Tag: ming

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