BENJAMIN BROSE
On December 23, 1942, Takamori Takasuke 高森隆介 (d. 1954), a commanding officer of Japanese soldiers stationed in Nanjing, was overseeing the construction of an Inari Shinto shrine just outside the city’s southern gate.1 While excavating the shrine’s foundation, his men discovered the crypt of an old Buddhist stupa. Inside a stone sarcophagus they found two nested boxes, the outer of bronze, the inner of silver. The inner box contained one small gold Buddha statue, several bronze and ceramic implements, hundreds of coins, and an offering of wheat grain.2 A separate copper box enclosed a small shard of bone, grayish brown in color and roughly rectangular in shape.3 Two inscriptions carved into the walls of the sarcophagus, one dating to the eleventh century, the other to the fourteenth, identified the bone as a skull fragment of the famous Tang-dynasty monk Xuanzang 玄奘 (600?–664).
This was a spectacular find. Xuanzang is one of the most celebrated monks in the history of Asia. His historic pilgrimage from China to India in the seventh century has been reimagined in texts, images, and performances for well over a thousand years.4 In the early twentieth century, Xuanzang’s translations and commentaries were also enjoying revival after more than a millennium of neglect. The Faxiang 法相 tradition of Yogācāra Buddhism, whose intricate phenomenological and epistemological systems were popularized in China through Xuanzang’s efforts, fell out of favor soon after his death. The textual corpus of Yogācāra had been reintroduced to China by the late-Qing-era lay scholar Yang Wenhui 楊文會 (1837–1911), who had retrieved a collection of Yogācāra texts from Japan in the late nineteenth century.5 Incredibly, just a few decades after the body of Xuanzang’s work had been brought back from obscurity, his long-lost physical remains were also unearthed.
Since its discovery, Xuanzang’s skull shard has both reenacted and extended Xuanzang’s life. It has also multiplied. Since its discovery in the 1940s, Xuanzang’s parietal bone has been broken and divided more than a dozen times, producing a plurality of relics, each with its own history. Because Xuanzang’s life and literary legacy have left such a deep imprint on the Buddhist cultures of Asia, his remains have been sought by various groups—religious and secular, national and transnational—in the service of sometimes starkly different agendas. Fragments of what is believed to be the original relic now reside in mainland China (four sites), Taiwan (three), Japan (five), and India (one). Like the head of John the Baptist, Xuanzang’s skull seems to be everywhere.6
This chapter examines the recent history of Xuanzang’s relics against the broader backdrop of religion, nationalism, and international diplomacy in Asia. Ever since the death, cremation, and division of the Buddha’s remains twenty-five hundred years ago, relics have played a central role in the development and diffusion of Buddhism.7 The Indian king Aśoka’s legendary distribution of eighty-four thousand Buddha relics in the third century B.C.E. and Chinese emperors’ veneration of the Buddha’s finger bone during the Tang dynasty are some of the best known examples, but there are countless others. During Xuanzang’s pilgrimage to India he visited several sites where the Buddha’s relics were enshrined, including a temple in Haḍḍa (present-day Afghanistan) where a piece of the Buddha’s skull, his uṣṇīṣa, was on display.8 When Xuanzang returned to China, he brought with him not only hundreds of Buddhist manuscripts but also a cache of one hundred and fifty grains of the Buddha’s relics.9 Now, thirteen hundred years later, people make pilgrimages to pay homage to Xuanzang’s remains.
Despite the monumental changes that have transformed Asia during the past century and a half—modernization, globalization, and political and economic revolutions—the power of Buddhist relics appears undiminished. Throughout Asia, devout Buddhists continue to venerate the remains of eminent monks as objects imbued with extraordinary powers. The temples that enshrine fragments of Xuanzang’s skull draw crowds of supplicants who prostrate themselves before the bone, offer money, incense, and fruit, and seek Xuanzang’s aid in everything from physical health to world peace. What was once denounced as superstition at the beginning of the twentieth century is now celebrated as cultural heritage at the beginning of the twenty-first. The story of these relics thus offers a unique opportunity to examine the confluence of religion, politics, tradition, and modernity in very specific cultural and historical contexts.
BROKEN BONES AND BODY POLITIC
From the very beginning, there were questions about where the relic had come from and where it ought to go. According to the earliest accounts of the relic’s discovery, after the crypt was opened in Nanjing, Japanese and Chinese “experts” were immediately called in to inspect the bone, and they concluded that it was indeed an authentic relic of Xuanzang. Who these experts were, we are not told, but their verification of the bone’s authenticity was important because, although Xuanzang is said to have traveled some ten thousand miles during his life, Nanjing was never on his itinerary. After returning from India in 645, Xuanzang presided over translation teams at Hongfu Temple 弘福寺 and then at Ci’en Temple 慈恩寺, both in the Tang capital of Chang’an (modern-day Xi’an).10 The final five years of Xuanzang’s life were spent at the Yuhua Palace 玉華宮 (about forty-five miles north of Chang’an). Following his death in 664, his body was returned to the capital and buried in the eastern suburbs of Chang’an at a place known as the White Deer Plateau (bailuyuan 白鹿原). Tang emperor Gaozong (r. 649–683) later had Xuanzang’s remains relocated to a site several miles south of the city, near the foot of the Zhongnan Mountains.11 Although no one knows for sure, the stupa and the temple (xingjiao si 興教寺) established at the grave may have been destroyed two hundred years later when the infamous rebel Huang Chao 黃巢 (d. 884) besieged and occupied Chang’an from 880 to 883.12 According to the inscription carved on the side of the Nanjing sarcophagus in 1027 and a thirteenth-century gazetteer for the city of Nanjing, during Huang Chao’s rebellion, Xuanzang’s remains were surreptitiously moved from Xingjiao Temple to Zige Temple 紫閣寺, a small complex deep in the Zhongnan Mountains. There the relics lay until a monk by the name of Kezheng 可政 (dates unknown) from Nanjing’s Changgan Temple 長干寺 happened upon the dilapidated remains of Zige Temple a century later, in 988. Kezheng reportedly salvaged a piece of Xuanzang’s skull, brought it back to Nanjing, and interred it in a stupa on a hill to the east of his monastery.
The account of how Xuanzang’s relics ended up in Nanjing requires several leaps of faith. There is no reliable evidence that the relics were ever moved from Xingjiao Temple or that the relic obtained by Kezheng in the Zhongnan Mountains came from Xuanzang’s skull. The whole story could be based on a series of misunderstandings, or it could be willful fabrication. In a sense, though, the real history of the relic is irrelevant. What matters is that for more than a thousand years, the bone from Nanjing has been venerated as an authentic relic of Xuanzang. Faith can transform even the wildest fiction into fact. No one ever seems to have questioned that the relic enshrined at Changgan Temple had come from the skull of the great Tang monk.
Changgan was one of the most prominent Buddhist temples in Nanjing, famous for its towering stupa that purportedly contained a portion of the Buddha’s relics (a skull fragment, in fact) distributed by Aśoka.13 Xuanzang’s reliquary was relocated next to the Meditation Hall on the southern hill of the temple complex in 1386.14 With the exception of the hall standing in front of Xuanzang’s stupa, the entire temple was razed in the middle of the nineteenth century, when Nanjing served as the capital of the iconoclastic Taiping Heavenly Kingdom. The significance of the site was gradually forgotten until Japanese troops sank their shovels into the southern hill in the winter of 1942.
Xuanzang had lived during the early decades of the Tang dynasty (618–907), a period of political stability and cultural efflorescence. Xuanzang’s relics, on the other hand, emerged during a much more troubled era of Chinese history. By the winter of 1942, Nanjing had endured a devastating occupation by Japanese forces for nearly five years. In 1938, Japan’s Imperial General Headquarters established a puppet state in southeastern China with Nanjing as its capital.15 Wang Jingwei 汪精衛 (1883–1944), a rival of Chiang Kai-shek’s, was appointed the titular president of the so-called Reorganized Government in 1940, but real authority rested with his Japanese handlers.16 Chinese officials serving the Reorganized Government publicly maintained that the presence of Japanese troops and administrators was not an act of aggression but a means of protecting China from the threat of “Red Imperialism” (the Soviets and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) and the colonial designs of Western nations, particularly England and America. In 1940, the Japanese government announced the formation of the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, an alliance of Asian nations to be led by Japan. To promote a sense of transnational solidarity, Japanese propagandists emphasized the shared cultural heritage of all Asian nations, and Buddhist teachings and traditions came to serve as powerful ideological tools for unifying and pacifying the populations of Japan’s occupied and allied territories. In May 1943, less than six months after the discovery of Xuanzang’s remains, the Greater East Asia Buddhist Federation (da Dongya Fojiao zonghui 大東亞佛教總會) was established in Shanghai with the mission of driving “out the invasive power of England and America from the realm of Greater East Asia” and using “Buddhism to unite all the nations and peoples of Greater East Asia together to finish the Greater East Asian war and construct the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.”17 Chinese and Japanese Buddhists, it seems, were now allies in the war effort.18
The discovery of Xuanzang’s relic during this same period afforded a perfect opportunity to rally the Buddhist faithful of China and Japan around their mutual reverence for the life and legacy of this beloved monk. But the propaganda potential was initially outweighed by a desire to possess the relic. Some Japanese authorities apparently planned to quietly ship the contents of the crypt back to Japan, a clear indication that, at least for some, the value of the relic extended beyond its mere political utility. Word of the find quickly spread, however, and a belated press release was issued on January 22, 1943.19 Xuanzang’s relic would be given a public reception worthy of an illustrious monk. Government dignitaries and clergy from both China and Japan attended a grand ceremony on February 23, with a procession carrying the relic from the site of its discovery through the center of Nanjing to Jiming Temple 雞鳴寺, a prominent Buddhist monastery located just inside the city’s northern wall.20 After the ceremony, the bone was sent to Nanjing’s Department of Cultural Relics, adjacent to Jiming Temple, where, newspapers report, one hundred thousand people prostrated themselves before it.21
The initial plan was for the relic to be reenshrined at a site on the grounds of Pilu Temple 毘盧寺, one of Nanjing’s flagship Buddhist institutions located near the Guomingdang’s presidential residence and government housing compound. The Chinese side, represented by Wang Jingwei’s brother-in-law and the vice-chairman of the new Greater East Asia Buddhist Federation, Foreign Minister Chu Minyi 褚民谊 (1884–1946), would pay for the construction of a new stupa. The Japanese side, represented by Foreign Minister Shigemitsu Mamoru 重光葵 (1887–1957), would fund the construction of a Xuanzang Hall. Foreseeing Japan’s imminent victory in the war, the complex was also slated to include a memorial stupa for the casualties of the “Great East Asian War”—the first of many attempts to enlist the salvific powers of the relic for the benefit of fallen soldiers and civilians. Although fund-raising for the Memorial Hall was carried out in Tokyo, in those financially strained times the Japanese delegation was unable to secure the necessary funds, and plans for the construction of the monument were put on hold until the conclusion of the war.22 The hall, not surprisingly, was never built. But a stupa modeled on Xuanzang’s original reliquary at Xi’an’s Xingjiao Temple was constructed in late February 1944, on the nearby summit of Little Jiuhua Mountain.23 The stupa still stands, but its crypt contains only a small portion of Xuanzang’s original relic.24
FIGURE 4.1 Statue of Xuanzang below the stupa containing his relic, Little Jiuhua Mountain, Zijinshan Park, Nanjing
Photo by author, 2010
MUSEUMS AND MONASTERIES
After so many centuries sealed underground, the relic appears to have grown restless. According to the original inscription for the Little Jiuhua stupa, on December 28, 1943, nearly one month before the relic was to be enshrined in the new stupa, a relic division ceremony (fensong dianli 分送典禮) was held in Nanjing and the relic was broken. Two portions remained in Nanjing and a third was sent to Beijing so that “the radiance of the numinous bone could illuminate both the north and the south.”25 What may at first appear sacrilegious—the violation of sacred remains—was in fact neither unorthodox nor uncommon. The holographic quality of Buddhist relics ensures that even the smallest portion retains the undiminished efficacy of the original. Division only increased the relic’s reach.
Of the two relics in Nanjing, one, as we have seen, was interred in the stupa at Little Jiuhua, but the other was shuttled around to various institutions in the city over the course of the next thirty years. The reasoning behind the decision to withhold a portion of Xuanzang’s relic from the stupa in Nanjing was never made public, but it likely stemmed from competing conceptions of the status of relics in China at the time. As is well known, both the Nationalist and the Communist governments engaged in protracted campaigns to eradicate “superstitious” practices, and Buddhist relics—the remains of the dead, venerated as if alive—were seen, at best, as inert cultural artifacts of a bygone era, which belonged in a museum if they belonged anywhere. But many monastics and laypersons continued to view relics as sacred objects, imbued with miraculous life force, which should only be enshrined in a traditional Buddhist context. To split Xuanzang’s relic was to split the difference; one piece was interred in a reliquary and the other was sent back to Nanjing’s Department of Cultural Relics. The former has remained in its reliquary, but the latter has lived an unsettled existence.
In 1949, this latter relic was moved from the Department of Cultural Relics to the Nanjing Museum, where it was put on display together with ancient bronzes, paintings, and, later, depictions of the evolution of mankind and the ascent of Communism.26 In 1953, at the behest of the Nanjing Buddhist Association (Nanjing shi Fojiao jie 南京市佛教界), Xuanzang’s relic was relocated to Pilu Temple, which the CCP maintained as a showcase monastery for the benefit of visiting foreign dignitaries. This move followed the founding of the Chinese Buddhist Association (CBA) earlier that same year, with its mission of organizing Buddhists to participate in “movements for the welfare of the motherland.”27 Ten years later, in 1963, during the relative calm between the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, the bone was transferred yet again, to Qixia Temple 栖霞寺, a historic monastic complex situated in the hills to the northeast of Nanjing. At that time, Qixia, along with other sites in China, Taiwan, and Japan, was preparing to host an international event commemorating the thirteen hundredth anniversary of Xuanzang’s death.28 Events in China were staged in part to demonstrate the continued vitality of Buddhism in the People’s Republic of China (PRC); the government was eager to discredit rumors that the regime was hostile toward religion and to highlight the Buddhist culture China shared with its political and economic allies.
International concerns about religious repression in China, however, were well founded. Mao Zedong launched the Cultural Revolution in 1966, just two years after gala Xuanzang celebrations in Nanjing, Xi’an, and Beijing. The Nanjing Buddhist Association, fearing that the relic would be seized or destroyed during the increasingly virulent attacks on Buddhist monasteries, had the relic moved from Qixia Temple to Nanjing’s Cultural Management Board for safekeeping.
The Cultural Revolution lasted until 1976, but in 1973, Xuanzang’s relic was taken out of government storage and enshrined at Nanjing’s newly restored Linggu Temple 靈谷寺, a modest though politically charged temple situated near Xuanzang’s stupa on Little Jiuhua Mountain.29 With the onset of the Cultural Revolution, Linggu had ceased to function as a Buddhist temple; the monks were sent to labor camps, many of the temple’s buildings and icons were destroyed, and the local branch of the Revolutionary Committee occupied the structures that remained. But in May 1973, just seven months after the normalization of Sino-Japanese relations, the Japan-China Buddhist Exchange Group (Nitchū Bukkyō kōryū kondankai日中仏教交流懇談会) was scheduled to tour Buddhist sites in several Chinese cities.30 Shortly before their arrival in Nanjing, government officials sprang into action and, in the span of fifteen days, restored Linggu to its former status. The Revolutionary Committee was removed and monks were reinstalled. A Ming-dynasty Medicine Buddha statue was sent from Beijing, and sutra cabinets were brought from Pilu Temple. A Memorial Hall for Jianzhen 鑒真 (J. Ganjin, 688–763)—the Chinese monk credited with introducing the Vinaya tradition to Japan—was hastily established, and Xuanzang’s relic was installed in a new Xuanzang Memorial Hall.31 Linggu was thus quickly transformed from a headquarters of the Communist Revolutionary Committee to a kind of Buddhist museum with exhibits showcasing the cultural and diplomatic ties between Japan, China, and India.
Linggu’s Jianzhen memorial was later relocated, but the Xuanzang Hall remained and was recently renovated and expanded.32 On its main altar, before a statue of Xuanzang, sits a gilded reliquary filled with skull shards. These, it turns out, are not really Xuanzang’s relics but decoys, taken from the exhumed corpse of a monk from Zhenjiang.33 The real relic is kept hidden and is brought out only on special occasions, but even this represents only one piece of the bone that was brought to Linggu in 1973. The rest of the Linggu relic, as we will see, now resides in Taiwan.
FIGURE 4.2 Xuanzang cloister at Linggu Temple, Nanjing
Photo by author, 2010
FIGURE 4.3 Detailed view of reliquary with substitute relics, Linggu Temple, Nanjing
Photo by author, 2010
DIVISIONS AND DISAPPEARANCES
During the same period that Xuanzang’s relic was traveling around Nanjing, several other fragments of his skull were making the rounds in Beijing. The transfer of these relics to the north was later described by a Chinese military attaché named Zhang Heng 張恆 (dates unknown). In 1943, Zhang, representing the Reorganized National Government of China, accompanied the relic from Nanjing to Beijing along with three other men: the monk Shuangchi 爽痴, representing the Beijing Buddhist Association; the monk Miaoyuan 妙原, representing the Nanjing Buddhist Association; and the layman Bai Jian 白堅, representing the citizens of Nanjing.34 Some three thousand people reportedly gathered at Nanjing’s Minggugong airport (on the former grounds of the Ming dynasty’s imperial palace) to bid the bone farewell. During the flight—itself an extravagant display in an era of fuel shortages—Miaoyuan worked out the roles each member of the delegation would play upon their arrival in Beijing. The relic, naturally, would play the part of Xuanzang, but the other members of the party were cast as the characters that accompanied the fictional Xuanzang on his fantastic pilgrimage to India as depicted in the famous Ming-dynasty novel Journey to the West (Xiyou ji 西遊記). Miaoyuan’s instructions, as remembered by Zhang Heng, were as follows:
Great Master Shuangchi, you are the special envoy of the Beijing Buddhist Association, so you must be in the center [of our group] and carry the reliquary. You will represent Sandy Monk. Bai Jian, you are probably the reincarnation of a white horse.35 You sit in front of Shuangchi, representing the horse that Xuanzang rode. Military attaché Zhang Heng, since you have the rank of military attaché and are the special envoy of the central government, you will sit by the right side and be in charge of protecting Xuanzang. There will be no doubt that you are Sun Wukong [Monkey]. I [Miaoyuan] am a monk from a small temple and my attainments are few, so I can only play the role of Zhubajie [Pig].36
This staging—with Xuanzang’s relic playing the lead role in a reenactment of a scene from a work of fiction inspired by Xuanzang’s life—would later become a popular motif in Xuanzang memorials and festivals throughout China and Japan. These events are clearly intended to entertain and amuse, but they also point to the way that Xuanzang the translator and exegete is often overshadowed by Xuanzang the mythical, magical character in the imaginations of modern audiences. The Journey to the West may have been inspired by Xuanzang’s biography, but now the Journey to the West shapes modern conceptions of the historical Xuanzang and his relics.
After the plane landed in Beijing, the troupe presented the reliquary to Wang Kemin 王克敏 (1879–1945), the chairman of the North China Political Council, who, to follow Miaoyuan’s logic, must have been standing in for Tang Taizong (r. 626–649), the emperor who received Xuanzang on his return from India in 645. From the airport, the relic was taken to the Tuancheng 团城 Hall on the shore of Beijing’s North Lake 北海—the administrative heart of the city—where civil and military officials were given the first opportunity to pay their respects. A holiday was then declared for businesses and schools so that the residents of Beijing could also venerate the bones.
Xuanzang had arrived in Beijing, but his travels had only just begun. The Beijing relic was eventually divided into three more portions. The only fragments of this relic known to still exist in China were sent to Sichuan in 1949, on the eve of the Communist takeover of Beijing, and are currently enshrined at Wenshu Temple 文殊院in the city of Chengdu.37 A second portion of the Beijing relic appears to have been lost during the Cultural Revolution, although some later Chinese sources claim that it was given as a gift to Ceylonese monks in 1952.38 The final portion of the Beijing relic was initially taken to Tianjin but then, in 1957, was sent—or one might say returned—to India.
RETURNING TO NALANDA
The PRC’s gift of Xuanzang’s relic to the government of India was part of a long process of political courtship. Throughout the 1950s, the two countries had been working to strengthen diplomatic and economic ties, and, in June 1954, Zhou Enlai visited India for the first time to promote the newly agreed upon Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence.39 In October of that year, a Sino-Indian trade agreement was signed in Beijing and Sino-Indian Friendship Associations were established in both countries. Elaborate CCP-sponsored commemorations of traditional Indian culture ensued—the Ajanta cave murals in 1955, the life and work of Kālidāsa in 1956.40 In addition to demonstrating their respect for India’s heritage, officials in Beijing were eager to emphasize the historical roots of the two countries’ friendship. Xuanzang served as a ready-made symbol of China’s indebtedness to Indian culture while also exemplifying China’s native ingenuity and initiative. The propaganda potential was obvious, and in November 1955, the Times of India announced that China, India, and the U.S.S.R. were jointly planning to produce a film based on Xuanzang’s life.41
Xuanzang had emerged as a figurehead for Sino-Indian cooperation.42 Temples associated with his life in Xi’an—Ci’en and Xingjiao Temples—were some of the first Buddhist institutions to be restored by the CCP and were regularly shown to visiting Indian dignitaries.43 This appears to have been an effective strategy. After touring China in 1956, the leader of an international delegation, the Indian monk Bhadant Anand Kausalyayan (1905–1988), enthused that “Communists in China do not obstruct the growth or observance of any religion. I think the social conditions in People’s Republic of China make it easier for the followers of different faiths—Buddhists, Muslims, Christians and Taoists to observe their precepts.”44 Reports such as this reflect what has been called the honeymoon period of Sino-Indian relations, when the slogan “Hindi-Chini-bhai-bhai” (India and China are brothers) was trumpeted by Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and his administration.
The Chinese Communist state was not the only ostensibly secular government engaging in relic diplomacy during this period. The British were sending Buddhist relics to India and Ceylon; the Ceylonese gave relics to Vietnam and Japan; the French sent relics to Cambodia; and the Nepalese offered relics to China.45 China, in turn, organized a grand tour of its tooth relic to Myanmar in 1955.46 It was in this heady context that, in September and October 1956, Kausalyayan’s eleven-person delegation of Buddhist monks visited China and requested permission to enshrine a portion of Xuanzang’s remains at Nalanda—the long-defunct Buddhist university in northern India where Xuanzang had studied for several years.47 Zhou Enlai offered the portion of the Beijing relics that had been enshrined at Tianjin’s Dabei Cloister 大悲院 since 1945 and appointed the young fourteenth Dalai Lama to serve as China’s emissary. (The Dalai Lama, together with the Panchen Lama, had already been invited to Patna to attend ceremonies marking the twenty-five hundredth anniversary of the Buddha’s birth.) Along with the relic, Zhou Enlai sent copies of Xuanzang’s translations, a set of the Qisha Tripitaka, as well as three hundred thousand yuan and blueprints to be used for the construction of a Xuanzang Memorial Hall in traditional Chinese style.48 The relic was presented to Prime Minister Nehru on January 12, 1957, in a ceremony at Nalanda’s Mahavihara.49 Shortly thereafter, however, relations between China and India soured as territorial disputes arose over shared border regions. Thereafter, the joke goes, it was Hindi-Chini-bye-bye.
FIGURE 4.4 The Dalai Lama presenting Xuanzang’s relic to Jawaharlal Nehru at Nalanda, January 1957
Guangming ribao, January 26, 1957, no. 2748
FIGURE 4.5 The new Xuanzang Memorial Hall at Nalanda, completed in 2006
Photo courtesy of Jeffery Kotyk
Plans to construct a Xuanzang Memorial Hall were shelved until the Sino-Indian alliance was revived at the turn of the twenty-first century. In the fifty-year interim, Xuanzang’s relic was kept in a crystal reliquary at the nearby Patna Museum. It emerged in 2006, “India-China Friendship Year,” when, along with several other highly publicized demonstrations of mutual goodwill, efforts to complete the Memorial Hall were stepped up.50 In July of that year, a group of ten Chinese and Taiwanese monks, carrying a statue of Xuanzang sculpted from Chinese and Taiwanese clay, left Xi’an to spend four months retracing Xuanzang’s journey to India. Their arrival at Nalanda in November was scheduled to coincide with that of another delegation of “experts, scholars, media people, entrepreneurs, and celebrated personages from all walks of life” assembled by the state-run China Central Television Station.51 Both groups were early for the official inauguration, which took place a few months later, on February 12, 2007, but they were able to tour the nearly complete Memorial Hall and admire the life-size statue of Xuanzang that stood near its entrance. The plaque on the statue’s pedestal clarified Xuanzang’s global significance: “Xuan Zang belongs to a galaxy of world Citizens whose great mission was to interpret, for the good of mankind, sublime volumes of human civilization.” Xuanzang, it seems, was not necessarily Chinese and not necessarily Buddhist; he was simply one of the world’s great intellectuals. Despite claims of universality, the symbolism of these events—the traditional Chinese hall built in India, the image molded from Chinese and Taiwanese clay—unequivocally identified Xuanzang with China, and China with Taiwan.
JOURNEYS TO THE EAST
Despite Xuanzang’s excellent credentials, his career as a lobbyist for cross-straits unity got off to a rocky start. During the mid-1950s, another portion of Xuanzang’s relics was at the center of a diplomatic fallout between mainland China, Japan, and Taiwan. Japan’s possession and distribution of Xuanzang’s relics remain a sensitive and controversial issue in the mainland. A new plaque, affixed to the base of Nanjing’s Little Jiuhua stupa in 2003, is one of many indications that old wounds have been slow to heal:
During the Republican period, Japanese invaders occupied China, Nanjing fell into enemy hands, and the skull of the great master was plundered. Patriots and disciples of the Buddha, sacrificing their lives to protect the dharma, resisted the Japanese and rescued the bone. In the end, it was returned to Jiuhua. A stupa was built and offerings were made. Immediately, great crowds gathered to venerate the sage’s bone in a display of the nation’s patriotism. They rejected the disgrace of the illegitimate Wang government’s betrayal. It is truly as Lu Xun said: “The people are the backbone [of the nation].”52
The new plaque at Little Jiuhua emphasizes the patriotism of Nanjing’s residents, stating that they risked their lives to rescue one of the nation’s great treasures from the clutches of Japan. This oft-repeated claim, while not exactly inaccurate, is misleading. Monastic and civil authorities in Nanjing did manage to prevent the entire relic from being taken to Japan. But on October 10, 1944, just before it was interred in the newly built stupa on Little Jiuhua, that portion of the relic was split into at least two more pieces; one was sealed inside the stupa, the other was taken to Japan.
According to an account written by the Japanese missionary monk Mizuno Baigyō 水野梅曉 (1878–1949), shortly before the relic was interred in the new stupa, Foreign Minister Chu Minyi offered a piece of the relic to the Buddhists of Japan—represented by Mizuno Baigyō and the monk Kuramochi Shūhō 倉持秀峰 (1891–1972)—as an “expression of gratitude.”53 News of the gift was not made public until several days later, however, raising suspicions that the relic division had not been previously planned or officially sanctioned. These impressions appear to have been confirmed by the Japanese official Ōta Toyoo 太田外世雄 (dates unknown), who was present when the relic was split. Writing in 1974, Ōta recalled, “The morning before the ceremony for the completion of Dharma Master Xuanzang’s reliquary, I had come to Nanjing on other business and paid a visit to the diplomatic head Chu Minyi. Master Baigyō was also there, and he told me that he was about to divide the relic for Japan. We all participated in the ceremony.”54 Ōta’s account suggests that Mizuno Baigyō orchestrated the relic division, lending credence to Chinese accusations that the “gift” was more akin to a theft—furta sacra. Even if Chu Minyi did freely offer the relic to Mizuno, as an official serving at the pleasure of the Japanese government and military occupation forces, his actions could hardly be taken as representing the will of the Chinese people.
Upon its arrival in Japan, the relic was first installed at Zōjōji 增上寺 in Tokyo—one of two ancestral temples for the Tokugawa family. In 1945, in an effort to rescue the relic from the immanent firebombing of Tokyo, it was moved, first to Kuramochi Shūhō’s temple, Sangakuin 三学院, in Saitama prefecture, and then to nearby Jionji 慈恩寺, a temple that fortuitously bore the same name as the monastery in Chang’an where Xuanzang had carried out his translation work. At Jionji, construction commenced on a thirteen-level granite stupa to house the relic.
Work on the stupa was still under way in 1952 when Japan hosted the second meeting of the World Fellowship of Buddhists in Tokyo. Five hundred and forty delegates representing nineteen countries were in attendance, and Taiwan sent a delegation of prominent monks and laymen under the leadership of the Zhangjia Living Buddha (Zhangjia huofo 章嘉活佛, 1891–1957), then serving as the head of the Buddhist Association of the Republic of China (ROC).55 In Tokyo, Zhangjia and the members of his party met with Takamori Takasuke, the former Japanese commander who had first discovered Xuanzang’s relic in Nanjing. Takamori informed them that a portion of the relic was currently awaiting enshrinement in the nearly completed stupa at Jionji. The Taiwanese delegation immediately enlisted Takamori’s help in securing some or all of Japan’s relic for Taiwan.56 Negotiations briefly stalled when Takamori passed away in September 1954, but one year later—near the tenth anniversary of Japan’s surrender—the ROC’s embassy in Japan raised the issue again. The following month, the board of directors of the Japan Buddhist Federation (Zen Nihon Bukkyō-kai 全日本仏教会) voted to grant Taiwan one fragment of the relic kept at Jionji.57
The news was celebrated throughout Taiwan, but the representatives of the mainland’s CBA, along with some Japanese Buddhist and political organizations, were outraged. If the relic was to be moved, the CBA contended that the only logical destination was mainland China, its place of origin. By no means should it be sent to the “renegade” government on the island of Taiwan. On November 5, 1955, Zhao Puchu 赵朴初 (1907–2000), serving as the secretary-general of the CBA, circulated an open letter requesting that all plans to transfer the relic to Taiwan be abandoned and warning that such a move would seriously damage the fragile trust that had been building between Chinese and Japanese Buddhists since the end of the war.58 Zhao’s letter was addressed to two Japanese clerics: Ōtani Kōchō 大谷光暢 (1903–1993)—the chief abbot of the Jōdo Shinshū Ōtani sect who, unbeknownst to Zhao Puchu, had just stepped down as the chairman of the Japan Buddhist Federation—and Ōtani Eijun 大谷瑩潤 (1890–1973)—the head of the aforementioned Japan-China Buddhist Exchange Group.
Zhao Puchu and Ōtani Eijun were already acquainted through their collaborative efforts to repatriate the remains of Chinese citizens who had died in Japan while performing forced labor during the war. In 1942, the Japanese government, faced with a diminishing workforce, started to forcibly bring Chinese laborers to Japan to work in mine and dam construction. Harsh and dangerous conditions resulted in the death of nearly seven thousand Chinese over the course of just three years. Whether compelled by a sense of compassion for the families of the deceased or by fear of vengeful Chinese ghosts haunting Japan, in the 1950s several Japanese Buddhist organizations spearheaded efforts to exhume the remains of the dead, hold memorials, and arrange for their return to China.59 Through the work of Ōtani Eijun and others, five hundred remains were returned in 1953, but as of 1954 the bones of an estimated 5,435 Chinese were kept in Japan. Japan’s National Governors Conference passed a unanimous resolution calling for the return of all Chinese dead, but the central government, presumably fearing indictments for war crimes, refused to take action.60 Controversies surrounding Xuanzang’s relics—the remains of a famous Chinese “national” held in Japan against the will of the Chinese people—thus became enmeshed in broader issues of contrition, reconciliation, and human rights. Ōtani Eijun’s Japan-China Buddhist Exchange Group, together with the Communist and Socialist parties of Japan—organizations that shared a common goal of strengthening ties with mainland China—joined the CBA’s effort to block the transfer of Xuanzang’s relic to Taiwan.61 Their efforts, however, proved insufficient.
The Japan Buddhist Federation held a meeting to discuss the concerns of the mainland Chinese on November 10 and provided three justifications for their decision to proceed with the transfer: the relic had been freely given to Japan by Chu Minyi; the gift of the relic to Taiwan was purely a religious matter and should have no bearing on the friendly relations between Japanese and Chinese Buddhists; and, finally, China already had a portion of Xuanzang’s relics while Taiwan did not.62 The new international director of the Japan Buddhist Federation, the Shinshū priest Nakayama Riri 中山理々(1895–1981), was left with the unenviable task of explaining to Zhao Puchu that, although the concerns of the mainland Chinese Buddhists were taken very seriously, the relic would proceed to Taiwan as planned.63
FIGURE 4.6 The arrival of Xuanzang’s relic in Taiwan, November 1955. The four monks in the front (left to right) are Zhangjia, Yanpei (演培, 1917–1996), Oka Nobuchika 岡信慶 (dates unknown), and Kuramochi Shūhō.
Zhangjia Dashi Yuanji Dianli Weiyuanhui章嘉大師圓寂典禮委員會, ed., Huguo jingjue fujiao dashi Zhangjia hutuketu shiji ce 護國淨覺輔教大師章嘉呼圖克圖史蹟册 [Memorial volume on the history of Protector of the Nation, Completely Awakened, Guardian of the Teachings Great Master Zhangjia Khutuktu] (Taipei: Zhangjia dashi yuanji weiyuanhui, 1957), 15
One problem remained. Since the completion of the Xuanzang stupa at Jionji in May 1953, the relic was buried under several tons of granite. Fortunately and somewhat incredibly, Kuramochi Shūhō explained that during the interment process, participants discovered that the relic was too big to fit into the crystal reliquary that had been prepared for it. Part of the relic was therefore broken off, placed in a wooden box, and stored in the temple. It was this piece that was then conveniently available to be sent to Taiwan.64 A ceremony for “dividing” the relic was nonetheless held at Jionji on November 24, 1955. Kuramochi led the five-member Japanese delegation, leaving Japan at 1:00 A.M. the next day and arriving in Taipei later that morning amid a throng of onlookers waving ROC and Buddhist flags.65 The event was widely reported in the Taiwan press with headlines suggesting that the entire relic had been “returned” (guiguo 歸國) or “given back” (fanhuan 返還) to “China.”66
Japan, of course, retained much of its original relic. Xuanzang’s relics, moreover, had never been to Taiwan so could not actually be returned there. But since neither the ROC nor Japan recognized the authority of the PRC, politically speaking, Taiwan was China. So, on November 26, a “reinstatement” ceremony (fanhuan shidian 返還式典) was held at Taipei’s Shandao Temple 善導寺—a former branch temple of the Japanese Jōdō sect that served as the new headquarters of the ROC’s Buddhist Association.67 Addressing those who had gathered to welcome the relic, Kuramochi Shūhō expressed his hope that the return of Xuanzang’s relic would strengthen the friendship and trust between the peoples of China and Japan. He also understood the exchange as a step toward reconciliation and forgiveness: “Regarding the past wrongs committed by the Japanese in mainland China during the Second Great War, President Chiang [Kai-shek] has announced that he will requite enmity with virtue. This demonstrates the Buddhist spirit of compassion and for this the people of Japan are deeply grateful.”68
After the ceremonies in Taipei, the relic was briefly taken to Kaishan Temple 開善寺 on Mount Shitou 獅頭山 before being moved to a temporary hall at Sun Moon Lake. It was finally enshrined in the newly built Xuanzang Temple on the southern shore of the lake ten years later, in November 1965. Shortly thereafter, Chiang Kai-shek, whom some Taiwanese clerics lauded as a modern-day Tang Taizong, had a seven-story stupa erected behind the temple.69 This was not a stupa for Xuanzang’s skull, which remained inside the temple complex, but a monument for the repose of the president’s late mother, Wang Caiyu 王采玉 (1863–1921)—whose grave in Ningbo had been destroyed by the Red Guards during the Cultural Revolution. Chiang Kai-shek, whether consciously or not, was reenacting an age-old tradition of Chinese emperors harnessing the powers of Buddhist relics to soothe the spirits of their ancestors.
DIVIDING THE RELIC TO UNIFY THE MOTHERLAND
The piece of Xuanzang’s relic enshrined at Sun Moon Lake has recently been joined by yet another fragment of his skull, this one arriving not from Japan but by way of mainland China.70 After the warming of cross-straits relations in the late 1980s and 1990s, the Taiwanese cleric Liaozhong 了中 (b. 1932) wrote to Zhao Puchu in 1998 requesting a portion of Xuanzang’s relics for his recently opened Xuanzang University in the city of Hsinchu. Zhao was receptive to the idea, noting that although Taiwan already possessed one of Xuanzang’s relics, that fragment had come from Japan. For mainland China to freely make a gift of the relic to Taiwan was seen as a much more significant exchange, one that could help to strengthen the political and cultural ties between the PRC and the ROC. A grand ceremony was subsequently staged at Linggu Temple in Nanjing on August 8, 1998. Mingshan 茗山 (1914–2001), the vice president of the CBA, and Zhenci 真慈 (1928–2005), the abbot of Linggu, presided. A small piece of the relic was broken off, weighed, measured, and encased in a glass reliquary.71
The relic arrived in Taipei on October 2. A public ceremony, complete with a marching band in miniskirts and costumed characters from Journey to the West, was held the following day at Xuanzang University and attended by a host of dignitaries including Taiwan’s premier, Vincent Siew 蕭萬長 (b. 1939). The event culminated with the enshrinement of the relic in the university’s new Tripitaka Xuanzang Memorial Stupa (Xuanzang Sanzang jinian ta 玄奘三藏纪念塔). If Liaozhong and his supporters thought Xuanzang’s relic would draw attention to the new university and to the Buddhist foray into higher education in general, officials in Beijing clearly hoped this gesture of goodwill would speed the process of political reunification. In his speech, Mingshan, serving as Zhao Puchu’s representative, expressed his wish that the gift of the relic would “help advance the friendly cooperation between Buddhists on both sides of the strait, safeguard world peace, and encourage the writing of model theses on the peaceful reunification of the motherland”—sentiments that were echoed in the mainland media.72 Thus, in a peculiar way, the division of Xuanzang’s relic was heralded as a harbinger of unity.
FIGURE 4.7 Xuanzang’s relic and reliquary on the altar of Xuanzang Memorial Hall, Xuanzang University, Hsinchu
Photo by author, 2012
THE FUTURE OF THE PAST
As a young monk, Xuanzang defied the Chinese emperor to leave China and study in India. More than a millennium later, his relics have also traveled abroad, sometimes with the blessing of the Chinese authorities, sometimes without. This chapter has surveyed some of the roles Xuanzang’s relics have played in China’s diplomatic relations with India, Taiwan, and Japan. In keeping with the focus of this volume, I have centered my discussions on China and omitted other instances of Xuanzang’s modern incarnations—the complicated and controversial history of his relics in Japan, his rediscovery in modern India, and the growing fascination with him in the West. There is also much more to be said about the place Xuanzang occupies in modern Chinese political discourse.73 For now, it is worth simply noting that in recent years, the Chinese government has begun promoting Xuanzang as an emblematic and exemplary citizen. In the state-run press, party members regularly invoke the “spirit of Xuanzang” (Xuanzang jingshen 玄奘精神), a slogan meant to connote the qualities of devotion, bravery, diligence, and self-sacrifice. In the international sphere, Xuanzang, like Confucius, has become the bearer of China’s best intentions. Xuanzang, we are told, not only endured hardship for the greater good of the nation and worked tirelessly to enrich the intellectual and spiritual life of China but also nurtured international partnerships based on cultural exchange, mutual respect, and mutual enrichment—just as the PRC seeks to do today. In this telling of Xuanzang’s story, his role as transmitter of Indian Buddhist traditions to China is often overlooked, while his efforts to introduce Chinese culture to India (through his purported translation into Sanskrit of the Dao de jing) and the rest of Asia are highlighted.74
Readers of Chinese newspapers are reminded that Xuanzang was not just a student during his time in India but, more significantly, a cultural ambassador and a teacher as well; he had bested Indian monks in debate and even the elders at Nalanda and regional kings pleaded with him to remain in India. After Xuanzang returned to China, this narrative continues, the translations and commentaries he produced led to great revivals of Buddhism in Korea, Japan, and Southeast Asia. Xuanzang had bestowed the gift of understanding on all Asia. In the present age of rampant materialism and social alienation, China and Chinese Buddhists are now being called to a similar mission—to bring the wisdom of the East to the disenchanted West.75
These nationalistic deployments of Xuanzang’s story stand in an uneasy relationship with attempts to mold Xuanzang into a paradigmatic symbol of a unified, pan-Asian Buddhist culture. As a founding patriarch of a transregional Buddhist tradition, he belongs to a select pantheon of Buddhist saints—including Śākyamuni, Kumārajīva, Shandao, Zhiyi, and Linji—whose influence extends well beyond their empire of origin. And, as a transmitter of Buddhist texts and teachings, Xuanzang, like Faxian, Jianzhen, Kim Qiaojue, Kūkai, Dōgen, and others, also belongs to an elite group of clerics revered for their courage, insight, and contribution to spreading the dharma throughout Asia. Since the end of World War II, these medieval monks have become modern exemplars of Asian solidarity. They have been apotheosized in elaborate public memorials and commemorations designed to highlight points of past cultural unity and generate positive models for future cooperation in Asia. But unlike most others, Xuanzang is not just a disembodied symbol; his relics, after all, are real—some would say living—things. They are tangible objects that can be seen, moved, traded, and lost. Xuanzang is more than just a memory.
The year 2014 marked the thirteen hundred and fiftieth anniversary of Xuanzang’s death. Memorials were held in China, Taiwan, Japan, and India. Places that possess Xuanzang’s relics set them on altars and offered fruit, flowers, incense, and candles. Speeches were made. People asked Xuanzang to do things for them, and he is now expected to act. Those places that lack relics—Xuanzang’s home village in Luoyang, for instance, or Xingjiao Temple in Xi’an—also staged commemorations. One day they too may seek their own share of relics. Xuanzang’s travels are probably far from over. In all likelihood, the old monk still has a long road ahead.
NOTES
1. The excavation site was just south of Zhonghua Gate 中華門. On the construction of Shinto shrines outside Japan, see Nakajima Michio, “Shinto Deities That Crossed the Sea: Japan’s ‘Overseas Shrines,’ 1868 to 1945,” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 37, no. 1 (2010): 21–46.
2. Takamori Budai 高森部隊, “Mokuroku” 目錄 [Catalog], in Tang Xuanzang fashi guta fajue fengyi jingguo zhuance 唐玄奘法師骨塔發掘奉移經過專冊 [Special volume on the relocation of the excavated reliquary of Tang Dharma Master Xuanzang], ed. Xuanzang Fashi Dinggu Feng’an Choubeichu 玄奘法師頂骨奉安籌備處, 20 (Nanjing: Xuanzang fashi dinggu feng’an choubeichu, 1943). For an eyewitness account of the discovery, see Tanida Etsuji 谷田閲次, “Dai Hōonji Sanzō tō iseki hakkutsu no tenmatsu” 大報恩寺三藏塔遺址發掘の顛末 [An account of the excavation of the Sanzang stupa at Da Bao’en Temple], Shina Bukkyō shigaku 7, no. 3 (1944): 13–20.
3. The bone measured approximately 7 by 13 cm (roughly 3 by 5 in.). See Gu Zheyuan 顧蔗園, “Fengying Xuanzang fashi fogu ji” 奉迎玄奘法師佛骨記 [A record of receiving the relic of Dharma Master Xuanzang], Zhongbao, February 24, 1943.
4. For a discussion of visual representations of Xuanzang, see Liu Shufen 劉淑芬, “Gaoseng xingxiang de chuanbo yu huiliu—cong ‘Xuanzang fuji tu’ tanqi” 高僧形像的傳播與回流—從「玄奘負笈圖」談起 [The dissemination and reintroduction of images of eminent monks—with reference to the image of “Xuanzang carrying texts”], in Xu Pingfang xiansheng jinian wenji 徐苹芳先生紀念文集 [Memorial essays in honor of Mr. Xu Pingfang], ed. “Xu Pingfang xiansheng jinian wenji” Bianji Weiyuanhui, 333–59 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2012). See also Dorothy C. Wong, “The Making of a Saint: Images of Xuanzang in East Asia,” Early Medieval China 8 (2002): 43–98.
5. During this same period, Xuanzang was also introduced to Europe through translations of his travelogue, Da Tang xiyu ji 大唐西域記 [Great Tang record of the western regions], first into French by Stanislas Julien in 1857 and then into English by Samuel Beal in 1884. Beal went on to translate Huili’s biography of Xuanzang in 1911. On the Yogācāra revival in China, see Eyal Aviv, “Differentiating the Pearl from the Fish Eye: Ouyang Jingwu (1871–1943) and the Revival of Scholastic Buddhism” (PhD diss., Harvard University, 2008), and Ge Zhaoguang 葛兆光, “Zijia baozang de shi’erfude—wan Qing jiuyi Weishi dianji you Riben fanchuan Zhongguo zhi yingxiang” 自家宝藏的失而复得—晚清久佚唯识典籍由日本反传中国之影响 [Recovering our lost treasure—the influence of the return of long-lost Yogācāra texts to China from Japan during the late Qing], Shixue jikan 1 (January 2010): 66–71.
6. On the role of relics in Christian traditions, see Peter Brown, The Cult of the Saints: Its Rise and Function in Latin Christianity (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981); Patrick J. Geary, Furta Sacra: Thefts of Relics in the Central Middle Ages (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1978); Caroline Walker Bynum, The Resurrection of the Body in Western Christianity, 200–1336 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1995); Charles Freeman, Holy Bones, Holy Dust: How Relics Shaped the History of Medieval Europe (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2011).
7. There is now a growing body of work on Buddhist relics, including the essay by Gregory Schopen, “Relic,” in Critical Terms for Religious Studies, ed. Mark C. Taylor, 256–67 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998); John Strong, Relics of the Buddha (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004); Brian Ruppert, Jewel in the Ashes: Buddha Relics and Power in Early Medieval Japan (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Asia Center, 2000); and David Germano and Kevin Trainor, eds., Embodying the Dharma: Buddhist Relic Veneration in Asia (Albany: SUNY Press, 2004).
8. On the Buddha’s uṣṇīṣa, see Donald S. Lopez Jr., “Buddha,” in Critical Terms for the Study of Buddhism, ed. Donald S. Lopez Jr., 13–36 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005).
9. Hui-li and Jung-hsi Li, A Biography of the Tripiṭaka Master of the Great Ci’en Monastery of the Great Tang Dynasty (Berkeley: Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research, 1995), 173.
10. On these two temples, see Ono Katsutoshi 小野勝年, Chūgoku Zui-Tō Chōan ji’in shiryō shūsei kaisetsuhen 中国隋唐長安・寺院史料集成 解説篇 [Commentary on the collected historical sources on Chang’an during the Sui and Tang] (Kyoto: Hōzōkan, 1989), 3–8, 55–69.
11. Hui-li and Li, Biography of the Tripiṭaka Master, 338–39. Liu Shufen has argued that Xuanzang was caught up in a series of political purges during the final years of his life. The decision to disinter (and thus desecrate) his remains, she suggests, was part of a larger effort to discredit Xuanzang and disavow his legacy. See Liu Shufen, “Xuanzang de zhuihou shinian (655–664): Jianlun zongzhang ernian (669) gaizang shi” 玄奘的最後十年(655–664): 兼論總章二年(669)改葬事 [Xuanzang’s final ten years (655–664): With a discussion of the reburial event of 669], Zhonghua wenshi luncong, no. 3 (March 2009): 1–97.
12. The monks and officials affiliated with the modern incarnation of Xingjiao assert that the stupa itself was never destroyed and still contains the nearly complete (minus the skull fragment) remains of Xuanzang. The skull bone, they say, was given to Zige Temple in the ninth century, but the rest of Xuanzang’s bones remained undisturbed at Xingjiao Temple. See Fan Yaoting 樊耀亭, Chang’an xingjiao si 长安兴教寺 [Chang’an’s Xingjiao Temple] (Xi’an: Shaanxi renmin chubanshe, 1997). For a review of the debates surrounding the early history of Xuanzang’s relics, see Huang Yunxi 黃運喜, “Xuanzang Sanzang fashi sheli zhenwei wenti pingyi” 玄奘三藏法師舍利真偽問題評議 [An evaluation of the authenticity of Dharma Master Xuanzang Sanzang’s relic], Xuanzang Foxue yanjiu 7 (July 2007): 1–31.
13. This relic, identified as a portion of the Buddha’s skull, was unearthed in 2008.
14. The name of the temple changed to Tianxi Temple 天禧寺, and then again to Bao’en Temple in 1686.
15. Also known as the Reorganized National Government of China (Zhonghua minguo weixin zhengfu 中華民國維新政府).
16. On Wang Jingwei and his government, see Wang Ke-Wen, “Wang Jingwei and the Policy Origins of the ‘Peace Movement,’ 1932–1937,” in Chinese Collaboration with Japan, 1932–1945: The Limits of Accommodation, ed. David P. Barrett and Larry N. Shyu, 21–37 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001); David P. Barrett, “The Wang Jingwei Regime, 1940–1945: Continuities and Disjunctures with Nationalist China,” ibid.
17. This passage comes from a pamphlet issued at the inaugural meeting of the foundation, translated in J. Brooks Jessup, “A Bodhisattva Descends to Hell: The Buddhist Collaboration of Wen Lanting in Wartime Shanghai, 1937–1945” (paper presented at the Association for Asian Studies Annual Meeting, Toronto, March 17, 2012).
18. On the involvement of Chinese Buddhists in the war, see Xue Yu, Buddhism, War, and Nationalism: Chinese Monks in the Struggle against Japanese Aggressions, 1931–1945 (New York: Routledge, 2005). On the wartime activities of Japanese Zen Buddhists, see Brian Victoria, Zen at War (Lanham, Md.: Rowman and Littlefield, 2006).
19. The first newspaper to announce the discovery was the Shanghai-based Japanese language daily Tairiku shinpō 大陸新報. This was followed on February 3 with a Chinese-language translation of the Tairiku shinpō story, titled “Zhonghuamen wai faxian gudai shiguan” 中華門外發現古代石棺 [Ancient sarcophagus discovered outside Zhonghua gate], Minguo ribao (reproduced in Tang Xuanzang fashi guta fajue fengyi jingguo zhuance, 1). A collection of early materials related to the discovery of the relic was printed in a special edition of the journal Miao fa lun 妙法輪, nos. 4 and 5, May 1943. The plan to pilfer the crypt was allegedly spearheaded by Colonel Inada Masazumi 稲田正純 (1896–1986). See Tsujimura Shinobu 辻村志のぶ, “Kindai Nihon Bukkyō to Chūgoku Bukkyō no aida de—‘fukyōshi’ Mizuno Baigyō o chūshin ni” 近代日本仏教と中国仏教の間で—「布教使」水野梅暁を中心に [Between modern Japanese Buddhism and Chinese Buddhism: With a focus on the missionary monk Mizuno Baigyō], in Kokka to shūkyō: Shūkyō kara miru kingendai Nihon 国家と宗教 : 宗教から見る近現代日本 [Nation-state and religion: Modern Japan as seen through religion], ed. Arai Ken 洗建 and Tanaka Shigeru 田中滋 (Kyoto: Hōzōkan, 2008), 1:391.
20. The ceremony is described in “Xuanzang fashi yigu yijiao fengying dianli” 玄奘法師遺骨移交奉迎典禮 [Ceremony for transferring Dharma Master Xuanzang’s relics], first published in Zhongbao February 24, 1943, reproduced in Tang Xuanzang fashi guta fajue fengyi jingguo zhuance, 2.
21. “Chu Minyi faqi xingxiu pilu si” 褚民誼發起興修毘盧寺” [Chu Minyi launches restoration of Pilu Temple], Shenbao, June 13, 1943.
22. See the letter from Shigemitsu Mamoru to Chu Minyi, reproduced in Tsujimura, “Kindai Nihon Bukkyō,” 392–93. Additional information was reported by the Asahi shinbun, May 18, 1943.
23. Little Jiuhua was located in the Zijinshan 紫金山 area on the eastern outskirts of Nanjing. For a collection of essays and poems published to commemorate the establishment of this stupa, see Chongjian Sanzang Fashi Dinggu Ta Weiyuanhui 重建三藏法師頂骨塔委員會, ed., Song sheng ji (Datang Sanzang Xuanzang fashi jinian ce) 頌聖集 (大唐三藏玄奘法師紀念冊) [Collection of praises of the sage (commemorative volume of the Great Tang Dharma Master Sanzang Xuanzang)] (Nanjing: Mucun yinshua suo, October 10, 1944).
24. “Sanzang fashi dinggu dingqi fengying ruta” 三藏法師頂骨定期奉迎入塔 [A date is set for interring Dharma Master Sanzang’s parietal bone in a stupa], Shenbao, August 1, 1944. The stupa’s crypt was also intended to serve as a time capsule for later generations and was filled with objects solicited from prominent figures throughout China. It also apparently contains the other items found in the original sarcophagus. See Chongjian Sanzang Fashi Dinggu Ta Weiyuanhui, Song sheng ji, 10, and Miao fa yuekan 2, no. 10 (October 20, 1944): 16.
25. Chu Minyi 褚民誼, “Tang Sanzang da bianjue fashi Xuanzang dinggu ta bei ji” 唐三藏大遍覺法師玄奘頂骨墖碑記 [Stele inscription for the stupa containing the parietal bone of Tang Sanzang Great Universal Awakening Dharma Master Xuanzang]. The original inscription was destroyed during the Cultural Revolution but is transcribed in Chongjian Sanzang Fashi Dinggu Ta Weiyuanhui, Song sheng ji, 4–5.
26. In 1951, a goodwill mission to China from India was shown the relic among the other exhibitions in the Nanjing Museum. See Sunderlal, China Today: An Account of the Indian Goodwill Mission to China, September–October 1951 (Allahabad: Hindustani Culture Society, 1952), 308–9.
27. Holmes Welch, Buddhism Under Mao (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1972), 21. See also chapter 6 in this volume.
28. Wang Zhongde 王仲德, Xuanzang yuanji hou 玄奘圆寂後 [After Xuanzang’s death] (Xi’an: Shaanxi renmin chubanshe, 1999), 68. Commemorations were also staged in Beijing, Xi’an, Taipei, Japan, and India. The events at Beijing’s Fayuan Temple and Xi’an’s Xingjiao Temple were both billed as celebrations of shared Asian culture. Representatives from Cambodia, Ceylon, Indonesia, Japan, Laos, Mongolia, Nepal, Pakistan, and Vietnam gave speeches in both locations, beneath banners reading “Strengthen the unity of the Asian peoples!” and “Develop cultural exchange among all Asian nations!” See Renmin ribao, June 28, 1964, and July 6, 1964.
29. Linggu had a history of state appropriation reaching back to the 1920s. See Rebecca Nedostup, Superstitious Regimes: Religion and the Politics of Chinese Modernity (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Asia Center, 2010).
30. The group was headed by Nishikawa Keibun 西川景文 (1893–1973). For an account of the trip, see Nukaga Shōyū 額賀章友, Nitchū Bukkyō kōryū: Sengo gojūnen shi 日中仏敎交流: 戦後五十年史 [Sino-Japanese Buddhist exchange: A history of the first fifty years after the war] (Tokyo: Ribun shuppan, 2003), 149–65.
31. Yang Yongquan 楊永泉 and Chen Ruixin 陳蕊心, eds., Linggu si zhi 靈谷寺志 [Gazetteer of Linggu Temple] (Nanjing: Jiangsu guji chubanshe, 2001), 99–100.
32. The primary memorial shrine to Jianzhen in China is now located at Daming Temple 大明寺 in Yangzhou.
34. Shuangchi appears to be another name for the monk Shouye 壽冶 (1907–2001). I have been unable to find any biographical information on Miaoyuan, and this name is likely a mistake for Miaorou 妙柔, the abbot of Longchan Temple 隆昌寺 on Mount Baohua 寶華山 at the time (I am grateful to Shao Jiade for bringing this to my attention.) Bai Jian was later known as Bai Longping 白隆平 (b. 1883), a native of Sichuan who had studied politics at Waseda University in Tokyo. He later served in various posts in the Nationalist government and taught at Beijing Normal University. See Takata Tokio 高田時雄, “Ri Bō to Haku Ken: Ri Seitaku kyūzō Tonkō shahon Nihon ryū’nyū no haikei” 李滂と白堅: 李盛鐸舊藏敦煌寫本日本流入の背景 [Ri Bō and Haku Ken: The background of the arrival of Ri Seitaku’s old collection of Dunhuang manuscripts in Japan], Tonkō shahon kenkyū nenpō, March 2007, 1–26.
35. Bai Jian’s surname translates to “white.”
36. Zhang Heng 張恆, “Zai Nanjing faxian de Tang Xuanzang yigu” 在南京发现的唐玄奘遗骨 [The discovery of Tang Xuanzang’s remains in Nanjing], in Jiangsu wenshi ziliao xuanji 10 江苏文史资料选辑第十辑, ed. Zhongguo Renmin Zhengzhi Xieshang Huiyi Jiangsu Sheng Ji Nanjing Shi Weiyuanhui Wenshi Ziliao Yanjiu Weiyuanhui 中国人民政治协商会议江苏省暨南京市委员会文史资料研究委员会, doc. no. 312 (Nanjing: Jiangsu renmin chubanshe, 1982).
37. In 1949, Bai Jian, the same man who had brought the relic to Beijing six years earlier, sent three relic fragments, along with an account of their history, to Professor Meng Wentong 蒙文通 (1894–1968) of Chengdu’s Huaxi University 华西大学. Bai Longping’s handwritten account, “Tang Sanzang fashi Xuanzang linggu yinxian zhuanyi zhi ji” 唐三藏法师玄奘灵骨隐显转移之迹 [The traces of the covert transfer of Tang Sanzang Dharma Master Xuanzang’s numinous bone], March 1949, is reproduced in “Xianjun Meng Wentong xiansheng yu Xuangong de Foyuan” 先君蒙文通先生与奘公的佛缘 [The late Mr. Meng Wentong’s Buddhist affinity with Master (Xuan)zang], http://hk.plm.org.cn/gnews/20101112/20101112214490.html (accessed February 27, 2012).
38. On October 15, a ceremony was held at Beijing’s Guangji Temple 廣濟寺, and a Ceylonese delegation presented the CBA with a Buddha relic, a palm-leaf sutra, and a cutting from the Bodhi Tree. Xuyun 虛雲 (d. 1959), serving as the honorary president of the CBA, then presented the head of the Sinhalese delegation, the monk Dhammaratana, with a Buddha statue and a miniature silver stupa. Early accounts of this exchange make no mention of the contents of the stupa. See Chinese Buddhist Association, ed., Buddhists in New China (Peking: Nationalities Publishing House, 1956), 176. Later accounts specify that the reliquary contained Xuanzang’s relic. The earliest source I have found for this claim is Chi Nai 赤耐, Dangdai Zhongguo de zongjiao gongzuo 当代中国的宗教工作 [Contemporary China’s religious work] (Beijing: Dangdai Zhongguo chubanshe, 1998), 1:265.
39. These consisted of mutual respect for each other’s territorial integrity and sovereignty, mutual nonaggression, mutual noninterference in each other’s internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful coexistence.
40. Herbert Passin, “Sino-Indian Cultural Relations,” China Quarterly 7 (1961): 85–100.
41. “Film on Hsuan Tsang,” Times of India, November 1, 1955. It seems the film was never made.
42. Welch, Buddhism Under Mao, 172–73, 484n18.
43. Restoration of Daci’en Temple began in the early 1950s. See Chang Yao 畅耀, Daci’en si 大慈恩寺 [Da Ci’en Temple] (Xi’an: Sanqin chubanshe, 1988), 22. Nehru and Zhou Enlai visited Xingjiao Temple in the spring of 1953; members of the Indian Foreign Ministry came in 1956. See Fan, Chang’an xingjiao si, 110.
44. “Hsuan Tsang’s Relics: A Portion May Come to India,” Times of India, October 16, 1956.
45. Strong, Relics of the Buddha, 205–9.
46. The tooth relic was sent to Ceylon in 1961. Commenting on the Ceylonese tour, Zhao Puchu noted that it “signifies that the peoples of Ceylon and China, after having freed themselves of colonialism and imperialism, have not only revived a profound and historic friendship, but also developed it.” See Welch, Buddhism Under Mao, 184.
47. “Hsuan Tsang’s Relics.”
48. The official Chinese account of this series of exchanges is recorded on a stele created under the auspices of the PRC’s State Administration for Religious Affairs and erected at Nalanda in 2006. The inscription, together with an English translation, is available online at http://hk.plm.org.cn/gnews/2008118/200811885817.html (accessed August 4, 2011).
49. An account of the Dalai Lama’s and Panchen Lama’s trip to India, along with a photograph of the Dalai Lama presenting Xuanzang’s relic to Prime Minister Nehru, can be found in Hongfa yuekan 2 (1957): 177, and front cover. See also “Move to Shift Xuanzang Relics to Nalanda,” Times of India, December 29, 2003.
50. In 2006, the foundation was laid for an Indian designed and funded building at White Horse Temple (baima si 白馬寺) in Luoyang, the site where, tradition holds, Buddhism was first introduced from India to China. The structure, modeled on the Great Stupa at Sanchi, was inaugurated May 27, 2010, by the president of India, Pratibha Patil. See “India to Gift Sanchi Stupa Replica and Sarnath Buddha to China,” Times of India, April 25, 2010.
51. Xu Xun, “A Convergence of Nations: Revered Monk of Shared History Again Symbol of Intra-Asia Cooperation,” China Pictorial, November 2011.
52. The phrase credited to Lu Xun here is often interpreted as referring explicitly to Xuanzang as “the backbone of the nation,” but I have not been able to find any such statement in Lu Xun’s work.
53. Mizuno Baigyō水野梅曉, “Genzō tō no yurai” 玄奘塔の由来 [The origin of Xuanzang’s stupa], Shūkyō jihō 3, no. 5 (May 1949), cited in Sakaida Yukiko 坂井田タ起子, “Genzō Sanzō no hone no yukue—Nihon ni okeru hachikasho no hōan o megutte” 玄奘三蔵の骨の行方—日本における八ヵ所の奉安をめぐって [The locations of Xuanzang Sanzang’s bones: Eight sites of enshrinement in Japan], Nihon kindai Bukkyō 17 (May 2010): 84. On Mizuno Baigyō and his relationship to the relic, see also Tsujimura, “Kindai Nihon Bukkyō.”
54. Quoted in Sakaida, “Genzō Sanzō no hone,” 84.
55. During the Qing dynasty and Republican period, the Zhangjia Living Buddha (also known as Changkya Khutuktu) served as the spiritual head of the Gelug tradition in Inner Mongolia. The seventh incarnation, Lobsang Pelden Tenpe Dronme, immigrated to Taiwan in 1949. The Taiwanese delegation also included Zhao Hengti 趙恒惕 (1880–1971), Yinshun 印順 (1906–2005), Li Zikuan 李子寬 (1882–1973), Li Tianchun 李添春 (1898–1977), and Yuanming 圓明 (b. 1918).
56. A commemorative volume documenting the relic transfer with essays and photographs was published in May 1957: Zeng Wusheng 曾悟生 et al., Jinian Xuanzang dashi linggu guiguo feng’an zhuanji 紀念玄奘大師靈骨歸國奉安專輯 [Special issue commemorating the return and enshrinement of Great Master Xuanzang’s numinous bone] (Huweizhen: Xingtai chubanshe, 1957). See also Sakaida Yukiko 坂井田タ起子, “1950 nendai no Nikka Bukkyō kōryū saikai—Genzō Sanzō no ikotsu ‘henkan’ o megutte” 1950年代の日華仏教交流再開—玄奘三蔵の遺骨「返還」をめぐって [The resumption of Sino-Japanese exchange in the 1950s: The “return” of Xuanzang Sanzang’s remains], Gendai Taiwan kenkyū 32 (September 2007): 46–64.
57. “Genjō hōshi no tōkotsu ni saido kōgi” 玄奘法師の頭骨に再度抗議 [Another protest regarding Dharma Master Xuanzang’s skull], Asahi shinbun, November 20, 1955.
58. See the letters of Zhao Puchu (November 5, 19, and 22, 1955) collected in Zhao Puchu wenji 赵朴初文集 [The collected works of Zhao Puchu] (Beijing: Huawen chubanshe, 2007), 1:121–22, 138–39.
59. Nukaga Shōyū’s history of Sino-Japanese Buddhist relations after the war records in detail the efforts to repatriate the remains of Chinese laborers. See also Sakaida Yukiko 坂井田タ起子, “Chūgokujin furyo jun’nansha ikotsu sōkan undō to Bukkyōsha tachi: 1950 nendai no Nitchū Bukkyō kōryū o megutte” 中国人俘虜殉難者遺骨送還運動と仏教者たち：1950年代の日中仏教交流をめぐって [Buddhists and the campaign to return the remains of Chinese forced laborers: Sino-Japanese Buddhist exchange in the 1950s], Rekishi kenkyū 47 (2010): 23–43.
61. Sakaida, “1950 nendai no Nikka Bukkyō kōryū,” 56.
63. Nakayama’s letter to Zhao Puchu is reproduced ibid., 56.
64. Zeng, Jinian Xuanzang dashi linggu, 17.
65. A short video of this event, under the title “Tang seng Xuanzang dashi linggu lai Tai” 唐僧玄奘大師靈骨來台 [The arrival of the Tang monk Xuanzang’s numinous bone in Taiwan], is available online at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diNLzMZFf-I (accessed July 27, 2011).
66. For a sampling of headlines, see Sakaida, “1950 nendai no Nikka Bukkyō kōryū,” 57–58.
67. At the time, the eminent monk Yinshun and layman Li Zikuan, both of whom had been in the Taiwanese delegation to Japan in 1952, were managing the temple. For Zhangjia’s account of the relic’s arrival in Taiwan, see Zhangjia Dashi Yuanji Dianli Weiyuanhui 章嘉大師圓寂典禮委員會, ed., Huguo jingjue fujiao dashi Zhangjia hutuketu shiji ce 護國淨覺輔教大師章嘉呼圖克圖史蹟册 [Memorial volume on the history of Protector of the Nation, Completely Awakened, Guardian of the Teachings Great Master Zhangjia Khutuktu] (Taipei: Zhangjia dashi yuanji weiyuanhui, 1957), 49–51.
68. Zeng, Jinian Xuanzang dashi linggu, 22.
70. I recently learned that in September 2013 the True Enlightenment Practitioners Association (Fojiao zhengjue tongxiu hui 佛教正覺同修會), a new Buddhist organization headquartered in Taipei, held a relic-enshrinement ceremony during which they claimed to have installed a fragment of Xuanzang’s skull together with Buddha relics and a relic allegedly composed of Guanyin’s blood. The provenance of this piece of Xuanzang’s relic is not yet clear to me, but the ceremony is described on the organization’s website, http://www.enlighten.org.tw/dm/8.
71. The relic is reported to have weighed 2.8863 g, was 28.2 mm long, 17.9 mm wide, and 14.2 mm thick.
72. Yuan Puquan 袁普泉, “Husong Xuanzang fashi dinggu sheli fu Taiwan” 护送玄奘法师顶骨舍利赴台湾 [Escorting the skull relic of Dharma Master Xuanzang to Taiwan], Zhongshan fengyu, no. 6 (2011): 22–23. For other accounts, see Wang Yongping 汪永平 et. al. “Xuanzang fashi sheli fen gong yingsong Taiwan shimo” 玄奘法师舍利分供迎送台湾始末 [A full account of dividing the relic of Dharma Master Xuanzang and sending it to Taiwan], Nanjing shizhi, no. 6 (1998): 22–24. Additional descriptions of the events surrounding the gift of the relic can be found in Wang, Xuanzang yuanji hou, 81–84.
73. On reading the Journey to the West as political allegory, see Rudolf G. Wagner, “Monkey King Subdues the White-Bone Demon: A Study in PRC Mythology and the Politics of the Historical Drama,” in The Contemporary Chinese Historical Drama: Four Studies, 139–235 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990).
74. On efforts to translate the Dao de jing into Sanskrit, see Paul Pelliot, “Autour d’une traduction sanscrite du Tao-tö king,” T’oung-Pao 13 (1912): 351–430.
75. For a representative article, see Lin Jingsong 林劲松, “‘Xuanzang jingshen’ de xiandai qishi” “玄奘精神” 的现代启示 [The modern inspiration of “Xuanzang’s spirit”], Zhongguo minzu bao, January 18, 2011.
