Chapter LXI (2)

Sanang Setzen enumerates a variety of the wonderful acts which
could be performed through the _Dhárani_. Such were, sticking a peg
into solid rock; restoring the dead to life; turning a dead body
into gold; penetrating everywhere as air does; flying; catching
wild beasts with the hand; reading thoughts; making water flow
backwards; eating tiles; sitting in the air with the legs doubled
under, etc. Some of these are precisely the powers ascribed to
Medea, Empedocles, and Simon Magus, in passages already cited.
Friar Ricold says on this subject: “There are certain men whom the
Tartars honour above all in the world, viz. the _Baxitae_ (_i.e._
_Bakhshis_), who are a kind of idol-priests. These are men from
India, persons of deep wisdom, well-conducted, and of the gravest
morals. They are usually acquainted with magic arts, and depend on
the counsel and aid of demons; they exhibit many illusions, and
predict some future events. For instance, one of eminence among
them was said to fly; the truth, however, was (as it proved), that
he did not fly, but did walk close to the surface of the ground
without touching it; and _would seem to sit down without having any
substance to support him_.” This last performance was witnessed by
Ibn Batuta at Delhi, in the presence of Sultan Mahomed Tughlak;
and it was professedly exhibited by a Brahmin at Madras in the
present century, a descendant doubtless of those Brahmans whom
Apollonius saw walking two cubits from the ground. It is also
described by the worthy Francis Valentyn as a performance known and
practised in his own day in India. It is related, he says, that “a
man will first go and sit on three sticks put together so as to
form a tripod; after which, first one stick, then a second, then
the third shall be removed from under him, and the man shall not
fall but shall still remain sitting in the air! Yet I have spoken
with two friends who had seen this at one and the same time; and
one of them, I may add, mistrusting his own eyes, had taken the
trouble to feel about with a long stick if there were nothing on
which the body rested; yet, as the gentleman told me, he could
neither feel nor see any such thing. Still, I could only say that I
could not believe it, as a thing too manifestly contrary to reason.”

Akin to these performances, though exhibited by professed jugglers
without claim to religious character, is a class of feats which
might be regarded as simply inventions if told by one author
only, but which seem to deserve prominent notice from their being
recounted by a series of authors, certainly independent of one
another, and writing at long intervals of time and place. Our
first witness is Ibn Batuta, and it will be necessary to quote
him as well as the others in full, in order to show how closely
their evidence tallies. The Arab Traveller was present at a great
entertainment at the Court of the Viceroy of Khansa (_Kinsay_ of
Polo, or Hang-chau fu): “That same night a juggler, who was one of
the Kán’s slaves, made his appearance, and the Amír said to him,
‘Come and show us some of your marvels.’ Upon this he took a wooden
ball, with several holes in it, through which long thongs were
passed, and, laying hold of one of these, slung it into the air.
It went so high that we lost sight of it altogether. (It was the
hottest season of the year, and we were outside in the middle of
the palace court.) There now remained only a little of the end of
a thong in the conjuror’s hand, and he desired one of the boys who
assisted him to lay hold of it and mount. He did so, climbing by
the thong, and we lost sight of him also! The conjuror then called
to him three times, but getting no answer, he snatched up a knife
as if in a great rage, laid hold of the thong, and disappeared
also! By and bye he threw down one of the boy’s hands, then a foot,
then the other hand, and then the other foot, then the trunk, and
last of all the head! Then he came down himself, all puffing and
panting, and with his clothes all bloody, kissed the ground before
the Amír, and said something to him in Chinese. The Amír gave some
order in reply, and our friend then took the lad’s limbs, laid them
together in their places, and gave a kick, when, presto! there
was the boy, who got up and stood before us! All this astonished
me beyond measure, and I had an attack of palpitation like that
which overcame me once before in the presence of the Sultan of
India, when he showed me something of the same kind. They gave me a
cordial, however, which cured the attack. The Kazi Afkharuddin was
next to me, and quoth he, ‘_Wallah!_ ’tis my opinion there has been
neither going up nor coming down, neither marring nor mending; ’tis
all hocus pocus!’”

Now let us compare with this, which Ibn Batuta the Moor says he
saw in China about the year 1348, the account which is given us
by Edward Melton, an Anglo-Dutch traveller, of the performances
of a Chinese gang of conjurors, which he witnessed at Batavia
about the year 1670 (I have forgotten to note the year). After
describing very vividly the _basket-murder_ trick, which is well
known in India, and now also in Europe, and some feats of bamboo
balancing similar to those which were recently shown by Japanese
performers in England, only more wonderful, he proceeds: “But now
I am going to relate a thing which surpasses all belief, and which
I should scarcely venture to insert here had it not been witnessed
by thousands before my own eyes. One of the same gang took a ball
of cord, and grasping one end of the cord in his hand slung the
other up into the air with such force that its extremity was beyond
reach of our sight. He then immediately climbed up the cord with
indescribable swiftness, and got so high that we could no longer
see him. I stood full of astonishment, not conceiving what was to
come of this; when lo! a leg came tumbling down out of the air.
One of the conjuring company instantly snatched it up and threw it
into the basket whereof I have formerly spoken. A moment later a
hand came down, and immediately on that another leg. And in short
all the members of the body came thus successively tumbling from
the air and were cast together into the basket. The last fragment
of all that we saw tumble down was the head, and no sooner had that
touched the ground than he who had snatched up all the limbs and
put them in the basket turned them all out again topsy-turvy. Then
straightway we saw with these eyes all those limbs creep together
again, and in short, form a whole man, who at once could stand
and go just as before, without showing the least damage! Never
in my life was I so astonished as when I beheld this wonderful
performance, and I doubted now no longer that these misguided
men did it by the help of the Devil. For it seems to me totally
impossible that such things should be accomplished by natural
means.” The same performance is spoken of by Valentyn, in a passage
also containing curious notices of the basket-murder trick, the
mango trick, the sitting in the air (quoted above), and others; but
he refers to Melton, and I am not sure whether he had any other
authority for it. The cut on this page is taken from Melton’s plate.

Again we have in the Memoirs of the Emperor Jahángir a detail
of the wonderful performances of seven jugglers from Bengal who
exhibited before him. Two of their feats are thus described:
“_Ninth_. They produced a man whom they divided limb from limb,
actually severing his head from the body. They scattered these
mutilated members along the ground, and in this state they lay for
some time. They then extended a sheet or curtain over the spot, and
one of the men putting himself under the sheet, in a few minutes
came from below, followed by the individual supposed to have been
cut into joints, in perfect health and condition, and one might
have safely sworn that he had never received wound or injury
whatever ... _Twenty-third_. They produced a chain of 50 cubits in
length, and in my presence threw one end of it towards the sky,
_where it remained as if fastened to something in the air_. A dog
was then brought forward, and being placed at the lower end of the
chain, immediately ran up, and reaching the other end, _immediately
disappeared in the air_. In the same manner a hog, a panther, a
lion, and a tiger were successively sent up the chain, and all
equally disappeared at the upper end of the chain. At last they
took down the chain and put it into a bag, no one ever discovering
in what way the different animals were made to vanish into the air
in the mysterious manner above described.”

[There would appear (says the _Times of India_, quoted by the
_Weekly Dispatch_, 15th September, 1889) to be a fine field of
unworked romance in the annals of Indian jugglery. One Siddeshur
Mitter, writing to the Calcutta paper, gives a thrilling account
of a conjurer’s feat which he witnessed recently in one of the
villages of the Hooghly district. He saw the whole thing himself,
he tells us, so there need be no question about the facts. On the
particular afternoon when he visited the village the place was
occupied by a company of male and female jugglers, armed with
bags and boxes and musical instruments, and all the mysterious
paraphernalia of the peripatetic _Jadugar_. While Siddeshur was
looking on, and in the broad, clear light of the afternoon, a man
was shut up in a box, which was then carefully nailed up and bound
with cords. Weird spells and incantations of the style we are
all familiar with were followed by the breaking open of the box,
which, “to the unqualified amazement of everybody, was found to be
perfectly empty.” All this is much in the usual style; but what
followed was so much superior to the ordinary run of modern Indian
jugglery that we must give it in the simple Siddeshur’s own words.
When every one was satisfied that the man had really disappeared,
the principal performer, who did not seem to be at all astonished,
told his audience that the vanished man had gone up to the heavens
to fight Indra. “In a few moments,” says Siddeshur, “he expressed
anxiety at the man’s continued absence in the aerial regions, and
said that he would go up to see what was the matter. A boy was
called, who held upright a long bamboo, up which the man climbed
to the top, whereupon we suddenly lost sight of him, and the boy
laid the bamboo on the ground. Then there fell on the ground before
us the different members of a human body, all bloody,—first one
hand, then another, a foot, and so on, until complete. The boy then
elevated the bamboo, and the principal performer, appearing on
the top as suddenly as he had disappeared, came down, and seeming
quite disconsolate, said that Indra had killed his friend before
he could get there to save him. He then placed the mangled remains
in the same box, closed it, and tied it as before. Our wonder and
astonishment reached their climax when, a few minutes later, on the
box being again opened, the man jumped out perfectly hearty and
unhurt.” Is not this rather a severe strain on one’s credulity,
even for an Indian jugglery story?]

In Philostratus, again, we may learn the antiquity of some juggling
tricks that have come up as novelties in our own day. Thus at
Taxila a man set his son against a board, and then threw darts
tracing the outline of the boy’s figure on the board. This feat was
shown in London some fifteen or twenty years ago, and humorously
commemorated in _Punch_ by John Leech.

(_Philostratus_, Fr. Transl. Bk. III. ch. xv. and xxvii.; _Mich.
Glycas_, Ann. II. 156, Paris ed.; _Delrio, Disquis. Magic._ pp. 34,
100; _Koeppen_, I. 31, II. 82, 114–115, 260, 262, 280; _Vassilyev_,
156; _Della Penna_, 36; _S. Setzen_, 43, 353; _Pereg. Quat._ 117;
_I. B._ IV. 39 and 290 _seqq._; _Asiat. Researches_, XVII. 186;
_Valentyn_, V. 52–54; _Edward Melton, Engelsch Edelmans, Zeldzaame
en Gedenkwaardige Zee en Land Reizen, etc., aangevangen in den
Jaare 1660 en geendigd in den Jaare 1677_, Amsterdam, 1702, p. 468;
_Mem. of the Emp. Jahangueir_, pp. 99, 102.)

The Grand Temple of Buddha at LHASA]

NOTE 12.—[“The maintenance of the Lamas, of their monasteries,
the expenses for the sacrifices and for transcription of sacred
books, required enormous sums. The Lamas enjoyed a preponderating
influence, and stood much higher than the priests of other creeds,
living in the palace as if in their own house. The perfumes, which
M. Polo mentions, were used by the Lamas for two purposes; they
used them for joss-sticks, and for making small turrets, known
under the name of _ts’a-ts’a_; the joss-sticks used to be burned
in the same way as they are now; the _ts’a-ts’a_ were inserted in
_suburgas_ or buried in the ground. At the time when the _suburga_
was built in the garden of the Peking palace in 1271, there were
used, according to the Empress’ wish, 1008 turrets made of the
most expensive perfumes, mixed with pounded gold, silver, pearls,
and corals, and 130,000 _ts’a-ts’a_ made of ordinary perfumes.”
(_Palladius_, 29.)—H. C.]

NOTE 13.—There is no exaggeration in this number. Turner speaks
of 2500 monks in one Tibetan convent. Huc mentions Chorchi, north
of the Great Wall, as containing 2000; and Kúnbúm, where he and
Gabet spent several months, on the borders of Shensi and Tibet, had
nearly 4000. The missionary itinerary from Nepal to L’hasa given by
Giorgi, speaks of a group of convents at a place called Brephung,
which formerly contained 10,000 inmates, and at the time of the
journey (about 1700) still contained 5000, including attendants.
Dr. Campbell gives a list of twelve chief convents in L’hasa and
its vicinity (not including the Potala or Residence of the Grand
Lama), of which one is said to have 7500 members, resident and
itinerary. Major Montgomerie’s Pandit gives the same convent 7700
Lamas. In the great monastery at L’hasa called _Labrang_, they
show a copper kettle holding more than 100 buckets, which was
used to make tea for the Lamas who performed the daily temple
service. The monasteries are usually, as the text says, like small
towns, clustered round the great temples. That represented at p.
224 is at Jehol, and is an imitation of the Potala at L’hasa.
(_Huc’s Tartary_, _etc._, pp. 45, 208, etc.; _Alph. Tibetan_, 453;
_J. A. S. B._ XXIV. 219; _J. R. G. S._ XXXVIII. 168; _Koeppen_,
II. 338.) [_La Géographie_, II. 1901, pp. 242–247, has an article
by Mr. J. Deniker, _La Première Photographie de Lhassa_, with a
view of _Potala_, in 1901, from a photograph by M. O. Norzunov;
it is interesting to compare it with the view given by Kircher in
1670.—H. C.]

[“The monasteries with numbers of monks, who, as M. Polo asserts,
behaved decently, evidently belonged to Chinese Buddhists,
_ho-shang_; in Kúblái’s time they had two monasteries in Shangtu,
in the north-east and north-west parts of the town.” (_Palladius_,
29.) Rubruck (_Rockhill’s_ ed. p. 145) says: “All the priests
(of the idolaters) shave their heads, and are dressed in saffron
colour, and they observe chastity from the time they shave their
heads, and they live in congregations of one or two hundred.”—H. C.]

NOTE 14.—There were many anomalies in the older Lamaism, and it
permitted, at least in some sects of it which still subsist, the
marriage of the clergy under certain limitations and conditions.
One of Giorgi’s missionaries speaks of a Lama of high _hereditary_
rank as a spiritual prince who marries, but separates from his
wife as soon as he has a son, who after certain trials is deemed
worthy to be his successor. [“A good number of Lamas were married,
as M. Polo correctly remarks; their wives were known amongst the
Chinese, under the name of _Fan-sao_.” (_Ch’ue keng lu_, quoted by
_Palladius_, 28.)—H. C.] One of the “_reforms_” of Tsongkhapa was
the absolute prohibition of marriage to the clergy, and in this
he followed the institutes of the oldest Buddhism. Even the _Red
Lamas_, or unreformed, cannot now marry without a dispensation.

But even the oldest orthodox Buddhism had its Lay brethren and Lay
sisters (_Upásaka_ and _Upásiká_), and these are to be found in
Tibet and Mongolia (_Voués au blanc_, as it were). They are called
by the Mongols, by a corruption of the Sanskrit, _Ubashi_ and
_Ubashanza_. Their vows extend to the strict keeping of the five
great commandments of the Buddhist Law, and they diligently ply the
rosary and the prayer-wheel, but they are not pledged to celibacy,
nor do they adopt the tonsure. As a sign of their amphibious
position, they commonly wear a red or yellow girdle. These are what
some travellers speak of as the lowest order of Lamas, permitted to
marry; and Polo may have regarded them in the same light.

(_Koeppen_, II. 82, 113, 276, 291; _Timk._ II. 354; _Erman_, II.
304; _Alph. Tibet._ 449.)

NOTE 15.—[Mr. Rockhill writes to me that “bran” is certainly
Tibetan _tsamba_ (parched barley).—H. C.]

NOTE 16.—Marco’s contempt for _Patarins_ slips out in a later
passage (Bk. III. ch. xx.). The name originated in the eleventh
century in Lombardy, where it came to be applied to the “heretics,”
otherwise called “Cathari.” Muratori has much on the origin of the
name Patarini, and mentions a monument, which still exists, in
the Piazza de’ Mercanti at Milan, in honour of Oldrado Podestà of
that city in 1233, and which thus, with more pith than grammar,
celebrates his meritorious acts:—

“Qui solium struxit Catharos _ut debuit_ UXIT.”

Other cities were as piously Catholic. A Mantuan chronicler records
under 1276: “Captum fuit Sermionum seu redditum fuit Ecclesiæ, et
capti fuerunt cercha CL Patarini contra fidem, inter masculos et
feminas; qui omnes ducti fuerunt Veronam, et ibi incarcerati, _et
pro magna parte_ COMBUSTI.” (_Murat. Dissert._ III. 238; _Archiv.
Stor. Ital._ N.S. I. 49.)

NOTE 17.—Marsden, followed by Pauthier, supposes these unorthodox
ascetics to be Hindu Sanyasis, and the latter editor supposes even
the name _Sensi_ or _Sensin_ to represent that denomination. Such
wanderers do occasionally find their way to Tartary; Gerbillon
mentions having encountered five of them at Kuku Khotan (_supra_,
p. 286), and I think John Bell speaks of meeting one still further
north. But what is said of the great and numerous idols of the
_Sensin_ is inconsistent with such a notion, as is indeed, it seems
to me, the whole scope of the passage. Evidently no occasional
vagabonds from a far country, but some indigenous sectaries, are
in question. Nor would bran and hot water be a Hindu regimen.
The staple diet of the Tibetans is _Chamba_, the meal of toasted
barley, mixed sometimes with warm water, but more frequently with
hot tea, and I think it is probable that these were the elements
of the ascetic diet rather than the mere _bran_ which Polo speaks
of. Semedo indeed says that some of the Buddhist devotees professed
never to take any food but tea; knowing people said they mixed
with it pellets of sun-dried beef. The determination of the sect
intended in the text is, I conceive, to be sought in the history of
Chinese or Tibetan Buddhism and their rivals.

Both Baldelli and Neumann have indicated a general opinion that
the _Taossé_ or some branch of that sect is meant, but they have
entered into no particulars except in a reference by the former to
_Shien-sien_, a title of perfection affected by that sect, as the
origin of Polo’s term _Sensin_. In the substance of this I think
they are right. But I believe that in the text this Chinese sect
are, rightly or wrongly, identified with the ancient Tibetan sect
of _Bon-po_, and that part of the characters assigned belong to
each.

First with regard to the _Taossé_. These were evidently the
_Patarini_ of the Buddhists in China at this time, and Polo was
probably aware of the persecution which the latter had stirred up
Kúblái to direct against them in 1281—persecution at least it is
called, though it was but a mild proceeding in comparison with the
thing contemporaneously practised in Christian Lombardy, for in
heathen Cathay, books, and not human creatures, were the subjects
doomed to burn, and even that doom was not carried out.

[“The Tao-sze,” says M. Polo, “were looked upon as heretics by
the other sects; that is, of course, by the Lamas and Ho-shangs;
in fact in his time a passionate struggle was going on between
Buddhists and Tao-sze, or rather a persecution of the latter by the
former; the Buddhists attributed to the doctrine of the Tao-sze a
pernicious tendency, and accused them of deceit; and in support
of these assertions they pointed to some of their sacred books.
Taking advantage of their influence at Court, they persuaded Kúblái
to decree the burning of these books, and it was carried out in
Peking.” (_Palladius_, 30.)—H. C.]

The term which Polo writes as _Sensin_ appears to have been that
popularly applied to the Taossé sect at the Mongol Court. Thus we
are told by Rashíduddín in his History of Cathay: “In the reign
of Din-Wang, the 20th king of this (the 11th) Dynasty, TAI SHANG
LÁI KÚN, was born. This person is stated to have been accounted a
prophet by the people of Khitá; his father’s name was Hán; like
Shák-múni he is said to have been conceived by light, and it is
related that his mother bore him in her womb no less a period than
80 years. The people who embraced his doctrine were called شن شن
(_Shăn-shăn_ or _Shinshin_).” This is a correct epitome of the
Chinese story of _Laokiun_ or _Lao-tsé_, born in the reign of _Ting
Wang_ of the Cheu Dynasty. The whole title used by Rashíduddín,
_Tai Shang Lao Kiun_, “The Great Supreme Venerable Ruler,” is that
formerly applied by the Chinese to this philosopher.

Further, in a Mongol [and Chinese] inscription of the year 1314
from the department of Si-ngan fu, which has been interpreted and
published by Mr. Wylie, the Taossé priests are termed _Senshing_.
[See _Devéria, Notes d’Épigraphie_, pp. 39–43, and Prince _R.
Bonaparte’s Recueil_, Pl. xii. No. 3.—H. C.]

Seeing then that the very term used by Polo is that applied by both
Mongol and Persian authorities of the period to the Taossé, we can
have no doubt that the latter are indicated, whether the facts
stated about them be correct or not.

The word Senshing-ud (the Mongol plural) is represented in the
Chinese version of Mr. Wylie’s inscription by _Sín-săng_, a
conventional title applied to literary men, and this perhaps is
sufficient to determine the Chinese word which _Sensin_ represents.
I should otherwise have supposed it to be the _Shin-sian_ alluded
to by Baldelli, and mentioned in the quotations which follow;
and indeed it seems highly probable that two terms so much alike
should have been confounded by foreigners. Semedo says of the
Taossé: “They pretend that by means of certain exercises and
meditations one shall regain his youth, and others shall attain to
be _Shien-sien_, _i.e._ ‘Terrestrial Beati,’ in whose state every
desire is gratified, whilst they have the power to transport
themselves from one place to another, however distant, with speed
and facility.” Schott, on the same subject, says: “By _Sian_ or
_Shin-sian_ are understood in the old Chinese conception, and
particularly in that of the Tao-Kiao [or Taossé] sect, persons
who withdraw to the hills to lead the life of anchorites, and who
have attained, either through their ascetic observances or by the
power of charms and elixirs, to the possession of miraculous gifts
and of terrestrial immortality.” And M. Pauthier himself, in his
translation of the Journey of Khieu, an eminent doctor of this
sect, to the camp of the Great Chinghiz in Turkestan, has related
how Chinghiz bestowed upon this personage “a seal with a tiger’s
head and a diploma” (surely a lion’s head, _P’aizah_ and _Yarligh_;
see _infra_, Bk. II. ch. vii. note 2), “wherein he was styled _Shin
Sien_ or Divine Anchorite.” _Sian-jin_ again is the word used by
Hiuen Tsang as the equivalent to the name of the Indian _Rishis_,
who attain to supernatural powers.

[“_Sensin_ is a sufficiently faithful transcription of _Sien-seng_
(Sien-shing in Pekingese); the name given by the Mongols in
conversation as well as in official documents, to the Tao-sze,
in the sense of preceptors, just as Lamas were called by them
_Bacshi_, which corresponds to the Chinese _Sien-seng_. M. Polo
calls them fasters and ascetics. It was one of the sects of
Taouism. There was another one which practised cabalistic and other
mysteries. The Tao-sze had two monasteries in Shangtu, one in the
eastern, the other in the western part of the town.” (_Palladius_,
30.) —H. C.]

One class of the Tao priests or devotees does marry, but another
class never does. Many of them lead a wandering life, and
derive a precarious subsistence from the sale of charms and
medical nostrums. They shave the sides of the head, and coil the
remaining hair in a tuft on the crown, in the ancient Chinese
manner; moreover, says Williams, they “_are recognised by their
slate-coloured robes_.” On the feast of one of their divinities
whose title Williams translates as “High Emperor of the Sombre
Heavens,” they assemble before his temple, “and having made a
great fire, about 15 or 20 feet in diameter, go over it barefoot,
preceded by the priests and bearing the gods in their arms. They
firmly assert that if they possess a sincere mind they will not
be injured by the fire; but both priests and people get miserably
burnt on these occasions.” Escayrac de Lauture says that on those
days they leap, dance, and whirl round the fire, striking at the
devils with a straight Roman-like sword, and sometimes wounding
themselves as the priests of Baal and Moloch used to do.

(_Astley_, IV. 671; _Morley_ in _J. R. A. S._ VI. 24; _Semedo_,
111, 114; _De Mailla_, IX. 410; _J. As._ sér. V. tom. viii. 138;
_Schott über den Buddhismus_ etc. 71; _Voyage de Khieou_ in _J.
As._ sér. VI. tom. ix. 41; _Middle Kingdom_, II. 247; _Doolittle_,
192; _Esc. de Lauture, Mém. sur la Chine, Religion_, 87, 102;
_Pèler. Boudd._ II. 370, and III. 468.)

Let us now turn to the _Bon-po_. Of this form of religion and
its sectaries not much is known, for it is now confined to the
eastern and least known part of Tibet. It is, however, believed
to be a remnant of the old pre-Buddhistic worship of the powers
of nature, though much modified by the Buddhistic worship with
which it has so long been in contact. Mr. Hodgson also pronounces
a collection of drawings of Bonpo divinities, which were made for
him by a mendicant friar of the sect from the neighbourhood of
Tachindu, or Ta-t’sien-lu, to be saturated with _Sakta_ attributes,
_i.e._ with the spirit of the Tantrika worship, a worship which he
tersely defines as “a mixture of lust, ferocity, and mummery,”
and which he believes to have originated in an incorporation with
the Indian religions of the rude superstitions of the primitive
Turanians. Mr. Hodgson was told that the Bonpo sect still possessed
numerous and wealthy Vihars (or abbeys) in Tibet. But from the
information of the Catholic missionaries in Eastern Tibet, who
have come into closest contact with the sect, it appears to be now
in a state of great decadence, “oppressed by the Lamas of other
sects, the _Peunbo_ (Bonpo) think only of shaking off the yoke,
and getting deliverance from the vexations which the smallness of
their number forces them to endure.” In June, 1863, apparently
from such despairing motives, the Lamas of Tsodam, a Bonpo convent
in the vicinity of the mission settlement of Bonga in E. Tibet,
invited the Rev. Gabriel Durand to come and instruct them. “In
this temple,” he writes, “are the _monstrous idols_ of the sect
of Peunbo; horrid figures, whose features only Satan could have
inspired. They are disposed about the enclosure according to their
power and their seniority. Above the pagoda is a loft, the nooks
of which are crammed with all kinds of diabolical trumpery; little
idols of wood or copper, hideous masques of men and animals,
superstitious Lama vestments, drums, trumpets of human bones,
sacrificial vessels, in short, all the utensils with which the
devil’s servants in Tibet honour their master. And what will
become of it all? The Great River, whose waves roll to Martaban
(the Lu-kiang or Salwen), is not more than 200 or 300 paces
distant.... Besides the infernal paintings on the walls, eight
or nine monstrous idols, seated at the inner end of the pagoda,
were calculated by their size and aspect to inspire awe. In the
middle was _Tamba-Shi-Rob_, the great doctor of the sect of the
Peunbo, squatted with his right arm outside his red scarf, and
holding in his left the vase of knowledge.... On his right hand
sat _Keumta-Zon-bo_, ‘the All-Good,’ ... with ten hands and three
heads, one over the other.... At his right is _Dreuma_, the most
celebrated goddess of the sect. On the left of Tamba-Shi-Rob was
another goddess, whose name they never could tell me. On the left
again of this anonymous goddess appeared _Tam-pla-mi-ber_, ...
a monstrous dwarf environed by flames and his head garnished
with a diadem of skulls. _He trod with one foot on the head of
Shakia-tupa_ [_Shakya Thubba_, _i.e._ ‘the Mighty Shakya,’ the usual
Tibetan appellation of Sakya Buddha himself].... The idols are made
of a coarse composition of mud and stalks kneaded together, on
which they put first a coat of plaster and then various colours, or
even silver or gold.... _Four oxen would scarcely have been able to
draw one of the idols_.” Mr. Emilius Schlagintweit, in a paper on
the subject of this sect, has explained some of the names used by
the missionary. _Tamba-Shi-Rob_ is “_bs_tanpa _g_Shen-rabs,” _i.e._
the doctrine of Shen-rabs, who is regarded as the founder of the
Bon religion. [Cf. _Grenard_, II. 407.—H. C.] _Keun-tu-zon-bo_ is
“Kun-tu-_b_zang-po,” “_the All Best_.”

[_Bon-po_ seems to be (according to Grenard, II. 410) a “coarse
naturism combined with ancestral worship” resembling Taoism. It
has, however, borrowed a good deal from Buddhism. “I noticed,”
says Mr. Rockhill (_Journey_, 86), “a couple of grimy volumes
of Bönbo sacred literature. One of them I examined; it was a
funeral service, and was in the usual Bönbo jargon, three-fourths
Buddhistic in its nomenclature.” The Bon-po Lamas are above all
sorcerers and necromancers, and are very similar to the _kam_
of the Northern Turks, the _bô_ of the Mongols, and lastly to
the _Shamans_. During their operations, they wear a tall pointed
black hat, surmounted by the feather of a peacock, or of a cock,
and a human skull. Their principal divinities are the White God
of Heaven, the Black Goddess of Earth, the Red Tiger and the
Dragon; they worship an idol called _Kye’-p’ang_ formed of a mere
block of wood covered with garments. Their sacred symbol is the
_svastika_ turned from right to left 卍. The most important of
their monasteries is Zo-chen gum-pa, in the north-east of Tibet,
where they print most of their books. The Bonpos Lamas “are very
popular with the agricultural Tibetans, but not so much so with the
pastoral tribes, who nearly all belong to the Gélupa sect of the
orthodox Buddhist Church.” A. K. says, “Buddhism is the religion of
the country; there are two sects, one named Mangba and the other
Chiba or Baimbu.” _Explorations made by A—— K——_, 34. _Mangba_ means
“Esoteric,” _Chiba_ (_p’yi-ba_), “Exoteric,” and _Baimbu_ is Bönbo.
_Rockhill, Journey_, 289, _et passim.; Land of the Lamas_, 217–218;
_Grenard, Mission Scientifique_, II. 407 _seqq._—H. C.]

There is an indication in Koeppen’s references that the followers
of the _Bon_ doctrine are sometimes called in Tibet _Nag-choi_,
or “Black Sect,” as the old and the reformed Lamas are called
respectively the “Red” and the “Yellow.” If so, it is reasonable
to conclude that the first appellation, like the two last, has a
reference to the colour of clothing affected by the priesthood.

The Rev. Mr. Jaeschke writes from Lahaul: “There are no Bonpos in
our part of the country, and as far as we know there cannot be many
of them in the whole of Western Tibet, _i.e._ in Ladak, Spiti, and
all the non-Chinese provinces together; we know, therefore, not
much more of them than has been made known to the European public
by different writers on Buddhism in Tibet, and lately collected
by Emil de Schlagintweit.... Whether they can be with certainty
identified with the Chinese _Taossé_ I cannot decide, as I don’t
know if anything like historical evidence about their Chinese
origin has been detected anywhere, or if it is merely a conclusion
from the similarity of their doctrines and practices.... But the
Chinese author of the _Wei-tsang-tu-Shi_, translated by Klaproth,
under the title of _Description du Tubet_ (Paris, 1831), renders
_Bonpo_ by _Taossé_. So much seems to be certain that it was the
ancient religion of Tibet, before Buddhism penetrated into the
country, and that even at later periods it several times gained the
ascendancy when the secular power was of a disposition averse to
the Lamaitic hierarchy. Another opinion is that the Bon religion
was originally a mere fetishism, and related to or identical with
Shamanism; this appears to me very probable and easy to reconcile
with the former supposition, for it may afterwards, on becoming
acquainted with the Chinese doctrine of the ‘Taossé,’ have adorned
itself with many of its tenets.... With regard to the following
particulars, I have got most of my information from our Lama, a
native of the neighbourhood of Tashi Lhunpo, whom we consulted
about all your questions. The extraordinary asceticism which
struck Marco Polo so much is of course not to be understood as
being practised by all members of the sect, but exclusively, or
more especially, by the _priests_. That these _never_ marry, and
are consequently more strictly celibatary than many sects of the
Lamaitic priesthood, was confirmed by our Lama.” (Mr. Jaeschke then
remarks upon the _bran_ to much the same effect as I have done
above.) “The Bonpos are by all Buddhists regarded as heretics.
Though they worship idols partly the same, at least in name, with
those of the Buddhists, ... their rites seem to be very different.
The most conspicuous and most generally known of their customs,
futile in itself, but in the eyes of the common people the greatest
sign of their sinful heresy, is that they perform the religious
ceremony of making a turn round a sacred object _in the opposite
direction_ to that prescribed by Buddhism. As to their dress, our
Lama said that they had no particular colour of garments, but their
priests frequently wore red clothes, as some sects of the Buddhist
priesthood do. Mr. Heyde, however, once on a journey in our
neighbouring county of Langskar, saw a man _clothed in black with
blue borders_, who the people said was a _Bonpo_.”

[Mr. Rockhill (_Journey _, 63) saw at Kao miao-tzŭ “a _red_-gowned,
long-haired Bönbo Lama,” and at Kumbum (p. 68), “was surprised to
see quite a large number of Bönbo Lamas, recognisable by their
huge mops of hair and their _red_ gowns, and also from their being
dirtier than the ordinary run of people.”—H. C.]

The identity of the Bonpo and Taossé seems to have been accepted by
Csoma de Körös, who identifies the Chinese founder of the latter,
Lao-tseu, with the Shen-rabs of the Tibetan Bonpos. Klaproth
also says, “Bhonbp’o, Bhanpo, and _Shen_, are the names by which
are commonly designated (in Tibetan) the Taoszu, or followers of
the Chinese philosopher Laotseu.”[11] Schlagintweit refers to
Schmidt’s Tibetan Grammar (p. 209) and to the Calcutta edition of
the _Fo-kouè-ki_ (p. 218) for the like identification, but I do
not know how far any two of these are independent testimonies.
General Cunningham, however, fully accepts the identity, and
writes to me: “Fahian (ch. xxiii.) calls the heretics who
assembled at Râmagrâma _Taossé_,[12] thus identifying them with
the Chinese Finitimists. The Taossé are, therefore, the same as
the _Swâstikas_, or worshippers of the mystic cross _Swasti_,
who are also _Tirthakaras_, or ‘Pure-doers.’ The synonymous word
_Punya_ is probably the origin of _Pon_ or _Bon_, the Tibetan
Finitimists. From the same word comes the Burmese _P’ungyi_ or
_Pungi_.” I may add that the Chinese envoy to Cambodia in 1296,
whose narrative Rémusat has translated, describes a sect which he
encountered there, apparently Brahminical, as _Taossé_. And even
if the Bonpo and the Taossé were not fundamentally identical, it
is extremely probable that the Tibetan and Mongol Buddhists should
have applied to them one name and character. Each played towards
them the same part in Tibet and in China respectively; both were
heretic sects and hated rivals; both made high pretensions to
asceticism and supernatural powers; both, I think we see reason
to believe, affected the dark clothing which Polo assigns to the
_Sensin_; both, we may add, had “great idols and plenty of them.”
We have seen in the account of the Taossé the ground that certain
of their ceremonies afford for the allegation that they “sometimes
also worship fire,” whilst the whole account of that rite and of
others mentioned by Duhalde,[13] shows what a powerful element of
the old devil-dancing Shamanism there is in their practice. The
French Jesuit, on the other hand, shows us what a prominent place
female divinities occupied in the Bon-po Pantheon,[14] though we
cannot say of either sect that “their idols are all feminine.” A
strong symptom of relation between the two religions, by the way,
occurs in M. Durand’s account of the Bon Temple. We see there that
_Shen-rabs_, the great doctor of the sect, occupies a chief and
central place among the idols. Now in the Chinese temples of the
Taossé the figure of _their_ Doctor _Lao-tseu_ is one member of
the triad called the “Three Pure Ones,” which constitute the chief
objects of worship. This very title recalls General Cunningham’s
etymology of Bonpo.

[At the quarterly fair (_yueh kai_) of Ta-li (Yun-Nan), Mr. E.
C. Baber (_Travels_, 158–159) says: “A Fakir with a praying
machine, which he twirled for the salvation of the pious at the
price of a few cash, was at once recognised by us; he was our old
acquaintance, the Bakhsi, whose portrait is given in _Colonel
Yule’s Marco Polo_.”—H. C.]

(_Hodgson_, in _J. R. A. S._ XVIII. 396 _seqq._; _Ann. de la Prop.
de la Foi_, XXXVI. 301–302, 424–427; _E. Schlagintweit, Ueber die
Bon-pa Sekte in Tibet_, in the _Sitzensberichte_ of the Munich
Acad. for 1866, Heft I. pp. 1–12; _Koeppen_, II. 260; _Ladak_,
p. 358; _J. As._ sér. II. tom. i. 411–412; _Rémusat. Nouv. Mél.
Asiat._ I. 112; _Astley_, IV. 205; _Doolittle_, 191.)

NOTE 18.—Pauthier’s text has _blons_, no doubt an error for
_blous_. In the G. Text it is _bloies_. Pauthier interprets the
latter term as “blond ardent,” whilst the glossary to the G. Text
explains it as both _blue_ and _white_. _Raynouard’s Romance Dict._
explains _Bloi_ as “Blond.” Ramusio has _biave_, and I have no
doubt that _blue_ is the meaning. The same word (_bloie_) is used
in the G. Text, where Polo speaks of the bright colours of the
Palace tiles at Cambaluc, and where Pauthier’s text has “_vermeil
et jaune et vert_ et blou,” and again (_infra_, Bk. II. ch. xix.),
where the two corps of huntsmen are said to be clad respectively in
_vermeil_ and in _bloie_. Here, again, Pauthier’s text has _bleu_.
The Crusca in the description of the _Sensin_ omits the colours
altogether; in the two other passages referred to it has _bioda,
biodo_.

[“The Tao-sze, says Marco Polo, wear dresses of black and blue
linen; _i.e._ they wear dresses made of tatters of black and blue
linen, as can be seen also at the present day.” (_Palladius_,
30.)—H. C.]

NOTE 19.—[“The idols of the Tao-sze, according to Marco Polo’s
statement, have female names; in fact, there are in the pantheon
of Taoism a great many female divinities, still enjoying popular
veneration in China; such are _Tow Mu_ (the ‘Ursa major,’
constellation), _Pi-hia-yuen Kiun_ (the celestial queen), female
divinities for lying-in women, for children, for diseases of the
eyes; and others, which are to be seen everywhere. The Tao-sze
have, besides these, a good number of male divinities, bearing
the title of _Kiun_ in common with female divinities; both
these circumstances might have led Marco Polo to make the above
statement.” (_Palladius_, p. 30.)—H. C.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] This distance is taken from a tracing of the map prepared for Dr.
Bushell’s paper quoted below. But there is a serious discrepancy
between this tracing and the observed position of Dolon-nor, which
determines that of Shang-tu, as stated to me in a letter from Dr.
Bushell. [See Note 1.]

[2] These particulars were obtained by Dr. Bushell through the
Archimandrite Palladius, from the MS. account of a Chinese
traveller who visited Shangtu about two hundred years ago, when
probably the whole inscription was above ground. The inscription is
also mentioned in the Imp. Geography of the present Dynasty, quoted
by Klaproth. This work gives the interior wall 5 _li_ to the side,
instead of 2 _li_, and the outer wall 10 _li_, instead of 4 _li_.
By Dr. Bushell’s kindness, I give a reduction of his sketch plan
(see _Itinerary Map_, No. IV. at end of this volume), and also a
plate of the heading of the inscription. The translation of this
is: “Monument conferred by the Emperor of the August Yuen (Dynasty)
in memory of His High Eminence Yun Hien (styled) Chang-Lao
(canonised as) Shou-Kung (Prince of Longevity).” [See _Missions de
Chine et du Congo_, No. 28, Mars, 1891, Bruxelles.]

[3] Ramusio’s version runs thus: “The palace presents one side to the
centre of the city and the other to the city wall. And from either
extremity of the palace where it touches the city wall, there runs
another wall, which fetches a compass and encloses a good 16 miles
of plain, and so that no one can enter this enclosure except by
passing through the palace.”

[4] This narrative, translated from Chinese into Russian by Father
Palladius, and from the Russian into English by Mr. Eugene
Schuyler, Secretary of the U.S. Legation at St. Petersburg, was
obligingly sent to me by the latter gentleman, and appeared in the
_Geographical Magazine_ for January, 1875, p. 7.

[5] See Bk. II. chap. xiv. note 3.

[6] In the first edition I had supposed a derivation of the Persian
words _Jádú_ and _Jádúgari_, used commonly in India for conjuring,
from the Tartar use of _Yadah_. And Pallas says the Kirghiz call
their witches _Jádugar_. (_Voy._ II. 298.) But I am assured by Sir
H. Rawlinson that this etymology is more than doubtful, and that at
any rate the Persian (_Jádú_) is probably older than the Turkish
term. I see that M. Pavet de Courteille derives _Yadah_ from a
Mongol word signifying “change of weather,” etc.

[7] [See W. Foerster’s ed., _Halle_, 1887, p. 15, 386.—H. C.]

[8] A young Afghan related in the presence of Arthur Conolly at Herat
that on a certain occasion when provisions ran short the Russian
General gave orders that 50,000 men should be killed and served out
as rations! (I. 346.)

[9] Ar. _Táfir_, a sordid, squalid fellow.

[10] [Cf. Paulin Paris’s ed., 1848, II. p. 5.—H. C.]

[11] _Shen_, or coupled with _jin_ “people,” _Shenjin_, in this sense
affords another possible origin of the word _Sensin_; but it may in
fact be at bottom, as regards the first syllable, the same with the
etymology we have preferred.

[12] I do not find this allusion in Mr. Beal’s new version of Fahian.
[See Rémusat’s éd. p. 227; Klaproth says (_Ibid._ p. 230) that the
_Tao-szu_ are called in Tibetan _Bonbò_ and _Youngdhroungpa_.—H.
C.]

[13] Apparently they had at their command the whole encyclopædia of
modern “Spiritualists.” Duhalde mentions among their sorceries
the art of producing by their invocations the figures of Lao-tseu
and their divinities in the air, and of _making a pencil to write
answers to questions without anybody touching it_.

[14] It is possible that this may point to some report of the mystic
impurities of the Tantrists. The _Saktián_, or Tantrists, according
to the Dabistan, hold that the worship of a female divinity affords
a greater recompense. (II. 155.)

BOOK SECOND.

(1.) ACCOUNT OF THE GREAT KAAN CUBLAY; OF HIS PALACES AND CAPITAL; HIS
COURT, GOVERNMENT, AND SPORTS.

(2.) CITIES AND PROVINCES VISITED BY THE TRAVELLER ON ONE JOURNEY
WESTWARD FROM THE CAPITAL TO THE FRONTIERS OF MIEN IN THE DIRECTION
OF INDIA.

(3.) AND ON ANOTHER SOUTHWARD FROM THE CAPITAL TO FUCHU AND ZAYTON.