History of Cambodia Buddhism - Part 2

A NOTEBOOK:

King Suryavarman II, (1112-1152) was publicly devoted to Vishnu and Angkor Wat was constructed as his personal temple. He believed himself to be Vishnu incarnate. Even though Hindu worship was reinstated, the momentum for the ascendancy of Buddhism continued as a sort of popular revolution as the people increasingly abandoned the failed and burdensome ways of the Devaraja.

From the reign of Jayavarman VII onward, Buddhism was the ascendant religion of the Cambodia, except for a brief period at the end of the 13th century when there seems to have been a brief revival of Hinduism, responsible for he defacement of some of the Buddhist images of Jayavarman’s reign.

Images of Buddha carved into niches in along the path lining a processional way at the Preah Khan, for instance, were crudely removed and defaced in a determined effort to transform the Buddhist complex into a Hindu one in the thirteenth century.

[In legends and literature, Jayavarman VII is sometimes obliquely referred to as the “Leper King” – and Khmer folk legends continue the tradition that a great, king leper king lived in seclusion within the temple palaces. What is that about?]

MAHAYANA TO THERAVADA SHIFT

The conversion of Cambodian elite to Theravada Buddhism occurred shortly after the reign of Jayavarman VII. All the great building projects came to an end at his death, marking the virtual end of classical Angkor.

“During the Angkor Empire (9th to 13th centuries) the Khmer kingdoms and outlying principalities were loosely unified under the Khmer Rulers who based their powers on Hindu (devaraja, or god-king) and Mahayana Buddhism (Buddharaja, or Buddha-king) cosmological theories of order and political authority. Although several kings and ministers professed the Buddhist way, Suryavarman I and Jayavarman VII were Buddharajas of distinction who built numerous religious foundations of distinction (hospitals, sanctuaries, statuary, temples) in many parts of the realm. It is interested to note that Jayararman’s Buddhism had strong tantric features.”
“But the presence of Pali Theravada tradition was increaseingly evident. This Singhalese-based Theravada Buddhist orthodoxy was first propagated in Southeast Asia by Taling (Mon) monks in the 11th century and together with Islam in the 13th century in the southern insular reaches of the region, spread as a popularly-based movement among the people. Apart from inscriptions, such as one of Lopburi, there were other signs that the religious venue of Suvannabhumi were changing. Tamalinda, the Khmer monk believed to the be son of Jayavarman VII, took part in an 1180 Burmese-led mission to Sri Lanka to study the Pali cannon and on his return in 1190 had adepts of the Sinhala doctrine in his court. Chou Ta-Laun, who led a Chinese mission to Angkor in 1296-7 confirms the significant presence of Pali Theravada monks in the Khmer Capital.” [“Notes on the Rebirth of Khmer Buddhism” Radical Consrvativism, Peter Gyallay-Pap]

TAMALINDA
During the time Tamalinda was studying in Sri Lanka (1180-1190) at the famous Mahavihara, a dynamic type of Theravada Buddhism was being preached as the “true faith” in Sri Lanka. This pilgrimage-embassy to Sri Lanka included five monks including Tamalinda, accompanied by the monk Chapata, and

These monks spent ten years in Sri Lanka, becoming Theras who could perform ordination on their own authority after returning to their respective countries in Burma, Thailand (Mon regions), and Cambodia. The form of Theravada Buddhism in which they were educated was a particularly militant, resilient brand, due to centuries of struggle for survival against the Tamil oppression that nearly obliterated Buddhism in Sri Lanka, and did extinguish Buddhism in southern India.

Theravada Buddhism almost completely disappeared from the world in the 9th and 10th centuries. It remained active only in a few centers in southern India, Ceylon, lower Burma and central Thailand.

“By the ninth century, Buddhism of all schools was very much in retreat in its homeland India. From the ninth to eleventh centuries, Hindu Tamils waged continuous attacks against those kingdoms in southern India and Ceylon where Buddhism continued to exist. In southern India, Buddhism was finally extinguished; it was almost extinguished in Ceylon as well. Early in the eleventh century, the Singhalese had been forced by the Tamils to leave their old capitals of Anuradhapura and Polonaruva and to take refuge in the mountains country of southern Ceylon. In the middle of the elevenths century, the Singhalese king Vijaya-Bahu I was able to rally a significant force and in 1065, he succeeded in reconquering the country. He found that Buddhism had practice ally disappeared form the kingdom; monasteries had been destroyed and sacked, the order of nuns had completely disappeared, and there were not even sufficient monks left to perform a higher ordination. In order to reestablish the religion, he sent to Burma for some monks.” [The Golden Peninsula, Charles Keyes.]

When Buddhism was reestablished in Sri Lanka, it was a deliberately orthodox form. In the 13th century, wandering missionaries from the Mon-language parts of Siam [semi-Khmerized monks of lower Menam valley], Burma, and from Sri Lanka played an important part in this process. In addition, increasing numbers of pilgrims and monks from Cambodia traveled to India and Sri Lanka, to study Theravada Buddhism and obtain authentic ordination lineages.

Tamilinda and his colleagues, upon their return to Cambodia, Burma and Mon country, aggressively propagated this new, resilient “true faith” which insisted that monks strictly adhere to the rules of the monastic traditions (vinaya), and strongly emphasized pure ordination lineages which could be traced back to the Mahavihara in Ceylon. They also insisted on orthodoxy and rejected Mahayana “innovations.” This orthodox version of Theravada Buddhism was promoted not only in oral teaching and sermons, but also through compassion of texts.
[Note: “Chapata…was the author of a series of works in Pali, notably the grammatical treatise Suttaniddesa and the Sankhpakannana, a commentary on the compendium of metaphysics and Abhidhammathasangaha.
“Another monk of the same sect, Dhammavilasa…was the author of the first collection of laws composed in the Mon country, the Dhammavilasa Dhammathat, written in Pali….” The Golden Peninsula, Charles Keyes]

WHY THERAVADA?
By the thirteenth century a full fledged mass conversion to Theravada had been achieved throughout Cambodia, permanently disestablishing any other from of institutional religious practice. For the past thousand years, most Theravada Buddhists throughout the Angkor-Khmer Empire had lived unobtrusively as forest ascetics, meditating in the forests and jungles, living in quiet contact with the rural folks in the remote and withdrawn areas of the empire. These monks acted as a leaven over the centuries, spreading education, building up local folk traditions through ceremonies, story-telling and rituals.

How to explain this massive conversion to Theravada Buddhism, which amounted to a nonviolent, irrevocable revolution in the foundations of civilization as it had been practiced for centuries?

Theravada Buddhism was inclusive and universal in their outreach, recruiting disciples and monks from not only the elites and court, but also in the villages and among the peasants, further enhancing its popularity among the Khmer folk. The Theravada tradition under Prince Tamalinda were aggressive in promoting and proselytizing Theravada Buddhism. 

“Their messages succeeded because it provided a meaningful way of relating to the world for many who had been marginal to the classical civilizations of who had been seriously affected by the disruption of the classical civilizations in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries.” [The Golden Peninsula, Charles Keyes]

“It is important to stress that whereas Buddhism had been the religion of a small number of virtuous and a small number of elite lay persons prior to the twelfth century, the Theravada Buddhism introduced by those who had been to Ceylon became a popular religion whereas prior to the thirteenth century Buddhism was practiced in thousands and thousands of villages…” [The Golden Peninsula, Charles Keyes]

“Cambodians were ripe for conversion. The political integrity and morality of the kingdom were thrown into question at the time, and Cambodians converted en masse to this new faith that offered social tranquility without striving for material gain or power. The modest Buddhist bonzes were a welcome change from the arrogant and wealthy priests of the kings. The new Buddhists dressed in simple saffron robes. They possessed a sense of responsibility for all, not just the nobility. Eventually they became as revered as the devaraja, who in turn became a Theravada Buddhist himself as patron of the faith.” [When the War Was Over: Cambodia and the Khmer Rough Revolution, Elizabeth Becker]

Scholars suggest that the classical Angkor Empire collapsed from desertion from within and assault from without, from the growing external threats and assaults from Saim and Vietnam.

“The post Angkor period (14th to 19th century) saw the dramatic rise of the Pali Theravada tradition in Southeast Asia and concomitant decline of the Brahmanic and Mahayana Buddhist religious traditions. A 1423 Thai account of a mission to Sri Lanka mentions eight Khmer monks who again brought orthodox Mahavirhara sect of Singhalese order to Kampuchea. This particular event belied, however, the profound societal shift that was taking place from priestly class structure to a village-based monastic system in the Theravada lands. While adhering to the monastic discipline (vinaya), monks developed their wats, or temple-monasteries, not only into moral religious but also education, social-service, and cultural centers for the people. Wats became the main source of learning and popular education. Early western explorers, settlers, and missionaries reported widespread literacy among the male populations of Burma, Thailand, Kampuchea, Laos, and Vietnam. Until the 19th century, literacy rates exceeded those of Eur9ope in most of not all Theravada lands. In Kampuchea, Buddhism became the transmitter of Khmer language and culture.” [“Notes on the Rebirth of Khmer Buddhism” Radical Conservativism,]

Indravarman III (1295-1307, established Theravada Buddhism became once and for all the state religion of Cambodia during his reign.

As the old Angkor Empire declined, the center of government increasingly began to migrate to the center of Cambodia, near present day Phnom Penh, away from the old Angkor area of Siem Reap.

Under the Angkoran kings, the common people were virtual slaves. Chou Ta-kuan, an envoy of the court of Kubla Kahn, left a record of visiting the Ankoran people. He described that life centered around the palace and temples. People worked on building projects, canals, temples, servicing the temples, serving the shrines. 

One such temple he witnessed included 18 high priests, 2,740 officiants, 2,303 servants and 615 dancing girls. Ta Prohm temple housed 12,640 people and in addition required 66,625 men and women servant of the temple.

“Similarly, the people dependent on Preah Kahn – that is to say, those obligated to provide rice and other services – totaled nearly a hundred thousand, drawn from more than five thousand three hundred villages. The inscription goes on to enumerate people who had been dependent on previous temple endowments. Drawn from thirteen thousand five hundred villages, they numbered more than three hundred thousands. The infrastructure needed to provide food and clothing of the temples – to name only two types of provisions. – must have been efficient and sophisticated. Coedes estimated that the annual rice consumption by people in religious foundations came to 38,000 tons.” [Chandler, A History of Cambodia]

Jayavarmans hospitals were staffed/supported by “the services of 838 villages, with adult population totaling approximately eighty thousand people. The services demanded appear to have been to provide labor and rice for staffs attached to each hospital, or approximately a hundred people and their dependents.” [Chandler, A History of Cambodia p 61]

The Theravada revolution was a grassroots movement of the common people in resistance of, or rejection of, the oppressive burden of maintaining the god-king religion of Mahayana Buddhism and Hinduism. 

The great temples of Hindu and Mahayana had thousands of slaves attached to them, to supply the monks in their elite lifestyles. The people paid dearly for the merit making works of the king and the temples connected to his court and worship. The common people were relieved to be rid of the old oppressive slave-society.

Wm Shawcross notes: “[Theravada Buddhism] unlike almost all the previous religions of the country, its doctrines were not imposed from above but were preached to the people. It was simple, required no expensive priesthood or temples and little ceremonial. Its missionaries practiced austerity, solitude, humility, and poverty. Their example and their direct contact with the people started to undermine the old state religion and the monastery which rested upon it. Theravada Buddhism remained the great belief and comfort of the Khmer people until 1975. [Sideshow, Shawcross] 

The people then gently rejected the corruption of the elite system that excluded them, and turned to the gentle, poor, humble Theravada path.

Theravada Buddhism was a “relief from the burdens of the glory of Sanskrit-writing priests and the monarchs they deified. Between the Hinayanist evasion and the depredation of increasingly bellicose Thais, the Angkor civilization devolved.” [Angkor Life, Stephen O Murray]

RURAL BUDDHISM

Some insight into the nature of the rural/forest nature of the Theravada Buddhist monasticism that swept across Southeast Asia and the Khmer empire is revealed in the Sukothai Thai inscription of King Ram Khamhaieng of 1292. Sukothai was originally founded in the 12th century as a Khmer outpost of the Angkor Empire, with mainly a Thai population administered by its own “chiefs” (cao). “In the 1220s two of these Tai chiefs rebelled against the Khmer and established an independent Tai kingdom, the first Tai state in what is today central Thailand….” 

“The inscription of King Ram Khamhaieng of Sukhothai is the earliest document still extant written in Tai language (as distinct from Sanskrit or Khmer or Mon)….The inscription says the king made kathina robe offerings to the monks – “What is significant in this act is that the king traveled in a procession to a monastery some two kilometers away from the walled city itself. It was at this monastery, where monks were what is known as ‘forest dwellers’ (arannavasi), the senior monk of the kingdom, the ‘Mahatheara Sangharaja, the sage who has studied the scriptures form beginning to end, who is wiser than any other monk in the kingdom.’ The fact that the senior monk of the kingdom dwelt outside the city walls reflects a separation of religion and power that had not existed in the classic cities of mainland Southeast Asia." [Southeast Asia, Charles Keyes, p263]. 

These monks were therefore abandoning or undermining the old elite social order that was centered in the great cities of Angkor. The inscription goes on to say that the “magical and spiritual center of the kingdom” of Sukhothai was the “Great Relic” (Mahadhatu) shrine in the center of the royal city. The Great Relic shrine had statues of Buddha, including “statues eighteen cubits in height” and it was the residence for “city dwelling” monks (nagaravasi).

Zhou Daguan (Chou Ta-Kuan), a Chinese emissary from the court of Timur Khan, Emperor of China, lived in Angkor Thom for a year in 1296-97 and wrote a small book about his observations. He described Theravada monks who shaved their heads, wore yellow robes, leaving one shoulder bare, walked barefoot. Their temples were simple, containing one image of Sakyamuni; they called Pol-lai (Preah). The image was draped in red cloth Buddhas on the towers were bronze. There were no bells, drums, cymbals or banners visible. The monks ate meat or fish but did not drink wine. They ate only one meal a day. They did not cook in the temple, but lived on alms food.

“The books they recited from were very numerous. These were made of neatly bound palm leaves covered with black writing.” Zhou wrote. “Some of the monks were royal counselors, and therefore had the right to be conveyed in palanquins with gold shafts accompanied by umbrellas with gold or silver handles. There were no Buddhist nuns.” [Angkor Life, Stephen O Murray]

[Zhou also described observing the presence of Brahmins, and Shivaists (Taoists) all living peacefully together.]

THAI POWER

Another factor in understanding the the overthrow of the old social order was the ascendance of Thai power, filling the power-vacuum of the disintegration of the Angkor Empire. The Thais first attacked Angkor in 1296, taking slaves and pillaging the capital. Then in 1352-1430 the Kingdom of Ayutthaya attacked and looted Angkor four times, enslaving and imprisoning many Khmer. Angkor was finally abandoned in 1441, when the center of government moved to Phnom Penh area.

When Angkor was abandoned by the king in the 15th century, (the chronicles of Ayutthaya say the final siege of 1431 lasted for seven months), some of the Angkor temples and ruins, such as Angkor Wat, continued to be maintained by Theravada Buddhist monks. Louis Finot wrote in 1902 that he believed the Khmer peasants may have even welcomed the collapse of the Angkor Empire: “There is no evidence that the Khmer people resisted the Thai aggression with vigor. They perhaps even looked on it as deliverance. They had been forced not only to supply labor to construct enormous monument, the size of which still staggers us, but to maintain innumerable temples [in which they could not worship]…They did not defend these rapacious Gods or the slave drivers and tithe-collectors with much ardor. The conqueror, in contrast, offered them a gentle religion of resignation, well suited to exhausted and discouraged people, and demanding far less: its ministers were pledged to poverty, content with alms of rice. This moral religion stressed peace of the soul and social harmony. We can understand why the Khmer people readily accepted it and happily put aside the burdens of their former glory.”

The disintegration of Angkor Empire was gradual decline and depopulation over along period of time.

[ What were the effects of the revolution? 1) the monks were simple and poor, in contrast to the elite, indulged priest class of the big mountain-temple palaces; 2) they lived in contact with the people, dependent on daily alms, in contrast to the temple priests who were remote, living on taxes; 3) they “un-deified” the God-king, and the Mahayana Buddha-king, abandoning his royal court, and centering themselves in the forests as “outsiders” and marginal people; 4) they did not support pursuit of early glory or gain, especially that of taking lives or causing suffering; 5) the Theravada religion readily de-emphasized the things of this world, thereby undermining the authoritarian, militaristic state and the massive empire-enterprise needed to uphold the state; 6) they undermined Khmer Imperial glory; 7) peasants persisted in the Imperial ruins; 8) civilization falls apart.

Buddhist Middle Ages

Phnom Penh was probably a small riverside market center. The founding legend says a lady named Penh discovered a Buddha floating down the river on trees and enshrined it at Wat Phnom. The new Theravada kingship was more accessible to the people, like the model of the Mon and Thai kings, traceable to the Davaravati Mon kingly traditions which had practiced Theravada Buddhism for more than a thousand years.

COLONIALISM

Theravada Buddhism has proved astonishingly resistant to any foreign attempt to convert the people.

In 1556 the Portuguese missionary Gaspar de Cruz spent about a year in Cambodia and visited the capital Lovek where King Cham reigned. The missionary was disappointed about his inability to convert the Khmer people, and blamed is failure on the Khmer loyalty to the Buddhist monks and the Theravada king

He described the monks in typical Christian chauvinist terms: The monks are “exceedingly proud and vain…alive they are worshiped for gods, in so that the inferior among them do worship the superior like gods, praying unto them and prostrating themselves before them; and so the common people have great confidence in them, with great reverence and worship; so that there is no person that dare contradict them in anything….[It] happened sometimes that while I was preaching, many round me hearing me very well, and being very satisfied with what I told them, that if there came along any of these priests and said, ‘This is good but ours is better,’ they would all depart and leave me alone.” [A History of Cambodia, Chambers, p82]

When western merchants and missionaries first made contact with Kampuchea they discovered three tiered society, consisting of royalty-nobility, the common people who were mainly rice farmers, and the Buddhist Sangha of monks who were custodians and repositories of Khmer culture and identity.

The lives of the common people, peasants and farmers, have generally been overlooked and disregarded by historians, who tend to view history as a chronicle of elites and of war. Theravada Buddhism is a common people’s religions. Theravada Buddhism is a sort of spontaneous mass movement of the peasants. It accumulates momentum undetected by the attention of the elites, who generally disregard activities of the peasant class as irrelevant. In Theravada, the people are subatomic particles which eventually become manifest in atomic behavior. This invisibility of momentum is what gives the sense of “timelessness” and “paradise” that people often attribute to Theravada Buddhist countries, where centuries and ages pass with stability (the highest value of the poor peasant class), ages passing without apparent change.

NINETEENTH CENTURY

What was Buddhism like in Cambodia in the 19th century?
By the 19th century, Thailand exercised some type of authority over Cambodia, Issan, and Laos, Chang Mai and Chang Rai – though these outlaying kingdoms were relatively autonomous and paid tribute to the Thai court in Bangkok.

Chandler says, “Little is known about he sangha in nineteenth century Cambodia, and it could be misleading to assert that conditions were the same as those in Siam or Burma. There is no evidence, for example, that the sangha played a political role vis-à-vis the royal family, although monks and ex-monks were active in the anti-Vietnamese rebellion of 1821. By and large monks were widely respected and were repositories of merit, as sources of spiritual patronage, and as curators of Cambodia’s literary culture. They occupied a unique and therefore mysterious place in Cambodian life because they had abandoned – temporarily at least – agriculture, politics, and marriage.” [A History of Cambodia, Chandler, p106]

The 1821 uprising Chandler mentions occurred at approximately the same time in Cambodia, while in the Kingdom of Vientiane rose up (1825) against the authority of Siam. Siam ruthlessly crushed the rebellion and completely destroyed the kingdom of Vientiane, except for a few Buddhist temples which remained standing. The Thai took the Vientiane king back to Bangkok as a slave. The Vietnamese, who were also attempting to control Cambodia at this time, had encouraged the Vientiane uprising, evoking the fear, loathing and suspicion of the Thai, perhaps explaining the ruthless overreaction to the insubordination of the Vientiane kingdom.

KHMER INDEPENDENCE - NATIONALISM

The French inadvertently helped create Khmer independence and nationalist movement. How id it happen?
First, the French dispelled the political power of the old enemies of the Khmer, the Thai and the Vietnamese.
Second, the French helped recover Khmer identity through restoration, study and anthropology of Angkor Empire, generating national-ethnic identity.

Third, the French established a Buddhist Institute that generated a Khmer-language renaissance, and fostered nationalist and ethnic self awareness and pride.

The Thai and the Vietnamese had repeatedly invaded Cambodia to compete for power and control over the country. The Thai invaded, Cambodians appealed to Vietnam for help. Then the Vietnamese sought to subdue the Cambodians and they would turn to the Thai for help. Again and again this process continued for centuries. The Vietnamese finally got the upper hand in the early 1800s century. The Cambodian king was compelled twice a month to visit the Vietnamese temple in Phnom Penh and prostrate to the name of the Vietnamese emperor, while wearing Vietnamese ceremonial robes. 

The Vietnamese masters tried to suppress Theravada Buddhism, and impose Confucianism and Mahayana Buddhism on the Cambodians in an effort to “civilize” them. In 1820-21 the Cambodians rose up in a rebellion against the Vietnamese. The insurrection was led by a former monk named Kai, who was recognized as a “holy man” with supernatural powers. 

He organized his revolt from Ba Panom, a holy mountain in southeast Cambodia, the old capital of Funan and the place where the Buddhist King Jayavarman II landed when he returned from Java to establish the Angkor Empire. These monks and former monks embolden the peasants and Khmer populace in a general uprising my using charms and Buddhist incantations which would make them invulnerable to the enemy’s weapons. According to Khmer chronicles of these events, however, when the Khmer killed their enemies, the Vietnamese invaders, the nonviolent enchantment of the Buddhist charms was broken – and they were slaughtered in a terrible defeat.

During these insurrections, the Cambodian king was a vassal of the Vietnamese emperor, and was therefore duty bound to put down the uprising; yet he could not bring himself to fight against the insurrection led by Kai, whom he probably knew as a monk in Phnom Penh, and whom he would have revered as a holy man with great supernatural powers. The Vietnamese historians refer to the king as “extremely superstitious.”

This incident gives an insight to the popular Buddhism of the time. These “holy men” were greatly revered Buddhist leaders in Khmer society.

The Vietnamese regarded the Khmer as “uncivilized” barbarians and tried to “civilize” the Khmer – i.e. force them to adopt Vietnamese civilization, worldview, and religion. Part of their project involved suppression of Theravada Buddhism and the attempt to impose Vietnamese-style Confucianism and Mahayana Buddhism on the people – out of good intentions that nevertheless had terrible consequences for the Khmer people who were loyal to their own traditions. 

History of Cambodia Buddhism - Part 1

KHMER BUDDHIST HISTORY: A NOTEBOOK

Buddhism, under a variety of forms, existed in Southeast Asia for two thousand years or perhaps even longer. Buddhist legends say that Buddhism was originally introduced into Suvannabhumi, or the “Golden Peninsula”, by King Asoka, the great Buddhist Emperor in India, during the 3rd century BC.

For the first Thousand years of its history, Theravada, Saravastavada and Mahayana Buddhism co-existed throughout Southeast Asia, including the lands of present day Cambodia. These Buddhist traditions were practiced under the dominant Hindu religion of the region, which consisted primarily in the worship of the God-king, Vishnu or Shiva, embodied in the human king. 

Saravastavada Buddhism was Hinayana tradition, virtually identical with the present day Theravada, except it was based in a Sanskrit literary tradition, rather that Pali language tradition. The doctrinal teachings and the monastic practices were the same as Theravada. Theravada Buddhism was present also, evidence by Pali inscriptions from this period. Saravastavada Buddhism was the predominant form of Buddhism in Southeast Asia from the earliest days until Mahayana Buddhism became ascendant with the rise of the Angkor Empire from about 800 – 1200.

Mahayana Buddhism became increasingly influential over the centuries until it eventually replaced Hinduism as the official state religion under King Jayavarman VII.

At the height of the Angkor Empire, after the death of King Jayavarman VII, a “Theravada Revolution” occurred, and Theravada Buddhism became ascendant as the official state religion, which it has remained for past 800 years. Buddhism coexisted with the predominant Hindu Shiva worship for about one thousand years, until Buddhist religion became officially established about one thousand years ago, first with the establishment of Mahayana Buddhism of King Jayavarman VII, and then the ascendancy of Theravada Buddhism.

300 BC 

Buddhism, according to legend, came to Southeast Asia as early as 300 B.C. by way of missionaries dispatched by the renowned Indian Emperor Ashoka.

“Unconfirmed Singhalese sources state that Buddhism was introduced to Suvannabhumi, or the ‘Golden Peninsula’, as mainland Southeast Asia was once referred to, in the 3rd century BCE under the reign of King Asoka, the great Buddhist ruler. According to these sources, two monks, Sona and Uttara, were sent to propagate the doctrine of the Master in this region following the great council of 247BCE held in Ashoka’s capital Patalipitta, India. While this mission may be legendary, it points to a truth that Buddhism ahs been present in Southeast Asia for a long time. Various Buddhist sects and schools, including Tantrism, vied or coexisted with a dominant Brahmanism and indigenous animistic faiths for centuries before the rise of the classical Southeast Asian empires beginning in the 9th century CE. Through in part Indian merchant traders, Indian cultural influence was pervasive in this early period. In Funan (1st to 5th century CE), the first organized Khmer polity, the Khmer people embraced not only the diverse Brahmanic and Buddhist religions but also the social customs and mores of India.” [“Notes of the Rebirth of Khmer Buddhism” Radical Conservativism,]

FUNAN: 100 BC – 500 AD

Certainly there were Buddhists in Cambodia by 100BC.
In the 100BC-500AD the Kingdom of Funan in the present-day Mekong Delta established a flourishing sea-faring trade between China, Indonesia, and India. Hindu, principally Vishnu and Shiva religious practices were established in Funan.

An Indian Sanskrit inscription from 375 documents that an Indian claming descent from Scynthian line ruled as King of Funan. “He may have been responsible for establishing the worship of Surya, the sun god, who appears in many sculptures of this period. A second Indian, a Brahmin, succeeded him. Then other kings with Indian names appear in the inscription. One, Kuandinya Jayavarman (478-514) cultivated Buddhism, and sent a Buddhist mission complete with Funanese images [carved in coral] to the Emperor of China…” [The Art of Southeast Asia, Philip Dawson, p21]

[“Another early dated inscription of Kamboja (586-664) the Wat Prey Vier Sanskrit inscription is also definitely a Buddhist record, speaking of two Bhikkhus, Ratnabhanu and Ratnasimha, who were born of the same mother. That in Kamboja, Buddhism flourished already in the last half of the fifth century AD is also attested to by Chinese texts which have yielded to M Pelliot the important information that in 484 AD Jayavarman (king of Founan, who is also referred to in the inscription discovered at Ta Prom, cited above) sent the Indian monk Nagasena to present a memorial in the Chinese Imperial court which began with a panegyric of the Emperor a one of the patrons of Buddhism, in whose empire the Dharma flourished.” [Sanskrit Buddhism in Burma, Nihar-Ranjan Ray, 1936.]

Buddhism was clearly beginning to assert itself from year 450 onward, when the Chinese explorer I-tsing, toward the close of the 7th century, wrote the celebrated Records of the Buddhist Religion, based on extensive travels in India, Sri Lanka, the Indonesian archipelago, “he found that the islands of Southeast Asia, the Mulasarvastivada-nikaya had been universally accepted, except in Malaya where there were a few being Mahayana.” [Sanskrit Buddhism in Burma, Nihar-Ranjan Ray, 1936]

There was some interaction between Funan and Indonesia and India during these early centuries. As Funan declined in influence around 500AD, the southeast coast of Sumatra gained importance as a sea route from China to Indonesia and India, the central power between Java, Malaysia, and Chaya in southern Thailand.

CHENLA: 500 – 700 AD

In the year 500-700, a proto-Khmer civilization was established in Chenla near the Mekong and Sap rivers. These people spoke Mon and worshiped Shiva. The Mon-Khmer languages are connected.

The Mon people were known as Dvaravati, and were established in Central and northeast Thailand [Muang Fa Daet] and in Chang Mai. The Mon Dvaravati had embraced Theravada Buddhism from the earliest times. Many inscriptions from this early strata of Theravada Buddhism have been recovered from the ruins of the towns.

Buddhas seated in the European style, known as Palai Buddhas, have been found throughout the Dvaravati areas. Also sima stones and clay votive tablets bearing images of Buddha and inscribed in Pali and Mon script have been found widely distributed throughout the Angkor Empire, in present day Thailand, Laos, southern Vietnam.

“According to Ma Touan-Lin, a 13th century Chinese chronicler, there were ten monasteries of Buddhist monks and nuns studying the sacred texts in the 4th and 5th centuries CE [in Funan/Chenla – Cambodia]. He stated that two monks from Funan traveled to China in this period at the request of the Chinese emperor, to translate the Sanskrit Tipitika into Chinese. A passage from the History of Leang, a Chinese chronicle written in 502-556 CE, tells us that King Rudravarman sent a mission of monks to China in 535 under the direction of an Indian monk, Gunaratana. The delegation arrived in China in 546 CE, accompanied by 240 palm leaf manuscripts of Mahayana Buddhist texts. Evidence of a cult of Buddha’s relics was seen in Rudravarman’s request of the Chinese emperor for a 12 foot long relic of Buddha’s hair.” [“Notes of the Rebirth of Khmer Buddhism”, Radical Conservativism]

Although weakened in the Chenla period, Buddhism of the Mahayana tradition survived as seen in the inscription of Sambor Prei Kuk (626CE) and those of Siem Reap dealing, for example, with the erection of a statue of Avalikotesvara (791CE). Some pre-Angkorean statuary in lower Kampuchea and Kampuchea Krom attests to the existence of Sanskrit-based Theravada Buddhism. Additionally, fragments of Pali inscriptions dating from the 5th to 7th centuries have been discovered in the lower Burmese Mon region (Prome, or Crikshetra) and most recently in Prachinburi, Thailand (Dong Si Mahapot).

600-800

Abundant evidence exists indicating the establishment of Buddhism in Chenla during these centuries. Khmer-style Buddhas and Buddhist images are abundant from this period. Mahayana Buddhism had developed doctrines in which transcendent personages (bodhisattvas) played a major part. The bodhisattvas were living Buddhas, or people who were qualified for enlightenment but out of universal compassion decided to remain in the world to help other people escape from suffering. The bodhisattva’s spiritual states enabled them to perform all kinds of miracles, and more at will throughout the universe. The presence in Chenla of images of the bodhisattva alongside the images of Hindu deities suggests that these were more than one dynasty in the country with claims to royal sovereignty, in a situation also known in India. Some of these kings were Buddhist. In Khmer times the cult of Lokeshvara attained great importance. The bodhisattva images of Lokeshvara of Chenla existed both in stone and bronze. Their hair is done up in a carefully arranged chignon of rope-like locks, reminiscent of the long hair of Shiva images. At the front of the chignon is a small seated figure of the Buddha who is the bodhisattva’s spiritual authority.

Many Buddhist statues from 500 on were created in Cambodia. These indigenous Khmer images included both sitting Buddhas, and the standing with bent leg walking-Buddha. “There is one Buddha head, supposed to be the earliest, from Ran lok which is often said to recall the style of 3rd century Buddhas of Amarvati, on India’s Southeast coast. It is this resemblance which authorizes the assumption of its early date. There is indeed resemblance; but there are also marked differences. For this Ran lok head is a distinctively Cambodian work, with the marks of the sophisticated Cambodian style.” [The Art of Southeast Asia, Philip Rawson]

“A number of inscriptions and temple foundations are ascribed to King Bhavavarman III who ruled before 639 to after 656. It seems that, although the King’s patron deity was probably Shiva, the religion of Mahayana Buddhism suddenly spread in the kingdom. A number of Mahayana images were made in a distinctive style, which was centered in Prei Kmeng, and was probably contemporary with that of Sombor, continuing during the Prasat Andet and Kampong Preah epoch. The most characteristic images of this Mahayana group are the bodhisattva and images of one type of Bodhisattva in particular, known as Lokeshvara, “Lord of the World.” It is more than likely that such images represented a Buddhist form of royal pattern. When a Hindu king would derive his royal authority from a Hindu deity, a king who was Buddhist would find it difficult to derive similar authority from the Buddha himself, who was a humble mendicant.” [The Art of Southeast Asia, Philip Rawson]

One of the earliest inscriptions of the ancient kingdom of Founan discovered at the monument of Ta Prohm in the province of Bali, dated about 625, states, among other things, that Buddha, Dharma and Sangha are in a flourishing condition; “and through the purpose of the inscription is not clear it can be surmised that it recorded the foundation of a Buddhist monastery. This inscription studied along with other early inscriptions of Kamboja, particularly with the Visnuite inscription of Prince Gunavarman, found among the ruins of the monuments of Prasat Pram Loven on the hill of Thap-musi, reveals the interesting fact that in contemporary Kamboja as in Borneo, Brahmanism and Buddhism existed side by side.”

The transition from Hindu god-king to Mahayana Buddha-king was probably imperceptible gradual and imperceptible. The cult of Shiva and Vishnu gradually blended and morphed into the cult of the Bodhisattva. The prevailing cult of Bhahmanism was Vishnu. Shivism was the dominant form of Hinduism in Angkor in the earlier period of the 9th and 10th centuries. Vishnuism became dominant in the 11th century. The image of Buddha of Tuol Prah Theat, standing straight legged, Khmer art, imitates the dignity of a Hindu god. This indicates the blending of Buddhist and Hindu imagery prevalent in Cambodia at this time.

SILENDRA

What caused the ascendancy of Mahayana Buddhism throughout Southeast Asia at this time? I think it was the ascendancy of the Silendra dynasty, which arose to power in central Java. These may have been Khmer royalty who escaped the Funan Empire as it disintegrated. Both Funan and Silendra are known as “kings of the mountain”. These are the folks who built Borbudur in central Java in the 8th and 9th centuries. In other words, the Khmer royalty of Chenla may have migrated to Sumatra as their kingdoms disintegrated, bringing with them the Hindu-influenced Mahayana Buddhist world view. Mahayana Buddhism was greatly enhanced and intensified in the Silendra dynasty, which had close ties to the Mahayana Buddhist Pala Dynasty of Bengal. Both the Pala and Silendra dynasties were greatly influenced by the Mahayana Buddhist learning, Nalanda University, the vortex of Buddhist learning at the time. The Nalanda University in northern India radiated enormous influence throughout the world, under the patronage of the Pala kings.

“The Bengal University of Nalanda in Megadha (now Behar) was the theological center of Mahayana Buddhism under the protection of the Pala Dynasty [750-1060]. Shivaist (specifically Pashupata) interpretations of Buddhism, tinged with Tantrik mysticism (that may have revived portions of pre-Aryan northeastern Indian cults) were worked out in Megadha and then were exported throughout insular and peninsular Southeast Asia, particularly to Java. Yashovarman I, who ruled form the vicinity of Roluous in the late ninth century, seems to have been a Shivaist Buddhist influenced by Nalanda syncretism. His successors (notably Jayavarman IV) dedicated themselves to Vishnu and Brahma, as well as to Shiva, with whom they continued to be identified by hereditary families of priests. Rajendravarman II studied Buddhism intensely.” [Angkor Life, Stephen O Murray]

Srivijaya, capital of Sumatra, became an empire of neighboring islands in the Malayasian-Indonesian archipelago around 675-700. The inscriptions from this time document that Mahayana Buddhism was emerging as a dominant social force. By 750 Srivijaya extended its influence to Java and other surrounding islands. An inscription here in Java records the erection of three brick temples dedicated to Sakyamuni Buddha, Padmapani and Vajrapani in 775. The earliest inscription from Java is also a Mahayana Sanskrit document, the Kalasan inscription dated 778, which records a dedication of a temple to Tara, by the king of Srivijaya. This temple of Kalsan still stands today near the Barabudur.

A Sailendra dynasty copper-plate inscription from 875-900 says Balaputradeva of the Sailendra dynasty granted some villages for the upkeep of Nalanda University, revealing the devotion of the Mahayana Buddhist kings. The Sailendra dynasty also built the fantastic Mahayana Buddhist temple Barabudur in Java about this same time. This may have been the inspiration for the later fabulous Angkor building projects in Cambodia. The celebrated Bengali Buddhist monk, Atisha (980-1053) visited the city of Srivijaya, the capital of the Sailendra dynasty Sumatra, center of Mahayana Buddhism. The zeal of the Silendra’s for Mahayana Buddhism of Nalanda radiated its influence throughout the neighboring countries. This influence apparently spread at least until the eleventh centuries, explaining Jayavarman VII’s embrace of this form of Mahayana Buddhism, and launching the tremendous building projects of Angkor, in imitation of the tremendous efforts of Barabudur.

This rising Mahayana influence eclipsed the other Hinayana (Theravada and Saravastavada) forms of Buddhism that had flourished in Southeast Asia for the past 800 years. This new, intensified, robust Mahayana Buddhism was then reintroduced into Cambodia, with the rise of the Angkor Empire, under the patronage of the Silendra Dynasty of Java, who was probably themselves Khmer. Theravada Buddhism continued to exist throughout Cambodia and Southeast Asia, primarily as a forest tradition, practiced by hermits and anchorites in rural settings.

In Cambodia, an inscription from 782 refers to the dedication of a temple to Bodhisattva Manjusre (Manjugosa).

Images of Maitreya are also found.


800-850

King Jayavarman II (802-869) is the first real Khmer king of the Angkor Empire. He proclaimed himself God-king and began to establish the capital of Angkor (Rolous) near present day Angkor. Jayavarman, as a young man had visited Java-Sumatra and for some years lived and studied in the Mahayana Buddhist empire. He returned to Cambodia to proclaim himself god king (devaraja), according to Khmer traditions, clearly identifying himself with Shiva. Even though he maintained the ancient Hindu traditions of Cambodia, he was increasingly friendly to Mahayana Buddhist influence.

In Indian Cultural Influences in Cambodia, B R Chatterji said that the Sailendras of Srivijaya-Sumatra, towards the end of the eight and the beginning to the ninth centuries, exercised some sort of suzerainty over Cambodia as a vassal state.

When King Jayavarman II returned in Cambodia, he built three capitals in secession: Hariharalaya, Amarendrapura, and Mahendraparvata. Amarendrapura, identified with Banteai Chmar, has been found to be essentially a Mahayana city presided over by Avalokitesvara.

“The founder of Angkor-period dynasty, Jayavarman II had spent many years in the ardently Mahayana Buddhist kingdom Zabeg (the Arab name for a Kingdom of the Southern Sea, including Java, Sumatra, and much of the Malay peninsula). In the late-eighth century a Zabeg maharaj had sent a fleet for the head of a young Khmer (Zhenla) king who had rashly spoken of wishing the Zabeg maharaj decapitated. It is unclear whether Jayavarman II was in Java at the time, or soon there after the Zabeg maharaj had demonstrated his greater claim to being divinely powerful ( and just: he did not despoil the kingdom but had its kings’ head removed, embalmed, and returned to Zenla for the new king to remember). It is fairly certain that the Zabeg maharaj approved the Khmer council’s choice of a new king. It is also fairly certain that Jayavarman II moved inland at least partly form knowing how easily the Zabeg fleet had captured the Zhenla capital and taken away his predecessors head.”

“Jayavarman II had a Brahman priest consecrate his miraculous lingam on the highest mountain-top of Phnom Kulen (northeast of Angkor) as Prameshvara .ie the Supreme Lord, and ratify his capital as being Mahendra, the appropriate place for Shiva to reside. In turn, Jayavarman II made the family of Sivakaivalya the perpetual hereditary chief priest and royal chaplain….” [Angkor Life, Stephen O Murray]

The priests were court functionaries who helped chose and approve the new king. A new king would seek the approbation of the priests to divinize and legitimize his reign. The Theravada Sangha serves a similar purpose in Thailand, and modern Cambodia.

Tantra in Cambodia

This Vajrayana form of Buddhism was similar to Tibetan Buddhism of the Buddhist monks of Magadha and Bengal during the Pala dynasty:

“…the prevalence of Tantrayana in Java, Sumatra and Kamboja, a fact now definitely established by modern researches into the character of Mahayana Buddhism and Sivaism in these parts of the Indian Orient. Already in Kamboja inscription of the ninth century there is definite evidence of the teaching of Tantric texts at the court of Jayavarman II. In a Kamboja record of the 11th century there is a reference to the “Tantras of the Paramis”; and images of Hevajra, definitely a tantric divinity, have been recovered form amidst the ruins of Angkor Thom. [A Hevajra image was also found in Sumatra]. A number of Kamboja inscriptions refer to several kings who were initiated into the Great Secret (Vrah Guhya) by their Brahmanical gurus; the Saiva records make obvious records to Tantric doctrines that had crept into Sivaism.”

“But it was in Java and Sumatra that Tantrayana seems to have attained greater importance. There Mahayana Buddhism and the cult of Siva, both deeply imbued with tantric influences, are to be seen often blending with one another during this period. The Sang hyang Kamahayanikan, consisting of Sanskrit versus explained by an Old Javanese commentary, professed to teach the Mahayana and Mantrayana….”

Tantrayana blended Sivaism with Mahayana Buddhism. According to Nepalese accounts from this period, Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva are emanations of the Dhyani-Buddha Vairocana. The Kawa poem, the Nagarakretagama show that Kretanagara, the ruler of Singasari, was given to tantric practices: “A statue of this king has been found in a cremation ground which is a certain proof of his profession of Tantric doctrine; [it states that the king] had gone through the ten ceremonies of purification and the eight processes of initiation and that the carried out with scrupulous care the five makaras ‘free from all sensuality.’ The inscription engraved on the pedestal of his statue in the robes of a monk records that after his initiation on the cremation ground, he was supposed to be identified with Akshobya….”

The presence and influence of Buddhism continued to grow under successive kings. In 877-889, Indravarman I creates a unified Khmer Empire and begins the great irrigation systems that gave rise to the authentic Angkor Empire.

In 889-910, King Yosavarman succeeded Indravarman I and reigned for about ten years. He built several temples according to Mahayana Buddhist specifications, representing Mount Meru, the mythical Buddhist axis of the world. The largest of these temples is Phnom Kandal or “Central Mountain” which lies near the heart of the Angkor complex. He also built temples to Shiva, Vishnu and Buddha. Buddhism was having significant and growing influence at this time.

King Rajendravarman II (944-968) “studied Buddhism intensely. Although he decided to remain a Shivaist, he appointed a Buddhist, Kavindrarimathana, chief minister. Kavindrarimathana built shrines to Buddha and Shiva. Jayavarman V (son of Rajendravarman) also remained a devotee of Shiva. He, too, permitted his own chief minister, Kirtipandita, to foster Mahayana Buddhist learning and divination.” [Angkor Life, Stephen O Murray]

King Jayavarman V (968-1001), was a Shivast, but very strong patron of Buddhism, which exerted increasing influence on the royal court of Angkor.

Surayvarman I (1002-1050), the next successor after Jayavarman V, was a patron of Buddhism. His is probably the most outstanding Buddhist King except only Jayavarman VII.

King Surayvarman I was a Tamil-Malay (Srivijaya) “usurper” to the throne, who claimed legitimate succession to the throne through his Khmer mother. His father was king of the Buddhist kingdom of Tambralingam on the Malay peninsula. He publicly venerated Shiva or Rama, but was officially a Mahayana Buddhist king.

A strong proponent of Mahayana Buddhism, he nevertheless did not interfere with the growing prominence and dissemination of Theravada Buddhism during his reign. “Indeed, inscriptions indicate he sought wisdom from wise Mahayanists and Hinayanists and at least somewhat disestablished the Sivakaivalya family’s hereditary claims to being chief priests (purohitar). Suryavarman’s posthumous title of Nirvanapada, ‘the king who has gone to Nirvana’ is the strongest (though not incontrovertible) evidence that he was a Buddhist.” [Angkor Life, Stephen Murray]

King Udayadityavarman II (1050-1065), was the successor to Suryvarman I. Udayadityavarman II “restored Shivaism (and especially how own Shiva-lingam of gold in the Baphuon) though he did not restore the Brahmin priests, the Sivakivalya clan, as the court chaplains.

King Dharanindravarman II (1152—1160), appears to be a devout Buddhist King. He was father of the greatest of all Khmer Buddhist kings, Jayavarman VII.

JAYAVARMAN VII

In 1177, the Chams sacked Angkor, creating a sense of trauma and crisis throughout the Angkor Empire by attacking and looting the capital.

King Jayavarman VII (1181-1219), ascends to the throne in the sense of crisis that had descended on the Khmer empire. Jayavarman VII studied the doctrines of Mahayana Buddhism, rather than Theravada. His Mahayana faith was the source of his attempt to be a Dharma-king, a bodhisattva, through service and merit making, to liberate himself and his kingdom. Why did he officially establish himself as a Buddhist king, turning his back on the old Hindu deities? Perhaps he and his people had become disillusioned with the Hindu gods, because of their failure to protect the Angkor Empire from being sacked by their enemies, the Cham. 

Jayavarman VII may have rejected Hinduism because the Cham sacked Angkor, and he may have thought that Shiva failed the Khmer people. The Cham themselves were Hindu, and he may have felt an instinctive revulsion or disgust for the religion of his enemies. He had practiced Buddhism for a long time, and naturally began to accentuate the Mahayana Buddhist aspect of the tantric god-king religion that had long held sway in Khmer dynasties. He withdrew his devotion from the old gods, and began to identify more openly with the Buddhist traditions. His regime marked a clear dividing line with the Hindu past.

Before 1200, art in the temples mostly portrayed scenes from the Hindu pantheon such as Vishnu reclining on a lotus leaf, or the churning of the primeval sea of milk of primal creation. After 1200, scenes from the Buddhist Jatakas, and life of the Buddha, along with scenes of the Ramayana began to appear as standard

motif.

Jayavarman VII was elderly, perhaps 60, when he became king. He worked feverishly to accomplish his works in saving the Khmer people and establishing a Buddhist empire, in a race against time.

Jayavarman VII was a “bodhisattva king,” a Buddha-king, something like the Dalai Lama. “He was considered to be a living Buddha, or bodhisattva, turning back from the brink of enlightenment to redeem his people (a new concept in itself) from suffering. By redeeming others in this way, it was thought, a king redeemed himself.” [A History of Cambodia, Chandler]

He had a sincere earnest belief of his destiny as a bodhisattva whose path in life was to deliver his people from suffering. The people were objects of his compassion, an audience for his merit-making, his redemption. Images of Jayavarman portray him in the ascetic seated meditation posture with a serene, enlightened expression.

He built numerous public works to serve the people, including, water works, hospitals, temples, hospices for travelers, far beyond any other Cambodian king. Chandler calls him the “most otherworldly of Cambodia’s kings.” Inscriptions say he “suffered from the maladies of his subjects more than from his own; for it is the public griefs that make a king’s grief, and not his own.” 

Another inscription reads: “Filled with a deep sympathy for the good of the world, the king swore this oath; ‘All beings who are plunged in the ocean of existence, may I draw then out by virtue of this good work. And may the kings of Cambodia who come after me, attached to goodness…attain with their wives, dignitaries and friends, the place of deliverance where there is no more illness.” 

One sign of the change underway was the building of many monastic buildings, including monasteries (vihara) and libraries. Whereas in former times, all effort had been focused on building the massive temple-mount of the devaraja, now more resources were invested into building monastic residence. There was a shift away from the cult of the king to the cult of the Sangha, which was more “earthly”, in direct contact with the people.

The Preah Khan was example of Jayavarman VIIs building projects. An 1191 inscription at the temple documents the residence of a community of 97,840 people associated with the monastery. The central Buddhist sanctuary contained a beautiful statue of Lokesvara, the bodhisattva, sculpted in the image of Jayavarman’sVII father. Today, a stupa stands there. Shrines dedicated to Vishnu and Shiva are also in the Buddhist temple, showing Jayavarman VII’s continued inclusiveness in supporting Hindu tradition. “Preah Khan housed a portrait statue of Jayavarman VII father, Dharanindravarman, with the traits of Lokesvara, the deity expressive of the compassionate aspect of the Buddha. The symbolism is relentlessly appropriate, for in Mahayana Buddhist thinking the marriage of wisdom (pranja) and compassion (karuna) gave birth to enlightenment, which is to say, the Buddha himself, the enlightened one.”[?] The Preah Khan, Ta Prohn and Bayon are representative of this layout. The Bayon, with the faces looking out in the four cardinal directions, represents the Buddha himself: Jayavarman VII.

Jayavarman VII also built the temple Ta Prahm to honor his parents in 1186. His mother was worshiped there as Pranjaparimita, the Goddess of Wisdom, the mother of the Buddhas. The temple also contained many shrines, including an image of his Kru (guru). The resident monks of the temple were Buddhist, Shivite and Vishnuite.

He considered his city, Angkor Thom, and his temple the Bayon, to be his “bride”. An inscription says “the town of Yosadharapura, decorated with powder and jewels, burning with desire, the daughter of a good family…who married by the king in the course of a festival that lacked nothing, under the spreading dais of his protection.”

The object of the marriage, the inscription goes on to say, was the “procreation of happiness throughout the universe” – a worthy objective for a Buddha-king.

The building projects commissioned by the Buddha king were redolent with tantric Buddhist symbolism. The word “bayon” means “ancestor yantra” – yantra is a magical, geometric mandala shape. The central image of the of the temple was a Buddha, a portrait of Jayavarman VII himself, sheltered by an enormeous hooded snake.

The haunting faces of the Bayon, looking into the four directions, crowned with a blooming lotus, represent the four Brhamaviharas – love of a Buddha: Loving kindness, compassion, joy, and equanimity looking over the Angkor Empire, and the universe. The trinity of Avilokitshvara, Pranjaparimita and Buddha was central to his thinking and manifest in the projects he commissioned in his lifetime

He constructed the Bayon at Angkor Thom, and established the rising influence of Mahayana Buddhism, after thoroughly defeating the threat of the Champa.

“By the mid-tenth century, the temple mountains each king built to house the lingam representing his potency were becoming mausoleums after his death. Each new king who reigned long enough to build a temple mountain had his lingam installed in it. After his death his ashes or corpse was deposited there, which his spirit lived on in the image of a god.” 

In writing about Borobodur (the Javanese Angkor) Paul Mus explained that the temple-mountain was less a magnificent shelter for the dead than an architectural body, where the magic soul lived on – shifting from a human body to a stone body. The Mahayanist Buddhism of Jayavarman VII permitted such personal cults. Such self-glorification was anathema to the Theravada Buddhism of post-Angkor Cambodia.

“Villages were assigned responsibility to provide for the maintenance of temples (not only of reigning kings and their dead ancestors, but of some living men of signal eminence too). Multitudes of Khmer peasants ‘contributed’. Ta Prohm had 3,140 villages with 79,000 individuals working to support it; Preah Khan had 5,324 villages and nearly a hundred thousand persons in its service.” [Angkor Life, Stephen Murray]

The peasants and the public rarely or never saw or entered the temples they supported, along with the huge colleges of priests.

“Most scholars considered that the cult of the god-king was quite removed from everyday life. Devaraja was probably a burden without being felt to be much of an inspiration or blessing to those producing the rice surplus that made a religious elite and royal temple building possible. Surely the king inspired awe….” [Angkor Life, Stephen Murray]

Song From the Edge of the Forest

1

When the ascetic Gotama

was in the jungle for six years

why did he grow so thin?

What did his body look like?

What did he do in the summer?

What did he do in the winter?

What are the ways he used

to torture his body?

And finally why did he give it up?

Why did his five friends

leave him?

And who gave him milk when he fainted?

2

The Buddha ate nothing for 49 days,

then he practiced Anapanasati,

vowed he would not move

from that place, even if he

died in the process, until

Prince Sidhartha was enlightened and became

the Lord Buddha, at the 

foot of the Great Bodhi tree

in the shade.

3

The heart gradually emerged

from the boiling swamp

[of kilesas]

like the sun rising from the ground

to spread its light over the world:

Life exists for only a single

moment of consciousness.

What is impermanent is suffering.

All things are pervaded with

their non-existence.

4

His disciples wander far away

to practice meditation.

Bare poverty and deprivation,

plain rice to eat

with salt or chili pepper.

They rested and slept

on grasses and leaves

or under a bamboo shelter

to ward off sun and wind,

with a  rough platform

on which to lie.

And a pathway for walking meditation.

But they had to wander on 

for living in one place is not good;

moving on is a way to remain alert.

Moving on without fixed destination

to define time or  place - 

both of which tie one up -

is freedom.

5

Always moving on

responsible for only one's self

and the practice of the Way

which is the goal they aim for

with every breath.

6

They lived in the forest

under the shade of a tree

or in a charnal ground,

accepting whatever was available;

lived out in the open without any shelter

or they lived in a cave,

under a cliff

or in an abandoned shack

where no one was staying.

7

They used discarded rags

from the charnal ground

for their robes

and went on alms round every day,

ate only one meal a day

from their bowl,

and they practiced meditation:

Mindfulness with Breathing.

8

The Buddha taught this way

in kindness and compassion

for the world.

9

Therefore we are confident

to follow his empty footsteps

into the forest.

Peaceful and joyful in the forest

we enjoy the sounds of animals

which serenade forests with their music,

soothing lullaby, the animals

and birds gather around and call

to their friends. Their sounds

resound about the forest 

in due, regular hours of the day

and night,

for many kinds of animals roam

the forest in search for food

and their calls never cease.

10

Even though it is difficult

they must risk suffering and

danger in various ways.

Dhamma is to be found where

death is close by, if one has not

been faced with death one has

not seen dhamma.

11

They strive continually

with cause and result taking place

consistently and steadily.

They could see their heart's development.

Engrossed in this practice

they forget whether it is 

night or day.

12

They speak little and have no

liking for association with others

preferring to live by themselves, alone.

They like to go about on their own

and dislike giving dhamma talks.

13

They practice really determined,

unconcerned with mundane projects,

like one who dies without making arrangement

for his corpse. Anywhere will do

when his time has come.

While he is alive, he stays in

places like forests or caves

conducive to practice.

14

Sitting in samadhi for many hours

pain comes upon him

like a sea of flame

as if the body and mind is going to

break up and fall right there.

While separating out the bones and

feelings (of pain) with mindfulness

and wisdom, fully attentive

and committed,

investigating until he understands.

15

Then he separates out the feelings

from the mind (citta) until

he understands, all feeling 

disappears, and the mind

is absorbed in concentration.

Nor does fear arise anymore.

16

[Because one sees how feeling has

deceived him, made him fear

life and death.]

17

He sees the fresh and new footprints

of the master and the Arahants.

18

Anicca vata sankhara

When sankharas which compose

the body die, the body is no longer

of any use.

But the citta does not die

and can go on working endlessly.

If f the heart is used to going evil ways

it becomes dangerous and harmful to one's self.

The body is not steadfast

having been born it is bound

to die.

But the citta, the heart,

is steadfast.

It has no birth,

or death when the body dies.

It only whirls around in accord

with causes and conditions

that make it go around like this.

19

You should not become an Acariya

teaching others,

but become Acariya-teacher to teach

yourself.

Looking at one's self not others,

teaching one's self caution

of things which harm one's mind

such as projects, reform movements,

worldly ways -

but look only on bhavana

overcoming kilesa.

20

Greed terrifies decent people

for when the time comes for

the fire to start burning

and destroying, it will not discriminate.

For the word seems to be boiling

and getting hotter, smoldering

in every place, more disturbed 

every day.

Greed is an engine of destruction.

21

They help the world in various ways

without expecting material reward

and they make people glad at heart.

They are full of loving-kindness

and they never get tired of the people.

Wherever they go they do no harm

in the world, but instead go

about helping others.

They give help to the world like a 

doctor and nurse who

dispense medicine and tend

diseases of fellow humans.

22

They are good people full

of generous kindness, and

big hearted.

So there are still some good people

in the world.

Gautama Buddha was a forest monk

Sakyamuni Buddha was a forest monk the the "forest tradition", following the sramana way of life, which involved abandoning conventional society and its religion. 

Buddhist literature sometimes seem to present the Buddha as a domesticated monastery-dwelling monk, and the forest dwelling was his pre-Enlightenment struggles, but Reginald Ray in his book Buddhist Saints in India, says there the portrayal of Buddha in the earliest scriptures show the Buddha as a forest monk.

In the earliest Buddhism, the Buddha is clearly depicted as a forest renunciate who has attained enlightenment in the jungle. Others join him there as his disciples, and he teaches them the forest way of life.

Thus we read that Guatama initially determined to become a wanderer, living in the open air, begging his food, and practicing meditation. Meditating in the forest he encountered Mara, defeated him, and attained enlightenment. After his enlightenment, he continued to live a forest-lifestyle: the Suttanipatta says he wandered about, lived in  the forest and dwelt alone, teaching the virtues of seclusion and solitude (viveka) to his disciples and being questioned by others on these virtues, Ray says.

"In fulfillment of his forest character, he dwells with no roof over his head and lives sometimes in specific forest locales, or upon particular mountains. In one verse, he is compared to a lion in a mountain cave. In his remote habitation, he does not abandon meditation, takes little food, and is restrained in speech."

"Moreover, abiding in the forest, he is available to teach the dharma to others. His supplicants, in order to see him and engage in his cult, know that he dwells in the forest and that they must go there to find him. On one occasion, King Bimbisara must climb Mount Pandava to see the Buddha."

"The dharma that the Buddha preaches to his renunciate disciples is, not surprisingly, one of forest renunciation, in which solitude and meditation are the essence and are not to be abandoned; and sleep is seen as an impediment [to meditation]."

Ray refers to the earliest strata of pali literature as contained in the Suttanipata, Dhammapada, Udana, Itivvttaka, Theragata, and Therigata. 

Loving Our Enemies

How can we love our enemies? Because we recognize that loving-kindness is alive in every heart.

We love the evil-minded because they need it most! “In many of them, the seeds of goodness may have died because warmth was lacking for its growth. It perished form coldness in a world without compassion,” Maha Ghosananda said.

This is how we can love our enemies, because we understand.

We do not take sides in partisan conflicts, but advocate non-partisan reconciliation without limit, because no one is excluded form the need of love.

Loving-kindness saw the whole world as one family, the Human Family. Human rights begin when each man becomes a brother and each woman becomes a sister” when we truly care for each other.

Loving-kindness is a very powerful energy. It radiates to all without distinction. It radiates to our loved ones, to those towards whom we are neutral, and to our enemies. There are no boundaries to loving-kindness. The Dharma is founded on loving kindness. The Buddha looked on the whole world with eyes of compassion, so our personal prayer for happiness is a pryare for the whole world: May the whole world be happy.

Compassion compels us to reach out to all living beings, including our so-called enemies, those people who upset or hurt us. Irrespective of what they do to you, if you remember that all beings like you are only trying to be happy, you will find it much easier to develop compassion towards them.

Usually our sense of compassion is limited and biased to “me” and “mine”. We extend such feelings only towards our family and friends or those who are helpful to us.

But true compassion is universal in scope. There are no boundaries to loving kindness. The Buddha looked on the whole world with eyes of compassion.

One of the emotions most disturbing our mental tranquility is hatred. The antidote is compassion.

Wisdom sees the oneness of all things. Compassion sees the multiplicity, the individuality, of all things.

We are here to help as much as we can, as many as we can, for as long as we can.

Compassion is an understanding heart.

Loving-kindness is like water flowing everywhere. It is a gift that we can give.

Loving-kindness is the only way to peace.

If we can change ourselves, we can change the world. This is the essence of Compassionate Listening: seeing the person next to you as a part of yourself.

Impenetrable Moral Darkness

Has technology threatened human survival? Thomas Merton, sitting on the front porch of his hermitage in Trappist, Kentucky, fretted over such questions:

"We do not know if we are building a fabulously wonderful world or destroying all that we have ever had, all that we have achieved! All the inner force of man is boiling and bursting out, the good together with the evil, the good poisoned by evil and fighting it, the evil pretending to be good and revealing itself in the most dreadful crimes, justified and rationalized by the purest and most innocent intentions. Man is all ready to become a god, and instead he appears at times to be a zombie." (Conjectures of a Guilty Bystander, p.55)

"There is a danger of technology becoming an end in itself and arrogating to itself all that is best and most vital in human effort: thus humans come to serve their machines instead of being served by them....The more corrupt a social system is, the more it tends to be controlled by technology instead of controlling it. The intimate connection between technology and alienation is and will remain one of the crucial problems we will need to study and master in our lifetime. Technology means wealth and power but it bestows the greatest amount of wealth and power upon those who serve it most slavishly a the expense of authentic human interests and values, including their own human and personal integrity. Life in the United States shows this beyond question. But unfortunately, the rest of the world secretly or overtly wishes to become like the United States."

"What a tragedy that would be." (Punto Final)

Technology allows us diversion and escape into endless frenzy, and escape from inner journey of awakening.

"The tragedy of a life centered on 'things,' on the grasping and manipulation of objects, is that such a life closes the ego upon itself as though it were an end in itself, and throws it into a hopeless struggle with other perverse and hostile selves competing together for the possessions which will give them power and satisfaction. Instead  of being 'open to the world' such minds are in fact closed to it and their titanic efforts to build the world according tot their own desires are doomed in the end by the ambiguity and destructiveness that are in them. They seem to be a light, but they battle together in impenetrable moral darkness." (Zen and the Birds of Appetite, p.82)

On the Calling of a Cynic

I came across this passage in Epictetus that reminded me of wise man's way of life. The Cynics were philosophers who were like monks. They were early Beats. They sought happiness through freedom from desires; freedom from passions of fear, grief, anger. Freedom from religious or public authority  or public opinion  They wanted to live free, following the way of Nature:

“And how is it possible that a man who has nothing, who is naked, homeless, without a hearth, squalid, without a servant, without a city, can pass a life that flows easily? See, God has sent you  a man to show you that it is possible. 

"Look at me, who am without a city, without a home, without possessions, without a servant; I sleep on the ground; I have no wife, no children, no profession, but only the earth and heavens, and one rag-robe. And what do I lack? Am I not without sorrow? Am I not free from fear? Am I not free? 

"When did any of you see me failing in the object of my desire? Or ever falling into that which I would avoid? Did I ever blame God or man? Did I ever accuse any man? Did any of you ever see me with sorrowful countenance? And how do I meet with those whom you are afraid of and admire? Do not I treat them like equals? Who, when he sees me, does to think that he sees a king and master?”

Epictetus, On the Calling of a Cynic, Discourse 3.22