Relic Worship at the Famen Temple

R E L I C W O R S H I P A T T H E F A M E N T E M P L E 2 72 6

During the Tang dynasty, the Famen Temple relic, purported to be the finger bone of Shakyamuni Buddha, was one of the most famous Buddhist artefacts in East Asia, drawing large numbers of worshipers and donors, as well as prominent

critics. It was expressly brought from the monastery and venerated within the imperial palace on six separate occasions (see Chronology, p. 25) — a unique practice never accorded to any other remains of the Buddha circulating in ancient China. The records of the imperial procession carrying the relic from the Famen Temple to the residences of the Tang emperors (a distance of some 100 kilometres to Chang’an; 420 kilometres to Luoyang), the severe criticism by the Confucian official Han Yu (768 – 824) against the court’s participation in the lavish veneration activities, and the large number of precious offerings gave notoriety to the Famen Temple relic.1 Since its excavation in 1987, the Famen Temple, the finger bone relic, and the accompanying gold, silver, and other precious objects have again attracted widespread attention from Buddhist devotees, scholars, and tourists.2

The Famen Temple or monastery, a largely obscure institution before the seventh century, and the worship of the relic housed there, not only reflect the evolution of Buddhist doctrines and practices from the seventh to the ninth century, but also the material culture of Tang China. Additionally, the temple, the famous relic, and the precious objects found in the crypt tell the story of vibrant interactions between China and foreign societies during the period. Together they indicate the different attitudes of the Tang rulers toward Buddhism, the emergence and popularity of new ways to venerate the relics of the Buddha, the acceptance of Tantric rituals by the royalty and the Tang elite, and the impact of foreign art forms on the material culture of the period.

Relic Worship at the Famen Temple and the Buddhist World of the Tang DynastyT A N S E N S E N

1Detail of Cat. 16

Tansen Sen

In Alan Chong (Ed.), Secrets of the Fallen Pagoda: Treasures from Famen Temple and the Tang Court, pp. 27-49, 195-6. Singapore: Asian Civilisations Museum, 2014

T A N S E N S E NR E L I C W O R S H I P A T T H E F A M E N T E M P L E 2 92 8

t h e e v o lu t i o n o f r e l i c v e n e r at i o n i n c h i n aRobert Sharf suggests that the “movement of Buddhism might be better understood in terms of the diffusion of sacred objects, most notably icons and relics, along with the esoteric technical knowledge to manipulate them.”3 Indeed, the desire to venerate the relics of the Buddha not only prompted Chinese monks to visit monasteries and sites associated with the life of the Buddha, but also triggered the flow of the sacred remains and other related items from South Asia to China.4 In fact, the veneration of Buddhist relics in China served several purposes: it fashioned merit-making activities, stimulated material transactions, propagated the building of commemorative monuments, and contributed to the formation of political links between the state and the monastic community. More importantly, the relics, which are categorized as bodily relics, items used by the Buddha, and objects built in commemoration of the Buddha, provided Buddhist followers in China an opportunity to come into physical contact with objects that were supposed to be either the bodily remains of the Buddha or things closely associated with him. The close proximity between the Buddha relics and Chinese adherents realized one of the basic purposes of relic veneration: the bridging of the temporal and spatial gap between the followers and the sites and times of the founder of their faith; which, in turn, sustained the establishment of a Buddhist world in a foreign land.5

Intimately associated with the spread of the relic cult were the legends of King Ashoka (reigned ca 268 – 232 BC) of the Maurya dynasty, who ruled most of the Indian Subcontinent. He was recognized as the ideal Buddhist ruler who undertook the pious act of transmitting the teachings of the Buddha to foreign lands. One of the most famous Buddhist deeds was his building of stupas. After gathering all the relics that had been dispersed following the cremation of the Buddha, Ashoka is said to have redistributed them and, within a single day, built 84,000 commemorative stupas across the imagined Indic continent called Jambudvipa.6 While historically questionable, the pious actions of King Ashoka were emphasized by the members of the foreign Buddhist communities to substantiate the early and legitimate transmission of the doctrine.

In Sri Lanka, for example, the establishment of the Buddhist doctrine is linked to a mission from Ashoka and his donation of Buddhist relics (including a branch from the bodhi tree under which the Buddha is supposed to have attained enlightenment) to the Sri Lankan ruler Devanampiyatissa (reigned 250 – 210 BC).7

The story of Ashoka building 84,000 stupas was used by the Sri Lankan clergy to authenticate the remains of the Buddha enshrined in that

country, and by the Chinese clergy as evidence of early transmission of the doctrine and the “presence” of its founder in their land. “The Chinese naturally concluded,” Erik Zürcher points out, “(1) that China, being a part of the Jambudvipa, had in the past belonged to Ashoka’s empire and consequently had been converted to Buddhism under this king; (2) that the soil of China, if carefully investigated, might appear still to contain some traces of this golden age of Buddhism: remains of the stupas or even the holy relics themselves.”8

While the former notion was often used to validate the belief about the early transmission of Buddhism to China (some going as far back as the Zhou dynasty, ca 1045 – 256 BC), the latter belief was employed to authenticate relics discovered in China. The alleged miraculous power of the relics, evident from reports of emission of multicoloured lights and stories describing the restoration of eyesight to blind worshipers, provided further proof of the authenticity and efficacy of the Buddha relics, including the one housed at the Famen Temple.

The Buddhist deeds of King Ashoka, particularly his veneration of the relics, became popular in China in the fourth century when a number of hagiographic accounts of the king were rendered into Chinese.9 In the ensuing period, Ashoka’s distribution of the remains of the Buddha and the significance of relic veneration in India were being confirmed and promoted by Chinese pilgrims visiting Buddhist sites in South Asia. Faxian (337/342 – ca 422), who made a pilgrimage to India in the early fifth century, for example, narrated Ashoka’s Buddhist deeds in his travelogue Foguo ji. In addition, Faxian gave detailed accounts of the veneration of Buddha images in Khotan; his spittoon, alms bowl, and tooth relics in Kucha (both these sites are in eastern Central Asia, the present-day Chinese province of Xinjiang); the shadow of the Buddha, his parietal bone, and other relics in Uddiyana; his alms bowl in Purushapura (both in northern India); and his tooth relic in Sri Lanka. Moreover, one of the texts Faxian translated upon his return to China was the Mahaparinirvana Sutra, which contained the story of the distribution of relics and the building of reliquary monuments by secular rulers.

A related development taking place subsequent to the first translations of the Ashoka legends and texts promoting the merits of relic veneration was the frequent “discoveries” in China of miraculous images, sacred remains, and stupas built or relics deposited by the pious Ashoka.10 One famous story was about the Chinese monk Huida, who, during the Ningkang reign (373 – 76) of the Eastern Jin dynasty, discovered the Buddha’s hair and fingernails preserved in a golden casket buried at the base of a stupa in Jiankang (present-day Nanjing). It was determined that the stupa was one


of the 84,000 that King Ashoka had built and that the relics, in fact, had also been deposited by him.11

Less than two centuries later, Emperor Wu (reigned 502 – 49) of the Liang dynasty, recognized as one of the most devout Buddhist rulers of China, rebuilt the Ashoka stupa at Jiankang and lavishly venerated the relic housed there.12 During the veneration, the emperor discovered a golden image at the stupa, which, according to an inscription on the object, had been sponsored by the daughter of King Ashoka.13 As Zürcher has concluded, “the ‘relics of Ashoka’ and the miraculous happenings connected with their discovery served a dual purpose: they proved the existence of a Buddhist period in ancient Chinese history, thus providing the Buddhist clergy with the necessary pedigree and thereby enhancing its prestige, and at the same time they could be interpreted as auspicious omens evoked by the virtuous conduct of the secular ruler.”14 Indeed, Emperor Wu craftily used such Buddhist rituals and paraphernalia to secure the support of the monastic community and the lay Buddhists in asserting his imperial authority over a chaotic and fragmented China.

The popularity of relic and stupa veneration between the fourth and sixth centuries and its key role in political legitimization and in bridging the spatial separation between the Buddhist worlds of South Asia and China are epitomized in the Buddhist activities of Emperor Wen of the Sui dynasty. In 580, the very first year of his rise to power in the state of Northern Zhou, the future Emperor Wen revoked restrictions against the Buddhist community that had been instituted by the previous ruler of the state. Then, between 581, when he had taken the title of “emperor” and established the Sui dynasty, and 589, when he finally managed to consolidate power in both northern and southern China, Emperor Wen authorized the building of new Buddhist monasteries and allowed the renovation of old ones. These monastery-building campaigns were part of the emperor’s larger goals of using the doctrine to legitimize his own leadership and for unifying the entire nation under Buddhist ideology.15 Emperor Wen was lauded by members of the Chinese clergy as the ideal Buddhist ruler (Chinese: falun wang ➈㠩; Sanskrit: chakravartinraja) — a title commonly associated with King Ashoka. In fact, in order to emulate the Mauryan king’s meritorious deed of erecting stupas, Emperor Wen ordered the distribution of the Buddha’s relics throughout China in 601, 602, and 604.16

The practice of relic veneration in China evolved and diversified rapidly after the sixth century. One of the most significant developments was the penetration of acts of self-immolation and self-mutilation of body parts into relic-veneration ceremonies. The use of relics for their

2Stupa found in the front chamber of the Famen Temple crypt (called the “Ashoka Stupa”). Painted marble, height 78.5 cm. Famen Temple Museum


therapeutic value, the emphasis on the number and size of the relics, and the employment of the relics in Tantric rites also became widespread. Many of these developments are apparent in the relic veneration at the Famen Temple, located in what once was the Fufeng commandery in the Qi prefecture during the Tang dynasty (present-day Fufeng county, Shaanxi Province).

t h e b u d d h i s t w o r l d o f ta n g c h i n aBy the time the Tang dynasty was established in 618, the relic cult and the legends associated with King Ashoka had penetrated all levels of Chinese society. During the succeeding three centuries of Tang rule, Buddhist doctrines, practices, and notions of sacred spaces continued to evolve with significant input from members of the Chinese clergy and lay followers.17 Politically, the Tang dynasty was marked by two key transitions. The first took place in 690, when Empress Wu Zetian formally usurped the Tang court and founded her own Zhou dynasty. The second was triggered by the rebellion of the Sogdian general An Lushan (703 – 757) in the middle of the eighth century. An Lushan established the brief Yan dynasty (756 – 57), which quickly collapsed after his death. Both events, which were followed by restorations of Tang rule, had significant impact on political, economic, and social structures. They also influenced Tang China’s interactions with foreign states, people, and religious communities. Buddhism similarly witnessed discernible changes and evolutions.

There were at least four important aspects of Buddhism during the Tang period that are reflected in the activities taking place at the Famen Temple. First, the period witnessed vigorous interactions between Chinese and foreign Buddhist communities. Not only did Chinese monks travel to India in unprecedented numbers, but hundreds of Korean, Japanese, Indian, and Southeast Asian pilgrims, missionaries, and students visited monastic institutions and sacred sites in China. These travellers included famous Chinese monks such as Xuanzang (ca 602 – 664) and Yijing (635 – 713), the Korean pilgrim Hye’cho (ca 700 – ca 780), the Tantric master Amoghavajra (705 – 774), and the Japanese visitor Ennin (793/794 – 864). The cross-cultural activities of these monks resulted in the creation of a more integrated Buddhist world, where information, commodities, new doctrinal ideas, and artistic traditions flowed more rapidly and widely than ever before.

Second, the Tang period overlapped with the emergence of Vajrayana as one of the major Buddhist traditions. The South Asian monks Shubhakarasimha (d. 735), Vajrabodhi (671 – 741), and Amoghavajra were instrumental in popularizing Tantric doctrines associated with Vajrayana in China through their translation work and, in the case of Amoghavajra,

contacts with elite members of Tang society.18 Because of these three Tantric masters and their Chinese collaborators and students, new Buddhist ideas and art forms became popular in China and neighbouring regions. The impact of Tantrism, as noted below, is clearly visible in the objects found in the Famen Temple crypt.

Third, by the time Emperor Gaozu founded the Tang dynasty in 618, the use of Buddhism for political legitimization, military objectives, and foreign relations had become common practice. The Tang emperors continued such strategies. The best-known use of Buddhism for political legitimization was by the Empress Wu Zetian, who employed Buddhist monks, texts, relics, and beliefs to ingeniously support her usurpation of the Tang court and rule for a decade and half.19 Later Tang emperors, especially those interested in Tantric teachings, also used the doctrine to consolidate political power. Even Taizong (reigned 626 – 49), not normally considered an avid supporter of Buddhism, tried to employ Xuanzang during his military offensive in the Korean peninsula.20 However, there were also Tang rulers who saw Buddhism as having an adverse impact on the economy and tried to limit its powers. Emperor Wuzong’s (reigned 840 – 46) persecution of Buddhist institutions and defrocking of monks is the best-known anti-Buddhist incident during the Tang period.21

Finally, in the wider pan-Asian context, the Tang period was crucial for the rapid emergence of China as the central realm of Buddhism. The reports of Chinese pilgrims visiting South Asia made it evident that several Buddhist sites there were in decline. As a consequence, the notion of an impending decay of the Buddhist doctrines, an important part of the early Buddhist belief system, became a cause of great concern and predicament.22 The Buddhist clergy in China therefore tried to accrue relics and texts, and to create sacred sites. The aim, on the one hand, was to preserve as much of the doctrine as possible for its future revival; on the other hand, they sought to recreate in China alternative sacred spaces for Buddhist adherents. Mount Wutai, for example, over the course of the Tang dynasty, became recognized as the abode of the Buddhist divinity Manjushri. It was one of the most important Buddhist sites for pilgrims from across Asia, including those from India.23 The presence of the relics of the Buddha, including the finger bone at the Famen Temple, similarly served to establish sacred spaces and portray China as the centre of the Buddhist world.


t h e b e g i n n i n g o f r e l i c v e n e r at i o n at t h e fa m e n t e m p l eThe origin of relic veneration ceremonies at the Famen Temple is a complex issue that illustrates the ingenuity of the Chinese in recasting Buddhist ideas and practices transmitted from South Asia and other places. Since there are no comparable instances of imperial veneration of the relic before or after the Tang dynasty, the question that arises is why did the Famen Temple and the finger bone there attract the attention of the Tang rulers?

In an attempt to explain a similar question, Huang Chi-chiang has suggested that the Tang emperors opted to follow the tradition of venerating finger bone relics, common among the previous rulers of northern China, over the worship of tooth relics, which was popular with the courts in the south.24 Huang concludes, “If there were indeed two traditions in the imperial worship of the Buddha’s relics, apparently the monks at the [Famen Temple] wanted to make the finger bone the dominant tradition because they claimed that the finger bone at the temple was the same bone relic that had been worshipped by the emperors in the Northern Wei and the Sui.” They managed to build this link between the Tang and the pre-Tang relic of the Famen Temple “by reaffirming the lore, using it to substantiate the continuity of the northern tradition.”25 Huang’s explanation, although plausible, lacks contemporary evidence to confirm that the Tang rulers preferred finger bone relics over other types of bodily remains of the Buddha.

The earliest sources on the Famen relic are extremely vague about the type of the remains housed at the temple. An inscription about the Famen Temple entitled “Inscription, with a preface, for the jewelled stupa (containing the) True Body of the Great Sage at the Ashoka Monastery of the Divine Dynasty of Great Tang”, bearing the date 16 May 778, narrates what seems to be the belief at that time about the origins of the relic.26 According to the inscription, the relic first miraculously appeared on the palm of a Chinese monk, who, along with a few other fellow adherents, was searching for Buddhist remains in the region. Inscribed writings on the relic indicated that it was one of the bodily remains of the Buddha originally distributed by King Ashoka. The monk and his fellow brethren then enshrined the relic in what they called the “Ashoka Stupa”. No specific mention is made in the inscription about the kind of relic the monk had acquired. The fact that it was a finger bone was also not noted when Zhang Liang (d. 646), the governor of the Qi prefecture and a lay Buddhist, rediscovered it in 631.

Daoxuan (596 – 667), who was intimately involved in the Famen relic veneration ceremonies, wrote around 664 to report that the governor had retrieved a “bone” relic of the Buddha along with two inscribed tablets dated to the Western Wei-Northern Zhou period.27 In 660, when the relic was

brought to the imperial palace for the first time for special veneration by the emperor, the sacred remain is described only as “shaped like a small finger”.28 Other sources mention the existence of several relics, sometimes as many as eight or nine, at Famen Temple. In addition, the first imperial veneration of the Famen relic in 660 was conducted together with a parietal bone of the Buddha, which was reported to have been brought from South Asia by the Tang diplomat Wang Xuance.29 While the Famen relic was placed in a golden casket and returned to the temple in 662, the parietal bone remained at the palace.30 There is no indication from Daoxuan’s notice of this initial imperial veneration of the Famen relic that the Tang emperor in any way distinguished or attached more importance to the finger bone than to the parietal-bone relic. It seems, as discussed below, that the emperor may have been less interested in the specific type of relic than in its efficacy, especially its therapeutic potency.

Even the reports on the next two occasions of court-sponsored veneration of the Famen relic, in 704 and 760, fail to reveal the Tang ruler’s preference for the finger bone over other bodily remains of the Buddha.31 In fact, the veneration of a variety of other relics of the Buddha seems to have been common during the Tang period. Daoxuan reported that at least fifteen sites throughout China possessed remains of the Buddha.32 In 841, according to the Japanese monk Ennin, there were four monasteries in the Tang capital itself that housed tooth relics, all of which attracted lavish donations from the public. Ennin also noted that there were three other monasteries in China that held finger bone relics, although none attracted similar attention from the emperors.33

There may have been another justification for the exceptional fame of the Famen relic. It seems that the site of the Famen Temple itself had a close association with the Tang rulers. In fact, the Qi prefecture as well as the Fufeng commandery, the site of the Famen Temple, had special meaning to Emperor Taizong — the reigning monarch when the relic was first exhumed. Taizong’s father, Emperor Gaozu, served as a prefect of the Qi prefecture under the Sui government. Taizong himself was born near the Fufeng commandery. At the age of four, when Taizong and his father were in the Qi prefecture, a scholar predicted that by age twenty Taizong would “bring relief to the contemporary world and pacify the people” (jishi anmin). It is from this prediction, we are told, that Emperor Taizong got his name Shimin 㖺ス.34 Then, in early 618, a few months before his father officially founded the Tang dynasty, Taizong successfully defeated the rebel forces of Xue Ju at the Fufeng commandery.35 Daoxuan noted that prior to leading his army into the battle, Taizong ordained eighty monks from the local region, suggesting, perhaps,


that Taizong’s victory derived from this meritorious act. Having no place to reside in the war-torn region, the newly ordained monks were invited to live at the Famen Temple. Within a few years, however, the monastery reportedly began to crumble after a fire destroyed many of its halls.36

The fortunes of the monastery revived soon after Zhang Liang paid a visit to the dilapidated halls in 631. Noticing that it had only an unfinished stupa foundation, the governor sought permission from the emperor to complete the structure. The stupa that Zhang erected with Taizong’s consent and financial help seems to have been the first commemorative monument actually established at the Famen Temple.37 Since Emperor Taizong had little personal interest in Buddhism at this time, and had a few months earlier issued an edict questioning some of the practices of the Buddhist clergy, it is unlikely that he would have readily provided funds for Buddhist activities at an obscure monastery.38 It is possible, therefore, that Taizong may have sanctioned the renovation of the temple because Zhang Liang reminded the emperor of his past connections to the Fufeng region, and especially to the monks he had ordained before his victory against the rebel forces.

During the construction work, Zhang, it is reported, learned about an ancient legend that the relic underneath the stupa — when publicly displayed every thirty years — would bring great benefits to the people.39 Upon learning about this legend, the governor requested, and was subsequently granted, permission from the emperor to put the relic on public display. Thus began, without any known Indian antecedent, the local tradition of venerating the Famen relic every thirty years.40

When exhuming the relic, Zhang Liang had also discovered two inscribed tablets dating from the sixth century. The inscriptions seem to have played a salient role in linking the Famen Temple to the Tang rulers. Although Daoxuan reported that the two tablets, now lost, were undecipherable, they were the likely source for two later inscriptions about the temple, including the inscription of 778 mentioned above. This inscription records that in 555, the regional governor of Qi prefecture, named Tuoba Yu, performed Buddhist ceremonies, renovated religious monuments, and ordained monks. The second, later inscription, called “Inscription noting the Delivery of the True Body from Qiyang during the Xiantong reign of the Great Tang”, composed in 874 when the crypt was sealed for the final time, similarly reports that Tuoba Yu laid the foundation for a stupa at the Famen Temple and made offerings to the site in the sixth century.41

The two inscriptions also mention that during the Kaihuang period (581 – 600) of the Sui dynasty, and again at the end of the Renshou period (601 – 604), Li Min (576 – 614), the grandson-in-law of Emperor Wen,

renovated the stupa foundation and the Famen monastic complex. Li Min was a nephew of the famous Sui general Li Mu, who claimed to have descended from the Longxi Li clan. Kegasawa Yasunori’s study of an epitaph from the Northern Zhou period found within the Famen monastic complex suggests that Li Mu and his family similarly used the area for religious purposes.42 Since the Tang rulers also claimed descent from the Longxi Li clan, the complex may have been of special familial interest. This would perhaps explain why Taizong and later Tang emperors paid greater attention to the Famen Temple and the relic housed there than to scores of other bodily relics available throughout China, and even those especially brought from South Asian monasteries.

t h e c h a n g i n g u s a g e o f t h e fa m e n r e l i cIn 659, the members of the clergy seeking to put the Famen relic on public display for the second time invoked the legend of venerating it once every thirty years. Emperor Gaozong not only gave permission to display the relic to the public, but also brought it into the palace for special veneration. The reason for this unique act of “welcoming the bone [relic]” into the palace may be related to Gaozong’s poor health. Since the beginning of 657, the emperor had been unable to fulfill his court duties and was nursing his sickness at the eastern capital, Luoyang. In the seventh lunar month (August to September) of 657 the emperor expressed an interest in the Indian (Tianzhu 㝢含) longevity specialist named Naluoersuopomei ㅍ⺬䔓䩸㋇

り (perhaps Narayanasvamin). Court officials discouraged the emperor from taking drugs concocted by the foreign doctor and had him return to India. Failing to recover from his sickness over the next two years, the emperor seems to have turned to the remains of the Buddha for miraculous relief.43 Indeed, in East Asia, the healing of sickness and the regeneration of the body of the ruler were considered to be some of the main potencies of the remains of the Buddha.44 Even within the South Asian Buddhist tradition, the relics of the Buddha were proclaimed to have worked miraculous cures for the diseased and plague-infected population.45

In 660, the Famen Temple relic was venerated in the palace together with the parietal bone brought by Wang Xuance. The two relics failed to work a cure, however, and within months the emperor suffered a massive stroke leaving him temporarily paralyzed and with impaired vision.46 The inefficacy of the relic may have been one of the reasons why the practice of displaying the Famen relic every thirty years was temporarily discontinued. This is evident from the fact that Empress Wu Zetian, who employed various Buddhist paraphernalia to legitimize her usurpation of the Tang throne in


685, including the veneration of other Buddhist relics, seemed uninterested in displaying the Famen relic after thirty years had elapsed. It is possible that in addition to the relic’s questionable efficacy, she associated it with the Tang rulers and not her own, newly established Zhou dynasty, which was coincidently established exactly thirty years after the previous imperial veneration of the Famen relic.47

In 704, when Empress Wu Zetian had become seriously ill and had turned to Daoism to find life-extending elixir, the Famen relic was again displayed to the public and venerated inside the palace.48 The relic was first brought from the Famen Temple to the western capital, Chang’an, and housed at the Chongfu Temple — which functioned as the ancestral temple of Empress Wu. Then, early in the new lunar year, the relic was welcomed into the “Divine Capital” — Luoyang — and placed in the Luminous Hall.49 Since the third story of this hall functioned as, and was meant to symbolize, a Buddhist stupa, it was an appropriate location to house the relic.50 The Famen relic remained in Luoyang until 708, even after the overthrow and death of Empress Wu Zetian.

It must be pointed out here that the person in charge of bringing the relic to Empress Wu’s palace was Fazang (643 – 712), a monk of Sogdian origin and one of the most important figures in the Huayan school of Chinese Buddhism. Fazang had intimate connections to the Famen Temple before he became one of the favourite monks of Empress Wu. At the age of sixteen, in 658, Fazang is said to have burned one of his fingers as an offering to the relic at the Famen Temple. And in 704, when he arrived at the temple to retrieve the relic, Fazang is reported to have “destroyed,” symbolically it seems, his liver (hui gan 䡌⡬) as an offering to the sacred remains.51

Fazang was not the first one to perform such acts of self-mutilation at the Famen Temple. When Zhang Liang first displayed the relic in 631, a few members of the audience are also reported to have burned their fingers as offerings.52 The public display of the relic in 704 is also known to have prompted several acts of self-mutilation by visitors and onlookers. In fact, the practice of burning fingers at the Famen Temple continued during later periods.53 The intent of these self-mutilators may have ranged from the desire to establish good merit to other religious purposes.

According to one anecdote, a person who burned his finger when the Famen relic was first displayed to the public did so because the relic was invisible to him. As soon as he offered his finger, however, the relic became distinctly visible.54 A more metaphysical reason behind the acts of self-mutilation in front of Buddhist relics is given by John Kieschnick, who suggests that through self-mutilations the adherents attempted to draw on the

perceived power of the relic and “transfer or internalize the sanctity of the sacred objects.” Kieschnick further explains this point by stating that,

Self-mutilation before relics of the Buddha was not only a sacrifice; it was an appropriation. By burning himself, the adept drew on the power of the Buddha’s body, purifying his own body and transforming himself into a holy, living relic. Hence, while negative Buddhist attitudes towards the body as a source of defilement certainly encouraged the destruction and mutilation of the body, there was at the same time a more positive interpretation of the act … In other words, as in the case of cremation, self-mutilation and suicide were not merely attempts to destroy an impure body, but also to create a new and better one.55

During the time the Famen Temple relic was first displayed in 631 and until 708, when Emperor Zhongzong, after the death of Wu Zetian, returned the relic to the monastery, a number of new and indigenous practices had become part of relic veneration in China. While some of these practices seem to be unique to the veneration of the Famen Temple relic, others point to the continued evolution of Buddhist doctrine in China. The displaying of the Famen relic every thirty years and venerating it inside the imperial palace were, for example, exclusive to the Famen Temple relic. The practice of mutilating body parts as offerings to the relic, on the other hand, testifies to the amalgam of relic veneration and indigenous practices.

The first two episodes of relic veneration by Tang rulers show that neither Gaozong nor Wu Zetian employed the Buddha’s remains for the legitimization of their authority, as had been done in the Sui dynasty by Emperor Wen. Rather, the two Tang rulers seem to have been more interested in the relic’s purported therapeutic value. Indeed, the relic was displayed and welcomed into the palace not at a time of political instability or natural disasters, but when the two rulers were suffering from severe illness and searching for a miraculous cure. In the case of Gaozong, the veneration of the relic coincided with his interest in longevity doctors and the merit-making missions to India undertaken by the diplomat Wang Xuance.56 Furthermore, in 705 when the relic was brought to the palace for Empress Wu Zetian, perhaps as a last resort, she had already taken up residence in the Longevity Hall, the ancestral chamber and room where Tang emperors passed their final days. In fact, one of the individuals involved in the relic-veneration ceremony at this time was Cui Xuanwei, who oversaw the empress’s health matters.


Temple relic, the impact of their teachings is evident from the objects enclosed in the crypt of the pagoda.

The engravings on many of the donated objects made of gold and silver indicate the use of mandalic symbolism, with the presence of various Tantric imagery and deities, including Vairocana, Ganesha, and Ksitigarbha.59 Such imagery, which often symbolized the Buddhist universe, or mandalas, was employed by Tantric masters in rituals as a means to link a patron to the cosmic reality. Suffice it to say that when the crypt at the Famen Temple was sealed for the final time in the ninth century, the veneration of the finger relic may have been conducted according to esoteric rites. However, whether such rituals took place at the monastic site, or if the arrangement of objects in the crypt was modelled on a mandala remain issues of scholarly contention.60

Following the fall of the Tang dynasty, the Famen relic was never again displayed to the public, nor did it attract comparable attention from subsequent ruling families. Probable reasons for this neglect are: the severe criticism levelled by Han Yu, a noted Confucian official, against the ceremony and the “excessive reaction” it reportedly evoked among the public; and the misfortune the performance of relic-veneration seems to have brought upon the reigning emperors.61

Angered by both the imperial participation in relic veneration and those who engaged in self-mutilation, Han Yu, in a memorial presented to Emperor Xianzong in 819, deprecated Buddhism as a “barbarian” and “fraudulent” doctrine. The Buddha, Han Yu argued, did not dress like the Chinese, did not speak the language of the sagely kings of China, did not follow the virtues of loyalty and filial piety, and thus was an immoral person. As to the specific ceremony of venerating the Famen relic, Han Yu criticized the excessive exuberance of the gift-givers and the abnormal practice of self-mutilation during the public display of the relic. He especially voiced his displeasure with the emperor’s participation in the veneration and the act of housing the relic in the imperial palace. Pointing to the Confucian emphasis on maintaining a spatial distance between the living and the dead, he asked: “This dry bone is left over from his [the Buddha’s] baneful funerary remains. How could it be proper that it should be caused to enter the forbidden apartments of the imperial palace?”62 The immediate reaction to Han Yu’s criticism was so severe that the emperor at once ordered his execution. Within six days, however, the sentence was reduced and the critic was exiled to the southernmost territory of China. After a few months, when Han Yu offered a formal apology, Emperor Xianzong, wanting eventually to pardon the exiled minister, transferred him to a province near the capital.

A plausible link can also be established between the therapeutic function of the Famen relic, the act of burning fingers at the monastery, and the Buddhist practice of invoking Bhaisajyaguru, the bodhisattva of healing (see fig. 4). Those seeking good health, remedy from severe sickness, and longevity commonly performed rituals invoking Bhaisajyaguru. The Lotus Sutra records that in one of his past lives, Bhaisajyaguru, in order to pay homage to the remains of the Buddha, burned his hands in front of 84,000 stupas. “This act,” Raoul Birnbaum explains, “can be seen as the ultimate in the practice of dāna-pāramitā, the ‘perfection of giving’.” Birnbaum also points out that, while the act described in the Lotus Sutra was symbolic, the East Asian clergy took it in a literal sense, meaning that it “served for some as justification for actual suicide or for the offering of fingers to the Buddha.”57 Thus, while those performing acts of self-mutilation during the veneration of the Famen relic may have sought to achieve perfect merit for themselves, the Tang rulers seemed more interested in seeking remedies from sickness and to prolong their lives.

The practice and the objective of relic veneration at the Famen Temple underwent significant change after the middle of the eighth century. The last four episodes of imperial veneration by the Tang rulers — in 760 by Suzong, in 790 by Dezong, in 819 by Xianzong, and in 873 by Yizong — indicate that Tantric rituals and notions of huguo (protection of the state) and bringing peace and prosperity to the people had permeated the practice. While the introduction and subsequent popularity of Esoteric Buddhism was responsible for the former development, the use of the relic for national protection and to address the concerns of the society can be attributed to the recurrence of political upheavals in China. In 757, for example, a few days after the rebel leader An Lushan was assassinated, bringing to an end one of the most forceful and devastating rebellions against the empire, Emperor Suzong ordered that the Famen relic be brought to the imperial palace for veneration. The emperor, who gave credit to the supernatural powers of Buddhism for the victory against the rebel forces and was himself consecrated as a chakravartin king, may have sought the help of the relic to preserve peace and tranquility during the recovery phase of the empire.58

The spread of Tantric doctrines catalyzed the ritualistic aspect of Buddhism in China, reinforced the image of Buddhism as thaumaturgy, and significantly expanded the list of Buddhist-related items imported from various parts of the Buddhist world. As noted above, the systematic and successful transmission of Tantric doctrines owes much to the work of Shubhakarasimha, Vajrabodhi, and Amoghavajra. Although none of these monks seems to have been directly involved in the veneration of the Famen


Little more than a year after Han Yu had presented his memorial and before he could receive a full pardon, Xianzong died of an overdose of longevity drugs. The emperor’s death shortly after the veneration of the Famen relic in some ways vindicated Han Yu’s contention about the dire consequences of housing the finger bone in the imperial palace. Thus, when Emperor Muzong succeeded to the Tang throne in 820, he brought Han Yu back to the capital and elevated him to a high-ranking position. A few decades later, in 844, Emperor Wuzong banned all offerings and pilgrimages to sites housing the relics of the Buddha, including the Famen Temple.63 Then, in March to April 873, when Emperor Yizong ordered monks to revive the tradition of venerating the Famen relic inside the imperial palace, it is reported that yellow mud started pouring down with rain.64 Alarmed by the inauspicious sign, officials quickly reminded the emperor that Emperor Xianzong, almost a half a century before him, had died soon after he venerated the relic at the palace, and they advised him to rescind his order.

The adamant emperor remarked that he would venerate the relic even if it meant his death, and had the relic brought to the palace. The lavish rites that followed and the donations that poured in are evident from the objects discovered in the Famen crypt. An accompanying inscription, entitled “An inventory of offerings of gold, silver, precious objects to accompany the True Body”, which lists the names and titles of the donors and the date of donation, reveals that a majority of these donations were given during the ceremony ordered by Emperor Yizong (see Cat. 109). Within three and a half months of the ceremony, the emperor died of a severe sickness. Court officials did not formally bring up the relevance of the veneration to his death, but the finger bone at the Famen Temple never regained royal favour. In fact, in 874, a few months after Yizong died, the relic and all the precious items were stored in the Famen crypt, where they remained untouched until 1987.

t h e m at e r i a l w o r l d o f t h e fa m e n t e m p l eThe veneration of the finger bone relic at the Famen Temple was intimately linked to the cosmopolitan world of the Tang dynasty. On one hand, it was closely connected to the pan-Asian world of Buddhism, where ideas and doctrines flowed in multiple directions through various agencies. The influence of Tantric ideas on the activities and material remains at the monastery, for example, is one example of how teachings formulated in the Gangetic region of India (especially at the Nalanda and Vikramashila monasteries), the Abhyagirivihara in Sri Lanka, as well as those developed locally, coalesced at the site.65 On the other hand, it demonstrates the

3Finger bone relic of the Buddha from the hidden compartment under the rear chamber of the Famen Temple crypt.

O P P O S I T E

4Bhaisajyaguru, Medicine Buddha (Cat. 67)


5Gold cup, ca 826. From the Tang Shipwreck found at Belitung. Gold, height 9 cm. Asian Civilisations Museum, Singapore

transmission of foreign material goods and art forms and their influence on local craftsmanship and manufacturing industry.66 Indeed, much like the history and practice of relic veneration at the Famen Temple, the material culture of the site, as evident from the excavated objects, also points to the blending of local and foreign traditions.

Over 300 objects, including 118 gold and silver items, 70 made of bronze, 35 embroidered silk cloths, 20 glass vessels, and 16 porcelain objects, were found in the Famen crypt.67 There were also large numbers of copper coins. Most of these objects date from the period of emperors Yizong and Xizong and are recorded on an inventory stele also discovered in the underground chamber.68 In many ways, these findings at the Famen Temple, as well as an earlier find from the Jingzhi Temple in Hebei Province, are comparable in magnificence and timeframe to the objects found on the Belitung shipwreck in Indonesia (fig. 5).69 Together, these findings indicate the local production, domestic consumption, as well as the foreign trade, of luxury items.

The four relics and the set of containers that housed them are undoubtedly the most prized items from the Famen crypt. They were found separately in each of the three chambers and in a compartment under the rear chamber. Relics of the Buddha from the early history of Buddhism in China were, for reasons outlined above, one of the most sought-after commodities. There are records of purchases of relics made in South Asia by Chinese monks and diplomats, primarily in exchange for silk, received as gifts from South Asian rulers and monks, smuggled into China, or even acquired through military actions as seems to have been the case in 1410 – 11 when Zheng He (1371 – 1433) reportedly brought the tooth relic from Sri Lanka.70 This demand for relics and the various methods of acquiring them were not unique to the Buddhist tradition; scholars have also noted similar practices and means of acquiring relics, for example, among the followers of Christianity.71

The origins of the four relics at the Famen Temple are not clear. As the legend mentioned above indicates, the “genuine” relic appeared miraculously on the palm of a Chinese monk. The other three may have also originated locally. Two of the four relics are supposed to be made of jade and two of bone. While the “genuine” one (fig. 3) is called “true body” (zhenshen 㸊㔩) or “spirit bone” (linggu ⼵⤣), the other three relics are called “shadow bones” (yinggu 㱘⤣).72 The one found in the rear chamber has drawings of the seven stars of the Northern Dipper (fig. 6). Presumably, the “shadow bones” were made to protect the “true body” relic from destruction or theft. However, it was not always the “true body” relic that was taken to the imperial palace

for veneration. As has been pointed out, none of the relics, which are all shaped like polished hollow tubes and about 4 centimetres high, appear to be an actual finger phalange.73 “Although the clerics of Famensi,” Robert Sharf explains, “may have recognized the finger-bone relic as a contrivance or artifice, this did not preclude their regarding it, as one and the same time, as an authentic relic of the Buddha.”74 Indeed, in addition to their artistic and aesthetic values — for the Tang rulers who venerated the relic(s), the local onlookers who marvelled at the relic as it was paraded to the imperial palaces, and the Tang elite and monks who lavishly donated precious items — the finger bone was a powerful sacred object capable of fulfilling wishes, curing diseases, legitimizing political authority, and protecting the state. Sharf is correct to surmise that, “in the end, there is no material or epigraphic evidence that the relic in the secret niche was regarded more ‘genuine’ than the others, apart from its placement in the niche itself.”75 The clear distinction between a “genuine” and three copies or “shadows” seems to be a modern-day interpretation imposed on the complex faith in relic veneration during the Tang dynasty.


The reliquaries and caskets that house the four relics are similarly important displays of the confluence of the material and religious worlds of Tang China. Found in the front chamber of the crypt, nested inside the so-called Ashoka Stupa (fig. 2), was a small gilded silver, coffin-shaped reliquary that contained one of the relics wrapped in silk fabric (fig. 9). The second relic was discovered in the middle chamber inside another coffin-shaped reliquary of gilded silver (fig. 10). The famous set of eight nesting caskets, found in the rear chamber, contained the third relic (fig. 7). The so-called True Body relic was found inside a set of five nesting caskets placed in the secret compartment beneath the floor of the rear chamber. Some of the boxes in the nesting caskets are made of gold or silver, sometimes with extensive carvings and decorations. The outer boxes in the latter two cases were made of sandalwood. A jade coffin-shaped container held the True Body relic (fig. 8).

Various scholars and excavation reports have discussed the iconography, symbolism, and possible ritual purposes of these reliquaries and caskets. What also needs to be highlighted is the connection of these artefacts to the material world of the Tang dynasty, which was not only linked to the neighbouring societies through commercial and diplomatic interactions, but also associated with the development of local workshops and industries that catered to the elite members of the society and the export market. Qi Dongfang has pointed out how encouragement from the early Tang government and influences filtering in from Central Asia (primarily

7The relic and its reliquary from the eight nesting caskets in the rear chamber of the crypt.

Sogdian and Sasanian) and the Byzantine Empire shaped the growth of gold and silver industries in China.76 The designs of some of these objects, such as the ewers and censers (figs. 11, 12; Cats. 14, 16, 19), as Ren Xinlai has argued, also demonstrate Indic influences.77 And while during the later centuries, privately owned workshops flourished, the government continued to invest in the manufacturing of gold and silver objects as well as in recruiting and training craftsmen. Consequently, during the ninth century, the Tang craftsmen could use imported luxury items such as pearls, lapis lazuli, agate, sandalwood, etc.; copy foreign motifs; and produce sophisticated pieces of gold and silver objects. The caskets found at Famen Temple seem to have been made by such craftsmen working at government workshops in China. Some of the other gold and silver artefacts found in the crypt, such as ewers, censers, and staffs donated by the local elites and members of the monastic institutions, most likely originated from the private workshops. In some cases, the names of the craftsmen can be found engraved on the pieces, indicating perhaps that they had special standing or clientele in the local community.

The story of the glass objects found at Famen Temple is very different. Although there is evidence of production of glass vessels in Tang China, most of the glass pieces in the Famen crypt were imported. The designs and engravings on these glass items indicate that they originated in the Islamic world (fig. 13; Cats. 2, 3). These objects were either brought to Tang China by itinerant merchants or given as gifts by foreign tribute carriers.

6Finger bone relic of the Buddha, with the seven stars of Northern Dipper, found in the rear chamber of the Famen Temple crypt

8 Finger bone relic of the Buddha in the jade coffin-shaped reliquary (Cat. 21). Found in the hidden compartment under the rear chamber of the Famen Temple crypt.

9Coffin-shaped reliquary and the relic from the “Ashoka Stupa” in the front chamber of the Famen Temple crypt. Partly gilded silver, length 8.2 cm. Famen Temple Museum

10Coffin-shaped reliquary and the relic from the middle chamber of the crypt. Partly gilded silver, length 10.2 cm. Famen Temple Museum


12Salt cellar with a flower-bud finial. Found in the rear chamber of the Famen Temple crypt. Gilded silver, height 27.9 cm. Famen Temple Museum

11Incense burner surmounted by a figure of Ganesha. Found in the middle chamber of the Famen Temple crypt. Gilded silver, height 42 cm. Famen Temple Museum

13Glass dish. Iraq (Mesopotamia), before 874. From Famen Temple crypt. Diameter, 14 cm. Famen Temple Museum

Also closely connected to the Tang material culture, and especially related to the elite members of the society, are the mi se porcelain pieces from the Famen crypt (see Cat. 1). Some of these were produced exclusively for the imperial court at the Yue kilns (in present-day Zhejiang Province). These porcelain objects differ significantly from the export-oriented pieces produced at the Changsha kilns and found in large quantities in the Belitung shipwreck. The fact that only “imperial quality” porcelain pieces were discovered at Famen Temple underscores the close connection between the imperial court and the finger bone relic.

There are several other items, such as embroidered silk fabrics, and those mentioned in the inscription that have since perished, including various types of incenses, which also indicate the blending of Tang material culture, religious practices, and foreign influences. Indeed, the Famen Temple should not only be seen as a repository of Buddhist practices and beliefs, but also as an important representation of Tang China’s interactions with foreign societies. The economic, social, and cultural lives of the people, especially those who belonged to the elite class and who were associated with the imperial court, are also visible from the lavish donations made to what was then arguably the most famous relic of the Buddha in China. Together these various aspects of the Famen Temple reveal the multifaceted, vibrant, and interconnected Buddhist world of the Tang dynasty.

Relic Worship at the Famen Temple

Documents

Transcript of Relic Worship at the Famen Temple