Douglas Bernstein ARAH 9585 16 August, 2016 The Loving-One in the Land of High Passes: An Analysis of the Maitreya Cult in Ladakh Nestled between the 6,000-meter peaks of the Karakorum and Ladakh mountain ranges, the Nubra Valley, part of the larger trans-Himalayan region of Ladakh (Wylie: la dwags); literally, “Land of High Passes.”, is an otherworldly sight. Here, one can scarcely believe the geographic cavalcade, as vast windswept plains, verdant fields of apricot trees and flowers, undulating sand dunes, and jagged monoliths of metamorphic rock bleed into one another beneath perennially snow-capped mountain summits. The dazzling white of the high peaks rivaled only by the brilliance of an unblemished, impossibly blue sky, and the shimmering glacial meltwater cascading down the mountainsides. Nubra’s beauty, however, is not limited to the surreal landscape. Several kilometers from the confluence of the Nubra and Shyok Rivers, atop a hillock next to the monastery of Diskit, there sits, quite literally, a 32-meter statue of Maitreya, the Future Buddha. Facing north towards the disputed border with Pakistan, as though the statue were a lookout for the Indian Army, the giant Maitreya gazes out over the two upper arms of the Nubra Valley, the left arm leading to Baltistan (presently under Pakistani control), the right arm ending at the Siachen Glacier (presently under Indian control), the world’s highest battlefield. Consecrated in 2010 by none other than the Fourteenth Dalai Lama, it is the largest Buddhist statue in Ladakh, Another statue of Śākyamuni Buddha, of similar height, is presently under construction in the village of Stok. and among the largest in India. Figure 1: The Maitreya at Diskit, with Diskit Monastery in the background. The statue’s seat is two-stories high and functions as a small temple and monastic residence. It is the most recent large Maitreya statue to be built in Ladakh, conforming to standard Tibetan Buddhist iconographic tropes. (Credit: Bill Brunner/Studio Ladakh) Yet, the Diskit Maitreya is not a singular phenomenon, but instead represents the most recent expression of a more than 1,000 year Ladakhi and Western Tibetan fascination with Maitreya, a cult as old as Ladakh’s recorded history. Beginning with the oldest extant rock carvings, which predate Tibetan artistic influence, and proceeding through the period of royal patronage for the cult to the present, this essay seeks to examine the origins of Ladakh’s Maitreya cult, the cult’s iconographic evolution, and the reasons behind the cult’s continued patronage. Through such an endeavor, we shall come to a greater appreciation of Maitreya’s unique importance in Ladakhi history and the reasons behind this cult’s lasting influence and recent rebirth. An Introduction to the Cult of Maitreya Before proceeding to the crux of this essay, it is necessary to provide a proper context in regards to Maitreya, specifically, emic understandings of Maitreya and the reasons behind his enduring popularity. Such a context will prove necessary in the latter portion of this essay, providing the foundation for a more detailed analysis of the Maitreya cult in Ladakhi history, primarily expressed through the construction of large Maitreya images. Within the vast pantheon of Buddhist deities, Maitreya, whose name literally means the “Loving-One,” stands unique, not only as the first Bodhisattva mentioned in Śākyamuni’s teachings, but also as the only Bodhisattva to be found in the three Buddhist historical developments of Śrāvakayāna Lit. “Vehicle of the Listener;” synonymous with Hīnayāna, but without the polemical connotations of the latter. , Mahāyāna, and Vajrayāna, Ladakhi Buddhism being an example of Vajrayāna, the last of these developments. Belka 2006, 55. In Śrāvakayāna, the only extant form of which is Theravāda, the term Bodhisattva refers firstly, to the previous lives of Śākyamuni, and secondly, to a being destined for the absolute enlightenment of Buddhahood, as opposed to the subordinate enlightenment of an arhat or pratyekabuddha. It is in the vein of a Buddha-in-waiting, the conceptualization of the Bodhisattva held by Early Buddhism and Theravāda, that Maitreya makes his first textual appearance, in the Suttanipāta, from the Pāli Canon. The text describes Maitreya as Śākyamuni’s anointed successor, presently abiding in the Tuṣita Heaven, where he enjoys his penultimate life preaching the dharma (i.e. Buddhism) to a vast assembly of gods and other Buddhas-to-be. Torricelli 1994, 4. At some time in the future, Buddhists have agonized for millennia over the exact date, more recently, scholars have taken up the obsession. Estimates range from 5,000 years to 5.76 (or 5.67) billion years after Śākyamuni’s enlightenment (Kim 1997, 22). following a period of great strife and suffering and the disappearance of the Buddha’s teachings from the mundane world, Maitreya will take rebirth as human being, attain enlightenment, reestablish the dharma, and preside over a golden age of human existence as the last Buddha of the present epoch (Skt. Bhadrakalpa) Lit. “Auspicious Aeon.”. Buswell Jr. and Lopez Jr. 2014, 106. Such a vision of Maitreya’s present occupation and final birth exists in all forms of Buddhism, not only in Śrāvakayāna. Figure 2: Standing Bodhisattva Maitreya, c. Third Century, Gandhara. (Credit: ARTstor/The Metropolitan Museum of Art) Early depictions of Maitreya present a rather mundane figure, more or less a prince, devoid of the deifying attributes found in later iconography. Such Maitreya statues reflect the cult’s infancy and the Śrāvakayāna proclivities of the cult, emphasizing Maitreya’s human nature and the Śrāvakayāna’s unelaborate notion of the Bodhisattva. The Maitreya cult’s Śrāvakayāna origins, however, did not preclude its eager adoption and expansion by later Buddhist developments. Doctrinal Developments and the Cult’s Expansion Within Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna, which share the same philosophical foundation, Maitreya is also classified as a Bodhisattva, but the Bodhisattva found in Mahāyāna is a far different creature than its Śrāvakayāna primogenitor. With the appearance of Mahāyāna in the early centuries of the Common Era, the Bodhisattva becomes idealized as the pinnacle of human soteriological development, elaborated in ten grounds (Skt. Bhūmi) of successive levels of realization and supernatural abilities, culminating in the unsurpassed achievement of Buddhahood. Furthermore, the Bodhisattva loses its historical dimensions and becomes universalized, expressed through a vast and variegated pantheon of deities who have forsaken their own escape from cyclic existence (Skt. saṃsāra) to work for the benefit of all sentient beings. Taken to its extreme in Mahāyāna thought, in addition to great Bodhisattvas such as Maitreya, Avalokiteśvara The Bodhisattva of Compassion, easily the most popular Buddhist deity in Tibetan Buddhism, who is also considered the patron Bodhisattva of Tibet., and Tārā The “Saviouress,” of whom there are 21 distinct emanations in Tibetan Buddhism. She is known by the epithet, “Mother of all the Buddhas.” , the Bodhisattva denotes anyone endeavoring to attain enlightenment with the primary intent to benefit other beings. Powers and Templeman 2012, 100. The Bodhisattva thus represents an active, engaged conceptualization of enlightened beings, equally efficacious, yet eminently more accessible than the transcendent Buddhas. An equally important development of Mahāyāna in regards to the cult of Maitreya is the Trikāya, the doctrine of Three Buddha Bodies. According to this doctrine, the historical Buddha, and all enlightened beings, possess the three bodies of nirmāṇakāya—emanation body, sambhogakāya—enjoyment or celestial body, and dharmakāya—truth body. The nirmāṇakāya is the only Buddha body perceptible to ordinary beings, and it is as nirmāṇakāya that Buddhas and Bodhisattvas appear in the mundane world. Bernstein 2013, 20-21. The sambhogakāya represents the idealized body of Buddha, existing in a celestial pureland or Buddha-field (Skt. buddhakṣetra) or similar heavenly realm (e.g. Maitreya’s palace in the Tuṣita Heaven) Properly speaking, the Tuṣita Heaven is not a buddha-field/pureland as it exists within the Three Realms (Skt. tridhātu), specifically in the Desire Realm (Skt. kāmadhātu). However, it is generally referred to as a pureland in Buddhist texts, particularly in East Asia, even though, technically, it is not (Nattier 1988, 40). and possessing the thirty-two marks of a great man (Skt. mahāpuruṣa), perceptible only to those who have reached at least the first Bodhisattva ground. Buswell Jr. and Lopez Jr. 2014, 749. The dharmakāya is the true essence of a Buddha, a personification of enlightenment itself, from which both the nirmāṇakāya and sambhogakāya originate. Ibid., 246. According to this understanding, all final enlightenment is actually attained well in advance of a Buddha’s final rebirth, the nirmāṇakāya enacting a divine play for the benefit of sentient beings, as it is impossible for a fully enlightened Buddha to be subject to the depredations of cyclic existence. As such, Maitreya is already fully enlightened. As this understanding develops, reaching its apex in Vajrayāna, Maitreya continued to function and be depicted as a Bodhisattva, whose wisdom and salvific agency are accessible in the present. But, in light of the understanding that he was already fully enlightened—his final birth simply being a performance for the benefit of beings—he increasingly assumed the prestige and qualities of a Buddha, as, for all intents and purposes, Maitreya already was one. Such a blending of positions is not unique to Maitreya, as a similar conflation with Buddhahood occurs with many other deities in Vajrayāna’s extensive pantheon. In the wake of Śākyamuni’s absolute departure from mundane existence, vis-à-vis his parinirvāṇa The dissolution of the final corporeal form of an enlightened being., Early Buddhists were left without an authoritative source for the dharma, save for those teachings committed to memory and eventually codified in the Early Buddhist Canon (Skt. Tripiṭaka). Stepping into the void left by Śākyamuni’s final liberation, Maitreya, as Buddha-designate, became the foremost source for the dharma among Early Buddhists. Therefore, the earliest focus of the Maitreya worship was to secure a proximate rebirth to Maitreya—as “there/later” or “here/later” to borrow Nattier’s typology—either among his divine retinue in the Tuṣita Heaven, or as a human disciple during his final lifetime. Nattier 1988, 25. In both instances, the primary focus was not rebirth in a paradisiacal state, but direct exposure to Maitreya’s teachings in the hopes of realizing enlightenment, an increasingly difficult task in light of the perpetual decline of the dharma, as prophesized by Śākyamuni. Kim 1997, 27. This need to gain access to Maitreya’s wisdom was likely the primary stimulus for the cult’s formation. The dawn of Mahāyāna gave new impetus to the Maitreya cult, propelling it to levels unseen in Early Buddhism. One might suspect that Mahāyāna’s expanded pantheon of Buddhist deities would threaten Maitreya’s popularity, and to a certain degree, it did. Undoubtedly, with the emergence of Buddhas such as Amitābha, promising liberation to any who recited his name, and Bodhisattva’s such as Mañjuśrī, the embodiment of all the Buddha’s/Buddhas’ wisdom, Maitreya’s cultic status was challenged. However, his unique status as the Future Buddha entailed a special intimacy with this world system that ahistorical deities like Amitābha or Mañjuśrī could not rival, ensuring Maitreya’s continued popularity despite the increased competition. Indeed, while Amitābha’s buddha-field of Sukhāvatī, along with all the other purelands, exists outside of the physical universe, the Tuṣita Heaven where Maitreya resides, while resplendent, is a part of the same realm of existence that human beings inhabit, the desire realm (Skt. Kāmadhātu). Sponberg 1988, 288. Maitreya is thus a part of this world, with a physical proximity to our own station unlike that of any other buddha. Enhancing Maitreya’s prestige were the new Mahāyāna concepts of the Bodhisattva and the Trikāya, allowing for Maitreya’s propitiation and direct access in the present, investing the cult with a new sense of immediacy. This new imminence saw the focus of the Maitreya cult shift from securing a future rebirth in Maitreya’s presence, to encountering Maitreya in this very lifetime. To commune with Maitreya in this world, he first needed to be located in this world, a task primarily accomplished through the creation of Maitreya images and statues. There are, however, other means of contacting Maitreya, and one particular endeavor by Asaṅga, the co-founder (with his half-brother, Vasubandhu) of Yogācāra, deserves special mention. Confused over the ultimate meaning of the Perfection of Wisdom (Skt. Prajñāpāramitā) Sutras, Asaṅga sought clarification from none other than Maitreya, and resigned himself to solitary meditation in order to commune with the deity. Emerging from his solitude after a total of twelve fruitless years of intense meditation, he discovered a wounded dog outside his cave, whose laceration was infested with maggots. Moved by the dog’s suffering, Asaṅga wished to remove the maggots and dress the wound, but this would harm or kill the maggots and deprive them of their means to survive. To sustain the maggots, without harming another being, he cut off a piece of his own flesh and placed it next to the dog. He then concluded that the only way to transfer the maggots without harming them was with his tongue, which revolted even one as detached as him. Nevertheless, he resolved to do so and stuck out his tongue and closed his eyes as he leaned over the dogs wound. Yet, what his tongue touched was not maggots, but the stone floor of the cave. Startled, he opened his eyes to find Maitreya standing before him, the Future Buddha’s presence revealed by Asaṅga’s seminal act of compassion. (Lopez Jr. 2001, 84-86). These consecrated representations were, and continue to be, appreciated not as symbols of Maitreya, but as his literal countenance, embodiments coterminous with the Future Buddha himself. As Sharf notes, “icons thus empowered were treated as spiritual beings possessed of apotropaic powers, to be worshipped with regular offerings…” Sharf 1996, 261. Properly understood in a Ladakhi (i.e. Vajrayāna) context, representations of Maitreya function as manifestations of the Three Buddha Bodies in a single vessel, as nirmāṇakāya – physical objects readily perceptible to all beings, visually representing his sambhogakāya, and endowed with the immutable essence of his dharmakāya. This notion, while important for our focus on Ladakh, derives from (relatively speaking) later developments in Buddhist thought. Even before the full development of the Trikāya doctrine, however, Buddha images were still seen by the faithful not as symbols, but physical embodiments of the beings they portrayed. As such, antecedents of the Trikāya were certainly at work when the Maitreya image cult reached its peak in China, during the twilight of the Northern Wèi Dynasty, attested to by the numerous Maitreya images dating to this period. Wong 2001, 25. But beyond those religious virtuosi seeking gnosis with Maitreya, a distinct minority among the larger Maitreya cult, the cult of Maitreya possessed much broader appeal. This appeal centered on Maitreya as a profound means of earning merit (Skt. puṇya), and Maitreya images, in both their creation and propitiation, functioned as loci for the accrual of merit. Kitagawa 1988, 15. For the vast majority of Buddhists, making prostrations and giving offerings to Buddha images, such as those of Maitreya, were understood to be highly meritorious Pun intended., the means to secure benefits in this life and the next. This was especially so for Maitreya, given his concomitant soteriology and impending arrival in our world system. In the figure of Maitreya, we also see the reconciliation of ideal Buddhist religious and political identities, further enhancing his appeal. As the Future Buddha, Maitreya is the literal personification of the superlative Buddhist personage: a Buddha. Yet, this is not his only role, for Maitreya is also the ruler of the Tuṣita Heaven, with 32,000 other Buddhas (and innumerable gods and Bodhisattvas) as his subjects. Kim 1997, 18. As the ruler of the Tuṣita Heaven, Maitreya functions as a Cakravartin, the ideal king of late Vedic and Buddhist lore, of whom the Mauryan king, Aśoka See John S. Strong, The Legend of King Aśoka: A Study and Translation of the Aśokāvadāna (Princeton, 1989: Princeton University Press)., is the primary historical example. Kitagawa 1988, 10. In fulfilling the roles of both Buddha and Cakravartin, Maitreya overcomes a dynamic tension found in Buddhism between spiritual detachment and worldly engagement, unifying religious and secular roles. The figure of Maitreya thus presents a powerful prototype for political rulers to emulate, allowing Buddhist rulers to assume secular and religious power while simultaneously legitimating their political regimes as earthly expressions of Maitreya’s politico-religious dominion over the Tuṣita Heaven. Ibid., 17. This can been seen most prominently in the example of Empress Wǔ Zétiān of the early Táng Dynasty, who sought to substantiate her rule by portraying herself as a Cakravartin and an incarnation As opposed to an emanation. of Maitreya, Nattier 1988, 41. which, as Dorothy Wong notes, “provided the necessary propagandistic and ideological foundation to legitimize her rule, enabling her to become the only female [Emperor] in Chinese history.” Wong 2015, 3. There are numerous other aspects and examples of the Maitreya cult to be found throughout Buddhist history and Buddhism’s terrestrial domain. At this point, however, having established a proper foundation, we may proceed to this essay’s chief focus: the cult of Maitreya in Ladakh. The Evolution of the Maitreya Cult in Ladakh Ladakh’s history, as a distinct polity, begins more or less with the end of the Tibetan Empire, when the Buddhist monk, Lhalung Pelgyi Dorje, assassinated the allegedly anti-Buddhist king, Langdarma, in 842 C.E. Petech 1977, 14. In the aftermath of this act of regicide, the Tibetan Empire, for a time the most powerful force in Asia, disintegrated, its authority devolving to local chieftains. Roughly, a century after Langdarma’s demise, his descendants, specifically his great-grandson, Nyima-gon, migrated to Western Tibet and established a new kingdom, what would become Ladakh, subsumed within this new Figure 3: Ladakh’s Geographic Context. (Ryavec 2015, 11) domain. Ryavec 2015, 73. Nyima-gon’s empire—stretching from Baltistan to Purang (See Appendix: Map 2), beyond the holiest mountain in Tibet, Kang Rinpoche (Skt. Kailāśa)—was then divided among his three sons, with sovereignty over Ladakh passing to his eldest, Palgyi-gon. Rizvi 2012, 66. However, at least in the case of Ladakh, this sovereignty was theoretical and was only actualized by Palgyigon’s own hand, making him the first true king of Ladakh. Petech 1977, 17. Silk Road Origins Yet, Ladakh was no stranger to human settlement, its lower regions inhabited since the Neolithic Age. Powers and Templeman 2012, 388. Moreover, located at the intersection of the Indian subcontinent, the Tibetan Plateau, East Turkestan Alternatively, Xīnjiāng, as it is more commonly known. Xīnjiāng, however, is an exonym, and its use is an implicit acknowledgement of the People’s Republic of China’s colonization of the region., and Central Asia, Ladakh is a literal crossroads, and was a key hub in one of the ancient world’s most important networks of exchange and transmission: the Silk Road. As such, it is a forgone conclusion that Buddhist missionaries and pilgrims were present in Ladakh for centuries, well in advance of the establishment of a Buddhist kingdom in Ladakh in the mid-Tenth Century. Dorjay 2014, 40. Some have gone so far as to argue that Buddhism was present in Ladakh as early as the Second Century C.E., during the height of the Kuṣāṇ Empire, Francke 1907, 20. but this is highly improbable, not least because of a dearth of evidence beyond a few vague inscriptions and the rather specious extrapolations concerning a single stupa at Sani Monastery in Zangskar (see Appendix Map 1). van Ham 2011, 21-22. The stupa is called the Kanika chorten (Wyl. mchod rten; chorten being the Ladakhi word for stūpa), which bears a phonetic resemblance to Kaniśka, the most renowned king of the Kuṣāṇ Empire, who was also a devotee of Buddhism. Given the phonetic similarity and that Ladakh is near the region in which the Kuṣāṇ Empire was active, they must surely be related, or so the argument goes. A far more likely scenario is the arrival of Buddhist travelers in Ladakh around the Sixth Century C.E., when the upper Indus River Valley, which bisects Ladakh, was incorporated into the wider network of the Silk Road. Dorjay 2014, 40. It is thus no surprise that the earliest physical remnants of the Maitreya cult in Ladakh are found at locales coterminous with old trade routes linking Ladakh with Kashmir and Central Asia, both redoubts of Buddhism when the first Maitreya images were carved and sculpted in and around the upper Indus River Valley. The positioning of these Maitreya images is not haphazard, and it reveals an aspect of the cult not yet seen: Maitreya as protector. All are found in valleys or at the feet of mountains, before or after (depending on the direction of travel) the high passes punctuating the routes. These high passes—for which Ladakh is namedi—are no minor obstacles. I speak from experience, having summited a dozen high passes in Ladakh. Many stand above 5,000 meters, higher than any mountain in the continental United States. At this rarefied height, the altitude, weather, and unforgiving terrain can prove fatal, even today. In October of 2014 a blizzard on Thorong La, a 5,416 meter-high pass along the Annapurna Circuit in Nepal, similar to the passes one encounters in Ladakh, killed 43 people. An untold number (not including the Indian soldiers, engineers, and migrant workers who work to keep many of Ladakh’s passes open to vehicle traffic year-round) have been killed in avalanches and landslips on the motor roads built along the old trade routes, such as at Khardung La, a high pass connecting the Indus and Nubra Valleys, where a landslip in June of 2015 crushed an SUV, killing three. In light of their positioning relative to the most trying and dangerous legs of the journey, these earliest Maitreya images functioned not as route markers, but as objects of worship for the faithful braving the trans-Himalayan wastes. van Ham 2011, 22. Their creation earned merit for their sponsors, likely Buddhist merchants heading to Central Asia or China from Kashmir, while travelers propitiated the Maitreya images for protection before crossing the passes, and afterwards, in obeisance at having survived. Ibid. The location of the images lends credence to the theory that these images predate an indigenous Maitreya cult, and are instead the expressions of a Kashmiri Maitreya cult. The Mulbek Maitreya The most famous of these early Maitreyas is, undoubtedly, the more than nine meter-high high rock carving at Mulbek (see Appendix Map 1). Dorjay 2014, 42. The Mulbek Maitreya, along with all the other Maitreyas There are two other smaller rock carvings near Mulbek, a wooden statue at Sumda Chenmo, several rock carvings in Leh of uncertain date (but clearly pre-Tibetan), and the highly elaborate statues at Mangyu and Alchi, which represent the end of the period. of this period (Eighth to Eleventh Century C.E.) are clearly Kashmiri influenced, sporting elements popular in Kashmiri bronzes of Maitreya from the same time period. Literally everyone who was written on the subject is in agreement on this point. In regards to dating Ladakh’s earliest Maitreya images, contemporary scholars, Linrothe in particular, have increasingly argued that the earlier dates in this range, of Eighth to Ninth Century, are unlikely, if not impossible, and that the Mulbek Maitreya, in particular, can be dated no earlier than the Tenth or Eleventh Centuries. van Ham 2011, 167 n.27. This essay has no reason to disagree. If this is the case, it would mean the earliest Maitreya images in Ladakh were created during the rule of the early Ladakhi kings, who would likely have patronized the various Maitreyas’ creation. This substantiates the theory forwarded in a later section of this essay (see Royal Connections: The Namgyal Dynasty) that the Maitreya cult in Ladakh is, at least in part, the development of an earlier Maitreya cult among the Tibetan nobility during the First Dissemination of Buddhism to Tibet, transplanted in Ladakh as a result of Nyima-gon’s westward migration. Figure 4: Mulbek Maitreya. (Credit: ARTstor/Rob Linrothe) In iconographical terms, the Mulbek Maitreya’s most striking feature is the number of limbs, as the carving has four arms, a stylistic feature rarely seen outside of Kashmiri depictions of the Future Buddha. The upper-right arm is (possibly) in the gesture of discussion (Skt. vitarkamudrā) and holds a nineteen-bead rosary (Skt. mālā)—which Kim credits to Gupta Sārnāth influence. Kim 1997, 218-219. The lower-right arm preforms the boon-granting gesture (Skt. varadamudrā). The upper-left arm holds the stalk of a nāgakeśara tree, This is the variety of tree under which Maitreya will become enlightened in his final lifetime. while the lower-left arm holds a water pot (Skt. kamaṇḍalu). Torricelli 1994, 5-6. Here, and in the other works of the period, Maitreya is depicted unequivocally as a Bodhisattva, lacking the monastic robes of a Buddha, but still possessing the accoutrements of his final rebirth as a Brahmin in this world system. Ibid., 4. In addition to the Brahminical cord (Skt. upavīta), the Mulbek Maitreya sports a necklace, bangles, and belt—all made of pearls—signifying the high status of his final birth. Dorjay 2014, 42. There is also a stūpa in the carving's hair, a common element of Maitreya images thought to relate to the prophecy in which Maitreya receives Śākyamuni’s robes from Mahākāśyapa during his final lifetime. Torricelli 1994, 10. At nine meters tall, the colossal stature of the image—something of a motif in Ladakhi depictions of Maitreya—is itself another invocation of the Maitreya myth, which states that by the time of Maitreya’s final birth, human beings will have grown to such immense, Godzilla-like proportions that when Maitreya receives Śākyamuni’s robes from Mahākāśyapa, they will only cover two of his fingers. Buswell Jr. and Lopez Jr. 2014, 517. While the Mulbek Maitreya is unique, on account of its size, the few other Maitreya images in Ladakh dated to this period, such as the smaller rock carving at Khartse Khar (which is two-armed), See Fontein 1979 & Shah 2012. the numerous shallow relief carvings in Leh, See Dorjay 2014; Alexander and Van Schaik 2011; & Alexander and Catanese 2014. and the wooden statue at Sumda Chenmo, See Vohra 1993. generally subscribe to the same iconographical style. Dorjay 2014, 42. An Indigenous Beginning The extralocal origins of the Maitreya cult in Ladakh, while perhaps frustrating some Ladakhi Buddhist apologists, function as a prologue to the later founding of a properly indigenous (i.e. Ladakhi Buddhist) Maitreya cult. Indeed, such an indigenous beginning for the cult comes not long after Palgyi-gon’s assumption of temporal authority over Ladakh, a fact that is no mere coincidence. Although descendants of the supposedly anti-Buddhist Langdarma, Nyima-gon, Palgyi-gon, and their lineage seem not to have shared their forebearer’s hostility to the Buddha’s teachings, instead, they eagerly patronized Buddhism, looking to India, and especially Kashmir, in the hopes of formally establishing Buddhism in Ladakh. Indeed, it was in far-west Tibet, though not quite as far-west as Ladakh, that the second diffusion of Buddhism to Tibet began, thanks in part to Nyima-gon and his ilk, particularly the monk-king of Guge, Yeshe-Ö. Genoud and Inoue 1982, 24-25 & Rizvi 2012, 66. From Yeshe-Ö’s patronage of Kashmiri Buddhism came the scholar and missionary Rinchen Zangpo, who is credited with founding several Buddhist monasteries and temples in Ladakh, out of a total of 108 throughout the whole of Western Tibet. Of the Ladakhi sites credited to Rinchen Zangpo, only the one-thousand year-old remains of Nyarma, “now a heap of ruins,” can be properly attributed to him (see Appendix Map 1). Rizvi 2012, 67 & Snellgrove and Skorupski 1977, 15. Although, not truly the work of Rinchen Zangpo, the temples at Alchi are of profound importance to Maitreya cult, and the larger development of Buddhism in Ladakh, representing the twilight of Kashmiri influence and the beginning of an indigenous Buddhist tradition. Located roughly 65 kilometers upriver from the capital of Leh (see Appendix Map 1), just downstream from a massive hydroelectric dam on the Indus River, the temple complex at Alchi is the largest Ladakhi Buddhist religious foundation featuring widespread Kashmiri artistic influence. Although long since incorporated into the legend of Rinchen Zangpo, based on inscriptions found on one of the oldest buildings, The Assembly Hall (Wyl. ‘du khang). credit for Alchi’s founding goes to an individual, possibly a monk, Genoud and Inoue 1982, 49. by the name of Kalden Sherab. Snellgrove and Skorupski 1977, 30. The scholarly consensus seems to be that Alchi can be no older than the mid-Twelfth Century C.E. Luczantis 2004, 127. Exceptionally few details of the history surrounding Alchi’s founding are known to posterity, save that the region of Ladakh in which Alchi is located, called Shäm, was not under the direct control of the Ladakhi kings at the time, but of a local fiefdom, Idid., 126. the descendants of a Central Tibetan noble family that had journeyed westwards with Nyima-gon. Rizvi 2012, 67. The Alchi Sumtseg Maitreya Figure 5: Alchi Sumtseg Maitreya. (Credit: ARTstor/ The American Council for Southern Asian Art) Of Alchi’s many structures, the most important for our focus is the Sumtseg Wyl. gsum brtsegs, lit. “Three Storied.”. Like the Mulbek Maitreya, the Maitreya in the Sumtseg is also four-armed. The upper-right hand performs the gesture of discussion, Snellgrove and Skorupski incorrectly identify this as the gesture of fearlessness (Skt. Abhayamudrā). while the lower-right hand performs the boon-granting gesture. Snellgrove and Skorupski 1977, 49. The two left hands seem to be damaged or missing ornamentation. However, it can be inferred from the manner of their depiction that the upper-left hand once held the stalk of a plant, possibly the nāgakeśara tree, and the lower-left grasped what was likely a water pot, the essential element of Maitreya’s iconography. Ibid. & Kim 1997, 218. Save for the upper-right hand, which holds no rosary, the depiction of the hands is identical to that of the earlier Maitreya at Mulbek. According to Kim, the omission of the rosary is a historic development of Vajrayāna, with the gesture of discussion becoming the more important attribute over time. Kim, Ibid. Unlike in the earlier rock carvings, in the Sumtseg, Maitreya is not presented singularly, but as part of trio, with Avalokiteśvara to the left and Mañjuśrī to the right. All are of equal stature, over four-and-a-half meters high, Snellgrove and Skorupski 1977, 45. and occupy similarly phantasmagoric alcoves, however, given his positioning, Maitreya is the central, both literal and symbolic, figure of the temple. Luczantis 2004, 140. An inscription in Maitreya’s niche identifies the trio of deities as reliquaries of the Buddha’s body, speech, and mind, corresponding to the aforementioned Trikāya. Specifically, Maitreya is the “Buddha-mind” reliquary, representing the Dharmakāya. Snellgrove and Skorupski 1977, 48. As Luczantis notes: the association of the Bodhisattva Maitreya with the dharmakāya [his emphasis] can be justified, as in this case Vairocana, the absolute Buddha of the configuration, is placed in his crown and the supernatural Maitreya image can be considered a saṃbhogakāya manifestation of this Buddha. This interpretation is further supported by the depiction of the Life of the Buddha on Maitreya’s dhoti, a perfect metaphor for a mere display (the nirmāṇakāya). Luczantis 2004, 140. Figure 6: Sumtseg Maitreya’s Crown (Luczantis 2004, 140). The inclusion in Maitreya’s crown of Vairocana, specifically Vajradhātu-Vairocana, Ibid., 211. typically the central Buddha of the Five Buddha Families (Skt. pañcakula) and the Primordial Buddha (Skt. adibuddha) of early Vajrayāna, Later replaced in the role of adibuddha in Tibetan Buddhism by either Samantabhadra or Vajradhāra. also results in the removal of the stupa found in earlier iconography. This highlights a distinct shift in which Maitreya, as Future Buddha, becomes the emissary of the numinous Vairocana, the dharmakāya personified, to whom the historical Śākyamuni pales in comparison. In addition to Vairocana, the remainder of the Celestial Buddhas—Amoghasiddhi (North), Ratnasambhava (South), Akṣobhya (East), Amitābha (West)—are portrayed on Maitreya’s crown, thus rounding out the Five Wisdom Buddhas (Skt. pañca tathāgata) of the Five Buddha Families. As such, we find Maitreya, carrying atop his head, the zenithal systemization of Vajrayāna Buddhist thought: the quintet of Celestial Buddhas corresponding to the five directions, elements, aggregates (Skt. skandha), poisons (Skt. kleśa), wisdoms (Skt. jñāna), etc. The image created could not be starker, with Maitreya bearing the totality of the dharma, indeed, all of existence, as a literal crown. This monumental new ornament renders him not only the anointed standard-bearer of Śākyamuni, but of all the Buddhas throughout—and beyond, in the case of Vairocana—space and time. Maitreya’s seminal new attribute testifies to the adaptiveness and continued importance of the Maitreya cult at this stage in the history of Ladakh and Vajrayāna, as well as to the enduring prominence of Maitreya himself. For, it was through Maitreya that the artists and sculptors at Alchi and the exponents of the Five Buddha Families schematic—a radical Tantric synthesis of cosmology, ontology, and soteriology—legitimated a new vision of a fundamentally Buddhist universe Technically, a multiverse, as even in the Pāli Canon Śākyamuni Buddha speaks of multiple world systems, not to mention the “trillions of billions” found in later Mahāyāna sūtras., with Maitreya the indispensable link in its continuity. Royal Connections: The Namgyal Dynasty In the centuries immediately following the founding of Alchi, only a few sparse details of Ladakh’s history survive. At some point, the royal lineage of Palgyi-gon became bifurcated, one arm remaining in Shey, Ladakh’s oldest capital, the other settling in Basgo (see Appendix Map 1), 40 kilometers upriver, where there was a royal estate. Petech 1977, 25. In the latter half of the Fifteenth Century, Bhagan, a descendent of the Basgo line, reunited Ladakh under his rule, taking the surname Namgyal Wyl. rnam rgyal., literally meaning “complete victory,” for his new dynasty. Rizvi 2012, 72. This inaugurated the Namgyal Dynasty, which ruled Ladakh until 1842, when the Dogras of Jammu, themselves vassals of the Sikh Empire, invaded Ladakh, deposing the Namgyal Dynasty and bringing Ladakh’s independence to a brusque end. Ibid. 90-95. Exiled from their palace in Leh, which became Ladakh’s capital in the Seventeenth Century, the Namgyal family were allowed to settle on the opposite side of the Indus River, in the village of Stok, where they remain to this day, albeit totally divested of any formal political power. Ibid. By the end of the Fifteenth Century, in the wake of Bhagan’s political triumph, the capital was shifted to Basgo, as the writings of the Portuguese merchant Diogo d’Almeida, the first European to visit Ladakh, testify. Petech 1977, 36-37. At Basgo, eventually, three Maitreya temples were constructed, adjoining the royal palace. Of these three, the first to be built, For details of the other two images see Jamspal 1997, 150-52 & Snellgrove and Skorupski 1977, 96-97 known as the Champa Lhakhang (Wyl. byams pa lha khang)., literally the “Maitreya Temple,” houses the largest Maitreya image at Basgo, some three stories high. Jamspal 1997, 149. I was unable to find an exact height in any of my research, however, it is safe to say it is at least as high as the Sumtseg Maitreya. There is something of a disagreement as to who built which temple and when. Francke, Genoud and Inoue, Petech, Rizvi, and Snellgrove and Skorupski all credit Tsewang Namgyal Wyl. tse dbang rnam rgyal. with the construction of the Maitreya Temple, meaning the temple would have been constructed in the mid-Sixteenth Century. Lozang Jamspal, citing what he believes to be an incorrect reading of the Ladakh Chronicles by preceding researchers, attributes the construction of the Maitreya Temple to Dragspa-bum-de Wyl. grags pa ‘bum lde., who was actually the king of Shey, and reigned before the formal founding of the Namgyal Dynasty. Ibid., 141-44 & 148-49. Based on Dragspa-bum-de’s dates, this would necessitate the Maitreya Temple’s construction before the end of the Fifteenth Century. As for Tsewang Namgyal, about whom there is an inscription in the Maitreya Temple acknowledging his patronage of the structure, Jamspal credits him with painting the temple, a century after it would have been built by Dragspa-bum-lde. Ibid., 140. Whatever the merits (or demerits) of Jamspal’s argument, for our focus, the details of when the Maitreya Temple was built and by whom are of secondary importance. Far more vital is the revelation of a royal dimension to the Maitreya cult in Ladakh, for at Basgo, we have not just one, but three large Maitreya statues clearly built by the sovereigns of Ladakh, as part of the royal estate no less. While Basgo certainly represents the most dramatic concretization of a royal Maitreya cult in Ladakh, The large Maitreya statues (the largest being the same size as the largest at Basgo) at Leh, in the royal palace (Wyl. sle pho brang) itself and above it, in the Maitreya temple below the royal fort of Namgyal Tsemo (Wyl. rnam rgyal rtse mo; lit. “Victory Peak”), also deserve mention, but these statues are admittedly later constructions, following the relocation of the capital from Basgo to Leh in the Seventeenth Century (Snellgrove and Skorupski 1977, 84 & 99). there is evidence to suggest royal patronage of Maitreya was inherited by the kings of Ladakh from their Tibetan forefathers, a royal cult of Maitreya possibly existing on the Tibetan Plateau as long as Buddhism. Interestingly, the image in Tibet’s first Buddhist temple Wyl. byams pa’i mi ‘rgyur gling; the “Island of the Unchanging Maitreya.”, at Khadruk, was of Maitreya, as were the central images of numerous other Seventh Century Tibetan Buddhist temples. Alexander and Van Schaik 2011, 434. Additionally, the most famous Maitreya image in Tibetan Buddhism’s history, the no longer extant Maitreya Dharmacakra Wyl. ‘byams pa chos kyi ‘khor lo., was revered to the same degree as the Jowo Rinpoche Wyl. jo bo rin po che; lit. “Precious Lord.” and Jowo Mikyö Dorje Wyl. jo bo mi skyod rdo rje; lit. “Immovable Adamantine Lord.”, the two holiest objects in Tibet. Ibid. 434-436. As the legend goes, it was brought to Tibet by the Nepalese bride of Songtsen Gampo, the Tibetan emperor ca. 605-650 C.E. Powers and Templeman 2012, 368. Therefore, the statue was inextricably linked to the royal household, and as a result, the royal dynasty of the Tibetan Empire was linked to the cult of Maitreya. Several centuries later, in Guge, bordering Ladakh, there is evidence that Tashi-gon, Palgyi-gon’s brother and the father of Yeshe-Ö, constructed a statue of Maitreya. Alexander and Van Schaik 2011, 437. Additionally, there are two stone images of Maitreya carved at Shey, Ladakh’s earliest capital, meaning the early Ladakhi kings also patronized Maitreya to some degree. Ibid. 438. In light of these various revelations, attesting to a demonstrable popularity for the cult of Maitreya in early Tibetan Buddhism, a quite plausible narrative begins to form, in which early devotion to Maitreya among Tibet’s royalty was maintained through the collapse of the Tibetan Empire, and reestablished with the founding of substantive new domains in far-west Tibet. Ibid. Given that Palgyi-gon’s brother actively propitiated Maitreya, it is no stretch of the imagination to assume Palgyi-gon, Ladakh’s first king, did so as well, and that this tradition, or at the very least, knowledge of it, was maintained from generation to generation. As such, the Maitreya images at Basgo may very well denote the continued expression, or if nothing else, the reappearance of a long standing Maitreya cult among royal lineages in Western Tibet, rather than simply the cult’s sudden appearance. Beyond piety or the maintenance of tradition, Ladakh’s kings may have possessed other motivations in constructing the Maitreyas at Basgo, conflating themselves—like Empress Wǔ nearly one-thousand years prior—with Maitreya to legitimate their sovereignty in the eyes of Ladakh’s predominantly Buddhist populace. Maitreya, as inheritor of Śākyamuni’s mantle and progenitor of a new age, serving as the perfect metaphor for the Namgyal Dynasty’s assumption of political power, thereby also suggesting the dawning of a new age in Ladakh under their authority. Evidently, the rulers of the Namgyal Dynasty sought to maintain such a connection with Maitreya, as when the capital was again moved, this time from Basgo to Leh, something of a drawn out process concluded with the reign of Sengge Namgyal Wyl. seng ge rnam rgyal., new Maitreya temples were constructed in the Leh royal palace, and adjacent to the old royal fort, located higher up the same slope on which the palace rests. Rizvi 2012, 78. The iconography of these Maitreyas is virtually identical to the iconography of the primary Maitreya Figure 7: Leh Palace Maitreya. (Credit: Studio Ladakh) image at Basgo, albeit with significant refurbishment. The Basgo Maitreya While in the interregnum between the construction of the Maitreyas at Alchi and Basgo, Ladakh’s history is something of a blank, the history of neighboring Kashmir is decidedly more bleak. As early as the time of Rinchen Zangpo, Hinduism was making inroads among traditionally Buddhist strongholds throughout the Indian subcontinent, including in Kashmir. But the competition from Hinduism paled in comparison to the destruction loosed upon Kashmir’s Buddhist heritage with the region’s wholesale conversion to Islam, in which virtually every vestige of Buddhist religion, down to the smallest bronze image, was eradicated. Ibid., 68 & Snellgrove and Skorupski 1977, 16-17. By the dawn of the Fourteenth Century in Kashmir, Buddhism had not simply gone extinct, it had been purged. Thus, Kashmiri Buddhism came to a sudden and tragic end, as did Kashmir’s influence over Buddhism in Ladakh and the Western Himalayas. As a result, Ladakh turned to the east, to Tibet for religious authority, where Vajrayāna was in the ascendant. Figure 8: The Largest and Oldest Maitreya Statue at Basgo. (Credit: ARTstor/The American Council for Southern Asian Art) Therefore, in the Maitreyas at Basgo we see the beginning of nigh unchallenged Tibetan influence over Buddhism in Ladakh, in both content and form. According to Rizvi at least, the wall murals at Basgo still exhibit some Kashmiri influence (2012, ?). The most obvious changes are that Maitreya is no longer standing, but seated on a throne, and that he no longer possess an extra set of arms. It should be noted that the seated Maitreya is not a Ladakhi or Tibetan innovation, with seated Buddha images originating in Sarnath, Sāñcī, and Ajantā in the Fifth Century. Ibid. Some have argued that being seated, often referred to as a ‘European’ posture, is an attribute unique to depictions of Maitreya or that seated Maitreyas are inherently related to Vairocana, but Kim disputes both these points. 1997, 232-33. The earlier gestures have been abandoned, and his hands now perform the gesture of turning the wheel of dharma (Skt. dharmacakramudrā). As at Alchi, Maitreya is flanked on the left and right by Bodhisattva attendants, Snellgrove and Skorupski 1977, 96. but here they are literally tertiary figures, a third his size. Given the architectural layout of the Maitreya Temple at Basgo, in which the statue’s head is in an inaccessible upper niche, it is presently impossible to get a proper look at the details Maitreya’s crown. That being said, having examined the evidence available, here, Maitreya’s crown is three-jeweled and does not possess images of the Five Wisdom Buddhas. Certainly, there is some assuredly manifold symbolism to this three-jeweled crown—possibly the Trikāya, the Three Jewels (Skt. triratna) of Buddha, dharma, and sangha (Skt. saṃgha) Lit. “Assembly” or “Community;” originally the sangha referred only to the Buddha’s ordained followers (i.e. monks), however with Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna, as is the case in Tibet and Ladakh, the sangha connotes the entirety of the Buddhist community, monastic and lay., the Three Times (Skt. traikālika; triyadhva; or tryadhva) Lit. “Three Times;” the Past, the Present, and the Future., or the Three Lords of Knowledge Wyl. rig gsum dgon po; lit. “Three Lords of Knowledge;” the Bodhisattvas of the Tathāgata (Buddha), Padma (Lotus), and Vajra (Diamond/Thunderbolt) faimilies, respectively, Mañjuśrī – the embodiment of all the Buddha’s widom, Avalokiteśvara – the embodiment of all the Buddha’s compassion, and Vajrapāni – the embodiment of all the Buddha’s power. The Three Lords of Knowledge is a quite popular Tantric schematic in Tibetan Buddhism, rivaled only by the Five Buddha Families.—but without access to detailed photos or the statue itself, this is little but conjecture on the part of your author. While still dressed in the robes and jewels of a prince, the Brahminical ornaments of his final rebirth have been deemphasized, most notably, in the absence of the water pot. Indeed, this depiction, while still, strictly speaking, a Bodhisattva, is not of Maitreya during his final lifetime, but of him as he presently resides in the Tuṣita Heaven, the king of all the Buddhas-to-come. It also testifies to Maitreya’s spiritual ascendency, seated above his peers, much the way a Ladakhi or Tibetan lama would be seated in a traditional setting. At Basgo, Maitreya is presented with active potentiality, but waiting in equipoise. Yet, this waiting suggests not passivity, but Maitreya’s complete readiness to fulfill his soteriological mission. The adoption of the gesture of turning the wheel of dharma is also quite significant. This is a particularly powerful Buddhist gesture, eminently associated with the exposition and dissemination of the dharma. This specific gesture is a primary reference to Śākyamuni’s first sermon at Sarnath—the name of which is the Sūtra of Turning the Wheel of Dharma (Skt. Dharmacakrapravartana Sūtra). The image thus functions to invoke the legacy of Śākyamuni, while also presaging Maitreya’s own turning of the wheel of dharma during his definitive lifetime. The use of this gesture has another function, as it highlights Maitreya’s transmission of the dharma at this very moment, in the Tuṣita Heaven, to the various Buddhas, Bodhisattvas, and gods in attendance. Finally, whereas the Mulbek and Alchi Maitreyas reflected Nattier’s Here/latter typology—encountering Maitreya in his final lifetime on Earth, Nattier 1988, 26. the Basgo Maitreya reflects a preference in the Ladakhi Maitreya cult to a There/now and Here/now typology—encountering Maitreya in the present moment, either in the Tuṣita Heaven or here on Earth. Ibid., 29-31. This rising importance of the present moment suggests the influence of evolving and deepening Vajrayāna theories upon the Maitreya cult in Ladakh, as the express point of Vajrayāna is to rapidly actualize enlightenment, not to defer it, but to attain it in the present moment. Generally speaking, waiting or taking the slow-road is anathema to religious practice in Vajrayāna doctrine, and at this point in Ladakh’s history, Vajrayāna enjoyed a religious hegemony. Thus, it seems obvious that the cult of Maitreya in Ladakh would gravitate towards mystic encounters and actualizations in the present moment. An Exceptionally Brief History of Modern Ladakh As we make our way towards the final leg of our endeavor, concerning what this essay argues is a revival of the Maitreya cult in present-day Ladakh, we must unfortunately glaze over a significant chunk of Ladakh’s history, including such luring episodes as the Tibetan invasion of Ladakh by the forces of the Great Fifth Dalai Lama, This culminated in a three-year siege of Basgo, from 1681-83, by a combined Mongol-Tibetan army (Petech 1977, 73). as well as Ladakh’s aforementioned conquering by the Dogras in 1842. It is, however, necessary to delineate some of the more influential events of the last century, for, just as a Buddhist doctrinal foundation has served to ground the arguments of this essay, so to, at this juncture, is an understanding of Ladakh’s contemporary history a prerequisite to understanding the final evolution of the Maitreya cult in Ladakh. Following the Partition of India in 1947, the Mahārāja of the Princely State of Jammu and Kashmir—facing a Muslim insurrection in the Vale of Kashmir, fomented by Pakistani agents, and the invasion of Gilgit and Baltistan by Pashtun irregulars, also clandestinely assisted by the Pakistani government—signed the Instrument of Accession, incorporating Jammu and Kashmir, including Ladakh, with India. This triggered the Indo-Pakistani War of 1947-48, in which large portions of Jammu and Kashmir, including Baltistan, traditionally the northern half of Ladakh, were seized by Pakistan. In the darkest hour of the war, Pakistani forces had ocupied Zangskar, the western-most portion of Ladakh, and advanced as far south as the village of Taru, near Phiyang (see Appendix Map 1), roughly 20 kilometers upriver from Leh. Rizvi 2012, 98. A desperate defense, and brilliant counterattack by Ladakhi militias and the Indian Army, in which American-made tanks were used to take the 3,582 meter-high Zoji-La pass linking Ladakh with Kashmir, During a blizzard! saw the Pakistani forces driven from most of Ladakh, only Baltistan remaining under Pakistan’s control. Ibid., 99. In 1962, the brief Sino-Indian War erupted on Ladakh’s border with Tibet (see Appendix Map 3), this time with the Chinese military. The conflict, which lasted barely a month, saw the Indian military routed and humiliated, There were some quite heroic last stands, since memorialized by the Indian Military, such as at the pass of Rezang-La and at Gurung Hill. several elements of the Indian Army essentially dissolving in the face of the Chinese onslaught. Despite India’s thorough licking at the hands of the Chinese, save for the loss of Aksai Chin, to quote Rizvi, “a barren and uninhabitable waste, nowhere less than 4500 meters above sea-level,” the Chinese abandoned their other territorial gains, with the de facto boundaries returning to the status quo ante. Ibid., 100; even this description of Aksai Chin could be considered flattering. The most devastating effect of the Sino-Indian War was to shatter the false peace between the two Asian giants, the final nail in the coffin of Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru’s dream of a pan-Asian socialist brotherhood, emblazoned in the slogan Hindi-Chini bhai-bhai, ‘Indians and Chinese are brothers.’ Three years later, in 1965, came the Second Indo-Pakistani War, another rather short-lived conflict in which India was victorious, as it has been in every armed conflict, and World Cup cricket match, ‘fought’ with Pakistan. On this occasion, fighting in Ladakh was limited to dislodging Pakistani infiltrators from the mountains near the town of Kargil, See Appendix Map 1. less than 40 kilometers from the Mulbek Maitreya, and the strategically vital Srinagar-Leh Road (see Appendix Map 3). In 1971 came the Third Indo-Pakistani War, lasting just thirteen days, and leading to the birth of Bangladesh as nation. This saw India capture small portions of Baltistan in the Nubra Valley, such as the village of Turtuk, originally lost to Pakistan in 1947. Similarly, the Line-of-Control, the de facto border, was pushed twelve kilometers north of Kargil, which, prior to 1971, was so close that Kargil’s main bazaar was in range of Pakistani small arms fire. Ibid. 1984 brought Operation Meghdoot (Skt. Meghadūta), named after the Meghadūta of the great poet Kālidāsa, a brilliantly executed, rapid assault and capture of the Siachen Glacier, securing Indian control of the area from the Saltoro Ridge to the famed Karakoram Pass (see Appendix Map 3). Though a resounding tactical success, Operation Meghdoot resulted in a strategic nightmare. Skirmishes have continued on the Siachen Glacier—despite a ceasefire in 2003—for over thirty years, at a staggering logistical and human cost to both armies, Less than 10% of casualties are the result of actual combat, the vast majority stemming from terrain, altitude, and weather (Ives 2004, 186). and to the surrounding environment. The Indian Army’s presence generating over 1,000 kilograms of waste per day. Ives 2004, 186-87. With combat taking place above 6,000 meters, The Siachen Glacier has been dubbed, quite rightly, “the world’s highest battlefield.” in some of the most inhospitable conditions on Earth, Siachen is truly a frozen Pun intended. conflict, in every sense of that term. The most recent major armed conflict in Ladakh’s history is the Kargil War of 1999, a purely defensive operation for India, ousting Pakistani infiltrators—elements of the regular army dressed as mujahideen—who had covertly occupied territory on the Indian side of the Line-of-Control during the winter of 1998-99. Rizvi 2012, 101. The result saw heavy fighting on the ground and in the air, the Maitreyas at Mulbek and Khartse Khar no doubt hearing the roar of Indian and Pakistani fighter aircraft and the constant thundering of artillery. After two months of fighting, the infiltrators were defeated and dislodged. Ibid. Following the Kargil War, in Ladakh at least, an uneasy peace has persisted to the present, but this has done nothing to diminish Ladakh’s unparalleled strategic importance for India, or slow the continuing militarization of the region. If the present discussion of armed conflict in Ladakh’s recent history seems belabored, that is the point. Since Partition, Ladakh has witnessed four wars on its soil. The threat of war is ever present, the shadow of armed conflict looming ominously over Ladakh like the shadows cast by the mountain peaks. The ubiquitous military garrisons are a constant reminder of this uncomfortable reality, a reality Ladakhis have been forced to accept. The continual spectre of war is not the only issue facing modern Ladakh. Since its incorporation into the Princely State of Jammu and Kashmir in 1842, Ladakh has been politically marginalized, first ignored by the Hindu mahārājas of the Dogra Dynasty, and since partition, by a predominantly Muslim state government, with little concern for the Buddhists of Ladakh. Ladakh accounts for barely two percent of the Jammu and Kashmir’s population, but represents nearly two-thirds of its physical size. Prior to 1995, and the devolution of some power from the state government to the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council (LAHDC), Ladakhis had no control of their political destiny. Ibid., 105. The creation of the LAHDC has changed this, but the vast majority of Ladakhis still chafe under the corrupt and ineffectual state government, whose vision (and funds) so rarely extend beyond Jammu or the Vale of Kashmir. Modernity has also caused problems on a communal level. While historically, Ladakh’s Buddhists and Muslims coexisted symbiotically, the last few decades have seen the rise of sectarianism among followers of both religions. The 1979 division of Ladakh into a Buddhist-majority Leh district and Muslim-majority Kargil district certainly did not help matters. Ibid. Sectarianism in Ladakh reached a peak in 1989, thanks in no small part to the late Benazir Bhutto’s appeals, then Prime Minister of Pakistan, for Ladakhi Muslims to attack their Buddhist kin and expel them from the region. Powers and Templeman 2012, 392. After the shooting of Buddhist protestors by Muslim police, outside Leh’s central Buddhist temple no less, The bullet markings may still be seen on the wall outside the temple. violent riots erupted in Leh. The riots prompted an economic boycott of Muslims by the Ladakh Buddhist Association, lasting until 1993. Rizvi 2012, 105. Fortunately, since the early 1990’s, there has been a climb-down in sectarianism on both sides. Nevertheless, relations between Ladakh’s Buddhist and Muslim communities, while generally peaceable, remain strained. That being said, it is unlikely that there is a sectarian bend to the Maitreya cult’s revival in contemporary Ladakh, as the eschatology of the well-known Kālacakra Tantra—in which the Buddhist king of Śambhalaḥ leads his Buddhist army against the ravaging Muslim forces that have destroyed Buddhism in India in a decisive battle, from which the Buddhists emerge victorious—is both eminently more appealing to anti-Muslim sentiments and exceptionally closer in time, the great conflagration between the Buddhist and Muslim armies taking place in 2425 C.E. Buswell Jr. and Lopez Jr. 2014, 748-49 & Powers and Templeman 2012, 228. If the desire of Ladakh’s Buddhists is to the see the Muslims defeated and vanquished, and the majority of Ladakhi Buddhists hold no such sectarian proclivities, the legend of Maitreya, which promises nothing so violent, is the last place to look. Indeed, as Bĕlka argues, the Kālacakra cult is actually inimical to the Maitreya cult, undercutting, as it does, the Future Buddha’s soteriological importance. Bĕlka 2006, 56-57. Maitreya in the Age of Tourism Within this whirlwind of change came another tumultuous development. In 1971, having been closed to outsiders since Partition, Ladakh was once again opened to the outside world, inaugurating a new and seemingly perpetual foreign invasion: tourism. Rizvi 2012, 104. The influx of deep-pocketed foreign tourists presented a new lifeblood for Ladakh’s then ailing economy, the previous focus, trade, all but impossible with the sealing and fortification of the borders. This shift to a tourist economy began slowly, but has today reached fever pitch, and it has brought wealth to Ladakh, where, largely, there was none. Ibid., 218-19. Even the monasteries, out of necessity, have succumbed to the draw of the new tourist economy. One of the most important duties of Ladakhi monasteries is the staging of festivals at which the lay community may gather, socialize, and most importantly, earn merit. These festivals also provide an occasion for the monastic community to fulfill its roles, performing rituals and rites to honor Buddhist personages and to ensure the continued wellbeing of the villages and people within a monastery’s religious domain. The most striking of these festivals are centered upon what is called cham Wyl. ‘cham., or masked dance. These are highly ritualized performances, typically reenacting events from the live(s) of Padmasambhava Wyl. pad+ma ‘byung gnas; lit. “Lotus-Born;” usually referred to as Guru Rinpoche (Wyl. gu ru rin po che), “Precious Guru,” by Ladakhis., the apocryphal progenitor of Tibetan Buddhism. Traditionally, these masked dances, as well as most other religious festivals, took place during the winter, Winter in Ladakh, virtually all of which is at least 3000 meters above sea level, lasts from mid-November to early April, with the ambient air temperature rarely rising above 0°C. The ground is frozen solid and becomes unworkable. The tributary streams dry up, which flow from the mountain glaciers to the rivers below and are the primary source of water for most. What little does melt, simply evaporates before reaching lower altitudes, as the water in pipes also freezes. Thus, the only source of water is from hand pumps linked to underground wells, or natural springs, which are rare, but beloved. Physical labor is rendered all but impossible. Similarly, the high passes are also snowed in, save for those kept open out of strategic necessity by the Indian military. The flow of goods is reduced to a trickle, predominantly military rations flown in on a daily basis, with air transport the only way of leaving or entering Ladakh, as the two passes linking Ladakh with the rest of India (Zoji La and Baralacha La) are under as much as twenty to thirty meters of snow. when there is virtually nothing to do besides, “drink chang [barley beer] and make babies.” Your author was personally informed of this by a Ladakhi friend, who also happens to be a monk. Since Ladakh’s opening to tourism, virtually every single monastic festival, save for the one at Stok, has been moved to the summer so as to coincide with the tourist season. As a result, one often finds tourists—in shorts and tank-tops, sticking their cameras into the actual performance—outnumbering Ladakhis at the more highly publicized monastic festivals, like the one at Hemis, The masked dance at Hemis, in a rare exception, has always been held during summer. Ladakh’s largest monastery. Beyond monastic festivals, Ladakhi monasteries are limited in their ability to attract tourists, most of whom have only an ephemeral interest in Buddhism or Ladakhi culture, and for whom Ladakh is really just one big photo opportunity. In this competition for prestige and money, giant Buddha statues have proven a powerful draw for tourists, and also, for Ladakhis, with images of Maitreya possessing a special resonance considering the long historical presence of such images in Ladakh. The Tikse Maitreya Located 17 kilometers upriver from Leh (see Appendix Map 1), Tikse is the largest and one of the most important monasteries belonging to the Gelug school of Tibetan Buddhism in Ladakh. The construction of the Maitreya at Tikse marked the revival of the Maitreya cult in Ladakh, which went into decline during the twilight years of Ladakh’s independence, the last large Maitreya statue being constructed in the Eighteenth Century near the old fort, above Leh Palace. The Maitreya at Tikse Monastery is considered by many to be the most beautiful Buddha statue in all of Ladakh. Your author would happen to agree with this statement. Testifying to the statues importance, it was consecrated in 1980 by no less a figure than His Holiness the Fourteenth Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso, who remarked of the statue: This Maitreya is very beautiful. Even if you see this Maitreya again and again, you will never see it enough; you will always want to see more – you will never be satisfied. I have seen many statues but this Maitreya is special for me. I have never seen a Maitreya like this before. Rinpoche, the Sangha community and sponsors will accumulate great merit. Thiksay Monastery n.d., 4. Figure 9: Tikse Maitreya. (Credit: Studio Ladakh/Bill Brunner) The Tikse Maitreya is fifteen meters high and exhibits elements of both the Alchi and Basgo Maitreyas. Here, Maitreya is portrayed as he exists in the present, in the Tuṣita Heaven and is replete with prototypically Tibetan-style ornaments. With the Tikse Maitreya, the water pot makes a reappearance, on Maitreya’s left side, but rather than being held, it is borne by a blossoming lotus. A new iconographical element is the appearance of a dharmacakra, the eight-spoked wheel symbolizing, specifically, the Noble Eightfold Path (Skt. āryāṣṭāṅgamārga), and more generally, the dharma as a whole. The dharmacakra is, save for the image of Śākyamuni Buddha himself, the most ubiquitous and widely recognized symbol of Buddhism. This too is supported by a blossoming lotus, but on Maitreya’s right. Much like the gesture of turning the wheel of dharma, the dharmacakra as an attribute signifies Maitreya’s importance as Śākyamuni’s successor and as a revealer of the dharma. The most striking feature of the statue is that Maitreya sits in the lotus position (Skt. padmāsana) and does not have a throne. This is less common, but not unheard of in Tibetan iconography of Maitreya. Indeed, one of the smaller Maitreyas at Basgo, found in the personal shrine of Skalzang Dolma, Sengge Namgyal’s wife, is also depicted in the lotus position. Snellgrove and Skorupski 1977, 97. The primary reason for depicting Maitreya sans throne and in the lotus position may well have been practicality, Mundane, I know. as a statue of Maitreya of this size, seated on a throne, simply would not have fit in the temple in which it is housed. Here, as at Basgo, Maitreya preforms the gesture of turning the wheel of dharma. Unlike at Basgo, but invoking the Sumtseg Maitreya of Alchi, the Tikse Maitreya’s crown depicts the Five Wisdom Buddhas. There is, however, one slight difference in that the central Buddha is Akṣobhya, who, in certain presentations of the Five Buddha Families, occupies the central position instead of Vairocana. In light of the interchangeability, Akṣobhya’s supersession of Vairocana is not a cause for alarm. The Likir Maitreya Likir is another major Gelugpa monastic establishment, roughly 52 kilometers downriver from Leh (see Appendix Map 1). Francke credits its founding to the descendents of Palgyi-gon, in the early Twelfth Century, which is probably a bit too early. Francke 1907, 64. It is presently the monastic seat of the Fourteenth Dalai Lama’s younger brother, Ngari Rinpoche, who no longer resides at Likir, having disrobed some time ago. Rizvi 2012, 271. The Likir Maitreya was completed in 1997, and is 23 meters high. Ibid. As with the Basgo and Tikse Maitreyas, the Likir Maitreya preforms the gesture of turning the wheel of Dharma. As at Tikse, the Likir Maitreya is adorned with a water pot and dharmacakra, born by lotuses. Save for his hair, which is painted black, the Likir Maitreya is painted entirely in gold. It is difficult to make out in the image provided, but the Likir Maitreya sports a stūpa in its hair, reintroducing an iconographical element not seen in a large Ladakhi Maitreya since the rock-cut Maitreyas of Mulbek and Khartse Khar. Here, Maitreya is depicted in his Figure 10: The Likir Maitreya. (Credit: Studio Ladakh/Bill Brunner) final lifetime as a fully enlightened Buddha, with the robes of a monk and the illustrious cranial protuberance (Skt. uṣṇīṣa) that is the signifying mark of a Buddha’s enlightenment. While depicting Maitreya as a fully enlightened Buddha is rare in Tibetan iconography, it is not without precedent, as an earlier Maitreya statue at Tikse also portrays a fully enlightened Buddha Maitreya. Snellgrove and Skorupski 1977, 114. The reasons behind Maitreya’s portrayal at Likir as a fully enlightened Buddha, as opposed to the more orthodox form of Bodhisattva, merit further investigation, not presently possible in this essay. The Diskit Maitreya Figure 11: The Diskit Maitreya. (Credit: Studio Ladakh/Bill Brunner) Located in the Nubra Valley, a grueling half-day’s drive from Leh, over one of the highest motorable passes in the world (see Appendix Map 1), Diskit Monastery is a branch of Tikse, and the largest monastery in the Nubra Valley. Within the monastery is an older statue of Maitreya, this, however, is dwarfed by the 32 meter-high Maitreya statue that sits, quite literally, atop an adjacent hill, rising above the surrounding valley like Yurtle the Turtle above his pond on the island of Sala-ma-Sond. Consecrated in 2010, again, by the Fourteenth Dalai Lama (see Figure 12), it is the largest Buddha statue in Ladakh. Here, Maitreya is again presented as a Bodhisattva, wearing the typical Tibetan-style accoutrements, seated on a throne in the ‘European’ posture. He wears a five-pointed crown, but the quintet of Wisdom Buddhas are not themselves displayed. Lotuses supporting the dharmacakra and water pot emanate from his heart-center. As at Basgo, Tikse, and Likir, the Diskit Maitreya performs the gesture of turning the wheel of dharma. Although, from certain angles given their placement at Maitreya’s heart-center and symmetricity, the positioning of Maitreya’s hands seems to invoke, possibly, dual gestures of primordial wisdom (Skt. jñānamudrā), but this is highly unlikely, and to investigate this theory, in which there is little merit, is again, not possible at the moment in this essay. Conclusions As we move towards a conclusion in our endeavor, it must be admitted that we have come a very long way from Maitreya’s origins as the first Bodhisattva, a completely human figure, largely devoid of the wisdom and powers of enlightenment, and whose appearance on Earth is brutally far off in the future. With the development of Mahāyāna, and then Vajrayāna, leading to the creation of ever more elaborate Buddhist doctrines, Maitreya underwent a drastic transformation, becoming a salvific figure not only in the future, but in this life, his wisdom and guidance accessible in the present moment. Maitreya was thus elevated to a status rivalling that of Śākyamuni himself. As the legends and powers of Maitreya developed, so too did the cult around him, reaching stratospheric heights in China in the middle of the First Millennium. However, given Maitreya’s appeal and centrality to Buddhism, his cult was not geographically limited, but ever-present, emerging wherever Buddhism spread, notably, in Kashmir and in Tibet. And as the Buddhist faithful set out along the Silk Road, on arduous journeys of trade and proselytization, they carried with them their deep reverence for Maitreya. In Ladakh, the cult of Maitreya originated with those travelers who venerated Maitreya as a protector, looking to the Future Buddha, not only in his usual soteriological role, but as a watchful guardian of the high passes and barren wastes, and all who dared embark on so perilous a journey. The cult was set in stone For the last time, pun intended. in the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries by Kashmiri artists and their local patrons (perhaps, the early Ladakhi Kings), van Ham 2011, 26. most notably at Mulbek. The next phase of the cult came in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries, blossoming with Ladakh’s own Buddhist awakening. The cult absorbed and became a vehicle for new Tantric developments in Vajrayāna, as exemplified by Maitreya in the Sumtseg at Alchi, but also in Maitreya statues at Mangyu and Sumda Chung (see Appendix Map 1). Luczantis 2004, 211. Here, Maitreya’s role as Future Buddha was enhanced, functioning not merely as the heir to Śākyamuni, but the emanation of the superlative cosmic Buddha, Vairocana. While still maintaining the Kashmiri iconography of the early Maitreyas, the cult became indigenized, reflecting a new reverence among Ladakh’s populace for Buddhism in general, and Maitreya in particular. At Basgo, with the political reunification of Ladakh, and the founding of a new dynasty, the Maitreya cult developed further. This stage evinced the onset of unopposed Tibetan influence over Buddhism in Ladakh, while also presenting the most compelling evidence yet of a royal dimension to the cult of Maitreya, with the kings of Ladakh creating large Maitreya statues at their citadels in Basgo, and later, in Leh. In 1842, came the end of an independent Ladakh, and by extension, royal patronage of Buddhism. The result was the unceremonious and temporary end of the Maitreya cult, as the creation of giant statues, the cult’s primary means of expression, became all but impossible without funding from the state’s coffers. Finally, in the wake of Ladakh’s incorporation into the Union of India, and all the crises this precipitated, and the opening of the region to tourism, beginning Ladakh’s violent thrust into the modern world and the radical transformation of its economy, the cult of Maitreya emerged anew. Now, the cult of Maitreya has evolved to take on multifarious aspects, large Maitreya statues functioning as a means of harnessing the tourist economy and as assertions of Buddhist Ladakh’s identity, as well as their more orthodox role as literal embodiments of Maitreya himself. For Ladakhi Buddhists, considering the events since Partition, the appeal of Maitreya should be obvious. Ladakh has long since lost its sovereignty. Cultural mores are under threat. Traditions are being abandoned and forgotten. The environment, thanks to pollution and climate change, is deteriorating. The monastic ranks are thinning. The forces of Pakistan loom to the North, while the People’s Liberation Army claws at Ladakh’s southern and eastern borders. In the face of so much change, and under the incessant threat of war, one of the few sources of stability and hope for Ladakh’s Buddhists is their religion. And no figure in the Buddhist pantheon provides continuity and hope for the future more so than Maitreya, the scion of Śākyamuni and the architect of a new golden age of the dharma on Earth. The towering statues of Maitreya at Tikse, Likir, and Diskit are not merely works of art or the materialist appeals to tourists’ cameras, they are invocations of Ladakh’s Buddhist past, sources of merit and protection in Ladakh’s troubled present, and promises of hope and renewal for Ladakh’s future. Indeed, Ladakh’s Maitreya statues are synonymous with what Maitreya himself is to Buddhism at large, which, to quote Sponberg, “…is a symbol of hope, of the human aspiration for a better life in the future when the glories of the past will be regained.” Sponberg 1988, 2. This is Maitreya’s enduring appeal, and this is why now, in these times of great upheaval and uncertainty for Ladakhis, the cult of Maitreya once again flourishes in Figure 12: Consecration of the Diskit Maitreya by His Holiness the Fourteenth Dalai Lama. (Credit: The Office of His Holiness the Dalai Lama) the Land of High Passes. Map 1: The Upper Indus River Valley (van Ham 2011, 18). Map 2: The Kingdoms of Western Tibet (Ryavec 2015, 72). Appendix Map 3: Ladakh’s Contested Borders (U.S. Central Intelligence Agency 2004). Bibliography Alexander, André, and Andreas Catanese. 2014. "Conservation of Leh Old Town: Concepts and Challanges." Chap. 15 in Art and Architecture in Ladakh: Cross-Cultural Transmissions in the Himalayas and Karakoram, edited by Erberto Lo Bue and John Bray, 348-363. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill. Alexander, André, and Sam Van Schaik. 2011. "The Stone Maitreya of Leh: The Rediscovery and Recovery of an Early Tibetan Monument." Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 21 (4): 421-439. Bĕlka, Lubos. 2006. "Maitreya in Tibetan Buddhism: Image and Myth." Studia Asiatica (Asian Studies): International Journal for Asian Studies (Romanian Association for the History of Religions) VII (1): 55-73. Bellini, Chiara. 2014. "Treasures from the Neighbouring Kingdoms: A Preliminary Report on Portable Buddhist Statues in Ladakhi Monasteries." Orientations (Orientations Magazine Ltd) 45 (5): 41-47. Bernstein, Douglas Gregory. 2013. "Tearing the Yellow Hat in Two: Conflict and Controversy in the Evolution of Gelugpa Buddhist Authority in Tibet." Religious Studies Honors Papers. Paper 5. New London, Connecticut. http://digitalcommons.conncoll.edu/relighp/5. Buswell Jr., Robert E., and Donald S. Lopez Jr. 2014. The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhsim. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Denwood, Philip. 2007. "The Tibetans in the Western Himalayas and Karakoram, Seventh-Eleventh Centuries: Rock Art and Inscriptions." Journal of Inner Asian Art and Archaeology (Brepols Publishers) 2: 49-58. Dorjay, Phuntsog. 2014. "Embedded in Stone: Early Buddhist Rock Art of Ladakh." Chap. 2 in Art and Architecture in Ladakh: Cross-Cultural Transmissions in the Himalayas and Karakoram, edited by Erberto Lo Bue and John Bray, 35-67. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill. Fischer-Schreiber, Ingrid, Franz-Karl Erhard, and Michael S. Diener. 1991. The Shambhala Dictionary of Buddhism and Zen. Shambhala Dragon Edition. Translated by Michael H. Kohn. Boston, Massachusetts: Shambhala Publications, Inc. Fontein, Jan. 1979. "A Rock Sculpture of Maitreya in the Suru Valley, Ladakh." Artibus Asiae (Artibus Asiae Publishers) 41 (1): 5-12. Francke, A. H. 1907. A History of Western Tibet: One of the Unknown Empires. 1999 Reprint. Delhi, India: Pilgrims Books Pvt. Ltd. Genoud, Charles, and Takao Inoue. 1982. Buddhist Wall-Painting of Ladakh. English. Translated by Tom Tillemans. Geneva, Switzerland: Edition Olizane. Hai, Dinh Hong. 2009. "Maitreya Images in Asian Buddhist Fine Arts." (Harvard-Yencheng Institute). http://www.harvard-yenching.org/sites/harvard-yenching.org/files/featurefiles/MAITREYA%20image%20IN%20ASIAN%20BUDDHIST%20FINE%20ARTS_Dinh%20Hong%20Hai.pdf. Ives, Jack D. 2004. Himalayan Perceptions: Environmental change and the well-being of mountain peoples. New York, New York: Routledge. Jamspal, Lozang. 1997. "The Five Royal Patrons and Three Maitreya Images in Basgo." In Recent Research on Ladakh 6: Proceedings of the Sixth International Colloquium on Ladakh, Leh 1993, edited by Henry Osmaston and Nawang Tsering, 139-156. Bristol, Great Britain: University of Bristol. Khosla, Romi. 1979. Buddhist Monasteries in the Western Himalaya. Kathmandu, Nepal: Ratna Pustak Bhandar. Kim, Inchang. 1997. The Future Buddha Maitreya: An Iconological Study. New Delhi, India: D.K. Printworld (P) Ltd. Kitagawa, Joseph M. 1988. "The Many Faces of Maitreya: A Historian of Religions' Reflections." Chap. 1 in Maitreya, the Future Buddha, edited by Alan Sponberg and Helen Hardacre, 7-22. New York, New York: Cambridge University Press. Lopez Jr., Donald S. 2001. The Story of Buddhism: A Concise Guide to Its History and Teachings. New York, New York: HarperOne. Luczantis, Christian. 2004. Buddhist Sculpture in Clay: Early Western Himalayan Art, late 10th to early 13th centuries. Chicago, Illinois: Serindia Publications, Inc. Nattier, Jan. 1988. "The Meanings of the Maitreya Myth: A Typological Analysis." Chap. 2 in Maitreya, the Future Buddha, edited by Alan Sponberg and Helen Hardacre, 23-47. New York, New York: Cambridge University Press. Petech, Luciano. 1977. The Kingdom of Ladakh: C.950-1842 A.D. Vol. LI Serie Orientale Roma. Rome, Italy: Instituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente. Powers, John, and David Templeman. 2012. Historical Dictionary of Tibet. Edited by Jon Woronoff. Lanham, Maryland: Scarecrow Press, Inc. Rizvi, Janet. 2012. Ladakh: Crossroads of High Asia. Third edition. New Delhi, India: Oxford University Press. Ryavec, Karl E. 2015. A Historical Atlas of Tibet. Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press. Shah, Imtiyaz. 2012. "Khartse Khar Rock Sculpture of Metreya Buddha: Style and Development." Journal of Asian Civilizations (Taxila Institute of Asian Civilizations) 35 (1): 85-94. Sharf, Robert H. 1996. "The Scripture on the Production of Buddha Images." Chap. 19 in Religions of China in Practive, edited by Donald S. Lopez Jr., 261-267. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Snellgrove, David L., and Tadeusz Skorupski. 1977. The Cultural Heritage of Ladakh: Volume One, Central Ladakh. Vol. I. II vols. Boulder, Colorado: Prajña Press. Sponberg, Alan. 1988. "Epilogue: A Prospectus for the Study of Religion." In Maitreya, the Future Buddha, edited by Alan Sponberg and Helen Hardacre, 285-297. New York, New York: Cambridge University Press. Sponberg, Alan. 1988. "Introduction." In Maitreya, the Future Buddha, edited by Alan Sponberg and Helen Hardacre, 1-6. New York, New York: Cambridge University Press. Thiksay Monastery. n.d. Thiksay Monastery Guide Book. Leh, Ladakh (J&K): Thiksay Monastery. Torricelli, Fabrizio. 1994. "Some Notes On The Maitreya Image in Western Ladakh." The Tibet Journal (Library of Tibetan Works and Archives) 19 (1): 3-16. U.S. Central Intelligence Agency. 2004. "Kashmir Region." Perry-Castañeda Library Map Collection. Accessed December 12, 2015. http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/middle_east_and_asia/kashmir_region_2004.jpg. van Ham, Peter. 2011. Heavenly Himalayas: The Murals of Mangyu and Other Discoveries in Ladakh. New York, New York: Prestal Publishing. Vohra, Rohit. 1993. "Dating of a Maitreya Relief of the Mid-8th Century: from Sumda Chen." South Asian Studies (British Association for South Asian Studies) 9 (1): 98-103. Wong, Dorothy C. 2015. "Great Buddhist Monasteries in China and Japan in the Seventh and Eighth Centuries." (Unpublished Article) 1-14. Wong, Dorothy C. 2001. "Maitreya Buddha Statues at the University of Pennsylvania Museum." Orientations (Orientations Magazine Ltd) 32 (2): 24-31. Bernstein | 23