Dagmar Schwerk

Drawing Lines in a Mandala. .
A Sketch of Boundaries Between
Religion and Politics in Bhutan

Working Paper #12

Working Paper Series of the HCAS
“Multiple Secularities – Beyond the West, Beyond Modernities”#12: Dagmar Schwerk. “Drawing Lines in a Mandala:
A Sketch of Boundaries..
Between Religion and Politics in Bhutan”
Leipzig University, 2019.
© Dagmar Schwerk
This Working Paper has been published online and can be downloaded fromwww.multiple-secularities.de/publications/working-papers or ordered in print via
email to multiple-secularities@uni-leipzig.de
The HCAS’s Working Paper Series serves to disseminate the results of work inprogress prior to publication to encourage the exchange of ideas and academic
debate. Inclusion of a paper in the Working Paper Series should not limit publication in any other venue. Copyright remains with the authors.
Please cite as:
Schwerk, Dagmar. “Drawing Lines in a Mandala:
A Sketch of Boundaries Between..
Religion and Politics in Bhutan.” Working Paper Series of the HCAS “Multiple
Secularities – Beyond the West, Beyond Modernities” 12. Leipzig University, 2019.

Leipzig University
HCAS “Multiple Secularities – Beyond the West, Beyond Modernities“
Nikolaistraße 8–10
04109 Leipzig
Germany

The HCAS is part of Leipzig University and funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG).

Contents

Summary ...................................................................................................... 3
1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 5
1.1 Secularity, Secularism, and Secularisation ..................................... 5
1.2 Emic and Etic Categories and Concepts ........................................ 7
1.3 Technical Annotations ....................................................................... 8
1.4 Textual Sources .................................................................................. 9
2 The Maṇḍala ............................................................................................. 12
2.1 Conceptualisation: Earlier Developments .................................... 12

2.2 Manifestation: The Joint Twofold System of Governance ........... 15
2.3 Embodiment: Zhabdrung and the Foundation of Bhutan .......... 19
2.4 Metamorphosis: The Constitutional Framework of 				
Bhutan Today .................................................................................. 25
2.5 Shaping: Gross National Happiness (GNH) .................................. 31
3 Conclusion ................................................................................................. 39
4 Bibliography .............................................................................................. 45

1

Drawing Lines in a Maṇḍala

A Sketch of Boundaries Between Religion and Politics in
Bhutan*Summary
In the first half of the 17th century, three major Buddhist governments thatcombined a twofold religious and political structure under a Buddhist ruler
were established in the Tibetan cultural area (hereafter: Joint Twofold System of Governance).1 In 1625/26,2 Bhutan was united under the rule ofa charismatic Tibetan Buddhist master, Zhabdrung Ngawang Namgyel (1594–
ca. 1651; hereafter: Zhabdrung); Tibet and Sikkim followed, both in 1642 –although with significant differences in their respective institutionalisation.
The Bhutanese government as a constitutional monarchy with a
Buddhist king is the only one among the three still in existence today.
Bhutan’s transformation into a modern society along the lines of this Joint
Twofold System of Governance under the conditions of non-colonialisation
but with crucial and intense encounters of its societal elites with Western*

1

2This paper results from research as a Senior Research Fellow at the Kolleg-Forschungsgruppe(KFG) “Multiple Secularities – Beyond the West, Beyond Modernities” between November
2017 and May 2018. For further information, please consult https://www.multiple-secularities.de/team/dagmar-schwerk/. I would like to thank Christoph Kleine, Monika WohlrabSahr, Per K. Sørensen, and Judith Zimmermann for their suggestions and comments on
my paper. In addition, I owe my sincere thanks to the members of the Kolleg-Forschungsgruppe and colleagues from Tibetan and Bhutanese Studies, who significantly broadened myacademic horizon through the intense and fruitful discussions during my time in Leipzig
and beyond. In particular, I would like to express my gratefulness towards my Bhutanese andTibetan teachers and colleagues, both traditional and Western academics, and my Bhutanese
friends – to whom, in general, the credit for my research mainly goes.
As Tibetan cultural area is considered regions that have significant populations either
speaking the Tibetan language and its vernaculars or practising Tibetan Buddhism as religion. This roughly includes what nowadays constitutes Northern Pakistan, the Tibetan
Autonomous Region, parts of the Western Chinese provinces of Yunnan, Sichuan, Qinghai and Gansu, Bhutan, Mongolia, parts of the Indian Himalayas, such as Ladakh andSikkim, and parts of Nepal, such as Mustang and Dolpo; see also Matthew T. Kapstein,
The Tibetans (Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing, 2006), 1–2.
The corresponding Western year is not entirely clear, since the sources refer to theeleventh month of the Tibetan Wood Ox Year, lying between the middle of December
and January, cf. John A. Ardussi, “Bhutan Before the British: A Historical Study” (PhD
diss., Australian National University, 1977), 212, accessed June 22, 2019, https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/handle/1885/11280.
3

and Asian forms of modernity and secularity represents, therefore, aunique case in point.
First, to determine, how emic terms in classical Tibetan relate to theetic terms currently used in international and interdisciplinary discourses
about secularity, religion, and modernity in Bhutan in English, it is indispensable to extract emic terms as functional equivalents for the ‘religious’ and ‘political’ sphere in pre-modern Bhutan from textual sourcesthat deal with the Joint Twofold System of Governance. I set out to analyse their applicability to sketch out not only institutionalised but as wellmerely conceptualised boundaries between the ‘religious’ and ‘political’
sphere – boundaries that have been permanently negotiated and shifting.
To demonstrate the purpose of my reflective endeavours, this paper thenexemplarily correlates emic terms and the respective areas of interest with
the Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan from 2008 and the Buddhisminduced ideas and policies of Gross National Happiness (GNH).
Second, although this brings to light important emic terms important for
research on secularities – understood as distinction and differentiation processes in the spirit of the ‘multiple secularities’ approach in a non-evaluating
sense, further research needs to systematically address the language shifts
from classical Tibetan to Dzongkha and English as a literary medium andthe plurilingualism in discourses in contemporary Bhutan today.
Third, since the societal order of the Joint Twofold System of Governance today in Bhutan is still profoundly grounded in a non-Western cosmological order – that of Tantric Buddhism – I further argue that any analytical framework that aims to facilitate fruitful research about distinction
and differentiation processes – resulting in secularities – has to address not
only factual institutional arrangements but include the religious-doctrinal
background of Buddhism systematically.3
3

The title of this paper and the captions of section two intentionally but creatively allude
to a Maṇḍala as some of its numerous applications connect well with a variety of themes
touched upon in this paper. A Maṇḍala can symbolically represent a cosmological andmetaphysical scheme, can be interpreted on a philosophical and doctrinal level or as asymbolic representation of the human body in meditative practices and rituals. In addition, it is used in medical practices and found in the architecture of famous sacred sites.
Here, most important is its use as a geopolitical concept. Stanley Tambiah has called it
poignantly a “geometric, topographical, cosmological, and societal blueprint;” see Stanley
J. Tambiah, “The galactic polity in Southeast Asia,” HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory
3, no. 3 (2013): 503–04. While a Maṇḍala transgresses duality, it draws at the same time
manifold boundaries. Consequently, it possesses distinctions and differentiations defining
4In response to that, I suggest in closing to visualise the areas that point
to distinction and differentiation processes in pre-modern Bhutan not only
between the opposing etic poles of ‘religious’ and ‘other societal spheres’/‘secular’ but also to juxtapose them on a ‘Buddhist’ matrix with Christoph
Kleine’s “three-layered concept of immanence, relative and absolute transcendence.”4
By presenting first findings of the specific and unique case example ofpre-modern Bhutan this paper hopefully yields benefit for further interdisciplinary discourses about secularity, religion, and modernity in contemporary Bhutan – paying thereby tribute to the complexity of this field of
research. Besides for Bhutan, this analytical framework can be adapted forfurther research about different pre-modern formations of the Joint Twofold System of Governance in the Tibetan cultural area as a whole.

1 Introduction
1.1 Secularity, Secularism, and Secularisation

This text-critical analysis of the primary source materials partially adapts
etic terms, as laid out in the research programme of the HCAS “Multiple
Secularities – Beyond the West, Beyond Modernities,”5 which are of great
benefit in the case example of Bhutan.

45functions and rules, when applied in our context, in my view, ‘secularities’. For an extensive introduction, see Stanley J. Tambiah, World Conqueror and World Renouncer: A
Study of Buddhism and Polity in Thailand against a Historical Background (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1976). The apparent parallels to Buddhist conceptions ofrule through Zhabdrung in Bhutan, and more broadly, of governance, morality, and polity
in Bhutan that remain until today will become clear in the course of this paper.
See Christoph Kleine, “Religion and the Secular in Premodern Japan from the Viewpointof Systems Theory,” Journal of Religion in Japan 2, no. 1 (2013).
See Christoph Kleine and Monika Wohlrab-Sahr, “Research Programme of the HCAS
‘Multiple Secularities – Beyond the West, Beyond Modernities’,” Leipzig, March 2016.
For a detailed account of the development and definition of the concept of ‘multiple secularities’, see Monika Wohlrab-Sahr and Marian Burchardt, “Vielfältige Säkularitäten:Vorschlag zu einer vergleichenden Analyse religiös-säkularer Grenzziehungen,” Denkströme. Journal der Sächsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig 7 (2011): 53–71;
Monika Wohlrab-Sahr and Marian Burchardt, “Multiple Secularities. Towards a Cultural
Sociology of Secular Modernities,” Comparative Sociology 11, no. 6 (2012): 875–909; Marian Burchardt, Monika Wohlrab-Sahr, and Matthias Middell, eds., Multiple Secularities:
Beyond the West. Religion and Modernity in the Global Age (Boston: de Gruyter, 2015);
and Monika Wohlrab-Sahr and Marian Burchardt, “Revisiting the Secular: Multiple
Secularities and Pathways to Modernity,” Working Paper Series of the HCAS “Multiple
Secularities – Beyond the West, Beyond Modernities” 2 (Leipzig University, 2017).
5

Christoph Kleine and Monika Wohlrab-Sahr propose the term ‘secularity’ as an “analytical term” and “heuristic concept” – “a modality of distinction and differentiation” between religious and non-religious – defined
as follows:
We use the term secularity in a more general sense for institutionally aswell as symbolically embedded forms and arrangements for distinguishing
between religion and other societal areas, practices and interpretations. We
therefore do not understand secularity to be the opposite of religion […],
but rather associate the term with the modality of making distinctions, andare investigating this modality, as well as its prerequisites and effects.6

I understand the term ‘secularisation’ to refer only to the process of social
distinction (conceptual) and differentiation (institutional) between societal
spheres – here the religious and mainly the political – at a given point intime in a non-evaluating sense. As José Casanova has pointed out, secularisation does not necessarily entail the privatisation of religion or the
decline of religious belonging, belief and participation. I also separate theuse of the terms ‘secularity’ and ‘secularism’, the latter being understood as
an ideological legitimisation or promotion of the institutional arrangement
for separating religion from politics.7
In the spirit of the ‘multiple secularities concept’, I share the assumption that complex distinction and differentiation processes took place inmany pre-modern non-Western societies and that these can provide new
insights into alternative pathways towards modernity and contribute significantly to the field of secularity and modernity studies. In Bhutan, as
elsewhere, these processes included negotiations between different actors
and institutions. Such negotiations sought to tackle the issue of competing functions in society, and often resulted in overlapping and continuallyshifting boundaries of religious and other societal spheres.

6
7

Kleine and Wohlrab-Sahr, “Research Programme of the HCAS ‘Multiple Secularities’,” 3.
I follow in my use of the etic terms ‘secularity’, ‘secularisation’, and ‘secularism’ the distinctions laid out in the Research Programme of the HCAS “Multiple Secularities –Beyond the West, Beyond Modernities,” see Kleine and Wohlrab-Sahr, 1–3.
6

1.2 Emic and Etic Categories and Concepts

While recognising the importance of giving greater prominence in Western
academic discourse to discussion of alternative pathways towards modernity, I am nonetheless aware of the challenges inherent in such endeavours.
Two examples of these challenges are: (1) linguistic and methodologicalbarriers to accessing emic terminologies (with, in certain cases, relianceon translations); and (2) orality of emic terminologies not documented in
textual sources. Therefore, my research aims to be a first stepping stone
for further studies with the hope that other researchers in and outside of
Bhutan will proceed in this direction.
I apply the terminology of ‘emic’ and ‘etic’ in this paper, as this offersa sensible and systematic approach for discussing the intricate TibetanEnglish and Dzongkha-English translation processes. Pre-modern religious and historiographical works composed by Bhutanese authors weretraditionally written in classical Tibetan, called the “language of religion”(Tib. chos skad) in Bhutan. However, the official national language of Bhutan nowadays is Dzongkha, the “language of the fortress” (Tib. rdzongkha), which derived from dialects called “Ngalongkha” (Tib. snga longkha) originally mostly spoken in the Western valleys of Bhutan. After thefoundation of the State of Bhutan in 1625/26, Dzongkha became the spoken vernacular of the administration. Only since the 1960s, however, has
Dzongkha been promoted nationwide and thus steadily developed as aliterary language.8 Official legal and administrative documents are nowadays issued in most cases in two languages, English and Dzongkha, and8

For a concise overview of the various languages and vernaculars used in Bhutan, see
Karma Phuntsho, History of Bhutan (Noida: Random House, India, 2013), 51–62; seealso Michael V. Aris, Bhutan: The Early History of a Himalayan Kingdom (Warminster,
Wiltshire: Aris & Phillips Ltd, 1979), xvi–xvii. In particular, regarding the role of language politics in language shifts during nation-building and modernisation processes,
which, as in the case of Bhutan, often result in a shift from plurilingualism to monolingual or dual language policies; see Mark Turin, “Concluding Thoughts on Language
Shifts and Linguistic Diversity in the Himalayas: The Case of Nepal,” in The Politics ofLanguage Contact in the Himalayas, ed. Selma K. Sonntag and Mark Turin (Cambridge,
UK: Open Book Publishers, 2019, forthcoming), 125–34. For a concise overview of thisfield of study and the respective contributions in this volume, which include theoretical
approaches with respective Himalayan case studies, see Selma K. Sonntag, “Introduction:
Language Politics and Language Contact,” in The Politics of Language Contact, ed. Sonntag and Turin, 7–17. This publication is an excellent starting point to further address the
Bhutanese language shifts (oral and literary) concerning modernisation and secularisation processes.
7English is also the language of teaching in education. The pre-modern textual sources employed in my research for tracing emic terms are therefore
naturally in classical Tibetan. However, as classical Tibetan and Dzongkhaboth belong to the Tibeto-Burman language family, classical Tibetan emic
terms are often found (or even adopted) in Dzongkha, for example, in theConstitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan from 2008. It is with this particularlinguistic setting of challenging language shifts in mind that I sketch out
the crucial emic terms within the conception of the Joint Twofold System
of Governance.
For further studies on secularity in contemporary Bhutan, three aspects
need to be systematically addressed: (1) the plurilingualism in discourses
in Bhutan, carried out not just in Dzongkha and English, but also in othercommon vernaculars, such as Nepali and Tshangla; (2) the existing gap between written and oral communication media; and (3) the increasing roleof social media and the development of civil society. To sufficiently addressthese aspects, textual studies have to include additional ethnographic fieldresearch in Bhutan.
Finally, it is necessary to locate Bhutan’s discourses in the wider Tibetan
cultural area. Members of the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) in
exile, the Tibetan exile communities, and Tibetan intellectuals within
China and Mongolia have debated topics such as newly defining the Joint
Twofold System of Governance, ‘religious’ and ‘secular’, or the place of religion in the public domain. These discourses on secularity, secularism, andsecularisation have to be distinguished from those exclusive to Bhutan, letalone from the linguistic perspective, and do not form part of my analysis.9
1.3 Technical Annotations

As my paper is aimed at reaching an interdisciplinary readership that
may not be familiar with the languages of Tibetan, Sanskrit, Nepali, andDzongkha, I spell Tibetan and Bhutanese proper names, place names andterms phonetically according to the THL Simplified Phonetic Transcription of Standard Tibetan by David Germano and Nicolas Tournadre. The
exception to this is Bhutanese proper names, such as those of the Buddhist
9

For a concise overview of these discourses and the related Tibetan emic terms, see Holly
Gayley and Nicole Willock, “Introduction. Theorizing the Secular in Tibetan Cultural
Worlds,” Himalaya: The Journal of the Association for Nepal and Himalayan Studies 36,
no. 1 (2016): 12–21.
8

kings of Bhutan, which follow their own convention.10 By contrast, titles ofTibetan and Bhutanese works and emic Dzongkha, Nepali, Sanskrit andTibetan terms that are crucial to my analysis are transliterated in cursive
script and are usually bracketed. Emic terms form the core of my analysis
and therefore serve to facilitate research and discussions in Buddhist andTibetan studies. The emic terms in brackets are preceded by an abbreviation denoting the language: Dzongkha (Dzo.), Nepali (Nep.), Sanskrit(Skt.), and Tibetan (Tib.). In case of terms in several languages in one
bracket, the terms are separated by a colon. The transliteration of Tibetan
and Dzongkha characters follows the system of Turrell W. Wylie.11 Sanskrit
characters are transliterated according to the International Alphabet of
Sanskrit Transliteration (IAST). Birth-and-death dates follow the Buddhist
Digital Resource Center (hereafter: BDRC) unless noted otherwise.12
1.4 Textual Sources

My analysis of emic terms, in particular, focused on the standardised
Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729 (Tib. dPal ’brug pa rin po che mthu chenngag gi dbang po’i bka’ khrims phyogs thams cad las rnam par rgyal ba’igtam), that lays out the rules of the Joint Twofold System of Governance. It
was written down and arranged by the tenth Chief Abbot Tendzin Chögyel
(1701–66/67) and consists of three parts: (1) Introduction into the principlesof theocratic rule;13 (2) The duties of rulers and ministers; and (3) The duties
of government officials.14 Michael Aris has highlighted its significance in
10 See David Germano and Nicolas Tournadre, “THL Simplified Phonetic Transcription ofStandard Tibetan,” 2003, accessed June 14, 2019, http://www.thlib.org/reference/transliteration/#!essay=/thl/phonetics/s/b1.
11 See Turrell W. Wylie, “A Standard System of Tibetan Transcription,” Harvard Journal of
Asiatic Studies 22, no. 2 (1959): 261–67.
12 See Buddhist Digital Resource Center, accessed June 22, 2019, https://www.tbrc.org/.
13 For lack of a suitable etic term, I follow Michael Aris and other scholars in using theterms ‘theocratic’/‘theocracy’ throughout the paper. Nonetheless it should be highlighted
that neither ‘hierocracy’ (rule of priests) nor ‘theocracy’ (rule by God) are appropriate
descriptors for Bhutan. Note that for the case of Tibet, David Seyfort Ruegg has proposed‘Bodhisattvacracy’. Since Zhabdrung’s activities and his reputation have a strong emphasison Tantric Buddhist rule, I am hesitant to adopt it for the case of Bhutan, see David Seyfort Ruegg, “Introductory Remarks on the Spiritual and Temporal Orders,” in The relationship between religion and state (chos srid zung ‘brel) in traditional Tibet: Proceedings ofa seminar held in Lumbini, Nepal, March 2000, ed. Christoph Cüppers (Lumbini: Lumbini
International Research Institute, 2004), 11.
14 See Michael V. Aris, Sources for the History of Bhutan (Vienna: Arbeitskreis für tibetischeund buddhistische Studien, Universität Wien, 1986), 7–8; 121–86. Unless stated other9

providing unique insights into the principles and practices of governanceof the Joint Twofold System of Governance in pre-modern Bhutan.15 In
addition, emic terms and concepts from the Bhutanese Legal Code from1729 remain central to the constitutional framework of Bhutan today, andits political philosophy of Gross National Happiness (GNH). For example,
the academic and popular literature on Gross National Happiness (GNH)
frequently refers back to the term “happiness/well-being” (Tib./Dzo. bde
skyid) found in the Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729.16
The Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729 is contextualised by other Tibetan
language sources such as Bhutanese historiographical writings. Two historiographical works, in particular, are fundamental to the study of premodern Bhutan, but remain only partially translated. The first history of
Bhutan (Tib. lHo’i chos ’byung bstan pa rin po che’i ’phro mthud ’jam mgon
smon mtha’i ’phreng ba; hereafter: History of Bhutan I) was written by thetenth Chief Abbot Tendzin Chögyel, and includes the Bhutanese Legal Codefrom 1729. Michael Aris has observed that, out of a total of one hundredand fifty folios, only six folios concern the time prior to the unification of
Bhutan by Zhabdrung in 1625/26. Furthermore, only five of these six address the history of the Drukpa Kagyü school. By contrast, the second history (Tib. dPal ldan ’brug pa’i gdul zhing lho phyogs nags mo’i ljongs kyi chos’byung blo gsar ma ba’i rgyan; hereafter: History of Bhutan II), written by
the sixty-ninth Chief Abbot Gendün Rinchen (1926–97) in 1972, covers
all periods of the Drukpa Kagyü school in Bhutan, as well as the earlier
history of the Tibetan lineages. Gendün Rinchen drew from a wide rangeof sources for his history, however a number of these sources still remain towise, I have followed Michael Aris’ text-critical reading of the Tibetan text and translation. Other ‘earlier’ Bhutanese sources dealing with the monastic or civil law, and conceptions of governance are: (1) Zhabdrung’s personal seal, called the “Sixteen I’s”, (Tib.
nga bcu drug ma); (2) his early monastic code (Tib. rtsa yig chen mo) dated to 1629; and(3) the ‘first’ legal code from 1652 on slates of Punakha Dzong, Bhutan, that are almost
entirely illegible; see Michael Givel and Laura Figueroa, “Early Happiness Policy as a
Government Mission of Bhutan: A Survey of the Bhutanese Unwritten Constitution from1619 to 1729,” Journal of Bhutan Studies 31, no. 2 (2014): 1–21. For a translation of the‘first’ legal code, see Michaela Windischgraetz and Rinzin Wangdi, The Black-Slate Edictof Punakha Dzong (Thimphu: JSW Law Publishing Series 2019), accessed June 28, 2019,https://univie.academia.edu/MichaelaWindischgrätz.
15 Aris, Bhutan: The Early History, xxx–xxxii.
16 See Karma Ura et al., “A Short Guide to Gross National Happiness Index,” 6, accessed June21, 2019, http://www.grossnationalhappiness.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/ShortGNH-Index-edited.pdf.
10

be identified or located.17 My research is contextualised by these Bhutaneseand other Tibetan religious histories as well as civil and monastic codes.18
I have as well considered, but not systematically analysed the fascinating
travel account (Relação) of two Jesuit missionaries Estevão Cacalla and JoãoCabral dated to October 24, 1627. Their first-hand witnesses’ report describes their experiences during Zhabdrung’s political and religious masscampaigning directly after he announced the foundation of the State of
Bhutan under his rule, and it is the first documented encounter of Westernmissionaries with Bhutanese culture and religion. These Jesuit missionaries spent nearly eight months with the Zhabdrung in Bhutan in 1627 andwere even offered an own chapel room in his main Buddhist monastery
Cheri to proselytise. They provide remarkable insights in Zhabdrungs’s selfconception and his rule, his painful relation to his homeland Tibet, andmoreover, glimpses into the social reality of governance and administration
at that time.19
In conclusion, it is indispensable to analyse modern discourses about
religion, politics, and secularities in Bhutan against the backdrop of theseemic terminologies in pre-modern Tibetan textual sources. My paper provides the first glimpse into these sources and a vision of a complementary
analytical framework to conduct further research.
17 See Aris, Bhutan: The Early History, xxviii; 276; see also Ardussi, “Bhutan Before the
British,” 526. The sixty-ninth Chief Abbot Gendün Rinchen has made an immense contribution not only to the exegetical and doctrinal developments of his school and to thereligious institutions of 20th-century Bhutan, as a Buddhist master and prolific writer, butalso as a historiographer. In my PhD thesis, I provide an analysis of his vast Collected
Works which consists of ten volumes with one hundred and twenty-eight works (Dagmar Schwerk, A Timely Message from the Cave: The Mahāmudrā Doctrine and Intellectual Agenda of dGe-bshes dGe-’dun-rin-chen (1926–1997), the Sixty-Ninth rJe-mkhan-poof Bhutan (Hamburg: Department of Indian and Tibetan Studies, Universität Hamburg,
forthcoming 2020).
18 For a general introduction to historiographical writing in Tibet, see Per K. Sørensen,“The Development and Formation of Religious Historiography in Tibet,” in History of Religion: Narrating a Religious Past, ed. Bernd-Christian Otto, Susanne Rau, and Jörg Rüpke(Berlin: De Gruyter, 2015), 151–64. For an introduction to the genre of monastic codes(Tib. bca’ yig), see Berthe Jansen, The Monastery Rules: Buddhist Monastic Organizationin Pre-Modern Tibet (Oakland: University of California Press, 2018), 14–30.
19 For the English translation of the Relação, see Aris, Sources for the History of Bhutan, 8–9
and 170–86. Michael Aris also noted that the Relação is the first record of Zhabdrung
being called a Dharmarāja [Droma Raja] preceding all other Indian and British sources;
see Aris, 173, 184n13. Cf. also Aris, Bhutan: The Early History, 217–18. For an overview
and analysis about the different versions of Zhabdrung’s hagiographies, see also Schwerk,
A Timely Message from the Cave.
112 The Maṇḍala
2.1 Conceptualisation: Earlier Developments

Buddhist canonical and commentarial literature provides ample evidenceof the historical Buddha Siddhārtha Gautama teaching on topics such as
ethical standards for the behaviour of rulers, legitimisation of Buddhist
rule, wealth, and social responsibilities. These teachings correspond to acertain extent to our modern fields of law, politics, and economics. The
Buddha advised a multitude of people from all strata of society, roughly divisible into lay-people and the ordained. He even gave substantial advice toimportant rulers. Accordingly, from this context-dependent nature of the
Buddha’s teachings, we find sometimes seemingly contradicting statementsin the corpus of Buddhist scriptures from its inception on. The Buddha
neither put forward a systematically arranged religious-doctrinal system
nor promoted one specific political philosophy.20 Moreover, throughout his
career as a teacher, he even refused to answer specific philosophical andmetaphysical questions that he did not consider conducive to reachingNirvāṇa.21 After the Buddha’s death, and following the spread of Buddhism
throughout Asia, the elaboration of philosophical positions and the development of doctrinal systems played an essential role in producing a great
variety of Buddhist traditions and schools. In general, the historical development of Buddhism is roughly divided into “three vehicles” (Tib. thegpa: Skt. yāna): (1) Śrāvakayāna/Nikāya Buddhism; (2) Mahāyāna; and (3)Vajrayāna/Mantrayāna/Tantric Buddhism.22
20 Debates about Buddhist societies as either peaceful, which has been a very longstanding
notion about Buddhism, or violent per se, mostly as a reaction to the political developments in Sri Lanka and Myanmar, seem to overlook the complexity of the respective historical, political, and social context. On the relationship between violence and Buddhism,see, for instance, the contributions in Michael Zimmermann, ed., Buddhism and Violence(Lumbini: Lumbini International Research Institute, 2006).
21 The “fourteen unanswered things” (Skt. caturdaśāvyākṛta) are either listed as ten or fourteen questions in Pali or Sanskrit sources, respectively. They include, for example: whether the world is eternal and spatially finite or not, both, or neither; or does the Buddha
exist after death. The reason not to answer them is usually given as a parable told by the
Buddha as follows: Having been shot by a poisoned arrow (i. e. impermanence, birth, andso forth), would one ask, for example, who shot the arrow, from what material was thearrow made, or would one better just try to pull the arrow out? See Bhikkhu Thanissaro, “Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta: The Shorter Instructions to Malunkya,” in Tipitaka: The
Pali Canon, 1998, accessed June 19, 2019, https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/
mn.063.than.html.
22 As “vehicles” the Buddhist teachings are said to have the capacity to lead sentient beings
from the circle of endless rebirth (Skt. saṃsāra) to liberation (Skt. nirvāṇa), often com12

Besides these doctrinal developments, the societal spheres of religion,
politics, and economics have, from an early stage, been intertwined. In
India, Buddhist teachers and sages acted as advisors to rulers,23 religiously
legitimised their power and rule (and sometimes even violence and war),and engaged in economic relations to sustain their Buddhist communities and institutions. From there, Indian Buddhist conceptions regarding
Buddhist rule and kingship, cosmology, and social order evolved. With
this social order naturally manifold codes of conduct and rules alongside aform of reciprocal contractual ethics were developed. These ideas were interpreted, transformed, and institutionalised in varying ways in Buddhist
societies across Asia, a diversity mirrored in the distinctions in emic terminologies.
David Seyfort Ruegg has demonstrated that the conceptual dyad “belonging to the world/ordinary life” (Tib. ’jig rten pa: Skt. laukika) and“transcending/excelling/surpassing the world” (Tib. ’jig rten las ’das pa:
Skt. lokottara) 24 served as an ‘organizing principle’ in society, in harmony
with the cosmological order of early Indian Buddhism.25 Building on this,Christoph Kleine, in alignment with the framework of Luhmann’s ‘systems
theory’, has established this conceptual dyad as a “culturally specific versionof the binary code transcendence/immanence”. I will return to this topic
later in my conclusions as an additional possible and promising framework
pared with crossing a river or ocean with a ship and leaving the ship behind at the othershore.
23 For an introduction to the specific genre of advice literature (Tib. lugs kyi bstan bcos:
Skt. nītiśāstra), see José Ignacio Cabezón, The Just King: The Tibetan Buddhist Classic on
Leading an Ethical Life: Jamgön Mipham (Boulder, Colorado: Snow Lion, 2017), viiii–x.
24 The semantic field of this conceptual dyad in Tibetan is broad; just one example: “business of this life” (Tib. tshe ’di’i bya ba); see also (in German) Ulrike Roesler, “Die Lehre,
der Weg und die namenlose Religion: Mögliche Äquivalente eines Religionsbegriffs inder tibetischen Kultur,” in Religion in Asien? Studien zur Anwendbarkeit des Religionsbegriffs, ed. Peter Schalk (Uppsala: Uppsala University, 2013), 138–39.
25 See David Seyfort Ruegg, The Symbiosis of Buddhism with Brahmanism/Hinduism inSouth Asia and of Buddhism with “Local Cults” in Tibet and the Himalayan Region. Vol.
58 (Vienna: Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2008), 40; seealso David Seyfort Ruegg, Ordre spiritual et ordre temporal dans la pensée bouddhique del’Inde et du Tibet: Quatre conference au college de France (Paris: Collège de France, Institutde civilization indienne; Diffusion De Boccard, 1995); and David Seyfort Ruegg, “A Noteon the Relationship between Buddhist and Hindu Divinities in Buddhist Literature andIconology: The Laukika/Lokottara Contrast and the Notion of an Indian ‘Religious Substratum’?,” in Le parole e i marmi: Studi in onore di Raniero Gnoli nel suo 70. compleanno,
ed. Raffaele Torella (Rome: Istituto italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente, 2001), 735–42.
13

for analysing distinction and differentiation processes in a Buddhist context, in this case in Bhutan with its Joint Twofold System of Governance.26
Turning to the Tibetan cultural area, the conceptual dyad of Tibetan“chö” as “religion” (Tib. chos: Skt. dharma) and “si” as “politics” (Tib. srid:Skt. bhava) is abundantly present in Tibetan textual sources, such as legal
codes, genealogies and religious histories. It represents an ideal point of
departure to trace boundaries (and thereby understand relationships) between different societal spheres. Very generally speaking, the Sanskrit term
dharma for Tibetan “chö” can in the Indian context denote both religious
and non-religious systems of order in the different traditions of Jainism,
Hinduism, and Buddhism. The Tibetan translation of dharma, “chö” denotes an only partially overlapping semantic field to that of dharma,
though, which therefore requires careful study on its own terms. The term“chö” is used for the Buddhist doctrinal-religious system (though not for
Bön) and in certain cases more generally as a worldly order of rules.27
Whilst recognising the complexity of historical research on such emic
terms over a long period, this research is however not concerned withcomparing the semantic field of the Sanskrit terms (Skt. bhava, dharma) in
the Indian context with the Tibetan terms of “si” and “chö”.28 It is relevant
only to note that the semantic field of the Tibetan term “chö” as Buddhist
doctrine, practice system, and identification of belonging to specificallythis religious group, constitutes an implicit concept of ‘religion’ in Wittgenstein’s sense of family resemblances (Familienähnlichkeiten) or an alternative “prototype” as Ulrike Roesler has convincingly argued.29
26 For an analysis of the applicability of Niklas Luhmann’s ‘systems theory’ for Buddhism,see, Kleine “Religion and the Secular in Premodern Japan,” 9–13 and 14–16.
27 See Roesler, “Die Lehre, der Weg und die namenlose Religion,” 134–36. One example ofa more ‘worldly’ application is the “Sixteen pure rules of human conduct” (Tib. mi chosgtsang ma bcu drug). See also n. 47, p. 20.
28 For several early Tibetan sources going back to the Tibetan Empire including Dunhuang
sources, which mention and discuss the conceptual dyad of religion (Tib. chos) and politics(Tib. srid), see John Ardussi, “Formation of the State of Bhutan (’Brug gzhung) in the 17th
Century and its Tibetan Antecedents,” Journal of Bhutan Studies 11, no. 2 (2004): 26, n. iii.
29 See Roesler, “Die Lehre, der Weg und die namenlose Religion,” 132. For a discussion ofsemantic equivalents, family resemblances, and polythetic classes, see also Kleine, “Religion and the Secular in Premodern Japan,” 6–7. For “proto-types,” see Christoph Kleine,„Religion als begriffliches Konzept und soziales System im vormodernen Japan: Polythetische Klassen, semantische und funktionale Äquivalente und strukturelle Analogien,“ inReligion in Asien? Studien zur Anwendbarkeit des Religionsbegriffs, ed. Peter Schalk et al.
(Uppsala: Uppsala University, 2013).
14

The specific form of Buddhist governance that united a twofold religious and political structure under a Buddhist ruler, the Joint Twofold System of Governance, actualised this conceptual dyad of “politics/mundane
affairs” (Tib. srid) and “religion/transcending the mundane” (Tib. chos) in
the Tibetan cultural area.30 It represents an explicit Tibetan emic distinction and differentiation of what we can equate with a ‘religious’ and ‘political’ (and partially economic) sphere in the Tibetan cultural area. Therefore, it stands at the core of my consideration of pre-modern Bhutan after
the 17th century – a very late stage of this form of Buddhist governance.31
Tracing emic terms of the Joint Twofold System of Governance as conceptualised in the Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729 under consideration of thehistorical context forms the basis of our understanding of the particular semantic field of generic adjective compounds commonly used in academic
literature such as ‘religious-political’.
2.2 Manifestation: The Joint Twofold System of GovernanceGeorgios Halkias has poignantly summarised the ambiguity of the conceptof the Joint Twofold System of Governance (and its structural and functional differentiation), which poses enormous challenges to a researcher
in this field of study:
While there are clear lines of demarcations between the role of the Buddha
and his Sangha [monastic order] and the function of the king, there is often
a blurring of these lines in the literary, practical, and cultural manifestations of Buddhism across Asia. Ambiguity is nowhere more evident thanin the promotion and application of notions of “dual sovereignty” [Joint
Twofold System of Governance] combined in a single person capable of arbitrating secular and spiritual power in this world and the world beyond.32
30 I translate the Tibetan terms chos and srid if used, for example, as adjectives, as “religious”
and “political” respectively. Other possible translations of the conceptual dyad in academic
discourses depending on their historical context are: “spiritual/temporal”, “secular/spiritual”,“ecclesiastic/secular”, “religious/secular”, and “religious/royal”. To emphasise that, in thecase of Bhutan, the Joint Twofold System of Governance not only possesses two branches representing a functional and structural differentiation but also that these branches areunited in the overarching figure of a Buddhist master (and nowadays, Buddhist king), I
chose to translate throughout the paper: “Joint Twofold System of Governance”.
31 See also Nirmal C. Sinha, “Chhos srid gnyis ldan,” Bulletin of Tibetology 5, no. 3 (1968);
and the contributions in Cüppers, The relationship between religion and state. My research connects in many areas to the excellent scholarship of experts who have worked
extensively on the respective regions and periods. However, due to the limited scope of
this working paper, that scholarship serves mainly as the contextualising background.
32 See Georgios T. Halkias, “The Enlightened Sovereign: Kingship and Buddhism in In15

The first more concrete form of the Joint Twofold System of Governance was institutionalised in 1264, and lasted until 1368. It was established between the Yuan emperor Khubilai Khan (1215–94) and a Tibetan
Buddhist master from the Sakya school, Chögyel Pakpa (1235–80), who
was appointed as “imperial/state preceptor”. As such, Tibetan Buddhist
masters from the Sakya school exercised suzerainty not only over the religious but also daily political affairs in Tibet. This specific Tibetan and Central Asian arrangement of governance between a lay “ruler-donor” (Tib.
yon bdag) and his religious “counsellor-donée” (Tib. mchod gnas) has been
an essential characteristic of Tibetan politics. It needs to be carefully studied
in its respective periods and contexts since the relationships between the religious, political, and economic spheres of societies were uniquely determinedin each period and context.33
While the Joint Twofold System of Governance in the 17th century
was institutionalised in three instances in Tibet, Sikkim, and Bhutan, it
also diverged significantly in its respective formation and organisation.34
Bhutan was officially founded as a state in 1625/26 by Zhabdrung, who
fled there following a dispute with the central-Tibetan Tsangpa ruler overZhabdrung’s acknowledgement as the rightful incarnation of Pema Karpo(1527–92). Pema Karpo was the fourth hierarch of the Drukpa Kagyü school,a sub-branch of the Kagyü school, which is one of the four Tibetan Buddhist
do-Tibetan Tradition,” in A Companion to Buddhist Philosophy, ed. Steven Emmanuel(Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell Publishers, 2013), 493.
33 See Kapstein, The Tibetans, 110–16. For a detailed study of the crucial and complex
relationship between the lay “ruler-donor” (Tib. yon bdag) and his religious “counsellor-donée” (Tib. mchod gnas) and the societal spheres of religion and politics in the early
Tibetan period up until the Sakya-Mongol rule; see Seyfort Ruegg, Ordre spiritual et ordre
temporal. See also Per K. Sørensen, Tibetan Buddhist Historiography: The Mirror Illuminating the Royal Genealogies. An Annotated Translation of the XIVth Century Chronicle
rGyal-rabs gsal-ba’i me-long (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1994). I follow David Seyfort
Ruegg, with the English translation of the two emic terms.
34 Cf. Ardussi, “Formation of the State of Bhutan.” Institutionalisation denotes in this context the process of explicitly formalising Buddhist conceptions of governance into rules,
standardised processes, and political/religious institutions and actors. This dynamic process involves the establishment, adaptation, and replacement/substitution of rules andprocesses. In Weber’s sense, these processes can be differentiated by their intention andpurpose as “goal-oriented” (Zweckrationalität) and “idea-consolidating” (Wertrationalität), but not in an exclusivist sense, since both aspects often characterise processes of institutionalisation. See Hans Keman “Institutionalization,” accessed June 14, 2019, https://www.britannica.com/topic/institutionalization.
16

schools.35 Under the unifying charismatic figure of Zhabdrung, two branchesof government were institutionalised. A regent, the “Druk Desi” (Tib. ’brug
sde srid) exercised political power while the religious institutions were overseen by the Chief Abbot, the “Druk Je Khenpo” (Tib. ’brug rje mkhan po). In
Tibet, the Ganden Podrang government of the fifth Dalai Lama Ngawang
Lobsang Gyatso (1617–82) and a regent, the “Desi” (Tib. sde srid), had authority conferred on them by the Mongol Koshut prince Gushri Khan in 1642.
Consequently, the dual-authority system of lay ‘ruler-donor’ and religious‘counsellor-donée’ from the earlier Mongol-Sakya rule was renewed. In thesame year, in Sikkim, Buddhist kingship under the reign of the Buddhist
king Puntsok Namgyel (1604–70) was institutionalised through an absolute
hereditary monarchy lasting until 1975.36
I have mentioned here merely three major forms of Buddhist governancein the Tibetan cultural area, thus leaving aside additional institutionalisations of it in the Tibetan cultural area and beyond. It becomes neverthelessevident that under the umbrella of the conception of the Joint Twofold System of Governance, as pointed out by Georgios Halkias, distinctions anddifferentiations between the religious and other societal spheres – i. e. secularities – varied enormously in social practices and reality.37
Then, the emic terms for the Joint Twofold System of Governance,
while found to be used in many cases synonymously, transmit nevertheless slightly different connotations. I present here a non-exhaustive list ofthese terms, as found in various Tibetan textual sources: “religion and politics combined” (Tib. chos srid gnyis ldan), “religion and politics united”(Tib. chos srid zung ’brel), “religion and politics joint together” (Tib. chos srid
35 In general, Tibetan Buddhism is divided into four main schools (however, note that
there are alternative, well-established classifications): The first ‘old’ school, the Nyingma
school came to Bhutan and Tibet with the earlier dissemination (Tib. bstan pa snga dar)of Buddhism from India and the foundation of the Tibetan Empire from the 7th to 9th
century. The three ‘new’ schools, Kagyü, Sakya and Gelug, were founded after the later
dissemination (Tib. bstan pa phyi dar) of Buddhism to Bhutan and Tibet from the late
10th century on, from where they branched out into many different sub-schools.
36 The historical overview of the foundation of the three governments is based on Phuntsho, History of Bhutan, 207–59; and Ardussi, “Formation of the State of Bhutan,” 11–23.
37 Noteworthy is the establishment of religious kingship in other parts of the Himalayan
region, such as Mustang and Ladakh; for an analysis of the relationship between religion(Tib. chos) and politics (Tib. srid) within them, see, for example (in German), Dieter
Schuh, “Srid ohne Chos? Reflektionen zum Verhältnis von Buddhismus und säkularer
Herrschaft im tibetischen Kulturraum,” in ZAS Zentralasiatische Studien des Seminars für
Sprach- und Kulturwissenschaften Zentralasiens der Universität Bonn 33 (2004): 153–62.
17

gnyis ’brel), “religion and politics united” (Tib. chos srid zung ’jug), and “theocratic rule” (Tib. chos kyi rgyal srid). Moreover, the twofold distinction oflaws is called “twin laws” (Tib. khrims gnyis), “dual system/twin traditions”(Tib. lugs gnyis), “great twin laws” (Tib. khrims chen po gnyis) as well as “religious law which is tighter than a silken knot” (Tib. chos khrims dar gyi
mdud pa) associated with the “Law of the Buddha” (Tib. chos khrims: Skt.
buddhadharma) and “secular law which is heavier than a golden yoke” (Tib.
rgyal khrims gser gyi gnya’ shing)38 that is associated with the “Law of theruler” (Tib. rgyal po’i khrims: Skt. rājadharma).39 However, as we will latersee, the twin laws can by no means be simply equated with the the twin religious and political branches of the Joint Twofold System of Governance.
Distinctions and differentiation processes in the Tibetan cultural area have
proven too complicated to allow such a simple identification.
Other idioms frequently used in Bhutan were to bring “law to the lawless south and handle to the handleless pot,” i. e. bringing law and order to
Bhutan (Tib. lho khrims med la khrims dang rdza lung med la lung) or thesimile of an old lady carrying gold while traveling through the country andremaining entirely unharmed (Tib. rgan mo gser ’khur) – the latter likewise
attested in Tibetan sources.40
38 See Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729; in Aris, Sources for the History of Bhutan, 128 (Tib.),
129 (Engl.). See also Seyfort Ruegg, “Introductory Remarks on the Spiritual and Temporal Orders,” 9: “A further current expression is ‘twin (great) rule’ (khrims [chen po] gnyis),namely the supreme rule of the Dharma (chos khrims) and the mundane rule of the king(rgyal [po’i] khrims). The former rule is traditionally compared with a soft silken knot,
and the second rule with the heavy golden Yugaṃdhara (literally ‘Yoke-bearer’, i. e. oneof the seven great mountain-chains in Buddhist cosmology that surround in concentric
circles the axis mundi of Mount Sumeru).”
39 Christoph Kleine established a binary schema of the “mundane ruler’s nomosphere”/“Lawof the Ruler” and the (ultimately) supra-mundane nomosphere of the Buddha”/“Law of the
Buddha” based on elite discourses in pre-modern Japan. He also addressed the importanceof their interdependency from each other to secure the social, moral, political, and cosmic
order, which is highly applicable to the Joint Twofold System of Governance in Bhutan. See
Christoph Kleine, “The Secular Ground Bass of Pre-modern Japan Reconsidered. Reflections upon the Buddhist Trajectories towards Secularity,” Working Paper Series of the HCAS
“Multiple Secularities – Beyond the West, Beyond Modernities” 5 (Leipzig University, 2018),
25–30; see also Kleine, “Religion and the Secular in Premodern Japan,” 19–27.
40 See Phuntsho, History of Bhutan, 256–57; see also Aris, Sources for the History of Bhutan,
128 (Tib.); 129 (Engl.), 168n33. For an analysis of actual social practices of law in Bhutan
up until the introduction of the absolute hereditary monarchy in 1907, see Richard Whitecross, “‘Like a Pot without a Handle’: Law, Meaning and Practice in Medieval Bhutan,”
Cahiers d’Extrême-Asie (Droit et Bouddhisme. Principe et pratique dans le Tibet prémoderne/
Law and Buddhism. Principle and Practice in Pre-modern Tibet 26 (2017): 87–103.
18

The first part of the Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729 addresses the
purpose of theocratic rule, the genealogy and therefore legitimisation of
Zhabdrung as a Buddhist ruler, and his conquest of Bhutan as a Buddhist
Tantric master. Emic terms employed in it are the “dual system” (Tib. lugs
gnyis),41 “joint system” (Tib. lugs zung),42 “state laws in accordance with religion” (Tib. chos bzhin rgyal khrims),43 “theocratic rule” (Tib. chos kyi rgyalsrid),44 and “stainless theocracy of the dual system [of religious and seculargovernment]” (Tib. gnyis chos kyi rgyal srid dri ma med pa lugs).45 While
the authors of the History of Bhutan I and History of Bhutan II use the term
“dual system” (Tib. lugs gnyis) the modern-day Constitution of the Kingdomof Bhutan elliptically employs the term “the mode of the dyad of religion
and politics” (Tib./Dzo. chos srid gnyis kyi gnas lugs). The English versionof the Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan keeps the Dzongkha term
untranslated. While the terminology itself does not provide any insights
about the modern-day concrete conception and relationship between thetwo societal spheres, the constitution deals in further sections with the respective arrangements as laid out later in this paper.46
To summarise, this section provided an overview of emic terms within
the semantic field of the Joint Twofold System of Governance, which inthemselves denote imagined and partially institutionalised boundaries between the spheres of religion and mainly politics. What follows forms a brief
synopsis of the institutionalisation of this system in Bhutan in the 17th century, highlighting distinction and differentiation processes connected to it.
2.3 Embodiment: Zhabdrung and the Foundation of Bhutan

At the time of Zhabdrung’s arrival in 1616, Bhutan was under no central
political authority. Many influential principalities with their own chieftains, often from either secular or Tibetan Buddhist religious family lineages,
exercised local political and economic autonomy. Boundaries between the
41 Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729; in Aris, Sources for the History of Bhutan, 122, 128, 164(Tib.); 123, 129, 165 (Engl.); see also sixty-ninth Chief Abbot Gendün Rinchen, Historyof Bhutan II, 239; 258 (Tib.).
42 Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729; in Aris, Sources for the History of Bhutan, 134 (Tib.); 135(Engl.)
43 Aris, 128, 138 (Tib.); 129, 139 (Engl.)
44 Aris, 132, 162 (Tib.); 133, 163 (Engl.).
45 Aris, 128 (Tib.); 129 (Engl.).
46 Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan (Thimphu: Constitution Drafting Committee,2008), art. 2, sec. 2, 3 (Dzo.); 2 (Engl.).
19

secular and religious lineages were in many cases blurred since, for instance,
secular lineages produced prominent religious incarnations and religious
family lineages exercised significant political and economic power. After
his strict three-year meditation retreat from 1623 to 1625/26, Zhabdrung
declared the establishment of the State of Bhutan under his authority. Thisdeclaration was thereupon communicated throughout Bhutan using his personal seal, the ‘Sixteen I’s’.47
Zhabdrung, as a Buddhist master in the cosmological order of Tantric
Buddhism, brought the territory of Bhutan under his control in two important senses, which have to be understood as inseparable from each other. As the legitimate head of his specific Tibetan Buddhist school, he was
supported by the powers of his school’s protector deity, a raven-faced formof Mahākāla (Tib. las mgon bya rog gdong can: Skt. kākamukha) as well as
local deities in Bhutan. He therefore exercised both ‘worldly’ or ‘immanent’ power as head of his school, and ‘spiritual’ or ‘transcendental’ power
through these deities. The conquest and unification of the territory of Bhutan through conventional and ‘magical’ warfare is expressed in terms suchas the “subjugation of a spiritual field/field of conversion” (Tib. gdul zhing/’dul zhing/gdul bya’i zhing) or the “heavenly field/Buddhafield” (Tib. zhing
khams/dkar rgyud zhing khams) of this protector deity. His protector deity
Mahākāla had revealed itself to Zhabdrung in visionary dreams both earlier in Tibet, and also later in Bhutan.48 These aforementioned terms are
47 See Aris, Bhutan: The Early History, 212–17. Zhabdrung significantly modified the earlier“Sixteen pure rules of human conduct” (Tib. mi chos gtsang ma bcu drug) in his personalseal, called the “Sixteen I’s”, (Tib. nga bcu drug ma). The “Sixteen pure rules of human conduct” are ascribed to the Tibetan Buddhist king Songtsen Gampo along with the “Ten virtuous laws of gods” (Tib. lha chos dge ba bcu). For both sets of conduct in earlier historical
records, see also Sørensen, Tibetan Buddhist Historiography, 182–83; Janet Gyatso, Being
Human in a Buddhist World: An Intellectual History of Medicine in Early Modern Tibet (NewYork: Columbia University Press, 2016), 347–49; and Ulrike Roesler, “16 Human Norms(mi chos bcu drug) – Indian, Chinese, and Tibetan,” in The Illuminating Mirror: Tibetan
Studies in Honor of Per K. Sørensen on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday, ed. Olaf Czaja andGuntram Hazod (Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag, 2015). For a translation of the ‘Sixteen I’s’, see
Aris, Bhutan: The Early History, 213–14. Interestingly, at the coronation of the First Kingof Bhutan, the respective document of allegiance (Dzo. genja) was symbolically sealed with
Zhabdrung’s ‘Sixteen I’s’; see Phuntsho, History of Bhutan, 520–22; see also Françoise Pommaret, “The Chakravartin-King: Symbolism of the Bhutanese Monarchy,” in The Bodhisattva King. His Majesty Jigme Singye Wangchuck of Bhutan, ed. Tshering Tashi and Thierry
Mathou (Bangkok: Amarin Printing and Publishing PLC, 2015), 257–58.
48 See Aris, Bhutan: The Early History, 209, 212; see also Christoph Cüppers, “Bstan ’dzinchos rgyal’s Bhutan Legal Code of 1729 in comparison with Sde srid Sangs rgyas rgya
20

used throughout the Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729,49 as well as in thetitles of historiographical writings such as of the History of Bhutan II (Tib.
dpal ldan ’brug pa’i gdul zhing) composed by the sixty-ninth Chief Abbot
Gendün Rinchen in 1972.50
In the following decades, Zhabdrung consolidated his rule throughseveral successful strategies: He founded influential religious-educational
institutions and significantly expanded the monastic bodies, as well as introducing standard monastic and civil codes and a Bhutanese dress codeand etiquette. In particular, the civil and monastic legal framework not only
created the necessary administrative control but also supported the legitimisation of his new centralised Buddhist rule, establishing and promoting
a Buddhist Bhutanese identity. Furthermore, a network of fortresses,“Dzongs” (Tib. rdzong), was created, covering Bhutan like a spider’s web.
This network had the dual purpose of both consolidating Zhabdrung’s internal control over Bhutan, and combatting the external threat of Tibetan
and Mongolian invasion. In addition, Zhabdrung executed religious andpolitical campaigns on a vast scale.51 John Ardussi has highlighted themtsho’s Guidelines for Government Officials,” in Bhutan: Tradition and Changes. PIATS
2003: Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the Tenth Seminar of the International Association
for Tibetan Studies, Oxford, 2003, ed. John A. Ardussi and Françoise Pommaret (Leiden:
Brill, 2007), 48. On Zhabdrung’s protector deity, see also Phuntsho, History of Bhutan,
435. The protector deity is also depicted on the crown of the Bhutanese Kings, the ‘Raven Crown’. The First King Ugyen Wangchuck’s father, the fifty-first Druk Desi Jigme
Namgyel (1825–81), who was also known as the “black regent” (Tib. sde pa nag po), had
first worn a prototype of the crown as a helmet in battle; see ibid., 435; 471. For the crucialrole of the Buddhist protector deity Mahākāla in the Tangut Kingdom of Xixia (1038–
1227) and the Mongol Empire, see Karl Debreczeny, “Faith and Empire: An Overview,”
accessed June 26, 2019, http://asianart.com/articles/faith-empire/index.html.
49 Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729; in Aris, Sources for the History of Bhutan, 122, 128, 136,
162 (Tib.); 123, 129, 137, 163 (Engl).
50 The inseparability of the spiritual field and the territory of the modern Nation State of
Bhutan is still imagined today. Against this backdrop, an analysis of the developmentof the modern concept of ‘nation-state’ addressing emic concepts and related terms in
Bhutan would be preferable. Richard Burghart has provided an excellent example for thecase of Nepal, analysing the pre-modern emic concepts and terms of “possession” (Nep.
muluk), “realm” (Nep. deśa), and “countries of different people” (Nep. des/deśa); see Richard Burghart, “The Formation of the Concept of the Nation-State in Nepal, The Journal of
Asian Studies 33, no. 1 (1984): 101–25.
51 For an overview of the period of consolidation of Zhabdrung’s rule, see Aris, Bhutan:
The Early History, 215–32. In particular, for an insight into his religious and political mass-campaigning, see the travel account (Relação) of the two Jesuit missionaries
Estevão Cacalla and João Cabral; see Aris, Sources for the History of Bhutan, 8–9, 170–
186; see also Phuntsho, History of Bhutan, 224.
21

entrepreneurial character of Zhabdrung’s public addresses to enforce
Buddhist ethical behaviour, and law and order. These used pre-modern
Bhutanese public media, in the form of simple stone inscriptions (Tib. rdonag) and stone inscriptions carved on prayer walls (Tib. maṇi dang ring).52
A modernised form of this medium is still used in Bhutan, with painted
stones or signposts found in remote places, such as river beds, promoting,for example, environmentally responsible behaviour in accordance withthe modern-day principles of Gross National Happiness (GNH). Examples
include the statements “Pollution kills, keep stream clean” (Engl./Dzo.);or “Cleanliness is next to godliness” (Engl.) found on the way to “Tiger’s
Nest”, Taktsang, which is one of the holiest sites in Bhutan. They combine
Buddhist morality with environmental consciousness, supporting thereby‘environmental conservation’ as one of the ‘Four pillars’ of Gross National
Happiness (GNH).
To summarise, Zhabdrung gained the epithet of a “great magician” (Tib.
mthu chen) who was able to ensure the material and spiritual well-being,and security of his subjects and the country, through force if necessary. The
legitimacy as a Buddhist ruler stemmed from exactly this demonstrations of
the ability to ward off external enemies, natural disasters, and famine, andhence secure the material and spiritual well-being of the subjects. This was
supposed to be achieved by means such as communal and state rituals, including prayer ceremonies, the recitation of the Buddhist canon, and evocation of Buddhist protector deities, that were undertaken for the protection ofboth the country and the Buddhist doctrine, and thereby the welfare of the
populace. These rites were already a common and longstanding practice in
the Buddhist cultural area. However, Per K. Sørensen has noted that within the Tibetan cultural area, these longstanding and more loosely organised
communal rites became increasingly formalised and institutionalised as state
rituals in the 17th century.53
52 See John A. Ardussi, “Stone Inscriptions: An Early Written Medium in Bhutan and Its
Public Uses,” Journal of Bhutan Studies 14, no. 1 (2006): 1–11.
53 I thank Per Sørensen in particular for drawing my attention to the much earlier connotations and attestation of “happiness”, “well-being”, and “welfare” in Tibetan textual sources(Tib. bde skyid, bde thabs). These ‘positive’ terms were strongly conceptualised by theircounterpart, i. e. the absence of war, violence, famine, etc. As listed by Per K. Sørensen,
the rites that were supposed to ward off such threats and protect the “Lhasa Maṇḍala”
were termed in the Tibetan context, for example, “welfare rites or welfare projects for
Tibet and the Tibetan populace,” and “rites for the state and religion” (Tib. bod ’bangs
bde thabs rim gro, bod khams bde thabs, bod ’bangs bde thabs, bstan srid spyi rim); see Per
22

For example, after the second Tibetan-Mongolian invasion of Bhutan
in 1649, Zhabdrung introduced an extensive ritual for the multiple formsof Mahākāla, the Buddhist protector deity of the Drukpa Kagyü school, as
the basis of the New Year Festival at Punakha Dzong. Religious state rites
are still considered crucial in Bhutan, in particular the longevity prayers for
the Buddhist kings of Bhutan, intense prayer ceremonies for the flourishingof the Buddhist doctrine, and ritual offerings to protector deities of the
Drukpa Kagyü school that ensure the spiritual and material well-being andprotection of the nation.54
Two further observations about the foundation of Bhutan in the 17th
century seem noteworthy. First, the foundation of the State of Bhutan
subsequently resulted in a confessional split within the Tibetan Drukpa
Kagyü school and a domination of the southern lineage not only of theother sub-branches of the Drukpa Kagyü school but also over other Tibetan Buddhist confessions within Bhutan, such as Nyingma and Drikung
Kagyü. At the time of Zhabdrung’s arrival in Bhutan, the Drukpa Kagyü
school had already been subdivided into three different main branches, theupper, middle and lower Drukpa Kagyü. Following the initial dispute over
the rightful incarnation of Pema Karpo in Tibet, the middle branch of the
Drukpa Kagyü school further split into the northern lineage (Tib. byang’brug), which continued its incarnation lineage in Tibet, and the southern lineage (Tib. lho ’brug) under the spiritual and administrative leadership of the Chief Abbot, the “Druk Je Khenpo” (Tib. ’brug rje mkhan po).
Zhabdrung’s appearance in Bhutan thus elicited new rivalry in the existing
confessional and socio-economic structures of the other Buddhist schools
and consequently led to their subordination.55
Second, despite the seemingly clear differentiation into “twin laws”(Tib. khrims gnyis) and the “dual system/twin traditions” (Tib. lugs gnyis)
represented by the two branches of governance under the unifying figureof Zhabdrung, a schematic correlation of ‘lay’ and ‘monastic’ with ‘religious’ and ‘political/secular/other societal’ spheres, respectively, would
K. Sørensen, Rulers on the Celestial Plain. Ecclesiastic and Secular Hegemony in Medieval
Tibet. A Study of Tshal Gung-thang (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie derWissenschaften. 2007), 543–44.
54 See Aris, Bhutan: The Early History, 227–28. Françoise Pommaret has analysed several ofthese state rituals and other characteristics and symbols of Buddhist kingship in modernday Bhutan; see Pommaret, “The Chakravartin-King,” 258, 262–63.
55 See Aris, Bhutan: The Early History, 172–81.
23

ignore the complexity of the social realities in Bhutan. To give two examples: (1) Zhabdrung himself as a Tantric Buddhist master only took full
ordination after he had produced a male heir; and (2) from the 17th century
on, the ‘secular’ branch of government in Bhutan made the ordination as
monk a mandatory requirement for the position of the Druk Desi, the ‘secular’ regent, but did not do so for other officials.56
Returning, for the sake of completeness, to the brief synopsis of thehistorical context: Zhabdrung, having been a charismatic Buddhist ruler
and Tantric master, left behind a substantial power vacuum with his death,
which is thought to have occurred some time around 1651. The questionof his succession was highly problematic, and political developments in
Bhutan in the following two centuries were characterised by great internalturmoil and external threat. After Zhabdrung’s death, itself only revealed
to the public as late as 1704 to 1707, the male heir in the direct family
lineage proved incapable of ruling. As a result, the regulation of succession eventually shifted to a model of multiple incarnations of the body,speech and mind of Zhabdrung, and a prince regent.57 However, this shift
failed to solve the ongoing power struggles between the different factions
and important family lineages, religious and secular. Indeed, these tensions
proved destabilising to the extent of triggering civil war. Furthermore,
Bhutan had to deal with a series of external political challenges, such as theAnglo-Bhutanese war of 1772–73, the Duar War (1864–65) and five more
Tibetan-Mongolian invasions. Nevertheless, in brief, Bhutan was able tokeep its political sovereignty and economic autonomy. The identificationas ‘Drukpa’ developed from a religious confessional into a cultural andnational identity.58
56 As the different institutional arrangements of the Joint Twofold System of Governancein the 17th century in Bhutan and Tibet demonstrate, the distinction between lay andmonastic in the Tibetan cultural area is complex. While in Tibet the lay officials often had
their monastic counterparts and the distinctions were quite clear-cut, as we see, this is
not the case in Bhutan; see also Aris, Bhutan: The Early History, 262–63. See also Seyfort
Ruegg, Ordre spiritual et ordre temporal, 20.
57 For a depiction of the enigmatic circumstances of Zhabdrung’s ‘secret retreat’, the succession of the three kinds of incarnations, and the general problem of Zhabdrung’s succession; see Aris, Bhutan: The Early History, 231–62.
58 For a detailed overview of the history of Bhutan between the 18th and 20th century, see
Aris, Bhutan: The Early History, 243–74; see also Ardussi, “Bhutan Before the British,”279–418; Phuntsho, History of Bhutan, 273–512; and Matteo Miele, “Chinese Shadowson Bhutanese Independence after the Treaty of Punakha, The Tibetan Buddhist Connection and the British Diplomatic Action,” in Buddhism, Culture and Society in Bhutan,
24

2.4 Metamorphosis: The Constitutional Framework of Bhutan Today

Following the foundation of Bhutan as a nation state in 1625/26, two significant changes took place in its political system. First, the introduction of
the hereditary absolute monarchy in 1907 under the First King of Bhutan,
Ugyen Wangchuck (1862–1926; reign: 1907–26) with the result that theposition of the regent ceased to exist.59 The next significant change
occurred in 2008 when a constitutional monarchy was introduced under
the reign of the Fifth King Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck (b. 1980,
reign: 2006–present). The Fourth King Jigme Singye Wangchuck (b. 1955,
reign: 1972–2006) abdicated early in favour of his son in 2006.60
Study of the current constitutional framework of Bhutan promises insight into the formal relationship between religion and politics in Bhutan
in the present day. Nevertheless, the overview I present here vividly
demonstrates the challenges inherent in research on emic (and etic) terms
in Bhutan, as a result of the language shifts from classical Tibetan to
Dzongkha and English as the literary medium and languages of discourse,
well exemplified in the Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan from 2008.
Consequently, my overview has to be understood as preliminary. Nevertheless, I have documented several relevant Dzongkha terms and phrases
in footnotes with the hope to elicit discussion and that scholars knowledgeable in all three languages will pursue further research under consideration of ethnographic fieldwork.
Four areas of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan have been chosen as
relevant examples evidencing conceptualised and institutionalised boundaries
ed. Seiji Kumagai (Kathmandu: Vajra Books, 2018), 215–39. The emic designation of
the country Bhutan derived from the Tibetan Buddhist confession “Drukpa Kagyü” as“Drukyül,” (Tib. ’brug yul). Although unfortunately, not possessing any mastery of the
Italian language, I nevertheless refer here to Matteo Miele’s research. Here, in particular,
he addresses in depth the 20th-century development of the absolute monarchy from a
Buddhist perspective. Matteo Miele aims to demonstrate the limitations of the application of Western-based etic terminologies and models from political sciences alone as ananalytical framework for research into Bhutan; see Matteo Miele, “Isolamento ed interdipendenza, tradizione ed impermanenza. Note sul percorso costitutzionale del Bhutan,”in Annuario di Diritoo Comparato e di Studi Legislativi, vol. 8, ed. Katia Fiorenza et al.
(Naples: Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane, 2017), 381–404.
59 See Phuntsho, History of Bhutan, 520–25. Incarnations of the Zhabdrung have remained
into the present day but they have no institutional representation in the constitutionalmonarchy.
60 The Constitution of Bhutan generally stipulates an abdication of the King of Bhutan at
the age of sixty-five; see Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan, art. 2, sec. 6, 4 (Engl.).
25

between the religious and political spheres: (1) the renewal of the Joint Twofold
System of Governance, (2) the status of the king, (3) ‘Kidu’, (4) the regulation of
the religious branch of the government and the status of religion.
First, the Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan61 renewed Zhabdrung’s
Joint Twofold System of Governance as now represented by the King of
Bhutan as head of state in art. 2 (The Institution of Monarchy), sec. 2:
2. The Chhoe-sid-nyi [dual system of religion and politics] of Bhutan shallbe unified in the person of the Druk Gyalpo [King of Bhutan] who, as a
Buddhist, shall be the upholder of the Chhoe-sid [religion and politics].62

Second, in art. 2, sec. 15, the status of the King of Bhutan is defined:
The Druk Gyalpo shall not be answerable in a court of law for His actionsand His person shall be sacrosanct.63

The sacrosanctity of the Buddhist kings of Bhutan is theorised and expressed in overlapping models of righteous Buddhist rule, extending deep
into Tibetan and Indian history. These include: the embodiment of the former Buddhist kings during the Tibetan Empire (Tib. chos rgyal: Skt. dharmarāja), in Bhutan called the “Drukgyel” (Tib. ’brug rgyal);64 the “Universal Ruler” (Tib. ’khor los sgyur ba’i rgyal po: Skt. cakravartin), ruling
justly over the entire world; the “Great Elect” (Tib. man pos bkur ba: Skt.
mahāsammata), a King who is legitimised to rule through his merit andvirtues; or an incarnation of great Bodhisattvas,65 such as Avalokiteśvara,
61 The English version of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan provides a helpful glossary of the Dzongkha terms; see Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan, 64–66.
62 Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan, art. 2, sec. 2, 2 (Engl.)
63 Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan, art. 2, sec. 15, 15 (Engl.)
64 The three Dharma Kings during the Tibetan Empire were: (1) Songtsen Gampo, (2)Trisong Detsen, and (3) Ralpachen. For a concise analysis of different Buddhist conceptions of rule/kingship and governance in India and Tibet from both a synchronicand diachronic perspective; see Halkias, “The Enlightened Sovereign,” 491–507. See also
Brandon Dotson’s numerous contributions to the early Tibetan Empire; for example,
Brandon Dotson, “Theorising the king: implicit and explicit sources for the study of Tibetan sacred kingship,” Revue d’Etudes Tibétaines 21 (2011). Of course, the most prominent and earliest example of Buddhist kingship in South Asia is Aśoka (d. 232 BCE)
from the Maurya dynasty in India. He subsequently became the role model for various
conceptions of Buddhist kingship in South Asia and the Tibetan cultural area.
65 An essential shift in buddhological ideas occurred in Mahāyāna Buddhism resulting in theBodhisattva ideal. While in early Buddhism the prevailing ideal was of an Arhart, one who
wishes to end the circle of Saṃsāra for themselves, Mahāyāna Buddhism developed theconception of a being, who not only wishes for an end to their own suffering, but also tothat of all other sentient beings. Therefore, in their altruism, a Bodhisattva lets themselves
be consciously reborn in this world, Saṃsāra, to enable all sentient being to cross over theocean of Saṃsāra to the shore of Nirvāṇa. There is a threefold typology of Bodhisattvas:
26

Mañjuśrī or Vajrapāṇi. Additionally, the Fourth King of Bhutan, Jigme
Singye Wangchuck renewed the traditional relationship with him as lay‘ruler-donor’ with the famous Buddhist master Dilgo Khyentse Tashi
Peljor (1910–91) as his religious ‘counsellor-donée’.66 Particularly noteworthy is part of the coronation ceremony of the Buddhist kings of Bhutan,
formalised in the Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan in art. 2 (The Institution of Monarchy), sec. 4:67 In this ceremony, the Buddhist kings receive
a five-coloured scarf in front of the reliquary of Zhabdrung’s remains (Tib.
sku gdung) at the Punakha Dzong. Through visualisation of Zhabdrung’s
presence throughout the process, this act takes the role of a symbolic blessing and legitimisation for the new king’s rule.68
Third, connected to the specific status of the Kings of Bhutan, “Kidu”(Tib./Dzo. skyid sdug) has been established as a royal prerogative intended
to tackle social injustice and inequality, for example, in case of natural
disasters. It is based on the principle of a compassionate Bodhisattva kingand demands high moral responsibility in the rule of the king. Before theestablishment of the monarchy in Bhutan, ‘Kidu’ was a more informal principle with at least a twofold meaning. It referred to mutual aid and support
in the local context of village or monastery life, a concept also present in
Sikkim and Nepal, or to a form of dispensation or gift granted by rulers. It
seems that, in the case of Bhutan prior to the 20th century, a form of Kidu
was informally and seemingly irregularly granted by regents. Generally,
Kidu was flexibly applied in very different contexts in the Tibetan culturalarea and its pre-modern extent and function in societies in the Himalayan
region need to be further studied.69

66

67
68
69

(1) “king-like” (Tib. rgyal po lta bu), one who first achieves enlightenment for themselves
before leading everybody else towards it; (2) “boatman-like” (Tib. mnyan pa lta bu), one
who seeks to reach the other shore of Nirvāṇa together with everybody else; and (3) “herdsman-like” (Tib. rdzi bo lta bu), one who shepherds everybody safely over a dangerous abyss
before saving themselves; see Dorji Wangchuk, The Resolve to Become a Buddha: A Study of
the Bodhicitta Concept in Indo-Tibetan Buddhism (Tokyo: International Institute for Buddhist Studies, 2007), 267–71. For an extensive study of the concepts of bodhisattva andbodhicitta in early Buddhism in India and Tibet, also see Wangchuk.
See Pommaret, “The Chakravartin-King,” 254. Royal patronage of Buddhist masters has
been widespread in Bhutan, see, for example, between Ashi Phuntsho Choden/Gayum
Angay (1911–2003), the wife of the Second King of Bhutan, and the sixy-ninth Chief
Abbot Gendün Rinchen.
See Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan, art. 2, sec. 4, 3 (Engl.).
See Pommaret, “The Chakravartin-King,” 256–57.
See Brian C. Shaw, “Bhutan: Notes Concerning the Political Role of Kidu,” Journal of27‘Kidu’ is today institutionalised in art. 2, sec. 16:
The Druk Gyalpo, in exercise of His Royal Prerogatives, may:(a) Award titles, decorations, dar for Lhengyem [ministerial positions] andNyi-Kyelma [i. e conferring a red scarf] in accordance with traditionand custom;70(b) Grant citizenship, land kidu and other kidus;(c) Grant amnesty, pardon and reduction of sentences;(d) Command Bills and other measures to be introduced in Parliament;(e) Exercise powers relating to matters which are not provided for under
this Constitution or other laws.71

Fourth, and finally, the Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan regulates thereligious institutions and the procedures of appointment and duties of the
Chief Abbot, who still holds the highest religious post in Bhutan, in art. 3(Spiritual Heritage), sec. 4–7:
4. The Druk Gyalpo [King of Bhutan] shall, on the recommendation of theFive Lopons [Buddhist Masters], appoint a learned and respected monk
ordained in accordance with the Druk-lu [i. e. ordained in the Drukpa
Kagyü school], with the nine qualities of a spiritual master72 and accomplished in ked-dzog [the two stages of Vajrayāna meditation], as
the Je Khenpo [Chief Abbot].
5. His Holiness the Je Khenpo [Chief Abbot] shall, on the recommendation of the Dratshang Lhentshog [The Commission of the Monastic
Affairs], appoint monks with the nine qualities of a spiritual master andaccomplished in ked-dzog [the two stages of Vajrayāna meditation] as
the Five Lopons [Buddhist Masters].
Bhutan Studies 33, no. 2 (2015). Brian Shaw has also pointed out the necessity for further
studies of Kidu in relation to, in particular, land policies in pre-modern Bhutan. He uses
the term “Kidu democracy” or “democracy with Bhutan characteristics” for the specificBhutanese form of democracy; see Shaw, 1–2.
70 “Nyi-Kyelma” (Dzo.) is a red scarf and refers to the official dress code. According to theofficial dress code in Bhutan, different coloured scarves must be worn by men at official
occasions or at the visit of a Dzong. The colours clearly denote the wearer’s rank in thesocial hierarchy: (1) saffron for the Buddhist Kings of Bhutan and the Chief Abbots;(2) orange for ministers or members of the government (Tib. blon po); (3) red for malemembers of the Royal Family of Bhutan and other high officials (Tib. drag shos); (4)green for judges; (5) blue for members of the National Council and National Assembly;(6) white with a central red stripe for district governors (Tib. rdzong khag); (7) white with
red stripes at the outside for the headmen Gup (Tib. rgad po) of a group of villages; (Tib.
rged ’og); and (8) white for ordinary citizens.
71 Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan, art. 2, sec. 16, 6 (Engl.).
72 The nine attributes are to be learned, well-disciplined and kind (Tib. mkhas btsun bzanggsum), to be skilled in explication, debate and composition (Tib. ’chad rtsod rtsom gsum)
and possessing the qualities of study, contemplation and meditative practices (Tib. thosbsam sgom).
28

6. The members of the Dratshang Lhentshog shall comprise:(a) The Je Khenpo as Chairman;(b) The Five Lopons of the Zhung Dratshang [Central Monastic Body];
and(c) The Secretary of the Dratshang Lhentshog who is a civil servant.
7. The Zhung Dratshang and Rabdeys [i. e. monastic bodies in districts
other than Punakha and Thimphu] shall continue to receive adequate
funds and other facilities from the State.73

The Chief Abbot is responsible for performing and presiding over all
Buddhist state rituals of the country. His religious duties include regulartravels throughout the country, and he is the spiritual leader of the Drukpa
Kagyü school in Bhutan. His position is highly respected in Bhutan and has
high symbolic value, but he does not exercise any official political power.74
Furthermore, on the status of religion in Bhutan, as expressed in art. 3,
sec. 1–3 of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan:
1. Buddhism is the spiritual heritage75 of Bhutan, which promotes
the principles and values of peace, non-violence, compassion andtolerance.
2. The Druk Gyalpo is the protector of all religions in Bhutan.
3. It shall be the responsibility of religious institutions and personalities topromote the spiritual heritage of the country while also ensuring that
religion remains separate76 from politics in Bhutan. Religious institutions and personalities shall remain above politics.77
73 Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan, art. 3, sec. 4–7, 10 (Engl.). Note that the post of thesecretary functionally belongs to the religious branch of the government, but is exercisedby a layperson.
74 While the Drukpa Kagyü school is nowadays regulated and funded by the State of
Bhutan as the religious branch of the Joint Twofold System of Governance, the Nyingma
school (and other marginal Tibetan Buddhist schools) are mostly privately financed andadministered.
75 Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan, art. 3, sec.1, 13 (Dzo.). The corresponding
Dzongkha term for “spiritual heritage” is rgyal khab ’di’i srol rgyun gyi chos.
76 Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan, art. 3, sec. 3, 13 (Dzo.): The Dzongkha phrase for“religion remains separate from politics, or more literally, “religion and politics as different/distinguishable” is ’brug lu chos ’di srid don dang tha dad gnas. The term ’brug lu chosrefers to the Drukpa Kagyü school.
77 Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan, art. 2, sec 1–3, 13 (Dzo.). The Dzongkha phrase
for “going beyond/above religion” is srid don las ’das pa. See also Election Act of the Kingdom of Bhutan (Thimphu: Election Commission of the Kingdom of Bhutan, 2008), art.
184 (Ineligibility of a Religious Personality to Participate in the Electoral Process), 66: “A
truelku [incarnated Buddhist master], lam [Buddhist master], any influential religious
personality or ordained members of any religion or religious institutions excluding thelaity, as determined/registered as religious organisations or religious personalities under
the provisions of the Religious Organizations Act 2007, shall neither join a political party
29

One concrete example of the need to carefully consider the different
languages in discourses about secularisation and modernisation in Bhutan should be demonstrated here. Ulrike Roesler has pointed out that themost common term for religious belief systems in pre-modern Tibetan
textual sources appears to be “chöluk” (Tib. chos lugs), which can be translated as “religious tradition”. It is also commonly and widely used today in
the Tibetan cultural area, with the addition of the individual belief system
considered, for example ye shu’i chos lugs for “Christianity”.78 The phraseused in art. 3 (Spiritual Heritage), sec. 3 of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan that stipulates the separation of religion from politics uses
the Dzongkha term “Druk lu” (Dzo. ’brug lu chos: Tib. ’brug lugs), “the tradition of the Drukpa Kagyü” for ‘religion’. By merely considering the English terms used here, we are easily misled that this might include all religions, suggesting the separation of the societal spheres of religion andpolitics per se in Bhutan. However, in this case, the English term ‘religion’refers to merely one Tibetan Buddhist confession, that of the Drukpa Kagyü
in Bhutan. This is, however, the most significant Buddhist confession in
Bhutan, with its status as representant of the religious branch of the Joint
Twofold System of Governance.
On a side note, concerning adherents of other belief-systems: The Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729 employs the term “people who [pursue] philosophical systems different [from our own]” (Tib. grub mtha’ mi gcig pa’irigs [pa]) found in two instances in the second and third part (The duties
of rulers and ministers, The duties of government officials) laying out how todeal with such persons (and their use of hot springs!). It is to be differentiated from the mere designation of “people of different nationalities” (Tib.
mi rigs mi gcig [pa]) also found once in the same text.79

nor participate in the electoral process as they must remain above politics and cannot use
their influence for the benefit of any party or candidate.”
78 See Roesler, “Die Lehre, der Weg und die namenlose Religion,” 141–48. Other terms include “insider” for Buddhist (Tib. nang pa), “person who is following the Buddha” (Tib.
sangs rgyas pa), or respectively “outsider” for a non-Buddhist (Tib. phyi rol pa), “Hindu”(Tib. mu stegs pa), or also derogatory terms such as “barbarians” (Tib. kla klo’i chos lugs)
for Muslims (found in some pre-modern textual sources). The Buddhist doctrine is also
called “inner teaching/doctrine” (Tib. nang chos).
79 Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729; in Aris, Sources for the History of Bhutan, 142, 152, 156(Tib.); 143, 153 157 (Tib.).
30

Having provided insights into the formal relationship between religion
and politics in Bhutan in the present day as found in the constitutionalframework of Bhutan and connected emic terms from a diachronic perspective, we turn now exemplarily to the ideas and policies of Gross National Happiness (GNH) and its conceptual relation to the Bhutanese Legal
Code from 1729 under consideration of crucial emic terms.
2.5 Shaping: Gross National Happiness (GNH)

The ideas and policies of Gross National Happiness (GNH) that aim tofacilitate the happiness and well-being of Bhutan’s citizens, have also been
met with widespread appreciation and popularity outside of Bhutan. In
particular, Bhutan’s creation and implementation of an alternative path ofdevelopment, focussing on sustainability and socio-economic inclusion
based on the principles of Buddhist ethics, has awoken international admiration for Bhutan’s courage in setting out into uncharted territory. This
despite being a tiny still-developing country sandwiched between the
Asian giants of India and China.80
One of Bhutan’s major achievements on the global stage was the inclusion, thanks to Bhutan’s efforts, of subjective well-being and happinessin the official development agenda the United Nations in 2011. Following
Bhutan’s lead, the global community thereby acknowledged the importance of a more holistic approach to development policies and economicplanning.81 In particular, in the context of the aftermath of the financial
crisis of 2008, and the rapid progression of the environmental crisis stemming from climate change, Bhutan’s example calls for applicability elsewhere. Since then, Bhutan has continued to play a pioneering role globally,raising awareness of the need for other economic models and indicators to
80 The 2017 Population & Housing Census counts the total population of Bhutan as 735,553
persons (681,720 Bhutanese plus 53,833 non-Bhutanese including 8,408 tourists); see National Statistics Bureau of Bhutan, 2017 Population & Housing Census: National Report, 15,accessed June 22, 2019, http://www.nsb.gov.bt/publication/files/PHCB2017_national.pdf.
81 See United Nations General Assembly resolution 65/309, Happiness: toward a holistic approach to development, A/RES/65/309 (19 July 2011), available from https://digitallibrary.
un.org/record/715187. Furthermore, this year the Fifth King of Bhutan Jigme Khesar
Namgyel Wangchuck received a Special Award of Recognition from the United Nations
Development Programme “to honour his leadership in advancing human development
and the well-being and happiness of the people of Bhutan;” see “UNDP award to Bhutan’s
King for advancing country’s well-being,” South Asia Monitor, March 15, 2019, accessed
June 21, 2019, https://southasiamonitor.org/news/undp-award-to-bhutan-s-king-for-advancing-country-s-well-being/inthenews/29129.
31

be included in economic planning and development policies, an ongoingurgent challenge in the world today. 82
Gross National Happiness (GNH) was developed through intercultural
discourse and co-operation between societal elites from Bhutan and Asianand Western scholars of economic and social sciences, and thereby fromits inception transcended not only national borders within Asia (mainly
Thailand, India, and Japan) but also outside of Asia. The driving forces in
Bhutan behind these ideas and policies are the Centre for Bhutan Studies &GNH Research, and the GNH Planning Commission. Beginning in 2008,
the democratisation process has also led to a greater role for civil society
organisations, and, increasingly, the people of Bhutan. To date, seven international and interdisciplinary GNH conferences have taken place inside and outside of Bhutan.83 The proceedings published by the Centre for
Bhutan Studies & GNH Research document in detail the conceptualisation,
concretisation, and finally implementation of Gross National Happiness(GNH) in Bhutan. Consequently, they are a treasure trove for researchers
wishing to understand Bhutan’s encounters with and reaction to Westernconcepts of modernity and secularity, against the backdrop of its own
cultural (mostly Buddhist) imprints. Accompanied by necessary ethnographic field research, the study of these proceedings would thus be a
crucial next step in the analysis of social distinction and differentiation
processes in Bhutan.84
82 Some alternative economic models and approaches relevant in the context of GNH
would include institutional economics, sustainable ecology, environmental economics,
and happiness research. In Asia, they include Thailand’s ‘Sufficiency Economy’, and the‘Santi Asoke Buddhist Reform Movement’ as well as Ven. P. A. Payutto’s ‘Buddhist Economy’. See also the numerous publications by the distinguished economist John Helliwell;
an overview is found here: https://faculty.arts.ubc.ca/jhelliwell/prof_act.php.
83 The seven conferences are: (1) “Operationalization of Gross National Happiness”, Bhutan,
2004; (2) “Gross National Happiness and Development”, Canada, 2005; (3) “Towards Global Transformation: Rethinking Development”, Thailand 2007; (4) “Gross National Happiness: Practices and Measurement”, Bhutan, 2008 (5) “The Implementation and Practice ofGNH”, Brazil, 2009; (6) “From GNH Philosophy to Praxis and Policy”, Bhutan, 2015; and(7) “Business of GNH”, Bhutan, 2017. For the proceedings of the conferences, see https://www.bhutanstudies.org.bt/category/conference-proceedings/, accessed June 22, 2019.
84 I follow the threefold-approach to investigating non-Western pathways towards modernity, proposed by Christoph Kleine and Monika Wohlrab-Sahr; “As with the Multiple
Modernities programme, we are also taking a threefold approach: a) cultural imprints,b) encounters with Western modernity/the Western concept of secularity and c) the
handling of these encounters against the backdrop of cultural imprints. In accepting theexistence of the cultural imprints of modern forms of secularity, it is necessary to pursue
32

As background, in the 1970s the Fourth King of Bhutan, Jigme Singye
Wangchuck first coined the term “Gross National Happiness”. When asked
by a journalist to comment on the very low Gross National Product of his
country, the Fourth King of Bhutan, Jigme Singye Wangchuck answeredthat Gross National Happiness was more important than Gross National
Product.85 But it was not until 1998 that this concept was first made a
concrete and official policy, being included in Bhutan’s Eighth Five Yearplan for economic and social development.86 Later, in the year 2008, Gross
National Happiness was integrated into the Constitution of the Kingdom of
Bhutan, in two separate instances.
First in art. 9 (Principles of State Policy), sec. 2:
The State shall strive to promote those conditions that will enable the pursuit of Gross National Happiness.87

And, second, in art. 20 (The Executive), sec. 1:
The Government shall protect and strengthen the sovereignty of the Kingdom, provide good governance, and ensure peace, security, well-being andhappiness of the people.88

Today Gross National Happiness (GNH) consists of ‘Four Pillars’ which
form, the basis for policy development and administration: (1) environmental conservation, (2) sustainable and equitable socio-economic development, (3) good governance, and (4) preservation and promotion of

85
86
87

88

their historical roots. This is where our project comes into play and where we want tofill a gap in the existing research;” Kleine and Wohlrab-Sahr, “Research Programme of
the HCAS ‘Multiple Secularities’,” 6. Further research into Bhutan’s development path in
the 20th century would have to take into account Bhutan’s strong political and economic
dependence on India, as well as its shared and entangled histories with India, Nepal, andother Asian Buddhist countries, such as Thailand. Such an approach would be essential
for a systematic analysis of external, secularist and pluralistic challenges in Bhutan. In
addition, Bhutan’s geopolitical relevance as a buffer between India and China (along with
unsolved border conflicts with China) must be considered.
See Phuntsho, History of Bhutan, 397.
See Gross National Happiness Commission (GNHC), “Eighth Five Year Plan” (1998), accessed
June 22, 2019, https://www.gnhc.gov.bt/en/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/08fyp.pdf.
See Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan, art. 9, sec. 2, 18 (Engl.) The Dzongkha termfor “Gross National Happiness” is rgyal yongs dga’ skyid; see Constitution of the Kingdomof Bhutan, art. 9, sec. 2, 25 (Dzo.). Karma Phuntsho mentions the Dzongkha (or possibly
Tibetan) term rgyal yongs dga’ skyid dpal ’dzoms as an approximate equivalent, which was
only coined at the beginning of the 20th century; see Phuntsho, History of Bhutan, 398.
See Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan, art. 20, sec. 1, 38 (Engl.). The Dzongkha terms
for “well-being” and “happiness” are bde skyid and dga’ skyid; see Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan, art. 20, sec. 1, 52 (Dzo.).
33

culture.89 In addition, nine domains (and, currently, thirty-three further
sub-domains) constitute the basis for surveys and data evaluation: (1) living
standards, (2) education, (3) health, (4) environment, (5) community vitality, (6) time use, (7) psychological well-being, (8) good governance, and (9)cultural resilience and promotion.90
As already briefly touched upon in the introduction, the Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729 is used as a positive recourse for the development of theconcept of Gross National Happiness (GNH), as it represents the underlying Buddhist knowledge system – the ‘spiritual heritage’. In GNH literature, the most common reference (often adapted) addresses the purpose of
the law and the duty of the government (here represented by the lineage
holders of the Drukpa Kagyü school) to ensure the happiness of the people.
It is found in the first part of the Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729 (Introduction into the principles of theocratic rule):
If there is no law, happiness will not come to beings. If beings do not havehappiness there is no point in the Hierarchs of the ’Brug-pa [Drukpa
Kagyü] upholding the doctrine of the dual system [i. e. Joint Twofold System of Governance].91

Furthermore, the religious morality of the Buddhist ruler was supposedto spread to all levels of society, including the government and administration. This interdependence of the different spheres of society is
now-adays expressed in the value-based conception of Gross National
Happiness (GNH).92 Here it is exemplified based on a quote from the
89 See Centre for Bhutan Studies & GNH, “The 4 Pillars of GNH,” accessed June 21, 2019,http://www.gnhcentrebhutan.org/what-is-gnh/the-4-pillars-of-gnh/. For a detailed overview of the concept of GNH and its measurement indices and statistical method, see Ura
et al., “A Short Guide to Gross National Happiness Index.”.
90 See Centre for Bhutan Studies & GNH, “The 9 Domains of GNH,” accessed June 21, 2019,http://www.gnhcentrebhutan.org/what-is-gnh/the-9-domains-of-gnh/.
91 Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729; in Aris, Sources for the History of Bhutan, 130 (Tib.); 131(Engl.)
92 For an extensive analysis of the similarities between the ‘social contract theory’ in relation
to Buddhist rule through meritocracy embodied today by the Bhutanese monarchy, insights into the drafting process of the constitution, and the role of the judiciary in Bhutan,
see Dasho Lungten Dubgyur, The Wheel of Laws: An insight into the origin of Buddhist
Kingship, Constitution and Judicial Independence in Bhutan (Thimphu: Royal Court ofJustice, High Court of Bhutan, 2015). For an analysis of Bhutanese law under consideration of ethnographic field research, see Richard W. Whitecross, “The Zhabdrung’s Legacy: State Transformation, Law and Social Values in contemporary Bhutan” (PhD thesis,
University of Edinburgh, 2002); see also Richard W. Whitecross, “The Trimzhung Chenmo and the Emergence of the Contemporary Bhutanese Legal System,” in The Spider and34

second part (The duties of rulers and ministers) of the Bhutanese Legal Codefrom 1729:
If the king becomes enamoured of religion,
It is the path to happiness both in this and future lives
Subjects will also act as the king acts;
Therefore he must learn how to live in accord with religion.93

Different emic terms within the range of the semantic field of ‘happiness
and wellbeing in society’ are used throughout the Bhutanese Legal Codefrom 1729. The semantic field of each of the terms is naturally much morecomprehensive if additional textual sources are used in the analysis but,
nonetheless, observations based solely on the Bhutanese Legal Code from1729 prove fruitful for this research. Whilst at first glance the different
terms seem to be employed quite synonymously, it appears that their applications have different connotations in the respective contexts.94(1) “Happiness” (Tib. bde skyid) was used in our first example, andthroughout the Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729 as well as in the Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan. It refers to the happiness and well-beingof the subjects of the nation in a general sense, for example that achieved
through following the Buddhist doctrine or emphasised as a value in itself
to be established and maintained in a functional Buddhist society.95 (2) A
second term for “happiness/joy” (Tib. bde ba) was similarly applied in our
second example and in other instances in the Bhutanese Legal Code from1729.96 (3) Furthermore, a distinct term is used repeatedly for any “means/actions/ceremonies” which are carried out to create or maintain happiness

93

94

95
96

the Piglet: Proceedings of the First Seminar on Bhutan Studies, ed. Karma Ura and Sonam
Kinga (Thimphu: Centre for Bhutan Studies, 2004).
Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729 in Aris, Sources for the History of Bhutan, 135 (Tib.); 136(Engl.) In the Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729 this quote is attributed to the Buddha. I
have located the quote in two instances in the Tibetan Buddhist Canon. They belong to
the genre of former-birth stories (Skt. jātaka) that are found in the corresponding sectionof the Tibetan Buddhist canon (Tib. skyes pa’i rabs kyi rgyud). See Āryaśūra, Jātakamāla(D 4150, vol 168, fol. 81a6) and Vīryasiṃha, Jātakamālapañjikā (D 4460, vol. 213, fols.
300b7-301a1, corresponding commentary).
It should be kept in mind though that the semantic field of these terms is of course evenmore comprehensive when used in other genres and contexts, for example, “bliss” for the
Tibetan term bde ba in Tantric literature. This is not part of my analysis though, which ishere limited to the explicit usage in the Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729 itself.
Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729; in Aris, Sources for the History of Bhutan, 124, 130, 136,
138, 142 (Tib.); 125, 131, 137, 139, 143 (Engl.)
Aris, 122, 124, 126, 134, 138, 146 (Tib.); 123, 125, 127, 135, 139, 147 (Engl.)
35

and well-being of the subjects (Tib. bde thabs).97 (4) Then, the compound“benefit and happiness,” “beneficial happiness”, or “beneficial [for]” (Tib.
phan bde) is always employed in conjunction with a concrete reference tothe state, the religion, the laws themselves, or the districts and country.98(5) “Kidu” (Tib. skyid sdug),99 the royal prerogative of the Kings of Bhutan
and the former informal principle of mutual aid or support, is used in the
Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729 when pointing out the concrete responsibilities of rulers, ministers and government officers alike to observe and,if necessary, to balance the collective happiness and welfare status of thesubjects. One example given is the distribution of surplus in granaries, inorder to narrow the gap between those in the state of misery (Tib. sdug)
and those in the state of well-being (Tib. skyid).100 Failing to look after thewelfare of the subjects was considered serious neglect of duties, and wasquite severely sanctioned.101 As this suggests, the happiness and welfare of
the population were taken very seriously in pre-modern Bhutan (at leastaccording to this text).
Although this variety of terms for ‘happiness and wellbeing in society’is only one particular example, a wider point is clearly demonstrated
here, in highlighting the usefulness of analysis of emic terms. Such analysis helps to clarify how functions within, and arrangements between, thedifferent societal spheres of religion and politics within the Joint Twofold
System of Governance in pre-modern Bhutan were conceptualised and implemented. The observations made here also show that Buddhist moral
codes and values, which in many cases had a longstanding history in the
Tibetan cultural area, were stipulated as guidelines for the governance ofrulers, ministers and government officials alike. Furthermore, the government officials were responsible for not only enforcing religious and moral
codes on the general populace but also regulating religious institutions
and their monastic rules (Skt. vinaya) in the public sphere. Hence, religious and moral codes of conduct penetrated the everyday work of public
servants and created an intricate set of interactions between religious and
97 Aris, 136, 138, 140, 142, 148 (Tib.); 137, 139, 141, 143, 149 (Engl.) For welfare and happiness rites (Tib. bde thabs), see also n. 53 on p. 22.
98 Aris, 122, 124, 130, 162 (Tib.); 123, 124, 131, 163 (Engl.)
99 Aris, 136, 140, 144, 148, 150, 160 (Tib.); 137,141, 145 151, 161 (Engl.).
100 Aris, 148 (Tib.); 149 (Engl.).
101 Several draconian punishments prescribed for this dereliction of duty are listed in Aris,
161–62 (Tib.); 163–64 (Engl.).
36

non-religious spheres in the Joint Twofold System of Governance in
pre-modern Bhutan. These social spheres may thus be seen as overlapping
but not undifferentiated.102
In summary, the Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729, in its conception of
the Joint Twofold System of Governance in Bhutan, emphasises the legitimisation of Buddhist rule and governance through meritorious Buddhist
conduct in office. The merit of said conduct was to be measured by the
resulting happiness and well-being of the subjects.103 Material and spiritualwell-being and happiness of the subjects, and harmony and peace within the country were to be achieved by following Buddhist doctrine in allareas of religion and politics. According to the cosmological order of Tantric Buddhism, this would secure the region’s protection by the Buddhist
protector deities of the Drukpa Kagyü school, as referred to throughout
the Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729, against inner and outer enemies andother calamities.104
102 For example, the duty of government officials to ensure that the populace follows the “Tenrules of virtuous conduct” (Tib. dge ba bcu’i khrims); that is avoid killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, lying, harsh speech, slander, idle gossip, ill will, covetousness, and wrong
views; see Aris, 145 (Tib.); 146 (Engl.); cf. also Gayley and Willock, “Introduction. Theorizing the Secular in Tibetan Cultural Worlds,” 23. Other common Buddhist codes of conducts employed in the text are the “Ten religious practices” (Tib. spyod bcu), see Bhutanese
Legal Code from 1729; in Aris, Sources for the History of Bhutan, 136 (Tib.); 137 (Engl.);“Rules of the Vinaya” (Tib. dge slong bslab pa), see Aris, 140 (Tib.); 141 (Engl.); “Five precepts” (Tib. bslab pa gzhi lnga), in particular infusing the whole text; the “Sixteen pure rulesof human conduct” (Tib. mi chos gtsang ma bcu drug), see Aris, 128, 130 (Tib.); 129, 131(Engl.); and the “Four actions” (Tib. ’phrin las bzhi), i. e “pacifying, multiplying, ruling, andsubduing in order to fulfil” the role of a just ruler; see Aris, 138, 144, 164 (Tib.); 139, 145,
165 (Engl.); see also Cüppers, “Bstan ’dzin chos rgyal’s Bhutan Legal Code of 1729,” 50.
103 In general, Buddhist ethical principles and connected Buddhist knowledge systems andbinary codes are also found in earlier legal codes in the broader Tibetan cultural area, forexample Guidelines for Government Officials (Tib. Blang dor gsal bar ston pa’i drang thig
dwangs shel me long nyer gcig pa). This document, written in 1681 by the Tibetan regent
Sangye Gyatso (1653–1705), concerned the administration of the Joint Twofold System
of Governance in Tibet. However, Christoph Cüppers notes, in his concise comparisonof the Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729 to this earlier document, that while the Bhutanese
had copied quite significant portions from the Tibetan text (a quite common practicein the Tibetan cultural area) the emphasis on Buddhist morality and Buddhist codes ofconduct to enable happiness and well-being and to monitor the welfare of the subjects is
not found in the Tibetan counterpart. In addition, the Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729 ismuch more concerned with addressing legitimisation and justification of Buddhist rule;see Cüppers, “Bstan ’dzin chos rgyal’s Bhutan Legal Code of 1729,” 45, 47–50.
104 On the function of religion and, in particular, Buddhism as a social system in the ultimate
sense supposed to overcome any contingency, see Kleine, “Religion and the Secular in
Premodern Japan,” 11–13; see also Kleine, “The Secular Ground Bass,” 24.
37

How do these conceptions and practices relate to social differentiationin Bhutan today? Considering the background of these cultural imprints,
the ideas and policies of Gross National Happiness (GNH) seem indeed
to be a promising, though complex, topic of interest for research into imagined or institutionalised boundaries between societal spheres in Bhutan
today. These ideas and policies point, in particular, to distinction and differentiation between legality and morality in factual institutional arrangements or symbolic spaces. As paradoxical as it may seem, Buddhist knowledge systems, Buddhist ethics, and binary moral codes within the ideas
and policies of Gross National Happiness (GNH) are of central interest to
point towards critical distinction and differentiation processes, and thereby
secularities in Bhutan today. One of the main questions still to be considered regarding the religious heterogeneity105 in Bhutan is: Are Buddhist
knowledge systems modernised, thereby representing ‘Buddhism in a new
dress,’ or are they in fact transformed and thereby ‘secularised’ in Bhutan;
or moreover, do both processes happen simultaneously in the practice andimplementation of Gross National Happiness (GNH)?106

105 No official numbers are found in the current 2017 Population & Housing Census, therefore, the numbers provided are based on estimations by the Pew Research Center for theyear 2010: 74.7 % Buddhist, 22.5 Hindu, 1.9 % folk religions, 0.6 % Christian, 0.2 % Muslim, < 0.1 % unaffiliated, < 0.1 Jew, other < 0.1%; see Pew Research Center, “The Futureof World Religions: Population Growth Projections, 2010-2015,” April 2, 2015, accessed
June 22, 2019, https://www.pewforum.org/2015/04/02/religious-projection-table/. No
significant differences in the sources at hand are identified, cf., for example, www.indexmundi.com or www.worldpopulationreview.com.
106 A clear example of the latter case, the ‘secularisation of Buddhist knowledge systems andpractices’ is found in mindfulness training in schools throughout Bhutan, for example,
carried out by the Early Learning Centre initiatives (for further information, see https://www.facebook.com/pages/category/College---University/Early-Learning-Centre-Thimphu-172275416158080/, accessed June 24, 2019). They do not teach traditional Buddhist
mindfulness and meditation techniques according to the Drukpa Kagyü school (or other
Bhutanese Buddhist schools) but Western mindfulness approaches and techniques (interestingly often derived themselves originally from Buddhist meditative traditions as in
the case of Jon Kabat-Zinn’s approach of ‘Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction’).
38

3 Conclusion
To sum up, I would like to highlight three significant findings that promise
to be fruitful for further research:
First, an approach that traces pre-modern and modern ‘emic’ terms
and clarifies their correspondence to ‘etic’ terms in English, such as ‘religion’ and ‘politics,’ has proven necessary and productive based on examples
laid out in the course of this paper. This procedure establishes, as far as
possible, a common background and vocabulary in international and interdisciplinary discourses that address secularity, religion, and modernity
in Bhutan. An important first step in this process is to determine, from thecollected emic terms, areas relevant in relation to conceptualised or institutionalised boundaries between the “religious” (Tib. chos) and “political”(Tib. srid) sphere within the conception and institutionalisation of the
Joint Twofold System of Governance. By so doing, research illuminates theintricate distinction and differentiation processes and the resulting secularities in Bhutan, in the spirit of the ‘multiple secularities’ approach.
On the basis of the analysis of emic terminologies in this paper, performed in a diachronic perspective, the following areas seem to be relevant
for analysis of the relationship between religious and political spheres in
Bhutan, indicating negotiations over or formalisation of boundaries between them: (1) functions in society (religious/political/administrative);(2) actors (lay/monastic); (3) participation of the Buddhist ruler/king inpolitics (‘Kidu’); (4) status of the Buddhist ruler/king ; (5) legitimisationof Buddhist rule (incarnation/abbatial/hereditary/meritocratic); (6) ‘modernised’ or ‘secularised’? Buddhist ethics and morality as now institutionalised on the national, and not just civil societal, level in a religiously heterogeneous country; and (7) social practices of Buddhist communal and state
rituals interpreted either as cultural or religious practices. In brief, emic,
classical Tibetan terms that are found in earlier Bhutanese textual sources,
within the Joint Twofold System of Governance in pre-modern Bhutan,
require careful study. They are indispensable for a first understanding of
secularisation processes and their possible reasons also today.
Second, any research into Bhutan’s development path has to consider
the diversity of additional emic terms in Dzongkha, English, and othervernaculars. My glimpse into the constitutional framework here has been
severely constrained by my limited understanding of Dzongkha, save39

for the fact that its vocabulary and syntax overlap strongly with classicalTibetan. Consequently, there is need of further research, by scholars
trained in classical Tibetan, Dzongkha, and English (and, ideally, also inother vernaculars of Bhutan). This would enable them to sufficiently address the challenges caused by the language shifts from classical Tibetan to
Dzongkha (and English) as a literary medium, and to access oral discourses
on modernisation and secularisation in Bhutan.
Therefore, the handling of encounters with Western notions of secularity and modernity against the backdrop of the strong cultural imprints
of Buddhist rule and morality as represented by the Joint Twofold Systems
of Governance, have to be related in detail to the newly created emic terms
used in discourses about secularity, religion, and modernity in Bhutan today, and to our etic terms.
The impact of this analysis lies in locating culture-specific imprints
found in Bhutan, and the documentation of their manifestation in emic
terminologies in the past and present. It may also indicate culture-specificareas of interest for distinction and differentiation processes for further
research. Bhutan is a unique case as it shows a structural continuity in theform of the transformed Buddhist Joint Twofold System of Governance. In
addition, it is the only one of the three major Buddhist governments in the
Tibetan cultural area that is still in existence today.
Third and finally, the transformed Joint Twofold System of Governanceand the underlying Buddhist knowledge systems of Buddhist ethics in theconception of Gross National Happiness (GNH) are today still profoundly
grounded in a non-Western cosmological order – that of Tantric Buddhism. I argue that if there is the sincere wish to understand secularity,
religion, and modernity in a holistic and culturally non-biased way, ouranalytical framework should be expanded. It should transcend discourses constrained to, for example, a mere state-religion relationship such as“theocratic constitutionalism”.107
Consequently, I have proposed an additional analytical frameworkthat may hopefully prove fruitful for the case of Bhutan as a non-Western
107 As part of a comprehensive analysis, an investigation into the institutional arrangements
and legal framework is nevertheless sensible. A possible starting point for such research
could be Ran Hirschl’s categorisation of nine archetypical state-and-religion models; seeConstitutional Theocracy (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2010),
26–40; see also Larry C. Backer, “Theocratic Constitutionalism: An Introduction to a
New Global Legal Ordering,” Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies 16, no. 2 (2009).
40

society. It was with this in mind, that I intentionally chose to allude to a
Buddhist Maṇḍala in the title of my paper and in the captions of section
two. In particular, I suggest arranging the areas of interest that I have identified throughout the paper in a preliminary matrix that juxtaposes the opposing poles of ‘relative/absolute transcendence’ and ‘immanence’ roughlywith the spheres of ‘religion’ and other ‘secular’ societal spheres such as politics.108 This enables us to visualise the aforementioned Buddhist conceptual emic dyad and binary “belonging to the world/ordinary life” (Tib. ’jigrten pa: Skt. laukika) and “transcending/excelling/surpassing the world”(Tib. ’jig rten las ’das pa: Skt. lokottara) as opposing poles between which
the respective areas of interest that mark boundaries (and the related emic
terminologies) are located.
I here adopt Christoph Kleine’s approach that, based on the theoretical framework of Niklas Luhmann’s ‘systems theory’, has established theBuddhist conceptual emic dyad and binary “belonging to the world/ordinary life” (Tib. ’jig rten pa: Skt. laukika) and “transcending/excelling/surpassing the world” (Tib. ’jig rten las ’das pa: Skt. lokottara) as a ‘culturally
specific version of the binary code transcendence/immanence’. In addition,
Christoph Kleine has developed a “three-layered concept of immanence,
relative transcendence and absolute transcendence” as a graded scheme.109
Accordingly, to understand and describe distinction and differentiation
108 Cf. also Seyfort Ruegg, Ordre spiritual et ordre temporal, 149–56. David Seyfort Ruegg has
also pointed out the problem of drawing “a sharp and absolute boundary” between the religious and non-religious spheres of society in the Tibetan context; see Seyfort Ruegg, 151.
109 For an introduction to Christoph Kleine’s “three-layered concept of immanence, relativetranscendence, and absolute transcendence”, as exemplified by the theory of the three
Bodies of the Buddha see Kleine, “Religion and the Secular in Premodern Japan,” 14–19.
The three Bodies of the Buddha are: (1) the Dharmakāya (Tib. chos skyi sku), which isthe embodiment of the true nature of all phenomena and is discernible only to Buddhas;
and the two Rūpakāyas, which are the Form Bodies for the benefit of others; (2) theSaṃbhogakāya/Sāṃbhogikakāya (Tib. longs spyod rdzogs pa’i sku) as the Body of Enjoyment, which is discernible to beings with a high realisation such as Bodhisattvas in, forexample, Buddha realms such as Akaniṣṭha; and (3) the Nirmāṇakāya/Nairmāṇikakāya(Tib. sprul pa’i sku), the Emanation Body. For an overview of the three Bodies of the
Buddha see Orna Almogi, Rong-zom-pa’s Discourses on Buddhology: A Study of Various
Conceptions of Buddhahood in Indian Sources with Special Reference to the Controversy
Surrounding the Existence of Gnosis (jñāna; ye shes) as Presented by the Eleventh-Century
Tibetan Scholar Rong-zom Chos-kyi-bzang-po (Tokyo: International Institute for Buddhist Studies, 2009), 61–67. For Christoph Kleine’s highly engaging and detailed analysis
of pre-modern Japanese textual sources that depict Confucianism, Daoism, Brahmanism, Shintō, and Buddhism as being in varying capacities able to offer access to relative
and absolute transcendence see Kleine, “The Secular Ground Bass.”
41

processes within the cosmological order of Tantric Buddhism in Bhutan,
this provides a more flexible and holistic (not strictly binary) avenue supplementing the Western analytical and etic framework of ‘religion’ and‘other societal spheres’.
In closing, two brief examples elucidate this point. First, following Buddhist moral codes, let us take the example of environmentally responsible
behaviour. It can be interpreted as contributing to the wellbeing and happiness of the society as a whole either according to the immanent frameworkof the ideas and policies of Gross National Happiness (GNH) or in a transcendent framework of liberation by accumulation of positive merit, Karma,and creating balance in society according to the cosmological order of Buddhism. The signpost on the way to the holy site of Taktsang in Bhutan, mentioned earlier in this text, promotes environmentally responsible behaviourin accordance with Gross National Happiness (GNH) and connects it withgodliness and, therefore, accumulation of positive merit. Second, dependingon the model of Buddhist kingship and rule that is imagined, for example,
the King as Bodhisattva or as a Tantric Buddhist master such as Zhabdrung,they, in theory, serve in different capacities as mediators between the immanent and the relative/absolute transcendent sphere.
Figure 1 shows the basic matrix of this analytical framework with several
tentative examples resulting from this research.

42

Figure 1: Analytical framework: Joint Twofold System of Governance (Bhutan)
based on the analysis of the Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729, the Constitution of the Kingdom of Bhutan from2008, Gross National Happiness (GNH) with the ‘areas of interest’.

Relative
Transcendence

Absolute
Transcendence

Immanence“transcending/excelling/surpassing the world”(Tib. ’jig rten las ’das pa: Skt. lokottara)“belonging to the world/
ordinary life”(Tib. ’jig rten pa: Skt. laukika)

Dharmakāya/Nirvāṇa/absolute truthSaṃbhogakāya

Nirmāṇakāya, Saṃsara, relative truth“religion”(Tib. chos: Skt. dharma)“politics”(Tib. srid: Skt. bhava)“Law of the Buddha”(Tib. chos khrims: Skt. buddhadharma)“Law of the ruler”(Tib. rgyal po’i khrims: Skt. rājadharma)‘religious’‘cultural’/’spiritual heritage’‘other societal spheres’/’secular’

Functions in society (1)religious

political/administrative
Actors (2)Lay/monastic
Zhabdrung

Lay/monastic

Chief Abbot(Tib. ’brug rje mkhan po)

Buddhist Kingof Bhutan

Regent(Tib. ’brug sde srid)

Prime Minister

Participation of the Buddhist ruler/king in politics (3)‘Kidu’ (royal prerogative)
Legitimization of Buddhist rule (5)incarnation/Tantric Buddhist master

Bodhisattva ideal

abbatial

meritocratic

hereditary

Buddhist ethics and morality (6)Gross National Happiness (GNH)modernised’ Buddhism‘Kidu’ (mutual aid)‘secularised’ Buddhist ethics and practises

Social practices: Buddhist communal and state rituals (7)religious

cultural (GNH: ‘preservationand promotion of culture’)43From a diachronic perspective, boundaries between the societal spheresof religion and politics around the areas of interest have permanently shifted through negotiation processes – as we have seen in several examples
throughout this paper. In the future, research on Bhutan can, in a second
step, analyse differentiation processes, resulting in secularities, in more detail as these often provide solutions for a specific ‘societal reference problem’.
Such an analysis would enable us to see where negotiations over boundaries
and functions in society are likely to be expected in future.110
In summary, the exploratory character and form of this working paper
mirror the urgent need for further research into religion, secularity andmodernity in Bhutan, and I hope that the findings presented elicit reflection and discussion in interdisciplinary discourses. Extending beyond
Bhutan, the analytical framework used here can be adapted for further
research into different pre-modern formations of the Joint Twofold System of Governance in the Tibetan cultural area as a whole. In particular,
I would like this paper to function as a call for research on lesser known
formations of the Joint Twofold System of Governance, besides the threemajor formations in Tibet, Bhutan, and Sikkim.

110 Marian Burchardt, Matthias Middell, and Monika Wohlrab-Sahr have so far identified
four dominant reference problems, “(1) The problem of individual freedom in contrast
to dominating social entities; (2) the problem of religious heterogeneity and the potential
for conflict or actual conflict; (3) the related problem of societal or national integrationand development; and (4) the problem of autonomous development of societal subdomains;” Kleine and Wohlrab-Sahr, “Research Programme of the HCAS ‘Multiple Secularities’,” 6, 13–14.
44

4 Bibliography
Almogi, Orna. Rong-zom-pa’s Discourses
on Buddhology: A Study of Various
Conceptions of Buddhahood in Indian Sources with Special Reference
to the Controversy Surrounding the
Existence of Gnosis (jñāna; ye shes)
as Presented by the Eleventh-Century Tibetan Scholar Rong-zom Choskyi-bzang-po. Tokyo: International
Institute for Buddhist Studies, 2009.
Ardussi, John A. “Bhutan Before the
British: A Historical Study.” PhD
thesis, Australian National University, 1977. Accessed June 22, 2019.
https://openresearch-repository.anu.
edu.au/handle/1885/11280.
Ardussi, John A. Formation of the Stateof Bhutan (’Brug gzhung) in the 17th
Century and its Tibetan Antecedents.” Journal of Bhutan Studies 11,
no. 2 (2004): 10–23 (first publishedin Proceedings of the Seminar on The
Relation between Religion and State(chos srid zung ’brel) in Traditional
Tibet: Lumbini 4–7 March 2000, edited by Christoph Cüppers, 33–48.
Lumbini: Lumbini International
Research Center, 2004).
Ardussi, John A. “Stone Inscriptions: An
Early Written Medium in Bhutan
and Its Public Uses.” Journal of Bhutan Studies 14, no. 1 (2006): 1–11.
Aris, Michael V. Bhutan: The Early
History of a Himalayan Kingdom.
Warminster, Wiltshire: Aris &Phillips Ltd, 1979.
Aris, Michael V. Sources for the Historyof Bhutan. Vienna: Arbeitskreis fürtibetische und buddhistische Studien, Universität Wien, 1986.
Backer, Larry C. “Theocratic Constitutionalism: An Introduction to a New
Global Legal Ordering.” Indiana
Journal of Global Legal Studies 16,
no. 2 (2009): 85–172.

Burchardt, Marian, Monika WohlrabSahr, and Matthias Middell, eds.
Multiple Secularities: Beyond theWest. Religion and Modernity in the
Global Age. Boston: de Gruyter, 2015.
Burghart, Richard. “The Formation of
the Concept of the Nation-State in
Nepal. The Journal of Asian Studies
33, no. 1 (1984): 101–25.
Cabezón, José Ignacio, transl. The Just
King: The Tibetan Buddhist Classic
on Leading an Ethical Life: Jamgön
Mipham. Boulder: Snow Lion Publications, 2017.
Centre for Bhutan Studies & GNH
Research. “A Compass Towards
a Just and Harmonious Society:2015 GNH Survey.” Accessed May
22, 2019. http://www.grossnationalhappiness.com/SurveyFindings/2015GNHSurveyReport.pdf.
Constitution Drafting Committee. The
Constitution of The Kingdom of Bhutan, 2008. Accessed May 22, 2019.
https://www.nationalcouncil.bt/assets/uploads/files/Constitution%20%20of%20Bhutan%20English.pdf(Engl.), https://web.archive.org/
web/20110706163717/http://www.
constitution.bt/TsaThrim%20Dzongkha%20%28A5%29.pdf (Dzo.).
Cüppers, Christoph, ed. The relationship between religion and state(chos srid zung ’brel) in traditional
Tibet: Proceedings of a seminar held
in Lumbini, Nepal, March 2000.
Lumbini: Lumbini International
Research Institute, 2004.
Cüppers, Christoph. “Bstan ’dzin chosrgyal’s Bhutan Legal Code of 1729
in comparison with Sde srid Sangs
rgyas rgya mtsho’s Guidelines for
Government Officials.” In Bhutan:
Tradition and Changes. PIATS 2003:
Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the45

Tenth Seminar of the International
Association for Tibetan Studies,
Oxford, 2003. Edited by John A.
Ardussi and Françoise Pommaret,
45–52. Leiden: Brill, 2007.
Debreczeny, Karl. “Faith and Empire: An
Overview,” May 30, 2019. Accessed
June 27, 2019. http://asianart.com/
articles/faith-empire/index.html.
Dotson, Brandon. “Theorising the king:
implicit and explicit sources for the
study of Tibetan sacred kingship.”
Revue d’Etudes Tibétaines 21 (2011):
83–103.
Dubgyur, Dasho Lungten. The Wheelof Laws: An insight into the origin of
Buddhist Kingship, Constitution and
Judicial Independence in Bhutan.
Thimphu: Royal Court of Justice,High Court of Bhutan, 2015.
Election Commission of the Kingdom of
Bhutan. Election Act of the Kingdom of
Bhutan, 2008. Accessed June 19, 2019.
https://aceproject.org/ero-en/regions/asia/BT/bhutan-election-act-of-thekingdom-of-bhutan-2008/view.
Gayley, Holly, and Nicole Willock. “Introduction. Theorizing the Secularin Tibetan Cultural Worlds.” Himalaya: The Journal of the Association
for Nepal and Himalayan Studies 36,
no. 1 (2016): 12–21. Accessed June
19, 2019. http://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/himalaya/vol36/iss1/.
Gendün Rinchen, Chief Abbot (69th).
bShes gnyen chen po rje dge ’dun rin
chen mchog gi bka’ ’bum: The Collected Works (gsung ’bum) of dGebśes-brag-phug. Rewalsar: Achārya
Shedup Tenzin and Sherab Gyaltsen
Lama, Zigar Drukpa Kargyud Institute, 1985–1991 [BDRC: W10206].
Gendün Rinchen, Chief Abbot (69th).
History of Bhutan II (dPal ldan ’brug
pa’i gdul zhing lho phyogs nags mo’iljongs kyi chos ’byung blo gsar maba’i rgyan. Reprint. Thimphu: KMT
Publishers, 2005.

Germano, David, and Tournadre, Nicolas. THL Simplified Phonetic Transcription of Standard Tibetan. The
Tibetan and Himalayan Library,
2003. Accessed June 11, 2019. http://
www.thlib.org/reference/transliteration/#!essay=/thl/phonetics/s/b1.
Givel, Michael, and Laura Figueroa.
“Early Happiness Policy as a
Government Mission of Bhutan: A
Survey of the Bhutanese Unwritten
Constitution from 1619 to 1729.”
Journal of Bhutan Studies 31, no. 2(2014): 1–21.
Gross National Happiness Commission(GNHC). “Eighth Five Year Plan”(1998). Accessed June 22, 2019.
https://www.gnhc.gov.bt/en/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/08fyp.pdf.
Gyatso, Janet. Being Human in a Buddhist World: An Intellectual Historyof Medicine in Early Modern Tibet.
New York: Columbia University
Press, 2016.
Halkias, Georgios T. “The Enlightened
Sovereign: Kingship and Buddhism
in Indo-Tibetan Tradition.” In A
Companion to Buddhist Philosophy.
Edited by Steven Emmanuel, 491–
511. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell Publishers, 2013.
Halkias, Georgios T. “The Mirror and
the Palimpsest: The Myth of Buddhist Kingship in Imperial Tibet.”
In Locating Religions: Contact,
Diversity and Translocality. Editedby Reinhold F. Glei and Nikolas
Jaspert, 123–50. Leiden: Brill, 2017.
Hirschl, Ran. Constitutional Theocracy.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press, 2010.
Jansen, Berthe. The Monastery Rules:
Buddhist Monastic Organization in
Pre-Modern Tibet. Oakland: University of California Press, 2018.
Kapstein, Matthew T. The Tibetans.
Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing,
2006.

46

di Diritoo Comparato e di Studi
Legislativi vol. 8. Edited by Katia
Fiorenza et al., 381–404. Naples:
Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane, 2017.
Miele, Matteo. “Chinese Shadows on
Bhutanese Independence after theTreaty of Punakha. The Tibetan
Buddhist Connection and the British
Diplomatic Action.” In Buddhism,
Culture and Society in Bhutan,
215–39. Edited by Seiji Kumagai,
Kathmandu: Vajra Books, 2018.
National Statistics Bureau of Bhutan.
2017 Population & Housing Census:
National Report, 2018. http://
www.nsb.gov.bt/publication/files/
PHCB2017_national.pdf. Accessed
22 June, 2019.
Pew Research Center, “The Futureof World Religions: Population
Growth Projections, 2010–2050,”
April 2, 2015. Accessed 22 June,
2019. https://www.pewforum.
org/2015/04/02/religious-projection-table/
Phuntsho, Karma. History of Bhutan.
Noida: Random House, India, 2013.
Pommaret, Françoise. “The Chakravartin-King: Symbolism of the
Bhutanese Monarchy.” In The
Bodhisattva King. His Majesty Jigme
Singye Wangchuck of Bhutan. Edited
by Tshering Tashi, and Thierry
Mathou, 251–69. Bangkok: Amarin
Printing and Publishing PLC, 2015.
Roesler, Ulrike. “Die Lehre, der Weg
und die namenlose Religion: Mögliche Äquivalente eines Religionsbegriffs in der tibetischen Kultur.”
In Religion in Asien? Studien zur
Anwendbarkeit des Religionsbegriffs.
Edited by Peter Schalk, 129–50. Uppsala: Uppsala University, 2013.
Roesler, Ulrike. “16 Human Norms (michos bcu drug) –Indian, Chinese, andTibetan.” In The Illuminating Mirror:
Tibetan Studies in Honor of Per K.
Sørensen on the Occasion of His 65th

Keman, Hans. “Institutionalization,”
October 12, 2017. Accessed June 14,
2019. https://www.britannica.com/
topic/institutionalization.
Kleine, Christoph. “‘Wie die zwei Flügel
eines Vogels’ – eine diachrone Betrachtung des Verhältnisses zwischen
Staat und Buddhismus in der japanischen Geschichte.” In Zwischen
Säkularismus und Hierokratie: Studien zum Verhältnis von Religion und
Staat in Süd- und Ostasien. Editedby Peter Schalk, 169–207. Uppsala:Uppsala University, 2001.
Kleine, Christoph. „Religion als begriffliches Konzept und soziales
System im vormodernen Japan:
Polythetische Klassen, semantischeund funktionale Äquivalente undstrukturelle Analogien.“ In Religion
in Asien? Studien zur Anwendbarkeit
des Religionsbegriffs. Edited byPeter Schalk et al., 225–92. Uppsala:Uppsala University, 2013.
Kleine, Christoph. “Religion and theSecular in Premodern Japan fromthe Viewpoint of Systems Theory.”
Journal of Religion in Japan 2, no. 1(2013): 1–34.
Kleine, Christoph. “The Secular GroundBass of Pre-modern Japan Reconsidered. Reflections upon the Buddhist
Trajectories towards Secularity.”
Working Paper Series of the HCAS
“Multiple Secularities – Beyond
the West, Beyond Modernities” 5.
Leipzig University, 2018.
Kleine, Christoph, and Monika WohlrabSahr. “Research Programme of the
HCAS ‘Multiple Secularities – Beyond
the West, Beyond Modernities’,”Leipzig, March 2016. Accessed May
22, 2019. http://ul.qucosa.de/api/qucosa%3A16727/attachment/ATT-0/.
Miele, Matteo. “Isolamento ed interdipendenza, tradizione ed impermanenza. Note sul percorso costitutzionale del Bhutan.” In Annuario

47

Birthday. Edited by Olaf Czaja andGuntram Hazod, 389–409. Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag, 2015.
Schuh, Dieter. “Srid ohne Chos?
Reflektionen zum Verhältnis von
Buddhismus und säkularer Herrschaft im tibetischen Kulturraum,”
ZAS Zentralasiatische Studien desSeminars für Sprach- und Kulturwissenschaften Zentralasiens derUniversität Bonn 33 (2004): 153–62.
Schwerk, Dagmar. A Timely Message
from the Cave: The Mahāmudrā
Doctrine and Intellectual Agendaof dGe-bshes dGe-’dun-rin-chen(1926–1997), the Sixty-Ninth rJemkhan-po of Bhutan. In Indian andTibetan Studies. Edited by Harunaga Isaacson, and Dorji Wangchuk.
Hamburg: Department of Indianand Tibetan Studies, Universität
Hamburg (forthcoming 2020).
Seyfort Ruegg, David. Ordre spiritualet ordre temporal dans la pensée
bouddhique de l’Inde et du Tibet:
Quatre conference au college deFrance. Paris: Collège de France,
Institut de civilization indienne;
Diffusion De Boccard, 1995.
Seyfort Ruegg, David. “A Note on the
Relationship between Buddhist and
Hindu Divinities in Buddhist Literature and Iconology: The Laukika/
Lokottara Contrast and the Notionof an Indian ‘Religious Substratum’?
In Le parole e i marmi: Studi in onore di Raniero Gnoli nel suo 70. compleanno. Edited by Raffaele Torella,
735–42. Rome: Istituto italiano perl’Africa e l’Oriente, 2001.
Seyfort Ruegg, David. “Introductory Remarks on the Spiritual and Temporal
Orders.” In The relationship between
religion and state (chos srid zung‘brel) in traditional Tibet: Proceedingsof a seminar held in Lumbini, Nepal,
March 2000. Edited by ChristophCüppers, 1–13. Lumbini: Lumbini

International Research Institute,
2004.
Seyfort Ruegg, David. The Symbiosis of
Buddhism with Brahmanism/Hinduism in South Asia and of Buddhism
with “Local Cults” in Tibet and theHimalayan Region. Vol. 58. Vienna:
Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2008.
Shaw, Brian C. “Bhutan: Notes Concerning the Political Role of Kidu.”
Journal of Bhutan Studies 33, no. 2(2015): 1–22.
Sinha, Nirmal C. “Chhos srid gnyisldan.” Bulletin of Tibetology 5, no. 3(1968): 13–27.
Sonntag, Selma K. “Introduction: Language Politics and Language Contact.” In The Politics of Language
Contact in the Himalayas. Edited by
Selma K. Sonntag and Mark Turin,
7–17 (changing). Cambridge, UK:
Open Book Publishers, forthcoming. Doi: 10.11647/OBP.0169.
Sørensen, Per K. Tibetan Buddhist
Historiography: The Mirror Illuminating the Royal Genealogies. An
Annotated Translation of the XIVthCentury Chronicle rGyal-rabs gsalba’i me-long. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1994.
Sørensen, Per K., and Guntram Hazod.
Rulers on the Celestial Plain.
Ecclesiastic and Secular Hegemonyin Medieval Tibet. A Study of Tshal
Gung-thang. Vienna: Verlag derÖsterreichischen Akademie derWissenschaften, 2007.
Sørensen, Per K. “The Development andFormation of Religious Historiography in Tibet.” In History of Religion:
Narrating a Religious Past. Edited by
Bernd-Christian Otto, Susanne Rau,
and Jörg Rüpke, 151–64. Berlin: De
Gruyter, 2015.
Tambiah, Stanley J. World Conqueror
and World Renouncer: A Study of
Buddhism and Polity in Thailand

48

against a Historical Background.
Cambridge, MA: Cambridge
University Press, 1976. Doi:10.1017/
CBO9780511558184.
Tambiah, Stanley J. “The galactic polity
in Southeast Asia.” HAU: Journal of
Ethnographic Theory 3, no. 3 (2013):
503–34. Reprint: “The galactic
polity in Southeast Asia.” In Culture,
thought, and social action, 3–31.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press, 1973.
Tendzin Chögyel, Chief Abbot (10th).
Bhutanese Legal Code from 1729
(dPal ’brug pa rin po che mthu
chen ngag gi dbang po’i bka’ khrims
phyogs thams cad las rnam par rgyal
ba’i gtam), in lHo’i chos ’byungbstan pa rin po che’i ’phro mthud’ jam dgon smon mtha’i ’phreng ba,
fols. 100b4–115a3. Block print. N. p.:
n. n., n. d. [BDRC: W1KG9413].
Tendzin Chögyel, Chief Abbot (10th).
History of Bhutan I (lHo’i chos’byung bstan pa rin po che’i ’phromthud ’ jam dgon smon mtha’i’phreng ba). N.p.: n.n., n.d. [BDRC:
W1KG9413].
Thanissaro, Bhikkhu, transl. “Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta: The Shorter
Instructions to Malunkya.” In
Tipitaka: The Pali Canon, 1998. Accessed June 19, 2019. https://www.
accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/
mn.063.than.html#F_termsOfUse.
Turin, Mark. “Concluding Thoughts
on Language Shifts and Linguistic
Diversity in the Himalayas: The
Case of Nepal.” In The Politics ofLanguage Contact in the Himalayas.
Edited by Selma K. Sonntag andMark Turin, 125–34 (changing).
Cambridge, UK: Open Book Publishers, forthcoming. Doi: 10.11647/
OBP.0169.
Ui, Hakuju et al., eds. A complete
Catalogue of the Tibetan Buddhist
Canons (Bkaḥ-ḥgyur and Bstan-ḥgyur. Sendai: Tōhoku Imperial
University, 1934.
Ura, Karma et al. “A Short Guide to Gross
National Happiness Index” (Thimphu: The Centre of Bhutan Studies,
2002): 1–96. Accessed June 13, 2019.
http://www.grossnationalhappiness.
com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/
Short-GNH-Index-edited.pdf.
Wangchuk, Dorji. The Resolve to Becomea Buddha: A Study of the Bodhicitta
Concept in Indo-Tibetan Buddhism.
Tokyo: International Institute for
Buddhist Studies, 2007.
Whitecross, Richard W. “TheZhabdrung’s Legacy: State
Transformation, Law and Social
Values in contemporary Bhutan.”
PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh, 2002. Accessed June 22,
2019. https://dorjipenjore.files.
wordpress.com/2014/08/c2a0zhabdrung_s-legacy-state-transformation-law-and-social-values-in-contemporary-bhutan.pdf.
Whitecross, Richard W. “The
Trimzhung Chenmo and theEmergence of the Contemporary
Bhutanese Legal System.” In The
Spider and the Piglet: Proceedings ofthe First Seminar on Bhutan Studies.
Edited by Karma Ura and Sonam
Kinga, 355–78. Thimphu: Centre for
Bhutan Studies, 2004.
Whitecross, Richard W. “Like a Pot
without a Handle”: Law, Meaning
and Practice in Medieval Bhutan.”
Cahiers d’Extrême-Asie (Droit etBouddhisme. Principe et pratiquedans le Tibet prémoderne/Law andBuddhism. Principle and Practice in
Pre-modern Tibet) 26 (2017): 87–103.
Windischgraetz, Michaela, and Rinzin
Wangdi, The Black-Slate Edict of
Punakha Dzong. Thimphu: JSW Law
Publishing Series 2019. Accessed
June 28, 2019. https://univie.academia.edu/MichaelaWindischgrätz.

49

Wylie, Turrell W. “A Standard System
of Tibetan Transcription.” Harvard
Journal of Asiatic Studies 22, no. 2(1959): 261–67.
Zhang yi sun et al., eds. Bod rgya tshig
mdzod chen mo. 3 vols. Beijing: Nationalities Publishing House, 1985.
Zimmermann, Michael, ed. Buddhism
and Violence. Lumbini: Lumbini
International Research Institute,
2006.

Wohlrab-Sahr, Monika, and Marian
Burchardt. “Vielfältige Säkularitäten: Vorschlag zu einer vergleichenden Analyse religiös-säkularer
Grenzziehungen.” Denkströme.
Journal der Sächsischen Akademie
der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig 7(2011): 53–71.
Wohlrab-Sahr, Monika, and Marian
Burchardt, “Multiple Secularities.
Towards a Cultural Sociology ofSecular Modernities.” Comparative
Sociology 11, no. 6 (2012): 875–909.
Wohlrab-Sahr, Monika, and Marian
Burchardt, “Revisiting the Secular:
Multiple Secularities and Pathways
to Modernity.” Working Paper Seriesof the HCAS “Multiple Secularities –Beyond the West, Beyond Modernities” 2. Leipzig University, 2017.

50