Timeless Rapture: Inspired Verse from the Shangpa Masters

The Shangpa Masters and Their Lineage 335
Taranata’s ill-starred life span corresponded to a critical period in Tibet’s
political history. Each of the major schools of Tibetan Buddhism has
enjoyed a period of political power; Taranata was born ten years after the
Karma Kagyus continued their ascendancy in spite of a change in Tibet’s
leadership. The Karmapas and Zhamarpas had gained prominence under
the Rinpung administration (1478–1565) and then rode on the coattails of
a lay political leader, Karma Tséten Dorjé (d. 1599), of a new ruling clan
that made Zhigatsé (in Tsang, western Tibet) the capital of Tibet. During
Taranata’s lifetime, the son, grandson, and great-grandson of this family
lived short and eventful lives and succeeded one another on the unlucky
throne. Taranata and the Jonang monasteries, centered in the Zhigatsé
area, were supported by that ruling family; Taranata ministered to one of
the kings (Karma Puntsok Namgyal, d. 1621), a ruler he respected, as he lay
dying from poison.
Eight years after Taranata’s death, the dynasty fell, to be replaced by
that of the Fifth Dalai Lama. Soon after the defeat, imprisonment, and execution
of the Tsang king (the great-grandson, Karma Tenkyong, 1604/06–
1642), the Jonang monastic system was dismantled and its pieces dissolved
into the Gélugpa school. It is said that even the paintings on the walls
were reworked, the past hierarchs’ hats changed to yellow, more in keeping
with the new landlords’ team colors.
The motives for this suppression were undoubtedly political—this
seemed to put the finishing touches on a victory that in fact marked the
last major transfer of power in Tibet until the modern day. It was politics
as usual, the way the game was played in Tibet. Nevertheless, this change
marked the end of a period of lay rule and return to an oligarchy, rule
from a religious throne. Of course, no one ignored that the sponsors of the
change were once again the Mongolians, yet what home rule they allowed
the Tibetans now belonged to the church-state. We can only imagine that
if the Mongolians had chosen lay persons to be their agents on Tibet’s
throne, the Jonang would have been allowed to continue to exist. However,
when power returned to lamas’ hands, it is possible that other lamas and
monasteries were seen as potential rivals even after any secular competition
had been crushed. Further, if a secular ruler decided to suppress what he
saw as a troublesome religious institution, it is likely that the justification
offered would have been couched in secular terms, such as, “This institution,
which has sacrificed its stated mission of religious training for political
intrigues, threatens the stability of the country.”