Thread by @cbkwgl

Eight hours I sat concentrated to find out one single point. I learnt much but wasn't able to find the one point I wanted - what is the name of the kingdom which sits across the mountains in Tibet extending from Manasarovar to Kashmir. I learnt much about that area,

but not the name. That is the land of Kinnaras(Kim Nara?) and Kimpurushas(Kim Purusha?, it's called Manasa Khanda(the land of Manasa Sarovara) and is the land of Yakshas and Rakshasas(a Nepali historian translates it as Ya-Khasa and Ra-Khasa) with

Kubera being their ruler(Gandharvas as well), Kinnaras guarded Yaksha gold mines, and combined with Kubera's wealth, it became Suvarnadesa (but, it's not the formal name), there is a reference to Khasa kingdom and Khasa castes spread all the way from Nepal to Kashmir,

there is a reference to a Kirata kingdom under Subahu, someone called it Strirajya, but what's it's name, no clue. In fact, I came across a book yesterday which disproves the myth that the four rivers of Bon - Sutlej, Indus, Brahmaputra and Karnali emerge from the same area,

the implication is clear - people believed all four rivers originated from the same area. Manasa Sarovara is referred to even in the earliest of Hindu scriptures. The number of routes the book gives to reach the Holy Lake is a proof of it's popularity and mainstreamed position.

On the other hand, Tibetan sources called it mNgari, a book on Kumaon calls it gNari. Spelling mistake? Then, there is an extensive discussion over a Strirajya which many writers unanimously place it in NW and not NE of India. But, Huein Tsang places it in NE -> Suvarna Gotra.

Another book talks about Kulinda/Kuninda and their merging with Yaudheyas. They derive their name from Kalindi - Yamuna by virtue of staying in the upper reaches of the river. The reference to Herodotus's ants comes again - in Mahabharata. They are referred to, along with Khasas.

Round and round and round - finally, it's the same three references which everyone is using. But, here, they are talking about tribes like Kulindas. But, who rules them? Why is there no reference to Zhangzhung till now?

And something which caught my eye - desperate to prove the western accounts of ants as big as dogs chasing people who steal their gold, they talked about Tibetan Mastiffs. But, what's special in them? They look like lions. (Kimpurusha - the lion headed half humans?)

But, the author is guarded. There are some names, he refuses to call them Khasa, but then, doesn't name the kingdom. It's not as if it's a small kingdom not worth bothering about...

Looks like I took a snapshot of the page because I was too lazy to note it down in the night...

https://twitter.com/cbkwgl/status/1291992471560388608

And then, there is a certain Rupati. Rupati, the youngest son of Satanika and the grandson of King Janamejaya became the king of Western Tibet (Zhang Zhung) around 3050-3000 BCE. There is another Rupati I came across, a Kaurava warrior who fled into the hills after Mahabharata.

Now, compare this with the founding legend of Bashahr - it was founded by Lord Krishna's son Pradyumna. Same area, same timeframe. Notice, that is when Kalhana's Rajatarangini also starts - Lord Krishna killed the second king of Kashmir Damodara. Meaning it's a bigger legend.

Finally, something is making sense here. Himavat, eh?

What is this Brahma Kanwar story?

Meru?

Now, there is a detailed exposition trying to rationalize the concept of Stri Rajya.

Pandukeshwar is the last Indian village. Going by the fact that Katyuris emerged at the time Tibetan Empire collapsed, are we saying they were also beneficiaries?

On Nanda Devi. It is to be noted that Vasudeva, the founder of Katyuris is a Buddhist.

Whether the borderlands were a part of Zhangzhung or not, the point is, they are well integrated with the trade networks.

Well, this is new. We know that this marriage happened and the reverse marriage destroyed Zhang Zhung...

Really a good hint. He is not a king of Uttarakhand. And he is not a god.

https://twitter.com/Har54519901/status/1292024905198759938

So, it's Paun-Raja. And the ease with which they used the words Shanshun makes one wonder if it is the word used even in India. By the way, I never came across this much political information anything over Zhang Zhung as what I am seeing in this Hindi page.

English is searchable. Hindi isn't, that much. The article below.
kafaltree.com/paun-raja-of-j…

There is one very incongrious thing I am noting with regard to Uttarakhand. The assumption with the historians is, there is zero discussion over the impact of what happened on the other side of Himalayas over the local incidents in Uttarakhand.

An impression is given as if Khasas percolated down the Himalayas till almost Sikkim. Did they come by the hills or by the Ngari plains? Khasa and Kuninda dealt with gold dust but there they are supposed to rule the plains of India, advancing towards the hills.

But, the main thing here is Katyuris. Where did they come from, no clue. When did they start? Either 750 AD or 850 AD. Did anything tectonic happen in India to warrant the growth of a powerful kingdom? We know of Islamic Invasions which weren't powerful enough and

we know of the Kannauj Triangle and it wasn't devastating enough. On the other hand, the founder of the kingdom is said to be a Buddhist. If he is a Buddhist and not a Hindu, where did he come from? Besides, two major incidents happened at 750 AD and 850 AD -

in 750, Zhangzhung collapsed and the Bon religion was persecuted. Did anyone flee across the mountains into Uttarakhand? We know for sure that Songtsen Gampo crashed through the hills, reaching almost Badrinath. Did he impose Buddhism there? Is it even possible?

Now, who is this Paun Raja who is an ancestor for the Katyuris? And now, let's assume the dynasty was formed around 850 and not 750. What happened then? Nothing in India but Tibetan Empire collapsed. It took almost 150 years for Tibet to have a semblance of order.

And then, there was an even brutal persecution of the Bon - it was a physical slaughter of Bon teachers. Naturally, they will flee towards Uttarakhand or Nepal(their strongholds are in Manasarovar area). Now, that's not the end of the thing.

Katyuri inscriptions are found even in Pandukeshwar, considered the last village before Tibet. Again the question comes, how did they deal with their neighbours? And this story of Nanda Devi, who is the family goddess for the Katyuris but is married in Tibet?

And on the other hand, we have this Khasa kingdom which flexed it's muscles as far as Guge itself. Why not Katyuris? And then, we have a Nagaraja who came from Khari Pradesa and founded the Khasa kingdom. Here, we have a Buddhist Vasudeva who founded Katyuri kindom.

Are both the legends refering to the same person? Remember, Manasarovara is the residence of a powerful Naga king. But, there is a problem here. There is too much flux between 750 AD and 1000 AD because of which the whole narrative changed to the extent that from the outside,

it's hard to distinguish between Bon and Buddhism - Bon was influenced to that level. The language is lost, their cities are lost Indian side of the hills became more mainstream Hinduized (with Kings slowly behaving as if they are from a different race than that of the locals) -

besides, the land is hardy and sparsely populated, and probably will never be given the importance it should be given. We won't get much information over Zhangzhung - but the real question is, why don't we even know the name of the kingdom?

One thing of note here, everyone writes Bon's relation with Kashmir. Notice a parallel to Jesus's missing years in this.

See, this is another paradox. A civilization which builds temples at the origin of every river, how come it doesn't have a name for the area which is the mother of it's greatest rivers? Different thing, he errs by saying Manasarovar is in Kurmachal and messes it up, though.

Wait...the author states it is Kurmachala. Then, where did this Kurmachal end in the South, and where did it start in the North?

Back to Swarnabhumi again.

This is important because people knew that Shatadru which meets Indus in Punjab and Sarayu which meets Ganga in UP originate at the same place(Dattatreya to King Dhanvantari).

Again, the same confusion. What's the name of the area where the lake is located?

Come on...this is getting nowhere. Panchala? Uttara Kuru?

One can understand Pipilika entering India through Kashmir and Uttarakhand, but as the author notes, if it's just trade with those who extract it? And here, we are back at Kulinda and Khasa.

Finally, a possible reference to the kingdom - which is not Manasarovar or Kailasa - Garuḍagrāma - Kyunglung(Garuda Valley). Some consider it as the capital of Zhangzhung, some call it just a religious place.

Dating to 853 AD, this inscription can refer to Kyunglung itself (some 150 km afar) - probably, someone used the anarchy to advance a few. Alternately, it can be a small village or Pandukeshwar itself.

Huna Desha. But, what's the etymology? Botchhyogal is just Bhota(Tibet), Cho(Dharma) , Gyal(Raja). But, the kingdom is Angari Kursum. This is Ye Shes 'Od from the royal line of Songtsen Gampo, not an Indian. Or are we saying because the line originated in Purang, it is Indian?

Rahul Samkrutyayan is guarded. He says Khasas extended from Kashgar to Nepal but doesn't exactly place them. But, then, who are the other races? Another thing. Between Guptas and Katyuris, you have Bhotas. Who are they? Surely not the Tibetan Empire which ruled 25 years...

And he says Kiratamandala became Khasamandala and Khasamandala is a synonym for Kedarakhanda. What of Manasakhanda, then? And then, he says, Kinnara-Kirata-Bhilla-Naga are allied tribes.

And then again, he demarcates Khasas from Suvarnabhumi. Is it really Suvarnabhumi? Isn't that an odd name for a country? In fact, it's more curious that Huein Tsang used Suvarnabhumi and not a Tibetan or Chinese name. Not even Zhang Zhung.

Now, he calls it Khasamandala again. The last village on the way to Tibet from Shipki La and Kumaon share same customs. But, is it called Khasamandala? And then, he derives Kinnaur from Kinnara in a different book and uses the word Kinnara-desa.

Well, he himself is not confident what he is saying.

In reality, this is leading nowhere. I have a list here. But, which one is correct?
Hundesh
Naridesa-Strirajya
Suvarnagotra-Suvarnabhumi
Kharidesa
Kiratadesa-Kiratamandala
Khasamandala
Manasakhanda
Kinnaradesa
Kuninda/Kulindadesa
Shangshun
Bhota
Kurmachala
Any other I missed?

Back to Samkrutyayan. He is shooting in the air now.

Now, you may want to ask if the kingdom is really big enough to warrant a serious reference in Indian circles. It's not small. The traitor queen who invited her brother Songtsen Gampo to invade Zhang Zhung writes in her songs(there is much more than these snippets, though),

The boundaries are at least from Kyunglung to Guge Proper 175 km and Kyunglung to Maryum 200 km
Kliyung-lung ni mgul-mkhar zhig
Is a mouldy castle in Khyung-lung.
bran-gyi ni skal pog-pa
The servant that has fallen to my lot,
Gu-ge ni rkang-pran zhig
Is a serf coming from Gu-ge.

And it's filthy rich.
phyi hltas ni ngam-dang brag
Seen from without all gorge and boulders,
rzang bltas ni gser-dang dbyig
But seen from within all gold and precious stones.
Extending at least from Tholing to Maryum and till Uttarkashi, I don't see it to be a small kingdom.

Ok. Another new name. Hataka.

Suvarnagotra, again. But, again, I understand that it can be a big country, no problem there. But, how can you confirm that?

Here, I differ. Kosala is Awadh Area and Tangana is Kumaon, then, Hala, Strirajya, Bharukaccha and Tusara. Tusara is Balkh area. Now if Bharukaccha is not Bharuch and Kasyapa is naming kingdoms in an arc?

Tucci's Preliminary report on two scientific expeditions in Nepal seems to be an informative read - not just on Zhang Zhung conjectures but on Malla and Guge as well. Anyways. Back to Strirajya. Chinese references.

In fact, this explains why it is called Strirajya - the kings went to oversee gold mining and that means population centres are far away from that location - either the kingdom is sophisticated enough to have well connected routes or they want to keep their ways secret.

Another name, Cina. MahaCinachara originated from this area and is famous even in Uttarakhand. Comes between Kashmir and Nepal, fine, but in tis sequence?

A sort of guarded caution. China is a method, not a country. Or China is the place of origin of this country and there are various methods which came from there?

Another curious coincidence. Harsha died in 647, Songsten Gampo in 649 and Zhang Zhung rebelled at that time. It eked on for a century, but is the dating correct?

Chinachara is named not after Han China, but Zhang Zhung territory. Mahachina is Tibet. Chinachara Tantra says, Mahachina a Buddhist country
Bauddhadeshe’tharvavede Mahācīne sadā braja
to Mahācīna (Tibet) and the country of the Bauddhas and always follow the Arthavaveda

"Vasiśtha having heard these words of the Guru and meditating on Devī Sarasvatī went to the Kulamandapa to practise the wine ritual (Madirāsādhanā) and having repeatedly done Sādhanā with wine, meat, fish, parched grain and Śakti he becanie a complete Yogī (Pūrnayogī)."

Many have commented that this syncs with Bon rituals and not the Chinese way of life which, in two words can be defined as "nanzun nübei": men are venerated and women are denigrated.

In fact, this Chinachara Sādhanā became very famous simply because you will attain salvation through sensual pleasures - wine, meat, fish, parched grain and Śakti.

I don't know where this topic is taking me. From Hindu Puranas, it's Buddhist Tantras now. I came across Yoni Tantra somewhere, not my cup of coffee. But one thing here. Mahachina Tantra was imported from Tibet. Next question would be, where exactly is this Mahacina.

Tucci says it's Zhang Zhung, someone says it's Tibet, someone else, Tibet and Mongolia.

Back to Bon again.

And Bon=Tantrik Hinduism.

A counter argument - someone traces this Mahachinacara cult to Taoism but the author fails to send the exact message -

it is immaterial whether the stuff is Taoist or Hindu in origin. It entered through India. But, the confusion is reintroduced again - here, Mahachina is China and not Tibet or a part of it.

Now, another Tantra text. "The Sammohana Tantra states that Nila Sarasvatī and Ugra Tārā was born in a lake named Cola on the western side of the Meru in cIna-desa." Rahul Samkrutyayan notes Meru when talking about Kulinda and others in the same area.

But the article over Sammohana Tantra(On Foreign Element in the Tantra) creates a confusion again by linking Bhaskaravarman, Mahachina and Lao Tse.

This one. It says Tantric cults originated with Bon. And locals say it originated in Swat - the three Bon teachers(Kashmir, Bru za and local).

This is clearing some air. Bon Tibet is Cina(for Indians, it can be a generic appellation, but this makes sense only if whole of Tibet is a single country - which makes sense going by Bon mythology - a really old name). If so, what is Bhota?

So, Bhota is not a name for Tibetans. It's just the word used for conquered territories like Ngari. Meaning, we are back to Cina then. Next question. What's the difference between Cina and Mahacina? When did it start?

Bhaskaravarman's reference states that there are overland routes into India from China. So, how did they reconcile between two Cinas? Cina and Mahacina, colloquially called Cina?

"Chinese sources of the same era mentions of a Fu state (Chinese: 附国) of either Qiang or Tibetan ethnicity "more than two thousand miles northwest of Shu County". Fu state was pronounced as "bod" or "phyva" in Archaic Chinese."

Now, the word Bod. He was ejected and he set up his kingdom in Central Territories. On the other hand, the legend of Rupati. He conquered the lands. But, what needs to be checked is the oldest usage of the word Bhota in Sanskrit. Mahabharata uses Cina, but Bhota?

This is the problem. While a part of it is wishful linkage, it can refer to something more obscure. You can prove neither of them. But, one thing is certain. He is an outsider.

Taken out is fine. But, taken to where? He held all lands from Samarqand to Xian bordering the Himalayas.

Let me put the question differently. What did the Zhang Zhung call their neighbours?

Wait. Something else. Tibetan origin myth says, Pha Trelgen Changchup Sempa is a monkey who copulated with an ogress which wanted children. The progeny is the source of all life in Tibet.

When the queen of Streerajya wanted a child, she prayed to Lord Hanuman who sent the sage Matsyendranath. He spent some time before he was drawn back by Gorakshanatha.
Nothing more than a curious coincidence, though.

So, confirmed. Legends, yes but there is a kingdom level interaction between India and Zhang Zhung.

Not one, but there are many references, with people as far as Western India. But, how many are from Bon era and how many are post Bon, how do we know?

This is another question. If Kailasa itself is in Zhang-zhung and is known to India from before Zhang-zhung Civilization collapsed, why is there that less a coupling between Sanskrit and Zhang-zhung? Is it because it's true or is it because there is not enough research?

All sorts of linguistic monkey balancing. The bare minimum you would need is a Zhang Zhung-Tibetan-Sanskrit comparative vocabulary along with English and surviving languages conjectured to be related to Zhang Zhung.

The theory behind cultural interaction - Zhangzhung literally has nothing. It will have to depend on someone or the other for survival. If so, shouldn't they have a name?

What's the level of coupling between Tibetan and Zhang Zhung? If the Bon priests derived their religion from Manasarovar area, shouldn't one of the religions be heavily influenced by the other? Basic words are fine - there is no match, but liturgical?

A weak attempt at rationalization. Coupling with Kinnauri, Sanskrit and Tibetan, may be, some serious study needs to be done over that.

Something making sense - finally. Kinnara Kirata is a cognate language of Zhangzhung.

By the way, the surviving sister languages, extending all the way from Ladakh to Western Nepal.

The closest seems to be Darma - "I now believe the name Dar-ma of the twelfth-century text and the name of the modern language Darma are to be identified with each other because, well, they are in some large and significant sense the same, and not just in name."

A small digression to this out of control rambling. Remember the Bibilical demon Ba'al? He is a Philistine God. Same goes for Pehar Gyalpo. He is the Guardian Diety of Zhangzhung but for Buddhists, "they are "the spirits of evil kings or of high lamas who have failed their vows."

By the way, there is a Kirata Kingdom in Nepal founded by Yalambar, equated by some to Barbarika. When we have a Kiratamandala and a Kirata Kingdom combinedly extending from Sikkim to Kedarnath, probably the area is called Kirata?

Finally, nothing turns up. Probably, the area is called Kiratadesa or Cinadesa or Suvarnadesa but nothing is certain. Neither is information available from Zhangzhung side nor from Indian side. But, yes. Bon is a really interesting topic - much to learn there.

A few more names. Trivishtap, Alakapuri.

This is a major incongruity. Indians call lands across Himalayas as heaven and those across the Himalayas call India as heaven. Trivishtap is India's word for Tibet(any historic usage?), Tianzhu is Chinese word for India. Incidentally, the Jesuits named their god Tianzhu as well.

Huein Tsang used Suvarnagotra and not the Zhangzhung name of the territory. A question then. Did the Zhangzhung really call them Zhangzhung and not something else? What's the oldest attestation of that word? Is it possible, it simply means father-in-law's country or old country?

Or simply a word for Bar-ba - Central Country? Now, there is a language in Kinnaur by name Jangshung which claims descent from Zhangzhung spoken in 3 villages in Morang(for all it means, it can be Guge itself which is alternately called Zhangzhung). What's it's origins?

Now, look at King Ligmincha's seal. The seal is not seen but what we have is just this page by Lopon Tenzin Namdak, the source of all information. And it doesn't contain the word Zhangzhung.

This reminds me of another thing - the image of Vaikuntha Chaturmurthi in Khajuraho. "this statue came from Kailasa - the king of Bhota procured it from Kailasa, gave it to the king of Kira, who gave it to Bhimadeva Shahi,

who gave it to Gurjara-Pratihara Mahipala and from his son Devapala, it went to Yashovarman who built the temple" Why is this important? Because there is a Narayana Bhattaraka present in Garudagrama, probably Khyunglung itself.

https://twitter.com/cbkwgl/status/1292194328857554944

A few words on Kira, may be? The standard narrative is based around two facts - bin Qasim defeated al-Kiraj and the King of Kira waitied upon Dharmapala's assembly at Kannauj. The second one is pointless because Kira can be anywhere.

As to bin Qasim, it looks like a massive debate already happened over this. A word of caution before going to far flung places like Kangra or such - Mahmud of Ghazni's Lahore is not Lahore but Chhota Lahore on Indus. With limited resources, you just can't prance all around.

And now, coming back to Bhimadeva's Kira. It's possible it's Kangra and it probably refers to Kirata.

Now, this makes perfect sense. East of Kangra is what Kira ruled.

Unless they held the territory from Chamba to Uttarakhand or there are two different Kira kingdoms, how can we reconcile with the fact that, of all people, Kalachuris defeated them? Raid Nepal(some Kirata kingdom), makes sense, but raid Chamba, seriously?

Now, this is utter nonsense. The kingdom formed around 1000 AD, approximately when Guge was pushing armies across Shipki La pass. If we accept Ye Shes 'Od(959-988)'s burning of Bon Priests as true, one can only wonder what the ten princes whom he sent across Shipki La did.

Rather than following the British conspiracies, I will rather say, these are all princelings who broke free when Tibetan Empire collapsed in 842. But, when Tibet reasserted itself as Guge some 150 years later, they had to flee their lands and carve new kingdoms.

And when we know of Kirata kingdoms in that area from the era of Puranas, it shouldn't surprise that the fragments of Kirata power(Zhangzhung?) made their mark in histiographies at different corners. If Kiratas formed a major part of Zhangzhung's power, it's no surprise that

a king of Kirata fled with the idol from Kailasa after taking it's custody from a Zhangzhung ruler. Or he used the window of chaos between 850 and 950 to bring back an important idol. Remember, Bhimadeva Shahi(died 963) also flourished in that period.

So, a Kirata king transfers the idol into Hindu heartlands away from iconoclastic Buddhists? I am not surprised. Did he know that there is another iconoclastic culting knocking on the doors from the other sides? Who knows? Which Kira or Kirata did Bhimadeva come in contact with?

I won't venture to guess. But, is Zhangzhung a Kirata kingdom by name Suvarnagotra which patronized a religion which is a combination of Tantrik Hinduism and Central Asian Shamanism? Highly possible.

What explains the Kailasa cult? Is it copycat mountains on the lines of Kailasa or are they mountains forming a cult or are they set up as alternates after Bon lost Kailasa?

Now, there seems to be a slight problem. Zhang-zhung existed. But what's it's religion?

Now, there is this site dharmafellowship.org. How much can you accept it, it says the land is Suvarnadwipa.

And it says Cina is also Zhangzhung.

Now, this one. North of Cina is Suvarnadwipa. They are not same. But, one thing. When Tibetans came here, both Chinas were confused.

Locating Suvarnadwipa.
"Suvarnadwipa lay to the north of this valley, in what now is Western Tibet. "So-khyam" is the Tibetan rendering of the name "Su-gnam", the latter a prosperous village at the nine thousand foot level, deep in the Kinnaur Valley."

One glaring mistake - Nepal became Li because Khotan was overrun. But, read through.
dharmafellowship.org/biographies/hi…

So, China comes from Chi'ang and is older than Bod?

This is making more sense. Zhangzhung is a Chi'ang tribe which moved West from Amdo. Suvarnagotra is a part of this China.

The word Trivistapa is used for heaven as well as Tibet - may be because Tibet is the highest place known to India.

I don't know the name of the place but there are a few pointers. They are called Cina or Suvarnadesa and probably Kirata, they practiced some religion which was tolerant towards Indian cults. But, with Tibet taking over the territory, the only name we know is Bhota.
*Finis*

@threadreaderapp unroll