The Buddhist world in modern Russian culture (1873-1919): Literature and visual arts

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Summarize

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content THE BUDDHIST WORLD IN MODERN RUSSIAN CULTURE (1873-1919): LITERATURE AND VISUAL ARTS by Adele Di Ruocco A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE USC GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (SLAVIC LANGUAGES AND LITERATURES) May 2011 Copyright 2011 Adele Di Ruocco ii Acknowledgments This dissertation is the result of three years of research conducted both in the United States and in Russia. During this time I have been privileged to benefit from the help and encouragement of many people. To all of them goes my deepest gratitude. I especially would like to thank the members of my dissertation committee, my advisor – Professor John E. Bowlt, and the other two members –Professors Sarah Pratt and Sonya Lee. Their constructive comments and precious advice were essential in the entire process of structuring and writing this dissertation. I also would like to thank the faculty of the Slavic Department at the University of Southern California, my colleagues and the Department coordinator, Susan Kechekian for their help. In particular I am indebted to Professor Marcus Levitt for the Buddhist references from the satirical journals and to my colleagues, Zlatina Sandalska, for the citation of Zamiatin‘s We, and Oleg Minin for the English editing of the Russian poems translated in Chapters One-Five. I am truly thankful to Professor Thomas Seifrid for his support and his wife, Elena Seifrid. They provided me with a shelter and practical assistance when I went to Russia for my research. During my sojourn in St. Petersburg I had the luck to meet incredible people and scholars who were ready to help me in any possible way. I especially would like to thank the senior research assistant at the Ethnographical Department of South and Southwest Asia at the St. Petersburg Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography (Kunstkamera), Dr. Margarita Albedil. Her enthusiasm for my research topic, constant readiness to help and belief in me were the main driving forces behind my work in Russia. I also would like to iii thank the director of the Print Department at the Russian National Library, Dr. Elena Barkhatova, and her staff for their unbelievable help. Tremendously helpful was also the director of the House-museum of the explorer Petr Kozlov, Dr. Aleksandr Andreev. His availability and permission to familiarize myself with Kozlov‘s private library and any possible object in the museum greatly facilitated my understanding of the epoch I was researching. My acknowledgements would be incomplete if I failed to mention Professor Michael Wachtel who gave me the material on Viacheslav Ivanov, the art historian Irena Buzhinska who provided me with the reference on Vladimir Markov, Dr. Ben Dhooge who sent me the article in the magazine Sophia. I also would like to acknowledge the assistance of Dr. Colin Keaveney for my French translation, as well as of Mary Ann Murphy and Annalisa Zox-Weaver for editing. Of all the people who have helped me throughout the various stages of my dissertation there is one in particular to whom goes my deepest gratitude and sincere affection –Dr. Mark Konecny, Associate Director of the Institute of Modern Russian Culture in Los Angeles. His friendship, encouragement and advice have supported me throughout the years of my graduate studies from the very moment I have arrived in the United States. It is to him that I dedicate my dissertation. iv Table of Contents Acknowledgments ii List of Figures vii Note on Transliteration and Dates xii Abstract xiv Introduction 1 Orientalism 4 Occultism 10 Historical Background 17 ―The Journey‖ 23 Chapter 1: The Voyage to Asia 35 The Sentimental Journey: The Case of Konstantin Balmont 35 The Scientific Expedition: Nikolai Przhevalsky and ―The Myth of the Explorer‖ 41 Anton Chekhov‘s Scientific Exploration of Sakhalin Island and His Encounter with Buddhism 53 Deportation to Siberia: Another Kind of Exploration 63 Moving into Oriental Folklore: The Case of Aleksei Remizov 69 Chapter 2: Pilgrimage: ―Buddha Against the ‗Crucified‘‖ 76 Images of the Buddha in Visual Arts: Boris Anisfeld‘s Buddha with Pomegranates 76 East Meets West at World Literature: Visual and Textual Repercussions 87 Buddhism in Relation to Christianity: The Transmigration of Religious Myths 101 The Dissemination of the Legend of Barlaam and Josaphat into Modern Russian Literature: 108  Lev Tolstoy… 108  …and Aleksei Remizov 116 Dmitry Merezhkovsky and the Spiritual Triangle: Josaphat- Buddha-Christ 120 ―The Journey of the Buddha‖ According to Sir Edwin Arnold‘s The Light of Asia: Its Russian Reception 129 Ivan Bunin‘s Encounter with the Buddha 134 Conclusion 137 v Chapter 3: The Imperial Grand Tour of 1890-91 140 The Asian Tour of Tsar Nicholas II; A Political Trajectory 140 Nicholas II‘s Journey as Chronicle of Russian Expansion to Asia 145 Exhibitions and Asian Collections in Russia 154  The Imperial Buddhist Collections 154  Prince Esper Ukhtomsky‘s Lamaist Collection 159  Petr Kozlov‘s and Aleksandr Vereshchagin‘s Buddhist Collections 165 The ―Political Journey‖ and Visual Arts 174  Vasily Vereshchagin‘s Travels to the East as Artistic Documentation of Russian Imperialism 174  The Strange Case of Petr Badmaev and Nikolai Kulbin 181 Chapter 4: Facing Hostile Territory: The ―Yellow Peril‖ Threat 195 Fearing the Other: The ―Yellow Peril‖ and Its Political Connotations 195 The ―Yellow Peril‖ in Russian Literary Circles 207 Opposing Buddhism: Vasily Rozanov, Vladimir Soloviev, and Viacheslav Ivanov 218 Bely‘s Petersburg as the Imaginary Battlefield between Western and Eastern Civilizations 238  ―The Chinese are putting some heathen temple‖ in Petersburg: The Appearance of the First Buddhist Datsan in Europe 246 Conclusion 254 Chapter 5: From the West to the East: Buddhism in France and Its Russian Reception 259 The Blooming of Buddhism in Europe: An Introduction 259 Buddhism under the Sky of the Eiffel Tower 264 In the Name of Sakyamuni Buddha and All the Buddhas: The 1898 Buddhist Ceremony at the Guimet Museum 273  ―Buddhist Mass in Paris‖: Annensky‘s Poetical Record of the 1898 Buddhist Ceremony at the Guimet Museum 278  Two Strangers Around the Streets of Paris: The City Strolls of Maximilian Voloshin and Agvan Dorzhiev 284 Paris-Petrograd: The Communion of Buddhist Ideas 288 Chapter 6: The Blessing of Enlightenment—The ―Nothingness‖ of Nirvana: Russian Reception of Nirvana in Literature, Philosophy, and the Arts 299 The ―Nihilistic‖ Nirvana in Russian Literature and Philosophy: An Introduction 299 There is No Way Out: The ―Pessimistic‖ Nirvana of Vladimir vi Soloviev, Dmitry Merezhkovsky, and Afanasy Fet 303 Buddhism and Nirvana under the Herald of German Philosophy: Arthur Schopenhauer, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Friedrich Hegel 313 The ―Cosmic‖ Nirvana in the Arts: Nikolai Kulbin and Kazimir Malevich 329 Conclusion 354 Conclusion 357 Bibliography 362 vii List of Figures Figure 1. Balmont, Konstantin. Photograph of a Buddha statue at the Temple of Mendut 1912.In Ashvagosha, Zhizn‘ Buddy. Kalidasa. Dramy. Translated by K. Bal‘mont. Introduced and commented by Grigory Bongard-Levin. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1990, ill. 21, between 256 and 257. 37 Figure 2. Balmont, Konstantin. Photograph of a Buddha statue in Anuradhapura (Sri Lanka), 1912. In Ibid., ill. 20, between 256 and 257. 37 Figure 3. Sergeenko, Petr. Photograph of Anton Chekhov and Lev Tolstoy in Gaspra (Crimea), 1901. In Russkaia fotografiia: seredina XIX- nachalo XX veka. Edited by Nikolai Rakhmanov. Moscow: Planeta, 1996, 168. 59 Figure 4. Anisfeld, Boris. Buddha with Pomegranates, 1916. Prof. Boris Stavrovski collection, New York. In Boris Anisfeld. Catalogue Raisonné. Edited by Eckart Lingenauber. Monaco: Edition libertars, 2011, ill. 456, 163. 78 Figure 5. Anisfeld, Boris. The Golden God, 1917. Book cover of the exhibition catalog The Boris Anisfeld Exhibition. New York: Redfield- Kendrick-Odell Company, Inc., 1918-20, cover. 78 Figure 6. Photograph of Lev Bakst with his collection in Paris, 1923. In N. Misler, ―Ex Oriente Lux: Siamese Dancing and the Ballets Russes.‖ Annali dell‘Istituto Universitario Orientale 46 (1986): Ill. IV, c-d, unpaged. 78 Figure 7. Van Gogh, Vincent. Self-Portrait Dedicated to Paul Gauguin (Bonze), 1888. In J. Baas, Smile of the Buddha. Eastern Philosophy and Western Art from Monet to Today. Foreword by Robert A.F. Thurman. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 2005, 26. 82 Figure 8. Friesz, Othon. Still Life with a Statuette of Buddha, 1910. The State Hermitage, St. Petersburg. In The Hermitage. French Painting. Second Half of the 19th Century to the Early 20th Century. Leningrad: Aurora Art Publishers, 1982, ill. 186, unpaged. 82 viii Figure 9. Anisfeld, Boris. Goddess of Dreams, undated. In Boris Anisfeld. Catalogue Raisonné, 105. 84 Figure 10. Anisfeld, Boris. Preparatory sketch for Goddess of Dreams. In Ibid., 105. 84 Figure 11. Photograph of the members of the World Literature, 1925. In K. Chukovsky, Diary,1901-1969. Edited by Victor Erlich and translated by Michael Henry Heim. New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 2005, between 280 and 281. 91 Figure 12. Annenkov, Iury. Portrait of the Poet and Writer Maxim Gorky, 1920. In Yury Annenkov: Portrety. Petrograd: Petropolis, 1922, 33. 91 Figure 13. Altman, Natan. The Pray, 1914. The Anna Akhmatova Museum, St. Petersburg. < http://www.museum.ru/C5491> 97 Figure 14. Figure of the chief Mbopelyeen a-Ntshey in Buddha pose, ca. 1760-80. British Museum, London. In Voldemār Matvejs (Vladimir Markov). Stat‘i. Katalog proizvedenii. Pis‘ma. Khronika deiatel‘nosti ―Soiuza molodezhi‖). Edited by Irena Buzhinska. Latvia: Neputns, 2002, ill. 6, 95. 97 Figure 15. Goncharova, Natalia. Hermit. In A. Kruchenykh, Pustinniki. Pustynnitsa: dve poemy. Moscow: Izd. G.L. Kuz‘mina i S.D. Dolinskogo, 1913, unpaged. 97 Figure 16. Mendeleev, Vladimir. Photograph of the colossal statue of the Buddha Daibutsu at the Kotokuin Temple in Kamakura, 1891. In E. Barkhatova, et al. Russia and Japan—Mutual Understanding. To the 150 th Anniversary of the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations. Saint Petersburg: National Library of Russia, 2006, ill. 139, 103. 149 Figure 17. Photograph of the exhibition Slavs of Europe and the People of Russia (to the 140-Anniversary of the 1867 First Ethnographical Exhibition) at the Russian Ethnographical Museum in St. Petersburg, 2007. <http://www.ethnomuseum.ru/section341/349/881/4492.htm> 156 Figure 17a. Detail of the exhibition Slavs of Europe and the People of Russia. In Ibid. 156 ix Figure 18. Photograph of the exhibition of Petr Kozlov‘s finds at the Imperial Russian Geographical Society, 1910. In Lost Empire of the Silk Road. Buddhist Art from Khara Khoto (X-XIIIth century). Edited by Mikhail Piotrovsky. Milano: Electa, Thyssen-Bornemisza Foundation, 1993, ill. 31, 45. 160 Figure 19. Vereshchagin, Vasily. ―Buddhist Trinity.‖ In V. Vereshchagin, Painter—Soldier—Traveller. Autobiographical Sketches, vol. 1. Translated from the German and the French by F.H. Peters, M.A. fellow of University College, Oxford. With illustrations after drawings by the author. London: Richard Bentley & Son, 1887, 261. 179 Figure 20. Vereshchagin, Vasily. ―Lama Disguised as a Deity.‖ In Ibid., 263. 180 Figure 21. Vereshchagin, Vasily. Kalmyk Lama, 1873. The State Russian Museum, St. Petersburg. In Pittura russa del Museo di Kiev. Castello di Torre Canavese: Galleria M. D'Atrino, 1990, ill. 23, 60. 180 Figure 22. Knackfuss, Hermann. ―Nations of Europe, protect your holiest possessions!‖ From a sketch by Kaiser Wilhelm II, 1895. In J. C. G. Röhl, Wilhelm II: the Kaiser's Personal Monarchy, 1888-1900. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004, ill. 39, 755. 198 Figure 23. Russian folk print To the War of Russia Against Japan, 1904. In Russia and Japan—Mutual Understanding, ill. 213, 134. 198 Figure 24. ―Voina beloi i zheltoi ras. Allegoriia (s kartin khud. R. Vudvillia).‖ Moskovskii listok 12 (February 8, 1904): 8-9. 202 Figure 25. Interior of the St. Petersburg Datsan. Source unknown. 250 Figure 26. Plafond of the St. Petersburg Datsan with the Eight Auspicious Symbols, designed by Nikolai Roerich. In A. Andreev, Sankt-Peterburgskii Datsan. St. Petersburg: Nestor-Istoriia, publication date unknown, 18. 250 Figure 27. Roerich, Nikolai. Queen of Heaven on the Shore of the River of Life, 1912. In J.E. Bowlt, Moscow & St. Petersburg 1900-1920. Art, Life & Culture of the Russian Silver Age. New York: The Vendome Press, 2008, ill. 135, 75. 253 x Figure 27a. Detail of Queen of Heaven on the Shore of the River of Life. In Ibid., 75. 253 Figure 28. ―Torzhestvo u buddistov v Peterburge.‖ Ogonek, 1914. Reproduction of the article in the magazine Spark reporting the giving ceremony of the Buddhist statuette from the King of Siam. In A. Andreev, Khram Buddy v Severnoi stolitse. St. Petersburg: Nartang, 2004, 84. 256 Figure 29. Régamey, Élie. Buddhist Mass in Paris, 1898. Musée national des Arts Asiatiques-Guimet, Paris. In D‘outremer et d‘Orient mystique…Les itineraries d‘Émile Guimet. Edited by Françoise Chappuis and Francis Macouin. Suilly-la-Tour: Éditions Findakly, 2001, 105. 276 Figure 30. Durandelle, Louis Émile. Photograph of the bronze room at the Cernuschi Museum, Paris, ca. 1880-1890. In Viaggio in Oriente, L‘avventura di Enrico Cernuschi (1821-1896) patriota, finanziere, collezionista. Edited by Rosanna Pavoni in collaboration with Silvia Davoli. Milano: Federico Motta Editore S.p.A., 2005, 30. 291 Figure 31. Chinese portrait from the T‘ang dynasty. In ―Ars Asiatica.‖ Sofiia. Zhurnal iskusstva i literatury 3 (March 1914): 4-8. 291 Figure 32. Photograph of the works by members of UNOVIS at the Exhibition of Pictures of Petrograd Artists of All Directions, 1923. In Kazimir Malevich in the Russian Museum. Edited by Evgeniia Petrova and translated from the Russian by Kenneth MacInnes. St. Petersburg: Palace Editions, 2000, ill. 2, 437. 344 Figure 33. Malevich, Kazimir. Suprematist Composition: White on White, 1918. The Museum of Modern Art, New York. In Kazimir Malevich: Suprematism. Edited by Matthew Drutt. N.Y.: Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 2003, 200. 347 Figure 34. Malevich, Kazimir. Suprematist Painting (White Planes in Dissolution), 1917-18. Stedelijk Museum, Amsterdam. In Ibid., 202. 347 Figure 35. Malevich, Kazimir. Suprematism (Construction in Dissolution), 1918. Stedelijk Museum, Amsterdam. In Ibid., 203. 347 xi Figure 36. Malevich, Kazimir. Assumption of a Saint, 1907-08. From the cycle Study for a Fresco Painting. Khardzhiev-Chaga Cultural Foundation. In A Legacy Regained: Nikolai Khardzhiev and the Russian Avant-Garde. Edited and compiled by John E. Bowlt and Mark Konecny. St. Petersburg: Palace Editions, 2002, 257. 350 Figure 37. The Buddha‘s nirvana. Detail of the ―back‖ side of a stone stele, 691. Shanxi Museum, Taiyuan. In S. Lee. Surviving Nirvana. Death of the Buddha in Chinese Visual Culture. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2010, fig. I.1, 2. 350 Figure 38. Malevich, Kazimir. The Triumph of Heaven, 1907. From the cycle Study for a Fresco Painting. Russian State Museum, St. Petersburg. In J. Milner. Kazimir Malevich and the Art of Geometry. New Haven and London: yale University Press, 1996, 11. 353 Figure 39. Smirnov-Rusetsky, Boris. Buddha of the Evening Light, 1924. The Karakalpakstan State Museum of Art named after I.V. Savitsky, Nukus. <http://www.savitskycollection.org/pages/Galleries/Russians/Smirnov- Rusetskiy_Gallery.html> 353 xii Note on Transliteration and Dates This dissertation conforms to the U.S. Library of Congress transliteration system adopted by the Slavic and East European Journal. The following rules are respected throughout the text: 1. All Russian names that appear in the body of the text are Anglicized. Therefore, first and last names end in –y instead of –ii, –sky instead of –skii, -oy instead of – oi (Grigory and not Grigorii, Tolstoy and not Tolstoi). 2. The soft sign is not observed for names mentioned in the main text; e.g.: Balmont, Przhevalsky, Kulbin, Oldenburg (not Bal‘mont, Przheval‘sky, Kul‘bin, Ol‘denburg); it is observed, however, when names appear in bibliographical footnotes transliterating Russian titles. The name of Soloviev (not Solov‘ev) is given according to the standard form used in the Slavic and East European Journal. 3. Names of Tsars and of internationally renowned figures conform to the traditionally given western translation: Tsar Alexander, Tsar Nicholas, as well as Alexander Herzen, Sergei Witte, Nikolai Roerich (not Rerikh), and Helena Blavatsky (not Elena Blavatskaia). The name of the internationally renowned Orientologist Fedor Shcherbatskoi, however, is given in its literary Russian transliteration because too many variants have been given in western European languages. 4. Proper names, newspapers, and periodicals that begin with soft vowels are transliterated Ia, Iu, Io, instead of Ya, Yu, Yo; e.g.: Iadrintsev, Iurinsky, Iosafat. xiii 5. Geographical designations with Anglicized spellings are cited in their common appellation; e.g.: Moscow, St. Petersburg. Thailand, Beijing, and Ulan Bator, however, are mentioned in their earlier names—Siam, Peking, and Urga. The exception is St. Petersburg, which sometimes changes in Petrograd or Leningrad, according to its name at the historical moment under discussion. The name Karakhoto is given in its standard transliteration, unless it appears in Russian bibliographical references, in which case it is rendered Khara-Khoto. 6. Buddhist terms follow the Sanskrit transliteration system and not the Pali, therefore: Nirvana (not Nibbana), Siddhartha Gautama (not Siddhattha Gotama). Diacritical marks have been omitted as well for the sake of convenience, thereby nirvana won‘t be written nirvāna, Hinayana and Mahayana—Hināyāna and Mahāyāna. 7. Dates of historical events antecedent to 1918 are given according to the Julian calendar used back then, i.e. thirteen days behind the Georgian adopted in the West. 8. Translations from Russian into English are my own unless otherwise noted. xiv Abstract The purpose of this dissertation is to investigate how Buddhism informed the aesthetic and philosophical enquiries of Russian writers and artists from 1873 to 1919, and why they utilized specific Buddhist motifs. Until now the subject has received only fleeting attention from scholars, who have looked at it as simply another aspect of either Orientalism in Russian culture or of the general fashion for Theosophy and other esoteric movements. However, this dissertation has used an in-depth analysis of specific works of art and literature to argue that, when put in the context of broad socio-political (Russian Imperialism in Asia) and cultural indicators (private collections, art exhibition, conferences), the evocation of Buddhist resonances in modern Russian culture could come from a different source: the mania for traveling of that time. It was, indeed, the extreme mobility of Russian society which prompted the importation of foreign ideas both from the bordering Asian countries and from Western Europe. Travel, however, has been broadened in the present study to embrace two more general concepts—the real and the imaginary journey, both of which, in turn, are manifested in a series of nuanced interpretations. Hence the category of the ―real journey‖ subsumes scientific expeditions, deportations to Siberia, military invasions, diplomatic missions, world tours, and international exhibitions. Conversely, the ―imaginary journey‖ deals with the metaphorical traveling of specimens, ideas, and folkloric myths. Regardless of their affiliation with one category or the other, all these facets of the journey document how people and worldviews move fluidly in culture. xv Using close reading and examination of historical evidence, I analyze the phenomenon of itinerancy of Buddhist motifs in Russian culture which reached its peak in this specific timeframe, i.e. from 1873 (when the famous explorer of Central Asia Nikolai Przhevalsky came back from his first Asian expedition) to 1919 (when the internationally renowned Orientologist Sergei Oldenburg organized the First Buddhist Exhibition in Petrograd). These two events marked the beginning and the end of an epoch which brought to maturity the ―Oriental Renaissance,‖ starting with the first half of the nineteenth century as Raymond Schwab so aptly described in his The Oriental Renaissance: Europe‘s Rediscovery of India and the East (1680-1880). Still, it was not Schwab‘s book that prompted the topic of my dissertation, but Timothy Brook‘s Vermeer‘s Hat. The Seventeenth Century and the Dawn of the Global World. Here Professor Brook correlates the establishment of the Dutch East India Company with frequent journeys from the Netherlands to the East to the assimilation of new visual images and ideas consequently represented in Flemish paintings. In a similar fashion, I argue that frequent tours by artists and writers from Russia to Asia—Ivan Bunin‘s journey to Ceylon in 1911, Anton Chekhov‘s visit to India and Ceylon in 1895, David Burliuk‘s trip to Japan in 1919—explain the Buddhist references in works of art and literature that the representatives of the Russian creative world later produced. Thereafter, the Buddhist journey through Soviet Russia alighted upon very different destinations and witnessed very different outcomes – to constitute a new itinerary which provides rich material for another and subsequent exploration of the interaction of Orientology and modern Russian culture. 1 Introduction On February 7, 1888 Lev Tolstoy wrote to his friend, the editor Vladimir Chertkov: ―I don‘t know this book on the Buddha you‘re asking for. Is it Arnold‘s poem? As far as I remember, you already have it. I only quote Beal‘s English rendition of the Chinese text on the Buddha. I borrowed this book from the Rumiantsev Library. Shall I buy it for you? Or order it? Because when I asked, they didn‘t have a copy.‖ 1 That Tolstoy, one of Russia‘s primary creative voices, proved to be au courant of the most recent literature on Buddhism 2 is surely indicative of the general interest in this religion on the part of the Russian intelligentsia. It was the same interest which provoked the writer, Ivan Bunin, to exclaim: ―This Buddhism is a remarkable thing!‖ 3 and inspired Alexander Herzen‘s on ―Buddhism in Science‖ (1843), Vladimir Soloviev's "The Buddhist Mood in Poetry" (1894), and many other Russian works of art and literature. Given this diffused awareness, I have set myself the task —in this dissertation— to investigate why and how Buddhism informed the aesthetic and philosophical enquiries of certain modern Russian writers and artists especially in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and why they accepted this Oriental philosophy with such readiness. 1 L. Tolstoy, Sobranie sochinenii v 90-ti tomakh, vol. 86. Edited by M.V. Muratov. Moscow: Izdatel‘stvo "Khudozhestvennaia literatura," 1964, 118. 2 In the quote above Tolstoy refers to Sir Edwin Arnold‘s bookseller The Light of Asia (Chapter Two) and Samuel Beal‘s Outline of Buddhism from Chinese Sources (1870). See Ibid., note 4, 120. 3 I. Bunin, The Liberation of Tolstoy. Edited, translated from the Russian, and with an introduction and notes by Thomas Gaiton Marullo and Vladimir T. Khmelkov. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University press, 2001, note 97, 170. 2 In doing so, this study helps illuminate part of Russian cultural identity and its place in the world and the rest of Europe in particular. Indeed, unlike their counterparts in other European countries, Russians were more receptive toward this foreign faith for their proximity to Asia and their frequent contacts with Buddhist ethnicities on Russian soil. In addition to highlighting this aspect of Russian cultural identity, this dissertation also expands its contribution to scholarly fields outside Slavic studies and art history. Following an interdisciplinary approach, this research encompasses Buddhist and Asian studies, social and political history, international relations, and visual culture in general. In analyzing some of the causes which made Buddhism more familiar to the Russian audience, this dissertation crosses conventional thematic boundaries and provides the ethnic, political and cultural landscape that prompted the public reception, perception, and interpretation of Buddhism in Russia. To achieve this goal, I have consulted books and periodicals in the St. Petersburg National Library and in the Library of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences. I was also granted access to the archives, library, and special Buddhist collections at the Russian Ethnographical Museum, being allowed to photograph relevant materials. I also made extensive use of the library and the Buddhist collection at the St. Petersburg Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography (Kunstkamera) and consulted with the curators of the Buddhist department there. In turn, they showed me unfamiliar Buddhist artifacts and helped me understand the extent and wealth of private Buddhist collections at the turn of the twentieth century. The St. Petersburg Museum of History and Religion, in particular, preserves some of the finest Buddhist items, including the Buddhist altar of Buriat 3 provenance that belonged to Prince Esper Ukhtomsky and the statue of Buddha which in 1914 the King of Siam donated to the newly opened Buddhist Temple in St. Petersburg. In addition to museums and public libraries, I also visited the Memorial House of the explorer Petr Kozlov: in my dissertation I argue that the objects which the explorer brought back from his sensational discoveries in Karakhoto helped promote Buddhism among the Russian intelligentsia. Although the State Hermitage owns most of Kozlov‘s collection, his library is still preserved in situ. Acquaintance with the explorer‘s bibliographic and material legacy helped me to better understand his psychology and personality in general. However, relevant to my research are not only Russian, but also Western European archives, especially those at the Musée national des Arts Asiatiques-Guimet in Paris. There I found photographs and documents, related to the Buddhist ceremony held in 1898 by the Russian lama, Agvan Dorzhiev, and evidence of other activities on the part of Russian Orientologists. It was in the archives of the Musée Guimet, in fact, that I found a copy of Sergei Oldenburg‘s report to what was then the Russian Asiatic Museum (now the Institute of Oriental Studies in St. Petersburg) on the 1913 Buddhist exhibition at the Museum Cernuschi in Paris. Indeed, my comparative analysis of this exhibition and Oldenburg‘s organization of the ―First Buddhist Exhibition‖ in Petrograd in 1919 is much indebted to my researches at the Musée Guimet. One result of investigations is the conclusion that references to Buddhism in the works of certain Russian writers and artists are not merely coincidental; on the contrary, they form a unique phenomenon worthy of scientific study and appraisal. Furthermore, I 4 have also realized that the topic of Buddhism in modern Russian culture has received little recognition among art historians and Slavic scholars; in fact, the topic has generally been marginalized either as part of Orientalism—this ―large loose baggy monster‖ 4 embracing anything and everything related to the East—or, as yet another phenomenon of popular culture belonging to the fin-de-siècle vogue for the occult. Orientalism In American scholarship, what defines Orientalism has been impacted by Edward Said‘s 1978 pioneering Orientalism, in which he compares the Orientalist East to a theatrical stage displaying a series of cultural references recognizable to a Western audience. In Said‘s words: In the depths of this oriental stage stands a prodigious cultural repertoire whose individual items evoke a fabulously rich world: the Sphinx, Cleopatra, Eden, Troy, Sodom and Gomorrah, Astarte, Isis and Osiris, Sheba, Babylon, the Genii, the Magi, Nineveh, Prester John, Mahomet, and dozens more; settings, in some cases names only, half-imagined, half-known; monsters, devils, heroes; terrors, pleasures, desires. 5 What Said describes as the East relates mainly to Islamic culture of the Near and Middle East— territories that he saw as subjugated by western colonialism and imperialism. 4 The expression was first used by Henry James in his critical essay ―The Tragic Muse‖ in relation to long fictional novels, such as Lev Tolstoy‘s War and Peace, William Thackeray‘s The Newcomes, and Alexandre Dumas‘s The Three Musketeers. With this definition the critic meant to stress the lack of apparent coherence in the development of the plot, dominated by ―queer elements of the accidental and the arbitrary‖ (H. James, ―The Tragic Muse.‖ In Literary Criticism. French Writers, Other European Writers, the Preface to the New York Edition, vol. 2. New York: Literary Classics of the United States, 1984, 1107). Similarly ―Orientalism‖ comprises many arbitrary interpretations and notions that geographically span the Near to the Far East. 5 E. Said, Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books Edition, 1994, 63. 5 Whereas before him academia had neutrally or generically applied the term ―Orientalism‖ to the study of the East, after the emergence of Said‘s signal text, ―Orientalism‖ assumed pejorative connotations. Because of these negative associations with the term ―Orientalism‖ and because of the term‘s general affiliation with Islam and the Near East (in addition to a growing awareness that the Saidian interpretation is not entirely topical), in this dissertation I have adopted another approach supported by scholars such as David Schimmelpennick and Vera Tolz. Instead of ―Orientalism,‖ they prefer ―Orientology‖— a new definition that translates the Russian vostokovedenie (Oriental Studies) and avoids the derogatory connotations attributed to the term ―Orientalism,‖ after Said. 6 As the editors of Orientalism and Empire in Russia have stated, ―while Said blurred the lines between the academic discipline, Western stereotypes, and the business of imperial domination […] it is useful to distinguish, in the Russian context as elsewhere, between Orientalism as an attitude and Orientology as the discipline.‖ 7 Unlike ―Orientalism,‖ however, ―Orientology‖ lacks the idea of an Oriental repository of images and motifs (Buddhist included) from which artists could draw inspiration. This is the reason why, for the context of Buddhism in literature and the visual arts, I have used the expression 6 See Tolz‘s recently published book Russia's Own Orient. The Politics of Identity and Oriental Studies in the Late Imperial and Early Soviet Periods (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011) and D. Schimmelpenninck van der Oye, Russian Orientalism. Asia in the Russian Mind from Peter the Great to the Emigration. New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 2010. 7 Orientalism and Empire in Russia. Edited by Michael David-Fox, Peter Holquist, Alexander Martin. Bloomington, Indiana: Slavica, 2006, 9. 6 ―Buddhist world,‖ which has also been adopted by certain scholars, 8 even if others prefer ―Buddhist reminiscences,‖ 9 ―Buddhist ideas,‖ 10 and ―Buddhistic leitmotifs.‖ 11 Regardless of the actual choice, the use of such terms highlights an implicit academic agreement to discuss the reception of Buddhism in Russian culture as an aspect independent of Orientalism. To this category, for example, belong works such as Thomas Gaiton Marullo‘s If You See the Buddha: Studies in the Fiction of Ivan Bunin, 12 Dany Savelli‘s edited collection of essays on Buddhism in Russian culture, 13 and John Snelling‘s Buddhism in Russia. The Story of Agvan Dorzhiev, Lhasa‘s Emissary to the Tsar. 14 Tolstoy and Buddhism is an especially popular topic, as can be seen in the following scholarly works: Dragan Milivojevic‘s articles on Tolstoy and his book Leo 8 For instance Tatiana Ermakova in her book Buddiiskii mir glazami rossiiskikh issledovatelei XIX-pervoi treti XX veka. (Rossiia i sopredel‘nye strany). Saint Petersburg: Nauka, 1998. 9 A. Di Ruocco, Buddiiskie reministsentsii v izobrazitel‘nom russkom iskusstve pervogo tridtsatiletiia XX veka. N. Rerikh, ―Amaravella,‖ N. Kul‘bin, M. Matiushin, E. Guro. Moscow: Gosudarstvennyi institut iskusstvoznaniia, 2005. 10 T. Berniukevich, Buddiiskie idei v kul‘ture Rossii kontsa XIX –pervoi poloviny XX veka. Chita: Chitinskii gosudarstvennyi universitet, 2010. 11 H. H. Walsh, ―A Buddhistic Leitmotif in Anna Karenina.‖ Canadian-American Slavic Studies 11. 4 (Winter 1977): 561-6. 12 Evaston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 1998. 13 ―Présence du bouddhisme en Russie.‖ Edited by D. Savelli. Slavica Occitania 21. Touluse: Départment de Slavistique de l‘Université de Toulouse-Le Mirail, Centre de recherches ―Interculturalité et monde slave (langues, littératures et sociétés)‖ (CRIMS-LLA), 2005. 14 Shaftesbury, Dorset: Element, 1993. 7 Tolstoy, 15 Harry Hill Walsh‘s ―A Buddhistic Leitmotif in Anna Karenina,‖ 16 and Carla Muschio‘s articles ―Lev Tolstoy and India: An Interchangeable Relationship‖ 17 and ―Tolstoy, ‗Apostle‘ of Buddhism.‖ 18 In Russia, scholars who consider Buddhism an independent branch of research are Grigory Bongard-Levin, as witnessed by his articles on Balmont and Blok, 19 and Tatiana Berniukevich, as witnessed by her recent dissertation, Buddhist Ideas in Russian Culture at the End of the 19 th Century and the First Half of the 20th Century. 20 As for the arts, Tosi Lee‘s article ―Fire Down Below and Watering, That‘s Life. A Buddhist Reader‘s Response to Marcel Duchamp,‖ 21 and Jacquelynn Baas‘s captivating book Smile of the Buddha. Eastern Philosophy and 15 ―Tolstoy‘s Views on Buddhism.‖ Tolstoy Studies Journal 3 (1990: 62-75) and ―Some Similarities and Differences Between Tolstoy‘s Concepts of Identity and Vocation and Their Parallels in Hinduism.‖ Tolstoy Studies Journal 4 (1991: 97-103). Leo Tolstoy. New York: Columbia University Press, 1998. 16 Canadian-American Slavic Studies 11, 4 (Winter 1977): 561-6. 17 C. Muschio, ―Lev Tolstoj e l‘India: una relazione di scambio.‖ Quaderni Asiatici 52 (January-March 2000): 21-31. 18 C. Muschio, ―Tolstoj ‗apostolo‘ del buddismo.‖ Micromega 5 (2001): 321-33. 19 ―Indiiskaia kul‘tura v tvorchestve K.D. Bal‘monta.‖ In Ashvagosha, Zhizn‘ Buddy. Kalidasa. Dramy. Translated by K. Bal‘mont. Introduced and commented by Grigory Bongard-Levin. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1990, 6-30; G. Bongard-Levin, ―Aleksandr Blok i S.F. Ol‘denburg.‖ Vostok- Rossiia-Zapad. Istoricheskie i kul‘torologicheskie issledovaniia k 70-letiu akademika Vladimira Stepanovicha Miasnikova. Moscow: Pamiatniki istoricheskoi mysli, 2001, 231-249. 20 Buddhism as an aspect of Russian culture has been also investigated in a much broader sense in Anatoly Alekseev-Apraksin‘s dissertation Buddizm v kul‘turnoi zhizni Sankt-Peterburga (Saint Petersburg: Sankt- Peterburgskii gosudarstvennyi universitet, 2005) and Ekaterina Safronova‘s book Buddizm v Rossii. Moscow: Izd-vo RAGS, 1998. 21 T. Lee, ―Fire Down Below and Watering, That‘s Life. A Buddhist Reader‘s Response to Marcel Duchamp.‖ In Buddha Mind in Contemporary Art. Edited by Jacquelynn Baas and Mary Jane Jacob. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 2004, 124-139. 8 Western Art from Monet to Today 22 also belong to the category of works which consider Buddhism independent from Orientalism. Lee highlights the Buddhist world that Duchamp was familiar with through the private collection of the Musée Guimet, whereas Baas, challenging traditional art historical interpretations of renowned works of art, analyzes specific paintings by Vincent Van Gogh, Paul Gauguin, Claude Monet, and many other leading figures of visual arts, to enlighten a neglected aspect in western art (that of Buddhist influences). The ―Buddhist world‖ described in these sources includes neither contemporary critical essays that treat Buddhism as just another ingredient of Orientalism, nor traditional works of art and literature that stereotype the East. In the latter case, Buddhism is sometimes mentioned for purely aesthetic purposes which ignore the philosophical subtext often accompanying Buddhist ideas in Russian culture. An example of current literary criticism that identifies Buddhism with Orientalism is the collection of essays Russian Literature and the East (Peculiarities of Literary Orientalism 19 th -20 th cc.), 23 which sees the East as the exoticism of the Caucasus, immortalized in Tolstoy‘s Khadzhi Murat and A Prisoner in the Caucasus, 24 and in the Buddhist pagodas of Ceylon 22 J. Baas, Smile of the Buddha. Eastern Philosophy and Western art from Monet to Today. Foreword by Robert A.F. Thurman. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 2005. 23 Russkaia literatura i Vostok. (Osobennosti khudozhestvennoi orientalistiki XIX-XX vv). Edited by E.A. Karimov. Tashkent: Izdatel‘stvo ―FAN‖ Uzbekskoi SSR, 1988. 24 See P.M. Mirza-Akhmedova, ―Realisticheskie kartiny mira i cheloveka Kavkaza v rasskazakh ‗Nebg,‘ ‗Rubka lesa,‘ i ‗Kavkavzkii plennik‘ L.N. Tolstogo.‖ In Ibid., 36-68. 9 described by Ivan Bunin in his homonymous poems. 25 As for traditional works of art and literature that align with this Orientalist schema, there is the East of slavery of Xerxes King of Persia, condemned by the Symbolist philosopher Vladimir Soloviev in his 1892 poem ―Ex Oriente Lux,‖ and the exotic East that many Russian artists have associated with Armenia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and the other countries of Central Asia. 26 For these artists the Orient was something barbarian, primitive, irrational, and uncivilized (implicitly set against the traditional western view of the Occident as sophisticated, civilized, and cultured). Views of Orientalism, however, go beyond the geographical boundaries of the Near East and Central Asia to reach the East Asian countries of China and Japan as well. The Orientalist version of China is embodied in chinoiserie –an embellishment of the baroque and rococo style; the Orientalist version of Japan, instead, includes images of kimonos and chrysanthemums that the French Impressionists popularized through their passion for the work of Hokusai. This trend, called japonaiserie or Japonisme, fascinated Russians as well (as did chinoiserie), as attested by Anton Chekhov‘s reference to a geisha‘s performance in his Lady with the Dog, and Andrei Bely‘s mocking description of Madame Lipukhina in St. Petersburg. As Chapter One of this dissertation indicates, for Chekhov and Chapter Four for Bely, these clichés came from French and Russian contact with Japan— a nation that defeated Russia in the war of 1904-05. 25 See T. Lobanova, ―Oriental‘naia proza I. Bunina i dukhovno-esteticheskoe nasledie narodov Vostoka.‖ In Ibid., 69-91. 26 To the topic of Russian Orientalism in painting has been dedicated the exhibition Russia‘s Unknown Orient. Orientalist Painting 1850-1920, on view at the Groninger Museum in the Netherlands from December 19, 2010 to May 8, 2011. For further information see the homonymous exhibition catalog edited by Patty Wageman and Inessa Kouteinikova. Rotterdam: NAi Publishers, 2010. 10 However, as the Bely narrative exemplifies, at the turn of the twentieth century Western Europe and East Asia inspired not only Orientalism, but also a special interest in Buddhist philosophy. In Western Europe Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, both disposed toward Buddhism and both widely read by the young Symbolist generation, helped to disseminate Buddhist leitmotifs in Russian literature. Bely, for instance, was affected by Buddhist readings of the two German philosophers; however, his was not merely a derivative interpretation of Buddhism. On the contrary, through his combination of western philosophy and Russian fear of an imminent Japanese invasion (justified by Russia‘s defeat in 1905), Bely proves that the Russian assimilation of Buddhism was much more complex than a simple repetition of Western European readings. The differences and the primary factors that induced a distinctively Russian interpretation of Buddhism are also analyzed in this dissertation. Occultism In addition to reinterpreting Orientalism, my intention is to dissociate my thesis from the received interpretation of Buddhism as yet another phenomenon of popular culture belonging to the fin-de-siècle vogue for the occult. The latter is a rather false impression popularized by scholarship of the 1990s such as Maria Carlson‘s ―No Religion Higher than Truth.‖A History of the Theosophical Movement in Russia, 1875- 11 1922 27 and The Occult in Russian and Soviet Culture. 28 There the common assumption is that at the turn of the twentieth century everything ―buddhic‖ in works of art and literature manifested itself through the general interest in Theosophy, Occultism, and Esoterism. They were spiritual movements, or so the argument goes, that captivated modern Russian society by their alternative solutions to the general angst of the new millennium. Certainly, the popularity of these practices among the Russian intelligentsia is incontrovertible; however, it is an exaggeration to assume, as Carlson does for example, that Russian Theosophists, ―spoke for the Orient in the popular intellectual debates of the period,‖ 29 and that the scholarship produced by the finest Russian Orientologists such as Ivan Minaev, Sergei Oldenburg, Fedor Shcherbatskoi, and many others: ―made Theosophy less ‗exotic‘ than it might otherwise appear.‖ 30 In short, this general assumption that Buddhism was part of Theosophy has underestimated or, at least, distorted the role that this religion played in modern Russian culture. 31 27 M. Carlson, ―No Religion Higher than Truth.‖ A History of the Theosophical Movement in Russia, 1875- 1922. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1993. 28 The Occult in Russian and Soviet Culture. Edited by Bernice Glatzer Rosenthal. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1997. It is interesting to notice that Nikolai Bogomolov explains Nikolai Gumilev‘s accidental mentions of the Buddha (and of Mahomet) through the poet‘s involvement with Occultism. Contrarily, Chapter Two of the present dissertation will attempt to suggest another possible source for Gumilev‘s superficial knowledge of Buddhism (N. Bogomolov, ―Gumilev i okkul‘tizm.‖ In N. Bogomolov, Russkaia literatura nachala XX veka i okkul'tizm: issledovaniia i materialy. Moscow: Novoe lit. obozrenie, 1999, 118). 29 M. Carlson, ―No Religion Higher than Truth,‖ 154. 30 Ibid., 193. 31 Mysticism also belongs to those movements with which Buddhism is associated, as documented by Viktoria Kravchenko‘s book Mistitsizm v russkoi filosofskoi mysli XIX-nachala XX vekov. Moscow: izdattsentr, 1997. 12 To be sure, many of the individuals discussed in this dissertation considered Theosophy to be a sort of Neo-Buddhism, 32 and perhaps Helena Blavatsky— one of the founders of Theosophy— more than any other Theosophist encouraged this misunderstanding through her kinship for Buddhism. Nonetheless, she denied any similitude between the two doctrines, asserting that the Theosophists were all followers of Gautama Buddha ―no more than musicians are all followers of Wagner.‖ 33 Surely, when compared, Buddhism and Theosophy are two distinctive philosophies. The latter aims to unite all religions of the world in search of ―the higher truth‖—the Divine Wisdom —which lies at the heart of all the world‘s religions. The goal of Theosophy is ―to reconcile all religions, sects and nations under a common system of ethics, based on eternal verities.‖ 34 For this reason, Theosophy could be called Budhism (with one ―d‖), because Budhism translates the Sanskrit word ―Bodha,‖ meaning wisdom, knowledge. In short, Theosophy does not follow the teachings of the Buddha (from whom the term Buddhism stems) but rather seeks the attainment of knowledge (hence the word Budhism). 35 According to Theosophy, this knowledge is achieved through specific training, which includes the oriental practices of yoga and meditation—disciplines that open the inner potential of the initiate to the forces of the cosmos. That only a select group of 32 On Theosophy as a form of Neo-Buddhism, see Carlson, ―No Religion Higher than Truth,‖ 148-154. 33 H. Blavatsky, The Key to Theosophy. An Abridgment. Edited by Joy Mills. London: The Theosophical Publishing House, 1972, 8. 34 Ibid., 2. 35 Ibid., 8. 13 people is initiated to this training attests to the Theosophical predilection for the esoteric (the secret doctrine of religion revealed to a select group of initiates), rather than for the exoteric (cult thought for the masses). Indeed, this esoteric aspect led Theosophy to be closer to Buddhism, especially the Mahayana school, and in the late nineteenth century helped to disseminate the misleading idea that Buddhism and Theosophy were alike. 36 This confusion was perpetuated by Alfred Percy Sinnett‘s 1883 book, Esoteric Buddhism, in which the very title appropriates the word Buddhism to explain Theosophical concepts. However, as Sinnett remarks, the more Buddhism delves into the inner aspects of its doctrine, the more it shares general worldviews on the universe and nature with other religions, especially Brahmanism. 37 Nonetheless, in its early stage Theosophy preferred Buddhism to other Oriental religions. In particular Theosophy was closer to the Buddhist school of Mahayana than Hinayana, 38 although Theosophy used the Theravadin term 36 Members of the Theosophical Society wrote numerous treatises on Mahayana Buddhism. Only Helena Blavatsky translated into English three esoteric treatises on Tibetan Buddhism, which she used as the backbone for emphasizing the fundamental role of the mentor in the theosophical education. See E. Blavatskaia, Instruktsii dlia uchenikov vnutrennei gruppy. Moscow: IDLI, 2001, 19-20. Blavatsky‘s kinship to Mahayana Buddhism emerges in her book The Voice of the Silence (London: The Theosophical Publishing Company, 1889), a collection of chosen fragments from the Mahayanist Book of Golden Precepts, which she translated and annotated. 37 A.P. Sinnett, Ezotericheskii Buddizm. Moscow: Sfera, 2001, 17. 38 Hinayana, literally meaning ―lesser vehicle,‖ in contrast to Mahayana, the ―greater vehicle,‖ is also known as Theravada Buddhism. It is the early school of Buddhism, based on the teachings of Siddhartha Gautama. In a nutshell, one might affirm that the main difference between the two schools focuses on the role played by the arhat (in Theravada Buddhism) and the bodhisattva (in Mahayana Buddhism). The arhat is the one who reached nirvana without any external help, but relying only upon his spiritual training. He followed the Eightfold Path, which the Buddha indicated to defeat desire (the cause of sorrow) and to attain the awakening. The cold ideal of the arhat, however, better suits a monastic life for his life style, but does not provide an intermediary between the absolute entity (which in Mayahana stands for the figure of the Buddha himself, whereas in Hinayana the Buddha is the historical figure of Sakyamuni) and the masses. To fulfill this role, the Mahayana school offers the veneration of the bodhisattva— the compassionate, who after reaching nirvana went back to help the masses. Unlike Hinayana, Mahayana represents a later stage of Buddhism, which documents the development of a worship system that Hinayana does not perpetuate. 14 ―arhat‖ to refer to spiritual guides or masters who were also known by the Hindu word ―mahatmas.‖ 39 Theosophy accepted the Mahayana interpretation of the historical figure of the Buddha as one of many buddhas to have graced the human realm. Following the Mahayanist worldview, Theosophy likewise agreed that Gautama Buddha counted as the fourth reincarnation, and that, with the coming of the next race, the fifth ―buddha,‖ Maitreya, would reign. From Mahayana, Theosophy also took the esoterism of Tantrism, a later variant of the Mahayana tradition that developed around the sixth century A.D. in Tibet. The term ―Tantrism‖ comes from tantra, psycho-physical exercises and texts used to reach Buddhahood and performed in occasion of ceremonies. Only initiates selected by the master after an enduring and intense training could attend tantric ceremonies and rituals. At the time of the ceremony, participants drew mandalas (literally ―magic circles‖) that symbolized the cosmic forces; participants also pronounced words and syllables that had magical power. Likewise, Theosophy paid great attention to gestures and body parts that symbolize superhuman strength and accord with universal forces. 40 In short, Theosophy and Buddhism have very little in common. That some of the adversaries of Theosophy called it ―Neo-Buddhism‖ was a misconception perpetuated by the Theosophical appropriation of widely known Buddhist words such as nirvana, karma, and buddha. Nonetheless, Theosophists themselves argued that they were not Buddhist 39 A. P. Sinnett, Ezotericheskii Buddhizm, 26. 40 Blavatsky was also fascinated by the tantric concept of ―universal identity‖ and the Tantric assimilation of different magic rituals taken from various creeds, especially pagan. The idea of ―universal identity‖ comes from the notion of universal emptiness affirming that if everything corresponds with emptiness at the end, and thus everything is equal to the other, then the concepts of good and evil do not exist. 15 and that they adhered only to those esoteric aspects of Buddhism that united it with other Oriental philosophies. This misconception has been maintained in scholarship on the subject, in which references to Buddhism in modern works of art and literature have also been considered part of the Theosophical vocabulary. One goal of this dissertation, therefore, is to prove that the Buddhist world entered into modern Russian culture not because of Theosophy, but that Theosophy— at the fin de siècle— favored Buddhism to other religions for the popularity that Buddhism was enjoying in the West. The Buddhist revival in Western Europe came with what Raymond Schwab has called ―The Oriental Renaissance,‖ ―The revival of Sanskrit texts in Europe, which produced an effect equal to that produced in the fifteenth century by the arrival of Greek manuscripts and Byzantine commentators after the fall of Constantinople.‖ 41 Even the establishment of the Theosophical Society in 1875 coincided with events related to the promotion of Buddhism in Europe: in 1868, the School for Advanced Studies (École des Hautes Études) was founded in Paris, and Indic studies became part of its academic curriculum; in 1869 Theodor Benfy established the Society of Linguistically Oriental Philology in Germany (Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaften Orientalischen Philologie in Deutschland) in Munich. In 1879 the Orientologist Max Müller (himself an adversary of Theosophy) founded the Sacred Books of the East series in London, two years later initiating the translation of Buddhist texts, just as Thomas W. Rhys Davids 41 R. Schwab, The Oriental Renaissance. Europe‘s Rediscovery of India and the East, 1680-1880. Translated by Gene Patterson-Black and Victor Reinking. Foreword by Edward W. Said. New York: Columbia University Press, 1984, 11. In addition to Schwab‘s work, Henri de Lubac‘s book Le rencontre du Bouddhisme et de l‘Occident (Paris: Aubier, 1952) should also be consulted for further information about the development of Buddhist studies in the West. 16 was founding the Pali Text Society for the study of texts in Theravada Buddhism. In 1897 Oldenburg launched his scholarly edition of books on the east (Biblioteka Buddica), and in 1882-83 one of the main Buddhist collections in France— that of Emile Guimet— moved from Lyon to Paris. In Russia, too, the period witnessed the publication of important studies on Buddhism, such as Vasily Vasilev‘s Buddhism. Its Dogmas, Teaching, and Literature (Buddizm. Ego dogmaty, uchenie i literatura, 1857), 42 Oldenburg‘s Buddhist Legends (Buddiiskie legendy, 1884), Ivan Minaev‘s two-volume Buddhism: Researches and Materials (Buddizm: issledovaniia i materialy, 1887). 43 These scholars were closely aligned with artists and writers of the time (for instance, Oldenburg‘s book inspired some of Bunin‘s prose; the artist Nikolai Karazin accompanied Minaev on his trip to India), so that their work, rather than Theosophy, provided the creative world with a direct source of information on Buddhism. This ―Oriental Renaissance‖ promoted a general awareness of Buddhism and of borrowed Buddhist words and concepts. It was not, as Bernice Glatzer Rosenthal has alleged, that ―Occult doctrines motivated scholarly studies of Asian religions and cultures,‖ 44 but that critical studies of Asian religions and cultures motivated the appearance of occult doctrines, Theosophy, and Buddhism in modern Russian society. Unlike Rosenthal, I argue that the appearance of Buddhist motifs in modern Russian 42 In 1860 Vasilev‘s research on northern Buddhism was translated into German (der Buddhismus, vols. 2), and in 1865 into French by G.A. La Comme (Le Bouddhisme, ses dogmes, son histoire et sa littérature). The Orientologists A. von Schiefer and Emile Schlagintweit would continue Vasilev‘s study on Tibetan Buddhism. 43 See E. Safronova, Buddizm v Rossii, 1998. 44 B.G. Rosenthal, ―Introduction.‖ In The Occult in Russian and Soviet Culture, 30. 17 culture resulted from the foreign policy that Russia adopted with some Asian countries at that time. Historical Background By the second half of the nineteenth century the rush to conquer the Asian continent had culminated in ―Russia‘s drive to the East,‖ a phenomenon that David Dallin has identified with the period of 1896 to 1904. 45 Thus, at least from a cultural perspective, Russia‘s increasing interest in Central and East Asia dated back to 1873, that is, to the time of General Nikolai Przhevalsky‘s return from his first Central Asian expedition (1871-3). Owing to Przhevalsky‘s wide popularity, the promotion of his expeditions aroused new and widespread curiosity about the East, so that the Buddhist world, which had been previously confined to the territory of the Baikal Lake and Zabaikal (where the Russian Buddhist population of Buriats, Kalmyks, and Tuvinians 46 45 D. Dallin, The Rise of Russia in Asia. Archon Books, 1971, vii. 46 All three of these populations followed the Lamaist school of Buddhism. The Buriats and the Kalmyks were Mongol nomadic groups. Buriats settled in Zabaikalia along the valley of the Selenga River; they began professing Buddhism already from the last quarter of the sixteenth century, even though Buddhism arrived officially in 1712 when Tibetan lamas came to profess Lamaism. The ethnic origins of the Kalmyks date back to western Mongols, known as the Oirats, who became Russian subjects in the seventeenth century; first located in the area among the Ishim, Irtysh, and Om Rivers next to the border on Kazakistan, they lately settled in the territory north of the Caspian Sea, in the lower Volga. Unlike the Buriats and the Kalmyks, the Tuvinians were a Turkic-Mongol group moving in Central Asia along the Enisei River. In consequence of the Treaty of Peking, from 1860 to 1911 Tuva belonged to Outer Mongolia and was under Chinese control. With the collapse of the Qing dynasty, Tuva temporarily fell under the Russian sphere of influence, becoming then an autonomic region in 1915. Buddhism arrived in Tuva in different waves, the first dating ninth century and the last in the eighteenth century, when Lamaist Buddhism was definitely established in Tuva. For further information on the subject, see the following texts: J. Forsyth, A History of the Peoples of Siberia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994; Buddizm. Kanony, istoriia, iskusstvo, vol. 2. Edited by N.L. Zhukovskaia. Moscow: Dizain. Informatsiia. Kartografiia. Series Ars Buddhica, 2006; H.S. Hundley, ―Defending the Periphery: Tsarist Management of Buriat Buddhism.‖ The Russian Review 69 (April 2010): 231-50. For the study of Buddhism and its interaction with Shamanism, a 18 lived), now came to include the countries in Central and East Asia as well. For this reason, ―Russia‘s drive to the East‖ as a cultural phenomenon began in 1873 and ended in 1919, that is the year Oldenburg organized the ―First Buddhist Exhibition‖ in Petrograd. As Chapter Five explains, the exhibition was an important milestone in the advancement of Buddhist motifs among writers and artists; however, the exhibition also marked the swan song of the Romanov Empire: with the new Soviet state, a new ideology came forward, one that—inevitably—changed how the Buddhist world was perceived in Russia. 47 Although my dissertation treats ―Russia‘s drive to the East‖ as a cultural phenomenon dating from 1873 to 1919, Dallin‘s timeline (1896-1904) is also relevant; not only does it pinpoint the beginning, but it also marks the apogee of this impetus eastward. This impetus was affected by the livelihood of Russian foreign policy in Asia, a fact reinforced by the following historical overview. In 1867 Russia‘s annexation of western Turkestan and steady advance toward the borders of British India exacerbated political tensions with Great Britain, tensions which terminated with a bi-lateral agreement in 1872. According to this pact, Afghanistan was turned into a buffer zone between Russian and British territorial possessions. religion widely diffused in those areas, see Eva Jane Neumann Fridman, Sacred Geography: Shamanism Among the Buddhist Peoples of Russia. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 2004. 47 Buddhism in Russian culture continued to be present during the early Soviet period until 1931– the year that marked the closure of the St. Petersburg Institute of Buddhist Culture (1928-1931). It was an institution that, as Aleksandr Andreev has pointed out, in its brief existence marked— to some extent— a true renaissance of Russian Buddhology and Tibetology (A. Andreev, Ot Baikala do sviashchonnoi Lhasy. St.- Petersburg: Samara, 1997, 258). The Institute of Buddhist Culture represented both the apogee and the decline of Russian Oriental Studies, due to the subsequent repression of a whole generation of leading Russian Orientologists who died in the Stalinist purges. 19 Nevertheless, in 1876 Russia occupied Kokand in eastern Uzbekistan and moved to eastern Pamir. From that moment on, both Britain and Russia became the protagonists of the so-called ―Great Game,‖ that is the competitive acquisition of territories used to determine Russian and British spheres of influence on the chessboard of Central Asia. Russia advanced its expansionistic views both geographically and historically. Unlike other European nations, Russia could claim a long record of contact with East Asia. This record began in the seventeenth century with the construction of a fortress in Okhotsk— the first Russian settlement on the Northern Pacific Coast. Relations with China also dated back to the seventeenth century, specifically to 1689, the year the Chinese took the fortress of Albazin on the Amur River and forced Russia to sign the Treaty of Nirchinsk. Russia‘s policy toward China became aggressive only in the nineteenth century, when Count Nikolai Muraviev was appointed governor-general of eastern Siberia. Muraviev signed the Treaty of Aigun in 1858, a treaty not recognized by the Chinese authorities for two years— until the Russian representative, Nikolai Ignatiev, signed the Treaty of Peking. From the Chinese government, Ignatiev also obtained the territory between the Amur, the Ussuri and the Pacific Ocean, and parts of outer Manchuria. After the events in Chinese Turkestan, where Mohammedan tribes revolted in 1862, Russia and China signed the Treaty of Livadia on September 15, 1879, according to which Russia gained both territory and economic privileges. 48 48 This change occurred shortly after; the Treaty of Livadia was revised, accepted via the Treaty of Saint Petersburg, and signed on February 24, 1881. According to the final version of the agreement, Russia lost territory but received a larger indemnity and commercial license from China. 20 The nineteenth century also marked the beginning of frequent contact with Japan, a nation with which Russia divided the Kurile Islands and jointly occupied Sakhalin (Treaty of Shimoda, 1855). Only after the Sino-Japanese war, and the following Treaty of Shimonoseki in 1895, did Russia and Japan enter into conflict over Manchuria and Korea in an escalation of political tensions ending in the Russo-Japanese war of 1904-05. Before the war, the two nations, along with Western European governments, invaded China in 1900 to curb the Boxer uprising. Claiming to suppress the revolt, the coalition forces sacked China, plundering a good number of its treasures, including Buddhist cult items. These objects later turned up in the museums and private collections of many foreign countries, which displayed them in exhibitions, thus providing an additional intersection between political ideology and the cultural imagination. China and Japan represented only two of the Asian Buddhist countries with which Russia had contact. In fact, Mongolia, Tibet, and Siam (now Thailand) also maintained diplomatic relations with Russia. In the case of Mongolia, Russia‘s interest was also dictated by the presence of small groups of fellow citizens who began settling in neighboring Mongolia. In addition, the Russian Buddhist minorities of the Buriats and Kalmyks had Mongol origins. Russia‘s political influence over Mongolia became a reality at the time of the Chinese Revolution of 1911, when— liberated from Chinese supremacy and declared autonomous—Mongolia came under Russian control. As for Tibet, diplomatic missions from Lhasa arrived in St. Petersburg in 1898 and 1900 to solicit Russian protection against the Anglo-Indian threat. Although Tibet had some relevance to Russian domestic policy, thanks to the Dalai Lama in Lhasa, the spiritual 21 leader of the Lamaist population of the Buriats, Kalmyks, and Tuvinians, Tsar Nicholas II did not intervene in the ―Tibetan question,‖ thus undermining the value of diplomatic overtures by the Dalai Lama‘s Buriat emissary, Agvan Dorzhiev. Nevertheless, when the British invaded Tibet under General Francis Younghusband in 1904, the Dalai Lama rushed to the Mongolian capital, Urga (now Ulan Bator) and asked the Russian authorities for protection. Tsarist, and then Soviet, Russia closely watched the destiny of Tibet, following the three flights of the Dalai Lama, as the scholar Aleksandr Andreev has emphasized in his numerous books and articles on the subject. 49 Like Tibet, Siam tried to involve Russia in its foreign policy. A Siamese delegation first arrived in Russia in 1891, two years before the country became the center of imperialistic contention between British India and French Indochina. In this European rivalry, which lasted until the Anglo-French 1896 agreement on the neutralization of Siam, Russia took the side of its French ally. As a matter of fact, Russia‘s intervention in the Siamese controversy was not accidental, as Nicholas II (the Tsarevich) had established good relations with the Siamese King Chulalonghorn at the time of his Asian tour of 1890-91. Nicholas‘s acquaintance with the King of Siam stimulated cultural and political activities that strengthened the bonds between the two nations. Thus, in 1907, Russia‘s influence on Siam was such that England, France, and Russia gave birth to the triadic alliance of the Entente to limit their spheres of influence. 49 In English is possible to consult his book Aleksandr Andreev, Soviet Russia and Tibet. The Debacle of Secret Diplomacy, 1918-1930s. Leiden Boston: Brill‘s Tibetan studies library, 2003. Andreev‘s new book on the subject has been recently published in Russian Tibet v politike tsarskoi, sovetskoi i postsovetskoi Rossii. Sankt-Peterburg: Nartang, 2006. 22 In this intense work of diplomacy in Asia, India seems to be missing from Russia‘s foreign policy. Such an absence might be explained by the Russo-British rivalry, and the fact that India remained under England‘s rule for the whole period of the British colonization. Only when the Indian independent movement arose did Russia turn to this country, seeing in the nationalistic revolt a chance to obtain more power in India. Despite its political remoteness, however, India continued to inspire Russians, who often described the country in their travel accounts. The first of such accounts dated back to the twelfth century and was titled The Story of India the Rich, followed by other accounts such as Travels Beyond Three Seas (fifteenth century) by the merchant Afanasy Nikitin. The already mentioned Indologist, Ivan Minaev, also visited India and published his travel account under the title Journal of my Travel to India and Burma. 50 To the Russian mind, India remained an exotic place, mostly identified with Orientalist themes. As Margarita Albedil writes: In our country, India, remote and foreign, constantly evoked the image of distant heavenly lands, which, invariably, captured the imagination of those who felt constrained in the daily ‗corridor‘ of life. […] [Russians] always pictured this country in brightly lush, unearthly colors. 51 India and Russia is the subject of a wide number of publications, 52 thereby this dissertation analyzes the subject matter only with regard to specific works of literature 50 I. Minaev, Dnevniki puteshestvii v Indiu i Birmu, 1880 i 1885-86. Moscow: Izd-vo Akademii nauk SSSR, 1955. 51 M. Albedil‘, Indiia: bespredel‘naia mudrost‘. Moscow: Aleteia, 2003, 12. 52 To name just a few studies on the subject: Е. Liusternik, Russko-indiiskie ekonomicheskie, nauchnye i kul‘turnye sviazi v XIX v. Моscow: Nauka, 1966; R.H. Stacy, India in Russian Literature: Motilal 23 that deal with Buddhism and that had repercussions on modern Russian culture, as is the case of the Arnold‘s The Light of Asia (1879) mentioned above — the poeticized life of the Buddha, which was very successful in Russia. Undoubtedly, from the second half of the nineteenth century one of the most important mechanisms of Indian promotion was the Theosophical movement, whose headquarters moved to Odiar in 1878. One of the founders of the Theosophical Society, Sir Henry Steel Olcott, contributed to the field of Buddhist studies through his Buddhist Catechesis (1882), which was accepted by the Theravada school of Ceylon, and his Fourteenth Fundaments of Buddhism (1891), written as an attempt to unite the numerous Buddhist schools under one doctrine. As Chapter Three recounts, Olcott met members of the imperial Russian frigate when Tsar Nicholas stopped in Colombo during his 1890-91 Asian tour. On the imperial frigate he met Prince Esper Ukhtomsky, a renowned collector of Buddhist artwork. The story of Ukhtomsky‘s collection, which helped to popularize the Buddhist world in Russian culture, is discussed at length in Chapter Three. “The Journey” Ukhtomsky‘s acquaintance with Olcott also attests to a world of interconnectedness made possible by the rapid increase in travel toward the end of the nineteenth century, whether for recreation or scientific research. Indeed, voyages to the East and to the West represent the other main channel through which elements of the Banarsidass, Delhi, 1985; G. Gachev, Оbrazy Indii. (Оpyt ekzistentsial‘noi kul‘turologii). Introduced by. P. Grintser. Moscow: Nauka, 1993; M. Аl‘bedil, Indiia: Bespredel‘naia mudrost‘. 24 Buddhist world were diffused into modern Russian culture. From this perspective, even Russia‘s foreign policy vis à vis Asia can be seen as an aspect of the physical journey, intended as the political voyage undertaken by diplomats and, in the case of the Boxer rebellion and the Russo-Japanese war, as a movement of troops to the frontline. This type of interpretation relates to the study of travel as an interdisciplinary topic concerning the culture of travel, as approached, for instance, in Voyages and Visions. Towards a Cultural History of Travel. 53 Addressing a cultural history of travel from the sixteenth century to the present days, the authors of Voyages and Visions interpret travel ―as a culturally significant event rather than a mere physical movement,‖ 54 which is exactly the approach used in this dissertation. Yet, my study draws direct inspiration from Timothy Brook‘s Vermeer‘s Hat. The Seventeenth Century and the Dawn of the Global World. 55 In his work Brook looks at the appearance of fur hats and other objects such as silver coins, old maps, and caskets of fruits, in some of Johannes Vermeer‘s paintings, questioning their inspirational sources. Brook explicates the introduction of these objects into works of art through a discussion of the economic situation of seventeenth-century Netherlands, with the establishment of the Dutch East India Company. By providing goods such as silks, spices, and porcelain, Brooks continues, the Company made foreign objects familiar, thus facilitating the assimilation of new visual material and ideas that 53 Voyages and Visions. Towards a Cultural History of Travel. Edited by Jás Elsner and Joan-Pau Rubiés. London: Reaktion Books, 1999. 54 Ibid., 7. 55 T. Brook, Vermeer‘s Hat. The Seventeenth Century and the Dawn of the Global World. New York: Bloomsbury Press, 2008. 25 were consequently imported into Flemish paintings. It is no accident that Brook concludes his book by discussing the experience of the journey, as it was traveling that facilitated the assimilation of foreign cultures. In some sense, Brook‘s intention coincides with that of my own inasmuch as the presence of Buddhist themes in works by modern Russian writers and artists documents the same process that occurred in seventeenth-century Netherlands. In Russia from 1873 to 1919, Buddhist words such as karma, nirvana, enlightenment became common currency. 56 These words characterized a manner of speaking that, when put into the context of broad socio-political and cultural indicators, developed from the contemporary fashion of traveling. The extent to which the general enthusiasm for traveling whetted literary and artistic appetites is indicated by the Wanderlust of Konstantin Balmont, who first traveled to Oxford in 1897, where he lectured on Russian literature. His class was attended by the German Orientologist Max Müller, who actively participated in the international debate on the nature of nirvana. On his next trip, Balmont traveled around the world visiting many cultural sites in Africa, Australia, New Zeland, Fiji, New Guinea, as well as Buddhist shrines in Java, Ceylon, and India; he moved permanently to Paris in 1920. Before his definitive migration to the French capital, however, he collaborated with the Orientologist Sylvain Lévi, who helped him to translate the work of the Indian author Ashvaghosha. Balmont‘s frequent travels East and West brought him into contact with 56 When seen from this angle, that one of the most important artistic groups of the Russian Realist movement named itself ―The Wanderers‖ makes perfect sense. 26 Buddhism in a variety of ways. Evidently, his passion for traveling led him directly to Buddhism, which, in any event, paralleled the general Russian fashion for Buddhism. Indeed, Balmont‘s tour of Asia was not exceptional. Many other Russian writers and artists either traveled to the East or imagined going there. Anton Chekhov, Ivan Bunin, and Vasily Vereshschagin, for instance, actually went to Asia, whereas Natalia Goncharova, Aleksei Kruchenykh, and Mstislav Dobuzhinsky only dreamed visiting distant Asian lands. Nonetheless, whether actual or imaginary, their voyages to Asia attest to the urge to seek adventure, an impulse uniting an entire generation nurtured on writers such as Jules Verne and Daniel Defoe. Moreover, the plot of Verne‘s and Defoe‘s adventure books fit well with the past Romantic spirit that modern artists and writers inherited, because, Romanticism, too, with its yearning for the exotic Orient, enhanced interest in the East. The Romantic spirit and the ―Oriental Renaissance‖ that accompanied the tentative historiography of Buddhist studies in the first half of the nineteenth century elicited a curiosity about Buddhism that would echo in the works of Russian writers and artists thenceforth. However, the idea of traveling, understood as both real and imaginary journeys to the East in this context, is applied in my dissertation to the discussed artists in nuanced and sometimes unorthodox ways. Hence the category of the ―real journey‖ comprises scientific expeditions, deportations to Siberia, military invasions, diplomatic missions, world tours, and international exhibitions, whereas, the ―imaginary journey‖ deals with the metaphorical travel of specimens, ideas, and folkloric myths. Regardless of category, 27 these journeys document how itinerant not only people, but also worldviews were, prompting the recurrence of Buddhist imagery in modern literary and artistic productions. Chapter One focuses on how the ―real journey‖ determined the adoption of Buddhist motifs from modern writers, referring to the presence of the Buddhist world in the works of Balmont, Chekhov, and Aleksei Remizov and to the impact that scientific explorations, private travel, and deportations to Siberia had on modern Russian culture. Scientific expeditions also played a relevant role as a vehicle for information about foreign cultures, in this case about Buddhism. In turn, writers and artists followed the discoveries of explorers such as Nikolai Przhevalsky, Grigory Potanin, Petr Kozlov, and Sergei Oldenburg, some of whom excavated entire ancient Buddhist cities and even donated their findings to museums, thus acquainting the public at large with religious art objects. Przhevalsky remains the most famous explorer, whose first expedition to Central Asia (1870-1873) marked the beginning of an era that turned the explorer into a mythical figure, into a living embodiment of the mania for traveling. Pioneers of Central Asia, however, were not only adventurous entrepreneurs such as Przhevalsky, acting on their own volition, but also intellectual deported to Siberia against their will. But even under these harsh circumstances they contributed not only to the study of Siberian life, but also to animating a cultural dialogue between the center of the Russian empire and its periphery. The scientific expeditions of scholars such as Potanin and the future curator of the Ethnographical Department at the Alexander III Museum Dmitry Klements, for instance, greatly enriched Siberian ethnographical and Buddhist collections. 28 Scientific explorations, personal travels, and deportations to Siberia did not represent the only factors influencing the appearance of Buddhist ideas in modern literature and the arts. Chapter Two, for example, deals with the widely debated Buddhist origins of some Christian legends. One of these legends regarded the life of the Indian Prince Josaphat and his conversion to Christianity. At the time the international arena was divided into two groups, those who agreed with this interpretation and those who disagreed. Regardless of their positions, the resonance of the argument made the figure of the Buddha extremely popular both in visual arts and literature. Following the recurrent dual pattern of ―real journey‖ and ―imaginary journey,‖ this transmigration of religious myths symbolizes the ―imaginary journey‖ of ideas. In this case, since it dwells within Medieval legends, the ―imaginary journey‖ has been conceived metaphorically as the pilgrimage of the Buddha and Christ, aka Buddhism and Christianity, into the land of artistic production. Chapter Two, therefore, analyses works by Remizov, Tolstoy, Dmitry Merezhkovsky, and others so as to demonstrate how the debate on Buddhism and its relation to Christianity affected their choice to write stories and poems on the Buddha. From the ―imaginary journey‖ of ideas the dissertation goes back to the ―real journey‖ in Chapter Three, where the ―real journey‖ takes the shape of diplomatic missions. An exemplary case is Tsar Nicholas II‘s Grand Tour of 1890-91, which combined private tour and political agenda. In fact, despite its personal character, the Tsar‘s trip served major political interests, aimed at enhancing Russian diplomatic ties to Asia. Nicholas II brought back diplomatic gifts and devotional specimens, which the Buddhist ethnic minorities of the Buriats and the Kalmyks gave him as he passed through 29 their lands on his way back to St. Petersburg – and this addition of Buddhist devotional gifts to the imperial collection raises another question, i.e. the extent of Siberian Buddhist settlements along the Russian Asian border. Indeed Russia‘s unique Eurasian geography also determined the phenomenon of Buddhist collections in the country at large and of the presence of Buddhist artifacts in the Tsar‘s private collection specifically. This interaction with Buddhist ethnic minorities also helped disseminate Buddhist themes in Russian culture. Historically, Nicholas II‘s Grand Tour preceded a series of events which, from the Sino-Japanese conflict of 1894 to the Russo-Japanese war of 1904-05, diffused a common fear of the so-called ―yellow peril.‖ Chapter Four is dedicated to this issue. If in Chapter Two the debate about Buddhism and Christianity represented one idea that inspired creative works devoted to the figure of the Buddha, in Chapter Four the notion of the ―yellow peril‖ develops as the idea generated by the political journey. But in this case, the meditative figure of the Buddha abandoned the scene, yielding to apocalyptic scenarios that pointed to the end of the established monarchy and the dawn of a new era, as Vladimir Soloviev prophesized in his last poem ―Pan-mongolism: The Apocalypse.‖ Soloviev associated Buddhism and ―yellow peril‖ on various occasions, as did Viacheslav Ivanov and Vasily Rozanov. These three writers tended to blame Buddhism for the imminent end of the world, hardly responding positively to the diffusion of this religion in Russia and the West. Clearly, no matter how they felt about Buddhism, their fear of the enemy (the other), reflected in their work, showed how culture and politics were mutually implicated at the beginning of the twentieth century. 30 Politics and war— the most brutal outcome of the political journey— brought to the frontline not only people, but also civilizations and worldviews. Despite the despair and death that resulted, the belligerent turns of the political journey contributed as widely as private tours and scientific missions to the dissemination of Buddhist motifs in modern Russian culture. This process can be noted in writings by the adversaries of Buddhism (Soloviev, Ivanov, Rozanov), as well as in Kaiser Wilhelm‘s popular sketch on the ―yellow peril,‖ the numerous articles in the press, and the polemic around the St. Petersburg Datsan (―The Heathen Temple‖ in Bely‘s Petersburg), which opened concurrently with the Tercentenary of the Romanov dynasty. All of these examples document how lively the debate around the ―yellow peril‖ was and the degree to which some members of the intelligentsia associated Buddhism with the Asian threat. Fears of an imminent end to the world, which Soloviev foresaw in his pan- mongolian prophecy, seemed to be justified by the wave of political events. Russian writers dealt with the theme of the Apocalypse in many ways, drawing often upon Buddhist ideas and themes. In the specific case of Bely‘s novel Petersburg, apart from the author‘s explicit admission that the young hero of his novel had a ―tender feeling for Buddhism,‖ references to Buddhism and the Apocalypse are especially manifest, for instance, when Nikolai Ableukhov envisions a god resembling the Buddha or Confucius staring at him from the doorway of his room in his dream of the Last Judgment. Although motionless, with its gaze of dread and menacing position in the doorway, the god resembles the Buddha in Kaiser Wilhelm‘s popular sketch on the ―yellow peril.‖ In that image, too, the menacing divinity is located on a sort of frontline— the opposite shore of 31 the Japanese peninsula— and from there stares at the main heroes of the composition (the European Valkyries in the foreground) while slowly approaching them. Whether expressed visually or through the written word, the feeling of an imminent apocalyptic catastrophe is palpable in both works. In addition to the Apocalypse, Bely‘s novel points to another element relevant to the present dissertation— the significant influence that German Idealism, especially through Arthur Schopenhauer and Friedrich Nietzsche, exerted on the young generation of Symbolists. Bely took from Schopenhauer his pessimistic views and from Nietzsche his idea of the Übermensch. The constant travels of Russian intellectuals also brought Western interpretations of Buddhism into Russia; thus, Russian interest in Buddhism was not an isolated phenomenon, but part of a larger contemporary Western European vogue. Since Buddhism from the West played just as central a role as Buddhism from the East did in promoting Buddhist motifs in modern Russian culture, Chapter Five and Six give particular attention to the methods whereby Russian writers and artists imported Buddhist ideas from Europe, especially from France and Germany. Chapter Five analyzes the French cultural scene and the reasons why Buddhism enjoyed such popularity. The chapter especially deals with the private Buddhist collections of Émile Guimet and Henry Cernuschi, who traveled to Asia in search of precious Buddhist specimens. Guimet promoted Buddhism not only through his collection, but also through Buddhist ceremonies performed in his museum and attended by many representatives of the French beau monde. Among his visitors were Balmont, Maximilian Voloshin, and Innokenty Annensky, who even devoted his poem ―Buddhist 32 Mass in Paris‖ to one of the Buddhist ceremonies held at the Musée Guimet. The Russian reception of the Buddhist world in Paris, however, was not limited to visits to the collections of Guimet and Cernuschi. The 1900 ―Exposition Universelle‖ also showed Russia‘s private Buddhist collections to an international public. In fact, at the Russian Pavilion of Peripheral Regions there visitors from all over the world could admire Prince Ukhtomsky‘s and Nikolai Gomboev‘s Buddhist possessions. Ukhtomsky‘s collection, in particular, caught the attention of the German Orientologist Albert Grünwedel, who after seeing Ukhtomsky‘s collection at the ―Exposition Universelle‖ went to St. Petersburg to catalog part of it. Grünwedel‘s study of Ukhtomsky‘s collection stresses not only the strong international ties between Russia and Western Europe, but it also serves as a preliminary inquiry for introducing a discussion of Germany as the other main national source, along with France, that influenced how Russians understood the Buddhist world. As seen with Bely, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche made a vital, if misleading, contribution to the understanding of certain Buddhist concepts such as nirvana. For them it meant pessimism and annihilation— and not just the final achievement attained after a life spent following the Eightfold Path. Schopenhauer, however, was not the first to promote this pessimistic view; the way was paved by Hegel, who in the 1820s had already erroneously lectured on Buddhism as a cult of nothingness. Through his reading of Hegel, Alexander Herzen imported this misinterpretation to Russia. Indeed, a closer look at the international debate around the nature of nirvana showed that this nihilistic interpretation arose from a serious, but misguided, concern 33 about the historical meaning of this concept. It was an interpretation that mirrored a general anxiety in Europe about historical-political changes that had begun in Russia with the abolition of serfdom and the 1881 assassination of Tsar Alexander II. As was the case with discussions of the ―yellow peril,‖ here, too, political and social unrest intertwined with cultural constructs and sometimes with specific Buddhist motifs, which were then used, albeit metaphorically, to express the widespread malaise. The ―nihilistic‖ nirvana, for instance, found its political counterpart in the terrorism of the Populist movement, which initiated a series of changes culminating in the ―nirvanic annihilation‖ of the Romanov dynasty. In this climate of darkness and despair, the life of Prince Sakyamuni, with its existentialistic underpinnings, tempted the modern Russian soul trapped in uncertainty about the future. From this perspective the Indian Prince became a new Hamlet in the eyes of many writers and artists, who saw in him a consonant behavioral model. As highlighted in Chapter Two, this consonance justified the popularity of the figure of the Buddha in the arts and in literature especially from the 1880s to the 1910s. Nonetheless, the analysis of Kazimir Malevich‘s white Suprematism and of Nikolai Kulbin‘s writings on harmony as nirvana also attests to the perception of Buddhism that was gaining ground in the 1910s. This ―cosmic‖ view opened the way to new Russian approaches to Buddhism on the eve of the Soviet era. But because of the dramatic ideological differences introduced after the October Revolution, this dissertation closes historically with the fall of the Romanov dynasty and culturally with the 1919 First Buddhist Exhibition in Petrograd. Thereafter, the Buddhist journey through Soviet Russia alighted 34 upon very different destinations and witnessed very different outcomes – to constitute a new itinerary which provides rich material for another and subsequent exploration of the interaction of Orientology and modern Russian culture. 35 Chapter 1 The Voyage to Asia Lorsque enfin il mettra le pied sur notre échine, Nous pourrons espérer et crier: En avant! De même qu'autrefois nous partions pour la Chine, Les yeux fixés au large et les cheveux au vent, Nous nous embarquerons sur la mer des Ténèbres Avec le coeur joyeux d'un jeune passager. Entendez-vous ces voix charmantes et funèbres, Qui chantent: «Par ici vous qui voulez manger Le Lotus parfumé! c'est ici qu'on vendange Les fruits miraculeux dont votre coeur a faim; Venez vous enivrer de la douceur étrange De cette après-midi qui n'a jamais de fin!» 57 The Sentimental Journey: The Case of Konstantin Balmont How did the Symbolist poet Konstantin Balmont come to be so fascinated with Buddhism that he wrote on April 12, 1912: ―The Buddha accompanied me in the Atlantic and Indian Ocean, as well as in southern Africa. It seems surreal to me that everything is over‖? 58 The Russian poet wrote these remarks at the time of his tour around the world, which he began on February 1, 1912. 59 A quick look at the photographs of his trip confirms his infatuation with the Buddha. In a series of images, Balmont immortalized 57 C. Baudelaire, Le Voyage <http://fleursdumal.org/poem/231> 58 G. Bogdan-Levin, ―Indiiskaia kul‘tura v tvorchestve K.D. Bal‘monta.‖ In Ashvagosha, Zhizn‘ Buddy. Kalidasa. Dramy. Translated by K. Bal‘mont. Introduced and commented by Grigory Bongard-Levin. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1990, 17. 59 The route included southern Africa, Australia, New Zeland, Fiji, New Guinea, Java, Ceylon, and India. 36 the beautiful ninth-century Buddhist Temple Borobudur in Java (Indonesia), with its reliefs depicting the life of the Buddha, and numerous Buddha statues from various sites (fig.1-2). Photographs by Balmont and by Alfred A. Foucher of other Buddhist treasures also illustrate Balmont‘s translation of the life of the Buddha by the Indian chronicler Ashvagosha. Konstantin Balmont‘s engagement in the translation of Ashvagosha‘s The Life of the Buddha (Zhizn‘ Buddy) happened immediately after his voyage to Asia. It was released by Mikhail and Sergei Sabashnikov‘s publishing house for the series ―Monuments of World Literature‖ in 1913. Mikhail Sabashnikov was the husband of Balmont‘s sister-in-law; 60 his other brother, the doctor I. Sabashnikov (known in the literary world by the pseudonym ―Iurinsky‖) was one of the translators of Edwin Arnold‘s bestseller The Light of Asia 61 and one of the owners of the Moscow publishing house ―K-vo M. i S. Sabashnikovy.‖ Undoubtedly, Balmont‘s family ties with the Sabashnikov brothers determined his collaboration with them and reinforced his interest in Buddhist culture. Already a decade earlier in 1900, however, the Symbolist poet paid 60 G. Bongard-Levin, ―Indiiskaia kul‘tura v tvorchestve K.D. Bal‘monta,‖ note 13, 28. 61 Iurinsky‘s translation first appeared in 1891 under the title Svetilo Azii ili Velikoe otrechenie. Poem by E. Arnold. Translated by Iurinsky (I.I.-ova). Saint-Petersburg, 1891( 2 nd ed. 1896). In 1917, the publishing house of the Sabashnikov brothers released another reprint of Arnold‘s book in Iurinsky‘s translation (See G. Bongard-Levin‘s note 13, 28-9. In Asvagosha, Zhizn‘ Buddy, 1913). 37 Fig. 1 Konstantin Balmont, Photograph of a Buddha statue at the Temple of Mendut, 1912. Fig. 2 Konstantin Balmont, Photograph of a Buddha statue in Anuradhapura (Sri Lanka), 1912. 38 attention to the subject when he translated into Russian Pedro Calderón de la Barca‘s Life is a Dream (1636), a play inspired by Lope de Vega‘s drama Barlaam and Josaphat (1611). 62 Debates around the figure of the Indian prince Josaphat and his similarities to the life of Siddhartha Gautama will be the subject of the next chapter. Here, it is enough to stress that Balmont not only translated Calderón‘s drama, 63 but also added the emblem of the legend as displayed in J. Jacobs‘ book Barlaam and Joasaph: English Lives of Buddha (London, 1896). 64 Balmont‘s involvement with Indian culture, and Buddhism especially, developed during his years at Oxford (1897). As with his later world tour, this journey (to the west, in this case) provoked further study of Buddhism and fostered many intellectual interactions. According to Grigory Bongard-Levin, the famous German Indologist Max Müller attended Balmont's seminars on Russian literature at Oxford; on his side, Balmont 62 On the Buddhist subtext in Life is a Dream, see Martin Bidney‘s article ―Life is a Dream and the Challenge of ‗Saint Buddha‘: Bal‘mont‘s Calderònian Crisis and Its Nietzschian Resolution.‖ Slavic and East European Journal 42.1 (1998): 37-57. Additionally, it is interesting to note that Lev Tolstoy, too, adopted the concept of ―life is a dream‖ to explain metaphorically his understanding of the Buddhist law of karma. In a letter to Dmitry Khilkov dated February 7, 1892, Tolstoy alleged that our dreamt life was as real as our awakened existence. He continued: ―Just as dreams in this life are states during which we live by impressions, feelings and thoughts of a previous life and gather strength for a subsequent life, so all our present life is a state during which we live by the ‗karma‘ of a previous, more real life and during which we gather strength and earn karma for a subsequent one—that more real life from which we have come‖ (Tolstoy‘s Letters, vol. 2 Selected, edited and translated by R.F. Christian. New York: Charles Scribner‘s Sons, 1978, 490). Two years later Tolstoy would translate Paul Carus‘s story Karma, to be published in the Northern Herald (Severnyi vestnik) (Chapter Two). 63 Sochineniia Kal‘derona, vol. 2. Translated from the Spanish by K.D. Bal‘mont. Commented by K.D. Bal‘mont and Leo Ruana. Moscow: Izdanie M. i S. Sobashnikovykh, 1900-02. Calderón‘s elaboration shares with the original story few traits—a prince is the hero, conflict develops between father and son, the theme of seclusion appears—however, the work concentrates more on the issue of free will and the illusion of life rather than on the conversion of the prince. 64 Povest‘ o Varlaame i Ioasafe. Pamiatnik drevnerusskoi perevodnoi literatury XI-XII vv. Edited and commented by I. Lebedeva. Leningrad: Nauka, 1985, note 87, 33. 39 read Müller‘s writings extensively. 65 Balmont‘s affiliation with the international circle of Orientologists would become even more evident when he began translating Ashvagosha‘s poem and collaborated with the famous scholar Sylvain Lévi—the foremost specialist on the Indian chronicler. Lévi composed an introduction to Balmont‘s translation of Ashvagosha‘s poem, providing an overview of the history of Buddhism from its origins to the debates that followed upon Buddha‘s death. In his introduction, Lévi enters the debates on Christianity and Buddhism—the topic of Chapter Two—by mentioning that the adventures of the Buddha fascinated the Christian church to the extent that the Buddha, under the name of Josaphat, entered into the list of Christian saints. 66 Hence, the debates around Buddhism and Christianity could not help but echo in Balmont‘s rendition of the life of the Indian prince. 67 Therefore, Balmont found the Buddha in the West (Oxford), and then went to the East to immerse himself physically in Buddhism. The exemplary case of Konstantin Balmont‘s encounter with the Buddha during his journey to Asia perfectly illustrates the impact of Buddhism on modern Russian literature. It is the goal of the present dissertation to answer the question: How did specific Buddhist motifs come to emerge in modern literary and artistic production? The answer to that question lies in traveling. ―The journey,‖ be it actual or imaginary, is one of the prevailing features of modern Russian culture. Every modern writer and artist 65 Ashvagosha, Zhizn‘ Buddy. Kalidasa. Dramy, 7-8. 66 Ashvagosha, Zhizn‘ Buddy. Translated by K. Bal‘mont with an Introduction by Sil‘ven Levi. Moscow: M. i S. Sabashnikovy, 1913. 67 In 1916, Sergei Oldenburg introduced Balmont‘s other translation of Indian classics—the plays by the Indian playwright Kalidasa (Moscow: M. i S. Sabashnikovy). 40 traveled both into an internal universe in a quest for the Self (the imagined journey) and outside in search of the Other (the actual journey). His continuous action—thinking, creating, visiting, exhibiting, watching, and experimenting—reflected this dual meaning of the modern voyage. Such restlessness was not an isolated phenomenon; indeed, the intellectual response to the ―mania for traveling‖ 68 was sweeping society at the time. Although Western Europe remained the main traveling attraction for many Russians, Asia began to appeal to an increasing number of visitors as well. Balmont was not the only Russian writer to travel to the East, others did as well (Anton Chekhov and Ivan Bunin, for example), while Maximilian Voloshin thought of going to Central Asia after talking to the Buriat monk Agvan Dorzhiev in Paris (Chapter Five). Because they interacted with Buddhism in one way or another, these writers will be discussed in the present and following chapters. For their actual and imagined journeys to Asia, in fact, all of them represent key players in this unique trend in the cultural history of the time. The goal of this dissertation is to prove that this constant voyaging promoted the circulation of ideas and interactions with foreign cultures, in turn serving to assimilate Buddhist vocabulary into modern Russian artistic production. In short, looking at the modern ―mania for traveling‖ will help provide an answer to the persistent questioning of the interrogative ―how come.‖ 68 This is how an anonymous writer defined the phenomenon from the pages of the magazine Patriotic Notes (Otechestvennye zapiski) ―Sovremennaia maniia k puteshestviiam.‖ Otechestvennye zapiski 8 (August 1876): 147-165. Even though the author did not sign his article, Ianovsky et al. identify him as Nikolai Iadrintsev (N. Ianovsky et al., Vospominanie (okonchanie). Stat‘i, ocherki, retsenzii. Vospominaniia o G.N. Potanine, vol. 7. Novosibirsk: zapadno-sibirskoe knizhnoe izdatel‘stvo. Series ―Literaturnoe nasledstvo Sibiri,‖ 1986, 261). 41 The Scientific Expedition: Nikolai Przhevalsky and “The Myth of The Explorer” Traveling to the East also inspired the trend of collecting ethnographical data to send to museums in Russia. For his part, Balmont donated the collection that he had assembled during his world tour to the Anthropological Museum of Moscow University and was awarded with membership to the Society of Amateurs of Ethnography. 69 This urge to collect highlights that for modern intellectuals ethnographical materials served as additional cognitive instruments of Buddhist culture. Related to these ethnographic investigations were scientific explorations to Central and East Asia—a huge lure for modern society. From the second half of the nineteenth century into the first half of the twentieth century, such explorations followed quickly one after another. The constant attention of the press, travelers‘ public lectures, published travel accounts, official ceremonies awarding explorers honorary titles, and the erection of memorial monuments to those who had gone to distant lands made such expeditions one of the main cultural events of the time. They also helped to create what Beau Riffenburgh calls ―the myth of the explorer.‖ 70 Expeditions inspired the fictional world of novels, like Rudyard Kipling‘s Kim (1901). In Kim science and espionage mingle on the heights of the Himalayas, where a French and a Russian explorer/spy accidentally meet the hero of the story, Kim, a secret agent for the British government 69 G. Bongard-Levin, ―Indiiskaia kul‘tura v tvorchestve K.D. Bal‘monta,‖ 19. 70 B. Riffenburgh, The Myth of the Explorer. The Press, Sensationalism, and Geographical Discovery. London and New York: Belhaven Press, 1993. 42 (Ch. 12-13). 71 Kipling‘s fiction of the ―Great Game‖ provides a good example of how imperialism in Asia motivated intriguing plots that captured the attention of readers. As in fiction, in reality explorers competed with one another in treasure hunting. The British government, for instance, financed Aurel Stein‘s travels to Khotan, Dunhuang, Iran, Iraq, and many other places that explorers went in search of antiquities. Under the patronage of the Swedish government, Sven Hedin visited Turkestan, the Pamirs, and many sites of the Silk Road. Similar explorations were backed by Germany and Japan. France also sponsored many expeditions to Central Asia, including Paul Pelliot‘s mission to Dunhuang, where he discovered ancient Buddhist manuscripts and artwork that became part of the Louvre‘s collection and the Guimet Museum in Paris (Chapter Five). International rivalries and the politics of territorial explorations only increased public interest in Asian culture. Indeed, the study of Central Asia and Buddhism was so fashionable in Russian society by the end of the nineteenth century to the beginning of the twentieth century that, as Irina Popova wrote: ―not only the scientific, but also the broad reading audience waited anxiously for the publications of studies done on the East, especially on Buddhism, as well as for translations of works from Oriental languages.‖ 72 71 To confirm that Kipling‘s novel was read by a large number of Russians is its serial publication in the magazine European Herald (Vestnik Evropy) (Part I-III, June 1902: 746-800; Part IV-VII, July 1902: 247- 305; Part VIII-XI, August 1902: 703-765; Part XII-XV, September 1902: 213-285). 72 Peshchery Tysiachi Budd. Rossiiskie ekspeditsii na shelkovom puti. K 190-letiu Aziatskogo muzeia. Edited by Olga Deshpande. Saint-Petersburg: Izdatel‘stvo Gosudarstvennogo Ermitazha, 2008, 28.The scientific expeditions were sponsored by the Imperial Russian Geographical Society, which was: ―a learned society specially devoted to the study of lands, peoples, and resources of the Russian Empire‖ (N. Knight, ―Science, Empire, and Nationality. Ethnography in the Russian Geographical Society, 1845-1855.‖ Imperial Russia. New Histories for the Empire. Edited by Jane Burbank and David L. Ransel. 43 Russian intellectual circles fell under the same spell. Modern representatives belonged to a whole generation who grew up reading adventure books that nourished their young imaginations and stirred the modern ―mania for traveling.‖ The artist Mstislav Dobuzhinsky, a member of the World of Art (Mir iskusstva) group, whose memoirs on childhood often evoke his real and imaginary journeys, fantasized about becoming an explorer when he grew up. Listening to his father‘s adventures—a traveler, ex-officer in Turkestan in 1869, and devotee of natural sciences—the young Dobuzhinsky dreamt of being an explorer and following in the footsteps of the famous ethnographer Nikolai Miklukho-Maklai, who went to New Guinea, Australia, Philippines, and Indonesia. In his adolescent daydreams, Dobuzhinsky imagined his bed and his bedroom transforming into a huge flying wagon, transporting him southward to places that his father had so vividly described. 73 Perhaps one of the most beautiful renditions of ―the myth of the explorer‖ comes from Vladimir Nabokov‘s novel The Gift (1937), in which the hero‘s father, an entomologist, disappears in Siberia while searching Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1998, 108). Founded by the Admiral Fedor Litke in 1845, it was the Russian response to the establishment of similar contemporary international societies. A wide range of studies both on the Russian Imperial Geographical Society and its members exists in the United States and abroad. The same can be said about the literature on and by Russian explorers, a subject that was widely studied during the Soviet Union when Russian explorers enjoyed the fame of national heroes. On the subject see: P. Semenov-T‘ian-Shansky, Istoriia poluvekovoi deiatel‘nosti Russkogo geograficheskogo obshchestva 1845-1895. Saint-Petersburg; Tip. V. Bezobrazova i komp., 1896; L. Berg, Vsesoiuznoe geograficheskoe obshchestvo za sto let: 1845-1945. Moscow-Leningrad: Izdatel‘stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR, 1946; Russkie geography i puteshestvenniki. Fondy arkhiva geograficheskogo obshchestva. Edited by T. Matveeva, T. Filonovich, and T. Iarukova, L. Leningrad: Nauka, 1971; T. Lubchenkova, Samye znamenitye puteshestvenniki Rossii. Moscow: Veche, 1999. In English the topic has been developed in works, such as: M. Bassin, ―The Russian Geographical Society, the ‗Amur Epoch,‘ and the Great Siberian Expedition of 1855-1863.‖Annals of the Association of American Geographers 73 (June 1983): 240-56; N. Knight, ―Science, Empire, and Nationality. Ethnography in the Russian Geographical Society, 1845-1855,‖ 108-141. 73 M. Dobuzhinsky, Vospominaniia. New York: Put' zhizni, St. Seraphim Foundation Inc., 1976, 5, 25, 49. 44 for butterflies. 74 Notably, Dobuzhinsky‘s father also collected insects after his acquaintance with the explorer Aleksei Fedchenko in Turkestan. Valerian Dobuzhinsky even sent his collection of insects to the Academy of Sciences, which awarded him with a diploma. Valerian transmitted his passion to his son Mstislav, who, until the age of fourteen, collected butterflies every time he went on vacation. 75 Creative circles in St. Petersburg and Moscow were captivated by voyages even before the modern age. Romanticism, for instance, had depicted travels to far exotic lands. Unlike those in the Romantic era, however, modern voyages abandoned the strictly exotic aspect of the journey to focus more on its spiritual and existential aspects. Like new versions of Romantic heroes, modern travelers restlessly turned eastward to seek answers to their inner uncertainties. Such interests elucidate the special attention they paid to eastern philosophies, in this case Buddhism. Perhaps the best distinction between the Romantic and modern concept of the journey was offered by Voloshin in the pages of his article ―Claudel in China‖ (Klodel v Kitae ). 76 Here, affirming the beginning of a new era, Voloshin distances himself from the unhealthy exoticism embodied by the Romantics and the big explorers of the past century. Because of them, Voloshin continues, the 74 Nabokov himself planned to participate in the 1918 expedition, which was lead by the famous explorer Grum Grzhimailo, but the plan remained unfulfilled (I. Paperno, ―How Nabokov‘s Gift Is Made.‖ Literature, Culture, and Society in the Modern Age: in Honor of Joseph Frank, vol. 2. Edited by Edward J. Brown. Stanford, Calif.: Dept. of Slavic Languages and Literatures, Stanford University, 1991, note 17, 317). 75 M. Dobuzhinsky, Vospominaniia, 34. 76 M. Voloshin, ―Klodel v Kitae.‖ Apollon7 (1911): 43-62. Paul Claudel was French consul in China from 1895 to 1909. He combined his diplomatic career with his activity as a poet. Voloshin wrote his article in response to Claudel‘s poetry collection Connaissance de L'Est (1895-1900)—a poetical rendition of Claudel‘s impressions of China. For a commented edition of Voloshin‘s article, see M. Voloshin, ―Klodel v Kitae.‖ Published and commented by I.S. Smirnov. In Vostok-Zapad. Issledovaniia. Perevody. Publikatsii. Edited by M.L. Gasparov, E.M. Meletinsky, A.B. Kudelin, L.Z. Eidlin. Moscow: Nauka, 1985, 189-212. 45 Romantic artist looked at the Orient as ―the poison of his conscience, the exciter of his sensibility.‖ 77 Theirs was the Orient seen through the lenses of opium and hashish (a reference to the first opium war in 1842, when the Asian continent became the center of imperialism for such nations as France, Britain, Russia, and others). To the Orientalism of the Romantics (Coleridge, Délacroix, Rimbaud, Gauthier, etc…), Voloshin juxtaposed the East as seen by Paul Claudel, 78 who visited Buddhist and Confucian pagodas, as well as Chinese gardens in order to be better initiated to the mysteries of the East. Voloshin praised Claudel for his actual knowledge of the Orient—quite unlike the stereotyped Orientalist imagery–and placed him into the same category of people like Lev Tolstoy, for his return to rural life, and Paul Gauguin, for his travel to the unfamiliar Tahitian island. 79 In other words, Voloshin praised those who went in search of ―the ancient nourishing juices of nature, which awaken and inebriate like the living and ancient water of the sea.‖ 80 Notably, in the issue of Apollo (Apollon) that featured Voloshin‘s article on Claudel, Anton Ossendovsky also published his ―Contemporary Chinese Art‖ 77 M. Voloshin, ―Klodel v Kitae‖ (1985), 189. 78 In his commendation of Claudel, Voloshin forgot to mention that Claudel was a fervent Catholic and that he even considered entering a Benedictine monastery. Claudel‘s devotion to Christianity contrasted to Voloshin‘s opinion of Christianity as the corrupted creed of a corrupted Europe. 79 It is noteworthy that Gauguin also traveled to Borobudur—the same Buddhist monument visited by Balmont—and that he likewise cultivated an interest in Buddhism, as his painting Nirvana (1889-90) well documents (On Gauguin and Buddhism see J. Baas, Smile of the Buddha. Eastern Philosophy and Western Art from Monet to Today. Foreword by Robert A.F. Thurman. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 2005, 34-41. 80 M. Voloshin, ―Klodel v Kitae‖ (1911), 46. In his critique to the Romantics, Voloshin rebuked Leconte de Lisle‘s poetry, some of which Annensky translated into Russian. Voloshin defined de Lisle‘s poems on tropical exoticism as ―pathetic confessions‖ (Ibid., 44). 46 (Sovremennoe tvorchestvo Kitaitsev). 81 Antony Ferdinand Ossendovsky was a Polish- Russian traveler, scholar, and writer, who worked in Siberia and the Far East. When his article appeared in Apollo in 1911, Ossendovsky was working in St. Petersburg as journalist and writer. His popularity would increase in the years of the civil war, and in the spring of 1920 he met the legendary Baron Roman Ungern von Sternberg in Urga. Ungern was a leading figure of the white resistance in Siberia; he fought for the advancement of a Pan-mongolism embodied in a confederation of Asian countries and united under the flag of one Buddhist creed. 82 In And Animals, and People and Gods (I zveri, i liudi i bogi), Ossendovsky describes his encounter with the legendary Baron von Sternberg, who was also a visitor of the St. Petersburg Buddhist Temple 83 (Chapter Four). The book was published in English in London in 1922 and translated into Russian in 1925. 84 Its popularity meant that Ossendovsky‘s work not only enforced the myth surrounding Baron Roman von Ungern, but also strongly affected the dissemination of occultism throughout Europe. 85 Occultism, in fact, surrounded the Baron, whom Mongolians regarded as the mythical knight of Shambhala (the upcoming kingdom of the 81 A. Ossendovsky, ―Sovremennoe tvorchestvo Kitaitsev,‖ Apollon7 (1911): 63-9. 82 Ungern is the subject of a wide number of books. To cite just a few: D. Pershin, Baron Ungern, Urga i Altan-Bulak. Zapiski ochevidtsa o smutnom vremeni vo Vneshnei (Khalkhaskoi) Mongolii v pervoi treti XX veka. Edited by Inessa Lomakina. Samara: Agni, 1999; L. Iuzefovich, Samoderzhets pustyni. Fenomen sud‘by barona R.F. Ungern-Shternberga. Moscow: Ellis Lak, 1993; Baron Ungern-Shternberg i voiny Shambaly <http://www.netmistik.ru/occultism2/okvo82.htm> 83 A. Andreev, Khram Buddy v Severnoi stolitse. Saint-Petersburg: Nartang, 2004, 90. 84 A. Ossendovsky, Zveri, liudi i bogi. Riga: G. Birkgan, 1925. 85 Baron Ungern-Sternberg i voiny Shambaly <http://www.netmistik.ru/occultism2/okvo82.htm> 47 New Era of peace and prosperity, according to Tibetan Buddhist legends), who would lead the final apocalyptic battle between good and evil. 86 In the second half of the nineteenth century, however, the figure of the traveler had not yet assumed the tragic contours of the chronicler witnessing the apocalyptic battle between the White and Red Army. In the second half of the nineteenth century, Russians were unaware of what would happen in the 1920s and still enjoyed reading the adventures experienced by explorers. Perhaps one of the most popular of all the Russian explorers remained Nikolai Przhevalsky, the famous traveler to Central Asia. His popularity was such that when he suddenly died en route to his fifth expedition on October 20, 1888, the Imperial Russian Geographical Society launched public subscriptions for a memorial monument in St. Petersburg. 87 According to Daniel Brower, the fundraising was so successful that it competed with subscriptions for the Pushkin 86 The Bolsheviks shot Ungern dead in 1921. After his death, his legend began to spread. Some lamas in eastern Mongolia considered the Baron the personification of Mahagali, a six-hand divinity, the merciless custodian of the faith who, unable to reach nirvana, was eternally destined to fight against those who impeded the diffusion of Buddhism (Baron Ungern-Shternberg i voiny Shambaly). 87 The first monument to Przhevalsky was erected where he died on the shores of the lake Issyk-kul in Kyrgyzstan, not far from the city of Karakol, renamed Przhevalsk after his death. The monument, inaugurated in the summer of 1894, consists of a bronze eagle, symbol of strength, reason and fearlessness, on the top of a mountain slope made of granite. In its claws, the eagle holds the map of Asia with the territories opened by Przhevalsky, while in its beak, it carries an olive-branch, a reminder of the ―peaceful‖ struggles made in the name of science. Ten steps bring the visitor to the bottom of the monument, where a portrait of Przhevalsky is located (N.M. Przheval‘sky.Saint-Petersburg: Voennaia tipografiia, 1890, 1). 48 monument a decade earlier. 88 The result was a bust of the Russian explorer set in the Aleksandrovsky Gardens, where Przhevalsky was represented with a camel at his feet. 89 Artists and writers of the time were well aware of Przhevalsky‘s enterprises. The artist Pavel Filonov, for instance, advised the artist Baskanchin to look at Przhevalsky‘s biography and writings as an example to emulate. Filonov listed Przhevalsky next to figures like Peter the Great, Mikhail Lomonosov, the famous explorers David Livingston and Henry Morton Stanley, and the famous chemist and microbiologist Louis Pasteur. According to Filonov, their work served as basic reading for the master-artist‘s self- development. 90 The playwright and short story writer Anton Chekhov even wrote an obituary on Przhevalsky for the newspaper New Times (Novoe vremia) in 1888. In his homage to the explorer, Chekhov describes him as embodiment of the literary positive hero whose deeds are all the more admirable and educative because they were not confined to the fictional printed page, but took action into reality. 91 That Nikolai Przhevalsky represented a model for Chekhov emerges also in his correspondence, 88 D. Brower, ―Imperial Russia and Its Orient: The Renown of Nikolai Przhevalsky.‖ Russian Review 53.3 (July 1994): 367. 89 A. Zelenin, Puteshestviia N.M. Przheval‘skogo, vol. 2. Saint-Petersburg: Izdanie P.P. Soikina, 1899-90, 7. 90 P. Filonov, ―Pis‘mo nachinaiushchemu khudozhniku Baskanchinu ob analiticheskom iskusstve (19 fevralia 1940 g.).‖ In Filonov. Analiticheskoe iskusstvo. Edited by Nicoletta Misler and John E. Bowlt. Moscow: Sovetskii khudozhnik, 1990, 230. 91 A. Chekhov, ―N. Przheval‘sky.‖ In Sobranie sochinenii i pisem v 18-ti tomakh, vol. 16 (1881-1902). Мoscow: Nauka, 1979, 237. 49 especially in his letter to Elena Lintvareva dated October 27, 1888, where he wrote: ―I deeply love people like Przhevalsky.‖ 92 Because Przhevalsky was popular among writers and artists, his views on faith and civilization are relevant, especially insofar as they deal with Buddhism. In general, Przhevalsky related to Buddhism and Asian people in negative terms; for instance, his descriptions of Mongolians and Asians evidence his conviction about the racial superiority of Europeans, in this case of Russians, over the ―yellow race.‖ Furthermore, in his ethnographic descriptions of Mongols in the second chapter of his travel account Mongolia and the Country of the Tanguts (1875-76), 93 Przhevalsky blames Lamaism (the Tibetan school of Buddhism) for favoring the laziness of the nomadic population, and thus obstructing the Mongols from progressing toward ―civilization.‖ 94 Arguing that religion without any other instrument of civilization was not able to soften and surpass the barbaric instincts of the people, Przhevalsky maintains that: ―As people know, the Buddhist preaching professes the highest moral principles; however, it did not teach the Mongolian to see his brother in every man, and to be merciful even with his own enemy.‖ 95 According to Przhevalsky, the Christian missionaries, as representatives of a 92 A. Chekhov, Sobranie sochinenii v 12-ti tomakh, vol. 1, letter 147. Moscow: Gosud-noe izd-vo khudo- noi lit., 1956, 291. 93 N. Przheval‘sky, Mongoliia i strana tangutov. Trekhletnee puteshestvie v vostochnoi Azii, vol. 2. Saint- Petersburg: Izdanie Imperatorskogo Russkogo Geograficheskogo Obshchestva, 1875-76. See also E. Pervochkova‘s article ―Buddizm v Mongolii glazami russkikh puteshestvennikov vtoroi poloviny XIX v. (po materialam G.N. Potanina i N.M. Przheval‘skogo).‖ In Buddiiskaia kul‘tura: istoriia, istochnikovedenie, iazykoznanie i iskusstvo: Vtorye Dordzhievskie chteniia. Edited by Ts. A. Sambueva. Saint-Petersburg: Peterburgskoe Vostokovedenie, 2008, 212-219. 94 N. Przheval‘sky, Mongoliia i strana tangutov,vol. 1, 52. 50 ―higher‖ civilized race, were assigned the task of teaching the ―primitive‖ Mongolians the virtue of compassion. 96 In his travel accounts, the Russian explorer also tended to align Buddhism with paganism, 97 a correlation that would be recited on other occasions by people such as those who opposed the construction of the Buddhist Temple in St. Petersburg (Chapter Four). The parallel between Buddhism and paganism comes not only from his writing, but also from the visual material accompanying his travel accounts. Such a conflation is evident, for example, in the drawing of the colossal statue of Buddha in Taiyuan in the province of Shanxi, which Przhevalsky‘s fellow traveler, the explorer Vsevolod Roborovsky, made during their visits to the ruins of the so-called temple of the ―Thousand caves.‖ 98 The repeated use of the word ―idol‖ in the text and captions makes evident that both Przhevalsky and Roborovsky thought of Buddhism in terms of paganism. 99 Not until 1905, with the approval of the edict (ukaz) on April 17 on the 95 Ibid., 59. 96 Ibid. 97 Przhevalsky wrote of Buddhism in terms of paganism in the travel account of his third expedition to Central Asia (1879-1880) From Zaysan via Hami to Tibet and the Upper Reaches of the Yellow River (N. Przheval‘sky, Iz Zaisana cherez Khami v Tibet i na verkhov‘ya zheltoi reki.Tret‘e puteshestvie v Tsentral‘noi Azii. S.-Petersburg: Tipografiia V.S. Balasheva, 1883, ch. 5). 98 N. Przheval‘sky, Iz Zaisana cherez Khami v Tibet i na verkhov‘ya zheltoi reki, 102. The cave temple site described here is Tianlongshan, situated 40 kilometers (ca. 24 miles) southwest of Taiyuan. 99 Przhevalsky described the ruins of the ―Thousands caves‖ in the following way: ―Time contributed to the damage as well. Many eaves and even entire parts of the upper caves collapsed. Hence their idols, which had been previously placed inside the cave, now stand completely revealed… A large seated idol, Buddha himself, is located opposite to the entrance in the depth of the wall… The big caves are twice as large as the ones that I just described. There idols are much bigger, they are sometimes twice as big as human size…Moreover, in the big caves the main idols are placed in the middle of the space on a special pedestal; smaller idols are located behind this pedestal and on both sides of the walls. The two biggest idols of the entire cave are set in a special edifice‖ (emphasis mine, ADR) (Ibid., 101). 51 freedom of cult, would references to Buddhists as ―pagans‖ and ―idolaters‖ 100 be prohibited. Przhevalsky‘s argumentations published both in Russia and abroad provoked lively debates and responses, constantly drawing the attention of the public to his subject matter. 101 Yet, despite attacks on his political views and the horrified reaction to his racist statements from the St. Petersburg community of Orientologists, 102 from 1873, when he returned from his first expedition to Central Asia, General Przhevalsky became a celebrity and a constant landmark for a large number of Russians. His name was pronounced with other big foreign explorers of the time, such as the Scotsman David Livingston and the Welsh-born American Henry Stanley. Nikolai Przhevalsky was 100 A. Andreev, Khram Buddy v Severnoi stolitse, 30. Przhevalsky‘s sense of superiority over Asians belonged to the same discourse of the clash of civilizations that accompanied the British explorers to Tibet. Perceval Landon, for example, who entered Lhasa in the retinue of General Francis Younghusband in 1904, described the deities of the Tibetan iconography as Buddhist ―freaks.‖ Moreover, Landon himself used the term ―idol‖ to define representations of the Buddha. This characterization is the case with his description of the statue of Jowo Sakyamuni, located in the most venerated Jokang Temple in Lhasa. This image of the Buddha, beautifully decorated with precious metals and glittering jewels, is immortalized in the pages of Landon‘s travel account as ―the great golden idol‖ (P. Landon, Lhasa, vol. 2 London: Hurst & Blackett, 1905, 309-12). 101 International magazines like the Asiatic Quarterly Review published in its fourth issue the article ―General Prjevalsky on Central Asia‖ (July-October 1887): 393-452. In this essay the Russian explorer describes the Asians as barbarians, unable to live in freedom because of their ignorance in matters of State life. According to Przhevalsky, Buddhism and Mahometanism enforced this primitive condition, not allowing Christianity to penetrate into the country. In describing the inhabitants of Central Asia who lived under the control of China, Nikolai Przhevalsky could not but outline how Asians sincerely desired to be ruled by Russians, who were known for their humanity towards subjected nations (Ibid., 416-7). In Russia, Przhevalsky‘s statements, published in the Russian Herald (Russky Vestnik) (December 1886) roused numerous responses. One of these came from Sergei Georgievsky, who answered to Nikolai Przhevalsky in the pages of the European Herald. Georgievsky criticized Przhevalsky‘s judgments on the semi-barbarism of the Chinese, quoting the French ex Consul J. Simon, who, unlike Przhevalsky, lived in China for ten years and did know the subject matter (S. Georgievsky, ―Dva issledovatelia Kitaiskoi imperii. Po povodu stat‘i g. Przheval‘skogo ‗Sovremennoe polozhenie Tsentral‘noi Azii‘ i knigi Zh. Simona: ‗Sredinnoe tsarstvo.‖ Vestnik Evropy, August 1887: 781). 102 D. Schimmelpenninck van der Oye, Toward the Rising Sun. Russian Ideologies of Empire and the Path to War with Japan. DeKalb, Illinois: Northern Illinois University Press, 2001, 39. 52 awarded medals and honors from abroad; in Russia, people attended his lectures en masse, while the press kept its readers constantly informed about his deeds. According to Daniel Brower, Przhevalsky‘s enterprises would have not turned him into a national hero had they not appealed to society by building up a public image that responded to the expectations raised in the Russian audience by the positivist precepts proclaimed during Alexander II‘s reign. 103 Brower emphasizes: He [Przhevalsky] proved in his Ussuri work and in his subsequent speeches and articles that he spoke the language of positivism. In later years, his renown as explorer rested partly on the responsiveness of audiences to his romantic tales of adventure, partly on the prominence accorded his contributions to scientific knowledge of Russia‘s Asian borderlands, and partly on the aura of triumphant nationalism that he intentionally cultivated on his expeditions and in his speeches and writing. In all these respects, his reputation embodied key elements of what we might loosely term a Russian imperialist ideology. 104 That his Mongolia and the Country of the Tanguts became a bestseller by the standards of the time 105 confirms Przhevalsky‘s contribution to the promotion, albeit negative, of Buddhist culture in Russian society. His name was well known in the creative world to the extent that in 1912 David Burliuk named one of Velimir Khlebnikov‘s futurist poems ―Przhevalsky‘s Horse‖ (Kon‘ Przheval‘skogo). 106 The title hints at the ―Equus ferus przewalskii‖—the equine species that Przhevalsky discovered in Central Asia in 1881 and was named after him. However, despite its title, the poem does not feature any other reference to the explorer. Why, then, did Khlebnikov accept the title? The answer may be 103 D. Brower, ―Imperial Russia and Its Orient: The Renown of Nikolai Przhevalsky,‖ 369-70. 104 Ibid., 371. 105 Ibid., 369. 106 For the textual analysis of the poem, see K. Pomorska, Russian Formalist Theory and Its Poetic Ambiance. The Hague: Mouton & Co. N.V., Publishers, 1968, 101-106. 53 found in the Romantic imagery that prevails in the first part of the poem, which describes ravines, precipices, and the hero‘s wandering in the woods. 107 Perhaps the image of the protagonist traveling in unknown lands led Khlebnikov to accept the reference to Przhevalsky—the epitome of the Romantic ―myth of the explorer.‖ Anton Chekhov’s Scientific Exploration of Sakhalin Island and His Encounter with Buddhism Khlebnikov was not the only representative of the Russian intelligentsia to pay homage to the great Russian traveler. Anton Chekhov also admired Przhevalsky. Indeed, his appreciation of the explorer‘s discoveries surely played a role in his decision to undertake his own journey to the East. Similar to Przhevalsky‘s journeys to Central Asia, Chekhov went to Siberia seeking to ―discover‖ Siberian life conditions. However, unlike Przhevalsky, Chekhov had in mind not the ancient cities of the Silk Road, but the real towns on the Sakhalin Island, which were built to host deportees to Siberia. After all, the Russian writer departed for Siberia in the spring of 1890, two years after he wrote his obituary on Przhevalsky for New Times (Novoe vremia). On March 9, 1890, Chekhov explained why he decided to visit the Sakhalin Island in his letter to the editor of New Times, Aleksei Suvorin. The writer made clear that his journey to the island had a strictly scientific purpose aimed at studying the living conditions of deported criminals. 108 This 107 Pomorska suggests that the protagonist-narrator in the poem hints at Lermontov‘s Demon (Ibid., 103). 108 In his letter, Chekhov wrote: ―From the books that I read and from those that I am still reading it is evident that we left millions [italic in the text ADR] of people to rot in jail. We left them to rot there to no avail, without giving it a thought, barbarously. We deported chained people in the cold for ten thousand 54 characterization enlists the same ―language of Positivism,‖ with its emphasis on enlightenment, which Przhevalsky used, albeit without Przhevalsky‘s racist overtones. The reasons that pushed Chekhov to undertake his journey, as well as the critical analysis of his work, do not constitute study material here. 109 Rather, what will be examined is why he chose Siberia as a destination and what the literary repercussions were following his journey to the East. 110 Before moving to this discussion, however, it is worth highlighting that Chekhov was not the only traveler to choose Siberia as a destination; six months after him, in fact, the future Tsar Nicholas II visited Siberia on his way back from his Grand Tour to Asia (Chapter Three). 111 Nonetheless, Chekhov‘s and Nicholas II‘s versts; we infected them with syphilis, we corrupted them, multiplied the number of criminals and accused the defenseless red-nose guards of all of this (Sobranie sochinenii v 12-ti tomakh, vol. 11, 417). Despite Chekhov‘s claims, Victor Terras affirms that Chekhov decided to leave for Sakhalin partly to discharge his sense of guilt about his abandonment of medicine, partly to react to the depression followed after his brother‘s death, partly for the sake of adventure (Handbook of Russian Literature. Edited by Victor Terras. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1985, 80). 109 For a critical analysis of Sakhalin Island see: M. Teplinsky, A.P. Chekhov na Sakhaline. Iuzhno- Sakhalinsk: Dal‘nevostochnoe knizhnoe izdatel‘stvo Sakhalinskoe otdelenie, 1990; C. Popkin, ―Chekhov as Ethnographer: Epistemological Crisis on Sakhalin Island.‖ Slavic Review 51. 1 (Spring 1992): 36-51. 110 Anton Chekhov departed from Moscow on April 21, 1890 and it took him eighty-two days to reach the island. The main stops on the road included: Iaroslav, Perm, Tiumen, Ishim, Tomsk, Krasnoiarsk, Irkutsk, Sretensk and Nikolaevsk. On the road he wrote a travel journal, which was published serially in New Times (A. Chekhov, ―Iz Sibiri.‖ Novoe Vremia, June-August 1890). The Sakhalin Island first appeared on the pages of Russian Thought (Russkaia mysl‘ 1893, 1895), and then in book form in 1895. His travel journal was published in the local Siberian periodicals as well (Sibirskii vestnik 59, May 27, 1890; Vostochnoe obozrenie 23, 1890 and no 6, January 20, 1891; Vladivostok 27, July 7, 1891). His contemporaries read about Chekhov‘s journey printed in the press and commented it, as in the case of the famous Realist painter Ilia Repin, who wrote to the art critic Vladimir Stasov on July 25, 1890, probably referring to one of the related articles published either in New Times or in World Literature: ―What a beautiful letter by Chekhov from Siberia was there!‖ (I.E. Repin i V.V. Stasov. Perepiska, vol. 2, letter 243 (1877-1894). Edited by A.K. Lebedev. Moscow-Leningrad: Iskusstvo, 1949, 153). 111 Chekhov was aware of the imperial tour, as the luxurious travel account of Nicholas II‘s journey written by Prince Esper Ukhtomsky figured among the list of books that Chekhov sent to his ex-schoolmate, Pavel Iordanov, on November 24, 1896 (Sobranie sochinenii v 12-ti tomakh, vol. 12, 126). In addition, during the Tsar‘s trip, Ukhtomsky corresponded for Suvorin‘s newspapers New Times (No. 5526-5529), where Chekhov regularly published his works. Chekhov was also aware of the works by the illustrator of the 55 description of Siberian reality differed in their travelogue accounts. To Chekhov, Siberia was a place associated with mass deportations; 112 to Nicholas II, it was the scenario of Russia‘s transportation advancement, as epitomized by the construction of the Transiberian railway. Chekhov departed for Siberia with the intent to improve peripheral life conditions through public knowledge; however, it was not only the public, but also the traveler to benefit from this knowledge. If producing publicity about peripheral realities made people aware of the real life conditions in Siberia, going there personally represented an enlightening experience for the traveler as well. Chekhov‘s journey to the East, in fact, not only shed light on the miserable life conditions of the exiles, but it also became an intercultural experience that led the Russian writer to visit Hong Kong, Singapore, and Ceylon. 113 Moreover, Chekhov‘s traveling eastward surely inspired some of the Orientalist references in his literary production. 114 Orientalist and Buddhist motifs emerge in more than one work by Anton Chekhov. From his Fable (Basnya)—a short story in verse about Chinese hare hunters Imperial travelogue book Nikolai Karazin, whose art the writer disliked (letter to Suvorin, October 8, 1898. Ibid., 243). 112 The writer denounced the inhuman conditions of the deportees not only through his book, but also through the series of photographs that he took during his journey. Some of these photographs, which are kept at the State Literature Museum, were published in Russkaia fotografiia. Seredina XIX-nachalo XX veka. Edited by Nikolai Rakhmanov. Moscow: Planeta, 1996, 164-5. 113 On Chekhov‘s trip to India and China, see M. Kolodochko‘s article ―Chekhov v Indii i Kitae.‖ Don 10 (1959): 152-5. Chekhov wished to visit Japan too, but a cholera epidemic made him change his plan. 114 As reminders of the exoticism of Asia Chekhov kept a pair of mongooses that he brought from India (See Chekhov‘s letter to Leontev-Shcheglov and N. Leikin on December 10, 1890. In Sobranie sochinenii v 12-ti tomakh, vol. 11, 486-7) and later donated to the Moscow zoo park (M. Kolodochko, ―Chekhov v Indii i Kitae,‖ 153). 56 (1887)—to the Japanese scent and the Geisha performance in The Lady with the Dog (1899), 115 the exotic world of Asia subtly makes its appearance. 116 India plays a prominent role in Chekhov‘s review of Lebedev‘s ―An Indian Legend,‖ printed in the appendix to an issue of the New Times from November 30, 1891. Commenting on the tale, Chekhov wrote to Suvorin: The lotus flower, laurel wreaths, summer nights, and humming-birds: this is India! [The tale] begins with Faust craving for youth and ends with ―the blessing of the true life‖ in the spirit of Tolstoy. I threw away a few things, smoothed it out and it turned into a light, if not very important, fairy-tale, which you might read with a certain interest. 117 Later in 1899, Chekhov sent a copy of Auguste Barth‘s The Religions of India (Religii Indii) to the Taganrog library and though Cathy Popkin questions whether Chekhov actually read the book or was just filling a request, it is hard to believe that he might have ordered the book for the library without being familiar with its content. 118 The publication of an Indian legend in New Times was not something unusual; on the contrary, the appearance of such work reflected the general interest in the subject that Russian periodicals were developing at the time. Even a cursory look at the articles 115 On the sources of the Japanese motifs in Chekhov‘s Lady with the Dog, see R. Bartlett, ―Japonisme and Japanophobia: The Russo-Japanese War in Russian Cultural Consciousness.‖ The Russian Review 67. 1 (January 2008): 18-9. 116 Cathy Popkin also suggests an interesting parallel between Chekhov‘s story The Bishop (Arkhierei) (1899-1902) and Zen Buddhism with regard to the concept of ―Buddha nature‖ and the binomial concept of individuality/universality (C. Popkin, ―Doctor without Patients/Man without a Spleen: A Meditation on Chekhov‘s Practice.‖ Chekhov the Immigrant. Translating a Cultural Icon. Edited by Michael C. Finke and Julie de Sherbinin. Bloomington, Indiana: Slavica Publishers, 2007, 219-237). 117 A. Chekhov, Sobranie sochinenii v 12-ti tomakh, vol. 11, 532-3. 118 Popkin, ―Doctor without Patients…,‖ 235. 57 published in the same magazine for the year 1890-91 confirms this tendency. Like other periodicals, New Times gave broad attention to Nicholas II's Asian tour by publishing reports by its special correspondent, N. Smelsky. In these daily reports, Tsar Nicholas II's visit to India played a central role. 119 Stories of India appeared in other main newspapers as well. In 1896 The St. Petersburg Gazette (S.-Peterburgskie vedomosti) published S. Stepanov‘s fairy-tale ―Why Did The Lotus Become Blue (An Indian Fairy-Tale).‖ 120 The story was probably a translation from the English, as the location ―London‖ suggests at the end of the text. 121 The magazine European Herald regularly published articles like Grigory Danilovsky's "To India. Historical Tale From The Times of Peter The Great" 122 and M. Annenkov's "Akhal-Tekinskii Oasis And My Travel To India." 123 Asia manifested in Chekhovian discourse in various guises. For him Asia represented the dramatic traits of Siberian exiles or the exotic features of India and Ceylon, but could also assume the cruel physiognomy of war. As a matter of fact, Chekhov was willing to volunteer as doctor in China in 1900, at the time of the Boxer 119 See issues 5342 (January 12): 2-3, and all the other issues for the year 1891. 120 S. Stepanov, ―Otchego lotos stal golubym (Indiiskaia skazka),‖ S.-Peterburgskie vedomosti 303 (November 30, 1896): 2. 121 The content suggests that the source came from Brahmanism rather than Buddhism. Notably, in April 1890, Blavatskaia published The Legend of the Blue Lotus, a Vedic legend preserved in Brahmanist chronicles; furthermore, one of the pioneering studies on Buddhism, Eugène Burnouf‘s Le lotus de la bonne loi, appeared in 1852. 122 G. Danilovsky, ―Na Indiiu. Istoricheskaia povest' iza vremen Petra Velikogo.‖ Vestnik Evropy (December 1880): 512-616. 123 M. Annenkov, Akhal‘-tekinskii oazis i puti v Indiu.‖ Vestnik Evropy (May 1881): 317-340 and (June 1881):770-797. 58 rebellion. 124 As will become clear in the following chapters, military expeditions to China represented another means of assimilating Buddhism. After sacking the besieged Asian country of its national treasures, foreign invaders brought war spoils back to their own countries as trophies of territorial conquest. Some of this artwork was Buddhist cult items that entered private Russian collections and was occasionally showed to the public, thus fostering familiarization with a foreign culture. For his part, Chekhov never mentioned Buddhism openly in his works, although the Buddhist world often serves as the background to his encounters with the East. This is enhanced by his readings not only of travelogue journals, such as Prince Ukhtomsky‘s travel account of the Imperial Asian Tour of 1890-1891 and Grigory Potanin‘s reports on his expeditions, but also of writings such as Petr Boborykin‘s Nirvana (Chapter Six). 125 Perhaps the best representation of Chekhov‘s connections to Buddhism comes in the form of a photograph the author sent to his wife, Olga Knipper, on February 2, 1902 (fig. 3). 126 The photograph was taken by Petr Sergeenko on September 12, 1901 in the country-estate of Sophia Panina in Gaspra (Crimea). In the picture sits Lev Tolstoy with 124 See Chekhov‘s letter to Gorky on July 12, 1900 (Polnoe sobranie sochinenii i pisem A.P.Chekhova,vol. 18. Moscow: Gos. Izd-vo khudozh. Literatury, 1949, 372). 125 A. Chekhov, ―Letter to Ivan Gorbunov-Posadov‖ (March 19, 1903). In Sobranie sochinenii v 12-ti tomakh, vol. 12, 531. Despite Chekhov‘s citation of Boborykin‘s work, the author of the present dissertation has not been able to locate the item yet. 126 He accompanied the photograph with these words: ―I am sending you a photograph; on it are the Tolstoys—the old man and his wife S.A. In the background stand his daughter and Boulanger (I think), while in the foreground is your husband‖ (Perepiska A.P. Chekhova i O.L. Knipper v dukh tomakh, vol.1. Edited and commented by Z.P. Udal‘tsova. Moscow: Iskusstvo, 2004, 338). 59 Fig. 3 Petr Sergeenko, Photograph of Anton Chekhov and Lev Tolstoy in Gaspra (Crimea), 1901. 60 his wife and Anton Chekhov. Standing in profile is Tolstoy‘s daughter Maria Obolenskaia, while the far background converse features Tolstoy‘s youngest daughter, Aleksandra, and Paul Boulanger. 127 The writer Aleksandr Kuprin remembered the moment when the photograph was taken: Tolstoy was so immersed in the conversation that he completely forgot about his breakfast. He gripped the tea spoon in his right hand (its end under the thumb), as if he was threatening it. Chekhov had such a lovely and only slightly crafty smile (by the way I never saw a nice smile on Chekhov‘s face). It looked like as if Tolstoy was saying to Chekhov: ―First, Anton Pavlovich, it is necessary to write as simple as possible,‖ whereas Chekhov with his downcast smiling face seemed to answer: ―Lev Nikolaevich, this is indeed the most difficult achievement on earth.‖ 128 While Chekhov and Tolstoy chat at the table, Boulanger and Aleksandra Tolstaia talk in the far left corner on the terrace. Paul Boulanger was the author of The Life and Teaching of Siddhartha Gautama, Called the Buddha or the Most Perfect One (Zhizn‘ i uchenie Siddarty Gotamy, prozvannogo Buddoi [soversheneishim]), which Tolstoy edited and published in the magazine Life for All (Zhizn‘ dlia vsekh) in April 1910 (Chapter Two). It is possible that Boulanger was just paying a visit to his friend Tolstoy, which is why he was included in the photograph. What matters, however, is that he appears in the same picture with Anton Chekhov at all—a confirmation that Chekhov was, indeed, exposed to Buddhist sources. Interpreting the depicted situation metaphorically, one could conclude that although on the surface Chekhov ignored Buddhism, the Buddhist 127 Russkaia fotografiia: seredina XIX-nachalo XX veka,168. 128 Ibid., 156. 61 world subtly makes its presence perceivable through the remote silhouette of a man (Boulanger) conversing in the background of a photograph. If, on the one side, Boulanger counted as an indirect source of Buddhist thought for Chekhov, on the other side, Tolstoy represented its direct link. Because Tolstoy and Buddhism is an elaborately developed topic, 129 the present dissertation focuses only on aspects of the subject matter that support the main argument (see, for example, the literary elaboration of the figure of the Buddha in Chapter Two). That Chekhov and Tolstoy were friends implies the inevitable exchange of ideas and opinions on Buddhism as well. Their points of view may have diverged; nevertheless, the two writers discussed them. The same could be said in relation to Chekhov‘s friend Ivan Bunin, who visited Ceylon and India first in 1907, and then Ceylon again in March 1910. 130 As Thomas Gaiton Marullo nicely describes their common love for traveling: Some inner urge or wanderlust kept pushing the two forward, their wish being to live vicariously; they sought to flee the routines, responsibilities, and muddling 129 To quote but a few references: I. Shifman, Lev Tolstoi i Vostok. Moscow: Nauka, 1971; Leo Tolstoy. Edited by D. Milivojevich. New York: Columbia University Press, 1998; C. Muschio, ―Lev Tolstoj e l‘India: una relazione di scambio.‖ Quaderni Asiatici 52(January-March 2000): 21-31; I. Bunin, The Liberation of Tolstoy. A Tale of Two Writers. Edited, translated from the Russian, and with an introduction and notes by Thomas Gaiton Marullo and Vladimir T. Khmelkov. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 2001, xxiii-xxvii; C. Muschio, ―Tolstoj ‗apostolo‘ del buddismo.‖ Micromega 5 (2001): 321-33. 130 Like the case of Tolstoy, Bunin and Buddhism is a well-developed subject, as the following publications evidence: O. Slivitskaia, ―Bunin i Vostok (K postanovke voprosa).‖ Izvestiia Voronezhskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo instituta 114 (1971): 87-96; T.K. Lobanova, ―Oriental‘naia proza I. Bunina i dukhovno-esteticheskoe nasledie narodov Vostoka.‖ Russkaia literatura i Vostok. (Osobennosti khudozhstvennoi orientalistiki XIX-XX vv.). Edited by E. A. Karimov. Tashkent: Izdatel‘stvo ―FAN‖ Uzbekskoi SSR, 1988, 69-91; T. G., Marullo, If You See the Buddha. Studies in the Fiction of Ivan Bunin. Evaston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 1998. James B. Woodward‘s monographic book on Bunin presents very little analysis of Bunin‘s Buddhist theme, with which Woodward briefly deals only in relation to the story The Brothers (J. B. Woodward, Ivan Bunin: A Study of His Fiction. Chapel Hill: the University of North Carolina Press, 1980, 109-114). 62 bedlam of life, to appear as Buddhalike or Christlike seeker-wanderers, to lose themselves in existence, and to embrace every experience and pleasure in their race against time and other enemies who, they believed, would truncate their lives in a quick and merciless way […] If in Ceylon Bunin saw himself as a second Adam seeking Buddhist-style enlightenment in a world gone awry, Chekhov looked to the isle to pursue more earthly delights. 131 The memory of his journey to Ceylon remained with Bunin for the rest of his life, as testified, for instance, by his verses Ceylon (1915) and Ceylon (1916), and his prose piece The City of the Tsar of Tsars (Gorod tsaria tsariei) (1924). In these works, beautiful landscapes with paradisiacal settings are dominated by the majestic Alagalla Mountain located in Sabaragamuwa (Sri Lanka) (Ceylon, 1915); 132 the exoticism is evinced through palms, the blue sky, and wild animals of the jungle (Ceylon, 1916). 133 Whereas the Oriental settings indicate the degree to which Bunin‘s perception of Asia corresponded to that of Chekhov, the former‘s travel impressions render the Buddhist element far more relevant. For instance, his description of the sacred Buddhist city of Anuradhapura in his work The City of the Tsar of Tsars reveals that the memory of his visit was still vivid even years later. 134 Although Bunin‘s actual journey to Asia happened in a limited timeframe, its spiritual, especially Buddhist, seeds would inspire the writer‘s literary production for many years to come. Some of these seeds are the subject of analysis in the following chapter. 131 I. Bunin, About Chekhov. The Unfinished Symphony. Edited and translated from the Russian by Thomas Gaiton Marullo. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 2007, xxxiv-v. 132 I. Bunin, Sobranie sochinenii v deviati tomakh, vol. 1. Edited by A.S. Miasnikov, B.S. Riurikov, and A.T. Tvardovsky. Moscow: khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1965, 372. 133 Ibid., 406-8. 134 Ibid., vol. 5, 130-8. 63 Deportation to Siberia: Another Kind of Exploration Why did Anton Chekhov choose Siberia specifically as the place of his enquiry? If it is true that the answer to this question lies partially in the miserable life conditions of deportees on Sakhalin, it is also possible that his choice was affected by his direct acquaintance with some of the exiled intellectuals in Siberia. For instance, he corresponded with the belletrist Aleksandr Amfiteatrov, who was exiled to Minusinsk for his satirical feuilleton on the Romanovs. 135 Additionally, Chekhov read the scientific reports that the well-known explorer and exiled Grigory Potanin wrote about his expeditions; 136 he also read the works on Siberia that Potanin‘s friend and exiled, the intellectual Nikolai Iadrintsev, authored. 137 From his side, Potanin highly admired Chekhov— the writer of Sakhalin Island. 138 This mixture of personal entanglements and Positivist principles compelled Chekhov to initiate his journey. However, it is also true that Siberia was enjoying incredible popularity at the time. Indeed, in the second half of the nineteenth century, 135 A. Chekhov, Sobranie sochinenii v 12-ti tomakh, vol. 12, 485. 136 See Chekhov‘s letter to his friend Iordanov (A. Chekhov, Sobrabie sochinenii, vol. 12, letter no 415, 126). 137 Among Iadrintsev‘s articles, Chekhov read: ―The Corrective Meaning of Siberian exile‖ (―Izpravitel‘noe znachenie sibirskoi ssylki.‖ Golos 343, December 12, 1874);‖The Condition of Convicts in Siberia‖ (―Polozhenie ssyl‘nykh v Sibiri.‖ Vestnik Evropy 6.11-12, 1875). 138 That sentiment emerges from Potanin‘s letter to the editor of the magazine Russian Thought (Russkaia mysl‘) Viktor Goltsev, letter which he wrote at the news of Chekhov‘s death in 1904. Potanin remembered the writer especially for his ―deeply true, good and honest book‖ on Sakhalin (G. Potanin, ―Ob Antone Pavloviche Chekhove. Iz pis‘ma k V.A. Gol‘tsevu.‖ N. Ianovsky et al. Vospominanie (okonchanie). Stat‘i, ocherki, retsenzii. Vospominaniia o G.N. Potanine, vol. 7. 1986, 246). 64 general interest in this remote territory of the Russian Empire increased considerably. Educated deportees contributed significantly to drawing the attention of Russian society toward Siberian reality. It was due to them, in fact, that the cultural dialogue between the centre and the periphery of the Russian Empire, as well as between Russia and Western Europe, took a step forward. Although intellectual deportees were forced to leave their homes, their imposed journey turned out to be a vital force in the improvement of local cultural activities. Moreover, because Buddhism plays a central role in Siberian cultural identity, by promoting the study of Siberia, exiles indirectly contributed to the diffusion of Buddhist heritage. As one of their cultural initiatives, exiles promoted the establishment of museums on site. Their encouragement inspired lively debates on the topic of local museums, which circulated in the press. 139 The general subject matter, however, dealt not only with the relevance of local museums in terms of the preservation of cultural heritage, but also with broader issues related to the educative role that museums should play. By entering these debates, Russian exiles brought the reality of Siberian institutions to the attention of an international community of educated people, thus connecting Siberia with the rest of the world and vice versa. The exiled and later director of the ethnographical department at the St. Petersburg Russian Museum, Dmitry Klements, for example, accompanied his 139 To quote just some of them: N. Martianov, Desiatiletie Minusinskogo Muzeiia (1877-1887). Commissioned by the committee of the Minusinsk Museum. Tomsk: Tipografiia Sibirskoi gazety, 1887, 1- 9; N. Iadrintsev, ―Nauchnoe znachenie mestnykh muzeev.‖ In Nikolai Mikhailovich Iadrintsev. O literature. Stikhotvoreniia. Pis‘ma. Vospominaniia o N.M. Iadrintseve, vol. 5. Edited by N. Ianovsky et al. Novosibirsk: Zapadno-sibirskoe knizhnoe izdatel‘stvo. Series Literaturnoe nasledstvo Sibiri, 1980, 135- 138; D. Klements, Mestnye muzei i ikh znachenie v provintsial‘noi zhizni. (Lecture given at Kiakhta on October 8, 1892). Irkutsk: Tipografiia K.I. Vitkovskoi, 1893. 65 lecture Local Museums and their Importance in Provincial Life with his translation of the related speech The Museums of the Future that the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, the ichthyologist George Brown Goode, gave at the Brooklyn Museum in February 1889. 140 Likewise, in his article ―The Scientific Importance of Local Museums‖ Iadrinsetv stressed that Asian museums played an even more significant role than any other museum, because they showed the cultural fruits coming from the cradle of all civilizations: Asia. 141 Showing his awareness of the contemporary international scene, Iadrintsev proposed as models for Russia both the Guimet Museum in Paris, with its rich collection of Chinese, Japanese, and Indian artwork, and the German Ethnographical Museum in Berlin (Museum für Völkerkunde), which owned one of the largest Oriental collections in the world. 142 The blooming of local museums testified to the relevance of the debate. Institutions, such as the Museum of the Russian Geographical Society in Irkutsk, the Ethnographical Museum in the small town of Troitskosavsk on the Mongolian border, the 140 D. Кlements, Меstnye muzei i ikh znachenie v provintsial‘noi zhizni, 38-68. 141 N. Iadrintsev, ―Nauchnoe znachenie mestnykh muzeev.‖ Nikolai Mikhailovich Iadrintsev. O literature. Stikhotvoreniia. Pis‘ma. Vospominaniia o N.M. Iadrintseve, vol. 5, 135-8. Iadrintsev was known especially for his book Siberia As a Colony (Sibir‘ kak koloniia, first ed. 1882, second ed. 1892)—a condemnation of the tsarist policy of deportation to Siberia. It was considered one of the best renditions of Siberian life. In 1886, the book was translated into German by Professor Eduard Petri (N. Jadrinzew, Sibirien: geographische, ethnographische und historische Studien; mit bewilligung des Verfassers nach dem russischen Bearb. und vervollständigt von Ed. Petri. Jena: H. Costenoble, 1886). From April 1882 to his death, Iadrintsev edited the newspaper Eastern Review (Vostochnoe obozrenie), the main organ of diffusion on Siberia. In 1889, he went on his first expedition to Mongolia. On the upper reaches of the Orkhon River he founded the ruins of Karakorum, the ancient capital of the Mongolian Empire. Iadrintsev reported on his discovery at the Geographical Society on February 21, 1890, and his report was printed in the News of the Geographical Society under the title ―Travels on the Upper Reaches of the Orkhon River to the Ruins of Karakorum‖ (―Puteshestviia na verkhov‘ia Orkhona k razvalinam Karakoruma.‖ Izvestiia 26: 257-271). That same year in April, Iadrintsev went to Paris to report on his findings at the French Geographical Society. 142 N. Iadrintsev, ―Nauchnoe znachenie mestnykh muzeev,‖ 136. 66 Museums in Krasnoiarsk, Eniseisk, Nerchinsk, Tobolsk and Iakutsk were established almost simultaneously. Worth mentioning in more detail is the Minusinsk Museum, opened in 1877 and directed by the energetic Nikolai Martianov. The museum became renowned for its collections—donated by both private benefactors and explorers—and for visits by important political figures, like Nadezhda Krupskaia. 143 Despite its location in far eastern Russia, the Minusinsk Museum enjoyed international attention, as shown by international periodicals and scholars who wrote about the Museum and visited its collection. 144 Journals from the capital recognized the museum as well. The St. Petersburg magazine World Illustration (Vsemirnaia illiustratsiia), for instance, published an illustrative article on the collection of the Minusinsk Museum in 1892. 145 The following year, items from Minusinsk on popular medicine were shown at the 1893 All- Russian exhibition on hygiene. Part of the collections of the Minusinsk Museum then were sent to the 1896 All-Russian exhibition in Nizhny Novgorod and to the 1899 World 143 Krupskaia stopped at Minusinsk to meet the Polish revolutionary Felix Kon under arrest there from 1897 to 1904 (G. Iavorsky, N.М. Маrt‘ianov. Kratkii ocherk zhizni i deiatel‘nost‘. Krasnoiarsk: Krasnoiarskoe knizhnoe izdatel‘stvo, 1969, 10). 144 In 1880, for instance, the Viennese magazine Österreichische Monatsschrift für den Orient published the article ―Ein Musäum in Sibirien‖ on the Minusinsk Museum; in 1885, news on the Museum appeared in the Comptes Rendus of the Paris Geographical Society (Desiatiletie Minusinskogo Muzeiia 1877-1887. Commissioned by the committee of the Minusinsk Museum. Tomsk: Tipografiia ―Sibirskoi gazety,‖ 1887, 75). Aleksandr Stuckenberg‘s ―Materialen zur Kenntniss der Fauna der devonischen Ablagerungen Sibiriens,‖ was published by the Russian Academy of Sciences in 1886 (Mémoires de L'Académie Impériale des Sciences de St.-Pétersbourg 34.1, series 7, 1886, 1-19, pl. 1-4.). It dealt with fossil formations in Siberia, first discovered by the collaborators of the Minusinsk Museum (Desiatiletie Minusinskogo Muzeiia, 70). 145 Adrianov, ―Minusinskii Muzei.‖ Vsemirnaia illiustratsiia 47. 1204 (5) (February 15, 1892): 147-150. 67 Fair in Paris. 146 There, French visitors could admire the flora, geology, ethnography, and archeology of the area on the South Enisei River sent directly from Minusinsk. 147 Along with the Minusinsk Museum, the Irkutsk East-Siberian Branch of the Imperial Russian Geographical Society played an active role in promoting Siberian cultural heritage. Notable for its impact on the intellectual circles of St. Petersburg and Moscow is the sponsoring activity of its temporary director, the folklorist and traveler, Grigory Potanin. 148 In 1888, at the time when he directed the Irkutsk branch, Potanin organized the exhibition of Buddhist cult objects that he catalogued together with the 146 G. Iavorsky, N.М. Маrt‘ianov. Kratkii ocherk zhizni i deiatel‘nost‘, 33. 147 Оtchet po Minusinskomu mestnomu muzeiu i obshchestvennoi biblioteke za 1899 god. Мinusinsk: Tipografiia V.I. Kornakova, 1900, 8. The director of the Imperial Russian Geographical Society, Petr Semenov-Tianshansky, was the curator of the Russian pavilion in Paris. His program for the Russian exposition included items of daily use, clothes, local domestic milieu, and religious cult objects. Archeological artwork was sent too. In August 1900, the International Prize Jury awarded a diploma to the Minusinsk Museum entitling it to a silver medal (G. Iavorsky, N.М. Маrt‘ianov. Kratkii ocherk zhizni i deiatel‘nost‘. 1969, 37). 148 Potanin was arrested with his friend Nikolai Iadrintsev and others for his affiliation with the political movement known as ―Siberian separatism,‖ and for the foundation of the St. Petersburg secret society, known as The Siberian clique (Sibirskii kruzhok). At the end of the trial, Potanin was first condemned to death, and then to fifteen years of forced labor to be followed by life deportation. In 1868, he was sent to the Sveaborg fortress. In 1874, thanks to the initiative of the famous explorer Petr Semenov-Tianshiansky, Potanin was rehabilitated and allowed to return to Petersburg, where he devoted his career to the study of Central Asia. In 1876-77 and 1879, Potanin was commissioned to explore north-western Mongolia. The results of his mission were published in the three-volume report Ocherki severo-zapadnoi Mongolii. Rezul‘taty puteshestviia, ispolnennogo v 1876-1877 godakh po porucheniiu Imperatorskogo Russkogo Geograficheskogo Obshchestva, vol.3. St. Petersburg: tipografiia V. Bezobrazova i Komp., 1881-1883. His report contained material on the physical geography and topography of north-western Mongolia, and ethnographical material, which included descriptions of the local religious practices, including Buddhism. In 1884-1886, Potanin went to Central Asia again to explore China, east Tibet, and Inner Mongolia. His travel accounts were printed under the title ―Travels of G.N. Potanin to China‖ (Puteshestviia G.N. Potanina v Kitai) in the journal Eastern Review, founded by Iadrinstev first in Petersburg in 1882, and then moved to Irkutsk in 1888. Potanin‘s reports on Siberia appeared in the eleven-volume Illustrated Russia (Zhivopisnaia Rossiia), while his travel account was printed under the title Tangutsko-Tibetskaia okraina Kitaia i tsentral‘naia Mongolia (1893). Its second volume contained various folkloric materials, especially fairy-tales that Potanin collected from the oral tales of Mongols, Chinese, and Tanguts. 68 priest I. Podgorbunsky. 149 The exhibition included maps of the Buddhist world with brief descriptions of people professing Buddhism. It also featured photographs of monasteries and temples taken by some of Potanin‘s fellow travelers. Visitors could see sacred images and statues with explanatory iconography, medallions, ceremonies, musical instruments, daily and sacred clothes of the lamas, and their environment. The exhibition was a great success; people from Irkutsk became acquainted with the art of the Buddhist world for the first time. 150 The exhibition catalog contained the names of the collectors, whose identities were also displayed next to the artwork they owned or had donated to the museum. As such, we know not only what the public saw at the show, but also who the main collectors of the Buddhist items were. For instance, one of the donors to the 1888 Irkutsk exhibition was Nikolai Gomboev, a key figure in diplomatic relations between Russia and China at the end of the nineteenth century and also a prominent collector of Buddhist artwork. 151 In addition to appearing at the Irkutsk exhibition, Gomboev‘s significant collection was displayed with Prince Esper Ukhtomsky‘s at the 1900 ―Exposition 149 Katalog vystavki predmetov vneshnei obstanovki dukhovnoi zhizni buriatskikh, mongolskikh i tibetskikh lam. Edited by I. Podgorbunsky and G. Potanin. Irkutsk: Tip. Gaz. ―Vostochnoe Obozrenie,‖ 1888. 150 A. Sagalev and V. Kriukov, G.N. Potanin: Оpyt osmysleniia lichnosti. Novosibirsk: Nauka, sibirskoe otdelenie, Series ―Stranitsy istorii nashei Rodiny,‖ 1991, 113.Twenty years later, Podgorbunsky reedited the catalog, adding to the list of objects those which became part of the Museum‘s permanent collection (Katalog buddiiskoi kollektsii vostocho-sibirskogo otdela Imperatorskogo Russkogo Geograficheskogo Obshchestva. Otdel XVII. Irkutsk: Parovaia tipo-litografiia P.I. Makushina I V.M. Posokhina, 1908). 151 The artwork on show from Gomboev‘s collection was a painting representing the Buddha surrounded by lamas, Dara-eke and birds (Ibid., item 113, 18-19); a painting of Amithaba (Ibid., item 130, 21); one representation on silk and one on print of Arya-balo (Ibid., items 140, 142, 23); one book with illustrations of the thousand Buddhas in Tibetan (Ibid., item 452, 69); and one Chinese book titled The Illustrated Life of the Buddha (Zhizn‘ Buddy v kartinakh) (Ibid., item 459, 70). 69 Universelle‖ in Paris too (Chapter Three). The work‘s appearance in Paris indicates the extent to which Siberia and Europe were interconnected at that time and elucidates the private collecting of Buddhist art—an extremely widespread phenomenon at the turn of the century. Potanin also collected Buddhist artifacts, donating some of the Buddhist items he had gathered during his expeditions and some of his own collection to the Irkutsk Museum. The 1888 exhibition catalog gives an idea of what artwork Potanin collected for himself. Among other things, his private collection mostly made of Tibetan Buddhist artifacts included miniature bronze statuettes and various representations of Arya-balo, the Tibetan divinity also known by its Sanskrit name, Avalokiteshvara. This brief overview of the activities undertaken by deportees allows one to conclude that despite the inhumanity of the punishment, deportations to Siberia nonetheless informed modern writers of Buddhism as widely as did personal travels and scientific expeditions. Moving into Oriental Folklore: The Case of Aleksei Remizov Chekhov was not the only person to read the works of Grigory Potanin; Aleksei Remizov read them too. Remizov was especially interested in Potanin‘s studies on folklore. As his Io. A Tibetan Tale (Tibetskii skaz, 1916-1922) 152 and the other stories 152 A. Remizov, Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 2. Moscow: Russkaia kniga, 2000, 549-576. The tale was entirely published by ―Russkoe tvorchestvo‖ in 1922, when Remizov migrated to Berlin. Nonetheless some of his stories appeared in the Russian press earlier (A. Remizov, Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 2, 693) and an unauthorized version was printed in Chita by the publishing house ―Skify‖ in 1921. 70 about hares confirm, Remizov was challenged by the Tibetan folktales and legends that in 1912 Potanin published in the ethnographical magazine Living Antiquities (Zhivaia starina). 153 Notably, Potanin‘s article was followed by Badzar Baradiin‘s 154 records of other Tibetan fairy-tales. 155 Potanin recorded the legends from local lamas from eastern Tibet, whom the explorer had met on his Sichuan expedition of 1892-3. Unlike Remizov‘s, however, Potanin‘s collection of Tibetan folktales simply named the hero of the fable ―Hare‖ (zaiats), or ―io‖ in Tibetan. 156 As Potanin wrote in the preface to his article for the magazine, the Buriat from Zabaikal, Buddha Rabdanov, translated the stories into Russian for him. 157 Rabdanov‘s participation in initiatives for the promotion of Buddhist culture often brought him into contact with intellectual circles. His name also appeared in the Buddhist ceremony that the Buriat monk Agvan Dorzhiev performed in 153 G. Potanin, ―Tibetskie skazki i predaniia.‖ Zhivaia starina. Founded by V.I. Lamansky. Ethnographical Department of the Imperial Russian Geographical Society 21.2, 1912. Petrograd: Akademiia nauk, 1914, 389-436. For a further analysis of Remizov‘s fairy-tales production see I. Danilova, Literaturnaia skazka A.M. Remizova (1900-1920-e gody). Dissertatsiia na soiskanie uchenoi stepeni kandidata filologicheskikh nauk. St. Petersburg: Institut Russkoi literatury (Pushkinskii dom), 2008. Furthermore, like Potanin, Remizov too wrote about King Solomon (―Tsar Solomon i Tsar Goroskat.‖ Dokuka i Balagur‘e. Narodnye skazki. St. Petersburg: Sirin, 1914; Krug schast‘ia: legendy o tsare Solomone, 1877-1957. Paris: Opleshnik, 1957). 154 Baradiin studied in Petr Badmaev‘s (Chapter Three) school for Buriat children. He audited courses on Sanskrit, Tibetan, and Mongolian languages at St. Petersburg University. Baradiin studied with the two Orientologists, Sergei Oldenburg and Fedor Shcherbatskoi, who pointed to Baradiin as the explorer to be sent in mission to Tibet (Т. Ermakova, Buddiiskii mir glazami rossiiskikh issledovatelei XIX-pervoi treti XX veka. Saint Petersburg: Nauka, 1998, ch. 1). Baradiin wrote on Buddhism and he— together with Tsyben Zhamtsarano— represents one of the main Buriat scholars in the field of Oriental Studies. 155 B. Baradiin, ―Iz legend Tibeta.‖ Zhivaia starina (1912): 437-444. 156 G. Potanin, ―Tibetskie skazki i predaniia.‖ Zhivaia starina, 416-9. In her memoirs Marina Doriomedova—the daughter of Iury Doriomedov, friend of Remizov in Paris—remembers that her father showed Remizov Potanin‘s works on Tibetan legends (A. Remizov, Dokuka-skazka Zaiats. Tibetskie skazki. Moscow: Molodaia gvardiia, 1991, 29). 157 G. Potanin, ―Tibetskie skazki i predaniia.‖ Zhivaia starina: 1912, 390. 71 the presence of the Parisian beau monde and some Russian intellectuals in June 1898 (Chapter Five). In Io. A Tibetan Tale, Remizov uses the Tibetan word for ―hare‖ as a proper name so that ―Io‖ becomes the cynically manipulative hare that appropriates the Machiavellian motto ―the end justifies the means‖ in order to reach whatever his goal was. 158 The Aesopian language used in the aforementioned works, as well as the fable genre, were consistent with Remizov‘s other readings on bestiaries and the like. Moreover, a series of fables by Remizov dated from the 1910s attests to a specific literary pattern of Buddhist references. The Buddhist lineage emerges in The Bewitched Egg (Iaitso iaginoe), the Lamaist folktale that the thirteen-year-old Buriat, Galan Nindakov, transmitted to the Orientologist Andrei Rudnev in 1911. 159 Rudnev inserted Nindakov‘s stories in his Khoriburiatian Dialect. (Attempted Analysis, Texts, Translation, and Footnotes) (Khoriburiatskii govor. Opyt issledovaniia, teksty, perevod i primechaniia), which he published in 1913-14. 160 Two years later, Aleksei Remizov, who read Rudnev‘s book, 158 Remizov rewrote the stories as reported in Potanin‘s article ―Tibetskie skazki i predaniia.‖ In particular the stories ―The Tree Tunbachzhi‖ (Zhivaia starina, 408), ―The Hare (in Tibetan Io)‖ (Zhivaia starina: 416-9), and ―Buliuk‖ (Zhivaia starina,: 426-434). 159 By chance, in the same 1912 issue of Living Antiquities Rudnev published the Buriat fairytale ―The Armless Princess‖ (Tsarevna-bezruchka), as retold by Nindakov (Zhivaia starina: 445-8). Nindakov lived in the St. Petersburg Buddhist Temple, which was built under the supervision of the active Tibetan monk Agvan Dorzhiev (Chapter Four). In the summer of 1911, the young Galan visited the country estate of the Mongolist Andrei Rudnev, who belonged to the special committee for the construction of the Buddhist Temple in St. Petersburg. Rudnev was also the teacher of the future Orientologist and Buddhologist Boris Vladimirtsov, author of The Mongolian Collection of Tales from Panchatantra (Mongol‘skii sbornik rasskazov iz Panchatantra) (Petrograd, 1921). 160 I. Danilova, ―Kommentarii.‖ In A. Remizov, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, vol. 2, 661. Rudnev‘s version was commented on by Agvan Dorzhiev himself (Ibid., note 380, 662). 72 inserted The Bewitched Egg in his collection Reinforcement. A Word to the Russian Land about Our Native Soil, about the Secrets of Our Land and Destiny. 161 In addition to other sources, Remizov relied upon Potanin‘s ethnographical research to find inspiration for his work, a fact that further enforces the significant role played by intellectual deportees to Siberia in the dissemination of Buddhist motifs. As previously mentioned the increasing number of publications on Siberia —a place full of Buddhist traditions— was crucial in this sense. Remizov himself felt challenged by the unexplored landmass behind the Urals; his Siberian Spice-Cake: Fairy-Tales for Adults and Children, 162 which first came to press with the cover sketched by Remizov himself, represents this interest best. A collection of assembled folk tales transmitted in Iakutian, Chukchian, Karagasian, 163 and Tungutian languages, the work belonged to a broader unrealized project that the writer had planned to title Great Siberia (Velikaia Sibir‘). According to Inga Danilova, Remizov‘s Siberian cycle, as well as his Caucasian cycle of folktales, was also very much affected by the 1913 Tercentenary of the Romanov dynasty. On that occasion, many celebrative events took place, including the exhibition Russian People (Narody Rossii) at the Ethnographical Museum in St. Petersburg, which aimed to show the cultural variety of the vast Russian Empire. Remizov‘s Siberian cycle, Danilova explains, meshed well with this celebrative atmosphere and brought awareness 161 A. Remizov, Ukrepa. Slovo k russkoi zemle o zemle rodnoi, tainostiakh zemnykh i sud‘be. Petrograd: Lukomor‘e, 1916. For a detailed comparison with the Buriat original, see I. Danilova, ―Kommentarii.‖ In A. Remizov, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, vol. 2, 661-2, especially note 377). 162 A. Remizov, Sibirskii prianik: Bol‘shim i dlia malykh rebiat skazki. St. Petersburg: Alkonost, 1919. 163 A population from the Hungro-finnish branch, living in the Irkutsk region. 73 to the heterogeneity of the Russian nation. 164 In its celebration of the Tercentenary of the Romanovs, the recently built St. Petersburg Buddhist Temple also celebrated its first ceremony (Chapter Four). The connection between writers and explorers is even further strengthened by Remizov‘s acquaintance with Dmitry Semenov-Tianshansky, son of Petr Semenov- Tianshansky. Dmitry owned the house at 31 14 th Line on Vasilevsky Island in St. Petersburg, where Remizov and the Symbolist painter Nikolai Roerich lived. 165 Surely, Aleksei Remizov shared many ideas with his modernist colleagues, including their tendency to mix the literary and visual arts. It is useful to remember that Remizov illustrated some of his works and participated in the artistic activities of many of his friends. In 1910, for instance, he took part in the art exhibition Triangle (Treugol‘nik), organized by Nikolai Kulbin—the ―crazy doctor‖ of Modernist circles (Chapter Three). Likewise, during his emigration to Berlin, Remizov was in contact with Vasily Kandinsky, Boris Anisfeld, and many others. As will become clear in the present dissertation, Anisfeld‘s artistic production also echoed some Buddhist themes (Chapter Two). Aleksei Remizov‘s ―journey into folklore‖ readily shows how foreign myths, specifically Buddhist motifs, ―migrated‖ from one culture to another thanks to scientific journeys to Asia. In addition to Przhevalsky‘s expeditions to Central Asia, Chekhov‘s trip 164 I. Danilova, Abstract (avtoreferat) of her dissertation Literaturnaia skazka A.M. Remizova (1900-1920-e gody ), 10. 165 A. Remizov, ―Vzvikhrennaia Rus‘,‖ ―Dnevnik 1917-21.‖ In Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, vol. 5, 85, 111, 175, 441, 485. 74 to Sakhalin belongs to the category of the scientific journey. His was a journey that apparently brought no trace of Buddhism to his literary production; however, Chekhov‘s acquaintance with Siberian deportees, as well as his friendship with Bunin and Tolstoy, represented a crossroads of shared beliefs and disbeliefs. In other words, metaphorically speaking, both Chekhov and Remizov ―went‖ to Siberia. The former discovered Siberian lifestyle through his actual journey to Sakhalin Island; the latter visited it vicariously through the works on Siberian folklore that a deportee to Siberia—Potanin—wrote. The different types of journeys analyzed so far—scientific explorations, personal tours, deportations to Siberia, and metaphorical excursions into Siberian folklore—all contributed to the transition of elements from one culture to the other. The appearance of Buddhist references in Russian literature and the arts was the result of this transition, which itself stemmed from the era‘s ―mania for traveling.‖ Whether it was professional or personal, forced or touristic, spiritual or scientific, traveling made the Other closer and more familiar. The confrontation of cultures that resulted led to a questioning of generally accepted tenets and worldviews, stirring discussion and introducing new ideas. One of the debates, which stemmed from the inevitable comparison of cultures, dwelt with religion and the origin of common myths. As the following chapter will prove, at the turn of the century, scholars discussed the nature of Christendom and its similarities with Buddhism. Above all, the figures of Christ and the Buddha were at the center of inquiry. The argument highlighted the divide between those who maintained the independency of Christ and those who thought of him as a later elaboration of the Buddha. Literary and 75 artistic circles responded to the argument by creating a series of works devoted to the Buddha. From the physical hardships of Siberian life and of the Central Asian climate, the modern voyage moved to the psychological tribulations of religious heights. It was a spiritual journey at the end of which waited the ambiguous figure of Christ seated in meditation and smiling enigmatically. 76 Chapter 2 Pilgrimage: ―Buddha Against the ‗Crucified‘‖ 166 ―Awake, come back,‖ […] ―Where?‖ Pyotr cried, startled. ―How where? To the West: the West is over there. You are a Westerner‖ […] ―Avaunt, Satan! I am going to the East.‖ 167 Images of the Buddha in Visual Arts: Boris Anisfeld’s Buddha with Pomegranates Why does the figure of the Buddha recur in a series of representations realized in the first two decades of the twentieth century? And why, not only in the figurative arts, but also in literature, does the Buddha make his presence known? First of all, that the subject emerged in both media is not surprising, as writers and artists belonged to the same circles and the two modes of representation sometimes intertwined (as in the previously discussed case of Aleksei Remizov). The goal of this chapter is to offer some answers to these questions, as well as to attempt an interpretation of other modern representations. This study will demonstrate that ideas generated from the confrontation of two different civilizations (Christian and Buddhist) helped disseminate Buddhist motifs in modern Russian culture. Hence, if in the previous chapter the concept of journey entailed physical voyages to Asia— tours, expeditions, deportations— then the 166 F. Nietzsche, The Will to Power. Translated by W. Kaufmann and R.J. Hollingdale. New York, 1968, 154. Quotation taken from R.G. Morrison, Nietzsche and Buddhism. A Study in Nihilism and Ironic Affinities. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997, 28. 167 A. Bely, The Silver Dove. Translated and introduced by George Reavey. Preface by Harrison E. Salisbury. New York: Grove Press, Inc., 1974, 337. 77 present chapter deals with the ―spiritual journey‖ provoked by confrontations between Christianity and Buddhism. In this respect, one facet of the spiritual journey includes the pilgrimage, a term intended metaphorically here as the imaginary journey that Christ and the Buddha undertook in order to preach their doctrines. This chapter will demonstrate that debates around these two religions roused the popularity of the Buddha in modern intellectual circles, thereby explaining the appearance of Siddhartha Gautama in certain works of art and literature. The figure of the Buddha is directly cited, for instance, in Boris Anisfeld‘s Buddha with Pomegranates (1916, fig. 4), 168 and indirectly in his The Golden God, which he realized the next year, in 1917 (fig. 5). Generally speaking, Anisfeld‘s works have been interpreted in terms of the Symbolist fascination with the East. 169 168 Anisfeld also painted other undated canvases with the image of the Buddha (Buddha and Oranges, Two Asian Gods, Buddha and Other Statue, Buddha with Orange Flower Garland). However, for the purposes of this dissertation the analysis of his works limits to Buddha with Pomegranates. For a thorough study of Anisfeld‘s paintings with the Buddha, see the forthcoming article by the author, ―In the Name of the Buddha: the Figure of the Enlightened One in Yury Annenkov‘s Portrait of the Poet and Writer Maxim Gorky and in Boris Anisfeld‘s Paintings with the Buddha‖ (to be published in the Proceedings of the International Conference ―Orientalism/Occidentalism: Languages of Cultures vs. Languages of Description,‖ April 2011). 169 This characterization was how the American art historian Christian Briton, for instance, looked at Anisfeld‘s artistic production. However, unlike the Symbolists, Briton considered Russia itself part of the East, which is why he adduced the presence of the East in Anisfeld‘s works to the Slavic temperament, in which the East and the West, i.e. the mystic and the actual, dwelt (The Boris Anisfeld Exhibition. New York: Redfield-Kendrick-Odell Company, Inc., 1918-20, n.a.). 78 Fig. 4 Boris Anisfeld, Buddha with Pomegranates, 1916. Fig. 5 Boris Anisfeld, The Golden God, 1917. Fig. 6 Photograph of Lev Bakst with his collection in Paris, 1923. 79 In particular, Orientalism in the arts seems to have influenced the exotic setting of The Golden God, decorated as it is with floral motifs and women wearing turbans and odalisque outfits. That Orientalism played a role in Anisfeld‘s perception of the East is further confirmed by his affiliation with the World of Art group and Sergei Diaghilev‘s Ballets Russes, a private enterprise renowned for the exotic settings surrounding the ballet dancers. 170 If it is true that a vein of Orientalism pervades the two representations above, nonetheless, Buddhism permeates them as well. Especially Buddha with Pomegranates points to a specific Buddhist subtext related to the symbolism of the pomegranates 171 — one of the sacred fruits of Buddhism along with the citrus and the peach. Unfortunately, Anisfeld did not explain the resources upon which he drew for his figurative composition. Though it is hard to determine where Anisfeld read about the iconography of the pomegranate in Buddhism, the source of the statuette of the Buddha on the left has several possible explanations. It could have come from one of the several statuettes brought back from Asia at the turn of the century and sold on Nevsky Prospekt. Prince Esper Ukhtomsky‘s Lamaist collection, which will be discussed in detail in the next chapter, featured almost two thousand Buddhist statuettes, which visitors could admire in the collection of the Russian Ethnographical Museum in St. Petersburg. It is noteworthy that another member of the World of Art group— and a 170 Especially with regard to Anisfeld‘s sketches of The Golden God, one can trace visual similarities (the legs position, the torsion of the dancers‘ wrist) with Lev Bakst‘s costume designs, which he made for the ballet The Blue God some years earlier in 1912. For visual references see the catalog of the recently organized art exhibition A Feast of Wonders: Sergei Diaghilev and the Ballets Russes. Edited by John E. Bowlt, Zelfira Tregulova, and Nathalie Rosticher Giordano. Milan: Skira editore, 2009. 171 For the meaning of the pomegranate in Buddhism, see J. Hall, Illustrated Dictionary of Symbols in Eastern and Western Art. London: John Murray Publishers Ltd., 1994, 156. 80 colleague of Anisfeld— Lev Bakst, also had statuettes of the Buddha in his private collection, thus evidencing how widespread the phenomenon of collecting Buddhist artwork, in fact, was (fig. 6) (Chapter Three). The accompanying photograph of Bakst standing next to his private collection was taken in Paris in 1923. As will be discussed in Chapter Five, like Russia, the French capital was under the spell of Buddhism at that time. In Paris Buddhist motifs had begun circulating decades earlier, in the 1880s on the wave of the Impressionist infatuation with Japanese prints. This appeal is immortalized in Vincent Van Gogh‘s self-portrait in the guise of a bonze (a term used to indicate a Japanese Buddhist monk). In Self-Portrait Dedicated to Paul Gauguin (Bonze) (fig. 7, 1888), Van Gogh hinted at his resemblance to a Buddhist monk through his depiction of a shaved head and slanted eyes. The simplicity of his outfit and the slightly perceivable halo around his head characterize him as ―a simple worshipper of the eternal Buddha.‖ 172 According to Stephen Batchelor, this self- portrait attests to Van Gogh‘s attraction to the figure of the Buddha as a consequence of his disillusionment with Christianity. Like a true Romantic seeking an alternative to Europe, Van Gogh turned to Japan and its art and, through the Japanese philosophy of nature as an expression of a spiritual entity, he found the Buddha. 173 However, Jacquelynn Baas suggests that to inspire Van Gogh was Félicien de Myrbach- 172 S. Batchelor, The Awakening of the West. The Encounter of Buddhism and Western Culture. Berkeley, California: Parallax Press, 1994, 262. 173 Ibid., 262. 81 Rheinfield‘s illustration Japanese Buddhist Monks Leading a Funeral Procession in Pierre Loti‘s Madame Chrysanthème. 174 Motifs of the Buddhist world as interpreted through the colorful lens of French Post-Impressionism can be also found in Othon Friesz‘s Still Life with a Statuette of the Buddha (fig. 8, 1910). Compared to Anisfeld‘s interpretation of the same theme, though, the Russian painter clearly relied upon not only French Post-Impressionism, but also other inspirational sources. Friesz‘s interpretation of the image of the Buddha follows the French taste for ―chinoiserie‖ and Japanese prints. In this respect, his depiction of the Enlightened One has a purely decorative purpose, which emerges especially in the fan and ornaments around the Buddha. Furthermore, the composition lacks depth of perspective, thus aligning all the objects on the surface in one decorative panel. If Anisfeld saw Friesz‘s painting at Ivan Morozov‘s mansion in Moscow, 175 this viewing could only have influenced him superficially, for example in adopting the visual device of the statuette of the Buddha on the table. In fact, Anisfeld‘s Buddha with Pomegranates depicts a scenario imbued with Buddhist symbolism, as suggested by the presence of the pomegranates in the foreground. Moreover, as stated before, Anisfeld might have taken 174 J. Baas, Smile of the Buddha. Eastern Philosophy and Western Art from Monet to Today. Foreword by Robert A.F. Thurman. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 2005, 32. Furthermore, an interesting link between Van Gogh, Russia, and Buddhism emerges from the list of authors whom the artist read; among them, in fact, also figures Lev Tolstoy, who will be discussed in this chapter. For the list of Van Gogh‘s readings, see Ibid., 30. 175 Ivan Morozov, one of the main Russian collectors of western European painting, bought the painting through Maurice Denis. Today the painting belongs in the Hermitage collection (The Hermitage. French Painting. Second Half of the 19th Century to the early 20th century. Leningrad: Aurora Art Publishers, 1982, ill. 186). 82 Fig. 7 Vincent Van Gogh, Self-Portrait Dedicated to Paul Gauguin (Bonze), 1888. Figure 8. Othon Friesz, Still Life with a Statuette of Buddha, 1910. 83 inspiration from real cult objects that were part of Buddhist private collections in St. Petersburg (the Imperial collection or Ukhtomsky‘s collection, for instance). Apart from Buddha with Pomegranates allusions to the Buddha echo in Anisfeld‘s painting Goddess of Dreams (fig. 9), as well as in its preparatory sketch in tempera (fig. 10). In both cases, although the dreaming female figure might suggest references to the Christian Madonna— a fascinating mixture of Buddhist and Christian motifs— the crown of the goddess and the mandorla behind her shoulders accord with Buddhist visual vocabulary. Additionally, in the final version of the painting, the divinity stands in a cave contemplated by two figures on the right. The throne or pedestal is round and encircled by water exiting from a crack in the wall. The aquatic element and the roundness of the pedestal, as well as the green circles in the foreground, could easily resemble the lotus throne— an element present in any representation of the Buddha. Likewise, the facial expression of the goddess, with her eyes closed in a dreaming state, parallels representations of the meditative Buddha, also often depicted with closed eyes. Indeed, according to Buddhism the concept of life as a dream corresponds to the human condition before the attainment of enlightenment. The grotto shielding the female divinity is also relevant. For the mountainous environment, Anisfeld could have been inspired by the Buddhist cave temples on the Silk Road— archaeological sites that explorers continuously visited and were excavating at the time. Among them was Sergei Oldenburg, who led two very important expeditions to Turkestan in 1909-10 and 1914- 15, when he visited the Buddhist grottoes in Turfan and Dunhuang. 84 Fig. 9 Boris Anisfeld, Goddess of Dreams, undated. Fig. 10 Boris Anisfeld, Preparatory sketch for Goddess of Dreams. 85 Like Przhevalsky‘s (Chapter One), Oldenburg‘s expeditions evidence the role played by scientific exploration in disseminating Buddhist themes into modern Russian culture. In addition to undertaking scientific missions, Oldenburg helped to improve knowledge on Buddhism both in literature and the arts, for at the time, he was a world- renowned Russian Orientologist and secretary of the Academy of Science. 176 Among the writers who read Oldenburg‘s books was Ivan Bunin; according to T. Lobanova, Bunin drew some of his stories from Oldenburg‘s master thesis, Buddhist Legends. 177 Furthermore, as discussed in Chapter One, Oldenburg composed a forward for Balmont‘s translation of the Indian classic Kalidasa published in 1916 by the printing company owned by the brothers Sabashnikovs. 178 The connection between Oldenburg and literary circles has been the subject of several articles by Grigory Bongard-Levin; 179 what matters to the present discussion, however, is the informative role that the Russian Orientologist played in literary and artistic circuits. Oldenburg experienced extensive interconnectivity to literature throughout his life through encounters with Tolstoyans in the 1880s, translations of 176 On Oldenburg see the recently published biography, B. Kaganovich, Sergei Fedorovich Ol‘denburg. Opyt biografii. Saint-Petersburg: Feniks, 2006. 177 S. Ol‘denburg, Buddiiskie legendy. Part One. Saint Petersburg: Тipografiia Imperatorskoi Akademii Nauk, 1894, 82. 178 Kalidasa, Dramy. Translated by K. Bal‘mont, with an introduction by S. Ol‘denburg. Moscow: izdanie M. i S. Sabashnikovykh, 1916. 179 G. Bongard-Levin, ―Akademik Ol‘denburg o poezii K. Bal‘monta.‖ In Vostochnaia Evropa v istoricheskoi retrospektive. K 80-letiiu V.T. Pashuto. Moscow: Iazyki russkoi kul'tury, 1999, 35-41; ―Dvenadtsat‘ A. Bloka i ‗Mertvye‘ S.F. Ol‘denburga.‖ Iz ―Russkoi mysly.‖ Saint Petersburg: Aleteiia, 2002, 13-28; ―Aleksandr Blok i S.F. Ol‘denburg.‖ Vostok-Zapad-Rossiia. Sbornik stat‘ei k 70-letiiu V.S. Miasnikova. Moscow, 2001, 231-249. 86 Kipling and Anatole France for various Russian periodicals, and his acquaintance with Prince Ukhtomsky. Later Oldenburg made the acquaintance of the poet Aleksandr Blok (Chapter Five), whom he met for the first time during his work as a member of the Special Committee, which the Provisory Government instituted in 1917 in order to investigate episodes of anti-Soviet propaganda. 180 Oldenburg attended artistic events as well; for example, he visited the art exhibition of The World of Art group on March 16, 1903. 181 Moreover, he belonged to the board committee of the All Russian Congress of Artists in 1911-12, and was a member of various artistic institutions, such as the Hermitage, 182 the Russian Museum, 183 and many others. Perhaps the organization that best testified to Oldenburg‘s engagement with the creative world was Maxim Gorky‘s publishing house, World Literature; Oldenburg was a member of its editorial board. At World Literature, writers had a firsthand view of Buddhism and its doctrine. This collaboration at World Literature sheds some light on the recurring questions: Why does the figure of the Buddha repeat in a series of representations realized in the first two decades of the twentieth century? And why, not only in the figurative arts, but also in literature, does the Buddha make his presence known? 180 B. Kaganovich, Sergei Fedorovich Ol‘denburg, 15-6, 38-9, 69-70. In 1921, one of Oldenburg‘s closest collaborators in the Academy of Science became Aleksandr Blok‘s cousin Georgy Blok, who was in charge of conferences (Ibid., 83). 181 Ibid., 43. 182 In 1920, Oldenburg and the Orientologists Vasily Bartold and Nikolai Marr founded the Oriental Department at the Hermitage. 183 Oldenburg married Elena Golovachev, née Klements, niece of the populist and later director of the ethnographical department at the Russian Museum, Dmitry Klements. 87 East Meets West at World Literature: Visual and Textual Repercussions With the intent to unite western and eastern literary traditions and to produce the most recent and accurate translations of world literature classics, in September 1918 the writer Maxim Gorky established his publishing house in the Polovtsov mansion on 36, Mokhovaia Street. He and his close collaborator, Andrei Tikhonov, coordinated the editorial board, which was made up of scholars, writers, and critics. Participants were Aleksandr Blok, Nikolai Gumilev, Evgeny Zamiatin, Kornei Chukovsky, as well as Orientologists of the caliber of Sergei Oldenburg, Vasily Alekseev, Nikolai Marr, Boris Vladimirtsov, and many others. A photograph of the members of the World Literature board taken on December 15, 1925 (fig. 11) epitomizes this communion of West and East. Among the people depicted in the photograph, Kornei Chukovsky is recognizable sitting at the front perhaps next to Vera Sutugina-Küner (secretary of the publishing house). In the middle sits, from right to left: Zamiatin, Oldenburg, the Iranist Ignaty Krachkovsky; the artist Zinovy Grzhebin (editor and advertisement supervisor) poses behind them. Also recognizable in the photograph are Akim Volynsky, sitting next to Krachkovsky, the sinologist Vasily Alekseev standing and smiling second in the back row from the left, and Vladimirtsov at his right. The eastern and western editorial boards met once a week separately, although collective conferences happened as well. 184 Their descriptions can be found in the 184 B. Kaganovich, Sergei Fedorovich Ol‘denburg, 93. 88 memoirs and diaries of the participants, some of whom did not miss the occasion to mock these gatherings. 185 Kornei Chukovsky‘s diaries, for example, recorded World Literature activity in detail, leaving a vivid record of interactions among its members. On January 20, 1923, for example, Chukovsky wrote in his diary: Yesterday was Epiphany. All of us at World Literature—Volynsky, Oldenbrug, Vladimirtsev, Tikhonov, and I—agreed to listen to Zamyatin read his play. Oldenburg fell asleep and even snored from time to time. Vladimirtsev kept jerking his head, as if his collar were too tight. Tikhonov corrected proofs. Volynsky, a little old man, sat there impassively (you can see what he‘ll look like in the coffin—I suddenly noticed that until he opens his mouth he looks like a corpse). 186 Beside its importance in the translation of world literature classics, World Literature played a crucial role as an intersection point between the creative world and the scholarly field of Oriental Studies. The inclusion of members from both western and eastern branches on the editorial board functioned as the meeting point of East and West. It was also through this collaboration with scholars from the Academy of Science that modern writers began cultivating an interest in Asia. Hence such entries appeared in Blok‘s diary: 185 See for instance Zamiatin‘s ―Brief History of World Literature from Its Establishment to Today‖ (Kratkaia istoriia vsemirnoi literatury ot osnovaniia i do segodnia) published byV. Troitsky. In E. Zamiatin, Sochineniia, vol. 3. Edited by Evgeny Zhiglevich and Boris Filippov, with the collaboration of Aleksandr Tiurin. Germany: A. Neimanis Buchvertrieb und Verlag, 1986). See also Blok‘s play Scene From the Historical Painting ―World Literature‖ (XX Century B.C.) (Stsena iz istoricheskoi kartiny ―Vsemirnaia literatura.‖ XX stoletie do R.Khr). Blok satirized one of their meetings happening in the fall of 1919. The scene develops in the boudoir of an unknown duchess, where the western editorial board discusses who has to write an article on Herzen (the duty will fall on Chukovsky at the end). The play was translated into French with the title Arlequine poli par littérature (A. Blok, Sobranie sochinenii v vos‘mi tomakh, vol. 3. Edited by V.N. Orlov, A.A. Surkov, K.I. Chukovsky. Moscow-Leningrad: gos-noe izd-vo khud-noi lit., 1963, 422-5). Blok also writes about World Literature in his diaries (A. Blok, ―Dnevniki.‖ In Ibid., vol. 7, 355-7). 186 K. Chukovsky, Diary, 1901-1969. Edited by Victor Erlich and translated by Michael Henry Heim. New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 2005, 120. 89 July 12, 1917 Chinese book on the poet written by Alekseev, who speaks Chinese well. 187 Introduction to Kalidasa‘s dramas 188 —Generally speaking, eastern poetry requires from the reader much more creativity (tvorchestvo) than the western (Oldenburg). It is as if eastern poetry expects from the reader, who wishes to enjoy it, some effort in decoding the text […] October 22, 1920 V.M. Alekseev‘s article on Chinese literature [Italics in the original ADR]. New horizons and perspectives for new conclusions. Its connection with ‗World Literature‘ and with what we have in Acmeism. 189 Interaction between eastern and western editorial boards stimulated comparative analysis of different literary movements, as the notes from Blok attest. 190 This interaction could also explain the Buddhist traces in various literary and artistic works, as in the case of the Buddha statue in Zamiatin‘s novel We. Here the hero saw a statue of the Buddha in one of the apartments at the ―Ancient House‖ and recurrently remembered in his dreams. 191 That Zamiatin read his novel to the other members of World Literature, 192 demonstrates that there was indeed a Buddhist undercurrent circulating in the intellectual community. 187 Blok refers to Alekseev‘s book Chinese Poem on the Poet. Stansy Sykun-Tu (837-908) (Kitaiskaia poema o poete. Stansy Sykun-Tu, 837-908) published in Petrograd in 1916. 188 The edition of Kalidasa‘s drama to which Blok is referring in his diary entry is Balmont‘s translation of 1916 with a forward by Sergei Oldenburg. 189 A. Blok, Sobranie sochinenii v vos‘mi tomakh, vol. 7, 1963, 279, 372. Blok would meet Alekseev only a year later this diary entry was written; he was introduced to Alekseev‘s through Oldenburg. 190 The comparative method was also used by Orientologists like Oldenburg and Alekseev; following this methodology, Vasily Alekseev wrote articles, such as ―François Boileau and his Chinese Contemporaries on the Ars Poetica,‖ ―The Greek Logos and the Chinese Dao,‖ and many others (see M. Ban‘kovskaia, ―Schastliv tot, kto dva mira v sebe derzhit prochno…‖ In Vostok-Zapad. Issledovaniia. Perevody. Publikatsii. Edited by M.L. Gasparov, E.M. Meletinsky, A.B. Kudelin, L.Z. Eidlin. Moscow: Nauka, 1985, 246-271). 191 E. Zamiatin, ―My.‖ In Sochineniia, vol. 3, 1986, 130, 133, 145. 192 This is ascertained by Chukovsky, who wrote in his diary that Zamiatin read his novel at Voloshin‘s in Koktebel on October 7, 1923 (K. Chukovsky, Diary, 1901-1969, 129). Albeit Voloshin was not engaged in World Literature, nonetheless he was part of the same entourage and, as Chapter Five will demonstrate, had encounters with Buddhism, too. 90 Buddhist traces generated by interactions between eastern and western editorial boards also emerged in the visual arts, as writers and artists circulated among one another. A case in point is Iury Annenkov‘s drawing Portrait of the Poet and Writer Maxim Gorky (fig. 12, 1920). Gorky‘s involvement in the project and his deep sympathy for Oldenburg in particular 193 might explain, for instance, the presence of the Buddha in his portrait. Nonetheless, the image of the Enlightened One appears with other scattered images of modernity (the urban landscape drawn at Gorky‘s back with the cranes and skyscrapers rising behind the onion-shaped Orthodox cupolas). Some of these images can be directly related to Gorky. For instance, his participation in the newly born Soviet government is reflected in the street demonstration and the red banner at his right. His private collection of ―chinoiserie‖ is echoed in the Chinese vase floating behind the figure of the Buddha, and, as asserted before, the statuette of the Buddha references his collaboration with Oldenburg and other Orientologists. 193 An episode that proves Gorky‘s affection for Oldenburg is described in Chukovsky‘s diary on September 4, 1919. It deals with Gorky‘s reaction to the news of Oldenburg‘s sudden arrest: ―I‘ve just seen Gorky crying. ‗They‘ve arrested Sergei Fyodorovich Oldenburg!‘ he shouted, running into Grzhebin‘s publishing house on his way to Stroev‘s office. […] He started in on a long reply, but it disintegrated into gesticulations. ‗What can I do?‘ he finally managed to come out with. ‗I told the bastards—I mean, the bastard—that if Oldenburg wasn‘t released this very minute I‘d make a scandal. I‘d break with them, with the Communists, for good, damn them!‘ His eyes were moist‖ (K. Chukovsky, Diary, 1901-1969, 53). 91 Fig. 11Photograph of the members of the World Literature, 1925. Fig. 12 Iury Annenkov, Portrait of the Poet and Writer Maxim Gorky, 1920. 92 In addition to what is depicted in the portrait, a closer look at the representation reveals that the composition is divided into two sections. The background features noisy contemporary life, whereas in the foreground the meditative seated Buddha floats accompanied by Gorky‘s equally pensive mood. According to Evgeny Zamiatin, Annenkov‘s portrait aims at a synthesis of everyday life; however, Annenkov‘s rendering of reality is deprived of the traditional understanding of time and space. Objects are not displayed sequentially, but simultaneously, all mixed on the surface of the drawing. 194 Yet, in his description of Annenkov‘s portrait of Maxim Gorky, Zamiatin misses a possible explanation for why the artist decided to put the Buddha next to Gorky. Above all, the combination is unusual, especially considering that Gorky often talked about Buddhism in quite negative terms. For instance, when commenting on Lev Tolstoy‘s flight from Iasnaia Poliana before his death in 1910 and on Tolstoy‘s religious beliefs in general, Gorky wrote in his letter to Ekaterina Peshkova: ―You know how I hate this preaching of a passive attitude towards life; you should understand how pernicious Buddhist ideas are for a country steeped in fatalism.‖ 195 Why, then, does a statuette of the Buddha unexpectedly appear in Gorky‘s portrait? The answer could lay in the aforementioned collaboration with Sergei Oldenburg and in the fact that, simultaneous with The Portrait of the Writer and Poet Maxim Gorky, other works of art and literature were making direct references to Buddhism. 194 Iu. Annenkov, Portrety. Texts by Evgeny Zamiatin, Mikhail Kuzmin, Mikhail Babenchikov. Saint Petersburg: Petropolis, 1922, 31. 195 M. Gorky, Selected Letters. Selected, translated, and edited by Andrew Barratt and Barry P. Scherr. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997, 149. 93 The unexpected appearance of a statuette of the Buddha in Annenkov‘s drawing was not an isolated occurrence. Writers working at World Literature also conveyed an interest in the life of Siddhartha Gautama. As one example, in 1918 Nikolai Gumilev and Oldenburg sketched the unfinished theatrical piece The Life of the Buddha. 196 The work— a play in four acts—emphasizes Gautama‘s life before the Enlightenment, his court life, his escape into the desert, and the temptations of Mara. As will become clear from the following sections, Gumilev elaborated upon a topic recurrent in artistic and literary circles of the time (see, for instance, Bunin‘s attempt to write a tragedy on the same subject in 1912, an episode I will discuss at the end of this chapter). Gumilev and Oldenburg‘s unfinished play was recently discovered in Oldenburg‘s Moscow archive in a file labeled ―Outline of the lecture ‗the Life of the Buddha‖ (Konspekt lektsii ―Zhizn‘ Buddy‖). 197 Considering the timeframe (1918) and the similar content, tone may conclude that Oldenburg integrated the plot of the unfinished pièce into his speech The Life of the Buddha, the Indian Teacher of Life, which he gave on August 24, 1919 198 on the occasion of the conference accompanying the First Buddhist Exhibition in Petrograd (Chapter Five) — a milestone in the diffusion of Buddhism into modern Russian culture. The establishment of the eastern and western editorial boards at World Literature and their collaboration elucidate how Buddhist ideas entered into visual and textual 196 M. El‘zon, ―Novonaidennye teksty N.S. Gumileva.‖ In N. Gumilev i Russkii Parnas. Proceedings of the conference held on September 17-19, 1991. Edited by I.G. Kravtsova, M.D. El‘zon. Saint Petersburg: Muzei Anny Akhmatovoi v Fontannom dome, 1992, 104-108. 197 Ibid., 105. 198 S. Ol‘denburg, B. Vladimirtsov, F. Shcherbatskoi, O. Rozenberg, Zhizn‘ Buddy, indiiskogo Uchitelia Zhizni: Piat‘ lektsii po buddizmu. Samara: Agni, 1998, 8-40. 94 material. However, artists and writers shared not only topics, but also a lifestyle, in which traveling was a common denominator. Traveling enriched both the life and the literary vocabulary of the literati, as in the cases of Balmont, Chekhov, and Bunin (Chapter One), but also of Gumilev, Kruchenykh, and Goncharova. Gumilev, for instance, undertook both a physical journey to Africa and an imaginary travel to China. 199 His voyages provided him with the creative nourishment that made him open to foreign motifs. Perhaps to mock Gumilev‘s interest in the East, the artist Natan Altman caricatured him in his The Pray (molenie) (fig. 13, 1914), which features Gumilev in the genuflecting pose of a worshipper in front of the statue of a seated, crossed-leg divinity, whose female physiognomy probably hints at his wife, Anna Akhmatova. 200 The representation of the two figures could be poetically interpreted according to Vladimir Maiakovsky‘s introductive lines from his poem ―That‘s What‖ (Pro eto) (1923), where the poet depicts himself in the guise of a Buddhist believer. He writes: Like a poetical squirrel I whirled in this personal and shallow theme more than once and more than five times and now I want to whirl in it again. Now this theme is like a prayer at the Buddha‘s feet and a knife sharpened by a Negro at his masters. 201 199 For an analysis of Gumilev‘s poem Travel to China and its relation to the other poems of his The Return of Odysseus and Northern Radzha, see М. Basker, ―Gumilev, Rabelais i ‗Puteshestvie v Kitai‘: k prochteniu odnogo proto-akmeisticheskogo mifa.‖ In N. Gumilev i Russkii Parnas, 5-24. 200 The caricature is kept at the Akhmatova Museum in St. Petersburg (Anna Akhmatova: poslednie gody. Edited by Viktor Krivulin, Vladimir Murav‘ev, Tomas Ventslova. Saint Petersburg: Nevskii Dialekt, 2001, note 1, 145. 201 A complete English rendition is given in V. Maiakovsky, Pro eto-That‘s What. Translated by Larisa Gureeva and George Hyde. Todmorden, UK: Arc Publications, 2009. Here, the translation of Maiakovsky‘s poem is: ―This theme, repeated quite a few times, is a poor thing, but my own; a squirrel‘s cage where I go round and round feeling more and more alone praying for it not to stop like a Buddhist monk turning his prayer wheel or like a black guy carving ‗I love you‘ on his neighbour‘s skin‖ (Ibid.,23). For the Russian original Ibid. 22. 95 [В этой теме и личной и мелкой перепетой не раз и не пять я кружил поэтической белкой и хочу кружиться опять. Эта тема сейчас и молитвой у Будды и у негра вострит на хозяев нож]. In its purely stylized scenario of palms, a snake, and exoticism, Altman‘s rendition of the seated figure intertwines Buddhist imagery with Neo-Primitivist features. The Buddhist undercurrent in Neo-Primitivist art is further enhanced by the writings of the Latvian-born artist Vladimir Markov— one of the main theoreticians of this artistic movement. 202 In his search for an alternative to the ―overly cerebral‖ traditions of European art, Markov looked at African, Polynesian, and Asian cultures as expressions of a ―primitive‖ worldview that embodied simplicity, spontaneity, and linearity. In this context he also referred to Buddhism. In his essay ―Negro Art,‖ 203 for instance, he compared the Congo statuette of a seated man (fig. 14), 204 which he had photographed in the British Museum during one of his trips to Europe either in 1912 or 1913, to the image of the Buddha. Here he wrote: Sculpture No 21 also appears curious. How did this Buddha turn up in Central Africa, in the Congo, among the Bushoong (Kuba)? Its pose, chest, stomach, 202 Markov was one of the founding members of the group and the magazine The Union of Youth (Soiuz molodezhi), established in St. Petersburg by the initiative of the artists Elena Guro and Mikhail Matiushin and patronized by the factory-owner Levky Zheverzheev. It lasted from 1910 to 1914, and united many of the most innovative artists of the time, such as Vladimir Tatlin, Kazimir Malevich, Pavel Filonov, and many others. For further reference see J. Howard, The Union of Youth. Manchester: University Press, 1992. 203 The article was written in 1914, but it was published only posthumously in 1919 by The People‘ Commissariat for Enlightenment (Narkompros). It has been translated into English by Jeremy Howard in Art In Translation 1.1 (2009): 77-117. 204 Photograph taken from the catalog Voldemār Matvejs (Vladimir Markov). Stat‘i. Katalog proizvedenii. Pis‘ma. Khronika deiatel‘nosti ―Soiuza molodezhi). Edited by Irena Buzhinska. Latvia: Neputns, 2002, ill. 6, 95. 96 realistic legs with toenails, and ringlets around the arms are Buddha‘s. It is not my intention to establish a link or suggest the influence of Buddhist art on Africa by this observation. I merely want to suggest that at some point (the sculpture is date c. 1790) there occurred a relationship with and brief imitation of this alien art. 205 The ethnographic overtones in Markov‘s observations resonate with motifs of scientific exploration. As noticed in the previous chapter, the young generation of artists to whom Markov belonged, grew up imbued with what Beau Riffenburgh calls ―the myth of the explorer.‖ Markov‘s visits to the ethnographical collections of the most important museums in Western Europe exemplify the link between scientific missions and the creative world. In the guise of a pseudo-ethnographer, the artist went to museums in Paris, London, Brussels, Copenhagen, and other cities photographing the aboriginal material that explorers had donated to national museums. 206 As the next chapter will document, Markov and his friends were aware of the discoveries made by Russian 205 V. Markov, ―Negro Art.‖ Translated by J. Howard, Art In Translation, page number unknown. 206 He published the results of his visits to European museums in his articles ―The Art of Northern Asia,‖ ―The Art of Eastern Island‖ (1914), ―Negro Art‖ (1914), and ―The Chinese Pipe‖ (1914) all published posthumously (Voldemār Matvejs (Vladimir Markov). Stat‘i. Katalog proizvedenii. Pis‘ma. Khronika deiatel‘nosti ―Soiuza molodezhi, 66-85, 98-108). 97 Fig. 13 Natan Altman, The Pray, 1914. Fig. 14 Figure of the chief Mbopelyeen a-Ntshey in Buddha pose, ca. 1760-80. Fig. 15 Natalia Goncharova, Hermit, 1913. 98 explorers and went to see shows of Buddhist religious artwork that were organized in St. Petersburg. For instance, in his review ―The Russian Secession: Concerning the ‗Union of Youth‘ Exhibition in Riga‖ (1910), Markov openly discusses Petr Kozlov‘s sensational discovery of the city of Karakhoto in the Gobi Desert, and the exhibition of Buddhist items that the explorer brought back to St. Petersburg (Chapter Three). Another discovery of the time that Markov discusses was the famous Buddhist caves at Ajanta in Western India. In one of his letters to Levky Zheverveev, the collector and sponsor of The Union of Youth, Markov mentions the Ajanta frescoes, an art exhibition of which the Indian Society had organized in 1911. 207 Markov had possibly heard about the exhibition from Viktor Golubev— a collector of Buddhist artifacts and an explorer himself— who had photographed the Ajanta caves and donated a portion of his photographs to the St. Petersburg Academy of Science. Golubev‘s ties with the Russian artistic community will be discussed later in relation to Nikolai Roerich (Chapter Four) and Sergei Oldenburg (Chapter Five). What I note here, however, is that precisely when Markov was on his tour to Europe in 1913, the Buddhist exhibition organized by Golubev and the curator of the Cernuschi Museum, Henri d‘Ardenne de Tizac, opened in Paris. Hence, that Markov saw the Buddhist exhibition and knew Golubev is highly plausible. 207 Markov‘s own words were: ―India society has just released its latest publication for the year 1911. It contains 11 tables of Indian sculptures taken from English private collections. During the past year the society organized an exhibition of copies of the frescos, which are in the Ajanta caves in the old monasteries. The copies were made by four Indian artists who drew them life-size‖ (V. Matvei, ―Pis‘mo k L. Zheverzheevu.‖ In Voldemār Matvejs (Vladimir Markov). Stat‘i. Katalog proizvedenii. Pis‘ma. Khronika deiatel‘nosti ―Soiuza molodezhi, 142). 99 This brief overview of Vladimir Markov‘s writings on art 208 indicates how the Buddhist world underpinned Neo-Primitivist discourse as well. From this perspective, one might conclude that the position of the deity‘s legs in Anisfeld‘s The Golden God and the cross-legged posture of the female goddess in Altman‘s The Pray derive from this Buddhist undercurrent in the creative community in the 1910s. Therefore, the illustration of the seated, cross-legged figure by another Neo-Primitivist painter Natalia Goncharova— made for Aleksei Kruchenykh‘s book Hermits; Hermitess: Two Poems (Pustynniki. Pustynnitsa: dve poemy) in 1913— may have been a manifestation of this Buddhist theme as well (fig. 15). 209 Indeed, Goncharova‘s drawing represents a hermit seated cross-legged with his right hand turned toward the ground and his left hand raised up (one of the Buddha‘s meditative positions) catching the demon tempting him. Although the Christian orthodox motif is clear, the artist may have drawn from Buddhist imagery as well. Furthermore, Goncharova shared with the creative community not only common Oriental motifs, but also the idea of traveling, both imaginary and physical. In his fictional biography of Goncharova, in fact, the poet and artist‘s friend Ilia Zdanevich imagined the artist traveling the world, visiting places like India, Armenia, and Persia. 210 208 Markov also mentioned Buddhism in his essay Creative Principles in Plastic Arts (Printsipy tvorchestva v plasticheskikh iskusstvakh, 1913), where he describes an episode of Japanese women who donated their hair to a large representation of the Buddha in honor of the heroes fallen in the recent war (Ibid., 43). 209 A. Kruchenykh, Pustinniki. Pustynnitsa: dve poemy. Moscow: Izd. G.L. Kuzmina i S.D. Dolinskogo, 1913. Electronic version available online at http://www.getty.edu/research/conducting_research/digitized_collections/russian_avant-garde/pdfs.html 210 J.E. Bowlt, ―Women of Genius.‖ In Amazons of the Avant-Garde. Edited by John E. Bowlt and Matthew Drutt. New York: Guggenheim Museum, 2000, 26-7. 100 The poet Aleksei Kruchenykh made fictional visits to India and Persia in the futurist book Worldbackwards (Mirskontsa), which he coauthored with Velimir Khlebnikov— the poet who, as seen in the previous chapter, wrote about Przhevalsky‘s horse. 211 Further demonstrating the link between imagined travel and Buddhism, Kruchenykh wrote about India and Persia in the chapter of the book titled ―Travel all over the world‖ (Puteshestvie po vsemu miru). Among his travel adventures, he included an imaginary self-transformation into the Buddha. In short, both Zdanevich‘s and Kruchenykh‘s metaphorical references to imaginary voyages attest to the importance of the journey to modern Russian culture; they also assert a Buddhist undercurrent. Some works by the aforementioned artists intermingled Buddhist and Christian motifs as well— as in the case of Goncharova‘s illustration of the hermit and Anisfeld‘s Goddess of Dreams. For the remainder of Chapter Two, I will explicate the possible sources of such interconnectivity. As will become clear shortly, Buddhism entered visual and textual material not only through the collaboration of Orientologists and writers at World Literature, but also through the discussions of Buddhism and its relation to Christianity that were taking place in intellectual circles. As the following section will document, the modern community was aware of the debates. The liveliness of the topic dictated the popularity of the Buddha in modern Russian culture: visual artists depicted the Enlightened One in a series of representations discussed above, while writers composed poems about the Indian Prince Gautama. In other words, the debate on 211 Goncharova illustrated Worldbackwords with Mikhail Larionov, Vladimir Tatlin and others. A. Kruchenykh, V. Khlebnikov, Mirskontsa. Moscow: G.L. Kuzmin & S.D. Dolinskiy, 1912. Electronic view available at http://www.getty.edu/research/conducting_research/digitized_collections/russian_avant- garde/pdfs.html 101 Buddhism and its relation to Christianity foregrounded the Buddha in various media in modern Russian culture. Buddhism in Relation to Christianity: The Transmigration of Religious Myths At the turn of the nineteenth century, one argument animating scholarly debates concerned the primary sources of many folkloric and religious myths. Specifically, discussions dealt with the transmigration of legends from East to West, and vice versa. The previous chapter related the concept of the journey to physical traveling, for example trips to the East by explorers, writers, and deportees; this chapter takes into consideration intercultural similarities emerging from the ―imaginary journey‖ undertaken not by people, but by ideas. One topic on the sources of common myths concerned the identification of some Christian motifs as originally Buddhist. The thesis of the Buddhist origins of Christianity, in particular the life of Christ as a late elaboration of the life of Siddhartha Gautama, provoked the spirit of the dispute. 212 One defender of Christianity against the threat of Buddhist doctrinal contamination was the historian Vladimir Kozhevnikov, 213 who in 212 For an overview of the discussion, see E.J. Thomas, The Life of Buddha as Legend and History. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul LTD, 1960, 237-248. 213 Vladimir Kozhevnikov was a cultural historian follower of Nikolai Fedorov, whom he met in 1875 at the library of the Rumiantsev Museum. Some of his later works were based on the promulgation of Fedorov‘s ideas in contrast to other philosophical systems. For instance, in his Aimless Job, ―Inactivity‖ or Activity? (Bestsel‘nyi trud, ―nedelanie‖ ili delo?, 1893), Kozhevnikov aims to prove the futility of the Tolstoyan passivity with its non-opposition to evil in relation to the Fedorovian concept of Resurrection of the fathers. Kozhevnikov also dedicated to Fedorov his monographic work, Nikolai Fedorovich Fedorov. An Attempted Account of His Teaching Through His Published Works, Correspondence, and Personal Conversations (Nikolai Fedorovich Fedorov. Opyt izlozheniia ego ucheniia po izdannym proizvedeniiam, perepiske i lichnym besedam, 1908), and co-edited with the publicist and teacher, Nikolai Peterson, 102 1916 wrote a two-volume book in defense of Christianity titled Buddhism in Comparison with Christianity (Buddizm v sravnenii s Khristianstvom). 214 Here, the author stresses that the supposed similarities between Buddhism and Christianity came from a deep ignorance of Buddhist doctrine, which had nothing to do with Christianity. The author attributes the diffusion of such a false knowledge of Buddhism to the so-called neo- buddhists and theosophists, as well as to Orientologists, who mistakenly translated from Pali and Sanskrit. In spite of Kozhevnikov‘s questionable statements, his introduction provides a useful overview of the debate from both contending sides. It gives an idea of the extent to which the conviction that Buddhism was at the source of Christianity and that the life of Christ represented an elaboration of the Buddha‘s biography 215 was embraced by Europeans and Americans. Fedorov‘s manuscripts, titling them The Philosophy of the Common Task (Filosofiia obshchego dela, 1906- 13). On Kozhevnikov as publisher of Fedorov‘s writings, see Dmitry and Aleksandra Kozhevnikov‘s article ―Vladimir Kozhevnikov—Izdatel‘ trudov Nikolaia Fedorova.‖ In Filosofiia russkogo kosmizma i russkaia kul‘tura. (Proceedings of the international conference ―Cosmism and Russian Literature.‖ On the occasion of 100 years from Nikolai Fedorov‘s Death, October 23-25, 2003). Edited by Korneliia Ichin. Belgrad: Filologicheskii fakul‘tet Belgradskogo universiteta, 2004, 395-402. 214 Vladimir Kozhevnikov was unrelated to Aleksandr Kozhevnikov, the philosopher known by the French spelling of his name, Alexandre Kojève, albeit Kojève‘s father was named Vladimir (he died at the battlefront during the Russo-Japanese war). Kojève‘s father was step-brother of the renowned painter Vasily Kandinsky. The abstract painter remained in touch with his step-nephew Alexandre until Kandinsky‘s death (V. Kandinsky, Correspondences avec Zervos et Kojève. Edited and introduced by Christian Derouet. Paris: Centre Georges Pompidou, 1992). Although Buddhism in Russian philosophy does not concern the topic of the present dissertation, it is noteworthy that Alexandre Kojève not only studied Buddhism and Sanskrit, together with Tibetan and Chinese languages, at Heidelberg in 1920, but also wrote about the Buddha in his Diary of a Philosopher. Here the philosopher noted his dream ―Descartes and Buddha,‖ which he had in Warsaw on June 12, 1920. In his imaginary conversation with Descartes, Kojève identified himself with the Buddha (M. Filoni, Il filosofo della domenica. La vita e il pensiero di Alexandre Kojève. Torino: Bollati Boringhieri, 2008, 70-6). Like Vladimir Kozhevnikov, Kojève devoted some pages of his diary to the relationship between Christianity and Buddhism, too (Ibid., 86-8). 215 Among the books related to the controversy are E. von Bunsen, The Angel-Messiah of Buddhists, Essens and Christians. (London, 1880); R. Seydel, Das Evangelium von Jesu in seinen Verhaeltnissen zu Budda- 103 In opposition to Vladimir Kozhevnikov were Grigory Potanin and Aleksandr Veselovsky, as is clear from Potanin‘s letter to Leonid Maikov on February 8, 1888. Here, the Siberian exile asks Maikov to tell Veselovsky about the work Les fetês annuelement célébrées à Emoui (Amoy). Etude concernant la religion populaire des chinois by J. J. M. De Groot, which was published in the Annales du Musée Guimet. Potanin suggests paying particular attention to the section devoted to the feasts of Kouan Jin (Guan yin), a divinity that the French author was keen to identify with the Holy Mary. Thus, Potanin came to the conclusion that, considering the prior appearance of Buddhism, perhaps Christianity indeed had its origins in Buddhism. 216 As Andrei Sagalev and Vladimir Kriukov asserted: Potanin knew that in principle the influence of the East on the spiritual life of the West can not be arguable. Buddhist legends, once assimilated by Christian literature, became apocryphal. This was the case of the legend on the Tsarevich Josaphat, behind whom we can guess the figure of Buddha himself. 217 The legend of the Indian Prince Josaphat who was converted to Orthodoxy by the Christian monk Barlaam (Varlaam in Russian) makes evident how deeply the subject sage und Buddha-lehre (1882) and Die Buddha-legende und das Leben Jesu nach den Evangelien (1884); A. Lillie, Buddha and early Buddhism (1883), Buddhism in Christendom, or Jesus the Essen (1885), The Influence of Buddhism on Primitive Christianity (1893), The Claims of Christianity (1894); K. Neumann, Die innere Verwandtschaft buddhistischer und christlicher Lehren (1891). 216 Pis‘ma G.N. Potanina,vol. 4. Edited by A.G. Grumm-Grzhimailo, S.F. Koval‘, Ia.R. Koshelev, N.N. Ianovsky. Irkutsk: Izd-vo Irkut. universiteta, 1987-1990, 87. 217 Ibid., 129-130. Generally speaking, Potanin was convinced that the entire European and Asian iconography developed from one common initial source— the myth of the creation of the world. He devoted many of his studies on folklore to proving the Oriental origins of Christian myths. In On the Fairy- Tale of Mark the Rich-Man (K skazke o Marke Bogatom), printed in Kazan in 1895, for instance, he proposed a comparative analysis between the Russian fairy-tale and the fourth-century Mongolian legend on Burkhan-bakshi, the Mongolian name for the Buddha. In Erke. The Cult of the Celestial Son in Northern Asia (Erke. Kul‘t syna neba v Severnoi Azii), instead, the exiled intellectual alleged that the name for Christ came from the Chinese myth of the Son of the sky. 104 matter was intertwined. 218 Indeed, Christian and the Buddhist titles were sometimes even united in titles like Barlaam and Josaphat. English lives of Buddha. 219 As such, in the nineteenth century the provenance of the Christian chronicle roused numerous debates among scholars. On the one side were those who supported the Buddhist origins of the tale (Aleksandr Veselovsky and Grigory Potanin, for example), 220 on the other side were those who pointed to the numerous Christian motifs in the story, thus questioning the Indian influence upon the legend and asserting its Greek origins. 221 What contributed to doubt about the sources of the tale was its presence in other different cultures, such as Arabic and Georgian, as well as Byzantine and western European. 222 Nonetheless, the 218 The Legend of Josaphat and Barlaam entered into the Kievian chronicles not later than the twelfth century. The story was then enclosed in the Old Russian hagiography of the saints, namely the Prolog, sirech sviatykh vseproletnoe pisanie vsekh drevnikh sviatykh otets i sviatykh zhen otzhitei ikh i mucheniia vkrattse slozheniia slovesa i povesti chiudny ot otets zhe. The Prologue, first published in 1642-44, consisted in a calendar of daily readings with each day devoted to the life of a saint. The conversion of the Indian prince appeared as the assigned reading for November 18. In the second half of the nineteenth century, the stories of the Prologue were further elaborated in the religious collection of twelve volumes titled Grand Monthly Readings (Chet‘i-Minei, 1864)—the legend of Barlaam and Josaphat was displayed on November 19. 219 Barlaam and Josaphat. English Lives of Buddha. Edited by Joseph Jacobs. London: D. Nutt, 1896. 220 A. Veselovsky, Vizantiiskie povesti o Varlaame i Ioasafe. Saint Petersburg: s.n., 1877. In his essay Veselovsky mentions Ivan Minaev and Felix Liebrecht among the supporters of the Buddhist sources. Liebrecht‘s Die Quellen des ―Barlaam und Josaphat‖ (Jahrb. für roman. und engl. Liter. II, 1860. Bd. 314- 334) relied upon Barthélemy Saint-Hilaire‘s pioneering book Le Bouddha et sa religion (1860)— one of the first biographies of the Buddha in the west— to prove the Buddhist similarities of the Legend of Barlaam and Josaphat. 221 Among the latter group figured Aleksandr Kirpichnikov. His book, Greek Novels on New Literature. The Story of Barlaam and Josaphat (Grecheskie romany v novoi literature. Povest‘ o Varlaame i Ioasafe. Khar‘kov: Universitetskaia tipografiia, 1876), was meant as counterproof against Liebrecht‘s assertions (see Kirpichnikov‘s chapter IV ―Ioasaf i Budda‖). 222 For further information on the origins of the tale, see Povest‘ o Varlaame i Ioasafe. Pamiatnik drevnerusskoi perevodnoi literatury XI-XII vv. Edited and commented by I. Lebedeva. Leningrad: Nauka, 1985. 105 legend of Barlaam and Josaphat fits perfectly with the enormous production of books on the life of the Buddha and on the figure of the Buddha himself, which were published in the last quarter of the nineteenth century and the first decade of the twentieth century. Since the life and conversion of Prince Josaphat offered numerous similarities to the life of Prince Sakyamuni and because the life of the latter will be a constant point of reference in this chapter, it is worth outlining its salient moments. Prince Siddhartha Gautama (ca. 563-483 BCE) was the son of king Shuddhodana and queen Maya, regents of the Shakya kingdom in Kapilavastu (today Nepal). Legend tells that before giving birth Queen Maya dreamt of a white elephant king entering her body and conceived. When the time came to give birth, she was walking in a lonely grove and delivered her son from her side. It was a miraculous birth accompanied by many supernatural signs foretelling that her son would be a great Buddha ("an enlightened one"). 223 At the news of Siddhartha‘s birth, the highly venerated sage Asita went to king Shuddhodana to pay homage and see the future Buddha. Alarmed by the sage‘s prophecy of his son and unwilling to let Siddhartha become a hermit— a scenario that would have put at risk the continuity of the royal lineage— the king raised Siddhartha in luxury and isolated him from the world outside the imperial palace. In this life of pleasure, Prince Gautama married the beauty Iasho-dhara and had a son from her named Rahula. 223 According to Buddhism a ―buddha‖ is one ―who reaches the enlightenment.‖ The title applies not only to Siddhartha Gautama, but also to other seers who came before and after him. Indeed, in Mahayana Buddhism Siddhartha Gautama is considered the fourth buddha; after him the fifth buddha Maitreya will come. However, when people refer to the historical founder of Buddhism, Prince Gautama, like in this case, the appropriate title remains ―the Buddha‖ with the capitalized B preceded by the determinative article. For further information see S. Collins, Nirvana. Concept, Imagery, Narrative. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010, Chapter Five. 106 One day, while listening to the melodious chants of his maidens, Prince Siddhartha wished to go outside and see the city. King Shuddhodana then ordered that afflicted people should be removed from the street in order not to be seen by his son. Despite the king‘s restrictions, however, every time Siddhartha went out, he encountered human suffering first in the guise of an old man, then of a sick man, and finally of a dead body. Shocked by these three encounters, the young prince began wondering about the meaning of life and decided to escape from his father‘s palace to find the answer among the ascetics living in the forest. After fleeing from the imperial palace at night with the help of his servant, Chandaka, Prince Gautama joined various ascetic sects, whose philosophies he quickly mastered, but none of them helped him to achieve the enlightenment. He finally achieved the awakening when, one night, he was meditating under the foot of a bodhi-tree in Bodh Gaya. Seated under the tree and determined to remain still until he grasped the truth, Siddhartha was tempted by the evil god Mara and his legions of demons. Siddhartha‘s persistence and spiritual strength, however, defeated the evil spirit, and the prince was able to become a Buddha after understanding the meaning of his past and future lives. After the enlightenment, the Buddha decided to preach the truths he had grasped. He went to the Deer Park near Benares and gave the first of his sermons on the so-called ―middle way,‖ a doctrine about seeking a religious path between worldliness and asceticism. After his sermon, the Buddha began gathering disciples; among them were the people from Shakya and king Shuddhodana, who converted to his son‘s doctrine 107 when the Buddha went back to Kapilasvatu and performed several miracles in front of him. After spending his entire life spreading his teachings, the Buddha entered into nirvana in Kushinagar— but not before preaching to his disciples about monastic life (sangha). He entered the final nirvana surrounded by his beloved disciple, Ananda, who would later recollect the words of his teacher and write them down at the first assembly of the disciples of the Buddha in Rajagriha. 224 The legend of Josaphat presents many similarities to the life of the Buddha: his father‘s attempts to keep the young man in perennially joyful surroundings; Josaphat‘s encounters with sorrow and his subsequent aspiration to hermitage; the final conversion of king Shuddhodana to Buddhism and of Josaphat‘s father to Christianity. Likewise, the two religious figures of the Buddhist Asita and of the Christian Barlaam demonstrate similar behavior toward the respective young hero. Regardless of its source, with time, the legend of Prince Josaphat became so entwined with Christian motifs that the real Buddhist origin of the legend came to be questioned. Russian Orthodoxy ultimately abandoned any doubt about the authentic Christian roots of Josaphat when it definitively appropriated the story by enclosing it in canonical Christian hagiography. The Russian Church valued the conversion of Josaphat so highly that it had the dialogue between Barlaam and Josaphat memorialized in a fresco painted on the southern ceiling of the 224 The Buddha‘s biography has been summarized from The Life of the Buddha [Buddhacarita] by Ashvaghosa. Translated by Patrick Olivelle. N.Y.: The New York University Press and JJC Foundation, 2008. 108 Golden Hall (Zolotaia palata) at the Kremlin next to the representation of the Conversion of Vladimir. 225 The official canonization of Josaphat and Barlaam documented how the debate about the Buddhist influences on Christian myths went right to the core of Russian national culture. As the second part of this chapter will discuss, this debate impacted the creative world, in which the idea of Christ and the Buddha as sort of twin brothers challenged the imagination of modern writers. As will become evident shortly, the legend of Barlaam and Josaphat represented an inspirational source, upon which writers often elaborated— placing more emphasis on its Oriental traits than its Christian ones. The Dissemination of the Legend of Barlaam and Josaphat into Modern Russian Literature:  Lev Tolstoy… References to the legend of the Indian Prince Josaphat are found in the literary production of various authors. One of them was Lev Tolstoy, who mentions Josaphat in his Confession (1882). Here, Tolstoy paraphrases Josaphat‘s hagiography as the life of the Buddha, an interpretation that is not surprising when considering that Tolstoy was also engaged in writing and editing various versions of Gautama‘s life. The Russian writer was fascinated with the life of the Indian Prince Siddhartha Gautama. He attempted to render the Buddha‘s biography in his native tongue from 1885— the year when he began his version of Siddhartha, Called the Buddha, That Is The Enlightened. 225 Povest‘ o Varlaame i Iosafe. Pamiatnik drevnerusskoi perevodnoi literatury XI-XII vv., 38-9. 109 His Life and Teaching —until his death. Siddhartha 226 remained an unfinished sketch, on which Tolstoy worked with his friend Vladimir Chertkov and others. 227 Its outline, which was composed of an introduction and two chapters, appeared in 1916 in the magazine Unity (Edinenie). Tolstoy‘s editing of the life of the Buddha closely resembles Edwin Arnold‘s poem The Light of Asia, which I discuss at the end of this chapter. As a matter of fact, Tolstoy‘s correspondence with Vladimir Chertkov confirms his reading of the Light of Asia at the time of the composition of the Buddha‘s life. As Chertkov wrote in his letter to Tolstoy on April 14, 1889: I am sending you my paraphrase of the preaching of the Buddha as given by Arnold. I interpreted the Buddha as I understood him from Arnold; however, I feel that Arnold did not comprehend the depth of the Buddha. This is the reason why I would like to give a new reading of the Buddhist doctrine relying upon sources such as Beal and the like. 228 The other sources to which Chertkov referred mainly included Samuel Beal‘s book Outline of Buddhism. From Chinese Sources (London, 1870), Thomas William Rhys Davids‘ A Sketch of the Life and Teaching of Gautama the Buddha (London, 1878), and Spence Hardy‘s Manual of Buddhism (London, 1880). 229 In addition to those works, 226 L. Tolstoy, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii v 91 tomakh., vol. 25. Edited by V. Chertkov et al. Moscow: Gog.-noe izd-vo khudozhestvennoi literatury, 1928-1964, 540-3, 659-62. 227 The process of writing the life of the Buddha is well documented in the correspondence between Tolstoy and Chertkov, published in Tolstoy‘s Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, vol. 86. For the names of the other co- authors, see Ibid., note 7, 34. 228 L. Tolstoy, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, vol. 86, 230. 229 Ibid., note 4, 120; note 1, 230-1, 237; note 8, 241. Other bibliographical references were: Eugène Burnouf‘s Le lotus de la bonne loi. Traduit du Sanskrit, accompagné d‘un commentaire et de vingt et un mémoires relatives au Bouddhisme (Paris, 1852) and Édouard Schuré‘s Sakyamuni. The Ancient Sage. (Legends on Buddha) (Sakiia-Muni. Drevnii mudrets. Legendy o Budde. Moscow, 1886). It was the translation of a subject that Schuré already discussed in 1885 in his article ―Le Buddha et sa legende‖ in the 110 Tolstoy suggested that Chertkov read Hermann Oldenberg‘s Buddha, sein Leben, seine Lehre, seine Gemeinde (Berlin, 1881). 230 This latter choice was not accidental— Oldenberg‘s book was a worldwide success. In Russia, its first edition appeared in 1884, 231 followed by new editions in 1890, 1898, 1900, and 1905. Its Russian reviewers also included Vladimir Lesevich, who will be discussed later in this chapter and who reviewed the book in 1885 in his article for Nikolai Iadrintsev‘s magazine Eastern Review (Vostochnoe obozrenie). 232 Edwin Arnold and Hermann Oldenberg contributed significantly to the popularization of the figure of the Buddha in Russia. Somehow, their renditions complemented each other; indeed, if Arnold‘s poem accorded with a fictional rendering of the Buddha‘s biography, Oldenberg‘s book counterbalanced it with more scholarly material. Tolstoy‘s bibliographical suggestions for Siddhartha, Called the Buddha, That Is The Enlightened. His Life and Teaching aptly document how well informed the Russian writer was on the subject matter. His brief insertion of the life of the Buddha into his Cyclical Readings. Thoughts of Many Writers About Truth, Life And Behavior Selected, Collected, and Assigned To Each Day By Lev Tolstoy (Krug chteniia. Izbrannye, sobrannye i raspolozhennye na kazhdyi den‘ L‘vom Tolstym mysli mnogikh pisatelei ob magazine La revue des deux mondes. On Tolstoy's Buddhist sources for his unfinished story, see commentaries by N. Gudzii in Tolstoy, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, vol. 25, 887-90. 230 Ibid., 889. 231 G. Ol‘denberg, Budda. Ego zhizn', uchenie, i obshchina. Moscow: K.T. Soldatenkov, 1884. 232 V.L. ―Pervobytnyi Buddizm. German Ol‘denberg. Budda, ego zhizn‘, uchenie i obshchina.‖ In Literaturnyi sbornik. Izdanie redaktsii ―Vostochnogo Obozreniia.‖ Sobranie nauchnykh i literaturnykh stat‘ei o Sibiri i Aziatskom Vostoke. Edited by N.M. Iadrintsev. Saint Petersburg: Tipografiia I.N. Skorokhodova, 1885, 114-138. 111 istine, zhizni i povedenii, 1904-1908) exemplarily attests to Tolstoy‘s intermingling of Buddhist and Christian motifs, specifically of the stories of the Buddha and of Josaphat. Tolstoy read about Barlaam and Josaphat in the Prologue and the Grand Monthly Readings, 233 books that he had in his library at Iasnaia Poliana. 234 Following the same concept of everyday religious readings Tolstoy conceived of a calendar of daily edifying principles followed by related stories. The life of the Buddha appeared on February 11, and offered that, ―human life is good only when it is the embodiment of the law of life, of God‘s law.‖ 235 Perhaps it was not accidental that as the legend of Barlaam and Josaphat was inserted into The Grand Monthly Readings, so too was The Buddha included in Tolstoy‘s Cyclical Readings. In fact, Tolstoy‘s summary of the life of the Buddhist spiritual leader emphasizes episodes that echo Josaphat‘s experience and thereby present Christian undertones; these are Gautama‘s three encounters with illness, old age, and death (Josaphat encountered them too), but especially the Buddha‘s ―Ten Commandments,‖ which already represent Tolstoy‘s own Christian adaptation of the Buddha‘s sermon in Deer Park. In other words, what emerges from Tolstoy‘s version of the life of the Buddha, as reported in his Cyclical Readings, is the author‘s attempt to 233 L. Tolstoy, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, vol. 23, 52. 234 In addition to the 1864 edition of the Grand Monthly Readings and the 1875-6 edition of the Prologue, Tolstoy owned also V. Kliuchevsky, Drevnerusskie zhitiia sviatykh kak istoricheskii istochnik. Issledovanie. Moscow: izd. Soldatenkova, 1871 (L.Tolstoy, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, vol. 23, notes 36.52 21 and 37.52 21 , 534). 235 Ibid., vol. 41, 96-101. Its English translation can be found in Leo Tolstoy. Edited by D. Milivojevich. New York: Columbia University Press, 1998, 157-162. 112 highlight the syncretism of these two religions in order to show their points of convergences rather than their divergences. 236 Possibly because of the ethical similarities between the lives of Prince Sakyamuni and Prince Josaphat, and indirectly between Buddhism and Christianity, Tolstoy was fascinated with the figure of the Buddha throughout his life. This is documented, for instance, by his edition of Paul Boulanger‘s ―Life and Teaching of Siddhartha Gautama Called the Buddha, That is, The Most Perfect One,‖ which Tolstoy published in the magazine Life For All (Zhizn‘ dlia vsekh). 237 Although Boulanger authored the article, Tolstoy stood behind its composition, as testified to in his letter to Vladimir Posse, editor of the magazine, to whom Tolstoy explained the concept of the work, emphasizing how the text focuses on the ethics of Buddhism rather than on historic-scientific data. 238 From this perspective, that Tolstoy principally focused on the Buddha and his early teaching, instead of the consequent Buddhist schools, makes sense. His selection came from Tolstoy‘s conviction that religions shared a common belief in goodness and compassion, and that the establishment of churches and religious institutions destroyed the original meaning of doctrine, be it Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, or other. Furthermore, in her article on Tolstoy and Buddhism, Carla Muschio suggests that Tolstoy‘s special love for 236 A quick look at Tolstoy‘s bibliographical sources, however, reveals that the writer took inspiration from theosophical as well as from philosophical collections. Among his readings, in fact, is the theosophical edition of Perpetual Calendar with Golden Thoughts for Every Day in the Year, as well as a collection of thoughts on religious subjects. For the entire list of Tolstoy‘s readings, see L. Tolstoy, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, vol. 42, 586-9. 237 P. Bulanzhe, ―Zhizn‘ i uchenie Siddarty Gotamy, prozvannogo Buddoi (sovershenneishim).‖ Zhizn‘ dlia vsekh 3 (March 1910): 110-27. 238 L. Tolstoy, ―To the editor of the Journal Zhizn‘ dliia Vsekh.‖ In Leo Tolstoy. Edited by D. Milivojevich, 138. 113 the figure of the Buddha was also dictated by the writer‘s identification with the life of the Indian Prince. According to Muschio, both Tolstoy and Siddhartha were of noble birth, both abandoned wealth and went in search of happiness and wisdom, and both were nonconformists. 239 Tolstoy lived in a time when Buddhist studies were blooming; it is thus not accidental that he wrote about the Buddha simultaneously with other writers and artists, some of who were friends. While abroad, Tolstoy collaborated with the German-born journalist Paul Carus—one of the main promoters of Buddhism in the United States, editor of the journal The Open Court, and author of compelling articles, such as ―Goethe a Buddhist.‖ 240 Carus wrote several tales dealing with Buddhist themes; one of them, Karma. A Story of Buddhist Ethics, was translated into Russian by Lev Tolstoy. 241 During the time Tolstoy was working on his life of the Buddha, Carus published his article ―Buddha Pictures and Statues.‖ 242 Richly illustrated with images of the Buddha, the article went along with Carus‘ discourse on Buddhism and Christianity, as explained in 239 C. Muschio, ―Tolstoj ‗apostolo‘ del buddismo.‖ Micromega 5, Inedito 2 (2001): 322. 240 P. Carus, ―Goethe a Buddhist.‖The Open Court 445 (March 12, 1896): 4832-7. 241 Carus first published his fairy-tale in his journal The Open Court in 1894. That same year, Tolstoy translated the parable and sent it for publication to the editorial board of the Northern Herald (Severnyi vestnik). Karma was printed in the twelfth issue of the Russian periodical (L. Tolstoy, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, vol. 31, 47-56, 270). For his part, Carus published in his journal translations of Tolstoy‘s articles, even when he disagreed with the Russian author. One of these cases was Tolstoy‘s essay ―Christianity and Patriotism,‖ printed in The Open Court 462-7 (July-August 1896). In polemics with Tolstoy, Carus argued that the Russian writer seemed to condemn more what looked like chauvinism than patriotism, since patriotism meant, according to Carus: ―the love of one‘s own country and […] the legitimate aspiration of preserving all that is good in the character and institutions of one‘s own nationality‖ (The Open Court 467: 5012). 242 P. Carus, ―Buddha Pictures and Statues.‖The Open Court 505 (June 1898): 337-51. 114 Buddhism and its Christian Critics. 243 Carus had in mind a study in comparative religion aimed to promote better knowledge of both Christianity and Buddhism. His plan consisted of synthesizing common religious beliefs in what he called ―the Religion of Truth,‖ e.g. ―a religion based upon plain statements of fact unalloyed with myth or allegory.‖ 244 In other words, Carus alleged the existence of one truth behind all religions; this truth justified similarities among different sets of beliefs. 245 His argument on the kinship between Christianity and Buddhism also echoed in his best-seller, Gospel of Buddha (1904), 246 a provocative Buddhist adaptation of the gospel— a genre usually associated with the first four books of the New Testament devoted to the apostles‘ proselytism. Using the homiletic tone of the genre, Carus praises the life of the Buddha, as if provocatively to show the easily interchangeable nature of the two doctrines. According to Harold Henderson, Carus‘ decisive turn toward Buddhism, and to composing The Gospel of Buddha, happened after his attendance at the World‘s Parliament of Religions, held in Chicago from September 11 to September 27, 1893. 247 The World‘s Parliament of Religions brought together people and ideas from various continents. The presence in one place of so many foreign representatives, each 243 P. Carus, Buddhism and its Christian Critics. Chicago: The Open Court Publishing Company, 1894. 244 Ibid., (Preface, revised edition 1905, 10-1). 245 In his general outline Carus‘ synthetic approach to religion turns to be close to Tolstoy‘s approach to the same subject matter. 246 His book had been translated into German, French, Spanish, Dutch, and Urdu; it was going to be translated into Russian, Italian and many eastern languages (H. Henderson, Catalyst for Controversy. Paul Carus of Open Court. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press, 1993, 89). 247 Ibid., 91. 115 dressed in his own distinctive religious vestments, gathering together and peacefully discussing individual doctrinal views, impressed many attendants, including Russians. Prince Sergei Volkonsky belonged to this group of people, as he testifies in his report for the magazine The European Messenger. 248 The presence of an international audience at the congress in Chicago confirmed a general attention in religious matters, Buddhist included, which Russians shared with the international community. Once again, a physical journey— in this case the visit of religious representatives and international attendants to the World‘s Parliament of Religions in Chicago— encouraged a rich exchange of thought; among them was the relationship between Christianity and Buddhism. As seen from his collaboration with the American editor Carus and from his writing on the Buddha, Tolstoy participated in debates on Buddhism and its relation to Christianity as well. His attention to the subject matter emerges not only through his writing and international collaborations, but also through his correspondence. On March 10, 1910, for instance, Tolstoy sent a letter to Iosif Perper accompanied with Bruno Freidank‘s book Horrors of Christian Civilization. The book, translated from the German by A. Goldenweiser, appeared under the title ―Letters of a Buddhist to a Christian‖ in The Vegetarian Review that same year. The reason that Tolstoy sent the book to Perper was precisely due to the debates circulating around Buddhism and Christianity. As he wrote: In recent times Buddhism has been becoming more and more free of the excrescences covering it, the Christian world is getting to know its true essence 248 S. Volkonsky, ―Kongress religii v Chicago. Vpechatleniia i zametki.‖ Vestnik Evropy 2 (March 1895): 66-90. 116 more and more, and in recent times people who have gone over from Christianity to Buddhism are being encountered more and more often in both Europe and America. Not to mention the metaphysical depth of its teaching, so well explained by Schopenhauer, the moral efficacy of this teaching with its five basic commandments for all who believe in Buddhism is particularly attractive: (1) Do not deliberately kill any living creature; (2) do not appropriate to yourself what is considered by others to be their property; (3) do not give way to sexual lust; (4) do not lie; (5) do not stupefy yourself by alcoholic drinks or smoking. One cannot help thinking what an enormous change would take place in life if people knew these commandments and considered them at least as binding as the fulfillment of external rituals. 249 In short, the appearance of the Buddha‘s biography in more than one work by Lev Tolstoy derives from his participation in contemporary debates on Buddhism and its relation to Christianity. Content parallels between the legend of the Indian Prince Josaphat and the life of the Buddha especially excited the spirit of the debate, which split discussants into two opposing groups. As alleged here, Tolstoy was one who maintained the Oriental source of the Christian legend. However, he was not alone; other representatives of the Russian intelligentsia firmly believed that Buddhist sources lay behind the story of Josaphat. Regardless of agreements or disagreements, even when the literati were not convinced, they at least proved to be au courant of what was at stake.  …and Aleksei Remizov Another Russian writer aware of the debate was Aleksei Remizov. In fact he read the Legend of Barlaam and Josaphat and inserted excerpts from the ancient poem Verses on the Indian Prince Josaphat (Stikh o Iosafe tsareviche indiiskom) into his novel The 249 L. Tolstoy, Tolstoy‘s Letters, vol. 2. Selected, edited and translated by R.F. Christian. New York: Charles Scribner‘s Sons, 1978, 698. 117 Pond (Prud). 250 In The Pond, the distinguished industrialist Aleksei Ogorelyshev sings the first two lines of the ancient poem: ―Beautiful mother of the desert/Take me to your desert!‖ (Prekrasnaia mati pustynia/Primi menia v svoiu pustyniu!). 251 The two lines refer to Josaphat‘s wish to abandon the wealthy environment of his father‘s palace, where he has been confined, to join Barlaam in his eremitic life. 252 Although Remizov wrote The Pond in exile in Vologda in 1902-3, the book was not published until 1905 in Nikolai Lossky‘s magazine, Life Matters (Voprosy zhizni), 253 then in 1908 thanks to the intervention of Sergei Makovsky— editor of the magazine Apollo. The 1908 edition was issued by the Saint-Petersburg publisher ―Sirius,‖ with the cover made by Mstislav Dobuzhinsky. That Remizov‘s novel, with its reference to Prince Josaphat, was published and illustrated by members of the artistic community attests to the general awareness of the subject in modern intellectual circles. Whereas the previous chapter showed the connections between Remizov and Potanin in matters of Tibetan folklore, here it is stressed the important role played by intellectuals exiled in Vologda. They helped Remizov to deepen his knowledge of apocryphal legends. In point of fact, during his exile in Vologda, Remizov discussed the 250 For a textual analysis of the novel, see A. M. Shane, ―Remizov‘s Prud: from Symbolism to Neo- Realism.‖ California Slavic Studies, vol. 4. Guest editors- Robert P. Highes, Simon Karlinsky, and Vladimir Markov. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 1971, 71-82. 251 A. Remizov, Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 1. Edited by A.M. Gracheva. Moscow: Russkaia kniga, 2000, 141. 252 Like Tolstoy, Remizov too read the Grand Monthly Readings in Metropolitan Macarius‘ version (A. Remizov, ―Avtobiografiia.‖ In Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 4, 458). 253 A. Remizov, ―Prud.‖ Voprosy zhizni (April and May): 61-100; (June): 1-42; (July): 1-38; (August): 87- 124; (September): 4-46; (October and November): 1-49. 118 legend of Josaphat with the exiled historian Pavel Shchegolev. Shchegolev introduced Remizov to fundamental treaties on the subject, like Investigations in the Field of Russian Spiritual Verse (Razyskaniia v oblasti russkogo dukhovnogo stikha. SPb, 1880-1891), authored by his teacher, Aleksandr Veselovsky. This connection to Veselovsky who, as discussed above, wrote extensively on Buddhist sources of the legend of Barlaam and Josaphat 254 indicated that Remizov was another supporter of the Oriental origins behind the Christian myth of Josaphat. When in Vologda, however, Remizov absorbed the Oriental discourse not only from Shchegolev, but also from the other convict, Fedor Shchekoldin. He told him The Tale of the two Animals (Stephanites and Ichnilates) (Povest‘ o dvukh zveriakh Stefanit i Ikhnelat), a favorite book of Muscovite Rus‘ in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. 255 The story of Stephanites and Ichnilates— the two animals guarding the reign of the Lion King— belonged to the Oriental collection of fables Panchatantra. 256 Like in The Pond, in this fable, too, the Buddha and the Legend of Barlaam and Josaphat intersect in the episode of Stephanites‘ visit to Ichnilates in prison. The day before his trial, which ended with Ichnilates' death sentence, Stephanites gives Ichnilates the story 254 A. Gracheva, ―O cheloveke, Boge i o sud‘be: Apokrify i legendy Alekseia Remizova.‖ In A. Remizov, Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 6, 653. 255 A. Remizov, ―Istoriia povesti.‖ In Ibid., 293. 256 The book, written between 100 and 500 A.D., consisted of a pedagogical collection of fables and parables aimed at instructing rulers how to conduct their affairs properly (R. Stacy, India in Russian Literature. New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1985, 9). First translated from Sanskrit to Arabian in the sixth century, from the Arabian it was translated into Syrian. In the eleventh century the Syrian version was translated into Greek, and then from Greek into Slavic in the fourteenth century. A German translation of the book appeared as early as 1859: Pantschtantra, fünf Bücher indischen Fabeln, Märchen und Erzählungen, aus dem Sanscrit übersetzt with von Th. Benfey, vol. 1. Lepzig, 1859. 119 of ―Budasfa, in Russian Josaphat, the Indian Prince‖ as an example of redemption. 257 Although Remizov published the story from the Panchatantra decades later (in 1948), the literary sources upon which he relied dated back to the nineteenth century. The writer himself explained that he read the story both in the 1877-78 edition with an introduction by N. Bulgakov 258 and in the 1881 edition with an introduction by A. Viktorov. 259 Overall, considering that writers like Andrei Bely, Viacheslav Ivanov, Aleksandr Blok, and Maximilian Voloshin, among others, reviewed Remizov‘s The Pond, one may reasonably assume that debates around Buddhism and Christianity resonated in their conversations. 260 Metaphorically speaking, if in the Middle Ages the two monks Barlaam and Josaphat undertook a physical pilgrimage from India to Syria, centuries later in modern times, the notion of the pilgrimage transformed into a spiritual journey activated by religious myths. The cases of Tolstoy and Remizov, with their interpretations and references to the legend of Barlaam and Josaphat, elucidate the extent to which Buddhist leitmotifs circulated in modern Russian culture in alignment with the rest of Europe. 257 A. Remizov, Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 6, 289. 258 It was printed by the Society of the Amateurs of Ancient Scriptures (Obshchestvo liubitelei drevnei pis‘mennosti) (vol. 16 and 22). 259 This edition, too, was published by the Society of Amateurs of Ancient Scriptures (vol. 64 and 68). A. Remizov, ―Istoriia povesti.‖ In Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 6, 294. 260 Additionally, Andrei Bely reported in his poem The First Encounter that a fervent reader of the Cheti- Minei was Olga Mikhailovna, wife of Mikhail Sergeevich Soloviev-the youngest brother of Vladimir Soloviev (The First Encounter by Andrey Bely. Translated and introduced by Jerald Janecek. Preliminary remarks, notes, and comments by Nina Berberova. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1979, 25). 120 Dmitry Merezhkovsky and the Spiritual Triangle: Josaphat-Buddha-Christ The legend of the Indian prince especially fascinated the poet Dmitry Merezhkovsky. He elaborated upon the story of Josaphat in his poem ―Oriental Myth‖ (Vostochnyi mif) (1888), 261 and inserted sixteenth lines from the ancient poem in his later trilogy, Christ and Antichrist (Khristos i Antikhrist). 262 Unlike the Kievian version of the Legend of Barlaam and Josaphat, Merezhkovsky's ―Oriental Myth‖ focuses on the Prince's encounters with sorrow (aging, sickness, death), suggesting that the poet thought of the apocryphal story as an elaboration on the life of the Buddha (a plausible explanation since he was contemporarily composing verses on the Enlightened One). Nonetheless, Merezhkovsky's adaptation of Buddhist sources is not entirely accurate, and closer analysis of ―Oriental Myth‖ suggests that the poet had in mind a hero between Faust and Josaphat/Buddha. The epigraph at the beginning of the poem declares: Alles Vergängliche/Ist nur ein Gleichnis...(Every instant is only an illusion)— a quotation from 261 D.S. Merezhkovsky, Stikhotvoreniia i poemy. Introduced and edited by K.A. Kupman. Saint Petersburg: Gumanitarnoe agentstvo ―Akademicheskii proekt,‖ 2000, 643-6. 262 D. Merezhkovsky, Khristos i Antikhrist: trilogiia, vol. 4. Moscow: Kniga, 1989-1990. The reference to the legend of Josaphat is in the fourth volume ―Antikhrist (Petr i Aleksei)‖ (Ibid., 70), originally published in Moscow: Tip. T-va I.D. Sytina, 1914. In order to trace spiritual parallels between the young hero of his story Tikhon and the Indian Josaphat, Merezhkovsky quotes the following verses from the ancient poem: ―Oh wonderful mother of the desert/I shall wonder through forest and swamps,/I shall wonder through mountains and in dens,/I shall build a little hut./I, young tsarevich Josaphat, shall move without restraint in green and in grove./The cuckoo there will sing,/uttering its gaze so sweet/it will instruct me./In you, mother of the desert,/the logs so putrid will be my heavenly food,/my sugary poison,/and the cold waters-/my honey mash‖ [Прекрасная мати пустыня!/Поиду по лесам по болотам,/Поиду по горам по вертерам, /Поставлю я малую кижу./Разгуляюсь я, млад юнош,/Иосафии царевич,/Во зеленой во дуброве./Кукушка в ней воскукует,/Умильный глаз испущает—/И та меня поучает./В тебе, матерь- пустыня,/Гнилые колоды/—Мне райская пища,/Сахарное яство;/Холодные воды—/Медвяное пойло] (Khristos i Antikhrist, vol. 4, 70). 121 Goethe's Faust Part II, which Merezhkovsky translated into Russian as, "Every event is only a Symbol" (Vse prikhodiashchee est‘ tol‘ko Simvol). The choice of the moment when Faust realizes the meaning of life, and is thus redeemed before his death, directly parallels the awakening of Josaphat/Buddha in ―Oriental Myth.‖ The final message in Russian, however, differs from the German poem. Merezhkovsky‘s Indian Prince redeems himself through selfless love for his neighbor. The religious motif of love for one‘s neighbor comes from Merezhkovsky's own beliefs, not from Buddhism or Old Church Slavonic manuscripts. On the contrary, the hero of the poem in question resembles a modern Hamlet in search of answers to his existentialistic quest. At the end, in Merezhkovsky‘s contemporary adaptation, Prince Josaphat remains detached both from the brutal struggle between paganism and Christianity, which prevails in the original legend of Barlaam and Josaphat, and from the Buddhist escape to nirvana, which Buddhist sources made reachable through the Eightfold Path. It would be tempting to imagine that the message of unconditional love, with which the poet ends his ―Oriental Myth,‖ stemmed from the ―ménage à trois‖ of Merezhkovsky, Zinaida Gippius, and Dmitry Filosofov— the physical version of the would-be spiritual triangle of Josaphat-Buddha-Christ. However, while these are just assumptions, the relation between the three religious figures finds more factual support. Merezhkovsky had brought the compassion proclaimed in ―Oriental Myth‖ to its extreme realization in his other poem ―Sacrifice‖ (Zhertva), written two years earlier. In this case, too, the poet relied upon Oriental sources, specifically the story of Ushinara King of Shibi, which is narrated in the great Indian epics Mahabharata (book three, chapter 130- 122 1). 263 In his elaboration of the tale, Merezhkovsky particularly emphasizes the moment when King Ushinara— a hermit in Merezhkovsky‘s elaboration— is tempted by the Hindu god Indra. Years later, in his 1902 comparative analysis of Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, Merezhkovsky would go back to the story of King Ushinara, replacing the hero with the Buddha. In L. Tolstoy and Dostoevsky Merezhkovsky writes: Once in an effort to tempt the World Savior Buddha, the evil spirit under the guise of a black kite chased a dove. The dove took refuge in the Buddha‘s chest and when the Buddha tried to defend the bird, the black kite replied: ―What right do you have to take away my catch? One of us has to die, either he will die from my claws or I from hunger. Why do you have pity on him and not on me? If you are compassionate and wish that nobody dies, cut for me a piece of your flesh equal to the size of the dove.‖ Two scales appeared; the Buddha put the dove on one and a piece of his flesh on the other, but the scale did not move. Then he added another piece of his flesh and then another and another, cutting his entire body until the blood gushed and his bones became visible. The scale, however, remained motionless. Then with his last strength the Buddha went to the scale and jumped on it. Only then one side of the scale descended while the other with the dove ascended. 264 As in ―Oriental Myth‖ and ―Sacrifice,‖ the theme of unconditional love remains central. Nonetheless, in his critical essay, Merezhkovsky quotes the Oriental legend in relation to Tolstoy‘s vegetarianism— a conscious choice dictated by the wish not to harm one‘s neighbor regardless of its/his nature. Of even more relevance to the present discussion on Buddhism and its relation to Christianity is the fact that Merezhkovsky told the story of the Buddha and the dove within the frame of his general discussion of Christianity and 263 According to the story, a dove asks King Ushinara for protection from a chasing hawk. When the hawk complains to the king that in protecting the dove he was denying the hawk his alimentation, the king offered to feed the hawk with pieces of his flesh in exchange. In order for the hawk to receive the same amount of flesh that he would have from eating the dove, pieces of the king‘s flesh are placed on a balancing scale. The dove turned out to be so heavy that the king gave up large parts of his body, ultimately dying. 264 D. Merezhkovsky, L. Tolstoy i Dostoevsky. Vechnye sputniki. Moscow: Izdatel‘stvo ―Respublika,‖ 1995, 103. 123 specifically within his argument about redemption through sacrifice. Furthermore, it is worth remembering that in Christian mythology the dove plays a role as well. In the Old Testament the dove with an olive branch in its beak— a symbol of peace— goes to Noah after the Great Flood (Genesis 8:11), whereas in the New Testament the dove is usually associated with the Holy Spirit. Before appearing in print as a book, Merezhkovsky‘s essay on Tolstoy and Dostoevsky was serialized in the Symbolist magazine The World of Art. 265 Its notoriety among members of the Silver Age further confirms the presence of Buddhist motifs in modern Russian culture, as well as the common knowledge of the ongoing debates on Buddhism and Christianity. Reiterating the theme in the modern Russian community was the simultaneous appearance of literary works on the same subject. In fact, at the time when Tolstoy began working on his Siddhartha, Merezhkovsky published the first of a series of subsequent editions of his poem ―Sakyamuni‖ (1885). 266 After its first publication in the periodical The Northern Herald (Severnyi vestnik), the composition was censured for its ―open tendentiousness,‖ since, for the censorial committee, Merezhkovsky had camouflaged the figure of Christ in the vestiges of the Indian 265 D. Merezhkovsky, ―L. Tolstoy i Dostoevsky. Vechnye sputniki.‖ Mir iskusstva 2-22 (1900). The story of Buddha‘s sacrifice was published in 1900, No. 17-18:78-79. 266 Merezhkovsky‘s poem, accompanied by the subtitle ―Indian legend,‖ tells the story of the attempted robbery of the big brilliant gem carved in the Buddha‘s porphyry crown by a group of wandering homeless people who sought refuge in a Buddhist temple during a desert storm. The Buddha statue cast away the thieves as soon as they tried to grab the gem; only one of them dared to confront the stone statue to argue against its reaction. The homeless refugee addressed the Buddha with harsh words, proving that the divinity‘s action was against the doctrine of compassion and love for one‘s neighbor, proclaimed by the Buddha himself. The refugee‘s words sounded so convincing that the giant stone statue bowed before him lying in the dust. 124 prince. 267 Nonetheless, the success of Merezhkovsky‘s poem, together with his other poems on the subject, convinced Bongard-Levin that Balmont‘s poetical collection We Will Be Like the Sun (Budem kak solntse, 1903)— which the author dedicated to Merezhkovsky— was actually an answer to Merezhkovsky‘s famous poems ―Buddha‖ (1886) and ―Nirvana‖ (1895). 268 Moreover, substantiating the popularity of ―Sakyamuni‖ (1885) were the few lines of its verses paraphrased in an advertisement of the Shustovsky cognac, which appeared on one of the 1912 covers of the Blue Journal. 269 In the years 1885-6 the Buddhist tenet of detachment from anything transient— desire and therefore suffering (second Noble Truth) —seemed to hold a special appeal for Merezhkovsky. Transience of life, in fact, is the recurrent motif in his poem ―The Bayadère‘s Song,‖ subtitled ―Bodhisattva‖ (1886). A translation from the Indian Lalitavistara Sutra— a compilation of stories on the life of the Buddha was accidentally the inspiration for Arnold‘s The Light of Asia too. Afterwards, the poem appeared under both the title ―The Buddha‖ (1886) and ―Bodhisattva.‖ 270 That the word ―bodhisattva‖ appeared since the 1886 edition suggests that the author used Buddhist vocabulary to transmit his message of love for one‘s neighbor from the very beginning of his work on the subject. Merezhkovsky directly invoked the intercession of the Buddha in the role of bodhisattva— an ideal of compassion— to seek shelter in the hour of despair, which 267 D. Merezhkovsky, Stikhotvoreniia i poemy, note 94, 797-8. 268 G. Bongard-Levin, ―Indiiskaia kul‘tura v tvorchestve K.D. Bal‘monta,‖10. 269 Sinii zhurnal 32 (August 3, 1912). 270 D. Merezhkovsky, ―Bodisattva.‖ Vestnik Evropy 1 (January 1887): 300-2. 125 prevails with the approaching end of the world. In such an apocalyptic scenario, the poet concludes his poem with the image of the bodhisattva shedding tears of pity for the imminent ending of humankind: The hour struck, it‘s time to go! Into this immense conflagration of torments, desires, and passions You, like a blessed downpour, Shed tears of compassion!.. 271 [Пробил час, - пора идти!/В этот пламень необъятный/Мук, желаний и страстей/ Ты, как ливень благодатный,/Слезы жалости пролей!..] ―The Bayadère‘s Song‖ developed the Buddhist motif around the generally accepted Orientalist theme of the boyadère— an Indian female dancer performs during religious ceremonies and festivities. In the repertoire of fin de siècle Orientalist imagery, this young girl was associated with the exoticism identified with India and the East in general. From this Orientalist perspective, for example, the Ballet Master Marius Petipa directed the ballet La Bayadère (The Temple Dancer) to the music of the ballet‘s composer, Ludwig Minkus. When Merezhkovsky wrote his poem, ―The Bayadère‘s Song,‖ the ballet was playing its last season at the St. Petersburg Imperial Bolshoi Kammeny Theatre. 272 Although it is not certain whether Merezhkovsky saw the ballet production, the fact that both the poet and the ballet company worked on the common 271 D. Merezhkovsky, Stikhotvoreniia i poemy, 187. 272 Since its debut with the Prima Ballerina Ekaterina Vazem dancing the role of the heroine on February 4, 1877, the Imperial Ballet performed La Bayadère uninterruptedly, marking a success that would last for many years. Despite the beloved Symbolist plot of the love triangle and art décor settings and costumes, Petipa‘s choreographic adaptation of the play presented some Buddhist motifs as well— specifically, with the appearance of the shade/spirit of Nikiia (the bayadère poisoned by her beloved‘s rival) to her beloved Solor. Nikiia appears in her state of nirvana standing among the star-lit mountain peaks of the Himalayas, known also as The Kingdom of the Shades— the most celebrated passage of the entire ballet. 126 theme of the bayadère corroborates the circulation of shared Orientalist motifs. Merezhkovsky, however, did not limit himself to the adaptation of Orientalist themes; he also mixed them with Buddhist references, which may have arisen out of current debates on Buddhism and Christianity. Merezhkovsky plays with Buddhist and Orientalist imagery from the very first two stanzas, in which he orchestrates a duet between the mundane voice of the young boyadères and the sorrowful whispering of the Buddha statue: He rests under the cover of the purple lodge In the pale and pink glow of evening lights; The golden skin of the young body Cast a shadow in the gloom of deep eyes. The Buddha looks on at the maidens flashing by in the dance And they pour wine from silver vessels; Their provoking gaze is full of fiery caress; Beating the tumbrel, the boyadères sing. They call for the happiness of light-hearted delight Those, who are young, beautiful, powerful, and rich. But for the Buddha the modulations of the tumbrel Sound like a knell, like an endless groan: ―Everything yearns for destruction- All the worlds and all the centuries, Literally the infinite river is approaching its fall. Death will destroy everything that is alive, Everything that is dear death will take. He who loves you will stop loving you, Happiness gleams like a phantom. There is no salvation! Glory, happiness, Love and beauty Disappear like the colors of a bright rainbow on a rainy day. The spirit madly bursts toward the sky, While the flesh is chained to the ground. The man in the depth of darkness Fights like a bee in a vessel! (185-6) [Он лежит под навесом пурпурного ложа/ В бледно-розовом свете вечерних огней;/ Молодого чела золотистая кожа/Оттеняется мраком глубоких очей./Смотрит Будда, 127 как девы проносятся в пляске/И вино из кувшинов серебряных льют;/Вызывающий взор полон огненной ласки; Ударяя в тимпан, баядеры поют./И зовут они к радостям неги беспечной/Тех, кто молод, прекрасен, могуч и богат./Но как звон погребальный, как стон бесконечный,/Переливы тимпанов для Будды звучат:/ "Все стремится к разрушенью-/Все миры и все века,/Словно близится к паденью/Необъятная река./Все живое смерть погубит,/Все, что мило, - смерть возьмет./Кто любил тебя - разлюбит,/Радость призраком мелькнет./Нет спасенья! Слава, счастье,/И любовь, и красота/Исчезают, как в ненастье/ Яркой радуги цвета./Дух безумно к небу рвется,/Плоть прикована к земле;/Как пчела - в сосуде, бьется/Человек в глубокой мгле!] Using what the Formalists would later dub ―defamiliarization,‖ Merezhkovsky encourages the reader to detach himself from the joyful performance of the dancers (seen through the delighted eyes of the attending King), and look at the show from the perspective of another King— ―the stone guest‖ (the statue of the Buddha in front of which the scene develops), who interprets the happening in accordance with his professed doctrine of life as an illusion/dream. That Merezhkovsky had in mind Buddhism and not Orientalism when he juxtaposed the boyadères dance to the Buddha statue is evidenced by the appearance of two other contemporary poems ―Three Nights of the Buddha. An Indian Legend‖ (Tri nochi Buddy. Indiiskaia legenda) and ―Three Encounters of the Buddha‖ (Tri vstrechi Buddy, 1885), which were written by Semen Nadson. Merezhkovsky and Nadson met in 1882 and, for a certain period of time, were close. Nadson shared with the young Merezhkovsky (Merezhkovsky was sixteen and Nadson twenty years old when they met) a keen sense of loneliness and the transience of life. 273 The communality of their emotions may explain their infatuation with the figure of the Buddha as well, since the 273 In a letter to the poet Aleksei Pleshcheev, Nadson defined Merezhkovsky as his ―brother in suffering‖ (D. Merezhkovsky, Stikhotvoreniia i poemy, 17). 128 young poets paid attention to specific aspects of Gautama‘s biography. Notably, both Merezhkovsky and Nadson focused on Siddhartha Gautama, i.e., the Indian prince, and not on ―the Buddha,‖ which is how people refer to Gautama after his enlightenment. In other words, the figure of the rich predestined charming prince compelled the young Merezhkovsky and Nadson more than the Enlightened One, for his sense of the loneliness and transience of life, as well as for his extremely sensitive personality— all characteristics that Merezhkovsky and Nadson felt deeply themselves. To summarize, the literary examples introduced thus far— Tolstoy, Remizov, Merezhkovsky, Nadson— aimed to exemplify how religious myths migrated from one culture to another, helping to popularize certain motifs, such as the figure of the Buddha. The legend of Prince Josaphat was one source of inspiration for stories about the Buddha. Yet, it was not the only resource; as the discussion of Tolstoy demonstrates, Russia avidly participated in the international debates of the time. Thereby the argument of Buddhism and its relation to Christianity involved not only international conferences, like the 1893 World‘s Parliament of Religions in Chicago, but also shared readings of books devoted to the subject matter. In this sense, a significant contribution to the popularization of the life of the Buddha came from Sir Edwin Arnold‘s bestseller The Light of Asia, which was published in England in 1879 and which, as already noted, Tolstoy discussed with Chertkov in their correspondence. 129 “The Journey of the Buddha” According to Sir Edwin Arnold’s The Light of Asia: Its Russian Reception Sir Edwin Arnold‘s poetic biography, The Light of Asia or the Great Renunciation (Mahabhinishkramana) Being the Life and Teaching of Gautama, Prince of India and Founder of Buddhism (As Told in Verse by an Indian Buddhist), played a paramount role both in Russia and abroad in popularizing the figure of the Buddha. 274 From its very first printing, the book became a worldwide success. 275 By 1930, London alone counted fifty editions of the poem; double that in the United States. In India, Arnold‘s work entered the realm of classic literature; it listed among his readers Gandhi and the philosopher Ananda Coomaraswamy. 276 According to Rick Fields, the immense popularity of the book came from Arnold‘s ability to describe the Buddha as a mixture of various compelling figures. Fields writes: His Buddha is part romantic hero, part self-reliant man, and part Christ without being Christ. Arnold had been to India, and he made the most of its exotic settings. Indeed, his poem managed to combine sensuality and high seriousness with great skill. 277 Even more important to the present discussion is Brooks Wright‘s analysis of the similarities between Buddhism and Christianity, which, according to Wright, Arnold 274 The edition was printed by the publishing house ―Trübner and Company.‖ Arnold, however, was not totally satisfied with his work; hence, a revised edition appeared in 1885. 275 Its first translation appeared in German (Leipzig, 1887), followed by translations in Dutch (1895), French (1899), Czech (1906), Italian (1909), and in many other languages (B. Wright, Interpreter of Buddhism to the West: Sir Edwin Arnold. New York: Bookman Associates, Inc., Publishers, 1957, 79). 276 Henri de Lubac, La rencontre du Bouddhisme et de l‘Occident. Paris: Aubier, 1952, 209. 277 R. Fields, How the Swans Came to the Lake. A Narrative History of Buddhism in America. Third Edition, Revised and Updated. Boston & London: Shambhala, 1992, 68. 130 consciously foregrounded in his poem. According to Wright, The Light of Asia came to press at the most opportune moment, namely when the controversy between Buddhism and Christianity had reached its peak. Arnold‘s view on the controversy favored a conciliation of the two doctrines; it was a condition that for him could be realized only through a ―liberal‖ Christendom. As Wright puts it: ―If Buddha was the dawn, Jesus was the day; if one was the light of Asia, the other was the light of the world.‖ 278 As in the West, The Light of Asia was highly popular in Russia, 279 though it was not the first book to be published on the subject. 280 The first Russian edition of The Light of Asia appeared in Aleksandra Annenskaia‘s 281 translation in 1890 (followed by its 278 B. Wright, Interpreter of Buddhism to the West: Sir Edwin Arnold, 105. 279 According to William Peiris, one of the sources for Arnold‘s ―considerable study‖ of Buddhism came from the biography of the Buddha written by the Russian Isaak Jacob Schmidt and published in the Asiatic Journal in 1825 (W. Peiris, Edwin Arnold, A Brief Account of His Life And Contribution to Buddhism. Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 1970, 65). 280 The first to write about the Buddha was Vsevolod Soloviev, the eldest brother of the philosopher Vladimir Soloviev. In 1874, he published his Russian translation of the ―Temptation of the Buddha‖ in the European Herald (―Iskushenie Buddy.‖ Vestnik Evropy 6.50, vol. 11-2, December 1874: 630-6). It was an excerpt from chapter XXI of the Lalitavistara— one of the sacred Buddhist texts, which Soloviev read in its French translation by Philippe Foucaux, pupil of the Sanskritologist Eugène Burnouf. Probably, Vsevolod Soloviev read Foucaux‘s 1847 edition and translation Rgya tch`er rol pa, ou, Développement des jeux, contenant l'histoire du Bouddha Çakya-Mouni traduit sur la version tibétaine du Bkah hgyour, et revu sur l'original sanscrit (Lalitavistâra), vol. 2. Paris: L'Imprimerie royale, 1847-8. 281 Annenskaia was a children‘s writer. Among her translations were Daniel Defoe‘s Robinson Crusoe— a work that Vladimir Lesevich would trace back to Buddhist sources during his lectures in various Russian cities. Annenskaia was the wife of Nikolai Annensky, one of the editors of the journal Russian Wealth (Russkoe bogatstvo). 131 reprint in 1893). 282 The philosopher Vladimir Lesevich 283 edited and forwarded the book; he also selected excerpts from different sources on Buddhism to accompany Arnold‘s poem. For this reason, in its entirety, the first Russian edition of The Light of Asia resembled more of a book reader on Buddhism than a mere translation of Edwin Arnold‘s bestseller. Such a statement finds its confirmation especially in the style of the book, since the Russian translator replaced Arnold‘s blank verses with the more neutral prose rendition of the plot. 284 Lesevich‘s editorial choice contributed significantly to facilitating a broader understanding of Buddhism in intellectual circles. Especially because of his connections to the creative world, the figure of Lesevich merits a special digression here. Lesevich was an expert of Buddhism. He was also a close friend of the explorer Grigory Potanin, for whom he had translated European books on Buddhism. Lesevich worked as editor of the philosophical section of the periodical Russian Wealth (Russkoe bogatstvo) until his resignation and permanent move to Ukraine. His breakaway followed a quarrel with another member of the editorial board, Nikolai Annensky, about the German-Swiss philosopher Richard Avenarius. Lesevich was so absorbed in Buddhist culture that after 282 Beside Annenskaia‘s translation, Arnold‘s The Light of Asia went through eight reprints and several editions from 1890 to 1917 (A. Andreev, Khram Buddy v severnoi stolitse. Saint Petersburg: Nartang, 2004, note 10, 20). 283 Lesevich, like Potanin and many others, was exiled to Siberia in 1879 for his ties with revolutionary movements. Till 1888, the time when he returned to St. Petersburg, he lived in Kazan first, then Tver‘. 284 Instead of the introduction, for example, Lesevich inserted the first two chapters of Gustave Le Bon‘s Les civilizations de l‘Inde (Paris, 1887)— the sections on the time before the coming of Buddhism in India. The afterword included two other essays on the subject; the first was the article on Edwin Arnold‘s visit to Sinhalese Buddhists, as published in the magazine Russian Thought in 1887; the second was Lesevich‘s translation of Emile Sénart‘s article Les Inscriptions de Piyadasi, which appeared in the Revue des deux Mondes on May 1, 1889. 132 his resignation he could think of no better way of mocking Annensky than to caricature him as a buddha with his eyes rolled out of their sockets. He thought of this resemblance after buying a Buddhist statuette with prominent eyes in a shop on Sadovaia Street. Lesevich placed the statuette on the writing desk in his office in a spot that was impossible to miss. 285 As Potanin reported the episode in his memoires, when somebody asked Lesevich what the statuette stood for, Lesevich answered: ―This is the Mongolian lama defending Avenarius.‖ 286 In addition to his deep knowledge of Buddhism, his collaboration with one of the major journals of the time, and his friendship with Potanin, Lesevich was a member of Vladimir Soloviev‘s dissertation committee. Although it is true that Lesevich did not like Soloviev‘s dissertation, 287 the following polemics between the two philosophers 288 attests to the deep affiliation Lesevich had with the writers under review here. Because of this 285 The reference was to what Annensky said to Lesevich during their argument. On that occasion, Annensky said that from deepening into Avenarius‘ wisdom eyes could spring out on the forehead (G. Potanin, Vospominaniia. (Okonchanie). Stat‘i, ocherki, retsenzii. Vospominaniia o G.N. Potanine. Edited by N. Ianovsky et al. Novosibirsk: Zapadno-sibirskoe knizhnoe izdatel‘stvo. Series ―Literaturnoe nasledstvo Sibiri‖ 7, 1986, 96). 286 Ibid., 97. 287 On November 24, 1874 the young philosopher Soloviev defended his thesis, Crisis of Western Philosophy. It was a dissertation that Lesevich labeled a ―painting in Suzdal style‖ (kartina suzdal‘skogo pis‘ma), that is, an assortment of Positivism and philosophy of the unconscious. This was the content of Lesevich‘s article ―How people sometimes write dissertations,‖ published in Patriotic Notes (Otechestvennye zapiski) in 1875 (K. Mochul‘sky, Vladimir Solov‘ev. Zhizn‘ i uchenie. Paris: YMCA- Press, 1951, 56-7). 288 Soloviev replied to Lesevich‘s accusations in his article, ―A Strange Misunderstanding‖ (Strannoe nedorazumenie) published in the Russian Herald (K. Mochul‘sky, Vladimir Solov‘ev, 57). In 1890, however, Soloviev seemed to have forgotten his attacks on Lesevich and unexpectedly praised his philosophical achievements in the article ―On Philosophical Merits‖ (o filosofskikh zaslugakh) (Ibid., 191). 133 multilayered intellectual interconnectedness, Lesevich‘s edition of Arnold‘s The Light of Asia was relevant in diffusing Buddhism in modern Russian culture. In point of fact, Lesevich contributed to the dissemination of Buddhism not only through his writings and polemics, but also through his tours around Russian provinces, which he undertook before leaving St. Petersburg for good. During these travels he literally brought ―the Buddha to the people.‖ In each visited city Lesevich gave three lectures— one on Defoe, one on Buddhism, and one on folklore. His presentations provided unusual insight into the discussed topics. Indeed, not only was his approach to Buddhist doctrine innovative, but also his interpretation of Defoe‘s novel Robinson Crusoe shed new light on sources of the fictional story. According to Lesevich, in fact, Defoe‘s plot came from the Arabic novel The Pearl of the Sea (Zhemchuzhina moria) which, at its turn, took inspiration from legends on the Buddha. 289 Interestingly enough, both Arnold and his Russian editor, Lesevich, promoted the circulation of Buddhist ideas by sharing them with their peers on their travels. On the one side, Lesevich went around Russian cities lecturing on Buddhism; on the other side, Arnold decided to promote the figure of the Buddha after visiting India. Nonetheless, the seeds of Arnold‘s sponsorship went far beyond England or India; they rooted in Russia as well. In fact, in addition to Tolstoy and Lesevich, readers of Arnold were also Balmont 289 G. Potanin, Vospominaniia.( Okonchanie), 99. 134 (Chapter One) 290 and Ivan Bunin. Since the latter has not received due attention among the writers discussed thus far, the last part of the present chapter is devoted to him. Ivan Bunin’s Encounter with the Buddha Like his friend Balmont, Bunin was fascinated by the life of the Buddha, especially by the dramatic overtones to Siddhartha‘s life choices. This interest emerged in 1912, in an interview with the journal Stage and Life (Rampa i zhizn‘). On that occasion, the writer expressed his admiration for the genre of the tragedy, saying it gave the author the perfect tool to display passions, people, religion, and philosophy. In this sense, Bunin continued, the idea of a tragedy on the life of the Buddha was extremely tempting to him. 291 Though Bunin never realized the imagined play, reminiscences of episodes from the life of the Buddha echoed years later, in 1919, in his short story Gotami. 292 Gotami is a woman who first becomes the concubine of a prince and, after giving birth to his child in the woods, goes to live in solitude on the shore of a pond, where she spends her life feeding swans. The tale ends pointing to her rebirth in the realm of spiritual brotherhood (the yellow sacerdotal robes in the text), where the chain of samsara (rebirth) is broken. Reminiscent of episodes related to the life of the Buddha are, for example, the birth in the wood (Siddhartha‘s mother Mara also gave birth outdoors in a 290 The Symbolists knew Arnold‘s work, since the magazine The Scale (Vesy) reported Edwin Arnold‘s death in the obituary notice inserted in No 4 (April 1904): 79. 291 Iu. Sobolev, ―U I.A. Bunina.‖ Rampa i zhizn‘ 44 (1912): 5. In Ivan Bunin, vol. 1. Edited byV.R. Shcherbin. Moscow: Nauka. Series ―Literaturnoe nasledstvo‖ 84, 1973, 374-5. 292 I. Bunin, Sobranie sochinenii v deviati tomakh, vol. 5. Edited by P.L. Viacheslavov, O.V. Slivitskaia, O.V. Mikhailov. Moscow: Izd-vo khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1966, 22-4. 135 solitary grove), and the name of Gotami herself. In fact, in the canonical life of the Buddha, Gotami was the name of Mara‘s sister, who raised the young Siddhartha after his mother‘s premature death. Ultimately, the isolated life of Bunin‘s heroine, especially her daily habit of feeding the swans in the lake nearby, directly references a specific episode in the life of Siddhartha Gautama. One day while walking in the palace garden, Prince Gautama sees a flock of swans flying above him. Suddenly, the one ahead of the others falls on Gautama‘s head; the animal‘s wing had been wounded by an arrow shot by Siddhartha‘s cousin Devadata. Devadata tries to claim the swan, but Siddhartha refuses to give back the animal insisting that the healer has more rights than the hunter. The swan quarrel represents the first episode of Siddhartha‘s preaching on love and compassion. Bunin might have read about this story in Tolstoy‘s unfinished essay Siddhartha, Called the Buddha. Tolstoy also mentions one of Siddhartha‘s wives named Gotami, 293 thus providing an additional source that may have inspired Bunin‘s homonymous choice. Furthermore, considering that swans are a recurrent Modernist motif— from ―Swan Lake‖ by the composer Petr Tchaikovsky to Aubrey Beardsley‘s Bathyllus' Swan Dance— Bunin may have drawn from Modernism as well. Another possibility of an inspirational source for Bunin‘s story is Merezhkovsky‘s ―Oriental Myth‖ and ―Sacrifice,‖ which suggests that Bunin might have responded to a general topic discussed among his colleagues. 293 The story has been translated into English by Dragan Milivojevich (Leo Tolstoy, 141-156). The swan episode is on p.146-7, the reference to Gotami on p. 152. 136 The Buddhist undercurrent in Gotami is further enhanced by the realm of the ―Brotherhood of the Yellow robes‖ (Bratiia Zheltogo oblacheniia), which Bunin mentions at the end of the story. This brotherhood directly refers to the sacerdotal Buddhist group living in Panadura (Ceylon). In August 1873, Panadura was the site of the famous confrontation between Buddhist and Christian clergy. The dispute ended with the victory of the Buddhist supporters over missionaries working in the area. The Panadura controversy received wide resonance in the press. Copies of the debates circulated in English abroad. It is possible that Bunin read about it – or that, at least, he knew about the Brotherhood of the Yellow Robes through Edwin Arnold‘s writings. This assumption is sustained by the 1890 Russian edition of The Light of Asia translated by Annenskaia and edited by Lesevich, in which Arnold‘s report on his visit to Sinhalese Buddhists (and on the brotherhood of the yellow robes) appears in the appendix. 294 Though it may differ from the literary interpretations of the life of the Buddha that have been discussed thus far, nonetheless, Bunin‘s Gotami belongs to the same field— especially in light of his poems on Ceylon and The City of the Tsar of Tsars (Chapter One), which attest to a consistent elaboration of eastern and Buddhist motifs throughout his literary career (the aforementioned poems were written in 1915-16 and 1924, Gotami in 1919). Factors that favored this continuity include Bunin‘s journey to Asia (as part of his 1912 world tour), but also the popularity that Buddha was enjoying in the first two decades of the twentieth century. As documented in the previous section on World Literature, it cannot be coincidental that Bunin thought of writing a tragedy on the life of 294 E. Arnold, Svet Azii. Poema. Translated by A. Annenskaia with an introduction and comments by V. Lesevich. Saint. Petersburg: Tip. i lit. V.A. Tikhanova, 1893,185. 137 the Buddha in exactly the same period that Gumilev and Oldenburg were joining forces to write a play on the same subject, and that Gotami appeared in the same year that Oldenburg organized the First Buddhist Exhibition in Petrograd. Bunin belonged to the same circle of friends working at World Literature, thereby sharing their interests and readings. Conclusion This chapter aimed to answer questions around the popularity of the figure of the Buddha in visual art and literature. In addition to the external factors highlighted at the end of the previous chapter— personal travels, expeditions, and deportations to Siberia— the present chapter reckoned that the intercultural activity at Gorky‘s publishing house and the lively debates about Buddhism and its relation to Christianity were other possible vehicles of transmission. Especially considering international concerns about common sources of certain religious myths, the popular legend of Barlaam and Josaphat played a role in diffusing apocryphal episodes of the life of the Buddha in modern Russian culture. By reading the analyzed literary works there emerged a common assumption that Josaphat and Gautama were identified with one another. Regardless of the authenticity of such a belief, what matters is the general fascination with the legend surrounding Gautama and with the exotic environment in which the Indian Prince was raised. This fascination was rooted, on the one hand, in the fact that Siddhartha‘s life perfectly suited the modern Weltanschauung, which was still infatuated with the Romantic Orient. On the other hand, his biography full of existential choices— between love and privation, truth 138 and lies— that strongly appealed to the modern soul. Ultimately, Siddhartha‘s speculation about abandoning his family and reaching the enlightenment, and his sensitively pensive personality placed him on the edge and turned him into an outsider— which was exactly how many writers felt (see the young Merezhkovsky and Nadson foremost). From 1879 to 1919, Siddhartha Gautama would remain a favorite subject for modern Russian literary and artistic production. This chapter aimed to prove that such an interest was dictated neither by general fashion for Theosophy nor by occultism; on the contrary, the fascination stemmed both from the ―voyage‖ of ideas and from the restlessness of modernity, which pushed writers and artists to wander both inside their personal universe and outside in the world. The activity of World Literature and the international debate on Buddhism and Christianity, emblematically summarized in the Josaphat-Christ-Buddha triangulation, embodied the imaginary journey of ideas. Because this chapter dealt with the transmigration of religious myths, which partially originated in the Middle Ages (see the legend of Josaphat), one can imagine that Christian and Buddhist apocrypha confronted each other along the road of a metaphorical pilgrimage. Some results of this spiritual encounter matured through the figure of the Buddha. Like a pendulum, however, this dissertation goes back and forth between the concepts of ―real journey‖ and ―imaginary journey‖ to prove that both facets were equally important in disseminating the Buddhist world throughout literature and the arts. In this spirit, the next chapter will go back to the ―real journey,‖ as symbolized by the category of the ―political journey.‖ In particular, two subcategories of the political 139 journey —diplomatic missions and Russia‘s foreign policy in Asia— will be considered additional vehicles of transmitting Buddhism. The political facet of Russia‘s interaction with the East, in fact, helped to import Buddhist imagery into the Russian Empire and consequently to promote Buddhist initiatives in Russian society. What occurred was the same process that took place in England— the other colonial power in Asia, and Russia‘s imperial rival. The British Empire in India, in fact, partially favored the diffusion of Buddhism in England, bringing face-to-face two cultures and two worldviews. If, on the one hand, British people mostly went to the East to impose their lifestyle and presumptuously to bring ―civilization‖ to Indians, then, on the other hand, their journey to the East provoked interest in Oriental culture, including Buddhism, in the West. Ideas traveled with people. Like fruits falling down on soils situated miles away from the originating tree, Buddhist seeds migrated to the West, bringing the bloom of its culture abroad. 140 Chapter 3 The Imperial Grand Tour of 1890-91 ―I have been traveling a great deal. Soon I realized that railways and steamboats were made to be used.‖ 295 The Asian Grand Tour of Tsar Nicholas II: A Political Trajectory The modern thirst for traveling belonged to an era when cruising had reached the height of popularity. Writers and artists, explorers and missionaries, kings and ordinary people all fell under the spell of journeying, and all of them brought back to Russia a piece of the visited country in the shape of a memory or of a tangible souvenir. Like scientific explorations and personal travels, Nicholas II‘s Asian tour of 1890-91 296 contributed to the dissemination of Buddhist motifs in modern Russian culture, especially because it had wide cultural resonance both in Russia and abroad. As stated by the authors of the catalog of the 1893 exhibition devoted to the objects brought back by the future emperor from his tour, Russians ―with great curiosity read about those wonderful items that the Heir of the Russian throne brought back in large quantities from the 295 V. Vereshchagin, ―Avtobiografiia.‖ In Povesti. Ocherki. Vospominaniia. Edited, introduced and commented by V.A. Kosheleva and A.V. Chernova. Moscow: Sovetskaia Rossia, 1990, 7. 296 To the Tsar‘s tour to Asia has been devoted the recently opened exhibition, ―Imperial View: Travel to the East of Tsesarevich Nikolai Aleksandrovich 1890-1891‖ (Panorama imperii: puteshestve na Vostok tsesarevicha Nikolaia Aleksandrovicha), on view at the Museum-reservoir of Tsaritsyno in Moscow. Through the displacement of 1166 items brought back from the imperial journey, the show provides extensive documentation and confirms the cultural relevance that the event had at the time. 141 countries he visited.‖ 297 Russian readers followed the various stages of his Majesty‘s travel in magazines like The World Traveler (Vsemirnyi puteshestvennik), the appendix to the journal Fatherland (Rodina), Governmental Messenger (Pravitel‘nyi vestnik), World Illustration (Vsemirnaia illiustratsiia), and many others. These were periodicals that writers and artists read too. In other words, in a period of political tension and controversy in the East, the appearance of the Russian heir to the throne in places such as India, China, and Japan, could not escape particular attention. 298 Articles and reportage on the Asian sites seen by Nicholas II were sometimes accompanied by news on local ethnography, politics, and economy. As such, periodicals contributed to the circulation of Buddhist material available for artists and writers, who absorbed the information into their work. The St. Petersburg World Illustration, for instance, regularly published a travelogue diary by one of its special correspondents on board the Imperial fleet. 299 297 Katalog vystavki predmetam, privezennym velikim kniazem Gosudarem Naslednikom Tsesarevichem Nikolaem Aleksandrovichem iz puteshestviia Ego Imperatorskogo Vysochestva na Vostok v 1890-91 gg. Saint Petersburg: Tipografiia Ministerstva Putei Soobshcheniia, 1893, 3. 298 Officially, Nicholas II‘s Grand Tour aimed to acquaint the twenty-two year old heir to the Russian throne with countries such as Greece, Egypt, India, Siam, China, and Japan. Unofficially, its goal was to ensure the imperial presence at the inauguration of the commencement of the construction of the Transiberian railroad in Vladivostok, a significant event in the complex Oriental chess-board. Since the future Tsar had already visited Siberia, the Asian route represented an alternative southern itinerary going from west to east. According to the program, once in Vladivostok, Nicholas II would go back through the Russian cities of Khabarovsk-Blagoveshchensk, Chita, Irkutsk, Krasnoiarsk, Tomsk, Tobolsk, Omsk, Orenburg, Samara, Penza, Riazan, Moscow, and St. Petersburg. For a description of the Grand Tour and the list of recent literature on the subject, see D. Schimmelpenninck van der Oye, Toward the Rising Sun: Russian Ideologies of Empire and the Path to War with Japan. DeKalb, Ill.: Northern Illinois University Press, 2001, 15-23. 299 When Nicholas II and his entourage arrived in Ceylon, issue no. 1158 of 30 March, 1891 featured an entire article on the country (―Tseilon.‖Vsemirnaia illiustratsiia 1158, March 30, 1891: 224, 226-7, 230) with pictures of Ceylon and its temples taken by the magazine‘s special correspondent, N.B (―Tseilon- Khram.‖ Vsemirnaia illiustratsiia 116.1April 20, 1891: 276-7, 286, 291). 142 As seen with Anton Chekhov in Chapter One, intellectual groups followed in Nicholas II‘s footsteps. Additionally, like Chekhov and Filonov, the future heir to the throne was an admirer of the great explorer Nikolai Przhevalsky, with whom Nicholas II shared his imperialistic views on Central Asia. Ties between the two were further enforced by the fact that members of the imperial family attended Przhevalsky‘s lectures and visited his 1881 exhibition of zoological specimens at the Academy of Science. Furthermore, Przhevalsky tutored the then thirteen-years-old Tsarevich Nicholas II. 300 Perhaps, like the young Mstislav Dobuzhinsky, the young heir to the throne dreamt of far lands while listening to Przhevalsky‘s adventures. Nicholas II would fantasize about imaginary travels up until the age when he could see some of those described lands with his own eyes during his Asian tour. Nicholas II‘s journey to Asia took place in an epoch when imperial Asian tours were especially in vogue. The Grand Dukes Aleksandr and Sergei Mikhailovich, cousins and companions of the future Tsar, for example, went on tour too. 301 According to the introduction to their travel account, the Grand Dukes‘ expedition was motivated by 300 In May 1881, Przhevalsky visited the imperial family in its residence in Gatchina and, on that occasion, the Russian explorer had a series of ―conversations‖ with the Tsarevich (D. Rayfield, The Dream of Lhasa. The Life of Nikolay Przhevalsky (1839-88), Explorer of Central Asia. London: Paul Elek, 1976, 150-1). Furthermore, in 1883, before Przhevalsky‘s departure for his fourth expedition, Nicholas II presented the explorer with a lightweight aluminum telescope as sign of his friendship. Przhevalsky was very proud of this gift, which he frequently used during his hikes up to the mountains tops (P. Kozlov, V serdtse Azii. Pamiatnik N.M. Przheval‘skogo. Saint Petersburg: Tipografiia P.P. Soikina, 1914, 17). Przhevalsky kept correspondence with Nicholas II during his journey; their letters were published in the reports of the Imperial Russian Geographical Society for the year 1884 and in the bulletin of the Geographical Society Izvestiia 21, 3,6 (1885): 2. 301 The route went from north to south, from the Caucasus to Crimea, and then to Constantinople, the Red Sea, Ceylon, Sumatra, Celebes, and India, returning to St. Petersburg from Bombay. The Grand Dukes coordinated their sightseeing in order to meet the Tsarevich on their second stay in Colombo, remaining in Ceylon with him ten days. 143 scientific curiosity and a desire to see with their own eyes the spectacular landscape of tropical countries. 302 Like Nicholas II‘s, the Grand Dukes‘ travel account was printed in a luxurious two-volume book, edited by the explorer Gustav Radde, already author of Travel Along the Amur and Oriental Siberia (Puteshestvie po Amuru i vostochnoi Sibiri, 1868). The Grand Dukes‘ travelogue journal represented a typical example of how science and patronage combined with the concept of travel. The artist Nikolai Samokish illustrated the book. It is possible that Samokish was chosen as illustrator because the Grand Prince Vladimir, ex-president of the Academy of Arts, liked Samokish‘s work. Indeed, the Grand Prince introduced Samokish‘s drawings to Nicholas II. The imperial appreciation became even more manifest when Samokish‘s wife, Elena Samokish- Sudkovskaia, pupil of the artist Vasily Vereshchagin, was commissioned to design the expositive space at the Raphael Loggias in the Winter Palace for an exhibition of the objects that Nicholas II brought back from his Grand Tour. At the time of the Grand Dukes‘ trip, Nikolai Samokish‘s artistic production already included military paintings and an album of etchings that he realized under the supervision of academician Lev Dmitriev-Kavkavsky. At Kavkavsky‘s atelier, many artists, including Mstislav Dobuzhinsky, Pavel Filonov, and David Kakabadze, studied at the turn of the century. From 1887 to 1890, Kavkavsky was the editor of the artistic section of the magazine World Illustration, the same journal that featured political news with illustrative material on the discussed country. Here Kavkavsky published some of 302 23 000 mil‘ na iakhte ―Tamara.‖ Puteshestvie Ikh Imperatorskikh Vysochestv Velikikh Kniazei Aleksandra i Sergiia Mikhailovichei v 1890-1891 gg, vol. 1. Edited by Gustav I. Radde and illustrated by Nikolai S. Samokish. Saint Petersburg: Tipografiia Eduarda Gonne, 1892, intr. 144 his works. His gravures and etchings on the Caucasus, accompanied with strong ethnographical documentation, undoubtedly affected Samokish‘s style. His illustrations for the travel account of the Grand Dukes‘ tour, in fact, particularly emphasized the ethnography of the visited sites and artistically rendered the exoticism that, in those days, was associated with the scenery of Asian lands. Moreover, Samokish‘s Modernist affiliation emerged in his participation in the illustration of Colonel Nikolai Kutepov‘s four-volume book, The Hunting of the Grand Princes, Tsars and Emperors in Russia (Velikokniazheskaia, tsarskaia i imperatorskaia okhota na Rusi, 1896-1911), whose illustrators included Ilia Repin, Leon Bakst, Alexandre Benois, and others. Similar to the Grand Dukes‘ tour, Nicholas II‘s Grand Tour had an artist on board. As a matter of fact, two artists belonged to the imperial entourage, Nikolai Karazin and Nikolai Gritsenko. Karazin had the task of illustrating the written account of the trip. His recruitment was not accidental; on the contrary, he was chosen because he had experience with this type of commission. In fact, he had participated in the 1874-79 expedition to Central Asia, organized by the Russian Geographical Society, and joined the Orientologist Ivan Minaev on his 1885-86 trip to India. As in the case of Nikolai Samokish‘s illustrations for the travel account of the Grand Dukes, Karazin‘s images emphasized the exoticism of the sites according to the well-established Orientalist imagery. While Karazin‘s task was to illustrate the imperial journey, the painter Gritsenko provided watercolor landscapes of the route. For Gritsenko the sea itinerary of the Grand Tour was surely of particular interest, considering that before becoming an artist, 145 Gritsenko had studied at the Kronstadt Naval School. In 1885 he went to the Academy of Arts and in 1887 became an artist for the Naval Ministry. Gritsenko‘s choice of watercolor for his sketches was apt, as the evanescence of the technique perfectly suited the delicacy and transparency of the aquatic element. 303 Nicholas II’s Journey as Chronicle of Russian Expansion to Asia Nicholas II and his entourage departed from Gatchina on October 23, 1890 and returned on August 4, 1891. Members of the imperial accompaniment were his Majesty‘s tutor, the general-adjutant Grigory Danilovich, the admiral Ivan Shestakov, the famous geographer Aleksandr Voeikov, and the 1 st rank Captain Nikolai Lomen. The chief coordinator was Prince Vladimir Bariatinsky, his aides-de-camps were Prince Nikolai Obolensky, Prince V. Kochubei, and E. Volkov. The entourage included the aquarellist Nikolai Gritsenko, who joined the group in Trieste; the naval doctor V. von Rambach joined them at Cairo, while on the way back through Siberia; and the contra-admiral Vladimir Basargin accompanied Nicholas II. 304 The official chronicler of the Imperial tour was Prince Esper Ukhtomsky. 303 As additional illustrative material to the visited sites, the St. Petersburg Russian national Library owns five portfolios of photographs taken during the trip. According to Aleksandr Teriukov, these photographs were taken by Vladimir Mendeleev, the son of the well-known chemist, who was a dilettante photographer and companion of Nicholas II on his tour (Puteshestvie na Vostok. Exhibition on May 29, 1998. Edited by A.Teriukov. Saint Petersburg: Muzeino-vystavochnyi tsentr ―EGO,‖ 1998, 13). 304 Puteshestvie na Vostok Ego Imperatorskogo Vysochestva Gosudaria Naslednika Tsesarevicha. 1890- 1891 gg., vol. 1. Authored and edited by Esper Ukhtomsky with illustrations by Nikolai Karazin. Saint Petersburg, Leipzig: F.A. Brockhaus, 1893, 2. 146 According to David H. Schimmelpenninck van der Oye, Ukhtomsky‘s Asianist manifesto, 305 that is his travel account Travel to the East of His Imperial Highness Heir Tsesarevich 1890-1891 (Puteshestvie na Vostok Ego Imperatorskogo Vysochestva Gosudaria Naslednika Tsesarevicha. 1890-1891 gg.), brought him acclaim both abroad and in his own country. 306 The English historian Bernard Pares described the work, published in a luxurious three-volume edition, as, ―the text-book of the government policy of expansion eastwards.‖ 307 Ukhtomsky‘s travel account, with its digressions on religion, ethnography, politics, and history, stylistically echoed the genre of the reports written by the explorers of Central Asia and went far in making the Buddhist world accessible to a wide readership. The book enjoyed great success abroad, being translated into German (1894), English (1896-1900), and French (1898). In Russia the travel account was so popular that students received it as an award for study achievements. 308 305 D. H. Schimmelpenninck van der Oye, ―The Asianist Vision of Prince Ukhtomskii.‖ In Kazan, Moscow, St. Petersburg. Multiple Faces of the Russian Empire. Edited by Catherine Evtuhov, Boris Gasparov, Alexander Ospovat, Mark Von Hagen. Moscow: O.G.I., 1997, 188-201. The Asianists, known in Russian as ―vostochniki,‖ were a group of people who believed in the Tsar‘s holy mission to rule China and Asia in general. Considering Russia a country closer to the Orient than to the Occident, they shared the Slavophile‘s ideas on the origins of Russian roots (D. Schimmelpenninck, Toward the Rising Sun, 43). According to Karl E. Meyer and Shareen Blair Brysac, in their most extreme approach the Asianists were also known as advocates of the so-called ―Yellow Russia‖ (Zheltorossiia) (K.E. Meyer and S.B. Brysac, Tournament of Shadows. The Great Game and the Race for Empire in Central Asia. Washington D.C.: A Cornelia and Michael Bessie Book, 1999, 242). 306 The first volume, divided in two parts and published in 1893, was titled Puteshestvie na Vostok Ego Imperatorskogo Vysochestva Gosudaria Naslednika Tsesarevicha. 1890-1891.The second and third volumes were printed later in 1895 and 1897 under the title Puteshestvie Gosudaria Imperatora Nikolaia II na Vostok (v 1890-1891) (Travel of the Emperor Nicholas II to the East). 307 B. Pares, My Russian Memoirs. London: Jonathan Cape LTD, 1931, 58. 308 G. Leonov, ―E.E. Ukhtomsky. K istorii lamaistskogo sobraniia gosudarstvennogo Ermitazha.‖ In Buddizm i literaturno-khudozhestvennoe tvorchestvo narodov Tsentral‘noi Azii. Edited by R.E. Pubaev. Novosibirsk: izdatel‘stvo ―Nauka‖ sibirskoe otdelenie, 1985, 104. 147 Despite its high price, the book sold out quickly; cheaper paperback editions were printed, and the Empress Aleksandra Fedorovna herself provided copies for several government departments. 309 For his extensive knowledge of Buddhism, 310 Prince Esper Ukhtomsky accompanied the future Tsar on various stops of the Grand Tour as a trusted person and expert on Asian matters. Nicholas‘s visit to countries such as Ceylon, China, Japan and India, provided the Russian ruler with a firsthand acquaintance with Buddhism. 311 His education came in the form of welcome gifts, Buddhist sightseeing, and conversations with local authorities. One gift for the Tsarevich came from the Armenian religious community in Calcutta, which gave Nicholas II a silver model of the famous Buddhist temple in Bodh Gaya. It was a meaningful gift: according to the Buddhists, the temple was built in the place where Gautama supposedly reached the enlightenment (Chapter Two). 312 An important sightseeing spot the Tsarevich visited was in Japan. A photograph 309 D. Schimmelpenninck, Toward the Rising Sun, 49. Owing to its popularity, in 1904 Ukhtomsky reprinted a shorter version of his oeuvre under the title From Travel Sketches and Memoirs (E. Ukhtomsky, Iz putevykh nabroskov i vospominanii. Saint Petersburg: Vostok, 1904). 310 Ukhtomsky began seriously studying Buddhism during his enrollment in St. Petersburg University, when he began assembling a bibliography of all printed books on history, religion, culture, and art of the people from Central, South and East Asia. From 1886 to 1890, then, Ukhtomsky often traveled to Asia to acquaint himself with the subject that he learned from books (G. Leonov, ―E.E. Ukhtomsky,‖ 103). 311 That, however, was not the Tsarevich‘s first encounter with this religion since, according to the war Minister, General Aleksei Kuropatkin, Buddhism was a subject of lunchtime conversation for the royal family (D. Schimmelpenninck, Toward the Rising Sun, note 64, 231). 312 First built in the third century B.C. by King Asoka, the temple was destroyed later on and reconstructed in the fourteenth century. Besides, Bodh Gaya was the place where the Theosophists wanted to build their community headed by the Dalai Lama (Puteshestvie, vol. 2, part 3, 70-1). At that time, the temple of Bodh Gaya was at the centre of public discussions, above all after the famous writer Edwin Arnold visited the Buddhist temple and began publishing articles, for example, his ―East and West—A Splendid Opportunity‖ for the London Daily Telegraph, in which he prompted local authorities to return the illustrious monument to the Buddhist community (W. Peiris, Edwin Arnold: Brief Account of his Life and Contribution to 148 taken by Vladimir Mendeleev on June 9, 1891 immortalizes Nicholas II‘s retinue standing on the colossal statue of the Buddha (known as Daibutsu), the major attraction of the Kotokuin Temple in Kamakura, situated not far from Tokyo (fig. 16). 313 The presence of Vladimir Mendeleev, son of the famous chemist Dmitry, on board of the imperial frigate might seem surprising at first, but Dmitry Mendelev was quite devoted to Buddhism. Kandy, Ceylon: Buddhist Publication Society, 1970, 81-9). After his trip to Asia, Arnold decided to take an active role in helping to preserve Buddhist memorials. With Sumangala and Colonel Henry Olcott, he conceived the plan to present the Indian government with the request, supported by an international committee of Buddhists, to buy the temple and return it to the Buddhist community. As Rick Fields notes in his book, How the Swans Came to the Lake. A Narrative History of Buddhism in America: ―Without meaning to, Arnold had found the key Olcott had been searching for. The struggle for Bodh Gaya would unite the Buddhist world more than any number of committees, flags or common principles could ever do. Since there were scarcely any Buddhists left in India, Bodh Gaya became the responsibility of Buddhists everywhere‖ (Third edition, revised and updated. Boston & London: Shambhala, 1992, 115). On Arnold‘s Buddhist cause see also W. Peiris, Edwin Arnold: Brief Account of his Life and Contribution to Buddhism, 45-51. 313 The note accompanying the photograph locates the site in Yokosuka, which is where the residence of the Japanese Imperial Family is located. Nevertheless, the reproduced Great Buddha is located a few miles further in Kamakura. 149 Fig. 16 Vladimir Mendeleev, Photograph of the colossal statue of the Buddha Daibutsu at the Kotokuin Temple in Kamakura, 1891. 150 India and Buddhism and had a personal acquaintance with the Indologist Ivan Minaev. Minaev was the teacher of the well-known Orientologists Sergei Oldenburg and Fedor Shcherbatskoi, who were mentioned in Chapter Two in relation to Gorky‘s enterprise World Literature. Among the books that Grigory Bongard-Levin listed as part of Mendeleev‘s library was Edwin Arnold‘s The Light of Asia (Chapter Two) (which the chemist sent to his son Vladimir when he was sojourning in India with the imperial retinue) and Vasily Vasilev‘s Eastern Religions. Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism (Religii Vostoka. Konfutsianstvo, buddizm i daoizm). When Vladimir Mendeleev was with the future Tsar on his Asian tour, Bongard-Levin explains, he regularly wrote to his father describing the habits and customs of people living in Bombei, Benares, and other Indian cities. These letters are now kept in the Mendeleev archive at St. Petersburg University. 314 Notably, the Symbolist poet, Aleksandr Blok (Chapter Six), married Mendeleev‘s daughter Liubov‘, thus attesting to the link between Nicholas II‘s Asian tour and the intellectual community. Aside from the enclosed circles of intellectuals, the Russian public was familiar with the colossal statue of the Buddha at the Kotokuin Temple. It was a tourist attraction that Russians could admire in the pages of The World Traveler even before Vladimir Mendeleev took his picture of the monument. As early as the 1860s, in fact, the magazine began to publish travel accounts by people who went to visit the East— as in the case, for instance, of Aimé Humbert, special envoy to the Swiss Federal Government, who lived in 314 G. Bongard-Levin, ―Aleksandr Blok i S.F. Ol‘denburg.‖ In Vostok-Rossiia-Zapad. Istoricheskie i kul‘torologicheskie issledovaniia k 70-letiu akademika Vladimira Stepanovicha Miasnikova. Moscow: Pamiatniki istoricheskoi mysli, 2001, 232. 151 Japan for two years, 1863-4. Even before 1870, the year Aimé Humbert published his Japanese collection of prints in the two-volume edition titled Le Japon Illustré, The World Traveler regularly published Humbert‘s travel impressions under the title The 1863-64 Illustrated Travel to Japan (Zhivopisnoe puteshestvie v Yaponiu 1863-64 gg.). This serial publication was accompanied with images of his trip and notes on Buddhism as well. Among Humbert‘s pictures was one of the statues of Daibutsu. 315 In addition to sightseeing and receiving gifts from local Buddhist communities, Nicholas II‘s encounters with the Buddhist world happened through accidental acquaintances with other fellow travelers. In 1891, for example, at the time when Nicholas II arrived in Colombo, Colonel Henry Steel Olcott, founder with Helena Blavatsky of the Theosophical Society, was trying to unite the northern and southern Buddhist schools under one common doctrine, later summarized in his Fourteenth Propositions of Buddhism. When the imperial frigate stopped in Colombo, Olcott was there and was pleased to spend an hour ―in delightful conversation‖ 316 with Prince Esper Ukhtomsky and Lieutenant N. Crown of the St. Petersburg Navy Department. Olcott especially liked Ukhtomsky for his intense interest in Buddhism. Ukhtomsky seemed to reciprocate this sympathy. He invited Olcott to make a tour of the Buddhist monasteries in Siberia and asked for a copy of Olcott‘s Fourteen Propositions in order to give the 315 E. Giumber, ―Zhivopisnoe puteshestvie v Iaponiu 1863-64 g.‖ Vsemirnyi puteshestvennik 3 (10), (1868): 152. Humbert‘s Le Japon Illustré belonged to a well established tradition of illustrative books on foreign countries. In 1667, Athanasius Kircher, for instance, had already written his compendium China illustrata. 316 H.S. Olcott, Old Diary Leaves. The True Story of the Theosophical Society. Fourth series (2 nd Edition) (1887-1892), Madras: Theosophical Publishing House, 1931 (First printed in 1910), 298. 152 Russian Chief Priests of Buddhism his own translation of the text. 317 Unfortunately, Olcott‘s journey never took him as far as Siberia. The Buddhist community within the Siberian borders of the Russian Empire was a conversation topic that emerged in another encounter, this time with the governor general in Canton Li Hung Chang. On that occasion, the Chinese representative asked Nicholas II if Buddhism was practiced in Russia; 318 he was surprised to find that hundreds of thousands of Buddhist followers lived in Russian territory. 319 In this conversation, the Russian ruler was referring to the Buriat community living in the Baikal, the same community that Nicholas II met on his way back to St. Petersburg through Siberia. On that occasion, his Majesty received gifts from Buriat lamas, who gave him several Lamaist objects, like baldachins, cult items, and pillows. 320 A photograph of Nicholas II seated among the local clergy was printed in the epilogue to Puteshestvie and recorded this episode well. 321 317 Ibid., 298-9. 318 Li Hung Chang attended Nicholas II‘s coronation as extraordinary representative of the Chinese Empire. He was the intermediary between Russia and China in solving the Manchurian question regarding Chinese concession to the Russian railway on Manchurian soil (B. Romanov, Russia in Manchuria (1892-1906). On the History of the Foreign Policy of Tsarist Russia in the Epoch of Imperialism. Translated from the Russian by Susan Wilbur Jones. Ann Arbor, Michigan: J.W. Edwards, Publisher, 1952, 79). 319 Puteshestvie, vol. 2, part 3, 175. 320 Puteshestvie na Vostok. Exhibition on May 29, 1998. Edited by A.Teriukov, 80. 321 Puteshestvie, vol. 3, part 5, XVI. Buriats showed their devotion to the future Tsar not only with gifts, but also with welcome songs, exalting the White Tsar as an incarnation of unlimited virtue, represented by the merciful Tsagan Dara-Ehe (White Tara)-goddess of compassion in Tibetan Buddhism (Ibid., LXIV). The Kalmyks, like the Buriats, shared a belief in the Buddhist lineage of the imperial family too. The work by the Kalmyk lama from the Don, Dambo Ulianov, attests to that belief as well. In his Predictions of the Buddha about the House of Romanov and a Brief Account of My Travels to Tibet in 1904-5 (Predskazaniia Buddy o dome Romanovykh i kratkii ocherk o moikh puteshestviiakh v Tibet v 1904-5 gg. Saint 153 Nicholas II‘s sympathy for the Buddhist community in Russia was not accidental. At a time when Britain and Russia competed to gain as much influence as possible in Asia, the fact that Russia acknowledged Buddhist ethnicities on its soil served to create a spiritual connection to countries like China and Ceylon, which Russia hoped to add to its sphere of political influence. In an effort to justify its imperial aspirations, the British also attempted to prove that local Buddhist populations sought protection from them. After the British occupation of Tibet in 1904, for instance, The Illustrated London News published a reproduction of the Guardian Goddess of the Dalai Lamas, named Palden Lamo, arguing that the Tibetans identified the goddess with Queen Victoria. The caption affirmed: The Tibetans argue that the fact is indisputable. They will remind one that so long as Queen Victoria lived, the frontiers of Tibet were held strictly inviolate by India; but that, immediately after her death, the English troops came by force and penetrated to the very capital itself. 322 Petersburg: Tsentral‘naia Tipo-Litografiia, 1913), Ulianov interpreted one of the Buddha‘s twelve prophecies as a prediction of the coming of the New Era of Shambhala with Nicholas II embodying one of the Buddha‘s future reincarnations (Ibid.,94). 322 ―Tibet‘s most benign Goddess, supposed to have been reincarnated in Queen Victoria.‖ The Illustrated London News (126) 3439 (March 18, 1905):376. A completely different reaction to the reincarnation of the Russian and British rulers into Tibetan divinities came from another Englishman, Perceval Landon, member of the Younghusband‘s 1904 mission to Tibet. For Landon, Tibetan lamas cynically misused the doctrine of reincarnation as a political lever to take advantage of the rival European countries. Hence, the Dalai Lama made the convenient discovery that the Tsar was the reincarnation of the great reformer of Lamaism Tsong-kapa (P. Landon, Lhasa, vol. 1. London: Hurst & Blackett, 1905, 356). From the pantheon of Tibetan ―freaks,‖ as Landon defined Tibetan divinities, lamas selected Palden Lamo to convey the highest personal compliment to Queen Victoria. The terrible guardian deity of the land and of the faith is described by Landon as follows: ―a dark-blue lady with three eyes who sits upon a chestnut mule drinking blood from a skull and trampling under foot the torn and mutilated bodies of men and women. Her crown is composed of skulls, her eye teeth are four inches long, and the bridle, girths and crupper are living snakes kept in position by the dripping skin of a recently flayed man‖ (Ibid., 357). As Amy Heller points out in her article ―The Protective Deities of the Dalai Lamas,‖ most of Lamo‘s attributes come from her mythology. The ―dripping skin of a recently flayed man‖ probably refers to her son, whom the goddess had to sacrifice when she failed to convert the inhabitants of the Lanka island. After the sacrifice, Lamo peeled her son‘s skin and attached it to the saddle of her horse (in The Dalai Lama. A Visual History. Edited by M. Brauen. Chicago: Serindia Publications, 2005, 219). 154 Regardless of its political underpinnings, Nicholas II‘s Grand Tour strongly contributed to the popularization of Buddhist culture in the Russian capital by means of publicity from mass media, as well as from the collection of Asian artwork that the Tsarevich brought back from his trip. Exhibitions and Asian Collections in Russia  The Imperial Buddhist Collections Russians could admire the objects that Nicholas II collected on his tour in the exhibition that opened in 1893 at the Raphael loggias in the Winter Palace. The artist Elena Samokish-Sudkovskaia arranged the exposition area; the General-Adjutant Konstantin Poset and N. Sytenko organized the exhibition and edited its catalog, while the General-Lieutenant A. Vasilchikov wrote descriptions of the items on display. According to the exhibition catalog, rooms were divided into sections, each devoted to a visited country. Photographs of the show, nowadays belonging to the Russian National Library in St. Petersburg, recorded the event, as did articles from the press. Writers and artists, if they did not visit the show, surely read about the event in World Illustration, which paid broad attention to the exhibition in issues 1290-1304 for the years 1893-94. This type of exhibition was not an isolated episode; on the contrary, it belonged to a series of similar shows aimed at acquainting the public with foreign customs. In the summer 1891, for instance, the Historical Museum in Moscow held a Middle-Asian exhibition displaying ethnographical material and beautiful tissues produced in Bukhara, 155 Samarkand, and other Middle-East countries. 323 Much earlier, the Imperial Society of the Amateurs of Natural Science, Anthropology and Ethnography at the Moscow University opened the Russian Ethnographic Exhibition on April 23, 1867 at the Manege. The show, which displayed mannequins dressed in traditional clothes and surrounded by original items from various domestic environments, was an attempt to demonstrate the multiethnic character of the Russian Empire. 324 As can be seen from the recently reproduced 1867 exhibition in the Russian Ethnographical Museum, visitors could see all the peoples of Russia, including Buriat and nomadic lamas, as well as Buddhist cult objects embellishing altars (fig. 17, 17a). 325 The artwork that the Tsarevich brought back from his tour enriched the already existing imperial collection of Buddhist specimens. Indeed, Nicholas II was not the first emperor to gather Buddhist artifacts; in doing so, he participated in a tradition that dated 323 ―Illiustratsii Sredneaziatskoi vystavki v Moskve.‖ Vsemirnaia illiustratsiia 1190(November 9, 1891): 324-5. 324 Slaviiane Evropy i narody Rossii. K 140-letiiu pervoi etnograficheskoi vystavki 1867 goda. Saint Petersburg: Rossiiskii etnograficheskii muzei, 2007. 325 Svetlana Gorshenina gives the list of ethnographical exhibitions organized in the second half of the nineteenth century and early twentieth century, and especially of those exhibitions showing Turkestan artwork, in the appendix to her book The Private Collections of Russian Turkestan in the Second Half of the 19 th and Early 20 th Century. Berlin: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 2004, 125-130. 156 Fig. 17 Photograph of the exhibition Slavs of Europe and the People of Russia (to the 140-Anniversary of the 1867 First Ethnographical Exhibition) at the Russian Ethnographical Museum in St. Petersburg, 2007. Fig. 17a Detail of the exhibition Slavs of Europe and the People of Russia. 157 back to Peter the Great and continued with Catherine the Great. 326 Their collections were formed through gifts from the subjugated ethnicities and through personal acquisitions. According to the authors of the catalog Royal Collections of the Russian Ethnographic Museum ―The Tsars to the Peoples—The Peoples To The Tsars,‖ the earliest Buddhist object to become part of the royal collection was a plate that the Kalmyk deputation gave to Tsar Alexander III and Maria Fedorovna in 1883 at their coronation. The plate represents a beautiful stylistic mixture of Russian and Buddhist motifs in the decorative arts. The practice of giving the Tsar Buddhist artwork as a sign of devotion continued in the time of Nicholas II‘s reign. In 1908, for example, the spiritual leader of the Kalmyks from the Don, Minko B. Baramanjiinov, presented the Emperor with a remarkable three- dimensional mandala. It represented the 13-deity Vajrabhayrava-messenger of the Tantric school, taught by the Tibetan order of the Gelugpa. 327 Devotional gifts from Russian Buddhist subjects represented a direct link with Lamaist cult objects made in Mongolia and Tibet— places from where Buriats and Kalmyks came. 326 It is impossible to know precisely if Peter the Great had Buddhist items in his collection, as it was destroyed in the fire of 1747. Nonetheless, David Schimmelpenninck van der Oye lists some Buddhist xylographs among the Imperial belongings (D. Schimmelpenninck, Russian Orientalism. Asia in the Russian mind from Peter the Great to the Emigration. New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 2010, 159). Schimmelpenninck also discusses at length Peter and Catherine‘s fascination with China and everything Orientalist (Ibid., ch. 2-3). 327 In 1909, the Kalmyk deputation gave each member of the Royal family a Buddhist gift as a sign of devotion. Each of the four Princesses received a statuette of the White Tara. Nicholas II received the statuette of the Green Tara, the caretaker against calamities; the future heir to the throne, Tsarevich Aleksei, received the ceremonial composition of a stylized Buddhist altar with the central figure of the three-facial Ushnishavijaya, personification of longevity, on the top, and the ―Seven holy subjects‖ at the bottom on the tray. The symbolism of the representation was enhanced by the little statuette of Buddha Amitabha— the Buddha of Pure Land, whom Ushnishavijaya carries in her right hand. 158 In addition to the items given from the subjugated Buddhist ethnicities, the imperial Buddhist collection included objects that the Tsar himself bought and then donated to the St. Petersburg Ethnographical Museum. The largest portion of it was formed by Esper Ukhtomsky‘s assortment of 2,500 items, mainly statuettes of Lamaist cult, which Nicholas II bought in 1902. The Secretary of the Academy of Science, Sergei Oldenburg, cataloged the collection, which was exhibited in the White Column Hall of the Russian Museum Alexander III. 328 The artwork remained on display for two weeks. At the opening on March 11, 1902, at exactly 1:15 P.M., their Majesties, with other members of the Royal family, came to see the show and meet with the director and curators of the museum. 329 In the following years, Nicholas II continued to collect objéts d‘art from other private donors. In 1906, for instance, he donated to the Ethnographical Museum General-Major Aleksandr Vereshchagin‘s Chinese assortment, which the military had acquired during his service in China in 1900 at the time of the Boxer rebellion. In 1910 and 1911, the Tsar enlarged the Buddhist collection of the Ethnographical Museum with approximately other three hundred Lamaist statuettes and 328 At the time the Ethnographical Museum was a branch of the Russian Museum. 329 Materialy po etnografii Rossii, vol. 1. Edited by F. Volkov. Saint Petersburg: Izdanie etnograficheskogo otdela Russkogo Muzeia Imperatora Aleksandra III, 1910, XI. 159 various Buddhist cult items, coming from General-Major Petr Kozlov‘s 330 collection. 331 Before going to their final destination though, in spring 1910, Kozlov‘s finds were displayed at the Imperial Russian Geographical Society (fig. 18). That same spring, Kozlov was invited to Tsarskoe Selo to lecture the Imperial Family on his discovery. 332 Today, part of the collection is at the Ethnographic Museum, although most of the Imperial Buddhist collection belongs to the Hermitage.  Prince Esper Ukhtomsky’s Lamaist Collection One of the major collectors of Lamaist art was Prince Esper Ukhtomsky, who gathered many Buddhist objects during Nicholas II‘s Grand Tour and then published them in the epilogue of his journey account. Here, Lamaist items illustrate the text, but the collector‘s name is not given. Only later, in 1900, when the Orientologist Albert Grünwedel wrote Mythologie des Buddhismus in Tibet und der Mongolei. Führer durch die Lamaistische Sammlung der Fürsten E. Uchtomskij. Mit einem Einleitenden Vorwort des Fürsten E. Uchtomskij und 188 Abbildungen was the collector‘s name published. 330 Like for all Russian explorers, an incredible amount of literature exists on Kozlov; to cite but a few reference texts: А. Аndreev, Оt Baikala do sviashchennoi Lhasy. Novye materialy o russkikh ekspeditsiiakh v Tsentral‘nuiu Aziu v pervoi polovine XX veka (Buriatiia, Mongoliia, Tibet). Samara: Agni, 1997; E. Kychanov, ―Soblazn slavy.‖ Vostochnaia kollektsiia 7 (Fall 2001): 76-80; P. Коzlov, Dnevniki Mongolo- Tibetskoi ekspeditsii 1923-1926 gg. Edited by Т.I.Iusupova and A.I. Andreev. Saint Petersburg: Nauka, 2003. Series ―nauchnoe nasledstvo,‖ vol. 30; N. Kravklis, Zhizn‘ i puteshestviia Petra Kuz‘micha Kozlova. Smolensk: Poligramma, 2006; N. Kravklis, Spletenie sudeb. Smolensk: Poligramma, 2007. 331 On Kozlov‘s Sichuan collection see Lost Empire of the Silk Road. Buddhist Art from Khara Khoto (X- XIIIth century). Edited by Mikhail Piotrovsky. Milano: Electa, Thyssen-Bornemisza Foundation, 1993; K. Samosiuk, Buddiiskaia zhivopis‘ iz Khara-Khoto XII-XIV vekov. Mezhdu Kitaem i Tibetom. Kollektsiia P.K. Kozlova. Saint Petersburg: Izdatel‘stvo Gosudarstvennogo Ermitazha, 2006. 332 A. Andreev, Ot Baikala do sviashchennoi Lhasy, 79. The Tsar himself financed Kozlov‘s expedition by donating thirty thousand rubles (Ibid., 71). 160 Fig. 18 Photograph of the exhibition of Petr Kozlov‘s finds at the Imperial Russian Geographical Society, 1910. 161 This detail indicates either that the Tsar had not bought the artwork from Ukhtomsky yet or that the collection continued to be referred to as Ukhtomsky‘s despite its acquisition by another owner. Probably, knowing Ukhtomsky‘s experience of Asian matters, it was established from the very beginning that Nicholas II would buy the objects collected by the Prince during their joint trip. What is certain, however, is that in 1905, Professor Albert Grünwedel wrote another book on Ukhtomsky‘s collection, this time in Russian. The book, Overview of Prince E. E. Ukhtomsky‘s Collection of Lamaist Cult Objects (Оbzor sobraniia predmetov lamaiskogo kul‘ta kn. E.E. Ukhtomskogo, 1905), belonged to the series ―Biblioteka Buddica,‖ founded by Sergei Oldenburg. Unlike Mythologie des Buddhismus, where the study of Ukhtomsky‘s collection was based on the catalog of cards reproducing the photographs of Ukhtomsky‘s collection—photographs that Grünwedel took much earlier 333 — Overview of Prince E. E. Ukhtomsky‘s Collection of Lamaist Cult Objects was the result of the archival work that the German Orientologist was able to accomplish during his six-week sojourn in St. Petersburg. Sergei Oldenburg translated part of the book and Ukhtomsky added the illustrations to the text. The particular attention that famous Orientologists like Oldenburg and Grünwedel gave to Ukhtomsky‘s Lamaist collection attests to its scientific relevance. As a matter of fact, various scientific institutions valued the uniqueness of the collection, asserting that: 333 Later, Grünwedel interpreted the representation displayed on these cards thanks to the help of some lamas from Mongolia, to whom the German scholar sent photographs of the cards (Obzor sobraniia predmetov lamaiskogo kul‘ta kn. E.E. Ukhtomskogo. Edited by Prof. A. Grünwedel. Part One, Writing. Saint Petersburg: Tipografiia Imperatorskoi Akademii Nauk, 1905. Series ―Biblioteka Buddica,‖ vol. 6. Edited by S. Ol‘denburg, intr.). 162 Compiled with rare taste and mastery, with few exceptions, it consists exclusively of selected items. Now it may be firmly asserted after the full destruction of Peking Buddhist temples, that for many years it will be impossible to compile a collection such as Ukhtomsky‘s. The Berlin Museum of Ethnography, the [Saint Petersburg] Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography of the Imperial Academy of Sciences, the Guimet Museum, all keeping the collections of Buddhist items, when taken together don‘t cover even half of Ukhtomsky‘s collection in quantity, and they cannot be compared even in quality because of their lack of such old best statues and pictures. 334 Ukhtomsky‘s collection was known not only by scholars, but also by writers— among them, for instance, Anton Chekhov. As discussed in Chapter One, the writer saw the Buddhist statuettes reproduced in Travel to the East, 335 having sent a copy of the book to Pavel Iordanov on November 24, 1896. That Chekhov read the travel journal is confirmed by his negative comment on Karazin‘s illustrations. 336 Coincidentally, during the Imperial Asian tour, Ukhtomsky corresponded for Suvorin‘s newspaper, New Times. 337 In other words, both Ukhtomsky and Chekhov regularly worked for the same editor. Notably, in the 1880s Vladimir Soloviev— the spiritual father of many Symbolist poets— was a habitué at Ukhtomsky‘s salon. 338 His appearance at the Prince‘s house 334 E. Khamaganova, ―Princes Esper and Dii Ukhtomsky and Their Contribution to the Study of Buddhist Culture (Tibet, Mongolia and Russia).‖ In Tibet, Past and Present. Proceedings of the Ninth Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, vol. 1. Edited by Henk Blezer. Leiden, Boston, Köln, 2002: Brill, 318. 335 A. Chekhov, Sobranie sochinenii v 12-ti tomakh, vol. 12. Moscow: Gosud-noe izdatel‘stvo khudo-noi lit.,1956, 126. 336 See his letter to Suvorin on October 8, 1898 (Ibid. 243). 337 E. Ukhtomsky, ―Pis‘ma s puti Ego Imp. Vys na Vostoke.‖ Novoe vremia 5526 (July 19, 1891): 1; 5527 (July 20, 1891): 1; 5528 (July 21, 1891): 1-2; 5529 (July 22, 1891): 1. 338 K. Mochul‘sky, Vladimir Solov‘ev. Zhizn‘ i uchenie. Paris: YMCA-Press, 1951, 124. 163 casts additional light on the interconnectedness of major Buddhist collectors and members of the creative world. If not in Russia, artists and writers could admire Ukhtomsky‘s collection in the separate pavilion called ―Section of the Peripheral Regions‖ (Otdel Okrain), which was part of the 1900 Parisian ―Exposition Universelle.‖ This pavilion aimed to acquaint the international audience with the habits and customs of the population from the far eastern part of the Russian territory. The Buriat monk Agvan Dorzhiev, who personally knew Ukhtomsky and who will be discussed in Chapters Four and Five, likely saw the show, since the poet Maximilian Voloshin affirmed that the Buriat monk had visited the French capital at that time. 339 Grünwedel‘s book Mythologie des Buddhismus in Tibet und der Mongolei 340 appeared as a catalog to Ukhtomsky‘s collection at the show. According to the catalog of the Russian Pavilion at the ―Exposition Universelle,‖ Ukhtomsky‘s Buddhist collection was displayed with one belonging to a certain N. Gombaev (the misspelled name of Gomboev), perhaps the same person who had acquired the Buddhist objects for the Prince in China. 341 The very fact that Ukhtomsky had art dealers both in 339 The acquaintance of Ukhtomsky with Dorzhiev dated back at least to 1898, when Ukhtomsky played the role of intermediary between the Tsar and the Buriat monk (J. Snelling, Buddhism in Russia. The Story of Agvan Dorzhiev, Lhasa‘s Emissary to the Tsar. Shaftesbury, Dorset: Element, 1993, 52). Furthermore, a few years later in 1909, when Dorzhiev began the construction of the Buddhist temple in St. Petersburg, Ukhtomsky would figure in the building committee (A. Andreev, Buddiiskaia sviatinia Petrograda. Ulan- Ude: Agenstvo EkoArt, 1992, 89-90) (Chapter Four). 340 In that same year the Brockhaus publishing house printed Grünwedel‘s work in French too: Mythologie du Buddhisme au Tibet et en Mongolie basée sur la collection lamaïque du prince Oukhtomsky par Albert Grünwedel avec une préface du Prince Oukhtomsky. Traduit de l‘Allemand par Ivan Goldschmidt. Leipzig: F.A. Brockhaus, 1900. 341 Katalog Russkogo otdela na vsemirnoi Parizhskoi Vystavke 1900 g. Saint Petersburg: tipografiia Isidora Gol‘berga, publication date unknown, 472. The Buriat Naidan Gomboev, better known to Russians as Nikolai Gomboev, worked as the Postmaster-general at the Russian mission in Peking for over three 164 China and Buriatia indicates that his collection derived from Lamaist objects made both by Tibetan Buddhists living in China and by Buriat and Kalmyk Buddhists trained in Tibetan via Mongolian craftsmanship. After the acquisition of his collection by Nicholas II, Prince Esper Ukhtomsky continued gathering Buddhist artwork and continued donating them to the St Petersburg Ethnographical Museum. One of his last donations was the Buddhist altar representing Sukhavati, the Pure Land of Buddha Amithaba, which in 1904-05 Esper Ukhtomsky had commissioned in the old Buddhist monasteries at Gusinoe Ozero and Gegetuevsky in Buriatia. The son of Esper Ukhtomsky, Dii Ukhtomsky, archivist of the Buddhist collections at the Ethnographical Museum from 1908, brought the altar back to Saint Petersburg, where it was displayed with other items in Ukhtomsky‘s collection in hall 32 of the museum. 342 Dii Ukhtomsky‘s description of this masterpiece of Buriat handcraft, composed of a 107 pieces and 492 single objects, was published in the magazine Materials on Russian Ethnography in 1910. 343 In the 1930s the Sukhavati altar was given to the Museum of History of Religion, where after restoration it was first displayed in the decades. He was a good friend of the General Russian Consul in Urga Iakov Shishmarev. In 1869, the Lieutenant-colonel of the General Staff, P. Gelmersen, suggested Gomboev‘s candidacy as Buriat pilgrim to Lhasa for his knowledge of Mongolian and Manchurian, as well as of Chinese and written Tibetan. In the end, however, Gomboev did not participate to the journey to Lhasa (A. Andreev, ―Indian Pundits and the Russian Exploration of Tibet: An Unknown Story of the Great Game Era.‖ Central Asiatic Journal 45. 2, 2001: 169, 174). A collector of Lamaist and Chinese Buddhist cult objects, Gomboev lost part of his collection during the Boxer rebellion (G. Leonov, ―E.E. Ukhtomsky,‖ 111). If Gomboev was Ukhtomsky‘s art dealer in China, in the Zabaikal the Buriat Vambotserenov was one of the people in charge of sending to St. Petersburg the gifts he collected not only in Buriatia, but also in Mongolia (Ibid., 111-113). 342 E. Khamaganova, ―Princes Esper and Dii Ukhtomsky and Their Contribution to the Study of Buddhist Culture (Tibet, Mongolia and Russia),‖ 319. 343 D. Ukhtomsky, ―Rai Sukavati.‖ In Materialy po etnografii Rossii, vol. 1, 1910, 89-93. Here the author explains the iconography of its representation and the origin of the legend about Sukhavati— the land of infinite happiness, which appeared circa in the seventh century A.D. in Mahayana Buddhism (Ibid., 90). 165 section on Buddhism and Lamaism in 1933. Dii‘s trip to Trans-Baikal represented the first of a series of later missions for which the Ethnographical Museum commissioned him in 1910 and 1913. Today, the largest part of Esper Ukhtomsky‘s collection is at the Hermitage, while other museums, such as the Ethnographical Museum and the Kunstkamera, own smaller parts.  Petr Kozlov’s and Aleksandr Vereshchagin’s Buddhist Collections Even though Ukhtomsky‘s Lamaist collection surely represented the largest portion of Nicholas II‘s Buddhist acquisitions, Kozlov‘s and Vereshchagin‘s Buddhist collections are worth mentioning for their cultural resonance. Part of Kozlov‘s collection included items that the Dalai Lama had presented to the explorer during their encounters in 1904 and 1909; on those occasions, His Holiness had given the Russian visitor gifts for the Tsar too. 344 The most significant part of his collection, however, came from his Mongolian-Sichuan expedition, which brought him national and international fame for 344 When the Dalai Lama fled from Tibet in 1904 and moved to Urga after the British invasion of his country, Kozlov belonged to the group of Russian representatives appointed by the Imperial Russian Geographical Society and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to meet His Holiness. The Russian explorer met the Tibetan spiritual leader both in 1904, on the occasion of his first escape from Tibet, and in 1909 when the Dalai Lama left his country for the second time after the Chinese invasion. For details on both the meetings, see Kozlov‘s diary Tibet i Dalai-Lama. Moscow: Tovarishchestvo nauchnykh izdanii KMK, 2004 (first published in 1920). Among the gifts from His Holiness to the Tsar figure: two portraits of the Dalai Lama by the Russian artist N. Ia. Kozhevnikov, now kept at the Oriental Department of the Hermitage Museum (G. Leonov, ―Two Portraits of the Thirteenth Dalai Lama.‖ Arts of Asia 21. 4, July- August 1991: 108-21) and two bronze statues— a Buddha on the Lion‘s Throne and a Maitreya (P. Kozlov, Tibet i Dalai Lama, 76-8). To Kozlov‘s private collection belonged, instead, the statuette of Sakyamuni sewn in cloth, with the seal of the Thirteenth Dalai Lama and inscription stating that this statue is a gift to Mr. Khodzolop (Koslov) (The Dalai Lama. A Visual History. Edited by M. Brauen. Chicago: Serindia Publications, 2005, ill. 94, 142). 166 his discovery of the old city of Karakhoto, 345 a Medieval Tangut city in the southern Gobi Desert near the Juyan Lake in western Inner Mongolia. 346 Petr Kozlov arrived at Karakhoto on March 19, 1908, and excavated an entire town that still had most of its treasure intact. Today, the State Hermitage owns most of the finds, consisting of 3,500 items, of which some 200 are paintings on silk, canvas, paper, wood, and wall paintings. The Institute of Oriental Studies collection owns circa 8,000 items, including most of the xylographs and the drawings accompanied by the text they illustrate. Other objects in the collection include sculptures of clay, wood and bronze, textiles, paper banknotes and coins, artwork of local pottery and porcelain of the Yuan Dynasty, various iron, wood and bronze utensils. 347 345 The name Karakhoto literally means" black city;" it is identifiable with Marco Polo's description of the city of Edzina— the name of Karakhoto in 1280-1368 at the time of the Mongolian Yuan reign. 346 Karakhoto was first visited by Kozlov‘s protégé, the Buriat Tsokto Badmazhapov in the spring of 1907. Badmazhapov, who had previously worked as a translator in Kozlov‘s Mongolian-Kam mission, reported his detection to Kozlov and the Imperial Russian Geographical Society before Kozlov went to the ancient city and made his spectacular discovery (A. Andreev, ―O tom, kak byl dvazhdy otkryt mertvyi gorod Khara-Khoto.‖ Оt Baikala do sviashchennoi Lhasy, 61-86). If, on the one side, Aleksandr Andreev affirms in his essay that Badmazhapov was the real discoverer of Karakhoto, then, on the other side, Evgeny Kychanov argues that Kozlov had the right to take the credit for the findings (E. Kychanov, ―Soblazn slavy,‖ 76-80). As a matter of fact, Kychanov‘s argumentation is not convincing, above all in his conclusions. Here, the author seems to imply that the failure to mention the name of the real discoverer of the ancient city cannot be considered amoral when taken from the perspective of military credits. After all, Kychanov writes, Badmazhapov was a simple Cosack-Buriat non-commissioned officer, while Kozlov was first a Russian colonel and then a general (Ibid., 80). 347 K. Samosiuk, Lost Empire of the Silk Road, 46. Kira Somosiuk, curator of the Karakhoto collection at the Hermitage, devoted her book, Buddiiskaia zhivopis‘ iz Khara-Khoto XII-XIV vekov. Mezhdu Kitaem i Tibetom, to the study of Kozlov‘s finds. Recently, the Hermitage displayed some of the Buddhist artwork from its Karakhoto collection in the exhibition Peshchery tysiachi budd (Rossiiskie ekspeditsii na shelkovom puti. K 190-letiu Aziatskogo muzeia. Edited by Olga Deshpande. Saint-Petersburg: Izdatel‘stvo Gosudarstvennogo Ermitazha, 2008). Previously, the archeological finds were shown in different exhibitions abroad— in Paris in 1977, in Lugano in 1993, and in many other places (K. Samosiuk, Buddiiskaia zhivopis‘ iz Khara-Khoto XII-XIV vekov, 23). 167 Kozlov‘s sensational discovery had strong resonance in the print media. The bulletin (Izvestia) of the Imperial Russian Geographical Society reported it in 1909; in 1914 Sergei Oldenburg partially deciphered the Buddhist iconography of the discovered paintings, statuettes and other artwork, publishing his work in the bulletin of the ethnographical journal. 348 In that same issue, the anthropologist Fedor Volkov published his study on the provenance of the bones excavated from the ruins. 349 Kozlov‘s account was translated into English as well, and published by the Royal Geographical Society of London (The Mongolia—Sze-chuan Expedition of the Imperial Russian Geographical Society, 1909). The manuscripts brought back from Karakhoto were written in Chinese, Tibetan, and Mongolian. They mostly dealt with Buddhist compositions, although there were also Confucian and Daoist classics. World renowned scholars, such as Paul Pelliot— he was in St. Petersbug in 1910— Vasily Alekseev, Nikolai Nevsky, and Konstantin Flug worked on their deciphering. 350 As in the case of the 1888 Buddhist exhibition organized by Grigory Potanin in Irkutsk (Chapter One), here too exhibitions and scholarly publications of Kozlov‘s discovery contributed to the promotion of Buddhism in Russia. The poet Aleksandr Blok, for instance, owned a copy of Oldenburg‘s article on the Buddhist iconography of Karakhoto 351 — with a dedication on the cover from the author. The artist and theoretician 348 S. Ol‘denburg, ―Materialy po buddiiskoi ikonografii Khara-Khoto.‖ In Materialy po etnografii Rossii, vol. 2, 1914, 79-157. 349 F. Volkov, ―Chelovecheskie kosti iz suburgana v Khara-Khoto.‖ Ibid., 179-182. 350 E. Kychanov, Peshchery tysiachi budd, 319. 351 G. Bongard-Levin, ―Aleksandr Blok i S.F. Ol‘denburg,‖ 240, note 59, 248. 168 of Neo-Primitivism, Vladimir Markov, discussed in the previous chapter, also spoke of Buddhism in relation to the aforementioned 1910 exhibition of Kozlov‘s findings in his review ―The Russian Secession: Concerning the ‗Union of Youth‘ Exhibition in Riga.‖ 352 Since Markov‘s reference to the Karakhoto exhibition plays a crucial role in documenting the bridge existing between the Buddhist world and the creative community, an excerpt from his article will be quoted in length: We seek only beauty. Buddhism teaches us that there exist several circles of our existence. The innermost circle is that of the lowest instincts, the circle of earthly desires and earthly sensations. It stands furthest from the deity and light. Next comes the exterior circle—of the spirit, of intangible nature. One must possess refined and keenly ordered thoughts and feelings in order to forget the ordinary and mundane so as to penetrate this circle. Here there is a completely different type of desire, a different kind of beauty, different mysteries, and different motives. The ancient peoples knew how to penetrate this world, but now we can only envy the east, the cradle of so many great religions. Assyria, India, and Japan have gathered so many miracles that our hearts sink and our minds weary as we come to realize just how weak we are. This spring there was a Buddhist exhibition in St. Petersburg that displayed images and sculptures from the Tibetan town of Hara-Hoto. All the art was ancient. General Kozlov, with an Imperial subvention, found and excavated this town in sand, and brought to St. Petersburg all the frescoes, canvases, and boards upon which anything had been drawn, together with all the sculpture that had been discovered. The painting had been executed in vegetable dyes. The technique was simple. But one could hardly have imagined the delicacy, the voluptuousness, and the mystery of this lost kind of painting. The color combinations were so unexpected and yet so logical; everything was arranged with such a diabolical richness and mystery that one realizes that these people were unadulterated; their feelings had not been distracted by the dirt of realism: they were able to apprehend beauty, to feel, believe, love, and reason. 353 352 V. Markov, ―The Russian Secession: Concerning the ‗Union of Youth‘ Exhibition in Riga.‖ Translated and Introduced by Jeremy Howard. Experiment. A Journal of Russian Culture 1 (1995): 45-54. 353 Ibid., 50-1. 169 Notably, Kozlov‘s finds were exposed at the First Buddhist Exhibition in Petrograd in 1919 (Chapter Five), thus making it highly likely that more than one representative from the creative world knew about this discovery. Furthermore, the recurrence of the image of the Buddha in the figurative arts (Chapter Two) developed simultaneously with Kozlov‘s finds at Karakhoto. In other words, it is probable that this scientific exploration may have also inspired some Buddhist motifs in literature and the arts— even more so when considering that some of the Orientologists who deciphered the Buddhist manuscripts from Karakhoto would collaborate with Gorky in his World Literature publishing series in 1918 (Chapter Two). Kozlov‘s private collection also increased with the finds from his later 1923-1926 Mongolo-Tibetan expedition, 354 where the General-Major discovered ancient tumuli on the wooded slopes of the Noin-Ula Mountains. 355 The Noin-Ula burials included more than 200 burial tumuli, known in Russian as kurgan. They were made of timber burial chambers furnished with various textiles from Greco-Bactrian, Parthian, and Anatolian origins. The artwork included Hunnish craftsmen, like weaponry, home utensils, art objects, and multiple Chinese artifacts from bronze, nephrite, lacquered wood, and textiles. Kozlov himself drew the plan of the kurgans together with some of the horse motifs and inscriptions, which were sent to St. Petersburg in June 1924. 356 The next year, his finds embellished the walls of the Russian Museum along with the earlier discovered 354 For a bibliography on the works related to the finds of the mission, see P. Kozlov, Dnevniki Mongolo- Tibetskoi ekspeditsii 1923-1926, 953-955. 355 For the art historical analysis of the finds in English, see W. Perceval Yetts, ―Discoveries of the Kozlov Expedition.‖ The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs 48. 277 (April, 1926): 168-185. 356 P. Kozlov, Dnevniki, 168-174. 170 objects of Karakhoto. 357 At the opening of the exhibition of artwork from Noin-ula, Kozlov talked in front of an overcrowded auditorium populated by Russian Orientologists and amateurs. 358 The audience likely included members of the artistic and literary community, since they certainly knew about the collection. The poet Maximilian Voloshin, in fact, mentioned the discovery in that same year that St. Petersburg flooded and many works of art were damaged, including the Kozlov collection. In this regard Voloshin wrote to the artist Anna Ostroumova-Lebedeva: ―What astonishes most is the loss of the Kozlov collection. Was it worth profaning the tombs of Karakorum if everything had to sink in Petersburg without even having time to dismantle and unpack it?‖ 359 Despite the unfortunate fate of the finds from Karakorum, the Kozlov collection can still be admired at the Hermitage and in the beautiful colored plates published in the exhibition catalog The Caves of One Thousand Buddhas. Russian Expeditions on the Silk Road. 360 Unlike Kozlov‘s, Aleksandr Vereshchagin‘s Buddhist collection was not assembled from scientific expeditions; on the contrary, it was shaped from the cruel face of war and the spoliation of national treasures— a burglary that followed the foreign 357 Ibid., 402. 358 Ibid., 422. The speech given at the opening of the exhibition at the Russian Museum marked the beginning of a series of talks on his finds that Kozlov also held in Moscow at the House of Scholars and at the Polytechnic Institute. The talk at the Institute was a great success with the public (Ibid., 442) and resonated with the press (Ibid., 446, notes 180, 190, 196). 359 V. Kupchenko, Stranstvie Maksimiliana Voloshina. Dokumental‘noe povestvovanie. Saint Petersburg: Logos, 1996, 387. 360 Peshchery Tysiachi Budd. Rossiiskie ekspeditsii na shelkovom puti, 313-394. 171 suppression of the 1900 Chinese Boxer rebellion. In this case, the Buddhist world entered into the salons of Russian upper-class society through one of the most violent types of undertaking: war. This type of military intervention happened when the Boxers revolted, giving voice to the anti-European malaise circulating in the Chinese population. To suppress the upheaval, the European nations and Japan allied; however, their intervention targeted not only the local turmoil, but also national landmarks. Indeed, once in situ the ―civilized‖ European nations conducted the aggressive spoilage of Chinese treasures. 361 Russian high-ranking representatives were well aware of the situation, as even the Minister of Finance, Count Sergei Witte, mentioned the episodes of vandalism in his memoirs. 362 General-Major Aleksandr Vereshchagin, who served in the Russian army in China for two years, from 1900 to 1902, repeatedly reported on how the sack of the rebel country was taking place and how the stolen artwork was being sold on the black market. Indeed, he describes episodes of vandalism both in his work In China (V Kitae, 1903) and in his travelogue tale, Around Manchuria, 1900-1902. Memoirs and Anecdotes (Po Man‘chzhurii 1900-1902. Vospominaniia i rasskazy). Both his tales were first serialized in the widely read magazine European Messenger and later printed in a separate edition. In addition to local anecdotes, Vereshchagin recounts how he gathered his collection of ―chinoiserie,‖ which in 1906 Tsar Nicholas II bought and donated to the Ethnographical 361 The event seen through the eyes of foreigners can be read in Diana Preston‘s book The Boxer Rebellion. The Dramatic Story of China‘s War on Foreigners That Shook The World In The Summer Of 1900. New York: Walker & Company, 2000. 362 The Memoirs of Count Witte. Translated and Edited by Sidney Harcave. Armonk, New York and London, England: M.E. Sharpe, Inc., 1990, 280. 172 Museum. 363 Below is an excerpt from Around Manchuria. This episode takes place when Vereshchagin‘s lunch with the Staff-Captain, Vasily Fomich, was interrupted by a soldier entering their tent: -Your Eminence, there is a soldier here who has brought some Chinese stuff. Do you wish me to let him in? -Oh, yes! Let him in!—happily exclaimed the Staff-Captain while smiling complacently. -Who is this soldier?—I asked -He has been assigned to be a policeman in town. A small skinny soldier with a little red moustache and a sack in his hands enters the tent. - Hey! -All my best, Your Eminence! -Well, show me!—exclaimed Vasily Fomich. The soldier began dropping different silver objects on the table: hair-pins, bracelets, earrings, little rings, buckles, and so on. Everything was very original, nicely decorated with various patterns and drawings. In all, these things weighted about three-four pounds. -This is for you!—My companion threw the soldier three silver rubles. - I deeply thank you, Your Eminence!—he exclaimed, turned abruptly and then disappeared. -You gave him so little money! Look how many goods!—I said to him. -What? Should I even spoil them? After all, he didn‘t pay for anything! He should be thankful that I gave him even that little bit!—Then, he began investigating what he bought. Would you like to take anything for yourself?—He asked -You don‘t mind giving these things away?—I said very pleased. -You can take everything if you want. -Well, then, thanks!—I gave him the three rubles and delighted I carried the purchase to my tent, where I lost myself in the lonely contemplation of my buy. 364 Scenarios like this follow one another in Vereshchagin‘s story. Private collectors, merchants, and black marketers with spoilage from Buddhist monasteries play the role of 363 In 1914 the Orientologist A. Ivanov published his article on Chinese ornament based on the nephrite objects from the Vereshchagin collection (―Simvolicheskii ornament v Kitae. Opisanie nefrita iz kollektsii A.V. Vereshchagina.‖ Materialy po etnografii Rossii, vol. 2, 175-8). 364 A. Vereshchagin, ―Po Man‘chzhurii 1900-1901 gg. Vospominaniia i rasskazy.‖ Vestnik Evropy (January 1902): 138-9. 173 heroes at the foreground of the siege of the Boxer rebellion. Regardless of this specific situation, though, the diffusion of such collections might also explain articles such as ―Dilettante Collections in Russia in 17 th and 18 th centuries‖ by Evgeny Opochinin. 365 If, on the one side, the publication dealt with another period in Russian history; on the other side, its publication in 1905, during the war with Japan, enhances the relevance of such a topic. As the present section demonstrates, war and art pillaging went arm-in-arm, presenting one of the most venal aspects of the political journey. To conclude, although no vocal or written report from any artist or writer attests that the creative world had a firsthand knowledge of Vereshchagin‘s collection, nonetheless it was quite certain for several reasons. First of all, Aleksandr Vereshchagin was the brother of the famous painter Vasily Vereshchagin and, as noted earlier, the artist Elena Samokish-Sudkovskaia (who arranged the show of Nicholas II‘s souvenirs from Asia) was one of Vasily Vereshchagin‘s pupils. Second, that artists such as Karazin, Samokish, and Gritsenko were involved in shows and illustrations of the imperial collections confirms that the artistic world knew about the works. Furthermore, it is worth remembering that Nikolai Gritsenko was the first husband of Leon Bakst‘s wife, Liubov‘ Tretiakova. 366 Hence, in this world of interconnectedness, artists very likely saw— or, at least knew about— Aleksandr Vereshchagin‘s collection, especially considering that Vasily Vereshchagin also cultivated the passion of collecting Oriental 365 E. Opochinin, ―Liubitel‘skoe kollektsionerstvo v Rossii v XVII i XVIII stoletiiakh.‖ Moskovskii listok 41 (April 24, 1905): 2-5. 366 C. Spencer, Leon Bakst. New York: St. Martin‘s Press, 1973, 35, 169. 174 objéts d‘art. Since the latter documents the entanglement between arts and politics, discussing him separately in the following section is necessary. The “Political Journey” and Visual Arts  Vasily Vereshchagin’s Travels to the East as Artistic Documentation of Russian Imperialism Aleksandr Vereshchagin was not the only member of the Vereshchagin family who contributed to promote the Buddhist world in Russia. His eldest brother, the painter Vasily Vereshchagin, also came into contact with the East both in its Muslim and Buddhist aspects. Although better known for the paintings he made during General Kaufman's expedition to Turkestan in 1867 and during the Turkish War in 1877, Vasily Vereshchagin sketched Central Asia as well. He traveled to the Himalayas, Tibet, India (which he visited twice in 1873 and 1884), and Japan (1903). His thirst for traveling combined both modern restlessness— tragically epitomized by his death on the flagship Petropavlovsk, which the Japanese navy blew up outside of Port Arthur in 1904— and the scientific curiosity that lay behind ethnographic expeditions. 367 As the artist wrote in his autobiography: I have been traveling a great deal. Soon I realized that railways and steamboats were made to be used…I recognize traveling to be the greatest school. I have seen and heard a lot, thus I am able to tell a lot. I talked, painted and wrote moved by a sincere intention to tell others of what I have learnt. 368 367 Apparently, the custom of collecting souvenirs from abroad included the acquisition of exotic animals. If Chekhov could not resist bringing back to Russia a pair of mongooses from his trip to India, Vereshchagin couldn‘t refrain himself from taking two monkeys, one of whom he shot dead for misbehavior back in Paris (V. Vereshchagin, Povesti. Ocherki. Vospominaniia, 255). 175 The intertwining of politics and art in Vereshchagin‘s series of paintings on Turkestan has been discussed by Daniel Brower and David Schimmelpenninck. From his reading of the 1874 exhibition catalog, Brower asserts that imperialistic views and Orientalist trends were clear at first sight in the show. As Brower wrote, Vereshchagin: ―carried to Central Asia two historical scenarios, one of progressive Western civilization bringing to an end, in his words, the ‗lawlessness and injustice‘ of the backward lands of the East, the other of the final triumph of the Russian Empire over its ancient Mongol- Turkic enemies.‖ 369 Unlike Brower, Schimmelpenninck uses milder tones to describe the painter‘s involvement in Russian-eastern policy. Without denying Vereshchagin‘s support of Russia‘s mission to Central Asia, the author alleges that the message of Vereshchagin‘s paintings questions the behavior of the Russian conquerors as well. In other words, for Schimmelpenninck the Turkestan series suggests that Russians and Europeans in general were as predisposed to vice as Asians. 370 Regardless of the artist‘s personal opinion of the subject matter, two civilizations confronted one another in this series. This confrontation expressed the conviction that 368 Ibid., 7. 369 D. Brower, ―Images of the Orient: Vasily Vereshchagin and Russian Turkestan.‖ European Society and Culture Research Group (March 1993). University of California at Berkley. Working Paper 3.5, 10. A reading of V. Vereshchagin‘s own travelogue journal evidences his connection to the imperialistic views promoted by other travelers, in particular Nikolai Przhevalsky. In his ―Notes of a Journey to Central Asia,‖ written in 1867, Vereshchagin explicitly insists in colonizing Russian Turkestan, whose Mahomedan population he considered uncivilized (V. Vereshchagin, Painter—Soldier—Traveller. Autobiographical Sketches, vol. 1. Translated from the German and the French by F.H. Peters, M.A. fellow of University College, Oxford. With illustrations after drawings by the author. London: Richard Bentley & Son, 1887, 145. 370 D. Schimmelpenninck, Russian Orientalism, 83. To make his argument clearer, Schimmelpenninck writes: ―As a student of one of Paris‘s foremost teachers, Vereshchagin naturally adopted the tropes of Orientalist art about the East‘s cruelty, fanaticism, and vice. Nevertheless, as his writings make clear, he made no fundamental Saidian distinction between European ‗self‘ and Asian ‗other‖ (Ibid., 91). 176 due to the political situation in Asia, the East and the West were ready to collide. This issue assumed apocalyptic tones as soon as the nineteenth century came to an end and wars in the Asian continents followed one another, culminating with the Russian 1905 defeat in the conflict with Japan. As the next chapter will discuss, unexpected political turns in East Asia made clear that— contrary to general expectations— the East, not the West, would win. Hence, the threat of the ―yellow peril‖ became tangible in the West to the extent that people began fearing the fall of western ―enlightened‖ civilization under the conquest of the ―barbaric‖ East. Political discourse aside, if, on the one hand, Orientalism stylistically guides Vereshchagin‘s rendition of the East—as seen in the highly decorated interiors and customs, as well as the exotic settings of his paintings— on the other hand, ethnography plays a main role in his travel sketches. A look at his works suggests that it is more than likely that the artist moved along the path of scientific expeditions, whose goal consisted mainly in collecting as much ethnographical data as possible. Such a thesis becomes even more plausible when considering that the ethnographer Nikolai Miklukho-Maklai invited the artist to join his community of Russian intellectuals united against the colonization of Papua-New Guinea. 371 Politics and art also intersect in Vereshchagin‘s series of Indian études, according to Frédéric Bertand. In his article, ―Le peintre Vasilij Vereščagin, l‘Himalaya et le Bouddhisme Tibétain,‖ Bertand suggests that through his work the artist attempted to 371 F. Bertrand, ―Le peintre Vasilij Vereščagin, l‘Himalaya et le Bouddhisme Tibétain.‖ Slavica Occitania, vol. 21. Published by le Centre de recherches "Monde slave et interculturalité (langues, littératures et sociétés)" (CRIMS) and the Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures at l‘ Univerversité de Toulouse-le Mirail. Toulouse: Département de slavistique, 2005, note 21, 283. 177 record a world vanishing under British colonial conquest. 372 Indeed, Vereshchagin‘s travelogue notes examine the political situation in India and Tibet from the view of colonies under the British Empire. Nonetheless, he also offers anecdotes about the Lamaist clergy, as well as insight into traditions and local habits, thus continuing to follow the ethnographic vein present in his Turkestan artistic production. 373 The painter‘s travelogue journals follow the same style of Aleksandr Vereshchagin‘s works. Thus, they are not fiction, but rather reports on the visited country and its local life, which is rendered through dialogues with people he had actually encountered. In Vasily‘s diaries, however, ethnography prevails. Unlike his brother Aleksandr, Vasily was predominantly a painter who looked at the surrounding environment as data to be reproduced in his sketches and paintings. The artistic journeys of Vasily Vereshchagin did not stop at paintings and sketches displayed in successful exhibitions in Moscow and St. Petersburg; on the contrary, they continued to influence the traveler after he returned to his homeland. Like his brother Aleksandr, Vasily collected souvenirs from abroad; his purchases complied with more legal routes, however. According to his son‘s memoirs, for instance, on his last trip to Japan, in 1903, the painter brought back a large collection of objéts d‘art, which he displayed in his atelier. Unlike his brother‘s collection, Vasily Vereshchagin‘s Japanese collection included mostly ―japonaiseries‖— silk tissues depicting dragons, the Fujiyama, 372 Ibid., 278. 373 V. Vereshchagin, Povesti. Ocherki. Vospominaniia, 236-240, 277-282. 178 as well as porcelains and other artwork of this kind. 374 Yet, from his previous tour of India and the eastern Himalayas in 1873, Vereshchagin brought ethnographic items such as medallions, necklaces made of human skulls, Tibetan earrings, and Lamaist cult objects, such as trumpets made of human tibias. 375 Encounters with the Tibetan Buddhist world often happened along the road and were dutifully reported by Vereshchagin‘s wife in their journal. The journal appeared in French translation as early as 1882 376 and in English in 1887. 377 Following the model of ethnographic reports written by explorers for the Academy of Science, Vereshchagin‘s travelogue journals were illustrated with copies of the paintings he took during his tours. In the pages of his diaries, readers could admire reproductions of Buddhist temples (fig. 19) and Tibetan lamas in ceremonial customs (fig. 20). Vereshchagin‘s paintings of his trip to the Himalayas and India are kept in various museum collections, including the State Tretyakov Gallery in Moscow and the State Russian Museum in St. Petersburg. The latter, for instance, keeps Vereshchagin‘s painting Kalmyk Lama (fig. 21, 1873), which was realized along the way to Central Asia, a destination that Vereshchagin reached traveling through Siberia. Kalmyk Lama fits in with the particular attention that Siberian culture enjoyed at the time. As shown in Chapter One, intellectual deportees played a significant role in 374 V. Vereshchagin, Vospominaniia syna khudozhnika. Leningrad: Khudozhnik RSFSR, 1978, 46-7. 375 M.me Vereshchagin, ―India.‖ In V. Vereshchagin, Painter—Soldier—Traveller. Autobiographical Sketches, vol. 1, 276. 376 Esquisses de Voyage dans les Indes par M. et Mme Véreschaguine. Ire Partie—L‘Hymalaya Oriental. Édition Illustrée. Paris: A La Librairie illustrée, 1882. 377 V. Vereshchagin, Painter—Soldier—Traveller, vols. 2. 179 Fig. 19 Vasily Vereshchagin, ―Buddhist Trinity,‖ 1873. 180 Fig. 20 Vasily Vereshchagin, ―Lama Disguised as a Deity,‖ 1873. Fig. 21 Vasily Vereshchagin, Kalmyk Lama, 1873. 181 bringing Siberian tradition to the attention of a broad audience; however, in this respect Kalmyk and Buriat people moving to the two capitals of the Russian Empire were important too, as they themselves engaged in promoting various cultural initiatives. Hence, Buddhism arrived in St. Petersburg and Moscow not only from the forced exiles to Siberia, but also inversely from Siberian minorities who moved from the Siberian border to St. Petersburg. One of these migratory cases will be discussed in the following section. The strange case of Petr Badmaev and Nikolai Kulbin A Buriat who moved to St. Petersburg and improved general knowledge of the cultural traditions of his place of origin was Doctor Petr Badmaev. His case is worth mentioning not only because of his political connections with high-ranking personalities, but also for the unusual parallels that his therapeutic practice have with the artist and Doctor Nikolai Kulbin. Petr Badmaev was not only a popular practitioner of Tibetan medicine, who counted the imperial family among his patients, 378 but also an active proponent of Russian imperialism in Asia. His political views, like his medical practice, perfectly corresponded with the climate of his epoch. In 1871 Petr Badmaev entered the Department of Oriental Languages at St. Petersburg University and graduated in 1875. Afterwards, he became an employee at the Asian Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Badmaev was acquainted with Prince Ukhtomsky, with whom he shared views 378 B. Gusev et al., Doktor Badmaev: Tibetskaia meditsina, tsarskii dvor, sovetskaia vlast‘. Moscow: Russkaia kniga, 1995, 31. 182 on the events in Central and Eastern Asia. Indeed, Ukhtomsky, who was still on good terms with Badmaev, introduced Badmaev to Witte 379 when, in 1893, Badmaev wanted to present Tsar Alexander with his pan-mongolian project, ―On the Annexation of Mongolia, Tibet and China to Russia.‖ 380 The project fitted well in ongoing debates about the clash of western and eastern civilizations, which alarmed intellectual circles in the two Russian capitals. The project also aligned Badmaev‘s political view with Ukhtomsky‘s, as both assigned Russia a hegemonic role on the Asian chessboard, given that it was closer to the Asian continent than were European powers. Badmaev‘s project on the annexation of some Asian countries enforced control of Chinese commerce, in particular on the tea and silk trade, whose heart beat in the rich town of Lanchow-fu. According to Badmaev, by taking possession of the Chinese tea and silk route, Russia would finally pay off its internal loan through the control of silver and gold that China earned from its commerce. 381 Badmaev‘s project of annexation was based on his conviction that the Manchu dynasty was ending and that Russia should take advantage of this political instability by 379 A. Malozemoff, Russian Far Eastern Policy 1881-1904. With Special Emphasis on the Causes of the Russo-Japanese War. New York: Octagon Books, 1977, 48. Count Sergei Witte talks about Badmaev in his memoirs. Here the Minister affirms that he and Ukhtomsky put distance between themselves and the Buriat doctor once they realized he was using his medical experience to gain favor at court and meddle in politics (The Memoirs of Count Witte, footnote, 230). 380 In 1900 Badmaev revised his report, adding further observations on his thesis. He published it with other writings on the subject under the title Russia and China (Rossiia i Kitai). A second edition of the book appeared in 1905. 381 P. Badmaev, Za kulisami tsarizma. (Arkhiv tibetskogo vracha Badmaeva). Edited and introduced by V.P. Semennikov. Leningrad: Gos-noe Izdatel‘stvo, 1925, 52. 183 proposing itself as the alternative to the Manchu dynasty. 382 Badmaev himself proposed to take care of Russia‘s economical interests through his ―Commercial House P.A. Badmaev & Co.‖ (Targovyi dom P.A. Badmaeva i Кº‖). Despite his disapproval of Witte, the Tsar supported Badmaev‘s economical enterprise and gave him the requested subsidy (the doctor asked for a two million rubles loan at 4% with a ten-year amortization). With the money, Badmaev went to Chita in 1895 to establish the headquarters of his commercial enterprise. The 1900 Boxer rebellion, however, put an end to Badmaev‘s grand project. He sold his office in Chita to the Governor General of the Priamur oblast, who used it as a cattle quarantine station. 383 Badmaev‘s failed enterprise echoed in the press of the capital, for example, in Prince Meshchersky‘s The Citizen (Grazhdanin), in which the editor suggested that the doctor should abandon such ambitious projects and focus instead on his more promising medical career. 384 382 According to Badmaev, the Russian government should arm the Mongolian youth against the Manchu oppressors and make proselytes of the locals by creating a commercial centre in the Zabaikal near Onon, between the rivers Ilia and Taptana, a fertile place for agriculture and cattle-raising. Once developed, this commercial center would attract people from China, Mongolia, and Tibet, who would promote sympathy for the Russian people, as well as certainty of being liberated from the Manchu yoke soon. Local people would take Lanchow-fu spontaneously with the aid of an armed cavalry. Once the Manchu dynasty would be defeated, people from China, Tibet and Mongolia, would go to St. Petersburg ―to ask the Tsar to take them under his protection‖ (italic by Badmaev, Ibid., 71). 383 A. Malozemoff, Russian Far Eastern Policy 1881-1904, 49. 384 T. Grekova, Tibetskaia meditsina v Rossii: istoriia v sud‘bakh i litsakh. Saint Petersburg: Aton, 1998, 45-6. 184 Like his political-commercial enterprise, Badmaev‘s Tibetan medical practice enjoyed public attention as well. 385 Born in a family of Mongolian origins and of Buddhist faith in the Zabaikal, Zhamsaran Badmaev (his name before his conversion to Orthodoxy) moved to St. Petersburg to help his eldest brother, Sultim, in the Tibetan pharmacy he had opened in St. Petersburg. Their practice of Tibetan medicine brought to the Russian capital a tradition particularly performed in Kalmykia and Zabaikal, where the local population assimilated Tibetan medical treatments together with Buddhism, both of which were coming from Mongolia. The Buriat lamas, in fact, learned medicine at a young age during their study in Mongolian and Tibetan lamaseries. Later on, medical schools were founded at the local Buddhist temples in Buriatia. 386 After his brother‘s death in 1873, Petr took over direction of the Tibetan pharmacy, whose popularity was constantly increasing. 387 While continuing the activity of his pharmacy on Poklonnaia Gora, in the northern side of St. Petersburg in the Vyborgsky district, Badmaev opened his studio on Leteiny 16, where he cured all types of diseases from rheumatism to tuberculosis using medicaments he himself prepared. 385 Doctor Badmaev was so celebrated that even the widely used Efron/Brockhaus encyclopedia ran an entry on the Badmaev brothers and their debatable Tibetan treatments (Entsiklopedischeskii slovar‘, vol. 2. Edited by Ivan Andreevsky. Saint Petersburg, Leipzig: F.A. Brockhaus, I. Efron, 1891, 674). 386 T. Grekova, ―Zhud-Shi v perevode Badmaeva.‖ In Doktor Badmaev, 107. 387 As shown in his notes to Witte, dated February 13, 1893, Badmaev reported that from the beginning of his practice in 1875 to August 1892, he visited 227,506 patients. From 1886 to August 1892, e.g. the moment he began to count the letters he received, he got 6,489 letters from 79 provinces and regions. From 1886 he used 1,816,630 powders to prepare 179 different medicines. In the last time from 40 to 100 people visited him daily, making from 17 to 20 thousand visits a year (P. Badmaev, Za kulisami tsarizma. Arkhiv tibetskogo vracha Badmaeva. Edited and introduced by V.P. Semennikov, 76-7). In 1900, the popularity and the efficacy of Badmaev‘s Oriental treatments were used as evidence of his professionalism in his polemic pamphlet in response to the Medical Committee, which refused to release a state license for his medical activity (P. Badmaev, Otvet na neosnavatel‘nye napadki chlenov meditsinskogo soveta na vrachebnuiu nauku Tibeta. Petrograd: tipografiia Sh. Bussel‘, 1915). 185 Badmaev‘s treatments provoked two types of reactions among his contemporaries— those who believed in his cures and those who considered him a charlatan. The former included Badmaev‘s patients (his clients belonged to different social backgrounds, including important people 388 ), the latter consisted of numerous doctors and members of the Medical Committee. Among Badmaev‘s opponents figured Ukhtomsky too. He discredited Badmaev‘s medical practice in the pages of his Saint Petersburg Gazette (Sankt-Peterburgskie vedomosti). 389 Worth mentioning here with respect to its literary connection is the doctor Nikolai Kirilov, the same Kirilov who worked in Sakhalin as a penitentiary, as well as juridicial and regional, doctor. 390 Among the intellectuals in the capital, Anton Chekhov, author of Journey to Sakhalin, knew about Kirilov‘s activity, as indicated by a letter that the ex-chair of the Korsakov district of Sakhalin wrote to the famous writer. 391 Additionally, it is noteworthy that Chekhov himself was a doctor and may have heard about Badmaev. Attacks on the Buriat doctor happened almost on a daily basis. When Badmaev translated the first volume of the fundamental Tibetan treaty on medicine, Zhud-Shi, in 388 Among them figured the Minister of Internal Affairs Aleksandr Protopopov (T. Grekova, Tibetskaia meditsina, 143). Witte remembers that Badmaev was on good terms also with the Commander of the Corps of Gendarmes, General Pavel Kurlov, and the Palace Commandant, Vladimir Dediulin, with whom Badmaev sought to establish a society for the practice of Buriat medicine (Memoirs of Count Witte, footnote, 230). Although Witte considered Badmaev a charlatan, when in 1892 a cholera epidemic developed in the Volga region and the Emperor sent him to check the situation, Badmaev gave the Minister some powders to take with food. Witte did not use them though (Ibid., 121). 389 T. Grekova, Tibetskaia meditsina, 74. 390 On Kirilov and the other Badmaev‘s opponents, see Tatiana Grekova, Tibetskaia meditsina v Rossii, 81- 9. 391 Ibid., 83. 186 1898 and then its revised edition in 1903, some members of the press did not hesitate to mock him, as shown in the satirical poem Scald. Zhud-Shi (The Book on Tibetan Medicine by Mr. Badmaev) (Skal‘d. Zhud-Shi. Vrachebnaia kniga g. Badmaeva) published in the daily Petersburg Gazette (Peterburgskaia gazeta) on January 7, 1903. 392 Much to the gratification of the press and the general audience, Badmaev was on trial the following year. 393 The trial began on January 10, 1904 and, as Tatiana Grekova reports, an imposing crowd attended the event in the St. Petersburg tribunal. 394 At the end, the court found Badmaev innocent and the Petersburg Gazette reported the jury‘s decision the next day. 395 Petr Badmaev remained a controversial figure throughout his life. His reputation stemmed from his political views and medical practice, as well as from his ambiguous relationship to religion. Although he declared himself a devout Christian, 396 he contributed to diffusing knowledge of eastern traditions not only through his pharmacy, but also through his numerous initiatives. One of these was Badmaev‘s translation of Zhud-Shi, as well as his secret financial support of the construction of the Buddhist 392 Ibid., 66-7. 393 One of his opponents, Doctor Isaak Kraindel, accused Badmaev of having caused the premature death of one of his patients— the professor at the Conservatory K. von Ark by wrongly diagnosing the patient‘s disease. 394 Ibid., 94. 395 ―Iz zaly suda (Delo P.A. Badmaeva).‖ Peterburgskaia gazeta (January 11, 1904). 396 P. Badmaev, Mudrost‘ v russkom narode.Saint Petersburg: Viktoriia,1917, 5. 187 temple in Petersburg. 397 In point of fact, Petr Badmaev knew Agvan Dorzhiev, as indicated by a group photograph published in Dorzhiev‘s Entertaining Notes (Zanimatel‘nye zametki), 398 and by Badmaev‘s request to the Tsar to award the Buriat lama for his attempts to send Buriats to Lhasa. 399 Controversial reactions to Badmaev also occurred in literary circles. In addition to Witte‘s and Ukhtomsky‘s negative opinions of him, the Symbolist poet Aleksandr Blok accused Badmaev of being a friend of Rasputin and Kurlov, as well as a court plotter. 400 According to Tatiana Grekova, however, Blok‘s allegations were untrue; to her, they were based on false information that Protopopov had given in 1917 during interrogations by the Provisional Government. 401 The poet and Futurist Benedikt Livshits also expressed skepticism about the efficacy of Badmaev‘s cures. In Livshits‘s memoirs, the Tibetan 397 A. Andreev, Khram Buddy v Severnoi stolitse, 62. This information was given by Badmaev‘s grandson N. Vishnevsky in his memoirs, which are kept in the family archive (Ibid.). Furthermore, according to Vladimir Baraev, Badmaev went with Dorzhiev to find the best location for the erection of the Buddhist Temple. They wondered together around in the outskirts of St. Petersburg in the area of the Poklonnaia Gora, where Badmaev lived. The name of Badmaev also appears in the list of people who belonged to the construction committee of the Temple (V. Baraev, ―Nerushimyi utes.‖ Buddizm 1, May 1992: 21). As tempting as it sounds, though, Baraev did not provide the source of the given information. 398 A. Dorzhiev, Zanimatel‘nye zametki. Opisanie puteshestviia vokrug sveta. Translated from the Mongolian by A.D. Tsendina. Transliteration, introduction, comments, glossary, and index by A.G. Sazykin and A.D. Tsendina. Moscow: Vostochnaia literatura RAN, 2003, 159. 399 T. Grekova, Tibetskaia meditsina, 160-1. 400 A. Blok, Poslednie dni imperatorskoi vlasti. Paris: Librairie de Sialsky, 1978, 12. Aleksandr Blok wrote: ―Badmaev was a smart and cunning Asian, who had political chaos in his mind and jokes on his tongue. Beside Tibetan medicine, he was involved in Buriat education and concrete piping. He was a friend of Rasputin and Kurlov who played a role in the murder of Stolypin once. Thanks to Badmaev‘s clique, Protopopov obtained the post of Minister of Internal Affairs‖ (Ibid.). 401 T. Grekova, Tibetskaia meditsina, 143. Such a negative description of Badmaev also emerges in the later movie by Elem Klimov Agoniia (Agony) (1975-85), with the role of Badmaev (friendly called ―Badma‖ by Rasputin in the film) played by the actor Baiten Omarov. 188 powders of Badmaev replace the velvet smock of Faust, both metaphors for unexpected combinations apt to produce ―the impression of supernatural depth and magic strength.‖ 402 In summer 1914, however, when Livshits was preparing to go to the front, he remembered to bring with him ―three kinds of Badmaev powders for external injury, internal bleeding and hunger,‖ 403 among other gifts that his friends Lidia Iliashenko and Inna Kosharpovskaia presented him. In his run westwards, the one-and-a-half-eyed archer did not forget to carry with him some of the ―diabolic tisanes‖ that Tibetan lamas so strongly recommended for all ailments. A member of the same community to which Benedikt Livshits belonged was the doctor and artist dilettante, Nikolai Kulbin. Nikolai Kulbin may have been indebted to Badmaev‘s Oriental treatments for his tests with needles. 404 The fact that in the St. Petersburg of the 1910s, Kulbin was the key figure to ask for the latest trends in all fields— arts, literatures, politics, philosophy, and social life— supports the possibility 402 B. Livshits, The One and A Half-eyed Archer. Translated, introduced and annotated by John E. Bowlt. Newtonville, Mass.: Oriental Research Partners, 1977, 144. 403 Ibid., 245. 404 In her article on the philosophical sources of non-objective art, Charlotte Douglas affirms that Kulbin‘s experiment on perceptions and its psychological resonance belonged to a general western European trend in the same field that artists like Robert and Sonya Delaunay, Carlo Boccioni, Jean Metzenger, Albert Gleize, and others developed at the time. According to Douglas, for these artists the words ―feeling, perception‖ (oshchushchenie) played a relevant role in their arts, echoing the broad resonance received by the experiments in psychology made by the German scientist Wilhelm Wundt and by the philosophical discussion on the nature of perception proclaimed by George Berkley and Henri Bergson (Sh. Duglas. ―K voprosu o filosofskikh istokakh bespredmetnogo iskusstva.‖ Kazimir Malevich. Khudozhnik i teoretik. Edited by A.D. Sarab‘ianov. Moscow: Sovetskii khudozhnik, 1990, 58). Still, although Douglas‘s thesis is legitimate and highly probable, it does not exclude the possibility that Kulbin might have taken inspiration from more than one source for his experiments. 189 that he was aware of Badmaev‘s treatments. According to Benedikt Livshits, 405 despite his age, in his constant search for what was newest, Kulbin resembled a child repeating, ―swear words he has picked up in the street, even though he doesn‘t understand their full meaning.‖ 406 Kulbin considered himself not only an educator, Livshits continued, but also a great inventor. 407 Since he had a tendency to try his hand in whatever was current, it is possible that Badmaev‘s trendy cures stimulated him to experiment in something similar as well. Indeed, in a letter to his friend, the poet Vasily Kamensky, dated October 13, 1915, Kulbin describes one of his inventions in the following way: Until 1907 I was officially studying natural sciences and only secretly art. Measuring the psyche through numerous instruments, which I myself had invented, I found the UNITIES OF THE PSYCHE. They are, my dear Vasia, very, very tiny unconscious perceptions, which stratify the world. The simplest and oldest unity of the psyche is the unity of responsiveness to mechanical stimuli-the unity of touch. […] The unity of touch represents the unconscious response to a pointed, but blunt contact which occurs when the needle of the mechanoestesiometer enters the human skin at the depth of one hundred millimeters. 408 Characteristic of his dual life of ―licit‖ and ―illicit‖ activities (science, on the one side, and art, on the other side), Kulbin, in his letter to Kamensky, seems to be reborn as Dr. Jackie, experimenting in his ―alchemical‖ lab in search of an instrument capable of capturing the unattainable essence of the psyche. For this purpose, Kulbin—―the crazy 405 To read more on Kulbin the artist, see A. Di Ruocco, Buddiiskie reministsentsii v izobrazitel‘nom russkom iskusstve pervogo tridtsatiletiia XX veka. N. Rerikh, ―Amaravella,‖ N. Kul‘bin, M. Matiushin, E. Guro. Moscow: Gos-nnyi Institut Iskusstvoznaniia, 2005. 406 B. Livshits, The One and a Half-Eyed Archer, 80. 407 Ibid., 68. 408 RGALI. Fond Kamensky. No 1497. Op. 1. ed. xr. 202. 190 doctor‖ 409 — analyzed the concept of sensitivity (chustvitel‘nost‘) focusing on the reaction of the nervous system to external stimuli. He invented the so-called ―mechanoestesiometer,‖ an assemblage of needles thought expressly to study the depth at which people began to feel a needle in their skin. Kulbin established that conscious awareness of the needle in the skin happened at the depth of 1 cm, a unity of measurement baptized as a ―kulbina,‖ from the name of its creator. As Kamensky notes: ―It is interesting to point out that it is enough to inject a needle in the forehead at the depth of 7 kulbina (1 kulbina=0,01 mm) to have the first conscious feeling of the injection.‖ 410 The importance of the sense of touch, as stressed by Kulbin through the contact of the skin with the needle, as well as his statement that all the other senses generated from the primary sense of touch, 411 echoed Badmaev‘s habit of diagnosing a patient‘s disease by checking his pulse, thus pressing his fingers on the skin of his patient— a diagnostic method based, indeed, on the sense of touch. Moreover, needles are used for therapeutic purposes in acupuncture, a treatment practiced especially in China, Japan, Tibet, Vietnam, and Korea. Further confirmation of Kulbin‘s interest in the Orient can be found in his collection of objects like an ashtray, a knife for paper, cups and narghilé with an Oriental design on the bottom. Kulbin probably gathered these items 409 This characterization came from an unknown visitor at the opening of the exhibition of contemporary painting when Kulbin tried to explain his concept of Impressionism. Kamensky reported the episode in his memoirs, The Journey of an Enthusiast (V. Kamensky, ―Put‘ Entuziasta.‖ In K. Kuz‘minsky, Zabytyi avangard. Rossiia pervaia tret‘ XX stoletiia, vol. 2. Sbornik spravochnykh i teoreticheskikh materialov. Wien: Gesellschaft zur Förderung slawistischer Studien, [198-], 102). 410 V. Kamensky, Zametki o Kul‘bine. Manuscript, earlier than 1917. RGALI. Fond Kamensky. No. 1497. Op. 1 ed. xr. 147, 3-5. 411 N. Kul‘bin, Letter to Kamensky, RGALI. 191 following the mainstream of collecting ―chinoiseries‖ on the wave of Orientalism in art. 412 In addition to touch, psychology played an important role in Kulbin‘s experimentation with needles. Among his scientific works dated from 1907, he authored the essay Receptiveness. Sketches on Psychometric and the Clinical Application of Its Data (Chuvstvitel‘nost. Ocherki po psikhometrii i klinicheskomu primeneniu ee dannykh). 413 Kulbin‘s term ―unities of the psyche‖ resembles one used by a contemporary scholar on Buddhism, Valery Androsov, in relation to the word ―dharma‖ 414 as a synonym for the smallest indivisible, analyzable parts of the psyche. Due to the psychological connotations of the word ―dharma,‖ Androsov suggested speaking of ―Dharma as the unity of the psyche.‖ 415 Whilst Kulbin wrote of ―unities of the psyche,‖ Androsov spoke of ―dharmo-particles‖ (dharmo-chastitsy) with regard to the cellules of conscience acting under specific laws. 416 Additionally, Kulbin possibly took 412 The aforementioned items were displayed at the solo exhibit on Kulbin That Who Can Budge the Water (Tot komu dano vozmushchat‘ vodu) held in the St. Petersburg Museum of the Avant-Garde (Memorial House of Matiushin and Guro) in spring 2008. 413 Work listed in Kul‘bin. Kniga vtoraia. Edited by Boris Kalaushin. Saint Petersburg: Apollon, 1995, 255. 414 The word ―dharma‖ has a plurality of meanings. In the original Theravada school, it means the teaching of Buddha (one of the Three Jewels with the other two being the Buddha and Sangha— the monastic order), as well as ―the real and profound essence of things.‖ Dharma can also refer to Law, Doctrine, and Right, while in the Pali plural form it refers to spiritual conditions and various elements of existence. 415 V. Androsov, Budda Shakiamuni i indiiskii buddizm. Sovremennoe istolkovanie drevnikh tekstov. Moscow: Vostochnaia literatura RAN, 2001, 39. 416 He writes: ―For example, we call dharma psychological cases, like calm, humility, neither anger nor hate, laziness, shamelessness. Each of these cases represents a category of moments acting in the conscience. The same process happens in the structures of the psyche-memory, assimilation, perception, etc.‖ (Ibid., 39). 192 the psychological methodology of his research from Carl Gustav Jung, who was also interested in Buddhism 417 and yoga techniques. 418 Kulbin was an admirer of Jung, as his friend, Aleksandr Belenson, wrote in his poem ―Kulbin,‖ published in 1915 on the pages of the collection The Archer (Strelets). In his poetical portrait of the ―crazy doctor,‖ Belenson, in fact, questioned whether Kulbin was a Socratic or a passionate Jungian. 419 Undoubtedly, part of Kulbin‘s vocabulary comes from esoterism and Theosophy too, as John E. Bowlt indicates in his article ―Esoteric Culture and Russian Society.‖ 420 Nevertheless, the relevance of the Asian Buddhist scenario to Russia‘s foreign policy suggests a shift of perspective, in which Buddhism and not Theosophy (which mainly resembled an esoteric branch of Buddhism) served as the main propagator of certain theories. The parallel between Badmaev and Kulbin helps to sustain this thesis best. Assuming that Kulbin knew about Badmaev, the aforementioned experiments on human receptiveness might be a direct consequence of debates on the effectiveness of Badmaev‘s cures. Therefore, in addition to Bowlt‘s thesis, which affiliates Kulbin‘s 417 In 1934, for instance, the first edition of Suzuki‘s work An Introduction to Zen Buddhism was printed in Kyoto by the Eastern Buddhist Society with foreword by Jung. On Jung and Buddhism has also been recently published The Essence of Jung's Psychology and Tibetan Buddhism: Western and Eastern Paths to the Heart by Radmila Moacanin (Somerville, MA: Wisdom Publications, 2003) and Jung and Eastern Thought. A Dialogue with the Orient by John James Clarke (New York: Routledge, 1994). 418 See The Psychology of Kundalini Yoga: Notes of the Seminar Given in 1932 by C.G. Jung. Edited by Sonu Shamdasani. Princeton University Press, 1996. 419 See, for instance, these lines on Kulbin: ―He loads his arrows a-trilling/While in his mantle he keeps laughable manias,/-Is he a passionate Socrates or a Jungianian/from an unknown Oceania?‖ (Он в трели наряжает стрелы/И в мантии—смешные мании,/ -Сократ или юнга загорелый/ из неоткрытой Океании?) (Strelets, vol. 1. Edited by A. Belenson. Petrograd: Tipografiia A.N. Lavrov i Ko, 1915. Reprint: Ann Arbor, Michigan: Ardis, 1978, 192). 420 In The Spiritual in Art: Abstract Painting 1890-1985. Edited by Maurice Tuchman. New York: Abbeville Press, 1986, 165-183. 193 experiment both with the search for the ―Miracle‖ proclaimed by the Theosophist Petr Uspensky and with the Symbolist quest for the essence of things, 421 one might consider the popularity of traditional curative methods, as practiced by Badmaev, an additional source of inspiration for Kulbin. Moreover, that people from his entourage, including Livshits, talked about the Buriat doctor, allows one to assume that Kulbin knew of Badmaev‘s activity. Furthermore, unlike his dilettante career as an artist, Kulbin was a professional doctor with recognized high state titles. He was, indeed, a private-docent at the Medical-Military Academy and a doctor at the General State of the Russian Army, honored with the title of General and the rank of State Councilor. 422 Hence, he might have had even stronger motivation to challenge himself in one of the current issues dominating medical debates. Kulbin died on March 17, 1917. As Kulbin‘s daughter, Nina Kulbina-Kovenchuk, remembers in her memoirs, during those revolutionary years, her father was a coordinator of the first-aid police who helped injured people on the street. The hard conditions of life, above all the lack of food, caused Kulbin‘s painful death from the aggravation of his rooted gastric ulcer. 423 The hardship of the upcoming new Soviet reality also caused Badmaev‘s death. 424 While still alive, Badmaev continuously went in and out of prison 421 J. Bowlt, ―Esoteric Culture and Russian Society.‖ In Ibid., 170. 422 So far one of the most complete monographs on Kulbin is Kul‘bin. Dokumenty, vol. 1, part 2. Edited by Boris Kalaushin. Saint Petersburg: Obshchestvo ―Apollon,‖ 1995. 423 Ibid., 210. 424 The Badmaev archive belongs to his family; Badmaev‘s grandson, Boris Gusev, relies, in fact, on the material in the family archive for his biography on his grandfather Doktor Badmaev: Tibetskaia meditsina, tsarskii dvor, sovetskaia vlast‘. 194 under various charges, including his alleged affiliation with the Black Hundreds and other counterrevolutionary movements, as well as his connection with the monarchy. Racked by continuous imprisonment, he passed away in the summer of 1920 and was buried at the Shuvalovsky cemetery. 425 425 T. Grekova, Tibetskaia meditsina, 145-157. 195 Chapter 4 Facing Hostile Territory: The ―Yellow Peril‖ Threat ―Early in the morning, immediately after his awakening, an Oriental man with a turban appeared in front of him [Soloviev]. He talked strange nonsense about the article on Japan that Soloviev had just finished writing. [Soloviev told Trubetskoy:] ―I was walking on the street and I was reading about Buddhism; take this for Buddhism!‖ and he smacked him in the belly [the Oriental man] with an umbrella. The vision disappeared, but Soloviev felt a strong pain in the liver, which lasted for three days.‖ 426 Fearing the Other: The “Yellow Peril” and Its Political Connotations On July 10, 1895, Kaiser Wilhelm II wrote the following words in a letter to the Tsar ―Nicky‖: Dearest Nicky, […] I was glad to be able to show, how our interests were entwined in the Far East, that my ships had been ordered to second yours in case of need when things looked doubtful, that Europe had to be thankful to you that you so quickly had perceived the great future for Russia in the cultivation of Asia and in the Defence of the Cross and the old Christian European culture against the inroads of the Mongols and Buddhism, that it was engaged in this tremendous work you wished to have Europe quiet and your back free…I would let nobody try to interfere with you and attack from behind in Europe during the time you were fulfilling the great mission which Heaven has shaped for you. That was as sure as Amen in Church. 427 426 Е. Тrubetskoi, Мirosozertsanie Vl. S. Solov‘eva, vol. 1. Introduced by A. Nosov and edited by T. Umanskaia. Мoscow: Moskovskii filosofskii fond izdatel‘stvo ―Medium,‖ 1995, 31. 427 Wilhelm II, Letters from the Kaiser to the Czar. Copied by Issac Don Levine from government archives in Petrograd unpublished before 1920. New York, Frederick A. Stokes, 1920, 12-13. 196 Despite the fact that the Kaiser hoped to keep the Tsar focused on the Far East more for his own interests in Western Europe than for any real concern that Asia was encroaching upon the West, Wilhelm‘s apocalyptic tone reflects the general apprehension in Europe about historical events taking place in the Far East, especially in Manchuria, China, Japan, and Korea. These events mainly developed as a consequence of the opium war. In fact, after 1842, the Asian continent, and China in particular, became the center of imperialism for such nations as France, Britain, Russia and others. From then on, Asia consistently increased in relevance on the political chessboard of European power. David Dallin, author of The Rise of Russia in Asia, considers the timeframe between 1896 and1904 to be Russia‘s first period of heading toward Asia, known as the so-called ―Russian Drang nach Osten.‖ 428 In 1896-1904 Russian foreign policy in Central and Eastern Asia was very active, as made evident by just a few of the contemporary episodes: the Sino-Japanese war of 1894-5, the construction of the Transiberian railroad, Tsar Nicholas II‘s Asian tour, the Russo-Japanese war, and the creation of a Special Committee for Far Eastern Affairs nominally controlled by the Tsar, but actually governed by Aleksandr Bezobrazov. Besides, the Russian annexation of western Turkestan in 1867 and Russia‘s increasing advancement to the borders of British India caused a series of politically tense experiences with Great Britain, culminating with the Russian occupation of Kokand in 1876. Because of its politically strategic geographical position, Turkestan became one of the most exploited places in Central Asia. It was the centre of scientific expeditions, 428 D. Dallin, Rise of Russia in Asia. Archon Books, 1971, vii. 197 whose discoveries of local Buddhist manuscripts and antiquities contributed to the notoriety of whatever nation was financing the enterprise (Chapter One). Some of these political events fostered a general fear among Europeans that Europe could be overrun by the ―yellow race.‖ Kaiser Wilhelm II repeatedly characterized this threat from the Far East in terms of a real crusade against the Asians. He did so not only in his letters to the Tsar, but also in his famous sketch Against The Yellow Peril. Realized on April 30, 1895, the sketch was accompanied by the following caption: ―Nations of Europe, protect your holiest possessions!‖ A final version was realized by Hermann Knackfuss, an art history professor at the Kasseler Art Academy (fig. 22). The Kaiser himself explained the meaning of the representation in another letter to the Tsar, dated September 26, 1895, in which he wrote: The development of the Far East, especially its danger to Europe and our Christian Faith is a matter which has been greatly on my mind ever since we made our first move together in Spring. At last my thoughts developed into a certain form and this I sketched on paper. I worked it out with an artist—a first class draughtsman—and after it was finished had it engraved for public use. It shows the powers of Europe represented by their respective Genii called together by the Arch-Angel-Michael,—sent from Heaven,—to unite in resisting the inroads of Buddhism, heathenism and barbarism for the Defence of the Cross. Stress is especially laid on the united resistance of all European Powers, which is just as necessary also against our common internal foes, anarchism, republicanism, nihilism. I venture to send you an engraving begging you to accept it as a token of my warm and sincere friendship to you and Russia. 429 The Kaiser‘s work was sent to several political figures and nations, including the United States, while Germans could admire it on the steamboats of the German East 429 Letters from the Kaiser to the Czar, 18-9. 198 Fig. 22 Hermann Knackfuss, ―Nations of Europe, protect your holiest possessions!‖ From a sketch by Kaiser Wilhelm II, 1895. Fig. 23 Russian folk print To the War of Russia Against Japan, 1904. 199 Asian Cruise Line. 430 In Russia, the magazine World Illustration (Vsemirnaia illiustratsiia) reproduced the work in its issue dated November 11, 1895. 431 The engraving depicts a clash of civilizations, with Asia personified as a seated Buddha moving threateningly toward the West. This image is a curious interpretation of Buddhism, considering the religion‘s doctrine of non-violence and that Buddhism is but one of several religions practiced on the Asian continent. Additionally, this image vulgarizes Buddhism since it reduces this religion to some generic notion of its precepts without taking into consideration the variety of its schools. Nineteenth century writers intentionally perpetrated this gross misinterpretation in order to stress cultural differences and superiority, in this case of Christianity versus Buddhism. Kaiser Wilhelm was not an exception to this doctrinal generalization, as Jing Tsu has pointed out, he appropriated a discourse that began in the 1870s, when Ernest Renan talked about the peril coming from the East, although referring, ironically enough, to the Russian menace. 432 The iconography of Knackfuss‘ work, symbolizing the European powers as mythological figures, with the archangel Michael pointing to the approaching 430 J. Tsu, Failure, Nationalism, and Literature. The Making of Modern Chinese Identity, 1895-1937. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 2005, 80. 431 ―Narody Evropy beregite vashi sviashchenneishie prava!‘ Kartina Vil‘gel‘ma II.‖ Vsemirnaia illiustratsiia 1398 (November 11, 1895): 384, 386. 432 J. Tsu, Failure, Nationalism, and Literature, 80. Later, between 1901 and 1905, Americans, too, associated the threat of the ―yellow peril‖ with that of the ―Slavic peril,‖ fearing a possible Russian hegemony over China (R. Thompson, The Yellow Peril 1890-1924. New York: Arno Press, 1978, 282-3). For people like Brooks Adams, author of the book America‘s Economic Supremacy (New York, 1900), Russia was preparing itself for a Slavic domination of the world, made possible with German help. Adams continued to affirm that signs of a new economic orientation towards the East were already visible in the Russian railway enterprises and in the Russian expansion into Manchuria (R.Thompson, The Yellow Peril 1890-1924, 284-5). 200 seated Buddha, would be echoed in a later Russian folk print, also related to the ―yellow menace.‖ Under the powerful title To the War of Russia Against Japan (K voine Rossii s Iaponiei, 1904) (fig. 23), this folk print shows Russia as a valkyrie with the imperial eagle on her shoulder and the flying angel pointing to a red dragon looking eagerly from the opposite Japanese shore. 433 Even though the outbreak of the war between Russia and Japan threw the question of the ―yellow peril‖ into relief, Russian books on this issue appeared even earlier. In 1900, at the time of the Boxer rebellion, S. Maltsev published his brochure Yellow Peril (The Sino-European Conflict in 1900). Maltsev referred to Wilhelm II‘s engraving, which he misquoted by calling Pan-mongolism and the Buddha, suggesting that the idea of the work was not new and that the association Buddhism/‖yellow peril‖ was widespread. According to Maltsev, war between civilizations had begun— a war between European nations and the United States, on the one side, and the pan-mongolian threat (spreading out since the Boxer rebellion), on the other side. 434 Still, the year 1904 saw the blooming of literature on the ―yellow peril‖ and in this respect the Russo-Japanese War did represent the watershed moment in Russia‘s view of 433 For more information about the ―yellow peril‖ and its historic-political link to the Russo-Japanese war, see D. Schimmelpenninck van der Oye, Toward the Rising Sun. Russian Ideologies of Empire and the Path to War with Japan. DeKalb, Illinois: Northern Illinois University Press, 2001, 82-103; instead, for a visual overview of the war see Stephen M. Norris‘ chapter six, ―Illustrating the Racial War. Images from the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905‖ in A War of Images. Russian Popular Prints, and National Identity, 1812-1945. Dekalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 2006. 434 S. Mal‘tsev, Zheltaia opasnost‘ (Kitaisko-Evropeiskii konflikt 1900 g.). Warsaw: Tsentral‘naia tipografiia, 1900, 11-5. The fear of the ―yellow peril‖ would emerge in Russia from time to time, according to the political situation. Still in 1913 works on the subject were published. This was the case, for example, of S. Tavokin‘s book On the Issue of the ―Yellow Peril‖ (K voprosu o ―zheltoi opasnosti‖). The book dealt with the subject matter from the perspective of the prevailing Socialism in Manchuria, Korea, China, and Japan, threatening the ―white‖ capitalist West. 201 the East. How our Yellow Enemy Lives? (St. Petersburg, 1904) and How and by What Our Japanese Enemy Lives? (Odessa, 1904) were only a few of the books dealing with the topic. 435 The same concern can be found in the press. Richard Caton Woodwille‘s drawing The War Between the White and the Yellow Race. An Allegory, for instance, was reproduced in no. 12 of the Moscow Sheet (Moskovskii listok) (fig. 24). 436 The original English title of Woodville‘s drawing, which was printed in The Illustrated London News, lacked the racial emphasis of the Russian interpretation. Published in the British press with an announcement about the opening of hostilities between Russia and Japan, Woodwille‘s work was more soberly titled War: An Allegory. 437 Instead of stressing the conflict between the white and yellow races, Woodwille pointed to the apocalyptic aspects of such a military confrontation, as indicated by the giant fire-breathing samurai/monster in the middle of the representation and by the lightening-like sword that the samurai carries in his hand. 435 For more literature on the subject, see E. Barkhatova et al., Russia and Japan—Mutual Understanding. To the 150 th Anniversary of the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations. Saint Petersburg: National Library of Russia, 2006, 24. 436 ―Voina beloi i zheltoi ras. Allegoriia (s kartin khud. R. Vudvillia).‖ Moskovskii listok 12 (February 8, 1904): 8-9. 437 R. Woodville, ―War: An Allegory.‖ The Illustrated London News 124. 3382 (February 13, 1904): 233. 202 Fig. 24 ―Voina beloi i zheltoi ras. Allegoriia (s kartin khud. R. Vudvillia).‖ Moskovskii listok 12 (February 8, 1904): 8-9. 203 The year 1904 saw many other articles in the Russian press devoted to the ―yellow peril,‖ some of which had a Buddhist subtext. 438 The article ―The Russo- Japanese War and the Yellow Peril,‖ by a Russian author with the penname Ivanovich, is noteworthy. If Kaiser Wilhelm had not openly used the term ―crusade‖ when he described his sketch for Tsar Nicholas II, Ivanovich did so repeatedly when he described the departure of the Russian troops for the Far East. The author wrote: The departure of the two Wladimirovitch Grand Dukes and of the commander-in- chief and admirals had the character of a crusade, or holy war. The double-headed eagle is the Janus of heraldic birds. If that court favourite, Oukhtomsky, parades the Grand Lama, the present war has been so far waged on the side of Russia in the name of the orthodox faith, and under the sign of the Greek cross…Kuropatkin, Makaroff and Skrydloff almost repeated the ceremonial observed by Coeur de Lion, Philip Augustus and other princes who took the cross in the 12 th century. 439 According to Ivanovich, Russia was creating the myth of the ―yellow peril,‖ but doing so unconsciously. Russia‘s mistake consisted of recruiting crusaders among those who were not worshippers of the Christ of Tolstoy or of Constantine, but rather were mercenaries 438 In the April and May issues of the magazine European Messenger (Vestnik Evropy), Leonid Slonimsky published his article ―Zheltaia opasnost‘‖ (The Yellow Threat) (April: 762-776, May: 5-37). Reminding the reader of Vladimir Soloviev‘s prophecy on ―pan-mongolism,‖ Slonimsky saw this threat coming with the present war, where Japan was advancing with the intent of uniting the Asian people and leading them in the future ―world war‖ (April: 762). Leonid Slonimsky had no doubt that Russia was going to win the conflict, but for him the victory would not solve the problem, since Japan would always exist. Hence, according to Slonimsky, a policy of understanding would be better than the actual Russian attitude of indifference towards Japan (April: 774). The threat of pan-mongolism, specifically of Japanese pan-mongolism, also appeared in the pages of the magazine The Citizen, which carried an article ―Chinese wealth‖ (Kitaiskie bogatstva), authored by the French Professor Alexandre Ular, who was defined by the New York Times as ―the mouthpiece of M. Witte‖ (August 16, 1905) (Grazhdanin 85, October 24, 1904: 12-4; no 86, October 28, 1904: 13-4; no 87, October 31, 1904: 14). 439 Ivanovich, ―The Russo-Japanese War and the Yellow Peril.‖ Contemporary Review 86 (July-December, 1904): 162-3. 204 sent into exile in western Siberia. 440 In his reference to Prince Esper Ukhtomsky‘s support of the Dalai Lama, Ivanovich was likely referring to the 1901 Tibetan diplomatic mission, headed by the Buriat Agvan Dorzhiev, which arrived in the port of Odessa on June 12. 441 In light of this state of affairs, it would be unfair to assert that Tsar Nicholas II‘s policy in the Far East was a direct consequence of the Kaiser‘s insistence on the ―yellow peril,‖ 442 especially considering that Nicholas felt a deep antipathy for the German ruler, whom he referred to as ―boring mister Wilhelm‖ (―nudnyi gospodin‖ Vil‘gel‘m) in his diaries. 443 Nevertheless, the Russian emperor shared with his German cousin a conviction 440 Ibid., 164-5. 441 Then the Tibetan delegation moved to St. Petersburg and remained in the Russian capital until July 17. The event was constantly the center of public attention by the Russian press which regularly published about it. See Odessian News (June 12, 1901), and New Times (June 19, 1901) in A. Andreev, Soviet Russia and Tibet. The Debacle of Secret Diplomacy, 1918-1930s. Leiden, Boston: Brill‘s Tibetan studies library, 2003, 33-34. The 1901 Tibetan mission to Russia was the culmination of a series of attempts from the Dalai Lama, dating back to 1898, when the spiritual leader sent a first embassy, also headed by the Buriat Agvan Dorzhiev, to St. Petersburg looking for a Russo-Tibetan alliance to counterbalance the British expansionistic ambitions in Tibet. However, Dorzhiev‘s attempts to conclude a formal agreement between the two nations failed and the draft of a Russo-Tibetan treaty remained confined to a file with the title ―support for Buddhism‖ (Ibid., 36). 442 In Nicholas and Alexandra, Robert K. Massie writes: ―For ten years, 1894-1904, the Kaiser manipulated Russian foreign policy by influencing the youthful, susceptible Tsar. Eventually, an older and wiser Nicholas shook off this meddlesome influence. But the harm was done. Urged on by William, Russia had suffered a military catastrophe in Asia" (R.K. Massie, Nicholas and Alexandra. N.Y.: Laurel, 1967, 85). 443 Dnevniki imperatora Nikolaia II. Edited and introduced by K.F. Shatsillo. Moscow: Orbita, 1991, 103 (diary entry on September 18, 1895). The Tsar used the expression ―boring mister Wilhelm‖ when he received the Kaiser‘s etching Yellow Peril. Nicholas‘ intolerance to Wilhelm‘s frequent letters emerges more than once in his diary. On October 24, 1895, for example, Nicholas wrote in his diary: ―After tea I read and then engaged myself in the compilation of the draft of my answer to Wilhelm. Unbearable waste of time considering that I have much more on my plate and much more important, too!‖ (Ibid., 109). Nicholas‘ antipathy toward Wilhelm is confirmed in Count Sergei Witte‘s memoires. Witte remembers that, ―In the early years of his reign Emperor Nicholas was by no means fond of the German Kaiser. In this respect he followed in the footsteps of his august father, who actually disliked the German ruler, with his weakness for stage effects and spectacular splurges. Emperor Nicholas‘ antipathy to William was further complicated by personal rivalry. His Majesty could not help feeling that in the opinion of Russia and of the 205 about Russia‘s special mission in the East, a mission particularly justified by Russia‘s geographical proximity to the Asian border. Such a conviction was so firmly rooted that during the reign of Nicholas II, the Minister of Finance Sergei Witte himself concluded his report on the Far East situation, submitted in July 1903, in the following terms: ―Given our enormous frontier line with China and our exceptionally favourable situation, the absorption by Russia of a considerable portion of the Chinese Empire is only a question of time, unless China succeeds in protecting herself.‖ 444 Holding a similar worldview was Prince Esper Ukhtomsky— a great supporter of Russian imperialism in Asia. According to Ukhtomsky, Russian intervention in the conflicts taking place in Asia would determine the transmission of Russian ―advanced‖ civilization eastwards. Believing in the Russian mission in the East, Ukhtomsky commented upon every episode from this perspective. In fact, when the Russo-Japanese conflict was ready to explode, he disputed the threat of pan-mongolism and ―yellow peril,‖ which was again being discussed in intellectual circles. From the pages of his brochure Facing a Menacing Future. On the Russo-Japanese Conflict (Pered groznym budushchim. K russko-iaponskomu stolknoveniu, 1904), Ukhtomsky answered Vladimir Soloviev and his followers, arguing that Russia— Japan‘s eldest brother— and Japan world the German ruler stood higher than himself. Even in appearance William was more of an emperor than he, Nicholas. Given His Majesty‘s somewhat excessive self-esteem, this could not but be a thorn in his flesh‖ (S. Witte, The Memoirs of Count Witte. Translated from the Original Russian Manuscript and Edited by Abraham Iarmolinsky. Salisbury, N.C.: Documentary Publications, 1977, 404). The relationship between the two kings eventually improved later when the Kaiser‘s attitude towards the Tsarina Alexandra changed for the better, since at first he treated her ―as a petty German princess‖ (Ibid., 405). 444 Ibid., 122. 206 participated in the conflict because of a misunderstanding. 445 It seems, however, in less official speeches, Ukhtomsky did not really speak in terms of brotherhood with the Japanese, but rather spoke in racist tones. 446 The same discriminatory attitude, arrogantly mixed with a sense of superiority, was demonstrated by the explorer and later director of the Ethnographical Department at the Russian Museum, Dmitry Klements, in his article ―Quick Notes on the Yellow Peril‖ (Beglye zametki o zheltoi opasnosti). 447 Russian confidence in facing enemies from the East agitated political circles and the literary community alike. Now, writers and artists did not look at East Asia as a travel destination, but rather as a hostile territory threatening to take over their homeland first and the rest of Europe next. Because of its relevance to some members of the intelligentsia and because of its association with Buddhism, the ―yellow peril‖ as perceived by the intellectual community will be the subject of the following section. As will become evident, debates around the ―yellow peril‖ served to disseminate Buddhist ideas into modern Russian culture, albeit in negative terms. 445 E. Ukhtomsky, Pered groznym budushchim. K russko-iaponskomu stolknoveniu. Saint Petersburg: Vostok, 1904, 7. 446 As reported by Pares, in his conversation with the Russian Prince, Ukhtomsky pronounced the following words about the Russo-Japanese conflict: ―It is almost beneath our dignity,‖ he said, ―to be fighting the Japanese. This war in itself is nothing. Of course, we shall dictate peace in Tokyo, but after that we must clear up everything in Asia, the question of India included‖ (B. Pares, My Russian Memoirs. London: Jonathan Cape LTD, 1931, 58). In other words, according to Ukhtomsky, the certain Russian victory over Japan would open up the doors of Oriental conquest for Russia. 447 D. Klements, ―Beglye zametki o zheltoi opasnosti.‖ Russkoe bogatstvo 7 (1905): 36-56. 207 The “Yellow Peril” in Russian Literary Circles Debates around the ―yellow peril‖ that animated political circles of the time excited the literary community as well. Like some politicians, some writers associated the ―yellow peril‖ with Buddhist civilization. Hence these associations partially enriched literature with Buddhist vocabulary and nourished the migration of foreign religious ideas, which as a consequence were absorbed into the Russian literary lexicon. Mirroring public opinion, periodicals reflected how the intellectual community felt about any given subject. As will become evident shortly, some writers believed in the geographical advancement of the Asian population to Europe, and therefore were convinced that Buddhism would overtake Christianity in importance. One essay on this topic was Lev Tolstoy‘s ―Patriotism or Peace? Letter on Venezuelan Dispute,‖ dated January 5, 1896, and printed in the Daily Chronicle on March 17. 448 Tolstoy concludes the piece with remarks on Kaiser Wilhelm‘s drawing— remarks made by one of Tolstoy‘s friends who, looking at the picture in question, noticed a contrast between the image and its accompanying caption. According to Tolstoy‘s friend, the image meant that the Archangel Michael was indicating to the European governments, depicted as robbers (razboinik) and covered with weapons, what would kill 448 More than once Tolstoy expressed his opinion about the Kaiser Wilhelm II. In his pamphlet ―Thou shalt not kill,‖ published in The New York Evening Journal on August 26, 1903, the Russian writer portrayed the German ruler as ―a man of limited understanding, little education, and with a great deal of ambition.‖ 208 and defeat them, i.e. the meekness of the Buddha and the wisdom of Confucius. 449 For Tolstoy, the real barbarians were the Europeans who, forgetting the Christian tenet of brotherhood and hypocritically hiding murders behind patriotism, 450 rushed overseas to kill. 451 Generally speaking, in his articles against war, especially against the Russo- Japanese conflict, Tolstoy supported the dualist worldview of the Orient and the Occident by depicting two clashing civilizations: Christian, on the one side, and Buddhist, on the other side. This binary pattern emerged again in his article ―Bethink Yourself: Tolstoy‘s Letter on the Russo-Japanese War,‖ 452 in which the author accuses the Russians and the Japanese of manipulating and misinterpreting peaceful Christian and Buddhist doctrines in order to justify their reciprocal animosity. 453 Such a longstanding intentional misusage, Tolstoy continued, came from both sides, since the Buddhist monk and scientist Soyen Shaky also encouraged his countrymen to fight against Orthodox Russians in the name of 449 L. Tolstoy, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, vol. 90. Moscow: Gosudarstvennoe izdatel‘stvo khudozhestvennoi literatury, 1958, 52. Tolstoy‘s letter was translated into other languages as well; however, its German version omitted the part on Kaiser Wilhelm II (Ibid., 362). 450 Tolstoy expressed his opinion on Christianity and patriotism at the time of the Sino-Japanese war too. See L. Tolstoy, ―Christianity and Patriotism.‖ The Open Court 462.X (July 2, 1896): 4967-9; 463 (July 9, 1896): 4975-8; 464 (July 16, 1896): 4983-4; 465 (July 23, 1896): 4993-4; 466 (July 30, 1896): 4999-5000; 467 (August 6, 1896): 5007-9. Paul Carus, editor of the magazine, refuted Tolstoy‘s views on Christianity and patriotism; his rebuttal ―Patriotism and Chauvinism‖ was published next to Tolstoy‘s conclusions in the issue 467 (August 6, 1896): 5012. 451 L. Tolstoy, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, vol. 90, 53. 452 It was first printed in the London Times on June 27, 1904. The text here is quoted from the edition translated into English by Vladimir Chertkov (Boston: The American Peace Society, 1904). 453 Tolstoy wrote: ―Scientists, historians and philosophers, on their side […] argue interminably about the laws of the movement of nations, about the relationship between the yellow and the white races, or about Buddhism and Christianity‖ (Ibid., 6). 209 the Buddha. 454 Overall, even as purely literary and artistic speculations on Buddhism in relation to Christianity could foreground similarities between the figure of the Buddha and of the Christ (Chapter Two), these affinities seemed to be forgotten when politics and foreign affairs were at stake. Russian periodicals commented on Tolstoy‘s articles on war published abroad. Indeed, Tolstoy‘s publication in the London Times especially caught the attention of the conservative St. Petersburg newspaper, The Citizen (Grazhdanin). In his article ―Tolstoy Spoke‖ (Tolstoi zagovoril), A. Babetsky labels Tolstoy‘s views as self-repeating, boring, and monotone ―senile grumbling‖ (starcheskoe briuzzhanie). 455 Despite its negative overtones, however, the critical article contributed to the identification of the ―yellow peril‖ with Buddhism. In order to undermine Tolstoy‘s opinion, in fact, Babetsky considers Tolstoy‘s parallel between the Buddha and Christ. Babetsky‘s intention was to ascertain Tolstoy‘s role as false prophet, who denied the very divine nature of Christ and reduced His preaching to the mere principle of ―submission to evil‖ (nesoprotivlenie k zlu). 456 As in Ivanovich‘s article, Babetsky‘s work describes the Russian intervention into Japan in terms of a Christian crusade against the pagan Japanese. For Babetsky, Japanese 454 See Tolstoy‘s ―Bethink Yourself‖ (Ibid., 36-8). Tolstoy quoted Soyen Shaky‘s article ―Buddhist Views on War,‖ which appeared on The Open Court in May 1904 (XVIII.576: 274-6). In 1904 The Open Court published other articles related to the Russo-Japanese War and the ―yellow peril‖ (see the Editor‘s ―The Yellow Peril‖ XVIII.578, July: 430-3, and the Editor‘s ―Orientalism‖ XVIII. 579, August: 504-6), included Tolstoy‘s article ―Bethink Yourself‖ (XVIII. 583, December: 761-4). 455 A. Babetsky, ―Tolstoi zagovoril.‖ Grazhdanin 52 (Thursday July 1, 1904): 4. 456 Ibid., 4-5. 210 paganism resided in the worship of the Buddha and in the belief in attaining nirvana— all precepts that Tolstoy preferred to Christian values. 457 Associations between the ―yellow peril‖ and Buddhism by the press were enhanced by the article ―Buddhist Indolence‖ (buddiiskaia kosnost‘) by the anonymous writer I.N.K. 458 The Citizen published it as a serial along with the aforementioned ―Tolstoy Spoke.‖ The article dealt with the missionary question in Kalmykia— one of the Buddhist autonomic regions located in the southern-European part of Russia and today a republic under the jurisdiction of the Russian Federation. From the reading of the missionary reports on actual conversions to Christianity in Kalmykia, I.N.K. wonders whether the failure to convince the Kalmyks to abandon their Buddhist faith in favor of Christianity did not depend on the laziness and incapability of the Orthodox clergy, instead of on Buddhist indolence, which missionaries ascribed to the Lamaist clergy. This critique sounds strikingly similar to the situation described by Prince Ukhtomsky in his brochure On the Condition of the Missionary Question in Zabaikal in Relation to the Causes Determining the Failure of Christian Preach Among Buriats (Chapter Three). 459 457 Ibid., 5. 458 I.N.K. ―Buddiiskaia kosnost‘. Stranitsy putevoi knizhki.‖ Grazhdanin 50 (Thursday June 24): part I, 7-9; 52 (Thursday July 1): part II, 6-8; 54 (Thursday July 8): part III, 7-9. 459 E. Ukhtomsky, О sostoianii missionerskogo voprosa v Zabaikale, v sviazi s prichinami, obuslovlivaiushchimi malouspeshnost‘ khristianskoi propovedi sredi buriat. Saint Petersburg: Sinodal‘naia tipografiia, 1892. 211 Both ―Buddhist Indolence‖ and On the Condition of the Missionary Question in Zabaikal feature a deep antinomy between Christendom and Buddhism. 460 Intellectual responses to the ―yellow peril‖ also appeared in satirical journals— which is relevant to the discussion since many Modernist artists such as Mstislav Dobuzhinsky and Evgeny Lanceray, for instance, collaborated with satirical journals. Indeed, this union between artists and satire indicates the extent to which artistic circles were aware of the debate around the ―yellow peril.‖ The satirical journal Bouquet (Buket), for example, confirmed this awareness by publishing in 1906 a thirty-stanza poem, ―Japanese Arabesque‖ (Iaponskaia arabeska), by the anonymous writer A.L. 461 Here the author prophesizes the future of humankind on Earth— a future dominated by an apocalyptic scenario of darkness and dullness. 462 In accordance with the imagery in Kaiser Wilhelm‘s etching, the poet imagines the Orient, in this case Japan, threatening from the other side of the ocean. After reviewing Japanese history from feudalism to the Sino-Japanese conflict of 1894-95, the anonymous poet points to Japan‘s increasing 460 The Citizen returned to the theme of the ―yellow peril‖ again with Alexandre Ular‘s ―Chinese Wealth‖ (Kitaiskie bogatstva) inserted under the heading ―Thoughts from abroad‖ (mysli za granitseiu), published in October 1904 (A. Ular, ―Kitaiskie bogatstva.‖ Grazhdanin 85, Sunday October 24, 1904: part I, 12-4; 86, Thursday October 28: part II, 13-4; 87, Sunday, October 31: part III, 14). Unlike I.N.K.‘s article, Ular‘s analysis of Chinese riches addressed the future economic turns of the ―yellow peril.‖ According to Ular, Japanese pan-mongolism was as harmless as Moscow Slavophilism, Berlin Pan-Germanism, and London Jingoism (Ibid., part I, 12). The real threat for Europe, Ular continued, would come from China‘s economic system of co-operative societies and money sharing. Ular developed his theories on Chinese super- productivity and its consequences upon Russia in his book Un Empire Russo-Chinois first published in 1903 (Paris: F. Juven). For its English translation, see A Russo-Chinese Empire: An English Version of ―Un Empire Russo-Chinois.‖ Westminster: Archibald Constable and Co. Ltd, 1904. 461 A.L., ―Iaponskaia arabeska.‖ Buket 1. Edited by E.M. Narusbek. St. Petersburg: V.F. Veshke, 1906: 6-7. 462 ―It is dark and dim on Earth,/People drown in sordid darkness;/I will dream and divine/in order to dispel my boredom‖ [Темно, тускло на земле,/Люди тонут в грязной мгле;/Стану грезить и гадать,/Чтобы скуку разогнать](Ibid., 6). 212 military self-confidence. Such self-confidence was made possible by the ruling capacities of King Mutsuhito 463 and his modernization of the country. With quick changes shaping the Nipponese peninsula, A.L. wonders (with the rest of Europe) what will come next. While the famous Japanese geisha Sadayakko, whose Oriental performances in Paris will be discussed in the next chapter, patriotically took the side of her countrymen, Kaiser Wilhelm II solves the Oriental enigma in his sketch. The anonymous author of ―Japanese Arabesque‖ ironically explains Kaiser Wilhelm‘s solution for the ―yellow peril‖ in the following trochaic tetrameters: […] A horde of female warriors Staring timidly into the distance, And there Buddha-the pandit 464 Strangely sits. The allegory is beautiful And the danger-so dreadful! They began to call it yellow To frighten one another. The sun had sneaked behind the clouds, Diplomats, as if in complete darkness Something is fermenting and boiling, Vaguely stirring their mind. Years follow one another, Bringing the disaster ever closer. [Сонм воительниц дев/Смотрит в даль оробев,//И там Будда—пандит/Как-то странно сидит./Аллегория прекрасна/И опасность так ужасна!/Желтой стали называть,Что-б друг друга запугать./Солнце скрылось в облаках,/Дипломаты, как в 463 King Mutsuhito (1852-1912) reigned over Japan for forty-five years after he defeated the shoguns (generals) in a civil war. He transformed Japan into a military power able to win international conflicts, one against China and one against Russia. 464 Here the term is probably used just as an honorary title for teacher or spiritual leader. 213 потьмах;/Что-то бродит и кипит,/Смутно ум их шевелит./Чередом идут года,/Ближе, ближе все беда]. In his prophecy of the approaching ―sunset of Europe,‖ the poet blames European nations for their hypocritical behavior toward the battle over Korea and the warfare agreement sealed at The Hague Peace Convention of 1899. 465 The poet concludes his ―Japanese arabesque‖ with his vision of an indignant China and Japan rising against their oppressors. The rise of China and Japan, however, would not be infinite; following their rule of world history, the author continues, the two Asian countries, like empires before them, would bloom but inevitably perish. Like the case of The Citizen, Bouquet highlights a specific pattern, indicating how discussions around the ―yellow peril‖ aroused curiosity about Buddhism among its readers. This interest manifested in a series of articles about Buddhist culture, which were published in the same journals following the debate around the ―yellow peril.‖ For example, in the same year that ―Japanese Arabesque‖ was printed, Bouquet published Anatole France‘s essay ―On Buddhism‖ (o buddizme). 466 A Russian translation of one of France‘s articles was published in the Parisian newspaper Le Temps. 467 ―On Buddhism‖ provides not only an overview of its doctrine, but it also documents the popularity that 465 The Hague Peace Conference took place on May 18, 1899 for an initiative by Queen Wilhelmina of the Netherlands and Tsar Nicholas II. Its aim was to discuss a possible reduction of armaments and to revise existing rules on naval and land warfare. 466 A. Frans, ―O buddizme.‖ Buket 4 (1906): 11-3; 5: 7. 467 The newspaper, which was founded and edited by Auguste Neftzer, had already passed to the editorship of Adrien Hébrard when France began writing for it. He collaborated first sporadically from 1875 to 1879, and then regularly from 1886 to 1893. His articles were collected in the four-volume edition La vie littéraire (Paris: Calmann Lévy, 1888-1900). His essay ―Bouddhisme‖ appeared in the third volume of La vie littéraire (1891, 379-387). 214 Buddhism was enjoying in Western Europe at the time. This work is examined at length in the next chapter, thus the content of France‘s essay will not be analyzed here; however, that his writing appeared in Bouquet shortly after the end of the Russo-Japanese war was not accidental; it was the result of the particular attention that the Russian press gave to what the French writer had to say on the subject, which is evidenced, for instance, in the publication of excerpts from Anatole France‘s The White Stone 468 in the newspaper The Dawn (Rassvet), edited by Prince Esper Ukhtomsky. 469 Notably, in addition to general fear of the ―yellow race,‖ the war with Japan aroused curiosity about Japanese culture and art. As Petr Sidorov remarks in his article ―On Japan,‖ published on the Symbolist magazine The Scale (Vesy) in 1904, Japan was not only the enemy, but it was also the homeland of great artists like Utamaro. Hence, the editors of The Scale decided to decorate the pages and the cover of issues 10 and 11 with 468 A. France, Sur la pierre blanche. Paris: C. Levy, 1905. For the English translation see A. France, The White Stone. Translated by Charles E. Roche. London, New York: John Lane Company, 1910. The book was also reviewed by S. Rafalovich in The Scale (―Anatole France, Sur la pierre blanche.‖ Vesy 8, August 1905: 61-2). It looks as if France enjoyed certain popularity in Russian press in 1905; to him, in fact, the magazine Life Matters (Voprosy zhizni) also devoted two articles. One of them dealt with his literary career (A. Bauler, ―Anatol Frans.‖ Voprosy zhizni 10-11, October-November, 1905: 212-235; 12, December, 1905: 103-118), another was Sergei Oldenburg‘s translation of France‘s article ―Holy Scholastics‖ taken from La vie littéraire (S. Ol‘denburg, ―Blazhennaia skholastika.‖ Voprosy zhizni 12, December, 1905: 1-4). 469 A. Pletnev, ―Anatol Frans o zheltoi opasnosti.‖ Rassvet. Ezhednevnaia politicheskaia, obshchestvennaia gazeta bez predvaritel‘noi tsenzury 89 (Wednesday June 8, 1905): 4. Edited and Published by Prince E.E. Ukhtomsky. St. Petersburg: Tipografiia Sp. Akts. Obshch. ―Slovo.‖ The main idea behind France‘s book concerned the author‘s conviction that, because of the European raids in Asia, the white race was to blame for the appearance of the ―yellow peril.‖ Part of the section in question reads in its English translation: ―For many long years have Asiatics been familiar with the White Peril. The looting of the Summer Palace, the massacre of Peking, the drownings of Blagovestchenk, the dismemberment of China, were these not enough to alarm the Chinese? As to the Japanese, could they feel secure under the guns of Port Arthur? We created the White Peril. The White Peril has engendered the Yellow Peril‖ (A. France, The White Stone, 1910, 162). 215 reproductions of Japanese prints. 470 Moreover, in 1904 and 1905 Russian status reports on war and news on Japanese art exhibition were given simultaneously. 471 As Rosamund Bartlett stresses in her article ―Japonisme and Japanophobia: The Russo-Japanese War in Russian Cultural Consciousness,‖ love for Japan and fear of Japan went together with the outbreak of the war. 472 One show on Japanese art was inaugurated in the rooms of the Imperial Society for the Encouragement of the Arts (Imperatorskoe obshchestvo pooshchreniia khudozhestv) on September 25, 1905 and displayed approximately 250 paintings, 1,500 photographs on Japanese customs and habits, and etudes by the best Japanese artists. The objects came from the collection of the lieutenant colonel Sergei Kitaev, who had lived in Japan for several years. Kitaev himself was a dilettante artist who composed circa 150 watercolors of Japanese views, which were also on show. 473 Like The Dawn, the magazine Art (Iskusstvo) published reviews on current art shows on Japanese art. In Nos. 5-7 of the periodical, for instance, appeared Ino‘s article ―Selected Relics of Japanese Art.‖ 474 Remarkably, the author opened his essay by way of reference to the importance of Buddhism in old Japanese art, 475 an assertion that the Symbolist 470 P. Sidorov, ―O Iaponii.‖ Vesy 10 (October 1904): 39. 471 See, for example, the reports ―Khudozhestvennye novosti.‖ Rassvet 171 (Tuesday September, 13 1905): 4; А. G—n., ―Vystavka iaponskoi zhivopisi.‖ Rassvet 181 (Saturday September 24): 3. 472 R.Bartlett, ―Japonisme and Japanophobia: The Russo-Japanese War in Russian Cultural Consciousness.‖ The Russian Review 67. 1 (January 2008): 24. 473 А. G—n., ―Vystavka iaponskoi zhivopisi‖: 3. Kitaev had already showed the artwork from his collection in a previous exhibition organized at the St. Petersburg Academy of Arts in 1896 (R. Bartlett, ―Japonisme and Japanophobia: The Russo-Japanese War in Russian Cultural Consciousness,‖ 17). 474 Ino, ―Izbrannye relikvy Iaponskogo iskusstva (k snimkam).‖ Iskusstvo 5-7 (1905): 21-48. 475 Ibid., 22. 216 magazine Life Matters (Voprosy zhizni) confirmed. 476 Also noteworthy is that every Symbolist artist (Alexander Benois, Ivan Bilibin, Konstantin Somov, and others) collected Japanese woodcuts and that Prince Mikhail Shcherbatov‘s and Nadezhda von Meck‘s contemporary art enterprise in St. Petersburg carried a showroom of Japanese woodcuts. Although Japan in Russian culture 477 represents an independent topic much more concerned with the fashion of ―Japanisme‖ 478 than with the assimilation of the Buddhist artistic world, Ino‘s article shows that it was possible to find marginal references to Buddhism even in apparently unrelated topics. To summarize, the debate around the ―yellow peril‖ developed as a consequence of the conflicts taking place in the Far East, in particular in China, Korea, and Japan. These conflicts represented the defining events in world politics of the time and contributed significantly to broadening interest in the East. The ―Asian Orient‖ transformed into a geopolitical notion comprised not only of Tibet and Mongolia (more familiar, because of proximity), but also Japan, China, and Korea (unfamiliar, because of its distance). The conflicts taking place in the Far East could be interpreted as a variation on the concept of the journey, specifically the ―military journey.‖ When war raged in the 476 See, for instance, Pshesnytsky‘s article ―Iaponskaia graviura.‖ Voprosy zhizni 2 (February 1905): 247- 280. In the previous issue of the same journal appeared also Bulgakova‘s article on Japan ―Nrastvennyi oblik iapontsev‖(Ibid. 1: 93-115), where Buddhism was mentioned along with Shintoism in the author‘s description of Japanese faiths. 477 On the topic see for example Russian Views of Japan, 1792-1913: An Anthology of Travel Writing. Edited and translated by David N. Wells. London; New York, NY: RoutledgeCurzon, 2004; Bartlett‘s ―Japonisme and Japanophobia,‖ and Russia and Japan—Mutual Understanding. 478 A good definition of ―Japanisme‖ is given by Rosamund Bartlett, who explains that ―Japanisme‖ is: ―a term used originally to denote Japanese influence on avant-garde painters in the late nineteenth century, but now understood as encompassing the embrace, by consumers as well as the artistic elite, of a wide range of Japanese art forms and styles, including fashion, furniture, landscape design, theater, and literature‖ (―Japanisme and Japanophobia,‖ 10). 217 Far East, worldviews and civilizations struggled at the front together with troops, volunteers, and the Red Cross. Back home, news from the battlefield generated discussion and activated intercultural confrontations, as in the case of debates on the ―yellow peril.‖ Periodicals, which were good indicators of public opinion, proffered sufficient insight into the development of the debate. Periodicals also confirmed a certain tendency of some intellectuals to associate the ―yellow race‖ with Buddhism; in light of such an association, the topic becomes a pertinent case study. Furthermore, unlike in the other chapters of this dissertation, in this case, Russian intellectuals perceived the Buddhist world with hostility. Those who were intolerant of Buddhism are significant to this project as well, because hate as much as love contributed to the circulation of and familiarization with Buddhist ideas. Hostility toward Buddhism came as a response to the Russo-Japanese war and the shock that the victory of an Asian nation over a European one caused in the western international community. Additionally, in the eyes of ―civilized‖ Europeans, a possible alliance between China and Japan made the future scenario even worse— to the extent that the poet Dmitry Merezhkovsky talked of the ―sinicization‖ (kitaizatsiia) of Europe in his collection of essays The Coming Boors (Griadushchy kham). 479 Because opponents of Buddhism played as important a role as proponents thereof, looking at their derisory ideas is worthwhile. 479 Here, Merezhkovsky expressed his opinion about the ―yellow peril‖ in relation to the advancement of China. He departed from what Herzen said in his article ―Ends and Beginnings‖ (1864) where Herzen quoted John Stuart Mill and his concept of ―conglomerated mediocrity‖—a set of petty bourgeois values that, according to Merezhkovsky, China embodied (D. Merezhkovsky, Griadushchii kham. St. Petersburg: M.V. Pirozhkov, 1906). This book was reviewed by Evgeny Liatsky for the magazine The European Herald (―Sredi novykh knig. Zametki. ‗Griadushchii khram‘, D.S. Merezhkovskogo.‖ Vestnik Evropy 2, April, 1906: 807-23). The book was reprinted in Bol‘naia Rossiia. Leningrad: Izdatel‘stvo Leningradskogo universiteta, 1991, 11-110. 218 Opposing Buddhism: Vasily Rozanov, Vladimir Soloviev, and Viacheslav Ivanov The Russo-Japanese war was not the only political event to cause the publication of articles like Babetsky‘s ―Tolstoy Spoke‖ and the anonymous ―The Buddhist Indolence‖ in Prince Meshchersky‘s conservative newspaper, The Citizen. This publication also featured Vasily Rozanov‘s article ―Orient‖ (Vostok) 480 in relation to the Chinese Boxer rebellion. As discussed with regard to periodicals, an interpretative dynamics emerged between the two regions; facing hostile territory, Russia (aka Christian civilization) confronted a totally different world (Asian civilization). This confrontation assumed the tone of a crusade against pagan infidels, some of them even identified as Buddhist idolatries. In such cases, Russians looked at the Buddhist world with hate and diffidence. In his article, Rozanov continues the belittlement of Buddhism that he had begun two days before in his article ―The Reign of the Fairy-Tales‖ (Skazochnoe tsarstvo), published in New Times. 481 According to Rozanov‘s interpretation of Asian culture, Asia was like a child that passed from childhood to senility without intermediary stages. For this reason, he claims, Asians made naïve discoveries shouting: ―eureka! eureka!‖ all the time. In the category of naïve discoveries, Rozanov continued, belonged Buddha‘s enlightenment under a tree, Zarathustra‘s awakening in a cave, and Mahomet‘s flight in the three skies. 482 480 V. Rozanov, ―Vostok.‖ Grazhdanin 5 (May 28, 1900). The article has been republished in V. Rozanov, Vo dvore iazychnikov. Edited by A.N. Nikoliukin. Moscow: Izdatel‘stvo ―Respublika,‖ 1999, 125-130. 481 The article was a review of the 1900 Russian edition of Edouard Laboulaye‘s fairy-tales. V. Rozanov, Vo dvore iazychnikov, 117-124. 482 Ibid., 123. 219 With this attitude, Rozanov authored ―Orient.‖ Being unable to take seriously any of the Asian religions, the Russian writer described the Buddhist type in the following terms: ―The Buddhist…well, he simply sits and for twenty years contemplates his navel. What does he see there? What does he think? Why does he look there?‖ 483 The author‘s only answer was a paraphrase of Alexander Macedonian‘s description of Indians: the Buddhist must be a philosopher— what else, if not philosophy, could compel him to gaze at his belly for twenty years? Professing nirvana, Rozanov continued, is like being secluded in jail; without a philosophy, the Buddhist can become crazy during the years of his detachment from the world, years that he spends exclusively staring at his umbilicus. Rozanov ends his considerations on Buddhism with the rhetorical question: ―To be honest then, wouldn‘t it have been better for Dostoevsky, for example, to ‗contemplate his navel‘ instead of saying weak and incomprehensible words in those passages and at those moments when he tried to express the holiest of his holy convictions?‖ 484 Sarcasm aside, Vasily Rozanov‘s opinion of Buddhism matters above all for its connection to the political events of the time. Rozanov did not mention the ―yellow peril‖ in his article; however, his argument about Buddhism developed in relation to political news coming out of the Chinese turmoil of 1900. Thereby, his perception further evidences how Russian foreign policy in Asia, especially in Japan and China, affected the intellectual community of the time and promoted the circulation of Buddhist topics. 483 V. Rozanov, ―Vostok,‖ 125. 484 Ibid., 126. 220 Overt mention of the ―yellow peril‖ was made by the philosopher Vladimir Soloviev. According to David H. Schimmelpenninck, Soloviev began thinking of the ―yellow peril‖ in Paris in 1888 when his attempts to unify the Catholic and Orthodox Churches failed. 485 In this pessimistic mood, the Russian writer attended the meeting of the Parisian Geographical Society and was negatively impressed by the national attire that China‘s military attaché, the senior army officer Chen Jitong, stubbornly wore among Europeans. 486 For Soloviev, such dress embodied the Chinese attitude of loving only themselves and holding in respect exclusively force. 487 Soloviev‘s arguments against the ―yellow race‖ echoed the campaign in Ivanovich‘s article and Kaiser Wilhelm‘s etching. 488 Indeed, Soloviev came to the conclusion that if not reconciled with Christianity, China would demonstrate the same menacing consequences that Islam had in medieval Europe. 489 As he wrote in his essay ―The Enemy from the East‖ (Vrag s Vostoka, 1892): ―There is a basis for thinking that the Far East, which has sent devastating masses of its nomads upon the Christian world, is preparing to set out against 485 Schimmelpenninck develops the topic of the ―yellow peril‖ at length in Chapter Five ―The Yellow Peril. Aleksei Kuropatkin‖ of his Toward the Rising Sun. There the author introduces the theme with an analysis of Soloviev‘s take on the subject (D. Schimmelpenninck van der Oye, Toward the Rising Sun, 82-6). 486 Soloviev himself reports the episode in his essay ―China and Europe‖ (Kitai i Evropa) (first published in Russkoe obozrenie 2-4, 1890). In V. Solov‘ev, Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 6.Edited and commented by S.M. Solov‘ev and E.L. Radlov. St. Petersburg: ―Prosveshchenie,‖ 2 nd edition, 1966, 93-150. For its English translation see V. Solov‘ev, Enemies from the East?: V.S. Soloviev on Paganism, Asian Civilizations, and Islam. Edited and translated from the Russian by Vladimir Wozniuk. Evaston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 2007, 34-79. 487 V. Solov‘ev, Enemies from the East? 35. 488 Soloviev devoted one of his last poems Dragon (To Siegfried) to the Kaiser (V. Solov‘ev, ―Drakon, Zigfridu.‖ In Chteniia o Bogochelovechestve. Stat‘i. Stikhotvoreniia i poema iz ―Trekh razgovorov.‖ Kratkaia povest‘ ob Antikhriste. Introduced, edited and commented by A.B. Muratov. St. Petersburg: khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1994, 413). The poem was first printed in Vestnik Evropy 9 (1900): 316. 489 V. Solov‘ev, Enemies from the East?, 77. 221 it one final time from a completely different quarter: it is preparing to conquer us by our own cultural and spiritual forces, concentrated in the Chinese state and the Buddhist religion.‖ 490 Two years later, Soloviev again invoked the parallelism with the Middle Ages in his well-known poem ―Pan-mongolism,‖ where he references the Fall of Constantinople under the Muslim Ottoman Turks in the fifteenth century. The ultimate message from Soloviev‘s poem sounds apocalyptic: Russia— the Third Rome has not learned from the past, and thus is destined to perish under the yoke of another Oriental nation— China. 491 Strictly speaking, Soloviev‘s ideas offer a political interpretation of the relationship between Christianity and Asian faiths. Besides, that a writer of Soloviev‘s caliber devoted his time to discussing the ―yellow peril‖ indicates how important the issue was for intellectuals. From the 1890s onwards, Vladimir Soloviev faced a resurgent Asia on more than one occasion both in his literary and essayistic production. Like Ukhtomsky would do in his chronicles a decade later, Soloviev followed the historical-political situation in Asia and devoted several essays to the subject. Furthermore, Soloviev and Ukhtomsky were acquainted; in the 1880s, at the time of Soloviev‘s professorship at St. Petersburg University, the young philosopher was part of Ukhtomsky‘s aristocratic clique. 492 Despite their acquaintance and possibly shared views, when articles similar to L. Slominsky‘s ―The Yellow Peril: A Sketch‖ began to appear in the press, Prince Ukhtomsky contested 490 Ibid., ix. 491 V. Solov‘ev, ―Panmongolizm.‖ Chteniia o Bogochelovechestve. Stat‘i. Stikhotvoreniia i poema iz ―Trekh razgovorov.‖ Kratkaia povest‘ ob Antikhriste, 392-3. 492 K. Mochul‘sky, Vladimir Solov‘ev. Zhizn‘ i uchenie. Paris: YMCA-Press, 1951, 124. 222 Soloviev‘s prophesy of the ―yellow peril.‖ In disagreement with those like Slominsky and Prince Sergei Trubetskoy, who saw the fulfillment of Soloviev‘s pan-mongolian scenario in the Russo-Japanese war, Ukhtomsky insisted that no pan-mongolism, no ―Asia for Asians,‖ no Japan able to awaken the Orient against Europe would— or could— ever happen. 493 Quoting an excerpt from Soloviev‘s poem ―Ex Oriente lux‖ (O Rus‘! In lofty premonition/You ponder a proud idea;/Which East do you want to be:/The east of Xerxes or of Christ?), 494 Prince Ukhtomsky ends his observations by compelling his country to choose between the Orient and the Occident. Hoping that Russia‘s choice falls with the Orient, Ukhtomsky already foresaw his country taking over Asia, starting with Japan and ending with India. 495 Ukhtomsky‘s aristocratic clique was not the only salon attended by Soloviev; he was also in contact with writers like Dostoevsky and Tolstoy. 496 Perhaps this acquaintance can begin to explain Tolstoy‘s interpretation of Buddhist doctrine in exclusively nihilistic terms. A quick reading of an excerpt of Tolstoy‘s Confession demonstrates this pessimistic approach most lucidly. In this writing, the author shows his interest in Oriental fairy-tales, 497 naming specifically the collection of fables 493 E. Ukhtomsky, Pered groznym budushchim, 6. 494 Translated by Tatiana Tulchinsky, Andrew Wachtel, and Gwenan Wilbur http://max.mmlc.northwestern.edu/~mdenner/Demo/index.html [О Русь! В предвидении высоком\Ты мыслью гордой занята...\Каким-же хочешь быть Востоком—\Востоком Ксеркса иль Христа?]. 495 E. Ukhtomsky, Pered groznym budushchim, 7. 496 On Soloviev and his literary ties, see A. Losev, ―Vl. Solov‘ev i ego blizhaishee literaturnoe okruzhenie.‖ Literaturnaia ucheba 3 (1987): 151-164; Ibid. 4: 159-168. 497 The collection of Buddhist fairy-tales, summoned by the writer, has been lately published in the Russian magazine Buddizm 1 (May, 1992): 44-5. 223 Panchatantra, 498 which he probably consulted in Zhukovsky‘s rendering. 499 Tolstoy‘s reading of these Buddhist fables betrays pessimistic overtones, especially in the episode that describes the parable of the traveler who holds himself to the branches of a shrub coming out from the cracks in the well, inside of which he has found refuge from the wild animals chasing him in the forest. 500 The story is a parable of life and its illusions of joy. Tolstoy gauged the message of the fable to his personal experience and bitterly noticed: So do I keep holding to the branches of life, albeit I know that the dragon of death inevitably is waiting for me and is ready to tear me into pieces, and I cannot understand how I ended up in this anguish. So do I try to suck the honey which comforted me before, albeit now this honey already does not rejoice me; while day and night the white and black mice chew the branch holding me. I see the dragon and the honey is already unsweetened to me. I only see the fatal dragon and mice; I cannot turn my eyes from them. This is not a fable, but the truly undeniable and everybody known truth. 501 Like Soloviev and many others, whose statements will be discussed in the last chapter of this dissertation, Tolstoy stopped at the first two Noble Truths of Buddhism (1. Life is 498 The book, written between 100 and 500 A.D., was included in a pedagogical collection of fables and parables aimed to instruct rulers on how to conduct affairs properly (R. Stacy, India in Russian Literature. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1985, 9). It was first translated from Sanskrit to Arabian in the sixth century, then from the Arabian it was translated into Syrian. In the eleventh century, the Syrian version was translated into Greek, and then from Greek into Slavic in the fourteenth century. A German translation of the book appeared as early as 1859: Pantschtantra, fünf Bücher indischen Fabeln, Märchen und Erzählungen, aus dem Sanscrit übersetzt with von Th. Benfey, vol. 1. Lepzig, 1859. 499 L. Tolstoy, ―Ispoved‘.‖ Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, vol. 23. Edited and commented by N. Gusev. Moscow: GIKhL, 1957, 13; note 22.13 34 , 533. 500 According to the Tolstoyan version of the fable, at the bottom of the well lays an open-mouth dragon waiting for the traveler to fall down so he can devour him. While thinking of his entrapped condition between two equally terrible deaths— the wild animals chasing him outside the well and the dragon inside the well— the man notices that two mice— one black and one white— went to both sides of the shrub and started chewing the branches he is holding to. In anticipation of his death, the man cannot refrain from enjoying the delight of some honey drops scattered on the leaves of the shrub. For a summary of the original story, see R. Stacy, India in Russian Literature, 23. 501 L. Tolstoy, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, vol. 23, 13. 224 suffering 2. The origin of suffering is attachment), disregarding the other two Noble Truths (3. The termination of suffering is possible, 4. The Eightfold Path), which help human beings escape from their condition of suffering. In addition to his philosophical affinities with Tolstoy and his attendance at Ukhtomsky‘s salon, Soloviev highly influenced the young Symbolist generation. As the last section of this chapter will show, the apocalyptic farewell that Soloviev gave through his last work, ―The Tale of the Antichrist,‖ echoed in Bely‘s Petersburg with the addition of a Buddhist undercurrent. 502 Because of the significant role played by Soloviev in shaping Symbolist ideas, we can benefit from focusing on his views of the ―yellow peril,‖ above all when considering that some of his observations concerned Buddhism. Ironically, in his youth Soloviev was an admirer of Buddhism. This appeal coincided with his university years, when he cultivated an interest in theosophy and occultism. Soloviev discovered Buddhism through Schopenhauer and the West, thus his philosophical interpretations, especially his take on nirvana, will be discussed in the next chapter. Nonetheless, by the time debates around the ―yellow peril‖ arose, Soloviev had already turned himself into an opponent of Buddhism. Even though he spared this religion from the harsh criticism launched against Confucianism and Daoism— the other two religions practiced in China 503 — Soloviev saw in early Buddhist doctrine an intrinsic contradiction that made it unsuitable as a state religion. Paraphrasing what he wrote in his 502 Perhaps the Symbolist affection to Soloviev is attested to best in Aleksandr Blok‘s memories of the early deceased philosopher (A. Blok, ―Rytsar‘-monakh.‖ O Vladimire Solov‘eve. Edited by E. Kol‘chuzhkin. Tomsk: Izdatel‘stvo Vodolei, 1997, 89-95). It is also worth remembering that Soloviev‘s nephew, Sergei, was a friend of Bely and Blok. 503 V. Solov‘ev, ―Kitai i Evropa.‖ In Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 6, 107-143. 225 historical outline of Japan, 504 Soloviev explained that early Indian Buddhism denies sensory experiences and a life dominated by desire, but humankind, and especially historical nations, cannot rule detached from reality. Hence, people have only two choices, either they can be disappointed with Buddhism, and consequently go back to their previous cult (India); or Buddhism can adapt to local beliefs and transform itself into a new doctrine able to appeal to locals (Japan). 505 Despite moral improvement in the Japanese lifestyle, Soloviev continues, Buddhism could not offer a positive religious example for Japan because its negative essence, based on the promotion of an abstract void, would obstruct a nation from its historical process. 506 Soloviev concludes his outline on Japan remembering the first missionaries arriving in the peninsula. It was a curious occurrence, Soloviev writes, that a state like Japan, situated the farthest East, turned to Christianity several times, whereas people from farthest West— France, England, and North America— had lately begun seeking spiritual shelter in Oriental religions, especially in Buddhism. 507 Here Soloviev refers to ―neo-buddhists,‖ whom he mainly identifies with the Theosophists Helena Blavatsky and Sir Henry Olcott. 508 In prophesying the end of the pagan Orient, Vladimir Soloviev interpreted the Buddhist 504 V. Solov‘ev, ―‗Iaponia‘ (Istoricheskaia kharakteristika)‖ (1890). In Ibid., 153-173; English translation in Enemies from the East? 80-96. 505 V. Solov‘ev, Enemies from the East? 89. 506 Ibid., 90. 507 Ibid., 96. 508 On Soloviev and Blavatsky see Soloviev‘s articles ―Retsenziia na knigu E.P. Blavatskaia: ‗the key to Theosophy‖ (1892). In Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 6, 287-292; ―Zametka o E.P. Blavatskoi‖ (1892). In Ibid., 226 revival in the Occident as the last global reaction to eastern paganism before the ultimate triumph of universal Christendom. This idea was Soloviev‘s message to posterity, a message he would reassert in his last work, Three Conversations. 509 Before his death, the Russian philosopher wrote down his Apocalypses; among all the religions he could mention in relation to the infidels, he chose Buddhism. Soloviev wrote his book arguing Lev Tolstoy— the ―Christian‖ Prince in the Conversations— whose sympathy for Buddhism was well known. Nevertheless, some word associations in the text justify interpreting that the Buddhist reference goes beyond a critique of Tolstoy to include a pan-mongolian discourse. In the second conversation, the politician mentions Buddhism in the following way: ―The problem is that these people [the Slavophiles] writing against Europe and our Europeanism cannot sustain the perspective of our Greco-Slavic originality. Thus they immediately think of how to confess and profess any type of China-ism (kitaizma), Buddhism, Tibetism (tibetizma), and all sorts of Indo-Mongolian Asiatism (aziatchiny).‖ 510 Soloviev explicitly mentions Buddhism in his book‘s foreword, where he explains his intent and reveals his imaginary addressee, namely believers who proclaim themselves ―true Christians,‖ although they consider Christ a myth created by the apostle 394-8. On Soloviev and Anthroposophy see E. Gurvich, Vladimir Solov‘ev i Rudol‘f Steiner. Moscow: Martis, 1993. 509 The work was first published in 1900 (V. Solov‘ev, Tri razgovora o voine, progresse i kontse vsemirnoi istorii, so vkliucheniem kratkoi poviesti ob antikhristie i s prilozheniiami. St.Petersburg: Tip. t-va ―Trud,‖ 1900). 510 V. Solov‘ev, Tri razgovora. Introduced by S.A. Levitsky. New York: Izdatel‘stvo imeni Chekhova, 1954, 122. 227 Paul. 511 Here Soloviev refers to Tolstoy and his doctrine of ―nonresistance to evil,‖ which has been mentioned before in relation to his view on war. For Soloviev, these ―true Christians‖ should leave Christ alone and look for a religious authority closer to their precepts. This authority is the Buddha who preached what they wanted: ―nonresistance, detachment, sobriety,‖ and the Buddhist sacred texts with their praise of the concept of emptiness. 512 In other words, Soloviev criticizes Tolstoy for his incoherence and disillusion, because he should call his doctrine with its real name: Buddhism, and not Christianity. Yet, if the polemics with Tolstoy partially provoked the Buddhist references in Three Conversations, they also appeared in the text as a consequence of the ―yellow peril‖ threat, which Soloviev associated with the rise of pan-mongolism. As he himself wrote in the foreword to the book: ―I am far from being unconditionally hostile to Buddhism and even more so to Islam, but even without counting me in, there are already too many people who enthusiastically turn their eyes away from the real condition of our actual situation.‖ 513 The Muslim and Buddhist threat that Soloviev had in mind came from two political-religious groups: the Muslim Senussi 514 and the Tibetan Buddhist Kalons (Soloviev misspelled their name in Kelan). The Kalons were ministers of the Privy Council in Tibet and were directly elected by the Dalai Lama. Soloviev read about 511 Ibid., 22. 512 Ibid., 24. 513 Ibid., 30. 514 The order of Senussi was founded by the Grand Sayyid Muhammad ibn Ali as-Senussi in Mecca in 1837. It fought for the spiritual and political integrity of Islam in places like Libya and Sudan. 228 the Kelan in Abbé Huc‘s travel account of his 1845-6 journey to Central Asia. 515 The Russian writer himself had revealed his source years earlier in his 1892 book review of Helena Blavatsky‘s The Key to Theosophy, where he mentions Huc in defense of the Theosophist, who was blamed for having imagined the existence of Mahatmas (spiritual leaders) and Kalons. 516 Soloviev‘s affiliation of the Tibetan school of Kalon to his pan-mongolian discourse shed new light on his apocalyptic vision, for according to Tibetan legend this Buddhist group of ministers was associated with a belief in the future rise of the reign of Shambhala 517 and in the end of the world. Although neither Huc nor Soloviev openly mention the word ―Shambhala,‖ Huc‘s description of the Buddhist prophecy clearly refers to it. 518 In this respect Soloviev did play the role of prophet, since years later, at the time of the civil war between the Whites and the Reds, the figure of Baron Roman 515 E. R. Huc, Souvenirs d'un voyage dans la Tartarie, le Thibet, et la Chine pendant les années 1844, 1845 et 1846, vol. 2. Paris: Le Clere et Cie, 1850. The English reference book used here is the 1931 edition Souvenirs of a Journey through Tartary, Tibet and China During the Years 1844, 1845 and 1846, vol. 2. New edition annotated and illustrated by J.-M. Planchet, C.M.. Peking: Lazarist Press, 1831. 516 V. Solov‘ev, Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 6, 291-2. 517 According to Buddhist creed, after a period of war and misery Maitreya— the next incarnation of the Buddha—would rule on Earth bringing prosperity and peace. 518 In his travel account, Huc wrote about the next incarnation of the Panchen Lama (the second spiritual leader after the Dalai Lama and commander of the future reign of Shambhala) in the north of Lhasa. There he would prepare himself for the sanguinary battle against the Chinese. That would be a holy war, in which the Panchen Lama would combat together with his devoted resurrected Kalons. Huc continues: ―Pànchàn [the Panchen Lama] will distribute arrows and fusils to all of them [the Kalons], and will form of this multitude a formidable army of which he himself will take the command. The society of Kalons will march with the Saint of Saints, and will throw themselves on the Chinese, who will be cut to pieces […] The Pànchàn will be proclaimed universal sovereign, and under his holy influence Lamaism will be soon restored to its pristine vigour, superb Lamaseries will rise everywhere, and the whole world will recognize the infinite power of Buddhic prayers‖ (E. Huc, Souvenir of a Journey, vol. 2, 242). 229 Ungern von Sternbergov rose from the East to fight against the Red Army (Chapter One). The Baron embodied the pan-mongolian prophecy of Vladimir Soloviev. Vladimir Soloviev was not alone in his fight against Buddhism. Another adversary was the Symbolist Viacheslav Ivanov, who did not spare harsh words where this religion was concerned. He made references to the ―virus of Buddhism,‖ 519 classifying it as an instrument of Satan‘s accomplice, Ariman. 520 What made Ivanov dislike Buddhism so much? It seems that more than everything else, Ivanov could not tolerate its nihilistic view and its extreme individualism. As he puts in his chapter ―On Dionysius and Culture‖ (1909), Dionysius and Buddhist nihilism represent the negative pole of that ―right craziness‖ (pravoe bezumie) that strengthened the naturally salutary and creative ability of humankind. 521 A good example of positive human genius in contrast to the negative Buddhist doctrine is given by Ivanov in his article ―Idea on the Aversion to the World‖ (Ideia nepriiatiia mira, 1906). Here, the author lists as positive examples Michelangelo‘s Last Judgment, Raphael‘s Transfiguration, and Leonardo Da Vinci‘s Last Supper. Describing Michelangelo‘s masterpiece, Ivanov writes that in the representation: ―the aversion to the world is neither pessimism nor Buddhism. It is the energy (energetizm) proclaimed in this horrifying composition that seems to resound with 519 V. Ivanov, ―Ideiia nepriatiia mira.‖ In Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 3. Edited by D.V. Ivanov and O. Deshart. Bruxelles: Foyer Oriental Chrétien, 1979, 84. 520 V. Ivanov, ―‗Prolegomeny o demonakh.‘ (Lik i lichiny Rossii).‖ Ibid., 246. 521 V. Ivanov, ―Sporady.‖ In Ibid., 123. Ivanov published separately the chapters of his essay in different magazines. Some of them appeared on The Scale in 1908, others in The Golden Flee and The Torch (Fakel). He included the chapter on ―Dionysius and Culture‖ in his book Po zvezdam (St. Petersburg: Ory, 1909). See V. Ivanov, Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 3, note on page 735. 230 deafening music— the flaming element of the sacred prophetic wrath. ‗The fire purifies the world with its loathed love.‘ We are looking at the ‗implacable No,‘ when the ‗sacred Yes‘ has not been established yet.‖ 522 The energy (energetizm) to which Ivanov refers is the mystical energy, the self-assertion of the supernatural, which is Divine will. Considering that Ivanov‘s ―Idea on the Aversion of the World‖ aroused questions among the Symbolist community, 523 he certainly helped sustain the debate about Buddhist philosophy through his polemic writings. Ivanov‘s intolerance of Buddhism seems inexplicable, given that he was interested in its philosophy and culture for a period of time. He learned Sanskrit with Ferdinand de Saussure in Geneva in 1902 524 and interacted with Sergei Oldenburg. 525 During the years of his study in Geneva, Ivanov read about Asian religions, such as Brahmanism and Hinduism, as well as Buddhism. 526 He would continue to cultivate his interest in Oriental culture, especially Indian, even later, as evidenced by his translation of part of the Indian epos Nal and Damaianti (1934-5) and, to a certain extent, by some 522 V. Ivanov, ―Ideia nepriiatiia mira.‖ In Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 3, 85. 523 His article first appeared as an introduction to Georgy Chulkov‘s book O Misticheskom anarkhizme (St. Petersburg: Fakely, 1906). Its publication aroused polemics that would last for several years. One of its opponents was Valery Briusov, who criticized Ivanov‘s introduction on the pages of the magazine The Scale (V. Ivanov, Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 3, 1979, endnote on page 707-33). 524 G.M. Bongard-Levin, ―Indiia i indologi v zhizni i tvorchestve Viach. Ivanova.‖ In Vestnik istorii, literatury, iskusstva, vol. 5. Edited by Grigorii Bongard-Levin. Moscow: Sobranie, 2008, 204. 525 Ibid., 203, 206-7. 526 In his article ―Indiia i indologi,‖ Grigory Bongard-Levin provides a list of books read by Ivanov. Among them are the Annals of the Guimet Museum (vol. 1-4, 1881); I.P. Minaeff, Recherches sur le bouddhisme. Translated from the Russian by R.-H. Assier de Pompignan, introduced by Émile Senart and with remarks on the author by Serges d‘Oldenburg. Paris, 1894 (Bongard-Levin, ―Indiia i indologi,‖ note 27, 215-6). 231 episodes in his epics Tale About Tsesarevich Svetomir. The Legend of the Sage Enoch (Povest‘ o Svetomire Tsareviche. Skazanie startsa-inoka, 1928-1949). 527 Ivanov even translated parts of the Panchatantra 528 — the Sanskrit collection of canonical fables— which, as discussed above and in Chapter Two, Remizov and Tolstoy also read. Ivanov‘s fascination with India places him in the same sphere as people sharing common themes, including Buddhist subjects. If Ivanov participated in this general interest in Buddhism, what caused him to reverse his feelings on the subject? Specialists on Ivanov, such as Gennady Obatnin and Nikolai Bogomolov, have tended to align everything ―Oriental‖ in Ivanov‘s literary production with mysticism and occultism; 529 however, reading all sections in both his articles and his correspondence in which Ivanov mentions Buddhism, one glimpses a possibly different explanation. The goal of this chapter, and especially of the last chapter devoted to the Russian interpretation of nirvana, is to prove that part of the impetus for Buddhism entering Symbolist vocabulary did not come from Occultism, Esoterism, Theosophy, or Anthroposophy, 530 but from 527 For instance in Joann Presviter‘s letter to Tsar Vladary in the fifth book of the epics, the addresser mentions the ―White India‖ (Chapter Two) and the Apostle Foma-the enlightener of India (Chapter Seven) (V. Ivanov, ―Povest‘ o Svetomire Tsareviche. Skazanie startsa-inoka.‖ In Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 1, 1971, 353, 359). Sakyamuni and Confucius appear in the epics as the pagan divinities worshipped by the locals (Ibid., 361). 528 Ivanov‘s translation is given in appendix to Bongard-Levin‘s article ―Indiia i Indologi,‖ 212-3. 529 G. Obatnin, Ivanov-Mistik. Okkul‘tnye motivy v poezii i proze Viacheslava Ivanova (1907-1919). Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2000. N. Bogomolov, Russkaia literatura nachala XX veka i okkul‘tizm. Moscow, 2000. 530 Anthroposophy was founded by Rudolf Stein in 1913 after his resignation as head of the German and Austrian branch of the Theosophical Society. Unlike Theosophy, Anthroposophy puts man and not divine wisdom to the center of its doctrine. Thus, Anthroposophy aligns more with Christianity than Oriental philosophies. 232 other external factors— traveling to Asia, wars with eastern countries (China and Japan primarily), and imperialist and colonialist policies undertaken both in Western Europe and Russia. At the time, Russia was close to Western Europe both politically and culturally, and Buddhism was enjoying great popularity in countries such as England, France, and Germany, thus Russians assimilated some views on Buddhism from the west. In this respect, Ivanov‘s take on Buddhism came from Schopenhauer‘s and Nietzsche‘s nihilistic interpretations of nirvana and emptiness. As the Russian poet himself said years later during his speech at the ―Lunedi letterari‖ (literary Mondays) in San Remo Italy on April 10, 1933, the materialism and nihilism of modernity—which philosophers like Kant, Hegel, Nietzsche, and many others perpetrated in their worldviews— disoriented the spirit, provoking moral fatigue and spiritual falsehood. Worse yet, Ivanov continues, an evil breeze from the East brought new germs to Europe. This Eastern wind represented a homogeneous and malign contamination, which had in Buddhist nihilism one of its most aggressive elements. 531 Ivanov‘s dislike of Buddhism came as a reaction not only to German philosophers, but also to French writers, such as Vicomte de Vogüé. Ivanov talked about de Vogüé, whose parallels between Buddhist nihilism and the Russian spirit will be discussed in Chapter Six, in his letter to his wife, Lidia Zinoveva-Annibal (February 15, 1902). 532 Here, Ivanov comments on Aleksei Suvorin‘s articles, ―Short Letters,‖ 531 V. Ivanov, ―Discorso sugli orientamenti dello spirito moderno.‖ In Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 3, 460. 532 V. Ivanov, L. Zinov‘eva-Annival, Perepiska: 1894-1903, vol. 2. Edited by D.O. Solodka and N.A. Bogomolov with the participation of M. Wachtel. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2009, 251-3. 233 (Malen‘kie pis‘ma) published in New Times on January 7-8, 1902. Ivanov agrees with Suvorin‘s answer to de Vogüe regarding a Russian pessimistic attitude. According to de Vogüe, the more he looked at Russian lifestyle and literature, the more de Vogüe became convinced that Buddhist philosophy was the pole to which Russia was gravitating. Russian fictional heroes, de Vogüe continued, deny life and sink lower and lower into the spiral of nirvana. 533 For Suvorin Russians never would turn into Buddhists; he further explains that Russian pessimism and nihilism is a result of the hardship of Russian life and climate. According to Suvorin, Russians did not know how to laugh because they had been psychically damaged by war. Everything in Russia was like a convulsion, nothing happened smoothly, but always spasmodically. This notion applies to wars, seasons, and so on. Still, Suvorin ended his ―Short Letters‖ optimistically, placing his trust in common people— a potential repository of talent that would save Russia from turning to Buddhism. 534 In his opposition to Buddhism, Ivanov, who would embrace Catholicism in 1937, shared Soloviev‘s negative approach. Even though Ivanov did not openly associate the ―yellow peril‖ with Buddhism, nonetheless, his elaborations on ―yellow Asia‖ have a Buddhist subtext. For example in his work ―On the Russian Idea‖ (O russkoi idee, 1909), after introducing the Solovievian scenario of pan-mongolism and the Apocalypses, Ivanov alleges that with the Russo-Japanese war, ―yellow Asia‖ fulfilled its mission to 533 V. Suvorin, ―Malen‘kie pis‘ma.‖ Novoe vremia (January 8, 1902): 2. De Vogüe was referring in particular to Chekhov‘s theatrical pieces. 534 Ibid., 2-3. 234 test the European Christian spirit. 535 His conclusive remarks compare the Buddhist self- destructive doctrine to the Christian view of self-preservation. In the penultimate chapter, he writes: ―The legend about the Buddha who gave his flesh to feed the hungry tigress is inacceptable to Christian feeling; at the same time, the Buddha does not crucify his body to redeem humankind from its sin. The purely human tragedy in religion is deeply alien to Buddhism.‖ 536 For Ivanov, the parallel between Christ‘s Calvary and the Buddha‘s sacrifice most effectively demonstrated the vastly different mindsets of the two doctrines. According to his interpretation, unlike the Buddha, who limited himself to solving temporary problems, Christ had a much broader perspective and was focused on the solution of universal questions, such as the redemption of humankind and its preservation. Notably, Ivanov took the aforementioned episode of the sacrifice of the Buddha from the Jataka Tales— a collection of tales about the previous reincarnations of Sakyamuni. The story that Ivanov retold concerns the sacrifice of the young Prince Sattva, son of King Maharatha, who immolated his body to save a starving tigress that, in order to survive, was ready to devour her newborn cubs. Ivanov possibly read the tale during his years of study in Geneva, since at that time the Jataka Tales had been already translated into English by various Sanskritologists and was collected in a seven-volume 535 V. Ivanov, ―O russkoi idee.‖ In Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 3, 322. His article was first published in The Golden Flee in 1909 (see endnote to the book on page 805). 536 Ibid., 335. 235 edition published by Cambridge University Press (1895-1907). 537 Furthermore, Ivanov‘s paraphrase of Prince Sattva‘s sacrifice brings to mind Merezhkovsky‘s own adaptation of King Ushinara‘s immolation in his poem ―Sacrifice‖ (Chapter Two). That Ivanov and Merezhkovsky shared a set of common themes is not surprising; on the contrary, it is worth remembering that Merezhkovsky invited Ivanov to publish his acclaimed series of Parisian lectures in the pages of his magazine, New Path (Novy Put‘). 538 Perhaps what best demonstrates Ivanov‘s contribution of Buddhist imagery to the ―yellow peril‖ theme 539 is his 1916 review of Andrei Bely‘s novel Petersburg. 540 According to Ivanov, Bely entirely accepted Soloviev‘s prophesy of pan-mongolism and ―yellow peril;‖ however, the young Symbolist added some new and specific traits, such as a mystical Terror taking over an epoch that had lost its faith in God. This Terror (with a capital T) was the same that Greeks felt in Aeschylus‘ tragedies, in particular in his trilogy Oresteia, which Ivanov paraphrases in his book review. Undoubtedly, for Ivanov the Hellenic matricide of Orestes, who killed his mother, Clytemnestra, as vengeance for 537 The Jātaka or Stories of the Buddha‘s Former Births. Edited by Edward B. Cowell. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1895-1907. 538 During his Parisian sojourn in May 1903, Ivanov was invited to give a series of lecture on the Dionysian Hellenic religion. Immediately after the conclusion of his lectures, Merezhkovsky invited Ivanov to publish his course in his magazine. Ivanov‘s lectures appeared under the title ―Ellinskaia religiia stradaiushchego Boda‖ (1904-1905); they were an immediate success (V. Ivanov, Rodnoe i vselenskoe. Edited, introduced and commented by V.M. Tolmachev. Moscow: Respublika, 1994, 5). 539 Ivanov went back to his vision of the Christian white Europe united against the yellow Asians again at the outbreak of World War I. According to Ivanov, only the union of England and Russia— the two powers with a direct interest in Asia— could contrast the advancement of the ―yellow peril‖ in the west (V. Ivanov, ―Rossiia, Angliia i Aziia.‖ In Rodnoe i vselenskoe, 377-380). 540 V. Ivanov, ―Vdokhnovenie uzhasa (O romane Belogo ‗Peterburg‘).‖ In Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 4, 1987, 619-29. 236 her murder of Agamemnon, inspired fascinating parallels with the attempted patricide by Bely‘s hero Nikolai Apollonovich Ableukhov. Nonetheless, Oresteia was not the only play Ivanov had in mind when writing his book review. Indeed, his argumentation of the ―yellow peril‖ threat in Petersburg mixes the ―terror antiquus‖ of the past Greco-Persian Wars (499-449 B.C.), when Greece was invaded by Persians, with his own contemporary fear of the consequences of the Russo-Japanese war. Imagining the terror that Aeschylus felt at the sight of ―barbaric‖ Persians invading his motherland, Ivanov saw history repeating itself. That Ivanov saw similarities between the two conflicts is clear from the word ―Turan,‖ the Greek name for Scythia— the ancient region inhabited by Iranians— which he used to introduce his further elaborations on pan-mongolism and the ―yellow peril.‖ 541 Ivanov‘s view includes a wide range of stereotypes and doctrines embracing Orientalism, Buddhism, and Theosophy— all mixed together in the irrational fear that the ―yellow race‖ would take over the ―white race.‖ In Ivanov‘s understanding, Orientalism belongs to the exotic world of Persia and Japan, as represented in the ―Japanisme‖ recognizable in the prints of Japanese landscapes and views of Mt. Fujiyama, as well as in Sofia Petrovna‘s physiognomy. She looked like ―a real Japanese girl‖ wearing a pink kimono 542 who pretended to understand theosophical matters (see her reading of Anne Besant). 543 As if this fascination with the Orient was not enough, Ivanov continued, the main hero, 541 Ibid., 627. 542 A. Bely, Petersburg. Translated, annotated, and introduced by Robert A. Maguire and John E. Malmstad. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1978, 39. 543 V. Ivanov, ―Vdokhnovenie uzhasa (O romane Belogo ‗Peterburg‘),‖ 628. 237 Nikolai Apollonovich, was an admirer of Buddhism, in whose doctrine he saw the rationalization of Kantian Idealism, which, at its most extreme, fulfilled the Buddhist notion of nothingness. Hence, Ivanov concluded, Nikolai Apollonovich was a ―Nirvanic man.‖ 544 Leaving aside the discussion on nirvana for now, Ivanov‘s argument makes it easy to recognize the extent to which Buddhist philosophy was a discussion topic in Symbolist circles. One can easily imagine Bely sitting in Ivanov‘s ―tower‖ writing his novel and discussing the plot with his friend in front of a cup of tea. Indeed, Bely did write his novel at Ivanov‘s home and Ivanov suggested the title Petersburg instead of Bely‘s blunt title, The Lacquered Carriage (Lakirovannaia kareta). 545 Bely‘s novel stands as an exemplary case of how the ―yellow peril‖ threat mingled with the Apocalypse and Buddhism. It is also exemplary of how the notion of ―the journey‖ can function in both real and imagined space. The fact that the hometown in question is St. Petersburg— a highly symbolic place in the Russian imaginary— further strengthens the symbolic message of Bely‘s fictional interpretation of space. As the following section will demonstrate, Bely‘s Petersburg transposed into fiction some of the fears discussed thus far; however, no matter how hard the author tried to exorcise these fears in the narrative space of a novel, some of them materialized in the real space of St. Petersburg, specifically at 91 Primorsky pr., Staraia Derevnia— the address where, in 1909, the first Buddhist Temple in Europe was built. 544 Ibid. 545 V. Ivanov, Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 4, 1987, note 619, 783. 238 Bely’s Petersburg as the Imaginary Battlefield between Western and Eastern Civilizations Among the various aspects of journeying, the collision of two mindsets plays a prominent role. Whether this confrontation happens peacefully (a private tour abroad) or violently (a military conflict), its consequences are reflected in the national consciousness. Russia‘s foreign policy with China and Japan caused a collision that awoke in the Russian consciousness the long dormant fear of the past Tataro-Mongol yoke. That time of trouble and darkness that Russia had experienced in the thirteenth century again menaced the country in the form of the ―yellow features‖ of the new enemies from the East. Unlike the past, however, ―the new invaders‖ brought a new culture and new religions, one of them being Buddhism. Bely never openly associated the ―yellow peril‖ threat with Buddhism; however, he sometimes suggested such an interpretation indirectly. Before analyzing the works in which Andrei Bely assumed this parallel, it is worth remembering that Solovievian beliefs had been deeply imbued in his worldview, especially Soloviev‘s prophesy of the Apocalypse. 546 Though Andrei Bely was too much of a ―convinced Buddhist‖ 547 to appreciate Vladimir Soloviev from their very first encounter, the Russian philosopher did influence Bely‘s worldview, including 546 On the theme of the Apocalypse in Bely‘s literary production, see Samuel D. Cioran‘s book The Apocalyptic Symbolism of Andrei Bely (Mouton: The Hague, 1973) and A. Bely, Antichrist. Abbozzo di un mistero incompiuto. Edited and commented by Daniela Rizzi. Trento: Dipartimento di Storia della Civiltá Europea, Universitá di Trento, 1990. 547 A. Bely, Zapiski chudaka. Moscow/Berlin: knigoizdatel‘stvo Gelikon, 1922. Reprint Lausanne: Éditions l‘Âge d‘Homme, vol. 1,1973, 98. 239 his perceptions of Buddhism and the ―yellow peril.‖ As proof, one needs only to recall that in his autobiographical Notes of an Eccentric Man (Zapiski chudaka), Bely openly credits Soloviev‘s article ―The Enemy from the East,‖ especially the passage where the author mentions Buddhism along with the advancement of the desert from the East to the West, for inspiring his thesis On Ravines (Ob ovragakh). 548 Bely also took from Soloviev the identification of pan-mongolism with the Apocalypse, to which he added the Russo-Japanese conflict as historical background, thus participating in contemporary debates taking place in periodicals. A quick look at Bely‘s articles from the period 1904-5 published in The Scales evidences his involvement best. One in particular, ―Apocalypse in Russian Poetry,‖ 549 is a case in point, opening as it does with Soloviev‘s poem ―Pan-mongolism‖ as an epigraph and developing the image of the red dragon throughout the text. The red dragon was a reference not only to the book of the Apocalypse, but also to Soloviev‘s homonymous poem dedicated to Kaiser Wilhelm II. The political subtext, which Bely had appropriated in his article by referring to the Dragon— the mythological beast that Soloviev in his turn used in his poem dedicated to the German ruler, might also help explain the image of Russia as a sleeping beauty called to wake up and fight against the red dragon. As seen in the first section of 548 Ibid., 52. 549 A. Bely, ―Apokalipsis v russkoi poezii.‖ Vesy 4 (April 1905): 11-28. Facsimile reprinted in 1968 (Nendeln/Liechtenstein: Kraus Reprint LDT). On a similar topic Bely wrote ―Khimery‖ (Vesy 6, June 1905: 1-18), which was accompanied in the same issue by Viacheslav Ivanov‘s article ―Iz oblasti sovremennykh nastroenii. Apokaliptiki i obshvhestvennost‖ (Ibid., 35-9). 240 this chapter, To the War of Russia Against Japan (fig. 23) depicts Russia as a young lady dressed in a military attire ready to fight against a red dragon. 550 According to Robert A. Maguire and John E. Malmstad, Bely hinted at Kaiser Wilhelm and his coinage of the ―yellow peril‖ in Stepka‘s prophesy, which he speaks of in Petersburg. 551 Moreover, references to the ―yellow peril‖ can be found throughout the novel in everything from the recurrent color yellow 552 to Stepka‘s prophesy. 553 Indeed, in the novel, the color yellow sometimes assumes certain Buddhist underpinnings, as it will become clear shortly. 550 Bely directly addressed the theme of war and ―yellow peril‖ in his poem Take this, Jap! (Iaponets voz‘mi, 1906, 1925): ―A fly is buzzing in my ear,/The dusty square is vacant…/The yellow foot will step into/the remotely sounding suburbs./The scream of our dying brothers/Will arise in the vacant balalai,/Tsar Nicholas, do you hear the barking of the advancing armies?//Into the shining of the rising sun,/standing under the prison window,/The yellow mug of a Jap/Will soon step out of the darkness.//Die out - you cesspit!/Give way - you Russian folk!/Soon Marshal Oyama will enter the city to the sounds of music.‖ [Муха жужукает в ухо,/Пыльная площадь—пуста.../В пригород, тукнувший глухо,/ Желтая ступит пята.// Крик погибающих братий/Встанет в пустой балалай,/Лай наступающих ратей/Слышишь ли, цар Николай?// В блеск восходящего солнца,/Став под окошко тюрьмы,/Желтая рожа японца/Выступит скоро из тьмы.// Тухни,--помойная яма!/Рухни,--российский народ!/Скоро уж маршал Ояма/С музыкой в город войдет]. A. Bely, Sobranie sochinenii. Stikhotvoreniia i poemy. Edited by V.M. Puskinova. Moscow: Respublika, 1994, 424. 551 A. Bely, Petersburg. Translated by Robert A. Maguire and John E. Malmstad, note on page 327. Styopka, the son of the shop-keeper Ivan Stepanov in Bely‘s previous novel The Silver Dove, reappears at the end of Chapter Two of Petersburg in the turmoil preceding the first Revolution. He meets the porter Matvei Morzhev for a chat and, while prophesying the end of the world, he says: ―There‘s a certain prophecy: let us hearken, it is said…the sword, it is said, is raised against us…while to the Japs—the victor‘s laurel. And then again, the birth of the new child. And further: they say the Prooshan Imperor…‖ (Ibid., 69). 552 Ibid., note 17, 536 in the Russian edition of A. Bely, Petersburg. Roman v vos‘mi glavakh s prologom i epilogom. Commented by S.S. Grechishkin, L.K. Dolgopolov, and A.V. Lavrov.Kiev: Izdatel‘stvo khudozhestvennoi literatury ―Dnipro,‖ 1990. 553 Hostility towards the ―Mongol mugs‖ is also perceived in the episode of the automobile with Japanese people inside rushing toward the Neva River. Bely refers to the Japanese delegation that arrived in St. Petersburg to formalize the peace treaty (A. Bely, Petersburg. Translated by Robert A. Maguire and John E. Malmstad, 65 and note on page 325). 241 Perhaps a better summary of how esoterism, Orientalism, Buddhism, and the ―yellow peril‖ all mingled in the fear of pan-mongolism can be seen in Nikolai Apollonovich‘s dream of the Last Judgment. He dreams of the head of a god looking at him from the doorway of his room, as he explains: Was it the head of Confucius or Buddha? In the doorway, the swish of an iridescent silken dressing gown; and he recalled his own Bukhara dressing gown, with the same iridescent feathers—the dressing gown, over whose smoky- sapphire fabric crawled sharp-beaked, golden, winged miniature dragons […] Thus a hallowed Mongol entered the room: millennia breezes wafted. 554 This dream becomes one of those moments in which various facets of the Orient merge in a stream of consciousness. Generally speaking, the East seems to flow into the fictional discourse of Petersburg from two distinctive branches— ―Japanisme‖/Orientalism and philosophy/Orientology. The former relates to the world of Sophia Petrovna Likhutina— the ―Japanese girl‖ with the hue ―of pearl iridescent with the rosy whiteness of delicate apple blossom petals,‖ 555 and who wears a pink kimono in the morning and reads Annie Besant‘s theosophical book Man and his Body (1896). Through Likhutina and her salon, as well as through her attendance of séances at Baroness R.R.‘s house, the reader glimpses what was in vogue in Russian upper society at the beginning of the last century. Bely himself did not sympathize with that life, as his letter to N.I. Petrovskaia on June 21, 1904 confirms. 556 Parallel to that world with no 554 Ibid., 165. 555 Ibid., 39. 556 Here he wrote: ―Mysticism cannot agree with the necessity of outer phenomena. Neither Christ nor Buddha nor even prophets organized séances. When they made miracles, they clearly had a transcending meaning, i.e. they were symbols and not phenomena‖ (A. Bely, Peterburg. Commented by S.S. Grechishkin, L.K. Dolgopolov, A.V. Lavrov, note 23, 552). 242 perspective 557 stood the logical world of philosophy, where people seek plausible answers to eternal questions of existence. The hero of the novel, Nikolai Ableukhov, devotes his life to the study of philosophy, and is motivated by hostility to any form of divination. In this respect Nikolai Ableukhov particularly respected Buddhism for having overcome other religions in two ways: ―in the psychological— it taught love for all living creatures; in the theoretical— its logic had been developed by Tibetan lamas. Nikolai Apollonovich remembered that he had read the logic of Dharmakirti with commentaries by Dharmottara.‖ 558 The logical and psychological aspects of this religion and the friendly relations with the Tibetan lamas that his Kirghiz-Kaisak ancestors had maintained possibly explain Nikolai Ableukhov‘s ―tender feeling for Buddhism.‖ 559 Nonetheless, his interest in Buddhist philosophy may also be explained by the similarities between its religious doctrine and Idealist philosophy, especially the 557 The lack of perspective is the leitmotif accompanying Bely‘s description of Sophia Petrovna‘s lifestyle, which, similar to the Japanese prints hanging on the walls of her apartment, lacks any perspective (A. Bely, Petersburg. Translated by Robert A. Maguire and John E. Malmstad, 65 and note on page 39). 558 Ibid., 164. Nikolai Apollonovich, aka Bely, is referring to the Buddhist treatise on Logic, which the Orientologist Fedor Shcherbatskoi translated and commented in 1904 (Ibid. 337). According to the editors of the Russian edition of Bely‘s Petersburg, S. Grechishkin et al., Bely had a copy of this book in his library and Briusov asked for its title and date-lines in February 1904 (A. Bely, Peterburg. Commented by S.S. Grechishkin, L.K. Dolgopolov, A.V. Lavrov, note 20, 572). Bely mentioned Dharmakirti on other occasions as well; for example in his literary portrait of Balmont. Here he defined the Symbolist poet as a ―Buddhist-orgiastic,‖ the embodiment of a contradiction made of two patterns: red arabesques and the cold emblem of some Buddhist sage Dharmakirti (A. Bely, ―Bal‘mont.‖ In Simvolizm kak miroponimanie. Edited, introduced and commented by L.A. Sugai. Moscow: Respublika, 1994, 406). Years later, during his antroposophical period, Bely mentioned Dharmotarra and Dharmakirti again in his poem The First Encounter (The First Encounter by Andrey Bely. Translated and introduced by Jerald Janecek. Preliminary remarks, notes, and comments by Nina Berberova. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1979, 7). 559 A. Bely, Petersburg. Edited by Maguire and Malmstad, 165. Bely maintained this Oriental linage in reality as well; in his autobiographical novel The Christened Chinaman the author attributed his father, Nikolai Bugaev, Chinese facial traits and the wisdom of Confucius and Lao Tze (A. Bely, The Christened Chinaman. Translated, annotated and introduced by Thomas R. Beyer. Tenafly, N.J.: Hermitage Publishers, 1991). 243 transcendental Idealism of Kant and the ―ideational‖ world of Schopenhauer. 560 Both the Kantian ―Thing-in-itself‖ and the state of ―buddhahood‖ profess a noumenic worldview that stresses individual achievement. On another level, the philosophical discourse in Petersburg functions as an instrument of comparison between the older generation of fathers (Apollon Apollonovich) and the younger generations of sons (Nikolai Apollonovich). As Bely beautifully puts it in the pun Kant/Comte (in Russian it would sound Kant/Kont) during a table conversation between father and son, 561 young Ableukhov‘s kinship to Idealism also represented a sharp break with the previous generation of Positivists embodied by Ableukhov senior. Bely explains this generational clash in his biographical notes On the Border of Two Centuries (1929); children born on the border of two centuries could not cross the doorway of the new century without saying ―no‖ to their fathers first. For the young generation, the ―yes‖ of the fathers had no meaning; thereby it looked for a different answer, which led it to seek nirvana and Schopenhauer. What united the children born on the border of two centuries was not the ―yes,‖ but rather, the ―no.‖ 562 The juxtaposition of ―yes‖ and ―no,‖ used by Bely to express the generational clash, points to two considerations. First, the juxtaposition highlights that the young Symbolist generation shared vocabulary. In fact, as seen in the previous section, 560 Nikolai Abkeukhov was a big admirer of Kant (he even had a bust of the German philosopher in his study) and the neo-kantians, especially Hermann Cohen. 561 The dialogue goes as follows: ―Cohen is a representative of serious neo-Kantianism.‖-―You mean Comtianism?‖-―No, Kantianism, papa.‖- ―But didn‘t Comte refute Kant?‖-―But Comte is unscientific…‖ (A. Bely, Petersburg. Translated by Maguire and Malmstad, 79. 562 A. Bely, Na rubezhe dvukh stoletii. On the Border of Two Centuries. Introduced by Georgette Donchin. Chicago, Illinois: Russian Language Specialties, 1966, 191. 244 Viacheslav Ivanov also used the metaphor of ―yes‖ and ―no‖ to distinguish between the positive Christian genius of Michelangelo, Raphael, and Leonardo da Vinci, and the negative Buddhist attitude. 563 Second, this dialectic enhances Bely‘s affiliation with the wide-spread interpretation of Buddhism as a nihilistic doctrine promoting pessimism, the cult of death, and emptiness. This view came straight from the west, in particular from Schopenhauer and his popular The World as Will and Representation (1818). Above all, Russians associated nihilism and emptiness with nirvana— a concept that will be discussed in depth in the last chapter. Bely embraced such a view of nirvana as nothingness. Indeed, he named the hero Nikolai Ableukhov a ―nirvanic man,‖ as synonym for ―Kantian‖ and especially ―Cohenian.‖ 564 For a generation that proclaimed the nihilistic ―no‖ to herald a new era, the Buddhist doctrine, with its First Noble Truth affirming that ―life is sorrow,‖ perfectly concerted with the new generational mindset. This pessimistic approach also convinced Bely and his friends to add Schopenhauer— an admirer of Buddhism himself— to the list of their readings. Through reading Schopenhauer‘s The World as Will and Representation (Bely‘s father owned a copy of it in his library), Andrei Bely discovered the Upanishads; 565 and, during his ―Schopenhauerian period,‖ Bely ―deeply appreciated Buddhism and its ascetics.‖ 566 Looking retrospectively to his ―Schopenhauerian period,‖ and even earlier to his 563 V. Ivanov, ―Ideia nepriiatiia mira.‖ In Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 3, 85. 564 A. Bely, Peterburg. Commented by S.S. Grechishkin, L.K. Dolgopolov, A.V. Lavrov, 290-1. 565 ―Musical scales sing from the heights of Nirvana, while the sound of melody comes from Vedanta‖ (A. Bely, Zapiski chudaka, vol. 2, 155). 566 A. Bely, Na rubezhe dvukh stoletii, 352. 245 childhood, Andrei Bely labeled himself a ―little Buddhist.‖ 567 This classification came from the pessimism that characterized his life from the age of five to eight— a dark time due to the vexation young Boris Bugaev endured from both his parents. Remembering his youth, Bely wrote: ―I abandoned sciences and my teachers noticed that their pupil B. became a sluggard, a pessimist, a Buddhist.‖ 568 If, on the one hand, part of Bely‘s Buddhist vocabulary stems from his interest in Theosophy and Anthroposophy, 569 on the other hand, his participation in the debates of the time and reading Schopenhauer enriched his Buddhist repository with other sources of inspiration. Moreover, living in St. Petersburg endowed the poet with first-hand material, since many events related to the dissemination of Buddhist culture were taking place in the capital. Some of these events included exhibitions of Buddhist cult objects, some of which came from the imperial collections, and the opening of Badmaev‘s Tibetan pharmacy (Chapter Three); others concerned the Buddhist temple under construction at the time. That same ―heathen temple‖ was, according to Stepka, being built by the Chinese in the city 570 — an inadvertent error on the part of Bely since in 1905— the year in which Petersburg is set— the temple had not yet been constructed (building would begin in 1909). 567 Ibid., 201. 568 A. Bely, Zapiski chudaka, vol. 2, 155. 569 See, for instance, his poem ―Karma‖ (1917) in A. Bely, Sobranie sochinenii. Stikhotvoreniia i poemy, 292-3) and his already mentioned The First Encounter (translated and introduced by Jerald Janecek.). 570 A. Bely, Petersburg. Translated by Robert A. Maguire and John E. Malmstad, 68. 246  “The Chinese are putting up some heathen temple” 571 in Petersburg: The Appearance of the First Buddhist Datsan 572 in Europe The erection of a Buddhist datsan in the city menaced those who feared the ―yellow peril,‖ especially after the defeat of Russia by Japan. 573 The fear of Pan- mongolism and the news that the Chinese mission (with the Japanese consulate) was collecting funds to put a school next to the monastery for the young Buddhists arriving in St. Petersburg, convinced authorities to block the construction of the temple. 574 Alarming the population even more was a series of hostile articles from the Orthodox press ominously titled: ―On Defense of our Capital from Paganism,‖ 575 ―Heathen Temple in Staraia Derevnia‖ (Groza, February 6, 1913), and many others. Such headlines may have inspired the line ―The Chinese are putting up some heathen temple‖ in Andrei Bely‘s novel. Because of such opposition to the erection of a datsan in the Russian capital, authorities blocked its construction, claiming that the building committee was not respecting regulations against the Lamaist Priesthood in Eastern Siberia passed in 571 Ibid. 572 ―Datsan‖ is the term used for Buddhist pedagogical monasteries that belong to the Tibetan school of Gelukpa (the Yellow hat sect) in Tibet, Mongolia, and Siberia. 573 The datsan was built in the district of Staraia Derevnia on 91Primorsky Prospekt. Today it is open to the public and has an official website that includes current events http://dazan.spb.ru/ 574 A. Andreev, Khram Buddy v Severnoi stolitse. St. Petersburg: Nartang, 2004, 49-50. Aleksandr Andreev has written about the St. Petersburg Temple extensively in articles and books. From the 1990s onward he has published: Buddiiskaia sviatinia Petrograda. The Buddhist Shrine of Petrograd. Ulan-Ude: Agenstvo EkoArt, EcoArt Agency, 1992; Sankt Peterburgskii datsan-The Saint-Petersburg Datsan. St.-Petersbug: ―Nestor-Istoriia‖ (date of publication unknown). 575 L.V. Katansky, V zashchitu stolitsy ot iazychestva (St. Petersburg, 1920). This article, and the following articles in the text are quoted from A. Andreev, Khram Buddy v Severnoi stolitse, 65-6. 247 1853. 576 Consequently, the police department began an investigation, which came to the conclusion that members of the building committee intended to recruit proselytes from St. Petersburg‘s upper class, members of which had been ―infected‖ by the foreign ―Anglomania‖ and thereby showed sympathy to Buddhism. With the goal of educating the St. Petersburg Buddhist communities according to the example of Buddhist schools in London, the report continued, the building committee wanted to erect a datsan of large dimensions to perform ceremonies in the vein of Indian Buddhism. 577 The political message in these conclusions adduced that England— Russia‘s main rival in Asia— was one of the main causes of Buddhist proselytism at home. However, as early as 1905, at the time of the Dalai Lama‘s flight to Urga after the British invasion of Tibet, the Orientologist Fedor Scherbatskoi personally met with the Tibetan spiritual leader and they discussed the possibility of building a Buddhist datsan in the Russian capital. 578 In the spring of 1908—the year before construction began in St. Petersburg— Nicholas II himself pronounced enthusiastically when Dorzhiev presented his request at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to build the datsan. In his words: ―Buddhists in Russia can feel safe under the wing of the mighty eagle.‖ 579 Promoting the construction was the Dalai Lama‘s emissary to the Tsar, the Buriat monk Agvan Lobsan Dorzhiev who, back 576 A. Andreev, Buddiiskaia sviatinia Petrograda, 16. 577 A. Andreev, Khram Buddy v Severnoi stolitse, 67. 578 Ibid., 31. 579 A. Andreev, Buddiiskaia sviatinia Petrograda, 14. 248 in 1898, had been on a diplomatic mission to Europe seeking international attention for the Tibetan cause. 580 Yet, politics was not the only issue at stake; as the police department reported, Buddhism was gaining proselytes in Russian upper-society. That the Buddhist temple attracted some of the most notorious people of the time can be verified by considering the members of its building committee: Vasily Radlov (Chairman), Sergei Oldenburg, Esper Ukhtomsky, the assistant professor Fedor Shcherbatskoi (representative of the building committee), the Orientologists Vladislav Kotvich and Andrei Rudnev, the two artists Nikolai Roerich and Varvara Schneider, niece of the Indologist Ivan Minaev. The original project was commissioned to the student of urban engineer Nikolai Berezovsky and then passed to the engineer Gavriil Baranovsky. 581 These people belonged to the same community of writers and artists discussed thus far. In fact, as seen in Chapter One, Andrei Rudnev was the source for Aleksei Remizov‘s interpretation of Lamaist folktales; Sergei Oldenburg‘s literary and artistic ties have been discussed in Chapter Two and Three, and Esper Ukhtomsky‘s in Chapter Three. According to the Buddhist Estonian 580 As emissary of the 13 th Dalai Lama, on more than one occasion Dorzhiev went on diplomatic missions to Russia to seek protection against the British expansionistic plans in Tibet. John Snelling affirms that Ukhtomsky asked Dorzhiev to go to St. Petersburg in 1898 and to meet Nicholas II in order to discuss the Tibetan question (J. Snelling, Buddhism in Russia. The Story of Agvan Dorzhiev, Lhasa‘s Emissary to the Tsar. Shaftesbury, Dorset: Element, 1993,52-3). For the same purposes Dorzhiev went on diplomatic mission to France, an ally of Russia in Asia. Aleksandr Andreev writes that the Tibetans decided to ask the French Government for help against the British after two Frenchmen Gabriel Bonvalot and Prince Henry d‘Orleans visited Tibet (A. Andreev, Soviet Russia and Tibet, 27). An incredible amount of literature exists on Dorzhiev in Russian; in English the pioneering book on him remains John Snelling‘s; Dorzhiev is widely discussed also in Alexandre Andreev, Soviet Russia and Tibet. 581 A. Andreev, Buddiiskaia sviatinynia Petrograda, 14-5. 249 Friedrich Lustig, son of the jeweler and goldsmith employed by Karl Fabérgé, 582 Esper Ukhtomsky also attended the salon of the Kalmyk Prince Danzan (Dmitry) Tundutov and his wife, Ksenia Briger, who lived on 59 Kamennoostrovsky prospekt. 583 Ukhtomsky was not the only visitor to the salon; among the guests also figured eminent personalities, such as Prince Nikolai Urusov, Aleksandr Trepov, Princess Volkonskaia, and Obolenskaia. 584 Of great interest are the two artists members of the building committee— Nikolai Roerich and Varvara Schneider. Varvara Schneider was not only an artist, but also an art historian and collector of folk art. She corresponded with people like Ilia Repin, Vladimir Stasov, and Princess Maria Tenisheva. Schneider was an ethnographer who specialized in the regions of Tambov, Penza, Ulianovsk, and Ufa. Her finds are now part of the St. Petersburg Ethnographical Museum. She and her sister, Aleksandra Schneider, who was also an artist, wrote a memoir (never published) about their uncle Ivan Minaev, which is 582 Ashin Ananda (Friedrich Lustig), ―A Brief Sketch of My Life.‖ In Fifty Selected Poems. Rangoon, publisher unknown, 1980s. It is noteworthy that one of Karl Fabérgé‘s sons, Agafon, was a collector of Oriental and Buddhist art. His collection included statuettes of the Buddha and various Chinese and Japanese artwork (A. Perevyshko et al. Peterburg Karla Faberzhe. Al‘bum. St. Petersburg: Liki Rossii, 2005, 47). Moreover, Fabérgé‘s youngest son, Aleksandr, who like his brother was also a collector, studied Chinese hieroglyphs; he was one of the founders of the Museum of Oriental Arts and worked as expert on Oriental Art for the Narkompros (People's Commissariat for Education) in 1918-19 (Peterburg Karla Faberzhe, 7). 583 A. Andreev, Khram Buddy v Severnoi stolitse, 67. The Tundutov and the Tiumen families represented the Kalmyk salons of St. Petersburg high society. Some of their members were deputies in the Duma. Danzan Tundutov patronized Buddhism and was friend with the Russian explorer Petr Kozlov, at his turn a visitor of the St. Petersburg datsan (Ibid., 16-7). 584 Ibid., 67. In his book on the subject Alexander Andreev does not specify the names of Princess Volkonskaia and Obolenskaia, perhaps because they are not mentioned in the unpublished manuscript upon which the author is relaying. 250 Fig. 25 Interior of the St. Petersburg Datsan. Fig. 26 Plafond of the St. Petersburg Datsan with the Eight Auspicious Symbols, designed by Nikolai Roerich. 251 kept at the Institute of Russian Literature (Pushkinskii Dom). 585 Perhaps the decision to have Varvara Schneider on the building committee was dictated not only by her family ties, but also by her acquaintance with Olga Semenova-Tianshanskaia, daughter of the famous explorer Semenov-Tianshansky. 586 Tianshansky may have suggested Schneider to Dorzhiev during their second meeting in November 1907, when the Buriat monk presented him his project ―On the Rapprochement between Russia, Mongolia, and Tibet.‖ 587 Nikolai Roerich was the other artist participating in the construction of the St. Petersburg datsan. He made sketches for the beautiful Art Nouveau stained glass windows that decorate the vault of the temple (fig. 25) and its plafond (fig. 26) to this day. Roerich began working at the interior of the temple in 1914-15, assisted by Buriat craftsmen. The Art Nouveau stained-glass windows, illuminated by sunlight, symbolized the ―Eight auspicious emblems‖ of Tibetan Buddhism. 588 According to Aleksandr 585 This biographical information has been taken from the only available source on the artist, which can be consulted online at http://www.ethnology.ru/biobib/Result.php?fnc=9 This site also explains that the building committee usually met in the apartment of Schneider‘s sister on 3 Masterskaia Street. 586 Varvara Schneider pronounced the speech in memory of Olga Semenova-Tianshanskaia at the Ethnographical Department of the Russian Geographical Society on December 8, 1906 (O. Semenova- Tianshanskaia, Pamiati Ol‘gi Petrovny Semenovoi. St. Petersburg: Tipografiia M.M. Stasiulevicha, 1908). 587 A. Andreev, Buddiiskaia sviatynia Petrograda, 12. The first encounter between the two happened at the time of Dorzhiev‘s first diplomatic mission to Russia in February 1898 (A. Andreev, Khram Buddy v severnoi stolitse, 26). 588 The Buddhist emblems are a conch shell, a lotus, a wheel, a parasol, and endless knot, a pair of golden fishes, a banner proclaiming victory, a treasure vase (A. Andreev, The St. Petersburg Datsan, 18). According to the Tibetan Buddhist tradition, the ―Eight auspicious Symbols‖ were given to the Buddha when he reached the enlightenment under the tree of Bodh Gaya. They are considered to bring good luck and protect from calamities. The parasol, or umbrella, ―is the sign of royal dignity and offers protection from all evils. The two gold fish, matsya or sergyi-na, the insignia of the Indian master of the universe, here express spiritual liberation. They stand for the beings saved from the ocean of suffering earthly existence. The treasure vase or bowl, kalasha, or bumpa, contains spiritual jewels, and can serve as a receptacle for 252 Andreev, at the time of Roerich‘s involvement in the construction of the Buddhist temple, Roerich first heard about the prophecy of Shambhala from a Buriat lama. 589 If it is true that Roerich would become entirely involved with Buddhism and the upcoming reign of Maitreya from the 1920s, it is also possible to find traces of Buddhism in his early artistic production, namely from the time he was a member of the Symbolist artistic movement gravitating around the World of Art group. Concurrent with his work at the St. Petersburg datsan, Nikolai Roerich completed the now destroyed fresco Queen of Heaven on the Shore of the River of Life (fig. 27), which Princess Tenisheva had commissioned him to do in 1912 for the interior of her church at Talashkino, near Smolensk. It belonged to an earlier project meant for the Church of the Veil of the Mother of God in Parkhomovka (in the Kharkov province) in 1906, but was rejected as uncanonical. 590 Roerich designed the early project of The Queen of Haven in collaboration with the Indologist Vladimir Golubev, an archeologist and collector of Oriental art. At the time Roerich was realizing his fresco in Talashkino in 1912, Golubev lustral water, considered to be the nectar of immortality. The lotus flower, padma or pema, symbolizes original purity. It is found in various colors and forms, and is a privileged attribute of the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas. The white conch shell, sankha or dungkar, which is even more revered if its spiral winds rightward, signifies the word that proclaims the glory of the Enlightened Ones, and sometimes bears the name of victory trumpet. The endless knot, srîvasta or pälbeú, is a token of love or eternity, representing infinite life. The great banner, (56) dhvaja or gyältsen, is in fact a wound flag, testifying to the power of Buddhist teaching or the victory of the Good Law. And the golden wheel, chakra or khorlo, is naturally the wheel of teaching (Dharma), to be practiced assiduously to attain Enlightenment. It represents the unity of all things and remains the quintessential symbol of Buddhist doctrine‖ (C.B. Levenson, Symbols of Tibetan Buddhism. Foreword by the Dalai Lama, Photographs by Laziz Hamani. Paris: Éditions Assouline, 1996, 56-59). 589 A. Andreev, Khram Buddy v Severnoi stolitse, 71. 590 J. McCannon, ―Mother of the World. Eurasian Imagery and Conceptions of Feminine Divinity in the Works of Nikolai Roerich.‖ In Russian Art and the West. A Century of Dialogue in Painting, Architecture, and the Decorative Arts. Edited by Rosalind P. Blakesley and Susan E. Reid. DeKalb, Ill. : Northern Illinois University Press, 2007, 146. 253 Fig. 27 Nikolai Roerich, Queen of Heaven on the Shore of the River of Life, 1912. Fig. 27a Detail of Queen of Heaven on the Shore of the River of Life. 254 organized a successful exhibition of ancient Chinese painting and became one of the organizers of the Exhibition of Buddhist art at the Cernuschi Museum in Paris in 1913 591 (Chapter Five). Upon close examination, the seated Madonna resembles a Buddhist representation (fig. 27a) with her hands joined at the chest and the mandorla in the back. Likewise, Roerich‘s contemporaries, like the Symbolist poet Maximilian Voloshin and the collector Sergei Shcherbatov, immediately recognized the Buddhist Tibetan character of the composition, thus confirming well-established Buddhist imagery among the Russian artists of the time. 592 This well-established Buddhist imagery could also explain some visual similarities between Roerich‘s Madonna and Boris Anisfeld‘s undated Goddess of Dreams (Chapter Two), which both suggest a female divinity in an enclosed space. Conclusion The first ceremony at the St. Petersburg datsan was held on the occasion of the 1913 Tercentenary of the Romanovs. The event did not pass unnoticed; on the contrary, it caught the attention of newspapers such as the St. Petersburg Sheet, New Times, The Bell, 591 T. Ermakova, Buddiiskii mir glazami rossiiskikh issledovatelei XIX-pervoi treti XX veka. (Rossiia i sopredel‘nye strany). St. Petersburg: Nauka, 1998, 164. 592 M. Voloshin, ―Khudozhestvennye itogi zimy 1910-1911.‖ Russkaia mysl‘ 6 (1911): 30; S. Shcherbatov, ―Russkie khudozhniki.‖ Vozrozhdenie 18 (1951): 117. Roerich‘s Madonna was also reproduced in his monograph Iu. Baltrushaitis, A.N. Benua, A.I. Gidoni, A.M. Remizov and C.P. Iaremicha, Rerikh. Desiat‘ skazok i pritch‘ N.K. Rerikhа. Edited by V.N. Levitsky. Petrograd: Izd-vo ―Svobodnoe iskusstvo,‖ 1916, 181. 255 and Global Panorama. 593 The second important Buddhist ceremony took place in 1914, on the occasion of the donation of the two statuettes of the Buddha given by the Siamese King Maga Vachiravud. The statuettes, placed on the upper altar of the temple, were brought by the Russian General Consul in Siam Georgy Planson-Rostkov, himself a famous collector. 594 The Russian General Consul personally participated in the giving ceremony with two Siamese diplomats. 595 As with the previous ceremony, this one caught significant attention from the press. The magazine Spark (Ogonek), for instance, published pictures of the ceremony and of the regal gifts (fig. 28). 596 593 ―V Buddiiskoi kumirne.‖ Peterburgskii listok (February 22, 1913); Novoe vremia (February 22, 1913); ―Idolosluzhenie v Peterburge.‖ Kolokol (February 23, 1913); Vsemirnaia panorama 202-9 (1913): 14 (listed in A. Andreev, Khram Buddy v Severnoi stolitse, 82). 594 A. Andreev, Khram Buddy v severnoi stolitse, 78. Planson‘s private collection included unique pieces of Buddhist sculptures with other artwork of Indian statues and religious tools. His collection is kept at the St. Petersburg Museum of the History of Religions and the State Hermitage. 595 Ibid., 87-8. Diplomats serving in Buddhist countries were big collectors of Buddhist cult objects. To give an idea of how widespread the phenomenon of collecting was among them, some of these Russian diplomats included the Russian Consul-General in Kashgar, Nikolai Petrovsky, who competed with his rival for antiquities and political intelligence, the Englishman George Macartney, in acquiring as many ―old books‖ as possible (P. Hopkirk, Foreign Devils of the Silk Road: the Search for the Lost Cities and Treasures of Chinese Central Asia. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1984, 74). The Russian Minister to Peking, Count Arthur Cassini, author of the celebrated ―Cassini Convention‖ between Russia and China, ―was a noted Sinophile and collector of Chinese objets d‘art‖ (A. Malozemoff, Russian Far Eastern Policy 1881-1904. With Special Emphasis on the Causes of the Russo-Japanese War. New York: Octagon Books, 1977, 55). A less known diplomat involved in scientific contributions was the general consul in Urga, Viktor Liuba; his wife, Nadezhda Liuba, cultivated an interest in the arts, Buddhist included. Part of her collection, kept in the Ethnographical Russian Museum under the mysterious name of Madame Liuba, are, among other things, costumes and ornaments of the Chinese people living in Mongolia and Manchuria, masks used in the Tsam Buddhist ceremony, and various items of ethnographical clothing (Russian Ethnographical Museum, archives no 689, 1005, 1033). 596 A. Andreev, Khram Buddy v Severnoi stolitse, 84. Articles appeared also on the newspapers: Birzhevye vedomosti, (June 11, 1914); Ves‘ mir 25 (1914): 8; Ogonek 25 (June 22, 1914): 15 (listed in A. Andreev, Ibid., 90). 256 Fig. 28 ―Torzhestvo u buddistov v Peterburge.‖ Ogonek, 1914. 257 The story of the St. Petersburg datsan, whose golden-topped pagoda would later gleam in Daniil Kharms‘ absurdist prose, 597 evidences best how the Buddhist world and the Russian community of artists and writers were entwined. The subject of the St. Petersburg Buddhist temple spawned polemics and anxieties, love and hate; but it also stood at the crossroads of two worlds— the East and the West— and served as the temporary stop for the continuous motion of traveling ideas. As Aleksandr Andreev rightly noticed, at the turn of the nineteenth century St. Petersburg became the meeting point of two different Buddhist traditions— one coming from the West and one coming from the East. The former arrived from Western Europe, especially from Great Britain and France where Theosophical and Buddhist headquarters were advancing the study of early Hinayana Buddhism, which the two countries imported from southern India. The other Buddhist tradition came from Asia and professed Buddhism of the Tibetan variant, which the Russian minorities of Buriats and Kalmyks brought to the Russian capital. 598 Thus far, this dissertation has mainly addressed the Buddhist tradition from the East, only pointing to what came from the West. However, since Buddhism from the West influenced Russian literature and the arts as deeply as Buddhism from the East, the next two chapters will be devoted to the discussion of ―the journey‖ to the West. In short, when traveling to Western Europe, Russian writers and artists enriched their Buddhist 597 In his story The Old Woman, the hero looks at the golden top of the Buddhist pagoda while passing through Lanskaia and Novaia Derevnia in the train (The Man with the Black Coat. Russia‘s Literature of the Absurd. Selected works by Daniil Kharms and Alexander Vvedensky. Edited and translated by George Gibian. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 1987, 151). 598 A. Andreev, Khram Buddy v Severnoi stolitse, 20. 258 vocabulary with new concepts and ideas. Paradoxically though, it took a trip to Europe for them to arrive in Asia. 259 Chapter 5 From the West to the East: Buddhism in France and Its Russian Reception Quo vadis? ("Whither goest thou?") John 13:36 The Blooming of Buddhism in Europe: An Introduction The modern thirst for traveling often meant yearning for the beautiful architecture of France, the sunny weather of Italy, the urban landscape of London, and the green scenery of Germany and Austria. Indeed, Russians felt so comfortable in these foreign countries that they often considered these places a second home. When the hardships of the new Soviet rule advanced, many of them did not think twice about migrating there. Of those writers discussed so far, for instance, Konstantin Balmont migrated to France, as did Aleksei Remizov, whereas Viacheslav Ivanov traveled to Italy so many times that Rome became his second home. Whether as migratory journey or vacation, for Russians, traveling to the West was as important as voyaging to the East. Furthermore, of particular relevance to the present discussion is that when Russians traveled to Western Europe, some of them encountered Buddhism there, too. In other words, the blooming of Buddhism was such that even when touring the West visitors could step into the East. Therefore, the present chapter will first study the main cultural indicators concerning the reception of Buddhism in Europe and then will turn its focus onto the French reception of Buddhism in order to outline the ways in which that 260 reception coincided or differed from the Russian version of events. As will shortly become clear, the Parisian world mainly assimilated Buddhism in its East Asian (especially Japanese and Chinese) variant, whereas the St. Petersburg and Muscovite circles absorbed both Japanese/Chinese and Tibetan schools. This Russian peculiarity derived from a number of factors: the country‘s proximity to Asian territories and its foreign policy there, as well as the entanglement of Russian intellectuals with western cultural trends, in this case, with Buddhism. Some of the interconnections between the West and Russia that promoted the diffusion of the Buddhist world into modern Russian culture have been addressed in previous chapters. In Chapter Two these ties emerged in the discussion of Sir Edwin Arnold‘s The Light of Asia and its Russian translation; in Tolstoy‘s collaboration with Paul Carus, the editor of the Chicago magazine The Open Court; in Prince Sergei Volkonsky‘s attendance at the World‘s Parliament of Religions held in Chicago in 1893; and, in Balmont‘s collaboration with the French Orientologist Sylvain Lévi. In Chapter Three Russian interaction with the West arose with regard to the 1900 ―Exposition Universelle‖ in Paris, where Prince Esper Ukhtomsky and Nikolai Gomboev showed their Buddhist collections in the Pavilion of Peripheral Regions. Also of importance is that Ukhtomsky‘s collection was the research topic of the German Orientologist Albert Grünwedel, who in 1905 went to St. Petersburg to catalog Ukhtomsky‘s collection. Among the fashionable ideas and religious trends circulating in the West, Buddhism was gaining more and more ground. In 1892 Prince Ukhtomsky himself remarked in his brochure on the missionary question in Zabaikal that Buddhism was 261 popular not only in Siberia, but also in Western Europe. In fact, according to Ukhtomsky, Buddhism was making proselytes among intellectuals and English youth as well. To support his statement, Prince Ukhtomsky mentions General Alexander Cunningham, who discovered evidence of Buddhism‘s ancient past in his excavations in India –likely a reference to Cunningham‘s excavations in 1837 at the Buddhist shrine at Sarnath, outside Benares. Sir Cunningham, who was also the first director of the Indian Archaeological Survey, participated in the restoration of the Temple of Bodh Gaya –a monument that, as previously discussed, was the centre of public attention especially after Edwin Arnold‘s visit. For Ukhtomsky, Cunningham‘s and Arnold‘s activities were indeed symptomatic of the prevalent European interest in Buddhism. This involvement in Buddhist matters, the author stresses, pleased Russian lamas, who had recently also been delighted by a series of articles published in Russian periodicals. 599 Yet, according to Ukhtomsky‘s brochure, England was not the only country to which Buddhism was spreading; he reminded his readers that a Buddhist temple existed even in Paris. And in Paris, Ukhtomsky continues, the Theosophical Society, a sect promoting Buddhist ideas and allegedly maintaining mysterious contacts with Tibetan lamas, was growing. 600 A number of events evidenced Buddhism‘s flourishing in Western Europe, 601 as Ukhtomsky notes. To a certain extent this blooming was the continuation, if not the 599 Ukhtomsky mentions, for example, the Northern Messenger (Severnyi vestnik), which reported on how thrilled the Russian Buddhist clergy was for the visit of Edwin Arnold to Buddhist temples (E. Ukhtomsky, О sostoianii missionerskogo voprosa v Zabaikale, v sviazi s prichinami, obuslovlivaiushchimi malouspeshnost‘ khristianskoi propovedi sredi buriat. Saint Petersburg: Sinodal‘naia tipografiia, 1892, 44). 600 Ibid. 262 apogee, of the Romantic ―Oriental Renaissance‖ that Raymond Schwab so accurately describes in the homonymous book. 602 Still, the growth of Buddhist studies in Europe also occurred as a consequence of other external factors. In Great Britain, for example, two of these factors concerned British commerce with India, and England‘s imperialist policy in Asia. A quick survey of the cultural scene in the United Kingdom reveals a series of initiatives related to the promotion of Buddhism. To mention but a few: in 1879 Arnold‘s popular The Light of Asia was published; in 1881 the British scholar Thomas Rhys-Davids 603 founded the Pali Text Society in London; in 1895 The Sacred Books of the Buddhists, a serial publication devoted to the study of Buddhist texts was established. In 1879 the same idea led the German Indologist Max Müller to establish the series Sacred Books of the East, and in 1897 the Russian Orientoligist Sergei Oldenburg to launch the scholarly edition of books on the East, Biblioteka Buddica. Theosophy also played an important role in the diffusion of Buddhism, especially after 1887 when Helena Blavatsky moved to London. In fact, early Theosophical works first appeared in England. One example is Esoteric Buddhism (1883) by the Theosophist Alfred Percy Sinnett. From England Buddhism spread to Germany, where in 1903 the 601 On the subject, see: M. Bergonzi, ―Il buddhismo in Occidente.‖ In Storia del Buddhismo. Edited by Henri-Charles Puech. Bari: Editori Laterza, 1984, 338-396; H. de Lubac, La rencontre du Bouddhisme et de l‘Occident. Paris: Aubier, 1952; R. Fields, How the Swans Came to the Lake. A Narrative History of Buddhism in America. Third edition, revised and updated. Boston & London: Shambhala, 1992. 602 R. Schwab, The Oriental Renaissance. Europe‘s Rediscovery of India and the East, 1680-1880. Translated by Gene Patterson-Black and Victor Reinking. Foreword by Edward W. Said. New York: Columbia University Press, 1984. 603 Rhys-Davids was also elected president of The Buddhist Society of Great Britain and Ireland, founded in 1907 by J.R. Pain, R.J. Jackson, and others. The Buddhist Society aimed to prepare the ground for the coming of the first Buddhist mission in Europe, led by Ananda Metteya, the name adopted by the British C.H.A. Bennet, who converted to the Theravada school in Burma (M. Bergonzi, ―Il buddhismo in Occidente,‖ 378-9). 263 first Buddhist society was founded in Leipzig by Karl Seidenstucker. In France the first Buddhist society was established much later in 1929 by the American Buddhist Constant Lounsbery and was called ―friends of Buddhism‖ (Les Amis du Bouddhisme). Despite its late official acknowledgement, however, Buddhism in France was in vogue much earlier than 1929. In 1894, in fact, Jules Bois had already discussed Buddhism and French society in his book The Little Known Religions of Paris (Les Petites Religions de Paris). 604 According to Bois, in 1894 Paris counted more than one hundred thousand practitioners of Buddhism and at least one thousand adepts among artists, intellectuals, and common people. 605 The Parisian followers of the Buddha were split into two groups, Bois explains: scholars, like those working at the Guimet Museum, and those like Léon de Rosny—the spiritual brother of Lev Tolstoy. 606 Buddhism in French society was also the topic of I. Iakovlev‘s article ―Buddhism, Black Magic, and Devilry,‖ printed in the Russian newspaper New Times. 607 From the title itself, one can easily imagine the content of the article. There, Iakovlev cites Buddhism as but another example of those gross superstitions taking hold in Parisian upper society. Regardless of the interpretation, the flourishing of Buddhism in Paris remained a fact. Moreover, Paris was chosen as the locale of the possible second Congress of the World Parliament of 604 J. Bois, Les Petites Religions de Paris. Paris: Léon Charilley Successeur, 1894. 605 Ibid., 41. 606 Ibid., 43, 60. 607 I. Iakovlev, ―Buddizm, chernaia magiia i chertovshchina.‖ Novoe vremia 5474 (1891): 1-2. 264 Religions which was planned to be held on the occasion of the 1900 ―Exposition Universelle.‖ 608 Because of its deep connections to Russia, Buddhism in Paris is a subject worth discussing in some detail; thus, the next section will be devoted to that topic. As it will become clear shortly, on French soil the Russian encounter with Buddhism took some unexpected turns. Buddhism under the Sky of the Eiffel Tower The display of Prince Esper Ukhtomsky‘s and of Nikolai Gomboev‘s Buddhist collections at the 1900 Paris ―Exposition Universelle‖ offered a glimpse of the Buddhist world in the context of the other episodes attesting to the flourishing of Buddhism in Europe. One such episode consisted of the performances of the famous Japanese geisha Madame Sadayakko. The shows of the Oriental superstar sold out every night and enjoyed extreme popularity both in Europe and in the United States. Sadayakko was the embodiment of that ―Japanisme‖ that inspired the fictional heroine Sophia Petrovna Likhutina of St. Petersburg (Chapter Four). For the French audience Madame Sadayakko performed two pieces, one of which, titled The Geisha and the Knight, was ―a universal success through America and Europe.‖ 609 The plot deals with the unhappy love story of a 608 Abbé Victor Charbonnet, ―A universal congress of Religions in 1900.‖ The Open Court IX-43, no. 426 (October 24, 1895): 4679. 609 L. Downer, Madame Sadayakko. The Geisha Who Bewitched the West. New York: Gotham Books, 2003, 125. 265 geisha who falls in love with a man betrothed to another woman. After some attempts to get her beloved back, the geisha dies of a broken heart. Among the various elements of ―Japanisme,‖ Buddhist references appear in the second part of the play, the ―Dojoji.‖ The episode takes place in the courtyard of a Buddhist lamasery, where the geisha‘s beloved and his fiancé have fled to escape the rage of the betrayed woman. The scene of the geisha‘s dance in front of the gates where she tries to seduce the monks in order to pass was Sadayakko‘s pièce de résistance. 610 The Russian magazine European Herald reported the theatrical event in its February issue of 1901. 611 The mysterious author ―M.‖ notes the Buddhist element of the geisha‘s dance, which, according to him, was a dance in honor of the Buddha. Russians could also see Madame Sadayakko on stage in St. Petersburg and Moscow. Sadayakko and her troupe arrived in St. Petersburg in 1902; Lesley Downer describes the Russian experience of the Japanese diva in these terms: Russia was an unforgettably romantic place for Yakko. The gallant young Russian men treated her like a goddess. On the streets they cast their coats on the ground where she was to tread as a gesture of welcome, so that they could treasure the imprint of her little foot. When she left a banqueting hall or stepped out of a carriage, she would be amazed to find the ground black with overcoats. Even the snow-white marble floor of the hotel was pitch-black, covered in overcoats, when she walked in once. 612 610 Ibid., 125-6. 611 М, ―Itogi vsemirnoi vystavki. 1900 goda. Pis‘mo iz Parizha.‖ Vestnik Evropy (February 1901): 798. 612 L. Downer, Madame Sadayakko, 197-8. 266 Tsar Nicholas II invited the Japanese geisha to the Winter Palace, where a grand reception was organized in her honor. A photograph, taken for the occasion, shows Sadayakko in her kimono sitting at the table with the Tsar behind her. 613 The Japanese dances of Sadayakko were not the only Oriental performances presented at the 1900 ―Exposition Universelle.‖ Also featured were Cléo de Mérode‘s interpretation of Cambodian dances, and Siamese and Javanese dances. French and Russian artists recorded these events in their works, as evidenced by Lev Bakst‘s painting A Siamese Sacred Dance (1901), Michel Fokine‘s productions, and, in particular, Sergei Diaghilev‘s enterprise of Les Orientales with Vaslav Nijinsky posing in Siamese costume. 614 Vasily Rozanov went to see the performance of the Ballet Troupe of the Royal Siamese Court in St. Petersburg that same year, and commented on the event in his article ―Interesting Night‖ (Zanimatel‘nyi vecher), published in the Symbolist magazine The World of Art. 615 The performance at both the Mikhailovsky and the Alexandrinsky theatre of Ballet Troupe of the Royal Siamese Court enjoyed wide success in upper society and in the Buddhist community in the Russian capital. 616 Though these Symbolist works followed the fashion of Orientalism and exoticism, an independent Buddhist undercurrent at times emerged among artists of the 613 Ibid., 198. Photograph printed between pp. 178 and 179. 614 N. Misler, ―Ex Oriente Lux: Siamese Dancing and the Ballets Russes.‖ In Annali dell‘ Istituto Universitario Orientale, vol. 46. Naples: Istituto Universitario Orientale, 1986, 201, 208-9. 615 V. Rozanov, ―Zanimatel‘nyi vecher.‖ Mir iskusstva 1 (1901): 43-48. The Siamese troupe performed in St. Petersburg at the Mikhailovsky and the Alexandrinsky Theatre on Saturday, October 28, and Sunday October 29, 1900 (N. Misler, ―Ex Oriente Lux,‖197). 616 Ibid., 1-2. 267 Silver Age. Accordingly, the presence in Bakst‘s Oriental collection of two statuettes –a standing Buddha and a seated Buddha, among other things, may have derived not from the Symbolist fascination with the exotic, but rather from the general mania for collecting Buddhist artwork –a diffused habit both in Russia and abroad. As seen in Chapters One and Three, Buddhist collections were widely formed after explorations to Siberia or tours to Asia. Not coincidentally, then, the two Buddhas in Bakst‘s collection resemble the other two bronze statuettes of Siamese Buddhas, one seated and one standing, that the Siamese King Maga Vachiravud presented at the inauguration of the Buddhist Temple in St. Petersburg (Chapter Four). No evidence exists that Bakst saw the Siamese statuettes or that he acquired his Oriental collection either in Russia or abroad. The presence of Buddhist artwork in his collection, however, is not surprising, when considering not only that some of the people he knew cultivated an interest in Buddhism (Nikolai Roerich for one), but also that Bakst belonged to a period when collecting Buddhist objéts d‘art was in vogue. As a diary entry in the 1920s by the explorer Petr Kozlov documents, the sale of Buddhist artwork was indeed so widespread that everybody could buy statuettes in shops on Nevsky Prospekt. 617 Mstislav Dobuzhinsky, in his memoirs, also remembers how St. Petersburg was a real ―gold-mine‖ for private collectors in search of real treasures, which could be found at the Aleksandrovsky second-hand market on Voznesensky Prospekt. 618 Furthermore, it is worth remembering that Bakst was shortly married to Liubov 617 P. Kozlov, Dnevniki Mongolo-tibetskoi ekspeditsii 1923-1926. Edited by T. Iusupova and A. Andreev. Saint Petersburg: Nauka, 2003, 426. 618 M. Dobuzhinsky, Vospominaniia. Edited by Grigory Sternin. Moscow: Nauka, 1987, footnote 5, 181. 268 Tretiakova, 619 the widow of Nikolai Gritsenko –the aquarellist who went on tour with Nicholas II. Hence, Bakst may have been familiar with the Buddhist items brought back from the Grand Tour (Chapter Three). Also noteworthy is that one of the pieces in Ivan Morozov‘s collection was Othon Friesz‘s Still Life with a Statuette of Buddha (Chapter Two, fig. 8), a painting displayed at the Parisian Druet Gallery in 1910, which Morozov bought afterwards through the agency of Maurice Denis. That Morozov bought the painting from a Parisian gallery was not accidental since at the time the French capital dominated the art scene. It was also in Paris that from the second half of the nineteenth century Buddhist artwork became part of several collections as well. As Michel Maucurer describes it in his article ―Asia Within Reach of Europe‖ (L‘Asia a portata dell‘Europa), starting from 1840 oriental museums opened one after another in Paris. On Boulevard Bonne-Nouvelle Parisians could visit the Chinese and Japanese Museum, which held artifacts from Paul Ginier‘s collection; some years later, in 1855, the French consul at Shanghai, Charles de Montigny, opened his own ―Chinese museum.‖ In 1860, after the Taiping revolt, a large number of Chinese objects, many of which were stolen by soldiers, appeared on the art market. Those coming from the sack of the Chinese Summer Palace were exposed at the Tuileries Palace and then became part of the Empress‘ Chinese museum at her castle in Fontainebleau. 620 619 C. Spencer, Leon Bakst. London: Academy Editions, 1973, 35, 169. 620 M. Maucurer, ―L‘Asia a portata dell‘Europa.‖ In Viaggio in Oriente, L‘avventura di Enrico Cernuschi (1821-1896) patriota, finanziere, collezionista. Edited by Rosanna Pavoni in collaboration with Silvia Davoli. Milano: Federico Motta Editore S.p.A., 2005, 26. 269 In addition to those formed from the assemblage of war trophies, Buddhist collections also resulted from the private initiative of single individuals such as Émile Guimet and Henri Cernuschi, 621 in the capital, and Adolphe Philippe d‘Ennery, in Toulouse. 622 Among the many collectors, Émile Guimet merits further comment for its promotion of Asian cultures, which he supported not only through the creation of an Asian Museum, but also through a series of cultural initiatives. One such activity was the publication of the scholarly magazine Annales du Musée Guimet, whose purpose was to promote the history of human thought through documents related to faiths, philosophies, history, literature, and the arts. 623 Abiding by the thought: ―in order to understand the Buddha well, you must have a Buddhist soul‖ 624 (pour bien comprendre Bouddha, il faut se faire une âme bouddhique), Guimet toured Asia in 1877 with the artist Félix Élie Régamey, illustrator for the magazine The Illustrated London News in 1871—the same periodical that the Russian World Illustration (Vsemirnaia illiustratsiia) used as an 621 The Italian émigré Enrico Cernuschi bequeathed the city of Paris circa five thousand works of art, which he had collected during his joined trip to Japan and China in 1871. Today his collection can be visited at the Cernuschi Museum located at his mansion on 7 avenue Valasquez on the edge of Parc Monceau. 622 D‘Ennery was a French Jewish playwright and a collector of oriental objects coming from China, Japan, and Vietnam. His collection can now be admired in the museum taking his name, which from 2004 became a public branch of the Guimet Museum. 623 L. De Milloué, Annales du Musée Guimet, vol 12. Bibliothèque de vulgarisation. Conferences at the Guimet Museum 1898-1899. Preface by M. Émile Guimet. Paris: Ernest Leroux Éditeur, 1902, iv. The periodical was divided into four sections: section one –translations, descriptions of monuments, illustrations, and projects; section two –specialized library material; section three –divulgation material; section four –review on the history of religions (L. De Milloué, Annales du Musée Guimet, vi). Minaev and Oldenburg were among the Russian Orientologists to be published in the Annales (See I.P. Minayeff, Recherches sur le Bouddhisme. Translated from the Russian by R.H. Assier de Pompignan. Paris: Ernest Leroux Éditeur, 1894. Series Annales du Musée Guimet, vol. 4. Bibliothèque d‘études). 624 J.-F. Jarrige, D‘outremer et d‘Orient mystique…Les itineraries d‘Émile Guimet. Edited by Françoise Chappuis and Francis Macouin. Suilly-la-Tour: Éditions Findakly, 2001. 270 inspirational model. 625 From his two-year journey, the French industrialist brought back nine hundred objéts d‘art and a thousand books from Japan only. 626 This collection, with the Buddhist treasures that French explorers excavated from the ancient sites of the Silk Road (for example, the Buddhist manuscripts and artwork that Paul Pelliot discovered in Dunhuang), embellished the halls of the Guimet Museum. 627 The Museum was a popular attraction at the time, in fact, counting more than a thousand visitors per day immediately after its opening and four thousand guests on certain Sundays. 628 Among its visitors were the famous Dadaist artist Marcel Duchamp, 629 the painter Paul Gauguin, 630 and the writer Anatole France, previously discussed in relation to the ―yellow peril‖ (Chapter Four). France‘s great admiration for Buddhism emerges in his 625 During their Asian tour, Guimet and Régamey spent two days in Kamakura, the same place where Mendeleev took his picture of the imperial retinue posing on the giant Buddha Daibutsu. Guimet and Régamey went to Kamakura in company with Charles Wirgman, the English illustrator of The Illustrated London News (Omoto, ―Dans le Japon de l‘ère Meiji.‖ In D‘outremer et d‘Orient mystique, 54). 626 F. Macouin, D‘outremer et d‘Orient mystique, 37. Both Guimet and Régamey shared a true passion for Japan. To their two and a half month sojourn in the country of the rising sun, Guimet devoted his two- volume Promenades Japonaises with illustrations by Régamey. The book was Guimet‘s response to Aimé Humbert‘s Le Japon illustré, which, as already discussed in the previous section, Russians read serially on the pages of World Traveler (Vsemirnyi puteshestvennik). On Guimet and Japan, see Omoto‘s ―Dans le Japon de l‘ère Meiji‖ (in D‘outremer et d‘Orient mystique, 43-61). 627 Guimet decided to open a Museum of Religions after the success of his collection at the ―Exposition Universelle‖ of 1878 (Vinca and Pierre Baptiste, D‘outremer et d‘Orient mystique, 77). 628 Levy-Rueff, D‘outremer et d‘Orient mystique, 73. 629 This is what hypothesizes Tosi Lee in ―Fire Down Below and Watering, That‘s Life. A Buddhist Reader‘s Response to Marcel Duchamp.‖ In Buddha Mind in Contemporary Art. Edited by Jacquelynn Baas and Mary Jane Jacob. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 2004,127. 630 See J. Baas, Smile of the Buddha. Eastern Philosophy and Western Art from Monet to Today. Foreword by Robert A.F. Thurman. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 2005, 37. 271 The Message of Buddha. 631 Indeed, in the ―peaceful halls‖ of the Museum, standing in front of a statue of the Enlightened One, the French author thought of ―the harsh necessities of life, the law of toil, and the sufferings of existence‖ 632 that beautifully inspired Sakyamuni. In deep doubt that Europe was ready to embrace the doctrine of nirvana, France praised the message of compassion imbued in the Buddhist doctrine and which the Guimet Museum harmoniously displayed in its collection. Russians read about activities at the Guimet Museum not only through Anatole France, but also through other sources or through personal visits. As discussed in Chapter One, the Siberian activist and exile Nikolai Iadrintsev suggested that the French Museum serves as a model for Asian Museums in general. As discussed in Chapter Two, Konstantin Balmont visited the Guimet Museum to study its Indian collection. Vasily Rozanov overtly mocked the curious construction of the Buddhist temple (which is what the library of the Guimet Museum was usually called) in his 1900 article ―Orient.‖ 633 The Buddhist temple in Paris was also mentioned by Prince Ukhtomsky in his brochure on the missionary question in Zabaikal, 634 albeit the Russian Prince might also have referred to the temporary Buddhist temple that opened mid-August 1889 on the Esplanade des Invalides on the occasion of the ―Exposition Universelle.‖ 635 The uncertainty of the 631 A. France, The Message of Buddha. New York: K.Y. Kira, (date unknown). 632 Ibid., 7. 633 V. Rozanov, ―Vostok.‖ In V. Rozanov, Vo dvore yazychnikov. Edited by A.N. Nikoliukin. Moscow: Izdatel‘stvo ―Respublika,‖ 1999, 125. 634 E. Ukhtomsky, О sostoianii missionerskogo voprosa v Zabaikale, 44. 272 reference derives from the fact that both the temple on the Esplanade and the Guimet Museum on the central Place d‘Iéna opened that same year. 636 The Guimet Museum played a relevant role as sponsor of Buddhism not only through exhibitions and its Annales, but also through its organization of Buddhist ceremonies held in the rotunda of its library and performed in 1891, 1893, and 1898. The first ceremony was held by Japanese monks from the school of Pure Land and was a sensation, with more than hundred forty articles reporting on it. 637 Officiating the 1893 ceremony were monks from the Shingon School. Among its attendants was Jule Bois, author of the aforementioned The Little Known Religions of Paris. He reported the event in his book, noting ad marginem how the future Prime Minister of France, Georges Clémenceau, could not refrain from exclaiming at the end of the ceremony: ―Pooh…little girls playing at dolls!‖ (―Peuh… des dînettes de poupée‖). 638 Of particular relevance to 635 The official opening of the temple featured the performance of nine Buddhist monks, especially invited to Paris from the French colonies in Asia. It was a political act aimed to celebrate the French annexation of the Vietnamese territories into its sphere of influence after the Sino-French war (1884-85). In Russia the event was reported and illustrated in World Illustration 1076 (September 2, 1889: 155-6) with the reproduction of the ancient Buddhist pagoda of Angkor, the Buddhist holy city of the past situated on the shores of the Tonle Sap Lake in Cambodia. The Buddhist pagoda was also erected on Esplanade des Invalides among the pavilions devoted to the French colonies. 636 The Guimet Museum of Asian Arts, which before WW II was called Museum of Religions, resembled a temple with its rotunda and pinnacle designed by the architect Charles Terrier and its circular library surrounded by neoclassical columns. It is highly probable that Ukhtomsky thought of the library at the Guimet when he mentioned the temple in Paris in his brochure. Furthermore, the Guimet Museum was called ―the Buddhist temple‖ by the press (See Le Gaulois, November 14, 1893, and A. Boussemart, D‘outremer et d‘Orient mystique, 103) and by some of his visitors, including Alexandra David-Neel and Innokenty Annensky. 637 Celebrities, such as the President of the Republic, ministers, ambassadors, as well as artists like Edgar Degas and the sculptor Albert Bartholomé, attended the performance (A. Boussemart, D‘outremer et d‘Orient mystique, 99). World Illustration published a photograph of the ceremony on the issue 1154 (March 2: 170). 638 J. Bois, Les Pétites Religions de Paris, 78. 273 the Russian audience, however, was the third Buddhist ceremony, 639 which was performed by the Buriat monk Agvan Lobsan Dorzhiev, mentioned in the previous chapter with regard to the St. Petersburg Buddhist temple. In the land of the Eiffel Tower, the Buriat monk came from the Far East to celebrate Buddhism. His became both a diplomatic and missionary journey whose repercussions in Russian literature are the subject of the next section. In the Name of Sakyamuni Buddha and All the Buddhas: The 1898 Buddhist Ceremony at the Guimet Museum Dorzhiev celebrated the Buddhist mass at the Guimet Museum with the help of another Buriat, Buddha Rabdanov. He was the same person to help the explorer and folklorist, Grigory Potanin, translate the collection of Tibetan folktales that lay behind Aleksei Remizov‘s Io. A Tibetan Tale (Chapter One). 640 Rabdanov also worked as editor and translator from the Mongolian for Petr Badmaev‘s magazine, Life on the Oriental Border (Zhizn‘ v vostochnoi okraine), 641 a periodical that the Buriat doctor established 639 The English description of the Buddhist ceremony can be found in J. Snelling, Buddhism in Russia. The Story of Agvan Dorzhiev, Lhasa‘s Emissary to the Tsar. Shaftesbury, Dorset: Element, 1993, 59-60. 640 Rabdanov also worked as an interpreter on Potanin‘s Sichuan expedition of 1892-3. As Potanin himself remembered in his memories, Rabdanov was a dedicated Buddhist who, at the time of their mission, preached karma and nirvana (N. Ianovsky et al., Vospominanie (okonchanie). Stat‘i, ocherki, retsenzii. Vospominaniia o G.N. Potanine, vol. 7. Novosibirsk: zapadno-sibirskoe knizhnoe izdatel‘stvo. Series ―Literaturnoe nasledstvo Sibiri,‖ 1986, 115). Rabdanov was a ―Buddhist of the rank‖ (riadovoi buddist), who built his life according to the Buddhist catechesis. He agreed to participate in the expedition without taking any honorary, just being happy to visit places where his religion was professed (Ibid.). Upon his return from Paris, Potanin remembered how satisfied Rabdanov was to see his dream fulfilled: Buddhism had reached Paris –What he believed was the capital of the world (Ibid., 119). 641 Iu. Kuz‘min, ―Pëtr Badmaev, entrepreneur en Transbaїkalie et en Mongolie.‖ Slavica Occitania, vol. 21. Published by le Centre de recherches "Monde slave et interculturalité (langues, littératures et sociétés)" 274 simultaneously with his commercial enterprise in the Transbaikal region (Chapter Three). Rabdanov translated the ceremony from Mongolian into Russian, while the Russian Jewish-born Joseph Deniker 642 probably translated Rabdanov‘s speech from Russian into French. 643 Both local and international press reported on the ceremony in honor of Sakyamuni Buddha and all the Buddhas. Le Matin mentioned the event in its issue of June 28, the Chicago journal of Paul Carus, The Open Court, cited the Buddhist ceremony in Theodore Stanton‘s article ―The Guimet Museum‖ in its November issue. 644 Régamey immortalized the performance in a pastel, which to this day remains in the archives of the Guimet Museum (fig. 29). In his representation Dorzhiev sits in a meditative pose on an elevated throne, while Rabdanov and Deniker stand down on the steps to Dorzhiev‘s right. Some of the people depicted at the ceremony have marked facial traits, suggesting that the painter portrayed real personages, as is the case with Dorzhiev, Rabdanov, and Deniker, but also with a habitué of the Museum, Georges Clémenceau, who is sitting on the second chair to the right of the painting. Clémenceau, distinguishable for his prominent cheekbones, sits (CRIMS) and the Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures at l"Univerversité de Toulouse-le Mirail. Toulouse: Département de slavistique, 2005, 207. 642 Deniker hosted Dorzhiev during his sojourn in Paris. Deniker was a naturalist, anthropologist, and a librarian of the Museum of National History from 1888. Along with natural sciences, he cultivated an interest in Buddhism , as testified to by a number of his works, like his introduction to Alice Getty‘s The Gods of Northern Buddhism (Oxford, 1904). According to John Snelling, he served as communication channel between Russian Orientologists and the West through his French translations of Russian scholarly articles. In addition to his acquaintance with Prince Ukhtomsky, Deniker maintained constant correspondence with the Secretary General of the Imperial Russian Geographical Society, Aleksandr Grigoriev (J. Snelling, Buddhism in Russia, 58). 643 A. Boussemart, D‘outremer et d‘Orient mystique, 106. 644 T. Stanton, ―The Guimet Museum.‖ The Open Court XII-11, no. 505 (November 1898): 669-74. 275 next to a woman who also has marked facial traits. She might be Clémenceau‘s American wife, Mary Plummer, age forty-nine. Two other figures are recognizable in Régamey‘s painting: a man standing behind Clémenceau and carefully looking at the ceremony and a young woman standing at Clémenceau‘s right behind the plant. The woman strongly resembles the French traveler Alexandra David-Neel, age thirty in 1898. She may have attended the Buddhist performance before her departure for Tunis. 645 Unlike the recognizable facial features of Clémenceau and David-Neel, the identity of the young man in the painting is difficult. Comparison to a photograph of the poet Innokenty Annensky, taken in the 1880s, suggests some similarities, but a match is 645 This suggestion finds support in the information given by Snelling, who reports that during his sojourn Dorzhiev met a woman named ―Alexandra‖ (J. Snelling, Buddhism in Russia, 60). Besides, David-Neel herself describes the Guimet Museum in the introduction to her memoirs, remembering her visits to the temple/museum when she was in her twenties (A. David-Neel, L‘Inde. Hier-Aujourd‘hui-Demain. Paris: Librairie Plon, 1951, 2). 276 Fig. 29 Élie Régamey, Buddhist Mass in Paris, 1898. 277 impossible to verify. 646 What is certain is Annensky‘s presence at the ceremony, for he recorded the episode in his poem ―The Buddhist Mass in Paris‖ (Buddiiskaia messa v Parizhe), first published in 1906 in the collection Northern Speech (Severnaia rech‘). Annensky dedicated his five stanzas in iambic hexameters to his friend Tadeusz Stefan Zielinsky (known in Russia as Faddei Zelinsky), a professor in the Classics Department of St. Petersburg University. Annensky and Zelinsky worked together and respected each other. Zelinsky edited and commented on Annensky‘s translation of Euripides, albeit his commentary quibbled with the accuracy of the translation. 647 ―Buddhist Mass in Paris‖ was not the only work that Annensky dedicated to Zelinsky; there were also single excerpts from Annensky‘s translations of Euripides. 648 For his part, Zelinsky‘s closeness to Annensky emerged on the occasion of the premature death of the poet, for whom Zelinsky wrote the necrology ―Innokenty Fedorovich Annensky as a Philologist of Classics‖ (Innokenty Fedorovich Annensky kak filolog- klassik), published in the Symbolist magazine Apollo. 649 646 According to Dany Savelli, the poet Maximilian Voloshin attended the ceremony, too (D. Savelli,‖Penser le bouddhisme et la Russie.‖ Slavica Occitania, note 212, 81); however, according to Vladimir Kupchenko‘s outline of Voloshin‘s biography, the poet arrived in Paris for the first time on October 16, 1899 (Z. Davydov and V. Kupchenko, Krym Maksimiliana Voloshina. Avtografy, risunki, fotografii, dokumenty, otkrytki iz gosudarstvennykh i chastnykh sobranii. Foto al‘bom. Kiev: Mistetstvo, 1994, 66). 647 For more information about the relationship between Annensky and Zelinsky, see I. Annensky, Ucheno- komitetskie retsenzii 1899-1900 gg., vol. 1. Edited, commented, and introduced by A.I. Cherviakov. Ivanovo: Iunona, 2000, 227-229. 648 Evripid. Ippolit. Translated with Greek verses by I. Annensky and with ―Tragedii Ippolita i Fedry‖ in appendix. Saint Petersburg: Senatskaia tipografiia, 1902. 649 F. Zelinsky, ―Innokenty Fedorovich Annensky kak filolog-klassik.‖Apollon 4 (January 1910): 1-9. 278  “Buddhist Mass in Paris”: Annensky’s Poetical Record of the 1898 Buddhist Ceremony at the Guimet Museum The poet‘s choice to compose in traditional verse form and to dedicate his poem to his friend, representative of the Classics world –a field to which Annensky himself belonged –represents the rationalistic layout within which the irrational mystery of the Buddhist ritual develops. Hence, the ambivalent nature of the poem emerges from the very beginning. ―Buddhist Mass,‖ in fact, constantly shifts perspectives, vacillating between the real, rationalistic setting of the temple, built in the middle of the Guimet Museum, and the unreal, fantastic world, evoked through mysterious Buddhist music and chants. The evocative tone, so characteristic of Annensky‘s style, was first noticed by Viacheslav Ivanov, who classified Annensky‘s poetry as ―associative symbolism‖ (assotsiativnyi simvolizm). 650 Likewise, in the Symbolist vein, Annensky allows the fantastic to reveal itself through symbols and gestures that only the poet and those few people with pure hearts could perceive. The first stanza of the poem evokes the event through gentle and serene memories of the past: Oh, columns, wrapped in yellow silk, And dresses pêche and mauve In a frame that‘s slightly bright Amidst the flowing pitch and murmurs of the bells, And the strange rhythms of thousand-year words Gently softened in autumn gilt - Today, all of you my memory will summon. 650 Ivanov wrote: ―The poet-symbolist of this type adopts something physically or psychologically concrete as a departing point for his creative process. But without defining it, often even without mentioning it at all, he creates a series of associations somehow related to this. The discovery of this something helps one to recognize clearly and multilaterally the spiritual nature of the phenomenon, which has turned into source of sorrow for the poet. Such a discovery sometimes helps to first call the spiritual nature of the phenomenon by its name, a name that sounded ordinary and empty before, but that has become so deeply meaningful now‖ (V. Ivanov, ―O Poezii I.F. Annenskogo.‖ Apollon 4, January 1910: 16-7). 279 [Колонны, желтыми увитые шелками,/И платья pêche и mauve в немного яркой раме/Среди струистых смол и лепета звонков,/И ритмы странные тысячелетних слов,/Слегка смягченные в осенней позолоте,—/Вы в памяти моей сегодня оживете.] Here, the poet introduces the first group of characters –those circulating in the space of the temple surrounded by neoclassical columns. These represent people from the French beau monde, the high society with its ―dames à la mode‖ wearing their light colored dresses (Annensky leaves the colors in French in the text to emphasize the worldly aspect of the guests). Nevertheless, a light breeze flows through the geometrical setting of the columns, adding an unstable element that suggests the rhythm of ancient words and sounds, moving past the columns of the temple like yellow silk. Among the colors here, the yellow prevails. Yellow is the color of the Tibetan lamas, known as the Yellow hats (Gelugpa school), 651 to which Dorzhiev belonged. According to the dual principle of the poem, the spiritual yellow of the lama sitting inside the temple contrasts with the gilded autumn outside in the street. Notably, Annensky confused the time of the Buddhist mass, which took place in the summer, on June 27, 1898. What did occur in the fall of 1898, on October 12 to be precise, was the inauguration of the Cernuschi Museum, an event that Annensky may have attended as well, in which case, another element in the poem may be explained. The second group of characters enters the scene in the second stanza: The basalt Mongol was solemnly performing, With the secret words slowly fading away In the temple capriciously erected in the midst of the Museum, 651 The Yellow hat sect was founded by Tsongkhapa (1357-1419); the Dalai Lama is its most important representative. 280 So that the ladies would play with their black fans, And being as alien to the mystery as their fresh iris, The misses would carefully listen to the translators. [Священнодействовал базальтовый монгол,/И таял медленно таинственный глагол/В капризно созданном среди музея храме,/Чтоб дамы черными играли веерами/И, тайне чуждые, как свежий их ирис,/Лишь переводчикам внимали строго мисс.] Dorzhiev, the basaltic Mongol, is the primary representative of the unseen but perceivable other world. His translators, Rabdanov and Deniker, are only mentioned. They symbolize the sentinels, the bridge between here and there, the only ones able to catch the attention of the audience and to introduce them to unknown mysteries. The narrator, Annensky himself, remains in the shadow, although he belongs to the other world as well. The name Dorzhiev is never pronounced; he remains the ―basalt Mongol,‖ a reference to the dark color of his skin (in contrast to the white of the ladies‘ skin). Possibly, however, Annensky found inspiration for his parallel between Dorzhiev and the dark statue in the big Meguro Buddha, a Japanese bronze of the eighteenth century, a piece Cernuschi brought back from Tokyo that was considered the centerpiece of his collection. The disturbing black element of the basalt creates a visual dissonance that goes back and forth, from the immobile posture of the dark skinned monk to the mobile gesture of the ladies waving their black fans. In these lines, the feminine, so dear to the Symbolists, acts in both its demonic and angelic aspects. 652 The former guides the female guests, while the latter hides in the flowers –the iris in this case. With its blue-toned petals, the iris epitomizes the Symbolist mode and could be identified with the ―blue flower‖ that from Sturm und Drang to 652 For more information about this aspect of the Symbolist poetic, see J.E. Bowlt, ―Russian Symbolism and the ‗Blue Rose‘ Movement.‖ The Slavonic and East European Review 51.123 (April, 1973): 161-181. 281 Romanticism and on stood as the symbol of initiation, of a Golden Age, of an uncontaminated nature that the Romantics yearned to reclaim. German Romantics in particular hunted for the blue flower, as Novalis‘s novel Heinrich von Ofterdingen (1802) emblematically testifies. 653 Russian Symbolists were aware of the motif as well, as Sergei Auslender‘s review in the magazine Apollo indicates. 654 Auslender titled his article ―The Blue Little Flower‖ (Goluboi tsvetok) in accordance with Viacheslav Ivanov‘s lecture on Novalis and his Spiritual Verses and Hymns to the Night, which Ivanov read on November 23. Apart from expressing admiration for the German poet, the review highlights how the thematic blue flower inevitably intertwined with the role of memory. Indeed the two were so inextricable that Auslender could not help but begin his review by remembering that the blue flower was the motif held very dear by the Romantics. In homage to this mode, Annensky opened his poem relying on his memory, too. The ―Buddhist Mass‖ ends with the powerful image of the demonic and angelic juxtaposed: And it was strange and terrifying for me to see How veils would descend upon the smiles And fingers would drop the delicate flowers of the gods. [И странно было мне, и жутко увидать,/Как над улыбками спускалися вуали/И пальцы нежные цветы богов роняли.] 653 Many years later Hermann Hesse wrote the short story Iris (1918), in which the symbolism of the flower remains unchanged, thus testifying to the continuity of meaning throughout German literature. Besides, Hesse‘s kinship to Buddhist philosophy is well known. 654 S. Auslender, ―Khronika.‖ Apollon 3 (December 1909): 41-2. As John E. Bowlt notes, Russian Symbolist artists and writers acknowledged Novalis as their precursor; especially certain works by the Symbolist group ―the Blue Rose‖ offer parallels with Novalis‘s Heinrich von Ofterdingen (J. E. Bowlt, ―Russian Symbolism and the ‗Blue Rose‘ Movement‖: 175). 282 Veils lowering onto enigmatic smiles resemble the curtain descending on the stage after the show, but are also reminders of the seen/unseen relationship enacted by the transparency of the veil –an ambiguity masterfully immortalized in Blok‘s contemporary poem ―The Stranger‖ (1906). The absence of dialogue between the mundane and the spiritual world, which defines the entire poem, manifests in the final image of the delicate flowers of the gods, donated by the basalt monk at the end of the ceremony and upon which the guests trample while rushing out to see the operetta. The fourth stanza: The mass had ended and the hall comes instantaneously alive, With a smile, the Mongol gave us flowers, And while inhaling these exotic fragrances, Singers and diplomats, as well as ladies carefully holding their train, Hurried towards the exit - So that in the evening they could listen to Mascotte or Carmen [Обедня кончилась, и сразу ожил зал,/Монгол с улыбкою цветы нам раздавал,/ И, экзотичные вдыхая ароматы,/ Спешили к выходу певцы, и дипломаты,/ И дамы, бережно поддерживая трен,—/Чтоб слушать вечером Маскотту иль Кармен.] In a poem of consonances and dissonances like ―Buddhist Mass,‖ the enigmatic smile of the monk, who stays immobile distributing flowers while the women move out of the temple, counterbalances the smiles of the departing guests. In this Symbolist depiction of the Buddhist ceremony, music could not help but occupy a prominent role. To music, the queen of the arts, Annensky paid homage in the central third stanza: Silk dots caressed my vacant look, The mystery revealed only the music to me, And therefore so much more attentively I strove to catch the combinations of sounds, I breathed the rhythms, flattered like waves, And I was ashamed of being capable To render that mystical and musical vision 283 Only in pale prose [Мой взор рассеянный шелков ласкали пятна,/Мне в таинстве была лишь музыка понятна,/Но тем внимательней созвучья я ловил,/Я ритмами дышал, как волнами кадил,/И было стыдно мне пособий бледной прозы/Для той мистической и музыкальной грезы.] Evoking the Romantic image of the creative process as a painful act leading to ecstasy, Annensky concludes the poem by starting the last stanza with the display of the real addressees of the mass: While in the air there lived an unpronounced phrase, Aroused from the soul in a torment of ecstasy So that the pure hearts could drink its grace from it. [А в воздухе жила непонятая фраза,/Рожденная душой в мучении экстаза,/Чтоб чистые сердца в ней пили благодать...] In conclusion, the library/temple of the Guimet Museum transfigures into the temple of creation, accessible to a few adepts only (those with pure hearts). It will be seen in the next chapter how the accord consonance-ecstasy –or, rather, consonance-nirvana – will also occur in Nikolai Kulbin‘s writing, thus proving that Russian artistic and literary circles assimilated specific religious vocabulary from a Buddhist and not a theosophical context. 655 655 Though he did not practice any of them, Annensky was aware of Asian religions, as references to them appear in his literary production on more than one occasion. For instance, Annensky translated the poem La Maya by the French Parnassian poet Charles Marie Leconte de Lisle (1818-1894). Like Annensky, De Lisle cultivated a passion for classical cultures, in particular Greek. His poem La Maya was printed as part of his collection Poèmes tragiques (1884). It belonged to a number of other poems dealing with Hinduism. Although closer to Russian cosmism than to Buddhism, Annensky‘s early poem, ―∞‖ (sign for the infinite), first published in his collection of poems, Silent Songs, (Tikhie pesni, 1904) could also be interpreted according to the precepts of Buddhist syncretism. Furthermore, Annensky read carefully the poet Semen Nadson-author of various poems on the Buddha (Chapter Two) (I. Annensky, Ucheno-komitetskie retsenzii I.F. Annenskogo, vol. 2, note 23, 147). 284  Two Strangers Around the Streets of Paris: The City Strolls of Maximilian Voloshin and Agvan Dorzhiev Annensky was not the only Russian poet to visit the Guimet Museum and to meet Dorzhiev, Maximilian Voloshin did so as well. 656 The poet‘s diary records that he went to the Museum on more than one occasion during his trips to Paris, 657 whereas the poet‘s correspondence describes Voloshin‘s personal encounter with the Buriat monk. A letter to his friend, Iakov Glotov, dated October 3, 1902, reveals, for instance, that Dorzhiev went to Paris at the time of the 1900 ―Exposition Universelle,‖ and a third time in 1902. 658 During his last visit, Voloshin accompanied the Buriat monk around Paris, talking with him about nirvana and Buddhism, as well as about the Tibetan question. 659 Dorzhiev made such an impression on the young poet that he convinced him to leave for 656 Voloshin and Annensky wrote together in the magazine Apollo. After Annnesky‘s death in 1909, Voloshin remembered him as a poet in his article ―The Faces of Creation. I.F. Annensky as Lyric ―(M. Voloshin, ―Liki tvorchestva. I.F. Annensky-lirik.‖ Apollon 4, January 1910: 11-6). That same issue opened with Zelinsky‘s memory of his friend (―Innokenty Fedorovich Annensky kak filolog-klassik‖: 1-9) and ended with Viacheslav Ivanov‘s ―On the poetry of I.F. Annensky‖ (―O poezii I.F. Annenskogo.‖ Ibid.:16- 24). 657 See diary entry on June 7, 1904 and July 20, 1905, as well as later on May 19, 1932 (M. Voloshin, Istoriia moei dushi. Edited by Vladimir Kupchenko. Moscow: AGRAF, 1999, 58, 133, 369). At the Guimet Museum Voloshin saw a copy of the statue of the Egyptian Princess Tiye, whose physiognomy reminded him of Margarita Sabashnikova. He liked the work so much that he bought a copy of it in Berlin in 1905 and brought it later to his house in Koktebel. Voloshin dedicated a homonymous poem to Tiye and mentioned her in the conclusive verses of In the Atelier (V masterskoi) (M. Voloshin, ―Parizha ia liubliu osennii strogii plen…‖ Edited by V.T. Danchenko and with an introduction by E.Iu. Genneva. Moscow: Vagrius, 2008, 58-9; 70-1. 658 V. Kupchenko and E. Demin, ―V Zabaikal‘e—cherez Parizh.‖ Baikal 2 (1989): 143. According to John Snelling, in 1902 Dorzhiev intended to visit Paris to present a collection of Buddhist artwork to the Guimet Museum. Dorzhiev arrived in the French capital in October to commission a vase of life (tse-boum), a ritual instrument for the Dalai Lama. This beautiful object made of coral, lapis-lazuli, and other precious material was displayed in the Guimet Museum for a week (J. Snelling, Buddhism in Russia, 99-100). 659 Kupchenko and Demin affirm that Voloshin sketched a portrait of Dorzhiev, today kept at the poet‘s memorial house at Koktebel in South-Eastern Crimea. The portrait is mentioned in the artist Iulia Obolenskaia‘s diary (1913) (―V Zabaikal‘e—cherez Parizh‖: 143). 285 Asia, a project that Voloshin had already planned in 1900 when he was sent to Tashkent after the students‘ protests at St. Petersburg University. 660 The tour Voloshin had planned included the Lake Baikal, Japan, China, and India—cradles of Buddhism and Oriental philosophies that represented to him an alternative to the corrupted Christian Europe. His diary entry on August 10, 1905 also reveals that the Russian poet invited his future wife, Margarita Sabashnikova –niece of the brothers Mikhail and Sergei Sabashnikov, mentioned in Chapter Two with regard to Balmont‘s edition of Kalidasa‘s poems –to go with him on tour. Voloshin‘s planned trip was also to include stops at the lamasery at Gusinoe Ozero in the Zabaikal en route to China. According to Voloshin‘s diary, Dorzhiev told his Buriat countrymen at the lamasery to expect Voloshin‘s visit. 661 Voloshin came into contact with Buddhism even before his acquaintance with Dorzhiev. According to I. Smirnov, his first encounter happened at the age of six when the young poet was tutored by Nikandr Turkin –future editor of the magazine Nature and Hunting (Priroda i okhota). Smirnov sustains that Turkin lectured Voloshin on Buddhism probably using Arnold‘s The Light of Asia as a course reader. 662 A more remarkable encounter with Buddhism, however, happened years later in 1903 when, in January, Voloshin paid a visit to Sergei Oldenburg in St. Petersburg. 663 660 Ibid., 143. 661 M. Voloshin, Istoriia moei dushi, 146. 662 I. Smirnov, ―Vse videt‘, vse poniat‘…‘ (Zapad i Vostok Maksimiliana Voloshina).‖ Vostok-Zapad. Issledovaniia. Perevody. Publikatsii. Edited by M.L. Gasparov, E.M. Meletinsky, A.B. Kudelin, L.Z. Eidlin. Moscow: Nauka, 1985,178. 663 M. Voloshin, Istoriia moei dushi, 146, 398. 286 The aforementioned episodes portray an independent stream of information that Voloshin assimilated directly from Buddhist sources and not from Theosophy and Anthroposophy. If it is true that these two schools supplied Voloshin with Buddhist vocabulary, also undeniable is that in the eyes of the Russian poet, Buddhism detached itself from these two esoteric branches. In fact, when he wrote his autobiography, Voloshin distinguished between Buddhism and the other movements that influenced his life from 1905 to 1912. 664 That Buddhism informed his life in that period is confirmed by his visits to Viacheslav Ivanov, who was in Geneva studying Sanskrit in 1904 (Chapter Four). For them Buddhism served as a discussion topic on more than one occasion. For instance, on August 10, Ivanov and Voloshin chatted about versification, and Ivanov exclaimed: ―You are a Buddhist…You are alien to us. I am against the virus of Buddhism.‖ 665 Ten days later Voloshin went to visit Ivanov again and they mentioned Buddhism during that visit, too; according to Voloshin: ―Andrei Bely doesn‘t have versification (Andrei Bely. U nego net stikha), but he has all the other merits of the poetical speech. Heaven and nirvana. They are different words, but coincide in essence. – Ivanov: ―I am only afraid that you will turn into a heretic of Buddhism, if you think of nirvana as the highest exertion of will.‖ 666 664 He wrote: ―Stages of soul wandering: buddhism, catholicism, magic, masonry, occultism, theosophy, R. Steiner. Period of great personal troubles both in a romantic and mystical way‖ (M. Voloshin, ―Avtobiografiia.‖ In M. Voloshin, Stikhotvoreniia i poemy v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1. Introduced by B. Filippov and E. Rais. Paris: YMCA-PRESS, 1982, CIX). 665 M. Voloshin, Istoriia moei dushi, 74. 666 Ibid., 81. 287 In short, both Voloshin and Annensky were exposed to Buddhism when they went to Paris. They might have not written about Buddhism at length, but they definitely knew about it and talked about it with their Russian friends. This sharing of common topics favored the adoption of Buddhist vocabulary in some modern works of art and literature. Apart from the curious impression that the sight of Voloshin‘s imposing Russian figure walking next to a Buriat monk must have made on French people, Voloshin‘s city strolls with Dorzhiev hinted that Buddhism was in the air; the strolls also typified the mobility of ideas and people at that time. Certainly Voloshin‘s walks around the streets of Paris did not carry the symbolist underpinnings of Nikolai Ableukhov‘s vagrancy, as described in Bely‘s Petersburg (Chapter Four); nonetheless, in both cases the urban landscape functions as spatial dimension enlarging the perspective on the concept of journey. Walking through the city streets metaphorically embraces the advancement of personal knowledge and transforms a physical journey into a spiritual one. The 1898 Buddhist mass in Paris is exemplary of how the Buddhist world entered modern Russian culture from the West and how Russia and Western Europe were intertwined. The communion of fashion and lifestyle also emerged in the ―mania for traveling‖ that captivated both Russians and western Europeans. As a consequence of his tour to Asia, in fact, Guimet began his collection of Asian artwork and promoted Buddhism, thereby allowing more people to become familiarized with foreign culture. Guimet‘s sponsorship activated another migration of ideas, ushering alien Buddhist concepts into the artistic imagination, as in Annensky‘s poem or Régemay‘s pastel. 288 Guimet, however, was not the only French collector to travel to the East; Henry Cernuschi did so as well. Moreover, like Guimet, Cernuschi founded a private museum of Oriental art, too, which became as popular as the Guimet Museum among Russians. The ties between the Cernuschi Museum and the Russian intelligentsia are discussed in the following section which also seeks to prove that the 1913 Buddhist exhibition at the Cernuschi Museum provided the ideational model for Sergei Oldenburg‘s 1919 First Buddhist Exhibition in Petrograd. Paris-Petrograd: The Communion of Buddhist Ideas As in the case of Émile Guimet, after a trip to Japan and China Henri Cernuschi began to assemble his collection of Asian art. 667 According to an inventory taken upon Cernuschi‘s death, his collection included five thousand artifacts divided in 2500 bronzes, 2000 ceramics, and various books and paintings 668 mainly from Japan and China. Cernuschi showed his collection for the first time at the Industrial Palace on the occasion of the annual Orientalist conference and it remained on display from August 1873 to mid-January 1874. According to Michel Maucuer, the show was a revelation for 667 Cernuschi went to Asia with the other collector, the Orientalist, and art critic Théodore Duret in 1871. On the Cernuschi collection and his tour to Asia, see M. Maucuer et al., Henri Cernuschi (1821-1896). Voyageur et collectionneur. Paris: Les Musées de la Ville de Paris, 1998. Duret, like Guimet, inherited his fortune from his family, which was in the cognac business. Duret became one of the biggest promoters of Impressionism after his encounter with Manet in Spain in 1865. In addition to their art, Duret shared the impressionists‘ passion for Japan. 668 M. Maucuer, ―Les collections asiatiques d‘Henri Cernuschi.‖ Henri Cernuschi (1821-1896). Voyageur et collectionneur, 31. 289 the French public. 669 Afterwards it went to Cernuschi‘s mansion on Vélasquez Avenue next to Parc Monceau, and at his death the collection became the property of the City of Paris, which transformed Cernuschi‘s mansion into a museum. Henri Cernuschi was part of the Parisian creative world; he was renowned for his extravagant parties, which were attended by celebrities of the caliber of Émile Zola and Guy de Maupassant. 670 During one of his masquerades, the host of the house received his guests wearing an embroidered kimono, while the French statesman, Léon Gambetta, harangued at the feet of the giant statue of the Meguro Buddha in the bronze room. 671 A photograph of the time usefully documents the interior of this room (fig. 30). To the beau monde Cernuschi‘s collection was as popular as Guimet‘s, and like Guimet‘s, Cernuschi‘s Buddhist artifacts inspired artists, too 672 –among them the French painter Gustave Moreau, whose works depicted the iconography of Buddha statues, 673 and the Impressionists Claude Monet and Édouard Manet, who personally knew Duret. 674 Probably Voloshin also visited the Museum, since in October 1899—a year after the 669 Ibid., 35. 670 G. Béguin, ―L‘Hotel particulier di Henri Cernuschi.‖ In Viaggio in Oriente, 20. 671 Ibid. 672 According to Michel Maucurer, however, the Guimet and the Cernuschi Buddhist collections differed; whereas the former remained the collection of an amateur, the latter was a ―collection of objects‖ intended for pedagogical purposes which were dictated by Cernuschi‘s liberal past (M. Maucurer, ―L‘Asia a portata dell‘Europa.‖ In Viaggio in Oriente, 29). 673 See Ibid., 64-5. 674 J. Baas, Smile of the Buddha, 22. Furthermore, in this world of interconnectedness that characterized the international artistic arena of the time, it is noteworthy that Clémenceau, who has been previously discussed in relation to the Buddhist mass at the Guimet Museum, was Monet‘s friend and biographer (Ibid., 23). 290 Cernuschi Museum was inaugurated—he went walking in Parc Monceau to admire the bust of Maupassant. 675 Cernuschi‘s pedagogical purposes in putting together his Buddhist collection were continued by the then-curator of the Museum, Henri d‘Ardenne de Tizac. Among his initiatives was the 1912 exhibition of Chinese paintings, which he organized in collaboration with Viktor Golubev 676 —the Russian archaeologist mentioned in the previous chapter in relation to Nikolai Roerich. Russians read about the Chinese exhibition in the magazine Sophia (Sofiia), which reviewed it in one of its 1914 issues. 677 Taking a cue from the appearance in the press of Golubev‘s first volume of Ars Asiatica dedicated to Chinese art, the anonymous reviewer looked at the growth of Buddhist collections abroad to question the absence of the same phenomenon in Moscow and St. Petersburg. The only evidence of interest in Asian collections, the author continues, could be found in Sergei Shukin‘s acquisition of a Chinese portrait dated from the T‘ang dynasty (618-906) (fig. 31) hanging on the wall of Shukin‘s Gallery next to a painting by Cézanne. Despite the craftsmanship of the representation, though, the anonymous reporter could not refrain from noticing that there was something alien and cruel in the 675 This is a paraphrase of the initial verses from the poem written in Paris in October 1899: ―Here it is Parc Monceau. Here a bust to Maupassant has been erected‖ [Вот парк Монсо. Здесь Мопассана/Поставлен бюст] (M. Voloshin, ―Parizha ia liubliu osennii, strogii plen…,‖ 151). 676 Golubev graduated in history and archaeology at St. Petersburg University; he took his doctorate in philology at Heidelberg University, and then in 1904 moved to Paris. His first trip to India took place in 1910-1911, later he specialized in Cambodian archaeology and art (G. Bongard-Levin, R. Lardinois, A. Vigasin, Correspondances Orientalistes entre Paris et Saint-Pétersbourg (1887-1935). Paris: Diffusion de Boccard, 2002: note 216, 136). 677 ―Ars Asiatica.‖ Sofiia. Zhurnal iskusstva i literatury 3 (March 1914): 4-8. 291 Fig. 30 Louis Émile Durandelle, Photograph of the bronze room at the Cernuschi Museum, Paris, ca. 1880-1890. Fig. 31 Chinese portrait from the T‘ang dynasty. In ―Ars Asiatica.‖ Sofiia. Zhurnal iskusstva i literatury 3 (March 1914): 4-8. 292 facial traits of the Chinese persona. Echoing debates around the ―yellow peril,‖ the anonymous writer concludes his article, remarking that this ancient and wise piece of art seems to propagate ―a subtly evil breeze‖ that makes the viewer seek refuge in comfortingly ―good‖ Italian and Russian art. 678 Contrary to the anonymous reviewer‘s opinion, the two Russian capitals, as well as the provinces participated, indeed, in this trend of assembling private Buddhist collections –a transversally widespread habit embracing both Western Europe and Russia. With the aim of taking advantage of this diffused interest in the East, in which the French capital was also participating, after the Chinese paintings exhibition Golubev—a collector of Buddhist artifacts himself—organized with d‘Ardenne de Tizac a Buddhist exposition of objects lent from various private collections in Paris. The show opened on April 15, 1913 and closed on June 30. It presented bronzes and paintings from various private collectors, including Golubev‘s own collection, and photographs of the Ajanta caves in India, which were borrowed from the Indian Society of London. 679 According to the description of the exhibition given by d‘Ardenne de Tizac in the journal L‘art décorative, the goal of the art show was to offer French visitors the most accurate picture of the various Buddhist schools in Asia. To serve the audience best, the curators displayed the specimens in the Museum by offering a comparative analysis of the stylistic 678 Ibid., 8. 679 Golubev donated more than one thousand of his photographs of Indian and Buddhist antiquities to the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences (S. Ol‘denburg, Otchet o komandirovke na vystavku po buddiiskomu iskusstvu v Parizhe. Saint Petersburg: Tipografiia Imperatorskoi Akademii nauk, 1913, 379-380). 293 differences among the various Asian Buddhist schools. 680 Sergei Oldenburg, who was sent to the show by the St. Petersburg Academy of Science, reported his impressions at a meeting held by the Department of History and Philology on April 10, 1913. For him, the show documented two major facts: first, that Buddhism in Asia was as important as Christendom in Europe and that Buddhist art played as relevant a role to Asia as Classicism did to the West. 681 Second, the show assured the reappearance on the art scene of Buddhist artifacts that were considered being lost forever. Therefore the show attested to the existence of an art market based on private collectors who were ready to pay incredible sums of money in order to obtain rare pieces of art. 682 According to Tatiana Ermakova, the 1913 Buddhist exhibition at the Cernuschi Museum influenced Oldenburg‘s organization of the 1919 First Buddhist Exhibition in Petrograd. As she notes, the expositive principle of dividing sections by country and of comparing originals with photographs recalled the French Buddhist exhibition. Also reminiscent of the French show, Ermakova continues, was the pedagogical goal of instructing the viewer on Buddhism through visual reproductions of Buddhist temples and sacred representations. 683 Undoubtedly, the French Buddhist exhibition at the Cernuschi Museum influenced Oldenburg‘s organizational plan; however, the idea of dividing artifacts according to country of origin was not new in Russia. Ethnographical 680 H. d‘Ardenne de Tizac, ―L‘art bouddhique au Musée Cernuschi.‖ L‘Art Décoratif (June 1913): 245-6. 681 S. Ol‘denburg, Otchet o komandirovke na vystavku po buddiiskomu iskusstvu v Parizhe, 379. 682 Ibid. 683 T. Ermakova, Buddiiskii mir glazami rossiiskikh issledovatelei XIX-pervoi treti XX veka. (Rossiia i sopredel‘nye strany). Saint Petersburg: Nauка, 1998, 165. 294 and oriental exhibitions were organized in St. Petersburg according to this scheme, as with the 1893 exhibition of souvenirs that Tsar Nicholas II had brought back from his Asian tour of 1890-91 (Chapter Three). When this exhibition opened, Oldenburg was already thirty years old, and may have visited the art show. He may also have thought of the 1893 exhibition, when years later, he assembled specimens by country of origin for the 1919 show. That the Buddhist exhibition at the Cernuschi Museum had an impact on the organization of the First Buddhist Exhibition in Petrograd is confirmed by some of the photographs that Golubev took during his expedition to the Javanese stupa of Borobudur –the same Buddhist site that Konstantin Balmont visited on his 1912 Asian tour (Chapter One). Golubev‘s photographs and some bronze statuettes represented Javanese Buddhist art at the show. 684 Unlike the French exhibition, the best countries illustrated at the Petrograd exposition were those bordering on Russia or serving as scientific destinations for many Russian explorers. 685 Hence, Mongolia, China, and Tibet dominated the show along with Kozlov‘s exceptional finds from the city of Karakhoto (Chapter Three). Chinese Turkestan, especially the cave temples at Dunhuang, also was well represented, since Oldenburg had recently visited the site in his expeditions of 1909-1910 and of 1914-1915. 686 Objects for the show were also taken from the St. Petersburg 684 S. Ol‘denburg, Pervaia Buddiiskaia vystavka v Petrograde. Ocherk. Saint Petersburg: Izdanie Otdela po delam Muzeev i okhrane pamiatnikov Iskusstva i Stariny, 1919, 27. 685 This reasoning explains why India, Japan, and Indochina were less represented. 686 In 2008 the St. Petersburg Hermitage opened the Second Buddhist Exhibition, in an attempt to fulfill Oldenburg‘s original plan to show the entire Buddhist collection formed after Russian scientific expeditions 295 Ethnographical Museum, the Buddhist collections of the Russian Museum, and the Asian Museum (now called the Institute of Oriental Studies at the Academy of Science). 687 When compared with the French show, the 1919 exhibition in Petrograd documents Russia‘s distinctive contribution to the promotion of Buddhist art, a contribution based on the advancement for the Buddhist art coming from those countries which were hardly reachable to other European nations. Unlike Western Europe, in fact, Russia could take advantage of its geographical proximity to Asia, thus having an easier access to some of those Buddhist countries which were precluded to the rest of Europe. The First Buddhist Exhibition opened on August 24 at the Russian Museum on Lasalle Square, a month before Oldenburg‘s ―preventive‖ arrest. 688 Accompanying the exhibition was a series of talks held on Sundays and Thursdays, at which the Buddhologist Fedor Shcherbatskoi lectured on Buddhism and its religious community, while Professors Boris Vladimirstov and Otto Rozenberg talked, respectively, of Buddhism in Tibet and Mongolia, and of Buddhism in Japan. 689 This series of lectures was opened by Oldenburg‘s speech on the life of the Buddha, which took place at the show‘s official opening. Oldenburg‘s approach to the subject contributed to the discourse to Asia (Peshchery Tysiachi Budd. Rossiiskie ekspeditsii na shelkovom puti. K 190-letiu Aziatskogo Muzeia. Edited by Olga Deshpande. Saint Petersburg: Izdatel‘stvo Gosudarstvennogo Ermitazha, 2008). 687 S. Ol‘denburg, ―Pervaia buddiiskaia vystavka v Peterburge (1919 g.).‖ Commented and introduced by Tatiana Ermakova. In Buddiiskii mir glazami rossiiskikh issledovatelei, note 11, 212. 688 Oldenburg was arrested on September 4 following the series of ―preventive‖ detentions that the Soviet government perpetrated in response to the turmoil of the civil war. He was confined with other professors to the provisory imprisonment center on Shpalernaia Street, and released three weeks later (B. Kaganovich, Sergei Fedorovich Ol‘denburg. Opyt biografii. Saint Petersburg: Feniks, 2006, 81). 689 The poster of the exhibition has been published in the exhibition catalog Peshchery tysiachi Budd, 10. The lectures have been collected and published in S. Ol‘denburg, B. Vladimirtsov, F. Shcherbatskoi, O. Rozenberg, Zhizn‘Buddy, indiiskogo Uchitelia Zhizni: Piat‘lektsii po buddizmu. Samara: Agni, 1998. 296 on Buddhism and its relation to Christianity, as discussed in Chapter Two. His talk stresses how the discourse reverberated in literature through the identification of the Indian Prince Josaphat with Siddhartha Gautama. Confirming Oldenburg‘s affiliation with this interpretative branch are his conclusions to the exhibition inaugural speech, in which he stressed that Christians, Muslims, and Zoroastrians knew about the Buddha even before they became aware of his actual identity, since they read and talked about the life of the Indian Prince Josaphat, which was nothing less than the Buddha‘s own biography. 690 Though no direct evidence exists that representatives of the creative world attended the opening of the Buddhist exhibition in Petrograd, their presence is likely. After all, only a year earlier Oldenburg and Nikolai Gumilev co-authored the unfinished play The Life of the Buddha. Moreover, Oldenburg was still collaborating with Gorky at World Literature when the Buddhist exhibition opened, making it highly improbable that his colleagues from the editorial board missed the event. Especially likely is that the poet Aleksandr Blok, with whom Oldenburg often met from 1918 to 1921, attended the Buddhist exhibition. If he did not, Blok still held in his library a copy of Oldenburg‘s lecture on the Buddha and a copy of the exhibition catalog. 691 690 Ibid., 40. 691 G. Bongard-Levin, ―Aleksandr Blok i S.F. Ol‘denburg.‖ In Vostok-Rossiia-Zapad. Istoricheskie i kul‘torologicheskie issledovaniia k 70-letiu akademika Vladimira Stepanovicha Miasnikova. Edited by Sergei Tikhvinsky. Moscow: Pamiatniki istoricheskoi mysli, 2001, 243. At the time the two were close, Blok owned copies of Oldenburg‘s books and vice versa. For sure Blok gave Oldenburg his poems The Twelve, Verses on Russia, Grey Morning, On the Edge of Past Years (Za gran‘iu proshlykh let), and the third volume of his Poems (B. Kaganovich, Sergei Fedorovich Oldenburg, 96). 297 Blok‘s ties with Oldenburg and with Buddhism in general have been the subject of a thorough analysis by Grigory Bongard-Levin, 692 and therefore they will not be repeated here. Perhaps what best proves Oldenburg‘s affection to Blok (and links it to the main topic of this dissertation—the concept of journey) is his article in memory of the poet, ―Heart Cannot Live in Peace.‖ 693 Combining the world of fairy-tales and adventure books, the Orientologist evokes the image of the early deceased poet who lives in solitude in an enchanted garden and dreams as he is lulled by nightingales. This fairy-tale is interrupted with the metonymic image of the undertow knocking at the walls of the enchanted garden –it is the ocean calling the poet to enter the world of adventure on board sailing ships that will bring him to unknown lands. For Oldenburg, abandoning the nightingale garden to take a journey metaphorically summarized Blok‘s life –one lived briefly, but intensely. 694 Ultimately, Oldenburg‘s symbolism of the journey as metaphor for Blok‘s lifestyle also applies to his entire generation, for Blok shared with his peers the same Weltanschauung. To conclude; thus far the Russian reception of Buddhism from the West has been analyzed in relation to the Buddhist revival in Paris. France, however, did not represent the only source of inspiration for Russian literati; Germany and, in particular, Nietzsche‘s and Schopenhauer‘s elaborations on nirvana played a role as well. Perhaps only the figure of the Buddha himself could compete with the concept of nirvana in terms of popularity 692 G. Bongard-Levin, ―Aleksandr Blok i S.F. Ol‘denburg,‖ 231-249. 693 S. Ol‘denburg, ―Ne mozhet serdtse zhit‘ pokoem.‖ Nachalа 1 (1921): 9-14. 694 Ibid., 9. 298 among modern Russian intellectuals, which is why any discussion of ―European‖ Buddhism in modern Russian culture cannot be considered complete without a thorough discussion on nirvana; thus, the last chapter of this dissertation is devoted to that subject. 299 Chapter 6 The Blessing of Enlightenment—The ―Nothingness‖ of Nirvana: Russian Reception of Nirvana in Literature, Philosophy, and the Arts K. Malevich, Suprematist Composition: White on White 1918. Museum of Modern Art, New York The “Nihilistic” Nirvana in Russian Literature and Philosophy: An Introduction On February 8, 1899 Sergei Oldenburg read his paper ―Is It True That Buddhism Is Imbued With Pessimism?‖ 695 to an audience at St. Petersburg University. The topic of his speech, as Oldenburg explains in his introduction, was dictated by the fact that: ―Whenever people talk about pessimism, almost every time they also mention, somehow reluctantly, Buddhism.‖ 696 His was a defense of the Buddhist doctrine against those who misinterpreted its message; but who were these people to whom Oldenburg referred in his speech? Probably, the Orientologist was addressing a general attitude toward Buddhism rather than alluding to any individual. This attitude privileged a worldview that found 695 S. Ol‘denburg, ―Deistvitel‘no li buddizm proniknut pessimizmom?‖ In Godichnyi akt Imperatorskogo S.Peterburgskogo Universiteta 8-go Fevralia 1899 goda. 1898 Report on the status and activity of the Imperial St. Petersburg University compiled by Professor V.N. Latkin. Saint Petersburg: Tipografiia i Litografiia B.M. Vol‘fa, 1899, 135-149. 696 Ibid., 135. 300 expression in essays like Leonid Kashetin‘s ―Buddhism. Its Recognition from the Point of View of Pure Pessimism,‖ 697 and which, in the 1920s, would be exemplified in the polemic around the essence of nirvana. The polemic developed between the Belgian Indologist Luis de la Vallée Poussin and the Buddhologist Fedor Shcherbatskoi 698 — pupil, with his long-lasting colleague Oldenburg, of the well-known expert on Buddhism Ivan Minaev. Indeed, a consequence of the scholarly debate around the concept of nirvana was that for some writers and philosophers Buddhism meant nihilism. Because of this pessimistic interpretation of Buddhist doctrine, and specifically of nirvana, the present chapter will examine cultural indicators that illuminate the sources of the misleading nihilistic view of nirvana that circulated in modern Russian intellectual circles. Before addressing this topic, however, I offer a brief definition of nirvana according to recent 697 L. Kashetin, Buddizm: raspoznanie ego s tochki zreniia chistogo pessimizma. Leipzig: F.A. Brokhaus, late 1800s. 698 The polemic between the two was aroused after the publication of Poussin‘s ―Nirvana‖ in Etudes sur l‘histoire des Religions, vol. 5 (Paris, 1925). Here, the Belgian scholar perpetuates the nihilistic view on nirvana that he had already put forth in 1916 at the time of his lectures on ancient Buddhism held at Manchester College in Oxford (February-April, 1916). His lectures were published the next year under the title The Way to Nirvāṇa. Six Lectures on Ancient Buddhism as a Discipline of Salvation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1917. Shcherbatskoi reviewed Poussin‘s work on nirvana in the Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies, University of London 4.2 (Th. Sterbatsky, ―Nirvana. Par Luis de la Vallée Poussin,‖ 1926: 357-60), and then in more detail in his The Conception of Buddhist Nirvana (Leningrad: Akademiia nauk SSSR, 1927. For a more recent edition, see its 1965 release by The Hague, Mouton & Co. Series Indo-Iranian Reprints edited by the Editorial Board of the Indo-Iranian Journal VI). Criticizing the generally accepted notion by Poussin and other western scholars of nirvana as nihilism based on some vague interpretation of Indian yoga and Buddhism, Shcherbatskoi attempted to prove that this notion was a gross generalization of a more profound concept, which changes its meaning according to the two main Buddhist schools of Hinayana and Mahayana. For a deeper analysis of Shcherbatskoi‘s study see B. Semichov, A. Zelinsky, ―Akademik Fedor Ippolitovich Shcherbatskoi.‖ In F. Shcherbatskoi, Izbrannye trudy po buddizmu. Edited by A. Zelinsky and B. Semichov, with an introduction by G. Bongard-Levin. Moscow: Nauka, 1988, 25-30. Guy Richard Welbon also devotes to the subject Chapter Eight of his book The Buddhist Nirvāna and Its Western Interpreters. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1968. 301 interpretations, in order to have a yardstick for the nineteenth century readings that follow. According to Nirvana and Other Buddhist Felicities. Utopias of the Pali imaginaire, by Steven Collins, Professor in the Humanities at the Department of South Asian Languages and Civilizations at the University of Chicago: ―The Buddhist doctrinal position can be stated simply. Nirvana is indeed the ultimate religious goal, a state of release from all suffering and impermanence, but no language or concepts can properly describe it.‖ 699 Further complicating nirvana is the distinction between two types— nirvana and parinirvana; both can refer to the moment of enlightenment, which the Buddha attained at the age of thirty-five under the bodhi-tree, and to the moment of his death at the age of eighty. 700 Simply put, one might conclude that parinirvana concerns a state antecedent to the final nirvana, which is sometimes identified with the enlightenment, whereas nirvana itself means the desegregation of the so-called ―aggregates‖ that form personhood. 701 699 S. Collins, Nirvana and Other Buddhist Felicities. Utopias of the Pali imaginaire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998, 97. 700 Ibid., 148. Apparently there are also slight etymological differences between the Pali and Sanskrit denotation of the word nirvana (Ibid., 193). Collins wrote: ―It is common in English to speak of attaining nirvana, but verbal forms from the roots (pari-) nir-vā are by far the most common means of referring to the events, and states, of enlightenment and final nirvana. It is also common to say that the Buddha died, or to refer to the death of an enlightened person; sometimes equivalent words are used in Pali, but this usage can be misleading. In so far as these words simply refer to the end of life, without implying anything about what may or may not exist afterwards, there is no problem; but in modern English they can carry the assumption that afterwards the dead person is no more. The possibilities ‗exists,‘ ‗does not exist,‘ both and neither are all explicitly refused as inapplicable to the enlightened person after death; and as was shown in the previous chapter, nirvana itself certainly exists. For both these reasons, in certain contexts it seems useful to me to coin the English term nirvanize, inelegant though it is, as an attempt to preserve both the form and the ambiguities of the Pali‖ (Ibid., 193). 701 The aggregates (khandha) are Form, Sensation, Perception, Mental Formation, Consciousness. For more information, see S. Collins, Nirvana. Concept, Imagery, Narrative. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010, 32, 52-4, 69, 92. 302 Precisely because it proves so difficult to define, nirvana has been subjected to many misinterpretations and, at the same time, has led many scholars, from the very start of Buddhist studies in the first half of the nineteenth century up to the present day, to attempt a conclusive definition of the concept. 702 Notably, in the time period studied in this project, modern writers and philosophers interpreted nirvana exclusively as a synonym for nihilism. This approach, however, elucidates much more about the epoch in question than it does about the real meaning of nirvana as intended by doctrinal Buddhism. How Buddhism entered modern Russian culture is the focus of this dissertation; thus the members of the literary community who contributed to a pessimistic interpretation of nirvana will be the subjects of analysis in this chapter. Why the Russian intelligentsia interpreted Buddhism as nihilism will be answered, as I approach the issue from the standpoint of the ―imaginary journey.‖ If in Chapter Two this ―imaginary journey‖ involved the transmigration of religious myths about Buddhism versus Christianity, and in Chapter Four this journey dwelt with the debate around the ―yellow peril,‖ here it concerns the misinterpretation of the notion of nirvana. As seen in the aforementioned chapters, the idea of Christ as a latter-day elaboration of the Buddha, as well as the idea of the ―yellow race‖ taking over the ―white race,‖ hid a much deeper social malaise, which developed from the political situation in Asia, and reached its apogee with the Russian defeat during the 1904-05 Russo-Japanese war. Likewise, the 702 After all, Collins himself devoted his six hundred-page book to the subject matter without giving a definitive explanation of nirvana. 303 modern understanding of nirvana as nihilism was symptomatic of western angst, whose causes and effects are the subject of the following sections. There is No Way Out: The “Pessimistic” Nirvana of Vladimir Soloviev, Dmitry Merezhkovsky, and Afanasy Fet One Russian philosopher and writer who adopted this pessimistic view of nirvana was undoubtedly Vladimir Soloviev, as documented in his article ―The Buddhist Mood in Poetry‖ (Buddiiskoe nastroenie v poezii), first published in the literary magazine European Herald in 1894. 703 His article was a review of Count Arseny Golenishchev- Kutuzov‘s two-volume edition of poems, printed in 1884. Soloviev decided to write a review of the poems a decade after their publication due to the popularity that Kutuzov had enjoyed in the 1890s. At that time many literary critics talked of Golenishchev- Kutuzov as an intellectual scion of Pushkin. This characterization was stressed with particular emphasis by Nikolai Strakhov in 1894 on the occasion of the award ceremony at the 10 th anniversary of the Pushkin prize. 704 Because of Kutuzov‘s nomination to the prestigious prize, Soloviev decided to express his opinion of Count Kutuzov‘s poetical view. In his article Soloviev agreed with Strakhov and others in their appreciation of Kutuzov‘s poetry; however, he could not refrain from highlighting some fundamental distinctions between Pushkin‘s and Golenishchev-Kutuzov‘s styles. According to 703 V. Solov‘ev, Filosofiia iskusstva i literaturnaia kritika. Moscow: ―Iskusstvo,‖ 1991, 425-465. The article has been analyzed also in Sergei Nosov, Liki tvorchestva Vladimira Solov‘eva. With ―Kratkoi povesti ob Antikhriste‖ in appendix. Saint Petersburg: Dmitry Bulanin, 2008, 148-159. 704 See note 5, p. 676 in V. Solov‘ev, Filosofiia iskusstva i literaturnaia kritika. 304 Soloviev, whilst Pushkin advanced a confident, joyful, and cheerful tone, Kutuzov enlisted a minor tone, a hopeless attitude; Kutuzov was ―the poet of death and nirvana.‖ 705 In so writing, Soloviev was by no means suggesting that Kutuzov was a follower of Buddhism; he was not. The author of the article was, in fact, proposing a Buddhist lecture of some of Kutuzov‘s poems according to Soloviev‘s understanding of Buddhism as nihilism and pessimism. In other words, in poems such as ―Past Talks‖ (Starye rechi), ―Grandfather‘s Farewell‖ (Ded prostil), and ―The Dawn‖ (Rassvet), Soloviev perceived a generally hopeless acceptance of death, which culminates in ―The Dawn,‖ where death is seen as the ultimate blessing and actual beatitude. 706 The hero‘s acceptance of death, as well as the love triangle in the plot and the fact that he was assisted by his beloved at his death bed, reminded Soloviev of Lev Tolstoy‘s famous scene of Prince Andrei Bolkonsky‘s death in War and Peace. Here too, the author continues, Bolkonsky‘s glimpse at nirvana [underline mine ADR] and his acceptance of death as something inevitable caused the hero‘s apathy to the beloved around him. 707 Probably, Soloviev had in mind specifically the passage from Tolstoy‘s masterpiece where Bolkonsky‘s exclaims: ―Yes, death is an awakening!‖ (Da, smert‘ – probuzhdenie!). 708 705 Ibid., 426. 706 Ibid., 441. 707 Ibid., 440. 708 L. Tolstoy, War and Peace. Translated by Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2007, 985. 305 Soloviev‘s interpretation of Prince Bolkonsky‘s death as entrance into the realm of nirvana was shared by Dmitry Merezhkovsky in his critical analysis of Tolstoy and Dostoevsky. Similarly, the Symbolist poet stresses the nothingness of nirvana and of Buddhist nihilism, which the Tolstoyan hero reaches at the very end of his life. Merezhkovsky remarks: What then is there? ―There is nothing, only silence, calmness.‖ In other words nothing exists beyond annihilation in God, in Nirvana […] He does not think of holiness, of the greatness of life and death, he thinks only of the annihilation of death and life [italics here and to follow in the original ADR]. Yes indeed, his ultimate word about this revelation of the celestial truth deals only with annihilation, only with destruction, only with negation, only with the eternal No without the eternal Yes. 709 Here, as for Bely and Ivanov (Chapter Four), tone highlights the same usage of ―yes‖ and ―no‖ to describe the juxtaposition of negative (Buddhist) and positive (Christian) values as indicative of a manner of speaking diffused among exponents of the same literary circles. Moreover, proving how well-informed he was of the debates on Buddhism and Christianity, discussed in Chapter Two, Merezhkovsky contrasts the two religions in his essay at length. 710 Still, Merezhkovsky‘s critique of Prince Andrei‘s death and his consideration of nirvana contradicted his earlier poem ―Nirvana,‖ which he had written only four years before his essay on Tolstoy and Dostoevsky. The poem goes as follows: 709 D. Merezhkovsky, L. Tolstoi i Dostoevsky. Vechnye sputniki. Moscow: izdatel‘stvo ―Respublika,‖ 1995, 183. 710 Criticizing Europeans who mixed Christianity with Buddhism, Merezhkovsky stresses how these two religions were, in fact, antipodal. He writes, for instance, that whereas Christianity professed the union of life and death for Resurrection, Buddhism disunited life and death, for its final goal did not include rebirth but only ultimate extinction (Ibid.). 306 And again, like in the first day of Creation, The heavenly azure is quiet, As if there is no suffering in the world, As if there is no sin in the heart. I don‘t need love and fame: In the silence of morning fields I breathe as do these grasses… Neither past nor present days Do I wish to recall and count. I only feel again The happiness of thoughtlessness And the delight of languor! 711 [И вновь, как в первый день созданья,/Лазурь небесная тиха,/Как будто в мире нет страданья,/Как будто в сердце нет греха./Не надо мне любви и славы:/В молчаньи утренних полей/Дышу, как дышат эти травы.../Ни прошлых, ни грядущих дней/Я не хочу пытать и числить./Я только чувствую опять,/Какое счастие - не мыслить,/Какая нега - не желать!] This poem might suggest that in 1896 Merezhkovsky still looked at nirvana as both the extinction of desire and of blessing. For him nirvana was comparable to the first day of creation— before original sin had been committed. Thus, his early vision of nirvana had cosmic features. What, then, made him change his mind? A conclusive answer cannot be given. Likely, his about-face was influenced by an apocalyptic fear that prevailed in the last years of the nineteenth century, and which Symbolist crowds felt with great intensity. After all, Merezhkovsky‘s essay on Tolstoy and Dostoevsky appeared right in 1900— that is, at a time when people widely believed that the end of the world was coming. Hence, possibly Merezhkovsky, along with the young Symbolist generation, adopted the idea of pan-mongolism prophesized by Soloviev and, from then on, rejected his earlier positive view of nirvana. 711 D. Merezhkovsky, Sobranie sochinenii v 4-kh tomakh, vol. 4. Moscow: Pravda, 1990, 534. 307 Indeed, this common assumption that nirvana meant nothingness, that nirvana was synonymous with the ultimate denial of life, and therefore with death was what Oldenburg was reproaching in his 1899 speech at St. Petersburg University. This pessimistic approach privileged a one-sided reading of Buddhism, refusing to take into consideration the part of its doctrine concerning the path to salvation and escape from suffering. Against this negative portrait Vladimir Soloviev, as seen previously with Viacheslav Ivanov and Dmitry Merezhkovsky as well, juxtaposed the positive Christian idea of Resurrection. Especially in his Readings on God-mankind (Chteniia o Bogochelovechestve), and in particular in his third reading, 712 Soloviev contrasted the Christian ―positive revelation‖ (polozhitel‘noe otkrovenie) to the Buddhist ―negative revelation‖ (otritsatel‘noe otkrovenie), which corresponded in philosophy to the nihilism of Schopenhauer and Hartmann. 713 As seen in Chapter Two, in his Confession Tolstoy also agreed with Soloviev‘s interpretation of Buddhism and nirvana—as did Andrei Bely (Chapter Four). Broadly speaking, one might apply to the representatives of the Russian creative world what Dragan Milivojevich wrote about Tolstoy when he asserted that the latter interpreted Buddhism in nihilistic terms ―because of the popular belief among the 19 th -century Buddhologists and Schopenhauer that the word Nirvana meant ‗blowing out 712 V. Solov‘ev, Chteniia o Bogochelovechestve. Stat‘i.Stikhotvoreniia i poema. Iz trekh razgovorov. Introduced, edited and commented by Askol‘d Muratov. Saint Petersburg: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1994, 55-75. For a review on Buddhism and Soloviev, see Tatiata Berniukevich‘s Ph.D. dissertation Buddiiskie idei v kul‘ture Rossii kontsa XIX-pervoi poloviny XX veka. Chita: Chitinskii gosudarstvennyi universitet, 2010, 21-45. 713 V. Solov‘ev, Chteniia o Bogochelovechestve, 74. The presence of Buddhism in Russian philosophy is the subject of Tatiana‘s Berniukevich‘s book Buddizm v Rossiiskoi filosofskoi kul‘ture: ―Chuzhoe‖ i ―svoe.‖ Moscow: knizhnyi dom ―Librokom,‖ 2009. 308 life.‘ The metaphor of blowing out life as a Buddhist symbol for Nirvana is present in Anna Karenina in the scene before her suicide when the light in her candlestick blows out as well as in a similar blowing out of light before old Prince Bolkonsky‘s death in War and Peace.‖ 714 That Tolstoy interpreted nirvana in these terms is documented in his correspondence with the poet Afanasy Fet; both Tolstoy and Fet understood nirvana like Soloviev, namely as a synonym for death and annihilation. In his letter to Tolstoy on April 12, 1877, Fet wrote with regard to Kitty‘s childbirth in Anna Karenina: ―I jumped up when I read as far as the two holes in the spiritual world, the holes into Nirvana. These two visible and eternally mysterious windows: birth and death.‖ 715 Exiting the womb and entering the world represented for Fet an apt metaphor for his view of nirvana as a realm of the unconscious and everything preceding life. Unconsciousness, dream, prenatal conditions, death: all of them underpinned the concept of nirvana, which is why, in January 1873, Tolstoy was alarmed to hear from Fet that he ―quietly wanted to think about nirvana.‖ 716 This assertion was accompanied by the news of Tiutchev‘s imminent 714 D. Milivojevich, ―Tolstoy‘s Views on Buddhism.‖ Tolstoy Studies Journal 3, 1990: 66. The article has been republished in Milivojevich‘s book devoted to Tolstoy and eastern religions, Leo Tolstoy. N.Y.: Columbia University Press, 1998, 1-17. Several studies have been devoted to Tolstoy and Schopenhauer, among them, Sigrid McLaughlin, ―Some Aspects of Tolstoy‘s Intellectual Development: Tolstoy and Schopenhauer. California Slavic Studies 5 (1970): 187-248; S.Valiulis, Lev Tol‘stoi i Artur Shopengauer. Vilniaus: Ishleido Vilniaus pedagoginis universitetas, 2000. 715 S. H. Mauer, Schopenhauer in Russia: His Influence on Turgenev, Fet, and Tolstoy. University of California, Berkley, Ph.D. dissertation, 1966. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms, Inc., 1981, 209. 716 L. Tolstoy, Perepiska s russkimi pisateliami. Edited, commented, and introduced by S. Rozanova. Moscow: Gosudarstvennoe izdatel‘stvo Khudozhestvennoi literatury, 1962, 296. Years later in April 1876, Fet showed the same attitude in another letter to Tolstoy, whom he called ―to witness his departure.‖ On 309 death and Turgenev‘s supposed death. To comfort his friend, Tolstoy offered the following considerations: ―To all of us (or at least to me, I think) Nirvana is much more interesting than life; however, I agree that no matter how long I keep thinking of it, I cannot come up with a definition of Nirvana beyond nothingness. I champion but one thing – out of religious respect - my fear of this Nirvana. In the end there is nothing more important than this.‖ 717 In light of these observations, one might interpret Fet‘s poem ―Nonentity‖ (Nichtozhestvo) (1880) as a paraphrase of nirvana; his sixth stanza of iambic hexameters is as follows: I don‘t know you. Painful shouts Came out of my chest on your threshold, And the first state of my earthly being Was for me agonizing and wild. Through baby tears hope could illuminate with a deceitful smile my body And from that moment on with mistake after mistake I still seek good and find only evil. And days alternate with loss and anxiety (Isn‘t it all the same how many these days are?), I want to forget you under heavy work, But then in a blink of an eye you‘re there with your abyss that occasion, too, Tolstoy compared death with Nirvana: ―In the face of death, contact with people who in this life look beyond its bounds is precious and heartening, and you and those few real people I have been close to in life, in spite of a healthy attitude to life, always stand on its very verge and see life clearly just because they look now at Nirvana, the illimitable, the unknown, and now at Sansara, and that view of Nirvana strengthens their vision. But worldly people, priests, etc., however much they may talk about God, are unpleasant to the likes of us, and must be a torment when one is dying, because they don‘t see what we see, namely the God who is more indeterminate, more distant, but more lofty and indubitable, as was said in that article‖ (Tolstoy‘s Letters, vol. 1. Selected, edited and translated by R.F. Christian. New York: Charles Scribner‘s Sons, 1978, 298). 717 L. Tolstoy, Perepiska s russkimi pisateliami, 296. 310 What are you? Why? Keep silent, feelings and consciousness. Whose eye did glance into the fatal plunge? ―You‖ is indeed ―I‖ myself. You‘re only a negation Of what I am given to know through emotions. What did I learn? It is time to realize that in the universe, Whatever you‘ll look at, you‘ll find only questions and not answers; While breathing and living, I understood that in ignorance is only regret and not fear. And in the meantime, when breaking down under great commotion, I would have at least some childish strength To welcome your brink with the same high-pitched voice With which once I left your shore. 718 [Тебя не знаю я. Болезненные крики/На рубеже твоем рождала грудь моя,/И были для меня мучительны и дики/Условья первые земного бытия.//Сквозь слез младенческих обманчивой улыбкой/Надежда озарить сумела мне чело,/И вот всю жизнь с тех пор ошибка за ошибкой,/Я всѐ ищу добра - и нахожу лишь зло.//И дни сменяются утратой и заботой/(Не всѐ ль равно: один иль много этих дней!),/Хочу тебя забыть над тяжкою работой,/Но миг - и ты в глазах с бездонностью своей.//Что ж ты? Зачем? - Молчат и чувства и познанье./Чей глаз хоть заглянул на роковое дно?/Ты - это ведь я сам. Ты только отрицанье/ Всего, что чувствовать, что мне узнать дано.//Что ж я узнал? Пора узнать, что в мирозданьи,/Куда ни обратись, - вопрос, а не ответ;/А я дышу, живу и понял, что в незнаньи/Одно прискорбное, но страшного в нем нет.//А между тем, когда б в смятении великом/Срываясь, силой я хоть детской обладал,/Я встретил бы твой край тем самым резким криком,/С каким я некогда твой берег покидал.] The opening metaphor of childbirth, accompanied by a painful outcry, welcomes the life of another human being. From the moment of its appearance in the world, the self differentiates itself from the other, identified with the personal pronoun ―you.‖ This distinction between the two entities— the ―I‖ and the ―You‖— is further emphasized by the initial statement, ―I don‘t know you,‖ followed by a caesura. This stress on the human 718 A. Fet, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh. Edited, commented, and introduced by A.E. Tarkhov. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1982, 57-8. 311 condition determines the motif of the poem, which shifts from one self (―I‖) to its negation (―You‖), only to arrive at the conclusion that they are the same. The illusion that the ―You‖ is other than the ―I,‖ an illusion generated from the very moment of one‘s birth, is a deception that the ―I‖ will become aware of by making one mistake after another throughout its life. At the end, the self will finally reach the conclusion that ―You‖ and ―I‖ coincide. ―You‖ is the unknown, the nonentity, the shore that the self left at birth, and the shore it returns to at death. Unlike the Symbolists, Fet preferred to use the two personal pronouns (you and I) instead of ―yes‖ and ―no‖ to identify two opposite poles. Moreover, he suggested a final synthesis between the two entities, a resolution absent in the work of Andrei Bely and Viacheslav Ivanov. Nonetheless, the reader cannot help notice that the word choice ―nichtozhestvo,‖ here translated as ―nonentity,‖ is also the leitmotif in Merezhkovsky‘s excerpt on nirvana quoted above and translated as ―annihilation.‖ From works of literature written in the second half of the nineteenth century emerges a shared vocabulary that was enlisted by different authors to express certain Buddhist principles. The Buddhist interpretation of the term ―nonentity‖ as a synonym for nirvana in Fet‘s poem is further enforced by the date of its composition. Fet wrote the poem in 1880— a few years after he compared Kitty‘s childbirth in Anna Karenina to a hole into nirvana; thus, the metaphor of childbirth opening ―Nonentity‖ may also hint at nirvana. Indeed life and death—the two windows into nirvana— open and close respectively Fet‘s poem, visualizing metaphorically two gates that lead into the nonentity. Between these two conditions life flows with its illusion, or what the Buddhists call 312 ―Maya.‖ Reality as illusion, life as sorrow, ignorance as the cause of sorrow are all Buddhist principles that can be found throughout ―Nonentity.‖ Additionally, Fet probably filtered the Buddhist world through Schopenhauer, as he was working on his translation of The World as Will and Representation when he wrote this poem. In fact, in his letter to Tolstoy dated January 2, 1879, Fet ended his consideration of Schopenhauer with the following verses on life and death: ―I want to live! Screams the daring one. – Let the deceit be! Oh, give me the deceit!‖ And it doesn‘t occur to him that this is an ice with many cracks, And there, underneath, there is a bottomless ocean. To run? Where? Where‘s the truth and where‘s the error? Where is the hold that hands can reach? There is no living dawn, no smile, - Over them death already triumphs. Blind people uselessly search for the road, Trusting the blind guidance of their senses; But if life is the noisy bazaar of god, Then only death is its immortal shrine. 719 [«Я жить хочу! - кричит он, дерзновенный. –/Пускай обман! О, дайте мне обман!»/И в мыслях нет, что это лед мгновенный,/А там, под ним, - бездонный океан.//Бежать? Куда? Где правда, где ошибка?/Опора где, чтоб руки к ней простерть?/Что ни расцвет живой, что ни улыбка, -/Уже под ними торжествует смерть.//Слепцы напрасно ищут, где дорога,/Доверясь чувств слепым поводырям;/Но если жизнь - базар крикливый бога,/То только смерть - его бессмертный храм.] That Arthur Schopenhauer played a significant role in promoting Russian interest in Buddhism and Oriental philosophies in general is irrefutable. As seen thus far, the German philosopher affected Fet‘s views on life and death, Bely‘s pessimistic attitudes in 719 A. Fet, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 2, 258. 313 his youth (Chapter Four), and Soloviev‘s early interest in Buddhism. 720 Despite Schopenhauer‘s paramount influence in Russia, however, other German philosophers impacted Russian culture as widely as he did. Some of them, for example Friedrich Nietzsche and Friedrich Hegel, dealt with Buddhism, too; hence, Buddhism from the West also entered Russian soil through Germany and its philosophers. As discussed in the last two chapters of this dissertation, German philosophers, as well as French discoverers of Buddhist texts and organizers of art exhibitions had a significant impact on modern Russian culture. Thus, if the previous chapter was devoted to the study of Buddhism in Paris, the present analysis of Buddhism in Europe and its Russian reception would be incomplete without studying the German contribution to the subject matter. Buddhism and Nirvana under the Herald of German Philosophy: Arthur Schopenhauer, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Friedrich Hegel In 1865 the twenty-one-year-old Friedrich Nietzsche went on vacation with his friend Erwin Rodhe to the valley on the Pleiße River on the outskirts of Leipzig. The 720 This interest was confirmed by Soloviev‘s close friend, the psychologist and philosopher Lev Lopatin (L. Lopatin, ―Filosofskoe mirosozertsanie V.S. Solov‘eva.‖ Filosofskie kharakteristiki i rechi. Introduced by V.V. Zen‘kovsky with an afterword by V.V. Rubtsov and A.D. Cherviakov. Moscow: Academia, 1995, 111). Lopatin particularly objected to the German philosopher‘s ethics, his moral interpretation of the Will, and his view of nirvana as blissful and soothing for everybody (blazhennoe uspokoenie vsekh sushchestv). Agreeing with Soloviev‘s distinction between Buddhism and Christianity, Lopatin attacked Schopenhauer for promoting a Buddhist worldview, according to which an irrational, evil force created the world, and in which life is evil, sorrow, and illusion. There is no doubt, Lopatin continued, that Christianity with its eternal reason and love would defeat Buddhism, which proclaims death the highest achievement (L. Lopatin, ―Nrastvennoe uchenie Shopengauera.‖ Filosofskie kharakteristiki i rechi, 80). For a philosophical analysis of Schopenhauer‘s influence on Soloviev‘s thought, see also E.N. Trubetskoi, Mirosozertsanie V.S. Solov‘eva, vol. 1. Introduced by A. A. Nosova, edited by T.A. Umanskaia. Moscow: Moskovskii filosofskii fond izdatel‘stvo ―Medium,‖ 1995, 54-5, 128-133. 314 peacefulness of the site was such that the two friends decided to rename it ―Nirvana.‖ 721 According to Guy Richard Welbon, this moment marked Nietzsche‘s earliest reference to anything buddhistic. 722 Later the philosopher would study Sanskrit with the scholar Hermann Brockhaus— son of the publisher Friedrich Arnold Brockhaus, the same publisher who, from 1890 to 1906, participated in the German-Russian joint venture to produce the Brockhaus-Efron encyclopedic Dictionary. Ties between Buddhism and Russian culture have been shown throughout the present study and the Brockhaus-Efron enterprise represents additional evidence in this respect. Many leading figures, such as the chemist Dmitry Mendeleev, the philosopher Vladimir Soloviev, and the ethnographer Grigory Potanin, contributed articles to the Dictionary, thus making the philosophical bond even tighter. One notable interconnection in this world was that Hermann Brockhaus was Richard Wagner‘s brother-in-law and that the German composer was fascinated with Buddhism as well. 723 721 G. R. Welbon, The Buddhist Nirvāna and Its Western Interpreters, 185. 722 Ibid. 723 On Wagner and Buddhism, see the chapter ―Richard Wagner—Buddha als Heldentenor?‖ in Welbon‘s The Buddhist Nirvāna and Its Western Interpreters, 171-184. Welbon traces an interesting parallel between the triad Schopenhauer-Nietzsche-Wagner and three stages of Buddhism; he writes: ―Schopenhauer, Wagner, and Nietzsche—together the three represent an intriguingly exact, microcosmic correspondence to the history of Buddhism in India, as it were, a curious rebirth of fifteen hundred years of Buddhism within a single century of European experience. In this ‗Upanisad,‘ Schopenhauer stands for the earliest Buddhist attitudes, and certainly those of the Theravāda. His emphasis, as theirs, was on deliverance—a notion first suggesting a from rather than a to. For Wagner, the idea of renunciation blended with various personal considerations, resulting in an attitude remarkably like that of the Tantrics. In both, enlightenment assures that participation in otherwise profane activities will bring salvation. Latent equations of the phenomenal and the noumenal, the profane and the sacred in Wagner‘s scheme become more or less explicit in Nietzsche‘s work—reminding one of the extreme conclusions in the prajñāparāmitā‖ (Ibid., 192-3). 315 Given that the influence of Nietzsche on Russian culture, especially Symbolism, was extremely strong, 724 the philosopher‘s meditations on Buddhism made him an additional vehicle for the transmission of this religion to Russians. Case in point, for instance, is what Bely wrote in his Notes of an Eccentric Man: ―I understood distinctively that ‗Ecce homo‘ had been described by Friedrich Nietzsche as evidence of being; however, the course of a condition inaccessible to him […] Nietzsche did not become a bodhisattva, perhaps he will become one in his future wanderings.‖ 725 To explain Nietzsche‘s inability to comprehend the essence of being, Bely thought of a Buddhist parallel. By comparing Nietzsche to a bodhisattva— the empathetic who, after reaching the enlightenment, goes back to help others attain the same achievement—Bely conceives of the German philosopher as the one who pointed the others down the right path, but who himself has failed to go along the way. Moses, who led the Exodus of the Hebrew people from Egypt to the Promised Land, but himself never entered it, would have been a more appropriate metaphor; nonetheless, Bely chose a Buddhist reference to demonstrate his point of view. Bely‘s notes limn a pattern that had already emerged in Soloviev‘s article and in writings by many other Russian intellectuals: the use of Buddhist metaphors to explain a concept. That among all the possible parallels both Bely and Soloviev chose Buddhist examples, and did not think it necessary to explain the original meaning of these precepts, 724 On the subject, see B. G. Rosenthal, Nietzsche in Russia. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1986 and of the same author, Nietzsche and Soviet culture: ally and adversary. Cambridge [England]; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994. 725 A. Bely, Zapiski chudaka, vol. 1. Moscow/Berlin: knigoizdatel‘stvo Gelikon, 1922. Reprint Lausanne: Éditions l‘Âge d‘Homme, 1973, 54. 316 attests to the Russian familiarity with, and assimilation of, Buddhist vocabulary. Such citations confirm the prevalence of a Buddhist manner of speaking in Russian creative circuits. Moreover, the comparison between the German philosopher and a bodhisattva forges a connection between Nietzsche and Buddhism, which might have been inspired by the simple consideration that Nietzsche read about its philosophy, and thereby for Bely it was an immediate association; but why was Nietzsche interested in Buddhism? Nietzsche saw in Buddhism a cure to depression through the adoption of ―hygienic measures,‖ such as a life in the open air, wandering, and moderation of food and alcohol. 726 Nonetheless, he also feared what he called the Buddhist ―passive nihilism,‖ the end result of an evolutionary ontological process developed in India, where awareness that what was believed to be reality turned out to be an illusion. According to the philosopher, ―passive nihilism‖ would bring anarchy and what he called ―European Buddhism.‖ 727 The latter Nietzsche feared most because it easily attracted fatigued, over- intellectual civilizations like those of Europe, thus representing an alluring alternative to his Übermensch. 728 To the ―passive nihilism‖ of the Buddhists, Nietzsche juxtaposed his ―active nihilism,‖ a worldview that would arise when ―one actively frees oneself from the values, goals, convictions, articles of faith, and unconscious assumptions founded upon the two-world framework; in other words until the horizon appears free to us again.‖ 729 726 R.G. Morrison, Nietzsche and Buddhism. A Study in Nihilism and Ironic Affinities. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997, 25. 727 Ibid., 5, 12. 728 Ibid., 24. 729 Ibid., 12. 317 Nietzsche was first attracted to Buddhism for the pessimism of its philosophy, as promoted by Schopenhauer in his The World as Will and Representation. 730 Like Bely, Nietzsche found an echo of his young pessimism in Schopenhauer‘s major work, and through this reading, Nietzsche was first introduced to Buddhism and Indian thought in general. 731 Likewise, as stressed in Chapter Four, Bely was deeply affected by the pessimism of Schopenhauer; from reading the philosopher‘s widely popular book The World as Will and Representation, Bely first heard of the Upanishads. 732 It is tempting to imagine that while Schopenhauer used to sit at his desk contemplating the bust of Kant and the statue of the Buddha, 733 so sat Bely, albeit vicariously, in his novel St. Petersburg where the young hero, Nikolai Ableukhov, also owned a bust of Kant and was a great admirer of both Kant and the Buddha (Chapter Four). Because Schopenhauer was widely read in Russia, 734 looking in some detail at his approach to Buddhism and nirvana is 730 As Robert G. Morrison writes in his detailed study Nietzsche and Buddhism: ―Schopenhauer saw in the Buddhist view of existence an early Indian parallel to his own: life was unconditionally unsatisfactory; it could never offer man true lasting happiness or fulfillment but only endless disappointment and sorrow. The only path out of this predicament was through the denial of life‘s fundamental impulse: the ‗will to live‘‖ (Ibid., 3). 731 Ibid. 732 A. Bely, Zapiski chudaka, vol. 2, 153. 733 S. Batchelor, The Awakening of the West. The Encounter of Buddhism and Western Culture. Berkeley, California: Parallax Press, 1994, 255. 734 Schopenhauer and Russia is a well-developed topic. See, for instance, S. H. Maurer, Schopenhauer in Russia: his influence on Turgenev, Fet, and Tolstoy. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University Microfilms International, 1966; J.T. Baer, Arthur Schopenhauer und die russische Literatur des späten 19. und frühen 20. Jahrhunderts. München: O. Sagner, 1980; G. A. Time, ―Nigilist, buddist, mertvist…‘ (O fenomene A. Shopengauera).‖ In Vozhdi umov i mody. Chuzhoe imia kak nasleduemaia model‘ zhizni. Edited by V.E. Bagno. Saint Petersburg: Nauka, 2003, 193-216. 318 worthwhile, as his interpretation contributed to the Russian reception as pessimistic and nihilistic. The German philosopher mentions nirvana several times in The World as Will and Representation, a widely read treatise, thrice reprinted (1818, 1844, and 1859) in Germany, translated into Russian by Afanasy Fet in 1879, and published in 1881. 735 For Schopenhauer the Buddhist nirvana symbolized nothingness; it was the void prevailing once the world was dissolved by the abolition of the Will, an abolition which caused incurable suffering and infinite misery. 736 As for Tolstoy and Fet, for Schopenhauer nirvana meant death, extinction, ―blowing out‖ life 737 — an interpretation that the German philosopher took from early studies of Buddhism by the Russian scholar Isaak Jakob Schmidt, Henry Thomas Colebrooke, Jean Baptiste François Obry, and Spence Hardy. 738 These authors, along with Brian Houghton Hodgson, Alexander Csoma of Körös, and Eugène Burnouf were pioneers of Buddhist studies in Western Europe. 739 Specifically, Schopenhauer took the idea of nirvana as ―blowing out‖ life from Colebrooke and Orby. As Schopenhauer quoted them: 735 Here the referred edition is A. Schopenhauer, The World As Will And Representation, vol. 2.Translated from the German by E.F.J. Payne. New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1958. 736 Ibid., vol. 1, 411-2. 737 Ibid., vol. 2, 508. 738 These are the authors directly cited by Schopenhauer in the second volume of The World as Will and Representation, note 34, 508-9. 739 See G. R. Welbon, The Buddhist Nirvāna and Its Western Interpreters. The notion of nirvana as a synonym for nihilism was not limited to Europe, it circulated in the United States too around the 1840s (R. Fields, How the Swans Came to the Lake. A Narrative History of Buddhism in America. Boston and London: Shambhala, 1992, 60). 319 According to Colebrooke (Transactions of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. I, p. 566), it comes from va, ―to blow‖ like the wind, with the prefixed negative nir; hence it signifies a lull or calm, but as adjective ―extinguished.‖ Obry, Du Nirvana indien, p. 3, says: ―Nirvanam in Sanskrit literally means extinction, e.g., as of a fire.‖ (translated). According to the Asiatic Journal, Vol. XXIV, p. 735, it is really Neravana, from near, ―without,‖ and vana, ―life,‖ and the meaning would be annihilation. 740 Schopenhauer‘s readership did not question his view of Buddhism, above all because from the second half of the nineteenth century, especially after the philosopher‘s death in 1860, many firmly believed that Schopenhauer and the Buddha professed the same philosophy. 741 Schopenhauer himself fueled such a provocative belief. As Roger- Pol Droit interprets it, Schopenhauer‘s acquisition of the bronze statue of the Buddha made by ―the great foundry of Tibet,‖ which the private counsel to the Prussian government had brought to him from Paris per his request, embodied just such a non- conformist character: ―The latent idea seems to have been that of a secret among initiates, of an esoteric complicity, with a touch of provocation aimed at visitors, and more generally at Christian orderliness.‖ 742 Schopenhauer, however, was not the only one affected by this general interpretation of nirvana; the entire international community was. Although according to Roger-Pol Droit, the French philosopher Victor Cousin was responsible for coining the 740 A. Schopenhauer, The World As Will And Representation, vol. 2, note 34, 508. 741 R.-P.Droit, The Cult of Nothingness. The Philosophers and the Buddha. Translated by David Streight and Pamela Vohnson. Chapell Hill and London: The University of North Carolina Press, 2003, 93. 742 Ibid., 94. Schopenhauer described his bronze in these terms: it is ―covered with black lacquer, a foot tall, with pedestal...It is completely authentic and shown in a quite orthodox fashion: I suppose it came from the great foundry in Tibet; it is already quite old. It shall rest on a console in the corner of my living room: visitors, who usually already enter with considerable fright and some flap, will now understand immediately where they are: in a holy place. Perhaps Herr Pastor Kalb of Sachsenhausen, who from his pulpit was vituperating ‗that these days even Buddhism is being brought onto Christian soil,‘ will come‖ (Ibid.,93). 320 expression ―cult of nothingness.‖ 743 One of the most extreme interpreters of Buddhism as nihilism was Jules Barthélemy Saint-Hilaire, a journalist for Journal des Savants in the 1850s and author of Du bouddhisme 744 and Le Bouddha et sa religion (1860). Saint- Hilaire was horrified by nirvana 745 and used to repeat ad nauseam in his publications and speeches on the subject that Buddhist nirvana was absolute annihilation, and that nihilism was horrible and naïve. 746 Saint-Hilaire‘s assertions caused reactions in the international community of Orientologists; one of his adversaries was Max Müller. As discussed at the very outset of this dissertation, Müller attended Konstantin Balmont‘s seminars on Russian literature at Oxford (Chapter One). Nietzsche was likely acquainted with Müller‘s writings as well, as he studied Sanskrit with Müller‘s teacher Hermann Brockhaus. 747 Because of these literary and philosophical connections, Müller‘s response to Saint-Hilaire is relevant. Müller was Saint-Hilaire‘s former classmate and a pupil of Éugene Burnouf. His interpretation of nirvana went from early nihilistic allegations to late milder, conciliatory statements. 748 Although until his last years the German scholar thought of nirvana in terms of nothingness, he began to distinguish 743 Ibid., 84. 744 J.B. Saint-Hilaire, Du bouddhisme. Paris: B. Duprat, 1855. 745 R. Welbon, The Buddhist Nirvāna and Its Western Interpreters, 69. 746 Ibid., 73. 747 Among his readings was also Herman Oldenberg‘s popular book Buddha: Sein Leben, seine Lehre, seine Gemeinde (Ibid., 186). 748 The two works more concerned with nirvana and nihilism were his lecture on Buddhist nihilism, delivered before the General Meeting of the Association of German Philologists at Kiel on September 28, 1869, and his article ―The Meaning of Nirvana,‖ published in The Times in 1857 (F. M. Müller, Selected Essays on Language, Mythology and Religion, vol. 2. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1881, 280-291, 292-312). 321 between a relative and absolute nothing; as he stated: ―Could we dare with Hegel to distinguish between a Nothing (Nichts) and a Not (Nicht), we might say that the Nirvâna had, through a false dialectical process, become from a relative Nothing an absolute Not.‖ 749 Momentarily putting aside the reference to Hegel, what Müller was trying to prove in his later studies on Buddhism was that whereas this religion professed nihilism and atheism early on, it preached indeed compassion in its ultimate articulation. Müller‘s parallel with Hegel was not coincidental. As Roger-Pol Droit has pointed out, in his philosophy Hegel initiated the erroneous concept that Buddhism was a cult of nothingness. 750 Hegel lectured on Buddhism in his courses on history of philosophy from 1822 onward and wrote about Buddhism and nothingness in Lessons on the Philosophy of Religion (1827), 751 in which he asserts that the Buddhist fundamental principle declares that nothing stands at the beginning and the end of everything. 752 If Nietzsche and Schopenhauer deeply influenced Russian thought in the last decade of the nineteenth 749 M. Müller, ―Lecture on Buddhist Nihilism.‖ In Ibid., vol. 2, 307. 750 R.P. Droit, The Cult of Nothingness, 60. 751 G.W.F. Hegel, Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion, vol. 4. Edited by Peter C. Hodgson. Translated by R.F. Brown, P.C. Hodgson, and J.M. Stewart with the assistance of H.S. Harris. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 1984-1988. 752 R.P. Droit, The Cult of Nothingness, 61. As Droit explains it: ―In accord with the principle thus attributed to Buddhists, Hegel considered their religious practice to be a return to this inherent and immutable ‗nothing,‘ supposed to form the only and ultimate reality in their eyes. Their spiritual discipline tended therefore toward the systematic destruction of the self, toward the obliteration of consciousness, toward the annihilation of thought itself. The most constant action of Buddhism, its ultimate purpose, according to Hegel, was destruction (Vernichtung). This total destruction passed through a series of negations and refusals that were just so many attempts at desubjectification and depersonalization. By means of these diverse attempts at self-destruction, consciousness set for itself the goal of effacing its reflexivity. This Vernichtung must therefore look like dissolution of the soul‖ (Ibid.). 322 century, so did Hegel in the 1840s; thus his interpretation of the subject matter is pertinent to the present argument. Hegel and Russia is a well-developed topic, and does not require further explication here; 753 however his elaboration on Buddhism and nirvana deserves further analysis for its repercussions in Russian culture. One Russian thinker influenced by Hegel was Alexander Herzen. In 1842 Herzen debuted with the collection of essays Dilettantism in Science (Dilettantizm v nauke), the fourth article of which was titled ―Buddhism in Science‖ (Buddizm v nauke). Paraphrasing Hegel‘s admonition not to consider form and content two separate aspects of the self-revelation of spirit, Herzen dubbed formalists, that is proponents of form, Russian Hegelians, in particular Mikhail Katkov. Herzen debunked them for they excelled in looking only at one side of the phenomenology of spirit— its reconciliation with the idea (which in Hegelian terms represents the content of spirit), thereby missing the equally important role played by the manifestation of spirit in life (manifestation that Hegel identified with form). 754 These formalists, whom Herzen called ―the Buddhists of science,‖ behaved as if they had adopted the Buddhist view of freedom attainable through the Buddha and not through the 753 See D. Chizhevsky, Gegel v Rossii. Saint Petersburg : Nauka, 2007; Gegel' i filosofiia v Rossii. 30-e gody XIX v. - 20-e gody XX v. Edited by V.E. Evgrafov. Moscow: Nauka, 1974. 754 In the introduction to his Philosophy of Spirit, Hegel explains how spirit –the universal, also known as being-for-self, reveals itself in the other. This self-revelation represents the content of spirit. Once spirit decides to manifest itself in the other, it takes a form that is not fortuitous but conformed to its content. As Hegel has written: ―The self-revelation is therefore itself the content of spirit, and not in some way merely a form in which the spirit derives its content from without. Consequently, spirit reveals in its revelation not a content differing from its form, but the form in which its entire content is expressed i.e. its self-revelation. In spirit, form and content are therefore identical with one another.‖ F. Hegel, Hegel‘s Philosophy of Subjective Spirit, vol. 1. Edited and translated with an introduction and explanatory notes by M.J. Petry. Dordrecht, Boston: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1978, 55. 323 social-historical process of life. In other words, Russian Hegelians were ―Buddhists‖ because, according to Herzen, they followed the idealistic precepts of Buddhism—the self-revelation of the spirit through a salvation path— instead of searching for the amelioration of human conditions by delving into the forms that the phenomenon takes in life. 755 Apart from the philosophical debates, what is relevant to the present discourse is that Herzen, like Soloviev and, later, Bely, decided to use a Buddhist reference to explain a western philosophical concept— an indication that already by the mid-nineteenth century, Buddhist vocabulary was circulating in Russian intellectual circles. Herzen, in fact, chose to title his article ―Buddhism in Science,‖ moved as he was by the same principle that led Soloviev to title his article ―The Buddhist Mood in Poetry.‖ Both Soloviev and Herzen appropriated a foreign Buddhist concept to clarify their points of view without explaining the borrowed concept. Instead, they both assumed that their readership was familiar with its meaning. In the case of Herzen, two other considerations may explain such a choice. The first deals with the religious subtext accompanying Indian colonialism. The international political situation in India— mentioned by Herzen himself, brought to the attention of westerners the religious context, which accompanies Indian culture. Hence, historical events in Asia helped to diffuse an interest in Buddhism as well. The second consideration concerns Herzen‘s religious choice. Buddhism denotes only one of the religions practiced in India, so why did Herzen pick Buddhism as 755 A.Herzen, Sobranie sochinenii v tridtsati tomakh, vol. 3. Moscow: Izd-vo Akademii nauk SSSR, 1954- 1965, 76. For Herzen this Buddhist passivity to reality, and therefore to social-historical matters, was explicable through the Buddhist belief that reality was illusionary. Herzen defined this passivity ―Indian quietism,‖ and considered it the cause of Indian submission to British colonialism (Ibid., 77). 324 example of ―Indian quietism,‖ and not Hinduism, for example? The explanation comes from Hegel, in particular from his distinction between being and non-being, that is between something and nothing. When, in his Science of Logic (1816), Hegel defined nothing through the example of Buddhism, whose philosophical system identifies the absolute principle with the void, 756 he promulgated the wrong interpretation, which in turn was diffused among western philosophers, that Buddhism preached a nihilist doctrine. His was an inaccurate understanding that Schopenhauer would perpetuate. Likewise, Herzen talked about the Buddhist experience of entering into ―nothingness‖ after death, an experience that to him meant to perish and not to be reborn in spirit. 757 For Herzen being called a Buddhist was one of the worst offences, as becomes clear from two letters addressed to Ivan Turgenev, one in 1856 and another in 1862. 758 Preceding Viacheslav Ivanov by several decades, Herzen, already in 1856, referred to ―the activity of the admirers of Buddha‖ as a terrible disease affecting Western Europe. Later, in 1862, when his correspondence with Turgenev turned to Schopenhauer, Herzen could find no other offence to the German philosopher than to call him ―ideal nihilist, buddhist, and necrophile‖ (nigilist, buddist i mertvist). 759 In conclusion, Herzen chose Buddhism because its philosophy served his polemical purposes best. His was not an isolated case; on the contrary, his choice 756 F. Hegel, Science of Logic. Translated by A.V. Miller. Foreword by J.N. Findlay. New York: Humanities Press, 1969, 83. 757 A. Herzen, ―Buddizm v nauke.‖ In Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 3, 67. 758 A. Herzen, ―Eshche variatsiia na staruiu temu.‖ In Ibid., vol. 12: 425. 759 Ibid., vol. 27, 266. 325 corresponded to that of the other German philosophers and French scholars, as well as to their Russian counterparts, who have been analyzed thus far. In view of this brief synopsis of nirvana in German philosophy and in modern Russian culture, one cannot help but wonder why Europeans were so eager to condemn Buddhism; indeed, citing Droit: ―Was it really about the Buddha?‖ 760 Droit‘s query about the cultural phenomenon is compelling. For him the debates around Buddhism as cult of nothingness hid Europe‘s uncertainty of identity. Europeans accused Buddhism of being an atheist religion, but the atheism in question came from the Europeans themselves, and not from what Buddhists were practicing on the other side of the world. The European cult of nothingness, Droit continues, foresaw the upcoming national revolts that inflamed Europe in 1848, incited the Commune in Paris in 1871, and provoked the birth of democratic systems that annihilated the previous worldview. 761 On the modern laic wave that accompanied the aforementioned turmoil, Christendom weakened and Buddhism rose in popularity precisely because of its alleged atheism. Atheism, however, contained the seeds of anarchism. 762 Visually speaking, this uncertain political scenario also inspired Kaiser Wilhelm‘s etching of the ―yellow peril,‖ embodied by a threateningly approaching Buddha (Chapter Four). Russia fully participated in this European turmoil; thereby the causes that Droit adduces to the development of the European cult of nothingness can be applied, in their general traits, to 760 R.P.Droit, The Cult of Nothingness, Chapter Eleven. 761 Ibid., 163-4. 762 R.P.Droit, The Cult of Nothingness, 163-4. 326 this country as well. Like the rest of Europe, Russia— at the time the discourse on Buddhism and nihilism developed— was experiencing social unrest as well. With the emancipation of serfdom in 1861, peasants became a hotbed of a social malaise, giving birth to the anarchical movement of populism and culminating with the terrorist assassination of Tsar Alexander II on March 13, 1881. In an epoch when nihilism assumed tragically political traits in Russia, the accusations that Buddhism was nihilistic could not have been more timely. The connection between political nihilism and Buddhist nihilism in Russia was also noticed by the French-appointed secretary in 1877 to the embassy at St. Petersburg, Eugène-Melchior de Vogüé. De Vogüé was still living in St. Petersburg when the Tsar was murdered; his diary describes the event at length, along with the rise of populism and the trials of the terrorists, also known as nihilists. 763 His opus magnum, however, remains Le roman russe (1886) — a literary attempt to trace the history of Russian literature from the reign of Peter the Great up to the work of De Vogüé‘s contemporary, Lev Tolstoy. 764 For the French diplomat the so-called fourth period of Russian literature, that is Realism and the rise of novel as a genre, represented Russia‘s best contribution to literature. In order to understand the peculiarity of the Russian character, with all its sadness, 763 F. de Vogüé, Journal du Vicomte Eugène-Melchior de Vogüé. Paris-Saint-Pétersbourg 1877-1883. Paris: Éditions Bernard Grasset, 1932. 764 The English edition used here is The Russian Novel. Translated from the Eleventh French Edition by Colonel H.A. Sawyer. London and Hall, Ltd., 1913. 327 confusion, and ambiguity, 765 however, de Vogüé considered it necessary to trace the intellectual origins of Russians. According to the French diplomat: It is at once discovered that the Russian people are victims of ―historic sufferings‖ partly due to an inherited evil derived from their earliest ancestors, partly in consequence of what they have themselves contracted since. The evil inherited from the most ancient sources is the tendency of the Slav spirit towards that negative doctrine which we to-day call ―Nihilism,‖ and which holds exactly the same meaning as the word ―Nirvana‖ among the Hindoos. To know Russia well, all that has once been learnt about ancient India must be recalled to mind. […] It is a fact familiar to scholars in Russia, where some philosophers openly avow adherence to the Buddhist faith and proudly vaunt the purity of their Arian blood. 766 Who were these Russian philosophers to openly adhere to the Buddhist faith? Unfortunately that point goes unelaborated, although De Vogüé possibly had in mind Tolstoy among others. Nonetheless, de Vogüé sustained that Russia descended from India, and he found confirmation not only in physiognomic similarities between the two peoples, but also in linguistic affinities between ancient Slavic (Old Church Slavonic) and Sanskrit (!). 767 The ―historic sufferings‖ that de Vogüé attributed to the Russian people stemmed from the disasters and profound mortification that Russia had suffered from throughout its history, as characterized by violent upheavals that had changed the course of its history. 768 For the French author, nihilism functioned as part of this Russian malaise, which found its exemplary bard in the Turgenevian hero of Fathers and Sons, Bazarov. As de Vogüé clarifies: ―nihilism is the Nirvana of the Hindu, the self- 765 Ibid., 28. 766 Ibid. 767 Ibid., 29. 768 Ibid., 31-6. 328 abnegation of discouraged primitive man before the force of Matter and the Occult moral world; and the Nirvana necessarily engenders the furious reaction of the vanquished, the blind effort for the destruction of the Universe that crashes and disconcerts him.‖ 769 To be certain that his readers understood what he had in mind, de Vogüé continues: ―Turgeneff‘s hero has many points in common with Fenimore Cooper‘s Red Indian, but a redskin fuddled with the doctrines of Hegel and Buchner, instead of with ‗fire water,‘ and who stalks the world with a lancet instead of rushing about with a tomahawk.‖ 770 De Vogüé‘s interpretation of Russians and Russian literature, offered as it was through the prism of Buddhist nihilism, could not but incite response from Russian intellectual circles. As seen in Chapter Four, Aleksei Suvorin responded to De Vogüé‘s reading from the pages of the newspaper New Times, arguing that the suffering to which de Vogüé refers derived the frigid Russian climate, and that certainly Russians would never turn into Buddhists. Viacheslav Ivanov agreed with Suvorin and discussed de Vogüé in his correspondence with his wife (Chapter Four). 771 Still, despite de Vogüé‘s questionable interpretation of Russian history and culture, his book proved that in late nineteenth-century Europe the expression ―Buddhist nihilism‖ gauged an entire mindset that, in fact, had little to do with Asian Buddhism and that perhaps already embodied Nietzsche‘s notion of ―European Buddhism.‖ Due to its wide range of meaning, the term ―Buddhist nihilism‖ assumed a variety of nuances that rendered relative and 769 Ibid., 179. 770 Ibid., 180. 771 About the Russian reception of de Vogüé‘s book writes briefly Magnus Röhl in his Le roman russe de Eugene-Melchior de Vogüé. Etude préliminaire. Stockhom: Almqvist&Wiksell International, 1976, note 7, 166. 329 contradictory what Alexandre Foucher De Careil said about Germans in 1862. He wrote: ―Scratch a German and underneath you will see an old follower of the Buddha come back into view;‖ 772 ironically, his compatriot de Vogüé proved him to be wrong: it was under the skin of a Russian that the real Buddhist was hiding. The “Cosmic” Nirvana in the Arts: Nikolai Kulbin and Kazimir Malevich Along with the aforementioned understanding of nirvana as nihilism and pessimism— an understanding that in modern Russian culture was mainly adopted by proponents of the Symbolist movement— the first decade of the twentieth century saw the development of a parallel trend, which mainly interpreted nirvana in terms of cosmism. If the dramatic events of terrorism and the assassination of the Tsar put in motion a chain of events culminating in the general fear of the Apocalypse, politically associated with the general idea of tabula rasa of the old regime, the 1910s— as dramatic as they were for Russia‘s involvement in World War I and the October Revolution— already indicated that times were different and that the indefinable essence of nirvana could participate in a broader plan. As part of the blossoming avant-garde movement in art— with its rejection of Symbolism and its advocacy of a new society adequate to the recently established Soviet Russia— artists like Kazimir Malevich envisioned a new system that dwelt on the dissolution of forms in the universe. However, as will become clear from this section, despite the avant-garde‘s detachment from Symbolism, some of its ideas in fact stemmed directly from the previous movement. Overall, nirvana still 772 R.P. Droit, The Cult of Nothingness, 102. The original quotation is in Alexandre Foucher De Careil. Hegel et Schopenhauer. Études sur la philosophie allemande moderne. Paris: Hachette, 1862, 307-8. 330 meant annihilation; what changed was the general attitude: pessimism was replaced by optimism. One of the cosmist philosophers read by avant-garde artists was Konstantin Tsiolkovsky. 773 In 1914 he published a brochure titled Nirvana. 774 The idea that the cosmist philosopher aimed to develop had a pseudo-scientific character. Departing from the statement that in life humankind experiences three types of sensations (oshchushchenie) —negative, positive, and neutral— Tsiolkovsky foresaw the next stage of human evolution— when perfect organisms would live without reacting to joy or to sorrow. As the cosmist philosopher explained it: ―A philosophical indifference, the Buddha‘s indifference, the greatness of nirvana will arise. There will be no mortal peace, but a life full of action and great deeds. […] Thus, long-live active nirvana, the nirvana of useless sensations, but not of deeds!‖ 775 By ―active nirvana,‖ Tsiolkovsky meant a state of mind liberated from the sensations that the brain produce and that block the evolution of mankind. His ―nirvana‖ 773 On the subject, see M. Holquist, ―Tsiolkovsky as a Moment in the Prehistory of the Avant-Garde.‖ In Laboratory of Dreams. The Russian Avant-Garde and Cultural Experiment. Edited by John E. Bowlt and Olga Matich. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1996, 100-117, and the exhibition catalog El cosmos de la vanguardia rusa. Arte y exploración espacial 1900-1930. Edited by John E. Bowlt, Nicoletta Misler and Maria Tsantsanoglou. Santander: Fundación Marcelino Botín, 2010. 774 K. Tsiolkovsky, Nirvana. Kaluga: Tipografiia S.A. Semenova, 1914. Here cited from K. Tsiolkovsky, Ocherki o Vselennoi. Introduced by E.N. Kuzin with an afterword by V.V. Kaziutinsky. Commented by N.G. Belov, L.A. Kutuzov, T.V. Chugrov. Moscow: PAIMS, 1992, 6-18. It is interesting to stress that the other cosmist philosopher, Vladimir Vernadsky, also cultivated an interest in Buddhism and other Asian religions, thus attesting to a fascinating Buddhist undercurrent circulating in this branch of Russian philosophy. For more information on Vernadsky and Buddhism, see V. Rosov, V.I. Vernadsky i russkie vostokovedy. Mysli—Istochniki—Pis‘ma. Saint Petersburg: Institut istorii estestvoznaniia i tekhniki,‖ 1992. 775 Ibid., 11. According to Tatiana Berniukevich, Tsiolkovsky‘s juxtaposition of positive and negative emotions directly echoes some lines of the Buddhist scripture Sutta Nipata (T. Berniukevich, Buddiiskie idei v kul‘ture Rossii kontsa XIX-pervoi poloviny XX veka, 142). 331 provides the antidote to suffering, which is why Tsiolkovsky wrote of great deeds and action. Because of the certainty that, like a mathematic formula, sorrow always follows happiness and that consequently the happier the individual is the more he will suffer later, Tsiolkovsky promoted the ―neutral path,‖ a lifestyle with no sensations, which will free man from feelings, thus making him invulnerable. Tsiolkovsky‘s ―neutral path‖ closely resembles the Buddhist ―middle path‖ that Siddhartha Gautama announced after his enlightenment. His lifestyle promoted a moderate alternative to the two extremes of sensual indulgence, on the one hand, and of self-mortification, on the other. Additionally, what is striking in Tsiolkovsky‘s brochure is that the author used a Buddhist concept as an explanatory metaphor for his theory. Like Soloviev, Bely, and Herzen before him, Tsiolkovsky metaphorically adapted a Buddhist concept to his argument without explaining the foreign term. Thereby he confirms a level of familiarity with such language in creative circles, including the visual arts. Further promoting this assumption is the year 1914 marking the writing of his brochure, for, as noted in Chapter Two, around the 1910s the figure of the Buddha became popular among artists, suggesting the circulation of a Buddhist vocabulary at the time. That Tsiolkovsky chose the title of his work from popular Buddhist motifs also emerges from the fact that years later, in 1928, he returned to his study of sensations, but this time he erased the word ―nirvana‖ from the text. Instead of making a religious reference, he neutrally titled his work Reason and Passions (Um i strasti). 776 In other 776 K. Tsiolkovsky, Um i strasti. Kaluga: izdanie avtora, 1928. Reprinted in K. Tsiolkovsky, Ocherki o vselennoi, 87-100. 332 words, the Soviets of the late 1920s did not tolerate religious metaphors and abstract speculations; in response creative circles dropped Buddhist references in favor of more rigorous terminology. Tsiolkovsky‘s cosmic view of nirvana as a global shelter against sorrow could be paraphrased with Nikolai Kulbin‘s definition of the same term as ―perfect harmony.‖ 777 As with Tsiolkovsky, Kulbin possibly used the word ―nirvana‖ in his article ―Free Art as the Fundament of Life. Harmony and Dissonance (On Life, Death, and Etceteras)‖ 778 on the wave of the contemporary manner of speaking. If it is true that the concept of dissonance was widely debated among the artists and poets with whom Kulbin associated— see, for instance, the ―unresolved dissonances‖ in Aleksei Kruchenykh‘s manifesto Declaration of the Word as Such (1913-17) 779 or Mikhail Matiushin‘s experimental music for the Futurist play Victory over the Sun 780 — it is also possible that Kulbin mixed Futuristic experiments with the Buddhist concepts in vogue at the time. Strikingly anticipatory of what, in a few years, Tsiolkovsky would write in his brochure on nirvana, Kulbin sustained that the principle of free art was related to the concept of dissonance, that is to the introduction into natural harmony of a disturbing element able 777 N. Kul‘bin, ―Svobodnoe iskusstvo, kak osnova zhizni. Garmoniia i dissonans (O zhizni, o smerti i prochem).‖ In Studiia impressionistov. Kniga 1-aia. Saint Petersburg, 1910, 3. 778 The article first appeared in the 1910 collection Studio of the Impressionists. 779 A. Kruchenykh, ―Declaration of the Word as Such.‖ In A Legacy Regained: Nikolai Khardzhiev and the Russian Avant-Garde. Edited and compiled by John E. Bowlt and Mark Konecny. St. Petersburg: Palace Editions, 2002, 7. 780 A. Kruchenykh, K. Malevich, M. Matiushin, Victory over the sun. Album compiled by Patricia Railing. Translated from the Russian by Evgeny Steiner. Forest Row, East Sussex, England: Artists Bookworks, 2009. 333 to awaken subconscious associations in the viewer. Dissonance in works of art removed the insipidity of the painting and stimulated the viewer‘s empathy. Yet, Kulbin did not consider dissonance simply a pile of deconstructed elements; on the contrary, he thought that despite its apparently chaotic character, dissonance was subjected to precise rules called ―harmony of consistency‖ (garmoniia posledovatel‘nosti). From this principle it followed that a certain harmony was present in dissonance; a harmony locked in the individual‘s sleeping memories. Hence this harmony addressed every subconscious reacting to the rule of contrasting dissonances. This communication developed on more of a psychological level than a material one. Though Kulbin considered dissonance the fundamental principle of global structure, harmony played as important a role as dissonance in the creation of the world. Harmony remained the ultimate goal for which the self yearned; it was the perfection that hid in itself the All. As Kulbin wrote: The perfect harmony is nirvana for which the weary I yearns. The perfect harmony is death. Death is the quietness of life and not its absence. The Not does not exist.* Death is similar to a circle: there is no beginning and no end, everything else is in there. A closed spring is motionless, but strength is still calmly present therein. Strength relies in quietness, in the potential sleeping force. *Close to nothingness is Nala when he loses Damayanti with gambling, he drinks vodka and neglects the arts. 781 Accompanying the Oriental flavor of the story of Nala and Damayanti, taken from the Indian epos Mahabharata, 782 were A. Nikolaev‘s illustrations depicting Indian scenery. 781 N. Kul‘bin, ―Svobodnoe iskusstvo, kak osnova zhizni.‖ In Studiia impressionistov, 3. 782 The story tells that the Hindu God Kali was envious of Nala because Damayanti bothered him, and bewitched his human soul. Under the evil spell of Kali, Nala loses his kingdom gambling with his brother 334 The Orient of the Mahabharata also emerged in August Ballera‘s article ―Wajang. Javanese puppet show,‖ where the author praises the marvelous fairytales and the epic episodes from Mahabharata that Javanese puppet theatre traditionally displayed on stage. 783 Kulbin‘s reference to Indian culture seems to accord with the exotic imagery that accompanied Russian understanding of India; thus, it reflects Orientalism in art and does not stem from the debates around nirvana. Nonetheless, this Orientalism does not exclude the possibility that the dilettante artist aimed to mix both streams, in an attempt to create a melting pot in which the Buddhist nirvana, intended as harmony, is equal to the happy ending of the Indian love story. The episode of Nala‘s loss of Damayanti and his dissolute life that followed accorded with what Kulbin defined as the ―harmony of consistency.‖ In other words, Nala‘s misfortunes looked like a series of repeated dissonances that served a purpose in their totality. They aimed to make Nala a better man and to reunite him with his wife in a harmonious ―nirvanic‖ conjugal life. To this combination of sources, Kulbin added Theosophy, which dealt with harmony and dissonance, too. Anne Besant, in particular, spoke about harmony and dissonance with regard to mankind‘s relation to nature. She explained this duality in her four lectures delivered on the twenty-first anniversary of the Theosophical Society at Adyar, Madras. Her lectures and is forced to flee to the forest with Damayanti. To protect his beloved from other misfortune, Nala abandons her, but after several adventures the couple reunites in the happy ending. 783 A. Ballera, ―Wajang. Javanese puppet show.‖ In Studiia impressionistov, 29. 335 were then collected and published in London in 1897. 784 Konstantin Balmont reviewed the Theosophical publication in the Symbolist magazine The Scale in 1904 and, in light of Kulbin‘s ties with artistic circles of all kinds, very well may have read Balmont‘s review and Besant‘s work. 785 Theosophical influences in the art of Kulbin and other members of the artistic community is a topic already studied by John E. Bowlt, 786 though the Buddhist undercurrent in Kulbin‘s writing still remains little researched. 787 From both Buddhism and Theosophy Kulbin could have found information not only for his interpretation of nirvana, but also for his description of death as absolute harmony. He intended death as motionless life and not as its absence; for him death was like a circle that included everything except the beginning and the end. The metaphor of the circle could be interpreted according to the Buddhist concepts of karma and samsara (cycle of rebirths), which regard death only as transition to the next level of spiritual evolution. From this perspective, death acquires overtones different from those adopted by Fet and Tolstoy. For Kulbin death does not assume the existentialistic mood overwhelming a man at the end of life, a man going toward the abyss of nothingness in a desperate outcry. For 784 K.B. ―Iz oblasti mysli.‖ Vesy—nauchno-literaturnyi i kritiko-bibliograficheskii ezhemesiachnik 2.1 (January 1904). Edited by S.A. Poliakov. Facsimile edition, Nendeln/Liechtenstein: Kraus Reprint LDT, 1968: 57-8. 785 Notably one of Besant‘s translations also included a summarized version of Mahabharata, which she titled The Story of the Great War (K. Bal‘mont, ―Iz oblasti mysli.‖ Vesy 1.2, January 1904: 57). 786 J.E. Bowlt, ―Esoteric Culture and Russian Society.‖ The Spiritual in Art: Abstract Painting 1890-1985. Edited by Maurice Tichman. New York: Abbeville Press, 1986, 165-183. 787 John E. Bowlt, however, did admit that in painting, the Russian doctor went as far as something resembling the mandala theory (J. E. Bowlt, ―The ‗Union of Youth.‖ In Russian Modernism. Culture and the Avant-Garde 1900-1930. Edited by G. Gibian and H.W. Tjalsma. Ithaca and London: ―Cornell University Press, 1976, 171). The mandala is a ritual circle made of colored sand that Buddhist monks create to symbolize the union between man and the universe. 336 Kulbin death represents only the moment when man transitions into another state of being –a cycle in which death and life, dissonance and harmony alternate. In other words, the binary model life/death emerges in his worldview as distinctively as it did in the previously discussed literature; however, unlike its poetical interpretation, here the binary model life/death replaces earlier nihilistic tones with the cosmic quietness of the music of the spheres. 788 To Kulbin this music lays at the basis of world‘s structure and thereby he directly associates with the Symbolist generations of poets, such as Bely and Balmont, as well as Innokenty Annensky who, as seen in his poem ―Buddhist Mass in Paris,‖ highly praised the enchanting sounds of unknown words (Chapter Five). The concepts of absence/presence and of harmony/dissonance that Kulbin explains at length in his article does not represent an isolated episode in the multifaceted world of the arts. The 1910s witnessed a series of provocative initiatives undertaken by artists who proclaimed nothingness to be the supreme attainment. To these initiatives belonged Vasilisk Gnedov‘s Poems of the End (1915)— a collection of poems whose word count gradually reduced in each work until the last poem, ―The Death of Art‖ (smert‘ iskusstva), consisted only of a blank page. Velimir Khlebnikov‘s ―Black Notebook‖ (chernaia tetrad‘) and Kazimir Malevich‘s poems on emptiness 789 and white on white paintings also played with the concept of infinity and nothingness, as did in 788 The concept of ―music of the spheres‖ known in ancient philosophy in its Latin version ―musica universalis‖ interprets the movement of the planets as a sort of silent harmonic music. Allegedly the Greek philosopher and astronomer Pythagoras coined the expression. 789 On Khlebnikov‘s and Malevich‘s experimental poetry of ―emptiness‖ (pustota) see Aleksandra Shatskikh‘s introduction to K. Malevich, Poeziia. Edited, published, introduced, and commented by A. Shatskikh. Moscow: Epifaniia, 2000, 28-9. 337 1920 the Russian Dadaist group ―The Nothingnists‖ (nichevoki). 790 Of all the aforementioned examples, Malevich‘s writings and white Suprematism reflected Buddhist themes and the notion of ―cosmic‖ nirvana best. In his prose, Malevich openly mentions the Buddha, albeit en passant, in his ―Declaration of Human Rights‖ (1918), 791 ―On the Necessity of a Commune of Economists-Suprematists‖ (1919), 792 ―The World As Non-Objectivity (the Ideology of Architecture)‖ (1924), 793 and ―From the Book on Non-Objectivity‖ (1924). 794 In all these cases the author enlists the Buddha in the sequence ―Christ, Mahomet, Buddha, Lenin‖ to emphasize turning from the past— made of various religious leaders— toward the future dominated by Suprematism. Surely, mentioning the Buddha as representative of old times does not mean that Malevich was an expert on Buddhism— or that he read any Buddhist treatise. In this sense, Aleksandra Shatskikh rightly concludes in the introduction to the third volume of Malevich‘s collection of essays that the various mystical and philosophical reminiscences in Malevich‘s Suprematism attest to his eclecticism and to his ability to superficially assimilate the various streams of his epoch rather than to his 790 Members of the group were Aetsy Ranov, Riurik Rok, Lazar Sukharebsky, and others. They announced the death of poetry and the ―tabula rasa‖ of literature in their manifesto Vam. Moscow: K-vo ―Khobo,‖ 1920. 791 K. Malevich, ―Proekty. ‗Deklaratsii prav cheloveka.‖ In Sobranie sochinenii v piati tomakh, vol. 5. Edited by A. Shatskikh. Moscow: Gileia, 2004, 100. 792 K. Malevich, ―O neobkhodimosti kommuny ekonomistov-suprematistov.‖ In Ibid., 164. 793 K. Malevich, ―Mir kak bespredmetnost‘ (ideologiia arkhitektury).‖ In Ibid., vol. 4, 2003, 202. 794 K. Malevich, ―The World as Non-Objectivity.‖ The World as Non-Objectivity. Unpublished Writings 1922-25, vol. 3, Translated by Xenia Glowacki-Prus and Edmund T. Little. Edited by Troels Andersen. Copenhagen: Borgens Forlag, 1976, 345. The original can be found in K. Malevich, ―Iz knigi o bespredmetnosti.‖ In Sobranie sochinenii v piati tomakh, vol. 5, 2004, 230. 338 deepening of any specific concept. 795 Nonetheless, what matters is that in an epoch of traveling— both of ideas and of people— foreign worldviews entered the creative world leaving traces behind them. These traces were sometimes more and sometimes less distinguishable. Malevich first absorbed the main ideas circulating in his contemporary artistic community and then he went on to develop his own thought. In Malevich‘s poetry, Buddhist parallels arise in the undated verse ―The aim of music is silence‖ (Tsel‘muzyki/molchanie), 796 a line that transposed into music Malevich‘s concept of ―white non-objectivity.‖ Visually, the association of white (a color that results from all the colors of the spectrum) with the principle of non-objectivity (a theory that similarly dissolves forms into shapeless volumes) motionlessly reverberates in a purely contemplative world. Philosophically, Malevich elaborated more on his concept of silence in ―The World as Pure Knowledge‖— part two of his main treatise, Suprematism. The World as Non-Objectivity or Eternal Rest (Suprematizm. Mir kak bespredmetnost‘, ili vechnyi pokoi) (1923). As he explains in his treatise, silence expresses rhythm, that is the moment when no dissonance is audible and everything is rhythmically harmonized and perceived as one distinctive sound amidst a plurality of tones. 797 In this world of no dissonance, silence acts as the phantom of white non- objectivity, because it, too, makes its presence felt through its dissolution of sound. In 795 A. Shatskikh, ―Malevich posle zhivopisi.‖ In Ibid., vol. 3, 2000, 11. 796 K. Malevich, The Artist, Infinity, Suprematism. Unpublished Writings 1913-33, vol. 4. Translated by Xenia Hoffmann, 8. Aleksandra Shatskikh dates this verse in the mid 1920s. K. Malevich, Poeziia, 112. A leitmotiv in Malevich‘s reasoning was also Tiutchev‘s poem Silentium, whose verses the artist paraphrased in his article ―Poeziia‖ (1918) (Ibid., note 3,169). 797 K. Malevich, Sobranie sochinenii v piati tomakh, vol. 3, 2000, 139-140. 339 other words, all three of them— white, non-objectivity, and silence— ambivalently play with what defines presence/absence. Furthermore, albeit written a decade later, Malevich‘s philosophical speculations on silence align him with other poets and writers who wrote about harmony in music. In the previous chapter, this subject was the case of Innokenty Annensky, who, in his ―Buddhist Mass in Paris,‖ paid homage to the harmonious sounds pronounced by Agvan Dorzhiev, whereas in this chapter, the subject of harmony in music resounded in Kulbin‘s own definition of harmony as nirvana. Although it is true that, unlike Kulbin, Malevich did not openly associate silence with nirvana and that he mentioned the Buddha in his writings only sporadically and always in generic terms, his statements on silence, rhythm, and music accorded with Kulbin‘s musical notion of universal harmony intended as nirvana. This shared cosmic vision of silence, along with the previously mentioned ambivalence about presence/absence united Kulbin and Malevich. Malevich‘s ―white period,‖ with its proclamation on the dissolution of forms in a weightless universe, fits perfectly into the present discourse on ―cosmic‖ nirvana. Moreover, Malevich‘s cosmic view of God as ―eternal rest‖ (vechnyi pokoi) as the weightless realm that the individual can reach only after overcoming space and destroying the flow of unperceivable lives 798 indeed recalls the meaning of nirvana and the Buddhist concept of samsara. Ultimately, Malevich adopted a manner of speaking that had diffused among modern writers and artists because he belonged to that artistic milieu. With it he shared interests and concerns, as well as readings. For instance, growing up in an epoch when 798 K. Malevich, ―Bog ne skinut.‖ In Ibid., vol. 1, 1995, 264. 340 people widely read Schopenhauer and, as previously noted, identified his philosophy with Buddhism, Malevich could not but read him, too. 799 In a letter to Mikhail Gershenzon dated October 13, 1924, the artist directly quotes Arthur Schopenhauer‘s The World as Will and Representation to argue against the philosopher‘s main idea. He wrote to his friend: ―Obviously, I didn‘t read it; I just read its title in the storefront. I didn‘t think a lot about this title, nonetheless I came to the conclusion that the World exists, only where there is no will and no representation. Where these two exist, there will be no World, but only a struggle of representations.‖ 800 For someone who didn‘t read the book and didn‘t think a lot about its content, he certainly contradicts himself when he titles his own main treatise, The World as Non-Objectivity, directly paraphrasing The World as Will and Representation. That Schopenhauer left ―an indisputable mark‖ 801 upon Malevich‘s literary work of the mid-twenties has been suggested by Troels Andersen in his preface to the third volume of Malevich‘s collection of essays. 802 Here, the Danish art historian goes so far as to compare the general content of The World as Will and Representation to The World as Non-Objectivity, outlining similarities and concluding that: 799 The influence of western and as well as eastern philosophies on Malevich‘s thought has been studied by Jirí Padrta, who has traced all the possible philosophical sources behind Malevich‘s artistic credo (from German Idealism to Mysticism, from Oriental philosophies to Russian thinkers of the caliber of Soloviev and Soviet ideologues) in his article ―Le mond entant que sans-objet ou le repos éternel.‖ Cahier Malévitch 1. Lausanne, Suisse: L'Âge d'homme, 1983: 133-183. Malevich and philosophy was the field of enquiry also for Emmanuel Martineau in his Malévitch et la philosophie. La question de la peinture abstraite. Lausanne: L‘Age d‘homme, 1977. 800 K. Malevich, Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 3, 2000, 352-3. 801 T. Andersen, Preface to The World as Non-Objectivity. Unpublished Writings 1922-25, vol. 3, 9. 802 Ibid., 7-10. 341 Apparently Malevich wanted in his book to reconsider the basic ideas of Schopenhauer in relation to the art of his own period. He tried to substitute vital, contemporary topics of discussion for those relevant to the early nineteenth century. The chapters left out by Malevich are those irrelevant for him or those that tended towards an all-embrasive aesthetic theory. This suggestion can be supported by an examination of the general correspondences between the idea of non objectivity and the basic attitude of Schopenhauer‘s, as expressed in the conclusive parts of ―The World as Will and Representation.‖ 803 In short, Malevich‘s treatise bridges the antecedent Symbolist epoch, characterized by individualism and existentialistic quests, to the new Soviet reality of the 1920s based on rationalism and utilitarian aesthetics. Also for what concerns the Buddhist world, his theoretical and artistic production hints at new possible parallels to Mahayana Buddhism where the concept of emptiness plays a major philosophical role. As noticed earlier, in the 1920s Malevich wrote the verse, ―The aim of music is silence,‖ which remarkably brings to mind the dialogue between the layman Vimalakirti and the bodhisattva Manjusri –the protagonists of the Mahayana treatise Vimalakirti Sutra. One of the most famous moments of the story is when Manjusri asks Vimalakirti to define non-duality and Vimalakirti answers with complete silence. 804 This episode represents the apex of a series of exchanged questions and answers aimed to explain the Mahayana doctrine of emptiness, intended as the flux of ―forms in the realm of 803 Ibid., 9. 804 The episode goes as follows; Manjuri says: ―How does the bodhisattva enter the gate of nondualism? At that time Vimalakirti remained silent and did not speak a word. Manjushri sighed and said, ‗Excellent, excellent! Not a word, not a syllable—this truly is to enter the gate of nondualism!‖ The Vimalakirti Sutra. Translated by Burton Watson from the Chinese version by Kumarajiva. New York: Columbia University Press, 1997, 110-1. 342 formlessness.‖ 805 Such a definition directly brings to mind Malevich‘s own definition of non-objectivity as well as his aforementioned verse on silence. As Aleksandra Shatskikh has remarked, by proclaiming ―the aim of music is silence,‖ Malevich anticipated the 1952 famous performance 4‘33‘‘ by the American artist John Cage, who silently sat at the piano for the duration of his show. 806 What the Russian scholar omitted, however, is that Cage‘s Conceptualist performance took inspiration from Zen Buddhism, 807 especially from its philosophy of intellectual reasoning and meditative introspection. Likewise, when Malevich leveled God, the soul, spirit, art, nature, and everything else to zero in his manifesto Suprematist Mirror 808 and attached to his words two completely untouched canvases (fig. 32), he summarized Cage‘s Conceptualism, Mahayana philosophy of emptiness and Zen minimalist art. Indeed, the two untouched canvases could represent a visual parallel to the sound of silence that Cage orchestrated in 805 Ibid., 83. In the introduction to The Vimalakirti Sutra, Burton Watson explains: ―The Buddha had taught that all things in the phenomenal world are conditioned in nature, brought into being and governed by causes and conditions. They are thus in a state of constant flux and are destined to change and pass away. They may therefore be designated as ‗empty‘ or ‗void‘ because they lack any inherent characteristics by which they can be described, changing as they do from instant to instant. At best they can be delineated by what they are not—not permanent, not possessed and of any fixed form or self-nature,‖ Ibid., 9-10. 806 K. Malevich, Poeziia, 29. On Cage and Zen Buddhism, see J. Baas, Smile of the Buddha. Eastern Philosophy and Western Art from Monet to Today. Foreword by Robert A.F. Thurman. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 2005, 164-177. 807 Zen Buddhism was imported from China in the thirteenth century, where it is known as Chan. Japanese Zen Buddhism stresses the importance of meditation to reach the final state of nirvana or satori (zen indeed means ―meditation‖). Because of this particular attention to personal realization and training, Zen Buddhism was especially welcome by the samurai class before becoming one of the main religions in Japan. Among its practices, this school of Buddhism fosters not only religion, but also other ways of self- improvement, such as calligraphy, ink painting, literature, and gardening. For further reading see D.T. Suzuki, An Introduction to Zen Buddhism. Foreword by Carl G. Jung. N.Y.: Grove Press, 1964. 808 The manifesto was presented at the Exhibition of Petrograd Artists of All Directions 1918-1923. For its English translation, see K. Malevich, Essays on art 1915-1928, vol. 1. Translated by Xenia Glowacki-Prus and Arnold McMillin. Edited by Troels Anderesen, 224-5. 343 his performance. Moreover, it is the same principle applied to some of Malevich‘s nihilistic statements, for instance: ―I have transformed myself in the zero of form,‖ 809 as does his syncretism of nature, which echoes Mahayana philosophy for its communion between the single and the whole. See, for example, the following excerpt taken from his manifesto God is Not Cast Down: ―The miracle of nature is that it all is contained in a small seed, and yet this ‗all‘ cannot be embraced. Man, holding a seed, holds the universe and yet cannot examine it, regardless of all the obviousness of the latter‘s origin and of ‗scientific foundations.‘ One must understand this small seed in order to also reveal the whole universe.‖ 810 As with Cage‘s Conceptualism and Mahayana philosophy of emptiness, Malevich‘s white on white paintings evoke similarities with Zen minimalist art, too. The 809 K. Malevich, ―From Cubism and Futurism to Suprematism. The New Painterly Realism (1915).‖ In Essays on art 1915-1928, vol.1, 19. For the Russian original, see K. Malevich, Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 1, 1995, 35. 810 K. Malevich, ―God is Not Cast Down. Art, Factory and Church‖ (1922). In Essays on art 1915-1928, vol. 1, 193. 344 Fig. 32 Photograph of the works by members of UNOVIS at the Exhibition of Pictures of Petrograd Artists of All Directions, 1923. 345 idea that the geometric shapes of the square, cross, rectangle, and semi-sphere have lost their rigidity and now flee in a weightless space, which has absorbed and transposed colors and individual perceptions into the cosmic realm of harmony and silence, reminds of the worldview behind Zen gardens. If imagined in a three-dimensional space, Malevich‘s white paintings could be used to draw the geometric patterns of the Japanese minimalist dry landscape made of rocks and ―simple‖ lines traced along the ―empty‖ surface of the ground to symbolize a meditative mood based on the communion of the single and the whole. As Thomas Hoover wrote about the Zen garden of Ryoan-ji: ―Evoking a sense of infinity in a strictly confined space, it is a living lesson in the Zen concept of nothingness and nonattachment.‖ 811 The same principle can be found in Malevich‘s philosophy of white nothingness, which he began to develop in his Suprematist series of white on white in 1918 and which he elaborated in his treatise Suprematism. The World of Non-Objectivity or Eternal Rest. In chapter I/42 ―Non- Objectivity‖ the artist wrote: …our own point of view in relation to the whole is defined as follows: the whole is ―something,‖ and to arrive at the whole, means to set out on the reverse path, and to arrive at one‘s source, to be outside any circumstances, and if to be outside any circumstances means not to change one‘s aspect, to return to ―the world,‖ into ‖nothing,‖ it is possible to change only through the widening of oneself in time and in space, through such technical means which do not exist in the ―world.‖ If this state does not exist, then there is no aspect, there is no face, there is no image, there is no form, construction…In other words one can say that there are no signs of any existence, it seems as though the painterly canvas proves the latter by the fact that representation of space, time, depth, and of all that which exists in true authenticity, does not exist…Only in such a way can I answer the question about the whole and the unit. Thus, whoever wants to express the wholeness of the world must come only to this ―nothing,‖ for ―the something‖ of the world does 811 For further reading, T. Hoover, Zen culture. New York: Random House, 1977, 110. 346 not exist. This ―nothing‖ is in everything which seems tangible to us, existing in reality, in me authentic things exist and they are all physical, they impinge upon my shell so strongly that they make me scream, groan in my sleep. 812 What Malevich was trying to say in his rather contorted syntax was that man cannot prove the existence of the whole, because he experiences only the fragmented episodes of daily life. Because of this limit, the human mind adopts the mental construct of the existence of the whole (the ―something‖ in Malevich‘s term) in order to rationalize what cannot be scientifically proved, that is the existence of unity outside each circumstance. Malevich‘s solution to this existentialistic dilemma whirls around ―nothingness,‖ that is around the annihilation of individual perceptions in order to open reality up to wider universal horizons. This dynamic is what he attempts in his white canvases –visual transpositions of the symbolism of nothingness, here intended as sum of the whole. Suprematist Composition: White on White (1918, fig. 33), Suprematist Painting (White Planes in Dissolution) (1917-18, fig. 34) and Suprematism (Construction in Dissolution) (1918, fig. 35), all play with the notion of overcoming boundaries. Notably, in addition to the aforementioned paintings from Malevich‘s white on white period, a Buddhist aura seems to emerge in some of his earliest artistic attempts. Before becoming the world-renowned inventor of Suprematism and member of the Russian Avant-Garde, Malevich trained, like many of his peers, in Symbolist art. 812 K. Malevich, The World as Non-Objectivity. Unpublished writings 1922-25, vol. 3, 59-60. 347 Fig. 33 Kazimir Malevich, Suprematist Composition: White on White, 1918. Fig. 34 Kazimir Malevich, Suprematist Painting Fig. 35 Kazimir Malevich, Suprematism (Construction (White Planes in Dissolution), 1917-18. in Dissolution), 1918. 348 Symbolism, both in art and literature, was a movement particularly fascinated with the mystical and esoteric aspects of religion. Though religion, and especially the role of Orthodox iconography, in the works of Malevich and the other members of the Avant- Garde movement, is a topic well developed in Evgeniia Petrova‘s ―Malevich‘s Suprematism and Religion,‖ 813 scholars have failed to analyze a Buddhist undercurrent mingled in the iconography of some Christian motifs represented by main Symbolist artists. This mingling has been noticed, for example, in Nikolai Roerich‘s Buddha-like Madonna Queen of Heaven on the Shore of the River of Life –the destroyed fresco commissioned in 1912 by Princess Tenisheva for her church in Talashkino (Chapter Four, fig. 27 and 27a) – and Boris Anisfeld‘s ―buddhish‖ accessories in Goddess of Dreams (Chapter Two, fig. 9 and 10). This Buddhist world is also present in Malevich‘s Assumption of a Saint (1907-08, fig. 36) from the cycle Study for a Fresco Painting. Christ‘s meditative closed-eye pose at the center of the representation, his shaved head and oriental facial traits, his threefold halo (reminiscent of the crowns embellishing Buddhist statuettes), and the group of angels at his back forming a mandorla, all echo representations of the Buddha. In particular, Assumption of a Saint compels fascinating parallels with one of the nirvana images described by Sonya Lee in her recently published study, Surviving Nirvana. Death of the Buddha in Chinese Visual Cultures. When analyzing the scene of the Buddha‘s nirvana carved on a stone stele dated 691 and now at the Shanxi Museum in Taiyuan (fig. 37), the American professor wrote: 813 E. Petrova, ―Malevich‘s Suprematism and Religion.‖ In Kazimir Malevich: Suprematism. Edited by Matthew Drutt. N.Y.: Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 2003, 88-95. 349 The composition consists of two basic components: a reclining Buddha with head pointing to the left and feet to the right, and an accompanying group of mourners observing his passage in the background. The emotional outpour of the mourners strikes an uncanny balance with the motionless tranquility of the deity in recline. The interweaving of two extreme emotions fuels a kind of quiet dynamism in the visual layout, which pivots around a horizontal field enveloped within a circle of contrasting elements. Yet it is the one-on-one encounter with the nirvana Buddha that compels the beholders to connect what they see with their own worlds. The full exposure of the figure‘s body for uninhibited viewing clashes with the shunning effects of his closed eyes, thus underscoring a deep-seeded ambiguity in representation that prompts one to wonder: Is the Buddha alive or dead? 814 Likewise, in Malevich‘s painting the same question arises: is the Saint alive or dead? Similarly, the groups of saints/mourners observing the passage of the saint to Heaven are located at both sides of the reclining figure and, in the foreground, transmitting the same quiet dynamism as the visual layout present in the Shanxi stele. Correspondingly, the open arms of Christ, as well as the semicircular arrays of angels at his back, frame the scene as a theatrical stage similar to the arched nature in the background of the Buddha‘s nirvana. Ultimately, the roundness of the human faces and of the floral ornaments echo in Malevich‘s ―Christian version‖ in the circularity of the haloes and the silhouettes of angels filling out the entire surface of the composition. 814 S. Lee, Surviving Nirvana. Death of the Buddha in Chinese Visual Culture. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2010, 3. 350 Fig. 36 Kazimir Malevich, Assumption of a Saint, 1907-08. From the cycle Study for a Fresco Painting. Fig. 37 The Buddha‘s nirvana. Detail of the ―back‖ side of a stone stele, dated 691. 351 The parallel between some of the works from Malevich‘s series Study for a Fresco Painting and Buddhist iconography has been also stressed by John Milner who, while discussing The Triumph of Heaven (1907, fig. 38) wrote: Whilst it is possible to speculate upon the arrangement of polyptychs or sequences of paintings, this is difficult not least because of the nature of the imagery, which does not follow Christian traditions of iconography closely or consistently. Instead Malevich depicts a paradise and in The Triumph of the Heavens some of the figures inhabitating the cloud at the right appear to be closer to Buddhist than to Christian imagery – precisely the blending of religions proposed by the Theosophists Blavatsky and Schuré and precisely the kind of imagery adopted by Ranson, Redon and other Nabis painters. 815 Here Milner aligns his analysis of the painting with the generally accepted interpretation offered by art historian and Slavic scholars that Theosophy was at the origin of everything Buddhist in the Avant-Garde. 816 However, if it is undeniable that Theosophy played a role in shaping some experiments of Modernist artists, the goal of this dissertation has been to suggest an alternative source of inspiration for some creations. In the case of Malevich‘s The Triumph of Heaven, the cosmogony of the representation is similar to that in the Assumption of a Saint, thereby making possible the assumption that the studies share Buddhist visual reminiscences. This remark is further enforced by a visual comparison to Boris Smirnov-Rusetsky‘s painting Buddha of the Evening Light (1924, fig. 39). 815 J. Milner, Kazimir Malevich and the Art of Geometry. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1996, 11. 816 To quote just a few of them: C. Douglas, Swans of Other Worlds. Kazimir Malevich and the Origins of Abstraction in Russia. Ann Arbor, Michigan: UMI Research Press, 1980; J.E. Bowlt, ―Esoteric Culture and Russian Society‖ and S. Ringbom, ―Transcending the Visible: The Generation of the Abstract Pioneers.‖ In The Spiritual in Art: Abstract Painting 1890-1985, 165-183, 131-153; M. Böhmig,‖Tempo, Spazio e Quarta Dimensione nell‘avanguardia russa.‖ In Europa Orientalis 8. Napoli: Istituto universitario ―Orientale,‖ 1989, 341-380. 352 Smirnov-Rusetsky knew Malevich‘s paintings and artistic credo well; 817 he and Vasily Kandinsky had a strong impact on his early artistic years, a mentorship that would eventually be replaced by that of Nikolai Roerich. Perhaps, it is not coincidental that Smirnov-Rusetsky felt particularly close to these three major artistic personalities because, in one way or another, all searched for the spiritual and its manifestation in art. In the case of Malevich and Rusetsky, the latter‘s Buddha of the Evening Light shares with Malevich‘s series Study for a Fresco Painting the cosmic view of the depicted episode, which centers on the human figure immobilized in meditative posture, surrounded by the quiet dynamism of the visual layout and the roundness of accompanying shapes. Additionally, yellow and red overtones prevail in both works of art, evoking a state of mind on the verge of breaking into a higher level of consciousness. This moment immediately anticipating the enlightenment can be metaphorically compared to the dawn announcing the coming of a new day. 817 Boris Smirnov-Rusetsky was member of the group ―Amaravella‖ (1927-30) –a union of artists who called themselves cosmist-intuitivists to stress the central role played by the cosmos in their artistic credo. They were inspired by various Oriental philosophies, including Theosophy, Hinduism and Buddhism. For further readings, see A. Di Ruocco, ―‘Amaravella‘. Ee poetika i khudozhestvennaia deiatel‘nost‘po vospominaniam Marii Drozdovoi-Chernovolenko.‖ In Aspirantskii sbornik. Moscow: Gosudarstvennyi institut iskusstvoznania, 2004, 73-86 and of the same author, Buddiiskie reministsentsii v russkom izobrazitel‘nom iskusstve pervogo tridtsatiletiia XX veka. N. Rerikh, ―Amaravella,‖ N. Kul‘bin, M. Matiushin, E. Guro. Moscow: Gosudarstvennyi institut iskusstvoznaniia, 2005, 48-89. 353 Fig. 38 Kazimir Malevich, The Triumph of Heaven, 1907. From the cycle Study for a Fresco Painting. Fig. 39 Boris Smirnov-Rusetsky, Buddha of the Evening Light, 1924. 354 Conclusion As seen throughout this chapter nothingness meant much more than ―nothing;‖ on the contrary, it embraced philosophical worldviews (nicely defined by Jean-Claude Marcadé as ―negative philosophies of the ‗Nothing‖), 818 existentialistic quests and the recurrence of ―the eternal questions.‖ At the socio-political level, nothingness mirrored the void left by terrorism and the uncertainties of the future. As for the Buddhist world in modern Russian culture, this discourse interpreted nirvana as a synonym for nihilism and pessimism. By refusing to give a straightforward answer about what nirvana means and in limiting his explanation to the vague sentence that its essence cannot be expressed in words, the Buddha challenged an array of scholars to define the indefinable. In so doing, nineteenth-century European readings of the concept revealed more about the anxieties of people from the old continent than about any historically informed study of nirvana. Nietzsche‘s and Schopenhauer‘s philosophical elaborations on the subject were especially important in this respect, as they partially mediated the Russian interpretation of nirvana and Buddhism in general as synonyms for nihilism and pessimism. As Roger- Pol Droit has noted, the German philosophers represented the apogee of an attitude that began in the 1820s when the word ―Buddhism‖ made its first recorded appearance in Europe. 819 However, already at the outset of the twentieth century, this early understanding of Buddhism was rejected as inaccurate by a new generation of scholars, Fedor Shcherbatskoi for one, who, highly trained in reading scriptures in the original, 818 J.C. Marcadé, ―Malevich, Painting, and Writing: On the Development of a Suprematist Philosophy.‖ In Kazimir Malevich: Suprematism. Edited by Matthew Drutt, 39. 819 R.P. Droit, The Cult of Nothingness, 12. 355 rejected the sometimes dilettantish translations of some of the pioneering studies in Sanskritology. When interpreted by the creative world of art and literature, the scholarly debates around nirvana gave birth to a confusing vocabulary of Buddhist references, in which notions of nihilism from the nineteenth century mingled with the cosmism taking hold of in the twentieth century. Apart from this confusion, what matters here is that this confusing vocabulary of Buddhist references reveals a manner of speaking that developed from the mobility of people and ideas, from the interaction of worldviews and civilizations, from the continuous journeying characterizing modern Russian culture. Modernity, however, changed shape in the 1920s. Metaphorically speaking, Malevich‘s dissolution of form, or as Gerry Souter aptly put it, his ―journey into the disappearance of his geometric forms into nothingness‖ 820 silenced an entire epoch and marked a shift in the dialogue between modern Russian culture and Buddhism. Indeed, the advent of a new Socialist Russia determined not only the birth of the Soviet Union, but also a new way of looking at Buddhism. With the Romanovs not only did monarchic Russia come to an end, but also a lifestyle characterized by intellectuals living in the middle of the international debates of the time. With their frequent travels abroad these intellectuals participated in the circulation of new ideas and trends and kept cultural confrontation alive. With Bolshevism politics entered the creative world and brought the national cultural dialogue to a different level. The ideologues of Communism sieved all religions professed on Russian soil, including Buddhism—and how could they not given that some Russian territory borders on Buddhist countries?— however, their approach 820 G. Souter, Malevich. Journey to Infinity. New York: Parkstone Press International, 2008, 164. 356 was less tolerant than that of the old regime. With the goal of exporting Communism to neighboring countries, the Bolsheviks tended to manipulate some Buddhist concepts and prophecies in order to gain support among locals. This manipulation happened with the Tibetan belief of the upcoming reign of Shambhala, which Russian authorities used to their advantage, proclaiming that soldiers of the Red Army embodied the knights of the future Buddhist reign on Earth. How the doctrine of the Buddha merged with Lenin‘s political vision and what repercussions this encounter had on Russian culture is a fascinating topic; however, such an encounter marks the beginning of a new epoch and therefore represents an independent case study. In short, it is another story. 357 Conclusion I have demonstrated that the presence of the Buddhist world in modern Russian culture represents a distinct moment independent of either Orientalism or Theosophy. In fact, when put into the context of broad socio-political and cultural indicators, the adoption of Buddhist motifs by modern Russian writers and artists was determined to a considerable degree not only by serious ethnographical and anthropological scholarship, but also simply by the contemporary mania for traveling – by tourism. Through the analysis of the cultural aspect of the journey, manifested in physical travels to Asia and in imaginary itineraries of ideas, this dissertation delineates parameters of interconnectedness that prompted a new and common awareness of Buddhism and its main tenets. Buddhism entered the Russian cultural consciousness both from the East and from the West. From the East it infiltrated through the Buddhist minorities of the Buriats, Kalmyks, and Tuvinians living in Siberia: they offered a firsthand notion of Tibetan Buddhism which reached the beau monde and plutocracy of St. Petersburg (see Petr Badmaev and his pharmacy). From the West Buddhism arrived via France, Great Britain and Germany –countries which, in any case, were preferred tourist destinations for many Russians. These European nations helped diffuse a sort of ―European Buddhism‖ in Russia, which had little in common with its Asian original and was much more symptomatic of the general European malaise developing from the political situation of the time. Regardless of its provenance, what matters is the uniqueness of Russia‘s reception of Buddhism, for unlike other European countries, Russia also benefited from 358 its geographical proximity to Asia, thus being closer to some of the territories where Buddhism was being practiced. Poised between two worlds, oscillating eastwards and westwards, Russia has experienced this dilemma for centuries. It is an anomaly that western Europeans have often noted, as Rudyard Kipling once wrote: ―Let it be clearly understood that the Russian is a delightful person till he tucks in his shirt. As an Oriental he is charming. It is only when he insists upon being treated as the most easterly of western peoples instead of the most westerly of eastern that he becomes a racial anomaly extremely difficult to handle.‖ 821 Certainly, Kipling‘s words were an exaggeration partially dictated by the Russo-British rivalry of the Great Game. Nevertheless, Russians themselves have long been aware of a fundamental inability to adjust harmoniously to one or the other part of the world. But by virtue of her Eurasian location Russia had to deal with the East —and Buddhism throughout her history. Consequently, unlike the rest of Europe, Russia was one of the first to acknowledge Buddhism as one of her indigenous religions as early as 1741 and to build the first Buddhist temple in Europe in 1913. Apart from the Buddhist temple, contacts between Buddhism and Russia can be highlighted throughout the entire twentieth century. Even when the Romanov dynasty ended in 1917 and the Bolsheviks took power, the Buddhist world never ceased to circulate in Russian culture; undoubtedly, the dynamics changed, but the overall pattern did not. Historically, the Great Game of the nineteenth century was replaced with Russia‘s political hegemony vis-à-vis her bordering countries, especially in the wake of 821 R. Kipling, ―The Man Who Was.‖ A Choice of Kipling‘s Prose. Edited by W. Somerset Maugham. London: Macmillan, 1952, 28. 359 the revolutionary movements that followed the downfall of the Qing dynasty in 1911. The new Bolshevik Russia justified its moves by claiming geographical proximity to Asia. Culturally, too, the 1920s witnessed the publication of relevant literature such as Vsevolod Ivanov‘s The Return of the Buddha of 1923 –the same year that the artist Nikolai Roerich went on his expedition to Tibet (which lasted until 1928). Afterwards the Soviet authorities invited him to Moscow in order to discuss his program for ―The Buddhist Revolution‖ that his guru, the Mahatma Morya, dictated to his wife, Helena Roerich. What the artist-turned-prophet proposed was a manifesto which promoted the union of Buddhism and Leninism. Roerich‘s program was accompanied by two letters from the Mahatmas, the spiritual leaders living on the Himalayas, which were addressed to the Soviet Foreign Minister Georgy Chicherin and the ―Moscovite Communists.‖ In these letters the Mahatmas praised the achievements of Communism and referred to Lenin as ―one of us‖, i.e. a Mahatma. 822 Agvan Dorzhiev, the Buriat monk discussed in relation to the construction of the Buddhist temple in St. Petersburg (Chapter Four) and the Buddhist mass of 1898 in Paris (Chapter Five) also encouraged the union of Buddhism and Communism. After the advent of the new regime, Dorzhiev expressed a willingness to adjust Buddhism to the needs of the newly born Soviet policy. At the time of the First Buddhist Congress at the Atsagatsky Datsan south of Ulan-Ude in the autumn 1922, Dorzhiev adhered to the group of Buddhist innovators, who supported the adaptation of the doctrine to the new Communist precepts. When examined as a whole, Dorzhiev argued, Marx‘s and Lenin‘s 822 A. Andreev, Gimalaiskoe bratstvo. Teosofskii mif i ego tvortsy. St. Petersburg: Izdatel‘stvo S.- Peterburgskogo universiteta, 2008, 308-9. 360 teachings were the empirical realization of Gautama‘s ideals. 823 However, Dorzhiev continued, Marx‘s statement ―religion is the opium of the people‖ did not apply to Buddhism, because Buddhism asserts the principle of relativity of the entire being. For Dorzhiev, such a speculation echoed Einstein‘s theory of relativity, but with the following distinction: ―Buddha just speculated on this theory consolidating it in himself as the basis for daily contemplation, while the German scholar, like any average scholar of our time, reached the same conclusion through scientific experimentations.‖ 824 Despite Dorzhiev‘s attempts to adapt Buddhism to Soviet Russia, the Stalinist regime repressed Russian Buddhists along with all the other ―heretics‖ who fell victim to the purges. In this respect, the closure of the St. Petersburg Institute of Buddhist Culture in 1931 marked the beginning of an era of silence which would last till Nikita Khrushchev‘s famous ―Secret Speech‖ delivered at the Twentieth Congress of the Communist Party in 1956, when Stalin‘s crimes were first denounced. Following the temporary opening to the West that characterized the early stage of Khrushchev‘s Thaw, Russians could now glimpse contemporary Western – and Eastern – culture from behind the Iron Curtain. It was on this occasion that Russian artists, especially those belonging to the so-called ―underground movement‖ –dissidents who refused to align themselves with the official ideology of Socialist Realism, could familiarize themselves with art which took direct inspiration from Buddhism, as in the case of Mark Tobey‘s painterly 823 A. Andreev, Ot Baikala do sviashchennoi Lhasy. Novye materialy o russkikh ekspeditsiiakh v Tsentral‘nuiu Aziu v pervoi polovine XX veka (Buriatiia, Mongoliia, Tibet). Samara: Agni, 1997, 236. 824 Ibid., 239. 361 experiments with Japanese calligraphy and the Zen performances of John Cage and Merce Cunningham. Like many radical American artists and writers of the 1960s and 1970s, Russians began reading about Zen and applying the minimalist principle of this Buddhist school to their art. Hence the Moscow group ―Collective Actions‖ organized its Conceptualist performances on the outskirts of Moscow to experience the white Buddhist void that the snowy Russian landscape would evoke. It was the same notion of emptiness that the artist Ilia Kabakov transmitted in his Conceptualist canvases and that Mikhail Kulakov, himself a champion of Buddhist philosophy, expressed in his abstract paintings. Nature now became a meditative landscape and mirror of the soul. Trying to forget the terror of the recent past, the contemporary Russian artist now rejected the collective, seeking an isolation that allowed him to transcend reality and reach the all-embracing forces of the universe. In this aspiration lay the strongest debt of the new Russian intelligentsia to the Buddhist legacy. 362 Bibliography Abbé Charbonnet, V. ―A universal congress of Religions in 1900.‖ The Open Court 426. IX-43 (October 24, 1895): 4679. Adrianov, ―Minusinskii Muzei.‖ Vsemirnaia illiustratsiia 47. 1204 (5) (February 15, 1892): 147-150. A.L. ―Iaponskaia arabeska.‖ Buket 1 (1906): 6-7. Albedil‘, M. Indiia: bespredel‘naia mudrost‘. Moscow: Aleteia, 2003. Alekseev-Apraksin, A. Buddizm v kul‘turnoi zhizni Sankt-Peterburga. Saint Petersburg: Sankt-Peterburgskii gosudarstvennyi universitet, 2005. Amazons of the Avant-Garde. Edited by John E. Bowlt and Matthew Drutt. New York: Guggenheim Museum, 2000. Ananda, A. Fifty Selected Poems. Rangoon, publisher unknown, 1980s. Andreev, A. Buddiiskaia sviatinia Petrograda. Ulan-Ude: Agenstvo EkoArt, 1992. ---. Sankt Peterburgskii datsan-The Saint-Petersburg Datsan. St.-Petersbug: ―Nestor- Istoriia‖ (date of publication unknown). ---. Оt Baikala do sviashchennoi Lhasy. Novye materialy o russkikh ekspeditsiiakh v Tsentral‘nuiu Aziu v pervoi polovine XX veka (Buriatiia, Mongoliia, Tibet). Samara: Agni, 1997. ---. ―Indian Pundits and the Russian Exploration of Tibet: An Unknown Story of the Great Game Era.‖ Central Asiatic Journal 45, 2 (2001): 163-180. ---. Soviet Russia and Tibet. The Debacle of Secret Diplomacy, 1918-1930s. Leiden, Boston: Brill‘s Tibetan studies library, 2003. ---. Khram Buddy v Severnoi stolitse. Saint-Petersburg: Nartang, 2004. ---. Tibet v politike tsarskoi, sovetskoi i postsovetskoi Rossii. Sankt-Peterburg: Nartang, 2006. ---. Gimalaiskoe bratstvo. Teosofskii mif i ego tvortsy. St. Petersburg: Izdatel‘stvo S.- Peterburgskogo universiteta, 2008. 363 Androsov, V. Budda Shakiamuni i indiiskii buddizm. Sovremennoe istolkovanie drevnikh tekstov. Moscow: Vostochnaia literatura RAN, 2001. Anna Akhmatova: poslednie gody. Edited by Viktor Krivulin, Vladimir Murav‘ev, Tomas Ventslov. Saint Petersburg: Nevskii Dialekt, 2001. Annales du Musée Guimet, vol 12. Bibliothèque de vulgarisation. Conferences at the Guimet Museum 1898-1899. Preface by M. Émile Guimet. Paris: Ernest Leroux Éditeur, 1902. Annenkov, Iu. Portrety. Texts by Evgeny Zamiatin, Mikhail Kuzmin, Mikhail Babenchikov. Saint Petersburg: Petropolis, 1922. Annenkov, M. ―Akhal‘tekinskii oazis i puti v Indiu.‖ Vestnik Evropy (May 1881): 317- 340. ---. ―Akhal‘tekinskii oazis i puti v Indiu.‖ Vestnik Evropy (June 1881):770-797. Annensky, I. Ucheno-komitetskie retsenzii 1899-1900 gg., vols. 2. Edited, commented, and introduced by A.I. Cherviakov. Ivanovo: Iunona, 2000. d‘Ardenne de Tizac, H. ―L‘art bouddhique au Musée Cernuschi.‖ L‘Art Décoratif (June 1913): 245-6. Arnold, E. The Light of Asia or the Great Renunciation (Mahabhinishkramana) Being the Life and Teaching of Gautama, Prince of India and Founder of Buddhism (As Told in Verse by an Indian Buddhist). London: ―Trübner and Company,‖ 1879. ---. Svetilo Azii ili Velikoe otrechenie. Translated by Iurinsky (I.I.-ova). Saint-Petersburg, 1891. ---. Svet Azii. Poema. Translated by A. Annenskaia with an introduction and comments by V. Lesevich. Saint. Petersburg: Tip. i lit. V.A. Tikhanova, 1893. ―Ars Asiatica.‖ Sofiia. Zhurnal iskusstva i literatury 3 (March 1914): 4-8. Ashvagosha, Zhizn‘ Buddy. Translated by K. Bal‘mont with an Introduction by Sil‘ven Levi. Moscow: M. i S. Sabashnikovy, 1913. ---. Zhizn‘ Buddy. Kalidasa. Dramy. Translated by K. Bal‘mont. Introduced and commented by Grigory Bongard-Levin. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1990. 364 ---. The Life of the Buddha [Buddhacarita]. Translated by Patrick Olivelle. N.Y.: The New York University Press and JJC Foundation, 2008. Auslender, S. ―Khronika.‖ Apollon 3 (December 1909): 41-2. Baas, J. Smile of the Buddha. Eastern Philosophy and Western Art from Monet to Today. Foreword by Robert A.F. Thurman. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 2005. Babetsky, A. ―Tolstoi zagovoril.‖ Grazhdanin 52 (July 1, 1904): 4. Badmaev, P. Otvet na neosnavatel‘nye napadki chlenov meditsinskogo soveta na vrachebnuiu nauku Tibeta. Petrograd: tipografiia Sh. Bussel‘, 1915. ---. Mudrost‘ v russkom narode.Saint Petersburg: Viktoriia, 1917. ---. Za kulisami tsarizma. (Arkhiv tibetskogo vracha Badmaeva). Edited and introduced by V.P. Semennikov. Leningrad: Gos-noe Izdatel‘stvo, 1925. Baer, J.T. Arthur Schopenhauer und die russische Literatur des späten 19. und frühen 20. Jahrhunderts. München: O. Sagner, 1980. Blavatskaia, E. Instruktsii dlia uchenikov vnutrennei gruppy. Moscow: IDLI, 2001. Blavatsky, H. The Voice of the Silence (London: The Theosophical Publishing Company, 1889. ---. The Key to Theosophy. An Abridgment. Edited by Joy Mills. London: The Theosophical Publishing House, 1972. Baradiin, B. ―Iz legend Tibeta.‖ Zhivaia starina 21.2 (1912): 437-444. Baraev, V. ―Nerushimyi utes.‖ Buddizm 1, May 1992: 20-4. Barkhatova E. et al., Russia and Japan—Mutual Understanding. To the 150 th Anniversary of the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations. Saint Petersburg: National Library of Russia, 2006. Barlaam and Josaphat. English Lives of Buddha. Edited by Joseph Jacobs. London: D. Nutt, 1896. Baron Ungern-Shternberg i voiny Shambaly <http://www.netmistik.ru/occultism2/okvo82.htm> 365 Bartlett, R. ―Japonisme and Japanophobia: The Russo-Japanese War in Russian Cultural Consciousness.‖ The Russian Review 67. 1 (January 2008): 8-33. Bassin, M. ―The Russian Geographical Society, the ‗Amur Epoch,‘ and the Great Siberian Expedition of 1855-1863.‖Annals of the Association of American Geographers 73 (June 1983): 240-56. Batchelor, S. The Awakening of the West. The Encounter of Buddhism and Western Culture. Berkeley, California: Parallax Press, 1994. Bauler, A. ―Anatol Frans.‖ Voprosy zhizni 10-11 (October-November 1905): 212-235. ---. ―Anatol Frans.‖ Voprosy zhizni 12 (December 1905): 103-118. Bely, A. ―Apokalipsis v russkoi poezii.‖ Vesy 4 (April 1905): 11-28. Facsimile reprinted in 1968 (Nendeln/Liechtenstein: Kraus Reprint LDT). ---. ―Khimery.‖ Vesy 6 (June 1905): 1-18. ---. Zapiski chudaka. Moscow/Berlin: knigoizdatel‘stvo Gelikon, 1922. Reprint Lausanne: Éditions l‘Âge d‘Homme, vol. 1, 1973. ---. Petersburg. Translated, annotated, and introduced by Robert A. Maguire and John E. Malmstad. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1978. ---. Na rubezhe dvukh stoletii. On the Border of Two Centuries. Introduced by Georgette Donchin. Chicago, Illinois: Russian Language Specialties, 1966. ---. The Silver Dove. Translated and introduced by George Reavey. Preface by Harrison E. Salisbury. New York: Grove Press, Inc., 1974. ---. Antichrist. Abbozzo di un mistero incompiuto. Edited and commented by Daniela Rizzi. Trento: Dipartimento di Storia della Civiltá Europea, Universitá di Trento, 1990. ---. Petersburg. Roman v vos‘mi glavakh s prologom i epilogom. Commented by S.S. Grechishkin, L.K. Dolgopolov, and A.V. Lavrov.Kiev: Izdatel‘stvo khudozhestvennoi literatury ―Dnipro,‖ 1990. ---. The Christened Chinaman. Translated, annotated and introduced by Thomas R. Beyer. Tenafly, N.J.: Hermitage Publishers, 1991. ---. Sobranie sochinenii. Stikhotvoreniia i poemy. Edited by V.M. Puskinova. Moscow: Respublika, 1994. 366 ---. Simvolizm kak miroponimanie. Edited, introduced and commented by L.A. Sugai. Moscow: Respublika, 1994. Berg, L. Vsesoiuznoe geograficheskoe obshchestvo za sto let: 1845-1945. Moscow- Leningrad: Izdatel‘stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR, 1946. Berniukevich, T. Buddizm v Rossiiskoi filosofskoi kul‘ture: ―Chuzhoe‖ i ―svoe.‖ Moscow: knizhnyi dom ―Librokom,‖ 2009. ---. Buddiiskie idei v kul‘ture Rossii kontsa XIX-pervoi poloviny XX veka. Chita: Chitinskii gosudarstvennyi universitet, 2010. Bidney, M. ―Life is a Dream and the Challenge of ‗Saint Buddha‘: Bal‘mont‘s Calderònian Crisis and Its Nietzschian Resolution.‖ Slavic and East European Journal 42.1 (1998): 37-57. Blok, A. Sobranie sochinenii v vos‘mi tomakh, vols. 8. Edited by V.N. Orlov, A.A. Surkov, K.I. Chukovsky. Moscow-Leningrad: gos-noe izd-vo khud-noi lit., 1963. ---. Poslednie dni imperatorskoi vlasti. Paris: Librairie de Sialsky, 1978. ---. ―Rytsar‘-monakh.‖ O Vladimire Solov‘eve. Edited by E. Kol‘chuzhkin. Tomsk: Izdatel‘stvo Vodolei, 1997, 89-95. Bogomolov, N. Russkaia literatura nachala XX veka i okkul‘tizm. Moscow, 2000. Böhmig, M. ―Tempo, Spazio e Quarta Dimensione nell‘avanguardia russa.‖ Europa Orientalis 8. Napoli: Istituto universitario ―Orientale,‖ 1989, 341-380. Bois, J. Les Petites Religions de Paris. Paris: Léon Charilley Successeur, 1894. Bongard-Levin, G. ―Dvenadtsat‘ A. Bloka i ‗Mertvye‘ S.F. Ol‘denburga.‖ Iz ―Russkoi mysly.‖ Saint Petersburg: Aleteiia, 2002, 13-28. ---. Lardinois, R., Vigasin, A. Correspondances Orientalistes entre Paris et Saint-Pétersbourg (1887-1935). Paris: Diffusion de Boccard, 2002. ---.―Indiia i indologi v zhizni i tvorchestve Viach. Ivanova.‖ In Vestnik istorii, literatury, iskusstva, vol. 5. Edited by Grigorii Bongard-Levin. Moscow: Sobranie, 2008: 201-18. 367 The Boris Anisfeld Exhibition. New York: Redfield-Kendrick-Odell Company, Inc., 1918-20. Boris Anisfeld. Catalog Raisonné. Edited by Eckart Lingenauber. Monaco: Edition libertars, 2011. Bowlt, J.E. ―Russian Symbolism and the ‗Blue Rose‘ Movement.‖ The Slavonic and East European Review 51.123 (April 1973): 161-181. ---. Moscow & St. Petersburg 1900-1920. Art, Life & Culture of the Russian Silver Age. New York: The Vendome Press, 2008. ―Brat‘ia Badmaevy.‖ Entsiklopedischeskii slovar‘, vol. 2. Edited by Ivan Andreevsky. Saint Petersburg, Leipzig: F.A. Brockhaus, I. Efron, 1891, 674. Briton, C. The Boris Anisfeld Exhibition. New York: Redfield-Kendrick-Odell Company, Inc., 1918-20. Brook, T. Vermeer‘s Hat. The Seventeenth Century and the Dawn of the Global World. New York: Bloomsbury Press, 2008. Brower, D. ―Images of the Orient: Vasily Vereshchagin and Russian Turkestan.‖ European Society and Culture Research Group. Berkeley: University of California at Berkeley, 1993. Working Paper 3.5, 1-16. ---. ―Imperial Russia and Its Orient: The Renown of Nikolai Przhevalsky.‖ Russian Review 53.3 (July 1994): 367-381. Buddha Mind in Contemporary Art. Edited by Jacquelynn Baas and Mary Jane Jacob. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 2004. Buddiiskaia kul‘tura: istoriia, istochnikovedenie, iazykoznanie i iskusstvo: Vtorye Dordzhievskie chteniia. Edited by Ts. A. Sambueva. Saint-Petersburg: Peterburgskoe Vostokovedenie, 2008. Buddizm. Kanony, istoriia, iskusstvo, vols. 2. Edited by N.L. Zhukovskaia. Moscow: Dizain. Informatsiia. Kartografiia. Series Ars Buddhica, 2006. Bulanzhe, P. ―Zhizn‘ i uchenie Siddarty Gotamy, prozvannogo Buddoi (sovershenneishim).‖ Zhizn‘ dlia vsekh 3 (March 1910): 110-27. Bulgakova, E. ―Nrastvennyi oblik iapontsev.‖ Voprosy zhizni 1 (January 1905): 93-115. 368 Bunin, I. Sobranie sochinenii v deviati tomakh, vols. 9. Edited by A.S. Miasnikov, B.S. Riurikov, and A.T. Tvardovsky. Moscow: khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1965. ---. Sobranie sochinenii v deviati tomakh, vols. 9. Edited by P.L. Viacheslavov, O.V. Slivitskaia, and O.V. Mikhailov. Moscow: Izd-vo khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1966. ---. The Liberation of Tolstoy. A Tale of Two Writers. Edited, translated from the Russian, and with an introduction and notes by Thomas Gaiton Marullo and Vladimir T. Khmelkov. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 2001. ---. About Chekhov. The Unfinished Symphony. Edited and translated from the Russian by Thomas Gaiton Marullo. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 2007. Carlson, M. ―No Religion Higher than Truth.‖ A History of the Theosophical Movement in Russia, 1875-1922. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1993. Carus, P. Buddhism and its Christian Critics. Chicago: The Open Court Publishing Company, 1894. ---. ―Goethe a Buddhist.‖The Open Court 445 (March 12, 1896): 4832-7. ---. ―Patriotism and Chauvinism.‖ The Open Court 467.X (August 6, 1896): 5012. ---. ―Buddha Pictures and Statues.‖The Open Court 505.XII (June 1898): 337-51. ---. ―The Yellow Peril.‖ The Open Court 578. XVIII (July 1904): 430-3. ---. ―Orientalism.‖ The Open Court 579.XVIII (August 1904): 504-6. Chekhov, A. Sobranie sochinenii v 12-ti tomakh, vols. 12. Moscow: Gosud-noe izd-vo khudo-noi lit., 1956. ---. Sobranie sochinenii i pisem v 18-ti tomakh, vols. 18. Мoscow: Nauka, 1979. Chekhov the Immigrant. Translating a Cultural Icon. Edited by Michael C. Finke and Julie de Sherbinin. Bloomington, Indiana: Slavica Publishers, 2007. Chizhevsky, D. Gegel v Rossii. Saint Petersburg : Nauka, 2007. Chukovsky, K. Diary, 1901-1969. Edited by Victor Erlich and translated by Michael Henry Heim. New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 2005. Chulkov, G. O Misticheskom anarkhizme. St. Petersburg: Fakely, 1906. 369 Cioran, D. The Apocalyptic Symbolism of Andrei Bely. Mouton: The Hague, 1973. Collins, S. Nirvana and Other Buddhist Felicities. Utopias of the Pali imaginaire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. ---. Nirvana. Concept, Imagery, Narrative. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. El cosmos de la vanguardia rusa. Arte y exploración espacial 1900-1930. Edited by John E. Bowlt, Nicoletta Misler and Maria Tsantsanoglou. Santander: Fundación Marcelino Botín, 2010. The Dalai Lama. A Visual History. Edited by M. Brauen. Chicago: Serindia Publications, 2005. Dallin, D. Rise of Russia in Asia. Archon Books, 1971. Danilova, I. Literaturnaia skazka A.M. Remizova (1900-1920-e gody). Dissertatsiia na soiskanie uchenoi stepeni kandidata filologicheskikh nauk. St. Petersburg: Institut Russkoi literatury (Pushkinskii dom), 2008. Danilovsky, G. ―Na Indiiu. Istoricheskaia povest' iza vremen Petra Velikogo.‖ Vestnik Evropy (December 1880): 512-616. David-Neel, A. L‘Inde. Hier-Aujourd‘hui-Demain. Paris: Librairie Plon, 1951. Davydov, Z. and Kupchenko, V. Krym Maksimiliana Voloshina. Avtografy, risunki, fotografii, dokumenty, otkrytki iz gosudarstvennykh i chastnykh sobranii. Foto al‘bom. Kiev: Mistetstvo, 1994. Desiatiletie Minusinskogo Muzeiia 1877-1887. Commissioned by the committee of the Minusinsk Museum. Tomsk: Tipografiia ―Sibirskoi gazety,‖ 1887. Di Ruocco, A. ―‘Amaravella‘. Ee poetika i khudozhestvennaia deiatel‘nost‘po vospominaniam Marii Drozdovoi-Chernovolenko.‖ In Aspirantskii sbornik. Moscow: Gosudarstvennyi institut iskusstvoznania, 2004, 73-86. ---. Buddiiskie reministsentsii v izobrazitel‘nom russkom iskusstve pervogo tridtsatiletiia XX veka. N. Rerikh, ―Amaravella,‖ N. Kul‘bin, M. Matiushin, E. Guro. Moscow: Gos-nnyi institut iskusstvoznaniia, 2005. Dnevniki imperatora Nikolaia II. Edited and introduced by K.F. Shatsillo. Moscow: Orbita, 1991. 370 Dobuzhinsky, M. Vospominaniia. New York: Put' zhizni, St. Seraphim Foundation Inc., 1976. Dorzhiev, A. Zanimatel‘nye zametki. Opisanie puteshestviia vokrug sveta. Translated from the Mongolian by A.D. Tsendina. Transliteration, introduction, comments, glossary, and index by A.G. Sazykin and A.D. Tsendina. Moscow: Vostochnaia literatura RAN, 2003. Douglas, C. Swans of Other Worlds. Kazimir Malevich and the Origins of Abstraction in Russia. Ann Arbor, Michigan: UMI Research Press, 1980. D‘outremer et d‘Orient mystique…Les itineraries d‘Émile Guimet. Edited by Françoise Chappuis and Francis Macouin. Suilly-la-Tour: Éditions Findakly, 2001. Downer, L. Madame Sadayakko. The Geisha Who Bewitched the West. New York: Gotham Books, 2003. Droit, R.-P. The Cult of Nothingness. The Philosophers and the Buddha. Translated by David Streight and Pamela Vohnson. Chapell Hill and London: The University of North Carolina Press, 2003. Ermakova, T. Buddiiskii mir glazami rossiiskikh issledovatelei XIX-pervoi treti XX veka. Saint Petersburg: Nauka, 1998. Esquisses de Voyage dans les Indes par M. et Mme Véreschaguine. Ire Partie— L‘Hymalaya Oriental. Édition Illustrée. Paris: A La Librairie illustrée, 1882. Evripid. Ippolit. Translated with Greek verses by I. Annensky and with ―Tragedii Ippolita i Fedry‖ in appendix. Saint Petersburg: Senatskaia tipografiia, 1902. A Feast of Wonders: Sergei Diaghilev and the Ballets Russes. Edited by John E. Bowlt, Zelfira Tregulova, and Nathalie Rosticher Giordano. Milan: Skira editore, 2009. Fet, A. Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh. Edited, commented, and introduced by A.E. Tarkhov. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1982. Fields, R. How the Swans Came to the Lake. A Narrative History of Buddhism in America. Third Edition, Revised and Updated. Boston & London: Shambhala, 1992. Filoni, M. Il filosofo della domenica. La vita e il pensiero di Alexandre Kojève. Torino: Bollati Boringhieri, 2008. 371 Filonov. Analiticheskoe iskusstvo. Edited by Nicoletta Misler and John E. Bowlt. Moscow: Sovetskii khudozhnik, 1990. Filosofiia russkogo kosmizma i russkaia kul‘tura. (Proceedings of the international conference ―Cosmism and Russian Literature.‖ On the occasion of the 100 Anniversary from Nikolai Fedorov‘s Death, October 23-25, 2003). Edited by Korneliia Ichin. Belgrad: Filologicheskii fakul‘tet Belgradskogo universiteta, 2004. The First Encounter by Andrey Bely. Translated and introduced by Jerald Janecek. Preliminary remarks, notes, and comments by Nina Berberova. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1979. Forsyth, J. A History of the Peoples of Siberia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994. Foucaux, P. Rgya tch`er rol pa, ou, Développement des jeux, contenant l'histoire du Bouddha Çakya-Mouni traduit sur la version tibétaine du Bkah hgyour, et revu sur l'original sanscrit (Lalitavistâra), vol. 2. Paris: L'Imprimerie royale, 1847-8. Foucher De Careil, A. Hegel et Schopenhauer. Études sur la philosophie allemande moderne. Paris: Hachette, 1862. France, A. La vie littéraire. Paris: Calmann Lévy, 1888-1900. ---. Sur la pierre blanche. Paris: C. Levy, 1905. ---. The White Stone. Translated by Charles E. Roche. London, New York: John Lane Company, 1910. ---. The Message of Buddha. New York: K.Y. Kira, (date unknown). Frans, A. ―O buddizme.‖ Buket 4 (1906): 11-3. ---. ―O buddizme.‖ Buket 5 (1906): 7. Gachev, G. Оbrazy Indii. (Оpyt ekzistentsial‘noi kul‘turologii). Introduced by. P. Grintser. Moscow: Nauka, 1993. Gegel' i filosofiia v Rossii. 30-e gody XIX v. - 20-e gody XX v. Edited by V.E. Evgrafov. Moscow: Nauka, 1974. 372 Georgievsky, S. ―Dva issledovatelia Kitaiskoi imperii. Po povodu stat‘i g. Przheval‘skogo ‗Sovremennoe polozhenie Tsentral‘noi Azii‘ i knigi Zh. Simona: ‗Sredinnoe tsarstvo.‖ Vestnik Evropy (August 1887): 777-822. Giumber, E. ―Zhivopisnoe puteshestvie v Iaponiu 1863-64 g.‖ Vsemirnyi puteshestvennik 11-3 (1) (1867): 2-48. ---. ―Zhivopisnoe puteshestvie v Iaponiu 1863-64 g.‖ Vsemirnyi puteshestvennik 10 (3), (1868): 1-160. ---. ―Zhivopisnoe puteshestvie v Iaponiu 1863-64 g.‖ Vsemirnyi puteshestvennik 19 (3), (1868): 289-305. ---. ―Zhivopisnoe puteshestvie v Iaponiu 1863-64 g.‖ Vsemirnyi puteshestvennik 22 (3) (1868): 353-368. ---.―Zhivopisnoe puteshestvie v Iaponiu 1863-64 g.‖ Vsemirnyi puteshestvennik 28 (4) (1868): 433-448. ---. ―Zhivopisnoe puteshestvie v Iaponiu 1863-64 g.‖ Vsemirnyi puteshestvennik 35 (4) (1868): 545-560. ---. ―Zhivopisnoe puteshestvie v Iaponiu 1863-64 g.‖ Vsemirnyi puteshestvennik 40 (4) (1868): 625-640. ---. ―Zhivopisnoe puteshestvie v Iaponiu 1863-64 g.‖ Vsemirnyi puteshestvennik 46 (4) (1868): 721-736. ---. ―Zhivopisnoe puteshestvie v Iaponiu 1863-64 g.‖ Vsemirnyi puteshestvennik 42 (5) (1869): 657-670. ---. ―Zhivopisnoe puteshestvie v Iaponiu 1863-64 g.‖ Vsemirnyi puteshestvennik 1-2 (7) (1870): 1-27. ---. ―Zhivopisnoe puteshestvie v Iaponiu 1863-64 g.‖ Vsemirnyi puteshestvennik 3 (7) (1870): 33-47. G—n., A. ―Vystavka iaponskoi zhivopisi.‖ Rassvet 181 (September 24, 1905): 3. Gorky, M. Selected Letters. Selected, translated, and edited by Andrew Barratt and Barry P. Scherr. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997. Gorshenina, S. The Private Collections of Russian Turkestan in the Second Half of the 19 th and Early 20 th Century. Berlin: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 2004. 373 Grekova, T. Tibetskaia meditsina v Rossii: istoriia v sud‘bakh i litsakh. Saint Petersburg: Aton, 1998. Grünwedel, A. Obzor sobraniia predmetov lamaiskogo kul‘ta kn. E.E. Ukhtomskogo. Saint Petersburg: Tipografiia Imperatorskoi Akademii Nauk. Series ―Biblioteka Buddica‖ 6, 1905. N. Gumilev i Russkii Parnas. Proceedings of the conference held on September 17-19, 1991. Edited by I.G. Kravtsova, M.D. El‘zon. Saint Petersburg: Muzei Anny Akhmatovoi v Fontannom dome, 1992. Gurvich, E. Vladimir Solov‘ev i Rudol‘f Steiner. Moscow: Martis, 1993. Gusev B. et al. Doktor Badmaev: Tibetskaia meditsina, tsarskii dvor, sovetskaia vlast‘. Moscow: Russkaia kniga, 1995. Hall, J. Illustrated Dictionary of Symbols in Eastern and Western Art. London: John Murray Publishers Ltd., 1994. Handbook of Russian Literature. Edited by Victor Terras. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1985. Hegel, F. Science of Logic. Translated by A.V. Miller. Foreword by J.N. Findlay. New York: Humanities Press, 1969. ---. Hegel‘s Philosophy of Subjective Spirit, vols. 3. Edited and translated with an introduction and explanatory notes by M.J. Petry. Dordrecht, Boston: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1978. ---. Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion, vols. 4. Edited by Peter C. Hodgson. Translated by R.F. Brown, P.C. Hodgson, and J.M. Stewart with the assistance of H.S. Harris. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 1984-1988. Henderson, H. Catalyst for Controversy. Paul Carus of Open Court. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press, 1993. The Hermitage. French Painting. Second Half of the 19th Century to the Early 20th Century. Leningrad: Aurora Art Publishers, 1982. Herzen, A. Sobranie sochinenii v tridtsati tomakh, vols. 30. Moscow: Izd-vo Akademii nauk SSSR, 1954-1965. 374 Hoover, T. Zen culture. New York: Random House, 1977. Hopkirk, P. Foreign Devils of the Silk Road: the Search for the Lost Cities and Treasures of Chinese Central Asia. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1984. Howard, J. The Union of Youth. Manchester: University Press, 1992. Huc, E.R. Souvenirs of a Journey through Tartary, Tibet and China During the Years 1844, 1845 and 1846, vols. 2. New edition annotated and illustrated by J.-M. Planchet, C.M.. Peking: Lazarist Press, 1831. ---. Souvenirs d'un voyage dans la Tartarie, le Thibet, et la Chine pendant les années 1844, 1845 et 1846, vols. 2. Paris: Le Clere et Cie, 1850. Hundley, H.S. ―Defending the Periphery: Tsarist Management of Buriat Buddhism.‖ The Russian Review 69 (April 2010): 231-50. Iadrintsev (?), N. ―Sovremennaia maniia k puteshestviiam.‖ Otechestvennye zapiski 8 (August 1876): 147-165. ---. Sibirien: geographische, ethnographische und historische Studien, mit bewilligung des Verfassers nach dem russischen Bearb. und vervollständigt von Ed. Petri. Jena: H. Costenoble, 1886. ---. ―Puteshestviia na verkhov‘ia Orkhona k razvalinam Karakoruma.‖ Izvestiia 26 (February 21, 1890): 257-271. Iakovlev, I. ―Buddizm, chernaia magiia i chertovshchina.‖ Novoe vremia 5474 (1891): 1- 2. Ianovsky, N. et al. Nikolai Mikhailovich Iadrintsev. O literature. Stikhotvoreniia. Pis‘ma. Vospominaniia o N.M.Iadrintseve. Novosibirsk: Zapadno-sibirskoe knizhnoe izdatel‘stvo. Series ―Literaturnoe nasledstvo Sibiri‖ 5, 1980. Ianovsky, N. et al. Vospominanie (okonchanie). Stat‘i, ocherki, retsenzii. Vospominaniia o G.N. Potanine. Novosibirsk: zapadno-sibirskoe knizhnoe izdatel‘stvo. Series ―Literaturnoe nasledstvo Sibiri‖ 7, 1986. Iavorsky, G. N.М. Маrt‘ianov. Kratkii ocherk zhizni i deiatel‘nost‘. Krasnoiarsk: Krasnoiarskoe knizhnoe izdatel‘stvo, 1969. I.E. Repin i V.V. Stasov. Perepiska, vols. 2. Edited by A.K. Lebedev. Moscow-Leningrad: Iskusstvo, 1949. 375 ―Illiustratsii Sredneaziatskoi vystavki v Moskve.‖ Vsemirnaia illiustratsiia 1190 (November 9, 1891): 324-5. Imperial Russia. New Histories for the Empire. Edited by Jane Burbank and David L. Ransel. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1998. I.N.K. ―Buddiiskaia kosnost‘. Stranitsy putevoi knizhki.‖ Grazhdanin 50 (June 24, 1904): 7-9. ---. ―Buddiiskaia kosnost‘. Stranitsy putevoi knizhki.‖ Grazhdanin 52 (July 1, 1904): 6- 8. ---.―Buddiiskaia kosnost‘. Stranitsy putevoi knizhki.‖ Grazhdanin 54 (July 8, 1904): 7-9. Ino, ―Izbrannye relikvy Iaponskogo iskusstva (k snimkam).‖ Iskusstvo 5-7 (1905): 21-48. Ivan Bunin, vols. 2. Edited by V.R. Shcherbin. Moscow: Nauka. Series ―Literaturnoe nasledstvo‖ 84, 1973. Ivanov, V. ―Iz oblasti sovremennykh nastroenii. Apokaliptiki i obshvhestvennost.‖ Vesy 6 (June 1905): 35-9. ---. Po zvezdam. St. Petersburg.: Ory, 1909. ---. ―O poezii I.F. Annenskogo.‖ Apollon 4 (January 1910):16-24. ---. Sobranie sochinenii, vols. 4. Edited by D.V. Ivanov and O. Deshart. Bruxelles: Foyer Oriental Chrétien, 1971. ---. Rodnoe i vselenskoe. Edited, introduced and commented by V.M. Tolmachev. Moscow: Respublika, 1994. ---. and Zinov‘eva-Annibal, L. Perepiska: 1894-1903, vols. 2. Edited by D.O. Solodka and N.A. Bogomolov with the participation of M. Wachtel. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2009. Ivanovich, ―The Russo-Japanese War and the Yellow Peril.‖ Contemporary Review 86 (July-December, 1904): 162-3. Iuzefovich, L. Samoderzhets pustyni. Fenomen sud‘by barona R.F. Ungern-Shternberga. Moscow: Ellis Lak, 1993. 376 James, H. Literary Criticism. French Writers, Other European Writers, the Preface to the New York Edition, vols. 2. New York: Literary Classics of the United States, 1984. James, J. C. Jung and Eastern Thought. A Dialogue with the Orient. New York: Routledge, 1994. The Jātaka or Stories of the Buddha‘s Former Births. Edited by Edward B. Cowell. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1895-1907. Kaganovich, B. Sergei Fedorovich Ol‘denburg. Opyt biografii. Saint-Petersburg: Feniks, 2006. Kalidasa, Dramy. Translated by K. Bal‘mont, with an introduction by S. Ol‘denburg. Moscow: izdanie M. i S. Sabashnikovykh, 1916. Kamensky, V. Zametki o Kul‘bine. Manuscript, earlier than 1917. Rossiiskii Gosudarstvennyi Arkhiv Literatury i Iskusstva (RGALI). Fond Kamensky. No. 1497. Op. 1 ed. xr. 147, 3-5. Kandinsky, V. Correspondences avec Zervos et Kojève. Edited and introduced by Christian Derouet. Paris: Centre Georges Pompidou, 1992. Kashetin, L. Buddizm: raspoznanie ego s tochki zreniia chistogo pessimizma. Leipzig: F.A. Brokhaus, late 1800s. Katalog buddiiskoi kollektsii vostocho-sibirskogo otdela Imperatorskogo Russkogo Geograficheskogo Obshchestva. Otdel XVII. Irkutsk: Parovaia tipo-litografiia P.I. Makushina I V.M. Posokhina, 1908. Katalog Russkogo otdela na vsemirnoi Parizhskoi Vystavke 1900 g. Saint Petersburg: tipografiia Isidora Gol‘berga, publication date unknown. Katalog vystavki predmetam, privezennym velikim kniazem Gosudarem Naslednikom Tsesarevichem Nikolaem Aleksandrovichem iz puteshestviia Ego Imperatorskogo Vysochestva na Vostok v 1890-91 gg. Saint Petersburg: Tipografiia Ministerstva Putei Soobshcheniia, 1893. Katalog vystavki predmetov vneshnei obstanovki dukhovnoi zhizni buriatskikh, mongolskikh i tibetskikh lam. Edited by I. Podgorbunsky and G. Potanin. Irkutsk: Tip. Gaz. ―Vostochnoe Obozrenie,‖ 1888. Kazimir Malevich. Khudozhnik i teoretik. Edited by A.D. Sarab‘ianov. Moscow: Sovetskii khudozhnik, 1990. 377 Kazimir Malevich in the Russian Museum. Edited by Evgeniia Petrova and translated from the Russian by Kenneth MacInnes. St. Petersburg: Palace Editions, 2000. Kazimir Malevich: Suprematism. Edited by Matthew Drutt. N.Y.: Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 2003. K.B. ―Iz oblasti mysli.‖ Vesy—nauchno-literaturnyi i kritiko-bibliograficheskii ezhemesiachnik 2.1 (January 1904). Edited by S.A. Poliakov. Facsimile edition, Nendeln/Liechtenstein: Kraus Reprint LDT, 1968: 57-8. Khamaganova, E. ―Princes Esper and Dii Ukhtomsky and Their Contribution to the Study of Buddhist Culture (Tibet, Mongolia and Russia).‖ Tibet, Past and Present. Proceedings of the Ninth Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, vol. 1. Edited by Henk Blezer. Leiden, Boston, Köln, 2002: Brill, 307- 326. ―Khronika, Nekrolog E. Arnol‘da.‖ Vesy 4 (April 1904): 79. ―Khudozhestvennye novosti.‖ Rassvet 171 (September 13, 1905): 4. Kipling, R. ―Kim.‖ Vestnik Evropy (June 1902): 746-800. ---. ―Kim.‖ Vestnik Evropy (July 1902): 247-305. ---. ―Kim.‖ Vestnik Evropy (August 1902): 703-765. ---. ―Kim.‖ Vestnik Evropy (September 1902): 213-285. ---. A Choice of Kipling‘s Prose. Edited by W. Somerset Maugham. London: Macmillan, 1952. Kirpichnikov, A. Grecheskie romany v novoi literature. Povest‘ o Varlaame i Ioasafe. Khar‘kov: Universitetskaia tipografiia, 1876. Klements, D. Mestnye muzei i ikh znachenie v provintsial‘noi zhizni. Irkutsk: Tipografiia K.I. Vitkovskoi, 1893. ---. ―Beglye zametki o zheltoi opasnosti.‖ Russkoe bogatstvo 7 (1905): 36-56. Kliuchevsky, V. Drevnerusskie zhitiia sviatykh kak istoricheskii istochnik. Issledovanie. Moscow: izd. Soldatenkova, 1871. Kolodochko, M. ―Chekhov v Indii i Kitae.‖ Don 10 (1959): 152-5. 378 Kozlov, P. V serdtse Azii. Pamiatnik N.M. Przheval‘skogo. Saint Petersburg: Tipografiia P.P. Soikina,1914. ---. Dnevniki Mongolo-Tibetskoi ekspeditsii 1923-1926 gg. Edited by Т.I.Iusupova and A.I. Andreev. Saint Petersburg: Nauka. Series ―nauchnoe nasledstvo‖ 30, 2003. Kravchenko, V. Mistitsizm v russkoi filosofskoi mysli XIX-nachala XX vekov. Moscow: izdattsentr, 1997. Kravklis, N. Zhizn‘ i puteshestviia Petra Kuz‘micha Kozlova. Smolensk: Poligramma, 2006. ---. Spletenie sudeb. Smolensk: Poligramma, 2007. Kruchenykh, V. and Khlebnikov, V. Mirskontsa. Moscow: G.L. Kuzmin & S.D. Dolinsky, 1912. Kruchenykh, Pustinniki. Pustynnitsa: dve poemy. Moscow: Izd. G.L. Kuzʹmina i S.D. Dolinskogo, 1913. Kruchenykh, A., Malevich, K., Matiushin, M. Victory over the sun. Album compiled by Patricia Railing. Translated from the Russian by Evgeny Steiner. Forest Row, East Sussex, England: Artists Bookworks, 2009. Kul‘bin, N. ―Letter to Vasily Kamensky‖ (October 13, 1915). Rossiiskii Gosudarstvennyi Arkhiv Literatury i Iskusstva (RGALI). Fond Kamensky. No 1497. Op. 1. ed. xr. 202. Kul‘bin. Kniga vtoraia. Edited by Boris Kalaushin. Saint Petersburg: Apollon, 1995. Kupchenko V. and Demin, E. ―V Zabaikal‘e—cherez Parizh.‖ Baikal 2 (1989): 143. Kupchenko, V. Stranstvie Maksimiliana Voloshina. Dokumental‘noe povestvovanie. Saint Petersburg: Logos, 1996. Kuz‘minsky, K. Zabytyi avangard. Rossiia pervaia tret‘ XX stoletiia, vols. 2. Sbornik spravochnykh i teoreticheskikh materialov. Wien: Gesellschaft zur Förderung slawistischer Studien, [198-]. Kychanov, E. ―Soblazn slavy.‖ Vostochnaia kollektsiia 7 (Fall 2001): 76-80. 379 Laboratory of Dreams. The Russian Avant-Garde and Cultural Experiment. Edited by John E. Bowlt and Olga Matich. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1996. Landon, P. Lhasa, vols. 2 London: Hurst & Blackett, 1905. Lee, S. Surviving Nirvana. Death of the Buddha in Chinese Visual Culture. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2010. A Legacy Regained: Nikolai Khardzhiev and the Russian Avant-Garde. Edited and compiled by John E. Bowlt and Mark Konecny. St. Petersburg: Palace Editions, 2002. Leonov, G. ―E.E. Ukhtomsky. K istorii lamaistskogo sobraniia gosudarstvennogo Ermitazha.‖ Buddizm i literaturno-khudozhestvennoe tvorchestvo narodov Tsentral‘noi Azii. Edited by R.E. Pubaev. Novosibirsk: izdatel‘stvo ―Nauka‖ sibirskoe otdelenie, 1985: 101-116. ---. ―Two Portraits of the Thirteenth Dalai Lama.‖ Arts of Asia 21. 4 (July-August 1991): 108-21. Leo Tolstoy. Edited by D. Milivojevich. New York: Columbia University Press, 1998. Lesevich, V. ―Pervobytnyi Buddizm. German Ol‘denberg. Budda, ego zhizn‘, uchenie i obshchina.‖ Literaturnyi sbornik. Izdanie redaktsii ―Vostochnogo Obozreniia.‖ Sobranie nauchnykh i literaturnykh stat‘ei o Sibiri i Aziatskom Vostoke. Edited by N.M. Iadrintsev. Saint Petersburg: Tipografiia I.N. Skorokhodova, 1885, 114- 138. Levenson, C.B. Symbols of Tibetan Buddhism. Foreword by the Dalai Lama, Photographs by Laziz Hamani. Paris: Éditions Assouline, 1996. Liatsky, E. ―Sredi novykh knig. Zametki. ‗Griadushchii khram‘, D.S. Merezhkovskogo.‖ Vestnik Evropy 2 (April, 1906): 807-23. Literature, Culture, and Society in the Modern Age: in Honor of Joseph Frank, vols. 2. Edited by Edward J. Brown. Stanford, Calif.: Dept. of Slavic Languages and Literatures, Stanford University, 1991. Liusternik, E. Russko-indiiskie ekonomicheskie, nauchnye i kul‘turnye sviazi v XIX v. Моscow: Nauka, 1966. 380 Livshits, B. The One and A Half-eyed Archer. Translated, introduced and annotated by John E. Bowlt. Newtonville, Mass.: Oriental Research Partners, 1977. Lopatin, L. Filosofskie kharakteristiki i rechi. Introduced by V.V. Zen‘kovsky with an afterword by V.V. Rubtsov and A.D. Cherviakov. Moscow: Academia, 1995. Losev, A. ―Vl. Solov‘ev i ego blizhaishee literaturnoe okruzhenie.‖ Literaturnaia ucheba 3 (1987): 151-164. ---. ―Vl. Solov‘ev i ego blizhaishee literaturnoe okruzhenie.‖ Literaturnaia ucheba 4: 159-168. Lost Empire of the Silk Road. Buddhist Art from Khara Khoto (X-XIIIth century). Edited by Mikhail Piotrovsky. Milano: Electa, Thyssen-Bornemisza Foundation, 1993. de Lubac, H. La rencontre du Bouddhisme et de l‘Occident. Paris: Aubier, 1952. Lubchenkova, T. Samye znamenitye puteshestvenniki Rossii. Moscow: Veche, 1999. М. ―Itogi vsemirnoi vystavki. 1900 goda. Pis‘mo iz Parizha.‖ Vestnik Evropy (February 1901): 798. Maiakovsky, V. Pro eto-That‘s What. Translated by Larisa Gureeva and George Hyde. Todmorden, UK: Arc Publications, 2009. Malevich, K. Essays on art 1915-1928, vols. 2. Translated by Xenia Glowacki-Prus and Arnold McMillin. Edited by Troels Anderesen. Copenhagen: Borgens Forlag, 1968. ---. The World as Non-Objectivity. Unpublished writings 1922-25. Translated by Xenia Glowacki-Prus and Edmund T. Little. Edited by Andersen. Copenhagen: Borgens Forlag, 1976. ---. The Artist, Infinity, Suprematism. Unpublished Writings 1913-33, vol. 4. Translated by Xenia Hoffmann. Edited by Troels Andersen. Copenhagen: Borgens Forlag, 1978. ---. Poeziia. Edited, published, introduced, and commented by A. Shatskikh. Moscow: Epifaniia, 2000. ---. Sobranie sochinenii v piati tomakh, vols. 5. Edited by A. Shatskikh. Moscow: Gileia, 2004. 381 Malozemoff, A. Russian Far Eastern Policy 1881-1904. With Special Emphasis on the Causes of the Russo-Japanese War. New York: Octagon Books, 1977. Mal‘tsev, S. Zheltaia opasnost‘ (Kitaisko-Evropeiskii konflikt 1900 g.). Warsaw: Tsentral‘naia tipografiia, 1900. The Man with the Black Coat. Russia‘s Literature of the Absurd. Selected works by Daniil Kharms and Alexander Vvedensky. Edited and translated by George Gibian. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 1987. Markov, V. ―The Russian Secession: Concerning the ‗Union of Youth‖ Exhibition in Riga.‖ Translated and Introduced by Jeremy Howard. Experiment. A Journal of Russian Culture 1 (1995): 45-54. ---. ―Negro Art.‖ Translated by Jeremy Howard. Art In Translation 1.1 (2009): 77-117. Martianov, N. Desiatiletie Minusinskogo Muzeiia (1877-1887). Commissioned by the committee of the Minusinsk Museum. Tomsk: Tipografiia Sibirskoi gazety, 1887, 1-9. Martineau, E. Malévitch et la philosophie. La question de la peinture abstraite. Lausanne: L‘Âge d‘homme, 1977. Marullo, T.G. If You See the Buddha. Studies in the Fiction of Ivan Bunin. Evaston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 1998. Massie, R.K. Nicholas and Alexandra. N.Y.: Laurel, 1967. Materialy po etnografii Rossii, vol. 1. Edited by F. Volkov. Saint Petersburg: Izdanie etnograficheskogo otdela Russkogo Muzeia Imperatora Aleksandra III, 1910. Materialy po etnografii Rossii, vol. 2. Saint Petersburg: Izdanie etnograficheskogo otdela Russkogo Muzeia Imperatora Aleksandra III, 1914. Maucuer, M. et al. Henri Cernuschi (1821-1896). Voyageur et collectionneur. Paris: Les Musées de la Ville de Paris, 1998. Mauer, S.H. Schopenhauer in Russia: His Influence on Turgenev, Fet, and Tolstoy. University of California, Berkeley, Ph.D. dissertation, 1966. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms, Inc., 1981. McLaughlin, S. ―Some Aspects of Tolstoy‘s Intellectual Development: Tolstoy and Schopenhauer. California Slavic Studies 5 (1970): 187-248. 382 Merezhkovsky, D. ―Bodisattva.‖ Vestnik Evropy 1 (January 1887): 300-2. ---. ―L. Tolstoy i Dostoevsky. Vechnye sputniki.‖ Mir iskusstva 2 (1900): 1-7. ---. ―L. Tolstoy i Dostoevsky. Vechnye sputniki.‖ Mir iskusstva 3-4 (1900): 45-51. ---.―L. Tolstoy i Dostoevsky. Vechnye sputniki.‖ Mir iskusstva 5-6 (1900): 81-6. ---.―L. Tolstoy i Dostoevsky. Vechnye sputniki.‖ Mir iskusstva 7-8 (1900): 125-132. ---.―L. Tolstoy i Dostoevsky. Vechnye sputniki.‖ Mir iskusstva 9-10 (1900): 169-191. ---.―L. Tolstoy i Dostoevsky. Vechnye sputniki.‖ Mir iskusstva 11-12 (1900): 209-241. ---.―L. Tolstoy i Dostoevsky. Vechnye sputniki.‖ Mir iskusstva 13-14 (1900): 1-20. ---.―L. Tolstoy i Dostoevsky. Vechnye sputniki.‖ Mir iskusstva 15-16 (1900): 40-57. ---.―L. Tolstoy i Dostoevsky. Vechnye sputniki.‖ Mir iskusstva 17-18 (1900): 71-84. ---.―L. Tolstoy i Dostoevsky. Vechnye sputniki.‖ Mir iskusstva 19-20 (1900): 119-138. ---.―L. Tolstoy i Dostoevsky. Vechnye sputniki.‖ Mir iskusstva 21-22 (1900): 167-195. ---. Griadushchii kham. St. Petersburg: M.V. Pirozhkov, 1906. ---. ―Sakyamuni‖ (paraphrased). Sinii zhurnal 32 (August 3, 1912): cover. ---. Khristos i Antikhrist: trilogiia, vols. 4. Moscow: Kniga, 1989-1990. ---. Sobranie sochinenii v 4-kh tomakh, vols. 4. Moscow: Pravda, 1990. ---. Bol‘naia Rossiia. Leningrad: Izdatel‘stvo Leningradskogo universiteta, 1991. ---. L. Tolstoy i Dostoevsky. Vechnye sputniki. Moscow: Izdatel‘stvo ―Respublika,‖ 1995. ---. Stikhotvoreniia i poemy. Introduced and edited by K.A. Kupman. Saint Petersburg: Gumanitarnoe agentstvo ―Akademicheskii proekt,‖ 2000. Meyer K.E. and Brysac S.B. Tournament of Shadows. The Great Game and the Race for Empire in Central Asia. Washington D.C.: A Cornelia and Michael Bessie Book, 1999. 383 Milivojevich, D. ―Tolstoy‘s Views on Buddhism.‖ Tolstoy Studies Journal 3, 1990: 62- 75. ---.―Some Similarities and Differences Between Tolstoy‘s Concepts of Identity and Vocation and Their Parallels in Hinduism.‖ Tolstoy Studies Journal 4 (1991): 97- 103. Milner, J. Kazimir Malevich and the Art of Geometry. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1996. Minaeff, I.P. Recherches sur le bouddhisme. Translated from the Russian by R.-H. Assier de Pompignan, introduced by Émile Senart and with remarks on the author by Serges d‘Oldenburg. Paris, 1894. Minaev, I. Dnevniki puteshestvii v Indiu i Birmu, 1880 i 1885-86. Moscow: Izd-vo Akademii nauk SSSR, 1955. Misler, N. ―Ex Oriente Lux: Siamese Dancing and the Ballets Russes.‖ Annali dell‘ Istituto Universitario Orientale, vol. 46. Naples: Istituto Universitario Orientale, 1986, 197-219. Moacanin, R. The Essence of Jung's Psychology and Tibetan Buddhism: Western and Eastern Paths to the Heart. Somerville, MA: Wisdom Publications, 2003. Mochul‘sky, K. Vladimir Solov‘ev. Zhizn‘ i uchenie. Paris: YMCA-Press, 1951. Morrison, R.G. Nietzsche and Buddhism. A Study in Nihilism and Ironic Affinities. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997. Müller, F.M. Selected Essays on Language, Mythology and Religion, vols. 2. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1881. Muschio, C. ―Lev Tolstoj e l‘India: una relazione di scambio.‖ Quaderni Asiatici 52 (January-March 2000): 21-31. ---. ―Tolstoj ‗apostolo‘ del buddismo.‖ Micromega 5 (2001): 321-33. Mythologie du Buddhisme au Tibet et en Mongolie basée sur la collection lamaïque du prince Oukhtomsky par Albert Grünwedel avec une préface du Prince Oukhtomsky. Traduit de l‘Allemand par Ivan Goldschmidt. Leipzig: F.A. Brockhaus, 1900. ―Narody Evropy beregite vashi sviashchenneishie prava!‘ Kartina Vil‘gel‘ma II.‖ Vsemirnaia illiustratsiia 1398 (November 11, 1895): 384, 386. 384 N.B. ―Tseilon.‖Vsemirnaia illiustratsiia 1158 (March 30, 1891): 224, 226-7, 230. ---. ―Tseilon-Khram.‖ Vsemirnaia illiustratsiia 116.1 (April 20, 1891): 276-7, 286, 291. Neumann Fridman, E.J. Sacred Geography: Shamanism Among the Buddhist Peoples of Russia. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 2004. Nietzsche, F. The Will to Power. Translated by W. Kaufmann and R.J. Hollingdale. New York: Vintage Books, 1968. Nindakov, G. ―Tsarevna-bezruchka.‖ Zhivaia starina 21.2 (1912): 445-8. N.M. Przheval‘sky. Saint-Petersburg: Voennaia tipografiia, 1890. Norris, S.M. A War of Images. Russian Popular Prints, and National Identity, 1812- 1945. Dekalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 2006. Nosov, S. Liki tvorchestva Vladimira Solov‘eva. With ―Kratkoi povesti ob Antikhriste‖ in appendix. Saint Petersburg: Dmitry Bulanin, 2008. Obatnin, G. Ivanov-Mistik. Okkul‘tnye motivy v poezii i proze Viacheslava Ivanova (1907-1919). Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2000. The Occult in Russian and Soviet Culture. Edited by Bernice Glatzer Rosenthal. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1997. Olcott, H.S. Old Diary Leaves. The True Story of the Theosophical Society. Fourth series (2 nd Edition) (1887-1892), Madras: Theosophical Publishing House, 1931. Ol‘denberg, G. Budda. Ego zhizn', uchenie, i obshchina. Moscow: K.T. Soldatenkov, 1884. Ol‘denburg, S. Buddiiskie legendy. Part One. Saint Petersburg: Тipografiia Imperatorskoi Akademii Nauk, 1894. ---. ―Deistvitel‘no li buddizm proniknut pessimizmom?‖ Godichnyi akt Imperatorskogo S.Peterburgskogo Universiteta 8-go Fevralia 1899 goda. Edited by Professor V.N. Latkin. Saint Petersburg: Tipografiia i Litografiia B.M. Vol‘fa, 1899, 135-149. ---. ―Blazhennaia skholastika.‖ Voprosy zhizni 12 (December 1905): 1-4. 385 ---. Otchet o komandirovke na vystavku po buddiiskomu iskusstvu v Parizhe. Saint Petersburg: Tipografiia Imperatorskoi Akademii nauk, 1913, 379-380. ---. Pervaia Buddiiskaia vystavka v Petrograde. Ocherk. Saint Petersburg: Izdanie Otdela po delam Muzeev i okhrane pamiatnikov Iskusstva i Stariny, 1919. ---. ―Ne mozhet serdtse zhit‘ pokoem.‖ Nachalа 1 (1921): 9-14. ---. Vladimirtsov, B. Shcherbatskoi, F. Rozenberg, O. Zhizn‘ Buddy, indiiskogo Uchitelia Zhizni: Piat‘ lektsii po buddizmu. Samara: Agni, 1998. Opochinin, E. ―Liubitel‘skoe kollektsionerstvo v Rossii v XVII I XVIII stoletiiakh.‖ Moskovskii listok 41 (April 24, 1905): 2-5. Orientalism and Empire in Russia. Edited by Michael David-Fox, Peter Holquist, Alexander Martin. Bloomington, Indiana: Slavica, 2006. Ossendovsky, A. ―Sovremennoe tvorchestvo Kitaitsev,‖ Apollon 7 (1911): 63-9. ---. Zveri, liudi i bogi. Riga: G. Birkgan, 1925. Оtchet po Minusinskomu mestnomu muzeiu i obshchestvennoi biblioteke za 1899 god. Мinusinsk: Tipografiia V.I. Kornakova, 1900. Padrta, J. ―Le mond entant que sans-objet ou le repos éternel.‖ Cahier Malévitch 1. Lausanne, Suisse: L'Âge d'homme, 1983: 133-183. Pares, B. My Russian Memoirs. London: Jonathan Cape LTD, 1931. ―Parizhskaia vystavka.‖ Vsemirnaia illiustratsiia 1076 (September 2, 1889): 155-6. Peiris, W. Edwin Arnold, A Brief Account of His Life And Contribution to Buddhism. Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 1970. Perceval Yetts, W. ―Discoveries of the Kozlov Expedition.‖ The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs 48. 277 (April, 1926): 168-185. Perepiska A.P. Chekhova i O.L. Knipper v dukh tomakh, vols.2. Edited and commented by Z.P. Udal‘tsova. Moscow: Iskusstvo, 2004. Perevyshko, A. et al. Peterburg Karla Faberzhe. Al‘bum. St. Petersburg: Liki Rossii, 2005. 386 Pershin, D. Baron Ungern, Urga i Altan-Bulak. Zapiski ochevidtsa o smutnom vremeni vo Vneshnei (Khalkhaskoi) Mongolii v pervoi treti XX veka. Edited by Inessa Lomakina. Samara: Agni, 1999. Peshchery Tysiachi Budd. Rossiiskie ekspeditsii na shelkovom puti. K 190-letiu Aziatskogo muzeia. Edited by Olga Deshpande. Saint-Petersburg: Izdatel‘stvo Gosudarstvennogo Ermitazha, 2008. Pis‘ma G.N. Potanina,vols. 4. Edited by A.G. Grumm-Grzhimailo, S.F. Koval‘, Ia.R. Koshelev, N.N. Ianovsky. Irkutsk: Izd-vo Irkut. universiteta, 1987-1990. Pletnev, A. ―Anatol Frans o zheltoi opasnosti.‖ Rassvet. Ezhednevnaia politicheskaia, obshchestvennaia gazeta bez predvaritel‘noi tsenzury 89 (June 8, 1905): 4. Edited and Published by Prince E.E. Ukhtomsky. St. Petersburg: Tipografiia Sp. Akts. Obshch. ―Slovo.‖ Polnoe sobranie sochinenii i pisem A.P.Chekhova, vols. 20. Edited by Sergei Balukhatyi. Moscow: Gos. Izd-vo khudozh. Literatury, 1944. Pomorska, K. Russian Formalist Theory and Its Poetic Ambiance. The Hague: Mouton & Co. N.V., Publishers, 1968. Popkin, C. ―Chekhov as Ethnographer: Epistemological Crisis on Sakhalin Island.‖ Slavic Review 51. 1 (Spring 1992): 36-51. Potanin, G. Ocherki severo-zapadnoi Mongolii. Rezul‘taty puteshestviia, ispolnennogo v 1876-1877 godakh po porucheniiu Imperatorskogo Russkogo Geograficheskogo Obshchestva, vol.3. St. Petersburg: tipografiia V. Bezobrazova i Komp., 1881- 1883. ---. ―Tibetskie skazki i predaniia.‖ Zhivaia starina 21.2 (1912): 389-436. Povest‘ o Varlaame i Ioasafe. Pamiatnik drevnerusskoi perevodnoi literatury XI-XII vv. Edited and commented by I. Lebedeva. Leningrad: Nauka, 1985. Preston, D. The Boxer Rebellion. The Dramatic Story of China‘s War on Foreigners That Shook The World In The Summer Of 1900. New York: Walker & Company, 2000. Przheval‘sky, N. Mongoliia i strana tangutov. Trekhletnee puteshestvie v vostochnoi Azii, vols. 2. Saint-Petersburg: Izdanie Imperatorskogo Russkogo Geograficheskogo Obshchestva, 1875-76. ---. Iz Zaisana cherez Khami v Tibet i na verkhov‘ya zheltoi reki.Tret‘e puteshestvie v Tsentral‘noi Azii. S.-Petersburg: Tipografiia V.S. Balasheva, 1883. 387 ---. ―General Prjevalsky on Central Asia.‖Asiatic Quarterly Review 4 (July- October 1887): 393-452. Pshesnytsky. ―Iaponskaia graviura.‖ Voprosy zhizni 2 (February 1905): 247-280. The Psychology of Kundalini Yoga: Notes of the Seminar Given in 1932 by C.G. Jung. Edited by Sonu Shamdasani. Princeton University Press, 1996. Puteshestvie na Vostok. Edited by A.Teriukov. Saint Petersburg: Muzeino-vystavochnyi tsentr ―EGO,‖ 1998. Radde, G.I. 23 000 mil‘ na iakhte ―Tamara.‖ Puteshestvie Ikh Imperatorskikh Vysochestv Velikikh Kniazei Aleksandra i Sergiia Mikhailovichei v 1890-1891 gg, vols. 2. With illustrations by Nikolai S. Samokish. Saint Petersburg: Tipografiia Eduarda Gonne, 1892. Rafalovich, S. ―Anatole France, Sur la pierre blanche.‖ Vesy 8 (August 1905): 61-2. Ranov, A. et al. Vam. Moscow: K-vo ―Khobo,‖ 1920. Rayfield, D. The Dream of Lhasa. The Life of Nikolay Przhevalsky (1839-88), Explorer of Central Asia. London: Paul Elek, 1976. Remizov, A. ―Prud.‖ Voprosy zhizni (April and May 1905): 61-100. ---. ―Prud.‖ Voprosy zhizni (June 1905): 1-42. ---. ―Prud.‖ Voprosy zhizni (July 1905): 1-38. ---. ―Prud.‖ Voprosy zhizni (August 1905): 87-124. ---. ―Prud.‖ Voprosy zhizni (September 1905): 4-46. ---. ―Prud.‖ Voprosy zhizni (October and November 1905): 1-49. ---. Dokuka i Balagur‘e. Narodnye skazki. St. Petersburg: Sirin, 1914. ---. Ukrepa. Slovo k russkoi zemle o zemle rodnoi, tainostiakh zemnykh i sud‘be. Petrograd: Lukomor‘e, 1916. ---. Sibirskii prianik: Bol‘shim i dlia malykh rebiat skazki. St. Petersburg: Alkonost, 1919. 388 ---. Krug schast‘ia: legendy o tsare Solomone, 1877-1957. Paris: Opleshnik, 1957. ---. Dokuka-skazka Zaiats. Tibetskie skazki. Moscow: Molodaia gvardiia, 1991. ---. Sobranie sochinenii, vols. 10. Moscow: Russkaia kniga, 2000-2003. Rerikh. Desiat‘ skazok i pritch‘ N.K. Rerikhа Edited by V.N. Levitsky. Petrograd: Izd-vo ―Svobodnoe iskusstvo,‖ 1916. Riffenburgh, B. The Myth of the Explorer. The Press, Sensationalism, and Geographical Discovery. London and New York: Belhaven Press, 1993. Röhl, J.C.G. Wilhelm II: the Kaiser's Personal Monarchy, 1888-1900. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Röhl, M. Le roman russe de Eugene-Melchior de Vogüé. Etude préliminaire. Stockholm: Almqvist&Wiksell International, 1976. Romanov, B. Russia in Manchuria (1892-1906). On the History of the Foreign Policy of Tsarist Russia in the Epoch of Imperialism. Translated from the Russian by Susan Wilbur Jones. Ann Arbor, Michigan: J.W. Edwards, Publisher, 1952. Rosenthal, B.G. Nietzsche in Russia. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1986. ---. Nietzsche and Soviet culture: ally and adversary. Cambridge [England]; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994. Rosov, V. V.I. Vernadsky i russkie vostokovedy. Mysli—Istochniki—Pis‘ma. Saint Petersburg: Institut istorii estestvoznaniia i tekhniki,‖ 1992. Rozanov, V. ―Zanimatel‘nyi vecher.‖ Mir iskusstva 1 (1901): 43-48. ---. Vo dvore iazychnikov. Edited by A.N. Nikoliukin. Moscow: Izdatel‘stvo ―Respublika,‖ 1999. Russia‘s Unknown Orient. Orientalist Painting 1850-1920. Edited by Patty Wageman and Inessa Kouteinikova. Rotterdam: NAi Publishers, 2010. Russian Art and the West. A Century of Dialogue in Painting, Architecture, and the Decorative Arts. Edited by Rosalind P. Blakesley and Susan E. Reid. DeKalb, Ill.: Northern Illinois University Press, 2007. Russian Modernism. Culture and the Avant-Garde 1900-1930. Edited by G. Gibian and H.W. Tjalsma. Ithaca and London: ―Cornell University Press, 1976. 389 Russian Views of Japan, 1792-1913: An Anthology of Travel Writing. Edited and translated by David N. Wells. London; New York, NY: RoutledgeCurzon, 2004. Russkaia fotografiia. Seredina XIX-nachalo XX veka. Edited by Nikolai Rakhmanov. Moscow: Planeta, 1996. Russkaia literatura i Vostok. (Osobennosti khudozhstvennoi orientalistiki XIX-XX vv.). Edited by E. A. Karimov. Tashkent: Izdatel‘stvo ―FAN‖ Uzbekskoi SSR, 1988. Russkie geografy i puteshestvenniki. Fondy arkhiva geograficheskogo obshchestva. Edited by T. Matveeva, T. Filonovich, L. Iarukova. Leningrad: Nauka, 1971. Safronova, E. Buddizm v Rossii. Moscow: Izd-vo RAGS, 1998. Sagalev A. and Kriukov, V. G.N. Potanin: Оpyt osmysleniia lichnosti. Novosibirsk: Nauka, sibirskoe otdelenie, Series ―Stranitsy istorii nashei Rodiny,‖ 1991. Said, E. Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books Edition, 1994. Saint-Hilaire, J.B. Du bouddhisme. Paris: B. Duprat, 1855. Samosiuk, K. Buddiiskaia zhivopis‘ iz Khara-Khoto XII-XIV vekov. Mezhdu Kitaem i Tibetom. Kollektsiia P.K. Kozlova. Saint Petersburg: Izdatel‘stvo Gosudarstvennogo Ermitazha, 2006. Schimmelpenninck van der Oye, D.H. ―The Asianist Vision of Prince Ukhtomskii.‖ Kazan, Moscow, St. Petersburg. Multiple Faces of the Russian Empire. Edited by Catherine Evtuhov, Boris Gasparov, Alexander Ospovat, Mark Von Hagen. Moscow: O.G.I., 1997, 188-201. ---. Toward the Rising Sun. Russian Ideologies of Empire and the Path to War with Japan. DeKalb, Illinois: Northern Illinois University Press, 2001. ---. Russian Orientalism. Asia in the Russian mind from Peter the Great to the Emigration. New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 2010. Schopenhauer, A. The World As Will And Representation, vols. 2.Translated from the German by E.F.J. Payne. New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1958. Schwab, R. The Oriental Renaissance. Europe‘s Rediscovery of India and the East, 1680- 1880.Translated by Gene Patterson-Black and Victor Reinking. Foreword by Edward W. Said. New York: Columbia University Press, 1984. 390 Semenov-T‘ian-Shansky, P. Istoriia poluvekovoi deiatel‘nosti Russkogo Geograficheskogo obshchestva 1845-1895. Saint-Petersburg: Tip. V. Bezobrazova i komp., 1896. Semenova-Tianshanskaia, O. Pamiati Ol‘gi Petrovny Semenovoi. St. Petersburg: Tipografiia M.M. Stasiulevicha, 1908. Shaky, S. ―Buddhist Views on War.‖The Open Court 576.XVIII (May 1904): 274-6. Shane, A.M. ―Remizov‘s Prud: from Symbolism to Neo-Realism.‖ California Slavic Studies 4. Guest editors- Robert P. Highes, Simon Karlinsky, and Vladimir Markov. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 1971, 71-82. Shcherbatov, S. ―Russkie khudozhniki.‖ Vozrozhdenie 18 (1951): 117. Shcherbatskoi, F. The Conception of Buddhist Nirvana. Leningrad: Akademiia nauk SSSR, 1927. Reprint by The Hague: Mouton & Co. Series ―Indo-Iranian Reprints‖ edited by the Editorial Board of the Indo-Iranian Journal VI, 1965. ---. Izbrannye trudy po buddizmu. Edited by A. Zelinsky and B. Semichov, with an introduction by G. Bongard-Levin. Moscow: Nauka, 1988. Shifman, I. Lev Tolstoi i Vostok. Moscow: Nauka, 1971. Sidorov, P. ―O Iaponii.‖ Vesy 10 (October 1904): 39. Sinnett, A.P. Ezotericheskii Buddizm. Moscow: Sfera, 2001. Slavica Occitania 21. Edited by Dany Savelli. Touluse: Départment de Slavistique de l‘Université de Toulouse-Le Mirail, Centre de recherches ―Interculturalité et monde slave (langues, littératures et sociétés)‖ (CRIMS-LLA), 2005. Slaviiane Evropy i narody Rossii. K 140-letiiu pervoi etnograficheskoi vystavki 1867 goda. Saint Petersburg: Rossiiskii etnograficheskii muzei, 2007. Slivitskaia, O. ―Bunin i Vostok (K postanovke voprosa).‖ Izvestiia Voronezhskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo instituta 114 (1971): 87-96. Slonimsky L. ―Zheltaia opasnost‘.‖ Vestnik Evropy (April 1904): 762-776. ---. ―Zheltaia opasnost‘.‖ Vestnik Evropy (May 1904): 5-37. Snelling, J. Buddhism in Russia. The Story of Agvan Dorzhiev, Lhasa‘s Emissary to the Tsar. Shaftesbury, Dorset: Element, 1993. 391 Sobolev, Iu. ―U I.A. Bunina.‖ Rampa i zhizn‘ 44 (1912): 5. Sochineniia Kal‘derona, vols. 2. Translated from the Spanish by K.D. Bal‘mont. Commented by K.D. Bal‘mont and Leo Ruana. Moscow: Izdanie M. i S. Sobashnikovykh, 1900-02. Solov‘ev, Vl. ―Drakon, Zigfridu.‖ Vestnik Evropy 9 (1900): 316. ---. Tri razgovora o voinie, progresse i kontse vsemirnoi istorii, so vkliucheniem kratkoi poviesti ob antikhristie i s prilozheniiami. St. Petersburg: Tip. t-va "Trud,‖ 1900. ---. Tri razgovora. Introduced by S.A. Levitsky. New York: Izdatel‘stvo imeni Chekhova, 1954. ---. Sobranie sochinenii, vols. 13. Edited and commented by S.M. Solov‘ev and E.L. Radlov. St. Petersburg: ―Prosveshchenie,‖ 1966. ---. Filosofiia iskusstva i literaturnaia kritika. Moscow: ―Iskusstvo,‖ 1991. ---. Chteniia o Bogochelovechestve. Stat‘i. Stikhotvoreniia i poema iz ―Trekh razgovorov.‖ Kratkaia povest‘ ob Antikhriste. Introduced, edited and commented by A.B. Muratov. St. Petersburg: khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1994. ---. Enemies from the East?: V.S. Soloviev on Paganism, Asian Civilizations, and Islam. Edited and translated from the Russian by Vladimir Wozniuk. Evaston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 2007. Solov‘ev, Vs. ―Iskushenie Buddy.‖ Vestnik Evropy 11-12 (December 1874): 630-6. Souter, G. Malevich. Journey to Infinity. New York: Parkstone Press International, 2008. Spencer, C. Leon Bakst. New York: St. Martin‘s Press, 1973. The Spiritual in Art: Abstract Painting 1890-1985. Edited by Maurice Tuchman. New York: Abbeville Press, 1986. Stacy, R. India in Russian Literature. New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1985. Stanton, T. ―The Guimet Museum.‖ The Open Court 505.XII (November 1898): 669-74. Stepanov, S. ―Otchego lotos stal golubym (Indiiskaia skazka),‖ S.-Peterburgskie vedomosti 303 (November 30, 1896): 2. 392 Sterbatsky, Th. ―Nirvana. Par Luis de la Vallée Poussin,‖ Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies, University of London 4.2 (1926): 357-60. Storia del Buddhismo. Edited by Henri-Charles Puech. Bari: Editori Laterza, 1984. Strelets, vol. 1. Edited by A. Belenson. Petrograd: Tipografiia A.N. Lavrov i Ko, 1915. Reprint (Ann Arbor, Michigan: Ardis, 1978). Stuckenberg, A. ―Materialen zur Kenntniss der Fauna der devonischen Ablagerungen Sibiriens.‖ Mémoires de L'Académie Impériale des Sciences de St.-Pétersbourg 34.1, series 7 (1886): 1-19, pl. 1-4. Studiia impressionistov. Kniga 1-aia. Saint Petersburg, 1910. Suvorin, V. ―Malen‘kie pis‘ma.‖ Novoe vremia (January 8, 1902): 2. Suzuki, D.T. An Introduction to Zen Buddhism. With a foreword by Carl Gustav Jung. Kyoto: Eastern Buddhist Society, 1934. ---. An Introduction to Zen Buddhism. Foreword by Carl G. Jung. N.Y.: Grove Press, 1964. Teplinsky, M. A.P. Chekhov na Sakhaline. Iuzhno-Sakhalinsk: Dal‘nevostochnoe knizhnoe izdatel‘stvo Sakhalinskoe otdelenie, 1990. Thomas, E.J. The Life of Buddha as Legend and History. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul LTD, 1960. Thompson, R. The Yellow Peril 1890-1924. New York: Arno Press, 1978. ―Tibet‘s most benign Goddess, supposed to have been reincarnated in Queen Victoria.‖ The Illustrated London News (126) 3439 (March 18, 1905): 376. Time, G.A. ―Nigilist, buddist, mertvist…‘ (O fenomene A. Shopengauera).‖ In Vozhdi umov i mody. Chuzhoe imia kak nasleduemaia model‘ zhizni. Edited by V.E. Bagno. Saint Petersburg: Nauka, 2003, 193-216. Tolstoy, L. ―Christianity and Patriotism.‖ The Open Court 462.X (July 2, 1896): 4967-9. ---. ―Christianity and Patriotism.‖ The Open Court 463.X (July 9, 1896): 4975-8. ---. ―Christianity and Patriotism.‖ The Open Court 464.X (July 16, 1896): 4983-4. 393 ---. ―Christianity and Patriotism.‖ The Open Court 465.X (July 23, 1896): 4993-4. ---. ―Christianity and Patriotism.‖ The Open Court 466.X (July 30, 1896): 4999-5000. ---. ―Christianity and Patriotism.‖ The Open Court 467.X (August 6, 1896): 5007-9. ---. ―Thou shalt not kill.‖ The New York Evening Journal (August 26, 1903): 1. ---. ―Bethink Yourself: Tolstoy‘s Letter on the Russo-Japanese War.‖ Translated by Vladimir Chertkov. Boston: The American Peace Society, 1904. ---. ―Bethink Yourself.‖ The Open Court 583.XVIII (December 1904): 761-4. ---. Perepiska s russkimi pisateliami. Edited, commented, and introduced by S. Rozanova. Moscow: Gosudarstvennoe izdatel‘stvo Khudozhestvennoi literatury, 1962. ---. Polnoe sobranie sochinenii v 91 tomakh, vols. 91. Edited by V. Chertkov et al. Moscow: Gog.-noe izd-vo khudozhestvennoi literatury, 1928-1964. ---. War and Peace. Translated by Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2007. Tolstoy‘s Letters, vols. 2. Selected, edited and translated by R.F. Christian. New York: Charles Scribner‘s Sons, 1978. Tolz, V. Russia's Own Orient. The Politics of Identity and Oriental Studies in the Late Imperial and Early Soviet Periods. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. Тrubetskoi, E. Мirosozertsanie Vl. S. Solov‘eva, vols. 2. Introduced by A. Nosov and edited by T. Umanskaia. Мoscow: Moskovskii filosofskii fond izdatel‘stvo ―Medium,‖ 1995. Tsiolkovsky, K. Nirvana. Kaluga: Tipografiia S.A. Semenova, 1914. ---. Um i strasti. Kaluga: izdanie avtora, 1928. ---. Ocherki o Vselennoi. Introduced by E.N. Kuzin with an afterword by V.V. Kaziutinsky. Commented by N.G. Belov, L.A. Kutuzov, T.V. Chugrov. Moscow: PAIMS, 1992. Tsu, J. Failure, Nationalism, and Literature. The Making of Modern Chinese Identity, 1895-1937. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 2005. 394 Ukhtomsky, E. ―Pis‘ma s puti Ego Imp. Vys na Vostoke.‖ Novoe vremia 5526 (July 19, 1891): 1. ---. ―Pis‘ma s puti Ego Imp. Vys na Vostoke.‖ Novoe vremia 5527 (July 20, 1891): 1. ---. ―Pis‘ma s puti Ego Imp. Vys na Vostoke.‖ Novoe vremia 5528 (July 21, 1891): 1-2. ---. ―Pis‘ma s puti Ego Imp. Vys na Vostoke.‖ Novoe vremia 5529 (July 22, 1891): 1. ---. О sostoianii missionerskogo voprosa v Zabaikale, v sviazi s prichinami, obuslovlivaiushchimi malouspeshnost‘ khristianskoi propovedi sredi buriat. Saint Petersburg: Sinodal‘naia tipografiia, 1892. ---. Puteshestvie na Vostok Ego Imperatorskogo Vysochestva Gosudaria Naslednika Tsesarevicha. 1890-1891 gg., vols. 3. With illustrations by Nikolai Karazin. Saint Petersburg, Leipzig: F.A. Brockhaus, 1893. ---. Iz putevykh nabroskov i vospominanii. Saint Petersburg: Vostok, 1904. ---. Pered groznym budushchim. K russko-iaponskomu stolknoveniu. Saint Petersburg: Vostok, 1904. Ular, A. Un Empire Russo-Chinois. Paris: F. Juven, 1903. ---. A Russo-Chinese Empire: An English Version of ―Un Empire Russo-Chinois.‖ Westminster: Archibald Constable and Co. Ltd, 1904. ---. ―Kitaiskie bogatstva.‖Grazhdanin 85 (October 24, 1904): 12-4. ---. ―Kitaiskie bogatstva.‖Grazhdanin 86 (October 28, 1904): 13-4. ---.―Kitaiskie bogatstva.‖Grazhdanin 87 (October 31, 1904): 14. Ulianov, D. Predskazaniia Buddy o dome Romanovykh i kratkii ocherk o moikh puteshestviiakh v Tibet v 1904-5 gg. Saint Petersburg: Tsentral‘naia Tipo- Litografiia, 1913. Valiulis, S. Lev Tol‘stoi i Artur Shopengauer. Vilniaus: Ishleido Vilniaus pedagoginis universitetas, 2000. de la Vallée Poussin, L. The Way to Nirvāṇa. Six Lectures on Ancient Buddhism as a Discipline of Salvation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1917. 395 Vereshchagin, A. ―Po Man‘chzhurii 1900-1901 gg. Vospominaniia i rasskazy.‖ Vestnik Evropy (January 1902): 103-148. ---. ―Po Man‘chzhurii 1900-1901 gg. Vospominaniia i rasskazy.‖ Vestnik Evropy (February 1902): 573-627. ---. ―Po Man‘chzhurii 1900-1901 gg. Vospominaniia i rasskazy.‖ Vestnik Evropy (March 1902): 130-173. Vereshchagin, V. Painter—Soldier—Traveller. Autobiographical Sketches, vols. 2. Translated from the German and the French by F.H. Peters, M.A. fellow of University College, Oxford. With illustrations after drawings by the author. London: Richard Bentley & Son, 1887. ---. Vospominaniia syna khudozhnika. Leningrad: Khudozhnik RSFSR, 1978. ---. Povesti. Ocherki. Vospominaniia. Edited, introduced and commented by V.A. Kosheleva and A.V. Chernova. Moscow: Sovetskaia Rossia, 1990. Veselovsky, A. Vizantiiskie povesti o Varlaame i Ioasafe. Saint Petersburg: s.n., 1877. Viaggio in Oriente, L‘avventura di Enrico Cernuschi (1821-1896) patriota, finanziere, collezionista. Edited by Rosanna Pavoni in collaboration with Silvia Davoli. Milano: Federico Motta Editore S.p.A., 2005. The Vimalakirti Sutra. Translated by Burton Watson from the Chinese version by Kumarajiva. New York: Columbia University Press, 1997. de Vogüé, F. The Russian Novel. Translated from the Eleventh French Edition by Colonel H.A. Sawyer. London and Hall, Ltd., 1913. ---. Journal du Vicomte Eugène-Melchior de Vogüé. Paris-Saint-Pétersbourg 1877- 1883. Paris: Éditions Bernard Grasset, 1932. ―Voina beloi i zheltoi ras. Allegoriia (s kartin khud. R. Vudvillia.‖ Moskovskii listok 12 (February 8, 1904): 8-9. Voldemār Matvejs (Vladimir Markov). Stat‘i. Katalog proizvedenii. Pis‘ma. Khronika deiatel‘nosti ―Soiuza molodezhi). Edited by Irena Buzhinska. Latvia: Neputns, 2002. Volkonsky, S. ―Kongress religii v Chicago. Vpechatleniia i zametki.‖ Vestnik Evropy 2 (March 1895): 66-90. 396 Voloshin, M. ―Liki tvorchestva. I.F. Annensky-lirik.‖ Apollon 4 (January 1910): 11-6. ---. ―Klodel v Kitae.‖ Apollon 7 (1911): 43-62. ---. ―Khudozhestvennye itogi zimy 1910-1911.‖ Russkaia mysl‘ 6 (1911): 30. ---. Stikhotvoreniia i poemy v dvukh tomakh, vols. 2. Introduced by B. Filippov and E. Rais. Paris: YMCA-PRESS, 1982-4. ---. Istoriia moei dushi. Edited by Vladimir Kupchenko. Moscow: AGRAF, 1999. ---. ―Parizha ia liubliu osennii strogii plen…‖ Edited by V.T. Danchenko and with an introduction by E.Iu. Genneva. Moscow: Vagrius, 2008. Vostochnaia Evropa v istoricheskoi retrospektive. K 80-letiiu V.T. Pashuto. Moscow: Iazyki russkoi kul'tury, 1999. Vostok-Rossiia-Zapad. Istoricheskie i kul‘torologicheskie issledovaniia k 70-letiu akademika Vladimira Stepanovicha Miasnikova. Edited by Sergei Tikhvinsky. Moscow: Pamiatniki istoricheskoi mysli, 2001. Vostok-Zapad. Issledovaniia. Perevody. Publikatsii. Edited by M.L. Gasparov, E.M. Meletinsky, A.B. Kudelin, and L.Z. Eidlin. Moscow: Nauka, 1985. Voyages and Visions. Towards a Cultural History of Travel. Edited by Jás Elsner and Joan-Pau Rubiés. London: Reaktion Books, 1999. Walsh, H.H. ―A Buddhistic Leitmotif in Anna Karenina.‖ Canadian-American Slavic Studies 11. 4 (Winter 1977): 561-6. Welbon, R. The Buddhist Nirvāna and Its Western Interpreters. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1968. Wilhelm II, Letters from the Kaiser to the Czar. Copied by Issac Don Levine from government archives in Petrograd unpublished before 1920. New York, Frederick A. Stokes, 1920. Witte, S. The Memoirs of Count Witte. Translated from the Original Russian Manuscript and Edited by Abraham Iarmolinsky. Salisbury, N.C.: Documentary Publications, 1977. Witte, S. The Memoirs of Count Witte. Translated and Edited by Sidney Harcave. Armonk, New York and London, England: M.E. Sharpe, Inc., 1990. 397 Woodville, R.C. ―War: An Allegory.‖ The Illustrated London News 124. 3382 (February 13, 1904): 233. Woodward, J.B. Ivan Bunin: A Study of His Fiction. Chapel Hill: the University of North Carolina Press, 1980. Wright, B. Interpreter of Buddhism to the West: Sir Edwin Arnold. New York: Bookman Associates, Inc., Publishers, 1957. Zamiatin, E. Sochineniia, vols. 3. Edited by Evgeny Zhiglevich and Boris Filippov, with the collaboration of Aleksandr Tiurin. Germany: A. Neimanis Buchvertrieb und Verlag, 1986. Zelenin, A. Puteshestviia N.M. Przheval‘skogo, vols. 2. Saint-Petersburg: Izdanie P.P. Soikina, 1899-90. Zelinsky, F. ―Innokenty Fedorovich Annensky kak filolog-klassik.‖Apollon 4 (January 1910): 1-9.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Dances of death: visual and verbal transformations of the body in Russian modernism

PDF

Vagrancy, law, and the limits of verisimilitude in Russian literature

PDF

From Prutkov to Kharms: tracing nonsense in the Russian literary tradition