Tibetan and Himalayan Library - THL

THL Title Text
Tibetan Buddhism at Wutai Shan in the Qing
Gray Tuttle, Columbia University
JIATS, no. 6 (December 2011), THL #T5721, pp. 163-214
Notes

Notes

[1] Wutai shan, also known as Qingliang shan (Clear and Cool Mountain), is a cluster of five alpine peaks located only some one hundred and fifty miles west of Beijing and has been renowned as a Buddhist site since the Northern Wei dynasty (Bei wei, 386-534 CE).
[2] My use of the term “Confucian,” though problematic, is merely an expedient shorthand referring to the Chinese literati and bureaucratic community, especially that associated with a critique of monastic Buddhist practice. The views of such men have been adopted by much modern scholarship, and is probably best exemplified by Sung-peng Hsu’s statement, “For political expediency, many Chinese rulers appointed Tibetan monks to the central government office of religion to participate in Buddhist activities in China.” See his A Buddhist Leader in Ming China: The Life and Thought of Han-Shan Te-Ch’ing (University Park: Pennsylvania University Press, 1979), 45. This statement is especially out of place in describing the Ming (1368-1644) situation, when relations with Tibet, as a political entity, were almost non-existent. See also, Lawrence Kessler, K’ang-hsi and the Consolidation of Ch’ing Rule (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1976), 145.
[3] Where possible I will compare these accounts to what I am calling Confucian-dominated historiography, especially as recorded in the Shunzhi and Kangxi Veritable Records (Shi lu) and the Kangxi Diaries of Rest and Repose (Kangxi qi ju zhu).
[4] David Farquhar, “Emperor as Bodhisattva in the Governance of the Ch’ing Empire,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 38, no. 1 (1978): 34.
[5] Farquhar, “Emperor as Bodhisattva,” 25.
[6] Ruth Dunnell (“The Hsia Origins of the Yüan Institution of Imperial Preceptor,” Asia Major 5, part 1 [1992]: 110) is one of the many scholars to have accepted this identification citing Faraquhar to say that “Qubilai later was identified as the bodhisattva Manjusri in the Mongolian text of the Juyong Gate stele inscriptions, erected under the last Yüan emperor.”
[7] One obvious place where such an association should be found (but is not) would have been in Pakpa’Phags pa’s text for Qubilai Khan’s heir Jinggim: Pakpa Lodrö Gyentsen’Phags pa blo gros rgyal mtshan, Prince Jing-Gim’s Textbook of Tibetan Buddhism: The shes-bya rab-gsal (Jñeya-prakāśa), translated and annotated by Constance Hoog. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1983 [1278]. In a cursory reading of Pakpa’Phags pa’s praises of Wutai shan, I also found no ready association of Qubilai with Mañjuśrī.
[8] Discussed in Karl Debreczeny’s introduction to these articles: Karl Debreczeny, “Wutai Shan: Pilgrimage to Five-Peak Mountain,” Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies, no. 6 (December 2011), http://www.thlib.org?tid=T5714.
[9] Morris Rossabi, “Khubilai Khan and the Women in his Family,” in Studia Sino-Mongolica: Festschrift für Herbert Franke (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag GMBH, 1979), 161.
[10] Farquhar, “Emperor as Bodhisattva,” 14.
[11] See Elliot Sperling, “Early Ming Policy Toward Tibet: An Examination of the Proposition that the Early Ming Emperors Adopted a ‘Divide and Rule’ Policy toward Tibet” (PhD diss., Indiana University, 1983), 117, 184.
[12] Both Hoong Teik Toh and Natalie Köhle have looked at the primary sources on this subject, especially the presence of Tibetan Buddhists in China proper. See Natalie Köhle, “Why Did the Kangxi Emperor Go to Wutai Shan?” (Master’s thesis, Harvard University, 2006), to which I will refer, since this was the version available to me when I wrote this paper. Her work was later published in revised form as Natalie Köhle, “Why Did the Kangxi Emperor Go to Wutai Shan?” Late Imperial China 29, no. 1 (2008): 73-119. Hoong Teik Toh, “Tibetan Buddhism in Ming China,” (PhD diss., Harvard University, 2004).
[13] Hsu, A Buddhist Leader in Ming China, 71-75.
[14] Cui Zhengseng, “Wutai Shan Fojiao wen hua.” Shi jie zong jiao yan jiu 3 (1991): 89.
[15] Samuel Grupper, “The Manchu Imperial Cult of the Early Ch’ing Dynasty: Texts and Studies on the Tantric Sanctuary of Mahakala at Mukden” (PhD diss., Indiana University, 1980), 90-91.
[16] For another reading of this phenomenon, responding in part to early drafts of the present essay, see Köhle’s work on Wutai shan, “Why Did the Kangxi Emperor Go to Wutai Shan?”
[17] “Qingdai lama jiao beike lu,” in Zhang Xixin, Qing zhengfu yu lama jiao (Lhasa: Xizang renmin chubanshe, 1988), 246-48. These texts were preserved in Princeton’s Gest Library, Qingliang shan xinzhi [New Clear and Cool Mountain Gazetteer] (1701), volume 7, 21b-26b. For a chronological list of relevant gazetteers, see Appendix 1.
[18] My thanks to Johan Elverskog (and David Robinson), who provided the following information on this figure: “David Robinson checked the Ming military records he worked on for the name Jia, and it turns out Mongols did have that Xing [surname]. Thus, in accord with the colophon of 1662/1721 gazetteer and his biography in the 1702 [edition] I believe he must have been Mongol.”
[19] For details on this encounter from the Fifth Dalai Lama’s biography see: Ngawang Lozang GyatsoNgag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho, Ngawang Lozang Gyatsö NamtarNgag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho’i rnam thar (Lhasa: bod ljong mi dmangs dpe skrun khang, 1989 [1681]) 407, 415; Awang Luosang Jiacou, Wushi Dalai lama zhuan, trans. Chen Qingying and Ma Lianlong, Zhongguo bianjiang shi di ziliao conggan-Xizang juan (Beijing: Zhongguo Zangxue chubanshe, 1992 [1681]), 338, 343.
[20] Zhang, “Qingdai lama jiao beike lu,” 246. See Köhle, “Why Did the Kangxi Emperor Go to Wutai Shan?” for further evidence of the continuity of such positions from the Ming dynasty. The term Fan must have included Mongol Buddhists as well.
[21] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 3, 17a. Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao [Summary of Clear and Cool Mountain] (post-1780), first volume (shang juan), 63a. I have translated xiujian daochang as “conduct a ritual” on the basis of Luo Zhufeng, ed., Hanyu da cidian (Shanghai: Hanyu da cidian chubanshe, 1995), vol. 10, 1078, the fourth definition of daochang, which speaks of a forty-nine day daochang done for an elderly lady at great expense. This definition emphasizes the religious activity rather than the locus of the religious activity. Although these two aspects seem almost inseparable in the Chinese, I can think of no fluent way to incorporate both ideas. Nevertheless, the meaning may well be something more like “established a field of religious activity [for the duration of] forty days.” The activity which occurs in these rituals is most likely that described in the first definition: “the recitation of scriptures and religious services.” Vague though this definition is, we will see elements of it confirmed and refined based on later sources, described below.
[22] Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780), first volume, 63a.
[23] On Soni, see Arthur William Hummel, Orientalia Division Library of Congress, Eminent Chinese of the Ching period (1644-1912) (Taipei: Ch’eng Wen Publishing; New York: Paragon Book Gallery, 1970), 663.
[24] Shizu shi lu [Shunzhi Veritable Records], 1302-303.
[25] For similar arrangements made in the same year for the capital, see Da Qing hui dian li fan yuan shi li, vol. 5, volume 974, 2b, which records the written authorization (tizhun) regarding the Tibetan Buddhist monastics at court. For instance, starting in the Shunzhi reign, 108 lamabla mas were assigned to the Rear Yellow Temple (Houhuang si – the residence built for the Fifth Dalai Lama’s visit to the capital). This number was maintained by the Kangxi emperor (Da Qing hui dian li fan yuan shi li, vol. 5, volume 974, 3a).
[26] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 3, 17b, 22b. Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780), first volume, 63b, 66b. As Köhle (“Why Did the Kangxi Emperor Go to Wutai Shan?”) has shown, similar ritual activity by Tibetan Buddhists was supported in the late fifteenth century and probably continued on into the sixteenth century, so this too marked an element of continuity.
[27] At this time while he reconnoitered the way to prepare for escorting his grandmother, the grand empress dowager, to the mountain, he sponsored a three-day life-extending ceremony (yenshou wuliang daochang) to pray for the grand empress dowager, and then he made offerings for prayers to protect the grand empress dowager’s prosperity and long-life (fuqi yanmao shengshou wuliang). See Gest Library’s New Clear and Cool Mountain Gazetteer (1701), volume 3, 18a-18b. Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780), first volume, 63b, 64a-65a. Only on this first occurrence was the emperor directly responsible for its initiation; otherwise, according to the gazetteers’ record, different members of the imperial family (an imperial prince twice and the empress dowager twice) would initiate this particular ritual activity. For the exceptional ceremonies, which were also largely concerned with imperial longevity, see Table 1.
[28] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 3, 19a. According to Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780), first volume, 64a-65a.
[29] Yishu Guan, ed., Kangxichao Manwen zhupi zouzhe quanyi (Beijing: Shehui kexue chubanshe, 1996), 261, no. 460. These are Chinese translations of the unpublished Manchu original archives. Memorials written in 1702, 1704, 1707, and 1708 frequently discussed the recitation of sutras in relation to long-life (wanshou wuliang) prayers at both Wutai shan and other locations in Shanxi. Yishu Guan, ed., Kangxichao Manwen zhupi zouzhe quanyi 261, 264, 407, 415, 508; nos. 460, 461, 468, 831, 859, 860, 1106.
[30] Yishu Guan, ed., Kangxichao Manwen zhupi zouzhe quanyi, 415, no. 859. In 1707, the Manchu governor visited Wutai shan to start the long-life sutra recitations on behalf of the emperor. Yishu Guan, ed., Kangxichao Manwen zhupi zouzhe quanyi, 508, no. 1106. I have not examined the entire (1500-page) collection of these memorials.
[31] Yishu Guan, ed., Kangxichao Manwen zhupi zouzhe quanyi, 407, no. 831.
[32] I list the records in both Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701) and Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780). In all cases but one noted below, the Gest Library record is more complete.
[33] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 3, 17a. Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780), first volume, 63a.
[34] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 3, 17a. Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780), first volume, 63a.
[35] Shunzhi Veritable Records, vol. 3, 1302-303.
[36] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 3, 17b. Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780), first volume, 63b. The offerings were fairly standard and accompanied each ritual. Sometimes a specific amount was given to a specific monastery or individual monastic leaders.
[37] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 3, 18a. Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780), first volume, 63b.
[38] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 3, 18b. Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780), first volume, 64a-65a. The phrase daochang encountered in previous records does not appear in these Chinese translations of the Manchu.
[39] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 3, 19a. According to Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780), first volume, 64a-65a, the latter ritual took place twice, in the second and ninth months; whereas the Gest Library edition does not have a separate entry for the ninth month. It seems to have collapsed the two visits into one entry.
[40] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 3, 20b. Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780), first volume, 66a. She died over a month later. See also Jonathan Spence, Emperor of China: Self-portrait of K’ang-hsi (New York: Vintage Books, 1988 [1974]), 104-105.
[41] Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780), first volume, 66a.
[42] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 3, 21a. Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780), first volume, 66a-b. See also Evelyn S. Rawski, The Last Emperors: A Social History of Qing Imperial Institutions (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998), 51.
[43] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 3, 21b. Entry absent in Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780).
[44] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 3, 21b-22a. Entry absent in Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780).
[45] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 3, 22a. Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780), first volume, 66a-b.
[46] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 3, 22b. Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780), first volume, 66b.
[47] The fact that the Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi edited edition (post-1780) did not report such events after 1698 suggests that it was based on the Gest Library edition, and that its compilers did not have access to the Manchu archives.
[48] Yishu Guan, ed., Kangxichao Manwen zhupi zouzhe quanyi, 261, 264; no. 461, see also nos. 460, 468. In relation to no. 461, see also Shengzu shi lu [Kangxi Veritable Records], vol. 5, 2782, which discussed the establishment of a longevity pavilion (jian wanshou ting yi zuo).
[49] Yishu Guan, ed., Kangxichao Manwen zhupi zouzhe quanyi, 407, no. 831.
[50] Yishu Guan, ed., Kangxichao Manwen zhupi zouzhe quanyi, 407, 415; nos. 831, 859, 860.
[51] Yishu Guan, ed., Kangxichao Manwen zhupi zouzhe quanyi, 415, no. 859.
[52] Yishu Guan, ed., Kangxichao Manwen zhupi zouzhe quanyi, 508, no. 1106.
[53] Yishu Guan, ed., Kangxichao Manwen zhupi zouzhe quanyi, 261, 264, 407, 415, 508; nos. 460, 461, 468, 831, 859, 860, 1106.
[54] Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780), first volume, 68a-71a.
[55] See Table 2 for the years listed. I have not tried to extend the record beyond 1701, as the Qinding Qingliang shan zhi [Imperial Gazetteer of Clear and Cool Mountain] written in the Qianlong reign was not available to me when I was compiling this data.
[56] See Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780), first volume, 67a.
[57] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 3, 17b. Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780), first volume, 63b. The offerings were fairly standard and accompanied each ritual. Sometimes a specific amount was given to a specific monastery or individual monastic leaders.
[58] Although references to these monasteries being associated with Tibetan Buddhist practice are only found in much later sources (1813 in the case of Shuxiang Si [see appendix list of gazetteers], and not until the 1930s in the case of Bishan Si [see Gray Tuttle, Tibetan Buddhists in the Making of Modern China (New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 2005), 214]) there was probably a gradual introduction of Tibetan Buddhist practices to these sites as a result of the early Qing patronage and support for Tibetan Buddhists.
[59] On such patronage in the Qianlong period, see Patricia Berger, Empire of Emptiness: Buddhist Art and Political Authority in Qing China (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2003).
[60] On the second point, see Köhle, “Why Did the Kangxi Emperor Go to Wutai Shan?” regarding the Kangxi emperor’s support for other parties at Wutai shan.
[61] Kangxi Diaries of Rest and Repose, vol. 2, 960-61, see also Kangxi Veritable Records, vol. 3, 1430, which omitted mention of the magistrate.
[62] Kangxi Veritable Records, vol. 5, 2781. This assemblage of persons is the closest I could find in the primary sources to the group of officials (Shanxi governor, Datong Regional Military Commander, and Daizhou Circuit Intendant) who were said to have been ordered to present tribute (jingong) in association with the presentation of a seal of command (tidu yin) of Mount Wutai to a Chinese monk versed in Tibetan Buddhism. See the annotations (not in Tibetan original) to Tuguan, Zhangjia Guoshi Ruobi duoji zhuan, tr. Chen Qingying and Ma Lianlong (Beijing: Minzu chubanshe, 1988), 304, n. 3.
[63] Vladimir Uspensky, “Legislation Relating to the Tibetan Buddhist Establishments on Wutai Shan during the Qing Dynasty,” paper given at the “Wutai Shan and Qing Culture” Conference at the Rubin Museum of Art (May 12th -13th, 2007), noted that the Kangxi emperor was accompanied by the Khalkha Mongol lamabla maÖndür Gegen at this time, though this person was not recorded in the Qing dynastic sources. Köhle stated that the Jetsün DampaRje btsun dam paKhutukhtu was also said to have accompanied the Kangxi emperor at this time (note 133 does not specify the source of this information), but Charleux noted that his attendance was not recorded in the Veritable Records of the Successive Reigns of the Great Qing Dynasty (Da qing li chao shi lu). If the source for this reference was a later biography of the Jetsün DampaRje btsun dam paKhutukhtu, such a source might have sought to exaggerate the importance of its subject, by inventing a trip in the company of the emperor. See Isabelle Charleux, “Mongol Pilgrimages to Wutai Shan in the Late Qing Dynasty,” Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies, no. 6 (December 2010), http://www.thlib.org?tid=T5712; Charles R. Bawden, The Jebtsundamba Khutukhtus of Urga (Wiesbaden: O. Harrassowitz), 1961.
[64] On his second and third visits to the mountain no mention of officials coming pay homage is made in the relevant passages: Kangxi Veritable Records, vol. 3, 1493-95; vol. 5, 2516-17.
[65] Kangxi Veritable Records, vol. 5, 3223. As an aside, it appears that the King of Annam (annan guowang) sent tribute at this time and (his envoys) were banqueted according to regulations. It is unclear from the entry whether this event took place at Wutai shan, or just – as is more likely – contemporaneously.
[66] For Mongol nobles who accompanied the Jiaqing emperor in 1811, see Charleux, “Mongol Pilgrimages to Wutai Shan.”
[67] Köhle’s translation of excerpts of Gao Shiqi’s “Daily Record of Following in the Retinue of Kangxi’s Western Tour” makes this case quite well.
[68] At the conference in which these papers were presented, Susan Naquin brought up the important idea of competition between traditions at Wutai shan. This effort to put up such a stele at Pusa Ding might be an instance of such competition (Chinese lay Buddhist countering the Tibetan Buddhist activities), but it might equally be evidence of Chinese lay Buddhists working in concert with the Tibetan Buddhists who ran and staffed the monastery, toward the same goal of praying for the emperor’s longevity.
[69] Yishu Guan, ed., Kangxichao Manwen zhupi zouzhe quanyi, 261, no. 461. I am relying on a Chinese translation of a Manchu document in this case. I am assuming that the Chinese translator has carefully translated the term for province (I would expect Manchu golo), which should firmly indicate that the governor is referring to China proper rather the outer dependencies of the empire (Manchu, tulergi golo). In any case, no specific mention of appealing to the Mongols is made in this case. For a related reference to this pavilion, see Kangxi Veritable Records, vol. 5, 2781-82.
[70] Yishu Guan, ed., Kangxichao Manwen zhupi zouzhe quanyi, 261, no. 461. This is the translation of the vermilion rescript: “zhi dao liao.”
[71] Pamela Crossley, A Translucent Mirror: History and Identity in Qing Imperial Ideology (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999), 43-44.
[72] Timothy Brook, Geographical Sources of Ming-Qing History, Michigan Monographs in Chinese Studies 58 (Ann Arbor: Center for Chinese Studies, 1988), 174-77. I have compiled a far more complete list, including Tibetan and Mongolian editions (see Appendix 1) of the gazetteers devoted to Wutai shan than that compiled by Brook (Geographical Sources, 45, 125-26). Knowing Brook’s devotion to the Jiangnan region, I feel confident that his survey of the West Lake gazetteers is comprehensive within the limitations of libraries in North America, a limitation I have also largely observed.
[73] Susan Naquin, Peking: Temples and City Life, 1400-1900 (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2000).
[74] Suzhou, Hangzhou, Ganzhou, or Nanjing might also figure in this accounting, but most of the gazetteers that Brook lists for these places are much more localized (guides to a particular monasteries or mountains), and thus do not have the same sort of coverage as the accounts I highlight here.
[75] All texts are in Chinese unless otherwise indicated. Notes given in Appendix 1. I have only included general descriptions of the entire mountain complex here, as opposed to more narrowly conceived temple histories or prayers to local deities, which are included in Appendix 1. For poetry related to the mountain, see Kurtis R. Schaeffer, “Tibetan Poetry on Wutai Shan,” Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies, no. 6 (December 2011), http://www.thlib.org?tid=T5719.
[76] See Gugong Bowuyuan, ed., Qingliang shan zhi [Clear and Cool Mountain Gazetteer], Qingliang shan xinzhi [New Clear and Cool Mountain Gazetteer], Qinding Qingliang shan zhi [Imperial Gazetteer of Clear and Cool Mountain] (Haikou Shi: Hainan Chubanshe, 2001), 5, 5a.
[77] Despite the fact that nearly everyone attributes the entire 1831 guide to Wutai shan to Changja Rölpé DorjéLcang skya rol pa’i rdo rje, he appears to have only authored the first two chapters of the later 1831 printing, as these were all that were printed in his collected works.
[78] The 1661 preface by Awang Laozang is preserved in Yen-ching Library’s Qingliang shan zhi (1755), preface, 4.
[79] Farquhar, “Emperor as Bodhisattva,” 31, n. 89. Though Köhle (“Why Did the Kangxi Emperor Go to Wutai Shan?” note 77) has noticed a more subtle connection was made between the emperor and Mañjuśrī, this was something that only Buddhists would notice, and not Confucian bureaucrats.
[80] Ngawang LozangNgag dbang blo bzang and Lozang TenpaBlo bzang bstan pa. See: Gugong Bowuyuan, Qingliang shan zhi [Clear and Cool Mountain Gazetteer] 5, 136.
[81] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 10, 17b-20a.
[82] Preserved in Yen-ching Library’s Qingliang shan zhi (1755), preface, 4b.
[83] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 7, 21b-24a.
[84] “Qingdai lama jiao beike lu,” in Qing zhengfu yu lama jiao, edited by Zhang Xixin (Lhasa: Xizang renmin chubanshe, 1988), 243-48. These texts were preserved in Gest Library’s New Clear and Cool Mountain Gazetteer (1701), volume 7, 21b-26b.
[85] “Qingdai lama jiao beike lu,” 246.
[86] “Qingdai lama jiao beike lu,” 247. See also the entry in Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780), first volume, 64a.
[87] “Qingdai lama jiao beike lu,” 248. For biographical details, see Appendix 2.
[88] Although the full form of his name (with “Jiancan” at the end) only occurs in one place, a Kangxi era stele inscription, it seems the Chinese did not understand that the final genitive “i” should have been dropped, changing the sound of the word from “bei” to “ba” in the shortened form. Maybe this form was kept to distinguish him from his eponymous student, who was involved in the erection of the memorial to his teacher. Without these final two syllables of his full name, one might have expected the Tibetan of the name to be Lozang TenpelBlo bzang bstan dpal. Thanks to Natalie Köhle for bringing the rare full spelling of his name to my attention. For a reference to the stele, see Köhle, “Why Did the Kangxi Emperor Go to Wutai Shan?” n. 22.
[89] “Qingdai lama jiao beike lu,” 244.
[90] The title is drawn from the 1694 preface to the New Clear and Cool Mountain Gazetteer, edited by this monk, and preserved in Yen-ching Library’s Qingliang shan zhi (1755), preface 4b.
[91] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 3, 22b: “Huangshang... feng Qingxiu chanshi, yin yin zhong si shi ba liang, reng tidu Wutai shan Fan Han Da Lama shi.”
[92] It is also possible that there was a large group of Mongol Buddhists who read only Chinese, but this seems less likely, though the issue should be explored further. Very few, if any, ethnic Tibetans knew classical Chinese in the Qing.
[93] Most of the Tibetan language guides to the mountain were written or made available in printed form only after imperial support for Wutai shan seems to have waned, that is, after 1813 (see Table 2). Moreover, most (if not all) of these guides, though written in Tibetan, were penned by Mongols or Monguors, and not Tibetans.
[94] 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, edited by Bryan Cuevas and Kurtis R. Schaeffer (Leiden: Brill, 2006), 65-87.
[95] For the details of this see Gray Tuttle, Tibetan Buddhists in the Making of Modern China (New York: Columbia University Press, 2005), 28.
[96] TukwanThu’u bkwan III, Chökyi NyimaChos kyi nyi ma, Changja Rölpé Dorjé NamtarLcang skya rol pa’i rdo rje’i rnam thar (Lanzhou: Kan su’u mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1989 [1792-1794]), 220. Tuguan, Zhangjia Guoshi Ruobi duoji zhuan, 137. The Tibetan text is quite clear that the school was intended for training Khalkha Mongols, Chinese and Tibetan monks. The Chinese translation is misleading, as it seems to indicate that the monks are merely to be drawn from the Khalkha Mongols and the Chinese and Tibetan regions. Thus, someone only consulting the Chinese translation might assume those drawn from the Chinese areas could be of any ethnicity, such as Mongols whose families were long resident in China. But the Tibetan text clearly indicates that Chinese (gyargya) were to be trained at the monastic college set up at Yonghe Gong.
[97] Köhle, “Why Did the Kangxi Emperor Go to Wutai Shan?”; Toh, “Tibetan Buddhism in Ming China”; and more recently David Robinson’s article, “The Ming Court and the Legacy of the Yuan Mongols,” have looked at the popularity of Tibetan Buddhism among Han Chinese in the Ming dynasty, though evidence of and detailed information on individual Chinese, outside the dynastic family, who practiced Tibetan Buddhism is still difficult to discover.
[98] My thanks to Johan Elverskog for assistance with the translation of the Mongol and Manchu titles in this list.
[99] Preface preserved in Yen-ching Library’s Qingliang shan zhi (1755), preface, 4. Since I did the research for this paper in the mid-1990s using original editions, a much more convenient modern reprint of this gazetteer has been reproduced in Gugong Bowuyuan, Qingliang shan zhi. I have preserved my original references, as they can easily be located in the new edition.
[100] Farquhar, “Emperor as Bodhisattva,” 30.
[101] Preface preserved in the Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi preface, 21-22.
[102] Preface preserved in Yen-ching Library’s Qingliang shan zhi (1887 reprint), book 1, volume 4, 1-2; also in Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780), first volume, 1-3 (though the date is missing). The 1701 version is preserved at Princeton University’s Gest Library.
[103] Farquhar, “Emperor as Bodhisattva,” 30.
[104] Köhle, “Why Did the Kangxi Emperor Go to Wutai Shan?” n. 28-29.
[105] Brook, Geographical Sources, original preserved only in Japan, though now available in a reprinted edition: Gugong Bowuyuan, ed., Qingliang shan zhi [Clear and Cool Mountain Gazetteer; 1661]. Qingliang shan xin zhi [New Clear and Cool Mountain Gazetteer; 1701]. Qinding Qingliang shan zhi [Imperial Gazetteer of Clear and Cool Mountain; 1811]. Haikou Shi: Hainan Chubanshe, 2001.
[106] By Lozang TenjinBlo bzang bstan ’jin, see Farquhar, “Emperor as Bodhisattva,” 30.
[107] Details from Köhle, “Why Did the Kangxi Emperor Go to Wutai Shan?”
[108] Vladimir Uspensky, “Gombojab: A Tibetan Buddhist in the Capital of the Qing Empire,” in Biographies of Eminent Mongol Buddhists, ed. Johan Elverskog (Halle: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies, 2008). Uspensky noted that this was a thirteen-folio text. Another thirteen-folio text dedicated to Wutai shan attributed to Gelong Sönam RinchenDge slong bsod nams rin chen is located in the Nepal National Archives.
[109] See note on Yen-ching Library’s Qingliang shan zhi 1887 reprint edition: some of the changes found in that edition were almost certainly incorporated in this initial recarving, which also preserved the preface of the 1661 edition. Since I was only able to examine the 1887 edition, I have listed the changes I found in that text under that item in this list.
[110] Noted in Dznyana ShrimanDznyā na shrī man, Riwo Tsengé Karchak Rapsel MelongRi bo rtse lnga’i dkar chag rab gsal me long (Zi ling: Mtsho sngon mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1994), i, 17. This must be the same text mentioned as being the inspiration for ChangjaLcang skya’s incomplete text, where it is described as the “ri bo rtse lnga mjal bar song skabs gnas kyi dkar chag rnying pa” by Lama [Riwo]tsé NgawaBla ma [ri bo] rtse lnga ba, Pelden DrakpaDpal ldan grags pa. TukwanThu’u bkwan noted that because Pelden DrakpaDpal ldan grags pa’s text was a rather poor translation of the Chinese text(s) on which it was based, it was difficult to understand, which prompted ChangjaLcang skya to start a new text. See Wen-shing Chou, “Ineffable Paths: Mapping Wutaishan in Qing Dynasty China,” the Art Bulletin 9, no. 1 (March 2007): 128, n. 30, citing Tuguan, Zhangjia Guoshi Ruobi duoji zhuan, 306; Tibetan original: TukwanThu’u bkwan, Changja Rölpé Dorjé NamtarLcang skya rol pa’i rdo rje’i rnam thar, 504; see also Marina Illich, “Selections from the Life of a Tibetan Buddhist Polymath: Chankya Rolpai Dorje (Lcang skya rol pa’i rdo rje), 1717-1786” (PhD diss., Columbia University, 2006), 606-607, who used a different edition of ChangjaLcang skya’s biography.
[111] For a detailed treatment of ChangjaLcang skya’s time at Wutai shan and a translation of this poem, see Chapter 6 of Illich, “Selections from the Life.”
[112] Despite the fact that nearly everyone attributes the entire 1831 guide to Wutai shan to Changja Rölpé DorjéLcang skya rol pa’i rdo rje, he appears to have only authored the first two chapters of the later 1831 printing, as indicated in the colophon of that later work, and noted in his biography. See Illich, “Selections from the Life,” 606-607.
[113] Now available as a downloadable scan on-line (by subscription) from the Tibetan Buddhist Resource Center (www.tbrc.org) in vol. 5 of the author’s collected works (TBRC W28833).
[114] Two copies are at the Yen-ching Library: one contained in first and last volumes of Summary of the Shanxi Gazetteer, the second as a separate set. Contains poems written by the Yongzheng emperor, first volume, 25-28a.
[115] Brook, Geographical Sources, 126.
[116] Brook, Geographical Sources, 126.
[117] See the Tibetan Buddhist Resource Center website for the full text. Although it is unclear whether this figure was one in the lineage of the incarnation series of the Aja ZhapdrungA skya zhabs drung (Akya Zhapdrung in Standard Tibetan pronunciation) based at KumbumSku ’bum, he was clearly from the Aja DéA skya sde (Akya Dé in Standard Tibetan pronunciation; from the Chinese a jia: "A household") community, which suggests that he may have been a Mongour.
[118] Although this text was supposed to be held in the Library of Congress collection (according to Brook, Geographical Sources, 126), the librarians could not locate it, and I was not able to use a version of this gazetteer while initially doing research on this topic. Since I completed the Chinese-language research for this paper in the mid-1990s using original editions, a much more convenient modern reprint of this gazetteer has been reproduced by the Gugong, which is the edition I consulted in revising this article.
[119] Wen-shing Chou, “Ineffable Paths,” 120. See also Patricia Berger, “The Jiaqing Emperor’s Magnificent Record of the Western Tour,” Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies, no. 6 (December 2011), http://www.thlib.org?tid=T5711.
[120] Heissig, Die Pekinger lamaistischen Blockdrucke in mongolischer Sprache; Materialien zur mongolischen Literaturgeschichte (Wiesbaden: O. Harrassowitz, 1954), 163-64, cited in Farquhar, “Emperor as Bodhisattva,” 30, n. 88. Heissig says this author used both the 1667 and 1721 Mongol editions of Wutai shan gazetteers. Yeshé DöndrupYe shes don grub was from Big Buddha Temple (Dafo si), which Heissig says is Zhantan Si, the famous Tibetan Buddhist monastery in Beijing, though Robert Service (“Notes on The Beautiful Flower Chaplet: A Nineteenth Century Mongolian Guide to the Shu-hsiang Szŭ of Wu-t’ai shan,” Mongolian Studies [2007]: 29, 192) says that Big Buddha Temple is another name for Puning Si in Chengde. In the Tibetan translation of the text, I could find no reference to the Qing emperor as Mañjuśrī, which is mentioned by Farquhar as existing in the Mongol version (without reference to where it occurred in the text). The Library of Congress copy was obtained by Berthold Laufer (labeled T12 of his materials in the Library of Congress).
[121] According to Kurtis R. Schaeffer: “An example of a widespread genre that cannot be traced back any further than the Desi, but exploded in Amdo. The skor tshad is a ‘circumambulation survey.’ The five-chapter outline of that work really reads like other skor tshad.” Schaeffer, personal communication, May 2007. For more on this genre of text, see Schaeffer, “Ritual, Festival and Authority,” 192, n. 17. On the Mongol version of this text, see Service, “Notes on The Beautiful Flower Chaplet,” 180-201.
[122] Thanks to Gene Smith and PeldorDpal rdor of the Tibetan Buddhist Resource Center for searching their two editions for indications of the date the blocks were carved. Since neither of the editions indicated this date, this dating is based on oral history about the collected works. Personal communication, Gene Smith 1/30/2007. A version of this text is available in the Rockhill collection (no. 38) of the Library of Congress. Now available as a downloadable scan on-line (by subscription) from the Tibetan Buddhist Resource Center (www.tbrc.org), the final text in vol. 7 of the author’s collected works.
[123] The one possible exception in the 1870 map, said to be imperially sponsored, but I have not seen this item to confirm its association with the imperial household.
[124] Drakpa Gyentsen, Gyel KhenpoGrags pa rgyal mtshan, rgyal mkhan po, Riwo Tsengé Netö Dönden Tsangpé DrayangRi bo rtse lnga’i gnas bstod don ldan tshangs pa’i sgra dbyangs, in Gangjong Khewang Rimjöngyi Tsomyik Sergyi DrambuGangs ljongs mkhas dbang rim byon gyi rtsom yig gser gyi sbram bu [Zangzu lidai wenxue zuopin xuan] (Zi ling: Mtsho sngon mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1989 [1824]), vol. 3, 1445-55.
[125] See Dznyana ShrimanDznyā na shrī man, Riwo Tsengé Karchak Rapsel MelongRi bo rtse lnga’i dkar chag rab gsal me long, 186. The seventh year of the Taoguang (Sriö Gyelposrid ’od rgyal po) reign is mentioned. Blocks carved by: 1) YangjaYang kyā (Yangkya in Standard Tibetan pronunciation; yang jia) Gelong Lozang TsültrimDge slong blo bzang tshul khrims, 2) ChijaChi kyā (Chikya in Standard Tibetan pronunciation; qi jia) Gelong Sherap ZangpoDge slong shes rab bzang po 3) Deden Riu LhazoDad ldan ri’u lha bzo (the faithful artisan RiuRi’u, probably Ch. Liu). The occurrence of the Chinese family names Yang and Qi probably indicates that these men were Monguors. On the Qi family in AmdoA mdo, see Elliot Sperling, “A Note on the Chi-kya Tribe and the Two Qi Clans in Amdo,” in Les habitants du Toit du monde, edited by Samten Karmay and Phillipe Sagant (Nanterre: Société d’ethnologie, 1997), 111-24.
[126] See Changja Rölpé DorjéLcang skya rol pa’i rdo rje, Zhingchok Riwo Tsengé NeshéZhing mchog ri bo rtse lnga’i gnas bshad (Zi ling: Mtsho sngon mi rigs dpe sgrun khang, 1993), 204.
[127] For an early reference to this 1831 edition, see Leonard van der Kuijp, “Jayanada. A Twelfth Century Guoshi from Kashmir among the Tangut,” Central Asiatic Journal 37 (1993): 193, n. 16. The colophon indicates that the first part was at least orally transmitted by Rölpé DorjéRol pa’i rdo rje (and was later printed first as part of Rölpé DorjéRol pa’i rdo rje’s collected writings). Possibly the latter part of this text was drafted by ChangjaLcang skya but was deemed too erroneous to be included in his collected works. The colophon to the 1831 printing says that the latter part (chapters 3-5?) were stylistically revised and faulty translations from the Chinese Wutai shan gazetteer were corrected (See ChangjaLcang skya, Zhingchok Riwo Tsengé NeshéZhing mchog ri bo rtse lnga’i gnas bshad, 207-208). See also ChanglungLcang lung’s short biographies at the Tibetan Buddhist Resource Center and in Dungkar Lozang TrinléDung dkar blo bzang ’phrin las, Khewang Dungkar Lozang Trinlé Chokgi Dzepé Bö Rikpé Tsikdzö Chenmo Sheja RapselMkhas dbang dung dkar blo bzang ’phrin las mchog gis mdzad pa’i bod rig pa’i tshig mdzod chen mo shes bya rab gsal [Dungkar’s Great Tibetological Dictionary], aka Dungkar TsikdzöDung dkar tshig mdzod (Pe cin: Krung go’i bod rig pa’i dpe skrun khang; Mtsho sngon zhing chen zhin hwa dpe tshong khang gis bkram, 2002), 800. His full biography discussed his encounters with Changja Rölpé DorjéLcang skya rol pa’i rdo rje (who recognized him as an incarnation), his visits to Wutai shan, and the printing of this text. See, Rgyal dbang chos rje blo bzang ’phrin las rnam rgyal, Jetsün Pelden Lama Dampa Changlung Arya Pendita Rinpoché Ngawang Lozang Tenpé Gyentsen Pelzangpö Nampar Tarpa Khepé Yitrok Norbü DoshelRje btsun dpal ldan bla ma dam pa lcang lung arya pandi ta rin po che ngag dbang blo bzang bstan pa’i rgyal mtshan dpal bzang po’i rnam par thar pa mkhas pa’i yid ’phrog nor bu’i do shal, digital scan from the Tibetan Buddhist Resource Center, vol. 1: 93, 203-208, 233-236; vol. 2: 181-182 (on printing these blocks). My thanks to Kurtis Schaeffer for these page references.
[128] Changja Rölpé DorjéLcang skya rol pa’i rdo rje, et al. Zhingchok Riwo Tsengé NeshéZhing mchog ri bo rtse lnga’i gnas bshad, in Neyik ChokdrikGnas yig phyogs bsgrigs [Fo jiao sheng di zhi nan], by Gendün ChömpelDge ’dun chos ’phel, et al. (Khreng tu’u: Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1998), 384-565. Additions to text start on page 585.
[129] Wen-shing Chou, “Mapping Landscapes of Transformations: A Sino-Tibetan Revelation of Wutaishan in Qing China” (Master’s thesis, University of California-Berkeley History of Art Department, 2006), illustration list. Date based on National Library of Beijing’s assessment.
[130] Definitely not simply a reprint of 1596 edition. Peppered with additions and changes: 1) At the end of one section a note about the special tree from the Shunzhi period is added (See Yen-ching Library’s Qingliang shan zhi [1887 reprint], book 1, volume 3, 13). For more on this tree and its relation to the Dalai Lama, see the Gest Library edition. 2) Kangxi preface added to Yen-ching Library’s Qingliang shan zhi (1887 reprint), book 1, volume 4, 1-2. 3) In the biography of the Karmapa, Taizong wen huangdi (太宗文皇帝, Taitsungtha’i tsung) Hongtaiji (r. 1627-1644) is mentioned (See Yen-ching Library’s Qingliang shan zhi [1887 reprint], book 3, volume 8, 22b; partially translated by Sperling, “Early Ming Policy Toward Tibet,” 117). 4) Additional biographies dating from the Qing, two from Kangxi and two from Qianlong reign-periods (See Yen-ching Library’s Qingliang shan zhi [1887 reprint], book 3, volume 8, 30-32, 35-36).
[131] Chou, “Mapping Landscapes,” illustration list, no. 11. Date presumably based on National Library of Beijing’s assessment.
[132] Chou, “Mapping Landscapes,” illustration list, no. 10. Date presumably based on National Library of Beijing’s assessment
[133] Listed by Brook (Geographical Sources, 45) as held in Library of Congress, though it does not appear in on-line catalogue.
[134] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 7, 21b-24a.
[135] “Qingdai lama jiao beike lu,” 246-48. Also, Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 10, 17b; Dznyana ShrimanDznyā na shrī man, Riwo Tsengé Karchak Rapsel MelongRi bo rtse lnga’i dkar chag rab gsal me long, 131; Heissig, Die Pekinger lamaistischen Blockdrucke, 12.
[136] “Qingdai lama jiao beike lu,” in Qing zhengfu yu lama jiao, edited by Xixin Zhang (Lhasa: Xizang renmin chubanshe, 1988), 246-48. This texts was preserved in Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 7, 21b-26b.
[137] Farquhar, “Emperor as Bodhisattva,” 30.
[138] This Tibetan spelling is found in Dznyana ShrimanDznyā na shrī man, Riwo Tsengé Karchak Rapsel MelongRi bo rtse lnga’i dkar chag rab gsal me long, 135: “Jasagh LamaBlo bzang bstan pa.”
[139] “Qingdai lama jiao beike lu,” 243-45. Also, Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi(1701), volume 10, 17b (Shandong origins).
[140] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 10, 17b. See also the many entries which mention him in Yen-ching Library’s Wang Benzhi, ed., Qingliang shan jiyao (post-1780), first volume, 67a-69a.
[141] “Qingdai lama jiao beike lu,” 244.
[142] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 2, 10a. Or in 1682, see Köhle, “Why Did the Kangxi Emperor Go to Wutai Shan?” n. 24.
[143] Gest Library’s Qingliang shan xinzhi (1701), volume 10, 17b-20a.
[144] Köhle, “Why Did the Kangxi Emperor Go to Wutai Shan?” n. 24.
[145] Köhle, “Why Did the Kangxi Emperor Go to Wutai Shan?” n. 24.
[146] Damchø GyatshoDharmatāla, Rosary of White Lotuses: Being the Clear Account of How the Precious Teaching of Buddha Appeared and Spread in the Great Hor Country, translated and annotated by Piotr Klafkowski (Wiesbaden: O. Harrassowitz, 1987 [1889]). The Table on page 483 of this work presents a list of all the Manchu rulers from Nurhaci (r. 1559-1626) to the Guangxu emperor (光緒, Kwongshukwong shu, r. 1875-1908), reproduced here for convenience and comparison with earlier names.
[147] Information on the Xianfeng, Tongzhi (同治, Tungchi Yéthung cī ye, r. 1862-1875), and Guangxu emperors’ names is drawn from Dharmatāla, Rosary of White Lotuses. The Table on page 483 of this work presents a list of all the Manchu rulers from Nurhaci (r. 1559-1626) to the Guangxu emperor.
[148] Lü Xiegang, Zangmi xuifa midian (Beijing: Huaxia chubanshe, 1996), vol. 5, 351-53.

Note Citation for Page

Gray Tuttle, “Tibetan Buddhism at Wutai Shan in the Qing: The Chinese-language Register,” Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies, no. 6 (December 2011): , http://www.thlib.org?tid=T5721 (accessed ).

Note Citation for Whole Article

Gray Tuttle, “Tibetan Buddhism at Wutai Shan in the Qing: The Chinese-language Register,” Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies, no. 6 (December 2011): 163-214, http://www.thlib.org?tid=T5721 (accessed ).

Bibliography Citation

Tuttle, Gray. “Tibetan Buddhism at Wutai Shan in the Qing: The Chinese-language Register.” Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies, no. 6 (December 2011): 163-214. http://www.thlib.org?tid=T5721 (accessed ).