The Spread of Buddhism

88 xavier tremblay

had been the most powerful sovereign of India since A oka and could

emerge in the Buddhist legends, the avadnas, as a de facto major protec-

tor of Buddhism, he was later ascribed bona  de all possible patronages.

Such dignity was not denied to his offspring, since Kanika’s son, king

Huvika, was dubbed a promoter of Mahyna.^58

Buddhism after the Kuas

Buddhism throve in Bactria also after the Kua empire. The manu-

scripts found around Termez date from the Hepthalite period and the

Great Buddhas of Bamiyan were erected under the Hephthalites.^59

The monastery of AÌina was built during the seventh and eighth cen-

turies. Xuanzang noted ten monasteries in Termez (with 1,000 monks),

 ve in anyn, two in Sumn (both with “a few monks”), three in

Kubyn (with 100 monks), none in Wax, Xottal, Kumi, Baln,

ten in Xulm (with 500 monks), 100 in Bactres (with 3,000 monks, all

H nayna), ten in Gaz (with 300 Sarvstivda monks), 10 in Bamiyan

(with 1,000 monks).^60 For comparison, in the kingdom of Kapi a,

Xuanzang counted 6000 monks.^61 Xuanzang’s approximate numbers

give the impression that Buddhism was cultivated in Bactria, but not

everywhere, and not as the sole religion. An interesting example is a

Bactrian contract (BD Vl. 24), written in 741 AD by a Mazdean “in the

presence of the God Oxus”. It stipulates that the purchaser of a piece

of land may convert it to the purpose of his choice, “a bride-price,

dowry, vihra or Mazdean temple, daxma or crematorium”. The contract

bespeaks that Buddhism was popular enough to have its practices taken

in consideration as possibilities in the clauses of a profane estate sale

contract. Still, the Mazdean scribe seems to have remained apathetic

as to the choice between Mazdeism and Buddhism. Likewise, although

the Hephthalites do not seem to have been Buddhists, Buddhism was

introduced or reintroduced under their dominion in Margiana^62 and

Sogdiana.^63

(^58) Cf. an avadna on a palm-leaf of the fourth century from the Schøyen collection,
MSC III, p. 256 = MSC 2378/9 v 2.
(^59) Rhie 1999–2002, vol. 1, pp. 232f., holds that they were already erected under
the Chionites.
(^60) T.2087.51.872a21–873a9.
(^61) T.2087.51.873c19.
(^62) Callieri 1996.
(^63) La Vaissière 2002, p. 84.
Heirman_f5new_75-129.indd 88 3/13/2007 1:15:53 PM