re described as his consorts.[43]
His worship prevailed not only in India but in Nepal, Tibet, China,
Japan and Java. Fa-Hsien states that he was honoured in Central India,
and Hsuean Chuang that there were stupas dedicated to him at
Muttra.[44] He is also said to have been incarnate in Atisa, the
Tibetan reformer, and in Vairocana who introduced Buddhism to Khotan,
but, great as is his benevolence, he is not so much the helper of
human beings, which is Avalokita's special function, as the
personification of thought, knowledge, and meditation. It is for this
that he has in his hands the sword of knowledge and a book. A
beautiful figure from Java bearing these emblems is in the Berlin
Museum.[45] Miniatures represent him as of a yellow colour with the
hands (when they do not carry emblems) set in the position known as
teaching the law.[46] Other signs which distinguish his images are the
blue lotus and the lion on which he sits.
An interesting fact about Manjusri is his association with China,[47]
not only in Chinese but in late Indian legends. The mountain
Wu-t'ai-shan in the province of Shan-si is sacred to him and is
covered with temples erected in his honour.[48] The name (mountain of
five terraces) is rendered in Sanskrit as Pancasirsha, or Pancasikha,
and occurs both in the Svayambhu Purana and in the text appended to
miniatures representing Manjusri. The principal temple is said to have
been erected between 471 and 500 A.D. I have not seen any statement
that the locality was sacred in pre-Buddhist times, but it was
probably regarded as the haunt of deities, one of whom--perhaps some
spirit of divination--was identified with the wise Manjusri. It is
possible that during the various inroads of Graeco-Bactrians,
Yueeh-Chih, and other Central Asian tribes into India, Manjusri was
somehow imported into the pantheon of the Mahayana from China or
Central Asia, and he has, especially in the earlier descriptions, a
certain pure and abstract quality which recalls the Amesha-Spentas of
Persia. But still his attributes are Indian, and there is little
positive evidence of a foreign origin. I-Ching is the first to tell us
that the Hindus believed he came from China.[49] Hsuean Chuang does not
mention this belief, and probably did not hear of it, for it is an
interesting detail which no one writing for a Chinese audience would
have omitted. We may therefore suppose that the idea arose in India
about 650 A.D. By that date the
|