Month: November 2018

Posted on

Dpal ldan bkra shis

Dpal ldan bkra shis (Palden Tashi)

Dpal ldan bkra shis (Chinese – Bandan zhashi, 1376-14–?) was a significant figure in Ming imperial interactions with Tibet through patronage of Tibetan Buddhism. He was a key participant in Beijing’s Buddhist activities during his tenure there, and was influential in the National Buddhist Registry (Senglusi). By way of example of his work in Beijing, Dpal ldan bkra shis is recorded to have translated Tibetan Buddhist texts into Chinese, acted as translator for the Fifth Karmapa, and ordained Ming officials. Under imperial order, the Huguosi temple was rebuilt as his personal residence in 1435 and a portrait statue of him was installed in perpetuity. Additionally, he was one of three clerics acknowledged in Fahaisi temple inscriptions as having played a critical role in the founding of this imperially sponsored Beijing temple. Fahaisi is located on Mt Cuiwei in the Shijingshan district of Beijing and bears typical marks of both Chinese and Tibetan iconography, making it useful for art historical investigations of “Sino-Tibetan” aesthetics. Dpal ldan bkra shis was given the title Jingjue ciji daguoshi or “Purely Enlightened Compassionately Helpful Great State Preceptor.”

Outside Beijing Dpal ldan bkra shis was instrumental in the construction and management of two imperially sponsored provincially located temples that served notably strategic political functions as well as religious ones. These were Qutansi in Qinghai (founded 1392), where he was abbot, and Lhun grub bde chen gling in Gansu, which he founded. Qutansi was originally a Bka’ brgyud temple with close ties to the Sa skya until Dge lugs pas became dominant there in the mid-16th century. It is located at the border of the Northwest Ming frontier and the Eastern edge of Amdo and its abbots were key figures in the Ming imperial courts’ interactions with Tibet. As the seat of the Xining Prefectural Buddhist Registry (Xining Senggangsi) Qutansi’s abbots had jurisdiction over 13 other temples and their estates. The Yongle emperor named Dpal ldan bkra shis abbot in 1408. Artistically, the temple’s exterior is distinctively Chinese, while the interior shows more Tibetan influence in terms of iconography and style.

Dpal ldan bkra shis founded Lhun grub bde chen gling (Longzhu deqinglin, formerly Da Chongjiaosi) in Minzhou, Gansu in 1428. Like the temples mentioned above, this temple exhibits objects and images of both Chinese and Tibetan styles. Dpal ldan bkra shis’s biography records that the imperial patronage of the project included the appointment of two high ministers, one hundred civil officials, 200 district officials, 1, 100 artisans, and 25,000 military corvee laborers. Thus it seems to have been the site of major imperial interest and attention, apparently due in large part to its strategic location.

Dpal ldan bkra shis’s fundamental involvement in these three temples is a key indicator of his role in the Ming imperial courts’ interfacing with Tibet/Tibetan Buddhism.

Source:
Debreczeny, Karl. “Sino-Tibetan Artistic Synthesis in Ming Dynasty Temples at the Core and the Periphery”

Entry by Dominique Townsend

user-1541796311

Posted on

Monk Officials of Gling-Tshang

Monk Officials of Gling-Tshang

Under the rule of Ming Ch’eng-tsu, commonly referred to as the Yongle emperor, interest and diplomatic relations between China and the Gling-Tshang and Gon-gyo regions of Tibet began and developed. Although both regions, beyond the Szechwan (Sichuan) frontier, were initially important, the former eventually took precedence and its leader was allowed to be dubbed wang, translated as king. The two monks in Gling-Tshang and Gon-gyo were the only two monks dubbed wang outside of central Tibet.

A monk from the Gling-Tshang region named Chos-dpal-rgyal-mtshan served as the Chinese envoy’s contact in the Gling Tshang region. He was bestowed with the title on April 20, 1407, coincidentally the same day of the visit of the Fifth Karmapa to the Chinese Ming court. The emperor’s interest in Chos-dpal-rgyal-mtshan remained purely secular. Interested in opening up passages between China and Tibet, the Ming court focused on trade and, in the beginning, its need to obtain foreign horses. In 1456 or 1457, tribute was set at once every three years. Finally in 1482/1483 officials in the Ministry of Rites tried to streamline the ritual of tribute and mandated that tribute also include envoys limited to 150 per mission.

Sometimes known as the Tsan-shan wang (“prince who assists virtue”), the monk received a gift of letter patent, robes and damask brocades from the Yongle emperor’s envoy on March 31, 1405. The entry recording the gifts was the first to mention him by name. A similar gift was made to Od-zer-nam-mkha in the Gon-gyo region.

The next entry in the Ming shih-lu on Apil 20, 1407 records the emperor’s demand that both monks cooperate to “reestablish relay stations, so as to allow the passage of envoys of the western Regions.” At the same time, the Chinese court nominated a number of local leaders to military positions.

Military positions are also an indication of how dangerous the routes between Beijing and Tibet could be. One instance had a Ming envoy attacked at a relay station in Gling-tshang, which indicated the need for increased local cooperation.


Source:

Elliot Sperling. “Ming Ch’eng-tsu and the Monk Officials of Gling-tshang and Gon-gyo,” in Lawrence Epstein and Richard F. Sherburne, eds., Reflections on Tibetan Culture: Essays in Memory of Turrell V. Wylie, Lewiston, N.Y., 1990, pp. 75-90. 16pp.

Entry by Megan H. Chan

Posted on

The Fifth Karmapa

The Fifth Karmapa

The Fifth Karma-pa, (1384~1415), De-Bzhin gShegs-pa or Helima (Halima) (Chin.: 哈立麻), is the reincarnated head of the Black –Hat (Zwa-nag) Karmapas. The fifth Karma-pa was invited by Yongle emperor (Zhu Di, 朱棣) of the Ming dynasty in 1407, to perform a mass of universal salvation (pudu dazhai) at Linggu Monastery in honor of the Yongle emperor’s late father, the Hongwu emperor, and his late putative mother, the Empress Ma. The Fifth Karma-pa received a title “Rulai dabao fawang xitian dashan zizai fo” (Chin.:如來大寳法王西天大善自在佛; Tathagata, Great and Precious Dharma King, Great Goodness of the Western Heaven, Self-Abiding Buddha) during his stay in Nanjing.

What is worth noting is that the title “dabao fawang” (Chin.: 大寳法王) was initially bestowed by Mongol’s Yuan court to Phags-pa (1235-1280), a member of the Sakya sect of Buddhism. That two distinct figures who represent two sectarian traditions in Tibet received the same imperial title from Yuan and Ming dynasty respectively suggests that the title “dabao fawang” was an emblem of importance of Tibetan Buddhism for both Yuan and Ming dynasties in terms of legitimacy. The Yongle emperor’s uncertain origin and his usurping the power made it necessary for him to employ Tibetan Buddhism (then, called Buddhism without any qualifications) for the purpose of legitimacy. Sources from both Tibetan and Chinese sides glorify, or rather, apotheosize the Fifth Karma-pa and his visit. The Fifth Karma-pa, at a matter of fact, was destined to perform the magical powers from the Tibetan’s perspective, because he was the fifth exponent of a lineage of lamas especially noted for their ecstatic visions and magical powers. A silk handscroll that was first kept in Tsurphu Monastery and transferred to Norbulingkha in Lhasa afterwards illustrates the Fifth Karma-pa’s visit to Nanjing. By adding glory to the emperor and the Fifth Karma-pa, the surreal, magical signs that were described in historical records in both China and Tibet were translated into a non-Buddhist idiom and made to serve the legitimation of imperial power.

However, it would be oversimplified to suggest that the Fifth Karma-pa’s visit to Nanking, the capital of Ming dynasty and Mt. Wutai afterwards was merely a religious activity. During the early Ming dynasty, the Ming government might have been trying to obtain horses in Khams, fighting Tibetan tribes in A-mdo and drawing support from Tibetan Buddhism in a hope of legitimizing the newly usurped throne (in the case of Yongle emperor, particularly.) These aspects of the visit of The Fifth Karma-pa and the role of Tibetan Buddhism in early Ming dynasty deserve more attention.

Sources:
Berger, Patricia, Miracles in Nanjing: An Imperial Record of the Fifth Karmapa’s Visit to the Chinese Capital, Cultural Intersections in Later Chinese Buddhism, UH.P. 200
Sperling, Elliot, The 5th Karma-pa and Some Aspects of the Relationship Between Tibet and Early Ming, Tibetan Studies in honor of High Richardson: Proceedings of the International Seminar of Tibetan Studies, Oxford 1979, Warminster: Aris & Phillips Ltd. & Did the Early Ming Emperors Attempt to Implement A “Divide and Rule” Policy in Tibet?, Contributions on Tibetan Language, History and Culture, Wien, 1983 & Si-tu Chos-kyi rgyal-mtshan and the Ming Court, Lungta 13, Winter 2000
Silk, Jonathan A, Notes on the History of the Yongle Kanjur, Suhrllekhah: Festgabe für Helmut Eimer. Swisttal-Odendorf: Indica et Tiebtica Verlag, 1996

Entry by Lan Wu, 2/18/ 07

user-1541796316

Posted on

Yongle Emperor

The Yongle Emperor / Chengzu

The Yongle emperor (1360 – 1424), born Zhudi, Chengzu or Cheng di, was the son of the founder of the Ming – the Hongwu emperor. Ascending to power in 1402 after a bloody civil war, in which he overthrew his own nephew, the Yongle emperor ambitiously commissioned public works projects for his new capital in Beijing and launched military expeditions far into Mongol territory and Southeast Asia. He is perhaps most well-known for commissioning eunuch and naval admiral Zheng He’s naval expeditions which reached the coast of Africa. One of his other most notable achievements was repairing the Grand Canal, which made Beijing directly accessible via waterway.

After winning the costly civil war, Chengzu was able to restore economic stability to the empire. His kingdom greatly benefited from the agricultural tax, and while his public works projects and diplomatic envoys began expanding and modernizing the kingdom, they eventually drained the country’s purses and led to economic instability after his death. The opening of the Grand Canal, the beautification of the Beijing capital (including the construction of the Forbidden City), grand maritime and military expeditions and other public works all took their toll on the government, specifically taxpayers, who found it hard to keep up with the government’s “progress.”

The Yongle emperor also promoted the use of paper currency –but confidence in it fell after his reign – and mandated an increase in mining quotas, which led to record and near surpluses of silver for the capital, but an economic crash when his successor scaled back mining practices.

Zhu Di died while on an expedition to what is now Inner Mongolia. He was the first emperor to be buried in the Ming Tombs, north of Beijing, and is entombed in the complexes largest mausoleum.


Sources:

Atwell, William S. “Time, Money, and the Weather: Ming China and the “Great Depression” of the Mid-Fifteenth Century.” The Journal of Asian Studies. 2002.
Kapstein, Matthew T. “The Tibetans.” Blackwell Publishing. Cambridge, England, 2006.

Entry by Megan H. Chan

user-1541796320

Posted on

Guoshi/State Preceptor

Guoshi (国师)

This is the title that kings and emperors gave to the great monks and lamas. The first Guoshi of the history was in China; in 550, the king of Beiqi (北齐) bestowed the title to a great lama, Fachang (法常). Afterward, while Chinese dynasties had relationships with Tibet in Yuan, Ming and Qing era China, they bestowed the titles of “Fawang (法王)”， “Wang (王)”， “Daguoshi (大国师)”， “Guoshi (国师)”, and so on.

“Guoshi” can be interpreted as “State Preceptor.” The most influential and popular “Guoshi” in Yuan period was P’hags pa, and Bsod names bkra shis had been bestowed with a title of “Guoshi” by the Ming Court in Ming dynasty. Some Chinese historians argue that Chinese empires’ bestowing these titles to the Tibetan lamas represents Chinese empires’ having power over Tibet from the Yuan dynasties. However, according to Hangyu Kim’s “Sino-Tibetan Historical Relationship” (Seoul, 2003), it can be also viewed as cultural exchange, rather than vertical power structure of politics or diplomacy.


Sources:

Hangyu Kim, “Sino-Tibetan Historical Relationship” (Seoul, 2003)

user-1541796064

Posted on

Chanshi

Chanshi 禪師

The title chanshi (禪師) appeared in different contexts during the Ming. In one documented case, the Chinese monk Fudeng (or Miaofeng, 1540-1613), a master builder and renowned monk who enjoyed the patronage of Empress Dowager Li for thirty years during the Wanli (萬曆) reign period, was given the title Huguo chanshi (Protection of the Dynasty Chan Master). He received this title, as well as the position of abbot, after completing the rebuilding of Xiantong monastery (now renamed Da huguo shengguang yongming) at Wutaishan.

In the context of the Ming court’s relations with Tibetans, however, the title chanshi was imbued with additional meaning and significance. Lamas from Honghua temple (弘化寺) in Qinghai were granted the title Puying chanshi (普應禪師) and played a significant role in the military defense of the Ming border with Mongolia. Located on the very fringes of the Ming borderlands, Honghua si played a dual role as a temple and also a fortress with a military garrison and beacon tower serving the Ming empire. The Puying chanshi sent tribute to the Ming court and maintained frequent relations between his Dge lugs pa temple, where Shakya Yeshe’s reliquary stupa resided, and the imperial center.

The founder of Honghua si, Zhang Xingjizangbu (張星吉藏卜, Tib. Seng ge bzang po), was granted the titles of guoshi (國師) and chanshi and the right to pass them down to his successive tuyi (徒裔). The exact meaning of “tuyi” remains unclear. However, another source indicates that at Maying si (馬營寺), a branch monastery near to Honghua si whose name is often confused with the latter, the title chanshi was passed down to the son of a brother. Maying si was associated with the Lingzang (靈藏) tribe, and a Lingzhan jiemu (領占節木, Tib. Rin chen rtse mo) was one of the first recipients of the Puying chanshi title. This type of kinship succession system was unusual for the Dge lugs pa, who are most often linked with succession from master to disciple or by transmigration. In the case of Honghua si, this kinship succession system gave the Buddhist temple an extended role as a politically powerful organization run by a local hereditary tribal leader. Indeed, the Xunhuating zhi (循化廳志) explicitly states that the Tibetan officials at Maying si, granted hereditary chanshi titles by letter of imperial authorization, held authority over local tribal people in addition to the monks in their monasteries. When imperial authorization was revoked in 1727, however, the heads of these temples were demoted to the title Dougang (都綱) and afterwards are said to have controlled only their monasteries, not the local populace.


Sources:

Tomoko Otasaka. 1994. A Study of the Hong-hua-si Temple. Memoirs of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko. 52: 69-101.
Marsha Weidner. 2001. Imperial engagement with Buddhist art and architecture: Ming variations on an old theme. In Cultural intersections in later Chinese Buddhism. Honolulu: Univesity of Hawai’i. pp. 136-139.

Entry by Stacey Van Vleet

Posted on

Feilai Feng

Feilai Feng 飛來峰

Feilai Feng (Mt. Feilai; Chin.: 飛來峰) is located in Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, which was the capital of the Southern Song (Chin.: 南宋; 1127-1279). There are sculptures at the caves on the walls outside the Qinglin Dong (Cave Qinglin: Chin.: 清林洞) at Feilai Feng. These sculptures were carved with inscriptions around 1292, and are known for the Tibetan Buddhist influences on them. It is evident that there were numbers of tantric divinities among the sculptures that were foreign to the Chinese- ruled Southern Song. A Tibetan Buddhist monk, Yang Lianzhenjia, whose ethnicity still remains ambiguous, was the chief donor. Yang Lianzhenjia was notorious in China for his crimes. For instance, he desecrated the Song imperial tombs in 101 different places near Shaoxi (Chin.: 紹興), Zhejiang Province and destroyed former Song palaces and altars while he served as Director of Priests for the Jiangnan (Chin.: 江南) region (Jiangnan shijiao zongtong; Chin.: 江南釋教總統), consequently, his misdeed antagonized both laymen and Chinese Buddhist monks in Jiangnan in 1278. The sculptures reveal that Hangzhou, which has been considered as a significant center of Chinese culture, appeared as an active Tibetan Buddhist centre around the year 1300. For an image that is clearly tantric in the Tibetan Buddhist tradition (holding a double-vajra and bell), see this link.

Sources:
Heather Karmay, Early Sino-Tibetan Art, Aris and Phillips, 1975; Herbert Franke, “Tibetans in Yuan China” China among equals: the Middle Kinndom and its neighbors, 10th-14th centuries, UC.P. 1983

Entry by Lan Wu, 2/02/07

user-1541794739

Posted on

Zhuo Zhou

Zhuo Zhou 涿州

Zhuo Zhou, located north of the Zhu River, was the site of a Mahakala temple built at the request of ‘Phags pa (1235–80) in 1276. ‘Phags pa assigned the famous Nepalese artist, Anige (阿尼哥) (1244–1318) to direct the construction of the temple, the structure of which was identical with the Qian Yuan (乾元) temple in Shangdu (上都), which Anige had built in 1274. The statue of Mahakala housed inside faced south. ‘Phags pa consecrated the temple himself and later appointed Dampa (1230–1303) as the temple’s abbot. This temple dedicated to Mahakala was built as part of a larger initiative to support the Yuan in their conquest of the Southern Song. Specifically, it was built to guarantee the success of chancellor Bayan Baharidai (1236–95) in his campaign against the remaining Southern Song forces in the Jiangnan area, which resulted in victory in the same year of the building of the temple.


Source:

Weirong, Shen. 2004. Magic Power, Sorcery and Evil Spirit: The Image of Tibetan Monks in Chinese Literature during the Yuan Dynasty. In Christoph Cüppers, Ed. The Relationship between Religion and State (chos srid zung ‘brel) in Traditional Tibet. Lumbini International Research Institute: Lumbini. pp. 202–04.

Entry by Eveline S. Yang, 4/24/07

user-1541794741

Posted on

Juyong Guan

Juyong Guan 居庸关

The Juyong Gate was constructed between 1343–45 at the orders of the last Mongol emperor, Xundi (1333–67). According to its inscriptions, Dynastic Preceptor Nam mkha’ seng ge, a Tibetan lama of the Sa skya lineage, presided over the planning and construction of the gate and stupas, which were consecrated upon completion by Kun dga’ rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po (1333–58), one of the last Imperial Preceptors, also a Tibetan lama of the Sa skya lineage. Inscriptions also state that the emperor ordered its construction “in order to bring happiness to the people who pass under the stupas and receive thus the Buddha’s blessing.” See images here.

The Juyong Gate was built at a strategic pass just south of the Great Wall and northwest of Beijing. The arched gate was originally built as a base for three stupas (which disappeared and were replaced with wooden pavilions by 1448), and the architecture of the structure was in the Tibetan style. Stupa-arches were a completely Tibetan architectural form, introduced to China via the Mongols during the Yuan dynasty, and served the same function as they did in Tibet, standing at the entrance to important cities. The Juyong Gate may have been one of four planned gates intended to guard the four directions of the capital.

The arched passageway is carved with relief images that represent a highly developed state of lamaist art, which some link to the tradition established by Anige (1243–1306), the influential Nepalese artist invited to Khubilai’s court at the suggestion of ‘Phags pa in 1260. Prominent among the carved reliefs are images of the guardians of the four directions as well as mandalas of the five meditation buddhas, each of whom are associated with one of five directions (four directions and the center). The depiction of cosmological symbols based on four and five directions seem to be a reflection of the Mongol adoption of an originally Indian cosmology (four-directional) as well as a Chinese cosmology (five-directional). The idea that the Mongol rulers were guardian kings ruling over different directions (displaced onto actual geographies) was one of many religious conceptual models used to legitimate Mongol dominance.

The most significant aspect about the gate is its use of the above cosmological imagery together with inscriptions in five languages (Chinese, Mongol, Tangut, Tibetan, and Sanskrit) that posthumously articulate the divine nature of Khubilai Khan. Although the multilingual inscriptions differ subtly in content from each other, the Mongol inscription has been interpreted as elevating Khubilai Khan as a reincarnation of Manjushri, the resident bodhisattva of Mount Wutai in China. Such an identification of an emperor with Manjushri was unprecedented (and not mentioned in Chinese inscriptions due to incompatibility of the concept of reincarnation with Chinese Confucian sensibilities) and signaled a first step toward the role that Mongol emperors would later take as reincarnations of Manjushri/Manjusri. This use of the Tibetan concept of reincarnation together with the association of Manjushri with China (where the Mongol rulers resided) cleverly solidified Mongol legitimacy as religious authorities. Its significance as a religious-political model continued beyond the fall of the Yuan dynasty and was eventually passed onto the Qing.


Sources：

Patricia Berger. Preserving the Nation: The Political Uses of Tantric Art in China. In Later Days of the Law: Images of Chinese Buddhism 850–1850. Lawrence: Spencer Museum of Art, University of Kansas. 1994. pp. 103–07.
Heather Karmay. Early Sino-Tibetan Art. Aris and Phillips. 1975. pp. 21–27.
Franke, From Tribal Chieftains to Universal Emperor and God p. 64–72

Entry by Eveline S. Yang, 2/06/07

Posted on

Da huguo renwang si

Da Huguo Renwang Si 大護國仁王寺

The Da huguo renwang si was built during the years 1270 to 1274 on the Gaoliang river outside of Beijing. The temple owed its founding to the Empress Zhaorui shun-sheng (Mongolian Cabi or Cabui), the principal wife of Qubilai and mother of his chosen heir, Jinggim. Because of the generous patronage of the imperial family, the temple was extremely wealthy. In the Beijing metropolitan area it owned 28,633 qing 51 mou of irrigated fields and 34,414 qing 23 mou of dry fields, as well as the rights for forests, fisheries, moorings, bamboo and firewood in twenty-nine places. In also owned land in fifteen places around Beijing where jade, silver, iron, copper, salt and coal were produced, in addition to 19,061 chestnut trees and a wine-shop. In the Xiangyang region the temple owned 13,651 qing of irrigated and 29,805 qing 68 mou of dry fields. In Jianghuai it owned at least 140 wine shops. The temple also owned many houses and halls, and had a total of 37,059 tenant families as well as 17,988 families providing corvée labor. This list of property is drawn from an inscription written by Cheng Jufu, available in the Cheng Xuelou ji (see Franke 1984 for full reference).

In the fourth month of the Yuanzhen reign year yi-wei (1295), the Tibetan cleric (and posthumously declared Imperial Preceptor) Sga A gnyan dam pa kun dga’ grags (Ch. Gongjia ge la si or Dan pa 膽巴) received an imperial summons to become abbot in the Da huguo renwang temple. The Treasury (tai fu) was ordered to prepare an elaborate welcome ceremony on par with those prepared for the emperor himself, and many officials escorted Danpa/Dam pa Kun dga’ grags/Dan pa to the temple. Later Dan pa was also buried there in the Qing-an stupa. His relics were taken to the stupa by the mayor of Da du [Beijing], along with a retinue of servants and musicians, by order of the emperor Chengzong.

In 1311, An pu, son of the disgraced Yang, became commissioner of the Huifu yuan (會福院), the name by which Da huguo renwang si was known by between the years of 1310 and 1316. At the same time he was ennobled as the Duke of Qin and he was also once again holding the post of commissioner of the Bureau of Buddhist and Tibetan Affairs (Xuanzheng yuan 宣政院). An pu had been dismissed from this post in 1291 because of widespread resentment against his father, who had destroyed the tombs of the Song emperors during a zealous campaign to convert sites in Jiangnan into Buddhist temples.


Sources:

Franke, Herbert. 1984. “Tan-pa, a Tibetan lama at the court of the Great Khans,” Orientalia Venetiana, Volume in onore di Leonello Lanciotti. Firenze: Leo s. Olschiki Editore. pp. 157-180.
Franke, Herbert. 1983. “Tibetans in Yuan China,” in China among equals: the Middle Kingdom and its neighbors, 10th-14th centuries. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Sperling, Elliot. 1991. “Some Remarks on Sga A-gnyan dam-pa and the Origins of the Hor-pa Lineage of the Dkar-mdzes Region,” in Ernst Steinkellner, ed., Tibetan History and Language: Studies Dedicated to Uray Gyeaza on his Seventieth Birthday, Vienna. pp. 455-465.

Entry by Stacey Van Vleet, 2/4/07

user-1541794744