TEXTS

by Michelle Janet Sorensen

In the previous two chapters, I explained how Machik Labdron adopted and adapted traditional Buddhist teachings to develop the Chod practices of cutting through the body and cutting through the mind. In order to trace these fundamental and distinctive practices, I relied on several of the texts I translated for this study: in particular, my discussion of the gift of the body in Chod was primarily derived from The Distinctive Eightfold Supplementary Section;

and my discussion of the significance of Dud in Chod praxis was primarily derived from The Great Speech Chapter. In this chapter, I provide an account of each of the six foundational treatises (gzhung rtsa, or root texts), conventionally attributed to Machik herself, that I have translated in the appendices: The Great Speech Chapter; The Supplementary Chapter; The Quintessential Chapter; The Common Eightfold Supplementary Section; The Uncommon Eightfold

Supplementary Section; and The Distinctive Eightfold Supplementary Section. I also discuss in detail two of the earliest extant commentaries on Chod: An Outline of the Great Speech Chapter of Chod and A Commentary on the Great Speech Chapter of Chod, both composed by the Third Karmapa, Rangjung Dorje, in the fourteenth century. Apart from The Great Speech Chapter, these texts are being provided in the English language for the first time.

While there is no authoritative collection of Machik's teachings (gsung ‘bum), the texts I am considering are listed in an early vitae on Machik, edited by Namkha Gyaltsen (ca. 1370¬1433) and included in The Great Explanation collection, suggesting that these texts might be considered as representative of her oeuvre. The second biographical section on Machik in The Great Explanation quotes Machik addressing the Indian yogi-scholars who have come to investigate the system of Chod, skeptical that it is actually Buddhist Dharma. After debate on these

teachings, the pandits became her students and proceeded to transmit numerous of Machik's Chod teachings to India. According to this text, with the experience of generating in her mental continuum the distinctive experience of severing the four Negative Forces on their own ground [that is, in

one's own consciousness], the very profound dharma teaching was composed by Machik in ten texts. . . . Because [the teachings] were transmitted to India, moreover, all Indians having trust in the dharma teachings and all of them gaining dharma experience, the Tibetan dharma teachings were spread in India.

The teachings by Machik that were transmitted to India are said to include the following: The Great Speech Chapter; The Supplementary Chapter; The Quintessential Chapter; and

Supplementary Texts. Additional texts mentioned, but which may no longer be extant, are the following: Gnad them; Khong rdol; Gsang ba brda chos; Bzlas skor gsum; Gzhi lam du slong ba; and the Khyad par gyi man ngag. These latter texts are referred to in various historical and commentarial sources, but they are not included in Jamgon Kongtrul's Treasury of Instructions, which is a primary source for the six texts by Machik and the two commentaries by the Third Karmapa Rangjung Dorje I am discussing and include in the appendices.

The Third Karmapa Rangjung Dorje was a key figure in the later transmissions of Chod. In the fourteenth century, Rangjung Dorje composed commentaries on Machik's teachings as well as other texts on Chod, transmitting his interpretation of the Chod system within the Karma Kagyu tradition. His formalizations of Chod praxis, including his compositions of practice techniques (sgrub thabs; sadhana), contributed to the later assimilation of Chod into

Karma Kagyu lineages. In this chapter, I consider the transmission lineage of Chod as it was passed through Rangjung Dorje because his commentaries on The Great Speech Chapter are the earliest datable commentaries on Machik's texts. Through these commentaries, we can establish that The Great Speech Chapter was composed prior to the fourteenth century.

While we cannot confidently attribute each of the six works I translate to Machik, these texts, along with Rangjung Dorje's commentaries, constitute the foundation of the Chod tradition. It is vital that these texts be revisited as they provide an alternative perspective of Library; edition from Shinhua (1992). Edou writes that Jampa Sonam “is said to be the thirtieth holder of the hearing lineage (lung brgyud). If one estimates twenty years per generation, he would have lived in the nineteenth century, and hence be a contemporary of Jamgon Kongtrul Lodro Thaye” (195, n. 30). In addition, there is A Concise Life Story of Machig Labdron, Derived from An Exposition of Transforming the Aggregates into an Offering of Food (The Concise Life Story)

(phungpo gzan skyur ba’i rnam par bshadpa las ma gcig lab sgron ma’i rnam par thar pa mdor msdus tsam zhig), by Kunpang Tsodrü Sengé (ca. 13th century). He was either a direct disciple of Machik or fifth, eleventh or twelfth in the lineage. As well, in the Chester Beatty Library in Dublin is a text entitled Phung po gzhan bskyur gyi ram bhzag bshadpa Gcod kyi don gsal byed ma cig ye she’s mkha’i ‘gro’i sgung dri ma med pa, which Hermann-Pfandt (1998, 101 n. 16) says is the rnam bshad attributed to Namkha Gyaltsen. Jérôme Edou also mentions another edition of Machig's biography that he found near Lang Gonpa

near Phyger, Dolpo. The Dolpo edition, entitled Ma gcig ma’i rnam thar or Rnam thar mgur ma, is a dbu med blockprint manuscript lacking an explicit author or date, but containing the information that it was edited at the request of Rin bzang gras pa dbang phyug (Edou 1996, 220). According to Edou, this manuscript is written in cursive script and, although it lacks author or date, “appears to be quite old” (Edou 1996, 194 n. 28). According to Edou, this text includes elements not found in the other rnam thar, and it is supplemented with a collection of mgur, or spontaneous songs: “It follows the general historical trends of Machig's life, but devotes for example an entire chapter to the young Machig's fight with her parents to avoid marriage and dedicate

herself to the practice of Dharma. Another chapter covers Machig's wanderings in fearful places subjugating demons. Due to its late discovery, we only managed to include here a few quotes from the manuscript where it differs from other available sources” (Edou 1996, 194-195, n. 28). Edou notes that this biography was published at the request of certain Rin bzang grags pa dbang phyug and has seven chapters:

“(1) How Machig renounced the worldly life and left her family;

(2) How Machig opened the gates of Dharma;

(3) How Machig followed Thopa Bharé and taught Dharma to her husband and her son Gyalwa Dondrop;

(4) How Machig gained realization and subjugated demons in fearful places;

(5) How Machig taught the ultimate meaning (of her doctrine) to Lhatag Khenpo and others ;

(6) How Machig settled at Zangri and worked to propagate her doctrine for the benefit of beings; (7) How Machig departed for the state beyond suffering” (Edou 1996, 175, n. 3). Hermann-Pfandt (1998), in her review of Edou's text, laments that Edou chose to retranslate materials previously in circulation rather than presenting more rare materials, such as the 13th century Kunpang Tsodro Sengé text mentioned above or the Ma gcig ma'i rnam thar. She suggests that “it is easily possible that the Ma gcig ma'i rnam thar is one of the lost source texts the influence of which Kollmar-Paulenz has traced in some of the sources of the biographical tradition of Ma gcig” (1998, 99).

Edou cites The Concise Life Story (the University of Washington text) as stating that Machik, at the age of fifty-six or fifty-seven, “composed four major treatises known under the generic title of The Grand Exposition (rNam bshad chen mo):

(1) The Grand Exposition according to Sutra, at Sakarlog, requested by Khugom Chokyi Sengé and five other disciples who wrote it down.

(2) The Grand Exposition according to Tantra, at the cave of Shampogang, requested by her son Thonyon Samdrup. The text was transmitted by eight of her disciples, including her four spiritual daughters and Khugom Chokyi Sengé.

(3) The Grand Exposition according to Sutra and Tantra Combined, in Lhodrag, requested by Khugom Chokyi Sengé, and copied out by twelve people.

(4) The Grand Exposition of Transforming the Aggregates into an Offering, at Zangri, through the request of Thonyon Samdrup” (1996, 107).

According to Edou, “[o]ne of the difficulties in identifying these texts lies in the fact that most sources use the generic title The Grand Exposition without specifying whether it refers to all four treatises or to only one of them. No version of these four original texts has so far become available. A reference to Machig's Grand Exposition of Transforming the Aggregates into an Offering is found in the Labrang Karchag, but whether it refers to Machig's

original version remains mere speculation since the text is not available” (Edou 107). Here Edou attaches a note: “Phung po zan skyur Gcod kyi gsal byed ma cig rnam bshad chen mo (Machig’s Grand Exposition of Transforming the Aggregate into a Food Offering, Illuminating the Meaning of Chod) in: Bod kyi bstan bcos khag cig gi mtshen byang dri med shel dkar phreng ba, referred to as the Labrang Karchag, edited by mTsho sngon mi rigs dpe skrun khang, in the rnam mthar chapter, p. 70.

Access to this text would tell us whether it is Namkha Gyaltsen's version of The Grand Exposition mentioned below (see n. 36), an earlier version of Machig's Grand Exposition of Transforming the Aggregates into an Offering of Food which could be the source of all the later versions and currently unknown, or a different text altogether” (Edou 1996, 195, n.33). Edou also remarks that “the colophon following chapter ten of our main source, Transforming the Aggregates, describes a lineage for the Grand Exposition: Machig Labdron; Thoyon Samdrup, her son; Gangpa Mugsang; Gangpa Lhundrup; Sangyé Tensung; Nyamé Dorjé Dzinpa; Gangpa Rinchen Gyaltsen; Lama Dorjé; Namkha Gyaltsen, the compiler of the Marvelous the Chod system to the view popularly presented in modern communities of Tibetan and non¬Tibetan practitioners that emphasizes

demons, charnel grounds and dramatic performances. As I have repeatedly emphasized, Chod teachings are frequently considered without reference to their historical and cultural contexts, limiting our ability to assess and appreciate the consistency and change of the tradition as a whole. To complement the historical and philosophical analyses of the previous chapters, I now turn to a discussion of the texts translated as appendices one through nine in this dissertation.

By providing accounts of each of these texts, I aim not only to augment our understanding of the canonical texts of the Chod tradition, but also to develop my argument that Chod both legitimated itself through its association with Buddhist traditions and presented itself as an innovation on those traditions. As can be clearly seen in these six texts, Machik was a transmitter of orthodox teachings, yet she was also an original thinker who creatively interpreted these teachings. Machik constructed her authority through traditional Buddhist references, yet

her project was also one of renewal: through focusing on the Prajhaparamita teachings on the Negative Forces, her system of Chod reintroduced these important teachings and revitalized them through her commentaries and instructions for practice. When the Third Karmapa, Rangjung Dorje, developed his exegeses on The Great Speech Chapter, we can see this process of legitimation and innovation extended into the commentarial tradition. Eliot Deutsch maintains that traditional Indian philosophy is characterized by “recovery” rather than

“discovery": he describes the function of philosophy qua commentary as “appropriation," since the intellectual project is always necessarily determined by traditional readings of the “original." As I will discuss below, Rangjung Dorje's role in the systematization of Chod is characterized by both “recovery" and “appropriation."

THE GREAT SPEECH CHAPTER AND RANGJUNG DORJE'S COMMENTARIES

In this section I discuss The Great Speech Chapter attributed to Machik and Rangjung Dorjé's substantial Commentary on The Great Speech Chapter, both of which are translated and included as appendices to this study. My study of the Negative Forces, or Düd, in chapter five was based on my interpretations of The Great Speech Chapter, but here I turn to a discussion of topics in which the differences between Machik and Rangjung Dorjé are most apparent: Primordial Wisdoms, the Three Bodies, the practice of offering the body, the various capacities of practitioners, the use of authoritative Buddhist references, and the association of Chod with

Mahamudra. By comparing The Great Speech Chapter with Rangjung Dorjé's commentaries on it, we see how the Chod tradition began to develop and how Machik's teachings were both preserved and altered.

Rangjung Dorje's commentaries help us to understand how The Great Speech Chapter was both legitimated and renewed by scholars of Chod. Through these commentaries, we begin not only to understand how Chod was assimilated to the Kagyu school, but also to trace the development of Chod. As we seem from his commentaries, Rangjung Dorje was at least partially responsible for later developments in Chod, including increased emphasis on the “demonic” nature of the Negative Forces (as well as exorcism and healing), the development of more formal sadhana (along with deity yoga including supramundane female figures such as Vajravarahi and Vajrayogini), and the intertwining of Chod with Mahamudra.

The full name of The Great Speech Chapter is The Great Speech Chapter, the textual tradition of the oral instructions of the profound Chod of Prajnaparamita (Shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa zab mo gcod kyi man ngag gi gzhung bka’ tshoms chen mo). My English translations are based on the Tibetan texts found in the two slightly varying editions of Jamgon Kongtrul's multivolume compendium from the

19th century, the Treasury of Instructions. The honorific term “bka’ rtsom” literally means “composition.” According to Sarah Harding, Ringu Tulku Rinpoche observes that the term “bka’ rtsom” frequently refers to “sayings”—in particular to the Dhammapada, a collection of sayings attributed to Sakyamuni Buddha. Machik herself stated that after her study of the speech (bka') of Sakyamuni, she composed the bka' rtsom, reinforcing the connection between The Great Speech Chapter and authoritative teachings like the Dhammapada.

The colophon of these editions of The Great Speech Chapter credits the composition to Machik, the wisdom dakini, Tara of Lab (16/465). A note on this attribution states that this teaching is in the tradition of Aryadeva the Brahmin, particularly the tradition that was passed from Machik through her spiritual son Drapa Hagton (Grwa pa hag ston, n.d.). Drapa Hagton is mentioned by Go Lotsawa Zhonnupel in his list of great “sons” who received the precepts from Machik herself (1976, 985; 2003, 1143). He is also mentioned in the Zhije and Chod History by Dharma senge as one of the “eight sons” of

Machik. In an addendum to The Great Speech Chapter by an unknown author (possibly the editor Jamgon Kongtrul), it is explicitly stated that this text should be presented together with Rangjung Dorje's Outline and Commentary. Although there have been other translations of The Great Speech Chapter into English and Italian, this study is the first time it has been presented in an English translation together with these complementary texts by Rangjung Dorje.

The association of Chod with the Karmapa, the lineage of incarnating heads of the Karma Kagyu school of Tibetan Buddhism, may have begun with the First Karmapa, Dusum Khyenpa (Dus gsum mkhyen pa, 1110-93). Karmapa Dusum Khyenpa studied Prasangika with Pa tshab as well as esoteric teachings with Gampopa (Sgam po pa). Ronald Davidson intimates that Dusum Khyenpa may have had contact with

Machik in the mid-twelfth century when he stayed in Zangri where Machik lived. As Kurtis R. Schaeffer (1995, 15) notes, the Third Karmapa Rangjung Dorje (1284-1339) is well known as a “systematizer” of Machik’s Chod teachings. Dharmasenge, the author of the 19th century Zhije and Chod History, credits Rangjung Dorje with “clarifying the inaccuracies regarding the Chod of Machik Labdron,” presumably at least in part through his Commentary and Outline on The Great Speech Chapter.

In addition to The Great Speech Commentary and The Great Speech Outline, both translated in the present study, Rangjung Dorje is credited with the composition of Chod practice manuals and other explanatory texts. One of the most comprehensive collections of works on the practices of Chod (the Gcod kyi tshogs las rinpo che'iphreng ba 'don bsgrigs bltas chog tu bdudpa gcod kyi lugs sor bzhag, or the Gcod tshogs) is attributed to Rangjung Dorje and was revised by Karma Chagme in the 17th century. Rangjung Dorje's interest in Chod may have been due to his connection to Padampa Sangye: at a young age,

Rangjung Dorje's family made a pilgrimage to Langkhor, Dingri, a site closely associated with Padampa Sangye, and the boy received blessings from a statue of Padampa Sange. What can be definitively established is that Rangjung Dorje was aware of these Chod teachings by the early fourteenth century and found them important enough that he wrote commentaries on existing Chod texts as well as composing his

own teachings. From Rangjung Dorje's commentaries, we learn that by the fourteenth century, teachings were circulating under the name of “Chod" that were not presented as a subset of Padampa's Zhije system. Rangjung Dorje's commentaries also allow us roughly to date The Great Speech Chapter as existing prior to the fourteenth century. In addition to being the earliest datable Chod text, The Great Speech Chapter is noteworthy as one of the teachings said to have been initially given to the three Indian scholars as mentioned above.

The Great Speech Chapter opens with the author “pay[ing] homage to the state without thought, the realm beyond objects and without reference," rather than (as one might expect) to the Goddess Prajnaparamita or another form of enlightened being. The text is a systematic discourse on self-liberation from the Negative Forces as understood within the Chod tradition, and it communicates its messages via three strategies: by short and simple statements, through analogies, and with more elaborate explanations. As in other Chod texts, the three Negative Forces—the Negative Force with Obstruction, the Negative Force

without Obstruction, and the Joyous Negative Force—are distinct, yet they are also fundamentally interconnected with the Negative Force of Pride. The root of all of these Negative Forces is one's own mind and its propensity to identify and attach itself to mental and physical objects, leading to mental confusion and other poisons. In The Great Speech Chapter, we are told that the “most distinguished instruction” (gdams ngag kun la khyad par ‘phags) is on comprehending deities and demons (lha ‘dre) as apparitions of one's own mind, for which the antidote is the severance of the mind (here it is literally “the flow of mindfulness” [dran rgyun]).

Primordial Wisdoms

While I have analyzed the presentation of the Negative Forces in The Great Speech Chapter at length in chapter five of this study, here I will turn to another innovative bridge that Machik constructs between Sutra and Tantra teachings. The five poisons and the five realms of existence are often interconnected in Sutra teachings. In The Great Speech Chapter, however, Machik uses her trope of Negative Forces to underline the impermanence of these realms due to their mental construction. Though Rangjung Dorje pays scant attention to this topic in his commentaries, Machik provides an alternative

reading of the Negative Forces through a Vajrayana teaching on the transformation of such Forces into Wisdoms. This teaching parallels conventional Vajrayana teachings on the transformation of the Five Poisons into the Five Wisdoms through the antidotes of the Five Dhyani Buddhas. Through this connection between realms of existence and Negative Forces, Machik emphasizes the fundamental Buddhist teaching that even the realms of existence and corresponding experiences of suffering are ultimately

mentally fabricated and based in ignorance of the true nature of reality. According to Machik, Resulting from severing the root of the production of pride (snyems byed rtsa ba), aggression is also liberated in its own place; emancipated from the molten hell Negative Forces, one attains Mirror-Like Primordial Wisdom. Resulting from severing the root of the production of pride, desire and attachment are also liberated in their own place; emancipated from the hungry and thirsty ghosts, one attains the Individually- Discriminating Primordial Wisdom. Resulting from severing the root of pride (snyems kyi rtsa ba),

confusion is also liberated in its own place; emancipated from the animal slavery Negative Force, one attains the Dharmadhatu Primordial Wisdom. Resulting from severing the root of pride, jealousy is also liberated in its own place; emancipated from the Negative Force of changeable persons, one attains the Activity¬Accomplishing Primordial Wisdom. Resulting from severing the root of pride, arrogance is also liberated in its own place; emancipated from the Negative Force of dissension, one attains the Equanimous Primordial Wisdom. Furthermore, the uncut rope of pride is the five poisons; the severance of pride is self-liberated wisdom.

The traditional Buddhist list of the five poisons (dug lnga) includes desire (‘dod chags; raga), aggression (zhe sdang; dvesa), delusion (gti mug; moha), pride (nga rgyal; mana), and jealousy (phrag dog; îrsyâ). In The Great Speech Chapter, Machik elaborates this classification in order to situate her teachings within a classical Sutra discussion of the five poisons and five realms of being. At the same time, Machik elaborates a Vajrayana teaching on the transmutation of the five poisons into the five wisdoms. By combining these two and reinterpreting them through her trope of Negative Forces, as can be seen in Table Three, she appropriates the traditional Sutra and Tantra teachings to her system of Chod.

Table Three

POISON NEGATIVE FORCE PRIMORDIAL WISDOM

aggression Molten Hell Mirror-like

desire, attachment Hungry Ghost Individually-discriminating

confusion Animal Slavery Dharmadhâtu

jealousy Changeable Persons Activity-accomplishing

arrogance Dissension Equanimous

As can be seen in the table above, there are two differences between traditional teachings and Machik's exposition. The first difference is in the representation of realms of existence. While in Theravada Buddhism there are only five realms of existence because they do not distinguish between the realms of the titans (asuras) and the gods (devas), in Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism, these two realms are usually distinguished. The traditional six realms are: the Realm of the Hell-beings (dmyal ba; naraka; niraya); the Realm of

the Hungry Ghosts (yi dvag; preta; petta); the Realm of Animals (dud ‘gro; tiryagyoni; tiracchanayoni); the Realm of Humans (mi; manusya; manussa); the Realm of the Titans (lha ma yin; asura); and the Realm of the Gods (lha; deva). Not only does Machik use slightly different descriptors for these categories (“molten hell” for the more general “hell”; “animal slavery” for the more general “animal”;

“changeable person” for “human”), but she follows the Theravada practice of not discriminating between the titans and the gods—both classes appear to be included in the category of “Dissension Negative Forces.”

The second difference is in Machik's discussion of the Primordial Wisdoms. In conventional teachings, the Primordial Wisdoms are connected with the five Dhyani Buddhas (or the five buddha families): Aksobhya (with Mirror-like Wisdom); Ratnasambhava (with Equanimous Wisdom); Amitabha (with Discriminative Wisdom); Amoghasiddhi (with All¬accomplishing Wisdom); and

Vairocana (with Dharmadhatu Wisdom). Rather than presenting the transformation of the poisons into the wisdoms with the five Dhyani Buddhas, Machik presents them in relation to a basic teaching on the realms of existence that are the results of the actions and karmic accumulations of sentient beings. With this strategy, Machik returns a conventionally Vajrayana teaching back to its roots in basic Sutra teachings on the law of karma. Body offering

As I elaborated in chapter four, The Distinctive Eightfold Supplementary Section contains an extensive discussion of the gift of the body, which is likely the basis for later elaborations of this practice in Chod sadhana, or practice texts. The Great Speech Chapter contains a much simpler version of a body offering practice that emphasizes the practitioner's non-attachment to her physical embodiment. In a passage that recalls early Buddhist teachings on the withdrawal of the senses, Machik teaches that one should be like a corpse:

With enlightened knowing (rig pa), bearing the corpse of one's own body to severe places, places of leprosy, and so forth, one should abandon [one's body] in a non¬attached fashion. The mind itself rests in the sphere of the Great Mother. Whatever thoughts and cognitive acts occur, moreover, are thoughts as emanations of the Great

Mother herself. The emanation of the Mother is not bound to the place of samsara. Like the dullness of one with a full stomach, rest in disintegrated cognition. Abandon samsara; have certainty in nirvana. E Ma Ho! How wonderful! Without deliberate activity, it is time to use your mind!

Here Machik recommends that the practitioner should bear her body to a severe place, such as a place where there is leprosy. As if her body were a corpse, she should abandon it in a non¬attached fashion, allowing her mind to rest in the sphere of the Great Mother, Prajnaparamita.

Rangjung Dorje's commentary on this passage elaborates on Machik's recommendation that one practice as if one is a corpse. Rangjung Dorje suggests that this instruction is directed specifically toward beginners for whom the knowledge of the unity of discursive thinking and enlightened knowing is a terrifying place in itself. Once one has accustomed oneself to the internal terror of non-duality, one can reorient

oneself in external terrifying places without fear. Rangjung Dorje suggests that for beginners, the practice of casting off the body as food is a strategy for dwelling in the state of prajnaparamita, the perfection of wisdom. Rangjung Dorje addresses Machik's teaching on the connection between the practitioner knowing that her thoughts lack true existence and her passing into nirvana:

In this regard, this very combination of one's own enlightened knowing and discursive thinking about grasped objects and grasping subjects is a terrifying place. Having cut through this very [internal terrifying place], one will cut through even external terrifying places. If one is a beginner, even with just a few anxieties, by casting off [the body] as food and so forth, one will become unattached. The aim is to dwell in the state of the perfection of wisdom.

There are two points worth noting here. While The Great Speech Chapter does not fully explain the body offering practices that will become central to the

Chod tradition (and which I have discussed in chapter four), Rangjung Dorje uses language that will become characteristic of Chod body offering practices (lus sbyin). For example, Rangjung Dorje uses the term “gzan skyur,” referring to the “casting off" of the body as food, whereas in The Great Speech Chapter, the image is of bearing one's body as a corpse. One could speculate that Rangjung Dorje's interpretation of this early text influenced more elaborate descriptions of this practice in later texts. Secondly, Rangjung Dorje's introduction of the notions of internal and external terrifying places

is puzzling. Although he insists that this practice is for beginners, Rangjung Dorje suggests that they should cut through internal terrifying places, which are equated with the experience of non-duality of discursive and non-discursive knowledge. Such an experience, as Machik suggests with her use of the term “rig pa" in the root text, is an advanced level of enlightened knowing. As with his descriptions of several other practices, Rangjung Dorje seems to suggest that Chod is only suitable to advanced practitioners, though Machik implies that her teachings are for all.

The Three Bodies

We can see similar subtle differences between Machik and Rangjung Dorje in their discussions of the traditional Buddhist concept of the Three Bodies—the Truth Body (chos sku; dharmakaya), Enjoyment Body (longs sku; sambhogakaya), and Emanation Body (sprul sku; nirmanakaya). Machik is skeptical in her treatment of the topic of the Three Bodies, cautioning against fixating on them as

ultimate truth. In Machik's view, aspiration to attain the Three Bodies can lead to attachment to particular teachings and tenet systems, thus constituting an obstruction to enlightenment. Here Machik characterizes the problem of desire for attaining the Three Bodies as a “Negative Force of Results” : “Because desires for the definitive attainment of the Three Bodies are the

results of the tenet systems of the vehicles of the Hearers (sravaka), the Self-conquerors (pratyekabuddha), and the others, because of the joy associated with [such] desires, there are Negative Forces.” Machik argues that dependence on enlightened ones, rather than on one’s own self-nature, will not lead to the realization of one’s own nature as enlightened: “The Three Bodies are explained as the result of the threefold self-nature of body, speech and mental consciousness; [the Three Bodies] are not established from the side of the

enlightened ones (sangs rgyas).” By giving up the desire for attainment through tenet systems, the practitioner gives up hope for particular results dependent on external causes: “[w]ithout hope, Chod practitioners are freed from the limits of hope and fear; having cut the ropes of grasping, definitely enlightened (nges par sangs rgyas), where does one go?” Beyond the limits of

concepts such as the Three Bodies, Machik insists that cutting through mental grasping and attachment is the ultimate form of practice.

In his Commentary discussing this passage, Rangjung Dorje emphasizes understanding, rather than achieving, one’s own enlightened identity. For him, the Three Bodies are a means, rather than an obstacle, to this understanding: “The previous cause, result, and so forth, are created by liberation from having hopes and fears; when one understands one’s own triad of body, speech and mind as the Three Bodies, there will not be accomplishment through other enlightened ones.” In order to undergird his position, Rangjung Dorje turns to Naropa: “By the master Naropa it is said, ‘all things abide in the mind.'”

This aphorism is a paraphrase of the second line of Naropa's The Summary of Mahamudra (Phyag rgy chenpo'i tshig bsduspa), which reads “chos rnams thams cad rang gi sems” (“All things are mind in itself”). Herbert Guenther argues that it is problematic to translate “rang gi sems” as “one's mind”:

ran sems, also ran-gi sems, is a term most likely to mislead the linguistic specialist by inducing him to translate the genitive case ran-gi as such and render the whole term as ‘one's mind,' taking ‘one' as one entity and ‘mind' as another. However, the use of ran is, to our Western thinking, exceedingly ambiguous. Above all it refers to itself so that ran-gi sems would have to be translated as ‘mind pointing to itself,' ‘mind in itself,' ‘mind as such' or any such similar circumlocutions.

Yet, oddly enough, Rangjung Dorje seems unintentionally to reinforce just the duality that Guenther cautions against: Rangjung Dorje uses “gnas,” which can be read as a verb meaning “to abide, to dwell, to stay, to remain,” but not as a copula connecting “chos” (“things”) and “sems” (“mind”). Rangjung Dorje's

paraphrase of Naropa distinguishes between two entities: “things” abide in the “mind.” This formulation of containing things in one's mind seems a long way from the non-place Machik posits as a result of cutting the ropes of grasping. While Rangjung Dorje's use of Naropa muddles Machik's teaching, he might invoke Naropa to yoke Machik's Chod teaching to Naropa's Mahamudra system. I discuss the association between Chod and Mahamudra further in a later section of this chapter.

In another passage from The Great Speech Chapter, Machik reiterates that the result of the Three Bodies is self-arising: “[a]s for the self-arising without attachment, it is said to be the Ornament of the Dharmakaya Without Pride. Because the result of the Three Bodies is one's own, it is not necessary to generate joy in another way.” Here Machik suggests that the attainment of the Three Bodies does not require specific training techniques, but is rather the spontaneous result of cutting through mental grasping. In his commentary on this section, Rangjung Dorje explains that, “when you yourself are freed of

both grasped object and grasping subject, you can depend upon your unhampered skills; this is an ornament.” Although Machik does not mention anything unorthodox in this passage, Rangjung Dorje then uses the Samcayagatha to associate this “ornament” with the miracles (rdzu ‘phrul; rddhi) performed by a bodhisattva: “‘similarly, an intelligent bodhisattva—abiding in emptiness and primordial wisdom (ye shes), having reached the side of miracles and without an abode—displays infinite kinds of activities to beings without wavering and without exhaustion for ten million kalpa.'” This shifts the topic from

Machik's ongoing concern with severing pride as the fundamental action to Rangjung Dorje's interest in the bodhisattva's capacity for miraculous acts. While Machik's critique of tenet systems encourages ordinary practitioners to attain the “result of the Three Bodies” by cutting through the root of mind, Rangjung Dorje associates such “results” with the exceptional attainment of the bodhisattva, implicitly putting them out of reach of most practitioners.

Near the conclusion of The Great Speech Chapter, Machik reiterates her argument that the essential problem for practitioners to address is attachment: “Without grasping a body, it is the body of a Victor; without grasping speech, it is the speech of a Victor; without grasping mental consciousness (yid),

it is the mind (thugs) of a Victor; without grasping, one is included in the luminous Mother.” Through severing the habitual act of dualistic grasping, not only will one have the body, speech and mind of a Buddha, but one will be inseparable from the luminous Mother, Perfection of Wisdom, Prajnaparamita. In his Commentary, Rangjung Dorje expands on Machik's argument, making explicit connections with the six virtuous perfections and the Three Bodies: “In addition, the yogin, having a foundation in the six perfections as his own path, purifies self-grasping on its own ground; when apprehended objects have been diffused into the Body and Primordial Knowledge, they will be inseparable from the body, speech and mind of the Enlightened Ones. . . . Because one

understands the inseparability of the Three Bodies, one does not seek the mind of the Victor elsewhere. Rangjung Dorje implies that one must cultivate the six perfections, which accommodates Machik's Chod to conventional Paramitayana teachings. Rangjung Dorje also seems to add a process of “diffusing” grasped objects into the Body and Primordial Knowledge, in contrast to Machik's claim that a practitioner who abandons dualistic grasping attains the Three Bodies of a buddha.

Capacities of Practitioners

The paradigm of the Three Bodies not only illustrates the different perspectives of Machik and Rangjung Dorje on established tenet systems, but it also demonstrates their different views on and approaches to the capacities of Chod practitioners. While Machik cautions that hoping to attain the Three Bodies is a Negative Force, she does accept that the provisional teaching on the results of the Three Bodies is a useful tool for the unaccomplished practitioner: “The teaching of the results for the unaccomplished is the teaching on the results of the Three Bodies; in addition, the major and minor marks, and so

forth, [are explained] in the teaching on the provisional meaning. This is for those without even the slightest trace of accomplishment." In his commentary on this “teaching on the provisional methods for those with lesser mental functioning," Rangjung Dorje provides more details on what such a provisional practice would include: “Even though appearances are exhausted for disciples through the power of aspirational prayers, as well as the thirty-

two major marks, the eighty minor marks, and so forth, definitive appearances on top of meaning and actuality are not truly established even in the slightest amount." Rangjung Dorje here uses an esoteric text, the Uttaratantra, to elucidate this teaching apparently intended for a less advanced practitioner: “according to the explanation from the Uttaratantra, it is said that, just as a jewel appears as if it is insubstantial by the variety of

its colors, likewise the All-pervading Lord (khyab bdag; vibhu) appears insubstantial due to the various conditions of [his] being." If this is in fact a teaching for practitioners of lesser accomplishment, Rangjung Dorje's use of an esoteric reference curiously obfuscates this practice. As in his explication of the body offering practice, Rangjung Dorje's reference seems to make this “unaccomplished” teaching inaccessible to the unaccomplished practitioner.

While The Great Speech Chapter represents the teaching on the Three Bodies as suited to practitioners of lesser capacity, it suggests that those of moderate capacity, as I discussed above, will subscribe to a particular tenet system and thus only reach a partial understanding of reality. The Great Speech Chapter frequently stresses the exceptionality of Machik's teachings of Chod as a dharma system, though

it does not claim that these teacings are only for those of the highest capacity. According to Machik, one of the exceptional aspects of Chod is that it teaches “non¬view” (“mi lta ba”), which is defined as “not committing to a viewpoint.” This “non-view” is a logical consequence of a mental state of enlightened knowing in which “whatever arises [in one's mind] is unobstructed.”523

In his commentary on this passage, Rangjung Dorje explicitly associates the Chod “non-view” with “exceptional students,” stressing that these teachings are “for the few persons who have a foundation of sharp faculties, because even explanations about the unfathomable particularities of view and meditative cultivation are not created in their actual mental consciousnesses, the mind of reification is also abandoned and one extensively determines the lack of truth of unobstructed apparent appearances.” Although Machik does not present her teachings as exclusive, here Rangjung Dorje suggests that they should be

reserved for the most advanced practitioners. Machik does not link her “non-view” to authoritative Buddhist sources, but Rangjung Dorje cites the Rgyas pa to explain this perspective: “Also in that way, the extensive teaching states, ‘form is not created in mental consciousness' (gzugs yid la mi byed), since it is said that there is no creation in mental consciousness (yid) in the middle of omniscience (rnam pa thams cad mkhyen pa nyid).” Rangjung Dorje domesticates Machik's teaching by contextualizing it within what appears to be a Prajnaparamita discourse. Machik's potentially radical advocation of a “non-view” is here subsumed by Rangjung Dorje to an established Buddhist tradition.

Ranjung Dorje's Secondary Sources

In contrast to Rangjung Dorje's legitimation of her teachings through sources such as the Prajnaparamita and the Uttaratantra, Machik emphasizes that her “exceptional path” is “taught from the speech (bka'; vacana) of the Victorious One,” that is, Sakyamuni Buddha. Following this “exceptional path,” when one has transcended cognitive fabrications such as “form” and

“feeling” and is no longer bound by dualistic thinking, one will be freed from karmic latencies and attain enlightenment: “If cognitions such as form and feeling are not created in one's mental consciousness, one will be freed from dwelling in the three realms; one will not be mixed up in samsara. If nothing whatsoever is created in one’s mental consciousness, karmic latencies do not arise, and the

ground and path are complete.” Once the practitioner has attained this non-dual awareness, “it is not necessary to interrupt the movements of mental consciousness; they will be liberated on their own ground like mirages. . . . One travels on the path by means of any activities whatsoever.” Rangjung Dorje develops this teaching of Machik’s through citing The Superior One (‘phags pa): “The Superior One also explains, ‘Because all things are unfabricated

in mental functioning itself, the perfection of wisdom is unfabricated in mental functioning itself.’” Although these passages are evocative of Prajnaparamita teachings in general, I have not been able to locate a specific source for them. But once again, Rangjung Dorje implicitly discounts Machik’s claim that her teachings are buddhavacana by supporting them with authoritative textual materials. While the root text has an editorial note reinforcing that this teaching “is not for the purpose of an ordinary person” (’di nas tshig rkang gnyis dpe phal ched du med), Rangjung Dorje appears to

use an exoteric Sutra source—rather than an esoteric one— to elucidate this teaching for non-ordinary persons.

Rangjung Dorje’s frequent references to canonical texts not only legitimate Chod as authentically Buddhist, but they serve to diminish Machik’s unique contributions to Buddhist dharma. In Machik’s biographies and The Great Explanation, there is a distinct effort to locate Machik in a previous (male-embodied) life in India, to identify her as a student of Padampa Sangye, and to describe her teachings being tested and found valid according to “experts.”

Similarly, Rangjung Dorjé, in his efforts to domesticate Chod, makes canonical Buddhist references explicit, drawing connections between passages in The Great Speech Chapter and authoritative Indic sources. Machik's teachings are thus both legitimated and altered through Rangjung Dorjé's references.

In The Great Speech Chapter, Machik never makes explicit reference to other teachings. She does occasionally allude to other traditions, as when she uses

the Prajnâpâramitâ aphorism “the essence of form is empty” to explain that one should meditate on emptiness. She also claims that “[t]he word of the Victorious One (rgyal ba, jina; i.e. the Buddha) is not tainted by alteration; if altered, the alteration is because of a Negative Force.” This reference both legitimates her own teaching and reminds the reader of episodes in the life of the Buddha when he himself encountered Negative Forces personified as Mara. Rangjung Dorjé offers the following commentary on this passage: “Resting uncontrived and loosely is discussed in nine lines, from ‘bcos bslad mi

bya.' In this regard, from equanimous engagement in a state of mental inactivity, when there is another [[[state]]] contrived by discursive thinking because of a Negative Force, one should rest uncontrived and loosely.” In his commentary on Machik's text, Rangjung Dorjé neglects to mention that the object of Machik's discussion is the legitimate speech of the Buddha (buddhavacana) which “is not tainted by alteration” unless a Negative Force is involved.

We see this strategy of subordinating Chod to established traditions in Rangjung Dorjé's commentary on a rare passage of The Great Speech Chapter in which the authorial voice is made

explicit through “nga yis smras,” or “I say.” This construction is used to emphasize Machik's central teaching that all suffering (and its manifestation through Negative Forces) is a result of mentally constructed pride: “Since one has been liberated from samsara in one's own place, one does not search from the side of nirvana. From one's own form arising in concepts, one does not meditatively cultivate for the purpose of concept lessness. Thus, because

everything is pride, I say that one must cut the ropes of pride. It has been taught that one who rests in the clear essence does not identify a mind of clear essence.” In his commentary on this passage, Rangjung Dorje relies upon the Prajnaparamita, thus subordinating the authorial voice to the authoritative Buddhist source: “Furthermore, these types of Negative Forces should be understood from the detailed Prajnaparamita sections on the Negative Forces; moreover, because the root of these [Negative Forces] is discursive thought, cutting that very [[[root]]], one

should do meditative cultivation (de nyid bcad cing bsgom par bya).” While the topic of cutting through the mental construct of pride is implicit in the Prajnaparamita teachings, Machik explicitly and repeatedly emphasizes the action of cutting the object of pride in her discourses and techniques. In addition, there is a tension between the root text and the commentary in the instructions for this process. In the

root text, we are told that the method for cutting the ropes of pride is to “rest in the clear essence” without “identifying] the mind of clear essence.” Rangjung Dorje interprets this spontaneous realization through the more active language of

“meditative cultivation,” which includes “understanding that thought processes lack true existence . . . since there is no cause for meditative cultivation by means of another antidote.”

The distinction between Machik and Rangjung Dorje's teachings becomes clearer in the section immediately following. In this section, Machik uses several enigmatic analogies to further explicate her teachings. Though these analogies are somewhat difficult to understand, they caution against depending merely upon the teachings of others (especially those who are not themselves liberated) at the expense of one's own experiential effort. For example,

As for the determinations by analogy: the oral teachings of the yogas of attainment are like a small bird nurturing its fledglings. When oral teachings are conveyed by one's lips, it is like a teacher starving a fledgling to death (ltog grir shi ba). I (rang nyid) can be certain of wandering in samsara. Like a fine dri (‘bri; female yak) nurturing her calf, when her own is satiated and she has the objective of helping [others] (rogs kyi don byas), [her nurturance] similarly spreads (‘cho ba ) to [other] calves and so forth. When one severs one's own rope of pride, sentient beings will be liberated with certainty; the objectives of others will be established without doubt.

In his Commentary, Rangjung Dorje appears to support Machik's position, asserting that “a person who has obtained the oral instructions [but] who is not liberated herself should not benefit others,” and explaining that only “when one understands oneself” as not truly existent can one improve the welfare of sentient beings. But in his commentary on the first part of this passage in the Great Speech Chapter Outline (Gcod bka' tshoms chen mo'i sa bcad), Rangjung Dorje interprets the “little bird” analogy as meaning “when one does not rely on one's lineage, one is fettered.” Not only does Machik not mention the concept of lineage here, but Rangjung Dorje's endorsement of a particular tenet system as leading to liberation is exactly counter to Machik's critique of tenet systems as discussed above.

While Machik legitimates her teachings through nonspecific references to buddhavacana, Rangjung Dorje frequently uses authoritative Buddhist texts to the same end. His most frequently used source is the Samcayagatha, verses on the Prajnaparamita that emphasize the duties of a bodhisattva. A typical example is his gloss on Machik's explanation of “loosening” one's “tightness.” Machik explains that “[t]hrough cutting one's own pride, one pacifies the Negative Forces. By comprehending the separation from a root, the enlightened state becomes manifest.

Therefore, one's own tightness should be loosened. In all cases, one should rest in Thatness.” Rangjung Dorje cites the Samcayagatha to expand on this passage: “‘whoever transcends whatever is the guardian of the mundane world of the ten directions; the king of physicians trained in this knowledge mantra becomes unsurpassed.'” Here Machik's teaching on “resting in Thatness” is reinterpreted by Rangjung Dorje to be training in the knowledge mantra of the Prajnaparamita.

Not only does Rangjung Dorje use authoritative Buddhist sources to legitimate Machik's teachings, but he also explicitly subordinates Chod to the Prajnaparamita teachings:

Having the intention of both Sutra and Tantra, the Prajnaparamita is the ultimate [[[teaching]]]. In that regard, [the Prajnaparamita] is a fine discipline from these two methods of gaining experience: from the [[[Sutra]]] perspective of authoritative transmissions and logic, [the Prajnaparamita] is definitely understood as separate from the eight extremes of elaboration;

relying on resting within is the [[[Tantra]]] method for eliminating the apparently true illusions of form and the rest. A supplementary practice to these two [[[Sutra]] and Tantra], the mixing of subject and object without duality, is the oral instruction of Chod based in the Prajnaparamita.

While the Prajnaparamita is the ultimate teaching, Rangjung Dorjé does acknowledge the contribution of Machik's Chod teachings to the authoritative Mahayana transmission. Chod provides a “supplementary practice” to Sutra and Tantra methods, a technique for enhancing one's practice (bogs ‘don) of the Buddha dharma.

In The Great Speech Chapter, no object of consciousness is immune from critique, even dogmatic Buddhist constructs. For example, as I explained above, Machik examines the notion of the Three Bodies and the doctrinal tenet systems which have been classified by scholars and practitioners of Buddhism, emphasizing that they are themselves constructs and do not have inherent reality. In contrast, Rangjung Dorjé is concerned to legitimate Chod by demonstrating how it is compatible with authoritative Buddhist teachings. By legitimating Chod through references to canonical texts, Rangjung Dorjé paradoxically innovates on Machik's Chod system.

Mahamudra and Chod

Through his commentaries, Rangjung Dorjé undoubtedly influenced the evolution of Chod teachings, especially grounding Chod in the Prajnaparamita and contributing elements of later practices. His commentaries also helped to establish the association of Chod with

Mahâmudrâ. In her influential article on Chod, Janet Gyatso glosses a Chod text recovered by

the 19th century Nyingmapa, Düdjom Lingpa ([[Bdud ‘joms [gling pa]], 1835-1904), by stating that

“[w]e should . . . note that Mahâmudrâ is . . . used in apposition to Gcod as a title of the

tradition. . . . The philosophical contents of Mahâmudrâ and Prajnâpâramitâ are closely

compatible, both being appropriate descriptions of the formless realization engendered at the

completion of the Gcod sâdhanas.” For Gyatso, Mahâmudrâ and Prajnâpâramitâ are interchangeable foundations of the Chod tradition, though she posits that Chod is conventionally known as “Mahâmudrâ Gcod.” In addition, two recent English-language studies of The Great Explanation, by Jérôme Edou and by Sarah Harding, also characterize Chod as “Mahâmudrâ Chod.” While contemporary scholarship seemingly takes for granted the apposition of Chod and Mahâmudrâ, an examination of Rangjung Dorjé's Commentary on The Great Speech Chapter can give us a more nuanced understanding of the historical development of their relationship.

The Great Speech Chapter only refers to Mahâmudrâ once, including it in a catalogue of various Buddhist tenet systems. Mahâmudrâ appears in this list as one of many systems which lead to confusion as a result of attachment to their own fundamental standpoints:

the divisions (rim pa) of the dharma vehicle rely on confused knowing of self-nature; in addition, the knowledge of view, meditation and effect is confused. The nihilist has knowledge of the non-existent object; the absolutist has knowledge of the changeless object; the srâvaka has knowledge of the perceiver and the perceived object; the pratyekabuddha has knowledge of the emptiness of dependent relations; the Mind-Only student has knowledge of his mind's own knowledge; the Madhyamaka student has knowledge that is freed from elaborations; the Father Tantra student has knowledge of bliss, clarity and

winds; the Mother Tantra student has knowledge of bliss, emptiness, and extensive offerings; students of skillful means and wisdom have knowledge of non¬duality; students of Mahâmudrâ have knowledge of transcending the mind; students of Dzogchen have knowledge of the great primordiality. In that way, as for all knowledge, it is knowledge of the knowledge of objects. Subjects are not thatness. Lacking an object, the mind is without knowledge; one is fettered by knowledge of whatever is known.

According to The Great Speech Chapter, by their very nature, each of these systems has a preconceived object of knowledge and thus continues to be bound by the cognitive binary of a knowing subject and a known object. As the Chod teaching presented in The Great Speech Chapter does not advocate such objective constructs of ultimate actuality, it is not fettered to objects of knowledge like these tenet systems.

In his commentary, Rangjung Dorjé suggests a different reading of this passage. His gloss of the reference to Mahamudra appears fairly straightforward: “One group asserts the transcendence of discursive mind and states that Mahamudra is the ultimate of both [Father and Mother Tantra]).” At first glance, although Rangjung Dorjé situates Mahamudra as the ultimate Tantra teaching, he attributes this idea to a particular Buddhist “group.” Rangjung Dorjé then supplements his gloss with a reference to Tilopa's Personal Instructions on Mahamudra (Phyag rgya chenpo'i man ngag): “Mantra expressions, paramita,

vinaya, sûtra, abhi[[[dharma]]], and the like, as each has its own textual tradition and tenet system, the luminous Mahamudra will not be seen; one is not able to see the luminosity because of one's own wishes.” Using Tilopa, Rangjung Dorjé is able to insist on the primacy and transcendence of Mahamudra even as he appears to be agreeing with Machik's classification of Mahamudra as one school among many. Intriguingly, Rangjung Dorje's citation of Tilopa resonates with a later passage of The Great Speech Chapter in which Machik says that “the perfection of wisdom (shes rab pha rol phyin pa; prajnaparamita) is not

established through objects of the discursive mind” (16/465), even if such an object is the foundation of a tenet system. Whereas for Machik, prajnaparamita is descriptive of the perfected wisdom that is obscured by clinging to the discursive objects of tenet systems or particular texts, Mahamudra takes this place for Rangjung Dorje. Through using Tilopa, Rangjung Dorje makes a subtle revision to

Machik's argument, intimating that Mahamudra is not merely a tenet system or a discursive object of a tenet system; for Rangjung Dorje, Mahamudra also signifies ultimate actuality and thus transcends the critique of tenet systems, as the prajnaparamita does for Machik.

The innovation of Rangjung Dorje's interpretation becomes more obvious when contrasted with a commentary on The Great Speech Chapter composed by his near contemporary, the Nyingma adept Dorje Lingpa (Rdo rje gling pa, 1346-1405). Dorje Lingpa follows The Great Speech Chapter in pointing out the confusions of the fundamental standpoints of the various traditions, including both Mahamudra and

Dzogchen. Unlike Rangjung Dorje, Dorje Lingpa does not find textual authority to establish the superiority of any particular tenet system—not even the Dzogchen perspective, as one might expect from a Nyingmapa. Rangjung Dorje's implicit association of Mahamudra with Chod thus appears to be his own interpolation.

If one were to become familiar with The Great Speech Chapter only through Rangjung Dorje's commentaries, one might think that Chod philosophy is inherently associated with Mahamudra. Since the *Anuttaratantra Mahamudra is central to the Kagyu lineages, it is unsurprising to find Rangjung Dorje construing Mahamudra as the highest teaching in his commentary on Chod. What is more difficult to understand is why Rangjung Dorje should engage with Chod so

extensively. Perhaps Chod was popular enough at the time that Rangjung Dorje felt the need to assimilate its teachings and its practitioners to the Kagyu tradition, or perhaps the Kagyu saw Chod praxis as particularly efficacious. By aligning Chod with Mahamudra, Rangjung Dorje initiated the historical process through which Chod became known as “Mahamudra Chod.” While Kagyu teachings were apparently accorded greater popularity, prestige, or efficacy by incorporating Chod, Chod was able to survive as a praxis through its incorporation by dominant schools such as the Kagyu.

The Kagyupas were not the only Tibetan Buddhists interested in the praxis of Chod. The First Panchen Lama of the Geluk School, Lozang Chokyi Gyaltsen (Blo bzang chos kyi rgyal mtshan, 1570-1662) wrote a treatise on Chod in the late 16th or early 17th century entitled Chod Instructions for Those Who Desire Liberation (Gcod kyi gdams pa thar ‘dod ded dpon). This text became a source for many commentaries by other Gelukpas. In another text entitled The Mahamudra Root Text of the Precious Ganden and Kagyu Lineages, the Main

Road of the Victorious Ones (Dge Idan bka’ brgyud rinpo che’iphyag chen rtsa ba rgyal ba’i gzhung lam), Lozang Chokyi Gyaltsen catalogues various teaching lineages including Chod and Zhije. In this work, Lozang Chokyi Gyaltsen's rhetorical aim is to argue for the ultimate incorporation of all these lineages within the Geluk-Kagyu Mahamudra system, namely “the Main Road of the Victorious Ones.”

One key way in which Lozang Chokyi Gyaltsen assimilates Chod to the Geluk tradition can be traced by following the adaptations of the well-known Chod saying discussed above: “With regard to what has been concentrated by tightening, relax by loosening.” Versions of this dictum are included in various Chod texts, including The Distinctive Eightfold Supplementary Section, where it is mentioned at the conclusion of a discussion on meditative cultivation. Frequently recited in other texts attributed to Machik, for many Tibetan Buddhists this instruction has become an aphorism signifying Chod teachings as a whole.

The ubiquitousness of this saying can be attributed to its use in subsequent texts. This aphorism is cited by Tsongkhapa in his 14th century work, An Instruction Manual on the Profound Path of Chod (Zab lam gcod kyi khrid yig): “With regard to what has been concentrated by tightening, relax by loosening. One stays in that way, resting in rig pa [or “enlightened knowing”]). In The Mahamudra Root Text of the

Precious Ganden and Kagyu Lineages, Lozang Chokyi Gyaltsen picks up on Tsong kha pa's instructions by repeating this dictum, although he elides the reference to rig pa or “enlightened knowing.” Following Tsongkhapa, Lozang Chokyi Gyaltsen, distills the teachings of Chod to this mnemonic core, making them more easily assimilable to the Geluk-Kagyu Mahamudra tradition.

When we return this dictum, “with regard to what has been concentrated by tightening, relax by loosening” to its original context in The Distinctive Eightfold Supplementary Section, we see that Tsongkhapa and Lozang Chokyi Gyaltsen have extracted it from a detailed technical instruction on a Chod visualization practice. In the context of Machik's teaching, this instruction follows a description of the meditative experiences of persons of varying capacities. According to Machik, through the Chod visualization practice she describes, a practitioner of high capacity will have an experience of “Freedom

from Elaborations” or “spros bral”; a person of middling capacity will have an experience of “Direct Crossing” or “thod rgat"; and a person of low capacity will have an experience of “Possessing Strength” or “shugs can.” After one has concentrated by tightening, that is, by cultivating the stages of the visualization, one relaxes by loosening this mental functioning, with the ultimate goal of an experience beyond subject/object duality. In other words, once one has a particular meditative experience that can be conceptualized, one must not cling to the particular result, but relax one's hold. Just as

Machik warns against clinging to tenet systems in The Great Speech Chapter, here she is warning against clinging to meditative experiences.

However, in the context of the works of Tsongkhapa and Lozang Chokyi Gyaltsen, this instruction is presented as an aphorism definitive of Chod praxis as a whole. While this is arguably justified by Machik's claim that such instruction is the “pith” of meditative cultivation, removing this saying from its particular context allows it to be accommodated to a range of philosophical foundations. By eliding Machik's specific instructions for Chod practice, Tsongkhapa and Lozang Chokyi Gyaltsen are able to construe Chod as easily compatible with Geluk and Mahamudra philosophies. This association of The

Mahamudra Root Text of the Ganden and Kagyu Lineages with the praxis of Chod continues to the present: in his text on the Ganden Aural Lineage of Chod, the 20th century Geluk Chod practitioner Lozang Donden (Blo bzang don ldan) specifically recommends Lozang Chokyi Gyaltsen's Mahamudra Root Text to persons wishing to learn about Chod. As in Rangjung Dorje's Commentary on The Great Speech Chapter, one could argue that the Gelukpa adaptation of the aphorism,

“what has been concentrated by tightening; relax by loosening,” both preserves and transvalues the original teachings of Chod. Reduced to a core principle, as encouraged by such pithy formulae found in its root texts, Chod becomes flexible enough to be adapted as an efficacious means along varying dharma paths. For example, in his 16th century text, Moonbeams of Mahamudra (Phyag chen zla ba'i ‘od zer), Takpo Tashi Namgyal presents a form of Chod known as “kusulu Ishog" as an expedient method available to those who follow the Kalacakra injunction against the Mahamudra yoga of union with a human consort.

The extraction of discrete parts of Chod teachings from their broader philosophical contexts is symptomatic of how Chod has been incorporated into and transmitted through other Tibetan Buddhist lineages. For example, as I explained in chapter three, Chod practices gradually merged with pre-existing models of deity yoga, such the Vajrayogini practices within Nyingma, Kagyu, and Geluk traditions. Fundamental Chod practices such as those described in The Common

Eightfold Supplementary Section do not tend to involve the kind of deity visualization common to *anuttaratantra practices, but many Mahamudra Chod practices have been reconciled with other lineages through the employment of such visualizations. The incorporation of Chod by the Geluk and Kagyu schools has thus had equivocal results: on the one hand, fragments of Chod teachings are preserved, but on the other, the distinctiveness of Chod is diminished in the service of different fundamental standpoints such as that of Mahamudra.

The historical intersection of Chod and Mahamudra has not simply been a unilateral process, in which Chod was adapted and altered to serve the purposes of Mahamudra teachings. In various texts, the Chod tradition seems to be adapting and altering Mahamudra principles for its own purposes. One example of this inversion occurs in the teachings attributed to Machik contained in The Great Explanation. In the chapter framed as teachings that Machik gives to her son Thonyon Samdrub during his extended retreat, Machik explains the profound and especial meaning of Chod. Perhaps reflecting the association of Chod and

Mahamudra which had become conventional by the time The Great Explanation was published in this form, the text contends that Mahamudra Chod is the heart essence (snying khu) of all Dharma and the pinnacle of all teachings. Using a popular rhetorical stance employed by advocates of particular systems of Buddhist teaching, The Great Explanation also claims that Chod is the superior essence of all Sutra and Tantra teachings rolled into one. After a general discussion of how Chod follows Sutra teachings on the problems of ego-clinging and the importance of generosity, the text contextualizes Chod within Mahamudra. Echoing traditional exegesis of the four seals of *anuttaryoga tantra as presented in texts such as the Vajramala,"^' the text describes the

three seals of phenomena (chos kyi phyag rgya chen po), consort or karmamudra (las kyi phyag rgya chenpo) and spiritual commitment (dam tshig giphyag rgya chenpo). Here each of these three seals is called a “great seal,” while the fourth seal, traditionally referred to as the “Great Seal,” is subdivided into two: the Mahamudra of bliss-emptiness (bde stong phyag rgya chen po) and the Mahamudra of clarity-emptiness (gsal stong phyag rgya chen po]]). (While these

two seals are discussed in Mahamudra teachings, they are not included in conventional three- or four-fold taxonomies.) Finally, the text adds a sixth and predominant seal: the Chod of Mahamudra (phyag rgya chen po'i gcod). In order to explain the pre-eminence of this Mahamudra, The Great Explanation follows tradition in providing a functional etymology of “mudra,” translated as “phyag rgya” in Tibetan. It states that “phyag” or “hand” signifies objective reality and “rgya” or “seal”

signifies the absence of true existence of objects. It thus posits that it is only through the practice of Chod that one can attain correct realization of actuality. This section concludes by maintaining that Machik's system of Chod not only is the perfection of Mahamudra, but also subsumes the unexcelled Madhyamaka and the fruitional teaching of Dzogchen.

Perhaps by the time The Great Explanation was circulating in its present form, the subordination of Chod to Mahamudra in the compound “Mahamudra Chod” was firmly established, or perhaps a resurgent Chod tradition became strong enough to resist absorption into Mahamudra. At any rate, the innovative taxonomy

of Mahamudra, as conveyed in The Great Explanation, demonstrates 19th-century Chod reasserting its identity and emphasizing Chod in the formulation Mahamudra Chod. The exegesis of The Great Explanation suggests that Mahamudra is incomplete without the complementary understanding of reality that is generated by the Chod teachings. In fact, the Mahamudra Chod of The Great Explanation goes so far as to critique the common conception of Mahamudra: “A few

ordinary people have the delusion together with their experiences of alertness and concentration that the innate characteristics of mind are simply clarity and simply emptiness, and they say that is ‘Mahamudra.' Even [clarity and emptiness] are not innate characteristics of the mind; because such Mahamudras of mis¬knowing are the dharma systems of the stupid and foolish, do not focus on them, leave them at a distance.” In other words, if Mahamudra is not complemented with Chod, it will lead to mistaken knowledge and confusion. As an antithesis to the assimilation of Chod by Mahamudra, we see in The Great Explanation an attempt to subsume Mahamudra teachings under the all¬encompassing praxis of Chod.

Although The Great Explanation was asserting the primacy of Chod as late as the 19th century, Chod has an ambivalent legacy within the construct of Mahamudra Chod. While Chod is perpetuated through its incorporation in other tenet systems, it might be argued that some of its key original aspects have been overshadowed or forgotten. As part of a study of the transmissions of Chod praxis, I hope that these preliminary analyses of Mahamudra Chod will provide some material for understanding how originally distinct systems merged through the circulation and interpretation of teachings and practices. In

addition, given the subordinate status of the Great Practice Vehicle of Chod to dominant traditions such as the Geluk and Kagyu schools, continued investigation into the symbiosis of Chod and Mahamudra may contribute to an understanding of how power relationships are historically negotiated in and through Tibetan Buddhist lineages.

THE SUPPLEMENTARY CHAPTER, THE QUINTESSENTIAL CHAPTER, AND THE SUPPLEMENTARY SECTIONS

While we can trace the early development of Chod through Rangjung Dorje's commentaries on The Great Speech Chapter, the other five foundational texts attributed to Machik demonstrate the complexity of the early Chod tradition. These five texts take a variety of forms, from interview to didactic treatises to directions for practice. They also demonstrate a range of approaches to topics and themes central to Chod and elaborated in The Great Speech Chapter and Rangjung Dorje's commentaries. By tracing some of these key elements, including the Negative Forces, body offering, types of practitioners, and practice instructions, I aim to illustrate the heterogeneity of foundational Chod.

The Supplementary Chapter

The full name of The Supplementary Chapter is The Supplementary Chapter of oral instructions of the Prajhaparamita (Shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa’i man ngag yang tshoms zhus lanma). It is in the form of an interview or audience between Machik and a student or students, almost consistently presented in the form of seven-syllable verse. Carol Savvas states that The Supplementary Chapter is “said to be answers given by Machig Labdron in response to the questions asked by her son, Gyalwa Dongrub" (1990, 311 n. 1); however, she does not provide any evidence to support such a claim and thus far I have not

found any evidence to substantiate it. Given that the questions are varied in their concerns and in the degrees of expertise and knowledge that they demonstrate, I would suggest that there are various students asking the questions—one of whom may have been Gyalwa Dondrub (a spiritual son of Machik's discussed in chapter two above). The editions of the texts translated herein divide the text into two components: Twenty-five Supplementary [Questions] to

the Instructional Interview (zhus lan gyi gdams pa yang rtsom nyi shu rtsa lnga pa), and The Vajra Play Interview (zhus len rdo rje rolpa). Rather than twenty-five questions (nyi zhu rtsa lnga), as suggested by the title of the first section, twenty-eight questions and their replies are presented. This might be due to additional material being added since the text became known by this title. In addition to Twenty-five Supplementary [Questions] to the Instructional Interview, The Vajra Play Interview has an additional nineteen questions with much briefer replies.

The topic of the Twenty-five Supplementary [Questions] to the Instructional Interview is the practice of Buddhist Dharma in general and of Chod in particular. It begins with outlining fundamental Buddhist teachings, including the rarity of a human rebirth out of all possible rebirths, the

improbability of being born with awareness of Buddhist teachings, and the results of performing harmful acts that increase one's karmic demerit. The interview then turns to questions of how one has the capacity for faith in the teachings and how to cultivate such faith. As in Rangjung Dorje's Commentary, The Supplementary Chapter emphasizes that the Prajhaparamita is the most excellent Dharma teaching, though this text develops a “Chod” teacing of the Prajhaparamita.

Rather than providing a logical argument for the unity of wisdom and emptiness as the underpinning of actuality, the teacher of The Supplementary Chapter introduces the Negative Forces as the object of concern for the practitioner. The seventh question asks, “What is the most excellent of all Dharma?” The response is that “[i]t is stated by all perfected buddhas that this Great Mother Perfection of Wisdom is the most excellent among all Dharma [teachings].” This exchange sets up a Chod interpretation of the Prajhaparamita which foregrounds the method for “outshining” the Negative Forces (bdud rnams zil gyis

non par ‘gyur) through the practice of not fabricating signs in the mind and thus abiding in the expanse of the Great Mother. According to this text, “[i]f one does not fabricate signs in the mind, although one does not train in the stages of grounds and paths, one will abide in the Great Mother Expanse. Having understood the primordial meaning of that Great Mother, the afflictions of mental exertion become pacified.” Training in the Prajnaparamita, and

thus abiding in the uncontrived, birthless, deathless ground of the Great Mother, one is freed from the ignorance of being dominated by the proliferation of signs that defines samsara. But as in The Great Speech Chapter, the ultimate understanding is self-arising: “uncontrived, birthless, obstructionless, by means of one's own nature, there is luminosity. The Mother that is the source of the buddhas of the three times is exactly that—there is nothing else. As for abiding in that state, it is abiding in the Great Mother Expanse." Through the practice of Chod the Negative Forces will be “outshone," dissolved by the luminosity of one's own unadulterated nature.

As in The Great Speech Chapter, The Supplementary Chapter asserts that Negative Forces are created by one's own mind, but here this idea is emphasized through the curious simile of “Raksa's spit": “there are the Negative Forces with Obstruction, the Negative Forces without Obstruction, the Joyous Negative

Forces, and the Negative Forces Producing Pride. Having arisen from oneself, they harm oneself. For example, they are like a Raksa's spit." In Indic mythology, Raksas are often considered to be flesh-eating demons; however, in Buddhist texts such as the Alavaka Sutta (SN 10.12), a Rakshasa who beleaguers the Buddha is akin to a Mara. One would think that, from the context of this simile, Machik is suggesting that a Raksa is not immune to its own spit or venom.

In the eleventh question, Machik reiterates that the method for outshining the Negative Forces is a crucial point of her instruction. In this response, when one maintains the experience of not deliberately grasping onto the dualities of subject and object and not producing cognitive thought, they will not produce the mental objects that are Negative Forces: “A mental object that arises is a Negative Force; the grasping subject welcomes the grasped object.

The grasped are not grasped, noble child!” This idea of Negative Forces is complicated in the twenty-sixth question, where we are told that the Negative Forces are themselves the Dharmakaya. By recognizing one’s mind as the Dharmakaya, one should not fabricate Negative Forces (or anything else): “As for resting in the unfabricated, how can the apparitions of Negative Forces arise?” As she does at length in The Great Speech Chapter, Machik suggests that desire to attain the Three Bodies should not interfere with the non-dual perception of Negative Forces.

The Supplementary Chapter does not extensively discuss body offering practices. In response to the twentieth question (“What should one do when fever arises in oneself?”), however, Machik replies that a practitioner should repeatedly cut up her body and offer it “to the assembly,” with the result that her “discursive thoughts will be concealed in the treasure of Dharmata.” This is a slightly more descriptive passage on body offering than we see in the

passage in The Great Speech Chapter that I discussed above, where one is merely encouraged to consider oneself as a corpse. But like The Great Speech Chapter, The Supplementary Chapter does not provide instruction on cutting up one’s body and making it into an offering. This passage is followed by Machik remarking that “[i]f one does not understand how to turn adverse conditions into favorable ones, even lofty views are realms for going astray. One

who is overconfident about simply having an empty mind is one who is grasped by a Secret Negative Force.” Here the “Secret Negative Force” appears to be a synonym for the “Negative Force Producing Pride” that is mentioned earlier in The Supplementary Chapter, as well as in other Chod texts, as one of the four main types of Negative Forces.

The second section of The Supplementary Chapter, The Vajra Play Interview, begins with a request for a “complete summary of the Chod system of Negative Forces of the Noble Mother (a ma jo mo).” This summary distinguishes between two types of practitioners: “faithful ones” and “knowledgeable ones.” The faithful ones “have not abandoned the abyss of the lower state of existence”; the Chod teaching for these individuals emphasizes that they should protect

their commitments in order to become liberated from samsara and not be reborn in a lower form of existence. The knowledgeable ones are those “who are not placed in the fetters of samsara.” Again we find Machik being critical of doctrinal tenet systems. These “knowledgeable ones” are not to “enter the inferior gates of the tenet systems”; rather, they are to gain “meditative experience of bliss and clarity.” By entering the “unmistaken” gate of Chod, they will have “the experience of meditation without remembering and without mental events.” As in The Great Speech Chapter, Machik emphasizes that knowledgeable Buddhists should not be seduced by the lure of tenet systems, which are ultimately just another form of mental fetter.

The Quintessential Chapter

The Quintessential Chapter of the Chod System of Negative Forces, The Instructions of the Prajnaparamita (Shes rab kyipha rol tuphyinpa’i man ngag bdud kyi gcod yul las [s]nying tshoms), known in brief as “The Quintessential Chapter,” opens with the following acknowledgement: “I take refuge, prostrating to the mother of all Victors [[[buddhas]]]. The meaning of this teaching by the liberated emanation body of the Lady Labki dronma on the intent of the Prajnaparamita has five parts.” The title might indicate that it is a dgongs gter, a “mind treasure” originating from Machik and transmitted to the mind of the author.

The structure of this text is more systematic than The Great Speech Chapter, with clearer delineations of its organization common to more scholastic treatises such as Rangjung Dorje's commentaries on The Great Speech Chapter. The text contains references not only to the Prajnaparamita teachings in general, but also to the Samcayagatha, the sources for many of the quotes used by Rangjung Dorje in his Commentary on the Great Speech Chapter. In addition, The Quintessential Chapter is not presented as a dialogue, but as a didactic treatise. This generical style might suggest an influence of

scholasticism. In contrast with The Great Speech Chapter and The Supplementary Chapter, which depict direct transmission from teacher to student, The Quintessential Chapter marks an attempt to organize a system of Chod teachings.

The Quintessential Chapter cites the Samcayagatha two times. The first citation occurs when Machik is discussing how one's mind should rest naturally in the pervasive display of thatness: “[t]his is the realm of space, inseparable and indivisible.” The orthodox Prajnaparamita teachings as presented in the Samcayagatha are used to elaborate her teaching: “[i]n this way, when one understands how to rest in the state of identification, the expressive qualities, experience, signs of accomplishment, and so forth, occur of their own accord.” It is interesting to note that the gloss introduces distinct

characteristics of experience—qualities and signs, for example, that will occur of their own accord—to interpret a passage that is using the metaphor of inseparable and indivisible space. The second passage from the Samcayagatha is cited following a brief exposition by Machik on different types of practitioners; she explains how those with the best capacities, those with mediocre capacities, and those with the worst capacities take Negative Forces on

the path. The Samcayagatha passage posits that “through association with wisdom, it should be known as the equanimous place.” The Quintessential elaborates on this passage to claim the “mind itself (sems nyid) will be the unwavering place with regard to the goal of equanimity.” According to Machik's interpretation, the mind is not merely figuratively associated with an equanimous place, but will itself “be” the place. As we have seen above, a similar strategy is employed by Rangjung Dorjé when he draws on the Samcayagatha in his Commentary on the Great Speech Chapter, suggesting a level of

commentary in The Quintessential by someone other than Machik. Such authoritative associations, as in Rangjung Dorjé, help to legitimate Chod in relation to Buddhist traditions such as the Prajñaparamita. At the same time, the Chod teaching innovates on the Samcayagatha message, creatively interpreting it for its audience.

Chapter explicitly describes practices that later become closely identified with Chod (some of which I discuss in detail in chapter five). The text begins with instructions on preliminary practice that are comparable with developed sadhana, including a seven-limbed practice that includes an opening of taking refuge and a conclusion of dedicating merit. These instructions could either constitute a full practice or provide a frame for more elaborate practices.

The Quintessential Chapter describes various forms of meditative practice to rest the mind, overcome discriminating modes of consciousness, and realize the space-like nature of mind. The text also elaborates antidotes for states of consciousness that are not conducive to good meditative practice. Negative Forces, or Düd, are frequently discussed in the text as representative of flawed, dualistic mental activity. The characteristics of successful meditative practice are also outlined.

The Quintessential Chapter also provides advice on the best places to practice. It particularly recommends places where there are deities or demons (lha 'dref'8 that will challenge one's cognitive composure and produce strong reactions of ego-clinging. The practitioner's response to these places will make her aware of the activities of her mind that are to be severed, including the projection of such forms as the body, deities, and demons, and the correspondent grasping at objects.

Like The Great Speech Chapter, The Quintessential Chapter does not explicitly present a body offering practice. However, The Quintessential Chapter does make several statements on giving the body. The first example advocates that one should give one's body to the deities and spirits without concern; if one becomes distracted by such deities and spirits, then one should relax by relaxing the mind. The second passage reassures the practitioner that although

the meditation might be dangerous, it will ultimately not be harmful. Although the meditation includes the practitioner visualizing her own self-dissection and offering her own heart, and “even if various unpleasant things occur such as it being said that you are dead at this time," one should not consider such unpleasant things to be true; rather, with a tranquil consciousness one should rest in the vast mind—the essence of the Mother—that is generated. The practitioner is encouraged to “rest without fear or anxiety, without pride or conceptual thought" and to recognize that “it is the time of authentically

severing erroneous views," such as cognitive dualism and attachment to subjects and objects. Here The Quintessential Chapter expands on the technique in The Great Speech Chapter that advocates considering oneself to be like a corpse, adding the practice of offering one's dissected corpse. The final mention of body offering occurs when the text counsels the practitioner on how she should address problems of “hungry ghost sinking" (yi dwags kyi byings), the signs of which include “deep sleep, sluggish consciousness, or alternatively, an unhappy heart, a mind that is not abiding in its own self¬nature, and gasping for breath." In such instances, the practitioner should approach her teacher and go for refuge. In addition, she should give her body, illness and thought to the spirits, discarding her naked body in a dreadful place, and perform activities such as jumping, running, and twirling to energize the body and quiet the mind.

The Common Eightfold Supplementary Section

The theme of The Common Eightfold Supplementary Section (Thun mong gi le lag brgyad), in common with all of these foundational texts, is the role of the mind in the construction of Negative Forces and dualistic perception. As in Machik's other major texts, The Common Section explains that the mind also has the capacity for enlightened knowing that does not perceive subjects and objects and is primordially peaceful. The Negative Forces are divided into two categories, the Unobstructed and the Obstructed, neither of which can exist apart from the Negative Force Producing Pride. Unlike in other teachings

attributed to Machik, the Joyous Negative Force is not mentioned here. The Common Section is the least systematically organized of the three Supplementary Section texts. The Common Section explicitly states that it is teaching the oral instructions of Chod. Although The Common Section does not have an explicit outline, the end of each section clearly identifies each of the text's eight topics. The sections are described as follows: [1] the section on

uncontrived resting and thusness; [2] the section on the non-existence of grasping by an antidote; [3] the section on connections with effort; [4] the section on the occurrence of attainments through gaining experience; [5] the section on the introduction to becoming a buddha within one life; [6] the section on the marks that distinguish the places for straying; [7] the section of the heart essence [of the teaching]; and [8] the section on the instructions on gaining experience. It is quite lyrical and metrical, with most lines consisting of seven syllables, and the

rhetorical exclamation “E ma ho" (translated here as “How wonderful!") conveys an immediacy that is lacking in the other two Supplementary texts. As in The Great Speech Chapter, The Common Section teaches from the first person perspective, often employing colorful metaphors, as in the following passage: “Through skill in means regarding the single non-duality, even speaking about various things, sentient beings, by the flaws of their rational minds, are like beetles wrapped in

fiber. This has been examined by me, an old lady: even dharma practitioners, are fettered by dharma; desiring liberation, they are once again fettered; desiring the Chod system, they are fettered yet again.” By speaking in the first person as “an old lady,” Machik encourages her students to believe that they are also capable of profound realization. Through the striking image of “beetles wrapped in fiber,” Machik reminds her students that even cognition of

and desire for an “object” (such as “dharma” or “liberation”) or attachment to a particular “system” (even if that system is Chod itself) will obstruct their realization of non-duality. Here The Common Section echoes The Great Speech Chapter in its critique of the division of the Buddhist Dharma into schools or vehicles, since these divisions are mentally constructed: “The division into nine [vehicles], as well, is by the mind (sems); things do not exist apart from mind (sems las ma gtogs), things are the mental thoughts (blo yi bsam).” The taxonomy of the nine vehicles is predominantly employed by the Nyingma school of Tibetan Buddhism, which may be the direct object of Machik’s criticism here.

The Uncommon Eightfold Supplementary Section

The Uncommon Eightfold Supplementary Section is organized as a scholastic treatise, with a clear outline of its contents and agenda. As is indicated by the title, the text has eight sections:

[1] The section on the meaning of the name;

[2] The section on teaching of the key points;

[3] The section on experiential teaching correlated with the faculties;

[4] The section on teaching the dispelling obstructions;

[5] The section on teaching about places of potential error;

[6] The section on containing distractions;

[7] The section on accepting any kind of experience when illness occurs; and

[8] The section on enhancement of practice when strong.

Unlike the eight topics addressed in The Common Section, which are more philosophical in nature, the topics of The Uncommon Section contain more explicit instructions for practice.

The second part of The Uncommon Section provides instruction for a guru yoga practice (bla ma rnal ‘byor). The guru who is the object of this practice is one's lineage lama. Although the text does not indicate a specific lineage, the lama to be visualized is an accomplished being (siddha) who is naked, holding a damaru and a khatvanga, and wearing six bone ornaments (587/141). It does not contextualize the guru yoga practice within the seven-limbed practice as many highly formalized Vajrayana sadhana practices do, although it does presuppose familiarity with the seven-limbed practice in the fourth section (591/145).

The third part of The Uncommon Section discusses different practices depending on practitioners' abilities: highest, mediocre and lowest. No matter the ability of the practitioner, the experiential practices described are all nurtured and supported through engaging with apparitions of non-humans, which will prevent distraction by a happy mind and the Joyful Negative Force. In addition, all practitioners are reminded that no matter the environment of their practice, they should not act hypocritically or for profit, nor should they be separate from emptiness, compassion and devotion to their lama; if they act otherwise, they engage with Negative Forces (589-90/143-44).

The Uncommon Section makes several references to body offering practices (lus sbyin), initially in the introductory section, which states that Chod practice is directed toward severance of clinging to the body and cutting through the root of mind. Unlike in the other texts I translate, The Uncommon Section does not mention Negative Forces (Dud) in the context of describing practices such as body offering. In this text, the role of Negative Forces is

fulfilled by “non¬humans” (mi ma yin) and “negative influences” (gdon). A brief passage in the third section contextualizes body offering within an experience of a practitioner being tested by non-humans in a solitary place. The practitioner is initially advised to use loving kindness and compassion in

an attempt to pacify the non-humans. When this does not work, the practitioner is assured that the non-humans “will be pacified by throwing away one's body-mind aggregates as food. The activities of a gentle Chod practitioner are not abusive, forceful actions. Compassion, loving- kindness, and the spirit of enlightenment should be brought onto the path of freedom for oneself and all others.” Unlike in the other foundational texts I discuss, The Uncommon Section emphasizes the practice of offering over the practice of resting in the non-discriminating mind.

In the sixth section, the practice of body offering is described as a method for manifesting negative forces when one's Chod practice has gone stagnant. In order to excite the negative elements, the practitioner should strip naked, blow a thighbone trumpet, play a damaru, and summon deities and demons by calling out their names, enjoining them to “all gather here because I am doing Chod!” Following this, the practitioner makes offerings of white and red tormas. The final instruction is to “complete the collection of merit by giving the body's flesh that was brought and blood that was brought when one's

body and mind were separated.” The practice of offering the body is also discussed in the seventh part within a description of how to practice when one is ill. In this part, one is advised to go to a severe place and to cut the thought of clinging to one's body by giving it to the negative influences, announcing that ‘“You and I both are now interconnected through a single aspiration [the aspiration to attain happiness and avoid suffering]. Therefore, moreover, by offering this body of mine to you [the negative elements], you remain here! Because the profound aural lineage [was transmitted to me], I will

meditatively cultivate the correct meaning in the aim of purifying the faults of us both.”' Unlike the “old lady” of The Common Section, the author of this passage acknowledges that she has received an aural transmission of the system, not that the system originated with her. The text advises that no matter what the type of illness, it will abate if one separates the mind and body in this way and mentally relaxes in the meaning of actuality.

The role of active compassion in Chod is evident in the seventh part which addresses how to heal oneself or other people afflicted by illnesses; this section is more elaborate than the brief discussion in section four of experiences of illness that are obstructions to one's own practice. The importance of grounding Chod in compassion, loving kindness and the spirit of enlightenment is also in the fifth part of The Uncommon Section. This part describes three areas in which a Chod practitioner might deviate from the authentic teaching and thus take erroneous actions: 1) Chod that deviates into divination medicine; 2) Chod that deviates into attributes of the desire realm; and 3) Chod that deviates into wrathful mantras. In addition, the cultivation of compassion toward all types of sentient beings of the six realms as the method of “extracting the profit” — of augmenting one's practice—is central to the eighth and final section of the text.

The Uncommon Section concludes with the author addressing the topic of the attainment of the Three Bodies. Unlike in The Great Speech Chapter, where the practitioner is cautioned against desiring attainment of such a reified concept of enlightenment, The Uncommon Section presents the Three Bodies in a more positive light. In The Uncommon Section, the practitioner is encouraged to identify non-dual awareness with these Bodies of enlightenment, which are represented as progressive stages of realization. Addressing the a question regarding the attainment of the Three Bodies, the student is informed that

“[o]ne who has understood and realized the emptiness of all things is the dharmakaya.” Once attaining identification with the dharmakaya, and with the power of aspiration for the enlightenment of all sentient beings, one will achieve the nirmanakaya. Once one has attained the Three Bodies, identity with the sambhogakaya is achieved with the unbiased understanding regarding the aims of all beings that arises through non-conceptuality and non-duality. The svabhavikadharmakaya (ngo bo nyid chos kyi sku) is the essence that transcends thought and expression, a product of understanding the inseparability of the

Three Bodies. By including a discussion of the svabhavikadharmakaya, a Body of the essence of reality which sublates the other Bodies,

Machik again uses Mahayana teachings in her own innovative system. Although The Uncommon Section is traditionally attributed to Machik herself, it contains more elaborate discussions of topics familiar from The Great Speech Chapter, which suggests that this is either a more mature work by Machik or that it has undergone substantial emendation in its transmission. The Distinctive Eightfold Supplementary Section

The Distinctive Eightfold Supplementary Section (Khyad par gyi le lag brgyadpa) is similar to The Uncommon Section in that it is another systematically organized manual of practical instruction on Chod. The colophon states that “this is the Practical Instruction of the Lady Machik, The Distinctive Eightfold Supplementary Section on the Chod System of the Negative Forces from the Prajnaparamita." " The eight sections of this text are identified as:

1) The entrance (‘jugpa), going for refuge with the conception of the spirit of enlightenment;

2) The blessings, the separation of the body and mind;

3) The meditative cultivation, without mindfulness and without mental activity;

4) The practice, the giving up of the mental and physical aggregates of being as food;

5) The view, not straying into the activity sphere of the Negative Forces;

6) The practical instruction, the pacification of temporary hindrances of body and mind;

7) The teaching of the Chod commitments; and

8) The teaching on the fruits of gaining experience.

The impersonal nature of this text—not being in the form of a dialogue between Machik and an audience, but rather in the form of a scholastic treatise—might suggest that it has been interpreted

as a transmission from Machik and is not a direct teaching given by Machik herself.

In comparison to the other Supplementary Sections texts, The Distinctive Section is unusual in giving specific instructions for visualizing an assembly field (tshogs zhing) to support one's practice of paying homage and going for refuge to lineage figures. The lineage in The Distinctive Section includes:

the Great Mother, Prajnaparamita; the Lord and Victor Sakyamuni; Machik Labdron; her two spiritual sons, the Victorious Dondrub, and the Savior of Beings, Thonyon Samdrub; the Buddhas of the Ten Directions; the Dharma; and the Sangha. Illustrating that it is a Vajrayana practice, one also pays homage and goes for refuge to one's lama, an assembly of one's personal deities (yi dam), and the heroes and heroines who protect the Dharma (603/147). It is interesting

to note that this is a very spare assembly field, without mention of Padampa Sangye or other historical figures other than Machik's two spiritual sons, Dondrub and Samdrub, whose relation to Machik and their roles in the transmission of Chod are discussed in chapter three of my study. The Distinctive Section also provides more explicit details for visualizing a body offering practice than in the other texts attributed to Machik. In this text, the body offering practice directly follows the visualization of the assembly field gathered around the Great Mother, the embodiment of

Prajnaparamita. The practitioner is directed to “visualize to the degree one's mind can hold" the dissection and offering of her body to the members of the assembly field: “Think that there is a sword of wisdom in the right hand; the first part that is the head, having cut right through from the neck, by making an offering to the lama and the [Three] Jewels, think ‘May this give you great pleasure.' Likewise, having broken into the vital [region of] the chest, having entered into the five vital organs [i.e., the heart, lungs, liver, spleen, and kidneys], and so forth, think ‘May you [the recipient(s)] be pleased by this offering.'" The description of the

dissection that the practitioner is to enact through visualization is more graphic and visceral in this text than in the others I have discussed. According to The Distinctive Section, this body offering practice can be considered a complete practice in and of itself. It includes the necessary activities of generating the supreme mind of enlightenment and going for refuge, in addition to the offering of the body, which increases one's store of virtuous merit, and the activity of resting in the unfabricated state following the offering, which increases one's store of intuitive wisdom.

Later passages of The Distinctive Section return to the subject of offering the body with kindness and compassion and provide various methods for this practice. According to the ability of the practitioner, different types of sentient beings are identified as recipients for the offerings, including obstructors, harm doers and negative influences. In addition, the practice of offering one's body is explicitly linked to the abstract ideal of the perfection of wisdom, or prajnaparamita, through a passage from “the noble teaching by the Noble One”: “Because the perfection of wisdom is uncreatedness

in the mind, all things are non-creation itself in the mind. Because the perfection of wisdom is equanimity, all things are equanimity. Because the perfection of wisdom is birthlessness, all things are birthlessness. Because the perfection of wisdom is ceaselessness, all things are ceaselessness.” The Distinctive Section is the only one of the supplementary texts attributed to Machik to invoke the perfection of wisdom, one of the six virtues in Buddhist teachings.

As in other works attributed to Machik, The Distinctive Section distinguishes among the experiences of practitioners with high, mediocre and low capacities for spiritual development. As I mentioned in the Mahamudra section, those with the highest faculties will have an experience of spros bral, or simplicity and freedom from elaborations (a common component of Mahamudra practice); those with mediocre faculties will have an experience of thod rgal, or direct crossing (a common component of Dzogchen practice); and those with the lowest faculties will have an experience of shugs can, or the possession of

strength. Not only are these experiences suggestive of higher levels of Vajrayana teachings, they are validated by citing Machik herself: “Machik said, ‘As for what has been concentrated by tightening, relax by loosening. The pith of meditative cultivation is like that.”’ Like Rangjung Dorje’s commentaries, The Distinctive Section seems both to rely on Machik as authoritative source and innovate on her teachings.

The final three parts of The Distinctive Section—the sixth section on the pacification of temporary hindrances of body and mind, the seventh section on the general and the distinctive commitments of Chod, and the eighth section on the teaching of the fruits of gaining experience—are notable for their brevity. According to the text, the pacification of temporary hindrances should be learned directly from a lama. The general commitments of Chod are to avoid the

ten traditional Buddhist non-virtues and to accomplish the ten virtues together with the six perfections, while the distinctive commitments are to avoid performing Bon rituals, medical treatments and exorcisms at all times. The eighth section on the fruits of gaining experience notes that “the circumstantial fruit is liberation from physical illness.” The pacification of the four Negative Forces will lead to liberation from mental suffering, and one will ultimately become a buddha with the self-nature of the Three Bodies. With this conclusion of the Distinctive text, we again see a positive representation of the Three Bodies as an aim of one's practice.

Conclusion

Through a critical reading of these six texts, there are indications that someone other than Machik at least transcribed them (not uncommon to Tibetan spiritual teachings in general), if not edited or even wrote them. According to one biography, Machik stated: “Anyone who wishes to can write down my words, on stone, cloth or rock, and carry them away.” Just as the tracing of transmission genealogies is complicated, tracing the teachings that originate with Machik is problematic. An obvious problem is that some of the texts that we read about in the sources are not in material circulation; it may be the

case that such texts were never written down, or it might be that they have been lost. A second problem is knowing when one can be certain about attributions to Machik, since we do not have material texts discussing her teachings that we can confidently date to the eleventh or twelfth centuries. Regardless of how we attribute the authorship of The Great Speech Chapter, Ranjung Dorje's Outline and Commentary situate it as a key text in the historical inclusion of Chod praxis within the Karma Kagyu school. More importantly, these commentaries legitimate The Great Speech Chapter as integral to

the tradition of Chod. Because of the influence of Rangjung Dorje's scholarship, The Great Speech Chapter is the most important of these six foundational texts. Of the other five texts attributed to Machik that I consider here, The Supplementary Chapter is closest in content. Because it covers a range of basic material that complements The Great Speech Chapter, it seems primary to the latter text. The

dialogue in The Supplementary Chapter addresses fundamental Buddhist topics such as the rarity of attaining a human embodiment and how a practitioner develops faith in the Buddha Dharma; but like The Great Speech Chapter, it describes the role of the mind in the construction of Negative Forces and the doctrine of Chod for cutting through such mental constructions.

The other four foundational texts present intriguing similarities to and differences from the teacings in The Great Speech Chapter. Using strategies similar to those employed by Rangjung Dorje in his commentaries, The Supplementary Chapter and The Quintessential Chapter invoke authoritative Buddhist teachings to elucidate and legitimate the Chod teachings of Machik, often emphasizing the connection between Chod and Prajhaparamita teachings. In

comparison with these texts that demonstrate an effort to systematize Chod within a context of traditional Buddhist teachings, The Common Eightfold Supplementary Section is a less systematic compilation of oral teachings, suggesting that it is an earlier composition. In contrast, The Supplementary Chapter, The Uncommon Eightfold Supplementary Section, and The Distinctive Eightfold Supplementary Section appear to represent later attempts at

systematization: they are more sophisticated and methodical in their form and present specific instructions for practices that are to function as methods for the attainment of enlightenment and liberation (sgrub thabs; sadhana). The Uncommon Section is distinctive in lacking a discussion of the Negative Forces, a topic that is central to Machik's Chod system. Despite Machik's warnings in The Great

Speech Chapter regarding the tendency of Buddhist practitioners to reify the Three Bodies into a dogma presented in tenet systems, The Uncommon Section and The Distinctive Section paradoxically reclaim the formulation of the Three Bodies to illustrate positive attainments.

If we take these six texts attributed to Machik and the two exegetical texts by Rangjung Dorje to constitute a provisional collection of early authoritative texts on Chod, the sytem of Chod is complex, paradoxical and sometimes self-contradictory. However, as students of Buddhism are well aware,

the capacity of the audience and the skill of the teacher are crucial elements when interpreting such complexities, paradoxes, and contradictions—different methods suit different practitioners in different contexts. Although the same basic concerns and teachings emerge in each text, these texts reflect different adaptations of whatever the “original” teaching was of the Chod of Machik. Critically revisiting the early sources of the tradition helps us to

understand the processes of legitimation and innovation that produced this fascinating and complicated system necessarily requires critically revisiting the early sources of the tradition in dialogue with each other.

---

“brgyad” is written “brgyud” in the short edition. In Shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyinpa’i man ngag yang tshoms zhus lan ma (Treasury of Instruction, Vol. IX, 547-610; Vol. IX, 576-586). Savvas cites The Ruby Garland as stating that “the Eight Ordinary Chapters are unelaborate and explain how to subdue the Four Demons, like the sun shining in the sky; the Eight Extraordinary Chapters are elaborate, and explain how to cut the adverse conditions from the root; the Eight Special Chapters are brief, and explain how to change the demon of pride, by eating it, like (the peacock) transforms poisons into nectar” (1990, 137).

The “Uncommon Eight Supplements.” In Shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa’i man ngag yang tshoms zhus lan ma (Treasury of Instruction: Vol. IX, 547-610; Vol. IX, 586-601). This text has been previously translated by Carol Savvas in her Ph.D. dissertation. Although I am familiar with the Savvas translation, I have chosen to retranslate the text because the Savvas translation is very unreliable and does not follow the original text closely; in her version there are several omissions, as well as many additions from an acknowledged source (possibly an oral commentary).

This is the Tibetan collection of texts that includes a two-part biography (or, as I have argued, two distinct biographies) of Machik, attributed to Namkha Gyaltsen. These biographies have been translated several times, most notably by Phuntsog Tobjhor and Lama Tsewang Gyurme (in Allione 1984) and by Edou (1996). The collection of ten chapters has been translated

The assembly for these teachings at her retreat, Zangri Khangmar, was said to have included five hundred thousand five hundred and seventy-three women and men, including four translators and seventy thousand nuns and monks who had gathered for the occasion. See the article by Dekyi Drolma (n.d., 1) for what I take to be images of this site; also see Gyatso 1985. The TBRC entry for Zangs ri mkhar dmar cites Mkhyen brtse gdan rabs on Zangs ri mkhar dmar as the residence of Machik and her followers (TBRC.org, Place RID G2819).

“bdud bzhi rang sar gcod pa'i nyams khyad par can rgyud la skyes pa'i myong chos shig tu zab pa ma cig gis mdzad pa'i bka' rtsom chen mo / yang rtsom nying rtsom / le'u lag / gnad them / khong rgol / gsang ba brda chos la bzlas skor gsum / gzhi lam du slong ba / khyad par gyi man ngag dang bcu / rgya gar du bskur bas / [[rgya gar ba thams cad kyang chos la yid ches nas thams cad kyis chos nyams su myong te bod chos rgya la dar bar byas so” (The Great Explanation 80).

In the Gdams ngag mdzod (Vol. IX: 456-466; Vol. XIV: 7-16). Translated by Orofino into Italian (1987) and into English (2000). Also translated by Michael Azzato in his MA thesis (1981), and in an unpublished manuscript by Carol Savvas and Geshe Champa Lodro Rinpoche. The term bka’ tshoms, as Harding notes Ringu Tulku Rinpoche observing, is frequently used to refer to “sayings,” in particular, those of the Dhammapada, considered the sayings of the Buddha. Harding also notes that “[i]n my texts, it is most often spelled bka’ rtsom (‘composition’). Kongtrul favors bka’ tshom (TOK, 3:423). The text itself in the Gdams ngag mdzod (9:456) uses bka’ tshoms in the title” (Lab sgron 2003, 304, n. 40). The notion that these texts are meant to be considered in relation to teachings like the Dhammapada is substantiated by Machik herself when she states that after her study of the bka’ of Sakyamuni, she composed the bka’ tshoms based on them (Lab sgron 1974, 75).

In Shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa’i man ngag yang tshoms zhus lan ma (Treasury of Instruction: short edition: Vol. IX, 547-610), 548-561.

In Shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa’i man ngag yang tshoms zhus lan ma (Treasury of Instruction: short edition: Vol. IX, 547-610; Vol. IX, 562-576). In the Paro edition, the title is given as man ngag bdud kyi gcod yul las snying tshom chen mo (“[[snying tshom] chen mo]]”). This text is sometimes referred to with alternate spellings of “nying” for “snying” and/or “tshoms” for “tshom.” I have chosen to use “snying” and “tshoms” for reference herein.

The latter title may or may not refer to the text we presently have entitled the Khyad par gyi le lag brgyad pa. This catalogue of teachings thought to have been transmitted from Tibet to India is iterated by the following: the 19th century Geluk scholar, Bka' chen blo bzang bzod pa, who is drawing from the Dga' ldan snyan brgyud transmission lineage of Chod (5-6); the 19th century Nyingma scholar Rdza sprul (77); and Dharmasengge, another 19th century Nyingma scholar (470-71). Carol Savvas, citing Rlong rdol bla ma, provides a different context for the composition of the bka’ tshoms chen mo,

wherein it was composed at the behest of Nye gnas ma, an attendant of Machik's. Also according to Rlong rdol bla ma, Machik's son, Grub po, requested the teaching of the Yang tshoms nyer lnga, while her student Nam mkha' dpal requested the Le lag brgyad ma, along with the Kong khol ma nyi shu, Gdams pa skye med tshig chod, Brda’ chos and the La bzlo ba. Regarding this latter text, Savvas writes, “this is probably the same as la bzla, merely a different

spelling” (1990, 136 n.3). Savvas' reference is Tibetan Buddhist Studies of Klon rdol bla ma nag dban blo bzan, Vol. 2, edited by Ven. Dalama (Mussourie, 1964, 147). Savvas (1990, 141) also discusses references to these texts by Smon lam tha yas rgya mtsho ([[Ma gcig mkha’ ‘gro snyan rgyud lam zab rgyun gyi rnal ‘byor bde bkod pa in Gcod tshogs, 308) and by Bka' chen Blo bzang bzod pa. In the Commentary on the Great Speech Chapter of Chod, Rangjung Dorje refers to four teachings of Machik's: the exoteric Great Speech Chapter, the esoteric Ngo sprod, the vital Gnad them, and the secret Brda chos; the latter three have not been found as identifiable individual texts. Edou has noted that the Concise Life Story (manuscript folio 196) names the following as the four root texts: the outer Bka’ tshoms chen mo; the inner Le’u lag; the secret Brda’ chos; and Don khang rgol gnad them su bstan pa (1996, 81).

The assimilation of Chod into Nyingmapa and Gelukpa traditions have different genealogies, although there are similarities in how this process worked, especially in the articulation of formal practice methods and the use of deity yoga. I am presently in the process of researching these developments.

This observation is not original to me and has been noted by others, including Kollmar-Paulenz. Another early commentary I have located is attributed to Dorje Lingpa (1346-1405); I will be presenting a translation of this in the near future.

Through a critical reading of several of these texts, there are indications that someone other than Machik at least transcribed them (not uncommon to Tibetan spiritual teachings in general), if not edited or even wrote them. According to one biography, Machik stated: “Anyone who wishes to can write down my words, on stone, cloth or rock, and carry them away.” Quoted in Dharmasengge, Commentary on the 21 Commitments, folio 84; cited in and translated by Savvas (1990, 133) without the inclusion of the original Tibetan. I am not sure which edition Savvas translated; there is no corresponding quote in folio 84 of the edition that I received from the Kawaguchi collection of the Toyo Bunko Library, Tokyo Japan. I thank Lauran Hartley of Columbia University for her assistance in acquiring this text.

Here Machik seems to be echoing a similar injunction that Buddha Sakyamuni made to his followers when he was asked what language his teachings should be transmitted in to foster systematization. Just as the tracing of transmission genealogies is complicated, tracing the teachings that originate with Machik is problematic. An obvious problem is that some of the texts that we read about in the sources are not in material circulation; it may be the case that such texts were never written down or it might be that they have been lost. A second problem is knowing when one can be certain about attributions of authorship to Machik, since we do not have material texts discussing her teachings that we can confidently date to the eleventh or twelfth centuries.

An additional key text to understanding the development of Chod is the Great Explanation, although as others have noted (Hermann-Pfandt 1998, 95) the edition that is presently in print circulation was probably compiled in the 18th or 19th century. Additional texts that Machik is also reputed to have composed include a text referred to as the “Twenty-one Commitments”; however, this text may no longer be extant apart from a commentary written by Dharmasengge, entitled dam chos bdud kyi gcod yul las gzhi lam ‘bras bu gsum gyi dam tshig gnyer gi khrid rim ye shes mkha ‘dro'i zhal lung phrin las nyi

ma'i nying po. Dharmasengge also refers to this text in his History, claiming that the “Twenty-one Commitments” was composed for Gyalwa Dondrup, a son of Machik, who eventually became a serious student of Chod, and for whom Machik intended the “Commitments” as his primary practice. In this regard, TBRC lists two entries (TBRC W11234 and W11235), 127 ff. and 161 ff. in Volume One of the Potala gsung ‘bum, but it does not have these texts in its collection. Savvas, who obtained a copy of this text from Geshe Champa Lodro Rinpoche, cites it frequently (e.g. 142). She says Machik's text is quoted in folio 21. She also cites Dharmasengge's History (506-507).

I have now collected five editions of The Great Explanation, but have not compared them: edition from the Gcod kyi chos skor; edition from Urgyen Tenzin (Sarnath); edition from Herbert Guenther; edition from Latse

Edou cites The Concise Life Story (the University of Washington text) as stating that Machik, at the age of fifty-six or fifty-seven, “composed four major treatises known under the generic title of The Grand Exposition (rNam bshad chen mo):

(1) The Grand Exposition according to Sutra, at Sakarlog, requested by Khugom Chokyi Sengé and five other disciples who wrote it down.

(2) The Grand Exposition according to Tantra, at the cave of Shampogang, requested by her son Thonyon Samdrup. The text was transmitted by eight of her disciples, including her four spiritual daughters and Khugom Chokyi Sengé.

(3) The Grand Exposition according to Sutra and Tantra Combined, in Lhodrag, requested by Khugom Chokyi Sengé, and copied out by twelve people.

(4) The Grand Exposition of Transforming the Aggregates into an Offering, at Zangri, through the request of Thonyon Samdrup” (1996, 107).

According to Edou, “[o]ne of the difficulties in identifying these texts lies in the fact that most sources use the generic title The Grand Exposition without specifying whether it refers to all four treatises or to only one of them. No version of these four original texts has so far become available. A reference to Machig's Grand Exposition of Transforming the Aggregates into an Offering is found in the Labrang Karchag, but whether it refers to Machig's original version remains mere speculation since the text is not available” (Edou 107). Here Edou attaches a note: “Phung po zan skyur Gcod kyi gsal byed ma cig rnam bshad chen mo (Machig’s Grand Exposition of Transforming the Aggregate into a Food Offering,

Illuminating the Meaning of Chod) in: [[Bod kyi bstan bcos khag cig gi mtshen byang dri med shel dkar [phreng ba]], referred to as the Labrang Karchag, edited by [[mTsho sngon [mi rigs dpe skrun khang]], in the rnam mthar chapter, p. 70. Access to this text would tell us whether it is Namkha Gyaltsen's version of The Grand Exposition mentioned below (see n. 36), an earlier version of Machig's Grand Exposition of Transforming the Aggregates into an Offering of Food which could be the source of all the later versions and currently unknown, or a different text altogether” (Edou 1996, 195, n.33). Edou also remarks that “the colophon following chapter ten of our main

source, Transforming the Aggregates, describes a lineage for the Grand Exposition: Machig Labdron; Thoyon Samdrup, her son; Gangpa Mugsang; Gangpa Lhundrup; Sangyé Tensung; Nyamé Dorjé Dzinpa; Gangpa Rinchen Gyaltsen; Lama Dorjé; Namkha Gyaltsen, the compiler of the Marvelous the Chod system to the view popularly presented in modern communities of Tibetan and non¬Tibetan practitioners that emphasizes demons, charnel grounds and dramatic performances.

As I have repeatedly emphasized, Chod teachings are frequently considered without reference to their historical and cultural contexts, limiting our ability to assess and appreciate the consistency and change of the tradition as a whole. To complement the historical and philosophical analyses of the previous chapters, I now turn to a discussion of the texts translated as appendices one through nine in this dissertation. By providing accounts of each of these texts, I aim not only to augment our understanding of the canonical texts of the Chod tradition, but also to develop my argument that Chod both

Life; Tashi Gyaltsen; Nyima Gyaltsen; Monchod Tsodru Senge” (1996, 107; this reference does not appear in the Harding translation of the colophon).

Confucius, Analects 7.1: “Following the proper way, I do not forge new paths.” (Ames and Rosemont, trans., 1998, 111).

“Even when dealing with a text that explicitly posits itself within a defined textual tradition, the analyst should seek to understand how such a textual tradition is being posited and what claims are being made through that positing” (Puett 2002, 26).

Deutsch further describes the historical development of Indian philosophy as a commentarial tradition, in which certain texts are established as authoritative by the commentaries and subcommentaries written on them (1989, 168-71). One might argue a similar point with regard to the “canonization” of many Buddhist texts; their canonical status is ensured through the commentarial process. José Cabezón has argued that, following an examination of western criteria informing the notion of “canon,” “the Indo-Tibetan siddhanta schema is very much the functional equivalent of a canon, albeit a philosophical or doctrinal one” (1995, 67; cf. Cabezón 1990, 7-26).

Also included in the nine appendices is a translation of Rangjung Dorjé's outline of the Great Speech Chapter. Two other texts of related interest in the context of Machik's Bka' rtsom are in the collection of the great Nyingma Gter ston Dorjé Lingpa (1346-1405 CE). The first is a commentary on the Bka' rtsom chen mo teaching entitled the Bka' rtsom chen mo'i TIKA lta sgom gyi khogs byung khyung chen nam mkha' ldings ltar / bshad pa gzhug soha / ba dzra bho dra'o. In addition, this collection has a text named bka' rtsom gyi zhu len sum bcu rtsa lnga ba zhes bya ba yang rtsom rin gron ma lta sgom gyi gnad

‘brel rgya mtshor gza' / skar shar ba ltar bshad bshugs so, which appears to be a gter ma text (possibly from the Sharmapa? Skar shar ba). A third text is also worth noting, a different Bka' rtsom text, Bka' rtsom kyi zhus lan sum bcu rtsa lnga pa / A ma'i yang gsang thugs kyi nying khu zhes bya ga rdzogs soha is included in the Gcod tshogs kyi lag len (Bir, Tsondu Senghe, 1985, [15-31]. Savvas (1990, 133) says this is another edition of the Dorjé Lingpa text in the Gcod skor (311-352), but I don't think it is since the number of pages is so very different.

Shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa zab mo gcod kyi man ngag gi gzhung bka’ tshoms chen mo (“bka' tshoms chen mo”). In the Gdams ngag mdzod (Vol. IX: 456-466; Vol. XIV: 7-16).

As noted earlier, translated by Orofino into Italian (1987) and into English (2000). Also translated by Michael Azzato in his MA thesis (1981), and in an unpublished manuscript by Carol Savvas and Geshe Champa Lodro Rinpoche. Orofino also translates the [[shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa’i man ngag Gcod kyi gzhung shes rab skra rtse’i sa gzhung spel ba rin po che’i gter mdzod ces bya ba bzhugs so (from the Gdams ngag mdzod, 528-546) into Italian in the same volume. In some sources, including versions of the Rnam bshad chen mo, this text is referred to as the “Bka’ rtsom.”

Harding also notes that “[i]n my texts, it is most often spelled bka’ rtsom (“composition”). Kong sprul favors bka' tshom (TOK, 3:423). The text itself in the Gdams ngag mdzod (9:456) uses bka' tshoms in the title” (304, n. 40). Orofino (2000) translates “bka’ tshoms” as “collection of teachings,” and Edou (1996) as “collection of precepts,” while Azzato (1981) translates it as “Testament.”

“dang po thub pa chen po'I bka' rgyas ‘bring bsdus gsum la gzigs rtog mdzad nas bka' thogs tu grol ba'I tshul gyis bka' la brten nas gcod bka' rtsom pa” (Lab sgron 1974, 75).

“mngon shes dang rdzu 'phrul mnyam pa ma gro'i rgya sgom hag ston” (Lab sgron 1974, 75b6).

Aside from these references, I have not been able to learn more about Drapa Hagton.

{gzhung ‘di nyid gra sa hag ston gyi bus nyan bshad byed ba brgyad cu tsam byung zer la / snga dus kyi ‘grel pa mdo sdud pa dang sbyar ba zhig kyang snang zhing / chos kyi rje rang byung rdo rjes sa bcad dang ‘grel pas mtshon phyis kyi gzhung ‘grel mad do / ‘di dang bram ze Aa rya de bas mdzad pa'i gzhung {17/466} yid bzhin nor bu gnyis gcod yul gyi gdams pa thams cad kyi gzhi lta bur snang ngo / MCHAN}

{Note: with regard to this very textual tradition, reported to be approximately eighty aural teachings given by the son of Gra sa hag ston, the previous commentary should be connected with the collected Sutras; moreover, appearing illustrated (mtshon) with an outline (sa bcad) and commentary (‘grel pa) by the Dharma Lord Rangjung Dorje, the later textual tradition is a true (mad = bden) commentary. And this, the textual tradition of the composition by Aryadeva the Brahmin, the ground of all instructions of the Chod

system of the two wish-fulfilling jewels [possibly referring to Padampa and Machik] appears as the view.} In his M.A. thesis, Azzato says that he compensates for not including Rangjung Dorje’s commentaries by including Aryadeva’s tshigs bcad and its ‘grel. Orofino does not seem to acknowledge this caveat at all. I have no record of Savvas translating the supplementary texts by Rangjung Dorje.

In his 19th century history, Khams smyon ‘jigs ‘bral chos kyi seng ge (1974, 27a-b) refers to the rnam thar by Namkha Gyaltsen and notes that the second Karmapa, Karma Pakshi (1203-1284 CE) and Rangjung Dorje are both said to have followed Machik’s partner, Thod pa bha dra.492 This would be chronologically unlikely according to normative historical dating, since there would be almost a century between Thod pa bha dra (given Machik’s dates) and the second Karmapa, and more than a century between Thod pa bha dra and Rangjung Dorje. In addition, this information does not appear in the editions of Namkha

Gyaltsen’s biography of Machik that are in the Great Explanation collection. Moreover, Chokyi Senge voices his lack of confidence in this connection, stating that it is not absolutely certain and cannot be confirmed because of the lack of biographies (“’on kyang rnam thar du ma yod pas mtha' gcig tu ma nges so”). Chokyi Senge later mentions that Karma Pakshi and Brtson ‘grus seng ge (1207¬1278; Shangpa Kagyupa) received the linear transmission of the essential profound teachings of Chod (zab don snying po'i bka' babs grub chen karmapakshi) (68a). According to the TBRC database (P 95), Brtson ‘grus seng ge received a Gcod kyi chig brgyud from “Ma gcig sprul sku” in 1216 CE.

Toyo Bunko edition, 68; gcod kyi chos skor edition, 546.

These texts include the Gcod kyi khrid yig, the Tshogs las yon tan kun 'byung, the Ma lab sgron la gsol ba 'deb pa'i mgur ma, the Zab mo bdud kyi gcod yil kyi khrid yig, and the Gcod kyi nyams len. I plan to continue studying these texts in order better to explain Rangjung Dorje's contributions to the transmission of Machik's Chod system.

Schaeffer 1995, 8.

This has also been noted by Kollmar-Paulenz (1994, 24-25) and Hermann-Pfandt (1998, 95). Hermann-Pfandt posits that The Great Speech Chapter is an early text, given that the Third Karmapa Rangjung Dorje (1284-1339) commented on it (1998, 95). In addition, Rdza rong bla ma Ngag dbang bstan ‘dzin nor bu (1867-1940; Nyingma), in his Gcod yul byin rlabs gter mtsho, remarks that Machik herself recorded this text, although as Hermann-Pfandt acknowledges, “this single notice written down about 600 years later can of course not be enough to make the authorship of Ma gcig sure" (1998, 95).

This section discusses the five types of Primordial Wisdom (ye shes Inga; panca jnanani), which are the antidotes to the five poisons (see note below).

Reading “so sor rtog pa'i ye shes” for “so sor rtogs pa'i ye shes.”

There is a shift here from “snyems byed rtsa ba” (“the root of the production of pride”) as the object to be cut to “snyems rtsa ba” (“the root of pride”) as the object. I am unsure of the significance of this shift.

Das interprets “'gyur byed” as “a changer; one who brings about changes” (1973, 294). According to the Padma Karpo Translation Committee (2005) entry for “spra ‘chal,” this term is a modern form of the archaic “'gyur byed,” meaning “[a]n older person who does not have any burdens of work that they have to do or any particular projects that they have to complete. Like a retired person in the West who has nothing particular they have to do any longer.”

The five poisons (dug lnga) are desire (‘dod chags; raga), aggression (zhe sdang; dvesa), delusion (gti mug; moha), pride (nga rgyal; mana), and jealousy (phrag dog; irsya)

zhe sdang rang sar grol ba yang / / snyems byed rtsa ba chod las byung / / btso bsreg dmyal ba'i bdud las thar / / me long lta bu'i ye shes thob / / ‘dod chags rang sar grol ba yang / / snyems byed rtsa ba chod las byung / / bkres skom yi dvags bdud las thar / / so sor rtogs pa'i ye shes thob / / gti mug rang sar grol ba yang / / snyems kyi rtsa ba chod las byung / / bkol spyod byol song bdud las thar / / chos kyi dbyings kyi ye shes thob / / phrag dog rang sar grol ba yang / / snyems kyi rtsa ba chod las byung / / ‘gyur byed mi yi bdud las thar / / bya ba grub pa'i ye shes thob / / nga rgyal rang sar grol ba yang / / snyems kyi

places of leprosy, and so forth, one should abandon [one's body] in a non¬attached fashion. The mind itself rests in the sphere of the Great Mother. Whatever thoughts and cognitive acts occur, moreover, are thoughts as emanations of the Great Mother herself. The emanation of the Mother is not bound to the place of samsara. Like the dullness of one with a full stomach, rest in disintegrated cognition. Abandon samsara; have certainty in nirvana. E Ma Ho! How wonderful! Without deliberate activity, it is time to use your mind!