Born a child prodigy and one of the highest reincarnated lamas in Tibet, the Tenth Karmapa fled to the far southeastern border regions due to civil war. In exile, he took a consort, collected birds, and applied himself to painting. Art historian Karl Debreczeny examines a highly personal painting by Tibetan history’s most unconventional artist, who took inspiration from Kashmiri sculpture and long-forgotten Chinese painting to forge his own unique style. Workshops and admirers would later emulate his creations.
In early Buddhism, arhats were those who had followed the path taught by the Buddha, and achieved release from the cycle of birth and death, or samsara. In later Mahayana traditions in China, the arhats were understood as a set group of disciples to the historical Buddha Shakyamuni, and an artistic tradition arose that depicted them as wizened sages with exaggerated features drawn from Daoist immortal imagery. Inspired by these Chinese paintings, Tibetan artists began to depict these figures in a genre that often carried with it aspects of Chinese artistic and material culture. In the Tibetan tradition they appear as a group of sixteen, representing the monastic ideal, and are invoked in rituals of confession and mending vows.
Avalokiteshvara, an embodiment of compassion, is a powerful bodhisattva, worshiped all across the Buddhist world. Avalokiteshvara is part of the very origin myth of the Tibetan people, and seen as the protector deity of Tibet. Many Tibetans believe that the emperor Songtsen Gampo, the Karmapas, and Dalai Lamas are all emanations of Avalokiteshvara. A special Avalokiteshvara image, the Pakpa Lokeshvara, is enshrined at the Potala Palace in Lhasa. In India and Tibet, Avalokiteshvara is understood as male, while in East Asian Buddhism, Avalokiteshvara is often thought of as female, and is known by the Chinese name Guanyin. Avalokiteshvara is recognizable in the Tibetan tradition by the lotus he holds, the image of Buddha Amitabha in his crown, and antelope skin over his shoulder.
Hindus and Buddhist believe that all beings die and are reborn in new bodies, or “incarnations.” While reincarnation is recognized across the Buddhist world, in the Tibetan Buddhist tradition, some important teachers (lamas) are thought to be able to control this process. Their successive incarnations, known as tulkus (emanation bodies), formed incarnation lineages such as Dalai Lamas, Panchen Lamas, Karmapas, and others.
The Kagyu are a major Later Diffusion tradition of Tibetan Buddhism. The Kagyu trace their lineages back to the Mahasiddhas, the great tantric masters of medieval India. The Kagyu are known for their yogic practices, as well as the teaching of Mahamudra, or the “Great Seal.” The Kagyu tradition includes many different branches, such as the Karma, Drukpa, Drigung, Tselpa, Pakmodru, and others. The most influential leaders of the Karma Kagyu are the Karmapas, a tulku lineage associated with that Kagyu branch. In Bhutan, the Drukpa Kagyu tradition serves as the state religion. A follower of the Kagyu is called a Kagyupa.
The Karmapas are a lineage of tulkus, or reincarnated lamas, and heads of the Karma Kagyu tradition of Tibetan Buddhism, recognizable by their distinctive black hats. They began tracing their reincarnations starting in the thirteenth century when Rangjung Dorje (1284–1339) recognized himself the reincarnation of two predecessors, to whom he gave the titles Second and First Karmapas. The Karmapas are thus the historically oldest tulku lineage in Tibetan Buddhism. The Karmapas were a major force in medieval Tibet, but their economic and political power was broken in the mid-seventeenth century when the Geluk-tradition Dalai Lamas and their Mongol allies defeated the king of Tsang and drove many Karma Kagyupas into exile. Nevertheless, the Karmapa lineage survived, and remains influential today. The Karmapas are believed to be emanations of the bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara.
The Tenth Karmapa, Choying Dorje (1604–1674), provides a rare glimpse into the life of a Tibetan artist. Little is known about the lives and works of most artists, but the ’s importance as the head of the Karma Kagyu tradition of led to the production of extensive biographical material, giving us a wealth of information about his artistic career, including his early training, collecting interests, documentation of his artistic production, and models he sought for imitation. He drew from a wide range of sources. According to Tibetan tradition his paintings were inspired by Chinese models and his sculpture by the tradition. A true connoisseur of the art of the past, the Tenth Karmapa was inspired by archaic models not practiced by other artists for centuries, as if harking back to a better time, a reaction to his own turbulent era. He did not just adopt styles and genres wholesale, but rather experimented with different compositional and figural models as well as styles, even mixing genres to create a personal visual idiom.
The Karmapa’s Life and Authorship
The Tenth Karmapa was something of a child prodigy. By the age of seven he is said to have fully learned the art of painting, and by the age of eight he was already a prolific artist. His most quoted statement reveals his self-conception as an artist: “Regarding poetry and painting there is none greater than me in Tibet. I am one who pleases . I am one who has come into this world to paint.”
Despite being a great incarnate , the Tenth Karmapa lived a challenging life. When the long-standing sectarian strife between the Karmapa’s main patron, the ruler of Tsang in southwestern Tibet, and the monastic order and their Mongolian patrons boiled over into war, the rose to political power. In 1645 the Karmapa fled east to the distant lands of on the Sino-Tibetan border, an area protected by the Karma Kagyu’s longtime patrons, the Naxi kings of Lijiang. While the Tenth Karmapa’s long twenty-five-year exile seems to have limited his wider activity as a religious leader, it also provided him with the opportunity to explore his creative affinity as an artist.
In Lijiang survives a set of seven paintings of and the Sixteen dated 1660 (fig. 1), executed and inscribed by the Tenth Karmapa’s own hand. The end of a lengthy gold inscription at the top of the set’s central painting makes his authorship clear (fig. 2):
For the sake of the wishes of the Prince Karma Puntsok Wangchuk who possesses a wealth of faith, the one practiced in the arts called “Lokeshvara,” and who is praised as the tenth to be blessed with the name “Karmapa,” Choying Dorje, painted in their entirety by his own hand.
The modest, almost self-deprecating phrasing suggests the Tenth Karmapa wrote the inscription himself. Moreover, “Lokeshvara,” meaning “Lord of the World,” is an unusual epithet that the Tenth Karmapa used to refer to himself, which reaffirms his authorship. The name Lokeshvara references the Karmapas’ identity as emanations of the Avalokiteshvara. Both Tibetan and Chinese sources corroborate that the recipient of this set of paintings named in the inscription was the Naxi crown prince of Lijiang, Mu Jing (1628–1671).
The Arhat Genre
Most paintings identified as being in the style of the Tenth Karmapa depict arhats, the original followers of the Buddha, and biographical writings confirm that arhats were the Karmapa’s favorite subject to paint. The arhat genre was imported from China, making it a rich vehicle for Chinese visual modes, which may have made it a convenient medium for the Karmapa to explore his artistic interests.
The paintings in this set feature small groups of arhats participating in social activities and mundane acts such as eating. In Arhats Viewing a Painting of Birds (fig. 1), two arhats are looking at a painting, a scholarly activity. Chinese convention would show the arhats looking at a religious icon such as Avalokiteshvara, but here the arhats view a secular theme of birds. The Tenth Karmapa’s love of birds was so well known that people gifted them in great profusion, inundating his court with avian creatures. The Karmapa combined secular and religious artistic traditions, here merging the Chinese bird-and-flower painting genre and the arhat genre.
The arhat holding the top of the painting of cranes grasps a brush in his right hand, suggesting he painted these birds. This depiction therefore self-identifies the Karmapa, himself a monastic and painter of birds, with these arhats. Moreover, the Tibetan-style cap on the young boy attendant is likely a reference to the birth of the Tenth Karmapa’s son, the Sixth Gyeltsab, Norbu Zangpo (1660–1698), that year. While the Karmapa was fully ordained, he lived an unconventional life in exile, taking a consort and having children. These elements demonstrate that the paintings in this set are more than simple icons—they are personal paintings, quite unlike the usual Tibetan conventions of this genre.
His Painting Style
As seen in this inscribed set, the Tenth Karmapa’s figural forms are idiosyncratic and spontaneously drawn. They share a whimsical naïveté recognizable by the fleshy abbreviated faces with tiny pursed red lips. These faces do not resemble contemporary Tibetan forms but seem to draw on ancient Chinese Tang dynasty (618–907) models. Following the conquest of China by the and the establishment of their new alien regime, the Qing dynasty (1644–1911), Chinese artists living through the social turmoil used such models to evoke a distant golden age. The Karmapa was likely exposed to these conventions while living in Yunnan.
The Tenth Karmapa was also fascinated with a wide range of animals, especially birds, which he rendered sensitively and even playfully. His brushwork is especially distinctive; he skillfully employed subtle ink washes and often used a “boneless” technique combined with short, quick, controlled lines to evoke shape, a brush technique known in the Chinese tradition as “tremulous brush” (zhanbi) (fig. 3).
Fig. 3.
Tenth Karmapa, Choying Dorje (1604–1674); detail of Two Arhats and Heshang with a Woman Washing Daikon, showing examples of “tremulous brush” (in the leaves) and “boneless brush” (in the rabbit) brushwork, from a set of seven paintings; Lijiang, Yunnan Province, China; dated 1660; ink and pigment on silk; 26¾ × 16½ in. (68 × 42 cm); Lijiang Municipal Museum; no. 439.4
The use of silk as a support, or canvas, is another unusual characteristic, as Tibetan painters usually preferred cotton. The Tenth Karmapa’s biographies suggest some of the sources for his new “Chinese-style painting.” Shortly after arriving in Lijiang, for instance, he “examined many thousands of Chinese paintings on silk” in the king’s palace. Local tradition also recounts that the ruler invited the master painter Ma Xiaoxian from Ningbo to Lijiang, and the Tenth Karmapa is said to have greatly admired his work. Perhaps not coincidentally, the Karmapa’s compositions most resemble extant twelfth-century paintings from , a famous center of artistic activity on the east coast of China.
These stylistic observations enable us to identify other works by the Karmapa’s hand (figs. 4, 5, and 6). However, the Tenth Karmapa’s biographies also record that he set up workshops for the production of images, and he worked collaboratively with other artists throughout his life. Several sets of paintings evidence his distinctive idiom but lack his telltale brushwork, as well as revealing the hands of multiple artists of varying skill. These characteristics indicate workshop production (figs. 7 and 8).
Fig. 4
Attributed by inscription to Tenth Karmapa, Choying Dorje (1604–1674); Marpa Lotsawa (1012–1097); Tibet; 17th century; pigments on silk; 19⅞ × 12¼ in. (50.5 × 31 cm); Collection of Ulrich von Schroeder; HAR 33257; photograph courtesy of Ulrich von Schroeder
Fig. 5
Attributed by inscription to Tenth Karmapa, Choying Dorje (1604–1674); Damchen, the Oath-Bound Protector; Gura Sharkha, Minyak, Kham region, eastern Tibet; dated 1655; ground mineral pigment on silk; 18⅞ × 12 in. (48 × 30.5 cm); Private collection; HAR 81825
Fig. 6
Attributed to Tenth Karmapa, Choying Dorje (1604–1674); Karmapa in Cave (Tenth Karmapa, Sixth Gyeltsab, and Kuntu Zangpo); Tibet or Gyeltang, northern Yunnan; 17th century (ca. 1668–1674); pigments on silk; 15¾ × 10⅝ in. (40 × 27 cm); Shamarpa Collection; HAR 60687
Atelier of Tenth Karmapa, Choying Dorje (1604–1674) or later followers; Tara; Tibet; 17th century; brass with pigments; 8 × 3⅝ × 3⅝ in. (20.3 × 9.2 × 9.2 cm); Rubin Museum of Art; C2005.16.3 (HAR 65425)
The Tenth Karmapa was also fond of making painted copies of old famous statues, especially from Greater Kashmir, which he sometimes used to model his painted figures, such as images of the Buddha (fig. 2). His own sculptural production featured figural forms largely inspired by the arts of Kashmir (figs. 9 and 10), while the faces of some of his sculptures seem to draw on ancient Chinese models (fig. 9). The Karmapa’s sculptures therefore also reflect a synthesis of stylistic sources from different cultures and time periods.
Fig. 9
Attributed to Tenth Karmapa, Choying Dorje (1604–1674); Padmapani Lokeshvara; Tibet; 17th century; ivory; height 11½ in. (29.2 cm); Cleveland Museum of Art; Sundry Purchase Fund (1968.280); CC0 – Creative Commons (CC0 1.0)
Fig. 10
Attributed by inscription to Tenth Karmapa, Choying Dorje (1604–1674); Unidentified Deity Seated on a Cow (Yama?); Tibet; 17th century; copper with traces of gilding; height 16 in. (40.5 cm); Lhasa Jokhang (Gtsug lag khang); Inv. no. 893; photograph by Ulrich von Schroeder from von Schroeder, Ulrich. 1995. 108 Buddhist Statues. DVD1, 108:30
Impact and Later Followers
Some Tibetan scholars have suggested that the Tenth Karmapa’s long exile in Lijiang may have limited the spread of his activity. Yet others believe that the Tenth Karmapa’s art forms one of the roots for the painting tradition founded by Situ Panchen (1700–1774) at Pelpung Monastery in Kham region, southeastern Tibet, in the eighteenth century. There is even some confusion between the works of the Tenth Karmapa and those of Situ Panchen (1, 2, 3, 4). Strong textual and visual evidence shows later followers emulated the Tenth Karmapa’s style into the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
Looking beyond the individual artist, workshop pieces suggest that teams of artisans were trained in the Tenth Karmapa’s unusual style (figs. 7 and 8). Given the exalted status of the artist as one of the highest incarnate lamas, it is little wonder that his works were also copied. So far, the Tenth Karmapa marks the only instance in the history of Tibetan art where we can trace works from the hand of the master to workshop production and later copies.
Footnotes
1
For instance, in English translation see Shamar Rinpoche, A Golden Swan in Turbulent Waters: The Life and Times of the Tenth Karmapa Choying Dorje (Lexington, VA: Bird of Paradise Press, 2012); Irmgard Mengele, Riding a Huge Wave of Karma: The Turbulent Life of the Tenth Karma-Pa (Kathmandu: Vajra Publications, 2012).
2
Si tu and ’Be lo = Si tu Paṇ chen Chos kyi ’byung gnas and ’Be lo Tshe dbang kun khyab, [Unpublished Biography of Chos Dbyings Rdo Rje]. Originally Part of Bsgrub Rgyud Karma Kam Tshang Brgyud Pa Rin Po Che’i Rnam Par Thar Pa Rab ’byams nor Bu Zla Ba Chu Shel Gyi Phreng Ba. Republished in Rgyal Dbang Karma-Pa Sku Phreng Bcu Pa Chos-Dbyings-Rdo-Rjeʼi Rnam Thar Dang Gar-Dbang Chos-Kyi-Dbang-Phyug Gi Rnam Thar Rtogs Brjod ʼdod ʼjoʼi Ba Mo (Sarnath, Varanasi: Wā-ṇa Badzra-bidyā Dpe-mdzod-khang, (1775) 2012), 399-468, fol. 184a, lines 7–184b, line 1. http://purl.bdrc.io/resource/MW4CZ294918.
3
For more on this inscription, see Karl Debreczeny, The Black Hat Eccentric: Artistic Visions of the Tenth Karmapa, Exhibition catalog (New York: Rubin Museum of Art, 2012),97–103, 299n474 https://issuu.com/rmanyc/docs/6._black_hat_eccentric_96.
4
See for instance Karl Debreczeny, The Black Hat Eccentric: Artistic Visions of the Tenth Karmapa, Exhibition catalog (New York: Rubin Museum of Art, 2012), 125, fig. 3.19 https://issuu.com/rmanyc/docs/6._black_hat_eccentric_96.
5
Gtsang mkhan chen ’Jam dbyangs dpal ldan rgya mtsho, “Rgyal Mchog Chos Dbyings Rdo Rje’i Rnam Thar Mdo Sde Rgyan Gyi Lung Dang Sbyar Ba,” in Gsung Thor Bu / ’Jam Dbyangs Dpal Ldan Rgya Mtsho, Published as Poetical Biographies of Dharmakirti and the Tenth Karma Pa Chos Dbyings Rdo Rje with a Collection of Instructions on Buddhist Practice (Delhi: Lakshmi Press, 1982), 210 http://purl.bdrc.io/resource/MW23998; Si tu and ’Be lo = Si tu Paṇ chen Chos kyi ’byung gnas and ’Be lo Tshe dbang kun khyab, [Unpublished Biography of Chos Dbyings Rdo Rje]. Originally Part of Bsgrub Rgyud Karma Kam Tshang Brgyud Pa Rin Po Che’i Rnam Par Thar Pa Rab ’byams nor Bu Zla Ba Chu Shel Gyi Phreng Ba. Republished in Rgyal Dbang Karma-Pa Sku Phreng Bcu Pa Chos-Dbyings-Rdo-Rjeʼi Rnam Thar Dang Gar-Dbang Chos-Kyi-Dbang-Phyug Gi Rnam Thar Rtogs Brjod ʼdod ʼjoʼi Ba Mo (Sarnath, Varanasi: Wā-ṇa Badzra-bidyā Dpe-mdzod-khang, (1775) 2012), 399-468, fol. 174b, lines 2, 6–7. http://purl.bdrc.io/resource/MW4CZ294918.
6
See Shamar Rinpoche, A Golden Swan in Turbulent Waters: The Life and Times of the Tenth Karmapa Choying Dorje (Lexington, VA: Bird of Paradise Press, 2012), xiv, 210, 219; Irmgard Mengele, Riding a Huge Wave of Karma: The Turbulent Life of the Tenth Karma-Pa (Kathmandu: Vajra Publications, 2012), 245.
7
Si tu and ’Be lo = Si tu Paṇ chen Chos kyi ’byung gnas and ’Be lo Tshe dbang kun khyab, [Unpublished Biography of Chos Dbyings Rdo Rje]. Originally Part of Bsgrub Rgyud Karma Kam Tshang Brgyud Pa Rin Po Che’i Rnam Par Thar Pa Rab ’byams nor Bu Zla Ba Chu Shel Gyi Phreng Ba. Republished in Rgyal Dbang Karma-Pa Sku Phreng Bcu Pa Chos-Dbyings-Rdo-Rjeʼi Rnam Thar Dang Gar-Dbang Chos-Kyi-Dbang-Phyug Gi Rnam Thar Rtogs Brjod ʼdod ʼjoʼi Ba Mo (Sarnath, Varanasi: Wā-ṇa Badzra-bidyā Dpe-mdzod-khang, (1775) 2012), 399-468, fol. 179b, line 3. http://purl.bdrc.io/resource/MW4CZ294918.
8
On these sets as workshop productions, see Karl Debreczeny, The Black Hat Eccentric: Artistic Visions of the Tenth Karmapa, Exhibitioncatalog (New York: Rubin Museum of Art, 2012), https://issuu.com/rmanyc/docs/6._black_hat_eccentric_96, 128–69; Karl Debreczeny, “Recrafting Remote Antiquity: Art of the Tenth Karmapa,” Arts of Asia 50, no. 6 (November–December) (2020): 72–87; Karl Debreczeny, “Of Bird and Brush: A Preliminary Discussion of a Parinirvāṇa Painting in the Distinctive Idiom of the Tenth Karmapa Recently Come to Light,” in Gateways to Tibetan Studies: A Collection of Essays in Honour of David P. Jackson on the Occasion of His 70th Birthday, ed. Volker Caumanns et al., Indian and Tibetan Studies, 12.1 (Hamburg: Department of Indian and Tibetan Studies, University of Hamburg, 2021), 1:161-88.
9
David P. Jackson, “The Language of Art: The Challenge of Translating Art Historical Terms from the Biography of the Tenth Karmapa,” in The Black Hat Eccentric: Artistic Visions of the Tenth Karmapa, ed. Karl Debreczeny, Exhibition catalog (New York: Karl, 2012), 282–86; Luczanits 2016, https://issuu.com/rmanyc/docs/6._black_hat_eccentric_96.
10
On his sculpture, see Ulric von Schroeder, Buddhist Sculptures in Tibet, 2 vols. (Hong Kong: Visual Dharma Publications, 2001); Ian Alsop, “Sculpture,” in The Black Hat Eccentric: Artistic Visions of the Tenth Karmapa, ed. Karl Debreczeny, Exhibition catalog, vol. 2012 (New York: Rubin Museum of Art, 2012), 215–77; Christian Luczanits, “Inspired by the Past: The Art of Chöying Dorjé and Western Himalayan Sculpture,” in The Tenth Karmapa and Tibet’s Turbulent Seventeenth Century, ed. Karl Debreczeny and Gray Tuttle (Chicago: Serindia, 2016), 107–51; Luo Wenhua, “A Survey of a Willow-Branch Guanyin Attributed to the Tenth Karmapa in the Palace Museum and Related Questions,” in The Tenth Karmapa and Tibet’s Turbulent Seventeenth Century, ed. Karl Debreczeny and Gray Tuttle (Chicago: Serindia, 2016), 153–83..
11
Tangla Tsewang, quoted in Dkon mchog bstan ’dzin, Yon tan tshe ring and Rdo dril, eds., Thang bla tshe dbang phyag bris gces bsgrigs bzo rig mig rgyan (Chengdu: Sichuan minzu chubanshe, 2006), 218, http://purl.bdrc.io/resource/MW1PD82465.
12
Karma Gyeltsen, personal communication, October 20, 2010. Tangla Tsewang (written in the 1950s, reproduced in Dkon mchog bstan ’dzin, Yon tan tshe ring, and Rdo dril, eds., Thang bla tshe dbang phyag bris gces bsgrigs bzo rig mig rgyan (Chengdu: Sichuan minzu chubanshe, 2006), 218. http://purl.bdrc.io/resource/MW1PD82465.) and W.D. Shakabpa, Bod Kyi Srid Don Rgyal Rabs / Political History of Tibet (Kalimpong: T. Tsepal Taikhang, 1976), http://purl.bdrc.io/resource/MW28263 propose similar theories.
13
David P. Jackson, A History of Tibetan Painting: The Great Tibetan Painters and Their Traditions, Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften Philosophisch-Historische Klasse Denkschriften 42 (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1996), 251–52; Karl Debreczeny, The Black Hat Eccentric: Artistic Visions of the Tenth Karmapa, Exhibition catalog (New York: Rubin Museum of Art, 2012), https://issuu.com/rmanyc/docs/6._black_hat_eccentric_96, 263–72.
14
On later followers, see Karl Debreczeny, “From Hand of the Master to Workshop Production: Paintings Attributed to the Tenth Karmapa,” in The Tenth Karmapa and Tibet’s Turbulent Seventeenth Century, ed. Karl Debreczeny and Gray Tuttle (Chicago: Serindia, 2016), 219–31.
Debreczeny, Karl, and Gray Tuttle, eds. 2016. The Tenth Karmapa and Tibet’s Turbulent Seventeenth Century. Chicago: Serindia.
Shamar Rinpoche. 2012. A Golden Swan in Turbulent Waters: The Life and Times of the Tenth Karmapa Choying Dorje. Lexington, VA: Bird of Paradise Press.
In early Buddhism, arhats were those who had followed the path taught by the Buddha, and achieved release from the cycle of birth and death, or samsara. In later Mahayana traditions in China, the arhats were understood as a set group of disciples to the historical Buddha Shakyamuni, and an artistic tradition arose that depicted them as wizened sages with exaggerated features drawn from Daoist immortal imagery. Inspired by these Chinese paintings, Tibetan artists began to depict these figures in a genre that often carried with it aspects of Chinese artistic and material culture. In the Tibetan tradition they appear as a group of sixteen, representing the monastic ideal, and are invoked in rituals of confession and mending vows.
Avalokiteshvara, an embodiment of compassion, is a powerful bodhisattva, worshiped all across the Buddhist world. Avalokiteshvara is part of the very origin myth of the Tibetan people, and seen as the protector deity of Tibet. Many Tibetans believe that the emperor Songtsen Gampo, the Karmapas, and Dalai Lamas are all emanations of Avalokiteshvara. A special Avalokiteshvara image, the Pakpa Lokeshvara, is enshrined at the Potala Palace in Lhasa. In India and Tibet, Avalokiteshvara is understood as male, while in East Asian Buddhism, Avalokiteshvara is often thought of as female, and is known by the Chinese name Guanyin. Avalokiteshvara is recognizable in the Tibetan tradition by the lotus he holds, the image of Buddha Amitabha in his crown, and antelope skin over his shoulder.
Hindus and Buddhist believe that all beings die and are reborn in new bodies, or “incarnations.” While reincarnation is recognized across the Buddhist world, in the Tibetan Buddhist tradition, some important teachers (lamas) are thought to be able to control this process. Their successive incarnations, known as tulkus (emanation bodies), formed incarnation lineages such as Dalai Lamas, Panchen Lamas, Karmapas, and others.
The Kagyu are a major Later Diffusion tradition of Tibetan Buddhism. The Kagyu trace their lineages back to the Mahasiddhas, the great tantric masters of medieval India. The Kagyu are known for their yogic practices, as well as the teaching of Mahamudra, or the “Great Seal.” The Kagyu tradition includes many different branches, such as the Karma, Drukpa, Drigung, Tselpa, Pakmodru, and others. The most influential leaders of the Karma Kagyu are the Karmapas, a tulku lineage associated with that Kagyu branch. In Bhutan, the Drukpa Kagyu tradition serves as the state religion. A follower of the Kagyu is called a Kagyupa.
The Karmapas are a lineage of tulkus, or reincarnated lamas, and heads of the Karma Kagyu tradition of Tibetan Buddhism, recognizable by their distinctive black hats. They began tracing their reincarnations starting in the thirteenth century when Rangjung Dorje (1284–1339) recognized himself the reincarnation of two predecessors, to whom he gave the titles Second and First Karmapas. The Karmapas are thus the historically oldest tulku lineage in Tibetan Buddhism. The Karmapas were a major force in medieval Tibet, but their economic and political power was broken in the mid-seventeenth century when the Geluk-tradition Dalai Lamas and their Mongol allies defeated the king of Tsang and drove many Karma Kagyupas into exile. Nevertheless, the Karmapa lineage survived, and remains influential today. The Karmapas are believed to be emanations of the bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara.
Stay connected. Sign up for the Rubin Museum’s monthly newsletter to receive updates about upcoming exhibitions, programs, digital features, and more.
