![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Abstract
This article examines how certain Tibetans and Han Chinese converts to Tibetan Buddhism in Diqing Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture and Beijing are articulating various forms of environmental discourse, both in terms drawn from Tibetan ‘geopiety’, and/or from a Western model of environmental protection. In relation to these trends, I further explore how certain Tibetans are articulating their understanding of Tibetan Buddhism within an apparently localised context, while other Tibetans are more obviously appropriating from discourses originating in the West and/or wider Chinese society to become more ‘modern’, while at the same time retaining a conceptualisation of Tibetan Buddhism that is hybridised between traditional and modernist understandings. I also explore how some Han practitioners may seek to become more ‘Tibetan’ by endorsing localised forms of Tibetan Buddhism and/or ‘performing’ certain Tibetan modes of religiosity, while others, due in part to geographical distance from the Tibetan landscape and cultural context, endorse an understanding of Tibetan Buddhism which is more closely tied to discourses of environmental protection originating in the West. In both Tibetan and Han Chinese cases, informants reflect upon their own beliefs and identity by gazing at the Other (Tibetan, Han, or Westerner), and marking out differences and similarities between Self and Other.
Acknowledgements
I would like to acknowledge the Australian Postgraduate award (2010–2013) which made the research for this article possible. I would also like to acknowledge the support of my supervisors Professor Gary Sigley and Associate Professor David Bourchier, and especially my informants for their patience and generosity.
Disclosure statement
I will receive a small publication grant from Sheridan College arising from the publication of this article.
Notes
1. Yeh, “Greening Western China,” 886.
2. Kolas, A Place Called Shangrila, 6.
3. Litzinger, 489, cited in Coggins and Hutchinson, “The Political Ecology,” 88.
4. Hillman, 188, cited in Coggins and Hutchinson, “The Political Ecology,” 88.
5. Coggins and Hutchinson, “The Political Ecology,” 89.
6. Zinda, “Making National Parks,” 393.
7. See Yeh, “The Rise and Fall,” 255–78.
8. See Coggins and Hutchinson, “The Political Ecology,” 85–107.
9. Ibid., 94.
10. See Buffetrille, “Reflections on Pilgrimages,” 18–34.
11. Coggins and Hutchinson, “The Political Ecology,” 99.
12. Ibid., 99–100.
13. Ibid.
14. Yeh, “Reverse Environmentalism,” 195.
15. Lacan, Four Fundamental Concepts, 72–3.
16. Ibid., 84.
17. Lacan, 95, cited in Copjec, 30–31, cited in Krips, “The Politics of the Gaze,” 92.
18. Krips, “The Politics of the Gaze,” 92.
19. Ibid., 93
20. Ibid.
21. Moran, Buddhism Observed.
22. He is evidently referring here to unenlightened mountain deities.
23. Kolas, A Place Called Shangrila, 44.
24. International conservationists have cited successful conservation efforts built upon Native American ‘deep ecology’ as reasons for preserving mountain cults in Diqing. See Anderson et al., “Conserving the Sacred Medicine Mountains,” 3066.
25. See note 23 above.
26. See Huber, “Green Tibetans,” 103–99.
27. Chertow, “Embodying the Nation,” 158.
28. Lang and Yunfeng, “Religion and Environmentalism,” 262.
29. Also known as Padmasambhava, the eighth-century siddhi who established the Vajrayana tradition in Tibet.
30. Smyer-Yü, The Spread of Tibetan Buddhism, 54.
31. Gerke, “Engaging the Subtle Body,” 119.
32. Ashiwa and Wank, Making Religion, 59.
33. ‘Taking refuge’ or guiyi in Chinese refers to a practicing Buddhist’s pledge to take refuge in the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha.
34. The other is Mt Kailash.
35. Roasted barley flour.
36. Germano, “Re-membering the Dismembered Body,” 68 and 91.
37. Smyer-Yü, The Spread of Tibetan Buddhism, 86.
38. The movement of Han into Tibetan areas is obviously a contentious issue. Yet, ascases presented in this article, and perhaps others in a wider study may show that there is also a degree of ‘Tibetanisation’ or ‘reverse acculturation’ occurring among some urban, middle-class Han living in these areas, especially those following, or interested in Tibetan Buddhism.
39. Moran, Buddhism Observed, 175–7.
40. Jin Yong is a martial arts novelist who is very popular throughout the Chinese world.
41. Yeh, “Reverse Environmentalism,” 205.
42. Ibid., 198–9.
43. Ibid.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Joshua Esler
Dr Joshua Esler is an adjunct lecturer and researcher at Sheridan College, Perth, Western Australia. His primary research focus is the historical and contemporary adaptation of Tibetan Buddhism to Greater China, and the implications of this adaptation for wider Chinese society.