for much in such a matter. The statement of I-Ching however has considerable weight, especially as the earliest inscription found in Champa (that of Vocan) appears to be inspired by Buddhism.

2

It may be well to state briefly the chief facts of Cambojan history[264] before considering the phases through which religion passed. Until the thirteenth century our chief authorities are the Sanskrit and Khmer inscriptions, supplemented by notices in the Chinese annals. The Khmer inscriptions are often only a translation or paraphrase of Sanskrit texts found in the same locality and, as a rule, are more popular, having little literary pretension. They frequently contain lists of donations or of articles to be supplied by the population for the upkeep of pious foundations. After the fourteenth century we have Cambojan annals of dubious value and we also find inscriptions in Pali or in modern Cambojan. The earliest Sanskrit inscriptions date from the beginning of the seventh century and mention works undertaken in 604 and 624.

The first important king is Bhavavarman (c. 500 A.D.), a conqueror and probably a usurper, who extended his kingdom considerably towards the west. His career of conquest was continued by Mahâvarman (also called Citrasena), by Iśânavarman and by Jayavarman[265]. This last prince was on the throne in 667, but his reign is followed by a lacuna of more than a century. Notices in the Chinese annals, confirmed by the double genealogies given for this period in later inscriptions, indicate that Camboja was divided for some time into two states, one littoral and the other inland.

Clear history begins again with the reign of Jayavarman II (802-869). Later sovereigns evidently regard him as the great national hero and he lives in popular legend as the builder of a magnificent palace, Beng Mealea, whose ruins still exist[266] and as the recipient of the sacred sword of Indra which is preserved at Phnom-penh to this day. We are told that he "came from Javâ," which is more likely to be some locality in the Malay Peninsula or Laos than the island of that name. It is possible that Jayavarman was carried away captive to this region but returned to found a dynasty independent of it[267].

The ancient city of Angkor has probably done more to make Camboja known in Europe than any recent achievements of the Khmer race. In the centre of it stands the temple now called Bayon and outside its walls are many other edifices of which the majestic Angkor Wat is the largest and best preserved. King Indravarman (877-899) seems responsible for the selection of the site but he merely commenced the construction of the Bayon. The edifice was completed by his son Yaśovarman (889-908) who also built a town round it, called Yaśod harapura, Kambupuri or Mahânagara. Angkor Thom is the Cambojan translation of this last name, Angkor being a corruption of Nokor ( = Nagara). Yaśovarman's empire comprised nearly all Indo-China between Burma and Champa and he has been identified with the Leper king of Cambojan legend. His successors continued to embellish Angkor Thom, but Jayavarman IV abandoned it and it was deserted for several years until Rajendravarman II (944-968) made it the capital again. The Chinese Annals, supported by allusions in the inscriptions, state that this prince conquered Champa. The long reigns of Jayavarman V, Suryavarman I, and Udayâdityavarman, which cover more than a century (968-1079) seem to mark a prosperous period when architecture flourished, although Udayâdityavarman had to contend with two rebellions. Another great king, Sûryavarman II (1112-1162) followed shortly after them, and for a time succeeded in uniting Camboja and Champa under his sway. Some authorities credit him with a successful expedition to Ceylon. There is not sufficient evidence for this, but he was a great prince and, in spite of his foreign wars, maintained peace and order at home.

Jayavarman VII, who appears to have reigned from 1162 to 1201, reduced to obedience his unruly vassals of the north and successfully invaded Champa which remained for thirty years, though not without rebellion, the vassal of Camboja. It was evacuated by his successor Indravarman in 1220.

After this date there is again a gap of more than a century in Cambojan history, and when the sequence of events becomes clear again, we find that Siam has grown to be a dangerous and aggressive enemy. But though the vigour of the kingdom may have declined, the account of the Chinese traveller Chou Ta-kuan who visited Angkor Thom in 1296 shows that it was not in a state of anarchy nor conquered by Siam. There had however been a recent war with Siam and he mentions that the country was devastated. He unfortunately does not tell us the name of the reigning king and the list of sovereigns begins again only in 1340 when the Annals of Camboja take up the history. They are not of great value. The custom of recording all events of importance prevailed at the Cambojan Court in earlier times but these chronicles were lost in the eighteenth century. King Ang Chan (1796-1834) ordered that they should be re-written with the aid of the Siamese chronicles and such other materials as were available and fixed 1340 as the point of departure, apparently because the Siamese chronicles start from that date[268]. Although the period of the annals offers little but a narrative of dissensions at home and abroad, of the interference of Annam on one side and of Siam on the other, yet it does not seem that the sudden cessation of inscriptions and of the ancient style of architecture in the thirteenth century was due to the collapse of Camboja, for even in the sixteenth century it offered a valiant, and often successful, resistance to aggressions from the west. But Angkor Thom and the principal monuments were situated near the Siamese frontier and felt the shock of every collision. The sense of security, essential for the construction of great architectural works, had disappeared and the population became less submissive and less willing to supply forced labour without which such monuments could not be erected.

The Siamese captured Angkor Thom in 1313, 1351 and 1420 but did not on any occasion hold it for long. Again in 1473 they occupied Chantaboun, Korat and Angkor but had to retire and conclude peace. King Ang Chan I successfully disputed the right of Siam to treat him as a vassal and established his capital at Lovek, which he fortified and ornamented. He reigned from 1505 to 1555 and both he and his son, Barom Racha, seem entitled to rank among the great kings of Camboja. But the situation was clearly precarious and when a minor succeeded to the throne in 1574 the Siamese seized the opportunity and recaptured Lovek and Chantaboun. Though this capture was the death blow to the power of the Khmers, the kingdom of Camboja did not cease to exist but for nearly three centuries continued to have an eventful but uninteresting history as the vassal of Siam or Annam or even of both[269], until in the middle of the nineteenth century the intervention of France substituted a European Protectorate for these Asiatic rivalries.

The provinces of Siem-reap and Battambang, in which Angkor Thom and the principal ancient monuments are situated, were annexed by Siam at the end of the eighteenth century, but in virtue of an arrangement negotiated by the French Government they were restored to Camboja in 1907, Krat and certain territories being at the same time ceded to Siam[270].

3

The religious history of Camboja may be divided into two periods, exclusive of the possible existence there of Hinayanist Buddhism in the early centuries of our era. In the first period, which witnessed the construction of the great monuments and the reigns of the great kings, both Brahmanism and Mahayanist Buddhism nourished, but as in Java and Champa without mutual hostility. This period extends certainly from the sixth to the thirteenth centuries and perhaps its limits should be stretched to 400-1400 A.D. In any case it passed without abrupt transition into the second period in which, under Siamese influence, Hinayanist Buddhism supplanted the older faiths, although the ceremonies of the Cambojan court still preserve a good deal of Brahmanic ritual.

During the first period, Brahmanism and Mahayanism were professed by the Court and nobility. The multitude of great temples and opulent endowments, the knowledge of Sanskrit literature and the use of Indian names, leave no doubt about this, but it is highly probable that the mass of the people had their own humbler forms of worship. Still there is no record of anything that can be called Khmer—as opposed to Indian—religion. As in Siam, the veneration of nature spirits is universal in Camboja and little shrines elevated on poles are erected in their honour in the neighbourhood of almost every house. Possibly the more important of these spirits were identified in early times with Indian deities or received Sanskrit names. Thus we hear of a pious foundation in honour of Brahmarakshas[271], perhaps a local mountain spirit. Śiva is adored under the name of Śrî Śikhareśvara, the Lord of the Peak and Krishṇa appears to be identified with a local god called Śrî Champeśvara who was worshipped by Jayavarman VI[272].

The practice of accepting and hinduizing strange gods with whom they came in contact was so familiar to the Brahmans that it would be odd if no examples of it occurred in Camboja. Still the Brahmanic religion which has left such clear records there was in the main not a hinduized form of any local cult but a direct importation of Indian thought, ritual and literature. The Indian invaders or colonists were accompanied by Brahmans: their descendants continued to bear Indian names and to give them to all places of importance: Sanskrit was the ecclesiastical and official language, for the inscriptions written in Khmer are clearly half-contemptuous notifications to the common people, respecting such details as specially concerned them: Aśramas and castes (varṇa) are mentioned[273] and it is probable that natives were only gradually and grudgingly admitted to the higher castes. There is also reason to believe that this Hindu civilization was from time to time vivified by direct contact with India. The embassy of Su-Wu has already been mentioned[274] and an inscription records the marriage of a Cambojan princess with a Brahman called Divâkara who came from the banks of the Yamunâ, "where Kṛishṇa sported in his infancy."

During the whole period of the inscriptions the worship of Śiva seems to have been the principal cultus and to some extent the state religion, for even kings who express themselves in their inscriptions as devout Buddhists do not fail to invoke him. But there is no trace of hostility to Vishnuism and the earlier inscriptions constantly celebrate the praises of the compound deity Vishṇu-Śiva, known under such names as Hari-Hara[275], Śambhu-Vishṇu, Śaṇkara-Narâyaṇa, etc. Thus an inscription of Ang-Pou dating from Iśânavarman's reign says "Victorious are Hara and Acyuta become one for the good of the world, though as the spouses of Parvatî and Śrî they have different forms[276]." But the worship of this double being is accompanied by pure Śivaism and by the adoration of other deities. In the earliest inscriptions Bhavavarman invokes Śiva and dedicates a linga. He also celebrates the compound deity under the name of Śambhu-Vishṇu and mentions Umâ, Lakshmî, Bhâratî, Dharma, the Maruts, and Vishṇu under the names of Caturbhuja and Trailokyasâra. There appears to be no allusion to the worship of Vishṇu-Śiva as two in one after the seventh century, but though Śiva became exalted at the expense of his partner, Vishṇu must have had adorers for two kings, Jayavarman III and Sûryavarman II, were known after their death by the names of Vishṇu-loka and Parama-Vishṇu-loka.

Śiva became generally recognized as the supreme deity, in a comprehensive but not an exclusive sense. He is the universal spirit from whom emanate Brahmâ and Vishṇu. His character as the Destroyer is not much emphasized: he is the God of change, and therefore of reproduction, whose symbol is the Linga. It is remarkable to find that a pantheistic form of Śivaism is clearly enunciated in one of the earliest inscriptions[277]. Śiva is there styled Vibhu, the omnipresent, Paramvrahmâ ( = Brahmâ), Jagatpati, Paśupati. An inscription found at Angkor[278] mentions an Acârya of the Pâśupatas as well as an Acârya of the Śaivas and Chou Ta-kuan seems to allude to the worshippers of Paśupati under the name of Pa-ssŭ-wei. It would therefore appear that the Pâśupatas existed in Camboja as a distinct sect and there are some indications[279] that ideas which prevailed among the Lingayats also found their way thither.

The most interesting and original aspect of Cambojan religion is its connection with the state and the worship of deities somehow identified with the king or with prominent personages[280]. These features are also found in Champa and Java. In all these countries it was usual that when a king founded a temple, the god worshipped in it should be called by his name or by something like it. Thus when Bhadravarman dedicated a temple to Śiva, the god was styled Bhadreśvara. More than this, when a king or any distinguished person died, he was commemorated by a statue which reproduced his features but represented him with the attributes of his favourite god. Thus Indravarman and Yaśovarman dedicated at Bakô and Lolei shrines in which deceased members of the royal family were commemorated in the form of images of Śiva and Devî bearing names similar to their own. Another form of apotheosis was to describe a king by a posthumous title, indicating that he had gone to the heaven of his divine patron such as Paramavishṇuloka or Buddhaloka. The temple of Bayon was a truly national fane, almost a Westminster abbey, in whose many shrines all the gods and great men of the country were commemorated. The French archæologists recognize four classes of these shrines dedicated respectively to (a) Indian deities, mostly special forms of Śiva, Devî and Vishṇu; (b) Mahayanist Buddhas, especially Buddhas of healing, who were regarded as the patron saints of various towns and mountains; (c) similar local deities apparently of Cambojan origin and perhaps corresponding to the God of the City worshipped in every Chinese town; (d) deified kings and notables, who appear to have been represented in two forms, the human and divine, bearing slightly different names. Thus one inscription speaks of Śrî Mahendreśvarî who is the divine form (vraḥ rûpa) of the lady Śrî Mahendralakshmî.

The presiding deity of the Bayon was Śiva, adored under the form of the linga. The principal external ornaments of the building are forty towers each surmounted by four heads. These were formerly thought to represent Brahmâ but there is little doubt that they are meant for lingas bearing four faces of Śiva, since each head has three eyes. Such lingas are occasionally seen in India[281] and many metal cases bearing faces and made to be fitted on lingas have been discovered in Champâ. These four-headed columns are found on the gates of Angkor Thom as well as in the Bayon and are singularly impressive. The emblem adored in the central shrine of the Bayon was probably a linga but its title was Kamrateṇ jagat ta râja or Devarâja, the king-god. More explicitly still it is styled Kamrateṇ jagat ta râjya, the god who is the kingdom. It typified and contained the royal essence present in the living king of Camboja and in all her kings. Several inscriptions make it clear that not only dead but living people could be represented by statue-portraits which identified them with a deity, and in one very remarkable record a general offers to the king the booty he has captured, asking him to present it "to your subtle ego who is Iśvara dwelling in a golden linga[282]." Thus this subtle ego dwells in a linga, is identical with Śiva, and manifests itself in the successive kings of the royal house.

The practices described have some analogies in India. The custom of describing the god of a temple by the name of the founder was known there[283]. The veneration of ancestors is universal; there are some mausolea (for instance at Ahar near Udeypore) and the notion that in life the soul can reside elsewhere than in the body is an occasional popular superstition. Still these ideas and practices are not conspicuous features of Hinduism and the Cambojans had probably come within the sphere of another influence. In all eastern Asia the veneration of the dead is the fundamental and ubiquitous form of religion and in China we find fully developed such ideas as that the great should be buried in monumental tombs, that a spirit can be made to reside in a tablet or image, and that the human soul is compound so that portions of it can be in different places. These beliefs combined with the Indian doctrine that the deity is manifested in incarnations, in the human soul and in images afford a good theoretical basis for the worship of the Devarâja. It was also agreeable to far-eastern ideas that religion and the state should be closely associated and the Cambojan kings would be glad to imitate the glories of the Son of Heaven. But probably a simpler cause tended to unite church and state in all these Hindu colonies. In mediæval India the Brahmans became so powerful that they could claim to represent religion and civilization apart from the state. But in Camboja and Champa Brahmanic religion and civilization were bound up with the state. Both were attacked by and ultimately succumbed to the same enemies.

The Brahmanism of Camboja, as we know it from the inscriptions, was so largely concerned with the worship of this "Royal God" that it might almost be considered a department of the court. It seems to have been thought essential to the dignity of a Sovereign who aspired to be more than a local prince, that his Chaplain or preceptor should have a pontifical position. A curious parallel to this is shown by those mediæval princes of eastern Europe who claimed for their chief bishops the title of patriarch as a complement to their own imperial pretensions. In its ultimate form the Cambojan hierarchy was the work of Jayavarman II, who, it will be remembered, reestablished the kingdom after an obscure but apparently disastrous interregnum. He made the priesthood of the Royal God hereditary in the family of Śivakaivalya and the sacerdotal dynasty thus founded enjoyed during some centuries a power inferior only to that of the kings.

In the inscriptions of Sdok Kâk Thom[284] the history of this family is traced from the reign of Jayavarman II to 1052. The beginning of the story as related in both the Sanskrit and Khmer texts is interesting but obscure. It is to the effect that Jayavarman, anxious to assure his position as an Emperor (Cakravartin) independent of Javâ[285], summoned from Janapada a Brahman called Hiranyadâma, learned in magic (siddhividyâ), who arranged the rules (viddhi) for the worship of the Royal God and taught the king's Chaplain, Śivakaivalya, four treatises called Vrah Vinâśikha, Nayottara, Sammoha and Śiraścheda. These works are not otherwise known[286]. The king made a solemn compact that "only the members of his (Śivakaivalya's) maternal[287] family, men and women, should be Yâjakas (sacrificers or officiants) to the exclusion of all others." The restriction refers no doubt only to the cult of the Royal God and the office of court chaplain, called Purohita, Guru or Hotri, of whom there were at least two.

The outline of this narrative, that a learned Brahman was imported and charged with the instruction of the royal chaplain, is simple and probable but the details are perplexing. The Sanskrit treatises mentioned are unknown and the names singular. Janapada as the name of a definite locality is also strange[288], but it is conceivable that the word may have been used in Khmer as a designation of India or a part of it.

The inscription goes on to relate the gratifying history of the priestly family, the grants of land made to them, the honours they received. We gather that it was usual for an estate to be given to a priest with the right to claim forced labour from the population. He then proceeded to erect a town or village embellished with temples and tanks. The hold of Brahmanism on the country probably depended more on such priestly towns than on the convictions of the people. The inscriptions often speak of religious establishments being restored and sometimes say that they had become deserted and overgrown. We may conclude that if the Brahman lords of a village ceased for any reason to give it their attention, the labour and contributions requisite for the upkeep of the temples were not forthcoming and the jungle was allowed to grow over the buildings.

Numerous inscriptions testify to the grandeur of the Śivakaivalya family. The monotonous lists of their properties and slaves, of the statues erected in their honour and the number of parasols borne before them show that their position was almost regal, even when the king was a Buddhist. They prudently refrained from attempting to occupy the throne, but probably no king could succeed unless consecrated by them. Sadaśiva, Śaṇkarapaṇḍita and Divâkarapaṇḍita formed an ecclesiastical dynasty from about 1000 to 1100 A.D. parallel to the long reigns of the kings in the same period[289]. The last-named mentions in an inscription that he had consecrated three kings and Śaṇkarapaṇḍita, a man of great learning, was de facto sovereign during the minority of his pupil Udayâdityavarman nor did he lose his influence when the young king attained his majority.

The shrine of the Royal God was first near Mt. Mahendra and was then moved to Hariharâlaya[290]. Its location was definitely fixed in the reign of Indravarman, about 877 A.D. Two Śivakaivalya Brahmans, Śivasoma and his pupil Vâmaśiva, chaplain of the king, built a temple called the Śivâśrama and erected a linga therein. It is agreed that this building is the Bayon, which formed the centre of the later city of Angkor. Indravarman also illustrated another characteristic of the court religion by placing in the temple now called Prah Kou three statues of Śiva with the features of his father, grandfather and Jayavarman II together with corresponding statues of Śakti in the likeness of their wives. The next king, Yaśovarman, who founded the town of Angkor round the Bayon, built near his palace another linga temple, now known as Ba-puon. He also erected two convents, one Brahmanic and one Buddhist. An inscription[291] gives several interesting particulars respecting the former. It fixes the provisions to be supplied to priests and students and the honours to be rendered to distinguished visitors. The right of sanctuary is accorded and the sick and helpless are to receive food and medicine. Also funeral rites are to be celebrated within its precincts for the repose of the friendless and those who have died in war. The royal residence was moved from Angkor in 928, but about twenty years later the court returned thither and the inscriptions record that the Royal God accompanied it.

The cultus was probably similar to what may be seen in the Sivaite temples of India to-day. The principal lingam was placed in a shrine approached through other chambers and accessible only to privileged persons. Libations were poured over the emblem and sacred books were recited. An interesting inscription[292] of about 600 A.D. relates how Śrîsomasarman (probably a Brahman) presented to a temple "the Râmâyaṇa, the Purâṇa and complete Bhârata" and made arrangements for their recitation. Sanskrit literature was held in esteem. We are told that Sûryavarman I was versed in the Atharva-Veda and also in the Bhâshya, Kâvyas, the six Darśanas, and the Dharmaśâstras[293]. Sacrifices are also frequently mentioned and one inscription records the performance of a Koṭihoma[294]. The old Vedic ritual remained to some extent in practice, for no circumstances are more favourable to its survival than a wealthy court dominated by a powerful hierarchy. Such ceremonies were probably performed in the ample enclosures surrounding the temples[295].

4

Mahayanist Buddhism existed in Camboja during the whole of the period covered by the inscriptions, but it remained in such close alliance with Brahmanism that it is hard to say whether it should be regarded as a separate religion. The idea that the two systems were incompatible obviously never occurred to the writers of the inscriptions and Buddhism was not regarded as more distinct from Śivaism and Vishnuism than these from one another. It had nevertheless many fervent and generous, if not exclusive, admirers. The earliest record of its existence is a short inscription dating from the end of the sixth or beginning of the seventh century[296], which relates how a person called Pon Prajnâ Candra dedicated male and female slaves to the three Bodhisattvas, Śâstâ[297], Maitreya and Avalokiteśvara. The title given to the Bodhisattvas (Vrah Kamratâañ) which is also borne by Indian deities shows that this Buddhism was not very different from the Brahmanic cult of Camboja.

It is interesting to find that Yaśovarman founded in Angkor Thom a Saugatâśrama or Buddhist monastery parallel to his Brâhmaṇâśrama already described. Its inmates enjoyed the same privileges and had nearly the same rules and duties, being bound to afford sanctuary, maintain the destitute and perform funeral masses. It is laid down that an Acârya versed in Buddhist lore corresponds in rank to the Acâryas of the Śaivas and Pâsupatas and that in both institutions greater honour is to be shown to such Acâryas as also are learned in grammar. A Buddhist Acârya ought to be honoured a little less than a learned Brahman. Even in form the inscriptions recording the foundation of the two Aśramas show a remarkable parallelism. Both begin with two stanzas addressed to Śiva: then the Buddhist inscription inserts a stanza in honour of the Buddha who delivers from transmigration and gives nirvâṇa, and then the two texts are identical for several stanzas[298].

Mahayanism appears to have flourished here especially from the tenth to the thirteenth centuries and throughout the greater part of this period we find the same feature that its principal devotees were not the kings but their ministers. Sûryavarman I († 1049) and Jayavarman VII († 1221) in some sense deserved the name of Buddhists since the posthumous title of the former was Nirvâṇapada and the latter left a long inscription[299] beginning with a definitely Buddhist invocation. Yet an inscription of Sûryavarman which states in its second verse that only the word of the Buddha is true, opens by singing the praises of Śiva, and Jayavarman certainly did not neglect the Brahmanic gods. But for about a hundred years there was a series of great ministers who specially encouraged Buddhism. Such were Satyavarman (c. 900 A.D.), who was charged with the erection of the building in Angkor known as Phimeanakas; Kavindrârimathana, minister under Râjendravarman II and Jayavarman V, who erected many Buddhist statues and Kîrtipaṇḍita, minister of Jayavarman V. Kîrtipaṇḍita was the author[300] of the inscription found at Srey Santhor, which states that thanks to his efforts the pure doctrine of the Buddha reappeared like the moon from behind the clouds or the sun at dawn.

It may be easily imagined that the power enjoyed by the court chaplain would dispose the intelligent classes to revolt against this hierarchy and to favour liberty and variety in religion, so far as was safe. Possibly the kings, while co-operating with a priesthood which recognized them as semi-divine, were glad enough to let other religious elements form some sort of counterpoise to a priestly family which threatened to be omnipotent. Though the identification of Śivaism and Buddhism became so complete that we actually find a Trinity composed of Padmodbhava (Brahmâ), Ambhojanetra (Vishṇu) and the Buddha[301], the inscriptions of the Buddhist ministers are marked by a certain diplomacy and self-congratulation on the success of their efforts, as if they felt that their position was meritorious, yet delicate.

Thus in an inscription, the object of which seems to be to record the erection of a statue of Prajñâ-pâramitâ by Kavindrârimathana we are told that the king charged him with the embellishment of Yaśodharapura because "though an eminent Buddhist" his loyalty was above suspicion[302]. The same minister erected three towers at Bàṭ C̆uṃ with inscriptions[303] which record the dedication of a tank. The first invokes the Buddha, Vajrapâni[304] and Lokeśvara. In the others Lokeśvara is replaced by Prajñâ-pâramitâ who here, as elsewhere, is treated as a goddess or Śakti and referred to as Devî in another stanza[305]. The three inscriptions commemorate the construction of a sacred tank but, though the author was a Buddhist, he expressly restricts the use of it to Brahmanic functionaries.

The inscription of Srey Santhor[306] (c. 975 A.D.) describes the successful efforts of Kîrtipaṇḍita to restore Buddhism and gives the instructions of the king (Jayavarman V) as to its status. The royal chaplain is by no means to abandon the worship of Śiva but he is to be well versed in Buddhist learning and on feast days he will bathe the statue of the Buddha with due ceremony.

A point of interest in this inscription is the statement that Kîrtipaṇḍita introduced Buddhist books from abroad, including the Śâstra Madhyavibhâga and the commentary on the Tattvasangraha. The first of these is probably the Mâdhyântavibhâga śâstra[307] by Vasubandhu and the authorship is worth attention as supporting Târanâtha's statement that the disciples of Vasubandhu introduced Buddhism into Indo-China.

In the time of Jayavarman VII (c. 1185 A.D.), although Hindu mythology is not discarded and though the king's chaplain (presumably a Śivaite) receives every honour, yet Mahayanist Buddhism seems to be frankly professed as the royal religion. It is noteworthy that about the same time it becomes more prominent in Java and Champa. Probably the flourishing condition of the faith in Ceylon and Burma increased the prestige of all forms of Buddhism throughout south-eastern Asia. A long inscription of Jayavarman in 145 stanzas has been preserved in the temple of Ta Prohm near Angkor. It opens with an invocation to the Buddha, in which are mentioned the three bodies, Lokeśvara[308], and the Mother of the Jinas, by whom Prajñâ-pâramitâ must be meant. Śiva is not invoked but allusion is made to many Brahmanic deities and Bhikkhus and Brahmans are mentioned together. The inscription contains a curious list of the materials supplied daily for the temple services and of the personnel. Ample provision is made for both, but it is not clear how far a purely Buddhist ritual is contemplated and it seems probable that an extensive Brahmanic cultus existed side by side with the Buddhist ceremonial. We learn that there were clothes for the deities and forty-five mosquito nets of Chinese material to protect their statues. The Uposatha days seem to be alluded to[309] and the spring festival is described, when "Bhagavat and Bhagavatî" are to be escorted in solemn procession with parasols, music, banners and dancing girls. The whole staff, including Burmese and Chams (probably slaves), is put down at the enormous figure of 79,365, which perhaps includes all the neighbouring inhabitants who could be called on to render any service to the temple. The more sacerdotal part of the establishment consisted of 18 principal priests (adhikâriṇaḥ), 2740 priests and 2232 assistants, including 615 dancing girls. But even these figures seem very large[310].