Table Of Content1774:
The Scottish Enlightenment Meets the Tibetan
Enlightenment
Gordon T. Stewart
Michigan State University
Journal of World History : Volume 22, Number 3, September
2011
Abstract
The meeting in 1774 between Lobsang Palden Yeshes (1738-
1780), the Third Panchen Lama, and George Bogle (1746-1781),
an agent of the East India Company, was the first encounter
between Britain and Tibet. This remarkable moment in world
history brought the Scottish Enlightenment into contact with
Tibetan Lamaist Buddhism. The commentaries written during
this episode are used to test the widely held view that
Enlightenment thinking led to European imperialism. The
evidence from this encounter shows that Enlightenment-era
mentalities could be both supportive of and antipathetic to
imperialism. The article ends by glancing briefly at Tibetan
imperialism in an earlier period to suggest that both Buddhism
and the Enlightenment were sometimes implicated in the
creation of empires but that neither can be viewed as the root
cause of imperialism.
The concept of "enlightenment" has become problematic in
world history. The old-fashioned view that there was a single
phenomenon called "the Enlightenment" that shaped ideas and
politics in Western Europe and colonial North America in the late
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries has been discarded by
scholars. Respected authorities now refer to multiple
enlightenments often at odds with each other. As J. G. A. Pocock,
arguably the leading scholar on how Enlightenment era thinking
shaped European understandings of the rest of the world,
authoritatively sums up, there was not one single Enlightenment
but "a plurality of Enlightenments which cannot be appropriately
grouped together and unified by the employment of the definite
1
article." In spite of that well-known shift in scholarly
understanding, something called "the Enlightenment project"
still has a pervasive impact in world history. In this usage, the
Western world is charged with using its scientific approach to
knowledge, and its claims to a unique rationality, as a protean
means of asserting Western superiority over other cultures
encountered round the world during the peak phase of
European imperialism in the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries. A clear and concise example of this usage is
presented in Shelley Walia's account of Edward Said's influence
on the writing of history. "The Enlightenment project," Walia
bluntly states, "emphasized Reason and Progress which could
only issue forth from the Western mind. Said shows that the
Enlightenment ideals of Reason and Progress had a hidden
2
agenda: that of creating a successful imperial practice."
There has been a fierce debate about this key issue for the past
forty years or so. In opposition to the conventional wisdom
displayed in Walia's book on Edward Said, other scholars have
raised basic objections to the easy connection made between
Enlightenment and imperialism. Sankar Muthu, for example, has
drawn attention to major Enlightenment-era figures such as
Denis Diderot, Immanuel Kant, and Johann Herder, who
"attacked the very foundations of imperialism." And in her study
of the transition from Enlightenment to empire in France and
Britain, Jennifer Pitts has made the point that several key
intellectual figures in the late eighteenth century, such as Adam
Smith and Jean-Antoine-Nicolas Condorcet, launched "a critical
challenge to European conquest and rule." In a recent article in
the American Historical Review, Karen O'Brien has neatly
summed up this current defense of Enlightenment methods of
inquiry in the face of the powerful post-colonial critique that has
shaped representations of the Enlightenment over the past forty
3
years. So the Enlightenment has been a source of controversy
when it comes to assessing European encounters with the rest
of the world.
Meanwhile on the other side of the world there had been
another kind of enlightenment at work. The Buddhist path to
enlightenment has shaped cultures and societies in South, East,
and Southeast Asia, and much of Central Asia, over the course
of more than two thousand years. Beginning with Siddartha
Guatama (566-486 B.C.E.), and with the subsequent
development of various Buddhist schools and traditions,
Buddhism "devoted itself to the improvement and eventual
4
enlightenment of people." This Buddhist "enlightenment" has
definitional problems even more complicated than those related
to the European Enlightenment. In the latter case there is a
discrete time period of about 150 years and a limited
geographical area where something we now call the
"Enlightenment" had its major impact. In the case of Buddhism
we are talking about two thousand years and a vast
multicultural setting throughout Asia. There are many traditions
and schools of thought within Buddhism, and Tibetan Buddhism
is no exception with its own range of sects and rival
interpretations making claims for superior legitimacy. The use
by Europeans of the term "enlightenment" to sum up the core
idea of Buddhism obscures many of these significant variations.
While we use the word "enlightenment" in both these European
and Asian contexts, we are dealing with two quite different
phenomena in world history, each with its own set of
challenging epistemological issues. They do have one thing in
common however—both are ambitious efforts to understand the
nature of the universe and of humanity's place in that universe.
These seem to be two utterly different attempts at reaching
such an enlightened understanding of the human predicament.
One distinctive feature of the European version was the valuing
of secular and scientific knowledge; the Buddhist approach is
conventionally viewed as primarily spiritual and philosophical in
nature. The serendipity of world history brought these two
enlightenments into contact with each other in 1774. In that
year George Bogle (1746-1781), an emissary from Warren
Hastings (1732-1818), the governor-general of the East India
Company's possessions in India, met Lobsang Palden Yeshes
(1738-1780), the then-current Panchen Lama, at Tashilhunpo
monastery near Shigatse [Xigaze] in Tibet. Looking at how these
two men dealt with each other in this remarkable encounter
may help us better understand what we mean when we use the
term "enlightenment."
When the meeting took place, the Panchen Lama was a
powerful figure in Tibetan politics and society. The then Dalai
Lama, Jampal Gyatso (1758-1804) was still a minor, and a
regency council ruled at Lhasa. The Panchen Lama informed
Hastings that "the Dalai Lama rules this country with unlimited
sway but on account of his being in his minority, the charge of
the government and administration for the present is committed
5
to me." This was too simplified a version of the religious and
political structure in Tibet, but there is no doubt that Lobsang
Palden Yeshes was in an exceptionally strong position at this
time. One sign of his preeminence was his journey to the
imperial court in Peking in 1781 to consult with the Qianlong
6
Emperor.
In addition to managing relations with the Dalai Lama's officials
and the Chinese Ambans at Lhasa, the Panchen Lama had
extensive administrative tasks in his own region around
Shigatse and along the border with Nepal, Bhutan, and India. It
was these administrative responsibilities that brought him into
contact with the East India Company, which by this time was the
ruling power in Bengal. Units of the company's army had been
sent to push back Bhutanese forces that had invaded the small
state of Cooch Behar in northern Bengal. The very name of
Bhutan—meaning "the end of Tibet"—showed it had long been
7
within the Tibetan cultural sphere. Although the Bhutanese
had fought for their autonomy, the Tibetans still claimed an
influence in Bhutanese affairs. In his letter to Hastings, the
Panchen Lama asserted that "the said Deb Rajah [the current
8
ruler of Bhutan] is dependent upon the Dalai Lama." Beyond
those historical connections that linked Bhutan to Tibet, the
aggressive warfare of the company's army along Tibet's
southern flanks was an obvious cause of concern. It was these
factors that led the Panchen Lama to intervene as a
peacemaker between Bhutan and the company.
In his letter to Hastings, the Panchen Lama took pains to mollify
this new player on the Indian scene with abundant flattery
about the company's achievements, but he also took the
opportunity to educate this European intruder about the
Buddhist values he represented: Having been informed by
travellers from your quarter of your exalted fame and
reputation, my heart, like the blossom of spring, abounds with
gaiety, gladness and joy; praise that the star of your fortune is
in ascension; praise that happiness and ease are the
surrounding attendants of myself and family. Neither to molest
or persecute is my aim; it is even the characteristic of my sect
to deprive ourselves of the necessary refinements of sleep,
should an injury be done to a single individual. But in justice and
humanity I am informed you far surpass us. May you ever adorn
the seat of justice and power, that mankind may, under the
shadow of your bosom enjoy the blessings of happiness and
9
ease.
This message nicely shows how the Panchen Lama's many
responsibilities led him into a mode of discourse that easily
combined religion and politics (and how his ritualized phrasing
was shaped by Qing diplomatic conventions). This diplomatic
overture from across the Himalayas was seized upon by
Hastings to send Bogle as a company emissary with the goal of
expanding trade between Bengal and Tibet (and perhaps even
10
gaining backdoor access to the China market).
On top of his administrative and political duties in Tibet, and in
connection with the complex religio-political relations between
Tibet and China, the Panchen Lama was a major spiritual figure
in Tibetan and Central Asian Buddhism. He was the Panchen
Rimpoche—the precious gem of wisdom—the incarnation of the
11
Dhyani Buddha, Amitabha. One of the distinctive features of
this version of Tibetan Buddhism is its belief in the spiritually
pure land of Shambala (which in Western readings of Tibetan
12
Buddhism became the enchanted land of Shangri La). In
1775 the Panchen Lama wrote a treatise on this subject titled
An Explanation of Shambhala together with a Narrative of the
Holy Land. According to Edwin Bernbaum, this version of the
journey to Shambhala became the most respected of all Tibetan
texts on the subject. It remains even today "the most popular
and widely read guidebook . . . When speaking about the
journey to the hidden kingdom, Tibetans usually refer to this
13
text which has tended to supersede all others."
In the Kalacakra tradition of Tibetan Buddhism, within which
Lobsang Palden Yeshes was working, Shambhala is both an ideal
and an actual place. As Donald Lopez vividly explains, in the
texts associated with the Kalacakra Tantra the kingdom of
Shambhala is said to be located north of the Himalayan range. It
is a land devoted to the practice of the Kalacakra Tantra which
the Buddha himself had entrusted to Shambhala's king.
Shambhala is shaped like a giant lotus and is filled with
sandalwood forests and lotus lakes, all encircled by a great
range of snowy peaks. In the center of the kingdom is the
capital of Kalapa, where the luster of the palaces, made [End
Page 459] from gold, silver, and jewels, outshines the moon;
the walls of the palaces are plated with mirrors that reflect a
light so bright that night is like day. In the very center of the city
is the mandala of the Buddha Kalacakra. The inhabitants of the
960 million villages of Shambhala are ruled by a beneficent
ruler, called the Kalkin. The laypeople are all beautiful and
wealthy, free of sickness and poverty; the monks maintain their
vows without the slightest infraction. They are all naturally
intelligent and virtuous, devoted to the practice of the
Vajrayana, although all authentic forms of Indian Buddhism are
preserved. The majority of those reborn there attain
14
buddhahood during their lifetime in Shambhala.
Those who are devotees of this tradition within Tibetan
Buddhism "believe there are various ways of going to
Shambhala . . . The prevalent belief in these degenerate times is
that it can only be achieved through death and rebirth because
it is no longer possible to develop the superhuman powers
needed to follow the guidebooks, but a number of Tibetans still
believe it is possible to make the journey in this lifetime. There
are stories of yogis or lamas with exceptional powers who have
taken the journey; some tell of actually going there in their
15
physical bodies." But some practitioners also speak in terms
of "dream journeys which are sometimes difficult to distinguish
16
from the visionary journeys of meditation."
By whatever means the journey is made, it requires a highly
advanced level of theological and mythological knowledge if it is
to be completed successfully. The Panchen Lama's guidebook
was written to help seekers who wished to reach the spiritually
pure land attain the necessary level of cosmological knowledge
17
and self-discipline. Insofar as there is a notional geographical
location for the land of Shambhala, it is situated somewhere
north of the Himalayan mountains. It is extremely difficult to
reach, and "the journey is fraught with dangers, both natural
and supernatural: the traveller must cross vast deserts, forests
full of wild beasts, mountains inhabited by beautiful goddesses,
demons, flesh eaters, and hungry ghosts. Only those who are
neither tempted nor terrified may reach the perfect land of
18
Shambhala."
The Panchen Lama devoted the first half of his book to the
geography and history of India, the birthplace of Siddartha
Gautama, the historical Buddha, and hence "the holy land" in
the title. In writing his account of India he drew on material
provided by various informants; one of those informants was
none other than George Bogle. In his journal Bogle mentioned a
moment during their conversations when the Panchen Lama
quizzed him about Bengal and "desired me to inquire
particularly about the situation of a town called Shambul about
which he said the pundits of Bengal would be able to inform
19
me." As Albert Grunwedel, the German scholar who first
translated the Panchen Lama's text from Tibetan in 1915,
explained in his introduction, "the book was written in 1775 . . .
In the winter of 1774-75 the English envoy George Bogle was at
his court . . . What the Panchen Lama wrote about India comes
20
from the conversations with Bogle Sahib."
Grunwedel's comment, with its implication that the Panchen
Lama had to rely entirely on a European traveler to acquire
knowledge of contemporary India, reflects a complacent,
Description:the assortment of the journal articles have below details: Title ===== 1. 1774: The Scottish Enlightenment Meets the Tibetan Enlightenment 2. A Victorian Ecological Disaster: Imperialism, the Telegraph, and Gutta-Percha 3. Indian Convict Workers in Southeast Asia in the Late Eighteenth and Early Nin
