Navigation – Plan du site
Articles

Buddhism in Čampā

Le Bouddhisme au Champa
Anne-Valérie Schweyer
p. 309-337

Résumés

Le Čampā, pays du centre Vietnam, connut un bouddhisme Māhāyana du xe au xive siècle. Les inscriptions en sanskrit et en cam montrent que ce bouddhisme était essentiellement tantrique, relevant du bouddhisme Vajrāyana, mêlant pratiques Śivaïtes et bouddhiques. Plus précisément, le bouddhisme cam montre qu’aux côtés de Śiva sont honorées les trois émanations du Bouddha, Śākyamuni, Amitābha et Vairocana, avec la déesse Prajñāpāramitā, la Vraie Substance de la Connaissance ; on trouve également Vajrapāni, Lokeśvara et Vajrasattva. La confrontation des témoignages épigraphiques et archéologiques permet de mieux appréhender le bouddhisme cam, à la croisée des routes commerciales entre l’Inde et la Chine. Cet article exploite ces témoignages dans une perspective chronologique, avec un développement particulier pour le Bouddhisme ésotérique au xe siècle.

Haut de page

Notes de la rédaction

Cet article est la version revue et corrigée par l’auteur de l’édition papier.

Notes de l’auteur

This article is in continuity of a paper entitled “Campa Buddhism in Campa until 10th century” presented in March 2006 for International Conference on Dharma and Abhidharma, KJ Somaya Centre for Buddhist Studies, Bombay.

Texte intégral

  • 1 Book of the Song dynasty, 97 on Lin-yi (Soper 1959: 47 note 51).
  • 2 The Bibliography Chu San Tsang Chi Chi, 13 listing several pieces pertaining to the reign of Ming T (...)

1This paper draws together for the first time all the evidence for Buddhism found in the former Far-East Asian country of Čampā (see fig. 1), now part of central and southern Vietnam. The earliest Buddhist inscriptions and images in South-East Asia date to the 5th century (Jacq-Hergoualc’h 2002: 207-223, Chutiwongs 2002: 151, 211). Many Buddhist monks were travelling through the region during this period, for instance Guņavarman, an Indian guru who left India around 420 CE for China and stayed a long time in Java where he made many conversions to his faith. In the Song Shu1, it is said, for example, that “an important and auspicious image of the Buddha” was kept and brought to China in 446 CE. In the 5th century, the Bibliography Chu San Tsang Chi Chi2 refers to another image of “Buddha Amitāyus”. Most probably this was in Čampā, for in Cambodia at that time kings and dignitaries were interested in the doctrine of the Buddha, but at the system at court was firmly Śaiva.

Fig. 1: Map of Čampā

Fig. 1: Map of Čampā

Drawing H. David – A.-V Schweyer. All rights reserved.

  • 3 During the Chinese Liu Fang’ invasion of 605 CE, the Čam capital was destroyed, but royal archives (...)

2In 6053 the Chinese army captured 1 350 Buddhist texts (collected in 564 volumes) in Čampā, but we do not have the details of the texts. In the 7th century Čampā seems to have been an important centre for Buddhist studies; the Chinese monk Yijing at the end of this century says Buddhism was well known everywhere in the country. The first terracotta tablets known in Čampā (Châu Sa, Quảng Ngãi province, or Thuy Hòa, Phú Yên province) date from this time (Chuttiwongs 2005: 67 fig. 1, 69 fig. 4, Skilling 2003-2004: 286 fig. 14). The model of this type of tablet seems to come from the Malay Peninsula, and is found in Central Thailand, Myanmar and Java. Some of the Čam tablets bear Sanskrit inscriptions in the ye dharmma’ form (Skilling 2003-2004: 273-287). The first bronzes of the bodhisattva of the compassion, Avalokiteśvara, appeared at this same period. From then onwards, Avalokiteśvara was to remain dominant in the local form of Buddhism (Boisselier 1957: 255-274).

3The style of the earliest Buddha image known from Čam territory attests to cultural relationships with South India or Sri Lanka; for example, a bronze torso of Buddha, found in Quảng Khê (Quảng Bình Northern Province of Čampā) seems linked to the early Pā la tradition (Boisselier 1963: 27 and fig. 2). The Čams were also in touch with the Môn kingdom of Dvāravatī: an image of a Buddha sitting between two stūpas, from Thuy Hòa, Phú Yên province, dating most probably to the 8th century (Chuttiwongs 2005: 69 fig. 3), has similarities with Dvāravatī art from Central Thailand in the 8th-9th centuries. Other finds, like the terracotta tablets, suggest contacts with Gupta North India. These votive tablets bring to mind those from Mirpur Khās in the Sind, where Buddhist remains from 6th to 10th century have been found. The Chinese pilgrims, Xuanzang and Yijing, wrote that in the 7th century the Sind and West-India countries were under the influence of the Theravadin Sammitīya-nikāya. Yijing also wrote that Čam philosophy followed the Ārya Sammitīya, even if the Ārya Sarvastivāda-nikāya also had its followers. In fact we know very little about these two sects, even if we know they belong to the Theravada (the Sthāvira or “the Ancients”, the first group in the aṣṭadaśa-nikāya, the second being the Mahāsaṇghika or “Great Assembly”) (Dutt 1970: 194-222). It is difficult to evaluate the situation as there is no evidence Čampā to confirm these reports.

4The question of the source of Čam Buddhism at this period remains open: both routes – the Maritime Silk Road, through Java, or the Continental Silk Road from China – may have been the vehicles. For example, an Indian monk, called Vinitaruci in a much later Vietnamese work, is said to have arrived in China in 574 and gone on to the country of the Việt in 580, where he established a great Buddhist centre near modern Hà Nội. He practised a Tantric form of Buddhism involving meditation, asceticism, rituals, magic and thaumaturgy and followed texts like the Sanskrit Vajra-Prajñapāramitā-Sūtra. We have little information about what was happening further south in Čampā at this time.

  • 4 Sanderson (2003-2004: 427 n. 284) chose to translate lakṣagrantham abhiprajñaṃ yo’nveṣya pararās (...)
  • 5 There are complementary evolutions of Buddhism. The appellations Mantrayāna or “path of the Mantras (...)

5In terms the Buddhist schools in India, the Prajñapāramitā-Sūtra formed the textual platform of Mahāyāna Buddhism up to the first century CE. In the 2nd century Nāgārjuna, in his commentaries on these Sūtra, founded the philosophic school of the Mādhyamika. Čam inscriptions make no mention of the Prajñapāramitā-Sūtra, but the Khmer Wat Sithor Inscription (K.111) from the 970s, clearly says that Kīrtipaṇdita, Jayavarman V’s guru, “searched from abroad the one hundred thousand books of the higher wisdom”4. So the Prajñapāramitā-Sūtra were known in Southeast Asia and clearly announced a Mahāyāna orientation. In the 4th century Asaṅga founded in Nālanda a second Mahāyāna school of philosophy, the cittamātra, which is also called the yogacāra school, the school of the followers of yoga. This cittamātra school, “nothing-but-thought” philosophy, uses mantras as a means to Tantric meditation5. This is the earlier Tantric Vajrayāna, whose adepts, before the 7th century, were indistinct from the Mahāyāna. The Vajrayāna appears in the 7th century.

6From the 7th century onwards, the bodhisattva Lokeśvara is known in Čampā but the dominant religion in Čampā, except in the 9th-10th centuries, is Śaiva. Śiva is praised for his powers and victories; Buddha and Lokeśvara symbolized peace, benevolence and compassion. All appear to cohabit in great tolerance. Even the temples to Buddhist and Hindu deities follow the same architectural concepts, ruling out any sectarianism.

7The best-known Bodhisattva in Čampā is certainly Avalokiteśvara. He took on a greater importance when a specific Sūtra was written about him and included in the Lotus Sūtra (Saddharma-puṇḍarika-sūtra or The Sūtra of the Lotus Flower of the True Law), whose chapter XXIV, in the Sanskrit version, became the base for many practices addressed to Avalokiteśvara.

  • 6 Baptiste & Zéphir (2005: 205 notice 16), Avalokiteśvara. Hoài Nhỏn, Bình Ðịnh Province, 8th – 9th c (...)

8Starting from the 8th century, there is growing evidence for Buddhist activities. They include images of Avalokiteśvara6, with a figurine of the jina Amitābha in his hair.

  • 7 Many Chinese sources document Nāgārjuna as one of the early promoters of the Vajrayāna. For instanc (...)

9The 8th century saw Vajrayāna spread across East and Southeast Asia. The examples of Java with the Śailendra dynasty (c. 750-850, “the Śrīvijaya empire”) and the Malay Peninsula are the most significant. In the 8th century, Indian monks like Śubhakarasiṇha (637-735), Vajrabodhi (671-741) and Amoghavajra (705 in Sri Lanka-774)7 went to China by boat. It is said they passed through Java and Sumatra. It seems Vajrabodhi met Amoghavajra in Java in 717 and they arrived together in China (Guangzhou) in 719. They must have made stopovers in Čampā, because the navigation technologies of this period meant that a non-stop trip by sea was impossible. They developed the school of Mantras at the Court of China. In 741, Amoghavajra came back by boat to Sri Lanka to obtain some original Vajrayāna texts. He returned to China in 746 with more than 100 Vajrayāna texts and is credited with translating 77 into Chinese, including the Vajroṣnīṣayogasūtra, the third major text of the “school of the Mantras”, called Zhenyan in China. This “school of the mantras or secrets” first reached in China in the 7th century. The Indian monk Punyodaya (Lin Li-Kouang 1935: 83-100) first tried to introduce Vajrayāna into China in 655, but was repelled by Xuanzang, a yogācārin Chinese monk. Śubhakarasiṇha arrived in China in 716 and made the first Chinese translation of the Mahāvairocanasūtra, which shows that there was an audience for it by this stage. The situation will change again a century later, when proscription puts an end to all forms of Buddhism in China in 845 CE (Strickmann 1996).

  • 8 Baptiste & Zéphir (2005: 205 notice 16), Avalokiteśvara. Hoài Nhỏn, Bình Ðịnh Province, 8th – 9th c (...)

10In the 8th century, the art expressions became more local (see for example, the comparison between an 8th century and a 10th century Avalokiteśvara8: the style of the first one has marked similarities with Cambodian pieces whereas the second is clearly Čam). Čampā in the 8th century reveals with its bodhisattva figures a new step in its development. Influences from India as well as Java seem integrated into a distinctly Čam art.

11In Čampā in the 8th-9th centuries the official religion of the kings remains Śaiva, while Buddhism coexists alongside the official religion. In the Bakul inscription (Bergaigne & Barth 1893: 237-241), a governor erected “two vihāra of Jina” and “two temples of Śankara” and his son a sthavīra named Buddhanirvāṇa wrote the inscription to his father’s foundation.

C.23 inscription, from Bakul, in Ninh Thuận province, near Phan Rang

śrī

I. vikrānteśvaralokau yau tayor gupau sa nāyakaḥ |

samanta(ḥ) prathito nāmmā tasya puṇyam idaṃ matam ||

II. vihārau devakule dvau dve jinaśakarayos tayoḥ |

svajanārthaṃ prakurute tān gatiṃ pragataś śubhām ||

I. “This is the meritorious act of the leader who is famous by the name of Samanta, and who is under the protection of both, Vikrānta and Īśvaraloka”.

II.“Two temples and two monasteries for the Jina (Buddha) and Śaṇkara (Śiva) were made by him who has gone to this blissful life, for the welfare of his relatives”.

12This 829 CE inscription from South Čampā mentions shrines dedicated to the Buddha and to Śiva as though they formed equal parts of local belief.

The late 9th and the 10th centuries

13When a new Čam lineage and its first “king of the kings” Jaya Indravarman came to power in Indrapura, Buddhism for the first time became the official religion. Under his father Bhadravarman, a new form of Buddhism had already reached Central Čampā. An important inscription (C.138) shows a quite new conception of Buddhism and is therefore presented here in detail.

14Inscription C.138 (Huber 1911: 277-282 in Jacques 1995: 251-256) was discovered in An Thái, in Quảng Nam province, where no excavations have ever been made and no sculptures found. Because of this we have no other information about the kind of meditation it describes and the community for which it was made.

15Čam king Śrī Bhadravarman (Schweyer 2000: 205-218), in the late 9th century, authorized the foundation of a monastery dedicated to the Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara, called Lokeśvara and Lokanātha. The vihāra, Pramudita-Lokeśvara, is a foundation made by king Bhadravarman’s counsellor, the monk Nāgapuṣpa. This foundation is mentioned later by a descendant of the king Śrī Indravarman. In 902 CE the next king erected a Lokeśvara statue there.

16In the inscription there is no reference to doctrinal texts, but an actual, live act of meditation is projected in a Čam monastery in 902 CE. Stanza III says that after Vajrapāṇi destroyed the hells, human beings took to “the path of the Buddha”. In the Vajrayāna tradition it is said that the Tantras were transmitted from Śakyamuni to Vajrapāṇi, called the “Lord of the mysteries” (guhyapati), who is charged with transmitting them to human beings. He is the Bodhisattva capable of leading humans into the “path of the Vajra”, the Vajrayāna.

[namo Lo]kanāthā[ya]

III. mārair ugraiḥ parītāś ciram api manujāḥ pūrvvakarmmānuraktā

nistrāṇā . . . paramakaluṣitāh kṣutpipāsābhibhūtāḥ

pūrvvañ cādānadoṣāt sugatavimukhataḥ prāpta . . .

. . . vajrapāṇipraśamitanirayaṃ buddhamārggaṃ samāpuḥ ||

IV. śrī bhadravarmmanṛpateḥ tasya mato’tyantaballabhatvamatiḥ |

sujanāṅghriyugalasevī nāgapuṣpasthāviranāmā ||

V. lokeśvarañ jagadvyāptaṃ śraddhābhāvair atiṣṭhipat |

pṛthivīkīrttaye so’smai dharmmadeśanayā hitaḥ ||

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

XI. nāgapuṣpāhvayo bhāti sthāviras tulyaśīladhīḥ |

pūrvveṇa nāgapuṣpākhyenātmavaṃśena bhikṣuṇā ||

XII. gate śakābde yugakarṇṇakāyaiḥ

jyeṣṭhasya śukle navame dine’yam |

tena pratiṣṭhāpitayātmakīrttyai

śrī lokanāthas tu sa jīvavāre ||

Homage to Lokanātha

III. “Sinful men, attached to their works in former lives, and without any hope of deliverance, were eternally surrounded by the terrible hosts of Māra, and overpowered by hunger and thirst, on account of their want of liberality and aversion to Sugata (Buddha) in former times. But being rescued by Vajrapāṇi from hell, they secured the path of the Buddha.”

IV. “The Sthāvira named Nāgapuṣpa, who adored the feet of virtuous men, was highly esteemed by king Bhadravarman, and cherished very loyal and friendly feelings towards him.”

V. “He (Bhadravarman) established, for Nāgapuṣpa, with sentiments full of devotion, the (monastery) of Lokeśvara, who is omnipresent in the world. May He, consecrated for the sake of religious instruction, lead to his glory in the world.”

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

XI. “The Sthāvira Nāgapuṣpa, equal in intelligence and piety to a former monk of his own lineage called Nāgapuṣpa, is brilliant”.

XII. “In the elapsed year of the Śakas, denoted by bodies (8), ears (2) and ages (4) on the ninth day of the bright fortnight of the month Jyaiṣṭha, on Thursday, he established this Lokanātha for the sake of his glory.” (Translation Golzio 2004: 91-92).

17These are the important parts of the inscription on philosophico-meditation:

VIII. vajradhātur asau pūrvvaṃ śrīśākyamuniśāsanāt |

śūnyo’pi vajradhṛddhetuḥ buddhānām ālayo’bhavat ||

IX. padmadhātur ato lokeśvarahetur jinālayaḥ |

amitābhavaco yuktyā mahāśūnyo babhūva ha ||

X. cakradhātur asau śūnyātīto vairocanājñayā

vajrasattvasya hetuḥ syāt tṛtīyo’bhūj jinālayaḥ ||

18Three levels (dhātu) of meditation are indicated in three residences (jinālaya) of the Buddhas Śākyamuni, Amitābha and Vairocana; these dhātu – namely the Vajradhātu, the Padmadhātu and the Cakradhātu – respectively represent the Void (śūnyo), the Great Void (mahāśūnyo) and Behind the Void (śūnyātīto). The three Buddhas are the constructive forces or causes (hetu) of three further emanations – Vajradhṛt/Vajrapāṇi, Lokeśvara and Vajrasattva.

3 jinālaya

Vajradhātu

Padmadhātu

Cakradhātu

3 Buddhas

Śākyamuni

Amitābha

Vairocana

3 emanations

Vajradhṛt (Vajrapāṇi)

Lokeśvara

Vajrasattva

  • 9 Vajrapāṇi is a former yakṣa, turned Bodhisattva. See Lamotte (1966: 159) : “Forme secondaire d’In (...)

19So, on the level of the thunderbolt (vajra), Śākyamuni’s teaching is transmitted to Vajrapāṇi, the “Lord of the mysteries”9, who opens the “Path of the Vajras” or the Vajrayāna.

20On the level of the lotus (padma), Amitābha’s teaching goes to Avalokiteśvara.

21On the level of the wheel (cakra), Vairocana’s teaching goes to Vajrasattva.

  • 10 Snellgrove-Chandra (1981: introduction 5-67).
  • 11 See in chapter 6-10 assertions like: “O Lords, there are evil beings, Maheśvara and others, who hav (...)

22Vajrapāṇi played a major role in the propagation of Buddhism. The theme of conversions to Buddhism is current in early Mahāyāna texts, such as the Lotus Sūtra, where Vajrapāṇi was one of the agents of conversion (Lamotte 1966: 133-138). In the classical text of the Yogācāra literature, the Sarvatathāgatatattvasaṃgraha (STTS), Vajrapāṇi is put forward as chief converter to Buddhism10; his principal enemies being the Śaiva gods11. Vairocana himself then gives him a vajra, whose special powers enable him to encounter Śiva in a duel, kill him and revive him as a Buddha. With his vajra and his magical powers, Vajrapāṇi becomes a great Bodhisattva.

  • 12 “[The vajra-yāna’s] sphere of utmost potency is the vajra-dhātu-maṇḍala, and whoever rightly occu (...)
  • 13 “Vajrasattva, the sixth Dhyāni Buddha, is regarded as the Purohita or the priest of the five Dhyāni (...)

23No sculptural and architectural evidence has yet been found that illustrates the philosophical system of the An Thái inscription, but textual sources concerning Vajrasattva may help us get closer to recognizing the particular school of Buddhism practised in Central Čampā at this time. Snellgrove12 acknowledges “the impossibility of making any final distinction between Vajradhara and Vajrasattva for both represent buddhahood in its [ultimate] adamantine aspect”, but points out that they are “distinguishable iconographically” (Snellgrove 1959: 244).This is valid only for a form of Vajrayāna Buddhism in which Vajrasattva is already a Buddha13. However, in the An Thái maṇḍala, Vajrasattva is still a Bodhisattva and, according to the inscription, it is hard to say whether this kind of meditation scheme belongs to the Yogācāra school or to the beginning of the Vajrayāna in Čampā. Moreover there are only three levels or spheres – three dimensions or manifestations (kāya) of a Buddha. In Vajrayāna proper there are five kāya. It is therefore possible to say that the Čam maṇḍala on three levels belongs either to the Yogācāra school or to an early if not pre-Vajrayāna Buddhism.

  • 14 References given in Lobo (1997: 77 note 14).

24The temple in the An Thái inscription is dedicated to Avalokiteśvara and this configuration records the concepts of trikhāla and trimāla developed in Java in the early 10th century in a text called Sang Hyang Kamahāyānikan14. In this text, the triad Akṣobhya-Amitābha-Vairocana is associated with the triad Vajrapāṇi-Lokeśvara-Śākyamuni, which represent respectively the triple Essences (trikhāla) and the triple Manifestations (trimāla) of the three elements responsible for continuing transmigration (desire, hate and delusion).

SHK in 920 CE The principial Buddha

3 tattvas/kleśatraya

dveṣa

rāga

moha

trikhāla

Akṣobhya

Amitābha

Vairocana

trimāla

Vajrapāṇi

Lokeśvara

Śākyamuni

25Śākyamuni plays an important role. In the first of the systems described above (the An Thái inscription), he represents Akṣobhya, transcendental Buddha at the head of the Vajradhātu/Vajrakula. In the second (10th century Java), he is the manifest emanation of Vairocana. Both systems show a fundamental Buddhist concept with the three roots (desire, hate and delusion) causing the eternal return to further lives in the saṃsāra or phenomenal world.

26In the early 10th century Java was an important intellectual and religious centre. Dutch scholars have identified the Javanese Vajrayāna with the same Yogācāra doctrinal bases (Bernet Kempers 1933: 4) and most probably relations between the Śailendra dynasty of Java and the Čams were close.

27The Čam Nhan Biễu inscription (C. 149) records the minister of the “King of the kings” twice going to Java on diplomatic missions (Huber 1911: 299-311 in Jacques 1995: 273-285). The minister returned to establish two sanctuaries in 911 CE; the “official” one was to Śiva and the more personal one, on his own territory, was to Avalokiteśvara. This demonstrates how Vajrayāna Buddhism had penetrated the elite sphere.

VIII yavadvīpapuraṃ bhūpānujñāto nūtakarmmaṇi |

gatvā yaḥ pratipattisthaḥ siddhayatrām samāgamat ||

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

XI. yavadvīpapuraṃ bhūyaḥ kṣitipānujñayā…

dvivāram api yo gatvā siddhayātrām upāgamat

VIII. “At the command of the king he went to Yavadvīpura on a diplomatic mission, and obtained credit by the success of his undertaking.”

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

XI. “Again, at the command of the king he went to Yavadvīpura a second time and was successful in his undertaking.” (translation Golzio 2004: 112-113).

28A few years later this minister erected a temple to Śiva while in his own country he built a vihāra to Vṛddhalokeśvara, the compassionate Buddhist deity. The name of the deity combine Avalokiteśvara with the name of his grandmother the pu lyāng Vṛddhakula. She was also the grandmother of first queen Tribhuvanadevī, wife of king Jaya Siṃhavarman. Thus the minister was a member of the royal family through the female line. This family came from Viṣṇupura, near the village known today as Nhan Biễu in Quảng Tri province.

29Face C, l. 9-10

tataḥ pratiṣṭhāpita eva tena śrī vṛddhalokeśvaranāmadheyaḥ tritryaṣṭayukte ca śake vihāro grāme cikir nāmni tu sāgrajena ||

XX. yathā dharā’śritya vasundharādharaṃ

calācalāpi sthiratām upaiti sā |

tathā pradeśo’yam asau maheśvaram

kṛpātmakaṃ vāpi ca tatprabhāvataḥ ||

30“Then, in the Śaka year 833 (911 CE), he established, together with his eldest brother, a monastery called śrī Vṛdhalokeśvara in the village of Cikir.”

31XX: “As the supports for the instable earth would be the mountains making her firmer, so this country would find stable supports in the two sanctuaries of Śiva and of the ‘Being of compassion’ (Avalokiteśvara).”

Đồng Dương monastery

32With king Jaya Indravarman (Schweyer 2000: 205-218) and the construction of the Đồng Dương monastery, a great page is turned in the Buddhist history of Čampā. In the Čam Buddhist sanctuaries at this time a triad of the Buddha, Lokeśvara and his consort Tārā (or Prajñāpāramitā) was venerated. The third member of the triad is sometimes the bodhisattva Vajrapāṇi.

33We do not know whether the sanctuary at Đồng Dương was first consecrated by King Jaya Indravarman in 875 CE, or if he in that year extended the sanctuary and dedicated it to Lakṣmīndra-Lokeśvara. It seems likely that an earlier complex on the site was devoted to the Buddha and that King Jaya Indravarman, whose personal name was Lakṣmīndrabhūmīśvara, later added a Lokeśvara cult. It is said to have been erected “for the pleasure of the saṅgha and the propagation of the dharma”.

34C 66 face D, l. 10-16

35api ca yaś śrī indravarmmā kṣetrāṇi sadhanyāni dāsīdāsān sarajatasuvarṇṇa-kaṅsalohatāmrādīni dravyāṇi śrī lakṣ̣mīndralokeśvarāya bhikṣusaṅghaparibhogāya dharmmasantatiparipūraṇārthāya dattavān iti ||

36“Now this (king) Śrī Indravarman has given those fields together with their corn, male and female slaves and others goods, such as gold, silver, brass, iron, copper, etc. to Śrī Lakṣmīndra-Lokeśvara, for the enjoyment of the community of monks and for the sake of the propagation of the Dharma.”

37The Đồng Dương sanctuary today is little more than brick rubble after it was bombed during the American war in Vietnam. It was originally divided into three courtyards and enclosed within richly adorned brick walls (plate 2). The group was built on an exact east-west axis and was all of 1300 metres long. In the third enclosure (number 4, plate 2), a bronze Buddha (Baptiste & Zéphir 2005: notice 17, 206-209) and a stone one (Chuttiwongs 2005: 71 fig. 7) were discovered.

38The magnificent bronze Buddha, now on display in the Ho Chi Minh-City Museum, probably first welcomed devotees. He represents Buddha Śākyamuni. This standing Buddha in traditional monastic dress makes the argumenting gesture or vitarkamudrā with his right hand, while his left is in the katakamudrā (the catching gesture). This 1.19 metre high statue was apparently imported into Čampā; nothing about the way it looks nor the technique of its manufacture is Čam. It was most probably made in Sri Lanka in the 9th century, and was then consecrated in the temple (Baptiste and Zéphir 2005: notice 17, 206-209).

  • 15 Chuttiwongs (2005 : 71 fig. 7).

39A colossal stone statue representing the historical Buddha took place on an altar in the assembly room of the Buddhist monastery (number 4). The vihāra altar is now on display in the Đà Nẵng Museum (plate 3). The seated figure, without head (the head in the picture15 is not the original one, which has disappeared), is 1,54 m. high and is seated in an unusual posture with feet parallel; he also has both hands flat on the knees in an unusual mudrā. This Buddha seated with the legs pendant (bhadrāsana) was installed on a U-shaped pedestal before steep steps. The other three sides of the pedestal were carved with narrative panels, illustrating the life of the Śākyamuni (Guillon 2001: 89-94). The Buddha was flanked by two seated figures, which could be two bodhisattvas, and surrounded by an assembly of monks, disciples and worshippers.

40Invocation of the Buddha are frequent in the Buddhist inscriptions of Čampā. Usually, it is the buddharatna (Buddha-jewel) represented by Śākyamuni, who is the incarnation of the ultimate (paramārtha). The jewels of the buddharatna and the saṅgharatna (the jewel of the community of monks) are clearly present in the Đồng Dương vihāra. The pre-eminent role of the Buddha is evident and the Buddha and Lokeśvara (the personal deity of King Jaya Indravarman) may be two aspects of the primordial Ādi Buddha.

  • 16 A few vajra were found in the Đồng Dương excavations.
  • 17 The Sanskrit Mahāvairocanasūtra describes how the Buddha Mahāvairocana, at Vajrapāḥi’ request, exp (...)

41In the first courtyard the main group three of sanctuaries was preceded by a square temple (n°2) open on all sides and harbouring another Buddha image (Chuttiwongs 2005: 71 fig. 6). His rare hand gesture (plate 4) indicates it is Vairocana. This “vajra-fist” or bodhyagrīmudrā (bodhyangīmudrā or in Java dhvajamudrā mudrā) is only associated with Vairocana and belongs to Tantric Buddhism16. Pierre Baptiste has suggested that the head of this image could be the one on display in the Guimet Museum in Paris (Baptiste & Zéphir 2005: notice 19, 212-213). The location of Vairocana17 in the central tower indicates he played a central role and suggests that esoteric Buddhism was practised throughout the sanctuary. Vairocana is also the transcendental Buddha in the An Thái inscription.

42Considering the name of the monastery, we would expect that a statue of Avalokiteśvara stood in the Central shrine of the first Court. However, no evidence was found to confirm this. Most probably the sanctuary was re-consecrated to the bodhisattva Lokeśvara in 875 CE. The statue of the main sanctuary may have been another Buddha, probably Amitābha, whose emanation is the bodhisattva Lokeśvara, it is lost today. Perhaps the head stored in the National Museum of Hà Nội (Phạm 2003: 43) belongs to a statue of Amitābha. Without the body, it is impossible to say. But Amitābha is present in the chignons of the Lokeśvara and the Tārā images. Amitābha is considered as the manifestation of Lokeśvara in the sambhogakāya. The three Buddha emanations (Śākyamuni, Vairocana and Amitābha) mentioned in the C. 138 were present in the Đồng Dương monastery.

43The altar of this main shrine (n°1) was probably installed in 875 CE for Lakṣmīndra-Lokeśvara (plates 5 and 6). It was adorned with narrative panels. The artists appear to have sought their inspiration in the life of the Buddha as related in the Lalitavistara. Others seem taken from the stories of the Buddha’s previous existences. The composition of the narrative panels recalls the later rock-temples in Western India at Ajantā and Aurangābād. The style, however, suggests inspiration from Borobudur in central Java.

44A few years ago (1978) a beautiful bronze statue of a female deity was found at Đồng Dương (Baptiste & Zéphir 2005: notice 18, 210-211). She most probably represents Tārā or Prajñāpāramitā, and was venerated in one of the temples beside the main tower. The presence of a feminine deity is of great importance in Tantric Buddhism. The fact that goddesses seem to have been important in Čam cults may also indicate Tantric Buddhism. The goddess Po Nagar in Nha Trang is the second most important deity in Čampā, along with the Śiva (Śiva-Bhadreśvara) in Mỹ Sỏn; both are held to protect the earth of Čampā and the kings of Čampā.

  • 18 C.67 face B l. 9-10. śrī paramabuddhalokasya nṛpateḥ svabharttuḥ puṇyāya sādhumanasājñā pov ku (...)

45The iconography and style in Đồng Dương belong to the early Vajrayāna. Inscription C. 66 records the installation of a Lokeśvara and of a Buddha Abhayada (Finot 1904: 84-99 in Jacques 1995: 42-57). The Lokeśvara bears the personal name of the king of kings, Jaya Indravarman: Lakṣmīndrabhūmīśvara. The posthumous name of this king was Paramabuddhaloka, as we know from another inscription in Đồng Dương18.

Face B

IV. imañ ca paramaṃ loke buddhasantānajaṃ varam |

ahaṃ lokeśvaraṃ kartuṃ jagatāṃ syām vimuktaye ||

V. ke devāḥ karuṇātmakāḥ pṛthudhiyātrāṇeṣu satveṣu ca

lokeśas satataṃ kṛpātimatimāṅ kṣāntyā tv ajeyo’bhavat |

eva(ṃ) yo nṛpatir vvicintya hṛdayair dharmasya jijñāsayā

lokeśaṃ paramārthatatvaviśado hastena so vākarot ||

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

XII. maryādābhedināpi śrutivacanapado tena duḥkhārttacittā

nātyājyaspaṣṭanetrāś śaraṇam upagatāś śatravo ’pi priyās syuḥ |

lokeśas sthāpito pīśvaraguṇanipuno vismayo nāpy akāryya-

trāsevīhājñayānāvinamitamatināduṣṭavākyañca dharmme ||

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

XV. dīpte śrī śākarāje muninavagiribhis toyadhṛtsūryyaputre

śṛṅ̇gīn(e) dvandvajīvodayabhṛgujayute kāvyavāre’jabhūje |

kaulīrendau ca puṣye śucisitadivase pañcame śrīvivṛddhe

sa śrīmān indravarmmā sv abhayadam adhikaṃ svājñayātiṣṭhipad yaḥ ||

IV. “And in making this supreme and eminent Lokeśvara, born from a succession of Buddhas, I shall contribute to the deliverance of the world.”

V. “Who are the gods, the essence of whose souls is pity, and whose intelligence is wide awake in saving creatures? Lokeśa was always full of kindness and his patience was incomparable.” Desiring to learn what Dharma is, the king thought thus in his heart, and being skilful in finding out the essence of supreme truth, he made this Lokeśa by his own hand.”

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

XII. “Even enemies who had transgressed the boundaries are not forsaken by that good leader but become dear unto him when, repentant for their action they seek his protection with flattering words. Although he consecrated the image of Lokeśa, eminent in all the attributes of God, he felt no pride in his work. Docile as he was, he did not practise the faulty doctrine, if any, recorded in scriptures.”

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

XV. “In the year of the Śaka king, denoted by the Munis (7), nine (9) and the mountains (7) when Saturn was in Aquarius, the Sun in Taurus, Jupiter and Venus in Gemini, on Friday, when Mars was in Aries and the Moon in Cancer, in the Nakṣatra Puya, on the fifth day of the bright half of the month Śuci, he, Indravarman, by means of his own command, erected [the image of] Sv-abhayada (Buddha).” (translation Golzio 2004: 71-72).

46The bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara is called Lokeśvara (or Lokanātha or Lokeśa) in Čampā. As the representation of compassion, he strongly contrasts with the violent Śiva. He can be honoured alone or within a triad. Many monasteries were consecrated to him – each sanctuary bearing the name of the dedicator associated with that of Lokeśvara, for example Lakṣmīndra-Lokeśvara. A large number of little bronze statues have been found. They are usually in the varadamudrā, the gesture of offering. An Amitābha figurine is usually in his chignon conveying a mystical association.

47The prestige of Čampā during the Indrapura period could have permitted a wide diffusion of the cult of Lokeśvara. He was probably introduced into Yunnan at this time. In the Ðai Việt he takes a Chinese-style female form and is called Quan Âm. She was widely worshipped all around the country.

48In North Čampā, in Ðại Hữu (Finot et Goloubew 1925: 469-475) and in Mỹ Ðúc, in Quảng Bình province, are the northernmost Buddhist temples in Čampā, probably both established during the 9th – 10th centuries.

Ðại Hữu Sanctuary19

  • 19 Finot & Goloubew (1925: 470, fig. 19 map).

49This sanctuary (plate 7) was surrounded by a wall and contains three main shrines facing East.

50In the Northern shrine (temple C) were found different pieces of a bronze statue, including an arm and hand bearing a vajra and could be a Vajrapāṇi. The length of those 2 pieces (c. 20 cm) indicates a sculpture one meter high. In this shrine there was also a female stone statue (high: 65 cm); most probably the partner for the god with the vajra (Illustration in Phạm 2003: 47, fig. 11).

51In the Southern shrine (temple A) was found another stone female image (Illustration in Guillon 2001: 85, n° 25), most probably a Tārā, bearing a Buddha image in her chignon (high: 97 cm). I wonder whether a beautiful bronze Avalokiteśvara (Baptiste & Zéphir 2005: 203 n° 15), known only as of “Ðại Hữu provenance” was not be the partner of this goddess. He is 54 cm high and highly adorned with an Amitābha in his chignon.

52In the Central shrine (temple B), a bronze Buddha image (44.5 cm high) was found in vitarka-mudrā (Phạm and Vương 1994: 81 ill. 89, Chutiwongs 2005: 72, fig. 8).

  • 20 Boisselier (1963: fig. 70 and p. 134); Phạm and Vương (1994: 79 ill. 84).

53Near the shrine a little Lokeśvara statue20 (33.5 cm high without head) was found and a piece of an inscribed snānadronī, mentioning a silver “Ratna-Lokeśvara” erected in Vṛddha Ratnapura. In this sanctuary there was also a fine Chinese golden bronze statue dated to the late Tang (9th -early 10th century) (Phạm and Vương 1994: 80 ill. 85).

C.171 Ðại Hữu inscription21

  • 21 Finot & Goloubew (1925: 472-474).

54Face A

(1) . . . . . . . . [a]cañcalā buddhiḥ yasya prajāsu sutarāṃ kṛ. . . .

(2) bhāṇḍāgārādhikāro yaṃ tasyā bhṛtyaḥ prasā . . . . .

(3) ntayat puṇyavarddhanam . . ratnalokeśvaro yena

55Face B

(1) sthāpito rajatātmakaḥ . . . . vṛddhe ratnapure śā . . . . . .

(2) hjai traṅ kṣ̣etraṃ juṅāpure dvaḥ sirāla . . . . .

(3) manupama matiḥ śrīmāñ jayasiṅhavarmmadevo [yaṃ] . . .

“…his firm intelligence, his extreme [generosity] towards creatures. His officer supervising the treasure-house… the increase of his spiritual merit by whom (a statue) of Ratnalokeśvara, made of silver, was erected in the ancient Ratnapura… The field of Hjai (recte Hajai) Tranin Juṅāpura… incomparable mind (?). The fortunate king Jaya Siṅhavarman.” (Translation Golzio 2004: 93).

56This inscription records the erection of a silver statue in an already existing sanctuary. Made for the merit of an officer supervising the treasure-house of king Jaya Siṅhavarman in the early 10th century, this Ratnalokeśvara was erected in a city called “ancient Ratnapura”. The sanctuary dates at least to the 9th century and was built by a supervisor of the royal house who probably came from Ratnapura, the village known today as Ðại Hữu, in Quảng Bình province. The inscription also says that near the temple there was a fortified citadel (hajai), called Juṅāpura.

  • 22 Boisselier (1963: fig. 73).
  • 23 Boisselier (1963: fig. 74); Baptiste & Zéphir (2005: 232 n° 30).

57Not very far from Ðại Hữu is the Mỹ Ðúc sanctuary, where three temples were surrounded by a wall. Here were found two stone Avalokiteśvara, one since stolen from the Đà Nẵng Museum22 in 1988 (high: 1m.37) and the other23, in the Guimet Museum in Paris (high: 60 cm).

C.172 Mỹ Ðúc inscription24

  • 24 Finot & Goloubew (1925: 474-475).

58(1) . . . [sam]jñā skandhayatir jjagadgurur ayan dhasapa . . .

59(2) . . . nāṃ hitakārane tv abhayadasaṃ . . .

60This fragmentary inscription found in a wall is too damaged to render a clear meaning but two epithets of the Buddha can be recognized – “preceptor of the world” (jagadguru) and “giver of fearlessness” (abhayada); the second perhaps referring to a Buddha statue, making the abhayada gesture, as at Đồng Dương.

  • 25 For example: “And in making this supreme and eminent Lokeśvara, born from a succession of Buddhas, (...)

61Vajrayāna Buddhism was the platform for king Indravarman’s political expansion. Čam territory was at his maximum extension under the Indrapura’ lineage (for nearly a century) and it seems that growing settlement in Northern Čampā was due to the “new” religion. Buddhist caves in Quảng Bình province, such as the Lạc Sơn caves with many Buddhist wall inscriptions, or the Phong Nhà caves with inscriptions and many terracotta ex-voto sealings stylistically dated to the 9th-10th century. Furthermore, no Śaiva inscription has been found in this part of Čampā. The words of the Đồng Dương inscription (C.66) refer to the political impact of religion25. North of the direct territory (i.e the Thừa Thiên-Huế and Quảng Tri provinces) of king Indravarman, in Quảng Bình province, territorial expansion and religion are clearly aligned. Economical and other international conditions were also optimal in the 9th century for expansion: the Chinese Tang dynasty was declining, the Việt were not yet independent a political power and Čam prosperity was evident.

The 11th – 12th Centuries

62The fall of the Indrapura lineage at the end of the 10th century threw everything in Čampā into a state of flux. The Việt of the Red River Delta began to attack Central Čampā. The Việt always respected religious sites and did not destroy everything they attacked. Even five centuries later when Čampā hardly existed anymore, the Po Nagar sanctuary in Nha Trang was always preserved and the Čam goddess was honoured by the new inhabitants, though her name changed to that of an earth goddess.

63Čam Buddhism was respected by the Việt. Chinese monk Thảo-Ðửờng became the master of a new Vietnamese thiên (zen) school after being captured in a 1069 Việt incursion into Čampā. Back at the Việt Court he became the Lý Emperor’s guru. The thiên school of Thảo-Ðửờng was much influenced by thaumaturgy. Tantric Buddhism based on intoning sacred formulae with supernatural power developed at this time. Thảo-Ðửờng shifted the Buddhist focus from political to social life. He made Buddhist practices easier and Buddhahood more accessible. Việt Buddhism held a special place to the Hindu king of the gods Indra, known as Thiên Vương (“King of Heaven”), in a cult instituted in Thăng-Long (Hà Nội) in 1057. Accessible Buddhahood and a royal cult of Indra were thought to bring power to the king and stability and prosperity to his people. This form of Buddhism continued to be practised by the Việt for many centuries, and even during a strong anti-Čam period in the 14th century, it was still considered to be Čam influenced.

64During the 11th-15th centuries Buddhism was present but less powerful. In the mid-11th century a king who was clearly a descendant of the Indrapura lineage erected a vihāra in South Čampā, but he was not a powerful “king of the kings”. He is called “king cakravartin”, a rare title in Čampā, used when a king follows Buddhist prescriptions. His foundation was called Rājakula, most probably after the first queen of the great founder of the lineage, Jaya Indravarman.

65C.122 Phú Quí inscription, Ninh Thuân Province (Coedès 1912: 16-17)

66di śakarāja 977 nan kāla iśvaramūrtti sidaḥ yāṅ po ku śrī parameśvaravarmmadeva santāna uroja ya cakravarttirāja di nagara campa nei ra pratiṣṭhā yāṅ vihāra rājakula

“In the Śaka year 977 (1055 CE), His Majesty Śrī Parameśvaravarmadeva Īśvaramūrti, of the lineage of Uroja, and king cakravartin in this country of Čampā, erected a vihāra Rājakula…”

67This inscription is not specific about the local cult. The temple is a traditional Čam tower or kalan and donations are made “for the worship of the god and the duty of the divinity” (tuy devārccaṇa panūjā devatā). The name of the divinity was probably Rājakula-Lokeśvara and it can be assumed that there was a traditional Čam configuration with three towers (Parmentier 1918: 574-575), except that the central shrine (Lokeśvara’s one?) was placed further forward than the other two.

  • 26 Cakravarttirāja in C.122 and pu pov tana rayā cakravarti in C.89.

68Only two kings, in 1055 and 1081 CE, are described as ‘king cakravartin’, following the Buddhist precepts26, though we can say they were not the only ones in Čampā: King Parameśvaravarmadeva is the first one; king Harivarman, the other, was very important for Čam history.

Kingship and Buddhism27

  • 27 About the king cakravartin in Čampā and the kings following the dharma, see Schweyer (2007: 125-128 (...)
  • 28 C.89, face A, l. 7-9, 14 and 24-25 (Finot 1904: 946-947 in Jacques 1995: 128-129).
  • 29 Inscription C.89, in 1088 CE, in Mỹ Sỏn, face B, l. 6.
  • 30 C.89, face B, l. 18 vuḥ vihāra śrī indralokeśvara di tranūlvijaya (Finot 1904: 948 in Jacques 1995 (...)

69In the 11th Century Prince Pāṅ seized power from his nephew when his brother, king Harivarman prince Thāṅ, died in 1081 CE. His kingly title was “Paramabodhisattva”. He is called28 a “king cakravartin” with “all the marks of a king, according to the canon of the king cakravartin” (madā rājalaksaṇa sampūrṇṇa tuy nyāya pu pov tana rayā cakravarti). His Buddhist virtues are exalted in that he did not kill his nephew to attain power then reigned “following the precepts (of the traditional Indian texts)” ( po ku śrī paramabodhisattva dauk raksā rāja tuy tanatap viddhiḥ) and constantly practised “the dharma and the precepts with all his allies” (yāṇ po ku śrī paramabodhisattva payvar dharmma ṇan tanatap maddan sakalavandhuvargga). The king was following the mahādharmma (C. 89, face A, l. 17), and given his regnal title this could mean that he followed the Mahāyāna Dharma. His nephew, prince Vāk, who ruled under the name Jaya Indravarman, also respected Buddhism, displaying compassion towards all creatures (karuṇā di ya doṃ sarvvabhāva)29 and “leaning on absolute (unity), he has the power of yoga, contemplation and meditation and practises dharma” (jedunan kevalasādhāra utsāha di yogaddhyānasamādhi vavā dharma) (C.89, face B, l. 15-16). He erected a vihāra called Indralokeśvara30 in central Čampā, near Vijaya, (modern Bình Ðịnh-Qui Nhỏn). The probability this sanctuary to have included statues like the Buddha of Thửn Thiện, on display in the Đà Nẵng Museum (Boisselier 1963: 275-277 and fig. 187) or the one of Phụ Ngọc (op.cit. 277 and fig. 189) are quite important. The Buddha of Thử Thiện is making a very unusual mudrā, which was seen as “the victory on the devil”, Māravijaya; all suggests older iconography as in Đồng Dương or Ðại Hữu and a typical Čam tradition. The king gave his own name to the divinity and thus made the foundation an expression of his own beliefs – Indralokeśvara being his iṣṭadevatā or personal deity.

  • 31 Boisselier (1963: fig. 222 in the background).

70Buddhism at this time seems to be Mahāyāna. Icons of Buddha or Lokeśvara were found, but iconography begins to be influenced by Khmer iconography. Relations with Khmer king Sūryavarman II can be proved. In the 1130’s, Sūryavarman II seems to turn to Čampā, perhaps in Vijaya. He was able probably to make an alliance with the new Čam king Jaya Indravarman (1139-1145). Maybe the Khmers were helping him to clarify the political situation to his advantage. Anyhow Khmer king and Čam king have a common interest for pacification around Vijaya and Vijaya became then, from 1130 to 1149 a big place of trade. All site around Binh Ðinh expanded and Čam architecture showed clearly Khmer influence, like Bánh Ít sanctuaries (called “Silver Towers” by the French), where was found one of the finest Khmer bronze Buddhas seated on the coils of a Nāga31, (now in the Phnom Penh Museum) whose high, incised crown and heavy jewellery can be dated to the reign of Sūryavarman II. This icon of a Buddha enthroned on the coils of a giant Nāga is unknown in indigenous Čam art. This fine Nāga Buddha was found with other purely Khmer icons, like Buddha on a Nāga throne, and a Mañjuśrī (Boisselier 1963: fig. 222). Thử Thiện sanctuary, Canh Tiên tower (also called “Cupper Tower”), situated at the exact centre of the Chà Bàn fortress, or Thồc Lồc (called “Golden Towers”). Such temples, all around the ancient Vijaya, are directly influenced by Khmer designs and are quite different from the usual Čam kalan.

  • 32 Inscription C.92, face A, l. 6, pu po tana rayā nan ya pratiṣṭhāna yāṅ po ku śrī vuddhalokeśvara (...)
  • 33 C. 92, face A, l. 3-4 (Finot 1904: 971 in Jacques 1995: 153).

71Later on, other kings were following the Mahāyāna Buddhism. For example, in 1163 CE King Jaya Indravarman installed a Buddha Lokeśvara and a Jaya Indralokeśvara32; the last one could very likely be situated near Vijaya, (modern Bình Ðịnh-Qui Nhỏn), perhaps in Thử Thiện, as a sanctuary called Indralokeśvara was erected in the mid-11th century. King Jaya Indravarman in 1171 CE was considered “versed in all the philosophical doctrines especially the wisdom of Mahāyāna” (thuv samastatattvajñāna makapun mahāyānajñāna)33. It is noteworthy here that the main cult remains centred on Lokeśvara. The monasteries and temples bearing names ending with “Lokeśvara” are the most common foundations made during the 11th and 12th centuries.

The late 12th – 13th centuries

72This chapter cannot be complete without accounting for the Khmer king Jayavarman VII’s relationship with Čampā. The future king Jayavarman VII was resident as a Khmer prince in Čampā in some recorded capacity and subsequently he relied on Čam allies during crucial events in Cambodia. Jayavarman became deeply acculturated in Čam life and politics; his residence in Vijaya covered the formative period of his adult life and his engagement in Čam culture and high politics was undoubtedly the major experience of his life before he seized power in battle in Angkor.

  • 34 C.92 face B (Finot 1904: 972 in Jacques 1995: 154), and C.90 face D (Finot 1904: 936 in Jacques 199 (...)

73The Čam inscriptions34 reveal that Jayavarman VII, from his first months in power, taught Čam princes the arts of government and war at his court in Angkor. They were soon trusted with major military engagements to secure his fledgling state. As the Khmer inscriptions claim that Jayavarman took power by raising an army to end a Čam occupation of Angkor, we are faced with a quite remarkable situation, which invites us to probe into Jayavarman’s use of Čam allies. The future king Jayavarman VII had stayed for many years in Čampā and if we accept the Khmer inscriptional version according to which he attempted to intervene against an 1166 usurpation in Angkor, we may go on to speculate that Jayavarman may have used Čam allies in the Čam attack on Angkor in ca 1177, as well as in Jayavarman’s own eventual military victory in Angkor in 1182. If Čam allies of Jayavarman were involved in these crucial events, then the presence of highly trusted Čam princes in the new king’s court would be quite natural.

  • 35 C.92, face B, l. 8 (Finot 1904: 972 in Jacques 1995: 154).
  • 36 C.92, face B, l. 12-13 (Finot 1904: 972 in Jacques 1995: 154).

74Many years after Jayavarman VII took power, one of his key Čam allies rebelled against him on Čam territory. Prince Vidyānandana, the future king Sūryavarman, had been educated in literature and weapons like a Khmer prince at the court in Angkor “from his early youth in 1182” just after the investiture of Jayavarman VII and was soon called upon to suppress a rebellion at Malyang (near Battambang) where “seeing his value, [Jayavarman VII] conferred on him the title of yuvarāja.”35 The Čam Prince was successful and was later sent to restore Khmer control over part of Čampā. After initially crowning the brother-in-law of Jayavarman VII as king of Vijaya, he returned “to rule in Rājapura of Panrāng (South Čampā)”36 as king Sūryavarman.

  • 37 C.4, l. 3 Chỏ Ðinh (Aymonier 1891: 50-2 no 383); C. 30 B 4 l. 4 Po Nagar of Nhà Trắng (Schweyer 200 (...)

75Between 1190 and 1192 Čampā was as always divided, but the central and southern parts were clearly subordinate to Angkor: the king in the capital of Vijaya is a brother-in-law of Jayavarman VII and the Čam prince Vidyānandana educated at the Khmer court is the Khmer vassal king of Rājapura. In 1192, prince Vidyānandana, who had been the key instrument of Jayavarman VII’s success in Cambodia and Čampā, reneged on his relationship with his patron and proclaimed himself king of Vijaya as well as Rājapura, under the royal name Sūryavarman. If the Čam notion of a “32 years’ war” with the Khmers, referred to in inscriptions37, began in 1190 with Jayavarman VII’s recovery of Vijaya and ended only in ca 1220, when the Khmer army withdrew after Jayavarman’s death, it draws rather a theoretical situation than the true situation all over Čampā. The Khmer forces were present a few years in Vijaya, but some Khmers and some Čam were allies for a long time, and this situation is described in Čam inscriptions.

76With the emphatic Khmer presence in Čampā from 1190-1220, another form of Buddhism reached the Čam territory. In Vijaya (modern Quy Nhỏn) at this time Khmer sculptures – imported from Angkor or made locally by Khmer craftsmen – illustrate the strong Khmer influence. Khmer Buddhism, perhaps more Tantric than that of the Čams, represents the deity in direct relationship to the image and the politics of the ruler Jayavarman VII. Statues like the “Radiant Lokeśvaras” (Boisselier 1963: fig. 223) found in Bình Ðịnh province are unmistakably in Jayavarman VII’s “Bàyon style” of the 1190s. A Lokeśvara figure however seems to be a local image done in the Bayon style, presumably on Khmer orders (Chutiwongs 2005: 74, fig. 10). The Khmer cultural imprint on the sacred art of Čampā is very noticeable in this period of invasion and annexation. Some temples, such as Hửṅng Thạnh Towers or “Twin Towers”, within the city of Quy Nhỏn, or Dửỏng Long (called “Ivoiry towers”) were more directly influenced by Khmer models. From this period can be dated a Yoginīs relief of Hửng Thạnh Towers, typical of the Khmer 1200’s (Boisselier 1963: fig. 186).

  • 38 C.92, face B, l. 1-2 (Finot 1904: 971-972 in Jacques 1995: 153-154). “La stèle fut érigée sur la ba (...)
  • 39 C. 92 C, l. 6-7 (Finot 1904: 973 in Jacques 1995: 155).

77King Śrī Sūryavarman, prince Vidyānandana, “practises Mahāyāna Dharma, following the precepts of wisdom” (pu po tana rayā nan vavā mahāyānadharmma tuy jñānopadeśa)38. The Čam king, educated at the Khmer court, seems to have practised a Tantric Buddhism similar to that of Jayavarman VII. He is recorded as erecting in 1194 CE a temple to Śrī Heruka in Mỹ Sỏn (“he had made Śrī Heruka’s mansion” paṅap rumaḥ śrī herukaharmya)39. The temple dedicated to Heruka (Sharrock 2006: 85-90) celebrated Sūryavarman’s victory at Jairamya-vijaya over an army sent against him by Jayavarman VII. This temple citation is the sole surviving epigraphic record of a Heruka cult in Čampā and Cambodia. Ironically, this Heruka temple, erected to celebrate a Khmer defeat by a Čam turncoat of military genius, may give an important clue to the kind of Buddhism then being practised by Jayavarman VII. The Čam inscription does not explain why the Čam prince was received at the Khmer court but it does prove that a temple to Heruka was erected in Čampā in 1194 by a Čam king, who had been educated from his youth in Angkor. And as Vidyānandana was a favoured protégé of Jayavarman, there is a strong possibility that if his god was called “Heruka”, then so was Jayavarman’s.

  • 40 Mallmann (1986: 182). See also Dasgupta (1950: 98): “This Vajra-sattva, the Lord Supreme of the Tan (...)

78A Heruka cult has no recorded precedent in Čampā, which strengthens the possibility that this cult in Čampā was a direct export from Cambodia, and therefore a reflection of Jayavarman’s creed. And if Hevajra was called Heruka in Čampā by Sūryavarman-Vidyānandana, then the probability is increased that Jayavarman also called his supreme wrathful eight-headed Tantric deity Heruka. Heruka is a variant name of Hevajra in Tantric Buddhism40. He is a wrathful deity, drinking blood and it is the first time that Čampā adopts such a fearful deity.

79When he reneged on his relationship with Jayavarman VII, king Sūryavarman turned to emperor Long Cán of the neighbouring Ðai Việt for acknowledgement of his legitimacy, which was granted in 1199. But the extraordinary military career of the Čam king was to end in disaster. Vietnamese records show that after Jayavarman sent yet another army to defeat him in 1203, Vidyānandana fled and requested asylum in the Ðai Việt. He was rejected and disappeared without trace. His paternal uncle, called in the inscriptions yuvarāja oṅ Dhanapati-grāma, became a governor under the Khmer authority from 1203 to ca 1220, when the Khmer army withdrew after Jayavarman’s death.

Mid-13th to 15th centuries

  • 41 In C.52 inscription, Binh Ðinh Province, from 13th century (Aymonier 1891: 53, n° 411).

80In the 13th century, the dedication of many temples to Śrī Linga-Lokeśvara, Śrī Jina-Parameśvara, Śrī Jina-Vṛddheśvarī, Śrī Jina-Lokeśvara, Śrī Saugata-Deveśvara or Śrī Jina-Devadevī41 demonstrate a tendency for syncretism (Chutiwongs 2005: 75-76). This recalls Javanese religion in the 13th – 14th centuries, when all differences between Śaiva and Buddhism were fused into a unique concept of Śiva-Buddha. In both countries, Buddhism remains secondary.

81With the weakening of royal power in the 15th century and the fall of the capital in 1471, all Mahāyāna or Vajrāyana traces disappeared.

Fig. 2: Map of Đồng Dương monastery, Quảng Nam Province

Fig. 2: Map of Đồng Dương monastery, Quảng Nam Province

Late 9th century. Note the three successive courtyards, the third (n°4), the Central (n°3) and the first one, with a square temple (n°2) and the main shrine (n°1) (Parmentier 1918: pl. XCVIII).

Fig. 3: Đồng Dương monastery, Quảng Nam Province

Fig. 3: Đồng Dương monastery, Quảng Nam Province

The vihāra altar on display in the Đà Nẵng Museum

Picture of the author, March 2009.

Fig. 4 : Mudrā of knowledge, specific of Mahāvairocana in the Vajradhātu mandala

Fig. 4 : Mudrā of knowledge, specific of Mahāvairocana in the Vajradhātu mandala

(Cornu 2001: 377 s.v. mudrā).

Fig. 5: Đồng Dương monastery, Quảng Nam Province

Fig. 5: Đồng Dương monastery, Quảng Nam Province

The altar of the main sanctuary on display in the Đà Nẵng Museum

Picture of the author, March 2009.

Fig. 6: Drawing by Henri Parmentier of the pedestal in the main shrine, in the first enclosure of the Đồng Dương monastery, Quảng Nam Province, 9th century

Fig. 6: Drawing by Henri Parmentier of the pedestal in the main shrine, in the first enclosure of the Đồng Dương monastery, Quảng Nam Province, 9th century

(Parmentier 1918: pl. CXXVI “Piédestal de la tour principale de Đồng Dương I. Essai de restitution”)

Fig. 7: Ðại Hữu, Quảng Bình Province

Fig. 7: Ðại Hữu, Quảng Bình Province

Map of sanctuary

(Finot & Goloubew 1925: fig. 19).

Haut de page

Bibliographie

AYMONIER Etienne, 1891, “Première étude sur les inscriptions tchames”, Journal asiatique, (janvier-février) 17 (1): 5-86.

BAPTISTE Pierre & ZEPHIR Thierry (eds.), 2005, Trésors d’art du Vietnam. La sculpture du Champa, Paris: Musées Nationaux.

BERNET KEMPERS, A.J., 1933, The Bronzes of Nālānda and Hindu-Javanese Art, Leyden: Brill.

BOISSELIER Jean, 1957, “A propos d’un bronze cham inédit d’Avalokiteśvara”, Arts Asiatiques, IV(4): 255-274.

BOISSELIER Jean, 1963, La Statuaire du Champa. Recherches sur les cultes et l’iconographie, Paris: PEFEO, vol. LIV.

CHANDRA : see SNELLGROVE and CHANDRA 1981.

CHUTIWONGS Nandana, 2002, The Iconography of Avalokiteśvara in Mainland South East Asia, New Delhi: Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Art-Aryan Books International.

CHUTTIWONGS Nandana, 2005, “Le bouddhisme du Champa” in Baptiste et Zéphir (éds), Trésors d’art du Vietnam. La sculpture du Champa, Paris: Musées Nationaux, p. 64-87.

COEDES Georges, 1912, “Note sur deux inscriptions du Champa. II.- L’inscription de Phú-Quí (province de Phanrang)”, BEFEO, XII (8): 16-17.

CORNU Philippe, 2001, Dictionnaire encyclopédique du bouddhisme, Paris: Seuil, 843 p.

DASGUPTA Shashi Bhusan, 1950, An Introduction to Tantric Buddhism, Calcutta: University of Calcutta Press.

DUTT Nalinaksha, 1970, Buddhist Sects in India, Calcutta: Mukhopadhyay.

FINOT Louis 1904, “Notes d’épigraphie XI : Les inscriptions de Mi-son”, BEFEO, IV : 897-979.

FINOT Louis & GOLOUBEW Victor, 1925, “Notes et Mélanges. Fouilles de Ðai-Hữu (Quảng-Bình, Annam)”, BEFEO, XXV : 469-475.

GOLZIO Karl-Heinz (ed.), 2004, Inscriptions of Campā based on the editions and translations of Abel Bergaigne, Etienne Aymonier, Louis Finot, Edouard Huber and other French scholars and of the work of R.C. Majumda, Shaker Verlag: Aachen.

GUILLON Emmanuel, 2001, Guillon, Cham Art, Treasures from the Đà Nẵng Museum, Vietnam, Bangkok: River Books.

HUBER Edouard, 1911, “L’épigraphie de la dynastie de Đồng Dương”, BEFEO, XI : 268-311.

JACQ-HERGOUALC’H Michel, 2002, The Malay Peninsula, Cross Roads of the Maritime Silk Road, Leyden: Brill.

JACQUES Claude, 1995, Etudes épigraphiques sur le pays cham de Louis Finot, Edouard Huber, George Coedès & Paul Mus, réunies par Claude Jacques, Paris: Réimpression de l’Ecole française d’Extrême-Orient, N°7, 336 p.

LAMOTTE Etienne, 1966, “Vajrapāṇi en Inde”, in Mélanges de sinologie offerts à M. Paul Demiéville, Paris: PUF, p. 113-159.

LIN Li-Kouang, 1935, “Punyodaya (N’ati), un propagateur du Tantrisme en Chine et au Cambodge à l’époque de Hsüan-Tsang”, Journal Asiatique, Juillet-Décembre 227: 83-100.

LOBO Wibke, 1997, “L’image de Hevajra et le bouddhisme tantrique”, in Helen I. Jessup and Thierry Zéphir (eds.), Angkor et dix siècles d’art khmer, Paris: Réunion des Musées Nationaux, p. 70-78.

MALLMANN Marie-Thérèse de, 1986, Introduction à l’iconographie du tantrisme bouddhique, Paris: Librairie d’Amérique et d’Orient.

PARMENTIER H., 1918, Inventaire descriptif des monuments Čam de l’Annam, tome II, Paris: Ernest Leroux.

Phạm Hữu Mỹ and Vương Hải Yân, 1994, Champa collection, Ho Chi Minh City: Vietnam Historical Museum Ho Chi Minh City.

Phạm Thúy Hợp, 2003, The Collection of Champa Sculpture in the National Museum of Vietnamese History, Hà Nội: National Museum of Vietnamese History [Vietnamese and English versions].

PRAPANDVIDYA Chirapat, 1990, “The Sab Bāk inscription: evidence of an early Vajrayāna Buddhist presence in Thailand”, Journal of the Siam Society, 78 (2): 11-14.

SANDERSON Alexis, 2003-2004, “The Śaiva Religion among the Khmers”, BEFEO, XC-XCI: 349-462.

SCHWEYER Anne-Valérie, 2000, “La dynastie d’Indrapura (Quảng Nam, Việtnam)”, Southeast Asian Archaeology 1998. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference of European Association of Southeast Asian Archaeologists, Berlin – Hull: University of Hull ed., p. 205-218.

SCHWEYER Anne-Valérie, 2005, “Po Nagar de Nha Trang. Le dossier épigraphique”, Aséanie, (juin) 15: 87-119.

SCHWEYER Anne-Valérie, 2007, “La royauté dans les inscriptions du Campā ancien”, in M.-L. Reiniche et B. Brac de la Perrière (éds.), Les Apparences du monde, Paris: PEFEO, Collection Etudes thématiques, pp. 119-183.

SHARROCK Peter, 2006, “Hevajra at Bantéay Chmàr”, special edition of the Journal of the Walters Art Museum in honour of Hiram Woodward, Journal of the Walters Art Museum, 64/65 (2006/2007): 74-97.

SKILLING Peter, 2003-2004, “Traces of the Dharma, Preliminary Reports on some Ye dhamma and ye dharma inscriptions from Mainland South-East Asia”, BEFEO, XC-XCI: 273-287.

SNELLGROVE D.L., 1959, The Hevajra-Tantra. A critical study, Part I “Introduction and Translation”, part II “Sanskrit and Tibetan Texts”, London: London Oriental Series n°6.

SNELLGROVE D.L. & CHANDRA Lokesh, 1981, Sarva-tathāgata-tattva-samgraha: Facsimile reproduction of a Tenth Century Sanskrit Manuscript from Nepal, in Lokesh Chandra and David L. Snellgrove (eds.), New Delhi: Sharada Rani, ạata-pitaka series, vol. 269.

SOPER A.C., 1959, “Literary Evidence for Early Buddhist Art In China”, Artibus Asiae. Supplementum, 19: iii-296.

STRICKMANN Michel, 1996, Mantras et mandarins. Le bouddhisme tantrique en Chine, Paris: Gallimard.

WANG Gungwu, 1958, “The Nanhai trade: A study of the early history of Chinese trade in the South China Sea”, Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, 31 (2): 1-135.

ZEPHIR Thierry, 1997, Angkor et dix siècles d’art khmer, Helen I. Jessup & Thierry Zéphir (eds.), Paris: Réunion des Musées Nationaux.

Zéphir : see Baptiste & Zéphir, 2005.

Haut de page

Notes

1 Book of the Song dynasty, 97 on Lin-yi (Soper 1959: 47 note 51).

2 The Bibliography Chu San Tsang Chi Chi, 13 listing several pieces pertaining to the reign of Ming Ti (465-472) (Soper 1959: 53-54).

3 During the Chinese Liu Fang’ invasion of 605 CE, the Čam capital was destroyed, but royal archives and library appear to have been captured intact (Wang Gungwu 1958: 64 note 12).

4 Sanderson (2003-2004: 427 n. 284) chose to translate lakṣagrantham abhiprajñaṃ yo’nveṣya pararāṣṭrataḥ as ‘sought from abroad the Lakṣagrantha Prajñapāramitāsūtra’.

5 There are complementary evolutions of Buddhism. The appellations Mantrayāna or “path of the Mantras” and Tantrayāna or “path of the Tantras” are not separate but are terms used to describe Mahāyāna practices before the 7th century, including the yogacāra school and the Mādhyamika. I have chosen to use the term Vajrayāna for the Tantric evolution of Mahāyāna Buddhism.

6 Baptiste & Zéphir (2005: 205 notice 16), Avalokiteśvara. Hoài Nhỏn, Bình Ðịnh Province, 8th – 9th centuries; (op.cit.: 201 notice 13), Avalokiteśvara. Thửy Cam, Thừa Thiên Huế Province, 8th – 9th centuries.

7 Many Chinese sources document Nāgārjuna as one of the early promoters of the Vajrayāna. For instance, Amoghavajra’s Memorial Praise mentions: “In the past, Buddha Vairocana passed the supreme and secret teaching of the Yoga to Vajrasattva, after several hundred years, Vajrasattva passed the teaching to Bodhisattva Longmeng (Nāgārjuna), again after several hundred years Bodhisattva Longmeng passed the teaching to Ācarya Nāgavajra, and again after several hundred years, Nāgavajra passed the teaching to Ācarya Vajrabodhi. Vajrabodi came to the east and passed the teaching to the monk (Amoghavajra).”

8 Baptiste & Zéphir (2005: 205 notice 16), Avalokiteśvara. Hoài Nhỏn, Bình Ðịnh Province, 8th – 9th centuries; versus (op. cit.: 203-204 notice 15), Avalokiteśvara. Near Ðại Hữu, Quảng Bình Province, 8th – 9th centuries.

9 Vajrapāṇi is a former yakṣa, turned Bodhisattva. See Lamotte (1966: 159) : “Forme secondaire d’Indra, génie protecteur de Śākyamuni, bodhisattva attaché avec Ānanda au service du Maître, divinité émanée de l’Être suprême: telles sont en gros les étapes parcourues au cours des temps par le yakṣa Vajrapāṇi . Le secret de sa fortune et de son apothéose se trouve dans le vajra, son inséparable emblème. Vajra est le foudre servant d’arme offensive et défensive; c’est aussi le diamant, le plus dur des minéraux.”

10 Snellgrove-Chandra (1981: introduction 5-67).

11 See in chapter 6-10 assertions like: “O Lords, there are evil beings, Maheśvara and others, who have not been converted even by all of you Tathāgathas. How am I to deal with them?” (Snellgrove-Chandra 1981: 39).

12 “[The vajra-yāna’s] sphere of utmost potency is the vajra-dhātu-maṇḍala, and whoever rightly occupies this sphere is consubstantiated in Vajra-sattva. It is possible to force some distinction between Vajra-dhara, the idealised personification of the possessor of the power, who thereby becomes implicitly the supreme being, and Vajra-sattva, who is the properly consecrated being, but of course the two are never properly distinguishable, just because their self-identification is the whole purpose of the rite.” (Snellgrove 1959: 209).

13 “Vajrasattva, the sixth Dhyāni Buddha, is regarded as the Purohita or the priest of the five Dhyāni Buddhas. His worship is always performed in secret and is not open to those who are not initiated into the mysteries of the Vajrayāna.” (Prapandvidya 1990: 13).

14 References given in Lobo (1997: 77 note 14).

15 Chuttiwongs (2005 : 71 fig. 7).

16 A few vajra were found in the Đồng Dương excavations.

17 The Sanskrit Mahāvairocanasūtra describes how the Buddha Mahāvairocana, at Vajrapāḥi’ request, explains the tantra and his practise. The sūtra was collected in Nālandā by the Chinese monk, Wuxing, in the late 7th c. and translated in Chinese in 724 by Śubhakarasimha.

18 C.67 face B l. 9-10. śrī paramabuddhalokasya nṛpateḥ svabharttuḥ puṇyāya sādhumanasājñā pov ku lyaṅ śrī rājakulākhyayā . . . . guṇajñayā pratiṣṭhāpitaḥ śrīndraparameśvaro namneti. Rājakula is the name of the wife of king Jaya Indravarman, who made donations to the Ðông Ðửỏng vihāra in the year 875 CE. The posthumous name of this king was then Paramabuddhaloka.

19 Finot & Goloubew (1925: 470, fig. 19 map).

20 Boisselier (1963: fig. 70 and p. 134); Phạm and Vương (1994: 79 ill. 84).

21 Finot & Goloubew (1925: 472-474).

22 Boisselier (1963: fig. 73).

23 Boisselier (1963: fig. 74); Baptiste & Zéphir (2005: 232 n° 30).

24 Finot & Goloubew (1925: 474-475).

25 For example: “And in making this supreme and eminent Lokeśvara, born from a succession of Buddhas, I shall contribute to the deliverance of the world.” (C.66, face B, st. 4) or “Even enemies who had transgressed the boundaries are not forsaken by that good leader but become dear unto him when, repentant for their action they seek his protection with flattering words. Although he consecrated the image of Lokeśa, eminent in all the attributes of God, he felt no pride in his work. Docile as he was, he did not practise the faulty doctrine, if any, recorded in scriptures.” (Idem, B, st. 12).

26 Cakravarttirāja in C.122 and pu pov tana rayā cakravarti in C.89.

27 About the king cakravartin in Čampā and the kings following the dharma, see Schweyer (2007: 125-128).

28 C.89, face A, l. 7-9, 14 and 24-25 (Finot 1904: 946-947 in Jacques 1995: 128-129).

29 Inscription C.89, in 1088 CE, in Mỹ Sỏn, face B, l. 6.

30 C.89, face B, l. 18 vuḥ vihāra śrī indralokeśvara di tranūlvijaya (Finot 1904: 948 in Jacques 1995: 130).

31 Boisselier (1963: fig. 222 in the background).

32 Inscription C.92, face A, l. 6, pu po tana rayā nan ya pratiṣṭhāna yāṅ po ku śrī vuddhalokeśvara yāṅ po ku śrī jaya indralokeśvara (Finot 1904: 971 in Jacques 1995: 153).

33 C. 92, face A, l. 3-4 (Finot 1904: 971 in Jacques 1995: 153).

34 C.92 face B (Finot 1904: 972 in Jacques 1995: 154), and C.90 face D (Finot 1904: 936 in Jacques 1995: 118).

35 C.92, face B, l. 8 (Finot 1904: 972 in Jacques 1995: 154).

36 C.92, face B, l. 12-13 (Finot 1904: 972 in Jacques 1995: 154).

37 C.4, l. 3 Chỏ Ðinh (Aymonier 1891: 50-2 no 383); C. 30 B 4 l. 4 Po Nagar of Nhà Trắng (Schweyer 2005: 97); C.86 face A l. 3 Mỹ Sỏn (Finot 1904: 976-977 in Jacques 1995: 158-159).

38 C.92, face B, l. 1-2 (Finot 1904: 971-972 in Jacques 1995: 153-154). “La stèle fut érigée sur la base D3, devant le sanctuaire C de Mỹ Sỏn”.

39 C. 92 C, l. 6-7 (Finot 1904: 973 in Jacques 1995: 155).

40 Mallmann (1986: 182). See also Dasgupta (1950: 98): “This Vajra-sattva, the Lord Supreme of the Tantric Buddhists, is found in the Buddhist Tantras bearing many other names of which the most important are Hevajra and Heruka.”

41 In C.52 inscription, Binh Ðinh Province, from 13th century (Aymonier 1891: 53, n° 411).

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Titre Fig. 1: Map of Čampā
Crédits Drawing H. David – A.-V Schweyer. All rights reserved.
URL http://moussons.revues.org/docannexe/image/810/img-1.png
Fichier image/png, 261k
Titre Fig. 2: Map of Đồng Dương monastery, Quảng Nam Province
Légende Late 9th century. Note the three successive courtyards, the third (n°4), the Central (n°3) and the first one, with a square temple (n°2) and the main shrine (n°1) (Parmentier 1918: pl. XCVIII).
URL http://moussons.revues.org/docannexe/image/810/img-2.png
Fichier image/png, 190k
Titre Fig. 3: Đồng Dương monastery, Quảng Nam Province
Légende The vihāra altar on display in the Đà Nẵng Museum
Crédits Picture of the author, March 2009.
URL http://moussons.revues.org/docannexe/image/810/img-3.png
Fichier image/png, 135k
Titre Fig. 4 : Mudrā of knowledge, specific of Mahāvairocana in the Vajradhātu mandala
Crédits (Cornu 2001: 377 s.v. mudrā).
URL http://moussons.revues.org/docannexe/image/810/img-4.png
Fichier image/png, 192k
Titre Fig. 5: Đồng Dương monastery, Quảng Nam Province
Légende The altar of the main sanctuary on display in the Đà Nẵng Museum
Crédits Picture of the author, March 2009.
URL http://moussons.revues.org/docannexe/image/810/img-5.png
Fichier image/png, 131k
Titre Fig. 6: Drawing by Henri Parmentier of the pedestal in the main shrine, in the first enclosure of the Đồng Dương monastery, Quảng Nam Province, 9th century
Crédits (Parmentier 1918: pl. CXXVI “Piédestal de la tour principale de Đồng Dương I. Essai de restitution”)
URL http://moussons.revues.org/docannexe/image/810/img-6.png
Fichier image/png, 189k
Titre Fig. 7: Ðại Hữu, Quảng Bình Province
Légende Map of sanctuary
Crédits (Finot & Goloubew 1925: fig. 19).
URL http://moussons.revues.org/docannexe/image/810/img-7.png
Fichier image/png, 44k
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence papier

Anne-Valérie Schweyer, « Buddhism in Čampā », Moussons, 13-14 | 2009, 309-337.

Référence électronique

Anne-Valérie Schweyer, « Buddhism in Čampā », Moussons [En ligne], 13-14 | 2009, mis en ligne le , consulté le 25 octobre 2014. URL : http://moussons.revues.org/810

Haut de page

Auteur

Anne-Valérie Schweyer

Anne-Valérie Schweyer is researcher with Centre Asie du Sud-Est (CASE CNRS - UMR 8170). Her last books published: Le Viêt Nam ancien, Guide Belles-Lettres des Civilisations, Les Belles Lettres, Paris, 2005, 320 p. and Viêt Nam. Histoire, Arts, Archéologie, Olizane, Bangkok, 2011.

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

© Presses Universitaires de Provence

Haut de page