tricky representations: buddhism in the cinema during ......the penetration of buddhism to mongolia....

The socialist state regarded religion as anobstacle to modernization and an opiate of themasses. From late 1937 through early 1939,Mongolia eliminated religion along with theintelligentsia, the upper classes, and politicalleaders. In the span of about 18 months, 800Buddhist temple compounds (5,953 buildings)became ash heaps [Fig. 1]. Of 85,000 lamas,20,356 were killed and the rest were jailed,sent to labor camps, or forced to adopt layprofessions. By 1939 there were no officialcategories of religious practitioners registeredin the census, and Mongolia became a classlessand atheistic society (Baabar 1996).

Yet the destruction of the tangible structuresof Buddhism did not eliminate religion from thepeople’s minds. While the state was able toeradicate the public practices of religion — itsinstitutions, ceremonies, and overall presencein major events — it was also paranoid, andrightly so, about the existence of religion inprivate spaces and belief, an intangible entitythat could challenge the power of the secularstate. The people’s beliefs were the hardest tochange. Aware of that, the socialist statedelegated the task of eradicating religion fromthe minds of people to cultural production: toliterature, arts, and cinema amongst many other

venues. The idea that all societies go throughthe same stages of development oncepropagated by the European enlightenmenttheorists was reinforced in Mongolia as a partof socialist revolution in the 1921 andsubsequent nation-building processes.Ideologically, religion was seen as a remnantof the past and primitive superstition thatimpeded modernization and progress. In orderto succeed the socialist state needed devotedand dutiful followers who believed in theideology of socialism and nothing else. The statesanctioned mass media and art to shapepeople’s minds, to produce culture that wouldtransform the populace from devoted Buddhistto atheist citizens of a modernizing socialistcountry.

Yet the making of anti-religious propagandafilms was a complex task and required animmense creativity on the side of thefilmmakers. That is because Buddhism was notjust a spiritual domain, but a complex culturalmechanism through which people made senseof their daily lives, maintained family memory,and constituted a core of individual and nationalidentity. In order to eliminate religion in itsentirety, the state needed to create newidentities and tools that substituted for religion.In other words, the elimination of religion wasas much an act of destruction as an attempt atthe creation of a new culture. The filmmakers’tasks therefore were more complex than it wasoriginally perceived. Many films inevitablyoffered a redefined understanding of religion,history, and national identity that were beyondthe mandate and the expectations of the state.The anti-religious propaganda art had to createsomething new that was equally if not moreconvincing and truthful than religion. Thesocialist government was attempting to alterthe minds of the Buddhist nation that had beenshaped for almost three centuries in a matterof a few decades. Therefore, in order to

Tricky Representations: Buddhism in theCinema during Socialism in MongoliaManduhai BuyandelgerMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, Mass. (USA)

Fig. 1. The ruins of the Manjir Monastery, Tuv aimag.

Cop

yrig

ht ©

200

4 D

anie

l C

. W

augh

The Silk Road 6/1 (2008), pp. 54-62 54

comprehend the specific creativity on the sideof the filmmakers in representing a redefinedunderstanding of Buddhism beyond a simplisticatheistic message, it is helpful to revisit brieflythe penetration of Buddhism to Mongolia.

Buddhism’s path in Mongolia

Buddhism in Mongoliafought a centuries-longbattle with the localshamanic and otherfolk religious practicesin order to become amajor religion, one thatalso carries localvariations. It is knownthat Buddhism wasintroduced to Mongoliain the 13th century tothe ruling elite.Although it did notspread among thelarger populace, dif-ferent local branches ofBuddhism, mostlydifferent versions ofthe Red Hat sect, (theNya-ma-pa sect)seeped over the borderfrom Tibet and de-posited its specificteachings and practicesin various corners ofMongolia. Thus, often differentmonasteries in various locationshad maintained their specificlocal and historical identities andbecame integrated with the oralhistories of the local population.The Red Hat sect is also seen asa derivative of Bon-po, Tibetanshamanism. Its resemblancewith Mongolian shamanism,especially rituals of possession,also made it popular amongordinary people.

Since the 17th century, theYellow Hat sect of MahayanaBuddhism began its mass conversion withsupport of the institution of the Dalai Lama inTibet, the ruling elite of Mongolia, and theManchu Qing colonial administration. In its

battle to win the devotions of the populace,Buddhism had been transformed to fit theexpectations of the Mongols and replaced magicrituals, oral narratives, medicine, theatricalperformances, and many other venues of sociallife. It took several hundred years, violent andpeaceful measures, creative remodeling of

existing rituals, eco-nomic and legal sup-port by the localprinces and the insti-tutions of Dalai Lamaand many other waysfor Buddhism to be-come a major religion.

By the end of the19th century, therewere about 800monasteries and overa hundred thousandlamas in a countrywith a population ofless than 700.000people. The historybooks indicate that ason from every familybecame a monk(Heissig 1980). Be-sides being almost thesole spiritual force, theBuddhist church alsobecame the maineconomic and politicalpower in the country.

The local monasteries ownedlarge portions of land andlivestock. And the monarch, theHoly Enlightened Bogdo Khan[Figs. 2, 3] was more of aspiritual leader than a politicalone. More specifically, the thirdDalai Lama requested that theMongol khans destroy onggots(the images and figures thatrepresented shamanic spirits)and punish shamans and theirclients by taking away theirlivestock (Heissig 1980). Toattract believers, the lamas took

on the roles of shamans by offering the ritualsof healing, magic, and exorcism. The latter wereadopted from Bon-po (Tibetan shamanism)where the lama oracles go into trance and were

Fig. 2 (above). Mannequins of the 8thJebsumdamba Khutugtu or Bogdo Khan (1870-1924), the theocratic ruler of Mongolia, and his wifeDondogdulam (1870-1923). National Museum ofMongolian History, Ulaanbaatar.

Fig. 3 (below). The winter palace of the Bogdo Khan.Painting by B. Sharav? (copy by D. Djadambaa),early 20th century. Museum of Fine Arts,Ulaanbaatar.

Cop

yrig

ht ©

200

5 D

anie

l C

. W

augh

Cop

yrig

ht ©

200

5 D

anie

l C

. W

augh

55

meant to substitute for Mongolshamanic spirit possession.The Buddhist missionaries alsoreplaced the functions ofshamans by incorporating therituals of worship of mountaincairns (ovoos) [Fig. 4], and byintroducing various deitieswho protect livestock and life.Buddhism also offered in-dividual identifications withthe personalized Lamaistdeities which replaced theshamanic guardian spirits andancestors. The lamas taughttarani (magic spells) forindividuals’ protection, de-struction of evil, good luck,and healing of illnesses. Foreach illness and body organthere was a separate tarani.Lamas prescribed healingpackages consisting of taranis,herbal medicine, and rituals of cleansing anddeflection that the clients could perform athome. Buddhism promulgated itself as a moreadvanced spiritual practice as it operated notthrough the spirits of the deceased or animalsand nature, but by communicating with godsand deities (sahius). The missionaries prohibitedshamanic blood sacrifice as cruel and barbaric,and instead, propagated Buddhism with its dairyoffering as a more humanistic, gentle, andsuperior practice. Unlike in shamanism, whichonly has a celestial realm, Buddhism’s upper(heaven) and lower world (hell) were meant toinduce terror among non-believers.

By the early 20th century, Buddhism becameso strong that the Revolutionary Mongoliangovernment did not even consider abolishing ituntil the Soviet leaders pushed them to do so.In his paper about the measures that the statetook to pave its road to violence in 1937 andthereafter, anthropologist Chris Kaplonski(2008) notes that the Mongolian governmentconsidered abolishing the power of the Buddhistchurch, but they were also afraid, to a certainextent, of the backlash it would cause. He paysparticular attention to anxieties that Buddhismwas causing the Soviets and the fledglingMongolian Revolutionary Government. “In [a]1934 meeting with Stalin, Prime MinisterGenden remarked that a lama who had been

previously arrested had to bereleased after only a yearbecause of ‘unrest among thepeople’ over his incarceration”(Damdinsüren et al. 2005, p.102). Perhaps the most tellingphrase between Stalin andGenden that encapsulates thepower of the Buddhist churchis the following. In an interviewin 1934 with Genden, then theprime-minister of Mongolia,Stalin noted “It looks as if thereis a state (uls) within yourstate. One government isGenden’s government. Theother is the lama’s. But thelama’s government is strong”(Damdinsüren et al. 2005, p.102).Eradicating religion fromthe people’s minds

Besides the devotion on the side of thepopulace, there were other problems inrepresenting Buddhism in a negative light. Thewriters and producers of movies operated withinan extremely narrow cultural space under heavycensorship; the state allowed only a fewstereotyped images in the literature and filmsabout the socialist revolution in 1921 and thefollowing struggle for nation-building. Theimages included the Buddhist lamas ascounterrevolutionaries, as the upper-classexploiting ordinary herdsmen, and amoral andhypocritical individuals who indulged in sex,deception, and corruption. The top clergy werecruel terrorists (eserguu), bandits, betrayers ofthe nation, allies with Chinese politicians andrich merchants. Most importantly, in the filmson revolution, the lamas used the most sadistictortures towards the revolutionaries. The mosthorrific image is one of lamas worshipping theirbanners with a heart that was pulled out whilethe victim was still alive. The heart was stillpounding as the lama-terrorist squeezes it inhis hands and then splashes the banner with astream of blood by breaking the heart of avictim.

By producing images of crueler and morehateful enemies, and by dehumanizing theenemy, while humanizing itself, the statejustified its violence. It cast itself as a vulnerable

Fig. 4.The top of a Mongolianovoo, incorporating a Buddhistprayer flag and the Wheel of theLaw.

56

Cop

yrig

ht ©

200

5 D

anie

l C

. W

augh

rescuer of the people. But, as we learn fromoral history, the banner worship using the heartof a victim was the practice of the revo-lutionaries themselves. Specifically, the gloriouswarlord Khatanbaatar Magsarjav, who led theMongolian People’s Army and who freed thewestern part of Mongolia from the Chinese andother counter-revolutionaries was indeed knownfor such practices.

Literature, especially short stories and novelsdepicting the socialist revolution, has utilizedsuch images and motifs to exhaustion as theybecame almost standard ingredients in theliterature on revolution and state formation. Anymajor diversion from those types ofrepresentations could be interpreted as areligious propaganda, and the producers andwriters would be severely punished.

At least partially for that reason, many writersand scholars avoided the topic of religion, andthere is a dearth of representation of Buddhismin Mongolian cinema, literature, and arts afterthe 1950s. The other reason for decline ofreligion in arts and cinema was the eliminationof the Buddhist clergy during the state violencein the 1930s and 1940s. Simply put, how couldone represent religion during socialism if it wasnot supposed to exist any more? The problemwas that the state was aware that religionexisted in the forms of beliefs, languages,memories, and hidden private practices farbeyond its control. Yet the state could not allowthe representation of religion in post-revolutionary, socialist, modernizing Mongolia.For one thing, there was a danger that suchrepresentations would awaken the memories ofreligion. And another thing, more importantly,representing religion in modernizing Mongoliawould mean for the state to admit its failure todestroy it. Thus, anti-religious propaganda wasneeded, but in a way that would not provokememories of the past or much neededspirituality, but only lead people to despisereligion.

Within such a narrow space as was allowedfor creativity, filmmakers or at least scholarsand historians needed to be especiallyimaginative to come up with a suitable plot.Representing Buddhism in the historical pastwould be the safest way, but there was also arather poignant condition that made theproduction of culture even more difficult overall.

The scholars who had the deepest knowledgeof history, the ones educated in the histories ofEuropean enlightenment, secularization, andmodern democracy, and who could contributeto literature, art, and filmmaking, had beenpersecuted. In the 1910s and early 1920sseveral dozen students were sent to study inGermany and France. They spent five to tenyears there and became the most educated andprogressive professionals in Mongolia. Dressedin the latest fashions of the German upper-class,groomed to perfection, and poised in front ofthe camera while holding a cane or a pipe, theseyoung professionals epitomized everything thatsocialism considers to belong to the bourgeoisiewho must be eliminated. In the 1930s almostall of them were purged. Religious practitionerswere also persecuted and those remaining didnot dare to raise their voices. Courage wasnecessary to produce films and books on religioneven in a negative light. And individuals withsuch courage were rare. The two films that Idiscuss in this paper are exceptions. One is thefilm Tsogt Taij, which is about the historicalpast and which develops anti-religiouspropaganda in an unusual way, and the otheris Awakening (Serelt, 1957), which juxtaposesreligion against modernity.Nationalism and religion: Tsogt TaijA powerful attempt to show the harm ofBuddhism was made by a famous Mongolianscholar, writer, and filmmaker Rinchen Byambinin his epic film entitled Tsogt Taij. The nationalfilm studios, the Mongol Kino, were founded in1935 with Soviet technical assistance. The filmswere devoted to the themes of nationalism andheroism, and some were based on traditionalepics. Produced in 1945 right at the end of theWorld War II, the film Tsogt Taij is an anti-Buddhist film that also redefines Mongolia’srelationship with China, Tibet, and the Manchus,and looks at Buddhism not as an enlightenmentproject, but as a colonial tool. The film is ahistorically-based fiction. It depicts the eventsof the late 16th and early 17th centuries, whenMongolia was falling under the sway of theManchu Qing Dynasty. It is about a Mongolianprince who fought against Manchu en-croachment and against the Mongol princes whowere converting to Buddhism in exchange forpolitical and economic powers granted by theManchus and the Tibetans, particularly, theinstitution of the Dalai Lama.

57

The film fulfills the state order to presentBuddhism in a negative light, but goes furtherin explaining the role of Yellow Hat Buddhismthat is set against the Red Hat Buddhism inMongolia. The producer’s detailed knowledgeabout Mongolian history was unequalled byalmost anyone in Mongolia. Rinchin was one ofthe few scholars who had survived thepersecutions and he utilized his knowledge andskills as a linguist, ethnologist, historian, andwriter. Rinchen unravels the magic of religion,its techniques and circumstances of getting intopeople’s minds, from his perspective as adefender of the Red Hat sect of Buddhism. Thefilm is set specifically against the dominationby the Yellow Hat sect of Buddhism but doesnot have a strict atheist message.

In the film, the Tibetans, who are alsointerested in dominating Mongolia, conspire withthe Manchus about their strategy to seize theMongolian population using the power ofBuddhist deities. Each represents thestereotypes of their identities. The Tibetanmissionary is sly, politically savvy, and usespersuasive court speeches. The Manchuwarlords are aggressive and domineering.Together, they are a union of military andspiritual conquest.

Yellow Hat Buddhism arrives as the Manchusdefeat the last descendant of Chinggis Khan,the Ligden Khan, who dies before gettingChinggis Khan’s state seal to Tsogt Taij [Fig.5], a prince who is fighting for the country’sindependence. The Mongol princes are dividedbetween Red Hat Buddhism and the followers

of the Yellow Hat sect. Importantly, only TibetanBuddhism is cast in a negative light. The RedHat sect in this film is not a religious identity,but a form of cultural identity that is no differentfrom traditional Mongolian identity expressedthrough long songs, poetry, and wrestling. Thefilm shows no religious ceremonies,practitioners, and doctrines associated with theRed Hat sect.

Mongolia is presented as prey to the Manchusand Tibetans. Tsogt Taij interprets the imageof a Buddhist deity Manjusri as therepresentation of the Manchu Emperor. Hewarns the Mongols who had gathered in frontof the monastery that while today they areworshipping the deity Manjusri, tomorrow theywill worship the Manchu Emperor. Tsogt Taijfights against the establishment of the law thatstates individuals who do not memorize thesacred prayers will be punished with a fine of

three to five head of cattle. Throughout, filmshows that Tsogt Taij and his close friends andfollowers are highly educated individuals.Tsogt’s palace is a school for boys and a library,and contains a collection of rare art. His motheralso teaches the girls. Their knowledge ofpoetry, history, and arts is extensive, and anexchange of knowledge is their way of life. Thepalace is surrounded by a beautiful gardencultivated by a Chinese gardener who is also apoet and a connoisseur of rare wines [Fig. 6].

In contrast to highly educated,compassionate, cosmopolitan, and noble-looking Tsogt Taij and his people, the filmFig. 5. Tsogt Taij.

Screen shot courtesy of John Wells, Mongolian Cinema/Mongol Kino <http://www.kisetsuga.com/mongolkino/>.

Fig. 6. Tsogt Taij and the gardener drinking wineand singing before the storming of the palace.


58

presents the Buddhist lamas as vulgar, bored,shallow, and unkind to the populace. TheBuddhist Lamas and their Mongolian followersdo not have regard for the local culture, books,and artifacts; so they loot and destroyeverywhere they go.

But it is the internal struggle among theMongol aristocrats — the ambitious princes whofought for greater power on the grasslands —which allowed the penetration of the Manchusand Tibetan Buddhism. The disunity of princesis represented by the struggle between TsogtTaiji and the Gush Khan even though Tsogt’sson Arslan is in a romantic relationship withGush’s daughter Khulan [Fig. 7]. Once the latter

burns Tsogt’s palace, the relationship betweenGush Khan and his daughter Khulan is severedand the latter joins Tsogt to fight against theTibetans.

The plot of the film culminates when Arslan,the son of Tsogt Taij, a 22 year-old prince whohad been sent to Lhasa to fight the Tibetans,fails to carry out the important mission as hefalls prey to the savvy politics of conversionand seduction of the Tibetan politicians. Insteadof carrying out the attacks on Tibet, he falls fora stunning princess [Fig. 8] who summons himto the courts of the Dalai Lama. There theMongol prince becomes converted to Buddhismin order to marry the Tibetan princess. Theyoung prince disregards the scolding of the eldergeneral, and leaves his beloved Khulan whofights in his father’s army. As Tsogt Taij learns

about the betrayal of his son, he orders his sonto be beheaded. The young prince’s conversionto Tibetan Buddhism and a withdrawal from thebattle against Tibetans decides the faith of theMongols for the next few centuries. Without theprince’s reinforcements the Mongol army isdefeated and the country falls under the awayof Buddhism and Manchu domination

The most negative aspects of Buddhism arerepresented through the institution of the DalaiLama in Tibet. The Dalai Lama is a young boywho is a captive in his own elaborate palace.When his advisor enters his chamber to informhim about the arrival of the Mongolian prince(the son of Tsogt Taiji), the young Dalai Lamais asleep in his bed. The advisor wakens himand gives detailed protocol instructions forconverting the Mongol prince to Buddhism.

A young man will come towards you andbow to you. You should say: ‘Did you havea good journey?’ The man will come closerand bow to you. Upon my signal you shouldtouch his head with your right hand, justlike this [and he showed how to do that].Now, please tell me what will you do? asksthe advisor.

The young Dalai Lama repeats theinstructions. And in the next scene we watchthe enactment of the conversation, which

Fig. 7. Khulan, the daughter of Gush Khan — thetraitor who burns the palace of Tsogt Taij — and thebeloved of Arslan Taij, Tsog Taij’s son.


Fig. 8. The Tibetan princess presented to Arslan.


59

is the conversion of the Mongolian prince toTibetan Buddhism.

By associating the arrival of Buddhism withcolonialism, warfare, and the erasure of Mongolidentity, this film achieves a persuasive anti-Buddhist propaganda. We see the destructivenature of Buddhism layer upon layer. To start,Buddhism is a source of individuals’ hardshipand decline of economic condition, as the clergyand the Mongol elite who support Buddhismestablish an order that allows the church toconfiscate 3-5 head of livestock from everyindividual who had not memorized prayers.Buddhism is a source of family fights anddestruction of relationships between parentsand children. Tsogt Taij loses his only son tothe enemy. The girlfriend of the Mongol prince,Tsogt Taij’s son, renounces her father who joinedthe Manchus and Tibetans. Buddhist monkserase Mongolian culture; they destroy thegarden of Tsogt Taij’s palace, burn books, andkill all the students. Finally, coupled with theMachus, Buddhism causes internal warfareamong the princes, which leads to bloodshedamong ordinary people [Fig. 9].

The film was made during World War II, andit clearly has a patriotic aura, set against war,destruction, and violence. The emphasis on thedestructive nature of Buddhism had beenextended to the concerns of the time whenmovie was made. The country was fighting withthe Japanese. The news about the battles onthe Soviet lands had been promptly delivered,adding to the existing anxieties and fears.Mongolia also had just emerged from massivepolitical violence during which almost every

family had been affected. The populace wassubdued and terrified. The film was supposedto enhance courage and patriotism and help getthrough the difficult time.

But the intriguing aspect of the film, and thereason that I chose to discuss this particularone and not any other is that the film celebratesMongolian identity with long songs, folk tales,poetry, and local intelligentsia. These attributeswere also the targets of the socialist state. Inthe film, Rinchen reminds the audience abouttheir Mongolian identity, while the Soviets hadalready began their modernizing projects suchas building schools, changing the Mongolianalphabet, and clothes and dwellings. WhileRinchen propagandizes against Buddhism, hedoes it not in order to promote socialism ormodernity, but to re-establish national identity.The film was also an attempt to representMongolia as rich and cosmopolitan (with aChinese gardener and a Muslim houseattendant), not as primitive, stuck in atimelessness, as was usual in the depiction ofAsia of that time.

Awakening

While historical movies were important indemonstrating the way religion had come todominate the masses, the state also neededmovies that would glorify modernity and statepropaganda against religion. One of the mostpowerful movies that represent religion againstmodernity is titled Awakening. The movie beginswith a doctor finishing surgery in a modernhospital. He is summoned to the countryside,and while he travels in a car with two youngpeople, he tells the story of his youth.

When he was a young boy of about fourteen,his parents gave him as an apprentice to hismaternal uncle, a lama. But the boy lives morelike a slave to the lama than his apprentice.His lessons are meager, but his housekeepingworkload is high. He is constantly scolded andbeaten by the lama [Fig. 10, facing page].Things will gradually change after a youngRussian female doctor arrives at a nomadicsettlement to volunteer her services to the localpopulation. Despite her comfortable hospitalwith beds, ironed sheets, and shiny floors, thesick ignore her, and flock to the felt tent of thelama, who cures people with the power of hisspells, sutra recitation, and herbal medicine.


Fig. 9. A battle scene.

60

One day, the boy’s sister,Suren, becomes ill, and theRussian doctor and herMongolian assistant manageto convince her to stay in theirhospital. But the lama unclegets angry at the parents andthey bring Suren to the lama.The daughter’s conditionworsens as the lama predictsthat her days are numberedand interprets it as a con-sequence of receiving thetreatment from the wrongdoer.The parents blame themselvesfor letting their daughter stayin the Russian hospital andleave their daughter in theirextra tent, as she passes outin fever. In the meantime,Suren’s boyfriend who was inthe Russian hospital, over-hears in a conversationbetween Suren’s brother andthe doctor that Suren wants to come to thehospital, but her parents had given up on savingher. Suren’s boyfriend escapes the hospital andgallops on a horse to bring her from her hometo the hospital. Upon leaving the tent whereSuren was lying on a bed, her boyfriend knocksover the butter candle. The couple leaves on ahorse to the hospital while the tent burns tothe ground. Suren’s family assumes that theirdaughter died and was burned with the tent[Fig. 11]. The lama uncle tells them thatbecause of her sins, she is reborn as a lizard in

a desert — abad fate and alifetime ofsuffering.

During the49th day ofmourning, thelama unclep r o v o k e sSuren’s fatherto seek re-venge on theR u s s i a n

doctor by blaming her for thedeath of their daughter.Suren’s father runs to thehospital and tries to stab thedoctor with a knife, whenSuren, who has gottenconsiderably better, gets up tosave the doctor from herfather’s attacks [Fig. 12].Upon seeing the daughter thathe had mourned for 49 days,the father loses con-sciousness. After awakening,the father runs back to thelama’s felt tent and threatensto kill him for almost makingthe family bury their daughteralive.

Suren becomes the Russiandoctor’s nurse, and the localpopulation now lines up to seethe Russian doctor, while thelama receives no patients.Being a coward, he attempts

to kill the doctor by following her during asnowstorm and by causing an accident duringwhich the doctor and her horseman fall into aditch and their horse dies. But luckily, Suren’sfather, who was supposed to meet them, helpsthem out and then captures the lama and takeshim to the designated authorities.

The representation of a lama is often comicaland ridiculous. The lama constantly eats anddrinks while giving very little food to his

Fig. 10. The lama uncle holding astick for beating his disciple.

Screen shot courtesy of John Wells, MongolianCinema/Mongol Kino <http://www.kisetsuga.com/mongolkino/>.

Screen shots courtesy of John Wells, Mongolian Cinema/Mongol Kino <http://www.kisetsuga.com/mongolkino/>.

Fig. 11. Suren’s father, distraught afterhearing from the lama uncle about hisdaughter’s supposed death.

Fig. 12. Suren stops herfather from killing theRussian doctor.

61

apprentice. He is a womanizer and uses takingfemale patients’ pulse as a way of approachingthem. The lama is also brutal, as he always hasa stick next to him with which he brutally beatshis disciple.

But the most powerful aspect is the film’splot which unravels the magical powers thatthe lama claims to have. The lama is a charlatanand a fraud. That becomes clear to the mainheroes, who learn that their sick daughterneither died nor turned into a lizard, but wasbeing treated by the Russian doctor.

The fi lm propagates the triumph ofbiomedicine over traditional healing, the Sovietteachings over Buddhist, and the power of thestate over the clergy. Most importantly, the filmshows the changes in the people’s beliefs aboutreligion through the power of medicine. The filmwas made in 1957 for the celebration of the40th anniversary of the October Revolution. Itwas a token of gratitude to the Soviets forbringing modernization, medicine, and anti-religious teachings to Mongolia.

Whether the state was able to achieve theelimination of religion from people’s mindsmight seem almost irrelevant today whenBuddhism has regained its strength after thecollapse of socialism. The propaganda moviesthat presented religion in a negative light duringsocialism also reminded people what religionwas like. There is an ironic aspect to the state’scompetition with religion for the minds of thepeople. The state perceived that individuals canhave only one religious identity. By trying toeliminate religion, the state ended uptransforming itself into a religious entity. Thestate doctrines are in the history books,poetries, and national anthems, its rituals arefestivals and national holidays, its magic is theinspirational speeches of its leaders adorned inthe power suits and broadcast through TVs andmedia. But the more unexpected outcome wasthat religion remained active in the privatesphere. That, however, did not prevent thepopulace from worshipping the state and havingseveral beliefs, not just one.

Note: This essay is based on a lecture co-sponsored by the Silkroad Foundation and theInstitute of Asian Research at the University ofBritish Columbia and delivered at UBC onNovember 9, 2007, as part of a series on “Tibet-Mongolia Links in Religion and Medicine.”

AcknowledgementsSpecial thanks to John Wells (who maintainsthe website Mongolian Cinema/Mongol Kino<http://www.kisetsuga.com/mongolkino/> forproviding on short notice several screen shotsfrom the films discussed here.

About the authorManduhai Buyandelger is Assistant Professorof Anthropology at MIT. She received her Ph.D.in anthropology from Harvard University in 2004and was a Junior Fellow at the Harvard Societyof Fellows during 2004-2007. Her dissertationresearch was on the resurgence of previouslysuppressed shamanic practices after socialismamong ethnic Buryats of Mongolia. Her bookmanuscript, “Tragic Spirits: Shamanism,Socialism, and Neoliberal Capitalism inMongolia,” based on eighteen months ofdissertation research, will be published by theUniversity of Chicago Press. In 2008 at the timeof the parliamentary elections, she was inMongolia doing research on the politics ofgender and technologies of election. Herinterests include politics, gender, repre-sentation, shamanism, popular religion,memory, and media studies.

ReferencesBaabar 1996Baabar. XX Zuunii Mongol: Nuudel Suudal, GarzOlz (Twentieth-Century Mongolia, Nomadismand Sedentarism, Losses and Gains).Ulaanbaatar: State Photographic Center, 1996.

Damdinsüren et al. 2005S. Damdinsüren et al. Mongolyn tuhai BHK(b)H-yn barimt bichig (1920 – 1952) (VKP(b)documents about Mongolia, 1920-1952), Vol.2. Ulaanbaatar: National Archives, 2005.

Heissig 1980Walter Heissig. The Religions of the Mongols.London: Routledge & Kegan Paul,1980.

Chris Kaplonski 2008Chris Kaplonski. “Prelude to violence: Showtrials and state power in 1930s Mongolia.”American Ethnologist 35/2 (2008): 321-337.

62

tricky representations: buddhism in the cinema during ......the penetration of buddhism to mongolia....

Documents