Methodology and problematic

The fieldwork was conducted by means of interviews, participant observation and textual study.

The field research began in September 2007 when I flew to Beijing to meet Prof. Tshe ring mthar at the Minorities Institute, who kindly provided me with the initial contacts in the field.

The demanding, though necessary task of finding interpreters thus became more attainable.

From Beijing, I flew further to Chengdu, where our crew met and embarked on a bus journey, taking us through Eastern Tibet.

As far as the linguistic aspect of the ethnographic research is concerned, communication in the field was carried out with the help of different interpreters. I possess a modest knowledge of the Lha sa dialect and a fair command of Classical Tibetan. However, modern Lha sa dialect skills are usually not sufficient for fieldwork in remote regions of Khams, abundant in regional idioms, so much different from the Central Tibetan dialect. Therefore, it was important to acquire the help of assistants, native to the respective area of investigation.

Nevertheless, my experience with the classical language became necessary in comprehending utterances that were linked with the gist of the research – Tantric Buddhism. As a layperson, the interpreter I worked with in 2008 was not familiar with the complex ritual terminology in his own language, not to mention the possible English interpretations thereof. Therefore, during most of the interviews cited here, we collaborated on the interpretation.³⁷⁴

Since there is no vocabulary to describe field research or a doctoral thesis in the Khams pa dialects, the purpose of my stay at La phyi was presented to all informants in a descriptive manner – they were told I am writing a book about retreat practice, meant for university audience. This caused some problems in approaching many informants. Especially the nuns I questioned felt overwhelmed with what they believed was a demanding task suitable for a male scholar. Many of the nuns were still reluctant to be interviewed even when I only asked them questions about their daily routine or sources of fuel. The low-esteem and timid demeanor of ordained women was something I observed frequently in other retreat centers of Khams as well.

Generally, for all the openness of La phyi’s main teachers, as weeks passed, the contact with the majority of the practitioners inhabiting the hermitage became increasingly difficult.

The initial barrier created by the fact that from the beginning, my research objective was

374 For the necessity to complement skills in the modern language with Classical Tibetan in field studies see Crook & Low 1997: xiii.

incomprehensible to most informants, was never surpassed; later, the distance between me and the La phyi nuns was only magnified by the privileges I was granted at the hermitage.

As for working directly with the founding father and guru of La phyi, Tshul khrims mthar phyin, meeting with any Buddhist teacher or yogin of his social standing for merely one interview can be a difficult feat. During our initial visit to La phyi, we were first carefully examined and assessed, before we could obtain a brief audience with the yogin, who had at that time entered strict retreat. We were allowed to see him under one condition – that we each vow to repeat the Vajrasattva mantra 100,000 times, (though we were not given any specific time limit to fulfill this promise).

During this first audience, because Tshul khrims mthar phyin was technically in retreat and did not receive anyone, he did not utter a single word. We were told that we could ask him questions, although they had to be related to meditation practice. There was no use in inquiring about the yogin’s life story, since, according to his son and close disciple, Tshul khrims bdud ’dul, Tshul khrims mthar phyin “was beyond such trifle matters.” However, not one person from our small group had a question and we simply sat there, observing, photographing and filming the immovable, white-robed yogin, as he sat in his tiny cave, calmly gazing onto the horizon and working his mālā. He made almost no eye contact and did not even return the standard greeting with the kha btags shawl. He only interacted with our driver, who requested a small piece of the holy man’s white robe as a token of an auspicious connection (rten ’brel), which he was hoping to use as an amulet against the habit of smoking cigarettes.

In 2008, my travel companions and I were more fortunate, since the master had just entered a temporary “activity phase” shortly before and was open to interaction.³⁷⁵ However, Tshul khrims mthar phyin was resolved to instruct me in meditation and was not particularly sympathetic to my scholarly goal. He repeatedly stated how “unimportant” the composition of this thesis is, especially in comparison to the Tantric training that he was willing to impart. At one point, he expressed his explicit disapproval at my research questions, which he dismissed as “childish.” He insisted that I was wasting my time at the hermitage and that I should request advanced teachings which lead to liberation and enlightenment instead. Similarly to the cases of other contacts between representatives of Western scholarship and prominent

375 More on the phases of the hermitic cycle of renunciation in Chapter Ten.

Tibetan teachers of Vajrayāna Buddhism, the lama was convinced that his primary role was that of an instructor and not informant, which eventually lead to obstructions in research.³⁷⁶

At this point, I realized the greatest problem in conducting fieldwork for this particular case history. It is true that I had been granted complete access to all levels of an elitist project, normally inaccessible to lay people, especially Westerners – but I only had very limited time to tap it as resource for academic work. I had been allowed and even encouraged to stay as long as I pleased, but it was also clear that this invitation included the necessity of a full and active immersion in the life of the hermitage, beginning with the taking of monastic vows.

Leaving aside my personal unwillingness, accepting the rules of the Vinaya and the strict regulations of the hermitage would lead to serious limitations in data collection. For the time that should have been devoted to research, I would have lost the freedom of mobility and communication along with my independent schedule. Since the path of a renunciate involves turning away from all worldly ambitions, it would eventually mean abandoning the task completely; I was personally addressed with the expectation to do so already during the early stages of the study.

Germano has said that Tibetans “construct as much as they are constructed.”³⁷⁷ Discovering this has contributed to the difficulties in the research as well. While collecting material in the field, I sometimes had to put much effort into accessing certain facts from the lives of the leaders of the revival at sKyo brag and La phyi – my interviewers were so adamant to maintain what they thought would be the best public image of their lama, that several times they told me a straightforward lie or a “white lie”. Unknowingly, I stumbled across a number of taboos.³⁷⁸

Previous studies in a similar environment have managed to circumvent the issue of the researcher’s position or their personal commitment.³⁷⁹ For one thing, Crook and Low’s study of the lives of hermits in Ladakh consisted of a series of brief glimpses into their daily schedules and as such did not require a fundamental repositioning of their scholar-observer

376 I had similar experiences with many other lamas during fieldwork. Compare D.P. Jackson (2003) and Jamyang Sakya & Emery (1990) for the cooperation of sDe gzhungs Rin po che and Sa skya bdag chen with American Tibetologists in the U.S. in the 1960’s. Also see Qin (2000: 420) for the passages where the author is teased by the nuns from the monastery where she conducted her research for being “an intellectual.”

377 Germano 1998: 86.

378 The motives and circumstances of this manipulation will be discussed, since they are important indicators of how the revival is consciously constructed.

379 Or they met with approval and support for the academic cause, as opposed to the limited openness of the La phyi yogins, which merely signified that they expected that I take monastic vows, stay at the hermitage in retreat and in consequence, abandon the research. Compare Terrone 2010.

status.³⁸⁰ Qin, Tambiah and Salgado performed longitudinal fieldwork in secluded Buddhist meditation training centers.³⁸¹ However, none of those institutions (a Chinese monastery at Mt. Emei and two Theravada hermitages – one in Thailand and one in Sri Lanka) dealt with the performances of Vajrayāna Buddhism, especially those carried out in ritual seclusion (mtshams). Tantric rituals are extraordinary with respect to their intense focus on secrecy.

Thereby, the confidentiality does not only comprise one’s own subjective reality in meditation experience, but also extends to virtually all details of the practice – the technique as such, the scriptures, the ceremonial utensils, and all the more, the body of the meditator.³⁸² Even the privileged visitor/participant that I became was still barred from trespassing certain areas at the hermitage (i.e. the sgrub khang), where no-one – except the trainees themselves, their instructor and caretaker – was allowed. There was only one way into the enclosure – committing to a three-year period of intense meditation training in the sealed compound.

Ironically, even if the La phyi director encouraged me to make this commitment, it would put an end to my academic pursuit.

I was fortunate that by 2008, my then fourteen-year period of relatively intense exposure to and training in the majority of the Tantric techniques taught at La phyi sgom grwa facilitated the entry to its isolated sphere.³⁸³ This was the main factor which not only originally determined my admission into the community, but probably also advanced the comprehension of all layers of the hermitage – from the outer level of spatial arrangement and ritual behavior of the inhabitants to the most protected sphere of the training itself. This is one of the reasons why I believe that even my short stay at La phyi might offer more insight into the role of Tibetan hermitism and its special connotations today.

The obscurity of the processes of Tantric transformation and the cross-cultural misinterpretation were not the only obstacles in conducting this case study on the premises of the hermitage. There were also extremely austere conditions, which magnified the fuel problem. Yak dung was scarce at such high altitude and even the small group of visitors that we were, was becoming a burden to the small community in the face of the approaching winter.

380 Crook & Low 1997. Another sequence of brief and passing encounters with hermits is described in Porter (1993). This book, focusing on Zen (Ch’an) practitioners, mostly describes the hermit’s daily chores in terms of domestic work and self-sustainment.

381 Tambiah 1988, Qin 2000, and Salgado 1997: 213. For Qin’s portrayal of a contemporary Chinese Buddhist nunnery in a secluded mountainous setting, I consider her work as the study which resembles mine the most.

382 Also see Crook & Low (1997: 333-341) where an entire chapter is dedicated to the issue of secrecy in retreat.

383 At this point I had also had some personal experience in retreat practice, even if the seclusions were never long.

These were the conditions that determined the conclusion of my stay at La phyi after merely three weeks. The entire period of fieldwork should be understood as follows: in 2007, I spent two months travelling through the different Khams pa meditation centers and when I encountered La phyi, I spent the remaining four weeks collecting information and material on its founder Tshul khrims mthar phyin and his guru Karma nor bu. In 2008, I lived at the hermitage for less than one month and then had an additional nine weeks to explore the physical, social and ritual spheres surrounding the hermitage.

To summarize, I realize that especially the time I spent within La phyi meditation school itself was relatively brief in comparison to other case studies. However, especially given the difficult conditions of such research, I believe that the material presented here will both reveal a glimpse into the intricacies of ethno-religious revival in Eastern Tibet and serve as encouragement for future study.

Collecting information about the area of sKyo brag and its current religious activities also included interviewing informants outside Khams. For this reason, I repeatedly exchanged correspondence and telephoned with ’Ba’ rom bKa brgyud teachers living in exile, whose excellent command of English facilitated the communication. As for the intricacies of Tantric meditation and ritual seclusion, they were additionally consulted with several Eastern Tibetan scholars and lamas in exile, who had either been native to the Nang chen areas, versed in the practices of the bKa’ brgyud schools or experienced in meditation retreats. Those interviews were conducted in the Spanish retreat center known as “Karma Guen.”

Several historical and liturgical details were moreover supplied by Western informants, who became three-year retreat instructors in the French hermitages of the Karma bKa’ brgyud school, founded by dGe ’dun Rin po che, the meditation master born and trained in sKyo brag’s hermitages of the ’Ba’ rom school.