[Liang Yongjia] The limit of "duplication"

pick

Summary: The "Raosanling" festival of the Bai people in Dali has received national-level intangible cultural heritage in recent years and applied to UNESCO for World Intangible Cultural Heritage.

This success is due to the strong support and active organization of local governments.

But in fact, ordinary people participating in the "Raosanling" festival are concerned about the "prosperity" and "peace and prosperity" of families brought about by the festival, as well as the pilgrimage activities carried out by local temple organizations to realize the renewal and transmission of spiritual power.

The country's intangible cultural heritage of "Raosanling" is an effort to "duplicate" popular religions.

However, because this effort is based on the imagination of primitive reproduction worship, it depicts "Raosanling" as a national "carnival", but cannot cover the local meaning, presenting a kind of "duplication" limit.

Keywords: Intangible cultural heritage overlaps around Sanling, the relationship between state and religion.

Author brief introduction: Liang Yongjia, a professor at China Agricultural University.

His main research interests are religious and ethnic issues, rituals, royal power, etc.

Introduction: The "duplication" function of national reconstruction?

In May 2006, the Ministry of Culture announced the first batch of 518 national-level intangible cultural heritage lists.

Dali Bai Autonomous Prefecture was among them as a "cultural space" project that Yunnan Province applied to the Ministry of Culture for the "Bai people around three spirits".

Judging from the official application materials, the "Raosanling" activities that are different from Han festivals have become the main feature of this "cultural space".

This description and explanation is completely different from the official attitude towards "Raosanling" over the past century, and is also significantly different from the understanding of ordinary participants.

Local literati have always held a negative attitude towards the so-called "lover" relationship during festivals, believing that these activities are immoral and full of superstition.

However, the 2006 "intangible cultural heritage" application document advocated that "the secret relationship...

secretly reflects the Bai people's revision of Confucian feudal etiquette." Judging from the materials of field surveys, participants in "Raosanling" are generally unwilling to admit the existence of "lovers", and give "Raosanling" meanings such as promoting family prosperity "and" Qingji and peace ".

However, the application materials for "intangible cultural heritage" do not consider this meaning, but emphasize an unprovable ancient memory of the Bai people.

Why is there such a big contrast? How do participants in "Raosanling" understand this activity? Why are non-marital relationships the focus? How to understand the current meaning of the application and authorization of "intangible cultural heritage"?

This article will provide a tentative answer to these questions by analyzing the application text and the "Raosanling" activity itself.

The author believes that awarding the title of "intangible cultural heritage" to the "Raosanling" activity is an effort by the country to establish authority over folk religions, and can be called an attempt to rebuild the ability of "duplication".

But this attempt is based on the imagination of a "primitive romantic" nation, which is quite out of touch with the local meaning, presenting a kind of "overlapping limit." "Intangible Cultural Heritage" is an entry point for assessing the relationship between state and religion in contemporary China.

Yang Meihui Yang, 2008:1) believes that this relationship has been "troublesome" for a century.

Ge Zhaoguang (2001) pointed out that there is no clear corresponding fact for the category of "religion" in the China context.

Gao Wansang Goossaert, 2008) and Zhang Qianwen Nedostup, 2009) proposed that "religion" and "superstition" were categories created by the national system during the Republic of China and are closely related to the country's modernization anxiety.

Yang Fenggang, Yang, 2004) believes that this anxiety went to extremes after 1949, forming a kind of "radical atheism" that suppressed religion.

Although these studies are all very meaningful, they more or less presuppose the dichotomy between "home" and "society", or more specifically, the dichotomy between "politics" and "religion", ignoring that this dichotomy is just a national plan rather than reality, and especially ignoring the religious nature of the country, which historians have pointed out.

Yu, 2005;Lagerway, 2010).

The author believes that the concept of "superscript" proposed by Du Zanqi in 1988 is helpful to understanding the current relationship between state and religion.

This concept places state authority in a dynamic relationship with religious activities.

Take Guan Di as an example.

By giving Guan Di the title, the state declared this worship symbol that continued and changed among the people to be in line with the value of the national ethics, i.e."loyalty"), so Guan Di was canonized many times.

The meaning of this kind of "writing" above the local meaning is "overlapping writing".

It incorporates potential heresy into the national system and gives legitimacy and space for civil worship activities.

The prerequisite for this function is that the state upholds its own moral, ethical and cosmological transcendence, that is, the legitimacy of governing its subjects in the name of the metaphysical "Son of Heaven"(Duara, 1988).

This concept is quite explanatory.

Historically, the state awarded "titles" to folk gods and sent officials to sacrifice to Feuchtwang (2001), the state promoted the "standardization" of gods Watson (1985), and the use of clan organizations and god ceremonies to achieve local control Wang (2004) can all be understood more or less in terms of the concept of "duplication".

Since the Republic of China, the secular commitment of state authority has forced the state to create a "religion" category and then separate it from it, thus losing the "overlapping" function in symbols and making it difficult for religious activities, including folk religions, to be included in the national symbol system.

Recently, Du Zanqi proposed that the country should be considering recreating this "overlapping" feature (Duara, 2010).

Many scholars have tried to examine contemporary religious issues in China through the rupture and continuation from empire to state.

For the Kuomintang and the Communist Party, the creation and management of the categories of "religion" and "superstition" are indeed closely related to the country's commitment to secularization.

In the first 30 years of the Republic, the state implemented a strict policy of separation of church and state on the one hand, and restricted the ability of religion to organize on the other, thus forming a policy of strong control.

Goossaert and Palmer, 2010) However, since 1980, the country's management methods have gradually softened and enlightened, and some informal management methods have also been developed (Chen Jinguo, 2010; Zhao Litao, 2008).

Dr.

Tim Oakes and Donald Sutton proposed that China's "one theme of the reform period was the state's efforts to reconcile (co-opt) and digest) religious activities, and obviously) control and guide them through administration and laws...

and melt in principle within the framework of the party and the state-just as the gods and religious organizations recognized in the imperial era melted ideologically into imperial metaphors and bureaucratic systems" Oakes and Sutton, 2010:14 - 15).

This view clearly echoes the concept of "duplication" put forward by Du Zanqi.

However, the author does not believe that the country has rebuilt its "duplication" ability.

At most, it is working hard to rebuild its "duplication" ability.

There are limits to the country's "duplication", and the local significance of religious activities itself cannot be ignored.

The author hopes to analyze the process of applying for intangible cultural heritage by "Raosanling" and the analysis of "Raosanling" itself to see through the current relationship between folk religion and state management and its dilemma.

1.

The meaning of "roundabout three spirits" in local practice

"Raosanling" literally means "visiting three places".

Every year, it begins on the evening of April 22nd and ends on April 25th.

Most Bai families in Dali will have people participating, with as many as 200,000 people participating.

People stayed for one night in three places in the Dali Basin, visited the market,"sang tunes" and sang impromptu songs),"went to the temple to kowtow and burn incense", and there were other recreational activities such as dancing and watching movies.

The accounts about the three places are uncertain.

In fact, they include the south gate of the ancient city of Dali, the Qingdong Shendu more than ten kilometers north of the ancient city, Heyicheng on the Erhai Lake, and Majuyi in the south.

The entire journey follows three terrains: "flat dam","foot of the mountain" and "seaside", and circles around the Dali Basin clockwise.

"Raosanling" has the term "romantic meeting", which refers to the teasing and ambiguous relationship between men and women.

Some can even develop into de facto lovers and may also lead to marriage.

Many lovers will maintain long-lasting relationships, even after each other marries.

Because of this, the most common way to participate is for friends of the same sex to go together.

Except for family fun, couples generally do not go together.

As marriage patterns and sexual relationships change, such secret relationships are actually rare.

Among the participants of the "Raosanling", the "Lianchi Club" is the most organized and purposeful group.

This is the general term for regional worship organizations distributed in various villages.

The name of this organization is also written differently, such as "Lianci Society"), but there is still only one name in the White language,"guyaoni hui", which is "Old Mother Society", which is composed of elderly women.

Their activities are mainly concentrated in the temples of "Raosanling", including burning incense, worshiping Buddha, burning a letter praying to the gods on the table), chanting scriptures, sending gold nuns, sending son-in-law, etc.

In addition, they will occupy the square outside the temple, participate in singing and dancing entertainment activities, and are like the protagonists of "Raosanling"-they also think so.

This is one of the reasons why "Raosanling" is called a religious activity [1].

The meaning of "Raosanling" to local people is related to the Benzhu Temple widely spread in the Bai villages in Dali.

There is a clear correspondence between the main temple and the family.

For major and minor matters in the family, weddings and funerals, the elderly women in the family need to go to the main temple to "burn incense".

On the birthday of the owner, families in the entire settlement must send people to participate in the celebration.

The structure of the main temple is unusually stable.

People who come to burn incense believe that all gods promote "clear, auspicious and peaceful" and "prosperity."

The "Lianchi Club" is composed of elderly women in families with married children.

They meet regularly at the main temple, believing that they are "practicing" according to Buddhist regulations, and thus bringing "peace and prosperity" to their families.

It can be seen that there is a logic of "seeking from outside" between households and owners.

The family's "peace and prosperity" and "prosperity" are obtained from the outside by the elderly women in the family.

During important family activities such as weddings and funerals, going far away, doing business, building houses, etc.), they want to go to the main temple to burn incense and kowtow.

Many people still participate in the lotus pond meeting in their later years and go to the main temple to practice.

Although the safety and prosperity of a family is not enough to just ask for the owner, this "seeking from outside" relationship is the consensus of the vast majority of people, including elderly women, and has been recognized and supported by almost all members of society in practice.

If the temple of the Lord is the destination for the family to seek from abroad, then the temple of the "Shendu" in the "Raosanling" is the destination for the Lord to seek from abroad.

The main place for "Raosanling" is the "Shendu" where participants gather on the 23rd of the April lunar calendar.

It is located at the foot of Cangshan Mountain in Qingdong Village, more than ten kilometers north of the ancient city of Dali.

The main god of Shendu is the "Love Emperor", the god of the gods who rules all the lords of Dali, and is known as the "Five Hundred Godkings".

The structure of today's Shendu temples was rebuilt according to the pattern of the 1930s, which also reflects this affiliation.

In the main hall, the "Emperor Aimin" is in the middle, with a master next to him.

There are five statues of the master on the left and right sides of the front.

They hold wooden boards in their hands and face the god wearing the emperor's nine-strung crown, which happens to be the formation of "all officials going to court".

The remaining gods are no different from other main temples.

But there is an important difference, that is, there is no statue of "Prince Sakyamuni" in Shendu, but there is a small statue of "Mother of the Nation, Atai" on the right side of the "Aimin Emperor".

In an ordinary temple, if a newly married woman hits the statue of Prince Sakyamuni with a coin, it means that she will soon become pregnant.

In Shendu, newlywed women will use a pair of small shoes embroidered by themselves to secretly replace the small shoes in front of the "Mother of the Nation" statue.

It is believed that the effect is the same as hitting the Crown Prince, or even better.

Ordinary people who come to "surround the three spirits", with their arrival in the capital of God as a sign, generally also worship God and donate money.

The latter is called "hanging merit" or "moving merit".

This is called the "Chao" temple.

In addition, we also need to "stroll"(the meaning of "round" in "round three spirits"), go to the market, buy snacks and small goods, chat with friends and acquaintances, and a large number of visitors dance and sing.

Singing is called "singing tune" and is an impromptu song competition between strange men and women.

The Lianchi Society of almost every settlement in the Dali Basin will visit the temples one by one in the name of its own main temple, especially to go to the Shendu to "worship" the gods.

During these four nights and three days, they had to wear their best clothes, carry bedding, stools, incense sticks, and food, and worship God one stop at a time.

In addition to activities such as burning incense, kowtowing, making tables, cooking, and "exercising merit", they must use the lotus pond meeting as a unit to knock wooden fish and recite scriptures together.

Different from ordinary main temples, many members will go to the square outside the temple to beat the overlord whip and money drum during the day, and at night, they will sing, fight and joke among members.

But no matter what, they all use their own lotus club as their activity unit.

We can see that the core temples of the "Raosanling" and the Shendu) constitute the "exterior" of the effectiveness of the main owners of each village.

If women in the household gain prosperity and peace by going to the main temple to worship God and practice, then the Lianchi Society represents the "main lord" of the main temple to worship the main lord.

This reflects a hierarchical relationship with Shendu.

Women who did not join the Lianchi Association came to Shendu on this special day and also prayed for the prosperity and peace of their families.

The project blessed by the main temple-the peace and prosperity of people, wealth and livestock-can also be found in the Shendu.

The difference is that God is higher than God.

The four places that "Raosanling" experienced were located at the flat dam, the foot of the mountain and the seaside.

According to previous research Fitzgerald, 1941; Liang Yongjia, 2005), the flat dam-the foot of the mountain-the seaside constitute an obvious internal and external relationship.

Therefore, from the household to the owner and then to the capital of God, the "external pursuit" realized by women has been completed, and its theme is still prosperity and peace.

So, does God himself have an "external"? This involves the "prehistoric history" of "Raosanling" and is related to a myth widely circulated in Dali.

The myth describes the story of how an ancient princess in Dali made a private engagement with hunters from Weishan in the wild and was finally recognized.

The author has written many articles to discuss this myth and its significance in "Raosanling", believing that this is a "stranger-king" model (Liang Yongjia, 2005, 2009;Liang, 2006, 2007, 2011), that is, power comes from the outside and from Weishan south of Dali.

Moreover, this externality is "ultimate", that is, the "Stranger-King" itself no longer has externalities.

On the ninth day of the second month of the lunar calendar before the "Raosanling", each lotus pond meeting in Dali would go to the "Western Temple" in Weishan to take the princess back to the capital, known as the "Golden Lady".

On the third day of the third month of the lunar calendar, I have to go to Baohe Temple south of Shendu to see Aunt Jin's ugly husband off, which is called "sending off the son-in-law." On the 22nd day of the fourth lunar month, the Lianchi Festival will gather to spend the night outside the City God Temple at the south gate of the ancient city of Dali, and send off Aunt Jin and the son-in-law again early the next morning, sending off the couple who brought high yields and "prosperity" to Dali.

This send-off time kicked off the next "Round Three Spirits" festival.

The three "pickups" and "delivery" were carried out according to the dates stated in the myth.

It can be clearly said that the core capital of "Raosanling" comes from its exterior-the son-in-law of Weishan.

2.

Local governments and scholars: criticism and dilution

"Raosanling" is a controversial festival, in which the meeting of men and women is considered "disgraceful" in literature since the end of Qing Dynasty (Fitzgerald, 1941).

As far as the author knows, this custom has never been found in the literature before the end of Qing Dynasty.

[2]In the more than 50 years from the late Qing Dynasty to the Republic of China, many people have noticed the strangeness of "Rao Sanling".

Their descriptions emphasize the strange costumes and huge scale of the participants.

At the end of the Qing Dynasty, a Dali Jinshi named Duan Wei once wrote "Bamboo Branch Ci Around the Mountain Forest" to describe this custom.

Yang Qiong, another local scholar, lamented the grand occasion, but was puzzled: "It is said that this meeting began in Nanzhao and cannot be banned for thousands of years.

It is probably confused by witchcraft and prayed for his children to eliminate diseases.

Dali is also a Buddhist country, and the theory of gods and Buddhas is is particularly superstitious and unexplainable "[Yang Qiong, 19981910):302].

Yang Qiong's statement confirms that this custom is a mysterious custom with a long history and continuity.

This became the main idea of various interpretations with populism and evolutionism in the future, that is, to recognize that this is an ancient custom that should be banned but cannot be banned.

Moreover, predecessors accurately pointed out that the purpose of this festival is to "pray for children to eliminate disease", which is the same as the "prosperity" and "clear luck and peace" pursued by today's participants.

Since the end of the Qing Dynasty, local governments have slandered and even banned "Raosanling" in the name of "superstition." In the fifth year of the Republic of China (1916), the officially compiled "Dali County Annals Draft" said: "On the 234th and 5th days, the 'Raosanling' meeting was held at Shengyuan Temple in Xizhou.

Most people living in the countryside are superstitious about it.

Today, it is banned and the statue is destroyed." But as Yang Qiong said, this custom cannot be prohibited.

The author saw on the inscription in the 36th year of the Republic of China (1947) that the income of "Raosanling" reached 700,000 yuan in national currency that year.

The scale was quite large, and the local gentry all "made contributions".

Miao Luanhe also described the "Roundabout the Three Spirits" in the 1940s:"There was a grand meeting in Yu, called Roundabout the Three Spirits...

singing and dancing, competing with each other, and it was extremely prosperous for a while"[Xu Jiarui, 19781948):272].

In this regard, Xizhou literati Zhao Guansan [19991947):307] continued Yang Qiong's statement: "Roundabout Sanling has been together for more than 1,200 years without being abandoned.

It seems that it has not been easy to announce it with a piece of paper.

It can be seen that there is a certain gap between the government's interpretation of "Raosanling" and the interpretation of folk literati.

After the founding of New China, the Bai people became a nationally recognized minority.

"Raosanling" was initially reinterpreted by local scholars in a similar "graceful" way.

Zhang Wenxun, author of "The History of Bai Literature"(1959:301), believes that although "Raosanling" once had religious overtones and many of its contents were quite obscene, the essence of the festival was not there, but "became an entertainment gathering after the people's hard work and before the more intense labor planting seedlings." This avoids the "disgraceful" content.

During the "Cultural Revolution","Raosanling" was explicitly prohibited, and the reason seemed to be related to the "disgraceful" content.

Wang Ningsheng (1997:77) once recorded that during the "Cultural Revolution", many people who went to the "Three Spirits" were arrested on the charge of "messing around with men and women." Even in the 1990s, local scholars were still reluctant to discuss this sensitive content.

For example, Yang Zhengye 1994:20 - 30) only believed that "Raosanling" was a "ritual for the farming people." The views of scholars are actually in line with the wishes of the participants.

Not only do local people not want the fact that the lover relationship, which is not universal, to be known to outsiders, but they are also reluctant to openly discuss this plot in daily life.

Some Bai scholars also try to downplay this "lover" relationship (Zhao Yuzhong, 2008), which is understandable and should be respected.

Before the founding of New China, the distinction between Han and ethnic minorities was not important to "Rao Sanling" Liang Yongjia, 2008).

[3]The difference between Han people and civilian families lies in language and education, not blood.

The identification of the Bai people and the implementation of the ethnic policy in 1956 shifted the difference between the Bai people and the Han people from confirmation of language and education level to confirmation based on blood.

At the same time, writing about the Bai nationality based on Stalin's definition of the nation has gradually increased, and has increased even more since the 1980s.

The author once called this a process of "cumulative defamiliarization"(Liang, 2010).

By 2005, this process had allowed "Raosanling" to break through the "critical point".

The official neither denied the "backwardness" of this custom nor avoided the content of "lover".

On the contrary,"backwardness" became the reason why the festival should be protected, and "lover" became an important part of the demonstration of "intangible cultural heritage."

3.

Self-Orientalization: Apply for Intangible Cultural Heritage

UNESCO adopted the Convention for the Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage in October 2003 to protect oral legends, performing arts, social customs, etiquette, festivals and other content.

China joined the Convention in August 2004 and actively carried out cultural heritage protection.

It not only conducted a nationwide census, but also published a national-level intangible cultural heritage list many times.

"Raosanling" is a total of 518 items included in the first batch of national intangible cultural heritage in 2006).

After "Raosanling" was selected, its application materials were widely circulated on the Internet as a sample in Dali Bai Autonomous Prefecture, Yunnan Province, 2005).

Soon, the local government applied to UNESCO for a world intangible cultural heritage project through Yunnan Province and the Ministry of Culture.

The motivation of local governments to apply for intangible cultural heritage is relatively easy to understand.

Such a name can not only protect the heritage itself, but also expand the influence of the place, create opportunities for investment promotion, and especially revitalize the tourism industry.

As an important tourist city in southwest China, Dali certainly hopes to have "intangible cultural heritage" projects.

The reason for choosing "Raosanling" as the application project may be quite complicated.

The human, material and public relations resources involved in the entire application process will be very interesting research topics.

This article mainly focuses on how "Raosanling" was reinterpreted, so the analysis focuses on the application itself.

The whole text highlights the nationality, strangeness and fragility of "Rao Sanling".

It is a construction of "authenticity" and an active self-oriental text.

At the beginning of the application, the main body made the following judgment on "Rao Sanling":

"Dali Bai people around three spirits" is a traditional folk cultural activity formed by the Bai people during their long-term farming life and rice farming customs to entertain gods and people, and use singing and dancing, worship activities as carriers.

It contains history, religion, folk customs, art, commerce, etc.

Many cultural contents.

"Around three spirits"...

The original meaning may mean visiting three ancient public houses.

This content roughly positions "Raosanling": it is an ancient custom unique to the Bai people and may refer to the ancient "three public houses".

The term "Gongfang" was first seen in Yang Zhengye's "Bai Nationality Culture"(1994).

It may be said that this is an ancient group marriage model."Gongfang" is a place where a single woman meets a man who comes to woo her.

This statement may come from the imagination of nearby societies such as the Mosuo people and is based on early evolutionary thought's speculation about the pattern of human marriage.

Because of this,"Raosanling" has been given a nation-specific meaning similar to a "living fossil".

Precisely because "Raosanling" is regarded as unique to the Bai people, many contents highlight the "Bai people's characteristics".

Many of the more common musical instruments and arts mentioned in the application are called "Bai people", such as "Bai people suona","Bai people big three strings","Bai people dance", etc.

In addition, many statements that are obviously shared by the Han people and other ethnic minorities have also been portrayed as unique matters of the Bai people, such as "Overlord Whip","Double Swallow Swallow","Money Drum" and "Sun Cream".

Many "unique" matters come together to form a unique and concentrated cultural space.

As the application form states: "'Dali Bai Around Three Spirits 'is a unique folk carnival of the Bai people that entertains gods and people.

It focuses on displaying the Bai music, song and dance art."

"Raosanling" seems to have become a stage for comprehensively displaying Bai culture.

These activities and objects representing Bai culture "embody the ancient Bai people's worship and social sacrifice culture, carry many important historical and cultural information and original memories of the Bai people", and "embody the characteristics of the Bai people's diverse religious beliefs." "Raosanling""is actually a collection of Bai folk culture and a large-scale performance of various music, song and dance art.

It gathers almost all categories of performing arts popular among the Bai folk in Dali, fully demonstrating the Bai folk art in Erhai area.

Rich existence and high degree of artistic achievements." In addition,"Raosanling" is "a stable folk cultural activity in both time and space...

The song and dance art it contains not only forms its own unique fixed pattern, but also continuously develops and improves skills through the activity itself." It also "reflects the Bai people's artistic aesthetics, superb craftsmanship and creative talents...

It remembers the formation and development history of Bai national costumes, and reflects the profound Bai cultural connotation." This series of descriptions all highlight the corresponding relationship between "Raosanling" and "Bai nationality".

What is remarkable is that the application materials clearly state the content of "lover" in "Raosanling" and believe that this is an important value of "Raosanling" worthy of protection:

During the "Raosanling" festival, men and women are allowed and even encouraged to meet openly.

Whether they are men, women and old, they can meet their pre-marital lovers during these days.

Provide lovers who cannot become a couple with a few days of public time that society and family allow and are not subject to moral condemnation.

This is an unprecedented official attitude, which is different from the official attitude of the past century, including since 1949, and from the efforts of local scholars to downplay this content.

This "lover" relationship is no longer a "promiscuous relationship between men and women", nor a "production mobilization", nor is it a verbal joke that may not necessarily exist in fact.

Instead, it is a "place for the Bai people to freely communicate emotions." It "retains some ancient customs of group marriage and provides lovers who cannot become a couple with a few days of public time that is allowed by society and family, and is not subject to moral condemnation." This is considered to be a positive value and a "concentrated expression of Bai society's respect for women and recognition of women's status." This custom is even more commendable because it is different from the traditional morality of the Han people:

In addition to farming sacrifices and the belief in the Lord, the cultural connotation of the "Raosanling" activity conveys the very important reproductive worship message of the Bai people.

During the event, Bai men and women can establish a relatively secret relationship through duet songs and other forms.

This evolution of moral norms not only implied the Bai people's revision of Confucian feudal etiquette, but also expressed their great concern for human nature and externalized it as a symbol of the affinity between man and man and nature.

This passage is very interesting.

It implies an evolutionary premise: "Raosanling" retains the primitive custom of group marriage.

Because of this, it is higher than "Confucian feudal etiquette", which obviously refers to the culture that originated from the Han Dynasty that is believed to have no respect for women.

In other words,"Raosanling" is an ancient Bai custom that survives on the edge of Confucian etiquette.

Moreover, it happens to be in line with the so-called modern spirit of personality liberation and respect for women that the applicant imagines.

In this way, a reproductive worship activity formed in ancient times and passed down to this day has become a legacy that conforms to the contemporary value of equality.

This is why it revised "Confucian feudal etiquette".

Many Bai scholars have also begun to analyze the content of "lover".

Wang Wei 2006:51) believes that "Raosanling" is "a relic of the group marriage system between clans during the matriarchal clan era by the Bai ancestors." Today's "Raosanling" folk festival is called the 'Bai Nationality's Valentine's Day.

The' lover 'here refers to the lover before marriage.

It is another unexpected relationship between man and woman in the Bai nationality marriage and family relationship." The expression "Bai's Valentine's Day" also appeared on a CCTV program.

On August 5, 2009, CCTV-7's "Rural Areas" column described how married men and women met their past lovers during this festival known as the "romantic party" and "Valentine's Day", and how to "seek children" in this way.

A Dali Bai folk customs expert explained in detail the method and significance of this kind of lovers 'meeting.

The application materials believe that it is precisely because "Raosanling" has unique national characteristics, ancient and unique, that is,"authentic", that "in the face of the changes of today's times and the impact of strong culture, the ancient folk cultural activities of 'Raosanling' are facing a gradual crisis." The reason is also very paradoxical: the biggest enemy of the "Raosanling", which happens to be in line with the value of modern equality, is modernization itself:

In the past 20 years, with the changes in rural industrial structure and the continuous improvement of modern agricultural production levels, the lifestyle of the Bai people in Dali has undergone major changes.

Coupled with the popularization of mass media and the enhanced mobility of social members, Bai village culture, which has a long historical and cultural tradition, cannot be in a dominant position.

The values that have long maintained and supported the traditional Bai lifestyle are also undergoing drastic changes.

The farming culture of traditional Bai society is weakening day by day, and traditional moral concepts have been greatly impacted.

Coupled with factors such as local tourism development and the continuous increase in village population, the spatial environment on which the "Raosanling" activity relies has undergone major changes.

This change has exacerbated the decline of the "Raosanling" activity.

This ancient Bai folk cultural activity will face the crisis of gradual extinction.

The logic here is that precisely because the "Raosanling" is national, ancient, and authentic, non-Bai, modern, and mixed factors have become the enemies of the "Raosanling" and threaten the continuation of this activity, so it must be protected.

In other words, contrary to the logic of "Raosanling" participants "seeking from outside," the "outside" is the real threat to "Raosanling".

Judging from the text applying for intangible cultural heritage alone, the official interpretation is quite different from that of the practitioners of "Raosanling", interpreting "Raosanling" as a strange custom on the edge of contemporary society and the strong Confucian culture, and struggling as a result.

Of course, this expression largely conforms to the standards set by China and UNESCO for the protection of intangible cultural heritage, but it is also undeniable that this explanation is almost entirely based on an imaginary theory of human marriage development, taking it for granted that the so-called "primitive group marriage" state is recognized.

This explanation also clearly equates "Raosanling" with ethnicity, authenticity and antiquity, and is in line with the way marginalized groups are described in Chinese literature.

These are the three metaphors mentioned by Harrell (1995): ancestors, children, and women.

For this reason, the "Application Form for Representative Works of National Intangible Cultural Heritage" with the theme of "Rao San Ling" is not only an internal oriental description (Schein, 1997), but also a relatively obvious self-oriental description.

What is more noteworthy is that the text applying for intangible cultural heritage is not only limited in relation to the meaning given to the festival by the participants of the "Raosanling", but even uses the opposite logic.

Not only have they not been recognized, but even the core charter of the "Third Princess Golden Aunt" that "surrounds the three spirits" has not been mentioned.

As mentioned earlier, the logic of practitioners of "circling three spirits" is "seeking from outside", that is, a step-by-step outward process from home to owner, from owner to Shendu, and from Shendu to Weishan.However, in the logic of intangible cultural heritage applicants, the significance of festivals lies in the absolute internal and external differences, that is, the difference between "white" and "non-white".

"Raosanling" carries everything within the Bai people-the Bai people's religion, art, handicrafts, and cultural space, while external factors-modern agriculture, strong culture, mass media, population mobility, tourism development-are all factors that threaten "Raosanling" and are the reasons why "Raosanling" must be protected.

Conclusion: The limit of "duplication"

From the above analysis, we can see that there are very different interpretation spaces for the "Raosanling" festival.

As the main body, participants form complex social organizations, ritual activities and celebrations through layer by layer outward activities.

These activities are closely connected to their daily lives, and in these connections form an overall festival that can be called folk religion towards the invisible "other world".

At its core is a mythical story, a group of gods who are believed to have existed and still bless the entire Dali, as well as the master systems distributed throughout Dali with their own legends.

The relationship between gods provided the basic basis for the people and the Lianchi Society's "circling three spirits" and other activities.

Even Dali people who do not believe or are skeptical about this do not oppose the activities of believers and actively participate in these activities.

The formation or symbolic teasing of a "lover" is only one part of a series of activities to seek children and wealth, and it is mandatory to a certain extent: the author saw with his own eyes an expressionless man and woman singing to each other in public, never glancing at each other from the beginning to the end.

When newly married young women go to various temples to pray for children, they are often forced to do so under the pressure of their mother-in-law.

Therefore, these gods are not ancient and unverifiable "reproductive worship", nor are they historical memories recording Bai cultural symbols: the author has never heard such an explanation among ordinary Bai people.

These gods are a temple system closely related to the prosperity and peace of thousands of families.

There are many similar arguments in the study of folk religions across China.

Over the past 100 years, how to interpret festivals like "Raosanling" has been closely related to how to imagine the country, nation, modernity and history.

"Raosanling" has become mysterious and unexplainable, and the government has also adopted a hostile attitude.

However, scholars have not really laughed at the "indecent" plot and consciously catered to the wishes of the participants.

Intangible cultural heritage applications follow a different logic.

"Raosanling" is interpreted as a unique peculiar customs of the Bai people and has become very fragile in the face of modernity.

It is taken for granted that there was a phenomenon of group marriage in ancient times, which remains to this day and conforms to the ethics of modern people's equality.

The content of "lover" was not only officially recognized for the first time, but was also demonstrated as an activity to revise Confucian ethics and respect women.

There is a huge contrast between the official explanation and the participants 'explanation.

Obviously, the participants were not really involved in the interpretation process during the application process.

In this sense, the "intangible cultural heritage" application of "Rao Sanling" is a typical "national perspective."

The "intangible cultural heritage" of "Raosanling" is just one of dozens of religious activities that have successfully entered the ranks of "intangible cultural heritage".

One of the consensuses of the applicants and participants is the religious characteristics of "Raosanling", although the former is imagined as a primitive "reproductive worship" and the latter is imagined as a "son-in-law and princess" in history.

As a religious activity,"Raosanling" is not any of the five major religions, and its activities cannot be incorporated into the existing legal and regulatory system as a religion.

"Intangible cultural heritage" provides such an opportunity that the worship of the owner and the "Raosanling" ceremony can exist in the form of "culture", which not only protects the "Raosanling", but also provides an opportunity to develop Dali's tourism, which certainly kills two birds with one stone.

It is in this sense that the author believes that the "intangible cultural heritage" of "Raosanling" is a kind of "duplication", a kind of state authorization and management of various religious activities.

However, as mentioned above, there is a wide difference between the official interpretation and the participants 'interpretation.

One party actively orients itself and plays a romantic and primitive marginal role, while the other party simply pursues the prosperity of the family with "external ethics".

"Overlapping" external ethics through self-Orientalization does not so much create an endless space for "mutual appropriation", but rather creates an unbridgeable interpretation gap.

At least until now, the interpretations of both sides are still parallel and the well does not interfere with the river.

The local government wisely rehearsed a large-scale "Raosanling" artistic and artistic performance, which was held in Chongsheng Temple Square, which had no substantive relationship with "Raosanling", for higher-level evaluators to watch.

"Overlap" is an "seal" in the local sense, declaring that it conforms to a certain nationally recognized sense.

However, there is still no room for this "duplication" between the official "original memory of the nation" and the "group marriage status" relics and the folk's external pursuit of "prosperity" and "clear luck".

The author puts forward the "limit of duplication" in an attempt to describe how such a state of mutual understanding is formed.

On June 1, 2011, the "Intangible Cultural Heritage Protection Law" of the People's Republic of China was implemented,"overlapping" religious activities other than the five major religions, gaining greater initiative and meaning space.

On November 29 of that year, the 6th meeting of the UNESCO Intergovernmental Committee on Intangible Cultural Heritage ended in Bali, Indonesia.

The application for a representative work of the world intangible cultural heritage of "Raosanling" was not approved, and the Committee recommended that the applicant re-apply.

Ten days later, the Ministry of Culture held a national work conference on the protection of intangible cultural heritage.

Vice Minister Wang Wenzan said that in the protection and utilization of intangible cultural heritage, the cultural value and specific connotation of cultural heritage must be fully respected and "pseudo-customs" must be resolutely stopped.

The fate of intangible cultural heritage in the context of global secularization has undergone more profound changes under the joint effect of laws, policies, international conventions, local drivers, national norms, economic drivers and other aspects.

It may be said that how to understand the "duplication" ability of rebuilding the country in the secular era has become an issue that needs to be explored urgently in the current relationship between the state and religion in China.

(This article is included in the fourth edition of Religious Anthropology, September 2013.

See the original text for annotations and references)