By Eric Vandenbroeck and
co-workers
The Tang Dynasty
The Sui (589-618) and
T’ang (618-907) dynasties of China provide the opportunity
to examine the theory from two separate angles.101 On the one hand, the T’ang, and the preceding Sui dynasty, re-unified the
Chinese Empire using a hybridized form of Buddhism designed to win the support
of the Chinese in the South.
The success of this
project enabled the Sui and T’ang to lower the
physical and cultural barriers separating the North from the South. In effect,
the Sui and the T’ang reduced the number of sources
of transcendent credibility in the Eastern plain of China from at least
two to one. This was a necessary step in unification, or to put it another way,
in making the boundary between North and South less distinct.
On the other hand,
the T’ang confronted other political units around the
edges of their territory: the Eastern Turks in the North and the newly formed
Tibetan state in the West. The Tibetan government depended on a form of
Buddhism that had been borrowed from India and adapted to suit the conditions
of Tibetan society. Chinese Buddhism was very different from Tibetan Buddhism
in terms of how the ruler linked his (or her) credibility to a transcendent
source. In addition, the T’ang, for their part,
adapted their source of transcendent credibility to Taoism, albeit a Taoism
that looked very similar to Chinese Buddhism. This shift occurred during the
same period as the rise of prominence of Tibet. Once the Tibetans firmly
acknowledged a source of transcendent credibility that was different from the T’ang source, boundaries between the two political units
became more distinct.
These cases provide
evidence that the distinctiveness of boundaries between political units depends
on the number of sources of transcendent credibility in the system. The first
case will demonstrate that the Sui and T’ang reduced
the number of sources of transcendent credibility in China to one, in order to
eliminate the border between North and South China and create a single, unified
Chinese Empire. The second case will demonstrate that the appearance of a
militarily strong polity in the West that generated compliance using a
different source of transcendent credibilityfrom the
Chinese resulted in a fairly distinct boundary between Tibet and China.
Who Or What Made
China?
In the sixth century,
“China” was a distant idea. Since the fall of the Han dynasty in 220, the
region had been divided into a conglomeration of separate political units.
Although there arose a variety of ruling families and rival territories, the
one consistent boundary throughout this period separated the North from the
South. Roughly, this boundary, starting from the east, run along the Huai River
into the Qianling Mountains, where the watershed of
the Huang He belonged to the North and that of the Yangtze belonged to the
South. The South was significantly wetter than the North, leading to
differences in core agricultural crops. This geographic boundary paralleled a
political and cultural boundary as well. Thus, when the leaders of the Sui
dynasty sought to reunify China in 589, they had to devise a strategy to
overcome and eliminate this gash through the middle of the region. Making such
a boundary less distinctive required not just a military unification, but also
a unification of the source of transcendent credibility between North and
South.
Background: China before the Sui Dynasty (589)
There is no easy way
to characterize the political situation in China from the decline of the Han
Dynasty in 220 to the Empire’s reunification in 589. This period is marked by a
series of popular rebellions, a succession of local elites who gained power only
to lose it to another upstart, and waves of invasions of non-Chinese
peoples from the north. What was consistent throughout this period is the
preservation, at least in form, of many of the institutions originally set up
by the Han. In 440, the Toba Turks finally succeeded in creating a stable
political unit, and despite being ethnic and cultural outsiders, consolidated
their position among the Chinese elite by adopting Chinese institutions. Yet, a
powerful segment of these Turks who did not want to abandon their traditional
ways formed a new political unit off in 534. The “traditionalists” dynasty
later became known as the Northern Chou, while the “sinicized”
political unit was transformed into the Northern Ch’i. In 577, the Northern
Chou conquered the Northern Ch’i. Ironically, although it was the
traditionalist portion of the Wei that eventually won, it was “sinicization” that was the real winner: the traditionalists
became converted to the benefits of adopting Chinese institutions, elites, and
culture. In short, while the northern parts of China were very strong
militarily, they remained politically unstable until 577, due in large part to
disagreements over the ideological bases of government. The dynasties in the
South, on the other hand, considered themselves to be the true heirs of the
Han. Race and the continuity of institutions mattered. The peoples of the North
were seen as impure and barbaric, with non-Chinese
people continuously polluting those lands. While the North nominally kept the
Han institutions, “barbarians” could not understand their proper operation. The
South contained some of the best farmland in the region, which made these
dynasties relatively secure economically compared with the North. The Ch’en controlled the South beginning in 557. However, its
power was drastically reduced in 575 when the Northern Chou convinced the Ch’en emperor to attack the Northern Ch’i, a move that
weakened the two rivals of the Northern Chou to such an extent that the
Northern Ch’i were easilyconquered in 577 and the Ch’en in 589. The Ch’en’s
military troubles got worse with the accession of an Emperor ranked among the
least effective by Chinese historians. Thus, despite political stability and
economic prosperity, the Ch’en lacked the superior
military strength and leadership of the North.
It was into this
environment that the founder of the Sui Dynasty, Wen-ti,
stepped. Wen-ti was a senior court official in
Northern Chou who had intermarried into another important court family. The
intrigue of other court officials provided an opportunity for Wen-ti to stage a coup, assume leadership of Northern Chou, and
set up the Sui Dynasty. It would have been difficult to deduce that a new
dynasty had taken over if one merely looked at the royal court in the Northern
Chou capital Ch’ang-an. The same families were still in residence, providing
the corps of advisers and officials. Yet, Wen-ti
understood the importance of consolidating his authority in the North before
attempting an invasion of the South. To this end, he immediately created a
bureaucracy that brought together elites from Northern Chou and the nowdefunct Northern Ch’i. He set this group to work in
bringing the local regions under stronger central control. This group was also
responsible for creating and implementing a new legal code. In addition,
although Wen-ti knew he would need his troops for the
upcoming invasion, he did not neglect his subjects in the far north, sending
troops to the Great Wall to increase protection against invading Turks. Once
these reforms were accomplished, Wen-ti’s position
was secure enough that he began his campaign against the Ch’en,
conquering and annexing the South in 589.
Thus, in 589, prior
to the Sui conquest of the South, China was clearly divided into two political
units: the Sui in the North and the Ch’en in the
South. Despite changes in leadership and changes in the military capabilities
of both North and South, the boundary between the two units remained fairly
distinct and unmoved. The North and the South clearly saw their counterpart as
an “Other.” The unification of “China” was a geographic enterprise, not an
ethnic or cultural one. The dominant military of the North could conquer the
South, but it could do little to allow the Sui to “rule” the South and
efficiently generate compliance. What was required, the Sui learned, was a
single source of transcendent credibility that was palatable in both the North
and the South.
Reducing the number
of sources of transcendent credibility from two to one The Sui unification of
China is an interesting case study because it shows the Sui leadership
recognizing that one single source of transcendent credibility was needed where
there had been two. This was a conscious policy choice made by the Sui after
other policies designed to eliminate the boundary between North and Southmhad failed. Thus, it is important to demonstrate,
first, that the sources of transcendent credibility in the North and the South
differed significantly, second, the conscious policy choices made by the Sui
leadership to reduce the number of sources of transcendent credibility to one,
and third, the resultant source of transcendent credibility and its level of
acceptance in both the North and South.
Northern China
adhered to a very different source of transcendent credibility than the South
thanks to differences in historical development. Surrounded by oceans, dense
jungles, and high mountains, the South was relatively isolated compared to the
North. The North, on the other hand, was exposed to new influences thanks to
the numerous tribes of the steppes and their position as eastern terminus of
the Silk Roads. Although the North resisted these changes, they also found it
prudent to adapt in ways the South was not forced to do. The influence of the
peoples of the steppes continued because the Sui inherited the institutions of
the Northern Chou. As has been noted earlier, the key Turk families and
officials of the Northern Chou wished to retain many of the traditional
religious beliefs that their ancestors had brought with them from the steppes.
But, at the sametime, they recognized the value of
adopting Chinese institutions and religions to more effectively rule the
predominately Chinese population. Thus, many of the traditional steppe
practices had already been blended into existing Northern Chinese rites and
institutions.
However, the three
most important influences on Northern transcendent credibility came from
Confucianism, Buddhism, and Taoism. It must be recognized that these three
systems had existed together in Northern China for roughly five hundred years.
Whereas, in the beginning, these systems vied with one another for the hearts
and minds of the populace, over time they began to blend together. In their
extreme versions, each system could (and did) act as an alternative source of
transcendent credibility and, thereby, a threat to the existing government.
Yet, in their more moderate versions, each system could be shown as support for
the other. In short, by the sixth century, Taoism in and of itself was not a
threat to the government in power, but a Taoism that excluded, for example, the
legitimacy of the Buddhist teachings could very well be a threat or an
opportunity for the government in power.
This syncretic trend
in Northern China is very important as the source of transcendent credibility
for the Sui was a hybridized version of Buddhism and Confucianism. Sui Emperor
Wen-ti acknowledged the importance of Buddhism as a
source of legitimacy for any government in Northern China. Buddhism had been in
China for 500 years and was well integrated into every level of Chinese
society. The NorthernChou were ready to adopt the
more secular Confucian practices and institutions, but also wished to retained
many of the religious beliefs they had brought with them from the steppes. In
574, the Northern Chou ruler instigated a severe program of repression of the
Buddhist and Taoist clergy. Three years later, this policy was extended to the
newly conquered area of Northern Ch’i, a region where Buddhism was much more
firmly ensconced. Over the ensuing ten years, the rulers managed to enforce
this incredibly unpopular policy, but failed to change the hearts and minds of
the Northern Ch’i people and the elite. This costly policy combined with Wen-ti’s assurances to Buddhists contributed heavily to his
successful coup. It was well known that Wen-ti was
raised among Buddhist monks and nuns and that he had married a very devout
Buddhist woman. In the last years of the Northern Chou dynasty, Wen-ti watched as the ruler tried (unsuccessfully) to eradicate
all non-Confucian religious practices. As Emperor, Wen-ti
revived Buddhism.102
The transcendental
source of Emperor Wen-ti’s credibility was a
hybridized version of Buddhism and Confucianism.103 The Han Dynasty had based
their governance on Confucian doctrines. While many scholars argue that
Confucianism is not technically a “religion,” it cannot be denied that an
important facet of its doctrines is the “Mandate of Heaven” (t’ien-ming).104 Confucius argued that good government
requires recapturing the institutions and practices that worked in the “Golden
Age” of China, especially in the Shang and early Zhou dynasties. These
dynasties incorporated the idea that Heaven placed the current Emperor in his
position and, as long as he continued to rule in harmony with the cosmic
forces, society would flourish while he ruled.105 Hence, Confucianism is at
least “transcendent,” pointing to the legitimacy of political leadership
established by Heaven. It is this argument that Wenti’s
advisor, Li Te-lin, turned to in his “Discourse on
the Heavenly Mandate:” compared with the Chou, the new Sui dynasty produced the
least possible disruption to the cosmic order.106 Wen-ti
was not especially intellectual or learned; thus, he lacked some key qualities
Confucians valued. At the same time, he recognized the usefulness of Confucian
doctrines for establishing legitimacy and of Confucian scholars for effective
government. His Confucian advisor Su Wei convinced him that the moral health of
the people and government was crucial to a flourishing society.107 To that end,
Wen-ti pushed policies that focused on reinvigorating
the people’s filial piety (xiao). Against the advice of Li Te-lin,
Wen-ti argued that reading only the Confucian Classic
of filial submission was sufficient to establish one’s character and to govern
a state. This position stressed the importance of hierarchy in a family and the
state (especially if you are the Emperor at the top of the hierarchy).108 Early
in his reign he provided a great deal of support to Confucian schools in the
hopes of producing a strong group of advisors and bureaucrats. However, by 601
it was clear that these schools were either drawing mediocre students or not
effective educational institutions. Fed up with the low quality of graduates,
Wen-ti closed most of these schools. Not
coincidentally, on the same day he shut down the Confucian schools, he
distributed large numbers of holy Buddhist relics through the empire.
One of the most
important innovations of Wen-ti was blending
Confucianism and Buddhism together in such a way that the contradictions
between the two were ironed out and both provided complementary sources of
transcendent credibility for his rule. Confucianism said that Wen-ti ruled under the Mandate of Heaven, but Heaven (t’ien) had always been a vague term.109 In the Analects,
Confucius argued that questions about Heaven should wait until the questions
about mankind and the world are first answered.110 As a result, it was
relatively easy to attach a conscious Being to the vague notion of Heaven. In
Wen-ti’s words, it is the Buddha who “takes true
dharma and entrusts it to the princes of states. We, being honored among men,
accept Buddha’s trust.”111 Because it is the Buddha who has chosen the Emperor,
and the Buddha is the paragon of compassion, the ruler is seen as ideal. The
ruler is considered “a Cakravartin king,” which means that he is the Buddhist
political ideal of a ruler who brings peace and prosperity to his land.112 The
Cakravartin king is the secular counterpart of the Buddha. The word Cakra is
Sanskrit for yantra, which is a physical form of a mantra, meaning that the
king was something to look at to see how to be enlightened.113 Thus, Wen-ti’s duties as Emperor also included defender of the faith
and generous donor. He established Buddhist temples in every region of the
Empire, on the one hand fulfilling his role as donor, but on the other hand
providing a visible sign to the people that Buddha’s political counterpart was
in charge. The monks and nuns were put to work immediately. They served as
healers, leaders of religious rituals, and other crucial roles in the
community. The local people could see on a daily basis that the Emperor and the
unseen forces of Nature were working on the same side, for their benefit.
A third religious
factor in Chinese history, Taoism, also found a place in the Sui dynasty,
though its role was minimal. Taoism had transformed over the past 800 years
from a brief explanation of the Tao found in Lao-Tzu’s Tao-Te-Ching,
to a belief system that now deified the messenger, Lao-Tzu, and included
many other Immortals.114 During the Han dynasty, many of the more durable
concepts of Taoism had been melded into official Confucianism in order to
produce a fuller philosophical/theological system.115 Thus, at the time of the
Sui, Taoism was not perceived as an alternate source of transcendent
credibility than Confucianism. Yet, to the extent that Taoist clergy were
independent, they still represented a potential threat to the Sui’s ideology.
Emperor Wen-ti honored Lao-Tzu just enough to keep
the Taoists happy. Because this came at the tail end of ten years of harsh
repression under the Northern Chou, Taoists believed that they had a real
champion in Wen-ti. The truth is that Wen-ti only accepted Taoism to the extent that it meshed with
his hybridized version of Buddhism and Confucianism. For the most part, Taoist
practices that did not conform were illegal. He may have stopped the oppression
of both Buddhism and Taoism, but only Buddhism received his full support. At
the end of his reign, the capital Ch’ang-an contained 120 Buddhist buildings,
but only ten Taoist. In short, as long as the Taoist clergy were minimalized
and its most durable concepts were already appropriated, Taoism was permitted
to exist.
Relationship between
Emperor and Sangha Perhaps the most crucial distinction between Buddhism in the
North and South involved how the clergy related to the rulers. In the fourth
century, more than two centuries before the Sui reunification of China, the Buddhist
clerical leaders in the North and South made clear their different stances on
how monks relate to emperors.
The question was
whether monks, and especially the head of the Buddhist clergy (the Sangha),
should pay homage to the ruler.116 In the North, the relationship between the
Buddha and the king was closely connected. As Buddhism gained popularity in the
North, the ruler came to be seen as a bodhisattva well on his way to becoming a
Buddha. At times, however, a ruler could assert that he was a living Buddha or
even the Buddha reincarnated. The founder of the Wei dynasty (mid-fourth
century) claimed such status and the Buddhist clergy backed him up. Thus, when
the Sangha was asked to pay homage to the king, he could justifiably do so
since he was not acknowledging the authority of mere temporal ruler, but
spiritual authority already due a Buddha. According to one Sangha of the Wei
dynasty, Faguo, the ruler was both the temporal and
spiritual authority of every Buddhist monk.
In the South,
however, there was a very different outcome to this question. The emperors in
the South claimed to be persons in pursuit of buddhahood,
but this was very different from actually being one. According to Huiyuan, a Sangha of the South who established the
precedence that would be followed until reunification, the vocation of a
Buddhist monk is to renounce the world. Nothing on earth should have any hold
on a true monk. Thus, the Sangha should not bow before the ruler. If anything,
the emperor should bow to the monk for the service he is provided humanity. For
a variety of reasons, both political and spiritual, the leading families of the
South supported Huiyuan’s position. As a result, the
Buddhist clergy in the South remained almost totally independent of the
Southern emperors. Such a politicoreligious hierarchy was perceived by the
emperors of the North as a real and present threat to their ability to generate
compliance among the peoples of the North.
This hierarchical
distinction between North and South led to continued divergences between the
two forms of Buddhism. Free from direct imperial supervision and feeding off of
the support provided by many of the powerful families, Buddhists in the South were
allowed to spend much of their time considering the philosophical ideas. Many
schools sprung up as a result. Each monastery in effect had its own theology.
In the North, on the other hand, such ideological experimentation was frowned
on. The focus of Buddhists in the North was perfecting the practices and rites
associated with attaining Nirvana. The North was more prone to invasion and war
than the South, thus a focus on practices was more welcomed by the people of
the North who sought stability and solace in the midst of chaos. Yet,
philosophical matters remained largely undiscussed in the North, thereby
protecting the theological status quo. The source of transcendent
credibility in the South was a “purer” form of Buddhism, meaning one that was
less “tainted” by foreign influences.117
Buddhism was
incredibly strong in the Southern dynasties.118 There is less evidence about
religious practices of the rulers in the South, but this is understandable as
the conquered society usually leaves less to posterity than the conqueror.
There were few connections between the Buddhist clergy in the South and the
clergy in the North.
Thus, not only did
central doctrines differ, the hierarchy personnel differed as well. North and
South had distinct Sangha who saw their position vis-à-vis the emperor very
differently. In other words, a respected monk in the South was not necessarily
equally respected in the North.
The Buddhist clergy
in the North under Wen-ti emerged from ten years of
oppression under the last Northern Chou emperor. Their concern was with their
own status, not with that of the South. Their modest goals included not giving
Wen-ti an excuse to withdraw support and gradually
increasing their influence in society. The clergy in the South, on the other
hand, had always had a relatively privileged status. They had not faced
state-sponsored oppression for centuries and had come to take their position in
society for granted. In addition to this, they shared the Southern dynasties
contempt for the “barbarous” peoples that now populated the Northern portions
of the former Han Empire. The lack of evidence and the short term of the Ch’en dynasty prevents an adequate understanding of how it
related its legitimacy to a source of transcendent credibility. Clearly, rulers
of all the Southern dynasties claimed legitimacy as heirs to the Han
dynasty.119 However, Confucianism was not as strong in the South as it had been
in the Han or was currently in the North. No adequate compromise had been
reached between Buddhism and Confucianism – the success of one meant the
decline of the other. Over the past century, Buddhism had clearly been in
ascendance among both elite and masses. The theological innovation in the South
largely concerned blending some of the ideas of Buddhism and Taoism, but this
still fell short of peaceful co-existence of the two systems. As long as the
form of Taoism that deified Lao-Tzu was insignificant, its existence could be
tolerated.
The military conquest
of the South was a relatively easy affair. Wen-ti’s
efforts at consolidation of power in the North was the antithesis of the
decline the Ch’en ruler experienced in the South. A
year before Wen-ti launched his campaignagainst
the South, he sent the Ch’en ruler a letter
containing twenty crimes he had committed, suggesting that the Mandate of
Heaven had been lifted. Wen-ti considered the
elimination of the Ch’en ruler an obligation placed
on him by Heaven, and said so in his letter. Wen-ti
had 300,000 copies of a similar edict made and distributed in the South, an
early form of psychological warfare. In short, Wen-ti
wanted to make clear to the soon-to-be-conquered people in the South that he
had the Mandate of Heaven while the Ch’en did not.120
Resisting the Sui was resisting Heaven. The Ch’en
were easily defeated. Wen-ti found (as have many
other conquerors throughout history) that conquest was simpler than governance.
Wen-ti’s first actions in reuniting the Empire
involved shifting the legitimacy of the Ch’en ruler
to himself. Two policies were especially important in this. First, the Ch’en ruler and his family were kept alive and lived near
Wen-ti’s court in the capital Ch’ang-an. The Ch’en ruler was instrumental in encouraging rebels in the
South to do as he had done and accept the new Emperor.
The clemency shown to
the Ch’en ruler was also intended to symbolize the
leniency Wen-ti would show to the South once it
embraced him. Second, Wen-ti had the Southern capital
city, Chien-k’ang completely destroyed and turned
into farmland. The people were not killed, but there was nothing left to show a
city had once stood in that place. In short, Wen-ti
intended his dynasty to be more than the best option, it would be the only
option.
These early policies
of Wen-ti failed to win him legitimacy in the South.
Despite a common heritage and close proximity, these two cultures had been
completely separated for the past three hundred and fifty years. A good example
of this is that when the Ch’en ruler was brought to
Wen-ti, neither could understand the other because
they spoke different languages.121 Each society had evolved differently.
Yet, Wen-ti was determined to recreate the Chinese Empire of the
Han, and thisrequired finding ways to bridge these
cultural differences. In the South, it was not primarily the elites that had to
be won over. This could be done (and was) by involving some of the leading
families in Wen-ti’s bureaucracy. As had been the
case for centuries, the elite families would often associate themselves with
whichever star they perceived was on the rise. Since all dynasties North and
South, Chinese or other, used some Confucian principles of government, elite
officials were useful despite multiple changes of leadership. Instead, it
was the larger population that needed to be won over. This, in large part,
meant winning over the Southern Buddhist clergy who occupied prominent
positions in every community.
Wen-ti tried another unsuccessful policy designed to encourage
the North and the South to adhere to the same source of transcendent
credibility. This policy of imposing Confucian principles on the general
population backfired. Wen-ti’s goal was to drive home
the importance of filial piety throughout empire. To this end, everyone in the
Empire was required to memorize the “Five Teachings” (Wu chiao), which
basically emphasized the importance of the social hierarchy and fulfilling
one’s place in it. Whether the people in the South thought this doctrine to be
wrong or believed that it was a first phase in replacing Buddhism with
Confucianism is unclear. What is clear, however, is that the people of the
South did not like the policy of mandatory memorization the Five Teachings.
Many of Wen-ti’s officials in the South were killed,
and in some cases, eaten. Tradition says that as they ate the officials, the
rebels said “This will make you more able to memorize the Five Teachings!”122
These popular uprisings convinced Wen-ti that a new
policy was needed. The second policy was to convince the Southern Buddhists
that Wen-ti was really a Cakravartin king who would
not only protect Buddhism, but would enable it to thrive. Truth be told, it is
unclear that this was Wen-ti’s policy. It became his
policy in the latter years of his reign, but his adoption of it probably came
after his son, Yang Kuang, demonstrated how effective it was in uniting the
North and South. Yang Kuang, the Prince of Chin, was sent by his father with troops
to crush the Five Teachings uprisings and maintain order in the South. He
successfully stopped the rebellions, but recognized that the South would be won
more easily with both a carrot and a stick. Part of the discontent in the South
stemmed from the destruction of the capital city, which had also served as the
center of Buddhism. Lacking the money from elites (who had moved to the North
to serve Wen-ti), Southern clergy fretted that they
would lose their place to Northern Buddhists. Yang Kuang, however, immediately
began to pour money into their coffers, supported the building of newtemples, and invited them to come to his new Southern
home in Yang-chou to live and work. Of course, Yang Kuang purged the Southern
Buddhist clergy of any who did not support the new Sui Dynasty, but once they
passed the screening process, the clergy could expect to be treated very well.
The main Buddhist
school in the South was the T’ien-t’ai, headed by the
legendary Chih-i. Yang Kuang struck up a friendship
with Chih-i and made it clear that Buddhism in the
South would merge with Buddhism in the North, not be dominated by it. Chih-i also played an important symbolic role in the merging of
Northern and Southern Buddhism, which could not have been missed by Yang Kuang.
Chih-i was from an aristocratic Southern family, but
studied under the famous Northern Buddhist teacher Huisi.
One of the central doctrines of the Chih’i’s teaching
and the T’ien-t’ai School is that the philosophical
aspects of Buddhism (heavily emphasized in the South) and the discipline and
meditative aspects (heavily emphasized in the North) were “like the two wings
of a bird.”123 Yang Kuang promoted these teachings of Buddhism, elevated
the T’ien-t’ai School and its clergy, and doctrinally
ironed over the differences between Northern and Southern Buddhism.
Yang Kuang also
gathered sacred books from all over the Empire, had them copied, and sent these
manuscripts to important temples in the South. Gradually, Yang-chou became the
Southern political and cultural capital that Chien-k’ang
had been. The Buddhist clergy became the biggest supporters of the Sui in the
South, reducing the resistance to the new conquerors. In 604, Yang Kuang
succeeded his father with the new Imperial title, Yang-ti.
When he returned to Ch’ang-an he brought with him the
best of the Southern clergy. The Buddhists from the South merged with their
counterparts in the North and blended into one hierarchy. Confucianism had lost
favor with Wen-ti in the later years of his reign. Yangti revived Confucianism again, recreating the
complementary blend with Buddhism discussed above. The Buddhist clergy held
privileged places in the capital near Yangti’s court.
At the same time, Confucian rituals were brought back. In particular, the
Emperor traveled to one of the holy mountains, Heng-shan,
and performed a Confucian ritual dating from the Han dynasty that “dramatized
supreme power.”124 When blended properly, the doctrines and rituals of
Confucianism did not contradict those of Buddhism, and Yang-ti
recognized that a hybrid could actually produce the best of both worlds in
terms of generating compliance and authority.
The Gradual Emerging of China as a Whole
In sum, China was
divided both politically and religiously as late as 589. The North relied on a
newly developed blend of Confucianism and Buddhism, while the South was
Buddhist. The Sui Emperors conquered the South, consolidating their conquest by
blending an important Southern School of Buddhism into its Confucian-Buddhist
hybrid. Once this was done, the populace of the South was more willing to
accept significant Confucian principles without coercion. Likewise, the people
of the North were satisfied because the T’ien-t’ai
School still emphasized and celebrated the Northern practices of Buddhism. At
the same time, the Sui retained the Northern theological concept that the ruler
stood in authority above the clergy. Finally, all of this was combined with
Confucian institutions that had been the official state practices under the Han
dynasty, which held a transcendent credibility all its own. Only after this
hybridization was accomplished was the authority of the new Emperors secure.
The distinctiveness of the boundary between Northern and Southern China in 589
is a far cry from borders of the modern nation-state system. And yet, for the
time period, the Huai River-Qianling Mountain divide
formed a relatively distinct boundary between Northern and Southern political
units. This border, however, disappeared between 589 and 618. A military
victory was insufficient to eradicate this border as the division was more than
just a political phenomenon. Once the Sui imposed a single source of
transcendent credibility covering both the North and South, the boundary
gradually disappeared both physically and conceptually. Despite the obvious and
consistent military threats from the Northern nomadic peoples, the Northern
Chou also stationed troops along their southern border. This border closely
followed the Huai River in the East and the Qianling
Mountains further West. Because the North had a more powerful military, the
South was particularly vulnerable to an invasion that crossed the Mountains and
floated down the Yangtze to the population centers. A Northern invasion could
either hug the coastline or proceed down the Yangtze River gorge. This made the
geographic barrier a natural political and cultural boundary. Up river and on
the northern side of the Yangtze, the Northern Chou built outposts that could
guard any movement along the river. The Ch’en, and
many of the dynasties that preceded them, had built similar fortifications
downstream and on the Southern side. Thus, the River itself acted both as a
highway for invasion and a heavily controlled border. In the East, the Huai
River served as a similar barrier with fortifications on its North and South
banks. Under such scrutiny, very little in terms of people and trade passed
between North and South.
By the 580s, the
military threat in the South was minimal. The Ch’en
had once had a strong military power, but it was aimed primarily at the
Northern Ch’i.125 The failed invasion into Northern Ch’i in 575 reduced this
power to a purely defensive force. Northern Chou troop postings were intended
primarily to ensure that all flow of goods, people, and troops crossing the Qianling Mountains was checked. After Wen-ti took over in 589, he added a new objective to the
generals in charge along the Southern frontier: prepare to invade.
The worst part of the
fighting between the Sui and the Ch’en occurred in
the naval battles on the Yangtze. Once the Sui controlled the River, the rest
of the fighting was minimal. Interior defenses for the Ch’en
were almost non-existent. The Ch’en invested their
resources primarily in creating and controlling a distinctive border. Likewise,
the Northern Chou and the Sui invested the bulk of their troops along the
northern boundaries with the Eastern Turks and along the Yangtze River.
Military in the interior of the Sui realm consisted of local militias, not
centrally controlled and trained soldiers. In short, both the Sui and the Ch’en demonstrated a credible commitment to defend their
borders. Distance from the center was not the issue nor was the extent of the
military threat. Control of the borders militarily and non-militarily was the
primary concern. The northern shore of the Yangtze River126 was also a
distinctive boundary because authority of the political unit ended sharply at
the water’s edge. Persons living near the border could not appeal to both the
Sui and the Ch’en’s authority.
Officials in a
particular region or village were appointed by either the Sui ruler or the Ch’en ruler, depending on the side of the River. As the
local official was the primary provider of justice, hierarchies of appeal and
law existed, but did not cross the River. In general, persons on the North side
of the River spoke a different language and came from a different culture than
those on the South side. This separation was continually reinforced with new
deployments of troops from the interior of each respective realm.
The reunification did
not occur in an international vacuum. As the Sui and T’ang
reduced the distinctiveness of the boundary between North and South, external
enemies were growing stronger. Thus, some of the proxies that we would turn to
here will be somewhat masked in the country as a whole. For example, the
reduction ofborder defenses between North and South
to nothing was mirrored by an increase in troops stationed on the edges of the
Turkish and Tibetan realms. In addition, while the theory would predict a less
hierarchically arranged judicial system where a border becomes less
distinctive, in this case we see an increase in judicial hierarchy. However,
this intensification throughout the Empire is in response to the growing
threats on the frontiers. The hierarchy, however, now crossed the boundary and
embraced both North and South. In other words, despite the confounding effects
of China in an international system, it is still possible to see that the
boundary between North and South China grew less distinctive. Following the
conquest of the Sui and the pacification of the brief uprisings in the South,
troops were no longer stationed along the Yangtze River.127 Controlling the
flow of ideas was the last thing on the Sui ruler’s mind. In fact, ideally, he
sought to vastly increase the flow from North to South in terms of ideas.
Likewise, he expected the flow of economic goods to increase along the Yangtze
River. As was discussed earlier, thanks to the pacification strategy of Wen-ti’s son in the South, all of these things occurred. The
Yangtze was no longer a fortified border, but a highway of sorts that saw an
enormous increase in traffic. The Huai River experienced a similar
transformation. The expansion of the canal system primarily under Wen-ti’s heir, Yang-ti, improved the
flow of traffic between what was formerly divided between Northern Chou,
Northern Ch’i, and Ch’en. By 611, the Grand Canal
directly linked the Huang He and Yangtze River systems. Troops that had been
stationed on the River were first redeployed in the South for pacification, but
within a decade, redeployed to face the nomadic tribes in the North and
Northwest and to prepare for the doomed invasion of Korea.
Redeployment of
troops was relatively easy, but it took some time for the cultural barriers to
fall between North and South. In particular, the people in the South had always
looked down on the Northern people as barbarians merely dressed up as Chinese. Such
beliefs did not disappear overnight. Language barriers also took time to
dissipate. However, the free flow of goods and people between North and South
increased the rapidity of the assimilation. The Sui rulers and the later T’ang rulers appointed local officials in the South. Many
of these officials, though not all, were transplants from the North. At the
same time, however, many of the best people in the South were moved north to
work in other parts of the bureaucracy. People from the North and South were
forced to solve the assimilation problem in order to conduct daily affairs. By
the time the T’ang took control in 618, there was
little evidence that a boundary between North and South had existed.
All of these
unification strategies depended on the Sui ability to create a shared source of
transcendent credibility. After a number of brief uprisings in the South,
rebellions no longer revolved around the idea of a North as separate from the
South or vice versa. Relative internal peace reigned in the reunited China for
roughly twenty years. When a new spate of rebellions surfaced, the locus had
shifted to the northeast in the regions most heavily
affected by the 611 Huang He flooding. Further, the rebellions were not about
breaking away from the Empire, but replacing an Emperor who (in the eyes of the
rebels) had so clearly lost the Mandate of Heaven. The Sui policies had
solidified the idea that the Empire was eternal. Though it would go through
periods of decline, the Empire would always be revived. A distinctive border
tearing the Empire in half was a thing of the past.
Thus, in order to
eliminate this boundary, the Sui Emperors developed and implemented a conscious
strategy designed to generate compliance from the South with a minimal amount
of coercion. The Sui reduction of the number of sources of transcendent credibility
in China to one was instrumental in reducing the distinctiveness of the
boundary between its Northern and Southern halves. To put it another way, the
Sui goal of reunification depended on the Emperors’ ability to base their
legitimacy on a source of transcendent credibility shared in common throughout
the Empire.
China and Tibet (620-800)
Early in the seventh
century, a new power was rising in the West. No one in China would have
predicted that several disparate tribes of shepherds on the Tibetan Plateau
would suddenly merge into a single political unit capable of extending its
power all the way to the Chinese plains. And yet, the new T’ang
dynasty, taking over in China after Yang-ti’s
disastrous invasion of Korea on the 610s, found that their source of
transcendent credibility was no longer the only source in the system. This case
will demonstrate that the introduction of an alternate source of transcendent
credibility induced the Chinese and Tibetans each to invest heavily in their
mutual border, creating an incredibly distinct and incredibly long border
between their territories. The area where the distinct border emerged had
formerly been sparselypopulated, mountainous, and
distant from the Chinese and Tibetan centers of power. The frontier was just
that, incredibly indistinct and patrolled by tribes that preferred to be left
alone. However, the rise of Tibet and its alternate source of transcendent
credibility meant that this region would be the most hotly contested and highly
demarcated in Medieval Asia. When the T’ang came to
power in 618, they faced a new enemy on their western flank with which the Sui
had not had to contend. The Tibetans as a unified people were relatively new.
The land that would become Tibet was surrounded on all sides by mountains. The
area itself was a large plateau in the midst of the sharp peaks of the
Himalayas. The silk roads skirted this region to the north and the south, but
travel across the plateau itself was avoided as a costly and fruitless venture.
Thus, the many tribes that lived in Tibet were relatively isolated from
external influence and, by consequence, were neither powerful nor rich. Monks
from India had brought Buddhism to Tibet and neighboring Nepal in the third
century, but the dominant religion was Bon, which required Shamans in order to
speak to the various gods, demons, and spirits. In general, Bon resembled
religions found among the small nomadic tribes of Siberia, Africa, and North
America.
For reasons that are
unknown, late in the sixth century a number of leaders of the various tribes on
the plateau decided to make one of their number a king over them all. The lord
of Yar-lung became the Spu-rgyal btsan-po.
While rgyal means “king,” spu
refers to the sacred nature of the king as a divine manifestation. His
authority was not strictly political, but spiritual as well. From 570 to 608,
he consolidated the tribes and extended their power beyond the plateau. Though
the Sui had not encountered any of his forces, rumors of the growing power of
the Tibetans reached Ch’ang-an. It was said (and the Sui Emperors believed)
that the Tibetan king commanded 100,000 warriors. This number is clearly an
exaggeration, but its credibility can probably be ascribed to the rapidity at
which the Tibetans went from backward yak-herders to military power. It was the
son of this first Tibetan king who gets the lion’s share of the glory in
Tibetan history. Songtsen Gompo
(608-650) is known as the first chos-rgyal, or “religious
king,” a title given to him for his successful efforts to convert the Tibetans
to Buddhism. According to the traditional Tibetan history, Clear Mirror on
Royal Genealogy, written in 1364, the mother of Songsten
Gompo and the mothers of his two future wives,
one a princess of Nepal and the other a princess in China, were all impregnated
with a ray of light that emanated from the forehead of the Buddha Avolokitesvara. As rulers, they “brought the Dharma” to the
land of Tibet. The Clear Mirror, a Tibetan history, describes the people of
Tibet as being descended from the mating of a monkey and a rock-ogress.128
Hence, the Tibetans were a depraved people before the dharma came and all of
their neighbors knew this and despised them for it. However, when Songsten Gompo transformed dharma
laws into royal law, hetransformed the Tibetans into
a blessed and happy race. In this way the traditional account describes Songsten Gompo as both political
and spiritual savior of Tibet. In the end he does not die, but returns to the
Buddha from whom he originally emanated. Songsten Gompo, and by relation his royal descendents,
was no ordinary monarch, butwas a dharma-king.129
While there is much
in the traditional account that does not pass a modern believability test, it
is verified in many places that Buddhism became the source of transcendent
credibility in the reign of Songsten Gompo.130 The
traditional Bon religion was not so much eliminated as absorbed into Buddhism,
creating a unique form that evolved in different ways than Buddhism in India or
China or elsewhere for that matter. The Buddhism Tibet built on came straight
from India, while Songsten Gompo
also brought in various pieces of Chinese Buddhism to supplement and customize
for the Tibetan culture. This was symbolized in Songsten
Gompo’s marriages: his first and senior wife was from
Nepal and his second wife was from China. Each brought something of their
culture with them, but the pride of place belonged to the wife from the South. Songsten Gompo also imported
writing from India, primarily to get Buddhist texts translated and disseminated
for his people.
In terms of power,
Tibet was growing, but still not a match for the reunited Chinese Empire. In
the early years of his reign, Songsten Gompo requested that the daughter of the first T’ang Emperor be given to him as a wife. The first time he
asked, he was refused. The Tibetan account suggests the Tibetan emissaries were
laughed at.
Tibet was considered an
uncivilized land unworthy of a Chinese princess. However, after several
successful Tibetan campaigns that extended their border up to the Western
border of China, the T’ang Emperor relented and sent
his daughter to Tibet.
A temporary and wary
peace settled between Tibet and China that was broken twenty years after Songsten Gompo’s death. In 670,
the two armies fought along their shared boundary and this fighting continued
for the next 200 years. Differences between the Two Sources of Transcendent
Credibility It is important to note that even as Tibet was becoming a strong
Buddhist Empire, China was shifting from Buddhism to Taoism. However, to say
“Buddhism” is to brush over the differences that existed between Chinese Buddhism
and Tibetan Buddhism. In brief, Chinese Buddhism had been heavily infused with
Taoist principles, while Tibetan Buddhism was colored with the latest Indian
Buddhist evolutions and Tibetan Bon.131 Both Buddhisms
shared the underlying ideas of the Way and Enlightenment, yet they were very
unlike each other.
Tibet’s Source of Transcendent Credibility
The Tibetans held one
particular Buddha, Avalokitesvara, in highest esteem. As the legend goes, when
this Buddha attained full enlightenment, so great was his compassion to ease
human suffering that he chose not to go to Nirvana, but to stay and give aid to
those who need it.132 In particular, Avalokitesvara looked north at the great
plateau of Tibet and had compassion on the people there. He thus set in motion
a series of events that culminated in his incarnation as Songsten
Gompo, who brought the dharma to Tibet. Therefore,
the heirs of Songsten Gompo
were not merely men, but were also the descendents of
the Buddha, and in some cases were seen as new incarnations of the Buddha. The
modern world is more familiar with Avalokitesvara’s more recent incarnations as
the Dalai Lamas. Hence, the Tibetan king derived much of his credibility from
being the Buddha or at least the progeny thereof. The Buddha of compassion
cares so deeply for the people that the king’s actions must be for their
benefit.
Avalokitesvara also
held the place of honor that any Buddha would have in China. Yet, he was only
one of many Buddhas who favored the Chinese. Over time, the Chinese
transformed Avalokitesvara into Guanyin, a female figure.133 There is no
indication that this was done deliberately to slander the Tibetans, yet the
transformation occurs during the most competitive years between them. More
likely, the development of her female characteristics reflects the Taoist
influence of complementary properties (wu-hsiang).
Still, this religious modification probably mirrored how the Chinese viewed the
Tibetans – as the yin to the Chinese yang.
Guanyin would be a
very popular figure in China, specializing in compassion just as the male
counterpart in Tibet. Yet, Guanyin remained but one of many Buddhas in Chinese
lore.
The linkage between
Buddhist credibility and the king’s right to rule varied considerably between
the two political units. While kings in Tibet were seen as the Buddha, Chinese
Emperors were seen as surrogates of Heaven. Chinese rulers were not divine, but
they had been chosen by the divine. This distinction stayed with the Chinese
rulers whether Buddhism, Taoism, or Confucianism was ascendant. The idea of the
Mandate of Heaven was displaced into both Buddhism and Taoism. As a
representative chosen by the Buddha, the Immortals, or Heaven, respectively,
the Emperor could be seen as credibly looking after the best interests of the
people. Perhaps the one exception to this would be the T’ang
claim that they were descendents of Lao-Tzu.
The Transformation of China’s Source of Transcendent
Credibility
From the days of the T’ang dynasty’s first emperor, Kao-tsu,
the T’ang rulers attempted to replace the hybridized
Buddhism inherited from the Sui with a hybridized Taoism. As has been mentioned
earlier, over centuries the doctrines of Taoism andChinese
Buddhism had begun to mirror each other.134 Yet, there were two essential
differences important to the T’ang rulers. First, the
network of Buddhist temples was far larger than that of the Taoists. Buddhism
was an economic drain on the Emperor. Buddhist temples controlled large tracts
of land and the peasants that worked on them. Their clergy and workforce were
exempt from corvee labor and public service in the bureaucracy. The economic
situation of Kao-tsu resembled that of late Medieval
European kings vis-à-vis the church and monasteries. In 624, Kao-tsu was encouraged by his advisors, especially the court
astrologer Fu I, to rid China of Buddhism.135
Torn between the
obvious economic benefits and the unpopularity of such a move, Kao-tsu waited until 626 before issuing an edict that limited
the number of Buddhist temples. In three months, Kao-tsu’s
son, Li Shih-min held a bloodless coup in which he killed his brothers, retired
his father, and reinstated Buddhism. It is unclear if Li Shih-min’s actions
were motivated by personal piety, but clearly his move won him the affection
and support of the Buddhist clergy and faithful throughout China. Li Shih-min,
who became Emperor T’ai-tsung, would use his strong
bargaining position with the Buddhist clergy to hybridize the Chinese version
further.136
The second important
difference between Buddhism and Taoism for the T’ang
rulers was that Buddhism originated in India and was thus foreign, while Taoism
was a Chinese product. Taoism had been gaining in popularity throughout China. T’aitsung continuously pointed out that Buddhism was a
foreign religion, while Taoism was Chinese through and through. This shift was,
at least in part, a response to the rising Buddhist power to the West, the
Tibetans. By 646, as Tibet had extended its border to touch that of China, T’ai-tsung denounced Buddhism as a vulgar faith that misled
Emperors and people. However, unlike his father, T’ai-tsung
gradually and effectively shifted the basis for his legitimacy from Buddhism to
Taoism. Taoist priests gained the access to the royal court that the Buddhist
clergy had once had. Additionally, the royal historians claimed that the Li
family direct descended from Lao-Tzu, father of Taoism.137
From this point on,
the T’ang dynasty drew its legitimacy predominantly
from a blend of Taoism and Confucianism.138 Buddhism was not eradicated;
however, its development had to conform with the central doctrines of Taoism
and, as a result, it became uniquely “Chinese.” Chinese Buddhist doctrines
looked very different from those of India and Tibet. This change in Buddhism
was not inordinately difficult as Buddhism in China had already begun to
develop differently than in the West.139 T’aitsung
favored Taoism because it was a native religion and because it was less of an
economic drain.140 For the peasants, however, the difference was not too
noticeable. Finally, the change happened so gradually that the Buddhist clergy,
who may have been able to stop the switch early in T’ai-tsung’s
reign, were powerless to respond. Because Confucianism and Buddhism resembled
Taoism in terms of fundamental practices and vocabulary, the Emperors did not
eschew these. These systems pointed back to Taoism, which in turn supported the
legitimacy of the T’ang Dynasty. Arguably, the T’ang rulers went through brief periods of suppressing
Buddhism, yet in every case there is evidence that the purpose of these more
harsh measures was designed not to eradicate Buddhism, but to give the
government more leverage over it. Often, harsh measures applied to Buddhist
clergy were simultaneously applied to the more favored Taoist temples. Because
Buddhism in China so closely resembled Taoism, the fear was not that it offered
an alternate source of legitimacy, but that it, along with the Taoists,
siphoned too many resources in terms of money and manpower away from the
government. Even this was acceptable provided civil officials supervised.141
For most of the history of the T’ang, Taoist and
Buddhist clergy presided over important government ceremonies.
There was one
exception to this. Under Empress Wu (684-705), the balance ofpower
briefly shifted to Buddhism. There are several reasons for this. First, she was
attempting to legitimize her authority after she had essentially usurped power
from her husband and children. She was not descended from Lao-Tzu as the T’ang claimed, thus Taoism was a constant reminder that she
was a usurper (and a female one at that). She found an answer for bolstering
her legitimacy in The Great Cloud Sutra (Ta-yunching),
chapters four and six.142 In this Sutra, the Buddha informs a female divinity
named Ching-kuang that, because of her conversation
with him, she would be reincarnated as a universal monarch about 700 years
after the Buddha achieved Nirvana. This text was copied and distributed
throughout China by the Empress, with accompanying text implying that she was
that reincarnated divinity. However, some scholars point out a second reason
for her favoritism of Buddhism: her lover for the early part of her reign was a
Buddhist monk.143 These historians point out that when this monk fell out of
favor and she had him killed, she immediately shifted to favoring Confucianism,
again because her new lover was her Confucian physician. It is difficult to say
whether these theories are valid or if they are the product of misogynistic
history-writing; however, it is certain that she did not stick with Buddhism
very long. Thus, during a brief ten years of her reign, most of which was spent
consolidating her rule, her method of linking credibility to a transcendent
source very much resembled that in Tibet. However, the experiment was
short-lived (and unsuccessful). Her successors restored the balance between the
two similar religions, with favor falling heavier on Taoism. At the Council of
Lhasa, held in the famous Tibetan monastery of Samye in 742, the Tibetan king
summoned representatives from India and from China to debate which form of
Buddhism was superior.144 The debate centered on whether enlightenment is
instantaneous, the Chinese position, or gradual, the Indian view. In truth, the
Indian side was also the Tibetan side. For a variety of reasons, Tibet had
always allowed Indian views to have far more influence in their land than
Chinese views. Hence, the outcome of the Council was decided before it started.
However, as a result of this debate, the Tibetan ruler could justify a complete
exclusion of Buddhist doctrines from the East. Rumor even spread that, after
suffering such a humiliating defeat, the Chinese representative had the Indian
representative assassinated. This provided the Tibetan king with further
reasons to shut down the flow of ideas from China.
Comparison of Sources of Transcendent Credibility in
Tibet and China
Thus, there were two
very different sources of transcendent credibility in China and Tibet. First,
the Buddhisms practiced in the two regions differed
dramatically. While Tibet primarily focused on one Buddha, the Chinese followed
a host of Buddhas relatively equally (The Buddha, Siddartha Guatama,
being the exception, especially among those who believed he was actually
Lao-Tzu). Further, depended heavily on more recent manifestations of Indian
Buddhism combined with the native practices of Bon. Second, on many occasions
in their rivalry China did not rely on Buddhism, but a Taoism that was very
similar to Chinese Buddhism. Third, mthe link between
the source of transcendent credibility and the ruler differed in the two
regions. In Tibet, the king was an incarnation of Avalokitesvara or his direct
progeny. In China, the emperor’s credibility depended on his role as an earthly
representative of the transcendent source, whatever that source may be.
Increase in the
Distinctiveness of Boundary between Tibet and China Although strong military
threats had existed along this Chinese frontier prior to the arrival of Tibet
and its alternative source of transcendent credibility, a distinctive border
did not exist. Once this new source of transcendent credibility arrived, so too
did a very distinct border between the Chinese Empire and the area ruled by the
Tibetans.145 This border was well-demarcated, heavily defended, and fairly
stable for long periods of time despite continuous skirmishes back and forth.
In the 670s, the Tibetans expanded into areas dominated by Chinese allies and
created the outlines of the border that was to exist for roughly ninety years.
This period of the T’ang-Tibet rivalry can be divided
into two parts, with the dividing line being the An Lu-shan
rebellion in China from 756 to 763. In the first Chinese Buddhism had been
transformed from its Indian counterpart, fusing many aspects of its practice
closer to Taoism and Confucianism. In Tibet, Buddhism part, from 670 to 756, it
is roughly possible to say that Tibet controlled the highlands and China
controlled the lowlands. China controlled the Chinese plain and the Tarim
Basin, along with the narrow Gansu corridor that runs between the Gobi Desert
to the North and the Qilan Mountains to the South.
The Gansu Corridor was the route from the heart of China to the Tarim Basin and
the trade routes that passed through these to the West. Tibet, for its part,
controlled the mountainous territory south of the Tarim Basin and the Tibetan
plateau itself. In the 670s, it captured the Kokonor
region from the T’u-yu-hun, Chinese allies. This region contained the
headwaters of the Huang He River and literally overlooked the Gansu corridor
and the city of Lanchow. Lanchow may be thought of as the gateway to the Gansu
corridor, and thus held immense strategic importance to China. Likewise,
Lanchow was the last bastion of defense between Tibet and the Chinese capital
city of Ch’ang-an. At huge costs, China was able to fortify a line of defense
up into the mountains, but not penetrating very far.
Hence, the border
between the two political units was in the highlands, but just barely. In
addition to the Kokonor region, Tibet also captured
the Szechwan region. This is the mountainous area that, in effect, surrounds
the Chongqing Basin and holds the upper stretches of the Yellow River. It
overlooked Chinese trade routes to Southeast Asia (modern-day Myanmar). In
short, Chinese authority was strongest along the trade routes and in the China
plain. The border reflected this. In 763, when the An Lu-shan
rebellion ended, China had been forced to withdraw all of its troops from the
Tarim Basin and the Tibetan border to finally quell the revolt. China and its
army was incredibly weakened. Into this vacuum stepped the Tibetans who quickly
swooped into the Tarim Basin and the Gansu corridor. The new border with China
was much more strategically efficient as it reduced the length of contiguous
territory. Now Tibet occupied Lanchow, but recognized that holding these new
territories was very different as the Chinese in this area did not appreciate
the Tibetan claims to divine authority. Thus, military force was required to
maintain these new prizes, which meant Tibet’s ability to exploit China’s
internal weakness was limited. Thus, a new border was established between the
two units that excluded Gansu from Chinese rule. A stalemate was reached with
the Tibetans only after the T’ang Emperors invited
the nomadic peoples of the North, especially the Uighurs, to come into China to
help hold off the Tibetans. While they were fairly successful in this venture,
the remedy proved worse than the disease as the Uighurs moved in and almost
ended the T’ang Dynasty.
That the Chinese were
committed to defending their boundaries, even those thousands of miles from the
center, is without question. The Tarim Basin is a good example of this. Since
roughly 600, when the reunified Chinese Empire attempted to recapture the borders
of the Han Dynasty, the Tarim Basin and the trade routes were high priorities.
The Chinese established the An-his Protectorate over the peoples in this region
and built the “Four Garrisons,” manning these with 50,000 troops. Maintaining
so many troops in such a far away place that,
frankly, did not have the same plentiful resources as China proper, required
the simultaneous establishment of military colonies to feed these troops. Thus,
many Chinese headed West to build new settlements in the Tarim Basin. The more
troops that were sent, the more auxiliary citizens followed, forcing the
government to provide even more commitments to protect these colonists.
Protecting the Tarim
Basin also meant protecting the narrow Gansu corridor, a series of oases wedged
between the heart of the Gobi Desert and the Himalayas. This corridor was
vulnerable to horseback nomads from the North. The Han Dynasty had understood this
and built most of the Western sections of the Great Wall as a barrier between
the nomads and the Gansu corridor. However, the Gansu was also vulnerable to
attacks from the mountains to the South. In 600, the inhabitants of the Kokonor region were a relatively weak nomadic people known
as the T’u-yu-hun. Through diplomacy and the threat of military force, these
people were cowed into an alliancemwith the Chinese,
thereby allowing China to focus on the Northern raiders. However, in the 670s,
the rapidly expanding Tibetans conquered the T’u-yu-hun and made the Gansu
corridor vulnerable on all sides. Thus, to the high costs in money and manpower
to protect the Tarim Basin was added the costs of defending a highly vulnerable
strip of land from very mobile enemies to the North and South.
Finally, Tibetan
expansion eliminated other allies, protectorates, and puppet states that China
had along its Western boundary. The Tibetans and Chinese both formed huge
armies and had various degrees of success or failure, but none substantially
changed the boundary along the edge of the mountains and the China plains.
After the Tibetans captured Szechwan, China made several attempts to recover
it, all ending in failure. The mountainous terrain proved too much of a natural
defense. Thus, recognizing its inability to push Tibet back, China opted for a
defensive strategy along its Western border, building strong fortifications on
the Eastern edge of the mountains and sending troops to be permanently
stationed along this border. As in the Tarim, these troops required more
resources than the mountainous areas could provide, so military colonies were
established near the border to grow food and provide other goods for the
defenders. The presence of these colonies made the defense even more important
as brief in-and-out raids could diminish food supplies and thereby jeopardize
the entire border. Thus, China’s defensive strategy not only created a
distinctive border with Tibet, it also necessitated that the border would grow
more and more distinct over time.
Whether the Tibetans
could have overcome these defenses and, at least, pushed the Chinese border out
of the mountains is difficult to say since court intrigues and a series of
infant rulers stayed Tibet’s expansion in the late 600s. When a new Tibetan king
was able to rally the Tibetans around him and launch a new invasion in the Kokonor region to push China out of the mountains, it
failed. China built stronger fortifications in the area, signaling the border
that they were settling into. In 710 the Tibetans and Chinese signed a treaty
that recognized the border between them. This treaty also gave the Tibetans the
area in Kokonor known as the Nine Bends, which is the
upper stretch of the Huang He River, an enormously important strategic area
that basically opened Ch’ang-an up for invasion. However, this made the peace
unstable and Tibet broke the treaty and launched an invasion, which was beaten
back by the Chinese. The end result was that the original border was returned
to in a stalemate and the Chinese Emperor lost all trust in the word of the
Tibetans.
Chinese-Tibetan Borders from 712 to 756: The Reforms
of Hsuan-tsung
It is at this time
that the Chinese Emperor Hsuan-tsung (ruled from
712-756) reformed the military to reflect the permanent border.146 Before the
rise of Tibet, the neighbors that posed the largest threat to the Chinese were
nomadic people. With only a few exceptions, they were smaller groups who split
their time between sheep herding and minor raids into China. The Chinese
strategy to counter this was to ally themselves with other nomadic peoples who
would protect the frontier regions and Hsuan-tsung
created nine frontier areas along the Western and Northern boundaries of China.
Besides the An-hsi Protectorate that has already been
discussed in the Tarim Basin, three other zones abutted the Tibetans. In the
Southwest, in Szechwan, the Chien-nan Zone protected the trade road from China
into modern-day Myanmar. The mountainousness of the
area and its relative inaccessibility for both sides meant that fewer troops
were stationed here. Every accessible route from Tibet to China was fortified,
but there were few such routes. The headwaters of the Yellow River lay in this
region and, thus, much of the defense focused on this “roadway.” The Kokonor Region was the site of the Lung-yu
Zone. This zone was the home of many troops on both sides. Strategically, the
collapse of this Zone for the Chinese would have meant the loss of Szechwan,
the Gansu Corridor, and even the capital Ch’ang-an. Hence, it was extremely
well fortified. The third important military frontier was the Ho-hsi Zone, located in the Gansu Corridor, protecting the
sole road from China to the Tarim Basin. To the North, these troops had the
benefit of the Great Wall of China, but to the South, the Chinese built new
fortifications in the mountains, but on the edges. The other four zones were
located along the Northern boundary of China. When the Tarim Basin is included
in the calculations, as China adamantly did, the border that was permanently
manned and fortified was extremely long.
The Emperor appointed
a military commander for each zone. These commanders controlled everything from
troop movements down to food production. Civil officials often filled this role
along the Northern zones, but in the zones bordering Tibet, professional
soldiers commanded. In the first two decades, this system worked
extraordinarily well, largely because the early commanders were loyal serve as
a buffer between raiders and the Chinese people. If the raid was larger than to
the Emperor. However, the system became a liability as commanders became
personally powerful militarily and economically. The Emperor responded by
appointing royal princes as commanders of the zones. These princes lived in the
capital with the Emperor and sent deputies to take care of their duties along
the border. The surest route to becoming a top official under Hsuan-tsung was to win victoriesm
against the Tibetans along the border.
The costs of
maintaining permanent troops in far-off places along an incredibly long border
(perhaps the longest border ever) took a toll on the Chinese Empire. Flooding
of the Huang He River in 726 and 727, followed ironically by severe droughts in
the same region in 727 and 728, exacerbated the financial situation. Some of
the Emperor’s advisors suggested a new treaty with the Tibetans that would
enable the Chinese to reduce their costs. However, the Emperor remembered when
the Tibetans broke a treaty in 710. Instead, he argued that a strong offense is
the best defense and staged a large-scale attack in the Kokonor
Region. This came to nothing and a new treaty was signed in 730. The two sides
erected a stele on the border demarcated by the treaty. In 737, the Chinese
attacked again, this time succeeding in changing the border through the
reacquisition of the Szechwan region that had been under Tibetan control since
680. The people of this mountainous area, the Ch’iang
tribes, had grown tired of the overtaxing of the Tibetans and aided the Chinese
in breaking down the Tibetan defenses. However, despite back-and-forth
fighting, the rest of the border stayed relatively firm. Gains on either side
were made in unpopulated areas. In 755, the allies could handle, they at least
provided the time for the Chinese to raise an army from the center and march to
the frontier. Such a strategy proved inadequate against the Tibetans, who
easily crushed these nomadic allies. Likewise, in the North and Northwest in
the 710s, a new qaghan of the Turks united many of
the desert tribes and led them on raids into China. The new situation required
tighter control of the boundaries. The Chinese replaced frontiers manned with non-Chinese allies with fortifications and permanent
Chinese troop deployments.147 Under the new arrangement, there was a clear line
at which the authority of the Chinese ended and that of the Tibetans began.
These spaces did not overlap, as was the case with nomadic buffers. A mutually
recognized line existed, ratified in treaties and perpetuated through the
reality on the ground. Tibetan king died and a temporary peace was made.
Chinese ambassadors visited Lhasa and all appeared to be calm once again.
Chinese-Tibetan Borders from 756 to 80
In 756, the An Lu-shan rebellion commenced in the Northeast of China. To
quell it, the Emperor withdrew the troops stationed in the Tarim Basin. Tibet
moved in from the South and the Turks and Uighurs moved in from the North. It
would be 1,000 years before China would control the Tarim again. The Emperor
required more troops, however, because the rebellion was only gaining strength.
Thus, he was forced to pull his permanent troops off of the Tibetan border. By
763, the rebellion was done, a new Emperor sat on the Dragon Throne, but the
border was incredibly changed. The Gansu Corridor was no longer Chinese, Tarim
was gone, and the boundary between Tibet and China was no longer in the
mountains, but in the Northwestern valleys, no more than 100 miles away from
Ch’ang-an. The new Emperor had very little control over the military. In 763,
the Tibetans prepped for an invasion. The Tibetans were stretched extremely
thin with their troops located thousands of miles from Lhasa. Whether they
would have invaded given resistance is an unanswerable question. The Chinese
Emperor called on his military governor in the area, P’u-ku
Huai-en, to stop the invasion, but P’u-ku refused. The Tibetans marched untouched into
Ch’ang-an in 763, easily capturing the capital and forcing the Emperor to flee
the city for the second time in a decade. The Tibetans knew they were stretched
out further than they could maintain and pulled back after only a couple weeks.
The Emperor dismissed P’u-ku. P’u-ku
was an Uighur who had risen through the ranks of the Chinese military. After
his dismissal, he fled to the Tibetans and led them in a new invasion the
following year. In 765, he managed to create an alliance between the Tibetans
and the Uighurs and invaded again, an invasion that failed only because P’u-ku got sick and died, causing the alliance to fall
apart.
The Chinese did not
man the new border with Tibet as well as it had in the early part of the 8th
century, largely because it was still recovering from the rebellion and because
it became widely understood that Tibet had reached its limits of expansion.148
Yet, for the next fifteen years, Tibet raided at will into Chinese territory
and heaped enormous costs both financially and psychologically on the T’ang Emperors.149 In 783, a treaty was signed between the
two, again recognizing amdemarcated border between
them. In this treaty, the Chinese formally recognized Tibetan rule in the lands
that had been China’s before the An Lu-shan
rebellion. This border remained fairly stable until 805. Of course, this
twenty-five year period was full of attack and counter-attack between the
Tibetans and Chinese, but it was mostly the allies of the Chinese, especially
the Uighurs, who suffered. In 800, however, China teamed up with one of Tibet’s
former vassal states, Nan-chao, and struck hard into the heart of Tibet. The
strong anti-Chinese Tibetan king had recently died and the new ruler lacked the
ability to stop the invasion. By 805, the Tibetans were forced to pull back
their troops from their extended positions and reach a truce with the Chinese.
Without question, there was a correlation between the rise of a new source of
transcendent credibility in Tibet, backed with military power, and the
transformation of the Western Chinese boundary from one of frontiers and buffer
tribes to a sharply demarcated distinctive border. Military capability alone is
not an adequate explanation, as similar measures were not taken against the
Turks in the North in the late seventh century, who had adopted the Chinese
source of transcendent credibility.150 The Tibetans represented a qualitatively
different threat, combining a new linkage between Buddhist beliefs and the
legitimacy of the ruler to a large military capability. The perceived threat
generated with the introduction of this alternate source of transcendent
credibility compelled the T’ang rulers to respond
with enormous investment of resources in creating a relatively distinct border
along their western border with Tibet.
Conclusion P.2
These two episodes from Sui and T’ang
China, the reunification of Northern and Southern China and the relationship
between China and Tibet in the seventh and eighth centuries, demonstrate that
the hypothesis can transcend cultural, geographical, and temporal boundaries.
In both cases, the number of sources of transcendent credibility in the system
determined the distinctiveness of the boundaries between political units. In
the first case, the distinct border between Northern and Southern China was
eliminated only after the Sui Emperors pursued policies specifically intended
to reduce the number of sources of transcendent credibility in northern and
southern China to one. In the second case presented, the East Asian regional
system witnessed the appearance of an alternate source of transcendent
credibility in Tibet, backed with sufficient military capability, which induced
the T’ang rulers in China to invest heavily in the
creation and perpetuation of a distinct border between the two political units.
101 There are few
English language sources on the Sui and T’ang
Dynasties. The bulk of the historical narrative found in this part is drawn
from Denis Twitchett and John K Fairbank, eds.
(1979), The Cambridge History of China: Volume III: Sui and T’ang
China, 589-906, Part I (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) [indicated in
the footnotes as “CHC”] and Charles Benn (2002), China’s Golden Age: Everyday
Life in the Tang Dynasty (Oxford: Oxford University Press): 1-44. Other
important English-language scholars on the Sui and the T’ang
mostly predate the 1979 Cambridge History, and are thus included: Arthur F
Wright, Woodbridge Bingham, Charles P Fitzgerald, Howard J Weschler, Antonio
Forte, and Edwin G Pulley-Blank. The same is true for the history of Tibet
during the seventh and eighth centuries. Modern English-language sources are
concerned primarily with Tibet as it related to the Chinese dynasties or as it
relates to the current drive for Tibetan independence. Unfortunately,
therefore, the historical narrative on the Chinese-Tibetan rivalry necessarily
is primarily from the Chinese point of view.
102 China historian
Arthur Wright has labeled this set of Buddhist practices used to directly
support the Sui and T’ang dynasties as “Imperial
Buddhism,” Wright (1959), Buddhism in Chinese History (Stanford: Stanford
University Press).
103 “Buddhism had
added an extra dimension to the Tang heritage from the Han [Confucianism].”
John King Fairbank (1992), China: A New History (Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap
Press): 78.
104 On the discussion
of whether Confucianism is a religion, see Xinzhong
Yao, An Introduction to Confucianism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2000).
105 On the use of the
“Mandate of Heaven” in the Shang and Zhou Dynasties, see KC Chang, Art, Myth,
and Ritual: The Path to Political Authority in Ancient China (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1983): 33-35.
106 CHC 72.
107 CHC 74. One of
the most important places where common ground was found between Buddhism and
Confucianism was in their emphasis of moral behavior, Eric Zurcher (1959), The
Buddhist Conquest of China: The Spread and Adaptation of Buddhism in Early Medieval
China (Ledien: Brill).
108 The following is
indicative of what Wen-ti appreciated in the Classic
of Filial Piety: “Filiality begins with service to parents, continues in
service to the ruler, and ends with establishing oneself in the world,” Wm
Theodore de Bary and Irene Bloom, eds. (1999), Sources of Chinese Tradition: Volume
1: From Earliest Times to 1600, 2nd ed. (New York: Columbia University Press):
326.
109 Yao, 141-152.
110 Confucius,
Analects, 11.11.
111 CHC 76.
112 De Bary,
“Commentary on the Sutra for Humane Kings,” 476-480.
113 “Cakravartin” and
“Sri Yantra,” in The Concise Oxford Dictionary of World Religions, John Bowker,
ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000).
114 De Bary, 77-111,
392-414.
115 During the Han
dynasty, official Confucianism adopted many Taoist concepts in The Discourses
in the White Tiger Hall written by the historian Ban Gu (32-92 AD), which
reportedly recorded discussions on Confucian ideas held at the court of the Han
Emperor Zhang. De Bary, 344-347.
116 Whalen Lai
(2003), “Buddhism in China: A Historical Survey,” in Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy,
Antonio S Lua, ed. (Routledge): 7-19 [9-10]; DeBary, 426-29.
117 In particular,
the constant invasion and occupations of Turkish peoples from the north and
northwest that the northern portion of China had been exposed to for centuries.
118 Kenneth KS Ch’en, Buddhism in China: A Historical Survey (Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1964).
119 CHC 5.
120 CHC 110.
121 CHC 112.
122 CHC 113.
123 DeBary 444.
124 CHC 132-33.
Before his ill-fated invasion of Korea, Yang-ti also
performed three ancient Confucian sacrifices traditionally done by a ruler
before beginning a military campaign. CHC 133.
125 The Ch’en boundary with the Northern Ch’i lay primarily along
the Huai River, which was a relatively flat plain. Thus, this boundary was more
susceptible to invasion than that of the Northern Chou, who would need to cross
the Qianling Mountains and float an armada down the
fortified Yangtze River.
126 The Qianling Mountain range.
127 Except to protect
the flow of goods and people along it.
128 For more here,
consult Part I, chapter 7, entitled, “The Descent of the Tibetan Race from a
Monkey and a Rock-Ogress,” Gyaltsen, The Clear Mirror: 75-79.
129 Sakyapa Sonam
Gyaltsen, The Clear Mirror: A Traditional Account of Tibet’s Golden Age,
McComas Taylor and Lama Choedak Yuthok,
trans. (Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion Publications, 1996).
130 Hugh Richardson
(1984), Tibet and Its History; Charles Bell (1968), Tibet, Past and Present.
131 “The culture [of
Tibet] was one totally alien to the Chinese…. During the eighth century Tibet
was culturally united by a native culture using a native script derived from an
Indian model, and with cultural ties far stronger with Nepal and India than
with the Chinese. It remained little influenced by China until our times.” CHC
36.
132 “Avalokitesvara,”
in A Dictionary of World Mythology, Edward Cotterell, ed. (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1997).
133 “Guanyin,” in A
Dictionary of Asian Mythology, David Leeming, ed. (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2001).
134 When Buddhism
first arrived in China in the first century AD, translators used Taoist terms
to describe Buddhist concepts. For example, the Buddha achieving enlightenment
was said to have “obtained the Tao.” The Buddhist saints were translated to Taoist
chen-jen, or perfected immortals. In addition,
Taoists were open to Buddhist ideas. Lao-tzu was said to have disappeared to
the West and became the Buddha. Thus, to Taoists, Buddhism was just a lesser
form of Taoism – it was said that Lao-tzu had to dumb down his teachings for
the foreign audience in India. Thus, between the Han and T’ang
dynasties, Buddhism in China “Taoicized” itself to be
more compatible to local conditions and Taoism looked at Buddhism as more
teachings of Lao-tzu, although inferior. The average person in China would not
have been clear about doctrinal distinctions between the two by the time of
Chinese reunification. The practices were different and the clergy were
separate, but Buddhism and Taoism appeared to be two sides of the same coin.
The most popular form of Buddhism in China from the 7th century on was Ch’an, a synthesis of Buddhist and Taoist ideas. Ch’an Buddhism, unlike Western Buddhism, pursued
illumination in a single lifetime, rather than at the end of a series of
reincarnations. This syncretism removed the largest doctrinal distinction
between Buddhism and Taoism. “Taoism,” in Encyclopedia Britannica Macropedia Knowledge in Depth, Vol 28, Philip W Goetz, ed.,
15th edition (Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, 1989): 394-407; de Bary (1999),
Sources of Chinese Tradition.
135 CHC 180.
136 CHC 217-219.
137 Benn (2002),
China’s Golden Age, 60.
138 Taoism had been
adapting its core teachings to complement Confucianism since the latter’s
ascendancy during the Han Dynasty. See de Bary, “Learning of the Mysterious,”
377-391.
139 Ch’en, Buddhism in China, 1964.
140 It was less of an
economic drain primarily because there were more Buddhist monks and monasteries
than Taoist monks and monasteries.
141 Ch’en (1964), Buddhism in China, 214.
142 There were many
questions at the time whether the Great Cloud Sutra (known in India as the Mahamegha Sutra) was a real sutra “discovered” by Empress
Wu’s lover or whether he wrote it himself to legitimate the Empress, CHC 305;
Antonio Forte (1977), Political Propaganda and Ideology in China at the End of
the Seventh Century.
143 Ch’en (1964), Buddhism in China: 220-222; CHC, 256-265.
144 “Council of Lhasa,”
in A Dictionary of Buddhism, Damien Keown, ed. (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2003).
145 “Until the
seventh century, although Ch’iang tribesmen had
created havoc during the Later Han, and later he T’u-yu-hun people living
around Lake Kokonor had threatened what is now
western [Gansu], the western frontier had never been of crucial strategic
importance to the Chinese…. During the seventh century this situation was
transformed. Tibet suddenly grew into a powerful united kingdom and embarked on
a career of aggressive expansion…. From this time onwards the Tibetans
constantly threatened the Chinese both in the [Gansu] corridor and in the
region around Lan-chou, in which regions the T’ang
was forced to maintain huge permanent armies.” CHC 35-36.
146 CHC 362-370.
147 Prior to the rise
of Tibet, the Chinese military depended on local militia, known as fubing, made up essentially of the farmers of a particular
area. This method was a relatively cheap way to provide adequate frontier
defense against nomadic peoples. This system was no longer sufficient by the
eighth century, first and foremost because, although farmers may be able to
muster and defend wide frontiers, they could not be permanently deployed along
the more distinct boundaries the Tibetan threat demanded. Under Hsuan-tsung, “the fubing militia had
been made gradually into a professional fighting force grouped in nine
commands, mainly on the frontiers under generals with wide powers to repel
attacks.” Fairbank (1992), 82.
148 During the
An-Lushan Rebellion, “it was decided to withdraw the entire military
establishment of permanent armies from the north-west [the Tarim Basin],
leaving only such small garrisons as were needed to maintain order locally…. In
the long term the removal of the huge garrisons around Ho-hsi
and Lung-yu left the north-west and the Chinese
dominions in central Asia at the mercy of the Tibetans and the Uighurs, and
marked the end of Chinese control over the Tarim and Zungharia
for almost a millennium.” CHC 457. Tibet’s inability to consolidate these
latest expansions was evident from its inability to hold newly invaded
territory for a substantial period of time. After capturing Chang-an with almost no opposition and little external duress
from the Chinese forces, the Tibetans were forced to withdraw after only two
weeks. They were “in no position either militarily and politically to hold the
capital.” CHC 491.
149 During the 760s,
“the Tibetans attacked the frontier every autumn,” but the subsequently
withdrew. These raids “severely hampered the [Chinese] government in its
efforts to restore central control over various regional centers of authority
in the interior of China.” CHC 491. The Tibetan inability to permanently
advance further into Chinese territory and the Chinese inability to defend
against both the sporadic raids and enemies to the north-east produced a
détente during the late 770s and a formal treaty in 783. CHC 501.
150 CHC 181-182, 219-35, 286-287.
For updates
click homepage here