Tag Macaque

Shi Pantuo: An Influence on Sun Wukong

Jim R. McClanahan Leave a comment

I was asked on Tumblr if I was familiar with Shi Pantuo (石槃陀/石盤陀/石磐陀; fig. 1), a historical figure suggested to be one of several influences on Sun Wukong. [1] He is known for serving as a temporary guide to the historical monk Xuanzang (玄奘, 602–664), on whom the literary Tripitaka is based. According to Hansen (2012), Shi was a Sogdian, an Iranic people active in Central Asia and China:

The guide’s last name, Shi, indicated that his family had originally come from the region of Kesh, or Shahrisabz, outside Samarkand, Uzbekistan, while his given name, Pantuo, was the Chinese transcription of Vandak, a common Sogdian name meaning “servant” of a given deity (p. 85). [2]

In this article, I will quote Shi’s full story appearing in A Biography of the Tripitaka Master of the Great Ci’en Monastery (Da Tang Daci’en si Sanzang Fashi Zhuan, 大唐大慈恩寺三藏法師傳, 7th-century; T2053), a journal of Xuanzang’s travels written by his disciple Huili (慧立). I will also discuss why he is believed to have been an inspiration for the Monkey King.

On a related note, please see my past article about the historical monk Wukong (悟空).

Fig. 1 – Statues of Xuanzang (left) and Shi Pantuo (right) from the Xuanzang Procures the Scriptures Museum (Xuanzang qujing bowuguan, 玄奘取经博物馆) in Guazhou County, Gansu Province, China (larger version). Image found here.

Table of Contents

1. Historical Record

Determined to procure Buddhist scriptures from India, Xuanzang ignored a royal prohibition against leaving China by traveling in secret towards the western reaches of the country. He was initially worried about traversing the border, which was heavily guarded by the military, but then his horse died, making matters worse. Then he was shocked to find that a warrant had been issued for his arrest. All of this weighed heavily on the monk (Huili & Shi, 1995, pp. 20-21). It was shortly thereafter that he met Shi Pantuo:

Now the Master worried all the more. Of the two junior monks [who had recently joined him in Liangzhou], Daozheng had already gone to Dunhuang, and only Huilin remained with him. Knowing that he could not stand the hardships of the long journey ahead, the Master dismissed him and let him go home. He bought a horse, but the trouble was that he had nobody to be his guide. Before the image of Maitreya Bodhisattva of the monastery [in Guazhou (fig. 2)] in which he was staying, he prayed for a man who might guide him through the pass. That night a monk of the Hu [胡, i.e. “barbarian“] tribe, named Dharma, of that monastery dreamed that the Master was sitting on a lotus flower going west. Dharma felt it strange and in the following morning he came to tell his dream to the Master, who was delighted in his mind, knowing that this was a good omen indicating the possibility of continuing his journey. But he said to Dharma, “A dream is but a fancy and is not worth mentioning.”

He again entered the shrine hall to pray. Before long a man of the Hu tribe came to pay homage to the image of the Buddha. He worshipped the Master by circumambulating him two or three … (Huili & Shi, 1995, p. 21)

… times. Being asked his name, the man said that he was named Pantuo with the surname of Shi (emphasis added). He begged for the conferment of the Precepts and was given the Five Precepts. Greatly delighted, the Hu man went away and returned in a moment with cakes and fruits. Seeing that the man was intelligent and strong with a reverential manner, the Master told him about his intention of taking the journey. The Hu man consented to send him across the five watchtowers, and this greatly pleased the Master. He bought some clothes and a horse for the man and made an appointment with him.

On the following day, when the sun was about to set, the Master went to a bushland where he waited for the man. Before long he arrived together with an old man of the Hu tribe, riding on an aged lean horse of reddish color. At this sight the Master felt displeased. But the young man said, “This old man knows the route to the West perfectly well. He has travelled to and from Yiwu for more than thirty times. I have brought him along in the hope that he might give you some counsel.” Then the old Hu man said, “The road to the West is perilous and the Sha River is an obstacle on the long way. There are demons and hot wind. Whoever encounters them cannot be spared from death. Even if you travel together with a large group of companions, you might go astray or be lost. How can you, reverend teacher, try to go all alone? I ask you to consider the matter carefully and not gamble with your life.”

The Master replied, “I started on my journey to the West for the purpose of seeking the Great Dharma. I shall not return to the East before I reach the Brahmanic countries. I shall not regret it even if I die on the way.”

The old man said, “If you insist on going, you had better ride my horse. This horse of mine has travelled to Yiwu fifteen times. It is sound and knows the way well. Yours is too young to travel such a long distance.”

Then the Master recalled that when he was about to start on his journey to the West from Chang’an, there was a sorcerer, named He Hongda, whose witchcraft and divination were usually effective. The Master had asked him to foretell the events of his … (Huili & Shi, 1995, p. 22)

… forthcoming journey. The sorcerer said, “You will be able to go, and it seems that you will be riding on an aged, lean horse of a reddish color, equipped with a varnished saddle with a piece of iron at the front.” On seeing that the Hu man’s horse was lean and reddish in color and that the varnished saddle had a piece of iron, the Master deemed it appropriate to take it, and so he changed his horse for that of the old Hu man, who was quite pleased and went away after due salutation.

After having packed his outfit, the Master started on the journey with the young Hu man. At about the third watch, they reached the river and saw the Yumen Pass at a distance. They went up the stream for about ten li [3.10 mi or 5 km] from the pass and came to a place where the banks of the river were over ten [Chinese] feet apart [10.43 ft or 3.18 m], beside which there was a wood of tamarisks. The Hu man cut some branches and built a bridge, on which he spread grass and paved it with sand. Then they drove their horses across [fig. 3].

The Master was glad to have crossed the river, and he unsaddled his horse to take rest at a place more than fifty paces from the Hu man. They spread their quilts on the ground to sleep. After a little while the Hu man got up, unsheathed his knife, and slowly advanced toward the Master, but he retreated at a distance of about ten paces. Not knowing what he had in his mind and suspecting that he might have an evil intent, the Master got up and recited scriptures and repeated the name of Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva [i.e. Guanyin], whereupon the Hu man lay down and slept. [3]

When it was nearly daybreak, the Master wakened the man to fetch some water for a wash. At the moment when they were about to continue the journey after having taken breakfast, the Hu man said, “Your disciple considers that the journey ahead is long and dangerous with neither water nor grass on the way. As water can be obtained only at the five towers, we have to reach them at night to steal water and pass along. But once discovered we shall be dead men. So it is safer to turn back.”

But the Master was determined not to go back, and so the Hu man proceeded with reluctance. He took out his sword and drew his bow, ordering the Master to go before him, but the Master … (Huili & Shi, 1995, p. 23)

… refused to precede him. When they had gone a few li, the man stopped and said, ‘Your disciple cannot go any more. I have a big family to support, and moreover I dare not trespass against the law.” The Master knew his mind and let him go back. The Hu man said, “You will certainly not be able to reach your destination. What shall I do if you are arrested and I am involved in the matter?” The Master replied, “Even if I am cut to pieces, I will never implicate you in my affair.” He then took a solemn oath and the man was satisfied. The Master presented him with a horse out of gratitude for his service, and they parted (Huili & Shi, 1995, p. 23).

___________________________

(I’m presenting two Chinese versions of the text here because I’ve noticed some differences.)

CBETA:

自是益增憂惘。所從二小僧，道整先向燉煌，唯惠琳在，知其不堪遠涉，亦放還。遂貿易得馬一匹，但苦無人相引。即於所停寺彌勒像前啟請，願得一人相引渡關。

其夜，寺有胡僧達摩，夢法師坐一蓮華向西而去。達摩私怪，旦而來白。法師心喜為得行之徵，然語達摩云：「夢為虛妄，何足涉言。」更入道場禮請。俄有一胡人來入禮佛，逐法師行二三匝。問其姓名，云姓石，字槃陀。此胡即請受戒，乃為授五戒。胡甚喜，辭還。少時齎餅菓更來。法師見其明健，貌又恭肅，遂告行意。胡人許諾言，送師過五烽。法師大喜，乃更貿衣資為買馬而期焉。

明日日欲下，遂入草間，須臾彼胡更與一胡老翁乘一瘦老赤馬相逐而至。法師心不懌，少胡曰：「此翁極諳西路，來去伊吾三十餘反，故共俱來，望有平章耳。」胡公因說：「西路險惡，沙河阻遠，鬼魅熱風，過無達者。徒侶眾多，猶數迷失，況師單獨，如何可行？願自斟量，勿輕身命。」法師報曰：「貧道為求大法，發趣西方，若不至婆羅門國，終不東歸。縱死中途，非所悔也。」胡翁曰：「師必去，可乘我此馬。此馬往反伊吾已十五度。健而知道。師馬少，不堪遠涉。」

法師乃竊念，在長安將發志西方日，有術人何弘達者，誦呪占觀，多有所中。法師令占行事，達曰：「師得去。去狀似乘一老赤瘦馬，漆鞍橋前有鐵。」既覩胡人所乘馬瘦赤，鞍漆有鐵，與何言合，心以為當，遂換馬。胡翁歡喜，禮敬而別。於是裝束，與少胡夜發。三更許到河，遙見玉關。去關上流十里許，兩岸可闊丈餘，傍有胡椒樹叢。胡乃斬木為橋，布草填沙，驅馬而過。

法師既渡而喜，因解駕停憩，與胡人相去可五十餘步，各下褥而眠。少時，胡人乃拔刀而起，徐向法師，未到十步許又迴，不知何意，疑有異心。即起誦經，念觀音菩薩。胡人見已，還臥遂眠。天欲明，法師喚令起取水𣹉漱，解齋訖欲發，胡人曰：「弟子將前途險遠，又無水草，唯五烽下有水，必須夜到偷水而過，但一處被覺，即是死人。不如歸還，用為安隱。」法師確然不迴，乃俛仰而進，露刃張弓，命法師前行。法師不肯居前，胡人自行數里而住，曰：「弟子不能去。家累既大而王法不可干也。」法師知其意，遂任還。胡人曰：「師必不達。如被擒捉，相引奈何？」法師報曰：「縱使切割此身如微塵者，終不相引。」為陳重誓，其意乃止。與馬一匹，勞謝而別。(Source)

Wikisource:

自是益增憂惘。所從二小僧，道整先向燉煌，唯慧琳在，知其不堪遠涉，亦放還。遂貿易得馬一疋，但苦無人相引。即於所停寺彌勒像前啟請，願得一人相引渡關。其夜，寺有胡僧達磨夢法師坐一蓮華向西而去。達磨私怪，旦而來白。法師心喜為得行之徵，然語達磨云：「夢為虛妄，何足涉言。」更入道場禮請，俄有一胡人來入禮佛，逐法師行二三幣。問其姓名，雲姓石字盤陀。此胡即請受戒，乃為授五戒。胡甚喜，辭還。少時齋餅果更來。法師見其明健，貌又恭肅，遂告行意。胡人許諾，言送師過五烽。法師大喜，乃更貿衣資為買馬而期焉。明日日欲下，遂入草間，須臾彼胡更與一胡老翁乘一瘦老赤馬相逐而至，法師心不懌。少胡曰：「此翁極諳西路，來去伊吾三十餘返，故共俱來，望有平章耳。」胡公因說西路險惡，沙河阻遠，鬼魅熱風，遇無免者。徒侶眾多，猶數迷失，況師單獨，如何可行？願自料量，勿輕身命。法師報曰：「貧道為求大法，發趣西方，若不至婆羅門國，終不東歸。縱死中途，非所悔也。」胡翁曰：「師必去，可乘我馬。此馬往返伊吾已有十五度，健而知道。師馬少，不堪遠涉。」法師乃竊念在長安將發誌西方日，有術人何弘達者，誦咒占觀，多有所中。法師令占行事，達曰：「師得去。去狀似乘一老赤瘦馬，漆鞍橋前有鐵。」既睹胡人所乘馬瘦赤，漆鞍有鐵，與何言合，心以為當，遂即換馬。胡翁歡喜，禮敬而別。

於是裝束，與少胡夜發。三更許到河，遙見玉門關。去關上流十里許，兩岸可闊丈餘，傍有梧桐樹叢。胡人乃斬木為橋，布草填沙，驅馬而過。法師既渡而喜，因解駕停，與胡人相去可五十餘步，各下褥而眠。少時胡人乃拔刀而起，徐向法師，未到十步許又回，不知何意，疑有異心。即起誦經，念觀音菩薩。胡人見已，還臥遂睡。天欲明，法師喚令起取水盥漱，解齋訖欲發，胡人曰：「弟子將前途險遠，又無水草，唯五烽下有水，必須夜到偷水而過，但一處被覺，即是死人。不如歸還，用為安穩。」法師確然不回。乃勉仰而進，露刀張弓，命法師前行。法師不肯居前，胡人自行數里而住，曰：「弟子不能去。家累既大而王法不可忤也。」法師知其意，遂任還。胡人曰：「師必不達。如被擒捉，相引奈何？」法師報曰：「縱使切割此身如微塵者，終不相引。」為陳重誓，其意乃止。與馬一疋，勞謝而別。(Source)

Fig. 2 (Top) – Xuanzang’s route to (red) and from (green) India. The black triangle indicates his starting point in the Chinese capital of Chang’an. The red arrow indicates Guazhou, where he met Shi Pantuo (larger version). Image found here. Fig. 3 (Bottom) – Xuanzang’s route from Guazhou towards the Yumen Pass. The bottom arrow indicates Guazhou, and the top arrow indicates where the monk and his guide passed the river and eventually parted ways (larger version). Image found here.

2. Connection to Sun Wukong

Zhang Jinchi (张锦池), a professor of Chinese Language and Literature at Harbin Normal University, has proposed five reasons for why Shi is a prototype of Sun Wukong:

1) Their functions as guides are similar; 2) their functions in resolving danger are comparable; 3) their identities as pilgrims are identical; 4) their delicate master-disciple relationships are similar; and 5) Shi Pantuo was a “barbarian monk” (huseng), and this is pronounced similarly to “macaque” (husun).

(1) 向导作用相类；(2) 解决危难作用相若；(3) 行者身份相同；(4) 师徒间微妙关系相似；(5) 石磐陀乃胡僧，胡僧与“猢狲”音近 (Chen, 2011, p. 50).

I’d like to provide context as a reminder of what we have already learned about Shi and what is known about Monkey from his story cycle. First, both obviously guide their masters, Shi past the Yumen Pass and Sun all the way to India. Second, both resolve danger in particular ways. Shi built a bridge, which helped them bypass a river blocking their path, and he also carried a sword and bow, which means he could have protected the monk from bandits if the need arose. Wukong of course uses his magic and martial skills to protect Tripitaka from all sorts of monsters and spirits. Third, the term “pilgrim” (xingzhe, 行者) refers to a “postulant,” a lay Buddhist acolyte who has yet to be ordained but lives as an untonsured monk, one expected to follow the Five Precepts against killing, lying, stealing, sexual misconduct, and drinking alcohol (Buswell & Lopez, 2014, pp. 1011-1012). Therefore, both Shi and Monkey were/are essentially untrained, itinerant monks who travel(ed) with their masters on the road west. Fourth, the master-disciple relationship is delicate because both postulants threaten their masters’ lives. Shi attempted to assault Xuanzang with a knife in the night, and Sun attempts to kill Tripitaka with his staff when the cleric first uses the tight-fillet spell (Wu & Yu, 2012, vol. 1, p. 320). And of course we can’t forget the times when the Tang Monk kicks Wukong out of the pilgrimage (Wu & Yu, 2012, vol. 2, pp. 26-28; vol. 3, pp. 89-91). And fifth, huseng (胡僧, “barbarian monk,” i.e. Shi) and husun (猢猻, “macaque,” i.e. Monkey) sound similar, implying a connection. But this last point requires more explanation. Mair (2015) comments on the relationship between the word hu (胡), Hu-barbarians, and beards:

The earliest mention I know of for hú 胡 with the meaning of “non-Sinitic people from the west” is in the Zhōu lǐ 周礼 (Rituals of the Zhou), which is a Western Han (206 BC-9 AD) text, whereas the earliest occurrence of hú 胡 with the meaning “beard” that I’m aware of is considerably later, during the Liang period (502-587) of the Southern Dynasties.

This speaks to a stereotyped image of foreigners as bearded people (fig. 4). Most importantly, their association with body hair eventually gave rise to a new name for monkeys. The Compendium of Materia Medica (Bencao gangmu, 本草綱目, 1596) states, “Since a monkey resembles a Hu-barbarian (Hu ren), he is also called ‘grandson of the barbarian’ (husun)” (猴形似胡人，故曰胡孫). This term is often used to refer to macaques. For example, even Sun’s first master references it in JTTW chapter one: “Though your features are not the most attractive, you do resemble a pignolia-eating macaque (husun)” (你身軀雖是鄙陋，卻像個食松果的猢猻) (based on Wu & Yu, 2012, vol. 1, p. 115). [4]

Therefore, all of these points combined make it easy to see how the concept of a Hu-barbarian monk traveling with Xuanzang could’ve helped give rise to stories about a husun (macaque) monk traveling with Tripitaka.

Fig. 4 – A 7th-century Chinese temple carving of a bearded Sogdian dancer (larger version).

Note:

1) This reminds me of “Euhemerism,” a philosophical interpretation of mythology where gods are suggested to have originally been deified historical figures.

2) A chart in Hansen (2005) shows that another variant of Pantuo (槃陀/盤陀/磐陀), a common Sogdian given name, is “畔陀” (p. 305).

3) Hansen (2012) questions if Shi approaching Xuanzang with a knife was a nightmare (p. 86).

A more sinical person might read the old Sogdian convincing Xuanzang to switch animals as a plot to cheat the monk out of a better quality horse. And Shi approaching him in the night with a knife could thus be read as the murderous finale of that plan. After all, the cleric wouldn’t be able to return to complain to the authorities about the bad trade if he was dead. But there are two problems with this theory: 1) Shi guided Xuanzang for a distance and even built a bridge to help bypass a river. That sure seems like way too much effort just to turn around and murder someone. Killing the monk just outside of town would have taken much less time and effort; and 2) the sorcerer He Hongda is said to have foretold the use of this skinny horse while the monk was still in Chang’an. However, a sinical person might counter that: 1) Shi was just scared to do the dirty deed too close to home; and 2) The “prophecy” was just a cover for the bad trade. I’ll let the reader decide.

4) The only difference between the old husun (胡孫) from the Materia Medica and the current husun (猢猻) is the addition of the dog radical (quan, 犭), thereby transforming the barbaric grandson into an animal.

Sources:

Buswell, R. E. , & Lopez, D. S. (2014). The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Chen, M. (2011). Sun Wukong juese yanjiu jiqi yiyi tantao [An Investigation of the Research into Sun Wukong’s Role and Importance]. Journal of Xianning University, 31(11), 49-50. Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20181220230540/http://lyglibrary.com/tsg/xyjwx/xyjyj/%E8%A5%BF%E6%B8%B8%E8%AE%B0%E8%AE%BA%E6%96%872011/%E5%AD%99%E6%82%9F%E7%A9%BA%E8%A7%92%E8%89%B2%E7%A0%94%E7%A9%B6%E5%8F%8A%E5%85%B6%E6%84%8F%E4%B9%89%E6%8E%A2%E8%AE%A8.pdf

Hansen, V. (2005). The Impact of the Silk Road Trade on Local Community: The Turfan Oasis, 500-800. In E. Trombert, & E. La Vaissière (Eds.), Les Sogdiens en Chine (pp. 283-310). Paris: École française d’Extrême-Orient.

Hansen, V. (2012). The Silk Road: A New History. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press.

Huili, & Shi, Y. (1995). A Biography of the Tripitaka Master of the Great Ci’en Monastery of the Great Tang Dynasty (L. Rongxi Trans.). Berkeley, CA: Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research. Retrieved from https://www.bdkamerica.org/product/a-biography-of-the-tripitaka-master-of-the-great-cien-monastery/.

Mair, V. (2015, August 26). The bearded barbarian. Language Log. Retrieved from https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=20808

A Possible Origin for the Term “Handsome Monkey King”

Jim R. McClanahan 2 Comments

I normally don’t post tone marks for Chinese words, but I will include them here since they are important to the subject of this article.

Měihóu wáng (美猴王), or the “Handsome Monkey King,” is one of Sūn Wùkōng‘s many names and titles. I recently saw an online post where someone proposed their own folk analysis for the character měi (美, “beautiful/handsome”), suggesting that the two prongs on top reference Monkey’s iconic feathered cap. But others quickly pointed out that this was historically not the case. This reminded me of my theory on the origins of the term Měihóu wáng.

(Left) The character měi (美, “beautiful/handsome”) (larger version). Take note of the two prongs on top. Image found here. (Right) Èrláng vs Sūn Wùkōng (larger version). Take note of Monkey’s feathered cap. Image of a production still from the 1986 TV Series.

I have suggested in an update to a past article that the title is a play on Míhóu wáng (獼猴王, “Macaque/Monkey King”), míhóu being a common term for monkeys for centuries. [1] This is because the 13th-century version of Journey to the West (Xīyóu jì, 西遊記, 1592) calls Sūn Wùkōng‘s antecedent Míhóu wáng. [2] Even a 3rd-century Chinese version of an Indian jataka tale where the Buddha is a monkey king calls him Míhóu wáng. But most importantly, the Middle Chinese pronunciation of měi (美) sounds more like “mǐ” (mijX), as do the pronunciations of many ethnic groups and even neighboring countries. This might suggest that the pre-modern usage was adopted by these people and places in the past. Therefore, Míhóu wáng and Měihóu wáng may have sounded similar at some point in history:

Modern Chinese → Middle Chinese

獼猴王 (Míhóu wáng) → Míhóu wáng (mjie-huw hjwang) [3]

美猴王 (Měihóu wáng) → Mǐhóu wáng (mijX huw hjwang) [4] 

Ethnic and foreign pronunciations of měi (美)

If true, this would mean that the common link between Sūn Wùkōng‘s title and his ego is a later interpretation.

I must point out, however, that I am NOT a language expert. This is just something that dawned on me one day. I would like feedback from more knowledgeable readers. Please write me via the “contact” button on the menu, or leave a comment below.

The Handsome Monkey King is waited on by his children (larger version). Image from the Japanese children’s book Son Goku (孫悟空,1939).

Notes:

1) Míhóu is one of various transcriptions for a word of non-Chinese origin used in ancient China to mean “monkey”:

The fact that mu occurs in four variants: 母 and 沐 in Chou literature, and mi 米 or 獼 during the Han dynasty and later, proves that this binom is a phonetic rendering of a non-Chinese term (Van Gulik, 1967, p. 35).

2) The full title is the “Bronze-Headed, Iron-Browed King of the Eighty-Four Thousand Monkeys of the Purple Cloud Grotto on the Mountain of Flowers and Fruit” (Huāguǒ shān Zǐyún dòng bāwàn sìqiān tóngtóu tiě’é Míhóu wáng, 花果山紫雲洞八萬四千銅頭鐵額獼猴王) (Wivell, 1994, p. 1182).

3) See Kroll et al. (2015, pp. 162, 302, and 469).

4) See Kroll et al. (2015, pp. 162, 299, and 469).

Source:

Kroll, P. W., Baxter, W., Boltz, W. G., Knechtges, D. R., Lien, Y. E., Richter, A., Richter, M. L., Warner, D. X. (2015). A Student’s Dictionary of Classical and Medieval Chinese. Belgium: Brill.

Van Gulik, R. H. (1967). The Gibbon in China: An Essay in Chinese Animal Lore. Leiden: E.J. Brill.

Wivell, C.S. (1994). The Story of How the Monk Tripitaka of the Great Country of T’ang Brought Back the Sūtras. In V. Mair (Ed.), The Columbia Anthology of Traditional Chinese Literature (pp. 1181-1207). New York: Columbia University Press.

A Brief Study of the Term Mihou (獼猴) in Journey to the West

Jim R. McClanahan 2 Comments

Last updated: 09-27-2023

This article is based on a question put to me on Tumblr. I decided to post my answer here because it contains information from several previous articles discussing monkeys in Chinese culture and Buddhism. This is obviously important when thinking about Journey to the West (Xiyouji, 西遊記).

Question:

Heya, I was researching SWK’s various sworn brothers because I kept hearing abt this one sworn bro of his called “The Female Demon Monkey King” and obviously with a name like that I was curious abt them. But for some reason I can’t find any info abt them anywhere online, and one Tumblr post said that the Female Monkey King and the Macaque King were the same person? I was wondering if you knew anything abt that and had additional info abt the Female Monkey King?

The Female Monkey King seems to be based on a discrepancy in Anthony C. Yu’s (Wu & Yu, 2012) translation. The original Chinese name, Mihou wang (獼猴王, “Macaque King”), appears three times in the novel, but Yu translates it two different ways. I’ve added the Chinese text for comparison.

I. Examples of Mihou wang from JTTW

Chapter 3

At this time, moreover, he entered into fraternal alliance with six other monarchs: the Bull Monster King, the Dragon Monster King, the Garuda Monster King, the Giant Lynx King, the Macaque King, and the Orangutan King, they formed a fraternal order of seven (Wu & Yu, 2012, vol. 1, pp. 138-139).

此時又會了個七弟兄，乃牛魔王、蛟魔王、鵬魔王、獅狔王、獼猴王、狨王，連自家美猴王七個。

Chapter 4

[Sun Wukong] then said to the six brothers, “If little brother is now called the Great Sage, Equal to Heaven, why don’t all of you assume the title of Great Sage also?” “Our worthy brother’s words are right!” shouted the Bull Monster King from their midst, ”I’m going to be called the Great Sage, Parallel with Heaven.” “I shall be called the Great Sage, Covering the Ocean,” said the Dragon Monster King. “I shall be called the Great Sage, United with Heaven,” said the Garuda Monster King. “I shall be called the Great Sage, Mover of Mountains,” said the Giant Lynx King. “I shall be called the Telltale Great Sage,” said the Macaque King. ”And I shall be called the God-Routing Great Sage,” said the Orangutan King (Wu & Yu, 2012, vol. 1, pp. 156-157).

他卻對六弟兄說：「小弟既稱齊天大聖，你們亦可以大聖稱之。」內有牛魔王忽然高叫道：「賢弟言之有理，我即稱做平天大聖。」蛟魔王道：「我稱做覆海大聖。」鵬魔王道：「我稱混天大聖。」獅狔王道：「我稱移山大聖。」 獼猴王道：「我稱通風大聖。」狨王道：「我稱驅神大聖。」

Chapter 41

Now this is where the change happens.

Your [Red Boy’s] father, the Bull Monster King, called himself the Great Sage, Parallel with Heaven. He and old Monkey formed a fraternal alliance of seven, and we all made him the big brother. There were also a Dragon Monster King, who called himself the Great Sage, Covering the Ocean, and became the second brother; a Garuda Monster King, who called himself Great Sage, United with Heaven, and became the third brother; a Lion Monster King, who called himself the Great Sage, Mover of Mountains, and became the fourth brother; a Female Monkey King, who called herself the Fair Wind Great Sage and became the fifth member; and a Giant Ape Monster King, who called himself the God-Routing Great Sage and became the sixth brother. Old Monkey, the Great Sage, Equal to Heaven, was rather small in size, and so he was number seven (Wu & Yu, 2012, vol. 2, pp. 223-224).

你令尊叫做牛魔王，稱為平天大聖，與我老孫結為七弟兄，讓他做了大哥；還有個蛟魔王，稱為覆海大聖，做了二哥；又有個大鵬魔王，稱為混天大聖，做了三哥；又有個獅㾩王，稱為移山大聖，做了四哥；又有個獼猴王，稱為通風大聖，做了五哥；又有個狨王，稱為驅神大聖，做了六哥；惟有老孫身小，稱為齊天大聖，排行第七。

Despite what Yu (Wu & Yu, 2012) translates above, the original Chinese does not include any gendered language referring to the character as a woman. It’s just the exact same name, Mihou wang (獼猴王), used twice before. In addition, the Chinese refers to this character as the “fifth brother” (wuge, 五哥). The W. J. F. Jenner (1993/2020) edition translates the Chinese as such:

The Macaque King, our fifth brother, was the Great Sage Who Travels with the Wind (vol. 2, p. 925).

又有個獼猴王，稱為通風大聖，做了五哥 …

Some people try to explain away the discrepancy in Yu’s (Wu & Yu, 2012) translation by claiming mihou (獼猴) is associated with female monkeys. But if this was true within the context of Journey to the West, ALL monkeys referred to by this name would be women. This certainly isn’t the case, though, since Liu’er mihou (六耳獼猴, “Six-Eared Macaque“) (fig. 1), Sun Wukong’s doppelganger, is male. In fact, out of 13 mentions of mihou (獼猴) in the novel, over 61% refer directly to Six Ears:

  • Random monkeys (mihou, 獼猴) – 1
  • All monkeys (mihou zhu chu duoshou, 獼猴之畜多壽, “long life has been given to monkey beasts”) – 1
  • Macaque King (Mihou wang, 獼猴王) – 3
  • Six Ears – 8
    • Liu’er mihou (六耳獼猴) – 5
    • Na mihou (那獼猴, “that macaque”) – 2
    • Nanbian mihou (難辨獼猴, “Indistinguishable Macaques,” i.e. Six Ears and Sun Wukong) – 1

Notice, too, that the term is even used once to refer to monkeys as a whole. This takes place in chapter three when King Qinguang (秦廣王) of hell submits a complaint to heaven after Sun Wukong makes all monkeys immortal by striking their names from the book of life and death (Wu & Yu, 2012, vol. 1, pp. 142-143).

In addition, the term mi (獼) is used by itself to refer to all monkeys: Miyuan wei qin (獼猿為親, “[H]e called the monkey and gibbon his relatives”).

The Liu’er Mihou by Zhang Ji (larger version).

II. The Etymology of Mihou

Dynastic sources indicate that the association of mihou (獼猴) with female monkeys is based on a misunderstanding of the word’s etymological history. For example, the Compendium of Materia Medica (Bencao gangmu, 本草綱目, 1596 CE) states:

The monkey likes to wipe its face as if bathing (mu), so it is called a “bathing (monkey).” Later generations mistook this mu for “mother,” and then mother for mi. The meaning is lost as errors compound.

猴好拭面如沐，故谓之沐，而后人讹沐为母，又讹母为猕，愈讹愈失矣。

In addition, the Annotation of the Shuowen jiezi (Shuowen jiezi zhu, 說文解字注, 1815 CE) reads:

“Mother monkey” (muhou) is the name of the beast, not the female. “Bathing monkey” (muhou) and “full monkey” (mihou) are changes in dialect. The characters are wrong.

母猴乃此兽名，非谓牝者。沐猴、獮[獼]猴皆语之转，字之讹也。

This confusion is based on the non-Chinese origin of the word for macaque. Van Gulik (1967) explains:

The fact that mu occurs in four variants: 母 and 沐 in Chou literature, and mi 米 or 獼 during the Han dynasty and later, proves that this binom is a phonetic rendering of a non-Chinese term (p. 35).

Therefore, mihou (獼猴) is just one of several ways to refer to the primate, either male or female (fig. 2).

Fig. 2 – A most beautiful mihou (larger version). Image found here.

III. Male Mihou in Buddhist literature

It’s important to note that Buddhist literature also uses the term to refer to male monkeys. For instance, story no. 46 in the Collection of Sutras on the Six Paramitas (Liudu jijing, 六度集經, 3rd-century CE; “Collection of Sutras” hereafter) tells how a past life of the Buddha helps a macaque (mihou, 獼猴) regain his kingship after being usurped by his uncle. What’s important is that this tale, the Dasaratha Jataka, is a famous Buddhist retelling of the Hindu epic Ramayana (5th-century BCE). The hero-king Rama is replaced by the Buddha, and the warring monkey king brothers Sugriva and Vali (fig. 3) are replaced by a nephew and his uncle. [1]

The Buddha himself also has a past life as a king of monkeys. One Chinese variant of the Mahakapi Jataka, story no. 56 in the Collection of Sutras, expressly calls him Mihou wang (獼猴王). A second Chinese variant, story no. 12 in the Scripture on the Storehouse of Sundry Treasures (Za baozang jing, 雜寶藏經, mid-5th-century CE), calls him Shan mihou (善獼猴, “Good Macaque”).

Fig. 3 – The famous battle between the monkey king brothers Sugriva and Vali (larger version). Image found here.

IV. Conclusion

Journey to the West uses the term Mihou wang (獼猴王) three times to refer to the same character. Yu (Wu & Yu, 2012) translates this twice as “Macaque King” (ch. 3 & 4) but later changes it to “Female Monkey King” (ch. 41). Despite the original Chinese referring to the character as the “fifth brother” (wuge, 五哥), Yu (Wu & Yu, 2012) appears to represent them as a woman based solely on the association of mihou (獼猴) with female monkeys. However, not even Journey to the West follows this association, for out of 13 mentions of the term, over 61% refer directly to Liu’er mihou (六耳獼猴), Sun Wukong’s six-eared doppelganger. In addition, mihou (獼猴) and mi (獼) are even used in the novel to refer to monkeys as a whole.

The term mihou (獼猴) is just one of several transcriptions for a non-Chinese word used in China for millennia to mean “macaque” or “monkey.” Dynastic sources show that the association with female monkeys is a misunderstanding based on changes in dialect, along with differences in transcription. Said changes include muhou (沐猴, “bathing monkey”), muhou (母猴, “mother monkey”), and of course mihou (獼猴). Therefore, the word can be applied to either male or female monkeys.

The last point is exemplified in Buddhist literature. A 3rd-century CE Chinese version of the Dasaratha Jataka, which very briefly describes the Hindu epic Ramayana (5th-century BCE), references the great battle between the monkey king brothers Sugriva and Vali and calls the former Mihou (獼猴). A 3rd-century Chinese version of the Mahakapi Jataka, which tells of the Buddha’s past life as a monkey king, also refers to him as Mihou wang (獼猴王). And a 5th-century variant of the same story refers to the Enlightened One as the Shan mihou (善獼猴), or “Good Macaque.”

Update: 08-09-23

Sun Wukong calls himself the Meihou wang (美猴王, “Handsome Monkey King”) throughout JTTW. While it serves as an example of his ego-driven personality, I can’t help but think that meihou (美猴) is a play on mihou (獼猴). Recall that even the Buddha’s past life as a monkey king is referred to as Mihou wang (獼猴王) in Chinese sources.

Update: 09-27-23

It just dawned on me that Sun Wukong’s precursor, Hou xingzhe (猴行者, the “Monkey Pilgrim”) from the 13th-century JTTW, is also called Mihou wang (獼猴王). Chapter two refers to him as Huaguo shan ziyun dong bawan siqian tongtou tie’e Mihou wang (花果山紫雲洞八萬四千銅頭鐵額獼猴王, the “Bronze-Headed, Iron-Browed King of the Eighty-Four Thousand Monkeys of the Purple Cloud Grotto on the Mountain of Flowers and Fruits”) (Wivell, 1994, p. 1182). This adds to the evidence that mihou refers to monkeys as a whole and not just female macaques. Also, refer back to the suggestion in my 08-09-23 update.

Note:

1) See Mair, 1989, pp. 676-678 for a full English translation.

Sources:

Mair, V. (1989). Suen Wu-kung = Hanumat? The Progress of a Scholarly Debate. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Sinology (pp. 659-752). Taipei: Academia Sinica.

Van Gulik, R. H. (1967). The Gibbon in China: An Essay in Chinese Animal Lore. Leiden: E.J. Brill.

Wivell, C.S. (1994). The Story of How the Monk Tripitaka of the Great Country of T’ang Brought Back the Sūtras. In V. Mair (Ed.), The Columbia Anthology of Traditional Chinese Literature (pp. 1181-1207). New York: Columbia University Press.

Wu, C. & Jenner, W. J. F. (2020). Journey to the West (Vols. 1-4). Beijing: Foreign Languages Press. (Original work published 1993)

Wu, C., & Yu, A. C. (2012). The Journey to the West (Vols. 1-4) (Rev. ed.). Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press.

Archive #39 – Journey to the West Adaptations

Jim R. McClanahan 5 Comments

Last updated: 07-21-2025

The Journey to the West Research blog is proud to host an entry by our friend Monkey Ruler (Twitter and Tumblr). They have graciously written an essay on the global nature of Journey to the West adaptations, as well as provided a link to their ongoing project recording JTTW media (fig. 1). As of the publishing of this article, it includes a long list of almost 570 movies, 90 TV shows, and 160 video games! – Jim

Fig. 1 – Depictions of Sun Wukong from adaptations produced over 50 years apart: (left) Havoc in Heaven (Danao tiangong, 大鬧天宮, 1961) and (right) Monkey King: Hero is Back (Xiyouji zhi Dasheng guilai, 西遊記之大聖歸來, lit: “Journey to the West: Return of the Great Sage,” 2015) (larger version). Courtesy of Monkey Ruler.

I. Media adaptations

This started out as a collection of Xiyouji (西遊記; lit: “Journey to the West,” 1592) movies and TV shows for the sake of a Master’s class project; it was simple enough to look for Xiyouji media and start adding them to a collection datasheet. But even when the project was over, I kept finding more and more adaptations, even stumbling across others trying to show the magnitude of how much this novel has encompassed popular culture throughout the centuries. It has been told and re-told again and again in oral and published literature, plays, art, songs, poems, etc., and now on the big and small screens. Audiences are re-introduced to the image of Sun Wukong and his fellow pilgrims with every new media addition.

What really inspired me was the book Transforming Monkey: Adaptations and Representation of a Chinese Epic (2018) by Hongmei Sun, where she explained in depth the cultural impact that Sun Wukong (fig. 2) and Xiyouji has had on Chinese media, as well as how this loose set of franchises have come to represent Chinese culture as these shows and movies have become more globally accessible. Xiyouji is such an iconic cultural universe that it can be both heavily entertaining while still being so personal to audiences of any generation depending on how the artist/writer portrays their interpretation of these characters and their stories. 

There hasn’t been a lot written about how these interpretations influence modern Xiyouji adaptations despite how the story has greatly influenced popular culture.

Fig. 2 – The front cover of Transforming Monkey (2018) (larger version).

Xiyouji is such an influential story, one that will continue to grow more and more globally known throughout time because it is such an all-encompassing piece that can cover politics, identities, and allegories, while still being a very personal and interpersonal work that artists or writers can relate to. 

However, even with these layers of meaning and symbolism to be found, the story never loses the charming and entertaining aspects that can and have captured audiences. Despite being published over 430 years ago (with a history stretching back even further), Xiyouji is still able to relate to modern audiences through its allegories of oppression, rebellion, and self-identity. It has the capability to resonate with any generation depending on what artists or writers at the time wish to highlight or personally connect with themselves or their current world around them, using Xiyouji as a medium for their own struggles.

As Xiyouji starts to become more and more globally known, it is important to understand and resonate that this is still a Chinese story and how to address further adaptations with cross-nation gaps in both translation and cultural differences. There are media forms that are far more exploitative of the mythical journey, creating impractical scenarios of the narrative and thus changing the message of the story and characters completely. However, there needs to be an acknowledgment of what doesn’t work as Xiyouji adaptations due to the ever-changing zeitgeist in not only its home of origin but introducing it to a global sphere as it adds influence. 

In order to see what works for adaptations, there needs to be an acknowledgment of what is the core of the story and just why it remains popular, story-beat or character-wise. For example, Sun Wukong can be used as a great model for positive ambivalence in media, moving away from set limits of a single stereotype and rather being a constant motion of new ideas and new identities. Monkey has been changed from a mischievous monkey to a revolutionary hero to a post-modern rebel against authority throughout the years. But even throughout the constant changes and interpretations, people never lose sight of what the nature of Sun Wukong is: rebelliousness, variability, optimism, and persistence. 

Monkey is a transcending character as he is able to mediate contradictions within his own design, one being his gold-banded staff, a symbol of breaking barriers, and his golden filet (fig. 3), a symbol of limits. These two simple but prominent pieces of iconography immediately tell audiences who the character is supposed to be and what they are about.

Fig. 3 – A modern replica of Monkey’s golden filet or headband (larger version).

While it is entertaining and able to be enjoyed by younger audiences, Xiyouji still has a deeper meaning that can be interpreted and recognized into adulthood. This is one of the few stories that I imagine can be adapted again and again without the issue of overlap as there are so many ways people can personally connect with these characters. 

Having that any generation, anyone really can find enjoyment in this media, and perhaps even be inspired to read the novel itself.

II. Archive link

Please consult the tabs at the bottom of the spreadsheet linked below. They are listed as “Movie Information,” “Movie Links,” “Honorary Shows,” “Game Information,” “Game Pictures,” “Honorary Games,” and “Sources.” – Jim

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GsiCGzE1DZDy2Vpc85wiVXSyLWpxMbxj/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=112097376285754662736&rtpof=true&sd=true

Update: 07-21-25

Monkey Ruler has officially posted a website called “Journey to the West Media.” They continue to update the page with movies, tv shows, video games, and now comic books.

https://www.journeytothewestmedia.com/

Does the Buddha Lie in Journey to the West?

Jim R. McClanahan Leave a comment

I was recently directed to an online Chinese article by Ye Zhiqiu (叶之秋) (n.d.) in which they claim that the Buddha makes “four grand, overarching lies” (sige mitian dahuang, 四個彌天大謊) throughout the course of Journey to the West (Xiyouji, 西遊記, 1592; “JTTW” hereafter). They believe this is because the literary version of the Enlightened One is a master strategist who uses lies in a calculated attempt to usurp power from the Jade Emperor, ruler of the cosmos. This is admittedly a fascinating idea but one that falls apart under careful analysis. Ye (n.d.) displays a fundamental misunderstanding of the novel’s history and religious influences. Worse still, they appear to selectively interpret details to suit a possible agenda against Buddhism. In this article, I will show that there are far more plausible reasons for the Buddha’s statements than lying.

I. First Lie

The Buddha states the following about the novel’s Hindo-Buddhist cosmos (ch. 8), which features four island-like continents floating in a great sea around a cosmic mountain (fig. 1):

I have watched the Four Great Continents, and the morality of their inhabitants varies from place to place. Those living on the East Pūrvavideha revere Heaven and Earth, and they are straightforward and peaceful. Those on the North Uttarakuru, though they love to destroy life, do so out of the necessity of making a livelihood. Moreover, they are rather dull of mind and lethargic in spirit, and they are not likely to do much harm. Those of our West Aparagodānīya are neither covetous nor prone to kill; they control their humor and temper their spirit. There is, to be sure, no illuminate of the first order, but everyone is certain to attain longevity. Those who reside in the South Jambūdvīpa, however, are prone to practice lechery and delight in evildoing, indulging in much slaughter and strife. Indeed, they are all caught in the treacherous field of tongue and mouth, in the wicked sea of slander and malice. However, I have three baskets of true scriptures which can persuade man to do good (Wu & Yu, 2012, vol. 1, pp. 204-205).

我觀四大部洲，眾生善惡，各方不一：東勝神洲者，敬天禮地，心爽氣平；北俱盧洲者，雖好殺生，只因糊口，性拙情疏，無多作踐；我西牛賀洲者，不貪不殺，養氣潛靈，雖無上真，人人固壽；但那南贍部洲者，貪淫樂禍，多殺多爭，正所謂口舌兇場，是非惡海。我今有三藏真經，可以勸人為善。

Ye (n.d.) claims that the Enlightened One is lying because most of the monsters show up not in the supposedly evil continent of South Jambūdvīpa (the Land of the East, i.e. China) but in the Buddha’s home of West Aparagodānīya (India). They even provide a long list of monsters encountered there. Also, the writer theorizes that the planned scripture pilgrimage is just a ploy to spread the Buddha’s influence to the Land of the East, making him the ruler of two of four continents. The implication here is that he is slowly chipping away at the Jade Emperor’s domain.

However, the Buddha was likely referring to the people in those particular continents and not the monsters. And most importantly, his words appear to mirror the views of foreign Buddhist monks. When the historical monk Xuanzang (玄奘; 602-664), on whom Tripitaka is based, planned to return home from India, his friends tried dissuading him by describing China in similarly negative terms. Brose (2021) comments:

For many of the monks he had befriended, the decision was hard to fathom. “India is the birthplace of the Buddha,” they reminded him. “Although the Great Sage is gone, his traces remain. To travel around and venerate them is enough to make one’s life content. Why would you want to give this up after having come here? China is a barbarian land where people are neglected, and the Dharma is despised. That is why no buddhas have ever been born there. The people have narrow aspirations and deep impurities, so sages do not go there. The air is cold and the land is dangerous. How can you think of returning there?” Xuanzang reportedly responded by quoting an exchange from the Vimalakīrti Sūtra, where the noble layman Vimalakīrti asks Śāriputra, “Why does the sun come to Jambudvīpa?” The answer: “To illuminate it and eliminate the darkness.” If Xuanzang remained in India, the true Dharma might never be known in China (pp. 61-62).

Additionally, Xuanzang is known to have left China illegally when he first began his journey. Brose (2021) explains:

Xuanzang almost didn’t make it to India. Before setting out on his pilgrimage, his initial request for a travel permit was denied by the [Tang] court and, after traveling over five hundred miles from the capital to the westernmost Chinese city of Liangzhou, the local governor ordered him to turn back. Hiding during the day and traveling at night, Xuanzang quietly continued on to the desert outpost of Guazhou. There, he learned that the court had issued a warrant for his arrest. The local prefect, it turned out, was a pious Buddhist and urged Xuanzang to leave quickly… (p. 16).

Conversely, the monk in JTTW is portrayed as a loyal Confucian-type person. Therefore, in order to frame Tripitaka as a faithful, law-abiding citizen of China, the novel had to provide a reason for his pilgrimage, one that the Tang emperor would give his blessing to. [1]

Fig. 1 – A diagram of the Hindo-Buddhist cosmos by MC Owens (larger version). Image from this talk.

II. Second Lie

During Sun Wukong’s battle with the Six-Eared Macaque (ch. 58) (fig. 2), the Buddha reveals the doppelganger’s true identity, noting that he and Monkey are two of four celestial primates (sihou hunshi, 四猴混世, lit: “four monkeys of havoc”) with amazing abilities:

“The first,” said Tathāgata [the Buddha], “is the Stone Monkey of Numinous Wisdom, [2] who

Knows transformations,
Recognizes the seasons,
Discerns the advantages of earth,
And is able to alter the course of planets and stars.

The second is the Red-Buttocked Horse Monkey, who

Has knowledge of yin and yang,
Understands human affairs,
Is adept in its daily life
And able to avoid death and lengthen its life.

The third is the Tongbi Gibbon, who can

Seize the sun and the moon,
Shorten a thousand mountains,
Distinguish the auspicious from the inauspicious,
And manipulate planets and stars.

The fourth is the Six-Eared Macaque who has

A sensitive ear,
Discernment of fundamental principles,
Knowledge of past and future,
And comprehension of all things.

These four kinds of monkeys are not classified in the ten categories [of life], nor are they contained in the names between Heaven and Earth. As I see the matter, that specious Wukong must be a six-eared macaque, for even if this monkey stands in one place, he can possess the knowledge of events a thousand miles away and whatever a man may say in that distance” (Wu & Yu, 2012, vol. 3, p. 115).

如來道：「第一是靈明石猴，通變化，識天時，知地利，移星換斗；第二是赤尻馬猴，曉陰陽，會人事，善出入，避死延生；第三是通臂猿猴，拿日月，縮千山，辨休咎，乾坤摩弄；第四是六耳獼猴，善聆音，能察理，知前後，萬物皆明。此四猴者，不入十類之種，不達兩間之名。我觀假悟空乃六耳獼猴也。此猴若立一處，能知千里外之事；凡人說話，亦能知之。

Ye (n.d.) claims the Buddha concocted the list of supernatural primates in order to hide the fact that Six Ears was an aspect of the Monkey King’s mind. They reason that the falsehood was used to avoid offending the Daoist hierarchy who couldn’t figure out the doppelganger’s true identity.

I think the author’s issue here is that the Daoist gods considered Six Ears a real figure, while the Buddha knew him to be an aspect of Sun’s mind. Something being real and illusory at the same time may seem like a big contradiction, but it’s not in the JTTW cosmos. Campany (1985) explains that, as physical threats, the monsters enable Monkey and his religious brothers to build Buddhist merit (zhenguo, 正果; lit: “right fruit”) by fighting them. At the same time, being illusory aspects of the mind, the monsters help the pilgrims, especially Tripitaka, to understand that reality is empty (kong, 空). This is something that Wukong (悟空, “Aware of Emptiness”) reminds his master of throughout the journey.

Ye (n.d.) also points out that the listed powers of the Horse Monkey and Tongbi Gibbon don’t appear to be true, for they (under the guise of the commanders Ma and Liu and Beng and Ba – see section 2 here) are supposedly killed by Erlang’s forces in chapter six. They claim this proves that the two supernatural primates don’t actually exist. However, two things need to be said. One, the aforementioned underlings appear alive and well in chapter 28 (Wu & Yu, 2012, vol. 2, p. 32), meaning that they were not killed. And two, an irregularity in the story does not equate to a lie. The author hasn’t even come close to offering conclusive evidence of intent. Instead, I suggest that this is just an inconsistency born from the novel’s origin as individual oral tales that were eventually compiled, expanded, and published in book form. See, for instance, the 13th-century version of the story cycle. Therefore, irregularities are bound to pop up throughout the narrative.

But even if this lie was somehow true, how exactly does it further the Buddha’s supposed plan to take power from the Jade Emperor?

Fig. 2 – The Great Sage and Six Ears battle in the Western Paradise (larger version). Artist unknown.

III. Third Lie

After the Buddha learns that the holy beasts of two bodhisattvas have escaped their respective mountain paradises and become man-eating demons on earth (ch. 77) (fig. 3), he has the following conversation with his disciples:

[…] Tathāgata left the lotus throne and went out of the monastery gate with the rest of the buddhas. There they saw Ānanda and Kāśyapa leading Mañjuśrī and Samantabhadra [3] on their way to the monastery also.

As the two bodhisattvas bowed to him, Tathagata asked, “How long have your beasts of burden been gone from your mountains?” “Seven days,” replied Mañjuśrī. “Seven days in the mountain,” said Tathāgata, “are equivalent to several thousand years on earth. I wonder how many lives they have taken down there. You must follow me quickly if we are to retrieve them.” With one bodhisattva standing on each side of him, the Buddha and his followers rose into the air (Wu & Yu, 2012, vol. 4, pp. 29-30).

如來即下蓮臺，同諸佛眾，徑出山門。又見阿儺、迦葉引文殊、普賢來見，二菩薩對佛禮拜。如來道：「菩薩之獸，下山多少時了？」文殊道：「七日了。」如來道：「山中方七日，世上幾千年。不知在那廂傷了多少生靈，快隨我收他去。」二菩薩相隨左右，同眾飛空。

Ye (n.d.) believes that the Buddha is lying about the corresponding time on earth in order to mask his guilt over not intervening sooner. As evidence, they cite the fact that the novel states “one day in heaven is equal to one year on Earth” (Wu & Yu, 2012, vol. 1, pp. 150 and 167). However, this could just be one of the aforementioned inconsistencies. One oral tradition may have said one day equals one year, while another said it equals one thousand years, and then both of these made it into the novel. But there is a more likely answer (see below).

They also claim that the respective Bodhisattvas’ mountain paradises are on earth, meaning they would be subject to the same time as the mortal world. This carries the implication that the beasts were eating people for at least a few hundred years and none of the Buddhist deities did anything to stop them. But the author clearly doesn’t understand earthly paradises like Mañjuśrī’s Mount Wutai (Wutai shan, 五臺山; lit: “Five Terrace/Platform Mountain”), which they mention by name in the article. Chou (2018) notes that a “central paradox of Mount Wutai” is that it is “both an earthly place and a Buddhist paradise (pure land)” (p. 142). Kōtatsu (Kōtatsu & Otowa, 1996) explains that Pure Lands (Jingtu, 净土) are “world[s] of another dimension” that are “temporally different from this one” (p. 45). Therefore, it seems more likely that the Enlightened One was referring to the time difference between Buddhist mountain paradises and the mortal realm. This is distinct from the Daoist heaven, which is expressly associated with the “one heavenly day = one earthly year” time dilation.

Additionally, Ye (n.d.) claims that Mañjuśrī is lying about the length of time his beast was absent because of a similar bout of guilt. It’s strange, though, that the writer’s answer for everything is “such and such Buddhist figure is being dishonest”. I’d be interested to read some of their other work to see if there’s a pattern of deconstructing Buddhism. JTTW clearly treats the religion with reverence, placing the Buddha and his disciples at the top of the novel’s cosmic hierarchy. Therefore, selectively interpreting details to support some agenda against Buddhism wouldn’t reflect positively on the author or their writing.

And again, I have to ask: How would this lie further the Buddha’s supposed plans?

Fig. 3 – Sun Wukong and his religious brothers battling the bird, elephant, and lion demons from Lion-Camel Cave (larger version). Artist unknown. Image found here. The elephant and lion are the missing holy beasts who became monsters on earth.

IV. Fourth Lie

After the Buddha captures the Great Peng (ch. 77) (fig. 4), the bird demon submits to Buddhism but stubbornly refuses to stop eating meat. The Enlightened One thinks for a moment and then offers him the following solution:

“In the four great continents of my domain,” said Tathāgata, “there are countless worshippers. I shall ask those who wish to do good to sacrifice first to your mouth” (Wu & Yu, 2012, vol. 4, p. 31).

我管四大部洲，無數眾生瞻仰，凡做好事，我教他先祭汝口。

Ye (n.d.) believes that the Buddha is deceptively bragging here in order to placate the uber powerful monster. At the same time, his statement about having dominance over the four continents is thought to be a lie since the Jade Emperor is the stated ruler of the cosmos. They reason that it’s evidence of the Enlightened One wanting to govern all four continents. But it’s important to remember that, as mentioned above, the novel takes place in a world modeled after Hindo-Buddhist cosmic geography, which Ye (n.d.) is fully aware of. The Daoist bureaucracy of JTTW is therefore a syncretic veil that has been draped over a pre-existing Buddhist structure. In the original system, the world is overseen by the Devarāja Śakra (Sk: Śakro devānāṃ indraḥ; Ch: Dishi, 帝釋) from the heaven of the thirty-three gods atop Mount Sumeru (Buswell & Lopez, 2014, pp. 739-740 and 921-922). (Interestingly, the novel hints that the Daoist bureaucracy is located in this very same heaven – see the material above figure two here). But despite the gods’ divine lifespans, as inhabitants of the Realm of Desire, they are still subject to death and therefore susceptible to the Wheel of Reincarnation (Buswell & Lopez, 2014, pp. 230-233). Only the Buddha can help such beings escape from the endless rounds of rebirth by leading them to enlightenment. He does this within the confines of his own domain or “Buddha-Field” (Sk: Buddhakṣetra; Ch: Focha, 佛刹). Buswell and Lopez (2014) explain:

[W]hen a buddha achieves enlightenment, a “container” or “inanimate” world is produced in the form of a field where the buddha leads beings to enlightenment. The inhabitant of that world is the buddha endowed with all the [qualities of an Enlightened One]. Buddha-fields occur in various levels of purification, broadly divided between pure and impure. Impure buddha-fields are synonymous with a world system (cakravāḍa), the infinite number of “world discs” in Buddhist cosmology that constitutes the universe; here, ordinary sentient beings (including animals, ghosts, and hell beings) dwell, subject to the afflictions of greed, hatred, and delusion. Each Cakravāḍa is the domain of a specific buddha, who achieves enlightenment in that world system and works there toward the liberation of all sentient beings… (p. 153).

Therefore, the JTTW cosmos is the Enlightened One’s Buddha-Field. But Ye (n.d.) appears to be aware of this fact (at least on some level), for they write: “The truth of the matter is that the Buddha is the lord of all sentient beings in the Buddhist schools of the four continents” (Zhenshi qingkuang shi, Rulai shi si dabu zhou fopai zhongsheng zhi zhu, 真實情況是，如來是四大部洲佛派眾生之主). So why would the writer still claim that the Buddha’s statement is a lie when they know it isn’t? This is a prime example of the author selectively interpreting facts.

Fig. 4 – A modern depiction of the Great Peng trapped above the Buddha’s head (larger version). Artist unknown.

V. Conclusion

Ye (n.d.) claims that the Buddha is a master strategist who makes “four grand, overarching lies” in a bid to usurp power from the Jade Emperor, ruler of the cosmos. But the writer demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the novel’s history and religious influences. Worse still, they appear to selectively interpret details to suit a possible agenda against Buddhism. I show that the supposed falsehoods are instead likely based on the viewpoints of historical foreign monks, are inconsistencies within the JTTW narrative, reference Buddhist views of time, and reflect the Buddhist world system.

Notes:

1) The ruler’s decision to allow said pilgrimage is associated with a subplot in chapters 11 and 12 where he learns of countless orphaned souls in the underworld and searches for a monk to release them from their torments via a grand Buddhist ceremony. Tripitaka is chosen to lead the ceremony but is later convinced by the Bodhisattva Guanyin to halt the ritual until he has retrieved more appropriate scriptures from India.

2) Source altered slightly.

3) Yu (Wu & Yu, 2012) originally translates Puxian (普賢) as “Viśvabhadra” (vol. 4, pp. 29). I’ve changed it to “Samantabhadra” as this appears to be a more well-known version of the Bodhisattva’s name.

Sources:

Brose, B. (2021). Xuanzang: China’s Legendary Pilgrim and Translator. Boulder, Colorado: Shambhala Publications, Inc.

Buswell, R. E., & Lopez, D. S. (2014). The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism. N: Princeton University Press.

Campany, R. (1985). Demons, Gods, and Pilgrims: The Demonology of the Hsi-yu Chi. Chinese Literature: Essays, Articles, Reviews (CLEAR), 7(1/2), 95-115. doi:10.2307/495195.

Chou, W. (2018). Mount Wutai: Visions of a Sacred Buddhist Mountain. Princeton; Oxford: Princeton University Press.

Kōtatsu, F., & Otowa, R. (1996). The Origin of the Pure Land. The Eastern Buddhist, 29(1), 33–51. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44362148.

Wu, C., & Yu, A. C. (2012). The Journey to the West (Vols. 1-4). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Ye, Z. (n.d.). Rulai fo sa de sige mitian dahuang [The Four Grand, Overarching Lies Cast by the Buddha]. Sohu. https://web.archive.org/web/20220731055723/https://m.sohu.com/n/474302290/.