Matthew T. Kapstein Selected Articles on Tibetan Religion During the 11th-13th centuries All rights reserved. Not to be reproduced in any form without prior permission of the author. The present selection includes the following articles: 2009a “The Commentaries of the Four Clever Men: A Doctrinal and Philosophical Corpus in the Bon po rDzogs chen Tradition.” In East & West 59: 107-130. 2008 “The Sun of the Heart and the Bai rgyud ’bum.” In Tibetan Studies in Honour of Samten Karmay, Part II. Revue d’études tibétaines 15, pp. 275-288. 2009b “Preliminary remarks on the Grub mtha’ chen mo of Bya ’Chad kha ba Ye shes rdo rje,” in Sanskrit Manuscripts in China, ed. Ernst Steinkellner. Beijing: China Tibetology Publishing House, pp. 137-152. 2004 “Chronological Conundrums in the Life of Khyung po rnal ’byor.” In Journal of the International Asoociation of Tibetan Studies 1: 1-14. 1992 “The Illusion of Spiritual Progress”. In Paths to Liberation, ed. Robert Buswell and Robert Gimello. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, pp. 193-224. 2011 “The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven: A Tibetan Defense of Mongol Imperial Religion,” in Mahāmudrā and the Kagyü Tradition. Matthew T. Kapstein and Roger Jackson, eds. Andiast, Suisse: International Institute for Tibetan and Buddhist Studies GmbH, pp. 259-316. 2010 “Chos-rgyal ’Phags-pa’s Advice to a Mongolian Noblewoman,” in Historical and Philological Studies of China’s Western Regions, vol. 3, 135-143. The Commentaries of the Four Clever Men: A Doctrinal and Philosophical Corpus in the Bon po rDzogs chen Tradition by MATTHEW T. KAPSTEIN Among the major cycles of the early rDzogs chen tradition of Bon, the Byang sems gab pa dgu bskor (BGGK), or the ‘Ninefold Cycle of the Secrets of the Enlightened Mind’, has not received more than passing attention from contemporary scholarsi(1). While I shall not attempt to examine the cycle as a whole at this time – its complexity demands more sustained treatment than is possible here – one of the notable textual collections that is related to it will instead be my topic. This is a group of four commentaries devoted to the BGGK, reporting the views of four legendary masters, and said to have been discovered together in sPa gro, that is, Paro in what is today Bhutan, by the famed physician and gter ston Khu tsha zla 'odi(2). The presumed role of the latter in the redaction of the collection provides us with a plausible basis for its dating – at least for the dating of the received text – placing it roughly in the second half of the 12th centuryi(3). This is quite significant, as it permits us to relate these works to parallel developments within other traditions (1) Brief bibliographical notices will be found in Kværne 1974: 111, no. K 109, and 139, no. T 257); Karmay 1977: 95, nos. 53-53, and 143, no. 73.ii.5; and Martin 2001: 255, no. 20. See, too, Klein & Wangyal 2006: 327. The fundamental texts of the Byang sems gab pa dgu bskor were published in a lithographic po ti edition by the Tibetan Bonpo Monastic Community in 1967 (Karmay’s nos. 52-53). (2) The four commentaries were published in Gal mdo, pls. 147-498, reproducing the sMan ri xylographic print. When citing passages from this work below, I will provide the plate number with a point followed by the line number. Bon po hagiographical traditions concerning Khu tsha zla 'od may be found in Karmay 1972: 145-48. Prats (1982: 35-40, 91-92), translates and transcribes the brief rnam thar included by 'Jam mgon Kong sprul blo gros mtha' yas (1813-1899) in the gTer ston brgya rtsa'i rnam thar, where Khu tsha is called Ku sa sman pa. (3) Khu tsha’s lifetime may be assigned to the mid or late 12th century on the basis of a pointed reference to him in the life of the Buddhist treasure-finder Gu ru Chos dbang (1212-1270), where the latter’s father is presented as saying, ‘Doctor Kutsa, owing to his medical practice, neglected to serve living beings through the doctrine’ (Dudjom 1991: 765). As Gyatso (1994) has shown, Gu ru Chos dbang’s relationship with the Bon po gter ma tradition was in fact quite close, so that his awareness of Khu tsha, whose activities in sPa gro placed him in regions in close communication with Chos dbang’s native Lho brag, seems plausible. Klein & Wangyal (2006: 177, n. 40), state that Khu tsha composed the Four Commentaries in 1037, but this early dating is not supported by the sum of the evidence available. [1] 1 of Tibetan thought during the same period, as are now becoming much better known thanks to recent discoveries of early philosophical writings, above all the early bKa' gdams pa corpus found at the 'Bras spungs gNas bcu lha khangi(4). As my remarks below will make clear, the considerable interest of the Commentaries of the Four Clever Men (mkhas pa mi bzhi'i 'grel pa, KhMZh hereafter), as they are collectively designated, stems in large measure from their treatment of formal doctrinal categories, exegetical methods, and philosophical arguments within a broad context defined by the teaching of rDzogs chen. In this, they merit comparison with the Gal mdo collection that has been recently studied by Klein & Wangyal (2006), with which they share some features (and together with which they were in fact published), while remaining nevertheless quite distinctive. The BGGK itself, according to Bon po historical traditions, was first discovered and its primary texts established by the great creative figure in the early 2nd millennium development of Bon, gShen chen Klu dga' (996-1035)i(5). A variety of commentarial texts seem to have been included even in this initial revelation, though it remains a task for future research to trace out as precisely as possible the growth of the corpus as a wholei(6). The KhMZh, our concern here, was not among the original discoveries and is described as having been composed by the legendary Dran pa nam mkha' (placed by tradition in the 8th century) under the general title of the ‘Ocean of Awareness, the Four Commentaries Revealing the Intention of the Ninefold Cycle of the Secrets of the Enlightened Mind’ (Byang sems gab pa dgu bskor gyi dgongs pa bkrol pa'i 'grel bzhi rig pa'i rgya mtsho) (Gal mdo, pl. 147). Though, as the colophon affirms, Dran pa nam mkha' presented the ideas of the ‘four clever men’ (mkhas pa mi bzhi) within this worki(7), it is not the case that the four commentaries correspond to the four masters in turn. Rather, views attributed to them are found distributed throughout the KhMZh as a whole. The four commentaries that form the group are instead organized according to the different (4) The publication by the dPal brtsegs dpe rnying tshogs pa of 60 volumes of early bKa' gdams pa manuscripts over the past several years, most of them containing works dealing with philosophical topics, hints at the possibility of previously unanticipated precision in the study of the evolution of Tibetan thought during the crucial period of about 1100-1300. The impact of the gSang phu school on developments within a variety of traditions, including the early bKa' brgyud, the rNying ma (in particular, at Ka∆ thog), and the Bon po, and the various interactions among these traditions in the formation of philosophical scholarship, have not so far been studied in depth, though it is becoming clear that the promotion of pramå∫a?åstra at gSang phu had very broad ramifications extending far beyond the traditions most characteristically associated with specialization in this area. (5) I follow the dates proposed by Martin (2001: 88-89). (6) The most substantial of these apparently early commentaries is the Sems lung gab pa dgu skor gyi 'grel pa rgya cher bshad pa, the discovery of which is also attributed to gShen chen Klu dga' and which was published in the 1967 lithographic edition referred to in n. 1. (7) These four figures belong to the hoary antiquity of Bon and are listed as Zhang zhung sTong rgyung mthu chen, Me nyag lCe tsha mKhar bu chung, lDe gyi ma tsha rMa bu chung, and Se sha ri u chen. Refer to sPa bstan 1991: 137, 145. 2 [2] exegetical principles through which each one respectively elaborates, from various angles, the key concerns of the cycle, namely, the ‘secrets of the enlightened mind’. Their titles are as follows: 1. gces pa btus pa'i 'grel pa, ‘the commentary abridging cherished [instructions]’ (149.3-262.1); 2. spyi khog 'bru rnal gyi 'grel pa, ‘the commentary on the proper syllables of the general source-text’ (262.1-440.2); 3. sgos dmigs tshags kyi 'grel pa, ‘the sieve[-like] commentary [that catches just] the special points’ (440.2-470.4); 4. lta ba'i sgang (or: sgong) 'grel, ‘the overall commentary on the view’ (470.4-497.3). While these are all described as ‘commentaries’, 'grel pa, with the exception of the second they are not in fact direct glosses on the words of the primary text. They are concerned, rather, to orient the disciple to key themes and topics in relation to which the BGGK must be understood. I have described the cycle as belonging to the class of rDzogs chen texts, and, although this is in a general sense correct, it is important to note that the term rDzogs chen does not actually occur here, and that these works refer to their subjectmatter as rig pa byang chub kyi sems, the ‘awareness that is the enlightened mind’, thig le nyag gcig, the ‘sole seminal point’, or simply as theg pa chen po, the ‘Great Vehicle’. In this, and in many other features, their diction recalls the rDzogs chen sems phyogs, or ‘great perfection in the area of mind’, of the rNying ma pa tradition, which was undergoing a similar process of redaction and elaboration during roughly the same period as that to which our texts belongi(8). While such teachings are regularly presented as introducing the adept to a domain that transcends ordinary thought and discourse, what is particularly notable here, and resembling in some respects the Gal mdo materials, is the sustained strategy of developing discursive doxographical and dialectical frameworks precisely in order to dismantle and reach beyond themi(9). The commentaries, in this regard, are multifaceted in their recognition that no single approach will suit all disciples. The puzzle of speaking to surpass speech while addressing aspirants of varied capacity had emerged as a particularly prominent topic in Tibetan religious thought during the period of our texts' redaction; the roughly contemporaneous Ma∫i bka' 'bum, for instance, which shares their generalized rDzogs chen orientation, clearly thematises this in its use of (8) The rGyud 'bum of Vairocana offers a collection of works that in many respects merit comparison. Refer to Kapstein 2008. (9) Klein & Wangyal (2006) consider the issues involved here at length, writing on p. 37 that: ‘Unlike inference and direct perception in classic Buddhist discussions of mind and logic, reflexively authentic open awareness does not take the measure of anything. There is no process of authentification associated with open awareness at all; it is simply, in and of itself, authentic to its own nature. This is possible because, again, open awareness is not a consciousness. This is its unique epistemological characteristic, privileging it over the other authenticators’. [3] 3 the expression ‘magical fragments of instruction’ (man ngag 'phrul gyi dum bu) (Kapstein 2000: 153). In the BGGK and its allied literature, as well as the Gal mdo, the Sems phyogs literature of the rNying ma pa, and the Ma∫i bka' 'bum and related works, we find, I believe, diverse expressions of a common perspective, first arising perhaps in the rDzogs chen materials of the late first millennium, but reaching maturity and coming to pervade Tibetan contemplative traditions during the 12th century, when the ramifications of the new infusion of Indian learning began to be widely felt (cf. Germano 1994). The fourth of the commentaries of the KhMZh, ‘the overall commentary on the view’, offers a particularly salient example of the effort to employ discursive reason to transcend mundane conceptual activity. It appears initially as a fairly standard survey of elementary debating questions, presented in a manner well known from the contemporaneous Buddhist literature on logic and epistemology (Skt. pramå∫å, Tib. tshad ma), though following in its development the sequence of the nine vehicles (theg pa rim pa dgu), which will be considered in greater detail below. Thus, for instance, in the course of examining heretical (mu stegs pa) viewpoints, it introduces the theory, derived ultimately from some passages in the Upanißads, that ‘the soul is a permanent entity the size of a thumb’ (rtag pa'i bdag mthe bong tsam, 472.6)i(10). In its refutation of this notion, however, our text does not simply duplicate the Buddhist sources that surely lie in its background. The debate as it is developed here presents the proponent of the permanent soul as being asked whether his view is demonstrated just by affirming it (khas blangs pa tsam) or by rational proof (rigs pas brtags na 'grub). If the first, then he is refuted by the assertion that, if what is affirmed is so, just because it is so affirmed, then ‘gShen lha dkar po is here before us’ (mdun 'di ru gShen lha dkar po 'grub). And in the latter case, the proof offered by the soultheorist is that the åtman is required as the cause of bodily action (rtag pa mthe bong tsam de rgyu, lus kyi bya byed 'bras bu'o). But this is criticized as being an instance of non sequitur: ‘there’s a tiger down south, because of the clouds’ (lho phyogs na stag yod de, sprin 'dug pa’i phyir ro). Thus, though the topic and the methods of reasoning are well known from Buddhist writings, the precise development of the debate in this case is not. The author of our text sought to assimilate the new learning emanating from the Buddhist monastic colleges, but to do so according to his own lights. His goal, however, was to move beyond discursive reason, and so far, with this talk of the permanent soul and tigers and clouds, we remain well within its ambit. It is by working through a progression of theories, following the pathways of refutation and proof, that the ‘commentary on the view’ approaches its true destination, namely, the teaching of the ‘Great Vehicle’ (483.6 ff.), and in this context, to characterize the content of that teaching, it adopts a term employed equally in the Gal mdo: thig le nyag (10) The locus classicus is Ka†hopanißad, II.3.17: a¥gu߆hamåtra∆ purußo ’ntaråtmå sadå janånåæ h®daye sanniviß a∆, ‘the person who is the inner self, thumb-sized, rests ever in peoples’ hearts’. 4 [4] gcig, the ‘unique seminal point’ (or ‘unbounded wholeness’ in Klein & Wangyal’s evocative translation). Nevertheless, in presenting this concept, our text does not rush to assert that thig le nyag gcig is indeed beyond thought and language. Instead, in accord with the dialectical method that it has pursued thus far, it relies on the views attributed to the ‘four clever men’ to present even this as a topic to be debated (484.2 ff.). Thus two of the four are said to have affirmed that the ‘unique seminal point’ could be objectified in meditation (bsgom du yod pa), while the two others denied that this could be so (bsgom du med pa). A short extract from the debate at this point will help to illustrate the dialectical method as it has been adopted herein: First, the assertion that it may not be an object of meditation: as for the unique seminal point that is the essence of the view, it is sufficient that it be realized, for it is said that [its] realization and acquisition are simultaneous. Now the objection to that: is it the case that, having realized the unique seminal point, it need not be an object of meditation for one who has arrived at the conclusion, or that even beginners need not meditate? If you say that it need not be an object of meditation for one who has arrived at the conclusion, then as he would not have heard of ‘non-meditation’ [prior to the conclusion], on reaching the conclusion he would be meditating [upon it], which is something that even those who are partisans of meditation do not holdi(11). But if [one says that] beginners are not to meditate, then that is unworthy; for, because [such beginners] are liable to error, [non-meditation in this case] is not correct. Although, according to the assertion of non-meditation, the unique seminal point that is the way of reality for the Great Vehicle may not be the direct object of meditation, until the individual’s intellect is stable there is no contradiction in [affirming] meditation. Now, one says in objection to that: just how do you go about meditating upon the Great Vehicle intellectually? Do you meditate upon it as existent or as nonexistent? If you meditate upon it as existent, then it must have some characteristic properties. But if you meditate upon it as nonexistent, you enter into delusion, for there can be no meditating upon that which is not.i(12) (11) The interpretation of this sentence is not quite certain, and the text may be defective at this point. The argument, as I understand it, seems to be that, if non-meditation applies only at the point of culmination, then, because it does not therefore apply prior to that point, one must reach the culmination while meditating, which contradicts the original assertion of non-meditation. (12) Gal mdo, 484.2: de las dang po bsgom du med pa'i bzhed kyi/ lta ba'i ngo bo thig le nyag gcig de/ rtogs pas [3] chog ste/ rtogs thob dus gcig yin gsung ngo/ de la brgal ba/ lta ba thig le nyag gcig de rtogs nas/ mthar phyin pa la bsgom mi dgos sam/ las dang po la yang bsgom mi dgos/ mthar phyin nas bsgom mi dgos zhe na/ de bsgom med ma thos pa yin te/ mthar [4] phyin nas bsgom du yod par/ phyogs gcig bsgom yod pa rnams kyang mi 'dod pa/ las dang po ba nas bsgom du med na dmas pa yin te/ bslu bar 'gyur bas mi mad do/ bsgom du med pa'i bzhed kyis/ theg pa chen po'i yin lugs thig le nyag gcig de/ rang la bsgom [5] du med kyang/ gang zag la blo ma brtan gyi bar du bsgom pa la 'gal ba med ces bya'o/ de la rgol ba na re/ khyed theg pa chen po blo ji ltar bsgom/ yod par bsgom mam med par bsgom/ yod par bsgom na mtshan mar 'gyur la/ med par bsgom na 'khrul par 'gyur te/ [6] med pa la bsgom du med pa'i phyir ro. The entire discussion that we find here merits comparison with the treatment of ‘meditation and nonmeditation’ in the Gal mdo, as translated in Klein & Wangyal 2006: 254-57. [5] 5 Despite some questions of interpretation as noted, it is clear that the dialectical path explored here is not one that seeks to establish either ‘meditation’ or ‘nonmeditation’ in an ultimate sense. Rather, it urges the reader to surpass the network of binary oppositions in which the dispute finds its source. We may refer to Klein & Wangyal once again: What is the relationship between apparent binary opposites such as the conditioned and the unconditioned? The manner in which such conundrums are addressed is worthy of our attention. They are neither resolved nor unresolved, but, to coin a term, aresolved. (Klein & Wangyal 2006: 75). While structural oppositions of various kinds constitute the essential condition for constructive thought, the constructions that emerge are treated here as castles that appear in the sky. This is not to say, however, that the architecture of these intellectual edifices is not a matter of care. Indeed, as these brief notes on the ‘commentary on the view’ suggest, the system of the nine progressive vehicles forms a basic framework for doctrinal exposition throughout the KhMZh. Accordingly, close to the beginning of the ‘commentary abridging cherished [instructions]’ a summary account of the vehicles is provided, of which I provide a complete translation and text below. The specific approach that we find here, among the three major Bon po systems of nine vehicles, is that of the ‘southern treasure’ (lho gter), which also provides the basis for the exposition of the vehicles in the gZi brjid, now well-known thanks to David Snellgrove’s pioneering The Nine Ways of Bon (1967)i(13). The distinctive feature of the southern treasure’s teaching of the vehicles is the ample place that it accords, in the elaboration of the first four ‘causal vehicles’ (rgyu'i theg pa), for rites and techniques of apparently autochthonous Tibetan origin (though the Bon po themselves would insist on the transmission of these materials from Zhang zhung to Tibet, and before that from 'Ol mo lung ring). In the discussion of these approaches, we find the elements of what may be fairly described as an indigenous ethnography, as may be seen in its concern with divination, therapy, and mortuary rites, among other matters. The four ‘fruitional vehicles’ ('bras bu'i theg pa), by contrast, resembling more closely the ‘central treasure’ (dbus gter) of Bon in this regard, offer a clear parallel with the major Buddhist conceptions of the spiritual paths (Kapstein 200: 17). Finally, the culminating ‘Great Vehicle’ (theg pa chen po), as we have already seen, is none other than the teaching of the ‘enlightened mind’ (byang chub sems), understood here in the terms of the rDzogs chen traditions and the real point of the teaching of the nine vehicles as a whole. Despite my characterization of the content of the four causal vehicles as ‘autochthonous’, it should be noted that categories derived from Indian Buddhism (13) The system of the southern treasure is also summarized in the Bon sgo gsal byed, reproduced in Mimaki & Karmay 1997. For a brief introduction, see, too, Wangyal 1993: 203-206. 6 [6] are on occasion in evidence even here. This is perhaps most striking in connection with the fourth vehicle, the ‘gShen of Phenomenal Existence’ (srid gshen), where we read: [A]lthough one abandons [in death] the inanimate body, there are three – vital soul, intellect and mind – that wander in the round and experience pain. As for those three, vital soul, intellect and mind: the vital soul (bla) is that which amasses dispositions in the ground-of-all (kun gzhi); that which follows from connection with that is mind (sems); and there it is intellect (yid) that passes through varied pleasures and pains. The threefold analysis of the psyche in terms of kun gzhi, sems, and yid reflects quite closely the distinction found in such works as Asa¥ga’s Abhidharmasamuccaya, wherein vijñåna (rnam shes), manas (yid) and citta (sems) are distinguished, the latter being equivalent in this context to the consciousness of the ground-of-all (ålayavijñåna, kun gzhi'i rnam shes). Disregarding minor differences in the use of this terminology, however, the significant departure of our text from its Buddhist antecedents is to be found in its inclusion of the bla, the vital soul of properly Tibetan anthropologyi(14). This is a particularly clear example of a major Tibetan cultural concept that is prominent in the ritual lives of Buddhists no less than Bon po, but which Tibetan Buddhist doctrine ignores, no doubt due to its absence from the Indian Buddhist lexicon. By associating the bla with the workings of the ‘ground-of-all’, the author of our work has both established a role for it in an otherwise characteristically Buddhist conceptual scheme and, at the same time, ensured that the bla not be relegated to the status of folklore and treated as an artifact of Tibetan worldly belief that may be eliminated from more refined discourse. Given the great importance of the bla to Tibetan mythologies, rituals, and mentalities overall, it would seem that, in cases such as this, the Bon po succeed in presenting a truer picture of the actual Tibetan belief system than do the Buddhistsi(15). In closing this brief introduction to the BGGK and KhMZh, it may be worthwhile to reflect for a moment upon the endemic dispute within the study of Tibetan religion as to who owed what to whom, a dispute that has been sometimes couched in terms of the notion – an inappropriate and unhelpful one, I believe – of ‘plagiarism’. My examination of the texts treated here suggests, however, that, although there were certainly influences and borrowings, these often expressed themselves as creative appropriations, in which elements of originally disparate traditions were brought into new relationships in the field of what we might think of as Tibetan ‘fusion’ thought. Instead of invoking theft and plagiarism, we would do (14) On the bla, see especially Karmay 1998. (15) This is not to say, of course, that the bla is entirely ignored by Tibetan Buddhists. Its presence in ritual contexts but not in doctrine would no doubt be explained by appealing to the distinction between conventional and ultimate reality. The point remains, however, that normative doctrine seems rather removed from the predominant contours of properly Tibetan ways of thought. [7] 7 better to imagine a dialogic (or ‘plurilogic’) process unfolding within the history of Tibetan civilization, whereby, at various times and places, distinctive cultural syntheses were being continually achieved or challenged. Seen in this light, works like the BGGK and KhMZh may be seen as part of the historical trajectory that would culminate much later in such developments as the massive organization of the protector cults under the Fifth Dalai Lama, or of the ‘treasures’ under the aegis of the 19th century Ris med masters. In these and other cases, patterns of confrontation, accommodation and dialogue within Tibetan religious culture repeatedly engaged the polarities of autochthonous (= conventional, unrefined, wild) and Buddhist (= ultimate, cultivated, tame) beliefs and practices, undermining and reconfiguring both at one and the same time. TRANSLATION The Teaching of Bon in the Ninefold Progression of Vehicles The text translated here and transcribed below, as given in Gal mdo, 167.2-174.4, surveys the nine vehicles according to the system of the Southern Treasure. Though the exposition is in general quite clear, some of the vocabulary employed remains obscure, and I have not yet succeeded in resolving all points. I thank the Ven. Kyongtrul Rinpoche for his kind assistance in reading this work, though all faults of interpretation that may remain are of course my responsibility alone. I would be grateful to readers who may be aware of precise definitions of the more difficult terms noted here. Henceforth, the greatness of our proper textual tradition in respect to the vehicles is taught in what follows, where there are three [topics]: 1. the teaching of the four causal Bon; 2. the teaching of the four fruitional Bon; and 3. the teaching of the exceptional vehiclei(16). 1. Of them, in teaching the first, the four causal Bon, there are the vehicles of: 1.1. the gShen of Augury (Phya gshen), 1.2. the gShen of Appearance (sNang gshen), 1.3. the gShen of Marvels ('Phrul gshen), and 1.4. the gShen of Phenomenal Existence (Srid gshen)i(17). Each has three subtopics: the teachings of entranceway ('jug pa'i sgo), practical action (spyod pa'i las), and realized view (rtogs pa'i lta ba). (16) There is an annotation (mchan) at this point in the text that reads, sems kyi gnas lugs ji ltar (sic!) bar 'dug pa'i phyir ro, ‘because it is just as is the abiding nature of mind’, however, it seems probably to pertain to the line just above, which belongs to the preceding section of the work. (17) The terminology employed here is quite problematic from the perspective of translation. gShen, of course, refers to the Bon priesthood and in this context means roughly a ‘priestly way’. Phya was at times taken to be a quasi-divine force ordering the world, or at least apportioning the fate and fortune of living beings. Elsewhere it may refer to auguries and divinition, which better accord with the 8 [8] 1.1. First, then, the three concerning the gShen of Augury: 1.1.1. The entranceway is an entrance through exorcism (gto)i(18) and medical diagnosis (dpyad). How does one thus enter? In general, sentient beings are subject to many congenital afflicting spirits (gdon) and so forth, and one enters [this vehicle] in order to remove them by means of divination (mo) and exorcism. Because they are subject to many diseases of fever and cold, etc., one enters in order to alleviate them by medical treatment and diagnosis. 1.1.2. As for the practical action, when the effects of disease or afflicting spirits have appeared, first [one investigates] what harm has occurred and what sort of disease or afflicting spirit there is. You examine a disease by pulse and urine, while afflicting spirits are examined by divination and mthangsi(19). Without halting the application of medicine and treatment to the effects of disease, you bring about benefits by medicine and treatment; and without halting the application of divination and exorcism to the effects of afflicting spirits, you bring about benefits through various sorts of exorcism. This is the practical action. 1.1.3. Concerning, now, the realized view: for example, just as a scout on the mountain pass spies out all enemies and dangers [and so brings about their avoidance or removal], so in this case you realize, with respect to disease, that it may be treated and cured, and with respect to afflicting spirits, that they may be impeded and deflected. Such is the view. 1.2.1. Second, the entranceway to the gShen of Appearance: one enters through the gate of the four doors of incantation, the nine vocal inflections (skad gcong), and the forty-two thanksgivings. The four doors of incantation are the door of worship of the divine spirits, the door of removal and cleansing, the door of liberation and ransom, and the door of Augury (phya), Enrichment (g.yang) and gNyani(20). The nine vocal inflections are, first, three with respect to leading; then, three with respect to transformation; and, finally, three with respect to settling. The forty-two thanksgivings are ten with respect to the gate of worship of the divine spirits, ten present context. sNang, though signifying ‘appearance’, has special reference here to the apparent world taken as the play of divine and demonic forces that are engaged by ritual means. 'Phrul, always associated with illusion and magical ability, was, as Stein (1981) has shown, associated in early times with the marvelous insight of the king, an aspect of the semantic background that perhaps informs to some extent the use of the term here. Srid, though referring to ‘phenomenal existence’ in general, has particular reference here to post-mortem existence, as is seen in the emphasis that is clearly placed upon mortuary rites. Snellgrove (1967) remains the essential Western-language source dealing with this vocabulary in Bon po usage. (18) gTo covers in fact a broader category of ritual than ‘exorcism’, though ‘practical magic’ would perhaps be too broad. See now Liu 2005. (19) mthangs is of uncertain meaning, though no doubt referring to a type of sortilege. (20) Though gNyan is explained here with clear reference to the two classes mentioned just below, it is perhaps in fact the remedies to these that are of concern here. This would help to explain its inclusion with phya and g.yang. [9] 9 with respect to removal and cleansing, ten with respect to liberation and ransom, ten with respect to Augury and Enrichment, and one each with respect to gNyan pa sri and gNyan po spyii(21), making forty-two in all. In that way, one enters unerringly, in accord with the chants of thanksgiving and the methods of playing the drum. 1.2.2. As for the practical action: because all that appears and comes into being abides as gods and demons, with respect to the 80,000 sorts of obstacles and the eightfold groups of godlings (lha ma srin), whether in reference to past deeds or ephemeral conditions, one amasses the several requisites and ritual items. Having divided the beneficial deities and the harmful spirits and beseeched the deities for final purposes, the excellent priesthood (gshen rab) provides a refuge for its lords and patrons. At intervals, one offers ransoms (glud) to the obstacles, and thereby reconciles opponents ('gras pa), removing their animosity ('khon pa). Thus, one methodically extracts the nails and arrowsi(22), and gently terminates the continuity of the illness. In the end, one oppresses the sri at the threshold and so imprisons the sri in a pit (gcan khung). 1.2.3. Concerning the view to be realized: it is as at markettime, when the speech of the traders is translated by their respective leaders, whereby each ones’ desires are respectively fulfilled. Similarly, in recognizing this appearance to be a divinity, and thus beneficent, or a demon, and thus harmful, one comes to realize that all of birth and death are fashioned by divinities and demons. 1.3.1. Third, the entranceway of the gShen of Marvels: one enters by means of the combination of method and magic. As a method for extending the teaching of the eternal Bon, before those who are fearful, in a location where there are savage divinities and demons, one amasses the necessary provisions, including flesh and blood. One enters in order to coerce the divinities and demons, such as the bdud and srin po. 1.3.2. As for the practical action: by means of mantra, mudrå, and samådhii(23), according to one’s degree of intimacy with and attainment of the arrogant worldly divinities – such as the dbal mo, gyad mo, gzi ma and thang moi(24) – who are (21) These designations seem to name classes of malignant spirits – compare the definitions Snellgrove (1967: 297) offers for gnyen(-po) – though, if this is so, it would seem that in the present context it should be the means for alleviating the ills caused by such spirits that is at issue. The sri, mentioned here and in the following paragraph, are frequently associated with disease and death among infants. (22) thabs kyi [= kyis] gzer mda' 'phyung. The ‘nails and arrows’ (gzer mda') may perhaps be understood metaphorically here, as referring to the sources of ailments. (23) Of course, the use of Sanskrit vocabulary in the present context is in some respects inappropriate. Nevertheless, because it provides a widely recognized ritual terminology, it is adopted here for reasons of convenience. (24) The dbal mo are well known as the female counterparts to the fierce warrior-deities, the dbal. The remaining three groups of female spirits here mentioned are obscure, though the thang mo are perhaps the goddesses of the plains. 10 [10] respectful of Bon and attached to the gShen, one wins the sign of success (drod rtags), according to the degree to which one has entrapped the enemy's soul-sign (bla rtags), and thus one cultivates experience. Such is the practical action. 1.3.3. Concerning the view to be realized: it is like master and slave, for just as the master puts the slave to work, the practitioner, like the master, realizes the dbal mo and factotums (las mkhan) to be like slaves and servants. Thus, by freeing oneself, one desires to free others. This is the view. 1.4.1. Fourth, the entranceway of the gShen of Phenomenal Existence: one enters by way of the eighty-one means of death, the four doors to the grave, and the 360 mortuary rites. Among them, these are the eighty-one means of death: twenty deaths due to illness through fever or chill; twenty sudden deaths due to spirits and obstacles; twenty deaths by weapons, due to violence; twenty deaths conditioned by the elements; and the one death due to karman, when the lifeforce is spent. This makes eighty-one. They are summarized, moreover, in the four doors to the grave. What are those four? The four are the pair of bkra and bkre'ui(25), and the pair of knife and weaponi(26). As for the 360 mortuary rites: there are 120 varieties of deceased ancestor and parental lineagei(27); 120 varieties of cemetery interiori(28); and 120 varieties of mortuary priest, from among the entourage of the deceasedi(29). With respect to them, one enters without error. 1.4.2. As for the practical action: with compassion and loving affection, like a mother, one is to be skilled in the means of guiding the deceased, who turns in the three realms and wanders among the six destinies. One unites the true sign and its true significance (bden pa'i brda don) at the frontier of the visible world of the living and the invisible world of the dead, and purifies [the fate of the deceased] by emanating offerings (gtor ma) to discharge debts (lan chags)i(30) and as ransom (glud). This is the practical action. 1.4.3. Concerning the view to be realized: it is like a dream; for, on falling asleep, although one’s body does not budge from the bed, the mind is excited by objects (yul las 'phros), so that one experiences various pleasures and pains. Similarly, although one abandons [in death] the inanimate body, there are three – (25) Perhaps ‘fortune (= bkra shis) and famine (= bkres)’? (26) This should probably be read as meaning 'violent death' in general. Compare the usage of mKhas pa lde'u 1987, pp. 375-76. (27) shi rabs and cho 'drang (= cho 'brang?). This terminology, as used here, is somewhat obscure. Cho 'brang properly refers to maternal lineage. (28) 'dur ba'i khogs. Here, too, the reading is uncertain. The last syllable resembles khogl, which is of course impossible. (29) Despite the uncertainties in the precise interpretation of this passage, the division of mortuary rites in relation to the ancestors, the space consigned to the dead, and the priesthood concerned seems generally appropriate. (30) Lan chags is taken to refer specifically to ‘karmic debts’, i.e., obligations stemming typically from negative relations with others that must be discharged in this or future lives. [11] 11 vital soul, intellect and mind – that wander in the round and experience pain. As for those three, vital soul, intellect and mind: the vital soul (bla) is that which amasses dispositions in the ground-of-all (kun gzhi); that which follows from connection with that is mind (sems); and there it is intellect (yid) that passes through varied pleasures and pains. The desire to purify that by means of three – bskal, srid and gshogsi(31) – is the essential aspect of the view. 1.5. Thusfar, the causal vehicles have been explained. 2. Henceforth, in what follows, the four Bon of the result are taught: the vehicles of 2.1. laymen (dge bsnyen), 2.2. ascetics (drang srong), 2.3. the pure A (a dkar), and 2.4. the primordial gShen (ye gshen). There are three divisions of each of them, among which: 2.1.1. Concerning the first of them, the entranceway of the laymen is an entry via the ten virtues. Abandoning the three types of bodily evils, one enters by preserving life, distributing donations, and practicing continence. Abandoning the four types of evils of speech, one speaks the truth, avoids rumor, speaks gently, and does not prattle. Abandoning the three types of mental evil, one enters by not entertaining malicious thoughts, thinking beneficially, and thinking inerrantly. 2.1.2. The practical action is activity that, on abandoning even subtle forms of evil, cultivates the practice even of the slightest virtues. 2.1.3. And concerning the view to be realized, just as, having first prepared the cause, the result emerges later, so there is a cause of error in the mind, wherefore, for the while, one earnestly practices austerities so that that error is renounced and purified, whereupon one aspires to obtain the result later. That is the correct view. 2.2.1. Second, the entranceway of the ascetics is an entry via the four immeasurables and the ten virtues. Among them, the four immeasurables are love, sympathetic joy, compassion and equanimity. Of them, love is an all-embracing nurturing, while compassion empathizes and sustains. Sympathetic joy produces enthusiasm for the benefit of living beings. Equanimity makes no distinctions in the [the scope of that] joy. As for the ten virtues, one enters just as before. 2.2.2. Regarding the practical action, there is the men’s moral code and the women’s moral code. In the men’s moral code, one upholds 250 [branch regulations] that are derived from four roots. There the four roots are [to abstain from] killing, theft, sexual incontinence, and lying. The 250 branches derived from them are: 50 misdeeds pertaining to killing; 50 misdeeds pertaining to theft; 50 misdeeds pertaining to sexual incontinence; 50 misdeeds pertaining to lying; and 50 misdeeds pertaining to diet and comportment. One upholds thus 250. In the (31) The interpretation of this threefold classification of the means to purify the three elements that are subject to transmigration remains uncertain; bskal refers to ‘luck, fortune, destiny’, srid to the possibilities and prospects of phenomenal existence, and gshogs, literally ‘wing, flank’, perhaps to accompanying factors of some sort. 12 [12] women’s moral code, one upholds 360 branches derived from eight roots. Of them, the eight roots are, in addition to the four roots given above, [to abstain from] perverse desire, injurious thoughts, rumor, and anger. The 360 branches derived from them are: 100 regulations to be observed by the body; 100 regulations to be observed in speech; 100 regulations to be observed mentally; 20 regulations to be observed in one’s comportment; 20 regulations to be observed in adornments and colors [of clothing]; and 20 regulations to be observed in diet. These are the 360. To maintain them [i.e., the men’s and women’s codes] is the practical action. 2.2.3. The view that is to be realized is the understanding that the objects that are grasped externally are atoms and that the cognitions that grasp internally are momentary. The view holds that both exist ultimately. 2.3.1. Third, the entranceway of the Alpha Pure consists of the nine approaches that form the foundation for ritual service and the eighteen branches of attainment. There, the nine approaches that form the foundation for ritual service are three approaches to service that depend upon bodily mudrås, three approaches to service that depend upon vocal b¤jas, and three approaches to service that depend upon mental samådhi. The three bodily approaches are the mudrå of natural accoutrements, the mudrå of the upper body [in the phase of] creation [in the form of the divinity], and the mudrå of action involving [ritual] preparations and transformations. The three vocal approaches are the infallible cause which is the root mantra, the conditional mantra [in the phase of] creation, and the mantra of practical action that is recited. The three mental approaches are the samådhi of suchness, which is clear with respect to emptiness and selflessness, the samådhi of all-embracing appearance, which is clear with respect to the four immeasurables, and the causal samådhi, which is clear with respect to the body of the divinity, seedsyllables and light rays. The eighteen branches of attainment are: six branches of common attainment; six branches of supreme attainment; and six branches of exceptional attainment. Through these, one enters. 2.3.2. As for the practical action: in the bodily action, one practices the mudrås; in vocal action, one recites the mantras and b¤jas; and in mental action, one contemplates the three forms of samådhi. This is the practical action. 2.3.3. The view to be realized is like the moon arising [as a reflection] in water, or a rainbow appearing in the sky: all of the principles (bon) comprising the container and its contents, the round and transcendence are primordially autocognizing gnosis. One realizes the entire container that is the world to be a divine palace, and all the living beings that are its contents within to appear in the bodies of gods and goddesses. And one comprehends that to be apparent, but without substantial nature. 2.4.1. Fourth, the entranceway of the Primordial gShen is an entry via the expanse and gnosis. There, the ‘expanse’ is the unwavering ground-of-all, while gnosis is awareness that is limpid and incessant. Thus, one enters via clarity, without agitation. [13] 13 2.4.2. The practical action: the host of the pure divinities are entirely perfect with respect to their marks and signs; and to be entirely perfect, without adulteration, is the practical action. 2.4.3. The view that is to be realized is this: one comprehends that from the unborn space of appearance, awareness arises incessantly, or that the expanse and gnosis are nondual. 2.5. Thusfar, the four Bon of the result have been taught. Here, it is appropriate that the distinctions of cause and effect, or higher and lower vehicles, be put forth; and these should be known from the Summary Commentary on the View (lTa ba'i sgong 'grel). 3. Among them, this texti(32) is the general excellence of all of those vehicles. It is general, because there is none among the eight vehicles [just explained] that is not embraced in the expressive play of this Great Vehicle. And it is excellent because there is nothing at all superior to the realization of this Great Vehicle. 3.1. Hence, first concerning the entranceway of this, the Great Vehicle, being the general excellence of the ninefold sequence of vehicles and having been designated [as a vehicle] so as to resemble the preceding eight vehicles, it is not entered, as are the lower vehicles, via conceptual activity or with [the duality of] subject and object. Rather it is entered via the self-emergent great gnosis that is an equilibrium without duality. 3.2. The practical action is unlike that of the lower vehicles, in that there is no activity involving efforts; rather, one practices the four actions of the view, namely, oneness, plainness, open absence, and spontaneity. 3.3. The view that is to be realized is, unlike that of the lower vehicles, not a view involving objective orientation. 3.4. Because the meaning of these is taught at length below, it is unnecessary to do so here. That explains the Bon of the Great Vehicle. Thusfar, the greatness of the proper text of [this vehicle] has been explained. (32) I.e., the BGGK. 14 [14] TEXT: GAL MDO, 167.2-174.4 [15] 15 16 [16] [17] 17 18 [18] [19] 19 20 [20] [21] 21 22 [22] [23] 23 REFERENCES Achard, J.-L. (1999) L’Essence Perlée du Secret: Recherches philologiques et historiques sur l’origine de la Grande Perfection dans la tradition rnying ma pa. Turnhout. Dudjom Rinpoche, Jikdrel Yeshe Dorje (1991) The Nyingma School of Tibetan Buddhism: Its Fundamentals and History. Transl. Gyurme Dorje and M. Kapstein. Boston. Germano, D. (1994) Architecture and Absence in the Secret Tantric History of rDzogs Chen. Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies, 17, 2, pp. 203-35. Gal Mdo: Texts Concerned with the Logical Establishment of the Authenticity of the Rdzogs-chen Teachings of Bon. H.P. Dolanji, Tibetan Bonpo Monastic Centre, 1972. Gyatso, J. (1994) Guru Chos-dbang’s Gter 'byung chen mo: An Early Survey of the Treasure Tradition and Its Strategies in Discussing Bon Treasure. In P. Kværne, ed., Tibetan Studies. 2 vols., Vol. 1, pp. 275-87. The Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture. Oslo. Kapstein, M.T. (2000) The Tibetan Assimilation of Buddhism: Conversion, Contestation and Memory. Oxford University Press. New York. Kapstein, M.T. (2008) The Sun of the Heart and the Bai-ro-rgyud-'bum. In F. Pommaret & J.-L. Achard, eds., Tibetan Studies In Honor Of Samten Karmay. Part II – Buddhist and Bon po Studies. In Revue d’Études Tibétaines, 15, November 2008, (http://digitalhimalaya.com/collections/journals/ ret/): pp. 275-88. Karmay, S.G. (1972) The Treasury of Good Sayings. London Oriental Series, 26. Oxford University Press. London. Karmay, S.G. (1977) A Catalogue of Bonpo Publications. The Toyo Bunko. Tokyo. Karmay, S.G. (1998) Rituals for Recalling the bla and offering the glud. In The Arrow and the Spindle: Studies in History, Myths, Rituals and Beliefs in Tibet. Kathmandu. Klein, A.C. & Tenzin Wangyal (2006) Unbounded Wholeness: Dzogchen, Bon, and the Logic of the Nonconceptual. Oxford University Press. New York. Kværne, P. (1974) The Canon of the Tibetan Bonpos. IIJ, 16, 1, pp. 18-56; 16, 2, pp. 96-144. Lalou, M. (1952) Rituel Bon-po des funérailles royales. JA, 240, 3, pp. 339-61. Liu Shen-yu (2005) Tibetan Magic for Daily Life: Mi pham’s Texts on gTo-rituals. Cahiers d’ExtrêmeAsie, 15, pp. 107-26. Martin, D. (2001) Unearthing Bon Treasures: Life and Contested Legacy of a Tibetan Scripture Revealer. Leiden. Mimaki, K. & S. Karmay (1997) Bon sgo gsal byed: Two Tibetan Manuscripts in Facsimile Edition of a Fourteenth Century Encyclopedia of Bon po Doxography. The Toyo Bunko. Tokyo. mKhas pa lde'u (1987) mKhas pa lde'us mdzad pa'i rgya bod kyi chos 'byung rgyas pa. Gangs can rig mdzod Series, 3. Bod ljongs bod yig dpe rnying dpe skrun khang. Lhasa. Nebesky-Wojkowitz, R. de (1956) Oracles and Demons of Tibet. London-The Hague. Prats, R. (1982) Contributo allo studio biografico dei primi gTer-ston. Istituto Universitario Orientale. Napoli. The Rgyud-'bum of Vairocana (1971) 8 vols. Smanrtsis Shesrig Spendzod Series, 16-23. Leh, Ladakh. Snellgrove, D.L. (1967) The Nine Ways of Bon. Oxford University Press. London. Spa bstan rgyal bzang po (1991) bsTan pa'i rnam bshad dar rgyas gsal ba'i sgron me. Krung go'i bod kyi shes rig dpe skrun khang. Beijing. Stein, R.A. (1970) Un document ancien relatif aux rites funéraires des Bon-po tibétains. JA, 155-85. Stein, R.A. (1981) ‘Saint et Divin’, un titre tibétain et chinois des rois tibétains. JA, pp. 231-75. Stein, R.A. (1988) Tibetica Antiqua V: La religion indigène et les Bon-po dans les manuscrits de Touenhouang. BEFEO, 77, pp. 27-56. Wangyal, T. (1993) Wonders of the Natural Mind : The Essence of Dzogchen in the Native Bon Tradition of Tibet. Barrytown, New York. 24 [24] THE SUN OF THE HEART AND THE BAI-RO-RGYUD-’BUM* Matthew T. Kapstein EPHE, Vème Section Background n recent years we have seen much progress in scholarship clarifying the historical development of the Rdzogs-chen traditions of contemplative practice. Not long ago, this topic was, to quote Churchill in a context he never dreamt of, “a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma,” but now — thanks in large measure to the initial impetus provided by the late Herbert Guenther’s interpretations of the writings of Klong-chen Rab-’byams-pa (1308-64); to the pioneering contributions on the early formation of the Rdzogs-chen of Samten G. Karmay, to whom the present work is dedicated; and to the access to traditional instruction provided by some of the leading contemporary teachers of Rdzogs-chen meditation —, we face instead many particular riddles contained within a field whose general features no longer appear to be so mysterious as formerly they did.1 One of these particular puzzles is the collection of Rdzogs-chen tantras from the library of Rtogs-ldan Rinpoche that was published in 1971 under the title The Rgyud ’Bum of Vairocana (hereinafter: Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum). As the introductory remarks accompanying that work made clear, the collection had obvious affinities with the then known edition of the Rnying-ma-rgyud’bum, but also included many tantras not identified in the available catalogue of ’Jigs-med-gling-pa (1730-1798).2 Questions surrounding the origi- I * 1 2 The present essay was first presented to the International Association of Tibetan Studies meeting at Indiana University (Bloomington) in 1998. It is a pleasure to make it available in the present collection honoring a friend of many years, Samten G. Karmay, whose work has done so much to open the present subject-matter for scholarly investigation. For relevant background see, especially, Guenther 1975-76, 1984, 1994, Karmay 1988, Ehrhard 1990, Dudjom 1991, Germano 1994, Achard 1999, van Schaik 2003, Klein and Wangyal 2006, and Arguillère 2007. On the question of Rdzogs-chen in the Dunhuang documents, first explored in the work of Karmay, see most recently Meinert 2007. There have been, in addition, numerous popular translations of Rdzogs-chen texts that I do not attempt to document here. Since the original publication of Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum many additional materials for the study of the Rnying-ma-rgyud-’bum collections have become available. The Tibetan Buddhist Nyingma Tantras Archive, a project at the University of Virginia under the direction of Prof. David Germano, is seeking to develop a complete, comparative digital catalogue of the available sources. See also Ehrhard 1997. See now, too, the valuable resource created by Cantwell et al. 2002. 2 Tibetan Studies in honour of Samten Karmay nal provenance of the collection, the period and lineage in which it was compiled, remained unanswered. In the course of my work on the English version of the late Bdud-’joms Rin-po-che’s Rnying-ma’i chos-’byung, I became intrigued by references to the transmission of Rdzogs-chen materials in the Zur lineage, particularly during the 12th century. In the accompanying bibliography (Dudjom 1991 II: 269), I hazarded the guess that one of the works mentioned in the hagiography of Zhig-po Bdud-rtsis (1143-1199), namely, the Sun of the Heart of Contemplation (Bsam-gtan snying-gi nyi-ma, Dudjom 1991 I: 654), could be identified with a similarly titled text, the first text in fact contained in the Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum, which is entitled Paṇ-sgrub-rnams-kyi thugs-bcud snyinggi nyi-ma, the Sun of the Heart Which is the Essential Spirit of the Scholars and Saints.3 This guess led me to comment speculatively to several colleagues about the possible provenance of the Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum, and this snyanbrgyud came to be published, and later cited, without my prior knowledge or permission.4 I am now fairly convinced that my original hunch was in essence correct, and in the body of this essay will attempt to substantiate this, at the same time drawing out what conclusions might be warranted for our thinking about the history of the Rdzogs-chen tradition and the Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum itself, while also now providing interested colleagues with an appropriate citation. The Sun of the Heart The Sun of the Heart opens with a short introduction (3.1 - 4.1), in which two Tibetan bhikṣu-s, Bai-ro-tsa-na (Vairocana) and his companion Legsgrub, are in the course of receiving instruction from Shri Sing-nga-pra-pata (Śrī Siṃha) in the assembly hall of Ha-he-na-ku-sha (Dhahena).5 Coming to the exposition of the esoteric instructions in the area of mind (man-ngag sems-phyogs), he perceives that it is the time for Tibet to be tamed by this teaching, and so he imparts six particular teachings to them: 1. Rig-pa khu-byug 2. Rtsal-chen sprugs-pa 3 4 5 Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum, vol. 1, plates 1 - 172. In the remainder of this essay I refer to passages from this text by page and line number, given in parentheses without further identification. Germano 1994. The article in question in fact cited my unpublished opinions so frequently that it is a matter of some astonishment that the editors of the Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies made no effort at all to verify the many remarks that were attributed to me there. Germano’s reference was repeated in Ehrhard 1997: 263. Throughout this article I transcribe names and terms exactly as they are found in the Sun of the Heart, adding other, more widely known designations in parentheses where relevant. The Sun of the Heart 3 3. Khyung-chen lding-ba 4. Rdo-la gser-zhun 5. Mi-nub rgyal-mtshan nam-mkha’-che 6. Rmad-du byung-ba. With the original circumstances in which the teaching was imparted to the Tibetans thus described, the text launches into a series of expositions of the first five texts just enumerated, providing also brief indications regarding the qualities of the guru and appropriate circumstances for practice. It frequently describes these teachings as having been transmitted from Kun-tubzang-po to Dga’-rab-rdo-rje, and sometimes thence to ’Jam-dpal-bshesgnyen.6 I shall not discuss here in detail the identifications of the texts that are referred to by the titles just mentioned: the relationship between the first five titles and the five corresponding teachings is made very clear in the Sun of the Heart itself, and these five, moreover, correspond to the list of five “earlier translations of the Mental Class” found in many Rnying-mapa works7—the Rig-pa khu-byug and Rdo-la gser-zhun in particular are now very well known to contemporary students of Rdzogs-chen.8 The sixth, the text called Rmad-du byung-ba, a phrase that occurs in the titles of several Sems-sde tantras, is also usually included in the later lists of tantras transmitted by Śrī Siṃha to Bai-ro-tsa-na.9 This series of five teachings, which comprise more than half of the Sun of the Heart (to 104.6), is followed by a disquisition on “exegetical methods in general” (spyir bshad-thabs), explained in terms of the “aural transmissions relating to view, meditation, conduct and result” (lta-bsgom-spyod6 7 8 9 The pagination of the five teachings is as follows: 1. Rig-pa khu-byug (4.1 - 14.4): 2. Rtsalchen sprugs-pa (14.4-22.1); 3. Khyung-chen lding-ba (22.1-48.6); 4. Rdo-la gser-zhun (49.164.4); 5. Mi-nub rgyal-mtshan nam-mkha’-che (64.2-104..6). The close of the last interestingly remarks that “that [teaching] is not like what has been said in [the teachings of] the translators of the dharmacakra and Śākyamuni” (de ni chos kyi ’khor lo bsgyur ba mdzad mkhan dang/ shag thub la sogs par brjod pa lta bu ma yin no,104.5). The phrase chos kyi ’khor lo bsgyur ba mdzad mkhan may also be understood on analogy to ’khor lo bsgyur ba in the sense of Cakravartin. The first five are often classed as the snga-’gyur lnga, the “five early translations,” among the eighteen tantras of the Rdzogs-chen sems-phyogs that Vairocana transmitted. There are, however, differing redactions of these tantras in circulation and I have not yet attempted to identify the works referred to in the Sun of the Heart with actual texts to which we now have access. On the basis of the titles alone we may propose, however, the following general identifications, at least as a point of departure: 1. Rig-pa khu-byug (Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum, vol. 5, no. 8.a; Kaneko no. 8.1): 2. Rtsal-chen sprugs-pa (Bai-ro-rgyud’bum, vol. 5, no. 8.b; Kaneko no. 8.3); 3. Khyung-chen lding-ba (Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum, vol. 5, no. 8.c; Kaneko no. 8.2); 4. Rdo-la gser-zhun (=Byang-chub-kyi sems bsgom-pa, Bai-ro-rgyud’bum, vol. 5, no. 8.d; Kaneko no. 14); 5. Mi-nub rgyal-mtshan nam-mkha’-che (perhaps to be identified with Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum, vol. 4, no. 4; see Karmay 1988, p. 23, n. 22). Karmay 1988, Norbu and Lipman 1987. Rmad-du byung-ba occurs in the title of Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum, vol. 2, no. 2 (cf. Kaneko nos. 10, 20, 40, 42). 4 Tibetan Studies in honour of Samten Karmay ’bras-kyi snyan-(b)rgyud, 105.1-120.6). This subject-matter is further amplified by a group of brief commentaries and outlines on four Rdzogs-chen tantras, each given with its title in the vulgar Sanskrit often found in Tibetan works of this period, but with alternative titles at the end of each work. The texts in question are: 1. ’Bras bu rin po che dang mnyam pa’i rgyud kyi dka’ ’grel, also called Rin po che za ma tog ’bar ba (121.1 - 127.3). 2. Lta ba ye shes mdzod chen chos kyi dbyings, also called Rin po che ’phrul gyi lde mig (127.3 - 130.5). 3. Bsgom pa ye shes gsal ba chos kyi dbyings, also called Yang gsang thugs kyi lde mig (130.5 - 132.6). 4. Spyod pa ye shes ’bar ba chos kyi dbyings, also called Zab mo mchog gi lde mig (133.1 - 134.5). The texts of the tantras commented upon here are included in the second volume of the Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum.10 Finally, it is of great interest that the work closes with an extended discussion of “exegetical methods for explaining the precepts” (man-ngag bshad-pa’i bshad-thabs, 134.5 - 172.3). Here it treats of five major topics, explaining the teaching in terms of the significance of: (1) the history (lorgyus, 135.1 - 164.3), (2) the root [of the teaching, i.e. byang-chub-kyi sems] (rtsa-ba, 164.3 -6), (3) yoga (rnal-’byor, 166.2-169.3),11 (4) the purpose (dgosched,166.2-169.3) and (5) the words themselves (tshig), in fact a commentary on the Rig-pa’i khu-byug, referred to here as the “text” (gzhung, 169.3 172.3). The first and fullest of these sections is of special importance, as it is certainly one of the earliest relatively well-developed histories of the Rdzogs-chen traditions, it establishes the provenance of the work within the early Zur lineage, and it seems clearly related to the later expanded biographies of Bai-ro-tsa-na, known generally under the title ’Dra-’bag chen-mo.12 To call this a “history,” however, is perhaps misleading, for this 10 11 12 Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum, vol. 2, nos. 1.d-g. As Mr. Philip Stanley reminded me, the four texts commented upon here are among the Rdzogs-chen works preserved in the Peking edition of the Tibetan canon, nos. 5039-5042. Perhaps it is significant, too, that we find texts relating to the ’Khor-ba rtsad-gcod cycle in close proximity (nos. 5031-5035), which is also the case in Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum, vol. 2, nos. 1.a-c, and i-n. The provenance of the Rnyingma materials that are found in the Peking edition of the canon remains an intriguing problem. The Zur, of course, were active in China under the Yuan, but more pertinent, no doubt, was the reception by the Fifth Dalai Lama of elements of the old Zur-lugs. Cf. Ehrhard 1997: 262-263. This passage interestingly expands upon various explanations of the Tibetan term rnal’byor, and offers a very fine example of the manner in which some Tibetan religious circles were exploring the peculiarly Tibetan connotations of Buddhist terminology, quite apart from questions of Sanskrit usage. Note also that while a manuscript version of the ’Dra-’bag chen-mo is included in vol. 8 of the Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum, it certainly has no original relationship with the other The Sun of the Heart 5 section of the Sun of the Heart is primarily a lineage-list, expanded with the inclusion of occasional myths and legends. It opens with a version of the well-known Rdzogs-chen account of the primordial enlightenment of the buddha Samantabhadra,13 and then lists the succession of teachers of the Rdzogs-chen in India, providing only brief remarks on the circumstances of transmission from Samantabhadra through Mañjuśrīmitra (135.3 138.6). The entire lineage in India is as follows, and will be seen to resemble closely the list derived from the ’Dra-’bag chen-mo as given by Karmay.14 1. Kun-tu-bzang-po (Samantabhadra) 2. Rdo-rje-sems-dpa’ (Vajrasattva) 3. Dga’-rab-rdo-rje (Dudjom 1991 I: 490-494) 4. ’Jam-dpal-bshes-gnyen (=Mañjuśrīmitra, Dudjom 1991 I: 493-493) 5. Rgyal-po ’Da’-he-na-ta 6. Sras thu-bo Ha-ti (Rājahasti) 7. Sras-mo Pa-ra-ni 8. Rgyal-po Yon-tan-lag-gi bu-mo Gnod-sbyin-mo byangchub 9. Rmad-’tshong-ma Par-na 10. Kha-che’i mkhan-po Rab-snang 11. U-rgyan-gyi mkhan-po Ma-ha-ra-tsa (= King Indrabhūti) 12. Sras-mo Go-ma-de-byi (Princess Gomadevī) 13. A-rya A-lo-ke 14. Khyi’i rgyal-po Gu-gu-ra-tsa (Kukkurāja) 15. Drang-srong Ba-sha-ti (= ṛṣi Bhāṣita) 16. Rmad-’tshong-ma Bdag-nyid-ma 17. Na-ga-’dzu-na (Nāgārjuna) 18. Gu-gu-ra-tsa phyi-ma (the later Kukkurāja) 19. ’Jam-dpal-bshes-gnyen phyi-ma (the later Mañjuśrīmitra) 20. Lha’i mkhan-po Ma-ha-ra (Devarāja) 21. Bud-dha-kug-ta (Buddhagupta) 22. Shri Sing-nga (Śrī Siṃha) 23. Dge-slong-ma Kun-dga’-ma 13 14 manuscripts comprising the Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum itself, and thus should not be considered to be properly part of this collection. One of the later redactions of the ’Dra-’bag chen-mo is now available in English translation: Palmo 2004. Dudjom 1991 I: 115-119 and 447-450, Kapstein 2000: chapters 9-10. Karmay 1988: 19-21. The two lists are almost identical. Karmay was unaware that the ’Dra-’bag chen-mo was indeed repeating a received tradition at this point, and not itself inventing the lineage it reports. The concurrence between the Sun of the Heart and the ’Dra-’bag chen-mo here possibly strengthens my suggestion that the Sun of the Heart forms an important part of the background for the latter text. 6 Tibetan Studies in honour of Samten Karmay 24. Bye-ma-la-mu-tra (Vimalamitra) 25. ’Phags-pa Bai-ro-tsa-na The Sun of the Heart further specifies (138.6) that numbers 18-24 constitute the “lineage of seven,” with Bai-ro-tsa-na as the eighth added to this group. There are many interesting features of this list, which merits a much fuller analysis than space permits here. I confine myself to two topics of interest: (a) As its inclusion in the ’Dra-’bag chen-mo demonstrates, some knowledge of the lineage as given here was preserved through at least the 14th century, though the Rnying-ma-pa historians who do refer to it tend to abbreviate it, mentioning the figures 4-24 only as an enumeration of twentyone, twenty-three, or twenty-five generations, among whom few particular names are given.15 This sometimes results in the enumeration of the intervening generations being forgotten altogether: in the Gsan-yig of Gterbdag-gling-pa (1646-1714), for instance, the Rdzogs-chen-sems-sde lineage passes directly from ’Jam-dpal-bshes-gnyen through Śrī Siṃha to Bai-rotsa-na, although the lineage in Tibet that follows is closely similar to that given in the Sun of the Heart.16 The figures in the lineage in India who were still to some extent remembered seem to have been those also mentioned in connection with the traditions of Mahāyoga and Anuyoga, certainly the most important aspects of the Zur-lugs for the later Rnying-ma Bka’-ma tradition.17 15 16 17 Nyang-ral 488, for instance, mentions a lineage passing through “five hundred who were learned, including the twenty-five generations” ((gdung rabs) nyi shu rtsa lnga la sogs pa mkhas pa lnga brgya la brgyud). Klong-chen chos-’byung 202-203 enumerates Rgyalpo Dha-he-na-ta-lo, Sras thu-bo Ha-ti Rā-dza-has-ti, Sras-mo Pa-ra-ni, Klu’i Rgyal-po, Gnod-sbyin-mo byang-chub and the former Kukkurāja as having beheld the visage of Dga’-rab-rdo-rje. He further remarks that, down to Vimalamitra, there are differing enumerations of 25, 23, 21, 7, 5, 3, and 1 generation(s) in the lineage of transmission. Kong-sprul (1813-1899), Gdams-ngag-mdzod, vol. 12, 702.6, refers to the “twenty-one learned ones” (mkhas-pa nyi-shu-rtsa-gcig) intervening between Dga’-rab-rdo-rje and Bairo-tsa-na in the lineage of the “eighteen empowerments of the expressive power of awareness” (rig-pa’i rtsal-dbang bco-brgyad) according to the Kaḥ-thog tradition, and enumerates a lineage of the Rdzogs-chen sems-sde stemming from Kaḥ-thog (704.2-5) that passes from Dga’-rab-rdo-rje through Mañjuśrīmitra, Dha-he-ta-la, Go-ma-de-ba, Rabsnang-brtan, Tshogs-bdag, Klu-sgrub, Rdo-rje legs-brtsal, Ku-ku-rā-dza, Thor-tshugsdgu-pa and Mar-me-mdzad to Śrī Siṃha and thence to Bai-ro-tsa-na. That the Kaḥ-thog school may have preserved a richer tradition than the central and western Tibetan Rnying-ma-pa in regard to some of the obscure figures listed in the Indian Rdzogs-chen lineages is apparent, too, in the Sems-sde’i rgyud-lung-gi rtsa-ba gces-btus nang-gses letshan bdun, given in Bka’-ma, vol. 17. Gter-bdag Gsan-yig, plate 38. Examples include Indrabhūti, Gomadevī, and Kukkurāja. See, e.g., Dudjom 1991 I: 458462. On the mahāyoga and anuyoga lineages of the Zur, refer to Mdo-dbang and Dudjom 1991 I: book two, part five. The Sun of the Heart 7 (b) Some of the relatively obscure figures mentioned, for instance, the nun Kun-dga’-ma, are also known to Gnubs-chen Sangs-rgyas-ye-shes’s Bsam-gtan mig-sgron.18 Moreover, the form of Buddhagupta’s name, Buddha-kug-ta, conforms with other relatively early sources, including once again Gnubs-chen.19 This seems to suggest that the Sun of the Heart belongs to a stratum in the history of the Rdzogs-chen still close to that of the Bsamgtan mig-sgron, which indeed was also current within the early Zur tradition.20 Following the enumeration of the lineage in India, the lengthiest part of the history is given over to a biography of Bai-ro-tsa-na, treating especially of his exile in Rgyal-mo-rong in the east, and his disciple G.yu-sgra Snying-po (138.6 - 163.5). This entire section of the work merits careful comparison with the account of Bai-ro-tsa-na in the later ’Dra-bag chen-mo, of which the Sun of the Heart is possibly one of the prototypes.21 The historical discussion then closes with an enumeration of the lineage from G.yu-sgra onwards (163.5 - 164.3). Knowledge of the figures mentioned here was, of course, very well preserved in the later tradition.22 27. Bsnyags-gnya’ (Gnyags Jñānakumāra) 28. Sog-po Lha-dpal-gyi-ye-shes 29. Bsnubs (Gnubs) Sangs-rgyas-ye-shes 30a. Thugs-kyi sras bzhi (Pa-gor Blon-chen ’Phags-pa, So Yes-shes (sic!) dbang-phyug, Sru Legs-pa’i sgron-ma, Bsnubs Khung-lung (Khu-lung) Yon-tan-rgya-mtsho; cf. Dudjom 1991 I: 612-615) 30b. Sras Ye-shes-rgya-mtsho 31. Myang-mi Shes-rab-mchog 32. Myang Ye-’byung 18 19 20 21 22 Bsam-gtan mig-sgron 316 and 412. Norbu 1984 consistently reads “Buddhagupta,” correcting against the Bsam-gtan migsgron. The orthography of other old sources, such as the Dkar-chag ldan-kar-ma and Pelliot tibétain 44 (where it is a question of the transcription of the name Śrīgupta), however, confirms that the reading kug-ta/gug-ta does correctly represent the old Tibetan transcription. This is not to say, however, that it is necessarily the case that the composition of Gnubschen’s work (circa 10th century) and that of the Sun of the Heart were very close. I am maintaining only that both are familiar with similar sources and doctrines, and unfamiliar with developments such as the snying-thig traditions, so that both seem to stem from a common matrix within then early Rdzogs-chen tradition. Nevertheless, this does not preclude their composition being separated by several generations. Note that at the very beginning of this account plates 139-142 are out of order. The correct order here should be: 138, 141, 142, 139, 140, 143, 144, etc. BA 102-141, Mdo-dbang 148-261, Gu-bkra 242-283, Dudjom 1991 I: 600-652. Significantly, some members of this lineage are named in the labels of an exquisite ca. 13th century thang-ka depicting the blue Vajrasattva and now in the collection of the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts. Refer to Huntington and Huntington 1990: 309-13 and Kapstein forthcoming. 8 Tibetan Studies in honour of Samten Karmay 33. Zur Sha-kya-’byung-gnas 34. Rtse-mo lnga dang rtse-kog (Zhang ’Gos-chung, Memyag ’Byung-grags (Khyung-’dra), Gzad Shes-rabrgyal-po, Tsag Bla-ma, Zur-chung Shes-rab-grags-pa; cf. Dudjom 1991 I: 622, where the text reads rtse-mo bzhi dang rtse-kog-gcig, the last being Tsag Bla-ma) 35. Ka-bzhi gdung-brgyad (only the “four pillars” (ka-bzhi) are listed here: Skyo-ston Shakya ye-shes, Yang-kher (Yang-kheng) bla-ma, Rlan Shakya bzang-po, Mda’dig Chos-shag (Mda’-tig Jo-shāk); cf. Dudjom 1991 I: 642, where the “eight rafters” (gdung-brgyad) are also enumerated.) 36. Lha-rje Mda’-tsha hor-po (= Zur Sgro-phug-pa) 37. Lce-ston Rgya-nag 38. Dbus-pa Shakya bla-ma The list then closes with the characteristic phrase, des bdag la gnang ngo, “He bestowed it on me” (104.3). But who is this “me” that occupies the final position in the list? I would suggest that the name immediately preceding, Dbus-pa Shakya bla-ma, is likely to be identified with one of Lceston Rgya-nag’s leading disciples, Dbus-pa Ston-śāk, who is most often referred to in the histories by his epithet Dam-pa Bse-sbrag-pa (Dudjom 1991 I: 651-2). If this is correct, the self-reference may be due to none other than Zhig-po Bdud-rtsis, who counted Ston-śāk among his teachers and who, as we have seen, was involved in the transmission of the Sun of the Heart of Contemplation. Should we understand this to mean that he is the probable author of our text? I do not think that we should rush to such a conclusion, for the references to the Sun of the Heart in the histories suggest that it was already more or in less in existence, perhaps as a sort of compendium of treasured Rdzogs-chen instructions of the Zur tradition, though Zhig-po Bdud-rtsis may well have played a role in its redaction in the form in which it is preserved in the Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum today. Implications What, if anything, does this tell us of the Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum itself? One could, I suppose, argue that in the course of rumaging through old manuscript collections the compiler of the Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum found this interesting old Sems-sde text and decided to include it, in which case it really tells us nothing at all about the history of the collection of which it is but a small part. I think, however, that such a scenario is rather unlikely, and does not reflect a viable approach to the historical analysis of Tibetan scriptural corpora. While some tantras may have incidentally entered the The Sun of the Heart 9 Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum in this way, it is unlikely that an expository work, that is not itself a tantra, would have come to occupy a preeminent position within the Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum in this fashion. It is on the whole better to suppose that our collection is derived from earlier collections, and that one of these prominently included the Sun of the Heart, prominently enough in fact so that it would come to be placed as the very first text in the first volume of the Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum. Evidence of such a collection would plausibly point to the initial core which grew into the Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum. And, indeed, there is evidence of such a collection. Let us now consider further the reference, mentioned earlier, to the Sun of the Heart of Contemplation in Dudjom Rinpoche’s History. It occurs in close connection with the mention of Zhig-po Bdud-rtsis’s study of the “Twenty-four Great Tantras of the Mental Class, including the AllAccomplishing King and the Ten Sūtras.” A generation later, his disciple Rtaston Jo-ye (b. 1163) is reported to have “studied the Triple Cycle of the Mother and Sons, [which comprises] the All-Accomplishing King, the Ten Sūtras which are its exegetical tantras, and the four groups of exegetical tantras pertaining to the Tantra which Uproots Saṃsāra (’khor-ba rtsad-gcod-kyi rgyud) … and the commentaries on meditation [including] the Six Suns of the Heart (snying-gi nyi-ma drug)…” (Dudjom 1991 I: 658).23 This last title, I think, may also refer to our text, for as we have noticed above, its point of departure is the transmission of a group of six Rdzogs-chen tantras. Let us note, too, the conspicious presence in the first several volumes of the Bairo-rgyud-’bum of materials relating to the Kun-byed-rgyal-po and the ’Khor-ba rtsad-gcod cycle of tantras.24 Based upon what we have already seen, it is reasonable to assume that during the period with which we are here concerned, roughly the 12th century, there was an on-going process of compilation, within the Zur lineage, of texts and traditions connected with that tradition’s treasured teachings of the Rdzogs-chen Sems-sde, or Sems-phyogs, to use the expression that is actually employed within these texts.25 The initial parts of the Bai-ro23 24 25 The entire passage mentions several other texts and teachings, including the Bsam-gtan mig-sgron, which are also not represented in the Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum. If I am correct that the Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum is derived in part from an earlier Zur-lugs collection, it must be noted nevertheless that it is not a collection of which we have precise knowledge from our available sources. I defer here discussion of the “twenty-four great tantras of the mental class” (sems-phyogs-kyi rgyud-sde chen-po nyi-shu-rtsa-bzhi) referred to above. For their enumeration as given by Klong-chen-pa, see Dudjom 1991 II: 284-285. Possibly some of these are to be identified in Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum, vol. 1, nos. 2 and 3, etc. Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum, vol. 1, no. 4, gives only the last of the three main sections of the Kunbyed-rgyal-po, while vol. 2, no. 1, includes the ’Khor-ba rtsad-gcod cycle. The Mdo-bcu (Kaneko no. 10) are nowhere to be found in the Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum. The threefold classification of the sde-gsum—sems-sde, klong-sde, mang-ngag-gi sde—appears to originate in the tantras of the latter category and is unknown to the other systems of Rdzogs-chen. A single reference to the threefold classification in the rnam-thar of 10 Tibetan Studies in honour of Samten Karmay rgyud-’bum seem likely to have arisen as a result of this process, perhaps in one of the Western Tibetan lineages stemming from the Zur,26 so that what we find in the Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum today includes a truncated version of the Rdzogs-chen teachings of the Zur. At the same time, we must note that large sections of the Bai-ro-rgyud’bum appear to have no relation to the known Zur traditions. Franz-Karl Ehrhard has observed that a number of these tantras found in the Bai-rorgyud-’bum also appear in versions of the Rnying-ma’i rgyud-’bum recently located in Nepal.27 This may suggest some filiation among the textual traditions of the Rnying-ma-pa in the western parts of the Tibetan world, and perhaps the earlier existence of one or more collections that at some point were conjoined with the materials that, as I propose here, must derive from a branch of the Zur. In order to begin to sort out some of riddles that remain here, it will be no doubt useful to begin to compare our evidence regarding the Rdzogs-chen canons in West and Central Tibet with the available documents concerning the early Rdzogs-chen traditions of Kaḥ-thog.28 One hopes that the tracing of textual stemma on the basis of the available collections, in tandem with internal historical references, such as those I have indicated here, will permit us eventually to document the formation of the Rnying-ma Rdzogs-chen corpus in the crucial period from the 11th through 14th centuries. Given the importance of the Zur lineage in the history of the Rnying-ma Bka’-ma traditions,29 it remains puzzling that we have no evidence, so far as I have been able to locate to date, of later transmission, or even knowledge, of the Sun of the Heart, excepting of course the mere mention of the title in the histories.30 Even the Gsan-yig of the great Gter-dbag-gling-pa, in documenting the continuous transmission of the Zur tradition of the Rdzogschen, refers only to relatively late khrid-yig.31 One reason for this was no doubt the great success of the snying-thig traditions, which overshadowed the older approaches to the Rdzogs-chen, while absorbing much of their 26 27 28 29 30 31 Khyung-po rnal-’byor (written c. 1140) may be the earliest reference outside the tantras themselves, and perhaps reflects later editorial intervention. Refer to Kapstein 2004. Dudjom 1991 I: 702 mentions a Ya-stod zur-pa tradition, from which Klong-chen Rab’byams-pa apparently received some instruction. Besides this brief reference, however, nothing has so far come to my attention that would shed light on the Zur traditions in Western Tibet. Ehrhard 1997. Note that the tantras common to the collections studied by Ehrhard are concentrated in volumes 6-7 of the Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum (with some also in vols. 4-5), while the works I am tracing to the Zur-lugs are concentrated in vols. 1-2. Relevant sources include Theg-pa spyi-bcings and Rgya-mtsho mtha’-yas, on which see Kapstein 2000, pp. 97-106. See especially Mdo-dbang and Dudjom 1991 I: book two, part five. E.g., BA 138, Gu-bkra 281. Gter-bdag gsan-yig, plate 38, refers to two such works (khrid-yig che-chung) both authored by Blo-gros-bzang-po, who precedes Gter-bdag-gling-pa himself by only three generations. The Sun of the Heart 11 teaching.32 In the Sun of the Heart, for instance, we find much emphasis on bringing mind to rest in its natural state (sems-nyid rnal-du phebs-pa), a teaching that becomes formalized as part of the preliminary practice (sngon-’gro) in the snying-thig traditions and their offshoots. Moreover, the’Dra-‘bag chen-mo, in later times at least, no doubt supplanted whatever older biographies of Bai-ro-tsa-na were still to be found. The great interest shown by later Rdzogs-chen masters, particularly ’Jam-dbyangs Mkhyenbrtse’i dbang-po (1820-1892) and his disciples and colleagues, in the recovery and renewal of old and even lost teachings known only from the historical record, never seems to have extended to the early Zur-lugs.33 References Achard 1999 Arguillère 2007 BA Bai-ro-rgyud-’bum Bka’-ma Bsam-gtan mig-sgron Cantwell et al. 2002 32 33 Jean-Luc Achard, L’Essence Perlée du Secret: Recherches philologiques et historiques sur l’origine de la Grande Perfection dans la tradition rnying ma pa. Turnhout: Brepols. Stéphane Arguillère, Vaste sphère de profusion, Klong-chen rab-’byams (Tibet, 1308-1364), sa vie, son œuvre, sa doctrine. Orientalia Analecta Lovaniensa 167. Leiden: Peeters. G. N. Roerich, trans. The Blue Annals. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1976. The Rgyud-’bum of Vairocana. 8 vols. Smanrtsis Shesrig Spendzod series,16-23. Leh, 1971. H. H. Bdud-’joms Rin-po-che, ed., Rnying ma bka’ ma rgyas pa, Kalimpong, West Bengal: Dupjung Lama, 1987. Gnubs-chen Saṅs-rgyas ye-śes, Sgom gyi gnad gsal bar phye ba bsam gtan mig sgron, Smanrtsis Shesrig Spendzod series, vol. 74. Leh, 1974. Cathy Cantwell, Robert Mayer and Michael Fischer, The Rig ’dzin Tshe dbang nor bu The ascent of the snying-thig traditions may have corresponded, too, to a general shift in emphasis from bka’-ma to gter-ma teachings within the Rnying-ma-pa lineages. ’Jam-dbyangs Mkhyen-brtse and ’Jam-mgon Kong-sprul, however, were not altogether without interest in the Zur. According to a story I have been told repeatedly (by the late Dezhung Rinpoche, among others), but which I have not yet seen in written sources, they made great efforts to capture the vital force (srog) of the great, miraculous Heruka image of ’Up-pa-lung that had been constructed by Zur-po-che (Dudjom 1991 I: 626-28, 634-35) but which in their day no longer existed. 12 Tibetan Studies in honour of Samten Karmay Dudjom 1991 Ehrhard 1990 Ehrhard 1997 Gdams-ngag-mdzod Germano 1994 Gter-bdag Gsan-yig Gu-bkra Guenther 1975-6 Guenther 1984 Edition of the rNying ma’i rgyud ’bum: An Illustrated Inventory. University of Kent at Canterbury: Centre for Social Anthropology and Computing. Electronic publication: http://ngb.csac.anthropology.ac.uk/Title_p age_main.html Dudjom Rinpoche, Jikdrel Yeshe Dorje. The Nyingma School of Tibetan Buddhism: Its Fundamentals and History. Trans. Gyurme Dorje and Matthew Kapstein. Boston: Wisdom Publications. 2 vols. Franz-Karl Ehrhard, Flügelschläge des Garuḍa: Literar- und ideengeschichtliche Bemerkungen zu einer Liedersammlung des rDzogs-chen. Tibetan and Indo-Tibetan Studies 3. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag. Franz-Karl Ehrhard, “Recently Discovered Manuscripts of the Rnying ma rgyud ’bum from Nepal,” in Helmut Krasser, Michael Torsten Much, Ernst Steinkellner, and Helmut Tauscher, eds., Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the Seventh Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies. Vienna: Austrian Academy of Science, vol. 1: 253-267. ’Jam-mgon Kong-sprul Blo-gros-mtha’-yas, Gdams ngag mdzod: A Treasury of Instructions and Techniques for Spiritual Realization. Delhi: N. Lungtok and N. Gyaltsan, 1971. 12 vols. David Germano. “Architecture and Absence in the Secret Tantric History of rDzogs Chen,” JIABS, 17/ 2: 203-335. Record of Teachings Received: The Gsan yig of Gter-bdag-gliṅ-pa ’Gyur-med-rdo-rje of Smingrol-gliṅ. New Delhi: Sanje Dorje, 1974. Gu-ru Bkra-shis, Gu bkra’i chos ’byung. Beijing: Krung go bod kyi shes rig dpe skrun khang, 1990. Herbert V. Guenther, Kindly Bent to Ease Us. 3 vols. Emeryville, California: Dharma Publications. Herbert V. Guenther, Matrix of Mystery: Scientific and Humanistic Aspects of rDzogschen Thought. Boston/London: Shambhala. The Sun of the Heart Guenther 1994 13 Herbert V. Guenther, Wholeness Lost and Wholeness Regained: Forgotten Tales of Individuation from Ancient Tibet. Albany: State University of New York Press. Huntington and Huntington 1990. Susan L. Huntington and John C. Huntington. Leaves from the Bodhi Tree: The Art of Pāla India (8th-12th Centuries) and Its International Legacy. Seattle/London: The Dayton Art Institute in association with the University of Washington Press. Kaneko 1982 Eiichi Kaneko, Ko-tantura Zenshū Kaidai Mokuroku. Tokyo: Kokusho Kankōkai. Kapstein 2000 Matthew T. Kapstein, The Tibetan Assimilation of Buddhism: Conversion, Contestation and Memory. New York: Oxford Unversity Press. Kapstein 2004 Matthew T. Kapstein, “Chronological Conundrums in the Life of Khyung-po-rnal’byor: Hagiography and Historical Time,” in Journal of the International Asoociation of Tibetan Studies 1: 1-14. Kapstein forthcoming Matthew T. Kapstein, “Between Na rak and a hard place: Evil rebirth and the violation of vows in early Rnying ma pa sources and their Dunhuang antecedents,” in Matthew T. Kapstein and Sam van Schaik, eds., Aspects of Esoteric Buddhism at Dunhuang. Leiden: Brill. Karmay 1988 Samten Gyaltsen Karmay, The Great Perfection: A Philosophical and Meditative Teaching of Tibetan Buddhism. Leiden/New York: E. J. Brill. Klein and Wangyal 2006 Anne Carolyn Klein and Tenzin Wangyal, Unbounded Wholeness: Dzogchen, Bon, and the Logic of the Nonconceptual. New York: Oxford University Press. Klong-chen chos-’byung Klong-chen Rab-’byams-pa Dri-med-’od-zer, Chos-’byung rin-po-che’i gter-mdzod bstan-pa gsal-bar byed-pa’i nyi-’od, Gangs-can rig-mdzod Series 17. Lhasa: Bod-ljongs bod-yig dpernying dpe-skrun-khang, 1991. Mdo-dbang Rig-’dzin Padma-’phrin-las, Bka’ ma mdo dbaṅ gi bla ma brgyud pa’i rnam thar. Smanrtsis Shesrig Spendzod series, vol. 37. Leh, 1972. Meinert 2007 Carmen Meinert, “The Conjunction of Chinese Chan and Tibetan rDzogs chen 14 Tibetan Studies in honour of Samten Karmay Norbu 1984 Norbu and Lipman 1987 Nyang-ral Palmo 2004 Peking Rgya-mtsho mtha’-yas Theg-pa spyi-bcings van Schaik 2003 Thought: Reflections on the Tibetan Dunhuang Manuscripts IOL Tib J 689-1 and PT 699,” in Matthew T. Kapstein and Brandon Dotson, eds., Contributions to the Cultural History of Early Tibet, Leiden/Boston: Brill, pp. 239-301. Namkhai Norbu (Nam-mkha’i nor-bu), Sbaspa’i rgum-chung: The Small Collection of Hidden Precepts, A Study of an Ancient Manuscript on Dzogchen from Tun-huang. Arcidosso, Italy: Shang-shung Edizioni, 1984. Namkhai Norbu and Kennard Lipman, trans. Mañjuśrīmitra, Primordial Experience: An Introduction to rDzogs-chen Meditation. Boston/London: Shambhala. Nyang Nyi-ma ’od-zer, Chos-’byung me-tog snying-po sbrang-rtsi’i bcud, Gangs-can rigmdzod Series 5. Lhasa: Bod-ljongs bod-yig dpe-rnying dpe-skrun-khang, 1988. Ani Jinpa Palmo, trans., The Great Image: The Life Story of Vairochana the Translator. Boston: Shambhala. Daisetz T. Suzuki, ed., The Tibetan Tripitaka: Peking Edition, Kept in the Library of the Otani University, Kyoto. Tokyo/Kyoto: Tibetan Tripitaka Research Institute, 1961. Karma Pakshi (but attributed by the publisher to Karma-pa III Rang-byung-rdorje), Rgya-mtsho mtha’-yas-kyi skor. 2 vols. Gangtok: Gonpo Tseten, 1978. Dam-pa Bde-gshegs and Ye-shes-rgyalmtshan, Theg-pa spyi-bcings rtsa-’grel. Chengdu: Si-khron mi-rigs dpe-skrun-khang, 1997. Sam van Schaik, Approaching the Great Perfection: Simultaneous and Gradual Methods of Dzogchen Practice in the Longchen Nyingtig. Boston: Wisdom.  Preliminary remarks on the Grub mtha’ chen mo of Bya ’Chad kha ba Ye shes rdo rje Matthew T. Kapstein, Paris / Chicago The recent discoveries and publications of Tibetan manuscripts found at the Gnas bcu lha khang at ’Bras spungs Monastery (Lhasa, T.A.R.), and elsewhere, are shedding abundant new light on the development of Buddhist philosophy in Tibet, particularly during the seminal period of roughly 1100–1300. The age in question may be characterized as beginning with the activites of Rngog Lo tsā ba Blo ldan shes rab at Gsang phu, and culminating in the contributions of Bcom ldan Rig pa’i ral gri at Snar thang, in whose work the mastery of the Indian Buddhist philosophical tradition is fully in evidence.1 As an example of the unanticipated gems that are to be found among these newly revealed treasures, I offer here some initial observations on the Grub mtha’ chen mo, the “Great Siddhānta,” of Bya ’Chad (or: Mchad)2 kha ba Ye shes rdo rje (1101–1175), a 1 On Rngog, see now Ralf Kramer, The Great Tibetan Translator: Life and Works of rNgog Blo ldan shes rab (1059–1109), Collectanea Himalayica 1 (Munich: Indus Verlag 2007); and on Bcom ldan ral gri, refer to Leonard van der Kuijp and Kurtis Schaeffer, An Early Tibetan Survey of Buddhist Literature: The Bstan pa rgyas pa rgyan gyi nyi ’od of Bcom Idan ral gri, Harvard Oriental Series (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press 2009). 2 As the spelling ’chad is clearly preferred in all sources known to me, I write mchad only where directly transcribing an occurrence of that orthograph in the manuscripts. Ernst Steinkellner, Duan Qing, Helmut Krasser (eds.), Sanskrit manuscripts in China. Proceedings of a panel at the 2008 Beijing Seminar on Tibetan Studies, October 13 to 17. Beijing 2009, pp. 137–152. 138 Matthew T. Kapstein well-known figure in the early history of the Bka’ gdams pa order. Though widely famed for his contributions to blo sbyong, the systems of “spiritual exercise” that were at the heart of Bka’ gdams pa religious training, ’Chad kha ba had not been previously known as an author of philosophical works,3 so that the present text reveals an unanticipated dimension of his contribution to Tibetan religious culture. Dge bshes ’Chad kha ba, as he is most commonly known, was born in the Bya clan in the district of Lo ro and from childhood was a disciple of that region’s renowned teacher, Ras chung pa Rdo rje grags.4 The Blue Annals recounts that, on accompanying his master to a religious assembly that was “presided over by Rngog Lo tsā ba [i.e., Blo ldan shes rab] and [where] many kalyāṇa-mitras discussed the siddhānta, [f]aith was born in him and he proceeded in search of religion.”5 This is the first reference to grub mtha’ (siddhānta) that we find in the available biographical sketches of ’Chad kha ba. It suggests that he may have become interested in philosophical studies during his youth and that he was inspired in this no less than by 3 Thus, for example, Paṇ chen Bsod nams grags pa (1478–1554), in his Bka’ gdams gsar rnying gi chos ’byung yid kyi mdzes rgyan, Gangs can rigs mdzod 36 (Lhasa: Bod ljongs bod yig dpe rnying dpe skrun khang 2001), p. 24, describes him as “bdag pas (sic = bas) gzhan gces pa’i byang chub sems rin po che’i bka’ babs, “he to whom descended the dictum of the precious enlightened spirit, wherein other is more dear than self.” He makes no reference to philosophical teaching on the part of ’Chad kha ba at all. 4 Not all sources lay much stress on this, however. The Sa skya pa master Ngag dbang kun dga’ bsod nams grags pa rgyal mtshan, for instance, in his Dge ba’i bshes gnyen bka’ gdams pa rnams kyi dam pa’i chos byung ba’i tshul legs par bshad pa ngo mtshar rgya mtsho (Xining: Mtsho sngon mi rigs dpe skrun khang 1995), pp. 125–26, does not mention any connection with Ras chung pa. It may be that Bka’ brgyud sources, such as the Blue Annals, sought to emphasize what was in fact an incidental relationship between ’Chad kha ba during his childhood and the renowned Bka’ brgyud master of the region from which he hailed. 5 G. N. Roerich, trans., The Blue Annals (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass 1976), p. 273. The Grub mtha’ chen mo of Bya ’Chad kha ba Ye shes rdo rje 139 the “Great Translator” himself. However, the course of his training led him to specialize primarily in traditions relating to the study and practice of the Mahāyāna path. Among the textual sources mentioned in his biographies in this connection, we may note in particular the Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra, the rāvaka- and Bodhisattvabhūmis, and Bka’ gdams pa summaries of the path such as the Be’u bum sngon po. He certainly studied Abhidharma and the major treatises of Madhyamaka, but there is no hint that prāmāṇa was ever part of his curriculum. The teacher with whom he came to be most closely associated was the celebrated Bka’ gdams pa adept Shar ba pa (1070–1141), himself a disciple of Po to ba Rin chen gsal (1031–1105). It was through Shar ba pa that ’Chad kha pa was instructed in blo sbyong, and it was owing to his mastery of this tradition of practical spiritual discipline that he himself achieved renown. His summation of these teachings as the Blo sbyong don bdun ma (the “Seven-Point Mind Training”), as recorded by his disciple Se spyil pu pa (1121– 1189), has proven to be one of the most popular works of the blo sbyong genre, and is itself the subject of numerous commentaries.6 Five works by ’Chad kha ba may now be found in the eleventh volume of the recently published Bka’ gdams gsung ’bum phyogs bsgrigs series:7 Plates 225–252: Mchad kha ba’i grub mtha’ chen mo (found at Rgyal rtse Dpal ’khor chos sde) Pl. 253–269: ’Chad kha ba’i gsung sgros thor bu (found at Se ra dgon pa) 6 It is also said to be the single Tibetan text that has been most often translated into Western languages. For a recent discussion, see Thupten Jinpa, trans., Mind Training: The Great Collection, The Library of Tibetan Classics (Boston: Wisdom 2006), pp. 9–13. The list of commentaries given there is by no means exhaustive. The text itself is translated in the same work, pp. 83–85, with Se spyil pu’s commentary, pp. 87–132. Further commentary is also given in pp. 313–417. 7 Bka’ gdams gsung ’bum phyogs bsgrigs glegs bam bcu gcig pa bzhugs (Chengdu: Dpal brtsegs bod yig dpe rnying zhib ’jug khang 2006). Further references to this volume will use the abbreviation KDSB XI. 140 Matthew T. Kapstein Pl. 271–272: Blo sbyong don bdun ma’i rtsa ba (old print, accompanied by a dedication by Shar Tsong kha pa, found in the ’Bras spungs gnas bcu lha khang) Pl. 273–297: Dge bshes Glang ri thang pa’i Blo sbyong tshig rkang brgyad ma’i ’grel ba (from the personal collection of Mkhan rin po che Tshul khrims rgyal mtshan) Pl. 299–303: Rom po’i bshad pa’i gdams ngag (found in the ’Bras spungs gnas bcu lha khang) Four of these are manuscripts of undetermined date. The third text, however, the Blo sbyong don bdun ma’i rtsa ba is an interesting old xylographic print, including a dedication of merit by “Shar Tsong kha pa” (pl. 272.3–6), i.e., Tsong kha pa Blo bzang grags pa (1357– 1419). This is followed, however, by a brief printer’s colophon.8 It may well be the case, therefore, that the printer (or his patron) added the dedication, drawing it from Tsong kha pa’s works, and that it was not written by the latter expressly for this publication. If it were, however, it would be of considerable interest for the history of Tibetan xylographic printing. We may note, too, that the fourth work listed, ’Chad kha pa’s commentary on Glang ri thang pa’s famed Blo sbyong tshig rkang brgyad ma, has long been available in the Blo sbyong brgya rtsa collection.9 It is in the first of ’Chad kha ba’s works above, however, that his interest in philosophical studies is most in evidence, for here we find one of the earliest examples of a treatise on siddhānta by a Tibetan author.10 It is, moreover, a work that is unusual in respect of certain 8 The printer’s colophon (KDSB XI, 272.6–7) reads: brkos mkhan mkhas pa chu shul gyi // gnas pa dpal ’phel zhes bya bas // dad pa’i sems kyis kun blangs te // spar du brkos nas phul pa yis // dge bas ’gro ba ma lus pa // byang chub sems gnyis stobs rgyas nas // kun mkhyen rgyal ba’i sku thob ste // ’gro kun srid mtsho las sgrol shog // 9 Thupten Jinpa, op. cit., pp. 277–89. 10 Among the few still earlier exmples, one notes the Lta ba’ khyad par of the ninth-century translator Ye shes sde and a small number of additional works dating to the “early diffusion of the teaching,” as well as the Grub The Grub mtha’ chen mo of Bya ’Chad kha ba Ye shes rdo rje 141 features of its content, and not merely its relatively early date.11 Like many of the later, well-known examples of the Tibetan grub mtha’ genre,12 ’Chad kha ba’s text is broadly divided into two major sections treating non-Buddhist (phyi rol mu stegs pa) and Buddhist (nang pa sangs rgyas pa) philosophical systems respectively. I have provided a translation and transcription of the text of the first of these sections, and the remarks introducing the second, below. It will be seen that, as the author affirms, his descriptions of the non-Buddhist schools – Vedānta, Sāṃkhya, Vai eṣika, and Mīmāṃsā – are largely derived from the Tarkajvālā of Bhāviveka.13 His brief discussion, mtha’ brjed byang and Lta ba’i brjed byang of the eleventh-century Rnying ma pa master, Rong zom chos kyi bzang po. On the former, one may refer to David Seyfort Ruegg, “Autour du lTa ba’i khyad par de Ye es sde (version de Touen-houang, Pelliot tibétain 814),” Journal Asiatique (1981): 208–229. On Rong zom’s contributions, see now Orna Almogi, Rongzom-pa’s Discourses on Buddhology: A Study of Various Conceptions of Buddhahood in Indian Sources with Special Reference to the Controversy Surrounding the Existence of Gnosis (jñāna: ye shes) as Presented by the Eleventh-Century Tibetan Scholar Rong-zom Chos-kyi-bzang-po, Studia Philologica Buddhica Monograph Series XXIV (Tokyo: The International Institute for Buddhist Studies 2009). 11 It should be noted that the Grub mtha’ chen mo is accompanied by finely written annotations (mchan bu) throughout. Unfortunately, due to the mediocre quality of printing, these are in large part illegible or nearly so. For the purposes of the present, brief exposition, I have therefore ignored them. 12 For general surveys of Tibetan works on siddhānta, refer to Katsumi Mimaki, “Doxographie tibétaine et classifications indiennes,” in Fukui Fumimasa and Gérard Fussman, eds., Bouddhisme et cultures locales: Quelques cas de réciproques adaptations, Études thématiques 2 (Paris: École française d’Extrême-Orient 1994), pp. 115–136; and Jeffrey Hopkins, “The Tibetan Genre of Doxography: Structuring a Worldview,” in José Ignacio Cabezón, and Roger Jackson, eds., Tibetan Literature: Studies in Genre (Ithaca: Snow Lion Publications 1995), pp. 170–86. 13 This is not the place to enter into a prolonged discussion of current research on the Tarkajvālā or the correct form of the name of its author, Bhāviveka. Fortunately, these matters have been very thoroughly treated in the recent work of David Malcolm Eckel, Bhāviveka and His Buddhist Op- 142 Matthew T. Kapstein however, is no mere repetition of the Indian sources, for he endeavors, and in this seems unique among Tibetan authors, to advance some ideas about the manner in which these non-Buddhist traditions might have influenced Tibet. Thus he maintains that the Indian myth of the cosmic egg, Hiraṇyagarbha, might be the source of a similar myth among the Tibetan Bon, and that some of the contested aspects of tantric practice among the Tibetans were due to the influence of the Mīmāṃsakas. Lest we dismiss this as mere naïve speculation, it would be well to recall that recent scholarship has suggested both linguistic and mythological connections between archaic Tibet and Indo-Europeans,14 and that the presence of numerous elements linking Vedic and Tantric ritual systems is not something that contemporary students of Indian religions might be inclined to deny.15 The second and largest section of the Grub mtha’ chen mo, concerning the Buddhist systems of philosophy, interestingly departs from the model with which we are most familiar, namely, a progressive account of the four major philosophical schools – Vaibhāṣika, Sautrāntika, Yogācāra, Madhyamaka – and their respective subdivisions. Instead, ’Chad kha ba proceeds topically, discussing in turn ponents, Harvard Oriental Series 70 (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press 2008). 14 See, for example, Per Kværne, “Dualism in Tibetan Cosmogonic Myths and the Question of Iranian Influence,” in C. I. Beckwith, ed., Silver on Lapis: Tibetan Literary Culture and History (Bloomington: The Tibet Society 1987), pp. 163–174; Michael Walter and Christopher Beckwith, “Some Indo-European Elements in Early Tibetan Culture,” in Helmut Krasser, Michael Torsten Much, Ernst Steinkellner, and Helmut Tauscher, eds., Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the Seventh Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies. Vienna: Austrian Academy of Science 1997, vol. 2, pp. 1037–54. 15 If there are any who are, they may consult, e.g., the many references to Vedic rites in Agehananda Bharati, The Tantric Tradition (London: Rider 1965). In affirming a measure of continuity between Vedic and both Hindu and Buddhist Tantric traditions, however, I am not taking any particular stand on the influence vs. substratum debate. That is best left for another day. The Grub mtha’ chen mo of Bya ’Chad kha ba Ye shes rdo rje 143 the approaches of the four schools to particular questions and doctrines. After briefly describing points about which the schools agree (translated below), the remainder and most significant part of the text treats points of difference in turn. As an example, his procedure may be represented through these remarks on the five skandhas: Among the five skandhas, the Vaibhāṣika hold all five to be substantial. The Sautrāntika hold four and a half (lit. “with a half, five”) of the skandhas – excepting shapes and the viprayuktasaṃskāras – to be substantial. The Cittamātra maintain three and a half of the skandhas – excepting form (rūpaskandha) and the viprayuktasaṃskāras – to be substantial. The Mādhyamika do not maintain there to be a substantial nature in any of the five. ([KDSB XI, 230.2] phung po lnga las bye brag smra bas lnga ka rdzas su ’dod pa / mdo’ sde bas dbyibs dang ldan pa ma yin pa’i ’du byed ma gtogs pa phung po phyed dang lnga rdzas su ’dod pa’o // seṃs tsam pas gzugs dang ldan pa ma yin pa’i ’du byed ma gtogs pa phung po phyed dang 4 rdzas su bzhed pa’o // dbu ma bas lnga kha la rdzas kyi rang bzhin [3] mi bzhed pa’o //) A fuller investigation of the many topics that ’Chad kha pa treats in this fashion must await another occasion. His introductory passages, in translation and transcribed text, will suffice to close the present, preliminary description. As the concepts and categories discussed will be for the most part quite familiar to students of Indian and Buddhist philosophy, I have not burdened the translation with explanatory notes as might be useful to beginners in this field. Translation selection [225.1] Mchad kha ba’s Grub mtha’ chen mo. [226.1] From the measureless ocean of the Sugata’s dicta, [Come these] gems of the precious essence in brief; As I have comprehended [them] by holy mentors’ grace, I rehearse somewhat to clarify memory. In general, all living beings may be subsumed in two [types], those who do or do not affirm a philosophical system. As to the significance of those two, they are those whose thoughts have or have not been 144 Matthew T. Kapstein influenced by textual traditions. And concerning [what is called] a textual tradition, in this context it is held to be each one’s highest, reasoned knowledge. One may ask, “how many are the individuals of that sort, who affirm philosophical systems?” According to this teaching of ākyamuni, they are gathered in two: the outer Tīrthikas and the inner Bauddhas. The reason for allocating them as inner and outer pertains as to whether they are to be included within the pronouncements of the Buddha or fall outside of them. With reference to the distinctions of those two, although various irrelevancies are mentioned, nevertheless there are two according to whether or not one grasps faultlessly the Three Precious Jewels as one’s refuge. On that, the Lalitavistarasūtra says that all the textual traditions of the outsiders have arisen from the sustaining power of the Buddha, and thus so in order to beautify the Buddha’s teaching and to cause one to recognize its opposite. The Vairocanābhisambodhitantra, moreover, in reference to the material cause of Vairocana, speaks [of the Tīrthikas] as the remote cause, among the pair of remote and proximate cause, but this is an esoteric instruction. Concerning the outsiders, all the treatises speak of the sixteen who affirm what is outside [our teaching], and the sixty-two, and the 360 views. The most of all that emerge are drawn from a sūtra source in the Saṅghānusmṛti. Nevertheless, it says in the Tarkajvālā that they are all subsumed in four great textual traditions, as follows: Vedānta, Sāṃkhya, Vai eṣika, and Mīmāṃsā. [226.6] The first of them holds that all of these inner and outer entities are of the nature of a single great Self (mahātma). The upper regions are its head, the lower regions its feet, the sky its back, the directions its hands, the planets and constellations its hair, the peaks its breast, the mountain ranges its bones, the rivers its network of veins, the forests its body hairs and nails; its back is the celestial world, its forehead Brahmā, Dharma and Adharma are its two brows; its wrathful grimace is Yama, the sun and moon its eyes, its The Grub mtha’ chen mo of Bya ’Chad kha ba Ye shes rdo rje 145 inhalations and exhalations the winds, while sa ga ni is said to be the navel.16 It is said that that was no cause for harm in Tibet. [227.2] The Sāṃkhya affirm the twenty-five so-called “primitives” (tanmātra). Concerning them, they hold that the self, or person (puruṣa), is by nature conscious and aware, permanent and single. Its enjoyments are the “foremost” (pradhāna), the “great one” (mahat), egoism (ahaṃkāra), the five primitives (tanmātra), the five elements, and the eleven faculties. Thus they affirm the twenty-five primitives, of which the “foremost” is a nature (prakṛti) and not a transformation (vikāra). The seven beginning with the “great one” are natures and transformations, while the [remaining] sixteen are transformations. The person is neither a nature nor a transformation. According to this system, the foremost is solely a cause, while the seven beginning with the great one are both cause and effect. The sixteen, that is to say, the five elements and the eleven faculties, are solely effects. The person they hold to be neither cause nor effect. According to their own treatises, they affirm both saṃsāra and nirvāṇa. Nature is permanent and they also affirm a circumstantial impermanence, a so-called impermanence relating to the emergence of a disclosure and its [subsequent] disappearance. The master [Ati a] is reported to have said that this [system] alone is subtle in reasoning and hence hard to refute. One finds in their texts many minor objects of knowledge, such as the “supreme light,” that are not subsumed in the twenty-five primitives. It is said that they, too, have done no harm in Tibet. [227.5] The Vai eṣika maintain that all objects of knowledge are subsumed in six categories. As is said: Substance, quality, action and universal, Particularization and inherence are the six aspects. Among them, substance includes both permanent and impermanent substances, of which the first [includes] five: self, time, the di16 It is not clear to me whether sa ga ni should be read as a vulgar transcription of a Sanskrit word (sāgara?), or as Tibetan sa ga = Sanskrit vaiśākha. 146 Matthew T. Kapstein rections, atoms and space. The impermanent substances are those substances that are part-possessors; they hold that when two and three atoms conjoin, at that point there is the emergence of a discrete part-possessing substance that is not an atom. They hold that the so-called “universal” pervades everything from the part-possessing substance to inherence. Thus, they maintain that the permanent substances and the universal are absolute, but that all except those two are circumstantially impermanent and superficial. Qualities are, for instance, the tawniness of the cow, or a person’s cleverness and dignity. Actions are, for instance, the pot’s function of containing water. Particularization is, for instance, the large pot or the small one. Inherence, they hold, is that connection whereby a given substance inheres in a given aggregation. Among those [topics], the self, they maintain, is insentient, [numerically] different for each animate being, permanent, single, an agent, the experiencer of the ripening [of karman], and autonomous with respect to actions and enjoyments. They hold that it is without aspects. They hold, too, that it has a relationship with cognitions and with the substance in which the object inheres. And they hold that [it may be subject to] liberation and omniscience. Their textual traditions hold that everything came to be from an egg. Because something similar is maintained in the textual traditions of Bon, I wonder whether this Bon might be a Vai eṣika textual tradition. Later, the old writings say that in the time of Dri gung [= Gri gum] btsan po, it [i.e. Bon] came to be translated from the textual traditions of the Vai eṣika. [228.4] This textual tradition of Mimāṃsā is an exceedingly evil philosophical system that was of very great harm to Tibet. So, too, all preaching of injury as religion comes from their textual tradition. All teaching that there is no cause, and all the conduct of “union and liberation” practiced in the old mantras, and all these bone ornaments made up among the yogins are [derived from] their textual tradition. It is said that in the Pāramitā there has been no adulteration, but in these inner mantras, there is much adulteration due to the outsiders, whereby much harm has emerged in Tibet. The Grub mtha’ chen mo of Bya ’Chad kha ba Ye shes rdo rje 147 [228.5] Thus, I have discoursed a bit about the tenets of the outsiders. All of the textual traditions of the inner Buddhists may be subsumed in four great ones, as it is said: Buddhadharma has four aspects, Said to be those of Vaibhāṣika, etc.17 [228.6] About this, the Indian ānti pa [Ratnākara ānti] says that there are the Vaibhāṣika, Sautrāntika, and Yogācāra, and that the proposition that phenomena are non-veridical (*mithyākāravāda) is the Madhyamaka, while the Mahāyāna-Mādhyamikas are nihilists.18 All other Mahāyānists [hold that the four schools] are the two nikāyas [i.e., Vaibhāṣika and Sautrāntika], Cittamātra, and the Mahāyāna-Madhyamaka. [229.1] All four in common adhere to the divine Three Precious Jewels as their refuge. They hold that pleasure and pain are results due to one’s acts, and that a personal self does not exist even superficially. They are alike in refuting entirely the eternalism and nihilism of the Tīrthikas, and in affirming the four seals that characterize the [Buddha’s] dicta.19 The two nikāyas hold in common that the outsiders, Mādhyamikas, etc., have fallen into the extremes of exaggeration and depreciation, that there are six aggregates of consciousness, that apprehending subject and apprehended object are ultimately real, that the minimal component [lit. “end”] of the name is the phoneme, that the minimal component of time is the instant, 17 If one adopts the reading laṃ for lo, the second line would be translated, “The paths of Vaibhāṣika, etc.” 18 Of course, Yogācāra in all its forms is also Mahāyāna; nevertheless, the designation “Mahāyāna-Mādhyamika” (theg pa chen po dbu ma ba pa) is clearly being used here to refer to the Madhyamaka of Nāgārjuna and his successors. 19 Namely, that conditioned things are impermanent, that those subject to corruption (āsrava) are suffering, that no phenomenon is a self, and that nirvāṇa is peace. 148 Matthew T. Kapstein that the minimal component of form is the atom, and that reality is ascertained on obtaining the fruit of an ārya. [229.2] All of the Mahayānists hold in common that the philosophical systems of the outsiders and the philosophical systems of the nikāyas are not of definitive meaning, that, having at first engendered the enlightened spirit on behalf of others, and having amassed the two accumulations [of merit and wisdom] for an unlimited time, the two obscurations with their dispositions are abandoned, and that the triple embodiment (trikāya) is obtained as the fruit. [229.3] The proponents of Yogācāra-Cittamātra accord in holding that the elements, the products of the elements, apprehended object and apprehending subject do not exist even superficially, that the philosophical systems of the two nikāyas and Madhyamaka are not of definitive meaning, that all that is knowable is determined in terms of the three characteristics, and that the experience of the mind is non-dual and ultimate. [229.5] All of the Mādhyamikas hold in common that they refute all the entities posited by the lower philosophical systems, those up through Yogācāra, that all the knowable is determined in terms of the two truths, and that ultimately all phenomena are without substantial essence. Text [225.1] % // // mchad kha ba’i grub mtha’ chen mo / [226.1] %%% // : // bde gshegs gsung rab rgya mtsho dpag med las // gces pa’i snying po mdor bsdus rin po che // bshes gnyen dam pa’i drin gyis gang rtogs pa // dran pa gsal byed cung zad brjod par bya // // spyir skye ’gro thams cad ni grub mtha’ khas len pa dang mi len pa gnyis [2] su ’dus pa yin la / de gnyis kyi don yang gzhung lugs kyi blo bsgyur ba dang ma bsgyur ba gnyis yin no // gzhung lugs de yang skabs ’dir rang rang gi rigs pa’i shes pa mthar thug pa cig la ’dod pa’o // grub mtha’ khas len pa’i gang zag de lta bu du yod ce na / shag kya thub pa’i bstan pa ’di la phyi [3] rol mu stegs pa The Grub mtha’ chen mo of Bya ’Chad kha ba Ye shes rdo rje 149 dang / nang pa sangs rgyas pa dang gnyis su ’dus pa’o // de la phyi nang du ’jog pa’i rgyu ni sangs rgyas kyi gsung gi nang du tshud pa dang / phyi rol du gyur pa’o // / de gnyis kyi khyad par la ma ’brel pa sna … tshogs pa cig brjod mod kyi / ’on kyang kha na ma tho ba med pa nyid dkon mchog rin [4] po che gsum la skyabs gnas su ’dzin pa dang mi ’dzin pa gnyis yin no // de la rgya cher rol pa’i mdo’ sde las phyi rol ba’i gzhung lugs thams cad kyang sangs rgyas kyi byin rlabs kyis byung pa ste / ’di ltar sangs rgyas kyi bstan pa mdzes par bya ba’i phyir dang / de’i mi mthun pa’i phyogs ngo shes par bya ba’i phyir byung par gsung la / yang [5] rnaṃ par snang mdzad mngon par byang chub pa’i rgyud las kyang rnaṃ par snang mdzad kyi rgyu ni yin pa la / ring pa’i rgyu dang nye ba’i rgyu gnyis las ring rgyur gsungs pa ni ’dir man ngag yin no // phyi rol ba la phyi rol smra ba bcu drug dang / drug bcu rtsa gnyis dang / lta ba suṃ brgya drug bcu gsungs pa bstan bcos kun nas ’byung pa la / de kun pas kyang mang [6] pa dge ’dun rjes su dran par mdo’ khung drangs pa dag nas ’byung ste / ’on kyang gzhung chen po 4r thams cad ’du bar rtog ge la ’bar gsungs ste / ’di ltar rigs byed kyi mtha’ pa dang / grangs can pa dang / bye brag pa dang / spyod pa ba’o // de la dang pos ni phyi nang gi dngos po ’di thams cad bdag chen po cig gi rang bzhin du ’dod de / ’di [227.1] % / / ltar steng gi phyogs ni ’go’ / ’og gi phyogs ni rkang pa / naṃ mkha’ ni rgyab / phyogs rnaṃs ni lag pa / gza’ dang rgyu skar rnaṃs ni skra / ri bo rnaṃs ni brang / ri’i ’phreng pa rnaṃs ni rus pa / chu rlung rnaṃs ni rtsa’i dra ba / nags rnaṃs ni spu dang sen mo / rgyab ni mtho’ ris kyi ’jig rten / ’phral ba ni tshangs pa / chos dang chos ma yin pa ni smin ma / [2] gnyis / khro gnyer ni ’chi bdag / nyi zla gnyis ni mig / dbugs ’byung rngub ni rlung / sa ga ni la lte bo zer ste des bod la gnod rgyu tsam ma byung gsung // grangs can pas de tsam nyi shu rtsa lnga bya bar khas len la / de yang bdag skyes bu shes shing rig pa rtag pa cig pu’i rang bzhin du ’dod la / de’i longs spyod du gtso’o dang / chen po dang / nga rgyal dang / [3] de tsam lnga dang / ’byung ba lnga dang / dbang po bcu gcig ste de tsam nyi shu rtsa lnga khas len la / de yang / gtso bo rang bzhin yin gyi rnaṃ ’gyur min // chen po sogs bdun rang bzhin rnaṃ ’gyur 150 Matthew T. Kapstein yin // bcu drug po ni rnaṃ par ’gyur ba ste // skye bu rang bzhin ma yin rnaṃ ’gyur min // ces pa’i tshul gyis / gtso’o ni rgyu kho na yin la / chen po la sogs pa bdun ni [4] rgyu ’bras gnyis ka / ’byung ba lnga dang dbang po bcu gcig ste bcu drug po ni ’bras bu kho na yin la / skyes bu rgyu ’bras gnyis ka ma yin par ’dod de / rang gi gzhung gis ’khor ba dang myang ’das gnyis ka khas len la / rang bzhin rtag pa dang / gsal ba’i skye ba dang nub pa’i mi rtag pa ces pa gnas skabs mi rtag pa yang khas len te / jo bo’i zhal nas ’di kho na rigs [5] pa phra ba sun dpyung rka ba yin gsung skad // de tsam nyi shu rtsa lngas ma bsdus pa’i ’od mchog ces pa la sogs pa’i shes bya phra mo mang po yang rang gi gzhung las ’byung ste / de kyang bod la gnod pa tsam med gsungo // bye brag pas shes bya thams cad tshig gi don drug gis bsdus par ’dod de / ji skad du / rdzas dang yon tan las dang spyi // bye brag ’du [6] ba rnaṃ pa drug // ces te / de la rdzas la rtag pa’i rdzas dang mi rtag pa’i gnyis las / rtag pa’i rdzas ni lnga ste / bdag dang / dus dang / phyogs dang / rdul dang / nam mkha’o // mi rtag pa’i rdzas ni yan lag can gyi rdzas ste / rdul phra rab gnyis dang / gsum ’dus pa ni bar du yan lag can gyi rdzas rdul phra rab ma yin pa re skye bar ’dod do // [228.1] spyi zhes pa yan lag can gyi rdzas nas ’du ba’i bar thams cad la khyab par ’dod de / de ltar rtag pa’i rdzas dang spyi gnyis don dam du ’dod la / de gnyis ma gtogs pa gnas skabs mi rtag pa kun rdzob du ’dod pa’o // yon tan ni ba lang ser zal dang / skyes bu’i mkhas cing btsun pa la sogs pa’o // las ni bum pa’i las chu ’chu ba [2] la sogs pa’o // bye brag ni bum pa che chung la sogs pa’o // ’du ba ni tshogs pa re ’du ba’i rdzas res ’brel bar ’dod pa’o // de la bdag ni bems po sems can so so la tha dad pa / rtag pa / cig pu / las byed pa po / rnaṃ smin myong pa po / bya ba dang longs spyod la rang dbang du gyur par ’dod / de yang rnaṃ pa med par ’dod / shes pa dang don [3] ’du ba’i rdzas kyis ’brel bar ’dod de / thar pa dang thams cad mkhyen pa ’dod de / de’i gzhung gis kyang thaṃd sgo ngar las srid par ’dod la / bon gyi gzhung las kyang de ltar ’dod pas bon ’di bye brag pa’i gzhung cig yin naṃ snyaṃ la / phyi yig rnying las dri gung btsan po’i ring la bye brag pa’i gzhung las bsgyur bar ’byung gsungo // [4] spyod pa ba’i gzhung ’di grub mtha’ shin du The Grub mtha’ chen mo of Bya ’Chad kha ba Ye shes rdo rje 151 ngan pa bod la gnod pa shin tu che ba ste / ’di ltar ’tshe ba chos su smra ba thaṃd kyang de’i gzhung las ’byung / rgyu med par smra ba thaṃd dang / sngags rnying du byas pa’i sbyor sgrol spyod pa thaṃd dang / rnal ’byor bar byas pa’i rus pa’i rgyan cha can ’di kun de’i gzhung yin / pha rol du phyin pa la ’dres pa’i [5] zol med / sngags nang pa ’di la phyi rol ba dang ’dres pa’i zol mang pas bod la shin tu gnod par ’byung gsungo // des phyi rol ba’i ’dod pa cung zad gleng bslang pa’o // // nang pa sangs rgyas pa’i gzhung chen po 4r thaṃd ’du bar bzhed de / ji skad du / sangs rgyas chos ni rnaṃ pa bzhi // bye brag smra la sogs pa’i lo (laṃ?) // [6] zhes te / ’di la rgya gar shan ti bas bye brag smra ba dang / mdo sde ba dang / rnal sbyor spyod pa dang / rang gi rnaṃ par rdzun par smra ba la dbu ma zhes zer la / theg pa chen po dbu ma ba pa ni chad par smra bar ’dod do // theg pa chen po gzhan thaṃd kyis ni sde pa gnyis dang / rnal ’byor spyod pa seṃs tsam pa dang / theg pa [229.1] chen po dbu ma ba’o // de 4 kas thun mong du lha dkon mchog gsum la skyabs gnas su ’dzin pa dang / bde sdug rang gi las kyis ’bras bur ’dod pa dang / gang zag gi bdag kun rdzob du’ang med par ’dod pa dang / mu stegs pa’i rtag chad thaṃd ’gegs pa dang / bka’ rtags kyi phyag rgya bzhi khas len par bstun pa yin no // // sde pa gnyis kyis thun mong du phyi rol pa dang / [2] dbu’ ma ba la sogs pa sgro skur kyi mthar lhung bar ’dod pa dang / rnaṃ shes tshogs drug du ’dod pa dang / gzung pa dang ’dzin pa don dam du ’dod pa dang / ming gi mtha’ yi ger ’dod pa dang / dus kyi mtha’ skad cig du ’dod pa dang / gzugs kyi mtha’ rdul phra rab du ’dod pa dang / de nyid ’phags pa’i ’bras bu thob pa na nges par ’dod pa rnaṃs mthun pa’o // // theg pa chen po ba thaṃd [3] kyis thun mong du phyi rol ba’i grub mtha’ dang / sde pa dag gi grub mtha’ nges don ma yin par bzhed pa dang / dang po gzhan don du byang chub du thugs bskyed nas / tshogs gnyis dus thug pa med par bsags pas sgrib pa gnyis bag chags dang bcas pa spong par bzhed pa dang / ’bras bu sku gsum thob pas bzhed pa mthun no // // rnal ’byor spyod pa seṃs tsam pas ’byung ba dang ’byung [4] ba dang20 ’byung ba las 20 ’byung ba dang repeated by dittography. 152 Matthew T. Kapstein ’gyur pa dang / gzung ba dang ’dzin pa kun rdzob tsam du’ang med par bzhed pa dang / sde pa gnyis dang dbu ma’i grub mtha’ nges don ma yin par bzhed pa dang / shes bya thaṃd mtshan nyid gsum kyi (sic) gtan la ’bebs par bzhed pa dang / sems myong pa gnyis med don dam du bzhed par mthun no // // dbu ma ba thaṃd kyis thun mong du bzhed pa ni rnal ’byor spyod pa man [5] chad grub mtha’ ’og ma thaṃd kyis dngos por brtags pa thaṃd ’gegs pa dang / shes bya thaṃd bden gnyis kyis gtan la ’bebs pa dang / don dam par chos thaṃd rang bzhin med par bzhed pa mthun pa’o // // Abbreviation KDSB XI Bka’ gdams gsung ’bum phyogs bsgrigs glegs bam bcu gcig pa bzhugs. Vol. XI. Chengdu: Dpal brtsegs bod yig dpe rnying zhib ’jug khang 2006; cf. above n. 7. Sanskrit manuscripts in China Proceedings of a panel at the 2008 Beijing Seminar on Tibetan Studies October 13 to 17 Edited by Ernst Steinkellner in cooperation with Duan Qing, Helmut Krasser China Tibetology Publishing House Beijing 2009 Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 前言 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 • DUAN Qing A fragment of the Bhadrakalpasūtra in Buddhist Sanskrit from Xinjiang . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 FAN Muyou Some grammatical notes on the Advayasamatāvijayamahākalparājā . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Pascale HUGON Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge’s synoptic table of the Pramāṇaviniścaya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Harunaga ISAACSON A collection of Hevajrasādhanas and related works in Sanskrit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 Matthew T. KAPSTEIN Preliminary remarks on the Grub mtha’ chen mo of Bya ’Chad kha ba Ye shes rdo rje . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 Shoryu KATSURA Rediscovering Dignāga through Jinendrabuddhi . . . . . . . . . 153 Helmut KRASSER Original text and (re)translation – a critical evaluation. . . . . . 167 LI Xuezhu Candrakīrti on dharmanairātmya as held by both Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna – based on Madhyamakāvatāra Chapter 1 . . . . 179 6 Contents 李学竹 月称关于二乘人通达法无我的论证 – 以梵文本 入中论 第 一章为考察中心 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 LUO Hong A preliminary report on a newly identified Sanskrit manuscript of the Vinayasūtra from Tibet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 LUO Zhao The cataloguing of Sanskrit manuscripts preserved in the TAR: A complicated process that has lasted more than twenty years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 罗炤 西藏梵文贝叶经的编目情况及二十余年的曲折经过 . . . . . . . . 235 SAERJI Sanskrit manuscript of the Svapnādhyāya preserved in Tibet . . . 241 SFERRA The Manuscripta Buddhica project – Alphabetical list of Sanskrit manuscripts and photographs of Sanskrit manuscripts in Giuseppe Tucci’s collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259 Ernst STEINKELLNER Strategies for modes of management and scholarly treatment of the Sanskrit manuscripts in the TAR . . . . . . . . . . . 279 恩斯特∙斯坦因凯勒 西藏自治区梵文手稿的管理模式及学术性处理方面的策略 . . . . 293 Tsewang Gyurme Protecting the Sanskrit palm-leaf manuscripts in the Tibetan Autonomous Region – A summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303 YE Shaoyong A preliminary survey of Sanskrit manuscripts of Madhyamaka texts preserved in the Tibet Autonomous Region . . . . . . 307 Chronological Conundrums in the Life of Khyung po rnal ’byor: Hagiography and Historical Time Matthew T. Kapstein University of Chicago and École Pratique des Hautes Études Abstract: Traditional sources attribute to Khyung po rnal ’byor, the founder of the Shangs pa bka’ brgyud lineage, a lifespan of 150 years beginning in a tiger year, usually thought to be 978 or 990. A careful examination of the chronological indications given in his rnam thar, however, suggest that it is implausible to hold that Khyung po was born prior to the middle years of the eleventh century. The present communication surveys the relevant evidence for Khyung po’s dating, and demonstrates the reasons for which traditional historians regarded his career as beginning a full half century or more earlier than it actually did. It will be seen that the questions raised here are pertinent to the larger problems surrounding the “authenticity” of Shangs pa origins overall. The beginnings of Tibetan historical writing can be traced back to the period of the Tibetan empire, during the seventh through ninth centuries.1 Bureaucratic 1 I am grateful to an anonymous reviewer for noting several points in the present essay requiring correction or clarification. In addition, one general issue that the reviewer raised concerned my use of the term “historiography,” which she or he thought might be interpreted pejoratively, as if I were saying that the West has “history,” but others only the lesser practice of “historiography.” To avoid any misunderstanding about this, therefore, let me stress here that in my view all human societies have histories, but only some have historiography, by which I mean not only historical writings as literary artifacts, but also the intellectual and institutional canons and practices whereby history is written. Tibet, like the West, has a long and distinguished historiographical tradition in this sense; and indeed this is one of the things that makes the study of Tibetan civilization deeply interesting. Of course, there is another sense of “history,” one often associated with the markedly teleological concerns of Hegelian and Marxist historiographies, that does often regard history as the progressive evolution of humanity toward an end most characteristically disclosed in the civilization of the West. There are certainly important questions to be raised in this connection, but they are entirely beside the point of the present, modest Tibetological contribution. Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies, no. 1 (October 2005): 1-14. www.thdl.org?id=T1221. 1550-6363/2005/1/T1221. © 2005 by Matthew T. Kapstein, Tibetan and Himalayan Digital Library, and International Association of Tibetan Studies. Distributed under the THDL Digital Text License. Kapstein: Chronological Conundrums in the Life of Khyung po rnal ’byor 2 record-keeping fostered the composition of state annals, and narrative traditions relating to the monarchy were set down as chronicles. There is clear evidence of the influence of Chinese historiography in the Tibetan imperial documents; we know that the Book of Documents (Shujing) and the Annals of the Warring States (Zhanguoce) were translated into Tibetan and that the Records of the Grand Historian (Shiji) was as least to some extent known.2 The first traces of Tibetan Buddhist historiography may be also found among the Dunhuang manuscripts, and it is probably significant that the earliest Tibetan Buddhist hagiographical writings now known are to be found in a Tibetan Chan text of the mid-ninth century and in a short tantric work of the ninth or tenth century.3 On the basis of these documents, it seems certain that both Chinese and Indian Buddhist hagiographical traditions were becoming known and were already contributing to the formation of indigenous Tibetan Buddhist hagiography. It is, however, only with the renewed transmission of Indian Buddhism to Tibet during the late-tenth and eleventh centuries that we see a real proliferation of hagiographical and auto-hagiographical writing in Tibet. As Janet Gyatso has rightly argued in her Apparitions of the Self, these developments were likely the product of the fragmentation of religious and political authority in the wake of the empire’s collapse. This situation issued in, in her words, “a competitive climate in which the personal accomplishments of the individual religious master became a centerpiece in the struggle to establish a lineage and eventually an institution and a power base.”4 Hagiography and lineage histories thus gave literary expression to a multitude of competing claims of spiritual authority. It is by no means surprising, therefore, that the emphasis in these works is, in the first instance, on revelations, visions, prophetic dreams, miraculous abilities and mystical attainments, and secondarily on the study and transmission of authoritative Buddhist teachings and texts. Matters of historical circumstance of the sort that we emphasize in much of modern historiography rank a poor third. Nevertheless, over time a Tibetan Buddhist historiography did emerge and hagiographical writing itself was not unaffected by this development. This is a 2 The Tibetan translations of these works and aspects of their legacy are studied in W. S. Coblin, “A Study of the Old Tibetan Shangshu Paraphrase,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 111 (1991): 303-22, 523-39; Yoshiro Imaeda, “L’identification de l’original chinois du Pelliot tibétain 1291 – traduction tibétaine du Zhanguoce,” Acta Orientalia (Hungarica) 34, nos. 1-3 (1980): 53-68; Rolf A. Stein, “‘Saint et Divin’, un titre tibétain et chinois des rois tibétains,” Journal Asiatique nos. 1-2 (1981): 231-75; Rolf A. Stein, “Tibetica Antiqua I: Les deux vocabulaires des traductions Indo-tibétaine et Sino-tibétaine dans les Manuscrits de Touen-houang,” Bulletin de l’École Française d’Extrême-Orient 72 (1983): 149-236; and Tsuguhito Takeuchi, “A Passage from the Shih chi in the Old Tibetan Chronicle,” in Soundings in Tibetan Civilization, ed. Barbara Nimri Aziz and Matthew Kapstein (Delhi: Manohar, 1985), 135-46. Dr. Imaeda has kindly informed me that recent Chinese scholarship regards PT 1291 not as a translation of the Annals of the Warring States, but rather as derived from the commentarial tradition of the Spring and Autumn Annals. 3 I am referring to Pelliot tibétain 996, a manuscript first studied in Marcelle Lalou, “Document tibétain sur l’expansion du dhyāna chinois,” Journal Asiatique 231 (1939): 505-23; and to Pelliot tibétain 44, on which see F. A. Bischoff and Charles Hartman, “Padmasambhava’s Invention of the Phur-bu: Ms. Pelliot tibétain 44,” in Études tibétaines dédiées à la mémoire de Marcelle Lalou, ed. Ariane Macdonald (Paris: Adrien Maisonneuve, 1971), 11-28; and Matthew T. Kapstein, The Tibetan Assimilation of Buddhism (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), 158-59. 4 Janet Gyatso, Apparitions of the Self (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998), 116. Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies 1 (October 2005) 3 complicated story that so far is not very well understood, and for present purposes a summary account will have to suffice. From the twelfth century onwards we see a growing effort on the part of some Tibetan writers to address the history of Tibet, or of Tibetan Buddhism, overall, not focusing solely on the continuity of a single lineage.5 There seem to have been two important reasons for this shift in focus. On the one hand, the history of the old Tibetan empire was now a matter of renewed concern and interest, particularly among those whose own authority rested in part on ancient claims, real or imagined. This resulted in an effort to reassemble available documentation, including historical documents that were no doubt similar to what we now know from Dunhuang.6 On the other hand, there was a strong tendency within religious circles to pursue studies somewhat eclectically, so that in a given individual’s life and formation, differing lineages were frequently woven together as distinct strands of a single cord. To recount one’s lineage history now required in fact narrating several lineage histories, so that one could not help but remark upon those points at which the strands crossed, or came into conflict. To this we may perhaps add that, with the reunification of Tibetan government under the Mongol empire during the thirteenth century and throughout the successive hegemonies culminating in the Fifth Dalai Lama’s formation of a unified Tibetan polity during the seventeenth century, a bureaucratic interest in precise record-keeping once again came to the fore.7 Despite this, of course, the older hagiographical emphasis on spiritual attainment was never lost. As a result, in reading a masterwork of later Tibetan Buddhist autobiography such as the life of the early nineteenth-century master Zhabs dkar, one is repeatedly struck by the seamless course the author steers between visionary passages that would have not been too foreign in tone to St. Theresa and quantifications of pennies saved and earned that might well have given cheer to Ben Franklin.8 With these generalities in mind, I would like us to imagine ourselves for the moment to be in the position of earlier generations of Tibetan Buddhist historians, who had before them the records of differing lineages, that is, their hagiographical collections, and to pose for ourselves the problem of how, on this basis, we might construct histories. For, in a sense, we are in the same position today as was the 5 This is already the case in twelfth- and thirteenth-century histories such as Mkhas pa lde’u, Mkhas pa lde’us mdzad pa’i rgya bod kyi chos ’byung rgyas pa, Gangs can rig mdzod 3 (Lhasa: Bod ljongs bod yig dpe rnying dpe skrun khang, 1987) and Nyang nyi ma ’od zer, Chos ’byung me tog snying po sbrang rtsi’i bcud, Gangs can rig mdzod 5 (Lhasa: Bod ljongs bod yig dpe rnying dpe skrun khang, 1988). 6 It is of course well known that, as late as the mid-sixteenth century, Dpa’ bo gtsug lag phreng ba was still able to locate authentic sources dating back to the imperial period. Though there is sometimes good reason to believe that earlier historical writers – including, among others, Mkhas pa lde’u, Lde’u jo sras, and O rgyan gling pa – similarly incorporated elements of veritable early documents into their works, they were unfortunately seldom so scrupulous as was Dpa’ bo gtsug lag phreng ba, who frequently gives us clear indications when he relies on such materials. 7 The preservation in the Tibetan Archives in Lhasa of at least some official records dating back to the Phag mo gru pa and Rin spungs pa regimes gives hope that the materials needed to clarify this point with reference to the history of Tibetan bureaucratic practices may eventually become available. 8 Matthieu Ricard et al., trans., The Life of Shabkar: The Autobiography of a Tibetan Yogin (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1994). Kapstein: Chronological Conundrums in the Life of Khyung po rnal ’byor 4 author of the Blue Annals (Deb ther sngon po), ’Gos lo tsā ba, during the middle part of the fifteenth century.9 This is not to say, of course, that the interests which we bring to our interrogation of the hagiographical traditions are the same as his were. Still, there are some matters about which our interests clearly do converge: making sense of chronology is a case in point and we have a lot to learn from ’Gos lo tsā ba’s efforts to elucidate the chronological record. I dare say, in fact, that without his efforts and those of his successors, we would be hard pressed to interpret the relative and absolute chronology of Tibetan Buddhism in the eleventh through thirteenth centuries today. The particular case I wish to consider is the hagiography of Khyung po rnal ’byor, the “yogin of the Khyung clan,” who was the founder of the Shangs pa bka’ brgyud, considered one of the eight major practice lineages of Tibetan tantric Buddhism.10 I have written about Khyung po rnal ’byor and the Shangs pa bka’ brgyud tradition in a number of earlier articles and have been working for some time on a book about the Shangs pa bka’ brgyud, which is concerned primarily with the early history of the tradition and its distinctive teachings of dream and apparition. One of the several problems that has forcefully emerged in the course of this work involves the interpretation of the early hagiographies of the tradition as historical documents. How far are we entitled to go in reading these texts as historical sources? How do they speak to us of history? We have access at present to four redactions of the Golden Rosary of the Shangpa (Shangs pa gser ’phreng), the collected hagiographies of the Shangs pa bka’ brgyud masters.11 These were compiled in different times and places, by quite different branches of the Shangs pa bka’ brgyud. For the records of the early masters, however, those who flourished no later than the beginning of the fourteenth century, the four collections are closely similar, both in their selection of teachers whose hagiographies are included, and in the actual texts themselves. Much the same may be said of the condensed versions of the Golden Rosary of the Shangpa we find in the Blue Annals and in another fifteenth-century history, The Archive 9 ’Gos lo gzhon nu dpal, Blue Annals, 2 vols. (Chengdu: Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1984); G. N. Roerich, trans., The Blue Annals (1949; repr., Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1976). As mentioned below, it is evident that ’Gos lo tsā ba’s account of the Shangs pa bka’ brgyud tradition is based upon precisely the same lineage history preserved in the various versions of the Golden Rosary of the Shangpa Kagyü (Shangs pa bka’ brgyud gser phreng). 10 On this way of classifying the major lineages, see my “gDams ngag: Tibetan Technologies of the Self,” in Tibetan Literature: Studies in Genre, ed. José I. Cabezón and Roger R. Jackson (Ithaca: Snow Lion Publications), 275-89. 11 These are as follows. (1) Shangs-pa gser-’phreng: A Golden Rosary of the Lives of Masters of the Shangs-pa dKar[sic]-brgyud-pa Schools, Smanrtsis Shesrig Spendzod 15 (Leh: Sonam W. Tashigangpa, 1970). (2) Śaṅs-pa bKa’-brgyud-pa Texts: A collection of rare manuscripts of doctrinal, ritual, and biographical works of scholars of the Śaṅs-pa Bka’-brgyud-pa tradition from the monastery of Gsaṅ-sṅags-chos-gliṅ in Kinnaur, 2 vols. (Sumra, H.P.: Urgyan Dorje, 1977). (3) Shangs pa bka’ brgyud bla rabs kyi rnam thar, Gangs can rig mdzod 28 (Lhasa: Bod ljongs bod yig dpe rnying dpe skrun khang, 1996). (4) A sixteenth-century xylographic version from Mnga’ ris gung thang preserved in the National Archives of Nepal, in Kathmandu. An abridged, vulgar translation of the first version is found in Nicole Riggs, trans., Like An Illusion: Lives of the Shangpa Kagyu Masters (Eugene, OR: Dharma Cloud Publishing, 2000). Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies 1 (October 2005) 5 of China and Tibet (Rgya bod yig tshang), and in a later survey of Shangs pa bka’ brgyud history written by the renowned Tāranātha.12 This, together with much other evidence, reinforces the assertion of the Shangs pa bka’ brgyud tradition itself, that it remained a tightly knit and highly secretive lineage until the late-thirteenth and early-fourteenth centuries, when its masters began to promulgate its teachings much more widely than had been the case previously.13 These circumstances further suggest that the early hagiographies were redacted in more or less the form in which we now know them during this same period, and this in turn would explain the remarkable consistency of these texts in the known versions. It further suggests, however, that we must be rather cautious about attributing their contents to the age of the earlier figures they treat. All of the early Shangs pa bka’ brgyud hagiographies share a remarkable emphasis on dreams and visions. In them, what we think of as ordinary waking experiences, besides being frequently treated as matters of secondary importance, are often not systematically distinguished from these other states. The contemporary reader, even sometimes the Tibetan reader within the tradition, will be hard put at points to say whether a given episode takes place in fact, in visionary experience, or in dream. It is one of the hallmarks of later Tibetan writing that there are well-formed conventions for distinguishing among these experiential modalities.14 Though the early Shangs pa bka’ brgyud hagiographies do often specify that certain events are occurring in dreams – this reflects in part the emphasis upon lucid dreaming as a specialty of the Shangs pa bka’ brgyud contemplative system15 – it is also sometimes the case that we lose our bearings altogether and can only guess as to the level of reality in which a given narrative unfolds. Both the redaction history of the early Shangs pa bka’ brgyud hagiographies and their internal phenomenology, therefore, give us prima facie reasons for skepticism regarding their value as historical documents, except, of course, in as much as they are documents that we may draw upon in our contemporary constructions of the history of Tibetan mentalités. Nevertheless, some basic historical questions must be asked, and if we cannot turn to these documents for help, then we are left without any recourse at all. 12 (1) ’Gos lo gzhon nu dpal, Blue Annals. (2) Dpal ’byor bzang po, Rgya bod yig tshang chen mo (Chengdu: Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1983). (3) The Shangs pa chos ’byung of Tāranātha is found only in the editions of his gsung ’bum published in ’Dzam thang, Sichuan. One of these (the lithographic reprint of the recent xylographic edition) has recently been scanned and issued on CD-ROM by the Tibetan Buddhist Resource Center, New York. 13 For a sketch of the spread of the Shangs pa bka’ brgyud, refer to my “The Shangs-pa bKa’-brgyud: An Unknown School of Tibetan Buddhism,” in Studies in Honor of Hugh Richardson, ed. M. Aris and Aung San Suu Kyi (Warminster: Aris and Phillips, 1980), 138-44. See, too, E. Gene Smith, “The Shangs pa Bka’ brgyud Tradition,” in Among Tibetan Texts: History and Literature of the Himalayan Plateau (Boston: Wisdom, 2001), chap. 4. 14 The stock phrase, frequently encountered in later hagiographical writings, is dngos snang rmi lam gsum, the “threesome of reality, pure vision (dag snang), and dream.” 15 A very brief account of the Shangs pa bka’ brgyud system of tantric yoga may be found in Kapstein, “The Journey to the Golden Mountain,” in Tibetan Religions in Practice, ed. Donald S. Lopez, Jr. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997), 178-87. Kapstein: Chronological Conundrums in the Life of Khyung po rnal ’byor 6 So let us begin with perhaps the most basic of historical questions: how do we situate the Shangs pa bka’ brgyud in historical time? In particular, what can we say about the time of Shangs pa bka’ brgyud beginnings? To reduce this to the most pedestrian terms, just when was the Shangs pa bka’ brgyud founder, Khyung po rnal ’byor, born, and when did he die? (Some may urge that an even more primary question is: how can we know that there was even such a person at all? But this is not in fact a real issue in the present case – some of the evidence for my asserting this will be at least implicit in what follows.) Khyung po rnal ’byor’s hagiography does not provide us with precisely specified dates for his life, nor do the hagiographies of his successors make up this lacuna. Late Tibetan chronologies assert his birth to have occurred in either 978 or 990,16 but we shall soon see how they arrived at this calculation. The earliest Shangs pa bka’ brgyud master whose dates are known with relative assurance is Sangs rgyas ston pa (1219-1290),17 who was Khyung po rnal ’byor’s great-great-granddisciple. Before his time, our dating of events in Shangs pa bka’ brgyud history largely depends on relative chronology, for instance, when we find reference to persons also known from non-Shangs pa bka’ brgyud sources, whose dates are reliably known. One of the few dates specified in Khyung po rnal ’byor’s hagiography, albeit imprecisely, is the year of his birth: he is said to have been born in a tiger year, an assertion that is strengthened owing to the name of his father, “tiger-born” (stag skyes), reflecting the still-current custom in some Tibetan communities of addressing a parent by an epithet derived from the name or birthdate of the first-born.18 Tiger years, however, come around once in every twelve years. In seeking to determine just which tiger year is at stake here, we may wonder just why late Tibetan chronologists fixed their calculations on the tiger years 978 or 990; for there is nothing at all in the narrative of Khyung po rnal ’byor’s birth and childhood that would in fact support this, notwithstanding Snellgrove’s glib assertion that “there is no problem in accepting 990 as the ‘tiger-year’ in which he was born.”19 On the contrary, Khyung po rnal ’byor is depicted at age ten as studying the Kālacakra – here no doubt referring to the elementary mathematics taught in connection with 16 Thus, both alternatives are duly recorded in Tshe tan zhabs drung, Bstan rtsis kun las btus pa (Xining: Mtsho sngon mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1982), 150-51. 17 ’Gos lo tsā ba, in Roerich, Blue Annals, 746, frankly acknowledges the dating problem with respect to the early Shangs pa bka’ brgyud masters. Nevertheless, given Sangs rgyas ston pa’s birth in a hare year, his death at 72, and the birth of his leading disciple, Mkhas grub shangs ston, in 1234 (wood male horse), the present calculation seems plausible. 18 In the Sherpa communities of northeastern Nepal, for example, a parent is often known as “father (or mother) of so-and-so” (X-gi a pa / a ma). In everyday speech, however, the phrase mentioning the parental relation is often left off, so that the parent is in fact addressed by the child’s proper name. 19 David L. Snellgrove, Indo-Tibetan Buddhism: Indian Buddhists and Their Tibetan Successors (Boston: Shambhala, 1987), 501 n. Pace Snellgrove, I do not think that Roerich’s calculation of the date of Khyung po rnal ’byor’s birth as 1086 was a “mere oversight,” but most likely a tentative conclusion drawn from the close study of the relations among figures mentioned in the Blue Annals. Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies 1 (October 2005) 7 the Kālacakratantra’s astrological system – and this was not at all likely to have been current in Tibet before roughly the middle of the eleventh century.20 So why did the later Tibetan historians, who knew very well when it was that the Kālacakra was promulgated (indeed, they derived much of their system of calculation from it!) reach back a full half century and more in their determination of this particular tiger year? I have puzzled about this for a very long time and I have only found one plausible explanation: Khyung po rnal ’byor’s hagiography, though it does not state exactly the year of his death, does affirm that he lived for 150 years. Though this was certainly not always taken as literal truth,21 in a land in which three-century lifespans were claimed for some sages, many were prepared to accept a term of a century-and-a-half at face value. It is clear, at least, that not a few later Tibetan historians thought in just this way.22 We may propose then, that they sought to establish approximately the period of Khyung po rnal ’byor’s death, and then calculated back to a tiger year occurring close to 150 years before. The effort to determine the period of Khyung po rnal ’byor’s death, in fact, strongly suggests that this is precisely what did occur. Our best evidence for working out when Khyung po rnal ’byor was likely to have died comes from the hagiography of his main successor, Rmog lcog pa. Rmog lcog pa gives us sufficient information regarding his own age at various points in recounting his studies, so that we can adduce that he was in his late twenties when Khyung po rnal ’byor died.23 What’s more, tolerably precise references to certain of his contemporaries within his hagiography strongly suggest that he had been born close to 1110.24 This comports very well with the relative periodization we can determine for another of Khyung po rnal ’byor’s leading disciples, La stod dkon mchog mkhar of Gnas rnying.25 We are probably not far off, therefore, in inferring that Khyung po rnal ’byor must have passed away in about the mid- or 20 The use of the expression dus ’khor in this manner does not seem to be documented in the available Tibetan dictionaries. However, it is justified by the fact that the exoteric Kālacakra system, which treats of calendrical and astrological calculations, has basic numeracy as its prerequisite. Elementary education in the Kālacakra system was perhaps similar in India, as is suggested by the Kālacakrāvatāra of Abhayākaragupta (fl. late eleventh century), an introductory work on astronomical calculation. 21 See below, n. 31. 22 See, for example, Dpa’ bo gtsug lag phreng ba, Chos ’byung mkhas pa’i dga’ ston (Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1986), 2: 1373. 23 As a youth Rmog lcog pa had studied under Khyung po rnal ’byor for five years, leaving him at the age of twenty-one to pursue his education elsewhere. He returned to Khyung po rnal ’byor five years or so later and then spent one year and seven months as his chosen successor before the master passed away. 24 The chief evidence for this is his discipleship under Sgam po pa (1079-1153), which seems to place him in the same generation as the latter’s chief successors Phag mo gru pa rdo rje rgyal po (1110-1170) and Khams pa dbus se, aka Karma pa dus gsum mkhyen pa (1110-1193). 25 La stod dkon mchog mkhar may be assigned to the early and mid-twelfth century, as the Gnas rnying chos ’byung records him to have been a disciple and successor of ’Bre shes rab ’bar, one of the leading students of Rngog blo ldan shes rab (1059-1109). I am grateful to E. Gene Smith for sharing with me his transcription of the rare history of Gnas rnying, one of the few sources outside the Shangs pa bka’ brgyud tradition that affords, in its account of La stod dkon mchog mkhar, a small but precious element of independent testimony concerning Khyung po rnal ’byor. Kapstein: Chronological Conundrums in the Life of Khyung po rnal ’byor 8 late-1130s. And, from this conclusion, it is immediately apparent how the dates of 978 or 990 were determined. Now the real fun begins. How do the events of Khyung po rnal ’byor’s life, to the extent that they appear to refer to persons and circumstances we can situate, map onto a life that spanned circa 990-1140? We have already seen that his childhood studies involved material suggesting an education during or after the mid-eleventh century and certainly not the late-tenth or very early eleventh. As matters turn out, almost everything about the hagiography supports this. Khyung po rnal ’byor was born to a Bon po family and claims himself to have become an adept and successful teacher of this tradition before becoming a Buddhist adhering to the Rnying ma pa teaching of the Great Perfection (Rdzogs chen), in which he similarly claims to have enjoyed great success. Unfortunately, none of the figures mentioned as his teachers and students within these traditions has been so far securely identified,26 so that there is no chronological evidence at all to be derived from the tales of his involvement in them. But there is one curious detail we find in connection with his study of the Great Perfection: he includes among the topics that constituted his training the “three classes of the Great Perfection – mental, spatial, and esoteric instructional.” The precise origins of this classificatory scheme are not known, but there is strong reason to suspect that it entered into currency in connection with a particular system of Great Perfection teaching, that of the Snying thig, whose promulgation dates to the period of Zhang ston bkra shis rdo rje (1097-1167) or shortly before.27 If the reference indeed does go back to Khyung po rnal ’byor’s early career and is not an elaboration added late in his life or even afterwards, then it seems to support our suggestion that the period of Khyung po rnal ’byor’s youth could not have been earlier than the mid-eleventh century. It is with the introduction of Khyung po rnal ’byor’s third major teacher, the Mahāmudrā master Skor ni ru pa, that the approximate temporal location of the events of Khyung po rnal ’byor’s early career seems to be fixed. But be forewarned: almost everything connected with Skor ni ru pa is so strange that this is rather like triangulating the position of an illusion by reference to a mirage. In point of fact, Khyung po rnal ’byor’s hagiography tells us that after his involvement in Great Perfection he was still unsatisfied and, leaving his disciples, went on pilgrimage 26 Nevertheless, Dan Martin, Unearthing Bon Treasures (Leiden: Brill, 2001), does offer some suggestions regarding Khyung po rnal ’byor’s Bon po associates. It has not so far been possible for me to consider these in detail. 27 David Germano, “Architecture and Absence in the Secret Tantric History of the Great Perfection (rdzogs chen),” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 17, no. 2 (1994): 203-335, surveys aspects of the early history of the Snying thig tradition. See, too, Jean-Luc Achard, L’Essence Perlée du Secret: Recherches philologiques et historiques sur l’origine de la Grande Perfection dans la tradition rnying ma pa (Turnhout: Brepols, 1999). For a traditional account, refer to Dudjom Rinpoche, Jikdrel Yeshe Dorje, The Nyingma School of Tibetan Buddhism: Its Fundamentals and History, trans. Gyurme Dorje and Matthew Kapstein (Boston: Wisdom Publications, 1991), 1: 554-74. The association of the tripartite classification of the Great Perfection systems with the Snying thig in particular is due to the reference, in traditional Rnying ma pa doxography (e.g., Dudjom, Nyingma School, vol. 1, 319) to the A ti bkod pa chen po section of the Bi ma snying thig as the proof text in this context. Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies 1 (October 2005) 9 to Lhasa. During the course of this journey he met Skor ni ru pa, who transmitted the Mahāmudrā and other tantric teachings to him, praising him as his best disciple. I will leave to one side the questions that might be raised about the actual nature of Khyung po rnal ’byor’s relation with this teacher, assuming that indeed there was such a relation, and the role his claim about this may have played, or not, in authenticating his own attainments. Whatever else one may propose in the way of interpretation with respect to this, Khyung po rnal ’byor’s hagiography is clearly asserting that the period of his early career corresponded with the period of Skor ni ru pa’s teaching. It is here that we owe a debt of gratitude to ’Gos lo tsā ba and his Blue Annals, for by the fifteenth century Skor ni ru pa had already faded into obscurity, so that ’Gos lo tsā ba saw this as good reason to preserve in his history all that he knew of this figure and to attempt to rectify his dating with care.28 According to ’Gos lo tsā ba’s calculation, Skor ni ru pa lived for forty-one years from 1062 to 1102. This corresponds well with the other synchronizations we have proposed. However, we must wonder just what sources ’Gos lo tsā ba had at his disposal for his record of Skor ni ru pa, particularly because Skor ni ru pa was, in effect, the Lobsang Rampa of eleventh-century Tibet, a Tibetan yogin whose body had been taken over by an Indian saint. To the historical uncertainties of visions and dreams, then, we must also add possession! Despite this last complication, a pattern of sorts is beginning to emerge: Khyung po rnal ’byor’s youth and early career belong probably to the beginning of the second half of the eleventh century, not earlier. Those among his Indian teachers whom we can identify with some certainty – for instance, Maitripa’s disciple Atulyavajra, or Amoghavajra of Vajrāsana – similarly belong to the mid- and late eleventh century. Khyung po rnal ’byor claims to have studied, too, with Maitripa himself. Because the tradition sometimes gives the death year of this master as 1088,29 we can perhaps accept this without much upsetting our chronological assumptions, that is, if we accept that Khyung po rnal ’byor did indeed meet Maitripa himself. One further detail is worth noting here: Khyung po rnal ’byor states that he received his final ordination as a bhikṣu under the renowned Bka’ gdams pa preceptor Glang ri thang pa, who was born in 1054, founded Glang thang Monastery in 1093, and passed away some thirty years later, in 1123.30 All that we have seen up to now convinces us that the period of Khyung po rnal ’byor’s discipleship and search for enlightenment must have taken place during the last part of the eleventh century, perhaps even the beginning of the twelfth, and that, in effect, he represented matters in this way by constant reference to 28 ’Gos lo tsā ba, in Roerich, Blue Annals, 849-55. But consider, too, Kurtis R. Schaeffer, “The Religious Career of Vairocanavajra – A Twelfth-Century Indian Buddhist Master from Dakṣiṇa Kośala,” Journal of Indian Philosophy 28, no. 4 (2000): 361-84, esp. 371, on Vairocanavajra’s meeting with Skor. Schaeffer’s conclusion would argue either for a readjustment of Skor’s dates, or for discounting the meeting as apocryphal. As Khyung po rnal ’byor is associated with both of these figures, it may well be that the former conclusion is to be preferred. 29 See Mark Tatz, “The Life of the Siddha-Philosopher Maitrīgupta,” Journal of the American Oriental Society, 107, no. 4 (1987): 695-711. 30 Roerich, Blue Annals, 270-71. Kapstein: Chronological Conundrums in the Life of Khyung po rnal ’byor 10 Tibetan and Indian teachers who, we know, were active during just the same period. As we have seen above, his death certainly occurred in about 1135-1140. If we assume, then, that he was in fact born circa 1050, he would have been approaching ninety at the time of his death. It is not at all uncommon in traditional societies to add a few decades to the ages of elderly persons; two well documented examples well within the memory of living persons are the Tibetan teacher Ani lo chen, or Shugs gseb rje btsun ma, who probably lived into her mid-nineties but whose disciples thought she was well over 130 at the time of her death, and Baba Allaudin Khan, the virtuoso musician and father of the renowned sarodist Ali Akbar Khan, whose age was similarly exaggerated. Khyung po rnal ’byor’s claimed span of 150 years was a stretch, but nevertheless seems to exemplify a similar phenomenon. ’Gos lo tsā ba certainly saw matters in this way, and remarked in the Blue Annals that 150 had to be understood here “symbolically.”31 Nevertheless, despite our best efforts to elaborate an appropriately rationalized time-line for the events recounted in Khyung po rnal ’byor’s hagiography, there are a number of points at which the attempt simply comes undone. The most important of these occurs after Khyung po rnal ’byor’s second journey to India. If the assumptions guiding us so far have been correct, this could not have taken place much earlier than the mid 1080s. Here is how he narrates his return to Tibet: [Upon arriving in Tibet] I went to Tho ling accompanied by the translators Bklan dharma blo gros and Gayādhara. Since some of my Indian texts had begun to rot (rul), I thought, “I must go back to India.” The paṇḍita Dīpaṃkaraśrījñāna (=Atiśa) was also staying there at that time. He said to me, “[Your Indian texts] are in accord with my own [copies]. It will suffice to appoint Rin chen bzang po to translate them,” and they were translated by Rin chen bzang po and the translator Bklan dharma blo gros.32 This is followed by an extensive list of the teachings he subsequently received from Atiśa. This is all quite problematic. The translator Glan dar ma blo gros is a shadowy figure who turns up at a number of interesting places in connection with Khyung po rnal ’byor and the texts he collected in India.33 But he is mentioned occasionally elsewhere as well, particularly in connection with the Indian tantric scholar Vairocanarakṣita, who seems to have flourished during the early and mid-twelfth century.34 Glan dar ma blo gros, therefore, would appear to have indeed been Khyung po rnal ’byor’s contemporary according to the arguments already adduced. 31 Roerich, Blue Annals, 733; ’Gos lo tsā ba, Blue Annals, 2: 859. The term translated by Roerich as “symbolically” is dgongs pa can. 32 Shangs pa bka’ brgyud bla rabs kyi rnam thar, 39. The clan designation bklan is elsewhere most often given as glan. The printed text cited here is also unusual in its transcription of the proper name dar ma as dharma. 33 34 See, for instance, n. 37 below. Vairocanarakṣita is an alternative name of the Vairocanavajra studied by Schaeffer, “The Religious Career of Vairocanavajra.” Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies 1 (October 2005) 11 The three remaining figures, however, all were active much earlier: Gayādhara visited Tibet probably during the 1040s, Atiśa was there from 1042 until his death in 1054, and Rin chen bzang po likewise died in 1055.35 The last two were both in residence in Tho ling only during the mid-1040s. Khyung po rnal ’byor’s account of his meeting with them is, therefore, credible only if we assume that he travelled backwards in time!36 It appears, then, that one of the key events reported in Khyung po rnal ’byor’s hagiography is in conflict with the chronology that I have proposed, that is, a life spanning roughly 1050-1140. That event, however, may best be read as a fiction inserted into the hagiography for apologetical reasons. Why had his texts “begun to rot”? This would be an unusual development in Tibet, where eleventh- and twelfth-century palm-leaf manuscripts have been preserved in immaculate condition. Could it be that the “rot” is metaphorical, alluding to the fact that the texts in question were apocryphal works created by Khyung po rnal ’byor himself and not at all the writings of his Indian masters? In fact, this is probably just what did occur, but my detailed arguments about this must be reserved for another occasion.37 Still, let’s hold on here for a minute. If the episode in question is a fiction, found in a hagiographical account that seems to be largely constructed of dream and fiction, why on earth should we not suppose the episodes we have chosen to provide us with reliable chronological coordinates to be fictions as well? In that case, all that we have said in regard to Khyung po rnal ’byor’s probable dating has no more substance to it than the proverbial city of the gandharvas. I really have no way to answer this objection except to suggest, once again, that even in this case we are nevertheless considering fictions that, for the most part, index themselves to a particular period in time. Earlier on, I summarized the manner in which the early traditions of Tibetan hagiographical writing, though never entirely supplanted, did nevertheless have to make room for an emerging historiography that was relatively more interested in time and circumstance than early Tibetan hagiography had generally been.38 35 I know of no other record that places Gayādhara in Tho ling together with the others mentioned, though, as noted by Roberto Vitali, The Kingdoms of Gu.ge Pu.hrang According to mNga’.ris.rgyal.rabs by Gu.ge mkhan.chen Ngag.dbang.grags.pa (Dharamsala: Tho ling gtsug lag khang lo gcig stong ’khor ba’i rjes dran mdzad sgo’i sgrigs tshogs chung, 1996), 238, n. 336, Gayādhara is supposed to have first met his Tibetan disciple ’Brog mi in 1042, the year of Atiśa’s arrival in Tho ling. 36 Snellgrove, Indo-Tibetan Buddhism, mistakenly assumed that the purported meeting of Khyung po rnal ’byor with Atiśa at Tho ling could have taken place any time up until the latter’s passing in 1054, forgetting that he was no longer in Guge after 1045. 37 Namely, my edition and translation of the Tibetan text of the Sgyu ma lam rim and its autocommentary, both attributed to the yoginī Niguma and translated by Glan dar ma blo gros at the request of Khyung po rnal ’byor. For an introduction to these texts, see my “The Illusion of Spiritual Progress,” in Paths to Liberation, ed. Robert Buswell and Robert Gimello (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1992), 193-224. 38 Despite this, some relatively recent authors remain frustratingly vague when it comes to dates. A case in point is the autobiography of the late nineteenth – early twentieth-century Amdo Rnying ma pa master Bdud ’joms rdo rje rol pa rtsal, on whom see my “The sprul-sku’s Miserable Lot: Critical Voices from Eastern Tibet,” in Amdo Tibetans in Transition: Society and Culture in the Post-Mao Era, Kapstein: Chronological Conundrums in the Life of Khyung po rnal ’byor 12 Some of the hallmarks of the new historiography were its concern with the linearity of time and with the regularity, and hence measurability, of its flow.39 The evolution, moreover, of such categories as those of outer, inner and esoteric biography, together with the refinement of the literary conventions used to relate both mundane and marvelous events, tended to clarify the once inexplicit boundaries between reality, vision and dream. No doubt, the difficulties confronted by ’Gos lo tsā ba and others in retrieving the hagiographical traditions for their own historical writing were among the factors contributing to this development. But in Tibet the older traditions of hagiographical writing never died, though in some respects they did begin to fade away. What is perhaps most striking is their persistence, their refusal of disenchantment when pierced by the straight and unidirectional arrow of time. Bibliography Achard, Jean-Luc. L’Essence Perlée du Secret: Recherches philologiques et historiques sur l’origine de la Grande Perfection dans la tradition rnying ma pa. Turnhout: Brepols, 1999. Bischoff, F. A., and Charles Hartman. “Padmasambhava’s Invention of the Phur-bu: Ms. Pelliot tibétain 44.” In Études tibétaines dédiées à la mémoire de Marcelle Lalou, edited by Ariane Macdonald, 11-28. Paris: Adrien Maisonneuve, 1971. Coblin, W. S. “A Study of the Old Tibetan Shangshu Paraphrase.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 111 (1991): 303-22, 523-39. Dpa’ bo gtsug lag phreng ba. Chos ’byung mkhas pa’i dga’ ston, 2 vols. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1986. Dudjom Rinpoche, Jikdrel Yeshe Dorje. The Nyingma School of Tibetan Buddhism: Its Fundamentals and History, translated by Gyurme Dorje and Matthew Kapstein. 2 vols. Boston: Wisdom Publications, 1991. Germano, David. “Architecture and Absence in the Secret Tantric History of the Great Perfection (rdzogs chen).” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 17, no. 2 (1994): 203-335. ’Gos lo gzhon nu dpal, Deb ther sngon po. 2 vols. Chengdu: Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1984. ed. Toni Huber, PIATS 2000: Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the Ninth Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Leiden 2000, ed. Henk Blezer, vol. 2/5, Brill’s Tibetan Studies Library, ed. Henk Blezer, Alex McKay, and Charles Ramble (Leiden: Brill, 2002), 99-111. 39 Dated journals and diaries, such as those of Si tu paṇ chen, no doubt played a major role here. See E. Gene Smith, “The Diaries of Si tu paṇ chen,” in Among Tibetan Texts, chap. 7; and, on Tibetan diarists more generally, Janet Gyatso, “Counting Crows’ Teeth: Tibetans and Their Diaries,” in Les habitants du toit du monde, ed. Samten Karmay and Philippe Sagant (Paris: Société d’Ethnologie, 1997), 159-77. Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies 1 (October 2005) 13 Gyatso, Janet. “Counting Crows’ Teeth: Tibetans and Their Diaries.” In Les habitants du toit du monde, edited by Samten Karmay and Philippe Sagant, 159-77. Paris: Société d’Ethnologie, 1997. ———. Apparitions of the Self. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998. Imaeda, Yoshiro. “L’identification de l’original chinois du Pelliot tibétain 1291 – traduction tibétaine du Zhanguoce.” Acta Orientalia (Hungarica) 34, nos. 1-3 (1980): 53-68. Kapstein, Matthew. “The Shangs-pa bKa’-brgyud: An Unknown School of Tibetan Buddhism.” In Studies in Honor of Hugh Richardson, edited by M. Aris and Aung San Suu Kyi, 138-44. Warminster: Aris and Phillips, 1980. ———. “The Illusion of Spiritual Progress.” In Paths to Liberation, edited by Robert Buswell and Robert Gimello, 193-224. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1992. ———.“gDams ngag: Tibetan Technologies of the Self.” In Tibetan Literature: Studies in Genre, edited by José I. Cabezón and Roger R. Jackson, 275-89. Ithaca: Snow Lion Publications, 1996. ———. “The Journey to the Golden Mountain.” In Tibetan Religions in Practice, edited by Donald S. Lopez, Jr., 178-87. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997. ———. The Tibetan Assimilation of Buddhism. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000. ———. “The sprul-sku’s Miserable Lot: Critical Voices from Eastern Tibet.” In Amdo Tibetans in Transition: Society and Culture in the Post-Mao Era, ed. Toni Huber, PIATS 2000: Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the Ninth Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Leiden 2000, ed. Henk Blezer, vol. 2/5, Brill’s Tibetan Studies Library, ed. Henk Blezer, Alex McKay, and Charles Ramble, 99-111. Leiden: Brill, 2002. Lalou, Marcelle. “Document tibétain sur l’expansion du dhyāna chinois.” Journal Asiatique 231 (1939): 505-23. Martin, Dan. Unearthing Bon Treasures. Leiden: Brill, 2001. Ricard, Matthieu et al., trans. The Life of Shabkar: The Autobiography of a Tibetan Yogin. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1994. Riggs, Nicole, trans. Like An Illusion: Lives of the Shangpa Kagyu Masters. Eugene, OR: Dharma Cloud Publishing, 2000. Roerich, G. N., trans. The Blue Annals. 1949. Reprint, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1976. Śaṅs-pa bKa’-brgyud-pa Texts: A Collection of Rare Manuscripts of Doctrinal, Ritual, and Biographical Works of Scholars of the Śaṅs-pa Bka’-brgyud-pa Kapstein: Chronological Conundrums in the Life of Khyung po rnal ’byor 14 Tradition from the Monastery of Gsaṅ-sṅags-chos-gliṅ in Kinnaur. 2 vols. Sumra, H.P.: Urgyan Dorje, 1977. Schaeffer, Kurtis R. “The Religious Career of Vairocanavajra – A Twelfth-Century Indian Buddhist Master from Dakṣiṇa Kośala.” Journal of Indian Philosophy 28, no. 4 (2000): 361-84. Shangs pa bka’ brgyud bla rabs kyi rnam thar. Gangs can rig mdzod 28. Lhasa: Bod ljongs bod yig dpe rnying dpe skrun khang, 1996. Shangs-pa gser-’phreng: A Golden Rosary of the Lives of Masters of the Shangs-pa dKar[sic]-brgyud-pa Schools. Smanrtsis Shesrig Spendzod 15. Leh: Sonam W. Tashigangpa, 1970. Smith, E. Gene. Among Tibetan Texts: History and Literature of the Himalayan Plateau. Boston: Wisdom, 2001. Snellgrove, David L. Indo-Tibetan Buddhism: Indian Buddhists and Their Tibetan Successors. Boston: Shambhala, 1987. Stein, Rolf A. “‘Saint et Divin’, un titre tibétain et chinois des rois tibétains.” Journal Asiatique nos. 1-2 (1981): 231-75. ———. “Tibetica Antiqua I: Les deux vocabulaires des traductions Indo-tibétaine et Sino-tibétaine dans les Manuscrits de Touen-houang.” Bulletin de l’École Française d’Extrême-Orient 72 (1983): 149-236. Takeuchi, Tsuguhito. “A Passage from the Shih chi in the Old Tibetan Chronicle.” In Soundings in Tibetan Civilization, edited by Barbara Nimri Aziz and Matthew Kapstein, 135-46. Delhi: Manohar, 1985. Tatz, Mark. “The Life of the Siddha-Philosopher Maitrīgupta.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 107, no. 4 (1987): 695-711. Vitali, Roberto. The Kingdoms of Gu.ge Pu.hrang According to mNga’.ris.rgyal.rabs by Gu.ge mkhan.chen Ngag.dbang.grags.pa. Dharamsala: Tho ling gtsug lag khang lo gcig stong ’khor ba’i rjes dran mdzad sgo’i sgrigs tshogs chung, 1996. Jackson and Kapstein (Hrsg.) MAHĀMUDRĀ AND THE BKA’-BRGYUD TRADITION BEITRÄGE ZUR ZENTRALASIENFORSCHUNG MAHĀMUDRĀ AND THE BKA’-BRGYUD TRADITION PIATS 2006: Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the Eleventh Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Königswinter 2006. EDITED BY ROGER R. JACKSON AND MATTHEW T. KAPSTEIN Cover: Karma Pakshi, copper alloy with copper inlay and painted details, Tibet, circa 14th century, 12.5 cm. Photo courtesy Rossi & Rossi, London. Table of Contents List of Illustrations vii Contributors xv Preface xi I. FACETS OF MAHĀMUDRĀ The Study Of Mahāmudrā In The West: A Brief Historical Overview Roger R. Jackson 3 The Extraordinary Path: Saraha’s Adamantine Songs and the Bka’ brgyud Great Seal Lara Braitstein 55 The Collection of ‘Indian Mahāmudrā Works’ (phyag chen rgya gzhung) Compiled by the Seventh Karma pa Chos grags rgya mtsho Klaus-Dieter Mathes 89 II. TRADITIONS OF MEDITATION AND YOGA Prolegomenon to the Six Doctrines of Nā ro pa: Authority and Tradition Ulrich Timme Kragh 131 The Aural Transmission of Saṃvara: An Introduction to Neglected Sources for the Study of the Early Bka’ brgyud Marta Sernesi 179 Guru-Devotion in the Bka’ brgyud pa Tradition: The Single Means to Realisation Jan-Ulrich Sobisch 211 vi Contents III. CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE SUCCESSIVE KARMA PAS The Doctrine of Eternal Heaven: A Tibetan Defense of Mongol Imperial Religion Matthew T. Kapstein 259 The Role of Rang rig in the Pramāṇa-based Gzhan stong of the Seventh Karmapa Anne Burchardi The Eighth Karmapa’s Answer to Gling drung pa Jim Rheingans 317 345 Tibetan Interest in Chinese Visual Modes: The Foundation of the Tenth Karmapa’s ‘Chinese-style Thang ka Painting’ Karl Debreczeny 387 IV. THE LIFE AND LEGACY OF GTSANG SMYON HERUKA What Do the Childhood and Early Life of Gtsang smyon Heruka Tell Us about His Bka’ brgyud Affiliation? Stefan Larsson The Printing Projects of Gtsang smyon Heruka and His Disciples 425 Kurtis R. Schaeffer 453 PLATES 481 List of Illustrations In K. Debreczeny, Tibetan Interest in Chinese Visual Modes Fig. 1. The King of Lijiang, Mu Yi (1608-1692), official portrait. (After Mushi Huanpu, p. 136.) Fig. 2. Viewing Painting, central detail. Fig. 3. Rabbit detail. Fig. 4. Monkey and birds eating, detail. Fig. 5. Lin Liang. “Wild Fowl,” landscape detail. (After Liu Zhen, fig. 21.) Fig. 6. Lü Ji. “Two Ducks.” Ink and color on silk; 25 x 52 cm. Lijiang Dongba Cultural Museum (no. 1115). (After Lijiang shu hua xuan, Pl. 21.) Fig. 7. Notations detail from Deeds of the Buddha. Dpal-spungs Monastery. (Photograph courtesy of Matthieu Ricard, Shechen Archives.) Fig. 8. Arhat Sewing. Ink and color on paper flecked with gold; 30cm x 37cm. Private collection. Fig. 9. Arhat with Waterfall. Ink and color on paper flecked with gold; 30cm x 37cm. Private collection. Fig. 10. Arhat on Rock. Ink and color on paper flecked with gold; 30cm x 37cm. Private collection. Fig. 11. The Arhat Nāgasena. Ink on silk; 38 x 19 in. Gift of Mr. and Mrs. John C. Rezk, Collection of the Southern Alleghenies Museum of Art [92.062] Fig. 12. Monkeys Taking Mushrooms from an Arhat. Dpal-spungs Monastery. (Photograph courtesy of Matthieu Ricard, Shechen Archives.) Fig. 13. Arhat with Flock of Birds. Dpal-spungs Monastery. (Photograph courtesy of Matthieu Ricard, Shechen Archives.) Colour Plates (after p. 487) Plate 1. Chos dbyings rdo rje. “Buddha Śākyamuni.” Ink and pigment on silk; 68x 42 cm. Dated 1660. From a set of seven paintings, Lijiang Dongba Cultural Museum (no. 439.1). viii Illustrations Plate 2. Chos dbyings rdo rje. “Three Arhats Eating with Peacocks on Scholar’s Rock.” Ink and pigment on silk; 68 x 42 cm. From a set of seven paintings, Lijiang Dongba Cultural Museum (no. 439.2). Plate 3. Chos dbyings rdo rje. “Two Arhats and Dharmatāla Viewing Painting.” Ink and pigment on silk; 68 x 42 cm. From a set of seven paintings, Lijiang Dongba Cultural Museum (no. 439.3). Plate 4. Chos dbyings rdo rje. “Two Arhats and Hva-shang with Woman Washing Daikon.” Ink and pigment on silk; 68 x 42 cm. From a set of seven paintings, Lijiang Dongba Cultural Museum (no. 439.4). Plate 5. Chos dbyings rdo rje. “Three Arhats with Jade Gate.” Ink and pigment on silk; 68 x 42 cm. From a set of seven paintings, Lijiang Dongba Cultural Museum (no. 439.5). Plate 6. Chos dbyings rdo rje. “Three Arhats Eating with Monkey and Bamboo Fence.” Ink and pigment on silk; 68 x 42 cm. From a set of seven paintings, Lijiang Dongba Cultural Museum (no. 439.6). Plate 7. Chos dbyings rdo rje. “Three Arhats Heating Tea in Waterscape.” Ink and pigment on silk; 68 x 42 cm. From a set of seven paintings, Lijiang Dongba Cultural Museum (no. 439.7). Plate 8. Lin Tinggui (act. 1160-1180). “Luohans Laundering.” Ink and color on silk; 200 x 69.9 cm. Ningbo, dated 1178. Freer-Sackler Gallery of Art (F1902.224). Plate 9. “Lohans View Painting.” 500 Lohan set. Daitoku-ji, Kyoto. Plate 10. Deeds of the Buddha. Dpal-spungs Monastery. (Photograph courtesy of Matthieu Ricard, Shechen Archives.) Plate 11. Śākyamuni Buddha. Ink and color on silk; 68 x 52 cm. From a set of seventeen paintings, Lijiang Dongba Cultural Museum (no. 440). Plate 12. Arhat Nāgasena with a Dragon Issuing Out of a Jar. Ink and color on silk; 68 x 52 cm. From a set of seventeen paintings, Lijiang Dongba Cultural Museum (no. 440). Illustrations ix Plate 13. Arhat with Monkeys Stealing Mushrooms. Ink and color on silk; 68 x 52 cm. From a set of seventeen paintings, Lijiang Dongba Cultural Museum (no. 440). Plate 14. Arhat with Flock of Birds. Ink and color on silk; 68 x 52 cm. From a set of seventeen paintings, Lijiang Dongba Cultural Museum (no. 440). Plate 15. Arhat Sewing with Birds in Tree. Ink and color on silk; 68 x 52 cm. From a set of seventeen paintings, Lijiang Dongba Cultural Museum (no. 440). Plate 16. Buddha Śākyamuni. Attributed to Chos dbyings rdo rje. Ink and pigment on silk; 68 x 44 cm. Francoise & Alain Bordier Collection. (After Jackson (1996), p. 253.) In S. Larsson, The Early Life of Gtsang smyon Heruka Fig. 1. Mkhar kha, Gtsang smyon’s birthplace north of Rgyal rtse. Fig. 2. Dpal ’khor chos sde monastic complex at Rgyal rtse. Fig. 3. Gur pa gra tshang, the monastic department where Gtsang smyon studied at Dpal ’khor chos sde. Fig. 4. Mar pa, Mi la, and Ras chung, the first three Tibetan lineage lamas of the Aural Transmission of Ras chung. Modern statues at Ras chung phug. Fig. 5. A recent statue of Gtsang smyon in Ras chung phug, the place where he passed away. Fig. 6. Gtsang smyon’s shoe, kept in a village near his birthplace in Mkhar kha. PREFACE The spiritual traditions inspired by the great translator of Lho brag, Mar pa Chos kyi blo gros, and known generally as Bka’ brgyud, have had a remarkable legacy, contributing not only to the development of Tibetan religion, but to philosophy, art, literature, and politics as well. Though prominent teachers associated with several of the Bka’ brgyud orders have now established teaching centres throughout the world, touching the lives of thousands of persons outside of Tibet, and though a great many texts stemming from these traditions have now been translated into English and other Western languages, as a distinct area of inquiry the focused academic study of the Bka’ brgyud and their historical role in the formation of Tibetan culture is a relatively recent phenomenon. The present volume, offering the fruits of original research by twelve scholars, advances our knowledge in this field, while suggesting directions for future inquiry. The work published here is based on presentations at two panels at the Tenth Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies convened at Königswinter, Germany, in August 2006 under the auspices of the Seminar for Central Asian Studies at Bonn University. The first, concerning the Mahāmudrā teachings that are considered the very heart of Bka’ brgyud contemplative teaching, was organised by Roger R. Jackson and Lara Braitstein and entitled “Phyag rgya chen po: Perspectives, Debates, Traditions and Transmissions.” Besides the organisers, the contributors included Jim Rheingans, Burkhart Scherer, and Jan-Ulrich Sobisch. The second panel, commemorating the figure often considered the first representative of the unique Tibetan ecclesiatical institution of recognised hierarchical incarnation, was called “For Karma Pakshi’s Octocentenary: Dialogue and Innovation in the Bka’-brgyud Traditions.” Organised by Matthew T. Kapstein, it had as its other participants Karl Debreczeny, Ulrich T. Kragh, Stefan Larsson, Klaus-Dieter Mathes, xii Preface Puchung Tsering, Jann Ronis, Kurtis R. Schaeffer, and Marta Sernesi. In view of the close relationship between the two panels, and the overall quality and coherence of the new scholarship they introduced, the editors of this volume thought it advantageous that our efforts be combined. We regret that three of our colleagues (B. Scherer, Puchung Tsering, and J. Ronis) were unable to include their work in the present publication. At the same time, we were delighted that Anne Burchardi, whose communication was originally read in a panel devoted to Buddhist Philosophy, could make her research available for presentation here. In preparing this work for publication, the editors have been guided by the intellectual architecture of the contributions, rather than the plan of the original panels. The first part, “Facets of Mahāmudrā,” begins with R.R. Jackson’s survey of contemporary scholarship and translation relating to the Mahāmudrā traditions of India and Tibet. L. Braitstein’s study of the “Adamantine Songs” attributed to the renowned mahāsiddha Saraha, as well as K.-D. Mathes’s examination of the compilation of “Indian Mahāmudrā Works” directed by the seventh Karma pa, both enhance our growing understanding of the ways and means whereby Indian Mahāmudrā traditions were transmitted and transmuted in Tibet. The following section, “Traditions of Meditation and Yoga,” takes up specific Bka’ brgyud systems of spiritual discipline with reference to their texthistory and practical content. U.T. Kragh examines the formation of the textual sources of the famed “Six Yogas of Nāropa,” perhaps the most celebrated of the Bka’ brgyud teachings besides the Mahāmudrā. His work has its counterpart in M. Sernesi’s study of the Aural Transmissions (snyan brgyud) and their place in the yoga systems specific to Bka’ brgyud esotericism. In the final chapter in this section, on “Guru Devotion” by J.-U. Sobisch, we return to the Mahāmudrā in connection with the teaching of ’Bri gung Skyobs pa, considered controversial by some, that such devotion offered in fact the “single means to realisation.” Preface xiii The studies making up part three, “Contributions of the Successive Karma pas,” examine selected works—textual and artistic—produced by members of one of Tibet’s preeminent reincarnation lineages. M.T. Kapstein, in his investigation of a recently discovered and puzzling treatise by the second Karma pa, Karma Pakshi, discovers within it an apparently unique, albeit notably eccentric, defense of Mongol imperial religion. More mainstream doctrinal concerns are at issue in the two chapters that follow, though the approaches to them that we find here are strikingly original nevertheless. A. Burchardi’s topic is the seventh Karma pa’s treatment of reflexive awareness, a key element in Buddhist epistemological theory, in relation to the controversial doctrine of “extrinsic emptiness,” or gzhan stong¸ while J. Rheingans examines the eighth Karma pa’s remarks on Mahāmudrā in a letter responding to the questions of a disciple. In the closing chapter of part three, K. Debreczeny introduces us to the remarkable artistic production of the tenth Karma pa in a study based on painstaking efforts to locate and document the identifiable paintings that survive. The last section of the volume is devoted to the famous “Madman of Gtsang,” Gtsang smyon Heruka, the author of the best-loved of Tibetan literary masterworks, his redaction of the biography and songs of the poet-saint Mi la ras pa. S. Larsson’s contribution offers an overview of his youth and early career, placing his relation to the Bka’ brgyud tradition in a new, nuanced perspective. K.R. Schaeffer focuses on Gtsang smyon’s later achievement, and that of his followers, in bringing important parts of the Bka’ brgyud heritage into print for the first time. In this regard, one may note that Gtsang smyon also played a particularly strong role in the redaction of the Aural Transmissions studied by M. Sernesi in her contribution as mentioned above. In reflecting upon the work found here overall, we may note two broad tendencies underlying much of current Bka’ brgyud-related research. On the one hand, there is a significant interest in the early formation of the Bka’ brgyud orders, the particular doctrines and practices that distinguished them, and the hagiographical traditions surrounding their founding adepts. Besides xiv Preface this, a second area of focused study that is beginning to emerge concerns the great masters of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, figures such as the seventh and eighth Karma pas, as well as ’Brug chen Padma dkar po, Dwags po Bkra shis rnam rgyal, Gtsang smyon Heruka, and others. While much of the attention devoted to them concerns their important legacy in philosophy and religious thought, we must also recognize that their rise to prominence accompanied the age of Bka’ brgyud political dominance in Central Tibet. It is a task for future research to disclose more thoroughly than so far has been possible the precise relationships between the religious developments that have mostly interested scholars to date and the material and political conditions that enabled them. Roger R. Jackson & Matthew T. Kapstein Lo gsar, Year of the Iron Hare, 2011 CONTRIBUTORS LARA BRAITSTEIN is Assistant Professor at McGill University (Montreal, Canada). Her research focuses on Indian and Tibetan Buddhist poetic traditions, Buddhist Hagiography, and Esoteric Buddhism. She completed her dissertation, “Saraha's Adamantine Songs: Text, Contexts, Translation and Traditions of the Great Seal,” in 2005. ANNE BURCHARDI is External Lecturer in the Department of Cross Cultural and Regional Studies at the University of Copenhagen and Curator of the Tibetan Collection of the Department of Orientalia and Judaica at The Royal Library of Copenhagen. Her research focuses on Buddhist literature and philosophy, in particular the Gzhan stong tradition. Recent publications include “Shākya mchog ldan's Literary Heritage in Bhutan” (in Written Treasures of Bhutan: Mirror of the Past and Bridge to the Future, Thimphu 2008), “The Diversity of the Gzhan stong Tradition” (JIATS 2007) and “A Provisional list of Tibetan Commentaries on the Ratnagotravibhāga” The Tibet Journal 2006). KARL DEBRECZENY is Curator at the Rubin Museum of Art, New York. His research focuses upon the history of Tibetan Art. Recent publications include “Dabaojigong and the Regional Tradition of Ming Sino-Tibetan Painting in Lijiang” (in Buddhism Between Tibet and China, Boston 2009), “Bodhisattvas South of the Clouds: Situ Panchen’s Activities and Artistic Influence in Lijiang, Yunnan” (in Patron & Painter: Situ Panchen and the Revival of the Encampment Style, New York 2009), and “Wutaishan: Pilgrimage to Five Peak Mountain” (JIATS forthcoming). xvi Contributors ROGER R. JACKSON is John W. Nason Professor of Asian Studies and Religion at Carleton College (Minnesota, USA). His research focuses upon Indian and Tibetan Buddhist traditions of religious poetry and meditative praxis, especially as related to Mahāmudrā. Recent publications include Tantric Treasures: Three Collections of Mystical Verse from Buddhist India (New York/Oxford 2004) and, with Geshe Lhundup Sopa, The Crystal Mirror of Philosophical Systems: A Tibetan Study of Asian Religious Thought (Boston 2009). MATTHEW T. KAPSTEIN is Director of Tibetan Studies at the École Pratique des Hautes Études (Paris) and Numata Visiting Professor at the Divinity School of the University of Chicago. His research focuses upon the early development of Tibetan religious thought and its Indian antecedants. Recent publications include The Tibetans (Oxford 2006), Buddhism Between Tibet and China (Boston 2009), and, with Sam van Schaik, Esoteric Buddhism at Dunhuang: Rites and Teachings for this Life and Beyond (Leiden 2010). ULRICH TIMME KRAGH is Assistant Professor and Head of the Tibetan Research Team at Geumgang Center for Buddhist Studies (Korea). His research focuses upon the founder of the Bka’ brgyud school of Tibetan Buddhism, Sgam po pa Bsod nams rin chen, the Indian Madhyamaka philosopher Candrakīrti, and the Tantric writings of the female Uḍḍiyāna-master Laksmiṅkarā. Recent publications include “Early Buddhist Theories of Action and Result” (Vienna 2006), “Classicism in Commentarial Writing” (JIATS 2009), and the edited volume The Yogācarabhūmi and the Yogācaras (Cambridge, MA 2010). STEFAN LARSSON is a Visiting Scholar in the Center for Buddhist Studies at the University of California, Berkeley. His research focuses upon the non-monastic and yogin-oriented aspects of Tibetan Buddhism. His Ph.D. dissertation, “The Birth of a Heruka: How Sangs rgyas rgyal mtshan became Gtsang smyon Heruka—A Study of a Mad Yogin,” was completed in 2009. Contributors xvii KLAUS-DIETER MATHES is Professor of Tibetan and Buddhist Studies at the University of Vienna. His current research deals with the Indian origins of Tibetan mahāmudrā traditions. Recent publications include “Blending the Sūtras with the Tantras” (in Tibetan Buddhist Literature and Praxis, Leiden 2006), A Direct Path to the Buddha Within: Gö Lotsawa’s Mahāmudrā Interpretation of the Ratnagotravibhāga (Boston 2008), and “The Succession of the Four Seals (Caturmudrānvaya)” (in Tantric Studies 2008). JIM RHEINGANS is Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Center for Buddhist Studies of the University of Hamburg. His research focuses upon Tibetan religious history and literature, especially meditation guidebooks, hagiographies, and the mahāmudrā traditions. Recent publications include “Narratives of Reincarnation” (Boston 2009) and “Preliminary Reflections on Guru Devotion” (St. Petersburg 2009); his 2008 dissertation is entitled “The Eighth Karmapa's Life and his Interpretation of the Great Seal.” KURTIS R. SCHAEFFER is Professor in the Department of Religious Studies at the University of Virginia. His research focuses on the cultural and intellectual history of Tibet from the fourteenth through the eighteenth centuries. Recent publications include Himalayan Hermitess (Oxford 2004), The Culture of the Book in Tibet (New York 2009), and, with Leonard W. J. van der Kuijp, An Early Tibetan Survey of Buddhist Literature (Cambridge, MA 2009). MARTA SERNESI is a Post-doctoral Fellow at the Ludwig-Maximilians- Universität (Munich). Her research focuses on Tibetan history and literature of the eleventh through seventeenth centuries, particularly on the transmission and representation of religious traditions and lineages. Her current work is devoted mainly to Bka’ brgyud sources, in particular to the school of Gtsang smyon Heruka and to the issues of the production and circulation of manuscripts and blockprints in Tibet and the Himalayas. xviii Contributors JAN-ULRICH SOBISCH is Associate Professor for Tibetan Studies at the University of Copenhagen. His research focuses upon the reception of Indian tantric Buddhism in Tibet and Tibetan theories of tantric practice, with a special interest in Tibetan manuscripts. His publications include Three-Vow Theories in Tibetan Buddhism (Wiesbaden 2002), Life, Transmissions, and Works of A-mes-zhabs (Stuttgart 2007), and Hevajra and Lam-’bras Literature of India and Tibet (2008). THE DIALECTIC OF ETERNAL HEAVEN: A TIBETAN DEFENSE OF MONGOL IMPERIAL RELIGION* MATTHEW T. KAPSTEIN 1 Introduction The doctrinal writings of the second Karma pa hierarch, Chos kyi bla ma (1204 or 1206–83), better known as Karma Pakshi, have so far been available to us primarily through an incomplete manuscript of the Rgya mtsho mtha’ yas skor from Rum btegs Monastery in Sikkim, published in India during the late 1970s, but misattributed, as I have shown elsewhere, to Karma Pakshi’s successor, the third Karma pa Rang byung rdo rje (1284–1339).1 With the gradual rediscovery of Tibetan manuscript collections in Central Tibet and Khams, it is now evident that a number of additional works have been preserved, and scans or photo> graphs of some of these have begun to become available to researchers outside of Tibet. While it is too early to maintain that Karma Pakshi’s complete Bka’ ’bum may be reconstituted—a goal that tradition holds to have been unrealis> able even in pre>1959 Tibet2—it appears that the major part of his writings * The present article is dedicated in friendship to the Ven. Thub bstan nyi ma Rin po che and to Karma Bde legs, in recognition of their outstanding efforts to locate and to preserve the surviving literary legacy of Tibet. 1 Kapstein 1985, reprinted, with some revisions, in Kapstein 2000: 97–106. 2 Most of his teachings, which were believed to have exceeded two Bka’ ’gyurs (!), were said to have been carried off by the ḍākinīs and other spirits and never circulated among common mortals. See e.g. Sman sdong mtshams pa 1976, pp. 107–108: phyi nang gi grub mtha’ theg pa sna tshogs pa rnams kyang rdo rje theg pa’i nges gsang snying po’i don kho na la gzhol zhing ’bab par ’gyur ba’i bstan bcos kyi rim pa’ang bka’ ’gyur ro ’tshal nyis ’gyur tsam bstan cing de dag gi gleng gzhi dang ’brel ba’i 260 Matthew T. Kapstein formerly in circulation may be identified once more. 3 As earlier research suggested, the Rgya mtsho mtha’ yas skor seems in fact to comprise all but a small part of his production.4 Karma Pakshi’s regular use of the name Rang byung rdo rje, as I have shown before, means that some texts signed with this name, and even some apparently belonging to the Rgya mtsho mtha’ yas skor, must be considered with care. For instance, a work entitled Dam tshig rgya mtsho mtha’ yas has appeared in the collected writings of the third Karma pa and its actual author> ship is, in all probablity, correctly credited to him.5 This text does, however, rnam thar mang po ’thor nas yod par gsungs pa la / deng sang mi yul du snang ba la gsung rab po ti drug tsam las / de bying rgyal ba’i gsung rab ltar / dpa’ bo / mkha’ ’gro / lha klu gnod sbyin sogs kyis yul du spyan drangs par don gyis gsal ba’i phyir bsam gyis mi khyab pa’i gnas so //. The notion that Karma Pakshi’s teachings attained some two Bka’ ’gyurs in volume in fact derived from his autobiographical writings: Karma Pakshi 1978a, p. 110. 3 Manuscripts containing works by Karma Pakshi have been located, for instance, in the collection of the ’Bras spungs Gnas bcu lha khang (Lha sa) and at Dpal spungs (Sde dge). As many as eight po tis of his writings are now known to exist, and one hopes that they will soon be made available in their entirety. The scanned manuscripts that have been so far added to the archive of the Tibetan Buddhist Resource Center (TBRC, New York), together with other available texts, are listed in Appendix III below. 4 It would not be appropriate for me to anticipate those who have been working in Tibet and Khams on the reconstitution of Karma Pakshi’s œuvre by reproducing here their lists of titles above and beyond those that have already become available, as given in Appendix III. The texts now found in the TBRC collection, as might be expected, in fact mostly belong to the Rgya mtsho mtha’ yas corpus. 5 Full title: Dam tshig rgya mtsho mtha’ yas rnam par snang bar byed pa dri ma med pa’i snying po, in Karma pa Rang byung rdo rje 2006, vol. 8 (nya), pp. 1–114. The author in fact gives his name as Rang byung rol pa’i rdo rje (113.2), a form that is not used, so far as I am aware, by Karma Pakshi. No explicit reference to Karma Pakshi’s Rgya mtsho mtha’ yas skor appears to occur in the text and there is no sure basis for supposing it to have been composed as a supplement to it. The title alone seems to have The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 261 problematise the use of the phrase Rgya mtsho mtha’ yas as a signature title. Only the eventual availability of the entire extant Rgya mtsho mtha’ yas corpus will permit us to determine whether or not any of the works included within it may have been similary composed or redacted by Karma Pakshi’s successors. Among the recent discoveries whose authorship seems secure, however, one stands out, to my eyes at least, for its remarkable novelty, even in relation to the originality that characterises the second Karma pa’s writings overall.6 been intended as an allusion to the author’s predecessor. Nevertheless, the published handlist of the manuscripts that have been discovered in the Gnas bcu lha khang of ’Bras spungs Monastery, does attribute to Karma Pakshi a Dam tshig rgya mtsho’i rang ’grel in 58 folios (Dpal brtsegs 2004, vol. 1, p. 1112, no. 011037). An assessment of this attribution must of course await that text’s becoming available. 6 As noted already in Kapstein 1985, Karma Pakshi’s writings appear to have been poorly known even among the Karma Bka’ brgyud, and this no doubt owing to his pronounced Rnying ma orientations and the remarkable eccentricity of his style of exposition and argument. A brief note, found accompanying a manuscript of the Zhu lan rgya mtsho mtha’ yas preserved at Dpal spungs, and transcribed in Appendix III below (under W22469) reveals for the first time something of the manner in which Karma Pakshi’s writings were perceived within the tradition. It says in part: “Although the expressions [in Karma Pakshi’s works] seem as if somewhat misconstrued, they are the words of a venerable siddha and not in the scope of conventional designation; if one becomes certain [about them] with discrimination endowed with the four points of reliance (Tib. rton pa bzhi, Skt. catuḥpratisaraṇa), because there is nowhere greater development of the essential points of the nine vehicles proceeding from the Śrī> Guhyagarbha, rather than letting them lie to rot in darkness, I pray a thousand times that you regard them and know their meaning.” The note is signed by one Dge slong Bstan pa’i nyi ma, who, given his diction and his audacity in committing to writing the opinion that the second Karma pa’s writings “seem somewhat miscontrued,” must have been no ordinary monk. Though I have not so far succeeded in determining his precise identity, it appears at least possible in this context that it is none other than the great Si tu Paṇ chen (1699/1700–1774), whose writings are often signed Bstan pa’i nyin byed, or Bstan pa’i nyi mor byed pa. 262 Matthew T. Kapstein This is the manuscript of a previously unknown work that bears the puzzling title Mo gho ding ri’i sgra tshad, though the title turns out to be just the first of the many puzzles to be found therein.7 Here, I wish to suggest that the Mo gho ding ri’i sgra tshad, in terms of both style and content, is consistent with the other major writings of Karma Pakshi that have so far come to light, namely those belonging to the Rgya mtsho mtha’ yas skor.8 However, the Mo gho ding 7 As shown in Appendix III, the same manuscript appears in two separate scanned versions in the TBRC archive. In addition, I have made use of high quality digital images of the manuscript, which is preserved at Dpal spungs monastery in the Sde dge district of Khams (Ganzi zhou, Sichuan). 8 The common authorship is confirmed, moreover, by passages in which the author of the Mo gho ding ri’i sgra tshad explicitly refers to the Rgya mtsho mtha’ yas skor, for instance at Mo gho ding ri 20b7–21a1: lung rigs sna tshogs kyis mueț [= mu stegs] pa’i grub mtha’ bshiț [= bshigs] cing sgrub / ci’i phyir na bstan pa rgya mtsho mtha’ yas nas / ston pa drugis gleng bzhi [= gzhi] gleng lhong mueț kyis grub mtha’ cheno [= chen po] dang / ’dod pa rgya’o [= rgya mtsho] mtha’ yas dang / khyab ’jug dang / zhus len rgya’o mtha’ yas rnaṃs kyis shes pa… lung rig sgra tshad (21a) rnam la mkhas shing rtog par bya’o //: “Various scriptures and reasonings confirm the refutation of the tīrthikas. How so? In the Limitless Ocean of the Teaching, where the discourse of six teachers [forms] the narrative frame, there is the Great Siddhānta of the tīrthikas; and it may be known [too] from the Limitless Ocean of Tenets, the [Limitless Ocean of] Viṣṇu, and the Limitless Ocean of Dialogue.… One should become learned and realised in the language and logic of scripture and reason.” The Limitless Ocean of Viṣṇu (Khyab ’jug rgya mtsho mtha’ yas) is found, with some lacunae, in a scanned manuscript in the TBRC archive: W22340 (see Appendix III below). Khyab ’jug here seems to have a double meaning, referring at once to the Hindu divinity Viṣṇu and to Samantabhadra, the primordial buddha of the Great Perfection (rdzogs chen), who is sometimes also known as the “Great All>Pervader” (khyab ’jug chen po = Skt. Mahāviṣṇu). See e.g. Dudjom 1991, vol. 1: 447. Of course, we must await the opportunity to examine the Khyab ’jug rgya mtsho mtha’ yas in detail before enter> taining further conjectures about precisely what Karma Pakshi may have intended. Note, too, that in citations from the text of the Mo gho ding ri’i sgra tshad, because of the abundant use of abbreviations and plentiful occurrences of unconventional spellings The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 263 ri’i sgra tshad is distinguished from these latter, and in a sense adopts an approach that is even more radical than the skepticism of the ’Dod pa rgya mtsho mtha’ yas,9 in that it offers what at first blush appears to be a robust defense of Mongol imperial religion; for the mo gho ding ri of the title is none other than the supreme divinity of Mongol religion, “Eternal Heaven,” Möngke tengri.10 The term may also have in this case a double signification, however, for we know that Karma Pakshi’s royal patron was Möngke Khan, and some passages in our text do seek to underwrite the latter’s sacral status before the Tibetans.11 (in some cases clearly errors) throughout, I have thought it best not to litter my trans> criptions with the notation ‘sic.’ Similarly, I have not attempted to emend within the texts the indifferent use of the “instrumental” (kyis, etc.) and “genitive” (kyi, etc.) or other grammatical irregularities. 9 Kapstein 2000: 101–104. 10 Heissig 1973: 403–405, esp. 403: “L’usage constant de la formule mongole « Möngke tngri>yin küčündür… », « Par la force du Ciel éternel », dans des épitres, des ordonnances, des panneaux de consignes (p’ai>tzu) et des inscriptions lapidaires de l’époque mongole (13e>14e siècle) atteste la croyance des Mongols dans l’existence d’une puissance céleste à laquelle sont soumises toutes les forces supra>terrestres et terrestres.” The “constant use” of the formula no doubt explains Karma Pakshi’s familiarity with and interest in it. There is, of course, an excellent English translation of Heissig’s text (originally in German) by Geoffrey Samuel [The Religions of Mongolia (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980)], but it is unavailable to me at this time. 11 As is the case, in the preamble of the text translated below (3a.6), where Karma Pakshi speaks of “the merit of the king of the world, Möngke Khan.” The depth of Karma Pakshi’s regard for Möngke is very much in evidence in Karma Pakshi 1978a (see Kapstein 2000: 99n62) and was recalled in later tradition. Dpa’>bo 1986, p. 912, for instance, states that “in fact, the foremost among his disciples who were vessels [capable of retaining his teaching] was Möngke Khan, whom he blessed so that his renunciation and realisation were equivalent to his own” (dngos su snod ldan gyi slob ma’i gtso bo rgyal po mong gor gan nyid dang spangs rtogs mnyams par byin gyis 264 Matthew T. Kapstein 2 Title and preamble The Mo gho ding ri’i sgra tshad is a substantial work, occupying 149 long folios of tightly written, and much abbreviated, dbu med. The difficulties in the interpretation of our text, however, begin even on the title page: dam pa’i chos ’dul ba’i gling bzhi na gos dmar can gyi yul nas ’ongs ba’i mkhas pa yang dag phyi rol nyid bzhugs gsungs te / de la sha na’i gos can ’jams dpal dmar po la sogs pa’i tshan ’brug tsam du tha snyad ’dogs shing ngo bo cig la mthong tshul tha dad pa ’di lta ste / mo gho ding ri’i sgra tshad bzhugs so //. The following, very tentative, translation may be proposed based on indications given elsewhere in the text: In the frame>narrative (reading: gleng gzhi) of the Vinaya of the True Dharma, it is said that from the land of the Red>garbed came a paṇḍita who dwelt genuinely outside. Names (reading: mtshan),12 including Śāṇakavāsin and Red Mañjusrī,13 were thunderously attributed to him, just as there are brlabs pa). Note, too, that in Karma Pakshi 1978a, p. 15, Möngke is styled mo ghor rgyal po, confirming his use of mo gho to transcribe Mongolian möngke. 12 There is some possibility, too, that tshan is used here in an extension of its meaning “section, segment,” or in the sense of tshan kha. In the latter case the phrase should mean roughly “powers, including [those of] Śāṇakavāsin and Red Mañjusrī, were thunderously attributed to him,” though this strikes me as not so plausible as the proposed emendation to mtshan. 13 The bodhisattva Mañjusrī plays a particularly important role in Karma Pakshi’s visionary world, and in the redaction of the Rgya mtsho mtha’ yas skor. Dpa’ bo 1986, p. 888, for instance, tells us that “in Ke>chu he beheld Mañjusrī, yellow with a thousand hands and a thousand eyes, and this [he took] as a sign of enlightened activity in both this lifetime and the next” (ke chur ’jam dbyangs ser po phyag stong spyan stong pa gzigs pa sku tshe phyi ma gnyis kyi ’phrin las kyi brdar ’dug). (Here Dpa’ bo The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 265 various visions of a single essence and hence: here is contained the Dialectic of Eternal Heaven. It is not clear, at the outset at least, why the peculiar expression “genuinely outside” (yang dag phyi rol nyid) should be applied to the arhat Śāṇakavāsin here; one may think perhaps of his borderline outsider status in the early saṅgha, an issue discussed at length by John Strong,14 and some of the legends involved may have inspired Karma Pakshi’s use of yang dag phyi rol nyid, as will be seen in the text selections given below. It is possible, too, that Xuanzang’s description of Śāṇakavāsin as having attained the “boundary>limit samādhi” (ru bianji ding 入邊際定) further contributed to the liminal assoc> iations of this arhat.15 What will emerge thoughout the text, however, is that one of Pakshi’s chief concerns is to engage in debate with the “outsiders” (tīrthika, phyi rol mu stegs pa), although the connection of this with the famed arhat remains not altogether clear. In all events, we have already shown in our earlier study that Karma Pakshi had a special interest in integrating non> Buddhists into the fabric of Buddhist thought, an interest that explicitly stem> med from his involvement in the debates and discussions among representatives of differing religions sponsored by Möngke Khan in 1256.16 We shall return to is following the text found in Karma Pakshi 1978a, p. 129.) What’s more, the entire Zhu lan rgya mtsho mtha’ yas is cast as a dialogue between Karma Pakshi and the bodhisattva. 14 Strong 1992: 66–74, esp. p. 71: “Śāṇakavāsin … look[s] grubby, [has] long hair, and appear[s] to be a mahalla [a pejorative term for an uncouth old monk]; but he is actually enlightened, and he is Upagupta’s master.” 15 Beal 1884, vol. 1: 52–53; Watters 1904, vol. 1: 120. Note, too, that the tradition reported here by Xuanzang concerning the deep red colour of Śāṇakavāsin’s robe, preserved as a relic in a monastery described in his chapter on Bamiyan, conforms with Karma Pakshi’s attribution to him of red garb as well. For the Chinese text, see Xuanzang 2000, vol. 1 ( 16 ), pp. 132–33. Demiéville 1973: 181–82, summarises what is reported of these debates in Chinese sources (as given in Chavannes 1904), which focus primarily on the censure of the 266 Matthew T. Kapstein consider this point in further detail below. Given Karma Pakshi’s conviction that the imperial policy of religious tolerance favored by the Khan was correct, and his conviction, too, that a tacit adherence to Buddhism by the Khan under> girded this policy,17 we may imagine that Karma Pakshi sought to expound a teaching that was distinctively Buddhist, but at the same time made room for everyone. This, at least, is what his effort simultaneously to refute and to authenticate the mu stegs pas seems inevitably to imply. Pakshi’s use of the term sgra tshad in the title seems to point in the same direction. The expression literally means “language and logic,” though I have used “dialectic” as an approximation to save words. The latter, in its primary sense (given in the Oxford English Dictionary as “the art of critically investigating the truth of opinions; logical disputation or argument”), may be close to the author’s intended meaning in any case. In one passage, cited above (n. 8), he even seems to suggest that the two terms used here in compound correspond closely to lung rigs, scripture and reason. If so, then sgra tshad, “language and logic,” may be employed to cover broadly the disciplines charged with the task of interpretation and judgement in these two domains. Daoists. The head of the Buddhist party, the Kashmiri monk Na mo, had long>establish> ed ties to the Mongol ruling house and was appointed by Möngke in 1252 to direct Buddhist affairs throughout the empire (Demiéville 1973: 178). Though the Chinese sources refer also to the presence of the then sixteen>year>old Sa skya pa bla ma ’Phags pa (1239–80) at these debates, the Chinese transcription of his name as it occurs here— bahesiba 拔合斯八—is somewhat unusual, leading some to have speculated that ‘Pakshi’ may have been the name intended. (See, for instance, Richardson 1998: 341, repeated by D. Jackson 2009: 261n185.) It may be noted in passing, too, that the condemnation of Daoism stressed in the Chinese records stands in apparent contrast with Möngke’s religious inclusivism as stressed by Karma Pakshi (Kapstein 2000: 244n81) and, sometime earlier, by the Franciscan William of Rubruck (P. Jackson 2009: 236: “But just as God has given the hand several fingers, so he has given mankind several paths.”). 17 Kapstein 2000: 99. The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 267 The first several paragraphs of the Mo gho ding ri’i sgra clearly exemplify both the work’s unusual stance and the difficulties involved in seek> ing to understand it:18 (1b.1) The dialectic of Eternal Heaven is proclaimed to be the measure> less, imponderable dialectic, to be discussed and definively established. As the example of a body [followed by its] shadow, when the proposition affirmed is measureless and imponderable, the implied conclusion is measureless and imponderable. (1b.2) For this is evidently valid.19 Hence, affirming the propositions that saṃsāra and nirvāṇa may be either measureless and imponderable or delimited and ponderable, they are to be proclaimed and discussed. So I pray that the Jina, the perfection of the five kāyas, together with his sons (1b.3), be present as the holy witnesses. I pray that Viṣṇu and Īśvara, Phywa and Brahmā, along with the eight classes of deities and demons arrayed throughout the three worlds, who uphold respectively the outer and inner systems, be present as the holy witnesses. (1b.4) As for this wheel of swordplay,20 refutation and proof, the delimited and ponderable dialectic and the measureless, imponderable dialectic of the Red>garbed Eternal Heaven, it has not come forth previously here in Tibet, the Glacial Land, nor will it come again. (1b.5) In 18 The Tibetan text is the first given in Appendix I below. 19 Throughout the Mo gho ding ri, Karma Pakshi appears to insist that the sole valid means of knowledge is the “criterion of perception” (mngon sum tshad ma, Skt. pratyakṣapramāṇa). He seems to be using this term with a peculiar sense, however, not precisely limited to ‘perception’ as we are accustomed to regard it, but including what is ‘intuitive,’ as this is often understood by anglophone philosophers (i.e. as referring to what is known a priori). The phrase ‘evidently valid’ seems often to correspond, at least roughly, with Karma Pakshi’s usage and so has generally been adopted here. 20 ral (b)skor. Meaning uncertain, though the usage here and throughout the text inclines me to take it as referring to exercises in swordsmanship, much as we use “parry” and “riposte” in English to refer both to the martial arts and to debate. 268 Matthew T. Kapstein debate with others, outer and inner, here is how at first the outer and inner systems are respectively distinguished: I affirm the proposition that unknowing is proven to be the bewilderment and ground for the bewilderment of beings of the six classes. Do you assent to refute it or not? (1b.6) I affirm the proposition that the perverse views are the 360 errant views of the tīrthikas and their subdivisions. Do you assent21 to refute this or not? In assenting, do define your bounds. Among the inner systems of the Buddhists, (1b.7) the nine vehicles that are partially realised and egocentric, 22 I affirm the propositions establishing the teaching of the nirmāṇakāya, that is, the Tripiṭaka. You, tīrthika, must affirm that you refute this. I affirm the propositions establishing the teaching of the sambhogakāya, that is, the three outer tantras. (2a.1) You, tīrthika, must affirm that you refute this. I affirm the proposition establishing that the declaration of the intention of the dharmakāya is the unsurpassed Mahāyoga, [according to] the ancient and modern [tantras]. You, tīrthika, must affirm that you refute this. 21 Reading shes for bshig. 22 Karma Pakshi is here following (as he often does) the doctrinal categories elaborated in connection with the Mahāyoga exegetical tradition of the Guhyagarbha Tantra and the Anuyoga system of the Mdo dgongs pa ’dus pa. Here, the “nine vehicles that are partially realised and egocentric” (phyogs rtog(s) ngar ’dzin gyi theg pa dgu) are the worldly “vehicle of gods and men” (lha mi’i theg pa) together with the first eight of the nine vehicles (i.e., śrāvakayāna through Aunyoga) of the standard nine>yāna system of the Rnying ma pa. Many treatments of the highest vehicle, that of the Great Perfection (rdzogs chen), or Atiyoga, adopt a similar standpoint, charcterising the lower vehicles as “intellectually contrived” (blos bcos); see, for example, Dudjom 1991, vol. 1: 294– 310. The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 269 (2a.2) As for whether the teaching of the svābhāvikakāya, the Anuyoga, is the general transmission of all systems, I affirm that to be the proposition to be established. If you affirm yourself to be clever about all the systems, then go ahead and refute me! The self>emergent five bodies are fully (2a.3) realised in the teaching that is the Great Perfection (rdzogs pa chen po). It is entirely complete, unmixed with the ostensible outer and inner systems involving lack of realisation and wrong realisation and so forth. Therefore, I will establish it, and you, tīrthika, who act as the king of dumb ideas, (2a.4) you must assent to refute it, and then prove what you may! What’s more, are you or are you not going to refute or to prove the subdivisions of the outer and inner systems piece>by>piece? In accord with your faculties and reason, (2a.5) advice has been given to you; now it is you who must advise! In all events, because nothing at all is unincluded, unrealised, or unembraced in the binary division of delimited and measureless, with respect to the outer and inner systems, (2a.6) all of them, know that in affirming them to be either delimited or measureless, there is nothing but refutation or proof. Whatever you proclaim and discuss should be unabashedly brought forth for discussion, set out without error, one time, three times, (2a.7) and so ascertained—this is my advice. Such is the intention of Mañjuśrī, whose samādhi is firm, distinguishing the outer and inner systems and definitively establishing the abiding nature of reality! (2b.1) The Lord of Speech, the self>created Lion of Disputants, debates once, debates twice, debates everything—debate that! Endless debate is like sword>play. One is proven, two are proven, everything under debate is decisively proven. Oṃ sarva pratisiddhi hūṃ! [Addressing] Śākyamuni, (2b.2) Aniruddha entered into an exchange of questions and answers between master and disciple, [whereby] they analysed the great cycle, which neither fails to pervade the appearance and reality of the Three Jewels, the cognitions and cognitive objects of saṃsāra and nirvāṇa, nor is fixed with respect to any aspect [of them]. (2b.3), Thus 270 Matthew T. Kapstein it is related in the prophetic declaration at the point of Śākyamuni’s parinirvāṇa: “In the land of Vārāṇasī, one called ‘Śāṇakavāsin’ (2b.4) will emerge, whose deeds and activities with be the equal of the Buddha’s but who will not be adorned with the major or minor marks of a buddha. He will spread and expand my teaching, dividing the outer and inner systems. He will definitively establish various holy doctrines.” If translated into Tibetan, he is the Red>garbed One (gos dmar can, Tāmraśāṭiya), while the ’Bum, (2b.5) concerning the auspicious marks [says] “revealing a red, red color, like the fabric of Vārāṇasī, or like fabric of majukonaka23 or like the color of mañjujonaka...” Translated into Tibetan, this is khug chos dar lo [a type of flower, perhaps saffron?] (2b.6) by name.24 When the holy doctrine of the Vinaya became mixed with tīrthika systems, so that there were no longer any bounds, the saṅgha implored Śāṇakavāsin, encouraging him in his vow, at which time, at the Banyan Temple (2b.7) an emanation of Śāṇakavāsin arrived outside and sat there.25 The functionaries among the saṅgha saw him and invited him in, but the Red>garbed One remained well stationed outside in the sky, where he had arrived on being invited. (2b.8) Meeting [him] thus, the sthaviras were 23 The reading of the second syllable, ju, is uncertain. 24 Typically ’Bum, as a title, refers to the Śatasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā. Though there are some doubts about the interpretation of this passage, khug c(h)os does seem to be a species of crocus, so that the reference to saffron appears plausible. However, the Indic terms cited by Karma Pakshi have not yet been identified. Concerning the arhat Śāṇa> kavāsin’s association with the colour red, see n. 15 above. 25 Here and in the paragraphs that follow, the tale that we find seems an exceedingly eccentric retelling of the well>known story of Śāṇakavāsin’s appointment as Ānanda’s successor in the aftermath the first council at the Banyan Tree of Rājagṛha and the subsequent establishment of the Teaching in Kashmir by Śāṇakavāsin’s successor Madhyāhnika. For Bu ston’s account, refer to Obermiller 1931–32: 87–91. Of course, though there is no mention of tīrthikas here, schism within the saṅgha itself is a prominent theme. The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 271 inspired and rejoiced,26 and he, having made the distinctions,27 turned the dialectical wheel of the Three Precious Jewels, that is, the dialectic of the Buddha’s gnosis and all principles of saṃsāra and nirvāṇa, so that the masses of tīrthikas were (2b.9) overcome and rebuked. With respect to that [dialectic] there is a threefold division of topics as follows: (i) there is the dialectic affirming the cause with respect to the Three Precious Jewels, for, among ordinary beings, there emerge various bewilderments from the ground of bewilderment, the six classes of destinies; (3a.1) (ii) as the systems of the tīrthikas are erroneous, for they [do not]28 practise the path with respect to the Three Precious Jewels and do not delight in the Three Precious Jewels, [and whereas] tīrthikas including the five fortunate companions [of Siddhārtha] became the Teacher’s first circle [of disciples], there is (3a.2) the dialectic comprising the result with respect to the Three Precious Jewels in relation to the tīrthikas; and (iii) there is the dialectic traversing the path, for the particulars of the inner Buddhist vehicles, such as the Vinaya of the genuine doctrine and the Three Precious Jewels are to be obtained. The wheels [of the doctrine] that [the Buddha] turned (3a.3) are [these].29 [This] dialectic, which analyses them all in particular and synthesises them, has as its purpose the analysis of all the particulars, so that there is nothing not 26 Reading gnas brtan rnams dbugs nas dga’ nas. Uncertain. 27 I am reading nang du dbye nas as referring to Śāṇakavāsin’s analytical teaching, though if we accept the punctuation of the passage, it might alternatively refer to the divisions among the saṅgha. The text at this point seems in any case not very clear, at least to this reader. 28 Reading lam ma gom zhing against the ms. I see no other way to make sense of this sentence without even more extensive emendation. 29 The threefold division proposed here evidently corresponds to the distinctions among non>realisation (ma rtogs), erroneous understanding (log rtogs), and realised gnosis (rtogs pa’i ye shes), upon which Karma Pakshi insists elsewhere. See below, Appendix III, 3. 272 Matthew T. Kapstein embraced thereby. Because [there is such a purpose], 30 Śāṇakavāsin emerged in the manner of an emanated disciple, (3a.4) as follows: The Linen Clad (rad pa’i gos can = Śāṇakavāsin) and Madhyāhnika,31 numberless emanations, filled Jambudvīpa. In particular, in the land of Kashmir, Padmo dka’, there is the Kashmiri city called Krigs brtan,32 (3a.5), as it is famed, where there are known to be 360 million 30 Reading dgos pa yod pa’i phyir na, and taking this as a ‘pivot phrase’ joining the preceding (where it is translated “has as its purpose”) and the present sentence. 31 I am assuming that one should read nyi ma gung pa for nyi ma ’gyur. It is possible that Karma Pakshi felt a special affinity with this arhat; a tooth of Madhyāhnika (dgra bcom pa nyi ma gung pa’i tshems) is reported among the items incorporated into the central image of the Mtshur phu temple during its consecration in the course of its expansion under Karma Pakshi’s direction: Dpa’ bo 1986, p. 902. 32 khyad par ga smin gyi yul padmo dka’ / du ba kha che’i grong khyer krigs brten. It is not at all clear to me how du ba at the beginning of the second phrase is to be con> strued. If it is used here with its normal Tibetan meaning, “smoke,” perhaps it is describing the city of Krigs brtan as a smoky or misty place. And if Krig(s) brtan is to be idenified with Śrīnagara, this would be at times appropriate. (Though given the likelihood that Karma Pakshi never actually traveled to Kashmir, actual description is probably irrelevent in any case.) The reference of the toponym ‘Krig(s) brtan’ remains in any case puzzling. Its occurrence in such works as the rnam thar of Khyung>po rnal ’byor (Shangs pa gser phreng 1996, p. 26) as the name of a region clearly associated in context with northwest India, and not at all with Central Asia, seems to rule out any possibility of considering it to be a corruption of the ethnonym ‘Khitan,’ which does sometimes appear as Khri (br)tan in late Tibetan sources. We may note, though, that Karma Pakshi did at one point visit the realm of the Khitan, the Western Liao, which he calls Khyi tan: Karma Pakshi 1978a, p. 19 (khyi tan rgyal po’i dbyar sa). But consider, as well, n. 39 below, where kha che khri brtan seems surely to refer to Kashmir and certainly not to the Liao. A plausible solution to the problem has, how> ever, recently emerged: in response to a tentative Sanskrit back>translation of khri brtan as *Sthirāsana or *Dhruvāsana, which I circulated among Indological colleagues, Doctor Hartmut Buescher (Copenhagen) perspicaciously suggested that the name The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 273 collections of a hundred thousand tantras, and the arhat Nyi>ma>’bum [i.e. Nyi>ma>gung, or Madhyāhnika] preserved the scriptural traditions. Outer and inner learned paṇḍitas and siddhas beyond number (3a.6) always dwell there, turning the wheel of dialectic, scriptural transmission, and reason. There, due to the merit of the king of the world, Möngke Khan, I, the renowned Karma pa, was looked to and acclaimed by the king of Kashmir, his priests, beings adhering to Buddhism and outsiders, and the outer, tīrthika (3a.7) paṇḍitas. Protecting them with various transmissions, emblems, food, and wealth, I resolved doubts with regard to the dialectic of the Three Precious Jewels. Later, having travelled to Kashmir, (3a.8) I shared in the honour of the king of Kashmir and others, upholders of the religious systems, and, by means of the dialectic of the Red>garbed, purified the assembly—this is evident. Therefore, this dialectic of the Three Precious Jewels (3a.9) is unlike that which was translated into Tibetan in fits and starts from [the works of] Dignāga and others among the six ornaments of Jambudvīpa;33 there is nothing that it does not embrace. By the distinctions of the great measure [or ‘logic’], it is rightly implied that the taintless, immeasurable dharma> kāya is introduced. But apart from that which is inseparable from the immeasurable spontaneous presence of the trikāya, the Three Precious Jewels, you assert tenets, repeatedly turning34 about what is limited (tshad can). Amen to that!35 represented might be Adhiṣṭhāna, which is in fact one of the old designations of Śrīnagara. On this usage, refer to Slaje 2005. 33 The six ornaments are usually listed as Nāgārjuna and Āryadeva, Asaṅga and Vasu> bandhu, and Dignāga and Dharmakīrti. bskor tse bskor tser. The idiom interestingly occurs as well in the autobiographical writings: Karma Pakshi 1978a, p. 110: kor tse kor tse yang rnor [= rnal ’byor] rang byung rdore [= rdo rje] yi rnam thar gleng gzhi rgyas bsdus mang pos yul khaṃs khyab nas yod pa …: “repeatedly turning, the yogin Rang byung rdo rje has filled the 34 lands with many liberation accounts, expanded and condensed…” It is not entirely 274 Matthew T. Kapstein 3 The ‘Red> ‘Red>Garbed,’ God, and Christianity The several concrete references found here—to Kashmir, to the red>garbed Tāmraśāṭiya order, etc.—seem to call for explanation. When did Karma Pakshi travel to Kashmir? What is known of the Tāmraśāṭiyas there? Unfortunately, these and other specifications found in the text only deepen, rather than help to resolve, our puzzlement about it. Concerning Pakshi’s sojourn in Kashmir, for instance, Dpa’ bo Gtsug lag phreng ba (1504–66) is altogether clear: From the Tāmraśāṭiya order of Kashmir he miraculously heard the Vinaya, Pramāṇa and Abhidharma, [due to which he wrote] the Limitless Ocean of the Vinaya, etc., which are preserved in his Bka’ ’bum.36 clear to me whether “repeatedly turning” should in this case be taken to refer to his peregrinations, or, as perhaps better accords with the context, to his ceaseless authorial activity. 35 Following this, the text becomes excessively obscure to me for some lines, and so I have concluded the ‘preamble’ at this point. One point of interest that may be mentioned in connection with the immediately subsequent lines 3b.1–2 is a reference to the “region of Ri bo dgu ’dul [sic = ’dus].” This was a site of major importance for the 11th century Zur lineage of the Rnying ma pa (see Dudjom 1991, vol. 1: 621–23, 638–39) and as such hallowed within the tradition of Kaḥ thog, in which Karma Pakshi was educated. One may even begin to wonder whether Karma Pakshi did not in some sense pave the way for the relations that emerged in the 14th century between the Mongol court in China and the Zur hierarchs Bzang po dpal and his son Shākya ’byung gnas (Dudjom 1991, vol. 1: 669–72). It may be noted in this connection that Rnying ma pa traditional historiography, which maintains that the former undertook the printing of Rnying ma works with Mongol sponsorship, seems now partially confirmed thanks to the recent discovery of Bzang po dpal’s 1317 print of the Lam rnam par bkod pa, on which see Sherab Sangpo 2009: 48. Dpa’ bo, 1986, p. 885: kha che gos dmar po’i sde pa las rdzu ’phrul gyis ’dul tshad mngon gsum gsan te ’dul ba rgya mtsho mtha’ yas la sogs pa bka’ ’bum na bzhugs. 36 The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 275 In other words, Karma Pakshi never visited Kashmir. 37 This may help to explain his insistence on the presence of the southern Tāmraśāṭiya order there, though so little is precisely known of the Tāmraśāṭiya that we cannot altogether exclude the possibility of their presence in the far north.38 The major city of Kashmir, called Krigs brtan (or Khri brtan) in Tibetan and probably to be ident> ified with Śrīnagara (usually dpal gyi grong khyer), was already a place of myth in Pakshi’s time (see n. 32 above): Dpa’ bo Gtsug lag records that Pakshi’s predecessor, Dus gsum mkhyen pa (1110–93), among his visions of the past lives of celebrated persons saw that the master Phya pa (Chos kyi seng ge, 1109–69) had been born there as a paṇḍita.39 Interpreting the Mo gho ding ri’i sgra tshad is further complicated by the overall pattern of the work; it follows a peculiar course touching upon a diffuse array of topics—for instance, whether or not the corpus of Buddhist scriptures known in Tibet is or is not really representative of the entire Indian corpus, whether or not the Pramāṇa corpus really represents the systems of logic known in India, just what’s packed into the Tibetan use of the verb thal in the debate logic,40 etc.—and it does this without a clearly coherent pattern of 37 I thank Mr. Charles Manson (London), who has undertaken to compare the available accounts of Karma Pakshi’s life, for confirming that his researches so far tend to support the same conclusion. 38 On the Tāmraśāṭiyas in general, see Bareau 1955: 204. Lamotte 1976: 592, locates them in Ceylon, and (605), also in Nāgārjunikoṇḍa. But he regards them, too, as being among those whose views were discussed by Asaṅga and Vasubandhu, which, if correct, would suggest that there was some knowledge of them in the northwest of India. Is it possible that the Kashmiri monk “Lama Namu/Namo,” who became estab> lished at the Mongol court under Ögedei, and continued to serve the court under Güyük and Möngke, played a role as Karma Pakshi’s informant? 39 Dpa’ bo 1986, p. 868: slob dpon phya pa kha che khri brtan du paṇḍi tar ’khrungs sogs dpag tu med pa gzigs. 40 Mo gho ding ri, 82a5>6: bod kyi tshad ma thal ba ’di nyid la yang / thaṃd kyis bshiț sgrub snoț yod pa’i phyir na/ thal zer ba’i tshig 1 sdu [=mdo] li’i thog du kha rgyal kha phan [= pham] snogs ’byung ba shes pas mdzod /: “As for ‘implication’ (thal ba) 276 Matthew T. Kapstein development, or at least without a pattern that has as yet disclosed its order to me. It is possible to imagine, therefore, that möngke tengri, as it is invoked repeatedly here, is not in fact used to privilege the high divinity of Mongol religion per se. It seems, rather, that the foreign designation was adopted in the interest of short>circuiting established expectations. Such a read>ing of the work brings us back to the remarkable skepticism of the ’Dod pa rgya mtsho mtha’ yas, which I have discussed elsewhere.41 To cite just one doctrinal question raised in our present text that appears to confirm such a perspective, we may consider Pakshi’s inquiry as to whether one ought to take one’s refuge in the beings in hell. No, you say? Well consider this: you take refuge in the Buddhas of the three times, right? That includes the Buddhas of the future, right? And you’ve taken your bodhisattva vows so that all beings, especially the tormented beings in the infernal realms, will be liberated as Buddhas. So they’re the future Buddhas, right? … 42 in the logic of Tibet, because everyone has it for all sorts of refutations and proofs, you should know that it is on the palanquin of this one word ‘implies!’ (thal) that all sorts of victories and defeats in debate are borne.” It may be noted that, although the so> called thal phyir form of argument is universally employed in the practice of Tibetan monastic debate, literary evidence of it before Karma Pakshi’s time is quite rare. 41 Kapstein 2000: 101–106. Mo gho ding ri, 4a8>b2: ma rig cing ’khrul gzhi ’khor ba’i ’gro ba rigs drug spyi khyab du lus ngag yid 3 bye brag so sor yod pa rnam sku gsum ngo sprod kyis cig [= rig] cing rtoṭ na dkoogs [= dkon mchog] 3 ma ’ong pa’i sangyas thaṃd kyis sku gsung thuṭ yin pa mngon sum tshad ma / de’i phyir na dmyal ba la soṭ ’gro ba rigs drug la ni phyag ’tshal zhing skyabsu ’gro bar mi ’dod pa mngon 3 tshad ma / (4b) ma ’ong pa’i sangyas sku gsung thuṭ dang ldan pa’i dkon mchog 3 skyabsu ’gro bar thal rig / de’i phyir na khyod bod kyi tshad ma rnams ngan song 3 la soṭ pa seṃn rnam la ni skyabsu ’gro bar mi ’dod cing ma ’ong dkooṭ 3 la skyabs su ’gro ba’i dam bca’ la svā hā //: “It 42 is evident that, in general, if the six classes of beings of saṃsāra, whose ground is ignorance and bewilderment, become aware by means of the introduction to the three buddha>bodies (sku gsum, Skt. trikāya) [with respect to], in particular, their body, speech, and mind, and so realise [the three buddha>bodies], that they are then the Three The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 277 Despite the many uncertainties that attend the reading of the Mo gho ding ri’i sgra tshad, it is very clear that Pakshi was deeply troubled, as the texts of the Rgya mtsho mtha’ yas skor already reveal, by the problem posed by the mu stegs pa. For most Tibetan doctrinal authors, as we know well, the mu stegs pa had only a theoretical existence; they corresponded to no one you were likely to meet in real life. As with most strawmen, they were to be disposed of with a few gestures of facile refutation, before turning to the real beef, the contests among Buddhist schools. Part of what makes Karma Pakshi’i dialect> ical universe so strange, by contrast, is that the mu stegs seem to be the domin> ant pūrvapakṣa. Challenged, reviled, and then revalued as embodying the Buddhist enlightenment on some hidden level, the mu stegs pa are present in the Mo gho ding ri’i sgra tshad wherever we turn. But just who were these mu stegs pa who so exercised the second Karma pa? If we can identify them, perhaps it will help us to make sense of möngke tengri as well, for in some respects this latter seems to stand outside of the Buddhist>mu stegs pa dichotomy altogether. Karma Pakshi’s references to a “Red>garbed” religious order advoc> ating a novel system of dialectics, together with the knowledge that he had encountered Christians at the court of the Khan, immediately raises the question as to whether or not the Karma pa may have been speaking in fact of Christian clerics in red vestments. Indeed, Leonard van der Kuijp has recently asserted that “in this context it is perhaps significant to note that Nestorian Christian patriarchs wore red clothing and that therefore Karma pa II’s repeated mentions of the Gos dmar can might actually refer to the Nestorian Precious Jewels, the Body, Speech, and Mind of all the buddhas of the future. Therefore, [although] it is evident that [you] do not affirm the six classes of beings in the hells, etc. [as objects of] salutations and refuge, it is rightly implied that one should go for refuge to the Triple Gem endowed with the Body, Speech, and Mind of all the buddhas of the future. Therefore, you logicians of Tibet, amen to your assertion not to affirm going for refuge in the sentient beings of the three evil destinies while going for refuge in the Three Precious Jewels of the future!” 278 Matthew T. Kapstein Christians.”43 However, although ceremonial vestments in red are current in both Roman and Orthodox rites, and may have been in the Nestorian rite as well,44 it is significant that the colour with which the latter were associated in 43 Van der Kuijp forthcoming. During my first presentation of my researches on the Mo gho ding ri, at the University of Virginia in March 2003, I had already suggested that the “Red>garbed” might have been inspired by encounters with Christians, but as a mere hypothesis that had to be treated with considerable caution. Prof. van der Kuijp’s assertion, quoted here, is presented without a supporting citation—an uncharacteristic departure from the author’s habitual precision in such matters—and I have not so far been able to locate a confirming source. The closest I have been able to come is William of Rubruck’s mention of “a priest from Cataia [i.e. Khitan, Cathay] … dressed in cloth of the finest red.” In his remarks on this passage, P. Jackson (2009: 202n1) mentions Rockhill’s proposal “that this must have been a Tibetan (or possibly a Mongol) lama, since the Chinese Buddhists did not wear red and the Uighurs wore yellow,” and adds, “we cannot be sure that Rubruck is referring to a lama … and it is at least as likely that the person in question here was a Christian, like the one mentioned at p. 152.” On examining this last reference, however, one finds that the colour red is nowhere mentioned and that it is a question of a “Nestorian priest who had cone from Cataia,” which is to say that Jackson is addressing solely the bearing of the priest’s origins in Cataia upon the question of his religious affiliation. In other words, the red>robed priest may have been Buddhist or Christian; we have no means to be sure. 44 In the Roman Catholic and Byzantine rites, red vestments are prescribed for a number of solemn feast days. (In the Byzantine rite, it appears that there is considerable latitude in actual practice, while the Roman rite is at present stipulated in the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani, the text of which is subject to periodic updates and revisions.) The famous c. 1412 Paris manuscript of the Book of Marco Polo, Biblio> thèque Nationale de France, ms. fr. 2810, executed by the so>called Boucicaut master, seems to favour white robes in depicting Eastern Christian clerics, but some are also wearing red. (See, for instance, folio 10v, ‘God moves a mountain for the Christians of Baghdad,’ reproduced in Baumer 2008: 154.) But the documentary value of this for our understanding of Christian vestment further (and even nearer!) east remains uncertain. The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 279 China was white.45 Moreover, given Karma Pakshi’s explicit association of the designation “red>garbed” with the arhat Śāṇakavāsin and the fact, as we have seen, that this association was well established in earlier Buddhist tradition, we are left with no real basis to suppose that Karma Pakshi used the term to speak of Christians. Although, for these reasons, I do not believe that Karma Pakshi’s “Red> garbed” order can be identified with Nestorian or other Christians he may have encountered during his travels outside of Tibet, the possibility that Christianity was among his sources of inspiration cannot be altogether dismissed. Karma 45 As we read in line XXVI of the Xi’an (Chang’an) Nestorian stele of 781, the Christian priests were “maîtres Radieux aux vêtements blancs” (Pelliot 1996: 178). In his note on this passage (292n228), Pelliot however explains that “vêtement blanc” (Ch. baiyi 白衣) may refer in ordinary Chinese usage to persons without official function, as it does when, in Buddhist contexts, it means ‘laity.’ In the present instance, nevertheless, there is the possibility that it refers specifically to the Christian priesthood, or to a part thereof. As Pelliot comments, “une solution s’offre immédiatement à l’esprit, qui est de retrouver dans le nestorianisme la distinction du clergé ‘blanc’ et du clergé ‘noir’ qui nous est si familière dans l’église grecque et dans l’église russe.” Notably, red does not figure among the colours he discusses. Beyond these considerations, recent correspondence with Professor Mark Dickens (SOAS) and Mr. Steven Ring (Bristol), both specialists in the study of the Church of the East, has brought home to me that besides the so>called ‘Nestorians’ (an adjective no longer much in favour, though retained here for reasons of custom and convenience), representatives of several other Christian churches were circulating in Möngke’s domains even after William of Rubruck’s departure, including Armenian Christians and Roman Catholics (Rubruck’s companion Bartholomew of Cremona had stayed behind). Moreover, Manichaeans, too, may have been present among the interlocutors at Möngke’s court. For these and other reasons, we should resist the temptation to assume too readily that Karma Pakshi’s references to the ‘Red>garbed’ allude to meetings with ‘Nestorian Christian patriarchs [who] wore red clothing,’ though there can be no doubt that he did, in some manner or another, encounter representatives of the Church of the East. 280 Matthew T. Kapstein Pakshi, in fact, though everywhere challenging the mu stegs pa to debate, tells us almost nothing of their actual tenets; his work is far too thin on this score to allow us to use doctrine to identify his unnamed opponents. However, his autobiographical writings clarify the matter perfectly. For here he recounts that, prior to the debates sponsored by Möngke Khan in 1256, the Mongol royal family, and especially Möngke and Qubilai’s younger brother Ariq>böke, as well as a noblewoman whose name he gives as E lji ga ma, were especially devoted to a mu stegs pa faith called e rga ’o that had aspirations of converting the entire world.46 In this case, e rga ’o is clearly a transcription of Mongol erke’ün, that is, Christianity, Ariq>böke’s devotion to which was noted by William of Rubruck in 1254.47 This perhaps helps us to understand just why it is that a noteworthy feature of the Dialectic of Eternal Heaven is the author’s sustained interest in addressing the challenge of theism. Tibetan thinkers were, of course, broadly familiar with the outlines of certain Indian theistic traditions and the Buddhist critiques of them, above all through the treatment of these matters in the Pramāṇasiddhi chapter of Dharmakīrti’s Pramāṇavārttika and its comment> 46 Kama Pakshi 1978a, pp. 100–101: sngon dus 3 mkhyen pas glang po cher sprul nas log lta can gyi rgyal po ’khor bcas btul ba de skye ba ’ga’ brgyud nas da ltar ’dzaṃ gling rgyal po mo ’gor gan du sku ’khrungs shing/ sngon gyi bag chaṭ kyis mu steg er ga ’o yi grub mtha’ ’dzin cing er ka’i sloon [= slob dpon] mang pos mu steṭ kyi grub mtha’ ’chad cing/ thya [= mtha’] ’khor nas ’dzam bu gling pa thaṃd mu steṭ kyi bstan pa la ’jug dgos ’dug pa rgyal bu a ri po ka: dpon mo i lji ga ma soṭ la rgyal rgyud khaṃs kyi ’bangs thaṃd kyang / sngon mueṭ kyi rgyal po btsun mo sras dang nye du dmag dpon mi la soṭ pa thaṃd da res ’dir ’khor bcas lhan cig tu skyes pa’i phyir na / … ming yongs su graṭ pa karmā pa ? mo ’gor rgyal po 1 ? pu’i don du skyes shing ’khor bcas mtho ris thar pa la snoṭ [= sna tshogs] thabs kyis ’god pa dgos par dran cing / gnam lo rgyal po ’brugi lo la zi ra ’ur rdor rgyal rgyud thaṃd ’tshoṭ pa’i dusu phyin pa las / … mu steṭ kyi grub mtha’ las rje ’bangs thaṃd bzlog cing / nang pa sargyas pa’i bstan pa la btsud pa ste. See, too, the summary account in Dpa’ bo 1986, p. 889. 47 P. Jackson 2009: 212, 223. The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 281 aries.48 However, because the theistic schools in question were not at all active in Tibet, they were largely a matter of exegetical interest and not of active polemical or apologetical concern. 49 Karma Pakshi, though addressing the affirmation of a deity described as Īśvara (dbang phyug), or “Īśvara with Consort” (dbang phyug yab yum), and clearly conceiving of the theism he criticises as a variety of the Śaivism well>known from Indian Buddhist sources, nevertheless seems to speak with an urgency that is not at all characteristic of Tibetan treatments of the issue. Is it possible that, in meeting representatives of Christian traditions, he discovered that the theistic views he knew from the works he had studied had not just a theoretical existence, and that they presented a genuine challenge to Buddhist positions? Perhaps. In all events, it is not clear that he grasped the distinctive features of Christian theism in contrast to the Indian doctrines with which he was familiar. The conceptions of a necessary being and of creatio ex nihilo are at best somewhat obscurely suggested in one passage in his text (at 26b.7 in the selection translated below, on “whether or not there is a self>emergent that has not emerged within the three realms”), but only to be immediately dismissed, apparently too absurd to merit further discussion. In short, if Karma Pakshi’s interest in theism was due to his meeting living Christian theists, his response to their beliefs was firmly cast in the mould of the Indian Buddhist traditions in which he had been schooled.50 48 For a useful introduction to Indian Buddhist ‘atheology,’ see Hayes 1988, and for a thorough study of a major Sanskrit work on the subject, Patil 2009. Aspects of the Pramāṇasiddhi chapter of the Pramāṇavārttika have been studied by Franco 1997, and, in the Tibetan context, by R. Jackson 1993. 49 Though see Kapstein 2009 for an example of a Tibetan doxographical work (in this case by Bya ’Chad kha pa Ye shes rdo rje [1101–75]) prior to Karma Pakshi’s time that does seek to relate the discussion of the non>Buddhist schools to actual religious concerns in Tibet. 50 Cf. the responses to Christian argument attributed by Rubruck to the tuin, presum> ably Chinese Buddhist priests, with whom he debated; P. Jackson 2009: 231–34. 282 Matthew T. Kapstein In this connection, it is striking to note, too, that in his great synthesis of the Dignāga>Dharmakīrti tradition of Pramāṇaśāstra, the seventh Karma pa, Chos grags rgya mtsho (1454–1506), refers to his predecessor Karma Pakshi precisely in connection with the refutation of theism in the Pramāṇasiddhi chapter, attributing to him a work entitled the Tshad ma rgya mtsho mtha’ yas. However, no reference to a text with this title has so far been discovered in Karma Pakshi’s available writings, nor has it yet appeared in any of the lists of manuscripts in Tibet, so far known to me, in which works by Karma Pakshi have otherwise been reported. Is it possible that the seventh Karma pa was inexact in his citation of Karma Pakshi’s title? I believe that this may in fact have been the case, and for some time worked under the hypothesis that the Mo gho ding ri’i sgra tshad itself was the text referred to as the Tshad ma rgya mtsho mtha’ yas. However, although, as will be seen, the Indian Vaiśeṣika philosophy occupies a particularly important place in Karma Pakshi’s con> ception of theism, as it does in the description of the Tshad ma rgya mtsho mtha’ yas, the Mo gho ding ri’i sgra tshad is not plausibly the work that the seventh Karma pa mentions. It was, rather, Karma Pakshi’s discussion of Vaiśeṣika thought in a part of the Bstan pa rgya mtsho mtha’ yas that he likely had in mind. Appendix II below sets forth in detail my reasons for drawing this conclusion, but here let us return to consider Karma Pakshi’s treatment of theism in the Mo gho ding ri’i sgra tshad. It must be stressed at the outset that Karma Pakshi’s argumentation about this is sometimes very difficult to follow, at least in many precise points, and it is not at all certain whether this is due to obscurity or confusion in his own thought or expression, or to problems in the transmission of the text. The main lines of his argument, however, are often clear enough. The selection that follows will suffice to introduce his treatment of traditions that assert the existence of a divine creator:51 51 The Tibetan text is given as the second selection in Appendix I. The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 283 (26a.6) … You tīrthikas hold, (26a.7) do you not, that your source and culmination is Īśvara with His Consort. Do you affirm or not that Maheśvara and Consort are the parents of all living creatures? If you do affirm Maheśvara and Consort to be sentient beings’ parents, because you [therefore] affirm that there were no sentient beings in the three realms prior to the emergence of Maheśvara, (26a.8) then did Maheśvara have parents and ancestors or not? If you hold that he did, you must affirm there to have been one culminating ancestor. For if there were no such culmination, then Maheśvara and Consort, would have arisen [fortuitously] like bubbles in water, without depending upon the aggregations and continuum of awareness (26a.9) from which they emerge.52 Why so? As it says in the text of the measureless dialectic:53 these distinctions are resumed as finite or infinite. Therefore, given that you tīrthikas speak of Maheśvara and Consort, Phya, Brahmā, (26b.1) etc., and the three teachers or the many divisions, 54 and because there is a debate between you who evidently appear as tīrthikas and myself, a Buddhist insider,55 do you hold Maheśvara and Consort, etc., (26b.2) to have a culmination, or not? 52 I am not entirely comfortable with this interpretation, though I cannot imagine how else to understand the passage. While the text appears to read rigrgyur, I am taking this as meaning rig rgyun, the “continuum of awareness” linking one life to the next in a series of births. 53 Cf. his references to “the measureless, imponderable dialectic of the Red>garbed Eternal Heaven,” e.g. in 1b.4 of the selection given earlier. It was not clear there, however, that Karma Pakshi was speaking of a “text” (gzhung). Was the work in question real, or, like the Red>garbed Kashmiri order, the product of the author’s visions? 54 It is not clear to me to whom the “three teachers” refer in this context. Is it possible that, because we know Daoists to have been engaged in the dragon>year debates, that Karma Pakshi is responding to the Chinese conception of “three teachings” (sanjiao 教), i.e. Confucianism, Daoism, and Buddhism? 55 For want of a better English formula to represent the standard expression nang pa sangs rgyas pa. 284 Matthew T. Kapstein If you hold that, according to the tīrthikas, the great divinities have their culmnination in Maheśvara, then I, the Buddhist insider, will assert that the four teachers are not gathered in one as [their] culmination.56 And if you tīrthikas assert that Maheśvara is without culmination, (26b.3) I, the Buddhist insider, will affirm that the Buddha has a culmination. 57 For example, when the rain falls in torrents on a mountain, because it stops and dries58 quickly, (26b.4) does not this example, tīrthikas, (26b.4) apply to Maheśvara whom you hold to have a culmination? [But on the other hand,] if you hold Maheśvara to be without culmination, does not your assertion collapse, viz. that “you reach nothing beyond Maheśvara and Consort, that everything arises from him, and is made by him?” 56 Who are the “four teachers” in this case? If, indeed, the “three teachers” mentioned just above are the “three teachings” of Chinese tradition, then maybe we have here a garbled allusion to the notion of the unity of the three teachings (sanjiao he yi 教和 一), that had become current during the Song. This would perhaps explain Karma Pakshi’s notion of the several of which he speaks being “gathered in one.” Alter> natively, if indeed the Christians are his interlocutors at this point, the “four teachers” might be the Four Evangelists, and Jesus the “one” in whom they are gathered. Perhaps more plausibly, Karma Pakshi is following Indian Buddhist doxographical traditions well known in Tibet (Kapstein 2009) that emphasised the primacy of just four of the non>Buddhist Indian philosophical traditions: Vedānta, Sāṃkhya, Vaiśeṣika, and Mī> māṃsā, as surveyed in the Tarkajvālā of Bhāviveka. In this case, however, the sense in which they are supposed to be “gathered in one” is uncertain. 57 This, I think, is less confusing that it seems. We may recall that in the ’Dod pa rgya mtsho mtha’ yas (Kapstein 2000: 101–106) Karma Pakshi employed a skeptical form of argument similar to the tenth mode of classical skepticism, according to which an assertion is placed in doubt by showing its opposite. The goal of the procedure is not, of course, to prove the opposite, but to engender a doubt, and that is precisely Karma Pakshi’s strategy here. 58 Reading skam for snyam. (The appearance of this syllable in the ms. is in fact ambiguous.) The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 285 Why so? Do you affirm, or not, that Maheśvara and Consort have a sole ancestor? (26b.5) If you do not affirm it, then, even as you adhere to the tīrthikas’ philosophical system, it is implied that it has emerged from Buddhism and is Buddhist. For, as for us, the Buddhist insiders, it is evident that the way in which Samantabhadra, self>emergent gnosis, is realised and emerges, (26b.6) is a continuous flow, like a stream of water, immeasurable and imponderable. For you tīrthikas, but for Maheśvara there is neither an upper culminating limit nor a lower culminating limit, and hence it is implied that you thus put the pieces in order.59 Why so? (26b.7) You assemblies of tīrthikas, owing to eternalism, affirm all to be self> emergent, made by no one. To this [one asks] whether or not there is a self> emergent that has not emerged within the three realms. That is, are Maheśvara and Consort understood to be within the three realms or not? (26b.8) Therefore, [because] it is evident that everything has emerged from causes and conditions, does not your affirmation of “made by no one” collapse? Therefore, your eternalism implies the fault of annihilation. You tīrthikas who are nihilists say (27a.1) that you have washed away the plentiful talk of everything’s being made by a creator [such as] Phya, Maheśvara, or Brahmā, and that you hold to the philosophical system of nihilism. Do you or do you not? If you do, then, [as for] all the outer vessel and inner contents [i.e. the world and beings]—none of it has arisen primordially from the buddhas’ power and blessing. (27a.2) It is not to be terminated by the efforts of sentient beings, and all the past activities of study and teaching [on the part] of Buddhist insiders originate and are destroyed by the collective merits of sentient beings. So they say. … 59 Though the first part of this sentence clearly means something like “without Maheśvara there is neither beginning nor end,” the last phrase eludes me in this context. Perhaps it may be taken as an idiom saying, roughly, “your position falls to pieces.” Elsewhere, the phrase is known in the Rnying ma bka’ ma traditions, early versions of which were familiar to Karma Pakshi from Kaḥ thog, where it occurs in the titles of texts that put into order fragmentary instructions (dum dum khrigs su bkod pa). 286 Matthew T. Kapstein That the problems raised by the thesis of divine creation were of sus> tained concern to Karma Pakshi is further underscored by his repeated rehearsal of them throughout the Mo gho ding ri’i sgra tshad.60 In sum, though the identification of the “Red>garbed” with Nestorian Christians seems implaus> ible, Karma Pakshi’s uncommon interest in the refutation of theism seems best explained by his encounters with actual theists at the court of Möngke Khan. 4 Conclusions Conclusions Karma Pakshi’s peculiar dialectical strategy in the Mo gho ding ri’i sgra tshad seems generally to turn on a distinction between two types of proposition, those termed “measureless and imponderable” (tshad gzhal med pa) and those that are “delimited and ponderable” (tshad gzhal yod pa). This distinction 60 For instance, at 72a8ff.: rten ’brel bcuis dang / byed pa’i skyes bu bcuis la soṭ par bye brag grub mtha’ grangs mtha’ yas par khas blangs zhing dam bcas kyang / khyed rnams kyi bskyed byed dbang phyug cheno yuṃb dang bcas pa’i yang ma rig rgya’o cheonr ’khrul pa’i tshad gzhal med pa’i mngon suṃ tshad ma / (72b) de’i phyir na khyod muegs byed khyad par du khyad lta ba rnams / ma rig log rtogis tshad ma khas len nam mi len/ khyod thaṃd byed pa pos byas pa yin zer zhing / khyod kyi byed pa po’i phyug (sic?) phya dang dbyuṃg dang po sus byas pa yin / […] (72b 4) ci’i phyir na / khyed chad lta ba rnams phya’i phya dang / dbyuṃgis dbyuṃg byed pa po’i gong nas gong du yod zer ba khas len/ phya dang dbyuṅg phug thug pa medr thal ci’i phyir na byed pa po’i thog ma’i dusu byas pa ’di yin bya ba khas len zhing da ltar mngon suṃ du khyod kyis ston nusaṃ mi nus /. The notion of the “twelve fabricants” (byed pa’i skyes bu bcuis) that we find here, particularly in connection with Karma Pakshi’s question about who might have made Īśvara, is of some interest in connection with Rubruck’s report (P. Jackson 2009: 233), that the ‘tuins’ objected to his assertion of a single supreme God, saying, “On the contrary, there is one supreme god in Heaven, of whose origin we are still ignorant, with ten others under him and one of lowest rank beneath them; while on earth they are without number.” The argument opposing the conception of a single creator god with that of ‘creation by committee’ was much invoked in Indian Buddhist critiques of Nyāya>Vaiśeṣika theism, and is well>known to modern Western philosophy of religion from the Dialogues of David Hume. The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 287 corresponds, very approximately, to the classical division between the two truths, or, rather, to that between “logic investigating the absolute” (don dam dpyod pa’i tshad ma) and “logic investigating conventions” (tha snyad dpyod pa’i tshad ma). Those propositions that are “delimited and ponderable,” whether Buddhist or mu stegs pa are all subject to “proof and refutation,” but what is “measureless and imponderable” is what remains when all possibility of proof and refutation is exhausted. This is the dharmadhātu, Samantabhadra, Mahāviṣṇu, and, of course, möngke tengri, “eternal heaven.” Regarded in this fashion, the puzzling dialectic of the Mo gho ding ri’i sgra tshad begins to emerge as a reflection of the religio>political order of the Mongol Empire, at least, as Karma Pakshi conceived it to be. For the supreme Khan, Möngke, regarded by Karma Pakshi as a realised adept of the Mahāmudrā, was the “measureless and imponder>able” center of gravity around which his squabbling subjects—Christians, Daoists, and Buddhists alike—were but “delimited and ponderable” sublunary bodies. Pakshi’s eulogy of the Khan as at once a fervent Buddhist and yet a protector of his subjects’ varied faiths seems to accord with just such a perspective. If the essential point is so simple, however, why does Karma Pakshi require 149 folios of dense and often confusing argumentation to make it? I am not at all sure that a clear answer is readily available, but perhaps we can suggest the direction in which our answer must lie by noting that, for Karma Pakshi, everything is always multiplied to exhaustion: his visions of divinities have thousands of arms, multiply themselves billion>fold throughout infinite reaches of space, blessing numberless beings in countless lands and cosmic systems. His revelations express themselves as a limitless ocean, surpassing in its extent even the dimensions of the Bka’ ’gyur. In the words of his Limitless Ocean of Tenets (’Dod pa rgya mtsho mtha’ yas): There is a limitless ocean of tenets pertaining to the principles of saṃsāra and nirvāṇa and to the particular philosophical systems. You must realise it to be neither conjoined with, nor separate from, the limitless ocean of 288 Matthew T. Kapstein realisation, which is free from all acceptance and rejection, and which is spontaneously present, pristine cognition.61 Analogously, in debate, one must consider each and every one of the myriad propositions that may arise in all of their innumerable permutations. As he himself put it: “Endless debate is like swordplay. One is proven, two are proven, everything under debate is decisively proven. Oṃ sarva pratisiddhi hūṃ!” 61 Kapstein 2000: 103. The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 289 Appendix I: I: Selected passages from the Mo gho ding ri’i sgra tshad In the following text selections, corresponding to the extended passages translated above, I provide diplomatic transcriptions of the available manu> script. Hence, I let irregularities of orthography—of which there are many— stand as they appear in the text, and have attempted to reproduce the frequent abbreviations found therein as faithfully as is possible. Underlined phrases are those written in red ink in the original manuscript. Though shad and tsheg are graphically indiscernable in the manuscript, the shad is represented by tsheg followed by an extended space, which does not otherwise intervene between syllables separated by the tsheg. On this basis, I have taken the liberty of introducing the standard form of the shad in the present transcriptions. Na ro and ’greng bu are often written in closely similar forms and one must decide contextually which is appropriate; in a few cases, e.g. khyod/khyed, the decision is virtually arbitrary. 1. Title page and preamble ག (1a.2) ༇། དམ་པའི་ཆོས་འ ལ་བའི་ ིང་བཞི་ན་གོས་དམར་ཅན་ ི་ ལ་ནས་འོངས་ བའི་མཁས་པ་ཡང་དག་ ི་རོལ་ཉིད་བ གས་ག ངས་ཏེ། (1a.3) དེ་ལ་ཤ་ན་པའི་གོས་ཅན་ འཇམས་དཔལ་དམར་པོ་ལ་སོགས་པའི་ཚན་འ$ག་ཙམ་ ་ཐ་'ད་འདོགས་ཤིང་ ངོ་བོ་ཅིག་ལ་མཐོང་(ལ་ཐ་དད་པ་འདི་)་*ེ མོ་གྷོ་དིང་རིའི་,་ཚད་བ གས་སོ།། །། (1b.1) ༄༅༆།། །།མོ་གོ་དི་རི་,་ཚད་གཞལ་མེད་པའི་,་ཚད་ ,ོཊ་ཞིང་ ེང་བ་ གཏན་ལ་ཕབ་པ་ཏེ། 2ས་དང་3ིབ་མའི་་དཔེ་བཞིན་4། ཚད་གཞལ་མེད་པར་དམ་བཅས་ 290 Matthew T. Kapstein ན། ཚད་གཞལ་མེད་པ་5ཊ་ལས་ (1b.2) འ6ང་བ་མངོན་ མ་ཚད་མ་ཡིན་པའི་ ིར་ ན། འཁོར་བ་དང་7་ངན་ལས་འདས་པའི་ཚད་གཞལ་མེད་པ་དང་ཚད་གཞལ་ཡོད་པ་གཉིས་ ་དམ་བཅའ་ནས་,ོཊ་ཞིང་ ེང་པ་ཡིན་པའི་ ིར་ན། <ས་དང་ (1b.3) 8་9་ཡོངས་ ་:ོགས་པའི་;ལ་བ་ བཅས་པ་=མས་དཔང་པོ་དམ་པར་བ གས་ ་གསོལ། >བ་འ?ག་དང་ དབང་@ག༌B་དང་ཚངས་པ་C་<ིན་Dེ་བ;ད་ལ་སོཊ་པ་འཇིག་Eེན་ག མ་ན་འཁོད་ཅིང་ ི་ནང་ གི་Fབ་མཐའ་སོ་སོར་འGན་པ་=མས་Hངས་པོ་དམ་པར་བ གས་ ་གསོལ། དིང་རི་གོས་དམར་ཅན་ ི་ཚད་གཞལ་ཡོད་པའི་,་ཚད་དང་། (1b.4) མོ་འགོ་ ཚད་གཞལ་མེད་པའི་,་ཚད་ བཤིག་པ་དང་། Iབ་པ་རལ་བJོར་ ི་འཁོར་ལོ་འདི། བོད་ ལ་ཁ་བ་ཅན་ ི་Kང་ ོགས་ འདིར་Lོན་ཆད་མ་6ང་ ིས་མི་འ6ང་བ་ཏེ་ )ར་ ་ ི་ནང་གི་Iབ་མཐའ། (1b.5) གཞན་དང་Mོད་ན་ ི་ནང་དང་པོའི་འདི་ སོ་སོར་ས་གཅོད་པ་འདི་)་*ཻ། འ3ོ་བ་རིས་OPQ་གིས་འRལ་པ་དང་འRལ་གཞི་Iབ་པར་དམ་བཅས། པར་ཁས་ལེནཾ་མི་ལཻན། (1b.6) ངས་མ་རིག་པ་ >ོད་Sིས་བཤིག་ Fབ་མཐའ་ལོག་པར་)་བ་Uེཊ་Sི་)་ལོག་ མ་བ;་ OPQ་V་Kེ་Wག་དང་བཅས་པ་ང་ཡིས་Iབ་པར་དམ་བཅས་>ེད་Sིས་ཤེས་པར་ཁས་ལX་མི་ལེན། ས་འཚམས་ ེད་པར་ཁས་ལོང་། ནང་པ་ས;ས་པའི་Fབ་མཐའ་ ོཊ་ ི་ཐེག་པ་དY་ལས། (1b.7) Eོག་ངར་འGན་ Zལ་8འི་བ*ན་པ་Dེ་[ོད་ག མ་དང་ངའི་Iབ་པར་དམ་བཅས། >ོད་Uེཊ་Kེད་Sིས་བཤིག་པར་ཁས་ལོང་ཞིང་དམ་ཆོས། \ོད་:ོགས་པ་Zལ་8འི་བ*ན་པ་ The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven ི་]ད་ག ཾ་(?)་ངའི་ (2a.1) 291 Iབ་པར་དམ་བཅས། >ོད་Sི་Uེཊ་Kེད་Sིས་བཤིག་པར་ཁས་ ལོང་ཤིང་དམ་ཆོས། ཆོས་Sི་8འི་དགོངས་པ་2ང་བ*ན་=ོར་ཆཻན་^་ན་མེད་པ་གསར་_ིང་ང་ཡི ས་Iབ། Uེཊ་Kེད་ཡིན་ན་>ོད་Sིས་བཤིཊ་པར་དཾ་ (2a.2) ཆོས། ངོ་བོ་ཉིད་Sི་8འི་བ*ན་པ་ ཨ་a་ཡོ་ག་Fབ་མཐའ་ཐཾད༌Sིས་bི་2ང་ཡིན་ན་ང་ཡིས་Iབ་པར་དམ་བཅས། >ོད་Fབ་མཐའ་ ཐཾད་ལ་མཁས་པར་ཁས་ལེན་ན་བཤིག་པར་དམ་ཆོས། རང་འ6ང་8་9་ཡོངས་ (2a.3) ་ Eོགས་པའི་བ*ན་པ་:ོགས་པ་ཆཻན་ཅིག་ཡིན་ཏེ། མ་Eོག་ལོག་Eོག་གཉིས་ལ་སོཊ་པ་ ི་ནང་གི་ Fབ་མཐའ་འདི་བ་མ་འOེས་པ་ཡོངས་ ་:ོགས་པའི་ ིར་ན། ང་ཡིས་Iབ་>ོད་Uེཊ་Kེད་Sིས་ cན་bོད་ལོག་པར་Eོག་ (2a.4) པའི་;ལ་པོ་ཡིན་ན། >ོད་Sིས་བཤིག་པར་དམ་ཆོས་བཅའ། >ོད་Sི་Iབ་པར་ཁས་ལོང་། ཡང་ན་ ི་ནང་གི་Fབ་མཐའི་Kེ་Wག་=མས་ མ་d་རེ་རེ་ནས་ བཤིག་པ་དང་Iབ་པར་Kའམ་མི་K། >ོད་Sིས་དབང་པོ་རིཊ་པའི་ བ4ན་ནས་>ོད་ལ་གདམ་ཁ་eིན་པ་ཏེ། (2a.5) Kེ་Wག་དང་ >ོད་Sིས་འདོམ། འདི་=མས་Sང་ཚད་ཡོད་ པ་དང་། ཚད་མེད་པ་གཉིས་ ་མ་འ ས་པ་དང་མ་Eོགས་པ་དང་མ་>བ་པ་གང་ཡང་མེད་པའི་ ིར་ན། ི་ནང་གི་Fབ་མཐའ་ (2a.6) ཐཾད་ལ། ཚད་ཡོད་ཚད་མེད་གཉིས་ ་དམ་བཅའ་ཞིང་ བཤིག་Iབ་མ་གཏོཊ་པ་གང་ཡང་མེད་པར་ཤེས་པར་མfད། Kེད་ན་ཡང་འདི་=མ་མ་ནོར་བར་འ3ིག ་ཚར་ཅིག་གི་ཚར་༣་ མ་ །གང་དང་གང་ ་,ོཊ་ ེང་ (2a.7) མེད་པར་འདོན་ནས་ ,ོ་ ེང་བ་ལ་གོར་བVག་ཅིང་ ེང་བ་མན་ངག་ཡིན། དེ་)ར་འཇམ་དKངས་ཏིང་ངེ་འGན་བEེན་ 292 Matthew T. Kapstein ཞིང་ ི་ནང་Fབ་མཐའ་ཤན་འKེད་གནས་2ག་ཆོས་ཉིད་གཏན་ལ་ཕབ་པའི་དགོངས་པ་ ཡོད་པའོ། ། (2b.1) ངག་གི་དབང་@ག་རང་འ6ང་h་བའི་སེང་གེ་༡་Mོད་༢་Mོད་cན་Mོད་ དེ་Mོད། Mོད་པ་མཐའ་ཡས་རལ་Jོར་དཔེ་དང་མ(ངས། ཅིག་Iབ་གཉིས་Iབ་Mོད་པ་ ཐདཾ་བIབ་གཅོད།། །།ཨk་སl་m་ཏི་སིnི་oྃཿ rS་sབ་པ་ལ་ (2b.2) མ་འགཊ་པ་ དཔོན་tོབ་གཉིས་Sིས་ ་བ་ ་ལེན་བ,ོཊ་ཞིང་ ེང་བ། དཀཽནག མ་ ི་ཆོས་ཅན་ཆོས་ཉིད་ འཁོར་བ་དང་7་ངན་ལས་འདས་པའི་ཤེས་པ་དང་ཤེས་Kའི་wགས་=མས་ལ་མ་>བ་ཅིང་གང་ དག་གང་ལ་མི་གནས་པ་ (2b.3) མེད་པའི་Jོར་ཆཻན་དKེ་བ་ནི་འདི་)་*ེ། 7་ངན་ལས་འདས་ཁར་2ང་བ*ན་ལས། rS་sབ་པ་ བ་ར་ན་སེའི་ ལ་ ་སxས་Sི་མཚན་དང་དཔེ་ Kད་Sིས་མ་བ;ན་པའི་ཡང་མཛད་པ་zིས་སxས་དང་མཉམ་པའི་ཤ་ན་པའི་གོས་ཅན་ ཞེས་K་བ་འ6ང་*ེ། (2b.4) ངའི་བ*ན་པ་དར་ཞིང་;ས་པར་Kེད་ཅིང་ ི་ནང་གི་Fབ་མཐའ་ཐདཾ་ ཤན་འKེད་པ་ཏེ། དམ་པའི་ཆོས་[་wཊ་གཏན་ལ་འབེབ་པར་Kེད་པ་ཏེ། བོད་Jད་ ་བ{ར་ན་ གོས་དམར་པོ་ཅན་ཞེས་བ|ོད་པ་ཏེ། འdཾ་ (2b.5) ིས་མཚན་བཟང་གི་ ོགས་Jོར་ན། ཁ་དོག་དམར་པོ་དམར་པོར་*ོན་ཞིང་བ་ར་ན་སེའི་གོས་~་*ེ། ཡང་ན་མ་•་ཀོ་ན་ཀའི་ གོས་~་ཏེ། ཡང་ན་མ€་f་ན་ཀའི་མདོག་འO་བ། བོད་Jད་ ་བ{ར་ན་•ག་ཆོས་དར་ལོ་ (2b.6) མིང་བ་ཏེ། དམ་པའི་ཆོས་འ ལ་བ་U་Eེཊ་Sི་Fབ་མཐའ་དང་འOེས་ཤིང་ས་མཚམས་ མེད་པའི་3ངས་ ་དYེན་=མ་Sི་ཤ་ན་པའི་གོས་ཅན་ལ་གསོལ་བས་བཏབ་ཤིང་sག་དམ་ ི་]ད The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven ་བ8ལ་བའི་ ས་ ་ནེ་‚ོ་ཏའི་གƒཊ་ (2b.7) 293 ལག་ཁང་ ་ ི་རོལ་ ་ཤ་ན་པའི་གོས་ཅན་ ི་ =མ་འ„ལ་Kོན་ནས་བ ཊ་པ་དYེན་ ི་ལས་Kེད་Sི་མཐོང་ནས་ནང་ ་…ན་ཏེ་གོས་དམར་ཅན་ ིས་…ན་ནས་Kོན་པའི་མཁའ་ལ་ཡང་དག་ ི་རོལ་༢་ན་བ ཊ་ (2b.8) ཞེས་…ག་པ་ལ། གནས་བEེན་=མ་དdག་ནས་དགའ་ནས་ནང་ ་དKེ་ནས། སxས་ཡཻས་འཁོར་བ་དང་ 7་ངན་ལས་འདས་པའི་ཆོས་ཐདཾ་,་ཚད་དཀཽནག མ་ ིས་,་ཚད་Sི་འཁཽར་བJོར་ཞིང་། Uེཊ་Sི་wཊ་ =མ་ཟིལ་ (2b.9) ིས་མནན་ཏེ་ ན་@ང་ཏེ། དེ་ལ་ག མ་ ་དKེ་ཞིང་ས་ བཅད་པ་ནི་འདི་)་*ེ། †ེ་བོ་ཐ་མལ་པ་ལ་འ3ོ་བ་རིགས་OPQ་འRལ་གཞི་ལས་འRལ་པ་[ོཊ་ འ6ང་*ེ། དཀཽནག མ་ ིས་]་ཡིན་པའི་,་ཚད་དང་ (3a.1) U་*ེག་Sི་Fབ་མཐའ་=མ་ ལོག་ཅིང་དཀཽག ཾ་ལ་ལཾ་གོམ་ཞིང་དཀཽནག མ་ལ་མི་དགའ་བའི་ ིར་ན། 9་Dེ་བཟང་པོ་ལ་ སོཊ་པ་Uེཊ་=མ་Sང་*ོན་པའི་འཁོར་ ི་དང་པོར་‡ར་པ་*ེ། Uེཊ་ (3a.2) Kེད་Sི་དཀཽནག མ་ ིས་འ$སའི་བˆས་པའི་,་ཚད་དང་། དམ་པའི་ཆོས་འ ལ་བ་ལ་སོཊ་པའི་ནང་པ་སxས་ པའི་ཐེག་པའི་Kེ་Wག་དང་། དཀཽནག མ་ཐོབ་པར་K་བའི་ ིར་ལམ་བ3ོད་པའི་,་ཚད་Sི་ འཁཽར་བJོར་བ་ (3a.3) ཡིན། ཐདཾ་སོ་སོར་འKེད་ཅིང་ཅིག་4་Dོམ་པའི་,་ཚད་ཡིས་ ཐདཾ་ལ་མ་>བ་པ་མེད་པར་Kེ་Wག་སོ་སོར་འKེད་པའི་དགོས་པ་ཡོད་པ་ཡོད་པའི་ ི་ན་ཤ་ན་པའི་ གོས་ཅན་ ིས་=མ་པར་འ„ལ་པའི་tོབ་པའི་(ལ་ ་ (3a.4) འ6ང་བ་ནི། རད་པའི་གོས་ཅན་ ཉིད་དང་ཉི་མ་འ‡ར་ལ་སོཊ་པ་=མ་པར་འ„ལ་པ་3ངས་མེད་པ་=མ་Sིས་འཛམ་dའི་ ིང་>བ་ 294 Matthew T. Kapstein པར་མཛད་པ་ཏེ། >དར་ག་‰ིན་ ི་ ལ་པŠོ་དཀའ། (3a.5) ་བ་ཁ་ཆེའི་3ཻངར་‚ིཊ་བEེན་ཞེས་ K་བར་3ཊ་པ་ལས། ]ད་འdམ་w་Kེ་བ་ མ་V་སོ་OPQ་ཡོད་པར་3ཊ་པ་ན། ད3་ བཅོམ་པ་ཉི་མ་འdམ་ ིས་ག ང་2ཊ་བ†ང་བ་ཡིན། ཐོབ་པའི་3ངས་མཐའ་ཡས་པ་=མས་ ི་ནང་གི་པ‹ི་ཏ་མཁས་པ་Fབ་པ་ (3a.6) ]ན་ཆད་མེད་པར་བ ཊ་ཤིང་,་ཚད་2ང་རིགས་ Sིས་འཁཽར་བJོར་བ་ཏེ། དེ་ལ་འཛམ་d་ ིང་གི་;ལོ་མོ་གྷོ་གན་ ི་བསོད་ནམས་ལ་གར་‰ིན་ ིས་;ལོ་དིང་དེའི་^་མཆོད་ནང་པའི་སེནཾ་ ི་པ་=མ་དང་། ི་པ་Uེཊ་Sི་ (3a.7) པ‹ི་ཏ་ =མས་ངོ་)་ཞིང་2ང་བ*ན་ ་འ6ང་བ་ལས་མིང་ཡོངས་ ་3ཊ་པ་ཀŒ་པས་བདག་བ•ང་ཞིང་ 2ང་ལག་Eག་ཟས་ནོར་[་wགས་Sིས་བ†ང་ཞིང་དཀཽནག མ་ ིས་,་ཚད་Sི་བདར་ཤ་བཅད་ ཅིང་། ིས་ཁ་ཆེའི་ ལ་ (3a.8) ་ཡང་ ིནས་ཁ་ཆེའི་;ལོ་ལ་སོཊ་པ་Fབ་མཐའ་འGན་པ་ =མ་Sི་བcར་ཏི་བགོས་ཤིང་གོས་དམར་ཅན་ ི་,་ཚད་Sིས་wགས་ལ་ག་དར་Kས་པ་མངོན་ མ་ཚད་མ། དེའི་ ིར་ན། དཀཽནག མ་ ིས་,་ཚད་ (3a.9) འདི་འཛམ་ ིང་;ན་OPQ་ ོཊ་ Sི་ ང་པོས་སོཊ་ནས་བོད་ལ་ མ་ མ་Ž་Ž་འ‡ར་བ་དང་མི་འO་ཞིང་ཐདཾ་ལ་མ་>བ་པ་མེད་ ཅིང་། ཚད་ཆེན་Kེ་Wགིས་wགས་=མ་ཚད་གཞལ་མེད་པ་ཆོས་8་Oི་མ་མེད་པར་ངོ་•ོད་ (3b.1) ཐལ་རིག དེའི་ཚད་གཞལ་མེད་པའི་དཀཽནག མ་8་ག མ་•ན་ ིས་Fབ་པའི་ ཐ་དད་མེད་པ་ལས་>ེད་=མ་ཚད་ཅན་བJོར་Ž་བJོར་Žར་འདོད་པའི་དམ་བཅའ་ལ་‘་’། The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 295 2. On Īśvara (26a.6) … >ོད་Uེཊ་པའི་6ང་ འདོད་པ་ཡིནམ་མིན། ད6ཾག་ཆཻན་ ཾབ་†ེ་འ3ོ་ཡོངས་Sིས་ཕ་མར་ཁས་ལེནམ་མི་ལེན། ད6ཾག་ཆཻན་ ཾབ་སེནཾ་ ིས་ཕ་མར་ཁས་ལེན་ན། སེནཾ་>ོད་ (26a.8) •ང་དང་མཐར་sག་པ་དེ་ད6ཾག་ ཾབ་ལ་ (26a.7) དབང་@ག་ཆཻན་མ་6ང་བའི་Lོན་རོལ་ ་ཁཾ ཾ་ མེད་པར་འདོད་པའི་ ིར་ན། དབང་@ག་ཆཻན་ལ་ཕ་མ་དང་ཕ་7ེས་ ཡོད་དམ་མེད། ཡོད་པར་འདོད་ན་ ཕ་མེས་Sི་མཐར་sག་པ་༡་ཡོད་དགོས་པ་>ོས་ཁས་ལོང་། མཐའ་sག་པ་མེད་ན་ད6ཾག་ ཆཻན་ ཾབ་འ6ང་བའི་wཊ་=ཾས་དང་། རིག]ར་ ལ་མ་བEེན་པར་“འི་“་dར་བཞི”་6ང་བར་ཐལ། ག ང་ལས། མཐའ་sག་ཡོདཾ། (26a.9) གཉིས་ ཅིའི་ ིར་ན་ཚད་གཞལ་མེད་པའི་ཚད་མའི་ sཊ་མེད་ ་བˆས་པའི་Kེ་Wག་པ་འདི་=ཾས་ཡིན་པའི་ ིར་ན། >ོད་ད6ཾག་ཆཻན་ ཾབ་ ་དང་ཚངས་པ་ (26b.1) ལ་སོཊ་པ་=མས་དང་། Uེཊ་Sིས་*ོནཔ་༣་མཾ་ Kེ་Wག་མང་ ་ག ང་པ་=མས་དང་། ད་)ར་>ོད་Sིས་མངོན་ ཾ་ཚད་མར་Uེཊ་པར་[ང་ཞིང་། ང་ནང་པ་སxས་པ་ལ་>ོད་Sིས་Mོད་པའི་ ིར་ན། >ོད་ད6ཾག་ཆཻན་ ཾབ་ལ་སོཊ་པ་=ཾས་ མ•ག་ཡོདར་ (26b.2) འདོད་དམ་མེདར་འདོད། >ོད་Uེཊ་Sིས་Cེན་=མས་ད6ཾག་ཆཻན་ ལ་མ•ག་ཡོདར་འདོད་ན། ང་ནང་པ་ སxས་པས་*ོན་པ་བཞི་*ོན་པ་༡་ ་འ ས་པར་མཐར་sག་ མེད་པར་དཾ་བཅའ། >ེད་Uེཊ་པ་ད6ཾག་ཆཻན་མ•ག་མེདར་དམ་བཅའ་ན། (26b.3) ང་ནང་པ་ སxས་པས་སxས་ལ་མཐར་sག་ཡོད་པར་ཁས་ལེན་ཏེ། དཔེར་ན་རི་ལ་ཆར་Oག་པོ་འབབ་པའི་ ས་ན་2ང་པ་གང་བའི་“་6ང་ན་ཡང་། –ར་ ་ཆད་ཅིང་'ཾ་པའི་ ིར་ན་>ེད་Uེཊ་པས་མ•ག་ 296 Matthew T. Kapstein ད6ཾག་ཆཻན་ལ་ (26b.4) འདོད་པ་དེ་ཡང་དཔེ་དེ་དང་མ(ངམ་མི་མ(ང་། >ེད་ད6ཾག་ཆཻན་ sག་མེད་ ་འདོད་ན། >ོད་ད6ཾག་ ཾབ་བས་ག4ག་པ་མེད། ཐདཾ་ཁོ་ལས་6ང་། ཁོས་Kས་ ཟེར་བའི་དཾ་བཅའ་ཉཾ་མཾ་མི་ཉཾས། ཅིའི་ ིར་ན་ >ོད་ད6ཾག་ཆཻན་ ཾབ་ ིས་ཕ་7ེས་༡་ཁས་ (26b.5) ལེན་ནཾ་མི་ལེན། ཁས་མི་ལེན་ན་ >ོད་Uེགས་པའི་Fབ་མཐའ་བ•ང་ན་ཡང་། དེ་ནང་པ་སxས་པ་ལས་6ང་ཞིང་སxས་པ་ཡིན་པར་ཐལ། cན་4་བཟང་པོ་རང་འ6ང་ཡཻས་Eོག་(ལ་དང་6ང་(ལ་ མི་འཆད་པ་ཚད་གཞལ་མེད་པའི་མངོན་ མ་ཚད་མ། ངེད་ནང་པ་སངས་;ས་པ་ལ་ནི། (26b.6) “་བོའི་]ན་བཞིན་ ་]ན་ >ེད་Uེཊ་པ་ལ་ནི་ད6ཾག་ཆཻན་མེད་པར་ ཡར་—ག་sག་པ་མེད། མར་མཐར་sག་པ་མེད་པའི་ ིར་ན། >ོད་ མ་ མ་˜ིག ་ཐལ་ཅིའི་ ིར་ (26b.7) ན། རང་6ང་ཡིས་ཁས་ལེན་པ་ལ། >ོད་Uེཊ་Sིས་wགས་=མ་Eག་)་བས་ཐདཾ་ ས་Sང་མ་Kས་པར་ ཁམ་༣་ན་མ་6ང་བའི་རང་འ6ང་གཞན་ན་ཡོད་དམ་མེད། དབང་@ག་ཆཻན་ ཾབ་ཡང་ཁཾ ཾ་ ིས་ཁོངས་ ་ (26b.8) Eོག་གམ་མི་Eོག དེའི་ ིར་ན་ཐདཾ་ ]་™ེན་ལས་འ6ང་བ་མངོན་ ཾ་ཚད་མ། >ོད་ ས་Sང་མ་Kས་ཟེར་བ་ཁས་ལེན་ཉམསཾ་ མི་ཉཾས། དེའི་ ིར་ན་>ོད་Eག་)་བའི་འཇིཊ་པའི་†ོན་ཅན་ ་ཐལ། >ེད་Uེཊ་ཆད་)་བ་=ཾས་ན་རེ་ (27a.1) ཐདཾ་ ་དང་དབང་@ག་ཆཻན་ཚངས་པ་Kེད་པ་པོས་Kས་ཟེར་ཞིང་གཏཾ་མང་ ་Kང་ཞིང་། མེད་པའི་Fབ་མཐའ་འGན་པ་>ོད་ཡིནཾ་མིན། ཡིན་ན་ ི་[ོད་ནང་བVད་ཐདཾ། གདོད་མ་ནས་ སངས་;ས་=མས་Sིས་མsོབས་ (27a.2) Kིན་šབས་ལས་མ་6ང་། སེནཾ་=ཾས་Sིས་Mོལ་བས་ The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 297 མི་བཅག་པ་དང་། ནང་པ་སxས་པའི་Lོན་ཉན་བཤད་Kེད་པ་cན་། སེནཾ་bི་མsན་བསོད་ནམས་ ལས་ཆཊ་འཇིགས་Kེད་པ་ཡིན་ཟེར་བ་ཡོད་་་་་་། Appendix II: Karma pa Chos grags rgya mtsho on the Tshad ma rgya mtsho mtha’ yas Although, as was documented already in Kapstein 1985, a small number of later authors—including Dpa’ bo Gtsug lag phreng ba, Sog bzlog pa Blo gros rgyal mtshan, and Karma Chags med—clearly had some degree of familiarity with parts of Karma Pakshi’s Rgya mtsho mtha’ yas skor, only one with whom we are so far familiar actually quotes any of Karma Pakshi’s doctrinal writings. (The Autobiographical Writings, by contrast, are abundantly cited by Dpa’ bo and later Karma Bka’ brgyud historians.) This is the seventh Karma pa, Chos grags rgya mtsho, who reproduces a lengthy passage that he attributes to the Tshad ma rgya mtsho mtha’ yas in his famous commentary on the works of Dignāga and Dharmakīrti, the Tshad ma rigs gzhung rgya mtsho (on which see the contribution to this volume by A. Burchardi). As mentioned earlier, it seems significant that this citation occurs in the seventh Karma pa’s comments on the refutation of theism.62 Though none of the works by Karma Pakshi now known in fact bears the title Tshad ma rgya mtsho mtha’ yas, the passage given by the seventh Karma pa corresponds almost precisely with a part of the manu> script described in Appendix III, 3 below, and entitled Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, a work that evidently belongs to the group of writings called Bstan pa rgya mtsho mtha’ yas. I reproduce here the passage as given in the Tshad ma rigs gzhung rgya mtsho, with the differences between this and Karma Pakshi’s work noted.63 Besides the light that this text sheds on Karma Pakshi’s 62 This is the īśvarāder apramāṇyam section of the Pramāṇasiddhi chapter of the Pra> māṇavārttika, verses 9–28 in the edition of Miyasaka 1972. Karma pa Chos grags rgya mtsho 2001, pp. 38–43. In the manuscript of the Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, the passage in question occupies folio 9a.2–12a.2. In record> 63 298 Matthew T. Kapstein interest in theism, it serves also as an example of the evident care with which he reported doxographical traditions that were available to him in Tibetan sources (though just what these were remains to be established), despite the eccentricities that so frequently characterise his writing overall. For, as an introduction to the refutation of Śaivite theism, the text given here offers a relatively well delineated survey of the system of the categories (padārtha) according to the philosophy of the Vaiśeṣika school. The precise circumstances of Karma Pakshi’s philosophical education, however, remain in most respects obscure. * དབང་@ག་Eག་པ་ཚད་མར་འདོད་པ་དགག་པ་ལ་bིའི་དོན་དང་། དང་པོ་ནི། œག་གི་དོན་གཉིས་ལས། རིན་པོ་ཆེ་ཀŒ་པཀྵིའི་ཚད་མ་;་མw་མཐའ་ཡས་ལས་འ6ང་བ་)ར་ཤེས་པར་ K་*ེ།* 64 འདི་ལ་ ོགས་L་མ་*དགོད་པ་དང་།* 65 དེ་དགག་པ་གཉིས་ལས། དང་པོ་ལ། དབང་@ག་གི་མཚན་ཉིད་དང་། དེའི་ག ང་h་བ་Kེ་Wག་པའི་འདོད་པ་དང་། *རིག་པ་ཅན་པའི་ འདོད་པ་* 66 =མ་པར་བཞག་པའོ། །དང་པོ་ནི། དབང་@ག་ཡོན་ཏན་བ;ད་དང་žན་པ་*ེ། z་བ་དང་། ཡང་བ་དང་། མཆོད་པར་K་བ་དང་། བདག་པོར་‡ར་པ་དང་། དབང་ ་‡ར་པ་ ing differences between the two texts, the phrases concerned being set apart by asterisks, I am concerned here only with substantive differences and not simple variants of orthography, particles, or punctuation, or use of abbreviations, etc. Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 9a.2: rtag par smra ba’i sde gnyis pa dbang phyug pa’i gzhugs dgag pa las /. 65 Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 9a.2: dgag pa las /. This seems surely to be 64 merely a copyist’s error, as also do several others among the variants that follow. Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 9a.3: de’i gzhung smra ba rigs pa can gyi khyad bar. 66 The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven དང་། གར་ཡང་ ིན་པ་དང་། འདོད་དY་žན་པ་དང་། 299 དགའ་མYར་གནས་པ་*ེ། སེམས་ཅན་ ི་འཇིག་Eེན་†ེ་འཇིག་Kེད་པ་དང་། [ོད་Sི་འཇིག་Eེན་†ེ་འཇིག་Kེད་པ་དང་། འ6ང་པོ་ཐམས་ཅད་Sིས་མཆོད་པར་K་བ་དང་། [ོད་བVད་གཉིས་ཀ་†ེ་འཇིག་Kེད་པ་དང་། འ6ང་པོ་ཐམས་ཅད་ལ་ཕན་གནོད་Kེད་པའི་དབང་Kེད་པ་དང་། ཡིད་Sིས་ཐམས་ཅད་འFབ་པ་ དང་། * ཡོན་ཏན་ཐམས་ཅད་འདོད་དYར་Kེད་པ་དང་། མཐོ་རིས་དང་ཐར་པ་གང་འདོད་ ཐོས་པ་=མས་དང་རིམ་པ་བཞིན་ ་eར་རོ།* 67 །ཡོན་ཏན་དེ་དག་མདོར་བˆ་ན། གང་ཞིག་z་ ཞིང་གཅིག་Ÿ་†ེ་གནས་འ ག །དེ་ཡིས་འདི་cན་†ེ་ཞིང་འཇིག་པར་Kེད། །དེ་ནི་དབང་བདག་ མཆོག་*eིན་* 68 C་མཆོད་K། །ཡོན་ཏན་Kེད་པ་ཤིན་4་ཞི་བ་ཐོབ། །Kེད་པ་པོ་ལ་ཤེས་པ་ ཡོད་མིན་ཏེ། །བདག་གི་བདེ་ˆག་ལ་རང་དབང་མེད། །དབང་@ག་གིས་བ8ལ་ཡང་ན་གཡང་ སའམ། །ཡང་ན་མཐོ་རིས་དག་4་འ6ང་བར་འ‡ར། །ཞེས་དང་། དབང་@ག་བ ོམས་ པས་ཐར་པ་ཐོབ་པ་དང་། །z་ཞིང་རབ་<བ་cན་རིག་Kེད་པ་ཐམས་ཅད་Kེད། གོམས་པས་=ལ་འKོར་པ་ཡི་བསམ་གཏན་ ལ། །ཞི་བའི་བདེ་བ་* 69 འདོད་པ་=མས་Sིས་ དབང་@ག་Eག་4་བ ོམ། །ཞེས་བཤད་པ་ཡིན་ནོ། ། Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 9a.6: thob pa dang /. Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 9b.1: bzhin. 69 Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 9b.3: inserts dam pa. 67 68 །བསམ་གཏན་ 300 Matthew T. Kapstein * གཉིས་པ་དེའི་ག ང་h་བ་Kེ་Wག་པའི་འདོད་པ་བཤད་པ་ནི།*70 ཤེས་Kའི་གནས་ 2གས་œག་དོན་OPQ་*ཁས་ལེན་ཏེ།*71 :ས་དང་། ཡོན་ཏན་དང་། ལས་དང་། bི་དང་། Kེ་Wག་དང་། འ ་བའོ། །:ས་ནི་དY་*ེ། ས་དང་། “་དང་། མེ་དང་། ¡ང་དང་། ནམ་མཁའ་དང་། ས་དང་། ོགས་དང་། བདག་དང་། ཡིད་དོ། །དེའང་དང་པོ་བཞི་ནི། རགས་པ་མི་Eག་པ་K་བ་དང་བཅས་པ་*cན་ལ་>བ་པ་*72 འདོད་ཅིང་། ནམ་མཁའ་ལ་སོགས་ པ་ག མ་ནི་*cན་ལ་>བ་པ། K་བ་མང་ལ་* 73 Kེ་Wག་པ་ཕལ་ཆེ་བས་འདོད་Sང་། ཁ་ཅིག་ གིས་ ས་]ར་h་བས་K་བ་དང་བཅས་པར་འདོད་པའང་ཡོད་དེ། ས་Sི་†ེ་¢་ˆད་པར་Kེད། ། ས་Sིས་འ6ང་བ་‰ིན་པར་Kེད། ། ས་Sིས་གཉིད་ལོག་སད་པར་Kེད། ། ས་འདའ་བར་ནི་ དཀའ་བ་ཡིན། །ཅེས་དང་། * འོབས་* 74 ནི་;་མw་བ£ང་བ་ མ་བMེགས་དང་། དམག་ནི་<ིན་པོ་ནོར་eིན་Kེད། །དེ་ཡི་བ*ན་བཅོས་*པ་སངས་ཚདམེད་ཉམས། dང་བ་* 75 དེ་ལ་ ས་Sི་དབང་གིས་ཉམས། །ཞེས་བཤད་པ་ཡིན་ནོ། ། །,་,ོག་ །བདག་ནི་Eག་ Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 9b.4: gnyis pa ni mu stegs bye’ brag pa’i lugs dgod pa la gsuṃ ste /. 71 Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 9b.4–5: ngos bzung ba ni/ tshig gi don drug yang dag par khas len te /. 72 Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 9b.6: ma khyab par. 73 Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 9b.6: khyab pa/ rtag pa byed pa myed pa. 74 Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 10a.2: ngo bos. 75 Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 10a.2–3: pa ba sangs tshad mnyam// sgra bsgrogs bu. 70 The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 301 པ་ཐམས་ཅད་ ་འ3ོ་བ་དགེ་བ་དང་མི་དགེ་བ་ལ་སོགས་པའི་ལས་Kེད་པ་པོར་རང་ཉིད་སེམས་ མེད་Sང་སེམས་པ་དང་འWེལ་བར་འདོད་ཅིང་། ཡིད་ནི་K་བ་དང་བཅས་པས་ཡོངས་ ་* མ་>བ་པར་འདོད་པ་ཡིན་ནོ། 76 །:ས་དེ་དག་གི་ཡོན་ཏན་ནི་ཁ་དོག་ལ་སོགས་པ་ཉི་5་M་9་*ེ། ཁ་དོག་Oི་རོ་རེག་K་*ེ་9་* 77 ནི་འ6ང་བ་བཞི་དང་། ནམ་མཁའི་ཡོན་ཏན་*ནི།* 78 མིག་གི་ ^ོ་ལ་སོགས་པ་^ོ་9་བདེ་བ་ˆག་བLལ་འདོད་པ་། Dང་བ་འབད་པ་ཆོས་དང་ཆོས་མ་ཡིན་པ་ དང་འ ་Kེད་པ་*ེ་བV་ག མ་ནི་བདག་གི་ཡོན་ཏན། 3ངས་དང་བོང་wད་དང་། སོ་སོ་བ་དང་། * z་རགས་དང་། དKེ་བ་དང་།* 79 ས་Sི་ཡོན་ཏན་ཏེ་ཉི་5་M་9། * གཞན་དང་། གཞན་མ་ཡིན་པ་ཞེས་K་བ་བ ན་ནི་ དེ་དག་ནི་ལ་ལ་Eག་པ་ཡིན་ལ། ལ་ལ་མི་Eག་པའོ། ། ལ་ལ་* 80 ནི་9་*ེ། །འདེགས་པ་དང་། འཇོག་པ་དང་། བ8མ་པ་དང་། བ™ང་བ་དང་ འ3ོ་བའོ། །bི་ནི་གཉིས་ཏེ། >བ་པའི་bི་དང་། ཉི་¤་བའི་bིའོ། །Kེ་Wག་ནི་ཉི་¤་བ་བ་ལང་E་ལས་ žོག་པ་)་dའོ། །འ ་བ་ནི་]་དང་འWས་d་zད་པའོ་ཞེས་ཟེར་རོ། །འཇིག་Eེན་ཆགས་པའི་ (ལ་དེ་དག་Sང། འཇིག་Eེན་*ོངས་པའི་ཚ་འ6ན་བ་བཞིའི་¥ལ་ཆ་ཤས་མེད་པ་སོ་སོར་གནས་ པ་ལས་དབང་@ག་གིས་འཇིག་Eེན་Zལ་པར་འདོད་ལ། །དེའི་|ེས་ལ་སེམས་ཅན་ ིས་ཆོས་ Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 10a4: inserts chad pa. Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 10a5: inserts lnga. 78 Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 10a5: no //. 79 Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 10a6: phrad pa dang bye ba. 80 Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 10b1: las. 76 77 302 Matthew T. Kapstein དང་ཆོས་མ་ཡིན་པས་བདས་པའི་དབང་གིས་འ6ང་བ་བཞིའི་¥ལ་འKར་བ་ལས། ཡང་ཞིང་ གཡོ་བ་¡ང་གི་དSིལ་འཁོར་དང་། དེའི་*ེང་ ་“་ཡང་དང་ཡང་ ་འ>ིལ་བ་དང་། དེའི་*ེང་ ་ སའི་དSིལ་འཁོར་ཆེན་པོ་དང་། དེའི་*ེང་ ་མེའི་—ང་པོ་ཆེན་པོ་འབར་བ་རབ་4་འབར་བ་cན་4་ འབར་བ་མེ་¦ེ་གཅིག་4་འབར་བ་ཆགས་སོ། །དེའི་ནང་ ་དབང་@ག་ཆེན་པོ་འདོད་པ་ཙམ་ལས་ ཚངས་པའི་ ོ་9་ཆེན་པོ་གསལ་ཞིང་རབ་4་འབར་བར་འ ག་ལ། དེ་‰ིན་ཅིང་འRགས་པའི་ ནང་ནས་ཚངས་པ་གདོང་བཞི་པ་རལ་བ་ཅན་པŠ་ལ་གནས་པ་6ང་*ེ། དེ་འཇིག་Eེན་ ི་མེས་པོ་ ཡིན་པས། དེ་†ེ་]་ཐམས་ཅད་Kས་ནས་འཇིག་Eེན་ཐམས་ཅད་ཆགས་ཤིང་གནས་པར་འ‡ར་ ལ་། *ཚངས་པའི་ཁ་ནས་Wམ་ཟེ་དང་། དŸང་པ་ལས་;ལ་རིགས་དང་། བš་ལས་|ེ§་རིགས་ དང་། ¨ང་པ་ལས་དམངས་རིགས་†ེས་པར་ཁས་ལེན་ཅིང་། རེ་ཞིག་གདོལ་བའི་རིགས་ནི་ གང་ལས་†ེས་མི་ཤེས་སོ་ཞེས་ཟེར་རོ།* 81 །འདིས་འWེལ་བ་ནི་9་ཁས་ལེན་པར་Kེད་དེ། མེ་ དང་ ་བ་)་d་ནི་འKོར་བའི་འWེལ་བའོ། །žན་པའི་འWེལ་བ་ནིམེ་དང་ག•གས་)་dའོ། ། འzོད་པ་འ ་བའི་འWེལ་བ་ནི་མེ་དང་ག•གས་དང་žན་པ་ཉིད་)་dའོ། །འ ་བ་དང་žན་པའི་ མཚན་ཉིད་Sི་འWེལ་བ་ནི་མེ་དང་ ་བ་ལ་ཡོད་པའི་ག•གས་)་dའོ། །žན་པ་དང་འzོད་པ་འ ་ 81 Not found in the Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs and so perhaps an amplification on the part of the seventh Karma pa. Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 11a1, at this point reads ’brel ba dang tshad ma dpyad pa ni, introducing the passage that follows. The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 303 བའི་མཚན་ཉིད་Sི་འWེལ་བ་ནི་མེ་དང་ ་བ་ལ་ཡོད་པའི་ག•གས་དང་žན་པ་ཉིད་)་dའོ། །ཚད་ མ་ནི་ *ག མ་*ེ། །འzད་པའི་ཚད་མ། མངོན་ མ། |ེས་དཔག་གོ་ཞེས་ཟེར་རོ། །*82 * 83 རིགས་པ་ཅན་པ་ཕལ་ཆེར་Kེ་Wག་པ་དང་མsན་མོད་Sི། ཚད་མ་ལ་མངོན་ མ་ དང་། |ེས་དཔག་དང་། ཉེར་འཇལ་དང་། ,་ལས་6ང་བའི་ཚད་མ་དང་བཞིར་འདོད་ཅིང་། མངོན་ མ་ཡང་དོན་ཉེ་བར་ངེས་པའི་Eོག་པ་ཡིན་པར་འདོད་དོ། །དེའང་ཡོན་ཏན་ལ་དམིགས་ པ་>ད་པར་ཅན་ ི་ཤེས་པ་ནི་ཚད་མ། :ས་ལ་དམིགས་པ་>ད་པར་ཅན་ ི་ཤེས་པ་ནི་ཚད་མའི་ འWས་d་ཡིན་ནོ་ཞེས་ཟེར་རོ། །དེ་དག་གིས་Sང་¥ལ་z་རབ་དང་ ས་ལ་སོགས་པ་Eག་པར་ ཁས་ལེན་པས་འ ས་Kས་Jད་ཅིག་མར་མི་འདོད་ལ། བདག་དང་དབང་@ག་Kེད་པ་པོར་h་ བས་ཆོས་ཐམས་ཅད་བདག་མེད་པར་ཡང་ཁས་མི་ལེན་ནོ། ། གཉིས་པ་དེ་དགག་པ་*ལ། Kེ་Wག་པ་དགག་པ་དང་། རིགས་པ་ཅན་པ་དགག་ པའོ། །*84 དང་པོ་ནི། ¥ལ་zན་=མས་སོ་སོར་བEགས་ཏེ་ ོགས་ཆའི་དKེ་བས་གཞིགས་ནས་ རགས་པར་འ‡ར་བ་མི་<ིད་ཅིང་། རགས་པ་ཆ་ཤས་མེད་པར་ཡན་ལག་ཅན་ ི་:ས་ཡིན་ན། Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 11a4: gnyis khas len te phrad pa dang mngon sum dang rtags las/ byung ba rjes su dpag pa ste / phrad pa dang mngon sum ni cig par bzung ngo /. 83 Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 11a4: inserts gsum pa ni. 84 Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 11b2: ni gsum ste / bye brag pa’i rdzas dgag pa dang / tshad ma gsum du ’dod pa dgag pa dang / rig pa can gyi tshad ma dag (sic! = dgag) pa’o //. 82 304 * Matthew T. Kapstein བ,ིབས་པའི་ཡན་ལག་དང་། ཁ་བ{ར་བའི་ཡན་ལག་=མས་མ་བ,ིབས་པ་དང་། བ{ར་བའི་ཡན་ལག་ཅན་ ི་:ས་ཡིན་པས་མ་བ,ིབས་པ་དང་། རོ། །* 85 ཁ་མ་ ཁ་མ་བ{ར་བར་འ‡ར་ ོགས་ ས་གཉིས་འ6ང་བ་བཞི་ལས་:ས་གཞན་ཡིན་ན་ས་ལ་སོགས་པ་འ6ང་བ་ བཞི་ལ་ཤར་ལ་སོགས་པའི་ ོགས་དང་། འདས་པ་ལ་སོགས་པའི་ ས་མེད་པར་འ‡ར་ རོ། །:ས་གཞན་མ་ཡིན་ན། ས་ལ་སོགས་པ་རགས་པ་མི་Eག་པ་བཞིན་ ་ ོགས་དང་ ས་Sང་ མི་Eག་པར་འ‡ར་བས་Eག་པར་ཅི་)ར་©ང་། རིམ་ ིས་བ†ེད་པའི་]ར་མི་འ‡ར་ལ། མི་©ང་ངོ་། * ཡང་དབང་@ག་Eག་པ་འWས་d་འ3ོ་བ་ འ3ོ་བ་རིམ་ ིར་བ†ེད་ན་Eག་པའི་དངོས་པོར་ །ཚད་མས་ ལ་འzད་ནས་འGན་ན། བ]ད་ནས་འzད་པས་འGན། དངོས་ ་འzད་ནས་འGན་ནམ། དང་པོ་)ར་ན་ག•གས་,་Eོགས་པའི་ཚད་མ་མི་<ིད་པར་ འ‡ར་ལ།*86 གཉིས་པ་)ར་ན་མིག་ཤེས་Sིས་Sང་Oི་ལ་སོགས་པ་Eོགས་པར་འ‡ར་རོ། ། Appendix Appendix III: Recently discovered writings writings by Karma Pakshi The following list includes all writings attributed to Karma Pakshi that have so far become available to me: the 1978 publications of Karma Pakshi’s Auto> biographical Writings and Rgya>mtsho mtha’>yas>kyi skor, scanned documents Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 11b3–4: bsgribs pa dang ma bsgribs pa dang kha bsgyur ma bsgyur la sogs pa myed par ’gyur ro //. 86 Bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs, 11b6–12a1: gnyis pa ni phrad pa tshad ma yin na/ dngos su phrad pa dang dngos kyis ’brel par kho na tshad ma yin nam / brgyud pa’i phrad pa’ang tshad ma yin / dang po ltar na yon tan gyi chos rtogs pa’i tshad ma myi srid cing /. 85 The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 305 available through the Tibetan Buddhist Resource Center (TBRC), as well as a small number of items that are not (yet?) available through TBRC. My references to page numbers of the TBRC scans are to roman numerals pasted in the upper right hand corner or left side of each plate, and these do not necessarily correspond to the Tibetan page numbers. In some of the scanned texts, moreover, folios are missing, and this in some instances appears to be due to errors in scanning and not to defects of the original manuscripts. The present brief and tentative list does not attempt to document these points in detail. I am grateful to Charles Manson for sharing with me his notes on Karma Pakshi’s writings, which I have been able to compare usefully with my own while completing the present Appendix. 1. The 1978 Gangtok publications (i) The Autobiographical Writings of the Second Karma>pa (a) 1–55: grub chen karmā pakśi’i bka’ ’buṃ las / nyid kyi rnam par thar pa gdug pa tshar gcod gzi brjid ’od ’bar bzhugso // (b) 57–118: grub chen karmā pakśi’i bka’ ’buṃ las / nyid kyi rnaṃ thar dus 3 dus med gcig tu rtogs shing rtsal cheon rdzoṭ pa’i gleng gzhi bzhugso // (c) 119–35: grub chen karmā pakśi’i bka’ ’buṃ las / nyid kyi rnam thar lhan skyes ye shes dgongs pa lung bstan bzhugs pa’i dbu phyogs so // (ii) Rgya mtsho mtha’ yas kyi skor Refer to Kapstein 1985: 359n2, for a discussion of problems in the alpha> betical ordering given in the margins. Here, I just list the individual works in the order in which they appear. Volume I (a) 1–9: bshad lung sbyor bkod rgya mtsho mtha’ yas 306 Matthew T. Kapstein (b) 11–208: bstan pa rgya mtsho mtha’ yas kyi spyi gzhung chen mo rtog pa rab ’byams chos dbyings ye shes lnga ldan (incomplete: missing 11– 24 and 193–206) (c) 209–470: glegs bam ’dir bstan pa rgya mtsho mtha’ yas kyi bshad pa phun sum tshogs pa rgya mtsho mtha’ yas (d) 471–601: bstan pa rgya mtsho mtha’ yas byin gyis brlabs pa’i bka’ chen (e) 603–37: ’dod pa rgya mtsho mtha’ yas (f) 639–47: skyes rabs sbas mchod la nyams su blangs pa Volume II (g) 1–70: gsar rnying la sogs pa’i bzhed pa so sor ’byed pa gsang ba rgya mtsho mtha’ yas (h) 71–221: bya ba’i rgyud dang spyod pa’i rgyud rnal ’byor gyi rgyud rnams kyi don brtan la ’bebs par byed pa phyi rgyud gsum gyi rgya mtsho mtha’ yas (note that the title given in the romanised table of contents was mangled in this case). (i) 223–34: pha rgyud ma rgyud thabs dang shes rab dbyer med kyi rgyud la gtogs tshad kyi klad don gyi gzhung (j) 235–453: gsang sngags rnam par bla na med pa’i rgyud sde chen po rnams kyi bzhed pa ma hā yo ga gsar pa’i rgya mtsho mtha’ yas (k) 455–524: mkha’ ’gro yid bzhin nor bu’i gzhung 2. Scanned texts in the TBRC archive W22466, W22467, W22468, and W22469 appear to be volumes 3–4 (ga–nga) of a collection of Karma Pakshi’s writings preserved at Dpal spungs Monastery in the Sde dge district of Khams. W22340 appears to preserve parts of a dif> ferent set: W22340: Including parts of several different volumes; the texts it contains are out of order and the scanned pages begin with 94a. The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 307 (a) From volume ga. 94a: a cover page that is very poorly scanned, the first syllables not clearly legible. The colophon of this text (120b), however, establishes that it should read: gsang ba rgya mtsho mtha’ yas bzhugs. (b) From volume ga. 1a: mdo sde rgya mtsho mtha’ yas bzhugs. Ending on 55b. (c) From volume ca. The first page, 46a, is the obverse of Tibetan folio 46, perhaps the second folio of the text. A note at the top of the folio, written in a fine hand and barely legible due to the poor quality of the scan, seems to read rdzogs chen dbang gi chu bo bzhugs. The text concludes on folio 80b. (d) From volume ca. The first page (81a) gives the title in a fine hand above the beginning of the text: khyab ’jug rgya mtsho mtha’ yas. Ending on 120a. All reverse folio sides from 109b through 118b are unfortunately missing. Folio 120b is laid out to resemble a title page, but is illegible (though it does appear to contain the syllables khyab ’jug.) (e) From volume cha. Beginning on folio 1a: dbu’i phyogs lags s+ho. Above this is a partially illegible note in fine hand: sde (?) X X a nu yo ga bzhugs. Ending on 94a (94b is blank). (f) From volume cha. Beginning on folio 95a: a nu yo ga’i chings bzhugs (written in fine hand above the first line of text). Ending on 123b. (g) From volume cha. Beginning on folio 124a: dbang gi bstan pa rgya mtsho mtha’ yas bzhugs (written in fine hand above the first line of text). Ending on 133b. (h) From volume cha. Beginning on folio 134a: gsang ba’i (?) ma hā yo ga’i rgya mtsho mtha’ yas bzhugs (written in fine hand above the first line of text). Ending on 228a (228b is blank). (i) An incomplete text, lacking title page, perhaps from another collection and numbered 102a–125b. The colophon (125a) indicates it to be the phun sum tshogs pa rgya mtsho mtha’ yas mdor bsdus pa. 308 Matthew T. Kapstein (j) Some miscellanous pages from volume ga (apparently the same volume as (a) and (b) above): 126a, 127a, 128a. The reverse is blank in each case and an English label attached to 128a reads “redos.” (k) The final part of the first volume of an unrelated work, on plates numbered 449a–477b, and followed (478a) by an interesting note attributing the text to the eighth Karma pa, Mi bskyod rdo rje stating that the work was borrowed during the sixth month of an earth tiger year (sa stag) from the Bla brang dpe mdzod—the library of the bla ma’s residence—for the purpose of carving blocks for publication (spar brko). The text is called karma pa’i dgongs pa gsal bar byed pa’i bstan bcos thar pa’i lam chen bgrod pa’i shing rta, and a ms. containing the missing first folios of this same volume is given in the TBRC as W00KG04035. (None of the second volume has yet been located.) Though the work, a very detailed tantric lam rim, is attributed in the note just mentioned to the eighth Karma pa, it is clear that it is in fact based on his oral teaching and that the author of the written text was a disciple, possibly Dpa’ bo Gtsug lag phreng ba. W22466: The mo gho ding ri’i sgra tshad in the same manuscript that I have consulted here, but missing the title page and beginning on folio 1b. A complete scan of the same manuscript, however, will be found in W00KG03996 below. W22467: Volume nga from a collection of Karma Pakshi’s works, bearing a general title on p. 1—chos thaṃd gtan la phabsba yongsu mya ngan las ’da’ ka rgya mtsho mtha’ yas dang / mdoe rgy'o mtha’ yas kyi chings dang / ma rig ’khrul ba’i rtsa rgyud dang / theg rim dgu’i spyi chings dang / sde snod gsuṃ gyi chings dang / chos tshan lnga yod— and containing the following individual texts: (a) 2–219: no title given, though the general title above designates this text to be the yongs su mya ngan las ’da’ ka rgya mtsho mtha’ yas, and a The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 309 similar title is mentioned passim in the text itself, for instance on p. 153, where we find shākya thub pa’i ’da’ ka ma’i rgya mtsho mtha’ yas, and p. 172, where it is sku gsum rangin [=rang bzhin] gyis gnas pa’i ’da’ ka ma’i rgya mtsho mtha’ yas. (b) 221–65: mdo sde’i chings bzhugs so. But called at the conclusion mdo sde bstan pa rgya mtsho mtha’ yas kyi chings. (c) 267–70: ma rig ’khrul pa’i rtsa rgyud bzhugs pa’i dbu phyogs lags so. (d) 271–74: sde snod gsum gyis ching bzhugs pa’i dbu phyogs lags so. (e) 275–80: theg pa drug kyis ching bzhugs pa’i dbu phyogs lagso. (f) 281–373: byin gyis brlabs pa’i bka’i bstan pa rgya mtsho mtha’ yas bzhugs so / byin gyis brlabs pa’i bka’i bstan pa rgya mtsho mtha’ yasrab ’byaṃs chos kyi phung po bka’ gsuṃ bye ba phrag brgya’i rtsa ba theg pa cheno byuṃb seṃda’i gzhi laṃ bru’i gdaṃs ngag rnaṃs bzhuṭ so. This last work is not mentioned in the general title of the volume. Possibly, within the general structure of the Rgya mtsho mtha’ yas skor, (a)–(e) form a distinct subset, while (f) is (or is part of) a separate section of the cycle. W22468: Volume nga from a collection of Karma Pakshi’s works. The layout and calli> graphy being closely similar to those of W22467, both of these volumes were perhaps parts of the same the fourth volume (nga) of a set. The contents of the present volume are: (a) 1–23: ’dod pa rgya mtsho mtha’ yas bzhugs so. On this work, given also in Karma Pakshi 1978a, vol. I, text (e), refer to Kapstein 2000: 101–103. (b) 25–85: shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa’i rab dbye bzhugs lags so. W22469: Cover title, p. 1: ’phaṭ pa ’jaṃ pa (!) dang ’jal nas zhus pa ste / zhu len rgya mtsho mtha’ yas bzhugso. This is the sole text contained in this volume, the 310 Matthew T. Kapstein last folio of which is (in the Tibetan pagination) 101. The arabic page numbers are 1–200. The discrepancy (as Tibetan folio 101a–b should be equivalent to arabic 201–202) is due to a single folio that bears the double numbering 44–45 (arabic 87–88), and apparently not to a missing folio. A series of digital photographs of the same manuscript, which are in my possession, demonstrate clearly that the title page bears the label ga; but owing to the somewhat pale red ink in which this is written, it does not appear in the TBRC scan. Also missing from the latter is an interesting handwritten note, in a refined cursive (dbu med) script, preceding the title page, but on paper similar (so far as one can determine from the photograph) to that used in the preparation of the ms. itself: rgyal ba kun gyi brtse ba’i thuṭ rje ni // dkar gsal gangs rir sprin gzhon gyis ’khyud lta’i (?) // ’gro ba’i mgon po spyan ras gziṭ dbang dang // tha dad mi phyed karma yab sras rgyal // phyag rgya chen po dang rdzoṭ pa chen po la zhuṭ pa’i gang zag de dag las gsungs pa’i theg rim dgu’i rnam par bzhag pa rtoṭ ’dod pa rnaṃs kyis bstan pa rgya mtsho mtha’ yas kyi gzhung ’di la gziṭ shing nan tar du nges pa drangs na don gyi gteng (? or: gting) bsaṃ gyi mi khyab pa de dag dang / khyad par du’ang ’jaṃ dpal gyi zhu len ’dir shintu zab pa’i gnad mang po mnga’ bas gal che zhing / tshig ’gaṭ (?) phye mi ’grigs pa lta’u cung zad snang na yang87 rje grub thob kyi gsung yin pa tha snyad gdaṭ bya’i yul ma yin cing rton pa bzhi dang ldan pa’i shes rab kyis nges par byas na dpal gsang ba’i snying po las ’phros pa theg dgu’i gnad ’di ’dra rgyas pa gang du’ang med pa de’i phyir rul mun gyi gnas su bzhuṭ mi ’jug par gziṭ shing don shes pa gsol ba lan stong du ’debs // zhes pa’ang dgeong [= dge slong] chos smra ba bstan pa’i nyi mas so // manggalaṃ //. This is followed by a brief notation in similar handwriting, but much finer, that I find to be only partially readable: ’dis snyan rang dgra bcom pa � ung soṭ shes bya mtha’ dag gi steng nas stong nyid ���’dug // 87 [� = illegible syllable] Though the reading of the syllable following tshig is uncertain, it is clear that this clause as a whole means “although the expressions seem as if somewhat miscon> strued….” Refer also to n. 6 above. The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 311 W00KG03996: Under this record number, the TBRC archive includes two volumes from a single collection: Volume I is in fact the same manuscript also reproduced as W22469 and W22466, but missing the title page of the former. Together they formed volume ga in a collection of Karma Pakshi’s works. Volume II is in fact the same manuscript also reproduced as W22467, but the scan here is incomplete and concludes with p. 234. W22467 + W22468 seem to have been volume nga of the same collection as the volume ga given here as volume I. 3. Other available manuscripts A number of high quality digital images of manuscripts containing writings by Karma Pakshi became available to the present writer some years ago. Three of the works in question are now available in the TBRC archive as noted above: mo gho ding ri’i sgra tshad (W22466), mdo sde’i chings (W22467(b)), and zhu lan rgya mtsho mtha’ yas (W22469). A fourth manuscript included among them, however, has neither appeared in the TBRC collection, nor, to the best of my knowledge, elsewhere. In terms of the quality of the calligraphy and the overall preparation of the manuscript, it is surely the finest of the manuscripts of Karma Pakshi’s writings to have surfaced so far, though it is by no means free of apparent errors. Its 257 folios contain one text, the title page of which is unfortunately worn and not fully legible, in contrast with the almost perfect clarity of the entire body of the text that follows. Its first line, inscribed in dbu can script with consonants in red and vowel signs in black, is quite clear for the first six syllables: bstan pa rgya mtsho’i dbu’ phyogs. The seventh and final syllable of the title appears rather like begs, which cannot be correct, though perhaps this should be legs. (I imagine that it may have been originally lags, as we find so often in the titles given above.) The second line, in black ink in dbu med, and in a finer hand, cannot be satisfactorily deciphered. The content of the work, which is clearly related by title to the several sections of the bstan pa 312 Matthew T. Kapstein rgya mtsho mtha’ yas already known from the first volume of the 1978 Gangtok Rgya mtsho mtha’ yas skor (see above), offers a very detailed survey of views and paths, beginning with those of the mu stegs pa and culminating with the Great Perfection, according to the threefold division of non>realisation, erroneous understanding, and realised gnosis: ma rtogs pa ’gro drug gi ’khrul gzhi dang, log par rtogs pa mu stegs kyi lta ba…dang, rtogs pa’i ye shes (fol. 2a). This scheme is in turn based on Karma Pakshi’s preferred citation from the Guhyagarbha Tantra, which he repeats at intervals throughout the Limitless Ocean Cycle: Intention, Discipline, and Esotericism, Non>realisation and mistaken realisation, Partial realisation and not realising what is genuine Give rise to doubts about this absolute.88 That the work given here may have been of particular importance within the structure of the Rgya mtsho mtha’ yas skor as a whole may be gathered from the seventh Karma pa’s probable use of it, as shown in Appendix II above. 88 Refer to Kapstein 2000: 104–105. The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 313 BIBLIOGRAPHY Bareau, A. 1955. Les sectes bouddhiques du petit véhicule. Publications de l’École française d’Extrême>Orient XXXVIII. Paris: École française d’Extrême> Orient. Baumer. C. 2008. The Church of the East: An Illustrated History of Assyrian Christian> ity. London: I.B. Taurus. Beal, S. 1884. Si>yu ki: Buddhist Records of the Western World. London: Trübner. Chavannes, E. 1904. Inscriptions et pièces de chancellerie chinoises de l’époque mongole. T’oung Pao, Second Series 5(4), 357–447. Demieville, P. 1973 [1957]. La situation religieuse en Chine au temps de Marco Polo. In Choix d'Études Sinologiques. Leiden: Brill, pp. 166–209. Dpa’ bo Gtsug lag phreng ba. 1986. Chos ’byung mkhas pa’i dga’ ston, 2 vols. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1986. Dpal brtsegs bod yig dpe rnying zhib ’jug khang. 2004. ’Bras spungs dgon du bzhugs su gsol ba’i dpe rnying dkar chag. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang (= Minzu Chunbanshe). Dudjom Rinpoche, Jikdrel Yeshe Dorje. 1991. The Nyingma School of Tibetan Buddh> ism: Its Fundamentals and History. Trans. G. Dorje and M. Kapstein. Boston: Wisdom Publications. 2 vols. Franco, E. 1997. Dharmakīrti on Compassion and Rebirth. Wiener Studien zur Tibeto> logie und Buddhismuskunde 38. Vienna: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien, Universität Wien. Hayes, R. 1988. Principled atheism in the Buddhist scholastic tradition. Journal of Indian Philosophy 16, 5–28. Heissig, W. 1973. Les religions de la Mongolie. In G. Tucci and W. Heissig, Les relig> ions du Tibet et de la Mongolie. Trans. R. Sailley. Paris: Payot, pp. 337–489. Jackson, D.P. 2009. Patron & Painter: Situ Panchen and the Revival of the Encamp> ment Style. New York: Rubin Museum of Art. Jackson, P. 2009 [1990]. The Mission of Friar William of Rubruck. Indianapolis: Hackett. Jackson, R.R. 1993. Is Enlightenment Possible? Dharmakīrti and rGyal tshab rje on Knowledge, Rebirth, No>Self and Liberation. Ithaca: Snow Lion. 314 Matthew T. Kapstein Kapstein, M.T. 1985 Religious syncretism in 13th century Tibet: The Limitless Ocean Cycle. In B.N. Aziz and M.T.Kapstein (eds.) Soundings in Tibetan Civilization. Delhi: Manohar (rprt. Kathmandu: Vajra, 2009), pp. 358– 71. —— 2000. The Tibetan Assimilation of Buddhism: Conversion, Contestation and Memory. Oxford University Press. —— 2009. Preliminary remarks on the Grub mtha’ chen mo of Bya ’Chad kha ba Ye shes rdo rje. In E. Steinkellner et al. (eds.) Sanskrit Manuscripts in China. Beijing: China Tibetology Publishing House, pp. 137–52. Karma pa Chos grags rgya mtsho. 2001 [1502]. Tshad ma legs par bshad pa thams cad kyi chu bo yongs su ‘du ba rigs pa’i gzhung lugs kyi rgya mtsho. Stod cha. In Bka’ brgyud pa’i gsung rab pod drug pa: Tshad ma. Xining: Mtsho sngon mi rigs dpe skrun khang. Karma Pakshi. 1978a. The Autobiographical Writings of the Second Karma>pa Karma Pakśi and Spyi>lan ring>mo. Gangtok: Gonpo Tseten. —— (but attributed by the publisher to Karma pa III Rang byung rdo rje). 1978b. Rgya>mtsho mtha’>yas>kyi skor. 2 vols. Gangtok: Gonpo Tseten. Karma pa Rang byung rdo rje. 2006 Karma pa Rang byung rdo rje’i gsung ’bum Xining: Mtshur phu mkhan po lo yag bkra shis. van der Kuijp, L.W.J. 1995. ‘Baγśi’ and Baγśi>s in Tibetan historical, biographical and lexicographical texts. Central Asiatic Journal 39(2), 275–302. —— Forthcoming. The Tibetan Expression “bod wooden door” (bod shing sgo) and its probable Mongol antecedent. In Shen Weirong (ed.) Festschrift for Professor Wang Yao. Lamotte, É. 1976. Histoire du Bouddhisme Indien. Louvain: Institut Orientaliste. Miyasaka, Y. 1972. Pramāṇavārttika>kārikā (Sanskrit and Tibetan). In Acta Indologica II, 1–296. Obermiller, E. 1931–32. History of Buddhism (Chos>ḥbyung) by Bu>ston. I. Part. The Jewelry of Scripture and II. Part. The History of Buddhism in India and Tibet. Heidelberg: O. Harrassowitz. In Suzuki Research Foundation Reprint Series 5. Patil, P. 2009. Against a Hindu God: Buddhist Philosophy of Religion in India. New York: Columbia University Press. Pelliot, P. 1996. L’Inscription nestorienne de Si>ngan>fou, edited with supplements by Antonino Forte. Kyoto/Paris: Italian School of East Asian Studies and Collège de France. The Dialectic of Eternal Heaven 315 Richardson, H. 1998 [1958–59]. The Karma>pa sect: A historical note. In M. Aris (ed.) High Peaks, Pure Earth: Collected Writings on Tibetan History and Culture. London: Serindia Publications, pp. 337–78. Shangs pa gser phreng. 1996. Shangs pa bka’ brgyud bla rabs kyi rnam thar. Gangs can rig mdzod 28. Lhasa: Bod ljongs bod yig dpe rnying dpe skrun khang. Sherab Sangpo 西热桑布. 2009. edition). 中国 文“元版”考 (Ancient Tibetan books of the Yuan 学 (China Tibetology) 2009(1), 41–50. Slaje, W. 2005. Locating the Mok opāya. In J. Hanneder, ed., The Mok opāya, Yogavāsi ha and Related Texts. Aachen: Shaker Verlag, pp. 21–35. Sman sdong mtshams pa. 1976. Chos>rje Karma>pa sku>’phreng rim>byon>gyi rnam> thar mdor>bsdus dpag>bsam khri>shing,. In The Collected Works of Sman> sdong>mtshams>pa Rin>po>che Karma>nges>don>bstan>rgyas, vol. II, pp. 1– 471. Bir, H.P.: D. Tsondu Senghe, 1976. Strong, J.S. 1992. The Legend and Cult of Upagupta: Sanskrit Buddhism in North India and Southeast Asia. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Watters, T. 1904. On Yuan Chwang’s Travels in India, 629–645 A.D. London: Royal Asiatic Society. Xuanzang 玄奘. 2008. Da Tang Xiyuji jiaozhu 大唐西域記校注, Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju.