Zanabazar Jebtsundamba Khutuktu

Zanabazar, the first Jebtsundamba Khutukhtu (Jetsun Dampa Khutuktu)

Zanabazar (1635-1723) was the initial incarnation of the Urga or Jebtsundamba (rje btsun dam pa) lineage of the western Outer Mongolian (Khalkha) monastery Erdeni Zuu. Recognized by the Fifth Dalai Lama when he was twenty-five, Zanabazar later held a close relationship with the Kangxi emperor and is credited with convincing the Khalkha Mongols to submit to the Qing empire – and not to culturally alien Russia – around 1691.[[#_ftn1|[1]]] After this, Kangxi bestowed upon Zanabazar the title “Da Lama,” and in turn the lama alluded to their reenactment of Khubilai Khan and Phakpa’s close relationship during the Yuan dynasty. In addition to his spiritual and political roles, Zanabazar was renowned in his own time up to the present for the intricate and elegant sculpture he created in a Nepali-derived style.

In 1639, at the age of fifteen, Zanabazar (son of the Khalkha Tshuyetu Khan Gombodorji) was accepted as an incarnate lama by a convocation of Khalkha nobles at Erdeni Zuu. The Khalkha Khan may have been trying to usurp some of the power of the Gelugpa (dge lugs pa) sect, and at the same time circumvent a potential alliance between the Tibetans and the newly founded Qing dynasty. The boy was sent to Tibet for recognition by the Dalai Lama in 1649, and he received many initiations and teachings over the next year from the Great Fifth and from the Fourth Panchen Lama Lobsang Chokyi Gyaltsen (blo bzang chos skyid rgyal mtshan). The Dalai Lama also gave Zanabazar the title Jebtsundamba Khutukhtu and recognized him as the reincarnation of Taranatha (1575-1634), a Jonangpa (jo nang pa) missionary lama who had traveled widely in Inner Mongolia and rivaled Gelugpa influence in the region. This recognition had astute political consequences. Besides transferring all the merit accumulated by Taranatha in Tibet and Mongolia to Zanabazar (and the Gelugpa), the Fifth Dalai Lama was also able to incorporate Taranatha’s monastery in Tibet, the center of the Jonangpa, Puntsokling (phun tshogs gling). The Great Fifth then “renovated” this monastery with murals by Nepali artists, thus materially inscribing there his ambition. Zanabazar did not preside over Puntsokling, however, but returned instead to Khalkha in the company of fifty painters and bronze casters (commanding both Nepali and Tibetan styles) to build a stupa for Taranatha’s remains, and to establish a new Gelugpa stronghold at Erdeni Zuu.

Zanabazar also never took up permanent residence at his seat of Erdeni Zuu, however, which was the largest stationary monastery of its time. His real establishment was in fact a traveling one; called orgoo (or in Russian, Urga) or Da Khuree or Ikh Khuree, which in Mongolian means Great Circle. With his traveling entourage, Zanabazar worked to carry out the proselytizing mission of the Gelugpas, especially the Fifth Dalai Lama. On the other hand, the Dalai Lama and Jetsundamba Khutukhtu sometimes acted like rival lords, investing, entitling, and providing seals for Mongol Khans, arbitrating disputes between the Khans, and – like emperors and Khans – receiving and dispatching embassies and commanding populations and sometimes even armies. Zanabazar’s Da Khuree ranged over at least seventeen different locations and five hundred kilometers between the mid-seventeenth and eighteenth century. The decoration of the lama’s roving temples reveals some of the techniques he employed towards his proselytizing and diplomatic ends, through his deep engagement with the elaborate artistic traditions and ritualism of his day. His tents were rich with painting, sculpture, textile hangings, and ritual objects created in his workshop. Zanabazar is also said to have composed ceremonial music and designed monks’ costumes and rituals, based on what he had seen at the Panchen Lama’s monastery Tashilunpo (bkra shis lhun po). His famous Nepali-influenced bronze sculptures are said to have been “created” at the unlikely place of Tovghuun, his retreat center on the outskirts of Erdeni Zuu. Patricia Berger argues that this reference mostly likely means that Zanabazar visualized the sculptures during meditation retreat after receiving various spiritual transmissions of texts (he was especially associated with Tara and Vajrapani), and that their later execution took place with the help of his artisan entourage. Actual production sites were spread over a wide geographic swath, unsurprisingly also linking sites of Zanabazar’s diplomatic and missionary endeavors: Beijing, Chengde, Dolonnor, Inner Mongolian Koke qota, and Amdo. Bronzes were sent to the court of the Kangxi emperor around 1655, and Zanabazar is also said to have produced sculptures in metal and gemstones while visiting Beijing in 1691. Continuing the tradition of Nepali-style artistry at the imperial court begun by Anige during the Yuan period, Zanabazar’s bronzes profoundly influenced Qing art.

Zanabazar’s visit to Beijing in 1691 came at a politically significant moment. The lama had just convinced the Khalkhas to submit to the Qing empire at Dolonnor, siding with the Kangxi emperor against the Western Mongolian Dzungars. Forging closer ties with the Manchu emperor – there is a story that Kangxi attempted to test the lama when he first arrived, but that Zanabazar revealed these tricks and also delighted the emperor with displays of his powers – Zanabazar again visited Beijing in 1721 to participate in Kangxi’s birthday celebrations. When the emperor passed away soon afterwards, Zanabazar came once more to conduct rituals for his death at Beijing’s Yellow Monastery (Huang si 黃寺). The lama passed away himself in Beijing only a few months later, in 1723. His body was sent back to Mongolia and mummified. Kangxi’s son, the Yongzheng emperor, ordered a Chinese-style monastery dedicated to Zanabazar’s main tutelary deity, Maitreya, to be built at the place where the lama’s traveling Da Khuree had stood at the moment of the his death. This monastery, called Amur-Bayasqulangtu or “Monastery of Blessed Peace,” resembles Yongzheng’s own palace Yonghegong in Beijing (converted by his son the Qianlong emperor into a Buddhist monastery). The monastery’s sophisticated construction in such a remote location – north of the modern city of Darkhan, near the northern Outer Mongolian border – demonstrates the far reach of the Qing empire in the early eighteenth century. Yongzheng pledged 100,000 liang of silver to the monastery’s construction, which was not completed until a year after his own death in 1736. Zanabazar’s body finally found its way there in 1779 (the project thus spanning three different reign periods), and remained at the monastery until being carried off and lost during the revolution in Mongolia of 1920s and 1930s.

Sources:
Patricia Berger. 2003. Empire of Emptiness: Buddhist Art and Political Authority in Qing China. University of Hawai’i Press.
Sabine Dabringhaus. 1997. “Chinese Emperors and Tibetan Monks: Religion as an Instrument of Rule,” in China and her neighbours. Wiesbaden: Harrasowitz Verlag.
James L. Hevia. 1995. “A multitude of lords: The Qing Empire, Manchu rulership and interdomainal relations,” in Cherishing men from afar: Qing guest ritual and the Macartney embassy of 1793. Durham N.C.: Duke University Press.
Wang Xiangyun. 2000. “The Qing court’s Tibet connection: Lcang skya Rol pa’I rdo rje and the Qianlong Emperor.” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 60 (1): 125-163.

Entry by Stacey Van Vleet, 3/28/07

[[#_ftnref1|[1]]] The date of this event is contested; it is variously cited as 1688, 1691, or 1693.

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

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

Da sheng shou wan an si

Da sheng shou wan an si 大聲壽萬安寺

The Da sheng shou wan an temple (大聲壽萬安寺) was built sometime between 1279 and 1288 in the western part of Beijing by order of Qubilai, and originally housed the renowned Sandalwood Buddha. The sandalwood statue was said to have been the only lifelike portrait of the Buddha, carved during his lifetime in 990 B.C. by his disciple Maudgalyayana. Its presence in Beijing greatly added to the prestige of the Yuan Mongol empire.

The planning of the Da sheng shou wan an si is attributed in his biography to the Nepali architect and sculptor A ni ge (阿尼哥), who came to work at the Yuan court in 1261 and died in 1306. The temple was also known as Baita si (白塔, Temple of the White Stupa), because it was built around the Baita (White Stupa), the oldest and highest stupa or pagoda in Beijing. The 167 foot high stupa was completed in 1279 and long dominated the skyline of the western part of the city.

Just before the Yuan Mongol court fled Beijing for the north, the Da sheng shou wan an si was struck by lightning. This was on June 20, 1368, and except for two halls, the temple burnt to the ground. The Sandalwood Buddha had been moved before this to a temple inside the imperial palace. The White Stupa still stands, although it has been renovated many times during the Yuan, Ming, Qing, and Republican periods. In 1457 a new temple was erected around the stupa and called the Miaoying si (妙應寺, Temple of Miraculous Evidence). Popularly, it was again known as the Baita si.


Sources:

Franke, Herbert. 1978. From tribal chieftain to universal emperor and god: the legitimation of the Yuan dynasty, Sitzungsberichte – Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse. Munchen: Verlag der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Franke, Herbert, 1994, “Consecration of the ‘White Stupa’ in 1279,” Asia Major VII (Third Series) (1): 155-184

Entry by Stacey Van Vleet, 2/4/07

Stupa comparison–middle stupa is Anige’s

Stupa 2006, note layers of “13 wheels” under canopy

museum reconstruction of Yuan period monastery