DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.75620#0103
CHAPTER VII
GANE^A IN CHINA
IT is not known at what epoch or by which route or routes the cult of Ganesa was
first introduced into China, and a still greater problem presents itself when
attempting to account for the double form of Ganesa worshipped by the Chinese
which, outside of China and Japan, was totally unknown.
There were two channels by which his cult might have reached China. The first,
and probably the earliest, was by the overland route either via Chinese Turkestan
or passing through Nepal and Tibet. His worship was certainly brought to China
either by Indian pandits1 or by Chinese Buddhist monks returning from their pil-
grimages to the Buddhist shrines of India, carrying back with them the tenets of the
Yogacara or Tantric school favourable to the mystic cult of Ganesa as conceived
by the Chinese.
No difficulty presents itself in tracing the second route, for precise records attest
to the voyages of Buddhist monks who crossed the seas from India to China, where
they introduced the Tantric texts and practices as well as the Mahayana doctrine
of the mandalas of the Two Parts: the Vajra-dhatu and the Garbha-dhatu, mystic
diagrams wherein Vinayaka had his allotted place.
Ganesa was known to the Chinese as well as to the Japanese under two
aspects: Vinayaka, the single form, and Kuan-shi-t'ien (Kangi-ten), the double
form. The single form was similar to that found in practically all Buddhist
countries, that is, elephant-faced with two arms, and was usually cross-legged.
The double form, which, as we have said above, was totally unknown outside
of China and Japan, was represented by two elephant-faced deities standing vis
d vis, interlaced.
Unfortunately there are only two ancient representations of Ganesa known to us
in China. One is a fresco on the wall of a grotto-temple at Tun-huang, while the
other is a stone bas-relief in the rock-cut temple at Kung-hsien. According to Paul
Pelliot, the frescos date from the first half of the sixth century, which would make
them contemporary with the stone sculptures of Kung-hsien. Rene Grousset traces
in the frescos at Tun-huang the progressive adaptation by the Chinese of Gan-
dharian, Gupta, and Iranian models ;2 but were these purely Hindu frescos executed
by Buddhist Chinese, by Indian artists, or by both ?
At this period, the finest frescos at Ajanta were being painted, and among the
steady stream of Buddhist pilgrims from China to India were assuredly Chinese
artists who, like the illustrious Buddhist traveller Hsiian-tsang, visited Ajanta and
returned to China via Tun-huang. While at Ajanta the gradual development of
mural painting may be traced which culminated in the masterpieces in Cave I, at
Tun-huang, although various influences are apparent, the frescos seem to have
been executed by sure and experienced hands. They were, however, apparently not
1 v. p. 73.
2 H. de I'E.-O., tome i. p. 316.
GANE^A IN CHINA
IT is not known at what epoch or by which route or routes the cult of Ganesa was
first introduced into China, and a still greater problem presents itself when
attempting to account for the double form of Ganesa worshipped by the Chinese
which, outside of China and Japan, was totally unknown.
There were two channels by which his cult might have reached China. The first,
and probably the earliest, was by the overland route either via Chinese Turkestan
or passing through Nepal and Tibet. His worship was certainly brought to China
either by Indian pandits1 or by Chinese Buddhist monks returning from their pil-
grimages to the Buddhist shrines of India, carrying back with them the tenets of the
Yogacara or Tantric school favourable to the mystic cult of Ganesa as conceived
by the Chinese.
No difficulty presents itself in tracing the second route, for precise records attest
to the voyages of Buddhist monks who crossed the seas from India to China, where
they introduced the Tantric texts and practices as well as the Mahayana doctrine
of the mandalas of the Two Parts: the Vajra-dhatu and the Garbha-dhatu, mystic
diagrams wherein Vinayaka had his allotted place.
Ganesa was known to the Chinese as well as to the Japanese under two
aspects: Vinayaka, the single form, and Kuan-shi-t'ien (Kangi-ten), the double
form. The single form was similar to that found in practically all Buddhist
countries, that is, elephant-faced with two arms, and was usually cross-legged.
The double form, which, as we have said above, was totally unknown outside
of China and Japan, was represented by two elephant-faced deities standing vis
d vis, interlaced.
Unfortunately there are only two ancient representations of Ganesa known to us
in China. One is a fresco on the wall of a grotto-temple at Tun-huang, while the
other is a stone bas-relief in the rock-cut temple at Kung-hsien. According to Paul
Pelliot, the frescos date from the first half of the sixth century, which would make
them contemporary with the stone sculptures of Kung-hsien. Rene Grousset traces
in the frescos at Tun-huang the progressive adaptation by the Chinese of Gan-
dharian, Gupta, and Iranian models ;2 but were these purely Hindu frescos executed
by Buddhist Chinese, by Indian artists, or by both ?
At this period, the finest frescos at Ajanta were being painted, and among the
steady stream of Buddhist pilgrims from China to India were assuredly Chinese
artists who, like the illustrious Buddhist traveller Hsiian-tsang, visited Ajanta and
returned to China via Tun-huang. While at Ajanta the gradual development of
mural painting may be traced which culminated in the masterpieces in Cave I, at
Tun-huang, although various influences are apparent, the frescos seem to have
been executed by sure and experienced hands. They were, however, apparently not
1 v. p. 73.
2 H. de I'E.-O., tome i. p. 316.