TIBET

Tibet became one of the last major zones in Buddhist Asia to accept Buddhist ideology and rituals into its culture, which assumed a unique position as the perceived source for true dharma study during the twelfth to the twentieth centuries. Throughout their religious history, Tibetans have emphasized a balance of scholarship, contemplative meditation, and the indivisibility of religious and secular authority; most of these values were formulated under the aegis of Buddhist tantrism. Tibetan Buddhism matured over the course of fourteen centuries and will be assessed in this entry in phases that, if somewhat contested in scholarly literature, still represent important stages in its development.

The Royal dynasty and the early translation period

Tibetan literature attributes the formal introduction of Buddhism to the reign of its first emperor, Srong btsan sgam po (Songtsen gampo, d. 649/650). Undoubtedly, though, proto-Tibetan peoples had been exposed to Buddhist merchants and missionaries earlier. There is a myth that the fifth king before Srong btsan sgam po, Lha tho tho ri gnyan btsan, was residing in the ancient castle of Yum bu bla mkhar when a casket fell from the sky. Inside were a gold reliquary and Buddhist scriptures. While the myth is not early, it possibly reveals a Tibetan memory of prior missionary activity. We do know that official contact with Sui China was accomplished from Central Tibet in 608 or 609 and that, as Tibet grew more powerful, Buddhist contacts increased.

Nonetheless, two of Srong btsan sgam po's wives—Wencheng from China and Bh?ku?? from Nepal—were credited with constructing the temples of Magical Appearance (Sprul snang, or the Jo khang) and Ra mo che. Other temples were built as well, and twelve were later considered limb-binding temples, where a demoness representing the autochthonous forces of Tibet was subdued by the sanctified buildings. Srong btsan sgam po is also credited with having one of his ministers, Thon mi Sambhota, create the Tibetan alphabet from an Indian script and write the first grammars.

Buddhist progress occurred with the successors to Srong btsan sgam po. Notable was the foundation of the first real monastery in Tibet, Bsam yas (Samye, ca. 780) and the influx of Indian, Chinese, and Central Asian monks around that time. Particularly influential were ??ntarak?ita, an important Indian scholar, and his disciple Kamala??la. ??ntarak?ita and his entourage were responsible for the first group of six or seven aristocratic Tibetans to be ordained in Tibet. These authoritative monks did much to cement the relationship between Indian Buddhism and Tibetan identity. Another teacher, Padmasambhava, was a relatively obscure tantric guru whose inspiration became important later.

Translation bureaus in Dunhuang and Central Tibet were opened by the Tibetan emperors, from Khri srong lde'u btsan (Trisong détsen, ca. 742–797) through Ral pa can (r. 815–838), but unofficial translations were recognized sources of concern. While the official bureaus emphasized the Mah?y?na monastic texts, unofficial translations tended to feature more radical tantric works. During the reign of Sad na legs (r. 804–815) a council was convened to regularize Tibetan orthography and to establish both translation methods and a lexicon of equivalents for official translators. The result was the emergence of classical Tibetan, a literary language developed to render both sophisticated Buddhist terminology and foreign political documents into the rapidly evolving Tibetan medium.

Translations were initially made from several languages, but principally from Sanskrit and Chinese, so that a consistent tension between Indian and Chinese Buddhist practice and ideology marked this period. The Northern Chan school was present in Tibet, but from 792 to 794 a series of discussions between Indian and Chinese exegetes at the Bsam yas debate was ultimately decided in favor of the Indians. Eventually, Buddhist translations from Chinese were abandoned for exclusively Indic sources.

Fragmentation and the later spread of the dharma

The last of the emperors, Dar ma 'U dum btsan (r. 838–842) began a campaign of suppression of Buddhism contemporary to the Huichang suppression in China. Dar ma was assassinated by a Buddhist monk, and the vast Tibetan empire fragmented over imperial succession. The period from 850 to 950 was a chaotic time marked by popular revolts and warlordism. Surviving Buddhist monks fled, and monastic practice was eclipsed in Central Tibet for approximately a century. Aristocratic clans that had accepted Buddhism, however, continued to develop indigenous rituals and new literature based on the received tradition. This is the time that the classical persona of the nonmonastic religious teacher coalesced: the lay lama, sometimes a mystic inspired by visions of imperial preceptors. With the reestablishment of records in the late tenth century, we see active lay Buddhist behavior—pilgrimage, lay rituals, autochthonous divinities as protectors, and so on—that was to endure to the present.

Yet the monastic religious form was closely allied to the memory of the empire, and Bsam yas stood empty. Eventually several Tibetans under the leadership of Klu mes from Central Tibet traveled to Dan tig Temple, in modern Xining, and received monastic ordination from Tibetan monks who had maintained it. Returning to Central Tibet around 980, Klu mes and others began to refurbish Bsam yas as well as construct networks of new temples. Their position, though, was often threatened by the lay lamas called Ban de, and the new monks were sometimes physically attacked.

One line of the imperial house established itself in Gu ge, in West Tibet, and some two dozen men, preeminently Rin chen bzang po (958–1055), were sent to study in Kashmir. Like the Tibetan emperors, the Gu ge kings supported Mah?y?na scholarship and were critical of extreme tantric behavior, whether Tibetan or Indian. While Rin chen bzang po principally translated esoteric works, many other translators, especially Ngog Blo ldan shes rab (1059–1109), specialized in Mah?y?na philosophical treatises, rendering many into Tibetan for the first time. Thus, the Five Treatises of Maitreya and much of the work of Dharmak?rti and other scholastic authors were introduced to Tibetans through their activity. A great translator's convocation, where scholars discussed their texts and procedures, was called by the Gu ge king in 1076.

In Central Tibet, the later translation movement began with 'Brog mi (ca. 990–1060), who studied in Vikrama??la and elsewhere in India. Following him, Dgos lo, Rwa lo, Mar pa, Kyung po rnal 'byor, and other scholars began the new translation or revision of Indian works. Many of these eleventh-century Central Tibetan translators were concerned with the newly evolving tantras, which they presumed had not been revealed to earlier Tibetans. They also believed that the imperially sponsored systems had become mixed with indigenous Tibetan practices and derided them as "old style" (rnying ma).

For their part, certain Rnying ma (Nyingma) teachers—especially Rong zom Chos kyi bzang po (late eleventh century)—were also translators and defended their own texts by decrying perceived inadequacies of the new translators and their Indian informants. Rong zom also composed the first synthetic Tibetan treatment of the Buddhist path in a detailed manual called the Theg chen tshul 'jug (Entering the Method of the Mah?y?na), which begins with monastic Buddhism and culminates in the Great Perfection (rdzogs chen) teaching. The Zur clan was also involved in Rnying ma defense, and Zur chen and Zur chung put together the earliest Rnying ma rgyud 'bum (Old Tantric Canon).

Another Rnying ma response became the development of the "treasure" literature (gter ma), grounded in indigenous scriptural composition during the tenth century, when Central Tibet was isolated. Scriptural composition was normative Buddhist behavior, liberating the intention of the Buddha from excessive literalness. In India, the practice was inhibited by various conservative strategies, but Tibetans began to stretch the form in creative ways. By the eleventh century, they realized that texts revealed in Tibet could not be justified on standard literary grounds. They therefore formulated the ideology that these works had been hidden, physically or spiritually, as treasures by saints of the Royal dynasty. Many of these early treasures were dedicated to the Great Perfection view and practices.

In 1042 the important Indian missionary, Atisha D?pa?kara ?r?jñ?na (982–1054), arrived, invited by the Gu ge king. Atisha introduced the popular Bengali cult of the goddess T?r? and reframed tantric Buddhism as an advanced practice on a continuum with monastic and Mah?y?na Buddhism. This systematization, already known in India, became designated the triple discipline (trisa?vara: the monastic, bodhisattva, and tantric vows) and Atisha embedded this ideal in his Bodhipathaprad?pa (Lamp for the Path to Awakening). Atisha also promoted the basic Mah?y?na curriculum of his monastery Vikrama??la, where works like ??ntideva's Bodhicary?vat?ra (Introduction to the Conduct That Leads to the Enlightenment) were fundamental to monastic stability. Atisha's lay lama disciple 'Brom ston Rgyal ba'i byung gnas (1004–1064) founded the monastery of Rwa sgreng in Central Tibet (1057) and organized the Bka' gdams pa order.

The tantric orders evolved out of the activity of the early Central Tibetan translators. Preeminent were the various traditions of the Dwags po Bka' brgyud that derived from Mar pa (Marpa, 1002/1012–1097). While some of Mar pa's disciples were concerned with tantric scholarship, it was Mar pa's poet disciple Milaraspa (Milarepa, (1028/40–1111/23), and Milarepa's disciple Sgam po pa, who effectively grounded the tradition in both tantric and monastic practice. Likewise, 'Brog mi's center in Mu gu lung did not last, but his later follower 'Khon Dkon mchog rgyal po (1034–1102) founded Sa skya (Sakya) Monastery in 1073, and the Sa skya order became widely acknowledged through the influence and learning of 'Khon clan members. Beyond these, many smaller lineages were received from Indian masters but only partially succeeded in the institutionalization process of the twelfth century, eventually becoming subsets of one or another of the major orders.

Tanguts, Mongols, and Buddhist efflorescence in the twelfth to fourteenth centuries

By the twelfth century, small lineages began developing into specific orders that compiled the writings of exemplary figures. The initial cloisters were expanded, becoming "mother" monasteries for a series of satellite temples and monasteries. Orders established dominion in their areas, so that lay practice tended to come under the aegis of important teachers. Buddhist doctrinal and philosophical material became an important part of the curriculum. Translation activity continued, but with an emphasis on the revision of previous translations. A canon of translated scripture and exegesis was compiled throughout this period, so that by the end of the fourteenth century its major outlines became relatively clear. Finally, the aura of the emerging orders attracted the interest of Central Asian potentates, beginning with the Tanguts and extending to the grandsons of Genghis Khan.

The Rnying ma order had coalesced around the received teachings derived from the Royal dynastic period, whether transmitted in a human succession (bka' ma) or as revealed treasure teachings (gter ma). Preeminently, Vimalamitra and Padmasambhava among the Indians, and Bai ro tsa na among the Tibetans, were the mythic sources for treasure scriptures. The important treasure finder Nyang ral Nyi ma 'od zer (1142–1192) and his school in southern Tibet promoted Padmasambhava over other figures. From Nyang ral's group came the Ma?i Bka' 'bum, the vehicle for the spread of the cult of Avalokite?vara as the special protector of Tibet, purportedly embodied in Emperor Srong btsan sgam po. Treasure hagiographies of Padmasambhava by U rgyan gling pa (1323–?) have proven classics of the genre. Karma gling pa revealed the Bar do thos grol, widely known in the West as the Tibetan Book of the Dead. Although Rnying ma philosophical authors were relatively few, Klong chen rab 'byams pa (1308–1363) set the standard for tantric scholarship. Basing himself on treasures of the Snying thig (seminal drop) tradition of the Great Perfection, Klong chen pa authored important discussions of Rnying ma theory and practice.

The 'Khon clan continued to develop Sa skya Monastery, with the help of such individuals as Ba ri lo ts? ba (1040–1112), who assembled many relics at Sa skya. The great literary contributions, though, came from the five Sa skya masters: Sa chen Kun dga' snying po (1092–1158), Bsod nams rtse mo (1142–1182), Grags pa rgyal mtshan (1147–1216), Sa skya Pa??ita (Sakya Pa??ita, 1182–1251), and Chos rgyal 'Phags pa (1235–1280). Sa chen specialized in tantric scholarship, writing the first summary of the tantric path in Tibet and compiling eleven commentaries on the central text of the esoteric Lam 'bras (Path and Fruit), attributed to the Indian saint Vir?pa. Sa chen's sons, Bsod nams rtse mo and Grags pa rgyal mtshan, contributed to the myth of the Buddha, established tantric exegesis, commented on ??ntideva's Bodhicary?vat?ra, and codified the Sa skya understanding of the tantric path. With Sa skya Pa??ita, the Sa skya took to conservative philosophical scholarship, and the Sa skya order came to be known for its maintenance of the triple discipline and its defense of Dharmak?rti's epistemological system.

However, many original Tibetan contributions to Buddhism also came from this period. Among his innovations, Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge (1109–1169) developed philosophical definitions, doctrines of universals, and methods of argumentation; many challenged Indian assumptions, especially those of Dharmak?rti. In an entirely different direction, seminal Bka' brgyud (Kagyu) representatives, like Sgam po pa bsod nams rin chen (1079–1153), delineated the doctrines of the self-sufficient white remedy (dkar po gcig thub). These doctrines posited a soteriology of a single meditative method under the rubric of the Great Seal (m?hamudr?). Another Bka' brgyud pa, 'Bri gung 'Jig rten mgon po (1143–1217), additionally proposed that all the Buddha's statements were of definitive meaning (n?t?rtha), so that they all had the same intention (dgongs gcig). Also based on esoteric Buddhist ideals, Dol bu pa Shes rab rgyal mtshan (1292–1361) represented the newly formed Jo nang school, a tradition grounded in K?lacakra exegesis. Dol bu pa's reading of ??nyat? (emptiness) emphasized an emptying of attributes from a ground of reality and became technically known as the "other emptiness" (gzhan stong). This position stood in opposition to the "self emptiness" (rang stong) of orthodox Madhyamaka school philosophy. Like the ideology of the eighth-century Chinese Heshang Moheyan and the more radical Rnying ma doctrines, most of these Tibetan contributions became refuted by the orthodox, who adhered to a narrow definition of acceptable statements based on conformity to Indian texts by specific authors.

The Sa skya were granted control over Tibet during the Yuan dynasty, with the fifth of the great Sa skya teachers, 'Phags pa blo gros rgyal mtshan (1235–1280) proclaimed Kublai Khan's national preceptor in 1261. Sa skya leaders supported Mongol policies, such as the first census of Tibet, and some scholars became influenced by Mongol and Chinese literature, with Chinese imperial records translated into Tibetan. However, about 1350, during the Yuan decline, the Bka' brgyud pa monk Ta'i si tu Byang chub rgyal mtshan (1302–1364) challenged the Sa skya for control of Central Tibet. He was successful in some measure, and his Phag mo gru pa subtradition was the dominant political force for most of the next century.

One result was the formalization of the Tibetan canon under Ta'i si tu's patronage, by Bu ston (ButÖn) Rin chen grub (1290–1364). Bu ston catalogued the tantric canon (rgyud 'bum) section of the translated scriptures (Bka' 'gyur) and compiled the translated authoritative treatises (Bstan 'gyur). In the canonical compilation process, Bu ston wrote a history of the dharma, where scriptures and treatises were set out in a grand schematism of history, cosmology, and mythology. About the same time, the learned Sa skya hierarch, Bla ma dam pa Bsod nams rgyal mtshan (1312–1375), wrote the Rgyal rabs gsal ba'i me long (Mirror Illuminating Royal Genealogy), representing the popular mythology of the imperial period and origin of the Tibetan people.

Moreover, the peculiarly Tibetan office of the reincarnate lama became institutionalized. One of Sgam po pa's important disciples, the Karma pa I Dus gsum mkhyen pa (1110–1193) was said to have prophesied his own rebirth as Karma pa II Karma Pakshi (1204–1283). While earlier teachers were said to be the reembodiment of specific saints or bodhisattvas, this was the first formalization of reincarnation, with the previous saint's disciples maintaining continuity and instructing his reembodiment. Following the lead of the Bka' brgyud pa, most traditions eventually appropriated the institution.

Great institutions and the Dga' ldan pa in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries

If the previous three centuries represented an intense struggle with intellectual and canonical issues, the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries demonstrated the struggle for institutional authenticity. In part because of the political power wielded by the Sa skya and Bka' brgyud orders, many of the cloisters had become more social or political institutions, with religious involvement in the hands of the great clans or landed interests. Indeed, Tibetan monasteries were ripe for reformation, with great wealth and political authority eclipsing aspects of spirituality.

The most important event of this period was the rise and development of the reform order of Tsong khapa Blo bzang grags pa (1357–1419). Born in Amdo, Tsong kha pa originally studied in many traditions, but his most important intellectual influence was the Sa skya monk Red mda' ba (1349–1412), who had championed the radical Pr?sa?gika-Madhaymaka system of Candrak?rti (ca. 600–650). However, Tsong kha pa became dissatisfied with the contemporary understanding of monastic institutions and more general aspects of scholarship. With successive visions of Mañju?r?, Tsong kha pa understood that he was to emphasize the system that Atisha had brought to Tibet. Eventually, after many years of wandering through Tibet bestowing instruction, he was persuaded to settle down and in 1409 founded the monastery of Dga' ldan, the Tibetan translation of Tu?ita, the name of Maitreya's heaven. Tsong kha pa's order was called the Dga' ldan pa, although it was also known as the new Bka' gdams pa or the Dge lugs (Geluk; Virtuous Order). He changed the color of their hats to yellow as well, giving them the name Yellow Hats in the West.

In a series of important treatises, he articulated a systematization of the exoteric Mah?y?na meditative path (Lam rim chen mo) and the esoteric practice according to the Vajray?na (Sngags rim chen mo). In the latter instance, he employed interpretive systems developed by exponents of the Guhyasam?ja tantra to articulate a systematic hermeneutics that could be applied to all tantras. Tsong kha pa, though, is best noted for his intellectual synthesis of the Madhyamaka and Yog?c?ra systems of Buddhism, using Indian treatises as a basis for his great commentaries and subcommentaries, and emphasizing the philosophical position of Candrak?rti.

Three of his disciples were most important in the continuation of his work. Rgyal tshab Dar ma rin chen (1364–1432) was Tsong kha pa's successor at Dga' ldan and was especially noted for his orthodox summaries and commentaries that became the basis for much of Dge lugs pa scholasticism. Mkhas grub Dge legs dpal bzang (1385–1438) succeeded him at Dga' ldan and was known for his acerbic tone toward his contemporaries as well as his epistemological treatises and his K?lacakra tantra exegesis. Dge 'dun grub pa (1391–1474, posthumously the first Dalai Lama) founded the great monastery of Bkra shis lhun po in 1447 and was also noted for his scholarly work on epistemology. The rush to construct new Dga' ldan pa monasteries continued through the fifteenth century, with 'Bras spung (1416) and Se ra (1419) founded in the area of Lhasa, while others spread out east and west. Some of these monasteries eventually enrolled several thousand monks and were virtual religious cities. Part of this process led to the mission of Bsod nams rgya mtsho (1543–1588) to the Mongols, who had lapsed from Buddhist practice after their involvement with the Sa skya. Widely received, he was given the title Dalai Lama by Altan Khan, a title extended to his earlier incarnations beginning with Dge 'dun grub pa. Bsod nams rgya mtsho's reincarnation (Dalai Lama IV, Yon tan rgya mtsho, 1589–1616) was discovered as the great-grandson of Altan Khan, the only Dalai Lama not Tibetan by birth.

The intellectual and institutional vitality of the Dga' ldan pa did not go unopposed, and the Sa skya in particular found much to criticize. Interestingly, the Sa skya tradition also became involved in its own reform movement. Ngor chen Kun dga' bzang po (1382–1456) founded the monastery of Ngor E wam chos ldan in 1429 and established it as the most important tradition of esoteric Lam 'bras instruction, supplemented by the personality and work of Tshar chen Blo gsal rgya mtsho (1502–1566).

The sixteenth century was a high-water mark for scholarship in other traditions as well. Karma pa VIII, Mi bskyod rdo rje (1504–1557), questioned the basis for Dga' ldan pa confidence and provided a critique of the Rnying ma as well. The Bka' brgyud pa historians Dpa' bo Gtsug lag phreng ba (1504–1566) and 'Brug chen Pad ma dkar po (1527–1592) forcefully established their readings of Tibetan history and the tantric movement. Mnga' ris pan chen Pad ma dbang rgyal (1487–1542) formulated the classic Rnying ma statement of the triple discipline. Sog bzlog pa Blo gros rgyal mtshan (b. 1552) compiled the statements of Rnying ma opponents and established a defense of Rnying ma and treasure legitimacy.

The Dalai Lamas and Rnying ma revitalization in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries

The Tibetan religious landscape changed dramatically again in the seventeenth century. Clans in the provinces of Dbus and Gtsang had been warring for several decades, and each had its associated religious affiliation. In Dbus, the fifth Dalai Lama—affectionately known to Tibetans as the Great Fifth (Za hor ban de Ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho, 1617–1682)—had developed a base of power in 'Bras spung Monastery. The Great Fifth Dalai Lama was extraordinarily learned, with teachers from the Dga' ldan, Sa kya, Zha lu, and Rnying ma traditions. He was also highly ambitious and built on the previous Dalai Lamas' Mongolian connections, finally using the military might of Gushri Khan's Qoshot Mongols to solidify control over Tibet in 1642, inaugurating the reign of the Dalai Lamas.

Some traditions favored by the Great Fifth were greatly benefited. Because of his strong Rnying ma connections (he was one of the very few Dgan' ldan pa treasure finders) the Rnying ma tradition prospered. This was an important time for treasure traditions, with visionaries like Mi 'gyur rdo rje (1647–1667) and U rgyan gter bdag gling pa (1616–1714) revealing new textual cycles. Likewise, Rnying ma scholarship flourished, with scholars like Lo chen Dharma ?r? (1654–1717). Virtually all the greatest Rnying ma monasteries were built during this period—Rdo rje brag (1632), Ka? tog (originally 1159 but resurrected in 1656), Dpal yul (1665), O rgyan smin grol gling (1670), Rdzogs chen (1685), and Zhe chen (1735). Despite a short-lived suppression from 1717 to 1720, the Rnying ma tradition in the eighteenth century was graced by exceptional figures as well, especially the historian Kah tog rig 'dzin Tshe dbang nor bu (1698–1755) and the Omniscient 'Jigs med gling pa (1730–98). 'Jigs med gling pa was to dominate Rnying ma meditative traditions for the next two centuries with his Klong chen snying thig revelations.

Conversely, traditions not favored by the Great Fifth experienced significant problems. Most notoriously, he suppressed the Jo nang order, which had been undergoing a revival through the profound influence of Jo nang T?r?n?tha (1575–1634), an erudite scholar and historian. However, after 1642 the monastery was placed in Dga' ldan pa hands, the literature of the Jo nang pa was suppressed, and the order survived only in a few minor convents in far northeastern Tibet. The works of scholars critical of Tsong kha pa or his disciples were also suppressed, so that copies survived only in rare collections. The unfortunate sectarianism displayed by the Dga' ldan pa at this time was embodied in the literary form of the monastic syllabus (yig cha), the obligatory textbook of sectarian principles. Sectarianism was occasionally mitigated by open-minded Dga' ldan scholars like Lcang skya rol pa'i rdo rje (1717–1786).

This period was the great printing period for Tibetan Buddhism. Despite Tibetan forays into wood-block printing as early as the thirteenth century in Mongolia, the entire Tibetan canon (Bka' 'gyur and Bstan 'gyur) was not completely printed until the eighteenth century. The first Bka' 'gyur editions were printed under Chinese patronage, which continued through the eighteenth century (Yongle, 1410; Wanli, 1606; Kangxi, 1684–1692, 1700, 1717–1720; Qianlong, 1737). Editions produced in Tibet included the Li tang (1608–1621), Snar thang (1730–1732), Sde dge (1733), Co ni (1721–1731), and the Lha sa (1930s). The Bstan 'gyur editions include the Qianlong (1724), Sde dge (1737–1744), Snar thang (1741–1742), and Cho ni (1753–1773). In this same period, the collected works of the Sa skya masters were printed in Sde dge (ca.1737), and 'Jigs med gling pa reorganized and expanded the Old Tantric Canon; it was eventually printed from 1794 to 1798.

The modern nonsectarian movement and monastic intransigence in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries

The nineteenth century saw the rise of a nonsectarian movement in Eastern Tibet (Khams), where the Sa skya and the Rnying ma orders were especially supported. This movement tried to move Tibetans from a narrow view of lineage toward an ecumenical vision of Buddhist study and practice and specialized in the collection and publication of compendia of religious practice and ideas. 'Jam dbyang Mkhyen brtse'i dbang po (1820–1892) received training in both Sa skya and Rnying ma schools, and he promoted the study of their esoteric systems. Kong sprul Blo gros mtha' yas (1813–1899) developed a synthetic vision of treasure, one that integrated Rnying ma, Bon po, and Bka' brgyud systems all together in his great Rin chen gter mdzod (Treasury of Gems). In the Sa skya order, 'Jam dbyang Blo gter dbang po (1847–ca. 1914) brought together two great compendia of new translation practices, as well as editing and publishing the Sa skya esoteric system of the Lam 'bras in the face of criticism about the loss of secrecy. Two Rnying ma scholars established specifically Rnying ma scholastic syllabi: 'Ju Mi pham (1846–1912) and Mkhan po Gzhan dga' (1871–1927), the former studied by Rnying ma students, while Gzhan dga' was also favored by the Ngor pa subsect of the Sa skya.

By the turn of the twentieth century, Tibetans were becoming exposed to the wider world, especially through the Younghusband expedition (1904). With a British trade agent forcibly placed in Tibet, the Chinese responded, and the thirteenth Dalai Lama alternatively took refuge with the Chinese and the British, with Tibetans becoming aware that the world was unexpectedly changing. Sometimes this awareness had unforeseen consequences, and the scholar Dge 'dun chos 'phel (1901–1951) was especially provocative, as a monk with an interest in journalism, erotic literature, and intellectual criticism.

Communism and the Tibetan diaspora

The Communist Chinese military success of 1949 and subsequent invasion of Tibet in 1950 succeeded in subduing Tibet, where centuries of prior Chinese efforts had failed. For Buddhist traditions, the initial destruction of temples and monasteries in Eastern Tibet was still relatively modest, and many believed that Tibet could negotiate with Mao Zedong. The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution of 1966 to 1976 changed everything, with the resultant massive destruction of virtually all monastic institutions and much of the religious art and literature. Some had read the signs, and Tibetans carried out or hid an astonishing amount of their portable art and books.

The fourteenth Dalai Lama had already fled Tibet in 1959, and over the next decade a steady stream of refugees began to populate the camps on Indian soil—perhaps 100,000 in all. Ever true to their traditions, Tibetans immediately set about to construct temples, monasteries, monastic schools, and print their sacred books. The latter project was assisted by the Public Law 480 Program of the United States, especially when directed by the brilliant Tibetologist E. Gene Smith, so that Tibetan (and other) books were purchased as part of Indian debt servicing to the United States. The Public Law 480 Program allowed foreign scholars access to Tibet's great literature for the first time, while publishers could provide monasteries with discounted copies of their literature.

Post-Maoist Tibet

Since the opening of Tibet after the Cultural Revolution, there has been a resurgence of Buddhist practice. The Chinese have resurrected religious buildings—the Potala, Norbulinka, the Jo khang, and so on—as museums for tourism, and Tibet's cities have become Han Chinese enclaves, but Buddhism is thriving in the countryside. Ever suspicious of religion, the Chinese have sought to control monastic construction and the number of clergy. The participation of monks (and foreign sympathizers) in insurrections has exacerbated Beijing's mistrust. Even then, individual teachers have temporarily managed against great obstacles, although their building efforts are often dismantled. Certain lamas find allies in Han businessmen, who provide capital and political legitimacy to construction projects. China has also played politics with the process of reincarnation, installing its own Panchen Lama and incarcerating the Dalai Lama's choice. More curiously, Tibetan publishing has taken off in the People's Republic of China since Mao's death, making many rare chronicles available for the first time.

The continued tug-of-war between the Dalai Lama's government in Dharamsala and Beijing over human rights and religious freedom is in part incomprehension by Beijing, in part stalling tactics until the Dalai Lama's death. Many young Tibetans in diaspora chafe at the Dalai Lama's pacifism, and there is unhappiness among some Tibetans in India or Nepal about either the Dalai Lama's policies or his ecumenical religious position. Some Dga' ldan pa sectarianism continues and promotes Rdo rje shugs ldan, a divinity representing the dominance of the Dga' ldan pa. American movie stars and the 1989 Nobel Prize for peace for the Dalai Lama have provided legitimacy to Tibetan aspirations, at the cost of some integrity. Yet, despite tensions inside Tibet and elsewhere, there can be little doubt that Buddhism and national identity are so intertwined in Tibetans' minds that the continuation of some sort of Buddhist practice by Tibetans is assured.

See also:Apocrypha; Communism and Buddhism; Himalayas, Buddhist Art in

Bibliography

Cabezón, José Ignacio, and Jackson, Roger R. Tibetan Literature: Studies in Genre. Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion, 1996.

Dreyfus, Georges B. J. Recognizing Reality: Dharmak?rti's Philosophy and Its Tibetan Interpretations. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1997.

Ekvall, Robert B. Religious Observances in Tibet: Patterns and Function. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964.

Huber, Toni. The Cult of the Pure Crystal Mountain: Popular Pilgrimage and Visionary Landscape in Southeast Tibet. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.

Jackson, David. Enlightenment by a Single Means. Vienna: DerÖsterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1994.

Kapstein, Matthew T. The Tibetan Assimilation of Buddhism: Conversion, Contestation, and Memory. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Nebesky-Workowitz, René de. Oracles and Demons of Tibet: The Cult and Iconography of the Tibetan Protective Deities. The Hague, Netherlands: Mouton, 1956.

Powers, John. Introduction to Tibetan Buddhism. Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion, 1995.

Ruegg, David Seyfort. Buddha-nature, Mind, and the Problem of Gradualism in a Comparative Perspective. London: School of Oriental and African Studies, 1989.

Shakabpa, Tsepon W. D. Tibet: A Political History. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1967.

Smith, E. Gene. Among Tibetan Texts: History and Literature of the Himalayan Plateau. Somerville, MA: Wisdom, 2001.

Snellgrove, David. Indo-Tibetan Buddhism: Indian Buddhists and Their Tibetan Successors. Boston: Shambhala, 1987.

Stein, R. A. Tibetan Civilization. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1972.

Thondup, Tulku. Hidden Teachings of Tibet: An Explanation of the Terma Tradition of the Nyingma School of Buddhism. London: Wisdom, 1986.

Tucci, Giuseppe. Tibetan Painted Scrolls. Rome: La Libreria Dello Stato, 1949. Reprint, 3 vols., Bangkok, Thailand: SDI, 1999.

Tucci, Giuseppe. The Religions of Tibet, tr. Geoffrey Samuel. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980.

Ronald M. Davidson