An Early Example of Svasthāveśa Ritual: A Chinese Hagiography of the Early Fifth Century

Nobumi Iyanaga

This paper has several aims: the first is to show that a particular form of spiritual possession for oracular purpose—the one that uses the ball of one’s thumb on which is reflected an image that a child reports to the practitioner—, known to be performed in Indian lore from mainly Tantric sources, had an earlier example found in a Chinese biography of a Buddhist monk dating from the early fifth century. The previous scholarship had held that the svasthāveśa ritual in general, during which a possessed child plays a central role, originated in the milieu of Śaiva Tantra dating around the sixth century; the example presented here demonstrates that the practice dates back earlier, and could originate in a more common milieu, that of folkloric magic of ancient or early medieval India. Another purpose of the paper is to present the usefulness of research in Chinese sources to get interesting data related to Indian religious history. Finally, this paper aims also to present to international scholarship the advance of recent Japanese research related to the ritual of spiritual possession of Buddhist (and so Indian) origin in Japanese history.

ISSN 0915-6119 CIRCULAIRE DE LA SOCIETE FRANCO-JAPONAISE DES ETUDES ORIENTALES no 42 0 2 1 3 Kyoto-Tokyo, mars 2019 ż42¼ 2019õ3ħ31ġ CIRCULAIRE DE LA SOCIETE FRANCO-JAPONAISE DES ETUDES ORIENTALES nº 42 31 mars 2019 ġ}įŉØ Ũ Ļ ƪ ĝ An Early Example of Svasthāveśa Ritual: A Chinese Hagiography of the Early Fifth Century Iyanaga Nobumi þńƉ ġĬ/Ŀě *GglSekTJOdlġĬƜļ/ľ »-Ë<Ĥ äc[lkġŤƉ Paul Claudel et l’Indochine Michel Wasserman 1 33 83 įŉØǈ/ƫŏkhlFHbMX ]MHDekhMKe\i[lekFglNe*BiPHQ ǝƫŏfIa_Ǟ ]RHi[IC^ÿġXgGc^ 95 Hi[IC^ġĬØ-<ġ}ØƘxŋ/=4)*= :@Ƌ<ĝØŮŸkÛěŮŸ@6&( ÍÁ 99 Hi[IC^ÛěťƻƎ*~ƌćÛěØkÛě»Ø- <ŢŻ /ŁƶĠŇƪ@7*6( ÿġXgGc^ 105 ØŊ«ÍÁ 2018õúġ}įŉØƆÍÁ 109 ġ}įŉØ ơÍÁ 113 ŭ: ƐƏÚĬ£Ǆż 37 ÇyǀùĝƴǝŔ¦©ƴǞ@ºƴ 115 ƇǐĂƢ 117 ࿦ɹɹจ An Early Example of Svasthāveśa Ritual: A Chinese Hagiography of the Early Fifth Century∗ I YANAGA Nobumi ከӬ৴ඒ Introduction Studies on Indian lore about spiritual possession, generally known as āveśa rituals, have made great progress in recent years (āveśa means “entry”; āveśa as a spiritual possession is the “entry” of the spirit into the body of a medium). Among various practices which were object of research, one that seems particularly spectacular is the oracular possession using a child as medium. Studies on this type of rituals appear to suppose that they mainly belong to the Tantric stratum of Indian religions that flourished after the sixth or the seventh century. In this paper, I will examine a Chinese text of the fifth century in which is reported the deed of a third to fourth century monk who came from Central Asia, who is said to have practiced a ritual of this type. This will show that, if most of the documents describing such practices are from the Tantric period of Indian religions, the origin of the oracular possession using a child medium go further in the history, up to the large folk religious traditions of India or around, which served as sources of later Tantric developments. At the same time, this gives me the opportunity of emphasizing the importance of non-Indian (especially Chinese) ∗ This paper could not have been written without essential contributions from Dr. Oda Etsuyo খాӻ୅, and Dr. Rolf Giebel. In addition, Dr. Caleb Carter made English corrections. I express to all these friends and colleagues my deepest gratitude. It goes without saying that all mistakes are mine own. It must be noted that parts of the contents of this paper were presented in a talk at the public workshop of the Research Institute for Old Japanese Manuscripts of Buddhist Scriptures (Nihon koshakyō kenkyū-jo ೔ຊ‫ݹ‬ሜៃ‫ )ॴڀݚ‬of International College of Postgraduate Buddhist Studies (Kokusai Bukkyō-gaku daigakuin daigaku ᅳࡍဠ‫ڭ‬ላେላӃେላ), Tōkyō, held on the November 11th, 2017. A paper based on this talk is published in the Journal of the Research Institute for Old Japanese Manuscripts of Buddhist Scriptures (Nihon Koshakyō Kenkyū-jo Kenkyū Kiyō ೔ຊ‫ݹ‬ሜៃ‫ݚॴڀݚ‬ ‫لڀ‬ཁ), 4 (2019), under the title of “Indo, Chūgoku, Nihon ni okeru Hyōrei Shinkō wo megutte: Zōmitsu Bunken no Sekai e no Irigushi to shite” Πϯυɺதᅳɺ೔ຊʹ͓͚Δጪྶ৴‫ڼ‬ΛΊ͙ͬͯʕʕʕᯑີจᘔͷੈք΁ͷೖ Γ‫ͯ͠ͱޱ‬, p. 1-20. 1 An Early Example of Svasthāveśa Ritual (I YANAGA Nobumi) sources for the study of the early history of Indian religious practices and traditions. Carried by the large diffusion of Buddhism, Indian religiosity had a great influence on Far Eastern cultures. The use of child medium in healing or oracular rituals was certainly one of the outcomes of such influence. Recent Japanese studies on this kind of practices present many interesting results, which remain quite unknown to Western academia focused on Indian religious culture (in fact, the inverse is true too: Japanese academia on Japanese phenomena largely ignore Western studies on Indian spiritual possession traditions). I also want in this paper to draw attention of Western researchers to these rich studies done in the field of Japanese studies. However, it is good to first present a simple overview of recent studies on the Indian lore of spiritual possession: I will only mention two major works among them which have greatly advanced our knowledge of this field: Jackie Assayag and Gilles Tarabout’s edited volume, La possession en Asie du Sud: parole, corps, territoire—Possession in South Asia: Speech, Body, Territory, Purus.ārtha, 21 (1999), which contains fascinating ethnographic and ethnologic studies along with an important article by André Padoux on Kashmirian Tantric texts on the theory and practice of Śaiva āveśa dating back from the 9th to fourteenth century;1 the other is Frederick M. Smith’s great book, The Self Possessed: Deity and Spirit Possession in South Asian Literature and Civilization,2 which presents in its over 700 pages, fruitful insights combining ethnologic perspective with a historical and philological study of Indian textual traditions from the Vedic times up through the present.3 As it may not be well-known in Western academia, it is worthwhile to bring attention to Japanese research on the Buddhist Tantric conception of the “entry (āveśa) of the Buddha’s wisdom” in the practitioner’s body, in the ritual tradition of the Sarvatathāgata tattvasam . graha. Inui Hitoshi ‫ס‬ਔࢤ wrote two important papers on this subject (both in Japanese): “WisdomEntry in Sūtras and Rituals in Chinese Translation” (2005) and “The Characteristic of Esoteric Buddhism Viewed Through the Vajradhātu (Adamantine Realm) Man.d.ala, with a Special Reference to Bodhisattva Vajrāveśa (Adamantine Entry), or Bodhisattva Vajraghan.t.a (Adamantine Bell)” (2008).4 1 André Padoux, “Transe, possession ou absorption mystique? L’āveśa selon quelques textes tantriques cachemiriens,” in op. cit., p. 133-147. 2 New York, Columbia University Press, 2006. 3 Other interesting studies are listed and discussed in Geoffrey Samuel, “Possession and self-possession: spirit healing, tantric meditation and āveśa,” Diskus [Electronic journal of religious studies], vol. 9 (2008), online at: <http://jbasr.com/basr/diskus/diskus9/samuel.htm> [last accessed on Dec. 11, 2017]. 4 Inui Hitoshi ‫ס‬ਔࢤ, “Kan’yaku kyō-ki ni mieru nyūchi” ‫׽‬༁ៃ‫͑ݟʹي‬Δೖ஌, Yoritomi Motohiro hakase 2 ࿦ɹɹจ On the Buddhist (or Śaiva) side, another short but important contribution was made by Rolf Giebel in his exemplary translation of the (Garud.a) āveśa Rite Explained by the God Maheśvara Which Swiftly Establishes Its Efficacy (Suji liyan Moxishouluo tian shuo [jialouluo] aweishe fa ଎ཱ࣬ᱛຐᬮटཏఱઆʦՠᒭཏʧѨඌᇋ๏).5 He presents this translation in a paper entitled “A Śaiva Text in Chinese Garb? An Annotated Translation of the Suji liyan Moxishouluo tian shuo aweishe fa,”6 a title suggesting the peculiar characteristic of this text. As Giebel writes:7 ...the greater part of [this text] describes the use of child mediums in rites of spirit possession (āveśa) for the purpose of divination. The text itself would seem to be entirely devoid of any Buddhist content (apart from one reference to a Buddha when describing the iconography of Maheśvara), and Alexis Sanderson (2009: 136-38, n. 318) has pointed to the possible influence of Śaivism.8 This text is ascribed to a translation by Bukong (Jp. Fukū ෆۭ, Amoghavajra) sometime before his death in 774. It opens with a question raised by Nārāyan.a to Maheśvara on Mount Gandhamādana. Indeed, there are almost no references to Buddhism in the whole work (except an image of the Buddha on the top of Maheśvara’s crown). This text was mentioned and partially translated into French by Paul Demiéville as early as in 1929 in the first fascicle of the Hōbōgirin ๏ሞٛྛ.9 Later in 1983, I mentioned it alongside several references to Chinese Buddhist texts and Japanese folklore materials in my article on Maheśvara in Buddhism in the same dictionary.10 Moreover, Michel Strickmann worked on it extensively in his book Chinese Magical Medicine, thus preparing the way for the translation by Giebel.11 It was also discussed by Edward L. Davis in his important study on kanreki kinen ronbun-shū. Mandara no shosō to bunka. Jō. Kongō-kai no maki ↳෋ຊ޺ത࢜ؐྐྵ‫ه‬೦࿦จ ूɹϚϯμϥͷॾ૬ͱจԽɹ্——ۚ߶քͷრ, Kyōto, Hōzōkan ๏᤽‫ؗ‬, 2005, p. 183-198; Id., “Kongō-kai mandara wo tōshite mita mikkyō no tokushoku: tokuni Kongōrei bosatsu wo chūshin to shite” ۚ߶քϚϯμϥΛ ௨ͯ͠‫ڭີͨݟ‬ͷಛ৭——ಛʹۚ߶ླ฾ࡵΛத৺ͱͯ͠, in Nihon bukkyō-gaku nenpō. Bukkyō to chie ೔ຊဠ ‫ڭ‬ላ။೥ใ——ဠ‫ͱڭ‬ஐ‫( ܛ‬The Journal of the Nippon Buddhist Research Association), 2008, p. 125-138. 5 T. XXI 1277 329b-331a. 6 In Andrea Acri, ed., Esoteric Buddhism in Mediaeval Maritime Asia: Networks of Masters, Texts, Icons, Singapore, ISEAS Publishing ISEAS - Yusof Ishak Institute, 2016, p. 381-388. 7 Idem, ibid., p. 381a. 8 Alexis Sanderson, “The Śaiva Age—The Rise and Dominance of Śaivism During the Early Medieval Period,” in Shingo Einoo [Ӭϊඌ৴‫]ޛ‬, ed., Genesis and Development of Tantrism, Tōkyō, Institute of Oriental Studies, Tokyo University, 2009: 41-349, p. 136-138, n. 318 [p. 138]. 9 Hōbōgirin ๏ሞٛྛ, Dictionnaire encyclopédique du bouddhisme d’après les sources chinoises et japonaises, fasc. 1, Tōkyō, Maison Franco-japonaise, 1929, p. 7a-b, s.v. Abisha Ѩඌᇋ. 10 Iyanaga Nobumi, in Hōbōgirin, fasc. 6, Paris, Librairie d’Amérique et d’Orient Adrien-Maisonneuve, Jean Maisonneuve, Succ. ; Tōkyō, Maison Franco-Japonaise, 1983, s.v. Daijizaiten େࣗࡏఱ, p. 752b-753b. 11 Michel Strickmann, Chinese Magical Medicine, edited by Bernard Faure, Stanford, Stanford University Press, 2002, p. 229-232. 3 An Early Example of Svasthāveśa Ritual (I YANAGA Nobumi) Society and the Supernatural in Song China.12 Frederick Smith’s book is not limited to Indian sources, but makes abundant references to sources in other languages such as Chinese and Tibetan as far as they are related to the Indian lore of spiritual possession. Relying on secondary works in Western languages for the Chinese sources, he discusses it in chapter 11 (“Tantra and the Diaspora of Child”) of his book, which focuses on mainly Śaiva materials on the āveśa ritual of induced possession of children for divination purposes.13 According to Smith, this type of āveśa rituals is called “svasthāveśa” (literally “possession of one who is in a good state of [mental and physical] health”).14 Such rituals are characterized by the use of young children as mediums for oracular possession. Smith further notes:15 In svasthāveśa, a medium causes a spirit or deity to descend into any one of several reflective objects or into the body of a young boy or girl, after which the medium or youth answers questions from a client regarding events of the past, present, or future.16 Most of the Sanskrit texts in which svasthāveśa is mentioned by name or described without using this term are unedited tantric compendia from northern and eastern India that may be dated from the ninth to twelfth centuries. A few texts that mention svasthāveśa or its distinctive components predate this material, while others describing this practice without identifying it by name are, with rare exception, much later manuscript fragments found in libraries in South India. To the best of my knowledge, the name svasthāveśa is mentioned in only four published texts: the Hars.acarita, a prose hagiography of King Hars.a composed by Bān.abhat.t.a in the mid-seventh century; the Kathāsaritsāgara, composed by Somadeva in the eleventh century; a tantric compendium called Īśānaśivaguru-devapaddhati (ĪŚP) by the eponymous Īśānaśivagurudevamiśra, composed in Kerala in the eleventh century; and the anonymous tantric digest titled Tantrarāja of the sixteenth century. Except the ĪŚP, all of these were composed in North India. [. . .] Of central concern is the transmission of this ritual, at least in its textual redactions, from its probable point of origin in North India, eastward across the Himalayas into China and southward into the Deccan and the present-day states of Andhra Pradesh and Tamilnadu. Thus, the Chinese remains of Buddhist texts are important sources of this type of āveśa rituals. Finally, we must mention recent Japanese studies on āveśa rituals in Japan, in 12 Edward L. Davis, Society and the Supernatural in Song China, Honolulu, University of Hawai i Press, 2001, p. 125. 13 The Self Possessed: Deity and Spirit Possession in South Asian Literature and Civilization. New York, Columbia University Press, 2006, p. 416-470. 14 F. Smith, ibid., p. 416. 15 Idem, ibid., 417. 16 It is obvious that the medium object does not “answer” any questions by itself; it is either the practitioner or the young medium who “reads” the answers in reflections that appear on the object and interprets their meanings. [This is my own note.] 4 ࿦ɹɹจ which many Chinese sources are examined, along with properly Japanese developments of the rituals. It is useful to recall the context in which Japanese researchers came to recognize forms of āveśa rituals in historical records of the Heian and later periods. For some time now, it has been known that the Japanese court and aristocracy had recourse to a certain type of Buddhist ritual when they fell ill. They used to call esoteric monks to the bedside of sick persons. These monks prayed and performed a ritual by which the demonic being that was thought to have had caused the illness was transferred to mediums (often children or ladiesin-waiting). The demon was then “tied up” (baku റ) inside the medium’s body, questioned until it was compelled to reveal its identity, and finally was expelled. The mechanism of this type of exorcist-magical healing method has been an object of research since at least 1976 (by Komatsu Kazuhiko খদ࿨඙).17 Then in 2002, Morimoto Sensuke ৿ຊઋհ published a historical analysis of healing rituals focused on those which were executed on the occasion of Taira no Tokushi’s ฏಙࢠ (a.k.a., Kenreimon-in ‫ݐ‬ᜌ໳Ӄ, 1155-1214) pregnancy of the future emperor Antoku ҆ಙఱߖ (1178-1185, r. 1180-1185).18 In this study, he identified among contemporaneous documents a manual for a healing ritual describing an āveśa ritual involving a child medium. Since then, other studies on this ritual from the Heian period until the Muromachi period have been conducted. Of note are various pioneering articles by Koyama Satoko খࢁᡏࢠ19 and a remarkable book by Ueno Katsuyuki ্໺উ೭ entitled 17 Komatsu Kazuhiko, “Gohō shinkō-ron oboegaki: chiryō girei ni okeru ‘mononoke’ to ‘gohō”’ ‫ޢ‬๏৴‫ڼ‬࿦ ᧷͑ॻ͖——࣏ྍّᜌʹ͓͚Δʮ෺ոʯͱʮ‫ޢ‬๏ʯ[Note on the beliefs of Dharma-protector (gohō): mononoke [disease-causing demon] and gohō in healing rituals], Kikan Gendai Shūkyō ‫ݱץق‬୅फ‫ڭ‬, 7 (1976), of which an enlarged version is included in his Hyōrei Shinkō-ron: Yōkai Kenkyū e-no Kokoromi ጪ᯦৴‫ڼ‬࿦——༯ո‫΁ڀݚ‬ ͷࢼΈ, Tōkyō, Kōdansha ߨஊࣾ, 1994. 18 Morimoto Sensuke, “Tennō no shussan kūkan: Heian-matsu, Kamakura-ki” ఱߖͷग़࢈ۭؒ——ฏ҆຤ɾ ‫ח‬૔‫[ ظ‬The Space of the Delivery of Emperor: At the End of Heian and Kamakura Periods] in Yamamoto Kōji ࢁຊ޾࢘ ed., Kosumorojı̄ to Shintai ίεϞϩδʔͱ਎ମ [Iwanami Kōza Tennō to ōken wo kangaeru ‫ؠ‬೾ߨ࠲ ɹఱߖͱԦᒟΛߟ͑Δ, vol. 8], Tōkyō, Iwanami shoten ‫ؠ‬೾ॻళ, 2002, p. 227-248. 19 Koyama Satoko, Shinran no Shinkō to Jujutsu: Byōki Chiryō to Rinjū Gyōgi ਌ᳵͷ৴‫ͱڼ‬ढज़——පᔅ ࣏ྍͱྟऴߦّ [Shinran’s belifes and Magic: Healing and Death-bed Rituals], Tōkyō, Yoshikawa kōbunkan ٢ ઒߂จ‫ؗ‬, 2013, especially p. 11-47, notes on p. 62-72; Id., “Yori-gitō no Seiritsu to Abisha-hō: Heian-chūki ikō ni okeru Byōki-chiryō to no Kakawari wo Chūshin to shite” ጪ‫ف‬禱ͷ੒ཱͱѨඌᇋ๏——ฏ҆த‫ظ‬Ҏ߱ʹ ͓͚Δපᔅ࣏ྍͱͷ᮫ΘΓΛத৺ͱͯ͠ [The Formation of the Possession-exorcist Ritual and āveśa Ritual: Focusing on the Relationship with the Healing Rituals of Mid-Heian and later Periods], Shinran no Suimyaku ਌ ᳵͷਫ຺, 5 (2009): p. 25-43; Id., “Gohō-dōji Shinkō no Seiritsu to Fudō Shinkō” ‫ޢ‬๏ಐࢠ৴‫ڼ‬ͷ੒ཱͱෆ ಈ৴‫[ ڼ‬The Formation of the Belief in the Youth Dharma-protector and Belief in Acala], in Iso Mizue үਫ៸ ed., Ronshū Bungaku to Ongaku-shi: Shiika Kangen no Sekai ࿦ूɹจላͱԻᒜ࢙——ࢻՎ؅‫ݭ‬ͷੈք, Tōkyō, Izumi shobō ࿨ઘॻ๪, 2013, p. 499-515; Id., “Hikaru Genji to Rokujō-miyasudokoro no Shiryō” ޫ‫ͱࢯݯ‬࿡৚ ‫ޚ‬ଉॴͷࢮ᯦ [Hikaru Genji and the Soul of the Dead Rokujō-miyasudokoro], Setsuwa આ࿩, 21 (2014), p. 11-17; Id., “Inseiki no Yori-gitō ni okeru Monotsuki no Taigū: Roku wo Chūshin to shite” Ӄ੓‫ظ‬ͷጪ‫ف‬禱ʹ͓͚Δ෺෇ ͷ଴۰——ᜆΛத৺ͱͯ͠ [The Treatment of the Medium for Possession-exorcist Rituals in the Heian Period: Focusing on the Pay], Nihon Shūkyō Bunka-shi Kenkyū ೔ຊफ‫ڭ‬จԽ࢙‫ڀݚ‬ʱ19-1 (2015): 22-41; Id., “Hakujō na Otoko Hikaru Genji: Genji-monogatari no Aishū to Hijō” ബ৘ͳஉɺޫ‫——ࢯݯ‬ʰ‫ࢯݯ‬෺‫ޠ‬ʱͷѪࣥͱඇ ৘ [Hikaru Genji: A Cold-hearted Man: Sentimental Attachment and Heartlessness in the Genji Monogatari], in Nishō-gakusha daigaku Bungaku-bu Kokubun-gakka ೋদላࣷେላจላ෦ᅳจላՊ, ed., Koi suru Jinbun-gaku: Chi wo Hiraku Nijū-ni no Tobira ፁ͢Δਓจላ——஌ΛͻΒ͘ 22 ͷ൶, vol. 1, Tōkyō, Kanrin shobō ؉ྛॻ๪, 2016, p. 47-59; Id., “Kakunyo ga Ikita Jidai no Ekibyō Chiryō” ᧷೗͕ੜ͖ͨ࣌୅ͷӸප࣏ྍ [Plague Healing 5 An Early Example of Svasthāveśa Ritual (I YANAGA Nobumi) Yume to Mononoke no Seishin-shi: Heian Kizoku no Shinkō Sekai ເͱϞϊϊέͷਫ਼ਆ ࢙——ฏ҆‫و‬଒ͷ৴‫ੈڼ‬ք [An Intellectual History of Dreams and Ill-causing Demons: The Belief World of Heian Aristocracy].20 Ueno’s important work makes extensive use of aristocratic diaries that record esoteric rituals that were performed for various illnesses. These diaries are indeed unique treasures of Japanese historical documentation. Not only do they report extraordinary or public events but also daily events in minute details that occurred in the lives of their authors. Analyzing these descriptions, Ueno reconstructs in a vivid manner the familial life of the court and aristocracy. This includes how they faced diseases and the types of healers they relied on: medical staff who administrated medicines, Onmyōdō ӄཅಓ officials who diagnosed and prescribed various interdictions, and Buddhist monks who performed diverse types of rituals. A special category of monk referred to as “genja [or genza]” ᱛऀ that was thought to have particularly strong magical efficacy, was one of the most common types. These healers visited the sick person’s houses with a medium (or chose a medium among the personal of the house). The officiant (the genja) used a spiritual being called gohō ‫ޢ‬๏ (dharma-protector, which would correspond with Skt. dharma-pāla) as his agent.21 He made him capture the disease-demon and tied it up (baku റ or jubaku ढറ) inside the medium’s body; the officiant served the gohō as his “messenger.” Through a meticulous analysis of all cases mentioned in these historical documents, Ueno determined the period in which the esoteric ritual of āveśa was introduced in the healing methods of the Japanese courtly life around the mid-tenth century. He also shows that interest in the āveśa ritual among monks dates the end of the nineth century, with one instance involving the Tendai monk Enchin ᅵ௝ (814-891).22 These works by Koyama and Ueno open a new perspective into the study of so-called “shamanic phenomena” in the history of Japanese religions. Indeed, until their publication, it was generally assumed that these phenomena were rooted in timeless Japanese traditions, going off of records in ancient sources such as the Kojiki ‫( هࣄݹ‬712) and Nihon shoki ೔ຊ ॻ‫( ل‬720). By demonstrating that some “shamanic” healing methods (where the spiritual possession of medium played an essential role) were used from the Heian period onward and clearly originated in continental Buddhist rituals, these studies historicize at once these in the Period when Kakunyo lived], Shinran no Suimyaku ਌ᳵͷਫ຺, 19 (2016): p. 35-42. 20 Ueno Katsuyuki, Yume to Mononoke no Seishin-shi: Heian Kizoku no Shinkō Sekai ເͱϞϊϊέͷਫ਼ਆ ࢙——ฏ҆‫و‬଒ͷ৴‫ੈڼ‬ք, Kyōto, Kyōto daigaku gakujutsu shuppankai ‫౎ژ‬େላላज़ग़൛။, 2013. 21 This deity is represented as a child deity (dōji ಐࢠ). It is interesting to note that the term dhama-pāla is also used in Tibet in a context of āveśa ritual. See Frederick M. Smith, op. cit., p. 304. 22 In his Doubts and Questions [to Tang masters], Gimon ٙ໰, Enchin asked for an explanation on the phrase “[the practitioner] should next protect the [medium] girl’s one hundred and eight life-nodes (myōsetsu ໋અ) with the great mudrā” (see the āveśa Rite Explained by the God Maheśvara, T. 1277 330a8; Giebel’s translation, art. cit., p. 386a and n. 33); he also adds: “Some people here attempted to perform this ritual, but without success. I doubt that there are some hidden teachings not written in the text. I humbly ask you to please instruct us about this point” (େ೔ຊဠ‫ڭ‬શॻ, 27, ஐᨽେࢣશू, 3, p. 1018b17-1019a2). Unfortunately, we have no record of answers by Tang masters to his question. See Ueno, op. cit., p. 96 and p. 108; p. 118, n. 51 and p. 120, n. 68. 6 ࿦ɹɹจ practices. The impact of this new idea is not yet fully developed: for example, many rituals of possession that can be observed in present-day village festivals may (at least partially) go back to this Buddhist influence. However, this has not yet been studied. I believe this will soon become the core of a major revision of the history of Japanese religious traditions. Since Ueno, Oda Etsuyo খాӻ୅ has published an important book on related subjects in a work titled Jubaku, Gohō, Abisha-hō: Setsuwa ni Miru Sō no Genryoku ढറɾ‫ޢ‬๏ɾѨ ඌᇋ๏——આ࿩ʹ‫ݟ‬Δૐͷᱛྗ [Magical Binding, Dharma Protectors and āveśa Rituals: Monks’ Magical Efficacy related in Tale Literature].23 In this book, the author analyzes how āveśa rituals are described in Japanese medieval tales literature (setsuwa આ࿩). In doing so, she goes back to Chinese esoteric sūtras and ritual texts to examines instances of āveśa and related rituals that had not yet been examined in previous studies. This material gives a new dimension to the Japanese studies on āveśa rituals by providing a new historical and intercultural background against which Japanese phenomena should be contextualized. While studies by Japanese researchers very often tend to limit their fields of investigation to uniquely Japanese facts, the important parts of the texts referred to by Oda belong to the Chinese Buddhist Canon which are translations from Indian originals. In this way, her study shows that Japanese medical-religious traditions of the Heian and later periods were closely related to earlier Indian practices, opening thus a new broad perspective in South and East Asian religious studies. The majority of Chinese translations of Indian Buddhist texts can be dated, which is rarely the case for Indian texts (especially those from the first to eighth or ninth centuries). In addition, the considerable number of examples of texts related to the āveśa ritual in the Chinese Canon is an important element that must be taken in account for further study of the subject. However, as I will show in the next section, it is not in the Chinese Buddhist Canon, but in a secular collection of tales from the Liu Song ཱུ૙ dynasty (420-479) that one of the oldest texts reporting an āveśa ritual using a child could be found. One of the Oldest Examples of the āveśa Ritual: Fotucheng’s Case Concerning the historical origins and evolution of svasthāveśa rituals, Frederick Smith, who refers to a personal communication by Alexis Sanderson, writes:24 Although the relevant Tantras are themselves undated, Sanderson suggests that one of the earliest, the Niśvāsaguhya [which mentions a rite of the type of svasthāveśa], 23 24 Tōkyō, Iwata-shoin ‫ॻాؠ‬Ӄ, 2016. Frederick Smith, op. cit., p. 427-428. 7 An Early Example of Svasthāveśa Ritual (I YANAGA Nobumi) could be a product of the sixth century, though it can be dated with certainty only to a single ninth-century Nepalese manuscript. Thus, Sanderson states that, though the Niśvāsaguhya “seems to be one of the very earliest Tantras of the Siddhānta,” it is nevertheless representative of “a tradition for which we have epigraphical evidence from the sixth century onwards.”25 Sanderson’s remaining texts, which describe svasthāveśa in greater complexity and variation, were composed at various times up to the twelfth century. The epigraphical evidence to which Sanderson refers is important because it helps establish a general dateline for the diffusion of svasthāveśa to China. This evidence exposes a Śaiva tradition from Central and South India that appears to have entered Kashmir only in the first few decades of the eighth century with the ascendancy of Lalitāditya, the wealthiest and most successful of Kashmir’s imperial monarchs. It is worth noting that Lalitāditya and his successors patronized both brahmanical sects and Buddhism, establishing a climate conducive for intellectual exchange. Given the strong tantric presence in Kashmir at that time, this active exchange of ideas quickly engendered a common tantric foundation for Hindu and Buddhist sects. Sanderson and others have extensively explored the epigraphical evidence for the background of northern Tantrism. Among the most important epigraphia are the following:26 (1) A hoard of nine copperplate inscriptions of a local monarch named Mahāśivagupta Bālārjuna discovered in Sirpur (Śrı̄pura, the ancient capital of Daks.in.a Kosala; Raipur District, Chattisgarh), which includes records of grants to Śaiva ācāryas. This is shown by their initiation names, which confirms that the Śaiva Siddhānta was established by the second half of the sixth century.27 (2) The Senakapāt. stone slab inscription issued in the fifty-seventh year of the reign of Śivagupta (c. 647).28 This records a grant to an ascetic named Sadāśivācārya, who, the inscription implies, is the lineage successor to an ascetic named Sadyanśivācārya who hailed from a hermitage (tapovana) called Āmardaka.29 The latter is also a name of Kālabhairava, a form of Śiva dominant in this tradition, who, as we see below, is 25 Note 59 of Smith’s chapter 11 (p. 461): “Personal communication, September 13, 2001. Sanderson further notes, ‘Tantric Śaivism of this relatively public and strongly soteriological variety was not merely present in the seventh century but well established’ (2001 [Alexis Sanderson, “History Through Textual Criticism in the Study of Śaivism, the Pañcarātra and the Buddhist Yoginı̄tantras,” in Les sources et le temps / Sources and Time. A Colloquium, Pondicherry, 11-13 January 1997, ed. François Grimal, pp. 1- 47, Pondicherry: École française d’Extrême Orient, 2001]:11).” 26 Note 60 of Smith’s chapter 11 (p. 461): “This account is based on a long message sent to me by Sanderson (March 10, 2002) and references he has suggested, as well as on his 2001 article.” 27 Note 61 of Smith’s chapter 11 (p. 461): “Cf. Bakker 2000 [Hans Bakker, “Somaśarman, Somavamśa . and Somasiddhānta: A Pāśupata Tradition in Seventh-Century Daks.in.a Kosala,” In Harānandalaharı̄: Volume in Honour of Professor Minoru Hara on his Seventieth Birthday, ed. Ryutaro Tsuchida and Albrecht Wezler, 2000: 1-19, Reinbek: Dr. Inge Wezler Verlag für Orientalistische Fachpublikationen], p. 15f. n. 42.” 28 Note 62 of Smith’s chapter 11 (p. 461): “Cf. Dikshit and Sircar 1955-56 [M. G. Dikshit and D. C. Sircar, “Senakapat Inscription of the Time of Sivagupta Balarjun,” Epigraphia Indica 31 (1955-56)], p. 31-36]; Shastri 1995 [Ajaya Mitra Shstri, Inscriptions of the Śarabhapurı̄yas, Pān.d.uvam . śins and Somavam . śins, 2 vols. New Delhi: Indian Council of Historical Research, and Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1995], 1: p. 169-172, 2: p. 154159.” 29 Note 63 of Smith’s chapter 11 (p. 461): “āsı̄tsadyahśivācāryahśrı̄mānvaryastapovatām(-tām) | śrı̄ma. . . dāmarddakakhyāti-tapovanavinirggatah. ||” 8 ࿦ɹɹจ closely affiliated with the possession deities in some of our texts.30 It is also important that this hermitage is the parent institution of most of the Saiddhāntika lineages recorded in inscriptions, lineages that eventually became ascendant in Kashmir. (3) Inscriptions recording the Śaiva initiations to several important southern monarchs in the latter half of the seventh century.31 Although this is evidence for the broad dissemination of Śaiva lineages, the inscriptions do not take note of specific practices. Nevertheless, linguistic and cultural evidence permit us to speculate on the range of practices that constituted the divinatory milieu of svasthāveśa. Thus, for Smith, the possible origin of the svasthāveśa ritual seems to go back to the sixth century, in a Śaiva milieu of the northern India. However, —and this is the main point that I want to make in this paper—one of the oldest testimonies to a performance of this type of possession ritual seems to be much earlier. Oda Etsuyo, through personal correspondence, drew my attention to a passage of the Youminglu ༓໌࿥ [Records of the Hidden and the Visible Worlds], a text of which Zhenjun Zhang writes that it is “conventionally attributed to Liu Yiqing ཱུٛ‫( ܚ‬403-444), [. . .] one of the most important collections of zhiguai ࢤո (accounts of anomalies) in the Six Dynasties period (222-589).”32 In an email of February 13th, 2017 that she wrote to me, Oda quoted an article by Sano Seiko ࠤ໺੣ࢠ, a specialist of the medieval Chinese literature, entitled “Chūgoku no bukkyō-sha to yogen, shinshi: bukkyō ryūnyū-ji kara Nan-Boku-chō jidai made” தᅳͷဠ‫ͱऀڭ‬ဇ‫ݴ‬ɾᩌࢻ— —ဠ‫ྲྀڭ‬ೖ‫͔ظ‬Βೆ๺ே࣌୅·Ͱ [Chinese Buddhists and Prophecies and Prophetical Poetry: From the Period of the Introduction of Buddhism until the Period of Southern and Northern Dynasties]33 in which she found a reference to this passage of the Youminglu. The story is about Fotucheng ဠᅷ੅ (ca. 233?-349?), who was one of the earliest Buddhist monks of some renown in China, especially known for his magical power.34 Fotucheng’s biography is described in several sources: the most detailed is included in the Gaoseng zhuan ߴૐၚ [Biographies of Eminent Monks] by Huijiao ‫ܛ‬᚞, compiled in 30 Note 64 of Smith’s chapter 11 (p. 461): “Dikshit and Sircar state: ‘Āmardaka, which is the name of KālaBhairava, a form of Śiva, was probably derived from the locality where Bhairava was worshipped’ (1955-56: p. 34-35).” 31 Not 65 of Smith’s chapter 11 (p. 462): “See Sanderson 2001, p. 8-10, n. 6: ‘These kings are the Cālukya Vikramāditya I of Bādāmı̄, the Eastern Gaṅgā Devendravarman, and the Pallava Narasim . havarman of Kāñcı̄.”’ 32 Zhenjun Zhang, “A Textual History of Liu Yiqing’s You ming lu,” Oriens Extremus, 48 (2009): 87-101, p. 87. —Liu Yiqing belonged to the imperial family of the Liu Song dynasty, and is known as the author (or compiler) of important works such as the Shishuo Xinyu ੈઆ৽‫[ ޠ‬A New Account of the Tales of the World]. 33 Edited by Higashi-Ajia kaii-gakkkai ౦ΞδΞዊҟላ။, Ajia yūgaku ΞδΞ༡ላ, 187, special issue “Kaii wo Baikai suru mono” ոҟΛഔհ͢Δ΋ͷ [That what Mediates the Anormal Phenomena], Tōkyō, Bensei shuppan ษ੒ग़൛, 2015: p. 206a-220b, p. 207b-209a. —Sano Seiko wrote another paper on similar subjects: “Rikuchō Sōryo Koji Tankyū: Shikai to Sōden no Aida” ࿡ேૐཿ‫ࢤ——ٻ୳ࣄނ‬ոͱૐၚͷ͍͋ͩ [Research in Legends of Buddhist Monks in Six Dynasties: Between Records of Anomalies (zhiguai ࢤո) and Buddhist Monks’ Biographies], Nagoya daigaku chūgoku-go bungaku ronshū ໊‫ݹ‬԰େላதᅳ‫ޠ‬ላจላ࿦ू, 29 (2015): 21a-43a, especially p. 28b-29a; p. 33a-34b. 34 I briefly presented this discovery by Oda Etsuyo in my talk at the meeting of the Research Center of Japanese Old Sūtra Manuscripts (Nihon koshakyō kenkyūjo ೔ຊ‫ݹ‬ႇៃ‫)ॴڀݚ‬, on November 11, 2017, at International College for Postgraduate Buddhist Studies, Tōkyō. See supra note ∗ . 9 An Early Example of Svasthāveśa Ritual (I YANAGA Nobumi) 519.35 The Shiliuguo chunqiu े࿡ᅳय़ळ [Historical Records of the Sixteen Kingdoms], compiled by Cui Hong ቐߵ (478-525), contains also much information on Fotucheng’s biography (juan რ 11, 13, 15-17, 20-21, 32, 42).36 The dynastic history of the Jin, Jinshu Ꮾॻ, compiled in 648, juan 95, p. 2484-2489 is mainly based on the Shiliuguo chunqiu.37 Probably native to Kutcha, Fotucheng had learned about Buddhism in the north-western region of India (present-day Kashmir and Gandhāra) and came to the northern China, in Loyang བཅ, in 310, for the propagation of Buddhism and construction of temples. But the time was not favorable because that was the moment of the collapse of the Western Jin ੢৾ (311), and the region was in disorder. However, Fotucheng could find a protector in the person of Guo Heilüe ֲࠇུ, a general who believed in Buddhism and served under the order of Shi Le ੴᯮ (ca 274 - 333), the brilliant general of Jie ᠨ origin,38 who later became the first emperor of the dynasty of Later Zhao ‫ޙ‬᪅ (Emperor Ming ໌ߖఇ, r. 319333). Fotucheng excelled in prophecy and especially in divining the future victory or defeat of battles; he communicated his prophecies to his protector Guo. Shi Le was surprised that his lieutenant always knew the tide of battles and asked him the reason. Having known the source of his knowledge, Shi Le took Fotucheng as his own counsellor. Thus, the Buddhist master could become influential in the military government of Shi Le. It is in this context that our tale of the Youminglu can be placed. According to the Youminglu (before 444), it is said that once, Shi Le asked Fotucheng: “I want to capture Liu Yao ཱུ༵ (ca 275 - 329).39 Is there any sign for such an event?” Cheng then made a child purify himself and fast for seven days. [After that,] he took sesame oil (mayou ຑ༉)40 and smeared it on his 35 Gaoseng zhuan, T. L 2059 ix 383b15-387a29. This biography was translated into English with extensive notes by Arthur F. Wright, “Fo-T‘u-Têng ဠᅷ੅: A Biography,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, Vol. 11, No. 3/4 (Dec., 1948): 321-371 (referred to by Michel Strickmann, Mantras et mandarins : le bouddhisme tantrique en Chine, Paris, Gallimard, 1996, p. p. 461, n. 20); see also a translation into modern Japanese by Yoshikawa Tadao ٢઒஧෉ and Funayama Tōru ધࢁప, Kōsō-den ߴૐၚ [Iwanami bunko ‫ؠ‬೾จ‫ ݿ‬33-342-3], vol. 3, Tōkyō, Iwanami shoten, 2010, p. 297-343. 36 The edition of the collection Qinding siku quanshu ‫ێ‬ఆ࢛‫ݿ‬શॻ can be consulted online, at <https: //ctext.org/wiki.pl?if=en\&res=933789> [last accessed on February 24, 2018]. 37 Jinshu Ꮾॻ, juan 95, ed. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju த՚ॻ‫ہ‬, edition of 1974, p. 2484-2489. See Sano, “Rikuchō Sōryo Koji Tankyū: Shikai to Sōden no Aida,” p. 29a and n. 16. The passage of interest for our topic, p. 2484, was translated into English by Alexander Vovin, Edward Vadja and Étienne de la Vaissière, “Who Were the *Kjet (ᠨ) and What Language Did They Speak?,” Journal asiatique, 304-1 (2016): p. 125-144, p. 128-129. — On Vovin’s argument, see also <http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/29Huns/AVovin_ XiongnuLanguageEn.htm> (last accessed on February 18, 2018). 38 Jie ᠨ (Middle Chinese pronunciation: jié corresponding with a hypothetical phonetic value “*kjet”) is the name of an ethnic group of northern China (or Central Asia), to which Shi Le belonged. See for example the Wikipedia article at <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jie_people> (last accessed on the February 22, 2018). 39 The fifth and the last emperor of the Early Zhao લ᪅ dynasty. Shi Le was first a general under Liu Yao. Liu Yao was Shi Le’s greatest enemy. Having defeated him, Shi Le ascended to his emperorship. 40 The Chinese word mayou ຑ༉ may mean “hemp oil” as well, but in the Buddhist context, it seems to correspond with Skt. taila, meaning “sesame oil.” Sano adopts this rendering; see also the translation of the Biography of Fotucheng from the Biographies of Eminent Monks by Arthur Wright, art. cit., p. 337, n. 3, 10 ࿦ɹɹจ hands and rubbed them. He burnt [the incense of] sandal-wood and intoned a charm. After some time, he raised his hands and showed them to the child. His palms were shining in a strange way. Cheng asked [the child]: “Do you see anything?” [The child] replied: “I see only an officer; he is tall and big and has a clear complexion.41 [He has peculiar looks.]42 His elbows are bound by a red cord.” Cheng said: “That is Liu Yao!” That year, [Shi Le] could indeed capture alive [Liu] Yao.43 The same episode is narrated in very similar terms in the Shiliuguo chunqiu े࿡ᅳय़ळ (before 525) and the Jinshu Ꮾॻ (648).44 In the Gaoseng zhuan ߴૐၚ (519), the story of the capture of Liu Yao is related, but without the child medium. Among all these sources, the Youminglu is the earliest one.45 The difference between the version of the Youminglu, Shiliuguo chunqiu and Jinshu, on the one hand, and that of the Gaoseng zhuan on the other hand, is interesting. As has been noted (see above, p. 9), the Gaoseng zhuan contains the most detailed and longest biography of Fotucheng. There are three instances where the special magical ability of the monk is referred to or narrated. First, in the introductory part of the biography, it is said:46 [Fotucheng] excelled in the recitation of divine spells (shenzhou ਆढ). He was able to make demonic deities serve him (yishi guiwu ໾࢖َ෺). Mixing sesame oil with rouge (yanzhi ᢎࢷ, Skt. kusunbha?)47 and smearing his palms with it, he could see things of one thousand li ཬ away as if they were just before him, and he could also show them to people who had been purified themselves.48 He could also listen to the sounds of bells and tell [things] without any failures. where he refers to Laufer, Sino-Iranica [Field Museum of Natural History. Anthropological ser. vol. 15. no. 3], (Chicago, 1919), p. 289-296. 41 According to Vovin et al., p. 128, Liu Yao was an albino. 42 Sano, “Rikuchō Sōryo Koji Tankyū,” p. 33b and Id., Chūgoku Koten Shōsetsu Sen தᅳ‫ݹ‬యখઆબ [Anthology of Old Tale Literature of China], vol. 2, Rikuchō ࿡ே, vol. 1, Tōkyō, Meiji shoin ໌࣏ॻӃ, 2006, p. 406 adds here to the text: “༗ҟ๬.” 43 ੴᯮ໰ဠᅷ੅ɻཱུ༵ՄᎧஹՄ‫ݟ‬ෆɻ੅ྩಐࢠᴡࣣ೔ɻऔຑ༉ঠத‫ݚ‬೭ɻᗔᏘஇࣕढɻ༗ࠒᎯखɻ޲ಐ ࢠɻঠ಺ឝવ༗ҟɻ੅໰༗ॴ‫ݟ‬ෆɻᐌɻ།‫ݟ‬Ұ‫܉‬ਓ௕େന఩ɻʤ༗ҟ๬ɺ ʥҎगើറଖගɻ੅ᐌɻࠑଈ༵໵ɻ ଖ೥ՌੜᎧ༵ (quoted in the Taiping yulan ଠฏ‫ޚ‬ཡ [ed. Siku quanshu ࢛‫ݿ‬શॻ, Wenyuange จ෵ֳ], juan 370, 5a, corresponding to the edition of the Youminglu by Luxun’s ࿋ਝ Gu xiaoshuo gouchen ‫ݹ‬খઆᭉ௜, shangce ্ၽ, Hong Kong, Xinyi chubanshe ৽᥁ग़൛ࣾ, 1970, p. 264, tale number 89). See also the Japanese translation by Sano, “Rikuchō Sōryo Koji Tankyū,” p. 33b; Id., “Chūgoku no bukkyō-sha to yogen, shinshi,” p. 208b-29a; Id., Chūgoku Koten Shōsetsu Sen, vol. 2, Rikuchō, vol. 1, p. 405-407. 44 Jinshu Ꮾॻ, ed. Zhonghua shuju, 1974, juan 95, p. 2484: “‫߈༵ࣗٴ‬བཅɺᯮሡ‫ٹ‬೭ɺଖᠧԼᄎᨠҎҝෆ ՄɻᯮҎ๚੅ɺ੅ᐌɿʮ૬ྠླԻӠɿʰलࢧସ戾Ԭɺ๻୩Ⴗಝᙛɻʱࠑᠨ‫ޠ‬໵ɻलࢧɺ‫܉‬໵ɻସ戾Ԭɺग़໵ɻ ๻୩ɺཱུ༵‫މ‬Ґ໵ɻႷಝᙛɺଊ໵ɻࠑ‫܉ݴ‬ग़ଊಘ༵໵ɻ ʯຢྩҰಐࢠܿᜊࣣ೔ɺऔຑ༉߹胭ࢷɺ᪺ࣗ‫ݚ‬ԙঠ தɺᎯखࣔಐࢠɺឝવ༗ًɻಐࢠ‫ڻ‬ᐌɿ ʮ༗‫܉‬അਙऺɺ‫ݟ‬Ұਓ௕େന晳ɺҎगើറଖගɻ ʯ੅ᐌɿ ʮࠑଈ༵໵ɻ ʯ ᯮਙ悅ɺ਱ෝབ‫༵ڑ‬ɺੜᎧ೭.” —See the text of the Shiliuguo chunqiu in n. 53 below. 45 The postface of the Gaoseng zhuan explicitly mentions the Youminglu as one of its sources. See T. L 2059 xiv 418b28-29; see also Arthur Wright, art. cit., p. 345, n. 31. 46 T. L 2059 ix 383b21-24: ળᨙਆढɻೳ໾࢖َ෺ɻҎຑ༉ᯑ胭ʤ胭ࢷʹԏࢷʻࡾʼ, ᣊփʻ‫ٶ‬ʼʥࢷృঠɻ ઍཬ֎ࣄօప‫ݟ‬ঠத೗ሣ໘ᖼɻຠೳྩܿᜊऀ‫ݟ‬ɻຢᡒླԻҎ‫ࣄݴ‬ɻແෆ֍ᱛɻCf. the translation by Arthur Wright, p. 337-338. See also Japanese translation, p. 298. 47 See Wright’s translation, p. 337, n. 4, where he refers to Lauffer, Sino-Iranica, p. 324-328. 48 Wright’s translation, p. 338, n. 5, gives interesting accounts on this magical practice. According to Qian Daxin’s ᭝େ昕 Nianershi kaoyi ೓ೋ࢙Ꮔҟ, juan 10, ad Jinshu (juan 95, p. 2484), Fotucheng’s magical operation would be the origin of the “art of round light (yuanguang zhi shu ᅵޫ೭ज़) of the present-day custom” 11 An Early Example of Svasthāveśa Ritual (I YANAGA Nobumi) The second instance is the one that narrates the capture of Liu Yao by the army of Shi Le. The passage is rather long. Shi Le and Liu Yao are about to undertake the final battle in 328: Liu Yao and his party were in Loyang, and Shi Le’s army attacked that city. Shi Le wanted to know the battle’s tide and asked Fotucheng about it. The latter replied:49 [. . .] “I heard the bells attached to the wheel [on the top of] the stūpa (xianglun ૬ ྠ).50 It said ‘xiu zhi ti li gang pu gu qu tu dang’ लࢧସ໭Ԭ๻୩Ⴗಝᙛ. These are words in the language of Jie ᠨ. ‘Xiu zhi’ means ‘army’; ‘ti li gang’ means ‘going out’; ‘pu gu’ designates Liu Yao’s rank in his ethnic group [bok kok]; ‘qu tu dang’ means ‘to capture.’ [All this] means ‘Armies went out and will catch Liu Yao.”’51 At that time, Xu Guang ঃޫ, [an official under Shi Le,] heard Fotucheng’s words and strongly recommended [Shi Le] to relocate the army in preparation for battle. [Shi Le decided] to leave his eldest son Shi Hong ੴ߂ to stay in the province of Xiangguo ᧜ᅳ (the present-day Xingtai 邢୆ in the department of Hebei Տ๺ল) with Cheng to protect it, and to go to lead himself his infantry and cavalry in the direction of Loyang [the location of Liu Yao’s army]. As soon as the battle had begun, Yao’s army was routed, and Yao’s horse sank in the water. Shi Kan ੴ‫[ ת‬a general of Shi Le’s army who became his adopted son] captured him and sent him to Le’s place. At that time, Cheng [who was in Xiangguo] smeared his palms with something (yi wu tu zhang Ҏ෺ృঠ), and examined them: he saw there many people among whom one was bound, with a red cord tightened around his neck. He informed Hong about [this sign]. It was at that very time that Yao was captured. The third case is about a disciple of Fotucheng. It is narrated:52 (jin suchuan ࠓଏၚ) (the text is available online: <https://ctext.org/library.pl?if=en\&file= 21649\&page=64>, last accessed on Feb. 25, 2018). On this magical “art of round light,” Wright quotes also an anecdote from the Qingbai leichao ਗ਼ඕྨᭁ (Shanghai, Commercial Press, 1917, 1920), compiled by Xu Ke ঃՑ (1869-1928), 33.60, where is reported, among other stories on the magic divination of yuanguang, a story about a magician who practiced “the magic art of Fotucheng” (ဠᅷ੅ज़) in the later nineteenth century (the text is available online: <http://www.guoxuedashi.com/a/2772r/124620j.html>, last accessed on February 24, 2018). On another important reference given by Wright in this note, see below, Appendix 1. 49 T. 2059 ix 384b5-14: ᯮҎ๚੅ɻ੅ᐌɻ૬ྠླԻӠɻलࢧସ໭Ԭ๻୩Ⴗಝᙛɻࠑᠨ‫ޠ‬໵ɻलࢧ‫܉‬໵ɻସ ໭Ԭग़໵ɻ๻୩ཱུ༵‫މ‬Ґ໵ɻႷಝᙛଊ໵ɻࠑ‫܉ݴ‬ग़ଊಘ༵໵ɻ࣌ঃޫฉ੅ࠑࢫɻۤჅᯮߦɻᯮ᫱ཹ௕ࢠੴ ߂ɻ‫੅ڞ‬Ҏ᭪᧜ᅳɻࣗ཰த‫܉‬าٍɻ௚ࢦབ৓ɻၷਞ᠇ަɻ༵‫܉‬େ௵ɻ༵അᔒਫதɻੴ‫ת‬ੜᎧ೭ૹᯮɻ੅࣌ Ҏ෺ృঠɻ᧺೭‫ݟ‬༗େऺɻऺதറҰਓɻगើ໿߲ɻଖ࣌ҼҎࠂ߂ɻᙛ࣐೭࣌ਖ਼ੜᎧ༵໵. Cf. Arthur Wright’s translation, p. 344; Japanese translation, p. 306-307. 50 On the meaning of the word xianglun, see Nakamura Hajime, Bukkyō-go Daijiten ဠ‫ޠڭ‬େ᫥య, p. 870a-b. Alexander Vovin et al., art. cit., p. 129, explains that ૬ྠླ xiāng lún líng refers to Buddhist ritual bells that have their handles shaped like a pagoda spire (૬ྠ xiāng lún pagoda spire ), see, e.g., http://www.narahaku. go.jp/collection/1407-0.html for some early specimens preserved in Japan. This explanation is not correct. A description of such a stūpa with bells can be found for example in the Luoyang qielan ji བཅՀཟ‫ه‬, T. LI 2092 i 1000a1-14; see also an image at <http://www.redleaves.jeez.jp/enr1013.html> [last accessed on February 18th, 2018]. 51 This couplet of Jie phrase, being practically the unique remaining of examples of Jie language, is the object of an important controversy about the phonetic values of characters, meaning, and the origin of the language referred to. Here, I follow the most recent reconstruction in an article signed by Alexander Vovin, Edward Vadja and Étienne de la Vaissière, quoted above, n. 37, p. 138: “*sjuwH ke” लࢧ, “army”; “th ejH lejH kaN” ସ໭Ԭ, “go out”; “bok kok” ๻୩, “[a barbarian title]” and “guo th ok taN” Ⴗಝᙛ, “catch.” The meaning of the phrase would be “Armies went out and will catch Bokkok!” The original language would be the Yeniseian (a family of languages that were spoken in the Yenisei River region of central Siberia). 52 T. 2059 ix 385b17-22: ੅ৗʤৗʹᙊʻ૙ʼʻ‫ݩ‬ʼʻ‫ٶ‬ʼʥ‫ݣ‬ఋࢠ޲੢Ҭࢢ߳ɻ‫ࠂ੅ߦط‬ᰨఋࢠᐌɻঠ 12 ࿦ɹɹจ Once, Cheng sent a disciple to the Western regions (xiyu ੢Ҭ) in order to purchase incense. After he had departed, Cheng said to his other disciples: “I see in my palm my disciple who went to buy the incense, who arrived at a place: he is attacked by a band of brigands and is on the point of dying.” He then burnt incense and made a magical vow (zhouyuan ढ‫[ )ئ‬in order to] rescue him from afar. After the disciple returned, he said: “On such and such a day of such and such a month in such and such a place I was attacked by brigands. When I was about to be killed, I suddenly smelled the fragrance of incense. The brigands for no [apparent] reason were frightened and said, ‘Rescuing troops have arrived,’ and they fled from me.” Thus, in the three cases, the Gaoseng zhuan describes the magical ability of Fotucheng as that of seeing from afar in his palms events which are invisible to other people (a kind of clairvoyance; in modern Chinese and Japanese, qianliyan / senrigan ઍཬ‫)؟‬. This was certainly the understanding of its author, Huijiao. However, for the Youminglu as well as the Shiliuguo chunqiu and the Jinshu (which adopt the Youminglu’s understanding of the ritual,)53 it is clearly an oracular power used by Fotucheng. The use of the child for the prophecy is a feature proper to the possession ritual of svasthāveśa. It is understandable that when Huijiao composed his Biographies of Eminent Monks, he could not realize the importance of this detail, because this ritual would be fully described only much later in Tantric texts. It is fortunate for us that the Youminglu and the other two texts did not omit this detail. Later Descriptions of the Oracular Possession Rituals Using Fingers in Chinese Canon Now, this description of Fotucheng’s magical ritual, as found in the passages above, closely corresponds with later descriptions of a certain type of āveśa ritual in Tantric texts. I could த‫ݟ‬ങ߳ఋࢠࡏ๭႔ॳʤॳඃ߷ʹඃ଑ʻࡾʼʻ‫ٶ‬ʼʥඃ߷ਨࢮɻҼᗑ߳ɻढ‫ئ‬ᴴ‫ޢٹ‬೭ɻఋࢠ‫ؐޙ‬Ӡɻ๭ ݄๭೔ʤʢԙʣʴ๭႔ʻࡾʼʥ๭႔ᗣ଑ॴ߷ɻਨᙛ‫ࡴݟ‬ʤࡴʹࢮʻ‫ٶ‬ʼʥɻࠌฉ߳ᔅɻ଑ແ‫ڻࣗނ‬ᐌɻ‫ٹ‬ฌ ቮࢸɻ‫غ‬೭ࣕ૸. Cf. Wright’s translation, p. 353-354; Japanese translation, p. 320. 53 In the first part of the episode of the capture of Liu Yao, these two texts agree with the Gaoseng zhuan by narrating the story of the sounds of the stūpa’s bells and their interpretation by Fotucheng, but the later part is very similar with the version of the Youminglu. Here is how that part is narrated in the Shiliuguo chungjiu: Moreover, he [Fotucheng] made a child purify himself for seven days. He took some sesame oil and mixing it with rouge, he smeared his palms with it. He raised his hands and showed them to the child. They were clearly shining. The child was surprised and said: There are many war horses and people. I see one person, tall and big, with a clear complexion. His elbows are tied with a red cord. Fotucheng said: That is Liu Yao. If a big army is sent, he will certainly be captured. Le was very pleased (ຢྩಐࢠܿᴡࣣ೔ɻऔຑ༉߹ᢎࢷɻࣗ‫ݚ‬ဋঠதɻᎯखࣔ ಐࢠɻឝવ༗ًɻಐࢠ‫ڻ‬ᐌɻ༗‫܉‬അਙऺɻ‫ݟ‬Ұਓ௕େɻന™ɻҎगើറଖගɻ੅ᐌࠑଈ༵໵ɻେ‫܉‬एग़ඞ Ꭷཱུ༵ɻᯮਙӻ). Shiliuguo chungjiu े࿡ᅳय़ळ, juan 13, 24b-25a (ed. Qinding siku quanshu ‫ێ‬ఆ࢛‫ݿ‬શॻ, Wenyuange ben จ෵ֳຊ; see <https://ctext.org/library.pl?if=en\&file=58899\&page= 146\#\%E4\%BD\%9B\%E5\%9C\%96\%E6\%BE\%84>). The text of the Jinshu is quoted above, n. 44. 13 An Early Example of Svasthāveśa Ritual (I YANAGA Nobumi) identify five examples from the Chinese Canon,54 and several references in F. Smith’s book. Here, I translate the Chinese texts in chronological order. The first is a passage from the 55 Subāhu-paripr.cchā translated by Śubhakarasim . ha in 726: Moreover, ô Youth Subāhu, if the mantrin (niansong ren ೦ᨙਓ) [wants] Prasenā (Bosina ുࢲಹ)56 to descend and ask her a question, he must follow the appropriate method of invocation (rufa qingzhao ೗๏੥ঌ). [Prasenā descends on media objects] such as the fingers, copper mirrors, pure water, sword-blades, flames of a lamp, a jewel, a statue of [the Bodhisattva] Ākāśagarbha,57 youths, pearls, or flints (? huojushi Րᡉੴ; literally “stones of accumulated fire”). Prasenā, having been evoked, descends and shall talk herself [everything that happens] on the heaven as well as in the human world; she shall narrate in detail everything of the past, present and future, and things transcending the Three Times [of the past, present and future], good and bad things. If the ritual has missing things, such as too many syllables or too few syllables in the recited mantra, or the non-recitation of the sūtra, or not having the correct faith or the non-execution of the worship, or the impurity of the ground, or the bad weather, or [the fact that] the youth is too tall or too short; if there are such insufficiencies, Prasenā shall not descend. If [the practitioner] wants to make her descend, he must first recite her mantra. Having succeeded in the racitation, he must fast either the eighth, fourteenth, or fifteenth day of the White [half of the] month. Then he must smear the ground with 54 The second one of these examples was given to me by a private email of Oda Etsuyo of March 8th, 2018; and another one, the fifth, was identified by Dr. Rolf Giebel; see below, n. 68 and Appendix 2. 55 Supohu tongzi qingwen jing ોം‫ݺ‬ಐࢠ੥໰ៃ, T. XVIII 895 728a16-b9: “෮࣍ોം‫ݺ‬ಐࢠɻए೦ᨙਓ໰ Լുࢲಹऀɻጯᙛʤ೗ʴʢੋʣʻࡾʼʻ‫ٶ‬ʼʻߕʼʥ೗๏੥ঌɻॴҦखࢦ҃ಔ‫ڸ‬ɻ‫ٴ‬ਗ਼ਫԣ౛౯ԍሞ౳ɻ‫ڏ‬ ۭଚ૾ಐࢠᚸचՐᡉੴ౳ɻԙ೗ੋ႔ɻുࢲಹԼऀɻ੥ঌိቮɻᙛଈʤࣗʹಘʻ‫ٶ‬ʼʥࣗઆఱ্ਓؒɻ‫ٴ‬ա‫ڈ‬ ະိ‫ࡏݱ‬ɻ௒ӽࡾੈળዱ౳ࣄɻҰҰ۩આɻ๏ए༗ᮨɻ࣋ᚸ‫ࣈݴ‬Ꮠ҃༗Ճ‫ݮ‬ɻ҃ෆៃᨙɻෆ۩ਖ਼৴ຠෆ‫ڙ‬ཆɻ ԙෆᕃ஍ఱෆᛂ໌ɻಐࢠ਎෼҃賸҃গɻ༗ࢩա౳ࢲಹෆԼɻएཉ੥ʤ ʤԼʥ−ʻࡾʼʻ‫ٶ‬ʼʻߕʼʥԼɻॳጯ ࣋ᨙࢲಹᚸ‫ݴ‬ɻ࣋ᨙޭඟɻଈԙന݄ീ೔҃े࢛೔҃े‫ޒ‬೔ɻੋ೔ෆ৯ɻҎᛏຎృ஍೗‫ڇ‬ൽ‫ܗ‬ɻଈሡಐࢠਗ਼ ᕃᖑཋɻஶ৽നҥ࠱ԙଖ্ɻҎՖ߳౳ࣕᗣ‫ڙ‬ཆɻࣗຠԙ಺໘޲ʤଖʹਖ਼ʻࡾʼ, ‫ٻ‬ʻ‫ٶ‬ʼʥଖ౦ɻࣕ࠱‫૲כ‬ɻ ຢएཉྩ൴‫ڸ‬த૬๴‫ऀݱ‬ɻʤଇʹ૬ʻࡾʼʻߕʼʥଇઌऔଖ‫ڸ‬ɻҎᑓߦംཏ໳‫ݺ‬ຎ೭փɻᎉ‫ྩڸ‬ᕃɻࣣ҃ീ ว೫ࢸेวɻஔԙჭᣡཏ্ɻ‫ڼ‬ஶ‫ڸ‬தɻଈ‫ݱ‬ग़ੈؒࣄɻຢԙԣ౛த‫ࣄ؃‬๏ऀɻຠಉ೗‫ڸ‬ɻएཉԙखࢦ໘্‫؃‬ ٢‫ऀڟ‬ɻઌҎࢵᛝਫਗ਼ᕃଖࢦɻ‫ޙ‬Ҏ߳༉ృ೭ɻଈ‫ॾݱ‬٢‫ࣄڟ‬ɻएཉԙਫத‫ऀ؃‬ɻᕃࠉଖਫஔԙළத҃ᙈதɻ વ‫ݣޙ‬Ұಐࢠԙத‫؃‬೭ɻଈօ‫ݟ‬Ұ੾٢‫[ ڟ‬. . . ]” —Corresponding with the Song translation by Dharmadeva: T. XVIII 896 754b14-c12. — The Tibetan translation of this passage of the Subāhu-paripr.cchā (containing many elements not found in the Chinese translations) is summarized in Japanese by Ōtusuka Nobuo େ௩৳෉, Indo Shoki-mikkyo Seiritsu-katei no Kenkyū Πϯυॳ‫ڭີظ‬੒ཱաఔͷ‫[ ڀݚ‬Study on the Formation Process of the Early Esotericism in India], Tōkyō, Shunjū-sha य़ळࣾ, 2013, p. 880-882 (from sDe dge, no. 805, the ’Phags pa dpuṅ bzaṅ gis źus pa źes bya ba’i rgyud, 131a3-b3, 121b5-132b3). See also Giacomella Orofino, “Divination with Mirrors. Observations on a Simile Found in the Kālacakra literature,” in Per Kværne, ed., Tibetan Studies, Oslo, 1994, vol. 2, p. 612-628 (quoted by Strickmann, Mantras et mandarins, p. 460, n. 16), especially p. 614-615. Strickmann, Ibid., p. 222-224, translates this passage from the Chinese. 56 Prasenā (or Prasena; also Pasina or Pasinā, etc. in Middle Indian) seems to designate a special deity who . . responds to the questions asked by the practitioner in an āveśa session. The very complicated etymology of this name was elucidated by Frederick Smith, op. cit., p. 421-427; one possible origin is Skt. praśna, meaning “question.” 57 The original Chinese has “Xukongzun xiang” ‫ۭڏ‬ଚ૾ (the Song translation does not have any corresponding word). Strickmann, Mantras et mandarins, p. 460, n. 18, understands it as “une statue creuse,” without a determined identity. 14 ࿦ɹɹจ cow dung in the shape of a cow hide; he must purify the youth by bathing him, and dress him in a new white garment, and make him sit down on there [the ground smeared with the cow dung]. He must offer flowers and incense [to the deity (or the youth)?]. He sits down himself inside the [smeared ground], on the thatch (maocao ‫૲כ‬, Skt. kuśa) seat, with his face toward the east. If he wants to make her appear in the mirror (ruo yu lingbi jingzhong xiangmao xian zhe एཉྩ൴‫ڸ‬த૬๴‫)ऀݱ‬, he must first take that mirror. He shall wipe its whole surface seven or eight times, up to ten times, with the ash of the homa ritual executed by a brahman of pure behavior in order to purify it. He shall put it on the man.d.ala, with its surface upward (? yang zhu jing ‫ڼ‬ஶ‫)ڸ‬. Then there shall appear things transcending the world. If [the practitioner uses] the method of seeing things in a sword-blade, he shall do what was prescribed for the mirror. Or if he wants to see the good or bad luck on the surface of [his] finger, first, he shall purify it with the water of amethyst (? zikuang shui ࢵ ᛝਫ), then smear it with perfumed oil (yi xiangyou tu zhi Ҏ߳༉ృ೭). Then good or bad lucks shall appear. If he wants to look in the water, he shall put purified water inside a bottle or a jar, then dispatch a youth to make him see in it. He shall see there all the good and bad lucks. [. . .]58 The text continues further to give long prescriptions about the ritual procedure, but there is no more mention of the finger as a medium in this passage. The use of finger smeared with oil as a medium of oracular apparition is explicitly stated in this passage, although it is not clear if it is the youth or the practitioner himself who is supposed to see it.59 The second text that discusses the ritual is dedicated to Cun.d.ı̄ [or Cundı̄] (Zhunti ।ఏ), a female deity whose name’s original meaning is unknown (perhaps a form of Can.d.ı̄, one of the numerous names of Durgā?). In Buddhist esotericism, she is thought to be the “mother 60 of seven million buddhas.” Her main mantra is “Om . cale cule cunde svāhā.” One of the ritual manuals dedicated to this deity, translated by Amoghavajra between 746 and 771, is the Qijuzhi fomu suoshuo Zhunti tuoluoni jing ࣣ۞ᡠဠ฼ॴઆ।ఏଫཏೌៃ.61 It opens with a long enumeration of various magical rituals.62 Many of them are āveśa rituals; in one of them, the practitioner’s thumb is smeared with oil for the portending of future events.63 58 Strickmann, Mantras et mandarins, p. 461, n. 20, gives, besides a reference to the translation by Arthur Wright on the biography of Fotucheng (see above, n. 35), many other references to works on similar methods of apparitional oracles practiced in different cultures, on an oiled finger or palm, in the flame of a lamp, in a magical mirror, etc. 59 Strickmann translates so that it is the youth who is supposed to see the apparitions; but the text itself seems without precision on this point. 60 Mochizuki bukkyō daijiten ๬݄ဠ‫ڭ‬େ᫥య, III, p. 2526a-2527c; Mikkyō daijiten ີ‫ڭ‬େ᫥య, p. 1105c-1107a; see also Japanese and English Wikipedia articles on this deity: <https://ja.wikipedia. org/wiki/\%E5\%87\%86\%E8\%83\%9D\%E8\%A6\%B3\%E9\%9F\%B3> and <https://en. wikipedia.org/wiki/Cundi_(Buddhism)> [last accessed on March 10, 2018]. 61 T. XX 1076. 62 On these rituals and other related texts, see Ōtsuka Nobuo, op. cit., p. 753-755. 63 T. XX 1076 179a28-b24: ए༗म࣋ࠑଫཏೌɻᙛ஌ະိ੒ब႔ॴɻ༗೉ແ೉ɻࣩ஍ᬌ࣬ɻጯԙҰᕃࣨɻ ҎᛏຎҔృҰখஃɻᬋྗ‫ڙ‬ཆɻҎ݁քᚸ‫ํे݁ݴ‬քɻҎ߳ਫҰළஔࡏஃதɻҰ೦ᨙɻଖළಈ᫚ɻᙛ஌ॴᗣ 15 An Early Example of Svasthāveśa Ritual (I YANAGA Nobumi) If one uses this dhāran.ı̄64 [in a ritual practice], one is able to know its [i.e. the ritual’s] future success (siddhi), if there will be difficulties or not, and if the success will be quick or slow. [For this purpose,] build a small alter in a pure room with the [ground] smeared with cow dung. Make offerings according to one’s abilities. With the mantra for creating a boundary around the ritual area (jiejie zhenyan ݁քᚸ‫)ݴ‬, delimit a ritual area in the ten directions. Put in the center of the alter a jar full of perfumed water. Recite once [the dhāran.ı̄]. If the jar moves (dongzhuan ಈ᫚), that means that the wanted purpose [of the ritual] shall be realized [that is, there will be siddhi]. If it does not move, that means it shall not be realized. There is another method: Take a bowl made of tile. Smear it with perfume and put it on the alter. Recite [the dhāran.ı̄] with concentration. If the bowl moves, then the wanted thing shall be realized; if it does not move, then it shall not be realized. There is another method: If one wants to know the future, build a small alter with [cow dung] smeared on it. Order a youth of good looks (juxiang fude tongzi ۩૬ ෱ಙಐࢠ) to purify himself and wear a new pure garment. With the mantra of [the mother of] the seven million (qijudi zhenyan ࣣ۞ᡠᚸ‫ݴ‬, Skt. saptakot.i mantra?) [buddhas], sacralize and empower the youth’s hand by smearing it with perfume; sacralize and empower flowers [with the mantra recited] seven times and put them in the youth’s hand; then make him stand on the alter with his face covered. Take another flower and recite the mantra. Sacralize and empower it once and strike [once] the back of the youth’s hand with it. Continue this with twenty-one [flowers]. Then ask the youth of the [future] good or bad events. The youth shall tell everything. There is another method: Take a clear mirror and put it on the alter. First, sacralize and empower flowers by reciting the mantra. When it has been done one hundred and eight times, then recite again the mantra. [Recite] once and strike once the surface of the mirror. On the mirror’s surface shall appear letters, which shall tell [all] the good or bad events. There is another method: If one wants to know in advance if the [desired] thing is good or bad and if it will be a success or not, take some perfumed oil of the great flowered jasmine (sumona hua ોຎಹՖ, Skt. sumanā). Recite the mantra, sacralize and empower it one hundred and eight times. Then smear the ball of one’s thumb on the right hand with this oil. Recite the mantra so that your voice never stops. Make ॴ‫ࣄٻ‬੒बɻएෆಈ᫚ଖࣄෆ੒ɻຢ๏ɻऔҰ‫נ‬࿶ɻҎ߳ృஔԙஃதɻሢ৺೦ᨙɻ࿶ए᫚ಈࣄଈ੒बɻएෆ ಈࣄଈෆ੒ɻຢ๏ɻཉ஌ະိ೭ࣄɻઌృҰখஃྩҰ۩૬෱ಙಐࢠɻᖑཋਗ਼ܿɻஶ৽ᕃҥ෰ɻҎࣣ۞ᡠᚸ‫ݴ‬ɻ Ճ࣋߳ృಐࢠखɻຢՃ࣋ՖࣣวɻஔಐࢠखதɻྩಐࢠԈ໘ཱԙஃதɻຢऔผՖᨙᚸ‫ݴ‬ɻՃ࣋ҰวҰଧಐࢠ खഎɻ೫ࢸೋेҰຕɻଈ໰ಐࢠળዱ೭ࣄɻಐࢠօઆɻຢ๏ɻऔҰ໌‫ڸ‬ஔԙஃதɻઌᨙᚸ‫ݴ‬ɻՃ࣋ՖҰඦീ วቮɻવ‫ޙ‬ຢᨙᚸ‫ݴ‬ɻҰวҰᎸଧ‫ڸ‬໘ɻԙ‫ڸ‬໘্ଈ༗จࣈ‫ݱ‬ɻઆળዱࣄɻຢ๏ɻཉ஌ࣄળෆળ੒बෆ੒बɻ औોຎಹՖ߳༉ɻᨙᚸ‫ݴ‬Ճ࣋Ұඦീวɻృӈखେ฼ࢦ໘ɻᨙᚸ‫ݴ‬ᡎෆᏗઈɻྩಐࢠ᧺ࢦ্ɻ‫ॾݱ‬ဠ฾ࡵ‫ܗ‬ ૾ɻ҃‫ݱ‬จࣈɻ۩આળዱɻຢ๏ɻएਓ‫ັَױ‬පɻऔ༶༄ࢬ҃‫૲כ‬ɻᨙᚸ‫ݴ‬፫‫ऀױ‬਎ɻଈಘআ༈ɻຢ๏ɻए ‫ױ‬ॏපऀɻᨙᚸ‫ݴ‬Ұඦീวɻ᜝൴ਓ໊ɻҎ‫ڇ‬ೕ‫ޢ‬ຎଈࠩɻຢ๏ɻएሇࢠ໷ᄹɻྩಐঁӈ᎔ઢɻᨙᚸ‫ݴ‬Ճ࣋ɻ ݁ೋेҰ݁‫ܨ‬ԙܱԼɻሇࢠଈෆ໷ᄹ. —It is Oda Etsuyo who drew my attention to this text. 64 That is, certainly, the mantra “Om cale cule cunde svāhā.” . 16 ࿦ɹɹจ the youth look at the finger’s surface. There shall appear images of the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas. Or there shall appear letters, which shall tell in detail the good or bad [omens]. There is another method: If there is a sick person possessed by a demon (guimei َ ັ), take a willow branch or a [bunch of] thatch; brush the sick person’s body with it while reciting the mantra. He shall be healed. There is another method: If there is a seriously ill person, recite the mantra one hundred and eight times; recite the person’s name and put the cow milk in the homa [sacrifice fire]. He shall be healed. There is yet another method: If there is a baby who cries in the night, make a girl twine in the right direction a string; recite the mantra and sacralize and empower it. Make twenty-one knots in the string and tie it around the [baby’s?] neck. The baby shall no longer cry in the night. [ . . . ] Similar rituals follow. Here it is clearly stated that it is the youth who is supposed to look at the signs appearing on the ball of the practitioner’s thumb. Next in the chronology is a translation attributed to the Indian master Prajñā (ca. 734 ca. 810) called the Shouhu guojie zhu tuoluoni jing क‫ޢ‬ᅳքओଫཏೌៃ {Dhāran.ı̄ sūtra of the Protection of the State Master]. Dated by Takagi Shingen ߴ໦訷‫ ݩ‬to 804,65 it is in fact a compilation by Prajñā partially based on earlier texts.66 In chapter nine, entitled “Merits and Rituals of Dhāran.ı̄” (Tuoluoni gongde guiyi pin ଫཏೌޭಙ‫ّي‬඼), one section is devoted to the ritual of āveśa. It contains a long dhāran.ı̄ of forty-one Sanskrit words in transliteration and also two other Sanskrit words in transliteration (which certainly designate substances for offering). These were restored into Sanskrit thanks to Dr. Rolf Giebel (see infra n. 68-76). —It is Vajrapān.i who teaches this ritual:67 65 Takagi Shingen, Shugo kokkai-shu darani-kyō क‫ޢ‬ᅳքओଫཏೌៃ, Shin kokuyaku daizōkyō Mikkyō-bu ৽ᅳᩄେ᤽ៃɹີ‫ڭ‬෦, vol. 3 (Tōkyō, Daizō shuppan େ᤽ग़൛, 2000), p. 21. Yoritomi Motohiro ↳෋ຊ޺, Chūgoku Mikkyō no Kenkyū தᅳີ‫ڭ‬ͷ‫ڀݚ‬, Tōkyō, Daitō shuppansha େ౦ग़൛ࣾ, 1979, p. 27-30, dates it to 803. 66 Takagi, op. cit., p. 31-47; Yoritomi, ibid., p. 54-62. 67 Shouhu guojie zhu tuoluoni jing क‫ޢ‬ᅳքओଫཏೌៃ, T. XIX 997 569a21-b26: एཉઌ஌ળዱ٢‫ڟ‬ఆෆఆ ऀɻጯᙛᨙࠑଫཏೌᐌɻ Ұ ೋ߹ ೋ߹ ೋ ࡾ ೋ߹ ೋ߹Ҿ ࢛ ‫ޒ‬ ೋ߹ ೆᨸ ɹ囉ዐᐋ ɹዐ囉 ໹໵ ɹೆᨸ ɹ࢝ፌ ፣嚩ં囉 ᪍ᐋӪ ɹຎլ ᥂‫ࠥޤ‬ ࡄಹു ଷӪฏ࿡ɹ ᠷᱸࣣ ɹ໪ ௾໵൓ീ ɹു囉‫ࠥޤ‬ೋ߹ ᣕ‫ ۝‬ɹᇟɹᣕेɹ ໪ ௾໵൓ेҰ ɹࡾᔒທ ௾໵൓ ᧲ेೋ ɹ唵ेࡾ ೋ߹ ɹѨຶ㗚 ௿ े࢛ ɹዐ儞໵ೋ߹ ଞे‫ޒ‬ɹ ፌ抳ɹፌ抳े࿡ ɹҹ抳ɹᔠ抳ेࣣ ɹૐᠨ ຎेീ ɹᔠ抳े‫ ۝‬ɹѨඌ ೋे ೋ߹ ೋेҰ ೋेೋ ೋ߹ೋेࡾ ೋे࢛ ೋे‫ޒ‬ ᇋɹ‫ڲ‬೟ ɹു囉 ඌᇋ‫ڲ‬೟ ɹѨࣩᔠ ɹѨ᳼ᘧᄖ ჭ஡ທ ɹുઔ౒ ɹಹ囉ՠ ೋे࿡ ಹທՠೋेࣣɹ 儞ඌಹೋेീ ɹᏖᤃᖮೋे‫ ۝‬ɹѨดɹ᧲ࡾे ɹຎ౒ࢁࡾेҰ ɹᏖᤃೖ፧熠൓ ຾Ꮦᤃࡾेೋɹ ᪍ 囉ೋ߹ 嚩ೖ ଟ໵᧲ࡾेࡾɹ‫ܥ‬ಹɹ紇ທೋ߹ ᄸࡾे࢛ ɹӪೖ ሜ紇ທೋ߹ ᄸࡾे‫ ޒ‬ɹӪೖ ዐ囉ೋ߹ࡾे࿡ɹ ࣩଞൺᄸࡾेࣣ ɹዐࡾेീ ɹࡵ൨ࡾे‫ ۝‬ɹೀທᖮೋ߹ ໵࢛े ɹᣞ嚩ೋ߹Ҿ լ࢛ेҰҾ ࣍આ࣋೦‫ّي‬ɻۚ߶ѨᮦསઌҎᛏຎҔృ੒ํஃɻҎೕཙ຤࡞ʤ ʤ࡞ʥ−ʻ໌ʼʻߕʼʥ儞໵߹ Ѩᒜଟɻ֤ ੝ᕝ࿸ஔஃ࢛࢛֯֯ɻஔ౯ɻવ‫ࢄޙ‬Ֆᗑ҆ʤࣩʹଉʻ໌ʼ*ʥࣩ߳ɻ҃ԙႯத҃‫҃ڸ‬ᗨɻ҃ࢦ҃ঠ҃౯҃ဠ ૾ɻ҃ਫਫ਼҃ஃ҃ླྀཨதɻ᜝৺ॴཉ‫ݟ‬ଖળዱɻᙛҎಐஉ҃༗ಐঁɻ਎ແᚄࠟਗ਼ᕃແաɻᖑཋ਎ᱪஶʤղʹ ઱ʻߕʼʥղനҥɻᨙࠑᚸ‫༻ݴ‬Ճ࣋೭ɻզᙛࢸ൴ࣗ‫ݱ‬ଖ਎ɻᬋଖॴ໰ࡾੈ೭ࣄɻࣩօ᫦આɻᬋ৺ٙ࿭ࣩօ ᏗআɻएᗣᚖᚉَັॴஶɻᙛҎ༶ࢬ‫ٴ‬ੴᒙࢬɻҎ্ᚸ‫ݴ‬Ճࣣ࣋วɻᗑ҆ *ࣩ߳ɻԙ஍ᙘ൴َਆ‫૾ܗ‬ɻྩલ 17 An Early Example of Svasthāveśa Ritual (I YANAGA Nobumi) If one wants to know in advance the [future] good and bad lucks either determined or undetermined (ding buding ఆෆఆ), one must recite the following dhāran.ı̄:68 namo ratnatrayāya namaś can.d.avajrapān.aye mahāyaks.asenāpataye imām . vidyā[m .] pra[va]ks.āmi69 sā me vidyā samr.dhyatu om amr te phat tad yathā can d i can d i in . . . .. . . . d.i min.d.i sam krāma min d i āviśa gaud i praviśa gaud i asmin aṅgus t haman d ale paśyantu . .. . . .. . . 71 dārakadārikā div[ye]na caks.us.ā apetu70 mānus.am caks.u pravar. caks.u divyam . tayatu kena hr.tam . yasya hr.tam . yatra sthāpitam . tam . sarvam . darśaya svāhā. Tentative English Translation:72 Homage to the Three Jewels! Homage to Violent Vajrapān.i, great general of yaks.as! I shall proclaim this spell. May the spell succeed for me! Om . , O immortal one, phat.! To wit: O Can.d.ı̄, Can.d.ı̄, In.d.ı̄, Min.d.ı̄! Appear, Min.d.ı̄! Enter, Gaud.ı̄!73 Enter, Gaud.ı̄, into this thumb pad!74 May the boys and girls see with divine vision! May human vision go away and divine vision come forth! [In the case of a missing article,] make them see everything—by whom it was taken, for whom it was taken, and where it is kept.75 All hail! Next, I [guhyapati Vajrapān.i] shall teach the ritual for the recitation (chinian ࣋೦, Skt. jāpa?): the vajrācārya [i.e. the practitioner] must first smear the cow dung and construct a rectangular alter (fangtan ํஃ). With coagulated milk (rulao ೕཙ, Skt. dadhi), an intoxicating drink, (moniye ຤儞໵, Skt. madya) and blood (aleduo Ѩ ᒜଟ, Skt. rakta),76 he must make [a substance for offering]. On the four corners ಐࢠࣥ༶ࢬ౳ɻฬ൴ᅷᙘَਆ‫ڳ૾ܗ‬എ౳႔ɻ࣌൴පਓ೗Ꭺଖ਎ɻᕬ‫ڣ‬ᄹ‫ٽ‬ୟ಄‫ٹٻ‬ɻኺࠓӬ‫ڈ‬ෆ‫ိߋ׶‬ɻ ࣌Ѩᮦསྩَཱ੤ɻए࠶ိऀ‫ئ‬զᚼሱ૕໓ແᰨɻَཱ੤‫ߋޙ‬ෆ࠶ိɻපऀฏ෮ɻඇ།‫ڈ‬පछछউࣄɻࠑ័ ࣋ྗօಘ᜝৺੒बॴ࡞. 68 This dhāranı̄ was restored by Dr. Rolf Giebel, to whom I express my deep gratitude. Dr. Giebel also made . me aware of the reference to the Xifang tuoluo nicang zhong jingangzu Amiliduo Junzhali fa ੢ํଫཏೌ᤽தۚ ߶଒Ѩຶທଟ‫܉‬吒ར๏, T. XXI 1212 60c8-18, where is found a very similar dhāran.ı̄ and a ritual which seems almost identical with this one. See below, Appendix 2. 69 For pravaksyāmi, cf. Edgerton, Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar, ːː2.23, 31.29. [Note by Rolf Giebel.] . 70 For apaitu, cf. Edgerton, Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar, ː3.67. [Note by Rolf Giebel.] 71 This reading is uncertain but is based on the same dhāranı̄ in T. 1212 (and is supported by the Bower . Manuscript, which includes the phrase apetu mānus.am . caks.u divyam . caks.u pravartatu). [Note by Rolf Giebel.] 72 Translation by Dr. Giebel. 73 “Candı̄” (from “canda”, violent, cruel), is a name of Durgā, the consort of Śiva. Monier-William’s Sanskrit.. .. English Dictionary does not record the names “In.d.ı̄” and “Min.d.ı̄”; they are probably names associated with Can.d.ı̄. “Gaud.ı̄” is the feminine form of “gaud.a,” designating a wine extracted from molasses; it is considered as an intoxicating liquor. Gaud.a is also a region name of Bengal, and “gaud.ī” may also mean a women from this region. Here, it may to be the name of a minor female deity associated with Durgā. 74 Giebel renders the Sanskrit “aṅgusthamandala” by “thumb pad.” .. .. 75 This mention of the “missing article” can be explained by the ritual described in T. 1212. See below, p. 30 and n. 117 76 The two transliterated words, “moniye” ຤儞໵ and “aleduo” Ѩᒜଟ, were restored into Sanskrit by Dr. Rolf Giebel. He notes: “Takagi Shingen ߴ໦訷‫ ݩ‬in his Shin kokuyaku daizōkyō Mikkyō-bu ৽ᅳᩄେ᤽ៃɹີ‫ڭ‬෦, vol. 3, p. 238, emends the text on the basis of the Sanjūjō sakushi ࡾे஽ࡦࢠ [of Kūkai], etc., [from mozuoniye ຤࡞儞໵] to moniye ຤儞໵ and restores these two words to māireya (a combined wine?, chōwa-shu ௐ࿨ञ) and raktaka (a red pigment) respectively. However, these should be corrected to madya (intoxicating drink) and rakta (blood), which would then tally with the statement Sijiao an siping sheng jiu. Yiping sheng xie ࢛࢛֯҆ළ੝ञɻ Ұළ੝݂ [“Put on the four corners four jars full of wine and a jar full of blood”] in T. XXI 1212 60c19-20.” —On this text, a passage from the Xifang tuoluo nicang zhong jingangzu Amiliduo Junzhali fa, T. 1212, see Appendix 2, p. 29. 18 ࿦ɹɹจ and four intermediate directions [?] (sijiao sijiao ࢛࢛֯֯) of the man.d.ala, he puts bowls full of [the substance] and lamps. Then he must spread flowers on it and burn the incense of Sogdiana (anxi xiang ࣩ҆߳, Skt. guggula). [The practitioner shall have the oracular] visions according to his desire, either in [the blade of] a sword, on a mirror, a wall (qiang ᗨ, Skt. prākāra?), on one’s finger or one’s palm, in [the flame of?] a lamp, on a statue of Buddha, in a crystal (shuijing ਫਫ਼, Skt. sphat.ika), on an alter, or on a lapis lazuli (liuli ླྀཨ, Skt. vaid.ūrya). [In order to determine whether] the desired will is good or bad, he must take a young boy or a young girl whose body has no scars and is pure without sins. He then has the child take a bath to purify the body, wear a new white garment, and recite this mantra in order to sacralize and empower (jiachi Ճ࣋, Skt. adhis..tā?) him [or her]. I [Vajrapān.i] shall come to him [or her] and manifest my own body. I shall speak in details about things of the Three Times [of past, present and future] according to what is asked. Following the mind [of the practitioner], I shall settle and eliminate all the doubts. If there is a [sick] person possessed by a demon of epilepsy (dianxian guimei ᚖᚉَັ, Skt. apasmāra?), [the practitioner] must use a willow stick or a pomegranate stick. He shall recite seven times the above mantra and sacralize and empower [the stick]. He shall burn incense of Sogdiana and draw the form of the demon on the ground. He shall make the youth take the stick, and whip its image with it on its chest and back, etc. At that time, the sick person shall behave as if his own body were being beaten. He shall cry and roar, kowtow on the ground, and ask to be saved. [He shall say,] “From now on, I will leave forever and never dare to come back!” At that time, the ācārya makes him vow: “If you ever happen to come back, it shall be that my attendants will destroy [you] without any remains.” The demon, having made that vow, shall never come back, and the sick person shall be healed. This [method] is not only efficacious in ridding the disease [demon], but it is excellent for many other things. The power of this dhāran.ı̄ shall bring about all successes according to one’s desire. The last part of this ritual, in which a healing method is taught, is particularly interesting in that it is similar with the healing method that was practiced in Japan from the tenth century onward. The fourth text is a long ritual text focused on the deity Mārı̄cı̄ translated in the Northern Song, between 980 and 1000 by Devaśanti (Tianxizai ఱଉࡂ). The description of the āveśa ritual is rather short:77 77 Foshuo Da Molizhi pusa jing ဠઆେຎཬࢧ฾ࡵៃ, T. XXI 1257 i 264a28-b9: ෮༗੒ब๏ɻॳʤ ʢ೔ʣʴॳʻࡾʼʥग़࣌ྩҰಐঁચཋਗ਼ᕃɻҎനՖગஇృ਎ɻஶനҥ෰ॅɻᦲຎҔ࡞ऀɻ ჭ፣ཏதᗑࣩ҆ʤࣩʹଉʻ໌ʼˎʥ߳ɻ༻ԏࢷછखେࢦɻྩ೦ࠑᚸ‫ݴ‬Ұඦวɻᚸ‫ݴ‬ᐌ 264b03: 唵Ҿ ᄷཬᄷཬ໨ᇟ嚩ೋ߹Ҿ լ ෮ᨙᚸ‫ݴ‬ീඦวՃ࣋ଖ༉ɻሡࠑ༉ຠృେࢦ্ɻృቮࢦ໘໌রɻೳ‫ݱ‬ఱਓ౳૾ɻ෮ᨙ唵𤚥ᚸ‫ݴ‬ɻՃ࣋౯ീ ඦวɻଖಐঁೳ‫ݟ‬ա‫ࣄڈ‬ɻ೗ሣ໨લɻ‫ٴ‬ೳௐ෬Ұ੾฼ʤ฼َʹَ฼ʻ໌ʼʥَ೭ऺɻ෮ೳߋ೦唵ʢҾʣ晚 ଟྴʢҾʣ𤚥ʢҾʣ໨ɻᚸ‫ݴ‬ɻѨᄻଟᏐɻܾఆೳ஌Ұ੾ળዱ೭ࣄɻ 19 An Early Example of Svasthāveśa Ritual (I YANAGA Nobumi) [. . .] There is yet another siddhi. Make a young girl take a bath at the break of the day to purify herself. With sandalwood of white flowers (? baihua zhantan നՖગ இ), smear her body, and make her wear a white garment. Use cow dung [to make a man.d.ala], and inside it, burn incense of Sogdiana. Smear one’s ball of the thumb with rouge (yan zhi ԏࢷ, Skt. kusunbha?). Make [the girl (?)] recite this mantra (ling nian ci zhenyan ྩ೦ࠑᚸ‫ )ݴ‬one hundred times. The mantra states:78 79 Om . [tsı̌@k [?] ᄷ lı̌@ ཬ tsı̌@k [?] ᄷ lı̌@ ཬ mı̌uk ໨] svāhā! [Om . cili cili muh. svāhā!] Recite repeatedly eight hundred times the mantra and sacralize and empower the oil.80 Then smear again one’s ball of the thumb with this oil. The finger surface shall shine, making divine persons appear. Then recite another mantra “Om . Mām . ” (on man 唵𤚥).81 Sacralize and empower the lamp eight hundred times. [Then] the girl shall be able to see things of the past as if in front of her eyes. [The practitioner ?] shall be able to subjugate all the demon-mothers (mugui ฼َ, Skt. mātr.kā?). He shall also be able to recite the [following] mantra:82 “Om . [mı̌w5n 晚 tα ଟ liei ྴ (Ҿ)] Mām . 𤚥 (Ҿ) [miuk ໨]! Om . vartale mām . muh.” a billion (ayuduo Ѩᄻଟ, Skt. ayuta) times. He shall be certain to know all good and bad things. Here it is clear that it is the girl who sees the vision on the practitioner’s ball of his thumb, just as in the description in the Youminglu. It both texts, moreover, rouge is used to magically empower his thumb. Other Indian References Now, I would like to quote some passages from the eleventh chapter of Smith’s book, in which the finger or the palm of the practitioner is used for an oracular ritual. First, Smith refers to a Jain text known as the Niśı̄tha Cūrn.i. As he describes, it was “composed in the mid-seventh century by the prolific Jaina scholar Jinadāsagan.i Mahattara.”83 78 This mantra was restored into Sanskrit thanks to Dr. Giebel. The Chinese characters are preceded by their Tang phonetic values according to the transliteration system of Wang Li Ԧྗ (I use the web search function of “Xiaoxue tang zhongguyin ziliao ku” খላಊத‫ݹ‬Իࢿྉ‫< ݿ‬http://xiaoxue.iis.sinica.edu.tw/ zhongguyin>, last accessed on August 18th, 2018). 79 Wang Li’s system does not have the character “ᄷ”; I use instead the value of “卽.” 80 The oil in question is certainly an oil of mustard (jiezi you ևࢠ༉, Skt. katuka-taila?) mentioned earlier in . the same passage, T. XXI 1257 i 263a7 and a8. 81 The character “𤚥” corresponds with the Sanskrit phonetic value of mam: see Shittan-zō ࣩಶ᤽ by Annen . ҆વ, T. LXXXIV 2702 v 418b14. As the same character appears later in this passage with the annotation of long vowel (Ҿ), I suppose that here too, the long vowel is intended. 82 This mantra was restored into Sanskrit thanks to Dr. Giebel. The Chinese characters are preceded by their Tang phonetic values according to the transliteration system of Wang Li. 83 Smith, The Self Possessed: Deity and Spirit Possession in South Asian Literature and Civilization, p. 423424. —P. 423, n. 38 quotes “Cf. Jain 1999 [Sagarmal Jain, Jaina Literature and Philosophy: A Critical Approach, Varanasi: Pārśvanātha Vidyāpı̄t.ha, 1999], p. 8; more detailed is Sen 1975 [Madhu Sen, A Cultural History of the Niśı̄tha Cūrn.i, Amritsar: Sohanlal Jaindharma Pracharak Samiti, 1975], p. 6-9.” 20 ࿦ɹɹจ According to the Niśı̄tha Cūrn.i, a question is asked of a pasin.ā, which had entered one’s thumbnail (am . gut..tha-pasin.ā) or arm, the leftovers after eating a sweet called kam . sāra, a piece of cloth, a mirror, a sword blade, water, or a wall. Pasin.āpasin.ā, according to this text, is also a kind of divination in which a question is answered by a pasin.ā who appears in a dream, thus confirming that the PSM [Prākr.taśabdamahārn.avan] drew its definition from this late section of the āyaram . gasutta. This pasin.ā is called “dream deity” or “dream-divination” (suvin.ā-pasin.ā).84 It must be noted that the northern and eastern (and subsequently the Tibetan and Chinese) use of this kind of divination may well have been adopted, at least partially and indirectly, from these Jaina sects. Smith later quotes a passage from the Cakrasam . vara Tantra, a Buddhist tantra from the eighth century:85 It [the word “prasenā”] also appears in chapter 43 of the Cakrasam . vara Tantra, in a verse that reads, “Having repeated the mantra over a sword, water, one’s thumb, a lamp or a mirror, one will cause the descent of the divinatory image [prasenā] by means of the yoga of oneself [as the deity].”86 This is clearly drawn from earlier Indic material. Smith also refers to personal communication with Sanderson:87 The loci of the prasenā are many. She appears in highly insubstantial and unstable form as a shadow or apparition. Her appearance does not come out of thin air, however, but, on the surface of water, a metal pot, a sword-blade, in the flame of a lamp, in a mirror, the eye of a girl, the sun, the moon, his own thumb smeared with oil, or within his body in the point of light between his brows, and there reveals the answer he seeks. The answer may take the form of apparitional writing or a disembodied voice, or it may be uttered by a young boy or girl placed in a trance for this purpose (svasthāveśan); or it may appear to such a medium in one of the aforesaid substrates; or it may arise in the sādhaka’s mind when he awakens after a night spent in a temple of the deity. Smith also provides another example of a divinatory ritual using a young girl:88 84 Smith, op. cit., p. 424, n. 41, quotes: “Niśı̄tha Cūrni 3, p. 383: suvinayavijja kahiyam kathimtassa . . . . pasin.āpasin.am . bhavati; cf. Sen 1975: p. 317.” 85 Smith, op. cit., p. 426-427. 86 Smith, op. cit., p. 427, n. 55, refers to: “Translated from the Tibetan by Gray (2006, in press). The Sanskrit of this chapter is lost. Gray provides a translation of Bhavabhat.t.a’s commentary on this verse: ‘Having repeated [the mantra] one hundred and eight [times] over a sword, etc., one will cause the descent of the luminous divinatory image.’ The name of the mantra that causes the divinatory image to descend into the object is upahr.daya.” 87 Smith, op. cit., p. 430 (n. 70 quotes: “Sanderson, personal communication, September 13, 2001”). 88 Smith, op. cit., p. 431-432. 21 An Early Example of Svasthāveśa Ritual (I YANAGA Nobumi) A further example of this, though not explicitly labeled svasthāveśa, is found in Hemacandra’s [a Jain philosopher of the twelfth century] Yogaśāstra (5.173-176). The context here is very specific, the determination of lifespan. In this passage, the deity is said to enter into an inanimate reflective medium, such as a mirror, after which a young girl picks up and passes on messages transmitted by the deity through the reflective surface. One might argue that this is not possession of the girl; rather, it is an allied divinatory practice. However, in South Asia, people, especially women, are considered possessed if they transmit such messages in trance states. There is every reason to believe that this was also the case in the first millennium. Hemacandra says: Upon being queried, a deity [devatā], who has been made to descend into a mirror, a thumb, a wall, or a sword through a rite involving mantra repetition, announces her verdict regarding time [of death]. The mantra to be recited is om . naravı̄re svāhā, and is perfected after 10,008 repetitions of it during a solar or lunar eclipse. After that, whenever such a question is asked, the ritualist need repeat it only 1,008 times at that moment. The deity then becomes absorbed in the mirror, etc., following which a young girl [kanyā] announces the verdict. In this way, the deity, attracted by the virtues of a good sādhaka, herself speaks decisively on topics regarding the past, present, and future [trikālavis.ayam].89 This variety of media that might become possessed appears to be retained in the comparable Chinese texts, though the later Sanskrit manuscript material focuses on inducing āveśa only in young boys. It is interesting to consider that the earliest Sanskrit suggestion of this procedure is found in one of the foundational texts of Āyurveda, the Suśruta-Sam . hitā, composed in approximately the second century c.e. This text includes the following verse: “As a reflection is to a mirror or other similar surface, as cold and heat are to living beings, as a sun’s ray is to one’s gemstone, and as the one sustaining the body is to the body, in the same way ‘seizers’ [grahāh.] enter an embodied one but are not seen.”90 This raises an important question: Do we see in this statement a movement from metaphor to metaphysics as the idea proceeds from āyurvedic texts to tantric texts? Can we assume that what began as a trope ended up assuming a concretized cosmological and ritual locus? Or does Suśruta take an older known divinatory practice and turn it into a trope? Based on the present state of evidence, it is impossible to answer these questions confidently. 89 Smith, op. cit., p. 431, n. 74: “The syllables tha tha are code for svāhā. See now the translation by . . Qvarnstrøm (2000 [Olle Qvarnstrøm, “Jaina Tantra: Divinatory and Meditative Practices in the Twelfth-Century Yogaśāstra of Hemacandra,” in David Gordon White (ed.), Tantra in Practice, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2000, p. 595-604], p. 600), that in part misunderstands this passage. This chapter of the Yogaśāstra is very much in the tradition of omens and portents established by Varāhamihira.” 90 Smith, op. cit., p. 431, n. 75: “SuSam [Suśrutasamhitā of Suśruta, with the Nibandhasamgraha Com. . . mentary of Śrı̄ D . alhan.ācārya and the Nyāyacandrikā Pañjikā of Śrı̄ Gayadāsācārya on the Nidānasthāna, ed. ācārya Trivikram Yādav and Nārāyan. Rām ācārya “Kāvyatı̄rtha,” Jayakr.s.n.adāsa āyurveda Series, 34. Bombay: Nirn.ayasāgara Press, 1938; 4th ed., Varanasi, Delhi: Chowkhamba Orientalia, 1980], 6.60.19: darpan.ādı̄n yathāchāyāśı̄tos.n.am . prān.ino yathā | svaman.im . bhāskarasyosrā yathā deham . ca dehadhr.k | viśanti ca na dr.śyante grahās tadvac charı̄rin.am ||” 22 ࿦ɹɹจ Finally, it is good to quote Michel Strickmann’s words on the importance of the use of youth in these rituals of possession:91 Although the use of children as seers appears to have been widespread in Tibet, the priest himself may gaze into the mirror. Some descriptions of pra-divination92 omit the child entirely, presenting the visionaries (pra-ba) as experienced monks. Such is the account given by Lama Chime Radha (head of the Tibetan section at the British Library). He states that the diviner focuses his attention by gazing into a small mirror of polished stone or metal. He may also employ the still waters of a lake or the clear sky itself. It is also possible for him to use his own thumb, a method that dramatically illustrates the terse reference to the use of the fingers as an alternative to a mirror in the Chinese translation of the Questions of Subāhu: The ball of the thumb (the-bon) can also be used for pra divination. It is painted red and dipped in soft wax so that it becomes covered with a film of it. All light is shut out of the room and only a single butter-lamp is left burning. The praba holds up his thumb and to everyone present it appears to grow in size and become like a large screen. On this screen appear visions of various symbolic objects—it may be of trees, lakes, people, or other concrete forms. The visions then have to be interpreted according to the question which was asked. If the interpretation is doubtful or uncertain, the pra-ba asks again in his mind, and another vision appears. If he asks yet again, then letters appear on the thumbscreen. After that, the visions fade. Like other authorities on the subject, Lama Chime Radha states that if the pra-method does not at first succeed, one may repeat it, seeking fresh visions, but after a third unsuccessful attempt, it is necessary to try some other method. He cites a famous example of pra-apparitions in a holy lake near Lhasa, which in 1935 guided the Regent of Tibet and his associates in their discovery of the present (fourteenth) Dalai Lama. He also quotes cases of successful pra-divination using a mirror, the ball of the thumb, and the sky from the experience of Tibetan friends and colleagues.93 Evidently, the child-visionary or child-medium could be left out of the procedure completely, at least in Tibet.94 Perhaps children were eventually relegated to a secondary role as the technique came to be applied in vital decision making processes of 91 Michel Strickmann, Bernard Faure, ed., Chinese Magical Medicine, p. 216-218. According to Strickmann, op. cit., p. 215 and n. 42, the Tibetan word “pra” stands for the Sanskrit prasena. “The word pra, in Tibetan, designates a particular class of divinatory techniques and phenomena. Pra pha-pa (“to bring down the pra”) means to divine by means of a charmed mirror. This is, of course, precisely what we find in the eighth-century Questions of Subāhu: The text speaks of bringing down Prasena and recommends prominently, among other implements, a mirror over which a spell has been pronounced.” 93 Strickmann, op. cit., p. 217, n. 45: “Chime Radha 1981 [Chime Radha, Lama, “Tibet,” in Carmen Blacker and Michael Loewe, eds., Oracles and Divination, p. 3-37, London: Random House, 1981]: p. 8-12.” —The quoted passage is on page 9. 94 Strickmann, op. cit., p. 217, n. 46: “See Alexander Macdonald 1975 [Alexander W. Macdonald, Essays on the Ethnography of Nepal and South Asia, Kathmandu: Ratna Pustak Bhandar, 1975], p. 126-27. Contrary to Macdonald, who does not think that pra-ceremonies reflect an Indian influence on Tibet, Strickmann argues that we are in presence of a type of phenomena found in all societies where Tantric culture spread—although voluntary 92 23 An Early Example of Svasthāveśa Ritual (I YANAGA Nobumi) the Lamaist state. There can be little doubt, though, that the use of a child was basic to the original operation, and I believe it very likely that the Questions of Subāhu was a primary scriptural source for this form of divination, in Tibet as well as in China and Japan. It is, in any case, precisely the utilization of juveniles that we need to pursue here. After all, at least one of the Chinese texts makes it clear that this prasenafigure was envisioned as being a youth—the Prasena-youth who was requested to carry the officiant’s message up to the buddhas in heaven.95 The association between a child-medium and a childlike god is, I think, no accident. It seems fully consistent with a principle that has been emerging as a fundamental modus operandi in Tantric Buddhist ritual structure: the association by nature or analogy of like elements in the divine, demonic, and mortal spheres. The better to explore this sympathetic link, we now turn to a figure of the Indian pantheon, within Buddhism as well as outside it, in whose cult such traits and propensities appear to exist in close alliance: the god Skanda. [ . . . ] I personally believe that this insight by Strickmann is very important. Skanda, as the prototype child deity of possession, messenger, and a dangerous disease-causing demon, must be studied in depth.96 Conclusion Initially, I thought of titling this paper “The Oldest Example of Svasthāveśa,” but I now realize that it is safer to title it as “An Early Example of Svasthāveśa.” It is always best to be prudent in one’s affirmations. This is particularly the case if one later discovers texts which may go back even earlier than what had been presumed to be the oldest version. In fact, Strickmann, in his Mantras et mandarins, already referred to three verses of the first text of the Dı̄gha nikāya, the Brahama-jāla sutta (I, 26), where, in a list of “lower arts” practiced by “some recluses and Brahmans (Pāli saman.abrāhman.ā) [who live] on food provided by the faithful, earn their living by wrong means of livelihood,” the following items are mentioned:97 possession clearly predates Tantrism. But again, Asian ‘shamanism,’ as we know it, is not a “primitive” technique of ecstasis (as Eliade and Blacker would have us believe): It is always a “secondary” shamanism, influenced by Indian and Chinese practices.” [The notes in this book are partly due to its editor, Bernard Faure.] 95 Strickmann, op. cit., p. 210 and n. 33 refers to the Yaoshi rulai guanxing yigui fa ᥂ࢣ೗ိ᧺ߦّ‫ي‬ ๏ translated by Vajrabodhi, T. XIX 923 28c12 (“fengqing Bosina tongzi” ไ੥ുࢲಹಐࢠ) where Prasenā (or Prasena?) is mentioned as a “child” who serves as the practitioner’s “messenger” to convey with the smoke of the burnt incense his wishes to the Buddhas and other deities. 96 See the very interesting remarks by Duquenne Robert, in his review of “M. Strickmann (éd. B. Faure), Chinese Magical Medicine,” in Cahiers d’Extrême-Asie, vol. 14, 2004, In Memoriam Isabelle Robinet (19322000). Pensée taoïste, Alchimie et cosmologie: 423-440, p. 437-440. 97 Michel Strickmann, Mantras et mandarins, p. 216 and p. 459-460, n. 7, quoting T. W. Rhys Davids, Dialogues of the Buddha, I, London, Frowde, 1899, p. 24. Strickmann, ibid., refers also to Anne-Marie Esnoul, “La divination dans l’Inde,” in André Caquot et Marcel Leibovici, ed., La Divination, Paris, Presses universitaires de France, 1968, vol. 1, p. 115-139, especially p. 119-121. Giacomella Orofino, “Divination with Mirrors,” p. 24 ࿦ɹɹจ (14) Obtaining oracular answers by means of the magic mirror.98 (15) Obtaining oracular answers through a girl possessed.99 (16) Obtaining oracular answers from a god.100 In the Pāli original text, these three verses are condensed only in these three words: 101 “ādāsapañham . kumārikapañham . devapañham . .” The translation by Rhys Davids must be based on the commentary of the text by Buddhaghosa of the fifth century, Sumaṅgalavilāsinı̄ Dı̄ghanikāya-At..thakatā. Strickmann adds: “Ainsi, on faisait appel, dans l’un et l’autre cas [that is, above (15) and (16)], à un médium possédé, et on considérait que ces méthodes étaient apparentées à l’art de la catoptromancie, qui consiste à utiliser un miroir pour obtenir des images mantiques et des réponses visuelles aux questions.” It is indeed a fragmentary reference, but if we take into account other old references to a similar practice,102 I think we must take these verses of the Dı̄gha nikāya as an important proof of the early date of such methods. If the original line, “questioning a mirror, questioning a girl and questioning a deva,” of the Pāli Dı̄gha nikāya means what Buddhaghosa suggests, then one must suppose that these kinds of practices were already known around the first century in India (in what region?). Even if that is not the case, by the fifth century (when Buddhaghosa was active), these oracular possessions were certainly practiced in India.103 This date roughly corresponds with that of the Youminglu, an account more detailed than the short mentions of the Dı̄gha nikāya and its commentary. If we consider that Fotucheng lived around the first half of the fourth century (he died circa 349), and if the Youminglu’s account of his magical operations had any historical foundations,104 it is possible to go back to the late third century in India (Kashmir or Gandhāra?) or in Central Asia (Kutcha?) one of the earliest affirmative sources of such practices.105 At any rate, we should put stress on the fact that the Youminglu 614 and n. 21 also mentions the reference to the verses of the Dı̄gha nikāya. 98 Rhys Davids, Dialogues of the Buddha, I, p. 24, n. 1: “ādāsa-pañho. Buddhaghosa says they made a god appear in the mirror and answer questions put. It is a later conception to discard the god, and make the mirror itself give pictures of the hidden events. The mirror is of metal (Par. Dip. [Paramattha Dı̄panı̄] p. 235).” 99 Rhys Davids’s note, p. 24, n. 2: “Kumāri-pañho. Through a girl of good family and repute.” 100 Rhys Davids’s note, p. 24, n. 3: “Deva-pañho. Also obtained through a girl, but this time a deva-dāsı̄ or temple prostitute. It is instructive to find, even under the patriarchal regime of the sixth century b.c., that men thought they could best have communications from the gods through the medium of a woman.” 101 Dı̄gha-nikāya, ed. T. W. Rhys Davids and J. Estitin Carpenter, vol. 1, London, Pali Text Society, 1975. p. 11, meaning literally “Questioning a mirror, questioning a girl, and questioning a deva.” The Pāli word “pañhā” derives from the Sanskrit “praśna” (> pr.cch-)—which, itself, is one of the supposed etymologies of the Sanskrit odd word “prasenā” (or “prasena,” related also to the Middle Indian “pasin.a” or “pasin.ā”). See above, n. 56. 102 Quoted by J.-P. Norelius, see below, note 105; see also the reference to Suśrutasamhitā of the second century . mentioned by Smith, quoted above p. 22. 103 Perhaps the area was in Śrı̄ Laṅka, where Buddhaghosa lived. However, he was originally from another part of the Indian subcontinent of which we know very little. 104 The very close relationship between this text and three other Chinese accounts of the same events (Shiliuguo chungjiu, Jinshu and Gaoseng zhuan) allows to believe that they all rely on a common source, which may go back earlier than all the four texts. 105 There is yet another old mention of a ritual of the same kind, although the precise date cannot be known: 25 An Early Example of Svasthāveśa Ritual (I YANAGA Nobumi) is exceptionally detailed and concrete compared to these earlier examples of the oracular possession rituals. All these sources show that these kinds of oracular rituals were known from a much earlier date than the Tantric texts that were discussed by Frederic Smith. It is certainly not in Tantra, nor in Śaivism, that we must look for the original environment where they were first formed. Rather, they seem to derive from an earlier, common ground of Indian folk religion, and developed in such an environment (which were shared by Buddhism as well as Jainism); Tantric and Śaiva sources incorporated these earlier materials and gave them a new turn.106 Tantric Buddhism also made them an important doctrinal core of “being possessed by the Buddha while entering oneself in the Buddha as well” (nyūga ganyū ೖզ զೖ)—to “realize the Buddhahood in the present body” (sokushin jōbutsu 卽਎੒ဠ).107 Another lesson that we can draw from this quest for earlier examples of this type of possession ritual for oracular purpose is the crucial importance of Chinese Buddhist materials for this kind of study (not only properly Buddhist but also secular sources reflecting Buddhist elements, such as the Youminglu). As I have pointed out, Chinese sources are often datable, and the tremendous abundance of data that can be found in them is interesting not only for the history of Buddhist beliefs but also for Indological references. Buddhist studies should not be limited to Buddhist interests; a broader perspective on the history of Asian religious traditions will reveal all kinds of new information. At the same time, Indological studies should not be limited to the narrowly “Classical Indian materials,” but also look into Buddhist, Jaina or ethnologic phenomena that are scattered not only in Indian various dialects but also in Chinese, Tibetan, South-East Asian languages, and Japanese. Last but not least, Japanese studies on Japanese or Chinese phenomena should not be ignored; but at the same time, students of Japanese phenomena should not ignore Indological studies. see P.-J. Norelius, “Strı̄kāmā vai gandharvāh.: Spirit-possession, women, and initiation in Vedic India,” Acta Orientalia, 76 (2015): 13-89, p. 29 of the online version (<http://uu.diva-portal.org/smash/ get/diva2:1162086/FULLTEXT01.pdf>, last accessed February 26, 2018), where we read: “. . . the Sāmavidhāna Brāhman.a, 3.8.1ff (one of the very youngest Brāhman.a texts, but certainly older than any of the tantric texts treated by Smith), prescribes a very similar ritual, with the purpose of preventing one’s rebirth after death. Here, a kanyā [girl], with plaited hair (śikhan.d.inı̄-) and noose in hand, serves as oracle in a preparatory, nightly ritual; she reveals to the person wishing not to be reborn the year, half-year, season, month, etc., down to the day or night and muhūrta [moment] when he is going to die, thereupon to be reborn (3.8.3). With this knowledge, that person may then, using spells and penance, avert the rebirth awaiting him, and instead attain the realm of air (ākāśa-) after death.” 106 A recent article by Ronald M. Davidson, “Magicians, Sorcerers and Witches: Considering Pretantric, Nonsectarian Sources of Tantric Practices,” Religions. 8 (2017), 188, [p. 1-33, doi:10.3390/rel8090188] is very interesting in this regard. 107 See also the articles by Inui Hitoshi referred to in the above n. 4; see also my paper published in Nihon Koshakyō Kenkyū-jo Kenkyū Kiyō, 4 (2019), p. 14 and notes 58 and 59 [see supra note ∗ ]. 26 ࿦ɹɹจ Appendix 1 A Passage from the Biography of the Nun An Lingshou ҆ྩट: Arthur Wright, in his translation of the biography of Fotucheng, refers to a passage of the Biographies of Nuns (Biqiuni zhuan ൺٰೌၚ) composed around 517 by Baochang ሞএ (fl. from around the end of the 5th and the beginning of the sixth century).108 Its date is almost the same as the Gaoseng zhuan by Huijiao (519). It contains an interesting biography of a nun named An Lingshou’s ҆ྩट who was ordained by Fotucheng, where one finds a reference to a magical use of the hand in which appears a vision—this time, the vision of a previous life. Although the method is somehow different from what other sources report about Fotucheng’s magic of seeing the distant or future events, it is worth translating.109 [The nun] An Lingshou’s ҆ྩट original family was Xu ঃ, from Dongguan ౦، (a city in the present-day Province of Guantong ኍ౦ল, roughly 50 km to the east of Canton ኍभ); her father, of the name Chong 忡, served the false Zhao ᪅110 as a supernumerary official of the army. From her young age, Lingshou was clever and liked to study. Her speech was pure and elegant, and her character was indifferent and unworldly. She did not like human affairs; calm and tranquil, she found contentment in Buddhist Law and did not want to be married. Her father said: “You should belong to another [man]. [If you do not want to be married,] then what would you get?” Shou replied: “Upright in thought in the path of my karma (yedao ‫ۀ‬ಓ), I want to go beyond the thoughts related to human affairs. Immobile regarding the honor or dishonor, I want to be a person of true integrity and self-sufficiency. Why is it necessary [to follow the path of] the three obeisances [to her father before marriage, to her husband when married, and to her eldest son after becoming a widow] and then be correct in the [Confucian] Rite (sancong ranhou wei li ࡾኺવ‫ޙ‬ᗣᜌ)?” The father said: “If you want to be the only correct person (dushan ᘐળ, self-righteous), then how would you be able to rescue your parents?” Shou replied “I want to become a person practicing the [Buddhist] path in order to save and deliver all [the sentient beings]; what more could I do on behalf of my parents?” On this, Chong went to ask Fotucheng. Cheng said: “Return to your home, and purify yourself and fast for three days; then come back again to see me.” Chong followed this advice. [When he came 108 Arthur F. Wright, “Fo-T‘u-Têng ဠᅷ੅: A Biography,”, p. 338, n. 5. Biqiuni zhuan by Baochang, T. L 2063 iv 935a7-20: “҆ྩटɻຊ੏ঃɻ౦،ਓ໵ɻ෕忡࢓ၝ᪅ʤʤᗣʥ− ʻࡾʼʥᗣ֎ฌʤ࿠ʹ෦ʻࡾʼʥ࿠ɻྩट༮ᡏහ޷ላɻ‫ݴ‬࿦ਗ਼៉խੑ‫୶ڏ‬ɻෆᒜਓؒɻኺ༰ؓᯩɻҎဠ๏ ࣗ‫ޘ‬ෆ‫ٻئ‬ᇡɻ෕ᐌɻೊጯ֎ሱԿಘ೗ࠑɻटᐌɻ୺৺‫ۀ‬ಓઈ૝ਓ֎ɻᆝᩆෆಈ྿ਖ਼ࣗ଍ɻԿඞࡾኺવ‫ޙ‬ᗣ ᜌɻ෕ᐌɻೊཉᘐળҰ਎ɻԿೳ݉ᖖ෕฼ɻटᐌɻཱ਎ߦಓํཉ౓୤Ұ੾ɻԿ‫گ‬ೋ਌໹ɻ忡Ҏ໰ဠᅷ੅ɻ੅ ᐌɻ‫܅‬ᓤՈܿᜊࡾ೔ᰈՄိɻ忡ኺ೭ɻ੅ʤ ʤҎʥ−ʻ૙ʼʻ‫ݩ‬ʼʥҎʤᣊࢧࢠʹԏᑌʻ‫ݩ‬ʼ, ᢎࢷʻ໌ʼʥᣊ ࢧࢠຏຑ༉ၕ忡ӈঠɻྩ忡ࢹ೭ɻ‫ݟ‬Ұࠫ໳ࡏେऺதઆ๏ɻ‫ܗ‬ঢ়ࣅঁɻ۩Ҏന੅ɻ੅ᐌɻੋ‫ঁ܅‬ઌ਎ɻग़Ո ӹ෺ɻԟࣄ೗ࠑɻएኺଖࢤɻํᙛᒇ፝࿡਌ྩ‫܅‬෋‫و‬ɻੜࢮେۤʤʤւʥ−ʻࡾʼʥւ޲ಘଖᬑɻ忡ؐ‫ڐ‬೭ɻ टศႩམɻኺ੅೫ᕃ撿ೌडռɻཱ‫ࣉݡݐ‬ɻ” 110 “False Zhao” (wei Zhao ၝ᪅) designates the Later Zhao; the epithet “false” is added because the author, Baochang, belongs to the dynasty of Liang ྊ. 109 27 An Early Example of Svasthāveśa Ritual (I YANAGA Nobumi) back to ask Fotucheng], Cheng smeared Chong’s right hand with rouge [mixed with] sesame oil and made him rub his hands. Then he ordered Chong to see in [his hand]: he saw there a śraman.a among a crowd who was preaching. [The śraman.a] looked like a woman. Chong reported that to Cheng. Cheng said: “That is your daughter in her previous life. She had left her home to help people. Since it was already thus in old times, if you comply with her will, she will [help you to] prosper and save all your family and relatives (liuqin ࿡਌). She will bring [all your family and relatives] to the [other] side of the ocean of sufferings of birth and death.” Chong returned to his home and allowed [her to become nun]. Shou then had her head shaved, followed Cheng who confirmed her purity, and received from him the precepts of a nun. She built the temple called Jianxiansi ‫ࣉݡݐ‬. [ . . . ] Appendix 2 A svasthāveśa ritual of the Xifang tuoluo nicang zhong jingangzu Amiliduo Junzhali fa ੢ํଫཏೌ᤽தۚ߶଒Ѩຶທଟ‫܉‬吒ར๏: This long ritual dedicated to Amr.ta Kun.d.alin is a developed version of the rituals described in the Tuoluoni ji jing ଫཏೌूៃ (T. XVIII 901 viii 851c11-860b23). Its text has a very peculiar history: as accounted by Ōmura Seigai େଜ੢֑ in his preface to the text (T. XXI 1212 49b6-50b1), this is a translation by Yicao ٛૢ (fl. end of the 8th to beginning of the ninth century) who was a disciple of Huiguo ዳՌ (746-805). The translation date is given as 821, and it was “written down” (bishou චड) by Haiyun ւӢ (fl. first half of the ninth century). This very manuscript was transmitted to Japan by Ennin ᅵਔ (794-864) in 847, and was preserved at Hieizan ൺӥࢁ and then at Ishiyama-dera ੴࢁࣉ, but almost nobody has consulted it since the tenth century. In the Meiji period, it came into the possession of Tanaka Mitsuaki ాதޫᰖ (1843-1939), an official of the Meiji government. He recognized the importance of the manuscript, and consulted Ōmura Seigai who was working with the editing team of the Taishō Canon. Ōmura transcribed the text and published it in 1916; afterward, it was included in the Taishō Canon. In addition to the passage that will be translated, the text contains another āveśa ritual where children or women are used as mediums (T. XXI 1212 53a5-b9 and sq.).111 Its sixteenth chapter, titled “Methods of Kun.d.alin for seeing things” (Juntuli kanshi fa ‫܉‬ᣡར‫؃‬ ࣄ๏, 60c7-61c4) is entirely devoted to āveśa rituals. Dr. Rolf Giebel, to whom I asked to reconstruct the Sanskrit original of the dhāran.ı̄ of the Shouhu guojie zhu tuoluoni jing (see above p. 17-19), discovered that the dhāran.ı̄ in question was almost identical with the first dhāran.ı̄ that is written down in this chapter. Moreover, the ritual prescription that follows 111 See also T. XXI 1212 59a2-27; 59c15-60b25; 69b19-71a9. 28 ࿦ɹɹจ it is very similar to the one recorded in the Shouhu guojie zhu tuoluoni jing and contains details that help to better understanding the latter text. Here is a tentative translation of this passage:112 Sixteenth: Methods of Kun.d.alin for seeing things: namo ratnatrayāya namaś can.davajrapān.aye mahāyaks.asenāpataye imām . vidyām . pravaks.āmi sā me sā me113 vidyā [samr.dhya]tu om amr te phat tad yathā can.d.i . . . can.d.i in.d.i min.d.i sam . krāma min.d.i āviśa gaud.i niviśa gaud.i praviśa gaud.i asmin aṅgus..thaman.d.ale paśyantu dārakadārikā divyena caks.us.ā apetu mānus.am . caks.u divyam . caks.u pravartatu yena hr.tam . yasya hr.tam . yatra sthāpitam . tam . sarvam . darśaya svāhā Tentative English Translation Homage to the Three Jewels! Homage to Violent Vajrapān.i, great general of yaks.as! I shall proclaim this spell. May the spell succeed for me! Om . , O immortal one, phat.! To wit: O Can.d.ı̄, Can.d.ı̄, In.d.ı̄, Min.d.ı̄! Appear, Min.d.ı̄! Enter, Gaud.ı̄! Descend, Gaud.ı̄! Enter, Gaud.ı̄, into this thumb pad! May the boys and girls see with divine vision! May human vision go away and divine vision come forth! [In the case of a missing article,] make them see everything—by whom it was taken, for whom it was taken, and where it is kept. All hail!114 This magical method [is the following:] Smear the ground with cow dung. Put on the four corners four jars full of wine and a jar full of blood (sijiao jue an siping sheng jiu, yiping sheng xie ࢛࢛֯҆ළ੝ञɻҰළ੝݂).115 Light four lamps. Spread flowers on the alter, and burn [fragments of] an aromatic tree (xunlu xiang ‫߳཮܆‬, Skt. kunduruka).116 On the corner of the alter, take oil. 112 T. XXI 1212 60c7-61a8: ‫܉‬ᣡར‫ࣄ؃‬ʤ๏ʴʢ඼ʣΧʻ‫ݪ‬ʼʥ๏ୈे࿡ ಹᨸɹ囉ዐಹዐ囉ೋ߹ ໷໵ɹಹലࣦɹᏘ፣᪎ં囉೾፣Ӫɹຎᨈ᥂ࠥ੘ಹുଟӪɹҏຎ ೋ߹ ɹඌశɹ᪍囉 ೋ߹ ኄ‫ࠫޤ‬ኤɹᣞɹኤɹᣞɹኤɹඌ஍໵ ᧲ɹ唵ɹѨຶທఈɹ泮吒ɹ ɹ໑ଞɹፌᏨɹፌᏨɹҼᏨɹᔠᏨɹૐ ೋ߹ ᨂ囉ຎɹᔠᏨɹѨඌࣺɹᇷᏨɹ儞ඌࣺɹᇷᏨɹു囉 ඌࣺɹᇷᏨɹѨࣩᔠɹᓩ۪ᘧဧჭ፣རɹുઔ౎ɹಹ ্ ฏ ೖ ೋ߹ ্ 囉ՠ ಹທՠ ɹ೧ ඏӪ ಹɹᏖ‫ ۥ‬ᑃࠫɹѨൺ౎ɹຎౕᦳɹᏖ‫ ্ۥ‬ᑃɹ೧ኤ᳸ɹᏖ‫ ্ۥ‬ᑃɹു囉຤ଟ ᧲ɹӪᇠɹ ທೋ߹ ፦ɹ໵ሜɹ ທೋ߹ ፦ɹ拽ዐ囉ɹ࠹஍ඟ፦ɹዐɹࡵ‫ׇࢗ‬ം ೋ߹ɹᇠ囉ࣺ໵ɹᣞ嚩ೋ߹ ᨈ ࠑढ๏ɻ‫ڇ‬ฅట஍ɻ࢛࢛֯҆ළ੝ञɻҰළ੝݂ɻᗑ࢛ᚬ౯ɻࢄՖࡏஃ্ɻᗑ‫߳཮܆‬ɻԙஃᬑऔ༉ɻผຊ Ӡɻ࿨๽‫ٴ‬༉ృେ฼ࢦ໘্ԡᨙढɻ‫ݣ‬ಐࢠʤ ʤ҃ಐࢠʥ−Χʻ‫ݪ‬ʼʥ҃ಐࢠ҃ಐঁɻਗ਼ᕃચཋஶ৽ᕃҥɻढ ਫચ໘ɻ‫؃ݣ‬ɻԙதॴ༗٢‫ڟ‬೭ࣄɻ័ԙத‫ݱ‬ɻएࣦ෺ऀɻຠ‫ࡏ؃‬Կ႔࡞Կ৭ɻੋ୭ሡ‫ڈ‬Կ႔҆ஔɻࣩԙத ‫ݟ‬ɻ৺தॴٙҰ੾ຠ೗ੋɻ‫؃‬ԙதࣩ‫ݟ‬Ұ੾ɻཉಘ᫚ു߹஛౳ɻຠᨙढࣣวɻᗑࣩ҆߳ɻଈ᫚ɻऔ஛҃౻ࢬ ҆ʤஇʹஃΧʻ‫ݪ‬ʼʥஇதɻஶऔَපਓɻਗ਼ᕃᖑཋஶ઱ܿҥɻ࠱ஶஃதɻऔ౻ࢬ҃஛ଧ஍ɻଖَଈ‫שڣ‬ᄹ ᄠࠂ‫ݴ‬ɻലଧզߋෆိ໵ɻढࢣଈใӠɻᢛզ࡞੤ɻएိզߋ࡞๏ɻଖَଈ‫ڈ‬ɻපऀଈࠩɻຢ๏ɻऔແපಐ உಐঁɻਗ਼ᕃᖑཋஶ઱ܿനҥɻ߳ਫᖮ಄໘্ᕃ႔Ꭳ࣏ɻҰஃೋගɻஶ৽ʤ࠱ʹ࠲Χʻ‫ݪ‬ʼʥ࠱খচࢠɻԙ ஃதஶ‫ݣ‬খၲ࠱্ɻᗑࣩ҆߳߳Ֆ‫ڙ‬ཆɻᨙ‫ޢ‬਎ढɻʤᨂᨙʹᨙᨂΧʻ‫ݪ‬ʼʥᨂᨙ੥‫ש‬ɻऔၷ࿸ਫʤަʹ‫ڭ‬Χ ʻ‫ݪ‬ʼʥަখၲɻҰख擎Ұ࿸ɻଈᗑ߳ᨙढɻ೫ࢸখၲಈ᫚Լ‫ޠ‬ɻա‫ڈ‬ະိҰ੾٢‫័ࣄڟ‬આɻ 113 The repetition of sā me is probably a scribal error. [Note of Giebel.] 114 Both the Sanskrit reconstruction and the translation of the dhāranı̄ are due to the kindness of Dr. Rolf Giebel, . to whom I express my deep gratitude. 115 See above, n. 76. 116 Monier William’s Sanskrit-English Dictionary has “the resin of the plant boswellia thurifera.” See Digital Dictionary of Buddhism <http://www.buddhism-dict.net/cgi-bin/xpr-ddb.pl?q=\%E8\ %96\%B0\%E9\%99\%B8\%E9\%A6\%99> [last accessed March 5th, 2018]. 29 An Early Example of Svasthāveśa Ritual (I YANAGA Nobumi) Another text states (bieben yun ผຊӠ): Mix ink and oil (he mo ji you ࿨๽‫ٴ‬༉) and smear one’s ball of the thumb with it. Then recite the spell on it. Make a boy or a girl purify himself [or herself] in a bath and wear a new pure garment. Make him [or her] wash the face with water on which the spell [was recited], then make him [or her] look at [the ball of the thumb]. All things of good or bad lucks shall appear there. If there is a missing article, he [or she] shall see where it is kept, what its colors are (ruo shiwu zhe, yi kan zai hechu zuo hese... एࣦ෺ऀɻຠ‫ࡏ؃‬Կ႔࡞Կ৭. . .), who has taken it away and where it has been put. All this is seen there.117 All the doubts in one’s mind, all the same way, all is seen there. If one wants to turn a bowl and put together a bunch of bamboo (? zhuanbo hezhu ᫚ു߹஛),118 one must recite seven times the spell and burn the incense of Sogdiana. Then it [the bowl?] shall turn [or move]. Take bamboos or branches of wisteria [wisteria vine?] (tengzhi ౻ࢬ), which shall be installed on the alter. [To expel?] a demon which possess a sick person, make the person take a bath and be purified and dressed in a new garment; make him sit in the center of the alter. Take a branch of wisteria [wisteria vine?] or a bamboo and strike the earth with it. The demon shall cry and weep, saying “Do not strike me! I will not come again!” The mantrin shall reply: “Make an engagement with me. If you come back again, I will do again the [same] method.” The demon shall immediately leave and the sick person shall recover. There is yet another method. Take a boy or a girl without illness. Make him [or her] take a bath, be purified and be worn of a new white garment. Spread on his [or her] face perfumed water. In a pure place, take care in order to construct an alter of two forearms [er zhou ೋග; zhou is a unit of length, a “cubit,” approximatively 18 inches]. Take a new chair and put it on the center of the alter. Make the child sit down on it. Burn incense of Sogdiana and 117 This mention of the quest for a missing article explains the phrase of the dhāranı̄ “yena hrtam yasya hrtam . . . . . yatra sthāpitam . sarvam . darśaya,” translated by “[In the case of a missing article,] make them see everything—by whom it was taken, for whom it was taken, and where it is kept.” [Note by Giebel.] 118 The meaning of this passage is not clear to me. The expression “zhuanbo” ᫚ു literally means “turn or move a bowl”; it may also mean “transform a bowl [into]”; but it seems that it means here “to make a bowl fly in the sky.” Cf. Dafoding guangju tuoluoni jing େဠ௖ኍᡉଫཏೌៃ, T. XIX 946 v 174c2-3 where we read: “If one wants to turn a bowl, then burn the incense as before. The bowl will immediately turn and fly in the sky and everything shall be as one wants” (Ruo yu zhuanbo, ruqian shaoxiang. Qibo ji zhuan ji tengkong. Yiqie ruyi एཉ᫚ുɻ೗લᗑ߳ɻଖുଈ᫚‫ٴ‬ಅۭɻҰ੾೗ҙ). Then “put together baboos” (hezhu ߹஛) would mean “gather bamboo sticks.” We find an interesting passage in the anonymous Biography of Huiguo where we read that in a session of magic performance that Huiguo (746-805) executed before Emperor Daizong ୅फ (726-779, r. 762-779) when he was twenty-five years old (that would be in 770, since the year compute is one year less in the Chinese civilization areas), he could “turn a jar and put together bamboos” (Datang Qinglongsi sanzhao gongfeng dade xingzhuang େ౜੨ཾࣉࡾே‫ڙ‬ไେಙߦঢ়, T. L 2057 295a19: “Zhuanping hezhu. Bing de chengjiu” ᫚ළ ߹஛ɻኂಘ੒ब). The whole passage is T. L 2057 295a15-20: “೥ೋे‫ޒ‬ɻಛไԸࢫৃ໋ೖ಺ɻԙ௕ੜ఼ɻᙛ ࣌༗௘‫ש‬ɻሣ໰ɻࢣ༗ԿޭޮɻᇄఱӠɻඍૐະ༗ޭޮɻไɹ௘ศ੣ᙛ࣌ɻ‫ש‬ಐࢠീਓɻߟঌՃ࣋ɹɹԸ໋ ॴ໰ɻᚭօ੒बɻ᫚ළ߹஛ɻኂಘ੒बɻɹɹఇ೫େ‫ت‬.” Tentative translation: “At the age of twenty-five years, he [Huiguo] had a special favor of being summoned to the palace by an imperial order. He was summoned to the Palace of the Longevity (Changshengdian). He was asked: “Master, what merit have you?” [He said:] “Being close to the Heavenly [person] (? jiantian ᇄఱ), I, humble monk, have not yet any merit.” Having received an imperial order, he summoned eight youths, whom he sacralized and empowered [so that they were possessed]. Then he asked them questions raised by the emperor. Everything succeeded. The bowl turning and the bamboo gathering also succeeded. The emperor was greatly pleased.” The expression “kaozhao” ߟঌ is the technical term (of frequent use in Daoist literature) meaning “ask questions to a possessed medium.” —The expression “bowl turning and bamboo gathering” is certainly related to this passage of the Xifang tuoluo nicang zhong jingangzu Amiliduo Junzhali fa. On this episode, see also below. 30 ࿦ɹɹจ make flower offering. Recite a spell to protect the body. Having finished reciting, invite and summon [the deity] (qinghuan ੥‫)ש‬. Take two bowls of water and hand them over to (jiao ަ) the child. [Make him (or her)] raise one hand with one bowl, and burn incense and recite the spell once, [and continue to do thus] until the child begins to tremble (xiaoer dongzhuan খၲಈ᫚) and make descend words (xia yu Լ ‫)ޠ‬. He shall speak all the past and future things of good or bad lucks. After this method, the same chapter describes other āveśa rituals in which the practitioner can see all the past, present and future things in water, or make an image of the deity Kun.d.alin move, etc.119 This text of the Amr.ta Kun.d.alin ritual raises a problem concerning the nature of the text of the Shouhu guojie zhu tuoluoni jing that we translated above. As it is known that the latter sūtra is a compilation due to the pretend “translator” Prajñā, we can assume that he borrowed the passage in question from the Amr.ta Kun.d.alin ritual that would be later translated by Yicao. But as some details are different, it is also possible that the sources for the two texts were not the same. The performance of oracular ritual by Huiguo that I referred to in the previous note 118 is described with other details in the “History of the Transmission of the Teaching of Secret man.d.alas” (Himitsu mandara-kyō fuhō den ᜃີອᣡཏ‫෇ڭ‬๏ၚ) by Kūkai ۭւ (774835). Here, it is explicitly stated that the ritual was an āveśa ritual to make Maheśvara reply to questions of Emperor Dazong ୅फ; however, the detail about “the bowl turning and the bamboo gathering” is not reported here:120 When he [Huiguo] was fifteen years old,121 he had for the first time some magical efficacy. Emperor Daizong, having heard that, invited him [to the palace] and ordered him, saying: “I have some doubts. Please resolve them for me.” The Master [Huiguo] then sacralized and empowered two or three children (ryō san dōji ၷࡾಐࢠ) and summoned the deva Maheśvara to descend [into them]. His magical power being inconceivable, [the deity] completely entered (hennyū วೖ, Skt. āveśa) the children. The master said to the king: “Now, the method has succeeded. Please ask them according to your saintly intentions.” The emperor descended from his seat and 119 T. 1212 61a9-c4. Himitsu mandara-kyō fuhō den ᜃີອᣡཏ‫෇ڭ‬๏ၚ, kan რ ii, Kōbō-daishi zenshū ߂๏େࢣશू, Kōyasan Ϯ λϦ ߴ໺ࢁ, Mikkyō bunka kenkyūjo ີ‫ڭ‬จԽ‫ॴڀݚ‬, 1965, vol. 1, p. 38-39: ೥ำϝςे‫ޒ‬χɺ᜗〻ಘೋ ᯦ᱛҰ ɻ୅ ϝγς Ϯ ϔ Ϩς δς χ Ϋ Ϧ Ϋϋ ϝχ έτ Ϯ ν ϊ Ϯγς फߖఇฉϨ ೭ ܴ ೖ ɺ໋Ϩ ೭ ᐌ ɻ௛༗ೋ ٙ଺Ұɻ‫ ئ‬ᗣ ղϨ ೭ ɻ࿨ঘ卽 ྩࡾၷࡾ ಐࢠ ґ Ϩς χ γς δ α ๏ Ճ࣋ ɺ੥ೋ ߱ ຎᬮटཏఱҰϮɻ๏ྗෆࢥٞϊ‫ނ‬χɺ卽νวೋεೖಐࢠҰχɻ࿨্നϨγςԦχ‫ݴ‬Ϋɻ๏ቮχ੒ϨϦɻਵ Ϯ Ϋ ϊ Ϋ ϊ Ϯ Ϋ Ω ϊ ϔό χ ν πς Ϯ χ γ‫ۄ‬ϔτ ς ɻߖఇԼϨ ࠲ ໰Ϩ ఱ ɻଇ આೋ ࡾੈ ࣄҰ ɺҕ ࠂೋ ఇԦ 曆ᏐҰ ɻߖఇ୵ᐌ ɻཾ ࢠ ೋ ੟ҙҰ ੥໰ ϋ φϦτ Ϋ ε Ϯ ϋ φϦτ ε Ϯ ϊ ς χ πτ ν ς Ϯ ς ᦒϨখ ɻೳ ‫ى‬ೋ ӢӍҰ ɻᬶࢠ ᦒϨ༮ ๏ྗ߱Ϩ ఱ ɻೖළ খࢣɺԙϨ ࠓ ‫ ݟ‬ᛘɻ卽 ऎೋ ‫៌ݜ‬Ұ Ҏ ᏜҰϋεਆ༻ҰϮ.” —This reference was given to me by Oda Etsuyo in a private email of March 5th, 2018, to whom I would like to express my deep gratitude. This text is cited in the Shingon fuhō san’yō-shō ᚸ‫෇ݴ‬๏ࢊཁঞ by Seison ੒ଚ (1060), T. LXXVII 2433 418a25-b3. 121 Huiguo’s age is different from the account in the Chinese biography (where it is stated that “the Master was twenty-five years old”). Counting from his birth year, 746, if he was fifteen years old according to the Chinese compute of one’s years (that is fourteen), the year would be 760; that year, Dazong would not be on the throne (he reigned from 762 to 779). One should probably suppose that the character “ೋ” (“two”) before “े” (“ten”) had fallen during the transmission of the manuscripts. 120 31 An Early Example of Svasthāveśa Ritual (I YANAGA Nobumi) asked the deva. He then told [everything concerning] the Three Times [past, present and future]. He informed Emperor of the details of his destiny (rekisū 曆Ꮠ). The emperor said with a sigh: “The dragon, even if he is young, is able to raise clouds [and bring] rain. The Buddha’s child, even if he is young, has the miraculous power of making a deva descend [into children] and make [?] enter in the jar a little master (nyūbin shōshi ೖළখࢣ).122 I saw it now!” Then he bestowed [on Huiguo] silk twill as the insignia of his miraculous power. 122 I do not understand the exact meaning of this phrase. —The image suggests a story like that of “Aladdin’s magic lamp.” The “little master” would correspond to the deity who “descended” and the jar, the medium children (?). 32

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS

Log In

An Early Example of Svasthāveśa Ritual: A Chinese Hagiography of the Early Fifth Century

An Early Example of Svasthāveśa Ritual: A Chinese Hagiography of the Early Fifth Century

Related Papers

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS