“A short consideration regarding Christian elements

in a IX century Buddhist wall-painting from Bezeklik”

in The Tibet Journal – A publication for the study of Tibet, vol. XXIV, n.2
Dharamsala (India) 1999, pp. 101-107

MASSIMILIANO A. POLICHETTI

Table XVIII of F.H. ANDREWS Wall-Paintings from Ancient Shrines in Central Asia, recovered
by Sir Aurel Stein1, showing a wall painting from the site of Bezeklik (Sing Kiang), reveals the
discovery of the presence of a Nestorian monk2 among the figures surrounding the Buddha. The
author’s description, contained at p. 69 of the volume which provides a commentary to the tables, runs
as follows:

« ... of the two monks above, one is elderly, rather bald, with bushy greying eyebrows,
like those of the kneeling figure, and a nose that projects more abruptly than usual. From
his costume, very similar to that of the kneeling donor, he probably belongs to the same
order; and the rosary round his neck with pendant cross suggests that he may be a
Christian or a Manichaean, and from the type of features, a foreigner. »
 Once we accept the hardly negligible role played by Christianity particularly in its Nestorian3
expression among both the nomad and sedentary populations of Central Asia4, it appears indeed
peculiar that over such a vast area we are able to obtain only comparatively few elements which may be
directly related to Christianity5. The pictography which is the object of this short paper is therefore
paticularly worthy of note, and drives these remarks.

First of all, if one identifies the main figures in the fresco as the historical founder of Buddhism
(rectius: buddhadharma), it clearly follows that such an image, dating back to the ninth century C.E.,
already presupposes the whole process of gradual deification which the figure of the Enlightened One
has undergone over the centuries before. This process of deification is thus confirmed by encouraging
the devotee to ponder a meta-historical fact, in other words, that Buddha may have preached to some
Christians.
Moreover, if–as maintained by Andrews–the object worn around the neck by the “foreign”
monk were to be a real rosary complete with a cross, this religious implement would then have to be
recognized as the most ancient iconographic representation of a Christian rosary. Related to this last
remark, are the following observations. It is not possible to attain the highest degree of certainty
regarding the object which the elderly figure appears to delicately grasp between the fingers of his right
hand. The object could be a cross, considering that the Central Asian area undoubtedly constitutes an
iconic receptacle for elements such as this also6. Unfortunately, that very point in the fresco is damaged
by a crack, which renders the reading ambiguous. We are able to instead identify with a greater degree
of certainty the set of beads clearly represented around the figure’s neck as a “rosary” or, more in
general, as an object intended as an aid to prayer or recitation of words with spiritual aims 7. The
consideration that monks, be they Buddhist or Christian, will necessarily be vowed to poverty among
the other pledges, would in fact exclude the possibility of it being a mere ornament8. Yet:

« ... Le rosaire, qui n’a pas existé dans notre Occident latin avant le XIIIe siècle, est resté
ignoré au Moyen Age des Eglises orientales et les Chaldéenns n’ont jamais eu le pensée
de compter les prières sur les grains. »9

If the above statement is correct, it follows that a “Chaldean” monk would never have worn a
rosary. In this case Andrews may not have been sufficiently attentive in his description of this fragment
of the fresco, or, as the same author fails to notice, it could be a case of the iconographic representation
of a Christian rosary occurring within a Buddhist context belonging to that peculiar sphere of
exchanges between cultures and peoples which is Central Asia10.

NOTES

1) Oxford, University Press, 1948.

2) This is confirmed also in the analytical index at the end of the volume.
3) For a concise but exhaustive explanation of the names which during the course of the centuries
has been attributed to the Nestorian religious society, see J. DAUVILLIER, “Les Provinces Chaldéenne
de l’Exterieur au Moyen Age”, in Mélange F. Cavallera, Toulose, 1948, p. 262 - note 1.
4) In between the historical studies, see: J.A. ASSEMANI, De Catholicis seu Patriarchis
Chaldaeorum et Nestorianorum Commentarius Historico-Chronologicus, Roma, 1775; E. GISMONDI,
Maris Amri et Slibae: de Patrirchis Nestorianorum Commentaria, ex Cocidibus Vaticanis edidit ac
Latinae reddidit Henricus Gismondi S.J., Roma, 1896; S. GIAMIL, Genuinae Relationes inter Sedem
Apostolicam et Assyriorum Orientalium seu Chaldaeorum Ecclesiam, Roma, 1902; H. LABOURT, De
Timotheo I Nestorianorum Patriarcha (728-823), et Christianorum Orientalium condicione sub
Chaliphis Abbasidis, Paris, 1904; F. NAU, “L’Expansion Nestorienne en Asie”, in Annales du Musée
Guimet, vol. XL, Chalon sur Saone, 1914; A. MINGANA, “The early spread of Christianity in Central
Asia and the Far East - a new document”, in The J.Rylands Library, Manchester, 1925; E. BLOCHET,
“La Conquete des Etats Nestoriens de l’Asie Centrale par les Schiites - Les influences chrétienne et
bouddhique dans le dogme islamique”, in Revue de l’Orient Chretien, vol. V, Paris, 1926; E.
TISSERANT, “Nestorienne (l’Eglise)”, in Dictionaire de Theologie Catholique, Paris, 1932; G. MESSINA,
Cristianesimo, Buddhismo e Manicheismo nell’Asia Antica, Roma, 1947; J. RICHARD, “Le
Christianisme dans l’Asie Centrale”, in Journal of Asian History, vol. XVI/2, Wiesbaden, 1982; J.
DAUVILLIER, Histoire et Institution des Eglises Orientales au Moyen Age, London, 1983.
5) Concerning the Nestorian iconography in Central and Eastern Asia, see: F. HOLM, The
Nestorian Monument - an ancient record of Christianity in China, Chicago, 1909; H. WALEY, “Christ
or Bodhisattva?”, in Artibus Asiae, 1925, n.1, p.4-5; P.Y. SAEKY, D. LITT, The Nestorian Documents
and Relics in China, Tokyo, 1937; M. BUSSAGLI, La Peinture de l’Asie Centrale, Genève, 1963.
6) For the presence of the Christian cross in Central Asian area, see: A. GRUNWEDEL,
Altbuddhistische Kulstatten in Chinese Turkistan, Berlin, 1912, p. 170, pl. 392; P. ALFARIC, Les
Escritures Manichéennes, Paris, 1918, p. 190; A. STEIN, Ancient Khotan - a detailed report of
archaeological exploration in Chinese Turkestan, Oxford, 1921, pl. LXXVIII; A. VON LE COQ, Die
Buddhistische Spatantike in Mittelasiens, Berlin, 1922-33, vol. II - Miniaturen; A.H. FRANCKE,
“Felseninschriften in Ladakh”, in Sitzungsberichte Akademie, Berlin, 1925, p. 366 - 370; J.
DAUVILLIER, “Les Croix Trionphales dans l’Ancienne Eglise Chaldéenne”, in Eleona, Toulose, 1956;
G. TUCCI, Tibet - Archaelogia, Genève, 1975, plates 11, 29, 112; H.J. KLIMKEIT, Manichaean Art and
Calligraphy, Leiden, 1982, pl. XXII.
7) Some of the first Christian ascetics, like St. Paul of Tebe (IV century), are told counting prayers
and psalms by using heaps of stones. According to the Roman Catholic tradition, the inventor of the
rosary was St. Dominic from Guzman (born in Calaruega, Spain in 1170, dead in Bologna, Italy in
1221), founder of the Black Friars. But it is certain that the use of telling beads for counting prayers
comes to Europe from Asia, in other words from a religious context which is well different from the
Latinitas; see: W. KIRFEL, “Der Rosenkranz, Ursprungund Ausbreitung”, in Beitrage zur Sprach und
Kulturgeschichte des Orients, vol.1, Walldorf/Hessen, 1949; see also R. SCHERSCHEL, Der Rosenkranz
- das Jesusgebet des Westens, Friburg, Herder, 1979. The contiguity between East and West may be
noticed in this specific case also in the recurrence of the numbers 54 and 108, respectively in the beads
making up the Catholic corona (that is, the third part of a complete rosary) and in the beads making up
the Buddhist and the Hindu mālā. Lastly, it is possible to compare the similar shape of the rosary used
in the Coptic Christian Church and that one of the type of mālā used by devotees of vajrāyana in its
Tibetan expression. In both these cases, in addition to the remarkable similarity of the point, or terminal
part, of the rosary (the so called “guru-bead”, which is a feature formally shared also with the Muslim
rosary, made of 99 beads), we notice that two “counters” are incorporated for the telling of beads, one
for the tens and one for the hundreds. In Eastern Christian Orthodox tradition, to the rosary of solid
beads is preferred the rosary of soft knots made by wool (chokti), just in order to avoid the puzzling
similarity with the Muslim one; in fact, still today the Greeks use the Muslim rosary, so similar to the
Roman Catholic and Indian ones, only as a plaything (comboloy), but never for prayer. Lastly, also if
the shape of the Eastern Christian rosary differs so much from the asiatic ones, the kind of recitation in
the Orthodox Churces is much more near to the indian concept of japa than in Catholic tradition. It’s
actually only in the very recent times that the Roman Catholic Church has choose to reconsider the
value of esicast (from ἡσυχίαtranquillity) prayer (also called “heart prayer”), that is the repetition of
short sentences tuned on the breath and/or the palpitation; still few years ago this way of
contemplation, so venerated along the centuries in the Orthodox Churches, was interpreted by the Latin
Church as an irenistic aid leading towards mere quietism.
8) It’s remarkable that the term designating a Buddhist monk, bhikṣu, has in between the proper
meanings that of a person living of alm, the word “monk” deriving from the greek μοναχός solitary.
9) Note by J. Dauvillier, in: P. PELLIOT, Reserches sur les Chrétiens d’Asie Centrale e d’Extrème
Orient, Paris, 1972, p. 205.
10) On Central Asian interwoven cultural influences, see in between the others (in alphabetical
order): M. BUSSAGLI, Culture e Civiltà dell’Asia Centrale, Torino, 1970; L. HAMBIS, “Kuca centri”, in
Enciclopedia Universale dell’Arte, VIII, Venezia-Roma 1958, pp. 498-506; D. KLIMBURG-SALTER, The
Silk Route and the Diamond Path: Esoteric Buddhist Art on the Trans-Himalayan Trade Routes, Los
Angeles, 1982; P. MORTARI VERGARA CAFFARELLI, “Le due lapidi degli Illioni di Yang-Chou,
testimonianza di un sincretismo figurativo tra la Repubblica di Genova e l’Impero Mongolo di Cina nel
Trecento”, in Studi in Storia delle Arti, 4, Genova, 1994; M. TADDEI, Arte narrativa tra India e mondo
ellenistico, Roma, 1993; R. WHITFIELD, A. FARRER, Caves of Thousand Buddhas: Chinese Art from the
Silk Route, London, 1990; J. WILLIAMS, “The Iconography of Khotanese Painting”, in East and West,
Roma 1973, pp. 109-154; W. ZWALF, Buddhism: Art and Faith, London, 1985.