·······································

В.6 Примечания к Введению

Дэвидсон Р.М. «Тибетский ренессанс: тантрический буддизм и возрождение тибетской культуры»
<< К оглавлению

 

1. Pakpa’s letter to Khubilai, ca. 1255-59, rGyal bu byang chub sems dpa la gnang ba’i bka’ yig, SKB VU.238.3.2-4. This letter was noticed by Szerb 1985, p. 165, n. 2. He is undoubtedly right in identifying this letter as addressed to Khubilai, and it was written to Khubilai before he achieved his election as Khan on May 5, 1260; Rossabi 1988, pp. 51-52; Ruegg 1995, pp. 38-40. In his new years’ greetings of 1255-58 to Khubilai, ‘Phags-pa generally uses the phrase “Prince- Bodhisattva” when addressing Khubilai, once adding Khubilai’s name (Tib: go pe la); see rGyal po go pe la sras dang btsun mor hcas lashing mo yos sogs la gnang ha’i bkra shis kyi tshigs bead rnams, SKB VIl. 30 0 .3.7 (1255), 301.1.4 (1256), 301.4.7 (1258); the undated text between 1256 and 1258 has bsod rnams dbang phyug rgyal ba’i sras po go pe la instead (301.2.1). One of ‘Phagspa’s other compositions addressed to Khubilai Khan, his bsNgags par ‘os pa”i rah tu byed pa, written in response to Khubilai’s successes against the Song dynasty in 12751 is almost as obsequious.
2. The consequence of Sa-skya Pal).Qita’s effective imprisonment was that he produced virtually nothing while in Mongol internment; Jackson 19871 vol. 11 pp. 28-29, 68. Tucci 1949, vol. 1, pp. ro – 12, translated a letter to Tibetans attributed to Sa-skya Pandita on their dire position; its authenticity was challenged in Jackson 1986.
3. Petech 1990, pp. 16-22. On the office of national preceptor, see Ruegg 1995, pp. 18-19, 46-52. On the antecedents of the imperial preceptor, see Dunnell 1992; Sperling 1987-
4. Franke 1981, pp. 58-69; Heissig 1980, p. 24. It is difficult to follow Ruegg 1997, p. 865, that neither Sa-skya Pandita nor ‘Phags-pa was “in a position to compose a full theoretical treatise on the ‘constitutional’ relation between the two orders represented by the Officiant/Spiritual Preceptor and the Donor-Ruler” because of excessive responsibilities. I would instead argue that such an idea was without Indic precedent and would have proved extraordinarily problematic in both theory and practice. Compare rGyal po la gdams pa ‘i rah tu hyed pa ‘i rnam par hshad pa gsung rah gsal ba’i rgyan, esp. SKB VI l. 95.1.6- 4.11 on the esoteric vows between master/disciple. Szerb 1985, p. 168, indicates that the work was by Shes-rab gzhon-nu but supervised by ‘Phags-pa.
5. Franke 1978, pp. 58-61; Szerb 1980, p. 290; Rossabi 1988, p. 143; Crupper 1980, pp. 47-63, app. 1; and Sperling 1991 and 1994, most of whom emphasized the role of Mahakala rituals in the Mongol and Tangut worlds; Sperling 1994, p. 804, observed that “one pivotal element in the relationship was a shared belief in the efficacy of rituals linked to Mahakala as a means for manifesting powers that could be harnessed to the Mongol imperium.” While the statement is doubtlessly the case, the texts cited are from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, a time when Mahakala became especially important. Heissig 1980, pp. 26-27, 56, shows that Mahakala became for later Mongols a ritual system devoted to mediating relationships with animals, which was perhaps also true for the early Mongols.
6. Rossabi 1988, pp. 145-47.
7. For a summary, see Petech 1990, pp. 39-140.
8. Petech 1990, p. 9. Like most modern historians, Petech glosses over the availability of descendants of the royal family to be taken by the Mongols as Tibetan representatives and their hostages.
9. Rossabi 1988, pp. 143-44-
10. Jagchid 1970, pp. 121-24.
11. Wylie 1977, pp. 113-14.
12. Rossabi 1988, pp. 16, 41. Crupper 1980, pp. 53-54, app. 1, cites the 1739 Altan Kurdun Mingyan Gegesutu Bic’ ‘ig.
13. Szerb 1980, p. 290, sums up the difficulty of this fuctionalist-reductionist supposition: “The primary reasons for the growing influence of the Sa-skya sect were no doubt political. But as Mongol rulers were generally enthusiastic about magic … “
14. Ratchnevsky 1991, pp. 96-101; Cleaves 1967.
15. Meyvaert 1980, pp. 252-53.
16. Boyle 1968, pp. 538-42; Petech 1990, pp. 11-12.
17. Heissig 1980, pp. 26-28; Jagchid and Hyer 1979, pp. 180-82.
18. Szerb 1985; Sperling 1994; and Ruegg 1995 have made contributions in this direction.
19. For example, Petech 1990, p. 2; Wylie 1977, p. 103. We may note that even as late as Ruegg 1995, who is certainly not a functionalist, the early (1283) ‘Phags-pa hagiography in the Lam ‘bras slob bshad collection, bLa ma dam pa chos kyi rgyal po rin po che i rnam par thar pa rin po che”i phreng ba, by Ye-shes rgyal-mtshan, was overlooked.
20. On the Mongol patronage of the Kashmiri master Na-mo, see Jagchid 1970, pp. 117- 20; 1980, pp. 80-84.
21. For a translation of the biography of Kuma rajiva’s captor, Ltiguang, see Mather 1959, esp. pp. 4-6, 35, 86- 87; on Kumarajiva’s life and position, see Robin­ son 1967, pp. 71-95.
22. Wright 1990 , pp. 34-67 (originally published in HJAS 11 [1948]: 321-71). Wright’s analysis of Fotudeng’s relationship to Shile and the Shi clan is somewhat more sophisticated than most later proposals of ‘P hags-pa’s interaction with Khubilai. Wright maintained that the Kuchean monk demonstrated the “fetish power of Buddhism in four fields”: rain making, military advice, medicine, and politics.
23. For a list of the Mongols and their Tibetan teachers, see Wylie 1977, p. 108, n. 16.
24. Heissig 1980, p. 25: “Not only Chinese sources but also Mongolian sources describe the orgies celebrated at the Mongol court as the result of the profane misunderstanding of this doctrine, and the degeneration of the Mongolian ruling class which went along with this, as one of the most important causes of the collapse of Mongol rule over China (1368).”
25. For a recent assessment of the process, see Ehrhard 1997.
26.The problem of Bon sources is discussed by Martin 2001b, pp. 40-55. I have perused most of the literature he mentions, but with such meager results that I feel the topic would be better pursued by Bon specialists.
27. This date has been consistently represented as 1253 or 1258; see Szerb 1985, p. 166; Ruegg 1995, pp. 33, n. 42 (1258, relying on the mKhas pa’i dga’ ston, pp. 1414-15), pp. 48-49, nn. 88, 54. Most scholars apparently follow the 1736 Sa skya gsung rah dkar chag, p. 316.4.2, which gives 1253. The early hagiography in the Lam ‘bras slob bshad collection, bLa ma dam pa chos kyi rgyal po rin po che ‘i rnam par thar pa rin po che’i phreng baby Yes-shes rgyal-mtshan is entirely silent about the ostensible three consecrations (‘Phags-pa’s relationship to Khubilai is specified on pp. 304-6, 327-29), but ‘Phags-pa’s own bsTod pa rnam dag gi phreng ba SKB VII.143.3.2 gives the date of Khubilai’s initiation as 1263 (chu mo phag). The rGya bod yig tshang chen mo of 1434 gives the date of the consecration sometime after the fifth month of 1255 (p. 326.8) and before ‘Phags-pa’s return to Tibet in 1256 ( p. 328.4). The tradition that Tibet was a consecration gift (dbang yon) from Khubilai to ‘Phags-pa seems first to appear in the rGya bod yig tshang chen mo, p. 327, and is possibly a post Yuan Sa-skya attempt to claim continued authority in Tibet, long after actual political dominion had been lost to Phag-ma gru-pa Byang-chub rgyal-mtshan. My suspicion is that the consecration was given only once, in 1263, but that it kept getting conflated with other events, eventually to be combined with the myth of Tibet as a gift for consecration.
28. Stearns 2001 is referenced throughout, and our differences in reading the material will be apparent .
29. Davidson 2002c, pp. 1-24, is devoted to this issue. Intellectuals in traditional societies perceive their agenda as the reaffirmation of the religious culture, by gloss­ ing over difficult issues of discontinuity, innovation, and unethical conduct and by restricting the questions asked to those already affirmed by the tradition. For traditionalists, the preferred method of treating modern, critical history is to launch an ad hominem attack discounting the historian and his or her motives, behavior, or psychology.
30. Davidson, Indian Esoteric Buddhism: A Social History of the Tantric Movement.
31. Spitz 1987, vol. 1, p. 2; Cochrane 1981, pp. 14-20.
32. See Green 1988, pp. 120-21; See Maristella Lorch, “Petrarch, Cicero, and the Classical Pagan Tradition, ” in Rabil 1988, vol. r, pp. 71-114.
33. The social position of medieval artisans is treated in Mayamata, chap. 5; compare Dubois 1897, pp. 34-35, 63, who believes the problems of bad government are at fault. A good modern study is that by Kumar 1988, pp. 12-62, which looks at the social status of artisans in Banaras. For the rise in artists’ status in sixteenth­ century Europe, see Martines 1988, pp. 244-59; Burke 1986, pp. 74-87- The relationship of medicine to religion took some time to emerge; the Deb ther sngon po, for example, does not mention the rGyud bzhi or the other medical or artisan works. There is material on medicine and other arts in the 1434 rGya bod yig tshang chen mo, yet the author seems to indicate that, as in the case of his discussion of swords ( p. 232), precious little had been written earlier. Earlier works on medical history seem to stem from the twelfth century; see Martin 1997, nos. 17, 35-37, 105, etc. The twelfth century is the time we also see medicine in the Sa-skya, and Crags-pa rgyal-mtshan devoted a work to the science, which is conspicuously placed as the last item in his collected works; gSo dpyad rgyal po’i dkor mdzod, SKB IV.354.3.1-396.1.6.
34. An example of the application of these categories to the visual arts in Tibet is Klimburg-Salter 1987.
35. Stark and Bainbridge 1985. More recent interesting studies on emerging religions phenomena include Barrett 2001; Dawson 2001; and Fink and Stark 2001, among many others.
36. Gould 2002, pp. 745-1022, is an extended treatise on this model and its application to culture.

<< К оглавлению
Web Analytics