Did you know that Angkorian kings used to regularly travel to the lower Mekong region to worship a female deity?
No, you didn’t know that. I know you didn’t.
But don’t feel bad about that. It’s not your fault! You’re still as smart as ever.
It’s more like you’ve been deceived. . . Oh, but don’t feel bad about that either!! Because again, you had nothing to do with any of this. You’re innocent!!
You see, there is a placename mentioned in Chinese sources, Sanfoqi, which for over a century, scholars have argued refers to an imagined kingdom on the island of Sumatra, “Srivijaya,” when it actually refers to “Kambuja.” That’s right, “Cambodia.”
One of the Chinese sources that talks about Sanfoqi/Kambuja mentions Angkorian kings worshipping a female deity.
But you had no way to know that because no one told you that Sanfoqi was Kambuja. . . Bummer, huh?
Yea, but it’s ok. Life goes on.
This information is in a 1178 collection of information about foreign lands, Representative Responses about Beyond the Passes [Lingwai daida 嶺外代答], by Zhou Qufei.
I know, it’s a weird name for a book (or maybe my translation just sucks).
In this book, Zhou Qufei stated that Sanfoqi had vassal kingdoms and that one of Sanfoqi’s vassals was a polity called the Kingdom of Foluo’an (Fuluo’an guo 佛羅安國).
I know, this is another weird name, but in this case, it’s weird because it’s a Chinese transcription of a foreign name, and, you know, something got distorted in the process, kinda like when your tone-deaf friend cranks up the reverb at a Karaoke to try to not sound so bad. . .
It still sounds bad. And distorted.
But I digress. . .
The first character of this name, Foluo’an, is the character for “Buddha.” While it’s used here to represent a foreign sound, I also feel like it was intentionally chosen to try to give this place name a bit of a “religious” feel.
Maybe not though. I don’t know. I’m just guessing.
But my tendency to try to guess and feel things also leads me to think that this name might be trying to represent the Khmer word “phnom,” meaning “mountain,” and a term used in numerous Cambodian place names.
In the twelfth century, Foluo’an could have been pronounced something like “fɦut-la an.” There isn’t a way to pronounce the consonant cluster “phn” in Chinese. The “fɦut-la” could be an effort to do so.
In which case, the “an” would be an effort to add the “om” to get “fɦut-la an” / “Ph-n om.”
Again, just another guess, but it’s the best I got.
In any case, the really cool stuff that Zhou Qufei recorded was not about the name of this place. It was about the stuff that happened there.
First, he noted that the ruler of Foluo’an was appointed by the king of Sanfoqi/Kambuja, which indicates a special relationship between these two places.
Second, and this is the big one, so get ready – Zhou Qufei noted that Foluo’an had a “Sage Buddha” (Shengfo 聖佛) and that the king of Sanfoqi regularly visited its temple to burn incense. (2/13b)
Later in this work, Zhou has a separate passage on this “Sage Buddha” where he explains that this was a deity that was worshipped in the various barbarian kingdoms in the Southern Sea.
He states that it was said to have originated in a place called Zhanlipo Citadel (Zhanlipo cheng 占里婆城) in the kingdom of Zhenla.
According to Zhou Qufei, this was a female deity who was stopped by a Dragon King while crossing the sea. She promised the Dragon King that if he would let her ascend the shore, she would give birth to a son who would worship him.
The Dragon King agreed, and the local people came to worship this lady, and merchants all stopped at her temple. (10/19b)
This is REALLY frickin’ interesting!!!
I don’t know where Foluo’an was. But the more I look at this stuff, the more I get the sense that there were historically two poles in the greater Cambodian world: the inland kingdom of Angkor and coastal (or near-the-coast) polities that were important centers of trade, and in the case of Foluo’an, religion.
Who was this “Sage Buddha,” and was she a Buddhist deity, or is this just how Chinese merchants referred to her?
I have no idea.
Wow, you read all the way to here and just found out that I have nothing to tell you. . . That’s sad!
Well, hold on, maybe I do have something to say. . .
The brief story about her in Zhou Qufei’s account could be a simplified/localized version of the story of the goddess of the earth, Bhumi/Vasudhara, a goddess that seems to have been the inspiration/precursor (?) for an earth goddess that is popular in places like Cambodia today and is known there as Preah Thorani.
Again. I don’t know. I’m stumbling into unfamiliar territory.
My contribution here is just to point out that Zhou Qufei recorded that this goddess, whoever she was, was worshipped by kings from Sanfoqi, and as I have made clear in the previous posts in the “Srivijaya 2.0” series, we now know that Sanfoqi was Kambuja/Angkor.
But like I said, I know you’re smart, so I’m entrusting you to figure out the rest.
May the Sage Buddha guide you!!
For those who want to see the relevant passages in Zhou Qufei’s text:
三佛齊國，在南海之中，諸蕃水道之要衝也。東自闍婆諸國，西自大食、故臨諸國，無不由其境而入中國者。國無所產，而人習戰攻，服藥在身，刃不能傷。陸攻水戰，奮擊無前，以故鄰國咸服焉。蕃舶過境，有不入其國者，必出師盡殺之，以故其國富犀象、珠璣、香藥。其俗縛排浮水而居。其屬有佛羅安國，國主自三佛齊選差。地亦產香，氣味腥烈，較之下岸諸國，此為差勝。有聖佛，三佛齊國王再歲一往燒香。
And. . .
南海諸蕃國皆敬聖佛。相傳聖佛出世，在真臘國之占里婆城。聖佛，女子也，有夫。渡海而舟為龍王所蕩，乃謂龍王曰；「使我登岸，當歲生一子以奉龍王。」既，海神送其舟于占里婆城，乃顯神異。人有慢輕，必降禍焉；人有祈求，必赴感焉；人有自欺於前，必報驗焉。南蕃皆敬事之。凡相爭者，必相要質于聖佛前，曲者不敢往也。南蕃所居皆茅廬，唯聖佛廟貌甚整，黃金飾像，四軀為四殿。蓋一佛而三夫也。女巫數輩，謂之夷婆。廟多鼓舞，血食無虛日。每歲正月十三日，設廬于廟前，積禾于中，請聖像出廟，而焚禾以祭。十四日聖佛歸廟，二十日聖佛生子，乃忽有一圓石出其身。二十日夜，舉國人民不寢，以聽佛之生子。明日國人皆奉珍寶、犀象獻佛。其所生子，舟載而投諸海以奉龍王云。六合之外，妖祥怪誕愈多如此！
This Post Has 4 Comments
The major question would be which epoch the information in this collection actually describe. It sounds very much like a “water and land Chenla” scenario, maybe with a hint towards female Bodhisattva of the Mahayana tradition, somebody like Avalokiteshvara?
Yes, as for “Sanfoqi,” it is in Song Dynasty era sources (960-1279) that it is first mentioned. It is also clear to me that Sanfoqi is Angkor, so I don’t think these details were found by Zhou Qufei in some text (now lost) from the 6th century, for instance. On a textual level, it makes sense to see the information here as dating from the Song period.
But I think “Sage Buddha” (Shengfo 聖佛) could be a lot of different things. It could be something Buddhist. It could be something non-Buddhist that a Chinese writer who was only familiar with Buddhism referred to by that name. It could be something hybrid.
I think this is where we need the help of art historians and archaeologists.
Talking about Buddhist and Non-buddhist. Zhou Dagaun reported of a reclining Buddha to be found on “east of Angkor” but what we found is a reclining Vishnu in the middle of West Baray. Maybe the Chinese sum up everything as Buddhist, just my guess.
Thanks for mentioning this. It’s a really good point!! My quick answer is that what you say is sometimes correct (maybe most of the time), but not all of the time. You’ve inspired me to write a post about this, because it’s a very important point. I’ll do that soon. Thanks!!