Zhang Hawii 0085O 10657.Pdf

TALES OF THE WATER GOD IN THE WATER GOD TEMPLE OF

GUANGSHENG MONASTERY:

FOLK RELIGION AND SOCIAL JUSTICE IN THE PREMODERN

CHINESE POLITICAL TRADITION

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI‘I AT MĀNOA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS

IN

ASIAN STUDIES

MAY 2020

By Xinli Zhang

Thesis Committee

Cathryn H. Clayton, Chairperson Edward L. Davis Kate Lingley

Acknowledgments

First of all, I would like to thank all of my committee members including Prof

Cathryn Clayton, Prof Edward Davis, and Prof Kate Lingley. I would also like to thank

Mr. Starr and his foundation and the Asian Studies Program, which granted me enough funding to do fieldwork in China in winter 2018 and summer 2019. During the fieldwork, I visited all the places mentioned in this paper and collected enough evidence to support my research and argument. In addition, I would like to thank my family. They accompanied me and drove me across the whole province of Shanxi, on rugged and bumpy roads, to find these hidden temples located on remote mountainsides. I would also like to thank my friend Yufei Ye, who drove me and acted as a guide on my visit to Fujian province. Last but not least, my girlfriend Rui helped me a lot and gave me the emotional and psychological support I need to be able to finish this paper on time.

In this paper, I have a two-track argument. One track presents a new hypothesis on the identity of the Water God of Guangsheng Monastery. However, as I mentioned in the paper, there is no direct evidence to prove this identity; my argument is largely conjecture. The second and more substantiated argument concerns the relationship between Chinese political tradition, religion, and social justice. The hypothesis of Water

God’s identity was a clue that pointed me in the direction of this argument but is not direct evidence to support it. In fact, the reason why local people forgot the identity of

Water God is what serves as evidence for the second track of my argument.

1

Abstract: This paper focuses on a Yuan dynasty Water God Temple in Hongtong

County, Shanxi Province, China and hopes using this temple to research the special relation between Chinese political tradition, folk religion, and social justice. This paper used two argument tracks. The first argument track is focusing on the identity of Water

God himself. The second but core argument track is to discuss the relation between

Chinese political tradition, folk religion, and social justice. The first argument is not the evidence but a very important clue to finish the main argument. In conclude, both political authority and local communities were using folk religion as tool to search their benefits and remain social justice. The benefit for authority is the stability but the benefit for local communities is water, the resource. In the end, a Water God from folk religion became the symbol of social justice.

Keywords Water God Temple, Ming Ying Wang, Guangsheng Monastery, Chinese

Political Tradition, Folk Religion, Social Justice

2

Introduction

The Water God Temple of the Guangsheng Monastery (广胜寺水神庙) (Table 1) is in

Hongtong County (洪洞县), Shanxi province (山西省), in the lower Fen River valley

(Fig.1). Its location is 17 kilometers to the northeast of today’s Hongtong city. The temple sits on the north bank of the Huo Springs (霍泉), facing the Huo Canal (霍渠).

To the east of temple is the Mount Huo (霍山). On top of the mountain lies the Upper

Guangsheng Monastery (广胜寺上寺). Today, the Water God Temple is referred to as the Lower Guangsheng Monastery (广胜寺下寺). Its principal hall is dedicated to Ming

Ying Wang, or King of Luminous Response (明应王), also known as the Water God, and its four walls are adorned with some of the most beautiful Yuan-dynasty religious frescos extant in China (Table 2). Despite the fame of these frescos, only the southeastern portion of the murals has been examined in any detail, and scholarly discussion of the frescos on the other three walls is limited. The mural on the southeastern wall is a very important resource for research into Chinese theater.

There have been four attempts to explain the temple murals, but only two of these focus on all four walls. In a paper published in 1981, Chai Zejun and Zhu Xiyuan divide the murals into thirteen units or separate compositions (tu 图).1 They emphasize the realism of these compositions, which describe different historical scenes from life in the Yuan dynasty. But scholars have totally ignored the religious context and significance of these paintings, and the main theme linking all these paintings has gone unnoticed. Although Chai and Zhu assign names to each of their thirteen ‘compositions,’

1 Chai Zejun and Zhu Xiyuan, “Guangshengsi Bihua Chutan 广胜寺壁画初探.” 3

these titles do not correspond to the content or meaning of the paintings. For example, they call the painting on the southwest wall “The Thousand-Mile Journey of Tang

Taizong” (Tang Taizong Qianli Xingjing Tu 唐太宗千里行径图), but the scholar Liu

Nianzi has concluded, “It is not certain if the painting depicts this story.”2 This legend will be discussed in the later part of this paper. Furthermore, Jing Anning provides additional evidence that the person in this painting is not the Tang emperor, noting that the person wears the costume of a low-level Yuan-style official.3 It is obvious that, to some degree, Chai and Zhu’s research is only conjectural, but it is an important initial hypothesis. Their papers, however, are very short, and do not provide enough evidence to support it.

A second explanation of the murals may be found in a 1990 paper by Isobe Akira.4

He rejects the notion of multiple isolated compositions. He thinks the murals present a singular theme: ‘Liu Quan Presents Pumpkins’ (Liu Quan Jin Gua 刘全进瓜). This is also the name of a Yuan drama, the complete text of which has been lost.5 Although the play is no longer extant, Isobe Akira reconstructs the plot based on quotations and references in later sources, including a Qing period legend called Fishing Boat (Diaoyu

2 Liu, “Yuan Zaju Yanchu Xingshi De Jidian Chubu Kanfa 元杂剧演出的几点初步看法.” p.68 3 Jing, The Water God’s Temple of the Guangsheng Monastery: Cosmic Function of Art, Ritual and Theater, p.74. 4 Isobe, “Kosho Ji Myoo o Ten No Gendai Gikyoku Hekiga No Gadai Ni Tsuite.” 5 The story of Liuquan Presenting the Pumpkin is that when Emperor Taizong of the Tang was saved from Hell, he asked a volunteer to present a golden pumpkin to the King of Hell (Yan Wang,阎王) on his behalf, as a token of his appreciation. Low-ranking general Liu Quan, whose wife had committed suicide, offered himself to Taizong as an ambassador. When he arrived in hell, he presented the golden pumpkin to the King of Hell and also asked if his wife might return with him to the world of the living. The King of Hell approved his request, but his wife’s corpse had already rotted away, so a new body had to be found for her soul. Liu Quan asked Tang Taizong to allow him to borrow the corpse of the Yuying Princess (玉英公主) for his wife to inhabit. Taizong approved and let him marry the reborn Yuying Princess. The question remains, however, as to why the painters used this story to decorate the main hall of the Water God Temple. Isobe Akira finds no narrative or religious links between the Water God and the story of Liu Quan and his wife. 4

chuan 钓鱼船) and the twelfth chapter of the Journey to the West (Xiyou Ji 西游记), one of four famous novels of the Ming Dynasty.6 Although Isobe’s explanation is not strong enough to prove the relation between the Water God, Liu Quan and the Ming

Ying Wang, the link between the murals and the stories in the Journey to the West is still a very important clue as to the theme and the meaning of the murals inside the

Ming Ying Wang Hall.

At present, the meaning of the murals inside the Ming Ying Wang Hall remains obscure. This paper will offer an interpretation of the murals, taking several clues from the paintings as potential evidence. Recorded information on the paintings or in texts is very limited, as is our understanding of the identity of the Ming Ying Wang himself.

However, my analysis of the social and political context of the lower Fen River valley from the Tang through Yuan will suggest a new hypothesis concerning the identity of

Ming Ying Wang: namely, that the King of Luminous Response, the Water God of the

Lower Guangsheng Monastery, was first identified with the Tang Marshal Guo Ziyi (郭

子仪); then transferred to the Fenyang Guo clan, who were his descendants; then became a local immortal with power over water, and finally became the Water God with responsibility over water distribution and irrigation in Hongtong county. In the end, he became an omnipotent deity who controlled the everyday life of the local agricultural community.

Anning Jing presents a comprehensive argument in his book, The Water God’s

Temple of the Guangsheng Monastery: Cosmic Function of Art, Ritual and Theater. He

6 Isobe, p. 57. 5

tries to explain the Water God and his temple in terms of the Chinese cosmic system and how it was an instantiation of local religion and the visible patterns of art and theater.

This paper will continue the discussion of the Chinese cosmic system, but will focus on the relation between religion and art. In this paper, I offer a new hypothesis as to the identity of Ming Ying Wang, emphasize the role of local politics and the imperial government in religion and religious art, suggest an interesting historical transaction between the Tang and Yuan empires in the North China, and examine the narratives and paintings of Ming Ying Wang himself to propose a triangular relation between Chinese notions of governance, folk religion and social justice.

As mentioned earlier, there are two lines of argumentation in this paper, the identity of Ming Ying Wang as Guo Ziyi and the Chinese political tradition and its relations with religion and social justice. The new hypothesis of the identity of Guo Ziyi provides a clue and an angle for the discussion of Chinese political tradition and its relations with religion and social justice. Thus, I will discuss the identity argument first in this paper.

Who is the Ming Ying Wang?

Who was the Water God, the ‘King of Luminous Response,’ Ming Ying Wang? There is no certain answer to this question. One widely accepted theory about this omnipotent god derives from his nickname, Dalang (大郎, first-born or eldest son), which was recorded on a temple stone inscription entitled Stele of Reconstruction of the Temple of the Ming Ying Wang (1283):

According to Huan Yu Ji (寰宇记, Legend of Universe), since the Tang and Song

6

periods, the water god has been called ‘Dalang.’7

In his book The Guangsheng Monastery, Hu Shixiang proposed that Ming Ying Wang refers to Li Bing (李冰), one of the most famous hydraulic engineers in ancient China.

His hometown was recorded as Hedong Prefecture (河东郡), today’s Yuncheng (运城) city in Shanxi province, but there is no record of the specific years of his birth and death.

He designed and led local people to construct the Du Jiang Yan (都江堰) in Shu

Prefecture (蜀郡), today’s Dujiangyan city, Sichuan province (四川省), during the Qin

Dynasty (221 B.C-207 B.C). This was the most elaborate water conservancy project of pre-modern China. The Du Jiang Yan hydraulic project was built between 256 B.C and

251 B.C, when Li Bing had become Prefect of Shu by order of the King of Qin during the Waring States Period.8 Today, the Du Jiang Yan hydraulic project still plays an essential role in irrigation and flood prevention in Sichuan province and Chongqing city.

It was listed as a World Heritage Site in 2000.

Li Bing later came to be worshiped as a water god in the Sichuan area, where his nickname was ‘Dalang.’ Hu inferred that Ming Ying Wang was Li Bing because the nickname of the Ming Ying Wang was also ‘Dalang’. However, there is no direct evidence to support this conjecture, and Hu’s proposal has not been accepted by other scholars. There are lots of temples not only in Dujiangyan city, but in other areas of

Sichuan, which memorialize Li Bing and his second son, who is known as ‘Erlang’

(second son, 二郎). Their temples are known as the Two Kings Temple (二王庙) or

7 Liu Maoshi, Chongxiu Ming Ying Wang Miao Bei 重修明应王庙碑, 1283. Original in Chinese: 按 《寰宇记》, 自唐宋以来，目其神曰大郎 8 Sima Qian, Hequ Shu 河渠书. 7

Temple of the Masters of Shu (蜀主祠). However, since the Southern Song dynasty, Li

Bing’s second son became an important local immortal in the Sichuan area. There are two legends about the origin of Erlang worship, one of which attributes it to Zitong (梓

潼) and another to Guankou (灌口), part of modern Dujiangyan city in Sichuan province. According to Zhu Xi, the worship of Erlang was the most important local religious cult in the Sichuan area. Li Bing was also worshiped in Sichuan, but in the

Southern Song dynasty many monsters appeared in Sichuan, threatening the local people, and it was Li’s second son who came to earth and killed these monsters.9 Later, in both Yuan and Ming dynasties, opera and fiction reworked folk beliefs, and Erlang became a very powerful immortal who had three eyes and was known as the Erlang

Immortal (二郎神) throughout China. His story can be found in the Yuan dynasty drama,

The Treasure Louts Light (宝莲灯) and in Ming fiction, such as The Investiture of the

Gods (封神演义) and The Journey to the West.

Admittedly, there is some overlap between the Ming Ying Wang and the “Two

Kings of Shu” (Li Bing and his second son, Er Lang). First, Ming Ying Wang and Li

Bing were both gods of water. Second, Li Bing’s hometown was recorded as Hedong, approximately 150 kilometers away from the Ming Ying Wang temple in Hongtong.

Third, there are similarities between some tales of the exploits of the Ming Ying Wang in Hongtong and the Immortal Erlang, both of whom are said to have killed monsters and protected local people. These tales have circulated widely since the Jin and

Southern Song dynasties (12th–13th centuries). These similarities, however, are not

9 Zhu, Zhuzi Yulei, 朱子语类. 8

strong enough to prove that Ming Ying Wang was Li Bing. First, Li Bing was not as popular in Shanxi as he was in Sichuan, despite the fact that he was born in Hedong.

Second, there are some Erlang Temples in Shanxi province, but they only worship the immortal Erlang, not Erlang and his father together. Last but not least, the nickname itself is not strong evidence, because ‘Dalang’ is a very common nickname in China.

Thus, there has to be another explanation for the identity of Ming Ying Wang.

In ancient China, a similarity of names, especially nicknames, was a random and frequent occurrence. By contrast, employing a title was a very serious matter, and its improper use was viewed as a serious breach of ritual propriety that might result in punishment and even death. In the other words, an analysis of the title, ‘Ming Ying

Wang,’ should bring more precise information on the identity of the Water God than an analysis of his nickname.

What is the meaning of the title ‘King of Luminous Response’ (Ming Ying Wang)?

It denotes a celestial king immediately responsive to people’s requests for rain and demonstratively compassionate to the suffering of the people, who are experiencing either a shortage of water or prolonged conditions of drought. Parenthetically, the same title, ‘King of Luminous Response,’ was conferred in the eleventh century to a 22nd generation grandson of Chen Shi (陈寔), a founding ancestor of the ‘Yingchuan Chen

Lineage’ (颍川陈氏) who had achieved transcendence on Mount Blackstone (乌石山) in Fuzhou (福州), Fujian province in the eighth century and was worshipped in a temple on the plains below from the early ninth. A brief examination of this Fuzhou Ming Ying

Wang sheds some light on the politics of the divine transformation of historical figures.

9

The Chen family was one of the most influential families in Fujian province (福建

省) and ultimately in Taiwan province (台湾省) as well. Chen Yuanguang (陈元光), a late 7th/early 8th century Tang dynasty general who later became the first prefectural governor of Zhang prefecture (today’s Zhangzhou city, Fujian province 漳州), was worshipped as a god in both Fujian and Taiwan provinces. His godly title was sealed numerous times by different emperors from several dynasties since the Five Dynasties period. In the end, he came to be worshipped as the ‘Sage King Who Established

Zhangzhou’ or Kaizhang Sheng Wang in Chinese (开漳圣王). He is one of essential local gods for South Fujian people and their descendants who migrated to Fujian,

Taiwan, Canton and Southeast Asian countries. There is no biographical information about Chen Yuanguang in either the History of the Tang or the New History of the Tang.

His name and family background are recorded in The General Local History of Canton; from this, we know that Chen Yuanguang’s family originated in Jieyang, and he belonged to the Yingchuan Chen Lineage.10

In the case of the veneration of Ming Ying Wang in Fuzhou, there is no longer a temple on Mount Blackstone (Wushi), which is located in downtown Fuzhou city.

However, the Local Gazetteer of Mt. Wushi provides evidence of Chen Yuanguang’s transformation from the founding ancestor of the Chen family in the region of the ‘Eight

Min’ into a water god with the title King of Luminous Response (Table 3):

The (Ming Ying Wang) Temple was located on the west side of Mt. Wushi. According to the records of the stele inside the temple, the King’s surname is Chen. He was the 22nd generation grandson of Chen Shi (the first ancestor of the Yingchuan Chen family.) The Ming Ying Wang

10 Guo, Guangdong Tong Zhi. 广东通志. Original text in Chinese: 陈元光，揭阳人，先世家颍川 10

himself was a hermit and lived on Mt. Wushi. He became an immortal and appeared on Mt. Wushi after he died. The first temple was constructed in the Yuanhe period of the Tang (806- 820). People in this county would worship him when they met flood, drought or epidemic disease. In the Dazhong reign-period of the Tang (847-860), Luo Rang, the Surveillance Officer (Guancha shi, the highest local official from the central government in the late Tang period) prayed for rain in this temple and it immediately rained there. In the Xiantong reign-period of the Tang (860-874), Surveillance Official Li Bo shipped military materiel to Hubei and Hunan, and the Ming Ying Wang provided him with divine shelter. Later, the King of Min County, Wang Shenzhi (862-925), was the first to commend his divine achievement and granted him the titles of Ningyuan General and Duke of Wuning, and later enhanced his title to that of Xian Ying Wang (King of Immediate Response). In 932 (third year of Changxing of Five Dynasties period of the Tang), the local emperor changed his title to the King of Fu Yuan Chang Yun (Conquering Far Regions and Prosperous Destiny). Later in 934, his title was changed to the King of Zhen Yi Bao Cheng (Prospering Integrity and Preserving the Status Quo). In 944, his title was changed to the King of Zhen Gu An Ji (Keeping Firm and Peaceful Auspiciousness) again by the same local regime. Later, the state of Wuyue occupied the Fujian area, and the regime changed his title to King of Xuan Wei Gan Ying (Propagandizing Prestige and Immediate Response). In 1076 (the eighth year of Xining of the Northern Song dynasty), his title was finally changed to King of Ming Ying.11

The life story of this Ming Ying Wang in Fuzhou was recorded by citing the text of a stone carving inside the Ming Ying Wang Temple, which was written by Chen Tan (陈

郯). Chen Tan and his father were both key officials in the government of Min Kingdom in the Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms (Wu Dai) period. Chen Tan was also a member of the Yingchuan Chen lineage, who has clear historical record in the New Five

Dynasties History. Thus, his writing of the Ming Ying Wang’s life story directly proves that Ming Ying Wang in Fuzhou city was originally one of the ancestors of Yingchuan

Chen lineage in the Fujian area.

The control of water and rain was not a superpower possessed only by the Ming

11 Guo, Wushishan Zhi 乌石山志. Original text in Chinese: 庙在乌石山之西。王姓陈氏，按庙碑 云，汉太邱长寔二十二世孙也。旧隐是山，没而灵显。唐元和后始立庙。郡人凡水旱疾疫必祷 焉。大中时，观察使罗让祷雨立应。咸通中，观察使李播运饷湖湘，亦获阴佑。至闽王审知乃 表其事，封宁远将军，进武宁侯，增至显应王。五代唐长兴三年，改服远昌运王。后五年改振 义保成王。又十年改贞固安吉王。后地归吴越，封宣威感应王。宋熙宁八年改封今号. 11

Ying Wang in Fuzhou. As mentioned before, the most famous ancestor of the Yingchuan

Chen lineage in Fujian, the omnipotent god Chen Yuanguang, also had as one of his core powers the ability to control rain and help irrigation. In addition to holding the same title, the functions of these two kings were also very similar. It is clear from the life story recorded above that the titles of the water god in Fuzhou were always being changed according to the different political situation in the Fujian area, especially in times of strife. The title itself was closely connected with the political needs of the regime in control of the region. The Local Gazetteer of Mt. Wushi recorded the whole history of the Ming Ying Wang in Fuzhou city: at first, Ming Ying Wang was a just local immortal or ancestor of the Yingchuan Chen lineage in the Fuzhou area; then he became a water god because the Surveillance Officers of Tang dynasty observed that he always gave a quick response when people prayed for rain. Later, the frequently changing political regimes boosted his title to show the rulers’ authority and political ambitions.

Finally, in the Northern Song dynasty, his title was changed to King of Luminous

Response.

At the time when the immortal in Fuzhou was finally sealed as the King of

Luminous Response, both Shanxi and Fujian were ruled by the same newly established central government, the Northern Song Empire. To reduce the lingering influence of a previous dynasty, newly established dynasties would often confer new titles on gods.

For example, the second emperor of the Northern Song Dynasty, Taizong (Zhao

Guangyi 赵光义), redirected the water of the Fen (汾) River to destroy the royal Jinci

Memorial Temple in Taiyuan (Table 4), canonizing Shu Yu’s (叔虞) mother, Yi Jiang

12

(邑姜), as the main god of the temple, in an effort to reduce the sway of the Tang dynasty which had originated in Taiyuan.12

Clearly, the Kings of Luminous Response in Shanxi and Fujian shared the same divine functions. Did the water god temple in Hongtong undergo a similar process as that experienced by the Jinci temple in Taiyaun? That is, did the Northern Song government transform a temple memorializing a Tang Dynasty military leader, Marshal

Guo Ziyi (郭子仪), into a temple dedicated to an apolitical Water God? Did Guo Ziyi,

Tang hero and ancestor of the local Song and Yuan-dynasty Guos, become the Water

God?

The ‘King of Luminous Response’ as the Tang-dynasty Prime Marshal Guo Ziyi,

‘King of Fenyang’

Guo Ziyi (Table 5) was an important person who lived during the middle period of the Tang dynasty. He led a rather undistinguished life until the An Lushan-Shi Siming

Rebellion (安禄山-史思明) of 755 gave him the opportunity to organize Tang defenses.

He was granted the position of Military Commissioner of Shuofang (朔方) by the

Xuanzong (玄宗) of Tang at the age of 58. He led his local army to suppress rebellions in Hedong (河东) and points east. Two years later, in 757, Guo Ziyi became Assistant

Prime-Marshal of the Imperial Cavalry (天下都兵马副元帅), and later joined Li Yu

(李豫), Prime Marshal of the Imperial Cavalry (天下都兵马大元帅), King of

Guangping (广平王), and future emperor Daizong (代宗), to fight against the rebels.

12 Miller, The Divine Nature of Power, p. 55. 13

In October of 757, after Guo Ziyi captured Chang’an (长安), the Tang capital, for the second time, he immediately went on to recapture Luoyang (洛阳), the eastern capital of Tang, by the end of the year. Emperor Suzong (肃宗) of Tang praised Guo Ziyi for single-handedly ‘restoring the state.’13 However, in 758, he experienced his first defeat at Xiangzhou (相州), and a year later the emperor Suzong deprived him of his command, only to recommission him as ‘King of Fenyang’ in 762. In the winter of 763, Tibetans occupied the capital, Chang’an, but Guo Ziyi recaptured it again. When Daizong returned to Chang’an, he granted Guo Ziyi an ‘iron book’14 and asked a royal painter to paint his portrait, which he then ordered to be hung in the Lingyan Pavilion (凌烟

阁), built by the emperor Taizong in 643 to honor civil or military officials who had made significant contributions to the establishing the Tang state. Significantly, Guo

Ziyi’s portrait was the only one added to the Lingyan Pavilion after the reign of Taizong.

After 766, Guo Ziyi’s military career involved defending the ‘western territories’ from

Tibetan invasion. He died in 781 at the age of 85. After his death, the emperor Dezong

(德宗) granted him many ritual privileges. The level of his tomb was higher than other officials; it became affiliated with Suzong’s Jian Mausoleum (建陵); and his name plaque was placed in the Royal Ancestral Lineage Temple (太庙) of the Tang Dynasty.

The existing scholarly literature makes no connection between the ‘King of

Luminous Response’ in Hongtong and Guo Ziyi, the ‘King of Fenyang,’ nor between the Water God Temple of Guangsheng Monastery and a hypothetical Tang memorial

13 Ouyang, The New Tang History 新唐书, Volume 137. 14 The Iron Book (铁券) was a certificate of award for people who made an enormous contribution to the government. A description of their achievement would be written in vermilion ink in a book made of iron. 14

temple or altar to the Marshal Guo Ziyi. However, there are many connections between the time-honored Assistant Prime Marshal Guo Ziyi and the Guangsheng Monastery, the Water God Temple, and the people and administration of Hongtong and its prefecture, Huozhou (霍州).

In his book, Hongtong Guangsheng Si, Hu Shixiang has recorded several legends concerning the Water God of Hongtong county and its relationship to Buddhism. The site of the Guangsheng Upper Monastery was first established, ostensibly in the Tang, to store the Sarira of Asoka. As the legend goes, an old monk buried a treasure box on

Mt. Huo which could produce an endless stream of water that irrigated the fields below.

A monster residing on the southern peak of Huo Mountain (霍山) hoped to steal the treasure box, but the Water God knew of his evil plan and decided to fight in order to preserve the endless spring. The monster surrendered to the Water God after learning his name, and from then on, the water of Huo Springs ( 霍泉) flowed without obstruction or contestation. 15 Another legend recorded by Hu describes the Water

God’s defeat of a black dragon with the help of the local people. The black dragon had caused disasters for them, and demanded the sacrifice of a beautiful girl each year.16

These legends in turn should be linked to a Tang-dynasty stone inscription at the

Upper Guangsheng Monastery that records a petition from King of Fenyang, Guo Ziyi, dated to the fourth year of the Dali reign-period (769), requesting that the emperor construct a royal monastery on Mount Huo to house the relics of Asoka. In the petition,

Guo states that the idea for a Buddhist temple was first suggested to him by Li

15 Hu, Hongtong Guangshengsi 洪洞广胜寺, pp. 30-31. 16 Hu, Hongtong Guangshengsi 洪洞广胜寺, pp. 32-34. 15

Guangzan (李光瓒, a military officer under Guo Ziyi’s command), the ‘King of

Wuyuan.’ Li had reminded Guo of the existence of an old pagoda (塔) on Mount Huo, where Guo himself held a fief. Guo Ziyi recommended that the emperor build a new temple on the grounds of the old pagoda as a way to enhance the Tang state. He also suggested that the emperor name the new monastery ‘Guangsheng’ in fulfillment of a vow made by a local sexagenarian named Chen Xiantong (陈仙童). Finally, he requested that the emperor personally write the monastery’s name for the temple plaque.17 The emperor approved all of Guo’s requests, and later the emperor’s edict and calligraphy were preserved and sealed in a box.

A mural on the west wall of the hall of the ‘King of Luminous Response,’ in fact, records this moment. An official holding a box in both hands and riding a horse is followed by Guo Ziyi on a robust white horse. A beautiful ritual umbrella is held by an attendant above Guo’s head; according to the ritual protocol, this was standard practice for a person with the status of king. The ‘King of Fenyang’ is followed by two monks in red cassocks riding horses and by another white horse pulling a golden pavilion that houses a miniature jade stupa containing the relics of the Indian king, Asoka. Above the golden pavilion, the mural also depicts auspicious colorful clouds that support three standing buddhas, while a soldier holding the flag of the Great Tang rides a horse leading the train (see Fig. 2).

By establishing the Guangsheng Monastery, both Guo Ziyi and emperor Daizong intended not only to propagandize Buddhism, but to pacify the fractious emotions of

17 Guo, “Tang Dali Sinian Zhuangqing Zhi Siwen Bei 唐大历四年状请置寺文碑.” 16

local people and soldiers in the area east of the Yellow River (Hedong), which had been devastated by the An Lushan-Shi Siming rebellion and its aftermath. After Guo Ziyi had sent his petition to the emperor, he left his fief in Hezhong (河中) and went to

Binzhou (邠州) to fight rebels in the area west of the Yellow River (Hexi, 河西).18 He hoped that this royal monastery might contribute to the stability of Hezhong and

Hedong, as did Daizong. However, another rebellion occurred that very winter in

Taiyuan (太原), the northern capital and the birthplace of the Tang dynasty. In the absence of the ‘King of Fenyang,’ two generals – Wang Wuzong (王无纵) and Zhang

Fengzhang (张奉璋) – disrespected their new civilian leader, Wang Jin (王缙), and the latter was compelled to eliminate the two generals along with five others.19

For his entire life, Guo Ziyi had been struggling against rebellious generals and defending against foreign threats. In 762, seven years before Wang Jin finally established control over Shanxi, Guo Ziyi had been ennobled with the title ‘King of

Fenyang’. However, 762 was not a peaceful year for the Tang Empire; the Emperor

Xuanzong and the Emperor Suzong both passed away, while the An Lushan-Shi Siming

Rebellion had not been completely repressed. Additionally, foreign countries were exerting strong pressure on the Tang Empire, as the Uighurs (回纥) occupied the East

Capital of the Tang Empire.20 Worse still, new rebellions emerged, including one in

Jiangzhou (绛州), just south of the Guangsheng Monastery, that affected the entire

18 Sima Guang, Zizhi Tongjian 资治通鉴, Vol. 224, Tang Ji No. 40, "Daizong Ruiwen Xiaowu Huangdi Zhong Zhi Dali Sinian" 代宗睿文孝武皇帝中之大历四年. 19 Sima Guang, Zizhi Tongjian 资治通鉴, Vol. 224. 20 Sima Guang, Zizhi Tongjian 资治通鉴, Vol. 222, Tang Ji No. 38 唐纪三十八，Suzong Wenming Wude Dasheng Daxuan Xiaohuangdi Xia Zhi Baoying Yuannian 肃宗文明武德大圣大宣孝皇帝下 之下宝应元年 . 17

province of Shanxi. It was the need to suppress this rebellion that prompted the Emperor

Suzong to ennoble Guo Ziyi as ‘King of Fenyang.’ According to the Zizhi Tongjian,

Guo Ziyi’s outstanding prestige was still missed by rebellious soldiers and generals:

At the beginning, Li Guozhen rigorously administered the military. Generals and soldiers in Shuofang area felt sad. All of them were missing Guo Ziyi. Wang Yuanzhen used this chance to rebel against the government. Once Guo Ziyi’s army came, Wang Yuanzhen thought his rebellion could serve as a justification for Guo Ziyi to be the new leader of the whole country—the emperor. Guo Ziyi said, “Your army is facing the rebels (Shi’s military), but you killed the main general of Jiangzhou. If the rebels use this opportunity to start a war, Jiangzhou will not survive. I, as a Prime Minister—how could I advance my own private interests like a soldier?” On May 2nd (Gengchen), Guo Ziyi arrested Wang Yuanzhen and his forty accomplices. All of them were executed. When Xin Yunjing heard this news, he also interrogated dozens of people who were accomplices in the murder of Deng Jingshan. All of them were executed, too. After this, all counties in the Hedong area came under the control of Tang laws.21

Sima Guang records here how Guo Ziyi used his personal prestige to bring an end to the turmoil in the Hedong area; it reminds us of the legend of Ming Ying Wang in

Zhaocheng preventing the Monster of Southern Mountain from stealing the treasure box. For Chinese people in premodern times, military-political turmoil caused the instability of society and the instability of society directly affected people’s livelihood, the cultivation of crops. The Jiangzhou Rebellion, in fact, had been caused by the failure of the harvest in Hedong. Guo Ziyi first brought enough silk, crops and food products to calm the soldiers’ fractious emotions, and then used his good reputation in the army to easily bring an end to the rebellion.22 Afterwards, both Guo Ziyi and his soldiers

21 Sima Guang, Zizhi Tongjian 资治通鉴, Vol. 222, Tang Ji No. 38. Original text in Chinese: 初，李 国贞治军严，朔方将士不乐，皆思郭子仪，故王元振因之作乱。子仪至军，元振自以为功，子 仪曰：“汝临贼境，辄害主将，若贼乘其衅，无绛州矣。吾为宰相，岂受一卒之私邪！”五月， 庚辰，收元振及其同谋四十人，皆杀之。辛云京闻之，亦推按邓景山者数十人，诛之。由是河 东诸镇率皆奉法。 22 Sima Guang, Zizhi Tongjian 资治通鉴, Vol. 222. 18

could live peacefully in Hezhong and Hedong and Luzhou, because all of these areas became his fiefs. For local people of this area, it is likely that they viewed their great general as their guardian deity, inspiring countless legends.

According to the Yuan-period temple inscription, the Guo family still had two representatives, Guo Jingwen (郭景文) and Guo Yi (郭弈), among the ‘elder and prestigious people’ ( 老 而 德 者 ) who lent their support to, and witnessed, the reconstruction process of the Ming Ying Wang Hall in 1319.23 Of course, we cannot prove that Guo Jingwen and Guo Yi were Guo Ziyi’s descendants, but even today, the

Fenyang Guo family is still the most important Guo clan in all of China.

Sunzi’s famous dictum, ‘Subduing the enemy without fighting is the highest skill,’ written in his book The Art of War during the Warring States period, explains the relationship between politics and war in China. War is one way of solving problems, but the best way is to achieve political goals peacefully. On one hand, it is much less costly to the state or regime. On the other hand, people desire peace, especially during periods of turmoil. Although Sunzi’s words reflect a beautiful hope, subduing the enemy without fighting has not been a common outcome in China’s three-millennia history. What made Guo Ziyi so popular was his clever strategy for subduing the Uighur army without any weapons. Even when Guo Ziyi’s army was much weaker than the

Uighur army, he was very clear that he could use his personal prestige to win the Uighur leaders’ trust, overthrow the Tibetan-Uighur allied forces, then work with the Uighurs to defeat the Tibetan army. Guo Ziyi wore civilian clothes, without any weapons or

23 Cihaci, Chongxiu Ming Ying Wang Dian zhi Bei 重修明应王殿之碑. 19

armor, and went with a small retinue. His courageous behavior surprised the Uighurs but also threated them.24 They knew how much influence Marshal Guo had in the Tang

Empire; his personal bravery on this occasion successfully tricked the Uighurs into believing that he had so much military strength that he dared to come to the negotiating table completely unarmed. The Uighurs therefore submitted to Marshal Guo. “Pugu

Huai’en (the Tibaten khan) has deceived me,” said Yaogeluo (the Uighur leader). “Pugu

Huai’en told me that the Heavenly Qaghan (Tang Emperor Daizong) and you, Marshal

Guo, had both died, leaving China with no sovereign. Now that I have learned that the

Heavenly Qaghan is still in Chang’an, you are again in charge of Tang army, how can we fight you?” 25 This story was recorded in detail, both in history books and in paintings.

It is obvious that his personal prestige as a marshal was Guo Ziyi’s strongest political resource, one which enabled him to become a political stron man and made him a legend in his own time. Although everyone dies, Guo’s prestige and fame would not disappear with his physical body. His spirit was kept alive by his followers and later generations. His political achievements, which contributed to the stability of both the region and the nation, was memorialized and recreated as divine power. People memorialized Marshal Guo as a political strongman who returned peace to the people, and this memory became an emotional comfort in the tumultuous three centuries after the Tang collapsed.

On the southeast wall of the Ming Ying Wang Hall there is the world-famous mural

24 Wang, Tang China in Multi-Polar Asia, pp. 171-173. 25 Wang, Tang China in Multi-Polar Asia, p. 171. 20

depicting the vivid scene of a Yuan period opera performance (Fig.3). This scene was painted on the south wall, directly facing the sculpture of Ming Ying Wang. It seems that the mural of the opera performance was painted to entertain Ming Ying Wang. In this mural, the curtains that form the stage backdrop depict a hero fighting a black dragon. As mentioned before, one legend about Ming Ying Wang is that he fought and killed a black dragon, returning a continuous supply of water, and therefore a stable social environment, to the people.

Although many people believe that the stable social environment was due to the

Ming Ying Wang’s intervention, the social stability was a result of the political situation.

For the local community, the Ming Ying Wang may not have needed a realistic identity; he could have been the historical figure Guo Ziyi, who defeated the ‘evil’ powers and created social stability, or he could have represented a future person, a political strongman who could overthrow an ‘evil’ power in times of need and restore social stability. This positive hope is one essential function that folk religion serves for people who have no political power of their own but must depend on those in power to create the conditions for a better life for them. The black dragon has an alternative meaning which will be discussed in the later part of this paper.

How Did Guo Ziyi Become a Water God?

In China, there are several existing temples that memorialize and worship Guo Ziyi as the ‘first ancestor’ of the Fenyang Guo lineage. However, Guo Ziyi was never worshiped in these temples as a water god. Thus, why, or how did local people in

21

Hongtong come to worship him as Water God, and why or how did these same local people eventually come to forget who their Water God was?

Water gods in China have always been seen as deities who administer rain and control water. The Water God in Hongtong county was specifically in charge of the allocation of the water from Huo Springs to two different counties, Zhaocheng (赵城) and Hongtong, through two channels or canals. Present-day Hongtong county was only established in 1954 after the establishment of the People’s Republic. Even today, Huo

Springs is still the main source of water for the entirety of Hongtong county, and the local government protects this source with iron barriers and warning signs. The spring and canals provide water for everyday use, industrial production, and irrigation in the greater Hongtong area, though today the springs have lost the traditional political and social functions examined in this paper.

Before 1954, today’s Hongtong county was divided between Hongtong and

Zhaocheng counties, and Huo Springs was the most important natural resource for both.

The administrative system through which the water from the Huo Springs was allocated was called the ‘Two Canal System’ and had been maintained for approximately a millennium. It distributed water to Hongtong and Zhaocheng counties at a ratio of 3:7, respectively. This unequal allocation had long caused conflict between the inhabitants of these two counties. Although the ratio had been approved by the local and central governments, and even by the emperor, for centuries – the ratio had been carved in stone and enshrined in two pavilions – the risk of social instability always remained.

Importantly, however, ‘ancient precedents’ (guli 古例) gave the villagers of these two

22

counties the right to demand that government to support their local interests. 26 In general, peasants who lived in villages had no or very limited political power or judicial capacity, so it was the long-term political balance between state power and local interests that birthed the Two Canals System.

The authority and local prestige of the Water God worked to make people accept what was in fact an unfair, or at least disproportionate, allocation of water between the two counties. As mentioned above, for centuries, the water from the Huo Springs had been distributed between Hongtong and Zhaocheng counties at a ratio of 3:7, respectively. The ‘Northern Canal’ was the natural, but artificially-reinforced, riverbed of Huo Springs. It passed through the southern portion of Zhaocheng county and emptied into the Fen River.27 The Northern Canal also had two sub-canals, the Pure

Water Canal (清水渠) and Small Canal (小水渠), which were designed especially for irrigation. The ‘Southern Canal’ had been built with the help of local and central government officials in the Tang. It siphoned off some of the water from Huo Springs and directed it to Hongtong county for irrigation purposes only. In the Northern Song dynasty, the distribution of the water Huo Springs was divided between the Southern and Northern canals at a set ratio of 3:7.28 Such a ratio was in fact typical for southern

Shanxi in the Tang and Northern Song dynasties. Wang Jinyang provides another example from Shanxi: the distribution of the water of Nanlao Springs (难老泉) in

Jinyang county (modern Taiyuan city in Jinyuan district 晋源区太原市). Thirty percent

26 Wang, In the Wake of the Mongols, p. 169. 27 Li, Commentary on the Water Classic 水经注, Vol. 6. Original Text in Chinese: 汾水又南，霍水 入焉。水出霍太山,………,西南逕趙城南，西流注于汾水. 28 Wang, In the Wake of the Mongols, p. 188. 23

of the water from Nanlao Springs was used to irrigate rice in Jinci village, while 70% was used to irrigate other villages, from which it flowed into the Fen river. In the Song

Dynasty, this ratio was still considered ‘customary.’ When Mongols occupied Shanxi in the late thirteenth century, the Northern and Southern Canals became part of an officially managed system of both irrigation and worship. It was approved by Monke

Khan (蒙哥汗) and was typical of water management systems in Southern Shanxi.29

Two Canal Water Distribution System of Huo Spring (Wang, In the Wake of the Mongols, p. 189, Fig. 4.3)

Fortunately, we have similar legends that seek to explain how this ratio was arrived at, in both Huo Springs in Hongtong and Nanlao Springs in Taiyuan. According to legend, the governor sought to resolve once and for all the perennial conflicts over water,

29 Wang, In the Wake of the Mongols, p. 171. 24

and his chief advisor proposed a distribution method. The governor posted an official announcement informing people that he had devised a fair way to distribute water. He prepared a huge iron pot of boiling oil in front of the Springs, threw ten copper coins into it at noon, and asked both communities to send representatives to retrieve the copper coins from the boiling oil. The two communities remained silent, but about one hour later a single mother brought her disabled bachelor son from Zhaocheng county

(in the Huo Springs case) or Jinci village (in the Nanlao Springs case). He volunteered, diving into the boiling oil and retrieving seven of the coins. As a result, Zhaocheng county and Jinci village both received 70% of the water allocation, after which the brave hero died of his injuries.

In the case of Nanlao Springs, the local people built a stone tomb in the style of a

Buddhist pagoda next to the outlet of Nanlao Springs to honor his sacrifice, but also to legitimize the distribution of water (and to protect the corpse from polluting their spring). At Huo Springs, by contrast, the local people built a temple, the Hero Temple

(好汉庙), in the west wing of the Water God Temple to memorialize the young man’s bravery. According to the recording of the General History of Shanxi (山西通志), the local community built this temple to memorialize all those who died in the fight over water with their neighboring community in 1931.30

But why are the stories about the two springs so similar? On one hand, the water management policy of the Yuan dynasty explicitly sought to make use of local religion and highlighted the Huo Springs Canal System as a model for the whole province. On

30 Hu, Hongtong Guangshengsi 洪洞广胜寺, p. 21. 25

the other hand, local people used religious authority to protect the legitimacy of their water usage and the judicial status of their property. The sublime status of the local religion, the belief in the King of Luminous Response, guaranteed the impartiality of the canal system. No one in Hongtong county would have contested the ratio itself for fear that the Water God would cut off their supply. This is the case despite the fact that the relations between the residents of the two counties, Hongtong and Zhaocheng, remained tense and conflictual.

A local legend – depicted on the southwestern wall in the Hall of the King of

Luminous Response – underscored the authority of the Water God himself in order to justify the uneven distribution of water. According to this legend, the Water God had initially invited a black pig to Huo Springs to dig a canal for the local people. The King of Luminous Response gave the black pig one night to complete the task; if he could not finish before sunrise, the pig would not be able to return to Heaven. The black pig tried its best to dig the canal, but lost track of time. When the sun came up, it died, and the local people of Hongtong had to finish digging the canal.31 Thereafter, the people of Hongtong remained forever grateful to the King of Luminous Response and his black pig for their help in providing water, and thus they came to accept the unequal division of water between them and their neighbors in Zhaocheng county.

The mural on the southwestern wall of the Temple of the King of Luminous

Response depicts the beautiful river/canal dug by the black pig. The river/canal links

Heaven to Mount Huo and Huo Springs to the local population, providing a reliable

31 Hu, Hongtong Guangshengsi 洪洞广胜寺, pp.29-30. 26

source of water to irrigate their crops. Local civil and military officials, dressed in Song and Yuan clothing, are shown worshiping the King of Luminous Response in appreciation for the work of his black pig, who is presented in the painting along with two monsters (i.e. water demons whom he has defeated/ controlled) and a train of local officials. An elderly man, perhaps the King of Luminous Response himself, stands on a red bridge that crosses the canal, perhaps indicating the Pavilion of Water Allocation

(fenshui ting, 分水亭), while several celestial immortals hover above the bridge – an auspicious sign, and an auspicious painting (Fig. 4).

According to a historical notice in the Song-dynasty Fangyu jiyao, the two canals of Huo Springs were in fact constructed during the Zhenyuan period (贞元, 785-805) of the Tang dynasty, no doubt at the prompting of local officials (who are represented in the painting). Their aim, of course, was to satisfy the irrigation needs of both

Hongtong and Zhaocheng counties without impeding the flow of Huo Springs into the

Fen River (汾河).32 Guo Ziyi died in 781. Four years later, the local people began the construction of the Southern Canal, which took ten years to complete. However, the entire water conservancy project probably began when Guo Ziyi was still alive. Since the course of Huo Springs had been known for centuries – it was already remarked upon in the 6th-century Shuijingzhu – why was this project only undertaken in the eighth century? There can be no doubt, I think, that it was undertaken specifically to bring stability to war-torn Hedong and revive agricultural production there to support both

32 Gu, Dushi Fangyu Jiyao 读史方舆纪要, Vol. 41, No. 3 of Shanxi Province, Zhaocheng County, Original Text in Chinese: 霍渠………唐贞元中，引流分二渠，名曰北霍、南霍………兼溉洪洞 境内之田………下流注于汾水. 27

local officials and the local population. Moreover, after the war, many soldiers in Guo

Ziyi’s army were settled in the latter’s fief in the central and eastern area of Shanxi.

Another popular legend in Huoyi county (霍邑), downstream along the Hongtong canal, is also relevant to the legitimation and distribution of water for irrigation. The legend concerns the use of a part of the Huo Springs by the wealthy elite of Duzhuang village (杜庄) in Huoyi. In the Tang dynasty, according to the legend, emperor Taizong himself had granted to the ancestor of their village, Commander Du (杜大将军), the privilege of using the water from Huo Springs in Huoyi. According to a local history dated to 1273 (based on the oral account of villagers of Duzhuang), the Tang ancestor of the people of Duzhuang was identified as the rich villager, Du Shiwan (杜十万), who had donated a large amount of food and supplies to Li Shimin in support of the latter’s campaign against the tyrannical Sui Yangdi (隋炀帝, (581-618) in Shanxi.

When Li and his army, having received this support, were resting at the foot of Mt. Huo,

Li’s white horse began making strange loud noises while pacing around a particular piece of land. Li immediately used his sword to cut into the ground indicated by the horse. A stream of spring water gushed out, which Li named ‘Running-Horse Divine

Spring’ (Mapao Shenquan 马跑神泉/马刨神泉).33 After Li Shimin became emperor, he memorialized Du Shiwan for his life-saving assistance, granted him the title of

Commander (大将军), and offered him treasure as a reward. Du accepted the former but refused the latter. He asked Taizong to reward him by providing him with access to water, which was in short supply in Duzhuang. Taizong agreed and granted him the

33 The pronunciations of the words ‘running’ and ‘circling’ are very similar in Chinese, especially in the Jin dialect (晋语). 28

water of the Running-Horse Divine Spring as his personal fief, making it off-limits to others. Du, however, shared the water from his private spring with the other villagers of Duzhuang, and after he passed away, the spring itself became the private property of the Duzhuang villagers.34 Over time, the villagers of Duzhuang shared their portion of the water from Huo Springs with some of their neighboring villages that were suffering from the effects of drought, while other neighbors seemed to accept the principle that they didn’t have right to use the water that was inherited from the ancestor of the

Duzhuang villagers, and now enforced by a divine power.35

By the Jin dynasty, according to the temple inscription of 1283, decades of war in north China had forced the people of the two counties to abandon the Water God Temple.

At the end of the thirteenth century, the Abbot of the Guangsheng Monastery decided to reconstruct the temple, while moving it to another location, where it stands today.36

Since this time, the Water God Temple became part of the Guangsheng Monastery and was regarded as the ‘lower temple’ of the Guangsheng Monastery. Before the move and reconstruction, celebrated in 1283, the original Water God Temple had been lying in ruins for at least two centuries. But the abbot of the monastery understood the connection between the temple and Huo Springs, as did the Chair of the Canal

Committee (渠长) who supported the reconstruction process. 37 The Water God, however, was now tasked with the mundane administrative function of supervising the fairness of water allocation in front of his temple, which was now located at the

34 Wang, In the Wake of the Mongols, p.182. 35 Wang, In the Wake of the Mongols, p.183. 36 Liu, “Chongxiu Ming Ying Wang Miao Bei” 重修明应王庙碑. 37 Liu, “Chong Xiu Ming Ying Wang Miao Bei” 重修明应王庙碑. 29

distribution point of the two canals – the Pavilion of Water Distribution (Fig. 5).

In fact, the real situation of these two local communities, Zhaocheng and Hongtong was not as peaceful as the governor believed. Conflicts, lawsuits, and even physical altercations with weapons continued between the villagers in Zhaocheng and Hongtong counties, but interestingly, the focal point of these conflicts was not the fairness of the ratio itself, but rather how to ensure that they actually received the amount of water promised by the ratio. There is a stele in the Pavilion of Water Distribution, inscribed by order of a Shanxi provincial official in 1762, which records the words written in cinnabar ink by the former magistrate of Zhaocheng county, Jiang Chengjian (前赵城

县知县江承减丹书). The stele explained how the villagers in these two counties, as well as both the head of the civil administration of the Shanxi provincial government

(山西布政使) and the governor of Shanxi province (山西巡抚), had approved the new facility in order to guarantee that both communities received the amount of water due them.

In the Kaibao reign-period of the Song dynasty (开宝, 968-976), the incline of the

Southern Canal had become steeper, causing an increase in the water’s velocity and yield. By contract, the terrain of the Northern Canal remained flat, causing the water to slow and the yield to decline. Thus, the two communities were not receiving the quantity of water they had been promised, which gave rise to more conflict between these two counties. At the time (in the 10th c.), the administrator placed a ‘Restricting the Water Stone’ (限水石) at the entrance of the Southern Canal to slow down the flow.

And another stone pillar called the ‘Constraining the Water Stone’ (逼水石) was placed

30

along the western portion of the Southern Canal in order to prevent the water from flowing directly into the Northern Canal. However, in 1568 (the second year of

Longqing 隆庆), the two stones were damaged and the riverbeds changed, causing an unfair distribution of water once again, and conflicts between Zhaocheng and Hongtong counties resumed. Although the government surveyed these two canals and reset the two stones, the villagers in these two counties continued to sue and fight each other.38

In 1723 (the second year of Yongzheng), conflict between Hongtong and

Zhaozheng flared up once more. The magistrates of these two counties immediately reported to the provincial government, which launched a judicial investigation. The

Prefect of Jiangzhou, Wan Guoxuan (万国宣), was dismissed for illegal activities and corruption, and the provincial government announced a new waterworks, but this was not enough to pacify the inhabitants of the two counties. Conflict resumed that same year. A villager in Hongtong country toppled the ‘Restricting the Water Stone.’ One evening the magistrate of Zhaocheng, Jiang Chengjian, righted the stone, but the

Hongtong villager toppled it again. Then, the villagers in Zhaocheng took revenge by uprooting the ‘Constraining the Water Stone.’ At this point, according to Jiang

Chengjian, the magistrates of the two counties agreed that they did not have the authority to handle this situation and reported it to the higher-level authorities.39

The provincial government asked the Pingyang circuit (平阳路) to survey once again the geology of the canals and irrigation areas. They found many problems with the waterworks that prevented it from distributing the water fairly and decided to scrap

38 Jiang, “Jian Huoqu Fenshui Tiezha Ci” 建霍渠分水铁栅辞. 39 Jiang, “Jian Huoqu Fenshui Tiezha Ci” 建霍渠分水铁栅辞. 31

the entire system. Jiang Chengjian proposed a new type of distribution system to the provincial government, which was approved.40

The new canal system was called the ‘Dumen Water System’ (都门水制). The two canals were lengthened by several zhang (丈) to meet Huo Springs farther upstream, and Huo Springs itself was divided into ten equal sections marked by eleven iron pillars.

Water from pillars one through three flowed into the Southern Canal, and water from pillars four through ten flowed into the Northern Canal. A stone wall (a dam) was also built between the two canals at pillar four, allowing the water to distribute itself fairly at the ratio of 3:7.41 The Pavilion of Water Distribution was also moved to the position where it stands today, in front of the main gate of the temple of Ming Ying Wang. As the two communities pushed against each other, and both communities pushed against the government, the Water God stood above both communities and the local government as guarantor of a sacred ratio and judge of the fair distribution of a vital natural resource.

The Ming Ying Wang Hall of the Guangsheng Monastery (Fig. 6) was rebuilt in

1319, following the terrible earthquake of 1303, when the two-canal system became the model of water distribution in the Southern Shanxi province. The new ‘double hip-and- gable roof’ displayed the high status of both the god and his temple. In China, the status of a building is revealed by the type of its roof, and, since the Ming, by its color. In general, the status of palace buildings was expressed in the style of roof in the following descending order: double hip-roof (重檐庑殿顶), double gable-and-hip roof (重檐歇

40 Jiang, “Jian Huoqu Fenshui Tiezha Ci” 建霍渠分水铁栅辞. 41 Jiang, “Jian Huoqu Fenshui Tiezha Ci” 建霍渠分水铁栅辞. 32

山顶), double pyramidal roof (重檐四面攒尖顶), hip roof (庑殿顶), gable-and-hip roof (歇山顶), pyramidal roof (四面攒尖顶), overhanging-gable roof (悬山顶), and flush-gable roof (卷棚顶) (fig.7). The status of the temple for a local god, therefore, was even higher than that for the gods of the Hall of the Three Purities (三清殿) in the

Yongle Palace (永乐宫) in Ruicheng (芮城), Shanxi, which had only a hip roof to display its royal seal.

The Yongle Palace in Ruicheng is the only extant group of royal buildings that date to the Yuan dynasty. In the Yuan, Quanzhen Daoism (全真教) was the state religion.

The palace was built in Yongle County in southern Shanxi by Song Defang (宋德方), also known as Piyun Zhenren (披云真人), one of four disciples of Qiu Chuji (丘处机), the most important Chuanzhen Daoist in the early Yuan. The Yongle Palace was built originally in front of the legendary tomb of Lv Dongbin (吕洞宾), purported to be a famous Daoist priest in the Tang, who became one of the Eight Immortals (八仙) and was worshiped as the patriarch of Quanzhen Daoism.42 The real founding father(s) of the Quanzhen Daoism was Wang Chongyang (王重阳) and his seven disciples, known as the Seven Masters of Quanzhen (全真七子). Qiu Chuji, the ‘Changchun Master’(长

春子), was the most famous of these. According to the legend, Wang Chongyang discovered several volumes of heavenly books from two elder immortals. Later, Wang figured out that these two persons were Lv Dongbin and his own teacher, Zhong Liquan

(钟离权), a legendary Daoist priest from the Eastern Han dynasty who became an immortal and taught Lv Dongbing in the early 9th century. 43 Wang Chongyang

42 Chen, Changchun Daojiao Yuanliu Kao, 长春道教源流考.pp.2-3 43 Chen, Changchun Daojiao Yuanliu Kao, 长春道教源流考 pp.14-17. 33

worshipped Zhong Liquan and Lu Dongbing as his masters and established the

Teaching of Complete Purity. Later generations worshipped all three as their religious ancestors, and the three were invested with titles by the Yuan authorities.

Because Zhong Liquan was an immortal, he had no tomb. Lv Dongbing was also immortal, but a tomb was ascribed to him in the Song dynasty. Wang Chongyang, on the other hand, built his own tomb while he still alive (活死人墓) and practiced Daoism inside the tomb for seven years. After he passed away, his remains were placed in the tomb, which was revered by Quanzhen Daoists.44 Given this background, Song Defang supervised the whole building process for an ancestral monastery of Quanzhen Daoism at one of the sacred places, Lv’s tomb, by Yuan imperial order.45 The Yongle Palace was designed using hip roofs for the main gate and the Three Purities Hall, the hall for the highest Daoist God, Laozi (老子), a Chinese philosopher in the Spring and Autumn

Period (春秋时期) and the author of Daodejing (道德经), who is also known as known as Three Purities (三清). Chunyang Hall, the hall of Lv Dongbing, and Chongyang Hall, the hall of Wang Chongyang, were designed with a lower-status roof, the hip-and-gable roof (Fig. 8).

As the Ming Ying Wang Hall was not a royal building like the Yongle Palace, the local and provincial governments were its key promoters.46 Why was an official local temple permitted to employ the architectural features of higher status buildings? The only possible explanation is that the function of the Ming Ying Wang Hall was not only

44 Chen, Changchun Daojiao Yuanliu Kao, 长春道教源流考 p.21. 45 Shanxi luyou jingqu zhi bianweihui, Yongle Gong Zhi, 永乐宫志. P.16 46 Cihaci, “Chongxiu Ming Ying Wang Dian Zhi Bei 重修明应王殿之碑.” 34

religious, but political – it functioned like a government office, a local divine court that served to arbitrate social conflicts over the distribution of a natural resource. The physical evidence from the Water God Temple supports this interpretation. At water-god temples throughout China, name plaques and pillar scrolls adorn the main gate or door of a temple, and usually include auspicious and pious words. By contrast, the plaques and scrolls of the Water God Temple in Hongtong seem more suitable as a warning:

Horizontal Plaque (above the door): By Divine Authority

Pillar Scrolls, Right Side: The benevolent kindness of the Water God is manifest in the fragrant waterways for the people of two counties. The Water God is incomparably compassionate in administering the canals.

Pillar Scrolls, Left Side: The Water God answers people’s prayers to Heaven for rain. People must remember, and show gratitude to, the Water God’s merit by worshiping him for ten thousand years.47

The main gate announces the two divine functions of the Water God: first and foremost, administrating and supervising the fairness of the water allocation; second, responding to the people’s calls for rain.

Three naturalistic scenes occupy portions of the western and eastern walls of the

Hall of the King of Luminous Response. They seem to depict details from daily life in the Yuan dynasty. Chai and Zhu describe, quite accurately, these scenes as picturing persons playing golf, chess, and selling fish (Fig. 9). What, however, do they mean?

And why are all the figures wearing Tang-style clothing?

When I was doing fieldwork at the Lower Guangsheng Monastery, the local people told me that the reason these scenes are depicted together is to accord with homonyms

47 Anonymous, 1319. Original text in Chinese: 横额：神威镇压。楹联：上联：明德惟馨香两县人 民治水泽 下联：应天补雨露万年祀典报神功。 35

of auspiciousness. The words for chess (qi 棋), ball (qiu 球), and fish (yu 鱼) are homonymous with ‘qi qiu yu’ 祈求雨 (to beg for rain). But these three scenes are also relevant to the tales of King of Luminous Response. In the chess-playing scene, two attendants without mustaches wear official Tang-style clothing. This indicates that they are eunuchs, and since only kings employ eunuchs, one of the chess players must be

Ming Ying Wang himself. The deity may also be identified in the person playing golf

(chuiwan 捶丸), who is accompanied by another attendant keeping score. On the wall in the eastern hall, there is the depiction of another eunuch carrying a tray with a wine bottle amidst a crowd of officials, though it is hard to know what this scene means.

Why did the painter choose golf rather than polo, which was the most popular game in the Tang dynasty? Most of the figures, after all, are dressed in Tang-style clothing.

By the Yuan dynasty, however, Chinese golf had become a popular game, and is mentioned in the Yuan-dynasty Golf Classic:

At present, All Under Heaven hold peace in high regard, and the extremities of the empire are quiet. Generals are relaxed and in repose, their bows and arrows stored in bags. Soldiers amuse themselves as they go to and fro grazing their cows and horses. If they never practice shooting [golf] balls in their leisure time, how can they defeat the enemy when an emergency happens?48

It is evident that golf was a game played by soldiers during peacetime to maintain their military skills and readiness. We might infer that the golf-playing scene expresses the

‘peace’ brought to Hedong both by the King of Luminous Response (after defeating the black dragon) and by Guo Ziyi (after defeating the rebels) in the eighth and ninth

48 Anonymous, Wan Jing 丸经, Vol.1. Original text in Chinese: 方今天下隆平，边陲宁谧，将帅宴 安于橐弓服矢之际，士卒嬉游于放牛归马之馀，苟非弹石习闲，何以临机而制敌也？ 36

centuries, but it also indicates the ever-readiness of both to engage the enemy in battle.

How the to explain the two other scenes? A clue may perhaps be found from the story of ‘Liuquan Presents a Pumpkin’ and its relation to the Journey to the West. In the latter, chapters nine, ten, eleven and twelve record the Tang legend of a black dragon suppressed by the King of Luminous Response. This tale, in turn, is linked to another in which Taizong’s prime minister Wei Zheng (魏征) has a dream in which he kills the

Dragon King of the Jing River (泾河). The tale goes thus:

There was an old fisherman who lived during the Zhenguan reign-period of the

Tang dynasty. Each day he would offer a golden fish to a well-known diviner named

Yuan Shoucheng (袁守诚), the uncle of Yuan Tiangang (袁天罡), in exchange for advice as to the best place to fish in the Jing River the following day. Overfishing, however, ultimately reduced the fish population of the Jing River, angering the Dragon

King. The latter sought out the diviner Yuan in Chang’an and hoped to get rid of him by proving him to be a liar. Thus, they made a bet about the coming rain. Yuan, the diviner, predicted the exact quantity of the coming rains: the Jade Emperor, according to Yuan, would ask the Dragon King of Jing River to drop 30% of the rain on the city and 70% on the rural area. When the Dragon King returned to his palace, an edict arrived, ordering the 3:7 ratio of rainfall just as the diviner had anticipated. Upset, the

Dragon King reversed the proportions and dropped 30% on the fields and 70% on the city. As a consequence, the rivers ran dry while the city was flooded. The Jade Emperor, angry at the contravention of his edict, intended to kill the Dragon King. Fearing for his life, the Dragon King sought out the diviner again and begged him for help. The diviner

37

told the Dragon King that Wei Zheng, Taizong’s Prime Minister, was the Dragon King’s celestial executioner and that he would need Taizong to intervene on his behalf. The

Dragon King sought out Taizong and begged for his life. Taizong responded by inviting his prime minister to play a game of weiqi (J. gō, 围棋) as a means of delaying the Jade

Emperor’s execution order. However, the prime minister fell asleep while playing chess and killed the Dragon King in a dream. He further dreamt that the Dragon King became a ghost and complained to Taizong about the failure to delay his execution, causing the emperor to experience bad dreams every night. Taizong then asked two of his generals,

Qin Qiong (秦琼) and Yuchi Gong (尉迟恭), to stand guard while he slept, to protect him from the ghost of the Dragon King. The two generals, however, became so tired guarding Taizong that the sympathetic emperor asked the famous painter, Yan Liben

(阎立本) to draw their figures, which he then pasted on the door, thus preventing the ghost of the Dragon King from disturbing his sleep. Afterwards, Taizong died and was returned to life by the King of Hell. There then follows the story of “Liuquan Presents a Pumpkin.’ In the end, Taizong decided to employ a monk to make a pilgrimage to the

West in search of Buddhist scriptures. The story of Journey to the West begins here.

It is hard to say whether this story is alluded to on the temple murals. Nonetheless, both the story and the murals arrive at the same conclusion: no one can change the amount of rain or the allocation of water once it has been decreed by Heaven, and if anyone does – even an emperor or prime-minister – he will be punished by divine decree. In the other word, divine power is justice.

How Did the King of Luminous Response become the God of Mt. Huo?

38

The first reconstruction of the Water God Temple by the Yuan lasted for only fifty years.

On September 17, 1303, between 7:00 and 9:00 pm, a serious earthquake centered on

Mount Huo rocked north China, killing thousands of people, destroying countless houses, and causing the collapse of the Water God Temple and the two canals.49 The

Pingyang circuit government initiated a dredging of the canals soon after the earthquake in 1303,50 but reconstruction of the Water God Temple began only after the canals were finished. In the autumn of 1305, the circuit intendant Wanshengdu (万僧都) asked the magistrate of Zhaocheng, Cihaci (刺哈刺), and the chief of canals, Shi Gui (史珪), to present incense at the Dou Dafu Memorial Temple in Taiyuan, the provincial capital.

This visit proved decisive in the decision of the two officials to rebuild the Ming Ying

Wang Hall. The temple was completed in 1319.51 Portions of the murals had survived the earthquake, and so we can assume that the restoration preserved the themes of the old murals, though, as we shall see, the artists may have added or deleted certain scenes.

Since at least the Shang dynasty, mountains and rivers had been recognized as the most important natural powers that connected Heaven and Earth. Rain clouds accumulated around mountain tops and sent streams of water down the mountain, nourishing the flora and fauna on its slopes and the cultivated fields below, and the spirits of the mountain were responsive to sincere requests for rain. The spirit of Mount

Huo (Huoshen 霍神) had been venerated centuries, and as recently as the earthquake at the beginning in the fourteenth century.52 Why then did the people, along their

49 Wang, In the Wake of the Mongols, p.166 50 Cihaci, “Chongxiu Ming Ying Wang Dian Zhi Bei 重修明应王殿之碑.” 51 Cihaci, “Chongxiu Ming Ying Wang Dian Zhi Bei 重修明应王殿之碑.”. 52 Jing, The Water God’s Temple of the Guangsheng Monastery, p .80 39

religious leaders, distinguish the spirit of the mountain from the spirit of water, and why, after the earthquake, did they then take the Water God, the King of Luminous Response, as the Mountain God? I would like to suggest that Temur (帖木儿), the Mongolian leader of Shanxi province, played a key role in this process.

Less than two months after the earthquake in 1303, Temur had sent special envoys to lead the local government of Zhaocheng in a triple veneration of Mt. Huo. 53

Unfortunately, the ritual sacrifice to the spirit of the Mt. Huo did not prevent further aftershocks, and Temur ordered his scholars to provide an explanation. Chen Tianxiang

(陈天祥), a Grand Academician of the Academy of Scholarly Worthies, explained that yin (阴) and yang (阳) were at odds, and that heaven (天) and earth (地) were out of joint, a cosmic situation that resulted from a failure in human affairs.54 The academic answer did not limit Temur to self-reflection. Three months after the earthquake, he initiated the reconstruction of the Hall of the King of Luminous Response as well as of the canals of Huo Springs.55 However, the reconstruction of the canals was much swifter than that of the temple. As discussed before, the double gable-and-hip roof, the five-bay weight, the one-bay weight corridor and high platform all suggest that the undertaking far exceeded the capabilities of the two communities. While not an imperial building, it was still essentially an official building. An inscription on the south wall of the Hall indicates that responsibility for the murals was shared between the staff of the two canal committees, and that the monks from the Guangsheng Monastery, one Daoist

53 Jing, The Water God’s Temple of the Guangsheng Monastery, p. 25. 54 Song, The History of Yuan Dynasty. Translated by Anning Jing in The Water God’s Temple of the Guangsheng Monastery, p.25. 55 Cihaci, Chongxiu Ming Ying Wang Dian Zhi Bei 重修明应王殿之碑, 1319. 40

priest, and the two local communities all donated money to rebuild this temple.56

Temur had asked the local governments to perform three times a sacrifice to the spirit of the Mount Huo, which indicates that, like the people, he understood the water god, Ming Ying Wang, to be the spirit of Mount Huo (rather than a Daoist immortal or

Buddha). In the Yuan dynasty, such cooperation between local communities and the government was common. On one hand, Temur understood well that the restoration of the Water God temple was essential to the security and well-being of the two local agricultural communities. On the other, he also understood how essential the water gods were to Chinese residents of the new province.

According to an officially-carved stone inscription in the Dou Dafu Memorial

Temple (窦大夫祠), now in the Wanbailin District (万柏林区) of modern Taiyuan city,

Temur’s daughter’s husband, Yu Jining (于冀宁), visited the temple in Taiyuan on multiple occasions from 1345 through 1348, and participated in official rituals – rain and river sacrifices – to the spirit of the Fen River.57 The Dou Dafu Memorial Temple was the water god temple in the capital of Shanxi province. The existing building complex is dated to the Yuan dynasty. The water god of this temple was named Dou

Chou (窦犨), a sage official in the State of Jin (晋国) during the Spring and Autumn period. According to the Local History of Zezhou (泽州府志) and the Shi Ji, as

Confucius was traveling west to meet with Zhao Jianzi (赵简子), the leader of Zhao lineage family who dominated the State of Jin, he received news that Dou Chou had been killed by Zhao Jianzi south the Yellow River. Thinking that Zhao Jianzi had not

56 Jing, The Water God’s Temple of the Guangsheng Monastery, p. 16 57 Zhang, “Jining Jianjun Zhaolie Gong Daoyu Ganying Song 冀宁监郡朝烈公祷雨感应颂.” 41

thereby shown himself to be a sage leader, Confucius turned around and went home.58

Over the long term, Dou Chou was honored in the southern Shanxi area as a sage ancestor and wise official in the local community, but when he appears as an officially worshiped god in Shanxi in the Yuan dynasty, he has become the water god of the capital of the newly established administrative unit, the ‘province of Shanxi.’59 Under Temur,

Dou Chou, sage official of the ancient state of Jin, became the Water God – the spirit of the Fen River, the Cold Springs (寒泉) and Mount Erlong (二龙山) – worshipped by the provincial government.60 In the Yuan period, the provincial government thought the ‘dragon hand’ of the Fen River was located at the Dou Dafu Memorial Temple in

Shanglan Village (上兰村). The Yuan dynasty implemented a provincial administration system for the first time. Taiyuan was the political center and the capital of the newly established Shanxi province. Identifying Dou Dafu Memorial Temple as the origin of

Fen River was thus not the result of scientific inquiry, but of political design. For this reason, the Mongol government called Han Springs the “Dragon Head of Fen River” rather than the “origin” of the Fen River. Official worship by the provincial government at the Dou Dafu temple continued through the Yuan and Ming dynasties. We are reminded then that when the intendant, magistrate and canal supervisors went to present incense in Taiyuan, they were doing so at the Dou Dafu Memorial Temple -- a fact that was recorded by a Ming scholar, Yu Qian, and then carved on another stone inscription at the Dou Dafu Memorial Temple.61

58 Shi Shiyu, “From a Virtuous Person to a Water Deity." 59 Shi Shiyu, "From a Virtuous Person to a Water Deity." 60 Shi Shiyu, "From a Virtuous Person to a Water Deity." 61 Yu, “Lieshi Ci Daoyu Ganying Bei 烈石祠祷雨感应碑. 42

It is still difficult to say definitively that Cihaci and Shi Gui traveled to Taiyuan to participate in a ritual at the Dou Dafu Memorial Temple, because the earliest extant stone inscription inside the Dou Dafu Memorial Temple was carved three decades after that trip. Nonetheless, the reconstructed temple and canal system in Yuan-dynasty

Shanxi demonstrates Temur’s appreciation for the King of Luminous Response and his recognition of the importance of the water god’s historical role in local society. The new religious system linking the water god, the canal system, and political authority in

Shanxi province offered a new model of cooperation in which the state government assumed the responsibility for managing and distributing natural resources (rivers and mountains) and administering the citizens of the province in order to both ensure the economic well-being of the people and to enhance the authority of the Mongol throne in a resource-limited province in North China.

The reconstruction of the Hall of the King of Luminous Response, moreover, was not an isolated event. Despite literati opinion, cooperation between the government and the local community (reconstructing the temple and waterworks) counted very much as a ‘human affair’ that sought to re-balance yin and yang, heaven and earth, and, as a result, the water god of the reconstructed Ming Ying Hall assumed new powers as an extension or even expression of the divine authority of the god of Mount Huo.

The murals themselves reflect this sought-after balance between yin and yang, earth and heaven: they depict the King’s harem on the north wall, behind the effigy of the king himself. More generally, the murals are separated into two parts, a western part

(Fig.10) and an eastern part (Fig.11), that are aligned to either side of the throne of the

43

King of Luminous Response, who stands in the north facing south, perhaps reflecting the fact that the women’s court was always called the ‘eastern and western palaces’ (东

西宫). In the western palace depicted on the western wall, one female attendant is wearing simple green attire, holding a zither and standing in the rear, while a eunuch and another female attendant are helping four concubines prepare the wine and fruit for the king. In the eastern palace depicted on the eastern wall, five concubines are busy preparing snacks and tea for their lord, while two female attendants are boiling water, a eunuch is holding a colorful feathered fan, another female attendant is holding a plate with snacks, and still another concubine is holding a matching bowl on a red stand as she waits to serve her lord. Her expression is sad, but no one but herself knows why.

Finally, the remaining female figure on the eastern wall may be the king’s wife.

Traditionally, the queen lived in the central palace (中宫), the heart of the imperial palace. The reason she is painted on the eastern wall may be that she has not yet married the king; perhaps she is still a concubine, combing her hair and applying cosmetics as she awaits an auspicious time for her wedding ceremony.

These are scenes from a Chinese king’s daily life, and embody the hopes of the people that their imperial god, who represents Heaven, is enjoying the blandishments of a host of nubile women, who represent earth, the land, and the local community.

Since the Song period, moreover, imperial concubines and wives had been chosen from among commoners. Although not every man could satisfy so many women, the King of Luminous Response, a hero and a generalissimo, would have been strong enough to satisfy them all. In other words, the pure yang from this divine king would be able to

44

control and balance the excess of yin which had been responsible for the earthquake and its aftershocks.

As I mentioned above, Quanzhen Daoism became popular in Yuan-period Shanxi and may have influenced the understanding of the frescos. Unlike other branches of

Daoism (i.e. Celestial Master Daoism in the south), abstinence became an important value in Shanxi. From a Daoist point of view, the ladies depicted in the paintings were not concubines or wives of Ming Ying Wang, because, as an immortal, he didn’t need such companions. Those ladies, like the black dragon, were instead personifications of the excessive yin of Mount Huo. They were subdued by the personification of the power of pure yang embodied in the King of Luminous Response, and in his followers or students, who were devoted to abstinence and immortality themselves. Thus, in general, these people depended on the King of Luminous Response to subdue the extra yin power which had caused the earthquake and destroyed the water works. He was indeed a king of ‘luminous response.’

Conclusion

Can a god without a specific identity really have supreme power? The answer may be no. But, where does a god’s supreme power come from? His power was sealed by political authority. How could political authority seal a god’s power for him?

Because people trust the god more than the political authority. As a result, the people grant omnipotent power to the god.

This paper has tried to answer the question: who was the King of Luminous

45

Response? My hypothesis has been that he can be identified with Guo Ziyi, the

Associated Great Marshal of the Tang Empire and ‘King of Fenyang.’ He was the ancestor of the ‘Fenyang Guo’ lineage and a heroic leader with exalted status and prestige in his fief, in Fenyang county, and among the soldiers in his army. The fame and prestige of this “local boy” gave ordinary people a feeling of local pride and the sense that his spirit was still alive even after his mortal form had passed away.

Unfortunately, his identity became obscured, and ultimately became less valuable to local residents than the power embodied in his official ‘sealed’ title, ‘King of

Luminous Response.’ Pride in the spirit of a native son was not as important as the provision of the real resource, water, on which their livelihood depended. Devotion to the ‘King of Luminous Response’ came with real benefits – economic, political and judicial – as his title promised. Devotion to the ‘King of Luminous Response’ also guaranteed their rights to the water to irrigate their lands, and increased their ability to demand that state power be used to protect those rights. Moreover, devotion to a ‘King of Luminous Response’ also led commoners to expect a ‘luminous response’ to specific problems that arose from time to time, and gave them leverage over the political authorities with which to address issues of the water management system. At one and the same time, the political authorities might also derive benefit from the positive

‘practical responses’ of the King. Engaging the ‘prestige’ of the king by granting new honors and titles was always the easiest way for the political authorities to handle rivalries and disputes between two communities. A respectful and deferential attitude to the King was the most effective way to control the villagers, maintain social stability,

46

and protect the throne and the official hierarchy. State reliance on the divine power of the ‘King of Luminous Response,’ finally, guaranteed the fairness of the distribution of resources while benefiting the greatest number of people. The King of Luminous

Response, therefore, benefited both local communities and the political authorities, and the appeal to, and celebration of, a higher divine authority allowed for a balance of power in which both commoners and officials enjoyed ‘satisfaction’ (in the sense that increasing trust resulted in grants of titles and more power). In the end, when the terrible earthquake occurred in 1303, both sides immediately sought a ‘luminous response’ from him, and, in the end, he became an omnipotent divine power whose religious status was accurately reflected in his title. But again, as the villagers and provincial officials came together around the title and expectations of their divine arbiter, they also forgot the earlier identity of the water god as a local hero.

This is an unusual case. In pre-modern China, a local spirit or divinity (e.g. a local earth god, city god, or water god) is usually identified with an historical person who has a specific name and well-documented story. If there is a titular office, human or divine, there must be an individual who fills this role. So, what made the King of

Luminous Response so different? Perhaps it was because both the local communities and political authorities came together over the titular powers of the King of Luminous

Response, who proved more “objective” than the local hero, and more capable and authoritative in satisfying the benefits for two local communities and the provincial government.

Inside the Hall, the vivid murals may be separated into three parts, but all of them

47

tell divine stories of the King of Luminous Response. However, each mural also has its mundane meanings, and while the Ming Ying Wang Hall is a religious building, the functions of his temple are completely secular. This means that devotion to the King of

Luminous Response does not represent ‘folk religion.’ The temple functions as a political institution that balances the interests of two local communities and the political authorities, and as a judicial institution—a court—that addresses and adjudicates the conflicting interests of the villagers of Hongtong and Zhaocheng counties. It appears to be a special governmental organization that played an essential role in limited resource management in the Yuan period, at least as concerns water management in Shanxi.

In premodern China, there were no unbridgeable barriers between political authority, administration, social justice, and religion. Religion was the most flexible part of the political tradition. A god could be created or updated to meet society’s needs.

Religion could be a tool for the powerless to gain political power, and could also be part of the administrative system. At the same time, however, despite the omnipotence of the gods, religion was the most fragile part of China’s pre-modern political tradition.

Only when political authorities and powerless residents both derived benefits from a specific religious cult could religion attain its own supremacy vis-a-vis other forms of power, achieving a balance between the rulers and the ruled, between domination and submission. Religion itself could not safeguard the justice or fairness of a political or social system. It was only a symbol of procedural justice. Laws could be broken, and new laws put in place. An administrative system could be abolished, and a new one created. However, without a religious frame for procedural justice, without a supreme

48

divine authority, people would not accept administrative decisions as fair or just.

References

Anonymous 佚名. Wan Jing 丸经. Vol. 1. Yuan Dynasty 元. Zhongguo Zhexueshu

Dianzihua Jihua 中国哲学电子化计划, National Library of China.

https://ctext.org/wiki.pl?if=gb&res=173629&remap=gb.

Chai, Zejun 柴泽俊, and Xiyuan Zhu 朱希元. “Guangsheng Si Bihua Chutan 广胜寺

水神庙壁画初探.” Wenwu 文物, No. 5 (1981): 86–91.

Chen, Minggui 陈铭珪. Changchun Daojiao Yuanliu Kao 长春道教源流考. Vol. 1.

Taipei: Guangwen Shuju 广文书局, 1989.

Cihaci 刺哈刺. “Chongxiu Ming Ying Wang Dian Zhi Bei 重修明应王殿之碑,” 1319.

Transcribed by Hu Shixiang, see entry for Hu Shixiang.

Gu, Zuyu 顾祖禹. Dushi Fangyu Jiyao 读史方舆纪要, 1692. 130 vols. Beijing:

Zhonghua Shuju edition, 中华书局, 2005.

Guo, Bocang 郭柏苍. Wushi Shanzhi 乌石山志, 1842. Fuzhoushi Difangzhi Bianzuan

Weiyuanhui 福州市地方志编纂委员会, 10 Vols. Fuzhou: Haifeng Chubanshe

海风出版社, 2001.

Guo, Pei 郭裴. Guang Dong Tong Zhi 广东通志, Ming Dynasty 明. Ji, Yun 纪昀.

Qinding Siku Quanshu 钦定四库全书, Vol 47, 1782. Shanghai: Shangwu Yinshu

Guan edition, 商务印书馆, 1922.

Guo, Ziyi 郭子仪. “Tang Dali Sinian Zhuang Qinzhi Siwen Bei 唐大历四年状请置

寺文碑,” 769. Transcribed by Hu Shixiang, see entry for Hu Shixiang.

Hu, Shixiang 扈石祥. Hongtong Guangsheng Si 洪洞广胜寺. Beijing: Minzu

49

University of China Press, 1988.

Isobe, Akira. “Kosho Ji Myoo o Ten No Gendai Gikyoku Hekiga No Gadai Ni Tsuite.”

Tohogaku 79 (1990): 143–48.

Jiang, Chengjian 江承减. “Jian Huoqu Fenshui Tiezha Ci 建霍渠分水铁栅辞,” 1762.

Transcribed by Hu Shixiang, see entry for Hu Shixiang.

Jing, Anning. The Water God’s Temple of the Guangsheng Monastery: Cosmic

Function of Art, Ritual and Theater. Sinica Leidensia, v. 53. Leiden: Brill, 2002.

Li, Daoyuan 郦道元. Notes of The Text of Water 水经注, Vol. 6. Northern Wei

Dynasty 北魏. Ming Dynasty Handwritten Photocopy for The Song Dynasty

Edition 影宋明钞版, Photocopy of Ming Handwritten Edition Shui Jing Zhu,

Vol.2, 6 Vols., Beijing: Guojia Tushuguan Chubanshe 国家图书馆出版社, 2018.

Li, Jingde 黎靖德. Zhuzi Yulei 朱子语类, Vol. 2, 1270. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju

edition 中华书局, 1986.

Liang, Sicheng 梁思成. A Pictorial History of Chinese Architecture, Beijing: Baihua

Wenyi Press 百花文艺出版社, 2001.

Liu, Maoshi 刘茂实. “Chongxiu Ming Ying Wang Miao Bei 重修明应王庙碑”, 1153.

Manuscript by Hu Shixiang, see Hu Shixiang.

Liu, Nianzi 刘念兹. “Yuan Zaju Yanchu Xingshi De Jidian Chubu Kanfa 元杂剧演

出形式的初步看法.” Xiqu Yanjiu 戏曲研究 2 (1957): 66–85.

Ma, Yimin 马毅敏. The Guangsheng Temple of China 中国广胜寺, Beijing: Xinhua

Press 新华出版社, 2008.

Miller, Tracy. The Divine Nature of Power : Chinese Ritual Architecture at the Sacred

50

Site of Jinci. Harvard-Yenching Institute Monograph Series no. 62. Cambridge,

Mass.: Harvard University Asia Center for the Harvard-Yenching Institute:

Distributed by Harvard University Press, 2007.

Ouyang, Xiu 欧阳修. “Xin Tang Shu 新唐书” Vol.137, 225 vols., 1060. Beijing:

Zhonghua Shuju 中华书局, 1975.

Shanxi Lvyou Jingqu Zhi Bianweihui 山西旅游景区志编委会. Yongle Gong Zhi 永

乐宫志. Taiyuan: Shanxi Renmin Chubanshe 山西人民出版社, 2006.

Shiyu, Zhao 赵世瑜. “从贤人到水神：晋南与太原的区域演变与长程历史——兼

论山西历史的两个‘历史性时刻’ (From a Virtuous Person to a Water Deity: The

Regional Evolution and the Long-Duree History of Southern Shanxi and Taiyuan”).

Shehui Kexue 社会科学, no. 2 (2011): 162–171.

Sima, Guang 司马光. Zizhi Tongjian 资治通鉴, Vol. 222, Tang Ji No.38 唐纪三十八,

Suzong Wenming Wude Dasheng Daxuan Xiao Huangdi Xia Zhi Baoying Yuannian

肃宗文明武德大圣大宣孝皇帝下之下宝应元, 1071. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju

edition, 中华书局, 2011.

Sima, Guang 司马光. Zizhi Tongjian 资治通鉴, Vol. 224, Tang Ji No.40 唐纪四十,

Daizong Ruiwen Xiaowu Huangdi Zhong Zhi Dali Sinian 代宗睿文孝武皇帝中

之大历四年, 1071. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju 中华书局, 2011.

Sima, Qian 司马迁. "Hequ Shu" 河渠书. Shiji 史记, Vol. 29, 91 B.C. Taipei: Jinchuan

Chubanshe edition, 金川出版社, 1982.

Song, Lian 宋濂. The History of Yuan Dynasty 元史, n.d. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju

中华书局, 1976.

51

Wang, Jinping. In the Wake of the Mongols: The Making of a New Social Order in

North China, 1200-1600. Harvard University Asia Center for the Harvard-

Yenching Institute : Distributed by Harvard University Press, 2018.

Wang, Zhenping. Tang China in Multi-Polar Asia: A History of Diplomacy and War.

The World of East Asia Series. Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press, 2013.

Yu, Qian 于谦. “Lieshici Daoyu Ganying Bei 烈石祠祷雨感应碑,” 1434. Transcribed

by author from stele located in Dou Dafu Ci 窦 大 夫祠 , 733 Xinlan Road,

Jiancaoping District, Taiyuan, Shanxi, China 中国山西省太原市尖草坪区新兰

路 733 号.

Zhang, Xiuben 张修本. “Jining Jianjun Zhaolie Gong Daoyu Ganying Song 冀宁监

郡朝烈公祷雨感应颂,” 1348. Transcribed by author from stele located in Dou

Dafu Ci 窦大夫祠, 733 Xinlan Road, Jiancaoping District, Taiyuan, Shanxi, China

中国山西省太原市尖草坪区新兰路 733 号.

52

Appendix I: Tables

Table 1 Chronology of the Development of Guangsheng Monastery, the Water God Temple and the Canal System

Date Event 769 Guo Ziyi Emperor to build, in his fief, an imperial monastery to hold the Saria of Asoka, and to name it Guangsheng Monastery 785-805 Canals for Huo Springs first constructed 1213-1217 Water God Temple collapses during warfare 1283 First reconstruction 1270s-1290s Two-Canal System becomes standard across southern Shanxi Province; Two- stones water distribution method introduced. 9/17/1303 Water God Temple and Canals collapse in earthquake 1303 Canals reconstructed 1303 Temur asks local Zhaocheng Government to triple worship Mt. Huo 1303 Temur asks the Grand Academy to explain the cause of the earthquake 1305 Zhaocheng Magistrate, Cihaci, and Chief of Canals, Shigui, burn incense in Taiyuan 1319 Reconstruction of Water God Temple 1568 Two Stones damaged, causing inaccurate water distribution 1760 Two counties fight over water rights 1762 Water Distribution Pavilion rebuilt; Dumen water distribution system applied 1931 Hero Temple Constructed

Table 2 Chronological Order of Chinese Dynasties from Sui until Qing

Sui (Union) 590-618 Tang (Union) 618-907 Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms (Turmoil) 907-979 Five Dynasties (Northern China) 907-960 Later Liang 907-923 Later Tang 923-936 Later Jin 936-947 Later Han 947-950 Later Zhou 951-960 Ten Kingdoms (Southern China) 891-979 Southern Wu 919-937 Southern Tang 937-975 Wuyue 907-978 Southern Chu 927-951 Min 909-945

53

Southern Han 917-971 Former Shu 907-925 Later Shu 934-965 Jinnan 924-963 Northern Han 951-979 Two Song (Turmoil) 960-1279 Liao 907-1125 Northern Song 960-1126 Xixia 990-1227 Southern Song 1127-1279 Jin 1115-1234 Yuan (Mongol; Union) 1260-1368 Ming (Han; Union) 1368-1644 Qing (Manchu; Union) 1644-1911

Table 3 Evolution of the Fuzhou Ming Ying Wang’s Divine Titles

Date Event 806-820 Establishment of temple; worship at times of flood, drought and epidemic 847-860 Prayers for rain 860-874 Prayers for safe shipment 862-925 Titled Ningyuan General, Duke of Wuning and King of Xianying 932 Titled King of Fuyuan Changying 934 Titled King of Zhenyi Baocheng 944 Titled King of Zhengu Anji 944-978 Titled King of Xuanwei Ganying 1076 Titled King of Ming Ying

Table 4 Chronological Development of Jinci Temple

Date Event 4th-5th B.C.E Legendary establishment, dedicated to Shuyu Before 466 Jinci established 550-559 Imperial Ancestor Building of Tang to Worship Shuyu 980 Flooding of Jinci and Taiyuan City by Zhao Guangyi 983 Rebuilt 1032 Temple to Shuyu’s Mother rebuilt 1102 Main Hall of Temple to Shuyu’s Mother reconstructed 12th Century Two Canal System for Nanlao Springs 1270s-1290s Two Canal System becomes law 18th Century Dumen Water Distribution System Applied

54

Table 5 Life History of Guo Ziyi

Date Event 697 Born 757 Assistant Prime Marshal of the Imperial Cavalry 757 Recaptures capital of Tang from rebels 758 First defeat at Xiangzhou 762 King of Fenyang; quells local rebellion in Jiangzhou (his fief) by using personal prestige; fights with Uighur rebels 769 Requests Emperor to build, in his fief, an imperial monastery to hold the Saria of Asoka, and to name it Guangsheng Monastery 769 Taiyuan Rebellion 763 Recaptures Chang’an from Tibetans; peacefully subdues Uighur generals 766 Defeats Tibetans 781 Death

55

Appendix II: Figures

Fig. 1. Key Sites and Temples, Shanxi province (Map from http://ditu.ps123.net/china/1679.html, marked by Author)

56

a.

b Fig. 2. Murals on the West Wall (Ma, The Guangsheng Temple of China, parts of image on p.150)

57

Fig.3 Murals on the Southeast Portion (Ma, The Guangsheng Temple of China, p.160)

Fig. 4 Mural on the Southwest Wall (Chai, Zejun and Xiyuan Zhu, Guangsheng Si Bihua Chutan, Fig.1)

58

Fig.5 Pavilion of Water Distribution (Author’s Photo)

Fig. 6 Ming Ying Wang Hall, Reconstructed in 1319 (Author’s Photo)

59

1. Overhanging Gable Roof 2. Flush Gable Roof 3. Hip Roof 4. Gable-and-hip Roof 5. Pyramidal Roof 6. Flush-gable-and-hip Roof 7. Double Pyramidal Roof 8. Double Gable-and-hip Roof 9. Double Hip Roof

Fig.7 Roof types of traditional Chinese buildings (Liang, A Pictorial History of Chinese Architecture, Figure 3)

1 2

3 4 1. Main Gate, Hip Roof; 2. Three Purities Hall, Hip Roof 3. Chunyang Hall, Hip-and-gable roof; 4. Chongyang Hall, Hip-and-gable roof

Fig. 8 Roof Types in Yongle Palace (Author’s Photos)

60

a

b

c Fig.9 Three Murals on West and East Walls. (Ma, The Guangsheng Temple of China, a:p.162, b:163, c: p. 156)

61

Fig.10 Mural of West Palace on the North Wall (Ma, The Guangsheng Temple of China, p. 164)

Fig.11 Mural of East Palace on the North Wall (Ma, The Guangsheng Temple of China, p.165)

62