Bulletin of the Asia Institute

New Series/Volume 24

2010

Published with the assistance of the Neil Kreitman Foundation (U.K.)

 Contents
David Stronach Solomon at Pasargadae: Some New Perspectives 1
Domenico Agostini Encountering a Beautiful Maiden: On the Zoroastrian dēn in
Comparison with Dante’s Beatrice 15
Yishai Kiel Gazing through Transparent Objects in Pahlavi and Rabbinic
Literature: A Comparative Analysis 25
Dieter Weber Villages and Estates in the Documents from the Pahlavi Archive:
The Geographical Background 37
Michael Shenkar The Epic of Farāmarz in the Panjikent Paintings 67
Étienne de la Vaissière Silk, Buddhism and Early Khotanese Chronology: A Note on the
Prophecy of the Li Country 85
Harry Falk Libation Trays from Gandhara 89
Phyllis Granoff Maitreya and the Yūpa: Some Gandharan Reliefs 115
David Frendo Sovereignty, Control, and Co-existence in Byzantine-Iranian
Relations: An Overview 129
Zsuzsanna Gulácsi The Prophet’s Seal: A Contextualized Look at the Crystal Sealstone
of Mani (216–276 C.E.) in the Bibliothèque nationale de France 161

Review Article
Prods Oktor Skjærvø
Gnosis and Deliverance: Werner Sundermann’s “Speech of
the Living Soul” 187

Reviews
AZARNOUCHE, ED. AND TRANS. Husraw ī Kawādān-ē ud Rēdag-ē:
Khosrow fils de Kawād et un page (Jenny Rose) 205
AGOSTINI. Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg: Un texte eschatologique
zoroastrien (Daniel Sheffield) 207
JULLIEN, ED. Eastern Christianity: A Crossroads of Cultures
(David Frendo) 210

Books Received 215

Abbreviations 217

Color plates including images from Michael Shenkar and

Zsuzsanna Gulácsi follow pp. 74 and 162 in this volume.

v
 Silk, Buddhism and Early Khotanese Chronology:
A Note on the Prophecy of the Li Country
É T I E N N E D E L A VA I S S I È R E

ehess

The Prophecy of the Li Country (Li yul luṅ-
bstan-pa), extant in the Tanjur, is a Tibetan text
that describes the Buddhist religious history of
Khotan and gives a chronological list of royal foun-
dations of Buddhist monasteries. Fifty-six gener-
ations of kings, one regent and some queens are
mentioned, with the monasteries they created.1
This chronological text might have yielded sig-
nificant information regarding the poorly known
history of the oasis, as the author is clearly well
aware of Khotan, whether translating a Khotanese
text, or writing in Tibetan about Khotan in the
second half of the 8th century. Unfortunately, it
has proved difficult to find any links between the
royal genealogy and external data, be it Chinese
texts or Khotanese documents, except for the
very last part of the text, which deals with kings
of the 7th and 8th centuries. The chronology pro-
vided in the list is not of great use, claiming in an
impossible manner to go back 1,256 years before
a Dog Year.2
Moreover, the repetition of the names of the
kings may have created some overlaps and con-
fusions in the middle of the list—there are three
successions of Kīrti-Saṅgrāma for instance. How-
ever, these potential errors occur after the period
of the early kings in the list; the aim of this brief
note is to provide a very tentative and basic time
frame for some early kings of Khotan, who acted
as donor (dānapati) and created some of the mon-
asteries and might have been remembered more
precisely by the monastic tradition.
A synoptic table of the early kings and their
monasteries is below:

King Monastery Other Data

Sa-nu
Yehu-la Built Khotan
Saṃbhava Ćar-ma First monastery

No monasteries created during seven generations of kings

Vīrya Hgum-tir, Gautośan

No monasteries created during two generations of kings

Jaya Ma-źa, Potarya Sericulture in Khotan
Dharma Hdro-tir, Mjal-mo-ka ka-ro-ṅa Mahāsāmghika and Sarvāstivādin in Khotan
Siṃha Sam-ña
Kīrti Sru-ño
Saṅgrāma Dharmakīrtis

No monasteries created during fifteen generations of kings

Kīrti
Saṅgrāma Attacked the Türks

85
 d e l a v a i s s i è r e : Silk, Buddhism and Early Khotanese Chronology
The analysis is based on the succession of the
three kings Jaya, Dharma and Siṃha and is cer-
tainly not valid if this succession is rejected. All
of them created monasteries, and it is obvious
from the text of the Prophecy that the chrono-
logical order of these creations was an important
criterium of precedence.
The key point of the analysis is the fact that the
grandson, Siṃha, created the Sam-ña monastery.3
This monastery is described extensively by Xuan-
zang under the name of Suomoruo mon-
astery,4 which was then pronounced *samańa.5
In particular, Xuanzang gives the location of the
monastery, five to six li to the west of the capital.
But this monastery is also known under a differ-
ent name, as demonstrated by Zhang Guangda
and Rong Xinjiang in an article on the monastic
geography of Khotan:6 Faxian, who visited Kho-
tan in 400, has a long description of a monastery,
the New monastery of the king , situated
seven to eight li west of the capital.7 The distance
and direction are similar, and moreover the li of
Faxian was slightly shorter than the Tang one.8
Several details in both depictions are also similar,
and there is no doubt that the Sam-ña monastery,
then quite recent, is designated under the name of
New monastery of the king in Faxian.
The interesting point is that Faxian gives a date
for the creation of the monastery: eighty years be-
fore his sojourn in Khotan.9 Thus, the king Vijaya
Siṃha would have reigned ca. a.d. 320. It would
provide us with a much-wanted firm point in
Khotanese early chronology.
This may be partly sustained by a report that
might point to the accuracy of this date. It is well
known that during the High Middle Ages, Kho-
tan was mainly Mahayanist. In 400, this domi-
nation was already complete according to Faxian.
Regarding the dominant trend in Khotanese Bud-
dhism in the 270s, it is said that the first Chi-
nese pilgrim in search of the law to the West,
Zhu Shixing, stopped at Khotan ca. a.d. 265–270
and attempted to obtain a more complete text of
the Prajñāpāramitā.10 Initially, he was opposed
by the Hinayanist monks, who were then much
more numerous and powerful than the Maha-
yanist ones according to Zhu’s biography. The
king was their ally, and they managed to have his
request blocked; only an ordeal by fire applied to
the text itself allowed for its delivery to the Chi-
nese monk. He sent the manuscript to China in
282. In other words, it is between the sojourn of
86
Zhu Shixing and that of Faxian, i.e. between ca.
270 and 400, that Mahāyāna became the domi-
nant religious faction in Khotan. This evolution
might have been shortly after the Zhu Shixing
period, as two Mahayanist Khotanese monks ar-
rived in 291 and 296 in China.11
Returning to the text of the Prophecy, during
the reign of the father of Vijaya Siṃha, Vijaya
Dharma, that is, in the last quarter of the 3rd
century, a huge influx of Mahāsāṃghika monks
from India was supposed to have taken place in
the oasis. They created no less than sixteen mon-
asteries in Khotan and its surroundings, while un-
der the same king only one explicitly Hinayanist
monastery, of the Sarvāstivādin, was created.12
The whole episode of the Prophecy, with the op-
position between the two schools, both theoret-
ical and numerical, clearly aims to explain the
domination of Mahāyāna in Khotan. Moreover,
the intimate links between the Mahāsāṃghika
school and the development of Mahāyāna are
well known. The balance between the two trends
of the Buddhist community was certainly modi-
fied during this period. All these dates concur.
This chronology of Mahayanist evolution in
Khotan is an independent confirmation of the
chronology proposed for Siṃha. We would have
two kings in succession, Dharma and Siṃha, be-
tween an unknown date after ca. 270 and ca. 320.
In turn this chronology gives some very inter-
esting results on the vexed question of the first
time Chinese sericulture became known outside
of China. The story, narrated by Xuanzang, is
well known: a king of Khotan wanted to develop
sericulture in the oasis and, confronted with the
Chinese monopoly, induced a Chinese princess
who was supposed to marry him to secretly bring
seeds of the white mulberry tree and silkworm
eggs hidden in her hat. This story is known also
in Khotanese iconography. In addition, it is nar-
rated, in a slightly different form, in the Prophecy.
Xuanzang and the Prophecy underscore the role
of a Chinese wife of the king of Khotan and on
the foundation of a Mashe monastery, Ma-źa
in the Tibetan text. This princess and this monas-
tery are precisely linked in the Prophecy to King
Vijaya Jaya, the grandfather of Siṃha, the king
who reigned ca. 320, and the father of King Vijaya
Dharma, who reigned after 270. Vijaya Jaya might
actually have been the king whom Zhu Shixing
met ca. 270. This story of technological spying
easily could be placed in the period of the 270s
 d e l a v a i s s i è r e : Silk, Buddhism and Early Khotanese Chronology

and 280s of the 3rd century when China again ex- text, with its numerous Sogdian traders, concurs well
panded to the west: Shanshan, the next important with the almost contemporary Ancient Sogdian Let-
oasis to the east, was reconquered by the Chinese ters. For internal, but vague, reasons, this Kharoṣṭhī
in 263, thus putting Khotan in immediate contact document had been ascribed to the 3rd or 4th c.: it is
another hint, if vague, of the accuracy of the whole set
with China.
of dates here analyzed. This method of reasoning is
The development of a stable, sizeable silk in-
however weakened by the fact that some other Siṃha
dustry in Khotan would have taken at least one might be hidden among the numerous nameless kings
or two generations after the 270s and 280s; this of the list.
might explain the lack of any reference to mul-
berries or silkworms in the primarily 3rd cen-
tury a.d. Niya documents (ca. 235–ca. 324). One
of these documents is interesting in this regard: Bibliography
“at present there are no merchants from China,
Burrow 1940 T. Burrow. A Translation of the
so that the debt of silk is not to be investigated Kharoṣṭhi Documents from
now.”13 This explicit mention of the necessity of Chinese Turkestan. London.
waiting for silk arriving from China to settle a le- Chu San Zang Ji Ji Chu San Zang Ji Ji ,
gal dispute should be dated probably ca. 290–310, ed. in Taishō, vol. 55, no. 2145.
as a name in it is known from other documents Coblin 1994 W. S. Coblin. “A Compendium
dated to this period. It proves that the silk indus- of Phonetics in Northwest
try in Khotan could not have been established for Chinese.” Journal of Chinese
a long time, as it still could not provide silk to Linguistics. Monograph
nearby Niya. Conversely the Beishi (88.3209) de- series 7.
Da Tang Xiyu Ji Da Tang Xiyu Ji , ed.
scribes a sizeable sericulture in 5th to 6th century
in Taishō, vol. 51.2, no. 2087.
Khotan, implying that this had been established
Duan and Wang 2013 Duan Qing and H. Wang, trans.
before ca. 400.14 “Were Textiles Used as Money
in Khotan in the Seventh and
Eighth Centuries?” JRAS, se-
Notes ries 3, 23.2: 307–25.
Emmerick 1967 R. Emmerick. Tibetan Texts
1. Edited and translated in Emmerick 1967. Concerning Khotan. London.
2. Emmerick 1967: 75. Faxian 2013 Faxian . Mémoire sur les
3. Emmerick 1967: 33. pays bouddhiques ,
4. Text in Taishō, vol. 51, no. 2087 ( ), trans. J.-P. Drège. Paris.
p. 944: . Noble 1931 P. Noble. “A Kharoṣṭhī Inscrip-
5. Coblin 1994: 124, 130, 400. tion from Endere.” BSOAS 6.2:
6. Zhang and Rong 2008: 232. 445–55.
7. Faxian 2013:  8: . Stein 1907 A. Stein. Ancient Khotan.
8. Wilkinson 2012: 556. Vol. 2. Oxford.
9. Faxian 2013: 8: 十 . Wilkinson 2012 E. Wilkinson. Chinese History:
10. Text in Taishō, vol. 55, no. 2145 ( ), A New Manual. Cambridge,
p. 97. See also Zürcher 1972: 61 for other data. Mass.
11. Zürcher 1972: 62. Zhang and Rong 2008 Zhang Guangda and Rong
12. Emmerick 1967: 41, 45. Xinjiang. “Yutian Fosi Zhi”
13. Burrow 1940: p. 9, no. 35. , in
14. Another byproduct of this hypothesis would 1986.3: 140–49; repr. in Zhang
be to more firmly date the Endere document no. 661, and Rong, Yutian Shi Cong Kao
as kindly suggested to me by Yutaka Yoshida: it was , 224–39. Beijing,
drafted in the reign of a Khotanese king named Vijita 2008.
Siṃha (Noble 1931). Hence it should have been writ- Zürcher 1972 E. Zürcher. The Buddhist
ten ca. 320 as the next Siṃha in the list is posterior to Conquest of China: Spread and
the mention of the Türks, after the end of the use of Adaptation of Buddhism in
Kharoṣṭhī script in Central Asia. The content of the Early Medieval China. Leiden.

87