1 The Scripture for Humane Kings and Buddhist Kingship

It was Amoghavajra’s version of the Scripture for Humane Kings (T no. 246) that found favor with the Dali court, but the scripture had a longer history: its earlier version (T no. 245) was probably written in fifth-century North China under the Tuoba 拓跋 Northern Wei 北魏 (386–534). Sixth-century Buddhist sources classify the text as a “suspect scripture” (Ch. yijing 疑經), but the 597 Record of the Three Jewels throughout History (Ch. Lidai sanbao ji 歷代三寶記, T no. 2034) claims that it was translated by the prolific monks Dharmarakṣa (Ch. Zhu Fahu 竺法護; 230?–316), Kumārājiva (Ch. Jiumoluoshi 鳩摩羅什; 344–413), and Paramārtha (Ch. Zhendi 真諦; 499–559).⁵ Even before this attribution, the Scripture for Humane Kings was adopted by the rulers of the Chen 陳 dynasty (557–589), who invited Tiantai Zhiyi 天台智顗 (538–597) to lecture on the scripture.⁶ Tang Taizong 太宗 (r. 626–649) also embraced the Scripture for Humane Kings, and in 630 ordered monks in Chang’an 長安 to recite the scripture once a month.⁷ Most standard commentaries (i.e., those titled Ch. shu 疏) on the Scripture for Humane Kings follow this earlier version and come from a Tiantai perspective, with its emphasis on the Three Truths.⁸

Amoghavajra “retranslated” the scripture in 765 at the behest of Tang Daizong 代宗 (r. 762–779), who also called for a Scripture for Humane Kings ritual to be performed in the wake of Tibetan attacks.⁹ This retranslation project involved removing obvious references to Chinese concepts that might have revealed the text’s indigenous provenance.¹⁰ Amoghavajra also brought the text more in line with its Perfection of Wisdom (Skt. prajñāpāramitā) genre and the system of esoteric Buddhism in which he was trained, and he removed arguments against religious involvement in statecraft.¹¹ However, the Scripture for Humane Kings’s distinctive message remained its identification of rulers with bodhisattvas and its promise that upholding the scripture would help rulers protect their countries.¹²

Only one standard commentary was written on Amoghavajra’s Scripture for Humane Kings, the Commentary on the Prajñāpāramitā Scripture for Humane Kings to Protect Their States (Ch. Renwang huguo bore boluomiduo jing shu 仁王護國般若波羅蜜多經疏, T no. 1709). Its author was the monk Liangbi 良賁 (717–777), who assisted Amoghavajra with his Scripture for Humane Kings revision. Liangbi’s text was the basis for Dali-kingdom sub-commentaries on the scripture, including the Sub-commentary. However, Amoghavajra’s Scripture for Humane Kings also sparked several ritual commentaries attributed to Amoghavajra himself.¹³ One of the ritual commentaries based on Amoghavajra’s Scripture for Humane Kings was among the sources used in the 1136 Dali-kingdom Invitation Rituals.¹⁴ Court Buddhists in Dali, like their counterparts in late Nara and Heian Japan, used Amoghavajra’s Scripture for Humane Kings texts to develop their own ritual, textual, and visual system aimed at protecting the state. These courts’ adoption of Amoghavajra’s version of the scripture, rather than the earlier Tiantai version, may stem from the ritual commentaries’ greater focus on practical, direct means for protecting their states in comparison to standard commentarial exegesis. In the case of Dali and Nara-Heian Japan, Amoghavajra’s Scripture for Humane Kings also fit into the larger system of esoteric Buddhism that found favor at court.

2 The Dali Kingdom in Historical Perspective

Duan Siping 段思平 (r. 937–944) founded the Dali kingdom in 937 after a series of short-lived regimes that arose in succession after the fall of Nanzhao 南詔 (ca. 649–903).¹⁵ Dali-kingdom rulers looked to their Nanzhao predecessors for their governmental structure, titles, and religion, but lived in a very different geopolitical world. The rulers of Nanzhao found themselves in the middle of a power struggle between Tang and Tibet in the eighth century. By skillfully forming alliances with these larger empires, Nanzhao conquered its regional rivals to expand its territory and eventually challenge Tang control of Annam in what is now Vietnam.¹⁶ Based on extant records, the Dali kingdom had fewer diplomatic and military interactions with its neighbors, prompted in part by Song Taizu’s 太祖 (r. 960–975) decision to use the Dadu River as the boundary between the two states.¹⁷ The Song court only allowed Dali to present tribute a handful of times in order to avoid entanglements in the southwest.¹⁸ As a result, there are more Tang (and to a lesser extent, Tibetan) records about Nanzhao than there are Song records about Dali. However, more Buddhist materials survive from the Dali kingdom than from Nanzhao, making Buddhism one of the best documented facets of Dali-kingdom culture.

One of the challenges in distinguishing Dali-kingdom Buddhist materials from Nanzhao materials (for example, undated statues and manuscripts) is that there are so many similarities between them. Buddhism had become a prominent part of Nanzhao ruling ideology by the mid-ninth century, when the Temple for Revering the Holy One (Ch. Chongsheng si 崇聖寺) and its Thousand-League Pagoda (Ch. Qianxun ta 千尋塔) were built in the Nanzhao capital.¹⁹ The first dated Buddhist objects are statues of Amitābha and Maitreya from 850 at Stone Treasure Mountain (Ch. Shibao shan 石寶山), located in the Jianchuan region northwest of the Dali plain; they were probably commissioned by a Nanzhao official.²⁰ Tang records report that the Nanzhao ruler Shilong 世隆 (r. 860–877) “revered the buddhadharma,” and this religious orientation appears clearly in the 899 Illustrated History of Nanzhao (Ch. Nanzhao tuzhuan 南詔圖傳; hereafter, Illustrated History).

The Nanzhao officials Wang Fengzong 王奉宗 (d.u.) and Zhang Shun 張順 (d.u.) commissioned the Illustrated History to explain in images and text to the penultimate Nanzhao ruler Shunhuazhen 舜化貞 (r. 897–902) how Buddhism entered the region.²¹ According to the Illustrated History, Acuoye (Skt. Ajaya; Eng. Invincible) Guanyin 阿嵯耶觀音 took the form of an Indian monk to spread the Buddhist teachings, and helped the first Nanzhao rulers found their new kingdom. Near the end of the illustrations is an image of Shunhuazhen’s father Longshun 隆舜 (r. 878–897) standing before a statue of Acuoye Guanyin: Longshun is barefoot, wears only a dhoti, and has his hands in an añjali mudrā; behind him are two youths holding vases. This image, combined with the text’s statement that Longshun was “sprinkled by the basin” in 897, suggests that Longshun performed an esoteric consecration rite centered on Acuoye Guanyin.²² The Illustrated History’s text additionally credits Acuoye Guanyin with “opening the marvelous gate of the esoteric” and identifies the bodhisattva as the “worthy of the Lotus Family,” one of the three sections of the Garbhadhātu (Ch. Taizangjie 胎藏界; Eng. Womb Realm) maṇḍala.²³ This shows that by the late ninth century Nanzhao rulers embraced a model of Buddhist kingship effected through esoteric rites.

Further evidence of Nanzhao rulers’ esoteric orientation appears in the Sub-commentary, which was originally written in five fascicles during the early tenth century by the monk Xuanjian 玄鑒 (d.u.), “Recipient of the Purple Robe, Master of Exegesis, Abbot of the Temple of Revering the Holy One, and Monk of Inner Offerings.”²⁴ Xuanjian wrote his sub-commentary on the Tang monk Liangbi’s commentary to Amoghavajra’s version of the Scripture for Humane Kings, meaning that the rulers of the Changhe 長和 kingdom (903–927), and probably the late Nanzhao rulers as well, would have been familiar with this scripture’s model of Buddhist kingship and its methods for state protection. Though Xuanjian declines to comment on the scripture’s dhāraṇī or esoteric methods, it is clear from his explanation that he is aware of them.²⁵

The Duan rulers of the Dali kingdom followed the esoteric Buddhist kingship of the Illustrated History and Sub-commentary as part of their larger adoption of Nanzhao models of governance. Dali-kingdom rulers presented themselves as heirs to Nanzhao in several ways: they claimed Nanzhao royal titles such as Piaoxin 驃信, meaning “Lord of Pyu” (modern-day Myanmar); donned the same tall crowns; and continued to worship Acuoye Guanyin as a tutelary deity. In fact, the Painting of Buddhist Images reproduces almost the entire visual narrative of the Illustrated History, culminating in a scene of all the Nanzhao rulers worshipping Eleven-Headed Avalokiteśvara.²⁶ Dali rulers—or at least Duan Zhixing, who commissioned the painting—thus claimed to carry on the Buddhist mandate originally bestowed by Acuoye Guanyin upon the early Nanzhao kings.

The greater number of extant sources from the Dali kingdom means that these Nanzhao legacies coexisted with other Buddhist teachings. Chan and Huayan texts and visual culture appear in scriptural collections and the Painting of Buddhist Images, and popular Mahāyāna scriptures such as the Vimalakīrti Sūtra, Lotus Sūtra, and Diamond Sūtra also circulated in Dali. These texts all appear in their Sinitic translations, but there are six ritual texts that appear to have been composed in Dali. Though at least two of these texts draw extensively on Chinese scriptures, commentaries, and ritual manuals, they still show how Dali-kingdom Buddhists—especially those with ties to the court—created their own Buddhist materials.²⁷ A similar dynamic characterized Dali-kingdom Buddhist art. Images of the popular buddhas and bodhisattvas Avalokiteśvara (in many forms), Maitreya, Amitābha, Kṣitigarbha, Mañjuśrī, Samantabhadra, and others appear among the figures of the Painting of Buddhist Images, the Buddhist grottoes at Stone Treasure Mountain, and the statues found in Thousand-League Pagoda and other structures in the region. Dali-kingdom visual culture generally drew on Tang and Song styles, forms, and iconographies, but there were exceptions, for example in images of Acuoye Guanyin and Mahākāla that display iconographies not found in Tang-Song territory.

3 The Duan and Gao Families

Most surviving sources for Dali-kingdom Buddhism come from the court, but the court included more than just the Duan rulers. While it is clear that the Duan family sponsored multiple Buddhist projects, the Gao family did as well. Among the handful of extant inscriptions from the Dali kingdom, most concern members of the Gao clan and their Buddhist devotion. Aside from these materials, the earliest account of Duan-Gao relations appears in the Yuan History (Yuan shi 元史, 1370), which states that at the time of the Mongol conquest of Dali, “The Duan ruler of Dali was weak, and state affairs were all decided by the brothers Gao Xiang and Gao He.”²⁸ It is only in the Ming (1368–1644) Unofficial History of Nanzhao (Ch. Nanzhao yeshi 南詔野史; hereafter, Unofficial History) that a more detailed account of Duan-Gao relations appears, but this text must be treated with suspicion when used as a historical record.²⁹ I consult the Unofficial History when its contents accord with those of Dali-era materials.

The Gao family rose to prominence in the late eleventh century when Duan Silian 段思廉 (r. 1045–1075) granted the title Grand Guardian (Ch. taibao 太保) to Gao Zhisheng 高智昇 after the latter quashed a rebellion.³⁰ According to the Yuan Concise Gazetteer of Yunnan (Ch. Yunnan zhilue 雲南志略), Duan Zhengming 正明 (r. 1082–1094) abdicated his throne for Zhisheng’s son, Gao Shengtai 昇泰 (d.u.), who established the Great Central Kingdom (Ch. Dazhongguo 大中國) in 1094.³¹ However, his sons reportedly refused to take the throne after his death in 1095, so the Dali kingdom was restored under Duan rule.³² It is only with Gao Shengtai’s son Gao Taiming 泰明 (d.u.) that we find an example of Gao Buddhist activity, in this case sponsoring a manuscript of the Vimalakīrti Sūtra in gold ink on indigo silk as a gift for a Song envoy in 1118.³³ Over the twelfth century Gao Taiming’s descendants continued to serve as high officials who suppressed rebellions and sponsored Buddhist structures. One such figure, Gao Miaoyin Hu 妙音護 (fl. late twelfth century), showed his Buddhist devotion by building the Temple of Great Flourishing (Ch. Gaoxing si 高興寺) on the east side of Er Lake.³⁴ Miaoyin Hu also married well: his wife was Duan Yizhang Shun 段易長順, the sister of Duan Zhixing, sponsor of the Painting of Buddhist Images.³⁵ Gao men continued to occupy top official positions until the Mongol conquest, when the invading army executed Gao Xiang and Gao He.

The Duan emperors had a similar background to the Gao prime ministers in that Duan men served as prime ministers under the Nanzhao kingdom. Duan Siping, in founding the Dali kingdom, drew on his martial prowess in joining with the “thirty-seven tribes” (Ch. sanshiqi bu 三十七部) to unify the region after the series of short-lived kingdoms in the tenth century.³⁶ However, other Duan rulers were less inclined toward military affairs. At least two Duan emperors abdicated to become monks, which could reflect their Buddhist devotion, political coercion, or both.³⁷ Several inscriptions from the Dali kingdom mention the emperor (often bestowing titles on illustrious Gao officials), but few discuss Duan figures in detail. An inscription on a gilt bronze statue of Acuoye Guanyin from the Temple for Revering the Holy One reads:

The Emperor and Piaoxin Duan Zhengxing 正興 makes this record on behalf of the princes Duan Yizhang Sheng 易長生 and Duan Yizhang Xing 興. May their blessings be as numerous as metaphorical motes of dust and grains of sand, and may they preserve this good fortune for their descendants for a thousand years, with the banners of Heaven and Earth passed down through myriad generations.³⁸

An image of Yizhang Guanshiyin 易長觀世音 appears in frame 100 of the Painting of Buddhist Images, suggesting that this form of the bodhisattva may have been the tutelary deity of at least some Duan rulers.³⁹ Aside from this, the Painting of Buddhist Images as a whole reflects the Buddhist devotion of Duan Zhixing, and the Duan rulers probably participated in the range of Dali-kingdom Buddhist traditions that survive in images, texts, and objects.

Dali-kingdom records illuminate several facets of the world in which materials related to the Scripture for Humane Kings circulated. First, the preponderance of inscriptions from different sites about the Gao family in surviving Dali-kingdom records strongly suggests that their political and military power rivaled or surpassed that of the Duan family. Duan power was consolidated in the main capital of Yangjumie 陽苴咩 (modern-day Dali) but the Gao seemed to control a larger area, including the eastern capital of Shanchan 鄯闡 (modern-day Kunming). Second, for the period in which Scripture for Humane Kings sources appear (the mid-eleventh century through the twelfth century), the Gao family was involved in a variety of Buddhist projects that touched on Chan, the Vimalakīrti Sūtra, a dhāraṇī pillar with esoteric imagery, and the building of temples tied to both esoteric and Chan monks. In this way, their commitments mirror the kinds of Buddhist materials that have survived from the Dali kingdom. Finally, the Buddhism of the Gao and Duan families was intertwined, as were the families themselves. Gao men and Duan women intermarried, and members of the two families jointly sponsored Buddhist temple construction.

The dated materials related to the Scripture for Humane Kings were created during this period: the Sub-commentary was copied under the reign of Duan Silian, as Gao power was growing; Invitation Rituals was compiled under Duan Zhengyan 正嚴 (r. 1108–1147); and the Painting of Buddhist Images was completed under Duan Zhixing, who was an affinal relation of Gao Miaoyin Hu. These projects were attached to the court, but the court included Gao as well as Duan figures. In addition, both Gao and Duan men became monks, which complicates our understanding of court-saṅgha relations. One of the key tensions that emerges in the Scripture for Humane Kings and ideals of Buddhist kingship more broadly is the relative authority of rulers and monastics. While one of Amoghavajra’s goals in revising the Scripture for Humane Kings was to remove arguments against religious involvement in statecraft, and to promote the authority and independence of the saṅgha, rulers did not always interpret the text that way in practice.⁴⁰ Examining in more detail the Scripture for Humane Kings in the Dali kingdom, and specifically its scenes in the Painting of Buddhist Images, will clarify how the Dali rulers presented themselves as humane kings within their foreign and domestic geopolitical contexts.

4 The Scripture for Humane Kings in Dali

The 1052 copy of the tenth-century Sub-commentary offers the first evidence for the importance of the Scripture for Humane Kings in Dali-kingdom Buddhism. Additional evidence comes in the form of two partial manuscripts of the text (as well as a fragment), which include parts of Liangbi’s commentary as well as annotations and a sub-commentary that differs from that of the tenth-century Sub-commentary. The State-Protecting Prajñā Buddha Mother section of Invitation Rituals further demonstrates interest in the esoteric ritual tradition based on the Scripture for Humane Kings. These texts indicate that the Dali court—including its high-ranking monks—devoted considerable time and resources to making sense of the Scripture for Humane Kings and putting its rituals into practice.

Compared to other Dali-kingdom materials related to the Scripture for Humane Kings, the Sub-commentary gives the clearest sense of the kinds of kingship that elite monks of the Changhe and Dali kingdoms promoted, namely, a combination of classical Chinese rulers—e.g., the sage-king Yao—and paradigmatic Buddhist rulers, such as the cakravartin Aśoka (r. ca. 269–ca. 232 BCE) who is credited with spreading Buddhism in the Mauryan empire (ca. 383–ca. 185 BCE). These two kinds of rulers come together in the Liang dynasty’s Emperor Wu (Liang Wudi 梁武帝; 464–549), whom Xuanjian credits with adapting his Confucian ritual obligations to Buddhist principles of nonviolence.⁴¹ Given the Tang context in which Liangbi composed his commentary on Amoghavajra’s Scripture for Humane Kings, it is no surprise that the Sub-commentary also lauds Tang emperors: for example, Liangbi’s praise for the reigning emperor Suzong 肅宗 (r. 711–726) inspires Xuanjian’s comments on ideal Confucian rulership.⁴² However, the Dali-kingdom monk Shi Daochang’s 釋道常 (d.u.) one-fascicle abridgement of Xuanjian’s five-fascicle original actually adds a section on the first eight Tang emperors, showing how important Tang models remained for Dali court monks.⁴³

While the Sub-commentary praises rulers like Emperor Liang who perfectly combine Buddhist and Confucian aspects of statecraft, it also suggests that ideal rulers are those who properly respect Buddhist authorities. In his commentary, Liangbi defines the scripture’s key terms: “ ‘Humane king’ is the good name of an inviting host who shows widespread respect; ‘protecting the state’ is the great work of those who spread universal love.”⁴⁴ Xuanjian expands on this by citing an episode in the Scripture for Humane Kings in which King Prasenajit (Ch. Bosini wang 波斯匿王), ruler of Śrāvasti, had invited the Buddha to lecture on the bodhisattva path, thereby “showing widespread respect.”⁴⁵ By extension, humane kings are those who consult and honor Buddhist advisors, a message that undoubtedly appealed to the monks who wrote and copied the Sub-commentary.

Daochang’s copy of Xuanjian’s Sub-commentary underscores court monks’ desire to make sense of the Scripture for Humane Kings through Liangbi’s commentary. The two partial manuscripts of the Scripture for Humane Kings, which also include annotations, passages from Liangbi’s commentary, and separate sub-commentary, further attest to this desire.⁴⁶ Though neither manuscript bears a date nor the name of a scribe or author, it is highly likely they were created in the Dali kingdom: their script resembles that of other dated Dali-kingdom manuscripts, and the second manuscript’s two colophons suggest a Dali-kingdom date.⁴⁷ Moreover, the Sub-commentary’s date shows that the Scripture for Humane Kings was known in Dali as early as the turn of the tenth century, making it reasonable to conclude that the Dali-kingdom court had access to the scripture as well.

The surviving portion of the first Scripture for Humane Kings manuscript covers part of chapter five, “Protecting the State,” all of chapter six, “The Inconceivable,” and part of chapter seven, “Receiving and Keeping This Scripture.” It gives the text of Amoghavajra’s Scripture for Humane Kings and Liangbi’s commentary, but often abridges both and occasionally adds or alters characters. Interlinear notes in red ink mark the scriptural text, usually to turn a single character (e.g., Ch. wang 王, “king”) into a binomial (e.g., Ch. guowang 國王, “king of state”).⁴⁸ The second manuscript includes unabridged passages from Amoghavajra’s scripture, selected parts of Liangbi’s commentary, and a sub-commentary. It also comes from the second half of the Scripture for Humane Kings, picking up in the middle of the seventh chapter and continuing to the end of the eighth and final chapter, “The Charge.” Both manuscripts show Dali court monks’ effort to make sense of the scripture’s meaning, in the first manuscript’s annotations and the second manuscript’s sub-commentary. The former may also have made the text more suitable for preaching or teaching.

Among the extant manuscripts from Dharma Treasury Temple, the Scripture for Humane Kings manuscripts are unique in their amount of annotation and sub-commentary. The section on the State-Protecting Prajñā Buddha Mother in Invitation Rituals tells us that the Dali court looked to this text not only for its meaning, but also for its efficacy. The court monk Shi Zhaoming 釋照明 (d.u.), né Yang Yilong 楊義隆, copied Invitation Rituals in 1136.⁴⁹ As its title indicates, Invitation Rituals consists of rituals for inviting around forty divine beings, from buddhas to bodhisattvas to ferocious dharma guardians. Like other ritual texts unique to Dali, it draws heavily on Tang ritual texts, particularly those credited to Amoghavajra and his esoteric lineage.⁵⁰ In the State-Protecting Prajñā Buddha Mother section the main sources are Liangbi’s commentary and the Ritual Procedures text attributed to Amoghavajra.

The ritual for inviting the State-Protecting Prajñā Buddha Mother begins with standard procedures found throughout Invitation Rituals. The practitioner first forms mudrās and mantras to summon vajra guardians, purify the dharma realm, and invoke the three families of buddhas, bodhisattvas, and vajra beings. Through visualizations, the practitioner then invites the Buddha Mother, makes a series of offerings to her, and finally identifies with her. Next the practitioner lays out the maṇḍala on the altar and carries out another set of visualizations so that “all the calamities and disasters within the state will be eradicated.”⁵¹ After inviting Vajrapāṇi of the east and Vajraratna of the south, the practitioner visualizes a letter-displaying maṇḍala (Ch. buzi lun 布字輪) in which the Siddham letters of the state-protecting dhāraṇī are arranged in three layers that dissolve into the central syllable dhiḥ (the manuscript also gives an illustration of this maṇḍala).⁵² As the text explains, the goal of this visualization is to destroy the three disasters and seven calamities, which are a key concern in the Scripture for Humane Kings. After this visualization, the practitioner continues by inviting the three remaining vajra beings: Vajratīkṣṇa of the west, Vajrayakṣa of the north, and finally Vajrapāramitā of the center. Each of these five vajra beings is identified with a bodhisattva and a vidyārāja.⁵³ The ritual ends by distinguishing between the inner and outer forms of protection: here the former refers to the letters of the maṇḍala spell, while the latter refers to destroying the “three disasters and seven calamities” (Ch. sanzai qinan 三災七難) through visualization.⁵⁴

Though this section makes passing mention of inner protection, the outer protection of eradicating disasters and calamities from the state receives more attention. This theme also recurs throughout the surviving sections of the Dharma Treasury Temple Scripture for Humane Kings manuscripts and (sub-)commentaries. Invitation Rituals was compiled in 1136, under the long reign of Duan Zhengyan 正嚴 (r. 1108–1147), the only Dali emperor to have received titles from the Song court.⁵⁵ It was around this time that Gao Taiming’s sons and grandsons were distinguishing themselves for their military successes in quashing rebellions. The benefits promised in the Scripture for Humane Kings would have appealed to a Dali court facing various uprisings. As James Anderson argues in analyzing the different fates of the Dali and Đại Việt kingdoms during the Mongol conquest, the former was made up of a loose federation of clans that could not resist the onslaught, while the latter rested on strong alliances that allowed Đại Việt to remain independent.⁵⁶ The Dali court may have appealed to the Scripture for Humane Kings and its esoteric rituals for divine assistance in keeping this fragile coalition together.

Dali-kingdom textual sources related to the Scripture for Humane Kings tell us a lot about how the court engaged with this text and its ritual tradition. However, it is only in the Painting of Buddhist Images that we see how the Dali court appealed to the Scripture for Humane Kings in representing themselves in relation to other rulers. While the Duan rulers and their high officials may have turned to the scripture and its rituals to foster domestic peace and prosperity, they also used it to elevate themselves above their neighbors (even if their neighbors were not the intended audience).

5 Pillars of State: Scripture for Humane Kings Imagery in the Painting of Buddhist Images

A few decades after Yang Yilong compiled Invitation Rituals, the painter Zhang Shengwen 張勝溫 (d.u.) oversaw the creation of the Painting of Buddhist Images, which according to its opening colophon was “Painted [for] the Lizhen Emperor and Piaoxin,” i.e. Duan Zhixing.⁵⁷ The extant painting is over sixteen meters long, though indications of water damage and mismatched sections show that it was originally longer.⁵⁸ In addition, the painting was made in an accordion-fold (or concertina) format, so that viewers could open it to any section, but was later remounted as a scroll, which entails sequential viewing.⁵⁹ Art historians who have studied the Painting of Buddhist Images agree that Zhang Shengwen and his underlings were primarily trained in Chinese styles and techniques, but disagree on whether Tang or Song styles dominate.⁶⁰

One of the challenges in identifying the painting’s style and influences stems from its diverse array of figures, from arhats and Chan patriarchs, to buddha assemblies featuring Amitābha, Śākyamuni, and Bhaiṣajyaguru, to reproductions of the Illustrated History, to wrathful dharma guardians. This diversity has thwarted scholars’ attempts to connect the painting to any single influence, such as a maṇḍala or sūtra. However, we can discern an organizing principle in the painting, namely, the protection of the Dali state. Duan Zhixing and his retinue, facing left, open the painting in its first six frames (Figure 4.2), followed by two muscle-bound vajra guardians (Figure 4.3). The painting ends with four frames featuring the kings of sixteen great states, facing right (Figure 4.4), preceded by two frames, each with a painted dhāraṇī pillar (Figure 4.5): the pillar on the left is the “Precious State-Protection Pillar” (huguo baochuang 護國珤幢); the one on the right is the “Precious [Prajñāpārami]tā Heart Pillar” (duo xin baochuang 多心珤幢), which features an error-filled Siddham text of the Heart Sūtra.⁶¹ In addition to these direct references to the Scripture for Humane Kings, several frames depict Nanzhao kings, tutelary deities tied to the Duan family, and cakravartins surrounded by the seven precious things.⁶²

Figure 4.2

Duan Zhixing and retinue, Painting of Buddhist Images

Collection of the National Palace Museum

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

View Full Size

Figure 4.2

Duan Zhixing and retinue, Painting of Buddhist Images

Collection of the National Palace Museum

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

Figure 4.2

Duan Zhixing and retinue, Painting of Buddhist Images

Collection of the National Palace Museum

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

Figure 4.3

Vajra beings, Painting of Buddhist Images

Collection of the National Palace Museum

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

View Full Size

Figure 4.3

Vajra beings, Painting of Buddhist Images

Collection of the National Palace Museum

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

Figure 4.3

Vajra beings, Painting of Buddhist Images

Collection of the National Palace Museum

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

Figure 4.4

Kings of Sixteen Great States, Painting of Buddhist Images

Collection of the National Palace Museum

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

View Full Size

Figure 4.4

Kings of Sixteen Great States, Painting of Buddhist Images

Collection of the National Palace Museum

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

Figure 4.4

Kings of Sixteen Great States, Painting of Buddhist Images

Collection of the National Palace Museum

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

Figure 4.5

Dhāraṇī pillars, Painting of Buddhist Images

Collection of the National Palace Museum

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

View Full Size

Figure 4.5

Dhāraṇī pillars, Painting of Buddhist Images

Collection of the National Palace Museum

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

Figure 4.5

Dhāraṇī pillars, Painting of Buddhist Images

Collection of the National Palace Museum

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

The Precious State-Protection Pillar in frame 130 appears as a long rectangle topped with a Song-style two-tiered stūpa, standing on an hourglass-shaped lotus base.⁶³ A buddha sits in the top half of the stūpa as multicolored light shines up diagonally from the middle of the stūpa. The text of the dhāraṇī is black, unlike the red lettering used for Sanskrit characters in most Dali manuscripts. I am unaware of any other Sanskrit versions of this dhāraṇī, making this image (along with the abbreviated version in the Invitation Rituals) valuable for making sense of its many Sinitic transcriptions. This version closely matches Hatta Yukio’s reconstruction, but appears to differ in certain areas.⁶⁴ The state protection dhāraṇī extends a little more than halfway down the pillar, and what follows is another dhāraṇī with too many corruptions to be legible.⁶⁵ However, the semantic legibility is not the main point of dhāraṇī, whose power derives from their sounds and their talismanic function.

While stone dhāraṇī pillars are known throughout the Sinitic Buddhist world starting in the late Tang, I am unaware of any other examples of painted dhāraṇī pillars.⁶⁶ Stone dhāraṇī pillars from Tang territory tend to be octagonal and feature Buddhist figures and lotus decorations as well as dhāraṇī and dedicatory inscriptions in Sanskrit and/or Sinitic script.⁶⁷ A dhāraṇī pillar conforming to these specifications was erected in Kunming’s Kṣitigarbha Temple in the early thirteenth century to honor Gao Taiming’s son, Gao Mingsheng 明生. Its third level from the bottom includes thirty-eight Sanskrit dhāraṇīs (written horizontally, but right to left), including the text of the Heart Sūtra.⁶⁸ The dhāraṇī pillars in frames 129 and 130 of the Painting of Buddhist Images display several differences from their stone counterparts, even beyond their media: the painted pillars are presented as two-dimensional rectangles standing on apparently round lotus bases and topped by implicitly three-dimensional decorations, including (for the Heart Sūtra pillar) a cintamaṇi jewel and (for the State-Protection Pillar) a buddha figure; they include none of the different layers of images and texts that characterize stone dhāraṇī pillars. In addition, while the Heart Sūtra commonly appears on stone pillars, I have found no other examples of the State-Protection dhāraṇī from the Scripture for Humane Kings.

Inasmuch as the painted stone pillars in the Painting of Buddhist Images follow Tang practices of creating stone pillars inscribed with dhāraṇī, they further show the Dali court’s adoption of Chinese and Indian models. Dhāraṇī pillars belonged to Tang esoteric practices that used exotic Indian images—whether script or figural representations—to instantiate Buddhist power.⁶⁹ This logic operates in the Painting of Buddhist Images, where the two painted pillars at the end of the scroll perform the same protective role as do the wrathful guardians that populate the work’s final third. The pillars even resemble bodies, with lotus-base feet, text torsos, and stūpa heads with a buddha in the crown (in the case of the state protecting pillar). Moreover, these bodies are Indian (in a stereotypical sense): the wrathful dharma guardians evoke ethnic otherness with their exaggerated masculinity, while the pillars do so with their Sanskrit text. Not only do the pillars fit into the painting’s final section, they also fit into its symmetrical structure. Just as the sixteen kings mirror Duan Zhixing’s retinue, so too do the pillars mirror two ferocious vajra beings that follow the imperial retinue. They thus draw on the Tang visual culture that celebrated Indian exotica as well as drawing on the Scripture for Humane Kings.

We can make a similar observation about the kings of sixteen states that form the Painting of Buddhist Images’s final scene, who are primarily distinguished by their appearances: each king has different features and sports a different style of dress. Soper identifies similarities between this image and Dunhuang murals that show kings coming from all directions to see the debate between Vimalakīrti and Mañjuśrī, as narrated in the Vimalakīrti Sūtra.⁷⁰ He notes that the Dunhuang murals place the Chinese ruler on one side, and rulers of other states on another.⁷¹ The Painting of Buddhist Images draws the same division between the Dali court and rulers of the sixteen great states, which are separated by most of the painting. Though the kings of the sixteen great states are not labeled and no Chinese kingdoms are on the Scripture for Humane King’s list, Soper identifies the second from the right as a Chinese ruler based on his attire.⁷²

Figure 4.6

Thirteen Emperors, detail

Photograph © 2019 Museum of Fine Arts, Boston

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

View Full Size

Figure 4.6

Thirteen Emperors, detail

Photograph © 2019 Museum of Fine Arts, Boston

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

Figure 4.6

Thirteen Emperors, detail

Photograph © 2019 Museum of Fine Arts, Boston

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

When compared to Yan Liben’s (閻立本; 601–673) painting of the “Thirteen Emperors” (Lidai diwang tu 歷代帝王圖) from the second half of the seventh century (Figure 4.6), it is clear that the figure in the Painting of Buddhist Images resembles these Tang depictions of historical Chinese rulers. The difference is that Yan’s rulers have sun and moon insignia on their robes to denote their imperial status; in the Painting of Buddhist Images, it is Duan Zhixing, and not the Chinese ruler at the end of the painting, who wears these insignia.⁷³ Another analogous genre is that of foreign dignitaries paying tribute to the Chinese emperor, but this genre emphasizes the exotic animals and goods being offered to the Chinese emperor, elements that do not appear in the Painting of Buddhist Images.⁷⁴

Figure 4.7

Image of Barbarian Kings Worshiping the Buddha, detail

The Cleveland Museum of Art

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

View Full Size

Figure 4.7

Image of Barbarian Kings Worshiping the Buddha, detail

The Cleveland Museum of Art

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

Figure 4.7

Image of Barbarian Kings Worshiping the Buddha, detail

The Cleveland Museum of Art

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

The royal scenes that open and close the Painting of Buddhist Images show the Dali court’s continued reliance on Tang-Song visual culture, and specifically images based on the Scripture for Humane Kings. In addition to Dunhuang scenes of rulers coming to see Vimalakīrti and Mañjuśrī, and Tang-Song scenes of foreign dignitaries paying tribute to the Chinese emperor, another possible source for this image is the tenth-century Image of Barbarian Kings Worshiping the Buddha (Manwang lifo tu 蠻王禮佛圖) attributed to Zhao Guangfu 趙光輔 (fl. 960–976) (Figure 4.7). The left side of the painting depicts a heavily bearded Buddha sitting on a lotus throne and facing proper left, flanked by Ānanda and Mahākāśyapa and two additional attendants; a group of sixteen “barbarian kings” stands facing him, with the front figure holding a censer in the same way as Duan Zhixing holds the censer in the Painting of Buddhist Images’s opening scene.⁷⁵ Though the tenth-century painting does not bear a colophon or cartouche that explicitly connects it to the Scripture for Humane Kings, the text arguably inspired its set of sixteen rulers. The difference, of course, between the Painting of Buddhist Images and the Image of Barbarian Kings is that the former includes a Chinese ruler among the set of sixteen, while the latter does not.

Including the Chinese ruler among the Sixteen Kings of Great States fits the Dali-kingdom pattern of demoting the Song ruler to the level of “king” rather than “emperor.” While this practice probably only occurred in internal documents (such as the dhāraṇī pillar at Kṣitigarbha Temple), it shows the Dali court’s attempt to raise itself above its most powerful neighbor.⁷⁶ Inscriptions from the Dali kingdom also regularly use the Empress Wu (aka Wu Zetian 武則天; r. 690–705) character guo 圀 to refer to Dali, but the standard guo 國 to refer to other states.⁷⁷ This could indicate the Dali kingdom’s Buddhist orientation, given Empress Wu’s (in)famous devotion, or it could merely set apart the Dali kingdom from other states.⁷⁸

Duan Zhixing’s retinue is visually set apart from the “Kings of Sixteen Great States” in a way that privileges the Dali kingdom. The placement of these two scenes suggests a structural homology by way of doubling as well as opposition. Both depict Buddhist monarchs, foregrounding the painting’s message of state protection. Another connection ties the scriptural fate of the kings of sixteen states to the fate of at least a few Duan rulers. In the Scripture for Humane Kings, the kings renounce their thrones to become monks, just as some Duan rulers did in Dali. Visual references to the Scripture for Humane Kings in the Painting of Buddhist Images underscore the Dali kingdom’s superiority as a Buddhist regime and invoke the scriptural tradition for state protection. The Scripture for Humane Kings’s framing role reveals its centrality in Dali-kingdom Buddhism, especially in the twelfth century.

6 Conclusion

The Dali court embraced the Scripture for Humane Kings for the same reason other courts did: the scripture promised to eradicate disasters, championed Buddhist rulers as bodhisattvas, and offered specific ritual techniques for augmenting royal power. It is less clear from extant sources how the Scripture for Humane Kings played a role in saṅgha-state relations in Dali. Unlike in Tang or Song China, the saṅgha in Dali did not face threats from rival religious groups like Daoists or Confucians. There are no indications that Nanzhao or Dali rulers sought to curtail the power of Buddhist monks. This might stem from the fact that Dali was a much smaller regime in which a small number of families—Duan and Gao, but also Yang, Li, and Dong—occupied most official positions, including monastic roles. It is possible that Dali also held debates about the proper relationship between monks and emperors, but if so these records have been lost.

The Scripture for Humane Kings can operate at the level of state-saṅgha relations, but it also operates on the levels of foreign relations and domestic affairs. From what we know of Dali-kingdom history, the greatest threats were not invasions, such as the Tibetan attacks that prompted Daizong to call for a Scripture for Humane Kings ritual. Instead, internal unrest was the biggest problem, as shown by the many Gao generals who earned their fame through military exploits. The Dali court likely performed Scripture for Humane Kings rituals and sought to understand the scripture through commentaries and sub-commentaries in order to suppress the rebellions that threatened their state. In addition, the Painting of Buddhist Images suggests that the Scripture for Humane Kings offered a framework for Duan Zhixing (and by extension, other Duan rulers) to present himself as a dharmarāja, if not a cakravartin, and thus elevate his position above the Gao officials whose real political and military power exceeded his own.⁷⁹ Duan Zhixing appears as a monarch who worships and invokes the various gods, buddhas, and bodhisattvas that populate the scroll, which conforms to the scripture’s image of its humane kings.

The Dali court’s elevation of itself in contrast to the Song implicitly argues that it was Dali, rather than the Song, that inherited the Tang imperial mandate. Such a claim is belied by Dali’s repeated attempts to pay tribute to the Song court, as well as by the geopolitical realities that made such a claim absurd. However, the relatively remote relationship between Song and Dali, as well as the Song court’s defeats at the hands of northern regimes, gave the Dali court and high officials more rhetorical room to maneuver. It is unlikely the Song court was the intended audience for the Painting of Buddhist Images and the Dali rulers’ claims to be the scripture’s titular “humane kings.” Instead, such claims probably reflected internal Dali-kingdom political dynamics and were aimed at high officials as well as the Dali kingdom’s fragmented population. Considering the Dali kingdom’s domestic challenges, invoking the Tang models embedded in the Scripture for Humane Kings may in fact be seen as an act of weakness or desperation. The twelfth-century Dali court sought recognition as Buddhist monarchs because this was the one area in which they could claim supremacy.