THE SPREAD OF LAMAISM IN THE DZUNGAR KHANATE.

ISSN: 2582-4686 SJIF 2021-3.261,SJIF 20222.889, 2024-6.875 ResearchBib IF: 9.948 / 2024 VOLUME-5, ISSUE-12 855 JUNGʻOR XONLIGIDA LAMAIZMNI TARQALISHI. Mualiflar: Sharof Rashidov nomidagi Samarqand Davlat Universititi tarix fakulteti jahon tarixi kafedrasi mudiri dots Sh.Sh.Xamroqulova. jahon tarixi kafedrasi magistranti Tohirov Muhammadali Botir oʻgʻli. Annotatsiya: Mazkur maqolada XVII–XVIII asrlarda Jungʻor xonligi hududida lamaizm (tibet buddizmi)ning tarqalishi, uning siyosiy, ijtimoiy va madaniy hayotga ta’siri tahlil qilinadi. Tadqiqotda lamaizmning jungʻor hukmdorlari tomonidan davlat mafkurasi darajasiga ko‘tarilishi, diniy institutlarning shakllanishi hamda ruhoniylar tabaqasining siyosiy jarayonlardagi o‘rni yoritib beriladi. Shuningdek, lamaizmning jungʻor jamiyatida ijtimoiy birlikni mustahkamlash, markazlashgan hokimiyatni legitimlashtirish va tashqi siyosatda Tibet hamda Sin imperiyasi bilan munosabatlarga ta’siri ilmiy manbalar asosida ochib berilgan. Maqolada diniy omilning Jungʻor xonligining tarixiy taraqqiyotidagi ahamiyati kompleks yondashuv asosida tahlil qilingan. Kalit soʻzlar: Jungʻor xonligi, lamaizm, buddizm, moʻgʻullar, oyratlar, Tibet lamaist cherkovi, Dalay-lama, Altan-xon, Tsagan-nomun-xan, Zaya-Pandita, shamanizm, diniy siyosat, teokratik ittifoq, feodal munosabatlar, Markaziy Osiyo tarixi, Gʻarbiy Moʻgʻuliston, Sharqiy Moʻgʻuliston, xubilgan instituti, monastirlar. THE SPREAD OF LAMAISM IN THE DZUNGAR KHANATE. Authors: Sharof Rashidov Samarkand State University, Head of the World History Department, Faculty of History, Associate Professor Sh. Sh. Khamroqulova. World History master’s student, Tohirov Muhammadali Botir o‘g‘li. Abstract: This article analyzes the spread of Lamaism (Tibetan Buddhism) in the territory of the Dzungar Khanate in the 17th-18th centuries, its impact on political, social and cultural life. The study highlights the elevation of Lamaism to the level of state ideology by the Dzungar rulers, the formation of religious institutions and the role of the clergy in political processes. Also, the impact of Lamaism on strengthening social unity in Dzungar society, legitimizing centralized power and foreign policy relations with Tibet and the Sin Empire is revealed on the basis of scientific sources. The article analyzes the importance of the religious factor in the historical development of the Dzungar Khanate based on a comprehensive approach. Keywords: Dzungar Khanate, Lamaism, Buddhism, Mongols, Oirats, Tibetan Lamaist Church, Dalai Lama, Altan Khan, Tsagan-nomun Khan, Zaya-Pandita, shamanism, religious politics, theocratic union, feudal relations, history of Central Asia, Western Mongolia, Eastern Mongolia, Hubilgan Institute, monasteries. РАСПРОСТРАНЕНИЕ ЛАМАЙИЗМА В ДЖУНГАРСКОМ ХАНАТЕ. Авторы: Самаркандский государственный университет имени Шарофа Рашидова, ISSN: 2582-4686 SJIF 2021-3.261,SJIF 20222.889, 2024-6.875 ResearchBib IF: 9.948 / 2024 VOLUME-5, ISSUE-12 856 заведующая кафедрой всеобщей истории исторического факультета, доцент Ш. Ш. Хамрокулова. магистрант по специальности «Всеобщая история», Тохиров Мухаммадали Ботир ўғли. Аннотация: В данной статье анализируется распространение ламайизма (тибетского буддизма) на территории Джунгарского ханства в XVII-XVIII веках, его влияние на политическую, социальную и культурную жизнь. В исследовании освещается возвышение ламайизма до уровня государственной идеологии джунгарскими правителями, формирование религиозных институтов и роль духовенства в политических процессах. Также на основе научных источников раскрывается влияние ламайизма на укрепление социального единства в джунгарском обществе, легитимизацию централизованной власти и внешнеполитические отношения с Тибетом и Синской империей. В статье на основе комплексного подхода анализируется значение религиозного фактора в историческом развитии Джунгарского ханства. Ключевые слова: Джунгарское ханство, ламаизм, буддизм, монголы, ойраты, Тибетская ламаистская церковь, Далай-лама, Алтан-хан, Цаган-номун-хан, Зая-Пандита, шаманизм, религиозная политика, теократический союз, феодальные отношения, история Центральной Азии, Западная Монголия, Восточная Монголия, Хубилганский институт, монастыри. The Mongols first became acquainted with Buddhism as early as the thirteenth century. During the years of the Yuan Empire, Buddhism was supported by the Great Khans, who actively facilitated its spread among the Mongol aristocracy and the general population. However, despite this support, Buddhism did not achieve significant success at that time. After the collapse of the empire, its influence also came to an end. Among the Mongols, traditional shamanistic beliefs once again became dominant. This situation continued until the final quarter of the sixteenth century, after which the rapid process of Buddhism–Lamaism becoming a unified and absolutely dominant religion among all strata of Mongol society began. The new religion was first adopted by the khans and princes of Eastern Mongolia. Lamaism reached the Oirats with a delay of four decades, but there too it consolidated just as rapidly as it had in Eastern Mongolia. According to Mongol sources, the first Mongol to establish contact with the leaders of the Lamist Church in Tibet was the Ordos ruler Khutukhtai Setsen Khuntayji. In 1566, he invaded Tibet and sent an embassy to the three principal lamas with a message resembling an ultimatum: “If you submit to us,” the message stated, “we shall accept your religious teaching and follow it; if you do not submit, we shall treat you as enemies” [1, p. 175]. The author of Erdeniin Tobchi writes that the supreme lamas of Tibet, having received this ultimatum, hesitated for a long time and could not decide what to do. After three days, they capitulated, and Khutukhtai Setsen Khuntayji returned to Ordos accompanied by three Tibetan lamas. In 1576, the khuntayji visited his uncle, Altan Khan of the Tumed. He persuaded his uncle that in order to consolidate and develop his military and political successes in relations with China and the Oirats, it was necessary to rely on Buddhism—the religion respected and supported by Kublai Khan himself. Given Altan Khan’s advanced age and the issue of succession, such ideological support was especially important. Khutukhtai Setsen Khuntayji advised Altan Khan to invite the supreme lama of Tibet, ISSN: 2582-4686 SJIF 2021-3.261,SJIF 20222.889, 2024-6.875 ResearchBib IF: 9.948 / 2024 VOLUME-5, ISSUE-12 857 Sonam Gyatso, to Mongolia. Having consulted with other ruling princes, Altan Khan dispatched a special embassy to Tibet with an invitation to Sonam Gyatso. The supreme lama accepted the invitation with pleasure and soon set out on the journey. In 1577 he arrived at Kukunor, where local Mongol rulers welcomed him ceremonially and presented him with generous gifts. Along the entire route to Altan Khan’s residence, he was received with great honor, finally arriving there in 1578. That summer, a congress of princes and clergy was convened, during which—for the first time since the era of the Mongol imperial dynasty—the principles governing relations between Mongol secular authority and the Lamist Church were established and legally sanctioned. These principles were formulated in a five-point decree known as the “Teaching on the Ten Virtues of Buddhism.” One of its clauses concerned the rights and privileges of church hierarchs, stipulating punishment for those who insulted them, according to the status of the offended person. Another clause prohibited the slaughter of horses, camels, and other livestock as funerary sacrifices for the dead. Previously, such animals had been killed and buried together with the deceased, with the number of animals depending on the social status and wealth of the deceased. Under the new regulations, sacrificial livestock were not to be killed but donated to monasteries. All people were obligated to observe designated fasting days, refrain from killing, stealing, lying, and other transgressions [1, p. 198]. Altan Khan bestowed upon the supreme lama of Tibet the title of “Dalai Lama.” From that time onward, this title became attached to the head of the Tibetan Lamist Church. In return, the Dalai Lama generously distributed secular and religious titles and ranks to Mongol feudal lords. Thus was laid the foundation of an alliance that lasted until the victory of the People’s Revolution in Mongolia in 1921. Erdeniin Tobchi reports attempts by certain secular feudal lords to resist the growing influence and privileges of the Lamist Church. For example, in 1582, when Altan Khan fell ill, Tümed princes and officials demanded that the lamas be expelled from Mongolia. They justified their demands by arguing that if the lamas were incapable of helping the khan, others could hardly expect assistance from them [1, pp. 206–207]. However, such attempts were rare and untypical. Relations between Mongol khans and princes and the Church were not adversarial; rather, they were characterized by complete alignment of interests, mutual support, and class cooperation. Mongol rulers did everything possible to ensure that the Lamist Church quickly established ideological dominance over the masses. Shamanism, shamans, and their followers were ruthlessly suppressed; monasteries and temples were constructed on a wide scale; arats were encouraged to convert to Lamaism and were fully exempted from taxes and obligations upon doing so. In return, the Lamist Church persuaded the population of the futility and sinfulness of class struggle, the inevitability of obedience, and the divine origin of the authority of khans and princes. Furthermore, senior church positions were opened primarily to members of the feudal elite—especially younger sons of khans and princes with little chance of secular rule. Thus, after the death of Sonam Gyatso in 1586, the position of Dalai Lama was assumed by Altan Khan’s great-grandson Yonten Gyatso [2, p. 80], the only Mongol ever to hold this office. The leadership of the Church was keenly interested in Mongol feudal support amid the prolonged struggle for power in feudal-theocratic Tibet between rival groups and between the two major Lamist sects—the “Red Hats” and the “Yellow Hats.” Mongol princes, in turn, actively used the Church and its influence in their struggle for personal privileges. The Church refused no such requests, viewing them as additional means of strengthening its influence and increasing its wealth in Mongolia. Titles, honorary ranks, and even inclusion in the Lamist pantheon were generously bestowed upon feudal ISSN: 2582-4686 SJIF 2021-3.261,SJIF 20222.889, 2024-6.875 ResearchBib IF: 9.948 / 2024 VOLUME-5, ISSUE-12 858 lords, some of whom were proclaimed incarnations (hubilgan) of Buddhist saints. As a result, there were more hubilgans in Mongolia than in Tibet itself. To supervise affairs in Mongolia, the supreme lamas of Tibet sent their representative Tsagan Nomun Khan to the Tola River region in 1604. He effectively became a political advisor to Mongol khans and princes. All of this contributed to the extraordinary success of Lamaism in the khanates and principalities of Eastern Mongolia. In the western part of the country—among the Oirats—the process unfolded somewhat differently. Here, the victorious advance of Lamaism began only in the mid-1610s. Gaban-Sharab and BaturUbashi-Tyumen attribute the initiative of conversion to Lamaism to the Torgut noble Sain-TenesMergen-Temene, who belonged to the southeastern Oirat group and migrated together with the Choros [3, p. 104]. Around 1610, he approached Baybagas of the Khoshut, then head of the Oirat confederation, and other ruling princes with this proposal. Baybagas was inclined to accept the proposal, but the lack of direct contact with Tibet posed a serious obstacle. Hostile relations with Eastern Mongol rulers blocked the shortest route via Kukunor, while passage through the Kunlun Mountains was extremely difficult. These factors were among the main reasons for the delayed spread of Lamaism in Western Mongolia. According to Gaban-Sharab, the route to Tibet ran through Aksu and Barkul, still crossing the Kunlun range. Tsagan Nomun Khan arrived among the Oirats as the Dalai Lama’s representative. Initially, Baybagas himself intended to renounce secular affairs and join the ranks of the toyns (lamaaristocrats), having frequently heard from Tsagan Nomun Khan about the emptiness and impermanence of the external and internal worlds. However, other Oirat rulers opposed this decision, telling Baybagas: “Without you, it will be difficult for us to preserve the unity of the state” [3, p. 99]. After consulting Tsagan Nomun Khan, it was decided that it would be more beneficial for the Church if each noble dedicated one son to the clergy rather than Baybagas alone becoming a lama. Consequently, many Oirat rulers—including Dalai Taisha of the Derbets, Khara-Khula of the Choros, Kho-Urluk of the Torguts, Khundulen of the Khoshuts, and others—dedicated one son each to the Lamist clergy. Baybagas, who had no biological children, adopted a son of the Khoshut noble Baba Khan and likewise dedicated him to the Church. This adopted son later became a prominent religious figure known in Mongolian history as Zaya Pandita. Zaya Pandita was born in 1599 and was dedicated to the clergy at the age of seventeen. Thus, the official adoption of Lamaism by the Oirat feudal elite likely occurred around 1616. This is confirmed by testimonies of Russian envoys Tamila Petrov and Ivan Kunitsyn, who witnessed the conversion of the Oirat population by lamas arriving from Eastern Mongolia in that year [4, p. 53]. In 1617, Zaya Pandita arrived in Tibet, where he studied Buddhist scholarship and the theory and practice of the Lamist Church. He returned to his homeland in 1639 and launched extensive ideological and political activity. As in Eastern Mongolia, the suppression of shamanism and the establishment of Lamaism in Western Mongol uluses proceeded rapidly. However, among the Oirats the process exhibited significant peculiarities that left a lasting imprint on the subsequent history of the Lamist Church in Oirat khanates and principalities. Notably, the institution of reincarnations (hubilgans) did not fully develop, and the number of monasteries and clergy remained far smaller than in Eastern Mongolia. Consequently, the Church’s influence among the masses was less absolute and all-encompassing. This can be explained by the specific military-political and geographical conditions of Oirat territories at the turn of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, which limited the density of ties between the ISSN: 2582-4686 SJIF 2021-3.261,SJIF 20222.889, 2024-6.875 ResearchBib IF: 9.948 / 2024 VOLUME-5, ISSUE-12 859 Tibetan Lamist Church and Oirat feudal lords. Additionally, the gradual concentration of secular power in the hands of a single Oirat ruler at the head of the emerging Dzungar Khanate affected church–state relations. As a result, neither the Dzungar nor the Volga Kalmyk Khanates developed a centralized Lamist church organization comparable to that of Eastern Mongolia. The formation of the Dzungar Khanate resulted from a combination of internal and external political factors. Growth in livestock numbers led to relative land scarcity, exacerbated by the fragmentation of feudal holdings. Economic development demanded new pasturelands, pushing Oirat rulers toward internal conflicts and external expansion. Military failures further reduced available grazing lands, intensifying feudal strife and exhausting society. This crisis likely prompted Oirat feudal elites to exploit the political fragmentation of Mongolia and settle in the Ili Valley [3, p. 102]. In response to this crisis, some Oirat feudal groups migrated northwestward in the late sixteenth century to sparsely populated and weakly defended regions such as Kulunda, the Irtysh, and Ishim steppes. A major internal struggle unfolded between the Khoshut rulers led by Baybagas and the Choros house led by Khara-Khula. Baybagas represented forces opposing centralization, while Khara-Khula sought to unite Oirat lands under strong central authority, necessary for resisting external pressure and conducting successful expansion [6, p. 260]. Contrary to some scholars’ claims, these migrations were not driven by ambitions to restore a Chinggisid empire but rather constituted attempts to escape adverse economic and political conditions. Frequent conflicts with Kazakh feudal rulers, intensified in the seventeenth century by coordinated actions with Eastern Mongolian Altan Khans, posed direct threats to Oirat rulers and compelled them to overcome political fragmentation and form a unified state [5, p. 130]. The adoption of Buddhism–Lamaism as the official religion by the Oirats had profound consequences. It was rooted in the military-political interests of khans and princes, who recognized the advantages of alliance with the Tibetan Lamist Church, while the Church benefited from acquiring new followers. The specific historical context explains both the delayed conversion of Western Mongolia and the distinct features of church organization among the Oirats. While sources do not confirm B. Vladimirtsov’s exaggerated assessment of the cultural-historical significance of Oirat conversion to Lamaism, they also refute claims that deny its positive impact entirely. Religious ideology contributed to strengthening pan-Mongol unity, overcoming fragmentation, fostering literary development, facilitating cultural exchange with Tibet and India, and abandoning certain brutal shamanistic practices. In conclusion, one of the most significant religious and political processes in the Mongol world at the turn of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was the revival and widespread dissemination of Buddhism in the form of Lamaism. Initially adopted by Eastern Mongolian rulers, Lamaism rapidly encompassed all strata of Mongol society and resulted in a stable alliance between secular power and the Lamist Church. In Western Mongolia, its spread occurred later and under distinct conditions, leading to a less centralized and less dominant ecclesiastical structure. Nevertheless, the adoption of Lamaism played a crucial role in shaping the political, ideological, and cultural development of the Oirats and the Dzungar Khanate, vividly illustrating the interconnection of religious, political, and cultural processes in Mongol history. Foydalanilgan adabiyotlar roʻyxati. 1. [Sagang Secen] Erdeni-yin Tobci. Ulanbator, 1958. 2. Шара Туджн. Монгольская летопись XVII в. Пер. Н. П. Шастиной. М,— Л 1957. ISSN: 2582-4686 SJIF 2021-3.261,SJIF 20222.889, 2024-6.875 ResearchBib IF: 9.948 / 2024 VOLUME-5, ISSUE-12 860 3. И. Я. Златкин ИСТОРИЯ ДЖУНГАРСКОГО ХАНСТВА 1635–1758 Издание второе издательство «наука» редакция восточной литературы Москва -1983 258-c 4. Материалы по истории русско-монгольских отношений. 1607—/1036/. Сборник документов. М., 19519 5. История о завоевании китайским ханом Канхием калкаюкого и эле такого народа, кочующего в Великой Татарии, состоящая в пяти частях. Пер. И. Россохин. — СПб., 1750. C130, 6. Издание второе издательство «наука» редакция восточной литературы Москва -1983 c-260 7.