Measures on the Management of the Reincarnation of Living Buddhas in Tibetan Buddhism, Order No. 5, issued by China's State Administration for Religious Affairs in 2007, is the primary regulatory text itself, requiring government approval for the identification, verification and enthronement of reincarnated tulku within Tibetan Buddhism, formally stated as protecting religious tradition while barring living Buddhas from re-establishing abolished feudal privileges. Its strength is that it is the actual regulation's own wording, essential for any claim about what Chinese law formally requires rather than a paraphrase from either side of a heavily politicized dispute. Its limit is severe and should be stated directly: the Dalai Lama, the Central Tibetan Administration and international human rights organizations have condemned the order as a mechanism for state control over Tibetan Buddhist succession rather than genuine religious protection, so a claim treating the order's stated religious rationale as its actual purpose, rather than as one deeply contested framing, needs that opposing view stated alongside it.
Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier3
The People's Republic of China's State Administration for Religious Affairs' own regulatory measure; a primary government document, but one issued by a state authority whose relationship to the tradition it regulates is itself contested, and no live page could be independently confirmed, hence the tradition's-own-account tier rather than the top tier given to an uncontested primary institutional record. NotesThe Chinese state's regulation requiring government approval of recognised reincarnations. Cited as evidence of what the state has decreed. It is not a religious authority and the Tibetan religious institutions do not accept it.
Citation
AuthorState Administration for Religious Affairs, People's Republic of China
PublisherState Administration for Religious Affairs
Publication Year2007
Source Typeprimary-text
Claims Backed By This Source (25 claims)
This source backs 25 claims across the atlas. As facts: 14 well-attested, 3 scholarly debate. As cited relationships: 1 holds. Plus 7 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.
Disposition By Topic
- Sources, 7 claims: 7 well-attested.
- Religious Legal Instruments, 6 claims: 3 well-attested, 1 scholarly debate, 1 holds, 1 general references.
- Articles, 5 claims: 4 well-attested, 1 general references.
- Religious Offices, 4 claims: 2 scholarly debate, 2 general references.
- Cities, 1 claims: 1 general references.
- Denominations, 1 claims: 1 general references.
- Religious Roles & Titles, 1 claims: 1 general references.
Well-attested
14Religious Legal Instruments
Scholarly debate
3Religious Legal Instruments
Holds
1Religious Legal Instruments
General References
7Religious Legal Instruments
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.
View At A Past Year
The atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.