II. Early trends and hermitic role models in the Tibetan practice lineages practice lineages
II.2. Late dissemination period and a new synthesis
The original dissemination period of the Buddhist teachings in Tibet began in the 7th century and provided Tibetans with access to the doctrine already so popular among other Asian states. In the 9th century, after a period of stagnation, a great revival took place.
However, the 10th century rulers of Pu hrang, such as Ye shes ’Od (947-1024), who later became a monk himself, were principally interested in reviving Buddhist scholasticism and monasticism rather than Tantra and even opposed some Tantric interpretations, viewed as heresy.52
52 Samuel 1993: 466-467.
The Bengali master Atiśa Dipankaraśrījnāna (983?-1054), invited to Tibet during that period was not only, as expected by his royal patron of Pu hrang, a representative of the institutionalized and monastic form of Buddhism, but also a highly developed Tantric practitioner. His training at Vikramaśīla university reflected the contemporary trend in Indian Buddhism, which had an adept study philosophy as well as engage in the ritual practices of the Vajrayāna. As a result, Atiśa’s activity in Tibet proved that it was possible to combine what Tibetans, the king first and foremost, had believed to be antithetical: the rational aspect of Buddhism represented by study or ethical conduct with the mysticism and rites found in the Tantras. Thus, Atiśa’s arrival in Tibet initiated a new trend: his missionary success set an example, which illustrated that this synthesis was not only achievable, but was also a modern, desirable form of spirituality.
The dichotomy of the scholastic/rational versus the ritual/mystical was first brought up as a main instrument for both synchronic and diachronic analysis of Tibetan societies by Geoffrey Samuel in his application of the terms clerical and shamanic. The author equates the clerical with the monastic, scholastic and rational, while breaking with the convention of associating the term shamanic with the particular practices found among Tungusian peoples. Instead, he defines the phrase as follows:
I use the term ‘shamanic’ as a general term for a category of practices found in differing degrees in almost all human societies. This category of practices may be briefly described as the regulation and transformation of human life and human society through the use (or purported use) of alternate states of consciousness by means of which specialist practitioners are held to communicate with a mode of reality alternative to, and more fundamental than, the world of everyday experience. 53
Further in his book, in the Tibetan context, Samuel associates this “alternate reality” with Tantric deities, accessed through “the alternate states of consciousness of Tantric yoga.”54 Furthermore, the author describes that shamanic power is gained through meditation in retreat.55
If taken literally, the simplistic division into clerical and shamanic would pose several difficulties, as it does not embrace the full spectrum of Tibetan Buddhist developments.
However, I believe this division definitely offers certain analytical possibilities.Therefore, in
53 Samuel 1993: 8. Italics by author.
54 Samuel 1993: 8.
55 Samuel 1993: 8.
this dissertation I shall generally refer to Tibetan hermitism as shamanic, in the strictly Samuelian sense of this term.56
Samuel expounds upon the role of the shamanic principle in Tibet by quoting Gilles Deleuze and his concept of “nomad thought”/“nomadic science,” by means of which social groups or individuals have continuously endeavored to counteract hierarchical constructs such as state power.57 He claims it is only natural that “nomad thought” and the shamanic approach would develop in Tibet, due to its ample itinerant communities, especially in regions where the authority of a centralized state could never be completely established.58 I shall argue that one of the reasons for which hermitages condense shamanic power is because they counteract the political and religious establishments that threaten the identity of those who participate in such hermitages.
Observing the dynamics between the two principles of clerical-shamanic within the broad range of Tibetan religious phenomena allows for more understanding of the original adaptation of the Tantric teachings. The constant interaction of the clerical and the shamanic reveals a great deal about the expansion of the diverse schools on the Tibetan Plateau and sheds a different light on the growth or decline of the different Buddhist schools, lineages and singular rituals, including hermitic practices. What is more, juxtaposing the clerical and the shamanic could serve as an instrument for revealing the workings of the struggle for power and rivalry for access to resources behind the adaptation of Buddhism in Tibet:
Nomadic science, as Deleuze and Guattari note, is constantly subject to appropriation and transformation by State science. (...) The nomadic science of the Vajrayāna was reclaimed by the ‘civilized shamans’ of Tibet as a weapon against the incipient state. At any rate, the Vajrayāna came to present to the Tibetans a way of being and a form of social and political activity, capable of flowing around and beyond any kind of hierarchical structure.59
Since the ever-changing interrelationship linking these two principles has shaped the face of virtually every religious observance in Tibet, it influenced hermitism as well. Although meditation in retreat as such is more inclined towards the shamanic, it has always existed either intertwined with the clerical element or side by side with this tendency in a wide range of relations ranging from support, exchange and coexistence to competition or even collision.
56 For the critique of the disconnection from the term’s original sense see Gellner 2001: 56-57.
57 Deleuze 1985 in Samuel 1993: 373, 572-573.
58 Samuel 1993: 373-374.
59 Samuel 1993: 572.
As already mentioned, clerical forms were more likely to develop in those areas and times on the Tibetan Plateau, when centralized state control flourished, whereas the shamanic arose in regions with few centers of localized power or in periods in which no central power existed.
The state-supported activities of the bKa’ gdams pa founder Atiśa may have been a fairly good example of the clerical option favored by the gTsang pa sovereigns, with the exception of one detail. Atiśa was indeed engaged in performing monastic activities and teaching a Mahāyāna curriculum, but at the same time, he was well educated in the Tantras. Samuel claims that it was this embracement of Tantra that helped monasticism to survive on the plateau even without the assistance of centralized state authority, as it was still supported by the population concerned with utilizing shamanic power, which in this way became accessible for the population’s benefit:
In this situation it was perhaps inevitable that shamanism would survive by becoming Buddhist, and Buddhist monasticism would survive by becoming shamanic.60
After the period during which the gTsang pa rulers still thought of Tantrism as dangerous or heretic, the state-sponsored school of bKa’ gdams pa opened the way for Vajrayāna as not only harmless, but also effective in terms of gaining power. Although Tantric power belonged to the category of phenomena that were difficult to control, it had been proven that it could still be used for the sake of the state. Even if unintended, this was when the shamanic element became linked with political authority in Tibet for the first time on such a scale. The ancient Eastern Tibetan realm of Nang chen illustrates a similar development, which produced many famous yogins who were also temporal rulers of the region. This is especially interesting since areas of this former kingdom have become the scene for the great revival of hermitic practices analyzed in the case study sections of this dissertation.