Seite 426 [426]
Lusos BELKA
were only available for export (in English and German mutations of the book), not for
readers in Czechoslovakia. Some pictures portray Byambiin Rinchen in cordial con¬
versation with the abbot of Gandantegchinling, the only functioning monastery at that
time, N. Erdenepel“ (1887-1960; see Fig. 1); there are also lay people, men, women
and children and all the scenes give the impression of a standard situation (see Fig.
2-11). However, the historical context suggests that although such a religious encounter
was possible in the year 1958, it was a completely new situation! Ten or fifteen years
earlier the position ofreligion was radically different and it was unthinkable to conduct
a public religious ceremony. Stupas, statues, temples and entire monastery complexes
had been demolished and destroyed, not built or restored at the time. The 14% Dalai
Lama was in Tibet in 1958, but he had no link to Mongolian Buddhists: the process of
antireligious campaigns had started in the Peoples’ Republic of China, although without
the physical liquidation of sacral buildings — this occurred a decade later, during the
Cultural Revolution.*’ In the Mongolian People’s Republic and the Soviet Union, the
first revival of religious life, including Tibetan Buddhism, had already commenced at
that time; it was a converse process to China. The opening of the stupa in Ulaanbaatar
in 1958 was a representation of the process.
The naadam in 1958 was attended by numerous visitors from abroad, including
Inner Mongolians from the PRC (i.e. inhabitants of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous
Region), while almost none were present at the consecration ceremony. Therefore
Jisl’s and Vléek’s photographic documentation is unique in the global scope. Lumir
Jisl, together with his colleagues, documented the ritual as thoroughly as possible; they
used the material for the radio coverage and the foreign-language monograph (it was
the first book in English and German that brought recent information — more visual
than textual — to Western audiences after a long time); however, he did not study and
analyze the consecration ceremony any further. We may ask why. Jisl must have been
aware that he had a unique testimony and that Buddha’s stupa is of historic importance.
So why didn’t he elaborate on the topic?
46 Identified thanks to Ch. Dambajav, abbot of Dashchoiling Monastery and rector of Ziiiin Khiiree in
Ulaanbaatar (personal information of 30" August 2014, Ulaanbaatar). My thanks also extend to Veronika
KapiSovska in this context. Khambo Lama N. Erdenepel’s life was remarkably turbulent. He was born
in khoshuun Dalai khöökhür (present Ikh-Uul Dsavkhan aimag). He was the director of the National
Library in Ulaanbaatar in years 1927 and 1928; later he entered the monastery and stayed in Ikh khüree
(today’s Gandantegchinling), where he received the title of gavzha in the Dashchoinpel datsan. He had
other offices next to monastic duties: he worked at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1929; simultane¬
ously he was a monk until 1938. During the reprisals he left monastic ranks and he entered the sangha
again in 1944; he became the first abbot of Gandantegchinling Monastery after its reopening (see also
Teleki, Krisztina: Monasteries and Temples of Bogdiin Khüree. Institute of History Mongolian Academy
of Sciences, Ulaanbaatar 2012, p. 164.)
A highly informed description and analysis was written by Martin Slobodnik: Mao a Buddha: Nabozenska
politika voci tibetskemu buddhismu v Cine [Mao and Buddha: Religious policy towards Tibetan Bud¬
dhism in China]. Chronos Publishing, Bratislava 2007.
424