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.