LAMAISM. – It is the Buddhism of the "great vehicle" (mahāyāna), in the particular ritual form that it has assumed in Tibet. The name derives from the word *bla-ma* (pron. lama), master, which properly belongs only to monks of the highest rank.
SUMMARY:
I. Doctrine
II. Worship
III. History
IV. Present situation.Like other religions of Asia, Lamaism has a doctrinal aspect and a popular one, the former less known, the latter often described by European travelers.
I. DOCTRINE
The theoretical basis of Lamaism is Mahāyāna Buddhism, as it developed in India in the first centuries of the common era; more precisely, Lamaism is based on a particular form of it, the Vajrayāna or Tantrism. The Vajrayāna (adamantine vehicle) is Buddhist gnosis. From Mahāyāna it accepts all the philosophical foundations and especially the postulate of the insubstantiality of all things (*śūnyatā*); but it is hostile to philosophical knowledge and centers around mystical intuition (*prajñā*). This is reserved for initiates alone, regenerated through mystical baptism. The *prajñā*, as a symbol, is then transformed into an almost divine concept, practically into a *śakti*, or active principle of the divinity. The mystical process and *prajñā* itself are symbolically represented by the mystical formula (*mantra* or *dhāranī*), whose sounds are exalted until they themselves become a divinity. Another symbolic representation is the *mudrā*, or mystical position of the fingers and hands. Finally, both as a theoretical representation and as a practical aid to intuition, the Vajrayāna makes extensive use of the *mandala*, a mystical diagram of the divinity and at the same time of the psychic processes that lead to it, symbolizing eternal becoming in the macrocosm and microcosm. All these expressions and symbols are systematized in an immense series of liturgies (*śādhana*), practical methods for realizing, according to the various schools, the divinity in the soul of the mystic.The Vajrayāna and its *tantras* also have a pronounced sexual aspect, inasmuch as copulation, as a ritual ceremony according to certain rhythms and as an iconographic representation (Tibetan *yab-yum*, "father-mother"), symbolizes the union between the divinity and its contingent manifestation (*śakti*), between knowledge (*prajñā*) and the means to obtain it (*upāya*), between the mystic and the psychic forces he exerts. The boundary between mysticism and magic is then rather vague, and one passes insensibly from one to the other; some tantric liturgies have a lofty mystical meaning, others are pure and simple magic, and sometimes black magic. Hence the great success of the *Vajrayāna* among the lower classes. The texts of the *Vajrayāna* tend, in fact, to explain to the adept the ways to obtain knowledge (*vidyā*), a word that has the technical meaning of knowledge of the power of formulas and how to use them. The ideal of the *Vajrayāna* is not so much that Mahāyānic ideal of the *bodhisattva*, that is, the enlightened one who renounces entering *nirvāṇa* in order to lead men to salvation through preaching; it is rather the *siddha*, that is, the sage who through mystical practice has attained *siddhi*, supreme realization in its transcendental and earthly aspects. To reach this goal through contemplation (*samādhi*), the technique of *yoga* is used, even in its most violent form (*haṭhayoga*). On the one hand, it serves to achieve concentration and mystical unity between macrocosm and microcosm; on the other, it aims to obtain physical faculties superior to the ordinary, such as *guru-mo* (pron. *tummō*), that is, hyperthermia; *groh-jug* (pron. *dronggjūk*), which is the transfer of one's own vital principle and personality to a corpse, vivifying it; *pōra* (pron. *phovā*), that is, predetermination of one's rebirth; and others besides. So that *siddhi* often sinks to a mere concept of magical power.
At the center of the Vajrayānic (and Mahāyānic) pantheon stand the five Buddhas (*pañcatathāgata*): Vairocana, Akṣobhya, Ratnasambhava, Amitābha, Amoghasiddhi, who are hypostases of the one primordial Buddha (Ādibuddha); this is an abstract conception, having nothing to do with the historical Buddha. Of lesser doctrinal importance than the five Buddhas, but of much greater prominence in worship, are some of the *bodhisattvas*, especially Mañjuśrī and Avalokiteśvara. Higher in rank is Mañjuśrī, personification and protector of transcendent consciousness. But much more popular than he is Avalokiteśvara (Tibetan: *s’Yan-ras-gzigs*, pron. *Ceneris*), the *bodhisattva* who symbolizes one of the most human acts of the Buddha, that of looking with compassion (*vilokayati*) upon creatures; he is the personification of mercy, and is the tutelary god who protects Tibet, where he is incarnated in the Dalai Lama.
II. WORSHIP
The popular aspect of Lamaism is partly conditioned by its religious substratum. Before being converted to Buddhism, the religion of Tibet was the Bon (q.v.), a primitive animism originally very akin to Siberian shamanism; today, as a still living religion especially in eastern Tibet and among the Mo-so, it is deeply influenced and transformed by Lamaism itself. Buddhism met with strong resistance from the Bon, usually entrenched in the Tibetan aristocracy, which constituted its priestly class; and it did not succeed in overcoming it except by compromising with it, admitting into its own pantheon a certain number of Bon-po deities and accepting some of its cosmogonic ideas. In addition to the Bon, some Iranian and Central Asian influences also penetrated the Vajrayāna, which by its very nature is well suited to this form of syncretism. Thus, for example, there entered the Lamaist pantheon *dPe-har* (pron. *Pehār*), a tribal god of the northeast, who retained his semi-demonic qualities and who is now incarnated in the *cōs-skyōn* (pron. *ciōkōng*), protector of the law, the official oracle of the Tibetan state, residing at *gNasc’uṅ* (pron. *Necūṅg*) near Lhasa. Thus entered Beg-tse, a warlike deity armed with a sword and clad in armor, imported from Mongolia and become for the *dGe-lugs-pa* one of the principal defenders of the doctrine. It must be noted, however, that while the pantheon continued to be enriched with ever new deities, the fundamental bases of the doctrine remained intact and untouched by external influences.Lamaist worship is complex and sumptuous. In the great temples, populated by countless statues arranged according to rigidly fixed iconographic schemes, worship takes place in great collective ceremonies, with choral and individual prayers, offerings (never bloody), blessings. In the villages, local deities of Bon-po origin continue to be worshipped, the *sū-bdag* (pron. *sadāk*) and the *btsan* (pron. *tzen*), deities almost always malignant, barely tinged with a thin veneer of Lamaism.
III. HISTORY
The historical vicissitudes of Lamaism begin with the very introduction of Buddhism into Tibet. A first contact occurred with King Srohbsan-sgam-po (pron. *Songtzen-gampō*; ca. 620-49). The introduction of Buddhism as the state religion, however, took place only under King K’ri-sroh-ldebsan (pron. *Thi-song-de-tzen*; 755-97), under whom began the assiduous work of translating sacred texts from Sanskrit into Tibetan, in collaboration between Indian masters (*paṇḍita*) and Tibetan translators (*lo-tsā-ba*). It is the period that the Tibetans call the "earlier propagation" (*sīa-dar*, pron. *ngadār*). The resistance of the Bon was very strong, indeed so much so that after the reign of the bigoted Buddhist king Ral-pa-can (pron. *Ralpačen*), there was a furious reaction under King gLah-dar-ma (pron. *Langdārma*; 836-41).Buddhism was systematically persecuted and practically became extinct in Tibet, with the dispersal and exile of the monastic communities that formed its core. After the assassination of the King and the disintegration of the monarchy, the surviving Buddhist strongholds barely endured for about a century. Then, beginning with Klu-mes (pron. Lumè, early 11th century), followed by Rin-c’en-bzañ-po (pron. Rincen-sangpō; 958–1055) and the great Indian master Atīśa (d. 1054), a near *ex-novo* foundation of the monastic community in Tibet was established on somewhat different bases. This is the *propagation posteriore* (*p’yī-dar*, pron. cidār), which resulted in the definitive victory of Buddhism and the defeat of Bon, now reduced to small communities in the marginal regions of Tibet.
This entire period (11th–14th centuries) is marked by a great flourishing of spiritual life, the founding of most of the Lamaist sects, and the translation of the greater part of the canon. In the second half of the 13th century, the abbots of Sa-skyā (pron. Sākia) gained great influence at the court of Kublai Khan and his successors, obtaining the grant of temporal dominion over central Tibet. This first theocracy was short-lived, but from then on dates the intervention of the Lamaist sects in Tibetan politics and their growing temporal influence. Meanwhile, the doctrinal corpus was fixed in its final form when Bu-ston (pron. Putön; 1290–1364) revised and reorganized the previous collections, producing the two great canonical compilations that exist today: the *bKa'-gyur* (pron. Kanghür), “translations of revealed texts,” in 108 volumes; and the *bTan'-gyur* (pron. Tanghür), “translations of commentaries,” in 220 volumes. The theoretical foundations were thus beyond dispute; yet the common tantric substratum of all the older sects led to a severe relaxation of monastic discipline, drained of all content by the sometimes monstrous symbolism of tantric practices. Hence arose the need for reform, which was carried out by Tsoh-k’a-pa (pron. Tsong-khapà; 1357–1419). His sect, the *dGe-lug-pa* (pron. Ghelu kpà), ascended very slowly and amid opposition. For a long time it was merely one among several Tibetan schools, sometimes successfully opposed by its older rivals. Its superiority lay in its strict disciplinary organization and in the theory of incarnation, which established an absolute hierarchical continuity: the great leaders, especially the abbots of ’Bras-spuñs (pron. Drepüng) and of bKra-sìlhun-po (pron. Tascilhùnpo), are incarnations, i.e., phenomenal bodies (*nirmanakāya*, Tibetan *sprul-sku*, pron. tulku) of one of the Buddhas or bodhisattvas, who, however, remain in their celestial seats with their transcendent body (*dharmakāya*, Tibetan *c’os-sku*, pron. ciòku). The incarnates therefore do not die but merely change bodies when old age or illness wears the present one out, assuming that of a newborn child. This mode of succession was already adopted in the course of the 15th century for the abbot of ’Bras-spuñs, who later became known to the Mongols and hence to Europeans under the title of Dalai-Lama (lama-ocean; *dalai* is the Mongolian equivalent of *rgya-mts’o*, pron. ghiamtòz, which is the final element in all the names of the Dalai Lamas; the Tibetan title is instead *rGyal-ba Rin-po-c’e*, pron. Ghielvà Rimpocè). The rise and definitive victory of the *dGe-lug-pa*, with the aid of the secular arm of the Khoshot Khans (1642), belongs to the history of Tibet. Shortly after this victory, the fifth Dalai-Lama, Nag-dban-blo-bzán-rgyva-mts’o (pron. Ngawáng-lopsáng-ghiamtòz; 1617–82), recognized as the incarnation of the Buddha Amitābha and as the second-ranking dignitary of the sect the abbot of bKra-sìlhun-po, known to Europeans under the title of Tashi-Lama, from the name of his monastery, while the Tibetan title is *Pan-c’en Rin-po-c’e* (pron. Pancèn Rimpocè); in 1728 the Tashi-Lama also received a small temporal domain from the Chinese emperor. Thus 1642 saw the transformation of Tibet into a theocratic state dominated by the *dGe-lug-pa* sect. The subsequent history of [Tibetan] Buddhism is almost exclusively political, since after Tsoh-k’a-pa and his commentators there was no further doctrinal development, only a process of clarification and systematization.
Limited for a long time to Tibet, [Tibetan] Buddhism later took root beyond its borders. The protection granted by the Chinese emperors of the Yuan dynasty to the abbot of Sa-skyā led to some diffusion of Buddhism among the Mongols, especially those settled in China. With the expulsion of the Yuán (1368), Buddhism disappeared from China and languished almost to extinction in Mongolia as well. Its revival was largely due to political motives: to secure the support of Mongol princes in his bitter struggle within Tibet, the third Dalai-Lama, bSod-nams-rgyva-mts’o (pron. Sönam-ghiamtòz; 1543–88), traveled to Mongolia, where he succeeded in converting the leading Mongol chiefs and died there. His successor was the son of a Mongol chief. Thus Mongolia was definitively won over to the *dGe-lug-pa*. Mongolian Buddhism differs in no way from the Tibetan. The most learned Mongol lamas receive their theoretical training in Tibetan monasteries, and there has never been the slightest doctrinal deviation. The *bKa’-gyur* and *bTan’-gyur* have been translated into Mongolian, giving rise to a considerable literature in that language. At the head of Mongolian Buddhism stood the incarnate of Urga, the *rje-btsun Dam-pa* (pron. Getsun-dampà), in Mongolian *Maidari Qutqutu*, along with other minor incarnates. Not long afterward, Buddhism spread also to the Buryats of eastern Siberia and to the Kalmyks of the Volga.
The first Manchu emperors of the Qing dynasty promoted Buddhism, chiefly for political reasons. Emperor Yung-cheng (1722–35) converted into a convent (Yung-hò kung) the palace in which he had lived before ascending the throne. The Yung-hò kung became the principal one among the numerous Lamaist monasteries of Peking and Jehol. The capital became a center of Lamaist life; there resided numerous incarnates, e.g., the lCañ-skyà (pron. Ciàngkia) Qutqutu and the T’u-kuan Qutqutu, and there were printed in fine editions the *bKa’-gyur* and *bTan’-gyur*. Yet in China Buddhism remained always the religion of foreign circles connected with the court and never penetrated the mass of the Chinese people. From Peking attempts were made to introduce Buddhism into Manchuria. The *bKa’-gyur* was translated into Manchu, but the attempt was not carried through to completion and had no practical outcome.
IV. THE PRESENT SITUATION
The Buddhism that exists today is divided into various sects, which are commonly grouped into two broad divisions: a) the “red sects,” i.e., those preceding the reform of Tsoh-k’a-pa; b) the “yellow sect,” namely the *dGe-lug-pa*. This distinction arises from the fact that, although the liturgical vestments used in religious ceremonies are uniformly dark yellow for all, the former employ a red hat and the latter a yellow one. The red sects are found almost exclusively in Tibet; the principal ones are:1) The Rñin-ma-pa (pron. Gningmapà), that is, the “ancients,” descendants of Padmasambhava. They are the last remnant of the “earlier propagation,” and practice a Tantric Buddhism more contaminated than any other by Bon-po beliefs. Magical practices hold great importance among them. The monks may marry.
2) The bKa’-gdams-pa (pron. Kadampà), the first great school of the “later propagation,” descendants of Atiśa. Today they have almost disappeared, having been absorbed into the dGe-lugs-pa form that emerged from their midst.
3) The bKa’-brgyud-pa (pron. Kaghiatpà), descendants of Mar-pa (1012–53); they are characterized by the particular importance they attribute to Haṭhayoga and to the most severe ascetic practices.
4) The ’Brug-pa (pron. Drukpà), descended from Glin-ras-pa (pron. Lingrepà; 1122–88); they are no more than a branch of the bKa’-brgyud-pa, of little religious interest and politically insignificant, constituting the dominant sect in Bhutan; up to a century ago they were also dominant in Ladakh.
5) The Sa-skya-pa (pron. Sakiapà), descended from ’K’on dKon-mchog (pron. Khön Koncö, 1034–1102), enjoyed, as has been said, great political importance. Their abbot, still temporal lord of a small territory, is hereditary and therefore must marry. The sect has its own system of meditation, called lam-’bras (pron. landré), “the path and the fruit.”
The Yellow Sect or dGe-lugs-pa is dominant in Tibet and is the only one recognized in the Lamaist territories outside Tibet. The reform of Tsoṅ-k’a-pa constituted a return to tradition. In doctrinal matters, he restored to prominence the Mahāyānic ideal of the bodhisattva, in preference to the Tantric ideal of the siddha. Above all, however, he was a restorer of monastic discipline, which had become so relaxed in the Red Sects. The dGe-lugs-pa must observe celibacy and abstain from intoxicating liquors and meat; the life of the monasteries is conducted strictly according to ancient rules. The “curriculum” of studies is organized with a wise gradation of texts and rigid discipline; students may obtain various academic degrees. One of the most striking features of the sect are the enormous monastery-universities of ’Bras-spuṅs, Se-ra, dGa’-ldan (pron. Gadèn), and bKra-śis-lhun-po, inhabited by thousands upon thousands of learned lamas and simple monks (gra-ga, pron. trapà); previously, however, the monasteries (dgon-pa, pron. gompà, “solitude”) were what their name itself indicated: hermitages of a type, one might say today, Camaldolese. Magical practices are forbidden, and generally the Tantric and Yogic aspect of Lamaism is kept very much in the background. Instead, great emphasis is placed on dialectics, and formal logic is assiduously studied and practiced in public disputations. The principal text of the sect is the Lam-rim chen-mo of Tsoṅ-k’a-pa, a true Summa of Lamaist doctrine, of an intelligently eclectic character.
As a practiced religion, Lamaism is today in a phase of marked decline. It still dominates in Tibet, Bhutan, and some Indian territories (Sikkim, Ladakh, Spiti, Kunawar, Lahoul). In Outer Mongolia, which for a time was a theocratic state under the last rJe-btsun Dam-pa from 1912 to 1924, the Lamaist Church was gradually weakened and stripped of authority by the prevailing communism. During the last war hundreds of monasteries were abolished and thousands of monks reduced to the lay state; and today Mongolian Lamaism seems headed for dissolution. In Inner Mongolia, which remains subject to China, this process is still in its early stages, but the trend is the same; and this holds true also for the border regions between Tibet and western China. In Peking, Lamaism was already in noticeable decline after the fall of the empire; this decline has grown ever more pronounced today. The Lamaism of the Kalmyks of the Volga and the Buryats of Siberia suffered greatly under the anti-religious policy of the USSR from the Revolution until 1942; it is not possible to say whether the partial change in this policy during and after the last war may have favored the revival of religious life in the Transbaikalian monasteries, once so flourishing under the Tsarist regime. “Vedi tav. L1.