“The principle of self-defence, even involving weapons and bloodshed, has never been condemned, even by Gandhi.” – Martin Luther King, Jr.
“Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defence against a homicidal maniac.” –George Orwell
“One need not destroy one’s enemy. One need only destroy his willingness to engage.” -Sun Tzu (Art of War 孫子兵法;)
“Generally, what they have done grievously wounds the teachings of the Buddha, and in particular it is a great disgrace to the matchless Tsongkhapa and his followers. That is all I thought (when seeing it), but I did not show a displeased face or think of responding.” –8th Tai Situpa writing about the attacks of Mongol/Gelugpa ‘soldiers’ in the Jang region
Introduction
The fifth and final Karma Kagyu monastery I visited in Lijang, Yunnan was Phuntshog Dargye Ling (Puji Si 普濟寺). First built in 1771 by Dian Seng (典僧) of the local aristocratic He family (He shi 和氏) of Puji village and nephew of the founder of Zhiyun si, Dian Seng was studying Tibetan language at Fuguo Si, when he met 8th Kenting Tai Situpa, Chokyi Jungne (1699-1774) there, who praised his ability and recognised him as an arhat (more on that below).
The Phuntshog Ling monastery was a smaller (and a very low-key) monastery to the east of Lijiang town, in the Gucheng district. I could not even find it listed as a place on Google Maps, other than the name Puji. As a solo female foreigner, when I arrived there was no-one there at all as it was closed. I also faced some challenges entering and leaving the monastery ( including a Han Chinese woman ‘visitor’ in layclothes demanding to see my passport) but a Tibetan-speaking monk resident there was very kind to me and helped me see the monastery. The main shrine room contained artworks, statues and photos of the Karmapas and Tai Situpas, as well as the main Karma Kagyu Rinpoche in that region, 17th Drungpa Rinpoche (recognised in 1991) by the current 12th Tai Situpa) who has done an amazing job of maintaining the monasteries as places of spiritual meaning and practice.
In this article, I first share a little historical background, based primarily on the excellent research of Karl Debreczeny (2013) (see sources below). The 8th Tai Situpa, if you recall from other articles, was extremely influential in this region despite all the violence and conflict the Karma Kagyu had faced, and even managed to make an extremely important edition of the Kangyur, the Derge one (based on the previous Jang/Litang edition created by the 6th Zhamarpa with the assistance of the Naxi Mu Kings). The Litang edition of the Kangyur was stolen and sealed up by Gelugpa ‘soldier’ monks.
In particular, I share some of 8th Tai Situpa’s words (translated by Debreczeny) about his experience during his three visits to Lijiang and to these Karma Kagyu monasteries, which he helped to preserve and maintain after the 10th Karmapa’s passing away. In fact, it is said both the 11th Karmapa and 12th Karmapa, Jangchub Dorje (1703-1732) died at very young ages, in their twenties. For example, the 12th Karmapa (teacher of the 8th Tai Situpa) and 8th Zhamarpa (1695-1732) Chokyi Drondrub (a major Karma Kagyu ‘heart son’), both died at young ages in highly suspicious circumstances on the Chinese border en route to meet members of Manchu imperial family. Two Gelugpa monastics claimed to have murdered them (using ‘black magic’ tantric techniques) [1].
The 8th Tai Situpa speaks of his feeling ‘sad and depressed’ by the continuing persecution and violent attacks by ‘bandits’ (Mongolian soldiers and Gelugpa monks), which they had to fend off physically in self-defence. Thus proving that the Gelug-Mongols even tried to destroy/convert the Karma Kagyu monasteries after the Karmapas had escaped into exile in that region. The Mongolian-Gelug alliance seemed intent on destroying or converting every Kagyu monastery in the region, as well as looting all their treasures, including gifts given by Chinese emperors to the Karmapas [2]. Not aligned or consistent with the Buddha Shakyamuni’s teachings on love and compassion at all! The idea that this was some grand unification strategy by the Mongolians/Gelugpas for benefiting Tibet and Tibetans is simply not backed up by historical accounts and facts regarding property and texts.
I also felt rather depressed and sad when researching the history and reading 8th Tai Situpa’s biography of the 10th Karmapa, and personal account of the violent attacks on them by Mongol-Gelugpa sectarian monks and soldiers, forcing their own monks and locals to defend themselves physically. Thus, the common Tibetan exile narrative that the Gelugpa/5th Dalai Lama stopped a ‘civil war’ in Tibet is a false one (also propagated by Gelugpa biased Western and Tibetan scholars). It was a Mongolian military invasion, by a foreign army instigated and started by the aggression of the Gelugpa administrators. The 10th Karmapa refused to fight back with the armies of the King of Tsang, which then led to the deliberate execution by the Gelugpas of the Tibetan King and mass destruction and murder of Karma Kagyu monastics and institutions.
However, as Martin Luther King Jr said, in the opening quote, self-defence is justifable and is not equivalent to unjust violence, or an act of war. This is why it is so important that history accurately records who started the violence and division and why, and what they achieved and did after their ‘victory’.
Strangely,considering their publicly professed concerns about justice, civil liberties, love and compassion. there are no statements by the 14th Dalai Lama or any Gelugpa Geshe or scholar about the Mongol invasion and what they did in Tibet and to the other lineages with any kind of regret, compassion or need for reparation, apology or restitution. Instead, the Gelugpas seem intent on maintaining Gelug power in exile and globally in Tibetan Buddhism and returning to their grand palace, Potala. The media propaganda machine has succeeded in convincing Tibetans and westerners that is the best and right thing, but the facts speak differently. It is a failed political policy of the last six decades and the Chinese show no signs of wanting to speak to the Gelugpa/CTA representatives in exile.
Sun Tzu wrote in the Art of War (孫子兵法😉 “One need not destroy one’s enemy. One need only destroy his willingness to engage.” The understandable and commendable ‘unwillingness to engage’ of the Karma Kagyu and Karmapas as Buddhists in violent retaliation (other than in desperate self-defence) led to their ‘defeat’ in terms of material objects and political power. However, eventually it also led to the ‘defeat’ of the authoritarian ruling Gelugpas (and all Tibetans) with the ensuing Qing dynasty rule in Tibet, followed by absolute Chinese political power there. Thus showing that the violent Gelugpa religious sectarianism not only goes against the Buddha’s fundamental teachings but also never ends well.
In any case, the fact these Karma Kagyu monasteries are still standing and functioning is a message of hope and heroism, in particular the heroic courage of those who refused to ‘attack back’ with violence, such as 10th Gyalwang Karmapa and 8th Kenting Tai Situpa. When one looks at their legacy not only in the Jang region, but in Tibet and globally, in their texts, Kangyur editions, and unparalleled masterpiece artworks in Tibetan artistic history, it should not take a ‘genius’ to be able to see who the aggressors/political warlords in Tibet were (and are) and who are the enduring, worthy heroes and ‘victors’.
I dedicate this article to the memory of all those who were unjustly murdered in the Mongol-Gelug aggression, and to the memory of the executed Tibetan King of Tsang, and the pacifist and great artist, 10th Karmapa, Choying Dorje. May the Buddha’s teachings on love, compassion and non-violence endure, and may all those in the robes of religious men (who do the opposite) be swiftly eliminated and brought onto the Buddhist path!
Music? Jamgon Tai Situpa by Tenzin Kunsel, and Masters of War by Bob Dylan: “I just want you to know I can see through your masks…..You hide in your mansion, while the young people’s blood flows out of their bodies, and is buried in the mud.”
Written and compiled by Adele Tomlin, 24th August 2024.
Historical Background: Ongoing Suppression of Karma Kagyu by Gelug ‘soldier’ monks and 8th Tai Situpa’s visit there
In terms of the history of this Karma Kagyu monastery, it was built in 1771, before the 8th Tai Situpa passed away in 1774 at the age of 75. Debreczeny (2013: 243) writes that during his last visit to the Jang region, the 8th Tai Situpa performed many rites to end the violent supression and conflict in the Yunnan region. In particular, it is noted how Chinese the Jang region has become since the Naxi Mu Kings were disposed and the Qing dynasty (with the support of the 5th Dalai Lama/Gelugpas) became very dominant in the region [3]:
“Situ’s last involvement with Lijiang is recorded in 1772, just two years before he died, when he sent sculptors from É (Epé lhapzo) to Lijiang to erect a large statue, or great deity (lhachen). From this same passage we also learn that Situ explained the preliminary practices for mahāmudrā to people from Jang, among others, presented a banquet to those such as the guardians of all Lijiang (Jangkün kyong), and presented them with such things as a clay sculpture with consecration relics (zungzhuk). This monumental sculpture was probably intended for Püntsok Ling, known locally as Puji si (普济寺), the last of the five major Karma Kagyü monasteries to be built just the year before, in 1771, six kilometers west of Lijiang.”
According to a Chinese text engraved on a wooden tablet (mu bei 木碑) that used to hang in the main incarnation’s quarters, the Record of the Great Lama of Puji si (Puji si da lama jilue 普濟寺大喇嘛紀略), the monastery was built by Dian Seng (典僧) of the local aristocratic He family (He shi 和氏) of Puji village and nephew of the founder of Zhiyun si.
According to this record, Dian Seng was studying Tibetan scriptures with his uncle at Fuguo si when Situ Penchen arrived, and Situ was so impressed with Dian Seng that he recognized him as an incarnation of an arhat, incorporating him into the Tibetan incarnation system in his middle age. After Situ’s praise, Dian Seng built a small temple (Puji si) on a mountain behind the village and became very popular, with many followers. Presumably it was the main hall in this temple where Situ sent artists to build the monumental sculptures.
Three years after Dian Seng died at age eighty, Situ Penchen recognized his reincarnation in a boy in the same family, and, after being sent for education in Tibet, he returned to Puji si to become abbot, where he significantly expanded the temple into a large monastery, building monastic quarters and other structures, and established a new monastic discipline (probably a reference to another monastic customary which Situ authored for this local institution) before his death in 1837. This local Chinese record clearly demonstrates Situ’s continued direct involvement in Lijiang long after his final departure.”
Continuing persection by Mongol-Gelug forces during Situpa’s visits
However, during that time 8th Tai Situpa’s movement is a lot more restricted, “as Situ now needs an order permitting him to travel north back to Balung toward home. During this trip Situ starts being accompanied by local as well as Chinese officials with military escorts, makes note of troop movements, and in Pongtsera encounters another Chinese military campsite. Finally, Situ is himself caught in the midst of a battle and siege near Gyeltang, close to the Yunnan-Tibet frontier. The conflict began while Situ was staying with a regional officer, when so-called “bodyguards” (kakma; literally “ruffians”) of Nazangpa arrived:
“The army of Nazangpa arrived, and although five-hundred soldiers of [local] monks and laymen (benkyé) surrounded and attacked, they were unable to defeat them. I made ritual dough sculpture offerings to [the protector deities] Mahākāli and Mahākāla. The following day, the fighting was stopped by Chakdü Kukyé, Chömpel, and others. The gunmen [of Nazangpa] fled. They made a [fortified] military encampment. As many border people gradually gathered [at the] fortress, I granted an audience. A few people of Yunnan Province and adjacent areas, the envoy of the governor of Ba, commanders, treasurers, and others having arrived, met. There was a letter [written by] the governor (depa), Ruyön commanders, and the chief of the town (drongpön). The Naxi governor of Barpa, regional commanders (dingpön), and others having discussed it, thirty taels (sang) of silver and [other] property were given to reimburse the Nazangpa for the things that were lost. They (the Nazangpa) having build a bridge across the water, left.”
On this occasion, uncharacteristically bitter feelings come forth regarding sectarian violence in Kham, which depresses Situ:
“Today I made ritual dough sculpture offerings to the protector deities and prayed to the deities and dākinī (khandro) to stop at once fighting among monks, wicked behavior which undermines laymen’s faith. And I became depressed, thinking that [many uneducated local monks], greedy for the faith offerings of the faithful laypeople, stingy ones with [only] the [outer] appearance of a monk (sermowa), squabbling over monastic wealth (kor)– whichever tradition they belong to – and, in particular who, never mind understanding the basic tenets of Buddhism, have never even seen the good behavior of the Gelugpa monks of central Tibet, and having merely heard only the names Kagyü and Geluk take that to be a religious tradition and [proceed to] commit bad deeds that monks should refrain from, bearing weapons aloft, committing such actions as monks waging war on other monks. Generally, what they have done grievously wounds the teachings of the Buddha, and in particular it is a great disgrace to the matchless Tsongkhapa and his followers. That is all I thought (when seeing it), but I did not show a displeased face or think of responding.”
Debreczeny notes (2103: 240) that:
“Situ rarely expresses his feelings in his diaries as in this passage, and seldom were such plain feelings about sectarian fighting discussed in Tibetan sources. Based on the context of this passage, it would appear that Nazangpa is probably a Mongol prince with militant Geluk ties who invaded the area, as there were many such incursions by combined forces of Mongol and Tibetan Geluk partisans that forcibly converted, harassed, or destroyed local Kagyü institutions, as reflected in contemporary local gazetteers such as the one from Balung (the Weixi Travel Record written in 1769) quoted above and the Muli Chönjung.
The monks (bendé) of Gyeltang Kagyü monastic institutions and the local lay communities (kyé) banded together to defend themselves against the armies of Nazangpa, both of which fielded soldiers in this shameful display of violent sectarianism. Situ’s biography makes it clear that soldiers of the monastic communities are involved here, and it is the “monastic assemblies that wage civil war against [other] monastic communities” that especially sadden and depressed Situ:
“Ruffians of Nazangpa, etc., and soldiers of the monastic community bearing weapons etc, who appeared, having gone on the offensive were overcome/beaten back. Situ became sad and depressed thinking that the teachings of the Victorious One (Buddha) will never remain, as soon as he encountered those possessing the actions which turn away the faithful, [such as] the transgressions of a large force which wield weapons such as rifles, monastic assemblies which wage war against [other] monastic communities.”
Throughout Situ tried to maintain a Buddhist equanimity and succeeded in maintaining a calm deportment, resisting temptation to respond through harmful or violent rituals, but he still confessed being deeply saddened in the end.”
The White Tara ‘protection from fear of enemy armies’ paintings by 8th Tai Situpa and artistic legacy at Phuntsog Ling (Puji Si)
Debreczeny (2013: 241) interestingly notes how these events also effected his paintings:
“Altering well-established iconographic conventions to meet the needs of his troubled times. For instance, in this composition of “White Tārā Protectress from the Eight Fears” , a theme received from ancient India reflecting the cultural concerns of that time and place, Situ has changed the bottom left scene, replacing “Protection from Fear of Lions” with a more relevant and pervasive predator, “Protection from Fear of Enemy Armies”.
This “Fear of Enemy Armies” is not a pure invention of Situ but comes out of a larger set of sixteen fears. The long-life goddess White Tārā was of special significance to Situ, who is recorded to have painted her many times, starting a few years after this violent encounter: in 1762, 1763, 1764, 1766, 1768, 1769, 1772, and 1773.” [4]
18th Century Artworks at Puji Si
In terms of Tai Situpa’s artistic legacy at Puji si, Bebreszceny (2013) writes that most did not survive the Cultural Revolution destruction by the Chinese communists, however:
“Most intriguing among the few painting remnants to survive the Cultural Revolution at Puji si are two wooden panels in an alcove to the left of the main hall across from the caretaker’s quarters; they depict narrative scenes related to Padmasambhava coming to Tibet to convert the land. The architecture within these scenes, however, closely resembles local Naxi temples, and Padmasambhava’s notched red hat resembles Situ’s famous badge of office, so that a visual conflation of the taming of the two lands, Jang and Tibet, and the establishment of temples by these two saints seems to be made here.”
Getting to Phuntshog Ling (Puji Si) and personal observations and challenges
When I arrived at the Phuntsog Dargye Ling monastery by taxi (it takes about twenty minutes to drive from the centre of Lijiang) around 5.30pm, the main doors were shut and locked. As I was discussing with the Chinese taxi driver in Chinese whether to leave or stay (no internet connection there on my phone, so had to non-verbal hand gestures mainly), an adult monk came out of a side gate with a young Chinese woman. I greeted him and he spoke Tibetan which was a relief. He told me the monastery closed daily at 5pm and that he was going to walk the woman down to the local village. I informed him that I had come a long way and might not be able to come back the following day and asked if he would let me go inside to see the temple and take a few photos for half an hour. He kindly agreed and the Chinese woman went off to the bathroom while he did.
Once the monk had opened the main doors, I went to have a look around in the first main courtyard (see photos below). When we got to the main shrine room, I prostrated, took some photos and then asked the monk if I could meditate in the main shrine room for a few minutes, and he agreed but then the Chinese woman (suddenly turned up) and intervened and told me (in English) to leave the monastery. I asked her why and she said because it was closed and I should not be there. Although, she was correct, I told her I just wanted to meditate a little there. She then demanded to see my passport, which was strange because I had no idea who she was and she did not seem to be a policewoman or official. I asked her why and she told me she worked there (she did not speak Tibetan). I then asked the monk (in Tibetan) why she was asking for my passport and if she was a worker there, he said he did not know her well, that she did not work there and was a ‘volunteer’. I then relayed this information back to her in English to which she then reacted with greater hostility and threatened to call the police. It was rather bizarre and excessive considering the monk himself had agreed I could visit the monastery and I was not causing anyone any harm by being there either.
At this point, the woman’s conduct started making the monk look uncomfortable too, and her excessive reaction and threat was enough to make me want to leave. However, I was happy that due to the monk’s kindness and understanding, I was able to see the fifth main Kagyu monastery in the area. Although it was much smaller and not as grand as the others. I would have liked to have stayed longer but causes and conditions did not permit it.
When I left the main gateway, I was totally alone there was no internet signal, the sun would be setting soon too, so I had no choice but to walk a long way down alone. However, as if by the blessings of the Buddhas, a car arrived with four Chinese tourists, who did not speak a word of English, who kindly agreed to take me to the nearest village below the temple so I could then get the bus to Lijiang. “On the road” challenges as they say!
Here are some photos with descriptions of what I was able to visit there.
First courtyard
I then saw some art murals which were either very old, destroyed or about to be restored, I took some photos of them, and I did not see these mentioned in Debrezceny’s research:
The main shrine room at Phuntsog Ling (Puji Si)
The small shrine room had statues of both the Karmapa and Tai Situpa, and also some old looking thangka images behind them, which I was unable to get a closer look at. Here are some photos I took.
Endnotes
[1] “The Twelfth Karmapa and Eighth Zhamar died under questionable circumstances on the Chinese border en route to meet members of Manchu imperial family. Two Geluk lamas of the Kokonor area heavily invested in the Qing court, the Changja and Tukwan incarnations, claimed to have caused their deaths by use of magic, in order to deny them access to the most powerful patrons of the time. Tashi Tsering, “Situ Panchen: His Contribution and Legacy,” Lungta 13 (Winter 2000).
[2] For example (Debreczeny 2013: 204:n 30):
“In 1698 the printing blocks of the Lijiang edition were taken to Jampa Ling, a Gelukpa monastery in southwest Sichuan, by a Mongolian army led by Dargyel Boshoktü, a grandson of Güüshi Khan. Later this edition was known as being printed in Litang. See Imaeda, “L’edition du kanjur Tibetain de ’Jang sa-tham,” 176. Similarly, other Kagyü works, such as the blocks for the collected works of the Eighth Karmapa and the Second Pawo, were removed to prevent their teachings from spreading. Such acts occurred all over central Tibet and Kham. See Yu Haibo余海波 and Yu Jiahua余嘉华, Mushi tusi yu Lijiang木氏土司与丽江 [Mu Family Chieftains and Lijiang] (Kunming: Yunnan minzu chubanshe, 2002), 169; Tashi Tsering, “Situ Panchen: His Contribution and Legacy,” 5.
“At Drepung [monastery] all the receptacles of the three bodies of Ganden Phodrang and, in particular, the statues of Tonpa and the Sixteen Arhats in black Akaru wood, given by the Ta ming emperor to the Karmapa, are inside a multi-storeyed wooden house placed in a rocky landscape…” (Tashi Tsering 2013: 129: n.4).
Other contemporary scholars, such as Dr. Cecile Ducher, have been writing about the discovery of many Tibetan Buddhist texts sealed up and banned by the Gelugpas in places such as Drepung monastery including the collected works of the 8th Karmapa, Jonang and Nyingma. Why were they banned and sealed up? It seems for political and also philosophical reasons too. They did not want people studying the Shen-tong (empty-of-other) Madhyamaka view, which was actually a predominant view, along with Svatantrika Madhyamika and Cittamatra Madhyamaka, in Tibet at that time (for more on that, read the Introduction to my book Tāranātha’s Commentary on the Heart Sūtra).
[3] “One is not only struck by the numbers of such encounters with Chinese but also the more frequent references to Chinese material culture. This may reflect a larger trend of social change in southwestern China – a massive influx of ethnic Chinese settlers, merchants, and soldiers. In the early eighteenth century, when Situ first traveled south, the Chinese were a minority in Yunnan, but a little more than a century later, they became a majority. Also, Situ’s abrupt and terse statements reveal that he was suddenly told that he had to leave just after arriving, suggesting a tension and uncertainty in the air, even within Lijiang at the time. For instance when Situ returned to Ngedön Püntsok Ling to dedicate the monastery, the Qing imperial army arrived:
“Putsu Hermitage offered tea and I went to Lashi Monastery. I performed the donning the hat ceremony together with the dedication ceremony (for the monastery). I gave instructions on meditation. To the monks I gave general teachings and initiations. I resided at Dhuloka. I gave explanations on mahāmudrā. [While I was] together with the governor of Satam (Lijiang proper) and [monks of] Gyiling Si, the army arrived at Lashi. We discussed such things as the lamas of Okmin Ling.”
[4] White Tārā is primarily associated with long life and removing of sickness. In this context Tārā is also known for protecting from eight fears, which are: protection from snakes (top left), fire (mid L1), elephants (mid L2), drowning (top R), bandits (mid R1), ghosts (mid R2), tyrants/imprisonment (bottom R), and usually lions.
English language sources
Debreczeny, Karl, and Gray Tuttle, eds. 2016. The Tenth Karmapa and Tibet’s Turbulent Seventeenth Century. Chicago: Serindia.
Debreczeny, Karl, 2023 “Dabaojigong Temple: Agents of Religious and Artistic Dialogue along the Southern Sino-Tibetan Frontier,” Project Himalayan Art, Rubin Museum of Art.
Debreczeny, Karl, 2013, Si tu Paṇ chen’s Artistic Legacy in ’Jang. Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies
Tsering, Tashi. 2013. Situ Penchen and His Painting Style: A Retrospective. JIATS 7