Tag: text

Posted on

Lama Shuo

Qianlong’s Pronouncement on Lamas (Lama shuo)

In this 1792 stele pronouncement found in the Yonghe Gong, the Qianlong emperor declared formal Qing patronage over the dGe-lugs-pa which was enjoying high popularity among its Mongol followers. This Pronouncement was inscribed in Chinese, Manchu, Mongol and Tibetan, signifying the Manchu’s (and ultimately Qianlong’s) claim to universal rulership as the Court officially recognised both the Dalai and Panchen Lamas. The Pronouncement claimed that unlike the Mongols, the Qing has never used the term “di shi” (imperial preceptor) to represent the relationship between the Emperor and the leading Tibetan Lama. However, the term “guo shi” or “Teacher of the Kingdom” was only reserved for Lcang Skya who was the Qianlong Emperor’s confidante, as well as the leading Lama representing the Qing Court in Tibetan affairs. Since Qianlong explicitly rejects claims that the Lama had any spiritual superiority over the Emperor and re-establishes the hierarchy of rulership between Lamas and patron. The pronouncement also declared that the process of picking the future Dalai Lama would no longer be concentrated within the hands of certain Tibetan or Mongolian lineages. Instead, the names of the potential incarnates would be placed in a golden urn and selected in a public ceremony to ensure impartiality. This was also in response to the accusations of the defeated Nepalese Gurkhas, (and some Chinese) who claimed that the Qing merely patronised the dGe-lugs-pa for the sake of political expediency in keeping the Mongols in check. However, Qianlong, in the edict, proclaimed in the Manchu inscription that as a devote Tibetan Buddhist, he not only understood but had the right to make the changes that he did as Emperor.

Sources:
Patricia Berger. 2003. Empire of Emptiness: Buddhist Art and Political Authority in Qing China. U Hawaii Press pp 34-5, James L. Hevia. 1995. Lamas, Emperors, and Rituals

Entry: 4/28/07

Posted on

Qianlong Pentaglot Dictionary

Qing text Qianlong Pentaglot Dictionary (Wuti Qingwen Jian五體清文鑒)

The enormous project was to create a pentaglot dictionary (Manchu, Chinese, Mongolian, Tibetan, Chagatay) and seems to have been spearheaded by the guoshi Changkya Rolpay Dorje (Lcang Skya) who found it immensely difficult to provide accurate translations between the different languages employed by the Qing Court. It was completed in 1769 This stemmed from a bigger issue of translating Buddhist documents from the different languages and trying to retain its essential doctrines without compromising on its theology. This included translations of the Tibetan Kanjur into Mongolian, as well as its commentaries; the translation of the Tanjur and the Kanjur into Manchu and the Suramgaman Sutra from Chinese into Tibetan. Rolpay Dorje had also previously compiled an authoritative Manchu-Mongol dictionary to help translators in standardizing all translations.


Source:

Mimaki. A Tibetan Index to the Pentaglot Dictionary from the Qing Dynasty. JIATS 1988, pp. 279-282.

Entry by: ShiQi Wu, 4/2/07

Posted on

Qing Canon Printing

Tibetan Buddhist Canon Texts Printing in Qing

It became a tradition for the emperors to sponsor printings of the Tibetan Buddhist canonical texts from Hung Taiji and onwards in Qing dynasty, both at Mukden (present-day Shenyang) and at Peking, which served as a hub of the vast project. One way to accomplish this task was to establish an imperial publishing house, otherwise known as the palace publishing house.

In comparing the printings of the Buddhist canons in the Qing and in Yuan and Ming dynasties, the sponsorship of publishing was dramatically shifted from Tibetan lamas (who occupied official posts in the Yuan court) directly to the Qing emperors. Emperor Yongzheng (r. 1723-35) established a Buddhist publishing house where many Buddhist canons were published. One monastery in Beijing, Songzhusi Temple (Chin.: 嵩祝寺, within the Imperial City), emerged as a central site for printing Buddhist texts. The site of the Songzhusi Temple had been the location of the printing workshops in Ming dynasty, called Hanjing Chang (Chin.:漢經厰) and Fanjing Chang (Chin.: 番經厰), literally translated as Han canons workshop and “Barbarian” [i.e. Tibetan] canons workshop, respectively. Emperor Yongzheng re-established the Songzhusi Temple in 1733, and it was moved to the current location by Emperor Qianlong in 1772. A number of canonical texts were printed in this printing workshop.

What is also interesting is that the Qing court encouraged having the Tibetan Buddhist canonical texts translated into various languages, for instance, Manchu, Chinese and Mongolian. The Mongolian language was one of the languages promoted by the Qing court. Mongolian appeared not only on steles, tablets, etc., but also on the guidebooks to Mount Wutai, such as the Qingliangshan xin zhi (Chin.: 清涼山新志), a fine new version of a Buddhist guidebook to Mount Wutai and its temples, edited by Lao zang dan pa老藏丹巴(a Chinese monk), in ten juan卷 in 1701， as well as an expanded version in twenty-two chuan卷 that was published in 1811. Both editions were published by the palace publishing house. Several Qing emperors visited Mount Wu-tai, where Tibetan Buddhist lamas were active then. Compiling and publishing the guidebooks for the Mongols, therefore, deserves more attention in terms of the triangle relationship among the Manchu court, the Tibetan Buddhism and the Mongols that potentially threatened the Manchu in the frontier areas.

These printed texts were mostly purchased by visiting Mongolian lamas for their home monasteries; however, it would be improper to think that all these texts were for sale. The Tibetan Buddhist canons were exclusively distributed as imperial gifts. Copies of them were scattered throughout the country and even reached as far as Central Asia.

Taking over the publishing houses was important for the Qing court to manipulate, recreate history, thus, to reconstruct the ideology, ultimately, legitimize the political system. Several selected published editions of the Tibetan Buddhist canon and other texts follows[[#_ftn1|[1]]],

The Kanjur in 108 volumes (1684-92; 1700; 1717-20; 1737 and in ca. 1765)
The Tenjur in 225 volumes (1721-24; 1742-49)[[#_ftn2|[2]]]
The Manchu Kanjur (1772-1790)
One edition of the Chinese Buddhist canon (1738)
Two editions of the Tibetan Buddhist Kanjur (1692 and 1700)
The Mongolian canon of 1718-20
The Qingliangshan xin zhi清涼山新志in ten chuan (1701)
The Qingliangshan xin zhi清涼山新志. In twenty-two chuan (1811)

Sources:

Crossley, Pamela Kyle, The Rulerships of China. The American historical review, 1468-1483. 1992

Farquhar, David M, Emperor As Bodhisattva in the Governance of the Ch’ing Empire. Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 38 (1), 1978

Uspensky, Vladimir, The ‘Beijing Lamaist Centre’ and Tibet in the XVII-XX century. Tibet and her neightors.

Van Vleet, Stacey, “Entry of Yuan Canon printings”

Entry by Lan Wu 03/14/07

[[#_ftnref1|[1]]] This is not an exhausted list. Other printed products range from a pocket-size Heart Sutra in Tibetan with both Manchu transcription and Chinese translation, to huge works like, the Perfection of Wisdom Sutra in a Hundred Thousand Lines, were also published in Beijing. For further information, please consult with The ‘Beijing Lamaist Centre’ and Tibet in the XVII-early XX century by Vladimir Uspensky.
[[#_ftnref2|[2]]]Another resource mentions that the Bstan-‘gyur, and its publication in 226 volumes, which was the complete translation into Mongolian of the Tibetan supplementary canon was published during 1741 to 1749. Both of them may refer to the same printed Tenjur.

Posted on

Wutaishan’s Panoramic Map-Cifusi

Wutaishan’s panoramic picture of the sacred realm of the mountain of the five terraces and Cifu Ci (慈福寺)

The panoramic picture of the sacred realm of the mountain of the five terraces is a map of Wutai shan, which was craved by a Mongolian lama (Gelong) Lhundrup (act. 1846) in 1846 at Cihusi. A hand-colored print of the woodblocks was purchased by members of a Finnish expedition to Mongolia in 1909. Later on, the print was reproduced in eight sections by the National Board of Antiquities in Helsinki in 1987. This print depicts 130-odd temple sites in the mountain range, accompanied by an equal number of inscriptions, depictions of divine emanations, pilgrimage activities, rituals, and festivals.

The woodblock set serves as the master copy for numerous prints, although colored by different persons. These prints are preserved in various places around the world.

The full description of this print can be found in Wen-shing Chou’s article (pp. 109). This gazetteer map ought to be read in conjunction with texts. This map illustrates the spatial relations alongside a text that itemizes distances, directions, and relative locations in great detail. This map demonstrates in detail the number of bays and halls of large and small monasteries and liberally exaggerates the relative scale of certain portions to match their prominence and openness for public spectacle, therefore, it can be considered as more hierarchical, individuated, and complete assembly of sites than the topographically accurately maps. This map can bee seen as a guide map for visionary encounters.

It may be improper to describe the prints without introducing the monastery where it was produced, which is Cifu Si (慈福寺)

Cifu Si, also called Chantang Yuan[[#_ftn1|[1]]] (禅堂院) is located on a hill behind the Pusa Ding (the Bodhisattva Peak; Manjusri Peak). It was established during the Daoguang regime[[#_ftn2|[2]]] (r. 1820-1850) of the Qing dynasty. Cifu Si should be associated with the woodcut printings, since it was built at the time of the woodblocks’ execution.

This monastery served as the primary lodging center for all Mongolian lamas who made the pilgrimage to Wutaishan. Cihua Si is one of the three (out of seventy or so) monasteries that had no inscription in earlier textual records.

In sum, part of the intention of carving a new map of Wutaishan in Cifu Si was to place Cifu Si in the center of the map and legitimized this monastery as a permanent existence at Wutaishan.

Sources:
Chou, Wen-shing, Ineffable Paths: Mapping Wutaishan in Qing Dynasty China, Art Bulletin, March 2007, Vol. 89 No. 1
http://www.chinawts.com

Entry by Lan Wu 04/16/07
________
[[#_ftnref1|[1]]] 禅堂院：Shantang yuan or Chantang yuan, “禅”is a polyphonic character.
[[#_ftnref2|[2]]] According to Chou, the monastery was established in the early years of the Daoguang reign (1821-1851)

Posted on

Mantras Yuzhi Man Han Menggu Xifan Hebi Dazang Quanzhu

Yuzhi Man Han Menggu Xifan hebi dazang quanzhou 御製滿漢蒙古西番合壁大藏全咒

This text, which included dharani and mantra in Manchu, Chinese, Mongolian, and Tibetan, was printed and distributed to monasteries throughout the empire in 1773. It restored the proper sounds of Buddhist dharani and mantra, most of which had been rendered in Chinese in the Tang dynasty and were, by the 18th century, pronounced very differently and thus no longer zhenyan 真言—“true speech.” The Qianlong emperor’s uncle, Zhuang Qinwang Yinlu 莊親王胤祿 (1695-1767) supervised this project between 1748 and 1758, using Tibetan sources as a guide to proper pronunciation. His four-part compilation, titled in Chinese Yuzhi Man Han Menggu Xifan hebi dazang quanzhou 御製滿漢蒙古西番合壁大藏全咒.

Source:
Berger, Patricia, “The Jiaqing Emperor’s Magnificent Record of the Western Tour.” Wutaishan and Qing Culture, ed. Gray Tuttle and Johan Eleverskog, forthcoming

Posted on

Multilingual texts during Qianlong Reign

Multilingual texts during Qianlong Reign

There have been a lot of multilingual texts during Xixia, Yuan, Ming, and Qing periods. “Xixiazang” is one example of it; according to Heather Karmay, Guanzhuba was involved in making this work in Hangzhou. “Xixiazang” was written both in Xixia and Chinese, and made between 1306 and 1307. Among these dynasties and states, Qing empire had especially a lot of multilingual texts; Qianlong Emperor made many multilingual edicts. According to Patricia Berger, Qianlong Emperor carved four languages of empires when he made an edict for Ubasi, the leader of the Torghut Mongols having been arrived from Russia in 1773. The four languages of the Empire were Manchu, Tibetan, Chinese and Mongolian. In 1737, Qianlong Emperor also made “an edict of three languages” in the courtyard of the “Monastery of Blssed Peace (Qingningsi).” Again in 1792, he composed “quadrilingual stele of Yonghegong” in Yonghegong.

The reason for these dynasties and especially Qing Empire having a lot of multilingual texts has not been clearly known. However, Patricia Berger suggests the reason of Qianlong Emperor’s having made a lot of multilingual texts in her “Empire of Emptiness”; Qianlong Emperor thought he had power over other states, by mastering and using the languages of the states that Qing was ruling. Berger quoted Qianlong emperor saying,

“In 1743 I first practiced Mongolian. In 1760 after I pacified the Muslims, I acquainted myself with Uighur. In 1776 after the two pacifications of Jinchuan I became roughly conversant in Tibetan. In 1780 because the Panchen Lama was coming to visit I also studied Tangut. Thus when the rota of Mongols, Muslims and Tibetans come every year to the capital for audience I use their languages and do not rely on an interpreter… to express the idea of conquering by kindness.” [[#_ftn1|[1]]]

The quote shows that Qianlong Emperor actually thought knowing the language and showing his knowledge of the language itself show that Qing Empire’s power over the other states.

[[#_ftnref1|[1]]] Berger, p 38, note to Yuan Hongqi, “Qianlong shiqi de gongting jieqing huodong,” Gugongbowuyuan yuankan 53, no. 3 (1991: 85)

Posted on

Qianlong’s Yuhuashi (Hall of Raining Flowers)

Hall of Raining Flowers (Yuhuashi; 雨花室)

“Hall of Raining Flowers ” (雨花室) is a poem written by the Emperor Qianlong in 1754, when he devoted considerable energy to Buddhist practice and patronage in his late thirties and forties. In this poem, he reiterated his desire to “manifest emptiness”, as Vimalakirti had done.

This poem indicates the Emperor Qianlong’s paradoxical religious practice: The construction of a path to enlightenment and the apprehension of emptiness must take place in a sensory world filled with desirable, fascinating things.

Hall of Raining Flowers

During the three months of spring I came to a peaceful, quiet lodging
Where, for five days, I practiced pure amusements.
Each time I chanted I took a turn and
Discrimination returned.
On the other side of the window, the vaporous shadow of a kingfisher-
I enter and sit in solitude in the cypress’s shade
To put Vimalakirti’s investigations to the test,
So that I might yet manifest emptiness.

The Qianlong emperor was famous for his enthusiastic engagement with the material world. He was obsessed with collecting works of art and craft in all the media of the day. The Qianlong emperor did not only collect all these art works, but also arranged to construct a number of temples; each conceptually replicated an earlier model.

Sources:
Berger, Patricia, Empire of Emptiness: Buddhist Art and Political Authority in Qing China. U Hawaii .P, 2003

Entry by Lan Wu 03/23/07

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

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

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