The importance of a key document for the history of Buddhism in Cambodia was recognized long ago. This is the inscription of Vat Sithor (inventoried as K. 111), which recounts the career and accomplishments of a Buddhist teacher named Kīrtipaṇḍita and includes a royal proclamation (ajñā) in support of the practice of Buddhism. In an article published in 1883, Émile Sénart discussed this inscription, by way of background stating that the later Buddhism of northern India had been influenced heavily by Śaivism. “The purohita is the Brahmanic priest of the house of the king,” he wrote, appropriating the voice of the Vat Sithor inscription. “Is it the intent to suppress this position? By no means, but his duties will be modified. He will become ‘versed in the knowledge of letters and of Buddhist ceremonies’, he will bathe the image of the Buddha on festival occasions, he will replace hymns with Buddhist teachings, the Vedas with Buddhist chants.”

Since 1883, the Vat Sithor inscription has been studied only intermittently, and there are surely many learned Buddhologists who have never heard of it. The issues Sénart's comments raise are still alive today. How much of Kīrtipaṇḍita's outlook is due to the intrinsic nature of the Buddhism he espoused, how much to the constraints placed upon religious life in Cambodia in the 970s? Such matters will not be resolved in this paper, which merely concerns “Aspects of Buddhism” (“Some Minor Contributions” would be an equally valid title). A successful comprehensive study of the tenth century necessitates the careful weighing of evidence, both art historical and epigraphical, and will — eventually — depend on contributions from scholars with varied interests and training.

The tenth century is intrinsically important: this is when the patterns of life in Angkor were becoming established. The nature of the evidence, however, differs somewhat from that which survives from later centuries. The tenth-century inscriptions — like the Vat Sithor inscription — reveal a good deal about the nature of the Buddhism practised, but the art is not especially abundant, and there are no great surviving temple complexes. In later centuries, the situation was not the same.