Particularly in the early days of exile, a number of claims were made about the centrality of the practice of Dorje Shugden in Geluk practice, in particular, that the deity was the main protector of the Geluk.

This claim seems to be strongly linked to a doctrine connected with the 19th and 20th century charismatic Geluk teacher Phabongkha Rinpoche Dechen Nyingpo, and quite possibly his main teacher Tagphu Dorje Chang who emphasised “one lama, one personal meditation deity, and one protector” as being the essence of Geluk practice. It will therefore be looked at in that context.

One Protector

Quite clearly, as the Geluk tradition was founded by Je Tsongkhapa in the early 15th century and the non-canonical protector deity Dorje Shugden did not manifest until 1657, that deity’s practice could not have been the main protector practice of the Geluk for the first 250 years of the tradition.

The main protectors of the tradition until then, and the plural is important here, seem to have been the following:

• The canonical supramundane protector Karmaraja, locatable in the Yamantaka tantra cycle of the ‘father’ subdivision of the peerless yoga tantras and within that in the practices of Vajrabhairava;
• The canonical supramundane protector Six-Armed Mahakala, locatable in the ‘Vajra Tent’ tantra text in the Heruka cycle of the ‘mother’ subdivision of the peerless yoga tantra division;
• The canonical supramundane deity Vaishravana in the aspect of riding a lion and holding an umbrella in his right hand and a jewel spitting mongoose in his left.
• Later, but still before the appearance of the deity Dorje Shugden, the canonical supramundane deity Palden Lhamo Magzor Gyalmo became a protector of the Geluk. A clear date for this has not yet been established but may well turn out to be after the vision of the 2nd Dalai Lama, where Guru Rinpoche Padmasambhava instructed him to take Palden Lhamo as a personal protector. Certainly by the late 17th and early 18th century, her practice was well established across the Geluk. What is important to note here is that all these are supramundane and that they are shared in common with the other Sarma traditions of Sakya and Kagyu.

None is exclusive to the Geluk. From the surviving collected writings of great teachers in the Geluk tradition, there is documentary evidence of continued interest in the practice of all these deities as dharma protectors right up until the present day.

Some of them also have functions as institutional protectors. For example, Palden Lhamo is the chief protector deity for Ganden Jangtse college and the practice of Palden Lhamo is a chief practice of the protector chapel for Drepung Lhachi, i.e. the totality of that monastery.

Apart from a few, often oblique references criticising the practice by certain lamas, the first surviving documentary evidence we have of the widespread worship of Dorje Shugden in the Geluk comes from the first half of the 20th century and seems due to the activities of Phabongkha Rinpoche Dechen Nyingpo.

The 3rd Trijang Rinpoche was collating material in his Labrang before exile, and managed to reconstitute some of his collection in exile, where he wrote quite extensively on the practice of Dorje Shugden. It may be that in the library of his Labrang in Ganden there are original dateable documents from before Phabongkhapa.

Much of the 3rd Trijang’s interesting work on Dorje Shugden is the collation of oral tradition around the practice of the deity. The weight of evidence so far available suggests that the practice of Dorje Shugden as either a worldly oath-bound protector or as an emanation of a fully enlightened being was mainly a private protector practice, with few institutions in the Geluk monasteries doing this as a regular practice.

One obvious example until very recently was the Bomra regional house of Sera Mey college. There were Dorje Shugden shrines in both Sera and Ganden monasteries in old Tibet and in exile, it seems that a three dimensional model of his mandala house had been built at Ganden.

But such is the loss of documentation due to the ravages of the cultural revolution that it is not at all clear how long Dorje Shugden shrines had been established in those monasteries in old Tibet or how well patronised they were in terms of numbers. Both clearly had wealthy sponsors but that does not necessarily equate to numbers.

The evidence that the practice of Dorje Shugden was the main protector of the Geluk simply does not stack up. It seems that for the Geluk as a whole and as an institution, the three then four canonical supramundane deities from the early days have remained the main dharma protectors of the tradition.

One Personal Deity

The one personal deity claimed as central for the Geluk is the practice of the aspect of Vajrayogini that comes through Naropa, known as ‘Naro Khacho’. The practice of Vajrayogini cannot be accessed except through an initiation into a Heruka deity.

Nowadays in Tibetan Buddhism, this seems mainly to be through the system of the five deity Heruka mandala in the tradition of Tilbupa. Looking at the tantra masters in the prayers to the lineage masters of this Vajrayogini lineage produced in the 19th and 20th centuries before coming into exile, Je Tsongkhapa is noticeable by his absence and it would seem that the practice came into the Geluk from the Sakya not through Tsongkhapa.

The issue of who does and who does not get included in lineage prayers is in itself a topic of great interest as until recently it was extremely unlikely that any given tantra practitioner of note really only had one master in the practice. 

More likely he would have studied different aspects of the practice and received different transmissions and oral instructions connected with the practice from a number of tantra masters. This scattering of transmission lineages between teachers is often deliberate, being one way to ensure that transmissions are not severed by untimely death of the only holder.

If we look at the surviving documentary evidence of Tsonghapa’s collected works, it would seem that Je Tsongkhapa had a deep interest in the 32 deity Akshobhyavajra Guhyasamaja tantra system, the 13 deity Vajrabhairava system and the 62 deity Heruka Cakrasamvara system and made these three practices the core of Geluk tantra practice.

Again the plural is significant. It was of these three mandalas that Tsongkhapa had three dimensional models made in a special temple in Ganden, the seat of his tradition. It is these three practices that constitute the core of the ritual training in the two surviving tantra colleges of Gyu Toh and Gyu Med and constituted the core of the tradition at Sey Gyu dratsang at Sey in the Tsang province of old Tibet.

The transmission lineage of this last practice has been badly damaged and it is not clear whether it can be reestablished fully either in exile or in Tibet. But the other two tantric colleges have been successfully reestablished and continue to ensure the survival of these key tantra practices within the Geluk.

In the Geluk it is the recitation of these practices by the tantric monks from these two colleges that is considered the best way to consecrate a temple. Of the three tantras traditionally Guhyasamaja is held as the main practice, Vajrabhairava as a preliminary and obstacle removing practice and the 62 deity Chakrasamvara as an enhancing practice.

Vajrayogini in the form of Naro Khacho is a branch practice off the Cakrasamvara cycle of practices. The tradition holds that if the number of core tantric practices of Je Tsongkhapa is taken as four then the practice of Kalacakra should be taken as the fourth. If it expanded to five then the practice of Mahacakra Guhya(ka)adipati should be added as the fifth.

Again the weight of the evidence seems to show that Naro Khacho Vajrayogini never was the core or sole tantric practice of the Geluk, though much admired and taken up by some individuals as their main personal meditational deity. It seems that from very early on, the main or core personal meditation deity practices of the Geluk were 32 deity Akshobhyavajra Guhyasamaja, 13 deity Vajrabhairava and 62 deity Heruka Cakrasamvara.

If you enjoyed the video, you can download it here.

Situated behind the main chapel of Jowo Buddha or the Jokhang Temple, south of the Barkhor area in Lhasa is Trode Khangsar, one of the most famous Dorje Shugden chapels in Tibet and in the world today. Built by the Great 5^th Dalai Lama at the end of the 17^th Century, this holy chapel was destroyed during the Cultural Revolution and was left abandoned until some time in the 1980s. As a registered national heritage memorial, Trode Khangsar is now under the care of the Chinese government and in 2008, the Chinese government initiated renovation works to restore this chapel to its former glory.

Currently managed by Riwo Choling Monastery, this sacred chapel is open to tourists and pilgrims. The tradition of daily pujas by the resident monks still continues to this day. This iconic chapel also serves as a monument to the Great 5^th Dalai Lama’s reverence of the protector, although this historic fact has been twisted by the present Dalai Lama’s government in support of an unreasoned ban on Dorje Shugden’s practice.

Trode Khangsar

Trode Khangsar is an eight-minute walk from the Jokhang Temple. Click to enlarge.

Chapel Interior

Trode Khangsar was originally a three-storey building with an entrance leading to the main hall. The interior of the hall has eight 10-meter wide pillars with paintings of Dorje Shugden’s previous lives, auspicious symbols and deities such as Indra and Brahma.

A mural of Buddha Shakyamuni in Trode Khangsar

Below are some of the notable murals in Trode Khangsar featuring Dorje Shugden’s previous incarnations which bear witness to the true nature of the deity which is that of a Dharma king:

• Dorje Shugden’s previous incarnations such as Manjushri, Biwarpa, Shakya Shri Bhadra, Sakya Pandita Kunga Gyeltsen, Buton Rinchen Drub, Panchen Sonam Drakpa, Sonam Yeshe Wangpo and Ngawang Sonam Geleg.
• Nechung riding a snow lion, holding a bow and arrow, arriving at Lama Tsongkhapa’s teaching.
• Nechung in the form of a young boy interrupting Lama Tsongkhapa’s teaching.

This is the original mural that depicts the incarnation lineage of Tulku Drakpa Gyeltsen

• Duldzin Drakpa Gyeltsen, one of Lama Tsongkhapa’s main disciples, telling Nechung to stop interrupting his master’s teachings.
• Duldzin Drakpa Gyeltsen promising Nechung to protect Lama Tsongkhapa’s teachings in the future.
• A pleased Lama Tsongkhapa offering Duldzin Drakpa Gyeltsen a skullcup full of nectar.
• Tulku Drakpa Gyeltsen.
• Nechung urging Tulku Drakpa Gyeltsen to fulfill his promise to arise as a Dharma Protector.

Another mural in Trode Khangsar

Several Dorje Shugden statues and paintings in Trode Khangsar are uniquely different from the usual iconography as he is depicted holding a club in his right hand instead of a sword. This matches the 5^th Dalai Lama’s vision of this Dharma Protector, which is mentioned in the prayer he composed praising Dorje Shugden’s enlightened qualities:

Robes of a monk, crown adorned with rhinoceros leather hat,
Right hand holds ornate club, left holds a human heart,
Riding various mounts such as nagas and garudas,
Who subdues the mamos of the charnel grounds, praise to you!

~ His Holiness the 5^th Dalai Lama

Another notable precious item found in Trode Khangsar is the wood printing blocks for Dorje Shugden Fulfillment Ritual text (chos skyong shugs ldan gyi bskang chog rgyas pa) by Gaden Jangtse Serkong Dorje Chang.

At the north is the room where rituals are performed while in the east and west are rooms for monks. The ritual room has a skylight, black walls and paintings of various Dharma Protectors. At the north portion of the room is a Lama Tsongkhapa statue with his two heart sons, Gyaltsab Je and Khedrub Je.

The third floor, which used to house Dorje Shugden oracles, was removed during the Cultural Revolution.

The Great 5^th Dalai Lama (1617 -1682)

Born amidst auspicious signs in 1617 to a Nyingma family, Ngawang Lobsang Gyatso was enthroned at Ganden Podrang, Drepung Monastery at the age of six. This accomplished master studied at the feet of many leading Lamas of that era such as Lingme Shapdrung Konchok Chopel, His Holiness the 4^th Panchen Lama Lobsang Chokyi Gyeltsen and Mondro Pandita. His accomplishments were legendary and he continued to be an important lineage holder for the Nyingma School.

His Holiness the Great Fifth Dalai Lama Ngawang Lobsang Gyatso

In 1638, Lobsang Gyatso received his full ordination vows from the 4^th Panchen Lama and Lingme Shapdrung Konchok Chopel. He became the first Dalai Lama to have temporal and spiritual power all over Tibet and was instrumental in unifying Tibet after the Mongol intervention. The Great 5^th Dalai Lama had a close relationship with Tulku Drakpa Gyeltsen as they shared the same teacher, and both studied and debated together. Tulku Drakpa Gyeltsen also received many teachings from the Great 5^th himself.

Both these great masters were contemporaries with many great accomplishments. But when Tulku Drakpa Gyeltsen’s fame and popularity threatened to eclipse the Dalai Lama’s, Depa Norbu, one of the Dalai Lama’s men, decided to assassinate Tulku Drakpa Gyeltsen. The Dalai Lama later discovered the truth behind Tulku Drakpa Gyeltsen’s murder by his own men and was deeply disturbed. He immediately composed an apology that was read out at Tulku Drakpa Gyeltsen’s cremation. Later, when rumors arose that Tulku Drakpa Gyeltsen had been reincarnated as Dorje Shugden, a perfidious spirit, the Dalai Lama and many other high lamas tried to bind him with various powerful rituals but none of them worked.

Many sacred statues can be seen in Trode Khangsar, and one of them is a form of Dorje Shugden that holds a club.

Eventually, the 5^th Dalai Lama concluded that Dorje Shugden is enlightened and therefore indestructible, as only enlightened beings possess this nature. Realising this, he composed a praise to Dorje Shugden and even made a statue of him with his own hands. The 5^th Dalai Lama also built Trode Khangsar as the very first chapel dedicated to Dorje Shugden.

In modern times, as part of the Dorje Shugden conflict instigated by the present Dalai Lama, the 5^th Dalai Lama’s initial mistaken view of Dorje Shugden as a dark and malicious force is often quoted to validate the Central Tibetan Administration’s (CTA) ban on the worship of this protector. Conveniently omitted is the 5^th Dalai Lama’s final realization that Dorje Shugden is in fact enlightened.

Tulku Drakpa Gyeltsen (1619 – 1656)

Recognised by His Holiness the 4^th Panchen Lama Lobsang Chokyi Gyeltsen, Tulku Drakpa Gyeltsen displayed the many signs of an extraordinary being. As a young child, he had clear visions of the enlightened beings and was able to recall his past lives and teachers, play ritual instruments and recite prayers from memory. As a matter of fact, the Panchen Lama regarded Tulku Drakpa Gyeltsen to be an emanation of Manjushri.

Tulku Drakpa Gyeltsen

At the age of just seven, he took his novice vows from the 4^th Panchen Lama, who also conferred him the empowerments, long life initiations and initiations of Dharma Protectors as Mahakala and Kalarupa. By the time he was nine, he was already giving teachings and writing insightful commentaries. He received his full ordination vows when he was 20 and just like his previous lives, he held his vinaya (monastic) vows purely and he continued to request for many teachings, transmissions and initiations. Tulku Drakpa Gyeltsen, who was known for his unlimited thirst for the Dharma, was one of the two main disciples of the 4^th Panchen Lama, the other being the Great 5^th Dalai Lama.

A contemporary of the Great 5^th, Tulku Drakpa Gyeltsen became highly respected and sought after for his extraordinary skills in disseminating the Dharma, debate and composition. His teachings were perfect and soon his reputation began to overshadow the 5^th Dalai Lama’s. As mentioned above, His Holiness’ attendant, Depa Norbu, fearing the loss of power and position, hatched a plot to assassinate this erudite great master. After several unsuccessful attempts, Depa Norbu finally managed to kill Tulku Drakpa Gyeltsen by strangling him with a khata (Tibetan ceremonial scarf). Tulku Drakpa Gyeltsen then arose as the Dharma Protector Dorje Shugden, fulfilling the promise he made lifetimes ago as Duldzin Drakpa Gyeltsen to safeguard Lama Tsongkhapa’s Middle Way teachings.

Recognition from the Chinese Emperor

This mural of Manjushri on a lion is in the main prayer hall of Trode Khangsar

During the reign of His Holiness the 11^th Dalai Lama Khedrup Gyatso, a Chinese Amban (high official) named Che Trungtang wanted to test the authenticity of Dorje Shugden. On behalf of the then Chinese Emperor Daoguang, he wrote a list of important questions to ask Dorje Shugden. He then burnt the paper with the questions in front of a Dorje Shugden image and asked for clear answers and prophecies. The next day during the trance, the oracle of Dorje Shugden not only gave advice that was very clear but his answers also matched the sequence of questions that the Chinese Amban had written earlier. This clearly illustrates the enlightened nature of Dorje Shugden, as fully enlightened beings are known to have perfect clairvoyance.

Impressed by Dorje Shugden’s accurate and clear advice, the Qing Emperor Daoguang made an offering of a pandit’s hat and officially recognized Dorje Shugden as a great Dharma protector for Buddhism. The pandit’s hat was then placed over the door of Trode Khangsar in a grand ceremony attended by many important officials and dignitaries including the 11^th Dalai Lama, the Chinese Amban, Reting Rinpoche, the Dorje Shugden oracle and many others.

The Significance of Trode Khangsar

Given the controversy and untruths that surround the Dorje Shugden practice after the 14^th Dalai Lama banned this protector practice in 1996, Trode Khangsar’s very existence is pivotal as a solid testament of the Great 5^th’s reverence towards this Dharma Protector and an acknowledgement of Dorje Shugden’s true enlightened nature. The fact that the 5^th Dalai Lama built a sacred chapel dedicated to Dorje Shugden completely dismantles the foundation of an illogical and undemocratic ban. This is because the basis of the 14^th Dalai Lama’s ban is that the 5^th Dalai Lama regarded Dorje Shugden as an “Oath breaking spirit born from perverse prayers…” However as we will see, this is far from the truth.

Holy Dorje Shugden statue in Trode Khangsar.

Salient points to note:

[1] During Tulku Drakpa Gyeltsen’s cremation, there were strong gusts of wind, earthquakes and hail. Thick dark smoke in the shape of a hand enveloped all of Lhasa, and famine struck the population as crops failed and cattle died. Many thought that these natural calamities were due to Dorje Shugden taking revenge as an evil spirit. But these were actually the signs of the collective heavy negative karma returning to the people for killing a holy being – Tulku Drakpa Gyeltsen.

As we have seen, the Great 5^th initially did think that Dorje Shugden was a harmful spirit, and tried without success to subdue him with many different powerful rituals. Even Mindrolling Lama, who was renowned for his ability to subdue or destroy the most harmful spirits failed. Each time Mindrolling Lama tried to bind Dorje Shugden in a fire puja, he would see Yamantaka arising in the flames. This was a clear sign that Dorje Shugden could not be destroyed, and the visions of Yamantaka further indicated Dorje Shugden’s true nature, which is in essence, Manjushri.

This statue of Dorje Shugden was commissioned by The Great Fifth Dalai Lama.

The 5^th Dalai Lama soon realized that he had made a mistake as only awakened beings are beyond any karmas and therefore cannot be destroyed. The Great 5^th then quickly rectified his error by composing a praise to Dorje Shugden, and by making statues and chapels in his honor. By these acts, the 5^th Dalai Lama made it clear that Dorje Shugden is worthy as an object of refuge and veneration.

[2] Many have claimed that Dorje Shugden is just a minor practice. However, this false allegation is refuted by the fact that Trode Khangsar is located right in the heart of Lhasa, at a prime location just behind the world famous Jokhang Temple. If Dorje Shugden was indeed a minor practice, why would the 5^th Dalai Lama build his chapel in such a prime area of Lhasa? In fact, Trode Khangsar’s very location indicates that His Holiness wanted to encourage the people to engage in Dorje Shugden’s practice by making his temple easily accessible.

[3] The Great 5^th not only built Trode Khangsar and commissioned its main Dorje Shugden statue but also composed a prayer praising his qualities. It logically follows that His Holiness had full faith in Dorje Shugden and, given his stature in the Tibetan community both spiritual and temporal, influenced the spread of Dorje Shugden’s practice for hundreds of years making it one of the most popular protector practices before the unjust ban.

[4] The 5^th Dalai Lama’s building of Trode Khangsar effectively marked the start of Dorje Shugden worship in Tibet. The chapel served and continues to serve as a place of worship for many and was a means for the people to get connected to the practice of Dorje Shugden. If Dorje Shugden is indeed a harmful spirit as the CTA claims, then it was none other than the Great 5^th who began this “demonic” practice! Clearly, the CTA’s lies are absurd as the Dalai Lamas are emanations of Chenrezig and therefore have perfect wisdom and clairvoyance. It would be ridiculous to believe that Chenrezig would make such an error and cause such harm to sentient beings.

A mural of Mahakala located at Trode Khangsar

[5] Another false charge against Dorje Shugden is that he seeks to harm the life of the 14^th Dalai Lama and that his practice sends his devotees to the lower realms. However, it is also illogical to conclude that the Great 5^th Dalai Lama, the emanation of Chenrezig the Omniscient, would build a chapel dedicated to a malicious being that would harm his future incarnation’s life. Why would the Dalai Lama, whose sole purpose is to spread the Dharma, build a temple to venerate an evil spirit that would destroy the Dharma? What’s more, the Dalai Lamas have returned in perfect human form lifetime after lifetime to continue their previous life’s work. The fact that there is a 14^th Dalai Lama today is solid proof that people who practice Dorje Shugden do not go to the lower realms and that Dorje Shugden is certainly not a demon.

[6] The walls of Trode Khangsar are painted with murals of Dorje Shugden’s previous lives and with scenes depicting the historical account of Dorje Shugden’s origin story from the time he made a promise as Duldzin Drakpa Gyeltsen to protect the precious teachings of Lama Tsongkhapa. If we were to study the murals of Dorje Shugden’s previous incarnations in Trode Khangsar, we would also notice that one of Dorje Shugden’s previous lives is none other than Manjushri, the Wisdom Buddha.

Once the mind becomes enlightened, it cannot degenerate and revert to an unenlightened state. By virtue of this fact, Dorje Shugden is definitely not a perfidious spirit but a fully awakened being, whose essence is Manjushri.

Housed at Trode Khangsar, this is an extremely rare depiction of Dorje Shugden sitting on a throne.

[7] The murals of Dorje Shugden’s past lives show that his previous incarnations encompass lamas from different traditions. For example, Sakya Pandita Kunga Gyeltsen was one of the Five Founding Fathers of the Sakya school of Tibetan Buddhism. Another of Dorje Shugden’s previous incarnations is the Shangpa Kagyu founder Khyungpo Neljor. The CTA falsely claims that Dorje Shugden’s practice is sectarian, but why would Dorje Shugden want to destroy schools of Tibetan Buddhism that he had established in his previous lives? Furthermore, Dorje Shugden is not propitiated by the Gelugpas alone but also by the Sakyas and Kagyus. There are also thangkas depicting Dorje Shugden with Sakya lamas and key Nyingma deities, further dismissing claims that Dorje Shugden is sectarian.

Based on the above and the fact that Trode Khangsar is still in existence and flourishing today, it is clear that Tibetans recognize the awakened nature of Dorje Shugden and continue to have faith in him. The citizens of the world are not fooled by the CTA’s lies and their attempts at making Dorje Shugden the scapegoat for their own failures to regain Tibet. As they say, there are three things that we cannot hide – the sun, the moon and the truth.

Book: The Temples of Lhasa

More information on Trode Khangsar can be found in this book, page 195-199.

• Hardcover: 336 pages
• Publisher: Serindia Publications; illustrated edition (November 15, 2005)
• Language: English

(From the front flap of the book)
The Temples of Lhasa is a comprehensive survey of historic Buddhist sites in the Tibetan capital of Lhasa. The study is based on the Tibet Heritage Fund’s official five-year architectural conservation project in Tibet during which the author and his team had unlimited access to the buildings studied. The documented sites span the entire known history of Tibetan Buddhist art and architecture from the 7^th to the 21^st centuries.

The book is divided into thirteen chapters, covering all the major and minor temples in historic Lhasa. These include some of Tibet’s oldest and most revered sites, such as the Lhasa Tsuklakhang and Ramoche, as well as lesser-known but highly important sites such as the Jebumgang Lhakhang, Meru Dratsang, and Meru Nyingpa. It is illustrated with numerous color plates taken over a period of roughly fifteen years from the mid-1980s to today and is augmented with rare photographs and reproductions of Tibetan paintings.

This book also provides detailed architectural drawings and maps made by the project. Each site has been completely surveyed, documented and analyzed. The history of each site has been written — often for the first time — based on source texts and survey results, as well as up-to-date technology such as carbon dating, dendrochronology, and satellite data.

Tibetan source texts and oral accounts have also been used to reconstruct the original design of the sites. Matthew Akester has contributed translations of Tibetan source texts, including excerpts from the writings of the 5^th and Thirteenth Dalai Lamas.

This documentation of Tibetan Buddhist temple buildings is the most detailed of its kind, and is the first professional study of some of Tibet’s most significant religious buildings. The comparative analysis of Tibetan Buddhist architecture covers thirteen centuries of architectural history in Tibet.

The contents page of The Temples of Lhasa. Trode Khangsar is featured from page 195 to 199. Click to enlarge.

Map from The Temples of Lhasa showing the location of Trode Khangsar (number 10). Click to enlarge.

The Temples of Lhasa, page 195. Click to enlarge.

The Temples of Lhasa, page 196. Click to enlarge.

The Temples of Lhasa, page 197. Click to enlarge.

The Temples of Lhasa, page 198. Click to enlarge.

The Temples of Lhasa, page 199. Click to enlarge.

Introduction

In a single step, one can cross the threshold of the Jokhang,¹ stepping from the bustle of the Barkhor market to the devout atmosphere inside, moving from a heady jumble of merchants, soldiers, tourists and townsfolk, of warrens and back alleys teeming with shops and the sharp cries of peddlers, to a world of monks, devotees and deities, of the heavy smell of yak butter lamps and the hushed steps of pilgrims.

Watching over this threshold, and every such space in Tibetan temples are vibrant, ferocious guardians who mount a fierce watch over entering pilgrims. Vivid and horrific, laden with imagery, symbolism, and dynamism, these guardian deities were old friends – I had seen them in temples across Asia, from my native South India to China, from the crumbling caves of the ancient Silk Road to the shrines of modern Japan.

Still, my encounter with the Tibetan guardian image was like no other: with a distinctly wrathful iconography featuring blazing eyes, brilliant colors, garlands of freshly severed heads, mythical weapons, and a furious bloodstained scowl, Tibetan guardians are singularly terrible apparitions.

Despite their prevalence in Tibetan Buddhism, guardian deities are defined by contradiction. They are at once inside and outside, sacred and mundane, demonic and divine, wrathful in a compassionate and peaceful religion. In the following pages, I will attempt to explore the complex role and function of guardians in Tibet as well as account for the paradoxes inherent in these ferocious guardians.

Guardian deities, I will argue, are agents of transformation. In the first section I define guardian deities, and illustrate a few of the complexities in their classification. I then will discuss how guardians are marginalized, and mark transitions between the profane and the sacred in both mandala and in temples. In an effort to understand the liminal identity of guardians, we look to the myth of the demoness and the Jokhang.

I hope to demonstrate that this beautiful tale describes the deep roots that contemporary Tibetan guardians have in the arcane traditions that existed before Buddhism. Finally, I will attempt to capture guardians in motion from demonic to divine by looking to the elaborate mythology in which they are embedded.

We find time and again guardians change the spatial and religious axes in which they are embedded, and are themselves transformed by this process. Like Lhasa itself, my case will revolve around the Jokhang temple, the spiritual center of Tibet. First built over 13 centuries ago by the famous king Songtsen Gampo, the Jokhang has subsequently been rebuilt numerous times.² Regardless, its art, architecture, and sculptures allow us to decode the palimpsest of Tibetan notions of guardianship. The primary text must be the fantastic guardian image – but I will draw upon a diverse array of disciplines, including anthropology, history, art history, and religious studies in order to unpack the guardian image and its supporting mythology.

We begin our journey at the antechamber of the Jokhang, where the gentle scrape of prayer blocks and soft murmur of chanting is in the air, mixing with the thick fragrance of incense from the giant brazier. Pilgrims from all corners of Tibet and beyond are gathered here, but few are looking at the giant Lokapalas, or guardians of direction, painted in brilliant color on the walls flanking the threshold. Beyond are the mystical inner chambers of the Jokhang, adorned with compassionate Buddhas and gently smiling apostles – but for a moment, at least, we shall linger at the threshold.

A Brief Orientation

The classification of guardian deities in Tibet is characterized by complexity. Both in India and in China, there are a few classes of guardians who fit neatly into categories, such as Dvarapala – guardian of the gate, Lokapala – guardian of direction, or Dharmapala – guardian of duty. On the other hand, in Tibet, there are not only several classes of guardians, but also numerous intersections between diverse representations of Tibetan guardians and protective deities.

Despite their heterogeneity, guardian deities can easily be recognized by a combination of stereotypical location and wrathful features.³ Typically, their facial features are ‘wrathful’, and it is possible to organize Tibetan deities strictly according to their demeanor. In his beautiful book, Ruthless Compassion, Robert Linrothe introduces the category of krodha- vighnantaka (in Sanskrit ‘wrathful destroyer of obstacles’),⁴ or wrathful deities.

Guardians are often wrathful, and share specific iconographical elements. In Oracles and Demons of Tibet, the classic compendium on the topic, Rene de Nebesky – Wojkowitz describes:

The wrathful protective deities are mostly described as figures possessing stout bodies, short, thick and strong limbs and many of them have several heads and a great number of hands and feet. The color of their bodies and faces is frequently compared with the characteristic hue of clouds, precious stones, etc…the mouth is contorted into an angry smile, from its corners protrude long fangs…the protruding, bloodshot eyes have an angry and staring expression and usually a third eye is visible in the middle of the forehead ⁵

These are some of the features that typify guardian deities of Tibet. Many others, such as their bright color, the furious dance on the back of a pathetic creature, and the fire that rages behind them, are consistent with their ferocity and fierceness.

However, defining guardianship based strictly on wrathful iconography is problematic as wrathfulness has a wide scope in Tibetan religion. For example, relatively high status deities such as Avalokitesvara or Manjushri might have a wrathful form just as they have a compassionate form. Linrothe organizes the relationship between wrathful deities into a single diagram.

Relative status is the key dependent variable that differentiates between the wrathful deities. Guardians are considered to be of lower status than other wrathful deities. The profane status of guardian deities often manifests itself in the placement of guardian deities: typically, guardians appear on the periphery, at thresholds, outer walls, flanking major deities, or in Gonkhangs, special protector chapels on the outer kora of temples.

There are several classes of guardian deities, such as Lokapalas, Dvarapalas, and Dharmapalas. Many of them have deep roots in India, which we shall see has great relevance in thinking about guardian deities of Tibet. The Indian guardians originated from the form of a yaksa,⁶ a curious tutelary deity that predated Vedic culture. Guardian deities followed the trajectory of Buddhism as it spread to the Kushans (in present-day Afghanistan), across the expansive Silk Road and into China during the first millennium.⁷

Though a developed conception of sacred space existed in China before the arrival Buddhism,⁸ there is little question that guardians arrived in their current form along with Buddhism via the Silk Road. Whether Tibetans first encountered Buddhism and its guardians upon their early ravages of central Asia, through intermittent official channels with China and India, or through a slow diffusion of ideas over the Himalayas remains unknown.

However, there can be no mistake regarding the transformation that Buddhism effected upon Tibet.⁹ Buddhist protective deities were central players in this fundamental societal change. As in China, the guardians of Tibet arrived with Buddhism. However, I hope to demonstrate that the source of the current guardian image originates in the dialogue between Buddhism and indigenous Tibetan tradition.

At the Threshold

In the Indian view, the threshold is a singular location, in suspension between inside and outside, as illustrated by the myth of Narasimhan, the fifth avatar of Vishnu. According to the myth, the king Hryanakasyipu meditated for several years in order to win the gods’ favor, and thereby everlasting life.

The gods refused to grant him immortality; instead, they restricted the conditions on his death. He could not be killed inside or outside, during day or night, by man or beast, or by weapon or natural causes. On the strength of these boons, Hryanakasyipu became arrogant and fearlessly terrorized his subjects.

In response to the intense prayer of a young devotee, Vishnu returns to earth in the form of a man-lion, Narasimhan in order to kill the tyrannical king. Narasimhan cleverly takes Hryanakasyipu to the threshold at twilight, and kills him with his nails.

The crux of the story is that Narasimhan is only able evade all the restrictions on the circumstances on Hryanakasyipu’s death by looking in between the conventions of night and day, man and animal, weapon and hand, as well as inside and outside. The threshold, the site at which Narasihman kills Hryanakasyipu, is an interstitial place.¹⁰

Though this story is Indian, it reflects a conception of the threshold that is consistent in temples across Asia. As Bernard Faure observes, from a Chinese viewpoint of space and place, “The threshold in many local traditions, is a dangerous place, a focal point where space inverts…and Turner, among others, has stressed that liminal states and individuals are both ambiguous and dangerous.”¹¹

In Tibet, whose temples and monasteries are, in part, inspired by both their Indian and Chinese counterparts,¹² the threshold is a definitively liminal place. The placement of guardian deities at the threshold, then, is indicative of their peripheral status as well as their ambivalence.

Guardians are also peripheral in mandala, the ‘sacred circles’ which are central to Esoteric (or Tantric) Buddhism.¹³ As a ‘geometric projection of the world reduced to an essential pattern’,¹⁴ mandalas portray everything from the sweep of life and time to stylized line patterns. mandalas have diverse potential psychological and philosophical functions, and as renderings of Buddhist cosmos, offer deep insight on guardianship.

For instance, guardians, typically Lokapalas, often appear in the outer rings of the concentric circles of mandala in their official capacity, keeping watch over the cardinal directions. Even mandalas with no visible guardians retain the idea of a protected space: for example, the symbolic mandalas composed of concentric geometry, a design element is often alludes to guardians.

Common representations include changes in color, or renderings of a charnel ground.¹⁵ Furthermore, the fabled abodes of many guardian deities include the hallmark features of mandala. The Lokapala Vaisravana lives “In the middle of the four lakes lying in the four cardinal points.”¹⁶ Dorje Shugden and is “surrounded by a protective circle of meteoric iron.”¹⁷ Both contain direct references to the directional matrix contained in mandalas, and the carving out of a protected circle.

At their heart, mandalas are protective structures. For instance, the traveling camps and the war camps of Tibet are arranged in mandalaic patterns. For instance, in Stein’s Tibetan Civilization, it is possible to glimpse the Dalai Lama’s traveling camp, strikingly reminiscent of mandala. The similarity is no coincidence: judging from Stein’s account, early Tibetan camps are:

clearly comprised of concentric enclosures, for we are told of three successive gateways at a hundred paces distance from on another, guarded by soldiers and sorcerers or priests who escorted the visitor. In the center was a great standard with a high platform….the hierarchies lived at the center…with a throne and a statue of a protective deity…¹⁸

This description of a ninth century camp, recorded by the Chinese at the historic signing of a treaty with the Tibetans, is shot through with mandala. Like all mandala, we see concentric circles revolving around a clear axis. This description suggests that mandalas were practical protective enclosures; indeed their layered structures make utter sense as a fortification.

Notable, the Tibetan traveling camps also feature ‘thresholds,’ gateways between successive enclosures, with human guardians mediating each gateway. The date (around 822 CE) puts the camp/mandala on the cusp of Buddhism encroachment on Tibet and invites speculation about how deeply rooted mandalaic thinking is in Tibet.

“A mandala delineates a consecrated superficies and protects it from invasion by disintegrating forces,” wrote the 11thcentury sage Abhayakaragupta, an Indian scholar revered by Tibetans.¹⁹ A demarcation between sacred and profane space, order and chaos is clear throughout mandala iconography; even the simplest of mandalas illustrate this idea.

Even the most simplistic renditions of mandala manifest this concept. In line drawings of Mandala from Tibet and even in China, there often are circular patterns of lines embedded in more intricate, convoluted patterns. Beyond the outermost rings of this mandala is a jumble of disordered, undulating lines, in sharp contrast to the mandala itself, which is comprised of rigid geometry.

Mandalas create a polarity between protected and unprotected space, between sacred and profane, divine and demonic, order and chaos, tamed and wild. It is possible to extend this polarity along several axes, such as between heaven and earth, stillness and motion, passive and active, or masculine and feminine.

The polarity that is set up between mandala and non-mandala space is central to understanding the nature of the worlds that guardians stand in between. With one foot in mandala space, and one foot outside of mandala, they are truly between worlds, the very worlds that the pilgrim crosses between when stepping over the threshold.

As one moves inward in a mandala, one progresses in discrete increments towards sanctity, order, passivity, divinity, or heaven, rather like ascending a stepladder. The concept of incremental progression is the where guardians become paramount in mandala. Guardian deities stand watch over the contact points, the ‘thresholds’, between the different levels of mandala.

As Ray comments “the integration and hierarchical arrangement of [the mandala’s] terrible deities [indicates] not only their fundamental importance to the Tantric process of transformation, but also to the different stages of awareness bound up within this process.”²⁰ The guardian deities directly catalyze the transition between different levels, changing the untamed, disordered world to the consecrated space of mandala.

The Jokhang temple is no exception, and “encloses” the deity Jowo, around whom the entire temple revolves. The polarities of mandala are articulated in a pilgrim progress throughout the Jokhang temple. At the periphery, one encounters guardians, fiery, motive scrollwork, black frescoes, angry dancing demons and tiger skins.

As one moved inward through successive thresholds, the artwork retreats not in color but in temper: gods and famous monks can be observed to offer blessings with tranquil expressions, until finally the intrepid pilgrim glimpses the ultimate compassionate smile of Jowo in the inner sanctum, and then returns to the melee of the world outside.

The guardians’ role in the transformation of mandala is only the first level of their story, the first layer upon our palimpsest of guardianship. The Tibetan rendition of guardian deities encompasses more than articulations of consecrated space. To visualize these underlying layers of guardianship and engage their identity, we must look deeper at the Jokhang, not in space, but in time.

The Jokhang and the Demoness

There is rumored to be a stone in the Jokhang that sounds like the sea. According to the legend, behind this stone is a passageway that leads to an ancient, subterranean lake.²¹ In the Tibetan view, this lake, over which the entire Jokhang is built, is no ordinary body of water, but the heart of a gigantic demoness.

The tale of the demoness, and how she was subdued is an organizing principle in thinking about the adoption of Buddhism in Tibet. The story accounts for the construction of the Jokhang and her sister temples, as far afield as in Kham²² and Bhutan and details the shift in religious favor in Tibet towards Buddhism. Primarily, it is a story of the transformation of Tibet and the fate of all guardian deities.

The tale goes something like this: Songtsen Gampo, the Tibetan king who played a major role in consolidating the power of the Yarlung Valley kings, wanted to build a worthy temple to enshrine the gifts which he received as part of his dowry from his marriage to the Chinese Princess Wencheng.

She brought with her many fantastic treasures, including a magnificent Buddha statue, Jowo. Their original attempts to build a temple failed, being mysteriously undone at night. To determine the source of the trouble, the king and Princess Wencheng visited nearby Pabongka monastery and divined the presence of a supine demoness who inhabited the whole of Tibet.²³

Upon perceiving the demoness, King Songtsen Gampo set up out to tame it. He determined that her heart was contained in a lake at the site of the present day Jokhang:

The most important and vital landmark of the “Srin-land” is the “Plain of Milk” at Lhasa. It is of crucial importance, because this is the very spot where her heart-blood is pulsating. The three mountains which encircle the “Plain of Milk” denote her two breasts, and are her lifeline…Her subjugation is successfully achieved by the erection of Buddhist structures upon her body, at cardinal and other significant points.

Having been pinned down by brute force, she is now completely immobilized, and the construction of the temples can begin: on her arms and legs, on her hips and shoulders, and on her knees and elbows, thirteen temples in total are raised. By erecting these edifices, the Jokhang, as the dominant structure-placed on top of her heart-her life force is repressed and she is pacified, but not defeated.²⁴

This story is one of taming, and subjugation. The fate of the Srin mo demoness²⁵ can only be seen as symbolic: but if this is a story of conquest, what is the element that is buckling under, and that which is forcing it down? One could construe the Srin mo demoness as a manifestation of the unruly, hostile elements of Tibet, an instance of ‘adverse and unaccountable influences,’ which the guardians must combat.

In Tibetan conception, “thus is the entire shape of the landscape perceived as highly deleterious. The [demoness subduing story] goes on to attribute the unsavory behavior of the country’s inhabitants, such as banditry, etc. to the Srin mo land.”²⁶ The Srin mo demoness can be thought of as an “exponent of a chthonic and telluric forces of the cosmic substratum,”²⁷ supporting the relationship of the demoness to physical landscape of Tibet. If the demoness stands for the harsh landscape and unruly aspects of Tibetan culture, then Buddhism can be seen as an impetus to tame the land and transform it into a sacred, habitable space.

However, if we further unpack the symbolism of the demoness, it rapidly becomes clear that the demoness transcends a simple metaphor for the landscape. In her insightful piece “Down with the Demoness, Reflections on Feminine Ground in Tibet,” Janet Gyatso identifies the subjugation of feminine ground as domination over a pointedly female force. Both Gyatso and Rosemarie Volkmann suggest that the demoness subduing myth is a kind of rape of Tibet. Though the implications of such a reading are beyond the scope of this essay,²⁸ we shall return to interesting variations upon this theme later.

The method of subjugation that is prescribed is to pin the demoness at critical points, involving physical control of the demoness by erecting sacred edifices over her hips, joints, arms and legs²⁹. Elaborating on this idea, Stein points out that “The conquering and civilizing function…was performed in accordance with Chinese ideas: in square concentric zones, each boxed in by the next and extending further and further from the center.”³⁰ This construct has to be seen as mandala — the explicit reference to the cardinal direction and the concentric zones of temples are the hallmarks of mandala space.

Furthermore, it is telling that the impetus for the subjugation of the demoness stems from Princess Wencheng, who we may think of as the long arm of Chinese influence. The Jowo statue, a marriage present from China, is a rather obvious attempt to convert and pacify the heathen Tibetans, whom the Chinese view as a “savage race”³¹ threatening their western trade routes.³²

The fate of the demoness foretells the story of guardians, who have their origins in the demonic world. Foreign Buddhism attempts to fix local gods, as indicated by Faure:

…while Ch’an masters were intent on desacralizing places such as mountains, and imposing on them the abstract space of their monasteries, they became engrossed in enshrining relics and erecting stupas in order to fix dangerous chthonian influences, the creating of new centers, new sacred spaces or places that were protected by local gods and were in due time identified with them.³³

The fate of many local gods, then is to be fixed (or, if you’re a Srin mo demoness, impaled) – and then converted to guardians of the very spaces that converted them.

Another key point is that the demoness story is thought to have penetrated Tibetan consciousness well after the construction of the Jokhang. The late Michael Aris identifies the twelfth century Mani bka ‘bum as the seminal gter-ma³⁴ text for the Buddhist retrospective account of Songtsen Gampo’s reign and the first appearance of the supine demoness in Buddhist literature.³⁵ Though the Srin mo demoness may have deep origins in Tibet, there is a distinct revisionist aspect to the myth of the demoness. This is a story of Buddhism looking back and contemplating its own unfolding in an alien land.

The conversion of Tibet to Buddhism was a slow and difficult process³⁶ suggesting another possible rendering of the demoness – she represents not only landscape, unruly Tibetan culture, but also entrenched indigenous tradition. Evangelical Buddhists would obviously consider this tradition as an obstacle, and see it as profane, demonic, chaotic, feminine, and uncivilized.

Rolf Stein, in his pioneering treatise on Tibetan culture, Tibetan Civilization, finds a volume of evidence for pre-Buddhist customs, and groups them under the heading “The Nameless Religion.”³⁷ Though these pre-Buddhist customs are opaque to the present generations, they are a perennial specter in our consideration of Tibetan guardians and we will find evidence of them below in the gods of cairns and local gods.

The story of the demoness is one of the transformations of Tibet. An invading force, Buddhism, enters Tibet, and subjugates an opposing threat to its arrival. Tibetan society was profoundly changed by the arrival of Buddhism, and Buddhism was itself changed in this process:

what interests us particularly is just how much the native Tibetan genius turned all these foreign influences in specifically Tibetan directions, and how much of the original Tibetan indigenous culture remained as a coherent part of the new Tibetan Buddhist civilization.³⁸

As we think more about the origin of guardianship, it behooves us to follow these roots in the traditions that predate Buddhism and explore the native Tibetan genius, for the origins of guardian deities and the fate of the ‘nameless religion’ in Tibet are intimately intertwined.

The Origins of Guardians

The hillsides of Tibet are sprinkled with heaps of stones – cairns – brightly festooned with prayer flags, yak skulls, and bits of yak fur. Rolf Stein describes a Tibetans’ interaction with these cairns:

Every traveler that crosses the pass lays a stone on the heap, or, failing that a bone, rag, or tuft of wool or hair. At the same time, he calls out “The gods (of the sky, lha) are victorious, the demons are vanquished, ki-ki¸ so-so!” The exclamations at the end are war-cries. They are accounted for by the warlike nature of the gods (drga-lha) and the idea of passing through a difficult or strategic place. It is for this reason that other crossing places – fords and bridges -are marked in the same way.³⁹

As with the temple threshold, cairns denote a point of contact between two distinct regions of sacred space. In many cases, cairns simply mark the pass between two valleys or a river crossing. Summit cairns, perched atop mountains, denote the more subtle transition between heaven and earth. The stacked stones of cairns, with their tapered tower, are designed to represent the mu, rope, or ladder to the sky.⁴⁰ One finds cairns in a similar capacity at other auspicious locations, and at other salient junctions between earth and sky.

Like guardians, cairns confer protection at ambivalent places, whether it is the threshold or the mountain pass. All Tibetan travelers, from bus drivers to nomads, invoke the protection of the gods before proceeding. According to Drukpa Kunley⁴¹, a “mad” saint, poet and shaman of Tibet:

Formerly, at the time when the world was made, the heap of stones was built on the white glacier. It is the road-marker of man’s protecting gods…afterwards people built it in their own country or village -road marker of the mighty god of the country; then by lake and rock – road marker of the gods of the soil.⁴²

Protection, then, is a fundamental part of cairns, and is part of their original charter. An even more interesting point that Drukpa Kunley points out is the connection between cairns and local deities of place, the ‘gods of the soil’ and the country or village gods’, a point that we shall return to shortly.

Stein points out that, “Dimly, too, the heap of stones must have conjured up the idea of a tomb.”⁴³ Tombs are perhaps the aboriginal protected space, and perhaps were the birthplace of guardian deities. As Sha Wu-tian, a Dunhuang archeologist, sketched for me, guardians have been found throughout the construction of Chinese tombs.

The famous terracotta army of Qin Shi Huang is an army of such guardians, protecting the tomb of the ancient Chinese tyrant.⁴⁴ Though little is known about early Tibetan burial practice, Stein points out that “it is possible that the early kings [of Tibet] were inspired by great Chinese tombs.”⁴⁵

In Tibet, the original tomb guardians may have descended from actual people. The tomb was “guarded by ministers who behaved ‘like dead men’ and were thus enshrined as ‘servants of the corpse.’⁴⁶ According to an early Chinese text, some rituals included the practice of posting a living person by a fallen warrior as a sort of guardian. This living guardian would accept food and clothes for the fallen man. Stein discusses ancient kings whose subjects were buried alive with a king’s statue.⁴⁷

In time, these living tomb guardians have been converted to effigies and sculptures, the inspiration for the present incarnations of guardian deities. In any case, tombs are a sanctified space, and similarly to mandalas and temples, are delineated from the outside world by guardians.

The typical guardian image is replete with the symbolism of death:

Human corpses – mummified, fresh, and in decomposition – are lying scattered around…inside, the palace, corpses of men and carcasses of horses are spread out, and the blood of men and horses streams together forming a lake. Human skins and hides of tigers are stretched into curtains.

The smoke of the “great burnt offering” (i.e. human flesh) spreads into the ten quarters of the world. Outside, on top of a platform, revived corpses and raksasas are jumping around, and the four classes of accompanying attendants and skeletons perform there a dance. On all sides are hung as tapestries fresh skins of elephants and skins drawn from corpses…”⁴⁸

According to their mythology, guardian deities are often found at cemeteries and at charnel grounds,⁴⁹ and, as mentioned in previous sections, are rendered this way in mandala. Some of their most distinguishing features, such as the crown of five skulls, the skull cup, bloodstained mouths or the freshly severed heads are direct references to death.

The tight relationship of guardians with death, or Bardo,⁵⁰ is a further component of their transformative capacity. Charnel grounds and cemeteries are located on the periphery of human settlements and lie well outside the conventional conception of sacred. Like the guardians themselves, the cemetery is at once demonic and divine, pure and impure.

The charnel ground and the cemetery are points of transition between life and afterlife, heaven and earth, and the cemetery is a sort of threshold. At the crucial transition between life and death, the guardian serves to transform the soul along the same axes that they transform space in mandala: impurity into purity, chaotic into ordered, demonic into divine, profane into sacred.

Another common abode of guardian deities includes the mountains of Tibet. As Stein observes, mountains are representative of both tombs and guardians:

“Mountain and tomb were analogous in character… where human or stone ‘witnesses’ guarded the tombs of the historic kings…the tomb guardian of Yumbu Lhakar, the first royal castle was the sacred mountain Shampo Kangtsen.”⁵¹

The first kings of Tibet are not known to possess explicit tombs; rather, mountains have become their tombs. The tombs of later kings, such as at Chonggye, are built in their image. Furthermore, the spirits of first kings of Tibet are the source of many of the gods of the countryside, and of landscape, and have taken up residence among the breathtaking mountains of Tibet.

The interwoven symbolism of tombs, mountains, cairns, and guardians is beautifully intricate. Simply put, each of these facets of Tibetan tradition are related through their reference to sacred space and Tibetan ideas of protection. They also encompass the idea of ‘local’ or country gods, as the passage from Drukpa Kunley’s narrative above illustrates. Many of these local gods who originated from the life spirits of Tibet’s first kings, inhabit foci of the sacred landscape, such as mountains and rivers.

Many of the ‘gods of the country’ – local, indigenous gods had interesting fates as Buddhism encroached on Tibet:

Both Bon and Old Order (Nyingma, Tibetan Buddhism’s oldest sect) developed new sets of temple-rituals, which paid honor both to the Buddhas and the new Buddhist gods of Indian origin, as well as to selected indigenous gods, who from now on began to manifest themselves as protectors of the new religion.⁵²

Indeed, the origins of guardians lie outside of Buddhism, several of the mysteries that surround fall under a new light. Consider the Gonkhang, the protector’s chapel that stood unique to Tibetan temples. In Trandruk monastery, sister temple to the Jokhang in the Yarlung Valley, I saw angry masks fixed upon the threshold, scowling fury in bright colors. In one corner, a monk sat in one corner, beating a deep, resonant drum.

Inside, protectors were positioned slightly at or above eye level, covered by a cloth to shield the eyes of the pilgrims from their horrible faces. Like the masks on the threshold, nothing about the gonkhang is Buddhist, and potentially can be linked to the indigenous, pre-Buddhist traditions.

Typically, after local deities are tamed, they then faithfully serve Buddhism as protectors under oath. Padmasabhava, the great Buddhist missionary from India, is the keeper of many of these oaths:”many Tibetan deities [are] said to have tried to obstruct Padmasambhava’s mission in Tibet, but were eventually subdued and even turned into protectors of the Buddhist teachings.”⁵³

The same principles we find in the colorful stories of Drukpa Kunley, who demonstrates “not merely how to destroy demons, but to transform them into guardians and protectors of the Buddha’s Truth.”⁵⁴

We find, then, that the fate of the demoness is the fate of many of the guardians of Tibet. Guardians are subjugated local gods, who have been converted and transformed by Buddhism. It is important to remember that the demoness is not killed,⁵⁵ instead, she is transformed: her story and the story of guardians across Tibet are stories of subjugation, of taming a threat from a powerful opposing force.

The story of subjugation plays out in the guardian image, where we often see guardians dancing on the broken back of a pathetic creature is an act of violence. The violent essence of the guardian image, then, may be linked to its origins; indeed, though freshly severed heads, pouches full of disease, and skin smeared with human blood can be construed as philosophical devices, this denies the rather obvious demonic imagery of these hideous talismans.

Such fierce and disgusting iconography may suggest something of the stress of syncretism upon both Buddhism and an indigenous tradition in Tibet. If this is the case, then guardians are a point of departure for a reading of the subjugation of Tibet that is divergent from the monastic view: that of the forcible conversion of the local populace to an alien religion. The violence and wrath of the guardian and the fear that it inspires are testaments to the stress of transformation.

Guardians in Tibet, then, have primary connections landscape, as well as with cairns and tombs via their interface with sacred landscape and space. Guardian deities, who may have distant beginnings in an indigenous, pre-Buddhist Tibet, must be understood as creatures of syncretism with encroaching Buddhist deities.

Today, they appear in the same places and roles as Buddhist protectors. The guardian deities are emblematic of a tamed, indigenous religion, but they are also purveyors of very process of subjugation that they have experienced. Guardians transform threats to Buddhism and are themselves transformed along the similar axes, and their vivid iconography bears testament to the tension and stress of transformation.

Though Buddhism chooses to view the guardians as tamed, the indigenous, subjugated religion is not incapable of fighting back. Indeed, as I looked at the guardians of the Jokhang day after day, week after week, I could not be entirely sure that they were holding still.

The Ambition of Guardians

One of the most beloved deities in Hinduism is Ganesa, the elephant headed god. Any child in an Indian family inevitably hears volumes about Ganesa. Of course, one of these stories relates how it was that Ganesa came to have an elephant head:

Parvati is disturbed by her husband while she is bathing. Displeased, she decides needs a faithful doorkeeper. With the ‘impurities’ from her ablutions, she creates a handsome young man [Ganesa], who is to allow no one to enter. Siva tries to force his way, but Ganesa stops him. Siva calls in the troops, Visnu (and Skanda) are repelled, but by means of a trick, the creation of a beautiful woman named Maya who momentarily distracts the guard, the assailants cut off Ganesa’s head.

Parvati is furious and creates goddesses who attack the gods. She finally agrees to make peace on condition that her ‘son’ to be brought back to life. Siva cuts off the head of an elephant that has only one tusk and puts it in place of Ganesa’s severed head. He entrusts him with the command of the armies [ganas].⁵⁶

In this myth, Ganesa is the faithful guardian. He sacrifices a part of himself in the line of duty and comes out somehow changed. This change is a recurrent them in many tales of guardianship.⁵⁷

One more tale, recounted in the Bhavagatham,⁵⁸ provides further insight on the mobility of guardians. Jaya and Vijaya were evil kings. In order to redeem themselves, they had to be born three times on earth, always as enemies of Vishnu and slain by the hand of his avatar.

These three rebirths include famous villains in the Vaishnavite cannon, such as Sisupala and Kamsa (in the Mahabharata) Ravena and Kumbakarna (in the Ramayana) and Hiranyaksa and Hiranyakasipu– the very same king who was slain at the threshold by Narasihman, Vishnu’s fifth avatar. After their time on earth, the two gatekeepers were allowed into the good graces of Vishnu, where they were allowed to become the gate guardians of Vaikuntha and of Vaishnavite temples.⁵⁹

Once again, the concept of transformation is part and parcel of guardianship. A key point is that there is a direction to their change. Jaya and Vijaya begin far out of favor with Vishnu, and end up as vital, but still peripheral figures in Vaishnavite temples. They are moving through the position of the guardian of the gate. Guardians are not gods who fall out of favor, and are banished to the periphery; rather, they are in motion from profane to sacred.

The ‘direction’ of their transformation, from profane to sacred is rooted in the resilience of indigenous tradition. We would expect these indigenous forces to ‘fight back’, to vie for a stake in the present religion of Tibet. In Tibet, the beautiful story of Dorje Shugden illustrates the tenacity of indigenous Tibetan religion. Dorje Shugden is currently the focus of a firestorm that is currently raging through the Gelugpa sect stemming from deep historical and textual roots.⁶⁰ I believe that the conflict illustrates the ambition and motion of guardian deities. Consider the relatively recent origin of story of Dorje Shugden:⁶¹

Diseases raged in towns and villages, which killed people and animals. The Tibetan Government suffered misfortunes repeatedly and even the [fifth] Dalai Lama was not spared: some unknown, evil force began to manifest itself, mostly at noon, by turning over the dishes with the food which was being served to the Dalai Lama and causing damage to his personal property…Astrologers and oracles soon discovered that a vengeance-seeking spirit was the cause of all this trouble.

Many experienced lamas and magicians tried to destroy this evil force or to avert at least its harmful influence …the Tibetan Government requested the learned and experienced head-lama of Mindoling monastery to catch and destroy the roaming demon. The head-lama, taking his seat in front of the Potala, performed a sBying sreg ceremony, and by the power of his magic incantations he managed to attract the spirit into a ladle which he held in readiness in his hand.

Just when he was going to burn his captive, bSke khrad, the wrathful aspect of Tsangs pa, decided to help the imprisoned spirit…For a moment, the head-lama’s attention got distracted from the ladle and immediately the imprisoned spirit slipped out. Since all subsequent trials proved again in vain, the Tibetan Government and the spiritual leaders of the Gelugpa sect, who by now discovered that the cause of all the misfortune was the injustice they had done to bSod nams grags pa, decided to request his spirit to make peace with them, and instead of causing further harm to become a protective deity of the Yellow Hats.

To this the spirit agreed, and under the name Dorje Shugden, he became one of the chief divine protectors of the Gelugpa order and a dutiful guardian of its monasteries.⁶²

Several features of this story are by now familiar. Though the demon is not pinioned, as in the story of Jokhang, there is a clear bid to tame and control the demon by putting it in a ladle. When this attempt fails, the Tibetan Government resorts to diplomacy in order to contain the demon, which ultimately prevails. Still, the drive to fold the demon under the umbrella of Buddhism is unambiguous.

Like many guardian deities, Dorje Shugden is a demon turned to the good. Though demons can ‘cross over’ from profane to sacred, Dorje Shugden cannot easily shirk his demonic origins.

The logical place for him, then, is in a marginal, entry level post as a guardian deity. From this position, his demonic energy is harnessed to subjugate the enemies of Buddhism without any threat to the integrity of Buddhism. Though his profane origins do not allow them to easily transgress the threshold to the sacred space within, must he always remain there?

As illustrated by tale of Pehar, it is not impossible for guardians to move inwards and upwards in status. Pehar, a major wrathful deity, has many alleged origins. What is clear is that Pehar was once only a minor guardian, as the protector of Samye. As legend goes, he traveled in a box to the major monastery of Drepung, where he became chief protector of Drepung – a big promotion.

Today he is no longer strictly a guardian. He is no longer placed liminally, and comes complete with his own retinue. He is the subject of rituals, offerings, and appears at festivals. Pehar visits major Lamas in their dreams, has incarnations, and periodically possesses entranced devotees. Nonetheless, he has humble origins as a guardian, and his wrathful iconography bears the mark of his tenure as a guardian.

Dorje Shugden’s own ambitions lie in an ancient Tibetan tradition, which “claims that the guardian-deity Dorje Shugden “Powerful Thunderbolt”, will succeed Pehar as the head of all jig rten pa’I srung ma once the latter advances into the rank of those guardian-deities who stand already outside the worldy spheres.”⁶³ It is precisely his mobility that is the source of the conflict over his status among the Gelugpa.

Among some factions of the Tibetan government in Dharmasala, Dorje Shugden has moved from his post as a mere protector and crossed over the threshold to become the most important protector of the Gelugpa sect.⁶⁴ Dorje Shugden’s meteoric rise from a marginal protector to the center of a major conflict was primarily due to his popularity with several influential teachers. Among his current supporters, he is considered to be the major protector of the Gelugpa.

Dorje Shugden begins as a wayward spirit, an obstacle to Buddhism, and is currently moving towards a major protector of the largest sect of Tibetan Buddhism. The current conflict among the Tibetan exile community is in large part political. However, it is also about whether it is apropos for Dorje Shugden to ascend past his peripheral, liminal identity and become the king of Protectors. This conflict, then, is the natural product of the tension set in motion by the arrival of Buddhism in Tibet centuries ago.

Dorje Shugden exemplifies the resilience of indigenous religion. Through Dorje Shugden, we are partially able to explain the wrathful motif that runs deep in Tibetan religion. The wrathful deities are perhaps guardians who, after serving their time on the periphery, have ascended to more sacred, less peripheral positions within Tibetan religion. However, the wrathful iconography of these successful aspirants bears the demonic mark of their profane origins.

Guardian deities, are alive as cultural icons, possessing ambition and agency:

…mundane protectors (‘jig rtenpa’i lha) are guardians in a universe alive with forces which can quickly become threatening, and are considered by Tibetans to be particularly effective because they are mundane, i.e., unenlightened. They share human emotions such as anger or jealousy, which makes them more effective than the more remote supra-mundane deities (‘jig rten las ‘das pa’i lha), but also more prone to take offense at the actions of humans or other protectors.⁶⁵

In the Tibetan view guardians have to be alive in order to respond to the threats to Buddhism. The logic in placing guardian deities at the threshold, then, is transparent. Their links to the demonic world, from which they originate, allow them to be more effective at dealing with the obstacles to Buddhism, invariably manifested in the form of demons.

As transformed demons themselves, they are best equipped to deal with their wayward brethren, and convert them to Buddhism. Additionally, the threshold is a point of contact between the worlds of sacred and profane; and it makes utter sense to place guardians at this transitional space. Deities in the inner ranks of a temple are too spatially and religiously removed to make a difference at the periphery.

Conclusion

When I stepped over the threshold of the Jokhang for the very first time, I thought my curiosity about the fantastic Tibetan guardians would force me to explore every corner of the magical world inside the gates of the Jokhang. It seems, however, that I never left the periphery. By looking in between worlds, we have to some extent penetrated the historical, spatial and mythical dimensions of Tibetan Buddhism in order to tease out a coherent story of guardian deities in Tibet.

This story features guardian deities, incarnated in guardians of the gate, of the law, and of direction, as agents of active transformation. They remain suspended between outside and inside, profane and sacred, demonic and divine, their liminal identity defining them, extending beyond their placement to all aspects of their identity within Tibetan Buddhism.

To account for the paradoxes that characterize guardians, we have looked to the rich mythology underlying guardians. One of these myths, that of the construction of the Jokhang to subjugate a demoness which inhabited Tibet, is an organizing principle for guardian deities. As an allegory for the conversion of Tibet to a Buddhist state, the myth details the subjugation of pre-Buddhist Tibet via mandala space.

The origins of guardians have deep roots in these extant traditions, and can be thought of as products of the syncretism between indigenous tradition and encroaching Buddhism. However, they are not static images – many guardian deities are in motion from profane to sacred, bringing with them their demonic roots.

And what of guardians elsewhere? Guardian deities are fundamental to most Asian religious structures. Despite diverse readings of Buddhism and Hinduism across Asia, guardians remain constant fixtures of gate and the periphery. The unbridled wrath and terrifying imagery of the guardian image in Tibet is unparalleled, except in Japan, a sister tradition of Buddhism that is perhaps related in its appropriation of tension with local traditions.

Though the existence of guardian figures is ubiquitous, the specific flavor of guardian deities is culturally contingent. For example, the squat, stout guardians of Indonesia66 are counterpoints to the more princely versions in India, and to the many armed demons of Tibet. Despite the considerable variation among guardians, the themes of transformation, dynamism, and syncretism found in Tibet may be applied with broad strokes across Asia.

However, each rendering of guardianship merits independent inquiry to discover the particular beauty and history that must surround the guardian image in its many and brilliant colors.

Even in our current journey, it is difficult to say just how far we have gotten inside the question of guardianship, or just how many further layers exist upon our palimpsest of Tibetan Guardians. Given the intricate and beautiful complexity of religion in Tibet, it is likely that there many, many more.

In this essay, I am certain that we have only scratched the surface of a deep topic in Tibet that will sustain a myriad of questions. (The author is an MD/Ph.D student in Neurobiology at Yale University.)

1. Jokhang Temple is one of the most famous Buddhist monasteries in Tibet. It is known as Dazhaosi in Chinese. –Perspective Editor.
2. Victor Chan, Tibet Handbook Chico, Calif. : Moon Publications, 1994. p63
3. Robert Linrothe, Ruthless Compassion: Wrathful Deities in early Indo-Tibetan Esoteric Buddhist Art. London : Serindia Publications, 1999. pp20 – 29
4. Robert Linrothe, Ruthless Compassion. p12
5. Rene de Nebesky-Wojkowitz. Oracles and Demons of Tibet: The Cult and Iconography of Tibetan Protective Deities. Gravenhange: Mouton, 1956. p6
6. Robert Linrothe, Ruthless Compassion. p46
7. Edward Conze, A Short History of Buddhism.
8. Bernard Faure, “Space and Place in Chinese Religious Traditions”. In History of Religions. University of Chicago Press. May 27, 1987 p 337 – p356
9. Marilyn Rhies, Worlds in Transformation: Tibetan Art of Wisdom and Compassion. New York : Tibet House in association with the Shelley and Donald Rubin Foundation : Distributed by Harry N. Abrams, 1999.
10. I first read this story as a comic book in the infamous Amar Chitra Katha. However, you can find a version of this story at: www.hindumythology.com.
11. Bernard Faure, “Space and Place in Chinese Religious Traditions”. p351
12. David Snellgrove and Hugh Richardson, A Cultural History of Tibet. New York, F. A. Praeger, 1968. P78
13. Reginald A. Ray. Mandala Symbolism in Tantric Buddhism. PhD Dissertation, University of Chicago, 1973. p148.
14. Giuseppe Tucci. The Theory and Practice of the Mandala. trans. Alan Houghton Brodrick. London: Rider, & Co, 1961. p25
15. This became clear to me through discussions with the proprietor of a mandala shop just behind the Jokhang, in Lhasa. I was able to discuss this with only while haggling over the price of a painting.
16. Rene de Nebesky-Wojkowitz. Oracles and Demons of Tibet p72
17. Rene de Nebesky-Wojkowitz. Oracles and Demons of Tibet p136
18. Rolf Stein, Tibetan Civilization. Stanford University Press, 1972. p119 (my italics)
19. Lokesh Chandra, Tibetan mandalas. New Dehli, India: Aditya Prakashan, 1995.
20. Reginald A. Ray, mandala Symbolism in Tantric Buddhism. 194 – 195
21. Chris Taylor, The Lonely Planet: Tibet. Hawthorn, Australia: Lonely Planet Publications 1995.
22. Eastern Tibet, located in the western half modern Chinese province of Sichuan.
23. Victor Chan, Tibet Handbook. p63
24. Rosemarie Volkmann, “The Genetrix/Progentress as the Exponent of the Underworld.” p198
25. Akin to an Indian rakshasa.
26. Janet Gyatso. “Down With the Demoness: Reflections on a Feminine Ground in Tibet”. p37
27. Rosemarie Volkmann, “The Genetrix/Progentress as the Exponent of the Underworld.” in .Female Stereotypes in Religious Traditions. ed. By Ria Kloppenborg and Wouter J. Hanegraaff. Leiden, NY: E.J. Brill, 1995. p197
28. Both Janet Gyatso and Rosemarie Volkmann do a wonderful and intelligent analysis of the demoness subduing temple from a feminist point of view. Later, when I introduce Drukpa Kunley, an occult divine madman, I shall once again return to a sexual reading of subjugation. This is an interesting topic that is the focus of an altogether different direction of inquiry in to the relationship between sex and Esoteric Buddhism.
29. Rolf Stein, Tibetan Civilization. p39 Here is Stein’s original citiation: “rGyal-rabs-rnamesk-kyi ‘byung-thsul gsa-ba’I me-lon. 104 Dege By bSodnams rgyal – mtshan, 1508″
30. Rolf Stein, Tibetan Civilization. p39
31. The Sui Shu is a Chinese text found at Dunhuang dating from the Sui Dynasty 581-618 BCE. Quoted in: Janet Gyatso. “Down With the Demoness: Reflections on a Feminine Ground in Tibet”. p34
32. Tibet was a major power in Central Asia, with an immense sphere on influence that included the Silk Road. For more information, see Christopher Beckwith, The Tibetan Empire in Central Asia. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1987.
33. Bernard Faure, “Space and Place in Chinese Religious Traditions”. p355
34. A tradition or ‘sect’ within Tibetan Buddhism
35. Janet Gyatso. “Down With the Demoness: Reflections on a Feminine Ground in Tibet”. p36 (her italics)
36. David Snellgrove and Hugh Richardson, A Cultural History of Tibet p92 – 93.
37. Rolf Stein, Tibetan Civilization. pp191-223
38. David Snellgrove and Hugh Richardson, A Cultural History of Tibet p73
39. Rolf Stein, Tibetan Civilization. p206
40. Rolf Stein, Tibetan Civilization. p212
41. Who was Drukpa Kunley? I find that question difficult to answer…he was prophet, poet, saint and shaman somehow rolled together. For more information and an account of his charmed life, see The Divine Madman, translated by Keith Dowman. , Drukpa Kunley’s ribald adventures are a strange brew of sexual exploits, inspired religion, and Tibetan humor. He is a favorite subject of beer hall stories, a saint “closest to the hearts of the common people.” For me, Drukpa Kunley is a rare vista into a different Tibetan religious world, beyond and before Buddhism. Notice that his comments, in the space of three lines, unify much of the intersection between cairns, protector, and local / country gods that I am trying to articulate. For more infromation, see: Dowman’s book: The Divine Madman. London, UK: Rider and Co., 1980.
42. This quote is also lifted from Rolf Stein, Tibetan Civilization. p208. (Autobiography of Drukpe Kinley (80a-b). The italics are mine. Here is Stein’s original citation: ”Autobiography of Drukpe Kinley xylograph 2 vols 16th century.” (my italics)
43. Rolf Stein, Tibetan Civilization. p206
44. Shaanxi Museum, Qin Shi Huang: Pottery Figures of Warriors and Figures. Shaanxi Museum, 1981.
45. Rolf Stein, Tibetan Civilization, p202
46. Rolf Stein, Tibetan Civilization. p133.
47. Rolf Stein, Tibetan Civilization, p201.
48. Rene de Nebesky-Wojkowitz. Oracles and Demons of Tibet. p137
49. This is the ‘burning ground’ in Hindu mythology, site of all types of demons, spirits, and other unfriendly creatures. Typically, decaying corpses might pile up here, waiting for cremation. I am not sure how Tibetan view cremation. As far as I know, cremation has never been a major death rite in Tibet.
50. W.Y. Evantz – Wentz, The Tibetan Book of the Dead. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1974. I spent a lot of time looking through this book, and determined that an exploration of wrathfulness in the Bardo Thodol is a fascinating but altogether separate topic.
51. Rolf Stein, Tibetan Civilization. p206
52. David Snellgrove and Hugh Richardson, A Cultural History of Tibet p109
53. Rene de Nebesky-Wojkowitz. Oracles and Demons of Tibet. p154
54. Keith Dowman, The Divine Madman. p17
55. Janet Gyatso, “Down With the Demoness: Reflections on a Feminine Ground in Tibet.”p42
56. Rolf Stein, “The Guardian of the Gate”. p896
57. “Parvati, and the closed door to their room is guarded by Ganesa. Krsna throws the ax at him, and Ganesa consents to receive the blow with one of tusks, which breaks” Rolf Stein, “The Guardian of the Gate”. p897
58. Bhavagatham. This is a text of collected oral stories in Tamil, my mother tongue. It is a mainly about Krishna and Vishnu. It is a major text in the Vaishnavite canon. Its relevance to Tibet is perhaps marginal; I merely wish to illustrate that dynamism is part of guardianship. An English version is available at: http://www.hindumythology.com/
59. Bhavagatham from http://www.hindumythology.com/
60. George Dreyfus. The Shuk-Den Affair: The Origins of a Controvery. Available at http://www.tibet.com/dholgyal/shugden-origins.html.
61. I should stress that my version of this tale comes from faithful Nebesky-Wojkowitz. I have since found many different versions of the tale on the web; but it is hard for me, naive about the controversy and the forces at work within it, to discern the bias in each viewpoint. Clearly, those vying for Shugden’s ascendency would present the protector in a more favorable light than Shugden’s detractors. Then again, Nebesky-Wojkowitz’s version predates the controversy, and presents the details in a slightly different light.
62. Rene de Nebesky-Wojkowitz. Oracles and Demons of Tibet. p136
63. Rene de Nebesky-Wojkowitz. Oracles and Demons of Tibet. p140.
64. For more information regarding the controversy and its implications, see: http://www.tibet.com/dholgyal/ for the official line of the Tibetan Government in exile. Also see http://www.shugden.com/ for the opposite viewpoint from the Dorje Shugden International Coalition.
65. George Dreyfus. “The Shuk-den Affair:”
66. The dvarapalas of Indonesia are fascinating. According to art historian A. J. Bernet Kempers They are pointedly not wrathful,: “[dvarapalas] can hardly be called very terrifying. Central Javanese art avoided generally speaking all kinds of things which might upset the pious visitor. Even these guardians, meant to drive away evil influences, are in tune with this intention. In later times, however, in Eastern Java and Bali all kinds of terrible faces were depicted in order to create an auspicious atmosphere.” from A. J. Bernet-Kemper, Ancient Indonesian Art. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1959 p. 54.

[Author’s Acknowledgement: This project would not have been possible without many people and organizations: my advisors Bernard Faure and Mark Mancall, as well as to Hilton Obenzinger, all of whom were patient with me and my ignorance, the Undergraduate Research Office, and the Institute for International Education for their generous funding, especially to Richard Goldie who directly sponsored my project, James Russell and Liu Zhijun, who traveled with me and shared in my experiences, Sha Wu-tian, an archeologist who gave me free access to the magnificent caves at Dunhuang, Pema Chodring, a monk at the Jokhang, the multitude of people in Tibet and in China who shared with me their kindness, and facilitated my journey and research, my family both for extensive help with Indian mythology and for worrying about me while in Tibet.]

Source : www.oycf.org/Perspectives2/22_093003/4c.pdf

Video with beautiful photos and description of Dorje Shugden, Vajrayana Buddhism and various other tantric deities.

Part 2

[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]

Or watch on server | download video (right click & save file)