Tibetan Demonology PDF
Preview Tibetan Demonology
B Tibetan Demonology discusses the rich taxonomy of gods E L and demons encountered in Tibet. These spirits are often L the cause of, and exhorted for, diverse violent and wrathful activities. This Element consists of four thematic sections. The first section, “Spirits and the Body,” explores oracular Elements in Religion and Violence possession and spirit-induced illnesses. The second section, “Spirits and Time,” discusses the role of gods in Tibetan astrology and ritual calendars. The third section, “Spirits and Space,” examines the relationship between divinities and the Tibetan landscape. The final section, “Spirits and Doctrine,” T Tibetan ib explores how certain deities act as fierce protectors of e t religious and political institutions. a n D Demonology e m o n o lo About the Series Series Editors g Violence motivated by religious James R. Lewis y beliefs has become all too University of Tromsø common in the years since the Margo Kitts Christopher Bell 9/11 attacks. Not surprisingly, Hawai’i Pacific interest in the topic of religion University and violence has grown substantially since then. This Elements series on Religion and Violence addresses this new, frontier topic in a series of c. fifty individual Elements. Collectively, the volumes will examine a range of topics, including violence in major world religious traditions, theories of religion and violence, holy war, witch hunting, and human sacrifice, among others. Cover image: Jakub Grygier/Shutterstock ISSN 2397-9496 (online) ISSN 2514-3786 (print) ElementsinReligionandViolence editedby JamesR.Lewis UniversityofTromsø MargoKitts Hawai’iPacificUniversity TIBETAN DEMONOLOGY Christopher Bell Stetson University UniversityPrintingHouse,CambridgeCB28BS,UnitedKingdom OneLibertyPlaza,20thFloor,NewYork,NY10006,USA 477WilliamstownRoad,PortMelbourne,VIC3207,Australia 314–321,3rdFloor,Plot3,SplendorForum,JasolaDistrictCentre, NewDelhi–110025,India 79AnsonRoad,#06–04/06,Singapore079906 CambridgeUniversityPressispartoftheUniversityofCambridge. ItfurtherstheUniversity’smissionbydisseminatingknowledgeinthepursuitof education,learning,andresearchatthehighestinternationallevelsofexcellence. www.cambridge.org Informationonthistitle:www.cambridge.org/9781108712675 DOI:10.1017/9781108670715 ©ChristopherBell2020 Thispublicationisincopyright.Subjecttostatutoryexception andtotheprovisionsofrelevantcollectivelicensingagreements, noreproductionofanypartmaytakeplacewithoutthewritten permissionofCambridgeUniversityPress. Firstpublished2020 AcataloguerecordforthispublicationisavailablefromtheBritishLibrary. ISBN978-1-108-71267-5Paperback ISSN2397-9496(online) ISSN2514-3786(print) CambridgeUniversityPresshasnoresponsibilityforthepersistenceoraccuracyof URLsforexternalorthird-partyinternetwebsitesreferredtointhispublication anddoesnotguaranteethatanycontentonsuchwebsitesis,orwillremain, accurateorappropriate. Tibetan Demonology ElementsinReligionandViolence DOI:10.1017/9781108670715 Firstpublishedonline:June2020 ChristopherBell StetsonUniversity Authorforcorrespondence:ChristopherBell,[email protected] Abstract:TibetanDemonologydiscussestherichtaxonomyof godsanddemonsencounteredinTibet.Thesespiritsare oftenthecauseof,andexhortedfor,diverseviolentand wrathfulactivities.ThisElementconsistsoffourthematic sections.Thefirstsection,“SpiritsandtheBody,”explores oracularpossessionandspirit-inducedillnesses.The secondsection,“SpiritsandTime,”discussestheroleof godsinTibetanastrologyandritualcalendars.Thethird section,“SpiritsandSpace,”examinestherelationship betweendivinitiesandtheTibetanlandscape.Thefinal section,“SpiritsandDoctrine,”exploreshowcertain deitiesactasfierceprotectorsofreligiousandpolitical institutions. KEYWORDS:Tibet,demonology,ritual,demons,gods ©ChristopherBell2020 ISBNs:9781108712675(PB),9781108670715(OC) ISSNs:2397-9496(online),2514-3786(print) Contents Introduction 1 I Spirits and the Body 19 II Spirits and Time 36 III Spirits and Space 46 IV Spirits and Doctrine 55 Conclusion 64 Tibetan Transliteration and Translation 72 Glossary 73 Bibliography 81 TibetanDemonology 1 Introduction The Tibetan plateau may seem sparse, but it is overrun with the lives, adventures,andinfluencesofinnumerablegods and demons.Thesebeings playasignificantroleinshapingthereligioushistoryofTibetandcontinueto haveastrongpresenceinthedailypracticesandworshipofTibetans.Such entities are elicited in every facet of Tibetan cultural history. If a king is oppressingBuddhism,asinthecaseofLangDarmaintheninthcentury,heis believed to be possessed by a demon, and thus must be subjugated (i.e., assassinated). Conversely, the Tibetan Buddhist kings were believed to be possessedbydemonsbypractitionersofBön,whowerebeingpersecutedin theseventhandeighthcenturies.TheTibetanpeoplebelievethemselvestobe descendedfromgodsanddemonsfromvariousheavenlyrealms,aswellas fromemanationsofthebodhisattvasAvalokite´svaraandTa¯ra¯.TheTibetan landscapeisthoughttobeteemingwithspirits,whichistheexplanationgiven for the plateau’s harsh environment. The very land is said to be a giant recliningdemonesswhowassubjugatedbytemplesconstructedbythefirst TibetanBuddhistking,SongtsenGampo(557/617–650).Apopularnarrative tropeinTibetanritualandmythicliteratureisoftheeighth-centurytantric masterPadmasambhavaexorcisingandconvertingindigenousspiritsofthe land to Buddhism, often through destructive means. Tibetan medical texts describethevariousdemonicspeciesthatcausenumerouskindsofailments, and how to expel them in the process of healing. To this day, gods and demonsplayastrongpragmaticroleinthedailyandannualritualsofboth BuddhistandBön,layandmonastic,communities. A common thread in these various interactions with Tibetan spirits is that they are generally capricious and violent. They are often blamed for illnesses,consideredharbingersofmisfortuneorkarmicconsequences,and can even kill as an act of retribution or by stealing an individual’s soul. Anyone can fall victim to such violence, but it can also be quelled, harnessed, or directed by ritual specialists, and even interpreted toward soteriologicalends.PartofcontainingorchannelingtheviolenceofTibetan gods and spirits requires identifying and categorizing them in relation to oneanother.Thisisnoeasytask.Tibetanshaveatbestdevelopedloosely systematic spirit typologies and ontologies in an attempt to cope with the 2 ReligionandViolence dizzying assortment of nonhuman agents,1 drawing from both Indian and indigenoustaxonomies.Morespecifically,distinctTibetanreligiouslineages and even individual masters have developed their own pantheons of divi- nities.Incollectedworksandmonasticritualcatalogs,thesepantheonsevince ahierarchyrangingfromenlightenedbeingsandtantricdeitiesemulatedto achieve enlightenment, to guardian deities converted to Buddhism and entreated for protection, and finally to local demonic beings warded off with apotropaic rites. This spectrum of nonhuman beings also makes it difficult to establish clear boundaries between transcendent beings that fit morecomfortablyunderthelabelofsoteriologicaldivinitiesandthosespirits betterclassifiedunderdemonology.Theproblemisfurtherexacerbatedby manysuchbeingshavingoncebeenlivinghistoricalfigures,andbyseveral spirittermsreferencingthedivineoriginsofpastTibetankings.2 Theterm“demon”hasbecomepopularinthesecondaryliteraturethatrefers to these beings, given their general penchant for pernicious activity. This is problematic because of the linguistic difficulty inherent in representing these variousspiritclasseswithlimitedEnglishvocabulary.WhileEnglishhasone overarchingtermfordemons,therearenumerouskindsofnonhumanagents that exist in Tibet, possessing vastly different attributes and qualities both beneficentandmalevolent.Therehasbeenmuchscholarlydebateontheutility of“demon”inGreek,Egyptian,Israelite,andearlyChristianreligiouscontexts. InhisexplorationoftheoriginalGreektermdaimonanditslaterRomanusages, Jonathan Z. Smith understands demons as ultimately liminal beings and the demonic as a locative and relational category that helps define boundaries. Throughritualactionthe“demonis‘placed’bybeingnamed,entrappedand removedtoitsproperrealm(e.g.exorcism)orredirectedtoa‘proper’goal(i.e. tosomewhereorsomeoneelse,asinso-called‘hostile’magic).”3Inhisworkon Tibetanspirits,CameronBaileyusestheGreekterminhopesofrecapturingits originalbreadthofusage,thoughheacknowledgesthatitdoesnotcompletely 1 Iusethetermnonhumantorefertothesespiritsandtheiractivitiesratherthantheetic term“supernatural.”Tibetansbelievethatthesebeingsareasmuchapartofthe worldashumansare,andarenotthoughttotranscendnaturebuttoexistwithinit. 2 SeeKarmay2003,pp.69,71,andKarmay1998b,pp.294–305. 3 Smith1978,pp.428–429. Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Universite de Montreal, on 08 Jun 2021 at 02:23:41, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108670715 TibetanDemonology 3 mapontotheIndo-Tibetancontext.4Othershaveattemptedtorecognizethe individualityofthesediversespirittypesbyusingEuropeannonhumantermi- nology.Forinstance,thespirittypecalledtsenhasbeentranslatedas“furies,” whilesinpospiritshavebeencalled“orcs,”“ogres,”and“gnomes.”5Whileitis admirabletousedistincttermsforeachspirit,theseeticlabelsalsocarryspecific culturalconnotationsandconveycharacteristicsthatarenottruetotheoriginal Tibetan concepts. A sinpo looks very different from the popular images of gnomes. Due to the various limitations of the above attempts at translating individualspirittypes,itisultimatelybesttorenderthemphonetically.While initiallycumbersome,thismethodhasthebenefitofusingemicterminologyfor suchdistinctindigenousconcepts.Whendiscussingthesebeings,Icontinueto usetheterm“demon,”thoughmorewhenreferringtocertainTibetanspirits whoareconsideredespeciallyviolentandharmfulinnature.Iusethebroader term“spirit”morefrequently,whichspeakstotheoriginalnatureofmanyof thesebeingsastherestlessspiritsofpastindividuals. ThegoalofthisElementistoactasanintroductiontoTibetandemonol- ogy, providing a brief overview of its primary structures, classifications, content, and scholarship, especially as they pertain to various kinds of violence, so that the informed and interested reader can explore deeper avenues of this robust topic. With a field of inquiry that could easily fill multiple volumes, let alone a short one like this, the focus of this work is inevitably on taxonomy, categorization, and summary. Nevertheless, it is important to be cognizant of the greater complexities and multivocalities hiding beneath and behind the illusory order presented. In his extensive exploration of Japanese pantheons – or what he more accurately describes as “polytheons”6 – Bernard Faure discusses the pitfalls of essentializing narrativeswhilerecognizingtheneedtooccasionallyfallbackonaccessible language for the sake of expediency. In describing Japanese divinities and theirrelationtothehumancommunitiesinwhichtheyarefound,Fauredraws ontheactor–networktheorydevelopedbyBrunoLatour,MichelCallon,and 4 Bailey2012,pp.11–12. 5 ThesedefinitionscanbefoundintheRangjungYesheTibetan-EnglishDictionaryof BuddhistCulture,nowsearchableonline;seeRangjungYesheWiki2018. 6 SeeFaure2016,p.13. Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Universite de Montreal, on 08 Jun 2021 at 02:23:41, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108670715 4 ReligionandViolence John Law. The notion of actor–network emphasizes the relationships betweenhumanandnonhumanactorscreatingconstantlyshiftingconstella- tionsofstrategicinteractionandintersection.Assuch,godsanddemonsare activeagentsasmuchashumansare,signifyingequallyimportantnodesin a larger network. Faure describes the Japanese gods succinctly in their capacitytoactandchangeacrosspersonalandsocialcontexts: The gods are multilevel, kaleidoscopic phenomena (some wouldsaynoumenaandnumina):theyexistbothatthelevel ofindividualbeliefandatthatofcollectiverepresentations. Atthelevelofsociety,theyrepresentlargerforces,institu- tions, or groups, which are often in conflict: temples, shrines, lineages, palaces, courtiers, warriors, itinerant priestsandartists,Yin-YangMasters,andsoon.7 Withsomevariation,thisdescriptioncouldapplytothemultivalentandoften convoluted interactions between humans and nonhumans in the Tibetan milieu. Regardless, the following organization and taxonomic descriptions are meant to offer a limited but necessary demonological grammar upon whichdeeperreflectionandscholarlyexplorationcanadvance. Tibetan Demonologies Thedifficultiesandcaveatsoftranslationandorganizationaside,attemptingto delimit and consolidate Tibetan demonology is still a valuable enterprise. JonathanZ.Smithnotesthattaxonomycanhelptoclarifytheshiftingperspec- tivesofthedemonic–whichhecallschaoticandprotean–thatnonethelessare presented in seemingly orderedsystems within a culture (orcultures) across time and between regions. His observation that devotees themselves are “obsessed”withmakingdistinctionsandcategoriescancertainlybeobserved intheexamplesbelow.8AsRitaLucarelliexplains,theuseof“demonology”as astartingpointforexploration,aswellasacomparativeexercise,is“usefulin order to give a descriptive basis to analysis, stimulating issues of definition, 7 Faure2016,p.14. 8 SeeSmith1978,pp.437–438.Iuse“devotee”inplaceofthenowobsoleteand offensive“primitive”thatSmithuses,though,heseemstohavebeenawareofits negativeshiftinconnotationatthetime.
The list of books you might like
