Dreaming Giant Thangkas
I
suppose everywhere in the world we may find people greatly impressed by
things that are higher and taller. We
tend to entertain each other with trivia questions like ‘What is the highest
mountain? The highest skyscraper? The tallest person?’ As we know there are also people suffering
from monument phobia. Instead of being awe-struck, they feel oppressed and
threatened when faced with the very same tallness. I will neither engage in ‘heightism’ nor try to avoid it. This is not, and I repeat not, among the points I want to make
today. What is relevant here is not so
much height as that more abstract and impressionistic concept of monumentality that might go along with
it.
What is size after all? I
apologize that I might be a bit confusing in terms of
measurements, since I will be using some English, some metrical and some
Tibetan indications of height and width. Tibet in the past did not always make use of standardized measurements, and certainly never to the level of exactitude we’ve gotten accustomed to in the 21st century. Other times, other places, other standards.*
(*Well, Tibetan history writers do credit two different Emperors with weight standardizations, one in around the mid-6th century, and the other in the early 9th, but that doesn’t mean that grain volume measurements, for example, didn’t vary from place to place well into the 20th century. As we will see, in Tibetan art, the body of the artist or sponsor may supply the units of measurement. For a collection of materials about Tibetan measurements, see this page at Tiblical.)
I will also not say all that much about art-historical or
iconographic details. Instead, I want to
consider matters of more general cultural and religious significance from a
historical perspective. So forgive me if
I don’t go into great depths about materials, artistic techniques, aesthetics
and the like; things you may expect in a study that is after all about art.
So let’s delve a little into the history of Buddhist monumentality, identifying some of its main — Dare I use the word? — monuments. Giant Buddhas have been very much in the news not so long ago because of
the destruction in 2001 of the Bamiyan Buddhas, one 38 and the other 55 [53?] meters high. The best studies seem to suggest they were
made more-or-less in the middle of the sixth century. These two were probably the best known South Asian examples.
Todaiji's Giant Buddha courtesy of Wiki Commons |
Modern-day travelers in East Asia have surely seen some of the more famous monumental Buddhas. We might mention the Vairocana image known as Daibutsu, or ‘Giant Buddha’ in Todaiji Temple in Japan consecrated
by the South Indian Bodhisena in 752 CE.
By Ken Marshall from Absecon, New Jersey, USA Courtesy of Wikipedia Commons |
In
China, carved out of the rock of cliffs and caves are quite a number of giant
Buddhas from the fifth century onward. Among them is one that has been called the largest Buddha in the world —
the rock image of Maitreya at Leshan. It
took almost the whole of the eighth century to carve it out of the cliff and it
still stands at 71 meters high.
Less
well known and less than half as tall is the no longer surviving wooden image
of Maitreya at Darel in Central Asia. It was seen by Chinese travelers in
around 400 CE and should have been between 80 and 100 feet high.
There is a still surviving stone relief image
of Maitreya, nine meters high, at Mulbek in Ladakh that has been dated to the 8th
or 9th century.
And
nowadays at the holy sites of Buddhism in India and Nepal, there seems to be a
competition between the Buddhist nations of the world to build taller and
taller Buddhas. We’ll leave this issue aside for now.
If
we consider Buddha images made of every possible material, it is rather
remarkable that, while we do find huge Buddhas all over the Buddhist world,
until very recent times there seem to have been hardly any in the birthplace of
Buddhism, in the central parts of India or indeed the whole of the area of
modern India. This deserves a little closer attention. Of course today the situation is quite different, but what evidence is there from earlier times? Let’s have a look:
In one of the caves at Kānherī there are two
images carved out of the stone, each measuring a little over seven meters in
height. These are probably the tallest surviving Buddha images in
all of India (Miyaji, “Idea”).
However, in 1975 at the Buddhist monastic
university of Nālandā archaeologists excavating one of the many ruined temples
discovered two giant stucco feet from a standing Buddha
image. Judging from the fact that each foot is about one meter in
length, the entire image must have stood at six or seven meters in
height. In the same temple a stone inscription was
found. To quote a sentence from this inscription,
“This huge image of the
Buddha was sculpted by Pūrṇavarman, whose fame rested not only on the earth but
was even written on the moon.”
The image was sponsored by a king of Mathurā
named Prathamaśiva and the inscription itself was composed by that king's
minister. On the basis of the inscription, Gouriswor Bhattacharya
concludes that the inscription and the statue to which it ought to belong must
date to around 587 CE. But bear in mind that the relationship between the stone
inscription and the stucco feet is far from clear even though they were found
in the same temple.
To add perplexity to the picture, we also
have the following testimony of the Chinese pilgrim Xuanzang who visited
Nālandā in 637 CE. To give the old Samuel Beal translation:
Next, to the eastward 200 paces or so, outside the walls, is a figure of Buddha standing upright and made of copper. Its height is about 80 feet. A pavilion of six stages is required to cover it. It was formerly made by Pūrṇavarma-rāja.
Here
Pūrṇavarman, the name of the sculptor in the stone inscription, might appear to
be a king (rāja) who had the statue made. It is copper, not stucco (the
inscription doesn’t mention any material), and it is much much higher than
just seven meters. It is easy to imagine that it would have taken a
building six stories tall to enclose an 80-foot statue, and it surely seems
that Xuanzang must have known what he was talking about, since such a tall
building and image would surely have captured his attention during his stay in
Nālandā. It is not just hearsay. Perhaps we could be
justified in taking Xuanzang's testimony in isolation, and say that there
was an 80-foot copper standing statue of Buddha existing in Bihar in the early
7th century. Or, we could just say there is evidence, even if not all that clear or abundant evidence, that sixth-seventh century Nālanda had giant
Buddhas made of stucco, stone and copper.
For
our purposes the pertinent facts are:
Giant Buddhas are but little known in India proper in pre-modern
times. Those that once existed have left
few traces behind. They were constructed
from the fifth century until today in other Buddhist countries. While a number of these icons are of
Vairocana, many of them represent the future Buddha Maitreya. It has been suggested that Maitreya is
represented as being very tall simply because in the future era in which he
will be born all humans will be much taller. According to one source people in those days will be about ten feet tall,
while Maitreya will be twice that height, or 20 feet tall.* As we proceed, I feel sure that Tibetan monumental Maitreyas, whether statues, paintings or giant fabric thangkas, will be seen to fit into a larger trend of the Buddhist world.
(*Miyaji, “Idea,” p. 288; Chandra, “Colossi,” p. 32)
So,
with Maitreya in mind, we can engage our main topic.
Here
is one of the most amazing pieces illustrated in Pratapaditya Pal, Art from the Himalayas and China (Asian Art at the Norton Simon
Museum, Volume 2), Yale University Press in association with The Norton Simon
Art Foundation (New Haven and London 2003).
This
pieced-silk thangka has the overall
measurements of 177 (or 14"8') by 268 inches (or 22"4'), or if you prefer 449.6 by
680.7 centimeters.[1] It has the future Buddha Maitreya as its
central figure,[2]
with images of Tsongkhapa in five different forms — based on visions beheld by his student Khedrubjé — arrayed in the upper parts, as you can see in the following detail.
Closeup of the upper portion, showing the five forms of Tsongkhapa |
For comparison, another representation of Tsongkhapa’s five forms |
To
Maitreya’s right is the Eighth Dalai Lama Himself, and to His left, the Dalai
Lama’s Tutor Yeshé Gyaltsen.[3] The protectors of the four directions appear
at the bottom, two on each side of an inscription. As the inscription makes clear, and as the
catalogue correctly states, this image was made in 1793-4 as one of several
memorials for the Tutor, who died in 1793. The inscription is quite competently translated by Ratö Khyongla Rinpoche
in an appendix (p. 263), but I would like to attempt a fresh one.
The inscribed area of the thangka, I apologize for the unclear photo; the Wylie and Tibetan-script transcriptions are followed by an English translation |
om svasti /dga' ldan lha brgya'i gtsug rgyan mi pham mgon //rgyal ba byams pa mgon po'i snang brgyan dang //'jam mgon bla ma blo bzang grags pa'i sku //gang de'i bzlos gar gzigs pa lnga dang ni //rje btsun bla ma ye shes rgyal mtshan zhabs //spyan ras gzigs mgon 'jam dpal rgya mtsho dang //chos skyong rgyal po chen po bzhi la sogs //mtshan dpe'i dpal 'bar rgyal ba'i snang brnyan mchog //bzang gos dbang po'i gzhu ltar rab bkra ba'i //bkod mdzes rgyal ba'i sku mchog bzhengs pa'i dges //rgyal bstan snying po 'jam mgon ring lugs mchog //nam mkha'i mtha' khyab srid mthar rgyas gyur cig //
khyad par bdag gi yongs 'dzin bla ma mchog //bka' drin sum ldan ye shes mtshan ldan gyi //dgongs pa rdzogs shing slar yang zhing mchog 'dir //rgyal bstan snying po'i mgon du myur bzhengs shog //
yangs pa'i rgyal khams spyi dang gangs ljongs 'dir //mi 'dod rgud pa'i ming yang mi grag cing //chos 'byor dge bcu'i khrims la rtag gnas sogs //bkra shis bde legs chen pos khyab gyur cig //
With the virtue from erecting this supreme icon of the Victor, finely arranged, multi-colored like the Bow of Indra [the rainbow],of fine silk, with a superior reflected image of the Victor blazing with the glory of the “marks” [of Buddha’s body] —
including images of the head ornament of the hundred gods of Tuṣita,the undefeatable lord [Ajitanātha] Victor Maitreyanātha,
the Gentle Lord Guru [Tsongkhapa] Lozang Dragpain His dramatically posed forms of the Five Visions,[4]the Reverend Guru Yeshe Gyaltsen,
the Lord Avalokiteśvara Jampel Gyatso andthe Four Great Kings, Dharma protectors.May the supreme tradition of the Gentle Lord [Tsongkhapa], the essence of the Victor’s teachingsincrease to fill the horizons of the sky until the end of existence.In particular may the intentions of my Tutor, the supreme gurupossessing three kindnesses[5] by the name of Full Knowledge (Ye-shes) be fulfilledand may He quickly arise as lord of the essence of the victor's teachings in this supreme Buddhafield [of Tibet].In all the kingdoms of the wide [earth] and, in particular,here in this Snow Land may the word “want” not be heard;may the wealth of Dharma, the ethics of the ten virtues, remain forever;and may comfort, goodness and auspiciousness pervade all.
One of the giant thangkas of Gyantse depicting Maitreya |
The display tower viewed from below in Gyantse. |
These photos date to 1938. They were published in Life
Magazine of June 12, 1939. They were taken by F.
Bailey Vanderhoef who collected artworks now kept in Santa Barbara Museum of
Art. Supposed to date to 1438, it shows a form of Maitreya with
pitcher above His right shoulder. We’ll soon
say more about the Gyantsé thangkas. (See also Henss, “Silken Images,” as well as Henss, “Liberation.” On Vanderhoef, see this PDF of an essay by José Cabezón.)
In Tibet the unrolling of a giant silk thangka was, in a literal
sense of the word, a spectacular event. A large number of people would be required to carry it in procession to
the high place for its unrolling. This
was ordinarily done only on an annual holiday, with colorful processions, loud but sombre
sacred music, and prayers led by the monastic community. This performance bridged the divide between
official and popular religion. While the most important hierarchs were involved
in their construction, consecrations and unfurling ceremonies, thousands of
laypeople could be present as spectators and participate in various more or less active ways. The mere sight of such a thangka was said to be enlightening, to at least provide a
foretaste of what Complete Enlightenment might be. The most common term for this experience, a
term often employed in the very name of such an icon, is liberation by sight, although
other senses might be mentioned, too, especially hearing and touch.
If we can use the contemporary language of media studies and Byzantinology, it engages the sensorium, and it does it with a Buddhist sense of purpose.[6]
If we can use the contemporary language of media studies and Byzantinology, it engages the sensorium, and it does it with a Buddhist sense of purpose.[6]
To continue, click here...
Notes
[1] On
monumental Buddha images, see particularly the survey by Huntington, “Great Buddhas.” See also Pal, “Monumental,” an article that mainly discusses how the thangka gradually made its way from
Sikkim to its present location in the Norton Simon Museum, a subject not
covered in the catalog entry.
[2] As is
well known, the future Buddha Maitreya is very frequently depicted in a seated
position with both feet resting down below (usually described in the
literature as ‘the European seating posture’). This seated Maitreya is depicted in another thangka in our book, plate 138, where the accompanying description
gives this posture its Sanskrit names. However, in the brocade thangka
He is depicted with legs fully crossed in the Vajra Āsana. This way of visualizing Maitreya is
similarly described in a guruyoga
text by the Tutor of Tshe-mchog-gling, found under the general title Rje-btsun Byams-mgon-la Brten-pa'i Bla-ma'i
Rnal-'byor sogs Bla-ma'i Rnal-'byor 'Ga'-zhig, contained in
Tshe-mchog-gling, Works, vol. 17, pp.
341-389, with the relevant section on pp. 342-347. On p. 343, Maitreya is described as smiling,
wearing monastic robes, the two hands at His heart forming the gesture of turning the wheel of Dharma, and the feet in the Vajra posture. As usual in guruyoga texts, the visualization process emphasizes the complete
identity of the spiritual teacher with the divine focus of spiritual
aspirations (the yi-dam). It surely would help to explain the
significance of the thangka as a
whole, if it could be shown that the Tutor’s own disciples were practicing this
particular kind of guruyoga, fusing
the identity of their teacher with Maitreya. The presence of the stūpa on top of Maitreya’s head is justified
in a Tanjur text (*Nairitipa, Ajitanāthasādhana),
and there is a brief study on this very subject in Bhattacharya, “Stūpa.” For general
treatments of Maitreya and His iconography, see Sponberg and Hardacre, Maitreya, and Chandra, “Maitreya.”
[3] The best
available English-language biographies are in Mullin, Fourteen, pp. 332-333, and Willis, Enlightened, pp. 125-130. He received the advanced monastic
educational degree of Dka'-chen at Tashilhunpo Monastery, and this explains
why his name is sometimes prefaced with this title. He became the Eighth Dalai Lama’s tutor in
1782. As examples of his writings in
translation, see Guenther and Kawamura, Mind,
Mullin, “Tse-Chok-Ling’s,” and Willis, Enlightened. He was not the
most prolific writer in Tibetan history, but still it is worthy of note that his
works have been republished in no less than twenty-five volumes.
[4] These
are the five forms of Tsongkhapa as He appeared in visions, after His death,
to His disciple Khedrupjé.
These are mentioned and described briefly in Thurman, Life and Teachings, pp. 32-33. Sarat Chandra Das long ago wrote an article
on this very subject; see Das, “Five Visions.” See also Tucci, Tibetan Painted Scrolls, pp. 399-400, along with the painting
illustrated in plates 73 and 74. The
most detailed study I know of, accompanied by five thangka reproductions, is found in Yon-tan-rgya-mtsho’s history,
vol. 1, pp. 186-193, including the stories of the visions, and details of the
iconography. A thang-ka depicting only one of the five visions has been published
in Rhie and Thurman, Worlds, p. 356
(color illustration no. 127). An entire
set of five thangkas belonging to
the Potala has been illustrated in Bod-kyi
Thang-ka, illus. nos. 69-73. A thangka with the tiger-riding
Mahāsiddha form of Tsongkhapa in the center, with the other four forms of
Tsongkhapa in smaller size, and the 84 Mahāsiddhas in still smaller size
surrounding it has been illustrated in Se-ra
Theg-chen-gling, p. 77. This
last-mentioned thangka is evidently
based on a woodblock print (par).
I
located in Khag-cig Mtshan-byang, p.
287: Phur-lcog
Blo-bzang-tshul-khrims-byams-pa'i (=Byams-pa-rgya-mtsho, 1825-1901) Gsung-'bum,
the following [cycle] title: Rje Rin-po-che dang Rje Gzigs-pa
Lnga-ldan-la Brten-pa'i Bla-ma'i Rnal-'byor-gyi Skor.
Klong-rdol Bla-ma lists a
title said to be located at the end of volume KHA of Mkhas-grub-rje’s
works: Mkhas-grub-rje's own biography
('autobiography'?), Five Visions, composed by his disciple Gtsang-mda'-ba
Chos-ldan-rab-'byor (Mkhas-grub-pa
rang-gi rnam-thar Gzigs-pa Lnga-ldan | | Mkhas-grub-pa'i slob-ma Gtsang-mda'-ba
Chos-ldan-rab-'byor-gyis mdzad-pa).
This would seem to be the original text on the Five Visions, but so far
I have not been able to learn of its present existence, unless it is the same as the available Secret Biography (Gsang-ba'i Rnam-thar).
[5] This
term three kindnesses may have both sūtra and tantra
applications, but here it would seem that both were intended. In sūtra
contexts, the three kindnesses are: 1.
Teaching the Dharma. 2. Empowering the
mind and perceptions with blessings. 3.
Providing for the material welfare of the audience. In tantra
contexts, the three kindnesses are: 1.
Conferring initiations. 2. Explaining the
tantras. 3. Granting secret precepts.
[6] For a
sustained discussion of liberation through seeing and related concepts, see
Tokarska-Bakir, “Naive.” For
works about the giant thangka of
Paro, Bhutan, and the religious festival surrounding it, see Huntington, “Notes”; Stratton, “Paro”; and Fontein, “Notes.” Françoise Pommaret, “A Cultural Epiphany: Religious
Dances of Bhutan and Their Costumes,” Marg, vol. 66, no. 4 (June
2015), pp. 30-39, has magnificent photographs of the Paro Tsechu giant
thangka. Fontein estimates the size of the Paro thang-ka,
which has the 'Second Buddha' Padmasambhava as its main subject, at about 50 by
50 feet. Fontein also attempts a history of giant fabric Buddha
representations, most interesting being his discussion of the Korean kwaebul,
“Hanging Buddhas,” which were made between 1622 and 1982 CE. But
these kwaebul were mostly paintings on silk, and only rarely
pieced together from silk. The word appliqué is very often used in
connection with brocade icons, but since no backing cloth is required for their
construction — the backing cloth might be added only after completion for purposes entirely protective in nature — the
term is not always entirely appropriate (I admit to using such terms as appliqué rather
loosely). On textile thangkas more generally, see especially
Henss, “Woven” and Reynolds, “Luxury Textiles.” Primarily recommended for
its approach to the conservation of brocade thangkas is Loh,
“Decision.”
§ § §
Apologies and acknowledgements:
I hesitate to get started with acknowledgements and apologies. I am afraid it will take too long. So, to be brief — and start with the main apology:I apologize for talking about things I still do not know enough about. This is not a report about success, but rather an account of a continuing quest. Along the way I would like to make a modest point about the importance of Tibetan literature for knowing about Tibetan art.I should first of all thank Amy Heller and Paul Nietupski for most, but not all, of the illustrations I’ve used. Tibeto-logic is an entirely independent and noncommercial educational enterprise, and all illustrations are placed here for educational purposes only. I would like to thank Pratapaditya Pal, the famous expert on Himalayan art, for laying down the basis for much of what I have to say about the Pasadena thangka. It is far from my intention to criticize his work which deserves only admiration and praise, but I think I have a few things of substance that can embellish the picture historically speaking.Some of the Tibetan sources were found by myself the old fashioned way, by reading through lengthy Tibetan texts, but many of them would not have been located without hints and references from earlier works by David Jackson, Valrae Reynolds, Dungkar Rinpoche, Dagyab Rinpoche, Yukio Tanaka and others. Finding materials in the Fifth Dalai Lama’s huge biographies would not have been possible without the help of digitized texts done at the Lumbini International Research Institute in Nepal by Christoph Cüppers and Tsering Lama. Thanks to a workshop by Yuko Tanaka back in 2014, I was even able to try my hand at the stitching. I know it looks nice, so I must hurry to confess, the only line I did myself, and even then with a great deal of effort and struggle, was the one at the top of the flower on the right-hand side, the line you can hardly see. It took me over an hour. All the rest was done by Yuko. Well, trying to do it at least gave me a real appreciation of what those amazing Tibetan artists could accomplish.
Need bibliography? The key to the shortened bibliographical references will appear at the end of Part Three.