“clericalization” of retreat practice
III.6. Conclusions: reforms and consolidation of the Khams pa hermitic tradition tradition
Today, it is difficult to assess whether the efforts of the Ris med group to create a network of active and widely known pilgrimage destinations were effective. However, the symbolic conversion of Eastern Tibetan territory they advocated brought about great changes in the religious and social scene of their time. So how much transformative potential lay in the activities of the movement? What were the specific changes the Ris med introduced that later became the model for hermitic tradition across Khams?
Operating outside the growing dGe lugs pa power structure, the circles of Ngor pa dominance in sDe dge, and beyond the established complex of great Khams pa monasteries, the Ris med masters sought to revive and unify rare lineages while maintaining their vital characteristics. If the sustenance of the totality of Buddhist teachings was one of the principal goals of the movement, the necessary step leading to renewal was reform. Consequently, the
Ris med group formed their own system of spatial, philosophical, scriptural and ritual references that would make a deep and long-lasting impact upon Buddhism in Khams, and for this reason, later determine the agenda, content, styles and strategies of the post-Mao ethno-religious revival, which is addressed as follows.
By means of delineating the territory of their influence, the gTer chen gsum first found a symbolic, and then also a practical way to attract attention to their activity. The emphasis was drawn not only to the distinct places, which would nevertheless have been accentuated as Treasure revelation sites, but also on their mutual interdependence. It was partially for the sake of this coherence that the Ris med lamas recognized each other’s potential for ritual superiority and bound their efforts together, regardless of their diverse backgrounds. The result was the collaboration on a great non-sectarian vision of Tibetan Buddhist culture, designed and practiced within a network of hermitages; to read the life stories of the Ris med lamas amounts to following their paths in and between those retreat sites. It was this complex of sacred venues that served the Ris med for an organizing principle, helping to create their
“corporate identity” and translated their individual actions into what one would call “a movement.”
The idea of a religious movement is inevitably bound to bringing about a change. In the case of the non-sectarian association, the reforms did not involve introducing entirely new doctrines or their fundamental reinterpretation, like in the time of the later dissemination period; neither did they entail a critique of ecclesiastical corruption. The Ris med approach was rather different. Using the existing elements, the movement collected, revived and initiated lineages, rituals and philosophical schools to form a powerful new set-up, which was capable of challenging the institutions, whose religious and political agenda was not only irrelevant, but to some extent perilous for Khams pa autonomy and culture. The non-sectarian movement can thus be seen as a reaction of an elite group to the disintegration of both religious and political life of Eastern Tibet in the second half of the 19th century.261
This elite then formed a union, which operated principally outside the existing religious power structures, in this case the great monasteries of sDe dge. This was largely possible through their involvement in the gTer movement, through establishing their own training centers and through the fact that several of the main players during the first and second Ris
261 Ris med seems to bear most of the traits of a reformist movement as described by Bellah (1965: 168-225), who looks at the issues of religion and change in modern Asian societies from the point of view of political and social progress. Although he discusses the changes that occurred in 20th-century Asia, some elements of this discussion can be applied to 19th-century Khams, especially when the author discusses the reactions of religious elites to change.
med generation were individuals independent of the power structures governing reincarnates.
Like Mi la ras pa, they climbed the ladder of social and religious hierarchies due to their own efforts and talents. In this way, they could create a counterbalance, capable of reaching new frontiers on the religious and political scene of Eastern Tibet.262
Scholars concerned with the issue of religious reformism, such as Robert N. Bellah, observe that instigating religious change is inevitably bound with the question of identity more than with the issue of progress, and that one of the main objectives of reformist movements is forging new cultural identities.263 As previously argued, one of the main points on the non-sectarian agenda was the demarcation, cultivation and promotion of Khams as an area of sacred ground, undoubtedly designed to fuel a sense of a cultural uniqueness and autonomy. For the development of new identities on a more individual level, the Ris med masters emphasized individualistic responsibility, personal engagement and the enhancement of one’s own spiritual growth through meditation practice. Their approach was expressed through the endorsement of all doctrines seen as equal, but crowned with the universalistic Ātiyoga view and made available according to the particular propensity of a student. This approach was disseminated through rituals and sādhanās, which the new, self-empowered class of practitioners could perform within the network of independent hermitages, opening the field for the revival and reform of meditation training.
In 19th-century Khams, the scriptural (bshad brgyud) and the practice lineages (sgrub brgyud) were combined to suit the ideal of the scholar-yogin (mkhas sgrub). The fusion of clerical and shamanic skills accomplished by one person had already been known in Tibetan religious history, but in the second half of the 19th century it gained increasing weight and was best exemplified by Kong sprul and mKhyen brtse themselves, as well as some later lamas such as ’Ju Mi pham. The revitalization of both scholasticism and meditation practice lay at the heart of the Ris med agenda; it was a new potent synthesis of the clerical and the shamanic, endowed with the potential for bending rigid sectarian positions.264
In order to gain the authority necessary to bring about change and foster new identities, reformist movements rely on past examples,265 hence the self-promotion of the non-sectarian masters as embodiments or at the least as messengers of the polymaths of the Imperial Era.
Vimalamitra and Vairocana incarnated in the 19th century in the personas of mKhyen brtse
262 Bellah 1965: 189, 224.
263 Bellah 1965: 223.
264 See Samuel 1993, 525-552.
265 Bellah 1965: 183, 210.
and Kong sprul were real prototypes of the mkhas sgrub ideal, combing erudition and ritual expertise.
Because the gTer chen gsum themselves, as well as the Ris med lamas of later generations supported and embodied the scholar-yogin ideal, both the monastic colleges and hermitages of Khams became the centers of the Ris med approach and its practical application. The individuals active in those venues not only comprised the great number of disciples of the original non-sectarian teachers but also the numerous, concurrent cooperatives of reincarnations of the great triad, which at times would further initiate a sub-independent branch of a lineage. Hence, the structures created in the 19th century were maintained by the whole complex collective of the mKhyen brtse sprul sku; concurrent emanations of mChog gling each governed a different center that the original master had founded, as did the various reincarnations of Kong sprul, who were connected with monasteries and hermitages of varying sectarian denomination.266
The new Ris med generation oversaw the schooling of teachers at the independent hermitages at many of the twenty-five power places, but also at the monastic sgrub khangs.
Since the new sprul sku of the gTer chen gsum and their disciples started appearing more and more in the strictly monastic context, the great monasteries of Khams began providing the scene for Ris med activity. dPal spungs, Karma dgon, Zhe chen, rDzogs chen, even Zur mang, were the venues where the propagators of the non-sectarian masters passed down the vast collections of the Rin chen gter mdzod, mChog gling gter gsar, bKa’ brgyud sngags mdzod or the sGrub thabs kun bstus. Leaders of great sects or major monastic centers, like the Karma pa hierarchs, the 15th Karma pa mKha’ khyab rdo rje (1871 – 1922)267 and the 16th Karma pa Rang byung Rig pa’i rdo rje (1924 – 1981), Zhe chen rGyal tshab Padma rnam rgyal (1871-1926), Jam dbyangs Blo gter dbang po (1847-1914) and Dil mgo mKhyen brtse (1910-1991)268 all became holders of the Ris med-originated transmission cycles, and the heritage of the movement began to emerge in an environment that was more and more institutional.
Particular rituals revealed by mChog gling even found their place in the monastic calendar – like the ’cham dances or Vajrakīlaya rituals prevalent in the monasteries of the Karma bKa’
brgyud.
266 For a graphic representation of the mKhyen brtse, Kong sprul and Mi pham incarnations over the subsequent generations, see: E. G. Smith 1970: 73-78 and Douglas & White 1976: 167-171.
267 See ’Jam dbyangs 1997: 222-223.
268 Dil mgo mKhyen brtse, who was also a member of the mKhyen brtse conglomerate of reincarnates, a disciple of ’Ju Mi pham, as well as a famous hermit, conferred the various collected teachings of the Ris med masters many times to disciples from different schools. He also became an ardent advocate of the twenty-five gnas as venues for pilgrimage and meditation. See Rab gsal zla ba, et al. 2008.
As for the hermitic tradition, it blossomed all the more, due to the polymaths and great activists of the new generations, such as rTogs ldan Shākya Shrī (1853-1919), 269 rDzong gsar mKhyen brtse Chos kyi blo gros (1893-1959); Karma Kun khyab dPal bzang po, who became known as Kalu Rinpoche (Kar lu Rin po che, 1905-1989), sPrul sku O rgyan Rin po che (1920-1996) to name but a few: they helped develop the infrastructure and curriculum of the many centers for meditation in retreat, located in the sDe dge and Nang chen area or spread their activity to new places.270
The configuration of hermitages, power places, monasteries, incarnation lineages, doctrines and rituals that were developed from the second half of the 19th century in Eastern Tibet in a universalistic manner characterized the religious and social make-up of Khams until the arrival of Chinese communists and the resulting destruction of Tibetan culture that began in the 1950s. Thus, the referential network created by the Ris med masters came to represent
“tradition” to most of the sgrub brgyud lamas today, both in exile and within the PRC.
For the urgent lack of competent religious specialists during the early phase of the post-Mao revival, the few lamas trained by Ris med heirs and in the Ris med fashion, i.e. whose education had comprised doctrines and practices of several lineages and schools, also proved instrumental in the process of reinstalling religious transmission in Khams. Hence, as the propagators of Ris med, the contemporary revivalists could generally be seen as long-term products of the great non-sectarian revitalization era.271 With the revival of the Ris med networks, they contribute to the re-creation of the unique Khams pa identity in the face of its annihilation, degradation and instrumentalization. In the case study chapters, I will argue that similarly to the 19th-century Eastern Tibetan renaissance, the contemporary hermitic revival constitutes a reaction of religious elites to the socio-political and religious issues of the day.272
269 rTogs ldan Shākya Shrī was a native of the Eastern Tibetan region of Chab mdo. He was a disciple to mKhyen brtse, Kong sprul and Mi pham. He founded a massive meditation encampment famous for practicing Mahāmudrā teachings on one hillside and rDzogs chen on the other, located around the gnas of sKyid phug in south-central Tibet. His disciples and offspring spread his teachings throughout the Tibetan world, generating branches of their activity in regions as remote as Ladakh. See Crook & Low 1997, Chokyi Gyatso, et al. 2009 and Tulku Urgyen, et al. 2005: 129-134.
270 Compare Rab gsal zla ba, et al. 2008, D.P. Jackson 2003 and Tulku Urgyen, et al. 2005.
271 Compare Samuel 1993.
272 Sections of the material from Chapter Three on the Ris med movement were published as a journal article;
see Przyjemska 2012.
IV. The ethno-religious revival in today’s Khams IV.1. Introduction
As explained in the previous chapter, the specific doctrinal and ritual trends created, developed or revived in Eastern Tibet in the second half of the 19th century shaped the activity of religious professionals, who contributed much to the social and cultural life in many of the Khams pa kingdoms, such as sDe dge or Nang chen.273 This specific make-up was maintained up to the point of the arrival of Chinese communists in 1950 and until the subsequent destruction of Tibetan culture in the years that followed. Therefore, from the point of view of the “practice schools,” which embraced the majority of religious developments in the eastern areas of ethnic Tibet, to a large extent, the system of those ritual, spatial and historical reference points came to represent what will be described as “tradition.”274
This particular chapter deals with the revival of that tradition that is presently occurring in Khams; it also sketches a general theoretical and factual framework for the ethnographic study. Thus, the present sections will deal with general revival processes, which should also be seen in the context of the religious and ethnic revival occurring throughout all of ethnic Tibet, and even beyond its territories in many areas of post-Mao China.275
Aware of the problematic of specifying “ethnicity,” especially in the context of post-modern discussions and deconstructions of this expression, I will use the definition put forward by Stevan Harrell in his introduction to “Cultural Encounters on China’s Ethnic Frontiers.”276
As in the case of any process, it is extremely challenging to portray the revival in Eastern Tibet. Any such development involves an interdependence of the contributing factors and it is virtually impossible to grasp all of them in their complexity and diversity.277 Drawing on Anthony Wallace’s assumption that a society resembles a living organism or “mazeway”
compelled to cope with harmful influences that he terms “stress,” the dynamic realities in
273 For more on Nang chen’s history, also during the Ris med era, see the historical part of the next chapter.
274 The broader meaning of this term in the following chapters is most compliant with the writings of Eric Hobsbawm. See Hobsbawm & Ranger (1983: 2-3).
275 See Qin 2000, Schrempf 2001, Vermander 2009, Davis 2005. Also see Porter 1993, for a study devoted to Chinese Buddhist and Taoist monks after the Cultural Revolution.
276 Harrell 1995: 28.
277 What is more, the collection of fieldwork material for the present dissertation was completed in 2009, so especially the consequences of the 2011/2012 crackdowns on the Tibetan minority following the self-immolations and the subsequent demonstrations, will not be taken into account here.
Tibetan territories are continually under pressure, which makes it difficult to anticipate where all the changes in the “mazeway” are headed.278
Therefore, this chapter will point out some key characteristics of the Khams pa revival that will aid in the comprehension of its strategies for survival, revival and continuation, but most of all, it will provide the background and context for the case study discussed in the next chapters.