For three centuries after the mid-seventeenth century, Central Tibetan history was largely marked by the political predominance of the Gelukpa tradition of Tibetan Buddhism, whose leaders generally held power or shared it with the Tibetan nobility. Except during the first half of the eighteenth century, the source of Central Tibetan political legitimacy was the office of the Dalai Lama, in a hierocratic religiopolitical system. This power came through an alliance with the Khoshud Mongol Gushri Khan (1582–1655), who led a series of successful attacks across the Tibetan Plateau against the enemies of the Gelukpa tradition and then ruled all of Tibet (Ü-Tsang, Kham, and Amdo) as king from 1642. The royal line of Gushri Khan’s Mongol descendants retained the nominal status of kings of Tibet until 1717, but real power in Central Tibet gradually devolved into the hands of the Fifth Dalai Lama, Ngawang Lozang Gyatso (1617–82), and later his regent, Desi Sanggyé Gyatso (1653–1705). From 1705 to 1717, Gushri Khan’s grandson, Lhazang Khan, reasserted Mongol authority in Central Tibet, but with his death the lineage’s influence in Lhasa ended.
The Fifth Dalai Lama was an effective advocate for Tibet’s interests, as demonstrated by his 1653 visit to the then recently established Manchu Qing court in Beijing. Either the wealth or the prestige (or both) generated from this trip also seems to have helped him claim more authority to rule Central Tibet outright, as he invoked the title conferred on him by the Qing emperor when he recognized Sanggyé Gyatso as his regent. At some point before 1670, the “Great Fifth” came to exercise effective power over Central Tibet, Ngari, and parts of Kham through regents who governed in his name. The Ganden government, named after the Dalai Lama’s religious administrative headquarters, the Ganden Palace located in Drepung monastery, was at the outset also his political headquarters. By the late 1640s the administration was moved to the Potala Palace, just outside the Lhasa town center. This massive palace, described as a “Fortress of Religion,” became the administrative and symbolic center of Central Tibet. From its inception the government sought to consolidate economic, political, and symbolic power in Lhasa. To this end it converted monasteries formerly belonging to other Tibetan Buddhist traditions to the Gelukpa tradition. Monastic holdings often included large tracts of arable land and were valuable acquisitions for the new government. Control of monasteries constituted control of economic resources and networks as well as symbolic control of the Tibetan Buddhist tradition. The Ganden government had the sole right to maintain an army, the right to collect tax revenue from government estates across Central Tibet, and a court of final appeal when criminal cases could not be resolved at the local level.
This first half century of Gelukpa rule was a high point in the reintegration of the Tibetan cultural territory that had not been achieved since the Tibetan Empire and saw a literary flowering that attempted to summarize the collected knowledge of Tibet in the fields of medicine, astrology, and history according to the Gelukpa interpretation. Desi Sanggyé Gyatso was crucial to these efforts, and the
Yellow Beryl history of Gelukpa tradition (from which a selection is given below) is just one of many such works issued in his name: the
Blue Beryl, an illustrated work on Tibetan medicine; the
White Beryl, an illustrated work on Tibetan astrology; the
Red Beryl, a collection of magical practices; the
Black Beryl, a collection of curses; and the
Clearing the Tarnished Beryl, a response to questions about the
White Beryl raised by a rival astrologer. Sanggyé Gyatso also wrote volumes on the Dalai Lama’s life, linking him (as seen in the selection below) to the Buddha by analogous periodization of his life to the Buddha’s acts. Continuity of authority was a major problem in the transmission of power in Central Tibet, largely because the reincarnation system tended to produce periods without an obvious authority figure during the infancy and childhood of the Dalai Lamas. Thus, Sanggyé Gyatso did all he could to establish the Ganden Palace in a strong position before he yielded his office to his son in 1703. Unfortunately, the Sixth Dalai Lama was unwilling to take up the challenging task of leadership, and the succession faltered after Sanggyé Gyatso was killed in 1705. Moreover, once the Gelukpa tradition was firmly in control of most of Central Tibet, internal competition over resources quickly arose, as the rivalry between Drepung and Sera monasteries described in the Dalai Lama’s 1675 seating arrangements for a public prayer ritual demonstrates. The civil war of 1727 led to the appointment of Polhané Sönam Topgyé as the ruler of Central Tibet, a position that was described as that of king of Tibet by Christian missionaries at his court. When Pholhané’s son was killed for attempting to free Tibet from the influence of the Qing, effective rule by a Dalai Lama (the Seventh) was briefly restored, from 1750 to 1757. With the death of the Seventh Dalai Lama in 1757, a new position (
gyeltsap) developed that left the regency of Tibet to alternate among a small group of reincarnate lamas who were frequently selected after having been vetted by the Qing court. For more than a century, beginning in the late eighteenth century, the regents effectively ruled Tibet. Aside from the Eighth Dalai Lama, who lived to maturity but declined to take up leadership of the government except for a period of six years (ending in 1790), the Dalai Lamas of the nineteenth century generally died young until the time of the Thirteenth Dalai Lama, who did not take up rule until 1895. Despite all these internal troubles, the Gelukpa tradition was very successful in establishing outposts and attracting both donations and human resources (in the form of monks) far from Central Tibet, as demonstrated by the letters addressed to the Mongols of Kokonor, Outer Mongolia, and Inner Mongolia (Hohhot) and the history of the Ganden tradition. Although relations with the south did not involve mass conversions to Tibetan Buddhism or a dramatic growth in monastic establishments, relations with the rulers of the Kathmandu Valley were often cordial, which was particularly important because the Nepalese struck Tibet’s silver into coins. Nevertheless, as will be seen in the next chapter, following the rise of Nepal’s Shah dynasty in the late eighteenth century, conflict erupted on numerous occasions as Nepal sought to project its newfound power into Tibet. GT/KRS
Traditional accounts of the Buddha’s life are often arranged according to a fixed set of significant acts. In Mahāyāna Buddhist scriptures, and in Tibetan adaptations of them, the Buddha performs twelve major acts, from the period just prior to his birth in India as Siddhārtha up to his death at the age of eighty-five. These are:
1. Descent from the Tuṣita heavenly realm to earth.
2. Dream entrance into his mother, Queen Māyā’s womb, in the form of an auspicious white elephant.
3. Miraculous birth from his mother’s side.
4. Youthful sports and miracles.
5. Accomplishment in martial arts, governance, literature, and the fine arts.
6. Life of sensual pleasure, including love, marriage, children, and the enjoyment of a harem of women.
7. Departure from home to seek a means of permanent happiness.
8. Ascetic practices intended to train the body and mind to achieve enlightenment.
9. Overcoming demons during the final night before enlightenment.
10. Enlightenment at age thirty-five, in which he remains unmoving in a state of bliss for some time.
11. Turning the wheel of Dharma as a teacher, monastic leader, and institution builder from ages thirty-five to eighty-five.
12. Death, or final nirvāṇa, due to consuming poisonous food.
The twelve acts of the Buddha constitute popular organizational categories in Tibetan hagiography. Tibetan writers took the acts primarily from the voluminous life of the Buddha found in the Lalitavistara Sūtra, and used them to draw comparisons between Tibetan saints and the Buddha himself. Thus they lent authority to contemporary Buddhist leaders by claiming that their subject’s life was just like that of the Buddha. The acts were creatively interpreted to meet the needs of particular times and places, as illustrated by the twelve acts of the Fifth Dalai Lama given here.
In the passage below, Sanggyé Gyatso, the Fifth Dalai Lama’s regent and principal biographer, uses the twelve acts of the Buddha to structure his telling of the life of the Dalai Lama. If the Dalai Lama could be compared to the Buddha himself, his life was also so manifestly different from the Buddha’s that Sanggyé Gyatso was compelled to creatively adapt the acts to suit his subject. Whereas the Buddha descended from the celestial realm named Tuṣita, the Dalai Lama “migrated from the holy fields,” for he was considered a reincarnation of the previous Dalai Lama. More difficulty arises when Sanggyé Gyatso must compare the Buddha’s experiences of erotic pleasure, marriage, and fatherhood with the youth of the Fifth Dalai Lama, who became a novice monk as a child and lived, by all accounts, an entirely celibate life. He avoids such difficulties by deftly rearranging acts 4 through 7, and by replacing act 5, “Playing with the attendants of the Queen,” with a new act (now numbered 6), “The arousal of the Mind of Enlightenment,” in which the Dalai Lama realizes—or in his case, remembers—the central quest of his life, to compassionately relieve the suffering of other living beings and aid them on the path to enlightenment. The details vary, but the broader comparison of Buddha and Dalai Lama remains, as Sanggyé Gyatso persuades his readers that the leader of Tibet is, in the final analysis, no different than the founder of the Buddhist tradition. KRS
Although the number of deeds [that the Buddha] performed even as the son of King Śuddhodana was unlimited, in the Uttaratantra, which is a Mahāyāna treatise, the exalted master Maitreya says:
(i) |
The departure from the Tuṣita paradise, |
(ii) |
entry into the womb and |
(iii) |
rebirth, |
(iv) |
skill in practical matters, |
(v) |
playing with the attendants of the queen, |
(vi) |
escape [from the world] and |
(vii) |
performance of austerities, |
(viii) |
entry into the womb of Enlightenment, |
(ix) |
the conquest of the demon-hordes and |
(x) |
complete [Enlightenment], |
|
[the turning of] the wheel of Enlightenment and |
(xii) |
the departure for Nirvāṇa—[such are] the deeds [of the Buddha]. |
Here, too, with regard to the master [the Dalai Lama], spoken of in twelve deeds, the difference between “skill in practical matters” and learning is one of name only. As far as the activity of “playing with the attendants of the queen” is concerned, this and the skills that he had were combined in his youthful sports. The deed of “escape from the world”—because it was a renunciation (of the world)—is within the category of exhortation to others and, therefore, has the same meaning (as renunciation). “The entry into the womb of Enlightenment” is within the meaning of full Enlightenment and is, therefore, combined with it. The renewed arousal of the mind of Enlightenment, its increase and expansion are various minor deeds and complete the twelve accomplished deeds. So this is like a summary [of the life of the Fifth Dalai Lama]:
(i) |
Migration from the holy fields, |
(ii) |
entry into the womb and |
(iii) |
rebirth, |
(iv) |
youthful sports and |
(v) |
the performance of austerities, |
(vi) |
the arousal of the mind of Enlightenment and the recognition of its increase, |
(vii) |
abandonment of home and renunciation of the world, |
(viii) |
skill in learning, |
(ix) |
the conquest of other sects and |
(x) |
the attainment [of Enlightenment], |
(xi) |
the turning of the wheel of the religion of Enlightenment, |
(xii) |
the attainment of the Vajra-body. |
The complete list of the twelve deeds [for the Fifth Dalai Lama] is like this.
I. MIGRATION FROM THE HOLY FIELDS
Thus looking at the virtues of [the region of] Chonggyé through the many auspicious signs of father, mother, clan, and family, this master performed (i) the deed of migrating [from paradise] in the manner of the Great Compassionate One, the king of the sky—just as our teacher the Buddha had come in the form of a white elephant.
II. ENTRY INTO THE WOMB
With regard to his entry into the womb, a steward in Lhasa said that the sign which the mother had seen in her sleep was the Great Compassionate One in the form of the king of the sky, with five self-originated gods in gold-silver. With such and other auspicious signs, the Dalai Lama entered the womb. Even the time when he occupied the womb was happy. The thought of release from sa
ṃs
āra arose in his mother’s mind, spontaneously. Rain fell from a cloudless sky. A rainbow settled on the roof of the palace. In the Lukhang, the Serpent House [i.e., a temple dedicated to the
nāgas], many unique flowers grew. The country and the region had a good harvest. As never before and without making any effort, people performed such wonders as saluting and circumambulating the fortress [where the Dalai Lama was born].
III. BIRTH
With regard to his birth, when the time of the completion of the months of gestation was near, his mother was led to the window by a beautifully adorned woman. There were many other holy sights. Everyone saw unique flowers growing in the Serpent House. [The house where the Dalai Lama was born was] surrounded by the lights of a rainbow.
A rain of flowers, scattered by the lotus-hands of heavenly maidens, fell down. The sky was bright and clear, the wind was not cold and the four directions of the earth were at peace. The treasure-flask of these auspicious signs was opened. With many such signs he was born. At the time of the protracted delivery, the midwife, Tsomen, and the maidservant, Drölma Pelha, saved the mid-wives who were slow in doing their duties from becoming exhausted, since the signs of illness [in the newborn child] were few.
Wön Trashi Namgyel, the lord of Northern Latö, formed the protective circle and [offered] service and blessings. The Master of the Northern Treasure, the Knowledge-Holder Ngakgi Wangpo offered first of all the empowerment of long life “at the iron sacrificial post,” the empowerments of the fierce and red gods of death according to the school of [the teacher] Nyangrel and other empowerments and precepts which remove impediments. An uninterrupted series of visions of the great lord Atiśa, the Victor Tsongkhapa the Great and other lamas and many buddhas, bodhisattvas, [tantric] heroes, sky-wanderers, protectors of religion and protective deities arose. Their bestowal of profound doctrines as pure visions was unimaginable. The [Dalai Lama’s] mother, too, saw many visions of gods, Bektsé and many [other] protectors of religion sitting around her permanently in order to remove the impediments of her body.
IV. YOUTHFUL SPORTS
His youthful sports were far beyond ordinary ways. In the pattern of what was granted by his holy predecessor, from his childhood, he occupied himself only with discussing the accomplishment of avowed practices, questioning all his attendants, making
torma offerings, offering such offerings and beating the drum during sacred ceremonies.
V. THE PERFORMANCE OF AUSTERITIES
The performance of austerities: Even at the time of the disturbance created by the minister Khyenrap Pelzang, by relying on black magic, the auspicious signs of listening to the science taught by Telwé Wangpo were good; and there was the miracle of Zölpa seizing the scattered barley-offering with his upturned face.
VI. THE AROUSAL OF THE MIND OF ENLIGHTENMENT AND THE RECOGNITION OF ITS INCREASE (THE SPORT OF THE DANCE OF THE YELLOW ROBE)
The sport of the dance of the yellow robe, performed for the sake of the world by the Holy Vajrapāṇi, or the arousal of the mind, its growth and development, cultivated by embodied beings of both categories [clergy and laity] in this Age of Degeneracy:
As far as his recognition was concerned, not only was it prophesied by many prophecies in the treasures of precepts … and made evident in the sight of many holy persons; but also, within the experience of ordinary persons, it was prophesied by Zhingril Samyé [the Samyé oracle] and other oracle deities called drekpas [“imperious ones”] at the shrine of the lord Mañjuvajra, which is the chief shrine of Radreng Monastery, the headquarters of the Kadampa school, as follows: “The golden vajra of Chonggyé,” and “Keep up hope in the middle of the wet lands of Yarlung.” The Paṇchen Lama, the All-Knowing Lozang Chökyi Gyeltsen, and the representative of the Palace of Ganden, namely, the Tsawa Kachu, came to Nakartsé to identify the reincarnation of the All-Knowing Yönten Gyatso [the Fourth Dalai Lama]. As soon as they met [the Fifth Dalai Lama], he said many things remembering his previous births, so that they were confident [that he was a true reincarnation].
In his sixth year, in the year of the water dog (1622), on the twenty-fifth day of the second month (5 April 1622), at the only ornament of the land of Tibet, namely, the great monastery of glorious Drepung, he arrived at the Palace of Ganden, which is honored by both clergy and laity, accompanied by the Desi Sönam Chöpel, the lamas and teachers of [the monasteries of] Sera and Drepung, an ocean of monks, the great Incarnate Dharma King oracle, and an unimaginable number of monks who had come to meet him, together with a large crowd of over ten thousand people. At that time, although he spoke to an ocean of West Mongolian monks, who were free of error, about the time of his youth in a previous existence—which he [then] remembered—when he had not blessed them [by touching their heads] with his hands, he [also] bestowed much that was clear, which was subsequently understood through the deeds performed by both clergy and laity.
[Sangs rgyas rgya mtsho, Life of the Fifth Dalai Lama, trans. Zahiruddin Ahmad (Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1999), 251–252, 254–255.]
This passage occurs at the end of the Fifth Dalai Lama’s History of Tibet, written in 1643 by order of Tibet’s new Mongol ruler, Gushri Khan. It concerns the rise of this ruler, a great champion of the Gelukpa tradition against its internal Tibetan enemies and external Mongol enemies. Gushri Khan, like the Tibetan emperors and the Dalai Lamas of Tibet (who were linked to Avalokiteśvara), is associated with a protecting bodhisattva, in his case, Vajrapāṇi. In the Gelukpa Tibetan Buddhist tradition, this status explicitly justifies the violence that the Khan enacted, since he was performing military feats ostensibly for the benefit of sentient beings. As is clear from the opening paragraphs, although Buddhism recognizes that the violent taking of life has negative consequences, such as being reborn in the hell realms, nevertheless the role of bodhisattvas in Mahāyāna Buddhism, as beings who have the wisdom to know what is ultimately of most benefit, permits them to accept these consequences for the greater good, as defined by (sometimes sectarian) Buddhist goals.
In the middle of the seventeenth century there were great struggles for power in Inner Asia, and one of the leaders of the Khalkha Mongols, named Tsogtu, moved into the Tibetan region of Amdo from today’s outer Mongolia and attacked the Gelukpa tradition of the Dalai Lamas there. The Gelukpa were happy to have a rival Oirad Mongol leader, Gushri Khan, come to their defense. In so doing, he quickly expanded his domains and became the new ruler of all the Tibetan regions, uniting them under a single, independent sovereign for the first time since the Tibetan Empire. In this passage, he is directly linked to Songtsen Gampo by the way his actions are understood to protect religion and by being given the title of Dharmarāja (Religious King) in the Trülnang [Jokhang] temple that Songtsen Gampo founded in Lhasa. He is linked to the founder of the Gelukpa tradition, Tsongkhapa, especially by his protection of the Gelukpa tradition in Amdo, where Tsongkhapa was born, and by his miraculous visit to Ganden monastery, founded by Tsongkhapa, outside Lhasa. As this text was written just after Gushri Khan had eliminated the kings of Tsang in western Central Tibet, the reference to the three parts of Tibet over which he ruled must be to Amdo, Kham, and Ü-Tsang (Central Tibet). This history, though written by the Fifth Dalai Lama, notably does not mention any role of the Dalai Lama in governing Tibet, explicitly stating that Gushri Khan was the ruler, as illustrated by the taxes paid to and laws being made by him. This is in marked contrast to almost all later histories of Tibet (including those in the West) that suggest that the Dalai Lama was made the ruler of Tibet by Gushri Khan in 1642. Given the Fifth Dalai Lama’s own silence on this issue in 1643, it is clear that he did not feel comfortable making this assertion at that time. This passage opens with a prophecy, understood to be about Gushri Khan. GT
In general, at the end of seven border wars,
A king, who will be a reincarnation of Vajrapāṇi,
Will bring happiness to Tibet for a little while.
In this way, it was prophesied that Vajrapāṇi, the lord of secret (mantra), will play out a role in human existence. The holy bodhisattva, impelled by his compassion and prayers and thinking of the good of the world, took birth as a religious king, so that the hundred rays of benefit and happiness might be scattered in the ten directions. It is certain that he was one who had put away from himself all the darkness appearing in any self-destructive ordinary birth.…
As for the deed of entering into the fire-pit of hell as if it were the joyous grove of paradise, which bodhisattvas and holy ones, when they appear for the benefit of others, do—that truth [is thus]: At that time, the Khalkha and Oirad created a disturbance by preparing a mighty wave of warfare against each other. Gushri Khan came under the influence of great compassion for others and, without regard for the effort, prepared to hurl himself into the dense forest and rivers of endless evil reincarnations because of the very violent sinful act of taking life.…
“A second Songtsen Gampo, protecting the religion, has come here,” said the gods.…
Because of internal dissension among the rulers, the Khalkha, Tsogtu, was driven out of his own country and came to the edge of the lake [Qinghai/Kokonor]. Like the story of a rain of precious things falling on sinful country, his power waxed large for some time. His heart was possessed by the black devil, so that his mind was filled with evil thoughts and actions opposed to the teaching in general and the teaching of Tsongkhapa in particular. Because of this, this king [Gushri Khan], thinking only of the teaching, rose up with an army of soldiers from his own country and, in the first month of the fire-ox year (1637) came to the shores of the lake [Qinghai]. As the brave king Rāma killed the lord of Laṅkā, so Gushri Khan destroyed the 40,000 troops of Tsogtu. He brought the eastern region, up to the edge of the lake, under his power, and, through both religious and secular government, kept his subjects in happiness.
In due course, the sun [i.e., Gushri Khan] appeared in the kingdom of Ü. He celebrated the festival of the vast increase of his stock of merits. In the Trülnang temple of Rasa [the Jokhang of Lhasa], the Vajrāsana of Tibet, he took publicly the name and the title Great Dharmarāja, who rested his feet on the crown of petty kings. On his way back, he came to the great seat called Ganden Nampar Gyelwé Ling [i.e., Ganden monastery, founded by Tsongkhapa]. Although that night was the twenty-seventh [of the lunar month, and so should have been dark], in the evening, the darkness was very bright, so that even small stones were visible. At that time there also some signs that all Tibet and Greater Tibet would be under his rule. In the first month of the winter of the fire-ox year (1637), he returned to the shores of the lake.
Then, because Beri Dönyö in middle Kham was oppressing all those who followed the all-knowing Buddha and only the Bön were flourishing, in the Earth-Hare year (1639), in the fifth Mongol month (June), he brought down his army on Beri’s head and seized most of his subjects. In the iron-dragon year (1640–1), on the twenty-fifth day of the eleventh month (January 6, 1641), the ruler Beri and others fled to a well-defended frontier, but as by the sharp iron of a person’s virtue, the phenomenon of magnet and iron-filings occurs, so they were all captured and placed in a large prison-yard. The lamas and [secular] rulers of the Sakyapa, Gelukpa, Karmapa, Drukpa, and Taklungpa were brought out of the prison-dungeons where they had been placed and sent back to their own places. The people as far as the king of Jang [in the Lijiang region of today’s northern Yunnan] paid taxes in money and earnestly sought to bow down to him (Gushri Khan) respectfully. [Some predictions about his struggles and success follow.]
In accordance with signs of the times such as these, he got together an army of hundreds of tens of millions and brought the south, up to the (land of) the god of Death, under his power. In the water-horse year (1642), on the twenty-fifth day of the second month (March 25, 1642), the kings and ministers of all Tibet, (the land of) the wooden doors, lowered their proud faces and entered the practice of earnestly seeking to bow down to him respectfully. When the moon of the third Mongol month was full (April 14, 1642), from the (first) day of the first season of the year according to the Kālacakra, he became king of the three parts of Tibet and set up the white umbrella of his laws on the peak of the world.
[After Zahiruddin Ahmad, A History of Tibet by the Fifth Dalai Lama of Tibet, Indiana University Oriental Series, vol. VII (Bloomington: Indiana University Research Institute for Inner Asian Studies, 1995), 195–197.]
After years of exchanged invitations dating back to the time before either the Dalai Lama held power in Central Tibet or the Qing emperors held power over Beijing and northern China, the Fifth Dalai Lama finally accepted an invitation to visit the Qing court. He traveled for much of 1652 and arrived in Beijing in early 1653. In his account of the trip, after mentioning discussions of the situation in Central Tibet (Ü-Tsang), the Dalai Lama noted that although the Shunzhi emperor looked about seventeen years old (in fact he was only fourteen at the time), he carried himself very impressively.
The first two passages given here reflect the awesome impression such a major urban center and the imperial splendor of the Qing dynasty made on the Dalai Lama. For instance, when he arrived at the outskirts of the city, he found that a magnificent complex had been built especially for him at immense cost (almost a million dollars in twenty-first-century currency). This “Yellow House,” so named because it was covered inside and out with paint made from gold leaf, was an appropriate offering for the head of the Gelukpa or Zhaser, “Yellow Hat,” school of Tibetan Buddhism.
The Fifth Dalai Lama clearly recognized the extensive reach of the Qing empire, and noted both the variety of languages of those under its sway and the universal nature of the dynasty’s rule. One term he used for the emperor was a Sanskrit title,
cakravartin, which means a “wheel-turning king,” indicating his right to rule vast domains. The trappings of the imperial palace also led the Dalai Lama to equate it with the residence of one of the Four Heavenly Kings, Vai
śrava
ṇa (also known as the god of wealth), who resides in the north. Earlier, Vai
śrava
ṇa had been associated with the Mongol Yuan dynasty, and the Dalai Lama seems to have transferred that status to the Qing dynasty, ruling (like the Mongols) from Beijing. He was awed by the three concentric walls of the imperial city, its dense housing, and the way the surrounding terrain had been so carefully devoted to grain production. He also talked with two high officials in the palace about the governmental structure in China. His account carefully transcribes the Chinese terms for the variety of military offices for which there were no equivalents in Tibetan; they are reproduced here in
pinyin and translated in parentheses. This demonstrates what a great effort the Dalai Lama was making to comprehend the bureaucratic mechanisms by which the Manchus ruled their vast domains.
But the Dalai Lama also clearly felt that he had something to offer the Qing dynasty and the Chinese, in the form of the Mongol and Tibetan Buddhist monks who were installed at the court to teach Buddhism there. The last two passages translated here describe some of his efforts to help spread the Gelukpa teachings among the Manchus, Chinese and Mongolians at the capital, by sharing both his religious guidance and texts especially written to benefit Beijing’s Buddhist communities. The Dalai Lama discusses Tsongkhapa’s aspirations to bring Tibetan Buddhism to the Mongols and Chinese and sees his missionary work as a fulfillment of past prophecies. In particular, the fact that he brought many at the court to embrace a prayer to Tsongkhapa called the Miktséma (Aiming at Loving-Kindness), which has been called the Creed of the Gelukpa, was significant for him. In addition, he provided the Tibetan Buddhist monastic regulations (bca’ yig) by which Chinese and Mongol monastic communities in Beijing would live. He also wrote ritual texts at the behest of one of the most powerful men in the empire, the child-emperor’s elder brother, called here the Imperial Prince Gosingga, also known as Shisai. In return, he received substantial offerings from the courtiers, as well as more modest donations from a group of Chinese monks from the sacred Buddhist mountain of Wutai shan (the Five-Peaked Mountain in Shanxi province considered the worldly abode of the bodhisattva Mañjuśrī). GT
The night before, having stayed at Chenlou, on the seventeenth day (January 16, 1653), I arrived at Beijing, the palace that benefits both the royal family and others who speak the variety of languages and are under the sway of the Cakravartin’s great empire, and at a place established two furlongs [north of the city walls], the emperor had assembled materials worth 90,000 ounces of silver and built exclusively for my residence a mansion surrounded by a walled heavenlike garden, known as the Yellow House. The gold-leaf paint completely covering the interior and exterior of the central complex radiated an extraordinarily extensive brilliance.…
Under the great palace there are thirteen
Wujiang (military generals); the great citadels of the respective provinces each have civil officials and
junmen (military headquarters); under the
junmen are thirteen
tidu (provincial military commanders); under the respective
tidu are thirteen
zongye (company commanders), thirteen
tuye (overseers), thirteen
biaoye (banner officials), and thirteen
tongye (lieutenants). At each citadel, the soldiers are as numerous as the sesame seeds in five great Chinese units [of approximately a liter]. The great imperial government is surrounded by three fortified walls, colored respectively white, yellow, and red. Outside the fortified walls, to the limit of the east, south, west, and north, a vast expanse of the surrounding area has been devoted to growing wheat; the houses completely fill up the inside of the walls. Outside the imperial gate (Tian’an men) of the Inner Palace (the Forbidden City), one proceeds as through the residence of Vai
śrava
ṇa past the seven royal treasures of a universal emperor,
1 weapons, flags, and a variety of permanent parasols on high to the multifarious magnificent music, roarings and squeakings, both frightful and attractive.…
I wrote, in the manner required by the Yellow Temple’s Lama Azhang’s wishes, several compositions, such as a prayer to one’s personal lineage teacher, long-life prayers, and confessional texts. Due to the particular former aspirations and because of the unusual kindness of the Conqueror (i.e., Buddha) Tsongkhapa with respect to the countries of China and Mongolia, through other religious ceremonies, having transformatively expanded upon the Miktséma, I caused all the laity and clergy in the encampment and the Chinese, Tibetan, and Mongolian monks both inside and outside the palace to be guided [into the Gelukpa tradition], and all these numerous [disciples] accordingly made offerings of [a total] of nearly 10,000 ounces of silver.…
I wrote, in the manner required, a monastic charter to which the Chinese and Mongol monks and nuns could adhere. On the eleventh day, Tseten Wang arranged [before me as gifts] the auspicious material objects, foremost of which was a golden vase. About three hundred Chinese monks and hermits came from the Five-Peaked Mountain, and presented me with a vase blessed by Mañjughoṣa, various types of flowers, and five hundred wooden rosaries. In accordance with the wishes of the Imperial Prince Gosingga, I wrote the books of rituals that were needed in the Chinese regions.
[Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho, Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho’i rnam thar (Lhasa: Bod ljongs mi dmangs dpe skrun khang, 1989 [1681]), vol. 1, 394, 396, 400, 403. Trans. GT.]
A short work composed by the Fifth Dalai Lama, entitled
Guidelines for Seating Arrangements at the Great Prayer Festival of Lhasa (1675), provides a unique glimpse into rivalry between the monasteries of Lhasa under the rule of the Dalai Lama’s new government. The ostensible purpose of the work is to establish a hierarchical seating arrangement for monks participating in the Great Prayer Festival, an annual event founded by Tsongkhapa in 1409 (see
chapter 16). The more pressing concern, however, is to establish the monks of the Dalai Lama’s own Drepung monastery at the top of that hierarchy, and the monks of the other large Gelukpa institution near Lhasa, Sera monastery, in a secondary position. To this end the Dalai Lama focuses on one crucial point: individuals or sectarian groups should not foment discord in the Buddhist monastic community, the sa
ṅgha, for to do so vitiates the authority of the sa
ṅgha as a unified moral body in the eyes of the lay public and brings negative karma upon those who perpetrate such discord.
After providing a brief history of the introduction of Buddhism in imperial Tibet, as well as the founding of the Jokhang temple in Lhasa, the Dalai Lama offers a brief biography of the Gelukpa school’s founding father, Tsongkhapa. Two events in Tsongkhapa’s life are important here: the inauguration of the Great Prayer Festival in 1409 and the founding of Drepung monastery in 1416 by Tsongkhapa’s student, Jamyang Chöjé (1379–1449). Since that time, according to the Dalai Lama, the monks of Drepung and Sera have assembled “to establish faith anew in those who did not have faith in the Buddha, and renew the faith of those who had it.” In the mornings of the festival, monks would listen to sermons on the thirty-four birth stories of the Buddha, and in the evenings they would dedicate the merit created by the monastic community to the people, which “produced waves of virtuous karma that spread like a lake in summer.”
The Dalai Lama then describes the troubles that have plagued the Great Prayer Festival in recent years, and levels severe criticism at the monks of Sera. By contrast, the monks and officials of Drepung have promoted a communal perspective and have “sought friendship with the troublemakers, whatever their impure previous actions.” And it is in this spirit of harmony that the Dalai Lama has decided to impose strict seating arrangements for the festival, all of which, as one might expect, favor the monks of Drepung. In the final section of the work, the Dalai Lama attempts to smooth over the problems in the saṅgha by arguing that a few troublemakers should not be seen to represent the whole. (Here it seems that he speaks more to patrons of the event than to participants.) This would be a mistake, for the sūtras explain that the measure of any one person cannot be fully grasped by another. Even though the saṅgha appears to be made up of ordinary people, it may well be that there are advanced practitioners who are hiding their holiness and acting as normal monks. Harboring anger at the saṅgha as a whole, then, is tantamount to harboring anger at a potential or actual bodhisattva lying low in its midst.
The Dalai Lama’s work is an aggressive sermon, in which he makes clear that the sa
ṅgha must present a public image of unified ethical conduct. The group to lead this unified public display can, in the end, be only the monks of Drepung, his home monastery. KRS
[The Great Prayer Festival was begun] at the order of Tsongkhapa, in order to fulfill the wishes of Neudzongpa Namkha Zangpo. Led by the preceptors of the Lhasa Great Prayer Festival, the [festival] assembly consisted primarily of [monks from] Sera monastery and Drepung monastery. In brief, the monastic community of the four directions assembled, and it was as if this was the work of a second Victor, who worked to establish faith anew in those who did not have faith in the Buddha, and renew the faith of those who had it.
In the morning poetry specialists gave teachings on the thirty-four birth stories composed by the glorious A
śvagho
ṣa.
2 In the evening [people] made offerings pervading space, inviting the Buddha, his sons, and disciples through the power of faith and truth. At the dedication of merit, when the merit of all people was collected at midnight, based on the liturgical order, including the
Prayer of Samantabhadra,
3 the accumulation of merit produced waves of virtuous karma that spread like a summer lake.
All the various rumors since 1630 regarding Drepung and Sera when they met together during the Great Miracle are without meaning. Still, recently, due to faults in monastic officials, earlier and later differing opinions, and lately, in 1675, trouble that reached the ear of the Drepung discipline master, the festival was delayed by instruction of the Regent. After that a need arose for a barrier from the Sera masters and disciples, and because it was difficult to construct the area in which each would carry out duties, Lozang Jinpa and Gerlok Adar gave instructions.
After summarizing recent conflicts between Drepung and Sera monasteries, the Fifth Dalai Lama surveys problems between members of the two institutions in the past:
During the 1669 Prayer Festival, a Sokpo (Mongol) of [Sera] Jé monastery hit the Drepung disciplinarian, Lozang Rapten. The [Sera] Jé teacher Jamyang Lhündrup praised this action.… The faultess Drepungpa, who have a conciliatory perspective, sought friendship with the troublemakers, whatever their impure previous actions. Now, “the swan is satisfied with the lake, the owl is satisfied with the rock,” and based on that various faults in virtue arose, including taking credit for work [not done].
Therefore, this is the primary point upon which a ruling should be made: in front [shall be the] the Drepungpa, behind them facing west in six lines only Sera monks, then Meru Shidé monastery; in back of them a combination of Sera and Drepung along with various groups of monastic communities from all sects. If the Sera monks do not have an authoritative seating arrangement, there will be cause for argument, so explicit seating instructions are certainly in order. Disciplinarians from the seven colleges of Drepung provide examples for great discipline.
Finally, the Dalai Lama urges would-be patrons of the Lhasa Prayer Festival to think positively about the monastic community despite what they may have heard about the Sera–Drepung conflict, for speaking ill of the monks is a sure way to bring karmic ruin upon oneself.
In a vast religious gathering such as this, even though the monastic community appears to consist of ordinary people, it is explained in the scripture that the measure of a man cannot be grasped by a man, and it is certain that humans, superhumans, and the monastic community have developed an enlightened attitude [i.e., are bodhisattvas] and work in mysterious holy ways. The Introduction to Middle Way Philosophy says, “One who is angry at a bodhisattva destroys all the merit collected from giving and good conduct over a hundred eons, so there is no sin greater than intolerance.”
[Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho (1617–82), Lha ldan smon lam chen mo’i gral ’dzin bca’ yig, in Bod kyi snga rabs khrims srol yig cha bdams bsgrigs (Lha sa: Bod ljongs tshogs tshan rig khang gi bod yig dpe rnying dpe skrun khang, 1989), 324–345, selections. Trans. KRS.]
The first decree given here was issued in 1679 to appoint Sanggyé Gyatso to the post of governor of Greater Tibet, which is defined as including Ngari, Ü-Tsang, and Kham. Amdo is left out of this description, as it was clearly still under the rule of the Khoshud Mongols based in Kokonor, who had done so much to support the Gelukpa in controlling Central Tibet and Kham. The parallels with the earliest documents of imperial Tibet are obvious: the loyalty of the minister, the injunctions to obey him and not to sow dissension between minister and ruler, and the invocation of deities to enforce the edict. A novelty of this edict is the fact that it opens with the Dalai Lama claiming power (a portion of which he then assigns to his governor) by virtue of the recognition granted to him in 1645 by the Shunzhi emperor of the Qing dynasty, the leading power in East Asia. When the Fifth Dalai Lama first consolidated authority in 1642 with the support of the Mongol Gushri Khan, the Manchu Qing dynasty had not yet taken control of China. But as Mongol power weakened—after the death of Gushri Khan in 1655 and the rise of internal dissension between his sons, distracting them from taking an active role in Tibet’s affairs—Manchu Qing power continued to grow, which may explain why this title is cited here as a source of authority. This does not mean that Tibet was under Qing China’s authority, but the reception of such recognition from East Asia’s superpower was clearly relevant to the Dalai Lama’s claim to power.
A reassertion of Tibetan power in Greater Tibet seems to have come in the 1670s. Traditions associated with imperial Tibet were revived and Mongol titles, clothing, and styles of correspondence were discouraged. This document is also an early indication of the Fifth Dalai Lama’s claim to authority over both Tibetans and Mongols. The two peoples, especially their ruling elite (listed here in great detail by their titles), are the specific audience for this decree. This is also the first time the Fifth Dalai Lama makes the claim, absent in his History of Tibet (see above), that Gushri Khan had given him authority—not only over Central Tibet (including the former subjects of Samdruptsé, under the Tsangpa governor) but also over Gushri Khan’s own royal lineage.
It is often claimed that the Dalai Lamas, from the time of the Fifth Dalai Lama on, controlled spiritual and temporal affairs in Tibet, yet in this decree the Fifth Dalai Lama explicitly states that he cannot manage temporal affairs, but rather will appoint a series of governors to take this responsibility. The Dalai Lama is quite clear that the duties of these governors, meting out justice and commanding armed forces, violate the precepts of Tibetan Buddhism. This was one reason the Dalai Lama could not exercise these powers, and also why Sanggyé Gyatso and others who wished to keep religious vows tried to avoid being appointed to such positions. Especially interesting here are the discussions of problems of governance by a combined religious and lay Buddhist bureaucracy: issues of celibacy and propriety, the conflict between monastic and lay views of the world, the desire to have time designated for specific religious practice, etc.
This document essentially tries to resolve the problem of succession to power in Tibet, laying the basis for Desi Sanggyé Gyatso to rule the country after the death of the Fifth Dalai Lama (d. 1682). As the Great Fifth grew older, he must have been concerned about the transition of power after his death. He clearly intended that Sanggyé Gyatso would manage temporal affairs for a long time, since he speaks of the possibility that old age might eventually interfere with the twenty-six-year-old’s ability to govern. This experimental approach of selecting a Desi (Regent) with an unlimited term did work well in the short term, since Sanggyé Gyatso was able to lead Tibet until 1703, when he passed the post on to his son. However, in 1705 the wife of Lhazang Khan, a descendant of Gushri Khan who took his inherited role as King of Tibet literally, had Sanggyé Gyatso killed. The problems of succession within the Tibetan religiopolitical system were all too apparent and continued well into the eighteenth century.
The latter two documents were written after the Fifth Dalai Lama died, but it is clear from the first (1682) that Sanggyé Gyatso continued to speak in the name of the Dalai Lama, though the authority he claims, “Lord of the entire world,” has expanded. The range of positions to which he addresses this document marks a shift from a Mongol-centered world to a Manchu-centered list of noble titles. We see an economic benefit of issuing documents in the name of the Dalai Lama in the second decree, as it authorizes a monk trained at Sera monastery to travel to Amdo to raise funds for the regional house where monks from the northeastern part of Amdo stayed when at Sera. By 1693, when the last “diploma” given below was issued, the reference to the Dalai Lama’s authority deriving from his appointment by the emperor of China had been dropped from the introduction, though the Qing title given to the Dalai Lama was still preserved. The term Rapjampa mentioned in these two documents was a title conferred on those who had received religious training and passed certain exams in Lhasa. All these documents demonstrate the reach of the Gelukpa religious system, especially its far-flung educational network, in linking Lhasa to the Tibetans in Amdo and the Mongols from Amdo to Inner and Outer (Khalkha) Mongolia, as well as the region now known as Xinjiang (ruled then by the four tribes of Oirat Mongols). GT
1) The word of him who by decree of the Huangdi, the [Qing Shunzhi] Emperor, was given the title: “The Great Good Sovereign Buddha of the Western Heaven whose injunctions have become the sole doctrine of all creatures under Heaven, the immutable Vajradhara, the Dalai Lama.”
To all in general beneath the sun, who live on the wealth-bearing earth clearly distinguished by the wish-granting tree, and in particular to the three great seats of Sera, Drepung, and Ganden, to those of the neighboring Nampar Gyelwé Pendé Lekshé Ling [Namgyel monastery, associated with the Dalai Lama] and to the whole congregation of religious establishments which keep the monastic rule of non-attachment, to the masters of tantra, to the Bön of the Swastika,
4 and to whomsoever is dependent on a religious community; also to the forty great tribes of the Mongols, the four tribes of the Oirats, the king who lives by the shores of Trishor Gyelmo [Kokonor], to the royal [Chinggisid] clan, the Jinong, Taiji, officers great and small, Tabunang, Jaisang and nobles, together with the community of common folk, to the great officers of the kingdom of Great Tibet known as the three Circuits [Ngari], the four Horns [Ü-Tsang], and the six Ranges [Kham]; to the lay officials, governors of districts, household officers, couriers, and to those who hold any kind of responsible post; in short, to everyone high, low, middling, it is proclaimed:
By virtue of the high purpose and strong determination of Tendzin Chögyel [Gushri Khan, d. 1655], who by the grace of eternal heaven ruled over all the wide earth, the doctrine of the Victor Tsongkhapa went from height to height. At that time in the Water Horse year [1642] when all the people, especially the subjects of the palace of Samdruptsé and also the king’s own lineage, were set under me by a religious offering of selfless generosity, since I was unable by myself to undertake the government in both the religious and the temporal sphere, after the Governor (Depa) Sönam Rapten had carried out the task of governor for secular affairs, as all members of his family had died, I appointed Governor Trinlé Gyatso and others in succession to bear that responsibility. Now, as this Sanggyé Gyatso from Drongmé is not only the nephew of the Governor Trinlé Gyatso but in several prophecies, such as the recently discovered
Gyachen [a
terma discovered by the Fifth Dalai Lama], he is marked out by predictions as being fit to rule over Tibet, in the wood-hare year [1675] the reasons why he ought to accept that responsibility were urged upon him in detail. But because of his earnest pleading I had to excuse him. Consequently, without holding a test of the many other suitable persons, since the [Namgyel] College Steward Lozang Jinpa had been shown to be the favored candidate after Sanggyé Gyatso, the circumstances were explained to him. Although he was unwilling to accept, he was not able to resist my order. Moreover, on the repetition of the test by lot the result was that the choice had to be confirmed. He was then appointed on the express agreement that if everything went well for three years without disturbance and if then all obstacles had subsided and it was likely this would continue, that would be the term of his office. Since Lozang Jinpa is without personal ambition and his foremost care was to bring the advancement of the religious government, and especially because he has not departed in the least from my instructions, I had hoped, just as the all-knowing Gendün Gyatso [the Second Dalai Lama] expressed it in his verses for his disciple Gungrappa, that he might be able to continue.
But Governor Lozang Jinpa himself pressingly asked to be excused on account of the risk that there might be some confusion if his term of office were to be extended. So when the occasion arose for making a new appointment in accordance with several repetitions of the test by lot and after consulting Tsangpa of the White Conch-shell Headdress [an oracle], since there were so few others suitable, the matter was put forcefully to Sanggyé Gyatso in every way, on the grounds of the former tests by lot and the predictions and so on. Although for all sorts of hesitations and arguments he was unwilling to accept, he said that as I, following the example of the white conch and the sea monster [whom the conch tamed by feeding it with milk] would by no means excuse him, even though on account of the uncertainties of the future he was one who is greatly devoted to religion, if the present Governor were able to carry on, it would not be necessary to say anything. But, since that was not so, in case he were to ask to be excused before there had been an opportunity to conclude a new appointment all sorts of doubts might occur to people at large and the matter might fall by the way, so now he requests that without disobeying my orders he may keep his religious vows for two years and in that way he may be allowed to undertake the task.
Although to enter the religious orders is certainly a source of excellence, of those ministers who progressively increased the power of the Ganden Palace in its two spheres [religious and secular], from the two Treasurers Gyalé Kündün Rinpoché and Senggé down to the present time, none except for the Governor Lozang Jinpa has followed the example of fully dedicated acceptance of the Kadampa way of deliverance, shown by the all-knowing Gendün Gyatso and his predecessors, and has maintained a life of celibate purity. Especially, since it has been necessary to perform many kinds of severe and strict administrative acts of justice and warfare in bringing under control a kingdom extending in the east as far as Dartsedo [i.e., Dajianlu, modern Kangding in Sichuan] and exceeding in wealth those of the Pakmodrupa and the Tsangpa Governor, it was difficult for them to enter monastic orders and keep solely to a celibate life. The changeable nature of their minds causes impermanence in high and low alike so that there is no certainty that they will continue in their present opinions. Furthermore, as monks and geese have to live in flocks, not only is it difficult to be discriminating about one’s place of residence and one’s friends; but also the body of ministers in the highest administrative rank restricts their outlook to the world of transient appearances in the same way as the lay nobility, which is unpropitious for the future. Of course he would not set the example of keeping a mistress in the labrang [monastic estate, as had a previous governor who was therefore forced to retire], confusing private with public behavior and paying no heed to the opinion of others.
But apart from that, without giving up care for the maintenance of his private estates, Sanggyé Gyatso will give the fullest attention to his activity in the service of the government, according to the example of Gyalé Kündün Rinpoché already mentioned. In this office, when he is carrying out an increasingly heavy task unlike that of the former governors of Tibet such as the never-ending business of the hospitable reception of guests from China, Tibet, and Mongolia, some people may get the idea that the relaxation of such entertainments is detrimental to his official duties, and men may criticize him in different ways. But now the essence of his practice is the acceptance of my instructions and his opinions are agreeable as those of one whose good qualities are not to be concealed. And whatever he may do by way of relaxation, whether by observing the rule of the Eightfold Path or in the form of religious exercises, that shall not exceed three days in each month. While granting that amount of leave I have said it is unnecessary to fix a term of office, for in that way trouble would be avoided on each occasion and government expenditure would be saved. So I have appointed him Treasurer for so long as he can bear the responsibility. Since he will be acting as my representative for the secular administration which I am unable to undertake, everyone shall accept his orders without hesitation and without any suggestion of disagreement that whatever is done by him shall be the same as if it were done by me. And it shall not be allowed that anyone, by causing dissension between myself and the Governor, injure the interests of the government and maliciously concoct unfounded falsehoods. If it should happen that on account of old age and the like that he cannot continue to bear the burden imposed on him, following the practice of those who have formerly retired because of old age he shall be allowed to act in accordance with his wishes.
Praying that Queen Makzor [a female guardian deity of the Gelukpa, more commonly known as Pelden Lhamo] who has power over the world of desires, the Dharma-Protector Bektsé Chamdrel, and other guardians of the faith may continually give the assistance of the four orders of ritual by protecting all those, monk or lay, high or low, who duly carry out the terms of this edict and by cutting off completely those who entertain evil designs against it, dealing with them for good or ill according to their deserts. Written on the second Gyelwa [eighth] day of the bright half of the fifth Mongol month of the earth-female-sheep year [1679], according to the Chinese system of calendrical calculations, and which is known in the sacred land of India as Siddhārtha, in this country as Döndrup, and in the [Qing] kingdom of the Mañjughoṣa Emperor as Giyi [the corresponding branch and element from the Chinese calendrical system], at the great palace of the Potala which fully opens the gateway to the four kinds of attainment. Jayantu.
[After Hugh Richardson, “The Decree Appointing Sangs rgyas Rgya mtsho as Governor,” in High Peaks, Pure Earth (London: Serindia, 1998), 444–447.]
2) The word of him who by decree of the [Qing] Emperor was given the name of the ruling potentate of the realm of supreme virtue of the Western Region [Tibet], the Lord of the entire world and the whole of the Buddhadharma, the omniscient Vajradhara, the Dalai Lama. Sent generally to those living on the wealth-bearing earth and especially to the forty-nine ruling Princes of the Khalkha and Oirat Mongols, to those residing on the shores of Trishor Gyelmo [Kokonor], and in upper and lower Amdo, etc.: lamas and monks of all kinds, Princes, Beile, Beise, Gong, Taiji, Tabunang, Jaisang, noblemen, military commanders, together with envoys, travelers, common people, monks and laymen, high, low, and middle class, to all and everyone: The living quarters of the monks in the Drakti regional house of Sera Tekchen Ling (monastery) have part by part grown old and decayed. Because of this great damage, His Victorious Powerful Highness [the Dalai Lama] has accordingly announced a decree.
The name of the person who has been sent to look for contributions for the repair and renovation of the living quarters called Nyelam is the Venerable Rapjamba Drakpa. He is traveling with a retinue. Whether he is moving or staying, coming or going, those who agree with the law of the dual [religious and secular] regime should help him without delay in collecting the faithfuls’ gifts. Those not bringing any kind of harm or opposition and being nothing but friendly and properly fulfilling [these instructions] I will hereafter allow to enter into the protection of my virtue!
This letter, which must be heeded, is written in the water-dog year [1682], on the eighteenth day of the third month at the Self-Arisen Sublime and Incomparable [Potala] Palace.
3) The word of him called the Vajradhara, the Dalai Lama, the ruling potentate of the realm of superior virtue of the Western Region [Tibet], the Lord of the whole of the Buddhadharma.
Sent generally to mankind and particularly to the monks and laymen, the high and low in the direction of Köke qota [Hohhot, Inner Mongolia], to all and everyone.
The Tümed [Mongol] Rapjampa from Köke qota, called Tsenpa Gyatso, has resided from the time of his early years in this great monastery of the magnificent Drepung, the source of the accomplished teaching of the doctrine, for his training. He has become a Rapjampa and professor, exerting himself as much as possible in listening, thinking and learning, etc. about the fundamental principles of the Dharma. Now when returning to his country, this Doctor of philosophy is granted the title of a wise Master of the Dharma.
As he himself has followed the precepts of the Dharma, whether he is moving or staying, those who agree with the law of the dual [religious and secular] regime should not inappropriately harm or oppose him, but should help him in every way and act in friendship! Those who behave properly are allowed to enter into my protection.
Written in the water-bird year [1693], on the tenth day of the ninth month, from the Ganden Palace [the seat of Tibet’s government] of the great monastery, the splendor-blessed Drepung.
[After Harry Halén, “Two Tibeto-Mongol Regent Decrees in the Name of the Dalai Lama from the Years 1682 and 1693,” Opuscula Altaica: Essays Presented in Honor of Henry Scharwz, ed. Edward H. Kaplan and Donald W. Whisenhunt (Bellingham, WA: Center for East Asian Studies, 1994), 313–317.]
Some three hundred letters ascribed to the Fifth Dalai Lama, Ngawang Gyatso (1617–82), are still available to us. The vast majority of those directed to foreign rulers were sent north, as correspondence with Mongol or Manchu leaders. This is one of just three that were sent to rulers of kingdoms located to the south, in what is today Nepal. In this letter, written in 1680, the Dalai Lama is thanking King Jitāmitramalla, who ruled the kingdom of Bhaktapur in the Kathmandu Valley from 1673 to 1696, for sending a delegation and some presents to acknowledge the 1679 appointment of the new regent of Tibet, Sanggyé Gyatso.
Delegates regularly came from Bhaktapur to the court of the Fifth Dalai Lama and were received on the first day of the Tibetan New Year celebrations. As a sign of their relatively low status, they were generally treated to the lowest of five rungs of guest protocol: they sat on simple flat mats and were served tea, while the Dalai Lama sat on five thick cushions. In this case, two men named Bholaki and Lavor brought a letter and a set of four gifts to mark the event. The letter follows a standard format and largely consists of pleasantries, praising the foreign ruler and speaking of their mutual friendly relations.
One especially interesting aspect of the letter is the Fifth Dalai Lama’s indication that there are two parts of Tibet that respect the throne to which the regent was appointed. The Tibetan term for “respect” also includes the sense of “service,” which makes this brief statement a claim to the loyalties of Tibetans well outside the direct administrative reach of the Dalai Lama and his regent. The first part, Tibet proper, seems to indicate the domain over which he and his regents more directly ruled, which roughly corresponded to the regions around Zhigatsé, Lhasa, and as far east as the Yarlung Valley. The second region, Greater Tibet, probably refers to eastern Tibetan Kham (and possibly Amdo as well), most of which were not directly administered from Central Tibet. This is a very different statement of authority from that which the Dalai Lama made in his History of Tibet in 1643. Between the death of Gushri Khan and the rise of Lhazang Khan in the early eighteenth century, there was a period of relatively weak Mongol khans who did not directly interfere with governance in Tibet. Thus the Fifth Dalai Lama and his regent could assert this kind of authority, at least to a minor king to the south. Moreover, the Dalai Lama describes the post the regent assumed as that of taking the throne, which also suggests that the 1679 appointment was an effort to elevate a native ruler over the Mongol descendants of Gushri Khan, who had been declared King of Tibet some thirty years previously. GT
Reply to a letter brought by a delegation sent in the iron-monkey year [1680] by the king of Bhakatupur on the occasion of the appointment of Depa Sanggyé Gyatso as regent—a white conch shell [with a form] turning toward the right and [a sound] pervading all directions.
The letter of the Great King of Bhakatpur in Nepal to the west, the Wheel of Goodness visibly extolled to the whole world, “descended from Aṅgiras,” the deva of devas [“god of gods”] and ruler of men, has reached here safely with the [following] gifts:
one ornament/piece of jewelry
one leather bag of Acacia catechu resin
one leather bag of sulfur
one leather bag of sugarcane
[brought by] two messengers, Bholaki and Lavor.
A wide accumulation of merit has been completely collected during many ages. Therefore, the body of the accomplished ruler is like a mountain of gold free from disease; he is exalted and radiates amidst his subjects, and the power of his good fortune is completely extended.
From this the result is that the kingdom is everywhere free from disease, war and famine. And it is peaceful, and the necessary wealth is perfect for all his subjects in the endlessly wide circle [of his realm]. May his life last long, and may the highest joy of his heart be augmented as if [it were] rejoicing in a feast.
Here too it is clearly visible that the Buddhist teaching comprising the instruction and realization of the glorious Lion of the Śākyas, the Buddha, the only guide of all beings (including the gods) and the welfare of all beings are increasing.
I was very pleased that you sent these two [messengers] as a gratulatory and tributary delegation to the ruler newly appointed to the throne in the chutö month of the Siddhārtha year (= July 1679)—[a throne] very much respected by the people of Tibet and Great[er] Tibet.
It is self-evident that the “good relations” that have long existed between the Newar kingdom and Tibet will be mutually continued, and I wish that later, too, news [from there] will come uninterruptedly like the flowing of the Ganges River.
Sent from the great Potala palace on the auspicious date, the twelfth day of the ninth month of the so-called Rudra Year [October 5, 1680], together with a shawl (khatak) [and two pieces of] brocade for the inside and outside [of a gown] as gifts.
[Christoph Cüppers, “A Letter Written by the Fifth Dalai Lama to the King of Bhaktapur,” Journal of the Nepal Research Centre 12 (2001): 39–42.]
When the Fifth Dalai Lama died in 1682, his regent, Sanggyé Gyatso, was left with the task of overseeing the maintenance and growth of the Gelukpa tradition and all the domains over which it held sway. With the backing of Mongol khans based in the grasslands to the north, the Gelukpa had controlled much of cultural Tibet for four decades. But Sanggyé Gyatso did much to consolidate the explosive growth of the tradition. His massive work the Yellow Beryl, written in 1698, records this growth, as well as the bureaucratic nature of institutional maintenance. The Yellow Beryl recounts the religious history of the Gelukpa order, from the birth of its founder, Tsongkhapa, and his establishment of the tradition’s first monastery, Ganden (outside Lhasa), to the work of the Fifth Dalai Lama.
This narrative was one of the first in Tibetan history to explain the spread of a tradition through the lens of the geographic expansion of its monastic institutions; over half is dedicated to a geographically organized list of almost one thousand monasteries founded as or converted to Gelukpa institutions. This central part of the book takes the form of a bureaucratic register, recording for each monastery the name, foundation date, founder, and a list of abbots down to the end of the seventeenth century. Then there is usually a comment about the most important religious practices at the monastery, often a note about the disciplinary tradition that the monks follow (known as the monastic charter). Finally the book lists which Central Tibetan monasteries (mostly Drepung, Sera, Ganden, and Trashilhünpo) receive the recruits drawn from these far-flung extensions of Gelukpa influence, and how many monks currently reside at each. One such entry is included here as an example.
In essence, this list reveals the bureaucratic mechanism by which the Gelukpa tradition spread its message and brought human resources to the center of its zone of influence, which in turn led to great expansion and consolidation of the tradition. The passage selected here comes from the very end of the long list (over 250 pages) of monasteries, culminating in those that had spread beyond the Tibetan cultural region into Inner Mongolian lands on the border of China proper. The growth of Gelukpa Buddhism in these regions seems to have been conceived as a civilizing process that assisted the Mongols in driving out local Chinese religious traditions (referred to here as demons). And even beyond Mongol lands, the role of lamas who had served as Imperial Preceptors at the court in Beijing during the Yuan and Ming dynasties and established monasteries beyond the Tibetan cultural area is celebrated. The final sentence is a long aspiration prayer, indicating the grand scope of the regent’s hopes for the spread of his religion over all of the eastern part of the Asian continent, especially through the combined efforts of the Qing emperors and the Dalai Lamas in support of Buddhism. GT
On the frontier of China, the Upper Ganden Dargyé Ling monastery was established by the Master of the Dharma Sanggyé Gyatso
5—the disciple of Sönam Gyatso who was the third manifested emanation of the revered saffron lotus [i.e., the Third Dalai Lama]—at the same time that Litang monastery was established [1580]. Since that time, Mañju
śr
ī Tsongkhapa’s teachings have thoroughly increased in that region. On the abbatial seat [in sequence since that time]: Lakhampa Tsültrim Zangpo, Ngaripa Peljor Gyatso, Jampawa Gendün Trashi, the Ölkha incarnation Chö Gyeltsen, Lakham Trinlé Peljor, Drakti Jamyang Zangpo, Zegang Lodrö Gyatso, Jamyang Pelden, and now Pelden Zangpo. [The rites observed there] generally mix the local monastery’s with the Geluk Guhyasam
āja [Tantra] and the trilogy of the Three Black Ones. The monastic recruits [from this monastery go] to the Powo Affiliated Houses at Sera, Drepung, and Ganden [monasteries near Lhasa]. About seven hundred forty monks.… When the Ordos King Bindi acted as a patron for the establishment of [the monasteries known as] Püntsok Zhenpendé, Püntsok Namgyel Ling in Apel Noyon’s territory, and Püntsok Dargyé Ling in Sechen Daiching’s increasing foothold and so forth, inconceivable communities of virtuous ones [monks] appeared.
As for those [communities], they remained and tamed the [local] Chinese demons. The tutelary deities and Dharma protectors’ appearance and speech manifestations were granted. The Dharma wheel turned and so forth. Since too much writing would arise [if I went into the details], just look at the lord’s [the Fifth Dalai Lama’s] biography itself [to find such examples].
Moreover, because of the Venerable Victorious One, the Mighty and Gentle Protector Lama Tsongkhapa’s spiritual heirs, splendorous and preeminent lords of mankind, the two Imperial Preceptors, viz. Jamchen Chöjé (Great Compassionate Dharma King) and Jang Darma, and moreover [before that even] the great learned ones Shaka Tsülwa, Dutsang Chöjé, and [the Sakya lama] Sönam Zangpo and so forth, by means of many such great vessels, in Greater Mongolia, India, and China and so forth, many monasteries were established. In brief, as far south as the Ganges River, east to the edge of the ocean, west to the kingdom of Persia, and north in the Snowy Lands [of Tibet] may the adherence to a standard by a clergy practiced in the turning of the three wheels [study, teaching, and meditation] and produced from the combined compassion and deeds of the Lord, essence of Mañjuśrī [the Qing emperor] and the chief heir [of Tsongkhapa], Gendün Drupa [and his incarnations in the person of the Dalai Lamas], who is pleasing to behold, by virtue of not passing beyond the sphere of Buddhist practice, as was mentioned above, remain for a while in equanimity.
[Sde srid sangs rgyas rgya mtsho, Dga’ ldan chos ’byung baiḍūrya ser po, ed. Rdo rje rgyal po (Beijing: Krung go’i bod kyi shes rig dpe skrun khang, 1989), 299, 345. Trans. GT.]
