Tag: ming

Posted on

Wutaishan Pusading

Pusading 普薩頂/ Zhenrong yuan 真容院

Pusading, a small monastery located on the summit of Lingjiushan or Vulture Peak Mountain, is the highest point in Taihuai, the valley town between the five terraces of Wutai shan. Pusading has been an ongoing center of pilgrimage and imperial sponsorship since at least the Tang dynasty. According to the Expanded Record of the Clear and Cool Mountains (Guang Qingliang zhuan), compiled about 1057-63, the first temple at the site was Wenshuyuan (Cloister of Manjushri), built by Xiaowen (r. 471-499), emperor of the Northern Wei dynasty (385-534). The same record indicates that though apparitions of Manjushri were known to appear on this peak frequently, it was not until the time of the Tang Emperor Ruizong (662-716) that the temple became home to a sculpted image of Manjushri.

The tale of this sculpted image gave Pusading its other name, Zhenrong yuan, or Cloister of True Countenance. According to the Expanded Record, the reclusive sculptor Ansheng repeatedly failed in attempts to complete an image of Manjushri without cracks. Finally he appealed to the bodhisattva himself and then succeeded in making a perfect image by modeling it after seventy-two manifestations of Manjushri that accompanied him as he completed his work. Thereafter the monastery was known by the name Zhenrong yuan and was patronized by the emperors of successive dynasties until it was renamed during the Ming Yongle reign period as Pusading, or Bodhisattva Peak, also identified as Manjushri Peak.

The Ming Yongle emperor took a great interest in Pusading. The monastery was the site of Dawenshu-dian (大文殊殿), the first temple to house a copy of the Yongle edition of the Tibetan Buddhist canon or Kangyur (bka’ ‘gyur). Today, Dawenshu-dian is also sometimes referred to just as Pusading or Zhenrong yuan. The Ming Yongle emperor ordered the reconstruction of Dawenshu dian and then made an offering to the temple of the first printed copy of his Kangyur edition as soon as it was completed around 1410. There were also two temples on Pusading that housed copies of the Wanli print of the Kangyur, Luohou si bentang (羅喉寺本堂) and the Pule yuan bentang (普樂院本堂). Luohou si now houses the only known exemplar of a forty-two volume supplement to the Wanli Kangyur print, but it is missing two volumes.

The Qing Shunzhi emperor (r.1644-61) renovated Pusading extensively into an official imperial establishment and installed a Tibetan Buddhist lama from Beijing. Local legend says that the Shunzhi emperor staged his death and then took monastic vows at Pusading, and that his son the Kangxi emperor came in search of him there, performing many heroic deeds along the way. Both the Kangxi (1662-1722) and Qianlong (1736-1795) emperors stayed at this monastery during their numerous visits to Wutai shan.


Sources:

Jonathan A. Silk. 1996. Notes on the History of the Yongle Kanjur. In Suhrllekhah: Festgabe für Helmut Eimer. Swisttal-Odendorf: Indica et Tiebtica Verlag.
Wen-shing Chou. “Ineffable Paths: Mapping Wutaishang in Qing Dynasty China,” The Art Bulletin, Mar 2007, 89 (1): pp.108-129.

Entry by Stacey Van Vleet, 2/20/07

Posted on

Dabaoji Gong

Dabaoji Gong 大宝积宫

Dabaoji Gong was founded in 1582 in an ethnically Naxi village called Baisha (白沙村), several miles from Lijiang in Yunnan (云南丽江). The Naxi (纳西族) was a group ethnically and linguistically related to the Tibetans, but who had, by the Ming era, more closely identified themselves politically and culturally with the Chinese. Lijiang prefecture was officially recognized as beyond the direct control of the Ming court, but was still of strategic military and economic importance since major invasion as well as trade routes lay within its territory. Thus the Ming court recognized the authority of its local rulers and relied on them to maintain control over the Tibetans along the southwest border of the empire.

The height of Lijiang military conquests and territorial expansion into Tibetan areas occurred during the mid-16th and 17th centuries and corresponded with an increased interest in Tibetan Buddhism. This interest was reflected in a sharp increase in temple-building activity, which can be interpreted as Lijiang’s efforts to attract the support of major Tibetan Buddhist figures to install the Lijiang court with politico-religious legitimacy in the eyes of Tibetan, and perhaps also Chinese, communities. The Kar ma bKa’ brgyud in the early Ming were widely known for their esoteric powers, and were therefore targeted for religious patronage.

The founder of the Dabaoji Gong, Mu Wang (木旺) (r.1580–98), was the ruler of Lijiang. He, according to the Ninth Karmapa’s biography, had a Tibetan Buddhist preceptor named Byang bshes pa, and also wished to commission a new woodblock edition of the bKa’ ‘gyur, which his son and successor, Mu Zeng (木增) (r.1598–1646) later completed. In addition to the Kar ma pas, Mu Wang also patronized other sects, particularly the dGe lugs pa.

Mu Wang’s son, Mu Zeng, expanded the Lijiang kingdom to its greatest breadth and at the same time was involved in building an unprecedented number of temples. He renounced the throne in 1624 at the age of 36 to pursue religious instruction at Fuguosi (福国寺) (one of the five main bKa’ brgyud schools in Lijiang). He is thought to be responsible for the paintings extant at Dabaoji Gong.

While Ming-era murals in Lijiang predating the Daobaoji Gong reflect Chinese and Bai styles and subjects, the murals in Dabaoji Gong are unique in the Sino-Tibetan painting tradition they exhibit. Temple murals that succeed the Dabaoji Gong show the increasing influence of Tibetan styles and themes. Thus Daobaoji Gong can be identified as the earliest extant temple that demonstrates the Sino-Tibetan painting tradition executed by local patronage and workshop.

The murals in the front half of the hall contain a mixture of Chinese Buddhist, Daoist, and Tibetan Buddhist figures and themes, while the murals in the rear of the hall are Tibetan Buddhist in nature, particularly that of the Kar ma bKa’ brgyud order. Of significance is the mural on one section of the rear wall that depicts the root of the Mahamudra lineage from Vajradhara to what is thought to be the Tenth Karmapa, Chos dbyings rdo rje (1604–74), who later fled to Lijiang following the devastating attack inflicted by the Fifth Dalai Lama on the Karma bKa’ brgyud (c. 1642). The style executed in this mural link the paintings in both the front and back of the temple while the dating of this mural links it to Mu Zeng’s patronage program that aimed to build new temples in Lijiang as well as connect them to specific Tibetan Buddhist lineages.

In total, thirteen Karma pa temples were built in the Lijiang area, and all, including Dabaoji Gong later became branch temples of dPal spungs in sDe dge when the sDe dge Si tu lineage reassembled the scattered bKa’ brgyud leadership in Eastern Tibet.

Thus the Dabaoji Gong reflects the intricate role the Lijiang kingdom played as a peripheral, autonomous region involved in conflicts among the Tibetans as well as between the Tibetans and Chinese. Through Buddhism, the Lijiang court sought legitimacy as religiously-sanctioned rulers among the Tibetans via their patronage of lineages and building of temples, as well as the Chinese in their patronage of temples at Mt. Wutai and other sites in China.


Source:

Karl Debreczeny. Sino-Tibetan Artistic Synthesis in Ming Dynasty Temples. Tibet Journal. 28: 49–107.

Entry by Eveline Yang, 2/26/07

Posted on

Honghua si

Honghuasi (Monastery Honghua; Chin.: 弘化寺)

Honghua si is located in Zhuandao Village (轉導村), Minhe Huizu Tuzu Autonomous Prefecture (民和回族土族自治縣), Qinghai Province. It was built in 1442 in memory of Shakya-ye-shes, a dGe-lugs-pa high priest, who was granted the tile of Daci Fawang (大慈法王) by the Ming court and died in 1435 on the way back to his homeland from the capital of Ming.

What should catch our attention is that Honghua si was not merely a Buddhist monastery, but also played a significant role in meditating between Ming China and Mongols. The relationship between dGe-lugs-pa and the Ming court was rather a relationship including three parties, China, Mongols and the dGe-lugs-pa of Tibet.

Unlike the other two imperial titles (Dabao Fawang 大寳法王 and Dasheng Fawang; 大乘法王) granted by the court， the title of Daci Fawang was terminated later on, however. Nevertheless, the dGe-lugs-pa succeeded in maintaining preferential treatment from the Ming court on the ground of constructing Honghua si at the site of Shakya-ye-shes’s death. What’s more, Honghua si is said to be a chijiansi (敕建寺), which means it was constructed by imperial order. Honghua si served as a substitute for the role of Daci Fawang in terms of maintaining the relationship between the Ming court and the dGe-lugs-pa, one sect of Tibetan Buddhism. What kept the two parties close were that Honghua si sent tribute to the Ming court frequently while the Ming court was responsible for the expense of repairing the monastery.

Due to its crucial location, Honghua si also served as a military institution in order to resist Mongols, who had been active in Qinghai region in the course of the Ming dynasty. Though, the dGe-lugs-pa was in a close relationship with the Mongols, it might be improper to conclude that the dGe-lugs-pa was pro-Mongols. The 3rd Dalai Lama’s visit to Honghua si was a critical event that indicated the dGe-lugs-pa’s missionary activity towards the Mongols would not be against the Ming court’s interests in this area.

Besides considering Honghua si’s functions above, what ought not to be overlooked is its being a powerful political unit in this region. Its political function was executed mainly through maintaining the fortress and beacon tower as well as recruiting soldiers for the Chinese army with the benefit of having Qing China acknowledge its ownership of tax-exempt farmers. Honghua si did not only have political power, it also gained economic power by accumulating land under the pretext of fulfilling its responsibility of providing horses to the courts. Its both political and financial authority in the region was not disturbed by the courts. What differentiates Honghua si from other Buddhist monasteries also includes that the abbots of it were hereditary.

Its importance of maintaining stability in Qinghai was acknowledged, thus supported by the Ming court. Honghua si, as a local Tibetan religious authority played multiple roles during the Ming and Qing dynasties.


Resource:

Otasaka, Tomoko, A Study of Hong-hua-si Temple Regarding the Relationship between the dGe-Lugs-Pa and the Ming Dynasty, Memoirs of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko, 1994

Entry by Lan Wu, 2/23/07

Posted on

Qutan si

Qutansi/ Gro tshang lha khang

Qutan si (瞿曇寺), located in Ledu county in Qinghai Province, was founded by Sangs rgyas bkra shis in 1392. Due to its location connecting the northwest Ming edge and the eastern border of one Tibetan province of Amdo, Qutan si reflects both Chinese and Tibetan influences. However, Qutan si was largely dependent on the Ming imperial sponsorship. In 1392, Emperor Taizu of Ming dynasty bestowed a horizontal inscribed board with the three characters, Qutan si, on the temple. Qutan si did not undergo major construction and expansion until the 15th century when the Yongle Emperor appointed Sangs rgyas bkra shis’ nephew, dPal ldan bkra shis, abbot of Qutan si. Especially during the reigns of Hongxi (1425) and Xuande (1426-1435), Qutan si underwent major expansions. In 1782, the Qianlong Emperor of Qing solicited contributions to repair Qutan si. In 1944, an earthquake caused serious damage, and several halls in Qutan si were later repaired. Today Qutan si is the most well-preserved architecture from the Ming dynasty in Qinghai Province. In 1982, it was listed into the group of Historical and Cultural Relics under State protection.

Qutan si occupies an area of approximately 270,000 square meters. It is divided into three sections: the outer court, the front court and the back court. From the point of the entrance, there lie Jingang dian 金剛殿, Qutan dian瞿曇殿, Baoguang dian寶光殿 (Hall of Blazing Jewel Light) and Longguo dian 隆國殿 (Hall of Dynastic Prosperity) respectively. On the sides, there are Yubei ting御碑亭, Hufa dian護法殿, the murals gallery壁畫廊, Zuoyou Xiaojing tang左右小經堂, and four stupas四座鎮煞佛塔, etc.

The Jingang dian is located between the front court and the central court. It was constructed during Qing dynasty and occupies an area of 160 square meters.

Qutan dian is located at the center of the temple covering an area of 300 square meters. It was built during the reign of Hongzu and reconstructed during the Qianlong period of Qing. Inside of Qutan dian, there are paintings of Buddha done during the Ming-Qing period. The horizontal inscribed board bestowed by Emperor Taizu is hung above its front door.

Baoguang dian, constructed during the reign of Yongle, is located in the back of the central court, occupying an area of 500 square meters. The tallest hall in Qutan si is the Longuo dian in the very back. It is 16 meters tall and occupies an area of 1,000 square meters.
The most valuable paintings inside of Quan si are the murals on both sides of the covered gallery. There are 51 rooms in total, with images depicting the life of Sakyamuni Buddha. The artistic style indicates the synthesis of both Chinese and Tibetan influences. However, “Chinese brushwork, heavy colors and blue-green landscape styles” predominate.

Emperor Taizu of Ming played a crucial role in strengthening the importance and influence of Qutan si. The subsequent rulers followed his example and paid much attention to it. In the Ming dynasty, Qutan si was important in bridging the relations between the Ming court and the upper class in Qinghai Province and between the Han Chinese and Tibetans.

Source:
Karl Debreczeny. Sino-Tibetan Artistic Synthesis in Ming Dynasty Temples. Tibet Journal. 28: 49-107.

Entry by Agnes Lin, 2/27/07

Posted on

Fahai si

Fahai si (法海寺)

The construction of Fahaisi took five years and was completed in 1443AD under the patronage of an influential eunuch Li Tong. The temple is located on Mount Cuiwei in the Shijingshan district in the western suburbs of Beijing which was the capital of both the Yuan and Ming dynasties. Since the Yingshan Bureau of Ministory of Public Works (Yingshansuofu) was associated with construction of the temple, it resembled other official constructions and is believed to have had some importance in the court. It is possible that Fahaisi may have been built as a shengsi, a temple used to perform memorial rites for eunuchs who did not have any family members to do so after their passing. Much of the temple was destroyed during the Cultural Revolution but the remains suggests that the temple was constructed in the classic Chinese template imitating the construction of the Chinese imperial palace which had the buildings arranged on a central axis, sitting north and facing south.

The importance of the temple lies in its close ties with Tibetan Buddhism and the use of Tibetan imagery on the walls of the temple. Since Li Tong served as the Director of Imperial Accoutrements for the Yongle and Zhengtong Emperors, he was influenced by his patrons’ interest and their devotion to Tibetan Buddhism which was evident in their great displays of religious rituals and meetings with Tibetan clerics. He also had direct access and control of the building of the temple and there was strong evidence of his own personal following of the Buddhist cult. Only the Mahavira Hall survived the Cultural Revolution, and it can be divided into 3 basic sections. Flanking the sides of the north wall are Indra and Brahma dressed in typical Ming Court attire at a royal procession. The side walls were painted with the Buddhas of the Ten Directions and their eight bodhisattva attendants floating above a royal garden, which served as the background for the sculptures of the Eighteen Arhats. On three panels at the back of the rear alter screen are paintings of Water-moon Guanyin, Samantabhadra and Manjusri, all of which were common themes used during the construction of Ming temples. Moreover, usage of certain techniques such as the placement of figures and the re-use of common forms imply a court workshop production. From photos before the revolution, the eighteen Arhats were once lined in the east and west walls of Mahavira Hall and a wooden Mahakala statue was placed among them. The Mahakala statue was the protector of the Yuan dynasty and one of the important deities in the pantheon of gods within Tibetan Buddhism. The ceiling have 3 large mandala, located at the center is Vairocana, to the right, Bhaisajyaguru, and to the left, Amitabha. These are all linked to Tibetan mortuary liturgy and artistically reflect a Newar- Tibetal model.

Source:
Karl Debreczeny. Sino-Tibetan Artistic Synthesis in Ming Dynasty Temples. Tibet Journal. 28: 49-107.

Entry by ShiQi Wu, 26th Feb 2007

user-1541797070

Posted on

Fayuan Si

Fayuan Si 法淵寺

Fayuan Si in Beijing housed a Tibetan sutra repository and a Chinese sutra repository during the Ming Yongle period. Shakya ye shes stayed in this temple when he visited Beijing in 1415 as an emissary for Tsong kha pa, who famously declined the invitation himself. Fayuan Si was located within the imperial compound in the Songzhu-si (嵩祝寺) temple complex.


Source:

Jonathan A. Silk. 1996. Notes on the History of the Yongle Kanjur. In Suhrllekhah: Festgabe für Helmut Eimer. Swisttal-Odendorf: Indica et Tiebtica Verlag.

Entry by Stacey Van Vleet, 2/20/07

Posted on

Linggu Si

Linggu Si

In 1407 the Fifth Karmapa, De bzhin gshegs pa or Helima/Halima, traveled to Linggu Si in Nanjing to perform a “mass of universal salvation” (pudu dazhai) at the request of the Ming Yongle emperor. This ceremony honored the Yongle emperor’s late father, the Hongwu emperor, and alleged mother, the Empress Ma. A handscroll of forty-nine scenes, created by the Yongle emperor’s court painters, recorded the auspicious visions and signs said to have been witnessed by all who attended the ceremony. The miraculous displays depicted include multicolored rays of light, rains of flowers, rainbows, and arhats, bodhisattvas and cranes congregating around monastery buildings. The buildings, which include the Linggu Monastery pagoda, a monastic hall that was the Karmapa’s resting place, and the Western Chapel, change position relative to one another and their surroundings in many of the scenes. Patricia Berger argues that the Karmapa’s visit to Linggu Monastery and the ensuing scrolls served to elevate the prestige and sacredness of the cleric, the monastery itself, and the imperial ancestors, as well as to shore up the legitimacy of the Yongle emperor (who, rumor had it, was not the true son of the Empress Ma). The representation of the ceremony and miracles, furthermore, links Linggu Monastery to similar images and events at Mount Wutai, and therefore “urges a utopian, unlocalized interpretation” of the bodhisattvas from Wutai Shan who “appear unbeckoned (and discreetly incognito) in the capital to prop up the Ming heavenly mandate” (Berger 160).


Source:

Berger, Patricia. 2001. “Miracles in Nanjing: An Imperial Record of the Fifth Karmapa’s Visit to the Chinese Capital.” In Cultural Intersections in Later Chinese Buddhism. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i. Pp. 145-166.

Entry by Stacey Van Vleet, 2/20/07

Posted on

Karmapa Scroll

Karmapa Scroll ( Tsurphu Scroll)

The Karma-pa Scroll recorded the events that occurred during the 5th Karma-pa’s (Dezhin Shegpa) to Nanjing by invitation of the Yongle (Chengzu, r.1402-1424) emperor to perform the Mass of Universal Salvation (Pudu dazhai) at the Linggu Monastery in 1407. The 50m long silk handscroll depicted 49 scenes of miraculous signs that took place during the performance of the ritual, which were described in Chinese, Arabic, Uighur, Tibetan and Mongolian. The performance of the Mass of Universal Salvation for the deceased Hongwu emperor and his consort Empress Ma was part of the Yongle Emperor’s endeavor to first legitimize his position on the throne after usurping it from his nephew the Jianwen emperor and also to officially establish a Ming-Tibetan relationship. The scroll symbolically functioned as both a bureaucratic imperial tool as well as a religious and spiritual instrument for the ultimate fusion of universal authority supposedly mandated to the Yongle emperor. The fusion of both Buddhist and Daoist motifs and the fact that the scroll was tailored to appeal to the Chinese support the universalistic significance of the scroll as first and foremost a representation of the legitimacy of the Yongle emperor as the rightful heir to the throne. However, the scroll did not explicitly define the relationship between the Yongle emperor and the 5th Karma-pa, who rejected the proposal for formal relations with the Yongle Emperor along the same lines as that of the Yuan Emperors and the Sakya. However, the inscriptions and scenes on the scroll portrayed the Karma-pa as having attained actual Buddhahood, referring to him constantly as “rulai” (meaning, “thus come” an epithet for Buddha). Moreover, the wonders of the miraculous signs were also attributed solely to the performance of the Karma-pa beginning with the ritual of the Mass of Universal Salvation.

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. 2001
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

Entry by ShiQi Wu, 2/20/07

user-1541797010

Posted on

Zhufopusa

Zhufopusa miaoxiang minghao jingzhou 诸佛菩萨妙相名号经咒(The Marvellous Images, Names, Sutras and Dharanis of the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas)

The Zhufopusa miaoxiang minghao jingzhou is a two-volume collection of popular Buddhist texts and illustrations of 60 divinities of the Mahayana pantheon. It was printed in Beijing in 1431, during the Xuande reign period, by a donor who, by his name, appears to have been a Chinese Buddhist monk: Xiujishanzhu, or “he who dwells in cultivating Buddhism and storing up merit.”

The texts are of Chinese format and the preface, colophons, and selected texts are printed in four scripts: Chinese, Lantsa, Tibetan, and Mongolian. Most of the sutras, dharanis, and other texts are given in Chinese only; Chinese comprises the dominant language of the work as a whole. There are several interesting details regarding the two volumes. One is that, unlike the Juyong Gate, the content of the transcriptions in four scripts are parallel, though not identical. Another is the use of Chinese phonetic transcriptions of Tibetan names, along with the Chinese version of each name. Yet another is the use of the distinctly Tibetan Buddhist “refuge in the teacher” (in addition to the usual three: Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha) at the beginning of the Sutra of the names of the thirty-five Buddhas (San shi wu fo ming jing).

The stylistic features found in the images of 60 divinities, while not exemplary in technique, are linked to the Yongle bronzes and the images found in the Yongle Kanjur, and hint at the beginnings of the later lamaist style produced in Qing China in the 17th and 18th centuries. The designs found in the Shakyamuni-Manjushri-Avalokiteshvara triad at the beginning of the 60 divinities are similar to those found in the Kharakhoto paintings, the Xixia Tripitaka, the Jisha Tripitaka, the Yongle bronzes, and the sculptures and frescoes of central and western Tibet. Such linkages reflect not only the influence of the lamaist style as established by Anige under the Yuan, but also the influence of the contemporary style in central and western Tibet, which was facilitated by the environment of exchange during that period.

According to the Chinese colophon, this collection of Buddhist texts and divinities were transmitted from De bzhin gshegs pa, the 5th Karmapa (1348-1415), to the donor. In fact, De bzhin gshegs pa is included as the only human among the sixty divinities depicted; he appears after the Buddhas and bodhisattvas, and before the female divinities. Also notable is that in a list of Tathagatas and bodhisattvas in the second volume, he is again mentioned by many different titles, but among these titles is that of the Da bao fa wang, or the Great Precious Dharma King. This is a title the Yongle emperor bestowed on him in an attempt to re-establish an alliance with the Tibetans reminiscent of the Yuan-era (but an alliance that the 5th Karmapa rejected). Furthermore, the title of Da sheng fa wang, or the Great Vehicle King of Religion, given to Kun dga’ bkra shis rgyal mtshan, also appears in this list. Kun dga’ bkra shis rgyal mtshan (1349-1425) was the abbot of Sa skya and one of the three Tibetans who was presented the title of fa wang, or Dharma King, emphasizing the special religious relationship with the Ming emperor. Kun dga’ bkra shis rgyal mtshan visited the Yongle emperor in Nanjing in 1413-14.

As part of the Yongle emperor’s attempts to renew politico-religious relations with the Tibetans, his uniquely splendid treatment given to the 5th Karmapa is thought to have precipitated increased Tibetan missions to and from China during the Yongle (1402-24) and Xuande (1426-35) periods. During the time of the printing of the Zhufopusa, there was a significant increase in the frequency and number of participants in the missions from Tibet to China, as well as permissions granted for Tibetans to reside in Beijing.

The fact that such a work was produced over two decades following De bzhin gshegs pa’s visit to Nanjing (1407-08) demonstrates the continued importance in early Ming China of the 5th Karmapa in particular and perhaps the religious alliance with Tibetans in general. The content of this work, as a transmission from the 5th Karmapa, with its nominal use of four scripts and use of Chinese phoneticization of Tibetan names and mantras, perhaps points to a marked Chinese interest in propagating the teachings of the 5th Karmapa and reflect a lasting effect of the Yongle emperor’s attempts to re-invigorate a host of political, economic and religious relationships between the Chinese and Tibetans.


Sources:

Heather Karmay, Early Sino-Tibetan Art. Aris and Phillips. 1975: 55-99.
Elliot Sperling. 1980. The 5th Karma-pa and some aspects of the relationship between Tibet and the early Ming. In Tibetan Studies in honour of High Richardson: Proceedings of the International Seminar of Tibetan Studies, Oxford 1979. Warminster: Aris & Philips Ltd. 280-290.
Jonathan A. Silk. 1996. Notes on the History of the Yongle Kanjur. In Suhrllekhah: Festgabe für Helmut Eimer. Swisttal-Odendorf: Indica et Tiebtica Verlag.

Entry by Eveline S. Yang, 2/20/07

Posted on

Bsod nams rgya mtsho–The Third Dalai Lama

Bsod nams rgya mtsho (Sonam Gyatso), The Third Dalai Lama (1543–88)

Bsod nams rgya mtsho was the leading hierarch of the Dge lugs pa (Gelugpa) school of Tibetan Buddhism during a time when competition from rival sects within Central Tibet, especially the bKa’ rgyud pa, drove them to seek political and religious patronage from sponsors outside the Tibetan cultural regions. Such a practice of Tibetan Buddhist leaders seeking support from non-Tibetan patrons stretched back to the Yuan and had become established by the end of the Ming. This was due to the decentralized power of the Mongols that allowed different Tibetan Buddhist leaders to gain support from different branches of the Mongol imperial family. While the Tibetans did not have a centralized missionary aim, their own quest for patronage took place within the broader context of struggles between Mongol, Manchu, and Chinese groups over political and territorial primacy in Inner Asia.

Within such a context, the Mongols revived the lama-patron relationship in the late sixteenth century in an attempt to expand their political authority using Tibetan Buddhism. Altan Khan (1521–82), ruler of the Tumed Mongols, then the most powerful group in Inner Asia, met with Bsod nams rgya mtsho in the region of Kokonor (Tib. Mtsho kha/Mtsho sngon, Ch. Qinghai) in 1578. During this meeting, Altan Khan accepted Bsod nams rgya mtsho as his “spiritual guide and refuge” and gave him the title of “Dalai Lama.” In return, Bsod nams rgya mtsho gave Altan Khan the title of “Protector of the Faith.” Altan Khan’s conversion to the dGe lugs pas can be seen as part of a broader attempt to subvert his nominal superior, Tumen Khan (1558–92) of the Chakhar Mongols, who had cultivated relationships with the Sa skya pa, and who were allied with the declining Ming against the new Manchu state. Meanwhile, Bsod nams rgya mtsho gained for the Dge lugs pa the support of a powerful and wealthy patron, which enabled him to consolidate Dge lugs pa strongholds in Tibetan and Mongol regions as well gain the attention of the Ming court in Beijing.

The year after this meeting, Bsod nams rgya mtsho sent Stong ‘khor chos rje Yon tan rgya mtsho, the first Chahan lama, to Altan Khan as his representative to the Mongols. In 1583, Bsod nams rgya mtsho embarked on a second mission from Central Tibet, which took him first to the birthplace of Tsong kha pa (1357–1419), the founder of the Dge lugs pa school, in A mdo. Here, he founded an innovative Dge lugs pa school at Sku ‘bum (Kumbum Monastery) that later produced many Dge lugs pa missionaries to northeast Asia for the next two centuries. He also visited monasteries linked to Tsong kha pa’s disciple, Shakya Ye shes, and ensured their legacies as Dge lugs pa institutions. In 1585, Bsod nams rgya mtsho went to Koke khota (Tib. Mkhar sngon, Ch. Guihuacheng), the capital of Tumed Mongol territory, at the request of Altan Khan’s son. Here he established a translation school near the Chinese border. The next year, Bsod nams rgya mtsho visited the territory of the Kharchin Mongols, where he established another translation school. In 1588, he traveled further northeast at the invitation of the Khorchin. There he gave the Khorchin khan a Hevajra empowerment and consecrated the establishment of a monastic community. Owing to his reputation and activities among the Mongols, Bsod nams rgya mtsho was invited to the Ming court in 1588 by the Wanli emperor (r.1572–1620), who gave him the title of the Great Imperial Preceptor who Confers Initiations (Guanding tai guoshi). Bsod nams rgya mtsho was intending to accept this invitation when he fell ill and died in Mongol regions in 1588.

Before his death in 1588, bSod nams rgya mtsho predicted he would be reincarnated in Mongolia (indeed, the fourth Dalai Lama was recognized in the nephew of Altan Khan), thus beginning the line of Dalai Lama reincarnations that continues to play an important role in Tibetan religion and politics.

Sources:
Tak-sing Kam. The dGe-lugs-pa Breakthrough: The Uluk Darxan Nangsu Lama’s Mission to the Manchus. Central Asiatic Journal. 44:2 (2000) p. 161-176.
Evelyn S. Rawski. 1998. The last emperors: a social history of Qing imperial institutions. Berkeley: University of California Press. 244-262.
Gray Tuttle. “A Tibetan Buddhist Mission to the East: The Fifth Dalai Lama’s Journey to Beijing, 1652-1653.” In Tibetan Society and Religion: The Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries. Bryan Cuevas and Kurtis Schaeffer, eds. Leiden: Brill, 2006; 65-87.
Gray Tuttle. “Imperial Traditions” from Tibetan Buddhists in the Making of Modern China.

Entry by Eveline S. Yang, 3/27/07

user-1541796308