Snow Lion Publications 
P. O. Box 6483 
Ithaca, New York 14851 USA 
tel. 607-273-8519

Copyright © 1996 José Ignacio Cabezón and Roger R. Jackson

First edition USA 1996

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced by any means without prior written permission from the publisher.

Printed in the United States of America

ISBN 1-55939-044-1 (paper) 
ISBN 1-55939-031-X (cloth)

Studies in Indo-Tibetan Buddhism Series 
ISBN 1-55939-000-X

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Tibetan literature : studies in genre / edited by José Ignacio Cabezón and 
Roger R. Jackson. — 1st ed.

p. cm. — (Studies in Indo-Tibetan Buddhism) 
“Essays in honor of Geshe Lhundup Sopa.” 
Includes bibliographical references and index. 
ISBN 1-55939-044-1 (alk. paper). — ISBN 1-55939-031-X (alk. paper).

1. Tibetan literature — History and criticism. 2. Buddhist literature, 
Tibetan. 3. Tibet (China) — Civilization. I. Lhundup Sopa, Geshe, 
1925- . II. Cabezón, José Ignacio, 1956- . III. Jackson, Roger R., 
1950- . IV. Series.

PL3705.T53 1995

895’.409—dc20 95-22297

CIP

[page 39] If we are to believe later traditions, and there is in my opinion no reason not to do so, the first Tibetan historiographic writings date from Tibet's imperial period (seventh-ninth centuries), which coincided with her relations with the Nepalese, Indians, Arabs, Turks, Uighurs, 'A zha and, above all, Tang China. Only a fragment of this literary corpus, falling into two broad classes, has survived. The first of these constitutes those historical documents that were discovered as late as the beginning of this century in one of the caves of the famous cave-temple complex near the town of Dunhuang in Gansu Province in the People's Republic of China. Recent scholarship generally agrees that the cave housing these manuscripts was sealed sometime after the year 1002, the latest date found in the manuscripts, possibly around the year 1035 (Fujieda: 65), so that the terminus ad quem of these undated documents would fall in that year. Of signal importance are especially three untitled manuscripts that are known to English-language scholarship as:

1. (1-2) Royal Annals of Tibet (Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, Pelliot tibétain no.1288, together with India Office Library, London, Stein no.8212, 187).
2. (3) Old Tibetan Chronicle (Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, Pelliot tibétain no.1287)

[page 40] They have been studied in varying degrees of detail by a number of Western, Tibetan, Chinese and Japanese scholars.1 The first Tibetan to examine these was the great scholar and iconoclast dGe 'dun chos 'phel (1903-1951),2 who had gained access to these and a few other fragments while in Kalimpong sometime in 1939. As is related by H. Stoddard, his most recent biographer, the French Tibetanist Jacques Bacot visited Tharchin, a Christian missionary of Khunu descent, in Kalimpong and read with him several of these difficult manuscripts in Old Tibetan. Tharchin apparently solicited the help of dGe 'dun chos 'phel, who was able to aid him in deciphering a number of problematic readings. The results of Bacot's studies were published in 1946, but no mention is made there of either Tharchin or dGe 'dun chos 'phel, although he gratefully recorded his philological debt to another Tibetan, namely bKa' chen Don grub.3 The last tome of a recently published three-volume edition dGe 'dun chos 'phel's works contains inter alia three studies of a number of these Tibetan Dunhuang manuscripts. They include a reproduction of the Royal Annals with philological notes, an adaptation into Classical Tibetan of the Old Tibetan of the manuscripts of a large portion of a version of the celestial origin of the imperial families and other miscellaneous fragments, and a reproduction of the Old Tibetan Chronicle.4 Some of the results of these initial studies were subsequently incorporated into his incomplete work on Tibetan history, the Deb ther dkar po ("White Annals"). He was followed by such recent scholars as Khetsun Sangpo, Khang dkar sKal bzang tshul khrims, rDo rje rgyal po, and Chab spel Tshe brtan phun tshogs.

While most of Tibet's cultural institutions and literary canon derive from India or are based on one or other of her models, a notable exception is the intense preoccupation of Tibet's men of letters with history and historiography. In terms of literary genre, some of Tibet's historiographical writings bear a resemblance to, or are analogous with, the Indian vaṃśāvalī ("annals"), but her enormous historiographic literature, including that of biography and autobiography, bears testimony to an approach to history that is different from the Indian one(s) (see Warder, Subhrahmanian). As far as the secondary sources on this large corpus of literature are concerned, the premier study is still the one by A. I. Vostrikov.5 Now dated in a number of respects, it remains a classic and indispensable treatment of the various literary genres.

[page 41] Despite the fact that the dissolution of the Tibetan empire seems to have resulted in a virtual cessation of further literary developments for about a century, if we take the Tibetan Buddhist tradition at face value, there is ample evidence for affirming the existence in at least central and eastern Tibet of an unbroken transmission of historiographic texts, or quasi-historiographic documents like family chronicles, throughout this time and into the period of the so-called subsequent propagation, which the Tibetan Buddhist historians generally date to the middle of the tenth century. Indeed, we possess documents that trace the genealogies for such extended families or clans of the 'Khon and rLangs of, respectively, the Sa skya and gDan sa mthil/rTse[s/d] thang monastic principalities.6 Moreover, some sort of archives may also have been maintained, if only by the scattered descendants of the imperial family. A sample of the kinds of documents that may now lie buried somewhere in the vast collections of the Potala would be a series of "edicts" issued by Khri srong lde btsan (r. 742?-797?), which were preserved in the chronicle by the great sixteenth-century historian dPa' bo gTsug lag phreng ba (1504-1566).7 By the same token, the two recensions that are now available of the sBa bzhed, a virtual biography of the first Tibetan monk, sBa Ye shes dbang po (eighth century), suggest that the original text should by and large be considered a primary source on Khri srong lde btsan and his religious works, in spite of the fact that their transmission is beset with enormous complexity. In his chronicle of Buddhism in Tibet (and much else besides), Nyang ral Nyi ma 'od zer (1124-1192) refers to a number of very early works, in addition to numerous edicts, that have to do with the reign of the latter as well. Their descriptive titles are:8

1. (1) bKa'i yig rtsis che
2. (2) bKa'i yig rtsis chung
3. (3) bKa'i thang yig che
4. (4) bKa'i thang yig chung
5. (5) rGyal rabs rkyang pa
6. (6) Khug pa
7. (7) Zings po can
8. (8) sPun po

NYANGb wrongly collapses the titles of nos. 6 and 7, and reads Khug po zings pa [sic!] can. NYANGl has Yun po for no. 8, which is due to a misreading of the cursive ligature sp, which resembles[page 42] the graph for y. Moreover, the last four would appear to be historiographic texts per se, but none of these have been located so far if, indeed, they are still extant. One recension of the sBa bzhed, as do Nyang ral and, more elaborately, the chronicles of Buddhism by *lDe'u Jo sras and mKhas pa lDe'u,9 brings to attention the existence of five early historiographic texts from the imperial period, two of which appear to correspond to nos. 7 and 8 of the above titles. These have been briefly noted in a recent paper by S. G. Karmay.10

There are roughly three expressions which, when they occur in book titles, usually indicate that the books in question are historiographic in nature, and all of these are found in writings attested in Tibet for the period covering the eleventh to twelfth centuries, and one which in part may even go back as far as the seventh century. With their probable dates of inception, these are:

1. (1) Lo rgyus ("Records") (eleventh century)
2. (2) rGyal rabs ("Royal Chronology") (eleventh century)
3. (3) Chos 'byung ("Religious Chronicle") (twelfth century)

Due to limitations of space, we shall have to restrict ourselves, with one notable and fairly lengthy exception, to a bibliographic survey of historiographical texts belonging to these two centuries. However, it must be understood at the outset that those philological procedures that are fundamental to other branches of the humanities having to do with texts and their transmission have thus far mostly bypassed inquiries into Tibetan historiography, as they have virtually every other branch of Tibetan studies. Moreover, there are also considerable gaps in the literary corpus of available texts on the present subject. For these reasons, and also in the absence of "critical" texts, some of the remarks that follow are of necessity rather tentative.

The first instance of this expression in a historiographic context appears to be the famous but until now inaccessible Lo rgyus chen mo ("Grand Annals") by Khu ston brTson 'grus g.yung drung (1011-1075).11 The expression lo rgyus, literally "tidings of year[s]," is only very occasionally best rendered by "annals." It is far more often the case that works with this term in their title do not fulfill what[page 43] is promised by such a rendition, that is to say, they do not at all give a year-by-year account of their subject-matter, but rather present a narrative of events, historical, quasi-historical, or even ahistorical, in rough chronological sequence. It is well known that later historiographic sources abound in quotations from what appears to be Khu ston's work, although it does not seem to be extant.12 The fragments indicate that it was largely, if not entirely, written in verse. dPa' bo also often availed himself of this work in his study of Tibet's imperial period, and it functioned, for example, as one of his fundamental sources for information about the decades after Emperor Glang dar ma's assassination in 842 (or 846, the year which he assigns to this event), specifically about the insurrection of 869 against his two sons, 'Od srung and Yum brtan, which spread from central to eastern and northeastern Tibet (see DPA'1: 429-430; DPA': 432-433).

The expression rgyal rabs means something like "account/story of king(s)," and is perhaps best translated by "royal chronicle."13 As far as the rgyal rabs as a specific historiographic genre is concerned, the earliest ones that are presently available were composed by the third and fifth Sa skya pa patriarchs rJe btsun Grags pa rgyal mtshan (1147-1216) and 'Phags pa Blo gros rgyal mtshan (1235-1280).14 The latter's is dated to the year 1275. In addition to these two, there were also others that were written in the thirteenth century. Possibly dPa' bo but certainly the great Sa skya scholar Mang thos Klu sgrub rgya mtsho (1523-1596), in his study of the chronology of Buddhism in India and Tibet finally completed in 1587, have preserved several fragments of the rGyal po rabs phreng by U rgyan pa Rin chen dpal (1230-1309).15 According to bSod nams 'od zer's hagiography of U rgyan pa, the author wrote this work for Qubilai Khan (r. 1260-1294) as part of his attempt—his hagiographer and disciple states that he was successful—to dissuade the Mongol emperor from invading Nepal. While bSod nams 'od zer does not date this episode, evidence internal to the hagiography suggests that this may have taken place in the 1270s. This is now confirmed by the recent discovery of a thirteen-folio manuscript of U rgyan pa's rGyal po rabs kyi phreng ba, which is dated 1278.16 The still unavailable rgyal rabs is the rGyal rabs dpag bsam ljon shing[page 44] of 1286 by the elusive Byang ji ston pa Shes rab 'bum, which so far is first alluded to in Tshal pa Kun dga' rdo rje's extremely influential Deb gter/ther dmar po ("Red Book") (see TSHAL: 21a; TSHAL1: 45, Inaba-Satō: 103; Chen-Zhou: 41). The relevant passage states that his genealogy of Tibet's ruling families was for the most part taken from a summary of Byang ji ston pa's work, which had been written upon his request by a dPag thog pa Rin chen rdo rje or gSer thog pa Rin chen rdo rje.17

The Deb gter/ther dmar po, the earliest extant Tibetan example of an attempt at writing a global history, has so far been translated into Japanese and Chinese (see Inaba-Satō; Chen-Zhou; and also the papers of Bira, 1964, 1984). To be sure, its scope and the underlying conception of its composition can only be understood against the background of the Mongol conquest of Tibet in 1240 by Ögödei Khan (r. 1229-1241), the subsequent establishment of a central governing body under the 'Bri gung pa and Phag mo gru, and its inclusion into the Mongol empire. Under Qubilai Khan, Tibet became formally part of the Mongol empire in China, and the change of local government in the 1260s, headed this time by Sa skya, together with the preeminent position held by prelates from Sa skya, made it possible for Tibet, as during the imperial period, once again to make an entry onto the stage of world history, albeit this time of course not as a sovereign state, but under Mongol overlordship. The Mongol domination of Tibet from 1240 to 1368 had far-reaching effects on Tibet's religious and political institutions, as well as on the development of the Tibetan language and historiography. One of these was the adoption of numerous Uighur/ Mongol and Chinese loan words. Indeed, the very term deb gter/ther (gter and ther are homophonous) in the title of Tshal pa's work is an example of such a loan word; in fact, it is its first attestation in written Tibetan. It undoubtedly entered into the Tibetan lexicon from the Mongol debter which, in turn, ultimately derives from the Greek via the media of Persian and Old Turkish. While the introductory remarks in both recensions entitle it Deb gter dmar po, the chronicle is also known as the Hu lan deb gter/ther, where hu lan corresponds to Mongol ula'an/ulaghan, "red," a title which occurs at the very end of what may have been the original text (see TSHAL: 38b; TSHAL1: 149; Inaba-Satō: 194; Chen-Zhou: 128).

Tshal pa's notion of historiography is a traditional one, one which in another context Collingwood (257 ff.) has called the "scissors[page 45] -and-paste" approach to history, characterizing it as "...a kind of history which depends altogether upon the testimony of authorities." Tshal pa not only made use of a number of Indic and Tibetan sources, but also of treatises (originally) in Mongol and Chinese. A case in point of the former is the so-called Yeke tobčiyan ("Great/Large Records"), which, though they cannot be identified with any precision, could very well refer to the lost genealogical tables of the Mongol imperial family on which the relevant chapters of the Yuanshi are based, or perhaps even to the Dayuan tongzhi collection of legal documents.18 In this connection, we should note that for information on early Sino-Tibetan relations and for the royal/imperial genealogies of the Chinese, Xixia and Mongol empires, bLa ma dam pa, Yar lung pa, the chronicle of 1434 (with a few later interpolations) of sTag tshang pa dPal 'byor bzang po, alias Śrībhutibhadra, 'Gos lo tsā ba gZhon nu dpal's (1392-1481) Deb gter/ther sngon po of 1476-1478, Paṇ chen bSod nams grags pa's (1478-1554) Deb ther dmar po gsar ma ("New Red Annals") of 1538, and dPa' bo depend almost exclusively on the relevant texts in Tshal pa's compilation. Of interest is that dPa' bo contains a translation from a Chinese work on the spread of Buddhism in China which, he takes special pains to specify, is not met with in the so-called Deb dmar (see DPA'2: 567-572; DPA': 1391-1396). In his remarks that preface the reproduction of this work, he writes that it was first translated from Chinese into Uighur by a Uighur monk called Og zo at the order of Emperor Buyantu (r. 1311 to 1320); subsequently it was rendered into Tibetan in Sa skya Monastery by a Puṇyaśrībhadra (= bSod nams dpal bzang po), who was probably a Uighur as well.19

At the outset of the Deb gter/ther dmar po, in his statement of intent, Tshal pa writes that what follows is "the first of three Deb gter dmar po [texts]"; unfortunately, the other two, if they were ever written, are wanting. However, Dung dkar Blo bzang 'phrin las, the editor of the Beijing recension, does observe that he wrote in addition to other works (which include two biographies) a supplement to a/the Deb gter/ther dmar po,20 a rgyal rabs entitled Deb ther khra po ("Multicolored Book"), and a catalogue of the so-called Tshal pa bKa' 'gyur, which bore the subtitle of Deb ther dkar po ("White Book").21 Of some interest is of course the use of color terms in the titles (or subtitles) of books. This was unprecedented in Tibetan historiography and is something that is very Mongolian indeed.

[page 46] The third historiographic genre is that of the Chos 'byung ("Origin of Buddhism"). The very first of such texts may have been the one written by the eleventh-century scholar Rong zom Chos kyi bzang po of which only a few fragments have surfaced so far.22 Although the reasons are still far from transparent, it is possible that with the proliferation of various doctrinal cycles a need was felt to place these in historical perspective and thereby legitimate them. In any case we find, starting with the twelfth century, an enormous upsurge of interest in Indo-Tibetan religious history in particular. Unfortunately, only a fraction of the potentially available literary corpus of such texts has been located and published to date. For, while those authored by the bKa' gdams pa masters Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge (1109-1169) and his student gTsang nag pa brTson 'grus seng ge have yet to be discovered, the earliest extant text belonging to this genre is the Chos la 'jug pa'i sgo ("Introduction to Buddhism") by the second Sa skya pa patriarch Master (slob dpon) bSod nams rtse mo (1142-1182), a work which he completed towards the end of 1167 or the beginning of 1168. The overall approach to its subject-matter and its architecture typifies many subsequent chos 'byung texts such as those by *lDe'u Jo sras, mKhas pa lDe'u and Bu ston Rin chen grub, but we do not know whether he was indebted for these to his teacher Phya pa. His work was succeeded by the magnificent text of Nyang ral's chos 'byung which, however, bears little resemblance to it in terms of its scope and structure. bSod nams rtse mo's text deals in the main with the life of the Buddha, while Nyang ral principally deals with the religious environment of Tibet's imperial period. The thirteenth century, too, knew of a considerable number of such treatises, the sole information concerning which is owed to a very brief remark by Bu ston as well as potentially to a number of quotations in his own chos 'byung. He notes the existence of such treatises by Khro phu lo tsā ba Byams pa'i dpal (1172/73-1236), Chag lo tsā ba Chos rje dpal (1197-1264) and mChims Nam mkha' grags (1210-1285) to which he apparently had access when writing his own well-known work sometime between 1322 and 1326. The present whereabouts of these treatises, if they are still extant, is unknown. As few as two bona fide chos 'byungs that probably belong to this century have come down to us, namely those by *lDe'u Jo sras and mKhas pa lDe'u. Ne'u Paṇḍita Grags pa smon lam blo gros' sNgon gyi gtam[page 47] me tog phreng ba ("An Account of the Past, A Garland of Flowers") of 1283 (Chab spel, NE'U), while often referred to as a chos 'byung, styles itself in the introductory lines as a rgyal rabs. There is much in the manner in which the subject-matter is treated that is strongly reminiscent of a chos 'byung, so that we may characterize it as a text that falls midway between these two other genres.23

Other historiographic texts, that are sometimes styled, or that sometimes incorporate, smaller texts variously called lo rgyus, rgyal rabs, or chos 'byung, would be a limited number of so-called treasure-texts (gter ma) (see Gyatso, in this volume). A case in point is the bKa' chems ka khol ma, putatively Srong btsan sgam po's (?-649/50) testament (bka' chems), which was allegedly retrieved from a hole in a pillar (ka khol ma) by Atiśa (982?-1054?) in ca. 1049. It figures among the earliest such treasure-texts, and a number of particulars of its textual history were delineated by Vostrikov (28-32) and recently by Eimer (1983a). Although two versions were published some years ago, the best recension appears to be the one that was issued a few years ago by sMon lam rgya mtsho on the basis of two handwritten manuscripts, one at the Central Institute of Minorities, Beijing, and one written in silver on dark blue paper that belongs to the library of bLa brang bKra shis 'khyil Monastery in A mdo. In the colophon, the text elicits the following course of its transmission: Atiśa; Bang ston [Byang chub rgyal mtshan]; sTod lung[s] pa [Rin chen snying po] (1032-1116); sPyan snga ba [Tshul khrims 'bar (1033-1103)]; sNe'u zur pa [Ye shes 'bar (1042-1118/19)]; 'Bri gung pa [read here ?"lHa (chen) 'Bri sgang pa"]24; rGya ma ba; Rwa sgreng pa; dKon [mchog] bzang [po]; rDo rje tshul khrims25; "me." Who is this "me"? Obviously, he must be one with strong ties to the bKa' gdams pa school and he must have flourished sometime towards the end of the thirteenth or the beginning of the fourteenth century.

The bKa' chems ka khol ma contains a great deal of interest concerning the reign of this first Tibetan religious king, and also contains a number of prophecies in the sixteenth chapter. It served as a primary source for later Tibetan accounts of that period, including, it would appear, the narratives of Thon mi Sambhoṭa's alleged invention of the Tibetan script and the arduous journeys to,[page 48] and sojourns at, the Nepalese and Chinese courts by the minister mGar sTong btsan yul bzung for purposes of escorting a lady of their ruling houses to Tibet for betrothal to Srong btsan sgam po. Although it is supposed to be the work of the latter, it contains some information which perhaps impeaches the veracity of this imputation. For one, it mentions the date in which he passed away to the exact day and includes a number of prophecies in its sixteenth chapter that most of us would consider to be evidence for much later compilation, since Atiśa is mentioned in them!26

Of the twelfth and thirteenth century chronicles known to date, the text is only mentioned in the works of Nyang ral and mKhas pa lDe'u. The latter, if he is indeed to be placed in the second half of the thirteenth century, refers to it in passing just prior to his narrative of the building of the Ra sa phrul snang, the gTsug lag khang temple in the center of Lhasa.27 While he does not explicitly cite it in his account of the life and times of Srong btsan sgam po (although there can be no doubt that he must have used one or another recension of this work) Nyang ral records a few details of its retrieval in the bibliographic remarks at the end of his chronicle.28 There he writes that the document (yi ge) of the rGyal po bka' chems was of difficult access, and that Atiśa retrieved three works from a central beam (gdung bar) of the Ra sa phrul snang temple, namely the "bKa' rtsis chen mo written by the kings, the Dar dkar gsal ba'i me long written by the queens, and the Zla ba'i 'dod 'jo written by the ministers." He furthermore appears to hold that these three are known together as rGyal po bka' chems, which in turn seems to refer to the bKa' chems ka khol ma. This might be confirmed by what may be the best recension of the text itself, the first chapter of which states that Atiśa and two assistants excavated three scrolls (shog dril) from atop a jug-shaped pillar, or a (hollow) pillar containing a jug within it (ka ba bum pa can gyi steng nas), where the first and the third, here noted as the Zla ba 'dod 'jo and the bKa' chems kyi yi ge, are described as being lo rgyus.29 In addition to these texts, the bKa' chems ka khol ma also signals the existence of several other early treatises on which it may be based.30 A detailed study of this highly significant work, which perforce needs to include a comparative analysis of the various recensions (at least three are known to me) that have come down to us and the various recensions of the Maṇi bka' 'bum, is one of the many urgent desiderata in the area of Tibetan historiographic research.

[page 49] Of course, because gter ma texts are considered to date from Tibet's imperial period, many came to be considered crucial sources for this period in later historiographic works. A case in point is Nyang ral's chronicle, for not only is its discussion of the life and times of Srong btsan sgam po largely based on the bKa' chems ka khol ma, but Nyang ral also incorporated into it significant portions of the Zangs gling ma biography of Padmasambhava, a gter ma in its own right, which he himself had retrieved earlier.

As has hopefully become evident, the earliest Tibetan historiographical materials are extremely diverse and, regrettably, to a large extent still unpublished. Investigations into the literary sources used by authors of those texts that are available to us are also in their infancy, as is, consequently, research into the particular ways in which they have made use of them. This renders it particularly difficult to determine the original contributions made by these early authors in terms of how they interpreted them when they were not simply incorporating large portions of their sources into their own work.

Notes

[page 57] The great religions come down to us by means of a great chain of masters who receive faithfully the teachings from those before them and convey compassionately to those coming after them. The Tibetan schools of Buddhism have been very aware of the importance of these links of tradition. An important feature of Tibetan Buddhism is the authoritative role that representatives of Indian Buddhism have had. Indeed, the Tibetans often portray themselves as transmitters, rather than as originators, of doctrine and practice. As a consequence, the life stories of Indian masters, teachers and saints are zealously preserved by the Tibetans.

Biography and history are genres more characteristic of Tibetan than Indian Buddhist literature and it is Tibetan accounts of the lives of Indian masters that have been most accessible. Tāranātha's rGya gar chos 'byung ("History of Buddhism in India") gives accounts of the major Buddhist figures in India, particularly those important in Tibetan teaching lineages. It has been translated into a number of European languages. A biography of the Indian master Nāropa by the Tibetan master lHa'i btsun pa Rin chen rnam rgyal of Brag dkar has been translated by Herbert Guenther as The Life and Teaching of Nāropa.

Both of these texts were written by Tibetans. Tibetan translations of Indian biographies are somewhat more rare, and it is a sample of this translated literature that I want to examine here:[page 58] the Caturaśitisiddhapravṛtti, in Tibetan the Grub thob brgyad bcu rtsa bzhi'i lo rgyus (GTGC) ("The Lives of the Eighty-four Siddhas"). This text, originally written in Sanskrit by the twelfth-century master Abhayadatta, exists now only in Tibetan translation.

There have been three translations of this text into Western languages. The first was a German translation by Albert Grünwedel, Die Geschichten de vier und achtzig Zauberers aus dem Tibetischen übersetz (1916). The other two are in English: one my own, assisted by Geshe Lhundup Sopa, published as Buddha's Lions (1979); and the other by Keith Dowman, Masters of Mahamudra (1986).

The siddhas are the figures associated with the rise and transmission of tantric Buddhism in India. A siddha is literally "a perfected one," a "perfect master," and there are both male and female siddhas. A siddha is also one who possesses siddhi, a term which means "success," particularly in yoga; it came to be applied to the magical powers which are the signs of yogic success. The siddhas then are not only successful in their spiritual quest, but possess magical powers that confirm it. While early Buddhism tended to downplay the role of magic, by the time of the tantras, magical powers were very much an item of interest. And the stories of the siddhas are notable for the accounts of extraordinary feats which they are said to have performed.

After looking at certain structural elements common to the stories in the GTGC, I want to examine some methodological problems raised by these accounts. Although the masters are almost surely historical personages, and these accounts have a historical dimension, this literature is best considered hagiography; beyond even that, we may fruitfully call these narratives "Buddhist myths" which function in both a horizontal and a vertical dimension.

At least two types of accounts can be recognized in the eighty-four stories of the siddhas collected in the GTGC. The more common type is an almost formulaic narration of how individuals in various walks of life achieved high spiritual status, often by taking their daily lives in the world as the basis of spiritual exercise—what the Hindu tradition would call karmayoga.

Then there are stories of the great heroes, male and female, of the Buddhist Tantra: people like Virūpa, (the tantric) Nāgārjuna, Kṛṣṇācāri, Kambala, Indrabhūti and his sister Lakṣmīṅkarā and[page 59] Ghaṇṭapāda—all of whom figure prominently in tantric lineages. Compared with the first type, these stories are more complex and are often made up of several episodes. Keith Dowman uses a convention of calling the protagonists of the first type siddhas, and the figures of the second type mahāsiddhas or "great siddhas" (xv), though the tradition seems to use these terms interchangeably.

Narratives of the first type follow a certain pattern which, since it is repeated again and again, takes on an almost ritualistic quality (Robinson: 9). The central figure is first introduced by name, caste and country. This name is usually not the name by which the individual was known in ordinary life but a spiritual nom de guerre obtained in the course of practice. Lūyipa,1 for example, broke attachment to the fastidious pattern of eating he had acquired as a prince by eating the innards of fish that fishermen discarded in cleaning their catch. From this practice, he came to be known as Lūyipa, a name derived from a Bengali word for fish guts. Śiyalipa, the twenty-first siddha, took his name "Jackal-man" from the fact that the howling of jackals was at first an object of fear for him, then an object of meditation. Other names, such as Tantipa ("The Weaver") or Cāmāripa ("The Cobbler") or Kamparipa ("The Blacksmith"), are drawn from their respective occupations, which served as a focus for meditation.

Following the name, the account states the siddha's occupation and caste. While the most famous of the siddhas are monks, the majority are laypeople—a notable fact, given that Buddhism has often identified spiritual practice with monasticism. Furthermore, most of the siddhas had lowly origins and worked in menial positions. The text is clearly affirming that one can practice the Dharma in any condition of life.

Then follows a short description of a life situation that prompts the protagonist to seek the Dharma. The problems confronting the siddhas-to-be are familiar and universal: Kankaripa, the seventh siddha, is grieving for his deceased wife; Tantipa is old, senile, and neglected by his family; Kucipa is afflicted with a painful tumor; Medhini is a farmer who is sick and tired of having to work all the time. Still other protagonists are caught up in various self-destructive obsessions: Tantipa is a compulsive gambler; Sarvabakśa is an insatiable eater; Thaganapa is an incessant liar; Mahipa is inordinately proud of his physical strength.

Not all of these life situations that turn the individual from his or her ordinary concerns are unpleasant. Udheli sees the flight of[page 60] the wild geese and longs to be able to fly with them. Śavaripa is so impressed by a magic arrow that he wishes only to possess its power. Khaḍgapa is a thief who desires a magic sword to make him a better thief. Both positive and negative aspirations as well as life-crises are openings for the guru to offer transforming instruction. In some cases, the guru himself (occasionally herself) points by his (or her) very presence and example to higher possibilities in the human existence. Confronted with the living results of the Dharma, many protagonists simply surrender themselves and request teachings.

Most gurus are wandering ascetics living on what they can beg, sleeping in cemeteries, wearing patched clothes, etc. But the guru can also be a superhuman bodhisattva. Avalokita appears to the deer hunter Śavaripa and persuades him to abandon his practice of killing. Mañjuśrī appears to a seemingly lazy and dim-witted Bhusuku (Śāntideva) and delivers knowledge and wisdom to him.

Of particular interest is the fact that some of the gurus are ḍākinīs, the feminine embodiments of wisdom, who appear when needed to provide insight (Govinda: 190ff.). Some appear in dreams and visions, but in several of the stories the ḍākinīguru seems to be a human female adept (Robinson: 15).

Once the individual expresses a desire for the Dharma, the guru gives two things: initiation and instruction. Initiation, as the name implies, is a ceremony that begins the practice, but it is also seen as communicating an actual spiritual force, without which the student cannot be successful. The tantric systems of the Guhyasamāja, the Cakrasaṃvara, and the Hevajra are all mentioned.

After the initiation, the guru gives instruction to the student in terms that relate to his or her immediate situation. Often a worldly occupation or object of concern is used as a vehicle for transcending the world. As a consequence, unlike some other forms of spiritual discipline which require physical isolation, engaging in meditation and living in the world of ordinary human affairs do not exclude each other so long as both are done in the proper way. For example, Kamparipa, a blacksmith who develops a disgust for saṁsāra in general and for his work in particular, is told that he should let his inner acts of meditation be like those deeds he did outwardly. The right and left tantric veins should be the bellows, the central channel the anvil and the consciousness the smith. The conceptions should be fuel and his wisdom and insight the shining[page 61] fire. He should hammer the iron of misery; the result will be the stainless Dharma Body (Robinson: 160).

The student then works for a period of time—twelve years is a common span—and in the end achieves success. There may be some mention of how the siddha instructed others or performed some miraculous feat. Finally, he or she goes to the realm of the ḍākas, a type of tantric paradise.2

Stories of great masters of Tantra are not so easily analyzed. Sometimes we are told the condition in which they achieved enlightenment, other times we are simply given stories that manifest their signs of success. Saraha, a tantric adept, is forced by some Brahmans to justify his drinking wine, a violation of caste restrictions. He undergoes a trial by ordeal, plunging his hand into boiling oil, drinking molten copper and walking on water. Finally, the king simply says, "If anyone who has powers like these drinks wine, then let him drink" (Robinson: 43). Saraha then preaches to the king, who with his court is converted.

The story of Virūpa tells how a monk became a siddha through tantric practice. He eats the pigeons of the monastery then resurrects them. When he consumes vast quantities of liquor, he stops the sun to pay the bill. He humbles worshippers of Śiva and overcomes cannibal witches. In the story of Nāgārjuna we are told how he withstands the assaults of demonesses, attempts to change a mountain into gold until dissuaded by Mañjuśrī, helps a cowherder become king, and how he lives for several hundred years. The story of Kanhapa or Kṛṣṇācāri tells of a yogin who had gained all the worldly siddhis but found it difficult to put away his pride. Though he did not obtain full success till the end of his life, he was still able to walk on water and change his form from man to wolf. The stories of Ḍombipa and Kambala likewise portray awesome magical power.

Like all religious texts, particularly those that deal with an esoteric tradition, these biographies can be read on several levels. I propose three ascending and mutually enriching ways of reading the accounts of the siddhas: as history, as hagiography and as myth.

These three approaches do not exclude each other; each has its own particular emphasis and each puts the stories into a particular[page 62] perspective in the overall context of Buddhism. The historical approach looks for what the texts can tell us about the history of Buddhism in India, particularly the rise of tantric Buddhism. The hagiographic reading focuses upon the religious purposes of a text and how those purposes have affected its transmission and reception. The mythological perspective focuses upon the texts as sacred narrative. Keith Dowman suggests that stories of the siddhas can be read first as edifying tales, second as tantric allegories and symbolic narratives and finally as works that may offer historical insight (xi). Allegorical symbolism is undoubtedly very important here; Govinda, for instance, suggests that accounts of Virūpa stopping the flow of the Ganges and halting the sun are not at all to be taken as descriptions of literal events, but should be understood as descriptions of inner yogic processes (53). But it has been the historical and more strictly biographical levels that have attracted modern scholars, and so it is to these stories as historical narrative that we turn to begin our discussion.

Abhayadatta most likely set down the accounts in the GTGC as he had received them, that is, as actual biographical accounts. Tāranātha records similar stories (214-215) in a work intended as history, and while there are those in the Tibetan tradition who look more to the symbolism involved, many simply take these accounts in the same spirit that Americans take the account of Washington crossing the Delaware River in the American Revolution.

While the extraordinary nature of the activities of the siddhas requires careful analysis, there is no doubt that, at the very least, we may derive from them certain broad insights into the social conditions of the period. Every account that is passed on reflects its time, if for no other reason than that it has some degree of credibility with its audience. Even if the historical accuracy of certain events and personages may seem suspect to critical scholarly eyes, recurrent motifs probably are quite accurate in mirroring the conditions of the time. For example, the prevalence of lay people in the stories suggests that the tantras were reaching out beyond the monastic establishments, which were traditionally the centers of Buddhism. And the fact that several individuals claim that no one would teach them because they were of low caste suggests that, while Buddhism was less tied to ideas of caste than Hinduism was, it did function within Indian caste society and was not completely free of caste prejudice. Both Khaṇḍipa and Kamparipa remark that they had not expected to find a teacher because of their[page 63] caste status. While the significance of these observations may be modified by further research, these accounts have historical value quite apart from the credibility of specific events.

But be that as it may, the extraordinary feats attributed to these figures play a striking role in the stories and may cause modern readers some perplexity. We are unaccustomed to being told as historical fact that men and women fly by their own power through the air, that they can walk across water or engage in magical duels with witches, to say nothing of stopping the sun to pay one's bar tab. Some degree of skepticism seems in order.

Yet the siddhas are not simply products of a religious or literary imagination. Not only do they live in a certain time and place that is often identifiable to some degree, but, more importantly, we have texts attributed to the siddhas—someone had to write them. If, for example, Saraha did not write the Dohās, the cycle of tantric songs attributed to him, then they were written by someone else to whom we can only give the name "Saraha" (Guenther: 1969). Whether or not Abhayadatta's account of him is true in all its details, somebody in the history of Buddhism likely answered to the name "Saraha." And doctrines and practices do not emerge from thin air; someone has to develop them and someone has to transmit them. In the case of the Tantras, siddhas frequently appear in this role. As a consequence, we have little ground to deny ab initio that we are dealing with actual historical figures. So we have seemingly real characters who perform seemingly unrealistic deeds.

Western scholars have become increasingly sophisticated in evaluating accounts from other cultures. We examine their sociological function; we may look at them as a reflection of cultural dynamics, as expressions of deep psychological forces or may even consider their value from the point of view of their impact upon individuals and communities. Yet one cannot help but suspect that scholars develop these elaborate and sophisticated analyses precisely because they say in their hearts: of course, we all know that these extraordinary tales cannot be really true.

It is not unfair to say that for Western scholars, by and large, any explanation, to count as explanation, is put in terms of purely natural (some would say purely physical) causation and conditions. Anything which cannot be explained at present in purely natural terms simply awaits a natural explanation that will come with future research. As heirs of David Hume, whose essay on miracles (1964: 205-229) has been important in shaping scholarship,[page 64] we apply a strict canon of probability to historical events. The presumption is that there is no such thing as the miraculous or the extraordinary, though scholars can be very subtle in explaining how any given account came to be. In the final analysis, we are to side with "common sense."

But the rationality of common sense has an inherent limitation; it is by definition founded on the ordinary experience of ordinary people. It is the accustomed and familiar. The accounts of the siddhas contain extraordinary happenings but, after all, siddhas are extraordinary people. Abhayadatta nowhere claims that walking on water or resurrecting pigeons are events carried out in the normal course of our everyday world. We need not thereby subscribe to the historical truth of these stories but we have to acknowledge the limitations of common sense when used as a criterion of truth. The contemporary historian may well argue that common sense is all we have; but, in the end, it is a cultural postulate and an assumption.

One additional caveat: while such dramatic events as stopping the sun cannot be held literally without our substantially changing the laws of physics, instances of other extraordinary powers and discernments may not be as easily dismissed. Virtually every religion in which practitioners cultivate altered or expanded states of consciousness—that is, the mystical or shamanistic religions—also affirms that those who are successful acquire superhuman powers and perceptions. The siddha is only the tantric version of a type found all over the world. While individual religions vary as to their attitude concerning these powers, they affirm that they do exist. In the face of such widespread testimony, some caution is in order before dismissing such claims out of hand.3

These Accounts as Hagiography and Myth

Abhayadatta does not seem primarily interested in a history defined by the canons of an empiricist rationality—i.e., just the "facts" in their most plausible form. Rather, he is illustrating a particular tradition through the stories of the siddhas. Though he may have intended every story to be history, they may also be taken as symbolic tales in a historical form. Indeed, he might respond to a Western historian by asking what genuine insight anyone gets from mere recitation of facts unilluminated by a spiritual purport.

[page 65] If we cannot fully grasp what these stories are about by regarding them as straight history or biography, we may consider this genre of religious literature under the fruitful category of hagiography, "writings about holy people." The term emerges from the Christian tradition, where it refers to an account of a saint that is read to the people on the saint's feast day. From this, the term took on a generic meaning of a biographical story presented as historical fact but also designed to convey a religious meaning over and above the historical narration.

While a biography has someone writing a detached and critical account of the major events in the life of a subject, hagiography is concerned first and foremost to illuminate religious truth as exemplified through the lives of extraordinary men and women. This purpose is by no means incompatible with historical accuracy, but holding up a model or illustrating a doctrine shapes the narrative in a way that subordinates mere detail of fact.

The Roman Catholic scholar Hippolyte Delehaye has done much to try to recover the most authentic accounts of the lives of Christian saints (1963). Delehaye defined some of the factors that bear on the transmission of hagiography over time. For example, it is quite common for a link in the chain of transmission of a story to elaborate or refine certain details of an account. The religious purposes and messages are highlighted, other details are suppressed. Complex events are simplified, gaps are filled according to the pious creativity of the transmitter, multiple events and/or characters become conflated and single events and characters can become multiple and circulate independently. So it is with the stories of the siddhas. All of these factors come into play, often simultaneously.

To give an example of one such factor, how partially understood elements are provided explanation, we may look at the eleventh siddha, Cauraṅgi. The original form of his name was Caturaṅgi, "the man with four limbs," which probably referred to the fact that he practiced a yoga characterized by having four parts. However, in a story similar to the Greek myth of Phaedra and Hippolytus, a young prince who resists his lusty stepmother is sentenced by his father to have his four limbs cut off. By yogic siddhi, the prince is able to regain his limbs; hence the name Caturaṅgi, which in old Bengali became Cauraṅgi. In Sanskrit, this latter name can mean "member of the robbers"—a perplexing[page 66] name for a yogin and a detail begging for a story to explain it. So we are told some merchants were travelling at night near where Cauraṅgi slept. They woke him up. When he asked who they were, the merchants, afraid that he was a robber, said that they were carrying coal, though in reality they were carrying precious things. Cauraṅgi's curiosity being satisfied, he simply replied: "So be it," and went back to sleep. The merchants discovered the next day that their goods had turned to coal, since Cauraṅgi had spoken "words of truth," a yogic power by which whatever a yogin says comes to pass. They went back to him and begged him to return their original goods. Cauraṅgi denied any unfriendly intent and told them that everything would be as it was before. And so he is called, from this case of mistaken identity, "member of the robbers."

Reading religious biographies as hagiography allows us a richer degree of understanding the process by which this genre comes to be and the dynamics which shape the stories. It bridges the categories of history and symbolic literature; the stories can be presented as true in the spiritual sense and also, for the audience at which they are directed, true in the historical sense as well.

Extending this process one step further, hagiography may be considered a sub-genre of sacred narrative, equivalent to what might be meant by "myth"—a story, sanctioned by a tradition and used to convey what the tradition regards as deep truths. The story may focus on gods, on human beings, on both or may even focus on neither. In contrast to its usage in common parlance, the term "myth" need say nothing about historical accuracy or whether it is true to scientific fact or not.4

Mythology in the classical sense has seldom been acknowledged as having an important role in Buddhism, in contrast to Hinduism, for example, which has a particularly rich body of clearly mythological lore. But in this broader sense, Buddhism does indeed have a mythology. Unlike the Hindus and the Greeks, whose myths abound with superhuman beings, gods, devas, and spirits, the Buddhists have preferred to populate their mythology with human characters.5 The life of the Buddha illuminates the origin of the tradition and provides a model for understanding both what it means to be a Buddha and what it means to be a Buddhist.6

Using the life of the Buddha as a figure in history to illustrate the Dharma may provide a grounding principle for additional[page 67] myths—namely, that the lives of others, presented as historical narrative, may further reveal the Dharma. Understanding religious biography as myth allows us to bring Buddhism into structural comparison with other religions, both to highlight the similarities with the other religions and also to bring out the distinctive and unique features of Buddhism. The stories of the siddhas have more complex purposes than to serve as mere historical accounts that stand or fall by contemporary empiricist canons alone.

To summarize: the hagiographical literature about Indian saints is important for the Tibetan tradition because the men and women that it describes are intrinsically worthy of honor by their spiritual success. But their mythic function can be analyzed further into what may be called vertical and horizontal dimensions.

The vertical dimension of myth allows the saints to "humanize" the transcendent; they make the status of an enlightened being accessible to the human level. They give living focus for devotion. They exemplify spiritual triumph in ways understandable to those who still struggle. They give hope in the sense that if they were able to achieve their goal, so might the aspirant who makes the requisite effort. And the symbolic levels of the stories reveal how such a transition may take place. This value is transcendent in the sense that it does not depend upon historical accuracy.

But the horizontal dimension of history is not to be ignored. The claim of these stories to historicity anchors this vertical linking of spiritual success and the ordinary life. The saints represent continuity; they bind the great figures of the past to our own history-bound humanity. They are links in the chain of enlightened beings going back to the Buddha himself, the source of highest wisdom and the supreme teacher in the present age. By their insight and success, the Indian saints guarantee the value of the Dharma and preserve the purity of transmission. They legitimate lineages of spiritual masters living in times closer to our own. The fact that these masters link the present with the sacred past makes their historical existence very important. The alternative is a rupture in the tradition. So this genre derives its value not just from doctrine but also from its affirmation of the sacred in the process of history in which we all live.

Abhayadatta

GTGCGrub thob brgyad bcu rtsa bzhi'i chos skor. New Delhi: Chophel Legdan, 1973.

Corless, Roger

1989The Vision of Buddhism.New York: Paragon House.

Delehaye, Hippolyte

1962The Legends of the Saints.New York: Fordham University Press.

Dowman, Keith

1985Masters of Mahamudra.Albany: State University of New York Press.

[page 69] Eliade, Mircea

1964Shamanism: Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy.Translated from French by Willard Trask. New York: Pantheon Books.

1970Yoga, Immortality and Freedom.Translated from French by Willard Trask. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Govinda, Anagarika

1960Foundations of Tibetan Mysticism.New York: E. P. Dutton.

Guenther, Herbert V.

1963The Life and Teaching of Nāropa.London: Oxford University Press.

1969The Royal Song of Saraha: A Study in the History of Buddhist Thought.Seattle: University of Washington Press.

Grünwedel, Albert

1916Die Geschichten der vier und achtzig Zauberers aus dem Tibetischen übersetz.. Leipzig: Baessler Archiv.

Hume, David

1964Hume on Religion. Ed. by Richard Wollheim. Cleveland: World Publishing.

Robinson, James

1979Buddha's Lions.Berkeley: Dharma Publishing.

Smart, Ninian

1983Worldviews.New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.

Tāranātha

1970History of Buddhism in India. Translated from Tibetan by Lama Chimpa and Alaka Chattopadhyaya. Ed. by Debiprasad Chattopadhyaya. Simla: Indian Institute of Advanced Study.

Notes

[page 70] Sacred texts or scriptures, transmitted either orally or in written form, are common to all the world's religious traditions. In some traditions these texts are relatively brief and unitary, like the Koran, for example. In others they are longer and spring from various sources, but are brought together in a single compilation, as in the case of the Christian Bible. In such instances the resulting collection is known as a canon, which is not one book, but many. These many books, however, share a common identity by virtue of the particular sanctity or authority attributed to them, which sets them apart from other books. Not every work of religious literature is scripture, after all, but only that which for some reason is thought to be especially sacred. For Buddhists, whose canonical literature is extraordinarily prolific, the sacredness of their scriptures depended originally on their utterance by the Buddha, Siddhārtha Gautama. Insofar as we can determine it, the canon1 transmitted by Gautama's followers after his death consisted of two principal sets of texts, the Dharma or Sūtras (discourses delivered by the Buddha, or in some cases by his disciples, but with his blessing) and the Vinaya (the corpus of monastic regulations, with the various traditions relating to their original promulgation).[page 71] Later most schools added a third collection of summaries and systematic restatements of doctrine, the Abhidharma. These three collections or "baskets" (piṭaka) were passed down orally for several centuries, and as the Buddhist community split into different ordination lineages and schools, the Buddhist canon or Tripiṭaka ("Three Baskets"), which can hardly have been fixed even in the lifetime of the founder, diverged correspondingly, so that by the beginning of the Common Era there were various "canons" in existence. (Of these only one has survived to the twentieth century relatively complete, but with later modifications that scholars are now beginning to address: the Pāli Canon of the Theravādin school, which was committed to writing in the first century B.C.E.) We are unsure precisely to what extent these collections were ever considered "closed," setting the texts in them apart from others in circulation, but we know that Buddhists worked with very definite ideas about authenticity, about what could be accepted as the word of the Buddha (buddhavacana) and what could not (see Lamotte; Ray; Davidson). And we also know that Buddhists of all "Mainstream" schools (on this term see Harrison, 1992b: 45, n. 8) continued to produce works of literature, which caused no problems as far as the borderline between the canonical and the non-canonical was concerned, as long as they were not attributed to the Buddha.

This situation changed around the beginning of the Common Era with the advent of the Mahāyāna, a loose pan-Buddhist movement which, while it may have found more favorable conditions for growth within some Mainstream schools than others, soon overran their sectarian boundaries. To promote the various doctrinal and cultic innovations which were their characteristic concern, the followers of the Mahāyāna produced an enormous number of new texts claiming the status of buddhavacana. These then circulated in an uneasy relationship with the canons of the traditional schools, which had in many cases furnished the raw materials for their composition. Although this was in one sense an "anti-canon," co-existing with the Mainstream collections in India while challenging their claims to exclusive authenticity and completeness, this alternative set of scriptures was itself never "closed." Rather, it remained an "open canon," a contradiction in terms evidently occasioned by the need to assign the texts a certain primacy and yet not close the door on further creativity.2 As for the contents of this "canon," we can only speculate as to what[page 72] texts were available at any given time or place,3 but we may assume that most Mahāyānists can hardly have had at their disposal the huge collections of their scriptures we now possess. It is much more likely that, in addition to the traditional canons of the schools they belonged to, they had access to a limited number of Mahāyāna texts, in some cases perhaps to compendia of them. We know of two of these major sūtra collections, the Mahāsaṃnipāta and the Ratnakūṭa, the compilation of which poses difficult historical problems, although some of the texts in them are known to date back to the beginnings of the Mahāyāna. Alongside them we might also place "mega-scriptures" like the Avataṃsaka and the various longer versions of the Prajñāpāramitā ("Perfection of Wisdom"), one of the most philosophically important productions of the Mahāyāna. Such longer texts and text-compendia may well have done duty as a type of Mahāyāna Buddhist canon.

This situation was further complicated when a new movement known as the Vajrayāna or Tantric Buddhism began to take shape towards the middle of the first millennium. In fact the production of sacred literature simply continued unabated, while the themes addressed changed to suit the needs and tastes of the times. In this new wave of works, which are known as tantras, the ritual and iconographical repertoire of Mahāyāna Buddhism was extended, while its doctrines were stretched and remolded so as to harness the power of sexual desire and the potency of sexual symbolism (among other things) in the service of the quest for liberation. Although the tantras do indeed qualify as scriptures, given the circumstances of their production and use, a tantric canon was even less likely to emerge than a Mahāyāna canon. By the close of the first millennium, then, towards the end of its life in its homeland, Indian Buddhism was a complex amalgam of three strains—Mainstream, Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna—and it is this multi-layered tradition and its equally complex scriptural heritage which the Tibetans have inherited and passed down to the present day. Without some appreciation of this background, it is impossible to understand the canon which the Tibetans developed.

Tibetan translations of Buddhist scriptures, mostly Mahāyāna texts, began to be made in the seventh century C.E.; this is the beginning of the snga dar, the period of the first diffusion of Buddhism[page 73] in Tibet. Initially the production of these translations seems to have been a haphazard and irregular business, but significantly the central political authority soon moved to take control of the process. At the beginning of the ninth century, on the instructions of the Tibetan king, a group of Indian and Tibetan scholars devised a new set of guidelines and a new terminology for translating Buddhist texts, intended to be binding on all future translators. Some of the results of this remarkable attempt at literary standardization survive in the bilingual (later multilingual) glossary known generally as the Mahāvyutpatti,4 and in its accompanying volume, the sGra sbyor bam po gnyis pa (see Ishikawa). At the same time that new texts were being translated, previous translations were collected and revised by the committee, so that their wording could be brought into line with the new terminology. Lists of works so revised were made, one of which, the catalogue known as the lDan (or lHan) kar ma, has survived.5 The lDan kar ma provides no evidence that there was any move at this time towards setting limits to a Tibetan canon as such, presumably because no Mahāyāna or Vajrayāna canon existed in India. What it does show, however, is that even at this early stage Tibetans were beginning to classify Buddhist literature according to certain principles; and as we shall see, it is this attempt to order the scriptures, rather than to circumscribe them, which is most constitutive of Tibetan canon formation. Thus the lDan kar ma starts with sūtras, those of the Mahāyāna being followed by those of the "Hīnayāna." The Mahāyāna sūtras, which are much more numerous, begin with the Prajñāpāramitā texts, then the works making up the Avataṃsaka Sūtra, the Ratnakūṭa texts, various individual Mahāyāna sūtras, the Mahāsūtras, and lastly texts translated from Chinese. The sūtras are followed by a small number of treatises, then by tantras (gsang sngags kyi rgyud) and dhāraṇīs (gzungs), hymns of praise (stotra, bstod pa), prayers (praṇidhāna, smon lam) and auspicious verses (maṅgalagāthā, bkra shis tshigs su bcad pa). Next comes the Vinaya-piṭaka,6 followed by sūtra commentaries and treatises of various kinds, finishing up with works on logic and revisions and translations in progress. Anticipating subsequent developments, then, we could say that the lDan kar ma foreshadows the basic bKa' 'gyur/ bsTan 'gyur division of later times—that bka' (the sacred word) comes before bstan bcos (the treatises) is after all only logical—and that its "bKa' 'gyur section" follows the basic order Sūtra, Tantra, Vinaya.7 Within each category works are arranged according to length, with the[page 74] longer first. Over 700 titles are listed, testifying to the extraordinary level of activity at this time.

This efflorescence of scholarship, the precision and thoroughness of which has rendered the Tibetan translations so valuable to modern Buddhist scholarship, was eclipsed for some time by the political disturbances following the death of King Glang dar ma in 842 and the subsequent collapse of the Tibetan empire, but resumed eventually in the late tenth century with the translation work of Rin chen bzang po (958-1056) and others. Thus began the so-called second diffusion of Buddhism (phyi dar), which continued for many centuries, during which translations continued to be made, especially of tantric scriptures, which were still being produced in India. At the same time older versions from the snga dar period went on being copied and circulated throughout the greater Tibetan cultural sphere.

Although none of them has survived, catalogues like the lDan kar ma continued to be made, and it was only a matter of time before one of them came to be regarded as definitive, that is, moved from being descriptive—a simple inventory of the holdings of a particular monastery or palace library—to being prescriptive. We can say, in fact, that the formation of the Tibetan canon, or at the very least its shape, can be traced back to the work of cataloguers grappling with the task of imposing some kind of order on the sheer mass of Buddhist literature available to them. When that endeavor was combined with the editorial response provoked by the huge number of copies of individual texts in circulation, each carrying its own peculiar readings, the canon as we know it today was born. It is, however, also likely that the Tibetans were inspired by the Chinese example to attempt a definitive edition of their sacred texts. At any rate we know that at the beginning of the fourteenth century a decisive step was taken at the bKa' gdams pa monastery of sNar thang in gTsang near gZhis ka rtse. An account of this is found in the Deb ther sngon po ("The Blue Annals"), written by gZhon nu dpal (1392-1481) in 1476-1478, less than two hundred years after the event. In his sketch of the sNar thang scholar bCom ldan rigs (or rig) pa'i ral gri, gZhon nu dpal tells us (DTNP: 410-412) that his accomplishments were such that:

[page 75] ...he had many pupils who were fine scholars, and it is said that two thirds of the canon specialists (piṭakadhara, sde snod 'dzin pa) gathered at sNar thang. The great scholar 'Jam pa'i dbyangs was also one of his pupils, but because he once dressed up as a demon and menaced his teacher in the sacred courtyard (?),8 he was severely reprimanded and no longer allowed to stay with him. Having as a result taken up residence at Sa skya, he received an invitation from the Mongols and became the court chaplain of Buyantu Khan,9 where he composed a ṭīkā on the Pramāṇavārttika with a summary appended. No matter how many times he sent gifts to bCom ldan through the imperial messengers, the latter displayed no pleasure at all. Finally he sent him a small chest full of ink, with which he was very pleased. bCom ldan also composed sixteen volumes of treatises. The great scholar known as dBus pa Blo gsal was also a pupil of bCom ral and the Reverend 'Jam dbyangs. bCom ral verified the number of sections, the colophons and so on of the sacred word (bka') of the Sugata and also classified the treatises (bstan bcos) and then wrote the bsTan pa rgyas pa, a treatise which puts them together in their various categories.10 Later, the Reverend 'Jam dbyangs sent copious quantities of materials. In accordance with his request to dBus pa Blo gsal and others that they make copies of all the sacred word and the treatises in translation (bka' dang bstan bcos 'gyur ro cog) and keep them at sNar thang Monastery, dBus pa Blo gsal Byang chub ye shes, the translator bSod nams 'od zer and rGyang ro Byang chub went to great pains to find original exemplars (phyi mo) of the sacred word in translation (bka' 'gyur) and of the treatises in translation (bstan 'gyur)11 and make good copies of them, after which they were kept in the monastery known as 'Jam lha khang. From these, many copies spread to other places: in Upper Tibet they spread to such places as Grom pa Sa skya and Khab Gung thang, while in Lower Tibet too three copies went also to 'Tshal Gung thang, and three copies to sTag lung and its environs.12 Bringing the bsTan 'gyur from sNar thang, Bu ston Rin po che13 removed the duplicates, since the sNar thang one, being the very first, was a collection of whatever exemplars were to be had,14 arranged in proper order what had not been in any order, and added over a thousand new religious texts, after which it was kept in the monastery of Zha lu. Taking that as his exemplar the teacher Nam mkha' rgyal mtshan15 made a copy at gZhis kha Rin spungs, which was kept in the Dharma college of rTses thang.16 This supplied the exemplar for those kept at Gong dkar and gDan sa Thel.17 All the innumerable copies produced thereafter—the separate copies which Khams pas made and took to Khams, the copies which[page 76] were made using these as exemplars in Khams itself, the copy made by the Chos rje mThong ba don ldan,18 the copy made in dBus by the Du dben sha ba,19 the copy made from precious substances at 'Tshur phur by the Chos rje Rang byung ba,20 the copy made at Byams pa gling by Yar rgyab dPon chen dGe bsnyen pa,21 the copy in 180 volumes made by gZi Kun spangs pa,22 right down to when sTag rtse ba,23 built a fine monastery and made a copy which includes many exemplars obtained later, in addition to the former bKa' 'gyur and bsTan 'gyur—these also came into existence thanks to the Reverend 'Jam pa'i dbyangs, the pupil of bCom ldan rigs pa'i ral gri, and these two in the final analysis owed it all to the grace of rNgog lo tsā ba, who owed it to the grace of the scholars of Kashmir, and ultimately to the grace of the Buddhas.24

This account is worth quoting in full for a number of reasons, not least because of the light it throws on the motivation for the compilation of the sNar thang "edition."25 As gZhon nu dpal tells the story, this particular collection was made only in response to the request, and with the substantial material assistance of 'Jam pa'i dbyangs, whose contribution was therefore pivotal.26 There is thus a strong suggestion of Chinese influence, since working at the Yuan court 'Jam pa'i dbyangs would no doubt have been influenced by his Mongol patrons' sense of the importance of previous editions of the Chinese Buddhist canon produced under imperial sponsorship, and by their desire to add lustre to this tradition.27 We know too that sNar thang, like Sa skya, had very close connections with the Mongol rulers of China.28 Thus the initial compilation of the Tibetan canon may be seen as a distant echo of that well-known process by which the Chinese culturally subverted foreigners who had conquered them by force of arms, and its political implications merit attention. But what is equally interesting about gZhon nu dpal's account, on a more personal and human level, is the implied additional motivation for 'Jam pa'i dbyangs's initiative. Practical jokes often backfire on their perpetrators, but this hair-raising schoolboy prank had spectacular consequences. bCom ral must have given his hapless student such a severe dressing-down that the poor man smarted from it for the rest of his life, engaging in pathetically extravagant attempts to win back his teacher's favor. In this way a brief moment of boyish fun can be seen as the starting point for centuries of sober scholarly activity.29

[page 77] gZhon nu dpal also paints a vivid picture of the veritable explosion of bKa' 'gyur and bsTan 'gyur copies from sNar thang in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, as Tibet was swept by what we might call a "bKa' 'gyur craze." But he tells us little about the corresponding flow of copies towards that center which preceded the compilation of the "edition." Fortunately the details of that are preserved in the section colophons to the Tshal pa bKa' 'gyur (see below) which have been carried over into the Li thang and other editions.30 These are documents of capital importance. From them we learn that the Sūtra section of the Old sNar thang was based on over a dozen different sūtra collections (mdo mangs) from the libraries of Sa skya, gTsang Chu mig ring mo, Shog chung, sPun gsum, Zha lu, and other monasteries, together of course with those held at sNar thang itself. The Tantra section was based on at least five exemplars from Sa skya, Thar pa gling, and sPun gsum, and was arranged according to catalogues compiled by Grags pa rgyal mtshan (1147-1216), 'Phags pa (1235-1280), Rigs pa'i ral gri and others. The Vinaya was based on a manuscript edition compiled by mChims ston Nam mkha' grags pa, abbot of sNar thang from 1250 to 1289, compared against the Vinaya texts of Rung klung shod grog Monastery and others. Nam mkha' grags pa's text had itself been based on the edition made at La stod 'Ol rgod Monastery by Dharma seng ge using copies obtained from bSam yas mChims phu and other monasteries in dBus and gTsang with the help of the teacher and Vinaya specialist (vinayadhara, 'dul ba 'dzin pa) Zhing mo che ba Byang chub seng ge during the time of the Vinaya specialist of rGya, dBang phyug tshul khrims 'bar (1047-1131). We see then from these colophons that the sNar thang "edition" was the result of the gathering in of texts from various monastic libraries in gTsang and surrounding areas,31 and at the same time the culmination of several centuries of collecting and cataloguing activity at a number of centers, including Sa skya.

On some points, however, the testimony of these sources is frustratingly vague. In particular, we do not know whether the scholars of sNar thang took the original manuscripts of all these collections back to sNar thang, or returned home with complete copies of them, or, working from one of their catalogues, copied only those individual works not already in their possession. The DTNP gives the impression that bCom ral and his disciples had first worked on the translations of sūtras and śāstras held at sNar thang,[page 78] and had written several catalogues, before the collection process began, so it is quite possible that they collected selectively and to order. With two or more teams working concurrently, such a procedure is bound to have produced multiple copies of some texts. The DTNP enumerates three significant features of the copy of the sNar thang bsTan 'gyur which Bu ston worked on: it was incomplete, it was not in order (at least not to Bu ston's satisfaction), and it contained duplicates. What was true of the bsTan 'gyur is equally likely to have been true of the bKa' 'gyur; it is quite possible that it too contained multiple copies of texts, either different translations of the same text,32 or different recensions of the same translation. This means that both the sNar thang bKa' 'gyur and bsTan 'gyur may simply have been better arranged collections of high-quality copies, rather than editions in our sense of the word, and that therefore they still required editorial attention.

It is my belief that the initial collection of copies which took place at sNar thang was soon followed by a second phase in the production of the bKa' 'gyur and bsTan 'gyur collections that we know today, and that this phase was carried through in at least two different places.33 One of these places was Tshal (or 'Tshal) Gung thang Monastery in dBus, where a new edition of the bKa' 'gyur was produced during the years 1347-1351 under the sponsorship of the local ruler, Tshal pa Kun dga' rdo rje, also known as dGe ba'i blo gros (1309-1364). Since the original section colophons of this edition have survived we know a great deal about it. We know, for example, that the texts of the sNar thang "edition," of which three copies were employed, were substantially revised (using the Mahāvyutpatti and other such works to standardize the wording), and that their order was also rearranged, with a number of titles being deleted from the bKa' 'gyur because they were deemed to belong to the bsTan 'gyur.34 A three-volume set of tantric texts translated during the early period (rNying rgyud) was also added. The result is known as the Tshal pa edition. The second center of editorial activity was Zha lu in gTsang. We cannot yet be sure that Bu ston carried out a complete revision of the bKa' 'gyur (as well as the bsTan 'gyur) at Zha lu, but there are indications that he did edit both collections, even though gZhon nu dpal mentions only his bsTan 'gyur edition.35 However, we have firm evidence that Bu ston worked on substantial portions of the bKa' 'gyur, and that this editorial work was continued by his successors[page 79] at Zha lu and rGyal rtse (see Harrison, 1994). This aspect of the history of the bKa' 'gyur is rather problematic, but there are good reasons for believing that at some time in the first half of the fourteenth century a Zha lu bKa' 'gyur also came into existence, and that this edition may have been closer to the Old sNar thang than its Tshal pa counterpart, at least in terms of organization. I shall call this edition the *Zha lu ma, using an asterisk to mark its hypothetical status.36 Both the Tshal pa and Zha lu editions may well have been based on the same raw materials, but especially in the matter of the deletion of duplicates, different decisions could easily have been arrived at, which would account for much that was to follow.

From this point on our discussion concerns the bKa' 'gyur rather than the bsTan 'gyur, although we should note that the evolution of a basically bipartite canon seems to be a peculiarly Tibetan innovation.37 (This scheme was also adopted by the Bon pos, whose own canon, divided into bKa' 'gyur and brTen 'gyur, appears to have been systematized in the late fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries (see Kvaerne: 38-39) in imitation of the Buddhist model.) The bKa' 'gyur section of the Tibetan Buddhist canon has in its turn three major divisions: 'Dul ba (Vinaya), mDo (Sūtra) and rGyud (Tantra), thus making it a kind of tripiṭaka in itself, arranged according to the three "vehicles" or three different levels of religious avocation (sdom gsum): 'Dul ba for "Hīnayāna" (i.e., Mainstream Buddhism), mDo for Mahāyāna, and rGyud for Vajrayāna. To put it like this, however, oversimplifies the picture, because although the 'Dul ba section is comparatively clear-cut, the other two are not. Thus the mDo section, broadly conceived, is broken down into Sher phyin (Prajñāpāramitā texts), Phal chen (the Avataṃsaka Sūtra), dKon brtsegs (Ratnakūṭa texts), Myang 'das (Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra) and mDo sna tshogs or mDo mang(s) (miscellaneous sūtras) sections, while the rGyud texts are divided, following the classification scheme promoted by Bu ston and others, into four main classes, supplemented in some editions by the rNying rgyud ("Old Tantras") and gZungs 'dus ("Dhāraṇī collection") sections.38 These sections and subsections do not appear in the same order in all editions, partly because of different schemes for classifying the sequence of the Buddha's teachings (see, e.g., Skorupski: xiv-xvii). The same holds true for the order of the individual texts within the sections, especially in the rGyud, where[page 80] the placing of particular tantric cycles often indicates sectarian preferences.39 The study of the complicated issues involved here is one way of determining the affiliations of the editions. However, repeated re-arrangements of the bKa' 'gyur make it difficult for us to determine the original order of the Tshal pa and *Zha lu ma editions on the basis of their descendants.

The Tshal pa and the *Zha lu ma manuscripts are the twin fonts from which most of the later standard editions of the bKa' 'gyur appear to flow, hence the division of the bKa' 'gyur tradition as we now know it40 into what have been called the "Eastern" and "Western" branches. Identifying this bifurcation, and making a start at sorting out the twists and turns on both sides of the tradition has been the major achievement of recent bKa' 'gyur scholarship, above all that of Eimer (see especially Eimer, 1992), followed more recently by several other scholars. This scholarship brings three basic methods to bear on the problem of determining the affinities of the various accessible editions. The first is to examine Tibetan histories, biographies and the catalogues of these editions (dkar chag; see Martin, in this volume) for information relating to their creation; the second is to note carefully the order of sections and individual titles within the editions, since this can also indicate affinities; and the third is to apply classical text-critical technique to the problem, by editing individual texts, i.e., collating as many editions as possible and noting patterns of variants. Given the vastness of the bKa' 'gyur tradition, it is little wonder that these methods have not yet yielded all the answers, and that many problems remain unsolved. At the same time, some progress has been made. What follows is, I hope, a reasonably accurate and reliable reflection of our present state of knowledge.

On the so-called "Western" side of the picture the *Zha lu ma passes from the realm of hypothesis into that of historical fact in the form of the manuscript bKa' 'gyur which was made in 1431 on the order of the ruler Rab brtan Kun bzang 'phags pa (1389-1442) and deposited in the dPal 'khor chos sde Monastery at rGyal rtse.41 This is known as the Them spangs ma Manuscript. Complete in 111 volumes, it did not include the rNying rgyud collection. There is no doubt that some of its sections were edited by Bu ston and[page 81] his successors at Zha lu, but the provenance of others is not yet known. Whether the original still exists is a matter of some uncertainty, but there are still several old manuscripts at rGyal rtse, and one of these could be it. The Them spangs ma is extremely important, for it was much copied; during the reign of the fifth Dalai Lama alone (1617-1682), over a hundred copies were made. One such copy was presented to the Mongols in 1671, and now rests in the State Library at Ulan Bator.42 Another was made during the years 1858-1878 and later donated to the Japanese monk and traveller Kawaguchi Ekai; this is now in the possession of the Tōyō Bunko, Tokyo. These are two recognized copies of the Them spangs ma, but we also have to reckon with the many others which were made, and the copies which were made from them. Into this category fall the London Manuscript bKa' 'gyur, which derives from a manuscript held at Shel dkar chos sde,43 and the sTog Palace bKa' 'gyur, which was copied from a Bhutanese exemplar (Skorupski).44 No doubt many more of these copies will eventually come to light. The best general term for all these manuscripts is "the Them spangs ma tradition."

On the other ("Eastern") side of the picture the Tshal pa manuscript provided the basis for the first xylographic or woodblock print of the bKa' 'gyur, the Yongle edition made in Beijing in 1410. At this point the printing technology first invented by the Chinese largely for the purposes of propagating Buddhist literature was enthusiastically adopted by the Tibetans, who were to continue to use it up to the twentieth century, not least to produce ever more editions of the bKa' 'gyur (cf. Snellgrove and Richardson: 160). In Beijing new impressions continued to be taken from the Yongle blocks, and when they wore out, new blocks were prepared, using prints struck from the old blocks as masters. Minor alterations were sometimes made when this was done. In this way were produced the Wanli impression of 1605, the Kangxi impressions of 1684/92, those of 1700, 1717-1720, the Qianlong impression of 1737, and at least one further impression after 1765.45 But these are not the only offspring of the Tshal pa, for a copy of it kept at the castle of 'Phying ba sTag rtse in 'Phyong rgyas, a copy which must have received further editorial attention, was the basis for the 'Jang Sa tham or Li thang edition in 110 volumes of 1609-1614, which has only recently become available in the West.46 The same 'Phying ba sTag rtse Manuscript must also have been the basis for some of the sNar thang blockprint of 1730-1732 (on[page 82] which see below).47 The Li thang was in its turn the basis for the Co ne edition (107 volumes) of 1721-1731. A convenient term for all these editions is "the Tshal pa tradition."

So far all this looks relatively neat, but in fact we have as yet made no mention of the whole question of what is technically known as "contamination." Contamination occurs when one text is not copied from another in a simple linear progression, but instead mixes readings from two or more exemplars, or "conflates" them. In such a situation parentage is often difficult to trace. The later bKa' 'gyur tradition is in fact bedeviled by contamination, due in part to the great pains the compilers of new editions took to ensure that their text was as sound as possible, which they did by consulting as many reputable old editions as they could lay their hands on. Thus the block-print edition in 104 volumes produced in 1733 at the Sa skya pa monastery of sDe dge, which took as its base text the Li thang, also borrowed readings from the lHo rdzong bKa' 'gyur, a descendant of the Them spangs ma, as well as from a bKa' 'gyur produced by A gnyen pa kshi. The sDe dge xylograph thus represents a conflation of the two main branches of the tradition, as do its later offshoots, the Ra rgya (1814-1820), the Urga (1908-1910) and the Wa ra editions (twentieth century).48 Similarly, later reprints of the Peking edition often altered the text of the blocks with reference to the Li thang, while the modern Lhasa edition, produced in 1934, is widely known to be a conflation of sDe dge and sNar thang.49 The sNar thang blockprint edition of 1730-1732, however, is the most unusual case of mixed parentage, since although it takes its texts from at least two separate editions, it does not apparently conflate their readings: text by text, it seems to follow one edition or the other scrupulously. Text-critical research by Eimer and others has only recently enabled us to identify the sNar thang xylograph's two sources: one of them is the 'Phying ba sTag rtse manuscript of the Tshal pa edition,50 and the other is the Shel dkar copy of the Them spangs ma, on which the London Manuscript was based.51 What remains to be worked out is which texts it took from which sources, and whether we can identify the point where it switched from one to the other. At this stage it appears that the 'Dul ba section follows the Them spangs ma, while most of the mDo follows the Tshal pa (making the sNar thang in this respect a sister of the Li thang). Evidence for the rGyud section is sparse. We should note, however, that the sNar thang follows the basic order of the Tshal pa editions. The way in which[page 83] this edition was produced is a good illustration of the care the Tibetan editors took over their work, and of the sophistication of their approach. The same is true of sDe dge. Using these bKa' 'gyurs to edit texts ourselves, we are impressed by the extremely small number of errors which they introduced into the tradition, even though they have complicated our task somewhat by conflating their sources. One other point which needs to be noted in connection with these later printed editions is that the Tibetan canon was never entirely "closed," and that editors of the bKa' 'gyur seem to have had few qualms about adding recently translated or discovered works to existing editions. Texts were still being translated in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, albeit not at the prodigious rate of earlier periods.

This picture of the history of the bKa' 'gyur, as complex as it is, may soon need to be revised and elaborated. First of all, new bKa' 'gyurs continue to come to light, some of which do not fit at all well into this scheme. This is, for example, the case with the most recent arrival in the West, the Phug brag (also spelled Phu brag, sPu brag, sPud tra, etc.).52 In terms of organization this edition, produced ca. 1700, follows neither the Thems spang ma nor the Tshal pa traditions, it contains texts found in no other bKa' 'gyur, and it carries multiple translations of works. Since it has only recently become available, not much text-critical work on individual titles within this collection has been done, but what little research there is suggests an independent tradition, which is sometimes closer to the Them spangs ma, sometimes to the Tshal pa editions.53 In the second place, studies of the Tibetan sūtra translations found at Dunhuang, which date from the eighth to the eleventh centuries, are showing us that at its very beginnings the tradition which was later to become known as the bKa' 'gyur was not at all uniform, but highly contaminated. The Dunhuang collection is in fact a confusing mixture of crude archaic versions and later revised translations, together with texts standing somewhere in between, which must be either half-revised versions or conflations of old and new. If the situation frozen in time by the virtual sealing off of the Dunhuang collection was repeated at other Tibetan book repositories, then it would be surprising if the later history of the bKa' 'gyur did not turn out to be vastly more complicated than this survey might suggest. After all, we must remember that from the earliest times most Buddhist monasteries in Tibet would have possessed their own collections of scriptures, their own Sher[page 84] phyins, mDo mangs, rGyud 'bums, 'Dul bas, and so on, and that eventually many of these collections must have interacted in one way or another with the systematized bKa' 'gyur tradition sketched in this paper, which was itself derived from various monastic holdings of this type. The resulting pattern of criss-cross lines of descent, mutual influence and exchange is undoubtedly complex in the extreme.54

The historical and text-critical considerations raised above point up some divergences between the modern Western and the traditional Tibetan approach to sacred texts. While there is no denying the great skill and care with which many of the editions of the bKa' 'gyur were produced, the Tibetan editors approached their task from a rather different standpoint. Thus while the sDe dge edition, for instance, was in a loose sense critical, in that it attempted to establish the best text on the basis of at least three witnesses, it lacks the most essential attribute of a proper edition in the Western sense: it has no critical apparatus, by which we mean a set of footnotes recording the variant readings of all the copies of the text used. The sDe dge editors reproduced what they considered to be the best reading, and consigned the rest to oblivion, while a Western critical edition would record every variant of significance, enabling the reader to check the work of the editor, and occasionally to improve upon it. In this respect the bKa' 'gyurs are more like, say, the editions of Shakespeare produced for the popular market, which give their readers no idea at all of the intricate textual problems which underlie them; in both cases the evidence is, as it were, suppressed. Naturally Tibetan scholars were not unaware of the importance of variant readings in bKa' 'gyur editions—there are several works in existence which record them—but in creating new editions they were performing an act of piety as well as scholarship, and piety requires no critical apparatus.55 Similar considerations apply to their use of the scriptures.

Most modern Western scholars, trained as they are in an academic or scientific approach to texts, view the translations preserved in the bKa' 'gyur (and bsTan 'gyur) as a series of windows through which the historical development of Buddhist thought and practice can be glimpsed. In these translations many texts have been captured which would otherwise have disappeared forever.[page 85] They contain information, meanings and messages which Western scholars are concerned to extract and use in the pursuit of their own purposes; they have a content which can be appropriated intellectually. Tibetans are also capable of reading in this fashion, as the prolific nature of Tibetan scholarship indicates, yet at the same time they also believe the texts to be "meaningful" in a further sense. That is to say, they both contain meanings within themselves—in particular, the teachings relating to liberation from suffering—and have meaning or significance in their own right, as symbols of that liberation, the latter sense clearly being dependent on the former. Thus, as complete entities the texts of the bKa' 'gyur are thought to be powerful and transformative, as physical objects when seen or touched or as sounds when uttered or heard, whether or not intellectual understanding takes place. And if one text can be powerful, then the complete set of them, the entire canon, represents a total power source of considerable importance.

This attitude to the bKa' 'gyur is of course linked to tantric notions of sound, to the Buddhist identification of the Buddha with the Dharma, and to ancient Indian beliefs about the magical power of speech which represents the truth. It is the primary force which drives the whole history of the Tibetan canon, rather than any scholarly quest for accuracy, or for the definitive text. Indeed, it renders marginal questions as to the meaning of particular words on a particular page or the relationship between various editions, however important these might be to "those whose burden is books," be they Tibetans or Westerners. How else could one explain the extraordinary proliferation of bKa' 'gyur editions, each one of which consumed substantial resources in the making? It was no small thing to keep an army of calligraphers and carvers at work for years on end, or to furnish them with even the basic materials required for a new woodblock edition, to say nothing of supplying the gold, silver and other precious substances often used to adorn the title pages, covers and bindings of the prints, or to write the manuscript editions in their entirety. In fact, however, the more lavish the resources expended, the greater the merit which accrued to the sponsor of the edition, for naturally the sacred power of the bKa' 'gyur was conceptualized in terms of the Buddhist ideology of merit (puṇya, bsod nams). Nor are the political aspects of this ideology and its application any less relevant to the Tibetan situation than they are elsewhere in the Buddhist world. It is no accident that many of the editions we have[page 86] reviewed were produced by some of the most powerful players in Tibet's turbulent history: Kun dga' rdo rje, Byang chub rgyal mtshan, the fifth Dalai Lama and Pho lha bSod nams stobs rgyal were all important political figures; even 'Jam pa'i dbyangs, whose sponsorship initiated the whole process of systematization, must ultimately have been representing his Mongol patrons. In supplying the funds to create new editions of the bKa' 'gyur on which they could set their own seal, these rulers were no doubt pursuing less "transcendental" purposes as well.

Produced at the behest of the wealthy and powerful, the editions of the canon continued to provide Tibetans from all social strata with a source of merit. To this day, in monastery chapels all over Tibet (if they have been fortunate enough to survive the depredations of the twentieth century), sets of the bKa' 'gyur often flank the central images, with an ambulatory set up beneath them so that, simply by passing under one and around the other, the faithful can worship the books and the images at the same time—the former being a repository of the voice (gsung rten), the latter of the body (sku rten) of the awakened ones. Indeed, the books are often more worshipped than read, as the thick layers of dust which coat them testify. On special occasions, however, the texts may be recited, teams of readers going through the entire collection, or the bKa' 'gyur of the local monastery may be borne in procession around the fields, so that its power may be applied to the health of the community. This kind of ritual activity, then, is far more common than the kind of reading for sense with which Westerners are familiar (which is of course also practiced in Tibet), yet it is to the attitude which informs it, this intense feeling for the sacredness and power of the bKa' 'gyur as a whole, that we owe the survival of this precious historical resource.

Bethlenfalvy, Géza

1982A Hand-list of the Ulan Bator Manuscript of the Kanjur Rgyal-rtse Them spaṅs ma. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.

Davidson, Ronald M.

1990An Introduction to the Standards of Scriptural Authenticity in[page 92] Indian Buddhism. In Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha, pp. 291-325. Ed. by Robert E. Buswell. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Eimer, Helmut

1983Rab tu 'byuṅ ba'i gzi: Die tibetische Übersetzung des Pravrajyāvastu im Vinaya der Mūlasarvāstivādins. Asiatische Forschungen82. 2 vols. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.

1989Der Tantra-Katalog des Bu ston im Vergleich mit der Abteilung Tantra des tibetischen Kanjur.Indica et Tibetica17. Bonn: Indica et Tibetica Verlag.

1992Ein Jahrzehnt Studien zur Überlieferung des tibetischen Kanjur.Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde28. Vienna: Arbeitskreis für tibetische und buddhistische Studien Universität Wien.

Ferrari, Alfonsa

1958Mk'yen Brtse's Guide to the Holy Places of Central Tibet.Rome: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente.

Grönbold, Günter

1984Der Buddhistische Kanon: Eine Bibliographie.Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.

gZhon nu dpal

DTNPDeb ther sngon po. 2 vols. Chengdu: Sichuan minzu chubanshe, 1984, 1985.

Hadano, Hakuyū

1966Chibetto-daizōkyō engi [A History of compiling and editing of the Tibetan Buddhist Scriptures, 'Bkaḥ-ḥgyur and Bstan-ḥgyur'], [1].Annual of Oriental and Religious Studies/ Suzuki Gakujutsu Zaidan Kenkyu Nempō3: 35-83.

Harrison, Paul

1992aDruma-kinnara-rāja-paripṛcchā-sūtra: A Critical Edition of the Tibetan Text (Recension A).Studia Philologica Buddhica, Monograph Series7. Tokyo: The International Institute for Buddhist Studies.

1992bIs the Dharma-kāya the Real 'Phantom Body' of the Buddha?Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies15/1: 44-93.

1992cMeritorious Activity or Waste of Time? Some Remarks on the Editing of Texts in the Tibetan Kanjur. In Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the 5th Seminar of the International Association of Tibetan Studies, Narita 1989, pp. 77-93. Ed. by Ihara Shōren and Yamaguchi Zuihō. Narita: Naritasan Shinshoji.

1994In Search of the Source of the Tibetan Kanjur: A Reconnaissance Report. In Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the 6th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, Fagernes 1992,[page 93] Vol. 1, pp. 295-317. Ed. by Per Kvaerne. Oslo: Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture.

Ishihama, Y. and Y. Fukuda

1989A New Critical Edition of the Mahāvyutpatti: Sanskrit-Tibetan-Mongolian Dictionary of Buddhist Terminology.Studia Tibetica16, Materials for Tibetan-Mongolian Dictionaries, vol. 1. Tokyo: Tōyō Bunko.

Ishikawa, M.

1990A Critical Edition of the Sgra sbyor bam po gnyis pa: An Old and Basic Commentary on the Mahāvyutpatti. Studia Tibetica18, Materials for Tibetan-Mongolian Dictionaries, vol. 2. Tokyo: Tōyō Bunko.

Kvaerne, Per

1975The Canon of the Tibetan Bonpos.Indo-Iranian Journal 16: 18-56, 96-144.

Lalou, Marcelle

1953Les textes bouddhiques au temps du Roi Khri-sroṅ-lde-bcan.Journal asiatique 241: 313-353.

Lamotte, Etienne

1947La critique d'authenticité dans le bouddhisme. In India Antiqua, pp. 213-222. Ed. by F. D. K. Bosch et al. Leiden: E. J. Brill.

Ray, R.A.

1985Buddhism: Sacred Text Written and Realized. In The Holy Book in Comparative Perspective, pp. 148-180. Ed. by F. M. Denny and R.L. Taylor. Columbia, South Carolina: University of South Carolina Press.

Roerich, George

1976The Blue Annals. Second edition. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass [originally published in two parts, Calcutta, 1949-1953].

Ruegg, David Seyfort

1966The Life of Bu ston rin po che. Rome: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente.

Sakaki R.

1962Honyaku myōgi taishū/Mahāvyutpatti. Reprint ed. in 2 vols. Tokyo: Suzuki Research Foundation [lst ed. 1916, 1936].

Samten, Jampa, translated with Jeremy Russell

1987aNotes on the Lithang Edition of the Tibetan bKa'-'gyur.Tibet Journal 12/3: 17-40.[page 94]

1987bOrigins of the Tibetan Canon with Special Reference to the Tshal-pa Kanjur. In Buddhism and Science, pp. 763-781. Seoul: Tongguk University.

Skorupski, Tadeusz

1985A Catalogue of the Stog Palace Kanjur. Bibliographia Philologica Buddhica, Series Maior4. Tokyo: The International Institute for Buddhist Studies.

Snellgrove, David and Hugh Richardson

1968A Cultural History of Tibet.London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.

Tucci, Giuseppe

1949Tibetan Painted Scrolls. 2 vols. Rome: La Libreria dello Stato.

Back To Top

[page 95] It was due to certain historical factors1 and to the formative stages of the Tibetan canon or bKa' 'gyur2 that some tantric texts came to be treated as canonical or authentic and some texts, of uncertain origin, as unauthentic. The tantric texts that were eventually included in the bKa' 'gyur are considered to be authentic or canonical by the new schools (gsar ma pa), which began to dominate Tibetan Buddhism from the late tenth century onward. A decisive criterion of textual authenticity was a strict but rather arbitrarily imposed reliance on approved translations of tantric texts executed on the basis of attested Sanskrit or other Indian original sources. Thus, those tantric texts whose Indian origins were unattested or in doubt were excluded from the bKa' 'gyur. A considerable number of such "unauthentic" texts were, however, cherished by the adepts of the Ancient School (rNying ma pa), as is explained in Janet Gyatso's essay in this volume. The present article is concerned mainly with the tantric literature included in the bKa' 'gyur.

[page 96] The tantric division comprises several hundred titles in some twenty-two of the 108 volumes of works included in the bKa' 'gyur.3 These tantric texts represent a variety of works that are different in both length and content, and have diverse titles. The overall length of tantric texts varies considerably. Some are very short, comprising a few folios or even less, but on the whole their length varies between twenty and over one hundred folios, with only a few texts extending over two hundred. Like the sūtras the tantric texts are written in the form of dialogues or instructive expositions which are in prose or verse, but most frequently in mixed prose and verse. The tantras usually have an opening scene describing the setting and the general assembly surrounding the principal deity. Then, there follow individual sections or chapters that deal with specific topics. There seems to be no apparent logical arrangement within individual texts. Some tantras appear to be composed according to a preconceived structure, but in many instances the material is clearly put together in a somewhat disordered manner with the same topics being treated in different sections of the whole text. The principal tantras deal with a wide range of subjects that provide the essential instructions for the practice of tantric methods of liberation. Some texts deal with specific topics; others serve as branches, subtexts or elaborations of the major tantras. In principle, the totality of esoteric texts is referred to in Sanskrit as tantra (Tib. rgyud), a term which, like sūtra, and having similar literal meaning, came to be employed to distinguish this literary tradition from other Buddhist texts included in the early Tripiṭaka collections or among the Mahāyāna sūtras. However, in reality the matter is more complex. The tantric texts bear a number of qualifying terms in their titles. Different texts are named variously as Tantra, "Great Tantra" (mahātantra, rgyud chen po), "Root Tantra" (mūlatantra, rtsa ba'i rgyud), "Tantra King" (tantrarāja, rgyud kyi rgyal po), or again as "Ordinance" (kalpa, rtog pa), "Discourse" (sūtra, mdo),4 "Magical Formula" (dhāranī, gzungs), and "Heroine of Magical Power" (vidyārājñi, rig pa'i rgyal mo).5 These are the most frequently employed terms, but there are several others that are also used in the titles of tantric works. Some of these terms were in existence for a long time before the efflorescence of esoteric literature proper in the eighth and ninth centuries.[page 97]

The whole Tantra section as such, depending on the particular bKa' 'gyur edition referred to, is named simply "Tantra" (rGyud) or "Tantra Collection" (rGyud 'bum). However, it is often divided into two major groups called the "Tantra Collection" (rGyud 'bum) and the "Formula Collection" (gZungs 'dus).6 Whenever a particular bKa' 'gyur contains only one Tantra section, this single section includes all categories of tantric texts. When it is divided into the two "Collections" noted, the "Tantra Collection" comprises all tantric texts that belong to the four classes of Tantra (see below), those Mahāyāna sūtras that are recognized as tantric, magical formulas and all the remaining categories included in the Tantra section of the bKa' 'gyur editions that are not subdivided. The "Formula Collection" comprises over two hundred dhāraṇīs and similar texts, including some sūtras, that were gathered together because of their particular importance for ritual. The majority of texts included in this collection are also found among the texts in the "Tantra Collection."

The tantric texts contained in the bKa' 'gyur are arranged in a certain (sequential) order which seems to be quite deliberate, but difficult to ascertain with accuracy. However, on the whole the arrangement of individual texts follows the classification of tantric texts into the four classes. Thus, the Tantra section begins with works belonging to the Highest Yoga, followed by those of the Yoga, and finally those of the Action and Performance classes. There also exist further stratifications of works that appertain to a particular group of texts within each Tantra class, but the actual arrangement and sequence of tantric texts are not consistently the same in all editions of the bKa' 'gyur. Furthermore, in some bKa' 'gyur collections, the tantras are arranged at the beginning, as the first collection, because they are considered more important than other canonical works, such as the Vinaya or Sūtra collections. In some bKa' 'gyur collections they are placed at the end, as the last collection, which is more in accordance with the historical formation of Buddhist texts.

It is possible to discuss tantric literature without making any particular reference to the bKa' 'gyur. However, since so much effort has been invested by the Tibetan savants in the classification and arrangement of tantric literature in some meaningful manner, it is of importance to the understanding of the complexity and variety of tantric works to be aware of the bKa' 'gyur as the largest repository of such texts.[page 98]

The tantric texts included in the bKa' 'gyur represent translations predominantly from the Sanskrit but also from the Prakrit, Apabhraṃśa and other Indian languages. A certain number of such texts were translated into Tibetan during the first propagation (seventh-ninth centuries C.E.) of Buddhism in Tibet, and the majority during the second propagation (tenth century C.E. onward).7 The translation work was done by a number of well-trained Tibetan experts assisted by Indian masters such as Gayādhara, Advayavajra, Jayasena and others. Among the Tibetan translators Rin chen bzang po became the most renowned. But there were many other competent people such as Śākya ye shes or 'Gos lhas btsas who are also ranked very high.

The earliest evidence for the existence of texts with a tantric flavor is frequently sought in the texts of Indian Mahāyāna literature that have sections containing magical formulas. The presence of these formulas, spells and incantations, endowed with certain efficacious powers for the achievement of both worldly and supramundane results, is attested in all periods and forms of Buddhism. However, it is in the late Mahāyāna that such texts began to acquire an important position and serve as inspirations for various practices distinctly different from those of the traditional Mahāyāna. It is not so much the literary genre of the magical texts as such that should be seen as the precursor of tantric texts proper, but rather their spirit and tendency towards magic and occult practices. The exact time, place, and circumstances in which the first tantric texts were produced remain fundamentally unresolved. There exists much speculation and a variety of opinions on the origin of the tantras. It is, however, generally assumed and supported by Tibetan sources such as Tāranātha that the tantric texts and practices initially remained a very closely guarded secret in limited circles for several centuries, most likely as an oral transmission, before they became diffused and more readily acceptable to a wider audience of adepts in the eighth-ninth centuries. Such an assumption is further supported by the fact that it was also during that period that numerous commentaries on the tantras were written and their authors named.

Tibet was more spiritually inclined toward the tantric tradition than China or Japan, countries in which only selected tantric texts[page 99] were translated and practiced. The Tibetan tradition received the largest collection of tantric texts and practices, becoming thus the most prominent inheritor in Asia of tantric literature produced in India. A great variety of tantric texts and practices were carried over to Tibet, some surviving both as texts and living traditions, and some only as literary documents. There still continue to exist some salient disagreements in interpretation and precise grading of those texts within individual schools and among the different schools.8

The tantric texts themselves do not provide any specific information with regard to the categories or divisions in which they are to be placed, but they were eventually classified in several different ways, not so much in terms of their literary nature, but rather with regard to the various teachings and spiritual methods advocated for different spiritual adepts or with regard to different Buddha families. One of the common characteristics of all tantric texts is that they focus on one particular deity or groups of deities and incorporate a body of ritual and meditative instructions necessary to achieve spiritual realization in conjunction with those deities. A particular tantric tradition that follows a specific tantra or a group of related tantric texts and practices is often referred to as a tantric cycle. There is no clear evidence from Indian sources that the tantric texts were originally classified or grouped in any particular manner. They seem to have been written or compiled in a haphazard manner in different places by individuals or groups of yogins who made use of the appropriate mythological and literary lore, and of the various yogic practices that were available to them. In Tibet itself, one of the most widely recognized classifications of the tantras accepted by the New Schools is that into four classes. This classification is based on the deliberately stratified levels of spiritual and yogic practices that relate to particular deities and aim to assist the practitioner according to his or her spiritual disposition and aptitude. The four classes of tantras are named in ascending order of importance as Action or Ritual (kriyā, bya), Performance (caryā, spyod), Yoga (yoga, rnal 'byor), and Highest Yoga (anuttara, bla na med pa). Although there exists evidence that the tantric literature evolved in stages and in different religious centers, and that it contains certain common characteristics—for instance[page 100] ritual—and although the differentiations among the tantras are rather subtle and refined, this classification does serve as a useful point of reference.

In the works of the Action Tantra, the focus is on a wide range of externally performed ritual activities, more so than on internal spiritual exercises. The texts of this class provide instructions on various ritualized activities that are often accompanied by symbols and diagrams. They are predominantly concerned with the worship of deities, offerings and praises, the procurement of worldly and spiritual benefits, the appeasement of diseases and demonic powers, the blessing of images, and the consecrations of their adepts. They also contain instructions for painting deities. The longest text in this class is the "Ordinance of Mañjuśrī" (Mañjuśrīmūla-kalpa [or -tantra], 'Jam dpal gyi rtsa ba'i rgyud). Its structure and content contain literary and historical indications that it was compiled over a period of several centuries, with its oldest sections belonging probably to the earliest tantric period. In many ways, it represents a transition between the Mahāyāna sūtras and the tantras. It contains a mine of information on ritual, the production of images, astrology and some historical events. It also contains long sections that are concerned with Brahmanic deities and magical formulas.

Among the texts included in the Performance Tantra, which focuses on ritual activities in balance with meditative practices, the "Perfect Enlightenment of Mahāvairocana" (Mahāvairocanābhisambodhi, rNam par snang mdzad chen po mngon par rdzogs par byang chub pa) is the longest and most important. It is generally considered to be the root text of this class. It provides a fairly coherent and comprehensive exposition of tantric practices in relationship to a set of deities, with Vairocana as the central deity.

The Yoga Tantra texts, which represent an advanced and perfected system of tantric teachings, are predominantly oriented towards meditative and yogic practices. Ritual instructions are also present, but they are not considered essential for the attainment of spiritual perfection. Here, it is a particular set of internal—but also externally ritualized—meditational practices and consecrations that occupy the central position. Within this class, the "Compendium of the Essence of All the Tathagātas" (Sarvatathāgatatattvasaṃgraha, De bzhin gshegs pa thams cad kyi de kho na nyid bsdus pa) is the longest and most comprehensive. It comprises a[page 101] whole range of expositions concerned with the various sets of mystic circles (maṇḍala, dkyil 'khor), consecrations and instructions on the stages leading towards enlightenment.

The Highest Yoga Tantra attaches the greatest importance to the control and purification of the mind (citta, sems) as the chief agent of all human activities. Among this class, there are several important texts which are particularly valued and followed in Tibet. They are the "Secret Assembly" (Guhyasamāja, gSang ba 'dus pa), the "Hail Vajra" (Hevajra, Kye'i rdo rje), the "Wheel of Time" (Kālacakra, Dus kyi 'khor lo), the group of texts centered on the deity rDo rje 'jigs byed (Vajrabhairava), and the texts belonging to the 'Khor lo sdom pa (Cakrasaṃvara) cycle of which the principal text is the "Short Saṃvara" (Laghusaṃvara, bDe mchog nyung ngu).9 In fact, it is this Tantra class that is recognized among Tibetan new schools as setting forth the most adventurous and efficacious path towards spiritual perfection.

Among the four classes of Tantras, the Action, Performance and Yoga Tantras are also referred to jointly as the lower Tantras. However, it should be remembered that each Tantra category claims superiority for itself in the sense of providing a distinct and complete body of teachings and practices adequate, and indeed unique, for the attainment of the perfect state of enlightenment.

Taking into account the doctrinal elements, literary presentation and the nature of the presiding deities, it is also possible to divide the tantras into two major categories, namely those related to the Mahāyāna discourses and those with strong non-Buddhist associations. Since in some tantras the literary presentation clearly resembles and overlaps with the later Mahāyāna texts, it is reasonable to assume that such tantric texts, especially those belonging to the first three classes of tantras, came into existence in the same or similar religious milieu. It is also among the Mahāyāna texts that some of the earliest literary evidence for the existence of tantric works is to be found. The names of the buddhas and bodhisattvas in such texts are manifestly Buddhist and similar to those in the Mahāyāna discourses. There is, of course, a progressive assimilation of non-Buddhist Indian deities into the Buddhist pantheon, but in a conspicuously subservient role. Among the second category, in particular among the texts belonging to the Highest Yoga Tantra, the non-Buddhist setting and elements predominate. Here, the mythological and literary elements betray strong[page 103] associations with the Śaivite tantric texts and practices. The buddhas in such texts have little in common with Śākyamuni or his hypostases. They are usually fierce and awe-inspiring manifestations, variously referred to as bDe mchog (Śaṃbara), rDo rje mkha' 'gro (Vajraḍāka), Sangs rgyas thod pa (Buddhakapāla) or 'Jigs byed (Bhairava) and are usually accompanied by attendants of equally terrifying appearances.

The tantras, although manifestly apocryphal, are accepted as canonical or "revealed" by the adepts of tantric practices. They constitute the foundation, and indeed, justification for the Buddhist tradition or vehicle known as Mantrayāna, Tantrayāna or Vajrayāna. The term Mantrayāna represents historically an earlier alternative name for Vajrayāna and has closer links with the traditional Mahāyāna. The authorship of tantric texts is attributed to Śākyamuni Buddha himself or, more frequently, to various Buddha manifestations who preside as chief deities over their appropriate assemblies and enunciate their particular teachings. So far as the places of such discourses are concerned, the texts belonging to the Action Tantra are said to have been delivered in different localities associated with the mystical families of deities that occupy central positions in particular texts. The Performance Tantra is said to have been enunciated in the Akaniṣṭha heaven and the Yoga Tantra on Mt. Meru. The texts belonging to the Highest Yoga Tantra do not claim for themselves any particular locality, although occasionally the place of enunciation is given. The Kālacakra Tantra, for instance, is said to have been disclosed a year or so after the Buddha's enlightenment at a locality called Dhānyakaṭaka. The most frequent location for the discourses of the various wrathful Buddha manifestations is given as the vagina (bhaga; usually not translated into Tibetan) of the Vajra-Lady (Vajrayoṣid, rDo rje btsun mo) which is often explained as the Vajra-sphere (vajradhātu, rdo rje dbyings) or Wisdom (prajñā, shes rab). The justification for the validity and variety of the tantric texts is largely derived from the tantric reinterpretation of the Buddha's enlightenment and is based on the understanding that buddhahood can manifest itself in many different forms, both peaceful and wrathful. It is the Compendium of the Essence of All the Tathāgatas that provides a detailed description of how Śākyamuni attained the state of the tantric enlightenment[page 103] through instructions and meditative trances (abhisambodhi, mngon par 'tshang rgya ba), accompanied by consecrations bestowed by all the buddhas (see Skorupski, 1985).

As already indicated above, the subject matter of tantric texts encompasses a wide range of topics which deal with tantric theory and practice. In essence, the basic doctrinal assumptions are those of the Mahāyāna as propounded by the Madhyamaka and the Yogācāra systems, and in particular the assumption that phenomenal existence (saṃsāra, 'khor ba) and the absolute state of spiritual perfection (nirvāṇa, mya ngan las 'das) are not two separate entities but rather two contrasting ways in which the mind perceives the nature of things. This dualistic way of perceiving the world is due to the fact that the mind is imperfect and imbued with intellectual and moral impurities.

Taking for granted the doctrinal expositions of the Mahāyāna, the tantric texts represent, however, a radical departure from mere intellectual discourses and traditional practices. They may be viewed to some degree as a mode of protest against, or a reaction to, both speculation and logic as means of explaining and rectifying the human situation. Their main thrust is to provide concrete practical steps towards one's personal deliverance. In order to achieve such a goal, they unveil their own particular methods of meditational and yogic practices, which are cast not as systematic and rationalized expositions, but rather as mystical visions and encounters, and as ritualized and magical activities that are geared towards the inducement of inner experience.

Tantric teachings and practices frequently represent transpositions from the rational expositions of Buddhist doctrines into personified and graded divine manifestations corresponding to various concepts and interacting with phenomena, or into ritualized activities which usually center on cosmic diagrams or mystic circles (maṇḍala) in which the deities and ritual implements are given symbolic values. One is to enact such spiritual encounters and ritual exercises in order to gain simultaneously both an insight into the true state of things and spiritual freedom. The encounter with and merging of the phenomenal and transcendental elements is often presented in terms of the cosmic manifestations and activities of buddhahood assumed as being pervasive of all spheres[page 104] of existence. The steps leading to such an encounter are expressed in terms of particular types of meditation, visualization, tantric vows and consecration performed in connection with a variety of mystic circles, replete with appropriate sets of deities, or by making use, within the body, of the various psychic channels, called veins (nādi, rtsa) and nerve-centers, called wheels (cakra, 'khor lo) or lotuses, that serve as the foundation for one's spiritual reintegration10 with the absolute. Tantric practice is thus a particular type of meditation in which one visualizes individual buddha manifestations or sets of deities with whom one attempts to achieve spiritual identity. The visualization of deities can be supplemented by concentration on the movement of trance-inducing winds within the psychic channels of one's body which are guided into the central vein, inducing thus a meditational ecstasy, styled as merging of the winds. Similarly, the practice can focus on the journey of the yogic drop (bindu, thig le), most frequently identified with the semen, which represents the thought of enlightenment and gradually descends and ascends through the stratified nerve-centers within the body, culminating its movement in a similar experience of ecstasy.

Along with the specifically tantric types of meditation, which aim not just to eliminate moral and intellectual imperfections but specifically to achieve identification with the absolute, the texts set forth a great number of other important and essential devices, such as bodily postures and hand gesture (mudrā, phyag rgya), verbal utterances, a variety of ritual implements, empowerments (adhiṣthāna, byin gyis brlabs pa) and initiations (abhiṣeka, dbang bskur ba), all of which are to help in accelerating the progress towards enlightenment.

The essential tantric practices are often conceived and devised in relationship to the three fundamental aspects or functions of human beings, namely the body, speech and mind. The physical postures and gestures relate to the body. The verbal utterances of different kinds, but in particular the great variety of mantras and seed syllables (bīja, sa bon) of the visualized deities, relate to the speech faculty, and meditational states correspond to the state of the mind. These three functions are correlated with similar but perfect functions of buddhahood personified and manifested as different Buddhist deities. It is the perfect fusion of the two that leads to the apotheosis of the human. Tantric initiations may be performed as meditational self-consecrations11 or as externally[page 105] performed rituals combined with meditation, in which the tantric masters bestow upon their disciples certain esoteric skills. These initiations are said to be endowed with inherent and efficacious powers that are considered essential to the practice and eventual attainment of the final goal.12 Furthermore, use is made of astrology, magic and any other source of power that can help to advance one's spiritual progress.

The main textual symbology employed in the tantras often centers on sets of pairs that represent not just the apparent polarity of phenomenal existence and transcendent reality, but also, and principally, their fundamental nondual (advaya, gnyis su med) union. These two factors of spiritual reintegration are referred to as wisdom (prajñā, shes rab) and means (upāya, thabs), which in tantric texts are often represented as female and male deities embraced in sexual union (yab yum). This union may be experienced in meditational visualizations or practiced ritually through the union of the yogin(ī) with a human partner. It is also expressed through several other appropriate symbolic pairs, such as emptiness (śūnyatā, stong pa nyid) and compassion (karuṇā, snying rje), the moon and the sun, the vowels and the consonants, the left and the right psychic veins, the vajra and the bell, and so on.

The actual settings for tantric practices are described as solitary places, isolated trees or forests, temples, haunted cemeteries and various places of tantric power (pītha, gdan). The tantras do not hesitate to make use of any practice, whether seemingly moral or immoral, that is considered to be conducive to the achievement of a speedy spiritual realization. The lower tantras stress morality but occasionally instruct the disciple to contravene conventional morality in order to protect the tantric secrets. The Highest Yoga Tantra makes frequent use of the three fundamental obscurations, namely desire, hatred and delusion, as means of achieving deliverance. The various rituals, consecrations and initiations serve as powerful aids to breaking through the law of moral cause and effect (karma, las). The tantras assume that apart form the superficial body consisting of the five aggregates, one possesses a subtle body that should be fully developed in order to achieve a perfected buddha-body endowed with all the buddha attributes. It is the achievement of such a body through meditational, yogic and ritual devices that enables one to gain buddhahood speedily, even within a single lifespan.

[page 106] As already stated, the tantric texts do make use of Mahāyāna terminology, but in general they tend to express their teachings through the use of their own symbols and enigmatic phraseology, which often require special interpretation and the aid of commentaries; this is particularly true of the texts belonging to the Highest Yoga class. The most problematic area for the study of the tantras is not so much their general theories and practices, but the language they employ.13 The technical term for the literary language used by the tantras is variously translated as secret, enigmatic, esoteric or more often as intentional or twilight language (sandhābhāṣā, dgongs pa'i skad).14 As already noted, the fundamental difficulty associated with such language is its interpretation. Since it makes use of analogy, double meanings, and rich, and at times far-fetched, symbology, it is difficult to establish the exact significance and meaning of words and whole passages. The deliberate use of intentional language is often justified on the grounds of preserving the secrecy of tantric teachings. It is possible, however, to explain its use as a peculiar mystical language whose intention is not to provide literal and concrete expositions, but to indicate or evoke particular psychic and spiritual trances that are to be attained. The language employed in the three lower tantras is fairly comprehensible, although its symbology remains complex. In the case of the Highest Yoga class, the language as such presents a major difficulty. It is in this category that extensive use is made of sexual language and symbology. There is no doubt that sexual symbology serves as a powerful method to express tantric intentions, whether or not the "Western mind" finds such extensive and often very graphic descriptions of sexual activities acceptable in a religious context.

The Highest Yoga Tantra met with little success in China and Japan, whereas in Tibet itself, the tantras in general, and the Highest Tantra in particular, were and are highly appreciated. However, it was only after the various objection-inspiring misconceptions were removed and a proper interpretation based on learned commentaries was worked out that they gained widespread acceptance in Tibet.

Bharati, Agehananda

1975The Tantric Tradition.New York: Samuel Weiser.

Ch'en, Kenneth K. S.

1945-47The Tibetan Tripitaka.Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 9: 53-62.

Conze, Edward

1978The Prajñāpāramitā Literature.Tokyo: The Reiyukai.

Eimer, Helmut

1983Some Results of Recent Kanjur Research.Sankt Augustin: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.

Fremantle, Francesca

1971A Critical Study of the Guhyasamāja Tantra. Ph.D. dissertation. London: University of London.

George, Christopher S.

1974The Caṇḍamahāroṣanatantra, Chs I-VIII. [Sanskrit and Tibetan Texts with English Translation.] New Haven: Oriental Society.

Imaeda, Y.

1977Mise au point concernant les éditions chinoises du Kanjur et du Tanjur tibétains. In Essais sur l'art du Tibet, pp. 23-43. Ed. by A. Macdonald and Y. Imaeda. Paris: Librairie d'Amérique et d'Orient.

1981Note sur le Kanjur de Derge.Mélanges chinois et bouddhiques 20: 227-236.

Karmay, Samten G.

1980The Ordinance of Lha bLa-ma Ye-shes-'od. In Tibetan Studies in Honour of Hugh Richardson, pp. 150-162. Ed. by M. Aris and A. S. Suu Kyi. Warminster: Aris and Phillips.[page 110]

Kvaerne, Per

1975On the Concept of Sahaja in Indian Buddhist Tantric Literature.Temenos 11: 88-135.

Lalou, Marcelle

1953Les textes bouddhiques au temps du roi Khri-sroṅ-lde-bcan.Journal asiatique 241: 313-353.

Macdonald, A.

1962Le maṇḍala du Mañjuśrīmūlakalpa.Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve.

Simonson, N.

1957Indo-tibetische Studien, die Methoden der Tibetischen Übersetzer untersucht im Hinblick auf die Bedeutung ihrer Übersetzungen für die Sanskritphilologie.Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksells Boktryckeri.

Skorupski, Tadeusz

1983The Sarvadurgatipariśodhana Tantra: Elimination of All Evil Destinies. [Sanskrit and Tibetan Texts with Introduction, English Translation and Notes.] Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

1985Śākyamuni's Enlightenment According to the Yoga Tantra.Saṃbhāṣā 6: 87-94.

Snellgrove, David L.

1959The Hevajra Tantra. [Sanskrit Text, Tibetan Version and Commentary, and English Rendering.] 2 vols. London: Oxford University Press.

1987Indo-Tibetan Buddhism: Indian Buddhists and Their Tibetan Successors.London: Serindia.

Tajima, R.

1937Étude sur le Mahāvairocanasūtra.Paris: Maisonneuve.

Tsuda, Shinichi

1974The Samvarodaya-tantra (Selected Chapters).Tokyo.

1978A Critical Tantrism.Memoirs of the Research Department of the Tōyō Bunko 36: 167-231.

Tucci, Giuseppe

1961The Theory and Practice of the Maṇḍala.London: Rider.

Back To Top

[page 111] Tibetans translated into Tibetan more than one hundred sūtra commentaries. In this essay, we shall make observations about this genre of literature and give some indication as to its value and significance to the Buddhist tradition. For specific examples, we shall refer primarily to the three Indian commentaries to the Śālistamba Sūtra (SJD). We shall limit our observations to commentaries translated into Tibetan, largely excluding from consideration those written by Tibetans, with the exception of a few of historical importance from ancient Tibet. The sūtra genre itself will be mentioned here primarily to contrast Buddhist sūtra commentaries with ritual and grammatical sūtra commentaries in India. Information derived from this contrast will help us to appreciate the relation of sūtra commentaries to sūtras in the Buddhist tradition.

In India, Buddhist and Jain sūtras formed a distinct genre of literature. This can best be seen by contrasting them with ritual, grammatical, and philosophical sūtras. The latter types of sūtras, often called "aphorisms," are a prose literature characterized by conciseness of formulation, mnemonic arrangement, and the fact that they are descriptive in nature. They are intended to present succinctly the rules or tenets of a discipline. Because of these sūtras'[page 112] conciseness, commentaries are generally required to make sense of them. Sūtras and their commentaries probably began as part of an oral tradition of learning and were later written, though the question is undecided (Gonda: 648). Ritual and grammatical sūtras also had rules of interpretation called paribhāṣā, which, along with the careful ordering of the sūtras, contributed to their brevity. Finally, this literary genre is recognized to be unique to India.

Buddhist and Jain sūtras may be called "discourses." Leaving aside the Jain sūtras, those of the Buddhists bear little resemblance to ritual and grammatical sūtras. Although there do exist philosophical aphorisms in the Buddhist tradition, these are for the most part not known as sūtras. Instead, sūtras, or in Pāli, suttas, are considered by the Buddhist tradition to be the discourses of the Buddha, or at least inspired by the Buddha. These sūtras can and do mix verse with prose and, with the development of the Mahāyāna vaipulya sūtras, can be vast in size. Each Mahāyāna sūtra typically has four parts: a prologue (nidāna, gleng gzhi) with an opening formula that gives the time, place, and retinue of the Buddha when the discourse was spoken; an introduction of the topic of the discourse; a discourse or narration containing the bulk of the sūtra; and a formulaic conclusion. Because, unlike the ritual and grammatical sūtras, Buddhist sūtras are not exceedingly concise nor composed primarily for their mnemonic value (though they do contain features suggestive of an oral tradition—formulae and repeating structures), they do not require commentaries, but are more or less in the language of everyday discourse. They are meant as authoritative teachings of Buddhist doctrine that were spoken on a particular occasion, not as systematic summaries of a discipline. Thus, they are intended to be intelligible by themselves.

Therefore, whereas the ritual and grammatical sūtras are considered to have had commentaries from their beginning, the same cannot be said for Buddhist sūtras. Gonda observes that most ritual sūtras have commentaries and that their origin derives from "direct personal instructions of teachers who lived in close community with their pupils"(648). Compare this situation to Vasubandhu's urging anyone who wishes to comment upon a sūtra to greatly study, base oneself on study, and to accumulate learning (29a).1 Vasubandhu, who wrote in the fourth or fifth century C.E., seems to be urging the would-be commentator to become broadly knowledgeable in Buddhist doctrine before writing any[page 113] commentaries to sūtras. In that case, the sūtra commentary would not be based upon specific instructions about the sūtra passed down from teacher to student, but upon knowledge the commentator has been able to acquire through study, whether in an oral or written tradition, or some combination of both. In such a scenario, the commentary to a sūtra could be written any time after the sūtra came into existence, but would not accompany the sūtra from its origin.

Given the difference between the ritual and grammatical sūtras on the one hand and the Buddhist and Jain sūtras on the other, we well may wonder how the two literary genres could have the same name. Renou suggests the Buddhist use of the term sūtra may derive from the brief phrases that announce a dominant thesis, which is expanded upon and returned to in the large Buddhist sūtras (174). For example, the SJD begins with Śāriputra asking Maitreya the meaning of the following sūtra (and Śāriputra does indeed call the following statement a sūtra [mdo]) spoken by the Buddha: "Bhikṣus, he who sees dependent arising (pratītyasamutpāda, rten cing 'brel par 'byung ba) sees the Dharma. He who sees the Dharma sees the Buddha" (116a). The rest of the SJD is devoted to answering Śāriputra's question, with primary emphasis on describing dependent arising. In this way the SJD, when taken as a whole, can be seen to combine a sūtra, the Buddha's brief enigmatic statement, with its commentary, Maitreya's response to Śāriputra's question.

Now let us turn our attention to Tibet. Sūtra commentaries were among the early translations into Tibetan. We know this from early catalogues such as the Lhan (or lDan) kar ma (LKM), which is preserved in the bsTan 'gyur, "translated treatises," which constitutes one half of the Tibetan Buddhist canon (the other half is the bKa' 'gyur, "translated word [of the Buddha]"; see Harrison and Martin, in this volume). This catalogue, compiled in a Dragon year such as 800, 812, or 824 C.E., after approximately one hundred and fifty years of Tibetan translations of Buddhist texts, is an inventory of treatises stored in the Lhan kar ma Palace in Tibet. Lalou, who has transcribed and indexed the LKM, records 736 titles2 in thirty sections. Section twenty (nos. 514-564) contains the "Commentaries[page 114] on Mahāyāna Sūtras"; section twenty-one (nos. 565-572) contains the "Sūtra Commentaries Translated from Chinese" (318). Of these sixty recorded in the LKM, approximately3 half have been preserved in the bsTan 'gyur while the other half have been lost. Thus, fifty percent of the sūtra commentaries recorded in the LKM did not survive during the dark ages (ca. 840-1040 C.E.) between the early and later propagations of Buddhism in Tibet.

Eventually, Tibetan savants preserved translated sūtra commentaries in the bsTan 'gyur. The original Old sNar thang bsTan 'gyur dates back to the early fourteenth century. Bu ston Rin chen grub of Zhwa lu Monastery copied and expanded the bsTan 'gyur in 1335. All of the extant bsTan 'gyurs are descended from the Zhwa lu Monastery bsTan 'gyur and all of them have divided the sūtra commentaries into two sections: Prajñāpāramitā (Sher phyin), containing commentaries on the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras, and Sūtra Commentary4 (mDo 'grel), containing commentaries on non-Prajñāpāramitā sūtras. Although the LKM did not divide the Mahāyāna sūtras into these same two sections, it did place the Prajñāpāramitā commentaries first among sūtra commentaries. Likewise, the LKM placed the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras before all other sūtras, a tradition continued in many of the extant bKa' 'gyurs.

Each of these two sections of the bsTan 'gyur contains about forty sūtra commentaries. However, not all sūtra commentaries are found in the Prajñāpāramitā and Sūtra Commentary sections; seven more can be found in the Tantra (rGyud),5 Cittamātra (Sems tsam),6 and Miscellany (sNa tshogs) sections. Three of the four sūtra commentaries in the Miscellany section are by Tibetans, for this section is reserved for writings of ancient Tibetans, and the fourth lists no author.7 The compilers of the LKM included four or five (see the previous note) of these seven texts among the sūtra commentaries, but the editors of the bsTan 'gyur decided to place them in these other sections. Their placement in the Tantra and Cittamātra sections highlights the occasionally arbitrary nature of the classification of treatises as commentaries of sūtra, tantra, or Cittamātra treatises. For the most part, the Peking and sDe dge bsTan 'gyurs have the same sūtra commentaries, with some minor differences as to placement and total number. When the thirty sūtra commentaries lost since the compilation of the LKM are added to the ninety preserved in the bsTan 'gyur, we get a total of 120. Thus, of the more than one hundred sūtra commentaries translated into Tibetan, fewer than one hundred still exist.[page 115]

One-tenth of the sūtras in the bKa' 'gyur, a mere thirty-four, have extant commentaries in the bsTan 'gyur. Eight Prajñāpāramitā sūtras have extant commentaries (a ninth whose commentary is lost is recorded in the LKM)8; approximately twenty-five non-Prajñāpāramitā sūtras have commentaries. The non-Prajñāpāramitā sūtras include four spells (dhāraṇī, gzungs),9 three cherished recollections (anusmṛti, rjes su dran pa),10 one verse (gāthā, tshigs su bcad pa) entitled Ekagāthā, one prayer (praṇidhāna, smon lam) entitled Bhadracaripraṇidhāṇarāja, and sixteen sūtras proper, for a total of twenty-five. Thus, sūtra in this context seems to mean "the word of the Buddha" (buddhavacana) rather than the genre of sūtras that have prologues, introductions, lengthy discourses, and conclusions. Seven sūtras that received one-third of the extant commentaries include some of the most famous, popular, or important. These are the Hṛdaya (with seven commentaries), Vajracchedikā (three), Saddharmapuṇḍarīka (one), Bhadracaripraṇidhāna (six), Laṅkāvatāra (two), Saṃdhinirmocana (five), and Aṣṭasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā (six). Although all of these sūtras have been translated into Western languages, only some of these sūtras' commentaries have been analyzed with the results published. One example is Donald Lopez's study of Indian and Tibetan commentaries on the Heart Sūtra in which he summarized the seven Indian commentaries and translated two Tibetan commentaries.

Now let us take a closer look at the sūtra commentaries themselves. They range in length from several volumes (Haribhadra's Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā, vols. ga to ca) to less than a folio (Asaṅga's Dharmānusmṛtivṛtti); some are in verse (Śālistamba[ka]kārikā [SJT]) while most are predominantly prose (Kamalaśīla's Śālistambaṭika [SJGG]); some discuss several immense sūtras (Smṛtijñānakīrti's*Śatasāhasrikāpañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāṣṭādaśasāhasrikātrayasamānārthāṣṭabhisamayaśāsanā), others only a single verse (Vasubandhu's Ekagāthābhāṣya). Some comment upon entire sūtras (any of the SJD commentaries) and others only on parts of a sūtra such as the prologue (Śākya'i blo's *Daśabhūmisūtranidānabhāṣya) or a chapter (Ye shes snying po's *Saṃdhinirmocanasūtre ṭryamaitreyakevalaparivartabhāṣya). Thus, the commentaries are not homogeneous.

One sūtra commentary has been the subject of more commentaries than any one of the sūtras themselves. The Abhisamayālaṃkāra, a systematic exposition in verse of the Mahāyāna path of deliverance based on the doctrines of the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras [page 116] (in particular, on the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā, according to ṭrya Vimuktisena) has inspired at least twenty commentaries. Tradition includes the Abhisamayālaṃkāra, which has been translated into English by Edward Conze, as one of the Five Treatises of Maitreya, a heavenly bodhisattva, but many scholars attribute the work to Asaṅga, fourth-fifth century C.E. The text has eight chapters, one for each of its eight subjects, which also become the organizing principle for most of its commentaries. The first and dominant subject is the Buddha's omniscience. Because the treatise is very concise, it is difficult to understand without its commentaries, not unlike the ritual sūtras of the non-Buddhists. In fact, it has more features in common with the ritual sūtra genre than with other Buddhist sūtra commentaries: Stcherbatsky describes the Abhisamayālaṃkāra as descriptive, summarizing Prajñāpāramitā doctrine and its practice; concise, requiring commentary to be understood; and mnemonic in arrangement (vi, viii). It has also had the most lasting impact of any sūtra commentary; it serves as a gateway for the study of Prajñāpāramitā sūtras by Tibetan Buddhists of all schools, whose savants have amply added over the centuries to the number of its commentaries. One noteworthy example is gYag ston Sangs rgyas dpal's (1348-1414) eight volume gYag Tik for the study of the Prajñāpāramitā.

The other sūtra commentaries exhibit various commentarial techniques. (Indigenous Tibetan typology of commentary includes, but is not limited to, the tshig 'grel, mchan 'grel, don 'grel, and dka' 'grel; see Wilson, in this volume.) Versifications such as the SJT summarize their sūtras and require commentaries to explain both sūtra and versification. Prose commentaries invariably explain the words and phrases of their sūtras, again to lesser and greater degrees. Kamalaśīla's SJGG comments upon the opening phrase of Buddhist sūtras, evaṃ mayā śrutam ekasmin samaye:

In that [connection], by the expression "THUS" ('di skad; evaṃ), the compiler, having been supplicated, indicates all the contents of the sūtra that come below, in order to avoid disparagement (skur pa; *apavāda) and false attribution (sgro 'dogs pa; *samāropa).

These two [words], "I HEARD" (bdag gis thos pa; mayā śrutam), indicate that I directly heard [the sūtra from the Buddha] and did not understand [its meaning]; I myself heard but [what was heard] is not hearsay coming through a lineage from one [person] to another. [It] was merely heard and not understood, because it is impossible that another besides the Buddha [could][page 117] understand a matter such as this. That also is a cause for inducing belief; otherwise, if an impossible matter were stated, it would not be believed.

"ON ONE OCCASION" (dus gcig na; *ekasmin samaye) is joined to the above "heard"; "occasion" [means] either "time" or "gathering [of] the retinue," because of the great difficulty to hear such a precious sūtra anytime, anywhere. Also, "on one occasion" is joined to the following "the Blessed One resided"; this indicates that for the sake of infinite disciples, at other times the Blessed One resided at other [places]. (146b)

The next level of organization is for a commentary to follow its sūtra's chapter arrangement or a set of topics for its organizing principle. A twofold example of this is Haribhadra's Aṣṭasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitāvyakhyābhisamayālaṃkārālokā, which includes the eight subjects from the Abhisamayālaṃkāra and follows the thirty-two chapters from the Aṣṭasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā. More than thirty commentaries are organized along similar principles.

Many sūtra commentaries employ five terms in order to introduce their exposition: the "purpose" (prayojana, dgos pa), the "text" (abhidhāna, rjod pa), the "subject matter" (abhidheya, brjod par bya ba), the "connection" (sambandha, 'brel pa), and the "purpose of the purpose" (prayojanaprayojana, dgos pa'i dgos pa). Broido characterizes these terms as describing "the connection between the whole work and the general purposes for which it was written and is to be studied" (6). As far as he knows, the Indians had no single word for these terms whereas the Tibetans called them dgos 'brel ("purpose-connection") (6). Any number of the five terms may be found in a sūtra commentary, and they can be found in twenty-five of the commentaries, most often using four of the terms.

The relation of the five terms to the four anubandhas, which Huparikar describes as the four requisites at the beginning of a text that explain its purpose, may be quite simple. The Buddhists use the five introductory terms called dgos 'brel and certain non-Buddhists use the four anubandhas in order to introduce a text and its purpose. Three terms are similar: subject matter (viṣaya [non-Buddhist], abhidheya [Buddhist]), connection (sambandha), and purpose (prayojana) (121-122). Not surprisingly, in connection with the five terms, no Tibetan translation of the term anubandha is found in any of the sūtra commentaries.

Four of the five terms are used in the SJGS, a commentary to both the SJT and the SJD. After quoting and commenting on the[page 118] verses (kārikās) as well as on many of the sūtra's passages, it interprets both texts according to Yogācāra doctrine, thus bringing into question its traditional attribution to Nāgārjuna, who is credited with founding the Madhyamaka in approximately the second century C.E. The SJGS, whose organizing principle is the quoted verses from the SJT, is, however, encyclopedic in its descriptions of the Eightfold Path and its antithesis, the various realms, their inhabitants, the many localities of rebirth, the five aggregates, the Four Noble Truths, and so forth.

The SJGS gives us more information about its four introductory terms than most of the other commentaries that use them. It discusses at some length these four: the connection, the purpose, the text, and the subject matter. The commentary can be said to have a "connection" because it will explain the SJD and its kārikā; also, it is "connected" with the Buddha and not the works of non-Buddhists. Its "purpose" is—by understanding the meaning of causes and conditions, by realizing that persons and the factors of existence are selfless, and by realizing the absence of grasped and grasper—to become free of the obscurations of defilement and knowledge and so attain the supreme, truly complete buddhahood. Its "text" is the Śālistamba, which uses the example of a young rice plant (śālistamba, sā lu ljang pa) to link inner and outer dependent arising. Its "subject matter" is dependent arising, which is devoid of an agent and so forth, the understanding of which leads to the abandonment of defilement, the arising of wisdom, and the attainment of the Dharma Body (dharmakāya, chos kyi sku) (21b-22b). The omitted term is the "purpose of the purpose." It might also be translated as the ultimate purpose. It is the deeper purpose of the work and, according to Broido, is often more important than the purpose, though dependent upon it (7). However, the SJGS appears to combine the "purpose" with the "purpose of the purpose," since the stated "purpose" is so long and concludes with the attainment of buddhahood, a typical "purpose of the purpose."

Another commentarial system is explained in Vasubandhu's Vyākhyāyukti (NR), a treatise on how to explain and comment upon sūtras. He sets out five components to be included in a sūtra commentary: the purpose (prayojana, dgos pa), concise meaning (piṇḍārtha, bsdus pa'i don), meaning of the words (padārtha, tshig gi don), connections (anusaṃdhi, mtshams sbyar ba), and objections and answers (codyaparihāradvaya, brgal ba/dang lan gnyis) (30b). The[page 119] "purpose" points to the goal or result of the treatise, the "concise meaning" to the meaning and subject of the treatise, the "meaning of the words" explains the concise meaning and so forth, the "connections" explains the order of the words, and the "objections and answers" uphold the treatise's logical and internal consistency. Even though Vasubandhu composed a number of sūtra commentaries, Kamalaśīla (late eighth century C.E.) is the author who most explicitly follows Vasubandhu's instructions. The best example is the SJGG, in which Kamalaśīla introduces the treatise according to the NR's five components. He organizes the commentary according to a sevenfold concise meaning that conforms to Vasubandhu's directives in the NR. Eleven commentaries in all either mention or actually employ this fivefold method. Kamalaśīla wrote three of them: the SJGG, the Avikalpapraveśadhāraṇīṭīkā, and the Vajracchedikāṭīkā.

As recorded by the Tibetan tradition, the authors of the sūtra commentaries include the greatest luminaries of India: Maitreya, Nāgārjuna, Asaṅga, Vasubandhu, Dignāga, and Śāntideva. However, the authenticity of the authorship of the first two authors is not accepted unequivocally, making Asaṅga the most venerable of the sūtra commentary authors credible to most modern scholars. The next oldest author, and most prolific in this category, is Vasubandhu, with nine commentaries. Some of the other authors of sūtra commentaries have only a single surviving work: ṭrya and Bhadanta Vimuktisena, Dharmakīrtiśrī, Dharmamitra, Kumāraśrībhadra, Jaggatatālar gnas pa, Praśāstrasena, Śrīmahājana, Jñānadatta, Guṇamati, Śīlabhadra, Nyi ma grub, mDzes bkod, rGyan bzang po, and Yuan ts'e (Wen tshegs). Little is known about them. The authenticity of the attribution to later figures from the eighth and ninth centuries C.E. such as Kamalaśīla, Haribhadra, and Vimalamitra, who could have been alive when their works were translated into Tibetan, is more likely.

The LKM clearly identifies eight commentaries as translations from Chinese (332). Of these eight texts, only three survive in the bsTan 'gyur: the Saṃdhigambhīranirmocanasūtraṭīkā (= Lalou 565 according to Steinkellner [234]), Saddharmapuṇḍarīkavṛtti (= Lalou 567), and Laṅkāvatāravṛtti (= Lalou 568). Oddly, neither of the authors of the first two commentaries is Chinese: the first is Korean, Yuan ts'e (613-696 C.E.), according to Inaba (105), and the other, Pṛthivībandhu, Sinhalese, according to the colophon.11 Steinkellner observes that these two treatises display the analytical system used[page 120] by Tibetans of all epochs to structure their texts, the "divisions" or "sections" (sa bcad), a technique he has not been able to find in treatises of Indian origin; he concludes they are of Chinese origin (235).

According to the sDe dge catalogue, important translators of the sūtra commentaries include dPal brtsegs rakṣita and Ye shes sde (ca. 812) from the early spread of Buddhism in Tibet. Important translators of the Prajñāpāramitā sūtra commentaries include rNgogs lo tsā ba bLo ldan shes rab (1059-1109) and Rin chen bzang po (958-1055) from the later spread. More than forty paṇḍitas and translators translated sūtra commentaries.

What does a commentary tell us about its sūtra? On the one hand, in a direct manner, it interprets its sūtra, the meaning of its words, its purpose, and in some cases its perceived underlying organization. The commentary defends the statements of its sūtra or reframes them in a logically defensible manner. It may advance doctrinal positions not explicitly stated in its sūtra or be used to debate doctrinal points with contemporaries. Gómez has described a controversy between the proponents of sudden and gradual enlightenment that found expression in Kamalaśīla's Avikalpapraveśadhāraṇīṭīkā. Thus, the commentaries give us insight into the thoughts and contexts of their immediate authors and into the larger tradition of which they are a part. Because sūtra commentaries are written after the sūtra, not along with it, Eckel's comments on the Heart Sūtra commentaries are quite appropriate when he says they do not "yield the 'original' meaning" of the sūtra so much as "what a distinctive group of commentators thought it meant" (69). That is not to say that the commentaries are of no value for understanding their sūtras. They indeed help the reader to gain an understanding of their sūtras, but how are we to know that the understanding gained corresponds to that of the original meaning or that that was the commentator's purpose? We can count far more upon learning about the commentator and the meaning he (all the sūtra commentators are men) wished to convey (i.e., his interpretation as we interpet it) as well as the doctrinal issues and the received views of the tradition at his time.

In the relatively unstudied area of sūtra commentary, many problems still remain. For example, what was the relationship of the[page 121] sūtras to their commentaries: what determined which sūtras received commentaries and which did not? What was the role of sūtra commentaries in the Buddhist world: were they written primarily in order for the authors to express their doctrinal views, to explain the sūtras, or for some other reason, and who was their audience? How innovative were the commentaries: to what extent did they rely on traditional interpretations of the sūtras? How did the Tibetans decide which commentaries to translate?

To summarize, Buddhist sūtras and their commentaries preserved in the bsTan 'gyur did not originate contemporaneously; the sūtra commentaries came later than their respective sūtras. Approximately one-tenth of the sūtras in the bKa' 'gyur have commentaries in the bsTan 'gyur, and the bsTan 'gyur has placed them in two sections: Prajñāpāramitā and Sūtra Commentary. The Sūtra Commentary section, which includes commentary upon spells, cherished recollections, and so forth, uses a broad definition of "sūtra." From among all the sūtra commentaries, the Abhisamayālaṃkāra is preeminent; in Tibetan Buddhism it has become the gateway for the study of Prajñāpāramitā. The commentaries employ different commentarial methods, and the authors, though primarily from India, include a Korean, a Sinhalese, and a few Tibetans. Finally, the genre is at least as valuable for what it indirectly tells us about the later tradition and the role of sūtra in it as for its interpretations of the sūtras themselves.

Broido, Michael M.

1983A Note on dgos-'brel.Journal of the Tibet Society.35-19.

Eckel, Malcolm D.

1987Indian Commentaries on the Heart Sūtra: The Politics of Interpretation.Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 10/2: 69-79.

Gómez, Luis O.

1983Indian Materials on the Doctrine of Sudden Enlightenment. In Early Ch'an in China and Tibet, pp. 393-434. Ed. by W. Lai and L. R. Lancaster. Berkeley: Asian Humanities Press.

Gonda, Jan

1977The Ritual Sūtras.A History of Indian Literature. Vol. 1: Veda and Upanishads. Fasc. 2. Ed. by Jan Gonda. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.

gYag ston Sangs rgyas dpal

1985g.Yag Ṭīk: The Complete Yig cha for the Study of the Prajñāpāramitā[page 123] Literature. 8 vols. Manduwala, Dehra Dun: Pal Ewam Chodan Ngorpa Centre.

Huparikar, G. S.

1949 The Problem of Sanskrit Teaching. Kolhapur City (India): Bharat Book-stall.

Inaba, Shōju

1977On Chos-grub's Translation of the Chieh-shên-mi-ching-shu. In Buddhist Thought and Asian Civilization: Essays in Honor of Herbert V. Guenther on His Sixtieth Birthday, pp. 105-113. Ed. by Leslie S. Kawamura and Keith Scott. Emeryville: Dharma Publishing.

Kamalaśīla

SJGGŚālistambaṭīkā; Sā lu ljang pa rgya cher 'grel pa. In the sDe dge bsTan 'gyur, facsimile edition published in Delhi, vol. ji, Toh. no. 4001, ff. 145b-163b.

Lalou, Marcelle

1953Les texts bouddhiques au temps du roi Khri-sroṅ-lde-bcan.Journal asiatique 241/3: 313-354.

LKM

Pho brang stod thang lhan dkar gyi chos 'gyur ro cog gi dkar chag. In the sDe dge bsTan 'gyur, facsimile edition published in Delhi, vol. jo, Toh. no. 4364, ff. 294b-310a.

Lopez, Donald S., Jr.

1988The Heart Sūtra Explained: Indian and Tibetan Commentaries.Albany: State University of New York Press.

Renou, Louis

1963Sur le genre du sūtra dans la littérature sanskrite. In Journal asiatique 251/2: 165-216.

SJD

Śālistambanāmamahāyānasūtra; Sā lu ljang pa zhes bya ba'i theg pa chen po'i mdo. In the sDe dge bKa' 'gyur, facsimile edition published in Delhi, vol. tsha, Toh. no. 210, ff. 116a-123b.

SJT

Śālistamba[ka]kārikā; Sā lu ljang pa'i tshig le'ur byas pa. In the sDe dge bsTan 'gyur, facsimile edition published in Delhi, vol. ngi, Toh. no. 3985, ff. 18a-20b.

SJGS

Śālistamka[ka]mahāyānasūtraṭīkā; Sā lu ljang pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po'i mdo'i rgya cher bshad pa. In the sDe dge bsTan 'gyur, facsimile edition published in Delhi, vol. ngi, Toh. no. 3986, ff. 20b-55b.

Stcherbatsky, Th.

1929Abhisamayālankāra [sic] prajñāpāramitā-upadeśaśāstra: The Work of Bodhisattva Maitreya.Fasc. 1. Bibliotheca Buddhica 23. Co-authored with E. Obermiller. Osnabrück: Biblio Verlag, 1970.[page 124]

Steinkellner, E.

1989Who is Byaṅ chub rdzu 'phrul? Tibetan and non-Tibetan Commentaries on the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra—A Survey of the Literature.Berliner Indologische Studien 4/5: 229-251.

Tohoku

1934A Complete Catalogue of the Tibetan Buddhist Canons (Bkaḥ-'gyur and bstan-ḥgyur) . Ed. by Hakuju Ui, Munetada Suzuki, Yenshō Kanakura, Tōkan Tada. Sendai: Tōhoku Imperial University.

Vasubandhu

NRVyākhyāyukti; rNam par bshad pa'i rigs pa. In the sDe dge bsTan 'gyur, facsimile edition published in Tokyo, vol. shi, Toh. no. 4061, ff. 29a-134b.

Back To Top

Blondeau, Anne-Marie

1971Le Lha-'dre bka'-thaṅ. In Études tibétaines dédiées à la mémoire de Marcelle Lalou, pp. 29-126. Ed. by A. Macdonald. Paris: Maisonneuve.

1990Identification de la tradition appelée bsGrags-pa Bon-lugs. In Indo-Tibetan Studies, pp. 37-54. Ed. by T. Skorupski. Buddhica Britannica, Series Continua2. Tring: The Institute of Buddhist Studies.

Francke, A. H.

1924-49gZer-myig, A Book of the Tibetan Bon pos.Asia Major1: 243-346; 3 (1926): 321-339; 4 (1927): 161-239; 481-540; 5 (1928): 7-40; 6 (1930): 299-314; New Series 7 (1949): 163-188.

Hoffman, Helmut

1961The Religions of Tibet. London: Allen and Unwin. Translation of Die Religionen Tibets. Freiburg: Karl Alber Verlag, 1956.

Karmay, Samten G.

1972The Treasury of Good Sayings: A Tibetan History of Bon. London Oriental Series26. London: Oxford University Press.

1977A Catalogue of Bon po Publications. Tokyo: TōyōBunko.

1989The Great Perfection. A Philosophical and Meditative Teaching of Tibetan Buddhism. Leiden: E. J. Brill.

1990aTwo Eighteenth Century Xylographic Editions of the gZi-grjid. In Indo-Tibetan Studies, pp. 147-150. Ed. by T. Skorupski. Buddhica Britannica, Series Continua2. Tring: The Institute of Buddhist Studies.

1990bThe Decree of the Khro-chen King.Acta Orientalia51: 141-159.

Kun grol grags pa

ZBKKZab dang rgya che g.yung drung bon gyi bka' 'gyur gyi dkar chag nyi ma 'bum gyi 'od zer. Ms., N.p., n.d., 197 ff.

Kvaerne, Per

1971A Chronological Table of the Bon po. The bstan rcis of Ñi ma bstan 'jin.Acta Orientalia33: 205-282.

1974The Canon of the Tibetan Bon pos.Indo-Iranian Journal16/1: 18-56; 16/4: 96-144.

1986Peintures tibetaines de la vie de sTon-pa-gçen-rab.Arts asiatiques41: 36-81.[page 146]

1988A New Chronological Table of the Bon Religion. The bstan-rcis of Hor-bcun bsTan-'jin-blo-gros (1888-1975). In Tibetan Studies. Proceedings of the 4th Seminar of the International Association of Tibetan Studies. Ed. by Helga UebachJampa L. Panglung. Studia Tibetica Quellen zur tibetischen Lexicographie Band 2. Munich: Kommission für zentralasiatischen Studien der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.

1990A Bon po bsTan-rtsis from 1804. In Indo-Tibetan Studies, pp. 151-169. Ed. by T. Skorupski. Buddhica Britannica, Series Continua2. Tring: The Institute of Buddhist Studies.

Nyi ma bstan 'dzin

KTDGbKa' 'gyur brten 'gyur gyi sde tshan sgrigs tshul bstan pa'i me ro spar ba'i rlung g.yab bon gyi pad mo rgyas byed nyi 'od. Śata-Piṭaka Series37, Part II. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1965.

Orofino, Giacomella

1990Sacred Tibetan Teachings on Death and Liberation. Bridgeport: Prism Press. Translation and revision of Insegnamenti tibetani su morte e liberazione. Rome: Edizioni Mediterranee, 1985.

Rock, J. F.

1952The Na-khi Nāga Cult and Related Ceremonies, Part I. Serie Orientale Roma4/1. Rome: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente.

Roerich, George

1931Trails to Inmost Asia. Five Years of Exploration with the Roerich Central Asian Expedition.New Haven: Yale University Press.

Schuh, Dieter

1976Tibetische Handschriften und Blockdrucke. Teil 6. (Gesammelte Werke des Koṅ-sprul Blo-gros mtha'-yas).Verzeichnis der orientalischen Handschriften in DeutschlandBand XI, 6. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag.

Snellgrove, D. L.

1967The Nine Ways of Bon. London Oriental Series 18. London: Oxford University Press.

Smith, E. Gene

1970 Introduction to Kongtrul's Encyclopaedia of Indo-Tibetan Culture, pp. 1-87. Ed. by Lokesh Chandra. Śata-Piṭaka Series50. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture.

Back To Top

[page 125] ...while it is not accurate to say that an interpretation is helplessly dependent on the generic conception with which an interpreter happens to start, it is nonetheless true that his interpretation is dependent on the last, unrevised generic conception with which he starts. All understanding of verbal meaning is necessarily genre-bound.

—E. D. Hirsch1

This paper begins an exploration of the application of genre analysis to Tibetan commentaries on Indian exegetical works (śāstras). Although here only philosophical works will be considered, the śāstras, as extant in translation in the Tibetan Buddhist canon (see below), cover—in Western terms—not only traditional philosophical areas such as metaphysics, epistemology, logic and rhetoric, and cosmology, but also poetics, grammar, monastic discipline, and medicine. (For a more complete discussion, see Bu ston, DTSCB: 17a.) Tibetan scholars have been prolific writers of commentaries on the śāstras, explaining works such as Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakośa, Dharmakīrti's Pramāṇavārttika, and Candrakīrti's Madhyamakāvatāra. This trend is seen most readily in Sa skya and dGe lugs writers, and less so among bKa' brgyud and rNying ma authors.2[page 126]

It has been argued that Buddhism does not have a canon in the sense that canon is understood in the Abrahamic religions (Corless: 212-215). It is certainly the case that the Mahāyāna canon was an open one even in India and continues to be so in the Tibetan tradition (Lancaster: 505); this is especially the case in terms of the gter ma ("treasure texts"; see Gyatso, in this volume). It is also the case that the Buddhist canon is not seen as an exclusive revelation granted to humans by an extra-human divine being, as is the canonical literature of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The principal dissimilarity with the Abrahamic sense of canon, however, stems from the central hermeneutical principle of Buddhism—that the ultimate significance of a scriptural text lies neither in its literal meaning nor in the person from whom it comes, but rather in its ability to generate an awakening to reality (Thurman, 1978; Gómez: 535-536). As Roger Corless succinctly puts it, "The center of Buddhism is not the word of the Buddha, nor even the Buddha. It is bodhi, the enlightened mind.... The text is, in the final analysis, expendable in favor of the practitioner's own bodhi" (213). Corless encapsulates the principle behind the well-known four reliances (rten pa bzhi) that are the foundation of Tibetan Buddhist hermeneutics—to rely on doctrines and not on persons, on the meaning of those doctrines in preference to the words, on the definitive meanings in preference to those requiring interpretation, and on nonconceptual wisdom in preference to conceptual knowledge (Thurman, 1978; Hopkins: 425; Thurman, 1984: 113ff.; Gómez: 535-536). This must nonetheless be balanced with the observation that an appeal to a scripture's provenance has been very important, both in India and Tibet. Later Indian and Tibetan Buddhists justified the claim that the Mahāyāna sūtras and tantras were canonical by citing the claim (made in the texts themselves) that they were the actual teachings of Buddha.

With this in mind, let me offer the following as a tentative minimal definition of "canon": a list or group of texts that are accorded special status because of their perceived authority, an authority attributed either to their source(s) or their transformative ability, but most often to both. Such "transformative ability" in the ultimate sense (in Buddhism) would be salvific: the ability of a text to enable one who hears or reads it to successfully engage in the practice[page 127] of meditation leading to nonconceptual wisdom realizing emptiness (śūnyatā). Less ultimate aims would be the successful practice of morality or the development of compassion. In terms of texts that deal with philosophical issues, a more mundane sort of transformative ability is seen in the explicatory power of an exegetical treatise. In a more traditionally ritual sense, transformative ability may also be seen in the recitation of a text, for example a Prajñāpāramitā sūtra, for the sake of alleviating illness.

There was, in Indian Buddhism, a three-part canon, the Tripiṭaka or "three baskets" (see Harrison, in this volume) consisting of the Sūtras (the discourses given by Śākyamuni Buddha during his forty-five year teaching career), the Vinaya (rules of conduct for the monastic community extracted from Śākyamuni's teachings), and the Abhidharma (the "higher teaching," systematic presentations and analyses of Buddha's teachings). Of these two categories of texts, only the first two are actual buddhavacana or "words of the Buddha" (see Hirakawa: 509ff.). Thus, even within the most basic canon, the three baskets, there is a hierarchy of privilege, with the Sūtras being accorded more authority than the Abhidharma.

With the rise of Mahāyāna Buddhism, even more buddhavacana was recognized—beginning with the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras and continuing in the tantras—and these were accorded an even higher status than the earlier sūtras by followers of the Mahāyāna (see Skorupski, in this volume). Additionally, texts explaining the Sūtra and Vinaya texts were written—the śāstras or "exegetical works"—and these also attained canonical status, not only through their explicatory power but also through their authorship by writers remembered by later Buddhists not only as philosophers but also as meditation masters. It is these texts—those current in later Indian Buddhism—that became the basis of the canon of Tibetan Buddhism. Buddhavacana became the bKa' 'gyur (literally "Word-translation") and the śāstras became the bsTan 'gyur ("teaching/ treatise-translation").

It is, therefore, inappropriate to maintain that some of these texts are canonical whereas others are "quasi-canonical." It is more accurate to say that there is a hierarchy of canonical texts in Tibetan Buddhism, with the status of individual less-privileged, lower-ranked texts (for example, the śāstras) shifting in dependence on who is doing the ranking.[page 128]

Although sūtras are at the core of the scriptural dimension of Chinese Buddhism, this is not the case in Tibetan Buddhism. First, by far the greatest amount of literature is on the tantras. Secondly, the literature that is not explicitly tantric is not principally an attempt to explicate the sūtras per se, but rather their Indian exegeses (which are included among the śāstras; see Schoening, in this volume). Thus, instead of writing commentaries on the Perfection of Wisdom sūtras themselves, in most cases Tibetan expositions of the path to awakening as seen in these sūtras (an area called by the name "Perfection of Wisdom"—phar phyin [prajñāpāramitā]) are commentaries on Maitreyanātha's Abhisamayālaṃkāra which is itself a commentary on the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras. One can thus argue that a typical Tibetan commentarial treatise is actually a sub-commentary, or even a commentary on a sub-commentary.

A look at the Collected Works (gsung 'bum) of 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa (1648-1721) is instructive in this regard. There are many commentaries on tantras, none on sūtras, and about half of the total number of pages are on non-tantric philosophical subjects, including free-standing works on individual issues and on tenets, and commentaries on Indian śāstras. 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa is a scholar known for his extremely complex Grub mtha' chen mo (or "Great Exposition of Tenets")—in which he attempts to avoid the over-generalization characteristic of the tenets (grub mtha') literature through carefully examining his Indian sources book-by-book (instead of school-by-school) and in some cases in terms of the development of an author's thinking from youth through maturity (see Hopkins, in this volume). An examination of his collected works yields the following breakdown. Of a total of 143 separately titled works, 50 are on śāstras or tenets, with the remainder covering monastic discipline and monastery regulations, practice of the path to enlightenment, prayers, rituals, liturgies, meditation on the guru as Buddha (guru yoga), poetry, lexicography, grammar, history, visionary experience, and biography. There are 26 separately titled commentaries on the tantras of Guhyasamāja, Cakrasaṃvara, and Vajrabhairava, not including his two-part, 400-folio commentary on Vajrabhairava. Of a total of 6,343 folios, only about half are found in non-tantric commentaries on Indian texts. His śāstra commentaries include major analyses of Dharmakīrti's[page 129] Pramāṇavārttika, the Abhisamayālaṃkāra (attributed to Maitreyanātha), Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakośa, and Candrakīrti's Madhyamakāvatāra. Additionally, he wrote a major commentary on meditation theory (the dhyānas and samāpattis), a work on the four truths, a work on interdependent arising (pratītyasamutpāda)—all part of the perfection of wisdom curriculum—as well as books on hermeneutics and a number of introductory textbooks on philosophy, logic, and allied subjects.

'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa's works provide a general overview of the concerns of many Tibetan authors who have devoted themselves, at least in part, to writing on śāstras. In his autobiographical Lectures on Tibetan Religious Culture, Geshe Sopa speaks of his education at the Byes College of Se ra Monastery near Lhasa. He lists there the five major areas of study—Perfection of Wisdom (Prajñāpāramitā), Middle Way Philosophy (Madhyamaka), Monastic Discipline (Vinaya), Advanced Doctrine (Abhidharma), and Epistemology (Pramāṇa)—and the texts that he studied (Sopa: 42-43; see also Rabten: 47-49):

1. (1) Maitreyanātha's Abhisamayālaṃkāra on Perfection of Wisdom, pertaining to which there are twenty Indian commentaries (the chief of which is by Haribhadra);
2. (2) Candrakīrti's Madhyamakāvatāra on Middle Way philosophy and ontology in general, as well as the works of Nāgārjuna;
3. (3) Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakośaon "advanced doctrine" (although the most accurate doctrine, as perceived by most Tibetans, is that of Candrakīrti's Madhyamakāvatāra);
4. (4) Dharmakīrti's Pramāṇavārttika on epistemology.

These texts are at the core of the dGe lugs pa study of śāstra literature.

A different set of texts forms the basis of the recent śāstra curriculum of the schools of the rNying ma Order: the thirteen great texts (gzhung chen) (Tulku Thondup: 81-82).3 Two are on Vinaya and so will not be treated in this study of śāstras on philosophical subjects. The remaining eleven of the great texts are the following śāstras:[page 130]

1. (1-2) Asaṅga's Abhidharmasamuccaya and Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakośa—on advanced doctrine;
2. (3-5) Nāgārjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, Candrakīrti's Madhyamakāvatāra, and Āryadeva's Catuḥśataka—on the philosophy of Madhyamaka;
3. (6) Śāntideva's Bodhicaryāvatāra on bodhisattvas' practice;
4. (7-11) the five books attributed to Maitreya: theAbhisamayālaṃkāra, Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra, Madhyāntavibhaṅga, Dharmadharmatāvibhaṅga, and Uttaratantra (also known as the Ratnagotravibhāga).

There are modern commentaries (of the mchan 'grel or annotation type) on some of the thirteen great texts by Mi pham Phyogs las rnam rgyal (1846-1912) and on all thirteen by gZhan phan chos kyi snang ba (1871-1927).4

Note that both lists include the Abhidharmakośa, the Madhyamakāvatāra, and the Abhisamayālaṃkāra. Additionally, the Bodhicaryāvatāra is a work whose study is important to all lineages of Buddhism in Tibet, although it is not always explicitly included in scholastic curricula.

The category of Tibetan philosophical commentaries is too extensive to be considered a genre—in much the same way as theological and philosophical literature in the West: such commentaries comprise a type of literature only in the broadest sense, and those who are unaware of the many significantly different genres seen among commentarial works risk misreading those texts. There are three basic criteria for genre difference in Tibetan commentarial literature, all of which are usually operative in any given text.

(1) Genre in a more clearly literary sense is defined by the style, or format, of the commentary. Three of the more frequently seen formats are annotation commentaries (mchan 'grel), critical analyses (mtha' dpyod), and general expositions (spyi don).

(2) If we define "genre" (following E. D. Hirsch) as "that sense of the whole by means of which an interpreter can correctly understand any part in its determinacy" (86), it is not trivial to say that it is necessary to know, when one is reading a commentary on the Pramāṇavārttika, that one is reading an analysis or exposition of that work and not an explanation of the Abhidharmakośa. The philosophical jargon of Indian Buddhism is relatively homogeneous,[page 131] with innovation occurring more often in the interpretation of extant terms than in the coining of new ones. Thus, even simple terms (perhaps especially simple terms) such as dravya (Tib. rdzas, "substance" or "substantial entity"), bhava (dngos po, "thing, phenomenon"), and nairātmya (bdag med, "lack of self, selfless") are, in important ways, used differently by Dharmakīrti and Vasubandhu, the authors of the above texts.

(3) Finally, and in a sense as a corollary to the second defining criterion, genres are also delimited by perceptions about the primary text brought to it by the author (and the reader, if the reader is a Tibetan who is part of the oral tradition of explication based on that commentary). For better or worse, Tibetan Buddhist philosophers (influenced by tendencies already present in Indian Buddhism) have seen Indian texts not only as products of their authors, but also as the products of normative views of reality associated not only with those authors but with an entire school. The verses of Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakośa are thus read as a presentation of the tenets of the Vaibhāṣika school, whereas his autocommentary (that is, the rang 'grel—a generic name for a commentary composed by an author upon a text of which he is also the author) is read as a subtle Sautrāntika critique of the Vaibhāṣika position. Thus, from the point of view of a reader who is part of a Tibetan tradition of exegesis (which, historically, have combined both written and oral explanation), a Tibetan commentary on the Abhidharmakośa must be read with Sautrāntika and not Mādhyamika expectations.

Thus, the genre of a commentary is defined by (1) the format in which the commentary is written, (2) the basic text upon which it is a commentary or subcommentary, and (3) the school(s) of doctrine associated (by Tibetan writers and readers) with commentary on that basic text.

The first criterion—the style of the commentary—will be discussed in the next section. The second criterion, that the basic text which a commentary explains helps to define the genre into which that commentary should be classified, has three facets. First, as mentioned, whereas the technical language of Buddhist philosophy has, in a relatively conservative way, remained stable, the meanings of the terms have changed over time. (It is an awareness of differences in the application of terminology—that is, in definition [mtshan nyid, which, thus, also means "philosophy"]—that is at the basis of the Tibetan taxonomy of Indian Buddhist[page 132] and non-Buddhist philosophies invoked in the third criterion for genre.) Even such a basic distinction as that between existence as a substantial entity (dravya) and existence as an imputation (prajñapti) was construed in different ways by Nāgārjuna in the second century, Vasubandhu in the fourth century, and Haribhadra in the eighth century. Secondly, Buddhist writers did utilize different terminology in their works. Some of the terminology that Nāgārjuna inherited from the philosophers of his day was rejected by later writers such as Vasubandhu, along with belief in the existence of the phenomena which that terminology was constructed to describe. Finally, different Indian texts (the bases of the Tibetan commentaries) have different agenda. One of the primary concerns of Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakośa, for example, is to locate phenomena according to the "level" at which they are found (that is, in the kāmadhātu, rūpadhātu, or ārūpyadhātu—the Desire, Form, or Formless Realms) and to criticize what it perceives as an over-proliferation of substances in earlier Abhidharma literature. Haribhadra's Abhisamayālaṃkārāloka, on the other hand, is concerned primarily with the systematic analysis of paths to enlightenment. Nāgārjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā tends to accept without criticism many of the phenomena that Vasubandhu came to question two centuries later, but engages in a radical critique of their mode of existence. Thus, this criterion for defining commentarial genres suggests that the reader ought to approach the commentary in question with an awareness of the agenda of the Indian text that is its basis and of the terminology employed. This is not only a necessary condition for "correct understanding" of the commentary in Hirsch's sense, but is also necessary for recognition of those instances in which Tibetan authors are modifying the agenda and bringing in issues and terminology of their own.

The third criterion for genre implies that a dGe lugs pa commentary on Nāgārjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, for example, should be read—barring internal evidence to the contrary—with the assumption that Candrakīrti's Prāsaṅgika interpretation of Nāgārjuna's Mādhyamika is its normative stance (rang lugs, literally "own system"). A Tibetan commentary on the Abhisamayālaṃkāra, on the other hand, will normally be based on the interpretive viewpoint of the most influential later Indian commentary on that treatise, the Abhisamayālaṃkārāloka, a work written by Haribhadra from what is known in the Tibetan tradition as the Yogācāra-Svātantrika Mādhyamika standpoint.[page 133]

This is not to say that the twentieth-century reader should uncritically assume that Nāgārjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā is, in fact, a work written from the Prāsaṅgika viewpoint. (If nothing else, this is anachronistic, given that the Prāsaṅgika philosophy was constructed by Candrakīrti as a critique of Bhāvaviveka's sixth-century interpretation of Nāgārjuna.) That notwithstanding, the genre consisting of Tibetan commentaries on early Indian Mādhyamika texts such as the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā is made of works which, typically, are themselves identified as being written from a Prāsaṅgika standpoint. Likewise, the genre of Tibetan commentaries on Prajñāpāramitā—that is, on the Abhisamayālaṃkāra—is made up of texts which, at least heuristically, assume a Yogācāra-Svātantrika perspective.

The first criterion for recognizing a genre within commentarial works is the style or format in which such a work is written. Bu ston, in his Chos 'byung ("History of Buddhism") enumerates five main types of subcommentaries (bka' la mi brten pa'i bstan bcos) (DTSCB: 22a.4-7): (1) extensive commentaries (rgya cher 'grel ba) in which both the words and the meaning of the basic text are elaborated; (2) word commentaries (tshig 'grel) in which the lexical components of a text (that is, the words or syllables) are explained; (3) commentaries on difficult points (dka' 'grel) in which the points in the basic text that are difficult to understand are explicated; (4) commentaries in which the topics of the basic text are condensed into an abbreviated format (bsdus don gyi 'grel pa); (5) commentaries merely on the verbal significance of a basic text (ngag don tsam gyi 'grel pa).5 His taxonomy of commentaries (bka' la brten pa'i bstan bcos) seems more theoretical and less helpful (DTSCB: 22a.7-22b.1): (1) commentaries (such as the Abhisamayālaṃkāra) completely presenting the meaning of a single scripture; (2) commentaries which explicate systematically what is scattered (Obermiller: 58); and (3) commentaries (such as Śāntideva's Śikṣāsamuccaya) which explicate the meaning of many scriptures.

Bu ston is really speaking of canonical Indian commentaries, whereas our concern is with Tibetan literature. However, there are some clear parallels between genres of Tibetan commentaries and Bu ston's list of subcommentaries. If Tibetan commentaries on Abhidharma (especially on the Abhidharmakośa) are examined,[page 134] examples of four of the five types may be found.

(1) Extensive commentaries are quite common in Tibet; some are called such, while others (at least among the dGe lugs pa) are included in the genre of critical analyses (mtha' dpyod). An example of the first is the lengthy two-volume commentary on the Abhidharmakośa by the eighth Karma bKa' brgyud patriarch Mi bskyod rdo rje (1507-1554) which is labelled a 'grel pa rgyas par spros pa ("extensively elaborating commentary") (CNDGDP). An example of the second is 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa's 675-folio commentary on the Kośa (CNDGZK).

(2) Bu ston's term, "word commentary," is sometimes used by Tibetan writers, but more often seen is the mchan 'grel (commentary of annotations). These are commentaries in which the words of a basic text are printed either with small circles under them or in a larger size than the surrounding text, that surrounding text being an expansion on the words and/or syllables of the basic text. gZhan phan's thirteen annotation commentaries have already been noted.

(3) Commentaries on difficult points (dka' 'grel) are sometimes seen in Tibetan literature; an Abhidharma example is bSod nams grags pa's (1478-1554) commentary on Asaṅga's Abhidharmasamuccaya (CNKKYP).

(4) Commentaries which focus on the main points of a text are fairly common. One type is the spyi don (presentations of the "general significance" of a basic text). These are not actually abbreviations or condensations of the basic text, however; what makes them "general" is that they do not for the most part engage in the detailed polemical critique seen in their critical analysis counterparts. Thus, rJe btsun pa's spyi don on the Kośa (CNDKLS—labelled in the Library of Congress description a "general introduction") expands considerably on the basic verses of the Kośa; rJe btsun pa's textbooks serve as the core of the curriculum of Byes College of Se ra Monastery.

(5) Another type of general commentary is a true condensation of the meaning of the basic text. An example is one of the textbooks used in the sMad College of Se ra Monastery, rGyal dbang chos rje Blo bzang 'phrin las rnam rgyal's verse condensation (sdom tshigs or sdom gyi tshigs su bcad pa) presentation of the basic verses and autocommentary on the Kośa (CNDMSG).[page 135]

I have, in this brief essay, attempted to indicate how genre analysis might be applied to Tibetan commentaries on Indian exegetical works. Such an analysis might include an examination into the ways in which commentaries belonging to different genres elucidate one uncomplicated but significant passage from a basic text. What would need to be examined is the extent to which later commentaries build on earlier works, the extent to which novelty is seen in later commentaries, and—especially—the extent to which application of the three criteria for genre definition is actually necessary for a valid interpretation of the text.

Blo bzang 'phrin las rnam rgyal, rGyal dbang chos rje

CNDLNNChos mngon pa mdzod kyi dgongs don gsal bar byed pa'i legs bshad snying po'i snang ba. Delhi: Mongolian Lama Gurudeva, 1982.

CNDMSGDam pa'i chos mngon pa mdzod kyi rtsa 'grel gyi gnas 'ga' zhig phyogs gcig tu bsdebs pa'i sdom gyi tshig su bcad pa rmongs mun sel ba'i sgron me. Delhi: Mongolian Lama Gurudeva, 1982.

bSod nams grags pa

CNKKYPChos mngon pa kun btus kyi dka' ba'i gnad dgrol ba'i dka' 'grel mkhas pa'i yid 'phrog. Buxa: Shes rig 'dzin skyong slob gnyer khang, 1964.

Bu ston Rin chen grub

DTSCBbDe bar gshegs pa'i bstan pa'i gsal byed chos kyi 'byung gnas gsung rab rin po che'i mdzod. In The Collected Works of Bu-ston, vol. 24. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1971.

mChims Nam mkha' grags

CNDNGChos mngon mdzod kyi tshig le'ur byas pa'i 'grel pa mngon pa'i rgyan. Buxa, India edition of 1967.

Corless, Roger J.

1989The Vision of Buddhism: The Space under the Tree. New York: Paragon House.

Gómez, Luis O.

1987Buddhist Literature: Exegesis and Hermeneutics. In The Encyclopedia of Religion, vol. 2, pp. 529-540. New York: Macmillan.

Gyatso, Janet

1986Signs, Memory, and History: A Tantric Buddhist Theory of Scriptural Transmission.Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 9/2: 7-35.

gZhan phan chos kyi snang ba

CNDSMChos mngon pa'i mdzod kyi tshig le'ur byas pa'i mchan 'grel shes bya'i me long. Sides 7-257 in Gźuṅ chen bcu gsum gyi mchan 'grel.Dehra Dun: D. G. Khocchen Tulku, 1978.

Hirakawa, Akira

1987Buddhist Literature: Survey of Texts. In The Encyclopedia of Religion, vol. 2, pp. 509-529. New York: Macmillan.

Hirsch, E. D.

1967Validity in Interpretation. New Haven: Yale University Press.[page 137]

Hopkins, Jeffrey

1983Meditation on Emptiness. London: Wisdom.

'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa Ngag dbang brtson grus

CNDGZKDam pa'i chos mngon pa mdzod kyi dgongs 'grel gyi bstan bcos thub bstan nor bu'i gter mdzod dus gsum rgyal ba'i bzhed don kun gsal. In The Collected Works of 'Jam-dbyaṅs-bźad-pa'i-rdo-rje, vol. 10. New Delhi: Ngawang Gelek Demo, 1972.

Lancaster, Lewis R.

1987Buddhist Literature: Canonization. In The Encyclopedia of Religion, vol. 2, pp. 504-509. New York: Macmillan.

Mi bskyod rdo rje

CNDGDPChos mngon pa mdzod kyi 'grel pa rgyas par spros pa grub bde'i dpyid 'jo. New Delhi: Taikhang, 1975.

Mi pham rgya mtsho, 'Jam mgon 'Ju

CNDGGGDam pa'i chos mngon pa mdzod kyi mchan 'grel rin po che'i do shal bla gsal dgyes pa'i mgul rgyan. Dehra Dun: 1971.

Obermiller, E.

1931History of Buddhism (Chos-hbyung) by Bu-ston: The Jewelry of Scripture.Heidelberg: Otto Harrassowitz.

Rabten, Geshé

1980The Life and Teaching of Geshé Rabten. London: George Allen & Unwin.

Se ra rje btsun Chos kyi rgyal mtshan

CNDKLSChos mngon pa mdzod kyi spyi don dka' gnad legs par bshad pa. Buxa, India edition of 196?

Sopa, Geshe Lhundup

n.d.Lectures on Tibetan Religious Culture. Department of Indian Studies, University of Wisconsin.

Thurman, Robert A. F.

1978Buddhist Hermeneutics.Journal of the American Academy of Religion 46/1: 19-35.

1984Tsong Khapa's Speech of Gold in the Essence of True Eloquence. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Tulku Thondup

1987Buddhist Civilization in Tibet. New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Back To Top

[page 147] The rubric gter ma, or "Treasure," cannot properly be characterized as representing a genre of Tibetan literature. Texts classified as Treasure are of many different genres; in fact, the range of Treasure genres almost repeats that of Tibetan literature as a whole. Rather, the term Treasure refers figuratively to the place from which such a text was drawn. Or more precisely, Treasure means that which was drawn from such a place. The place is a treasure cache (sometimes distinguished in Tibetan as gter kha, which we may translate as "treasury"); the Treasure is the product extracted. This product is most notably text, but there are also a variety of material objects (gter rdzas) which are purported to have been extracted from such treasuries as well.1 The following, however, will focus upon those Treasures which are textual.

The fact that the range of Treasure genres competes in breadth with that of Tibetan literature as a whole alerts us to a critical feature of the tradition that needs to be noted from the outset. The various Treasure "cycles" (skor) that have been discovered by the Tibetan "Treasure discoverers" (gter ston) often constitute complete ritual and doctrinal systems which in an important sense stand on [page 148] their own. Such cycles of related texts function in their religious milieu as authoritative sets of teachings which amount to challenging alternatives to existing textual systems.

Treasure discovery is still practiced in the twentieth century by contemporary Tibetans in exile, such as Dil mgo mKhyen brtse Rin po che (1910-1991), and even in occupied Tibet, as seen in the outstanding Treasure career of mKhan po 'Jigs med phun tshogs (b. 1933). The tradition seems to have begun in Tibet in the tenth century C.E.2 The practitioners of this mode of introducing texts have been primarily rNying ma pas and Bon pos; these two groups had much overlap in their Treasure activity.3 The newer (and, it will be noted, more politically powerful) gSar ma pa schools tend to doubt the Treasures' authenticity (Kapstein, 1989), although there have been discoverers there too (Smith: 10). We need hardly note that Western scholars have also been dubious concerning Treasure claims (Aris, 1989).

The two primary modes of Treasure discovery are the unearthing of what is usually a fragmentary text buried in the ground, statue, or monastery wall (sa gter); and the finding of such a text buried in one's mind (dgongs gter). In both cases, the discoverer claims that the item found had previously been hidden in that very place at some point in the past. This claim concerning the past is another critical feature of the Treasure tradition, which strictly speaking distinguishes it from the other visionary modes of revealing text in Tibet such as "pure vision" (dag snang) and secret oral transmission (snyan brgyud) (though not infrequently these labels are used loosely to characterize Treasure as well).

Once discovered, many of the buried Treasure cycles came to be compiled into canons of their own. The early Bon po Treasures were incorporated into the Bon po bKa' 'gyur and brTen 'gyur, which together fill approximately 300 volumes; in fact, Treasures make up nearly all of the former and much of the latter parts of this collection.4 Per Kvaerne (1974: 39) estimated that the Bon po canon was assembled ca. 1450, approximately 150 years after the compilation of the Tibetan Buddhist canon of the new schools, the bKa' 'gyur and bsTan 'gyur.5 The Buddhist Treasures were not compiled into a collection of their own until the nineteenth century, when Kong sprul bLo gros mtha' yas edited the Rin chen gter mdzod (RT), a collection of cycles which in its current edition numbers over one hundred volumes. There are, however, a considerable [page 149] number of Buddhist Treasures not included in the RT, such as the two well-known "historical" cycles, the Maṇi bka' 'bum and the bKa' thang sde lnga, as well as some of the esoteric sNying thig ("Heart-Sphere") Treasures, some of which came to be classified as Atiyoga tantras of the "key instruction class" (man ngag sde) and included in the rNying ma'i rgyud 'bum.6 Also not included were cycles that were not available to Kong sprul, as well as some that were not deemed worthy of inclusion.

The subject matter of the Treasure texts, as was already indicated concerning genre, is as broad as that of the rest of Tibetan literature. For the sake of summary, the principal Treasure subjects may be distinguished into two main types: those that purport to recount history and/or hagiography; and those that present religious teachings and practices. In the case of history, the Treasure mode of textual generation performs the important function of offering an arena to recount competing versions of past events, i.e., versions that differ from orthodox or generally accepted versions. As would be expected, such Treasure histories are vulnerable to a charge of forgery; on the other hand, if the conceit of discovery is granted, then the purported age of the text and the status of its original author function to lend authenticity and legitimacy to its narratives.

In the case of religious teachings, legitimacy is claimed by characterizing the "core" of the cycle as a revelation. The Bon po Treasures are often identified as teachings of the founder of Bon, gShen rab mi bo (see Kvaerne, in this volume). In the Buddhist case, Treasure revelations are placed explicitly on a par with the sūtras and tantras of the more conventional Buddhist canon, and are said to be, in one sense or another, the "word of the Buddha." We shall see below that the very mode in which the Buddhist Treasures are transmitted is characterized as being in consonance with the mode in which the more well-known and accepted teachings of the Buddha were transmitted. The Buddhist Treasures gain legitimacy in particular by explicitly linking themselves with the texts and practices of the "Old Tantras" said to have been translated from Sanskrit, and compiled into what is called the rNying ma'i rgyud 'bum, itself a challenging alternative canon to the more conventional canon, the Buddhist bKa' 'gyur with its "New Tantras."7 In most cases, the Buddhist Treasures are distinct from the Old Tantras in that they present different texts and different visions, but rather [page 150] than competing with the Old Tantras they complement them, and thus stand together with the Old canon as a joint challenge to the New canon. However, the Buddhist Treasures still maintain an advantage over the canonical Old Tantras by virtue of the position of their discoverer: since the Treasures are received in a "close transmission" (nye brgyud), their discoverer has greater proximity to (and by implication, mastery of) the source of his teachings than does a master of the Old Tantras, who has received the texts he is teaching from a "long transmission" (ring brgyud), i.e., a succession of masters that stretches back into the distant past.

We have already suggested at least three ways in which the religious Treasure lays claim to authenticity: the exalted status of its original expounder, such as the Buddha; the nature of its doctrines, practices and mode of transmission, which are similar to the more well-known and accepted doctrines, practices and mode of transmission of canonical materials; and the special powers of the Treasure's discoverer. That the powers of the discoverer are of critical concern in the Treasure tradition may be seen particularly in the biographical, and sometimes autobiographical, accounts of the individual discoverers' visionary quests for Treasure. In a series of articles focusing on such accounts from the Buddhist Treasure tradition (1986, 1993, and n.d.), I have shown that the personal struggle to develop the power to find a Treasure, the difficulty in deciphering the cryptic codes and "ḍākinī language" in which the Treasure is originally revealed, and the discoverer-to-be's many self-doubts are all necessitated by the nature of the Buddhist myth of the Treasures' previous concealment (see, e.g., Tulku Thondup Rinpoche). Interestingly, this myth makes two legimating moves at once: it harkens back to the authoritative past, and simultaneously sheds positive light on the discoverer in the present.

The Buddhist Treasure myth has come to center upon the activities of Padmasambhava, the eighth-century Indic master credited with introducing tantric Buddhism into Tibet, even though there were a number of earlier traditions regarding the concealings of Treasures in Tibet, most notably those associated with the rDzogs chen teachings of Vimalamitra, another Indian teacher in Tibet during the same period.8 But by the time of discoverer Nyang ral Nyi ma 'od zer (1124-1192), the myth of the Treasures' origin that stars Padmasambhava and his Tibetan consort Ye shes mtsho rgyal began to dominate the Buddhist Treasure tradition. The predominance of Padmasambhava is probably attributable to the fact that[page 151] his image as a princely but lay tantric master reflected well the style of the very Tibetans—themselves often lay teachers of the aristocratic class—who were developing what we might call the full-blown Treasure tradition.9 Nonetheless, in this myth, Padmasambhava is still but a middleman in the dissemination of Treasure, if a very central middleman. The Treasure is most basically transmitted by a primordial buddha in a primordial pure land (rgyal ba'i dgongs brgyud). Secondarily it is transmitted in signs by the tantric "knowledge holders" (rig 'dzin brda'i brgyud), the Indian patriarchs of the rNying ma pa school. Only tertiarily is it taught in verbal form by Padmasambhava, in the eighth-century Tibetan court, "into the ears of persons" (gang zag snyan khung du brgyud) (Gyatso, 1986, 1993). Padmasambhava then proceeds to prepare the Treasure teaching for burial. He transmits the teaching in an empowerment ceremony (smon lam dbang bskur), during which he specially commissions certain disciples to rediscover it in a future incarnation at a specified time, a commissioning that is assured of fulfillment by virtue of a prophecy Padmasambhava utters to that effect (bka' babs lung bstan). Then he appoints powerful protectors to conceal the Treasure from everyone else until the right discoverer comes along at the right time (mkha' 'gro gtad rgya). The point is that the wrong person must not discover the Treasure; if he or she does, death will be imminent.10

Thus the crucial element in Buddhist Treasure discovery is that the discoverer must prove both to himself and to the world that he is indeed the previously commissioned individual. This is accomplished in a variety of ways, one of which is through signs which demonstrate the blessings of the exalted previous expounders of the Treasure, and another of which is by the discoverer's own spiritual accomplishments, which demonstrate that he or she already mastered the Treasure teachings while studying with Padmasambhava in a past lifetime.

The roots of this complex and arcane process of textual transmission may be recognized in the earlier and quite pragmatic Tibetan custom of burying politically sensitive items underground as a means of preventing their destruction. Tibetan histories state, for example, that because of repressive measures taken by anti-Buddhist ministers after the death of the king Mes ag tshoms (ca. 750 [page 152] C.E.) certain Buddhist texts newly introduced in Tibet such as the Vajracchedikā Sūtra were hidden underground, and later retrieved when the next Buddhist king, Khri srong lde btsan, took the throne (KG: 308-309; BC: 882). But this and other such incidents are not considered to be instances of Treasure transmission.

In some accounts of early Treasure concealment in the Bon po tradition, the reason for hiding texts is also primarily practical. The two principal moments of Bon Treasure burial occur in the wake of the persecutions of Bon during the reigns of (1) the prehistoric Tibetan king Gri gum bTsan po, and (2) Khri srong lde btsan.11 That this pragmatic view of the need for Treasure burial is still operative in the Bon po tradition may be seen from a recent comment by the contemporary Bon po master bsTan 'dzin rnam dag, who characterized the concealment of texts and objects after the Chinese invasion of Tibet in the 1950s as a third Treasure concealment, on the same order as the previous two (private interview, 1989).

However, at some yet undetermined moment in the development of both the Buddhist and Bon po Treasure traditions, the reasons given for concealment become grounded in the mantic powers of the concealer: rather than trying to protect texts from present adverse conditions, the concealer of Treasure is concerned with the future, which he perceives will be difficult, with special teachings needed. The Treasures that he then hides are specifically formulated to benefit the beings in that future moment. This future-determined motive is especially characteristic of the Buddhist Treasure myth that stars Padmasambhava, although early Bon po sources refer to prophecies of the future as well.12 In addition to the motive for concealment, the mode of discovery also changes. Rather than digging up an object based on a simple memory or notation of the hiding place, or indeed by accident, as is the case in some accounts of early Bon Treasure discoveries,13 the act of discovery becomes dependent upon visionary inspiration, the memory of past lives, and especially the compulsion exerted by the prophecy.14 The contemporary Buddhist Treasure tradition even goes so far as to disallow the accidental discoveries that are sometimes reported in the Bon po Treasure tradition (see Tulku Thondup Rinpoche: 103).

It is also the Buddhist Treasure tradition that, in elaborating the need for, and the mode of, Treasure transmission, was able to utilize incidents in the Indian Buddhist tradition as authenticating [page 153] precedents. The Buddhist Treasure tradition thereby claims that the mode of Treasure transmission is ultimately to be traced to Indian Buddhism. Indeed, at an early point Buddhism had already allowed the preaching of authentic "buddha-word" by individuals other than the Buddha, based either upon the Buddha's inspiration or on those individuals' own realizations (MacQueen). The Tibetan Buddhist expounders of Treasure theory can even cite statements in the sūtras that the bodhisattva will hear Dharma teachings from the sky, walls, and trees (NC: 511; Dudjom Rinpoche: 743). Buddhist legends concerning visionary receipt of scripture often cited as precedents by the Treasure proponents are Maitreya's revelation of Buddhist philosophical texts to the fourth-century Asaṅga, and Nāgārjuna's retrieval of the Prajñāpāramitā sūtras from a nāga realm under the ocean. Also noted was the Buddha's prophecy in the thirteenth chapter of the Pratyutpannasamādhi Sūtra that this text will "go into a cave in the ground" and 500 years later, in degenerate times, a few beings who have studied with former buddhas and who have "brought wholesome potentialties to maturity and planted seeds" will propagate the sūtra again (Harrison: 96-108; YM: 223-224; GT, vol. 2: 448). Further, well known to the Treasure tradition is the rNying ma pa account of the Indian transmission of the Old Tantras of the Mahāyoga bKa' brgyad class, which involves their concealment and later revelation from the caitya at Śītavana (NC: 111-112; Dudjom Rinpoche: 482-483). In fact, as early as the thirteenth century, the Treasure apologist Guru Chos dbang is finding analogues to Treasure concealment/revealment in virtually the entire history of the Buddhist scriptures, from the transmission of versions of the Vinaya, to that of certain sūtras, all classes of the Old Tantras, and even the textual transmission of several Mahāyāna śāstras (GC: 89-95).

Never mentioned by the Treasure tradition to my knowledge is its close affinity to accounts of text concealment and revelation in Chinese Ling-pao Taoism. For example, the third- to fourth-century "Grotto Passage" tells that Celestial Officials, out of compassion for the suffering beings in a degenerate age, granted special books written in a celestial script which came to be hidden in a casket in Mount Chung to await a future sage. These texts are said ultimately to have been recovered by a Taoist adept (Bokenkamp). We may also note that another frequently mentioned feature of earth Treasure revelation, namely, that it is recovered from the ground in the form of a paper scroll (shog dril), suggests Chinese [page 154] influence as well. Further, the doctrinal and meditative teachings of the rDzogs chen, which many Buddhist and Bon po Treasures propagate, have certain connections with Chinese Ch'an, even if the two are not to be equated (Karmay, 1988: 86-106; Kvaerne, 1983). In particular, the presence of Ch'an passages in the Blon po bka' thang (Tucci, 1958; Ueyama) suggests that Treasure may have offered a convenient means to reintroduce Ch'an teachings in Tibet. Such a theory is also implied by Bu ston Rin chen grub, the fourteenth-century scholar and historian who would have been critical of the Treasure tradition and its teachings; he states that when Hva shang Mahāyāna was sent back to China after his loss in debate to the Indian master Kamalaśīla, his books were "hidden as treasure" (BC: 890) .

If the Buddhist Treasure tradition itself locates its source in India, and the historian of religion can recognize influences from China as well, the phenomenologist of religion will notice the indigenous Tibetan elements operative in Treasure. We have already noted above that the practice of burying objects in the ground has early Tibetan roots. The significance of retrieving a text out of the Tibetan earth (or mind) should also not be lost on us. This is particularly evident in the Buddhist case, where Indic origin was a critical criterion for a text's inclusion in the bKa' 'gyur and bsTan 'gyur, the Buddhist canon with which Treasure competes. If we bracket, for a moment, the Treasure tradition's own construction of Indian precedent, we may note the thorough-going Tibetanness of the eidos of Treasure, i.e., the essentially Tibetan character, or thrust, of a Treasure's claim to fame and importance at the moment it is being presented into the Tibetan world. A Treasure is a text that has not been propagated in India; it was concealed during the period of the Tibetan nation's apogee of military might and golden age of Buddhist practice; it was formulated specifically for this particular moment in Tibetan history; its prophecies in fact describe this moment pointedly; and now this particular Tibetan master has revealed it to Tibet at the proper time.

Whether drawn out of the Tibetan ground or a Tibetan mind, the Treasure stands as a Tibetan product, in this important sense independent of Buddhist and other traditions of Tibet's neighbors. This independence is repeated on the smaller scale, too, within the dynamics of Tibet's internal scene. On this scale, the Treasure is an alternative, and challenge to the religious teachings being propagated in institutionalized, monastic circles. The discoverer [page 155] himself is an autonomous, maverick figure, typically declaring his independence from received tradition and study; rather, the discoverer focuses on his own mind, his own visions, his own memory of a previous life as Padmasambhava's disciple, his own predestined revelation that he propagates to his own circle of disciples. This recourse to the independent master facilitated by the Treasure tradition underlines the creativity that is thereby made possible. The Treasure itself describes a new vision, and a new system of meditation or ritual. The fact that innovation is made possible by Treasure means that vitality, flexibility, and responsiveness to new situations and needs are maintained in Tibetan religion.

Here we can only sketch out some of the general features of an enormous landscape. Further, this overview is limited to Buddhist Treasure; a full study of the Bon Treasure literature, especially when the Bon po canon becomes more readily available, will surely add much to our understanding of the Treasure tradition.

As already indicated, we may make a basic distinction between two major types of Treasure subject matter: (1) the "historical," which in the Buddhist case concerns the introduction of Buddhism to Tibet during the Yar lung dynasty, and (2) religious doctrine and practice.

Again, the first type exemplifies the Treasure tradition's focus upon primarily Tibetan matters. Tibetologists have long recognized that despite certain genuine ancient passages preserved therein, the Treasure narratives are greatly overlaid with myth and fantasy, and are not to be considered as providing historical information (Vostrikov). Nonetheless, the Treasure accounts of the events of the Yar lung dynasty are critical for our understanding of the way that period was retrospectively romanticized and glorified in Tibetans' views of their country's past, as well as the implications of that period for the place of Buddhism in Tibetan society altogether. The Treasures offer some of the most detailed stories of the seventh-century King Srong btsan sgam po, who builds many Buddhist temples to subdue the wild indigenous "demoness" of Tibet, and whose two wives from Nepal and China bring statues of the Buddha; of King Khri srong lde btsan, who invites the Indian Buddhist philosopher Śāntarakṣita and the tantric master Padmasambhava, and builds bSam yas Monastery; of [page 156] Padmasambhava, who introduces tantric Buddhism in Tibet, and brings under submission Tibet's demons who are transformed thereby into protectors of Buddhism; of the Tibetan teacher Vairocana, who is instrumental in the introduction of rDzogs chen in Tibet; of the great debate between the Indian master Kamalaśīla and the Chinese master Hva shang; and of many other matters at the heart of the founding of Buddhism in Tibet.15

The Buddhist Treasures that present these stories, along with much other material, date primarily from the twelfth to the fourteenth centuries. The Maṇi bka' 'bum is one of the few Buddhist Treasures that does not deal with Padmasambhava and the period of Khri srong lde btsan, but rather with the hagiography and purported teachings of Srong btsan sgam po. It also presents sādhanas for Avalokiteśvara as well as several Indic Buddhist canonical texts connected to the cult of Avalokiteśvara (Macdonald; Aris, 1979: 8-12; Kapstein, 1991; Blondeau, 1984). The bKa' thang sde lnga Treasure has five books: the rGyal po (Kings), bTsun mo (Queens), Blon po (Ministers), Lo paṇ (Translators and Pandits), and Lha 'dre (Gods and Ghosts), and was discovered in stages by O rgyan gling pa in the latter third of the fourteenth century (Blondeau, 1971: 42). These texts focus on the events surrounding Padmasambhava, but contain many other legends as well as passages with historical value, along with such diverse materials as an elaborate and lengthy description of the treasuries of the gYar lung kings in the rGyal po, and the Ch'an materials in the Blon po, already mentioned.16 As for the Treasures devoted solely to the hagiography of Padmasambhava, they have been analysed by Blondeau (1980), who found that the Treasure traditions of Padmasambhava's life portray his "miraculous birth" while non-Treasure renditions of his life speak of his "womb birth." The earliest of the Treasure hagiographies of Padmasambhava is the Zangs gling ma, discovered by Nyang ral Nyi ma 'od zer (ZL); the two best known are the Shel brag ma, discovered by O rgyan gling pa (1329-1367) (translated by Toussaint), and the gSer phreng, discovered by Sangs rgyas gling pa (1340-1367), which both contain a separate chapter of prophecies of Treasure discoverers. Another major "historical" Treasure is the hagiography of Padmasambhava's Tibetan consort Ye shes mtsho rgyal, discovered by sTag sham rdo rje in the seventeenth century, which recently has been translated into English twice (Dowman; Nam mkha'i snying po).

[page 157] The second type of subject matter, that which presents religious teachings, sādhanas, and rituals, constitutes the content of the majority of Treasure cycles. Once again, let us note that since most Treasures are purported to have been preached by Padmasambhava, these cycles too contain "historical" passages concerning the Yar lung period as well. But the bulk of the cycle is devoted to teachings and practices.

With the exception of several hagiographies of Padmasambhava, biographies of the Treasure discoverers, and texts relating to the structure of the collection, the one hundred plus volumes of the RT are comprised of these sādhana/ ritual cycles. The RT's editor, Kong sprul, has arranged much of the Treasures in this collection according to the nature of the central visualized figure of the sādhana/ritual. And since most of the Treasure cycles include several sections which focus upon different figures, Kong sprul saw fit to break these cycles up and insert the parts into their appropriate volumes so as to fit into the general structure according to which he arranged the collection as a whole. Thus the Rig 'dzin 'dus pa section of the famed Treasure cycle Klong chen snying thig will be found in volume 14 of the RT along with sections of other Treasure cycles that focus on a visualization of the interior guru in "peaceful form" as a nirmāṇakāya; the Bla sgrub thig le'i rgya can section of that same cycle is in volume 17 along with other Treasures presenting gurusādhanas; and the rDzogs chen sections of the cycle are in volume 89, in the rDzogs chen portion of the RT.

The main organizing principle of the RT is the group of the three "inner tantras" of the Old canon: the Mahāyoga, Anuyoga, and Atiyoga. The predominance of the first group, the Mahāyoga, in Treasure cycles may be seen from the fact that it occupies volumes 3 to 85 of the RT. The Anuyoga is represented by but a few cycles in volumes 85 and 86, and the Atiyoga occupies volumes 86 to 91.17

The deities of the Mahāyoga are organized in the RT under the three headings of guru, yi dam (the practitioner's principal deity; Skt. iṣṭadevatā), and ḍākinī. These headings are further broken down into such standard categories as the external/internal dyad, and the fourfold peaceful/extensive/powerful/wrathful typology of deities. The gurusādhanas are exceedingly numerous, occupying fourteen volumes of the RT. The yi dams, Treasures concerning whom fill thirty-two volumes of the RT, are primarily the eight who are classed together in the Mahāyoga tantras as the bKa'[page 158] brgyad. The ḍākinīs, comprising five volumes of the RT, include a variety of female deities. The Atiyoga Treasures also use some of the same deities in their practices, but there is more emphasis in these cycles on meditative techniques that focus on the nature of the mind. A large variety of techniques are introduced in the Treasures for recognizing that nature, and separate texts that focus on such practices are again organized taxonomically.

When one examines an individual Treasure in one of these categories, one finds that it too is divided into sections, but now at this closer level the organizing principle is no longer deity, and rather is literary genre. This genre-based organization is never strictly determined, but the ideal pattern, if one may say so, consists in what I have called a "core text," and its "surrounding" subsidiary commentarial and ritual texts (Gyatso, 1991). The core text may be couched as a tantra or other sort of "root text" (mūla; rtsa ba), and it is most likely to represent the revealed Treasure vision or philosophical teaching itself. As such, it will be anonymous, or couched as the words of Padmasambhava, or a buddha, or deity. It is also recognizable by the orthographical device of the gter shad—aseparating each line instead of the standard /, used in other forms of Tibetan literature. However, sometimes the gter shad is used improperly to mark the subsidiary commentaries and associated rituals as well.

The authorship of the subsidiary texts is often explicitly attributed to the discoverer, or even to a disciple; thus many of the texts included in the RT are strictly speaking not revealed Treasures but rather merely based upon them. The principal subsidiary texts are either descriptions of how to perform the empowerment ritual whereby disciples are initiated into the practices of the root text and/or its associated deity, or are sādhanas describing how to identify oneself as the deity in visualization meditation (see Cozort, in this volume). But then again, sometimes the revealed core text is itself an empowerment or sādhana.

The many other subsidiary genres present the many other types of rituals and liturgies associated with the core revelation, to the point that a typology of Treasure genres will be a typology of Tibetan rituals. Some of these rituals are placed close to their core texts in the RT, but others have been gathered in the last portion of the Mahāyoga section, in volumes 64 through 84, which becomes a virtual catalogue of the Treasure rituals that the practitioner of a given cycle may employ as needed or desired. A sampling of some [page 159] of the genres/rituals included here: construction of maṇḍalas; manufacture of ritual hats and costumes; geomantical analysis of a place for its spiritual properties (sa dpyad); rituals to appease the human and non-human "owners" of a place in which one intends to practice (sa chog); methods to ascertain the disposition of the large being that constitutes the entirety of a place (sa bdag lto 'phye); invocation of blessings (byin 'bebs); general meritorious rituals performed between more complex rituals (chos spyod); additional rituals to compensate for ritual transgressions (bskang bzhags); techniques for eating bits of paper inscribed with therapeutic mantra letters (za yig sngags 'bum); construction of offering cakes (gtor ma); mass offering-feast liturgies (tshogs mchod); consecration of icons (rab gnas); rites for the dead; burnt juniper offerings (bsang); construction of thread-crosses (mdos); uses of effigies (glud); crop cultivation; weather control; turning back of armies; protective devices against weapons; curing of physiological and psychological disease; extending of lifespan (tshe sgrub). Surveying this literature, one realizes how much a Treasure revelation is a starting point for the colorful tantric dramaturgy for which Tibetan religion is so well known. Each discoverer introduces new styles, images, and techniques; many have been accomplished choreographers, painters, sculptors, costume designers.

Several genres that are to be found at some point in the Treasure cycle are a function of the special features that distinguish Treasure from other forms of tantric literature. Most important is the prophecy (lung bstan) text, in which Padmasambhava predicts the future discoverer and the moment in history when the Treasure will be revealed. This text (or passage embedded in another text) is the central legitimating device of the Treasure; it proves, or attempts to prove, that the cycle was not authored by the discoverer but rather was formulated by Padmasambhava in the past. It also proves that the discoverer is in fact the person who was designated by Padmasambhava for the revelation of this Treasure. A related, distinctive Treasure genre is the certificate (byang bu; see Gyatso, n.d.), a curious mini-Treasure discovered prior to the Treasure proper, which may also include prophecies as well as explicit directions on how to find the rest of the cycle. Both the prophecy and certificate are part of the visionary "core" of the Treasure; they inevitably are marked with the gter shad device, and are presented as the words of Padmasambhava.

[page 160] Another important legitimating genre within the religious Treasure is the history of the cycle (sometimes called lo rgyus) which may or may not be part of the visionary core. I have identified two main types, one which recounts the transmission of the cycle from its origin in a buddha-land up to its concealment by Padmasambhava, and the other which narrates the events of the discovery (Gyatso, 1993). The account of the transmission of the cycle is often incorporated into the core, and functions to legitimate in much the same way as the prophecy and certificate just discussed.

The second, the account of the discovery, is of particular interest, since it too is meant to legitimate, or to "engender confidence" (nges shes bskyes pa) in the Treasure, but it does so on entirely different grounds than do the references to Padmasambhava and his buddha predecessors. Here the reader is presented with an individualistic account of the discoverer's trials and struggles in realizing the revelatory vision. The text recounting this visionary process is often authored by the discoverer. In some instances it is detailed enough to constitute the discoverer's autobiography, or "visionary autobiography," in that what is of concern is the discoverer's visionary career and development as a whole, as well as the events following the climactic revelatory episode, such as his decision to teach and publish the Treasure. Reading these accounts, we can observe quite concretely that the Treasure argument for legitimation is not based solely upon the invocation of the Treasure myth and the discoverer's purported role in the burial of the Treasure centuries earlier. Rather, there is an equal, if not greater, emphasis placed upon a show of honesty and an admission of inadequacies and error, as if such candor and display of self-doubt would also, ironically, engender confidence in the discoverer. The Treasure tradition understands the discoverer ultimately to become a highly realized meditation master capable of "owning" and "controlling" the powerful and esoteric teachings that the Treasure presents; he is not simply Padmasambhava's mailman or delivery boy, as one representative of the Treasure tradition recently put it.18 The painting of the visions, dreams, and personal qualities in the discoverer's autobiography gives us a picture of an idiosyncratic personality on the way to such mastery, and a sense of the importance of the charismatic individual in the Treasure tradition overall. Here the virtue of creativity reigns supreme.

Aris, Michael

1979Bhutan: The Early History of a Himalayan Kingdom. Warminster: Aris and Phillips, 1979.

1989Hidden Treasures and Secret Lives: A Study of Pemalingpa (1450-1521) and the Sixth Dalai Lama (1683-1706). London: Kegan Paul International.

bDud 'joms 'Jigs bral ye shes rdo rje

NC Gang ljong rgyal bstan yongs rdzogs kyi phyi ma snga 'gyur rdo rje theg pa'i bstan pa rin po che ji ltar byung ba'i tshul dag cing gsal bar brjod pa lha dbang gyul las rgyud ba'i rnga bo che'i sgra dbyangs. In Collected Works, vol. 1. Kalimpong, 1979. [Translated in Dudjom Rinpoche.]

Blondeau, Anne-Marie

1971Le Lha-'dre bKa'-thaṅ. In Études tibétaines dédiées à la mémoire de Marcelle Lalou, pp. 33-126. Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve.

1975-76 In Annuaire de l'École Pratique des Hautes Études, 84. Ve section, pp. 109-119.

1980Analysis of the Biographies of Padmasambhava According to Tibetan Tradition: Classification of Sources. In Tibetan Studies in Honour of Hugh Richardson, pp. 45-52. Edited by Michael Aris and Aung San Suu Kyi. Warminster: Aris and Phillips.

1984Le 'Découvreur' du Maṇi Bka'-'bum était-il Bon-po? In Tibetan and Buddhist Studies Commemorating the 200th Anniversary of the Birth of Alexander Csoma de Körös, pp. 77-123. Edited by Louis Ligeti. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.

1985Mkhyen-brce'i Dba'-po: La biographie de Padmasambhava selon la tradition du Bsgrags-pa Bon, et ses sources. In Orientalia Iosephi Tucci Memoriae Dicata. Edited by G. Gnoli and L. Lanciotti. Rome: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente.

1987Une Polémique sur l'authenticité des Bka'-thaṅ au 17e siècle.Silver on Lapis: Tibetan Literary Culture and History, pp. 125-160. Edited by Christopher I. Beckwith. Bloomington: The Tibet Society.

1988La controverse soulevée par l'inclusion de rituels bon-po dans le 1988 Rin-chen gter-mjod. Note préliminaire. In Tibetan Studies, Proceedings of the 4th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies, pp. 55-67. Edited by Helga Uebach and Jampa L. Panglung. Munich: Kommission für Zentralasiatische Studien Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften.[page 165]

Bokenkamp, Stephen R.

1986The Peach Flower Font and the Grotto Passage.Journal of the American Oriental Society 106/1: 65-77.

Bu ston Rin chen grub

BC bDe bar gshegs pa'i bstan pa'i gsal byed chos kyi 'byung gnas gsung rab rin po che'i mdzod. In The Collected Works of Bu-ston. Edited by Lokesh Chandra. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1971.

Byang bdag bKra shis stobs rgyal

SDgTer brgya'i rnam thar don bsdus gsol 'debs. In RT, vol. 2, pp. 1-31.

Dargyay, Eva M.

1977The Rise of Esoteric Buddhism in Tibet. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

Das, Sri Sarat Chandra, ed.

1915Gyal Rab Bon-Ke Jun Neh. Calcutta: Bengal Secretariat Book Depot.

Davidson, Ronald M.

1981The Litany of Names of Mañjuśrī. In Tantric and Taoist Studies in Honour of R. A. Stein, pp. 1-69. Edited by Michel Strickmann. Brussels: Institut Belge des Hautes Études Chinoises.

Dowman, Keith

1984Sky Dancer: The Secret Life and Songs Of The Lady Yeshe Tsogyel. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

dPa' bo gtsug lag phreng ba

KGChos 'byung mkhas pa'i dga ston. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1986.

'Dul 'dzin mKhyen rab rgya mtsho

DLSaṅs rgyas bstan pa'i chos 'byuṅ dris lan nor bu'i phreṅ ba. Gangtok: Dzongsar Chhentse Labrang, 1981.

Dudjom Rimpoche, Jigdrel Yeshe Dorje

1991The Nyingma School of Tibetan Buddhism. Translated by Gyurme Dorje and Matthew Kapstein. 2 vols. Boston: Wisdom.

Guru bKra shis Ngag dbang blo gros/ dByangs can dga' ba'i blo gros

GTbsTan pa'i snying po gsang chen snga 'gyur nges don zab mo'i chos kyi 'byung ba gsal bar byed pa'i legs bshad mkhas pa dga' byed ngo mtshar gtam gyi rol mtsho. 5 vols. Written 1807-1813. Published by (Dilgo) Jamyang Khentse, N.p., n.d.

Guru Chos dbang

GCgTer 'byung chen mo. In The Autobiography and Instructions of Gu-ru Chos-kyi-dbaṅ-phyug, vol. 2, pp. 75-193. Reproduced from a manuscript in the library of Lopon Choedak. Paro: Ugyen Tempai Gyaltsen, 1979.[page 166]

Gyatso, Janet

1981The Literary Transmission of the Traditions of Thang-stong Rgyal-po: A Study of Visionary Buddhism in Tibet. Ph.D. dissertation. Berkeley: University of California.

1986Signs, Memory and History: A Tantric Buddhist Theory of Scriptural Transmission.Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 9/2: 7-35.

1991Genre, Authorship and Transmission in Visionary Buddhism: The Literary Traditions of Thang-stong rGyal-po. In Tibetan Buddhism: Reason and Revelation, pp. 95-106. Edited by Ronald M. Davidson and Steven D. Goodman. Albany: State University of New York Press.

1993The Logic of Legitimation in the Tibetan Treasure Tradition.History of Religions 33/1: 97-134.

1994Guru Chos-dbang's gTer 'byung chen mo: An Early Survey of the Treasure Tradition and Its Strategies in Discussing Bon Treasure. In Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the 6th Seminar of the International Association of Tibetan Studies, Fagernes 1992, pp. 275-287. Edited by Per Kvaerne. Oslo: The Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture.

n.d. The Relic Text as Prophecy: The Semantic Drift of Byang-bu and its Appropriation in the Treasure Tradition.Tibet Journal, Rai Bahadur T. D. Densapa Special Commemorative Issue.

Harrison, Paul

1990The Samādhi of Direct Encounter with the Buddhas of the Present: An Annotated English Translation of the Tibetan Version of the Pratyutpanna-Buddha-Saṃmukhāvasthita-Samādhi-Sūtra.Tokyo: The International Institute for Buddhist Studies.

Kapstein, Matthew

1989The Purificatory Gem and Its Cleansing: A Late Tibetan Polemical Discussion of Apocryphal Texts.History of Religions 28/3: 217-244.

1991Remarks on the Maṇi Bka' 'bum and the Cult of Avalokiteśvara in Tibet. In Tibetan Buddhism: Reason and Revelation, pp. 79-94. Edited by Ronald M. Davidson and Steven D. Goodman. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Karmay, Samten G.

1972The Treasury of Good Sayings: A Tibetan History of Bon. London: Oxford University Press, 1972. [Translation of the Legs bshad mdzod.]

1977A Catalogue of Bonpo Publications. Tokyo: Tōyō Bunko.

1988The Great Perfection: A Philosophical and Meditative Teaching of Tibetan Buddhism. Leiden: E. J. Brill.[page 167]

Kong sprul Blo gros mtha' yas, ed.

RTRin chen gter mdzod. 111 vols. sTod lung mtshur phu redaction, with supplemental texts from the dPal spungs redaction and other manuscripts. Reproduced at the order of the Ven. Dingo Chhentse Rimpoche. Paro, Bhutan: Ngodrup and Sherab Drimay, 1976.

TGZab mo'i gter dang gter ston grub thob ji ltar byon pa'i lo rgyus mdor bsdus bkod pa rin chen baiḍūrya'i phreng ba. In RT, vol. 1: 291-759.

Kun bzang nges don klong yangs

NDBod du byung ba'i gsang sngags snga 'gyur gyi bstan 'dzin skyes mchog rim byon gyi rnam thar nor bu'i do shal.Dalhousie, India: Damchoe Sangpo, 1976.

Kvaerne, Per

1971A Chronological Table of the Bon Po: The Bstan Rcis of Ñi Ma Bstan 'Jin.Acta Orientalia [Copenhagen] 32: 205-282.

1974The Canon of the Tibetan Bonpos.Indo-Iranian Journal 16: 18-56; 96-144.

1983'The Great Perfection' in the Tradition of the Bonpos. In Early Ch'an in China and Tibet, pp. 351-366. Edited by Whalen Lai and Lewis R. Lancaster. Berkeley: Berkeley Buddhist Studies Series.

1990A Bonpo bsTan-rtsis from 1804. In Indo-Tibetan Studies, pp. 151-169. Edited by Tadeusz Skorupski.Buddhica Britannica Series Continua2. Tring: The Institute of Buddhist Studies.

Laufer, B.

1911Der Roman einer tibetischen Konigin. Leipzig.

Macdonald, Ariane

1968-69 In Annuaire de l'École Pratique des Hautes Études. IVe section, pp. 527-535.

MacQueen, Graeme

1981-82Inspired Speech in Early Mahāyāna Buddhism.Religion 11: 303-319; 12: 49-65.

Nam mkha'i snying po

1983Mother of Knowledge: The Enlightenment of Ye-shes mTsho-rgyal. Translated by Tarthang Tulku. Berkeley: Dharma Publishing.

Nyang ral Nyi ma 'od zer

ZLsLob dpon padma'i rnam thar zangs gling ma. Beijing: So khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1987.

Ratna Gling pa

RGgTer 'byung chen mo gsal ba'i sgron me. In Selected Works of Ratna-gliṅ-pa, vol. 1, pp. 1-215. Tezu, Arunachal Pradesh: Tseten Dorje, 1973.[page 168]

rDo grub chen 'Jigs med bstan pa'i nyi ma

TNLas 'phro gter brgyud kyi rnam bshad nyung gsal ngo mtshar rgya mtsho. In The Collected Works (Gsuṅ 'bum) of Rdo-Grub-Chen 'Jigs-Med-Bstan-Pa'i-Ñi-ma, vol. 4, pp. 377-447. Gangtok: Dodrup Chen Rinpoche, 1975. [Translated in Tulku Thondup Rinpoche.]

Rig 'dzin Kun grol grags pa

STSangs rgyas bstan pa spyi yi 'byung khung yid bzhin nor bu 'dod pa 'jo ba'i gter mdzod. In Three Sources for a History of Bon, pp. 197-552. Dolanji: Khedup Gyatso, 1974.

Roerich, George N.

1949The Blue Annals. 2 vols. Calcutta: Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal.

RR

De bzhin gshegs pa thams cad kyi ting nge 'dzin dngos su bshad pa ye shes 'dus pa'i mdo theg pa chen po gsang ba bla na med pa'i rgyud chos thams cad kyi 'byung gnas sangs rgyas thams cad kyi dgongs pa gsang sngags gcig pa'i ye shes rdzogs pa chen po don gsal bar byed pa'i rgyud rig pa rang shar chen po'i rgyud. In The Tibetan Tripitaka, Taipei Edition, vol. 56, pp. 46-100. Taipei: SMC Publishing, 1991.

Smith, E. Gene

1970Introduction to Kongtrul's Encyclopaedia of Indo-Tibetan Culture, pp. 1-78. Edited by Lokesh Chandra. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture.

Sog bzlog pa Blo gros rgyal mtshan

YMsLob dpon sans rgyas gñis pa padma 'byuṅ gnas kyi rnam par thar pa yid kyi mun sel. Thimphu: The National Library of Bhutan, 1984.

Thomas, F.W.

1935Tibetan Literary Texts and Documents Concerning Chinese Turkestan, pt. 1. London: Luzac.

Toussaint, G.C.

1933Le dict de Padma. Padma thaṅ yig. Paris: Bibliothèque de l'Institut des Hautes Études Chinoises.

Tucci, Giuseppe

1958Minor Buddhist Texts, Part II. Rome: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente.

Tulku Thondup Rinpoche

1986Hidden Teachings of Tibet: An Explanation of the Terma Tradition of the Nyingma School of Buddhism. London: Wisdom. [Includes English translation of TN.][page 169]

Ueyama, Daishun

1983The Study of Tibetan Ch'an Manuscripts Recovered from Tun-huang: A Review of the Field and Its Prospects. In Early Ch'an in China and Tibet, pp. 327-350. Edited by Whalen Lai and Lewis R. Lancaster. Berkeley: Berkeley Buddhist Studies Series.

Vostrikov, A.I.

1970Tibetan Historical Literature. Translated by Harish Chandra Gupta. Calcutta: Indian Studies, Past & Present.

Zab bu gdan sa pa Karma mi 'gyur dbang gi rgyal po

SBgTer bton brgya rtsa'i mtshan sdom gsol 'debs chos rgyal bkra shis stobs rgyal gyi mdzad pa las de'i 'brel pa lo rgyus gter bton chos 'byung. Darjeeling: Taklung Tsetrul Rinpoche Pema Wangyal, 1978.

Zhang ston bKra shis rdo rje (?)

DZrDzogs pa chen po snying tig gi lo rgyus chen mo. In sNying thig ya bzhi of Klong-chen-pa Dri-med-'od-zer, vol. 9 (Bi ma snying thig, part 3), pp. 1-179. New Delhi: Trulku Tsewang, Jamyang and L. Tashi, 1970.

Back To Top

[page 170] In the Tibetan cultural region (which stretches from Kalmuck Mongolian areas near the Volga River in Europe where the Volga empties into the Caspian Sea, through Outer and Inner Mongolia, the Buriat Republic of Siberia, and through Bhutan, Sikkim, Ladakh, and parts of Nepal) the genre of doxography called "presentations of tenets" (*siddhāntavyavasthāpana, grub mtha'i rnam bzhag) mainly refers to delineations of the systematic schools of Buddhist and non-Buddhist Indian philosophy. In this context, "philosophy" is, for the most part, related to liberative concerns—the attempt to extricate oneself and others from a round of painful existence and to attain freedom. Focal topics and issues of these schools are presented in order to stimulate metaphysical inquiry—to encourage development of an inner faculty that is capable of investigating appearances so as to penetrate their reality.

The basic perspective is that the afflictive emotions—such as desire, hatred, enmity, jealousy, and belligerence—that bind beings in a round of uncontrolled birth, aging, sickness, and death are founded on misperception of the nature of persons and other phenomena. Thus, when one penetrates the reality of things and this insight is teamed with a powerful consciousness of concentrated meditation, the underpinnings of the process of cyclic existence can be destroyed, resulting in liberation. Also, when wisdom [page 171] is further empowered through the development of love, compassion, and altruism—and by their corresponding actions—the wisdom consciousness is capable of achieving an all-knowing state in which one can effectively help a vast number of beings.

Because of this basic perspective, namely that false ideation traps beings in a round of suffering, reasoned investigation into the nature of persons and other phenomena is central to the process of spiritual development, though it is not the only concern. Systems of tenets, therefore, are primarily studied not to refute other systems but to develop an internal force that can counteract one's own innate adherence to misapprehensions. These innate forms of ignorance are part and parcel of ordinary life. They are not just learned from other systems, nor do they just arise from faulty analysis. Thus, the stated aim of studying the different schools of philosophy is to gain insight into the fact that many of the perspectives basic to ordinary life are devoid of a valid foundation. This leads the adept to then replace these with well-founded perspectives. The process is achieved through (1) first engaging in hearing great texts on such topics and getting straight the verbal presentation, (2) then thinking on their meaning to the point where the topics are ascertained with valid cognition, and (3) finally meditating on the same to the point where these realizations become enhanced by the power of concentration so that they can counteract innate tendencies to assent to false appearances.

Since it is no easy matter to penetrate the thick veil of false facades and misconceptions, it became popular in the more scholastic circles of India to investigate not just what the current tradition considered to be the best and final system but also the so-called lower systems. This provided a gradual approach to subtle topics that avoided their being confused with less subtle ones. Within such an outlook, a literary genre that compared the views of the different schools of thought developed in India and became even more systematized in Tibet. That the primary concern was indeed with developing the capacity to appreciate the profound view of a high system of philosophy is evidenced by the amount of time actually spent by students probing the workings of the so-called lower schools. Since the philosophies of those schools were appreciated, they were studied in considerable detail.[page 172]

Because of the need to get a handle on the plethora of Buddhist systems, the genre of "presentations of tenets" assumed considerable importance in Tibet. The main Indian precursors were texts such as the Tarkajvālā ("Blaze of Reasoning") by Bhāvaviveka1 (500-570 C.E.?) (Ruegg: 61) and the Tattvasaṃgrahakārikā ("Compendium of Principles") by the eighth-century scholar Śāntarakṣita with a commentary by his student Kamalaśīla (see Jha). Both Śāntarakṣita and Kamalaśīla visited Tibet in the eighth century and strongly influenced the direction that Buddhism took there.

In Tibet, the genre came to be more highly systematized, the presentations assuming a more developed structure.2 Some of these texts are long; for instance, a lengthy text entitled Theg pa mtha' dag gi don gsal bar byed pa grub pa'i mtha' rin po che'i mdzod ("Treasury of Tenets, Illuminating the Meaning of All Vehicles") (GTRD) was written by the great fourteenth-century scholar Klong chen rab 'byams3 (1308-1363) of the rNying ma school of Tibetan Buddhism. Another, the Grub mtha' kun shes nas mtha' bral grub pa zhes bya ba'i bstan bcos rnam par bshad pa legs bshad kyi rgya mtsho ("Explanation of 'Freedom from Extremes through Understanding All Tenets': Ocean of Good Explanations") (GTKS), was authored by the great fifteenth-century scholar sTag tshang lo tsā ba Shes rab rin chen (b. 1405) of the Sa skya school. The latter criticized many of the views of the founder of the dGe lugs pa school, Tsong kha pa Blo bzang grags pa (1357-1419), as being self-contradictory. sTag tshang's text in turn gave rise to the most extensive text of this genre in Tibet; the Grub mtha'i rnam bshad rang gzhan grub mtha' kun dang zab don mchog tu gsal ba kun bzang zhing gi nyi ma lung rigs rgya mtsho skye dgu'i re ba kun skong ("Explanation of 'Tenets,' Sun of the Land of Samantabhadra Brilliantly Illuminating All of Our Own and Others' Tenets and the Meaning of the Profound [Emptiness], Ocean of Scripture and Reasoning Fulfilling All Hopes of All Beings") (GTCM), also known as Grub mtha' chen mo ("Great Exposition of Tenets"),4 by 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa'i rdo rje ngag dbang brtson grus (1648-1721), is written in large part as a refutation of sTag tshang lo tsā ba Shes rab rin chen. 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa's text is replete with citations of Indian sources but is written, despite its length, in a laconic style (unusual for him) that can leave one wondering about the relevance of certain citations. Perhaps [page 173] this was part of the reason why the eighteenth-century Mongolian scholar lCang skya rol pa'i rdo rje (1717-1786)—whose reincarnation 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa, then an old man, helped to find—composed a more issue-oriented text of the same genre entitled Grub pa'i mtha'i rnam par bzhag pa gsal bar bshad pa thub bstan lhun po'i mdzes rgyan ("Clear Exposition of the Presentations of Tenets, Beautiful Ornament for the Meru of the Subduer's Teaching") (GTDG).5 After 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa passed away, his reincarnation, dKon mchog 'jigs med dbang po (1728-1791), became lCang skya's main pupil. In 1733, dKon mchog 'jigs med dbang po wrote an abbreviated version of these texts, entitled Grub pa'i mtha'i rnam par bzhag pa rin po che'i phreng ba ("Presentation of Tenets, A Precious Garland") (GTRP) (see Sopa and Hopkins, 1990).

In this sub-genre of brief presentations of tenets are earlier texts such as the Grub mtha'i rnam gzhag ("Presentation of Tenets") (GTNZ) by rJe btsun Chos kyi rgyal mtshan (1469-1546), the Grub mtha' rgya mtshor 'jug pa'i gru rdzings ("Ship for Entering the Ocean of Tenets") (GTGD) by the second Dalai Lama dGe 'dun rgya mtsho (1476-1542), the Grub mtha'i rnam bzhag blo gsal spro ba bskyed pa'i ljon pa phas rgol brag ri 'joms pa'i tho ba ("Presentation of Tenets, Sublime Tree Inspiring Those of Clear Mind, Hammer Destroying the Stone Mountains of Opponents") (GTTB) by Paṇ chen bSod nams grags pa (1478-1554), and the Grub mtha' thams cad kyi snying po bsdus pa ("Condensed Essence of All Tenets") (GTDP) by Co ne ba Grags pa bshad sgrub (1675-1748).6 A medium-length presentation of tenets that also treats the other schools of Tibetan Buddhism in a biased fashion was written by lCang-skya's biographer and student, who was also a student of dKon mchog 'jigs med dbang po, Thu'u bkvan Blo bzang chos kyi nyi ma (1737-1802). His text is called Grub mtha' thams cad kyi khungs dang 'dod tshul ston pa legs bshad shel gyi me long ("Mirror of the Good Explanations Showing the Sources and Assertions of All Systems of Tenets") (GTSM).

Most likely, authors such as dKon mchog 'jigs med dbang po chose to write concise texts so that the general outlines and basic postures of the systems of tenets could be taught and memorized without the encumbrance of a great deal of elaboration. Sometimes, the brevity itself makes the issues being discussed inaccessible, but, at minimum, it provides a foundation for the student, who can memorize these short texts and use them as a locus for [page 174] further elaboration. The aim clearly is to provide an easy avenue for grasping issues that revolve around the nature of persons and phenomena according to a traditional system of education.

dKon mchog 'jigs med dbang po's text is exemplary of the genre. It presents the principal tenets of Indian schools, both Buddhist and non-Buddhist, treating six renowned non-Buddhist schools very briefly and then focusing on the four Buddhist schools and their main sub-schools. In the order of their presentation (the list of Buddhist schools represents an ascent in order of estimation) these are:

1. NON-BUDDHIST SCHOOLS
   1. Vaiśeṣika (Bye brag pa) and Naiyāyika (Rig pa can pa) (Particularists and Logicians)
   2. Sāṃkhya (Grangs can pa) (Enumerators)
   3. Mīmāṃsā (dPyod pa ba) (Analyzers or Ritualists)
   4. Nirgrantha (gCer bu pa) (The Unclothed, better known as Jaina [rGyal ba pa])
   5. Lokāyata (rGyang 'phan pa) (Hedonists)
2. BUDDHIST SCHOOLS
   1. Hīnayāna (Lesser Vehicle)
      1. Vaibhāṣika (Bye brag smra ba) (Great Exposition School)
         1. 18 sub-schools
      2. Sautrāntika (mDo sde pa) (Sūtra School)
         1. *Āgamānusārin (Lung gi rjes 'brangs) (Following Scripture)
         2. *Nyāyānusārin (Rigs pa'i rjes 'brangs) (Following Reasoning)
   2. Mahāyanā (Great Vehicle)
      1. Cittamātra (Sems tsam pa) (Mind Only School)
         1. *Āgamānusārin (Lung gi rjes 'brangs) (Following Scripture)
         2. *Nyāyānusārin (Rigs pa'i rjes 'brangs) (Following Reasoning)
      2. Mādhyamika (dBu ma pa) (Middle Way School)
         1. Svātantrika (Rang rgyud pa) (Autonomy School)
         2. Prāsaṅgika (Thal 'gyur pa) (Consequence School)[page 175]

The division of Buddhist philosophy into four schools is itself largely an artificial creation. For instance, the so-called Vaibhāṣika school is, in fact, a collection of at least eighteen schools that never recognized themselves as belonging to a single, overarching school. Also, their tenets are so various (some prefiguring Great Vehicle schools) that it is extremely difficult to recognize tenets common to all eighteen; thus, rather than attempting to do so, the Tibetan doxographers set forth representative tenets as explained in the root text of Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakośa ("Treasury of Manifest Knowledge") (see Shastri, Poussin) as if these constituted the general tenet structure of such an overarching system, even though they are merely typical of assertions found in these eighteen schools. This pretended amalgamation of many schools into one is a technique used to avoid unnecessary complexity that might hinder the main purpose of this genre of exegesis—the presentation of an ascent to the views of systems considered to be higher. Hence, in the Vaibhāṣika school there is a wide variety of opinion, a wide range of views some of which differ greatly from the kind of short general presentation that dKon mchog 'jigs med dbang po gives. Strictly speaking, even the name "Vaibhāṣika school" should be limited to followers of the Mahāvibhāṣā, an Abhidharma text that was never translated into Tibetan.

Also, the division of the Sautrāntika school into those following scripture and those following reasoning is highly controversial. The former are said to follow Vasubandhu's own commentary on his Abhidharmakośa, in which he indicates disagreement with many assertions of the Vaibhāṣika school as presented in his own root text. The latter—the Proponents of Sūtra Following Reasoning—are said to be followers of Dignāga and Dharmakīrti who (despite the fact that Dignāga and Dharmakīrti do not assert external objects) assert external objects—objects that are different entities from the consciousnesses perceiving them. Again, neither of these groups saw themselves as sub-divisions of a larger school called the Sautrāntika.

Similarly, the two sub-divisions of the Cittamātra school are those following scripture, who depend on the writings primarily of Asaṅga and his half-brother Vasubandhu (after the latter converted to Asaṅga's system), and those following reasoning, who depend on what is accepted to be the main system of Dignāga's and Dharmakīrti's writings. Again, it is unlikely that these two [page 176] groups perceived themselves as being sub-schools of a larger school. Rather, the groupings are the results of later schematizations that are based on similarities between their systems but are committed to the accepted dictum that there are only four schools of tenets.

Also, the names of the two sub-divisions of the Mādhyamika school—the Autonomy school and the Consequence school—were, as is clearly admitted by Tsong kha pa and his followers, never used in India. Rather, these names were coined in Tibet in accordance with terms used by Candrakīrti in his writings. Thus, the very format of the four schools and their sub-divisions does not represent a historical account of self-asserted identities but is the result of centuries of classification of systems in India and Tibet. Its purpose is to give the scholar a handle on the vast scope of positions found in Indian Buddhism.

Given this situation, the format of four schools can be seen as a horizon that opens a way to appreciate the plethora of opinions, not as one that closes and rigidifies investigation. In Tibet, students are taught this fourfold classification first, without mention of the diversity of opinion that it conceals. Then, over decades of study, students gradually recognize the structure of such presentations of schools of thought as a technique for gaining access to a vast store of opinion, as a way to focus on topics crucial to authors within Indian Buddhism. The task of then distinguishing between what is clearly said in the Indian texts and what is interpretation and interpolation over centuries of commentary becomes a fascinating enterprise for the more hardy among Tibetan scholars. The devotion to debate as the primary mode of education provides an ever-present avenue for students to challenge home-grown interpretations, and affords a richness of critical commentary within the tradition that a short presentation of tenets does not convey.

In dKon mchog 'jigs med dbang po's text, each Buddhist school is treated under four major topics, the last having numerous subdivisions:

1. Definition
2. Subschools
3. Etymology[page 177]
4. Assertions of tenets
   1. Assertions on the basis
      1. Objects: the two truths, etc.
      2. Object-possessors (i.e., subjects)
         1. Persons
         2. Consciousnesses
         3. Terms
   2. Assertions on the paths
      1. Objects of observation of the paths
      2. Objects abandoned by the paths
      3. Nature of the paths
   3. Assertions on the fruits of the paths

First, for general orientation, a reader is given a definition of the school, its sub-schools, and an etymology of its name. Then the tenets of the school are introduced. The topics considered under the heading of "assertions of tenets" reveal the soteriological orientation of the inquiry. The assertions are divided into three categories—presentations of the basis, the paths, and the fruits of the path. The presentation of the basis refers to assertions on classes of phenomena, which provide the basis for practicing the spiritual paths, which, in turn, produce attainments, the fruits of the path. It is clear from this order that the reason for philosophical learning about phenomena is to enable practice of a path that can transform the mind from being mired in a condition of suffering to being enlightened in a state of freedom.

The general structure of basis, paths, and fruits probably takes its lead from the emphasis in texts of the Mādhyamika School on three coordinated sets of twos:

1. (1) the two truths—conventional and ultimate—which are the basis
2. (2) the two practices—method and wisdom—which are the paths
3. (3) the two Buddha Bodies—Form Bodies and Truth Body— which are the final fruits of the path.

According to the Great Vehicle as described in these texts, taking as one's basis conventional truths, one practices the paths of method—love, compassion, and the altruistic intention to become enlightened as well the compassionate deeds that these induce—in dependence upon which one achieves the fruit of the Form Bodies [page 178] of a buddha. Also, taking as one's basis ultimate truths, one practices the paths of wisdom—especially the realization of the final status of persons and phenomena, their emptiness of inherent existence—in dependence upon which one achieves the fruit of a Truth Body of a buddha. This threefold format of basis, path, and fruit that finds its main expression in the Great Vehicle seems to have supplied the structure for the genre of presentations of tenets for both the Lesser Vehicle7 and the Great Vehicle.

Objects. Within the section on the basis, the emphasis on the two truths in all four schools derives from the fact that the two truths are a prime subject in the tenets of what is considered to be the highest school, the Mādhyamika. As Gung thang dKon mchog bstan pa'i sgron me (1762-1823),8 who was the chief student of dKon mchog 'jigs med dbang po, says, the prime way that the Vaibhāṣika school and the Sautrāntika school delineate the meaning of the scriptures is by way of the Four Noble Truths, whereas the Cittamātra school accomplishes this through the doctrine of the three natures and the Mādhyamika school through the doctrine of the two truths (see DN: 80, 235). Thus, the emphasis given in this presentation of tenets to the four schools' delineations of the two truths derives from the system that the author and his tradition have determined to be the highest, the Mādhyamika school. This is not to say that the two truths are not important topics in all four schools, for they are; rather, the two truths are not the central topic in the other schools in the way that they are in the Mādhyamika school.

Object-Possessors. Having presented a school's assertions on objects, the text considers object-possessors, or subjects. Object-possessors are treated as being of three types—persons (since they possess objects), consciousnesses (since they are aware of objects), and terms (since they refer to objects).

One might wonder why there is a section on persons if Buddhist schools advocate a view of selflessness. In this Tibetan delineation of Indian schools of Buddhism, the term "self" in "selflessness" refers not to persons but to an over-reified status of phenomena, be these persons or other phenomena. Consequently, even though it is said that in general "self" (ātman, bdag), "person" (pudgala, gang zag), and "I" (aham, nga) are coextensive, in the particular context of the selflessness of persons "self" and "person" are not at all coextensive and do not at all have the same meaning.[page 179] In the term "selflessness of persons," "self" refers to a falsely imagined status that needs to be refuted, and "persons" refers to existent beings who are the basis with respect to which that refutation is made. All of these schools, therefore, believe that persons exist. They do not claim that persons are mere creations of ignorance.

A question between the schools concerns the nature of the person. According to dKon mchog 'jigs med dbang po and his dGe lugs pa predecessors, all schools except the Mādhyamika Prāsaṅgika posit something from within the bases of designation of a person as being the person. In contrast, the Prāsaṅgika school holds that even though a person is designated in dependence upon mind and body, the person is neither mind nor body, being just the I that is designated in dependence upon mind and body. Following the lead of Candrakīrti, recognized by most as the founder of the Prāsaṅgika school, dKon mchog 'jigs med dbang po identifies how in the other schools some factor among the five aggregates (forms, feelings, discriminations, compositional factors, and consciousnesses) is considered to be the person when sought analytically. The Vaibhāṣikas, in general, are said to hold that the mere collection of the mental and physical aggregates is the person, whereas some of the five Saṃmitīya subschools are said to maintain that all five aggregates are the person—dKon mchog 'jigs med dbang po's suggestion being that, for them, each of the five aggregates is the person (although the absurdity of one person being five persons would seem difficult not to notice). Another subschool, the Avantaka, is said to assert that the mind alone is the person.

Similarly, in the Sautrāntika school, the Followers of Scripture are said to assert that the continuum of the aggregates is the person, whereas the Followers of Reasoning are said to maintain that the mental consciousness is the person. In the Cittamātra school, the Followers of Scripture hold that the mind-basis-of-all (ālayavijñāna, kun gzhi rnam par shes pa) is the person, whereas the Followers of Reasoning assert that the mental consciousness is. Again, in the Autonomy school, both Yogic Autonomists and Sūtra Autonomists are said to assert that a subtle, neutral mental consciousness is what is found to be the person when it is searched for among its bases of designation.

For the most part, dKon mchog 'jigs med dbang po's delineation of what these schools assert to be the person is a matter of conjecture and not a reporting of forthright statements of these [page 180] schools' own texts. Though it is clear that most of these schools (if not all) accept that persons exist, it is by no means clear in their own literature that they assert that something from within the bases of designation of a person is the person. Rather, it would seem that, as presented in Vasubandhu's commentary on the ninth chapter of his Abhidharmakośa,9 persons are merely asserted to be non-associated compositional factors (viprayuktasaṃskāra, ldan min 'du byed) and thus an instance of the fourth aggregate, compositional factors, without a specific identification of any of the five aggregates that are a person's bases of designation as the person. For instance, one could quite safely say that there is not a single line in the whole of Indian Cittamātra literature that explicitly asserts that the mind-basis-of-all is the person. Rather, such an assertion is deduced from the fact that Cittamātrins Following Scripture (that is to say, the followers of Asaṅga) assert that the mind-basis-of-all travels from lifetime to lifetime carrying with it the karmic predispositions established by earlier actions. Bhāvaviveka, on the other hand, seems openly to assert that the mental consciousness is the person, when, in response to a challenge, he says that if the opponent is attempting to establish for him that consciousness is the person, he is proving what is already established for him (see Hopkins, 1983: 695-696). In any case, the emphasis of the dGe lugs pa treatises on identifying, for each of these schools, what, from among the five aggregates, the person is comes from their acceptance of Candrakīrti's claim to a unique assertion that nothing from among them is the person.

Thus, it can be seen that the very structure (basis, paths, and fruits) and the choice of topics (such as the two truths and assertions on the person) do not altogether arise from prime concerns within each school, but are brought over from focal issues in other schools, particularly those considered to be higher. That topics of prime concern in the "higher" schools dominate to some extent the presentation of the tenets of all four schools is natural, given that the main aim is to draw readers into realizing the impact of the views of the "higher" systems. This genre never seeks to give isolated presentations of these schools' views or a predominantly historical account.

Consciousnesses. The main focus of the tenets concerning consciousness is to identify the different types of minds in terms of misapprehension and correct apprehension. The purpose is to provide a psychological structure for the therapeutic paths that cause [page 181] a person to proceed gradually from misconceived notions about the nature of persons and other phenomena to states of mind that can counteract innate misconceptions. The liberative directionality of the overall enterprise informs the course of the discussion, the main interest being to separate correctly perceiving from improperly perceiving consciousnesses and to identify the difference between conceptual and non-conceptual consciousnesses. The latter, when they realize selflessness, are considered to be more powerful for overcoming obstructions to liberation and to full enlightenment.

The topics of consciousness are presented in their richest detail in the chapter on the Sautrāntika school, specifically the Sautrāntika Following Reasoning; correspondingly, the topic of terms is discussed most fully in the chapter on the Vaibhāṣika school. Thus, in many respects such books are to be read cumulatively, bringing over to another system those assertions that, although they come from a different system, are concordant with its outlook. The book does not always make clear what is to be carried over and what is not; such information is, however, supplied by the oral tradition, i.e., by a competent teacher.

Paths. Having presented a general outline of phenomena, the basis, dKon mchog 'jigs med dbang po presents the various schools' tenets on the spiritual paths which are founded on their respective assertions about the basis. The paths are described in terms of (1) the main objects of meditation, (2) the main misconceptions that are abandoned through such meditation, and (3) the layout of the paths.

In all four schools, paths are presented for hearers (śrāvaka, nyan thos), solitary realizers (pratyekabuddha, rang rgyal), and bodhisattvas. It might seem, at first reading, to be surprising that even the Lesser Vehicle schools—the Vaibhāṣika and Sautrāntika schools—should have paths for bodhisattvas, since bodhisattvas are associated primarily with the Great Vehicle. However, a distinction is made between philosophical schools, which are divided into Lesser Vehicle and Great Vehicle, and practitioners of paths, which also are divided into Lesser Vehicle and Great Vehicle. The philosophical schools are divided in this way according to whether they present a selflessness of phenomena (Great Vehicle) or whether they do not (Lesser Vehicle). Since the Great Vehicle tenet systems—the Cittamātra and Mādhyamika schools—present a selflessness of phenomena in addition to a selflessness of persons, [page 182] they also speak of "obstructions to omniscience" (jñeyāvaraṇa, shes sgrib), these being what prevent simultaneous and direct cognition of all phenomena as well as their final nature. The Lesser Vehicle schools, on the other hand, make no such claims even though they present buddhahood as having an omniscience which can serially know anything, but not simultaneously.10

Even though the Lesser Vehicle schools—the Vaibhāṣika and Sautrāntika schools—do not present a path leading to simultaneous and direct knowledge of all phenomena, they do speak of the path of a bodhisattva proceeding to buddhahood when they relate how Śākyamuni Buddha, for instance, became enlightened. Similarly, the Great Vehicle schools—Cittamātra and Mādhyamika—speak, not just about how bodhisattvas proceed on the path but also about how hearers and solitary realizers, who are Lesser Vehicle practitioners, proceed on the path. In the latter case, the Great Vehicle schools are not reporting how the Lesser Vehicle schools present the path, but how the Great Vehicle schools themselves present the path for those beings—hearers and solitary realizers—whose prime motivation, unlike that of bodhisattvas, is, for the time being, not the welfare of others but their own liberation from cyclic existence. Therefore, it is said to be possible for someone who is, for instance, a Prāsaṅgika Mādhyamika doctrinally to be a Lesser Vehicle practitioner by motivation, in that the person has decided for the time being to pursue his or her own liberation first before becoming primarily dedicated to the welfare of others. Also, it is possible for someone who is, for instance, a Vaibhāṣika to be a Great Vehicle practitioner in terms of motivation, having become dedicated to achieving the enlightenment of a buddha in order to be of service to all beings.

Fruits of the Paths. The three types of paths—hearer, solitary realizer, and bodhisattva—have different results or fruits. The first two lead to liberation from cyclic existence, whereas the last leads to buddhahood, a state free from both the obstructions to liberation from cyclic existence and from the obstructions to the omniscience of a buddha, as described in the respective systems.

Though one of the purposes of such presentations of tenets undoubtedly is to create a hierarchical structure that puts one's own system at the top, this genre of literature functions primarily to [page 183] provide a comprehensive worldview. Its presentations, ranging from the phenomena of the world through to the types of enlightenment, give students a framework for study and practice as well as a perspective for relating with other beings. The worldview that emerges is of individuals bound by misconception in a round of suffering and mired in afflictive emotions counterproductive to their own welfare, but also poised on a threshold of transformation. The uncontrolled course of cyclic existence is viewed as lacking a solid underpinning; it is ready to be transformed into a patterned advance toward liberation. The starkness of the harrowing appraisal of the current situation of multilayered pain stands in marked contrast to the optimistic view of the development that is possible. Such optimism stems from a perception that the afflictive emotions and obstructions that are the cause of misery are not endemic to the mind, but are peripheral to its nature and thus subject to antidotal influences that can remove them. The hierarchical presentation, fortified with reasoned explanation, itself inculcates the basic posture that the power of reason can penetrate the false veils of appearance and lead to a liberative reality. Presentations of tenets are founded on confidence in the mind's ability to overcome tremendous obstacles to the point where love, compassion, and altruism can be expressed in effective, continuous activity, and, therefore, they do more than just structure Indian Buddhist systems; they structure practitioners' perception of their place in a dynamic worldview.

Dalai Lama II, dGe 'dun rgya mtsho

GTGDGrub mtha' rgya mtshor 'jug pa'i gru rdzings. Varanasi: Ye shes stobs ldan, 1969.

dKon mchog 'jigs med dbang po

GTRPGrub pa'i mtha'i rnam par bzhag pa rin po che'i phreng ba. In The Collected Works of dkon-mchog-'jigs-med-dbaṅ-po, vol. 6, pp. 485-535. New Delhi: Ngawang Gelek Demo, 1972. For a critical edition: K. Mimaki. Le Grub mtha' rnam bźag rin chen phreṅ ba de dKon mchog 'jigs med dbaṅ po (1728-1791).Zinbun14: 55-112. The Research Institute for Humanistic Studies, Kyoto University, 1977.

Grags pa bshad sgrub, Co ne ba

GTDPGrub mtha' thams cad kyi snying po bsdus pa. Delhi: Mey College of Sera, 1969.[page 185]

Gung thang dKon mchog bstan pa'i sgron me

DNDrang nges rnam 'byed kyi dga' 'grel rtsom 'phro legs bshad snying po'i yang snying. Sarnath: Guru Deva, 1965.

Hopkins, Jeffrey

1983Meditation on Emptiness. London: Wisdom.

1987Emptiness Yoga. Ithaca: Snow Lion.

Iida, Shotaro

1980Reason and Emptiness. Tokyo: Hokuseido.

'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa'i rdo rje ngag dbang brtson grus

GTCMGrub mtha'i rnam bshad rang gzhan grub mtha' kun dang zab don mchog tu gsal ba kun bzang zhing gi nyi ma lung rigs rgya mtsho skye dgu'i re ba kun skong/ Grub mtha' chen mo. Musoorie: Dalama, 1962.

Jha, G.

1937-39The Tattvasaṃgraha of Śāntirakṣita with the commentary of Kamalaśīla. Gaekwad's Oriental Series, vols. 80 and 83. Baroda: Oriental Institute.

Klein, Anne C.

1986Knowledge and Liberation: Tibetan Buddhist Epistemology in Support of Transformative Religious Experience. Ithaca: Snow Lion.

1990Knowing, Naming, and Negation. Ithaca: Snow Lion.

Klong chen rab 'byams

GTRDTheg pa mtha' dag gi don gsal bar byed pa grub pa'i mtha' rin po che'i mdzod. Gangtok: Dodrup Chen Rinpoche, 1969(?).

lCang skya rol pa'i rdo rje

GTDGGrub pa'i mtha'i rnam par bzhag pa gsal bar bshad pa thub bstan lhun po'i mdzes rgyan. Varanasi: Pleasure of Elegant Sayings Printing Press, 1970.

Lopez, Donald S., Jr.

l986A Study of Svātantrika. Ithaca: Snow Lion.

Mimaki, Katsumi

1982Blo gsal grub mtha'. Kyoto: Université de Kyoto.

Nyima, Geshé Ngawang

1970Introduction to the Doctrines of the Four Schools of Buddhist Philosophy. Leiden, N.p.

Paṇ chen bSod nams grags pa

GTTBGrub mtha'i rnam bzhag blo gsal spro ba bskyed pa'i ljon pa phas rgol brag ri 'joms pa'i tho ba. Buxador, n.d.[page 186]

Poussin, Louis de La Vallée

1923-31 L'Abhidharmakośa de Vasubandhu. Paris: Geuthner.

rJe btsun Chos kyi rgyal mtshan

GTNZGrub mtha'i rnam gzhag. Bylakuppe: Se-ra Byes Grwa-tshaṅ, 1977.

Ruegg, David Seyfort

1981The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.

Shastri, Swami Dwarikadas, ed.

1970Abhidharmakośa & Bhāṣya of Ācārya Vasubandhu with Sphuṭārtha Commentary of Ācārya Yaṣomitra. Bauddha Bharati Series5. Banaras: Bauddha Bharati.

Shes rab rin chen, sTag tshang lo tsā ba

GTKSGrub mtha' kun shes nas mtha' bral grub pa zhes bya ba'i bstan bcos rnam par bshad pa legs bshad kyi rgya mtsho. Thimphu: Kun bzang stobs rgyal, 1976.

Snellgrove, David L.

1987Indo-Tibetan Buddhism: Indian Buddhists and Their Tibetan Successors. Boston: Shambhala.

Sopa, Geshe Lhundup and Jeffrey Hopkins

1990Cutting Through Appearances: The Practice and Theory of Tibetan Buddhism. Ithaca: Snow Lion.

1976Practice and Theory of Tibetan Buddhism. London: Rider.

Thu'u bkvan Blo bzang chos kyi nyi ma

GTSMGrub mtha' thams cad kyi khungs dang 'dod tshul ston pa legs bshad shel gyi me long. Sarnath: Chhos Je Lama, 1963.

Back To Top

[page 187] Texts of the bsdus grwa genre were some of the most influential works of Tibetan philosophical literature, since more than any other genre of text they determined how scholastics in the predominant dGe lugs pa tradition of Tibetan Buddhism reasoned and conceptualized. The term bsdus grwa or bsdus rwa originally probably meant bsdus pa slob pa'i sde tshan gyi grwa or "the schools or classes in which [primary students] learn bsdus pa or summarized topics [of logic or dialectics]." Later, the term was etymologized as rig pa'i rnam grangs du ma phyogs gcig tu bsdus pa'i grwa, or "the class where many arguments are summarized together."1 In modern usage, the term has both a general and a more restricted meaning. bsDus grwa in its broad sense means the introductory course or classes in dialectics, which consist of the three categories: bsdus grwa (in the narrow sense; ontology), blo rigs (epistemology) and rtags rigs (logic). Without mastering these basic stages, a student cannot advance any further in the dGe lugs pa tradition of Tibetan Buddhist scholasticism.

Although there exist a few differences in the dGe lugs pa monastic curricula among different colleges, in the main there are five principal subjects to be taught, which are known as the "five books" (po ṭi lnga): (1) Pramāṇa (tshad ma), (2) Prajñāpāramitā (phar phyin), (3) Madhyamaka (dbu ma), (4) Vinaya ('dul ba), and (5) [page 188] Abhidharmakośa (mngon mdzod). Each of these subjects is divided into small classes (called 'dzin grwa), and by advancing through these classes—a process which takes at least ten years—one can finally attain the degree of dge bshes (see Newland, in this volume).

Here we should remark that the last four of these five subjects, i.e., Prajñāpāramitā, Madhyamaka, Vinaya and Abhidharmakośa, are studied in direct dependence upon original Indian texts (rgya gzhung). As for Pramāṇa, however, the initial study by dGe lugs pa monks is undertaken exclusively on the basis of the native Tibetan bsdus grwa literature, rather than Indian texts, and at this initial stage the subject of study is commonly called bsdus grwa or rigs lam, instead of tshad ma (pramāṇa: Indian Buddhist logic and epistemology) properly speaking.

All monastic universities are composed of a number of grwa tshang, or self-supported colleges, and most of these colleges have a few khang tshan, or regional houses. Students live in khang tshans associated with their native place, and during the school term they attend their appointed class ('dzin grwa) in the grwa tshang. One year is divided into seven or eight school terms. Apart from the two terms of mid summer and mid winter, lessons are held inside the college.2

As we have said, the course of bsdus grwa can be divided into the following three stages: bsdus grwa (in the narrow sense), blo rigs and rtags rigs. Roughly speaking, these three treat of ontology, epistemology and logic, respectively. This threefold classification is sometimes expressed as the study of "objects" (yul), "subjects" (yul can), and "the ways to cognize objects" (yul de rtogs pa'i tshul). The precise contents of bsdus grwa texts are not completely uniform, but these texts do nonetheless share a corpus of principal subjects or "lessons" (rnam bzhag).

Let us now briefly examine the contents of bsdus grwa, blo rigs and rtags rigs by focusing on a few representative subjects. The first stage of the primary course is bsdus grwa in its narrow sense, generally comprised of three lessons. The first, which is common to all colleges, is known as "kha dog dkar dmar," which literally means "white and red colors." Some colleges even assign a separate class ('dzin grwa) to the subject. At this stage, students learn [page 189] about the notion of pervasion or entailment (khyab pa), as occurs, for example, between white color and color itself—the former entailing the latter. Similarly, students learn to differentiate between general propositions involving pervasions, such as "whatever is red must be a color" (dmar po yin na kha dog yin pas khyab), and those involving specific topics (chos can), such as "take as the topic, red; it is a color" (dmar po chos can kha dog yin) (see Tillemans: 286).

In the next class, called gzhi grub (literally, "established bases"), students are introduced to some ontological notions construed more or less in accordance with the system of the Indian Sautrāntika school, especially as it is portrayed by Dharmakīrti. Here again, students pay special attention to the inclusions and differentiations holding among the key concepts.

After completing this initial class, students proceed to the next, where they learn more abstract and theoretical notions. At this level, schemata necessary for logical thinking such as concept (ldog pa, literally "isolate"), cause and effect (rgyu dang 'bras bu), genus and species (spyi dang bye brag), relations and contraries ('brel ba dang 'gal ba) and definition and definiendum (mtshan nyid dang mtshon bya) are introduced and examined.3 In the last class of this first stage, students learn to use the thal 'gyur (prasaṅga) argumentation form, i.e., "consequences" or "reductio ad absurdum" (see Onoda, 1986, 1988) and other logical operators such as "implicative negations" and "non-implicative negations" (ma yin dgag dang med dgag). In short, the purpose of this first stage, i.e., bsdus grwa as more narrowly conceived, is not only to introduce students to basic theoretical schemata, but also to allow them to acquire the practical mastery of debating techniques which will be indispensable for more advanced dialectical study.

When a student has finished the initial stage of bsdus grwa classes, he is allowed to proceed to the next stage, i.e., blo rigs, which is largely concerned with epistemological matters. The main subjects are the classifications of cognition in terms of "valid and invalid means of cognition" (tshad ma dang tshad min), "conceptual and non-conceptual cognition" (rtog pa dang rtog med), "self-awareness and other-awareness" (rang rig dang gzhan rig) and "mind and mental factors" (sems dang sems byung). These classifications in turn frequently admit of sub-classifications. For example, invalid means of cognition (tshad min) is divided into five: subsequent cognition (dpyad shes), true presumption (yid dpyod), inattentive cognition (snang la ma nges pa), doubt (the tshom), and erroneous [page 190] cognition (log shes). Valid means of cognition (tshad ma) is divided into two: direct perception (mngon sum gyi tshad ma) and inference (rjes su dpag pa'i tshad ma). It should be noted that this type of sevenfold division of cognition (blo rigs bdun du dbye ba) is said to have originated with Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge (1109-1169) (see van der Kuijp, 1979).

The last stage, rtags rigs (see Onoda, 1981), introduces an Indian type of logic centered around the elaboration of the threefold criteria—the so-called tshul gsum (or trairūpya)—which enables one to distinguish between correct, or valid, logical marks (rtags yang dag) and those which are invalid, or more literally are pseudo-marks (rtags ltar snang).

These three types of texts—bsdus grwa, blo rigs and rtags rigs—teach students the practical applications of disputation or debate (rtsod pa). One of the main reasons why adepts of such a training are called mtshan nyid pa is that they pay special attention to terms and definitions (mtshan nyid), memorizing them and analysing them for inconsistencies, insufficiencies and redundancies. A further reason as to why this preliminary training is so indispensable is that the school manuals (yig cha) for advanced classes such as Prajñāpāramitā and Madhyamaka are written in the special style and format which we find in bsdus grwa texts. This format, where arguments are presented largely by means of prasaṅgas (thal 'gyur), was christened thal phyir, or "sequence and reason," by Stcherbatsky (55), who maintained that it probably had its origins with Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge (see Jackson, 1987: 152, n. 28; cf. van der Kuijp, 1983: 294, n. 220).

Both the conventional style and contents of the so-called bsdus grwa literature are widely said to have originated with the eighteen bsdus grwa subjects of Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge. According to A khu rin po che's list of rare books, Phya pa wrote two Pramāṇa summaries: one entitled Tshad [ma'i] bsdus [pa] yid kyi mun sel (MHTL 11805) and the other Tshad ma'i bsdus pa yid kyi mun sel rang 'grel dang bcas pa (MHTL 11804). Probably one was a verse work and the other was its autocommentary. According to Śākya mchog ldan (1428-1507), Phya pa wrote not only these Pramāṇa summaries but also an dBu ma bsdus pa ("Madhyamaka Summary"). Aside from Phya pa, other scholars of gSang phu Monastery are also [page 191] said to have written texts entitled bsdus pa. For instance, rGya dmar ba Byang chub grags who was a student of rNgog lo tsā ba (1059-1109) is said to have written several Tshad ma'i bsdus pa (MHTL 11810).4 gTsang nag pa brTson 'grus seng ge (twelfth century) wrote an dBu ma'i bsdus pa. Chu mig pa (thirteenth century) who was an abbot of gSang phu Upper Monastery, also wrote a Tshad ma bsdus pa (NTTR: 453). Even among the works of 'U yug pa (thirteenth century) of the early Sa skya pa we can find the title bsDus pa rigs sgrub, though this may simply be an abridgment of his famous Pramāṇa work. Although we cannot be sure about the contents of these works until the texts themselves appear, the term bsdus pa in their titles probably can be translated as "Summary." But as noted above, such a term was not used only for Pramāṇa summaries in the early period (twelfth to thirteenth centuries).

According to Klong rdol bla ma (1719-1794/5),5 Phya pa summarized Pramāṇa theories into the following eighteen subjects in his Tshad ma'i bsdus pa yid kyi mun sel:

1. (1) white and red colors (kha dog dkar dmar)
2. (2) substantial phenomena and conceptual phenomena (rdzas chos ldog chos)
3. (3) contraries and non-contraries ('gal dang mi 'gal)
4. (4) genus and species (spyi dang bye brag)
5. (5) related and unrelated ('brel dang ma 'brel)
6. (6) difference and non-difference (tha dad thad [= tha dad] min)
7. (7) positive and negative concomitances (rjes su 'gro ldog)
8. (8) cause and effect (rgyu dang 'bras bu)
9. (9) the three times (snga bcan bar bcan phyi bcan)
10. (10)definition and definiendum (mtshan mtshon)
11. (11) [prasaṅgas] with multiple reasons and multiple predicates (rtags mang gsal mang)
12. (12) exclusionary negations and determinations (dgag pa phar tshur)
13. (13) direct and indirect contraries (dngos 'gal rgyud 'gal)
14. (14) equal pervasions (khyab mnyam)
15. (15) being and non-being (yin gyur min gyur)
16. (16) negation of being and negation of non-being (yin log min log)
17. (17) cognizing existence and cognizing nonexistence (yod rtogs med rtogs)
18. (18) cognizing permanence and cognizing real entities (rtag rtogs dngos rtogs)[page 192]

The great scholar Sa skya Paṇḍita Kun dga' rgyal mtshan (1182-1251), in his Tshad ma rigs pa'i gter, criticised many of Phya pa's theories, showing how the latter's ideas differ from those of Indian Buddhist philosophers, who for Sa paṇ were the only source of authentic Buddhism. Sa skya Paṇḍita's criticisms relied predominantly on Dharmakīrti's own texts, with the result that after Sa paṇ, the theoretical focus of Pramāṇa studies in Tibet slowly but gradually shifted away from Phya pa's so-called Tibetan style to Sa skya Paṇḍita's more Indian-based orientation. Nonetheless, on the practical level, most dGe lugs pa and to some extent even Sa skya pa scholars continued to practice Phya pa's style of logic, debating on such typical Phya pa subjects as substantial and conceptual phenomena (rdzas chos ldog chos), even though some were aware that such subjects were simply Tibetan in origin.6 Especially in the dGe lugs pa school, with the establishment of the big monastic universities, it was the bsdus grwa tradition propagated by Phya pa that continued as the primary practice for beginners in dialectics.

About three centuries after Phya pa's activity, mChog lha 'od zer (1429-1500),7 who occupied the abbatial seat of gSang phu just as Phya pa had previously done, composed the manual known as the Ra bstod bsdus grwa. This text was widely used as the beginner's manual not only in the dGe lugs pa monasteries but also, it is said, in one or two Sa skya pa seminaries (such as at modern Na-lendra). mChog lha 'od zer wrote this text mostly based on Phya pa's tradition but also adopted a few elements of Sa skya Paṇḍita's position.8

Even after the three major dGe lugs pa monasteries in the Lhasa area had developed their own sets of debate manuals (yig cha), the Ra bstod bsdus grwa was still used by dGe lugs pa monks when they began their basic Pramāṇa studies. Another famous bsdus grwa text, the bTsan po bsdus grwa, was written at the Ra bstod college of gSang phu by gSer khang pa Dam chos rnam rgyal (seventeenth century), who served as the twenty-first abbot of the Ra bstod college, i.e., fourteen abbots later than mChog lha 'od zer (Vostrikov: 61) (see Onoda, 1989c, 1991). Unfortunately, since the text is lost, we know only the subject headings in the bTsan po bsdus grwa, but [page 193] they can be seen to exhibit a close resemblance to those of mChog lha 'od zer's work.9

The bTsan po bsdus grwa was written in response to a request from Ngag dbang 'phrin las lhun grub (1622-1699). The word "bTsan po" stands for "bTsan po no mon han," which was the honorific title of Ngag dbang 'phrin las lhun grub, the teacher of the celebrated dGe lugs pa author of scholastic manuals 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa'i rdo rje (1648-1721), who in turn served as the teacher of Sras Ngag dbang bkra bshis (1678-1738), author of the influential Sras bsdus grwa used in 'Bras spungs sGo mang College. So, in short, we can say that Ngag dbang 'phrin las lhun grub was probably the person who served as the link between the 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa tradition of bsdus grwa and the bsdus grwa tradition which had been handed down at gSang phu Monastery since Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge.

It is as yet unknown how many bsdus grwa texts Ngag dbang 'phrin las himself actually wrote, but we are informed (van der Kuijp, 1989: 16) that he wrote a bsDus grwa'i rnam bzhag cha tshang ba'i rig gnas legs bshad bang mdzod (Smith: 70), which has the following six subjects:

1. (1) pervasions (khyab mtha')
2. (2) negation of being and negation of non-being (yin log min log)
3. (3) cause and effect (rgyu 'bras)
4. (4) definition and definiendum (mtshan mtshon)
5. (5) genus and species (spyi bye brag)
6. (6) substantial phenomena and conceptual phenomena (rdzas ldog)

It should be noted that in the Complete Works of 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa'i rdo rje there is a bsdus grwa text entitled Kha dog dkar dmar,10 which has exactly the same six subjects as Ngag dbang 'phrin las lhun grub's shorter work. Here then is possible further confirmation of the relationship between the gSang phu lineage of bsdus grwa studies of Ngag dbang 'phrin las and that of sGo mang College.

The Complete Works of 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa'i rdo rje has four other titles which are concerned with bsdus grwa:11

1. (1) Presentation of bsdus grwa called "elegant description" (bsDus grwa'i rnam bzhag legs par bshad pa)[page 194]
2. (2) A summary of the advanced presentation of prasaṅga (Thal 'gyur che ba'i rnam bzhag mdor bsdus)
3. (3) Advanced presentation of bsdus grwa called "the golden key to open the art of science" (bsDus chen gyi rnam bzhag rigs lam gser gyi sgo 'byed)
4. (4) The essence of bsdus grwa called "the treasury of whole presentations" in verse (bsDus sbyor gyi snying po kun bsdus rig pa'i mdzod rtsa tshig)

In addition to these bsdus grwa of 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa, a number of other influential bsdus grwa texts were written as college manuals for the dGe lugs pa monastic universities.12 Blo gsal gling College of 'Bras spungs Monastery used Paṇ chen bSod nams grags pa's (1478-1554) bsdus grwa. sGo mang College used not only the above-mentioned bsdus grwas of 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa, but also that of Ngag dbang bkra shis, which was commonly known as the Khri rgan tshang gi bsdus grwa or Sras ngag dbang bkra shis bsdus grwa because the author was a chief disciple (sras) of 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa'i rdo rje (Vostrikov: 61).13

Perhaps nowadays the most widely used bsdus grwa is the Phur lcog bsdus grwa, which was adopted as a school manual in the Byes pa College of Se ra Monastery (Perdue). The text is also called the Yongs 'dzin bsdus grwa (Onoda, 1981) because its author, Phur bu lcog Byams pa tshul khrims rgya mtsho dpal bzang po (1825-1901), was the personal teacher (yongs 'dzin) of the Thirteenth Dalai Lama.14

The bsdus grwa of the Sa skya pa has so far hardly been studied at all. Here I will just enumerate the few such treatises known to me, without trying to indicate their relation to the dGe lugs pa bsdus grwa or earlier gSang phu traditions. To begin with, 'U yug pa Rigs pa'i seng ge (b.1250s or 1260s) who was a disciple of Sa skya Paṇḍita, is said to have written a (Tshad ma'i) bsDus pa which was entitled bsDus pa rigs sgrub (ZNDG: 469.3) or bsDus don rigs pa'i sdom (DGPK: 323). According to the list of the sDe dge printing house, a certain Byang chub dpal wrote a Tshad bsdus legs bshad rig pa'i 'od zer (DGPK: 145) and this may be an early Sa skya pa tshad ma'i bsdus pa. The outstanding scholastic gYag ston Sangs rgyas dpal (1348-1414) wrote a rtags rigs work (SCNT: 74). Likewise, mKhas grub bstan gsal (fl. fifteenth century), disciple of [page 195] Byams chen rab 'byams pa (1411-1485), is said to have written a Tshad ma'i rtags rigs chen mo (see van der Kuijp, 1989: 17). Go rams pa bSod nams seng ge (1429-1489) is said to have learned bsdus grwa in Khams using the bsDus grwa of dGe ba rgyal mtshan (1387-1462), who was the third abbot of Na-lendra Monastery (Jackson, 1989: 34). Go rams pa's disciple Kong ston dBang phyug grub (late 1400s), who was the second abbot of rTa nag Thub bstan rnam rgyal Monastery, wrote a Tshad ma'i spyi don blo rtag[s] (SKKC: 67). In about the same period, Glo bo mkhan chen bSod nams lhun grub (1456-1532) wrote blo rigs and rtags rigs texts entitled Blo'i rnam bzhag sde bdun gyi snying po and rTags kyi rnam bzhag rigs lam gsal ba'i sgron me (Jackson, 1987: 564). Such works continued to appear in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Mang thos Klu sgrub rgya mtsho (1523-1596), for instance, is said to have written a Blo rigs chen po (mo?) (SKKC: 100), and the famous Sa skya pa scholar Ngag dbang chos grags (1572/3-1641/2) wrote a blo rigs entitled Blo rigs gi legs bshad (SKKC: 108). Within the later lineage of Go rams pa's monastery, rTa nag Thub bstan rnam rgyal, there appeared the most famous recent Sa skya pa bsdus grwa, the Chos rnam rgyal gi bsdus grwa. A copy of this text is preserved at the Library of Tibetan Works and Archives, Dharamsala. The author, Chos rnam rgyal (fl. seventeenth century) also wrote a rtags rigs.16 The most recent of such works in the Sa skya pa tradition were written by Blo gter dbang po (1847-1914?), who also got his initial training at rTa nag Thub bstan rnam rgyal Monastery. The bsdus grwa works he composed were entitled Blo rigs zur bkol, rTags rigs zur bkol (SKKC: 162), and Tshad ma rtags rigs skor gtan la 'bebs par byed pa sde bdun sgo brgya 'byed pa'i 'phrul gyi lde'u mig (DGPK: 326).

The bsdus grwa logic was not just a training exercise, but was important for all levels of Tibetan philosophical studies in the gSang phu and dGe lugs pa traditions. As for the relationship to the Indian tradition, only a careful and detailed investigation and comparison of the bsdus grwa literature and the more Indian-based rigs gter tradition of the Sa skya school will enable us to discriminate meaningfully between the Indian and Tibetan elements in this system of logic. At any rate, the importance of this complex Indo-Tibetan relationship should not be underestimated. Anyone [page 196] who wishes to investigate seriously the indigenous Tibetan commentaries on such key Indian texts as the Pramāṇavārttika is confronted immediately by the fact that much of the terminology and many of the concepts used in such commentaries owe a heavy debt to the bsdus grwa.

A khu chin Shes rab rgya mtsho

MHTLdPe rgyun dkon pa 'ga' zhig gi tho yig: Materials for a History of Tibetan Literature. Part 3, pp. 503-601. Śata-Piṭaka Series30. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1963.

bKra shis rdo rje, Ko btso

DGPKsDe dge'i par khang rig gnas kun 'dus gzhal med khang chos mdzod chen mo bkra shis sgo mang gi dkar chag rdo rje'i chos bdun ldan pa'i lde'u mig. Si khron: Si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1983.

Goldberg, Margaret E.

1985Entity and Antimony in Tibetan bsdus grwa Logic. Parts I and II. Journal of Indian Philosophy 13: 153-199, 273-304.

Horváth, Zoltán

1987 Review of van der Kuijp (1983). Indo-Iranian Journal 30/4: 314-321.[page 199]

Jackson, David P.

1987The Entrance Gate for the Wise. Vienna: Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde17, Parts 1 and 2.

1989The Early Abbots of 'Phan po Na-lendra: The Vicissitudes of a Great Tibetan Monastery in the 15th Century. Vienna: Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde23.

'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa'i rdo rje

JYSBThe Collected Works of 'Jam-Dbyaṅs-Bźad-Pa'i-Rdo-Rje, Reproduced from prints from the Bkra-śis-'khyil blocks. Ed. by Ngawang Gelek Demo. 15 vols. Gedan Sungrab Minyam Gyunphel Series, vols. 40-54. New Delhi: 1972-74.

'Jam dbyangs mChog lha 'od zer

RTDGTshad ma rnam 'grel gyi bsdus gzhung shes bya'i sgo 'byed rgol ngan glang po 'joms pa gdong lnga'i gad rgyangs rgyu rig lde mig, Rwa stod bsdus grwa. Dharamsala: Library of Tibetan Works and Archives, 1980.

Klong rdol bla ma Ngag dbang blo bzang

TNMGTshad ma rnam 'grel sogs gtan tshig rig pa las byung ba'i ming gi grangs. Śata-Piṭaka Series100, pp. 660-712. New Delhi: 1973.

van der Kuijp, Leonard

1979Phya-pa Chos-kyi seng-ge's Impact on Tibetan Epistemological Theory.Journal of Indian Philosophy 5: 355-369.

1983Contributions to the Development of Tibetan Buddhist Epistemology. Alt- und Neu-Indische Studien26. Wiesbaden.

1989An Introduction to Gtsang-nag-pa's Tshad-ma rnam-par nges-pa'i ti-ka legs-bshad bsdus-pa, An Ancient Commentary on Dharmakirti's Pramāṇaviniścaya. Otani University Collection No. 13971. Kyoto: Otani University Tibetan Works SeriesII.

Kun dga' grol mchog

SCNTPaṇḍita chen po Śākya mchog ldan gyi rnam par thar pa zhib mo rnam par 'thag pa. In Collected Works of Śākya mchog ldan, vol. 16, pp. 1-233. Thimphu: 1975.

mKhan po A pad et al., compilers

SKKCdKar chag mthong bas yid 'phrog chos mdzod bye ba'i lde mig: A Bibliography of Sa skya pa Literature. New Delhi: Ngawang Topgyal, 1987.

Onoda Shunzo

1979Chibetto no sōin ni okeru mondō no ruikei [Pattern of the Tibetan Monacal Debate]. Bukkyō Shigaku Kenkyū [The Journal of the History of Buddhism] 22/1: 1-16.

1981The Yoṅs 'Dzin rTags Rigs: A Manual for Tibetan Logic. Studia Asiatica5. Nagoya University.[page 200]

1982Chibetto ni okeru ronrigaku kenkyū no mondai [Primary Course in Tibetan Monastic Universities]. Tōyō Gakujutsu Kenkyū [The Journal of Oriental Studies] 21/2: 193-205.

1983rJes 'gro ldog khyab ni tsuite [On rJes 'gro ldog khyab]. Indogaku Bukkyōgaku Kenkyū [Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies] 32/1: 437-434.

1986Phya pa Chos Kyi Seng Ge's Classifications of Thal 'Gyur.Berliner Indologische Studien, Band 2: 65-85.

1988On the Tibetan Controversy Concerning the Various Ways of Replying to Prasaṅgas.The Tibet Journal 13/2: 36-41.

1989aChibetto no Gakumonji [Tibetan Monastic Universities]. Iwanamikoźa Tōyōshiso [Oriental Thoughts]. Series 11, chapter 3.1, pp. 352-373. Iwanami Shoten: Tokyo.

1989bbsDus grwa sho no keifu [Genealogy of bsdus grwa literature]. Indogaku Bukkyōgaku Kenkyū [Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies] 37/2: 825-819.

1989cThe Chronology of the Abbatial Successions of the Gsaṅ phu sne'u thog Monastery.Wiener Zeitshrift für die Kunde Südasiens 33: 203-213.

1991Abbatial Successions of the Colleges of gSang phu sNe'u thog Monastery.Bulletin of the National Museum of Ethnology 15/4: 1049-1071.

1992Monastic Debate in Tibet—A Study on the History and Structures of Bsdus Grwa Logic. Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde27. Vienna.

Perdue, Daniel Elmo

1976Introductory Debate in Tibetan Buddhism. Dharamsala: Library of Tibetan Works and Archives, 1976.

Phur bu lcog Ngag dbang byams pa

PKPBGrwa sa chen po bzhi dang rgyud pa stod smad chags tshul pad dkar 'phreng ba: Three Karchacks. Gedan Sungrab Series13, pp. 46-169. New Delhi: 1970.

Śākya mchog ldan

ZNDGChos kyi 'khor lo bskor ba'i rnam gzhag ji ltar grub pa'i yi ge gzu bor gnas pa'i mdzangs pa dga' byed. In his Collected Works, vol. 16, pp. 457-482. Thimphu: 1975.

NTTRrNgog lo tstsha ba chen pos bstan pa ji ltar bskyangs pa'i tshul mdo tsam du bya ba ngo mtshar gtam gyi rol ma. In his Collected Works, vol. 16, pp. 443-456. Thimphu: 1975.

Smith, Gene

1969Tibetan Catalogue. Seattle: University of Washington.

Stcherbatsky, Th.

1932Buddhist Logic. Leningrad; reprint Tokyo: Meicho-Fukyū-kai, 1977.[page 201]

Su dhi pra sha ka and Sras Ngag dbang bkra shis

SNDGTshad ma'i dgongs don rtsa 'grel mkhas pa'i mgul rgyan. Ed. by DMu dge bSam gtan. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1987.

Tillemans, Tom J. F.

1989Formal and Semantic Aspects of Tibetan Buddhist Debate Logic.Journal of Indian Philosophy 17: 265-297.

Vostrikov, A.

1935-37Some Corrections and Critical Remarks on Dr. Johan van Manen's Contribution to the Bibliography of Tibet.Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 8: 60-62.

Back To Top

[page 202] Yig cha are the required textbooks in the curriculum of Tibetan Buddhist monastic colleges (grwa tshang). They may be called "debate manuals" because they are often structured around a series of debates which provide rich fodder for the oral debates characteristic of Tibetan monastic education. The word yig cha literally means "record" or "notes." Debate manuals have value both as explicit doctrinal records of the evolution of Buddhist thought and as implicit social records of attitudes among educated monks toward faith, reason, education, and tradition. The genre can be traced back almost a millennium, with new works still appearing in this century.

Often composed by distinguished scholars at the invitation of their colleges, many debate manuals are actually Tibetan sub-sub-commentaries pertaining to Indian Buddhist treatises (śāstras) such as Dharmakīrti's Pramāṇavārttika, Maitreya's Abhisamayālaṃkāra, and Candrakīrti's Madhyamakāvatāra. Thus, while debate manuals are by definition pedagogical works, intended to inform and to stimulate debate, the most noteworthy examples of the genre also involve elements of creative exegesis, polemic, and/or philosophical synthesis. If we believe that earlier formulations of a religious view are somehow more pure or more authentic—and therefore more worthy of academic concern—then we may dismiss debate manuals, along with Tibetan doxography (grub mtha') and [page 203] "grounds and paths" (sa lam) literature, as derivative, synthetic, post-classical scholasticism. However, if our interest is the life of Buddhist philosophy across generations of Tibetan scholars, and if we seek to know not just where tradition began but how it is remembered (and thus reshaped), then we must give debate manuals their due.

In the monastic colleges of the dGe lugs school debate manuals have been the primary focus of intellectual life for the last five or six centuries. This is certainly not to depreciate the enormous importance of Tsong kha pa Blo bzang grags pa (1357-1419) as the preeminent scholar and revered founder of the order, nor to imply a lack of reverence for Śākyamuni and the authors of the Mahāyāna treatises. Tibetan scholars do rely upon debate manuals for exegetical guidance through the "great books" of their tradition. The present Dalai Lama has reminded monks that they should not neglect to study Tsong kha pa's own writings. Yet the issuance of such a reminder, unnecessary for the best scholars, is indicative of the typical student's tendency to acquire Tsong kha pa's system in a secondhand way, relying heavily on the convenient and precise formulations of the debate manuals. Insofar as the colleges traditionally regard their manuals as ideal reformulations of the essential points of the treatises and commentaries, the focus on the manuals has tended to displace scholastic attention to the "great books."1

Monastic debate manuals bridge both historical and stylistic gaps by explicating the content of classical treatises in language patterned after and readily (re)assimilated to the scholastic oral debate tradition. Debate manuals, or substantial portions from them, are memorized by students and serve as the basis for (1) commentary by the teacher during class, and (2) debate among the students in the monastery courtyard after class. Thus, these manuals link the philosophy of the classical treatises to the living philosophy of courtyard debate, creating a shared universe for discourse among teachers and students of the same college. In Tibetan monastic debate, arguments must be framed as syllogisms (prayoga, sbyor ba) or consequences (prasaṅga, thal 'gyur), and the respondent must either challenge the sign (liṅga, rtags) (i.e., the minor premise), or the pervasion (vyāpti, khyab pa) (i.e., the major premise), or else accept the opponent's point. The same rules structure the debates in the manuals. Most manuals break down the [page 204] material into a series of topics, covering each topic in a tripartite schema: (1) debates refuting opposing systems (dgag pa), (2) a presentation of the author's own system (rang lugs bzhag pa) of definitions (mtshan nyid), etc., and (3) further debates dispelling objections (rtsod spong) posed by actual or hypothetical critics. This format allows authors to sharpen their arguments while creating text that their debate-trained readers find relatively easy to memorize for use in the courtyard. Conversely, debate manual authors must have derived some of their written debates from oral debates current in their respective colleges and generations.

Goldstein (21) estimates that twenty-six percent of traditional Tibet's male population were monks. Although Tibetans generally regard monks as superior to laymen, this high percentage is one reason that the official charisma of the robes was not potent enough to mark monks as an exclusive élite. In the dGe lugs, the dominant order of Tibetan Buddhism since the seventeenth century, scholarly achievement has been one of the most important paths into the élite circles of leadership. To understand this fact, we must reflect on the relationship between reason and liberation in Tsong kha pa's philosophy.

Like other Buddhists, Tsong kha pa and his dGe lugs pa followers contend that liberation from beginningless cycles of suffering is reached through non-dualistic (advaya, gnyis med) and trans-conceptual insight (nirvikalpajñāna, rtog med ye shes) into reality (dharmatā, chos nyid). However, for the dGe lugs pa this insight is not a spontaneous, naturally arising, objectless intuition. Rather it is something that must be gradually and systematically cultivated, and it has a specific, rationally comprehensible object—emptiness (śūnyatā, stong pa nyid). Although emptiness is the very nature of the mind, realization (rtogs pa) of this natural emptiness is a hard-won accomplishment. Realization of emptiness depends not only upon prior training in ethics, but upon conceptual mastery of what "emptiness" is and how logic can be used to approach it.

This philosophical stance reinforced the religious and political authority of those who controlled educational institutions equipped to provide the requisite training in logic and philosophy.2 Traditionally, much of dGe lugs education was controlled by [page 205] large monasteries near Lhasa, especially 'Bras spungs, Se ra and dGa' ldan.3 Each major monastic university comprised a number of colleges, each college having its own support personnel, its own temples, its own debate manuals, its own faculty, and its own abbot (mkhan po). Some colleges focused on tantric studies, while others existed only in theory or in vestigial forms; the major colleges that concern us here are sGo mang and Blo gsal gling at 'Bras spungs, sMad and Byes at Se ra, and Shar rtse and Byang rtse at dGa' ldan. While education was a major function of these institutions, at any given time most of the monks at the monastic universities were not students. Goldstein (24) reports, for example, that at the middle of this century the monks at the sMad college of Se ra monastery numbered 2,800; of these only 800 were students. Few of these students could expect to complete the entire monastic curriculum; most would find other vocations within the monastery. Thus, degree-holders were, and today remain, a small élite within the monastic community.

An education at a big monastery is not presumed necessary for spiritual development, but there is an implication that study at these monasteries represents a rare and invaluable spiritual opportunity for those who can withstand its rigors. Advancement through the curriculum and academic hierarchy of these institutions is presumed to reflect the attainment of (at least) the conceptual knowledge and analytical skills prerequisite to yogic realization. The colleges of 'Bras spungs, Se ra and dGa' ldan monasteries give the title dge bshes to scholars passing exams at the end of twenty to twenty-five years of study. The charismatic valence of this title is apparent when one considers that the Sanskrit equivalent of the title dge bshes—kalyāṇamitra, usually translated "spiritual friend"—is a standard epithet of a guru, i.e., a spiritual master.

Traditionally, considerable wealth and power accumulated in the hierarchies of these prestigious institutions; they played important religious, political, economic, and even military roles in the history of Tibet. Far-flung networks of affiliated monasteries not only provided a feeder system for promising students and appropriate sinecure for graduates, but also offered channels for political intercourse. The abbots of the major colleges were among the most important figures in Tibetan politics. Because the abbots were always selected from the ranks of the dge bshes, mastery of [page 206] the monastic syllabus—including expert knowledge of the debate manuals—was an important path "out of the ranks" into charismatic office and political power. While incarnate lamas (sprul sku) achieved their status otherwise, they were at least in principle expected to pass through the same educational system.

Intercollegiate solidarity within the large monasteries tends to be weak. Each functioning college has its own chapel ('du khang), staff, and debate manuals. As Goldstein (26-29) notes, when monks at Se ra Byes revolted against the central government in 1947, Se ra sMad did not help them; when 'Bras spungs Blo gsal gling quarrelled with the Dalai Lama in 1921, 'Bras spungs sGo mang did not take their side. A monk's strongest loyalties are to his college and his regional house (khang tshan), a sub-collegiate unit with membership traditionally based on natal province. Some colleges have traditional regional affiliations based on the provinces represented by their constituent houses; thus, rivalries between colleges within a monastery may have a regional flavor. Each college maintains the hagiographical tradition of its most important author and, to a certain extent, takes his assertions as orthodoxy. Rivalries still rage between contiguous colleges using different textbooks. At 'Bras spungs, doctrinal disputes between Blo gsal gling and sGo mang turn on differences so thin that one hesitates to call them "philosophical." Yet analytical debate of such differences plays an enormous role in the manuals and the lives of those who use them. In debate with other colleges (during the winter session and at sMon lam) each monk is expected to uphold, insofar as possible, the assertions of his college's manuals. Outside the context of debate with other colleges, dGe lugs monks differ greatly in their attitudes toward "debate manual orthodoxy." Many regard their teachers and manuals as sources of unassailable truth, using their definitions as absolute reference points. On the other hand, there are always those who "consider the knowledge imparted to them as a tool...accepted provisionally in order to advance" on a quest that is at once philosophical and spiritual (Dreyfus: 10-12).

Many of the most important Mādhyamika debate manuals are sub-commentaries on Tsong kha pa's dGongs pa rab gsal, his commentary [page 208] on Candrakīrti's Madhyamakāvatāra.4 These manuals also include relevant citations of sūtra and other Indian Mādhyamika texts, along with references to Tsong kha pa's Rigs pa'i rgya mtsho, Legs bshad snying po, Lam rim chen mo, and Lam rim 'bring, mKhas grub dGe legs dpal bzang po's sTong thun chen mo and rGyal tshab's sPyod 'jug rnam bshad. The authors of extant debate manuals on Madhyamaka include: Śānti pa Blo gros rgyal mtshan (fifteenth century), who wrote for the 'Khyil gang College of bKra shis lhun po Monastery; mKhas sgrub bsTan pa dar rgyas (1493-1568) and Grags pa bshad sgrub (1675-1748), authors for the sMad College of Se ra; rJe btsun Chos kyi rgyal mtshan (1469-1546), author for the Byes college of Se ra and the Byang rtse College of dGa' ldan;5 sGom sde shar pa Nam mkha' rgyal mtshan (1532-1592), a student of rJe btsun Chos kyi rgyal mtshan and an author for the Byes College of Se ra as well as the Byang rtse College of dGa' ldan; Khyung phrug Byams pa bkra shis (sixteenth century), another student of rJe btsun Chos kyi rgyal mtshan and an author for the Byang rtse College of dGa' ldan; Paṇ chen bSod nams grags pa (1478-1554), author for the Blo gsal gling College of 'Bras spungs and the Shar rtse College of dGa' ldan; and 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa Ngag dbang brtson 'grus (1648-1721), author of the texts of the sGo mang College of 'Bras spungs as well as the bKra shis 'kyil Monastery, which he founded.6

Paṇ chen bSod nams grags pa, rJe btsun Chos kyi rgyal mtshan, and 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa are the best known and most influential of the Mādhyamika debate manual authors. In their textbooks on Madhyamaka, these writers share two main goals: (1) to provide a basis for instruction in the fundamentals of Madhyamaka philosophy, and (2) to confirm the fundamental coherence of Tsong kha pa's system by refuting contrary interpretations and rebutting critics. Born in the same century during which Tsong kha pa and his immediate disciples died, and flourishing prior to the sect's attainment of political supremacy, rJe btsun pa and Paṇ chen see the founder and his early followers in the light of a charisma slightly less magnificent than that appreciated by later generations. Paṇ chen, in particular, boldly overthrows the assertions of mKhas grub and rGyal tshab when they conflict with his own conclusions (see BZSG: 61a and BJGL: 47a-47b). The work of rJe btsun pa and Paṇ chen seems quite terse when compared to 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa's elaborate grappling with myriad doctrinal complications. 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa's Mādhyamika manual is more [page 209] ambitious than others in its attempts (1) to demonstrate the fidelity of Tsong kha pa to his Indian sources and (2) to reconcile apparent contradictions among Tsong kha pa, mKhas grub, and rGyal tshab. Thriving in the heyday of dGe lugs power, 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa is also more deferential to Tsong kha pa's spiritual "sons" (sras)—mKhas grub and rGyal tshab. When he cannot reconcile a literal (tshig zin) reading of mKhas grub or rGyal tshab with his own understanding of Tsong kha pa, he works to reconcile the intentions (dgongs pa) behind their words.7

The following brief excerpt from 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa's Mādhyamika debate manual illustrates how instruction, polemic, and exegesis can be finely woven on the framework of the debate format. We find the author citing Candrakīrti's Prasannapadā and Madhyamakāvatāra in order to rebut attacks by Tsong kha pa's Sa skya pa critic, sTag tshang lo tsā ba Shes rab rin chen (b. 1405). 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa attempts to show that sTag tshang, in his critique of the dGe lugs presentation of valid cognition (tshad ma, pramāṇa) of conventional phenomena, adopts a position that Candrakīrti specifically refutes. At the same time, 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa implicitly offers a solution to an exegetical problem in the Prasannapadā.

In his discussion of the term lokasaṃvṛti ('jig rten gyi kun rdzob; worldly conventionality" or "worldly concealer"), Candrakīrti (PP: 493) first seems to say that the word loka ("world") does not imply a contrasting aloka ("non-world"). Yet Candrakīrti then appears to reverse himself, writing (PP: 493), "Yet, in one way there is such a non-world. Those who have erroneous vision because their senses have been impaired by opthalmia, blue eye-film, jaundice, etc. are not worlds." Many scholars ignore or gloss over Candrakīrti's initial denial. 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa thinks he can explain the intent of the initial denial, but he embeds his answer in a refutation of sTag tshang. A key feature of sTag tshang's presentation of conventionalities (saṃvṛti, kun rdzob) is the distinction between worldly conventionalities and yogic conventionalities (GTKN: 266). By citing Candrakīrti's denial of non-worldly conventionalities in refutation of sTag tshang, 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa suggests that Candrakīrti's initial denial is intended to rule out a special category [page 210] of non-worldly, yogic conventionalities.

'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa then uses a hypothetical objection as an opportunity to reconcile his reading of the Prasannapadā with earlier comments on the Madhyamakāvatāra. Confident that in a few brief strokes he has unravelled a passage in the Prasannapadā, aligned it with the Madhyamakāvatāra, and refuted sTag tshang, 'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa cannot resist concluding on a self-congratulatory note. He writes (BMC: 541-542):

Incorrect Position held by sTag tshang the Translator: [Candrakīrti's] use of the word loka ["world"] in the phrase lokasaṃvṛti ('jig rten gyi kun rdzob) precludes Superiors having in their continuums conventional valid cognitions (tha snyad pa'i tshad ma) that perceive conventional truths (saṃvṛtisatya, kun rdzob bden pa).8

Correct Response: It follows that this is incorrect because [Candrakirti's] statement of loka [in "lokasaṃvṛti"] is descriptive; it is not [made] for the sake of applying analyses such as [yours]. This is because Candrakīrti's Prasannapadā (493) says:

Is there also a saṃvṛti that is not worldly from which a worldly saṃvṛti could be thus distinguished? This [word "worldly"] describes how things are. That analysis [which assumes that since saṃvṛti is sometimes modified by "worldly," there must also be an unworldly saṃvṛti] does not apply here.

 

Incorrect Position with regard to this: It [absurdly] follows that worldly conventionalities (lokasaṃvṛti, 'jig rten gyi kun rdzob) are not divided into conventionalities that are real for the world ('jig rten gyi yang dag pa'i kun rdzob) and conventionalities that are unreal for the world ('jig rten gyi log pa'i kun rdzob) because [according to you] "world" (loka, 'jig rten) is stated [merely] for descriptive purposes [and not in order to differentiate two types of conventionalities].9 If you accept the consequence, it follows that your explanation that in Candrakīrti's Madhyamakāvatāra (104) worldly conventionalities are of two types—those that are real from a worldly perspective and those that are unreal from a worldly perspective—is incorrect.

Correct Response: The original reason [—that "world" is stated for descriptive purposes in the Prasannapadā—] certainly does not entail the consequence [—that worldly conventionalities are not divided into conventionalities that are real for the world and conventionalities that are unreal for the world—] because, since the erroneous—i.e., false—consciousnesses of one whose sense powers have been impaired by jaundice, etc., are not the world in relation to whose perspective something is posited as [page 211] real, Candrakīrti says "worldly conventional truth" (lokasaṃvṛtisatya) in order to make that point understood.10 This is because Candrakīrti's Prasannapadā (493.2-4) says:

Yet in one way there is [such a non-world]. Those who have erroneous vision because their senses have been impaired by opthalmia, blue eye-film,11 jaundice, etc. are not worlds. That which is a conventionality for them is not a worldly conventional truth (lokasaṃvṛtisatya).12 Therefore, a worldly conventional truth is distinguished from that.

 

Since it seems that even many former scholars did not explain13 this, I have written a little clearly.

From a dGe lugs religious perspective, debate manuals engender analytical skills and lay the foundations of right view, thus providing a solid conceptual basis from which yogic inquiry into the nature of reality can proceed. We may also observe that (1) minor differences among the manuals are focal points for the intellectual expression of collegial solidarity and intercollegiate tensions, while (2) their far broader commonalities in structure and content contribute to the socialization of the monastic élite within a shared worldview.

Candrakīrti

MAMadhyamakāvatāra. Tibetan translation: P no. 5261, vol. 98 in The Tibetan Tripiṭaka (see Suzuki).

PPMūlamadhyamakavṛttiprasannapadā. In Mūlamadhaymakakārikās de Nāgārjuna avec la Prasannapadā Commentaire de Candrakīrti. Ed. by Louis de la Vallée Poussin. Bibliotheca Buddhica4. Osnabrück: Biblio Verlag, 1970. Tibetan: P no. 5260, vol. 98 in The Tibetan Tripiṭaka (see Suzuki); and Jacques May, Prasannapadā Madhyamakavṛtti, douze chapitres traduits du sanscrit et du tibétain. Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1959.

Dharmakīrti

PVPramāṇavārttikakārika. In Pramāṇavārttika of Acharya Dharmakīrti. Ed. by Swami Dwarikadas Shastri. Varanasi: Bauddha Bharati, 1968. Tibetan: P no. 5709, vol. 130 in The Tibetan Tripiṭaka (see Suzuki).

Dreyfus, Georges B. J.

1987Definition in Buddhism. M.A. thesis. Charlottesville: University of Virgina.[page 214]

Goldstein, Melvyn C.

1989A History of Modern Tibet, 1913-1951: The Demise of the Lamaist State. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Grags pa bshad sgrub

BMYGdBu ma la 'jug pa'i dgongs pa yang gsal sgron me shes bya ba'i tshig 'grel spyi don mtha dpyod zung 'brel du bshad pa. New Delhi: Lha mkhar yongs 'dzin bstan pa rgyal mtshan, 1972.

Guṇaprabha

VSVinayasūtra. Tibetan translation: P no. 5619, vol. 123 in The Tibetan Tripitaka (see Suzuki).

Hopkins, Jeffrey

n.d.Reflections on Reality: The Nature of Phenomena in the Mind-Only School. Unpublished ms.

'Jam dbyangs bzhad pa Ngag dbang brtson 'grus

BMCdBu ma chen mo/ dBu ma 'jug pa'i mtha' dpyod lung rigs gter mdzod zab don kun gsal skal bzang 'jug ngogs. In his Collected Works, vol. 9. New Delhi: Ngawang Gelek Demo, 1972. Also, Buxaduor: Gomang, 1967.

Khyung phrug Byams pa bkra shis

BMKNdBu ma la 'jug pa'i rnam bshad dgongs pa rab gsal gyi dka' ba'i gnas gsal bar byed pa legs bshad skal bzang mgul rgyan. New Delhi: Lha mkhar yongs 'dzin bstan pa rgyal mtshan, 1974.

Klein, Anne

1986Knowledge and Liberation. Ithaca: Snow Lion.

Maitreya

AAAbhisamayālaṃkāra. In Abhisamayālaṃkāra-Prajñāpāramitā-Upadeśa-śastra. Ed. by Th. Stcherbatsky and E. Obermiller. Bibliotheca Buddhica22. Osnabrück: Biblio Verlag, 1970. Tibetan: P no. 5184, vol. 88 in The Tibetan Tripiṭaka (see Suzuki).

mKhas sgrub bsTan pa dar rgyas

BMLGbsTan bcos chen po dbu ma la 'jug pa'i spyi don rnam bshad dgongs pa rab gsal gyi dgongs pa gsal bar byed pa'i blo gsal sgron me. New Delhi: Lha mkhar yongs 'dzin bstan pa rgyal mtshan, 1972.

GRTPrNam bshad dgongs pa rab gsal gyi mtha dpyod rigs pa'i rgya mtsho blo gsal gyi' jug sgo. New Delhi: Lha mkhar yongs 'dzin bstan pa rgyal mtshan, 1972.

mKhas grub dGe legs dpal bzang po

TTCsTong thun chen mo/ Zab mo stong pa nyid rab tu gsal bar byed pa'i bstan bcos skal bzang mig 'byed. Dharamsala: Shes rig par khang, n.d.[page 215]

Newland, Guy

1984Compassion: A Tibetan Analysis. London: Wisdom.

1992The Two Truths. Ithaca: Snow Lion.

Paṇ chen bSod nams grags pa

BJGLdBu ma la 'jug pa'i brgal lan zab don yang gsal sgron me. In his Collected Works, vol. ja. Mundgod: Drebung Loseling Library Society, 1985.

BZSGdBu ma'i spyi don zab don gsal ba'i sgron me. In his Collected Works, vol. ja. Mundgod: Drebung Loseling Library Society, 1985.

Perdue, Daniel

1992Debate in Tibetan Buddhism. Ithaca: Snow Lion.

rJe btsun Chos kyi rgyal mtshan

BMPDbsTan bcos dbu ma la 'jug pa'i rnam bshad dgongs pa rab gsal gyi dka' gnad gsal bar byed pa'i spyi don legs bshad skal bzang mgul rgyan. New Delhi: LHa mkhar yongs 'dzin bstan pa rgyal mtshan, 1973.

Roerich, George N., trans.

1979Blue Annals. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

sGom sde shar pa Nam mkha' rgyal mtshan

TZKNThal bzlog gi dka' bai gnas gtan la 'bebs pa. New Delhi: LHa mkhar yongs 'dzin bstan pa rgyal mtshan, 1973.

Sopa, Geshe Lhundup

1983Lectures on Tibetan Religious Culture, vol. 1. Dharamsala: Library of Tibetan Works and Archives.

sTag tshang lo tsā ba shes rab rin chen

GTKNGrub mtha' kun shes nas mtha' bral grub pa zhes bya ba'i bstan bcos rnam par bshad pa legs bshad kyi rgya mtsho. Thimphu: Kun bdzang stobs rgyal, 1976.

Suzuki, D.T., ed.

1956The Tibetan Tripiṭaka. Tokyo-Kyoto: Tibetan Tripitaka Research Foundation.

Śānti pa Blo gros rgyal mtshan

GRKNrNam bshad dgongs pa rab gsal gyi dka' ba'i gnad gsal bar byed pa'i bstan bcos dbang gi rgyal po. New Delhi: Lha mkhar yongs 'dzin bstan pa rgyal mtshan, 1973.

Tsong kha pa Blo bzang grags pa

GPRSdGongs pa rab gsal/ dBu ma la 'jug pa'i rgya cher bshad pa dgongs pa rab gsal. P no. 6143, vol. 154 in The Tibetan Tripiṭaka (see Suzuki).[page 216]

LRBLam rim 'bring/ Byang chub lam gyi rim pa chung ba. P no. 6002, vols. 152-153 in The Tibetan Tripiṭaka (see Suzuki).

LRCLam rim chen mo/ sKyes pa gsum gyi rnyams su blang ba'i rim pa thams cad tshang bar ston pa'i byang chub lam gyi rim pa. P no. 6001, vol. 152 in The Tibetan Tripiṭaka (see Suzuki).

LSNPLegs bshad snying po/ Drang ba dang nges pa'i don rnam par phye ba'i bstan bcos legs bshad snying po. P no. 6142, vol. 153 in The Tibetan Tripiṭaka (see Suzuki).

RPGTRigs pa'i rgya mtsho/ dBu ma rtsa ba'i tshig le'ur byas pa shes rab ces bya bai' rnam bshad rigs pa'i rgya mtsho. P no. 6153, vol. 156 in The Tibetan Tripiṭaka (see Suzuki).

Back To Top

Bernabeo, P.

1987Apologetics. In Encyclopedia of Religion, vol. 1, pp. 349-353. Ed. by Mircea Eliade. New York: Macmillan.

Demiéville, Paul

1952Le concile de Lhasa.Bibliothèque de l'Institut des Hautes Études Chinoises7. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale de France.

Gómez, Luis O.

1987Purifying Gold: The Metaphor of Effort and Intuition in Buddhist Thought and Practice. In Sudden and Gradual: Approaches to Enlightenment in Chinese Thought, pp. 67-165. Ed. by Peter N. Gregory. Studies in East Asian Buddhism5. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Hopkins, Jeffrey

1983Meditation on Emptiness. London: Wisdom.

Karmay, Samten G.

1988The Great Perfection: A Philosophical and Meditative Teaching of Tibetan Buddhism. Leiden: E. J. Brill.

lCang skya rol pa'i rdo rje

GNTZGrub pa'i mtha'i rnam par bzhag pa gsal bar bshad pa thub bstan lhun po'i mdzes rgyan. Sarnath, India: Pleasure of Elegant Sayings Press, 1970.[page 227]

Lopez, Donald S.

1991Paths Terminable and Interminable. In Paths to Liberation: The Mārga and its Transformations in Buddhist Thought, pp. 147-192. Ed. by Robert Buswell and Robert Gimello. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Michael, Franz

1982Rule by Incarnation: Tibetan Buddhism and Its Role in Society and State. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

Ruegg, D. S.

1988A Karma Bka' Brgyud Work on the Lineages and Traditions of the Indo-Tibetan Dbu Ma (Madhyamaka). In Orientalia Iosephi Tucci Memoriae Dicata, pp. 1249-1280. Ed. by G. Gnoli and L. Lanciotti. Serie Orientale Roma56/3. Rome: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente.

1989Buddha-nature, Mind and the Problem of Gradualism in a Comparative Perspective: On the Transmission and Reception of Buddhism in India and Tibet. Jordan Lectures in Comparative Religion13. London: School of Oriental and African Studies.

Sahajavajra

Tattvadaśakaṭikā. P no. 3099, vol. 68 in The Tibetan Tripiṭaka (see Suzuki).

Schleiermacher, Friedrich

1977Brief Outline on the Study of Theology. Trans. by Terrence N. Tice. Atlanta: John Knox Press.

Se ra rJe btsun pa (rJe btsun chos kyi rgyal mtshan)

GLZab mo stong pa nyid kyi lta ba la log rtog 'gog par byed pa'i bstan bcos lta ba ngan pa'i mun sel zhes bya ba bshes gnyen chen po go bo rab 'byams pa bsod nams seng ge ba la gdam pa. The work has been published in India under the abbreviated title lTa ngan mun sel, vol. 2. New Delhi: Champa Chogyal, 1969.

KLgSung lan klu sgrub dgongs rgyan. New Delhi: Champa Chogyal, 1969.

SLZab mo stong pa nyid kyi lta ba la log rtog 'gog par byed pa'i bstan bcos lta ba ngan pa'i mun sel zhes bya ba bshes gnyen chen po shākya mchog ldan pa la gdams pa. The work has been published in India under the abbreviated title lTa ngan mun sel, vol. 1. New Delhi: Champa Chogyal, 1969.

Sekiguchi S.

1967Daruma no Kenkyō. Tokyo: Iwanami.[page 228]

Snellgrove, David

1987Indo-Tibetan Buddhism: Indian Buddhists and Their Tibetan Successors. 2 vols. Boston: Shambhala.

Sørenson, Per

1986A Fourteenth Century Tibetan Historical Work: Rgyal-rabs gsal-pa'i me-loṅ: Author, Date, and Sources—A Case Study. Copenhagen: Akademisk Forlag.

Stoddard, Heather

1985Le Mendiant de l'Amdo. Recherches sur la Haute Asie9. Paris: Société d'Ethnographie.

Suzuki, D. T., ed.

1956The Tibetan Tripiṭaka. Tokyo-Kyoto: Tibetan Tripitaka Research Foundation.

Tucci, Giuseppe

1958Minor Buddhist Texts. Part 2: First Bhāvanākrama of Kamalaśīla. Serie Orientale Roma9/2. Rome: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente.

Williams, Paul

1983A Note on some Aspects of Mi skyod rdo rje's Critique of dGe lugs pa Madhyamaka.Journal of Indian Philosophy11: 125-145.

Yanagida, S.

1983The Li-tai fa-pao chi and the Ch'an Doctrine of Sudden Awakening. In Early Ch'an in China and Tibet, pp. 13-49. Ed. by Whalen Lai and Lewis R. Lancaster. Buddhist Studies Series5. Berkeley: Asian Humanities Press.

Back To Top

[page 229] The Tibetan bstan rim ("Stages of the Doctrine") genre consists of works that expound the general Mahāyāna Buddhist doctrine—i.e., the bodhisattva's path—following a graded series of topics that leads from the spiritual status of the beginning bodhisattva to the final goal of a buddha's perfect awakening. A bstan rim (short for bstan pa'i rim pa) can be classified within Tibetan Buddhist literature as a separate genre allied to the lam rim ("stages of the path") type. Or, it can be considered the second main literary sub-type of the lam rim as more generally conceived, with the lam rim proper as the first sub-type.

A lam rim proper is a work that expounds the stages of the path of the three individuals (skyes bu gsum gyi lam gyi rim pa), i.e., it aims at being a complete introduction to spirituality, leading the student through the stages of the two lower spiritual orientations or "individuals" (who aspire for a better rebirth and for individual liberation), before reaching the highest level, that of the Mahāyāna "great individual" (who aspires to attain buddhahood for the benefit of all living beings). Treatises of this type normally conclude with a brief introductory mention of Tantra. The genre is primarily[page 230] associated with Atiśa Dīpaṃkaraśrījñāna (ca. 982-1054) and the followers of his bKa' gdams order. Its prototype and main textual base was the Byang chub lam sgron (Bodhipathapradīpa) of Atiśa himself. The series of smaller and larger lam rims by Tsong kha pa (1357-1419) are now the best-known examples.

The related bstan rim genre should, for the sake of precision, be classified as distinct from the lam rim proper. The best-known early examples of the bstan rim were written by teachers from the school of rNgog Blo ldan shes rab (1059-1109) and his followers at gSang phu Ne'u thog, such as Gro lung pa (fl. late 1000s to early 1100s), but varieties of this basic type seem to have been composed in the 1100s and early 1200s also by scholars of the bKa' brgyud and Sa skya orders. It seems likely that both the Thar pa rin po che'i rgyan of sGam po pa (1079-1153) and the Thub pa'i dgongs gsal of Sa skya Paṇḍita (1182-1251) are either the direct descendants of earlier examples of this genre or were heavily influenced by them. In the following pages I will describe the structure and contents of several important examples of this type of treatise.

Within the Tibetan tradition, the best-remembered early example of the bstan rim is that of Gro lung pa Blo gros 'byung gnas (fl. second half of the eleventh century to the early twelfth century). Thu'u bkwan Chos kyi nyi ma (1737-1802) (GSM, vol. kha: 7b), for instance, mentions both a greater and lesser bstan rim in his account of Gro lung pa's studies and writings,1 concluding with the remark:

Because the bsTan rin chen mo is a matchless explanation of the intended purport of [Atiśa's] Byang chub lam sgron ("Lamp on the Path of Awakening"), Tsong kha pa too when he studied it began his reading with worship through various offerings, and he wrote his own Lam rim chen mo largely in conformity with it.

The work of Gro lung pa survived down to the present time in part, no doubt, because Tsong kha pa had valued it so highly.2 But one of the more tangible reasons for its present accessibility is that certain early- or mid-nineteenth-century dGe lugs pa teachers commissioned its carving onto blocks at the Zhol printing-house near Lhasa. Those printing blocks were reportedly destroyed in the[page 231] 1960s during the Cultural Revolution, but at least two prints survived outside Tibet—one in a Mongolian temple and one at the Bihar Research Society, Patna (cat. no. 1289; Jackson 1989: 164-165).

The full title of the work is bDe bar gshegs pa'i bstan pa rin po che la 'jug pa'i lam gyi rim pa rnam par bshad pa (TRCM) ("Exposition of the Stages of the Path for Entering the Jewel of the Sugata's Doctrine"). The treatise is monumental in its length and scope, being a veritable encyclopedia of Buddhism in the early "later-propagation period" (phyi dar) on a scale probably never before attempted by the Tibetans—and it is an important source for understanding the particular doctrinal and scholastic developments that occurred within the school of rNgog Blo ldan shes rab by the early twelfth century (though no doubt reflecting some mainstream bKa' gdams pa influences too). The work has a rambling, discursive style of presentation and is not structured according to a minutely detailed subject outline. Nevertheless, its chapters present ten main topics in a practical order:

1. (1) How to study under a religious teacher (8a-37a)
2. (2) How to cultivate an awareness of the value of a human life that is free from the conditions that obstruct the practice of religion (37a-47a)
3. (3) How to cultivate an awareness of death and impermanence (47a-55a)
4. (4) How to cultivate an understanding of the working of moral causation (55a-152a)
5. (5) How to cultivate an awareness of the faults of cyclic existence (152a-183a)
6. (6) How to cultivate the "thought of awakening" (183a-213a)
7. (7) How to engage in the conduct of the bodhisattva (213a-345a)
8. (8) How to cultivate meditatively a realization of ultimate reality (345a-447a)
9. (9) How to cultivate the "levels" (bhūmi, sa) of the bodhisattva (447a-507a)
10. (10) How one attains the fruit, the level of buddhahood (507a-546a)

It also contains numerous scriptural quotations, which is another reason it should one day be carefully studied and indexed.[page 232]

Another treatise of this sort is the famed Thar pa rin po che'i rgyan ("Jewel Ornament of Liberation") of Dwags po lha rje sGam po pa bSod nams rin chen (1079-1153), well known among English readers thanks to the translation by H. V. Guenther (1959). Like Gro lung pa's work, it too is an exposition of the bodhisattva path, and it probably was written in the next few decades after Gro lung pa completed his own bstan rim. In its overall structure, the Thar pa rin po che'i rgyan is more penetratingly and broadly conceived, though in its individual chapters it omits none of the former's main topics. Its structure thus may represent an original plan conceived by sGam po pa himself. Nevertheless, since it also does not follow the typical organization of the teachings according to the three spiritual individuals, it can provisionally be classified here as more of a bstan rim than a lam rim. Thus, when 'Gos lo tsā ba mentions in his Blue Annals (DN: nya 25b) that sGam po pa composed a "bstan rim treatise of the bKa' gdams tradition" (bka' gdams kyi bstan pa'i rim pa' bstan bcos), he probably is referring to this work.

The treatise is divided into six main topics:

1. (1) The motivating cause for attaining highest awakening: the "buddha nature" (tathāgatagarbha, bde gshegs snying po)
2. (2) The corporal basis for achieving awakening: the precious human existence
3. (3) The contributing condition that impels one to achieving it: the religious teacher
4. (4) The means for achieving it: the instructions of the religious teacher
5. (5) The fruit that is so achieved: the "bodies" (kāyas) of buddhahood
6. (6) The enlightened activities that follow the attainment of buddhahood, i.e., the benefitting of living beings through the buddha's activities free from conceptual thought

When sGam po pa actually expounds these in more detail, he divides his treatise into twenty-one chapters, one chapter for each main section except for section four, to which sixteen chapters are devoted. That arrangement is quite understandable, because it is this section that contains the instructions on the general preparations,[page 233] the bodhisattva's perfections, etc. Thus, sections three through nine of Gro lung pa would fit into section four of the Thar pa rin po che'i rgyan, each comprising a chapter or more.

Particularly noteworthy here is sGam po pa's exposition of the "motivating cause," a subject missing as a separate chapter topic in Gro lung pa's work. (It remains for future investigation to determine how Gro lung pa treats the subject of the "buddha nature" [tathāgatagarbha] or the theory of gotra [rigs] in the body of his treatise.) sGam po pa also includes at the end a section that is lacking in Gro lung pa's work as a separate section. It has to do with the nature of the enlightened activities of buddhahood that manifest themselves spontaneously and without conceptual thought.3

The author of this next bstan rim was Phag mo gru pa rDo rje rgyal po (1110-1170), one of sGam po pa's most influential disciples and the father of eight sub-schools within the Dwags po bKa' brgyud school. Phag mo gru pa had studied under various teachers before meeting sGam po pa, including Sa chen Kun dga' snying po (1092-1158) and the bKa' gdams pa dge bshes Dol pa. Thu'u bkwan records (GSM, vol. kha: 6b-7a) that Phag mo gru pa also wrote a treatise of the bstan rim type, implying that it was influenced by Dol pa's teachings.4

Like Gro lung pa's work, this treatise is divided into ten main sections. Yet by including a section on what kind of individual can act as a suitable recipient and on the necessary qualities such as faith, Phag mo gru pa shifts the emphasis, perhaps reflecting the teachings of sGam po pa, who similarly devoted a chapter to these topics.5

Phag mo gru pa treats these stages more as the essential preparation for meditation practice. The bodhisattva's discipline is included within chapter nine, which deals with the production of "the thought of awakening," and the tenth chapter is remarkably inclusive since it contains not only an exposition of the final meditation on ultimate reality through integrated wisdom and compassion, but also a discussion of the attainment of the fruit of buddhahood. The wording of the treatise's title is perhaps also of significance: Sangs rgyas kyi bstan pa la rim gyis 'jug pa'i tshul (STRJ), "How to Enter into the Buddha's Doctrine by Stages." Does the[page 234] phrase "by stages" reflect a "gradual" versus "simultaneous" (rim gyis pa/ cig char ba) distinction Phag mo gru pa may have learned from sGam po pa? Also noteworthy are the appearance in the final chapter of decisive quotations from songs of realization (dohās), e.g., by Saraha (STRJ: 46, 47b), many of which sGam po pa had cited. The work thus probably dates to sometime after Phag mo gru pa's meeting with sGam po pa (i.e., to the period ca. 1150-1170).

The ten chapters of Phag mo gru pa's work are:

1. (1) The individual who practices this path, and faith (1b-2b)
2. (2) The defining characteristics of the teacher (3b-8a)
3. (3) The difficulty of obtaining a human life that is free from the conditions that obstruct the practice of religion (8a-11b)
4. (4) The awareness of death (11b-14a)
5. (5) The cultivation of an awareness of the faults of cyclic existence (14a-17b)
6. (6) The taking of refuge (17b-21a)
7. (7) Moral causation and the prātimokṣa (monastic) vows (21a-25b)
8. (8) The cultivation of benevolence and compassion (25b-30b)
9. (9) Producing the "thought of awakening" (30b-45b)
10. (10) The fruit, i.e., the three "bodies" of buddhahood (45b-52a)

Phag mo gru pa lists eleven sub-sections for chapter nine, in which the six perfections (39b) and the four means of attraction (bsdu ba'i dngos po bzhi) (42b) occur as subsidiary topics. Chapter ten has two main sections: (a) the cultivation of emptiness and compassion as inseparable and (b) the teaching of the fruit as being the attainment of the three "bodies" of buddhahood (47a). The first can be established in three ways, according to Phag mo gru pa: (1) through reasoning, (2) through the instructions of the guru, and (3) through scriptural quotation. The first two are not to be taught here, he says, only the last. Still, he utilizes concepts from the Pramāṇa tradition of reasoning to reject the first and establish the necessity of the second, namely the guru's instructions (46b):6

Since a theory derived from learning and reflection is [merely conceptual] understanding of the "object universal" (don spyi), in order directly to understand the cognitive object as an "own[page 235] mark" [or "particular"] (rang mtshan) one needs to cultivate in meditation the orally transmitted practical instructions of the noble guru.

Then there appear the quotations from the dohās.

The second part of the final chapter describes the "bodies" (kāya, sku) of buddhahood (47a), including descriptions of the Dharma Body (48a) and the Enjoyment Body (49a). It concludes with a discussion of the opposing views on whether gnosis exists for the buddha (50b) or does not (51b), an almost compulsory subject in such Tibetan treatises of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries.

In sum, this work is certainly a bstan rim of the early bKa' brgyud tradition, and it represents the sort of adaptation one might expect of the basic bstan rim structure to the demands of a more strictly practice- and meditation-oriented tradition, namely rJe sGam po pa's Mahāmudrā.

Sa skya Paṇḍita Kun dga' rgyal mtshan (1182-1251) was one of the key figures in the religious and intellectual history of Tibet. Among his five major works, the one that contains his most complete presentation of Mahāyāna doctrine and philosophy was the Thub pa'i dgongs pa rab tu gsal ba (TGS) ("Elucidating the Intention of the Sage") (Jackson, 1987: 46-47, 58). This step-by-step exposition of the bodhisattva's path is a work of crucial importance not only for the study of the Sa skya tradition but also for any attempt to trace the general development of Buddhist doctrines and thought in Tibet from the eleventh century onward. It continues to be an important work within the Sa skya tradition—serving, for instance, as the text of every new Sa skya khri 'dzin's first sermon at his enthronement—and though it has no full-scale commentary, it inspired a number of ancillary works for the benefit of its expositors (Jackson, 1983: 4-5). A much-abridged modern English adaptation exists (see Wangyal and Cutillo).

In its general structure, the Thub pa'i dgongs gsal was not directly or primarily an outgrowth of the main bKa' gdams traditions stemming from Atiśa. Instead—in its main topical arrangement at least—it continued a bstan rim tradition of the rNgog pa school that Sa paṇ's uncle Slob dpon bSod nams rtse mo (1142-1182) had received at gSang phu Ne'u thog from Phywa pa Chos[page 236] kyi seng ge (1109-1169). This tradition expounded the stages of the bodhisattva path in accord with two verses from the Mahāyāna-sūtrālaṃkāra (MSA: ch. 19, v. 61-62). bSod nams rtse mo had taught the general Mahāyāna path thus in his general exposition of tantric doctrine, the rGyud sde spyi'i rnam gzhag (GPN). He also had taught it to his younger brother Grags pa rgyal mtshan (1147-1216), who in due course became the main teacher of this way of presenting the bodhisattva path, as of so much else, to his nephew Sa paṇ.

The exposition of these verses by bSod nams rtse mo differs somewhat from that of Sa paṇ. As he explained them in the rGyud sde spyi'i rnam gzhag (GPN: 13a-b), they teach these stages:

1. (1) At the very first there is mentioned "spiritual lineage," which is the motivating cause of possessing the spiritual endowments or capacities.
2. (2) Then being motivated by the cause, compassion, having gone for refuge in the three jewels, there is mentioned "devoted adherence to religion."
3. (3) Then there is mentioned the generation of the "thought of awakening," which is the basis for entering the [bodhisattva's] conduct.
4. (4) Then there is mentioned the actual conduct practicing the six perfections. These four are called "the level of devoted application."
5. (5) Then there is the bodhisattva's "entering the faultless [attainment]," which is the occurrence of the attainment of the first level (bhūmi).
6. (6) Then with "bringing sentient beings to maturity," there is mentioned the [attainment of] up to the seventh level (bhūmi).
7. (7) Then the two phrases "purified field" and "non-entered-into nirvāṇa" refer to the three irreversible levels. Those are the path.
8. (8) Then comes awakening—i.e., the "full awakening" and "great nirvāṇa"—the working of benefits for sentient beings, which is the fruit.

There is some doubt about whether the ordering of these topics and the corresponding chapter divisions found in the standard sDe dge edition of Sa paṇ's Thub pa'i dgongs gsal are correct. In any case, the verse as it now appears at the start of Sa paṇ's treatise is slightly different:[page 237]

Spiritual lineage, devotion to religion, the generation of the thought [of awakening], accomplishing generosity and the rest, maturing sentient beings, entering upon the stainless [paths], the pure fields, non-entered-into nirvāṇa, the highest awakening and demonstration.

According to the present chapter organization, these ten things are understood as referring to the following seven main topics:

1. (1) Spiritual lineage (gotra), which is the basis for the disciple's religious capacity
2. (2) The taking of refuge
3. (3) Generating the thought of awakening
4. (4) The six perfections (pāramitās, phar phyin)
5. (5) The four means of attraction
6. (6) The five paths and the ten levels
7. (7) The fruit of buddhahood

Topic four, the six perfections, makes up the bulk of the treatise. The last five phrases from the MSA, viz., "entering upon the stainless [paths], the pure fields, non-entered-into nirvāṇa, the highest awakening and demonstration," are thus said to refer to the final two main topics. The paths and levels are thus treated as one main section, as are the attainments and qualities of buddhahood, which are mentioned through the final three phrases.

The indebtedness of the Sa skya pas to the rNgog lineage—especially as passed down through Gro lung pa and Phywa pa—for this way of teaching the general Mahāyāna through these verses of the MSA is acknowledged by Go rams pa bSod nams seng ge (1429-1489) in one of his minor works. This work was a reply to a doctrinal question from the fifteenth-century meditator or "practicer" (sgrub pa) Tshul khrims bzang po, who was a disciple of their mutual teacher Mus chen sems dpa' chen po dKon mchog rgyal mtshan (1388-1469). In his question, Tshul khrims bzang po had mentioned hearing that the system of Pāramitāyāna stages of the path taught in bSod nams rtse mo's rGyud sde spyi'i rnam gzhag did not come down from Sa chen Kun dga' snying po (1092-1158) through the lineage of the Indian siddha Birwapa, but rather was the system of the stages of the path based on the MSA as transmitted through the lineage of rNgog lo tsā ba and Phywa pa. In his reply written in 1481 at Thub bstan rnam rgyal, Go rams pa (DPZ: 326) mentions the likelihood of influences both from Sa chen and from Phywa pa through the rGyal sras 'jug ngogs of Gro lung pa (compare van der Kuijp: 268, n. 69).[page 238]

But if it is true for bSod nams rtse mo (who was very close to Phywa pa and his school) that this rNgog pa lineage was not to be considered the sole source of his general Pāramitāyāna teachings, the same could be said even more strongly for Sa paṇ, who otherwise opposed Phywa pa and some of his successors on many doctrinal points (though especially in the field of epistemology and dialectics). In other words, the outer structure of the Thub pa'i dgongs gsal and its detailed contents probably reflect the Sa skya pas' and in particular Sa paṇ's own special integration of this rNgog pa formulation into a basic body of doctrine received from other traditions.

One point that does emerge very clearly from Go rams pa's account is the importance of the work rGyal sras 'jug ngogs, which Go rams pa mentioned as being Gro lung pa's composition and as having been taught by Phywa pa. This, then, was the source for the tradition of arranging the topics following the two verses in the MSA (ch. 19, vs. 61-62) that bSod nams rtse mo had also adopted in his very brief exposition of the general Mahāyāna path in the rGyud sde spyi'i rnam gzhag (12b-13b). But there remain many questions about this crucial work of the rNgog pa tradition—questions that probably will not be satisfactorily answered until the work itself becomes available. On the one hand, Go rams pa asserts that it was Gro lung pa's work. It is said that Gro lung pa wrote two bstan rims, one longer and one shorter. This cannot have been the longer one, but could it have been the shorter? On the other hand, Śākya mchog ldan (1428-1507) (SGNT: 307), who was well-schooled in the tradition of rNgog, asserts in his biography of Rong ston Shes bya kun rig (1367-1449) that Rong ston received the "teachings belonging to the doctrinal realm of the [bodhisattva's] conduct, including the rGyal sras 'jug ngogs that had been transmitted through the lineage from rNgog lo tsā ba." This would seem to mark the tradition as originating at least with rNgog Blo ldan shes rab (1059-1109), he perhaps having learned it during his seventeen years of study in Kashmir. Though the existence of such a work is not recorded in rNgog's biography by Gro lung pa or in other lists of rNgog's writings, rNgog is said by Thu'u bkwan (GSM: bka' gdams chapter: 7b) and the bibliophile A khu chin Shes rab rgya mtsho (MHTL 11107) to have written his own bstan rim. Could this have been the rGyal sras 'jug ngogs?

Still other puzzling references to this or a similar work exist: it is recorded for instance that the great abbot (mkhan chen) bSod[page 239] nams grags pa (1273-1345) had studied a text entitled the rGyal sras lam 'jug from the mKhan chen bKa' bzhi pa Grags pa gzhon nu (see Khetsun Sangpo, 5: 457). Could this be a misspelling or an alternative title of the same rGyal sras 'jug ngogs of rNgog or Gro lung pa? Or is it a similar mistaking of the popular alternative title of the Thub pa'i dgongs gsal, namely, the rGyal sras lam bzang? Or is it yet another independent work?

In the present state of Tibetan Buddhist studies—i.e., in the absence of definitive and exhaustive catalogues, bibliographies and histories—such questions cannot be easily answered. Nevertheless at least one thing is clear: the traditions of doctrine and literature that the lam rim, bstan rim, and similar works embodied were already complex and highly developed by the twelfth century. Future scholarly studies of individual works belonging to these genres must each try to clarify further where a particular work stands structurally and doctrinally in relation to the others.

In addition to the four surviving works briefly described above and such presumably lost works as the rGyal sras snang ba of rNgog's tradition, several other bstan rims are mentioned in bibliographical sources but are thought to be no longer extant. One such case is the bstan rim composed by Atiśa's translator Nag tsho lo tsā ba Tshul khrims rgyal ba (b. 1011), the so-called Nag tsho'i bstan rim. Though this work survived and was taught at least as late as the fourteenth century (it was studied for instance by mKhan chen bSod nams grags pa [1273-1345], according to Khetsun Sangpo, vol. 5: 459), its exact contents and structure are unknown. According to Thu'u bkwan (GSM: 112), these teachings were an independent line of lam rim instructions which, through the lineage coming down from Nag tsho's disciple Lag sor ba, resulted in the composition of other written manuals. A much earlier source, the Deb ther dmar po ("Red Annals") of Tshal pa Kun dga' rdo rje (composed 1346), states that Nag tsho's disciple Rong pa Phyag sor pa [sic] (fl. mid-eleventh century) stayed his whole life in meditative retreat, only coming out to mediate a violent dispute. At that time he was invited to 'U shang rdo, where he gave a religious discourse to some five hundred monks. Among those present, four assistant teachers each took notes of his sermons,[page 240] and from them, four bstan rim came into being, namely those by the so-called "Four sons of Rong-pa": (1) Zul bya 'Dul ba 'dzin pa, (2) Rog sTag can pa, (3) gTsang na Zhu ldan pa, and (4) rNam par ba. The last of the four founded the temples of rNam pa and Ram pa Lha lding, and served for seven years as monastic leader of gSang phu Ne'u thog. The tradition of these masters was the Rong pa'i bka' brgyud, and it became known also as the "Lower bKa' gdams" because Rong pa's temple of bCom chung ba was situated below Rwa sgreng (Tshal pa Kun dga' rdo rje, DM: 65-66).

Still another unavailable but perhaps similar treatise was the so-called Lam mchog of Gro ston bDud rtsi grags (fourth abbot of sNar thang, fl. early thirteenth century), which is listed by A khu chin Shes rab rgya mtsho (1803-1875) among the lam rim works proper (MHTL 11117). Also listed there is its commentary by mChims Nam mkha' grags (1210-1285, seventh abbot of sNar thang) that became known to the later tradition as "mChims Nam mkha' grags's bsTan rim" (MHTL 11118).7

I have not mentioned here such important introductory manuals of Mahāyāna practice as the sNang gsum manuals of the Sa skya pa Lam 'bras or the Kun bzang bla ma'i zhal lung for the rDzogs chen nying thig, because, though they too contain Tibetan expositions of Mahāyāna practice, they are primarily appendages to other teaching cycles—in these cases, systems of tantric instructions. Thus, although in content and even topical arrangement they are sometimes similar, such preparatory manuals (sngon 'gro'i 'khrid yig) should be distinguished, since a true lam rim or bstan rim sets out to teach the general Mahāyāna as a path in itself sufficient for reaching the highest goal of buddhahood. Against this view some might argue that lam rims—including Tsong kha pa's, Bo dong Paṇ chen's, and even Atiśa's Byang chub lam sgron itself—presuppose the supremacy of Tantra, and assume that the disciple will choose that path after training him- or herself in every stage of the general Mahāyāna. The lam rims typically do include at the end a brief introductory mention of Tantra. Still, there is sufficient reason to classify and treat the introductory manuals (sngon 'gro) to the tantric practices separately from the lam rim and bstan rim types, just as one should also keep separate such general Mahāyāna teachings as the briefer "mind-training" (blo sbyong) instructions and their commentatorial literature (see Sweet, in this volume), though topically they sometimes cover almost the same ground as the lam rims and bstan rims.[page 241]

Much of current knowledge about the bstan rim as a literary type thus remains very sketchy. More definitive comparisons and conclusions must await the results of careful studies on the individual surviving instances of the genre and of related literary types. Such future investigations will also have to take into account the works of other closely related Tibetan and Indian types to which there exist literary references or for which the texts themselves still survive.

The genre classifications proposed above, moreover, are only provisional, having been based on just a preliminary comparison of a few examples. One cannot exclude the possibility, for instance, that examples of works called bstan rim existed which explained the path of the three individuals, or that there existed treatises called lam rim which expounded exclusively the Mahāyāna path. For instance, it is said that the bKa' gdams master sNe'u zur pa (1042-1118), who was a principal lam rim teacher, taught the "stages of the doctrine" (bstan pa'i rim pa) in great detail, and that many notes of his sermons set down by his students existed (Khetsun Sangpo, vol. 5: 113). Until such works can be examined or until some work closely modelled after them turns up, there is no way to classify them definitively, and any speculations about them will remain just that.

A khu chin Shes rab rgya mtsho

MHTLdPe rgyun dkon pa 'ga' zhig gi tho yig. In Materials for a History of Tibetan Literature, part 3. Śata-Piṭaka Series30, pp. 503-601. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1963. Reprint Kyoto: Rinsen, 1981.

bSod nams rtse mo

GPNrGyud sde spyi'i rnam gzhag. In Sa skya pa'i bka' 'bum, vol. 2, pp. 1.1-36.3 (vol. ga: 1a-74a). Tokyo: Tōyō Bunko, 1968.

Don grub rgyal mtshan, ed.

LKSLegs par bshad pa bka' gdams rin po che'i gsung gi gces btus nor bu'u bang mdzod. Delhi: D. Tsondu Senghe, 1985.

Go rams pa bSod nams seng ge

DPZDris lan pad mo bzhad pa. In Sa skya pa'i bka' 'bum, vol. 14, pp. 321.2-334.2 (vol. tha: 28a-72a). Tokyo: Tōyō Bunko, 1969.

'Gos lo tsā ba gZhon nu dpal

DNDeb ther sngon po. The Blue Annals. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1974. Śata-Piṭaka Series212.

Gro lung pa Blo gros 'byung gnas

TRCMbDe bar gshegs pa'i bstan pa rin po che la 'jug pa'i lam gyi rim pa rnam par bshad pa. Blockprint. Bihar Research Society, Patna. See Jackson, 1989: 164-165.[page 243]

Guenther, Herbert V., trans.

1959sGam-po-pa: The Jewel Ornament of Liberation. London: Rider.

Jackson, David

1983Commentaries on the Writings of Sa-skya Paṇḍita: A Bibliographical Sketch.The Tibet Journal8/3: 3-23.

1987The Entrance Gate for the Wise (Section III): Sa-skya Paṇḍita on Indian and Tibetan Traditions of Pramāṇa and Philosophical Debate. Wiener Studien zur Tibetologie und Buddhismuskunde, vol. 17. 2 parts. Vienna: Arbeitskreis für Tibetische und Buddhistische Studien, Universität Wien.

1989The "Miscellaneous Series" of Tibetan Texts in the Bihar Research Society, Patna: A Handlist. Tibetan and Indo-Tibetan Studies, vol. 2. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.

Khetsun Sangpo

BDTBiographical Dictionary of Tibet and Tibetan Buddhism. Completed in 14 vols.? Dharamsala: Library of Tibetan Works and Archives, 1973-?

van der Kuijp, Leonard W. J.

1983Contributions to the Development of Tibetan Buddhist Epistemology from the Eleventh to the Thirteenth Century. Alt- und Neu-Indische Studien26. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag.

Phag mo gru pa rDo rje rgyal po

STRJSangs rgyas kyi bstan pa la rim gyis 'jug pa'i tshul. Bir: Zogyam and Pema Lodoe, 1977.

Sa skya Paṇḍita Kun dga' rgyal mtshan

TGSThub pa'i dgongs pa rab tu gsal ba. In Sa skya pa'i bka' 'bum, vol. 5, pp. 1.1-50.1 (vol. tha: 1a-99a). Tokyo: Tōyō Bunko, 1968.

Śākya mchog ldan, gSer mdog paṇ chen

SGNTrJe btsun thams cad mkhyen pa bshes gnyen shākya rgyal mtshan gyi rnam thar ngo mtshar dad pa'i rol mtsho. In Collected Works, vol. 16, pp. 299-377. Thimphu: Kunsang Topgyay, 1975.

Thu'u bkwan Chos kyi nyi ma

GSMGrub mtha' thams cad kyi khungs dang 'dod tshul ston pa legs bshad shel gyi me long. In Collected Works, vol. 2, pp. 5-519. New Delhi: 1969.

Tshal pa Kun dga' rdo rje

DMDeb ther dmar po rnams kyi dang po lu lan deb ther. Dung dkar Blo bzang 'phrin las, editor and annotator. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1981.

Wangyal, Geshe and Brian Cutillo, trans.

1988Illuminations: A Guide to Essential Buddhist Practices. Novato, CA: Lotsawa.

Back To Top

[page 244] The revival of Buddhism during the eleventh century C.E. known to Tibetan historiography as the "latter dissemination of the Doctrine" (bstan pa'i phyi dar; see BA: 63-101) was motivated, to a large extent, by revulsion against the general breakdown of religious practice, discipline, and conduct which had prevailed during the preceding two centuries (Th'u bkwan: 96; Stein: 70-72). Consequently, in order to reestablish the faith on a firmer foundation, the reformist bKa' gdams pa sect founded by the followers of Atiśa (982-1054) undertook as one of its more important missions the presentation of the fundamentals of Buddhism in a manner easily accessible to the clergy and educated laity. One of the means by which this was accomplished was the development of succinct and useful guides to the essentials of Buddhist practice—the uniquely Tibetan literary genre of "Mental Purification" (blo sbyong). After an examination of the meaning of the term blo sbyong, and a general survey of the early history and sources of this genre, this paper will examine two of its most noteworthy examples: the Blo sbyong don bdun ma ("Seven-Topic Mental Purification") (LBDDM) originating in the bKa' gdams pa tradition, and the bLo sbyong mtshon cha 'khor lo ("Wheel Weapon Mental Purification") (LBTCK), whose provenance will be discussed below.[page 245]

As a named genre the mental purification literature appears to be a genuinely Tibetan innovation, although its contents are firmly anchored in Indian Buddhist tradition. The Tibetan compound blo sbyong, translated here as mental purification, means literally "[the] purifying [i.e., purification] (sbyong [ba]) of the mind (blo)." As a stereotyped phrase this does not, however, appear in the standard Tibetan-Sanskrit lexicon of Buddhist terminology, the Mahāvyutpatti (MVYT), nor apparently is it to be found in the translation of any text with a confirmed Sanskrit original. In addition, none of the texts with blo sbyong in their title found in the earliest collection of such works, the fifteenth-century Blo sbyong glegs bam ("Mental Purification Collection") (LBLB),1 bears a Sanskrit title along with the Tibetan one, the standard practice for texts actually or purportedly translated from an Indian original.

Nevertheless, even if this compound is not, strictly speaking, a loan translation, its meaning is quite clear in light of the compounds and phrases in which its components and their analogues appear. Tibetan blo is used primarily to render the Sanskrit buddhi, which in a non-technical sense has the meaning of "mind" in general; as a technical term it means the intellectual faculty, a sense that Buddhism shares with the other religio-philosophical systems of India. sByong is the present root of the Tibetan verb whose primary signification is "to purify" or "cleanse." As such it is used in rendering the action noun derivative (śodhana) of the Sanskrit root śudh, "to purify," and so we find it at MVYT 600 where it translates the Sanskrit [pari] śodhana as [yongs su] sbyong ba. The Sanskrit and Pāli citta (sems), which is virtually synonymous with buddhi, is often met with in analogous compounds and phrases throughout Indian Buddhist literature. A very close parallel appears in the most important source for the mental purification literature, Śāntideva's Bodhicaryāvatāra ("Introduction to Bodhisattva Practice") (BCA). In BCA 5, v. 97 we find the compound sems sbyong ba2 (cittaśodhana; "mental purification") in the line "One should always observe the practice [leading to] the purification of the mind."3 Similar compounds are found elsewhere, such as the Sanskrit cittapariśuddhi, "purification [or purity] of the mind" (Abhidharmakośa 8:1; Vasubandhu: 130), and Pāli phrases such as "to purify the mind" (cittam parisodheti) are common in the Theravāda literature (see PTSD, PTC). Many further examples might be cited.4[page 246]

Moreover, such compounds and phrases are expressive of their origins in the earliest and most fundamental Buddhist practices, all of which "aim(s) at purifying the citta" (Johansson: 23). As an important Mahāyāna scriptural quotation puts it: "Beings become soiled by the soiling of the mind; they are purified by the purification of the mind."5 Perhaps most importantly, the generation of universal love and compassion through empathic identification with all living beings, which similarly belongs to the most ancient stratum of Buddhist teachings (e.g., the Aṅguttara and Majjhima nikāyas, quoted in Vetter: 26-28; Buddhaghosa: 321-353), is, according to the great philosopher-saint sGam po pa (1079-1153), the very means by which the purification of the mind (sems sbyang ba) is brought about (Guenther: 144-146; sGam po pa: 92a2-94a6).

The earliest texts considered by Tibetan tradition to belong to the mental purification genre (RSBT: 1286-1287) include the various "Stages of the Doctrine" (bstan rim) texts by disciples of Atiśa and his pupil, the layman 'Brom ston pa (1005-1064), the most important being the bsTan rim chen mo ("Great Stages of the Doctrine") of Gro lung pa Blo gros 'byung gnas, which served as a model for Tsong kha pa's Lam rim texts (Thu'u bkwan: 104; Chattopadhyaya: 393; and D. Jackson, in this volume). The dPe chos ("The Dharma Through Examples"), a collection of religious instructions given by Po to ba Rin chen gsal (1027-1105), one of the chief disciples of 'Brom ston pa,6 teaches the basics of Buddhism through the use of folk sayings, stories, and analogies, and is representative of many of the earliest texts7 in its adaptation of pre-Buddhist Tibetan tales and folklore to the task of explaining Buddhist doctrine to a wide audience (Stein: 266-268). Religio-moral teaching through stories, aphorisms, and analogies was a staple of Indian Buddhist literature as well, from the early Dhammapada onwards (Sternbach: 59, n. 297). In this connection, it is interesting to note that tradition regards Atiśa as having introduced into Tibet the well-known Indian collection of vampire (vetāla, ro langs/ ro sgrung) stories in their Buddhist version (MacDonald: 14-16). Such writings are comparable, as folkloristic elucidations of religious doctrine, to the Jewish Midrash (Silver: 193-196).[page 247]

Although a folk homiletic tradition did continue in Tibet,8 the later mental purification literature is characterized by a more abstract and systematic presentation of its subject matter, and it is these texts which have constituted the basis for study and practice down to the present day. Although this essay is mainly concerned with the bKa' gdams pa and dGe lugs pa traditions, it should be noted that the mental purification genre figures importantly in all of the Tibetan Buddhist schools.

Of the major Indian sources for this genre, clearly the most important is Śāntideva's epitome of the Mahāyāna, the Bodhicaryāvatāra, one of the so-called "Six Basic Texts of the bKa' gdams pas" (bKa' gdams gzhung drug; Thu'u bkwan: 106; BA: 268),9 which formed the foundation for the non-Tantric teaching of that school. Atiśa's own synoptic work, the Byang chub lam sgron ("A Lamp for the Path to Enlightenment"; Bodhipāthapradīpa) (BCLG) is also considered an important source (Thu'u bkwan: 106; Tucci, 1949, vol. 1: 99), as are such other frequently cited works as Nāgārjuna's Ratnāvalī (Hahn) and Candrakīrti's Madhyamakāvatāra (Huntington).

The influence of the BCA on the mental purification literature is obvious. As a practice-oriented synthesis of the bodhisattva path it provided a model for mental purification texts, and it is often quoted in these texts and their commentaries to elucidate key ideas. The Tibetan tradition is quite clear about this influence, crediting Śāntideva as a major figure in the transmission of the mental purification teaching (dNgul chu mThogs med: 210; Thu'u bkwan: 109). Of the nine chapters of the BCA, the one of most significance for the mental purification texts is the eighth, on the perfection of contemplation (dhyānapāramitā).

The central conception of the eighth chapter of the BCA, which is developed more fully in the mental purification literature, is "exchanging oneself and others" [page 248] (parātmaparivārtana, bdag dang gzhan du brje ba; see BCA 8: 120-131). This involves a thorough effort to realize the distress inherent in pride and self-centeredness, and the happiness and virtue which come from valuing others as strongly as one values oneself. This exchanging of oneself and others is closely related to "equality of oneself and others" (parātmasamatā, bdag dang gzhan du mnyam pa), an attitude of complete empathic identification with other sentient beings (BCA 8: 90-119; Buddhaghosa: 334). These are ideas that are fundamental to Buddhism as a whole (see Collins: 190-191), but which were given new emphasis and refinement of expression by Mahāyāna authors like Śāntideva.

Atiśa's BCLG is a précis of the entire Buddhist path, and the prototype for the "Stages of the Path" (lam rim) literature. The mental purification texts are often indistinguishable, even by Tibetan commentators, from works on stages of the path (TCKZB: 466), except in their succinct presentation, practical orientation, and concentration on one portion of the path, i.e., generation of an enlightenment-directed attitude (bodhicittotpāda, byang chub sems skyed; see Dayal: 58-64). The stages of the path contain the mental purification teachings within them,10 and the full stages of the path themselves can be presented within the structure of mental purification, as in a work by Tsong kha pa (the Tshig sbyor phun sum tshogs pa'i snyan ngag gi lam nas drangs pa'i blo sbyong in TKSB, vol. 22: 406-411).

A number of key points relevant to mental purification are mentioned in the BCLG; for example, in verse 5, Atiśa affirms the exchanging of self and other, stating that bodhisattvas seek to extirpate others' sufferings because of their total empathic identification with them (see also BCLG, v. 32, on mental purification). Another work by Atiśa, the Byang chub sems pa'i nor bu'i phreng ba (Bodhisattvamaṇyāvalī, Toh. no. 3951; "Jewel Rosary of the Bodhisattva"; see Rabten and Ngawang Dhargyey), which stands at the beginning of the LBLB collection (7-11), does not explicitly deal with the meditative praxis essential to the mental purification tradition, but is, rather, a homiletic exhortation to bodhisattva conduct in general, and much of its subject matter is included as supplementary material in the mental purification texts, e.g., in the instruction (bslab bya) section of the LBDDM.

All the above lends support to the Tibetan tradition (dNgul chu mThogs med: 207; Chattopadhyaya: 85) that mental purification, as a specific arrangement of Mahāyāna teachings in a form suitable for meditation, was an oral instruction (upadeśa, man ngag) originally given by Suvarṇadvīpī-Dharmakīrti11 to his pupil Atiśa, who in turn handed it down to his disciples as a private teaching (lkog chos) until it was publicly lectured upon by [Bya] mChad kha ba (1101-1175) and others (Thu'u bkwan: 109-110).[page 249]