The Connection between Buddhist Temples, the Landscape, and Monarchical Power: A Comparison between Tuoba Hong (471–499) from the Northern Wei Dynasty and Li Shimin (626–649) from the Tang Dynasty

Abstract

Since the Western Jin period, Buddhism has confronted bureaucratic power within the architectural landscape. In this study, historical records and archaeological reports of two Buddhist temples—the Siyuan Temple 思遠佛寺 built during the reign of Tuoba Hong 拓跋宏 and Emperor Xiaowen 孝文帝 of the Northern Wei dynasty, and the Zhaoren Temple 昭仁寺, built during the reign of Li Shimin 李世民 and Emperor Taizong 唐太宗 of the Tang dynasty—were examined. A comparison was made of the two temples’ geographic locations in relation to cities while considering period-specific phenomena. This study also considers mountains, water, and topographical features. The geographic information reflects differences in the ideas of the ruling class and monarchs of the two historical periods. The findings are that both Buddhist temples were close to the capital and both emperors demonstrated the supremacy of their power by building them. Therefore, the religious landscape owes its formation, development, and underlying significance to emperors and social groups.

1. Introduction

1.1. Background

Since the Western Jin period, Buddhism has confronted bureaucratic power within the architectural landscape, beginning with Confucian officials proposing that Buddhist monks must bow their heads or kneel to emperors (Orbodoeva and Yangutov 2019). From these officials’ perspectives, there were two reasons for this confrontation: to retain the current state administrative system characterised by the divine right to rule founded on the Mandate of Heaven and to accept a political system in parallel with Buddhism. The Northern Wei dynasty, which was of a nomadic origin, saw Buddhism as an essential tool for achieving political centralisation. However, wary of the considerable influence of Buddhism and conscious of the Northern Wei being a conquest dynasty, its monarchs deemed it imperative to adopt a unified approach to contain Buddhism. Similarly, Emperor Taizong of the Tang dynasty also intended to suppress Buddhism. The state power and Buddhism have eventually found common ground in maintaining national unification since the Sui dynasty. Consequently, Buddhism did not develop vigorously in China until the middle and late phases of the Tang dynasty. Subsequently, it played an important role in public education and international diplomacy. The evolution of the relationship between state power and Buddhism from the Northern Wei to the Tang dynasties marked a notable shift for Buddhism. State power gradually eroded its independence, resulting in the transition from the separation of state and religion to the unity of the two.

In such contexts, temples may express Buddhist spirit and monarchical ideas in their architecture and landscape forms. Lévi et al. (1983) in Hōbōgirin 法寶義林 refers to Buddhist temples that monarchs or emperors commanded to be constructed as Daiji 大寺. Daiji was regarded as a true national temple by the emperor, and the evolution of the relationship between Buddhism and the centralised state is crucial to comprehending this. The monarchical power embodied in the temple can persist continuously in a specific historical period, geographical location, and environment, as a landscape can be symbolic (Cosgrove 1998, pp. 7–10) and be traced back to a particular historical event.

The Siyuan Temple built by the Northern Wei dynasty is attached to the mausoleum of the Empress Wenming, Yonggu Tomb on Fang Mountain. Li Shimin ordered the construction of the Zhaoren Temple to commemorate the generals killed in the war and it is one of the seven temples built following the Qisizhizhao 七寺之詔1. This paper compares the two temples based on four premises: (1) the ruling class was behind the construction of the two temples; (2) both temples were close to the capital, signifying their similar geopolitical nature; (3) the Buddhist temples were used as venues for rituals to worship kings and were closed to the public at that time, and so they were used as a viable mechanism for promoting political ideas; (4) the two temples were geographically close to Fang Mountain and Qingliang mountain, respectively, surrounded by rivers, despite differences in the way they blend into the environment. Therefore, a parallel comparison of the two temples in that respect is feasible. Tuoba Hong constructed the Siyuan Temple 思遠佛寺 after he entered the Central Plains and established a regime of the Northern Wei dynasty. The political situation was similarly relatively unstable during the ascension of Li Shimin to the throne. Thus, both regimes had to consolidate their monarchical power and urgently expand their territory.

1.2. Literature Review

While Buddhism was closely associated with power from the Northern Wei to the Tang dynasties, the interaction between the two was guided by principles driven by political motivations across different periods (Orbodoeva and Yangutov 2019). Buddhism was widely integrated into all social classes in China during the 2nd to 6th centuries on account of the narrative background and legends upon which Buddhism, Buddha statues, and scriptures were founded (Campany 2017, pp. 13–34). The increase in monks shuttling between the east and the west along the Silk Road via Pingcheng 平城 around the 5th century sped up this process. Additionally, in the early Tang dynasty, with the support of the state power, some temples started to disseminate Buddhist doctrines by cultivating monk scholars and undertaking research on the secular literature (Zürcher 2018, pp. 1580–621). Some scholars argue that Tuoba Hong of the Northern Wei dynasty advocated the construction of Buddhist temples to obtain merit and seek good returns (Ren 1988, 3.80–82). Conversely, during the early days of his reign, Li Shimin, who learned from the experience of the Sui dynasty’s decline partly due to Buddhism, was circumspect about its increasing influence but tolerated the religion because of political gains (Weinstein 1987, p. 29). The Da Tang sanzang shengjiaoxu 大唐三藏聖教序, which was written by the emperor on Buddhist scriptures after his discourse with Xuanzang 玄奘 during his return from a Buddhist pilgrimage, marked a shift in his attitude towards the religion. Later, he became faithful and dependent on Buddhism (Lai 210, p. 33).

Notably, the construction of Buddhist temples in Chang’an was influenced by urban planning, such as its proximity to cities, the imperial capital, the palace fortress, and strictly planned neighbourhoods (Yin 2012). In the Pingcheng period of the Northern Wei, the events in the capital, such as the construction of the Yungang Shiku 雲岡石窟 and the ceremonies related to the life and death of the elite gentry, were all closely associated with the imperial power and political manoeuvres of the ruling Tuoba family (Tseng 2012). Explorations into the Siyuan Temple began between 1939 and 1942. Japanese scholars Okamura and Mukai (2007) summarised the records they collected from Kyoto University and the University of Tokyo. In 1971, Datong City Museum began an archaeological excavation of the Siyuan Temple and revealed that the temple had a pagoda as its main building (Hu 2007). Archaeological research on Luo-yang yongningsita 洛陽永寧寺塔 built in 516 suggested that erecting pagodas in Buddhist temples or the use of pagodas as temples prevailed during the Northern Wei (Yang 1992; Yusheng Du 1981). As the Siyuan Temple was built as an annexe to the Yonggu Tomb 永固陵, the location of the mausoleum—Yonggu Country 永固縣—in Fang Mountain 方山, the composition of the tomb keepers, the structure of the county, and the time of its establishment and abolition have been of interest to historians (Xu and Ni 2021). Additionally, the site and restoration (Zhao et al. 2021) of the Buddhist temple were examined. Unearthed cultural relics, such as Wadang 瓦當, Foxiang 佛像, and Nisu 泥塑, were also compared with Longcheng siyan fotu (ta) 龍城思燕佛圖(塔) (Liu and Wang 2017). In addition to the comparison with Siyan fotu in terms of architectural structure, the Siyuan Temple was also compared with the Yongning Temple in Luoyang 洛陽 and the Dongwei Beiqi Yecheng zhaopengcheng fosi 東魏北齊鄴城趙彭城佛寺 in terms of building scale and tower base. Furthermore, the decisive role played by Empress Wenming in the construction of the Buddhist temple was also examined in detail (Chen 2017, pp. 69–98). She and Tuoba Hong were saluted as ‘two saints 二圣’.

The establishment of the Zhaoren Temple was often mentioned in parallel with the Qisizhizhao. Eleven historical biographies, such as the Xu gaosengzhuan 續高僧傳 and Guang hongmingji 廣弘明集, have different records about the establishment of the seven temples (S. Li 1994). Following the construction of the Zhaoren Temple, a stone tablet was erected to document Li Shimin’s philosophy of governing the country (Z. Yan 1981). According to interpretations of the stone tablet, Li Shimin’s governing philosophy was premised upon ambition, openness, and the cultivation of literature and ethics in people. He was also critical of the incompetence and bellicosity of Emperor Yang of the Sui dynasty (Yinuo Wang 2021). The Qisi zhizhao reflected Li Shimin’s purpose for building the temples: (1) to seek atonement for killing many people; (2) to tame people and win their support; (3) to cultivate the talents of monks to promote cultural prosperity (Lei 2015). Similarly, Yingfusi 應福寺 (also known as Shikusi 石窟寺), which was not far from the Zhaoren Temple and built for the same purpose—to commemorate deceased soldiers—presented the Buddhist paradise of bliss through the 20-metre-high seated Buddha statue and numerous grottos (Chang 1996).

These works confirmed that the establishment of Buddhist temples was closely related to the incumbent regimes. However, the connection between the decided location of a temple and the monarchical power has rarely been discussed. Moreover, the relevance of the landscape where a temple is located to monarchical power has not been sufficiently explained. The relationship between landscape, religion, and the monarchy was explored by Cosgrove (1998) in his study on the prominent role of the Italian monastic landscape in urban, state, and social formations (pp. 76–77). As far as the natural style manor landscape in England, ‘the landscape is a vehicle for cultural production in social formations stretched between city and country, feudalism and capitalism, but the modalities of its use and the theoretical predilections that underlie it relate to the specific historical circumstances in which it was employed’ (Cosgrove 1998, p. 222). The European Landscape Convention believed that ‘landscape contributes to the formation of local cultures’ (Déjeant-Pons 2006). Mitchell (2002) suggested that landscape had some symbolic features, and the historical narratives it produced were tailor-made for the discursive power of imperialism; during its development and expansion, historical and cultural spaces were transformed into natural spaces (pp. 9–17). In ancient China, between 220 and 927 AD, Buddhist structures and imperial ritual buildings with Buddhist characteristics and symbolic meanings were placed directly in the political axis of the capital, near or at the palace’s centre (Xie 2021). Other neighbouring East Asian countries with Confucian-based political systems also strengthened royal authority and developed their cultures through Buddhism. Ancient Japan and Korea leveraged Buddhism to strengthen or restore the power of the kings and ruling classes, via the construction of the Asukadera (Lee 2013), the Neungsanri temple, and the Wangheungsa Temple (Woong 2018).

During the Xizhou 西周 dynasty, geopolitics had a significant impact on the rise and fall of states in the Jing River 涇河 and Wei River 渭河 basins (F. Li 2006, pp. 193–233). However, as for research on the landscape in different historical periods in China, heritage protection strategies are still emphasised, with little discussion on the significance of the relationship between landscape, history, and the progression of civilisation.

2. Methodology

2.1. Research Scope

This paper focuses on the following two questions: (1) considering different political periods and historical backgrounds of the Siyuan and Zhaoren Temples, what are the differences in landscape, especially their relations with the capital? (2) Can these differences be mapped directly or indirectly to the actual significance and function of the temple landscapes in the two historical periods, as represented by the two temples, especially regarding political and sacrificial purposes? Given the complex and voluminous nature of Buddhist doctrines, this paper has not dealt with them in depth. Similarly, the architectural forms and structures related to ancient Chinese Buddhism, such as Si 寺, Ta 塔, and Sudupo 窣堵坡, have already been studied extensively in the literature and have not been addressed in this paper.

2.2. Research Methods

This study attempts to identify the connection between the landscape, temples, and monarchical power by comparing the two Buddhist temples and their landscapes. First, it analysed the background of their construction, the role played by the emperor in the construction process, and the temples’ statuses within national politics. Second, it compared the relationship of their locations with neighbouring cities, capitals, mountains, and rivers, thereby revealing the importance of geographic location and the emperor’s considerations. Finally, it suggests the interrelationship between state temples and monarchical politics and the underlying ideas conveyed through such a landscape.

3. The Relationship between Temples, Nations, and Cities

The Siyuan Temple was built adjacent to the Yonggu Tomb on Fang Mountain and dedicated to the Empress Wenming. A county was consequently established on account of the tomb and tomb keepers called Yonggu Country. However, the Siyuan Temple was more directly related to the capital of Pingcheng. Similarly, the Zhaoren Temple, located in Binzhou, which was adjacent to the capital Chang’an, was a crucial military stronghold. The following analysis of the relationship between the Buddhist temples and cities explains each emperor’s considerations when building the Buddhist temple.

3.1. The Siyuan Temple and the Northern Wei Dynasty

In 476, there were ‘altogether 6478 Buddhist Temples across the country 四方諸寺六千四百七十八’ (Wei 555). During the Northern Wei dynasty, many temples and pagodas were built, which encouraged the creation of Buddha sculptures, mural art, and grottoes. Historical records have demonstrated that Buddhism had a higher acceptance than the Han Chinese among the northern ethnic groups such as Xiongnu 匈奴, Jie 羯, Xianbei 鮮卑, Di 氐, and Qiang 羌 who invaded China in the historical period and are known as the ‘five tribes invading China’. Buddhism was revered in the Northern Wei dynasty when the Tuoba family of the Xianbei origin ruled, especially during the reign of Tuoba Hong and Empress Wenming (Kang 2020). As nomads, the Xianbei tribe had traditional ideas, such as ancestral worship and heaven and earth worship, in their culture. Research on Gaxian Cave 嘎仙洞 has shown that the spiritual belief of worshipping heaven and earth, typical of Han culture, had become mainstream in the Northern Wei imperial court (K. Liu 2016). The most convincing example is the relocation of the capital. The Pingcheng era began in 386, with the capital’s relocation from Shengle 盛樂 to Pingcheng, and ended in 494, with its relocation to Luoyang.

Tuoba Hong was the last Northern Wei emperor in the Pingcheng era. He was the mastermind behind the capital’s relocation to Luoyang, using what he promoted as the comprehensive sinicisation of the Northern Wei nation. The Siyuan Temple was built in the third year of Taihe (479 AD). The main building in the temple was a pagoda. A pagoda is regarded as the symbol of the Buddha and is also the origin of the other names for a Buddhist temple, such as Lingtu 灵圖, Fotu 佛圖, and Futu 浮圖. Although not very sizeable, the temple was open to the residents of the neighbouring towns, and was thus, almost a public space.

3.1.1. The Siyuan Temple’s Role in the Formation of the Northern Wei Dynasty

Before the death of Empress Wenming, Tuoba Hong visited Fang Mountain 17 times from August 479 to August 490. Empress Wenming died in October 490, and Tuoba Hong paid homage to Yonggu Tomb at Fang Mountain 12 times from November 490 to April 497. However, after relocating the capital in 494, Tuoba Hong visited the Yonggu Tomb only once in 497 (Hu 2007). Tuoba Hong had built Wanniantang 萬年堂 as his own mausoleum in the established Fang Mountain Cemetery. However, after the capital relocation to Luoyang, Wanniantang became a deserted palace, as Tuoba Hong built another imperial mausoleum in Luoyang. This raises an important question: What role did the Siyuan Temple play in the Northern Wei Dynasty from planning to completion?

The following could answer this question: (1) The temple was an expression of the power of Empress Wenming. Empress Dowager ruled from behind the curtain twice in the Pingcheng era, and she cultivated and appointed a group of loyal Pingcheng nobles. She sincerely believed in Buddhism and built many temples across the country. It was during this period that Buddhism witnessed a renaissance. There were ‘altogether over 100 old and new temples in the capital 京城内寺新旧且百所’ (Wei 555). She also contributed to the construction of some caves in the Yungang shiku. After completing the Siyuan Temple, she also ordered a Buddhist pagoda named Siyan fotu to be dedicated to her father Feng Hong, the king of Northern Yan, in Longcheng 龍城 (now Chaoyang 朝陽, Liaoning Province 遼寧省). Therefore, the close relationship between the Siyuan Temple and the royal cemetery shows the beliefs of the Chinese ruling class in ancient times that ‘death must be treated like life 事死如事生’. Moreover, building the Siyuan Temple is not only a creative part of the construction of the royal cemetery but also a manifestation of the royal family’s political power.

3.1.2. The Temple Manifests Tuoba Hong’s Filial Piety

There are many disputes over the relationship between Empress Wenming and Tuoba Hong. One theory is that Tuoba Hong’s actions, such as building the Siyuan Temple and the Baode Temple 報德寺 for the empress, are intended to fulfil his filial piety and engage in good deeds as a sign of deep attachment to his grandmother (Chen 2017). Another theory holds that ‘Empress Wenming thought the Emperor Tuoba Hong was so ingenious and tactical that he might threaten the Feng family, so she planned to drop his title of the emperor 文明太后以帝聰聖，后或不利於馮氏，將謀廢帝’ (Wei 555). Empress Wenming and Tuoba Hong were in a state of check and balance. However, according to historical records, both Tuoba Hong and Empress Wenming were satisfied with the location of the Buddhist temple: ‘The Empress Dowager and Gaozu (Tuoba Hong) travelled in the Fang Mountain. She looked around the mountains, rivers, and plains and thought of resting here in peace after death. Thus, she said to the ministers, ‘Emperor Shun was buried in Cangwu Mountain, and his two concubines were not buried here with him. To be considered honourable, does one have to be buried in a mountain mausoleum? However, I want to be buried here (Fang Mountain)’. Therefore, Tuoba Hong ordered a mausoleum and a Yonggu stone tomb for the Empress Dowager to finally make it the imperial ancestral temple for worshipping 太后與高祖遊於方山，顧瞻川阜，有終焉之志。 因謂群臣曰：「舜葬蒼梧，二妃不從。 豈必遠祔山陵，然後為貴哉！ 吾百年之後，神其安此。」 高祖乃詔有司營建壽陵於方山，又起永固石室，將終為清廟。’ (Wei 555). Moreover, Tuoba Hong also established his own mausoleum here: ‘At the beginning, Gaozu (Tuoba Hong) ordered his own mausoleum to the northeast of Yonggu Tomb to show his filial piety to the Empress Dowager. He is also determined to rest in peace here 初，高祖孝於太后，乃於永固陵東北里餕，豫營壽宮，有終焉瞻望之志’ (Wei 555). After the death of Empress Wenming, ‘Gaozu was so sad that he became feeble and refused to drink alcohol and eat meat 高祖毀瘠，絕酒肉’ (Wei 555). The above records show that the construction of Siyuan Temple and Fang Mountain Mausoleum manifested the deep bond between Tuoba Hong and Empress Wenming. Tuoba Hong, however, built his own mausoleum in Luoyang after moving the capital there, rendering the Wanniantang he built for himself in Fang Mountain, Pingcheng obsolete.

3.2. The Zhaoren Temple, Binzhou, and Chang’an

The Zhaoren Temple is in what is now Changwu County (in Xianyang City, Shaanxi Province), which was then known as Yiluxian 宜祿縣 in the second year of Zhenguan (628 AD) and was under the administration of Xinpingjun, Binzhou 邠州新平郡 (Yinuo Wang 2021). Guang hongmingji: ‘[The emperor] established the Zhaoren Temple in Binzhou after defeating Xue Ju 破薛舉，于豳州立昭仁寺’ (Daoxuan 644). There is still a ‘Binzhou zhaorensi beiwen 豳州昭仁寺碑文’ in the temple today.

The possible factors behind building the temple in Changwuxian (Qianshuiyuan) 長武縣 (浅水原) in Binzhou are as follows: (1) Geographical location. Binzhou has an advantageous geographical location. An official in the Tang dynasty, Li Zhifang 李直方, observed in the Binzhou jiedushi yuanbiji 邠州節度使院壁記: ‘Binzhou is of crucial geographical and defensive significance around the capital Chang’an. It can defend the western border as well as safeguard the territory from surrounding tribes 王畿之腋，劃為巨防。外殿朝那，作捍西疆。中拱皇都，以臨諸夏’ (Z. Li 1983). In other words, one must pass through Binzhou to go west from Chang’an. Similarly, Binzhou had played a prominent military role in previous wars and had strategic importance for all dynasties. Binzhou (豳) is what is now known as Bin (彬) County in Shaanxi Province, and Bin County, called Bin (豳) (Region) County in ancient times, was later renamed Bin (邠) County. According to the Tongdian 通典, ‘Binzhou was called Bin (豳) State in ancient times. It was where Duke Liu (leader of a tribe in the Zhou dynasty) lived. During the ruling of Qin Shi Huang (First Emperor of Qin), the place was under the administration of Neishi officials and encompassed the Youfufeng, An’ding, and Beidi prefectures in the Han dynasty. In the end of Han dynasty, Xinping County was set up there and also included the old An’ding County. This prominent status remained unchanged during the Wei and Jin dynasties. Binzhou was established during the Western Wei dynasty and was kept during the Zhou, Sui, and Tang dynasties. In the early days of Emperor Yang of the Sui dynasty, the name Binzhou was abolished and the place was split into two: An’ding and Beidi prefectures. Binzhou regained its name towards the end of the Tang dynasty, and the character Bin (豳) was changed to Bin (彬) in the 13th year of Kaiyuan. After the fall of the Tang dynasty, it was called Xinping Prefecture, and administered four counties: Xinping, Sanshui, Yongshou, and Yilu 邠州，古豳國。昔公劉居豳，即其地也(豳故旬邑是)。秦始皇屬內史，漢為右扶風、安定、北地三郡也。後漢末置新平郡，兼舊安定為二郡也。魏晉宜同。西魏置豳州，後周及隋唐皆因之。煬帝初，州廢，以其地為安定、北地二郡。大唐後置豳州，開元十三年改豳為邠。其後或為新平郡，領縣四：新平、三水、永壽、宜祿’ (You Du 1896). Sima Zhen 司馬貞 observed in Shiji suoyin 史記索引: ‘Bin (豳) is the same as Bin (邠), and it is just a matter of differences in writing in different times 豳即邠也，古今异字耳’ (Sima 1991). According to the Changwuxianshu biji 長武縣署壁記: ‘Changwu County belonged to Binzhou and was formerly a fief of King Tai of Zhou 武邑為邠州屬，古公之就地也’ (Shen 1969). This indicates that Binzhou was within the domain of the Emperor of the Zhou dynasty. The jurisdiction of Binzhou underwent many changes in the past. Thus, ‘Binzhou’ in this paper refers to the Binzhou area in the Tang dynasty in a broad sense, including Changwu County, Qianshuiyuan, and Xinping County. Moreover, Binzhou was the first stop on the northern road in the eastern section of the Silk Road spanning westward from Chang’an (Chang 1998), and was regarded as a strategic military stronghold.

(2) A place that witnessed Li Shimin’s military achievements. The construction of the Zhaoren Temple is closely related to military operations. Changwuxianshu biji stated, ‘Changwu County is an important portal of Shaanxi in the west 第地為陝西西路門戶’ (Shen 1969). Li Shimin built the Zhaoren Temple to commemorate the casualties from the Battle of Qianshuiyuan (618 AD), which was essential to the newly established Tang regime, as it enabled the dynasty to recover Longxi 陇西. Additionally, it was the first major battle after the founding of the Tang dynasty. Li Shimin was still the Prince of Qin at that time. In June of that year, in Gaozhicheng 高墌城 (north of Changwu County), he fought against Xue Ju, leader of the self-claimed kingdom in the Longxi area, for the first time, but failed. After Xue Ju died of illness, Li Shimin defeated his son Xue Rengao. The battle resulted in more than 30,000 casualties among the Tang army. Xiu zhaorensi beitingji 修昭仁寺碑亭記 stated, ‘this tablet was erected to praise Pang Yu who was a general dispatched by Emperor Taizong to Qianshuiyuan and defeated Xue Rengao 紀太宗遣總管龐玉破薛仁杲於淺水原’ (C. Wang 2021).

4. Results

Table 1. The Modern Topography, Elevation, and Historical Geographic Information Comparison of the Two Buddhist Temples.

Comparison Type	The Siyuan Temple	The Zhaoren Temple
Dynasty	Northern Wei	Tang
Year built	479 A.D.	628–629 A.D.
The old capital city	Pingcheng	Chang’an
Location	Xinrong District, Datong city, Shanxi Province	Changwu Country, Xianyang City, Shaanxi Province
Distance from the capital city	About 23 km	About 151 km
Landform	Loess plateau
Climatic landform	Arid-semi-arid inland climate
Mountain type	Arc	North–south
Altitude	1353–1358 m	1185 m
Basic geomorphological genesis type	Hills (Denude)	Hummock and tableland

depicts the geographical information about the Siyuan and Zhaoren Temples based on the topographic map of China in the National Agricultural Atlas of the People’s Republic of China (Nanjing Institute of Geography and Limnology 1989) and the mountain system map in the Atlas of Natural Geography of China (Liu 2010) in terms of topographic and geomorphologic features and altitude (Figure 1). Figure 2 compares the relationship between the two temples, the capital cities, and the nearest cities; Figure 3 compares the different landscape elements surrounding the two temples.

4.1. The Relationship between Buddhist Temples and the Natural Environment

4.1.1. The Natural Environment around Siyuan Buddhist Temple: Vast Landscape

In the Northern Wei dynasty, Buddhism owed its steady and continuous development to Tuoba Hong and later emperors (Yongping Wang 2017). For example, Tuoba Hong’s father, Emperor Xianwen 獻文帝, built the Luye Garden 鹿野苑 after his abdication. This temple is located on the west hill of the Yu Yuan 禦苑 (Imperial Garden), five kilometres away from the Chongguang Palace 崇光宮, where he lived after his abdication. This quiet residence was the place where Emperor Xianwen ‘lived away from worldly affairs and pondered over the essence of the Buddhist doctrines 思離塵以邁俗，涉玄門之幽奧’ (K. Yan 1958, p. 3651). Even though the regime originated from a nomadic tribe, the elites of the Northern Wei dynasty enjoyed the natural environment. Chenming Cao (1992) believed that the geographical location of Yonggu Tomb was chosen on account of the influence of the Feng Shui 風水 theory of the Han culture in the Central Plains. He proposed that the naming of ‘Kunde liuhedian 坤德六合殿’ and ‘Qianxiang liuhedian 乾象六合殿2’ built in the third year of Taihe (479 AD) embodied the theory of trigrams.

Further, Fang Mountain, where the Siyuan Temple is located, is on the northern edge of Pingcheng (Datong basin 大同盆地). As far as the broad geographical environment is concerned, Fang Mountain is sandwiched between two rivers, Yu River 禦河 (The Imperial River) and the Wanquan River 万泉河 as Figure 2. On the micro-level, the Siyuan Temple was built earlier than Yonggu Tomb; it leans against Fang Mountain to the south and faces Pingcheng. Additionally, Shuijingzhu 水經注 stated, ‘to the west of Yonggu Tomb is the Siyuan Temple, and to the west of the Siyuan Temple is the dining room. There are two stone gate towers at the south gate of the mausoleum. Outside the mausoleum gate, the original landscape was transformed to make a winding royal road from where one can see the pond in Lingquan Palace that is as bright as a round mirror 院外西側，有’思遠靈圖’，圖之西有齋堂，南門表二石闕，闕下斬山，累結禦路，下望靈泉宮池，皎若圓鏡矣’ (D. Li 2008) (see Figure 3). This description reflects the geographical location of the Siyuan Temple, illustrating the jagged mountain ranges surrounding Fang Mountain. Supported by records from The Chronicle of Datong County 大同縣誌 compiled during the reign of Emperor Daoguang 道光帝 of the Qing Dynasty in 1830, the main water systems around Fang Mountain can be described as follows: Yuhe is located in the west and the Wanquan River in the east, with the former passing through Pingcheng and draining into the Hun River 渾河. The mountains are Gu Mountain 孤山 in the west and Yehu Hill 野狐嶺, which is further away, Cailiang Mountain 采涼山 in the east, and Mapu Mountain 馬鋪山 across the river from the southern part of Fang Mountain (Li and Yang 2018) (see Figure 2). This geographical location conforms to the Feng Shui site selection principle: ‘Mountain is seen as a dragon that has a clear shape, which makes it clear to select the site of a temple. The hills and rivers gather around the temple, and the direction of the temple corresponds with the Feng Shui theory 龍真 、穴的、砂環、水抱、向正’.

4.1.2. The Natural Environment around Zhaoren Temple: A Solemn Landscape

Shen Xirong mentioned the phrase ‘the Yi Mountain and Xiu River 宜山秀水 (both yi and xiu mean beautiful in Chinese)’ multiple times in his article ‘Inscription for Zhaoren Temple’, which praises the temple. The Chronicle of Changwu County 長武縣志 also contains a painting called ‘Yi Mountain and Xiu River’ and records that ‘the Yi Mountain is ten miles south of the city, and the mountain shape resembles the character YI 有宜山，在城南十里，山形似宜字’ (Shen 1969). Further, the natural landscape around the Zhaoren Temple is roughly described in The Chronicle of Shaanxi Province 陝西通志 (Zhao 2006) in the Ming and Qing dynasties and in The Chronicle of Changwu County (Shen 1969) as follows (see Figure 3):

North: Shenlong Mountain, Shiquan Mountain, the Jing River, and the Tongji Spring 神龍山，石泉山，涇河，通濟泉

West: The Jixian Hump, Pangu Mountain, and The Hei River (which flows into the Jing River) 集賢岡，盤古山，黑水河 (匯入涇河).

Northwest: The Taoling Ditch and the Malian River (which flows into the Jing River) 桃林溝，馬蓮河 (匯入涇河).

Southwest: The Longchan Hump (Xie Hump) and the Mapao Spring 龍纏峰 (蟹峰)，馬刨泉

South: Yi Mountain, Xiangyan Mountain, the Xiu Hump, Ma’an Mountain, Qi Mountain, Huage Mountain, Yun Mountain, Ping Mountain, the Xiu River, and Nan River 宜山，翔雁山，秀峰，馬鞍山，岐山，畫閣山，雲山，屏山，秀水，南河

Southeast: Heihu Mountain, Xiang Mountain, Santai Mountain, Huilong Mountain, the Qi River (that flows into the Hei River) 黑虎山，香山，三臺山，回龍山，漆水 (入黑水河)

Northeast: The Ni River (that drains into the Jing River) and the Longnv Spring 泥水 (匯入涇河)，龍女泉

The site selection of the Zhaoren Temple, even on the plateau, conforms exactly to the site selection principle of ‘leaning against yin (mountains) and embracing yang (rivers) 負陰抱陽’, concluded through countless experiences in ancient China. Moreover, considering the macroscopic geographical environment, Binzhou is characterised by a pattern in which ‘a river is sandwiched between two mountains 兩山夾水’, that is, Jing river flows between Ziwu Hill 子午嶺 and Qian mountain 千山 (Figure 2). While the mountains are not very high, their geographical features are apparent.

The Dafo Temple is adjacent to the Zhaoren Temple; both are situated on the south bank of the Jing River and were built during the same period (the early Tang dynasty). S. Li (2002) discovered what Wu Taiyi 武太一, governor of Binzhou at that time, described the geography and climate of the place in an inscription for the Dafo Temple: ‘Binzhou is the fifth-class area around the capital, and it was a strategic place for various feudal states during the Spring, Autumn, Warring States periods, the Zhou dynasty, and the Qin dynasty. Now, it is the territory of the Tang dynasty. There are numerous temples and gardens surrounded by mountains and rivers, creating picturesque scenery of rivers winding around mountains. It is always cloudy but scarcely rains from summer to autumn 畿服五等，諸候茅土，周秦霸王之原。 皇唐經綸之野⋯⋯寺觀園林依依相屬，因山就水，負郭憑川，形勝往來，縈紆左右⋯⋯自夏涉秋，密雲不雨’. Li Bai depicts the local geography in his poem ‘Climbing the Xinping County Building’ as ‘Leaving the capital and climbing this Xinping Tower. In the twilight of autumn when everything starts to wither, I feel deep grief because I cannot go back home. The sky is vast; the sun sets in the distance; cold waves are gentle; the river flows quietly. Clouds rise from the woods of the mountain, and geese from the north perch on the shoal. The land stretches tens of thousands of miles and staring off into the distance makes me sad 去國登茲樓，懷歸傷暮秋。天長落日遠，水凈塞波流。秦雲起嶺樹，胡雁下沙州。蒼蒼幾萬里，目極令人愁’ (B. Li 1900). The geographical features of the Dafo Temple (and its relationship with the mountains and the Jing River) are still apparent, similar to those of the Zhaoren Temple. Although the Jing, Hei, and Nan Rivers (which are tributaries of the Yellow River) flow through the city, there is not much water on the surface, leading to water scarcity. However, like the Siyuan Temple, the Zhaoren Temple was also built with great importance attached to the roles of the rivers surrounding it.

4.2. The Relationship between theTemples, the Landscape, and Monarchical Power

4.2.1. Tuoba Hong: Exploitation, Sinicisation, and Integration

Tuoba Hong was a key figure who assimilated the Xianbei culture into the culture of orthodox Central Plains. He often cited Buddhist scriptures in his edicts to educate people, such as: ‘When monks are not in the temple, they often wander in villages and befriend cunning people. The emperor hereby decrees that people form in groups of five and make a vow to each other not to take in monks. People should be especially careful about monks without household registration, as they are very good at hiding themselves. If such monks are found, they should be arrested and sent to the local government. If such monks are found in the suburbs of the capital, they should be sent to the central office. If they are cultivating the people for the sake of the three treasures, namely Fo, Fa, Seng (Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha), they must carry the identification issued by the monastic affairs office of the town government when they are outside their registration area to be allowed to come and go. Anyone who violates this regulation is to be punished 比丘不在寺舍，遊涉村落，交通奸猾，經歷年歲。令民間五五相保，不得容止。無籍之僧，精加隱括，有者送付州鎮，其在畿郡，送付本曹。若為三寶巡民教化者，在外賡州鎮維那文移⋯⋯違者加罪’ (Wei 555). Tuoba Hong was also concerned about protecting animals and plants and decreed that ‘breeding birds of prey and grazing livestock are banned 禁斷鷙鳥，不得畜焉’ (Wei 555).

As for choosing the site for temples and the landscape, there are many forms in addition to Siyuan Buddhist Temple, which was built adjacent to a mausoleum:

• Within the capital: ‘There are hundreds of new and old temples and over 2000 monks and nuns. There are 6478 temples across the country and 77,258 monks and nuns 寺新旧且百所，僧尼二千馀人。四方諸寺六千四百七十八，僧尼七万七千二百五十八人’ (Wei 555).
• Renovated temples: (a) The conversion of buildings with functions other than temples: ‘(Tuoba Hong) abolished the bureau named Yingshi Cao and converted it into the Baode Buddhist Temple (高祖)罷鷹師曹，以其地為報德佛寺’ (Wei 555). Yingshi Cao was an official agency dedicated to breeding birds such as eagles and harriers in the Northern Wei dynasty. Abolishing an office intended for breeding birds of prey and renovating it into a Buddhist temple to show his gratitude for Empress Wenming reflects Tuoba Hong’s compassion and filial piety. (b) The renovation of buildings with the same function: ‘The temple whose abbot was Master Luo Shi had some vacant land. Tuoba Hong spoke highly of his dedicated practice of Buddhist doctrines and ordered the construction of a three-layer pagoda on the site of the old Buddhist Hall 羅什法師⋯⋯今常住寺，猶有遺地。(高祖)欽悅修蹤，情深遐遠，可於舊堂所，為建三級浮圖’ (Wei 555).
• Building temples on mountains: ‘There was a monk named Batuo from the west. His practice of Buddhism was high and Tuoba Hong trusted him deeply. Therefore, the emperor ordered the construction of a Shaolin Temple to the north of Shaoshi Mountain, and the government covered the temple’s daily expenditures 又有西域沙門名跋陀，有道業，深為高祖所敬信。詔於少室山陰，立少林寺而居之，公給衣供’ (Wei 555).

Nevertheless, Tuoba Hong was not wholeheartedly supportive of Buddhism. After moving the capital to Luoyang, there was only one imperial temple in the city: the Yongning Temple. As Luoyang City lacked the old Pingcheng aristocrats, it became a brandnew capital where Tuoba Hong could implement his drastic reforms and sinicisation plans. Tuoba Hong’s consolidation of monarchical power through Buddhism was realised in the following steps: first, the impact of the capital’s relocation on the Pingcheng aristocrats was weakened by creating the impression that Pingcheng was still the centre of the regime. Second, Buddhism was promoted among the Xianbei people and the process of sinicisation was sped up. Finally, the influence of the old followers of Empress Wenming was weakened and the transition of power to himself was accelerated.

4.2.2. Li Shimin: Eclectic, Control, and Education

Contrary to the aesthetic principles reflected in the Siyuan Temple, using the landscape of the temple as an embodiment of monarchical power by Li Shimin can be characterised as ‘control’ centred on Chang’an. Descriptions such as ‘Buddhist Temples are located in a quiet environment and can be passed down for generations 我佛基於靜刹，終永永而常傳’ and ‘maintaining the quietness and purity of temples can bless the royal family to rule forever 慧室長湛，皇基栽昌’ can be found in the tablet inscriptions of the Zhaoren Temple, Binzhou zhaorensi beiwen, demonstrating the wish of everlasting prosperity of the Tang dynasty based on the long-term development of Buddhist temples. Therefore, for Li Shimin, temple landscapes were not only an embodiment of psychological control but also emotional cultivation.

Li Shimin was an advocate of the eminent monk Xuanzang’s pilgrimage to India to obtain Buddhist scriptures. He also supported the sutra translation from Sanskrit into Chinese. Building temples or translating Buddhist scriptures were all means of ‘cultural governance’ for Li Shimin, who used these methods for the stable development of the empire (Rong 1996). However, the role of Buddhism in the Tang dynasty was not limited to governing the country and cultivating people. Quantangwen 全唐文 recorded what was said in Shushengji 述聖記 written by Li Zhi 李治 for his father Li Shimin: ‘Therefore, whenever Buddha is present, all the good results can be achieved through Buddhist practice. People who have been cultivated will be cleared of any evils and sins done in the past 故知聖慈所被，業無善而不臻；妙化所敷，緣無惡而不翦’; he also praised, ‘His Majesty governed the country and delivered benefits to the people as decreed by divinity, and his competency was admired by all countries far and wide 伏唯皇帝陛下上資元福，垂拱而治八荒; 德被黔黎，斂衽而朝萬國’ (Dong 1990). However, this monarchy did not support monks’ participation in politics and policymaking. The regime is realised in a top-down manner in that the emperor demonstrates the centralised power and national stability by controlling, governing, and utilising temples. In other words, the emperor relied on material entities (i.e., temples and surrounding landscapes) for potential political and ideological expressions. Next, Li Shimin was deeply influenced by the Buddhist idea of samsara, which explains his decision to order the establishment of the seven temples, including the Zhaoren Temple. He was also profoundly devotional, as he expressed remorse for killing many people on the battlefield: ‘The killing on the battlefield made me deeply sad, so much so that I could not live a normal life. Buddhism is merciful. Killing is the most serious sin. Such thoughts made me more regretful and scared than ever 追以愴恨生靈之重能不哀矜，悄然疚懷無忘興寢，且釋氏之教深尚慈仁，禁戒之科殺害為重，承言此理彌增悔懼’ (Daoxuan 644).

Moreover, given that Buddhism terms ‘equality between enemies and relatives 怨親平等’ and ‘ultimate equality 无上平等’, Buddhist temples were meant for commemorating not only Tang soldiers killed in wars but also those belonging to the Xue Ju. There is such a record in Tanghuiyao 唐會要: ‘He built temples for servicemen from both sides that were killed on the battlefield and recruited monks in the hope that the drum sound in the temple would turn the fire of wars into lotuses and the sutra could turn suffering into sweet dew 為義士兇徒隕身戎陣者，各建寺剎，招延勝侶。法鼓所振，變炎火於青蓮; 清梵所聞，易苦海於甘露’ (P. Wang 1955). The tablet inscriptions in the Zhaoren Temple also record this story: ‘Fighting his grief, the emperor tried his best to forget sandalwood and swords. Enemies that people hated and brave men who died for their motherland can all be purified by Buddhism. Every man is equal under the Bodhi tree 而上忍所被，旃檀與利刃兼忘。大慈所覃，怨賊將義夫齊指，俱潤法雨，同乘大轅，回向菩提，無上平等’ (C. Wang 2021).

Furthermore, although Li Shimin’s attitude towards Buddhism is ambiguous, he regarded Buddhist temples as a means of communicating his attachment to and seeking blessings for families. For example, the Falinzhuan 法琳傳 in the Xu gaoseng-zhuan 續高僧傳 documented that ‘in the early year of Zhenguan (about 629 AD), the Emperor Taizong built the Longtian Temple in the Dahe Palace on Nan Mountain for his father 貞觀初年, 帝於南山大和宮舊宅置龍田寺’ (Daoxuan 645). In the fifth year of Zhenguan (631 AD), Li Shimin built the Puguang Temple for his son Li Chengqian 李承乾, which is recorded in Tanzangzhuan 昙藏传: ‘When the Prince Li Chengqian lost his favour with the emperor, the emperor summoned him into the palace and allowed him to learn Buddhist instructions. Then, the emperor built the Puguang Temple for his son 及皇儲失禦，便召入宮，受菩薩戒⋯⋯並造普光寺’ (Daoxuan 645). Another record of praying for the empress and renovating the old temples is seen in the Anyang jinshilu 安陽金石錄: In April of the tenth year of Zhenguan (636 AD), Li Shimin ordered the renovation of 392 temples across the country to pray for the sick empress, including seven Buddhist pagodas that have beautiful scenery 貞觀十年四月，敕為皇后虛風日久，未善痊除，修復廢寺，以希福力，天下三百九十二所佛事院宇，並好山水形勝有七塔者 (Wu 2005). On May 14th in the fifth year of Zhenguan (641 AD), Li Shimin visited the Hongfu Temple 弘福寺 and informed the five senior monks that he had built the temple to commemorate his mother, which made the monks sob and mourn with the emperor. Later he wrote: ‘I feel deeply grateful for my mother who brought me up. I am grieved as I could never see her again. I feel regretful that I have not fulfilled my duty to serve my mother. I ask Heaven: how can I make my mother rest in peace? 追惟撫育之恩，每念慈顏之遠。泣血崩心，永無逮及。號天躄地，何所厝身’ He also said, ‘I feel nothing but regret when my mother is no longer here. I cannot overcome all these regrets and grief; I can only atone for my negligence with my devotion to Buddhism 敬養已絕，萬恨不追。冤酷之深，百身何贖。惟以丹誠，歸依三寶’ (Daoxuan 645).

In the seventeenth year of Zhenguan (643 AD), there was a ritual of sacrifice offering held in the southern suburbs of the capital: ‘It had been cloudy and snowy before the day of the sacrifice ritual. On the day of the ritual, it was still cloudy and foggy. However, when Emperor Taizong ascended to the altar, the fog dispersed, and the landscape became clear. When the ceremony was completed, the official responsible for the ritual read a thanksgiving message to the Heaven that said, “I, Li Shimin, Son of Heaven, dare to report to the Heaven. Since I became the emperor, I have always been caring about my people and have cultivated them with ethics and rites. I get up early and sleep late at night, with no time wasted on politics and governance, which, I hope, would live up to the expectations of my ancestors. These words are to be recorded, and I hope that my country will enjoy long-lasting peace and harmony, and that I am proven competent to carry forward the ambition of my ancestors. Please do bless me for that” 於時累日陰雪，是旦猶雲霧晦冥。及太宗升壇，煙氛四散，風景清朗，文物昭映。禮畢，祝官讀謝天祝文曰：“嗣天子臣世民，敢昭告於昊天上帝。世民纂成鴻基，君臨宇縣，夙興旰食，無忘於政道，導德齊禮，良愧於前聖， 爰有成命，表瑞貞石。文字昭然，歷數惟永。既旌高廟之業，又錫眇身之祚。’ (P. Wang 1955). The structure of the Buddhist Hall at the Zhaoren Temple is modelled on the imperial ancestral temple, suggesting that the temple served as a means of commemorating ancestors and praying to the heavens (Ji 2016, p. 20). The mapping relationship among power, temples, and the landscape is shown in Figure 3.

4.2.3. The Underlying Concept Conveyed through the Buddhist Landscape: The Supremacy of the ‘Son of Heaven’

Although Li Shimin rarely visited the seven temples after they were built, Tuoba Hong likewise hardly paid homage to Fang Mountain after he moved the capital to Luoyang. However, given the close connection between these two temples and national politics, the imperial powers guaranteed the temples’ operation and development to a certain extent. In Zhaoren Temple, for instance, there is still a stone tablet containing imperial edicts. In other words, the temples that would not be revisited by the monarch became the embodiment of imperial power at the local level. Therefore, despite their different geographical locations, both Buddhist temples made the Buddhist belief a social, secular, and bureaucratic norm at the level of imperial power.

In ancient Chinese history, the Mandate of Heaven was closely related to the power of the monarch. The legitimacy of the ruling regime was largely based on the thinking of the divine right of kings (A. Wang 1995). While cosmology and astronomy were not objectively related to politics, natural disasters, astrological changes, and disastrous weather were the fault of the ruler or a form of punishment in ancient China. Therefore, temples served the function of praying for blessings on behalf of the emperor. From the beginning of the 6th to the beginning of the 8th century, the symbolism of the chakravartin was mixed with the characteristics and traditional attributes of the Son of Heaven (Zürcher 2013, pp. 279–294). The long self-contained agriculture economy contributed to the Chinese people’s mindset that ‘harvest solely depends on natural conditions’ in the ancient times, thus intensifying the paradoxical question of who oversaw their destiny (Sangren 2012). The Buddhist doctrine of ‘predestination’ and ‘karma’ suggested a solution to this question that ordinary people could not answer. The concept of ‘saṃsāra 輪迴’ in Buddhism motivated people to accumulate blessings for their next life.

5. Conclusions

The above analysis of the Siyuan Temple from the Northern Wei dynasty and the Zhaoren Temple from the Tang dynasty shows that both Buddhist temples were close to the capital and both emperors demonstrated the supremacy of their power by building temples; however, there are key differences.

In terms of emotional expression, when Tuoba Hong of the Northern Wei dynasty built the Siyuan Temple, the de facto ruler of the empire was Empress Wenming. Tuoba Hong established the Siyuan Temple to show his respect for the Empress Wenming and stabilise his regime. When Li Shimin was still the Prince of Qin, he made remarkable military victories at Qianshuiyuan, but at the expense of too many lives; thus, he ordered the temple to display his benevolence and concern for his country and people.

In terms of geographical location, both the Siyuan and Zhaoren Temples were situated in a place where a river was sandwiched between two mountains, both in line with Feng Shui principles in ancient China (Figure 2). The Siyuan Temple dominated the Fang Mountain north of the capital Pingcheng and was close to the Yuhe (The Imperial River) and the Wanquan River; thus, the temple and the capital were both visible from each other. Therefore, one could say that the Siyuan Temple placed more emphasis on the topographical conditions. Similarly, the Zhaoren Temple was located in ancient Bin-zhou and was on the southern bank of the Jing River, as with the Dafo Temple. It was closely related to the Silk Road and the gateway to the Chang’an area; thus, the nearby waters were the major consideration when the Zhaoren Temple was constructed.

Regarding the expression of monarchical power, Tuoba Hong can be defined as an exploiter who oversaw the construction of Buddhist temples to promote the Xianbei people’s acceptance of and integration into the Han culture. Li Shimin preferred to regulate the construction of Buddhist temples to solidify his power and cultivate people.

From a social perspective, the temples in the capital regions of the Northern Wei and Tang dynasties were incorporated into the traditional political and economic fabric, and the hierarchy of different temples generally reflects the social structure of Chang’an. The stable financial resources of the state temples, the abundant daily offerings, and their integration with political forces all contributed to the development of Buddhism to a certain extent. Honouring ancestors or family members became the primary motivation for the imperial family to support the development of Buddhism. By giving land, building temples, recruiting eminent monks, and making daily offerings, the state temples became the core of Buddhism in the capital area.

Therefore, the religious landscape, as a specific way of experiencing history, owes its formation, development, and underlying significance to emperors or specific social groups. It is also a way of observing the past. The landscape began to be connected with monarchical power through historical developments and structures. It recorded social culture and progress and implicitly embraced a lot of ideas.

Additionally, research on the landscape in different historical periods in China, emphasises heritage protection strategies with little discussion on the significance of the relationship between landscape, history, and the progression of civilisation. In societies where the secular binary between the profane and the sacred is porous, the relationship between political power and religious institutions is always fraught. Historical narratives are relevant to contemporary times in as much as they help policymakers and religious leaders navigate tense situations to maintain a balanced perspective to resolve issues. This manuscript assists in such a decision-making process to maintain political and religious equilibrium.