Tag: Place

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

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