CHOS ‘BYUNG

In this section, I will provide a brief survey of “chos ‘byung,” that is, “dharma histories” (literally, “the arising of dharma”) that include sections on Chöd.

The genre of “chos ‘byung” includes literary texts that provide details of oral and/or written transmissions of teachings.

While chos ‘byung often provide extensive lineage information, they are not comprehensive. Information about who received what teaching from whom is often scant, though these texts will sometimes mention certain details about the transmission, such as the place where the

transmission was given, when it was given, who was present, and the particular occasion that precipitated the transmission. For my purposes, these texts record and map useful information on teaching lineages, which is important for charting processes of legitimation and renewal of Chöd from the perspective of a particular figure or institution.

Deb ther sngon po (late 15th to early 16th centuries)78 The earliest discussion of Machik and Chöd for which we can approximate a date is contained in The Blue Annals (Deb ther sngon po) by Gö Lotsawa Zhonnupel (‘Gos lo tswa ba Gzhon nu dpal, 1392-1481; Karma Kagyü), a chos ‘byung composed in the late fifteenth century (1139-62). In the section on Chöd, Zhijé is not foregrounded (in contrast to other sources which characterize Chöd as a branch of Zhijé). This source contains a relatively brief biographical

sketch with some lineage information as well as information on teachings that Machik received; it also mentions other figures who were key to the early development of Chöd. The transmission lineage of Buddhist Chöd from this text will be outlined in the next section of this study.79 Sections other than the one explicitly discussing Chöd have also provided me useful information for the broader genealogical study I am constructing.

Dam pa’i chos kyi ‘khor lo bsgyur ba rnams kyi byung ba gsal bar byed pa mkhas pa’i dga’ ston (mid-16th century)

This source is attributed to Dpa’ bo Gtsug lag ‘phreng ba (1503-1605, Karma Kagyü);80 its composition has been dated to 1545-1565.81 This history is traditionally considered reputable, 78 I agree with Kollmar-Paulenz (1998, 11) that this is the earliest roughly datable source; however, I am no longer

sure we can definitively date it to 1478 as is traditional. I am influenced by Leonard W. J. van der Kuijp’s argument

against the traditional belief that ‘Gos lo tsa ba finished The Blue Annals before his death, positing that it was completed by ‘Gos lo tsa ba’s disciples after he himself had passed away (2006, 1). Regarding Gzhon nu dpal’s scholarly influences, van der Kuijp writes, “It is probably best to characterize him as a non-partial scholar in the

sense that his training and scholarly interests led him to pursue textual studies that pertained especially to the Bka’ brgyud pa, Rnying ma pa, and Bka’ gdams pa traditions. Indeed, he shares these features with a good number of other fifteenth-century clerical associates of the Phag mo gru court at Sne’u gdong such as, to name but two, Byams

gling paṇ chen bsod nams rnam rgyal (1400-1475) and Zhwa lu lo tsā ba chos skyong bzang po (1441-1528)” (2006, 7-8). I have looked for mention of Machik in other early biographical catalogues including the Deb ther dmar po (composed between 1346 and 1363) by Tshal pa Kun dga’ rdo rje (1309-1364) to no avail; however, as Kurtis Schaeffer notes (1995, 6), this text does contain a biography of Rangjung Dorjé.

79 My reconstruction of this source material varies from those provided by Edou (1996) and Kollmar-Paulenz (1993).

80 Gtsug lag ‘phreng ba, the second Dpa’ bo of Gnas gnan (1504-1566) was the de facto regent of the Karmapa lineage while the 5th Zhwa dmar and 4th Rgyal tshab were searching for the 9th Karmapa; at the end of his life he

but it does include hagiographical materials. As well as providing a brief outline of the philosophical underpinnings of the tradition, it provides a brief biographical sketch of Machik and information on transmission lineages. The Mkhas pa’i dga’ ston describes a Chöd lineage from Padampa Sangyé to Sma ra ser po and then Smyon pa be ro, as well as one from Kyotön Sonam Lama to Machik Labdrön; in addition, it divides the transmission from Machik into “the Student or Instruction lineage” (slob brgyud) and “the [[[spiritual]]] Son lineage” (sras brgyud).

This text does mention that Machik met Padampa Sangyé, but does not explicitly say that she received Chöd teachings from him (1369-1371).

Chos ‘byung bstan pa’i padma rgyas pa’i nyin byed82 (late 16th century) This history, composed between 1575 and 1580, has a short entry on Chöd by ‘Brug pa Padma dkar po (1527-1592; ‘Brug pa Kagyü). Although the tradition is mentioned, it is not discussed in much detail. This work mentions transmissions of Chöd (“spyod” rather than “gcod”) teachings by Padampa Sangyé to Sönam Lama and Rma ra ser po, and it provides a short biography of Machik, including the names of her major students. Chos ‘byung ngo mtshar rgya mtsho83 (early 17th century)

Zhab drung Ngag wang Nam gyal (1571-1626) of the Stag lung Kagyü tradition initially composed this treatise in 1609; it is said to have been reedited by Ngag wang Ten pai Nyi ma (b. 1788). The section on Chöd is even briefer than in other sources and provides no new lived in the Karmapa's monastery where he gave the dge tshul vows and many initiations to the 9th Karmapa Dbang phyug rdo rje.

81 See Kollmar-Paulenz (1993, 9 n.32) who is following S. Richardson in Lokesh Chandra’s edition of the Mkhas pa’i dga ston, Vol. 1, ix. 82 See folia 212a2-214a2. 83 See folia 19b-20a.

information. It is worth mentioning if only to demonstrate a continuation of historical awareness of the Chöd tradition. Dam pa’i chos kyi byung tshul legs par bshad pa bstan pa rgya mtshor ‘jug pa’i gru chen zhes bya ba rtsom ‘phro kha skong bcas84 (17th century) The tenth abbot of the Sakya monastery of Ngor, Dkon mchog lhun grub (1497-1557) left this chos ‘byung unfinished at his death. It was rediscovered by the 25th abbot, Sangs rgyas phun tshogs (1649-1705), who resumed work on it and completed it in 1692; it was published in 1705 at Sde dge. It is most remarkable for being a Buddhist history that emphasizes the Sakya pa lineages, while also including a discussion of Chöd.85 This Sakya chos ‘byung describes the transmission of the “Pho Chöd” and “Mo Chöd” lineages. It mentions the transmission of the pith of the Chöd collection (gcod skor gnad) to Sönam Lama and Sma ra ser po (of Yar lungs)

from Padampa Sangyé in Gtsang on the latter’s third visit to Tibet. According to this text, on Padampa Sangyé’s fifth trip he travelled to Dingri (Ding ri) and taught the collection of Chöd transmissions; this teaching was twofold and would be transmitted as Pho Chöd (following Sma ra ser po) and Mo Chöd (following Machik).86

84 For the discussion of Chöd, see folia 167a-b (335-336). 85 As I have explained elsewhere in this study, Chöd teachings were not as prominent in the Sakyapa schools as they were in other Tibetan Buddhist schools. This text employs the classification of “pho” and “mo” when discussing Chöd transmission lineages.

86 “de yang dam pa nas brgyud pa’i gcod skor la / pho gcod mo gcod gnyis las / dang po ni sma ra ser po nas brgyud pa dang / gnyis pa ni ma gcig nas brgyud pa la zer ro / / ma gcig ni grwa pa mngon shes las rab tu byung zhing” (335).

‘Phags yul rgya nag chen po bod dang sog yul du dam pa’i chos ‘byung dpag bsam ljon bzang87 (18th century)

Written by the head of Dgon lung byams pa gling, Sum pa mkhan po Ye shes dpal ‘byor (1704-1788, Geluk pa), this text provides an elaboration on earlier accounts of the Chöd tradition. Kollmar-Paulenz88 (1988, 30-31, n. 52; original source reference 375, 22-23) points out a passage explicitly acknowledging the direct transmission of Chöd teachings on the four Negative Forces according to the Prajñāpāramitā from Padampa Sangyé to Machik;89 as is

discussed earlier in this chapter, this connection is not easy to establish definitively. This chos ‘byung provides an important example of intersections between historical and biographical materials, as Kollmar-Paulenz has also noticed (1993, 13). Along with a biography of Machik, a lineage of “Mo Chöd ” is briefly traced. Kollmar-Paulenz (1993, 14) observes that one unusual component of Ye shes dpal ‘byor’s chronology is that the Chöd tradition precedes the Zhijé tradition, contrary to other accounts.

Bstan ‘dzin gyi skyes bu rgya bod du byon pa’i ming gi grangs (18th century) Another eighteenth-century (1777) Geluk pa history was composed by Klong rdol bla ma Ngag dbang blo bzang (1719-1794). This text has a couple of passing mentions of Machik and Chöd.90 The most notable element of this brief account of Machik’s life is that Ngag dbang blo bzang explicitly claims that Machik was a student of and in a consort relationship with Padampa 87 See 374-379.

88 See Sarat Chandra Das (ed.), Pag sam jon zang, Part II, History of Tibet from Early Times to 1745 A.D., edited

with an analytical list of contents in English (Calcutta, 1908). I have not yet had the opportunity to see a copy of this text. 89 “dam pa dang mjal te sher mdo’i bdud l’eu las gsungs pa’i thogs bcas thogs med sogs kyi bdud bzhi thad kar gcod

byed kyi gdams pa thob cing.” Kollmar-Paulenz (1993, 13-14) also briefly mentions this text and its discussion of the Zhijé and Chöd schools, noting that the transmission of mo gcod is associated with Machik Labdron.

90 See Volume za, including a reference to her lung bstan on 5r; to Chöd on 27r; and to her place of birth and family 32v.

Sangyé.91 This claim continues to be repeated by contemporary Western and Tibetan individuals from this point forward; however, given that Ngag dbang blo bzang doesn’t cite his sources, we are not sure of its provenance or veracity.92 Bde bar gshegs pa’i bka’ dgongs ‘grel bstan bcos ‘gyur ro cog par du sgrub pa’i tshul las nye bar brtsums pa’i gtam yang dag par brjod pa dkar chag yid bzhin nor bu’i phreng ba (18th century)

This text is part of the collection by Dkon mchog ‘jigs med dbang po (1728-1791; Geluk pa), the eleventh Khri of Bla brang bkra shis ‘khyil, who was recognized as the second

incarnation of ‘Jam dbyangs bzhad pa. The version I have accessed is in the Co ne’i bstan ‘gyur gyi dkar chag yid bzhin nor bu'i phreng ba, which includes a section on Chöd in the third chapter entitled “Bstan ‘dzin rnams kyi bstan pa ji ltar bskyangs pa’i le’u,” with a subchapter entitled “Bod gangs can gyi ljongs su bstan pa ji ltar dar ba’i tshul” (folia 142b-143a). Grub mtha’ shel gyi me long93 (late 17th - early 18th centuries)

This text was composed by Thu’u bkwan Blo bzang chos kyi nyi ma (1738-1802; Kadampa; Dga’ ldan Geluk) and completed in 1802.94 This source has one chapter on Zhijé which includes information on Chöd and echoes The Blue Annals. The section on Chöd focuses 91 “yum chen mo’i sprul pa ma gcig lab kyi sgron ma ‘khrungs yul ni / E lab kyi ‘dab grong mtsho mer mo / yab chos

bla dbang phyugs mgon / yum klu ma ‘bum lcam dpal skyid kyi sras mor ‘khrungs / lo tsatsha ba khye gad ‘khor lo grags dang sku mched yin / pha gcig dam pa sangs rgyas kyi slob ma dang yab yum du gyur / dgung lo dgu bcu go

gcig / mang ‘ga’ zhig gi dgu bcu rtsa lnga dang rtsa brgyad bar du bzhugs zer / sras ra dgra grub be phyis su rgyal ba don grub du grags so” (32v, emphasis added).

92 Many Tibetans have also spoken of the consort relationship between Padampa and Machik to me in conversation. Kollmar-Paulenz (1988, 22) cites a different edition of this text and remarks that, according to her research, this “is

the only historiographical text which considers Ma gcig being the tantric consort of her teacher, although this is often asserted in Western works, cf. for example A. Ferrari, Mkhyen brtse’s Guide to the Holy Places of Central Tibet, Roma, 1958, p. 153, n. 543, and G. Tucci, Tibetan Painted Scrolls, Roma, 1949, I, p. 92.” One could also include Willis 1987, 98 and Samuel 1993, 477.

93 See chapter five on Zhijé, which includes information on Chöd. 94 For more on this figure and his work, see Gene Smith’s 1969 article "Philosophical, Biographical, and Historical Works of Thu'u bkwan Blo bzang chos kyi nyi ma" (2001, 147-70).

on its doctrinal tradition with a survey of the lineages and its general philosophical teachings, view and practice.

Bstan pa'i snying po gsang chen snga 'gyur nges don zab mo'i chos kyi byung ba gsal bar byed pa'i legs mkhas pa dga' byed ngo mtshar gtam gyi rol mtsho (n.d.) The Snga ‘gyur chos ‘byung is mentioned by Kollmar-Paulenz (1993, 16-17), but I have not been able to locate a copy anywhere. It is attributed to the late-18th/early-19th century Nyingma author Gu ru kra shi, a.k.a Stag sgang mkhas mchog ngag dbang blo gros. According to Kollmar-Paulenz, there is a short passage on Brgyud pa’i gcod kyi skor (folia 111b3-112b4), but it is of little value since it only repeats information, including a short biography of Machik, that is obtainable from other sources.

Theg pa'i sgo kun las 'dus pa gsung rab rin po che'i mdzod bslab pa gsum legs par ston pa'i bstan bcos shes bya kun khyab95 (mid-19th century) This study by the great Kagyü (and “ris med”) scholar Jamgön Kongtrül (1813-1899) is dated by Gene Smith (2001, 237) to 1863-1864. In this work, Chöd is considered to be a branch of the Zhijé tradition associated with Padampa Sangyé, although Kongtrül elsewhere (for example, in his Treasury of Instructions [[[Gdams ngag mdzod]]] collection and in his commentary on Chöd practice) classifies Chöd as independent of Zhijé.96 Often referred to as “encyclopedic,”

this source includes factual data as well as narrative elaborations often included in hagiographical sources to contextualize Chöd from a Kagyü perspective. The section on Chöd is

reminiscent of the information provided in The Blue Annals.97 However, it does include relevant 95 Chöd is discussed on folia 192a-194a in the section on Zhijé. 96 Reference to Chöd as a branch (yan lag) of Zhijé is seen in other sources such as the chos ‘byung by Padma rnam rgyal discussed below. 97 Note that it also includes the etymological discussion found in sources such as The Blue Annals and the Grub

citations from source materials (including The Great Speech Chapter and Le’u lag texts I have translated and included as appendices to the present study) and Kongtrül’s interpretation of these sources. Kongtrül cites the Zab don thugs kyi snying po by Smin gling lo chen Dharma śrī (1654-1718, Nyingma) on the topic of choosing an appropriate location for the practice of certain Chöd visualizations.98

Ma gcig mkha’ ‘gro snyan rgyud lam zab rgyun gyi rnal ‘byor bde bkod pa99 (19th century) Written by Smon lam Mtha’ yas rgya mtsho (b. 1863, Geluk), this historical survey is in a section of the text entitled Man ngag zab mo bdud kyi Gcod yul stan thog cig ma’i gzhung (291- 436) in the Geluk Gcod tshogs compilation. This text includes an extended discussion of the

transmission lineages that varies somewhat from other studies. The work also includes an analysis of the teachings that argues against any misunderstanding of their multiplicity and for a more uniform view of the tradition. One of the ways in which it homogenizes and legitimates Chöd teachings is through its representation of the Chöd lineage beginning with a prediction of

the Buddha, then moving to the Dharma ruler Khri srong lde btsan, on to Padmasambhava, and then to Ye shes mtsho rgyal as Tārā as Machik.100 Snga 'gyur rdo rje theg pa gtso bor gyur pa'i sgrub rgyud shing rta brgyad kyi byung ba brjod pa'i gtam mdor bsdus legs bshad padma dkar po'i rdzing bu101 (late 19th-early 20th century) mtha’ shel gyi me long.

98 Dharmaśrī’s text might be one of the earliest discussions of the role of place in Chöd practice. 99 The relevant chos ‘byung materials begin on folio 307 of the Chos tshogs. Neither Kollmar-Paulenz nor Savvas

discusses this source. I have made a working translation of this document. 100 In Gcod tshogs 291-436; 307.3. 101 Chöd is discussed as a branch of Zhijé on folia 241-242. Kollmar-Paulenz (1993, 17) gives the composition date of this text as 1850, which is not likely given the dates of Padma rnam rgyal.

Although this work, by the famous Nyingma scholar Zhe chen rgyal tshab Padma rnam rgyal (1871-1926, aka Padma dkar po), who was an esteemed student of Mi pham rgya mtsho, generally reviews familiar territory in its discussion of Chöd, it does discriminate more categories of transmission lineages than other sources. As a contemporary Nyingma pa historical survey of Buddhist teachings, this source also indicates continued interest in Chöd, albeit as a branch of the Zhijé tradition.

Zhi byed dang Gcod yul gyi chos ‘byung rin po che’i phreng ba thar pa’i rgyan (late 19th-early 20th century)

This history of Zhijé and Chöd by Dharmasenggé (aka Chos kyi seng ge, late 19th/early 20th century; Nyingma)102 is one of the most popular in circulation, probably due to its efforts at providing a comprehensive summary of the existing sources. However, even including this study, desirable details and dates regarding the development of Chöd, such as the provenance of important texts and the identity of early figures in the transmission lineage, remain unavailable.

Chos ‘byung kun gsal me long103 (20th century)

This recent historical survey (published in 1971) of the various religions of Tibet was written by the Bon scholar Dpal ldan tshul khrims (1904-1972). Chöd is treated as a distinct tradition in this work, which reviews the materials from The Blue Annals and other sources.

Source

[[1]]