The Śaiva Age - Alexis Sanderson

316 Pages·2009·1.6 MB·English

G D
ENESIS AND EVELOPMENT
T
OF ANTRISM
Edited by
Shingo EINOO
INSTITUTE OF ORIENTAL CULTURE
UNIVERSITY OF TOKYO

G D
ENESIS AND EVELOPMENT
T
OF ANTRISM
InstituteofOrientalCultureSpecialSeries,23
ShingoEinooisProfessorofIndologyatthe
InstituteofOrientalCulture,UniversityofTokyo
(cid:176)c March,2009,INSTITUTEOFORIENTALCULTURE,
UNIVERSITYOFTOKYO
Allrightsreserved
Theauthors:
Shingo EINOO UniversityofTokyo
Dominic GOODALL Pondicherry Centre of the Ecole franc¸aise
d’Extreˆme-Orient
Taiken KYUMA MieUniversity
Alexis SANDERSON AllSoulsCollege,Oxford
Francesco SFERRA Universita` degliStudidiNapoli“L’Orientale”
Tsunehiko SUGIKI Waseda Institute for Advanced Study, Waseda
University
Kimiaki TANAKA TheEasternInstitute
Ryugen TANEMURA UniversityofTokyo
ISBN978-4-903235-08-0
PrintedinJapan
CONTENTS
Preface ..........................................................................9
Introduction ...................................................................11
Shingo EINOO : Fromka¯mastosiddhis—TendenciesintheDevelopment
ofRitualtowardsTantrism— ...........................................17
Alexis SANDERSON : TheS´aivaAge—TheRiseandDominanceofS´aivism
duringtheEarlyMedievalPeriod— .....................................41
TheDominanceofS´aivism ........................................44
TheIncorporationofS´a¯ktism ................................45
TheEtiolationandSubsumptionoftheCultoftheSun-God .53
TheDeclineofVais.n.avismandtheRiseoftheTantric
Pan˜cara¯traFollowingS´aivaModels ..........................58
RoyalPatronageofBuddhism ................................70
TheVis.n.ukun.d.isofA¯ndhra ..............................70
TheMaitrakasofValabh¯ı ................................72
TheKa¯rko.tasofKashmir ................................73
TheLicchavisofNepal ...................................74
TheT.ha¯kur¯ıKingsofNepal .............................77
TheBhauma-KarasofOrissa ............................80
TheCandrasofSouth-EastBengal ......................83
TheKhad.gasofSamata.ta ...............................83
TheCandrasofArakanandMiscellaneousOther
BuddhistKingsofEasternIndia ........................84
ThePa¯laEmperorsandtheGreatMonasteries
ofEasternIndia .........................................87
ThePa¯las’EngagementwithS´aivism ..................108
BuddhistKingsofEasternIndiaandtheirCommitment
toBrahmanism .........................................115
JointPatronageofBuddhismandS´aivismintheKingdoms
oftheKhmers,Chams,andJavanese ...................117
TheDevelopmentofTantricBuddhismThroughtheAdoption
andAdaptationofS´aivaandS´a¯ktaS´aivaModels ..........124
TheParallelRepertoireofRituals ......................124
TheMaha¯vairocana¯bhisam. bodhi,theMan˜jus´riya-
mu¯lakalpa,andBuddhaguhya .........................128
–5–
GenesisandDevelopmentofTantrism
TheSarvatatha¯gatattvasam. grahaandtheFirstInroads
ofS´a¯ktaS´aivism: Possession,Goddesses,
andtheSacralizationofSex ............................132
TheGuhyasama¯ja: CopulatingDeities,SexualInitiation
Rites,andtheSacralizationofImpurity ................141
TheSarvabuddhasama¯yogad.a¯kin¯ıja¯las´am. vara: Heruka
andhisYogin¯ıs,Ka¯pa¯likaiconography,theGan.aman.d.alam,
andtheBeginningofS´aiva-BuddhistIntertextuality ...145
TheYogin¯ıtantrasandtheFullAppropriation
ofVidya¯p¯ı.thaS´aivism ..................................156
ChronologyandProvenance ........................158
S´am. vara/VajrarudraandVajrava¯ra¯h¯ı:
TheTransformationofBhairavaandhisconsort ..169
TheRiseoftheGoddesstoIndependence ...........173
TheAdoptionoftheVidya¯p¯ı.tha’sCarya¯ andYoga .179
TheIncorporationofText-passages
fromtheVidya¯p¯ı.tha ................................186
ConvertingtheOutsiders ...........................220
TheRefluxofBuddhistS´a¯ktisminto
theS´a¯ktismofBengal ..............................240
TheJains’AdaptationoftheS´aivaMantras´a¯stra ...........243
S´aivismintheBrahmanicalSubstrate .....................249
TheCausesoftheDominanceofS´aivism ........................252
TheEarlyMedievalProcess ............................252
S´aivismandMonarchy .................................254
S´aivismandtheRoyalTemple .........................274
S´aivismandNewSettlements ..........................280
S´aivismandIrrigation .................................282
S´aivismandSocialIntegration .........................284
TheS´aiva-brahmanicalOrder ..........................301
Abbreviations ....................................................304
References .......................................................305
ConventionsintheFootnotes .....................................348
Dominic GOODALL : WhoisCan.d.es´a? ......................................351
Kimiaki TANAKA : Na¯gabodhi’s S´r¯ı-guhyasama¯jaman.d.alopa¯yika¯-vim. s´ati-vidhi
—TheSanskritTextRestoredfromtheVajra¯ca¯ryanayottama— ......425
Francesco SFERRA : The Laud of the Chosen Deity, the First Chapter of the
Hevajratantrapin.d.a¯rtha.t¯ıka¯ byVajragarbha ..........................435
Taiken KYUMA : SuperiorityofVajraya¯na—PartI:SomeRemarksonthe
–6–
Vajraya¯na¯ntadvayanira¯karan.a(rDorjethegpa’imtha’gn˜isselba)
AscribedtoJn˜a¯nas´r¯ı— .................................................469
Ryugen TANEMURA : Superiority of Vajraya¯na — Part II: Superiority of the
Tantric Practice Taught in the *Vajraya¯na¯ntadvayanira¯karan.a (rDo rje
thegpa’imtha’gn˜isselba)— ..........................................487
Tsunehiko SUGIKI : The Structure and Traditions of the Systems of Holy Sites
inBuddhistSam. varaCycleandItsRelatedScripturalCyclesinEarly
MedievalSouthAsia—TheGeographyofEsotericBuddhismintheEyesof
theCompilersoftheScriptures— ......................................515
–7–
´
The Saiva Age
—TheRiseandDominanceofS´aivismDuringtheEarlyMedievalPeriod—
Alexis SANDERSON
The early medieval period, from about the fifth century to the thirteenth,
saw a decline in the role of S´rauta sacrifice in the religious ceremonies under-
takenbyIndianrulers. Butitwasnotthatkingsturnedasidefromthebrahman-
icaltraditioninafundamentalsense. Theycontinuedtoupholdthebrahmanical
social order of the castes and disciplines (varn.a¯s´ramadharmah.) and they were
commonly commended in inscriptions from the fifth to the eighth centuries for
having rigorously imposed it on their subjects. We see this in the case of the
Maukhari Harivarman in the fifth century, the Maha¯ra¯ja¯dhira¯ja Gopacandra of
Van˙ga and the Parivra¯jaka Maha¯ra¯ja Sam. ks.obha of D.abha¯lara¯jya in the sixth,
thePus.yabhu¯tiPrabha¯karavardhanaofKanyakubja,Bha¯skaravarmanofPra¯g-
jyotis.a,theMaitrakaKharagrahaIIDharma¯dityaofValabh¯ı,theGu¯rjaraDadda
III of Bharukaccha in the seventh, and the Licchavi S´ivadeva of Nepal at the
turn of the seventh and eighth.1 The same claim is seen in the account of the
1CII 3, p.220, ll.1–2: varn.a¯s´ramavyavastha¯panapravr.ttacakrah. ‘[Harivarman],
who set in motion the establishing of the distinctions between the caste-classes
and disciplines’; RAJAGURU 1962, ll.6–9: varn.a¯s´ramavyavastha¯hetuh. *sa¯ks.a¯d
(corr. RAJAGURU:sa¯ks.ad Ep.) dharma *ivopa¯ttajanma¯ (corr.:ivopa¯ntajanma¯ RA-
JAGURU) ...paramama¯hes´varo maha¯ra¯ja¯dhira¯jas´r¯ıgopacandra- ‘Maha¯ra¯ja¯dhira¯ja
Gopacandra, entirely devoted to S´iva, who caused the distinctions between the
caste-classes and disciplines to be established, as though he were Dharma incar-
nate’; EI 8:28, ll. 11–12: varn.a¯s´ramadharmastha¯pana¯bhiratena (Sam.ks.obha);
EI4:29,l.3: varn.a¯s´ramavyavastha¯panapravr.ttacakrah. (Prabha¯karavardhana);EI
12:13, ll.34–35: bhagavata¯ kamalasambhavena¯vak¯ırn.avarn.a¯s´ramadharmapravi-
bha¯ga¯yanirmitobhuvanapatir ‘King[Bha¯skaravarman], createdbyBrahma¯ him-
self to separate the caste-classes and disciplines that had abandoned their du-
ties’; CII 3, pp.173ff., ll.43–44: sa¯ks.a¯d dharma iva samyagvyavastha¯pitava-
rn.a¯s´rama¯ca¯rah. ‘[Kharagraha II Dharma¯ditya], who established the observances
of the the caste-classes and disciplines, as though he were Dharma in visi-
ble form’; CII 4i:21, ll.7–9: maha¯munimanupran.¯ıtapravacana¯dhigamavivekasva-
dharma¯nus..tha¯na*prav¯ın.o (em. MIRASHI:pravan.i Ep.) varn.a¯s´ramavyavasthon-
mu¯litasakalakalika¯la¯valepa<h.> ‘[Dadda III], who uprooted all the taints of this
[degenerate]ageofKalibyestablishingtheseparationofthecaste-classesanddis-
ciplines,well-versedintheexecutionofhisduty[astheking]throughdiscriminat-
ing understanding of the teachings authored by the great sage Manu’; LKA 140,
ll.1–2: suvihitavarn.a¯s´ramasthitirlicchavikulaketur...maha¯ra¯ja¯dhira¯jas´r¯ıs´ivade-
vah. ‘Maha¯ra¯ja¯dhira¯jaS´ivadeva,war-banneroftheLicchavidynasty,whocorrectly
established the system of the caste-classes and disciplines’; LKA 143, l.1: sam-
yagviracitasakalavarn.a¯s´ramavyavasthah. ‘[S´ivadeva], who correctly fashioned the
systemofthedistinctcastesanddisciplines’.
–41–
GenesisandDevelopmentofTantrism
historyofKashmirbeforetheadventoftheKa¯rkot.adynastyintheseventhcen-
tury given in the twelfth by the Kashmirian historian Kalhan.a. His chronology
for this early phase of his country’s history is confused, but it is likely that we
should assign to the fifth or sixth century the king Gopa¯ditya whom he com-
mends for having restored the first and perfect Age through his regard for the
castesandbrahmanicaldisciplines.2 Healsoreportsapopularbeliefofhistime
that in order to promote the orthodox brahmanical social order the Hephthalite
Mihirakula,whoruledKashmirintheearlysixthcentury,hadsettlednativesof
A¯ryades´ainhiskingdom,whichwasthen,wearetold,devoidofthetruereligion
(dharmah.),beingoverrunbyDardsandTibetans.3
Seeingtheseclaimsoftheroyalimpositionofthe varn.a¯s´ramadharmah. one
thinks of the non-geographical definition of territory fit for brahmanical rites
(yajn˜iyodes´ah.)formulatedbyManu’scommentatorMedha¯tithiduringtheninth
or tenth century, namely that it is any land in which a conquering brahmanical
king settles the four caste-classes and imposes on the rest of the population the
statusofuntouchables(can.d.a¯lah.). Thisdefinitionserved,Ipropose,toaccommo-
datethefactoftheterritorialexpansionofbrahmanicalsocietyintonewregions
thatwasoneofsalientfeaturesoftheearlymedievalperiod.4
2Ra¯jataran˙gin.¯ı1.339: jugopagopa¯dityo’thaks.ma¯m. sadv¯ıpa¯m. tada¯tmajah. jvarn.a¯-
s´ramapratyaveks.a¯dars´ita¯diyugodayah. ‘NexthissonGopa¯dityaprotectedtheearth
and its continents, causing men to experience the arising of a [new] First Age
throughhisattentionto[themaintenanceof]thecaste-classesanddisciplines’.
3Ra¯jataran˙gin.¯ı1.312–313b: a¯kra¯nteda¯radairbhau.t.tairmlecchairas´ucikarmabhih.
jvinas..tadharmedes´e’smin*pun.ya¯ca¯rapravartane(conj.:pravartanamEd.) ja¯rya-
des´ya¯nsasam. stha¯pyavyatanodda¯run.am. tapah. ‘*Inorderto(conj.) promotepious
observance in this land that had been overrun by barbarians of impure conduct,
DardsandTibetans,and[so]hadlostthe[brahmanical]Dharma,hesettled[brah-
mins]ofA¯ryades´a.Thereafterheperformedaterriblepenance’. STEIN(1979,p.46),
no doubt faithfully reproducing the reading of the codex archetypus, gives pun.ya¯-
ca¯rapravartanam rather than pun.ya¯ca¯rapravartane and this leaves him no alter-
nativeotherthantotakenotonlyda¯run.am. tapah. butalsothisastheobjectofthe
verb: “heperformedaterriblepenance,andre-establishedpiousobservances”. But
thereadingisunacceptable.Forevenifonecanbelieve,asIcannot,thatpun.ya¯ca¯ra-
pravartanam. vyatanotisnottooinelegantanexpressionforanauthorofKalhan.a’s
calibre,thereremainsthefactthatitrequiresustobelievealsothatvyatanotgov-
erns two objects even though the conjunction necessary for this interpretation is
lacking. I have therefore emended to pun.ya¯ca¯rapravartane, which, taken as an
instance of the use of the locative of purpose (nimittasaptam¯ı), yields an entirely
appropriatemeaningandsupposesascribalerrorthatisreadilyexplainedbythe
easewithwhichreadersoftheKashmirianscriptcanmistake-efor-am. ,thecom-
monsubstitutefor-am.Furthermore,STEIN’srenderingofa¯ryades´ya¯nsam. stha¯pya
as “after killing the inhabitants of A¯ryades´a” is, in my view, much less probable
thanthealternativeadoptedhere,whichistotaketheverbformsam. stha¯pyainits
contextuallymoreappropriatemeaning,namely‘havingsettled’.
4See SANDERSON 2005a, pp.400–401, citing Medha¯tithi, Manusmr.tibha¯s.ya p.80,
–42–
TheS´aivaAge
Thus the first centuries of this period are presented in our sources as
marked not by the decline of brahmanism but rather by its imposition, rein-
forcement, and expansion. Moreover, there is abundant epigraphical evidence
of kings throughout this time bringing Vaidika brahmins into their kingdoms
by making them grants of tax-exempt land,5 thereby extending the penetration
of brahmanical culture while facilitating the administration of their territories
andpromotingagriculturaldevelopment.6
Nonetheless, while kings continued to accept their role as the guardians of
thebrahmanicalorder(varn.a¯s´ramaguruh.),theirpersonalreligiouscommitment
generally took the form of Buddhism, Jainism, or, more commonly, devotion to
S´iva,Vis.n.u,theSun-God(Su¯rya/A¯ditya),ortheGoddess(Bhagavat¯ı),thedeities
ofthenewinitiatoryreligions,allegiancesthatwerecommonlydeclaredintheir
inscriptionsbytheinclusionamidtheirroyaltitlesofepithetsthatmean‘entirely
ll.24-26 on 2.23: yadi katham. cid brahma¯varta¯dides´am api mleccha¯ a¯krameyuh.
tatraiva <ca> <svadharma?>vyavastha¯nam. kuryuh. bhaved eva¯sau mlecchades´ah..
tatha¯ yadi kas´ cit ks.atriya¯dija¯t¯ıyo ra¯ja¯ sa¯dhva¯caran.o mleccha¯n para¯jayec ca¯tur-
varn.yam. va¯sayen mleccha¯m. s´ ca¯rya¯varta iva ca¯n.d.a¯la¯n vyavastha¯payet so ’pi sya¯d
yajn˜iyah. ‘Ifsomehowforeignersweretoinvadesuch[pure]regionsasthatbetween
theSarasvat¯ıandDr.s.advat¯ırivers(Brahma¯varta)<and>impose<theirreligion?>,
then even they would definitely become foreign lands [unfit for sacrifice]. By the
same standard, if some king belonging to the Ks.atriya or other [suitable caste-
class]andoforthodox[brahmanical]observanceweretoconquerforeigners[intheir
lands],settlecommunitiesofthefourcaste-classes[there],andimposeonthosefor-
eigners the status of untouchables, just as in the brahmanical heartland of India
north of the Vindhyas (A¯rya¯varta), then those territories too would be fit for the
performanceof[Vaidika]sacrifices’.
5On the duty of the king to donate [tax-free] land and other valuables to learned
Vaidikabrahmins(vipra¯h.,s´rotriya¯h.)see,e.g.,Ya¯jn˜avalkyasmr.ti1.315–320;1.323:
na¯tah. parataro dharmo nr.pa¯n.a¯m. yad ran.a¯rjitam j viprebhyo d¯ıyate dravyam. ...
‘Thereisnohigherreligiousobligationforkingsthanthatofbestowingthewealth
they acquire through war on learned Vaidika brahmins ...’; Vis.n.usmr.ti 3.81–82:
bra¯hman.ebhyas´ ca bhuvam. pratipa¯dayet ... ‘He should bestow land on brah-
mins’. On the king’s duty not to tax learned Vaidikas see Manusmr.ti 7.133ab:
mriyama¯n.o ’py a¯dad¯ıta na ra¯ja¯ s´rotriya¯t karam ‘Even though dying [through
poverty] a king may not levy a tax from a learned Vaidika’. The giving of land
to learned brahmins is already advocated at length as the king’s religious duty in
the Maha¯bha¯rata (Anus´a¯sanaparvan, Adhya¯ya 61); and that passage includes an
injunction that it should be read to the king immediately after his consecration
(13.61.36: abhis.icyaivanr.patim. s´ra¯vayedimama¯gamam).
6Forastudyofland-grantstobrahmins(brahmadeyam,agraha¯rah.,s´a¯sanam)dur-
ing our period in a particular region, Orissa and northern Andhra Pradesh, see
SINGH1994,pp.123–243. ForthesameintheFarSouthinPallavaandColatimes
seeKARASHIMA1984,especiallypp.3,36–40,and129;andSTEIN1994,especially
pp.63–89and141–172. Themigrationofgroupsofnorth-IndianVaidikabrahmins
as recipients of royal grants is the subject of DATTA 1989. See also DUTTA 1995,
pp.97–118onthepracticeandimplicationsofland-grantstobrahminsinnorthern
Indiac.400–700.
–43–